- BloodyWednesday
- Registered User
-
Member for 11 years, 2 months, and 14 days
Last active Tue, Mar, 30 2021 12:31:41
- 0 Followers
- 189 Total Posts
- 71 Thanks
-
1
benjameenbear posted a message on Tasigur, the Golden Fang: Razaketh Flash Hulk ComboPosted in: Competitive Commander (cEDH)
-
1
Onering posted a message on Banning Criteria discussion: Allow players to win out of nowherePosted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from Daemion »Expropriate is so much better than most cards on the ban list. I can't take this ban list seriously and it's irony that they now offer these criteria - it all just looks even more random
Expropriate should typically be worse than Time Stretch. Blatant Thievery is a good card, but Time Warp is better, and I'd rather have 2 Time Warps than a Time Warp plus a Blatant Thievery most of the time, especially when the former comes at a lower cost. It's a great splashy card, but it only becomes a problem when someone other than the caster votes for time. That's a problem that you should head off before it resolves by explaining how stupid it is to vote for time. 3+ time walks is usually going to be insurmountable, but a timewalk plus a Blatant Thievery should not be (at least when Time Warp wouldn't win on its own). -
1
ancienthonor posted a message on Paradox EnginePosted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from RedGauntlet »Quote from Buffsam89 »Quote from Dunharrow »Well now I guess I am forcing PE in Modern.
Banned because it wins seemingly out of nowhere. No other criteria mentioned.
While other cards also meet this criteria, it seems they leaned on the fact that it requires little deckbuilding focus to be effective.
I believe this is the first card to be banned because it wins seemingly out of nowhere since Coalition Victory. I do not know if this means other cards will start being more heavily considered for banning... but that seems like the logical conclusion.
Certainly shocked, that’s for sure. There’s precedent now for similar cards gaining traction for potential bans. Tooth and Nail being the first card I think falls into a similar category.
You know that tooth and Nail can be sued to tutor anything else that isn't combo right? Tell me what does Paradox Engine offers other then straight up combo? Untaping a couple of mana rocks to add more mana? Woow.
Tough i think they could have explained more the reason why it was banned, but now people aginst the comitee will twist their words in this and used it as more ammuntion.
Giving your team pseudo-vigilance by casting a spell after the attack step. Being able to use cool tap abilities multiples times. Untapping stuff that doesn't during your untap step. -
1
Dunharrow posted a message on Paradox EnginePosted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from RedGauntlet »Quote from Buffsam89 »Quote from Dunharrow »Well now I guess I am forcing PE in Modern.
Banned because it wins seemingly out of nowhere. No other criteria mentioned.
While other cards also meet this criteria, it seems they leaned on the fact that it requires little deckbuilding focus to be effective.
I believe this is the first card to be banned because it wins seemingly out of nowhere since Coalition Victory. I do not know if this means other cards will start being more heavily considered for banning... but that seems like the logical conclusion.
Certainly shocked, that’s for sure. There’s precedent now for similar cards gaining traction for potential bans. Tooth and Nail being the first card I think falls into a similar category.
You know that tooth and Nail can be sued to tutor anything else that isn't combo right? Tell me what does Paradox Engine offers other then straight up combo? Untaping a couple of mana rocks to add more mana? Woow.
Tough i think they could have explained more the reason why it was banned, but now people aginst the comitee will twist their words in this and used it as more ammuntion.
I use it in two decks.
Phenax uses it to mill opponents - kinda like Intruder alarm.
Maelstrom Wanderer is competitive and can use it to combo, but main use is being able to activate Crystal Shard and Tradewind Rider multiple times per turn.
-
1
Gashnaw II posted a message on Painter's ServantPosted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from schweinefett »So finally, it's unbanned. yay!
