I DO feel like cards like Shadowborn Apostle and Relentless Rats are against the flavor of the format. The fact that it's been legal for as long as it has and that some have embraced it, means that those cards have value as multiples are needed. If they were banned this far into the format's life, people would lose entire decks on the decision to ban them. It's not something that the RC would ever do.
I don't get this. Cards break the rules all the time. It's like saying Platinum Angel shouldn't prevent one from losing because it's against the rules. I understand if you thought that Wishes are ban worthy for some other reason (too powerful or too obnoxious, for example). But "against the flavor of the format" just doesn't seem like a real reason to me.
My intention isn't to be a fearmonger, but to stress that the potential for abuse is present. The potential for game length to be increased is very much present for sideboarding. Again, I will reference my previous points that cards like Sylvan Primordial and Prophet of Kruphix were banned; not for the fair play that they saw, but because of how they were abused.
But that was kind of the problem with Prime Time and Profit in that even trying to play them fairly often resulted in problematic situations. I'm not sure the same is true for Wishes. It might be, but I also think most players could use a Wishboard as a Swiss-army-knife of answers to call upon when the board gets out of control. Someone's got a Purphoros, God of the Forge that's about to kill everyone? Wish for an answer. Doubling Season make a literal bajillion dudes? Wish for an answer. A Boseiju'dGenesis Wave for 50 on the stack? Wish for a nope. If these are the kind of things people choose to do with Wishes, I'd say let them be free.
Sideboards, in general, have the potential to drag out games more than anything else, which is effectively a requirement to allow wishes to work. Deciding which card(s) out of 99 can be swapped out post game 1 or beyond depending on which decks switch and who is playing what... the odds that sideboards aren't used how they are for constructed formats is unlikely. Dragging out games at an LGS, let alone at a kitchen table, doesn't seem worth them being official.
I'll be honest, I've never actually seen anyone sideboard, even when the optional sideboard rule was around. I seriously doubt people would start boarding against specific generals pre-game (unless said general is extremely problematic in it's own right) if Wishes could be used.
Mycosynth lattice and maybe some other artifacts for Karn, since I am planning on playing him regardless of wishboards or no.
Other than that, I'd be unlikely to run many if any wishes in any lists so I can't say beyond that. Paying 2+ extra mana on any spell that wasn't important enough to be main decked seems pretty bad to me. Way more than 2 mana if I also had to actually tutor the wish first... which also means I wouldn't put anything particularly important in the wishboard.
Platinum Angel doesn't break the rules, it sets a static effect on the board. Don't "trumps" Do. Ex. If Teferi is out and you have Yeva, Nature's Herald out, you still can't play your creatures at instant speed. I do believe that wishes will prove to be more troublesome than they're worth. If there was a sensible way to make them work without causing problems, overly complicated erratas or the inclusion of sideboards, the RC likely would have found a way to do it.
My gripe with the cards like Relentless Rats and co. is more about it being an exception to the rule that allows it to break singleton. I don't like it, but I understand that it's realistically the only way Rats exists as a tribe, and makes budget mill a thing.
While sideboards can exist in the scenario that you mentioned, cards you mentioned could, and likely should see mainboard play (ex. Fade into Antiquity) as removal is almost always relevant when it has more than one mode. The potential for dick-ish things already exists in running cards like Choke, Tsunami, etc., but the potential to run them in a side/wishboard is literally inviting feel-bads. All it will likely take is a handful of people in a play group or LGS to do it, before it becomes commonplace to do the same thing. After all, if you're at a disadvantage to not, then you're likely to adopt what puts you on an even playing field. Some people also don't have the luxury of an LGS, or multiple potential groups to play at so switching in the event of "adapt or leave" isn't always available.
I would argue that sideboards aren't as big of a thing because they're not official and people don't expect to be able to use them regularly. The arms race is a thing. Especially at an LGS for events - if there's a buy in and a prize is to be won, people play to win.
The rule now is as hard as any in EDH.
You cannot (get a card from 'outside the game') without prior approval of the group.
This is exactly the same as:
You cannot (play a banned card card) without prior approval of the group.
Yeah but that is a soft rule. A hard rule would be actually giving them purpose or banning it. Rule 13 creates a soft rule for them.
To you the ban list is a soft rule because people can change it prior to a game starting?
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.
Platinum Angel doesn't break the rules, it sets a static effect on the board.
...which overwrites a rule. Instead of losing for having 0 or less life as a state-based action, you simply don't. So I don't really see the difference between that and a Wish, which lets you access cards you normally couldn't. Maybe Future Sight would have been a better example? There are a ton of cards that allow you to do things you otherwise wouldn't be allowed to. I don't really see why Wishes get singled out for 'breaking the rules'.
While sideboards can exist in the scenario that you mentioned, cards you mentioned could, and likely should see mainboard play (ex. Fade into Antiquity) as removal is almost always relevant when it has more than one mode.
Fade into Antiquity is a pretty mediocre card. It's good in niche situations, such as killing a God or a Darksteel Forge or something similar, but for the most part I would never maindeck it. I'd rather maindeck something like Nature's Claim because it is both cheaper and instant speed, and it also has the important upside of being able to destroy a T1 Sol Ring.
The potential for dick-ish things already exists in running cards like Choke, Tsunami, etc., but the potential to run them in a side/wishboard is literally inviting feel-bads. All it will likely take is a handful of people in a play group or LGS to do it, before it becomes commonplace to do the same thing. After all, if you're at a disadvantage to not, then you're likely to adopt what puts you on an even playing field. Some people also don't have the luxury of an LGS, or multiple potential groups to play at so switching in the event of "adapt or leave" isn't always available.
