"Because asking if you can use a wish [Battle of wits] for its actual intended purpose"
.
If you are on the wishboard team then this is not it's actual intended purpose. If you are on the Any card team you are "indirectly" saying you are against the intended purpose of some commander rules. (Singleton , Exactly 100 cards (that is also broken with wishboards) , color Identity, Banned cards)
So arguing from that point of intended purpose seems irrelevant to me because by going for one intended purpose you will break the other and vice versa.
And while I personally wouldn't mind a 115 card format I do belive breaking rules that are for an intended purpose is seen worse than breaking a cards intended purpose, as that happens all the time in commander and regular magic anyways. The whole in this case is more important than the part.
So changing that for everyone is a bit steep. It's also unfair to do that just for wishes if you are allowed to get anything you essentially are breaking the 100 card rule of the format just for wishes, but I can't do the same If I want to play battle of wits even though it works as intended and by doing that it has no functionality.
A question for everyone complaining about Rule 13 re: Wishes, etc.:
Nothing functionally changed in the rule with this update, so why is everyone getting all argumentative about it now?
Probably because they want wishes to work and this update showed that you guys discussed them and didnt reach a conclusion they liked.
Or, because it continues to be a poor solution. It's the same as if the RC added a hypothetical "Rule 14: Relentless Rats-type effects do not work in Commander." It's an example of the RC going out of their way to remove functionality from cards without actually banning the cards in question because... reasons? It is absurdly close to card-specific errata, and there is simply no reason for it. Either Wishes are fine and should be legal to work how they work, or they're not and they should be banned. There's no middle ground here.
If the worry is anti-social use of a wish, then you use the gentleman's agreement in a non-CEDH non-Competitive environment. Simple as that. If it can be done with combo, stax, land destruction, and anything else in the format, a wish following this agreement won't break the metaphorical camel's back.
Call me crazy, but your suggestion could easily be used in a non-competitive, friendly game of magic with the agreement to allow wish cards/boards. Every point arguing for the use of wishes can be alleviated with play groups agreeing to allow them. Almost like the RC/CAG didn't ban them to make it easier to facilitate that. The pro-wish group just doesn't want to be told no whenever they show up to a random group or LGS with wish cards and a sideboard for them; they want their view to be the norm and the current anti-wish ruling to be the unusual occurrence. Flipping the coin as it were.
Because asking if you can use a wish for its actual intended purpose, instead of rule 13, puts it in a similar territory to asking if you can play with a planeswalker as your commander that isn't normally one.
Yet like you quoted me but also skirted around what I said, you should still just use the Gentleman's Agreement, simple as that. If a person is being obnoxious with a particular type of deck or card, you ask them to swap the deck or card out. If they can't, someone at the table offers them a deck, if they won't take it then ask them to kindly sit out of the game. Like a reasonable human being. Now apply this to wishboards and wishes and its not hard to understand, downright simple in fact.
In fact humor for me a bit.
Hypothetical: I create a new rule, #111. "If you would search your libary for a land card and that card would be put it into any other zone, you fail to find the card in your search instead."
There I just blanked every mana ramp card. If you want to play mana ramp spells, you got to ask the permission of the table first. After all, The pro-rampers just want to play their ramp spells without being told no; they want their view to be the norm and the current anti-ramp ruling to be the unusual occurrence. Flipping the coin as it were.
Soooo, extreme example. But while I see what you were going for, you're leaving out the tiny detail of if blanking FAR more cards than the wishes account for, and you take away one of the defining areas of strength from an entire color (green). Exile is still technically an "in-game zone" with no sideboard as an extension of your deck, you cant even make the argument for the wishes to be legal. You're taking the text of the card and insisting on its legality, when its defying more rules that have been established and asking for additional rules to enable them to be incorporated.
Wishes, sideboards, running banned cards etc. Can all be used via a social contract and play groups that allow them. Nothing wrong with that. Further concessions to allow for breaking fundamental rules of what makes commander, commander, isn't acceptable
Either Wishes are fine and should be legal to work how they work, or they're not and they should be banned. There's no middle ground here.
The Problem with that approach is the cards that do more than just wish and that part is fine. You wouldn't wanna ban Fractured Powerstone just because the second ability has no effect , same with Mastermind's Acquisition or Research // Development. So a blanket ban is undesirable. And a specific ban on those who only wish is the single card errata on those that don't. Banning all is only a "clean" solution if you do the same for Fractured Powerstone, draft matters cards.
And even tough I am currently building a Rat colony deck I think that too is something that shouldn't be able to be something that can be done universally and should stay in local playgroups.
Or, because it continues to be a poor solution. It's the same as if the RC added a hypothetical "Rule 14: Relentless Rats-type effects do not work in Commander." It's an example of the RC going out of their way to remove functionality from cards without actually banning the cards in question because... reasons? It is absurdly close to card-specific errata, and there is simply no reason for it. Either Wishes are fine and should be legal to work how they work, or they're not and they should be banned. There's no middle ground here.
Creating format-specific rules is a poor solution? Well, there goes the 100 card rule, the color identity rule, the general damage rule, the command zone replacement effect, the singleton rule....
I'm going to throw out a slightly modified version of what ForgottenOne designed.
13. Since games of Commander are played without sideboards, abilities which refer to other cards owned outside the games (Wishes, Spawnsire, Research, Ring of Ma'ruf, etc.) function in Commander with the following rules:
The player must have what is called a "lamp" of no more than 3 cards prepared before the start of the match so as to not delay the game.
The cards in your "lamp" must conform to the color identity of your commander (see Rule 3)
The cards in your "lamp" do not count as part of your 100-card deck (see Rule 4)
The cards in your "lamp" may not be in your 100-card deck and vice versa (see Rule 5)
The cards in your "lamp" must be legal in Commander.
Sounds fun don't it? A magic lamp where you can get up to three of your magic wishes granted from a special item or benefactor. A special vault that could contain nearly anything.
Outside of lore reasons, I prefer to view 3 as the right number. Its enough for you to pack the three cards you would truly need. Also that constraints build creativity. 10 or 15 cards feels excessive and would likely lead to stagnation of the lamp. With only 3 cards, you must 'word your wishes wisely', when in a familiar or unfamiliar meta. Do you store a more generic card in your lamp if uncertain, or do you risk it and store a more specific kind of card in the lamp that might never be played once that evening.
The bigger of a wishboard/lamp, the more its going to just stagnate. After all, keeping it smaller keeps them from being the same. Having only 3 actual slots to use means you need to pick your cards more wisely instead of just shoving mostly goodstuff cards to fill in the slots. Also this is based on Sheldon's way of thinking, wanting to see less of the same for meta decks, but in this case with wishboards/lamps. After all the whole format is based on building off of restrictions unless you disagree with that.
Also you know right? 3 wishes, magical lamp, genies, phenomal cosmic power. Those sort of tropes? It resonates a lot better in the mind and is easier to remember than 5 or 7 or 10 wishes.
The bigger of a wishboard/lamp, the more its going to just stagnate. After all, keeping it smaller keeps them from being the same. Having only 3 actual slots to use means you need to pick your cards more wisely instead of just shoving mostly goodstuff cards to fill in the slots. Also this is based on Sheldon's way of thinking, wanting to see less of the same for meta decks, but in this case with wishboards/lamps. After all the whole format is based on building off of restrictions unless you disagree with that.
Well at most you have effectively increased your deck to 102 cards, since the wishes take up slots that could be used by, you know, those three cards in your wish board.
And not to be too pedantic, but if I were in favor of this change (I'm not) then it would create an annoyance that I would have to buy two packs of sleeves now because of a few extra cards.
Keep them in a separate kind of sleeves, maybe even penny sleeves, or maybe no sleeves at all to keep the card outside the deck. Also works in that you could have a penny-sleeved or unsleeved deck but you have a few sleeves like for your commander and now a few cards in your wishboard/lamp to differentiate them.
The card does what the card does, and when the card does something outside of the rules the card wins.
Eh, not really. Dichotomancy or Battle of Wits are 100% unplayable and worthless as intended in EDH, exactly like a Burning Wish, and yet they are legal cards (simply because the ban list belong to cards that actively hurt the gameplay and are not simply "do-nothing" cards).
There is a difference between a card being blanked (as Burning Wish is by Rule 13) versus a card being allowed to do exactly what it says with what the card says being virtually useless. In the case of Battle of Wits, there is no Rule 14 that states "Cards that would win you the game for having more than 200 cards in your deck do nothing in Commander." The card is allowed to function exactly as it reads, you just have no way of achieving that win condition in a normal game of Commander. These are completely different issues.
Also, referring to stuff like Teferi, Temporal Archmage is not a good example since it explicitly states in the card text that it does something special in the commander format....while a Wish not.
My point is that the card wins versus the rules. A wish shouldn't need extra text that says "In a game of Commander, do X instead".
I get it that some people don't like wishes because they fear the kinds of cards that people will Wish for. My only response to that is that if the Social Contract is good enough to discourage "anti-social" play, then why wouldn't it be good enough to discourage people from using a Wish in an "anti-social" way? Just like the RC doesn't ban cards based on the worst possible ways that cards can be used, there is no reason to think that Wishes wouldn't fall under the same stigma. If there is a "fair use", then that is what we should be evaluating the card on. If that "fair use" goes too far, then just ban the card.
Because you're suggesting the rule be amended to play cards that have a high potential for anti-social play via hate cards that wouldn't otherwise be in a deck (because they might not make the cut). The social contract is all well and good when you have a regular group, but to make it legal at large subjects people to it with pickup games where a contract might not be in place, because the players are unknown.
Pickup and "public" games are where the Social Contract is needed the most. If I am playing with strangers, I would be going the extra mile to make sure we are all on the same page regarding what is cool and what is not and choosing a deck accordingly.
Quote from Forgotten One » »
I also get it that there is a minority that don't like the idea that a Wish somehow breaks the 100-card deck limit, and that after Wishing for a card your deck is now greater than 100 cards and is no longer legal at that point. This is total rubbish. The card does what the card does, and when the card does something outside of the rules the card wins. Relentless Rats violates Rule 5 (the Highlander rule), Partner commanders violate Rule 2, Planeswalkers that can be used as your commander a la Teferi, Temporal Archmage violate Rule 2, Transguild Courier violates Rule 3 (the Color Identity rule), but we allow these cards to all function as-printed and we acknowledge (and celebrate) how they bend/break the rules. I don't understand how Wishes get singled out, but if this is indeed the actual issue here (which I highly doubt) then just ban the card.
First, it is highly presumptuous to state that those that don't want wishes to be legal are in the minority. If anything, it's a 50/50 split at the least - likely more in favor of anti-wishes considering that it's the current status-quo. The 100 card deck limit isn't rubbish, it's a defining characteristic of the format. You can't play [[Battle of Wits]] just because it's legal and you really like the card... The other concessions you mentioned don't directly violate any rules because they have text that states such, and they also maintain the 100 card singleton rule... the very basis of the format. You stance of the card wins versus the rules is clearly not the case here.
1) The comment about the "minority" wasn't about people wanting/not wanting wishes, it was specific to people not wanting wishes because of the idea that it somehow violates the 100 card rule. In my experience, this is not the biggest reason that people give for not wanting Wishes.
2) The 100 card rule isn't rubbish. Stating that a Wish violates that rule somehow is rubbish in my opinion. The 100 card rule clearly governs how your deck can be constructed while a Wish clearly talks about cards outside the game. Cards outside the game are clearly not in your 100 card deck. The two have nothing to do with one another.
3) You say that the other cards don't break the rules because of their card text, but neither does a Wish. Additional rules had to be written to override what the card says. That is the problem.
4) My point is that if Rule 13 were eliminated, then a Wish would occupy the same ground as the other cards; they would function as printed.
Quote from Forgotten One » »
I also somewhat get the concern of how one can verify that the player isn't violating the Highlander rule, but honestly how do you verify that now? Nobody is registering decks and doing deck checks, so why is it a non-issue now but a deal breaker when the topic of Wishes come up?
If a player plays or reveals that they have multiple copies of a card, it's a DQ. You're suggesting all of these additional conditions to allow for wishes, yet you just stated "The card does what the card does, and when the card does something outside of the rules the card wins." Not that it's true here, but that statement alone is enough of a point to argue for pulling a copy of a card that's already in the 99. After all, the card doesn't specify, does it? You want concessions to play your wishes, want to force these rulings on the player base at large, and you want and extra subset of rules added for less than 10 cards for this sort of effect. Meanwhile, there are cards like Dichotomancy, Hedron Alignment, Battle of Wits and more, that don't have this concession to allow for their usability. They're all perfectly good examples of functionally useless cards in commander, yet are still legal. Why should wishes be any different?
[/quote]
1) The point of proposing a new Rule 13 to govern how Wishes would work would be to eliminate any questions as to how they would function in a format like Commander that has specific deck construction rules. I would prefer this to just eliminating Rule 13 specifically to prevent someone from trying to pull shenanigans. Having Wishes work within the flavor of Commander makes sense, hence why I suggest Rule 13 be changed to what I proposed (or at least, something close to that). This is no different than how a Wish would work like in other formats where it still needs to be a legal card; you can't Cunning Wish for an Ancestral Recall in a game of Legacy and try and argue with a judge that "hey, it says outside the game so why not?"
2) Dichotomancy still does exactly what it says it does; there is no rule that blanks its text box. If the opponent Clones a creature, then the original gets Spin Into Myth'd back into that players library, then Dichotomancy works perfectly fine...
3) Hedron Alignment still does exactly what it says it does; there is not rule that blanks its text box. The chances of you meeting the victory condition are 0% given the current card pool, but it still works as printed. If WotC printed a card that said "Until end of turn, all non-land cards in Exile, your Graveyard, and your hand are copies of target permanent.", you could combo the two to win the game.
4) Battle of Wits still does exactly what it says it does; there is no rule that blanks its text box. Again, the chances of meeting the victory condition are currently 0%, but if they printed enough Eldrazi you could Spawnsire of Ulamaog them into your hand and shuffle them into your library and win...
5) There is a difference between functionally useless and being artificially made useless.
[quote]"Because asking if you can use a wish [Battle of wits] for its actual intended purpose"
.
If you are on the wishboard team then this is not it's actual intended purpose. If you are on the Any card team you are "indirectly" saying you are against the intended purpose of some commander rules. (Singleton , Exactly 100 cards (that is also broken with wishboards) , color Identity, Banned cards)
So arguing from that point of intended purpose seems irrelevant to me because by going for one intended purpose you will break the other and vice versa.
And while I personally wouldn't mind a 115 card format I do belive breaking rules that are for an intended purpose is seen worse than breaking a cards intended purpose, as that happens all the time in commander and regular magic anyways. The whole in this case is more important than the part.
The Oracle card rulings contradict your assumptions on "intended purpose" here, but even then I don't think its as black and white as you make it out to be. Both a Wishboard and "Any card" options can be made to work within the rules of Commander. Furthermore, Wishboards do not have anything to do with the 100 card deck construction rules; these cards are outside the game and not in your deck.
So changing that for everyone is a bit steep. It's also unfair to do that just for wishes if you are allowed to get anything you essentially are breaking the 100 card rule of the format just for wishes, but I can't do the same If I want to play battle of wits even though it works as intended and by doing that it has no functionality.
The examples of Battle of Wits and a Wish are totally different. First, stating that people are breaking the 100-card rule, breaking the CI rules, or breaking the Highlander rule with a Wish is attacking a strawman. Most people who support wishes want them to have the same restrictions as everything else in Commander. On the other hand, playing a 200+ maindeck just because you want to play Battle of Wits is obviously a violation of the rules.
The difference here is in the case of a Wish, its the card that is breaking any rules involved whereas in the case of playing a 200-card deck its the player who is breaking the rules. Two different things.
The Problem with that approach is the cards that do more than just wish and that part is fine. You wouldn't wanna ban Fractured Powerstone just because the second ability has no effect , same with Mastermind's Acquisition or Research // Development. So a blanket ban is undesirable. And a specific ban on those who only wish is the single card errata on those that don't. Banning all is only a "clean" solution if you do the same for Fractured Powerstone, draft matters cards.
The only 'real' card that would be hit as collateral is Karn, the Great Creator. The rest are either Wishes, underpowered jank nobody is playing anyways, or have functionally identical counterparts. But all of that is beside the point because this obviously wasn't even a concern for the RC seeing as how most of these cards didn't even exist when they created this rule. Rule 13 is, for all intents and purposes, a ban on Wishes without actually being a ban because that's what it was designed to be.
As for your other suggestions, it's not the same. Fractured Powerstone and draft-matters cards behave exactly how they are supposed to in a game of EDH. Same thing goes with Battle of Wits which people keep mentioning. All of these cards work as the rules say they do. Burning Wish does not. Its rules text has been explicitly removed by the RC. It's essentially format-specific errata, just like Karakas used to have. And we all know what happened there.
Lots of people think Wishes are fun.
Lots of people play them as written without worrying about it.
Lots of people don’t care if they get played.
Any debate involves positing opposing viewpoints but I find this particular list to be subjective to the point of uselessness.
I really enjoy how you cut of the conclusion to the point, then said the post was near pointless. Cool OOC quote
The issue is about the DEFAULT rule. The cleanest, easiest to interpret, most direct to implement should be favored.
The truth is, many people have been using wishboards in EDH for years and I rarely if ever see discussion of it in places like these forums. So it can’t be causing that much trouble.
If you don't see it debated on forums like this, you have not been around much. It comes up all the time, and gets beaten to death no matter how many times the RC says 'wishes do not work', without prearrangement.
That alone argues in favor of making them legal by default, in my opinion.
Because your subjective is better than the opposite subjective? Did I get that right?
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.
both options can be made to work within the rules of Commander
so special ruling is needed, esp. in the case of a wishboard because.
as someone stated before in unsanctioned games you can get the card from anywhere not just your sideboard. Also being able to grab anything not just cards that fit your normal commander deckbuilding rules.
Wishboards do have something to do with the 100 card rule just as a regular sideboard has to do something with the deckbuilding rule. A deck must have a minimum of 60 Cards adn may have a sideboard of 0 to 15 cards. Your normal deck isnt just your deck its your deck + SB. So the same appklies to commander if you do a wishboard the new deck construction rule is 100 + 0- max wishboard size. So if you are advocationg for a wishboard you are breaking the 100 card deckbuilding rule and making it a 100 + WB rule.
exactly how they are supposed to
Thats the problem with wishes They are not working how they are supposed to in sanctioned events (Wotc uses a format specific errata as in only sideboard cards) and the RC want to use the same errata whilst having no sideboard.
Why do you want it on the banlist if they don't allow for search all though? You said Fractured Powerstone works as intended but it does not its a special errata for the card that says "In non-Planechase games, Fractured Powerstone’s second ability will have no effect. " because if it works as intended you should be able to roll the planar die anyways since that is exactly what the card says.
I certainly wouldn't stop someone from rolling a planar die in an edh game. I'd even hand them one since I carry them on me. But if we weren't playing plane chase then there would be no effect. Just as I wouldn't stop someone from casting burning wish and then failing to find from their nonexistent side board.
The simple fact is that the no sideboard rule is a defining format rule, just as other formats have defined sideboards. This clarification is just an attempt to lay to rest the debates that arose due to wishy washy wording of the past.
both options can be made to work within the rules of Commander
so special ruling is needed, esp. in the case of a wishboard because.
as someone stated before in unsanctioned games you can get the card from anywhere not just your sideboard. Also being able to grab anything not just cards that fit your normal commander deckbuilding rules.
The concept of a Wishboard is strictly for time savings. You make the restriction solely for the purpose of not holding up the game. We don't even have to have a Wishboard for all I care, but even if a Wishboard wasn't codified in the rules I would still have a set of cards set aside specifically for each deck that had a wish in it. And yes, you provide a special ruling specifically so people won't argue about how they work and won't try to pull some of the shenanigans that some people are suggesting. In this case, the words "a card you own outside the game" needs some clarification, so let's clarify it.
Wishboards do have something to do with the 100 card rule just as a regular sideboard has to do something with the deckbuilding rule. A deck must have a minimum of 60 Cards adn may have a sideboard of 0 to 15 cards. Your normal deck isnt just your deck its your deck + SB. So the same appklies to commander if you do a wishboard the new deck construction rule is 100 + 0- max wishboard size. So if you are advocationg for a wishboard you are breaking the 100 card deckbuilding rule and making it a 100 + WB rule.
No. You wouldn't go to a sanctioned match with a 45 card maindeck and a 15 card sideboard and try and tell a judge "hey, my 'deck' is 60 cards. What's the problem?" Sideboard cards are clearly outside the game and accounted for differently than maindeck cards. Also, a wishboard for Commander and a sideboard for constructed are two totally different things. Where a sideboard has a very specific definition for constructed events, a Wishboard for Commander is just "a subset of cards outside the game specifically set aside to make searching for a card I wish for take less time". We can call it something else if it makes people feel better, but don't get hung up on the semantics. Cards outside the game don't count towards your 100-card deck, whether they are in a Wishboard or not.
exactly how they are supposed to
Thats the problem with wishes They are not working how they are supposed to in sanctioned events (Wotc uses a format specific errata as in only sideboard cards) and the RC want to use the same errata whilst having no sideboard.
The non-Commander rules and Oracle card rulings don't support this at all. Specifically, the Wishes all have the same Oracle ruling "In a sanctioned event, a card that’s “outside the game” is one that’s in your sideboard. In an unsanctioned event, you may choose any card from your collection." If I knew nothing about Rule 13, there would be no reason to think that I couldn't use a Wish to get the appropriate card from my trade binder since a game of Commander is clearly an Unsanctioned event. What we are asking for is to make that happen, but clarify exactly how it will work to avoid confusion.
Why do you want it on the banlist if they don't allow for search all though? You said Fractured Powerstone works as intended but it does not its a special errata for the card that says "In non-Planechase games, Fractured Powerstone’s second ability will have no effect. " because if it works as intended you should be able to roll the planar die anyways since that is exactly what the card says.
The Oracle card rulings take care of this issue just as they do with Wishes. We are asking that Wishes to be treated the same. You are basically proving my point. And even without the Oracle ruling on Fractured Powerstone, rolling a planar die in a game of Commander would have no effect. It would be like playing a Wrath of God when there are no creatures in play...
Fractured Powerstone is a non-example. The reason it doesn't work is because the game it is played with isn't the that is used in Commander, just like Paliano, the High City isn't meant for this format. Planechase in itself is technically its own game that is separate from Commander just as Archenemy is separate from Commander. You can mix these game modes, sure, but they are not the default. These example cards are not the same as a preexisting card losing usability because of a newer rule invented directly by a committee because of a notion against competitive environments.
Also a wishboard isn't counted for the number for your main deck set of cards. Your wishboard is a separate pile. If I had a main deck of 100 cards and a wishboard of 15, the main deck is still 100 cards. If I get a card from the wishboard, the main deck is still 100 cards in total.
I'm anti-wishboard for a stupidly simple reason (relative to the "grand philosophical musings" above and below): I don't think wishboards would be intuitive, affordable, or fun for new players and we need them.
Fact is, if wishes suddenly became more than a house-rule rarity, they'd spike in both price and popularity. *****, I've got a slot in basically every red deck for a burning wish with 15+ modes. The buyouts would be real. Chump change cards would now be both prohibitively expensive for casual players and ubiquitous in more competitive circles. So now we have more precons being stomped in pick-ups by unattainable cards that essentially constitute as the ultimate tutor effect. Sure most people would fix up a proper sideboards, but "outside the game" is a pretty nebulous term in social play and the first time a person whips out their 60 page binder and eats 10 minutes to resolve a wish, it won't leave a memorably pleasant taste in anyone's mouth.
That's all worst case scenario talk, yes. But I like our fabulous format as-is, and the growing popularity of EDH reflects that a lot of other people do too. I don't think extrapolating the wishboard experience is going to do us any favors in the long run, and I think that may be why the RC is choosing this direction as the status quo.
Thats the problem with wishes They are not working how they are supposed to in sanctioned events (Wotc uses a format specific errata as in only sideboard cards) and the RC want to use the same errata whilst having no sideboard.
Why do you want it on the banlist if they don't allow for search all though? You said Fractured Powerstone works as intended but it does not its a special errata for the card that says "In non-Planechase games, Fractured Powerstone’s second ability will have no effect. " because if it works as intended you should be able to roll the planar die anyways since that is exactly what the card says.
The thing that restricts Wishes to only getting cards from your sideboard isn't errata, it's the Tournament Rules. That's it. In any other setting Wishes are, by the rules of the game, allowed to get any card you own from outside the game. Except in EDH, where they have format-specific errata that says they do nothing.
Fractured Powerstone works in the sense that the card does what it's supposed to. It's just that most EDH games don't use Planechase planes, so the second ability is almost always entirely irrelevant. Burning Wish, when cast in any non-tournament setting (i.e. most games of EDH), however, is supposed to allow me to get any sorcery I own from outside the game and put it into my hand. But it doesn't. Because of a format-specific rule that serves no purpose except to prevent Wishes from working. At which point the question becomes "why aren't they just banned?" The RC obviously doesn't want Wishes allowed by default (hence the heavy-handed format errata) but if that's the case shouldn't they just be outright banned? Because the rule certainly wasn't put in place to make sure Karn, the Great Creator is still playable seeing as how he was released... what like a week ago, while the Wish rule was put into place at least a decade ago, if not longer.
Which circles us back around to the original point. If the goal is to make the default option for EDH games "no Wishes allowed" just ban them. It is both simpler and more intuitive to see these cards expressly forbidden than this sort of faux banned state they're in now, in which players are legally allowed to play cards that do nothing despite what the textboxes say.
The simple fact is that the no sideboard rule is a defining format rule, just as other formats have defined sideboards.
You'd think if it was such a defining rule of the format, the word "sideboard" would appear at least once on the Offical Commander Rules website. I certainly couldn't find it. Eh, I'm sure it's not important.
I'm anti-wishboard for a stupidly simple reason (relative to the "grand philosophical musings" above and below): I don't think wishboards would be intuitive, affordable, or fun for new players and we need them.
Fact is, if wishes suddenly became more than a house-rule rarity, they'd spike in both price and popularity. *****, I've got a slot in basically every red deck for a burning wish with 15+ modes. The buyouts would be real. Chump change cards would now be both prohibitively expensive for casual players and ubiquitous in more competitive circles. So now we have more precons being stomped in pick-ups by unattainable cards that essentially constitute as the ultimate tutor effect. Sure most people would fix up a proper sideboards, but "outside the game" is a pretty nebulous term in social play and the first time a person whips out their 60 page binder and eats 10 minutes to resolve a wish, it won't leave a memorably pleasant taste in anyone's mouth.
That's all worst case scenario talk, yes. But I like our fabulous format as-is, and the growing popularity of EDH reflects that a lot of other people do too. I don't think extrapolating the wishboard experience is going to do us any favors in the long run, and I think that may be why the RC is choosing this direction as the status quo.
Edit:spelling
While yes that is a worry, its a bit of an inevitability with prices. Maybe its not a wish, but instead the standard player has to deal with its a psychotic fury or a balduvian rage or aurelia's fury or sunforger because of feather, the redeemed they got from a pack or draft. Now people experience the feeling of missing out or FOMO because they could have easily bought these cards at any point, but didn't want to until it was too late.
A person who searches their library slowly for a card is not much better than person who slowly decides what card outside the game they want to put into their hand. A person who slowly calculates and recalculates the size of their board of their creatures and who they can go after isn't much better either. A person who goes through an infinite or near-infinite combo but takes a long time isn't much better either. A person who slowly decides if they let a spell resolve even if they couldn't actually respond to it anyway isn't much better either.
Those are the fairest equivocations so far, so I give you that. I just think wishes, as cards that could be universally great (best possible modal spell) in any deck and that were not reprinted recently to be cheap for new players to access easily and that nonetheless have a high chance of potential slow-play feel-bad, do not merit enough to warrant inclusion into the format.
"Why not?" is simply not a good enough reason to make wishboards anything beyond the odd houserule. But remember ladies and gents, (and this is the best part) these rules say you can bend them if you can find other people who also want to. So technically, you can play wishes anytime you want right now. Go ahead, take that burning wish and 15 sorcerys and sleeve 'em up, go to your lgs, talk to some sympathetic ears and convince them why wishboards are sicktek.dec, and bend some rules. Format wide extrapolation averted and you get your sideboard.
Edit: I can't seem to spell "extrapolation" correctly today. I'm gonna lay off the 10 euro words now.
Because of a format-specific rule that serves no purpose except to prevent Wishes from working. At which point the question becomes "why aren't they just banned?" The RC obviously doesn't want Wishes allowed by default (hence the heavy-handed format errata) but if that's the case shouldn't they just be outright banned? Because the rule certainly wasn't put in place to make sure Karn, the Great Creator is still playable seeing as how he was released... what like a week ago, while the Wish rule was put into place at least a decade ago, if not longer.
Your refusal to acknowledge some cards do things besides get cards from outside the game does not stop that from being an actual reason.
The rule has been around for a while, but so have cards that do something else. (EDIT : 2006)
You are using circular logic, and Wishes won't be banned or allowed to work as written.
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.
Also, banning them outright disallows people who do currently enjoy them and blanket legalization foists them upon people who don't wanna worry about super tutors with their own sideboards. Saying they formally do nothing is actually a kind of brilliant; it's hardline enough to keep wishes out of most games, but built on stuff flimsy enough for the people who do really want them to generate conversations and arguments with their lgs or playgroups about letting wishes fly.
Black and white is very clear, but gray stuff can be fine too.
You'd think if it was such a defining rule of the format, the word "sideboard" would appear at least once on the Offical Commander Rules website. I certainly couldn't find it. Eh, I'm sure it's not important.
Yep, you got me because I opted to shorthand an obviously understood term.
Let's take it a step further and get literal. Oracle ruling states that in a sanctioned game it pulls from your sideboard, and in a non sanctioned one is just pulls from outside the game (i.e. any card you have with you). I'm going to ignore the pedantic arguments of color identity, card legality, and singleton rule because we are smart people and know that this would be taken into account. But now the RC has to define a sideboard because otherwise it would be left.for every venue to define one for that particular sanctioned event. And then come the debates over whether an event is sanctioned or which sideboard to use. How many of the ~30 players at my league realize that the games are sanctioned and would show up with a wish binder?
Edh is a non sanctioned format by default, so playing the cards as written means being able to pull Amy card. That comes with it's own set of baggage so the RC decided to take a stand and apply a format specific rule, which some players don't agree with. It is what it is, but I would be willing to bet a very small percentage actually played with wishes so it's not like anything was lost, except for the potential to tutor for cards that aren't good enough to main deck. And I wasn't being sarcastic earlier. You already accept a number of format specific rules which don't exist in any.other format, so why yet up in arms over this specific one?
Your refusal to acknowledge some cards do things besides get cards from outside the game does not stop that from being an actual reason.
The rule has been around for a while, but so have cards that do something else. (EDIT : 2006)
You are using circular logic, and Wishes won't be banned or allowed to work as written.
A bad reason, in the same way having a rule that says "Effects can't prevent players from drawing cards" because the other half of Leovold, Emissary of Trest is fun is a bad rule.
As for the cards that predate the rule... oh wow a terrible punisher version of Jace's Ingenuity and probably the worst of the large Eldrazi. Cool. I can continue never seeing either of those cards ever played. Good thing the RC carved out a space to protect these two random cards, or else we might have had to make due with real, less awful cards.
What will happen and what should happen are often different. That doesn't change anything.
Also, banning them outright disallows people who do currently enjoy them and blanket legalization foists them upon people who don't wanna worry about super tutors with their own sideboards. Saying they formally do nothing is actually a kind of brilliant; it's hardline enough to keep wishes out of most games, but built on stuff flimsy enough for the people who do really want them to generate conversations and arguments with their lgs or playgroups about letting wishes fly.
Black and white is very clear, but gray stuff can be fine too.
This is literally why they just added Rule 0. If you want to play them you have to houserule them. Them being fake banned or actually banned doesn't change that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If you are on the wishboard team then this is not it's actual intended purpose. If you are on the Any card team you are "indirectly" saying you are against the intended purpose of some commander rules. (Singleton , Exactly 100 cards (that is also broken with wishboards) , color Identity, Banned cards)
So arguing from that point of intended purpose seems irrelevant to me because by going for one intended purpose you will break the other and vice versa.
And while I personally wouldn't mind a 115 card format I do belive breaking rules that are for an intended purpose is seen worse than breaking a cards intended purpose, as that happens all the time in commander and regular magic anyways. The whole in this case is more important than the part.
So changing that for everyone is a bit steep. It's also unfair to do that just for wishes if you are allowed to get anything you essentially are breaking the 100 card rule of the format just for wishes, but I can't do the same If I want to play battle of wits even though it works as intended and by doing that it has no functionality.
Soooo, extreme example. But while I see what you were going for, you're leaving out the tiny detail of if blanking FAR more cards than the wishes account for, and you take away one of the defining areas of strength from an entire color (green). Exile is still technically an "in-game zone" with no sideboard as an extension of your deck, you cant even make the argument for the wishes to be legal. You're taking the text of the card and insisting on its legality, when its defying more rules that have been established and asking for additional rules to enable them to be incorporated.
Wishes, sideboards, running banned cards etc. Can all be used via a social contract and play groups that allow them. Nothing wrong with that. Further concessions to allow for breaking fundamental rules of what makes commander, commander, isn't acceptable
The Problem with that approach is the cards that do more than just wish and that part is fine. You wouldn't wanna ban Fractured Powerstone just because the second ability has no effect , same with Mastermind's Acquisition or Research // Development. So a blanket ban is undesirable. And a specific ban on those who only wish is the single card errata on those that don't. Banning all is only a "clean" solution if you do the same for Fractured Powerstone, draft matters cards.
And even tough I am currently building a Rat colony deck I think that too is something that shouldn't be able to be something that can be done universally and should stay in local playgroups.
Creating format-specific rules is a poor solution? Well, there goes the 100 card rule, the color identity rule, the general damage rule, the command zone replacement effect, the singleton rule....
Whee! Hyperbole is fun.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
The player must have what is called a "lamp" of no more than 3 cards prepared before the start of the match so as to not delay the game.
The cards in your "lamp" must conform to the color identity of your commander (see Rule 3)
The cards in your "lamp" do not count as part of your 100-card deck (see Rule 4)
The cards in your "lamp" may not be in your 100-card deck and vice versa (see Rule 5)
The cards in your "lamp" must be legal in Commander.
Outside of lore reasons, I prefer to view 3 as the right number. Its enough for you to pack the three cards you would truly need. Also that constraints build creativity. 10 or 15 cards feels excessive and would likely lead to stagnation of the lamp. With only 3 cards, you must 'word your wishes wisely', when in a familiar or unfamiliar meta. Do you store a more generic card in your lamp if uncertain, or do you risk it and store a more specific kind of card in the lamp that might never be played once that evening.
Three seems like an awfully small number. At that point why bother?
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Also you know right? 3 wishes, magical lamp, genies, phenomal cosmic power. Those sort of tropes? It resonates a lot better in the mind and is easier to remember than 5 or 7 or 10 wishes.
Well at most you have effectively increased your deck to 102 cards, since the wishes take up slots that could be used by, you know, those three cards in your wish board.
And not to be too pedantic, but if I were in favor of this change (I'm not) then it would create an annoyance that I would have to buy two packs of sleeves now because of a few extra cards.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
There is a difference between a card being blanked (as Burning Wish is by Rule 13) versus a card being allowed to do exactly what it says with what the card says being virtually useless. In the case of Battle of Wits, there is no Rule 14 that states "Cards that would win you the game for having more than 200 cards in your deck do nothing in Commander." The card is allowed to function exactly as it reads, you just have no way of achieving that win condition in a normal game of Commander. These are completely different issues.
My point is that the card wins versus the rules. A wish shouldn't need extra text that says "In a game of Commander, do X instead".
Pickup and "public" games are where the Social Contract is needed the most. If I am playing with strangers, I would be going the extra mile to make sure we are all on the same page regarding what is cool and what is not and choosing a deck accordingly.
1) The comment about the "minority" wasn't about people wanting/not wanting wishes, it was specific to people not wanting wishes because of the idea that it somehow violates the 100 card rule. In my experience, this is not the biggest reason that people give for not wanting Wishes.
2) The 100 card rule isn't rubbish. Stating that a Wish violates that rule somehow is rubbish in my opinion. The 100 card rule clearly governs how your deck can be constructed while a Wish clearly talks about cards outside the game. Cards outside the game are clearly not in your 100 card deck. The two have nothing to do with one another.
3) You say that the other cards don't break the rules because of their card text, but neither does a Wish. Additional rules had to be written to override what the card says. That is the problem.
4) My point is that if Rule 13 were eliminated, then a Wish would occupy the same ground as the other cards; they would function as printed.
[/quote]
1) The point of proposing a new Rule 13 to govern how Wishes would work would be to eliminate any questions as to how they would function in a format like Commander that has specific deck construction rules. I would prefer this to just eliminating Rule 13 specifically to prevent someone from trying to pull shenanigans. Having Wishes work within the flavor of Commander makes sense, hence why I suggest Rule 13 be changed to what I proposed (or at least, something close to that). This is no different than how a Wish would work like in other formats where it still needs to be a legal card; you can't Cunning Wish for an Ancestral Recall in a game of Legacy and try and argue with a judge that "hey, it says outside the game so why not?"
2) Dichotomancy still does exactly what it says it does; there is no rule that blanks its text box. If the opponent Clones a creature, then the original gets Spin Into Myth'd back into that players library, then Dichotomancy works perfectly fine...
3) Hedron Alignment still does exactly what it says it does; there is not rule that blanks its text box. The chances of you meeting the victory condition are 0% given the current card pool, but it still works as printed. If WotC printed a card that said "Until end of turn, all non-land cards in Exile, your Graveyard, and your hand are copies of target permanent.", you could combo the two to win the game.
4) Battle of Wits still does exactly what it says it does; there is no rule that blanks its text box. Again, the chances of meeting the victory condition are currently 0%, but if they printed enough Eldrazi you could Spawnsire of Ulamaog them into your hand and shuffle them into your library and win...
5) There is a difference between functionally useless and being artificially made useless.
The Oracle card rulings contradict your assumptions on "intended purpose" here, but even then I don't think its as black and white as you make it out to be. Both a Wishboard and "Any card" options can be made to work within the rules of Commander. Furthermore, Wishboards do not have anything to do with the 100 card deck construction rules; these cards are outside the game and not in your deck.
The examples of Battle of Wits and a Wish are totally different. First, stating that people are breaking the 100-card rule, breaking the CI rules, or breaking the Highlander rule with a Wish is attacking a strawman. Most people who support wishes want them to have the same restrictions as everything else in Commander. On the other hand, playing a 200+ maindeck just because you want to play Battle of Wits is obviously a violation of the rules.
The difference here is in the case of a Wish, its the card that is breaking any rules involved whereas in the case of playing a 200-card deck its the player who is breaking the rules. Two different things.
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
As for your other suggestions, it's not the same. Fractured Powerstone and draft-matters cards behave exactly how they are supposed to in a game of EDH. Same thing goes with Battle of Wits which people keep mentioning. All of these cards work as the rules say they do. Burning Wish does not. Its rules text has been explicitly removed by the RC. It's essentially format-specific errata, just like Karakas used to have. And we all know what happened there.
The issue is about the DEFAULT rule. The cleanest, easiest to interpret, most direct to implement should be favored.
If you don't see it debated on forums like this, you have not been around much. It comes up all the time, and gets beaten to death no matter how many times the RC says 'wishes do not work', without prearrangement.
Because your subjective is better than the opposite subjective? Did I get that right?
as someone stated before in unsanctioned games you can get the card from anywhere not just your sideboard. Also being able to grab anything not just cards that fit your normal commander deckbuilding rules.
Wishboards do have something to do with the 100 card rule just as a regular sideboard has to do something with the deckbuilding rule. A deck must have a minimum of 60 Cards adn may have a sideboard of 0 to 15 cards. Your normal deck isnt just your deck its your deck + SB. So the same appklies to commander if you do a wishboard the new deck construction rule is 100 + 0- max wishboard size. So if you are advocationg for a wishboard you are breaking the 100 card deckbuilding rule and making it a 100 + WB rule.
Thats the problem with wishes They are not working how they are supposed to in sanctioned events (Wotc uses a format specific errata as in only sideboard cards) and the RC want to use the same errata whilst having no sideboard.
Why do you want it on the banlist if they don't allow for search all though? You said Fractured Powerstone works as intended but it does not its a special errata for the card that says "In non-Planechase games, Fractured Powerstone’s second ability will have no effect. " because if it works as intended you should be able to roll the planar die anyways since that is exactly what the card says.
The simple fact is that the no sideboard rule is a defining format rule, just as other formats have defined sideboards. This clarification is just an attempt to lay to rest the debates that arose due to wishy washy wording of the past.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
The concept of a Wishboard is strictly for time savings. You make the restriction solely for the purpose of not holding up the game. We don't even have to have a Wishboard for all I care, but even if a Wishboard wasn't codified in the rules I would still have a set of cards set aside specifically for each deck that had a wish in it. And yes, you provide a special ruling specifically so people won't argue about how they work and won't try to pull some of the shenanigans that some people are suggesting. In this case, the words "a card you own outside the game" needs some clarification, so let's clarify it.
No. You wouldn't go to a sanctioned match with a 45 card maindeck and a 15 card sideboard and try and tell a judge "hey, my 'deck' is 60 cards. What's the problem?" Sideboard cards are clearly outside the game and accounted for differently than maindeck cards. Also, a wishboard for Commander and a sideboard for constructed are two totally different things. Where a sideboard has a very specific definition for constructed events, a Wishboard for Commander is just "a subset of cards outside the game specifically set aside to make searching for a card I wish for take less time". We can call it something else if it makes people feel better, but don't get hung up on the semantics. Cards outside the game don't count towards your 100-card deck, whether they are in a Wishboard or not.
The non-Commander rules and Oracle card rulings don't support this at all. Specifically, the Wishes all have the same Oracle ruling "In a sanctioned event, a card that’s “outside the game” is one that’s in your sideboard. In an unsanctioned event, you may choose any card from your collection." If I knew nothing about Rule 13, there would be no reason to think that I couldn't use a Wish to get the appropriate card from my trade binder since a game of Commander is clearly an Unsanctioned event. What we are asking for is to make that happen, but clarify exactly how it will work to avoid confusion.
The Oracle card rulings take care of this issue just as they do with Wishes. We are asking that Wishes to be treated the same. You are basically proving my point. And even without the Oracle ruling on Fractured Powerstone, rolling a planar die in a game of Commander would have no effect. It would be like playing a Wrath of God when there are no creatures in play...
Jalira, Master Polymorphist | Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder | Bosh, Iron Golem | Ezuri, Renegade Leader
Brago, King Eternal | Oona, Queen of the Fae | Wort, Boggart Auntie | Wort, the Raidmother
Captain Sisay | Rhys, the Redeemed | Trostani, Selesnya's Voice | Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight | Obzedat, Ghost Council | Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind | Vorel of the Hull Clade
Uril, the Miststalker | Prossh, Skyraider of Kher | Nicol Bolas | Progenitus
Ghave, Guru of Spores | Zedruu the Greathearted | Damia, Sage of Stone | Riku of Two Reflections
Also a wishboard isn't counted for the number for your main deck set of cards. Your wishboard is a separate pile. If I had a main deck of 100 cards and a wishboard of 15, the main deck is still 100 cards. If I get a card from the wishboard, the main deck is still 100 cards in total.
Fact is, if wishes suddenly became more than a house-rule rarity, they'd spike in both price and popularity. *****, I've got a slot in basically every red deck for a burning wish with 15+ modes. The buyouts would be real. Chump change cards would now be both prohibitively expensive for casual players and ubiquitous in more competitive circles. So now we have more precons being stomped in pick-ups by unattainable cards that essentially constitute as the ultimate tutor effect. Sure most people would fix up a proper sideboards, but "outside the game" is a pretty nebulous term in social play and the first time a person whips out their 60 page binder and eats 10 minutes to resolve a wish, it won't leave a memorably pleasant taste in anyone's mouth.
That's all worst case scenario talk, yes. But I like our fabulous format as-is, and the growing popularity of EDH reflects that a lot of other people do too. I don't think extrapolating the wishboard experience is going to do us any favors in the long run, and I think that may be why the RC is choosing this direction as the status quo.
Edit:spelling
Fractured Powerstone works in the sense that the card does what it's supposed to. It's just that most EDH games don't use Planechase planes, so the second ability is almost always entirely irrelevant. Burning Wish, when cast in any non-tournament setting (i.e. most games of EDH), however, is supposed to allow me to get any sorcery I own from outside the game and put it into my hand. But it doesn't. Because of a format-specific rule that serves no purpose except to prevent Wishes from working. At which point the question becomes "why aren't they just banned?" The RC obviously doesn't want Wishes allowed by default (hence the heavy-handed format errata) but if that's the case shouldn't they just be outright banned? Because the rule certainly wasn't put in place to make sure Karn, the Great Creator is still playable seeing as how he was released... what like a week ago, while the Wish rule was put into place at least a decade ago, if not longer.
Which circles us back around to the original point. If the goal is to make the default option for EDH games "no Wishes allowed" just ban them. It is both simpler and more intuitive to see these cards expressly forbidden than this sort of faux banned state they're in now, in which players are legally allowed to play cards that do nothing despite what the textboxes say. You'd think if it was such a defining rule of the format, the word "sideboard" would appear at least once on the Offical Commander Rules website. I certainly couldn't find it. Eh, I'm sure it's not important.
A person who searches their library slowly for a card is not much better than person who slowly decides what card outside the game they want to put into their hand. A person who slowly calculates and recalculates the size of their board of their creatures and who they can go after isn't much better either. A person who goes through an infinite or near-infinite combo but takes a long time isn't much better either. A person who slowly decides if they let a spell resolve even if they couldn't actually respond to it anyway isn't much better either.
"Why not?" is simply not a good enough reason to make wishboards anything beyond the odd houserule. But remember ladies and gents, (and this is the best part) these rules say you can bend them if you can find other people who also want to. So technically, you can play wishes anytime you want right now. Go ahead, take that burning wish and 15 sorcerys and sleeve 'em up, go to your lgs, talk to some sympathetic ears and convince them why wishboards are sicktek.dec, and bend some rules. Format wide extrapolation averted and you get your sideboard.
Edit: I can't seem to spell "extrapolation" correctly today. I'm gonna lay off the 10 euro words now.
The rule has been around for a while, but so have cards that do something else. (EDIT : 2006)
You are using circular logic, and Wishes won't be banned or allowed to work as written.
Black and white is very clear, but gray stuff can be fine too.
Yep, you got me because I opted to shorthand an obviously understood term.
Let's take it a step further and get literal. Oracle ruling states that in a sanctioned game it pulls from your sideboard, and in a non sanctioned one is just pulls from outside the game (i.e. any card you have with you). I'm going to ignore the pedantic arguments of color identity, card legality, and singleton rule because we are smart people and know that this would be taken into account. But now the RC has to define a sideboard because otherwise it would be left.for every venue to define one for that particular sanctioned event. And then come the debates over whether an event is sanctioned or which sideboard to use. How many of the ~30 players at my league realize that the games are sanctioned and would show up with a wish binder?
Edh is a non sanctioned format by default, so playing the cards as written means being able to pull Amy card. That comes with it's own set of baggage so the RC decided to take a stand and apply a format specific rule, which some players don't agree with. It is what it is, but I would be willing to bet a very small percentage actually played with wishes so it's not like anything was lost, except for the potential to tutor for cards that aren't good enough to main deck. And I wasn't being sarcastic earlier. You already accept a number of format specific rules which don't exist in any.other format, so why yet up in arms over this specific one?
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
As for the cards that predate the rule... oh wow a terrible punisher version of Jace's Ingenuity and probably the worst of the large Eldrazi. Cool. I can continue never seeing either of those cards ever played. Good thing the RC carved out a space to protect these two random cards, or else we might have had to make due with real, less awful cards.
What will happen and what should happen are often different. That doesn't change anything. This is literally why they just added Rule 0. If you want to play them you have to houserule them. Them being fake banned or actually banned doesn't change that.