Ice Bear, if I could hug you over the internet I would. Me and my friends play pretty much only EDH these days, and I was horrified when I realized what the format has developed into outside the confines of my living room. It's just nice to see other people out there actually, you know, playing EDH for fun.
I also loves me some W/B/G, and have been thinking a lot about Karrandor, but for now I'm gonna make a Riku deck. Just out of curiosity, how much graveyard hate do you usually have to deal with? The other thing I'm wondering about is mana cost. If Karador is getting a lot of hate mid to late game, are you usually able to drop him and still cast one or two cards in your turn? There's nothing worse than having your general popped two turns in a row while everyone builds stuff up.
Also, I would imagine that the best way to deal with graveyard hate is by actually slow-playing what you have in your hand; if that's the case, how quickly can you usually drop Karandor (with, say, 7 or 8 mana) and recover from the graveyard after a Wrath effect?
Not for this deck, it would kinda screw up the tempo. But that gives me an idea for another deck I was thinking about putting together--similar ideas, but with a focus on cheap artifacts and token generation instead of cheap artifacts and facebeating. Thanks dude!
Nah, Trinket Mage serves the same purpose for the most part and has a lot of added utility. For the most part, the focus of the deck is to make the most out of cheap double-striking or metal-craft related creatures, not pull specific pieces of equipment.
I've been tinkering around with the aggro metal craft creatures for a while (namely Auriok Edgewright and Carapace Forger), mixed in with cheap to cast and attach Equipments. However, I found the most consistently effective (and sometimes flatout awesome) card was the Edgewright, so I reconfigured the deck and added blue for utility, card draw, etc.
The deck can come out swinging early game but will more consistently be a contender mid-game. Trigon of Rage may not seem like a good fit, but it's insane with an active doublestrike creature on board. Sylvok Lifestaff is also surprisingly good, adding a lot of damage with the doublestrike dudes and netting decent life each time a weenie gets popped.
The real trick is the transformative sideboard, however. Once your opponent has boarded in to deal with your insanely overpowered weenies and artifacts, the deck sides into a mid-range aggro/control deck.
I don't know if this has happened to anyone else, but I've had weird experiences both times I've bought a few packs of Eldrazi.
The first time I bought any was a couple of weeks ago. I picked up 5 packs; out of those 5 packs I got three mythic rares, including Gideon Jura, Kargan Dragonlord and Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, as well as two other perfectly decent rares which escape me right now.
Last Friday I go to the same store, and buy four packs. I hoped that I wouldn't get punished for my luck last time, but in my heart I knew I would.
I bought four packs, and began cracking them open.
Now I'm not complaining that out of four packs, I got three 50 cent rares and a jank dollar rare; I'll use em all (that's what EDH is for, right?) and buying 9 packs and getting 3 sweet mythics is totally worth it. But has this happened to anyone else? If not, it's the weirdest and most random coincidence I've ever had buying packs.
Although I did get two copies of Barren Glory out of like 5 Future Sight packs once, that was super sweet and cool.
I'm pretty sure we agree. I put quote marks around 'casual' in my post because it's a convenient label that everyone understands, but I don't think it's a good word in itself. What I disagree with is the word 'fun'. I think it's misleading; everybody plays Magic for fun. There's no distinction between those who play for fun and those who play to win, because the people who play to win find winning fun. If they weren't having fun they wouldn't play. So the distinction is not to do with playing for fun or playing to win, it's to do with what you find fun about Magic, i.e. what you enjoy. Both groups get grumpy when their method of enjoyment is frustrated; Spike hates building suboptimal decks (he enjoys winning and optimal decks = more winning), and Timmy/Johnny hate it when they get locked out or subjected to a sudden infinite game-winning combo. The challenge for players is to create an environment where, if you'll allow me to channel Aristotle for a second, everybody can pursue their own conception of the good.
Fair enough, dude; being a postmodernist means I can't really argue with other people's interpretation of "fun", no matter how lame it may seem to me. But I'm equally opposed to the label of "casual", catch-all though it may be. Perhaps the term "creative" EDH player better represents those of us who are willing to build our own decks and seek enjoyment in aspects of the game other than blowing everyone's face apart.
There is a line though....just like your argument about counterspelling. You should be prepared to play around some LD and artifact wreckin'!
And really, in a 4 player EDH game....it's just completely impossible to counter everything unless you are otherwordly with counterbalance. Well, then again, most people don't realize that when you counter things you only counter something that's actually a threat...hey...wait a second. So people often forget that the blue mage let you have a bunch of stuff, but they remember that one thing that they really wanted getting countered. Lesson, threat density.
A lack of general strategy and threat assessment is a common problem in a lot of the EDH groups I've played with, and can be pretty frustrating. I see similar problems in the table top strategy games I play, like Warhammer and Warhammer 40k.
I really think that this is due to many people not having to actually THINK about the game, and formats/decks where this is encouraged. I mean a lot of combo decks really represent no strategy whatsoever in terms of dealing with the rest of the board--it's just an issue of can I get my combo off before someone else does?
When these attitudes become popularized, it's hard for people to look past them. I think those of us that learned how to play the game creativley and make our own decks, instead of using the "right" decks or the "good" decks, perhaps have some advantage in these areas.
And for the record, occasional land destruction and counterspells as utility tools have their place. Nothing wrong with Ghost Quartering a Library of Alexandria, or countering the key card in an infinite combo. But "mass land destruction" and "mass counterspells" are not strategies, they are just examples of people trying to create a game imbalance that they can take advantage of by spamming a type of card. In a game as vast as Magic, this requires little in the way of creative thought.
I really think the word 'fun' is unhelpful here. Casual players are in no way opposed to winning, and Spikes, I assume, find winning 'fun'. Winning and fun are in no way mutually exclusive, which is why there's so much confusion/argument about casual vs competitive, especially in EDH. I think there's a better way of looking at it:
Magic players play Magic for enjoyment. It seems trivially true that very few people would play any game if they didn't enjoy doing so. Obviously, different people derive enjoyment from the game in different ways. People who play what we call 'competitive' decks derive enjoyment from the result of the game - the win. So, naturally, they optimise their decks to give them the greatest possible chance of deriving the most enjoyment from each game. This may include infinite combos, lockdown, and the like, which are fair game because they increase enjoyment for the player.
People who play 'casual' decks derive enjoyment from the process of playing the game. This includes winning, but also a whole host of other things - big plays, cool interactions, fat beats. 'Casual' players enjoy these things in and of themselves, whereas 'competitive' players view them as a means to an end. Naturally, 'casual' players don't like it when their enjoyment is frustrated by being locked out of the game.
So you have a situation where players derive enjoyment from different aspects of the game. The solution is not for 'competitive' players to play suboptimally, or for 'casual' players to suck it up and play Clique, but for each group to have a bit of maturity and realise that playing games by definition is not all about them, but involves other people who need to enjoy themselves if they are to keep playing. Compromise is the name of the game here.
P.S: the above is also why 'play to win' Street Fighter guy who was popular a while about was so horribly wrong about everything.
P.P.S: sorry for derailing the thread.
I agree that compromise--or just playing with people that want to play the way you do--is the only way EDH can work. But I disagree with the terminology "casual" player.
The point of "competative" play is to win first, have fun second. Hence the name--it invokes the spirit of competition that these players enjoy.
The point of "casual" play is to have fun first, and win second. My question is: why does this make me casual? I'm as hardcore into Magic as they come. I've been playing since Fallen Empires in 1994. I played standard for years and wrote articles on building your own original decks in that format too. Hell, I just wrote and defended a 130 page thesis for my Masters in sociology on the social importance of Magic subculture this summer. But I'm a "casual" player?
So, I refer to "casual" play as Fun play, because Fun is the main purpose--just like competition is the main purpose for competative play. "Casual" implies that we aren't serious about the game. How the hell am I a "casual" player when I spend hours building themed EDH decks, and the kid who decklists some stupid, boring build and then combos out is a "competative" player? The implication in this terminology is that he takes the game more seriously than me, and this is wrong.
Dude. There's no reason why Wizards has to mean lameness or cheese.
I use my theme decks to tell a loose story--it's how I like to play EDH. So my mono-black Baron Sengir deck is called "The Baron's Army", and plays like how I would envision his army playing.
My mono-blue deck, "The Thing That Should Not Be", is all about the idea of blue wizards dabbling in Magic beyond their comprehension and summoning terrifying creatures beyond their control. My general is Arcanis the Omnipotent, who is cool but not broken; he makes an awesome leader for wizards, and you'd be surprised at how many blue "untap creature" wizards there are. I build my base of goofy but utilitarian wizards, using almost all soft-counters and anything that seems wizardly (including familiars, such as Walking Atlas and Mulldrifter).
Eventually, you're able to build up enough resources to drop a fat Iceberg or Everflowing Chalice, and then summon something horrifying past the comprehension of mortal wizards--say, Marit Lage from Dark Depths, a signed copy of Leviathan (I met Mark Tedin, he's awesome) or an Eldrazi or two (such as a signed Emrakul, the Aeons Torn--did I mention I met Mark Tedin?). I protect them with Willbenders, Daring Apprentices, and possibly Unified Will, then my terrifying creations begin the quest for global domination.
It's hard for people to cry cheese when you're playing with goofy fun wizards like Apprentice Wizard and Merfolk Thaumaturgist. No one can really ***** when you're running blue with two "hard" counters (I like Lay Bare a lot as well) and no infinte combos.
But most importantly, I love the deck, and I love the idea that blue wizards push their research too far, and that in the end there are horrifying, far reaching consequences for reckless magic. I like the idea that right after they kill everyone else on board, the horrifying creatures that have been released by the hubris of wizards quickly turn on those that summoned them.
Anyways, that's just my take. I found that if I don't find a way to tell a story with my deck I get bored pretty quick; as it is I've found a blue deck that is awesome and fun to play with and against.
Also, one time I swung with FOUR Leviathans in a single turn due to cloning shennanigans. That was pretty legendary and hilarious.
I'm not sure we really disagree. You're more than welcome to have house rules, and you're more than welcome to ask those who join you to abide by those. If someone repeatedly violates the trust or accepted behavior of the playgroup, then that doesn't exactly leave you a lot of options, does it? I just have a problem with the policy of those playgroups or individuals that get upset (I mean, actually angry) the first time someone violates that norm.
Yup, I am on board with you. There's been a couple times where someone new shows up with a Uril, the Miststalker deck or combos out early or something, and it's not a big deal--in fact I'd rather it happen early instead of late in the game. When that does happen, we generally ask them to play with something else, and I let them sift through my dozen or so EDH decks for one they'll like. Everyone gets a certain amount of leeway for infinite combos as well. After all, if your combo gets set up and goes off on turn 20, that's not much different than me crapping out 30 saprolings and Pallid Mycoderming for the win.
I think if people go nuts because of one single game they lost quickly, when there are clearly opportunities for more games--well, there are bigger issues at hand.
Still, getting combo'd out on always sucks a little.
I would argue that caring about things other than winning makes you casual by definition. As far as I'm aware 'casual' means that you play for fun, not necessarily to win. I think you are giving the word negative connotations that it just does not have.
But "casual" does carry certain connotations. The underlying implication is that we somehow take the game less seriously than "competitive" players.
It's not that I don't care about winning--hell, I love winning! But I care about other aspects of Magic as well, and I don't care about winning so much that I'll do it at any cost.
My desire to win on my terms, using decks of my creations and setting my own limitations means that sometimes I lose games. But I'd rather lose a close, hard-fought game that was fun, engaging and riveting than win a blowout any day of the week, and I think it's silly that makes me a "casual" player. If anything, casual players are the ones who aren't willing to put enough time and creative energy into making unique decks of their own.
I agree, but at the same time you have to realize that at least some EDH players who "ban" or shun other people from their playgroup aren't exactly being objective. They've already been the victim of too many actual DB plays, or have read too many overzealous "Spirit of EDH" posts on dragonhighlander.net, or whatever, and they sometimes direct that frustration/animosity at someone who may not actually deserve it.
Any kind of social exclusion (especially in gaming, which really should be all-inclusive) is a nasty affair. However, if someone repeatedly violates the norms or trust of the group and won't concede to making changes in their behavior, they shouldn't be surprised that they aren't invited back.
The only way to really deal with it fairly is to have an attempt at group consensus and expectations. My friends and I house rule the hell out of EDH (we don't play with general damage), and we vote on particularly problematic matters--I mean we even voted to accept the M10 rules changes (we did, thank goodness). And if a group of friends can't comprise on EDH rules, standards of behavior, or expectations of fairness and fun, well then they probably have bigger issues to deal with than whether or not it's okay to combo out.
On an unrelated note, something that does irk me a little is this pervasive idea of "casual" EDH. I'm inclined to refer to "casual" EDH as "Fun" EDH.
I mean I take EDH way more seriously than some dude who just copies a combo deck online and gets it off by turn 5. And how is that enjoyable for anyone? Combo players, is it even fun for you? If so, is your temporary and fleeting fun at winning an arbitrary card game worth the expense of the potential fun had by an entire game played between interestingly themed and crafted decks?
I think that caring about aspects of the game OTHER than winning doesn't make you a casual player. Anyone can buy "staple" cards, figure out broken combos, and ruin a game night; doing this doesn't make you special. It takes a real man to make a Baron Sengir deck that's fun, flavorful, and can actually win a game WITHOUT taking infinite turns or doing something equally stupid.
1. When people complain about the power level of my deck, I am sorry I have a bigger card pool than you? Spend 100$ on random EDH staples and you should be golden.
2. People complaining that I run infinite combos. I'm sorry I would like a way to win when suddenly everyone at the table turns on me?
Those are my two biggest pet peeves in edh.
What are yours?
I have a buddy who runs Moxes, Library of Alexandria, and an Ancestral Recall in any deck that fits them. That doesn't bother me--in EDH, one extra mana or three extra cards is not the end of the world.
Unless, you know, he decides he's gonna use them to infinite combo out on the table.
I mean honestly what's the point in even sitting down to play with my deck that I spent hours creating--coming up with a uniting theme, finding fun cards and combos, putting in cards that have good synergy and are thematic--when someone is just going to combo out? Can you really not see how people who make their own decks and put time, energy and personality into them get a little upset because some genius figured out a "neat trick" that happens to lock the board down by turn 3 or 4?
Honestly, if there's one thing that bothers me more than this it's Magic players who think they are better than other players because A) they have more/better cards or B) they win a lot. Elitism should have no place in this game, and certainly not EDH.
How about a turn eight Storm Herd, courtesy saprolings and a Utopia Mycon? I got to drop 40 1/1 flying pegasus tokens, and swing for win next turn against three other players with an Overwhelm I'd forgotten was in my hand.
been forever and a half since I've been on here; what little MTG I've played in the last two years has all been EDH because, well, I love it and I won't ever go back.
I was just curious: do people write a lot or articles on or about EDH? If there are articles written, do they cover deckbuilding, strategy, or generally just discussing how and why it's awesome? I'm sure I could spend hours digging through the archives to find out, but I was hoping someone could save me the time, it being exam week and all ; )
If there isn't a lot of stuff being written about EDH, I may return to writing the occasional article . . .
I also loves me some W/B/G, and have been thinking a lot about Karrandor, but for now I'm gonna make a Riku deck. Just out of curiosity, how much graveyard hate do you usually have to deal with? The other thing I'm wondering about is mana cost. If Karador is getting a lot of hate mid to late game, are you usually able to drop him and still cast one or two cards in your turn? There's nothing worse than having your general popped two turns in a row while everyone builds stuff up.
Also, I would imagine that the best way to deal with graveyard hate is by actually slow-playing what you have in your hand; if that's the case, how quickly can you usually drop Karandor (with, say, 7 or 8 mana) and recover from the graveyard after a Wrath effect?
Anyways, keep up the good work dude.
4 Kor Duelist
4 Auriok Edgewright
3 Sunspear Shikari
3 Auriok Sunchaser
3 Riddlesmith
4 Trinket Mage
Equipment: (9)
2 Sylvok Lifestaff
2 Trusty Machete
2 Blazing Torch
2 Infiltration Lens
1 Basilisk Collar
3 Mox Opal
2 Brittle Effigy
1 Elixir of Immortality
2 Trigon of Rage
Land: (22)
1 Halimar Depths
4 Seachrome Coast
2 Glacial Fortress
1 Arid Mesa
1 Scalding Tarn
9 Plains
4 Islands
4 Indomitable Archangel
1 Linvala, Keeper of Silence
2 Sword of Body and Mind
1 Chimeric Mass
3 Turn Aside
2 Ratchet Bomb
2 Celestial Colonnade
The deck can come out swinging early game but will more consistently be a contender mid-game. Trigon of Rage may not seem like a good fit, but it's insane with an active doublestrike creature on board. Sylvok Lifestaff is also surprisingly good, adding a lot of damage with the doublestrike dudes and netting decent life each time a weenie gets popped.
The real trick is the transformative sideboard, however. Once your opponent has boarded in to deal with your insanely overpowered weenies and artifacts, the deck sides into a mid-range aggro/control deck.
The sided deck looks like this:
2 Auriok Edgewright
3 Auriok Sunchaser
3 Riddlesmith
4 Trinket Mage
4 Indomitable Archangel
1 Linvala, Keeper of Silence
Equipment: (7)
2 Sylvok Lifestaff
2 Blazing Torch
1 Infiltration Lens
2 Sword of Body and Mind
3 Mox Opal
2 Brittle Effigy
1 Elixir of Immortality
2 Ratchet Bomb
1 Chimeric Mass
Spells: (3)
3 Turn Aside
Lands: (24)
2 Celestial Colonnade
1 Halimar Depths
4 Seachrome Coast
2 Glacial Fortress
1 Arid Mesa
1 Scalding Tarn
9 Plains
4 Islands
The first time I bought any was a couple of weeks ago. I picked up 5 packs; out of those 5 packs I got three mythic rares, including Gideon Jura, Kargan Dragonlord and Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, as well as two other perfectly decent rares which escape me right now.
Last Friday I go to the same store, and buy four packs. I hoped that I wouldn't get punished for my luck last time, but in my heart I knew I would.
I bought four packs, and began cracking them open.
First rare: Gigantomancer.
Second rare: Gelatinous Genesis.
Third rare: Tuktuk the Explorer.
And for the grand finale . . . . . . Echo Mage!
Now I'm not complaining that out of four packs, I got three 50 cent rares and a jank dollar rare; I'll use em all (that's what EDH is for, right?) and buying 9 packs and getting 3 sweet mythics is totally worth it. But has this happened to anyone else? If not, it's the weirdest and most random coincidence I've ever had buying packs.
Although I did get two copies of Barren Glory out of like 5 Future Sight packs once, that was super sweet and cool.
Fair enough, dude; being a postmodernist means I can't really argue with other people's interpretation of "fun", no matter how lame it may seem to me. But I'm equally opposed to the label of "casual", catch-all though it may be. Perhaps the term "creative" EDH player better represents those of us who are willing to build our own decks and seek enjoyment in aspects of the game other than blowing everyone's face apart.
A lack of general strategy and threat assessment is a common problem in a lot of the EDH groups I've played with, and can be pretty frustrating. I see similar problems in the table top strategy games I play, like Warhammer and Warhammer 40k.
I really think that this is due to many people not having to actually THINK about the game, and formats/decks where this is encouraged. I mean a lot of combo decks really represent no strategy whatsoever in terms of dealing with the rest of the board--it's just an issue of can I get my combo off before someone else does?
When these attitudes become popularized, it's hard for people to look past them. I think those of us that learned how to play the game creativley and make our own decks, instead of using the "right" decks or the "good" decks, perhaps have some advantage in these areas.
And for the record, occasional land destruction and counterspells as utility tools have their place. Nothing wrong with Ghost Quartering a Library of Alexandria, or countering the key card in an infinite combo. But "mass land destruction" and "mass counterspells" are not strategies, they are just examples of people trying to create a game imbalance that they can take advantage of by spamming a type of card. In a game as vast as Magic, this requires little in the way of creative thought.
Probably the funniest thing I've read all day : D
I agree that compromise--or just playing with people that want to play the way you do--is the only way EDH can work. But I disagree with the terminology "casual" player.
The point of "competative" play is to win first, have fun second. Hence the name--it invokes the spirit of competition that these players enjoy.
The point of "casual" play is to have fun first, and win second. My question is: why does this make me casual? I'm as hardcore into Magic as they come. I've been playing since Fallen Empires in 1994. I played standard for years and wrote articles on building your own original decks in that format too. Hell, I just wrote and defended a 130 page thesis for my Masters in sociology on the social importance of Magic subculture this summer. But I'm a "casual" player?
So, I refer to "casual" play as Fun play, because Fun is the main purpose--just like competition is the main purpose for competative play. "Casual" implies that we aren't serious about the game. How the hell am I a "casual" player when I spend hours building themed EDH decks, and the kid who decklists some stupid, boring build and then combos out is a "competative" player? The implication in this terminology is that he takes the game more seriously than me, and this is wrong.
I use my theme decks to tell a loose story--it's how I like to play EDH. So my mono-black Baron Sengir deck is called "The Baron's Army", and plays like how I would envision his army playing.
My mono-blue deck, "The Thing That Should Not Be", is all about the idea of blue wizards dabbling in Magic beyond their comprehension and summoning terrifying creatures beyond their control. My general is Arcanis the Omnipotent, who is cool but not broken; he makes an awesome leader for wizards, and you'd be surprised at how many blue "untap creature" wizards there are. I build my base of goofy but utilitarian wizards, using almost all soft-counters and anything that seems wizardly (including familiars, such as Walking Atlas and Mulldrifter).
Eventually, you're able to build up enough resources to drop a fat Iceberg or Everflowing Chalice, and then summon something horrifying past the comprehension of mortal wizards--say, Marit Lage from Dark Depths, a signed copy of Leviathan (I met Mark Tedin, he's awesome) or an Eldrazi or two (such as a signed Emrakul, the Aeons Torn--did I mention I met Mark Tedin?). I protect them with Willbenders, Daring Apprentices, and possibly Unified Will, then my terrifying creations begin the quest for global domination.
It's hard for people to cry cheese when you're playing with goofy fun wizards like Apprentice Wizard and Merfolk Thaumaturgist. No one can really ***** when you're running blue with two "hard" counters (I like Lay Bare a lot as well) and no infinte combos.
But most importantly, I love the deck, and I love the idea that blue wizards push their research too far, and that in the end there are horrifying, far reaching consequences for reckless magic. I like the idea that right after they kill everyone else on board, the horrifying creatures that have been released by the hubris of wizards quickly turn on those that summoned them.
Anyways, that's just my take. I found that if I don't find a way to tell a story with my deck I get bored pretty quick; as it is I've found a blue deck that is awesome and fun to play with and against.
Also, one time I swung with FOUR Leviathans in a single turn due to cloning shennanigans. That was pretty legendary and hilarious.
Yup, I am on board with you. There's been a couple times where someone new shows up with a Uril, the Miststalker deck or combos out early or something, and it's not a big deal--in fact I'd rather it happen early instead of late in the game. When that does happen, we generally ask them to play with something else, and I let them sift through my dozen or so EDH decks for one they'll like. Everyone gets a certain amount of leeway for infinite combos as well. After all, if your combo gets set up and goes off on turn 20, that's not much different than me crapping out 30 saprolings and Pallid Mycoderming for the win.
I think if people go nuts because of one single game they lost quickly, when there are clearly opportunities for more games--well, there are bigger issues at hand.
Still, getting combo'd out on always sucks a little.
But "casual" does carry certain connotations. The underlying implication is that we somehow take the game less seriously than "competitive" players.
It's not that I don't care about winning--hell, I love winning! But I care about other aspects of Magic as well, and I don't care about winning so much that I'll do it at any cost.
My desire to win on my terms, using decks of my creations and setting my own limitations means that sometimes I lose games. But I'd rather lose a close, hard-fought game that was fun, engaging and riveting than win a blowout any day of the week, and I think it's silly that makes me a "casual" player. If anything, casual players are the ones who aren't willing to put enough time and creative energy into making unique decks of their own.
Any kind of social exclusion (especially in gaming, which really should be all-inclusive) is a nasty affair. However, if someone repeatedly violates the norms or trust of the group and won't concede to making changes in their behavior, they shouldn't be surprised that they aren't invited back.
The only way to really deal with it fairly is to have an attempt at group consensus and expectations. My friends and I house rule the hell out of EDH (we don't play with general damage), and we vote on particularly problematic matters--I mean we even voted to accept the M10 rules changes (we did, thank goodness). And if a group of friends can't comprise on EDH rules, standards of behavior, or expectations of fairness and fun, well then they probably have bigger issues to deal with than whether or not it's okay to combo out.
On an unrelated note, something that does irk me a little is this pervasive idea of "casual" EDH. I'm inclined to refer to "casual" EDH as "Fun" EDH.
I mean I take EDH way more seriously than some dude who just copies a combo deck online and gets it off by turn 5. And how is that enjoyable for anyone? Combo players, is it even fun for you? If so, is your temporary and fleeting fun at winning an arbitrary card game worth the expense of the potential fun had by an entire game played between interestingly themed and crafted decks?
I think that caring about aspects of the game OTHER than winning doesn't make you a casual player. Anyone can buy "staple" cards, figure out broken combos, and ruin a game night; doing this doesn't make you special. It takes a real man to make a Baron Sengir deck that's fun, flavorful, and can actually win a game WITHOUT taking infinite turns or doing something equally stupid.
I have a buddy who runs Moxes, Library of Alexandria, and an Ancestral Recall in any deck that fits them. That doesn't bother me--in EDH, one extra mana or three extra cards is not the end of the world.
Unless, you know, he decides he's gonna use them to infinite combo out on the table.
I mean honestly what's the point in even sitting down to play with my deck that I spent hours creating--coming up with a uniting theme, finding fun cards and combos, putting in cards that have good synergy and are thematic--when someone is just going to combo out? Can you really not see how people who make their own decks and put time, energy and personality into them get a little upset because some genius figured out a "neat trick" that happens to lock the board down by turn 3 or 4?
Honestly, if there's one thing that bothers me more than this it's Magic players who think they are better than other players because A) they have more/better cards or B) they win a lot. Elitism should have no place in this game, and certainly not EDH.
Also, I'm pretty sure my first new thread in like 2 years is in the wrong forum. Oh well.
been forever and a half since I've been on here; what little MTG I've played in the last two years has all been EDH because, well, I love it and I won't ever go back.
I was just curious: do people write a lot or articles on or about EDH? If there are articles written, do they cover deckbuilding, strategy, or generally just discussing how and why it's awesome? I'm sure I could spend hours digging through the archives to find out, but I was hoping someone could save me the time, it being exam week and all ; )
If there isn't a lot of stuff being written about EDH, I may return to writing the occasional article . . .