Reminds me a lot when Clones stopped being "X: kill target hexproof, indestructible general".
the sky was falling. Sharuum got buffed and overthrow Zur, Oloro, and every other blu or combo commander ever existed
Sigarda and Thrun became the top-tier voltron generals. they were unstoppable and killed everyone the turn after they hit the board
the format was broken
...
oh wait, nothing of these things happened.
I don't think removing tuck is a catastrophic, format-warping change. I, for one, will still play EDH. In fact my decks probably won't even be affected very much, if at all. I just consider this change to be a step in the wrong direction--collapsing diversity, pardoning poor deckbuilding, closing off avenues for future development.
I'm not sure how this collapses diversity. If anything it frees up some automatic deck-slots. I've run hinder and spell crumple in every blue deck I have since the beginning. Oblation has always previously been a no-brainer. Now I can move those out for something different (Dissipate, Dismiss or something else entirely).
It also opens the door for more commander-centric decks that don't have hexproof built in to their card text or decks that have limited ability to tutor up creatures.
I never used Condemn anyway but it was always a card on initial lists before getting cut in favor of Plow or Path. The remaining 4 are probably getting bumped out of my decks as they have generally better options now. Bant Charm might stick around because it's multi-modal but that's unlikely.
Chaos Warp is still worth running since it still sends away a permanent. Terminus and Hallowed Burial were a mixed bag since they were global and you had to plan to save your general anyway. They are still useful as anti-graveyard strategies and now you don't have to worry about tucking your own general along with it.
Cards that are decent replacements for tuck (but not quite as good):
Dryads was already really good anyway, but I think Arrest effects are a decent stand-in to tuck. Dissipate is probably a good candidate for a mono-blue counter in this slot. Gold has better options anyway like Voidslime and Render Silent.
I'm OK with this change because it reduces ubiquity. Spell Crumple and Hinder are in every blue deck I own. I get to find more interesting replacements for these spells now.
Mono-Red is quite good in EDH because there are a lot of disruptive cards with great synergy with basic mountains or token swarm, but overall red generally doesn't have a lot of quality support cards that you are going to throw into multi-color decks. Aside from Chaos Warp, Wheel of Fortune and maybe Fork there isn't a whole lot going in for it. Most colors can do whatever needs to be done better.
It would be cool to continue to expand on non-basic color disruption, powerful haste enablers, fork effects, mass removal and filter effects so there are more interesting support cards in the color. Generally in almost every mult-color deck containing red, I usually only have a handful of red cards and it's generally always my least used color.
Palinchron is one of the most powerful creatures in commander let alone blue creatures. I consider it right up there with Consecrated Sphinx and Deadeye Navigator on top of the blue list. It's an absurdly powerful combo enabler. I'm pretty shocked it wasn't on any original lists.
I added Exploration and BOP for additional ramp options. Exploration is also a nice Enchantress trigger since it's incredibly cheap and helps setup more explosive turns. Mirri's Guile serves a similar role: A cheap enchantment that facilitates card draw and card draw optimization.
Eidolon of Blossoms is heartily welcomed here. It's a Third Enchantress that serves both as a body to install Aura's and a card draw engine on top of that, not to mentioned triggering draw herself. An excellent card.
The Courser helps burn through the deck faster and triggers enchantress draws while also serving as a serviceable beater. Like the Eidolon, it's a three in one addition.
The removed cards just didn't fit for one reason or another despite all being excellent in a vacuum. Privileged Position is just so expensive it's difficult to get into play and often not necessary by the time you get it down with cards worth protecting. I'd rather just take an extra turn or back my assets with counter magic. Plow and Beast Within are both amazing cards that often don't synergize well with the deck and often feel redundant with the host of other options. I kept Oblation as my instant speed ace. Boon Satyr pales in a comparison to the comparative Theros Enchantment Creatures so that was an easy cut. It makes Rafiq menacing but without built in evasion it just isn't worth running. Tolaria West isn't worth running as it only fetches land targets. It was expendable once I added the additional mana creature.
Information is one of the most important non tangible resources in magic. Giving out free information puts you on a disadvantage. Telling everyone you're color screwed then casting a (colorless) spell to fix your mana is just begging for it to get countered, or stifled in this case.
Yeah I agree with that in a poker tournament. I clearly have a different take on that in a EDH game in my regular playgroup. But yes I realize that mulliganing to 5 and then openly reacting to that is basically setting myself up to predators who choose to take advantage of this information.
I guess the majority of this forum would take advantage of that information. My playgroup often talks about plays before making them. Talks about strategy openly during the game. Allows people to take back plays on occasion etc... it's a very different type of environment than most playgroups I guess, primarily because some of the players are very new and don't play all that frequently. Half of them aren't even using their own decks.
