In my meta, we implemented the new rule. I took out Spin Into Myth from the one deck that was running it. Chaos Warp is still in everything it was before.
I actually liked tuck because it encouraged you to build decks that contain branching gameplans for when your plan A doesn't work out. Even without the rule, doing this when possible is a good idea.
However, I'm not going to cry rivers about the rule being gone.
Tuck nerf is perceived to be minor because only a few cards had the effect, and often only 1-2 tuck spells would be cast per game.
But it's caused everyone to be a little more reckless when it comes to tossing out their general, and overall deckbuilding. Gameplay depth has been reduced in exchange for flavor reasons.
I just learned about this change after a couple years away. In my opinion this change is just stupid. Decks should be balance and not fall to pieces the second the commander is gone. But rather than encourage people to build balanced decks and play smart they nerf the game instead. Ridiculous.
Having played under this rule for a year now, it is still very exhausting having to devote so many resources to keep powerful commander-centric decks under control. The two newest additions to the nonstop value family, Mizzix of the Izmagnus and The Gitrog Monster, are probably even worse than their predecessors.
It paints me as the bad guy when I point removal spell after removal spell at these commanders, because if I don't, they just take over the game in short order. I miss the days where you could cast Hinder and everyone would just accept it.
This is a format about generals. Grenzo without Grenzo is boring as hell. Krenko without Krenko literally cannot function. And on the whole, it just reinforced the status quo - three colour decks cared the least, goodstuff decks cared the least, black and blue decks cared the least, but janky Red or White decks would be tucked and ****ed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH RRGrenzo plays your deck, GGYeva's mono green control, WW9-tails trys desperately for monowhite not to suck RWBUTymna and Kraum's saboteur tribal, UWG Kestia's Enchantress Aggro, RUB Jeleva casts big dumb spells, RGB Vaevictis' big critters can kill your critters hard
Deck construction and play in my group has gotten more careless in the last year. There is an assumption (rightfully) that the commander will be in play virtually the entire game, even if little effort is made in deck construction to include protection. I know I would play far more carefully with Mizzix if she could get tucked.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH playing competitive Magic cast away
Current Decks GTitania midrange RGThromok tokens/goodstuff | UB Grimgrin zombie tribal GW Sigarda enchantress | R Godo voltron U Braids aggro | WR Kalemne punisher RU Mizzix storm | BUG Mimeoplasm competitive reanimator | UG Ezuri infect
I just learned about this change after a couple years away. In my opinion this change is just stupid. Decks should be balance and not fall to pieces the second the commander is gone. But rather than encourage people to build balanced decks and play smart they nerf the game instead. Ridiculous.
If your deck can entirely function without your commander, why do you have a commander? So you can jam the best cards in your favorite color combo and roll face?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I am not Pro-Tuck or Pro-Spread; yet, I believe this thread can benefit from a poll after a year of playing with the change. Mods, can you make it happen? Vote and state ones position with evidence.
Having played under this rule for a year now, it is still very exhausting having to devote so many resources to keep powerful commander-centric decks under control. The two newest additions to the nonstop value family, Mizzix of the Izmagnus and The Gitrog Monster, are probably even worse than their predecessors.
It paints me as the bad guy when I point removal spell after removal spell at these commanders, because if I don't, they just take over the game in short order. I miss the days where you could cast Hinder and everyone would just accept it.
/salty
I both agree and disagree. I am a big advocate of mono colored commanders and honestly commander tuck more or less removed most mono white / mono red / boros decks from being able to be played even in more casual games because someone would eventually tuck your commander (sometimes indirectly through Hallowed Burial / Terminus).
I enjoy being able to play mono white and mono red these days because of that but I totally get what you mean when it comes to a super powerful central focused commander when you just cant get them to go away.
I think what the commander tuck rule came down to was that it was something that made new players and casual players feel terribly while those of us who played more and for a longer period of time felt it was useful. I agree with their reasons for doing it and honestly, theft can sort of serve as a tuck like effect.
It paints me as the bad guy when I point removal spell after removal spell at these commanders, because if I don't, they just take over the game in short order. I miss the days where you could cast Hinder and everyone would just accept it.
Do you think you could explain why you think people are OK with a tucked commander but not one that is around but costs a ton? That seems counter-intuitive to me.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
I was glad to see tuck go when they announced the rule change and am still glad it went away. All my and my playgroup's decks are commander-centric and we hated to condemn someone to a miserable game when tucking his central deck piece. Chaos Warp is still great, expecially for decks that can't normally deal with enchantments (R/UR/BR). Same goes for Terminus, Hallowed Burial and Brutalizer Exarch. The only spells that suffered from the changes are Spell Cumple and Hinder, and lets face it: blue still has a loads of great countermagic for EDH.
Once again a vocal minority in these forums made it look like a huge part of the EDH playerbase was upset about the changes ("... its going to kill EDH!"), when in reality it were only a few people who play competitive cutthroat EDH. Every person I told about the tuck rule changes sighed in relief.
I just learned about this change after a couple years away. In my opinion this change is just stupid. Decks should be balance and not fall to pieces the second the commander is gone. But rather than encourage people to build balanced decks and play smart they nerf the game instead. Ridiculous.
If your deck can entirely function without your commander, why do you have a commander? So you can jam the best cards in your favorite color combo and roll face?
That was a terrible response, considering 99% of Competetive decks are just "good stuff" builds...
It paints me as the bad guy when I point removal spell after removal spell at these commanders, because if I don't, they just take over the game in short order. I miss the days where you could cast Hinder and everyone would just accept it.
Do you think you could explain why you think people are OK with a tucked commander but not one that is around but costs a ton? That seems counter-intuitive to me.
I can see how it might seem that way, but in practice it has been the opposite. It also makes already-powerful commanders that much stronger.
Old scenario: Opponent casts Narset, Enlightened Master. I cast Hinder. "Sigghhhh... okay." Everyone plays tuck, it makes no intuitive sense, but it is a fact of life. You concede this weakness when you build your deck.
Current scenario: Opponent casts Narset. I cast Counterspell. A turn goes by, opponent recasts Narset and moves to combat. I cast Diabolic Edict. Two turns later, opponent re-re-casts Narset, I sacrifice Shard Phoenix. "DUDE, WHY WON'T YOU LET ME PLAY MY DECK." or "I HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING ALL GAME" etc.
Surely I am not alone in this experience?
@ISBPathfinder -- I have been thankful that my decks have become that much more resilient. Losing Squee to a random Timetwister was never fun. I also approve of the tuck rule change from a design point of view.
It paints me as the bad guy when I point removal spell after removal spell at these commanders, because if I don't, they just take over the game in short order. I miss the days where you could cast Hinder and everyone would just accept it.
Do you think you could explain why you think people are OK with a tucked commander but not one that is around but costs a ton? That seems counter-intuitive to me.
I can see how it might seem that way, but in practice it has been the opposite. It also makes already-powerful commanders that much s
Old scenario: Opponent casts Narset, Enlightened Master. I cast Hinder. "Sigghhhh... okay." Everyone plays tuck, it makes no intuitive sense, but it is a fact of life. You concede this weakness when you build your deck.
Current scenario: Opponent casts Narset. I cast Counterspell. A turn goes by, opponent recasts Narset and moves to combat. I cast Diabolic Edict. Two turns later, opponent re-re-casts Narset, I sacrifice Shard Phoenix. "DUDE, WHY WON'T YOU LET ME PLAY MY DECK." or "I HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING ALL GAME" etc.
Surely I am not alone in this experience?
That's fairly common in my area as well. When the player with instant kill combo with a commander points out he/she is being unfairly targeted, I remind them that their deck will instantly win if it resolves (or in Narset or Kaalia's case, move to combat). If the rest of the table doesn't agree with me, I don't stop it and let them win so the table can understand.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
This is a format about generals. Grenzo without Grenzo is boring as hell. Krenko without Krenko literally cannot function. And on the whole, it just reinforced the status quo - three colour decks cared the least, goodstuff decks cared the least, black and blue decks cared the least, but janky Red or White decks would be tucked and ****ed.
People think anything and everything can and gets tucked, when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth.
The only things that get tucked are the biggest threats. Just like any other removal spell. Your janky Aurelia, the Warleader deck is not getting the general tucked if there's a Zur or Derevi deck in the game. Consider that red and white are the two weakest colors in EDH, and that monored/monowhite/boros decks are often the weakest decks on the table.
Also "janky" red or white decks also sported some of the best tuck in chaos warp and oblation. So red and white actually lost some of their tools, whereas black and green are already playing the cards that "counter" tuck (tutors). So red and white are even worse than before whereas black and green get even better (blue did lose a bit with hinder and spell crumple effectively being useless, but it's still a ridiculously good color).
The only upside of the change was stremalining the rules and making things a little more intuitive. But it makes for worse gameplay. Not by a significant/gamebreaking amount, but it makes it even more difficult to stop tier 1 decks like Prossh and Derevi without playing your own cutthroat deck.
This is a format about generals. Grenzo without Grenzo is boring as hell. Krenko without Krenko literally cannot function. And on the whole, it just reinforced the status quo - three colour decks cared the least, goodstuff decks cared the least, black and blue decks cared the least, but janky Red or White decks would be tucked and ****ed.
People think anything and everything can and gets tucked, when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth.
The only things that get tucked are the biggest threats. Just like any other removal spell. Your janky Aurelia, the Warleader deck is not getting the general tucked if there's a Zur or Derevi deck in the game. Consider that red and white are the two weakest colors in EDH, and that monored/monowhite/boros decks are often the weakest decks on the table.
Also "janky" red or white decks also sported some of the best tuck in chaos warp and oblation. So red and white actually lost some of their tools, whereas black and green are already playing the cards that "counter" tuck (tutors).
Chaos Warp is still a terrific card in red since it is red's only way of dealing with enchantments.
And janky commanders still got hosed a lot too. A miracled Terminus meant to get rid of Arcum Dagsson's Blightsteel Colossus also hit your Razia, Boros Archangel? Sorry.
Hallowed Burial meaning to get Narset off the board? Too bad for your Zada, Hedron Grinder that your whole deck is based around, who happened to be on the field too.
Decks in EDH are already so reliant on sacrifice outlets. Tuck made cards like Phyrexian Altar or Ashnod's Altar necessary in every single deck.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I just learned about this change after a couple years away. In my opinion this change is just stupid. Decks should be balance and not fall to pieces the second the commander is gone. But rather than encourage people to build balanced decks and play smart they nerf the game instead. Ridiculous.
If your deck can entirely function without your commander, why do you have a commander? So you can jam the best cards in your favorite color combo and roll face?
Because EDH/Commander is the most popular singleton format there is and it's required. It's the same reason I only use the cards I open in sealed, or stuff from the most recent sets in standard. Gotta play the format.
And to your second question, it just depends on what I'm trying to do with the deck. You can make a deck that has a theme and fun interactions with the cards that doesn't completely revolve around one card. For example, when I play my Rhyss token deck I generally don't bother to play him past the early game, if at all, and the deck works just fine.
And I stand by my statement, I don't think a deck should only work when it has access to one card. My Kaalia deck relies on the commander more than any deck I've ever made but if she ever got tucked I could still pull out a win because I had enough other ways to cheat dudes in along with good removal and mana ramp.
I just think everything falling to pieces because you can't play one percent of your deck is lazy deck building and lazy playing. Think of a way out of the problem rather than just playing the same card over and over.
Having played under this rule for a year now, it is still very exhausting having to devote so many resources to keep powerful commander-centric decks under control. The two newest additions to the nonstop value family, Mizzix of the Izmagnus and The Gitrog Monster, are probably even worse than their predecessors.
I've found that cheaper generals are much more problematic for keeping off the board. Ayli comes to mind as one example.
This is a format about generals. Grenzo without Grenzo is boring as hell. Krenko without Krenko literally cannot function. And on the whole, it just reinforced the status quo - three colour decks cared the least, goodstuff decks cared the least, black and blue decks cared the least, but janky Red or White decks would be tucked and ****ed.
People think anything and everything can and gets tucked, when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth.
The only things that get tucked are the biggest threats. Just like any other removal spell. Your janky Aurelia, the Warleader deck is not getting the general tucked if there's a Zur or Derevi deck in the game. Consider that red and white are the two weakest colors in EDH, and that monored/monowhite/boros decks are often the weakest decks on the table.
Also "janky" red or white decks also sported some of the best tuck in chaos warp and oblation. So red and white actually lost some of their tools, whereas black and green are already playing the cards that "counter" tuck (tutors).
Chaos Warp is still a terrific card in red since it is red's only way of dealing with enchantments.
It's significantly worse with the nerf to tuck. Before you would consider playing chaos warp in any red deck just because tuck was that good. Now it's largely for monored, RB and RU.
And janky commanders still got hosed a lot too. A miracled Terminus meant to get rid of Arcum Dagsson's Blightsteel Colossus also hit your Razia, Boros Archangel? Sorry.
Hallowed Burial meaning to get Narset off the board? Too bad for your Zada, Hedron Grinder that your whole deck is based around, who happened to be on the field too.
There are more targeted tuck effects than sweeping tuck effects. In fact, considering that I've never seen anyone play hallowed burial (terminus is almost strictly better), it really is just terminus that could get your general in the crossfire. Also consider that this situation also requires that you don't have a sac outlet in play AND you don't have a way to get your general out back quickly AND your hand/board position is such that you happen to just fold with your general stuck in your library (many people can function without their general to some degree, but there are situations where even with the best deckbuilding you just happen to draw poorly).
It doesn't actually happen often enough to be a significant problem for those playing the janky commanders.
Decks in EDH are already so reliant on sacrifice outlets. Tuck made cards like Phyrexian Altar or Ashnod's Altar necessary in every single deck.
It's only red and white that need sac outlets the most to dodge tuck effects (and again, red and white's generals were often the least targeted with tuck because of power level). Black and green don't really give a ***** if their general gets tucked since they're the two best colors at tutoring creatures out (they'll play sac outlets because they also often have a lot of abilities that trigger when creatures die, but they don't require sac outlets just to literally dodge tuck on their general). Blue has enough draw power to get your general back quickly.
And to your second question, it just depends on what I'm trying to do with the deck. You can make a deck that has a theme and fun interactions with the cards that doesn't completely revolve around one card. For example, when I play my Rhyss token deck I generally don't bother to play him past the early game, if at all, and the deck works just fine.
And I stand by my statement, I don't think a deck should only work when it has access to one card. My Kaalia deck relies on the commander more than any deck I've ever made but if she ever got tucked I could still pull out a win because I had enough other ways to cheat dudes in along with good removal and mana ramp.
I just think everything falling to pieces because you can't play one percent of your deck is lazy deck building and lazy playing. Think of a way out of the problem rather than just playing the same card over and over.
I couldn't disagree more with this line of thinking. Yeah, there are some themes with enough support to make them happen without the commander (like tokens) but there are loads of decks that can only work because of their commanders. Vorel of the Hull Clade, Zada, Hedron Grinder, Borborygmos Enraged, Phenax, God of Deception.... etc. I could go on an on. Would EDH be a format as fun and diverse if everyone played the obvious strategies? Of course not.
Also, how is including a "tuck insurence" package into every deck the opposite of lazy deckbuilding and play? This logic literally encourages you to play the same cards over and over again...
People think anything and everything can and gets tucked, when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth.
The only things that get tucked are the biggest threats. Just like any other removal spell. Your janky Aurelia, the Warleader deck is not getting the general tucked if there's a Zur or Derevi deck in the game. Consider that red and white are the two weakest colors in EDH, and that monored/monowhite/boros decks are often the weakest decks on the table.
By this logic I would never be allowed to build a R/W/RW deck thats worthy of your attention. Is the Derevi deck more dangerous than Zada, Hedron Grinder? Probably. Will that stop you from casting it on Zada if you feel threatened by her, thus rendering her deck useless? No, it won't.
Commander is a political game. The threat of tuck alone is so strong against R/W/RW decks (and some others too), that it causes major disruption on the table. Tuck has been an unbalanced aspect of EDH from the very start. An effect that renders one deck entirely useless while simply baiting one of many tutors from another deck is dangerous. Keep in mind that this is not a metagame format where you can simply add another colour or change up the sideboard to compensate for your decks weaknesses.
It's only red and white that need sac outlets the most to dodge tuck effects (and again, red and white's generals were often the least targeted with tuck because of power level). Black and green don't really give a ***** if their general gets tucked since they're the two best colors at tutoring creatures out (they'll play sac outlets because they also often have a lot of abilities that trigger when creatures die, but they don't require sac outlets just to literally dodge tuck on their general). Blue has enough draw power to get your general back quickly.
Disagreed again. By this logic, you require every B/x or G/x deck to be full of tutor effects, and every U/x deck to be able to draw their deck. It is not a question of wether or not the colour could somehow combat tuck, its a question of wether its practical and fun. Why should I have to include a handful of sac outlets or mass draw spells in my Zedruu the Greathearted deck, where both is useless? The no-tuck rule has opened the doors for many janky, innovative and unusual decks. Every step away from good stuff as the default for deckbuilding is a big step forward for EDH.
And to your second question, it just depends on what I'm trying to do with the deck. You can make a deck that has a theme and fun interactions with the cards that doesn't completely revolve around one card. For example, when I play my Rhyss token deck I generally don't bother to play him past the early game, if at all, and the deck works just fine.
And I stand by my statement, I don't think a deck should only work when it has access to one card. My Kaalia deck relies on the commander more than any deck I've ever made but if she ever got tucked I could still pull out a win because I had enough other ways to cheat dudes in along with good removal and mana ramp.
I just think everything falling to pieces because you can't play one percent of your deck is lazy deck building and lazy playing. Think of a way out of the problem rather than just playing the same card over and over.
I couldn't disagree more with this line of thinking. Yeah, there are some themes with enough support to make them happen without the commander (like tokens) but there are loads of decks that can only work because of their commanders. Vorel of the Hull Clade, Zada, Hedron Grinder, Borborygmos Enraged, Phenax, God of Deception.... etc. I could go on an on. Would EDH be a format as fun and diverse if everyone played the obvious strategies? Of course not.
Also, how is including a "tuck insurence" package into every deck the opposite of lazy deckbuilding and play? This logic literally encourages you to play the same cards over and over again...
There are also cutthroat decks that rely on their commanders to do anything. For example, narset decks tend to flop around and die if she can't be cast. The difference, again, is taht narset, being on a higher power level than a *****ty commander like Phenax, would be targeted more often than Phenax (not in a literal sense as she has hexproof so things like chaos warp didn't work, but she would draw more attention from the board than Phenax).
The main cards that "countered" tuck are tutors, which are inherently powerful in EDH even without tuck because tutors in a 100-card singleton format are stupidly good. You are playing tutors like demonic tutor and survival of the fittest even post-tuck nerf. It sucks that their high power level causes them to be played by tons of people, but that's not the fault of tuck, that's the fault of the RC not banning those powerful, if not broken, tutors.
Basically, what the tuck nerf meant was that you no longer had to remotely consider using *****ty tutors if you were deathly afraid of tuck.
People think anything and everything can and gets tucked, when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth.
The only things that get tucked are the biggest threats. Just like any other removal spell. Your janky Aurelia, the Warleader deck is not getting the general tucked if there's a Zur or Derevi deck in the game. Consider that red and white are the two weakest colors in EDH, and that monored/monowhite/boros decks are often the weakest decks on the table.
By this logic I would never be allowed to build a R/W/RW deck thats worthy of your attention. Is the Derevi deck more dangerous than Zada, Hedron Grinder? Probably. Will that stop you from casting it on Zada if you feel threatened by her, thus rendering her deck useless? No, it won't.
You are trying to argue an obvious corner case here. I'm obviously talking about in a general/broad sense. There will be games when the janky general will get more attention than the cutthroat general. There are times when I divert my attention to the janky Borborygmos deck over the cutthroat Narset deck because the narset player got mana screwed while the Borborygmos player went T1 sol ring and then had borborygmos out on turn 4. But more often than not you will be saving your tuck for the cutthroat general.
Will I play tuck on Zada if I feel threatened? Sure. But the question isn't whether or not she's threatening in a void. It's whether or not she's more threatening than the other threats on the board. So more often than not, that Derevi WILL get more attention from me than Zada.
Commander is a political game. The threat of tuck alone is so strong against R/W/RW decks (and some others too), that it causes major disruption on the table. Tuck has been an unbalanced aspect of EDH from the very start. An effect that renders one deck entirely useless while simply baiting one of many tutors from another deck is dangerous. Keep in mind that this is not a metagame format where you can simply add another colour or change up the sideboard to compensate for your decks weaknesses.
Again, red and white were the best colors at tucking, so it's not like tuck just destroyed them with no benefits, because they also had the tools to do it back at other players. And keep in mind that black and green have, AFAIK, no cards that tuck creatures, and blue's tuck is mostly just spell crumple/hinder and didn't go in every blue deck even pre-nerf. So if boros player A is getting his general tucked, chances are it's being cast by boros player B, and so boros player A can do it back at him if needed.
And again, it is ignoring the fact that, more often than not, the boros player had the weaker general/deck than other people on the table, and thus their general had a lower chance of being tucked in the first place.
