The idea that tuck is limited to two different colors is horible wrong. red though not targeted tuck with the exeption of chaos warp has blanket tuck effects like warp ward. Green has tuck effects for artifacts and enchantments. black is the only one that doesnt have tuck spells.
That Reason should be removed from the RCs list of reasons for tuck
Isn't that like the last actual reason since all the others have been shown to be flimsy?
Probably, if wizards gave black a single tuck spell. They would have zero reasons left
Apparently the last bastion of reasoning is holding pretty well lololol... I will just say that this tuck rule has firmly divided the people who believe in the RC and ones who don't.
Those that were teetering on the edges have definitely chosen their side.
They were either pushed by irrational arguments (accumulated from past loose decisions made by the hierarchy), or strengthened by the belief that more protection (thus power) is given to commanders.
After watching Divergent (as well as its sequel Insugent), I can't help but laugh at the similarity.
I started playing Lin Sivvi, Defiant Hero because I used to play in the San Jose meta which is very competitive and full of tucks and I wanted to play a deck that focused on my commander. The meta has devolved into decks that don't need a commander to win and 80% of the cards are all the same. When I started EDH I really liked the idea of a commander and building around it using color identity. That is just not possible in a competitive tuck meta. Sure, some obnoxious commanders who only had "one sure fire way to stop" will be abusable, but that isn't the problem. I'd also like to state that I'm firmly in the camp that EDH is a competitive game and the idea that standard, legacy, and modern players have that it is a casual format are just flat wrong. This is a good change for the format.
So, since Hinder is now basically a glorified Cancel, I'm wondering if Dissipate would be a better lateral move for overall value. Thoughts?
It is a 100% improvement. Exile is only ever better than back in deck now.
When it comes down to reasons to run tuck it is essentially down to considerations due to versatility of targeting as well as some really obscure decks where putting creatures back in deck is better than the graveyard. Things like Terminus can still be relevant in some decks such as toolbox decks where the commander might tutor for creatures. In a Captain Sisay deck for instance you might still want to run tuck wraths because you can retrieve anything you tuck while still essentially wrathing the board. Tuck wraths can still be useful as well vs indestructable / regen / reanimator strategies.
I started playing Lin Sivvi, Defiant Hero because I used to play in the San Jose meta which is very competitive and full of tucks and I wanted to play a deck that focused on my commander. The meta has devolved into decks that don't need a commander to win and 80% of the cards are all the same. When I started EDH I really liked the idea of a commander and building around it using color identity. That is just not possible in a competitive tuck meta. Sure, some obnoxious commanders who only had "one sure fire way to stop" will be abusable, but that isn't the problem. I'd also like to state that I'm firmly in the camp that EDH is a competitive game and the idea that standard, legacy, and modern players have that it is a casual format are just flat wrong. This is a good change for the format.
Similarly there were a lot of commanders I refused to play just because of the colors and the lack of means to recover from tuck. I got into playing rebels for more or less the same reason. I play them now because I love the deck but my original reason to play them was similar.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
So, since Hinder is now basically a glorified Cancel, I'm wondering if Dissipate would be a better lateral move for overall value. Thoughts?
It is a 100% improvement. Exile is only ever better than back in deck now.
When it comes down to reasons to run tuck it is essentially down to considerations due to versatility of targeting as well as some really obscure decks where putting creatures back in deck is better than the graveyard. Things like Terminus can still be relevant in some decks such as toolbox decks where the commander might tutor for creatures. In a Captain Sisay deck for instance you might still want to run tuck wraths because you can retrieve anything you tuck while still essentially wrathing the board. Tuck wraths can still be useful as well vs indestructable / regen / reanimator strategies.
I started playing Lin Sivvi, Defiant Hero because I used to play in the San Jose meta which is very competitive and full of tucks and I wanted to play a deck that focused on my commander. The meta has devolved into decks that don't need a commander to win and 80% of the cards are all the same. When I started EDH I really liked the idea of a commander and building around it using color identity. That is just not possible in a competitive tuck meta. Sure, some obnoxious commanders who only had "one sure fire way to stop" will be abusable, but that isn't the problem. I'd also like to state that I'm firmly in the camp that EDH is a competitive game and the idea that standard, legacy, and modern players have that it is a casual format are just flat wrong. This is a good change for the format.
Similarly there were a lot of commanders I refused to play just because of the colors and the lack of means to recover from tuck. I got into playing rebels for more or less the same reason. I play them now because I love the deck but my original reason to play them was similar.
WheN it came to people tucking my general, I either didn't care or it was animar. Tuck was always vital though to keep decks like captain sisay, animat, maelstrom wanderer, and and other ones from being out of control. I believe in the RC I just believe this was a lack of good judgement on their part. After all who is using manifest in edh?
WheN it came to people tucking my general, I either didn't care or it was animar. Tuck was always vital though to keep decks like captain sisay, animat, maelstrom wanderer, and and other ones from being out of control. I believe in the RC I just believe this was a lack of good judgement on their part. After all who is using manifest in edh?
I dont think they were worried about manifest so much as asking what it was that constituted being a commander. If your commander got tucked and randomly did get manifested how would you track commander damage at that time was the question. When it comes to morph commanders they know the source of where you casted it from so essentially the whereabouts of your commander was always known. I could be wrong but I believe morphed commanders are supposed to do commander damage still (I could be wrong but thats how my meta always handled it).
It was more of a hypothetical question than one I suspect anyone really expected to see occur.
As for commander centric commanders, stealing them is still quite powerful. I have also had some success just killing them into oblivion. If you kill someone's commander 3 times, it generally hurts to try to continue casting them. It has in fact made a lot of the commander centric commanders better but that was sort of the expected result.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
As for commander centric commanders, stealing them is still quite powerful. I have also had some success just killing them into oblivion. If you kill someone's commander 3 times, it generally hurts to try to continue casting them. It has in fact made a lot of the commander centric commanders better but that was sort of the expected result.
This is half the reason I love low-cost Commanders like Saffi Eriksdotter and Glissa, the Traitor so much, as there are so many Commanders that adding even 4 to their costs can make them either unplayable/unprotectable, or such a negative tempo swing that you can't keep up with the rest of the table if you play it. I even picked Saffi as one of my first Commander decks because her built-in sacrifice effect would let me avoid the tuck spells that people/articles were advising me against at the time. I'm glad tuck led me to Saffi, but I'm perfectly happy to see it go if it makes the most unique and rules-laden aspect of the format more uniform.
I could be wrong but I believe morphed commanders are supposed to do commander damage still (I could be wrong but thats how my meta always handled it).
I have also had some success just killing them into oblivion. If you kill someone's commander 3 times, it generally hurts to try to continue casting them. It has in fact made a lot of the commander centric commanders better but that was sort of the expected result.
This does highlight one issue the tuck rule exaggerates - how good ramp is. Ramp's always been one of the best strategies in commander, and you'll see that the commanders that care less about being killed repeatedly (azusa, maelstrom wanderer) tend to be ramp focused. often, like those two, they functionally pay for their commander tax by ramping for free when they come into play. Similarly exaggerates how good Derevi's ability to bypass the commander tax is.
I notice in my Ephara and Skullbriar decks, neither of which ramps much to speak of, the commander being whacked even once is a big deal.
That said, I do prefer it how it is, but MW has got to be ridiculous.
The idea that tuck is limited to two different colors is horible wrong. red though not targeted tuck with the exeption of chaos warp has blanket tuck effects like warp ward. Green has tuck effects for artifacts and enchantments. black is the only one that doesnt have tuck spells.
That Reason should be removed from the RCs list of reasons for tuck
Isn't that like the last actual reason since all the others have been shown to be flimsy?
Probably, if wizards gave black a single tuck spell. They would have zero reasons left
The idea that tuck is limited to two different colors is horible wrong. red though not targeted tuck with the exeption of chaos warp has blanket tuck effects like warp ward. Green has tuck effects for artifacts and enchantments. black is the only one that doesnt have tuck spells.
That Reason should be removed from the RCs list of reasons for tuck
lol, your rebuttal is what is "horible wrong". While other colors have a smidgen of tuck, it is absolutely true that white/blue had the lion's share. Outside of those colors Chaos Warp was really the only great general-tucking option. Warp World kinda counts...but is a very different beast than the precision strikes in blue/white, requiring you to either build around it or risk getting hosed by its randomness just to fight a general. OTOH in UW you have Hinder, Crumple, Spin, Staff, Stalker, Condemn, Light, Terminus, Oblation...am I missing any?
Now it is absolutely fair to say "who cares? Some colors get it, others don't, just like lots of other things" and have a reasonable debate centered on that line of argument. But acting like the whole point is invalid basically because Chaos Warp exists just makes you look like you are grasping for straws.
WheN it came to people tucking my general, I either didn't care or it was animar. Tuck was always vital though to keep decks like captain sisay, animat, maelstrom wanderer, and and other ones from being out of control. I believe in the RC I just believe this was a lack of good judgement on their part. After all who is using manifest in edh?
I dont think they were worried about manifest so much as asking what it was that constituted being a commander. If your commander got tucked and randomly did get manifested how would you track commander damage at that time was the question. When it comes to morph commanders they know the source of where you casted it from so essentially the whereabouts of your commander was always known. I could be wrong but I believe morphed commanders are supposed to do commander damage still (I could be wrong but thats how my meta always handled it).
I feel like the simplest solution would be to simply add a rule saying "Damage from facedown creatures can't count as commander damage." Yes, this is a reversal of how the rules currently work, albeit only for a corner case most like to occur with Ixidron. But the rule that a facedown creature can deal commander damage is not intuitive, in that a new EDH player will typically have no reasonable guess as to what happens when it comes up unless told specifically what the rules say. I would say it's anti-intuitive, i.e. the initial instinct of most new EDH players familiar with standard Magic rules would be wrong if they relied, reasonably, on how creatures whose rules text include lifelink or deathtouch work when they are facedown.
By simply negating commander damage from facedown creatures, I think you would solve all extant issues with having a facedown commander. Your deck is already built to its color identity and that can't change during the game. Facedown creatures are always revealed when they move to another zone, so there is always the opportunity to return a facedown commander to the command zone when that happens.
I think the style of "your commander is always a commander, even if it's been transformed and inverted and tied to a rock" is more consistent and flavorful than making commander-ness a static ability that can be turned off.
Now that I think about it like that I can appreciate the flavor behind the tuck change more. I still like the tactics behind the old style, though.
I just like to add that any commander that has (built in) haste just gotten better, especially those with beefy bodies. Maelstrom Wanderer, Thraximundar and Karrthus are the prime examples. I've played games with Karrthus and it's certainly frustrating, even with the card adjustments.
Yet I thought only Gods and the pantheon legends (Azusa, Azami, Zur, etc) were the only cards to be concerned about.
I just like to add that any commander that has (built in) haste just gotten better, especially those with beefy bodies. Maelstrom Wanderer, Thraximundar and Karrthus are the prime examples. I've played games with Karrthus and it's certainly frustrating, even with the card adjustments.
Yet I thought only Gods and the pantheon legends (Azusa, Azami, Zur, etc) were the only cards to be concerned about.
I'm just going to back this up. Back before the legend rule change my jund deck was headed by Karrthus (and tuck was still not a widely-known strategy). It had such inevitability behind it. Incidentally, that type of inevitability is exacerbated by Derevi and that's why people feel like the tuck rule made her crazy as well.
lol, your rebuttal is what is "horible wrong". While other colors have a smidgen of tuck, it is absolutely true that white/blue had the lion's share. Outside of those colors Chaos Warp was really the only great general-tucking option. Warp World kinda counts...but is a very different beast than the precision strikes in blue/white, requiring you to either build around it or risk getting hosed by its randomness just to fight a general. OTOH in UW you have Hinder, Crumple, Spin, Staff, Stalker, Condemn, Light, Terminus, Oblation...am I missing any?
I'd count Bant Charm too, since you have to be playing both blue and white to use it.
I haven't read all the above responses, but I feel like this is kind of silly. I've literally never, ever felt the need to play white or blue in order to have access to tuck effects. I've also never, ever felt the need to include more tutors in a deck to find my potentially-tucked commander.
I feel like tuck provides a nice check-and-balance to commanders like Uril, the Miststalker who are otherwise hard to deal with and put a really fast clock on opponents. Play around it, or get borked.
I haven't read all the above responses, but I feel like this is kind of silly. I've literally never, ever felt the need to play white or blue in order to have access to tuck effects. I've also never, ever felt the need to include more tutors in a deck to find my potentially-tucked commander.
I feel like tuck provides a nice check-and-balance to commanders like Uril, the Miststalker who are otherwise hard to deal with and put a really fast clock on opponents. Play around it, or get borked.
1. I agree that tuck doesn't really pull you towards blue/white, it is just an exagerratedly strong effect in the format that happens to be in those colors.
2. As someone who has felt the need to play tutors to counter tuck I promise you that point isn't silly. I hate playing tutors in EDH, goes completely against the kind of experience I am working for in the format. But...with tuck around there was definitely a tug to play them when I was building a deck that was heavily dependent on its general.
let me bring up a alternative. The spells that tuck a commander instead exile with time counters say a limited amount of turns. For example 2 or 3 turns ( whichever MTG rules deems in time period ) . This would allow some limited removal instead of flat out banning a tuck.
let me bring up a alternative. The spells that tuck a commander instead exile with time counters say a limited amount of turns. For example 2 or 3 turns ( whichever MTG rules deems in time period ) . This would allow some limited removal instead of flat out banning a tuck.
Sadly this kind of complexity is forbidden by the modern RC. You no longer have to be Smarter Than a 5th Grader to play EDH. The RC has explicitly pointed out a desire towards lower-complexity and more intuitive play with as few circumstantial rules as possible. In all honesty, I can't say I'm a fan of your suggestion but the RC has made it clear about wanting to avoid anything resembling what you mentioned.
(As a side note, I fail to see how installing an additional circumstantial rule that prevents 'tuck' spells from functioning as the card describes is following their professed goal, but that may simply be my failure.)
I haven't had much appreciation for the RC ever since having spent time with Sheldon and their rules changes have ceased to surprise me. I truthfully believe that making an official break between EDH and "Commander", allowing the RC to govern EDH all they wanted (it's a format they, sorta, created) and allowing WotC to directly control Commander seems like a necessary change at some point. What happens when WotC's Commander 2016 product line includes copies of Spell Crumple and Hinder, only for excited purchases to realize that they're strict downgrades from Dissipate now. This has the same sort of problematic feel as the notion concerning Sol Ring: if it were banned by the RC but WotC had product releasing soon that included a Sol Ring in all the new commander decks, can you imagine the problems? "I want to play my commander precon", "sure, just take out the Sol Ring - Oh, and due to the new no-tuck Rule, Derevi was banned so you need a new commander" etc. This has been dramatized for effect, but the point is that if WotC is printing cards for EDH/Commander like Spell Crumple and Derevi with the idea that they both exist within a meta, it should be on WotC to decide how the rules for that meta adapt with time. The RC might be a great place for WotC to hire people to be on their Commander-oriented product team, but this is just one more example of how the RC's actions can be considered by many as uninformed and are obviously disconnected in a fundamental way from the producers of the product they're trying to rule.
I truthfully believe that making an official break between EDH and "Commander", allowing the RC to govern EDH all they wanted (it's a format they, sorta, created) and allowing WotC to directly control Commander seems like a necessary change at some point.
Well said.
EDH and Commander are not the same game. WotC is attempting to capitalize on a community driven experience.
EDH and Commander are not the same game. WotC is attempting to capitalize on a community driven experience.
I want to voice my agreement to this. I've always made sure to carefully use the correct word depending on the situation. If I'm talking about a game where people are playing to win, I call it Commander. If I'm talking about a game where the goal is an arbitrary fun metric that requires some level of durdling and intentional nerfing, I call it EDH. Neither is necessarily right or wrong, but simply a personal preference.
EDH and Commander are the same. Attempting to create meaningless splits in the format due to petty (at honestly hypocritical) ideological differences is exactly the opposite of what EDH stands for.
It's really pathetic that people seem to think that WotC is attempting to steal the format or the RC is somehow corrupt. Grow up all of you.
EDH and Commander are not the same game. WotC is attempting to capitalize on a community driven experience.
I want to voice my agreement to this. I've always made sure to carefully use the correct word depending on the situation. If I'm talking about a game where people are playing to win, I call it Commander. If I'm talking about a game where the goal is an arbitrary fun metric that requires some level of durdling and intentional nerfing, I call it EDH. Neither is necessarily right or wrong, but simply a personal preference.
I am a player that played EDH years before Commander began in 2011. I played when Channel, Fastbond and other equally powerful, if not more domineering, cards were legal. There have always been two factions: Play to Win and Play to...have fun (Casual, if one wants to put it that way). This is true at the kitchen table, shop, etc.
Keep brewing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Probably, if wizards gave black a single tuck spell. They would have zero reasons left
Those that were teetering on the edges have definitely chosen their side.
They were either pushed by irrational arguments (accumulated from past loose decisions made by the hierarchy), or strengthened by the belief that more protection (thus power) is given to commanders.
After watching Divergent (as well as its sequel Insugent), I can't help but laugh at the similarity.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
are divergent and insugent internet handles of peeps on mtgsalvation? i can't find their comments if so.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
It is a 100% improvement. Exile is only ever better than back in deck now.