On one hand you say you've taken out certain cards because winning isn't everything to you, but then you're upset someone color screwed you because it caused you to lose that game.
When you told the other players you were missing a color, what were you hoping for? Them to go easy on you until you could get what you needed to win?
I guess I was hoping they wouldn't compound the problem yes. But not necessarily so I could "get what I needed to win" just so that I could get what I needed to play the deck regardless of the ultimate outcome instead of sitting there in draw-go mode.
I think part of the problem is just the nature of multi-player EDH. One player gets knocked out/crippled and then has to sit there texting on their phone while the remaining players battle it out. This happens almost every game of course (unless one player just goes infinite and/or other people scoop to insurmountable board position) but it's just an unfortunate bi-product of how multi-player magic works. Many other non-mtg games specifically engineered to be multi-player aren't elimination games but rather are games where tallies occur at a given point in the game to determine the winner. Win or lose you get to play until the end of the game.
Anyways the nature of multi-player EDH isn't the fault of my opponent. And me getting color screwed is primarily on me for not constructing my deck correctly. But as I said in previous posts that's not the kind of play I would do myself and it's also atypical in my particular playgroup. However, it's enlightening to me that at least on this forum, it's a pretty standard play in other people's playgroups. So I find that informative. That's a big reason why I posted this, was to find out what the general consensus was in other people's opinions and attitudes. I've learned that a lot of other playgroups on this forum play differently that me and my playgroup.
I do not understand this "gentlemen's agreemen' people are posting.... If you announce you are color screwed, that is asking for them to Strip Mine you. If I only have to deal with 1 person, awesome. I hage wasting a counterspell on someone who is just going to concede after 4-5 turns of no lands.
Yeah I think that's not really the kind of playgroup I play in. We're not actively trying to color screw people or beat them that way. We're not seated around the table in sunglasses to hide our poker face. The quote above I would apply to tournament play or even semi-competitive standard or legacy but generally I won't do that in EDH. That's just me and my playgroup though. I understand other people like to play differently but I can't really relate to your comment.
That doesn't mean we don't play quality decks. Or at least should have an expectation to. MLD exists in our metagame. Combo does too. So does stax control. But we tend to tone down our decks when they prove a little over the top lest the whole game turn into counter-wars. One member of our playgroup just abandoned Mikeaus/Trike because he got tired of always going for that wincon and wanted his deck to do other things. I dumped Worldgorger Dragon and Palinchron from my re-animator deck for similar reasons. I purposely don't have Ophidian Eye in my Niv-Mizzet deck. I just find winning with cards like that un-interesting or at least I find it un-interesting to do it every single time I play with the deck. I don't really need to have Mind Over Matter in my Niv-Mizzet deck. It certainly helps me guarantee victory more frequently, but winning that way isn't as fun as various timetwister iterations instead.
I'm sorry, I get a little out of hand sometimes in these semi casual-vs-competitive discussions that always seem to go to nowhere. I'd just wish people were more tolerant of each other and don't go calling people jerks when playing a strategical game. In my experience (experience, not facts) I see casual tables have more fights, less fun and more calling each other for playing certain cards. It's just not how you're supposed to play a game.
Either way it was intolerant of me to burst out like this, even a little, so sorry for that. Guess you can't fight fire with fire.
I actually don't really think the guy is a jerk. I used that word in my post because it's inflammatory and I figured it would make the post title more interesting and engaging to read. I guess troll is a better word, or I guess I could have said "made an uncool play". But that doesn't really read better in the post header.
I was clearly frustrated at his move and it got the better of me in the game and I posted this to both vent and to actually get forum opinion on what other people thought. I admit I'm a bit surprised at the poll results. I thought it might be closer to even. I think it's a good reality check for me. So I accomplished what I wanted with this post: I got feedback and realize my perception of this is not typical and I need to live with that. Thanks for chiming in.
This whole thread is full of replies trying to show the other side of the story and all I see is reaction that you wouldn't do it.
It streamlines to this:
YOU think it's a jerk move
THE MAJORITY thinks it's a valid move and have no problem with it
HE's still a jerk in your eyes
HE's not a jerk in our eyes
See how this will never end? You made your point and seem to stand by it 100%, you see the poll results after 7 pages favor 75% in the favor of you being a little bit of a whiner. You probably are. Shouldn't that serve as a basis for you to start looking in the mirror and tolerate a bit more? It's a game and it's the players that make a game fun, not the plays.
Hey easy there turbo.
I'm just having a conversation about my experience here. I already conceded that the majority clearly doesn't agree with me on the boards and that I need to deal with it. It was a single experience I'm relating to the boards. I did it to check myself. Consider myself checked.
If I wanted to be delusional I wouldn't have bothered posting the poll and I would have just made up some story about how some mean guy with a $2,000 deck curb-stomped my pre-con.
I still won't play like that. But I'm obviously in the minority and *****ing about it isn't going to help so I'll go ahead and adjust.
Didn't even read your post. If you have to ask the question "Am I a whiner?" then you're a whiner. Coming here asking for validation to the contrary only proves it.
Okay now I see your problem. You have a very narrow view.
Think about this: You are in a situation where, if another player resolves his commander next turn you are in big trouble. However, you have no counter. You do have a card that can potentially prevent him from having the mana to play that commander.
What do you do? Do you Strip Mine that land? Do you Trickbind or Stifle a search ability? Do you flash in an Aven Mindcensor and hope they don't find the right color in the top four?
If your answer to any of those is no then you probably won't be finding much sympathy. Even from most casual or social players.
It entirely depends on his commander and what the rest of his board looks like. If he's mulliganed twice and is playing a tier 3 commander and has no other permanents I'm not going to consider it no.
If he's sitting there with a full hand of cards, an Arcum Daggson and a bunch of haste enablers and combo pieces already on the table I'd strongly consider it.
I guess that goes against my previous declaration but that point I'm making is I'm not going to pile on a weak opponent. If I see a threat I deal with it. If someone is just trying to get back to par I usually let them.
I don't see how one of those styles is any more "jerk"-ish than the other. They end with the same result. The latter just offers the illusion of success, until that final moment when you realize, "Nope. Fail." Is that illusion really that important of a thing to people?
That's not correct. IF you have mana you at least have choices. You get to make decisions about what you can play. Maybe you play a big spell or multiple small spells. You get to cast creatures and interact with the board. Maybe you bide your time or maybe you set up an explosive turn.
If you are mana/color screwed none of that matters. You have ZERO choices. You are a spectator.
I'm not sure how this collapses diversity. If anything it frees up some automatic deck-slots. I've run hinder and spell crumple in every blue deck I have since the beginning. Oblation has always previously been a no-brainer. Now I can move those out for something different (Dissipate, Dismiss or something else entirely).
It also opens the door for more commander-centric decks that don't have hexproof built in to their card text or decks that have limited ability to tutor up creatures.
I never used Condemn anyway but it was always a card on initial lists before getting cut in favor of Plow or Path. The remaining 4 are probably getting bumped out of my decks as they have generally better options now. Bant Charm might stick around because it's multi-modal but that's unlikely.
Cards that are probably still useful:
Chaos Warp is still worth running since it still sends away a permanent. Terminus and Hallowed Burial were a mixed bag since they were global and you had to plan to save your general anyway. They are still useful as anti-graveyard strategies and now you don't have to worry about tucking your own general along with it.
Cards that are decent replacements for tuck (but not quite as good):
Dryads was already really good anyway, but I think Arrest effects are a decent stand-in to tuck. Dissipate is probably a good candidate for a mono-blue counter in this slot. Gold has better options anyway like Voidslime and Render Silent.
I'm OK with this change because it reduces ubiquity. Spell Crumple and Hinder are in every blue deck I own. I get to find more interesting replacements for these spells now.
It would be cool to continue to expand on non-basic color disruption, powerful haste enablers, fork effects, mass removal and filter effects so there are more interesting support cards in the color. Generally in almost every mult-color deck containing red, I usually only have a handful of red cards and it's generally always my least used color.
Removed:
Added:
I added Exploration and BOP for additional ramp options. Exploration is also a nice Enchantress trigger since it's incredibly cheap and helps setup more explosive turns. Mirri's Guile serves a similar role: A cheap enchantment that facilitates card draw and card draw optimization.
Eidolon of Blossoms is heartily welcomed here. It's a Third Enchantress that serves both as a body to install Aura's and a card draw engine on top of that, not to mentioned triggering draw herself. An excellent card.
The Courser helps burn through the deck faster and triggers enchantress draws while also serving as a serviceable beater. Like the Eidolon, it's a three in one addition.
The removed cards just didn't fit for one reason or another despite all being excellent in a vacuum. Privileged Position is just so expensive it's difficult to get into play and often not necessary by the time you get it down with cards worth protecting. I'd rather just take an extra turn or back my assets with counter magic. Plow and Beast Within are both amazing cards that often don't synergize well with the deck and often feel redundant with the host of other options. I kept Oblation as my instant speed ace. Boon Satyr pales in a comparison to the comparative Theros Enchantment Creatures so that was an easy cut. It makes Rafiq menacing but without built in evasion it just isn't worth running. Tolaria West isn't worth running as it only fetches land targets. It was expendable once I added the additional mana creature.
Red: Chaos Warp and Fork
Green: Regrowth and Beast Within
White: Swords to Plowshares and Oblation
Black: Demonic Tutor and Vampiric Tutor
Land (Colorless): High Market and Strip Mine
Lim Dul's Vault
Filth (You run Urborg and it's often better than Wonder)
Sensei's Divining Top (especially with Trinket Mage)
Yeah I agree with that in a poker tournament. I clearly have a different take on that in a EDH game in my regular playgroup. But yes I realize that mulliganing to 5 and then openly reacting to that is basically setting myself up to predators who choose to take advantage of this information.
I guess the majority of this forum would take advantage of that information. My playgroup often talks about plays before making them. Talks about strategy openly during the game. Allows people to take back plays on occasion etc... it's a very different type of environment than most playgroups I guess, primarily because some of the players are very new and don't play all that frequently. Half of them aren't even using their own decks.
I guess I was hoping they wouldn't compound the problem yes. But not necessarily so I could "get what I needed to win" just so that I could get what I needed to play the deck regardless of the ultimate outcome instead of sitting there in draw-go mode.
I think part of the problem is just the nature of multi-player EDH. One player gets knocked out/crippled and then has to sit there texting on their phone while the remaining players battle it out. This happens almost every game of course (unless one player just goes infinite and/or other people scoop to insurmountable board position) but it's just an unfortunate bi-product of how multi-player magic works. Many other non-mtg games specifically engineered to be multi-player aren't elimination games but rather are games where tallies occur at a given point in the game to determine the winner. Win or lose you get to play until the end of the game.
Anyways the nature of multi-player EDH isn't the fault of my opponent. And me getting color screwed is primarily on me for not constructing my deck correctly. But as I said in previous posts that's not the kind of play I would do myself and it's also atypical in my particular playgroup. However, it's enlightening to me that at least on this forum, it's a pretty standard play in other people's playgroups. So I find that informative. That's a big reason why I posted this, was to find out what the general consensus was in other people's opinions and attitudes. I've learned that a lot of other playgroups on this forum play differently that me and my playgroup.
Yeah I think that's not really the kind of playgroup I play in. We're not actively trying to color screw people or beat them that way. We're not seated around the table in sunglasses to hide our poker face. The quote above I would apply to tournament play or even semi-competitive standard or legacy but generally I won't do that in EDH. That's just me and my playgroup though. I understand other people like to play differently but I can't really relate to your comment.
That doesn't mean we don't play quality decks. Or at least should have an expectation to. MLD exists in our metagame. Combo does too. So does stax control. But we tend to tone down our decks when they prove a little over the top lest the whole game turn into counter-wars. One member of our playgroup just abandoned Mikeaus/Trike because he got tired of always going for that wincon and wanted his deck to do other things. I dumped Worldgorger Dragon and Palinchron from my re-animator deck for similar reasons. I purposely don't have Ophidian Eye in my Niv-Mizzet deck. I just find winning with cards like that un-interesting or at least I find it un-interesting to do it every single time I play with the deck. I don't really need to have Mind Over Matter in my Niv-Mizzet deck. It certainly helps me guarantee victory more frequently, but winning that way isn't as fun as various timetwister iterations instead.
I actually don't really think the guy is a jerk. I used that word in my post because it's inflammatory and I figured it would make the post title more interesting and engaging to read. I guess troll is a better word, or I guess I could have said "made an uncool play". But that doesn't really read better in the post header.
I was clearly frustrated at his move and it got the better of me in the game and I posted this to both vent and to actually get forum opinion on what other people thought. I admit I'm a bit surprised at the poll results. I thought it might be closer to even. I think it's a good reality check for me. So I accomplished what I wanted with this post: I got feedback and realize my perception of this is not typical and I need to live with that. Thanks for chiming in.
Hey easy there turbo.
I'm just having a conversation about my experience here. I already conceded that the majority clearly doesn't agree with me on the boards and that I need to deal with it. It was a single experience I'm relating to the boards. I did it to check myself. Consider myself checked.
If I wanted to be delusional I wouldn't have bothered posting the poll and I would have just made up some story about how some mean guy with a $2,000 deck curb-stomped my pre-con.
I still won't play like that. But I'm obviously in the minority and *****ing about it isn't going to help so I'll go ahead and adjust.
Thank you for participating in the discussion.
It entirely depends on his commander and what the rest of his board looks like. If he's mulliganed twice and is playing a tier 3 commander and has no other permanents I'm not going to consider it no.
If he's sitting there with a full hand of cards, an Arcum Daggson and a bunch of haste enablers and combo pieces already on the table I'd strongly consider it.
I guess that goes against my previous declaration but that point I'm making is I'm not going to pile on a weak opponent. If I see a threat I deal with it. If someone is just trying to get back to par I usually let them.
That's not correct. IF you have mana you at least have choices. You get to make decisions about what you can play. Maybe you play a big spell or multiple small spells. You get to cast creatures and interact with the board. Maybe you bide your time or maybe you set up an explosive turn.
If you are mana/color screwed none of that matters. You have ZERO choices. You are a spectator.