Big effects are expensive and if a 9+ mana spell doesnt potentially END the game , theres no damn reason it costs 9+ mana to begin with.
If you play commander 1v1 all these "big" spells wont matter, the format is still as much about speed and just do what your commander wants to do quickly and end the game if it works out.
In multiplayer you still need something to "controll" the opponents, as you are about 3v1 in a 4player game, if you do something that wins, you better win against all of them or you face the counter attack, which probably kills you.
If a game simply doesnt end, as nobody can "risk" to attack, it becomes a grind , which is also incredible annoying to play with.
That said, you have to know what your game is about. If your "goal" is simply to ramp mana and play huge spells, you have to know that this means the game will end. Red has good means to prevent that, just wreck the manabases, destroy lands, destroy mana artifacts, if someones game plan relies on playing expensive spells, thats the ressource to attack.
Counterspells are the easiest solution to big spells, but far from the one and only.
Graveyard strategies are strong if nobody fights them, but its easy to hate a graveyard, as every deck can "at least" play the artifacts that cantrip if you have to and much more is viable.
In a casual group you can allways make up different extra rules that make your games more like what you want.
Simply using a pile of plane cards changes the game a lot, simply pick one and thats the plane for the game (no need for planar dice and changing plane cards, its usually enough to change a game a lot and sort out the "terrible" planes that you dont enjoy).
Hidden Agendas are cool aswell, some conditions are extra missions that only you know about and every player gets 3 different agendas, if they accomplish them, they win.
Plenty of options to make the game enjoyable for everyone.
Without some haymakers, the format can easily devolve into a game of "Let's spend 20 turns doing literally nothing as we have Mutually Assured Destruction going on, whoever attacks first loses" or "Well we're all just durdling, we never really get a gamewin out." I have had games like that and they become a boring hell.
None of those games are a surefire gamewin. They all require further setup or backup to win, so no, I don't have a problem with any of them except in the design of some (Omniscience especially seems like it was made "just to give EDH players something that seems like fun") but seriously, if you can stick a 10 mana enchantment and have fuel available in your hand, perhaps you deserve to win.
I much prefer my games to go for 20 turns of people gradually developing an edge rather than something like insurrection ending the game because 2 full turns went around with no boardwipe.
And omniscience's mana cost is kind of irrelevant. Hitting 10 mana in commander is pretty easy, and then it makes all your protection for it free, including your draw spells to get more protection. Of course, that's assuming you don't just end the game on the spot by casting your whole hand.
Until you get to the point where it becomes the same repetition of turns because everyone has ran out of resources, and any advantage is immediately negated by a boardwipe, a well-aimed spot removal or something else. Haymakers cause the table to scramble. There's a difference between grinding out a win (Something my Jori En, for example, is very proficient at - but it at least has a feeling of inevitability at one point) and grinding to a standstill which will likely never get resolved.
Insurrection only ends the game if there is more power on the board than your opponents have a combined life total. Omniscience only ends the game if you can chain up with drawspells - by the time you reach 10 mana, odds are your hand is either emptied or you're in such a strong position any 10 mana spell would likely win you the game.
Heck, I dare bet that in most of the decently powered metas, you'll even rarely see most of those cards you mentioned. Rise of the Dark Realms is the only one of those I see semi-regularly, and that's because it's a backup wincon in my Olivia deck, which is a Dragonstorm build. On that note, do you think Dragonstorm should be kicked out as well?
None, I repeat, NONE of those cards end the game on their own. Omiscience and Enter the Infinite are the only ones who combine to instantly end the game on the spot - and that requires you to hold on to Enter the Infinite, get Omniscience, and do this often enough without your playgroup telling you your deck is simply boring and they'd like to request a change of pace.
Seriously, your topics all tend to end the same way; you vs the rest. What are you expecting? The entire world to adapt to your specific playstyle? If those cards win so much at your LGS, why not talk to the people there? And if they win online, where do you find those low-powered games, cause I want to get in on that.
These are my observations after playing edhfor a while now.
EDH getting worse and worse.
Competitive commander is solitaire, and casual commander is 10 turns of "irrelevant" plays followed by some haymaker ending the game almost instantly. Sometimes its one card, sometimes it's synergy between multiple cards, but it's always some stupid explosive play that can take a table from full to 0.
There is no deck power level of commander I can enjoy anymore, because everyone thinks is super ok for a 10 mana spell to be game ending, despite the fact that you can easily reach that by the 5th turn. The idea of a grindy game almost doesn't exist anymore because of how many different game enders seem to be socially acceptable for a casual game of commander.
And all I get as responses is "run more removal" as if they fill their deck with 30 spot removal cards.
and once more you're completely ignoring the fact that none of those cards end the game all by themselves because it probably doesn't suit your argument. Are you seriously not seeing this?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
and once more you're completely ignoring the fact that none of those cards end the game all by themselves because it probably doesn't suit your argument. Are you seriously not seeing this?
Any time I bring up the existence of common cards people seem to think that it's ok. They don't win the game all on there own!
"Oh but X only ends the game if people play creatures!"
Decks aren't composed of grizzly bears + these haymakers.
I agree. We should all only play g/x decks because they are the most objectively fun and anyone who disagrees does not know the truth about EDH. Everyone should just play their decks because interaction beyond high fiving about how many land are in play is unfun and equivalent to casting Stasis while kicking puppies. I for one will never play with anyone who casts tutors, removal spells, blue cards, things I arbitrarily decide I don't like but will probably cast myself later.
and once more you're completely ignoring the fact that none of those cards end the game all by themselves because it probably doesn't suit your argument. Are you seriously not seeing this?
Any time I bring up the existence of common cards people seem to think that it's ok. They don't win the game all on there own!
"Oh but X only ends the game if people play creatures!"
Decks aren't composed of grizzly bears + these haymakers.
Insurrection gets pre-emptively stopped by any wrath effect ever. Rise of the Dark Realms gets pre-emptively stopped by any piece of mass grave hate ever. Things like that are so common in Commander that they prevent easy wins with those cards. You also point towards ramp. So ok, I ramp to 9 mana and cast my turn 5 Rise of the Dark Realms...wait, what good is that going to do again?
What IS an acceptable win, in your opinion? Is one only allowed to win after 20 turns of smashing slightly bigger creatures against those of their opponents? Except they may not be too good like Avenger of Zendikar because that too should be banned? I'm not following.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
As someone pointed out, many of those spells can be handled with graveyard hate, which is available in artifact form. All of these spells cost a bit to play, require set up, and they are all at Sorcery speed, you can always destroy their mana artifacts or key cards that bring them into play before you have your defense.
and once more you're completely ignoring the fact that none of those cards end the game all by themselves because it probably doesn't suit your argument. Are you seriously not seeing this?
Any time I bring up the existence of common cards people seem to think that it's ok. They don't win the game all on there own!
"Oh but X only ends the game if people play creatures!"
Decks aren't composed of grizzly bears + these haymakers.
Insurrection gets pre-emptively stopped by any wrath effect ever. Rise of the Dark Realms gets pre-emptively stopped by any piece of mass grave hate ever. Things like that are so common in Commander that they prevent easy wins with those cards. You also point towards ramp. So ok, I ramp to 9 mana and cast my turn 5 Rise of the Dark Realms...wait, what good is that going to do again?
What IS an acceptable win, in your opinion? Is one only allowed to win after 20 turns of smashing slightly bigger creatures against those of their opponents? Except they may not be too good like Avenger of Zendikar because that too should be banned? I'm not following.
An acceptable win to me happens somewhat organically.
A player sitting there with nothing then casting rite of replication on an opposing creature like gray merchant of asphodel and ending the game is the most boring kind of game to me.
If they built up threats over several turns and won, great.
If they built up threats, had them removed, and then win anyways because their graveyard wasn't exiled, bad.
and once more you're completely ignoring the fact that none of those cards end the game all by themselves because it probably doesn't suit your argument. Are you seriously not seeing this?
Any time I bring up the existence of common cards people seem to think that it's ok. They don't win the game all on there own!
"Oh but X only ends the game if people play creatures!"
Decks aren't composed of grizzly bears + these haymakers.
Insurrection gets pre-emptively stopped by any wrath effect ever. Rise of the Dark Realms gets pre-emptively stopped by any piece of mass grave hate ever. Things like that are so common in Commander that they prevent easy wins with those cards. You also point towards ramp. So ok, I ramp to 9 mana and cast my turn 5 Rise of the Dark Realms...wait, what good is that going to do again?
What IS an acceptable win, in your opinion? Is one only allowed to win after 20 turns of smashing slightly bigger creatures against those of their opponents? Except they may not be too good like Avenger of Zendikar because that too should be banned? I'm not following.
An acceptable win to me happens somewhat organically.