When it comes down to reasons to run tuck it is essentially down to considerations due to versatility of targeting as well as some really obscure decks where putting creatures back in deck is better than the graveyard. Things like Terminus can still be relevant in some decks such as toolbox decks where the commander might tutor for creatures. In a Captain Sisay deck for instance you might still want to run tuck wraths because you can retrieve anything you tuck while still essentially wrathing the board. Tuck wraths can still be useful as well vs indestructable / regen / reanimator strategies.
Similarly there were a lot of commanders I refused to play just because of the colors and the lack of means to recover from tuck. I got into playing rebels for more or less the same reason. I play them now because I love the deck but my original reason to play them was similar.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
WheN it came to people tucking my general, I either didn't care or it was animar. Tuck was always vital though to keep decks like captain sisay, animat, maelstrom wanderer, and and other ones from being out of control. I believe in the RC I just believe this was a lack of good judgement on their part. After all who is using manifest in edh?
I dont think they were worried about manifest so much as asking what it was that constituted being a commander. If your commander got tucked and randomly did get manifested how would you track commander damage at that time was the question. When it comes to morph commanders they know the source of where you casted it from so essentially the whereabouts of your commander was always known. I could be wrong but I believe morphed commanders are supposed to do commander damage still (I could be wrong but thats how my meta always handled it).
It was more of a hypothetical question than one I suspect anyone really expected to see occur.
As for commander centric commanders, stealing them is still quite powerful. I have also had some success just killing them into oblivion. If you kill someone's commander 3 times, it generally hurts to try to continue casting them. It has in fact made a lot of the commander centric commanders better but that was sort of the expected result.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
This is half the reason I love low-cost Commanders like Saffi Eriksdotter and Glissa, the Traitor so much, as there are so many Commanders that adding even 4 to their costs can make them either unplayable/unprotectable, or such a negative tempo swing that you can't keep up with the rest of the table if you play it. I even picked Saffi as one of my first Commander decks because her built-in sacrifice effect would let me avoid the tuck spells that people/articles were advising me against at the time. I'm glad tuck led me to Saffi, but I'm perfectly happy to see it go if it makes the most unique and rules-laden aspect of the format more uniform.
RRR - Bosh's School of Hard(cover) Knocks
This does highlight one issue the tuck rule exaggerates - how good ramp is. Ramp's always been one of the best strategies in commander, and you'll see that the commanders that care less about being killed repeatedly (azusa, maelstrom wanderer) tend to be ramp focused. often, like those two, they functionally pay for their commander tax by ramping for free when they come into play. Similarly exaggerates how good Derevi's ability to bypass the commander tax is.
I notice in my Ephara and Skullbriar decks, neither of which ramps much to speak of, the commander being whacked even once is a big deal.
That said, I do prefer it how it is, but MW has got to be ridiculous.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Rishadan Pawnshop + Enslave
lol, your rebuttal is what is "horible wrong". While other colors have a smidgen of tuck, it is absolutely true that white/blue had the lion's share. Outside of those colors Chaos Warp was really the only great general-tucking option. Warp World kinda counts...but is a very different beast than the precision strikes in blue/white, requiring you to either build around it or risk getting hosed by its randomness just to fight a general. OTOH in UW you have Hinder, Crumple, Spin, Staff, Stalker, Condemn, Light, Terminus, Oblation...am I missing any?
Now it is absolutely fair to say "who cares? Some colors get it, others don't, just like lots of other things" and have a reasonable debate centered on that line of argument. But acting like the whole point is invalid basically because Chaos Warp exists just makes you look like you are grasping for straws.
I feel like the simplest solution would be to simply add a rule saying "Damage from facedown creatures can't count as commander damage." Yes, this is a reversal of how the rules currently work, albeit only for a corner case most like to occur with Ixidron. But the rule that a facedown creature can deal commander damage is not intuitive, in that a new EDH player will typically have no reasonable guess as to what happens when it comes up unless told specifically what the rules say. I would say it's anti-intuitive, i.e. the initial instinct of most new EDH players familiar with standard Magic rules would be wrong if they relied, reasonably, on how creatures whose rules text include lifelink or deathtouch work when they are facedown.
By simply negating commander damage from facedown creatures, I think you would solve all extant issues with having a facedown commander. Your deck is already built to its color identity and that can't change during the game. Facedown creatures are always revealed when they move to another zone, so there is always the opportunity to return a facedown commander to the command zone when that happens.
Now that I think about it like that I can appreciate the flavor behind the tuck change more. I still like the tactics behind the old style, though.
Yet I thought only Gods and the pantheon legends (Azusa, Azami, Zur, etc) were the only cards to be concerned about.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
I'm just going to back this up. Back before the legend rule change my jund deck was headed by Karrthus (and tuck was still not a widely-known strategy). It had such inevitability behind it. Incidentally, that type of inevitability is exacerbated by Derevi and that's why people feel like the tuck rule made her crazy as well.
I'd count Bant Charm too, since you have to be playing both blue and white to use it.
I feel like tuck provides a nice check-and-balance to commanders like Uril, the Miststalker who are otherwise hard to deal with and put a really fast clock on opponents. Play around it, or get borked.
R.I.P. Sundering Titan (6/20/12) and Braids, Cabal Minion (9/12/14)
1. I agree that tuck doesn't really pull you towards blue/white, it is just an exagerratedly strong effect in the format that happens to be in those colors.
2. As someone who has felt the need to play tutors to counter tuck I promise you that point isn't silly. I hate playing tutors in EDH, goes completely against the kind of experience I am working for in the format. But...with tuck around there was definitely a tug to play them when I was building a deck that was heavily dependent on its general.
Sadly this kind of complexity is forbidden by the modern RC. You no longer have to be Smarter Than a 5th Grader to play EDH. The RC has explicitly pointed out a desire towards lower-complexity and more intuitive play with as few circumstantial rules as possible. In all honesty, I can't say I'm a fan of your suggestion but the RC has made it clear about wanting to avoid anything resembling what you mentioned.
(As a side note, I fail to see how installing an additional circumstantial rule that prevents 'tuck' spells from functioning as the card describes is following their professed goal, but that may simply be my failure.)
I haven't had much appreciation for the RC ever since having spent time with Sheldon and their rules changes have ceased to surprise me. I truthfully believe that making an official break between EDH and "Commander", allowing the RC to govern EDH all they wanted (it's a format they, sorta, created) and allowing WotC to directly control Commander seems like a necessary change at some point. What happens when WotC's Commander 2016 product line includes copies of Spell Crumple and Hinder, only for excited purchases to realize that they're strict downgrades from Dissipate now. This has the same sort of problematic feel as the notion concerning Sol Ring: if it were banned by the RC but WotC had product releasing soon that included a Sol Ring in all the new commander decks, can you imagine the problems? "I want to play my commander precon", "sure, just take out the Sol Ring - Oh, and due to the new no-tuck Rule, Derevi was banned so you need a new commander" etc. This has been dramatized for effect, but the point is that if WotC is printing cards for EDH/Commander like Spell Crumple and Derevi with the idea that they both exist within a meta, it should be on WotC to decide how the rules for that meta adapt with time. The RC might be a great place for WotC to hire people to be on their Commander-oriented product team, but this is just one more example of how the RC's actions can be considered by many as uninformed and are obviously disconnected in a fundamental way from the producers of the product they're trying to rule.
Well said.
EDH and Commander are not the same game. WotC is attempting to capitalize on a community driven experience.
| B Erebos, God of VampiresB | GYeva SmashG | RBosh ArtifactsR | GURAnimar +1 BeatsGUR | RBVial's Secret Hot SauceRB | UBRNekusar, Draw if you DareUBR | RGBDarigaaz'z DragonsRGB | GBSlimeFEETGB | UBOn-Hit LazavUB | URBrudiclad's Artificer InventionsUR | GUBMuldrotha's ElementalsGUB | WUGKestia's EnchantmentsWUG | GUTatyova - Draw, Land, Go!GU | WGArahbo's EquipmentWG | BUWVarina's ZOMBIE HORDESBUW | WLyra's Angelic SalvationW | WBChurch of TeysaWB | UAzami...WizardsU
cEDH: [G(U/R) Animar] - [(U/B)(G/W) Redless Wheels] - [(G/U)(W/B) Redless Pod] - [(B/G)W Ghave Metapod]
It's really pathetic that people seem to think that WotC is attempting to steal the format or the RC is somehow corrupt. Grow up all of you.
I am a player that played EDH years before Commander began in 2011. I played when Channel, Fastbond and other equally powerful, if not more domineering, cards were legal. There have always been two factions: Play to Win and Play to...have fun (Casual, if one wants to put it that way). This is true at the kitchen table, shop, etc.
Keep brewing.