This reminds me much of the problem of Crane and Scorpion clans from the game Legend of the Five Rings. Both were fairly non-interactive methods of playing the game, my avatar and second-half of my screen name is from that game. For a Honor Victory you needed to reach 40 Family Honor and for Dishonor Victory you had to make your opponent reach -20 Family Honor. Other clans could try for these victories, but Crane and Scorpion were the best at it. To determine starting Family Honor you had a card in play that told you how much you started with (usually 2-8, however negative starting honor was a possibility with the Spider Clan who really didn't care about Dishonor). The thing about these sorts of victories was they were not tied to a card like Test of Endurance but instead were part of the rulebook. If Family Honor started at an arbitrary amount, such as 20, the game would be worse off. As Crane would be too powerful and Scorpion would be far more weaker because of this and have to rely on combos and large punches of damage instead of peppering the opponent down.
the 21 is simple. EDH started with Elder dragons only (Hence the name Elder Dragon Highlander) and since they played with 20 life, 21 would kill you.
That's why Commander Damage is 21, not regular life totals.
exactly. But when you boosted the life to 40 you kept the 21 damage for commander damage. It is a nice (and working) gimmick. While not always utilized it does help defeat decks that gain tons of life or have ways to prevent damage often.
Having Commander damage be 21 in a game where 20 kills you would be silly.
The original life total was 200 divided by the number of players in the game. That usually meant 40 or 50. Life totals were never boosted to 40 after the existence of Commander damage.
the 21 is simple. EDH started with Elder dragons only (Hence the name Elder Dragon Highlander) and since they played with 20 life, 21 would kill you.
That's why Commander Damage is 21, not regular life totals.
exactly. But when you boosted the life to 40 you kept the 21 damage for commander damage. It is a nice (and working) gimmick. While not always utilized it does help defeat decks that gain tons of life or have ways to prevent damage often.
Having Commander damage be 21 in a game where 20 kills you would be silly.
The original life total was 200 divided by the number of players in the game. That usually meant 40 or 50. Life totals were never boosted to 40 after the existence of Commander damage.
my apologies, I was informed the life total was originally 20 that got boosted.
Stuff like Lightning Bolt isn't good in EDH because you need to deal 120 damage instead of 20. Changing that to 90 won't magically make Lightning Bolt playable.
Lightning bolt is still fine. It just rarely targets players (and if it does, it's for lethal).
I'm not really a fan of aggro, generally-speaking, but I think a LOT of the problems with commander could be solved by a 30-life start, if not lower. Besides just stuff like necro and ad naus, it also means that it's a lot less necessary to have some enormous swingy endgame bomb to win with - your craterhoofs, your omnisciences, your insurrections, rises of the dark realms, expropriates, rains of hailfire, tooths and nail, etc. People complain (hell, I complain) about how these cards can trivialize the rest of the game, but to a certain extent they're necessary, for many players anyway, to be able to win, because otherwise 120 life is too deep a hole to climb out of.
I think it's also worth asking the question - what exactly does that extra 10 life give you? I'm betting if your playgroup has been happy with 40 life and not having problems with combos or the aforementioned boring insta-win cards...then you almost certainly won't at 30, either. But it gives aggressive decks a LOT more ability to reign in the "ramp ramp ramp win the game" durdly nonsense that can just ignore the field because they have such a huge life cushion. They can't kill EVERYONE on turn 6 - that's still 90 damage to deal - but they might be able to knock out the combo player before they go off.
Stuff like Lightning Bolt isn't good in EDH because you need to deal 120 damage instead of 20. Changing that to 90 won't magically make Lightning Bolt playable.
Lightning bolt is still fine. It just rarely targets players (and if it does, it's for lethal.
First, holy necro. Second, perhaps I should offer an addendum to my previous comment (from 2 years ago): lowering the life total to 30 won't make Bolt *more* playable. It may have its uses but those uses won't suddenly change just because you have 10 life per person less to deal with.
As for the big bomby plays, some players just want to do that. On some level, that is what EDH is all about: big splashy plays. Players aren't necessarily playing those cards because they think they have to in order to win (and I personally don't play any of the cards mentioned) but they think they are fun so they play them. Insurrection in particular doesn't seem to change. Unless you are suggesting that lowering the life total means games will end prior to turn 8, which is a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. Some players want to play longer games of Magic. Those cards will still be played and will still end games the way they do now and I don't think whatever mindset people have that is leading them to play those cards would change with a lower life total.
First, holy necro. Second, perhaps I should offer an addendum to my previous comment (from 2 years ago): lowering the life total to 30 won't make Bolt *more* playable. It may have its uses but those uses won't suddenly change just because you have 10 life per person less to deal with.
As for the big bomby plays, some players just want to do that. On some level, that is what EDH is all about: big splashy plays. Players aren't necessarily playing those cards because they think they have to in order to win (and I personally don't play any of the cards mentioned) but they think they are fun so they play them. Insurrection in particular doesn't seem to change. Unless you are suggesting that lowering the life total means games will end prior to turn 8, which is a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. Some players want to play longer games of Magic. Those cards will still be played and will still end games the way they do now and I don't think whatever mindset people have that is leading them to play those cards would change with a lower life total.
Yeah, sorry, I didn't notice how old the post was (other than the response ahead of me). At least most of the same people are still around.
Fair enough RE: bolt. I'm guessing lethal bolt scenarios would be slightly more common, but it's not a big difference.
I'm fine with people making big splashy plays, but (1) 30 life doesn't make that impossible, and (2) call me crazy, but I think you should need to put more work in to "go off". Right now, in almost any casual edh table, it's extremely easy to win off a T&N or expropriate. The cool thing about big bombs isn't just playing them, it's the effort that goes into actually pulling them off. When I managed to pull of a win with parhelion II in draft it was SWEET, because of how hard it was to achieve. The other million billion times I've drafted it and had it fail miserably made the victory all the sweeter.
I'm not saying expropriate in EDH needs to be parhelion II in draft, where it's so unreliable as to be terrible. But right now there's almost no risk in running that sort of card in your deck. You can just run a bunch of ramp and bombs and pay almost no price, because your natural predator - aggro - is nonexistent. Setting life totals to 30 or lower would help alleviate that problem, and force people who want to play big dumb bombs to actually plan for early game so they don't get run over by weenies before they get a chance to deploy their bombs. Then maybe someone actually pulling off some huge bomb would get a cheer instead of a groan.
As time goes by, I see more and more virtues of limited and fewer and fewer of commander. Magic, the game of combat math and incremental card advantage and mana curves is intriguing and strategically interesting. EDH has lots of other virtues - being multiplayer adds lots of layers of strategy not present outside of it - but when the format devolves to people just sitting around goldfishing until someone draws a 1-hit haymaker, it's strategically shallow and boring.
It is funny to see this come back around because I have been playing both Canadian Highlander and Oathbreaker alongside Commander and the change in life total has been refreshing in opening the door to so many different strategies and putting in your head, okay I have a plan it works but will I survive to execute that plan.
I think 20 is too big a step for this format but more and more I think 30 is just right.
Think about how many times with 40 life you shock a land into play without a second thought.
I have literally played shocklands untapped to bluff plays. It is meaningless in commander.
We should keep in mind that we have access to commanders at all times and that we can win by dealing 21 damage with said commander. Life total of 20 seems low when you always have access to a legendary creature.
I personally think aggro could use a little help. I recently had a 5 person game where Krenko killed everyone very quickly. Goblin War Strike took me out of that game. However, it was a very explosive start and nobody had a wrath. And while that was memorable I can also remember beating Krenko many times due to a crawlspace or a Ghostly Prison. It has weaknesses.
I think aggro should be helped. I think 30-35 life would be the sweetspot. But it won't change much. The fact is that Aggro dealing 90 damage or 120 damage is still a tall order most of the time.
I think the nature of multiplayer naturally pushes out aggro. It is not the life total, really.
It's obviously going to be hard for aggro facing down multiple life totals. But combo has weaknesses in multiplayer too - it has to fight through 3 hands of potential answers. The problem is that, without the ability to pressure their life totals, they can sit on the combo until the optimal moment with relatively little concern that they'll get knocked out before they get the chance.
Having lower life totals wouldn't necessarily make it easy for aggro to run away with the game - they still have 3 opponents, after all - but it could mean that they can actually kill someone sitting on a combo before they can comfortably wait to play it protected. Which could mean, in a competitive setting, that aggro might at least have some foothold, and that no longer is all competitive EDH combo EDH.
Krenko is almost more of a combo deck (albeit not infinite combo). For krenko the difference between 60 and 120 life is like, one turn at most. While krenko obviously isn't top-tier competitive, he is the sort of aggro that "works" in commander, at least to a certain extent. But you're not going to see a lyzolda deck pulling any kind of weight in a competitive setting, for example, it just can't scale to those kinds of numbers.
Well I actually play a cattlebruiser deck, and life totals diminish rather quickly. I would not have the chance to accumulate my board state with a lower life pool. I like my dragon deck and the only reason it works is because I have time to set up. If there was a way to make sure no one could attack for a few turns, sure 30 would be fine... But I need that extra ten.
It's obviously going to be hard for aggro facing down multiple life totals. But combo has weaknesses in multiplayer too - it has to fight through 3 hands of potential answers. The problem is that, without the ability to pressure their life totals, they can sit on the combo until the optimal moment with relatively little concern that they'll get knocked out before they get the chance.
Having lower life totals wouldn't necessarily make it easy for aggro to run away with the game - they still have 3 opponents, after all - but it could mean that they can actually kill someone sitting on a combo before they can comfortably wait to play it protected. Which could mean, in a competitive setting, that aggro might at least have some foothold, and that no longer is all competitive EDH combo EDH.
Krenko is almost more of a combo deck (albeit not infinite combo). For krenko the difference between 60 and 120 life is like, one turn at most. While krenko obviously isn't top-tier competitive, he is the sort of aggro that "works" in commander, at least to a certain extent. But you're not going to see a lyzolda deck pulling any kind of weight in a competitive setting, for example, it just can't scale to those kinds of numbers.
I really don't think any rule changes should be made to the format to shake up cEDH at all. Aggro isn't bad in more casual settings, neither is midrange. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned a lowering the life total as a way to solve certain problems with EDH, and named Ad Naus as one. I can't remember the last time I saw Ad Naus outside of cEDH, so it shouldn't be relevant at all to the conversation. Meanwhile, playing shocks untapped shouldn't be considered a problem either, being able to do so helps smooth play in a format that by design can be somewhat clunky (100 card singleton).
Lowering the life total to 30 would certainly hurt Rube Goldberg machine combos and anything that relies on life payment (or high life totals), but it won't stop T&N from being a thing. 30 life in a multiplayer format is still a lot and T&N wins out of nowhere, so what is everyone gonna do, just swing out at the green player if they ramp at all? Because if you're splitting damage, he's still going to be able to survive until 9 mana, and if he has a bit of interaction he'll do so even if you target him. 30 life is not going to close out 4+ player games before someone hits 9 mana, when all these single card bombs that win the game hit at the latest. Its certainly not going to infringe on Hoof's place as a finisher, if anything Hoof gets even better because it needs even less of a board state to get you to swing for lethal, and by its very nature of wanting you to have creatures in play it means that you will have a built in defense against aggro just by playing into Hoof. As for the more competitive combos, the sort that try to get out their combo ASAP and aim to go off turns 3-5, which is going off fast enough that aggro isn't going to be able to reliably kill them before they go off, and those decks are already packing answers to deal with other combos and protect their own, so when they aren't going off that early they have ways to play control.
30 life WOULD give aggro better positioning in 75% metas, which is where it currently struggles yet isn't a lost cause (its fine in more casual metas, which can't answer threats as reliably, and probably beyond hope in cEDH unless life totals go to 20). I'm not so sure its worth it though. Aggro is more difficult to play correctly in multiplayer than midrange, combo, or control, because of the importance of proper threat assessment before you have a lot of information means that the decisions you make early have a lot more weight in determining whether you win or hit a wall than with other archetypes. Its already pretty easy to kill one person with aggro and then get shut down by the other 2 or 3, and lowering the life totals to 30 won't really change that situation. Sure, its going to be more punishing to the person who spends their early turns ramping instead of holding up answers or establishing a board state, but that just means that person is going to have a bad night while the control players get to hold their answers for the aggro player once he's done doing their dirty work. Games play out better when threats are answered by answer cards rather than getting preemptively answered by taking a player out of the game. Sometimes that can be necessary, like when someone is showing a clearly OP commander or is known to be playing a deck you can't otherwise answer, but it sucks when someone just gets jumpy and decides to come for someone's throat because they played a nature's lore and a cultivate. What would really suffer are Battlecruiser decks, as they are the least able to deal with aggro (control is probably best positioned because shutting down aggro is what control is all about, combo can still outrace aggro at 30 life often enough, and midrange wins out by being a step slower and a head taller which is where you always want to be). Aggro has its place in a variety of formats, Battlecruiser only has EDH, so if it comes down to allowing Battlecruiser to exist or making aggro better I'll choose allowing Battlecruiser to exist every time. If you are determined to play aggro, you can make it work (except in cEDH, though hatebears use aggro as a backup to its main combo line), though it may look different than it does in other formats (a bit more evasive, a half step slower, prioritizing abilities more and raw stats a bit less, more fish less sligh).
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!
Well I actually play a cattlebruiser deck, and life totals diminish rather quickly. I would not have the chance to accumulate my board state with a lower life pool. I like my dragon deck and the only reason it works is because I have time to set up. If there was a way to make sure no one could attack for a few turns, sure 30 would be fine... But I need that extra ten.
Have you considered that maybe you just have a badly-built deck?
"If you lower life totals to 30 I can't totally ignore the early game!" seems like a really bad argument to me.
Also: was cattlebruiser a typo, or is that a thing I haven't heard of?
I really don't think any rule changes should be made to the format to shake up cEDH at all. Aggro isn't bad in more casual settings, neither is midrange. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned a lowering the life total as a way to solve certain problems with EDH, and named Ad Naus as one. I can't remember the last time I saw Ad Naus outside of cEDH, so it shouldn't be relevant at all to the conversation. Meanwhile, playing shocks untapped shouldn't be considered a problem either, being able to do so helps smooth play in a format that by design can be somewhat clunky (100 card singleton).
Lowering the life total to 30 would certainly hurt Rube Goldberg machine combos and anything that relies on life payment (or high life totals), but it won't stop T&N from being a thing. 30 life in a multiplayer format is still a lot and T&N wins out of nowhere, so what is everyone gonna do, just swing out at the green player if they ramp at all? Because if you're splitting damage, he's still going to be able to survive until 9 mana, and if he has a bit of interaction he'll do so even if you target him. 30 life is not going to close out 4+ player games before someone hits 9 mana, when all these single card bombs that win the game hit at the latest. Its certainly not going to infringe on Hoof's place as a finisher, if anything Hoof gets even better because it needs even less of a board state to get you to swing for lethal, and by its very nature of wanting you to have creatures in play it means that you will have a built in defense against aggro just by playing into Hoof. As for the more competitive combos, the sort that try to get out their combo ASAP and aim to go off turns 3-5, which is going off fast enough that aggro isn't going to be able to reliably kill them before they go off, and those decks are already packing answers to deal with other combos and protect their own, so when they aren't going off that early they have ways to play control.
