With the addition of all these new static effect planeswalkers I continue to be sad that they are not legal commanders.
The most iconic story figures in the game and you cannot build a deck around them legally in the most popular casual format.
I mean, there is another format where you can do that, and I was told repeatedly when it launched that it was going to be better than commander in part because you could run planeswalkers, and because it lacked the busted fast mana and tutors, but it seems that format isn't very popular for some reason.
Judging from this poll (and every time I see this discussed elsewhere) allowing planes walkers as commanders is pretty unpopular, so it doesn't follow that they should be allowed as commanders in the most popular casual format. I'd also question them being the most iconic characters. Certainly some of them are, but there are also plenty of legendary creatures that are just as iconic, and plenty of planeswalkers that elicit a "who?" from most players.
It seems a strange thing to lay the failings of Brawl (that are many and vast as far as people I have talked to about it) solely at the feet of the thing you happen to be arguing should not happen in Commander.
It seems a strange thing to lay the failings of Brawl (that are many and vast as far as people I have talked to about it) solely at the feet of the thing you happen to be arguing should not happen in Commander.
From what I've read of the last few comments, it wasn't laid solely at the feet of this change.
Oh I am sorry it is only brought up in a thread about the planewalkers being able to be generals and only mentioned through that lens and alongside that is talked about how Brawl did not set the the world on fire and feels stagnant.
The intent seems to be to link those things in a way that is not entirely straight forward. More things both more complex and immaterial to this discussion that comes up to try and hammer some nails in.
Oh I am sorry it is only brought up in a thread about the planewalkers being able to be generals and only mentioned through that lens and alongside that is talked about how Brawl did not set the the world on fire and feels stagnant.
They're comparable formats, if for nothing else for the mechanism of a deck having a leader. As mentioned, there's a multitude of reasons Brawl isn't a prevalent format. The reason it was brought up is to illustrate that the people who want walkers to be able to play from the command zone are not currently without options.
The intent seems to be to link those things in a way that is not entirely straight forward. More things both more complex and immaterial to this discussion that comes up to try and hammer some nails in.
There are no hammer and nails from either side here. Neither side of the discussion can offer absolutes here, we can only discuss our opinions and back them up with as much logic and fact as we can muster. I don't believe there's any intent to be disingenuous here, it's purely to suggest that those on the 'ýea' side of the discussion are not without options - house rules, or Brawl.
I think it is incredibly generous to view the instances in which Brawl is brought in this thread as a place in which you can play the Planeswalkers you want and nothing else.
I think it is incredibly generous to view the instances in which Brawl is brought in this thread as a place in which you can play the Planeswalkers you want and nothing else.
What I've read suggests nothing more nefarious than that. It's at least a bit reductive of some of the discussion had here to suggest that this would be the sole reason for bringing the format up anyway, to be absolutely fair.
I haven't really put on my thinking cap and digested the spoilers so far, but there is a large number of planeswalkers so far that between their static abilities and/or activated abilities I really don't want to see in the Command zone. I don't know how many of them I would actually advocate to ban, but much like the existing list we made, plenty of them would not make for a fun game, imo. Ashiok, for example would be a pretty miserable game of wheel/discard followed by exiling graveyards ad nauseam.
I haven't really put on my thinking cap and digested the spoilers so far, but there is a large number of planeswalkers so far that between their static abilities and/or activated abilities I really don't want to see in the Command zone. I don't know how many of them I would actually advocate to ban, but much like the existing list we made, plenty of them would not make for a fun game, imo. Ashiok, for example would be a pretty miserable game of wheel/discard followed by exiling graveyards ad nauseam.
I agree on the “new” Planeswalker template being too much for the command zone. Like I said on the prior page, this is the first go-round for this, and a lot of these are pushed abilities on uncommons. If this is the direction of design going forward, you will undoubtedly see just as pushed abilities on higher rarities, which equates to more powerful abilities.
This is where I’m at right now.
-Were this change to happen, you’d have to strongly consider ~20+ cards for bans right out of the gate. From there, you’d have another ~50 cards that would end up being obnoxious that would warrant “watchlist” status. Then, with the new design direction of PW’s, you’d have to look at every single set going forward for broken PW’s, or broken support cards. All of that, just to add a few new, playablegenerals into the fold.
