Originally came to this when on the Rules FAQ. So I had a thought about Wizards and their role in commander. Primarily how they have the power to do some card rulings as fan service that would not hurt the game a ounce but would unify it allot without costing them a dime. Simple stuff like these next few ideas:
#1 Rule Gisela, the Broken Blade and bruna the fading light partner commanders. Mono white is horrible but this would be allot of fun to see and I think its something allot of house rules allow but yet wizards has stayed mum on
#2 Rule Genju of the Realm a viable commander. He's a great fun 5 color option who is not terrible powerful next to someone like Scion, Ramos, or Sliver Overlord. Seriously they just need to do this. Its again an unofficial commander.
#3 Rule Budoka Gardener, should be a commander come on now! Just rule it!
People will say, but it isn't in the rules...
Some of the above recommendations are stapels of small groups and house rules but are still not officially ruled in. None of them are competitive but they are all fun. This format is about fun and being memorable. I think before wizards does goofy stuff like make planeswalkers into commanders they should fix these and other cards I'm not yet aware of. Simple rulings in this specific area for a select number of cards would really infuse the format with allot of positivity as the rising competitive scene is starting to snuff out some of that at my local card shops.
I think the only reasonable rule would be those concerning Budoka Gardener: "if any part of the creature is legendary it may be your commander." Still no Elbrus/Westvale, but the kamigawa flips are okay.
The current rules are simple and easy to explain: your commander is one legendary creature unless the card says otherwise (partner commanders and planeswalker commanders).
If you start expanding that, the rule becomes much more difficult to explain. There become a number of exceptions that aren't obvious just by reading the card. Now we have to maintain a separate "Exceptions" list in addition to the Ban list. And then you have people arguing about where the arbitrary line is drawn. Why do you allow one pairing but not another? Why allow one legendary noncreature but not another? It becomes a slippery slope from "Why can't I run Gisela and Bruna as partners?" to "Why can't I run Brothers Yamazaki partners?" to "Why can't I run all versions of one particular legend as partners to each other?" (ie - Ezuri and Ezuri) The complexity snowballs out of control, and flavor can be used to justify anything.
KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) is a good guideline for a reason. Trying to be 'all the things to all the people' can lead to a loss of identity and focus. An idea executed in the most streamlined way, however, can become iconic. Which, I believe, is why EDH/Commander has become so popular - it's a cool twist that can be explained easily to other Magic players.
And you can always house rule to allow something beyond the official rules.
Some of the above recommendations are stapels of small groups and house rules but are still not officially ruled in.
This reads as "I don't want to have to dig for half of Brisela in my mono-white deck, and I want to use argumentum ad populum to convince people it's a good idea."
Some of the above recommendations are stapels of small groups and house rules but are still not officially ruled in.
This reads as "I don't want to have to dig for half of Brisela in my mono-white deck, and I want to use argumentum ad populum to convince people it's a good idea."
I read it as "I want an inelegant design because I don't want to dig for half of Brisela etc. etc."
I tend to think of it like tribal (the card type, not just "creature types matter"). While Goblin Grenade could be "Tribal Sorcery—Goblin" or Mobilization could be "Tribal Enchantment—Soldier", what does that accomplish, really? It just makes for a mess of errata just to make tribal staples trigger Door of Destinies.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
1. I disagree, I think facing Brisela is atrocious and I wouldn't want the whole combo to be in the command zone. Literally make a deck with 45 lands and 54 ramp spells, because it's all you need.
2. Okay, but can I use Aetherworks Marvel as a commander? What about Gaea's Cradle? Or any other legendary permanent? You can't change the rules to accommodate a single card. Either make it possible for all legendary permanents, or don't do anything.
3. What do you mean "just rule it"? Like, make a new rule that says that this specific card can be played as a commander? Seems arbitrary.
Wizards does not make the rules for commander, and they aren't going to Errata cards to say "This can be played as your commander" or "This card has partner", since the text does not appear on the card.
Don't you hate it when somebody plays something from Arabian Nights and you need to look up the oracle text to understand what it does? Well, now, you want us to look up every card for potential errata that is specific to commander?
While I think it is easy to explain that some legendary non-creatures are more obvious as commanders than others (like Genju of the Realms vs. Day of Destiny), I don't like just adding such things to the rules on a case by case basis.
There is no unifying thing that would explain why some non-legendary creatures should be allowed as commanders (Chromanticore) and why some non-creatures should be allowed. Just like there is no way to easily allow players to use Suspend from the Command Zone for Ith, High Arcanist or to allow players to discard Haakon, Stromgald Scourge from the command zone.
While I think you can combine all of the planeswalkers and let them be allowed as a group, that doesn't really apply to individual cards on a case by case basis and I don't think the rules should be modified to allow it. I definitely think House Rules are the way to go with these individual cards.
1. I disagree, I think facing Brisela is atrocious and I wouldn't want the whole combo to be in the command zone. Literally make a deck with 45 lands and 54 ramp spells, because it's all you need.
2. Okay, but can I use Aetherworks Marvel as a commander? What about Gaea's Cradle? Or any other legendary permanent? You can't change the rules to accommodate a single card. Either make it possible for all legendary permanents, or don't do anything.
3. What do you mean "just rule it"? Like, make a new rule that says that this specific card can be played as a commander? Seems arbitrary.
Wizards does not make the rules for commander, and they aren't going to Errata cards to say "This can be played as your commander" or "This card has partner", since the text does not appear on the card.
Don't you hate it when somebody plays something from Arabian Nights and you need to look up the oracle text to understand what it does? Well, now, you want us to look up every card for potential errata that is specific to commander?
The game is fine as-is. Fewer rules is better.
If you compare Brisela, Voice of Nightmares to other win con combo's in the mono white format... I think you may realize as OP as she seems you are actually dealing with a exceptionally manageable Character in her. She's slow to get out and easy to prevent. She isn't even a win con if you do get her out, she doesn't count as general damage. In all the games she has come of my deck or another's I've never gotten to see her attack once. People forget she has to survive a full rotation before attacking because she merges at the end of turn. If your afraid of her you simply don't understand her limitations or your play group meta is very... soft, if you can't handle Brisela you can't handle the better mono white commanders like avacyn who can combo out the turn they play to win the game.
The current rules are simple and easy to explain: your commander is one legendary creature unless the card says otherwise (partner commanders and planeswalker commanders).
If you start expanding that, the rule becomes much more difficult to explain. There become a number of exceptions that aren't obvious just by reading the card. Now we have to maintain a separate "Exceptions" list in addition to the Ban list. And then you have people arguing about where the arbitrary line is drawn. Why do you allow one pairing but not another? Why allow one legendary noncreature but not another? It becomes a slippery slope from "Why can't I run Gisela and Bruna as partners?" to "Why can't I run Brothers Yamazaki partners?" to "Why can't I run all versions of one particular legend as partners to each other?" (ie - Ezuri and Ezuri) The complexity snowballs out of control, and flavor can be used to justify anything.
KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) is a good guideline for a reason. Trying to be 'all the things to all the people' can lead to a loss of identity and focus. An idea executed in the most streamlined way, however, can become iconic. Which, I believe, is why EDH/Commander has become so popular - it's a cool twist that can be explained easily to other Magic players.
And you can always house rule to allow something beyond the official rules.
I think the only reasonable rule would be those concerning Budoka Gardener: "if any part of the creature is legendary it may be your commander." Still no Elbrus/Westvale, but the kamigawa flips are okay.
Guys, and to others of this concern you clearly don't realize the pure level of errata the average card in a legacy format contains, lol. I mean seriously reflect on that for a moment. Commander, is a legacy format... I would say 50 percent of the nonland cards in my deck don't play as they read. Some of my decks its more like 90 percent. Wizards could even do a errata print run product that has a pile of these new generals in a box set if they really want money. Then you'd have the simplified solution to your problem and the fan service. I can't go to a MTG Commander night and not see atleast 2 decks running unofficial commanders (and I'm fine with them as what I generally see are not OP but flavor based choices). Meanwhile you have wizards creating planeswalker commanders who are cool but in no way reflective of the flavor of the format.
I Simply think your stating a problem that; A. already exists in the format on a large scale so its not really an issue at all. & B. are not looking at past solutions they've already created for said problem.
While I think it is easy to explain that some legendary non-creatures are more obvious as commanders than others (like Genju of the Realms vs. Day of Destiny), I don't like just adding such things to the rules on a case by case basis.
There is no unifying thing that would explain why some non-legendary creatures should be allowed as commanders (Chromanticore) and why some non-creatures should be allowed. Just like there is no way to easily allow players to use Suspend from the Command Zone for Ith, High Arcanist or to allow players to discard Haakon, Stromgald Scourge from the command zone.
While I think you can combine all of the planeswalkers and let them be allowed as a group, that doesn't really apply to individual cards on a case by case basis and I don't think the rules should be modified to allow it. I definitely think House Rules are the way to go with these individual cards.
I'd have been cool if there was never a planeswalker commander. The format existed for long enough without them and they did sort of open a can of worms. Then follow that with the new legendary rules and its pretty annoying they all aren't commanders at this point.
That statement follows another point. The idea that legendary permanents need to have a natural creature state to be eligible. Not that something like a Westvale Abbey wouldn't be dangerous. Not sure how mono black gen's compare I don't play that yet and don't see allot in my play circles.
She isn't even a win con if you do get her out, she doesn't count as general damage. In all the games she has come of my deck or another's I've never gotten to see her attack once. People forget she has to survive a full rotation before attacking because she merges at the end of turn. If your afraid of her you simply don't understand her limitations or your play group meta is very... soft, if you can't handle Brisela you can't handle the better mono white commanders like avacyn who can combo out the turn they play to win the game.
First, I think idea is overall a bad idea. Feel free to house rule this as you want, but the number of things that could fall under this idea is too large and unwieldy to make it easy for someone to just build a deck or play a game. Enough examples of this have been given here to show that it is not as easy as you make it out to be. And just because Brisela is "weak" (which she is not) doesn't mean she should benefit from a rule change to make her better.
In any case, I wanted to comment on the above comment (bolded for reference). Brisela certainly does count as Commander damage. I am not sure why you think she wouldn't. As long as one half of the melded permanent is your commander, the melded permanent itself is then your Commander.
1. I disagree, I think facing Brisela is atrocious and I wouldn't want the whole combo to be in the command zone. Literally make a deck with 45 lands and 54 ramp spells, because it's all you need.
2. Okay, but can I use Aetherworks Marvel as a commander? What about Gaea's Cradle? Or any other legendary permanent? You can't change the rules to accommodate a single card. Either make it possible for all legendary permanents, or don't do anything.
3. What do you mean "just rule it"? Like, make a new rule that says that this specific card can be played as a commander? Seems arbitrary.
Wizards does not make the rules for commander, and they aren't going to Errata cards to say "This can be played as your commander" or "This card has partner", since the text does not appear on the card.
Don't you hate it when somebody plays something from Arabian Nights and you need to look up the oracle text to understand what it does? Well, now, you want us to look up every card for potential errata that is specific to commander?
The game is fine as-is. Fewer rules is better.
I've addressed #1 in other posts. #2, legendary permanents that have an on card creature state of some sort. Not that they create tokens but the permanent causes some sort of creature transformation if its not natively a creature.
to your #3, errata. This is a legacy format, if your not familiar with errata your not playing the cards right. To that end wizards up to the modern scene would typically have to rewrite the more powerful cards post printing with errata to balance them. We play a legacy format, so many of the cards we use have errata or rulings if they don't that have huge impacts on how they function. It would literally not be a big issue to errata a format like commander especially when you're legalizing weak but flavorful cards. They could assuage the concerned parties with reprints in a from the vault commander set showing the new text.
Guys I realize I may be ignorant of one angle here. MTG online. I mean if you play that I'm not sure how errata effects that at all. You may not have ever experienced it as I'm sure they can alter a card after generating it.
The average magic player in my play groups has been helming decks for over 20 years so errata is life, lol. We are just short of dual lands in our group, everyone has a half dozen scroll racks, divining tops, mana crypts, mana vaults, mox's etc. So I'm sure some of what I experience is different than you experience.
She isn't even a win con if you do get her out, she doesn't count as general damage. In all the games she has come of my deck or another's I've never gotten to see her attack once. People forget she has to survive a full rotation before attacking because she merges at the end of turn. If your afraid of her you simply don't understand her limitations or your play group meta is very... soft, if you can't handle Brisela you can't handle the better mono white commanders like avacyn who can combo out the turn they play to win the game.
First, I think idea is overall a bad idea. Feel free to house rule this as you want, but the number of things that could fall under this idea is too large and unwieldy to make it easy for someone to just build a deck or play a game. Enough examples of this have been given here to show that it is not as easy as you make it out to be. And just because Brisela is "weak" (which she is not) doesn't mean she should benefit from a rule change to make her better.
In any case, I wanted to comment on the above comment (bolded for reference). Brisela certainly does count as Commander damage. I am not sure why you think she wouldn't. As long as one half of the melded permanent is your commander, the melded permanent itself is then your Commander.
