> “RC doesnt follow it’s own criteria”
> Provides criteria as evidence that it isn’t followed.
> Criteria literally specifies that cards exactly like CV will be banned.
Good job.
So before you say that Exapropriate is the same, like Loucypher said, there’s nothing in it’s text that says it just wins. It’s floor is certainly high since at worst you get an extra turn and three lands, at which point you essentially casted a fused timewarp and explosive vegetation. However, even in its better scenarios you will generally still be playing after it resolves, allowing you choices where you don’t just lose.
CVs literal text is “you win the game”, how does it not automatically win on resolution?
Anyways besides it blatantly interacting poorly with the format, theres also the point you seem to be opting to ignore that it would create undesirable game states. How? Because everytime a 5c deck gets its five typed lands or its commander in play everyone will just be focused on stopping the CV. So sure, the odds of CV actually resolving might be low due to removal and counters, but its legality would work as a pseudo Karakas only for 5c decks.
Also, again, CV is literally the only card in all of mtg that wins solely by resolving AND is aided by edhs rules. Everything else needs something happening after the original card resolves.
> card that wins just by playing edh requires skill.
> card that needs the caster to make at least 3 choices out multiple options and also needs decision making from the opponents does not require any skill.
Isn't there already a thread on CV? Also, I'm not sure how you're actually able to claim that playing shocklands/basics and dropping your commander is a lot of set up.
Why is this thread even a thing still? Like what is even the argument anymore?
That it shoupd be unbanned? Well, the RC already said theres no plans of it coming out of the list.
That it's just like any card that combos with the commander? Yes and no. Just like curiosity and niv mizzet (for example) it just needs the natural progression of the game to win: play lands, get your commander out, use the card. Buuut.... on the one hand Curiosity (and most of these other combos) only work with one commander, while CV works with all 5c commanders. And on the other unless everyone is already mostly dead you still need some way to not deckout as you draw your entire library, while CV needs nothing else.
That it's a fun card? People groan at expropriate and actually has effects, some people might be like "oh, cool card!" once or twice, but the generally reaction will probably start from "oh" to various degrees of annoyance.
> Would a strictly better version that doesn't even require the creature part to be present on cast need to be banned?
So basically now you can only hope it either gets countered or you can destroy 1-x lands in hopes that the land type condition can't be met.
Are you serious? Lol.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
> Provides criteria as evidence that it isn’t followed.
> Criteria literally specifies that cards exactly like CV will be banned.
Good job.
So before you say that Exapropriate is the same, like Loucypher said, there’s nothing in it’s text that says it just wins. It’s floor is certainly high since at worst you get an extra turn and three lands, at which point you essentially casted a fused timewarp and explosive vegetation. However, even in its better scenarios you will generally still be playing after it resolves, allowing you choices where you don’t just lose.
Anyways besides it blatantly interacting poorly with the format, theres also the point you seem to be opting to ignore that it would create undesirable game states. How? Because everytime a 5c deck gets its five typed lands or its commander in play everyone will just be focused on stopping the CV. So sure, the odds of CV actually resolving might be low due to removal and counters, but its legality would work as a pseudo Karakas only for 5c decks.
Also, again, CV is literally the only card in all of mtg that wins solely by resolving AND is aided by edhs rules. Everything else needs something happening after the original card resolves.
> card that wins just by playing edh requires skill.
> card that needs the caster to make at least 3 choices out multiple options and also needs decision making from the opponents does not require any skill.
Well, okay then.
That it shoupd be unbanned? Well, the RC already said theres no plans of it coming out of the list.
That it's just like any card that combos with the commander? Yes and no. Just like curiosity and niv mizzet (for example) it just needs the natural progression of the game to win: play lands, get your commander out, use the card. Buuut.... on the one hand Curiosity (and most of these other combos) only work with one commander, while CV works with all 5c commanders. And on the other unless everyone is already mostly dead you still need some way to not deckout as you draw your entire library, while CV needs nothing else.
That it's a fun card? People groan at expropriate and actually has effects, some people might be like "oh, cool card!" once or twice, but the generally reaction will probably start from "oh" to various degrees of annoyance.
So basically now you can only hope it either gets countered or you can destroy 1-x lands in hopes that the land type condition can't be met.
Are you serious? Lol.