Again this just kind of feels like fear mongering. It's like saying "one person played a Tazri-Chain deck so then everyone had to build one". At what point do we start expecting the social contract to do something? If one or two players are playing decks above the curve or are otherwise playing in an antisocial way, the default response shouldn't be to match them in their antisocial-ness. It should be to say something like "hey we're not really having fun could you maybe play a weaker/more fun deck?" This idea that EDH is an arms-race is sadly one I've seen espoused before, and I simply refuse to believe it. The logical outcome it leads to is literally everyone playing cEDH decks, and I've never seen that happen.
Especially at an LGS for events - if there's a buy in and a prize is to be won, people play to win.
EDH with buy-ins and prizes is hardly EDH at all. "Commander is a Magic:The Gathering format which emphasises multiplayer play, social interactions, interesting games, and creative deckbuilding." It's literally the first line on the official site. You may notice 'winning' isn't on that list. So it would be a bit foolish to use cEDH players as a reason to not do something when they're not really the target audience to begin with.
I step away from this thread for a couple days and all heck breaks loose....
1) I would not be in favor of having Wishes get cards from Exile as some sort of compromise. The whole point of this exercise is to allow Wishes to function as close as possible within the rules of the game and cards in Exile are clearly not the same as cards "outside the game". I understand the idea of wanting to re-establish lost functionality, but that is a slippery slope.
2) Games of Commander are unsanctioned, so I don't know why the RC has to have any rulings on what a sideboard is. The concept of a sideboard is unnecessary for Commander play. The idea of people revealing their commanders and people siding in cards before a game starts seems awfully unnecessary and kinda lame, so I understand why people wouldn't want sideboards. But you don't need a sideboard for a wish to work; you just need to define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game". I will repeat this again; if calling it a Wishboard is somehow problematic because of a Wishboard's association with a sideboard for sanctioned, competitive play, then call it something different.
3) The biggest reason that I am opposed to the concept of "If you don't like Rule 13, then see Rule 0 and ask your playgroup" is that for every other class of cards that might come up under Rule 0, the default is that they are legal and allowed. We don't have a rule that says "Cards that destroy more than two lands do nothing in a game of Commander.", we ask before we start whether people are playing Mass-LD or not and go from there. We could do the same thing with Stax cards, infinite combos, extra turn cards, or whatever players might find objectionable, but the default is that these cards are legal and do exactly what they say they do. For some reason, Wishes are treated differently.
4) The biggest reasons why Wishes are treated differently has nothing to do with most of the reasons people bring up in this thread. The biggest reason is that the Oracle Card Rulings for Wishes are totally wishy-washy on what "outside the game" should mean for non-sanctioned play. The more I think about it, the more it makes a certain degree of sense for the RC to be equally vague on the subject. I just think that we have enough smart people in the room to figure this out so that we can fix this issue. And if it comes down to all the smart people coming together and saying that this issue is either not worth solving, unsolvable, or the issue are insurmountable, then so be it. I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker yet.
5) Someone had the great idea of posting actual potential wishboards for people to look at so that we can talk about the practical impact of what we are talking about here. I had a similar idea to post a few 10-card piles so that we could have the discussion; If a player came into a game asking to use a Wish and offered to show you their stack of cards that they have set aside for that wish, would you allow it? In another thread, I proposed the following as a wishboard for my Bosh, Iron Golem deck.
I'll post a few more wishboards later this week when I have some time to actually think about what I would want to play (I'm all about the hypothetical exercise). This will at least get some conversation going.
2) Games of Commander are unsanctioned, so I don't know why the RC has to have any rulings on what a sideboard is. The concept of a sideboard is unnecessary for Commander play. The idea of people revealing their commanders and people siding in cards before a game starts seems awfully unnecessary and kinda lame, so I understand why people wouldn't want sideboards. But you don't need a sideboard for a wish to work; you just need to define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game". I will repeat this again; if calling it a Wishboard is somehow problematic because of a Wishboard's association with a sideboard for sanctioned, competitive play, then call it something different.
I seriously doubt it has anything to do with the name. And without a set number of cards, you slide right back into 'how do wishes work outside known groups?'
3) The biggest reason that I am opposed to the concept of "If you don't like Rule 13, then see Rule 0 and ask your playgroup" is that for every other class of cards that might come up under Rule 0, the default is that they are legal and allowed. We don't have a rule that says "Cards that destroy more than two lands do nothing in a game of Commander.", we ask before we start whether people are playing Mass-LD or not and go from there. We could do the same thing with Stax cards, infinite combos, extra turn cards, or whatever players might find objectionable, but the default is that these cards are legal and do exactly what they say they do. For some reason, Wishes are treated differently.
There is also no confusion about how those cards work. Wishes work differently depending on what kind of game it is. Banned cards also do not fall under a separate class.
4) The biggest reasons why Wishes are treated differently has nothing to do with most of the reasons people bring up in this thread. The biggest reason is that the Oracle Card Rulings for Wishes are totally wishy-washy on what "outside the game" should mean for non-sanctioned play. The more I think about it, the more it makes a certain degree of sense for the RC to be equally vague on the subject. I just think that we have enough smart people in the room to figure this out so that we can fix this issue. And if it comes down to all the smart people coming together and saying that this issue is either not worth solving, unsolvable, or the issue are insurmountable, then so be it. I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker yet.
That discussion has clearly been had by the RC, and a decision was made. A certain faction will never like that idea. Much like Hybrid, or Extort.
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.
Each player must have a Wishboard before the game starts.
Each player may choose to not to reveal the contents of their Wishboard to the other players.
A Wishboard must be on the table and visible for all players.
You are not allowed to swap cards between your Deck and Wishboard like it were a sideboard.
Wishboards consist of 10 cards exactly.
Cards in the Wishboard must be within the same Color Identity as your Commander.
The Wishboard and the cards within the Wishboard don't count towards the 100 cards between your deck and commander.
Cards in the Wishboard must be legal for the Commander format by the banlist.
The Wishboard can not have duplicates of cards between itself and your deck unless the card in question is a basic land or a card that specifically says you may have any number (Ex: Relentless Rats).
2) Games of Commander are unsanctioned, so I don't know why the RC has to have any rulings on what a sideboard is. The concept of a sideboard is unnecessary for Commander play. The idea of people revealing their commanders and people siding in cards before a game starts seems awfully unnecessary and kinda lame, so I understand why people wouldn't want sideboards. But you don't need a sideboard for a wish to work; you just need to define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game". I will repeat this again; if calling it a Wishboard is somehow problematic because of a Wishboard's association with a sideboard for sanctioned, competitive play, then call it something different.
I seriously doubt it has anything to do with the name. And without a set number of cards, you slide right back into 'how do wishes work outside known groups?'
Except when people are purposefully misleading others into thinking that a Wishboard is anything other than something to make a Wish work as intended without holding up the game. It has been suggested that allowing sideboards for a Wish somehow implies that people will then be allowed to sideboard before and/or between games, and even though that was the intent of the old "House Rule" or "optional" sideboard rule (that has since been eliminated), that is just not the case here. Either people act confused to intentionally derail the conversation or they really are confused that the two are different. I'm just trying to reiterate that they are two different things.
3) The biggest reason that I am opposed to the concept of "If you don't like Rule 13, then see Rule 0 and ask your playgroup" is that for every other class of cards that might come up under Rule 0, the default is that they are legal and allowed. We don't have a rule that says "Cards that destroy more than two lands do nothing in a game of Commander.", we ask before we start whether people are playing Mass-LD or not and go from there. We could do the same thing with Stax cards, infinite combos, extra turn cards, or whatever players might find objectionable, but the default is that these cards are legal and do exactly what they say they do. For some reason, Wishes are treated differently.
There is also no confusion about how those cards work. Wishes work differently depending on what kind of game it is. Banned cards also do not fall under a separate class.
So once the confusion is cleared up, then we should be all good, right? So let's clear up the confusion. It's not that hard.
4) The biggest reasons why Wishes are treated differently has nothing to do with most of the reasons people bring up in this thread. The biggest reason is that the Oracle Card Rulings for Wishes are totally wishy-washy on what "outside the game" should mean for non-sanctioned play. The more I think about it, the more it makes a certain degree of sense for the RC to be equally vague on the subject. I just think that we have enough smart people in the room to figure this out so that we can fix this issue. And if it comes down to all the smart people coming together and saying that this issue is either not worth solving, unsolvable, or the issue are insurmountable, then so be it. I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker yet.
That discussion has clearly been had by the RC, and a decision was made. A certain faction will never like that idea. Much like Hybrid, or Extort.
There at least are very good reasons for why Hybrid and Extort behave the way they do in Commander; it is based firmly on the rules of the game. The rules state that a Hybrid card is both colors, not one color or the other. The rules state that reminder text has no function. For a format that was created by and is currently run by former judges, I would expect nothing less. People who don't like Hybrid or Extort rulings in Commander are basically asking for format-level errata to allow the cards to work differently than they do (not functionally, but within the rules of Commander which I concede is slightly different). What we are asking for with Wishes is that if they need format-level errata, then let's do it such that they act like their current printed intent.
With all that said, maybe the RC isn't the people we need to be talking to. Perhaps a better way to solve this is to petition WotC to provide a "real" Oracle card ruling for non-sanctioned play. I doubt that the powers-that-be at WotC would directly override to RC, but perhaps there is a way for the Oracle card rulings to be written to solve the problem in a way that doesn't require Rule 13.
Why would i not be able to switch cards between games? There’s nothing stopping you at the moment from doing it, why would that change with wishboards?
This is directed at the people who want to make wishes work so they can actually use them: what cards would you include in your wish boards? (Be as specific as possible)
Actually I might do something like:
Time Spiral (BW)
Massacre (BW)
Seeds of Innocence (BW)
Treasure Cruise (BW)
Enter the Infinite (BW)
Mnemonic Betrayal (BW)
Nexus of Fate (CW)
Misdirection (CW)
Mindbreak Trap (CW)
Omniscience (MA)
And just mix and match them depending on what colors/wishes I’m on.
Edit: Theres actually only deck where I would run Mastermind’s Acquisition, and it would mostly just be a more expensive Burning Wish... there might be some other cards I would slot for it but can not think of any others at the time.
2) Games of Commander are unsanctioned, so I don't know why the RC has to have any rulings on what a sideboard is. The concept of a sideboard is unnecessary for Commander play. The idea of people revealing their commanders and people siding in cards before a game starts seems awfully unnecessary and kinda lame, so I understand why people wouldn't want sideboards. But you don't need a sideboard for a wish to work; you just need to define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game". I will repeat this again; if calling it a Wishboard is somehow problematic because of a Wishboard's association with a sideboard for sanctioned, competitive play, then call it something different.
If you define the parameters in Form of numbers it is a Wishboard, sure we can call it something else to but it functions like one even if you take away the sideboard aspect so you have to have a ruling on what a wishboard is instead of a sideboard which is kinda the same problem.
And even without that you need a special ruling to "define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game".". And I think the easiest ways of doing that is by Sideboard / Wishboard or whatever you would call it, or not set parameters for it at all. If there is another way of doing that (without extending the rules definiton to much(lengthwise)) that I overlooked I would like to hear it.
3) The biggest reason that I am opposed to the concept of "If you don't like Rule 13, then see Rule 0 and ask your playgroup" is that for every other class of cards that might come up under Rule 0, the default is that they are legal and allowed. We don't have a rule that says "Cards that destroy more than two lands do nothing in a game of Commander.", we ask before we start whether people are playing Mass-LD or not and go from there. We could do the same thing with Stax cards, infinite combos, extra turn cards, or whatever players might find objectionable, but the default is that these cards are legal and do exactly what they say they do. For some reason, Wishes are treated differently.
I think in the gist this is also part of Impossibles Main reason for not liking the current rule 13.
As I stated before IMO we already give special treatment to cards be it that it still has a function on box but not one in Game with Battle of wits.
Or WOTC errataing Fractured powerstone. Or even give more funtionality to card groups like Legendary Creatures being able to be in the command zone.
So one more group shouldn't be so different. I personally wouldn't mind Wishboards as general Rule but I see the Issues People have with that, I would mind the grab anything Part or even the grab anything with X parameters part, because of the added searchtime and the bigger silver bullet problem that wishboards already have.
4) The biggest reasons why Wishes are treated differently has nothing to do with most of the reasons people bring up in this thread. The biggest reason is that the Oracle Card Rulings for Wishes are totally wishy-washy on what "outside the game" should mean for non-sanctioned play. The more I think about it, the more it makes a certain degree of sense for the RC to be equally vague on the subject. I just think that we have enough smart people in the room to figure this out so that we can fix this issue. And if it comes down to all the smart people coming together and saying that this issue is either not worth solving, unsolvable, or the issue are insurmountable, then so be it. I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker yet.
I partly agree with that statement even tough it is pretty clearly specified (Card you own from outside the game meaning exactly that) since it is a nonsanctioned event you could technically go home rummage trough your pile of cards get back to the LGS with the card you were looking for and It would be perfectly legal, and that to most would be unacceptable. But WOTC let the people themselves decide what is and what isn't acceptable. But unfortunately the players have different things they demm accepable. Which is why "I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker [for me] yet." is IMO the proper response since for others some of their arguments are true dealbreakers for them. That alone puts me more in the camp of "not worth solving" at least for general settings.
Each player must have a Wishboard before the game starts.
I think even though the format would become mostly like that with WB it should still be may.
Each player may choose to not to reveal the contents of their Wishboard to the other players.
I think this is Implicit as you don't have to show them your Maindeck either.
A Wishboard must be on the table and visible for all players.
Interesting anti cheating tech but I think this isn't needed either, if you feel someone is cheating in casual play you probably won't wanna play with them anyways.
Wishboards consist of 10 cards exactly.
Like the first Rule that will be most likely the standard but would soften to up to 10. (My Old playgroup played with 15)
The Wishboard and the cards within the Wishboard don't count towards the 100 cards between your main deck and commander.
This is implicit for the main deck so not needed there, but it is also implicit that it will count towards (complete) deck construction
All the unmentioned ones seem fine, and seem more or less like the way we did it back then.
Having it be a must instead of a may makes it less wishy-washy. If you don't really want to use a wishboard, just stuff it with basic lands and call it a day.
Forcing the wishboard to be visible on the table just was more of a thing with board games, but anti-cheating works as well.
The exact number is like the first one, makes it less wishy-washy, could also be "anti cheat tech".
Fair enough.
So I took a look at a few other decks to see where I might include Wishes. Just off the top of my head, I'm thinking that Burning Wish, Living Wish, Cunning Wish, Glittering Wish, and maybe Mastermind's Acquisition would be the ones that I would be serious about including. I don't think that I would include Research // Development in my Riku deck, and the others are too expensive for me to really seriously consider.
So I've already shown what [b]Burning Wish[/c] targets I would include for Bosh, so this is what I would do for Cunning Wish in Riku of Two Reflections (with obvious stipulations that I haven't though this out 100% so I might be missing something, but this is the general gist that would cover what I would want to cover).
So once the confusion is cleared up, then we should be all good, right? So let's clear up the confusion. It's not that hard.
I don't see anyone saying it cannot be done. The rules could be made in such a way that wishes would work in a direct manner.
There at least are very good reasons for why Hybrid and Extort behave the way they do in Commander; it is based firmly on the rules of the game. The rules state that a Hybrid card is both colors, not one color or the other. The rules state that reminder text has no function. For a format that was created by and is currently run by former judges, I would expect nothing less. People who don't like Hybrid or Extort rulings in Commander are basically asking for format-level errata to allow the cards to work differently than they do (not functionally, but within the rules of Commander which I concede is slightly different). What we are asking for with Wishes is that if they need format-level errata, then let's do it such that they act like their current printed intent.
You try and say those examples work because the rules say so, I agree. We also agree Wishes will not without format specific errata.
The questions is whether or not that is worth the effort and effects to gameplay.
With all that said, maybe the RC isn't the people we need to be talking to. Perhaps a better way to solve this is to petition WotC to provide a "real" Oracle card ruling for non-sanctioned play. I doubt that the powers-that-be at WotC would directly override to RC, but perhaps there is a way for the Oracle card rulings to be written to solve the problem in a way that doesn't require Rule 13.
I don't see that happening, but knock yourself out I suppose. What would be the upside for WotC to do so?
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 don't see that happening, but knock yourself out I suppose. What would be the upside for WotC to do so?
Nothing. It's not going to benefit WotC in any way. Alienating the RC by going over their heads isn't something that is positive, and it's not like EDH is a tournament-style format that needs such detailed-rules-lawyering.
I seriously doubt WotC will actually do anything drastic like this with the intent of 'fixing' EDH without first talking to the RC.