This puts me firmly in the “Absolutely not worth it” camp, and nothing will persuade me otherwise. Keep printing them in supplemental sets, but for all of them legal? That’ll be a no from me dawg.
With the addition of all these new static effect planeswalkers I continue to be sad that they are not legal commanders.
The most iconic story figures in the game and you cannot build a deck around them legally in the most popular casual format.
I mean, there is another format where you can do that, and I was told repeatedly when it launched that it was going to be better than commander in part because you could run planeswalkers, and because it lacked the busted fast mana and tutors, but it seems that format isn't very popular for some reason.
Judging from this poll (and every time I see this discussed elsewhere) allowing planes walkers as commanders is pretty unpopular, so it doesn't follow that they should be allowed as commanders in the most popular casual format. I'd also question them being the most iconic characters. Certainly some of them are, but there are also plenty of legendary creatures that are just as iconic, and plenty of planeswalkers that elicit a "who?" from most players.
It seems a strange thing to lay the failings of Brawl (that are many and vast as far as people I have talked to about it) solely at the feet of the thing you happen to be arguing should not happen in Commander.
It sure seems strange that you never seem to be able to read my entire post, as if you did you'd have noticed that I didn't do that at all. Unless of course you are just intentionally mischacterizing my post so you can dismiss it out of hand.
For anyone else with reading comprehension issues, intentional or otherwise, I pointed out that planeswalkers as commanders, as well as the lack of the auto include fast Mana cards and tutors, were touted as features of Brawl that should make it popular, and yet despite that Brawl failed. These are generally the top three complaints about commander you see online, that there's too much fast Mana that is too good, that the tutors are too good, and that you can't use any Planeswalker as your commander. All three of these complaints are addressed by brawl, so it follows that if these were really that important then brawl shouldn't be the failure that it is. You could argue that some or all of these contributed to brawl being unpopular, or you could argue that these were insufficient to overcome the limited card pool and rotating nature of the format.
Either way, it doesn't bode well for the argument that Carthage was making, that commander, as the most popular casual format, should logically allow planeswalkers as commanders, as they are, he argues, the most popular characters in magic. I attacked that argument on three fronts, first that planeswalkers generally aren't any more popular than legendary creatures generally, second that a commander like format that touts the availability of planeswalkers as a feature has proven unpopular which shows that it doesn't follow that allowing planeswalkers as commanders is something that would increase the draw of a format, and third that it's pretty clear that a lot more people are against pw commanders than for them, so it does seem that allowing all pws as commanders is more likely to be a liability than a benefit.
Brawl of course had no choice but to allow all walkers as there just aren't enough legendary creatures to sustain the format without them (and even with then it's close, and that's bouyed by legend and PW heavy sets like Dominaria and the three Ravnica sets). Personally, i think if pw commanders were actually a major draw then brawl would have done better, as pw commanders are the most tangible additive feature the format has that edh doesn't. If it had real value, the people who really want that feature would have done more to help the format to succeed. They didn't, and the only takeaway I can get from that is that, at best, pw commanders are not something that makes a format better, even for the people who most want that. This isn't even taking into account anyone who was turned off on brawl BECAUSE of pws, which is certainly non zero but since I don't have anyway of knowing how significant it is I'm not even considering it in my argument.
But the big, and I thought obvious, point in comparing edh to brawl centers on what Carthage said, that edh is by far the most popular casual format. He's complaining about the status quo, not allowing pws as commanders, in the most popular casual format, without considering that a big reason that it IS the most popular format is the decision making ability of the RC, who created the format and maintained it. Wizards promoting it helped it grows as did creating precons, but as we can see they promoted brawl more heavily and held brawl events and brawl failed, so promotion doesn't mean much without a good product, and in this case that good product are the rules that underpin the format. I don't agree with everything the RC does, but I recognize that, even with their mistakes, theyve done a phenomenal job, and the success of the format is proof, especially when even wizards can't generate the same amount of success with the formats they create or the tweaks they try to make to edh (see mtgo edh fiasco from a couple years back).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
I think it is incredibly generous to view the instances in which Brawl is brought in this thread as a place in which you can play the Planeswalkers you want and nothing else.
What I've read suggests nothing more nefarious than that. It's at least a bit reductive of some of the discussion had here to suggest that this would be the sole reason for bringing the format up anyway, to be absolutely fair.
