How do you feel about this interaction among Commander players at a LGS? What characters, if any, do you sympathize with?
Preface: I was at a LGS one time observing an EDH game with 4 players that were distant acquaintances that had only played together once or twice.The game was a good game, pretty close, these players were much less competitive than the average player here or myself. I would say they had 50% or 60% decks. The players weren't new to the game but weren't experts and frequently made misplays.
Scenario: One player was playing Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir as their commander, his deck wasn't optimized (he was using cards like Spellbook and Lay Bare) but it was the only blue deck in the game. Eventually he ended up tutoring for and successfully casting Knowledge Pool. The Teferi player grinned widely, eagerly waiting for his opponents to concede. One of his opponents said "alright, cool, you win, we're going to keep playing without you though because we came here to actually play our decks." The other players laughed and agreed. They then proceeded to ignore him and went on with their game.
Personally, I consider this to be total douche move. If someone's won, no matter how they did, it give them them their win, shuffle up and start a new game. If you don't like their wincon, ask them to play a different deck next time.
If someone's won, no matter how they did, it give them them their win, shuffle up and start a new game. If you don't like their wincon, ask them to play a different deck next time.
This. Unless someone knowingly ignores/exploits Meta rules there's propably no reason to do anything similar.
Whoever decided to be the shotcaller of the remaining group totally disrespected the Teferi player and ignored any sort of social contract, casual EDH is based on.
Scenario: One player was playing Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir as their commander, his deck wasn't optimized (he was using cards like Spellbook and Lay Bare) but it was the only blue deck in the game. Eventually he ended up tutoring for and successfully casting Knowledge Pool. The Teferi player grinned widely, eagerly waiting for his opponents to concede. One of his opponents said "alright, cool, you win, we're going to keep playing without you though because we came here to actually play our decks." The other players laughed and agreed. They then proceeded to ignore him and went on with their game.
The move alone was blatantly disrespectful, but on top of that the manner of it was just as aweful.
Such poor behavior would be reason enough not to sit down with them again.
I have done something similar.
1) we asked this guy not to play with us (as his decks were always quick infinite combos) and were hust casually playing. We eventually allowed him to play since wecwere only a pod of 3 and he had no one else to play with. He then within a few turns and another player suggested we play for second. (we had asked him not to play with us in the first place)
2) i had win on board, about 4-5 turns in. I asked te group if it was a win. They agreed it was, i scooped and leftso they could play for second (had to leave anyway)
It depends on how long into the game it happened. If it happened in the early game then yeah play for second(maybe be a bit less rude about how you put it) bit if it has been a long game and players had all gotten to do some portion of what they wanted to, which it seems it was, then just shuffle up and play a new game, if the rest of the group doesn't like the way that player won ask them to play a different deck or something.
Completely disrespectful infuriating bull***** is what it is.
In one move you are saying
1) We don't care about the game we just played
2) We are about to start the real game
3) Our methods of playing the game are valid and yours are not (even though we don't vocalize this at all until it happens)
Think about the same behavior in any other multiplayer game played around a table and you see why it also doesn't make any logical sense and is just done out of spite and pettiness.
As always, the key is communication. A lot depends on how the players communicated their expectations before the game, if they were clear about infinity combos etc. And then a lot depends on how the player with the combo behaves and how the others behave. The group behavior described by the OP (laughing etc) seems very disrespectful.
I have done something similar.
1) we asked this guy not to play with us (as his decks were always quick infinite combos) and were hust casually playing. We eventually allowed him to play since wecwere only a pod of 3 and he had no one else to play with. He then within a few turns and another player suggested we play for second. (we had asked him not to play with us in the first place)
2) i had win on board, about 4-5 turns in. I asked te group if it was a win. They agreed it was, i scooped and leftso they could play for second (had to leave anyway)
In these cases, I think the situation is more nuanced. Especially in the second case, nobody seems to have had any issues or bad vibes. The first case is an example of insufficient communication. Clearly the new player is also at fault, assuming you expressed to him the reason why you were unwilling to play: your dislike of early infinite combos. Still, he comboed off within a few turns. Seems like he was either really oblivious with regards to social clues, or he did it to spite you guys.
Overall, I think you cannot in general say who is right and who is wrong in these situations - but probably all participants have a degree of responsibility for not clearly communicating.
Riku of Two Reflections - Copy, then copy again | Shattergang Brothers - Token Sac&Recur | Gahiji, Honored One - Multiple attack steps | Karametra, God of Harvests - Landfall, Creaturefall, Shroud | Ruhan of the Fomori - Stop hitting yourself | Zurgo Helmsmasher - Equipment&Wraths | Crosis, the Purger - Dragon Tribal Reanimator | Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - No stax, just tap and untap fun | Anafenza, the Foremost - Enduring Ideal Enchantress | Sharuum, the Hegemon - Sphinx Tribal Control | Noyan Dar - Spellslinger | The Mimeoplasm - Counterpalooza
Lists can be found here.
Still convinced the guy on Beseech the Queen is wearing a Mitra-type hat. Wake up sheeple!
You can couch it however you want but typing out the line
While we did not play for seconds, the next round was usually a X vs 1, until the exploiter was dead and the group played by their own rules.
To sound justified or reasonable and not like a petty bunch of people incredible upset that some guy won a card game is some of the saddest ***** I have ever seen posted about this game. That is how it always comes across in the examples given where this 'makes sense'.
It is the same people who will accuse others of playing competitively or take the game too seriously not being able to handle when the game ends in a way that is unacceptable to them and modifying or morphing it to suit their whims in the moment.
Also in general, as much as people are going to say we were very clear about our house rules before the game I am going to be skeptical of that on the internet and about how clear you were being before the game compared to when the person won and you got upset that it was in a way that was out of line for you. At the point where you are modifying the game away from an outcome you don't like I am not sure I can fully trust your side of whatever story about the game you are telling, sorry.
While we did not play for seconds, the next round was usually a X vs 1, until the exploiter was dead and the group played by their own rules.
To sound justified or reasonable and not like a petty bunch of people incredible upset that some guy won a card game is some of the saddest ***** I have ever seen posted about this game. That is how it always comes across in the examples given where this 'makes sense'.
You might be surprised just how common I've personally found this phenomena to be.
I used to play a popular MMO browser game a few months back, and something I always wondered while I played it was why newer and low-skilled players spammed guild requests. These players would never seem to care about what particular guild they made it into. They just absolutely needed to be in something.
Well, over time as I played this game, I ended up learning that this behavior was due to more skilled players like myself preying on these individuals whenever the opportunity arose. For these weaker players, forming alliances of any kind was merely an act of survival. Without the advantage of large numbers, they felt as though they wouldn't be able to enjoy the game they were playing because someone would just pick them off if they were alone and that wouldn't be much fun at all. They literally needed the protection offered to them by several others just to participate in the game.
Now, I can't say for certain whether or not alliances like the one mentioned in the quote are made out of spite or not, but I can say that, since having made my realization, I've come to recognize this sort of phenomena quite often. It frequently manifests inside my games of Commander when I decide to sit down with strangers. And not always after the completion of a single game either. Sometimes it happens mid-game because I've just given off too great a presence for my opponents. In this regard, I am a little sympathetic. Everyone is the hero of their own story, and thwarting that one guy who "just doesn't get it" has got to produce some positive vibes. I gotta say though, for me, besting multiple opponents in combat despite all of them ganging up on me in desperation is something I've frequently found great satisfaction in.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
I am not sure if that example is the same thing at all. I have no problem with the people inside of a multiplayer game combining resources to halt a single person who is far ahead or about the beat them all in the moment that is inherent to games that are made up of more than 2 sides and have been forever, people just taking their turns and not talking about the board or the game or attempting to play up or down threats would feel unnatural and weird. (Also as someone who has taken off in games against friends and had to counter many separate attacks at once from them I agree it is rather fun and tense)
I think using a previous outcome from a game and going into a new fresh game with malicious left over intent from the previous game is more akin to the guy who gets mad cast Obliterate in the middle of a game and then gets up and walks away a turn later. It reeks of petulance when it is premeditated and is petty and that is what I have a problem with, in game making deals as the ground changes is fun.
In the city where I used to live there was a playgroup who did this a lot. They once ganged up on a friend of mine because he played Mystical Tutor in his Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge deck. Another time they lost to a perfectly regular (like 85%) Sek'kuar, Deathkeeper deck of another friend of mine and then proceeded to ignore him and finish the game as three people. None of my friends plays any infinite combos or cutthroat decks, but that group had an almost religious doctrine about how EDH games should be - which they didn't communicate until after the fact.
Riku of Two Reflections - Copy, then copy again | Shattergang Brothers - Token Sac&Recur | Gahiji, Honored One - Multiple attack steps | Karametra, God of Harvests - Landfall, Creaturefall, Shroud | Ruhan of the Fomori - Stop hitting yourself | Zurgo Helmsmasher - Equipment&Wraths | Crosis, the Purger - Dragon Tribal Reanimator | Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - No stax, just tap and untap fun | Anafenza, the Foremost - Enduring Ideal Enchantress | Sharuum, the Hegemon - Sphinx Tribal Control | Noyan Dar - Spellslinger | The Mimeoplasm - Counterpalooza
Lists can be found here.
Still convinced the guy on Beseech the Queen is wearing a Mitra-type hat. Wake up sheeple!
You know what I think is really, phenomenally stupid? Expecting people running 50% deck and getting blown out by a fast combo to not try to stop the combo next time. If the other players don't have a way to interact with the combo reliably, then they fallback on the only option they have, which is knocking out the combo player before they combo off. I say this as a guy who runs combos.
There are better ways to handle it, but they are longer term. You can upgrade your decks with ways to answer the combo, which is the best way and generally speaking all upside. For most combos, the answers you pack are general enough that the combo player can't whine that you are targeting him (though I have seen that). The only issue is that this may take some time.
If you shuffle up and go for game 2 right away, this option isn't really available. If you are playing at a shop, you can buy some cards to slot in, and if you have access to your collection you can swap right away, but either way its pretty clear that you are making changes to your deck specifically to target the combo player. Your other options have trade offs. You can play a different deck that answers the combo if you have one laying around, but again your often going to have the combo player feel targeted, because he is. You can ask the player to play a different deck, but leaving aside the fact that I've seen this cause whine fests, he or she might not have a different deck, or their other deck might also try to combo out quickly leaving the group in the same boat. If you are going for game 2 with the same decks, knocking out the combo player before they combo is often correct ( unless they comboed because they caught everyone tapped out or answer free, in which case the correct answer is just to be aware of the combo when making decisions so you'll be in a position to respond when it comes).
For OPs story, there's a couple of points that need to be made. It does seem like the group acted like dicks, but that includes the douche that brings Teferi Knowledge Pool to a 50% table. Its aa 2 card combo where one of the cards is your commander, can be flashed in at end of turn, and prevents any spell based interaction outside of each opponents main phases, meaning he prevents the table from stopping the combo. The only ways to deal with it is to have a board that can do so already in place (unlikely unless Johnny is a moron because he wouldn't try to land the combo into a telegraphed answer), to have your commander or graveyard be an answer (Knowledge Pool only effects cards cast from your hand, so ancient grudge from the yard kills it, as does Freyalise cadt from the command zone), or trying to kill the dude with your commanders generally ganging up on him. Every answer, aside from getting lucky and having a flashback answer in the yard that he didn't notice, is targeting him. Ending the game and reaching for Freyalise is counterpicking, and I'm sure plenty of folks have a problem with that ( even if its the right move, it still feels like a dick move).
More importantly, OP admits that he doesn't know these people that well, but that they know each other. He doesn't know what sort of agreements they have in place, or whether the Teferi player is breaking the pre discussed norms of the playgroup. If these were randos, Teferi is unambiguously in the right. If this is a playgroup operating on unwritten, undiscussed rules and they decided in the moment that Teferi crossed line, then they are wrong even if Teferi misread the mood. If that sort of play has already been discussed and openly frowned upon by the group, and Teferi did it anyway, then Teferi is unambiguously in the wrong. You know the whole group doesn't like it and doesn't want it in their games and you do it anyway, you're an ********. If you decide on the spot that you don't like something and throw a fit over it, you're an ********. OP doesn't give us enough back story for us to know who the ********s actually are. All we have is a partial story that serves as a cypher to tell us what the responders are more annoyed with, but not who is actually breaking the social contract. The proper response to this happening the first time is "OK, you won, but can you please take that combo out for next game, we really don't like it and don't have a real answer for it so knowing you have it is going to create a really bad play dynamic that the rest of us don't want to be a part of", and the correct response of the Teferi player would be " OK, I'll take it out and won't play it again, but could you be more specific about what was wrong with it so I can know what would be acceptable to the group, this way I can avoid this while not needlessly handicapping myself by cutting things you'd be OK with. "
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!
No one had a board state that could potentially kill him? Even after recasting commanders if necessary? Teferi lock isn't always a win, especially if your deck is trash which it sounds like his was.
Overall I think the generic case doesn't have a clear answer. Some people are fine comboing off and letting table play for second. Some people consider it poor sportsmanship. Which type was Teferi? It also depends on the relative power of the group. Did combos come up beforehand? Is anyone else playing combos?
I definitely don't consider it bad sportsmanship to gang up on someone who's known to have strong combos in their deck like teferi pool, that's just playing smart. If next game Teferi gets beat down quickly, he only has himself to blame.
It's a communication thing. I guess that in some circles it would be frowned upon, but I can see how with reasoned discussion this would be acceptable. End of the day he assembled his wincon, no one had a way to move past it. He won. Playing for second prize isn't a travesty or universally offensive, although it should be discussed with the meta should it come up again.
What is confusing me based on some of the replies here is that, assuming the OP is accurately describing the situation, the Teferi player wasn't being competitive at all. His deck had janky casual cards in it and given the use of the word "eventually" it sounds like he didn't rush into hitting his combo on turn 3-4 or similar. He was playing a pretty casual deck that happened to have a lock-out combo as it's wincon. If he'd sat down with either people he didn't know, or people he knew were very casual, with, say, a Thrasios/Tymna FlashHulk deck, I could have some sympathy with the other players - though I feel the correct reaction is "OK, you've won, now can we play another game where you don't use your competitive deck" rather than the rather douchy "you didn't play magic properly therefore that didn't count" that we see here - but based on the account given, he didn't do anything like this. He was playing a deck that's overall level wasn't utterly disproportionate for the game, the other players just decided they didn't like his chosen wincon and acted like douchebags.
Maybe this is more of a personal preference thing, but his deck sucking, were I at that table, would actually make me way more annoyed than if his deck looked competitive and was competitive. With almost any other combo I'd be less annoyed since you can try to be prepared to answer them, but TeferiPool is basically unanswerable (assuming you don't already have something on board or in the command zone to win or break the combo) except by countering teferi, which you'd presumably have little reason to do if the deck appeared to be low powered. I guess it's probably worth asking right at the onset whether they have pool in the deck, because the existence of that card in the deck is going to make me play VERY differently. In the sense of trying to kill them constantly and encouraging everyone else at the table to do so as well. No matter how casual the rest of the deck is.
To me it sounds like the sort of sucker punch deck that's basically designed to bull***** being casual and basically win one game before people figure out what's going on. The equivalent of atogatog tribal that secretly has a dozen tutors to hit reiterate + reset combo and win in response because everyone thought you were playing jank. The presence of cards like spellbook make me think that's even more likely. Maybe he's just a noob who heard about the combo and thought it sounded cool, but personally I'd be pretty pissed if someone tried that sort of thing on me, the more I think about it.
I feel like this should be pointed out but as the game continues combos that seem locked like Teferi/Pool or Teferi/Possibility Storm more and more cards are being introduced to break out of them.
Specifically Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre always was the one get out of jail free card due to the cast trigger but as Eldrazi came back around both Ulamog 2.0 and even World Breaker can crack open these previously untouchable states (obviously this only applies to the two card versions and still doesn't work against some things with Teferi like Omen Machine)
You can couch it however you want but typing out the line
While we did not play for seconds, the next round was usually a X vs 1, until the exploiter was dead and the group played by their own rules.
To sound justified or reasonable and not like a petty bunch of people incredible upset that some guy won a card game is some of the saddest ***** I have ever seen posted about this game. That is how it always comes across in the examples given where this 'makes sense'.
It is the same people who will accuse others of playing competitively or take the game too seriously not being able to handle when the game ends in a way that is unacceptable to them and modifying or morphing it to suit their whims in the moment.
To me, the problem is people who just don´t accept the fact there are different playstyles/powerlevel preferences, and try to force their thing into such groups to gain an advantage.
Why not bring a deck with an appropriate power level?
And if you want to play competetivly, why not against other competetive players, or play a competetive format like modern or legacy instead of a 100card singleton?
Can you please answer those questions, so i can understand your opinion here?
I think it is weird to assume because someone has one combo in a deck they are trying to take advantage of people in a card game they just met, because from all the stories of this I read the discrepancy of power level is nothing too far apart or are being embellished for dramatic effect, I think like others have said Teferi/Pool in a deck full of jank blue stuff isn't that bad.
You are describing things I do, I have a deck that is a hideous piece of bull***** and I have other decks that move at different speeds and win in different ways.
As for your other question I play Commander and not legacy or modern for the exact same reasons I am betting most people who play it do.
I like Commanders and building around them
I like the singleton nature
I like multiplayer
and
I like powerful cards from throughout magic mixing with cards you could never get away with in those other formats.
etc
Maybe this is more of a personal preference thing, but his deck sucking, were I at that table, would actually make me way more annoyed than if his deck looked competitive and was competitive. With almost any other combo I'd be less annoyed since you can try to be prepared to answer them, but TeferiPool is basically unanswerable (assuming you don't already have something on board or in the command zone to win or break the combo) except by countering teferi, which you'd presumably have little reason to do if the deck appeared to be low powered. I guess it's probably worth asking right at the onset whether they have pool in the deck, because the existence of that card in the deck is going to make me play VERY differently. In the sense of trying to kill them constantly and encouraging everyone else at the table to do so as well. No matter how casual the rest of the deck is.
To me it sounds like the sort of sucker punch deck that's basically designed to bull***** being casual and basically win one game before people figure out what's going on. The equivalent of atogatog tribal that secretly has a dozen tutors to hit reiterate + reset combo and win in response because everyone thought you were playing jank. The presence of cards like spellbook make me think that's even more likely. Maybe he's just a noob who heard about the combo and thought it sounded cool, but personally I'd be pretty pissed if someone tried that sort of thing on me, the more I think about it.
Thinking about it, this would piss me off too. If I see 90% durdlefest I expect the last 10% would be similar, so including Knowledge Pool comes off like a sucker punch or a cheap trick. It may not be intended that way, but that's how it would rub me, and it'd bug me.
I guess the long term effect of including this sort of trick in your deck is that, past game #1 pulling this sort of stunt, you're public enemy number one. Which only burns you, because you're playing 75% deck tops with one trick in it, which people will pack answers for. So its really only going to work once or twice max.
OP, that's hilarious.
I don't think it's a move I'd pull myself (and it'd get you kicked from legit tournaments), but if casual players want to keep playing after another player wins with combo, I wouldn't stop them. Combo gets their win, and everyone else gets to keep screwing around.
Hell, I wouldn't even be that mad if my Ezuri/Biovisionary deck got the same response.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Tell me who you walk with, and I'll tell you who you are.” Esmeralda Santiago Art is life itself.
With respect to the OP, that scenario could be seen as people being rude depending on how long that game went on.. It could be a salty move if they told him to pack it up if it were turn T8+ and was interacting with people.
People at my LGS keep playing past the T4 combo players, especially so if a person's wincon is that early and doesn't interact with anyone at the table. No interaction likely means little chance that someone else suffered major card disadvantage and is crippled for the rest of the game by a person's departure..
The non-interactive T4 or T5 infinite combo decks are often the ones packing for a new game at my LGS. But my meta has so much removal/counters this scenario rarely unfolds.
Too many people at my LGS wait all week to play magic. I'm in that boat too. I came to play, not shuffle every 4th turn in a casual format.. I'm fine if people politely continue playing for 2nd if a 100% tuned combo deck wins T4 without interacting at the table.
"OK, you won, but can you please take that combo out for next game, we really don't like it and don't have a real answer for it so knowing you have it is going to create a really bad play dynamic that the rest of us don't want to be a part of", and the correct response of the Teferi player would be " OK, I'll take it out and won't play it again, but could you be more specific about what was wrong with it so I can know what would be acceptable to the group, this way I can avoid this while not needlessly handicapping myself by cutting things you'd be OK with. "
I get what you’re saying, and I agree with you in principle, but I feel the flaw is actually expecting the Teferi player to do something. Someone might ask the Teferi player to take the combo out, but no one is going to have their deck criticized through confrontation and say what your correct response would be. That just won’t happen in a store with people they barely know. It will more likely be argument or walk-out, and hopefully the argument doesn’t get physical such as throwing a deck or flipping a table. The decent guy will just say “no” and walk out. I would. Because no matter how you couch it, asking someone not to do that thing they spent hours/weeks/months working on will come across as an attack, justified or not. People are people. This is Magic with normal people, not the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.
Having said that, I also understand why that group felt that way, though I don’t agree their response was correct. I still get it, though.
Only in Commander would this even merit a discussion, and it's one of the worst consequences of the, I don't know, social contract, marketing strategy, casual focus, not quite sure what, of the game. I love analogies, but I struggle to think of one. I've seen it mentioned a lot. Somehow in Commander, the first one to win doesn't count because if you're not losing, you're too competitive.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
UBRKess, Dissident MageUBR - Controlling Dissidents
GRhonas the IndomitableG - Indomitable Four Drops
WUBOloro, Ageless AsceticWUB - Loot & Renanimate
This way everyone gets what they want.
https://archidekt.com/user/71716
Whoever decided to be the shotcaller of the remaining group totally disrespected the Teferi player and ignored any sort of social contract, casual EDH is based on. The move alone was blatantly disrespectful, but on top of that the manner of it was just as aweful.
Such poor behavior would be reason enough not to sit down with them again.
1) we asked this guy not to play with us (as his decks were always quick infinite combos) and were hust casually playing. We eventually allowed him to play since wecwere only a pod of 3 and he had no one else to play with. He then within a few turns and another player suggested we play for second. (we had asked him not to play with us in the first place)
2) i had win on board, about 4-5 turns in. I asked te group if it was a win. They agreed it was, i scooped and leftso they could play for second (had to leave anyway)
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
In one move you are saying
1) We don't care about the game we just played
2) We are about to start the real game
3) Our methods of playing the game are valid and yours are not (even though we don't vocalize this at all until it happens)
Think about the same behavior in any other multiplayer game played around a table and you see why it also doesn't make any logical sense and is just done out of spite and pettiness.
In these cases, I think the situation is more nuanced. Especially in the second case, nobody seems to have had any issues or bad vibes. The first case is an example of insufficient communication. Clearly the new player is also at fault, assuming you expressed to him the reason why you were unwilling to play: your dislike of early infinite combos. Still, he comboed off within a few turns. Seems like he was either really oblivious with regards to social clues, or he did it to spite you guys.
Overall, I think you cannot in general say who is right and who is wrong in these situations - but probably all participants have a degree of responsibility for not clearly communicating.
Tamanoa - Welcome to the Jungle
Lists can be found here.
To sound justified or reasonable and not like a petty bunch of people incredible upset that some guy won a card game is some of the saddest ***** I have ever seen posted about this game. That is how it always comes across in the examples given where this 'makes sense'.
It is the same people who will accuse others of playing competitively or take the game too seriously not being able to handle when the game ends in a way that is unacceptable to them and modifying or morphing it to suit their whims in the moment.
Also in general, as much as people are going to say we were very clear about our house rules before the game I am going to be skeptical of that on the internet and about how clear you were being before the game compared to when the person won and you got upset that it was in a way that was out of line for you. At the point where you are modifying the game away from an outcome you don't like I am not sure I can fully trust your side of whatever story about the game you are telling, sorry.
I used to play a popular MMO browser game a few months back, and something I always wondered while I played it was why newer and low-skilled players spammed guild requests. These players would never seem to care about what particular guild they made it into. They just absolutely needed to be in something.
Well, over time as I played this game, I ended up learning that this behavior was due to more skilled players like myself preying on these individuals whenever the opportunity arose. For these weaker players, forming alliances of any kind was merely an act of survival. Without the advantage of large numbers, they felt as though they wouldn't be able to enjoy the game they were playing because someone would just pick them off if they were alone and that wouldn't be much fun at all. They literally needed the protection offered to them by several others just to participate in the game.
Now, I can't say for certain whether or not alliances like the one mentioned in the quote are made out of spite or not, but I can say that, since having made my realization, I've come to recognize this sort of phenomena quite often. It frequently manifests inside my games of Commander when I decide to sit down with strangers. And not always after the completion of a single game either. Sometimes it happens mid-game because I've just given off too great a presence for my opponents. In this regard, I am a little sympathetic. Everyone is the hero of their own story, and thwarting that one guy who "just doesn't get it" has got to produce some positive vibes. I gotta say though, for me, besting multiple opponents in combat despite all of them ganging up on me in desperation is something I've frequently found great satisfaction in.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
I think using a previous outcome from a game and going into a new fresh game with malicious left over intent from the previous game is more akin to the guy who gets mad cast Obliterate in the middle of a game and then gets up and walks away a turn later. It reeks of petulance when it is premeditated and is petty and that is what I have a problem with, in game making deals as the ground changes is fun.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Tamanoa - Welcome to the Jungle
Lists can be found here.
There are better ways to handle it, but they are longer term. You can upgrade your decks with ways to answer the combo, which is the best way and generally speaking all upside. For most combos, the answers you pack are general enough that the combo player can't whine that you are targeting him (though I have seen that). The only issue is that this may take some time.
If you shuffle up and go for game 2 right away, this option isn't really available. If you are playing at a shop, you can buy some cards to slot in, and if you have access to your collection you can swap right away, but either way its pretty clear that you are making changes to your deck specifically to target the combo player. Your other options have trade offs. You can play a different deck that answers the combo if you have one laying around, but again your often going to have the combo player feel targeted, because he is. You can ask the player to play a different deck, but leaving aside the fact that I've seen this cause whine fests, he or she might not have a different deck, or their other deck might also try to combo out quickly leaving the group in the same boat. If you are going for game 2 with the same decks, knocking out the combo player before they combo is often correct ( unless they comboed because they caught everyone tapped out or answer free, in which case the correct answer is just to be aware of the combo when making decisions so you'll be in a position to respond when it comes).
For OPs story, there's a couple of points that need to be made. It does seem like the group acted like dicks, but that includes the douche that brings Teferi Knowledge Pool to a 50% table. Its aa 2 card combo where one of the cards is your commander, can be flashed in at end of turn, and prevents any spell based interaction outside of each opponents main phases, meaning he prevents the table from stopping the combo. The only ways to deal with it is to have a board that can do so already in place (unlikely unless Johnny is a moron because he wouldn't try to land the combo into a telegraphed answer), to have your commander or graveyard be an answer (Knowledge Pool only effects cards cast from your hand, so ancient grudge from the yard kills it, as does Freyalise cadt from the command zone), or trying to kill the dude with your commanders generally ganging up on him. Every answer, aside from getting lucky and having a flashback answer in the yard that he didn't notice, is targeting him. Ending the game and reaching for Freyalise is counterpicking, and I'm sure plenty of folks have a problem with that ( even if its the right move, it still feels like a dick move).
More importantly, OP admits that he doesn't know these people that well, but that they know each other. He doesn't know what sort of agreements they have in place, or whether the Teferi player is breaking the pre discussed norms of the playgroup. If these were randos, Teferi is unambiguously in the right. If this is a playgroup operating on unwritten, undiscussed rules and they decided in the moment that Teferi crossed line, then they are wrong even if Teferi misread the mood. If that sort of play has already been discussed and openly frowned upon by the group, and Teferi did it anyway, then Teferi is unambiguously in the wrong. You know the whole group doesn't like it and doesn't want it in their games and you do it anyway, you're an ********. If you decide on the spot that you don't like something and throw a fit over it, you're an ********. OP doesn't give us enough back story for us to know who the ********s actually are. All we have is a partial story that serves as a cypher to tell us what the responders are more annoyed with, but not who is actually breaking the social contract. The proper response to this happening the first time is "OK, you won, but can you please take that combo out for next game, we really don't like it and don't have a real answer for it so knowing you have it is going to create a really bad play dynamic that the rest of us don't want to be a part of", and the correct response of the Teferi player would be " OK, I'll take it out and won't play it again, but could you be more specific about what was wrong with it so I can know what would be acceptable to the group, this way I can avoid this while not needlessly handicapping myself by cutting things you'd be OK with. "
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!
Overall I think the generic case doesn't have a clear answer. Some people are fine comboing off and letting table play for second. Some people consider it poor sportsmanship. Which type was Teferi? It also depends on the relative power of the group. Did combos come up beforehand? Is anyone else playing combos?
I definitely don't consider it bad sportsmanship to gang up on someone who's known to have strong combos in their deck like teferi pool, that's just playing smart. If next game Teferi gets beat down quickly, he only has himself to blame.
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
To me it sounds like the sort of sucker punch deck that's basically designed to bull***** being casual and basically win one game before people figure out what's going on. The equivalent of atogatog tribal that secretly has a dozen tutors to hit reiterate + reset combo and win in response because everyone thought you were playing jank. The presence of cards like spellbook make me think that's even more likely. Maybe he's just a noob who heard about the combo and thought it sounded cool, but personally I'd be pretty pissed if someone tried that sort of thing on me, the more I think about it.
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
Specifically Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre always was the one get out of jail free card due to the cast trigger but as Eldrazi came back around both Ulamog 2.0 and even World Breaker can crack open these previously untouchable states (obviously this only applies to the two card versions and still doesn't work against some things with Teferi like Omen Machine)
I think it is weird to assume because someone has one combo in a deck they are trying to take advantage of people in a card game they just met, because from all the stories of this I read the discrepancy of power level is nothing too far apart or are being embellished for dramatic effect, I think like others have said Teferi/Pool in a deck full of jank blue stuff isn't that bad.
You are describing things I do, I have a deck that is a hideous piece of bull***** and I have other decks that move at different speeds and win in different ways.
As for your other question I play Commander and not legacy or modern for the exact same reasons I am betting most people who play it do.
I like Commanders and building around them
I like the singleton nature
I like multiplayer
and
I like powerful cards from throughout magic mixing with cards you could never get away with in those other formats.
etc
You basically have 2 options: Go down to their level and watch the world burn, or just walk away. The former is always worth a few laughs.
Thinking about it, this would piss me off too. If I see 90% durdlefest I expect the last 10% would be similar, so including Knowledge Pool comes off like a sucker punch or a cheap trick. It may not be intended that way, but that's how it would rub me, and it'd bug me.
I guess the long term effect of including this sort of trick in your deck is that, past game #1 pulling this sort of stunt, you're public enemy number one. Which only burns you, because you're playing 75% deck tops with one trick in it, which people will pack answers for. So its really only going to work once or twice max.
I don't think it's a move I'd pull myself (and it'd get you kicked from legit tournaments), but if casual players want to keep playing after another player wins with combo, I wouldn't stop them. Combo gets their win, and everyone else gets to keep screwing around.
Hell, I wouldn't even be that mad if my Ezuri/Biovisionary deck got the same response.
Art is life itself.
People at my LGS keep playing past the T4 combo players, especially so if a person's wincon is that early and doesn't interact with anyone at the table. No interaction likely means little chance that someone else suffered major card disadvantage and is crippled for the rest of the game by a person's departure..
The non-interactive T4 or T5 infinite combo decks are often the ones packing for a new game at my LGS. But my meta has so much removal/counters this scenario rarely unfolds.
Too many people at my LGS wait all week to play magic. I'm in that boat too. I came to play, not shuffle every 4th turn in a casual format.. I'm fine if people politely continue playing for 2nd if a 100% tuned combo deck wins T4 without interacting at the table.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/magic-general/334931-what-is-the-most-pimp-card-deck-youve-seen-or?comment=5361
Commander
RGOmnath, Locus of Rage Grenades! EDHGR
UWSygg's Defense, EDH - Voltron & ControlWU
BUGMimeoplasm EDH ft. Ifnir Cycling-discard comboBUG
WBTeysa, Connoisseur of CullingBW
BWSelenia & Recruiter of the Guard suicice combo EDHWB
UBRWGO-Kagachi - 5 Color Enchantments - EDHUBRWG
Having said that, I also understand why that group felt that way, though I don’t agree their response was correct. I still get it, though.