Ewwwww, let's try really hard not to make this a discussion about individual cards on the banned list. There's another thread for that. This should be a discussion about the nature of the format itself, and whether it needs a banned list at all.
(And again, I'll try and reiterate: it's really not about those silly rules I posted either. They were just an illustrative example.)
In regards to the concept of a banned list: I really feel as though the banned lists in sanctioned formats have MUCH higher standards than the RC's one. In order for a card to get banned in extended or vintage or whatnot, it has to consistently prove to be a problem for a decent amount of time, to the point where it's provably affecting tournament attendance. Remember Skullclamp? That card was so nuts that it warped the metagame at the time into a mobius. In several PT events, the top 8 decks ALL had 4 copies of the card, AND 4 copies of Oxidize to destroy the opponent's! That's just silly, and that's banned-worthy. I can't think of a single card though, that would be played in EVERY SINGLE EDH deck (okay, maybe Black Lotus... MAYBE), AND be so powerful that literally every game revolved around resolving it. But that's the standard for banning a card in a sanctioned tournament.
So why is the bar set so high in sanctioned formats? Because Wizards really, really, really DOESN'T want to ban any cards. Mainly, because it lowers consumer confidence; people buy cards because they expect they can play them - if every set wizards banned 4 cards that were good in tournaments people wouldn't bother. Wizards has said that in an ideal world people can play with every card they print, which is why they were so hesitant (and upset) to have to ban Jace and Stoneforge in standard. They hate banning cards, but they REALLY hate banning cards in a format as popular as standard. They ban the cards they NEED to in order to keep the tournaments popular, but every time they ban a card it hurts them economically. So they naturally have a HUGE incentive not to ban cards. The RC has no such considerations, so they're more likely to ban a card.
But the reasons to ban cards just don't apply, because even if there are local tournaments, there's no huge interconnected tournament scene. If a local game store holds tournaments, and Biorhythm decks are just tearing it up there, they can ban it at that store - but the nature of the format is such that any strategy can be defeated if you're aware of it. That same deck at a different tournament might get stomped by people playing heavy counter-clique decks or whatever, if there was an actual tournament. And if there isn't, then we don't need a banned list.
Personally, I would add sol ring, mana crypt, mana vault, and hermit druid to the list. While they aren't as explosive as they are in 1v1 games, they still tend to beridiculous.
I probably agree with Hermit Druid but the other three aren't that bad. Green ramp spells almost pretty much do the same thing putting 2-3 lands into play. Besides Sol Ring was in every pre-con Commander deck and they aren't "broken."
killem2, from what I've read you've been a pretty consistent critic of how the RC handles the banned list. If you were in charge of the format, how would you handle the banned list? What would motivate your choices? I ask because this thread is about the nature of the format and I am curious as to how you view it.
Ewwwww, let's try really hard not to make this a discussion about individual cards on the banned list.
As Fponk suggested, I don't want to derail this topic, but I will say that D0su's suggested list, minus his joking comment about ante cards, is one I would support.
As for philosophy changes: you can also see my comments in Sheldon's thread.
I can't think of a single card though, that would be played in EVERY SINGLE EDH deck (okay, maybe Black Lotus... MAYBE), AND be so powerful that literally every game revolved around resolving it. But that's the standard for banning a card in a sanctioned tournament.
But the standard isn't that the card gets played in every deck. JTMS and Stoneforge Mystic weren't played in every deck.
In one of the strongest EDH decks, the game revolves around resolving Hermit Druid. It is quite hard to answer in competitive metas and decides a large number of games. That makes is worth considering for banning.
But the reasons to ban cards just don't apply, because even if there are local tournaments, there's no huge interconnected tournament scene. If a local game store holds tournaments, and Biorhythm decks are just tearing it up there, they can ban it at that store - but the nature of the format is such that any strategy can be defeated if you're aware of it. That same deck at a different tournament might get stomped by people playing heavy counter-clique decks or whatever, if there was an actual tournament. And if there isn't, then we don't need a banned list.
There are tons of EDH tournaments, both at LGSs and at GP side events. If I show up at a GP and want to play, only to discover that they've randomly picked a banlist that hoses my deck, I will be unable to participate. Having a consistent banlist puts everyone on the same page both for tournaments and for pickup games at the shop. That is the utility of the banlist.
Getting rid of the banlist and instead having a bunch of rules is kind of a cool idea. But there's one problem I see with it: there are a lot of cards in Magic that do basically the same kinds of things, but at entirely different power levels. Getting Stroke of Genius played on you third turn for a million is pretty lame, but dying to some obscure 8-card combo (half of which might only be in the deck for that specific combo) is kind of hilarious and something I wouldn't want to prevent. So, for example, if your intention is to prevent infinite combos, how do you draw the line over what is allowed without mentioning specific cards? Do you just ban all comboing?
Tl;dr ... Rules are cool, but is it poossible to make useful rules?
I probably agree with Hermit Druid but the other three aren't that bad. Green ramp spells almost pretty much do the same thing putting 2-3 lands into play. Besides Sol Ring was in every pre-con Commander deck and they aren't "broken."
Sol Ring is busted. EDH players are just jaded because they see it so often. The only other ramp that's even comparable to Sol Ring is Mana Crypt, its superior counterpart. Green spells have nothing on 1 and 0 investment permanent ramp.
The only reason I can figure these two aren't banned is that 2/99 cards are somehwat unlikely to show up in your opening hand or within the first 2 turns (when they'd matter most; not that they're not great later on).
The banlist does not exist to restrict kitchen-table Magic, in casual groups the players will always decide what banlist they use (and most don't use one, or have a gentlemanly agreement among them to avoid certain cards).
The banlist exists so that when tournaments ARE held, players can easily agree on which ridiculously overpowered cards to remove from play. The creation of a recognized and well-known banlist makes it easy for organizers to hold fair, competitive, and most of all FUN tournaments, will clearly outlining the rules and regulations for deck construction. This means each game store doesn't have to make such a list on their own, and this avoids a lot of possible negative politics. For example, a universal banlist means players can't accuse a store owner of "rigging" a tournament against a certain powerful deck, as the list is recognized as "fair" on a much wider scale than just the store itself.
You know what I'd like then? Maybe a disclaimer on the banned list. Something that says "The following is a list of cards that should be banned in any EDH tournaments being held for any sort of prize. While banning cards is silly in casual kitchen table matches with nothing at stake, we realize that sometimes tournaments will be held, so we provide the following list as an easy reference for anyone wishing to hold such a tournament. Again, in any non-tournament setting, no card is banned."
That would be nice. See, my problem is that each and every one of the banned cards is A.), fun to SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE, even if that person is a minority, and B.) usable in some non-jerk way.
People say that Biorhythm isn't fun. Okay, sure. But some people think it is! So if I run it in my deck, maybe someone will complain, and maybe they won't. But the same can be said of Time Stretch - sometimes when I cast it, people complain, and sometimes they don't. But that card's legal. Since literally the only reason to ban/not ban a card in EDH it whether it's fun/not fun, and "fun" is an arbitrary concept that no one will ever agree on, why ban anything outside of a tournament setting?
Hermit Druid, Time Stretch, and other such cards aren't banned. If a group finds them unfun, they can self-police. Why can't we trust groups with that same responsibility when it comes to Upheaval? I sat down with a new group once, and when I played Insurrection for the first time, they said, "Oh, we forgot that you're new. We banned that card." And I was like, "Oh, cool. Mind if I just untap my lands and draw a replacement then?" And they were fine with that, I put Insurrection to the side, and the game continued. And that was fine. And if the same thing happened with Sway of the Stars or Protean Hulk, that would be fine, too.
You know what I'd like then? Maybe a disclaimer on the banned list. Something that says "The following is a list of cards that should be banned in any EDH tournaments being held for any sort of prize. While banning cards is silly in casual kitchen table matches with nothing at stake, we realize that sometimes tournaments will be held, so we provide the following list as an easy reference for anyone wishing to hold such a tournament. Again, in any non-tournament setting, no card is banned."
That would be nice. See, my problem is that each and every one of the banned cards is A.), fun to SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE, even if that person is a minority, and B.) usable in some non-jerk way.
People say that Biorhythm isn't fun. Okay, sure. But some people think it is! So if I run it in my deck, maybe someone will complain, and maybe they won't. But the same can be said of Time Stretch - sometimes when I cast it, people complain, and sometimes they don't. But that card's legal. Since literally the only reason to ban/not ban a card in EDH it whether it's fun/not fun, and "fun" is an arbitrary concept that no one will ever agree on, why ban anything outside of a tournament setting?
Hermit Druid, Time Stretch, and other such cards aren't banned. If a group finds them unfun, they can self-police. Why can't we trust groups with that same responsibility when it comes to Upheaval? I sat down with a new group once, and when I played Insurrection for the first time, they said, "Oh, we forgot that you're new. We banned that card." And I was like, "Oh, cool. Mind if I just untap my lands and draw a replacement then?" And they were fine with that, I put Insurrection to the side, and the game continued. And that was fine. And if the same thing happened with Sway of the Stars or Protean Hulk, that would be fine, too.
I agree with this, but the counterargument to this is "what about the players who go to FNM(or local card store EDH night) to play EDH? They'll be up against who knows what, and that's not a tournament."
It's hard to approach it, but i don't think everyone is going to be happy- that's the bottom line. Yes the kid running tribal giants is going to get blown out by johnny combo player, but the banlist never protected that kid. I think players should have the common sense to bring a variety of decks if they're playing against new players - or just talk before the game so they get some common ground.
edit: i just woke up so if i'm not clear - I'm addressing the counterargument of players meeting from different groups and having different banlists
I agree, which is why I think the default should be no banlist. Talking before a game is a great idea. When you show up to a new group, new EDH night, whatever, there's always going to be a period of adjustment - just like there was back in the days of no tournament, 60 card casual decks. I can show up to a new group and get blown out of the water or destroy everyone now, and that's with a banned list. Even with it, some decks are just in a whole different category than others.
Maybe a group had to house-ban Genesis Wave, Time Stretch, or even (gasp) Sol Ring, but maybe they DIDN'T have a problem with Protean Hulk, Coalition Victory, or Balance. Let people play with whatever cards they want, and let the social rules do what they will - since they will anyway.
Maybe a group had to house-ban Genesis Wave, Time Stretch, or even (gasp) Sol Ring, but maybe they DIDN'T have a problem with Protean Hulk, Coalition Victory, or Balance. Let people play with whatever cards they want, and let the social rules do what they will - since they will anyway.
I mean, but isn't this the world we live in right now? I honestly think putting a disclaimer on the banlist saying "this is for tournaments, casual groups are free to disregard it" would do pretty much nothing since casual groups can already disregard it if they want.
Most groups follow it (or modify it only slightly) because they like the value of having new players know what's legal and what's not, or because they think it's a fair list. These are things that a disclaimer won't change. Even if the RC officially got rid of the banlist outright, I have a feeling most groups would continue to follow it for these reasons. So let's keep the list, which has many positive elements, and let those few groups who want to ignore it do so on their own.
"Let's take a look at 2 and 5 specifically. Say you drop everyone to 0 through some form. Normally you win right there. Now you get to sit through watching everyone play out another turn. Well what happens when everyone says they want to use Rule 5 to skip their turn, end step included, and exile 1 of your permanents. Until you have none left, then they simply search up every basic land left in their decks, or however many they need, and attempt to kill you or revive themselves with you completely helpless. Doesn't sound fun to me. "
I like this. Basically, play anything you and your groups wants, as you like. The banlist is for tournaments. That said, for tournaments, the banlist needs to be greatly expanded.
"6. Players may not spend more mana in one turn than the total number of lands controlled by all opponents." Now I'm just starting to dislike you, the more and more I read your post it sounds like you['re] trolling."
Really? You are disliking someone on account of an idea they put up for discussion? I didn't here the poster try to TELL anyone they must follow these rules, or any other. It's an _idea_ for _discussion_.
(And again, I'll try and reiterate: it's really not about those silly rules I posted either. They were just an illustrative example.)
In regards to the concept of a banned list: I really feel as though the banned lists in sanctioned formats have MUCH higher standards than the RC's one. In order for a card to get banned in extended or vintage or whatnot, it has to consistently prove to be a problem for a decent amount of time, to the point where it's provably affecting tournament attendance. Remember Skullclamp? That card was so nuts that it warped the metagame at the time into a mobius. In several PT events, the top 8 decks ALL had 4 copies of the card, AND 4 copies of Oxidize to destroy the opponent's! That's just silly, and that's banned-worthy. I can't think of a single card though, that would be played in EVERY SINGLE EDH deck (okay, maybe Black Lotus... MAYBE), AND be so powerful that literally every game revolved around resolving it. But that's the standard for banning a card in a sanctioned tournament.
So why is the bar set so high in sanctioned formats? Because Wizards really, really, really DOESN'T want to ban any cards. Mainly, because it lowers consumer confidence; people buy cards because they expect they can play them - if every set wizards banned 4 cards that were good in tournaments people wouldn't bother. Wizards has said that in an ideal world people can play with every card they print, which is why they were so hesitant (and upset) to have to ban Jace and Stoneforge in standard. They hate banning cards, but they REALLY hate banning cards in a format as popular as standard. They ban the cards they NEED to in order to keep the tournaments popular, but every time they ban a card it hurts them economically. So they naturally have a HUGE incentive not to ban cards. The RC has no such considerations, so they're more likely to ban a card.
But the reasons to ban cards just don't apply, because even if there are local tournaments, there's no huge interconnected tournament scene. If a local game store holds tournaments, and Biorhythm decks are just tearing it up there, they can ban it at that store - but the nature of the format is such that any strategy can be defeated if you're aware of it. That same deck at a different tournament might get stomped by people playing heavy counter-clique decks or whatever, if there was an actual tournament. And if there isn't, then we don't need a banned list.
I probably agree with Hermit Druid but the other three aren't that bad. Green ramp spells almost pretty much do the same thing putting 2-3 lands into play. Besides Sol Ring was in every pre-con Commander deck and they aren't "broken."
As Fponk suggested, I don't want to derail this topic, but I will say that D0su's suggested list, minus his joking comment about ante cards, is one I would support.
As for philosophy changes: you can also see my comments in Sheldon's thread.
I pretty much think this (loosely speaking) should be the standard for EDH banning: a card that consistently warps the metagame.
But the standard isn't that the card gets played in every deck. JTMS and Stoneforge Mystic weren't played in every deck.
In one of the strongest EDH decks, the game revolves around resolving Hermit Druid. It is quite hard to answer in competitive metas and decides a large number of games. That makes is worth considering for banning.
There are tons of EDH tournaments, both at LGSs and at GP side events. If I show up at a GP and want to play, only to discover that they've randomly picked a banlist that hoses my deck, I will be unable to participate. Having a consistent banlist puts everyone on the same page both for tournaments and for pickup games at the shop. That is the utility of the banlist.
Tl;dr ... Rules are cool, but is it poossible to make useful rules?
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=353661
Sol Ring is busted. EDH players are just jaded because they see it so often. The only other ramp that's even comparable to Sol Ring is Mana Crypt, its superior counterpart. Green spells have nothing on 1 and 0 investment permanent ramp.
The only reason I can figure these two aren't banned is that 2/99 cards are somehwat unlikely to show up in your opening hand or within the first 2 turns (when they'd matter most; not that they're not great later on).
The banlist exists so that when tournaments ARE held, players can easily agree on which ridiculously overpowered cards to remove from play. The creation of a recognized and well-known banlist makes it easy for organizers to hold fair, competitive, and most of all FUN tournaments, will clearly outlining the rules and regulations for deck construction. This means each game store doesn't have to make such a list on their own, and this avoids a lot of possible negative politics. For example, a universal banlist means players can't accuse a store owner of "rigging" a tournament against a certain powerful deck, as the list is recognized as "fair" on a much wider scale than just the store itself.
UR [PRIMER] Flash of the Firemind (Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind) RU
BG Death and Staxes: FireStorm4056's Competitive Meren Stax List GB
W Avacyn Angel of Hope W
R Akroma, Angel of (Your Opponent's) Fury R
R 99-Mountain Ashling R
That would be nice. See, my problem is that each and every one of the banned cards is A.), fun to SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE, even if that person is a minority, and B.) usable in some non-jerk way.
People say that Biorhythm isn't fun. Okay, sure. But some people think it is! So if I run it in my deck, maybe someone will complain, and maybe they won't. But the same can be said of Time Stretch - sometimes when I cast it, people complain, and sometimes they don't. But that card's legal. Since literally the only reason to ban/not ban a card in EDH it whether it's fun/not fun, and "fun" is an arbitrary concept that no one will ever agree on, why ban anything outside of a tournament setting?
Hermit Druid, Time Stretch, and other such cards aren't banned. If a group finds them unfun, they can self-police. Why can't we trust groups with that same responsibility when it comes to Upheaval? I sat down with a new group once, and when I played Insurrection for the first time, they said, "Oh, we forgot that you're new. We banned that card." And I was like, "Oh, cool. Mind if I just untap my lands and draw a replacement then?" And they were fine with that, I put Insurrection to the side, and the game continued. And that was fine. And if the same thing happened with Sway of the Stars or Protean Hulk, that would be fine, too.
I agree with this, but the counterargument to this is "what about the players who go to FNM(or local card store EDH night) to play EDH? They'll be up against who knows what, and that's not a tournament."
It's hard to approach it, but i don't think everyone is going to be happy- that's the bottom line. Yes the kid running tribal giants is going to get blown out by johnny combo player, but the banlist never protected that kid. I think players should have the common sense to bring a variety of decks if they're playing against new players - or just talk before the game so they get some common ground.
edit: i just woke up so if i'm not clear - I'm addressing the counterargument of players meeting from different groups and having different banlists
Maybe a group had to house-ban Genesis Wave, Time Stretch, or even (gasp) Sol Ring, but maybe they DIDN'T have a problem with Protean Hulk, Coalition Victory, or Balance. Let people play with whatever cards they want, and let the social rules do what they will - since they will anyway.
I mean, but isn't this the world we live in right now? I honestly think putting a disclaimer on the banlist saying "this is for tournaments, casual groups are free to disregard it" would do pretty much nothing since casual groups can already disregard it if they want.
Most groups follow it (or modify it only slightly) because they like the value of having new players know what's legal and what's not, or because they think it's a fair list. These are things that a disclaimer won't change. Even if the RC officially got rid of the banlist outright, I have a feeling most groups would continue to follow it for these reasons. So let's keep the list, which has many positive elements, and let those few groups who want to ignore it do so on their own.
Actually, this sounds exactly like fun, to me.
Really? You are disliking someone on account of an idea they put up for discussion? I didn't here the poster try to TELL anyone they must follow these rules, or any other. It's an _idea_ for _discussion_.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg