MTG Salvation

Quote from FunkyDragon »

I won't play any of the following:
Umezawa's Broken Beyond Belief Jitte
Iona, Queen of Douching a Color-based Format
Vorinclex, Voice of Unfun Games for Everyone

Yeah, Vorinclex is another card I simply do not include in my decks. I have never seen it make for a more fun game. Same with Jin. The other praetors are fine, but those two will never find a home in my decks.

Quote from FunkyDragon »

I won't play any of the following:
Umezawa's Broken Beyond Belief Jitte
Iona, Queen of Douching a Color-based Format
Vorinclex, Voice of Unfun Games for Everyone

i get Iona and vorinclex, but what's wrong with jitte? It's very powerful in 1v1 games but multiplayer? I don't even think it's particularly good. Most of the swords are probably better.

I f***ing hate Terastodon. When opponents use it on 3 of your cards, especially lands, I just feel like smashing their face for realz.

I also hate Annihilator, but I do play Kozilek, Butcher of Truth and Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre. But I'm using them for their cast abilities and the shuffle effect, rather than Annihilator 4.
So I'll never attack with them, as a courtesy that I don't appreciate the lopsidedness to attacking a single player in multiplayer.

That's why I hate Terastodon so much as often it's used to blow a single player out. That's why I think Sylvan Primordial is actually more balanced as you have to distribute the destruction, even if you do get the Nissa's Pilgrimage built in as well.

I just hate cards that blow out a single player out so much.

My group doesn't have any house-rule bans, but personally I think the ultra-expensive cards are easily enough steered clear of. Neither I nor any of my friends have ever run the moxen, but things quite nearly as powerful still make it into various decks. For example, my *weakest* deck amusingly runs the most expensive card I own, Gaea's Cradle, and it isn't really a problem there since, after all, it's my 'weakest' deck. Even my strongest deck isn't completely unfair, because by design it is not very consistent.

There is a possibility I'll buy a copy of Mana Crypt someday, but similarly, I don't think I'll put it in a crazy speedy combo deck if I do. Might well put it in a colorless eldrazi deck if I ever decide to build one of those.

As far as cards like Craterhoof, Iona, etc - no one really has a problem with them as we're all good sports about things in my group and people run a good number of answers.

What I mean to allude to with that little background on powerful cards in my playgroup is to say that these powerful cards can be just fine if they're balanced out by the rest of the deck you put them in, leading to a *decent* deck but not a totally unfair one.

As someone with 75% decks...

Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger

I'm someone who shamelessly plays Tooth and Nail and Craterhoof Behemoth, because I need them to pull the "fast" finishers when I do play competitive games (they're not even fast enough sometimes) and I don't fundamentally believe in "Not TNN-ing for your best instant game-winning combo is disrespecting yourself, your deck and the other players" because when I play casual games, the decks tune to "trying to win with flavor/style instead of the fastest way" instead (aka "casual mode") and TNN naturally drops in power level because my definition of "respect" stems from "do what you are supposed to do in the selected mode".

Vorinclex cannot do that. Vorinclex is stax with the inevitably of a loss because of the his abilities. Most mana-doublers are not taken lightly regardless of game (competitive or casual), but at least they function as a loud alarm most of the time and warn other players to take action (be it combo faster or remove it) swiftly. Vorinclex cripples the response potential and by nature of stax, that crippling only gets more and more severe the longer it drags on.
On top of all that he holds pretty much the same flexibility as... Protean Hulk. At least Hulk has the decency to end the game when it's cheated out. A quick rush into Vorinclex at a bad timing in a competitive game turns the game into one no different from one competitive deck trampling other casual decks over a few turns. I trust I don't need to mention how much worse it is in actual casual games then.

I am not particularly fond of the power level of Craw Wurm or Wood Elemental.
Do not imagine myself ever playing either of those in the future

Honestly guys stax is the hero edh needs but doesn't deserve.

Ramp is just too easy to play. There is too much redundancy and not enough answers and counters for the strategy are shunned by most of the community.

My internal moral compass for MTG lies somewhere around the 75% mark I guess. Here's what I won't play:

-In general, dedicated combo decks.
-Excess extra turn spells - Expropriate is the main culprit obvs.
-OG Eldrazi Titans and Blightsteel Colossus
-dedicated tutors - if it does something else, like Sidisi Undead Vizier I'll play it if I have it.
-'you win the game' cards

Granted, a lot of this I don't own anyway, and I'm not all that well off, so mostly it's a moot point. But a lot of this is within my range of affordability and I'm not interested. I do run Tooth and Nail, but I don't run it with Avengerhoof.

The 'you win the game' cards is kind of a personal thing. Losing to Laboratory Maniac is dumb, and leaves a lot to be desired on the receiving or giving end, so I won't do it to anyone. Likewise with Aetherflux Reservoir - I'm well aware the card isn't broken per se, but it is kind of a kill switch for a game, which is super boring and takes the challenge out of the game. This is more of a playboy bunny 'turn off' than anything, but whatevs. I like a challenge, and these aren't one.

I avoid using any commander-set legendary creature as my general.

I've built Nekusar before, just to play the Legends Underworld Dreams that I found in my old binder. Games were very similar and the deck did feel built already for me.

I personally don't like tutors as I hate "Wild Cards" in all games as it just feels lazy.

If someone is not tutoring for a combo piece then that's kinda boring (trying to reduce the variance in an inherent varied format), and if they are not looking for a combo piece then why do they need the tutor at all, just add more of whatever it is that you usually tutor for in the deck instead of just throwing in a tutor. Sure it's likely a sub par version of whatever they were tutoring for but at least they didn't have to pay the extra tutor cost plus waste everyones time shuffling again. I'm more ok with "tutor for a land", or "tutor for an enchantment", rather than tutor for anything, at least you need to get the right tutor. Perhaps if there was more tutor hate such as mindsensor and the like that could sit a bit better with me.

I do think land destruction can be ok if used sparingly specifically non-basic hate. Not saying blow everything up, but Green player ramping out too fast, set them back a bit, greedy mana bases, take them off some colors (as there should be a downside to playing more colors, as dual lands shouldn't be strictly better basics), utility lands shouldn't be untouchable. Should be used as more of a scalple than a chainsaw though.

Sure. In broad terms, no infinite mana, no mass LD, no mass discard, no time walks, no fast mana, no hard locks. Most importantly, non-permanent tutors (excluding land search) are disallowed. Interestingly, the removal of commander damage makes games even more fun.

Some cards we don't play based on "feelings" and past experiences. Razaketh, Survival of the Fittest are two permanent-based tutors we simply do not play. Feelbad cards like Iona, Void Winnower, etc are omitted. EZ Street cards like Craterhoof, Insurrection, Rise of the Dark Realms Doubling Season are almost taken out immediately.

We do allow Primal Command as the only non-permanent tutor, coz graveyard removal is everyone's responsibility. Same with planeswalker decks cards that tutor for the particular walker.

Again, like most playgroups, discussion and small debates are extremely important. This is why we've hardline group bans, supplemented by niche bans. Over time we evolved and stopped playing buyback cards, or any effect that gives a feel of a hardlock (like Eternal Witness and Ghostly Flicker). We don't ban EWit or Flicker, it's just that we choose to play either one or the other. Policing always starts with the deckbulder.

And yes, CommandZone's episode feels more like a rant than an actual discussion.

I play Commander specifically because the full scope of cards are available outside of a banlist, I don't personally have any strong negative feelings about any magic card nor has a magic card or play raised my hackles as it were. There are specific cards and strategies I just don't generally play but I don't really hate any cards in the game for any reason nor can I think of a situation where that would be different.

(I get more and more glad I found the group I did seeing all the weird restrictions you all put on your games though)

Darksteel Relic
I am not kidding i actually play it (granted, it is for a storm deck so...)

The Eldrazi: They just highlight why I hate green players. Like, I'm mean when I Assassin's Trophy an Eye of Ugin but throwing Annihilator 4 at a board with hardly anything but lands is splendid. Alright then.

Numot, the Devastator: The only time I ever used that card in my The Ur-Dragon was because I took another Ur-Dragon player's Numot with my Dragonlord Silumgar and proceeded to show its owner exactly how much "fun" I would've been having if things went according to his plan. Otherwise I would never in a million years run it because 1: the card isn't even good and 2: that card is the exact opposite of what dragon tribal is supposed to be. If I wanted to do that I'd be playing something above that league, like actual STAX.

Overwhelming Splendor: I still like that card and part of me still has the opinion that when it's stuck on someone they kinda deserved it anyway. However, ever since that time I threw it on a Sliver player to make his field wipe-able only to see the other 2 players join forces to counter any attempt the sliver guy made to get it off him and get back in the game I just kinda felt an eerie Trade Secrets vibe from it so I kinda don't run it anymore.

Other than those examples I just try to match the ideals of the group I have joined for the day.

I don't run Mycosynth Lattice in my Karn deck, because 1: destroy target land is just too mean, especially when colorless decks can frequently produce absurd amounts of mana. I also don't run it in my Traxos deck, which has Karn in the 99.

That said, I do have both Karn and Lattice in my Mishra deck, but that deck is already an ******** stax deck. If I put Karn into play and somebody else puts Lattice into play, I'll also still use Karn to kill lands.

Quote from DirkGently »

Quote from FunkyDragon »

I won't play any of the following:
Umezawa's Broken Beyond Belief Jitte
Iona, Queen of Douching a Color-based Format
Vorinclex, Voice of Unfun Games for Everyone

i get Iona and vorinclex, but what's wrong with jitte? It's very powerful in 1v1 games but multiplayer? I don't even think it's particularly good. Most of the swords are probably better.

I just remember playing against it when it first came out (remember that time they put a $20 card in a $10 precon?). It does too much and doesn't even require that the creature survive or even still be equipped. It's like a Swiss Army knife on steroids and has to be answered. Granted, you're probably right about the Swords generally being better (that protection can be very relevant), and I run all five of those, but I've just never had fun with a Jitte on the board. So I've never owned one and won't play it.

Quote from FunkyDragon »

Quote from DirkGently »

Quote from FunkyDragon »

I won't play any of the following:
Umezawa's Broken Beyond Belief Jitte
Iona, Queen of Douching a Color-based Format
Vorinclex, Voice of Unfun Games for Everyone

i get Iona and vorinclex, but what's wrong with jitte? It's very powerful in 1v1 games but multiplayer? I don't even think it's particularly good. Most of the swords are probably better.

I just remember playing against it when it first came out (remember that time they put a $20 card in a $10 precon?). It does too much and doesn't even require that the creature survive or even still be equipped. It's like a Swiss Army knife on steroids and has to be answered. Granted, you're probably right about the Swords generally being better (that protection can be very relevant), and I run all five of those, but I've just never had fun with a Jitte on the board. So I've never owned one and won't play it.

Jitte is also pretty unique in that the counters come from any combat damage, not just combat damage to a player. Even if you're chump blocking all day long, the Jitte player still gets counters to use.

My group has no explicit rules, but none of us runs infinite combos or hard locks (like Teferi-Knowledge Pool). In a game without rigidly game-winning combos, I don’t find tutors to be abusive. They are most often used for one of two things: getting out of a bad start (usually with some form of ramp or fixing to escape a land-light draw) or finding an answer to something one cannot handle. In this regard, I think tutors make the game better as they keep everyone in the game and playing.

I personally only really hate decks that run tons of counterspells, and I still wouldn’t make a stink about such a deck if I played one. Anything else is fine for my tastes.

One playgroup is pretty laid back on allowing people to play whatever we want but a few of us have agreed that the decks that have combos don't have tutors and the decks that have tutors don't have combos.

One of the gripe with tutors is that it takes too long. Same with some people having issues with Sensei's Divining Top.

Infect.

I resonated a lot with the premise of the article, mostly because I think a lot more things should be banned in this format if it’s to live up to its intent. Consequently, there are a lot of cards I just don’t play. I build my decks in anticipation of seeing them, but loathe them every time I so, and so seeing them on my side of the table just means I see them more and hate them more.

List of those cards I don’t play:


That said, I don’t get why Wound Reflection is on Sheldon’s list. I also don’t understand his prior comments on similar cards like Vicious Shadows. It just seems like his playgroup doesn’t like abrupt wins that occur outside the combat step, no matter how slow and obvious. They also don’t seem to play enough outside their own group to realize that a good half or more of Commander games seem to be won outside combat, no matter the power level of the group.

There are no cards I will universally refuse to play because of power levels. However, I will certainly avoid certain cards in specific decks if the power level of the card doesn't match the level I'm aiming the deck at.

I would love to sit down and play with cards tgat are less. In your face with how powerful they are. Unfortunately i play at a game store and not eveyone is on the same page. Thus i play what i want.i will a craterhoof. I will play a nexus of fate. If i have card and want to use it. I will.

I'm more likely to not run cards because I disagree with the playstyle, rather than power level. I try to go a bit lighter on hard combo (or at least, my ability to just search for combo pieces) because I like varied games with my decks. I also avoid stax and MLD, because I don't particularly enjoy playing against them, so I'd prefer not to inflict it upon others.