EDH is much different than any other mtg format. You have 100 card decks, 1 card max excluding basic lands which have no max.
Like many MTG players I am a collector of cards, which means I have at most one of a lot of cards I have ordered. What seems to limit my deckbuilding most of all is the randomness of EDH. I always want to build something consistent. Other mtg competitive formats lean towards playing playsets. EDH doesn't because there's a limit of 1 card max excluding basic lands.
Has there ever been any discussion of allowing playsets of up to 4 in commander for cards of certain rarities? For instance, if EDH allowed up to 4 commons and 2 uncommons of a single card rather than have all 1s would this break the format? Obviously certain cards at common or uncommon may be too powerful in multiples. But this could be resolved by a restricted list for common/uncommon.
What this would allow
1) more consistent overall deck strategies.
2) stronger decks for players on a budget.
3) Allow people who play other mtg formats to actually use former playsets collecting dust
By more consistent deck strategies I mean you could build decks based on playset types/effects. For instance 4 Peregrine Drakes from ENM with 1 Deadeye Navigator you tutor for could allow you to more consistantly find your combo for a newer player without $20-50 dollar tutors. For the more invested player they'd still play the $20-50 tutors but have a harder time with the guy with 4 Peregrine drakes.
Players on a budget then could find the powerful commons for cheaper than chase rares. They could use these to build a deck relying on certain card combinations.
Finally this would allow monocolored deck strategies to be more to be viable. Also this would allow people who play other mtg formats to actually be able to use old playsets gathering dust.
Why I think adding playsets of commons/uncommons could fill a niche.
1) I like others like playing with older, broken cards like sol ring/mana vault. It's nostalgiac. It's fun.
2) I don't want to drop hundreds of dollars on a legacy deck.
3) vintage nobody ever plays and there's no other format to play many older, cheap broken cards in.
4) many people like to collect older mtg cards. It's more than a hobby it's an investment. Some of these people happen to be competitive players. Adding playsets of commons/uncommons would allow a more competitive less random format for those collectors who want something more competitive.
So basically you'd have multiplayer vintage including the edh banned list.
Up to 4 of each common, 2 uncommon and 1 rare with a restricted list for problem commons/uncommons.
This would no longer be EDH/commander, so different that you couldn't even really call it a variant. But there's no reason not to try a new format like this with your friends - one of the best things about magic is the pretty much infinite ways it can be played. I enjoy coming up with formats and in general find people more hesitant than I'd like to experiment and make house rules.
I've thought of somewhat similar formats. I love EDH for its union of consistency- you always have your general - and variance - 100 card decks. But you can do anything. People have 60 card decks, 4 copies of a card deeply embedded in their minds, but these are just the choices that were made early on (not even the original choices). Why not 90 card decks with 3 copies of cards? Or 100 card decks with 5 copies? The numbers are arbitrary and it would be interesting to see how these different "formats" played out. Magic Duels I understand is based on rarity allowing you to have 4 copies of a common, 3 uncommmons, 2 rares and 1 mythic (or something like that, I had the idea I listed which they happened to also figure out since it's rather obvious).
These are just simple changes - you could make far more radical changes. I think you should go ahead and use your idea with your friends - if you enjoy it make a website about it. It's always possible (if unlikely) that it could take off and become a new format. But it won't be or replace EDH whose singleton nature is integral to the format.
There are smaller changes that could be variants of commander. Before partner came out I had a similar idea where you were allowed to have a second commander but the color identity of your "sub-commander" only gave you access to cards of both it AND your main commander's color - for example and for simplicity a monowhite commander with a mono black sub-commander could play white cards, white/black cards or cards with white/black hybrid mana. Maybe you also require the sub-commander to share at least one color with the main commander. I also like the idea of allowing a non-creature to co-exist in the command zone that you can also build your deck around but a lot of cards would be too powerful to do this with - something people can work out with their playgroup but hard to make a comprehensive rules list for.
I also like the idea of having a second small (maybe 10 cards) deck that you draw from in addition to your normal draw for the first turns. This deck would contain only ramp - people love to ramp early on and often people get an early head start by happening to draw their ramp in the beginning and this ramp is often dead in the mid to late game, so putting it all in the second deck would alleviate some variance, allow people to get to the mid-game faster (if this is what they wish) and equally while opening up more space for "real" cards in your main deck. I have some other really weird ideas involving multiple decks but I haven't worked it all out yet.
Anyway, I could go on and on (an additional 25 cards but only for "staple" cards - possibly allow 2 copies of "staple" cards), the point is don't be afraid to experiment and play how YOU want to play, but don't expect commander to ever become like what you're suggesting.
EDIT: There are ways of alleviating variance in commander if that is your primary goal. Play similar but not identical cards. You mentioned tutors, but not all are expensive. Card draw can reduce variance as you will just see more cards. Obviously card selection helps and finally and most severely if you're going for consistency you can fill your deck with "air" - cards that do little to nothing except draw you another card, increasing your deck's velocity and effectively shrinking the size of your deck.
Like th others have already said, the appeal with Commander to me is the random nature of a singleton format. Two games are rarely the same. I avoid even playing tutors in my decks, as I feel I lose that variation when I start hunting for certain cards.
But Magic can be whatever you want it to be, if your playgroup likes the idea - try it!
Like th others have already said, the appeal with Commander to me is the random nature of a singleton format. Two games are rarely the same. I avoid even playing tutors in my decks, as I feel I lose that variation when I start hunting for certain cards.
But Magic can be whatever you want it to be, if your playgroup likes the idea - try it!
Glad to see someone else who avoids tutors. I tend to find it difficult to get deck advice on this site when people start the decks with 8 tutors and a couple cheesy combo pieces.
But to add to the echo chamber. Its a highlander format for good reason and will remain so. The card pool is really massive so finding redundant versions of basic cards (ramp, removal, counters) is pretty easy.
I did used to play 5-color a 250 card format that allowed 4xs as well as having a restricted list. It was still highlander-like but you could have your 4 dark rituals or wahtever.
I have to admit there are some cards I'd love to play more than once. Not necessarily because of their power, but because their effect is so unique and so build-around in nature that I'd love to center a deck more strongly around it. Not every effect in the game has been printed in enough variations to be viable in a Singleton format, nor are they all available on legendary creatures. Paradox Haze for a deck that centers around upkeep effects is a good example of what I mean.
Of course, the Singleton format is a core part of EDH's identity. If you most enjoy building consistent decks with playsets (nothing wrong with that!), this may simply not be the format for you.
I think these are all good responses. What I wonder is with card printing being for profit, many of the invention cards are only playable in eternal formats such as commander/vintage. The fact a foiled sol ring can command over $100 for a casual format indicates players enjoy playing older cards. (Nobody honestly really still plays vintage from what I understand).
This means if there is a market for it, there is a player base for it. If there's a player base for it there is probably a competitive need for members of that player base.
How would you fill a competitive need for these players while also having an enjoyable format?
This last statement is why I feel there is an opportunity here. Also I feel if there is a competitive angle you'll start to see older, staple eternal cards rise in price. How this could be done is the question.
I have to admit there are some cards I'd love to play more than once. Not necessarily because of their power, but because their effect is so unique and so build-around in nature that I'd love to center a deck more strongly around it. Not every effect in the game has been printed in enough variations to be viable in a Singleton format, nor are they all available on legendary creatures. Paradox Haze for a deck that centers around upkeep effects is a good example of what I mean.
Of course, the Singleton format is a core part of EDH's identity. If you most enjoy building consistent decks with playsets (nothing wrong with that!), this may simply not be the format for you.
I have the exact same idea of making a deck built around paradox haze and upkeep effects - it's one of e cards I had in mind in my above post with the idea of allowing cards other than legendary creatures start in the command zone.
yea, I would like to see them print more cards like those two mentioned above here that were EDH playable. Allowing playsets of anything else def ruins a singleton format and is greatly against the spirit of EDH. wouldn't be surprise if that was a theme for future commander set. mono-colored decks each with 15 plus printings of one card and a dif card type for each color.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
Just seems like lazy a way to build consistency with decks, and takes away the deck building aspect. Run tutors, like ring of three wishes, tamiyo's journal, or diabolic tutor if consistency is that big of deal to you in commander / EDH (elder dragon HIGHLANDER)
I love the variety in Commander. Your typical 60-card deck really only has 10-12 unique nonland cards, which means if you play a bunch of games, they're all going to play fairly similarly. In Commander, you have around 60-65 unique nonland cards, so each game (barring excessive tutoring) feels a bit more unique. I get bored playing the same Commander deck multiple times in a row (that's why I've built around 50 of them), so I can't imagine how bored I would get if we started running playsets.
Like many MTG players I am a collector of cards, which means I have at most one of a lot of cards I have ordered. What seems to limit my deckbuilding most of all is the randomness of EDH. I always want to build something consistent. Other mtg competitive formats lean towards playing playsets. EDH doesn't because there's a limit of 1 card max excluding basic lands.
Has there ever been any discussion of allowing playsets of up to 4 in commander for cards of certain rarities? For instance, if EDH allowed up to 4 commons and 2 uncommons of a single card rather than have all 1s would this break the format? Obviously certain cards at common or uncommon may be too powerful in multiples. But this could be resolved by a restricted list for common/uncommon.
What this would allow
1) more consistent overall deck strategies.
2) stronger decks for players on a budget.
3) Allow people who play other mtg formats to actually use former playsets collecting dust
By more consistent deck strategies I mean you could build decks based on playset types/effects. For instance 4 Peregrine Drakes from ENM with 1 Deadeye Navigator you tutor for could allow you to more consistantly find your combo for a newer player without $20-50 dollar tutors. For the more invested player they'd still play the $20-50 tutors but have a harder time with the guy with 4 Peregrine drakes.
Players on a budget then could find the powerful commons for cheaper than chase rares. They could use these to build a deck relying on certain card combinations.
Finally this would allow monocolored deck strategies to be more to be viable. Also this would allow people who play other mtg formats to actually be able to use old playsets gathering dust.
Why I think adding playsets of commons/uncommons could fill a niche.
1) I like others like playing with older, broken cards like sol ring/mana vault. It's nostalgiac. It's fun.
2) I don't want to drop hundreds of dollars on a legacy deck.
3) vintage nobody ever plays and there's no other format to play many older, cheap broken cards in.
4) many people like to collect older mtg cards. It's more than a hobby it's an investment. Some of these people happen to be competitive players. Adding playsets of commons/uncommons would allow a more competitive less random format for those collectors who want something more competitive.
So basically you'd have multiplayer vintage including the edh banned list.
Up to 4 of each common, 2 uncommon and 1 rare with a restricted list for problem commons/uncommons.
A lot of cards have multiple printings at different rarities. It's just not worth the trouble.
UBRKess, Dissident MageUBR - Controlling Dissidents
GRhonas the IndomitableG - Indomitable Four Drops
WUBOloro, Ageless AsceticWUB - Loot & Renanimate
I've thought of somewhat similar formats. I love EDH for its union of consistency- you always have your general - and variance - 100 card decks. But you can do anything. People have 60 card decks, 4 copies of a card deeply embedded in their minds, but these are just the choices that were made early on (not even the original choices). Why not 90 card decks with 3 copies of cards? Or 100 card decks with 5 copies? The numbers are arbitrary and it would be interesting to see how these different "formats" played out. Magic Duels I understand is based on rarity allowing you to have 4 copies of a common, 3 uncommmons, 2 rares and 1 mythic (or something like that, I had the idea I listed which they happened to also figure out since it's rather obvious).
These are just simple changes - you could make far more radical changes. I think you should go ahead and use your idea with your friends - if you enjoy it make a website about it. It's always possible (if unlikely) that it could take off and become a new format. But it won't be or replace EDH whose singleton nature is integral to the format.
There are smaller changes that could be variants of commander. Before partner came out I had a similar idea where you were allowed to have a second commander but the color identity of your "sub-commander" only gave you access to cards of both it AND your main commander's color - for example and for simplicity a monowhite commander with a mono black sub-commander could play white cards, white/black cards or cards with white/black hybrid mana. Maybe you also require the sub-commander to share at least one color with the main commander. I also like the idea of allowing a non-creature to co-exist in the command zone that you can also build your deck around but a lot of cards would be too powerful to do this with - something people can work out with their playgroup but hard to make a comprehensive rules list for.
I also like the idea of having a second small (maybe 10 cards) deck that you draw from in addition to your normal draw for the first turns. This deck would contain only ramp - people love to ramp early on and often people get an early head start by happening to draw their ramp in the beginning and this ramp is often dead in the mid to late game, so putting it all in the second deck would alleviate some variance, allow people to get to the mid-game faster (if this is what they wish) and equally while opening up more space for "real" cards in your main deck. I have some other really weird ideas involving multiple decks but I haven't worked it all out yet.
Anyway, I could go on and on (an additional 25 cards but only for "staple" cards - possibly allow 2 copies of "staple" cards), the point is don't be afraid to experiment and play how YOU want to play, but don't expect commander to ever become like what you're suggesting.
EDIT: There are ways of alleviating variance in commander if that is your primary goal. Play similar but not identical cards. You mentioned tutors, but not all are expensive. Card draw can reduce variance as you will just see more cards. Obviously card selection helps and finally and most severely if you're going for consistency you can fill your deck with "air" - cards that do little to nothing except draw you another card, increasing your deck's velocity and effectively shrinking the size of your deck.
However, this could be great as an alternate format. I'd probably play it, myself.
But Magic can be whatever you want it to be, if your playgroup likes the idea - try it!
Glad to see someone else who avoids tutors. I tend to find it difficult to get deck advice on this site when people start the decks with 8 tutors and a couple cheesy combo pieces.
But to add to the echo chamber. Its a highlander format for good reason and will remain so. The card pool is really massive so finding redundant versions of basic cards (ramp, removal, counters) is pretty easy.
I did used to play 5-color a 250 card format that allowed 4xs as well as having a restricted list. It was still highlander-like but you could have your 4 dark rituals or wahtever.
In Progress
GBIshkanah, Grafwidow ~ BWGRTymna the Weaver & Tana, the Bloodsower ~ UGRashmi, Eternities Crafter ~ RGAtarka, World Render
Of course, the Singleton format is a core part of EDH's identity. If you most enjoy building consistent decks with playsets (nothing wrong with that!), this may simply not be the format for you.
This means if there is a market for it, there is a player base for it. If there's a player base for it there is probably a competitive need for members of that player base.
How would you fill a competitive need for these players while also having an enjoyable format?
This last statement is why I feel there is an opportunity here. Also I feel if there is a competitive angle you'll start to see older, staple eternal cards rise in price. How this could be done is the question.
I have the exact same idea of making a deck built around paradox haze and upkeep effects - it's one of e cards I had in mind in my above post with the idea of allowing cards other than legendary creatures start in the command zone.
"There can only be one" is a line from the movie highlander which is why edh is a singleton Format.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
Welll since Vintage is basically impossible, hardcore commander and tiny leaders are actually reasonably popular amoung the Spikes as an alternative.
Pioneer:UR Pheonix
Modern:U Mono U Tron
EDH
GB Glissa, the traitor: Army of Cans
UW Dragonlord Ojutai: Dragonlord NOjutai
UWGDerevi, Empyrial Tactician "you cannot fight the storm"
R Zirilan of the claw. The solution to every problem is dragons
UB Etrata, the Silencer Cloning assassination
Peasant cube: Cards I own
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Dragon Whelp Lowlander?
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter