I have no issue with wishes using a wishboard. But the one time outside of a wishboard I agreed to allow wishes (they said it was a wish deck focusing on Research into Hedron Alignment, which sounded interesting) I ended up sitting through them perusing a giant stack of cards they brought with them.
Worse, the giant stack included lots of basic lands and other cards that were neither Hedron Alignment, nor a card that the wish in question could actually fetch. It was in fact miserable.
When I played a game in my LGS that allowed a wish board, I basically just used it to hide my (not-yet-banned) Emrakul from Bribery effects. I figured if I can afford 15 mana then I can probably also afford 17 mana. Which is... not particularly unfair (or at least, not moreso than emmy is by default), but also sort of a boring way to use a wish card.
The only other good use I can think of for a wish is running narrowhatecards, which is about as fun as Iona herself. They also tend to disproportionately screw over monocolor decks, which are probably the least tryhard decks at the table unless maybe they're monoblue.
Otherwise you're probably better off just playing a charm or something if you're really that desperate for options.
I feel with spawnsirr, the singleton rule should still apply. If you ignore singleton you can ignore emrakul. Boom you just casted 4 emrakhls and get 4 extra turns, and get to keep one.
Excluding spawnsirr, emrakul and the transform cards, there are 121 more edrazi you can bring in with spawnsire. You may not be winning with battle of wits, but i really am tempted to build a deck that can in edh.
I think we should also have in our casual spirits the idea of being in a relaxed setting and getting something exciting to bring to the table that you wouldn't usually want to put in your deck, but you happen to have on-hand.
But you already have 100 slots and decided the card wasn't good enough to mainboard. Deckbuilding does, and should, involve making decisions and trade-offs. You build your deck ahead of time by including the cards you want to play and excluding the cards you don't. Wishes allow for sloppier deckbuilding, wasting time (just imagine if all four players had multiple wishes in their decks), and narrow hate cards that ruin the game for one player but never would have been included in a deck without a wish. Spawnsire is a one card game-ending combo with enough mana and a violation of the singleton rule, and while we have plenty of other cards that also win with enough mana they don't require violating one of the fundamental rules of the format.
With all of those negatives, let me ask you - what positives would wishes bring to the format?
well, the positives are pretty narrow, and depends on whether or not you'd consider normal deck-construction limitations to also apply to the wish-board. I'm always a proponent of having as few cards banned as possible, and for all the cards to be played within the spirit of the rules in the way that they are made.
I feel like wishes are like tutors, but can break the deck construction rules of whatever format I'm playing. outside the game to me is exactly that, so it allows for some potentially weird things that can be done. So to me, i can wish for progenitus in a mono green, since that makes wishes different from tutors. It just allows for some really silly things that otherwise wouldn't be viable. I suppose i have a quite mature playgroup, so we tend not to push oppression too much even with wishes and with a very open banlist. Also, death wish also allows me to pay half my life; there aren't many cards in magic that lets me do that.
With all of those negatives, let me ask you - what positives would wishes bring to the format?
Thank you for reading my post!
I just want to keep the setting light and fun, you know? I think wishes would bring some sort of impulsiveness to the game that can certainly be healthy if you don't take it too seriously. I think intentions are very important here. I want to play a wish to bring something to the table that no one expects; not even me when I put the card in my deck (that's not to say I wouldn't know what I'm looking for at the time). I hope that makes sense.
The general philosophy of this board is to keep discussions contained into a single thread, so people don't have to read 10 page discussions in 4 or more previous threads. Age, in these situations, does not matter.
On to the rest of your post...
I just want to keep the setting light and fun, you know? I think wishes would bring some sort of impulsiveness to the game that can certainly be healthy if you don't take it too seriously. I think intentions are very important here. I want to play a wish to bring something to the table that no one expects; not even me when I put the card in my deck (that's not to say I wouldn't know what I'm looking for at the time). I hope that makes sense.