But back to the subject at hand, I think wishes can add something to EDH, especially in the more try-hard metas. it allows deck builders to add something to their deck and have a specific mechanic that otherwise wouldn't be possible. I also like how karn, the great creator is worded specifically to adhere to the old 'original' wording of wishes (ring of ma'ruf), in specifying exile OR outside the game; but this is neither here nor there, i suppose.
You try and say those examples work because the rules say so, I agree. We also agree Wishes will not without format specific errata.
The questions is whether or not that is worth the effort and effects to gameplay.
Well, Wishes technically could work without format specific errata, but I would highly suggest we don't do that. If this thread has taught me anything, its that people will go out of their way to give themselves a favorable ruling on how a card works based completely on flimsy semantic arguments (which reminds me of the story about a casual game playing against a guy with Ball Lightning in his deck who tried to say that he didn't have to sacrifice it at end of turn because it said "sacrifice at end of any turn" so he got to choose what turn he wanted to sacrifice it ). I think that providing clarification on how Wishes work (which many, if not most, people assume how they would work anyway) is still a much better format-level rule than just saying they don't work.
With all that said, maybe the RC isn't the people we need to be talking to. Perhaps a better way to solve this is to petition WotC to provide a "real" Oracle card ruling for non-sanctioned play. I doubt that the powers-that-be at WotC would directly override to RC, but perhaps there is a way for the Oracle card rulings to be written to solve the problem in a way that doesn't require Rule 13.
I don't see that happening, but knock yourself out I suppose. What would be the upside for WotC to do so?
WotC is always trying to improve their card rulings and they listen to input from players. A specific example of this is that I sent in a suggestion on how they could reword the Oracle ruling on Chains of Mephistopheles by adding two instances of "this way" to help clear up one of the most frustrating mis-interpretations of the card. I actually got a very specific response back asking questions about my suggestion and about a year later the card's Oracle text was changed. Now I'm not saying that I was directly responsible for this, but the fact that I actually got a response back surprised the hell out of me, and the fact that it ended up happening makes me think that someone is out there listening.
Quote from Schweinfett »
Nothing. It's not going to benefit WotC in any way. Alienating the RC by going over their heads isn't something that is positive, and it's not like EDH is a tournament-style format that needs such detailed-rules-lawyering.
I seriously doubt WotC will actually do anything drastic like this with the intent of 'fixing' EDH without first talking to the RC.
I'm not suggesting that they go over the RC's head and make Commander decisions without consulting them. What I'm suggesting is that the Oracle card rulings be better defined to make the RC's job easier. If the definition of "outside the game" was at a minimum changed to "In a sanctioned event, a card that’s “outside the game” is one that’s in your sideboard. In an unsanctioned event, you may choose any card from your collection as long as the card is legal in the format you are playing (such as Two-Headed Giant, Commander, Brawl, etc.) and conforms to any rules or restrictions for that format (such as Singleton, Color Identity, Unified Construction, Block Constructed, etc.)", then 90% of the issues with how wishes worked in casual play would go away. It would be even better if they set a limit for how many cards a player could set aside for this as well. However, I think that they could do even better than that by having a specific Oracle ruling for official formats that don't use a sideboard.
as long as the card is legal in the format you are playing (such as Two-Headed Giant, Commander, Brawl, etc.) and conforms to any rules or restrictions for that format (such as Singleton, Color Identity, Unified Construction, Block Constructed, etc.)",
I mean I understand what you are proposing here and what you had in mind but technically that is what Rule 13 does as well. One of those restrictions is a Maindeck of exactly 99 cards so no additional card you can get conforms to rules and restrictions so with that Wording you would still essentially blank wishes. If the intent is to be able to only grab "legal" cards I think the RC would still need to rework the rules. It is very difficult to get a simple reworking on the term "Outside of the game" to such a degree that it works "as intended" without changing Deckbuilding rules.
as long as the card is legal in the format you are playing (such as Two-Headed Giant, Commander, Brawl, etc.) and conforms to any rules or restrictions for that format (such as Singleton, Color Identity, Unified Construction, Block Constructed, etc.)",
I mean I understand what you are proposing here and what you had in mind but technically that is what Rule 13 does as well. One of those restrictions is a Maindeck of exactly 99 cards so no additional card you can get conforms to rules and restrictions so with that Wording you would still essentially blank wishes. If the intent is to be able to only grab "legal" cards I think the RC would still need to rework the rules. It is very difficult to get a simple reworking on the term "Outside of the game" to such a degree that it works "as intended" without changing Deckbuilding rules.
There would be no contradiction between that rule and the 100-card deck rule. Cards outside the game are not in your deck. Bringing a card from outside the game with a Wish doesn't make your deck illegal all of the sudden.
Pro-wish individual here. I make all my decks with it in mind (10 pre-selected cards, adhering to Commander based card restrictions). The individual functions of each deck's set cards differ, but they usually follow the same idea: some way to draw cards, some way to recur cards, something dealing with land, a big effect or two (probably finishers), some cards that are highly synergistic with the given Commander. These 10 cards also represent the deck's flex slots, in the sense that I can shift new cards into them and if the card underperforms or is never the desired target it can be just cut. On the other, if it is commonly the only card I want from that stack of cards, I might need to think about putting it in the main deck.
Here are the lists for the four decks I currently consider playable. I am still working on refining them, but I feel Sen Triplets is the tightest list, while the others still need a fair bit of work.
There would be no contradiction between that rule and the 100-card deck rule. Cards outside the game are not in your deck. Bringing a card from outside the game with a Wish doesn't make your deck illegal all of the sudden.
