Cause Library wouldn't quadruple in price AT ALL if it became EDH legal....eeeeeesh
It absolutely would become the most expensive legal card or close to it.
The arguemnt for unbanning it is that even though it will become super expensive:
1. There are very few actual copies of the card meaning the damage it can do to games is very limited.
2. Does it even do damage to games? You need to have exactly 7 cards in hand at every point of the game to draw one additional card per turn. This is the format where draw is so good that you'll likely get much more value out of a Reliquary Tower letting you hold a grip of 12 then LoA giving you a draw.
When Library was like $200; I was in favor of unbanning it; now that it's $1600 I'm not due to it jumping higher then I'd ever be able to justify spending on a card. I still don't think it's the absurdly powerful autoinclude that it's made out to be by the RC, but then again I've never played against the card in all my years of magic due to it being legacy banned, commander bannded, and not even good in vintage.
It absolutely would become the most expensive legal card or close to it.
The arguemnt for unbanning it is that even though it will become super expensive:
1. There are very few actual copies of the card meaning the damage it can do to games is very limited.
2. Does it even do damage to games? You need to have exactly 7 cards in hand at every point of the game to draw one additional card per turn. This is the format where draw is so good that you'll likely get much more value out of a Reliquary Tower letting you hold a grip of 12 then LoA giving you a draw.
When Library was like $200; I was in favor of unbanning it; now that it's $1600 I'm not due to it jumping higher then I'd ever be able to justify spending on a card. I still don't think it's the absurdly powerful autoinclude that it's made out to be by the RC, but then again I've never played against the card in all my years of magic due to it being legacy banned, commander bannded, and not even good in vintage.
My whole stance is that who cares about price? Dual lands are staples of the format, see play A LOT, and are continuing to creep up in price. And while there are a plethora of worse duals available, everyone recognizes them and wants them (slight hyperbole with "everyone").
Point is, prices have gone full stupid on Reserve List cards. I don't know what is a reasonable price on a single before it is considered "unattainable" to the average player, but I feel that with the more time that passes and the bigger the format gets, the less we should care about PBtE actually being am issue. Newer sets are more at risk of hurting the format than unbanning the P9.
I play against someone regularly who plays a real The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale in his Sultai lands deck which is double the current price of LoA. It also feels like a much stronger card in Commander overall so I don't see why price should be somethings only reason for being banned.
The arguemnt for unbanning it is that even though it will become super expensive:
1. There are very few actual copies of the card meaning the damage it can do to games is very limited.
2. Does it even do damage to games? You need to have exactly 7 cards in hand at every point of the game to draw one additional card per turn. This is the format where draw is so good that you'll likely get much more value out of a Reliquary Tower letting you hold a grip of 12 then LoA giving you a draw.
1. Irrelevant
2. Yes, it does. It is easy to set up 7 cards in hand, and Librarykeeps you at 7. It is a supremely powerful effect that benefits every deck. It is on a land that taps for mana; the opportunity cost of including it in a deck is low, and the benefit it provides is extremely valuable for all decks.
Comparing it to Reliquary Tower is both insulting and ignorant.
I play against someone regularly who plays a real The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale in his Sultai lands deck which is double the current price of LoA. It also feels like a much stronger card in Commander overall so I don't see why price should be somethings only reason for being banned.
Tabernacle is significantly weaker than Library in most decks, and related is not ubiquitous. It does not tap for mana. It has a high opportunity cost of playing, and the effect is a symmetrical negative - few decks can play it effectively.
The secondary market value of a card is irrelevant. Further, comparing said market value of a card currently banned to a card currently legal as a basis of argument is... I really don't know what to say about that.
Online Tabernacle is a sub $6 card that is plentifully available and it sees no play outside of stax and some low creature count decks for a damn good reason, because it just isn't a very good card for most decks in this format. Even most low creature count decks don't run it because it takes up a spell slot better used for a card that actually furthers the goals of the deck and it uses your land drop for the turn, which is often better used to drop a land that actually makes mana.
PbtE is a pretty useless criteria when only taking price into account. Looking at MTGO prices is a good exercise to see why this is. Nothing that people normally bring up when citing PbtE is over $34 (Black Lotus). Library is less than $2. Yes, these would all spike in price if they were unbanned and thus useable in more than just Vintage, but lets say they quintuple. So now Black Lotus would be about $170, basically its current foil price, and about $100 less than Rishadan Port. Library would be like $10. Price would not be an issue. All of those cards would still be banned under other criteria.
But PbtE is still relevant. Here is the important part of the description of the criteria from Sheldon:
"it's not enough that the card is simply expensive. It must also be something that would be near-universally played if available and contribute to a perception that the format is only for the Vintage audience."
Very few cards meet this criteria. The Power 9 minus Timetwister (because its a relatively narrow card and not in the same league as the rest of the 9) plus Library and Time Vault. Is it redundant? Probably, but it sends the message that the RC intends to send, that Commander is not Vintage and not restricted to a Vintage audience.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Meaning of Life: "M-hmm. Well, it's nothing very special. Uh, try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations"
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Whether its blue players countering your spells, red players burning you out, or combo, if you have a problem with an aspect of Magic's gameplay, you can fix it!
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
1. Irrelevant
2. Yes, it does. It is easy to set up 7 cards in hand, and Librarykeeps you at 7. It is a supremely powerful effect that benefits every deck. It is on a land that taps for mana; the opportunity cost of including it in a deck is low, and the benefit it provides is extremely valuable for all decks.
Comparing it to Reliquary Tower is both insulting and ignorant.
Tabernacle is significantly weaker than Library in most decks, and related is not ubiquitous. It does not tap for mana. It has a high opportunity cost of playing, and the effect is a symmetrical negative - few decks can play it effectively.
The secondary market value of a card is irrelevant. Further, comparing said market value of a card currently banned to a card currently legal as a basis of argument is... I really don't know what to say about that.
Library of Alexandria needs to stay banned
1. Is it irrelevant? There are a number of cards which should be banned because they are unhealthy for the format and yet they remain legal because they don't actually see enough play to really make an impact. Why then should it be different when it's a card which is largely unattainable?
2. Is this your experience or are you just theory crafting? Because those of us who have used it had mixed results. Which isn't to say that my experience is right and yours is wrong, but actual usage should be weighed more than speculation.
2. Yes, it does. It is easy to set up 7 cards in hand, and Library keeps you at 7. It is a supremely powerful effect that benefits every deck. It is on a land that taps for mana; the opportunity cost of including it in a deck is low, and the benefit it provides is extremely valuable for all decks.
Comparing it to Reliquary Tower is both insulting and ignorant.
I don’t agree with this. I’d say in the vast majority of my games, my hand size is ~4-5 cards for the bulk of the game, even early turns I’m below 7 unless I’m just digging for something, and unless I’m playing a ton of draw, at which point I’m well above the threshold and I’d be better off running a basic land that taps for color. It’s also a tempo killer.
Now, I haven’t played with LoA in EDH, but, I’d say it’s probably an early draft include, final revision cut in more decks than not.
This is coming from a guy who usually jams Thawing Glaciers whenever I can.
2. Yes, it does. It is easy to set up 7 cards in hand, and Library keeps you at 7. It is a supremely powerful effect that benefits every deck. It is on a land that taps for mana; the opportunity cost of including it in a deck is low, and the benefit it provides is extremely valuable for all decks.
Comparing it to Reliquary Tower is both insulting and ignorant.
I don’t agree with this. I’d say in the vast majority of my games, my hand size is ~4-5 cards for the bulk of the game, even early turns I’m below 7 unless I’m just digging for something, and unless I’m playing a ton of draw, at which point I’m well above the threshold and I’d be better off running a basic land that taps for color. It’s also a tempo killer.
Now, I haven’t played with LoA in EDH, but, I’d say it’s probably an early draft include, final revision cut in more decks than not.
This is coming from a guy who usually jams Thawing Glaciers whenever I can.
It's important to remember that there are a lot of really good colorless lands at our disposal. I often struggle Sith cutting some in 9rder to ensure I run enough colored mana, but my experiences with it certainly haven't made me feel like it was an auto include, any more than Reliquary Tower.
It's important to remember that there are a lot of really good colorless lands at our disposal. I often struggle Sith cutting some in 9rder to ensure I run enough colored mana, but my experiences with it certainly haven't made me feel like it was an auto include, any more than Reliquary Tower.
Ignoring cost for a moment, Library of Alexandria has basically all of the same problems that Sol Ring does: it can easily fit into any deck, the opportunity cost to include it in your deck is very low, and in the early turns it gives you a grotesque amount of resources for essentially no cost. Assuming a multiplayer game, a T1 Library draws you up to 9 cards on your second turn, meaning even playing a land + spell ensures you still have a full grip to activate Library. There's really no compelling reason not to include it in your deck.
Ignoring cost for a moment, Library of Alexandria has basically all of the same problems that Sol Ring does: it can easily fit into any deck, the opportunity cost to include it in your deck is very low, and in the early turns it gives you a grotesque amount of resources for essentially no cost. Assuming a multiplayer game, a T1 Library draws you up to 9 cards on your second turn, meaning even playing a land + spell ensures you still have a full grip to activate Library. There's really no compelling reason not to include it in your deck.
Agree to disagree? As I already said, there are lots of colorless lands which do things. Quite a few decks I build already run around 5 colorless lands (which in general is my maximum in order to not dilute the mana base and pose a large risk of hurting my opening hand). Having played with Library in EDH, it simply isn't going to warp my deck building to thinking in terms of 97 card decks. There is also an opportunity cost in that those magical turns when you get it opening hand you might be up a card, but at the expense of a land drop and having less mana than the table. So while I agree that in theory you are correct, in practice it doesn't work like that. When I'm struggling between two lands, I will probably go with one that has a constant benefit or synergy with the deck over one that just taps for one colorless mana if I don't draw it in my opening hand.
I'll pose the same question to you: are you speaking from experience or theory?
In EDH? Theory. I have played Library in some 1v1 formats, however. It's not a very fair card.
Maybe I'm just greedier than you. I play multiple colorless lands in my 4-color decks.
Well I would posit that EDH plays differently than Vintage, so it's not a direct translation. You have to be playing a tempo deck that only plays one or two cards a turn, or one that can refill its hand. Most decks I run will have a large turn by T4, turning Low into a wasted slot (see what I d8d there?) So yeah, maybe if I drew it in my opening hand I got a couple of cards, but in my experience I usually had to play differently in order to keep at exactly seven cards.
Well I would posit that EDH plays differently than Vintage, so it's not a direct translation. You have to be playing a tempo deck that only plays one or two cards a turn, or one that can refill its hand. Most decks I run will have a large turn by T4, turning Low into a wasted slot (see what I d8d there?) So yeah, maybe if I drew it in my opening hand I got a couple of cards, but in my experience I usually had to play differently in order to keep at exactly seven cards.
Wasn't actually Vintage, it was one of those "Old School Magic" variants that my LGS was trying to get off the ground.
Honestly, though, how often and early are you multi-spelling in EDH? Barring some sort of Sol Ring shenanigans, most games I play don't have a single multi-spell turn until turn 5 or 6 at the earliest. And even then, it's not like a single multi-spell turn stops your Library, assuming you've played the Library beforehand. Don't get me wrong, I don't actually have strong opinions on Library and if it were unbanned I would never see it anyways (lol over $1,000) but it has some fairly obvious warning flags.
Wasn't actually Vintage, it was one of those "Old School Magic" variants that my LGS was trying to get off the ground.
Honestly, though, how often and early are you multi-spelling in EDH? Barring some sort of Sol Ring shenanigans, most games I play don't have a single multi-spell turn until turn 5 or 6 at the earliest. And even then, it's not like a single multi-spell turn stops your Library, assuming you've played the Library beforehand. Don't get me wrong, I don't actually have strong opinions on Library and if it were unbanned I would never see it anyways (lol over $1,000) but it has some fairly obvious warning flags.
I mean, once you go land > signet you're at six cards. Cast one more spell and you're down to five. And once you start your turn with "Draw to seven, tap Library" you're up 1/3rd of a card with the rest of the table at the expense of missing a land drop against 3 opponents.
Wasn't actually Vintage, it was one of those "Old School Magic" variants that my LGS was trying to get off the ground.
Honestly, though, how often and early are you multi-spelling in EDH? Barring some sort of Sol Ring shenanigans, most games I play don't have a single multi-spell turn until turn 5 or 6 at the earliest. And even then, it's not like a single multi-spell turn stops your Library, assuming you've played the Library beforehand. Don't get me wrong, I don't actually have strong opinions on Library and if it were unbanned I would never see it anyways (lol over $1,000) but it has some fairly obvious warning flags.
I mean, once you go land > signet you're at six cards. Cast one more spell and you're down to five. And once you start your turn with "Draw to seven, tap Library" you're up 1/3rd of a card with the rest of the table at the expense of missing a land drop against 3 opponents.
Yeah, this is how I view it as well. Unless you are playing hardcore control, you aren’t meeting the criteria after turn-2. In a format predicated on big-Mana and explosive plays relying on tempo, LoA is the exact opposite.
I mean, once you go land > signet you're at six cards. Cast one more spell and you're down to five.
Que?
T1>Draw for turn (8 cards in hand)>Library (7)>Endstep before next turn draw off Library (8)
T2>Draw for turn (9)>Land (8)>Signet (7)
T3>Draw for turn (8)>Land (7)>Draw off Library (8)>3-drop using signet (7)
How exactly are you running out of cards so quickly with an active Library?
And once you start your turn with "Draw to seven, tap Library" you're up 1/3rd of a card with the rest of the table at the expense of missing a land drop against 3 opponents.
This isn't a great argument. I will pay 1 to draw an extra card every turn. In what world is that a bad thing?
Que?
T1>Draw for turn (8 cards in hand)>Library (7)>Endstep before next turn draw off Library (8)
T2>Draw for turn (9)>Land (8)>Signet (7)
T3>Draw for turn (8)>Land (7)>Draw off Library (8)>3-drop using signet (7)
How exactly are you running out of cards so quickly with an active Library?
Yeah my math was off on the signet. Still, suppose you want to play a 4-drop instead? You can work out scenarios where you get to do your thing while drawing each turn, and I can do the counter. We can probably agree that there are a huge variety of decks in EDH and that they will each get varied amounts of mileage from Library.
This isn't a great argument. I will pay 1 to draw an extra card every turn. In what world is that a bad thing?
Have you never missed a land drop very early on and felt behind? Drawing a couple of extra cards is great, but not in the critical beginning turns when I am setting up my entire game.
Yeah my math was off on the signet. Still, suppose you want to play a 4-drop instead? You can work out scenarios where you get to do your thing while drawing each turn, and I can do the counter. We can probably agree that there are a huge variety of decks in EDH and that they will each get varied amounts of mileage from Library.
Have you never missed a land drop very early on and felt behind? Drawing a couple of extra cards is great, but not in the critical beginning turns when I am setting up my entire game.
You keep saying Library means you miss a land drop, but that's simply not true. If you want to cast a 4-drop off your signet, nothing is stopping you. Library taps for mana, which is kind of the problem. Personally, if given the option, I'd leave one of my lands tapped forever if it meant I get to draw an extra card every turn. Library is even better than that though because you have the option to actually use it as a mana if the need arises.
You keep saying Library means you miss a land drop, but that's simply not true. If you want to cast a 4-drop off your signet, nothing is stopping you. Library taps for mana, which is kind of the problem. Personally, if given the option, I'd leave one of my lands tapped forever if it meant I get to draw an extra card every turn. Library is even better than that though because you have the option to actually use it as a mana if the need arises.
You don’t need to convince me that Library is broken, that’s not a debate, and if we were talking about 1v1 I would agree with you. But in regular EDH you’re racing two to four other opponents. While you’re sitting there doing next to nothing but drawing an extra card you aren’t building your board state as fast as they are. And every time you don’t draw Library when you aren’t sitting on a full grip then you drew a colorless land that could be any other basic land or utility land.
So again, agree to disagree. I simply don’t see it wrecking games in the occasional time when you get it and are in a position to properly use it (power level in EDH). And like I’ve said many times already, PBtE is outdated and no longer needed.
2. Yes, it does. It is easy to set up 7 cards in hand, and Library keeps you at 7. It is a supremely powerful effect that benefits every deck. It is on a land that taps for mana; the opportunity cost of including it in a deck is low, and the benefit it provides is extremely valuable for all decks.
Comparing it to Reliquary Tower is both insulting and ignorant.
I don’t agree with this. I’d say in the vast majority of my games, my hand size is ~4-5 cards for the bulk of the game, even early turns I’m below 7 unless I’m just digging for something, and unless I’m playing a ton of draw, at which point I’m well above the threshold and I’d be better off running a basic land that taps for color. It’s also a tempo killer.
I run Magus of the Library in one of my decks, and while Magus is undeniably worse than Library (subject to summoning sickness, cost mana to play, weak to removal), more often than not it still functions very close to an Archivist. That's also a mana dork. For half the cost.
It's really not all that difficult to turn Library/Magus on.
I run Magus of the Library in one of my decks, and while Magus is undeniably worse than Library (subject to summoning sickness, cost mana to play, weak to removal), more often than not it still functions very close to an Archivist. That's also a mana dork. For half the cost.
It's really not all that difficult to turn Library/Magus on.
What kind of deck is it? Does it naturally contain lots of card draw? Without some kind of qualifier it’s easy to make that claim, but tell Boros just how easy it is to keep a full grip (just as one example).
I run Magus of the Library in one of my decks, and while Magus is undeniably worse than Library (subject to summoning sickness, cost mana to play, weak to removal), more often than not it still functions very close to an Archivist. That's also a mana dork. For half the cost.
It's really not all that difficult to turn Library/Magus on.
What kind of deck is it? Does it naturally contain lots of card draw? Without some kind of qualifier it’s easy to make that claim, but tell Boros just how easy it is to keep a full grip (just as one example).
Suicide Bant. Obivously not Boros, since it's using a Magus of the Library.
1. Irrelevant
2. Yes, it does. It is easy to set up 7 cards in hand, and Librarykeeps you at 7. It is a supremely powerful effect that benefits every deck. It is on a land that taps for mana; the opportunity cost of including it in a deck is low, and the benefit it provides is extremely valuable for all decks.
Comparing it to Reliquary Tower is both insulting and ignorant.
Tabernacle is significantly weaker than Library in most decks, and related is not ubiquitous. It does not tap for mana. It has a high opportunity cost of playing, and the effect is a symmetrical negative - few decks can play it effectively.
The secondary market value of a card is irrelevant. Further, comparing said market value of a card currently banned to a card currently legal as a basis of argument is... I really don't know what to say about that.
Library of Alexandria needs to stay banned
1. Is it irrelevant? There are a number of cards which should be banned because they are unhealthy for the format and yet they remain legal because they don't actually see enough play to really make an impact. Why then should it be different when it's a card which is largely unattainable?
2. Is this your experience or are you just theory crafting? Because those of us who have used it had mixed results. Which isn't to say that my experience is right and yours is wrong, but actual usage should be weighed more than speculation.
Yes, it is. That you do not have access to a card should absolutely never impact the games I or my group plays.
If this argument is to be used for ban decisions at all (and to be clear, it shouldn't), it actually works the other way. It is easier to house rule a card legal than it is to house ban a card, especially for players without a fixed group.
If only four copies of Blue Eyes, White Dragon exist, is it fair for the card to be legal for play?
I have had some experience experimenting with Library of Alexandria in Commander in the past, as have others I know.
I regularly play with very experienced individuals, including a former Pro Tour player, as well as various intermediate or new players. When I brought up the recent comparison of Library to Reliquary Tower, the consensus can best be described by one of the responses in particular.
"That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard."
Just to humor you though, I had the group I was with last night add Library to all of their decks in place of a land of their choice. The group consisted of me playing Teysa, another intermediate+ player borrowing my Gravetide deck, an intermediate player with a weaker ProsshFood Chain deck, and a new player using Krenko deck. Even before beginning, they all unanimously agreed Library needs to remain banned.
First game, no one drew Library. No one drew tutors.
Second game, Gravetide opened with a turn 1 Library. Its impact far exceeded any other single card the entire game, and far exceeded the impact a turn 1 Sol Ring or Mana Crypt would have had. It turned an otherwise weak hand into the dominant threat the majority of the game. The only reason he did not win was because the Prossh player mistakenly thought casting Fecundity when his own board consisted of Zulaport Cutthroat was a good idea, while my board consisted of Teysa, Viscera Seer, and Nether Traitor. Even then, I won on the upkeep of the turn Gravetide would have won, by casting Reveillark, and discarding Karmic Guide & Triskelion during cleanup.
The Gravetide player acknowledged that Library did impact his tempo that game, and yet it was still the correct play by a considerable margin to draw a card with it every turn. He might have tapped it for mana once.
To be clear, I do not expect Library of Alexandria to win every game it appears in. I do not expect it to define every game it appears in. It will however do so far more often than either Sol Ring or Mana Crypt would - two other cards that really should be banned precisely because of that type of impact (a symptom of their universality & power).
Que?
T1>Draw for turn (8 cards in hand)>Library (7)>Endstep before next turn draw off Library (8)
T2>Draw for turn (9)>Land (8)>Signet (7)
T3>Draw for turn (8)>Land (7)>Draw off Library (8)>3-drop using signet (7)
How exactly are you running out of cards so quickly with an active Library?
Yeah my math was off on the signet. Still, suppose you want to play a 4-drop instead? You can work out scenarios where you get to do your thing while drawing each turn, and I can do the counter. We can probably agree that there are a huge variety of decks in EDH and that they will each get varied amounts of mileage from Library.
This isn't a great argument. I will pay 1 to draw an extra card every turn. In what world is that a bad thing?
Have you never missed a land drop very early on and felt behind? Drawing a couple of extra cards is great, but not in the critical beginning turns when I am setting up my entire game.
Yes, and they are outliers. What does Library of Alexandria do in that circumstance? It taps for mana.
One final thing to note is the impact it would have on deck construction, if Library were legal. Every White deck I play adds Weathered Wayfarer - a card that is rarely included otherwise. Every Green deck I play adds Crop Rotation Every Blue and Red deck starts playing Wheel effects, even if they would otherwise have been excluded (probably - this may backfire after testing, with my opponents playing Library as well).
Most decks add Expedition Map that otherwise would not play them.
The total number of 'draw 2', 'draw 3', or 'draw on upkeep' effects would increase among every deck by 2-3, to help keep a late drawn Library active.
Most of the people at my location would make very similar changes across their decks.
And yes, most people would play Library here. We have legitimate copies of Library among us already. Several of us would simply acquire one, and we are very lax about the use of proxies. Even those who do not use proxies because they find it distasteful would likely proxy Library simply to not be left behind, or stop playing unless it was removed from other decks first.
There’s an argument to be made that Library of Alexandria interacts badly with the rules of the format, specifically that every player including the player to play first also draws a card. So every time Library is in the opener, the player can lay it down, draw immediately, then discard to hand size. Turn 2, they can lay a land, then draw, so on. And even after the first spell played, the player just alternates to activating the draw ability before they play the land or cast anything. So basically a Phyrexian Arena effect from Turn 1 for a static upkeep of 1.
In duel by contrast, the player to play first can only activate the Library Turn 2 and on, and then it deactivates after the first spell played.
The multiplayer draw rules only affect the first player, but this does make Library roughly twice as good in Multi as in Duel.
That and PBtE is real when you are talking about a card that costs $1000+, makes literally 100% of all decks, and doubles early draw quality when it’s in the opener. Just not something that the format needs.
There's more stages of the game beyond the opening hand. Sol Ring gets evaluated through a lens of what it does when you draw it in the middle or late game, so why restrict LoA to only considering the opening hand?
It absolutely would become the most expensive legal card or close to it.
The arguemnt for unbanning it is that even though it will become super expensive:
1. There are very few actual copies of the card meaning the damage it can do to games is very limited.
2. Does it even do damage to games? You need to have exactly 7 cards in hand at every point of the game to draw one additional card per turn. This is the format where draw is so good that you'll likely get much more value out of a Reliquary Tower letting you hold a grip of 12 then LoA giving you a draw.
When Library was like $200; I was in favor of unbanning it; now that it's $1600 I'm not due to it jumping higher then I'd ever be able to justify spending on a card. I still don't think it's the absurdly powerful autoinclude that it's made out to be by the RC, but then again I've never played against the card in all my years of magic due to it being legacy banned, commander bannded, and not even good in vintage.
My whole stance is that who cares about price? Dual lands are staples of the format, see play A LOT, and are continuing to creep up in price. And while there are a plethora of worse duals available, everyone recognizes them and wants them (slight hyperbole with "everyone").
Point is, prices have gone full stupid on Reserve List cards. I don't know what is a reasonable price on a single before it is considered "unattainable" to the average player, but I feel that with the more time that passes and the bigger the format gets, the less we should care about PBtE actually being am issue. Newer sets are more at risk of hurting the format than unbanning the P9.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
1. Irrelevant
2. Yes, it does. It is easy to set up 7 cards in hand, and Library keeps you at 7. It is a supremely powerful effect that benefits every deck. It is on a land that taps for mana; the opportunity cost of including it in a deck is low, and the benefit it provides is extremely valuable for all decks.
Comparing it to Reliquary Tower is both insulting and ignorant.
Tabernacle is significantly weaker than Library in most decks, and related is not ubiquitous. It does not tap for mana. It has a high opportunity cost of playing, and the effect is a symmetrical negative - few decks can play it effectively.
The secondary market value of a card is irrelevant. Further, comparing said market value of a card currently banned to a card currently legal as a basis of argument is... I really don't know what to say about that.
Library of Alexandria needs to stay banned
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
PbtE is a pretty useless criteria when only taking price into account. Looking at MTGO prices is a good exercise to see why this is. Nothing that people normally bring up when citing PbtE is over $34 (Black Lotus). Library is less than $2. Yes, these would all spike in price if they were unbanned and thus useable in more than just Vintage, but lets say they quintuple. So now Black Lotus would be about $170, basically its current foil price, and about $100 less than Rishadan Port. Library would be like $10. Price would not be an issue. All of those cards would still be banned under other criteria.
But PbtE is still relevant. Here is the important part of the description of the criteria from Sheldon:
"it's not enough that the card is simply expensive. It must also be something that would be near-universally played if available and contribute to a perception that the format is only for the Vintage audience."
Very few cards meet this criteria. The Power 9 minus Timetwister (because its a relatively narrow card and not in the same league as the rest of the 9) plus Library and Time Vault. Is it redundant? Probably, but it sends the message that the RC intends to send, that Commander is not Vintage and not restricted to a Vintage audience.
Onering's 4 simple steps that let you solve any problem with Magic's gameplay
Step 1: Identify the problem. What aspect of Magic don't you like? Step 2: Find out how others deal with the problem. How do players deal with this aspect of the game when they run into it? Step 3: Do what those players do. Step 4: No more problem. Bonus: You are now better at Magic. Enjoy those extra wins!
1. Is it irrelevant? There are a number of cards which should be banned because they are unhealthy for the format and yet they remain legal because they don't actually see enough play to really make an impact. Why then should it be different when it's a card which is largely unattainable?
2. Is this your experience or are you just theory crafting? Because those of us who have used it had mixed results. Which isn't to say that my experience is right and yours is wrong, but actual usage should be weighed more than speculation.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I don’t agree with this. I’d say in the vast majority of my games, my hand size is ~4-5 cards for the bulk of the game, even early turns I’m below 7 unless I’m just digging for something, and unless I’m playing a ton of draw, at which point I’m well above the threshold and I’d be better off running a basic land that taps for color. It’s also a tempo killer.
Now, I haven’t played with LoA in EDH, but, I’d say it’s probably an early draft include, final revision cut in more decks than not.
This is coming from a guy who usually jams Thawing Glaciers whenever I can.
It's important to remember that there are a lot of really good colorless lands at our disposal. I often struggle Sith cutting some in 9rder to ensure I run enough colored mana, but my experiences with it certainly haven't made me feel like it was an auto include, any more than Reliquary Tower.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Agree to disagree? As I already said, there are lots of colorless lands which do things. Quite a few decks I build already run around 5 colorless lands (which in general is my maximum in order to not dilute the mana base and pose a large risk of hurting my opening hand). Having played with Library in EDH, it simply isn't going to warp my deck building to thinking in terms of 97 card decks. There is also an opportunity cost in that those magical turns when you get it opening hand you might be up a card, but at the expense of a land drop and having less mana than the table. So while I agree that in theory you are correct, in practice it doesn't work like that. When I'm struggling between two lands, I will probably go with one that has a constant benefit or synergy with the deck over one that just taps for one colorless mana if I don't draw it in my opening hand.
I'll pose the same question to you: are you speaking from experience or theory?
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Maybe I'm just greedier than you. I play multiple colorless lands in my 4-color decks.
Well I would posit that EDH plays differently than Vintage, so it's not a direct translation. You have to be playing a tempo deck that only plays one or two cards a turn, or one that can refill its hand. Most decks I run will have a large turn by T4, turning Low into a wasted slot (see what I d8d there?) So yeah, maybe if I drew it in my opening hand I got a couple of cards, but in my experience I usually had to play differently in order to keep at exactly seven cards.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Honestly, though, how often and early are you multi-spelling in EDH? Barring some sort of Sol Ring shenanigans, most games I play don't have a single multi-spell turn until turn 5 or 6 at the earliest. And even then, it's not like a single multi-spell turn stops your Library, assuming you've played the Library beforehand. Don't get me wrong, I don't actually have strong opinions on Library and if it were unbanned I would never see it anyways (lol over $1,000) but it has some fairly obvious warning flags.
I mean, once you go land > signet you're at six cards. Cast one more spell and you're down to five. And once you start your turn with "Draw to seven, tap Library" you're up 1/3rd of a card with the rest of the table at the expense of missing a land drop against 3 opponents.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Yeah, this is how I view it as well. Unless you are playing hardcore control, you aren’t meeting the criteria after turn-2. In a format predicated on big-Mana and explosive plays relying on tempo, LoA is the exact opposite.
T1>Draw for turn (8 cards in hand)>Library (7)>Endstep before next turn draw off Library (8)
T2>Draw for turn (9)>Land (8)>Signet (7)
T3>Draw for turn (8)>Land (7)>Draw off Library (8)>3-drop using signet (7)
How exactly are you running out of cards so quickly with an active Library?
This isn't a great argument. I will pay 1 to draw an extra card every turn. In what world is that a bad thing?
Yeah my math was off on the signet. Still, suppose you want to play a 4-drop instead? You can work out scenarios where you get to do your thing while drawing each turn, and I can do the counter. We can probably agree that there are a huge variety of decks in EDH and that they will each get varied amounts of mileage from Library.
Have you never missed a land drop very early on and felt behind? Drawing a couple of extra cards is great, but not in the critical beginning turns when I am setting up my entire game.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
You don’t need to convince me that Library is broken, that’s not a debate, and if we were talking about 1v1 I would agree with you. But in regular EDH you’re racing two to four other opponents. While you’re sitting there doing next to nothing but drawing an extra card you aren’t building your board state as fast as they are. And every time you don’t draw Library when you aren’t sitting on a full grip then you drew a colorless land that could be any other basic land or utility land.
So again, agree to disagree. I simply don’t see it wrecking games in the occasional time when you get it and are in a position to properly use it (power level in EDH). And like I’ve said many times already, PBtE is outdated and no longer needed.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
It's really not all that difficult to turn Library/Magus on.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
What kind of deck is it? Does it naturally contain lots of card draw? Without some kind of qualifier it’s easy to make that claim, but tell Boros just how easy it is to keep a full grip (just as one example).
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Yes, it is. That you do not have access to a card should absolutely never impact the games I or my group plays.
If this argument is to be used for ban decisions at all (and to be clear, it shouldn't), it actually works the other way. It is easier to house rule a card legal than it is to house ban a card, especially for players without a fixed group.
If only four copies of Blue Eyes, White Dragon exist, is it fair for the card to be legal for play?
I have had some experience experimenting with Library of Alexandria in Commander in the past, as have others I know.
I regularly play with very experienced individuals, including a former Pro Tour player, as well as various intermediate or new players. When I brought up the recent comparison of Library to Reliquary Tower, the consensus can best be described by one of the responses in particular.
"That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard."
Just to humor you though, I had the group I was with last night add Library to all of their decks in place of a land of their choice. The group consisted of me playing Teysa, another intermediate+ player borrowing my Gravetide deck, an intermediate player with a weaker Prossh Food Chain deck, and a new player using Krenko deck. Even before beginning, they all unanimously agreed Library needs to remain banned.
First game, no one drew Library. No one drew tutors.
Second game, Gravetide opened with a turn 1 Library. Its impact far exceeded any other single card the entire game, and far exceeded the impact a turn 1 Sol Ring or Mana Crypt would have had. It turned an otherwise weak hand into the dominant threat the majority of the game. The only reason he did not win was because the Prossh player mistakenly thought casting Fecundity when his own board consisted of Zulaport Cutthroat was a good idea, while my board consisted of Teysa, Viscera Seer, and Nether Traitor. Even then, I won on the upkeep of the turn Gravetide would have won, by casting Reveillark, and discarding Karmic Guide & Triskelion during cleanup.
Notable plays that game were Library drawing Force of Will to counter my turn 4 Contamination lock, and more significantly "Activate Library. In response, Vampiric Tutor. Draw and cast Mana Drain.
The Gravetide player acknowledged that Library did impact his tempo that game, and yet it was still the correct play by a considerable margin to draw a card with it every turn. He might have tapped it for mana once.
To be clear, I do not expect Library of Alexandria to win every game it appears in. I do not expect it to define every game it appears in. It will however do so far more often than either Sol Ring or Mana Crypt would - two other cards that really should be banned precisely because of that type of impact (a symptom of their universality & power).
Then you tap Library of Alexandria for mana...
Yes, and they are outliers. What does Library of Alexandria do in that circumstance?
It taps for mana.
One final thing to note is the impact it would have on deck construction, if Library were legal.
Every White deck I play adds Weathered Wayfarer - a card that is rarely included otherwise.
Every Green deck I play adds Crop Rotation
Every Blue and Red deck starts playing Wheel effects, even if they would otherwise have been excluded (probably - this may backfire after testing, with my opponents playing Library as well).
Most decks add Expedition Map that otherwise would not play them.
The total number of 'draw 2', 'draw 3', or 'draw on upkeep' effects would increase among every deck by 2-3, to help keep a late drawn Library active.
Most of the people at my location would make very similar changes across their decks.
And yes, most people would play Library here. We have legitimate copies of Library among us already. Several of us would simply acquire one, and we are very lax about the use of proxies. Even those who do not use proxies because they find it distasteful would likely proxy Library simply to not be left behind, or stop playing unless it was removed from other decks first.
Edit: Fixed card tags
A Dying Wish
To Rise Again
Chainer, Dementia Master
Muldrotha, the Gravetide
Atraxa, Praetors' Voice
In duel by contrast, the player to play first can only activate the Library Turn 2 and on, and then it deactivates after the first spell played.
The multiplayer draw rules only affect the first player, but this does make Library roughly twice as good in Multi as in Duel.
That and PBtE is real when you are talking about a card that costs $1000+, makes literally 100% of all decks, and doubles early draw quality when it’s in the opener. Just not something that the format needs.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg