Because some people find it fun. We live in a world where "well adjusted, relatively social" people jump out of airplanes, hop bare ass naked into frigid water, and try to beat each other to death for money and the adulation of strangers. Much like degenerate combo decks, the only time they're an issue is when other decks aren't prepared to face them.
There's no accounting for taste, after all.
Pretty much this. People play stax because they enjoy it: no more, no less.
Infinite turns more often than not ends the game with a sour taste in opponents mouths because the game ended for them the moment the combo started, not several turns later when the win condition finally occurs. Stax removes permanents, inifinite turns removes all other players. Choosing to play alone in a multiplayer game is far more antisocial than oppressing others.
Wait, people actually sit around and wait for someone to play out the game after they've got infinite turns? Why not just scoop, give the guy his win, then start a new game?
A little bit of pushback against the misconception that players are entitled to goldfish unopposed in the spirit of "fun" till everyone gets a fair chance is good for the format. Stax is important because it helps players keep a healthy perspective.
Often times for those players, their infinite turns isn't the meat of the deck, but considered simply ramp. In order to feel fulfilled that their deck works, they have to do all of their shenanigans during said turns to feel their deck "got to do what they wanted it to do". If they don't get that, then they get upset, which sucks for the rest of the table since they are then seen as "poor winners" and thusly they accuse the rest of the table of being poor winners and so the next game everyone bands together to take infinite turns person out first and they get all upset because the rest of the table was not only not going to fall for the same trick twice in a row, but is now excluding a player from playing the rest of what will be a long game.
Tl;dr: some people want to win, others want their deck to do at least x,y and z. It is hard to win when your deck can't survive your meta and it is hard to pull off x,y, and z when those items take why too much of your opponents' patience and attention span.
I'd like to approach this subject from three angles that hopefully will be insightful.
1) Decks as combat sports.
Some of us play Commander because we want to box. We want to slug it out with grand hammer-blows until someone cracks (battlecruiser). Others of us want to wrestle. We want to steadily pin our opponent down until they are utterly helpless (stax). I'm sure someone could come up with analogies for other deck types. What I hope the comparison does is show that all these deck styles have a legitimate appeal. The problem arises when someone enters the ring expecting to throw punches and their opponent puts them in a pin. For this reason, we default to EDH rule no. 1: 'Talk to your opponents!'
2) Decks as power trips.
Seriously. You play your deck because something about it grabs you, right? Since this is a game about fighting, it's probably something about the deck's perceived fighting power. That can manifest as anything from Vorthos's admiration of the sleek forms of dragons in his cards' art boxes to Timmy's mad cackle as his creature swings for 40 to Spike's smug satisfaction as his opponents wriggles around with two mana under the tightening death-vice. By playing Magic, we're probably engaging in some sort of power trip. If we're not allowed to revel in our power trip at least some of the time, our enjoyment of the game will decrease. This could result from a player with a more powerful deck or mismatched archetype keeping us from competing or someone attacking our playstyle and refusing to play with us if we use such an 'unfair' deck. I don't know what a complete solution to this problem is, but I think the empathy of understanding and respecting your opponents' way of enjoying the game is the start.
3) Gameplay as agency.
I don't know much game theory, but if I had to guess, I'd say a big part of the appeal is the ability to do things that have consequences, or agency. (For a clearer example, why do I play as Master Chief in Halo? Because I get to do things I can't do normally.) If I ever feel that I can't do anything (meaningful) in the game, my enjoyment will plummet. A related concept is frustration. Frustration occurs when we want to do something or feel we should be able to do something but can't. I think this is why many players dislike facing countermagic or stax decks. As I've said above, I think countermagic and stax decks are legitimate. But I think it behooves players to consider how their playstyle may affect their play partners' enjoyment of the game. I think those play partners should reciprocate by considering how very much their opponents may enjoy their particular deck types as well. Then, hopefully, you can reach a compromise - or agree, cordially, to seek different playgroups if your styles really are incompatible.
None of this, of course, will be helpful if you don't choose to care about your opponent. I hope, as such, that it was indeed helpful in understanding other players' mindsets and sources of enjoyment in the game.
I'm wondering why any well adjusted, relatively social person would want to take MTG and play every card they can to ruin the experience for everyone else.
