It's been a number of years since Commander has become a "large" format. We have one aspect of the game finally at a close with the new 4 color commander decks finally being released. This only leaves more than likely next year's Ally preconstructeds and sometime after that colorless and 5 color.
Magic is a very large and viable game and adaptable. Planeswalkers were not created whenever Commander was still known as Elder Dragon Highlander. Since them we have seen a cycle of 5 Planeswalker Commanders from 2014. Every year our Commander list grows, but there's a greater focus on planeswalkers now as a core identity of Magic. Arguably, this is something that comes up every so often. But if we take from the lead of Mark Rosewater, in that Planeswalkers are the big identity push of Magic and their direction with marketing from Magic herein. This does not limit what Magic is doing when it comes to new Legendary Commanders or nerfs what is acceptable for new precon Commanders.
However, from a design stand point is one of the maxim's for simplicity. Why do we need to have a commander with a special tag on it that says "Maybe used as a Commander" to make it special?
A. Magic's identity is legendary creatures and Planeswalkers, they are pushing harder to make the identity of Planeswalkers a larger part of Magic.
B. Planeswalkers needing a special tag to "bypass" the "legendary only rule" is against a few presets of the Rules Council. The primary is requiring a special "in" for the Commander themselves, which is similar to rules errataing the Nephilim Cycle just for convenience prior to the precons being released. It is requiring a special rule to exist on a card, whenever the elimination of such rules baggage on a card would allow more options into the field. There have been other changes to harmonize rule sets such as changes to the tuck rule among others to better simplify, streamline, and harmonize Commander. The biggest example would be the change in the mulligan rules to use the new mulligan rules for all of Magic. It creates unnecessary clunkiness and limits the direction of the game's identity; planeswalkers.
C. Planeswalkers have more weaknesses than legendary creatures.
D. For future preconstructed decks, allowing Planeswalkers would open up design space for Magic Commander preconstructeds. It would also give greater value to planeswalkers in general since they can become generals after Standard is out. Thus allowing people who start in Standard to migrate more easily into Commander as an eternal.
E. It harmonizes "kitchen table rules" that allow for Planeswalker Commanders already.
G. As more planeswalker design space is mined, it would create more areas for more divergence in deck building strategies.
H. We would have Saheeli Rai and Dack Fayden as the Red/Blue artifact generals, among other deck types that are starved of legendaries for such color combination identities.
I. Werewolves would get Arlinn Kord as a Commander immediately running competition as a strong thematic choice.
J. Planeswalkers are people too and can be generals of an army, more so than some legendaries lorewise anyway.
K. They already exist as Commanders as a set of 5, and haven't created any rules set issue headaches and other such issues.
So adding new identity to color combinations, simplifying rules, and increasing the pool of commanders exponentially to open up more innovation is a key for the change. At the edge, since the creation of the Gatewatch Planeswalkers are central to Magic's marketing identity. As new players identify with Nissa or Jace, it becomes a rough question to justify why some Commanders can be planeswalkers and others cannot be when it only comes down a single rules text in a box. Adding simplicity and choice is one of the fundamental principals of harmonizing the rules for Commander.
I'd certainly love the idea overall, as Planeswalkers are a fun card and most wouldn't be any more broken then the nastiest of legal Legends. The only problem I can see is that it "forces" Wizards to keep Commander in mind for their Planeswalkers. ALWAYS having access to a Planeswalker, as well as being able to "recur" them so easily for multiple attempts at an ultimate, can make several of them very powerful. But I doubt it'd break the format, and it allows for lots of fun, thematic decks.
The big problem is is that you need to convince the Rules Committee of this. You are not the first, and they seem to not want to budge, so I am uncertain as to what may be said to move them.
Unfortunately every try hard from Sacramento to Shanghai preaches from the top of their 27 lands + Mana Reflection that Tooth and Nail and Time Stretch are fine to play in the same turn but Armageddon is unfair.
Do I want Ajani Vengeant, Karn Liberated, Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker, Sorin Markov, either Tezzeret, Ugin, the Spirit Dragon... in command zone? Not really, no. In developed metas these are would not be concerns at all, but I have zero interest in playing against Ugin, Karn, or Sorin in the command zone, regardless of how good the rest of the deck is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes... Three generations of imbeciles are enough."
