Get an Epic Experience with Premium
  • posted a message on Rules Committee
    I learned somewhere in business school that the sole purpose of a corporation is to provide profits to shareholders. I might be misremembering that, though.

    It is your role to buy packs, singles, and EDH release products, then deal with the dumptrucks full of horse pucky other players sling at you when you try to actually play.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Azami Combo - gone forever?
    Imagine you are playing in a game of craps on the street corner. Lots of people are playing fair, but there are a few haters who come around robbing games at gunpoint now and then. Playing Azami, Arcum, Jhoira is like trying to hustle that game of craps with a set of brass knuckles, instead.

    It is just good enough to be considered "unfair" by anyone playing against it, while being much worse than anything you might run into yourself that is legitimately unfair. There just doesn't exist anyone in that segment who will play those decks.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[SCD]] Marchesa, the Black Rose
    Yeah, I think EDH is the first game in the history of ever that you have to qualify strategy discussion with statements like "dependent on having a play group who actually allows you to try to win the game".

    If that is not the case, how do you go into a public forum to talk strategy? The inclusions in the deck would seem to depend entirely on preference at that point.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[SCD]] Marchesa, the Black Rose
    Killing Wave actually seems a bit silly. First, people have to have creatures for it to do anything at all except lower your own life total. Second, people who do opt to keep creatures will de-activate dethrone on themselves. Last, cards that give your opponents options are generally not very good, especially when one option is a completely cardless option in a game of resource management. It really doesn't make sense. If you want a board wipe, then run basically any board wipe. Damnation will do. And if you want to do more damage, then play a board wipe to kill blockers and attack on through next turn.

    Ditto on Jokulhaups. Lots of people want Magic to be a creature-combat game, but the fact is that it's a resource management game. Combat rules are silly, and resources are scarce. Making sure you have more resources is a winning strategy in 100% of Magic formats, ever. Run Obliterate and Devastation as well. And the Giant. Apocalypse too if you have sac outlets or opponents like to block. If you get Braids, Cabal Minion or an Avalanche Riders out there with a counter on it, you're also closing any avenue for a comeback. Just elementary-level douchebaggery, 101.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[SCD]] Marchesa, the Black Rose
    Quote from Psion ยป
    Marchesa is almost like Mikaeus, the Unhallowed with a much broader (better) color identity. Though dethrone is nice, I see it as sort of secondary to the recursion ability, as I see frequently being unable to attack the player with the highest life total (e.g., I have the highest life total, they have propaganda type enchantments, etc.) so I don't plan to rely on it, so will have other ways to put counters on things.

    Undying obviously pairs nicely with Marchesa. Geralf's Messenger and Flayer of the Hatebound are shoo-ins. Combine either of those with a sac outlet and it's pretty much GG.

    Like Nekusar, the Mindrazer, I see Marchesa being a popular tuck target.

    The main weakness I see is Grixis has no enchantment removal except for bounce, so some decks with some problematic enchantments may be tough matchups.


    This is true. Recursion is 99% of the deal, just like it's 99% of the deal with Undying. It is even inherently repeatable in Marchesa's case. But leave it to the EDH community when they are given unlimited mana-less creature recursion, to try Simic beats with Evolve instead.

    I do think though that the fear of enchantments is a little bit unfounded. Marchesa is probably a fairly counter-heavy build already due to the vulnerability to tuck, and for what does resolve Cyclonic Rift, Venser, Shaper Savant, Cryptic Command, and a bunch of utility Instants are available to do the job. And besides, Enchantments are mostly do-nothing cards, and can often be ignored by a deck with a plan to end the game.

    On another note, Nucklavee is pretty sick if people want more durdle 6-drops.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[SCD]] Marchesa, the Black Rose
    Too much *pew pew*, not enough *kaboom!*.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[SCD]] Marchesa, the Black Rose
    Interesting that the #1 response was "+1/+1" counter shenanigans, when mana-less creature recursion is the one and only thing I've ever tried to do with +1/+/1's. Marchesa will just do that automatically to anything that can attack the Oloro player. So, I guess give my stuff haste or make sure it costs 3 or less...

    Should be pretty easy to win with this deck. Jokulhaups, Obliterate, Devastation. Every Ponder in the game. 10-12 counterspells. Add mana cards. Every Elvish Visionary in these colors, then Gray Ogres. Bonus points for Gray Ogre himself. He will probably be 7/8 by the end of the game.

    ...get flamed. Lose friends irl. Wonder how you could build Marchesa some other way, then give up out of lack of interest. Go back to playing Xenagos Giants tribal.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [Offtopic] Community Thread
    This "drill weekend" idea seems pretty awesome. Whenever someone in my company went out and did anything wild, people would find out about it either immediately via Facebook, or next morning at the latest. I also wondered what the regs were of reservists who were not at drill, since you've got your uniforms and all I'm assuming. When the NCO's were being ********s about it, any time you went out on pass without your Class-B's and they found out about it on Facebook, you'd get a sit down. That would not make sense for reservists. At the same time though, I'd think it would be cheesy if reservists could go out to a bar on an ordinary weekend in their DCU's and try to be a douchebag with all the ladies. It's too bad that they were still shipping all the reservists out on deployment at the time I got out, otherwise I might have been tempted into that weekend warrior stuff.

    At Ashley Tisdale, I would have thought those skinny blonde types wouldn't have big enough you-know-what's to keep you interested very long, Galspanic.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[Official]] Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from MRHblue
    Quote from Jusstice

    Read post histories in this very thread. Put in whatever way it was originally put, the RC has said that one of the reasons they don't make whatever bans is because they don't want to give the impression that the format is fixed and/or could support "competitive" play. Which really means that the idea is for players to always, always be able to say that so and so is not doing it right, despite the legality of whatever cards they use. When there are cards that every rules body ever has banned/restricted and EDH keeps them legal, it's evident that the RC envisions other players to argue with someone who uses them and get them to either play something different or quit the format.

    Egro, the trap.


    Setting people up to communicate and setting them up to get shunned are very different things. Adding the next 10 (or 20 or 50) most degenerate cards to the ban list will never change that you can break EDH if you try to. The point is to find people who try at approximately the same level you do.


    People communicating and people being shunned is actually the same thing when what's being communicated about is someone being shunned. It's a bit circular.

    On the "it will always be broken if you break it" canard, you're going to have to have some context of what "broken" is before you can even make that statement. If you take Sheldon's statement on Vicious Shadows being unfun to mean that it's "broken", as will just about everyone who loses to Vicious Shadows and wants their opponent to stop playing it, then it's only in that case of an extremely broad read of "broken" that the statement is true. In just about every realistic idea of "broken" it may not be true.

    Most importantly though, and to the point of the actual issue, a card like D-Tutor probably fits close to no one's honest definition of not "broken". Just as every rules body ever has banned it or restricted it.

    Of course groups will dissolve if they cant agree on what is "OK", but expanding the ban list won't do that, it will only decrease the number of people that want to play. Just like you can't make people stop being tools about anything, all you can do is decide if you want to deal with that level of person. No magic ban list will make everyone happy and agree what is "OK" in EDH.

    Is your position that if the ban list was 'set in stone' and the RC told everyone 'any strat/combo/use is OK by us as long as you don't use a banned card' would fix this issue?


    To the first, if you say that having everyone agree with what is "OK" is the goal, then you can always be your own self-defeating counterexample by just complaining. You can arbitrarily complain about anything, regardless of the potential responses to it. Which people do a lot of, sheltered by the idea that they have to be on the lookout for these "broken" things that the RC warned them of. So the actual issue isn't what people say they want, because they are insincere, but what they really do want. I tend to believe that people want to pursue victory in ways that are more linear than not, they want interaction to be possible within the card pool, and they want to have a strategic balance so that they can adapt to other players. And what they don't want is to be subject to a volatile range of expectations of them such that there are constant complaints. It's not going to be a hit in every individual player's case, but the idea is that you get as narrow of a range of player expectations as possible so that people can actually sit down, play, and be able to interact in the game. And yeah, expanding the ban list will do that.

    To the second, it's not the role of the RC or any rules body to tell players that everything not on the banned list is "OK". If I show up to a shop with a Modern deck that is legal, but somebody doesn't want to play against it due to a poor matchup or whatever, then obviously any two players who speak the same language can figure something out. It's the job of a rules body to make sure that players have the resources within the pool of legal cards to interact with one another, and that the legal pool of cards represents a fair enough balance between strategies. No statement is necessary about what a ban list is supposed to be for or that things not on it are legal. That is what a ban list is. The card is legal if it's not on it. If you don't like it nevertheless, then say so. But at that point, it's on that person or that group to prove their case. People should not come pre-equipped with accusations that whatever they don't like on that particular day is against the spirit of EDH, because the RC said so. That is not the function of a rules body.

    Specifically on whether making a series of 10 bans would "fix the issue", it would allow people to play Control against Combo and beat it, wherever one player is inclined to play Combo and another Control. It's obviously not going to make Combo unplayable everywhere, which is an absurd goal if that's what anyone has in mind. It won't make everyone sing songs about how they love each other as if they were on Barney and Friends. What it will do is town down the cards players have available to the level of the responses that opponents have available to stop them. And that tends to give people the kind of linear, incremental games they want.

    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[Official]] Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from Forgotten One
    Quote from Jusstice

    It's a trap deliberately set so that people can't get better at the game, and can't play the type of game they want to have.

    Quote from Admiral Ackbar »

    It's a trap!!!!!

    Going into elaborate conspiracy theory territory now, are we? I don't think you'll get anyone to agree that this is all some carefully planned subterfuge...


    Read post histories in this very thread. Put in whatever way it was originally put, the RC has said that one of the reasons they don't make whatever bans is because they don't want to give the impression that the format is fixed and/or could support "competitive" play. Which really means that the idea is for players to always, always be able to say that so and so is not doing it right, despite the legality of whatever cards they use. When there are cards that every rules body ever has banned/restricted and EDH keeps them legal, it's evident that the RC envisions other players to argue with someone who uses them and get them to either play something different or quit the format.

    Egro, the trap.

    Quote from Forgotten One
    And I think that the vast majority of people who play this format would disagree with you; that there is no reason to "go there" and that abusing "broken cards" is actually fairly easy to ignore by just not doing it. There is very little to be gained by building the ultimate EDH combo deck except in the rare instances where a group decides that this is what they want to do.


    You're missing the point again.

    First, there might be people who want to play Combo. It's fun. Whether that is the busted, degenerate Combo under this ban list or Combo more along the pace of Turn 6 or 7, who is any of us to say that there is "little to be gained" from playing an EDH combo deck? You might as well say the opposite, that there is "little to be gained" in seeing Rite of Replication kicked over and over. The question isn't whether I think what Player X, Y, or Z does is fun, it's whether it's fun to them, and if so, whether there are the tools available to me to interact with it. The opponent playing with the cards they chose preserves their fun, and my ability to interact with it and do my own thing preserves mine. At least that's how it works in every healthy format in Magic.

    Second, there's a difference between just agreeing not to play the dreaded "speedball Combo" decks, and cutting off any long-term process of learning and engagement with the game. Something that even the holy founders would agree with, when someone plays a given deck, you're supposed to try to interact with that. You can do that reactively or actively. And one of the best, proven ways to interact with a slow, linear deck like Aggro or Midrange is to actively win the game faster than they can. Only when you do that in EDH, you begin to learn how to cheat on mana costs, access to your deck, and every fundamental aspect of what makes a card game a card game. Which ultimately leads you to using cards that are simply too powerful for control to deal with in a singleton format. But, who's to say when you've crossed the line from trying to get better to abusing the game? Some player who gripes about everything he loses to? If so, then you've just cut off the long-term engagement with the game because now you aren't allowed to get better. Maybe a specific list of cards that everyone knows they shouldn't play? But, but, how would we ever agree on what that list of cards is? Oh right, we can have a ban list!!!

    We've gone over this a couple times now. This stance that everyone knows what they should or shouldn't do and they're good at policing themselves is probably taking an individual case of a group that just happens to have reached an agreement on the issue by happenstance. Just as likely is the case of a group who's had to dissolve because they can't agree, and the card pool is busted. I know of at least 2 or 3 groups that have been like that, and that's just counting the ones I haven't participated in myself. It's a whole lot more complicated than it is simple, my friend.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.