I think most can understand where you're coming from, with wanting to inject new fun stuffs into the format. But I feel that the biggest downside to wishes would be Greed...you want all the things, but you can't find the place to put them in your deck. BUT YOU WANT ALL THE THINGS! It feels like it flies in the face of those who also wanted all the things, but made compromises, alternatives, and outright had to say, "Can't do it".
Intentions are indeed important...yours as well as anyone else's. While yours do sound noble, it would be far too easy for someone else to make it completely IGnoble in one manner or another. I am aware that the same could be said of anything in the format(indeed, the game), but some of those ignoble aspects are still expected(hosing mono-color decks with Iona for one).
Forgive me if I'm completely off track, but am I correct in assuming that one of your agendas(if you will) is that you want to play a wacky card in a completely off track deck because you don't have the cards to play a wacky deck with that card? No judgement, because I understand the struggle, but that's what your last post seems to indicate is one aspect.
The general philosophy of this board is to keep discussions contained into a single thread, so people don't have to read 10 page discussions in 4 or more previous threads. Age, in these situations, does not matter.
I understand that. I don't really appreciate being lumped into the general conversation, as I find it somewhat detracts from the spirit of what I was trying to communicate.
I think most can understand where you're coming from, with wanting to inject new fun stuffs into the format. But I feel that the biggest downside to wishes would be Greed...you want all the things, but you can't find the place to put them in your deck. BUT YOU WANT ALL THE THINGS! It feels like it flies in the face of those who also wanted all the things, but made compromises, alternatives, and outright had to say, "Can't do it".
Intentions are indeed important...yours as well as anyone else's. While yours do sound noble, it would be far too easy for someone else to make it completely IGnoble in one manner or another. I am aware that the same could be said of anything in the format(indeed, the game), but some of those ignoble aspects are still expected(hosing mono-color decks with Iona for one).
Forgive me if I'm completely off track, but am I correct in assuming that one of your agendas(if you will) is that you want to play a wacky card in a completely off track deck because you don't have the cards to play a wacky deck with that card? No judgement, because I understand the struggle, but that's what your last post seems to indicate is one aspect.
Thanks for the insight. I have to say I'm pretty taken aback by the negativity of the reactions. Some had very little to do with what I was talking about. You seem to understand where I'm coming from, so thank you!
I like to see wishes as an opportunity to inject some randomness into most decks to increase the fun at the table. I've come to understand that this isn't how most people see it. I really think the best way to play a Wish in a casual game is not to overthink it, both when deciding to put it into the deck and when casting it.
The deck would not really be off-track, but most decks can spare a few "flex-slots" for some fun, spicy inclusions. I was thinking Wishes would fill that role nicely, since it's like having a flex slot that changes every time you cast it!
Is it really impossible to just let them work as printed? You get a card you own from outside the game. In a nonsanctioned format, which edh is, this can be any card from your collection as per the official mtg rules.
Is it really impossible to just let them work as printed? You get a card you own from outside the game. In a nonsanctioned format, which edh is, this can be any card from your collection as per the official mtg rules.
This is pretty much my thinking as well. Thanks for chiming in. Now I know I'm not the only one.
Is it really impossible to just let them work as printed? You get a card you own from outside the game. In a nonsanctioned format, which edh is, this can be any card from your collection as per the official mtg rules.
This is pretty much my thinking as well. Thanks for chiming in. Now I know I'm not the only one.
I'm sort of on your side too. I like that it works differently from tutors, and gives a different flavour to the card that would otherwise disappear. Also, EDH is for funsies, not for bloodsies... as long as it doesn't take too long, obviously!
I am emphatically anti-wish. The prevalence of tutors in this game is out of hand already, no need to make it worse.
Tutors are not the same thing as wishes, and they should really be kept that way. I feel like this sort of sentiment is much more relevant to groups where tuning and competitiveness are a concern, and curbing those tendencies is a good thing (and i agree with those sentiments too). That's not to say that either side has more of a point than any other though, but especially if any reasonable deck in the meta has upwards of 10+ tutoring effects, the game can get quite stale, quick. Adding wishes to that has the potential to make it worse.
I'm not sure I grasp the idea of how allowing them to work as intended is anywhere near better than just limiting it to a wishlist/sideboard.
Because using the card as intended gives the card the flavour that it deserves; you're reaching out of the blind eternities to grab some instant from zendikar, or a beatstick from rath or an artifact from Rabiah. The intention is that it's supposed to be such a powerful spell that you can break the deck-construction rules of the game. In a non-sanctioned format, i don't see why this is a problem.
...that being said, where i DO see the problem is when players who don't know each other play. I wouldn't bring any of my decks with wishes or cards that are on the banlist to any convention or play with people who i aren't in my normal playgroup. It's partially curtesy, but mostly, i don't trust other players with my local version of the gentle-persons agreement. Worse is if some nutcase decided to put in all the wishes and bend all the rules and then scare off potential new players to the format.
Actually, just last night, i was playing at the LGS, and i can definitely single out some number of players there who would be pretty detrimental to spreading the format; a deck with what i can only describe as 10+ tutors, searching for the 2 card combo every time, every game by turns 2-3. 'Twas pretty boring. I don't recall any other players contributing any more than just ramping and dropping some utility dorks. And imagine giving that guy the OK from the 'official rules' to break the format even more!
So even though i'm a massive proponent of allowing wishes to be used as intended, i don't think the official rules should change beyond allowing some wish-board or whatever it currently is. I think that individual play groups should manage their own wish-rules. If I'd said anything to the contrary before this, i think that last night at the LGS (the first time in ages for me) really made an impression as to what 'outside my meta' looks like, and not scaring off potential new players definitely offsets my want to play the game as i/we want to.
Is it really impossible to just let them work as printed? You get a card you own from outside the game. In a nonsanctioned format, which edh is, this can be any card from your collection as per the official mtg rules.
Of course not, just like it would be fine to allow ante. Or dexterity cards. Or Griselbrand. The issue is what should be allowed for groups with unknown players, such as an LGS. Forcing them to interact with Wish cards is a serious downside, exactly because people do not agree to the scope in advance, and get hijacked.
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.
The main baggage sideboards carry for me, at least personally, is that they are inseparable from competitive Magic, and that's not a weight we care to load Commander with. The association is enough to want to keep the streams from crossing.
The main baggage sideboards carry for me, at least personally, is that they are inseparable from competitive Magic, and that's not a weight we care to load Commander with. The association is enough to want to keep the streams from crossing.
What about just having them work as written, like what the person who revived the thread was asking?
In terms of sideboard, on their own they don’t really make sense in commander regardless of competition. Technically it’s a “best of 1” format since there aren't any rounds. That said, nothing stops people from having a pack of cards on hand and switching up cards based on what they just played against. I’ll sometimes do that if I’m somewhere new and notice there’s some literally dead cards in my deck, but that’s about it.
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.
What about just having them work as written, like what the person who revived the thread was asking?
In terms of sideboard, on their own they don’t really make sense in commander regardless of competition. Technically it’s a “best of 1” format since there aren't any rounds. That said, nothing stops people from having a pack of cards on hand and switching up cards based on what they just played against. I’ll sometimes do that if I’m somewhere new and notice there’s some literally dead cards in my deck, but that’s about it.
The scenario I would envision is that the RC says wishes function as intended. They then have to define the size of the sideboard for sanctioned games, since those are things. Now we run into countless situations where player A casts a wish, grabs his binder, and player B argues that sideboards are only X cards.
Yeah, obviously it isn't an improvement at all which was my point a few posts back, but Sheldon just said:
The main baggage sideboards carry for me, at least personally, is that they are inseparable from competitive Magic
Which to me says that sideboards not existing doesn't have anything to do inherently with the wish cards. So basically what I want to clear up is if:
A) The RC just doesn't want wishes to function as intended because it'd be annoying, which is fine by me
B) The RC would probably allow them if side/wishboards actually existed, but they don't so wishes don't work
C) Something else entirely.
Note that "say they work as in the CR" just generates a million arguments. Do you have to obey color identity? Can it be the same card that's in your deck? How long do I have to give my opponents?
And yes, we got these questions all the time when we didn't have rules around wishes. The CR pretty much handwaves away wishes outside of a competitive setting, so the most appropriate thing is to leave it up to playgroups and set a default that prevents people from imposing their vision without discussion.
Why is anyone acting like having wishes conform to the Commander format would be complicated and unwieldy? It’s so intuitive a caveman can understand it. Restating arguments made against wishing that have already been debunked in this thread doesn’t make them any more correct. Ignoring better arguments doesn’t make them incorrect. At this point, arguments against wishes in Commander are starting to seem more like false pretense rather than what I thought were false, worst-case-scenario assumptions (seen below).
Wishes wouldn't be complicated if there were a set rule, but as Papa Funk stated, there are lots of questions surrounding it. And as we saw in the ban list update thread, multiple people in THAT thread have different ideas, ranging from three cards, 10 cards, to entire collections. And since other users want to nitpick the letter of the rule, it is only expected that we would have to expore every possibility, no matter how unlikely or intuitive it should be.
Why is anyone acting like having wishes conform to the Commander format would be complicated and unwieldy? It’s so intuitive a caveman can understand it. Restating arguments made against wishing that have already been debunked in this thread doesn’t make them any more correct. Ignoring better arguments doesn’t make them incorrect. At this point, arguments against wishes in Commander are starting to seem more like false pretense rather than what I thought were false, worst-case-scenario assumptions (seen below)
It's literally not intuitive, as displayed in the other thread. Multiple people think their idea is obvious and straight forward.
Arguments here have not been "debunked", they have had counter arguments made. This is all subjective, there is no 'correct' rule or ruling.
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.
Lets lay some ground rules:
1) Fractured Powerstone and Paliano, the High City are nonequivalent examples that have no weight in the discussion.
2) Concerns about price are a non-issue.
3) If a player would hypothetically misbehave with using wishes, they are obviously violating the social contract / gentleman's agreement.
4) The arguments against wishes that are "do we really need them?" and "but the RC made this rule years ago so..." are nonarguments.
5) The reason this discussion came about recently is because of misunderstanding and confusion, which rule 13 already creates for the masses who don't know about it, ergo clarity and strict rules are more desirable than murkiness and house rules.
Lets lay some ground rules:
1) Fractured Powerstone and Paliano, the High City are nonequivalent examples that have no weight in the discussion.
2) Concerns about price are a non-issue.
3) If a player would hypothetically misbehave with using wishes, they are obviously violating the social contract / gentleman's agreement.
4) The arguments against wishes that are "do we really need them?" and "but the RC made this rule years ago so..." are nonarguments.
5) The reason this discussion came about recently is because of misunderstanding and confusion, which rule 13 already creates for the masses who don't know about it, ergo clarity and strict rules are more desirable than murkiness and house rules.
1) Agreed.
2) Except that it is. Cards cost money and making cards more desirable suddenly is something that has to be taken into account by the RC and the CAG. We're not WotC and we're allowed to acknowledge the existence of the secondary market.
3) This is true for anything in Commander, not just wishes. What makes Wishes special is the degree to which a bad or ignorant actor can abuse them to the detriment of everyone else in the game.
4) You are literally arguing that a rule of the format should be changed. The onus is on the side asking for change to prove that change is better than the status quo. Inertia is a powerful force.
5) Rule 13 was clarified for exactly this reason. Should ignorance of any given rule by some percentage of the playerbase be a valid reason to argue for removal of that rule? I don't think so.
Lets lay some ground rules:
1) Fractured Powerstone and Paliano, the High City are nonequivalent examples that have no weight in the discussion.
2) Concerns about price are a non-issue.
3) If a player would hypothetically misbehave with using wishes, they are obviously violating the social contract / gentleman's agreement.
4) The arguments against wishes that are "do we really need them?" and "but the RC made this rule years ago so..." are nonarguments.
5) The reason this discussion came about recently is because of misunderstanding and confusion, which rule 13 already creates for the masses who don't know about it, ergo clarity and strict rules are more desirable than murkiness and house rules.
2) Except that it is. Cards cost money and making cards more desirable suddenly is something that has to be taken into account by the RC and the CAG. We're not WotC and we're allowed to acknowledge the existence of the secondary market.
4) You are literally arguing that a rule of the format should be changed. The onus is on the side asking for change to prove that change is better than the status quo. Inertia is a powerful force.
5) Rule 13 was clarified for exactly this reason. Should ignorance of any given rule by some percentage of the playerbase be a valid reason to argue for removal of that rule? I don't think so.
2)Even if a wish were to spike in price, the individual must adapt or fail, we aren't playing penny dreadful.
4) Because those two arguments are used as the last line of defense in the rules discussion section and have in their several years added nothing to a discussion other than inertia you speak of.
5) "The reason this discussion came about recently is because of misunderstanding and confusion" specifically from a rules clarification.
I like how not only people can’t agree on the rules for how wishes should be implemented (which is why they aren’t), but they also can’t agree on rules on how to discuss the topic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Worse, the giant stack included lots of basic lands and other cards that were neither Hedron Alignment, nor a card that the wish in question could actually fetch. It was in fact miserable.
When I played a game in my LGS that allowed a wish board, I basically just used it to hide my (not-yet-banned) Emrakul from Bribery effects. I figured if I can afford 15 mana then I can probably also afford 17 mana. Which is... not particularly unfair (or at least, not moreso than emmy is by default), but also sort of a boring way to use a wish card.
The only other good use I can think of for a wish is running narrow hate cards, which is about as fun as Iona herself. They also tend to disproportionately screw over monocolor decks, which are probably the least tryhard decks at the table unless maybe they're monoblue.
Otherwise you're probably better off just playing a charm or something if you're really that desperate for options.
- Rabid Wombat
Excluding spawnsirr, emrakul and the transform cards, there are 121 more edrazi you can bring in with spawnsire. You may not be winning with battle of wits, but i really am tempted to build a deck that can in edh.
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
My Helpdesk
[Pr] Marath | [Pr] Lovisa | Jodah | Saskia | Najeela | Yisan | Lord Windgrace | Atraxa | Meren | Gisa and Geralf
well, the positives are pretty narrow, and depends on whether or not you'd consider normal deck-construction limitations to also apply to the wish-board. I'm always a proponent of having as few cards banned as possible, and for all the cards to be played within the spirit of the rules in the way that they are made.
I feel like wishes are like tutors, but can break the deck construction rules of whatever format I'm playing. outside the game to me is exactly that, so it allows for some potentially weird things that can be done. So to me, i can wish for progenitus in a mono green, since that makes wishes different from tutors. It just allows for some really silly things that otherwise wouldn't be viable. I suppose i have a quite mature playgroup, so we tend not to push oppression too much even with wishes and with a very open banlist. Also, death wish also allows me to pay half my life; there aren't many cards in magic that lets me do that.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
Thank you for reading my post!
I just want to keep the setting light and fun, you know? I think wishes would bring some sort of impulsiveness to the game that can certainly be healthy if you don't take it too seriously. I think intentions are very important here. I want to play a wish to bring something to the table that no one expects; not even me when I put the card in my deck (that's not to say I wouldn't know what I'm looking for at the time). I hope that makes sense.
Also, this got merged with a 3-year-old thread?
UGTurboFogGU
BRSacrificial AggroBR
16The Paper Pauper Battle Bag16
EDH
BRRakdos, Lord of PingersBR
GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
UB Ramses OverdarkUB
Sig by Ace5301 of Ace of Spades Studio
The general philosophy of this board is to keep discussions contained into a single thread, so people don't have to read 10 page discussions in 4 or more previous threads. Age, in these situations, does not matter.
On to the rest of your post...
I think most can understand where you're coming from, with wanting to inject new fun stuffs into the format. But I feel that the biggest downside to wishes would be Greed...you want all the things, but you can't find the place to put them in your deck. BUT YOU WANT ALL THE THINGS! It feels like it flies in the face of those who also wanted all the things, but made compromises, alternatives, and outright had to say, "Can't do it".
Intentions are indeed important...yours as well as anyone else's. While yours do sound noble, it would be far too easy for someone else to make it completely IGnoble in one manner or another. I am aware that the same could be said of anything in the format(indeed, the game), but some of those ignoble aspects are still expected(hosing mono-color decks with Iona for one).
Forgive me if I'm completely off track, but am I correct in assuming that one of your agendas(if you will) is that you want to play a wacky card in a completely off track deck because you don't have the cards to play a wacky deck with that card? No judgement, because I understand the struggle, but that's what your last post seems to indicate is one aspect.
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)
I understand that. I don't really appreciate being lumped into the general conversation, as I find it somewhat detracts from the spirit of what I was trying to communicate.
Thanks for the insight. I have to say I'm pretty taken aback by the negativity of the reactions. Some had very little to do with what I was talking about. You seem to understand where I'm coming from, so thank you!
I like to see wishes as an opportunity to inject some randomness into most decks to increase the fun at the table. I've come to understand that this isn't how most people see it. I really think the best way to play a Wish in a casual game is not to overthink it, both when deciding to put it into the deck and when casting it.
The deck would not really be off-track, but most decks can spare a few "flex-slots" for some fun, spicy inclusions. I was thinking Wishes would fill that role nicely, since it's like having a flex slot that changes every time you cast it!
UGTurboFogGU
BRSacrificial AggroBR
16The Paper Pauper Battle Bag16
EDH
BRRakdos, Lord of PingersBR
GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
UB Ramses OverdarkUB
Sig by Ace5301 of Ace of Spades Studio
This is pretty much my thinking as well. Thanks for chiming in. Now I know I'm not the only one.
UGTurboFogGU
BRSacrificial AggroBR
16The Paper Pauper Battle Bag16
EDH
BRRakdos, Lord of PingersBR
GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
UB Ramses OverdarkUB
Sig by Ace5301 of Ace of Spades Studio
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
I'm sort of on your side too. I like that it works differently from tutors, and gives a different flavour to the card that would otherwise disappear. Also, EDH is for funsies, not for bloodsies... as long as it doesn't take too long, obviously!
Tutors are not the same thing as wishes, and they should really be kept that way. I feel like this sort of sentiment is much more relevant to groups where tuning and competitiveness are a concern, and curbing those tendencies is a good thing (and i agree with those sentiments too). That's not to say that either side has more of a point than any other though, but especially if any reasonable deck in the meta has upwards of 10+ tutoring effects, the game can get quite stale, quick. Adding wishes to that has the potential to make it worse.
Because using the card as intended gives the card the flavour that it deserves; you're reaching out of the blind eternities to grab some instant from zendikar, or a beatstick from rath or an artifact from Rabiah. The intention is that it's supposed to be such a powerful spell that you can break the deck-construction rules of the game. In a non-sanctioned format, i don't see why this is a problem.
...that being said, where i DO see the problem is when players who don't know each other play. I wouldn't bring any of my decks with wishes or cards that are on the banlist to any convention or play with people who i aren't in my normal playgroup. It's partially curtesy, but mostly, i don't trust other players with my local version of the gentle-persons agreement. Worse is if some nutcase decided to put in all the wishes and bend all the rules and then scare off potential new players to the format.
Actually, just last night, i was playing at the LGS, and i can definitely single out some number of players there who would be pretty detrimental to spreading the format; a deck with what i can only describe as 10+ tutors, searching for the 2 card combo every time, every game by turns 2-3. 'Twas pretty boring. I don't recall any other players contributing any more than just ramping and dropping some utility dorks. And imagine giving that guy the OK from the 'official rules' to break the format even more!
So even though i'm a massive proponent of allowing wishes to be used as intended, i don't think the official rules should change beyond allowing some wish-board or whatever it currently is. I think that individual play groups should manage their own wish-rules. If I'd said anything to the contrary before this, i think that last night at the LGS (the first time in ages for me) really made an impression as to what 'outside my meta' looks like, and not scaring off potential new players definitely offsets my want to play the game as i/we want to.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
What about just having them work as written, like what the person who revived the thread was asking?
In terms of sideboard, on their own they don’t really make sense in commander regardless of competition. Technically it’s a “best of 1” format since there aren't any rounds. That said, nothing stops people from having a pack of cards on hand and switching up cards based on what they just played against. I’ll sometimes do that if I’m somewhere new and notice there’s some literally dead cards in my deck, but that’s about it.
The scenario I would envision is that the RC says wishes function as intended. They then have to define the size of the sideboard for sanctioned games, since those are things. Now we run into countless situations where player A casts a wish, grabs his binder, and player B argues that sideboards are only X cards.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Which to me says that sideboards not existing doesn't have anything to do inherently with the wish cards. So basically what I want to clear up is if:
A) The RC just doesn't want wishes to function as intended because it'd be annoying, which is fine by me
B) The RC would probably allow them if side/wishboards actually existed, but they don't so wishes don't work
C) Something else entirely.
And yes, we got these questions all the time when we didn't have rules around wishes. The CR pretty much handwaves away wishes outside of a competitive setting, so the most appropriate thing is to leave it up to playgroups and set a default that prevents people from imposing their vision without discussion.
Wishes wouldn't be complicated if there were a set rule, but as Papa Funk stated, there are lots of questions surrounding it. And as we saw in the ban list update thread, multiple people in THAT thread have different ideas, ranging from three cards, 10 cards, to entire collections. And since other users want to nitpick the letter of the rule, it is only expected that we would have to expore every possibility, no matter how unlikely or intuitive it should be.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
It's literally not intuitive, as displayed in the other thread. Multiple people think their idea is obvious and straight forward.
Arguments here have not been "debunked", they have had counter arguments made. This is all subjective, there is no 'correct' rule or ruling.
1) Fractured Powerstone and Paliano, the High City are nonequivalent examples that have no weight in the discussion.
2) Concerns about price are a non-issue.
3) If a player would hypothetically misbehave with using wishes, they are obviously violating the social contract / gentleman's agreement.
4) The arguments against wishes that are "do we really need them?" and "but the RC made this rule years ago so..." are nonarguments.
5) The reason this discussion came about recently is because of misunderstanding and confusion, which rule 13 already creates for the masses who don't know about it, ergo clarity and strict rules are more desirable than murkiness and house rules.
Do I make myself clear?
1) Agreed.
2) Except that it is. Cards cost money and making cards more desirable suddenly is something that has to be taken into account by the RC and the CAG. We're not WotC and we're allowed to acknowledge the existence of the secondary market.
3) This is true for anything in Commander, not just wishes. What makes Wishes special is the degree to which a bad or ignorant actor can abuse them to the detriment of everyone else in the game.
4) You are literally arguing that a rule of the format should be changed. The onus is on the side asking for change to prove that change is better than the status quo. Inertia is a powerful force.
5) Rule 13 was clarified for exactly this reason. Should ignorance of any given rule by some percentage of the playerbase be a valid reason to argue for removal of that rule? I don't think so.
magicjudge.tumblr.com
GWU Angus Mackenzie's Fog of War GWU / B Sheoldred's Sleepless Cemetery B / R Ashling's Purifying Pilgrimage R
U Unesh's Sphinx Storm U / R Ib's Goblins: What It Says On The Tin R / UR Okaun & Zndrsplt Flip Out UR
Oathbreaker: UB Ashiok's Persistent Nightmare UB
4) Because those two arguments are used as the last line of defense in the rules discussion section and have in their several years added nothing to a discussion other than inertia you speak of.
5) "The reason this discussion came about recently is because of misunderstanding and confusion" specifically from a rules clarification.