Realistically, there are loads of "should have been legendary"s, like ali baba and uncle istvan, and even more recent ones like chromanticore. People are rarely wanting arguing those as legendary, though, because they just aren't as powerful, and until recently because they didn't helm otherwise unavailable color combos. With that part of it gone, I don't think there's any more reason to allow them than other flavor-legendaries, and I'd have no problem with someone denying them at a table.
Personally I'd be fine with it, as long as it wasn't OP (ink treader lol). I'm usually pretty flexible with the rules as long as you're doing something interesting. I personally wouldn't be likely to make one in the future though - I was hoping they'd errata them legendary in the precons, but with that not happening I'll put them in the pile with the uncle istvans of the world.
I hope one day they print a version of ink-treader that's less broken and is a legal commander, though. That ability is very cool. (EDIT: by which I mean, not Zada. That's a little tooo fixed - mostly because of the color)
Incidentally, there's also an argument to be made for Bringer of the White Dawn et. al.
And for the 10 super-hybrid spirit avatars from Llorwyn; Godhead of Awe and such.
I'm honestly not really opposed to any of them being played casually, since none of them are more overpowered than, say, Leovold, and they all feel 'legendary'. The only question then is "where do we draw the line"?
What was the story behind the spirit avatars? They all had legendary names, but they did not make the legend cut. Demigod even acknowledged there are others of it!
Not sure about the story, but they certainly seem legendary (Oversoul, Divinity, Deus, and Godhead, among others, don't sound like words you would use to describe nonspecific individuals), which I guess is the point I'm making; where is the line? As for Demigod of Revenge, I suspect its multiple-copies gimmick is solely mechanical (it haunts you for each time you kill it!) and that story-wise there aren't multiple of it. And again, I have no knowledge of the story surrounding them or what R&D was thinking, but I suspect that making Demigod's gimmick work is the reason that they weren't all legendary.
Honestly any of them would be okay in my book as long as they didn't turn out to be abusive (Oversoul of Dusk would also be a bit mean-spirited since it's extremely uninteractive unless you happen to be playing one of two colors... and because it's a spirit haha get it?-I'll stop now)
Prior to the C16 precons, I would just let them pass more leniently than others because there aren't any choices to begin with, whether you wanted them for the Colors (I can understand why people don't run 5c for aesthetic reasons) or wanted to actually build around them. But now 4-Colors have actual choices, the criteria is a lot more stringent (when I say that I meant comparatively to before, it's actually the same standard for the other combinations as well).
1) The "Just for colors" reason no longer flies with me, if the Nephilim is going to be as useless as literally any other legal choice, then just use the legal one.
2) You must have another Commander(s) ready to swap with the Nephilim at any time if someone disagrees. Preferably those cards are in the 99 (as to show that the deck can function as a traditionally legal one as well), but personally I won't fuss too much over that (just my deck design pickiness preferring that). Running a Commander that depends on table approval is akin to running one that can be "permanently removed" from the game at any time and if the deck that cannot adjust to that (instead hoping that table approval always happens) just feels like "bad design" to me. Or maybe I just got this bias because people who tend to design decks like these don't have a backup plan (or another deck for that matter) and it's just a feels-bad all around when someone doesn't agree.
Running a Commander that depends on table approval is akin to running one that can be "permanently removed" from the game at any time and if the deck that cannot adjust to that (instead hoping that table approval always happens) just feels like "bad design" to me.
Erm... I would hope that the table would figure out if it's okay before the game starts. Having them toss out their commander halfway through is a bit cruel, to say the least. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what you're saying here?
I was never on board with using the nephilim as commanders back before there were valid options for 4-color decks, so now that there are actually 4-color legendary creatures or partner combinations, I am even less inclined to allow them.
Running a Commander that depends on table approval is akin to running one that can be "permanently removed" from the game at any time and if the deck that cannot adjust to that (instead hoping that table approval always happens) just feels like "bad design" to me.
Erm... I would hope that the table would figure out if it's okay before the game starts. Having them toss out their commander halfway through is a bit cruel, to say the least. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what you're saying here?