Because some people find it fun. We live in a world where "well adjusted, relatively social" people jump out of airplanes, hop bare ass naked into frigid water, and try to beat each other to death for money and the adulation of strangers. Much like degenerate combo decks, the only time they're an issue is when other decks aren't prepared to face them.
There's no accounting for taste, after all.
Pretty much this. People play stax because they enjoy it: no more, no less.
Just because someone finds something fun doesn't automatically make it okay. The stax player's fun is usually at the expense of the group because the stax player thinks they are the hero of the day slowing down ramp, but in reality in actual played games all that happens is the game is slowed down to a crawl where nobody really does anything cool or funny. It's a moan and groan fest for the majority of the game, and anyone who says they enjoy the challenge of breaking the resource denial soft locks are simply reaching and are trying to sound like badasses.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"People are the worst. The worst thing about music is that people play it." - Mike Patton
It's a moan and groan fest for the majority of the game, and anyone who says they enjoy the challenge of breaking the resource denial soft locks are simply reaching and are trying to sound like badasses.
Argument from incredulity – "I cannot imagine how this could be true; therefore, it must be false."
It's a moan and groan fest for the majority of the game, and anyone who says they enjoy the challenge of breaking the resource denial soft locks are simply reaching and are trying to sound like badasses.
Argument from incredulity – "I cannot imagine how this could be true; therefore, it must be false."
A logical fallacy only applies when the opinion was derived from logic. He's not making a logical argument, he's stating his personal experience.
It's a moan and groan fest for the majority of the game, and anyone who says they enjoy the challenge of breaking the resource denial soft locks are simply reaching and are trying to sound like badasses.
Argument from incredulity – "I cannot imagine how this could be true; therefore, it must be false."
A logical fallacy only applies when the opinion was derived from logic. He's not making a logical argument, he's stating his personal experience.
Exactly, this has been my personal experiences in Commander for the past 8-9 years when playing against stax decks in person amongst many different groups in 5-6 cities and various GP's with randoms. I honestly can't even tell you a single game where it was memorable because the stax player made any positive contribution to the overall group enjoyment of the game. It is a "my fun only" strategy and attitude so you can feel like you are being cute annoying the other players for a few games until it gets old and you end up dismantling the deck. I know this also from personal experience from playing Grand Augustine, with the slow road to a real win con and making it so you can barely play your cards, it is just miserable for everyone else involved. Players usually tune out after a bit and start looking at their phones or just get up and leave. I would rather see someone gen-wave for 20 then have anyone barely playing the game most of the game. Isn't that the name of the game here, for ridiculous over the top huge mana plays? Why so tryhard?
They are making an assertion that anyone who claims to enjoy playing against the archetype are lying &/or posturing.
The argument is not that they disklike it, but that everyone does, in spite of personal assertions to the contrary. This can be summed up as "I don't like it, so no one likes it."
That is an Argument from Incredulity, and a fallacy. Fallacies are not applied to "opinions derived form logic". They are applied to any argument with unsound reasoning, regardless of the cause of said reasoning.
They are making an assertion that anyone who claims to enjoy playing against the archetype are lying &/or posturing.
The argument is not that they disklike it, but that everyone does, in spite of personal assertions to the contrary. This can be summed up as "I don't like it, so no one likes it."
That is an Argument from Incredulity, and a fallacy. Fallacies are not applied to "opinions derived form logic". They are applied to any argument with unsound reasoning, regardless of the cause of said reasoning.
You're only a week into your 100-level debate class, aren't you?
They are making an assertion that anyone who claims to enjoy playing against the archetype are lying &/or posturing.
The argument is not that they disklike it, but that everyone does, in spite of personal assertions to the contrary. This can be summed up as "I don't like it, so no one likes it."
That is an Argument from Incredulity, and a fallacy. Fallacies are not applied to "opinions derived form logic". They are applied to any argument with unsound reasoning, regardless of the cause of said reasoning.
You're only a week into your 100-level debate class, aren't you?
I'm 2 weeks into it and I recognize this as Ad Hominem! Yay me!
Because some people find it fun. We live in a world where "well adjusted, relatively social" people jump out of airplanes, hop bare ass naked into frigid water, and try to beat each other to death for money and the adulation of strangers. Much like degenerate combo decks, the only time they're an issue is when other decks aren't prepared to face them.
There's no accounting for taste, after all.
Pretty much this. People play stax because they enjoy it: no more, no less.
Just because someone finds something fun doesn't automatically make it okay. The stax player's fun is usually at the expense of the group because the stax player thinks they are the hero of the day slowing down ramp, but in reality in actual played games all that happens is the game is slowed down to a crawl where nobody really does anything cool or funny. It's a moan and groan fest for the majority of the game, and anyone who says they enjoy the challenge of breaking the resource denial soft locks are simply reaching and are trying to sound like badasses.
That's your personal opinion. And guess what? Not everyone shares it. Stop trying to turn an issue of personal preference into a matter of right or wrong.
They're are plenty of people who enjoy playing stax AND playing against it, just as there are many who don't. Then there's people who don't care one way or another. It varies from person to person, playgroup to playgroup. You don't like it? Fine, nothing wrong with that. You're perfectly entitled to an opinion of what you want out of this game and it's various aspects.
But don't sit there stereotype everyone who doesn't agree with you or pass your own opinion off as fact. How you can sit there and dictate what people find fun or not, is utterly beyond me. The fact that you have to demonize everyone who plays stax and attempt to invalidate anyone who can have fun playing against it, simply speaks to your own biases and a lack of sportsmanship.
They are making an assertion that anyone who claims to enjoy playing against the archetype are lying &/or posturing.
The argument is not that they disklike it, but that everyone does, in spite of personal assertions to the contrary. This can be summed up as "I don't like it, so no one likes it."
That is an Argument from Incredulity, and a fallacy. Fallacies are not applied to "opinions derived form logic". They are applied to any argument with unsound reasoning, regardless of the cause of said reasoning.
You're only a week into your 100-level debate class, aren't you?
I'm 2 weeks into it and I recognize this as Ad Hominem! Yay me!
An argument against the body would require me to make an argument. I didn't.
An argument against the body would require me to make an argument. I didn't.
So... you do not understand what Ad Hominem is.
Ad Hominem is not an argument. It is an attempt to refute or otherwise dismiss an opposing argument by attacking the individual making said argument, rather than addressing the argument itself.
I am done with this. It is becoming very clear that it is pointless to speak with you, and is off topic.
[quote from="FourDogsInAHorseSuit »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/commander-edh/781875-why-do-people-play-stax?comment=67"]
I am done with this. It is becoming very clear that it is pointless to speak with you, and is off topic.
See, now this is an ad homeinum. Turns out you knew what it was the whole time!
Public Mod Note
(Jivanmukta):
Warning for Spam - Jiv
There are a myriad of deck archetypes in EDH, all of which exist somewhere along the spectrum of casual to cutthroat. I know that stax generally exists on the higher end of the cutthroat side, and it's usually considered, in it's stronger builds, an effective competitive option.
However, that's not my question. I'm wondering why any well adjusted, relatively social person would want to take MTG and play every card they can to ruin the experience for everyone else. Stuff like Smokestack, Possessed Portal, Winter Orb that shut down the core concepts of playing the game: using mana, drawing cards, casting spells. This doesn't create a fun, interactive environment for people to play a game together. All this does is force people to sit through you dragging the game on as long as possible while they stare at pieces of paper in their hand that they can't use.
What's the point?
Because screw the xUG player that preaches from the top of his 27 lands and a mana reflection that his ability to draw 15 cards/turn is fair and reasonable.
Go fetch your basics with boundless realms. Sure. But don't cry when I take advantage of your general naivety and make you cry to an armageddon that puts out of the game.
There are a myriad of deck archetypes in EDH, all of which exist somewhere along the spectrum of casual to cutthroat. I know that stax generally exists on the higher end of the cutthroat side, and it's usually considered, in it's stronger builds, an effective competitive option.
However, that's not my question. I'm wondering why any well adjusted, relatively social person would want to take MTG and play every card they can to ruin the experience for everyone else. Stuff like Smokestack, Possessed Portal, Winter Orb that shut down the core concepts of playing the game: using mana, drawing cards, casting spells. This doesn't create a fun, interactive environment for people to play a game together. All this does is force people to sit through you dragging the game on as long as possible while they stare at pieces of paper in their hand that they can't use.
What's the point?
Because screw the xUG player that preaches from the top of his 27 lands and a mana reflection that his ability to draw 15 cards/turn is fair and reasonable.
Go fetch your basics with boundless realms. Sure. But don't cry when I take advantage of your general naivety and make you cry to an armageddon that puts out of the game.