--Buck v Bell, 1927. This case, regarding the compulsory sterilization of inmates at mental institutions, has -- somehow -- never been overturned. Just a wee PSA for ya.
I think the idea most certainly has merits and you aren't the first (and probably won't be the last) to bring up the possibility of allowing Planeswalkers as Commanders. First, some of my thoughts regarding some of your arguments:
B. Planeswalkers needing a special tag to "bypass" the "legendary only rule" is against a few presets of the Rules Council. The primary is requiring a special "in" for the Commander themselves, which is similar to rules errataing the Nephilim Cycle just for convenience prior to the precons being released. It is requiring a special rule to exist on a card, whenever the elimination of such rules baggage on a card would allow more options into the field. There have been other changes to harmonize rule sets such as changes to the tuck rule among others to better simplify, streamline, and harmonize Commander. The biggest example would be the change in the mulligan rules to use the new mulligan rules for all of Magic. It creates unnecessary clunkiness and limits the direction of the game's identity; planeswalkers.
I am not sure this is accurate. Having a special "in" on the current Planeswalker generals doesn't really go against any precepts of the current format philosophy. Magic has "special rules" in every format that go against the basics of that format. Annihilator (on Kozilek, Butcher of Truth) make you sacrifice a bunch of permanents except Sigarda, Host of Herons says different. While the current Planeswalkers are a more narrow example of this, it is not the first time a card overrides the inherent rules of the format (or the game itself for that matter). This also isn't even close to House-Ruling the Nephilim to be acceptable commanders. What has been done is a legal way to allow some Planeswalkers to act as generals. Nephilim are going against what the cards allow and to use them anyway. There isn't anything wrong with that, but they are different scenarios.
C. Planeswalkers have more weaknesses than legendary creatures.
I would be interested in example to back this up because from my perspective, Creatures have more weaknesses. There are so many cards that just get rid of creatures (Swords to Plowshares, Path to Exile, Damnation, Toxic Deluge) that don't touch Planeswalkers.
D. For future preconstructed decks, allowing Planeswalkers would open up design space for Magic Commander preconstructeds. It would also give greater value to planeswalkers in general since they can become generals after Standard is out. Thus allowing people who start in Standard to migrate more easily into Commander as an eternal.
As has already been shown, Wizards can already print Planeswalkers as Commanders if they want. Changing the rule doesn't open anything up for Wizards.
E. It harmonizes "kitchen table rules" that allow for Planeswalker Commanders already.
There will always be house rules so harmonizing those with the official rules is an uphill (and losing) battle. The best example against this is the one you have already mentioned; Nephilim. Those have been house-ruled in a number of playgroups and the RC isn't about to make an official rule allowing their use.
The only "Commander-Challenged" colors are Colorless (as you mentioned), 4 Color (which wouldn't be helped with this rule), and maybe 5 color (which also wouldn't be helped). In fact, I would argue that allowing Karn Liberated or Ugin as Commanders would make things worse, not better. A general that can continuously exile things and potentially restart the game and a repeatable board wipe that you always have access to are not things I want to see sitting across from me. Child of Alara is bad enough when they have to come up with each color mana and make it die, which means it is slower and they can't just recast it again. They then have to find a way to get it back to the Command Zone to re-use it. Ugin has no such restrictions.
J. Planeswalkers are people too and can be generals of an army, more so than some legendaries lorewise anyway.
Sure, but the flavor behind "loyalty" is that the Planeswalker is only willing to help out when they want to. If they get hurt to much, or too much is asked of them, they just go away. This isn't a reason not to let them be commanders, but flavor, or lore, isn't a good enough reason to allow them. Nor does it need to be for that matter.
K. They already exist as Commanders as a set of 5, and haven't created any rules set issue headaches and other such issues.
Of course they didn't. They were made to adhere to the current rules. They were intentionally worded in a way not to be a rules headache.
I cut out a few things I either agreed with or didn't feel were bad arguments, so that is why what I quoted is cut down a bit. With everything mentioned above, I do want to re-iterate that this isn't necessarily a bad idea, but there is more to it than just "let planeswalkers be commanders". Planeswalkers are often strong and giving access to them on curve and all the time would not make the format better (in my opinion). You mentioned Tamiyo, Field Researcher as a commander and she is one that I would ultimately have to target if someone sat down with her as their commander. Her ultimate is potentially game-breaking and Blue has enough cards to protect her and Green has ways to potentially ramp her out early.
Yeah, far too many PWs are game-breakingly powerful to allow them as commanders. I currently play Liliana, Heretical Healer as a Mono-Black hand control. Liliana of the Veil would be a strict upgrade. And would simply make things miserable early game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I'd certainly love the idea overall, as Planeswalkers are a fun card and most wouldn't be any more broken then the nastiest of legal Legends. The only problem I can see is that it "forces" Wizards to keep Commander in mind for their Planeswalkers. ALWAYS having access to a Planeswalker, as well as being able to "recur" them so easily for multiple attempts at an ultimate, can make several of them very powerful. But I doubt it'd break the format, and it allows for lots of fun, thematic decks.
The big problem is is that you need to convince the Rules Committee of this. You are not the first, and they seem to not want to budge, so I am uncertain as to what may be said to move them.
Oh, I know this has been debated to death over the years. The need is to refine the argument and show support, by having the ability to debate against those that are against the change.
However, they have been making changes to simplify and coordinate rules. This is greater rules simplification for the format. Along with one of the glaring problems, the marketing of Magic uses Jace as Mickey Mouse or Superman. So while "we" the "older players" see legendary creatures as a face, the greater push through marketing and storyline direction places emphasis on the identity of Planeswalker themselves for younger players. This is only going to snowball, and that's something that I'd like to really debate about with someone who has some finer points against it.
It's "not really a want" but more of the direction where Magic is going and has been going for sometime now and harmonizing the post Oath of the Gatewatchers world of Magic with one of now the most iconic formats of Commander.
The Rules Council is pragmatic, they were willing to change the name of the format from Elder Dragon Highlander to Commander. I feel that this change is similar in vein to some realities of the need for branding and being inclusive of the new movement in marketing direction of the game. With Kaladesh we're already seeing the gateway product as Planeswalker decks, this is the last step in harmonizing with this new reality to bring more players into the Commander fold.
"Cool I get to melt face with Chandra!"
That's the thing I'm looking at for younger players. Without younger players, this format dies and we need to get those youngsters they're marketing to into this format and not just Standard.
I'd love more than anything to make Sarkhan the Mad my commander partly because even with him I can easily make that idea into the most terrible mistake imaginable.
No. This would give us another 70+ generals.
Also likely leads to the banning of Tezzeret the seeker which I adore so I'd rather not
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hey guys so I've actually moved on from commander on to 60 card decks so I don't have any commander decks.
Anyway I've started my own gameplay channel in which I play games (Magic also)
No. This would give us another 70+ generals.
Also likely leads to the banning of Tezzeret the seeker which I adore so I'd rather not
This is where my biggest concern is. I don't want more cards getting a full ban in this format. Maybe if they can bring back the banned-as-a-commander list.
i dont see what the major fuss is whether or not it is 'officially' accepted.. if i build a deck with nicol bolas, planeswalker as my general and took it to a game night, i'd just ask the others if its cool, and if not, i'd have to whip out some other deck/swap bolas out for something else. its not a huge deal. its not like rosewater and the DCI is gonna bust through the windows and throw banhammers at us, right?
if i sat down at a table and someone else wants to have a PW as a general, i wouldn't be too fussed. if the PW general turns out to be insanely unfun to play against, i'd make sure that player knows; and if its deliberately done to troll us, then its just one more i'd add to my "don't share gaming ideals with" list.
even in places like conventions and all that, i'm pretty sure there'd be enough peeps out there who'd be willing to play a game or two just for funsies. there is no need for an official stamp of approval for PWs to be allowed to be generals. if its an officially sanctioned format, where i'm actually playing for prizes or whatever, i might be a bit more up in arms about it, but as it stands, its a casual format, and i'd want to keep the official rules baggage as low as possible.
I'm unsure of whether I like this idea (can't quite decide), but heres the pros and cons I can see off the top of my head:
Pros
-Overnight, we'd suddenly have 79 new commanders as options for commanders (cant count the 5 that already can be played as commander). It would take atleast a solid year for the edh community to settle down and adjust to this change. While crazy to think of, imagine how much fun it would be to have no idea what 79 new commanders are capable of. Also, imagine how much fun it would be testing them.
-Would open up a plethora of new playstyles, different commander options offering a lot more potential fun for both pilot and opponent
-planeswalkers which are representative of the whole card game could actually be played as a general (think how cool that would be for newcomers to the format) and would likely make the format grow in popularity. And no, 10 planeswalkers (5 flips, 5 precons) as options that are currently allowed isn't enough when comparing it to a whopping 79 more as legal commanders.
Cons
-Seeing as the "banned as commander" ruling is gone, certain cards that are fine to have in your deck would likely become banned because they are unfit to play as commander (examples may include sorin markov, vraska the unseen or tezzeret the seeker)
-potential slippery slope? Once something like this has been done it opens up the question "why can't we allow other things to become commanders?" for example people may ask for double sided cards with a legendary on the back to bypass the rule, for example elbrus, the binding blade or dark depths
There's also the issue of Green planeswalkers and Doubling Season. Have the Season out and Garruk, Primal Hunter becomes 2GGG: Put X 6/6 wurm tokens onto the battlefield, where X is twice the number of lands you control. This card gets 2 more expensive each time you cast it.
Not sure I'd want that, and there'll be other headaches too.
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'm going to go with a no as well, in no small part due to the fact that commander is at least partially defined by the commander damage rule (which most walkers can't interact with, minus some hilarious animated permanent shenanigans). Removing an entire format-defining win condition from, what, 75 of the available new commanders? Not fun.
I'm going to also offer a "no". I do not believe commander is the place to allow planeswalkers to lead decks. I feel planeswalkers commander should be a separate or variant format because it would need to maintain it own ban list for cards like Sorin Markov and Doubling Season and certain Proliferate cards or else the format would quickly degenerate
What happens now if I play a Teferi PW and you play a Teferi PW? PW rule where they both die (like the old legend rule) or new legend rule?
I'd be more open to PWs as generals if they acted under the old legend rule. I don't get the flavor of "well, you can summon Gerrard, but so can I, so let's have them fight!" No, all you do is negate both of them.
Being able to play your general is a bonus in this format. It should not be a necessity.
I'm going to also offer a "no". I do not believe commander is the place to allow planeswalkers to lead decks. I feel planeswalkers commander should be a separate or variant format because it would need to maintain it own ban list for cards like Sorin Markov and Doubling Season and certain Proliferate cards or else the format would quickly degenerate
This. So much this.
The things that are broken in PW decks would not necessarily be what are broken in normal Commander decks. If you want to try out this variant, by all means do so!
But, please, don't try to drag everyone else along with you.
Do I want Ajani Vengeant, Karn Liberated, Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker, Sorin Markov, either Tezzeret, Ugin, the Spirit Dragon... in command zone? Not really, no. In developed metas these are would not be concerns at all, but I have zero interest in playing against Ugin, Karn, or Sorin in the command zone, regardless of how good the rest of the deck is.
This, and the fact that I can't think of any other planeswalkers that I'd pay 2, 4, 6, or more extra to recast.
What happens now if I play a Teferi PW and you play a Teferi PW? PW rule where they both die (like the old legend rule) or new legend rule?
Pretty sure opposing Planeswalkers are fine, as they have been since the Legend rule change. I certainly don't remember anything about Playing the same Planeswalker knocking out the other at any point in time... That'd certainly change how popular they are in Standard and such.
But as was pointed out before, what's to stop you from doing this? Honestly, Commander rules are really just something to keep in mind. A good thing to keep everyone on the same page, but doubt it'd matter. Honestly, I would have more reservations about playing against something super oppressive then a Planeswalker theme deck, but Leovold (for example) is legal and Sarkhan the Mad is not. Honestly, it really just comes down to playgroups, intentions, and desires. If people want to try something weird, a good playgroup will usually agree for the sake of fun.
Besides, I find most new players don't even think about using Planeswalkers for Commander, especially given that most Legends are SUPER cheap in comparison.
What happens now if I play a Teferi PW and you play a Teferi PW? PW rule where they both die (like the old legend rule) or new legend rule?
Pretty sure opposing Planeswalkers are fine, as they have been since the Legend rule change. I certainly don't remember anything about Playing the same Planeswalker knocking out the other at any point in time... That'd certainly change how popular they are in Standard and such.
Well, there was when Jace, the Mind Sculptor was first released and everyone played Beleren just to kill off opposing Mind Sculptors to play their own.
But i think this is something that should stay in the house rules world. More commander products should be have PWs as commanders and the flip walkers from MTG Origins are good for now.
Magic is a very large and viable game and adaptable. Planeswalkers were not created whenever Commander was still known as Elder Dragon Highlander. Since them we have seen a cycle of 5 Planeswalker Commanders from 2014. Every year our Commander list grows, but there's a greater focus on planeswalkers now as a core identity of Magic. Arguably, this is something that comes up every so often. But if we take from the lead of Mark Rosewater, in that Planeswalkers are the big identity push of Magic and their direction with marketing from Magic herein. This does not limit what Magic is doing when it comes to new Legendary Commanders or nerfs what is acceptable for new precon Commanders.
However, from a design stand point is one of the maxim's for simplicity. Why do we need to have a commander with a special tag on it that says "Maybe used as a Commander" to make it special?
A. Magic's identity is legendary creatures and Planeswalkers, they are pushing harder to make the identity of Planeswalkers a larger part of Magic.
B. Planeswalkers needing a special tag to "bypass" the "legendary only rule" is against a few presets of the Rules Council. The primary is requiring a special "in" for the Commander themselves, which is similar to rules errataing the Nephilim Cycle just for convenience prior to the precons being released. It is requiring a special rule to exist on a card, whenever the elimination of such rules baggage on a card would allow more options into the field. There have been other changes to harmonize rule sets such as changes to the tuck rule among others to better simplify, streamline, and harmonize Commander. The biggest example would be the change in the mulligan rules to use the new mulligan rules for all of Magic. It creates unnecessary clunkiness and limits the direction of the game's identity; planeswalkers.
C. Planeswalkers have more weaknesses than legendary creatures.
D. For future preconstructed decks, allowing Planeswalkers would open up design space for Magic Commander preconstructeds. It would also give greater value to planeswalkers in general since they can become generals after Standard is out. Thus allowing people who start in Standard to migrate more easily into Commander as an eternal.
E. It harmonizes "kitchen table rules" that allow for Planeswalker Commanders already.
F. Allowing Planeswalker Commanders would open up "Commander challenged" color combinations. Namely colorless would gain Karn Liberated and Ugin, the Spirit Dragon. We would already have a new Bant Commander with Tamiyo, Field Researcher
G. As more planeswalker design space is mined, it would create more areas for more divergence in deck building strategies.
H. We would have Saheeli Rai and Dack Fayden as the Red/Blue artifact generals, among other deck types that are starved of legendaries for such color combination identities.
I. Werewolves would get Arlinn Kord as a Commander immediately running competition as a strong thematic choice.
J. Planeswalkers are people too and can be generals of an army, more so than some legendaries lorewise anyway.
K. They already exist as Commanders as a set of 5, and haven't created any rules set issue headaches and other such issues.
So adding new identity to color combinations, simplifying rules, and increasing the pool of commanders exponentially to open up more innovation is a key for the change. At the edge, since the creation of the Gatewatch Planeswalkers are central to Magic's marketing identity. As new players identify with Nissa or Jace, it becomes a rough question to justify why some Commanders can be planeswalkers and others cannot be when it only comes down a single rules text in a box. Adding simplicity and choice is one of the fundamental principals of harmonizing the rules for Commander.
Thank you.
What are your thoughts?
Modern
Commander
Cube
<a href="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-lists/588020-unpowered-themed-enchantment-an-enchanted-evening">An Enchanted Evening Cube </a>
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'
The big problem is is that you need to convince the Rules Committee of this. You are not the first, and they seem to not want to budge, so I am uncertain as to what may be said to move them.
EDIT: Grammar
--Buck v Bell, 1927. This case, regarding the compulsory sterilization of inmates at mental institutions, has -- somehow -- never been overturned. Just a wee PSA for ya.
I am not sure this is accurate. Having a special "in" on the current Planeswalker generals doesn't really go against any precepts of the current format philosophy. Magic has "special rules" in every format that go against the basics of that format. Annihilator (on Kozilek, Butcher of Truth) make you sacrifice a bunch of permanents except Sigarda, Host of Herons says different. While the current Planeswalkers are a more narrow example of this, it is not the first time a card overrides the inherent rules of the format (or the game itself for that matter). This also isn't even close to House-Ruling the Nephilim to be acceptable commanders. What has been done is a legal way to allow some Planeswalkers to act as generals. Nephilim are going against what the cards allow and to use them anyway. There isn't anything wrong with that, but they are different scenarios.
I would be interested in example to back this up because from my perspective, Creatures have more weaknesses. There are so many cards that just get rid of creatures (Swords to Plowshares, Path to Exile, Damnation, Toxic Deluge) that don't touch Planeswalkers.
As has already been shown, Wizards can already print Planeswalkers as Commanders if they want. Changing the rule doesn't open anything up for Wizards.
There will always be house rules so harmonizing those with the official rules is an uphill (and losing) battle. The best example against this is the one you have already mentioned; Nephilim. Those have been house-ruled in a number of playgroups and the RC isn't about to make an official rule allowing their use.
The only "Commander-Challenged" colors are Colorless (as you mentioned), 4 Color (which wouldn't be helped with this rule), and maybe 5 color (which also wouldn't be helped). In fact, I would argue that allowing Karn Liberated or Ugin as Commanders would make things worse, not better. A general that can continuously exile things and potentially restart the game and a repeatable board wipe that you always have access to are not things I want to see sitting across from me. Child of Alara is bad enough when they have to come up with each color mana and make it die, which means it is slower and they can't just recast it again. They then have to find a way to get it back to the Command Zone to re-use it. Ugin has no such restrictions.
Sure, but the flavor behind "loyalty" is that the Planeswalker is only willing to help out when they want to. If they get hurt to much, or too much is asked of them, they just go away. This isn't a reason not to let them be commanders, but flavor, or lore, isn't a good enough reason to allow them. Nor does it need to be for that matter.
Of course they didn't. They were made to adhere to the current rules. They were intentionally worded in a way not to be a rules headache.
I cut out a few things I either agreed with or didn't feel were bad arguments, so that is why what I quoted is cut down a bit. With everything mentioned above, I do want to re-iterate that this isn't necessarily a bad idea, but there is more to it than just "let planeswalkers be commanders". Planeswalkers are often strong and giving access to them on curve and all the time would not make the format better (in my opinion). You mentioned Tamiyo, Field Researcher as a commander and she is one that I would ultimately have to target if someone sat down with her as their commander. Her ultimate is potentially game-breaking and Blue has enough cards to protect her and Green has ways to potentially ramp her out early.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Oh, I know this has been debated to death over the years. The need is to refine the argument and show support, by having the ability to debate against those that are against the change.
However, they have been making changes to simplify and coordinate rules. This is greater rules simplification for the format. Along with one of the glaring problems, the marketing of Magic uses Jace as Mickey Mouse or Superman. So while "we" the "older players" see legendary creatures as a face, the greater push through marketing and storyline direction places emphasis on the identity of Planeswalker themselves for younger players. This is only going to snowball, and that's something that I'd like to really debate about with someone who has some finer points against it.
It's "not really a want" but more of the direction where Magic is going and has been going for sometime now and harmonizing the post Oath of the Gatewatchers world of Magic with one of now the most iconic formats of Commander.
The Rules Council is pragmatic, they were willing to change the name of the format from Elder Dragon Highlander to Commander. I feel that this change is similar in vein to some realities of the need for branding and being inclusive of the new movement in marketing direction of the game. With Kaladesh we're already seeing the gateway product as Planeswalker decks, this is the last step in harmonizing with this new reality to bring more players into the Commander fold.
"Cool I get to melt face with Chandra!"
That's the thing I'm looking at for younger players. Without younger players, this format dies and we need to get those youngsters they're marketing to into this format and not just Standard.
Modern
Commander
Cube
<a href="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-lists/588020-unpowered-themed-enchantment-an-enchanted-evening">An Enchanted Evening Cube </a>
Also likely leads to the banning of Tezzeret the seeker which I adore so I'd rather not
Anyway I've started my own gameplay channel in which I play games (Magic also)
Twitch:
https://www.twitch.tv/dies_to_doom_blade
Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/user/UpsidedownHandshake
This is where my biggest concern is. I don't want more cards getting a full ban in this format. Maybe if they can bring back the banned-as-a-commander list.
if i sat down at a table and someone else wants to have a PW as a general, i wouldn't be too fussed. if the PW general turns out to be insanely unfun to play against, i'd make sure that player knows; and if its deliberately done to troll us, then its just one more i'd add to my "don't share gaming ideals with" list.
even in places like conventions and all that, i'm pretty sure there'd be enough peeps out there who'd be willing to play a game or two just for funsies. there is no need for an official stamp of approval for PWs to be allowed to be generals. if its an officially sanctioned format, where i'm actually playing for prizes or whatever, i might be a bit more up in arms about it, but as it stands, its a casual format, and i'd want to keep the official rules baggage as low as possible.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
Pros
-Overnight, we'd suddenly have 79 new commanders as options for commanders (cant count the 5 that already can be played as commander). It would take atleast a solid year for the edh community to settle down and adjust to this change. While crazy to think of, imagine how much fun it would be to have no idea what 79 new commanders are capable of. Also, imagine how much fun it would be testing them.
-Would open up a plethora of new playstyles, different commander options offering a lot more potential fun for both pilot and opponent
-planeswalkers which are representative of the whole card game could actually be played as a general (think how cool that would be for newcomers to the format) and would likely make the format grow in popularity. And no, 10 planeswalkers (5 flips, 5 precons) as options that are currently allowed isn't enough when comparing it to a whopping 79 more as legal commanders.
Cons
-Seeing as the "banned as commander" ruling is gone, certain cards that are fine to have in your deck would likely become banned because they are unfit to play as commander (examples may include sorin markov, vraska the unseen or tezzeret the seeker)
-potential slippery slope? Once something like this has been done it opens up the question "why can't we allow other things to become commanders?" for example people may ask for double sided cards with a legendary on the back to bypass the rule, for example elbrus, the binding blade or dark depths
Not sure I'd want that, and there'll be other headaches too.
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'd be more open to PWs as generals if they acted under the old legend rule. I don't get the flavor of "well, you can summon Gerrard, but so can I, so let's have them fight!" No, all you do is negate both of them.
Being able to play your general is a bonus in this format. It should not be a necessity.
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'
This. So much this.
The things that are broken in PW decks would not necessarily be what are broken in normal Commander decks. If you want to try out this variant, by all means do so!
But, please, don't try to drag everyone else along with you.
This, and the fact that I can't think of any other planeswalkers that I'd pay 2, 4, 6, or more extra to recast.
WBG Karador, Ghost Chieftain
B Toshiro Umezawa
BG Pharika, God of Affliction - Necromancy and Politics
WWW The Church of Heliod
WBR Zurgo, Helmsmasher
RG Wort, the Raidmother
UBR Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge
UG Vorel of the Hull Clade
Pretty sure opposing Planeswalkers are fine, as they have been since the Legend rule change. I certainly don't remember anything about Playing the same Planeswalker knocking out the other at any point in time... That'd certainly change how popular they are in Standard and such.
But as was pointed out before, what's to stop you from doing this? Honestly, Commander rules are really just something to keep in mind. A good thing to keep everyone on the same page, but doubt it'd matter. Honestly, I would have more reservations about playing against something super oppressive then a Planeswalker theme deck, but Leovold (for example) is legal and Sarkhan the Mad is not. Honestly, it really just comes down to playgroups, intentions, and desires. If people want to try something weird, a good playgroup will usually agree for the sake of fun.
Besides, I find most new players don't even think about using Planeswalkers for Commander, especially given that most Legends are SUPER cheap in comparison.
Well, there was when Jace, the Mind Sculptor was first released and everyone played Beleren just to kill off opposing Mind Sculptors to play their own.
WBG Karador, Ghost Chieftain
B Toshiro Umezawa
BG Pharika, God of Affliction - Necromancy and Politics
WWW The Church of Heliod
WBR Zurgo, Helmsmasher
RG Wort, the Raidmother
UBR Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge
UG Vorel of the Hull Clade
This says you can't have two of the same in play at once (instead of "there can't be two in play at once").
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'
With some bans I think they could work.
But i think this is something that should stay in the house rules world. More commander products should be have PWs as commanders and the flip walkers from MTG Origins are good for now.
In Progress
GBIshkanah, Grafwidow ~ BWGRTymna the Weaver & Tana, the Bloodsower ~ UGRashmi, Eternities Crafter ~ RGAtarka, World Render