It's only red and white that need sac outlets the most to dodge tuck effects (and again, red and white's generals were often the least targeted with tuck because of power level). Black and green don't really give a ***** if their general gets tucked since they're the two best colors at tutoring creatures out (they'll play sac outlets because they also often have a lot of abilities that trigger when creatures die, but they don't require sac outlets just to literally dodge tuck on their general). Blue has enough draw power to get your general back quickly.
Disagreed again. By this logic, you require every B/x or G/x deck to be full of tutor effects,
Repeating for emphasis...
The main cards that "countered" tuck are tutors, which are inherently powerful in EDH even without tuck because tutors in a 100-card singleton format are stupidly good. You are playing tutors like demonic tutor and survival of the fittest even post-tuck nerf. It sucks that their high power level causes them to be played by tons of people, but that's not the fault of tuck, that's the fault of the RC not banning those powerful, if not broken, tutors.
Basically, at the very least I would need to see demonic tutor and survival of the fittest banned before I even remotely consider that "requiring" BG to be full of tutor effects to be considered a negative side effect of tuck. Even then, there are tons of other strong tutors like green sun's zenith and chord of calling that see play in nearly every green deck even post-nerf that the overall idea that tuck would "force" players to use these cards is silly.
and every U/x deck to be able to draw their deck.
enough draw power to get your general back quickly =/= draw your deck
Brainstorm, dig through time, etc. are great ways to dig back to your general. Intuition cna also get your general back (I believe the opponent can put your general into your graveyard and then you can use a replacement effect to get it back in your command zone, please let me know if this is incorrect).
It is not a question of wether or not the colour could somehow combat tuck, its a question of wether its practical and fun. Why should I have to include a handful of sac outlets or mass draw spells in my Zedruu the Greathearted deck, where both is useless? The no-tuck rule has opened the doors for many janky, innovative and unusual decks. Every step away from good stuff as the default for deckbuilding is a big step forward for EDH.
First, the person I responded to stated that "Decks in EDH are already so reliant on sacrifice outlets. Tuck made cards like Phyrexian Altar or Ashnod's Altar necessary in every single deck". He implied that many decks would be playing some number of sac outlets even without tuck, thus I operated under that assumption.
Now taking your response here separately, sac outlets had additional benefits outside of avoiding tuck. You would use a sac outlet to dodge...
- exile removal on your non-general creatures (e.g. someone swords to plowshares your karmic guide and you really want to keep KG around).
- mind control effects.
- things like oblivion ring.
- clone effects (extremely potent against clone effects that target such as rite of replication, but if you had an idea of what your opponent wanted to clone, you could sac certain creatures like your Terastodon before the clone resolved so the clone would have to copy something else. You technically wouldn't likely sac your general in response to a clone since the general for your deck is more likely to benefit you than the opponent having a copy of your general, but that doesn't change the fact that sac outlets had this purpose)
This is also not including the fact that there are cards you could add into your deck that the deck initially may not need a sac outlet, but could benefit from said sac outlet with the addition of that card (e.g. in my Zedruu deck I have Academy Rector, and I have High market in the deck even post-nerf because of it, and I would certainly have high market in the deck pre-nerf as having Zedruu avoid tuck for whatever reason would be nice).
I'm not a very competitive player at all, and I continue to miss the option of tucking commanders. This helped keep more degenerate commanders in check, and as they keep printing powerful commanders, that only becomes more of a concern. Any time I run into a Narset deck, I so wish commander tucking was still a thing.
The lack of tuck makes low-CMC commanders particularly difficult to deal with. As just one example, in my Karlov deck I would be much more careful with Karlov if I had to worry about him being tucked. In contrast, I just shrug at him getting hit by a wipe or targeted removal, because he is so cheap to cast.
I also continue to believe the loss of tuck enables lazy deckbuilding. This opinion is supported by some of the recent comments in this thread.
i think a major issue that a lot of peeps on this thread are touching on but don't actually explicitly mention is the notion of 'fairness' and 'balance'. EDH isn't a format known for those qualities and the RC is pretty explicit in that they aren't trying to 'balance' the format in any shape or form; they're primarily trying to weed out the unfun elements, especially aimed at enticing new blood onto the scene.
if your group enjoys the idea of their generals being tucked as a fun thing, then good on you guys, and im sure your group already houseruled it in. However, it would seem to me and at least the peeps at the local scene here that having your general tucked is one of the least fun things that can happen to them in a game. i can sort of understand why some people like tuck, but it would seem that for most people playing EDH, tuck is a general feel-bad.
if i got the wrong idea from the RC, my bad! i dont wanna be putting words in their mouth, but thats the impression i got anyways.
No big changes. Marton Stromgald is happy, though.
However, I'm not going to cry rivers about the rule being gone.
The Unidentified Fantastic Flying Girl.
EDH
Xenagos, the God of Stompy
The Gitrog Monster: Oppressive Value.
Marchesa, Marionette Master - Undying Robots
Yuriko, the Hydra Omnivore
I make dolls as a hobby.
Playtesting | Karador, Ghost Chieftain | Narset, Enlightened Master | Ephara, God of the Polis
Established | Gahiji, Honored One | Shirei, Shizo's Caretaker | Opal-Eye, Konda's Yojimbo | Rubinia Soulsinger
Retired | Medomai the Ageless | Diaochan, Artful Beauty
But it's caused everyone to be a little more reckless when it comes to tossing out their general, and overall deckbuilding. Gameplay depth has been reduced in exchange for flavor reasons.
WUBRGProgenitus
URGMaelstrom Wanderer
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic
WURZedruu, the Greathearted
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher ($100)
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Tactician ($100)
UGKruphix, God of Horizons ($100)(retired)UTalrand, Sky Summoner (French 1v1, $100)
It paints me as the bad guy when I point removal spell after removal spell at these commanders, because if I don't, they just take over the game in short order. I miss the days where you could cast Hinder and everyone would just accept it.
/salty
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
This is a format about generals. Grenzo without Grenzo is boring as hell. Krenko without Krenko literally cannot function. And on the whole, it just reinforced the status quo - three colour decks cared the least, goodstuff decks cared the least, black and blue decks cared the least, but janky Red or White decks would be tucked and ****ed.
RRGrenzo plays your deck, GGYeva's mono green control, WW9-tails trys desperately for monowhite not to suck
RWBUTymna and Kraum's saboteur tribal, UWG Kestia's Enchantress Aggro, RUB Jeleva casts big dumb spells, RGB Vaevictis' big critters can kill your critters hard
Arena Standard
UUUU Tempo, since before it was cool
Various Wx decks running Fountain of Renewal and Day of Glory
Anything I can cram Chaos Wand in to
Current Decks
GTitania midrange
RGThromok tokens/goodstuff | UB Grimgrin zombie tribal
GW Sigarda enchantress | R Godo voltron
U Braids aggro | WR Kalemne punisher
RU Mizzix storm | BUG Mimeoplasm competitive reanimator | UG Ezuri infect
If your deck can entirely function without your commander, why do you have a commander? So you can jam the best cards in your favorite color combo and roll face?
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Keep brewing.
I both agree and disagree. I am a big advocate of mono colored commanders and honestly commander tuck more or less removed most mono white / mono red / boros decks from being able to be played even in more casual games because someone would eventually tuck your commander (sometimes indirectly through Hallowed Burial / Terminus).
I enjoy being able to play mono white and mono red these days because of that but I totally get what you mean when it comes to a super powerful central focused commander when you just cant get them to go away.
I think what the commander tuck rule came down to was that it was something that made new players and casual players feel terribly while those of us who played more and for a longer period of time felt it was useful. I agree with their reasons for doing it and honestly, theft can sort of serve as a tuck like effect.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Chaos Warp is still great, expecially for decks that can't normally deal with enchantments (R/UR/BR). Same goes for Terminus, Hallowed Burial and Brutalizer Exarch. The only spells that suffered from the changes are Spell Cumple and Hinder, and lets face it: blue still has a loads of great countermagic for EDH.
Once again a vocal minority in these forums made it look like a huge part of the EDH playerbase was upset about the changes ("... its going to kill EDH!"), when in reality it were only a few people who play competitive cutthroat EDH. Every person I told about the tuck rule changes sighed in relief.
UR Mizzix of the Izmagnus ~~~ Build your own win-condition: Finite Spellslinging
UR Brudiclad, Telchor Engineer ~~~ We are the Borg. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own.
WUB Oloro, Ageless Ascetic ~~~ A Guide to dying slowly
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose ~~~ Marchesa's undying Marionettes
RGW Mayael the Anima ~~~ All Hail the Big Chungus
GWU Chulane, Teller of Tales ~~~ Permanents Only ETB Shenanigans
BGU Sidisi, Brood Tyrant ~~~ Sidisi's Restless Servants
WUBRG The Ur-Dragon ~~~ Dragons eat your face
That was a terrible response, considering 99% of Competetive decks are just "good stuff" builds...
Old scenario: Opponent casts Narset, Enlightened Master. I cast Hinder. "Sigghhhh... okay." Everyone plays tuck, it makes no intuitive sense, but it is a fact of life. You concede this weakness when you build your deck.
Current scenario: Opponent casts Narset. I cast Counterspell. A turn goes by, opponent recasts Narset and moves to combat. I cast Diabolic Edict. Two turns later, opponent re-re-casts Narset, I sacrifice Shard Phoenix. "DUDE, WHY WON'T YOU LET ME PLAY MY DECK." or "I HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING ALL GAME" etc.
Surely I am not alone in this experience?
@ISBPathfinder -- I have been thankful that my decks have become that much more resilient. Losing Squee to a random Timetwister was never fun. I also approve of the tuck rule change from a design point of view.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
That's fairly common in my area as well. When the player with instant kill combo with a commander points out he/she is being unfairly targeted, I remind them that their deck will instantly win if it resolves (or in Narset or Kaalia's case, move to combat). If the rest of the table doesn't agree with me, I don't stop it and let them win so the table can understand.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
People think anything and everything can and gets tucked, when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth.
The only things that get tucked are the biggest threats. Just like any other removal spell. Your janky Aurelia, the Warleader deck is not getting the general tucked if there's a Zur or Derevi deck in the game. Consider that red and white are the two weakest colors in EDH, and that monored/monowhite/boros decks are often the weakest decks on the table.
Also "janky" red or white decks also sported some of the best tuck in chaos warp and oblation. So red and white actually lost some of their tools, whereas black and green are already playing the cards that "counter" tuck (tutors). So red and white are even worse than before whereas black and green get even better (blue did lose a bit with hinder and spell crumple effectively being useless, but it's still a ridiculously good color).
The only upside of the change was stremalining the rules and making things a little more intuitive. But it makes for worse gameplay. Not by a significant/gamebreaking amount, but it makes it even more difficult to stop tier 1 decks like Prossh and Derevi without playing your own cutthroat deck.
WUBRGProgenitus
URGMaelstrom Wanderer
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic
WURZedruu, the Greathearted
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher ($100)
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Tactician ($100)
UGKruphix, God of Horizons ($100)(retired)UTalrand, Sky Summoner (French 1v1, $100)
Chaos Warp is still a terrific card in red since it is red's only way of dealing with enchantments.
And janky commanders still got hosed a lot too. A miracled Terminus meant to get rid of Arcum Dagsson's Blightsteel Colossus also hit your Razia, Boros Archangel? Sorry.
Hallowed Burial meaning to get Narset off the board? Too bad for your Zada, Hedron Grinder that your whole deck is based around, who happened to be on the field too.
Decks in EDH are already so reliant on sacrifice outlets. Tuck made cards like Phyrexian Altar or Ashnod's Altar necessary in every single deck.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Because EDH/Commander is the most popular singleton format there is and it's required. It's the same reason I only use the cards I open in sealed, or stuff from the most recent sets in standard. Gotta play the format.
And to your second question, it just depends on what I'm trying to do with the deck. You can make a deck that has a theme and fun interactions with the cards that doesn't completely revolve around one card. For example, when I play my Rhyss token deck I generally don't bother to play him past the early game, if at all, and the deck works just fine.
And I stand by my statement, I don't think a deck should only work when it has access to one card. My Kaalia deck relies on the commander more than any deck I've ever made but if she ever got tucked I could still pull out a win because I had enough other ways to cheat dudes in along with good removal and mana ramp.
I just think everything falling to pieces because you can't play one percent of your deck is lazy deck building and lazy playing. Think of a way out of the problem rather than just playing the same card over and over.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
It's significantly worse with the nerf to tuck. Before you would consider playing chaos warp in any red deck just because tuck was that good. Now it's largely for monored, RB and RU.
There are more targeted tuck effects than sweeping tuck effects. In fact, considering that I've never seen anyone play hallowed burial (terminus is almost strictly better), it really is just terminus that could get your general in the crossfire. Also consider that this situation also requires that you don't have a sac outlet in play AND you don't have a way to get your general out back quickly AND your hand/board position is such that you happen to just fold with your general stuck in your library (many people can function without their general to some degree, but there are situations where even with the best deckbuilding you just happen to draw poorly).
It doesn't actually happen often enough to be a significant problem for those playing the janky commanders.
It's only red and white that need sac outlets the most to dodge tuck effects (and again, red and white's generals were often the least targeted with tuck because of power level). Black and green don't really give a ***** if their general gets tucked since they're the two best colors at tutoring creatures out (they'll play sac outlets because they also often have a lot of abilities that trigger when creatures die, but they don't require sac outlets just to literally dodge tuck on their general). Blue has enough draw power to get your general back quickly.
WUBRGProgenitus
URGMaelstrom Wanderer
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic
WURZedruu, the Greathearted
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher ($100)
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Tactician ($100)
UGKruphix, God of Horizons ($100)(retired)UTalrand, Sky Summoner (French 1v1, $100)
I couldn't disagree more with this line of thinking. Yeah, there are some themes with enough support to make them happen without the commander (like tokens) but there are loads of decks that can only work because of their commanders. Vorel of the Hull Clade, Zada, Hedron Grinder, Borborygmos Enraged, Phenax, God of Deception.... etc. I could go on an on. Would EDH be a format as fun and diverse if everyone played the obvious strategies? Of course not.
Also, how is including a "tuck insurence" package into every deck the opposite of lazy deckbuilding and play? This logic literally encourages you to play the same cards over and over again...
By this logic I would never be allowed to build a R/W/RW deck thats worthy of your attention. Is the Derevi deck more dangerous than Zada, Hedron Grinder? Probably. Will that stop you from casting it on Zada if you feel threatened by her, thus rendering her deck useless? No, it won't.
Commander is a political game. The threat of tuck alone is so strong against R/W/RW decks (and some others too), that it causes major disruption on the table. Tuck has been an unbalanced aspect of EDH from the very start. An effect that renders one deck entirely useless while simply baiting one of many tutors from another deck is dangerous. Keep in mind that this is not a metagame format where you can simply add another colour or change up the sideboard to compensate for your decks weaknesses.
Disagreed again. By this logic, you require every B/x or G/x deck to be full of tutor effects, and every U/x deck to be able to draw their deck. It is not a question of wether or not the colour could somehow combat tuck, its a question of wether its practical and fun. Why should I have to include a handful of sac outlets or mass draw spells in my Zedruu the Greathearted deck, where both is useless? The no-tuck rule has opened the doors for many janky, innovative and unusual decks. Every step away from good stuff as the default for deckbuilding is a big step forward for EDH.
UR Mizzix of the Izmagnus ~~~ Build your own win-condition: Finite Spellslinging
UR Brudiclad, Telchor Engineer ~~~ We are the Borg. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own.
WUB Oloro, Ageless Ascetic ~~~ A Guide to dying slowly
UBR Marchesa, the Black Rose ~~~ Marchesa's undying Marionettes
RGW Mayael the Anima ~~~ All Hail the Big Chungus
GWU Chulane, Teller of Tales ~~~ Permanents Only ETB Shenanigans
BGU Sidisi, Brood Tyrant ~~~ Sidisi's Restless Servants
WUBRG The Ur-Dragon ~~~ Dragons eat your face
There are also cutthroat decks that rely on their commanders to do anything. For example, narset decks tend to flop around and die if she can't be cast. The difference, again, is taht narset, being on a higher power level than a *****ty commander like Phenax, would be targeted more often than Phenax (not in a literal sense as she has hexproof so things like chaos warp didn't work, but she would draw more attention from the board than Phenax).
The main cards that "countered" tuck are tutors, which are inherently powerful in EDH even without tuck because tutors in a 100-card singleton format are stupidly good. You are playing tutors like demonic tutor and survival of the fittest even post-tuck nerf. It sucks that their high power level causes them to be played by tons of people, but that's not the fault of tuck, that's the fault of the RC not banning those powerful, if not broken, tutors.
Basically, what the tuck nerf meant was that you no longer had to remotely consider using *****ty tutors if you were deathly afraid of tuck.
You are trying to argue an obvious corner case here. I'm obviously talking about in a general/broad sense. There will be games when the janky general will get more attention than the cutthroat general. There are times when I divert my attention to the janky Borborygmos deck over the cutthroat Narset deck because the narset player got mana screwed while the Borborygmos player went T1 sol ring and then had borborygmos out on turn 4. But more often than not you will be saving your tuck for the cutthroat general.
Will I play tuck on Zada if I feel threatened? Sure. But the question isn't whether or not she's threatening in a void. It's whether or not she's more threatening than the other threats on the board. So more often than not, that Derevi WILL get more attention from me than Zada.
Again, red and white were the best colors at tucking, so it's not like tuck just destroyed them with no benefits, because they also had the tools to do it back at other players. And keep in mind that black and green have, AFAIK, no cards that tuck creatures, and blue's tuck is mostly just spell crumple/hinder and didn't go in every blue deck even pre-nerf. So if boros player A is getting his general tucked, chances are it's being cast by boros player B, and so boros player A can do it back at him if needed.
And again, it is ignoring the fact that, more often than not, the boros player had the weaker general/deck than other people on the table, and thus their general had a lower chance of being tucked in the first place.
Repeating for emphasis...
The main cards that "countered" tuck are tutors, which are inherently powerful in EDH even without tuck because tutors in a 100-card singleton format are stupidly good. You are playing tutors like demonic tutor and survival of the fittest even post-tuck nerf. It sucks that their high power level causes them to be played by tons of people, but that's not the fault of tuck, that's the fault of the RC not banning those powerful, if not broken, tutors.
Basically, at the very least I would need to see demonic tutor and survival of the fittest banned before I even remotely consider that "requiring" BG to be full of tutor effects to be considered a negative side effect of tuck. Even then, there are tons of other strong tutors like green sun's zenith and chord of calling that see play in nearly every green deck even post-nerf that the overall idea that tuck would "force" players to use these cards is silly.
enough draw power to get your general back quickly =/= draw your deck
Brainstorm, dig through time, etc. are great ways to dig back to your general. Intuition cna also get your general back (I believe the opponent can put your general into your graveyard and then you can use a replacement effect to get it back in your command zone, please let me know if this is incorrect).
First, the person I responded to stated that "Decks in EDH are already so reliant on sacrifice outlets. Tuck made cards like Phyrexian Altar or Ashnod's Altar necessary in every single deck". He implied that many decks would be playing some number of sac outlets even without tuck, thus I operated under that assumption.
Now taking your response here separately, sac outlets had additional benefits outside of avoiding tuck. You would use a sac outlet to dodge...
- exile removal on your non-general creatures (e.g. someone swords to plowshares your karmic guide and you really want to keep KG around).
- mind control effects.
- things like oblivion ring.
- clone effects (extremely potent against clone effects that target such as rite of replication, but if you had an idea of what your opponent wanted to clone, you could sac certain creatures like your Terastodon before the clone resolved so the clone would have to copy something else. You technically wouldn't likely sac your general in response to a clone since the general for your deck is more likely to benefit you than the opponent having a copy of your general, but that doesn't change the fact that sac outlets had this purpose)
This is also not including the fact that there are cards you could add into your deck that the deck initially may not need a sac outlet, but could benefit from said sac outlet with the addition of that card (e.g. in my Zedruu deck I have Academy Rector, and I have High market in the deck even post-nerf because of it, and I would certainly have high market in the deck pre-nerf as having Zedruu avoid tuck for whatever reason would be nice).
WUBRGProgenitus
URGMaelstrom Wanderer
WUBOloro, Ageless Ascetic
WURZedruu, the Greathearted
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher ($100)
GWUDerevi, Empyrial Tactician ($100)
UGKruphix, God of Horizons ($100)(retired)UTalrand, Sky Summoner (French 1v1, $100)
The lack of tuck makes low-CMC commanders particularly difficult to deal with. As just one example, in my Karlov deck I would be much more careful with Karlov if I had to worry about him being tucked. In contrast, I just shrug at him getting hit by a wipe or targeted removal, because he is so cheap to cast.
I also continue to believe the loss of tuck enables lazy deckbuilding. This opinion is supported by some of the recent comments in this thread.
if your group enjoys the idea of their generals being tucked as a fun thing, then good on you guys, and im sure your group already houseruled it in. However, it would seem to me and at least the peeps at the local scene here that having your general tucked is one of the least fun things that can happen to them in a game. i can sort of understand why some people like tuck, but it would seem that for most people playing EDH, tuck is a general feel-bad.
if i got the wrong idea from the RC, my bad! i dont wanna be putting words in their mouth, but thats the impression i got anyways.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom