and it takes a land slot rather than a spell slot (the latter is also unlike Sol Ring)
What? Are you arguing that Library is a land and so it takes a land sot where Sol Ring isn't a land so it takes a non-land slot? If you think Library is less of a spell and more of a land in function, you're wrong. Sol Ring is ramp, but it's so low to the ground, you can cut a and for it without weakening your mana base, and that is a good quality few other ramp cards share. Library of Alexandria is a land, but its powerful secondary ability means you can pay it as a draw spell, letting you play an additional land in your deck without lowering your density of draw spells, and that's also a good quality. I don't agree with the "goes in any deck" assessment on Library because there are decks that want to play aggressively to the board, but the deck that wants to sit back on a full grip is also the deck that wants to consistently hit land drops and would probably be happy to play an additional land if it could draw a card every turn. That it doesn't necessarily just take up a land slot is a point in Library's favor.
If you didn't snip the quote, you'd see why your response is wrong. Yes, its a land, it takes a land drop, it comes into play untapped, and taps for mana, so it takes a land slot. Would you rather use it to draw every turn? Absolutely, but that doesn't matter. What matters is that, if you need to, you can count on it as a land. Sol Ring, often, will be almost a land. Sometimes, its better that its not, because you can cast it the same turn you play a land. We all know why Sol Ring is good. If you are cutting lands to play rocks that cost mana, or have a drawback like Mox Diamond, you are doing it wrong. You are setting yourself up for opening hands where your "lands" are actually rocks that you cannot cast. If you have, say, an Island and a Sol Ring, that's ok, because you can cast the Sol Ring, but if you have a Sol Ring and a Mana Vault, you need to mulligan that. Rocks are additive, they don't replace lands. You can stick LoA in without having to worry about drawing just it and a couple rocks opening hand, because you can just tap it for mana and cast your rocks. You also don't have to worry about it getting countered (a minor worry most of the time anyway, but I've seen Sol Rings countered), and it is much, much less likely to get blown up (It will absolutely be the target of any Strip Mine or Wasteland, but there are more staple artifact destruction effects running around, many of which are sweepers or etb effects, or both, and early rocks are always juicy targets).
Yes, it lets you add more land to your deck without losing consistency, and that's a point in its favor, but I think people usually undervalue hitting land drops. Its not OK to cut lands to add spells, even rocks, unless you have an outrageously low curve, but cutting a spell slot or two to add lands is fine, because the downside of adding land is very low, while the downside of cutting it is relatively high. This is because the consensus numbers for lands that you typically see develop due to min maxing, as reflected in decklists, tend to be on the low side of what you can safely run in order to maximize drawing gas, so cutting any further puts the risk of bad hands at dangerous levels. Adding a land, or even two in EDH, still leaves you in good shape with draws, especially if those extras are powerful utility lands like LoA. In EDH especially, its a range, with 37 being the min maxed low for most decks, but up to 40 being reasonable. The thing is, with LoA, you don't HAVE to increase your land count. You can still choose to run 37, and cut a basic, or a less powerful utility land, for it. Some decks will choose to run an extra land or two, but others won't, and depending on how the deck is constructed either could be correct.
I mean, in terms of comparison to Sol Ring, these are all, like I said before, pretty minor points in LoA's favor. But again, if we take Sol Ring as being right on the border of what should be legal and what should be banned, then a card like LoA ends up crossing that line by a bunch of small points.
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!
Personally, I think that's also an argument for banning Mana Crypt, the one legal rock I'd be fine with seeing go.
I have to disagree here. With well over half a decade playing both, Sol Ring is the stronger card in most typical games of Commander. I have seen players, myself included, lose to Mana Crypt triggers far more often than the CMC 1 of Sol Ring noticably affect the outcome of a game.
I believe both need to be banned. Failing that, they are close enough to functional copies that neither should be banned.
and it takes a land slot rather than a spell slot (the latter is also unlike Sol Ring)
What? Are you arguing that Library is a land and so it takes a land sot where Sol Ring isn't a land so it takes a non-land slot? If you think Library is less of a spell and more of a land in function, you're wrong. Sol Ring is ramp, but it's so low to the ground, you can cut a and for it without weakening your mana base, and that is a good quality few other ramp cards share. Library of Alexandria is a land, but its powerful secondary ability means you can pay it as a draw spell, letting you play an additional land in your deck without lowering your density of draw spells, and that's also a good quality. I don't agree with the "goes in any deck" assessment on Library because there are decks that want to play aggressively to the board, but the deck that wants to sit back on a full grip is also the deck that wants to consistently hit land drops and would probably be happy to play an additional land if it could draw a card every turn. That it doesn't necessarily just take up a land slot is a point in Library's favor.
Cutting a quote mid-sentence to avoid context and declare someone wrong is rather rude, and raises scepticism about anything else you say, regardless of how valid it may or may not be. With your phrasing, I also cannot tell if you are saying that is a point in favor of, or against banning.
What was said was that Library of Alexandria occupies a land slot, not a spell slot, & that this differs from the Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale,
Meaning Tabernacle takes a spell slot, not a land slot.
On an unrelated note, I have just learned edditing post quotes on a phone is a pain in the ass.
In cEDH, crypt is better full stop. That extra mana the turn you cast it is a big deal, and the 1.5 damage per turn won't matter in games decided before turn 7. In more casual games, they end up being more equivalent, but being able to cast a 3 mana spell with colored mana turn 1 is big.
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!
If you didn't snip the quote, you'd see why your response is wrong.
Gah! Snipping quotes doesn't mean I'm not reading the whole thing, I'm just focusing on the piece I'm responding to.
In your post I responded to, when I read "Unlike Tabernacle, it [Library]... (the latter is also unlike Sol Ring)" I thought latter was referring to Library because it was the second card referred to in the sentence, when it's now clear that you meant "the latter" to mean Tabernacle as the second card to appear in your post. I thought you meant that Library and Sol Ring aren't comparable when you were saying Tabernacle and Sol Ring/Library aren't comparable, and now that I no longer misunderstand you, I completely agree with what you were saying.
But I totally stand by snipping quotes, it's so much cleaner than throwing paragraphs at people and letting them guess what part I take issue with.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zedruu: "This deck is not only able to go crazy - it also needs to do so."
Saturday evening, the owner of another large game store from out-of-State was visiting locally. As I was reviewing some of the posts in this thread with others at the time, decided to bring up the topic of Library of Alexandria with him.
The reasoning behind this line of thinking perplexes me, so maybe there is some other facet I am missing. Regardless, I will relay it as it was explained to me.
They have a player who owns, and is permitted to play with, Library of Alexandria. As a direct result, they had to prohibit the use of 'infinite combos' to stop half their player base leaving.
Saturday evening, the owner of another large game store from out-of-State was visiting locally. As I was reviewing some of the posts in this thread with others at the time, decided to bring up the topic of Library of Alexandria with him.
The reasoning behind this line of thinking perplexes me, so maybe there is some other facet I am missing. Regardless, I will relay it as it was explained to me.
They have a player who owns, and is permitted to play with, Library of Alexandria. As a direct result, they had to prohibit the use of 'infinite combos' to stop half their player base leaving.
I'm genuinely curious as to the infinite combo which was so terrible thst they had to (re)ban Library in a format with a plethora of legal infinite combos already available.
You misunderstand.
They reportedly had to disallow 'infinite combo' as a viable means to end a game, because Library was still allowed.
What confuses me is to why they would not simply tell the guy Library is banned, and he could not play it. It was pretty strongly implied that various infinite combos were a problem explicitly because of Library.
You misunderstand.
They reportedly had to disallow 'infinite combo' as a viable means to end a game, because Library was still allowed.
What confuses me is to why they would not simply tell the guy Library is banned, and he could not play it. It was pretty strongly implied that various infinite combos were a problem explicitly because of Library.
I'm still confused. How did Library make infinite combos that much more potent than they already are? There is a ton of legal card draw and tutors which can act almost as efficiently, if not more efficiently than just drawing one extra card a turn.
You misunderstand.
They reportedly had to disallow 'infinite combo' as a viable means to end a game, because Library was still allowed.
What confuses me is to why they would not simply tell the guy Library is banned, and he could not play it. It was pretty strongly implied that various infinite combos were a problem explicitly because of Library.
I'm still confused. How did Library make infinite combos that much more potent than they already are? There is a ton of legal card draw and tutors which can act almost as efficiently, if not more efficiently than just drawing one extra card a turn.
Yeah, this sounds like an extreme overreaction. Considering there are combos in this format that would be hindered by playing LoA early, I don’t agree at all that LoA would lead to such a strong reaction. I mean, it’s not a combo piece, so I am genuinely confused.
1. Becomes arguably the best land in EDH.
2. All decks can run it, most decks should.
3. Is currently at over a thousand dollars, if unbanned this will skyrocket from there.
4. Will be tutored for over other lands 90% of the time when applicable (Crop Rotation, Knight of the Reliquary, etc.)
5. Extremely high power level: in function it competes with cards like Phyrexian Arena, Staff of Nin which are 3 and 6 CMC spells respectively.
6. It is already unobtainable to most EDH players because of rarity and cost. Unbanning will make the card more unobtainable and expensive.
These things considered, I ask what incentive does the RC have to unban this?
I think it would be a lot more likely were it highly available like Sol Ring, but as it stands it seems iffy that the RC would put this back into the environment all things considered.
1. Becomes arguably the best land in EDH.
2. All decks can run it, most decks should.
3. Is currently at over a thousand dollars, if unbanned this will skyrocket from there.
4. Will be tutored for over other lands 90% of the time when applicable (Crop Rotation, Knight of the Reliquary, etc.)
5. Extremely high power level: in function it competes with cards like Phyrexian Arena, Staff of Nin which are 3 and 6 CMC spells respectively.
6. It is already unobtainable to most EDH players because of rarity and cost. Unbanning will make the card more unobtainable and expensive.
These things considered, I ask what incentive does the RC have to unban this?
I think it would be a lot more likely were it highly available like Sol Ring, but as it stands it seems iffy that the RC would put this back into the environment all things considered.
I’d love for the RC to unban it simply to show that it really isn’t all that powerful, and that it just competes with cards like Gaes Cradle, Ancient TombStrip Mine and the like. Powerful in some decks, strictly worse in others, but not game warping.
1. Becomes arguably the best land in EDH.
2. All decks can run it, most decks should.
3. Is currently at over a thousand dollars, if unbanned this will skyrocket from there.
4. Will be tutored for over other lands 90% of the time when applicable (Crop Rotation, Knight of the Reliquary, etc.)
5. Extremely high power level: in function it competes with cards like Phyrexian Arena, Staff of Nin which are 3 and 6 CMC spells respectively.
6. It is already unobtainable to most EDH players because of rarity and cost. Unbanning will make the card more unobtainable and expensive.
These things considered, I ask what incentive does the RC have to unban this?
I think it would be a lot more likely were it highly available like Sol Ring, but as it stands it seems iffy that the RC would put this back into the environment all things considered.
1. So? There will always be a "the best X ever".
2. Again, so? There are lots of staples, and as other people have said, it is not a universally held opinion that most decks want it.
3. Price is irrelevant, there are cards that are double that price already. The RC cannot concern themselves with the secondary market.
4. Seems like an exaggeration. If I'm sitting at 4 cards in hand and no clear way to refill why would I tutor for it over a different utility land that can help me in that moment?
5. In function it is comparable to Magus of the Library. Both of those cards you listed unconditionally draw you a card each upkeep. Library does not.
6. Again, there are plenty of legal cards which are already unobtainable to most players. If Library is already unobtainable to those players then they aren't suddenly priced out because it becomes even more expensive. But now the people who do have it get one more card to play with, and everyone who is ok with proxies can use it as well.
Edit: the incentive is that they are removing a ban list criteria which is grossly misunderstood, shortening the ban list, and sticking to their consistency of this format being the one where you get to play with cool cards and stuff that's banned in other formats.
1. So? There will always be a "the best X ever".
2. Again, so? There are lots of staples, and as other people have said, it is not a universally held opinion that most decks want it.
3. Price is irrelevant, there are cards that are double that price already. The RC cannot concern themselves with the secondary market.
4. Seems like an exaggeration. If I'm sitting at 4 cards in hand and no clear way to refill why would I tutor for it over a different utility land that can help me in that moment?
5. In function it is comparable to Magus of the Library. Both of those cards you listed unconditionally draw you a card each upkeep. Library does not.
6. Again, there are plenty of legal cards which are already unobtainable to most players. If Library is already unobtainable to those players then they aren't suddenly priced out because it becomes even more expensive. But now the people who do have it get one more card to play with, and everyone who is ok with proxies can use it as well.
Edit: the incentive is that they are removing a ban list criteria which is grossly misunderstood, shortening the ban list, and sticking to their consistency of this format being the one where you get to play with cool cards and stuff that's banned in other formats.
1. It being the best land in the format matters.
2. It being a staple is relevant due to it being largely unobtainable.
3. It's not just price, but scarcity, and the fact that it would be a staple.
4. 90% might be high for some, that's where it would be for me. It will be tutored for "most" of the time.
5. Sure compare it to Magus of the Library, that creature costs double green and requires you to wait for a turn before you can activate it, making it several orders of magnitude worse than a land.
6. How many of those are format staples? "People can proxy it" doesn't seem like very solid ground to stand on.
Anyways, this is just my 2cents on the situation. In my view, it wouldn't make much sense for the RC to pull this off the list.
On the other hand, if like you I had one laying around I'd probably want them to remove it too.
1. It being the best land in the format matters.
2. It being a staple is relevant due to it being largely unobtainable.
3. It's not just price, but scarcity, and the fact that it would be a staple.
4. 90% might be high for some, that's where it would be for me. It will be tutored for "most" of the time.
5. Sure compare it to Magus of the Library, that creature costs double green and requires you to wait for a turn before you can activate it, making it several orders of magnitude worse than a land.
6. How many of those are format staples? "People can proxy it" doesn't seem like very solid ground to stand on.
Anyways, this is just my 2cents on the situation. In my view, it wouldn't make much sense for the RC to pull this off the list.
On the other hand, if like you I had one laying around I'd probably want them to remove it too.
Are you suggesting that my motivation is based on ownership? I'm insulted, good zir!!!!
Re: Magus, yoh compared it to a BB1 enchantment and six drop artifact, so
Anyway, I fully understand that the risk to reward ration for unbanning Library is stupid high and not happening. The mere fact that the price would double AT THE LEAST is enough for them to leave Library where it is. I think that sucks because when you remove the concern of affecting price that much or whether people will feel bad that a card they can't afford is suddenly even less affordable I stand by my opinion that the card isn't the bogeyman people make it out to be. My cube runs half the ban list and I can assure you that Library isn't near the top of the worst offenders or cards that have turned games on their heads.
1. So? There will always be a "the best X ever".
2. Again, so? There are lots of staples, and as other people have said, it is not a universally held opinion that most decks want it.
3. Price is irrelevant, there are cards that are double that price already. The RC cannot concern themselves with the secondary market.
4. Seems like an exaggeration. If I'm sitting at 4 cards in hand and no clear way to refill why would I tutor for it over a different utility land that can help me in that moment?
5. In function it is comparable to Magus of the Library. Both of those cards you listed unconditionally draw you a card each upkeep. Library does not.
6. Again, there are plenty of legal cards which are already unobtainable to most players. If Library is already unobtainable to those players then they aren't suddenly priced out because it becomes even more expensive. But now the people who do have it get one more card to play with, and everyone who is ok with proxies can use it as well.
Edit: the incentive is that they are removing a ban list criteria which is grossly misunderstood, shortening the ban list, and sticking to their consistency of this format being the one where you get to play with cool cards and stuff that's banned in other formats.
1. It being the best land in the format matters.
2. It being a staple is relevant due to it being largely unobtainable.
3. It's not just price, but scarcity, and the fact that it would be a staple.
4. 90% might be high for some, that's where it would be for me. It will be tutored for "most" of the time.
5. Sure compare it to Magus of the Library, that creature costs double green and requires you to wait for a turn before you can activate it, making it several orders of magnitude worse than a land.
6. How many of those are format staples? "People can proxy it" doesn't seem like very solid ground to stand on.
Anyways, this is just my 2cents on the situation. In my view, it wouldn't make much sense for the RC to pull this off the list.
On the other hand, if like you I had one laying around I'd probably want them to remove it too.
1) No, I really don’t think it matters. It’ll only matter when it overperforms, and that won’t be all of the time. Even then, did it Warp the game? I’m going to say no.
2)Being a staple implies that your deck isn’t as good as it could be without it. It’s the essence of this debate, but, you aren’t going to convince the majority of the EDH playerbase that this is truly the case. Again, this will only be the case when it overpreforms, which will be a seldom occurance in the vast majority of groups.
3) See #2.
4) I’m going to call BS right here, as politely as I can. It fills a niche role, incredibly well, but still niche. Let’s just say if I’m sitting at a table with you, I won’t feel pressured or threatened if that’s your tutor target. It’s easier for your opponents to make that a bad play than it is for you to make it a good play.
5)Well, you did compare it to unconditional draw, which is just as “bad” of an argument.
6)Again, your definition of “staple” is incredibly different than mine.
I’d like to see it for the reason I stated before. Powerful, not game breaking, I’ve seen worse type of deal.
Are you suggesting that my motivation is based on ownership? I'm insulted, good zir!!!!
Re: Magus, yoh compared it to a BB1 enchantment and six drop artifact, so
Anyway, I fully understand that the risk to reward ration for unbanning Library is stupid high and not happening. The mere fact that the price would double AT THE LEAST is enough for them to leave Library where it is. I think that sucks because when you remove the concern of affecting price that much or whether people will feel bad that a card they can't afford is suddenly even less affordable I stand by my opinion that the card isn't the bogeyman people make it out to be. My cube runs half the ban list and I can assure you that Library isn't near the top of the worst offenders or cards that have turned games on their heads.
I don't think it would break the format or anything and it is at least a reasonable card to discuss, but I think the availability/price/staple aspect is what keeps it on the list.
I think were it super available like Sol Ring it would probably be ok for the format but sadly it just isn't.
I don't think it would break the format or anything and it is at least a reasonable card to discuss, but I think the availability/price/staple aspect is what keeps it on the list.
I think were it super available like Sol Ring it would probably be ok for the format but sadly it just isn't.
See, thats my whole argument. You're agreeing with us thsst the card itself is probably safe. What I'm trying to do is to separate the card from the feeling surrounding it.
1) No, I really don’t think it matters. It’ll only matter when it overperforms, and that won’t be all of the time. Even then, did it Warp the game? I’m going to say no.
2)Being a staple implies that your deck isn’t as good as it could be without it. It’s the essence of this debate, but, you aren’t going to convince the majority of the EDH playerbase that this is truly the case. Again, this will only be the case when it overpreforms, which will be a seldom occurance in the vast majority of groups.
3) See #2.
4) I’m going to call BS right here, as politely as I can. It fills a niche role, incredibly well, but still niche. Let’s just say if I’m sitting at a table with you, I won’t feel pressured or threatened if that’s your tutor target. It’s easier for your opponents to make that a bad play than it is for you to make it a good play.
5)Well, you did compare it to unconditional draw, which is just as “bad” of an argument.
6)Again, your definition of “staple” is incredibly different than mine.
I’d like to see it for the reason I stated before. Powerful, not game breaking, I’ve seen worse type of deal.
1. I merely stated that it would be the best land in EDH, do you disagree?
2. Right now Library would make the cut in 22/22 of my decks and those lists are tiiiiiiiight. There are decks it doesn't go in, but those are niche. The card has no drawbacks and at it's best draws you an extra card a turn.
3. Being obtainable matters because it goes in so many decks.
4. You're not pressured by me drawing an extra card every turn? Poor threat assessment.
5. I wasn't comparing them in a vacuum. If I am playing Library, it will likely outperform both arena/staff in most games in terms of raw card draw since I'm able to throw it out early at no cost. I can play library turn 1 with no extra work, can't do that with the others.
6. I'll agree to disagree with you here. I think you have to be creative to NOT include Library, similarly to Sol Ring.
I agree that it is not game breaking. I am looking at it from the standpoint of availability/price/staple.
See, thats my whole argument. You're agreeing with us thsst the card itself is probably safe. What I'm trying to do is to separate the card from the feeling surrounding it.
Totally, I'm with you there. I'm questioning the possibility of actually unbanning the card for the reasons I stated.
I don't think it's a boogeyman like Balance. I do think however that it is very, very good and would be a format staple.
Totally, I'm with you there. I'm questioning the possibility of actually unbanning the card for the reasons I stated.
I don't think it's a boogeyman like Balance. I do think however that it is very, very good and would be a format staple.
Agreed. But staple isn't necessarily a bad thing. Solemn Simulacrum isn't a problem. Counterspell isn't a problem. And while I agree that having a staple be a card which is both limited in quantity and high in price, PBtE is the only criteria which does not evaluate a card based on how it plays but how it makes people feel.
Being a staple isn't a bad thing. Being a staple and being unobtainable is IMO.
Can't be a staple if not everyone is running it.
Now, if there were hard evidence that people were leaving the format in droves because they afford a Library I would say it's a problem. But I would believe those people about as much as I do the ones who quit because their pet card got banned.
Haha, this hard hitting analysis is why I come here!
Really though, people didn't leave the format in droves when things like PoK, Primetime, SPrime were legal though they were totally format warping, so I'm not sure that's a good lens to look through.
Also, I think we need to approach this discussion considering that Library is currently banned, and the RC needs actual reasons for it to come off.
Haha, this hard hitting analysis is why I come here!
Really though, people didn't leave the format in droves when things like PoK, Primetime, SPrime were legal though they were totally format warping, so I'm not sure that's a good lens to look through.
Also, I think we need to approach this discussion considering that Library is currently banned, and the RC needs actual reasons for it to come off.
"Because cryogen thinks it should come off" isn't good enough?
I th8nk we have made actual reasons for why it should come off the list as well S reasons it should remain banned. There needs to be a stronger argument to make the case for change in either direction, and I doubt we will be able to make a strong enough case to overcome the resistance to chance in this case, unless of course Wizards does away with the Reserve List and it gets a reprint. I think it's still a fun thought exercise and ultimately I'm happy go just draft it in my cube.
Tectonic Edge is bad, and should only ever be played if you cannot afford Wasteland, and your group disallows the use of proxies.
I run Tectonic Edge in my Thada Adel theft deck, as my fifth Strip Mine effect. I added them to the deck after Homeward Path was printed, because that single land ****s with my entire gameplan.
My other 30-odd decks either run Strip Mine alone, or else add Wasteland and/or Dust Bowl alongside the Strip Mine. I think one or two other decks might also have a Ghost Quarter as well.
Sure compare it to Magus of the Library, that creature costs double green and requires you to wait for a turn before you can activate it, making it several orders of magnitude worse than a land.
Magus is definitely at least an order of magnitude worse than Library. But after having played with Magus, I have a firsthand sense of exactly how effective Library would be. Magus is stronger than I think most people realize, and Library is the same effect, for free, on a more resilient permanent type.
Library of Alexandria should remain banned, if for nothing more than as a premptive "Problematic Casual Omnipresence" ban. The existence of LoA in the environment would create huge waves once people actually started playing with it. Most people have no idea given that they have never owned a Library nor have they ever played in a format that Library has been legal, but the card is downright broken in a format that is as relatively slow as EDH (as compared to Vintage). At least in Vintage, there is an opportunity cost to running Library of Alexandria (the biggest being the need to have UU up ASAP for Mana Drain and being able to Gush ASAP), but EDH has no real early-game needs other than board development where LoA is an absolute king. If people think facing down a Turn 1 Sol Ring is bad, let me tell you that facing down a Turn 1 Library of Alexandria is worse.
If LoA was unbanned, I think the only thing that would keep it from being format warping would be availability and price keeping it out of the hands of those that do not play with proxies. If such things were not an issue, you can bet that people would figure out in a hurry that the best thing you can do it to get Library of Alexandria up and running and ride it as long as you can. I think it would get to the point that Strip Mine, Wasteland, Dust Bowl, etc. would all be considered auto-includes just to combat it (cards which I'm sure that RC would rather not incentivize players to play), and that Vesuva and Thespian's Stage would see a spike in play to keep parity in case an opposing Library shows up. I would also wager that I would be playing a whole heck of a lot more Crop Rotation, Expedition Map, Sylvan Scrying, etc. in non-black decks (that can run Demonic Tutor and friends) in order to make sure Library gets online. Games will hinge on which player has a Library and which do not, and that is the textbook definition of format warping.
Given that it also hits the banned list in the "Perceived Barrier to Entry" category, I don't think that Library of Alexandria is ever going to see the day when it gets unbanned.
If you didn't snip the quote, you'd see why your response is wrong. Yes, its a land, it takes a land drop, it comes into play untapped, and taps for mana, so it takes a land slot. Would you rather use it to draw every turn? Absolutely, but that doesn't matter. What matters is that, if you need to, you can count on it as a land. Sol Ring, often, will be almost a land. Sometimes, its better that its not, because you can cast it the same turn you play a land. We all know why Sol Ring is good. If you are cutting lands to play rocks that cost mana, or have a drawback like Mox Diamond, you are doing it wrong. You are setting yourself up for opening hands where your "lands" are actually rocks that you cannot cast. If you have, say, an Island and a Sol Ring, that's ok, because you can cast the Sol Ring, but if you have a Sol Ring and a Mana Vault, you need to mulligan that. Rocks are additive, they don't replace lands. You can stick LoA in without having to worry about drawing just it and a couple rocks opening hand, because you can just tap it for mana and cast your rocks. You also don't have to worry about it getting countered (a minor worry most of the time anyway, but I've seen Sol Rings countered), and it is much, much less likely to get blown up (It will absolutely be the target of any Strip Mine or Wasteland, but there are more staple artifact destruction effects running around, many of which are sweepers or etb effects, or both, and early rocks are always juicy targets).
Yes, it lets you add more land to your deck without losing consistency, and that's a point in its favor, but I think people usually undervalue hitting land drops. Its not OK to cut lands to add spells, even rocks, unless you have an outrageously low curve, but cutting a spell slot or two to add lands is fine, because the downside of adding land is very low, while the downside of cutting it is relatively high. This is because the consensus numbers for lands that you typically see develop due to min maxing, as reflected in decklists, tend to be on the low side of what you can safely run in order to maximize drawing gas, so cutting any further puts the risk of bad hands at dangerous levels. Adding a land, or even two in EDH, still leaves you in good shape with draws, especially if those extras are powerful utility lands like LoA. In EDH especially, its a range, with 37 being the min maxed low for most decks, but up to 40 being reasonable. The thing is, with LoA, you don't HAVE to increase your land count. You can still choose to run 37, and cut a basic, or a less powerful utility land, for it. Some decks will choose to run an extra land or two, but others won't, and depending on how the deck is constructed either could be correct.
I mean, in terms of comparison to Sol Ring, these are all, like I said before, pretty minor points in LoA's favor. But again, if we take Sol Ring as being right on the border of what should be legal and what should be banned, then a card like LoA ends up crossing that line by a bunch of small points.
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!
In cEDH, crypt is better full stop. That extra mana the turn you cast it is a big deal, and the 1.5 damage per turn won't matter in games decided before turn 7. In more casual games, they end up being more equivalent, but being able to cast a 3 mana spell with colored mana turn 1 is big.
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!
Gah! Snipping quotes doesn't mean I'm not reading the whole thing, I'm just focusing on the piece I'm responding to.
In your post I responded to, when I read "Unlike Tabernacle, it [Library]... (the latter is also unlike Sol Ring)" I thought latter was referring to Library because it was the second card referred to in the sentence, when it's now clear that you meant "the latter" to mean Tabernacle as the second card to appear in your post. I thought you meant that Library and Sol Ring aren't comparable when you were saying Tabernacle and Sol Ring/Library aren't comparable, and now that I no longer misunderstand you, I completely agree with what you were saying.
But I totally stand by snipping quotes, it's so much cleaner than throwing paragraphs at people and letting them guess what part I take issue with.
The reasoning behind this line of thinking perplexes me, so maybe there is some other facet I am missing. Regardless, I will relay it as it was explained to me.
They have a player who owns, and is permitted to play with, Library of Alexandria. As a direct result, they had to prohibit the use of 'infinite combos' to stop half their player base leaving.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
I'm genuinely curious as to the infinite combo which was so terrible thst they had to (re)ban Library in a format with a plethora of legal infinite combos already available.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
They reportedly had to disallow 'infinite combo' as a viable means to end a game, because Library was still allowed.
What confuses me is to why they would not simply tell the guy Library is banned, and he could not play it. It was pretty strongly implied that various infinite combos were a problem explicitly because of Library.
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
I'm still confused. How did Library make infinite combos that much more potent than they already are? There is a ton of legal card draw and tutors which can act almost as efficiently, if not more efficiently than just drawing one extra card a turn.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Yeah, this sounds like an extreme overreaction. Considering there are combos in this format that would be hindered by playing LoA early, I don’t agree at all that LoA would lead to such a strong reaction. I mean, it’s not a combo piece, so I am genuinely confused.
1. Becomes arguably the best land in EDH.
2. All decks can run it, most decks should.
3. Is currently at over a thousand dollars, if unbanned this will skyrocket from there.
4. Will be tutored for over other lands 90% of the time when applicable (Crop Rotation, Knight of the Reliquary, etc.)
5. Extremely high power level: in function it competes with cards like Phyrexian Arena, Staff of Nin which are 3 and 6 CMC spells respectively.
6. It is already unobtainable to most EDH players because of rarity and cost. Unbanning will make the card more unobtainable and expensive.
These things considered, I ask what incentive does the RC have to unban this?
I think it would be a lot more likely were it highly available like Sol Ring, but as it stands it seems iffy that the RC would put this back into the environment all things considered.
I’d love for the RC to unban it simply to show that it really isn’t all that powerful, and that it just competes with cards like Gaes Cradle, Ancient Tomb Strip Mine and the like. Powerful in some decks, strictly worse in others, but not game warping.
1. So? There will always be a "the best X ever".
2. Again, so? There are lots of staples, and as other people have said, it is not a universally held opinion that most decks want it.
3. Price is irrelevant, there are cards that are double that price already. The RC cannot concern themselves with the secondary market.
4. Seems like an exaggeration. If I'm sitting at 4 cards in hand and no clear way to refill why would I tutor for it over a different utility land that can help me in that moment?
5. In function it is comparable to Magus of the Library. Both of those cards you listed unconditionally draw you a card each upkeep. Library does not.
6. Again, there are plenty of legal cards which are already unobtainable to most players. If Library is already unobtainable to those players then they aren't suddenly priced out because it becomes even more expensive. But now the people who do have it get one more card to play with, and everyone who is ok with proxies can use it as well.
Edit: the incentive is that they are removing a ban list criteria which is grossly misunderstood, shortening the ban list, and sticking to their consistency of this format being the one where you get to play with cool cards and stuff that's banned in other formats.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
1. It being the best land in the format matters.
2. It being a staple is relevant due to it being largely unobtainable.
3. It's not just price, but scarcity, and the fact that it would be a staple.
4. 90% might be high for some, that's where it would be for me. It will be tutored for "most" of the time.
5. Sure compare it to Magus of the Library, that creature costs double green and requires you to wait for a turn before you can activate it, making it several orders of magnitude worse than a land.
6. How many of those are format staples? "People can proxy it" doesn't seem like very solid ground to stand on.
Anyways, this is just my 2cents on the situation. In my view, it wouldn't make much sense for the RC to pull this off the list.
On the other hand, if like you I had one laying around I'd probably want them to remove it too.
Are you suggesting that my motivation is based on ownership? I'm insulted, good zir!!!!
Re: Magus, yoh compared it to a BB1 enchantment and six drop artifact, so
Anyway, I fully understand that the risk to reward ration for unbanning Library is stupid high and not happening. The mere fact that the price would double AT THE LEAST is enough for them to leave Library where it is. I think that sucks because when you remove the concern of affecting price that much or whether people will feel bad that a card they can't afford is suddenly even less affordable I stand by my opinion that the card isn't the bogeyman people make it out to be. My cube runs half the ban list and I can assure you that Library isn't near the top of the worst offenders or cards that have turned games on their heads.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
1) No, I really don’t think it matters. It’ll only matter when it overperforms, and that won’t be all of the time. Even then, did it Warp the game? I’m going to say no.
2)Being a staple implies that your deck isn’t as good as it could be without it. It’s the essence of this debate, but, you aren’t going to convince the majority of the EDH playerbase that this is truly the case. Again, this will only be the case when it overpreforms, which will be a seldom occurance in the vast majority of groups.
3) See #2.
4) I’m going to call BS right here, as politely as I can. It fills a niche role, incredibly well, but still niche. Let’s just say if I’m sitting at a table with you, I won’t feel pressured or threatened if that’s your tutor target. It’s easier for your opponents to make that a bad play than it is for you to make it a good play.
5)Well, you did compare it to unconditional draw, which is just as “bad” of an argument.
6)Again, your definition of “staple” is incredibly different than mine.
I’d like to see it for the reason I stated before. Powerful, not game breaking, I’ve seen worse type of deal.
I don't think it would break the format or anything and it is at least a reasonable card to discuss, but I think the availability/price/staple aspect is what keeps it on the list.
I think were it super available like Sol Ring it would probably be ok for the format but sadly it just isn't.
See, thats my whole argument. You're agreeing with us thsst the card itself is probably safe. What I'm trying to do is to separate the card from the feeling surrounding it.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
1. I merely stated that it would be the best land in EDH, do you disagree?
2. Right now Library would make the cut in 22/22 of my decks and those lists are tiiiiiiiight. There are decks it doesn't go in, but those are niche. The card has no drawbacks and at it's best draws you an extra card a turn.
3. Being obtainable matters because it goes in so many decks.
4. You're not pressured by me drawing an extra card every turn? Poor threat assessment.
5. I wasn't comparing them in a vacuum. If I am playing Library, it will likely outperform both arena/staff in most games in terms of raw card draw since I'm able to throw it out early at no cost. I can play library turn 1 with no extra work, can't do that with the others.
6. I'll agree to disagree with you here. I think you have to be creative to NOT include Library, similarly to Sol Ring.
I agree that it is not game breaking. I am looking at it from the standpoint of availability/price/staple.
Totally, I'm with you there. I'm questioning the possibility of actually unbanning the card for the reasons I stated.
I don't think it's a boogeyman like Balance. I do think however that it is very, very good and would be a format staple.
Agreed. But staple isn't necessarily a bad thing. Solemn Simulacrum isn't a problem. Counterspell isn't a problem. And while I agree that having a staple be a card which is both limited in quantity and high in price, PBtE is the only criteria which does not evaluate a card based on how it plays but how it makes people feel.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Can't be a staple if not everyone is running it.
Now, if there were hard evidence that people were leaving the format in droves because they afford a Library I would say it's a problem. But I would believe those people about as much as I do the ones who quit because their pet card got banned.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Haha, this hard hitting analysis is why I come here!
Really though, people didn't leave the format in droves when things like PoK, Primetime, SPrime were legal though they were totally format warping, so I'm not sure that's a good lens to look through.
Also, I think we need to approach this discussion considering that Library is currently banned, and the RC needs actual reasons for it to come off.
"Because cryogen thinks it should come off" isn't good enough?
I th8nk we have made actual reasons for why it should come off the list as well S reasons it should remain banned. There needs to be a stronger argument to make the case for change in either direction, and I doubt we will be able to make a strong enough case to overcome the resistance to chance in this case, unless of course Wizards does away with the Reserve List and it gets a reprint. I think it's still a fun thought exercise and ultimately I'm happy go just draft it in my cube.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
My other 30-odd decks either run Strip Mine alone, or else add Wasteland and/or Dust Bowl alongside the Strip Mine. I think one or two other decks might also have a Ghost Quarter as well.
Magus is definitely at least an order of magnitude worse than Library. But after having played with Magus, I have a firsthand sense of exactly how effective Library would be. Magus is stronger than I think most people realize, and Library is the same effect, for free, on a more resilient permanent type.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
If LoA was unbanned, I think the only thing that would keep it from being format warping would be availability and price keeping it out of the hands of those that do not play with proxies. If such things were not an issue, you can bet that people would figure out in a hurry that the best thing you can do it to get Library of Alexandria up and running and ride it as long as you can. I think it would get to the point that Strip Mine, Wasteland, Dust Bowl, etc. would all be considered auto-includes just to combat it (cards which I'm sure that RC would rather not incentivize players to play), and that Vesuva and Thespian's Stage would see a spike in play to keep parity in case an opposing Library shows up. I would also wager that I would be playing a whole heck of a lot more Crop Rotation, Expedition Map, Sylvan Scrying, etc. in non-black decks (that can run Demonic Tutor and friends) in order to make sure Library gets online. Games will hinge on which player has a Library and which do not, and that is the textbook definition of format warping.
Given that it also hits the banned list in the "Perceived Barrier to Entry" category, I don't think that Library of Alexandria is ever going to see the day when it gets unbanned.