And the only way to deal with that is locking down the entire board, consisting of 2+ other players besides that one player?? Sounds like a you problem that you want to make the tables problem. Like, I get it, ramp players get out of hand, but I'd rather a swift end to a game when it reaches the 27 land point rather then "oh, we have to teach this guy a lesson, a lesson that won't be learned except by playing a 2 hour long game".
We deter Stax in our shop by putting time limits on games, about ~20 minutes per player, so our 4 player games last about an hour. When noobs show up with lockdown decks that only try to drag out games in the name of "intelligent decision making", we make sure to point out that if the game goes to time, he's the loser. At a table consisting of competetive people who care about the outcome, sure, go nuts. At the table where I just want a break from 1 on 1 matchs, take your try hard elsewhere.
You're lying if you think Stax strategies don't slow games down, and those strategies are absolutely the worst for Multi-player, unless everybody shares your definition of "fun". Stop painting players against it as the ones who are "bad guys"(not just you). Most of what I've read here from those against Stax isn't the strategy itself, it's what the strategy does to a table of 4+, and that is ultimately drag a game out into oblivion. My time is valuable, waste your own, not mine.
-snip-
We deter Stax in our shop ... At the table where I just want a break from 1 on 1 matchs, take your try hard elsewhere.
... My time is valuable, waste your own, not mine.
An opinion I disagree with, yet it highlights what I think is an important point for this topic - just make sure everyone at the table is on the same page about what type of game you are about to play. When you play with me, unless I hear otherwise, I will "try hard" (to win). I will destroy your resources, or employ any number of strategies to try and win. But if I'm at your shop, and someone politely says to me before I sit down that this group prefers no MLD and no Stax, then I can go in with different expectations and pull out a weaker deck or one that plays within those parameters. But without having that conversation, don't expect me to water down my playstyle or play a weaker deck in order to make sure the game plays out in such a way where you feel you didn't waste your time. My time is valuable too.
There are a myriad of deck archetypes in EDH, all of which exist somewhere along the spectrum of casual to cutthroat. I know that stax generally exists on the higher end of the cutthroat side, and it's usually considered, in it's stronger builds, an effective competitive option.
However, that's not my question. I'm wondering why any well adjusted, relatively social person would want to take MTG and play every card they can to ruin the experience for everyone else. Stuff like Smokestack, Possessed Portal, Winter Orb that shut down the core concepts of playing the game: using mana, drawing cards, casting spells. This doesn't create a fun, interactive environment for people to play a game together. All this does is force people to sit through you dragging the game on as long as possible while they stare at pieces of paper in their hand that they can't use.
What's the point?
Because screw the xUG player that preaches from the top of his 27 lands and a mana reflection that his ability to draw 15 cards/turn is fair and reasonable.
Go fetch your basics with boundless realms. Sure. But don't cry when I take advantage of your general naivety and make you cry to an armageddon that puts out of the game.
Ignoring for a moment you said "don't cry when I make you cry" what else are they supposed to do for the next hour when while no one can do anything? Compliment you on how well you're wasting everyone's time?
There are a myriad of deck archetypes in EDH, all of which exist somewhere along the spectrum of casual to cutthroat. I know that stax generally exists on the higher end of the cutthroat side, and it's usually considered, in it's stronger builds, an effective competitive option.
However, that's not my question. I'm wondering why any well adjusted, relatively social person would want to take MTG and play every card they can to ruin the experience for everyone else. Stuff like Smokestack, Possessed Portal, Winter Orb that shut down the core concepts of playing the game: using mana, drawing cards, casting spells. This doesn't create a fun, interactive environment for people to play a game together. All this does is force people to sit through you dragging the game on as long as possible while they stare at pieces of paper in their hand that they can't use.
What's the point?
Because screw the xUG player that preaches from the top of his 27 lands and a mana reflection that his ability to draw 15 cards/turn is fair and reasonable.
Go fetch your basics with boundless realms. Sure. But don't cry when I take advantage of your general naivety and make you cry to an armageddon that puts out of the game.
Ignoring for a moment you said "don't cry when I make you cry" what else are they supposed to do for the next hour when while no one can do anything? Compliment you on how well you're wasting everyone's time?
They'll probably do whatever they would normally do while the UG players is casting 6 spells a turn for 3 turns in a row.
There are a myriad of deck archetypes in EDH, all of which exist somewhere along the spectrum of casual to cutthroat. I know that stax generally exists on the higher end of the cutthroat side, and it's usually considered, in it's stronger builds, an effective competitive option.
However, that's not my question. I'm wondering why any well adjusted, relatively social person would want to take MTG and play every card they can to ruin the experience for everyone else. Stuff like Smokestack, Possessed Portal, Winter Orb that shut down the core concepts of playing the game: using mana, drawing cards, casting spells. This doesn't create a fun, interactive environment for people to play a game together. All this does is force people to sit through you dragging the game on as long as possible while they stare at pieces of paper in their hand that they can't use.
What's the point?
Because screw the xUG player that preaches from the top of his 27 lands and a mana reflection that his ability to draw 15 cards/turn is fair and reasonable.
Go fetch your basics with boundless realms. Sure. But don't cry when I take advantage of your general naivety and make you cry to an armageddon that puts out of the game.
Ignoring for a moment you said "don't cry when I make you cry" what else are they supposed to do for the next hour when while no one can do anything? Compliment you on how well you're wasting everyone's time?
They'll probably do whatever they would normally do while the UG players is casting 6 spells a turn for 3 turns in a row.
Isn't strawmanning fun?
Casting spells? You mean that thing that you can interact with? That thing that will actually change the game state? That thing that will actually do stuff?
Why are we comparing that to denying resources, the thing that punishes you for simply sitting down at the table?
-snip-
We deter Stax in our shop ... At the table where I just want a break from 1 on 1 matchs, take your try hard elsewhere.
... My time is valuable, waste your own, not mine.
An opinion I disagree with, yet it highlights what I think is an important point for this topic - just make sure everyone at the table is on the same page about what type of game you are about to play. When you play with me, unless I hear otherwise, I will "try hard" (to win). I will destroy your resources, or employ any number of strategies to try and win. But if I'm at your shop, and someone politely says to me before I sit down that this group prefers no MLD and no Stax, then I can go in with different expectations and pull out a weaker deck or one that plays within those parameters. But without having that conversation, don't expect me to water down my playstyle or play a weaker deck in order to make sure the game plays out in such a way where you feel you didn't waste your time. My time is valuable too.
Well, we play EDH based on its underlying philosophy of being a social format. Winning is fine, but not at all costs. Why go through the trouble of sitting down at a table of your primary goal is to alienate the other 3 people playing with you. At the that point, you are being just as selfish as the ramp guy who want to play all the ramp spells in the world. Ignoring that is my problem with this thread. You are not smarter, more skilled, or a better person for employing such strategies. I tend to think of folks with your mindset as poor losers who would much rather take their ball and go home, and before you say otherwise, resources would be considered the ball, and your goal is to take that away, hence the analogy. Its a great strategy for 1v1, but not for a group. Which is where I side with the OP's point, your social skills would be considered lacking if your go-to for MP is resource denial, with or without knowing playgroup guidelines ahead of time.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Pretty much this. People play stax because they enjoy it: no more, no less.
BK'rrik Goodstuff
GWSythis Enchantress
URYusri Coin Flip
BRGKorvold Tokens
BGUYarok Lands Matter
WUBRaffine Looter
Wait, people actually sit around and wait for someone to play out the game after they've got infinite turns? Why not just scoop, give the guy his win, then start a new game?
Tl;dr: some people want to win, others want their deck to do at least x,y and z. It is hard to win when your deck can't survive your meta and it is hard to pull off x,y, and z when those items take why too much of your opponents' patience and attention span.
1) Decks as combat sports.
Some of us play Commander because we want to box. We want to slug it out with grand hammer-blows until someone cracks (battlecruiser). Others of us want to wrestle. We want to steadily pin our opponent down until they are utterly helpless (stax). I'm sure someone could come up with analogies for other deck types. What I hope the comparison does is show that all these deck styles have a legitimate appeal. The problem arises when someone enters the ring expecting to throw punches and their opponent puts them in a pin. For this reason, we default to EDH rule no. 1: 'Talk to your opponents!'
2) Decks as power trips.
Seriously. You play your deck because something about it grabs you, right? Since this is a game about fighting, it's probably something about the deck's perceived fighting power. That can manifest as anything from Vorthos's admiration of the sleek forms of dragons in his cards' art boxes to Timmy's mad cackle as his creature swings for 40 to Spike's smug satisfaction as his opponents wriggles around with two mana under the tightening death-vice. By playing Magic, we're probably engaging in some sort of power trip. If we're not allowed to revel in our power trip at least some of the time, our enjoyment of the game will decrease. This could result from a player with a more powerful deck or mismatched archetype keeping us from competing or someone attacking our playstyle and refusing to play with us if we use such an 'unfair' deck. I don't know what a complete solution to this problem is, but I think the empathy of understanding and respecting your opponents' way of enjoying the game is the start.
3) Gameplay as agency.
I don't know much game theory, but if I had to guess, I'd say a big part of the appeal is the ability to do things that have consequences, or agency. (For a clearer example, why do I play as Master Chief in Halo? Because I get to do things I can't do normally.) If I ever feel that I can't do anything (meaningful) in the game, my enjoyment will plummet. A related concept is frustration. Frustration occurs when we want to do something or feel we should be able to do something but can't. I think this is why many players dislike facing countermagic or stax decks. As I've said above, I think countermagic and stax decks are legitimate. But I think it behooves players to consider how their playstyle may affect their play partners' enjoyment of the game. I think those play partners should reciprocate by considering how very much their opponents may enjoy their particular deck types as well. Then, hopefully, you can reach a compromise - or agree, cordially, to seek different playgroups if your styles really are incompatible.
None of this, of course, will be helpful if you don't choose to care about your opponent. I hope, as such, that it was indeed helpful in understanding other players' mindsets and sources of enjoyment in the game.
Hrm...
Just because someone finds something fun doesn't automatically make it okay. The stax player's fun is usually at the expense of the group because the stax player thinks they are the hero of the day slowing down ramp, but in reality in actual played games all that happens is the game is slowed down to a crawl where nobody really does anything cool or funny. It's a moan and groan fest for the majority of the game, and anyone who says they enjoy the challenge of breaking the resource denial soft locks are simply reaching and are trying to sound like badasses.
Argument from incredulity – "I cannot imagine how this could be true; therefore, it must be false."
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
A logical fallacy only applies when the opinion was derived from logic. He's not making a logical argument, he's stating his personal experience.
Exactly, this has been my personal experiences in Commander for the past 8-9 years when playing against stax decks in person amongst many different groups in 5-6 cities and various GP's with randoms. I honestly can't even tell you a single game where it was memorable because the stax player made any positive contribution to the overall group enjoyment of the game. It is a "my fun only" strategy and attitude so you can feel like you are being cute annoying the other players for a few games until it gets old and you end up dismantling the deck. I know this also from personal experience from playing Grand Augustine, with the slow road to a real win con and making it so you can barely play your cards, it is just miserable for everyone else involved. Players usually tune out after a bit and start looking at their phones or just get up and leave. I would rather see someone gen-wave for 20 then have anyone barely playing the game most of the game. Isn't that the name of the game here, for ridiculous over the top huge mana plays? Why so tryhard?
The argument is not that they disklike it, but that everyone does, in spite of personal assertions to the contrary. This can be summed up as "I don't like it, so no one likes it."
That is an Argument from Incredulity, and a fallacy. Fallacies are not applied to "opinions derived form logic". They are applied to any argument with unsound reasoning, regardless of the cause of said reasoning.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
You're only a week into your 100-level debate class, aren't you?
I'm 2 weeks into it and I recognize this as Ad Hominem! Yay me!
That's your personal opinion. And guess what? Not everyone shares it. Stop trying to turn an issue of personal preference into a matter of right or wrong.
They're are plenty of people who enjoy playing stax AND playing against it, just as there are many who don't. Then there's people who don't care one way or another. It varies from person to person, playgroup to playgroup. You don't like it? Fine, nothing wrong with that. You're perfectly entitled to an opinion of what you want out of this game and it's various aspects.
But don't sit there stereotype everyone who doesn't agree with you or pass your own opinion off as fact. How you can sit there and dictate what people find fun or not, is utterly beyond me. The fact that you have to demonize everyone who plays stax and attempt to invalidate anyone who can have fun playing against it, simply speaks to your own biases and a lack of sportsmanship.
BK'rrik Goodstuff
GWSythis Enchantress
URYusri Coin Flip
BRGKorvold Tokens
BGUYarok Lands Matter
WUBRaffine Looter
An argument against the body would require me to make an argument. I didn't.
So... you do not understand what Ad Hominem is.
Ad Hominem is not an argument. It is an attempt to refute or otherwise dismiss an opposing argument by attacking the individual making said argument, rather than addressing the argument itself.
I am done with this. It is becoming very clear that it is pointless to speak with you, and is off topic.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
See, now this is an ad homeinum. Turns out you knew what it was the whole time!
Because screw the xUG player that preaches from the top of his 27 lands and a mana reflection that his ability to draw 15 cards/turn is fair and reasonable.
Go fetch your basics with boundless realms. Sure. But don't cry when I take advantage of your general naivety and make you cry to an armageddon that puts out of the game.
Steel Sabotage'ng Orbs of Mellowness since 2011.
And the only way to deal with that is locking down the entire board, consisting of 2+ other players besides that one player?? Sounds like a you problem that you want to make the tables problem. Like, I get it, ramp players get out of hand, but I'd rather a swift end to a game when it reaches the 27 land point rather then "oh, we have to teach this guy a lesson, a lesson that won't be learned except by playing a 2 hour long game".
We deter Stax in our shop by putting time limits on games, about ~20 minutes per player, so our 4 player games last about an hour. When noobs show up with lockdown decks that only try to drag out games in the name of "intelligent decision making", we make sure to point out that if the game goes to time, he's the loser. At a table consisting of competetive people who care about the outcome, sure, go nuts. At the table where I just want a break from 1 on 1 matchs, take your try hard elsewhere.
You're lying if you think Stax strategies don't slow games down, and those strategies are absolutely the worst for Multi-player, unless everybody shares your definition of "fun". Stop painting players against it as the ones who are "bad guys"(not just you). Most of what I've read here from those against Stax isn't the strategy itself, it's what the strategy does to a table of 4+, and that is ultimately drag a game out into oblivion. My time is valuable, waste your own, not mine.
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
An opinion I disagree with, yet it highlights what I think is an important point for this topic - just make sure everyone at the table is on the same page about what type of game you are about to play. When you play with me, unless I hear otherwise, I will "try hard" (to win). I will destroy your resources, or employ any number of strategies to try and win. But if I'm at your shop, and someone politely says to me before I sit down that this group prefers no MLD and no Stax, then I can go in with different expectations and pull out a weaker deck or one that plays within those parameters. But without having that conversation, don't expect me to water down my playstyle or play a weaker deck in order to make sure the game plays out in such a way where you feel you didn't waste your time. My time is valuable too.
Currently Playing:
Multiplayer EDH Lists (click italics for a link to the thread!)
[Primer] Lord of Tresserhorn - Don't Tell Me What I Can't Do[Primer] Roon of the Hidden Realm - Rhino Blink
5 Color Tribal Guide (Slivers, Atogs, Allies, Spirits)
Also Playing (most decklists can be found on my profile)
MarathGeistKamahlGrenzoBolasThassaGitrog
PiratesZurVial Smasher&ThrasiosYennettJhoira(cEDH)Strix(Pauper)
Legacy: Maverick
Modern:
Melira PodRIP 1/19/15GWHatebearsIgnoring for a moment you said "don't cry when I make you cry" what else are they supposed to do for the next hour when while no one can do anything? Compliment you on how well you're wasting everyone's time?
They'll probably do whatever they would normally do while the UG players is casting 6 spells a turn for 3 turns in a row.
Isn't strawmanning fun?
Casting spells? You mean that thing that you can interact with? That thing that will actually change the game state? That thing that will actually do stuff?
Why are we comparing that to denying resources, the thing that punishes you for simply sitting down at the table?
Well, we play EDH based on its underlying philosophy of being a social format. Winning is fine, but not at all costs. Why go through the trouble of sitting down at a table of your primary goal is to alienate the other 3 people playing with you. At the that point, you are being just as selfish as the ramp guy who want to play all the ramp spells in the world. Ignoring that is my problem with this thread. You are not smarter, more skilled, or a better person for employing such strategies. I tend to think of folks with your mindset as poor losers who would much rather take their ball and go home, and before you say otherwise, resources would be considered the ball, and your goal is to take that away, hence the analogy. Its a great strategy for 1v1, but not for a group. Which is where I side with the OP's point, your social skills would be considered lacking if your go-to for MP is resource denial, with or without knowing playgroup guidelines ahead of time.