As stated above, my LGS has banned infinite combos and alternate win cons, in effort to uphold the spirit of commander. We have a very casual meta at my LGS, so when someone uses tide-spout tyrant in their animar deck to bounce everyone's permanents, they tend to rage a little bit. I once had one guy yell at me because I ran to many counterspells in my esper control list. Anyways, on the the point of this whole thing.
For the past week I have been building an Azami, Lady of scrolls list. If anyone has played Azami before, you will know the easiest and most consistent way to win in the deck is combos and drawing out your deck and winning with laboratory maniac. Since both those aspects of the deck are banned, should I just build a new deck? Or submit a complaint to the TO and explain to him that these new rules make it so some commanders are impossible to play well at the stores commander tournaments. ( there is prize support for these tournaments to, so they are basically saying you cant play a competitive deck.) sorry for raging, I am a bit angry.
Luckily, I have two FLGS in my town; one of which is absolute cutthroat (Which I prefer), and one of which is Care Bear like this one.
My first bit of advice is to shop around and see if you have more options available (If that is what you want).
Under most social contracts with EDH, it's what the group wants. It sounds like what you and what the rest of your group wants is not compatible with eachother.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
Under most social contracts with EDH, it's what the group wants. It sounds like what you and what the rest of your group wants is not compatible with eachother.
What they want is most likely to win without being stopped. Nothing good comes from arbitrary restrictions.
I don't want a super competitive cutthroat environment. i like my LGS, but when your playing for prizes, i want to play a deck that can win consistently. and if some of the players don't like infinite combos, there are cards that can stop those combos, like curse of exhaustion, rhystic library, strangle hold, and uncounterable spells. activating a Boseiju to use a kill spell on my azami, or to tooth and nail is really good against my deck. or using cavern of souls to make their Uril, the miststalker uncounterable. All I'm saying is that there are ways to beat and disrupt combos and alternate win conditions. maybe people should include some cards to deal with these kind of decks instead of just saying that combos and alternate win conditions are banned.
I'm not trying to be disruptive, but maybe find a new game store? This one sounds dire... Magic is about more than turning dudes sideways, and I say that even though I play Aggro most of the time!
We havn't had any rules until now, and they are (quoting their facebook post) "FYI - The three new shop rules for Commander will start this Sunday.
1)No mass land destruction (single target destruction is ok)
2)No infinite combos
3)No win conditions without interacting with other players (such as Biovisionary or Laboratory Maniac)
*These rules have been added to keep games within the "spirit" of Commander, which is a casual format that should be fun for all players."
I don't want a super competitive cutthroat environment. i like my LGS, but when your playing for prizes, i want to play a deck that can win consistently. and if some of the players don't like infinite combos, there are cards that can stop those combos, like curse of exhaustion, rhystic library, strangle hold, and uncounterable spells. activating a Boseiju to use a kill spell on my azami, or to tooth and nail is really good against my deck. or using cavern of souls to make their Uril, the miststalker uncounterable. All I'm saying is that there are ways to beat and disrupt combos and alternate win conditions. maybe people should include some cards to deal with these kind of decks instead of just saying that combos and alternate win conditions are banned.
Yes, maybe the other players should be better at magic and deckbuilding. But that is hard. What's easy is banning things.
I doubt a complaint will do anything. It sounds like the majority of their customers who play EDH there prefer it that way. You also say that it makes some commanders "impossible" to play, but then earlier in your post you pointed out that the way you wanted to build the deck was just the "easiest." It's perfectly fine to make an Azami deck that doesn't combo out.
Now you're right in that the rules sound a little over the top, but from the sounds of it, you either have to live with it and build decks that fall into their constraints, or not play EDH at their tournaments. It sounds like you're a bit of a Spikey player and they're trying to keep Spikes out, so the rules actually seem like they're accomplishing what they intended.
I don't want a super competitive cutthroat environment. i like my LGS, but when your playing for prizes, i want to play a deck that can win consistently. and if some of the players don't like infinite combos, there are cards that can stop those combos, like curse of exhaustion, rhystic library, strangle hold, and uncounterable spells. activating a Boseiju to use a kill spell on my azami, or to tooth and nail is really good against my deck. or using cavern of souls to make their Uril, the miststalker uncounterable. All I'm saying is that there are ways to beat and disrupt combos and alternate win conditions. maybe people should include some cards to deal with these kind of decks instead of just saying that combos and alternate win conditions are banned.
What do you think Cutthroat is?
Even in Cutthroat, most people stay away from Zur or Arcum or similar, because the moment one of those is on the table it's 3v1.
It's all about being able to build yoru deck with answers, and preventing people from playing their win cons while playing your own.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
It sounds like you're a bit of a Spikey player and they're trying to keep Spikes out, so the rules actually seem like they're accomplishing what they intended.
Rules like this don't keep spikes out. They cater to more clever spikes or render the very notion of a "tournament" pointless. It's dishonest at best and outright manipulative at worst.
I don't get it. Banning infinite combos, fine, kinda lazy but whatever. But banning alternate wincons? What does that even mean? Like, banning anything that says "you win" on it? So no chance encounter?
I don't want a super competitive cutthroat environment. i like my LGS, but when your playing for prizes, i want to play a deck that can win consistently. and if some of the players don't like infinite combos, there are cards that can stop those combos, like curse of exhaustion, rhystic library, strangle hold, and uncounterable spells. activating a Boseiju to use a kill spell on my azami, or to tooth and nail is really good against my deck. or using cavern of souls to make their Uril, the miststalker uncounterable. All I'm saying is that there are ways to beat and disrupt combos and alternate win conditions. maybe people should include some cards to deal with these kind of decks instead of just saying that combos and alternate win conditions are banned.
This is all true. I do however understand the opposing point of view: If you have a bunch of narrow answers that only become useful against 1 or 2 opponents it is frustrating to draw dead cards against most groups.
I do no condone what happened, especially if there is prize support, and don't exclude people who play cards I don't care for. I do understand the point of view.
As for a solution: Rafiq voltron. It is fast, wins in the red zone and can have a few counters to protect specific cards.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
I don't get it. Banning infinite combos, fine, kinda lazy but whatever. But banning alternate wincons? What does that even mean? Like, banning anything that says "you win" on it? So no chance encounter?
...why?
My Care Bear group does this as well; it's so that you can't use cards like Laboratory Maniac, Biovisionary, or similar. It's so that "People can come out and play and have a good time and not be killed in five turns" is the official story.
Of course, when the store owner has an Oloro, Ageless Ascetic deck that is absolutely fine tuned to a T to be able to stop anything that's NOT an infinite, and he usually wins his own tourneys, it stopped being cool.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
Rules like this don't keep spikes out. They cater to more clever spikes or render the very notion of a "tournament" pointless. It's dishonest at best and outright manipulative at worst.
I agree they don't ultimately work, but I do understand the intent. I personally think EDH tournaments are silly anyway. Ultimately though I think it will work itself out. If the new rules are what the majority of players at that store want, they'll keep them. If people don't actually like the rule changes, they'll stop playing, and the new rules will go away.
I think the OP should voice his opinion (not obnoxiously; that won't help anything) and either not play those tournaments, or build his future decks within their rules.
The rules being manipulative and dishonest is a bit of a stretch too. Not well thought out is probably more accurate.
If you want to build an Azami list you still can, your win con simply changes from Lab Man to Wizard beats, just include cards like Door of Destiny and that new Obelisk along with counterspell dudes like Voidmage Prodigy, Glen Elendra Archmage, and snappy. You even still include mind over matter to make your hand insane whenever you feel like.
You should propose a Legacy tournament with cash prizes and old card giveaways, then I will lend you one of my Legacy decks and you will crush the sour puss from all of them. After, maybe they will see EDH with some form of novelty.
If you want to build an Azami list you still can, your win con simply changes from Lab Man to Wizard beats, just include cards like Door of Destiny and that new Obelisk along with counterspell dudes like Voidmage Prodigy, Glen Elendra Archmage, and snappy. You even still include mind over matter to make your hand insane whenever you feel like.
Don't know how most groups do it, but mine that has those rules also has "If something is an infinite loop, you can only do it once". So you can still Mike and Trike, but you can only bring it back once. You can still Mind over Matter, but only draw/discard once.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Oath of the Gatewatch; the set that caused the competitive community to freak out over Basic Lands.
You should propose a Legacy tournament with cash prizes and old card giveaways, then I will lend you one of my Legacy decks and you will crush the sour puss from all of them. After, maybe they will see EDH with some form of novelty.
People that play casually don't necessarily suck at the game. I feel like this post is rather uncalled for.
OT: If you're not wanting infinite combos, what type of deck are you wanting to play to stay competitive?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Decks:
Modern
Modern Warp / UR Control / UR Storm / Naya Breachshift / ElectroBalance
Legacy
Solidarity / Lands / Sneak and Show / Grixis Delver / Reanimator / Belcher / Storm / Dredge
They'll just ban it next time. Groups that attempt to tightly restrict the game have little concern with restricting it further.
Sorry just trying to follow you. When you say tightly restrict, are there certain cards? What about an artifact heavy deck that utulized Winter Orb to the max?
They'll just ban it next time. Groups that attempt to tightly restrict the game have little concern with restricting it further.
Sorry just trying to follow you. When you say tightly restrict, are there certain cards? What about an artifact heavy deck that utulized Winter Orb to the max?
I'm saying any group that adds incredibly vague restrictions will most likely add more incredibly vague restrictions to prevent what they consider "unfun" things from happening.
For the past week I have been building an Azami, Lady of scrolls list. If anyone has played Azami before, you will know the easiest and most consistent way to win in the deck is combos and drawing out your deck and winning with laboratory maniac. Since both those aspects of the deck are banned, should I just build a new deck? Or submit a complaint to the TO and explain to him that these new rules make it so some commanders are impossible to play well at the stores commander tournaments. ( there is prize support for these tournaments to, so they are basically saying you cant play a competitive deck.) sorry for raging, I am a bit angry.
My first bit of advice is to shop around and see if you have more options available (If that is what you want).
Under most social contracts with EDH, it's what the group wants. It sounds like what you and what the rest of your group wants is not compatible with eachother.
Modern Warp / UR Control / UR Storm / Naya Breachshift / ElectroBalance
Solidarity / Lands / Sneak and Show / Grixis Delver / Reanimator / Belcher / Storm / Dredge
What they want is most likely to win without being stopped. Nothing good comes from arbitrary restrictions.
I'm not trying to be disruptive, but maybe find a new game store? This one sounds dire... Magic is about more than turning dudes sideways, and I say that even though I play Aggro most of the time!
UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU's prison: blue is the new orange is the new black.
Mizzix Of The Izmagnus : wheels on fire... rolling down the road...
BSidisi, Undead VizierB: Bis zum Erbrechen
GTitiania, Protector Of ArgothG: Protecting Argoth, by blowing it up!
GYisan, The Wanderer BardG: Gradus Ad Elfball.
Duel EDH: Yisan & Titania.
In Progress: Grand Arbiter Augustin IV duel; Grenzo, Dungeon Warden Doomsday.
1)No mass land destruction (single target destruction is ok)
2)No infinite combos
3)No win conditions without interacting with other players (such as Biovisionary or Laboratory Maniac)
*These rules have been added to keep games within the "spirit" of Commander, which is a casual format that should be fun for all players."
Yes, maybe the other players should be better at magic and deckbuilding. But that is hard. What's easy is banning things.
Hell is other players.
Now you're right in that the rules sound a little over the top, but from the sounds of it, you either have to live with it and build decks that fall into their constraints, or not play EDH at their tournaments. It sounds like you're a bit of a Spikey player and they're trying to keep Spikes out, so the rules actually seem like they're accomplishing what they intended.
What do you think Cutthroat is?
Even in Cutthroat, most people stay away from Zur or Arcum or similar, because the moment one of those is on the table it's 3v1.
It's all about being able to build yoru deck with answers, and preventing people from playing their win cons while playing your own.
Rules like this don't keep spikes out. They cater to more clever spikes or render the very notion of a "tournament" pointless. It's dishonest at best and outright manipulative at worst.
...why?
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I do no condone what happened, especially if there is prize support, and don't exclude people who play cards I don't care for. I do understand the point of view.
As for a solution: Rafiq voltron. It is fast, wins in the red zone and can have a few counters to protect specific cards.
My Care Bear group does this as well; it's so that you can't use cards like Laboratory Maniac, Biovisionary, or similar. It's so that "People can come out and play and have a good time and not be killed in five turns" is the official story.
Of course, when the store owner has an Oloro, Ageless Ascetic deck that is absolutely fine tuned to a T to be able to stop anything that's NOT an infinite, and he usually wins his own tourneys, it stopped being cool.
I agree they don't ultimately work, but I do understand the intent. I personally think EDH tournaments are silly anyway. Ultimately though I think it will work itself out. If the new rules are what the majority of players at that store want, they'll keep them. If people don't actually like the rule changes, they'll stop playing, and the new rules will go away.
I think the OP should voice his opinion (not obnoxiously; that won't help anything) and either not play those tournaments, or build his future decks within their rules.
The rules being manipulative and dishonest is a bit of a stretch too. Not well thought out is probably more accurate.
What about Rule of Law and possibility storm? It is not a combo per se......
I buy HP and Damaged cards!
Only EDH:
Sigarda, Host of Herons: Enchantress' Enchantments
Jenara, Asura of War: ETB Value Town
Purphoros, God of the Forge: Global Punishment
Xenagos, God of Revels: Ramp, Sneak, & Heavy Hitters
Ghave, Guru of Spores: Dies_to_Doom_Blade's stax list
Edric, Spymaster of Trest: Donald's list
Don't know how most groups do it, but mine that has those rules also has "If something is an infinite loop, you can only do it once". So you can still Mike and Trike, but you can only bring it back once. You can still Mind over Matter, but only draw/discard once.
They'll just ban it next time. Groups that attempt to tightly restrict the game have little concern with restricting it further.
Since they are so hateful against counterspells they won't tutor a response lol.
People that play casually don't necessarily suck at the game. I feel like this post is rather uncalled for.
OT: If you're not wanting infinite combos, what type of deck are you wanting to play to stay competitive?
Modern Warp / UR Control / UR Storm / Naya Breachshift / ElectroBalance
Solidarity / Lands / Sneak and Show / Grixis Delver / Reanimator / Belcher / Storm / Dredge
Sorry just trying to follow you. When you say tightly restrict, are there certain cards? What about an artifact heavy deck that utulized Winter Orb to the max?
What about humility or dovescape?
I buy HP and Damaged cards!
Only EDH:
Sigarda, Host of Herons: Enchantress' Enchantments
Jenara, Asura of War: ETB Value Town
Purphoros, God of the Forge: Global Punishment
Xenagos, God of Revels: Ramp, Sneak, & Heavy Hitters
Ghave, Guru of Spores: Dies_to_Doom_Blade's stax list
Edric, Spymaster of Trest: Donald's list
I'm saying any group that adds incredibly vague restrictions will most likely add more incredibly vague restrictions to prevent what they consider "unfun" things from happening.