Ok, so to sum up, you guys want Mana Crypt/Sol Ring banned because it can give decks disgusting openers.
Or Survival if the deck is built to abuse it.
C'mon, gimme a break.
Especially in a singleton format, it's basically complaining that your opponent got lucky in every match.
Do they break the format? No.
There not even on the watched list, and there is a reason for that.
Wait a minute....
They banned Protean Hulk because decks were built to abuse it.
They banned Gifts Ungiven because decks were built to abuse it.
They banned Lion's Eye Diamond because decks were built to abuse it.
Heck, they banned Braids, Cabal Minion because decks were built to abuse it (as a general).
I see your point, but I'm just pointing out that abuse is THE typical reason for bannings. I guess what I'm saying is, if Lion's Eye Diamond deserves the ban hammer for insane tempo accel (AND it's a one-shot deal AND you have to build your deck in such a way that discarding your hand isn't a detriment), then how is Mana Crypt any less powerful when it requires zero commitment, has a much smaller downside, and sticks around turn after turn? It doesn't upset me either way, I'm just interested in an elaboration.
Quote from Hate »
Nobody agrees with me on Gaddock Teeg? He basically screws over EVERYONE!
As a Teeg player, I can tell you that he'll get killed more than any other general on the table (except maybe Rofellos). He does screw some decks over a TON, no doubt, but many decks can either function under a Teeg, handle Teeg with their general (Zur, Niv-Mizzet, Momir Vig, etc.), or get rid of him with traditional removal.
Wait a minute....
They banned Protean Hulk because decks were built to abuse it.
They banned Gifts Ungiven because decks were built to abuse it.
They banned Lion's Eye Diamond because decks were built to abuse it.
Heck, they banned Braids, Cabal Minion because decks were built to abuse it (as a general).
I see your point, but I'm just pointing out that abuse is THE typical reason for bannings. I guess what I'm saying is, if Lion's Eye Diamond deserves the ban hammer for insane tempo accel (AND it's a one-shot deal AND you have to build your deck in such a way that discarding your hand isn't a detriment), then how is Mana Crypt any less powerful when it requires zero commitment, has a much smaller downside, and sticks around turn after turn? It doesn't upset me either way, I'm just interested in an elaboration.
As a Teeg player, I can tell you that he'll get killed more than any other general on the table (except maybe Rofellos). He does screw some decks over a TON, no doubt, but many decks can either function under a Teeg, handle Teeg with their general (Zur, Niv-Mizzet, Momir Vig, etc.), or get rid of him with traditional removal.
I read his ability wrong rofl. But still, no Banefire for Teeg
I would like to see Rofellos banned as a General. He just gives too much acceleration to fast and is too easy to go infinite with. Seriously, unbanning Rofellos didn't make much sense. Why did Rofellos get unbanned?
I would like to see Sol Ring banned, because it is just too good and there is really no reason not to run it if you have it (But many people do not have them). Our playgroup has already banned Sol Ring.
Mana Crypt is also kind of crazy, but the extra damage actually does matter since EDH games tend to go really long. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing it banned as well.
DO NOT ban top. There is no problem with that card. If someone is taking too much time with it, the table will turn on them and kill them anyway.
To the person concerned with Tainted Pact: Read the card carefully (Its worded in a difficult way), you can only ever get one card put into your hand from its effect. Its more of a tutor than a draw spell.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I always knew you were trying to kill me, but never thought that you would betray me!
I read his ability wrong rofl. But still, no Banefire for Teeg
It's all good; I did the exact same thing when it was first printed. Then I was watching a match at this one FNM and I was like "OOOOHHHHH, you can't play noncreatures...."
I'm such a noob.
Quote from Ahmad Carroll »
I don't get the Sol Ring/Mana Crypt hate. Games usually go 20+ turns, is an extra 2 mana that big of deal?
In a multiplayer environment, it's generally not a big deal at all. Most issues people have with Sol Ring and the like are in the context of a one-on-one setting, where games will typically follow a faster, more traditional pace. In a duel, if one player gets a turn-1 Sol Ring followed by a turn-2 Grand Arbiter Augusin IV or Thran Dynamo or something, that's pretty much gg.
I'm still on the fence about Mana Crypt and Sol Ring, and if I had to choose, I guess they should remain unbanned. I can totally sympathize with people who feel that action needs to be taken, though.
To the person concerned with Tainted Pact: Read the card carefully (Its worded in a difficult way), you can only ever get one card put into your hand from its effect. Its more of a tutor than a draw spell.
Thanks! I had been playing that incorrectly. You can see why I thought it was banworthy.
The reason they banned Lions Eye Diamond was because you could effectively drop your 4+ mana general on turn 1. The general zone provided the loophole that the card needed to be very good (similar to a Black Lotus) if your deck is general-centric and doesn't necessarily care about cards in hand.
The synergies with random cards like Auriok Salvagers was just a minor annoyance.
In a multiplayer environment, it's generally not a big deal at all. Most issues people have with Sol Ring and the like are in the context of a one-on-one setting, where games will typically follow a faster, more traditional pace. In a duel, if one player gets a turn-1 Sol Ring followed by a turn-2 Grand Arbiter Augusin IV or Thran Dynamo or something, that's pretty much gg.
I'm still on the fence about Mana Crypt and Sol Ring, and if I had to choose, I guess they should remain unbanned. I can totally sympathize with people who feel that action needs to be taken, though.
I understand it in a one-on-one situation, but what cards the banned list makes people think that the rules committee cares in any way, shape, or form about duels?
Seriously, if all you do is play duels, have a local banned list. Or use the one the French use. Don't complain about the multiplayer one.
The reason they banned Lions Eye Diamond was because you could effectively drop your 4+ mana general on turn 1. The general zone provided the loophole that the card needed to be very good (similar to a Black Lotus) if your deck is general-centric and doesn't necessarily care about cards in hand.
The synergies with random cards like Auriok Salvagers was just a minor annoyance.
