Well, to be fair, we already have cards like comet storm that win the game given enough mana. Usually 44 ought to do the trick, although obviously lifegain is a thing, so it's not completely impossible to block without a counterspell. Still, I think we're way past the point where we can say that (near infinite mana) + (some specific card) shouldn't equal a win. It's just a matter of what that amount should be. So definitely there's a significant difference between, say, 10 mana win the game and 44 mana (probably) win the game.
In the last game I played with Phelddagrif (a "normal" game) I think I ended at around 17 mana before my opponent sort-of-conceded. Later borrowing a lands deck I had over twenty at some point. A lot, but nowhere near 44 in either case.
So, I'm unclear. Are we talking strict 'win the game is in the text' or a card that is strong enough to get you over the line? Because the second is really, really grey area, and the first is pretty cut and dried. People say Tooth and Nail. Well yeah, it's strong but it's not a done deal. I've heard Expropriate too. I've won against someone who resolved it for 4 extra turns. Just wondering.
The poll is "win the game". Have a counterspell (or a few other niche answers) or the game is over. If it's interesting we could also debate a version with split second/uncounterable/both.
I agree that expropriate and T&N are not win the game guarantees by any stretch, which is why I don't necessarily want to ban either. But I do see the argument fairly frequently (often in defense of those sorts of cards) that "well, this card costs X mana, so it ought to win you the game when cast". Which, fair enough for draft or standard or whatever, but I'm not sure there's amount of mana I'd allow it for in EDH - especially not the split second version.
The poll is "win the game". Have a counterspell (or a few other niche answers) or the game is over. If it's interesting we could also debate a version with split second/uncounterable/both.
I agree that expropriate and T&N are not win the game guarantees by any stretch, which is why I don't necessarily want to ban either. But I do see the argument fairly frequently (often in defense of those sorts of cards) that "well, this card costs X mana, so it ought to win you the game when cast". Which, fair enough for draft or standard or whatever, but I'm not sure there's amount of mana I'd allow it for in EDH - especially not the split second version.
I agree. Mana cost is irrelevant in this format for this sort of effect. Generally, if someone lands a 'win the game' card like Lab Man, I'll be a little bummed. It's way too easy. Approach, well, outside of the aforementioned combos it requires some finagling so there's some degree of opportunity to deny the condition. It's as close as we have to split second though, in that the condition is on cast, not resolution. So there are very few cards that can stop that second cast from winning you the game. Summary Dismissal, Mindbreak Trap, Time Stop....I can't think of any others off the top of my head.
I think in terms of what's appropriate for a win con card, it really does come down to how far you're willing to go. If the condition was 'do a backflip and land it', well *****, I'd shake the guys hand that can make that come together. Silly example I know, but the point is there. All this being said though, the more zany the win con, the less balanced as a viable deck inclusion the card becomes, so I'm really not sure where the middle ground lies, I just know it's pretty well unrelated to CMC.
Well, I think if we're being honest it's kind of silly to deny a version that costs, say, 100RR. There are already many not-at-all-problematic cards that win 99% of games for that cost.
Well, I think if we're being honest it's kind of silly to deny a version that costs, say, 100RR. There are already many not-at-all-problematic cards that win 99% of games for that cost.
Fake Out0
(U) Instant You win the game.
I can't take credit for this one, but I felt it was fully appropriate to this thread.
Well, I think if we're being honest it's kind of silly to deny a version that costs, say, 100RR. There are already many not-at-all-problematic cards that win 99% of games for that cost.
Fake Out0
(U) Instant You win the game.
I can't take credit for this one, but I felt it was fully appropriate to this thread.
Took me a minute to realize the printed text is flavor text.
Well, I think 0 mana with a 20 mana kicker and if this spell was kicked, win the game, would be okish. I do not think there is any way to cheat a kicker cost and 20 mana seems fair to me if you hard cast. I also feel that using it as a kicker is fair for an anti-cheat clause in the spirit of the thread.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Hail to the speaker, hail to the knower; joy to he who has understood, delight to they who have listened." - Odin
Well, I think 0 mana with a 20 mana kicker and if this spell was kicked, win the game, would be okish. I do not think there is any way to cheat a kicker cost and 20 mana seems fair to me if you hard cast. I also feel that using it as a kicker is fair for an anti-cheat clause in the spirit of the thread.
But infinite mana still breaks this in half.
IMO, there are more ways to generate infinite mana, than there are ways to win with infinite mana. Casting this vs. hitting Helix Pinnacle isn’t much of a difference.
I just don’t think any amount of mana would justify having an Easy Button.
Well, I think 0 mana with a 20 mana kicker and if this spell was kicked, win the game, would be okish. I do not think there is any way to cheat a kicker cost and 20 mana seems fair to me if you hard cast. I also feel that using it as a kicker is fair for an anti-cheat clause in the spirit of the thread.
But infinite mana still breaks this in half.
IMO, there are more ways to generate infinite mana, than there are ways to win with infinite mana. Casting this vs. hitting Helix Pinnacle isn’t much of a difference.
I just don’t think any amount of mana would justify having an Easy Button.
How does it "break it in half" that isn't broken by, say, comet storm? Do people run a lot of leyline of sanctity or something in your meta?
What about 20 mana, same as a starting life total. and how about ~~can only be cast using mana from basic lands.
That seems like enough hoops to have to jump through to win the game on the spot. The only way to get it off fast is by somehow putting all or most of your lands into play.
I was thinking of something similar, but a little less restrictive. Having the card count the number of lands in play is a much easier way to keep track of turns than needing an actual turn counter and players leave themselves open to losing if they spend most of their turns playing ramp spells that bring more lands into play rather than spells that impact the battlefield in other ways.
Also I think 15 mana is a good “win the game” cost to start with, since Emrakul is basically a win the game card when a player can get the extra turn from it’s cast trigger.
So I could see a card like this:
Win-con13WB Sorcery
Win-con can only be cast if you control 15 or more lands.
There is no mana cost that would justify a card like this because the issue with it is not mana cost. The issue with it is that it would add exactly nothing to any format at all.
Well, I think 0 mana with a 20 mana kicker and if this spell was kicked, win the game, would be okish. I do not think there is any way to cheat a kicker cost and 20 mana seems fair to me if you hard cast. I also feel that using it as a kicker is fair for an anti-cheat clause in the spirit of the thread.
But infinite mana still breaks this in half.
IMO, there are more ways to generate infinite mana, than there are ways to win with infinite mana. Casting this vs. hitting Helix Pinnacle isn’t much of a difference.
I just don’t think any amount of mana would justify having an Easy Button.
How does it "break it in half" that isn't broken by, say, comet storm? Do people run a lot of leyline of sanctity or something in your meta?
I'd guess because X spells in magic typically have many different situations where they are relevant and not only for 40-50+
Well yeah, but doesn't that just make them almost strictly better than a 40 mana "win the game" spell? Usually having more options is a good thing. Although I guess I'd rather that cards not be explicitly only for winning-the-game purposes, for the same reason I'm more ok with playing against a combo deck if it also has answers for other combos and isn't only dedicated to comboing itself ASAP while ignoring everyone else.
Part of me does recoil at the idea of an instant-win-the-game card, but realistically I think printing one at 30+ mana would be basically worthless. Maybe it'd get some traction for being playable in decks that wouldn't have comet storm, but I still suspect it'd actually be pretty trash.
At anything less than 14 or so I think it'd be really annoying. I have tons of games that go past that much mana.
Also if it was less than 16 it's basically admitting that no one hardcasts emrakul.
I think probably 16 is reasonable, but I still wouldn't like it.
There is no mana cost that would justify a card like this because the issue with it is not mana cost. The issue with it is that it would add exactly nothing to any format at all.
Well the question is more "what would be fair" and less "would it be fun".
The thing is that with infinite mana, there are thousands of cards that allow you to win by sinking mana. They might not have the words "You win the game", but the have the effect of "You win the game".
So even though I selected "Never fair at any cost", I'm now thinking that a card could be printed at a high mana cost.
Because at the end of the day what is better to have in the deck, an X type card that is going to be useful at various stages in the game, or a card that only can only be cast when you have massive amounts of mana?
It's always the X card. Sure "You win the game" can get around maybe player hexproof or Glacial Chasm, or maybe they are preventing you from drawing your deck with infinite mana with Spirit of the Labyrinth, or whatever weird funky way to stop your X spells.
It would need the wording to make sure that it can't be cast with the "may cast cards without paying their mana costs.". Cards like Narset, Enlightened Master for example.
As somebody pointed out a kicker cost could do this.
Heaven or Hell WUBRG
Sorcery
Kicker WWWUUUBBBRRRGGG
(You may pay an additional WWWUUUBBBRRRGGG as you cast this spell.)
You lose the game.
If Heaven or Hell was kicked, you win the game instead.
21 mana to cast a card can be done without infinite mana, but it also assumes a large setup, a game winning setup for sure.
So as you can see this actually is a pretty terrible card really for any deck. You're just going to want to play mana sink cards with no limits instead of this.
There is the obvious problem of ways to cast spells for free. They don't work with X spells.
So, at no mana cost is "You win the game" acceptable. Be it 9 mana or 125 mana, no spell should say "you win the game" because that mana cost can be cheated.
There are so many ways to cheat on cost, that any spell that basically wins the game should not exist.
Tooth and Nail is super close to that line. Expropriate should basically be time walk + Blatant Thievery, I don't even know why it is part of the discussion... it is not that powerful for 9 mana.
To me, if you have nothing but lands, Tooth and Nail is the only single card that can win you the game on the spot.
Yes, opponents can disrupt you. Yes if you have an absurd amount of lands you can kill a table with X spells... but that happens rarely. Tooth and Nail is played a lot and regardless of board state will usually be "You win the game" for 9 mana.
The only argument against this is that people can disrupt what you search... but that is hard too. Is the person getting AoZ and Hoof? Is the person getting Mike and trike? Kikki combo? Maybe Palinchron and DEN. Maybe it is a Hulk combo. It is not like your path to exile or your sudden death will always be an answer.
That being said, people are tired of T&N and I don't see it as often as I used to.
Colorless spell? Too easy to cheat out. With mana rocks and cost reducers. I could probably cast it turn 2 or 3. Heck one of my decks can cast (15 or less) turn 1.
Honestly I love cards that create alternate win conditions, but I love that they all have other requirements, such as filibuster counters and X life at your upkeep. A card that straight wins would just be too much.
Unless crazy requirements, it won't be fair. coalition victory is banned and for a good reason.
It's not nice to hear "regardless of board states and whatever, if you don't have a counter i win".
And now we also have omnispell adept so...
The best way to make a "i win no matter what" card is something like darksteel reactor
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
Well, there are options to prevent cheating the cost (and while fair point about omnispell adept, that effectively makes it a 2-card combo of which there are already many of course...I think jhoira is the bigger problem since she sits in the command zone, but even then, mike + trike is legal and no one is too broken up about it). The kicker idea is obviously kind of clumsy design-wise, but it's not like this is a great design idea in the first place and kicker seems fairly water-tight in terms of preventing cost avoidance. The focus was more on what would be fair, and less on what would actually be fun or interesting.
I mean there's already a "win the game immediately with one card in a way that's basically only vulnerable to countermagic" combo already with firemind's foresight (reset + reiterate + pick basically any 1-cmc spell, for the unaware). Obviously that requires 3 deck slots instead of 1, but still. That combo requires 15 mana, normally. So the lower limit for a non-cheatable "i win the game" is probably at least 15. But at a certain cost the card becomes unplayable bad. If the kicker is over 50 mana, for instance, there's no real reason to play it over some x-spell that wins like comet storm. So somewhere between 15 and 50 is probably where the fair cost lies.
So somewhere between 15 and 50 is probably where the fair cost lies.
Still i think that would be bad design. It would feel miserable.
Firemind Foresight is surely comparable but still has more option to be dealt with. Milling reset or rule of law, for example.
Narrow cases, sure, but they help making the card feel less "inevitable".
Mike+Trike is surely an strong combo, but triskelion alone is a really mediocre card.
A 20 mana cost "i win" sorcery would still be a win condition alone, while ALSO being able to "combo".
A enchantment/artifact option like darksteel reactor would be better imo, because it would feel less inevitable.
If you really need it to be a sorcery, i think that using "target players loses the game" would be better. i would probably make it cost 15.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
Still i think that would be bad design. It would feel miserable.
Firemind Foresight is surely comparable but still has more option to be dealt with. Milling reset or rule of law, for example.
Narrow cases, sure, but they help making the card feel less "inevitable".
Mike+Trike is surely an strong combo, but triskelion alone is a really mediocre card.
A 20 mana cost "i win" sorcery would still be a win condition alone, while ALSO being able to "combo".
A enchantment/artifact option like darksteel reactor would be better imo, because it would feel less inevitable.
If you really need it to be a sorcery, i think that using "target players loses the game" would be better. i would probably make it cost 15.
I've never argued that it wouldn't be bad design. I definitely don't WANT the card to exist. I'm just interested in speculating about where the fair cost of the effect lies.
Mostly I was curious about peoples' opinions because of the line of argument I see semi-frequently about big ridiculous bombs like (first and foremost) expropriate, that they "should" win you the game because they cost 9 mana or whatever, and sometimes even for lower-cost bombs. Which, at least from the looks of the poll, most people don't actually believe.
In the last game I played with Phelddagrif (a "normal" game) I think I ended at around 17 mana before my opponent sort-of-conceded. Later borrowing a lands deck I had over twenty at some point. A lot, but nowhere near 44 in either case.
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
I agree that expropriate and T&N are not win the game guarantees by any stretch, which is why I don't necessarily want to ban either. But I do see the argument fairly frequently (often in defense of those sorts of cards) that "well, this card costs X mana, so it ought to win you the game when cast". Which, fair enough for draft or standard or whatever, but I'm not sure there's amount of mana I'd allow it for in EDH - especially not the split second version.
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
I agree. Mana cost is irrelevant in this format for this sort of effect. Generally, if someone lands a 'win the game' card like Lab Man, I'll be a little bummed. It's way too easy. Approach, well, outside of the aforementioned combos it requires some finagling so there's some degree of opportunity to deny the condition. It's as close as we have to split second though, in that the condition is on cast, not resolution. So there are very few cards that can stop that second cast from winning you the game. Summary Dismissal, Mindbreak Trap, Time Stop....I can't think of any others off the top of my head.
I think in terms of what's appropriate for a win con card, it really does come down to how far you're willing to go. If the condition was 'do a backflip and land it', well *****, I'd shake the guys hand that can make that come together. Silly example I know, but the point is there. All this being said though, the more zany the win con, the less balanced as a viable deck inclusion the card becomes, so I'm really not sure where the middle ground lies, I just know it's pretty well unrelated to CMC.
My 720 Peasant Cube
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
(U) Instant
You win the game.
I can't take credit for this one, but I felt it was fully appropriate to this thread.
But infinite mana still breaks this in half.
IMO, there are more ways to generate infinite mana, than there are ways to win with infinite mana. Casting this vs. hitting Helix Pinnacle isn’t much of a difference.
I just don’t think any amount of mana would justify having an Easy Button.
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
I was thinking of something similar, but a little less restrictive. Having the card count the number of lands in play is a much easier way to keep track of turns than needing an actual turn counter and players leave themselves open to losing if they spend most of their turns playing ramp spells that bring more lands into play rather than spells that impact the battlefield in other ways.
Also I think 15 mana is a good “win the game” cost to start with, since Emrakul is basically a win the game card when a player can get the extra turn from it’s cast trigger.
So I could see a card like this:
Win-con 13WB
Sorcery
Win-con can only be cast if you control 15 or more lands.
You win the game.
RBGLiving EndRBG
EDH
UFblthpU
BRXantchaRB
BGVarolzGB
URWZedruuWRU
I'd guess because X spells in magic typically have many different situations where they are relevant and not only for 40-50+
Part of me does recoil at the idea of an instant-win-the-game card, but realistically I think printing one at 30+ mana would be basically worthless. Maybe it'd get some traction for being playable in decks that wouldn't have comet storm, but I still suspect it'd actually be pretty trash.
At anything less than 14 or so I think it'd be really annoying. I have tons of games that go past that much mana.
Also if it was less than 16 it's basically admitting that no one hardcasts emrakul.
I think probably 16 is reasonable, but I still wouldn't like it.
Well the question is more "what would be fair" and less "would it be fun".
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
Which isn't really a big deal considering they are cards probably in your deck no matter what.
The thing is that with infinite mana, there are thousands of cards that allow you to win by sinking mana. They might not have the words "You win the game", but the have the effect of "You win the game".
Walking Ballista, Exsanguinate, etc, etc.
There are just so many mana sink commanders as well;
Geth, Lord of the Vault, Thrasios, Triton Hero, Oona, Queen of the Fae, etc, etc.
So even though I selected "Never fair at any cost", I'm now thinking that a card could be printed at a high mana cost.
Because at the end of the day what is better to have in the deck, an X type card that is going to be useful at various stages in the game, or a card that only can only be cast when you have massive amounts of mana?
It's always the X card. Sure "You win the game" can get around maybe player hexproof or Glacial Chasm, or maybe they are preventing you from drawing your deck with infinite mana with Spirit of the Labyrinth, or whatever weird funky way to stop your X spells.
It would need the wording to make sure that it can't be cast with the "may cast cards without paying their mana costs.". Cards like Narset, Enlightened Master for example.
As somebody pointed out a kicker cost could do this.
WUBRG
Sorcery
Kicker WWWUUUBBBRRRGGG
(You may pay an additional WWWUUUBBBRRRGGG as you cast this spell.)
You lose the game.
If Heaven or Hell was kicked, you win the game instead.
21 mana to cast a card can be done without infinite mana, but it also assumes a large setup, a game winning setup for sure.
So as you can see this actually is a pretty terrible card really for any deck. You're just going to want to play mana sink cards with no limits instead of this.
I've changed my vote to 16+
Niv-Mizzet Reborn
Feather, the Redeemed
Estrid, the Masked
Teshar
Tymna/Ravos
Najeela, Blade-Blossom
Firesong & Sunspeaker
Zur the Enchanter
Lazav, the Multifarious
Ishai+Reyhan
Click images for decks->
-Prime Speaker Vannifar
---------------------Will & Rowan Kenrith
So, at no mana cost is "You win the game" acceptable. Be it 9 mana or 125 mana, no spell should say "you win the game" because that mana cost can be cheated.
There are so many ways to cheat on cost, that any spell that basically wins the game should not exist.
Tooth and Nail is super close to that line. Expropriate should basically be time walk + Blatant Thievery, I don't even know why it is part of the discussion... it is not that powerful for 9 mana.
To me, if you have nothing but lands, Tooth and Nail is the only single card that can win you the game on the spot.
Yes, opponents can disrupt you. Yes if you have an absurd amount of lands you can kill a table with X spells... but that happens rarely. Tooth and Nail is played a lot and regardless of board state will usually be "You win the game" for 9 mana.
The only argument against this is that people can disrupt what you search... but that is hard too. Is the person getting AoZ and Hoof? Is the person getting Mike and trike? Kikki combo? Maybe Palinchron and DEN. Maybe it is a Hulk combo. It is not like your path to exile or your sudden death will always be an answer.
That being said, people are tired of T&N and I don't see it as often as I used to.
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
coalition victory is banned and for a good reason.
It's not nice to hear "regardless of board states and whatever, if you don't have a counter i win".
And now we also have omnispell adept so...
The best way to make a "i win no matter what" card is something like darksteel reactor
I mean there's already a "win the game immediately with one card in a way that's basically only vulnerable to countermagic" combo already with firemind's foresight (reset + reiterate + pick basically any 1-cmc spell, for the unaware). Obviously that requires 3 deck slots instead of 1, but still. That combo requires 15 mana, normally. So the lower limit for a non-cheatable "i win the game" is probably at least 15. But at a certain cost the card becomes unplayable bad. If the kicker is over 50 mana, for instance, there's no real reason to play it over some x-spell that wins like comet storm. So somewhere between 15 and 50 is probably where the fair cost lies.
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
Still i think that would be bad design. It would feel miserable.
Firemind Foresight is surely comparable but still has more option to be dealt with. Milling reset or rule of law, for example.
Narrow cases, sure, but they help making the card feel less "inevitable".
Mike+Trike is surely an strong combo, but triskelion alone is a really mediocre card.
A 20 mana cost "i win" sorcery would still be a win condition alone, while ALSO being able to "combo".
A enchantment/artifact option like darksteel reactor would be better imo, because it would feel less inevitable.
If you really need it to be a sorcery, i think that using "target players loses the game" would be better. i would probably make it cost 15.
Mostly I was curious about peoples' opinions because of the line of argument I see semi-frequently about big ridiculous bombs like (first and foremost) expropriate, that they "should" win you the game because they cost 9 mana or whatever, and sometimes even for lower-cost bombs. Which, at least from the looks of the poll, most people don't actually believe.
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