I was talking in the "meta sense", not literally halfway through a game. To put it bluntly, I don't like people who build only a deck that is reliant on table approval/house rules without a backup deck/plan because that is asking for trouble if someone doesn't agree to it and one simply can't play as a result, which leads to a feels-bad all around when it does.
Shouldn't have put "game", I meant it as "EDH experience", that was my wording mistake. My intended meaning still stands the same.
Ah; I would agree then. Typically what I see when people ask about nephili or Elbrus, the Binding Blade or what have you is that they just keep entirely different decks at the ready in case people say "no".
I would totally allow it. I am biased though. Last winter break I built all five. Only played them several times outside of gold-fishing for balance. They're all great fun and fairly tuned but it's a shame that really none of these new 4C commanders can easily be exchanged for my Nephilim. And now the thought of having so many four color decks makes my mana butt hurt.
The story of the Shadowmoor Demigods is detailed in The Seer's Parables, a poem set up as a conversation between a Shadowmoor Kithkin and a Kithkin seer. The flavor text of each of the Demigods has a line from the appropriate section of the poem, but it's much longer than 10 lines.
The Kithkin asks "Tell me, O seer, how will the world end?" to which the seer replies "You are not ready for my answer. Perhaps there are other things you wish to know?"
The main portion of the poem is the Kithkin asking several questions, and the seer answering with the legend of one of the Demigods
"Where did this world come from?" (Overbeing of Myth)
"What causes the mighty quakes that scare my children and send me tumbling?" (Deus of Calamity)
"Why does our night stretch so everlasting?" (Demigod of Revenge)
"With the gloom all about us, why do the elves still hope?" (Oversoul of Dusk)
"Why must there be war?" (Nobilis of War)
"Why can some not act as one mind, one soul as we kithkin do?" (Dominus of Fealty)
"Why do we desire to keep on living even if that life is empty and hopeless?" (Deity of Scars)
"Why does the moon wax and wane?" (Godhead of Awe)
"What lies beyond death?" (Ghastlord of Fugue)
Then the Kithkin asks the first question again ("How will this world end?"), and the seer reveals herself to be Divinity of Pride, answers the question, and the Kithkin goes insane.
Taken from the poem, the Demigod of Revenge ripped himself apart, and then "Finally, he lay on the ground, panting from his extertions, when his form began to knit together in strange ways even he did not fathom. When all limbs were joined anew, and life returned to muscles, there stood now two of him, where there had only been one, united in purpose and hate." The two tore each other apart to become four, then eight, then sixteen, and then the damned army tore apart the hole in the sky to make the night. That's where the acknowledgement of multiple Demigods of Revenge comes from.
I would let someone play them if they asked if I was ok with it. I will generally test my luck against any challenge at least once.(subjecting a group to it is another matter.) Prior to Commander 2016, I'd gotten it since there was no legal options but now I don't see much point in using them over one of the legal options. They're collectively worse options than any of the single or paired options availible for the most part.
In general there's enough legal options for anything in commander that I see little purpose in bending the rules outside of experimenting for heck of it. I'd probably allow just about anything long as someone gave me a heads up to their special clause they were invoking. Going outside the box is fun from time to time, but I prefer they always keep a 100% legal option on them as well.
@Lithl that's pretty interesting. I really like the lore of that block overall.
I have wanted to make a Dominus of Fealty deck for some time. There aren't any other legitimate 'threaten' effect commanders other than Skyfire Kirin who requires arcane spells (there aren't enough good ones for EDH) and who doesn't even untap the creatures or give them haste...
There aren't any other legitimate 'threaten' effect commanders other than Skyfire Kirin who requires arcane spells (there aren't enough good ones for EDH) and who doesn't even untap the creatures or give them haste...
Um... what about Yasova Dragonclaw? On her own, she lets you threaten a power 3 or less creature every turn.
Brion Stoutarm is also good for a threaten deck, even if he doesn't threaten himself. Threaten+Fling is always a strong combo.
Um... what about Yasova Dragonclaw? On her own, she lets you threaten a power 3 or less creature every turn.
Brion Stoutarm is also good for a threaten deck, even if he doesn't threaten himself. Threaten+Fling is always a strong combo.
Ah, I would appear to have missed her due to her conditions, since I only searched for "gain control of target (creature/permanent/nonland permanent) until end of turn." (and had known about the Kirin ahead of time)
There was a time I might have allowed it because there were no options for 4 color but to be honest. I would be kind of more strongly against it now. I know of all the reasons people do want to play them but at the same time. What is to keep me from showing up with Cabal Coffers or Ugin, the Spirit Dragon as a commander? The established rules of the format I guess is the answer. Showing up with a nephilim deck would in my mind be something akin to showing up with Braids as your commander and being like you guys are cool with this right? The rules as the format is does not allow it so I would suggest talking to your group before assuming its fine and building it.
If you want to talk to your group and propose a change to the rules thats fine. I dont really think just showing up with a deck and assuming they would be cool with it would be so cool. I am against the idea of allowing someone to play with a commander of the sort because what if I want an exclusion to allow me to run card X or Y? Where does it stop? Can I just jam two legends together and pretend they both have partner while we are at it?
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.
There was a time I might have allowed it because there were no options for 4 color but to be honest. I would be kind of more strongly against it now. I know of all the reasons people do want to play them but at the same time. What is to keep me from showing up with Cabal Coffers or Ugin, the Spirit Dragon as a commander? The established rules of the format I guess is the answer. Showing up with a nephilim deck would in my mind be something akin to showing up with Braids as your commander and being like you guys are cool with this right? The rules as the format is does not allow it so I would suggest talking to your group before assuming its fine and building it.
If you want to talk to your group and propose a change to the rules thats fine. I dont really think just showing up with a deck and assuming they would be cool with it would be so cool. I am against the idea of allowing someone to play with a commander of the sort because what if I want an exclusion to allow me to run card X or Y? Where does it stop? Can I just jam two legends together and pretend they both have partner while we are at it?
More seriously, Braids is explicitly banned and for a good reason, so the obvious answer is 'no'. I understand the slippery slope argument you're making though; my rule of thumb is "is it better than anything else you could be playing?". If the answer is "yes" or "it's hard to tell" (Ugin, because he's stronger than the commander-PWs but he's also colorless) then I would request that they play a normal deck, then maybe play a game or two with them against their 'illegal' deck once I'm convinced they're not going to be abusing the exception or they're not going to be stubborn or confrontational about it if the group decides that the deck isn't fun or fair to play against.
If the answer is "no", well, there's your slippery slope again. Who decides that a card is better or worse than another card, in a game where card interaction is so important? My personal criteria centers around the idea that aggro and battlecruiser are underpowered while combo and control are dangerous and ramp is somewhere in the middle (hence why I'm not okay with Ink-Treader; he combos with a large subset of cards in a very non-restrictive set of colors). Oversoul of Dusk exemplifies the problem with my method moreso than most: it's clearly legendary flavor-wise, and it's "fair" in terms of power for mana paid. It doesn't combo and is decidedly not the best choice you could make for combo, control, or ramp. On the other hand, it's extremely good against three of the five colors and is almost impossible to remove without white or board wipe. Someone playing Sedris, the Traitor King is gonna have a bad time against Oversoul. And then on yet another hand, Animar is totally a card and is even more removal-resistant and combo-y than Oversoul. Should I then be okay with Oversoul if she was in Animar's colors instead of G/W?
There's definitely a lot of crevices for arguments to sprout from there, but there are too many neat possibilities (Gisela and Bruna, for example) to discount it entirely. Overall, I think a simple group vote is fairest.
Then again, I'm also the sort who would potentially be okay with custom-made commander cards, so YMMV.
More seriously, Braids is explicitly banned and for a good reason, so the obvious answer is 'no'. I understand the slippery slope argument you're making though; my rule of thumb is "is it better than anything else you could be playing?". If the answer is "yes" or "it's hard to tell" (Ugin, because he's stronger than the commander-PWs but he's also colorless) then I would request that they play a normal deck, then maybe play a game or two with them against their 'illegal' deck once I'm convinced they're not going to be abusing the exception or they're not going to be stubborn or confrontational about it if the group decides that the deck isn't fun or fair to play against.
If the answer is "no", well, there's your slippery slope again. Who decides that a card is better or worse than another card, in a game where card interaction is so important? My personal criteria centers around the idea that aggro and battlecruiser are underpowered while combo and control are dangerous and ramp is somewhere in the middle (hence why I'm not okay with Ink-Treader; he combos with a large subset of cards in a very non-restrictive set of colors). Oversoul of Dusk exemplifies the problem with my method moreso than most: it's clearly legendary flavor-wise, and it's "fair" in terms of power for mana paid. It doesn't combo and is decidedly not the best choice you could make for combo, control, or ramp. On the other hand, it's extremely good against three of the five colors and is almost impossible to remove without white or board wipe. Someone playing Sedris, the Traitor King is gonna have a bad time against Oversoul. And then on yet another hand, Animar is totally a card and is even more removal-resistant and combo-y than Oversoul. Should I then be okay with Oversoul if she was in Animar's colors instead of G/W?
There's definitely a lot of crevices for arguments to sprout from there, but there are too many neat possibilities (Gisela and Bruna, for example) to discount it entirely. Overall, I think a simple group vote is fairest.
Then again, I'm also the sort who would potentially be okay with custom-made commander cards, so YMMV.
I gave it a little more thought just a few of the more annoying things that would / could show up as a commander
Baleful Strix - draw / defense in colors that play tons of control and combo.
My problem is that why should we bend the rules for one instance? I just cant justify why an exception should be made for a few very corner case cards. I run Gisela and I accept that I have to find Bruna in my deck. Its a cool deck and I dont need any sort of exception to be made for me to play that deck. I wouldnt ask my meta to allow me any sort of exception because of the fact that someone will ask why they cant do the same with some other two.
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.
Well obviously no one would agree to those because they aren't legendary and they don't thematically feel legendary. It's a slippery slope, but those two are clearly the bottom.
I see nothing wrong with it honestly. Commander is casual and I think the nephilim are definitely legends but, not written on the card as such. Which is weird since I'm pretty sure story wise there's only the one of each, which, in itself makes it a legend creature, right?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH: Bruna, Light of Alabaster | Karlov of the Ghost Council | Breya, Etherium Shaper | Marchesa, the Black Rose | Queen Marchesa | The Mimeoplasm | Avacyn, Angel of Hope |
Pauper:
Orzhov Nightsky Mimic
Frequent lurker and vorthos player
As a dude that played several of them (including the Ink-Treader Nephilim combo deck), I have absolutely no problem. They each have fairly unique abilities, that lead to commander-centric decks. Many cards would only find their place in a Nephilim deck, and this is especially the case for Ink-Treader.
As for the slippery-slope argument, I really couldn't care less. If you want to brew your crazy Baleful Strix deck, I really don't mind. Hell, we had a player that made a Storm Crow brutal stax deck a while back, and it was an awesome blast to watch. Seriously, it was like nothing you have ever seen. It hasn't happened yet, but I would enjoy seeing an Aetherworks Marvel deck in action.
For me, I want to encourage creativity. If there is a certain deck that a player wants to build, I have no problem with it. I would just suggest to anyone that wants to do this to have another, 'legitimate' deck with them just in case others have a problem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Personally I'd be fine with it, as long as it wasn't OP (ink treader lol). I'm usually pretty flexible with the rules as long as you're doing something interesting. I personally wouldn't be likely to make one in the future though - I was hoping they'd errata them legendary in the precons, but with that not happening I'll put them in the pile with the uncle istvans of the world.
I hope one day they print a version of ink-treader that's less broken and is a legal commander, though. That ability is very cool. (EDIT: by which I mean, not Zada. That's a little tooo fixed - mostly because of the color)
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
And for the 10 super-hybrid spirit avatars from Llorwyn; Godhead of Awe and such.
I'm honestly not really opposed to any of them being played casually, since none of them are more overpowered than, say, Leovold, and they all feel 'legendary'. The only question then is "where do we draw the line"?
- Rabid Wombat
(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'
Honestly any of them would be okay in my book as long as they didn't turn out to be abusive (Oversoul of Dusk would also be a bit mean-spirited since it's extremely uninteractive unless you happen to be playing one of two colors... and because it's a spirit haha get it?-I'll stop now)
- Rabid Wombat
1) The "Just for colors" reason no longer flies with me, if the Nephilim is going to be as useless as literally any other legal choice, then just use the legal one.
2) You must have another Commander(s) ready to swap with the Nephilim at any time if someone disagrees. Preferably those cards are in the 99 (as to show that the deck can function as a traditionally legal one as well), but personally I won't fuss too much over that (just my deck design pickiness preferring that). Running a Commander that depends on table approval is akin to running one that can be "permanently removed" from the game at any time and if the deck that cannot adjust to that (instead hoping that table approval always happens) just feels like "bad design" to me. Or maybe I just got this bias because people who tend to design decks like these don't have a backup plan (or another deck for that matter) and it's just a feels-bad all around when someone doesn't agree.
Erm... I would hope that the table would figure out if it's okay before the game starts. Having them toss out their commander halfway through is a bit cruel, to say the least. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what you're saying here?
- Rabid Wombat
I was talking in the "meta sense", not literally halfway through a game. To put it bluntly, I don't like people who build only a deck that is reliant on table approval/house rules without a backup deck/plan because that is asking for trouble if someone doesn't agree to it and one simply can't play as a result, which leads to a feels-bad all around when it does.
Shouldn't have put "game", I meant it as "EDH experience", that was my wording mistake. My intended meaning still stands the same.
- Rabid Wombat
The Kithkin asks "Tell me, O seer, how will the world end?" to which the seer replies "You are not ready for my answer. Perhaps there are other things you wish to know?"
The main portion of the poem is the Kithkin asking several questions, and the seer answering with the legend of one of the Demigods
"Where did this world come from?" (Overbeing of Myth)
"What causes the mighty quakes that scare my children and send me tumbling?" (Deus of Calamity)
"Why does our night stretch so everlasting?" (Demigod of Revenge)
"With the gloom all about us, why do the elves still hope?" (Oversoul of Dusk)
"Why must there be war?" (Nobilis of War)
"Why can some not act as one mind, one soul as we kithkin do?" (Dominus of Fealty)
"Why do we desire to keep on living even if that life is empty and hopeless?" (Deity of Scars)
"Why does the moon wax and wane?" (Godhead of Awe)
"What lies beyond death?" (Ghastlord of Fugue)
Then the Kithkin asks the first question again ("How will this world end?"), and the seer reveals herself to be Divinity of Pride, answers the question, and the Kithkin goes insane.
Taken from the poem, the Demigod of Revenge ripped himself apart, and then "Finally, he lay on the ground, panting from his extertions, when his form began to knit together in strange ways even he did not fathom. When all limbs were joined anew, and life returned to muscles, there stood now two of him, where there had only been one, united in purpose and hate." The two tore each other apart to become four, then eight, then sixteen, and then the damned army tore apart the hole in the sky to make the night. That's where the acknowledgement of multiple Demigods of Revenge comes from.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
(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'
In general there's enough legal options for anything in commander that I see little purpose in bending the rules outside of experimenting for heck of it. I'd probably allow just about anything long as someone gave me a heads up to their special clause they were invoking. Going outside the box is fun from time to time, but I prefer they always keep a 100% legal option on them as well.
I have wanted to make a Dominus of Fealty deck for some time. There aren't any other legitimate 'threaten' effect commanders other than Skyfire Kirin who requires arcane spells (there aren't enough good ones for EDH) and who doesn't even untap the creatures or give them haste...
- Rabid Wombat
Brion Stoutarm is also good for a threaten deck, even if he doesn't threaten himself. Threaten+Fling is always a strong combo.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Ah, I would appear to have missed her due to her conditions, since I only searched for "gain control of target (creature/permanent/nonland permanent) until end of turn." (and had known about the Kirin ahead of time)
Much obliged!
- Rabid Wombat
If you want to talk to your group and propose a change to the rules thats fine. I dont really think just showing up with a deck and assuming they would be cool with it would be so cool. I am against the idea of allowing someone to play with a commander of the sort because what if I want an exclusion to allow me to run card X or Y? Where does it stop? Can I just jam two legends together and pretend they both have partner while we are at it?
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
If your two legends are Gisela, the Broken Blade and Bruna, the Fading Light then a lot of people would say yes!
More seriously, Braids is explicitly banned and for a good reason, so the obvious answer is 'no'. I understand the slippery slope argument you're making though; my rule of thumb is "is it better than anything else you could be playing?". If the answer is "yes" or "it's hard to tell" (Ugin, because he's stronger than the commander-PWs but he's also colorless) then I would request that they play a normal deck, then maybe play a game or two with them against their 'illegal' deck once I'm convinced they're not going to be abusing the exception or they're not going to be stubborn or confrontational about it if the group decides that the deck isn't fun or fair to play against.
If the answer is "no", well, there's your slippery slope again. Who decides that a card is better or worse than another card, in a game where card interaction is so important? My personal criteria centers around the idea that aggro and battlecruiser are underpowered while combo and control are dangerous and ramp is somewhere in the middle (hence why I'm not okay with Ink-Treader; he combos with a large subset of cards in a very non-restrictive set of colors). Oversoul of Dusk exemplifies the problem with my method moreso than most: it's clearly legendary flavor-wise, and it's "fair" in terms of power for mana paid. It doesn't combo and is decidedly not the best choice you could make for combo, control, or ramp. On the other hand, it's extremely good against three of the five colors and is almost impossible to remove without white or board wipe. Someone playing Sedris, the Traitor King is gonna have a bad time against Oversoul. And then on yet another hand, Animar is totally a card and is even more removal-resistant and combo-y than Oversoul. Should I then be okay with Oversoul if she was in Animar's colors instead of G/W?
There's definitely a lot of crevices for arguments to sprout from there, but there are too many neat possibilities (Gisela and Bruna, for example) to discount it entirely. Overall, I think a simple group vote is fairest.
Then again, I'm also the sort who would potentially be okay with custom-made commander cards, so YMMV.
- Rabid Wombat
I gave it a little more thought just a few of the more annoying things that would / could show up as a commander
Baleful Strix - draw / defense in colors that play tons of control and combo.
Snapcaster Mage - heavy blue control anyone?
My problem is that why should we bend the rules for one instance? I just cant justify why an exception should be made for a few very corner case cards. I run Gisela and I accept that I have to find Bruna in my deck. Its a cool deck and I dont need any sort of exception to be made for me to play that deck. I wouldnt ask my meta to allow me any sort of exception because of the fact that someone will ask why they cant do the same with some other two.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Well obviously no one would agree to those because they aren't legendary and they don't thematically feel legendary. It's a slippery slope, but those two are clearly the bottom.
- Rabid Wombat
Bruna, Light of Alabaster | Karlov of the Ghost Council | Breya, Etherium Shaper | Marchesa, the Black Rose | Queen Marchesa | The Mimeoplasm | Avacyn, Angel of Hope |
Pauper:
Orzhov Nightsky Mimic
Frequent lurker and vorthos player
As for the slippery-slope argument, I really couldn't care less. If you want to brew your crazy Baleful Strix deck, I really don't mind. Hell, we had a player that made a Storm Crow brutal stax deck a while back, and it was an awesome blast to watch. Seriously, it was like nothing you have ever seen. It hasn't happened yet, but I would enjoy seeing an Aetherworks Marvel deck in action.
For me, I want to encourage creativity. If there is a certain deck that a player wants to build, I have no problem with it. I would just suggest to anyone that wants to do this to have another, 'legitimate' deck with them just in case others have a problem.