Yep and aside from Iona, it still interacts poorly with some other cards -
1
Pokken posted a message on Let's speculate on Monday's announcementPosted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
I am ready for all the gray merchant of asphodel cycling kokusho tears. Just play some gravehate scrubs, amirite? -
1
GloriousGoose posted a message on Let's speculate on Monday's announcementI've got a bad feeling about this.Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum -
1
Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from Taleran »My problem with designating a card a card or cards into that is Commander and EDH is a place full of trickle down cards.
If you are gonna tell me that Ad Nauseam is a card that only sees play within a competitive environment I am gonna call you a liar as one example. People see mechanics and decks and synergies that work well in all kinds of decks and the parts of them they like or are affordable are re-purposed into decks they have made that sacrifice the speed of being tuned for some good hay maker all in strategies.
It is why it is dangerous to ascribe any card to any specific place alone because these formats are not vacuums.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I for one don't think that a change to a lower life total would impact the things you are talking about, because a balanced increase of aggro leads to people also running more responses to said aggro so the control decks and the combo decks both wanting to survive in early portions of the game becomes a real thing. This also allows for a meta that plays mostly in battlecruiser and similar configurations to play largely the same game sure the things that generally happened in those games would happen sooner but the amount of give and take would not be lessened I do not think.
I was more wondering about reasons people like 40 life outside of those, because as it stands right now the reasons to keep the life total where it is seem minimal.
Well, once again, I'm not designating them anything, I'm calling it as I see it, and I don't see Ad Nauseum being problematic in casual games. I almost never see it there, and when I do its not doing anything broken. I rarely hear it complained about outside of cEDH either, except for you, right now, as it suits your point. Even the point you try to make acknowledges that when these cards do get ran in more casual settings, its not in the same kind of all in way that would make them problematic. And calling me a liar is, as is so often your style, a baseless personal attack. I mean, maybe you've seen differently in your meta and that's why you are saying it, but if I wanted to be a jerk I could call you a liar and say you are making it up to suit your argument because I have not seen it. That would be asinine, because I have no proof that you have seen it, and that's a reasonable explanation for you insisting that its a problem. But unfortunately for your argument Ad Naus is not something that's running around ruining casual games of commander to any degree that would make it hit the banlist criteria, nor is Doomsday. They are cEDH cards simply because that is where they are ran. Should they actually spread out to casual and start making a splash in a problematic way, then they would cease to be cEDH cards. Then they would be relevant to the conversation on rules changes. And all this would be possible while still ignoring cEDH. We aren't ignoring the CARDS, we're ignoring the cEDH meta, and thus the impact that ANY card has in it. This also works for cards that are problematic in casual but bad in cEDH, as "it isn't in tier 1 decks" isn't an argument against banning.
Saying its a cEDH card isn't ignoring the card, its ignoring its impact on cEDH. The impact of the card on casual is still considered (as I do in my posts) and I don't believe those cards to be problematic in casual, or even prolific there. In order to argue that Ad Naus and Doomsday are significant in the format, you need to bring in cEDH, and that is irrelevant to rules discussion. -
1
I think quarantining certain cards in cEDH-ville while you are thinking about Commander can also be disastrous.Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
I guess to go back to an older style of doing this so much of this post is people posting reasons why we should have life totals lower than 40 and why that would be good and people responding as to why those things are bad.
What are the reasons other than it already being at 40 that it being at 40 is a good number? -
3
cryogen posted a message on Let's speculate on Monday's announcementAbout a month ago the Wizards podcast did an episode with I think 5 of the 6 CAG members, and they were asked what they would banned. Every single one of them said Iona, so I can't believe she is going to remain legal in the long run.Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1
1
Should be this
1
1
My money is on rules changes, maybe BaaC coming back.
Maybe some unbans.
Nothing too drastic in general.
1
2
1
1
That is not strictly true either. Mastermind's Acquisition came out well after Coax from the Blind Eternities and it does not have the 'from exile' template... so that blanket errata would potentially cause new cards to play differently in EDH than they do anywhere else for no real reason.
1
1