A player sitting there with nothing then casting rite of replication on an opposing creature like gray merchant of asphodel and ending the game is the most boring kind of game to me.
If they built up threats over several turns and won, great.
If they built up threats, had them removed, and then win anyways because their graveyard wasn't exiled, bad.
Rite of Replication is a 9 mana spell (assuming that they've kicked it). I'm not quite sure how you're supposed to get to 9 mana without building up a threat. Lands and mana rocks are the biggest threats in the game. If you don't want people casting spells liek those you list, don;'t let them get to the kind of mana they need to cast them....
and once more you're completely ignoring the fact that none of those cards end the game all by themselves because it probably doesn't suit your argument. Are you seriously not seeing this?
Any time I bring up the existence of common cards people seem to think that it's ok. They don't win the game all on there own!
"Oh but X only ends the game if people play creatures!"
Decks aren't composed of grizzly bears + these haymakers.
Insurrection gets pre-emptively stopped by any wrath effect ever. Rise of the Dark Realms gets pre-emptively stopped by any piece of mass grave hate ever. Things like that are so common in Commander that they prevent easy wins with those cards. You also point towards ramp. So ok, I ramp to 9 mana and cast my turn 5 Rise of the Dark Realms...wait, what good is that going to do again?
What IS an acceptable win, in your opinion? Is one only allowed to win after 20 turns of smashing slightly bigger creatures against those of their opponents? Except they may not be too good like Avenger of Zendikar because that too should be banned? I'm not following.
An acceptable win to me happens somewhat organically.
A player sitting there with nothing then casting rite of replication on an opposing creature like gray merchant of asphodel and ending the game is the most boring kind of game to me.
If they built up threats over several turns and won, great.
If they built up threats, had them removed, and then win anyways because their graveyard wasn't exiled, bad.
Except those wins are organic. They are wins based on the current game conditions. GY full of creatures happens organically. Accumulating mana happens organically. All of the conditions that make any of the cards you listed "unfair" happen during normal play of a game.
I, like many others, just can't get behind your crusade here. In all honesty, this isn't the format for you if those cards cause such a problem for you. Those are the "big, splashy" plays that the RC raves about, and in reality, the cards that define the format. They see next to no play anywhere else except EDH.
and once more you're completely ignoring the fact that none of those cards end the game all by themselves because it probably doesn't suit your argument. Are you seriously not seeing this?
Any time I bring up the existence of common cards people seem to think that it's ok. They don't win the game all on there own!
"Oh but X only ends the game if people play creatures!"
Decks aren't composed of grizzly bears + these haymakers.
Insurrection gets pre-emptively stopped by any wrath effect ever. Rise of the Dark Realms gets pre-emptively stopped by any piece of mass grave hate ever. Things like that are so common in Commander that they prevent easy wins with those cards. You also point towards ramp. So ok, I ramp to 9 mana and cast my turn 5 Rise of the Dark Realms...wait, what good is that going to do again?
What IS an acceptable win, in your opinion? Is one only allowed to win after 20 turns of smashing slightly bigger creatures against those of their opponents? Except they may not be too good like Avenger of Zendikar because that too should be banned? I'm not following.
An acceptable win to me happens somewhat organically.
A player sitting there with nothing then casting rite of replication on an opposing creature like gray merchant of asphodel and ending the game is the most boring kind of game to me.
If they built up threats over several turns and won, great.
If they built up threats, had them removed, and then win anyways because their graveyard wasn't exiled, bad.
Rite of Replication is a 9 mana spell (assuming that they've kicked it). I'm not quite sure how you're supposed to get to 9 mana without building up a threat. Lands and mana rocks are the biggest threats in the game. If you don't want people casting spells liek those you list, don;'t let them get to the kind of mana they need to cast them....
Lands for the first 3 turns
Turn 4: Land, Play thran dynamo
Turn 5: Mana crypt
As one example. Are you going to spend your turn destroying the thran dynamo? Maybe, maybe not, but my experience is usually it would see at least one untap step.
A big part of the problem is that save for some specific ridiculous spells like defense of the heart and living death, 8+ mana spells seem to be designed to take down an edh table, when it is not that hard to get the extra mana.
It might be a bit harder to get the extra mana, for a 1000% increase in gamewinning ability.
This line brings us back to a point both myself and LouCypher pointed out: what is the target for Rite of Replication on Turn 5 and how does this possibly end the game on the spot? It obviously isn't the person casting Rite that has the exceptionally powerful creature are this point since their turns were spent ramping.
EDIT: Saw your point of Gray Merchant, so I can see that being an issue, but how often does someone have Gray Merchant on the field at the same time someone wants to cast a kicked Rite? Once in a while seems fine. All the time (to the point of it being an actual issue) seems unlikely. Even more unlikely is that no one ever has an answer to Gray Merchant.
I find this type of card pretty boring so I don't run them, the same way I don't run much in the way of game ending infinite combos.
As for other people running them, I make sure my deck has methods to deal with this type of card. The only one you can't really deal with without blue is Omniscience - it needs to be countered or krosan gripped otherwise they can probably counter your spot removal to it since its now free and all.
So if you don't like them, just leave them out of your deck and make sure your packing answers for them. People are very right when they say that you can play around these cards
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH RRGrenzo plays your deck, GGYeva's mono green control, WW9-tails trys desperately for monowhite not to suck RWBUTymna and Kraum's saboteur tribal, UWG Kestia's Enchantress Aggro, RUB Jeleva casts big dumb spells, RGB Vaevictis' big critters can kill your critters hard
I built a whole deck around kicking RoR on grey merchant for nostalgic purposes in both commander and for casual modern
FFA. I ended up kicking on eternal witness in both decks more often though I never found RoR to be the key problem card for me in modem it was mana reflection gift ungiven and zendikar resurgent in commander it was all about the black tutors. The modern deck was 125 cards and singleton. Killed the table about 2 turns slower on average. The RoR can be just about anything at 9-10 mana the cards are designed to end games
Those are "Timmy" cards; big, splashy spells that find a home in the EDH format because the games go on long enough to use them effectively. They are made to appeal to a player personality that likes those crazy spells.
Nothing kills the format except for the speed of some decks. On good opening hands they can hit turn 4 on turn 1. On slow opening hands, they give enough time for counterplay. There are plenty of answers to haymakers... it's all a matter of someone at the table having an answer. If people don't like playing answers then it's a meta problem.
I am not sure if this is mean so if it comes off as this I apologize.
Having read your posts on Commander I honestly have to ask if you are just trolling these forums? Every time is the same formula, a thing no one else thinks is that big a problem a bunch of reasons explaining why the problem is not a problem and then you ignoring all of those reasons and continuing from square one.
It feels intentional after more than 2 examples of it.
I am not sure if this is mean so if it comes off as this I apologize.
Having read your posts on Commander I honestly have to ask if you are just trolling these forums? Every time is the same formula, a thing no one else thinks is that big a problem a bunch of reasons explaining why the problem is not a problem and then you ignoring all of those reasons and continuing from square one.
It feels intentional after more than 2 examples of it.
I believe the average commander player doesn't pay attention to what's actually going on in their games. What's winning, what's useless, what appears broken but isn't and what is actually absurd. I also believe it is extremely difficult to properly construct a casual commander deck that leads to fun games, well beyond the design skill of most players. It takes me days of thought and careful compromise to try and come up with a balanced commander deck, and that's with more than a decade of multiplayer experience.
The fact that people disagree with me does not bother me. I believe they will eventually realize I am right.
For example, I've recieved dozens of "just run more removal" replies. I ignore those outright.
First, I agree with you that it's disappointing to lose to those big, splashy spells when you've been trying to grind out advantage. The other day, someone kicked Rite of Replication on Archangel of Tithes and clogged the whole board. Everyone struggled to slow that player down after that.
Would it be possible for you to put some of your lists on the forums? I'd like to see what your design philosophy is. It's possible that you're having trouble with these spells for a reason, and maybe this is less a complaint or troll thread and more a way of asking for advice without actually asking for advice. Just my thoughts. At the very least, what generals do you run?
Go play Pauper Commander, the "proper" kind with common/uncommon commanders. Four man games turn into evening-devouring attrition slogs that it seems you'd love
I am not sure if this is mean so if it comes off as this I apologize.
Having read your posts on Commander I honestly have to ask if you are just trolling these forums? Every time is the same formula, a thing no one else thinks is that big a problem a bunch of reasons explaining why the problem is not a problem and then you ignoring all of those reasons and continuing from square one.
It feels intentional after more than 2 examples of it.
I believe the average commander player doesn't pay attention to what's actually going on in their games. What's winning, what's useless, what appears broken but isn't and what is actually absurd. I also believe it is extremely difficult to properly construct a casual commander deck that leads to fun games, well beyond the design skill of most players. It takes me days of thought and careful compromise to try and come up with a balanced commander deck, and that's with more than a decade of multiplayer experience.
The fact that people disagree with me does not bother me. I believe they will eventually realize I am right.
For example, I've recieved dozens of "just run more removal" replies. I ignore those outright.
You also ignore any other argument. Like how Insurrection needs there to be at least 120-damage already done power worth of creatures to be on the field. Or how Rise of the Dark Realms is definitely not a surefire win if there's no haste outlet along. Let alone Living Death. None of those cards are single-card finishers, they're simply very good cards that need to be answered one way or another, the same way big creatures do. I have plenty of commander experience to see that none of those on their own are a problem. If the graves get piled full and someone makes use of that; fair game to them. They still haven't won the game. But at least it causes the game to progress.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
I am not sure if this is mean so if it comes off as this I apologize.
Having read your posts on Commander I honestly have to ask if you are just trolling these forums? Every time is the same formula, a thing no one else thinks is that big a problem a bunch of reasons explaining why the problem is not a problem and then you ignoring all of those reasons and continuing from square one.
It feels intentional after more than 2 examples of it.
I believe the average commander player doesn't pay attention to what's actually going on in their games. What's winning, what's useless, what appears broken but isn't and what is actually absurd. I also believe it is extremely difficult to properly construct a casual commander deck that leads to fun games, well beyond the design skill of most players. It takes me days of thought and careful compromise to try and come up with a balanced commander deck, and that's with more than a decade of multiplayer experience.
The fact that people disagree with me does not bother me. I believe they will eventually realize I am right.
For example, I've recieved dozens of "just run more removal" replies. I ignore those outright.
You also ignore any other argument. Like how Insurrection needs there to be at least 120-damage already done power worth of creatures to be on the field. Or how Rise of the Dark Realms is definitely not a surefire win if there's no haste outlet along. Let alone Living Death. None of those cards are single-card finishers, they're simply very good cards that need to be answered one way or another, the same way big creatures do. I have plenty of commander experience to see that none of those on their own are a problem. If the graves get piled full and someone makes use of that; fair game to them. They still haven't won the game. But at least it causes the game to progress.
It doesn't need to immediately end the game on the spot for the game to be over. Inssurection taking out the main threat and leaving you in a dominant board position is plenty for an edh game to be over. It also doesn't feel less swingy when you are the target of an insurrection swing just because someone else happens to not die. You lost all your defenses and almost certainly targetted removal isn't going to stop the kill.
Living death for example would commonly recur something like eternal witness...getting back living death, making it extremely difficult to ever overcome the board state that comes afterwards.
The fact that people disagree with me does not bother me. I believe they will eventually realize I am right.
Then there is nothing more to be said now is there? If you are not willing to even entertain that your argument may be incorrect or flawed then what can be gained from this discussion?
I am not sure if this is mean so if it comes off as this I apologize.
Having read your posts on Commander I honestly have to ask if you are just trolling these forums? Every time is the same formula, a thing no one else thinks is that big a problem a bunch of reasons explaining why the problem is not a problem and then you ignoring all of those reasons and continuing from square one.
It feels intentional after more than 2 examples of it.
I believe the average commander player doesn't pay attention to what's actually going on in their games. What's winning, what's useless, what appears broken but isn't and what is actually absurd. I also believe it is extremely difficult to properly construct a casual commander deck that leads to fun games, well beyond the design skill of most players. It takes me days of thought and careful compromise to try and come up with a balanced commander deck, and that's with more than a decade of multiplayer experience.
The fact that people disagree with me does not bother me. I believe they will eventually realize I am right.
For example, I've recieved dozens of "just run more removal" replies. I ignore those outright.
You also ignore any other argument. Like how Insurrection needs there to be at least 120-damage already done power worth of creatures to be on the field. Or how Rise of the Dark Realms is definitely not a surefire win if there's no haste outlet along. Let alone Living Death. None of those cards are single-card finishers, they're simply very good cards that need to be answered one way or another, the same way big creatures do. I have plenty of commander experience to see that none of those on their own are a problem. If the graves get piled full and someone makes use of that; fair game to them. They still haven't won the game. But at least it causes the game to progress.
It doesn't need to immediately end the game on the spot for the game to be over. Inssurection taking out the main threat and leaving you in a dominant board position is plenty for an edh game to be over. It also doesn't feel less swingy when you are the target of an insurrection swing just because someone else happens to not die. You lost all your defenses and almost certainly targetted removal isn't going to stop the kill.
Living death for example would commonly recur something like eternal witness...getting back living death, making it extremely difficult to ever overcome the board state that comes afterwards.
Say hello to the elves for me, and don't forget to feed the reindeer when you leave Christmas land.
You're wrong, on so many levels. There isn't even logic behind this anymore. Like I said, your in the wrong format. 6 pages now of just nonsensical arguments against situationally good, 7+ mana spells. It's what the format is all about.
To answer the main question, no, Wizards is not killing the format by printing these cards, they are enhancing it. Banning these cards would kill the format. I play EDH because I can viably pop off a 10 mana spell, turn-6 or turn-20, because games actually last long enough to use them.
Nobody is going to see it this way, and obviously your playgroup doesn't either since you are continually seeing these spells.
There's options out there, EDH variants, or just another format all together. It's just so painfully obvious you are in the wrong place.
Is anyone actually impressed to see these cards win a game? Too me it always feels like "oh we were having a fun game and then he cast X and all previous play is now pretty much irrelevant"
I consider Enter the Infinite and Rise of the Dark Realms to be actively bad. Enter the Infinite can lose you the game with draw effects and you need to have really much mana to put those drawn cards into use, Rise of the Dark Realms on the other hand gets hosed by just so many things. Winning with Omniscience is more of a symptome than a cause. You must have set it up right and with this work you could just use another strong engine. For Insurrection there must be some factors right to do good work. But with that many free sac-effects floating around the card is at the bare minimum a one-sided Wrath, which is undeniable strong. Rite of Replication is strong and quite flexible with the 4 mana alternative. Living Death and Mizzix's Mastery are actually really strong. But those cards where meant to be game-changing and quite some amount of them without Commander in mind. Losing at the hand of such strong effects (but maybe more competitive ones) has always been a part of Magic in every format and every part of it (Ramp in Standard, Tron in Modern, Sneak and Show in Legacy, and don't get me started on kitchen table magic)! It's part of the game! So no, Wizards is not slowly killing Magic, but many Timmies play Commander... And Timmies are a group for which Wizards specifically designs (such) cards.
What me confuses is the list of cards you pick: Survival of the Fittest, Humility, Palinchron are all cards that shift the game to the extreme and are absolutely legal in Commander. And that is only a small glimpse at some of the 'worst'/'coolest' cards ever printed. Doesn't anyone play with these in your local meta?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If you play commander 1v1 all these "big" spells wont matter, the format is still as much about speed and just do what your commander wants to do quickly and end the game if it works out.
In multiplayer you still need something to "controll" the opponents, as you are about 3v1 in a 4player game, if you do something that wins, you better win against all of them or you face the counter attack, which probably kills you.
If a game simply doesnt end, as nobody can "risk" to attack, it becomes a grind , which is also incredible annoying to play with.
That said, you have to know what your game is about. If your "goal" is simply to ramp mana and play huge spells, you have to know that this means the game will end. Red has good means to prevent that, just wreck the manabases, destroy lands, destroy mana artifacts, if someones game plan relies on playing expensive spells, thats the ressource to attack.
Counterspells are the easiest solution to big spells, but far from the one and only.
Graveyard strategies are strong if nobody fights them, but its easy to hate a graveyard, as every deck can "at least" play the artifacts that cantrip if you have to and much more is viable.
In a casual group you can allways make up different extra rules that make your games more like what you want.
Simply using a pile of plane cards changes the game a lot, simply pick one and thats the plane for the game (no need for planar dice and changing plane cards, its usually enough to change a game a lot and sort out the "terrible" planes that you dont enjoy).
Hidden Agendas are cool aswell, some conditions are extra missions that only you know about and every player gets 3 different agendas, if they accomplish them, they win.
Plenty of options to make the game enjoyable for everyone.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
and once more you're completely ignoring the fact that none of those cards end the game all by themselves because it probably doesn't suit your argument. Are you seriously not seeing this?
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Tooth and Nail
Rude Awakening
Dragonstorm
Living Death
Divine Intervention (Moral victory)
Mind's Desire
Insurrection
Blatant Thievery
Storm Herd
Armageddon (At least, the correct way to use it.)
Any time I bring up the existence of common cards people seem to think that it's ok. They don't win the game all on there own!
"Oh but X only ends the game if people play creatures!"
Decks aren't composed of grizzly bears + these haymakers.
Insurrection gets pre-emptively stopped by any wrath effect ever. Rise of the Dark Realms gets pre-emptively stopped by any piece of mass grave hate ever. Things like that are so common in Commander that they prevent easy wins with those cards. You also point towards ramp. So ok, I ramp to 9 mana and cast my turn 5 Rise of the Dark Realms...wait, what good is that going to do again?
What IS an acceptable win, in your opinion? Is one only allowed to win after 20 turns of smashing slightly bigger creatures against those of their opponents? Except they may not be too good like Avenger of Zendikar because that too should be banned? I'm not following.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
As someone pointed out, many of those spells can be handled with graveyard hate, which is available in artifact form. All of these spells cost a bit to play, require set up, and they are all at Sorcery speed, you can always destroy their mana artifacts or key cards that bring them into play before you have your defense.
Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest WUR Voltron Control
Temmet, Vizier of Naktamun WU Unblockable Mirror Trickery
Ra's al Ghul (Sidar Kondo) and Face-Down Ninjas
Brudiclad, Token Engineer
Vaevictis (VV2) the Dire Lantern
Rona, Disciple of Gix
Tiana the Auror
Hallar
Ulrich the Politician
Zur the Rebel
Scorpion, Locust, Scarab, Egyptian Gods
O-Kagachi, Mathas, Mairsil
"Non-Tribal" Tribal Generals, Eggs
An acceptable win to me happens somewhat organically.
A player sitting there with nothing then casting rite of replication on an opposing creature like gray merchant of asphodel and ending the game is the most boring kind of game to me.
If they built up threats over several turns and won, great.
If they built up threats, had them removed, and then win anyways because their graveyard wasn't exiled, bad.
Rite of Replication is a 9 mana spell (assuming that they've kicked it). I'm not quite sure how you're supposed to get to 9 mana without building up a threat. Lands and mana rocks are the biggest threats in the game. If you don't want people casting spells liek those you list, don;'t let them get to the kind of mana they need to cast them....
Except those wins are organic. They are wins based on the current game conditions. GY full of creatures happens organically. Accumulating mana happens organically. All of the conditions that make any of the cards you listed "unfair" happen during normal play of a game.
I, like many others, just can't get behind your crusade here. In all honesty, this isn't the format for you if those cards cause such a problem for you. Those are the "big, splashy" plays that the RC raves about, and in reality, the cards that define the format. They see next to no play anywhere else except EDH.
Lands for the first 3 turns
Turn 4: Land, Play thran dynamo
Turn 5: Mana crypt
As one example. Are you going to spend your turn destroying the thran dynamo? Maybe, maybe not, but my experience is usually it would see at least one untap step.
Others include things like extraplanar lens, gauntlet of power, caged sun, gilded lotus.
You can also go more durable with green with a couple of double land ramp spells like explosive vegetation, ranger's path, skyshroud claim.
A big part of the problem is that save for some specific ridiculous spells like defense of the heart and living death, 8+ mana spells seem to be designed to take down an edh table, when it is not that hard to get the extra mana.
It might be a bit harder to get the extra mana, for a 1000% increase in gamewinning ability.
EDIT: Saw your point of Gray Merchant, so I can see that being an issue, but how often does someone have Gray Merchant on the field at the same time someone wants to cast a kicked Rite? Once in a while seems fine. All the time (to the point of it being an actual issue) seems unlikely. Even more unlikely is that no one ever has an answer to Gray Merchant.
As for other people running them, I make sure my deck has methods to deal with this type of card. The only one you can't really deal with without blue is Omniscience - it needs to be countered or krosan gripped otherwise they can probably counter your spot removal to it since its now free and all.
So if you don't like them, just leave them out of your deck and make sure your packing answers for them. People are very right when they say that you can play around these cards
RRGrenzo plays your deck, GGYeva's mono green control, WW9-tails trys desperately for monowhite not to suck
RWBUTymna and Kraum's saboteur tribal, UWG Kestia's Enchantress Aggro, RUB Jeleva casts big dumb spells, RGB Vaevictis' big critters can kill your critters hard
Arena Standard
UUUU Tempo, since before it was cool
Various Wx decks running Fountain of Renewal and Day of Glory
Anything I can cram Chaos Wand in to
FFA. I ended up kicking on eternal witness in both decks more often though I never found RoR to be the key problem card for me in modem it was mana reflection gift ungiven and zendikar resurgent in commander it was all about the black tutors. The modern deck was 125 cards and singleton. Killed the table about 2 turns slower on average. The RoR can be just about anything at 9-10 mana the cards are designed to end games
Damia http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=410191
DDFT Legacyhttp://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=505247
Domain Zoo http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10212429#post10212429
An enigma as vexing as life itself.
Having read your posts on Commander I honestly have to ask if you are just trolling these forums? Every time is the same formula, a thing no one else thinks is that big a problem a bunch of reasons explaining why the problem is not a problem and then you ignoring all of those reasons and continuing from square one.
It feels intentional after more than 2 examples of it.
I believe the average commander player doesn't pay attention to what's actually going on in their games. What's winning, what's useless, what appears broken but isn't and what is actually absurd. I also believe it is extremely difficult to properly construct a casual commander deck that leads to fun games, well beyond the design skill of most players. It takes me days of thought and careful compromise to try and come up with a balanced commander deck, and that's with more than a decade of multiplayer experience.
The fact that people disagree with me does not bother me. I believe they will eventually realize I am right.
For example, I've recieved dozens of "just run more removal" replies. I ignore those outright.
Would it be possible for you to put some of your lists on the forums? I'd like to see what your design philosophy is. It's possible that you're having trouble with these spells for a reason, and maybe this is less a complaint or troll thread and more a way of asking for advice without actually asking for advice. Just my thoughts. At the very least, what generals do you run?
You also ignore any other argument. Like how Insurrection needs there to be at least 120-damage already done power worth of creatures to be on the field. Or how Rise of the Dark Realms is definitely not a surefire win if there's no haste outlet along. Let alone Living Death. None of those cards are single-card finishers, they're simply very good cards that need to be answered one way or another, the same way big creatures do. I have plenty of commander experience to see that none of those on their own are a problem. If the graves get piled full and someone makes use of that; fair game to them. They still haven't won the game. But at least it causes the game to progress.
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
It doesn't need to immediately end the game on the spot for the game to be over. Inssurection taking out the main threat and leaving you in a dominant board position is plenty for an edh game to be over. It also doesn't feel less swingy when you are the target of an insurrection swing just because someone else happens to not die. You lost all your defenses and almost certainly targetted removal isn't going to stop the kill.
Living death for example would commonly recur something like eternal witness...getting back living death, making it extremely difficult to ever overcome the board state that comes afterwards.
Then there is nothing more to be said now is there? If you are not willing to even entertain that your argument may be incorrect or flawed then what can be gained from this discussion?
Say hello to the elves for me, and don't forget to feed the reindeer when you leave Christmas land.
You're wrong, on so many levels. There isn't even logic behind this anymore. Like I said, your in the wrong format. 6 pages now of just nonsensical arguments against situationally good, 7+ mana spells. It's what the format is all about.
To answer the main question, no, Wizards is not killing the format by printing these cards, they are enhancing it. Banning these cards would kill the format. I play EDH because I can viably pop off a 10 mana spell, turn-6 or turn-20, because games actually last long enough to use them.
Nobody is going to see it this way, and obviously your playgroup doesn't either since you are continually seeing these spells.
There's options out there, EDH variants, or just another format all together. It's just so painfully obvious you are in the wrong place.
I consider Enter the Infinite and Rise of the Dark Realms to be actively bad. Enter the Infinite can lose you the game with draw effects and you need to have really much mana to put those drawn cards into use, Rise of the Dark Realms on the other hand gets hosed by just so many things. Winning with Omniscience is more of a symptome than a cause. You must have set it up right and with this work you could just use another strong engine. For Insurrection there must be some factors right to do good work. But with that many free sac-effects floating around the card is at the bare minimum a one-sided Wrath, which is undeniable strong. Rite of Replication is strong and quite flexible with the 4 mana alternative. Living Death and Mizzix's Mastery are actually really strong. But those cards where meant to be game-changing and quite some amount of them without Commander in mind. Losing at the hand of such strong effects (but maybe more competitive ones) has always been a part of Magic in every format and every part of it (Ramp in Standard, Tron in Modern, Sneak and Show in Legacy, and don't get me started on kitchen table magic)! It's part of the game! So no, Wizards is not slowly killing Magic, but many Timmies play Commander... And Timmies are a group for which Wizards specifically designs (such) cards.
What me confuses is the list of cards you pick: Survival of the Fittest, Humility, Palinchron are all cards that shift the game to the extreme and are absolutely legal in Commander. And that is only a small glimpse at some of the 'worst'/'coolest' cards ever printed. Doesn't anyone play with these in your local meta?