To anyone who plays commander outside of a kitchen table setting, nothing has changed. Official rules are the only rules.
Well, that's just not true. Either your meta plays with only the most ironclad of rules or they're sticklers for officialdom. Either way, if they don't allow house ruling, that's a shame for you and I sympathise, but this scenario is far from the norm, in my experience.
Besides which, while there's official rules, we're talking about a casual format here. The prize you're playing for is nothing more or less than enjoyment, no prize money, no trophy, just a good time. If your meta doesn't allow house rules for walkers in the CZ, find another meta. Better yet, make your own and invite people. Rule 0 now makes it explicit that if you decree this is legal in your meta, it's legal in your meta. It's a small victory, but in a lot of ways it's enough of a victory to count. Take the win for what it is, I'd say. If you're after a hard and fast global allowance you're obviously left wanting, but this gives you enough to keep your preferred meta happy.
I feel like the argument was at least given a subtle nod with the implementation of what’s always been around covertly in rule 0. It’s a master stroke to make this explicit and formalized, in that it gives people who want to play these sort of variants leeway to play the format the way they want to. They always could in the right time and place of course, but now it’s a little more easy to have that discussion. It’s not a win for the ‘yes’ crowd, but it is middle ground that both sides of this debate can use to test the waters, and no one needs to feel any way for bringing it up as an option.
Regarding ‘if not now, when?’, I agree. If it were ever to be formalized, now would’ve been the time. The hype is up, there’s now focus on walkers than ever and plenty of choices. The fact that the RC and CAG unanimously decided against speaks volumes - allowing a global concession for all walkers would be ill advised. Regardless, the option was always there if you wanted it and now that’s made more obvious. It might not be formal and binding in every game you shuffle up, but does it really matter? Your meta is your meta, so long as they’re cool with it you’re good to go.
As a player that absolutely loves Planeswalkers and once heavily wanted to use them as Commander (and I have played since the format's inception) - I can honestly say that I have never gotten bored with finding legendary creatures to use.
In fact, even the Planeswalkers that they introduced specifically to fit into the Command Zone, are walkers I have never actually used as Commanders.
WOTC is on the right track, print Planeswalkers here and there that sidestep the RC's ability to dictate that PWs cannot be Commanders. The simple fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Planeswalkers don't enrich what you can or cannot do in the format already. Sure, flavor wins are nice. We all love flavor wins. But flavor wins don't actually equate to necessity.
Legalizing Planeswalkers as Commanders means you are now opening up the format to more bans on certain cards in an already oversized banned list.
I think people forget that you really have to pick and choose your battles, and if not having access ti PWs as Commanders turns you off of the format, then so be it. Go play Brawl. You are literally arguing that not having them legal as Commanders is of detriment to a format that continues to grow anyways...
It should be meaningless but the RC has specifically stated that interest in building around them matters, thus creating an unquantifiable reason to continue letting the format stagnate.
This is false equivalency. Yes, papa funk made mention of boring walkers - in a lot of cases, I don't disagree. It's a subjective thing, but in most cases we fall on the same side of the discussion. Your mileage may vary, as with any subjective discussion.
There's nothing to suggest that the format is stagnating for not having walkers globablly available from the command zone. I'd suggest it's probably the opposite and that the format is as popular as it's ever been, and there's likely plenty of sales data and social media activity to back that up.
Also, even if interest in building around them matters, this poll has indicated that just under 40% of people who have seen this thread are interested in building around walkers. That's not a small percentage, but it's not a majority percentage. So, even with interest in walkers being relevant there's not enough interest to sway a change in the format at present. It doesn't make sense in any field to make changes to a business/industry/project that less than half people want anyway, so I feel like this is logical and unsurprising.
Stopping fetch lands is not stopping the deck from interacting.
So you've never been mana screwed or colour screwed? Must just be me. I realise how sarcastic this is, but this literally happens to everyone time to time. If I can't hit my colours I'm dead in the water and you know it, you're totally splitting hairs. I get why people are anti-ramp. I just think lumping ramp in with turbo ramp and dedicated tutor is comparing apples to oranges to watermelons. Ramp in essence isn't the culprit you think it is until its symmetry is broken or it's abused. Same goes for tutors.
Again, this is all beside the point. Relating this all back to this specific walker, you're more than welcome to topdeck with no graveyard across from the guy running Ashiok and milling you out or comboing off, but I'll pass. And that's where the problem is. This isn't stopping ramp, or tutoring. It's just stopping the rest of the table doing it. And that's pretty garbage. It doesn't feel great and it's not fun. It's far less of an issue when there's a level playing field, but you're acting like this scenario would be, and it just plain would not be, purely based on the rules printed on the card and regardless of any other cards in the 99.
Agreed. That wasn't the point I was trying to make though.
The point I was trying to make was that demand should be (one of several) compelling reasons to make a change, not how interesting whatever the thing is that is in demand. Whether you or I find planeswalkers interesting should probably be a non-factor.
I mean there's plenty of other cons to making the change and not enough pros to make the change without taking this into consideration anyway.
If your deck is so narrow in it's focus that a single hate card shuts it down, it is probably teetering on the non-interactive itself.
Academically, there's a point there. But there's a difference between someone running Vampiric Tutor, Demonic Tutor and a Razaketh, the Foulblooded shell, and someone who just wants to pop Evolving Wilds to colour fix. The former is shutting down a likely lethal combo deck, the latter is stopping a generally innocent interaction and stopping a deck from being able to interact with the game whatsoever.
I would stop thinking in terms of "these cards would be broken" and start thinking in terms of "these cards would make for fun and interesting decks to face." Right now, there isn't enough reason to make the change to worry about why we shouldn't make the change. The positives are almost entirely centered around "these are cool characters from lore" rather than "these are cool cards to build around". That's a plus, but it's not enough to justify a major gameplay change, even before you get to the downsides.
On the bright side, WAR suggests that maybe they'll be looser about planeswalker designs in the future. Maybe there'll be fun, quirky ones to build around. But right now, when I hear "I want to build a Kiora deck!" it's solely driven by Kiora's backstory, not because the Kiora cards are interesting.
I can agree with this. Regardless of any broken-ness, I can't see global commander-walkers being any more fun that the game already is, and I can see it being considerably less fun. That's a totally subjective assessment that'll vary from person to person, of course.
She would be far better as a commander. Ramp is just way too consistent and the hate for it is way too inconsistent. Too many decks are just ramp into goodstuff. To a point where other archetypes are nonexistent. If you look at format staples from other formats you see that there are at best 1 ramp card in the 10 ten while in edh you have 6. Most played card in edh is a ramp card.
This isn't really pertinent to the discussion one way or another to be fair - I disagree for the most part, but that's neither here nor there. In terms of prevalence in the format, you're comparing a singleton 100 card format to 60 card with multiples and far greater consistency in mana and colour generation. Apples and oranges. This in itself doesn't make it a problem, although it can get a bit much with Azusa, Lost but Seeking and so forth. Either way, this point notwithstanding, that doesn't make Ashiok a suitable candidate for commander status. Too much ramp is bad, but shutting off fundamental game play altogether is oppressive and not fun. If I want to watch someone else play while I sit there, I won't even bother shuffling up at all.
Fun fact: Ashiok, as far as lore has dictated thus far, is genderless.
Non-interactive means it wins without caring what the opponent does
For example...say...tutoring up a 2 card combo and ending the game.
It makes the game non-interactive. When you sit there unable to play cards, unable to play your deck, you can't interact. There's no give and take - only take.
Agreed - this is the most accurate assessment of this card. While fine in the 99, completely gross in the command zone.
As someone who had multiple players playing Leovold in our Meta, we never had a problem with it... But you and I both know that that isn't a fair summary of the format at large.
I agree that Ashiok is oppressive, and a solid case study why one might not want Planeswalkers as commanders - but if you are predicating your argument on the best example of how wrong it can go, then you are being a bit hypocritical when you dismiss the frustrations an average table might feel towards other highly frustrating commanders that are still legal in the format.
None taken. And no, I wasn''t being disingenuous, though I get what you're saying.
Leovold was about strong in terms of providing advantage to you and disadvantage to your opponents without having to leverage his abilities in other ways as I've seen since...maybe Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary? I get it though, the people who busted him wide open were the ones who were responsible for the grossness they enabled in his name. That being said, he's certainly further up the spectrum than the other commanders mentioned by Carthage - Narset withstanding, she just takes whatever else your doing and makes it quicker and more bulletproof.
In terms of legality, I don't think any of them are as oppressive as Ashiok has the potential to be. They're all strong, but they're not oppressive and anti-fun like this would be.
I mean, you only get away with Leovold trying to strong-arm the table so many times before enough people recognize how unfun you are making Commander events and just gun for you. This is true for every banned Commander, and I think that is the great problem solver - more so than an actual banned list. Sure, Leovold can still work into games easily enough because of the low barrier to locking everyone else out, but the greatest regulator for fun play is the group itself. But that is really here nor there.
100% agree with your comments regarding table talk, house ruling and meta discussion - this is a social game, and it's only fun when everyone has fun - to some degree at any rate. And yes, playing a ubiquitous commander like Leovold will only get you so far - eventually you become the archenemy. I don't get this with Oloro (in a vacuum, at least) - he's ok, but I generally think it's poor threat assessment to gun for him straight away. Build dependent of course, but most are manageable.
If you want to argue that Planeswalkers can create unfair games, you should cite more than just the absolute pinnacle of the argument. I would not be pleased to see an Ashiok as a commander on the otherside of the table, if only that at 3CMC you cannot really lock them out of just repeatedly jamming Ashiok until they stick. I think that is the biggest issue for me, not so much that they are harder to deal with. You can still combo around them (generally) or just gun them down with the other players. I think people often forget how valuable table talk can be when it comes to balancing game play at a table.
I think there's games that will be unfair with walkers in the zone, but those can exist now - Daretti and precon Teferi can take care of that in terms of being competitive, but I think the bigger problem for me is creating games that aren't fun more than anything. There's a few that aren't legal that would be busted (mostly Tezzeret 1.0), and landing an emblem (or more than one of the same) just closes the door to victory in most cases, but I can't imagine most others being an enjoyable game either way. They'd either be oppressive, or underwhelming and so would not see play. For myself, I consider games a win when everyone has a great time. It's nice to actually win, but fun is more important. That won't always happen, granted. But walkers in the zone seems like fun for the player playing them, but only at the expense of everyone else at the table, and that's just not my jam.
As someone who had multiple players playing Leovold in our Meta, we never had a problem with it... But you and I both know that that isn't a fair summary of the format at large.
I agree that Ashiok is oppressive, and a solid case study why one might not want Planeswalkers as commanders - but if you are predicating your argument on the best example of how wrong it can go, then you are being a bit hypocritical when you dismiss the frustrations an average table might feel towards other highly frustrating commanders that are still legal in the format.
None taken. And no, I wasn''t being disingenuous, though I get what you're saying.
Leovold was about strong in terms of providing advantage to you and disadvantage to your opponents without having to leverage his abilities in other ways as I've seen since...maybe Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary? I get it though, the people who busted him wide open were the ones who were responsible for the grossness they enabled in his name. That being said, he's certainly further up the spectrum than the other commanders mentioned by Carthage - Narset withstanding, she just takes whatever else your doing and makes it quicker and more bulletproof.
In terms of legality, I don't think any of them are as oppressive as Ashiok has the potential to be. They're all strong, but they're not oppressive and anti-fun like this would be.
I never have got why people hold so much ire towards Oloro. He's always active, sure, but he's far from busted. Anything else a deck throws at you, you can point the blame squarely on the deck builder, not the commander.
Nekusar, yeah I get that. It tends to be somewhat of a glass cannon though. I haven't seen a whole lot of wins from Nekusar.
Of these, the only one I take umbrage with is Narset.
It seems like this is really just a list of commanders you've faced down that you've struggled to compete against. Would that be an accurate assessment? They're all strong in their own way, but none of them are unbeatable or necessarily unfun to play against. All are dependent on the 99 you surround them with in terms of how oppressive they are.
Well, that's just not true. Either your meta plays with only the most ironclad of rules or they're sticklers for officialdom. Either way, if they don't allow house ruling, that's a shame for you and I sympathise, but this scenario is far from the norm, in my experience.
Besides which, while there's official rules, we're talking about a casual format here. The prize you're playing for is nothing more or less than enjoyment, no prize money, no trophy, just a good time. If your meta doesn't allow house rules for walkers in the CZ, find another meta. Better yet, make your own and invite people. Rule 0 now makes it explicit that if you decree this is legal in your meta, it's legal in your meta. It's a small victory, but in a lot of ways it's enough of a victory to count. Take the win for what it is, I'd say. If you're after a hard and fast global allowance you're obviously left wanting, but this gives you enough to keep your preferred meta happy.
Regarding ‘if not now, when?’, I agree. If it were ever to be formalized, now would’ve been the time. The hype is up, there’s now focus on walkers than ever and plenty of choices. The fact that the RC and CAG unanimously decided against speaks volumes - allowing a global concession for all walkers would be ill advised. Regardless, the option was always there if you wanted it and now that’s made more obvious. It might not be formal and binding in every game you shuffle up, but does it really matter? Your meta is your meta, so long as they’re cool with it you’re good to go.
Very well said.
This is false equivalency. Yes, papa funk made mention of boring walkers - in a lot of cases, I don't disagree. It's a subjective thing, but in most cases we fall on the same side of the discussion. Your mileage may vary, as with any subjective discussion.
There's nothing to suggest that the format is stagnating for not having walkers globablly available from the command zone. I'd suggest it's probably the opposite and that the format is as popular as it's ever been, and there's likely plenty of sales data and social media activity to back that up.
Also, even if interest in building around them matters, this poll has indicated that just under 40% of people who have seen this thread are interested in building around walkers. That's not a small percentage, but it's not a majority percentage. So, even with interest in walkers being relevant there's not enough interest to sway a change in the format at present. It doesn't make sense in any field to make changes to a business/industry/project that less than half people want anyway, so I feel like this is logical and unsurprising.
So you've never been mana screwed or colour screwed? Must just be me. I realise how sarcastic this is, but this literally happens to everyone time to time. If I can't hit my colours I'm dead in the water and you know it, you're totally splitting hairs. I get why people are anti-ramp. I just think lumping ramp in with turbo ramp and dedicated tutor is comparing apples to oranges to watermelons. Ramp in essence isn't the culprit you think it is until its symmetry is broken or it's abused. Same goes for tutors.
Again, this is all beside the point. Relating this all back to this specific walker, you're more than welcome to topdeck with no graveyard across from the guy running Ashiok and milling you out or comboing off, but I'll pass. And that's where the problem is. This isn't stopping ramp, or tutoring. It's just stopping the rest of the table doing it. And that's pretty garbage. It doesn't feel great and it's not fun. It's far less of an issue when there's a level playing field, but you're acting like this scenario would be, and it just plain would not be, purely based on the rules printed on the card and regardless of any other cards in the 99.
I mean there's plenty of other cons to making the change and not enough pros to make the change without taking this into consideration anyway.
Academically, there's a point there. But there's a difference between someone running Vampiric Tutor, Demonic Tutor and a Razaketh, the Foulblooded shell, and someone who just wants to pop Evolving Wilds to colour fix. The former is shutting down a likely lethal combo deck, the latter is stopping a generally innocent interaction and stopping a deck from being able to interact with the game whatsoever.
I can agree with this. Regardless of any broken-ness, I can't see global commander-walkers being any more fun that the game already is, and I can see it being considerably less fun. That's a totally subjective assessment that'll vary from person to person, of course.
This isn't really pertinent to the discussion one way or another to be fair - I disagree for the most part, but that's neither here nor there. In terms of prevalence in the format, you're comparing a singleton 100 card format to 60 card with multiples and far greater consistency in mana and colour generation. Apples and oranges. This in itself doesn't make it a problem, although it can get a bit much with Azusa, Lost but Seeking and so forth. Either way, this point notwithstanding, that doesn't make Ashiok a suitable candidate for commander status. Too much ramp is bad, but shutting off fundamental game play altogether is oppressive and not fun. If I want to watch someone else play while I sit there, I won't even bother shuffling up at all.
Fun fact: Ashiok, as far as lore has dictated thus far, is genderless.
Agreed - this is the most accurate assessment of this card. While fine in the 99, completely gross in the command zone.
100% agree with your comments regarding table talk, house ruling and meta discussion - this is a social game, and it's only fun when everyone has fun - to some degree at any rate. And yes, playing a ubiquitous commander like Leovold will only get you so far - eventually you become the archenemy. I don't get this with Oloro (in a vacuum, at least) - he's ok, but I generally think it's poor threat assessment to gun for him straight away. Build dependent of course, but most are manageable.
I think there's games that will be unfair with walkers in the zone, but those can exist now - Daretti and precon Teferi can take care of that in terms of being competitive, but I think the bigger problem for me is creating games that aren't fun more than anything. There's a few that aren't legal that would be busted (mostly Tezzeret 1.0), and landing an emblem (or more than one of the same) just closes the door to victory in most cases, but I can't imagine most others being an enjoyable game either way. They'd either be oppressive, or underwhelming and so would not see play. For myself, I consider games a win when everyone has a great time. It's nice to actually win, but fun is more important. That won't always happen, granted. But walkers in the zone seems like fun for the player playing them, but only at the expense of everyone else at the table, and that's just not my jam.
None taken. And no, I wasn''t being disingenuous, though I get what you're saying.
Leovold was about strong in terms of providing advantage to you and disadvantage to your opponents without having to leverage his abilities in other ways as I've seen since...maybe Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary? I get it though, the people who busted him wide open were the ones who were responsible for the grossness they enabled in his name. That being said, he's certainly further up the spectrum than the other commanders mentioned by Carthage - Narset withstanding, she just takes whatever else your doing and makes it quicker and more bulletproof.
In terms of legality, I don't think any of them are as oppressive as Ashiok has the potential to be. They're all strong, but they're not oppressive and anti-fun like this would be.
I never have got why people hold so much ire towards Oloro. He's always active, sure, but he's far from busted. Anything else a deck throws at you, you can point the blame squarely on the deck builder, not the commander.
Nekusar, yeah I get that. It tends to be somewhat of a glass cannon though. I haven't seen a whole lot of wins from Nekusar.
Of these, the only one I take umbrage with is Narset.
It seems like this is really just a list of commanders you've faced down that you've struggled to compete against. Would that be an accurate assessment? They're all strong in their own way, but none of them are unbeatable or necessarily unfun to play against. All are dependent on the 99 you surround them with in terms of how oppressive they are.