30 life WOULD give aggro better positioning in 75% metas, which is where it currently struggles yet isn't a lost cause (its fine in more casual metas, which can't answer threats as reliably, and probably beyond hope in cEDH unless life totals go to 20). I'm not so sure its worth it though. Aggro is more difficult to play correctly in multiplayer than midrange, combo, or control, because of the importance of proper threat assessment before you have a lot of information means that the decisions you make early have a lot more weight in determining whether you win or hit a wall than with other archetypes. Its already pretty easy to kill one person with aggro and then get shut down by the other 2 or 3, and lowering the life totals to 30 won't really change that situation. Sure, its going to be more punishing to the person who spends their early turns ramping instead of holding up answers or establishing a board state, but that just means that person is going to have a bad night while the control players get to hold their answers for the aggro player once he's done doing their dirty work. Games play out better when threats are answered by answer cards rather than getting preemptively answered by taking a player out of the game. Sometimes that can be necessary, like when someone is showing a clearly OP commander or is known to be playing a deck you can't otherwise answer, but it sucks when someone just gets jumpy and decides to come for someone's throat because they played a nature's lore and a cultivate. What would really suffer are Battlecruiser decks, as they are the least able to deal with aggro (control is probably best positioned because shutting down aggro is what control is all about, combo can still outrace aggro at 30 life often enough, and midrange wins out by being a step slower and a head taller which is where you always want to be). Aggro has its place in a variety of formats, Battlecruiser only has EDH, so if it comes down to allowing Battlecruiser to exist or making aggro better I'll choose allowing Battlecruiser to exist every time. If you are determined to play aggro, you can make it work (except in cEDH, though hatebears use aggro as a backup to its main combo line), though it may look different than it does in other formats (a bit more evasive, a half step slower, prioritizing abilities more and raw stats a bit less, more fish less sligh).
I see necro plenty outside of cEDH. Plus vilis I'm sure will see plenty of play. Serra Ascendant, aetherflux reservoir...there are a lot of cards that ought to get taken down a peg imo.
Will combo still be a thing? Absolutely. Will people die before getting to T&N mana? Probably not, although maybe one person will if they're getting focused down. I think really the main reason to lower life totals, though, is that right now a LOT of people put combos in their decks as a "safety valve" for if the game is going too long. And I think this safety valve mentality is what's increased the prevalence of combos in otherwise noncompetitive metas, and made those combos faster and faster. With lower life totals, ending the game without an infinite combo becomes less difficult, and people are less likely to resort to infinite combos as their only reliable option.
Right now EDH has a reputation for creating games so long that they wear out their welcome, and then keep going for another two hours. Cutting down the absurd starting life totals would at least help put a dent in that.
Serra Ascendant is arguably a far more powerful turn one play with 30 life. it's a 5 turn clock instead of 7 and good luck ever coming back from those life swings if people's decks are built for 30 life
It also means you can’t fetch, shock, or city of brass/mana confluence into the mana to play it. It’s also much worse topdeck as at any point you’re more likely to have lost a single life than 30.
Sure, but if you play it turn 1 or 2 it's far more impactful. Hence "arguably." And nobody ever worries about SA as a topdeck. The complaint is always turn 1.
Really a footnote in the discussion. If this ever happens I would be very surprised. The fundamental change to the format is way too drastic.
I suspect they may come out with some semi-official game options or something at some point ( e.g. 30 life, no commander damage, etc.). But the more I think on it the more I think the life total change is way too drastic at this point.
Stuff like Lightning Bolt isn't good in EDH because you need to deal 120 damage instead of 20.
I wish people would stop saying this. It's downright wrong. You're not killing three other goldfish all alone. You have two other people helping you kill any specific individual player.
I don't know how many ways there are to say this - but while you might end up doing the majority damage in a game, there will be plenty of games where you won't need to bother with several players, or might even win by doing the minority damage. That actually can happen surprisingly often, as those that try to take the lead early get defensively allied against as they over-utilize all their resources, allowing an enterprising individual who bided their time to come in fresh.
You are (almost) never alone in killing everyone off, unless you take such a commanding lead that you actually make it Archenemy, at which point, the only one to blame for that is yourself.
Changing that to 90 won't magically make Lightning Bolt playable.
Lightning bolt is actually very playable. It's pretty good removal vs. utility creatures, and I've finished off a number of players who thought they'd managed to stabilize just short of dead with it.
Stuff like Lightning Bolt isn't good in EDH because you need to deal 120 damage instead of 20.
I wish people would stop saying this. It's downright wrong. You're not killing three other goldfish all alone. You have two other people helping you kill any specific individual player.
I don't know how many ways there are to say this - but while you might end up doing the majority damage in a game, there will be plenty of games where you won't need to bother with several players, or might even win by doing the minority damage. That actually can happen surprisingly often, as those that try to take the lead early get defensively allied against as they over-utilize all their resources, allowing an enterprising individual who bided their time to come in fresh.
You are (almost) never alone in killing everyone off, unless you take such a commanding lead that you actually make it Archenemy, at which point, the only one to blame for that is yourself.
Changing that to 90 won't magically make Lightning Bolt playable.
Lightning bolt is actually very playable. It's pretty good removal vs. utility creatures, and I've finished off a number of players who thought they'd managed to stabilize just short of dead with it.
The context of the comment was in response to Bolt suddenly being playable due to the lower life total. Whether it is playable now, and to what degree, is basically irrelevant. Changing the life total doesn't change the efficacy of Bolt in the format. It may have its uses but dealing 3 damage to an opponent seems to be one of the worst uses for it regardless of how much "help" you get from other people. Killing creatures are a better use and changing the life total doesn't change that use.
As I already said (amended) above: changing the life total doesn't make Bolt *more* playable. If you need it due to a number of small utility creatures, fine. By all means run it to deal with those creatures. But I disagree that including it in your deck and expecting it to be the killing blow is wrong. As of right now, that might be a nice little bonus to the card, but I just can't see a situation where including Bolt over basically anything already in a deck (if Bolt is not in the deck) is the right call based solely on the life total being reduced.
Well, there is some value in intentionally putting someone to 3 or less, letting them know you have a bolt in hand, and then using that leverage to make them do your bidding. Going face can be very relevant in that case. You've basically got a repeatable mindslaver.
Not to derail the conversation to lightning bolt again for no real reason
Pokken, any response to my argument besides "they probably won't actually do it"? (Which is probably true, but even more true if no one advocates for it)
Well, there is some value in intentionally putting someone to 3 or less, letting them know you have a bolt in hand, and then using that leverage to make them do your bidding. Going face can be very relevant in that case. You've basically got a repeatable mindslaver.
Not to derail the conversation to lightning bolt again for no real reason
Pokken, any response to my argument besides "they probably won't actually do it"? (Which is probably true, but even more true if no one advocates for it)
I've lost track of which thread I've talked about things in, but I think there are so many potential bad side effects of speeding games up that I think it's not worth the risk. Some things people think are automatically good like faster games but I think that's certainly arguable. I certainly would not want to do anything that slowed games down a lot but by the same token I think speeding them up may be undesirable.
* More pressure on budget manabases which are uncommonly bad in the early game (I think this is the one that concerns me the most honestly)
* More downward pressure on curves
* More pressure to ramp harder
* Pressure to play strong commanders because when you see fewer cards it's better to have a really good one available all the time (this goes with some potential unforeseen consequences specifically for commanders with Haste, Tap Effects, and Ramp in their text boxes)
* Pressure to combo even faster because life totals are under more pressure, generally normalizing combo in casual gameplay to combat aggro
* Many life-pay cards are driven toward the fringes of the format (good and bad both I think)
* Voltron gets a lot worse and it's already quite poor
And really the list just keeps going on and on the more I think about it.
I would not mind if they did something like:
1) Life total pace option was explicitly codified (30 for fast, 40 for medium, 50 for slow) so people were more inclined to test it
2) A season of 30 life (akin to silver bordered time)
The thing that bothers me the most is how much I think it would crap on budget manabases. They get a slight boost with fetches and shocks being very slightly discouraged but man ETB tapped lands are horrible now I can't imagine how much they would be with faster games.
* More pressure on budget manabases which are uncommonly bad in the early game (I think this is the one that concerns me the most honestly)
* More downward pressure on curves
* More pressure to ramp harder
* Pressure to play strong commanders because when you see fewer cards it's better to have a really good one available all the time (this goes with some potential unforeseen consequences specifically for commanders with Haste, Tap Effects, and Ramp in their text boxes)
* Pressure to combo even faster because life totals are under more pressure, generally normalizing combo in casual gameplay to combat aggro
* Many life-pay cards are driven toward the fringes of the format (good and bad both I think)
* Voltron gets a lot worse and it's already quite poor
Let's go through 'em.
Budget manabases - power level discrepancies are already a problem. etbt lands are like...maybe 5% of that at most. Even on a budget, you can easily build a 2 color manabase for a low cost without any etbt lands, and even 3-color is pretty reasonable - the issue is more with people that suck at building manabases. My budget Phelddagrif only has a couple etbt lands and I cut anything that cost more than $2. 5-color is tougher, sure, but even at 30 life speed isn't always desirable. Early starts get your targeted. Overall this feels like a mountain out of a molehill. If your meta is so fast that etbt lands are a huge liability, then you've either got the budget for a mostly-not-etbt manabase, or you shouldn't be playing in that group.
Downward pressure on curves - this is pure upside imo. I hate that decks that only ramp and bombs are as powerful as they are, because they face so little early pressure. If you want a big dumb endgame bomb strategy, you should have to be prepared to protect yourself until your bombs are online. That is, of course, personal opinion. But it's also how essentially every other format works.
More pressure to ramp harder - Pick one. You can't have both "more ramp" and "lower curves". If you want to win solely off 9-drops then sure, you want to ramp faster - but it's not like you wanted to ramp slower before. You're presumably ramping as fast as your budget and deckbuilding ability allows, if that's your strategy. Outside of that specific "strategy", I'd say ramp is less important the lower you set life totals, because you don't need to play enormous, high-impact cards in order to win, AND it's more important to defend yourself early.
combo is pushed to get faster - That's already happening with other combo decks in a race to see who can combo first. I know I'm seeing a lot more combo now than I used to - it's gone from being frowned upon and rare outside of the Azami players, to being in most decks as a "safety valve" to prevent long games. And sure, a playgroup could spiral towards competitiveness, but that's not specific to 30 life. Tryhards are gonna tryhard. Whether other people are pressuring them with combo or aggro, if they want to win more games by comboing faster, they're going to combo faster. There's not really a solution for that except a long talk (and possibly Phelddagrif).
Pay-life cards are less popular - I see this as 100% major win. **** necropotence. Those cards are balanced for 20 life, and they're frequently stupidly overpowered in 40-life formats.
Voltron gets worse - Kind of? Voltron is basically an aggro strategy, so I'd say it gets better in a lot of ways. Sure, commander damage is less important, but it's easier for it to piggy-back off enemy damage to deal normal lethal damage. One of the problems of voltron is kind of the same as mill - you're trying to kill via something that other people can't usually contribute to, and lower life totals make it more likely your damage will matter. I think mostly it's a wash. Commander damage could also be lowered I guess - no strong feelings on that one.
I do think a trial run of 30 life would be a positive idea. Jumping in full-force would be ill-advised, of course.
You're missing how ramp works; ramping hard will sometimes lower your real curve. Look at Tron in Modern. It's got one of the lowest curves in the game because all it does is ramp. most Modern and Legacy ramp decks are the same way. Downward pressure on curves presses decks that want to play bombs to ramp harder. It's closely connected.
Downward pressure on curves is not the same as downward pressure on average CMC.
I think if you take a peek at CEDH lists you'll see that faster games lead to more ramp not less, it just leads to cheaper ramp. Almost every CEDH deck is playing the same pile of 0-1 cmc ramp with a little 2 sprinkled in.
When I see you brushing concerns aside with "I see this as 100% major win" and "pure upside" I think it is clear that you're not really engaging with a fairly nuanced issue and it makes me inclined to disagree with you simply because I feel like the side making absolutist arguments is usually wrong when talking about complicated subjective things. Reminds me a lot of the Planeswalker discussion.
Fundamentally it does not matter how you see it. It matters how the population that plays EDH sees it, and in order to make good decisions we need to see things from broader perspectives.
You're missing how ramp works; ramping hard will sometimes lower your real curve. Look at Tron in Modern. It's got one of the lowest curves in the game because all it does is ramp. most Modern and Legacy ramp decks are the same way. Downward pressure on curves presses decks that want to play bombs to ramp harder. It's closely connected.
Downward pressure on curves is not the same as downward pressure on average CMC.
I think if you take a peek at CEDH lists you'll see that faster games lead to more ramp not less, it just leads to cheaper ramp. Almost every CEDH deck is playing the same pile of 0-1 cmc ramp with a little 2 sprinkled in.
When I see you brushing concerns aside with "I see this as 100% major win" and "pure upside" I think it is clear that you're not really engaging with a fairly nuanced issue and it makes me inclined to disagree with you simply because I feel like the side making absolutist arguments is usually wrong when talking about complicated subjective things. Reminds me a lot of the Planeswalker discussion.
Fundamentally it does not matter how you see it. It matters how the population that plays EDH sees it, and in order to make good decisions we need to see things from broader perspectives.
If modern played with a life total of 10, do you think tron would "ramp harder", or would it dedicate more cards to interact with early aggression? cEDH decks play a pile of 0-1 cmc ramp because those are some of the most powerful cards in the format, no matter what level of competition you're playing at. It's just that the cEDH lists are being optimized for power and don't have budgetary limitations. Given an unlimited card pool and building to win, I daresay nearly every deck would play those same cards, whether 30 life or 40. The only real constraint is that, the lower the life, the sooner you need to stop ramping and start developing a board state to defend yourself - tron wouldn't be playing ulamogs in 10-life modern, I'll tell you that (actually tron almost certainly wouldn't be able to exist at all, but that's a pretty extreme example). I'm fairly certain 30 life is nowhere near the limit of "uh oh, we can't play 8 mana cards anymore".
When a card is designed for 20 life (not that necro wasn't still broken in 20 life tbh), making the rules of the format more closely reflect the intended power level of the card seems like a pure win to me. Granted, Serra Ascendant, for example, is a card that helps keep mono-white marginally less terrible than without it - as compared to necro, which makes already powerful black even more powerful. But I'd rather white had powerful tools that functioned as intended, rather than mistakes.
Of course, there are people who love necropotence and want it to stay as powerful as it is because they like playing broken cards. Most players are not good arbiters of what creates an engaging, well-balanced format, though. Life-paying cards make up quite a few of the format's most problematic cards, in large part because of how they interact with the enormous life totals.
At any rate, I said "I see it was a win". Which is true. Of course I don't expect everyone will. I don't claim to have perfect knowledge of what the ramifications of changing the life totals would be. It's entirely possible it could suck, and I could be totally wrong. I'm arguing my viewpoint. It's my hope that my viewpoint is convincing enough that someone on the RC will notice and at least consider testing the format at 30 life for that more nuanced viewpoint you want. Or just that I can waste time arguing. That's good too.
Well I actually play a cattlebruiser deck, and life totals diminish rather quickly. I would not have the chance to accumulate my board state with a lower life pool. I like my dragon deck and the only reason it works is because I have time to set up. If there was a way to make sure no one could attack for a few turns, sure 30 would be fine... But I need that extra ten.
Have you considered that maybe you just have a badly-built deck?
"If you lower life totals to 30 I can't totally ignore the early game!" seems like a really bad argument to me.
Also: was cattlebruiser a typo, or is that a thing I haven't heard of?
I really don't think any rule changes should be made to the format to shake up cEDH at all. Aggro isn't bad in more casual settings, neither is midrange. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned a lowering the life total as a way to solve certain problems with EDH, and named Ad Naus as one. I can't remember the last time I saw Ad Naus outside of cEDH, so it shouldn't be relevant at all to the conversation. Meanwhile, playing shocks untapped shouldn't be considered a problem either, being able to do so helps smooth play in a format that by design can be somewhat clunky (100 card singleton).
Lowering the life total to 30 would certainly hurt Rube Goldberg machine combos and anything that relies on life payment (or high life totals), but it won't stop T&N from being a thing. 30 life in a multiplayer format is still a lot and T&N wins out of nowhere, so what is everyone gonna do, just swing out at the green player if they ramp at all? Because if you're splitting damage, he's still going to be able to survive until 9 mana, and if he has a bit of interaction he'll do so even if you target him. 30 life is not going to close out 4+ player games before someone hits 9 mana, when all these single card bombs that win the game hit at the latest. Its certainly not going to infringe on Hoof's place as a finisher, if anything Hoof gets even better because it needs even less of a board state to get you to swing for lethal, and by its very nature of wanting you to have creatures in play it means that you will have a built in defense against aggro just by playing into Hoof. As for the more competitive combos, the sort that try to get out their combo ASAP and aim to go off turns 3-5, which is going off fast enough that aggro isn't going to be able to reliably kill them before they go off, and those decks are already packing answers to deal with other combos and protect their own, so when they aren't going off that early they have ways to play control.
30 life WOULD give aggro better positioning in 75% metas, which is where it currently struggles yet isn't a lost cause (its fine in more casual metas, which can't answer threats as reliably, and probably beyond hope in cEDH unless life totals go to 20). I'm not so sure its worth it though. Aggro is more difficult to play correctly in multiplayer than midrange, combo, or control, because of the importance of proper threat assessment before you have a lot of information means that the decisions you make early have a lot more weight in determining whether you win or hit a wall than with other archetypes. Its already pretty easy to kill one person with aggro and then get shut down by the other 2 or 3, and lowering the life totals to 30 won't really change that situation. Sure, its going to be more punishing to the person who spends their early turns ramping instead of holding up answers or establishing a board state, but that just means that person is going to have a bad night while the control players get to hold their answers for the aggro player once he's done doing their dirty work. Games play out better when threats are answered by answer cards rather than getting preemptively answered by taking a player out of the game. Sometimes that can be necessary, like when someone is showing a clearly OP commander or is known to be playing a deck you can't otherwise answer, but it sucks when someone just gets jumpy and decides to come for someone's throat because they played a nature's lore and a cultivate. What would really suffer are Battlecruiser decks, as they are the least able to deal with aggro (control is probably best positioned because shutting down aggro is what control is all about, combo can still outrace aggro at 30 life often enough, and midrange wins out by being a step slower and a head taller which is where you always want to be). Aggro has its place in a variety of formats, Battlecruiser only has EDH, so if it comes down to allowing Battlecruiser to exist or making aggro better I'll choose allowing Battlecruiser to exist every time. If you are determined to play aggro, you can make it work (except in cEDH, though hatebears use aggro as a backup to its main combo line), though it may look different than it does in other formats (a bit more evasive, a half step slower, prioritizing abilities more and raw stats a bit less, more fish less sligh).
I see necro plenty outside of cEDH. Plus vilis I'm sure will see plenty of play. Serra Ascendant, aetherflux reservoir...there are a lot of cards that ought to get taken down a peg imo.
Will combo still be a thing? Absolutely. Will people die before getting to T&N mana? Probably not, although maybe one person will if they're getting focused down. I think really the main reason to lower life totals, though, is that right now a LOT of people put combos in their decks as a "safety valve" for if the game is going too long. And I think this safety valve mentality is what's increased the prevalence of combos in otherwise noncompetitive metas, and made those combos faster and faster. With lower life totals, ending the game without an infinite combo becomes less difficult, and people are less likely to resort to infinite combos as their only reliable option.
Right now EDH has a reputation for creating games so long that they wear out their welcome, and then keep going for another two hours. Cutting down the absurd starting life totals would at least help put a dent in that.
Well I actually play a cattlebruiser deck, and life totals diminish rather quickly. I would not have the chance to accumulate my board state with a lower life pool. I like my dragon deck and the only reason it works is because I have time to set up. If there was a way to make sure no one could attack for a few turns, sure 30 would be fine... But I need that extra ten.
Have you considered that maybe you just have a badly-built deck?
"If you lower life totals to 30 I can't totally ignore the early game!" seems like a really bad argument to me.
Also: was cattlebruiser a typo, or is that a thing I haven't heard of?
I really don't think any rule changes should be made to the format to shake up cEDH at all. Aggro isn't bad in more casual settings, neither is midrange. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned a lowering the life total as a way to solve certain problems with EDH, and named Ad Naus as one. I can't remember the last time I saw Ad Naus outside of cEDH, so it shouldn't be relevant at all to the conversation. Meanwhile, playing shocks untapped shouldn't be considered a problem either, being able to do so helps smooth play in a format that by design can be somewhat clunky (100 card singleton).
Lowering the life total to 30 would certainly hurt Rube Goldberg machine combos and anything that relies on life payment (or high life totals), but it won't stop T&N from being a thing. 30 life in a multiplayer format is still a lot and T&N wins out of nowhere, so what is everyone gonna do, just swing out at the green player if they ramp at all? Because if you're splitting damage, he's still going to be able to survive until 9 mana, and if he has a bit of interaction he'll do so even if you target him. 30 life is not going to close out 4+ player games before someone hits 9 mana, when all these single card bombs that win the game hit at the latest. Its certainly not going to infringe on Hoof's place as a finisher, if anything Hoof gets even better because it needs even less of a board state to get you to swing for lethal, and by its very nature of wanting you to have creatures in play it means that you will have a built in defense against aggro just by playing into Hoof. As for the more competitive combos, the sort that try to get out their combo ASAP and aim to go off turns 3-5, which is going off fast enough that aggro isn't going to be able to reliably kill them before they go off, and those decks are already packing answers to deal with other combos and protect their own, so when they aren't going off that early they have ways to play control.
30 life WOULD give aggro better positioning in 75% metas, which is where it currently struggles yet isn't a lost cause (its fine in more casual metas, which can't answer threats as reliably, and probably beyond hope in cEDH unless life totals go to 20). I'm not so sure its worth it though. Aggro is more difficult to play correctly in multiplayer than midrange, combo, or control, because of the importance of proper threat assessment before you have a lot of information means that the decisions you make early have a lot more weight in determining whether you win or hit a wall than with other archetypes. Its already pretty easy to kill one person with aggro and then get shut down by the other 2 or 3, and lowering the life totals to 30 won't really change that situation. Sure, its going to be more punishing to the person who spends their early turns ramping instead of holding up answers or establishing a board state, but that just means that person is going to have a bad night while the control players get to hold their answers for the aggro player once he's done doing their dirty work. Games play out better when threats are answered by answer cards rather than getting preemptively answered by taking a player out of the game. Sometimes that can be necessary, like when someone is showing a clearly OP commander or is known to be playing a deck you can't otherwise answer, but it sucks when someone just gets jumpy and decides to come for someone's throat because they played a nature's lore and a cultivate. What would really suffer are Battlecruiser decks, as they are the least able to deal with aggro (control is probably best positioned because shutting down aggro is what control is all about, combo can still outrace aggro at 30 life often enough, and midrange wins out by being a step slower and a head taller which is where you always want to be). Aggro has its place in a variety of formats, Battlecruiser only has EDH, so if it comes down to allowing Battlecruiser to exist or making aggro better I'll choose allowing Battlecruiser to exist every time. If you are determined to play aggro, you can make it work (except in cEDH, though hatebears use aggro as a backup to its main combo line), though it may look different than it does in other formats (a bit more evasive, a half step slower, prioritizing abilities more and raw stats a bit less, more fish less sligh).
I see necro plenty outside of cEDH. Plus vilis I'm sure will see plenty of play. Serra Ascendant, aetherflux reservoir...there are a lot of cards that ought to get taken down a peg imo.
Will combo still be a thing? Absolutely. Will people die before getting to T&N mana? Probably not, although maybe one person will if they're getting focused down. I think really the main reason to lower life totals, though, is that right now a LOT of people put combos in their decks as a "safety valve" for if the game is going too long. And I think this safety valve mentality is what's increased the prevalence of combos in otherwise noncompetitive metas, and made those combos faster and faster. With lower life totals, ending the game without an infinite combo becomes less difficult, and people are less likely to resort to infinite combos as their only reliable option.
Right now EDH has a reputation for creating games so long that they wear out their welcome, and then keep going for another two hours. Cutting down the absurd starting life totals would at least help put a dent in that.
I reject the argument that life pay and life matters cards need to be nerfed by lowering the total from 40 to 30, with the exception of necro. Necro is absurdly good at 40 but at 30 you are looking at 10 fewer cards, and it's easy to get into situations where you must be judicious with you draws (it starts becoming a liability at 15 life because of how easy it is to deal big chunks of damage in this format). You tend to overdraw with Necro to ensure you get cards you can play, because you have to wait until end of turn to get them,which means that they both aren't immediately available AND you can't tell how many you'll need to draw to have things to play. That makes necro more vulnerable to lowering the starting life total. Other life pay cards are either not a problem, or less vulnerable for a variety of reasons. 30 life would not make unbanning Yawgs Bargain or Grislebrand ok for instance, as both get you cards immediately, while Grisle can gain you the life back and with Yawgs Bargain you never have to overdraw, and with both you can abuse spells that care about card draw (necro doesn't actually draw cards). Sylvan Library otoh will only draw 2.5 fewer cards with this change, a small difference that will only really matter in more competitive settings. Greed, Erebos etc are already restricted by having to pay Mana. These, as well as the vast majority of life payment spells, are also completely fine and not problematic in how they play. They get better because of the higher starting life total, but they are far from overpowered because of it and their core function is unchanged. Other than necro, only Aetherflux strikes me at first glance as needing a Nerf, but 30 life ain't gonna do it. Aetherflux gains you plenty of life on its own, so it's a triflingly small speed bump to start at 10 fewer life. It will make it a bit more difficult to use to take out the last opponent, but that's it.
Meanwhile, the cards that care about life total aren't a problem. Felidar Sovereign is a trap card, if it has a chance at winning early it's getting killed. It's subpar card that may occasionally steal a win but really should not be ran outside of a dedicated lifegain control deck as an alt wincon. Serra Ascendant is by far the best of the lot and not a problem. It's a bit cheesy when someone drops it turn 1, and can get in lots of early damage, but usually eats removal as soon as it attacks anyone holding it. Late game it generally sucks outside of dedicated life gain. Even when it's a 6/6 late game it's still just ok because it's often outclassed by more expensive creatures. Dropping the starting total to 30 makes it easier to make it a 1/1 and harder to cast off of shocks and fetches, but it's still perfectly able to come down turn 1 as a 6/6 and then start swinging turn 2 and giving you enough extra life to play those shocks and fetches. Meanwhile, not it has a faster clock because everyone else starts at 10 less life.
The only real benefit I'm seeing is that it weakens necro. If that is something that is so desperately needed, then the better answer is to ban necro. It scores high on an number of the ban criteria as it is, and banning a single, clearly bonkers card is a much more reasonable course of action than changing a fundamental rule of the format.
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!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This reminds me much of the problem of Crane and Scorpion clans from the game Legend of the Five Rings. Both were fairly non-interactive methods of playing the game, my avatar and second-half of my screen name is from that game. For a Honor Victory you needed to reach 40 Family Honor and for Dishonor Victory you had to make your opponent reach -20 Family Honor. Other clans could try for these victories, but Crane and Scorpion were the best at it. To determine starting Family Honor you had a card in play that told you how much you started with (usually 2-8, however negative starting honor was a possibility with the Spider Clan who really didn't care about Dishonor). The thing about these sorts of victories was they were not tied to a card like Test of Endurance but instead were part of the rulebook. If Family Honor started at an arbitrary amount, such as 20, the game would be worse off. As Crane would be too powerful and Scorpion would be far more weaker because of this and have to rely on combos and large punches of damage instead of peppering the opponent down.
Having Commander damage be 21 in a game where 20 kills you would be silly.
The original life total was 200 divided by the number of players in the game. That usually meant 40 or 50. Life totals were never boosted to 40 after the existence of Commander damage.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
40 life is too low
I'm not really a fan of aggro, generally-speaking, but I think a LOT of the problems with commander could be solved by a 30-life start, if not lower. Besides just stuff like necro and ad naus, it also means that it's a lot less necessary to have some enormous swingy endgame bomb to win with - your craterhoofs, your omnisciences, your insurrections, rises of the dark realms, expropriates, rains of hailfire, tooths and nail, etc. People complain (hell, I complain) about how these cards can trivialize the rest of the game, but to a certain extent they're necessary, for many players anyway, to be able to win, because otherwise 120 life is too deep a hole to climb out of.
I think it's also worth asking the question - what exactly does that extra 10 life give you? I'm betting if your playgroup has been happy with 40 life and not having problems with combos or the aforementioned boring insta-win cards...then you almost certainly won't at 30, either. But it gives aggressive decks a LOT more ability to reign in the "ramp ramp ramp win the game" durdly nonsense that can just ignore the field because they have such a huge life cushion. They can't kill EVERYONE on turn 6 - that's still 90 damage to deal - but they might be able to knock out the combo player before they go off.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
As for the big bomby plays, some players just want to do that. On some level, that is what EDH is all about: big splashy plays. Players aren't necessarily playing those cards because they think they have to in order to win (and I personally don't play any of the cards mentioned) but they think they are fun so they play them. Insurrection in particular doesn't seem to change. Unless you are suggesting that lowering the life total means games will end prior to turn 8, which is a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. Some players want to play longer games of Magic. Those cards will still be played and will still end games the way they do now and I don't think whatever mindset people have that is leading them to play those cards would change with a lower life total.
Fair enough RE: bolt. I'm guessing lethal bolt scenarios would be slightly more common, but it's not a big difference.
I'm fine with people making big splashy plays, but (1) 30 life doesn't make that impossible, and (2) call me crazy, but I think you should need to put more work in to "go off". Right now, in almost any casual edh table, it's extremely easy to win off a T&N or expropriate. The cool thing about big bombs isn't just playing them, it's the effort that goes into actually pulling them off. When I managed to pull of a win with parhelion II in draft it was SWEET, because of how hard it was to achieve. The other million billion times I've drafted it and had it fail miserably made the victory all the sweeter.
I'm not saying expropriate in EDH needs to be parhelion II in draft, where it's so unreliable as to be terrible. But right now there's almost no risk in running that sort of card in your deck. You can just run a bunch of ramp and bombs and pay almost no price, because your natural predator - aggro - is nonexistent. Setting life totals to 30 or lower would help alleviate that problem, and force people who want to play big dumb bombs to actually plan for early game so they don't get run over by weenies before they get a chance to deploy their bombs. Then maybe someone actually pulling off some huge bomb would get a cheer instead of a groan.
As time goes by, I see more and more virtues of limited and fewer and fewer of commander. Magic, the game of combat math and incremental card advantage and mana curves is intriguing and strategically interesting. EDH has lots of other virtues - being multiplayer adds lots of layers of strategy not present outside of it - but when the format devolves to people just sitting around goldfishing until someone draws a 1-hit haymaker, it's strategically shallow and boring.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
But on the other hand creatures keep getting bigger and they keep printing more haste outlets.
I could see life totals go to 50 as easily as 30. I wouldn't mind either way but it would be s major deck redesign all around.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I think 20 is too big a step for this format but more and more I think 30 is just right.