If you do nothing to here she isn't weak. but again she has to survive a full rotation no matter what. And unless you got phat mana it easy to deny the board to one or both of her parts. Say each creature was knocked once, her total cost is now up 4! And she already is what, like 11 to drop on the board?
Better yet, if you have an answer let her transform then you can get her cost to go up 4 in one move rather than picking at the parts.
I didn't say she is bad, just that if your meta reliably lets Brisela survive a rotation... well that is your meta not her card. And there are allot of other creatures who will combo out same turn they drop to win or at-least gain a major foot hold in the match.
Again if on card is what you want a commander product could be made. As we are a legacy format and errata is part and parcel to my experience with it I don't see why this is such an issue. If commander was a "modern" or more current format it would make total sense. Instead we have like 20 banned cards so allot of errata in every game. Even when errata isn't an issue rulings are. I rarely get through a game without 3-4 quick googles into rules for stuff.
But such is the nature of magic. Also I think some confusion on this forum might come from people who only play the online game where I have no idea if errata exists, lol. or even how rulings officially work. Its kinda alien to me. I would see it as a bigger benefit to the online community as I'm sure you can't apply house rules. The only thing I've heard about online is how divining top slows the game down too much and everyone auto quits when they see a Niv-Mizzet.
Just like there is no way to easily allow players to use Suspend from the Command Zone for Ith, High Arcanist or to allow players to discard Haakon, Stromgald Scourge from the command zone.
But I really want to Ninjitsu Ink-Eyes from the Command Zone, so WIZARDS NEEDS TO CHANGE THE RULES to match my expectations. Yeah, making individual justifications would be a mess and isn't worth the extra baggage. What would it add to the format, really? A drop of flavor and a bucket of complication.
Guys, and to others of this concern you clearly don't realize the pure level of errata the average card in a legacy format contains, lol. I mean seriously reflect on that for a moment. Commander, is a legacy format... I would say 50 percent of the nonland cards in my deck don't play as they read. Some of my decks its more like 90 percent. Wizards could even do a errata print run product that has a pile of these new generals in a box set if they really want money. Then you'd have the simplified solution to your problem and the fan service. I can't go to a MTG Commander night and not see atleast 2 decks running unofficial commanders (and I'm fine with them as what I generally see are not OP but flavor based choices). Meanwhile you have wizards creating planeswalker commanders who are cool but in no way reflective of the flavor of the format.
I Simply think your stating a problem that; A. already exists in the format on a large scale so its not really an issue at all. & B. are not looking at past solutions they've already created for said problem.
So, you see a mess and want to pile more garbage on it? At what point do you believe the baggage outweighs the benefits?
Do a lot of older cards have errata? Yes. Is it to the point where you said that they "don't play as they read"? Some. Fifty to ninety percent? Doubtful. Got any examples? I mean, sure, Terror and Terror may use different words, but it still plays the same and is understandable - a nonblack, nonartifact creature goes from the battlefield to the graveyard; the only issue I see is that "bury" had an inherent "can't be regenerated" clause that was later spelled out for clarity, but I can't even think of the last time I saw someone regenerate a creature. So what are all these cards that don't play as they read?
If you are correct and the bulk of cards are burdened with errata that adds unnecessary complexity, I would think that you of all people would appreciate the KISS principle. We already get complexity creep - it's part of the game. Therefore, we should be looking for ways to simplify wherever possible rather than looking for ways to dramatically increase entropy. And keeping the commander rule to a single, easily described sentence rather than adding a massive list of exceptions and/or additional non-functional errata seems like a good place to start.
What does the format gain by adding such rules? Maybe a tiny bit of flavor? Maybe a mess that requires additional bannings? Certainly a bigger headache. Is it worth it? I don't think so. Again, the rules of branding value simple and focused. Complicated and all over the place just causes problems.
1. I disagree, I think facing Brisela is atrocious and I wouldn't want the whole combo to be in the command zone. Literally make a deck with 45 lands and 54 ramp spells, because it's all you need.
2. Okay, but can I use Aetherworks Marvel as a commander? What about Gaea's Cradle? Or any other legendary permanent? You can't change the rules to accommodate a single card. Either make it possible for all legendary permanents, or don't do anything.
3. What do you mean "just rule it"? Like, make a new rule that says that this specific card can be played as a commander? Seems arbitrary.
Wizards does not make the rules for commander, and they aren't going to Errata cards to say "This can be played as your commander" or "This card has partner", since the text does not appear on the card.
Don't you hate it when somebody plays something from Arabian Nights and you need to look up the oracle text to understand what it does? Well, now, you want us to look up every card for potential errata that is specific to commander?
The game is fine as-is. Fewer rules is better.
I've addressed #1 in other posts. #2, legendary permanents that have an on card creature state of some sort. Not that they create tokens but the permanent causes some sort of creature transformation if its not natively a creature.
to your #3, errata. This is a legacy format, if your not familiar with errata your not playing the cards right. To that end wizards up to the modern scene would typically have to rewrite the more powerful cards post printing with errata to balance them. We play a legacy format, so many of the cards we use have errata or rulings if they don't that have huge impacts on how they function. It would literally not be a big issue to errata a format like commander especially when you're legalizing weak but flavorful cards. They could assuage the concerned parties with reprints in a from the vault commander set showing the new text.
The errata question was addressed by another - the errata for older cards is not preferable, but unavoidable. If it can be avoided, it should be. Additionally, this is functional errata, which WOTC says they will no longer do as it causes more headaches than anything.
to your #3, errata. This is a legacy format, if your not familiar with errata your not playing the cards right. To that end wizards up to the modern scene would typically have to rewrite the more powerful cards post printing with errata to balance them.
This is not how errata works in Magic. Aside from the Grand Creature Type Update, errata is used for one of two things:
1) To make cards work the way they were printed with modern templating
2) To fix errors, of which I can think of three, none of which see any Legacy play (Hostage Taker, Marath, Walking Atlas)
Balancing is not done through errata. The primary goal of errata is so that players can look at an old card and still play *what the card already says* correctly, even though the text on it isn't functional Magic text.
Beyond that, I think the fact that you're already having to come up with arbitrary lines as to what should and shouldn't receive Commander designation is a sign that this is maybe a bad idea.
Guys, and to others of this concern you clearly don't realize the pure level of errata the average card in a legacy format contains, lol. I mean seriously reflect on that for a moment. Commander, is a legacy format... I would say 50 percent of the nonland cards in my deck don't play as they read. Some of my decks its more like 90 percent. Wizards could even do a errata print run product that has a pile of these new generals in a box set if they really want money. Then you'd have the simplified solution to your problem and the fan service. I can't go to a MTG Commander night and not see atleast 2 decks running unofficial commanders (and I'm fine with them as what I generally see are not OP but flavor based choices). Meanwhile you have wizards creating planeswalker commanders who are cool but in no way reflective of the flavor of the format.
There is a big difference between functional errata and templating. The only cards that I can think of that still have functional errata are Lotus Vale/Scorched Ruins/Mox Diamond making their ETB into a replacement effect.
WOTC is hesitant to make functional game errata to existing cards. Unless it is an obvious error (Walking Atlas missing its Artifact type), they don't want the headache of maintaining lots of functional changes.
They've stated that the Grand Creature Type Update was probably a mistake.
WOTC is hesitant to make functional game errata to existing cards. Unless it is an obvious error (Walking Atlas missing its Artifact type), they don't want the headache of maintaining lots of functional changes.
They've stated that the Grand Creature Type Update was probably a mistake.
Weird, the Grand Creature Type update made the game better.
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!
As to the idea of printing an "Errata Masters" that's just terrible. One of the most valid complaints I've heard about WotC updating the planeswalker redirection rule is this same errata issue. I shouldn't need to buy a new set of lightning bolts or bust out my phone and go to gatherer just to know for sure how my card plays. Similarly I shouldn't need to buy a new version of a card just to prove that what I'm doing in a casual format is legal.
As to your point of errata being life I think you're severely overestimating to make your point or you're playing a bunch of banding. I can't think of a single time in all the time I've been playing commander(all of which is in physical paper not online) that ive had to look something up because the card wasnt clear about what it does. Sometimes the way two cards interact can be obscure but I generally have enough rules knowledge to cover me and my friends weekly commander night.
Like every planeswalker prior to ixalan is Errata'd, lol. Do you play physical cards or just MTGO? I don't know anything about MTGO but I wonder how it handles errata and how many of the people commenting on here play MTGO. If it works as I suspect then it would explain the relative ignorance to Errata in a legacy format.
You're current on stuff but players who aren't online following the rules changes and Errata shifts don't internalize this stuff. I'm my play group I'm the guy who informs people, then they want me to google it and show them. Every, and I mean every game that goes past turn 5 has a ruling we need to lookup for a rare card interaction where errata or rulings are needed to see if the play works.
I'm not saying every legendary permanent needs to be a general, lol. Just that this house format has unofficial gen's who get lots of play. They frequently are not even competitive cards and so it would behoove Wizards to listen to the community. If they want to be lazy about it, they could simply do Errata. If they want to be cool they could make a commander from the vault product with new text on the cards in question.
It seems that the major sticking point for most people on this idea is the concept of Erata being bad, when in fact it is part of the format through and through. It's a legacy format. But if that is really the issue then wizards could cash in with a product for these fan favorites to print them, problem solved. I'm just saying wizards could listen to the audience here rather than making more game breaking generals in their precon products.
Like how many stinking generals don't even have their creature type on the card, seriously guys! Cromat thinks you all are silly.
WOTC is hesitant to make functional game errata to existing cards. Unless it is an obvious error (Walking Atlas missing its Artifact type), they don't want the headache of maintaining lots of functional changes.
They've stated that the Grand Creature Type Update was probably a mistake.
The new planeswalker ruling is a huge mistake but that doesn't stop them from making it or that from basically Erataing every planeswalker in modern, lol. A whole set of cards are now functionally different than they used to be, hilarious.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
#1 Rule Gisela, the Broken Blade and bruna the fading light partner commanders. Mono white is horrible but this would be allot of fun to see and I think its something allot of house rules allow but yet wizards has stayed mum on
#2 Rule Genju of the Realm a viable commander. He's a great fun 5 color option who is not terrible powerful next to someone like Scion, Ramos, or Sliver Overlord. Seriously they just need to do this. Its again an unofficial commander.
#3 Rule Budoka Gardener, should be a commander come on now! Just rule it!
People will say, but it isn't in the rules...
Some of the above recommendations are stapels of small groups and house rules but are still not officially ruled in. None of them are competitive but they are all fun. This format is about fun and being memorable. I think before wizards does goofy stuff like make planeswalkers into commanders they should fix these and other cards I'm not yet aware of. Simple rulings in this specific area for a select number of cards would really infuse the format with allot of positivity as the rising competitive scene is starting to snuff out some of that at my local card shops.
Brothers Yamizaki partners?
Weatherlight crew partners? (Gerrard Capashen/Captain Sisay/Hanna, Ship's Navigator/Ertai, Wizard Adept, etc)
Legendary lands as commanders?
Planeswalkers are noncreature legendaries, too.
I think the only reasonable rule would be those concerning Budoka Gardener: "if any part of the creature is legendary it may be your commander." Still no Elbrus/Westvale, but the kamigawa flips are okay.
If you start expanding that, the rule becomes much more difficult to explain. There become a number of exceptions that aren't obvious just by reading the card. Now we have to maintain a separate "Exceptions" list in addition to the Ban list. And then you have people arguing about where the arbitrary line is drawn. Why do you allow one pairing but not another? Why allow one legendary noncreature but not another? It becomes a slippery slope from "Why can't I run Gisela and Bruna as partners?" to "Why can't I run Brothers Yamazaki partners?" to "Why can't I run all versions of one particular legend as partners to each other?" (ie - Ezuri and Ezuri) The complexity snowballs out of control, and flavor can be used to justify anything.
KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) is a good guideline for a reason. Trying to be 'all the things to all the people' can lead to a loss of identity and focus. An idea executed in the most streamlined way, however, can become iconic. Which, I believe, is why EDH/Commander has become so popular - it's a cool twist that can be explained easily to other Magic players.
And you can always house rule to allow something beyond the official rules.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
I read it as "I want an inelegant design because I don't want to dig for half of Brisela etc. etc."
I tend to think of it like tribal (the card type, not just "creature types matter"). While Goblin Grenade could be "Tribal Sorcery—Goblin" or Mobilization could be "Tribal Enchantment—Soldier", what does that accomplish, really? It just makes for a mess of errata just to make tribal staples trigger Door of Destinies.
On phasing:
2. Okay, but can I use Aetherworks Marvel as a commander? What about Gaea's Cradle? Or any other legendary permanent? You can't change the rules to accommodate a single card. Either make it possible for all legendary permanents, or don't do anything.
3. What do you mean "just rule it"? Like, make a new rule that says that this specific card can be played as a commander? Seems arbitrary.
Wizards does not make the rules for commander, and they aren't going to Errata cards to say "This can be played as your commander" or "This card has partner", since the text does not appear on the card.
Don't you hate it when somebody plays something from Arabian Nights and you need to look up the oracle text to understand what it does? Well, now, you want us to look up every card for potential errata that is specific to commander?
The game is fine as-is. Fewer rules is better.
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
There is no unifying thing that would explain why some non-legendary creatures should be allowed as commanders (Chromanticore) and why some non-creatures should be allowed. Just like there is no way to easily allow players to use Suspend from the Command Zone for Ith, High Arcanist or to allow players to discard Haakon, Stromgald Scourge from the command zone.
While I think you can combine all of the planeswalkers and let them be allowed as a group, that doesn't really apply to individual cards on a case by case basis and I don't think the rules should be modified to allow it. I definitely think House Rules are the way to go with these individual cards.
Guys, and to others of this concern you clearly don't realize the pure level of errata the average card in a legacy format contains, lol. I mean seriously reflect on that for a moment. Commander, is a legacy format... I would say 50 percent of the nonland cards in my deck don't play as they read. Some of my decks its more like 90 percent. Wizards could even do a errata print run product that has a pile of these new generals in a box set if they really want money. Then you'd have the simplified solution to your problem and the fan service. I can't go to a MTG Commander night and not see atleast 2 decks running unofficial commanders (and I'm fine with them as what I generally see are not OP but flavor based choices). Meanwhile you have wizards creating planeswalker commanders who are cool but in no way reflective of the flavor of the format.
I Simply think your stating a problem that; A. already exists in the format on a large scale so its not really an issue at all. & B. are not looking at past solutions they've already created for said problem.
I'd have been cool if there was never a planeswalker commander. The format existed for long enough without them and they did sort of open a can of worms. Then follow that with the new legendary rules and its pretty annoying they all aren't commanders at this point.
That statement follows another point. The idea that legendary permanents need to have a natural creature state to be eligible. Not that something like a Westvale Abbey wouldn't be dangerous. Not sure how mono black gen's compare I don't play that yet and don't see allot in my play circles.
In any case, I wanted to comment on the above comment (bolded for reference). Brisela certainly does count as Commander damage. I am not sure why you think she wouldn't. As long as one half of the melded permanent is your commander, the melded permanent itself is then your Commander.
I've addressed #1 in other posts. #2, legendary permanents that have an on card creature state of some sort. Not that they create tokens but the permanent causes some sort of creature transformation if its not natively a creature.
to your #3, errata. This is a legacy format, if your not familiar with errata your not playing the cards right. To that end wizards up to the modern scene would typically have to rewrite the more powerful cards post printing with errata to balance them. We play a legacy format, so many of the cards we use have errata or rulings if they don't that have huge impacts on how they function. It would literally not be a big issue to errata a format like commander especially when you're legalizing weak but flavorful cards. They could assuage the concerned parties with reprints in a from the vault commander set showing the new text.
The average magic player in my play groups has been helming decks for over 20 years so errata is life, lol. We are just short of dual lands in our group, everyone has a half dozen scroll racks, divining tops, mana crypts, mana vaults, mox's etc. So I'm sure some of what I experience is different than you experience.
If you do nothing to here she isn't weak. but again she has to survive a full rotation no matter what. And unless you got phat mana it easy to deny the board to one or both of her parts. Say each creature was knocked once, her total cost is now up 4! And she already is what, like 11 to drop on the board?
Better yet, if you have an answer let her transform then you can get her cost to go up 4 in one move rather than picking at the parts.
I didn't say she is bad, just that if your meta reliably lets Brisela survive a rotation... well that is your meta not her card. And there are allot of other creatures who will combo out same turn they drop to win or at-least gain a major foot hold in the match.
Again if on card is what you want a commander product could be made. As we are a legacy format and errata is part and parcel to my experience with it I don't see why this is such an issue. If commander was a "modern" or more current format it would make total sense. Instead we have like 20 banned cards so allot of errata in every game. Even when errata isn't an issue rulings are. I rarely get through a game without 3-4 quick googles into rules for stuff.
But such is the nature of magic. Also I think some confusion on this forum might come from people who only play the online game where I have no idea if errata exists, lol. or even how rulings officially work. Its kinda alien to me. I would see it as a bigger benefit to the online community as I'm sure you can't apply house rules. The only thing I've heard about online is how divining top slows the game down too much and everyone auto quits when they see a Niv-Mizzet.
Do a lot of older cards have errata? Yes. Is it to the point where you said that they "don't play as they read"? Some. Fifty to ninety percent? Doubtful. Got any examples? I mean, sure, Terror and Terror may use different words, but it still plays the same and is understandable - a nonblack, nonartifact creature goes from the battlefield to the graveyard; the only issue I see is that "bury" had an inherent "can't be regenerated" clause that was later spelled out for clarity, but I can't even think of the last time I saw someone regenerate a creature. So what are all these cards that don't play as they read?
If you are correct and the bulk of cards are burdened with errata that adds unnecessary complexity, I would think that you of all people would appreciate the KISS principle. We already get complexity creep - it's part of the game. Therefore, we should be looking for ways to simplify wherever possible rather than looking for ways to dramatically increase entropy. And keeping the commander rule to a single, easily described sentence rather than adding a massive list of exceptions and/or additional non-functional errata seems like a good place to start.
What does the format gain by adding such rules? Maybe a tiny bit of flavor? Maybe a mess that requires additional bannings? Certainly a bigger headache. Is it worth it? I don't think so. Again, the rules of branding value simple and focused. Complicated and all over the place just causes problems.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
Are you saying you want all the Gideons and Sarkhan Dragonspeaker to be playable as commanders? What about Elbrus, the Binding Blade, Heart of Kiran, Sky Sovereign, Consul Flagship and Westvale Abbey? I'm not convinced that it is worth the headache
The errata question was addressed by another - the errata for older cards is not preferable, but unavoidable. If it can be avoided, it should be. Additionally, this is functional errata, which WOTC says they will no longer do as it causes more headaches than anything.
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
This is not how errata works in Magic. Aside from the Grand Creature Type Update, errata is used for one of two things:
1) To make cards work the way they were printed with modern templating
2) To fix errors, of which I can think of three, none of which see any Legacy play (Hostage Taker, Marath, Walking Atlas)
Balancing is not done through errata. The primary goal of errata is so that players can look at an old card and still play *what the card already says* correctly, even though the text on it isn't functional Magic text.
Beyond that, I think the fact that you're already having to come up with arbitrary lines as to what should and shouldn't receive Commander designation is a sign that this is maybe a bad idea.
There is a big difference between functional errata and templating. The only cards that I can think of that still have functional errata are Lotus Vale/Scorched Ruins/Mox Diamond making their ETB into a replacement effect.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
They've stated that the Grand Creature Type Update was probably a mistake.
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/163697454263/rd-seems-pretty-adamant-in-not-making-functional
Weird, the Grand Creature Type update made the game better.
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!
As to your point of errata being life I think you're severely overestimating to make your point or you're playing a bunch of banding. I can't think of a single time in all the time I've been playing commander(all of which is in physical paper not online) that ive had to look something up because the card wasnt clear about what it does. Sometimes the way two cards interact can be obscure but I generally have enough rules knowledge to cover me and my friends weekly commander night.
Also: wtf is a "commander common?"
Like every planeswalker prior to ixalan is Errata'd, lol. Do you play physical cards or just MTGO? I don't know anything about MTGO but I wonder how it handles errata and how many of the people commenting on here play MTGO. If it works as I suspect then it would explain the relative ignorance to Errata in a legacy format.
You're current on stuff but players who aren't online following the rules changes and Errata shifts don't internalize this stuff. I'm my play group I'm the guy who informs people, then they want me to google it and show them. Every, and I mean every game that goes past turn 5 has a ruling we need to lookup for a rare card interaction where errata or rulings are needed to see if the play works.
I'm not saying every legendary permanent needs to be a general, lol. Just that this house format has unofficial gen's who get lots of play. They frequently are not even competitive cards and so it would behoove Wizards to listen to the community. If they want to be lazy about it, they could simply do Errata. If they want to be cool they could make a commander from the vault product with new text on the cards in question.
It seems that the major sticking point for most people on this idea is the concept of Erata being bad, when in fact it is part of the format through and through. It's a legacy format. But if that is really the issue then wizards could cash in with a product for these fan favorites to print them, problem solved. I'm just saying wizards could listen to the audience here rather than making more game breaking generals in their precon products.
Like how many stinking generals don't even have their creature type on the card, seriously guys! Cromat thinks you all are silly.
Common now, was supposed to be come on now.
The new planeswalker ruling is a huge mistake but that doesn't stop them from making it or that from basically Erataing every planeswalker in modern, lol. A whole set of cards are now functionally different than they used to be, hilarious.