I've gotten used to him stretching for whatever he can find to dismiss my arguments out of hand and insinuate that I have nothing but foul intentions. He does that whenever a point is made that he cannot easily refute. It's easier to pretend you are the smartest guy in the room when you don't concede that the people you disagree with can make valid points. I still respond to him because he does often make valid points, and while he's dismissive he doesn't straight up call people <snip> like some posters that are impossible to talk to.
Public Mod Note
(cryogen):
Warning for inappropriate language
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
I've gotten used to him stretching for whatever he can find to dismiss my arguments out of hand and insinuate that I have nothing but foul intentions. He does that whenever a point is made that he cannot easily refute. It's easier to pretend you are the smartest guy in the room when you don't concede that the people you disagree with can make valid points. I still respond to him because he does often make valid points, and while he's dismissive he doesn't straight up call people <snip> like some posters that are impossible to talk to.
In all fairness most of the contributors to this thread have got fired up once or twice, myself included. In other interactions with Taleran I've found them cogent and pretty well reasoned. I really don't like getting into attacking people's character, so I won't - I don't think there's scope for it here anyway. But yeah, the last couple of comments have been a little disappointing.
Moving forward I think it's important for us to remember to attack arguments, not the people making them. Also, there's no value to be gained by misrepresenting someone's argument to prove your own point.
I haven't really put on my thinking cap and digested the spoilers so far, but there is a large number of planeswalkers so far that between their static abilities and/or activated abilities I really don't want to see in the Command zone. I don't know how many of them I would actually advocate to ban, but much like the existing list we made, plenty of them would not make for a fun game, imo. Ashiok, for example would be a pretty miserable game of wheel/discard followed by exiling graveyards ad nauseam.
We're complaining about having an exiling graveyard card commander now? Really? This is mind blowing bias against planeswalker commanders.
We're complaining about having an exiling graveyard card commander now? Really? This is mind blowing bias against planeswalker commanders.
No, it's not. Cryo is entitled to feel how they want about each card. If anything it's a preference to not wanting to see mass exile in the command zone. Which I can understand - I'm not overly worried about it myself, but I get why it's a concern.
Once again, misrepresenting someone's statements to strengthen your own is not a reasonable way to have a discussion.
We're complaining about having an exiling graveyard card commander now? Really? This is mind blowing bias against planeswalker commanders.
No, it's not. Cryo is entitled to feel how they want about each card. If anything it's a preference to not wanting to see mass exile in the command zone. Which I can understand - I'm not overly worried about it myself, but I get why it's a concern.
Once again, misrepresenting someone's statements to strengthen your own is not a reasonable way to have a discussion.
I consider calling ashiok a problem card to be extreme hyperbole to the point of ridiculousness. I will not entertain such statements. It is equivalent to me to saying brothers yamazaki is a problem card.
I mean, I can see why I wouldn't want to play against Ashiok as a general. Ramp/tutor hatebear with mill and mass exile doesn't sound like fun at all. It nerfs a whole ton of staples in virtually any type of ramp spell or tutor, leaving yourself free to do whatever you like.
It's not the poster for why walkers shouldn't be in the command zone to me, but I certainly wouldn't enjoy playing against an Ashiok deck.
We're complaining about having an exiling graveyard card commander now? Really? This is mind blowing bias against planeswalker commanders.
No, it's not. Cryo is entitled to feel how they want about each card. If anything it's a preference to not wanting to see mass exile in the command zone. Which I can understand - I'm not overly worried about it myself, but I get why it's a concern.
Once again, misrepresenting someone's statements to strengthen your own is not a reasonable way to have a discussion.
I consider calling ashiok a problem card to be extreme hyperbole to the point of ridiculousness. I will not entertain such statements. It is equivalent to me to saying brothers yamazaki is a problem card.
Well, its not just repeatedly exiling graveyards (and thus shutting down gy decks from the command zone), its also shutting down your opponents' ability to tutor and use sac lands. I mean, stopping the efficient tutors is a positive, but a lot of pretty basic stuff relies on searching the library, even budget stuff like terramorphic expanse, myriad landscape, cultivate, etc. It would be a pretty miserable commander to play against for most decks. Banworthy? I'm not sure, but certainly something I'd wager most people are glad they won't have to face in the command zone.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Do you guys also endorse the banning of creature commanders that are at least as bad as ashiok? If people shouldn't be allowed to play the planeswalkers that aren't fun, they shouldn't be allowed to play the creatures that aren't fun right?
Of these, the only one I take umbrage with is Narset.
It seems like this is really just a list of commanders you've faced down that you've struggled to compete against. Would that be an accurate assessment? They're all strong in their own way, but none of them are unbeatable or necessarily unfun to play against. All are dependent on the 99 you surround them with in terms of how oppressive they are.
Of these, the only one I take umbrage with is Narset.
It seems like this is really just a list of commanders you've faced down that you've struggled to compete against. Would that be an accurate assessment? They're all strong in their own way, but none of them are unbeatable or necessarily unfun to play against. All are dependent on the 99 you surround them with in terms of how oppressive they are.
Some are a bit on the whatever side in terms of being just ridiculously strong as opposed to unfun, but you are deaf to the community if you think oloro and nekusar are fun for your average table.
I never have got why people hold so much ire towards Oloro. He's always active, sure, but he's far from busted. Anything else a deck throws at you, you can point the blame squarely on the deck builder, not the commander.
Nekusar, yeah I get that. It tends to be somewhat of a glass cannon though. I haven't seen a whole lot of wins from Nekusar.
There's a few to start off with, there are many more.
None of these are remotely close to being as oppressive as Ashiok. If you cannot see the difference, then we aren’t going to have a productive discussion.
When you list those card, you are only basing what exists in the 99, and has absolutely nothing to do with those cards themselves. Like Toc said, Narset, and to a lesser extent, Derevi, could even be considered “oppressive”.
Maybe, though, this proves a point, but not yours. Those decks can be pretty oppressive, and mostly miserable to play against. It’s because they enable powerful interactions within your deck to take place.
Ancestral Statue and Morph are powerful cards/abilities in Animar, hardly anywhere else.
Oloro enables Stax/control builds by continually buffing your life total, which is used as a resource.
Kaalia? Seriously? Let me guess, Kaalia+Armageddon? Is that really Kaalia? Lol.
Ashiok, though, shuts off Ramp and graveyard strategies. Just Ashiok. Combine that with being in the best control colors, and you have a recipe for a pretty degenerate build. One card shuts off combo/ramp and graveyard shenanigans. Always Accesible.
So, of those cards you listed, which ones do something like that on their own?
I never have got why people hold so much ire towards Oloro. He's always active, sure, but he's far from busted. Anything else a deck throws at you, you can point the blame squarely on the deck builder, not the commander.
Nekusar, yeah I get that. It tends to be somewhat of a glass cannon though. I haven't seen a whole lot of wins from Nekusar.
No offense, but this seems a bit disingenuous.
As someone who had multiple players playing Leovold in our Meta, we never had a problem with it... But you and I both know that that isn't a fair summary of the format at large.
I agree that Ashiok is oppressive, and a solid case study why one might not want Planeswalkers as commanders - but if you are predicating your argument on the best example of how wrong it can go, then you are being a bit hypocritical when you dismiss the frustrations an average table might feel towards other highly frustrating commanders that are still legal in the format.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
LEGACY|UWStonebladeCOMMANDER|UBGThe Mimeoplsm Ooze & Aghhs!MODERN|UWAzorius Control THE JUICE[BOX]³ CUBE
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It seems a strange thing to lay the failings of Brawl (that are many and vast as far as people I have talked to about it) solely at the feet of the thing you happen to be arguing should not happen in Commander.
From what I've read of the last few comments, it wasn't laid solely at the feet of this change.
The intent seems to be to link those things in a way that is not entirely straight forward. More things both more complex and immaterial to this discussion that comes up to try and hammer some nails in.
They're comparable formats, if for nothing else for the mechanism of a deck having a leader. As mentioned, there's a multitude of reasons Brawl isn't a prevalent format. The reason it was brought up is to illustrate that the people who want walkers to be able to play from the command zone are not currently without options.
There are no hammer and nails from either side here. Neither side of the discussion can offer absolutes here, we can only discuss our opinions and back them up with as much logic and fact as we can muster. I don't believe there's any intent to be disingenuous here, it's purely to suggest that those on the 'ýea' side of the discussion are not without options - house rules, or Brawl.
What I've read suggests nothing more nefarious than that. It's at least a bit reductive of some of the discussion had here to suggest that this would be the sole reason for bringing the format up anyway, to be absolutely fair.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I agree on the “new” Planeswalker template being too much for the command zone. Like I said on the prior page, this is the first go-round for this, and a lot of these are pushed abilities on uncommons. If this is the direction of design going forward, you will undoubtedly see just as pushed abilities on higher rarities, which equates to more powerful abilities.
This is where I’m at right now.
-Were this change to happen, you’d have to strongly consider ~20+ cards for bans right out of the gate. From there, you’d have another ~50 cards that would end up being obnoxious that would warrant “watchlist” status. Then, with the new design direction of PW’s, you’d have to look at every single set going forward for broken PW’s, or broken support cards. All of that, just to add a few new, playablegenerals into the fold.
This puts me firmly in the “Absolutely not worth it” camp, and nothing will persuade me otherwise. Keep printing them in supplemental sets, but for all of them legal? That’ll be a no from me dawg.
It sure seems strange that you never seem to be able to read my entire post, as if you did you'd have noticed that I didn't do that at all. Unless of course you are just intentionally mischacterizing my post so you can dismiss it out of hand.
For anyone else with reading comprehension issues, intentional or otherwise, I pointed out that planeswalkers as commanders, as well as the lack of the auto include fast Mana cards and tutors, were touted as features of Brawl that should make it popular, and yet despite that Brawl failed. These are generally the top three complaints about commander you see online, that there's too much fast Mana that is too good, that the tutors are too good, and that you can't use any Planeswalker as your commander. All three of these complaints are addressed by brawl, so it follows that if these were really that important then brawl shouldn't be the failure that it is. You could argue that some or all of these contributed to brawl being unpopular, or you could argue that these were insufficient to overcome the limited card pool and rotating nature of the format.
Either way, it doesn't bode well for the argument that Carthage was making, that commander, as the most popular casual format, should logically allow planeswalkers as commanders, as they are, he argues, the most popular characters in magic. I attacked that argument on three fronts, first that planeswalkers generally aren't any more popular than legendary creatures generally, second that a commander like format that touts the availability of planeswalkers as a feature has proven unpopular which shows that it doesn't follow that allowing planeswalkers as commanders is something that would increase the draw of a format, and third that it's pretty clear that a lot more people are against pw commanders than for them, so it does seem that allowing all pws as commanders is more likely to be a liability than a benefit.
Brawl of course had no choice but to allow all walkers as there just aren't enough legendary creatures to sustain the format without them (and even with then it's close, and that's bouyed by legend and PW heavy sets like Dominaria and the three Ravnica sets). Personally, i think if pw commanders were actually a major draw then brawl would have done better, as pw commanders are the most tangible additive feature the format has that edh doesn't. If it had real value, the people who really want that feature would have done more to help the format to succeed. They didn't, and the only takeaway I can get from that is that, at best, pw commanders are not something that makes a format better, even for the people who most want that. This isn't even taking into account anyone who was turned off on brawl BECAUSE of pws, which is certainly non zero but since I don't have anyway of knowing how significant it is I'm not even considering it in my argument.
But the big, and I thought obvious, point in comparing edh to brawl centers on what Carthage said, that edh is by far the most popular casual format. He's complaining about the status quo, not allowing pws as commanders, in the most popular casual format, without considering that a big reason that it IS the most popular format is the decision making ability of the RC, who created the format and maintained it. Wizards promoting it helped it grows as did creating precons, but as we can see they promoted brawl more heavily and held brawl events and brawl failed, so promotion doesn't mean much without a good product, and in this case that good product are the rules that underpin the format. I don't agree with everything the RC does, but I recognize that, even with their mistakes, theyve done a phenomenal job, and the success of the format is proof, especially when even wizards can't generate the same amount of success with the formats they create or the tweaks they try to make to edh (see mtgo edh fiasco from a couple years back).
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
I've gotten used to him stretching for whatever he can find to dismiss my arguments out of hand and insinuate that I have nothing but foul intentions. He does that whenever a point is made that he cannot easily refute. It's easier to pretend you are the smartest guy in the room when you don't concede that the people you disagree with can make valid points. I still respond to him because he does often make valid points, and while he's dismissive he doesn't straight up call people <snip> like some posters that are impossible to talk to.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
In all fairness most of the contributors to this thread have got fired up once or twice, myself included. In other interactions with Taleran I've found them cogent and pretty well reasoned. I really don't like getting into attacking people's character, so I won't - I don't think there's scope for it here anyway. But yeah, the last couple of comments have been a little disappointing.
Moving forward I think it's important for us to remember to attack arguments, not the people making them. Also, there's no value to be gained by misrepresenting someone's argument to prove your own point.
Removed offensive language - cryo
We're complaining about having an exiling graveyard card commander now? Really? This is mind blowing bias against planeswalker commanders.
No, it's not. Cryo is entitled to feel how they want about each card. If anything it's a preference to not wanting to see mass exile in the command zone. Which I can understand - I'm not overly worried about it myself, but I get why it's a concern.
Once again, misrepresenting someone's statements to strengthen your own is not a reasonable way to have a discussion.
I consider calling ashiok a problem card to be extreme hyperbole to the point of ridiculousness. I will not entertain such statements. It is equivalent to me to saying brothers yamazaki is a problem card.
It's not the poster for why walkers shouldn't be in the command zone to me, but I certainly wouldn't enjoy playing against an Ashiok deck.
Well, its not just repeatedly exiling graveyards (and thus shutting down gy decks from the command zone), its also shutting down your opponents' ability to tutor and use sac lands. I mean, stopping the efficient tutors is a positive, but a lot of pretty basic stuff relies on searching the library, even budget stuff like terramorphic expanse, myriad landscape, cultivate, etc. It would be a pretty miserable commander to play against for most decks. Banworthy? I'm not sure, but certainly something I'd wager most people are glad they won't have to face in the command zone.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
Otherwise, give examples of creatures that would be similar.
Oloro, Nekusar, Kaalia, Ydris, Animar, Derevi, Narset, Prossh, Krenko
There's a few to start off with, there are many more.
Of these, the only one I take umbrage with is Narset.
It seems like this is really just a list of commanders you've faced down that you've struggled to compete against. Would that be an accurate assessment? They're all strong in their own way, but none of them are unbeatable or necessarily unfun to play against. All are dependent on the 99 you surround them with in terms of how oppressive they are.
Some are a bit on the whatever side in terms of being just ridiculously strong as opposed to unfun, but you are deaf to the community if you think oloro and nekusar are fun for your average table.
I never have got why people hold so much ire towards Oloro. He's always active, sure, but he's far from busted. Anything else a deck throws at you, you can point the blame squarely on the deck builder, not the commander.
Nekusar, yeah I get that. It tends to be somewhat of a glass cannon though. I haven't seen a whole lot of wins from Nekusar.
None of these are remotely close to being as oppressive as Ashiok. If you cannot see the difference, then we aren’t going to have a productive discussion.
When you list those card, you are only basing what exists in the 99, and has absolutely nothing to do with those cards themselves. Like Toc said, Narset, and to a lesser extent, Derevi, could even be considered “oppressive”.
Maybe, though, this proves a point, but not yours. Those decks can be pretty oppressive, and mostly miserable to play against. It’s because they enable powerful interactions within your deck to take place.
Ancestral Statue and Morph are powerful cards/abilities in Animar, hardly anywhere else.
Oloro enables Stax/control builds by continually buffing your life total, which is used as a resource.
Kaalia? Seriously? Let me guess, Kaalia+Armageddon? Is that really Kaalia? Lol.
Ashiok, though, shuts off Ramp and graveyard strategies. Just Ashiok. Combine that with being in the best control colors, and you have a recipe for a pretty degenerate build. One card shuts off combo/ramp and graveyard shenanigans. Always Accesible.
So, of those cards you listed, which ones do something like that on their own?
No offense, but this seems a bit disingenuous.
As someone who had multiple players playing Leovold in our Meta, we never had a problem with it... But you and I both know that that isn't a fair summary of the format at large.
I agree that Ashiok is oppressive, and a solid case study why one might not want Planeswalkers as commanders - but if you are predicating your argument on the best example of how wrong it can go, then you are being a bit hypocritical when you dismiss the frustrations an average table might feel towards other highly frustrating commanders that are still legal in the format.
THE JUICE[BOX]³ CUBE