2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Jan 18, 2016
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Casual groups should apparently just self moderate and form house rules to curve problems..... but they can't get around Prophet of Kruphix so we'll ban it

    Boy I can't wait for the casuals to get their hands on other good cards. Or do they then stop being casual and not your problem? Or they'll just be told to "house rule" it too aka "please stop talking because lalala you can't play with multiple groups"

    And oh man I can't wait for you guys to learn about the REALLY broken cards like Sol Ring and Mana Cry.... oh you know about those? Not a problem? Ok..

    <snip>
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Jan 2, 2016
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from Sheldon »
    There are people who are way better at math than I am so maybe they can speak to the specifics, but I'm reasonably sure the numbers work out that removing off-color fetches would not have a significant impact on how efficiently a deck works or how many turns it will take you to get all your colors or however one might measure such things. Anyone claiming that removing off-color fetches will cripple their deck is being hyperbolic at best, disingenuous, or simply blatantly lying because they don't like the idea. Which, I might point out, is an idea and one that we've had for a long, long time and not a 'proposed change.'


    Oh in that case I can offer 'Pro MTG tips' for beginners, starting at a low premium. I go into the advanced game theory like "why fetches are good" and "why idiotic changes like this kill playgroups". Also for a few more $, I can also give the very rare class "you've had your 15 minutes, the game is bigger than you can see, please for the love of god stop"

    This'll most likely get me banned again or whatever, but it needs to be said. If I could say it in person, I would.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 19, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on Commander Tuck Discussion
    Quote from asteriskreaper »
    Quote from Galspanic »
    Quote from asteriskreaper »
    The idea that tuck is limited to two different colors is horible wrong. red though not targeted tuck with the exeption of chaos warp has blanket tuck effects like warp ward. Green has tuck effects for artifacts and enchantments. black is the only one that doesnt have tuck spells.

    That Reason should be removed from the RCs list of reasons for tuck
    Isn't that like the last actual reason since all the others have been shown to be flimsy?



    Probably, if wizards gave black a single tuck spell. They would have zero reasons left




    Rishadan Pawnshop + Enslave
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 19, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on Post your pimp decks here!
    No Mikaeus, the Unhallowed?
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 12, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on Commander Tuck Discussion
    Quote from ScorchingMe »

    As a matter of fact people DO play Progenitus. I play him and so do other people and I'm sure we'd all agree that people tend to think he is scary and would rather him not hit the board.
    Also, counterspell DOES stop him from being hardcast (oh my gosh, shocker, people actually do that sometimes -_-)


    All I can really say is that (given your examples)we're playing two very different games.

    Quote from cryogen »
    Quote from Umaro »
    My only comment is this.

    I knew it was coming It just had to take enough whiners to make it happen. Just like everything else in this format. You don't like it, just start complaining about it, get your friends to do it and like a snow ball that's all it takes.

    Because that worked so well in getting Sol Ring, Hermit Druid, Serra Ascendant, Sorin Markov, and countless other cards banned. Seriously, why is it that every time some rule get changed or card gets banned in a format that it is the result of noobs crying about it?


    It's always easier to tear down a straw man instead of a real one I guess. If you wanted tuck changed? You were whining not arguing! If you wanted tuck to remain the same? You were whining not arguing!
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 11, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on Commander Tuck Discussion
    Quote from ScorchingMe »
    Quote from Daracaex »
    Quote from RxPhantom »
    Quote from Daracaex »
    What they see is that you're always supposed to have access to your commander in this format, and that all of a sudden, they don't.

    I've seen variations of this point bandied about, and I'd like to address it. Just because the format is called Commander doesn't mean opponents shouldn't be able to meaningfully respond to your commander, simply by virtue of its commander-ness. Thinking of it this way, in my opinion, is a gross oversimplification of the format that devalues strategic interplay, which is my favorite part of the format.
    Can they suddenly not meaningfully respond to commanders? There are cards that keep a commander from being cast. There are cards that keep activated abilities from being activated. There are cards that sit on commanders and keep them from doing much of anything. There are even cards that don't affect the commander at all, but makes the commander's strategy difficult or costly to maintain. Just because a rules update took away the catch-all answer to every commander doesn't mean there aren't any answers left.