This.
Protean Hulk and Gifts also tutored for entire combos.
So, when you play Gifts, you win.
When you play Hulk, you win.
You guys may say that a player playing Sol Ring or Mana Crypt wins, but it's not the same. There's still the rest of the game to go.
Not the case with the above 2 mentioned cards.
And Braids was disgusting as a General. You guys have to realize that a recurring Braids, is basically unstoppable, even if you play Sol Ring or Mana Crypt.
The list is fine.
I think there are a few cards that should get the shaft, but that's only because I don't like playing in 4-5 player games and one person playing a 1 card combo deck. I.e. pickles lock, infinite turns, niv mizzet, etc.
But I don't think anything should be added/removed.
But pickles lock is soooo good against greedy players. They need to axe the Staff of domination though.
The reason they banned Lions Eye Diamond was because you could effectively drop your 4+ mana general on turn 1. The general zone provided the loophole that the card needed to be very good (similar to a Black Lotus) if your deck is general-centric and doesn't necessarily care about cards in hand.
The synergies with random cards like Auriok Salvagers was just a minor annoyance.
Ah, true that. Didn't even cross my mind about ramping into your general.
Quote from d0su »
I'm such a noob.
Listen to this guy.
Quote from Ahmad Carroll »
I understand it in a one-on-one situation, but what cards the banned list makes people think that the rules committee cares in any way, shape, or form about duels?
Seriously, if all you do is play duels, have a local banned list. Or use the one the French use. Don't complain about the multiplayer one.
Man, I'm not complaining at all. In fact, I primarily play multiplayer games, plus I said I thought Sol Ring and Mana Crypt should probably remain unbanned. I even play Sol Ring. I was just explaining why those in favor of banning it are, in fact, in favor of banning it. Sorry if I was being unclear.
Quote from Dyne »
This.
Protean Hulk and Gifts also tutored for entire combos.
So, when you play Gifts, you win.
When you play Hulk, you win.
You guys may say that a player playing Sol Ring or Mana Crypt wins, but it's not the same. There's still the rest of the game to go.
Not the case with the above 2 mentioned cards.
And Braids was disgusting as a General. You guys have to realize that a recurring Braids, is basically unstoppable, even if you play Sol Ring or Mana Crypt.
I guess you're right. In other news, doesn't Survival of the Fittest fit all of those conditions? Granted, you need a creature card in your hand, but still.
1. Tutors up combos
2. Wins the game for 1GGGG, or somewhere thereabouts
(disclaimer: I like Survival of the Fittest, I play with Survival of the Fittest, and I don't want it to be banned. I still think it's a good candidate for the list, at any rate.)
1. This format is not Pauper, it is EDH. Once we start using the argument of "Everyone would want card X in their deck, then it must be too powerful so let's get rid of it." then we begin to drastically dumb down the power, versatility and flavour of the entire format. Once Sol Ring and Mana Crypt go, what will be next in line, and when do we decide to stop? And to even bring up Top being banworthy is absolutely absurd. These cards allow depth and variety to decks that might not even be viable in their absence [a well made point by my team mate Evergreen]. These are no where near as powerful as accelerants like LED, and should not be banned.
2. The whine factor. Seriously, have most of you even tried running answers to some of these cards? Let's take Rofellos as an example since there seems to be an unsettling amount of hate against him.
Being a creature [and with a toughness of 1, at that], Rofellos is the 2nd most easily dealt with permanent in the game [behind any artifact creature]. There are more than enough cards to deal with him in each colour that have plenty of application elsewhere. Blue has bounce, creature steal, counters, Acid Rain, etc. White has plenty of spot removal, Geddon and Wrath effects. Red has more damage dealing spells than any other colour. Black has enough tutors and spot removal to deal with Rofellos even if Rofellos was black, and even more than enough since he's not. Use your heads and be imaginative! Don't punish good cards because you are simply too lazy to build your deck competently enough to deal with them. I know a lot of people would rather save room for their fun big spells rather than have to run efficient answers like Swords or Terminate, but it is that exact frame of mind that holds the game back for people who enjoy pushing their decks to their limits. Adapt.
Rofellos has plenty of difficult matchups. An efficiently built mono-red deck can be incredibly hard to deal with if the Rofellos deck is heavily dependent on him. Zur is another inherently difficult matchup. Mono-black combo is yet another. Counterspell.dec is, again, yet another. Rofellos does not violate the Rock/Paper/Scissors principle of the format. Braids did this, and that factor in and of itself is why I don't disagree with her banning. You throw Zur, Rofellos, and Clique together and you have a pretty good R/P/S set up. This is when formats are healthy. It is when the entire metagame is 'Play Rofellos.dec or play Anti-Rofellos.dec' that you have a problem. That is not the case here.
He is neither blue, nor black. Those 2 colours have dominated MTG since nearly its inception. Finally Green has found a champion that allows its presence to be something more than just a support colour, and people are upset? I strongly feel this is because people love playing control and view counterspells as sacred cows. Let Green alone and keep Rofellos. I hear no one complaining about Azami, Erayo, or Clique, and those are all just as powerful as Rofellos can be with the proper deck tuning. But because they are blue, they are mostly left alone. Hypocrisy.
3. Mixed-colour ability generals [Memnarch, Rhys the Exiled, Daugher of Autumn, etc] should be allowed, thus amending the colour requirements for any given deck. This hurts none of the existing generals and turns a handful of previously unused cards into new, potential decks. Someone should be able to play a green/white Daughter of Autumn deck is they really want to. I do not foresee any of these generals being potential menaces, and believe it would only encourage new ideas and healthy diversity for the format.
4. Cards that are a problem strictly in 1v1 should not be banned solely on the premise that they are 'unfun.' 1v1 is far more competitive than multiplayer, and those that play 1v1 like it that way. While I fervently support a separate multiplayer/1v1 ban list, I fear that may not happen for some time. In the mean time, multiplayer players: please do not call to ban cards that you feel are only truly an issue in 1v1; 1v1 players may be completely fine with it. Since most multiplayer groups have their own house rules, anyway, this should not be a problem.
5. Lastly, cards that a.) win games outright or push the game so incredibly far ahead that catching up is nearly impossible as well as b.) require a near-unreasonable amount of precaution/hate to prevent/stop seems to be a fair criteria for a card 'deserving' a ban. While I greatly prefer players to think more creatively about ways to stop certain strategies rather than just banning the cards integral to those strategies outright, some cards probably are just 'too' good and deserve the axe. Fastbond and Gifts were most certainly justified examples that met the above criteria. Based on those factors, I would not be sad to see Necropotence, Mindslaver, Channel or Mind Twist go.
The only complaint I have with extra turns, is that it's boring and I don't really want to play anymore, as all I do is wait for them to find the combo.
EDH bannings are made on a case-by-case basis, usually based one of three principles:
#1: A card's power level in multiplayer EDH is signficantly in excess of both it's mana cost AND power level in other formats (due to different rules or game sizes). [Examples include Panoptic Mirror and Biorythm]
#2: A card's dollar cost is prohibitive for most players and the card usually detracts from the playing experience of everyone else in the game [The Power 8]
#3: A card or class of cards can not be consistantly interpreted by all players
NB: neither ubiquity among decks (Mind's Eye, for example), nor being irritating to some players (e.g.: Sensei's Divining Top), are held by the current rules body to be sufficient grounds for a card to be banned. Both are relevant to the discussion, but a card must frequently cause actual problems (substantial restriction on deck or game variety) for its ubiquity to be relevant. What constitutes "irritating" varies too much between players to act upon... one man's fun is another man's fury, so again the card must be causing problems for most players to be actionable.
Remember this is their ban logic, so a sol ring will probably never be on any banned list. Just because its in every deck, dosnen't mean it will get banned.
I pretty much agree with almost everything mutedequilibrium said. But I want to add my opinions as well.
1. EDH is a casual format. I have around 8 EDH decks (as well as more to come) with various competitiveness. My Verdeloth the Ancient deck has Overrun and Channel and Regal Force with a sub-theme of Treefolk and Saprolings. My Uril deck is a Enchantment based deck. My Atogatog deck is nothing but combos (Swans/Conflagrate, Sphinx/Hidetsugu's Second Rite, Painter's Servant/Chaotic Backlash, etc). My point? I have a choice of decks to choose from if I'm playing 1v1 or multiplayer. If they don't have a real competitive deck, then I won't play one.
2. EDH is a format that allows you to play combos if you want to. Combo cards that have been banned are banned for a good reason. Take a look at the Banned list at the moment. all the banned cards are A) Expensive (Moxes, Lotus) B) Cards that win out of no where (Coalition Victory, Biorhythm) C) Really broken cards that inhibit "I win" combos (Upheaval, Grindstone, Tinker, Worldgorger Dragon) or D) Abuse the General Zone (Riftsweeper, Lion's Eye Diamond). If you need to pay 10 or more mana to get a combo going, by all means, go ahead.
3. Banning mana acceleration that can fit in any deck? Sure, you might be able to get a good start if you have it in your opening hand, but it's a highlander format; you're not going to get it in every opening hand. There might be explosive hands from time to time, but you're going to get that with any deck.
4. Oh my gosh, there are cards you have to have answers for! Who ever thought that would ever happen in Magic? If your deck does not have answers to Artifacts, enchantments, creatures, lands or graveyards, then obviously you cannot complain if you are having trouble with those areas. If you're playing a mono-colored deck, use artifacts. While Blue does pretty much have an unfair monopoly on spells (countering them), if your deck has no answer to your opponent's general, then I don't know what to say. (The counter argument to what I said above, you're not going to draw it all the time. But if a card is format warping (you have to beat it or you lose), and it's hard to get rid of, then that's when it has to be looked at.)
My thoughts for Sept 20th (I forgot that the B/R list was changed to the 20th of the month):
1. Generals with off-color abilities: Let them in. I discussed with with Aaron Forsythe on twitter for a while and he complained why he couldn't do that. I agree.
2. Riftsweeper unbanned/New General Zone rules: With the new zone from Planechase, I think there should be some changes in some of the cards. If I play an Oblivion Ring on an opponent's General, they shouldn't be able to play that general until the Ring is removed.
3. Continued reinforcement that EDH is a casual multiplayer format. While I do play 1v1 games in EDH commonly, I don't believe there should be different banned lists for different play types. Wizards doesn't have different B/R lists for extended 1v1 and multiplayer games, do you?
Nothing anyone has said in this thread has conviced me to ban something (Other then Rofellos, which should be given some more time to see if it's format warping). Time Stretch, Mindslaver, and the new Planeswalker are (Will be) annoying, but nothing to be completely format warping.
I am going to agree with everyone saying that there is no reason to ban top/sol ring/mana crypt. They are good, and I can see how they can decide duels, but EDH is all about multiplayer, where it is pretty hard for them to be a big deal.
Things that need to change: The ability to play generals like Memnarch and Bosh, along with a change to be able to play Generals like the Myojins, Haakon, and Phage.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH Decks:
Halfdane Sek'Kuar
Please remember to autocard, just do [ card ] CARD NAME [ / card ] and for decks you can cover the whole thing in one deck tag like this: [ deck ] All of the cards in the deck [ / deck ]
2. Riftsweeper unbanned/New General Zone rules: With the new zone from Planechase, I think there should be some changes in some of the cards. If I play an Oblivion Ring on an opponent's General, they shouldn't be able to play that general until the Ring is removed.
I don't know about the rest of you, but most of the games I play in never reach turn 15. If your group is playing so slowly that Sol Ring or Mana Crypt on turn 1 is ruining games, you need to reevaluate your deckbuilding skills.
Wizards does, in fact, have separate banned lists for some sanctioned multiplayer formats. In the Two-Headed Giant format, Erayo, Soratami Ascendant is banned.
