I mean that’s not a great argument for eliminating the ban list. If there are cards you’d rather see banned, it seems perfectly logical to lobby for their banning. To throw out the entire list is not going to solve the problem for you, though. In fact it’s likely to present you with more issues, by the very nature of what you’re suggesting.
EDH is a very meta depended format so many cards vary in power level based on meta. Having a ban list only works for some fictional meta. Dumping the ban list might make people think what is fine and what isn't fine to bring to certain game.
I doubt that removing the ban list would create more problems. Guns don't kill people you know.
Guns don't kill people because we set a penalty for killing people. My hunch is that if we said, " you know, we have this law that says you can't kill people and people STILL kill each other. Let's just get rid of all the laws.", then I'm pretty sure murders would go up. Sure, within closed communities you would find people adhering to their own set of laws, but there would be a lot more people who didn't and good luck interacting with other communities.
Have you actually every played without a ban list? Like, not for one or two games, but just within your group thrown it out the window and played long enough to see what sort of meta developed as people acted and reacted? I haven't personally, but from anecdotal posts from a few people who have, it did not make the games brtter.
Guns don't kill people because we set a penalty for killing people. My hunch is that if we said, " you know, we have this law that says you can't kill people and people STILL kill each other. Let's just get rid of all the laws.", then I'm pretty sure murders would go up. Sure, within closed communities you would find people adhering to their own set of laws, but there would be a lot more people who didn't and good luck interacting with other communities.
Have you actually every played without a ban list? Like, not for one or two games, but just within your group thrown it out the window and played long enough to see what sort of meta developed as people acted and reacted? I haven't personally, but from anecdotal posts from a few people who have, it did not make the games brtter.
Anecdotally, one of my local shops did a no-banlist EDH night with prizes. In all honesty, not a lot changed. The same three players who consistently combo kill the board on turn 5 or 6 with a banlist did so on Turn 4 or 5 (proxies of Power Nine cards were permitted). Saw one Turn 1 kill off a Black Lotus and Mana Crypt (Swamp, Crypt, Lotus, Buried Alive (Mike and Trike), Reanimate, Exhume). But I've seen that player do that Turn 2 with a banlist.
Removing the banlist wouldn't make things better for anyone. But for the most competitive groups, they would barely notice.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
Anecdotally, one of my local shops did a no-banlist EDH night with prizes. In all honesty, not a lot changed. The same three players who consistently combo kill the board on turn 5 or 6 with a banlist did so on Turn 4 or 5 (proxies of Power Nine cards were permitted). Saw one Turn 1 kill off a Black Lotus and Mana Crypt (Swamp, Crypt, Lotus, Buried Alive (Mike and Trike), Reanimate, Exhume). But I've seen that player do that Turn 2 with a banlist.
Removing the banlist wouldn't make things better for anyone. But for the most competitive groups, they would barely notice.
Thank you for the feedback, its always good to hear more people talking about their experiences playing the format outside of the official rules, however anecdotal it may be.
Guns don't kill people because we set a penalty for killing people. My hunch is that if we said, " you know, we have this law that says you can't kill people and people STILL kill each other. Let's just get rid of all the laws.", then I'm pretty sure murders would go up. Sure, within closed communities you would find people adhering to their own set of laws, but there would be a lot more people who didn't and good luck interacting with other communities.
Have you actually every played without a ban list? Like, not for one or two games, but just within your group thrown it out the window and played long enough to see what sort of meta developed as people acted and reacted? I haven't personally, but from anecdotal posts from a few people who have, it did not make the games brtter.
I haven't played without a banlist but I have talked to people before playing and it often led to a better experience for everyone. When I don't it doesn't.
Anecdotally, one of my local shops did a no-banlist EDH night with prizes. In all honesty, not a lot changed. The same three players who consistently combo kill the board on turn 5 or 6 with a banlist did so on Turn 4 or 5 (proxies of Power Nine cards were permitted). Saw one Turn 1 kill off a Black Lotus and Mana Crypt (Swamp, Crypt, Lotus, Buried Alive (Mike and Trike), Reanimate, Exhume). But I've seen that player do that Turn 2 with a banlist.
Removing the banlist wouldn't make things better for anyone. But for the most competitive groups, they would barely notice.
Because there are cards which are problematic for the format, same as banlists for any other format.
Sure but there are also a lot of cards outside of the banlist that are problematic and some cards are only problematic in certain decks, metas, people, etc.
You can't police everything so why not let anarchy rein?
Dichotomous thinking is a very basic cognitive error. Your argument is a perfect example.
Guns don't kill people because we set a penalty for killing people. My hunch is that if we said, " you know, we have this law that says you can't kill people and people STILL kill each other. Let's just get rid of all the laws.", then I'm pretty sure murders would go up. Sure, within closed communities you would find people adhering to their own set of laws, but there would be a lot more people who didn't and good luck interacting with other communities.
Have you actually every played without a ban list? Like, not for one or two games, but just within your group thrown it out the window and played long enough to see what sort of meta developed as people acted and reacted? I haven't personally, but from anecdotal posts from a few people who have, it did not make the games brtter.
Anecdotally, one of my local shops did a no-banlist EDH night with prizes. In all honesty, not a lot changed. The same three players who consistently combo kill the board on turn 5 or 6 with a banlist did so on Turn 4 or 5 (proxies of Power Nine cards were permitted). Saw one Turn 1 kill off a Black Lotus and Mana Crypt (Swamp, Crypt, Lotus, Buried Alive (Mike and Trike), Reanimate, Exhume). But I've seen that player do that Turn 2 with a banlist.
Removing the banlist wouldn't make things better for anyone. But for the most competitive groups, they would barely notice.
So, it wouldn't matter for the folk the format wasn't designed around anyhow. Sounds like pretty much an irrelevant argument to the larger question of why we have a banned list.
Agree 100%. On that note, announcement should be a week from today. Predictions?
Personally, I expect another "no changes". I think that as.far as the list is concerned, the only card that is realistically on the chopping block is Iona, and Gifts is the only safe unban. But I dont expect either. Rules wise, there is a steady push to accentuate what makes Commander different while at the same time keeping the rules as mirrored to regular Magic as possible. To that extent, planeswalkers as commanders and the partner mechanic would be the only logical sweeping change, but they dont seem too receptive to doing that.
Of course, I'll always hold out hope that they remove PBtE and unban Library or bring back tuck and the BaaC list, but that's not going to happen.
I also expect 'No changes'. I can see justification for Iona's banning, but I feel like she is only played in more competitive metas.
I don't know what you mean about changing the partner mechanic. Do you mean getting rid of it?
Planeswalkers as commanders would necessitate the return of the BaaC list. I really don't think you can have "I win" emblems in the command zone. Sorin, Lord of Innistrad is fine, but Venser, the Sojourner is not.
Regarding the PBtE... they have two choices - ban cards that are now more expensive than LoA, or unban LoA. Right now, it just looks like they have been picking on LoA.
I mean there is the potential (based on internet chatter requesting it) that the RC could errata all planeswalkers to be usable as commanders, and to errata the partner mechanic to apply to all legendary creatures. The chances of this happening are slim to none, but i can't think of any other rules which are worth discussion.
I would be interested to hear from the committee if they were "forced" to make some change to the banned list / rules what it would be.
I also suspect no change but would be on board with ban Iona.
That's an interesting question. If you were forced to make one change, what would it be? I know it's not something they would answer, but a nice thought experiment nonetheless.
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.
Expect no changes hope for Paradox Engine to finally get got Saw it a bunch of times in casuals recently and card is as much of a blight on a table as Prophet of Kruphix just slightly less common.
As an engine card I feel that Paradox Engine is far less centralizing than PoK ever was (a card I understand but don't agree with the banning of)
Iona is a card I have never thought was very good and often ends up backfiring on the person who casts her due to reputation alone and I no longer believe that Iona is a big enough reason that is keeping Painter's Servant banned (but if we could just swap the two of them I would be all for it).
As an engine card I feel that Paradox Engine is far less centralizing than PoK ever was (a card I understand but don't agree with the banning of)
Iona is a card I have never thought was very good and often ends up backfiring on the person who casts her due to reputation alone and I no longer believe that Iona is a big enough reason that is keeping Painter's Servant banned (but if we could just swap the two of them I would be all for it).
Didn't papa funk at one point say they two weren't linked? Like, they could ban Iona and it wouldn't change their minds on Painter.
Seems things like Ugin have sealed its fate for now.
Right. Not necessarily because Ugin/Painter is worse than anything we can legally do, but because it shows that Wizards is still using that design space.
Right. Not necessarily because Ugin/Painter is worse than anything we can legally do, but because it shows that Wizards is still using that design space.
Isn't this an argument for unbanning Painter's Servant though? To me it seems if Wizards is still using this design space, that means there will be plenty of interesting and legitimate ways Painter's Servant could be used in the future.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Isn't this an argument for unbanning Painter's Servant though? To me it seems if Wizards is still using this design space, that means there will be plenty of interesting and legitimate ways Painter's Servant could be used in the future.
Except that the two most recent cards off the top of my head, Ugin and All is Dust, are not the least bit interesting or fun in their interaction with Servant.
Guns don't kill people because we set a penalty for killing people. My hunch is that if we said, " you know, we have this law that says you can't kill people and people STILL kill each other. Let's just get rid of all the laws.", then I'm pretty sure murders would go up. Sure, within closed communities you would find people adhering to their own set of laws, but there would be a lot more people who didn't and good luck interacting with other communities.
I think you misunderstood the reference. It's part of a larger quote: "guns don't kill people, people kill people." It has nothing to do with murder or other criminal punishments, it's a pro-gun argument. The implication here is that gun control is mostly meaningless because a bad actor will simply find another way to commit their crime while responsible gun owners are unfairly punished by having their guns taken away.
Laying aside the real world politics (in which this is a flawed and terrible idea) it translates pretty well to EDH. We all know that the ban list is kind of a joke from a competitive point of view. The RC has admitted as much and said they don't particularly care about that aspect. But if you're already letting people run around with Stasis and Doomsday, is there really any reason to keep something like Balance on the list? If people want to ruin games, they're going to ruin games. I guess the EDH corollary would be "cards don't ruin games, people ruin games". There is some merit in the idea of just straight up removing the ban list and trusting people to play in a social way. Isn't that the entire point of the format in the first place?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I mean that’s not a great argument for eliminating the ban list. If there are cards you’d rather see banned, it seems perfectly logical to lobby for their banning. To throw out the entire list is not going to solve the problem for you, though. In fact it’s likely to present you with more issues, by the very nature of what you’re suggesting.
I doubt that removing the ban list would create more problems. Guns don't kill people you know.
Have you actually every played without a ban list? Like, not for one or two games, but just within your group thrown it out the window and played long enough to see what sort of meta developed as people acted and reacted? I haven't personally, but from anecdotal posts from a few people who have, it did not make the games brtter.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Anecdotally, one of my local shops did a no-banlist EDH night with prizes. In all honesty, not a lot changed. The same three players who consistently combo kill the board on turn 5 or 6 with a banlist did so on Turn 4 or 5 (proxies of Power Nine cards were permitted). Saw one Turn 1 kill off a Black Lotus and Mana Crypt (Swamp, Crypt, Lotus, Buried Alive (Mike and Trike), Reanimate, Exhume). But I've seen that player do that Turn 2 with a banlist.
Removing the banlist wouldn't make things better for anyone. But for the most competitive groups, they would barely notice.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Thank you for the feedback, its always good to hear more people talking about their experiences playing the format outside of the official rules, however anecdotal it may be.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
I haven't played without a banlist but I have talked to people before playing and it often led to a better experience for everyone. When I don't it doesn't.
Dichotomous thinking is a very basic cognitive error. Your argument is a perfect example.
So, it wouldn't matter for the folk the format wasn't designed around anyhow. Sounds like pretty much an irrelevant argument to the larger question of why we have a banned list.
I also expect 'No changes'. I can see justification for Iona's banning, but I feel like she is only played in more competitive metas.
I don't know what you mean about changing the partner mechanic. Do you mean getting rid of it?
Planeswalkers as commanders would necessitate the return of the BaaC list. I really don't think you can have "I win" emblems in the command zone. Sorin, Lord of Innistrad is fine, but Venser, the Sojourner is not.
Regarding the PBtE... they have two choices - ban cards that are now more expensive than LoA, or unban LoA. Right now, it just looks like they have been picking on LoA.
8.RG Green Devotion Ramp/Combo 9.UR Draw Triggers 10.WUR Group stalling 11.WUR Voltron Spellslinger 12.WB Sacrificial Shenanigans
13.BR Creatureless Panharmonicon 14.BR Pingers and Eldrazi 15.URG Untapped Cascading
16.Reyhan, last of the Abzan's WUBG +1/+1 Counter Craziness 17.WUBRG Dragons aka Why did I make this?
Building: The Gitrog Monster lands, Glissa the Traitor stax, Muldrotha, the Gravetide Planeswalker Combo, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix + Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa Clues, and Tribal Scarecrow Planeswalkers
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
StaffI also suspect no change but would be on board with ban Iona.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
I hope for a you ban.
That's an interesting question. If you were forced to make one change, what would it be? I know it's not something they would answer, but a nice thought experiment nonetheless.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Aye Captain!
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
EDH decks: 1. RGWMayael's Big BeatsRETIRED!
2. BUWMerieke Ri Berit and the 40 Thieves
3. URNiv's Wheeling and Dealing!
4. BURThe Walking Dead
5. GWSisay's Legends of Tomorrow
6. RWBRise of Markov
7. GElvez and stuffz(W)
8. RCrush your enemies(W)
9. BSign right here...(W)
Iona is a card I have never thought was very good and often ends up backfiring on the person who casts her due to reputation alone and I no longer believe that Iona is a big enough reason that is keeping Painter's Servant banned (but if we could just swap the two of them I would be all for it).
Didn't papa funk at one point say they two weren't linked? Like, they could ban Iona and it wouldn't change their minds on Painter.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Seems things like Ugin have sealed its fate for now.
Right. Not necessarily because Ugin/Painter is worse than anything we can legally do, but because it shows that Wizards is still using that design space.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Except that the two most recent cards off the top of my head, Ugin and All is Dust, are not the least bit interesting or fun in their interaction with Servant.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Laying aside the real world politics (in which this is a flawed and terrible idea) it translates pretty well to EDH. We all know that the ban list is kind of a joke from a competitive point of view. The RC has admitted as much and said they don't particularly care about that aspect. But if you're already letting people run around with Stasis and Doomsday, is there really any reason to keep something like Balance on the list? If people want to ruin games, they're going to ruin games. I guess the EDH corollary would be "cards don't ruin games, people ruin games". There is some merit in the idea of just straight up removing the ban list and trusting people to play in a social way. Isn't that the entire point of the format in the first place?