    Daracaex is absolutely correct. Half of you on here are whining because you hate not being able to have a quick, easy way to get rid of someone's commander permanently. It would almost seem as though you guys dislike having to actually work hard to win. Knowing the format, how to play it, and what cards to play is way different than taking the easy way out and getting rid of your problems that all players are SUPPOSED to have access to (*ahem* I mean Commanders).
    You guys are also complaining about the game turning into a whining child's game who don't like their commanders taken away. I saw someone say EDH is turning into a "padded playpen". But getting rid of commanders in the first place is just players nerfing individual games, so that you don't have to deal with it and cry when they lose to powerful commanders. Your deck should be able to deal with commanders without removing them from other players' grasps entirely, and if it can't, then honestly you are no better than new players who aren't sure what they're doing. There are plenty of cards that I won't even stop playing REGARDLESS of no tucking. Because let's be honest, I ran Condemn in decks before the tuck rule changed. But this does not mean that I solely used it for tucking commanders, and even now, my deck will have it in order to simply remove big creatures headed my way during combat, whether it be a general or not.
    ANOTHER thing, people are arguing about the fun of a COMPLEX game of magic, whereas removing the tuck made the game "simpler". Did anyone even think as they said that? Because taking someone's commander, the single card that their ENTIRE deck is built around, and saying "Meh" and taking it from them with 1 mana seems like a pretty simple process to me, and definitely a good way to kill someones deck and win the game. As apposed to, say, killing Animar, Soul of Elements with Vindicate, casting Meddling Mage naming someone's Progenitus, and holding back Derevi, Empyrial Tactician with a Counterspell then having to deal with all of them later unless you can handle it makes the game a lot more interesting, complicated, and not let the game be you vs some guy who's so salty you can taste it as they anticipate the next draw hoping it's their commander and you beat their face in with your own commander.


    People play progenitus?.. and btw counterspell doesn't stop derevi's ability..
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 7, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on "Tiny Leaders" Variant
    I'm also bored of TL. I made a Kira, Great Glass-Spinner merfolk deck. I'd always wanted to play merfolk legacy, but the price of the deck was/is too much.

    So when I heard about TL I got super excited, and built the deck. And I hated it from game one. Maybe I was too used to EDH, but I wasn't enjoying it at all, even when winning by a landslide. I felt I had almost no control over the game, and I was just sitting there and praying to draw a lord. That's when I realized when I wasn't playing 12 lords and a few other merfolk weenies (like the legacy decks), any hand without lords was bad. And most hands were bad. And most draws were bad. I wasn't playing legacy merfolk and I wasn't playing EDH merfolk. It could be the deck, but I haven't had any desire to play the game again. A few players in my playgroup still enjoy it though, and they like to play between games or if they get knocked out of an EDH game early
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 6, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from papa_funk »
    Just dropping by to say that JWK has been nailing it these last few pages.

    Commander has been such a success precisely because it appeals to a different demographic than the other formats. We wanted a different experience and it turns out that there were a heck of a lot of other people who wanted that sort of thing too.


    So casual 60 card magic wasn't a thing? Casual highlander wasn't a thing? Casual highlander/60card multiplayer wasn't a thing?

    People flocked to EDH because of it's unique rules. It gave new light and power to cards that were "legendary", suddenly giving players the urge to pour through online databases or boxes of cards looking for a unique legend or a card that works brilliantly in EDH that otherwise wouldn't (rhystic study for example)

    No one explains EDH by first listing out what cards are banned, nor talking about the rules committee's "vision".

    And I don't think having the same stubbornness as the RC qualifies as "nailing it". When told that some people can only play MTGO he says
    Best solution? Play real, in-person Magic.

    I keep hoping this is all just one big joke
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 5, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from Sheldon »
    Quote from ProfessorWhen »

    I feel like a large portion of the list is there to make sure people have fun the way the RC says they should. At some point they either need to acknowledge that they are sculpting the format to their own personal definition or they need to understand that "tailor your game with house rules" is not an acceptable fix for a large portion of the EDH population.



    Pretty sure we've repeatedly acknowledged we're sculpting the format to our own vision.


    The disconnect comes in where the idea is to do that, however it comes out as "play how we play" not "play how you want to, within reason".

    "House rule ban" should be taken out of the RC vocabulary btw. It's never as simple as "just house rule it". For example- I think sol ring and mana crypt should be banned. A few other players in my group don't think they need banning. So we come at an impasse. After debating it at length, the only thing left to do (that still keeps the group together) is to just follow the official banned list. That's just my 2 cents while you're here - I realize you are not = to the RC btw, so don't think I'm coming down hard on you.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 4, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from ProfessorWhen »
    Quote from Elvish Sniper »
    Quote from ProfessorWhen »
    Furthermore, why is doom blade an acceptable check, but counterspell isn't?
    Because every deck has good options for removing a creature from the battlefield, but only blue has good options for removing a spell from the stack.


    Then why are enchantments allowed in the game when red and black can't deal with those?


    Banned list update: enchantment cards are now banned
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 3, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from Son_of_the_Suns »
    Considering that Griselbrand is banned, what do you think about Sidisi, Undead Vizier? Her EtB trigger can be "countered" with an instant removal spell, but the lower cmc and the tutor effect might make her even more obnoxious. Get Ad Nauseam, get everything, everyone dies? Too easy with Sidisi. Not crying for a ban yet, but she definitely needs an eye kept on her. Has anyone seen her being played yet?


    Just like the Maralen of the Mornsong Ad Nauseam deck - it would work exactly one time. The next game and every game after it is a 3v1 game. Why Sidisi would be banned over other combo-rific generals is beyond me.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 2, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Funny enough, speaking of Gifts Ungiven and Survival of the Fittest.. it seems much easier to combo out with survival (given your hand is not empty)

    That argument that was copy pasted was just awful though. I'm sure someone can construct a much better argument for banning it (but not me, I don't think it's worth banning)
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 1, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from Wildfire393 »
    Quote from Pokken »
    I don't think Squirrelcraft combo wins on the turn it goes off sadly, without a haste enabler.


    Even with, the tokens end up tapped.


    But surely you run Mobilize?
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 1, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from cryogen »
    Quote from DigitalFire »
    Better yet, try it on one of Sheldon's decks. But taking it one step further, how would you use Gifts in any of those decks to prove the reason it's banned?

    That sounds like a good idea. Ok guys and gals, here's a challenge for each of you who cares: Post a link to one of Sheldon's decks and then find the most broken thing(s) you could do with Gifts. To make this as easy as possible, assume optimal board state, no fear of disruption, and a decent (but not obscene or infinite) amount of mana. List the Gift stack you'd grab, and how they'd probably get piled for you.


    assuming optimal board state and a good amount of mana....

    His Mimeoplasm deck you could grab Bribery, Beacon of Unrest, Havengul Lich, and Chainer, Dementia Master

    ... and then you bribery/reanimate someone's Palinchron, then reanimate someones Deadeye Navigator, go infinite, then reanimate Thrashing Wumpus because #mercadianmasquestech

    Of course, that scenario is just silly



    What if they give you Dream halls and Replenish?
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • Waiting in the Weeds's avatar
    Apr 1, 2015
    Waiting in the Weeds posted a message on Commander Tuck Discussion
    Quote from cryogen »
    Quote from d0su »
    One other thing I will say in favor of this change: maybe now people will realize that Spin Into Myth is actually a bad card.

    But here we have Bennie Smith saying Gamble is sub-par! Come on, Bennie, don't be hatin' on Gamble!

    I used to really enjoy his articles but lately I've felt like I'm no longer his target audience. Seeing him say that about Gamble pretty much sealed the deal. I was also baffled by his "combo harder" solution. This is almost never a good longterm solutions .


    From the perspective of the Derevi player, I would love for everyone to "combo harder". The whole article is written under the assumption that the Derevi player lives to see the misery of magic players, and only enjoys games where he crushes casual groups that had no chance. In reality- if he made the deck to be as good as possible, he probably wants a deck of equal or better power to play against. But how he words it- I agree with you, it's not a great solution

    Neither are the "stand up!" solutions. Commander, being a "social format" has somehow given the players the OK to be anti-social. Shunning players from your group, telling them they can't play with you - that's where the real "feel bads" come in to play. Instead of asking him to switch decks if he has one, or asking if he could use one of your spare decks so you could all play on the same level, or just talking to the person; the reaction is to just give them the cold shoulder? Come on.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Back to Top