As to Gaddock Teeg...my favorite type of opponent is the type that can't play permission.
They're* not even on the watched list, and there is a reason for that.
Fixed and... wanted to point out that as far as I know, the watched list no longer is mentioned when they update the banned list for EDH as it was causing too much of a headache for the Rules Committee. As such complaining that a card is not on the watched list no longer holds any water as we really do not know what is or is not on the watched list anymore... unless you are claiming you are on the Rules Committee?
I would like to see Rofellos banned as a General. He just gives too much acceleration to fast and is too easy to go infinite with. Seriously, unbanning Rofellos didn't make much sense. Why did Rofellos get unbanned?
The reason, as I understand it was: because Rofellos had never properly been tested within the (un)Official EDH format. As such the Rules Committee decided that they wanted to give him a shot to see how he played. My opinion on whether Rofellos deserves to be banned or not is kind of torn. On the one hand I see the arguments that he is way to fast for the format. Allowing you to power out creatures and other effects of obscene size extremely fast. On the other hand, I also see the fact that Rofellos is among the most easy to deal with cards in existence (as far as removal goes, almost everything hits him).
This could be the problem...
But from what I hear, other people are having the same issues in their groups.
I wish there were either a consensus on how to go about using the Top in a multiplayer game without dragging the whole show to a standstill or ban the damn thing.
Half the problem people have with the time issues in relation to Sensei's Divining Top is because of the following reasons:
They don't know their deck list well enough to make decisions in relation to what the order of the cards on the top of their deck should be in a given situation.
They don't know the match up well enough to know how to respond to said match up with the 3 cards that are on the top of their deck.
They aren't used to playing in timed matches, and as such don't realize that taking their time to use the Top is kind of detrimental to the rest of the table.
Beyond this there isn't much to be said for why people tend to take a while with the top. However these reasons are not good enough reasons to complain about the Top taking too much time and causing lengthened games. The problem most people have is that they forget that EDH is a casual format, and has no official time limit to the matches. Nor should it have a time limit to the matches, at least beyond what is reasonable for the person who is sponsoring the EDH game (i.e. the store you are playing at).
A good reason to ban the Top would be if it caused enabled some sort of infinite combo that always won the game as soon as it hit the table. However the only infinite combo I am aware of with the Top in EDH usually involves Future Sight and I would say that the Sight is the more busted of the two cards anyways.
Mixed-colour ability generals [**snip** Memnarch **snip**] should be allowed **snip**
I disagree completely with this. Personally I have experienced the world of hurt that can be caused by a non-general Memnarch in a deck. I dread to think what a Memnarch would be capable of should he be allowed as a General. The card would be just a tad bit TOO broken for comfort. He would be near impossible to deal with permanently, plus he would be able to steal ANYTHING your opponents had. Sorry but the Legendary Merfolk Empress (forget her name) already does that pretty damn well. If a player really wants to play a theft deck they might as well just play her.
As well you shouldn't. The General should not be permanently dealt with by cards such as those (or even Oblivion Ring). The only card in existence that can TRUELY permanently deal with a General is in fact THIS and even then it requires the help of a Hinder, Spin Into Myth, or similar card to make it work.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of solving approaches zero." -- Varsuvius, Order of the Stick
yes but for say a red white or green deck with no tutor effects placing a general at the bottom of the deck neuters it.
I think there should be the option that if a general should leave play for ANY reason it can be put in the 'general zone'
since when did Green not have a tutor effect for Generals that get placed on the bottom of their Library? TheseSayOtherWise. Point of fact, the only thing Green really has tutors for at all, is creatures. So unless your opponent found a way to make your General NOT be a creature while it is in the deck, I don't see Green not being able to fetch it with a tutor.
Additionally, Red does have at least one tutor effect. Granted it isn't very good.
And White, well White by itself doesn't have a tutor effect for Generals but add in Green and Blue and it does have this bad boy
In otherwords, despite what most people think, most colors have a way to get their General back should it have been placed on the bottom of their library at some point.
I just posted a lengthy comment advocating the banning of Sol Ring and Mana Crypt in the rules discussion section on the official EDH forums. I encourage anyone especially interested in this topic to take some of the discussion there, where your voices can be heard by the EDH rules committee.
I'll post my arguments here as well:
I was traveling and sort of lost track of this thread, but I'd like to resurrect it now. With potential changes to the banlist coming up in a few weeks, now seems like a good time to refresh the arguments for banning Sol Ring and Mana Crypt. I've played a lot of EDH since I initially made this thread, both multiplayer and 1v1. Sol Ring and Mana Crypt are still, by far, the most broken 1v1 cards in the format--but it's been made clear that the banlist is for multiplayer-only, so I'll stick to that topic in this thread.
In the right decks, Sol Ring and Mana Crypt are still obscenely powerful in multiplayer. I could post numerous recaps of my own games illustrating this, but citing myself is poor practice. So instead, here's a recap of a 6-player multiplayer game from the perspective of an Arcum Dagsson player, crz87, on mtgsalvation. I think it's interesting reading.
Today, I played a sad 6 multiplayer free for all, which for me, was a 5v1 matchup. Arcum Dagsson however was the man, and luckily, he faced no resistance (almost died but I managed to barely scrape through with my lock).
Participants:
- Haagen (Child of Alara)
- James (Sharuum)
- Jon (Uril)
- Anthony (Merike Berit)
- Jeremy (Sliver Overlord)
- Me (Dagsson)
Here's an insane hand that I kept but sadly I didn't break it a turn earlier by going first:
3 Island, 1 Skill Borrower, 1 Mana Crypt, 1 Solemn Simulacrum, 1 Filigree Sages
The turns went with:
Players T1:
Land
My T1:
Island, Mana Crypt, Skill Borrower
Players T2:
Sharuum player played Ravager, others land.
My T2:
Take 3 from Crypt, Island, Dagsson (drew into Power Artifact)
(Now, I'm praying Dagsson survives and doesn't die, and if he doesnt, I should be in good shape and last a few turns with a couple of activations).
Players T3:
Sharuum player played Sculpting Steel on Ravager.
Uril player played a Civic Wayfinder I think,
Merike player played a thousand year Elixir.
My T3:
Tinkered Skill Borrower into Winter Orb and played Solemn Simulacrum.
Players T4:
Land and nothing.
My T4:
Tinkered Simulacrum into Tangle Wire, played Filigree Sages
Players T5:
Land and nothing. (They complain about Winter Orb and discuss on ganging on me).
My T5:
I didn't want to Tinker Filigree Sages since its one of the more useful Dagsson fodder that win games by itself. I played and equipped my drawn Greaves onto Dagsson.
Players T6:
Sharuum player had the only action: played Jitte but was short on mana to equip. At this point Tangle Wire is weakening in power, but the Sharuum player was the only player with creatures so Tangle Wire was still completely locking out everyone else. I risk Dagsson getting killed by Jitte. So I have to gamble and win fast. I have Power Artifact in hand. Next turn is to tutor up:
My T6:
I tinkered my beloved Filigree Sages into Grim Monolith, and played Power Artifact on Grim Monolith. I now have infinite colorless mana. I need to find a way to get enough blue to a point where I can play a ton of spells. I also happened to draw a Time Stretch. My deck really wants me to win, if I can still let Dagsson survive that is.
I started dropping my hand of colorless but failed after dropping a Shackles when the Sharuum player Silence me. I'm actually happy since this means he still doesn't have 2 mana to equip and swing with Ravager to kill Dagsson with Jitte. On to the next turn.
Players T7:
Sharuum player now has action and swings in with 2 Ravagers. I attempt to shackle one. He sacks and feeds it to the other Ravager. I take 3. I'm at 31 now from the Crypt pains. Other players pass their turn. Tangle Wire is at 1 counter. Things are ending shortly. I need to resolve Time Stretch soon.
My T7:
It begins. I play Future Sight, and with my infinite colorless mana, dumped out Crucible, Disk, some artifact creatures and acceleration. I then tinkered Copper Gnomes into a Gilded Lotus and played Time Stretch for UU (since I have infinite colorless, I don't need to pay 8UU). I take my extra 2 turns. I should win now.
Time Stretch Turn 1:
With my infinite mana, I got Nuisance Engine out to continue fueling Dagsson for the next 2 turns. Tangle Wire is now useless although I could most certainly recur it again with Master Transmuter. I decided to go for the win. I tinkered for Planar Portal, with infinite mana, fetched for "free" for Tolarian Academy. This together with inifinite colorless can allow me to play close to 10 blue spells in my deck. I played out my hand. Turn 1 passes as a little waste, although I've now set up a mana engine to play the remaining parts of my deck.
Time Stretch Turn 2:
I Planar Portalled again for "free" into Arcanis and equipped Greaves on him, drew 3 cards, and drew a Mycosynthe Lattice. I played Mycosynthe Lattice. Tolarian Academy currently taps for 28 blue mana. I tinkered into a Memory Jar as I played out a Ancestrall Recalled Mind over Matter from Arcanis. Memory Jar fueled my hand to start Arcanis + Mind over Matter card draw engine and I drew my deck and explained to them how it's game over since I have close to infinite blue mana, infinite colorless mana, all the cards I need, and all the threats and locks I needed.
I won 6-way FFA multiplayer on Turn 7! (Turn 9 off Time Stretch).
He won on turn 7, despite making some sub-optimal plays towards the end. Note that his "insane" hand consists of Mana Crypt, 3 Islands and 3 irrelevant artifact creatures (they could have been any artifact creature of cmc 5 or less, and this game would have worked out the same way). Since it's very easy to design a Arcum Dagsson deck to consistently draw into artifact creatures (crz87 runs 23 artifact creatures or land/artifacts that become artifact creatures, plus draw spells), all he needed to make this hand insane was Mana Crypt. And insane it was.
Mana Crypt (and Sol Ring would have done just the same thing) accelerated crz87 into Arcum on turn 2. None of his opponents happened to be holding any very cheap spot removal (they were playing some, but didn't happen to draw into it--these things happen). Despite pitting the whole table against him, he still won, purely off of this Mana Crypt. In this instance, Mana Crypt was almost literally a 0 mana double Time Walk. Because it boosted Arcum out before any one of his opponents could answer it, Arcum was able to lock his opponents out of the game, and then tutor for a combo kill.
Now, is the problem here Arcum Dagsson? Though he's a pretty decent general, he is not inherently the issue. If he had not hit play until turn 3 or 4, he would have been dealt with (Merieke was only a turn too slow). Considering that every other card in his starting hand was non-descript, and that he didn't need to draw into anything special, I think it's clear that drawing into Mana Crypt allowed him to win this 6-person game, single-handedly. He almost certainly wouldn't have won without it, as Arcum would not have been allowed to get rolling.
So...where am I going with this anecdotal evidence? Sol Ring and Mana Crypt can be broken in multiplayer, because they allow lockdown or combo generals to hit the table before most removal comes online. Though this is not as strong an argument for banning, it's ridiculously swingy to have multiplayer games hinge on whether Arcum draws a Mana Crypt or not. Massive tempo boosts are fine when they require combinations of cards, because one is much less likely to draw into particular combinations. Drawing a single card, and getting accelerated two turns ahead of the rest of the table, is too strong a boost for the generals who can abuse it.
Speaking of generals who can abuse it, I can virtually guarantee that if Sol Ring and Mana Crypt were to be banned, Braids, Cabal Minion could be unbanned. Braids was simply the best general at abusing the boost of Sol Ring and Mana Crypt, even better than Arcum. However, have you ever tried running Braids without Sol Ring and Mana Crypt? It's not viable, even in duels. She's only very strong when she hits play on turn 2, and the only single cards that can accomplish that are Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, and Mana Vault (Mana Vault being much weaker than the former options, as you can't milk it in subsequent turns). Dark Ritual and such doesn't count, as Ritualling into Braids on turn 2 is suicidal. I played Braids quite a bit when she was legal, and the chance of winning with her decreases drastically if you can't play her early. My experience with Braids is that you win the overwhelming majority of games where you resolve her turn 2. You win some where you resolve her turn 3, but these games are quite fair. Many decks can still win, and you have to fight for your victories. And if you can't resolve her until turn 4, Braids is likely to be mostly irrelevant for the entire game. Your opponent's boards are simply too developed by this stage to make her matter. The reason Braids won so often is that, with Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, and the weaker but still serviceable Mana Vault available, the permissive mulligan rules in EDH made it fairly easy to mulligan into a turn 2 Braids, or at least a turn 3 Braids. This made the deck far too consistent. If you ban Sol Ring and Mana Crypt, the chance of resolving turn 2 Braids is remote, and that start isn't nearly as good even if they luck into it. Braids would then be a slow enough deck to be fair. To be honest, I'm doubt she'd even be a very good general anymore, as she's just too ineffectual when she's slow. Arcum is very similar in some ways to Braids--the only reason he's not as dominant as she was is that he's effectively one turn slower than Braids, as you usually need to wait a turn before you can use him. Being able to legalize all legendary creatures as generals seems like a noble goal for the format, but it won't happen without banning Sol Ring and Mana Crypt.
I hear a lot of arguments about how people need Sol Ring in order to play their big, splashy, EDH spells. Please tell me, what happens in the majority of games, the ones where you do NOT draw Sol Ring? Can you not play your spells? The perception that it is only Sol Ring and Mana Crypt (which most casual players don't even play) that allows for the cool plays in EDH isn't based in fact at all--they're not necessary or reliable in any casual deck. Many casual players like them because randomly drawing into Sol Ring and experiencing a big tempo boost over their opponents is exciting, but this is just a random, swingy effect--it's not like your deck fizzles out if you don't draw it.
Finally, one last thing. Many of the people who posted in this thread are clearly casual players, and proud of it. I'm fine with that. That's a good thing. However, consider what the banlist is actually for. If you're a casual player, and proud of it, are you going to play with a Worldgorger Dragon combo? Protean Hulk? Gifts Ungiven? All of these cards are fine in a casual environment, and casual players can enjoy playing them. If you're in a friendly group, it's even encouraged to allow these cards--almost any card can be allowed in a casual group, and it's not going to mess anything up. The reason these cards are on the official banlist, pure and simple, is that Spikes, competitive players, can break them. In a very real sense, the banlist is geared towards competitive playgroups, because casual groups don't need them.
If you're in a casual group, go right on ahead and keep playing your Sol Rings and Mana Crypts. If everyone's playing big honking dragons and the like as their generals, these cards aren't going to be that huge a deal. If you're in a competitive group though, people will play whatever is legal for them to do so, and many players will do so with an eye towards "optimizing" their deck--this is exactly the sort of situation crz87, for instance, is in.
Competitive players love EDH too--it may even be the most popular format amongst even pro players right now, judging by the huge number of articles that reference EDH on sites like starcitygames. These competitive players are the ones who need a banlist, to keep the format fair and balanced. If they wanted to flip coins to simulate who draws into Sol Ring/Mana Crypt and wins that game, they could do that, but playing Magic is more fun.
I truly can't see why a banlist is of much importance to casual groups, whereas it's of tremendous importance to more competitive ones. The general consensus amongst more competitive players is certainly that Sol Ring and Mana Crypt should be banned, even in multiplayer. Please think about it.
Quotes in blog.
Wait a minute....
They banned Protean Hulk because decks were built to abuse it.
They banned Gifts Ungiven because decks were built to abuse it.
They banned Lion's Eye Diamond because decks were built to abuse it.
Heck, they banned Braids, Cabal Minion because decks were built to abuse it (as a general).
I see your point, but I'm just pointing out that abuse is THE typical reason for bannings. I guess what I'm saying is, if Lion's Eye Diamond deserves the ban hammer for insane tempo accel (AND it's a one-shot deal AND you have to build your deck in such a way that discarding your hand isn't a detriment), then how is Mana Crypt any less powerful when it requires zero commitment, has a much smaller downside, and sticks around turn after turn? It doesn't upset me either way, I'm just interested in an elaboration.
As a Teeg player, I can tell you that he'll get killed more than any other general on the table (except maybe Rofellos). He does screw some decks over a TON, no doubt, but many decks can either function under a Teeg, handle Teeg with their general (Zur, Niv-Mizzet, Momir Vig, etc.), or get rid of him with traditional removal.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
I read his ability wrong rofl. But still, no Banefire for Teeg
Quotes in blog.
A majority of the games I play in seem to be decided by 1 or 2 mana... Sometimes a CIP land kills a player.
In an opening hand it's a REALLY lucky draw.
In a late game hand it's still a lucky draw.
That's a lot of lucky going into a deck for 1...
I would like to see Sol Ring banned, because it is just too good and there is really no reason not to run it if you have it (But many people do not have them). Our playgroup has already banned Sol Ring.
Mana Crypt is also kind of crazy, but the extra damage actually does matter since EDH games tend to go really long. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing it banned as well.
DO NOT ban top. There is no problem with that card. If someone is taking too much time with it, the table will turn on them and kill them anyway.
To the person concerned with Tainted Pact: Read the card carefully (Its worded in a difficult way), you can only ever get one card put into your hand from its effect. Its more of a tutor than a draw spell.
It's all good; I did the exact same thing when it was first printed. Then I was watching a match at this one FNM and I was like "OOOOHHHHH, you can't play noncreatures...."
I'm such a noob.
In a multiplayer environment, it's generally not a big deal at all. Most issues people have with Sol Ring and the like are in the context of a one-on-one setting, where games will typically follow a faster, more traditional pace. In a duel, if one player gets a turn-1 Sol Ring followed by a turn-2 Grand Arbiter Augusin IV or Thran Dynamo or something, that's pretty much gg.
I'm still on the fence about Mana Crypt and Sol Ring, and if I had to choose, I guess they should remain unbanned. I can totally sympathize with people who feel that action needs to be taken, though.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
Thanks! I had been playing that incorrectly. You can see why I thought it was banworthy.
The synergies with random cards like Auriok Salvagers was just a minor annoyance.
Current EDH Decks:
G Multani, Maro-Sorcerer
B Xiahou Dun, the One-Eyed
GU Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
I understand it in a one-on-one situation, but what cards the banned list makes people think that the rules committee cares in any way, shape, or form about duels?
Seriously, if all you do is play duels, have a local banned list. Or use the one the French use. Don't complain about the multiplayer one.
This.
Protean Hulk and Gifts also tutored for entire combos.
So, when you play Gifts, you win.
When you play Hulk, you win.
You guys may say that a player playing Sol Ring or Mana Crypt wins, but it's not the same. There's still the rest of the game to go.
Not the case with the above 2 mentioned cards.
And Braids was disgusting as a General. You guys have to realize that a recurring Braids, is basically unstoppable, even if you play Sol Ring or Mana Crypt.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the amazing sig.
NO RUG: Primer
Tempo Thresh: Primer
But pickles lock is soooo good against greedy players. They need to axe the Staff of domination though.
Thanks to DarkNightCavalier at Scuttlemutt Productions for the awesome sig.
Currently playing:
EDH
:symw::symu::symb::symr::symg:Pro-Everthing-Genitus
Ah, true that. Didn't even cross my mind about ramping into your general.
Listen to this guy.
Man, I'm not complaining at all. In fact, I primarily play multiplayer games, plus I said I thought Sol Ring and Mana Crypt should probably remain unbanned. I even play Sol Ring. I was just explaining why those in favor of banning it are, in fact, in favor of banning it. Sorry if I was being unclear.
I guess you're right. In other news, doesn't Survival of the Fittest fit all of those conditions? Granted, you need a creature card in your hand, but still.
1. Tutors up combos
2. Wins the game for 1GGGG, or somewhere thereabouts
(disclaimer: I like Survival of the Fittest, I play with Survival of the Fittest, and I don't want it to be banned. I still think it's a good candidate for the list, at any rate.)
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
1. This format is not Pauper, it is EDH. Once we start using the argument of "Everyone would want card X in their deck, then it must be too powerful so let's get rid of it." then we begin to drastically dumb down the power, versatility and flavour of the entire format. Once Sol Ring and Mana Crypt go, what will be next in line, and when do we decide to stop? And to even bring up Top being banworthy is absolutely absurd. These cards allow depth and variety to decks that might not even be viable in their absence [a well made point by my team mate Evergreen]. These are no where near as powerful as accelerants like LED, and should not be banned.
2. The whine factor. Seriously, have most of you even tried running answers to some of these cards? Let's take Rofellos as an example since there seems to be an unsettling amount of hate against him.
4. Cards that are a problem strictly in 1v1 should not be banned solely on the premise that they are 'unfun.' 1v1 is far more competitive than multiplayer, and those that play 1v1 like it that way. While I fervently support a separate multiplayer/1v1 ban list, I fear that may not happen for some time. In the mean time, multiplayer players: please do not call to ban cards that you feel are only truly an issue in 1v1; 1v1 players may be completely fine with it. Since most multiplayer groups have their own house rules, anyway, this should not be a problem.
5. Lastly, cards that a.) win games outright or push the game so incredibly far ahead that catching up is nearly impossible as well as b.) require a near-unreasonable amount of precaution/hate to prevent/stop seems to be a fair criteria for a card 'deserving' a ban. While I greatly prefer players to think more creatively about ways to stop certain strategies rather than just banning the cards integral to those strategies outright, some cards probably are just 'too' good and deserve the axe. Fastbond and Gifts were most certainly justified examples that met the above criteria. Based on those factors, I would not be sad to see Necropotence, Mindslaver, Channel or Mind Twist go.
Just my $0.02
The only complaint I have with extra turns, is that it's boring and I don't really want to play anymore, as all I do is wait for them to find the combo.
pft, taking our group long enough as is, let alone the format on a whole
#1: A card's power level in multiplayer EDH is signficantly in excess of both it's mana cost AND power level in other formats (due to different rules or game sizes). [Examples include Panoptic Mirror and Biorythm]
#2: A card's dollar cost is prohibitive for most players and the card usually detracts from the playing experience of everyone else in the game [The Power 8]
#3: A card or class of cards can not be consistantly interpreted by all players
NB: neither ubiquity among decks (Mind's Eye, for example), nor being irritating to some players (e.g.: Sensei's Divining Top), are held by the current rules body to be sufficient grounds for a card to be banned. Both are relevant to the discussion, but a card must frequently cause actual problems (substantial restriction on deck or game variety) for its ubiquity to be relevant. What constitutes "irritating" varies too much between players to act upon... one man's fun is another man's fury, so again the card must be causing problems for most players to be actionable.
Remember this is their ban logic, so a sol ring will probably never be on any banned list. Just because its in every deck, dosnen't mean it will get banned.
1. EDH is a casual format. I have around 8 EDH decks (as well as more to come) with various competitiveness. My Verdeloth the Ancient deck has Overrun and Channel and Regal Force with a sub-theme of Treefolk and Saprolings. My Uril deck is a Enchantment based deck. My Atogatog deck is nothing but combos (Swans/Conflagrate, Sphinx/Hidetsugu's Second Rite, Painter's Servant/Chaotic Backlash, etc). My point? I have a choice of decks to choose from if I'm playing 1v1 or multiplayer. If they don't have a real competitive deck, then I won't play one.
2. EDH is a format that allows you to play combos if you want to. Combo cards that have been banned are banned for a good reason. Take a look at the Banned list at the moment. all the banned cards are A) Expensive (Moxes, Lotus) B) Cards that win out of no where (Coalition Victory, Biorhythm) C) Really broken cards that inhibit "I win" combos (Upheaval, Grindstone, Tinker, Worldgorger Dragon) or D) Abuse the General Zone (Riftsweeper, Lion's Eye Diamond). If you need to pay 10 or more mana to get a combo going, by all means, go ahead.
3. Banning mana acceleration that can fit in any deck? Sure, you might be able to get a good start if you have it in your opening hand, but it's a highlander format; you're not going to get it in every opening hand. There might be explosive hands from time to time, but you're going to get that with any deck.
4. Oh my gosh, there are cards you have to have answers for! Who ever thought that would ever happen in Magic? If your deck does not have answers to Artifacts, enchantments, creatures, lands or graveyards, then obviously you cannot complain if you are having trouble with those areas. If you're playing a mono-colored deck, use artifacts. While Blue does pretty much have an unfair monopoly on spells (countering them), if your deck has no answer to your opponent's general, then I don't know what to say. (The counter argument to what I said above, you're not going to draw it all the time. But if a card is format warping (you have to beat it or you lose), and it's hard to get rid of, then that's when it has to be looked at.)
My thoughts for Sept 20th (I forgot that the B/R list was changed to the 20th of the month):
1. Generals with off-color abilities: Let them in. I discussed with with Aaron Forsythe on twitter for a while and he complained why he couldn't do that. I agree.
2. Riftsweeper unbanned/New General Zone rules: With the new zone from Planechase, I think there should be some changes in some of the cards. If I play an Oblivion Ring on an opponent's General, they shouldn't be able to play that general until the Ring is removed.
3. Continued reinforcement that EDH is a casual multiplayer format. While I do play 1v1 games in EDH commonly, I don't believe there should be different banned lists for different play types. Wizards doesn't have different B/R lists for extended 1v1 and multiplayer games, do you?
Nothing anyone has said in this thread has conviced me to ban something (Other then Rofellos, which should be given some more time to see if it's format warping). Time Stretch, Mindslaver, and the new Planeswalker are (Will be) annoying, but nothing to be completely format warping.
GatheringMagic.com Commander Writer
Twitter: @mtgcolorpie
One of the GDS2 Final 101
Recently Written Posts:
1-31 MTGCP The Complete Commander - Designing Commander
12-18 MTGCP The Day Kibler Shut Down the World
Things that need to change: The ability to play generals like Memnarch and Bosh, along with a change to be able to play Generals like the Myojins, Haakon, and Phage.
Halfdane
Sek'Kuar
Please remember to autocard, just do [ card ] CARD NAME [ / card ] and for decks you can cover the whole thing in one deck tag like this: [ deck ] All of the cards in the deck [ / deck ]
Eh, I don't really like the idea of Swords to Plowshares or Path to Exile being greater than generals.
Wizards does, in fact, have separate banned lists for some sanctioned multiplayer formats. In the Two-Headed Giant format, Erayo, Soratami Ascendant is banned.
As to Gaddock Teeg...my favorite type of opponent is the type that can't play permission.
Fixed and... wanted to point out that as far as I know, the watched list no longer is mentioned when they update the banned list for EDH as it was causing too much of a headache for the Rules Committee. As such complaining that a card is not on the watched list no longer holds any water as we really do not know what is or is not on the watched list anymore... unless you are claiming you are on the Rules Committee?
The reason, as I understand it was: because Rofellos had never properly been tested within the (un)Official EDH format. As such the Rules Committee decided that they wanted to give him a shot to see how he played. My opinion on whether Rofellos deserves to be banned or not is kind of torn. On the one hand I see the arguments that he is way to fast for the format. Allowing you to power out creatures and other effects of obscene size extremely fast. On the other hand, I also see the fact that Rofellos is among the most easy to deal with cards in existence (as far as removal goes, almost everything hits him).
Half the problem people have with the time issues in relation to Sensei's Divining Top is because of the following reasons:
Beyond this there isn't much to be said for why people tend to take a while with the top. However these reasons are not good enough reasons to complain about the Top taking too much time and causing lengthened games. The problem most people have is that they forget that EDH is a casual format, and has no official time limit to the matches. Nor should it have a time limit to the matches, at least beyond what is reasonable for the person who is sponsoring the EDH game (i.e. the store you are playing at).
A good reason to ban the Top would be if it caused enabled some sort of infinite combo that always won the game as soon as it hit the table. However the only infinite combo I am aware of with the Top in EDH usually involves Future Sight and I would say that the Sight is the more busted of the two cards anyways.
I disagree completely with this. Personally I have experienced the world of hurt that can be caused by a non-general Memnarch in a deck. I dread to think what a Memnarch would be capable of should he be allowed as a General. The card would be just a tad bit TOO broken for comfort. He would be near impossible to deal with permanently, plus he would be able to steal ANYTHING your opponents had. Sorry but the Legendary Merfolk Empress (forget her name) already does that pretty damn well. If a player really wants to play a theft deck they might as well just play her.
As well you shouldn't. The General should not be permanently dealt with by cards such as those (or even Oblivion Ring). The only card in existence that can TRUELY permanently deal with a General is in fact THIS and even then it requires the help of a Hinder, Spin Into Myth, or similar card to make it work.
since when did Green not have a tutor effect for Generals that get placed on the bottom of their Library? These Say OtherWise. Point of fact, the only thing Green really has tutors for at all, is creatures. So unless your opponent found a way to make your General NOT be a creature while it is in the deck, I don't see Green not being able to fetch it with a tutor.
Additionally, Red does have at least one tutor effect. Granted it isn't very good.
And White, well White by itself doesn't have a tutor effect for Generals but add in Green and Blue and it does have this bad boy
In otherwords, despite what most people think, most colors have a way to get their General back should it have been placed on the bottom of their library at some point.
I'll post my arguments here as well: