2.1% chance of having no lands in your opening hand? Um, that is obviously false. I run a standard 23 land deck and I have no lands in my opening hand something around 20% of the time.
You don't understand numbers or statistics do you?
The odds of getting a no land hand with a 24 land deck is as follows
36/60 * 35/59 * 34/58 * 33/57 * 32/56 * 31/55 * 30/54
or
36!/(36-7)! / (60!/(60-7!))
or
36!*53!/(29!*60!)
or
~2.16%
This is easily understood as the odds of drawing a nonland with the first card is 36/60 e.g. the number of nonlands in the deck. Since the draws are without replacement (making it a hypergeometric distribution not a binomial distribution) the next draw's odds are 35/59 and so on.
Now, you might shuffle horribly, or your memory might over represent those hands with no lands in your mind (as they are so bad that your mind draws extra attention to them), or some other option. What isn't false is the 2.16% odds.
I'm a huge fan of Zedruu the Greathearted. It's definitely a very political deck with lots of "Don't attack me", "Let me help you", "Let's help each other", etc. type interactions. Not that it can't backfire and draw unwanted attention by itself, but that's part of the fun.
It's something aesthetical. Null Brooch in my monogreen deck looks good. Kitchen Finks does not.
Oh, it's a prettiness argument. Well, that's stupid. I'm pretty sure Geth wouldn't say, "Debtor's Knell sure isn't pretty. I guess I'll have to stick to prettier methods of bringing dudes back to life. *SIGH*"
I just think it's pretty stupid to think that a black mage would be like "Oh, I want to use Obelisk of Alara. Oh, drats, if a white mage were to use this, he could gain life. Icky. Nope, no how, not gonna touch this thing now."
If
"Cards in a deck may not have any colours in their identity which are not shared with the commander of the deck."
were replaced with
"Cards in a deck must be castable by a combination of mana in the colours in the identity of the commander of the deck."
Then everything would happy. Except for "prettiness".
I don't think it's what the general can do that's flavorful, but how it can go about doing it. A character like Sisay would say "hey, this artifact could really help us save Dominaria by temporarily subduing the will of those who are trying to attack us," whereas a character like Geth would say "I WILL HAVE THE POWER!" And because it's an artifact, they have no qualms about casting it, as it doesn't require them to harness an elemental force they don't comprehend.
In my estimation, it's not.
Every game has rules that have to be adhered to, because seeing what can be done within the confines of those rules is what makes the game interesting. If I were allowed to whip out a chainsaw while playing ice hockey and kill all the members of the opposing team, would I win? Probably. However, it would be unsporting and pointless. Giving players access to all colours of mana would be analagous to whipping out the chainsaw for some players, because all they would do would be to build five colour "good stuff" decks. Basically, it would end up being "the player who owns the most historically powerful cards wins." And THAT would be unflavorful.
1. The point is, the flavor argument is untenable. Artifacts (and colorless spells) break the color pie by the very fact that they have no color. Just because 1 has no mana symbols and the other, colorless hybrids, does doesn't change the fact that both could be cast without 'harnessing elemental forces beyond their reckoning' (paraphrased, on a bus).
2. That's my point. Using a 5 color general because the rules demand it, even though his deck could cast all other 99 spells using only white mana goes against the spirit of Commander.
3a. Tired argument about games and rules is tired. The rules are arbitrary as they are right now. They would be arbitrary with my or others' modifications. I would claim that they would be less so, but people are allowed to disagree.
3b. People can already run 5 color good stuff. People can run "optimal" decks. People choose not to. Changing this rule won't change that.
3c. I never suggested people should run 5 color goodstuff. I just think it'd be reasonable for monowhite to run minister of impediments if it wanted to.
As for Debtors Knell and whether it is 'white or black' or 'white and black'. It doesn't matter. If we said that players can't play spells outside of the modern color pie then it would. But we don't stop people from running psionic blast or dreamscape artist or ... It is castable using only white mana, it should be castable in a deck that only produces white mana.
All of this talk about the flavor of hybrids is ridiculous. If we want to start basing things only on flavor then we're going to have to make a lot of changes. I don't think it's flavorful for Sisay to enslave people's minds, but I think it'd be ludicrous if we said that a Sisay player can't run Mindslaver.
I knew someone who wanted to run mono-white hybrids (i.e. every single card that was W/X hybrid). He ran Plains and colorless utility lands (wasteland,tectonic edge, etc.) and Scion of the Ur-Dragon. He created what I would think is a flavorful deck (i.e. this deck is the area where white overlaps with everyone), but the only way he could do it was to run it with a commander that he could never cast. How is that in keeping with the flavor of Commander.
Sheldon, you say you don't like it when people run a commander just for the colors (at least, I think you have said this, I don't want to put words in your virtual mouth, but I'm too lazy to go digging for references), but by keeping this (backwards, I would say) rule you create a system where that is the only solution for some people.
Monocolor Hybrid is not something I want to see outside of its color. I don't like that color bleed.
If it can be cast for 6 colorless, it isn't color bleed.
That's like saying you hate Moonglove Extract because it allows for burn outside of red. Colorless cards exist, it isn't bleed.
Likewise, I don't like the Phyrexian Mana bleed either. I'm sick of seeing Dismember everywhere in standard. I don't want every deck to have access to Birthing Pod or Phyrexian Metamorph.
See above.
While I understand that the Bringers are restricted to 5 color decks, and they shouldn't need to be, or that Noble Heirarch in a U/G deck wouldn't bother me, it just makes things more complicated.
Fundamentally, simplicity is important. The current rule, even with its faults, is simple. I think I would choose the current shortcomings over the shortcomings of any of the alternatives.
Yeah, because removing a line of text sure makes things more complicated :tongue:.
What MaRo proposed and what others have proposed (myself included) is no less simple (or more complicated) than what already exists. It's just as confusing to say, "No, you can't have Noble Hierarch in your deck even though you're commander is Green," as it is to say, "You can run Mirrorweave in your mono-white deck because it is castable with only white mana."
The only thing that makes it 'complicated' is that it is different. But so was the change in color identity that allowed for such commanders as Bosh, Memnarch, Rhys, etc. You don't see people decrying that any more.
I think the best solution to this is:
Cards in a deck must be castable by the colours in the color identity of the commander of the deck.
This would allow for Phybrids, colorless hybrids, on-color hybrids, split cards, and cards that have different colors in their text box (e.g. Mirrorwood Treefolk in a green Treefolk deck), while not allowing mono-black reanimator to run Iona.
This would allow for a small amount of trickery with regards to Dream Halls (e.g. If I was playing a U/R deck with Dream Halls, I could include Research // Development and could wind up playing the Research half of the card), but that seems so inconsequential that I would allow for it.
My wife has played a game or two, but generally doesn't take part in any Magic. I keep most all of my cards in a cabinet in our living room and generally keep things pretty organized. It's when I'm sorting through things that she'll get a little annoyed. Especially if I'm sorting through things for a couple of days.
Are you me? Am I you?
Anyway, same as boinknet. My wife is fine with the habit, so long as I don't go overboard and I keep things relatively organized and clean.
I've recently gotten some of my co-workers into it and started a draft night that we host at our house, and my wife has been very supportive of that.
I really dislike dies, I understand why they did it but why couldn't they just destroyed instead. This way it could be used on any permanent type.
They wouldn't need to tweak any rules for that wording either, destroyed is synonymous with put into a graveyard from the battlefield.
Regeneration and Indestructible are the only cases I could think of that might cause confusion but these prevent destruction (or could be easily amended to if I'm mistaken) meaning that every works they way it is supposed to.
Liking and disliking Hexproof, but I imagine the name with grow on me.
Destroy is not synonymous with put into the graveyard. Destroying something typically results in it going to the graveyard, but not all things that go to the graveyard are destroyed.
Dies makes complete sense.
1) It doesn't have the baggage that something like buried (which has come to mean sacrifice or destroy, ~ can't be regenerated depending on the context) has
2) It doesn't require changing the meaning of a pre-existing term, a la destroy (Destroyed has a very specific meaning in Magic. If you can't figure that out, well I'm sorry)
3) It clears up card real estate
'Nathed
Dies is terrible. It sounds terribly juvenile and, frankly, stupid. In fact, rather than make the game easier, I think newer players will become MORE confused at differentiating enter the graveyard and remove from the game effects.
Well, then it sure is good that things aren't removed from the game any more.
Look, this makes sense. Yes, it can be confusing. But so can every other thing in Magic. The labeling makes it no more confusing than it already was, and probably is better (time will tell).
I have to say I am stunned by all of the people saying things like "Dies is stupid. It's too close to destroyed or exiled. People won't understand the difference." That might be (and probably is) true. But that's true of so many other freaking things in this game, that to complain about this is idiotic. This is a complex, confusing game, and it has a formal language devoted to it. This didn't just happen right now with the introduction of 'dies'. This is how the game was built. Words have very specific meanings in the game. Sure, it can be hard for someone new to fully understand what all of these words mean specifically, but that's always been the case.
Next, why don't you complain about how choose and target mean similar things, but have different meaning in the game. Or about how it is confusing that protection only prevents some things and not others. Or about how counter means 2 different things depending on the context. Or ... ad infinitum.
I think dies makes sense as a) it frees up card real estate and b) is a nice counterpoint to 'exiled'.
I have mixed feelings on hexproof. Pro) Finally a keyword Con) not a huge fan of the name.
Oh well, can't win them all.
Ok, I think I know the answers to these questions, but I just wanted to check.
1) I have a Dusk Urchins with 2 -1/-1 counters on it. Skinrender enters the battlefield and puts 3 -1/-1 counters on my Dusk Urchins. I draw 5 cards, not 3 right? Because when Dusk Urchins was put into the graveyard, it had 5 -1/-1 counters on it, correct?
2) Essentially an extension of the above question: I have a Flourishing Defenses in the above situation. I would get 3 Elf Tokens when Skinrender enters the battlefield, correct?
You don't understand numbers or statistics do you?
The odds of getting a no land hand with a 24 land deck is as follows
36/60 * 35/59 * 34/58 * 33/57 * 32/56 * 31/55 * 30/54
or
36!/(36-7)! / (60!/(60-7!))
or
36!*53!/(29!*60!)
or
~2.16%
This is easily understood as the odds of drawing a nonland with the first card is 36/60 e.g. the number of nonlands in the deck. Since the draws are without replacement (making it a hypergeometric distribution not a binomial distribution) the next draw's odds are 35/59 and so on.
Now, you might shuffle horribly, or your memory might over represent those hands with no lands in your mind (as they are so bad that your mind draws extra attention to them), or some other option. What isn't false is the 2.16% odds.
You got this one backwords chief.
Pre M10:
Combat damage went on the stack and then was dealt.
Other damage (e.g. Lightning Bolt) was just dealt.
Post M10:
Combat damage is dealt. Other damage is dealt.
But, nope you have it in your head that these changes are bad, so whatever.
Green Bringer in EDH
Oh, it's a prettiness argument. Well, that's stupid. I'm pretty sure Geth wouldn't say, "Debtor's Knell sure isn't pretty. I guess I'll have to stick to prettier methods of bringing dudes back to life. *SIGH*"
I just think it's pretty stupid to think that a black mage would be like "Oh, I want to use Obelisk of Alara. Oh, drats, if a white mage were to use this, he could gain life. Icky. Nope, no how, not gonna touch this thing now."
If
"Cards in a deck may not have any colours in their identity which are not shared with the commander of the deck."
were replaced with
"Cards in a deck must be castable by a combination of mana in the colours in the identity of the commander of the deck."
Then everything would happy. Except for "prettiness".
1. The point is, the flavor argument is untenable. Artifacts (and colorless spells) break the color pie by the very fact that they have no color. Just because 1 has no mana symbols and the other, colorless hybrids, does doesn't change the fact that both could be cast without 'harnessing elemental forces beyond their reckoning' (paraphrased, on a bus).
2. That's my point. Using a 5 color general because the rules demand it, even though his deck could cast all other 99 spells using only white mana goes against the spirit of Commander.
3a. Tired argument about games and rules is tired. The rules are arbitrary as they are right now. They would be arbitrary with my or others' modifications. I would claim that they would be less so, but people are allowed to disagree.
3b. People can already run 5 color good stuff. People can run "optimal" decks. People choose not to. Changing this rule won't change that.
3c. I never suggested people should run 5 color goodstuff. I just think it'd be reasonable for monowhite to run minister of impediments if it wanted to.
As for Debtors Knell and whether it is 'white or black' or 'white and black'. It doesn't matter. If we said that players can't play spells outside of the modern color pie then it would. But we don't stop people from running psionic blast or dreamscape artist or ... It is castable using only white mana, it should be castable in a deck that only produces white mana.
I knew someone who wanted to run mono-white hybrids (i.e. every single card that was W/X hybrid). He ran Plains and colorless utility lands (wasteland,tectonic edge, etc.) and Scion of the Ur-Dragon. He created what I would think is a flavorful deck (i.e. this deck is the area where white overlaps with everyone), but the only way he could do it was to run it with a commander that he could never cast. How is that in keeping with the flavor of Commander.
Sheldon, you say you don't like it when people run a commander just for the colors (at least, I think you have said this, I don't want to put words in your virtual mouth, but I'm too lazy to go digging for references), but by keeping this (backwards, I would say) rule you create a system where that is the only solution for some people.
If it can be cast for 6 colorless, it isn't color bleed.
That's like saying you hate Moonglove Extract because it allows for burn outside of red. Colorless cards exist, it isn't bleed.
See above.
Yeah, because removing a line of text sure makes things more complicated :tongue:.
What MaRo proposed and what others have proposed (myself included) is no less simple (or more complicated) than what already exists. It's just as confusing to say, "No, you can't have Noble Hierarch in your deck even though you're commander is Green," as it is to say, "You can run Mirrorweave in your mono-white deck because it is castable with only white mana."
The only thing that makes it 'complicated' is that it is different. But so was the change in color identity that allowed for such commanders as Bosh, Memnarch, Rhys, etc. You don't see people decrying that any more.
Cards in a deck must be castable by the colours in the color identity of the commander of the deck.
This would allow for Phybrids, colorless hybrids, on-color hybrids, split cards, and cards that have different colors in their text box (e.g. Mirrorwood Treefolk in a green Treefolk deck), while not allowing mono-black reanimator to run Iona.
This would allow for a small amount of trickery with regards to Dream Halls (e.g. If I was playing a U/R deck with Dream Halls, I could include Research // Development and could wind up playing the Research half of the card), but that seems so inconsequential that I would allow for it.
Are you me? Am I you?
Anyway, same as boinknet. My wife is fine with the habit, so long as I don't go overboard and I keep things relatively organized and clean.
I've recently gotten some of my co-workers into it and started a draft night that we host at our house, and my wife has been very supportive of that.
Destroy is not synonymous with put into the graveyard. Destroying something typically results in it going to the graveyard, but not all things that go to the graveyard are destroyed.
Dies makes complete sense.
1) It doesn't have the baggage that something like buried (which has come to mean sacrifice or destroy, ~ can't be regenerated depending on the context) has
2) It doesn't require changing the meaning of a pre-existing term, a la destroy (Destroyed has a very specific meaning in Magic. If you can't figure that out, well I'm sorry)
3) It clears up card real estate
'Nathed
Well, then it sure is good that things aren't removed from the game any more.
Look, this makes sense. Yes, it can be confusing. But so can every other thing in Magic. The labeling makes it no more confusing than it already was, and probably is better (time will tell).
Next, why don't you complain about how choose and target mean similar things, but have different meaning in the game. Or about how it is confusing that protection only prevents some things and not others. Or about how counter means 2 different things depending on the context. Or ... ad infinitum.
I think dies makes sense as a) it frees up card real estate and b) is a nice counterpoint to 'exiled'.
I have mixed feelings on hexproof. Pro) Finally a keyword Con) not a huge fan of the name.
Oh well, can't win them all.
1 Vhati il-Dal
Utility Creatures
1 Acidic Slime
1 Bone Shredder
1 Butcher of Malakir
1 Indrik Stomphowler
1 Mold Shambler
1 Sakura-Tribe Elder
1 Shriekmaw
1 Moriok Replica
Fat
1 Geth, Lord of the Vault
1 Helldozer
1 Platinum Emperion
1 Steel Hellkite
1 Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre
1 Wurmcoil Engine
Fellow Tappers
1 Avatar of Woe
1 Royal Assassin
Synergistic
1 Ascendant Evincar
1 Blight Mamba
1 Carnifex Demon
1 Cinderbones
1 Dusk Urchins
1 Grim Poppet
1 Pestilence Demon
1 Skinrender
1 Soul Snuffers
1 Sorin Markov
CA and mana-fixing
1 Armillary Sphere
1 Crystal Ball
1 Cultivate
1 Darksteel Ingot
1 Defense of the Heart
1 Expedition Map
1 Explosive Vegetation
1 Golgari Signet
1 Kodama's Reach
1 Mirri's Guile
1 Promise of Power
1 Rise from the Grave
1 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Sylvan Library
1 Syphon Mind
-X/-X Effects
1 Blowfly Infestation
1 Cauldron of Souls
1 Contagion Clasp
1 Contagion Engine
1 Fevered Convulsions
1 Flourishing Defenses
1 Gnarled Effigy
1 Incremental Blight
1 Marsh Casualties
1 Night of Souls' Betrayal
1 Serrated Arrows
1 Dregs of Sorrow
1 Putrefy
Equipment (or equipment-like)
1 Lightning Greaves
1 Loxodon Warhammer
1 Power Matrix
1 Puppet Strings
1 Umbral Mantle
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Skullclamp
Lands
1 Evolving Wilds
14 Forest
1 Golgari Rot Farm
1 Jund Panorama
19 Swamp
1 Terramorphic Expanse
1 Twilight Mire
Some choices are a bit random, aka Platinum Emperion, Steel Hellkite, Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre which are mostly here because I needed some more beef at the top end and I had them lying around.
Other cards that I'm on the lookout for are Necroskitter, Wickerbough Elder, Crumbling Ashes, Midnight Banshee, Grafted Exoskeleton, Thornbite Staff, and Phyrexian Arena.
Any other recommendations?
1) I have a Dusk Urchins with 2 -1/-1 counters on it. Skinrender enters the battlefield and puts 3 -1/-1 counters on my Dusk Urchins. I draw 5 cards, not 3 right? Because when Dusk Urchins was put into the graveyard, it had 5 -1/-1 counters on it, correct?
2) Essentially an extension of the above question: I have a Flourishing Defenses in the above situation. I would get 3 Elf Tokens when Skinrender enters the battlefield, correct?
Thanks.