Think about how many times with 40 life you shock a land into play without a second thought.
We should keep in mind that we have access to commanders at all times and that we can win by dealing 21 damage with said commander. Life total of 20 seems low when you always have access to a legendary creature.
I personally think aggro could use a little help. I recently had a 5 person game where Krenko killed everyone very quickly. Goblin War Strike took me out of that game. However, it was a very explosive start and nobody had a wrath. And while that was memorable I can also remember beating Krenko many times due to a crawlspace or a Ghostly Prison. It has weaknesses.
I think aggro should be helped. I think 30-35 life would be the sweetspot. But it won't change much. The fact is that Aggro dealing 90 damage or 120 damage is still a tall order most of the time.
I think the nature of multiplayer naturally pushes out aggro. It is not the life total, really.
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
Having lower life totals wouldn't necessarily make it easy for aggro to run away with the game - they still have 3 opponents, after all - but it could mean that they can actually kill someone sitting on a combo before they can comfortably wait to play it protected. Which could mean, in a competitive setting, that aggro might at least have some foothold, and that no longer is all competitive EDH combo EDH.
Krenko is almost more of a combo deck (albeit not infinite combo). For krenko the difference between 60 and 120 life is like, one turn at most. While krenko obviously isn't top-tier competitive, he is the sort of aggro that "works" in commander, at least to a certain extent. But you're not going to see a lyzolda deck pulling any kind of weight in a competitive setting, for example, it just can't scale to those kinds of numbers.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I really don't think any rule changes should be made to the format to shake up cEDH at all. Aggro isn't bad in more casual settings, neither is midrange. Earlier in the thread someone mentioned a lowering the life total as a way to solve certain problems with EDH, and named Ad Naus as one. I can't remember the last time I saw Ad Naus outside of cEDH, so it shouldn't be relevant at all to the conversation. Meanwhile, playing shocks untapped shouldn't be considered a problem either, being able to do so helps smooth play in a format that by design can be somewhat clunky (100 card singleton).
Lowering the life total to 30 would certainly hurt Rube Goldberg machine combos and anything that relies on life payment (or high life totals), but it won't stop T&N from being a thing. 30 life in a multiplayer format is still a lot and T&N wins out of nowhere, so what is everyone gonna do, just swing out at the green player if they ramp at all? Because if you're splitting damage, he's still going to be able to survive until 9 mana, and if he has a bit of interaction he'll do so even if you target him. 30 life is not going to close out 4+ player games before someone hits 9 mana, when all these single card bombs that win the game hit at the latest. Its certainly not going to infringe on Hoof's place as a finisher, if anything Hoof gets even better because it needs even less of a board state to get you to swing for lethal, and by its very nature of wanting you to have creatures in play it means that you will have a built in defense against aggro just by playing into Hoof. As for the more competitive combos, the sort that try to get out their combo ASAP and aim to go off turns 3-5, which is going off fast enough that aggro isn't going to be able to reliably kill them before they go off, and those decks are already packing answers to deal with other combos and protect their own, so when they aren't going off that early they have ways to play control.
30 life WOULD give aggro better positioning in 75% metas, which is where it currently struggles yet isn't a lost cause (its fine in more casual metas, which can't answer threats as reliably, and probably beyond hope in cEDH unless life totals go to 20). I'm not so sure its worth it though. Aggro is more difficult to play correctly in multiplayer than midrange, combo, or control, because of the importance of proper threat assessment before you have a lot of information means that the decisions you make early have a lot more weight in determining whether you win or hit a wall than with other archetypes. Its already pretty easy to kill one person with aggro and then get shut down by the other 2 or 3, and lowering the life totals to 30 won't really change that situation. Sure, its going to be more punishing to the person who spends their early turns ramping instead of holding up answers or establishing a board state, but that just means that person is going to have a bad night while the control players get to hold their answers for the aggro player once he's done doing their dirty work. Games play out better when threats are answered by answer cards rather than getting preemptively answered by taking a player out of the game. Sometimes that can be necessary, like when someone is showing a clearly OP commander or is known to be playing a deck you can't otherwise answer, but it sucks when someone just gets jumpy and decides to come for someone's throat because they played a nature's lore and a cultivate. What would really suffer are Battlecruiser decks, as they are the least able to deal with aggro (control is probably best positioned because shutting down aggro is what control is all about, combo can still outrace aggro at 30 life often enough, and midrange wins out by being a step slower and a head taller which is where you always want to be). Aggro has its place in a variety of formats, Battlecruiser only has EDH, so if it comes down to allowing Battlecruiser to exist or making aggro better I'll choose allowing Battlecruiser to exist every time. If you are determined to play aggro, you can make it work (except in cEDH, though hatebears use aggro as a backup to its main combo line), though it may look different than it does in other formats (a bit more evasive, a half step slower, prioritizing abilities more and raw stats a bit less, more fish less sligh).
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!
"If you lower life totals to 30 I can't totally ignore the early game!" seems like a really bad argument to me.
Also: was cattlebruiser a typo, or is that a thing I haven't heard of? I see necro plenty outside of cEDH. Plus vilis I'm sure will see plenty of play. Serra Ascendant, aetherflux reservoir...there are a lot of cards that ought to get taken down a peg imo.
Will combo still be a thing? Absolutely. Will people die before getting to T&N mana? Probably not, although maybe one person will if they're getting focused down. I think really the main reason to lower life totals, though, is that right now a LOT of people put combos in their decks as a "safety valve" for if the game is going too long. And I think this safety valve mentality is what's increased the prevalence of combos in otherwise noncompetitive metas, and made those combos faster and faster. With lower life totals, ending the game without an infinite combo becomes less difficult, and people are less likely to resort to infinite combos as their only reliable option.
Right now EDH has a reputation for creating games so long that they wear out their welcome, and then keep going for another two hours. Cutting down the absurd starting life totals would at least help put a dent in that.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Really a footnote in the discussion. If this ever happens I would be very surprised. The fundamental change to the format is way too drastic.
I suspect they may come out with some semi-official game options or something at some point ( e.g. 30 life, no commander damage, etc.). But the more I think on it the more I think the life total change is way too drastic at this point.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I don't know how many ways there are to say this - but while you might end up doing the majority damage in a game, there will be plenty of games where you won't need to bother with several players, or might even win by doing the minority damage. That actually can happen surprisingly often, as those that try to take the lead early get defensively allied against as they over-utilize all their resources, allowing an enterprising individual who bided their time to come in fresh.
You are (almost) never alone in killing everyone off, unless you take such a commanding lead that you actually make it Archenemy, at which point, the only one to blame for that is yourself.
Lightning bolt is actually very playable. It's pretty good removal vs. utility creatures, and I've finished off a number of players who thought they'd managed to stabilize just short of dead with it.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
As I already said (amended) above: changing the life total doesn't make Bolt *more* playable. If you need it due to a number of small utility creatures, fine. By all means run it to deal with those creatures. But I disagree that including it in your deck and expecting it to be the killing blow is wrong. As of right now, that might be a nice little bonus to the card, but I just can't see a situation where including Bolt over basically anything already in a deck (if Bolt is not in the deck) is the right call based solely on the life total being reduced.
Not to derail the conversation to lightning bolt again for no real reason
Pokken, any response to my argument besides "they probably won't actually do it"? (Which is probably true, but even more true if no one advocates for it)
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I've lost track of which thread I've talked about things in, but I think there are so many potential bad side effects of speeding games up that I think it's not worth the risk. Some things people think are automatically good like faster games but I think that's certainly arguable. I certainly would not want to do anything that slowed games down a lot but by the same token I think speeding them up may be undesirable.
* More pressure on budget manabases which are uncommonly bad in the early game (I think this is the one that concerns me the most honestly)
* More downward pressure on curves
* More pressure to ramp harder
* Pressure to play strong commanders because when you see fewer cards it's better to have a really good one available all the time (this goes with some potential unforeseen consequences specifically for commanders with Haste, Tap Effects, and Ramp in their text boxes)
* Pressure to combo even faster because life totals are under more pressure, generally normalizing combo in casual gameplay to combat aggro
* Many life-pay cards are driven toward the fringes of the format (good and bad both I think)
* Voltron gets a lot worse and it's already quite poor
And really the list just keeps going on and on the more I think about it.
I would not mind if they did something like:
1) Life total pace option was explicitly codified (30 for fast, 40 for medium, 50 for slow) so people were more inclined to test it
2) A season of 30 life (akin to silver bordered time)
The thing that bothers me the most is how much I think it would crap on budget manabases. They get a slight boost with fetches and shocks being very slightly discouraged but man ETB tapped lands are horrible now I can't imagine how much they would be with faster games.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Budget manabases - power level discrepancies are already a problem. etbt lands are like...maybe 5% of that at most. Even on a budget, you can easily build a 2 color manabase for a low cost without any etbt lands, and even 3-color is pretty reasonable - the issue is more with people that suck at building manabases. My budget Phelddagrif only has a couple etbt lands and I cut anything that cost more than $2. 5-color is tougher, sure, but even at 30 life speed isn't always desirable. Early starts get your targeted. Overall this feels like a mountain out of a molehill. If your meta is so fast that etbt lands are a huge liability, then you've either got the budget for a mostly-not-etbt manabase, or you shouldn't be playing in that group.
Downward pressure on curves - this is pure upside imo. I hate that decks that only ramp and bombs are as powerful as they are, because they face so little early pressure. If you want a big dumb endgame bomb strategy, you should have to be prepared to protect yourself until your bombs are online. That is, of course, personal opinion. But it's also how essentially every other format works.
More pressure to ramp harder - Pick one. You can't have both "more ramp" and "lower curves". If you want to win solely off 9-drops then sure, you want to ramp faster - but it's not like you wanted to ramp slower before. You're presumably ramping as fast as your budget and deckbuilding ability allows, if that's your strategy. Outside of that specific "strategy", I'd say ramp is less important the lower you set life totals, because you don't need to play enormous, high-impact cards in order to win, AND it's more important to defend yourself early.
combo is pushed to get faster - That's already happening with other combo decks in a race to see who can combo first. I know I'm seeing a lot more combo now than I used to - it's gone from being frowned upon and rare outside of the Azami players, to being in most decks as a "safety valve" to prevent long games. And sure, a playgroup could spiral towards competitiveness, but that's not specific to 30 life. Tryhards are gonna tryhard. Whether other people are pressuring them with combo or aggro, if they want to win more games by comboing faster, they're going to combo faster. There's not really a solution for that except a long talk (and possibly Phelddagrif).
Pay-life cards are less popular - I see this as 100% major win. **** necropotence. Those cards are balanced for 20 life, and they're frequently stupidly overpowered in 40-life formats.
Voltron gets worse - Kind of? Voltron is basically an aggro strategy, so I'd say it gets better in a lot of ways. Sure, commander damage is less important, but it's easier for it to piggy-back off enemy damage to deal normal lethal damage. One of the problems of voltron is kind of the same as mill - you're trying to kill via something that other people can't usually contribute to, and lower life totals make it more likely your damage will matter. I think mostly it's a wash. Commander damage could also be lowered I guess - no strong feelings on that one.
I do think a trial run of 30 life would be a positive idea. Jumping in full-force would be ill-advised, of course.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Downward pressure on curves is not the same as downward pressure on average CMC.
I think if you take a peek at CEDH lists you'll see that faster games lead to more ramp not less, it just leads to cheaper ramp. Almost every CEDH deck is playing the same pile of 0-1 cmc ramp with a little 2 sprinkled in.
When I see you brushing concerns aside with "I see this as 100% major win" and "pure upside" I think it is clear that you're not really engaging with a fairly nuanced issue and it makes me inclined to disagree with you simply because I feel like the side making absolutist arguments is usually wrong when talking about complicated subjective things. Reminds me a lot of the Planeswalker discussion.
Fundamentally it does not matter how you see it. It matters how the population that plays EDH sees it, and in order to make good decisions we need to see things from broader perspectives.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
When a card is designed for 20 life (not that necro wasn't still broken in 20 life tbh), making the rules of the format more closely reflect the intended power level of the card seems like a pure win to me. Granted, Serra Ascendant, for example, is a card that helps keep mono-white marginally less terrible than without it - as compared to necro, which makes already powerful black even more powerful. But I'd rather white had powerful tools that functioned as intended, rather than mistakes.
Of course, there are people who love necropotence and want it to stay as powerful as it is because they like playing broken cards. Most players are not good arbiters of what creates an engaging, well-balanced format, though. Life-paying cards make up quite a few of the format's most problematic cards, in large part because of how they interact with the enormous life totals.
At any rate, I said "I see it was a win". Which is true. Of course I don't expect everyone will. I don't claim to have perfect knowledge of what the ramifications of changing the life totals would be. It's entirely possible it could suck, and I could be totally wrong. I'm arguing my viewpoint. It's my hope that my viewpoint is convincing enough that someone on the RC will notice and at least consider testing the format at 30 life for that more nuanced viewpoint you want. Or just that I can waste time arguing. That's good too.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I reject the argument that life pay and life matters cards need to be nerfed by lowering the total from 40 to 30, with the exception of necro. Necro is absurdly good at 40 but at 30 you are looking at 10 fewer cards, and it's easy to get into situations where you must be judicious with you draws (it starts becoming a liability at 15 life because of how easy it is to deal big chunks of damage in this format). You tend to overdraw with Necro to ensure you get cards you can play, because you have to wait until end of turn to get them,which means that they both aren't immediately available AND you can't tell how many you'll need to draw to have things to play. That makes necro more vulnerable to lowering the starting life total. Other life pay cards are either not a problem, or less vulnerable for a variety of reasons. 30 life would not make unbanning Yawgs Bargain or Grislebrand ok for instance, as both get you cards immediately, while Grisle can gain you the life back and with Yawgs Bargain you never have to overdraw, and with both you can abuse spells that care about card draw (necro doesn't actually draw cards). Sylvan Library otoh will only draw 2.5 fewer cards with this change, a small difference that will only really matter in more competitive settings. Greed, Erebos etc are already restricted by having to pay Mana. These, as well as the vast majority of life payment spells, are also completely fine and not problematic in how they play. They get better because of the higher starting life total, but they are far from overpowered because of it and their core function is unchanged. Other than necro, only Aetherflux strikes me at first glance as needing a Nerf, but 30 life ain't gonna do it. Aetherflux gains you plenty of life on its own, so it's a triflingly small speed bump to start at 10 fewer life. It will make it a bit more difficult to use to take out the last opponent, but that's it.
Meanwhile, the cards that care about life total aren't a problem. Felidar Sovereign is a trap card, if it has a chance at winning early it's getting killed. It's subpar card that may occasionally steal a win but really should not be ran outside of a dedicated lifegain control deck as an alt wincon. Serra Ascendant is by far the best of the lot and not a problem. It's a bit cheesy when someone drops it turn 1, and can get in lots of early damage, but usually eats removal as soon as it attacks anyone holding it. Late game it generally sucks outside of dedicated life gain. Even when it's a 6/6 late game it's still just ok because it's often outclassed by more expensive creatures. Dropping the starting total to 30 makes it easier to make it a 1/1 and harder to cast off of shocks and fetches, but it's still perfectly able to come down turn 1 as a 6/6 and then start swinging turn 2 and giving you enough extra life to play those shocks and fetches. Meanwhile, not it has a faster clock because everyone else starts at 10 less life.
The only real benefit I'm seeing is that it weakens necro. If that is something that is so desperately needed, then the better answer is to ban necro. It scores high on an number of the ban criteria as it is, and banning a single, clearly bonkers card is a much more reasonable course of action than changing a fundamental rule of the format.
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!