What has Commander gotta do with Modern or Standard? I think you're not discussing this fairly here.
And LOL another argument that starts with Doubling Season. If DS was a colorless enchantment, I think you may have some ground. But it's green.
Look, this is just a preliminary discussion, and is open for debate. Closing oneself of ideas means boundaries wouldn't be pushed.
If we didn't push boundaries, we may not get things like Vehicles and Energy and Monarch today.
Planeswalkers are the focal point today, as correctly pointed out by the OP. Even the Magic Story lore has been warp around them, aka the Gatewatch. Again, if you don't like them, you don't have to play them. But don't shut out the idea.
Because this idea is already in black and white with our original 5. It's very feasible, and it's not over-the-top ridiculous that you dismiss it totally.
Emblems being uninterative (due to not being able to remove them?) Oh please. We have Poison Counters, Experience Counters. And now Energy.
I would say look at things with an open mind. Especially with modern magic these days. Anything can happen. Double faced cards. Legends-to-walkers double faced cards.
It's call evolution, folks. Be ready to embrace changes, or you be left behind. The essence is still Magic. It's still Commander. Look outside the box.
The issue isn't closed mindedness. I like a lot of the changes that WotC has made over the years, even things that started off scary. I don't like Walkers because of the ones they printed in the pre-cons. They are absolutely miserable to play against. I don't get to control what other people play but I'm convinced that opening up any Walker to the Commander slot is a bad idea. The value they can generate over the course of a game is nuts and that isn't even including their emblems. Sure, the example I used of how broke they are is the ceiling, not the floor but I think the floor is just as bad. Granted, that's just my opinion. When they first printed the Precons with the Walkers I was excited! I thought that this would be a great experiment and using Walkers designed with abilities balanced for the format. It was a train wreck. It was one of the most annoying things to play against. It is so difficult to deal with them. Sure you can attack them but that doesn't always work and if no one else at the table helps then you get punished for being the one to attempt to do what it takes to get rid of the threat. Until removal for 'Walkers reaches the same level that it has for Lands, Artifacts, Enchantments, and Creatures, I am of the mind that they are just too powerful. DS is just an example of the stupid things you get access to with Walkers that you don't get access to any other way. It is a problem unique to Walkers therefor a valid complaint against Walkers specifically.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The following link is an invitation to join Pucatrade (card trading service though similar to TCGPLayer). If you follow the link then it awards me with tokens to exchange for actual cards. Thanks! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
I'd argue that planeswalkers are one of the easiest card types to deal with, because any creature and any damage to a player can keep them in check, and or kill them. I play a dedicated planeswalker deck, and unless you have some potent protections or the board is empty, their are not lasting the turn cycle. I'm not saying all of the planeswalkers as would be balanced, but they are far from hard to deal with, including the ones we have now that can be commanders.
I'd argue that planeswalkers are one of the easiest card types to deal with, because any creature and any damage to a player can keep them in check, and or kill them. I play a dedicated planeswalker deck, and unless you have some potent protections or the board is empty, their are not lasting the turn cycle. I'm not saying all of the planeswalkers as would be balanced, but they are far from hard to deal with, including the ones we have now that can be commanders.
in a dedicated planeswalker deck... why would they last long? you're not running the tools to make them last long.
i've seen a resolved tezzeret the seeker do some pretty degenerate crap in decks not even built to exploit him. thats just the first one that pops into my head.
the reason they should not be legal unless the printed text says that they're legal as commanders is because none of them (except for those 5 that can be used right now (and i guess flip walkers)) are balanced around a commander type environment.
something like chandra ablaze is innocent enough when its part of the 99, but something like ugin can break a game even just as part of that 99. always having access to those that aren't balanced isn't fun for anyone to play against. it can be difficult enough for a table to deal with a planeswalker that says kill this thing now or the game changes with them just as part of the 99, when the entire deck is oriented around keeping that walker in play and exploiting its abilities? forget it.
I will always oppose this concept. I was very against the one situation where they built planeswalkers to be commanders but at least then they built with that in mind. Planeswalkers as commanders is far less interactive and harder to kill / remove as there is not that much removal for planeswalkers out there and most of it is any permanent or all non-land permenant removal.
The idea of planeswalkers as commanders in my mind is a very toxic idea. I would agree to it if life totals were 20 (aka I could just murder the player instead). Planeswalkers as a commander also extends your overall life as a player because they are soaking attacks that would otherwise hit you. There are just too many unfortunate things that turn the game into durdle control with planeswalkers as commanders so I would be against seeing it ever again to be honest.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
I will always oppose this concept. I was very against the one situation where they built planeswalkers to be commanders but at least then they built with that in mind. Planeswalkers as commanders is far less interactive and harder to kill / remove as there is not that much removal for planeswalkers out there and most of it is any permanent or all non-land permenant removal.
The idea of planeswalkers as commanders in my mind is a very toxic idea. I would agree to it if life totals were 20 (aka I could just murder the player instead). Planeswalkers as a commander also extends your overall life as a player because they are soaking attacks that would otherwise hit you. There are just too many unfortunate things that turn the game into durdle control with planeswalkers as commanders so I would be against seeing it ever again to be honest.
This is the most compelling argument against planeswalkers, in my opinion. Making EDH games even longer would probably not be very healthy for the format. Without adjusting the life totals (or something similar) it might get out of hand. I can already imagine 4 player games with 4 Planeswalker generals taking forever.
I will always oppose this concept. I was very against the one situation where they built planeswalkers to be commanders but at least then they built with that in mind. Planeswalkers as commanders is far less interactive and harder to kill / remove as there is not that much removal for planeswalkers out there and most of it is any permanent or all non-land permenant removal.
The idea of planeswalkers as commanders in my mind is a very toxic idea. I would agree to it if life totals were 20 (aka I could just murder the player instead). Planeswalkers as a commander also extends your overall life as a player because they are soaking attacks that would otherwise hit you. There are just too many unfortunate things that turn the game into durdle control with planeswalkers as commanders so I would be against seeing it ever again to be honest.
This is exactly my point as well. You covered the life total thing better than I did. I think that's why I hate the precon Ob Nixilis so much is because its basiacally Oloro in the Command Zone but it Oloro's ability also dinged each opponent. Its nearly as easy (not) to interact with a 'Walker on the field as it is Oloro in the Command Zone. (Sulphiric Vortex, Stigma Lasher, Havoc Festival)
RE: Removal. Sure it exists but again, my complaint with doing this is as much how it affects other formats as for how it affects Commander. Wizards now has to keep in mind how the abilities of a 'Walker affect Commander as well as Standard or Modern. That extends into 'Walker removal as well. We already have Dreadbore, Ruinous Path, and Hero's Downfall. Of those, I think only Hero's Downfall has any real flavor (cuz Elsepth even though the card isn't about her). I really don't want to see more "Destroy target Planeswalker" removal because I feel like it ruins the specialness of the 'Walkers but at the same time, if 'Walkers get to be Commanders then you over power G and B even further because they are the only colors that really get "Destroy target Planeswalker removal (Bramblecrush). Sure Dreadbore is B/R but you still have to be in black. White has O. Ring, etc. but G & B are already the top of the Commander heap anyway. Making 'Walkers commanders gives them yet another advantage in how easily they can deal with those threats vs the other colors.
tl;dr- Making all 'Walkers legal Commanders has much deeper and further reaching affects than I think anyone in here is really considering and changes the overall balance of the game in a way that I don't think is healthy for it at all, even beyond just this format.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The following link is an invitation to join Pucatrade (card trading service though similar to TCGPLayer). If you follow the link then it awards me with tokens to exchange for actual cards. Thanks! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
It's a bad idea. I play a Daretti, Scrap Savant stax build with MLD and will only play it when my opponents know what they are getting into. Some of the non legal ones are just to hard to interact with in a timely manner. At 40 life, if you set up your deck properly, it becomes very difficult outside of straight up combo to beat. And if you would be playing a 4 way game with 4 strong PW decks, it would just degenerate into oppressive emblems and what not.
I am very opposed to the idea of Planeswalkers becoming Commanders. I have many reasons, but for now I will say three: Removal Options/Stability, Format Toxicity, Complicating the Rules
Creatures have a ton of removal options, whereas most of the answers for Planeswalkers are fairly limited and wouldn't be run unless there were consistent Planeswalker decks. Creature commanders run answers, to answers just so that they don't super die. The difference between answers also makes Planeswalkers more stable commanders than their creature counterparts. Creatures are easy to repeatedly deal with, with Grave Pact tactics. Planeswalkers actually benefit from Wrath/Edict tactics, because they are missed. Someone mentioned that it would be fine for Planeswalkers, if they reverted Commander tuck rules. This is to say, that it would be fine if there were cards that forced the commander to be less consistent. Which means if the Planeswalker was a singleton, it wouldn't be an issue. Therefore this should infer that Planeswalkers position in the rules is fine. The tuck rule has helped the format in my opinion strongly, due to the fact that Commander tucking was really un-fun for everyone (and blue has enough strength already). Not to mention, even with these answers Planeswalkers immediately generate value based off Priority, whereas creatures normally do not get this type of value.
Format Toxicity:
You would be able to build decks entirely around the Planewalker, which would lead to abusive decks. I believe that the intention to make Planeswalkers into Commanders is an attempt to attract new people whereas, what it would really do would make a power spike for people with experience in Commander and make the Format toxic by pushing finely tuned Planeswalker decks, and hindering the approach-ability of Commander. Wizards has implemented Commander Planeswalkers previously (with varying results from weak to oppressive), I am fine with letting them continuing doing so.
Complicating the Rules:
Arguing that it would simplify rules is also inconsistent. Currently the rule is only Legendary Creatures, or cards that say otherwise. That's insanely simple. If it was instead Permanents with odd number of characters in their name and were drawn by Authors with a name that rhymes, than sure the rule needs to be simplified.
TL;DR;
I don't think there will ever be a time where Planeswalkers should be automatically included into the Commander pool due to the inherent strength of Planeswalkers.
I think people drastically overestimate planeswalkers in this format. I've talked about this at length, but planeswalkers are substantially worse when put into multiplayer because they become a politically acceptable target. While swinging at a player is an act of aggression, swinging at a PW is usually seen as removal. PWs in my experience aren't great at getting around the table unless someone just wrathed, so they either need to get immediate value or not be threatening enough to draw attacks. I think ultimately planeswalkers and creatures are pretty comparable when it comes to difficulty of removing them, but planeswalkers often don't require commiting spot removal to do so. Further, compared to the power and effectiveness of most popular commanders these days, PWs generally fall somewhat short, particularly because being restricted to once-per-turn makes them generally much less abusable.
The only walker I actually see on the potential chopping block is Tezz 1.0, with an argument to be made for maybe ugin. (But I don't buy it since he restricts you to colorless.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Check out the thread for my cube if you have the time, and tell me how terrible it is.
Generals meant to be drafted first in a single pack of 6 cards.
And here is the actual cube, meant to be drafted in 4 regular sized packs. (60 card decks)
I think people drastically overestimate planeswalkers in this format. I've talked about this at length, but planeswalkers are substantially worse when put into multiplayer because they become a politically acceptable target. While swinging at a player is an act of aggression, swinging at a PW is usually seen as removal. PWs in my experience aren't great at getting around the table unless someone just wrathed, so they either need to get immediate value or not be threatening enough to draw attacks. I think ultimately planeswalkers and creatures are pretty comparable when it comes to difficulty of removing them, but planeswalkers often don't require commiting spot removal to do so. Further, compared to the power and effectiveness of most popular commanders these days, PWs generally fall somewhat short, particularly because being restricted to once-per-turn makes them generally much less abusable.
The only walker I actually see on the potential chopping block is Tezz 1.0, with an argument to be made for maybe ugin. (But I don't buy it since he restricts you to colorless.)
You covered many of things I wanted to. While I do think there is a possibility for nasty Planewalker decks to appear, lets not get out of hand on how "hard" it is to get rid of them, because they are not. The only time I see a planeswalker live until ult across multiple turns, is when the board has been wiped or people ignore the planeswalker, and if it is ignored until it can ult, that's the way the cookie crumbles.
The only walker I actually see on the potential chopping block is Tezz 1.0, with an argument to be made for maybe ugin. (But I don't buy it since he restricts you to colorless.)
Have you ever played against a tuned colorless deck? They are the second best ramp "color," so imagine an annoyingly early one-sided wrath that the Ugin commander will be able to use for the entirety of the game. That isn't fun.
Sorin 1.0 being able to set people to 10 from the command zone is also pretty screwed up.
Dack gets very quickly to a game-warping ult at a cheap mana cost in control-capable colors.
Elspeth 1.0 is another walker who, if playable repeatedly, is hard not to get an ult in long wrath-filled games. I don't want to play against an indestructible emblem every other game, do you?
Lili of the Veil is very close to the already banned Braids, and more mana efficient to boot.
Im not even in the camp that walkers are broken (as I've said already, legendary status and commander damage help define the format, of which walkers are neither) but there are absolutely some unfun options in the pack.
The only walker I actually see on the potential chopping block is Tezz 1.0, with an argument to be made for maybe ugin. (But I don't buy it since he restricts you to colorless.)
Have you ever played against a tuned colorless deck? They are the second best ramp "color," so imagine an annoyingly early one-sided wrath that the Ugin commander will be able to use for the entirety of the game. That isn't fun.
Sorin 1.0 being able to set people to 10 from the command zone is also pretty screwed up.
Dack gets very quickly to a game-warping ult at a cheap mana cost in control-capable colors.
Elspeth 1.0 is another walker who, if playable repeatedly, is hard not to get an ult in long wrath-filled games. I don't want to play against an indestructible emblem every other game, do you?
Lili of the Veil is very close to the already banned Braids, and more mana efficient to boot.
Im not even in the camp that walkers are broken (as I've said already, legendary status and commander damage help define the format, of which walkers are neither) but there are absolutely some unfun options in the pack.
Then it would require a separate ban list to be maintained.
It might be time to just create a separate format then that can balance those issues using Commander as a base in the same way that Tiny Leaders works. Would need to set up a simple banned list with a rules listing, let it grow as is as a build on option. Would probably never amount to much outside of some interest. But it would have to be very different from Commander in some respects, perhaps pushing more towards a competitive format. That's really the only niche that one would fit into.
Creating:
A. Name of the format.
B. A "council" of it's own
C. Players that actually play it
D. Establishing a vision
Idea's not necessarily to "kill" or whatever with Commander as a taking your soccer ball. Rather an augmentation to an idea that has legitimacy and balance implications to something that already exists and popularized without killing either the old man or any potential infant format.. In the same vein that Legacy is creature based to Vintage's Power base, so too can a Planeswalker General format be established with it's own foundation may very well be the better option then. In the same way that French Commander has become it's own competitive format.
It might be time to just create a separate format then that can balance those issues using Commander as a base in the same way that Tiny Leaders works. Would need to set up a simple banned list with a rules listing, let it grow as is as a build on option. Would probably never amount to much outside of some interest. But it would have to be very different from Commander in some respects, perhaps pushing more towards a competitive format. That's really the only niche that one would fit into.
Creating:
A. Name of the format.
B. A "council" of it's own
C. Players that actually play it
D. Establishing a vision
Idea's not necessarily to "kill" or whatever with Commander as a taking your soccer ball. Rather an augmentation to an idea that has legitimacy and balance implications to something that already exists and popularized without killing either the old man or any potential infant format.. In the same vein that Legacy is creature based to Vintage's Power base, so too can a Planeswalker General format be established with it's own foundation may very well be the better option then. In the same way that French Commander has become it's own competitive format.
I agree with this.
People are missing the point when comparing creatures and planeswalkers, it's not about the damage, the removal nor whether planeswalkers are acceptable targets or not. Technically creatures (usually) only attack once a turn like planeswalkers using their abilities once a turn (and The Chain Veil exists, so there are combos on both sides, even if creatures do have more). Well some argue that creatures do more to change the game than a lot of planeswalker's non-ultimates and those creatures also have abilities on top to boot, but I'll say the frequency of which creatures get wiped is also proportional to that.
The real issue is the property of the Commander, not the card type. The Commander is basically a free Reanimate. Creatures die all the time, but it's also ridiculously easy to bring them back (hence gravehate being more and more relevant nowadays and why Kokusho aged well enough to get off the Banlist). With planeswalkers it is not so. Other than a few cards (like Obzedat's Aid and "staples" like Eternal Witness), most planeswalkers don't return once they're wiped out. Giving one the Commander property changes a lot of that tempo. Sure, it costs 2 more, but considering there's probably some Thraximundar cast from the Command Zone for the 5th time out there, I doubt that's actually an actual setback nowadays.
The frequency of return shouldn't be compared to the power of the card, but rather the interactivity (read:removal) of the card instead. I'm expecting the "but it's easy to remove a planeswalker" and here I have to say it is not always so and if a planeswalker is given a relatively cheaper return cost, then technically that's making it way harder to remove in the long run than say, a creature, because the way to remove a planeswalkers requires either few limited silver bullets or is dependent heavily on the board state itself, as opposed to creatures.
That being said, an idea of a "Planeswalker Highlander" format doesn't sound too bad and could prove to be a good testing ground for whole concept. I just feel that mixing two inherently different card types into the Commander Function creates too much of a dissonance in both function and identity.
It might be time to just create a separate format then that can balance those issues using Commander as a base in the same way that Tiny Leaders works. Would need to set up a simple banned list with a rules listing, let it grow as is as a build on option. Would probably never amount to much outside of some interest. But it would have to be very different from Commander in some respects, perhaps pushing more towards a competitive format. That's really the only niche that one would fit into.
Creating:
A. Name of the format.
B. A "council" of it's own
C. Players that actually play it
D. Establishing a vision
Idea's not necessarily to "kill" or whatever with Commander as a taking your soccer ball. Rather an augmentation to an idea that has legitimacy and balance implications to something that already exists and popularized without killing either the old man or any potential infant format.. In the same vein that Legacy is creature based to Vintage's Power base, so too can a Planeswalker General format be established with it's own foundation may very well be the better option then. In the same way that French Commander has become it's own competitive format.
I agree with this.
People are missing the point when comparing creatures and planeswalkers, it's not about the damage, the removal nor whether planeswalkers are acceptable targets or not. Technically creatures (usually) only attack once a turn like planeswalkers using their abilities once a turn (and The Chain Veil exists, so there are combos on both sides, even if creatures do have more). Well some argue that creatures do more to change the game than a lot of planeswalker's non-ultimates and those creatures also have abilities on top to boot, but I'll say the frequency of which creatures get wiped is also proportional to that.
The real issue is the property of the Commander, not the card type. The Commander is basically a free Reanimate. Creatures die all the time, but it's also ridiculously easy to bring them back (hence gravehate being more and more relevant nowadays and why Kokusho aged well enough to get off the Banlist). With planeswalkers it is not so. Other than a few cards (like Obzedat's Aid and "staples" like Eternal Witness), most planeswalkers don't return once they're wiped out. Giving one the Commander property changes a lot of that tempo. Sure, it costs 2 more, but considering there's probably some Thraximundar cast from the Command Zone for the 5th time out there, I doubt that's actually an actual setback nowadays.
The frequency of return shouldn't be compared to the power of the card, but rather the interactivity (read:removal) of the card instead. I'm expecting the "but it's easy to remove a planeswalker" and here I have to say it is not always so and if a planeswalker is given a relatively cheaper return cost, then technically that's making it way harder to remove in the long run than say, a creature, because the way to remove a planeswalkers requires either few limited silver bullets or is dependent heavily on the board state itself, as opposed to creatures.
That being said, an idea of a "Planeswalker Highlander" format doesn't sound too bad and could prove to be a good testing ground for whole concept. I just feel that mixing two inherently different card types into the Commander Function creates too much of a dissonance in both function and identity.
'Walkers aren't always as easy to remove as everyone is suggesting. Yeah, you can attack them down but that leaves you open as well. That's not always a good place to be because that attack can be in retaliation for removing their 'Walker. You don't always have the resources to spare, nor does everyone else. Getting to recast it from the Command Zone gives, basically, a free but better regrowth. If you have to/can cast your 'Walker twice in one turn, that's actually kind of a good thing because it means two activations instead of just 1. I mean, that's super mana intensive but still. Something else unique to 'Walkers that isn't really available elsewhere.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The following link is an invitation to join Pucatrade (card trading service though similar to TCGPLayer). If you follow the link then it awards me with tokens to exchange for actual cards. Thanks! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
So I can't cast a Creature Commander twice for its triggered ability? Isn't that the same as what you suggested as "kind of a good thing" for walkers? Be objective at least. This reason doesn't hold much water.
I just think that there are too many of them that would be oppressive.
A Narset Transcendent control deck that aims to lock down non-creature spells in 4 turns.
Same with Venser, the Sojourner control deck that gets an emblem in 4 turns, which when online is oppressive. Ugin, the Spirit Dragon would need to be banned. Just too much brutality going on there to have mass board wipe on tap.
The thing with the Planeswalkers that have been designed for being commander generals is that they have specifically not made the emblems too game breaking. As seen above some emblems are just game ending, thats what they were designed for, finishing games quick.
I think it just swings things too much towards creature-less control, which is already a problem.
From my side of view this pandora's should not be opened. If done then in the next step the people want an instant or a land card to be the Commmander.
Well I have wished Genju of the Realm could be a commander
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This aint your girlfriends meta! This is a man's meta! TURBO META.
I've gotten the chance to play with the planeswalker generals that were released a few years back and one of my buddies had a deck or two himself. Gameplay with and against planeswalker commanders was lackluster. They were easier to get rid of and just like anytime you would play a planeswalker normally in a game, it becomes a target and is removed quick. And in one of my playgroups we allowed the use for any planeswalker to be a commander because they technically are legendary. And sadly enough, it was still the same case. While many planeswalkers are powerful drops that can easily devastate opponents in other formats, I haven't seen this show of value in edh decks (outside of a superfriends deck).
However, I can agree with you. Allowing them to be your commander can add to the deck brewer's list. And it would be nice to see some new decks floating around the multiverse
Some would need to be insta-banned. Since the RC doesn't want Banned as Commander anymore (I miss Braids), nobody will be able to use Sorin Markov, Dack Fayden, Jace, the Mind Sculptor, and many others.
Maybe if they returned the tuck rule to its original form.
They should just bring back the tuck rule. It's like RC went out of their way to hate on blue's only viable method for removing generals from the equation.
That and reintroduce the "banned as commander" sub-category. I could see some planeswalker-generals being absurdly powerful in the command zone, but fairly tame in the 99. Tezzeret the Seeker comes to mind.
[quote from="Ph03niX »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/commander-edh/759213-is-it-time-to-allow-planeswalkers-as-commanders?comment=42"]Creature damage is not a very reliable way of dealing with a planeswalker, and direct damage is really only viable in red and black...green gets trample and Hurricane type effects I guess. Blue has some sub par direct damage...does white have any? I can't think of any off the top of my head for white.
There's also Sunlance, but the one, the only, the end-all be-all of mono-white burn would have to be Fire and Brimstone. It might look bad now, but trust me: no one will ever see it coming.
EDIT: oops, didn't notice this thread had 4 pages. MAH BAD. So instead I'll be more constructive and point out Nissa, Vital Force and Gideon, Ally of Zendikar. Gideon generates an emblem as soon as you play him if you want, while Nissa generates it one turn later. Imagine casting, then ult'ing Gideon multiple times per game with no more interactivity than a sorcery would have. At that point arguing for him to be a legal commander starts looking like arguing for Sorceries to be legal commanders (sure, it's not the strongest effect a sorcery could have, but it's permanent and can't be removed in any reasonable way, so in many ways it's stronger). Nissa at least gives you a turn, but the emblem is much stronger and in mono-G you'd better believe they're going to keep casting her until it sticks (or just run any proliferate card). The banlist would be long indeed.
I'm happy with the PW Commanders we already have, since most notably they all have drastically toned-down ults except for Teferi, who takes like 5 turns to get there, and Daretti, who I secretly suspect was intentionally made better due to being mono-R.
Personal opinion no - notice how all the C14 Planeswalkers are pretty expensive and take several turns to ult? All of them have super enticing minus abilities and kind of lackluster plus abilities, almost like the R&D is trying to steer you away from achieving their ult, and then the ults themselves are just good tempo swings?
The C14 walkers are not a precedent showing that PWs make great commanders, they're one of the best arguments I can think of as to why we could never have PWs as commanders. All five are very, very, very specifically engineered to not to have disproportionate impact when cast early/multiple times. PWs as a whole are cooked for Standard or Limited, high impact, fast paced games where these mythics need to hit and feel like mythics if you get them in your draft or need to be enticed to open packs hunting them (remember WOTC's goal is selling product) - giving anyone immediate and recurring access to the vast majority of them would be a total joke and with "Banned as Commander" on the way out you'd be inviting a total witch hunt.
Tezzeret the Seeker for example, ults on his next turn out and the ult basically reads "you win good game" if you have Mycosynth Lattice in play (and a Tezz EDH would). That's a powerful play in EDH already, even when it relies on the player finding Tezz, finding Lattice, casting both, keeping him safe for a turn, and being willing to lose the walker in exchange for the swing. Now picture that sequence if Tezz is just your commander, available at a moment's notice, there's no need to hesitate ulting him when he's at 5 because you'll just cast him again next turn and do it all again
But seriously, no. Doing so would cause WotC to need to balance them around being cast repeatedly and always being available in the command zone. They say they only design for standard and limited, but that isn't true. They absolutely are aware of how important commander is to selling cards, as seen by how many commander products they have released and making legends, and cycles of legends, aimed at commander (MARO: Here's your werewolf legend and spider legend commander fans, now stop bugging me! Get it! Bugging! About a Spider Commander! I WROTE FOR ROSANNE!). Making all walkers legal as commanders would make them even harder to design, just go read the articles about it from when they designed the 5 that are commanders. Add that what makes a good 60 walker doesn't always translate into 100 card singleton, and it becomes even more complicated. They could end up nerfing the next Chandra but let an Ugin through.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm not sure that energy or experience counters can even remotely be compared to a planeswalker emblem.
The issue isn't closed mindedness. I like a lot of the changes that WotC has made over the years, even things that started off scary. I don't like Walkers because of the ones they printed in the pre-cons. They are absolutely miserable to play against. I don't get to control what other people play but I'm convinced that opening up any Walker to the Commander slot is a bad idea. The value they can generate over the course of a game is nuts and that isn't even including their emblems. Sure, the example I used of how broke they are is the ceiling, not the floor but I think the floor is just as bad. Granted, that's just my opinion. When they first printed the Precons with the Walkers I was excited! I thought that this would be a great experiment and using Walkers designed with abilities balanced for the format. It was a train wreck. It was one of the most annoying things to play against. It is so difficult to deal with them. Sure you can attack them but that doesn't always work and if no one else at the table helps then you get punished for being the one to attempt to do what it takes to get rid of the threat. Until removal for 'Walkers reaches the same level that it has for Lands, Artifacts, Enchantments, and Creatures, I am of the mind that they are just too powerful. DS is just an example of the stupid things you get access to with Walkers that you don't get access to any other way. It is a problem unique to Walkers therefor a valid complaint against Walkers specifically.
https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
in a dedicated planeswalker deck... why would they last long? you're not running the tools to make them last long.
i've seen a resolved tezzeret the seeker do some pretty degenerate crap in decks not even built to exploit him. thats just the first one that pops into my head.
the reason they should not be legal unless the printed text says that they're legal as commanders is because none of them (except for those 5 that can be used right now (and i guess flip walkers)) are balanced around a commander type environment.
something like chandra ablaze is innocent enough when its part of the 99, but something like ugin can break a game even just as part of that 99. always having access to those that aren't balanced isn't fun for anyone to play against. it can be difficult enough for a table to deal with a planeswalker that says kill this thing now or the game changes with them just as part of the 99, when the entire deck is oriented around keeping that walker in play and exploiting its abilities? forget it.
The idea of planeswalkers as commanders in my mind is a very toxic idea. I would agree to it if life totals were 20 (aka I could just murder the player instead). Planeswalkers as a commander also extends your overall life as a player because they are soaking attacks that would otherwise hit you. There are just too many unfortunate things that turn the game into durdle control with planeswalkers as commanders so I would be against seeing it ever again to be honest.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
This is the most compelling argument against planeswalkers, in my opinion. Making EDH games even longer would probably not be very healthy for the format. Without adjusting the life totals (or something similar) it might get out of hand. I can already imagine 4 player games with 4 Planeswalker generals taking forever.
This is exactly my point as well. You covered the life total thing better than I did. I think that's why I hate the precon Ob Nixilis so much is because its basiacally Oloro in the Command Zone but it Oloro's ability also dinged each opponent. Its nearly as easy (not) to interact with a 'Walker on the field as it is Oloro in the Command Zone. (Sulphiric Vortex, Stigma Lasher, Havoc Festival)
RE: Removal. Sure it exists but again, my complaint with doing this is as much how it affects other formats as for how it affects Commander. Wizards now has to keep in mind how the abilities of a 'Walker affect Commander as well as Standard or Modern. That extends into 'Walker removal as well. We already have Dreadbore, Ruinous Path, and Hero's Downfall. Of those, I think only Hero's Downfall has any real flavor (cuz Elsepth even though the card isn't about her). I really don't want to see more "Destroy target Planeswalker" removal because I feel like it ruins the specialness of the 'Walkers but at the same time, if 'Walkers get to be Commanders then you over power G and B even further because they are the only colors that really get "Destroy target Planeswalker removal (Bramblecrush). Sure Dreadbore is B/R but you still have to be in black. White has O. Ring, etc. but G & B are already the top of the Commander heap anyway. Making 'Walkers commanders gives them yet another advantage in how easily they can deal with those threats vs the other colors.
tl;dr- Making all 'Walkers legal Commanders has much deeper and further reaching affects than I think anyone in here is really considering and changes the overall balance of the game in a way that I don't think is healthy for it at all, even beyond just this format.
https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
Removal Options/Stability:
Creatures: Exile, Destroy, Sacrifice, Fight, Direct Damage, Wraths, Counterspells, Combat Tricks, Theft... (There are likely more but this should be a large enough sample)
Planeswalkers: Exile Permanent (Including exile non-land permanent), Limited Destroy, Limited Direct Damage, Limited Wraths, Counterspells, Limited Theft, and Creatures attacking.
Creatures have a ton of removal options, whereas most of the answers for Planeswalkers are fairly limited and wouldn't be run unless there were consistent Planeswalker decks. Creature commanders run answers, to answers just so that they don't super die. The difference between answers also makes Planeswalkers more stable commanders than their creature counterparts. Creatures are easy to repeatedly deal with, with Grave Pact tactics. Planeswalkers actually benefit from Wrath/Edict tactics, because they are missed. Someone mentioned that it would be fine for Planeswalkers, if they reverted Commander tuck rules. This is to say, that it would be fine if there were cards that forced the commander to be less consistent. Which means if the Planeswalker was a singleton, it wouldn't be an issue. Therefore this should infer that Planeswalkers position in the rules is fine. The tuck rule has helped the format in my opinion strongly, due to the fact that Commander tucking was really un-fun for everyone (and blue has enough strength already). Not to mention, even with these answers Planeswalkers immediately generate value based off Priority, whereas creatures normally do not get this type of value.
Format Toxicity:
You would be able to build decks entirely around the Planewalker, which would lead to abusive decks. I believe that the intention to make Planeswalkers into Commanders is an attempt to attract new people whereas, what it would really do would make a power spike for people with experience in Commander and make the Format toxic by pushing finely tuned Planeswalker decks, and hindering the approach-ability of Commander. Wizards has implemented Commander Planeswalkers previously (with varying results from weak to oppressive), I am fine with letting them continuing doing so.
Complicating the Rules:
Arguing that it would simplify rules is also inconsistent. Currently the rule is only Legendary Creatures, or cards that say otherwise. That's insanely simple. If it was instead Permanents with odd number of characters in their name and were drawn by Authors with a name that rhymes, than sure the rule needs to be simplified.
TL;DR;
I don't think there will ever be a time where Planeswalkers should be automatically included into the Commander pool due to the inherent strength of Planeswalkers.
Current EDH
Akroma W | Tymna and Bruse RBW
The only walker I actually see on the potential chopping block is Tezz 1.0, with an argument to be made for maybe ugin. (But I don't buy it since he restricts you to colorless.)
Generals meant to be drafted first in a single pack of 6 cards.
And here is the actual cube, meant to be drafted in 4 regular sized packs. (60 card decks)
You covered many of things I wanted to. While I do think there is a possibility for nasty Planewalker decks to appear, lets not get out of hand on how "hard" it is to get rid of them, because they are not. The only time I see a planeswalker live until ult across multiple turns, is when the board has been wiped or people ignore the planeswalker, and if it is ignored until it can ult, that's the way the cookie crumbles.
Have you ever played against a tuned colorless deck? They are the second best ramp "color," so imagine an annoyingly early one-sided wrath that the Ugin commander will be able to use for the entirety of the game. That isn't fun.
Sorin 1.0 being able to set people to 10 from the command zone is also pretty screwed up.
Dack gets very quickly to a game-warping ult at a cheap mana cost in control-capable colors.
Elspeth 1.0 is another walker who, if playable repeatedly, is hard not to get an ult in long wrath-filled games. I don't want to play against an indestructible emblem every other game, do you?
Lili of the Veil is very close to the already banned Braids, and more mana efficient to boot.
Im not even in the camp that walkers are broken (as I've said already, legendary status and commander damage help define the format, of which walkers are neither) but there are absolutely some unfun options in the pack.
Then it would require a separate ban list to be maintained.
It might be time to just create a separate format then that can balance those issues using Commander as a base in the same way that Tiny Leaders works. Would need to set up a simple banned list with a rules listing, let it grow as is as a build on option. Would probably never amount to much outside of some interest. But it would have to be very different from Commander in some respects, perhaps pushing more towards a competitive format. That's really the only niche that one would fit into.
Creating:
A. Name of the format.
B. A "council" of it's own
C. Players that actually play it
D. Establishing a vision
Idea's not necessarily to "kill" or whatever with Commander as a taking your soccer ball. Rather an augmentation to an idea that has legitimacy and balance implications to something that already exists and popularized without killing either the old man or any potential infant format.. In the same vein that Legacy is creature based to Vintage's Power base, so too can a Planeswalker General format be established with it's own foundation may very well be the better option then. In the same way that French Commander has become it's own competitive format.
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>
I agree with this.
People are missing the point when comparing creatures and planeswalkers, it's not about the damage, the removal nor whether planeswalkers are acceptable targets or not. Technically creatures (usually) only attack once a turn like planeswalkers using their abilities once a turn (and The Chain Veil exists, so there are combos on both sides, even if creatures do have more). Well some argue that creatures do more to change the game than a lot of planeswalker's non-ultimates and those creatures also have abilities on top to boot, but I'll say the frequency of which creatures get wiped is also proportional to that.
The real issue is the property of the Commander, not the card type. The Commander is basically a free Reanimate. Creatures die all the time, but it's also ridiculously easy to bring them back (hence gravehate being more and more relevant nowadays and why Kokusho aged well enough to get off the Banlist). With planeswalkers it is not so. Other than a few cards (like Obzedat's Aid and "staples" like Eternal Witness), most planeswalkers don't return once they're wiped out. Giving one the Commander property changes a lot of that tempo. Sure, it costs 2 more, but considering there's probably some Thraximundar cast from the Command Zone for the 5th time out there, I doubt that's actually an actual setback nowadays.
The frequency of return shouldn't be compared to the power of the card, but rather the interactivity (read:removal) of the card instead. I'm expecting the "but it's easy to remove a planeswalker" and here I have to say it is not always so and if a planeswalker is given a relatively cheaper return cost, then technically that's making it way harder to remove in the long run than say, a creature, because the way to remove a planeswalkers requires either few limited silver bullets or is dependent heavily on the board state itself, as opposed to creatures.
That being said, an idea of a "Planeswalker Highlander" format doesn't sound too bad and could prove to be a good testing ground for whole concept. I just feel that mixing two inherently different card types into the Commander Function creates too much of a dissonance in both function and identity.
'Walkers aren't always as easy to remove as everyone is suggesting. Yeah, you can attack them down but that leaves you open as well. That's not always a good place to be because that attack can be in retaliation for removing their 'Walker. You don't always have the resources to spare, nor does everyone else. Getting to recast it from the Command Zone gives, basically, a free but better regrowth. If you have to/can cast your 'Walker twice in one turn, that's actually kind of a good thing because it means two activations instead of just 1. I mean, that's super mana intensive but still. Something else unique to 'Walkers that isn't really available elsewhere.
https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
A Narset Transcendent control deck that aims to lock down non-creature spells in 4 turns.
Same with Venser, the Sojourner control deck that gets an emblem in 4 turns, which when online is oppressive.
Ugin, the Spirit Dragon would need to be banned. Just too much brutality going on there to have mass board wipe on tap.
The thing with the Planeswalkers that have been designed for being commander generals is that they have specifically not made the emblems too game breaking. As seen above some emblems are just game ending, thats what they were designed for, finishing games quick.
I think it just swings things too much towards creature-less control, which is already a problem.
Niv-Mizzet Reborn
Feather, the Redeemed
Estrid, the Masked
Teshar
Tymna/Ravos
Najeela, Blade-Blossom
Firesong & Sunspeaker
Zur the Enchanter
Lazav, the Multifarious
Ishai+Reyhan
Click images for decks->
-Prime Speaker Vannifar
---------------------Will & Rowan Kenrith
Well I have wished Genju of the Realm could be a commander
This aint your girlfriends meta! This is a man's meta! TURBO META.
However, I can agree with you. Allowing them to be your commander can add to the deck brewer's list. And it would be nice to see some new decks floating around the multiverse
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
They should just bring back the tuck rule. It's like RC went out of their way to hate on blue's only viable method for removing generals from the equation.That and reintroduce the "banned as commander" sub-category. I could see some planeswalker-generals being absurdly powerful in the command zone, but fairly tame in the 99. Tezzeret the Seeker comes to mind.
UAzami, Locus of All KnowledgeU
BMarrow-Gnawer, Crime Lord of ComboB
WBRTariel, Hellraiser StaxWBR
Annul is really good in EDH
well, there's always Boros Reckoner kind-of sort-of.
There's also Sunlance, but the one, the only, the end-all be-all of mono-white burn would have to be Fire and Brimstone. It might look bad now, but trust me: no one will ever see it coming.
EDIT: oops, didn't notice this thread had 4 pages. MAH BAD. So instead I'll be more constructive and point out Nissa, Vital Force and Gideon, Ally of Zendikar. Gideon generates an emblem as soon as you play him if you want, while Nissa generates it one turn later. Imagine casting, then ult'ing Gideon multiple times per game with no more interactivity than a sorcery would have. At that point arguing for him to be a legal commander starts looking like arguing for Sorceries to be legal commanders (sure, it's not the strongest effect a sorcery could have, but it's permanent and can't be removed in any reasonable way, so in many ways it's stronger). Nissa at least gives you a turn, but the emblem is much stronger and in mono-G you'd better believe they're going to keep casting her until it sticks (or just run any proliferate card). The banlist would be long indeed.
I'm happy with the PW Commanders we already have, since most notably they all have drastically toned-down ults except for Teferi, who takes like 5 turns to get there, and Daretti, who I secretly suspect was intentionally made better due to being mono-R.
- Rabid Wombat
The C14 walkers are not a precedent showing that PWs make great commanders, they're one of the best arguments I can think of as to why we could never have PWs as commanders. All five are very, very, very specifically engineered to not to have disproportionate impact when cast early/multiple times. PWs as a whole are cooked for Standard or Limited, high impact, fast paced games where these mythics need to hit and feel like mythics if you get them in your draft or need to be enticed to open packs hunting them (remember WOTC's goal is selling product) - giving anyone immediate and recurring access to the vast majority of them would be a total joke and with "Banned as Commander" on the way out you'd be inviting a total witch hunt.
Tezzeret the Seeker for example, ults on his next turn out and the ult basically reads "you win good game" if you have Mycosynth Lattice in play (and a Tezz EDH would). That's a powerful play in EDH already, even when it relies on the player finding Tezz, finding Lattice, casting both, keeping him safe for a turn, and being willing to lose the walker in exchange for the swing. Now picture that sequence if Tezz is just your commander, available at a moment's notice, there's no need to hesitate ulting him when he's at 5 because you'll just cast him again next turn and do it all again
Do the Breya, Etherium Shaper and Sydri, Galvanic Genius players deserve to lose Tezzeret the Seeker to the banlist because people want to play him as a commander even if that was never his intended design?
tl;dr Planeswalker commanders are a painfully stupid idea
https://archidekt.com/user/71716
Long answer: NOOOOOOOOOO
But seriously, no. Doing so would cause WotC to need to balance them around being cast repeatedly and always being available in the command zone. They say they only design for standard and limited, but that isn't true. They absolutely are aware of how important commander is to selling cards, as seen by how many commander products they have released and making legends, and cycles of legends, aimed at commander (MARO: Here's your werewolf legend and spider legend commander fans, now stop bugging me! Get it! Bugging! About a Spider Commander! I WROTE FOR ROSANNE!). Making all walkers legal as commanders would make them even harder to design, just go read the articles about it from when they designed the 5 that are commanders. Add that what makes a good 60 walker doesn't always translate into 100 card singleton, and it becomes even more complicated. They could end up nerfing the next Chandra but let an Ugin through.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!