Actually it does commander is the only format with a maximum card size(brawl?) and if you enforce commander restrictions on the cards that way that counts. And if you dont you would be able to get any card as the card outside of the game as the rules enforcing the deck construction (Identity singleton etc.). Since if the cards don't count towards your deck they also don't count towards the singleton rule. Same with commander Identity since cards outside are not in your deck but must adhere to format rules. So the only thing youd limit would be banned cards.
EDIT:
My Wishboard would vary in PUGs esp. mtgo it would probably be half silver bullets like hosers since the powerlevel varies alot. in my local playgroup it would be more powered down hosers and niche answers.
Here's an interesting thought: Errata all wishes BACK to its original tempting.
As in, there was no exile zone when the wishes came. There was only 'removed from the game'. So if all wishes were templated like how the new karn does it. So now, the wishes read: "You may choose an XXXXX card you own from outside the game or in exile, reveal that card, and put it into your hand"
How does something like that sound? it actually captures the original intent/use of the wishes, and harkens back to the pre-exile days.
Here's an interesting thought: Errata all wishes BACK to its original tempting.
As in, there was no exile zone when the wishes came. There was only 'removed from the game'. So if all wishes were templated like how the new karn does it. So now, the wishes read: "You may choose an XXXXX card you own from outside the game or in exile, reveal that card, and put it into your hand"
How does something like that sound? it actually captures the original intent/use of the wishes, and harkens back to the pre-exile days.
That still leaves the question about what does outside of the game entail.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Mycosynth lattice and maybe some other artifacts for Karn, since I am planning on playing him regardless of wishboards or no.
Other than that, I'd be unlikely to run many if any wishes in any lists so I can't say beyond that. Paying 2+ extra mana on any spell that wasn't important enough to be main decked seems pretty bad to me. Way more than 2 mana if I also had to actually tutor the wish first... which also means I wouldn't put anything particularly important in the wishboard.
My gripe with the cards like Relentless Rats and co. is more about it being an exception to the rule that allows it to break singleton. I don't like it, but I understand that it's realistically the only way Rats exists as a tribe, and makes budget mill a thing.
While sideboards can exist in the scenario that you mentioned, cards you mentioned could, and likely should see mainboard play (ex. Fade into Antiquity) as removal is almost always relevant when it has more than one mode. The potential for dick-ish things already exists in running cards like Choke, Tsunami, etc., but the potential to run them in a side/wishboard is literally inviting feel-bads. All it will likely take is a handful of people in a play group or LGS to do it, before it becomes commonplace to do the same thing. After all, if you're at a disadvantage to not, then you're likely to adopt what puts you on an even playing field. Some people also don't have the luxury of an LGS, or multiple potential groups to play at so switching in the event of "adapt or leave" isn't always available.
I would argue that sideboards aren't as big of a thing because they're not official and people don't expect to be able to use them regularly. The arms race is a thing. Especially at an LGS for events - if there's a buy in and a prize is to be won, people play to win.
1) I would not be in favor of having Wishes get cards from Exile as some sort of compromise. The whole point of this exercise is to allow Wishes to function as close as possible within the rules of the game and cards in Exile are clearly not the same as cards "outside the game". I understand the idea of wanting to re-establish lost functionality, but that is a slippery slope.
2) Games of Commander are unsanctioned, so I don't know why the RC has to have any rulings on what a sideboard is. The concept of a sideboard is unnecessary for Commander play. The idea of people revealing their commanders and people siding in cards before a game starts seems awfully unnecessary and kinda lame, so I understand why people wouldn't want sideboards. But you don't need a sideboard for a wish to work; you just need to define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game". I will repeat this again; if calling it a Wishboard is somehow problematic because of a Wishboard's association with a sideboard for sanctioned, competitive play, then call it something different.
3) The biggest reason that I am opposed to the concept of "If you don't like Rule 13, then see Rule 0 and ask your playgroup" is that for every other class of cards that might come up under Rule 0, the default is that they are legal and allowed. We don't have a rule that says "Cards that destroy more than two lands do nothing in a game of Commander.", we ask before we start whether people are playing Mass-LD or not and go from there. We could do the same thing with Stax cards, infinite combos, extra turn cards, or whatever players might find objectionable, but the default is that these cards are legal and do exactly what they say they do. For some reason, Wishes are treated differently.
4) The biggest reasons why Wishes are treated differently has nothing to do with most of the reasons people bring up in this thread. The biggest reason is that the Oracle Card Rulings for Wishes are totally wishy-washy on what "outside the game" should mean for non-sanctioned play. The more I think about it, the more it makes a certain degree of sense for the RC to be equally vague on the subject. I just think that we have enough smart people in the room to figure this out so that we can fix this issue. And if it comes down to all the smart people coming together and saying that this issue is either not worth solving, unsolvable, or the issue are insurmountable, then so be it. I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker yet.
5) Someone had the great idea of posting actual potential wishboards for people to look at so that we can talk about the practical impact of what we are talking about here. I had a similar idea to post a few 10-card piles so that we could have the discussion; If a player came into a game asking to use a Wish and offered to show you their stack of cards that they have set aside for that wish, would you allow it? In another thread, I proposed the following as a wishboard for my Bosh, Iron Golem deck.
1 Molten Disaster
1 Wheel of Fortune
1 Warp World
1 Aftershock
1 Insurrection
1 Vandalblast
1 Molten Psyche
1 Brass's Bounty
1 Faithless Looting
I'll post a few more wishboards later this week when I have some time to actually think about what I would want to play (I'm all about the hypothetical exercise). This will at least get some conversation going.
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
There is also no confusion about how those cards work. Wishes work differently depending on what kind of game it is. Banned cards also do not fall under a separate class.
That discussion has clearly been had by the RC, and a decision was made. A certain faction will never like that idea. Much like Hybrid, or Extort.
Hows that for a set of rules?
Except when people are purposefully misleading others into thinking that a Wishboard is anything other than something to make a Wish work as intended without holding up the game. It has been suggested that allowing sideboards for a Wish somehow implies that people will then be allowed to sideboard before and/or between games, and even though that was the intent of the old "House Rule" or "optional" sideboard rule (that has since been eliminated), that is just not the case here. Either people act confused to intentionally derail the conversation or they really are confused that the two are different. I'm just trying to reiterate that they are two different things.
So once the confusion is cleared up, then we should be all good, right? So let's clear up the confusion. It's not that hard.
There at least are very good reasons for why Hybrid and Extort behave the way they do in Commander; it is based firmly on the rules of the game. The rules state that a Hybrid card is both colors, not one color or the other. The rules state that reminder text has no function. For a format that was created by and is currently run by former judges, I would expect nothing less. People who don't like Hybrid or Extort rulings in Commander are basically asking for format-level errata to allow the cards to work differently than they do (not functionally, but within the rules of Commander which I concede is slightly different). What we are asking for with Wishes is that if they need format-level errata, then let's do it such that they act like their current printed intent.
With all that said, maybe the RC isn't the people we need to be talking to. Perhaps a better way to solve this is to petition WotC to provide a "real" Oracle card ruling for non-sanctioned play. I doubt that the powers-that-be at WotC would directly override to RC, but perhaps there is a way for the Oracle card rulings to be written to solve the problem in a way that doesn't require Rule 13.
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
Actually I might do something like:
Time Spiral (BW)
Massacre (BW)
Seeds of Innocence (BW)
Treasure Cruise (BW)
Enter the Infinite (BW)
Mnemonic Betrayal (BW)
Mycosynth Lattice (Karn)
Pithing Needle (Karn)
Mindslaver (Karn)
Elixer of Immortality (Karn)
Glacial Chasm (LW)
Cabal Pit (LW)
Bojuka Bog (LW)
Cabal Coffers (LW)
Yixlid Jailer (LW)
Nexus of Fate (CW)
Misdirection (CW)
Mindbreak Trap (CW)
Omniscience (MA)
And just mix and match them depending on what colors/wishes I’m on.
Edit: Theres actually only deck where I would run Mastermind’s Acquisition, and it would mostly just be a more expensive Burning Wish... there might be some other cards I would slot for it but can not think of any others at the time.
Edit: more edits
Edit: more edits v2
If you define the parameters in Form of numbers it is a Wishboard, sure we can call it something else to but it functions like one even if you take away the sideboard aspect so you have to have a ruling on what a wishboard is instead of a sideboard which is kinda the same problem.
And even without that you need a special ruling to "define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game".". And I think the easiest ways of doing that is by Sideboard / Wishboard or whatever you would call it, or not set parameters for it at all. If there is another way of doing that (without extending the rules definiton to much(lengthwise)) that I overlooked I would like to hear it.
I think in the gist this is also part of Impossibles Main reason for not liking the current rule 13.
As I stated before IMO we already give special treatment to cards be it that it still has a function on box but not one in Game with Battle of wits.
Or WOTC errataing Fractured powerstone. Or even give more funtionality to card groups like Legendary Creatures being able to be in the command zone.
So one more group shouldn't be so different. I personally wouldn't mind Wishboards as general Rule but I see the Issues People have with that, I would mind the grab anything Part or even the grab anything with X parameters part, because of the added searchtime and the bigger silver bullet problem that wishboards already have.
I partly agree with that statement even tough it is pretty clearly specified (Card you own from outside the game meaning exactly that) since it is a nonsanctioned event you could technically go home rummage trough your pile of cards get back to the LGS with the card you were looking for and It would be perfectly legal, and that to most would be unacceptable. But WOTC let the people themselves decide what is and what isn't acceptable. But unfortunately the players have different things they demm accepable. Which is why "I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker [for me] yet." is IMO the proper response since for others some of their arguments are true dealbreakers for them. That alone puts me more in the camp of "not worth solving" at least for general settings.
I think even though the format would become mostly like that with WB it should still be may.
I think this is Implicit as you don't have to show them your Maindeck either.
Interesting anti cheating tech but I think this isn't needed either, if you feel someone is cheating in casual play you probably won't wanna play with them anyways.
Like the first Rule that will be most likely the standard but would soften to up to 10. (My Old playgroup played with 15)
This is implicit for the main deck so not needed there, but it is also implicit that it will count towards (complete) deck construction
All the unmentioned ones seem fine, and seem more or less like the way we did it back then.
Forcing the wishboard to be visible on the table just was more of a thing with board games, but anti-cheating works as well.
The exact number is like the first one, makes it less wishy-washy, could also be "anti cheat tech".
Fair enough.
So I've already shown what [b]Burning Wish[/c] targets I would include for Bosh, so this is what I would do for Cunning Wish in Riku of Two Reflections (with obvious stipulations that I haven't though this out 100% so I might be missing something, but this is the general gist that would cover what I would want to cover).
1 Counterspell
1 Artifact Mutation
1 Echoing Truth
1 Voidslime
1 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Arachnogenesis
1 Evacuation
1 Opportunity
1 Comet Storm
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
I don't see anyone saying it cannot be done. The rules could be made in such a way that wishes would work in a direct manner.
You try and say those examples work because the rules say so, I agree. We also agree Wishes will not without format specific errata.
The questions is whether or not that is worth the effort and effects to gameplay.
I don't see that happening, but knock yourself out I suppose. What would be the upside for WotC to do so?
Nothing. It's not going to benefit WotC in any way. Alienating the RC by going over their heads isn't something that is positive, and it's not like EDH is a tournament-style format that needs such detailed-rules-lawyering.
I seriously doubt WotC will actually do anything drastic like this with the intent of 'fixing' EDH without first talking to the RC.
But back to the subject at hand, I think wishes can add something to EDH, especially in the more try-hard metas. it allows deck builders to add something to their deck and have a specific mechanic that otherwise wouldn't be possible. I also like how karn, the great creator is worded specifically to adhere to the old 'original' wording of wishes (ring of ma'ruf), in specifying exile OR outside the game; but this is neither here nor there, i suppose.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
Well, Wishes technically could work without format specific errata, but I would highly suggest we don't do that. If this thread has taught me anything, its that people will go out of their way to give themselves a favorable ruling on how a card works based completely on flimsy semantic arguments (which reminds me of the story about a casual game playing against a guy with Ball Lightning in his deck who tried to say that he didn't have to sacrifice it at end of turn because it said "sacrifice at end of any turn" so he got to choose what turn he wanted to sacrifice it ). I think that providing clarification on how Wishes work (which many, if not most, people assume how they would work anyway) is still a much better format-level rule than just saying they don't work.
WotC is always trying to improve their card rulings and they listen to input from players. A specific example of this is that I sent in a suggestion on how they could reword the Oracle ruling on Chains of Mephistopheles by adding two instances of "this way" to help clear up one of the most frustrating mis-interpretations of the card. I actually got a very specific response back asking questions about my suggestion and about a year later the card's Oracle text was changed. Now I'm not saying that I was directly responsible for this, but the fact that I actually got a response back surprised the hell out of me, and the fact that it ended up happening makes me think that someone is out there listening.
I'm not suggesting that they go over the RC's head and make Commander decisions without consulting them. What I'm suggesting is that the Oracle card rulings be better defined to make the RC's job easier. If the definition of "outside the game" was at a minimum changed to "In a sanctioned event, a card that’s “outside the game” is one that’s in your sideboard. In an unsanctioned event, you may choose any card from your collection as long as the card is legal in the format you are playing (such as Two-Headed Giant, Commander, Brawl, etc.) and conforms to any rules or restrictions for that format (such as Singleton, Color Identity, Unified Construction, Block Constructed, etc.)", then 90% of the issues with how wishes worked in casual play would go away. It would be even better if they set a limit for how many cards a player could set aside for this as well. However, I think that they could do even better than that by having a specific Oracle ruling for official formats that don't use a sideboard.
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
I mean I understand what you are proposing here and what you had in mind but technically that is what Rule 13 does as well. One of those restrictions is a Maindeck of exactly 99 cards so no additional card you can get conforms to rules and restrictions so with that Wording you would still essentially blank wishes. If the intent is to be able to only grab "legal" cards I think the RC would still need to rework the rules. It is very difficult to get a simple reworking on the term "Outside of the game" to such a degree that it works "as intended" without changing Deckbuilding rules.
There would be no contradiction between that rule and the 100-card deck rule. Cards outside the game are not in your deck. Bringing a card from outside the game with a Wish doesn't make your deck illegal all of the sudden.
Anyway, I have also worked on a potential Glittering Wish stack for my Ghave, Guru of Spores +1/+1 counter deck.
1 Abzan Ascendancy
1 Aura Shards
1 Abzan Charm
1 Knight of Autumn
1 Camaraderie
1 Merciless Eviction
1 Angel of Despair
1 Death Grasp
1 Gaze of Granite
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
Here are the lists for the four decks I currently consider playable. I am still working on refining them, but I feel Sen Triplets is the tightest list, while the others still need a fair bit of work.
1x Command the Dreadhorde
1x Mnemonic Betrayal
1x Primevals' Glorious Rebirth
1x Rhystic Study
1x Sword of the Meek
1x Sydri, Galvanic Genius
1x Teshar, Ancestor's Apostle
1x Vesuva
1x Wurmcoil Engine
1x Eternal Dominion
1x Grapeshot
1x Manifold Insights
1x Past in Flames
1x Saheeli's Artistry
1x Spelltwine
1x Subterranean Tremors
1x Treacherous Terrain
1x Wildest Dreams
1x Beast Within
1x Descent into Madness
1x Dictate of Erebos
1x Illusionist's Bracers
1x Rakdos Charm
1x Tectonic Break
1x Triumph of the Hordes
1x Vandalblast
1x Wildest Dreams
1x Bloodgift Demon
1x Maga, Traitor to Mortals
1x Mikaeus, the Unhallowed
1x Miren, the Moaning Well
1x Necrotic Ooze
1x Pharika, God of Affliction
1x Riftsweeper
1x Woodfall Primus
1x Worm Harvest
Actually it does commander is the only format with a maximum card size(brawl?) and if you enforce commander restrictions on the cards that way that counts. And if you dont you would be able to get any card as the card outside of the game as the rules enforcing the deck construction (Identity singleton etc.). Since if the cards don't count towards your deck they also don't count towards the singleton rule. Same with commander Identity since cards outside are not in your deck but must adhere to format rules. So the only thing youd limit would be banned cards.
EDIT:
My Wishboard would vary in PUGs esp. mtgo it would probably be half silver bullets like hosers since the powerlevel varies alot. in my local playgroup it would be more powered down hosers and niche answers.
As in, there was no exile zone when the wishes came. There was only 'removed from the game'. So if all wishes were templated like how the new karn does it. So now, the wishes read: "You may choose an XXXXX card you own from outside the game or in exile, reveal that card, and put it into your hand"
How does something like that sound? it actually captures the original intent/use of the wishes, and harkens back to the pre-exile days.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
That still leaves the question about what does outside of the game entail.