This topic is more of a though exercise for me, as I'm fine with the RC banlist and so is my playgroup. Some of my playgroup members also play with another group that has gotten a little goofy with house bans, to the point that requesting house bans has become a sort of arms race. Additionally, Ive noticed that calls for banlist changes or specific bannings on this forum tend to fall into different categories, focusing on fast mana or overplayed cards or combo pieces or problem commanders. Additionally one of the reasons often brought up as to why it isn't enough to merely house ban certain cards is that litigating individual cards and getting the whole group to agree doesn't always work, and playing at LGSs rules it out beyond pointing to an established alternative banlist, like French or Leviathan, and playing based on that.
My idea to address this is an intermediate between relying on house bans and replacing the banlist. It would serve as a supplement to the RC banlist rather than a replacement, with the RC list being the starting point and then a few optional modules, or supplemental lists, that can be added on if the group agrees, based around categories of cards they ban. This would allow groups to buy in to the parts they want based on the issues the group has while ignoring the parts they aren't interested in, much like house bans work, but rather than litigating on a card by card basis you have to take the whole module, all or nothing. That means you could have a fast mana module that bans a range of fast mana cards that get complained about, but doing so means you don't have to argue for banning each card individually, and you don't start adding cards that are similar but not generally problematic. It would reduce the discussion time and make it simpler to understand that a large scale house ban (obviously just saying "no Sol ring" is simpler if it stays at that, but you quickly get into the "but what about" argument that brings additional cards into the discussion) Having a list to point to simplifies the discussion by being a finished product and point of reference, making the discussion about whether the list works for the playgroup rather than how bannig card x but not card y is a problem, or banning card z instead makes it work.
The categories/modules I had in mind to start would be a fast mana banlist, an "overplayed" banlist (for powerful cards that are basically auto includes like Rift or Craterhoof, sort of the miscellaneous list), a combo banlist to hit the biggest offenders, and a banned as a commander list. I don't know what these lists would all look like, or if other categories are needed, though I think I have a good idea of what the fast mana list would be.
Before getting into any details though, I'm interested in what people think about the concept, both about its viability and its value. Could it work as a functional supplement to the banlist, and would it be useful enough that people would use it and it would be worth the effort (if done right. Obviously a crappy end product wouldn't be used, but would even a functional version that works well be something that people would even be interested in, and would it serve its intended function?).
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!
I'm interested in seeing the idea expanded upon, if only to see where it ends up. Nevertheless, I'm skeptical, and I think my skepticism derives from me not seeing much of any value in house bans.
When it comes to Commander, I believe there's a multitude of ways to ruin games if players want to. The list of cards players can possibly use to create miserable games is so expansive that banning them all would lead to an untenable, mile-long list. Furthermore, and this is the real clincher I believe, almost none of those cards will always create a miserable game of Commander when played because the way cards are played matter.
In my experience, when someone calls for a house ban on some kind of card, it isn't the card in question which usually leads to miserable games, but the way a particular player or two within that playgroup is using said card. There are usually other non-heinous ways to play with such cards, illustrating that the issue isn't with the card per se, but the players. I think Sensei's Divining Top makes for a decent example. If players are upset with Top because they find it lengthens their games significantly without contributing much to it, and some players want it banned for that reason, we understand it's entirely possible to play with Top in ways that don't lead to that sort of gameplay. Players can activate Top before the last moment possible to speed things along, and they don't have to ponder over their decisions meticulously, even allowing other players to continue with their turn as Top is resolving if they believe whatever said player is doing won't affect the order of the top three cards.
Sol Ring strikes me as another good example. In the right deck (a deck whose goal is simply to combo off as quickly as possible), Sol Ring is a nightmare. It accelerates those sorts of decks past levels most playgroups would find acceptable. When Sol Ring is played in something akin to Demon-tribal though, an early Sol Ring won't likely be of consequence. My personal Commander deck practically exemplifies this aspect, using many cards players typically find problematic to little effect.
So, all of this leads me back to the idea you're entertaining here, Onering. I'm skeptical that the Commander ban list can be improved in any way by adding "buckets" with which local communities can pick and choose additional categories of cards to ban because I highly doubt the cards in said buckets will always be problematic; I believe the players using those cards will be the problem instead. As such, I think this would naturally lead to arguments regarding which buckets a group wants banned. (Not everyone would be in agreement, especially since some players within that group would likely already be playing cards in that bucket.) I think it would also lead to arguments regarding the cards listed within each bucket. (Again, communities being unanimous here seems highly unlikely.) Overall, I just don't think it's a good idea because I don't believe the Commander ban list can be improved with large swaths of banned cards. The problem usually lies within the players, not within the cards.
I'm interested in seeing the idea expanded upon, if only to see where it ends up. Nevertheless, I'm skeptical, and I think my skepticism derives from me not seeing much of any value in house bans.
When it comes to Commander, I believe there's a multitude of ways to ruin games if players want to. The list of cards players can possibly use to create miserable games is so expansive that banning them all would lead to an untenable, mile-long list. Furthermore, and this is the real clincher I believe, almost none of those cards will always create a miserable game of Commander when played because the way cards are played matter.
In my experience, when someone calls for a house ban on some kind of card, it isn't the card in question which usually leads to miserable games, but the way a particular player or two within that playgroup is using said card. There are usually other non-heinous ways to play with such cards, illustrating that the issue isn't with the card per se, but the players. I think Sensei's Divining Top makes for a decent example. If players are upset with Top because they find it lengthens their games significantly without contributing much to it, and some players want it banned for that reason, we understand it's entirely possible to play with Top in ways that don't lead to that sort of gameplay. Players can activate Top before the last moment possible to speed things along, and they don't have to ponder over their decisions meticulously, even allowing other players to continue with their turn as Top is resolving if they believe whatever said player is doing won't affect the order of the top three cards.
Sol Ring strikes me as another good example. In the right deck (a deck whose goal is simply to combo off as quickly as possible), Sol Ring is a nightmare. It accelerates those sorts of decks past levels most playgroups would find acceptable. When Sol Ring is played in something akin to Demon-tribal though, an early Sol Ring won't likely be of consequence. My personal Commander deck practically exemplifies this aspect, using many cards players typically find problematic to little effect.
So, all of this leads me back to the idea you're entertaining here, Onering. I'm skeptical that the Commander ban list can be improved in any way by adding "buckets" with which local communities can pick and choose additional categories of cards to ban because I highly doubt the cards in said buckets will always be problematic; I believe the players using those cards will be the problem instead. As such, I think this would naturally lead to arguments regarding which buckets a group wants banned. (Not everyone would be in agreement, especially since some players within that group would likely already be playing cards in that bucket.) I think it would also lead to arguments regarding the cards listed within each bucket. (Again, communities being unanimous here seems highly unlikely.) Overall, I just don't think it's a good idea because I don't believe the Commander ban list can be improved with large swaths of banned cards. The problem usually lies within the players, not within the cards.
I mostly agree. I believe that the RC banlist is well maintained and works well for most people, for the reasons you pointed out. That said, there are people and playgroups that it doesn't work for, and while often it is a player problem, sometimes it really is a matter of preference. I'm coming at this from the angle that it could be an improvement over house bans rather than an improvement over the banlist (at least for most people).
I've also thouht of another supplemental banlist possibility for once the UN celebration is over: an UnBanned list that bans certain silver bordered cards for groups that allow silver bordered. That might be worth exploring separately as well.
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!
I would be interested in it as well. There is the question though of if instead of having modules of bans if you just had a secondary banned list to apply as a blanket for possibly those trying to play a higher end comp game.
The question might be why have a secondary list at all when most of the higher end combo enablers and fast wins come from cards that more casual players probably dont play at all anyways.
I am cool with the concept though. I have always been baffled by those playing competitive EDH and still using the RC's list unmodified.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
I would be interested in it as well. There is the question though of if instead of having modules of bans if you just had a secondary banned list to apply as a blanket for possibly those trying to play a higher end comp game.
The question might be why have a secondary list at all when most of the higher end combo enablers and fast wins come from cards that more casual players probably dont play at all anyways.
I am cool with the concept though. I have always been baffled by those playing competitive EDH and still using the RC's list unmodified.
Perhaps that could be another "basket" or module, a "cEDH" module containing cards banned specifically for balance/power reasons, whereas the other ideas are more for addressing common complaints from casual players. I think I agree with you on making that less a module and more an alternate ban list, as any attempt at creating a module that balances for competitive play would be fruitless when combined with other modules. Leviathan/French already exist as banlists that fit this purpose, though those are for 1v1 while I assume you're talking about a list for traditional 40 life multiplayer. To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure what changes cEDH players would be looking for beyond perhaps the fast mana. My regular playgroup is more casual, and when you play online you rarely get a mix where everyone is running 100% decks, so I don't have enough experience actually playing at that level to have any suggestions, and I mostly follow ban list discussions from a casual perspective or 1v1 sub formats (which don't really translate well into multiplayer). What ideas do you have?
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!
I'm not sure what changes cEDH players would be looking for beyond perhaps the fast mana. My regular playgroup is more casual, and when you play online you rarely get a mix where everyone is running 100% decks, so I don't have enough experience actually playing at that level to have any suggestions, and I mostly follow ban list discussions from a casual perspective or 1v1 sub formats (which don't really translate well into multiplayer). What ideas do you have?
Banning fast mana would probably be a bad idea for cEDH as it would push decks into green even more. Their style of play seems pretty healthy using the RCs banlist as a variety of decks and gameplans exist (except pure Agro which is bad even in casual because 90-120 life is a lot).
I'd love to help out on the UnBanned list targeting sliver bordered cards, since my group is going to allow uncards even after the 15th.
Please feel free to make suggestions. So far I haven't played much of it so I'd be starting with what the RC banned for the celebration, and adding Spike because of the confusion she causes (she doesn't work unless you agree to allow sideboards/outside the game cards, but her legality can make people assume that she works).
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!
I'm interested in the idea as an academic experiment at the least.
At the very least, with some careful development of the idea, it's a novel idea that could make a nice alternative in niche circles where the general rules list doesn't quite lead to the desired "vibe".
It seems like most discussions of banned lists are generally on a slippery slope, and how far the discussion goes down that slope determines how much value the discussion has. This idea could, possibly, avoid that issue. I look forward to seeing what comes out of this.
Well if we're talking silver bordered bans, mox lotus could probably come off. I mean yeah it looks scary but I don't think there's any decent way to get it into play and get something worth having infinite mana for all that well. 15 is pretty uncastable unless you go all in with the ramp and you could even be cool with it and graft it and rocket launcher onto the seraph for coolness points. I mean it takes 2 attacks from a 4/4 flier for 6 for any payoff and if you get stopped your pieces are gone into exile. Even a stifle makes that jank compared to trying to win with felidar soverign.
Well if we're talking silver bordered bans, mox lotus could probably come off. I mean yeah it looks scary but I don't think there's any decent way to get it into play and get something worth having infinite mana for all that well. 15 is pretty uncastable
Uh... not sure what format you're playing, but a) 15 mana is plenty easy to reach at most tables without going infinite, and b) there is no need to cast Mox Lotus to get it onto the field. Show & Tell, Arcum Dagsson, Muzzio, Eureka, blue Braids, Master Transmuter, and Kuldotha Forgemaster just to name a few. And three of those are legendary creatures, so you could run them as your commander.
Well if we're talking silver bordered bans, mox lotus could probably come off. I mean yeah it looks scary but I don't think there's any decent way to get it into play and get something worth having infinite mana for all that well. 15 is pretty uncastable
Uh... not sure what format you're playing, but a) 15 mana is plenty easy to reach at most tables without going infinite, and b) there is no need to cast Mox Lotus to get it onto the field. Show & Tell, Arcum Dagsson, Muzzio, Eureka, blue Braids, Master Transmuter, and Kuldotha Forgemaster just to name a few. And three of those are legendary creatures, so you could run them as your commander.
To me even discussing specific cards at this point is getting the horse before the cart. I think the best place to start is from a discussion of the broader points - which subsections of EDH community do you want to make banlists for? Following from that, what do you want the modules to look like in a broader sense? (how heavily do you ban? How much overlap do you have in the separate modules? Are they separate entities or is there bleedover?) From there you discuss individual cards in a modular context, not in terms of blanket coverage.
I've actually been stewing on this same idea for a few weeks. Here're the buckets I thought of:
1) High power level creatures (Craterhoof, Sylvan Primordial, Iona, Avacyn, Angel of Hope, Deadeye Navigator etc.)
2) High power level tutors (Tooth & Nail, Gifts Ungiven, Vampiric tutor, demonic tutor, survival of the fittest, etc.)
3) Overpowered Due to Format Rules (multiplayer, life total, etc.) (Rhystic study, mystic remora, consecrated sphinx, sylvan primordial, serra ascendant, felidar sovereign/test of endurance, etc.)
4) Fast Mana (grim monolith, mana vault, mana crypt, sol ring, etc.)
5) Stax (Winter orb, static orb, tanglewire, stasis, etc.)
6) Problem commanders (Momir Vig, Arcum, Zur, Teferi PW, Prossh, probably others by now I'm sure)
Obviously all that's just at the idea stage and I wouldn't necessarily commit to those lists as is but they give an idea of the category.
"We use the stax and fast mana banlists because we only want to play green."
I'd love to help out on the UnBanned list targeting sliver bordered cards, since my group is going to allow uncards even after the 15th.
Please feel free to make suggestions. So far I haven't played much of it so I'd be starting with what the RC banned for the celebration, and adding Spike because of the confusion she causes (she doesn't work unless you agree to allow sideboards/outside the game cards, but her legality can make people assume that she works).
The list I put forth for my gorup is basically what the RC suggested with a location lock on Nerf War which is due to us playing at different places depending on the day of the week, here's what I added:
Mirror Mirror
Topsy Turvy ( we had enough trouble reversing the turn order, we don't need to add phases due to a plane in planechase)
Incoming! ( a little too crazy imo)
Infernal Spawn of Infernal Spawn of Evil
I like the idea of a modular banned list, and I think its ideal end goal if adopted officially, would be moving the more debated existing bans to modules instead of the core. I've always been a proponent of a fairly minimal banned list. If you divided the existing banned list into no debate necessary instabans, and heavily deliberated but we think we made the right decision bans, you could put the latter into optional modules. The only thing I'd ask is that modules not be considered added by default - I'd like the expected LGS ban list to be the minimal one.
I like the idea of a modular banned list, and I think its ideal end goal if adopted officially, would be moving the more debated existing bans to modules instead of the core. I've always been a proponent of a fairly minimal banned list. If you divided the existing banned list into no debate necessary instabans, and heavily deliberated but we think we made the right decision bans, you could put the latter into optional modules. The only thing I'd ask is that modules not be considered added by default - I'd like the expected LGS ban list to be the minimal one.
So the base of your idea, no local rules, has less cards banned than are banned now? You think thats the best for casual gameplay?
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.
I like the idea of a modular banned list, and I think its ideal end goal if adopted officially, would be moving the more debated existing bans to modules instead of the core. I've always been a proponent of a fairly minimal banned list. If you divided the existing banned list into no debate necessary instabans, and heavily deliberated but we think we made the right decision bans, you could put the latter into optional modules. The only thing I'd ask is that modules not be considered added by default - I'd like the expected LGS ban list to be the minimal one.
So the base of your idea, no local rules, has less cards banned than are banned now? You think thats the best for casual gameplay?
I think a format that puts so much stock in house rules should largely rely on them as the default answer to a problem. Commander is full of players adding additional cards to the banlist -- no mld, no stax, no "fast" combo, etc. If the format goes in a direction where this sort of thing is organized for us, it would be no problem at all to reduce the always-on banlist to only the cards whose ban required (almost?) no debate. All the bans that took a whole lot of back and forth, and all the cards on the shortlist of potentially safe unbans could be transferred to these modules that would be optional by definition rather than active by definition.
I think a format that puts so much stock in house rules should largely rely on them as the default answer to a problem. Commander is full of players adding additional cards to the banlist -- no mld, no stax, no "fast" combo, etc. If the format goes in a direction where this sort of thing is organized for us, it would be no problem at all to reduce the always-on banlist to only the cards whose ban required (almost?) no debate. All the bans that took a whole lot of back and forth, and all the cards on the shortlist of potentially safe unbans could be transferred to these modules that would be optional by definition rather than active by definition.
I think that absolutely wrecks people without a local group. If no fringe cards that 'interact poorly' or 'centralize the game' are on the basic list, it devolves fairly rapidly. I have no issue with striations of the ban list, but everyone at a table should have to 'opt in' as it is now for people playing banned cards. Groups can add strata quite easily without the basic rules being as 'wild wild west'.
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My idea to address this is an intermediate between relying on house bans and replacing the banlist. It would serve as a supplement to the RC banlist rather than a replacement, with the RC list being the starting point and then a few optional modules, or supplemental lists, that can be added on if the group agrees, based around categories of cards they ban. This would allow groups to buy in to the parts they want based on the issues the group has while ignoring the parts they aren't interested in, much like house bans work, but rather than litigating on a card by card basis you have to take the whole module, all or nothing. That means you could have a fast mana module that bans a range of fast mana cards that get complained about, but doing so means you don't have to argue for banning each card individually, and you don't start adding cards that are similar but not generally problematic. It would reduce the discussion time and make it simpler to understand that a large scale house ban (obviously just saying "no Sol ring" is simpler if it stays at that, but you quickly get into the "but what about" argument that brings additional cards into the discussion) Having a list to point to simplifies the discussion by being a finished product and point of reference, making the discussion about whether the list works for the playgroup rather than how bannig card x but not card y is a problem, or banning card z instead makes it work.
The categories/modules I had in mind to start would be a fast mana banlist, an "overplayed" banlist (for powerful cards that are basically auto includes like Rift or Craterhoof, sort of the miscellaneous list), a combo banlist to hit the biggest offenders, and a banned as a commander list. I don't know what these lists would all look like, or if other categories are needed, though I think I have a good idea of what the fast mana list would be.
Before getting into any details though, I'm interested in what people think about the concept, both about its viability and its value. Could it work as a functional supplement to the banlist, and would it be useful enough that people would use it and it would be worth the effort (if done right. Obviously a crappy end product wouldn't be used, but would even a functional version that works well be something that people would even be interested in, and would it serve its intended function?).
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!
When it comes to Commander, I believe there's a multitude of ways to ruin games if players want to. The list of cards players can possibly use to create miserable games is so expansive that banning them all would lead to an untenable, mile-long list. Furthermore, and this is the real clincher I believe, almost none of those cards will always create a miserable game of Commander when played because the way cards are played matter.
In my experience, when someone calls for a house ban on some kind of card, it isn't the card in question which usually leads to miserable games, but the way a particular player or two within that playgroup is using said card. There are usually other non-heinous ways to play with such cards, illustrating that the issue isn't with the card per se, but the players. I think Sensei's Divining Top makes for a decent example. If players are upset with Top because they find it lengthens their games significantly without contributing much to it, and some players want it banned for that reason, we understand it's entirely possible to play with Top in ways that don't lead to that sort of gameplay. Players can activate Top before the last moment possible to speed things along, and they don't have to ponder over their decisions meticulously, even allowing other players to continue with their turn as Top is resolving if they believe whatever said player is doing won't affect the order of the top three cards.
Sol Ring strikes me as another good example. In the right deck (a deck whose goal is simply to combo off as quickly as possible), Sol Ring is a nightmare. It accelerates those sorts of decks past levels most playgroups would find acceptable. When Sol Ring is played in something akin to Demon-tribal though, an early Sol Ring won't likely be of consequence. My personal Commander deck practically exemplifies this aspect, using many cards players typically find problematic to little effect.
So, all of this leads me back to the idea you're entertaining here, Onering. I'm skeptical that the Commander ban list can be improved in any way by adding "buckets" with which local communities can pick and choose additional categories of cards to ban because I highly doubt the cards in said buckets will always be problematic; I believe the players using those cards will be the problem instead. As such, I think this would naturally lead to arguments regarding which buckets a group wants banned. (Not everyone would be in agreement, especially since some players within that group would likely already be playing cards in that bucket.) I think it would also lead to arguments regarding the cards listed within each bucket. (Again, communities being unanimous here seems highly unlikely.) Overall, I just don't think it's a good idea because I don't believe the Commander ban list can be improved with large swaths of banned cards. The problem usually lies within the players, not within the cards.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
I mostly agree. I believe that the RC banlist is well maintained and works well for most people, for the reasons you pointed out. That said, there are people and playgroups that it doesn't work for, and while often it is a player problem, sometimes it really is a matter of preference. I'm coming at this from the angle that it could be an improvement over house bans rather than an improvement over the banlist (at least for most people).
I've also thouht of another supplemental banlist possibility for once the UN celebration is over: an UnBanned list that bans certain silver bordered cards for groups that allow silver bordered. That might be worth exploring separately as well.
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!
The question might be why have a secondary list at all when most of the higher end combo enablers and fast wins come from cards that more casual players probably dont play at all anyways.
I am cool with the concept though. I have always been baffled by those playing competitive EDH and still using the RC's list unmodified.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Perhaps that could be another "basket" or module, a "cEDH" module containing cards banned specifically for balance/power reasons, whereas the other ideas are more for addressing common complaints from casual players. I think I agree with you on making that less a module and more an alternate ban list, as any attempt at creating a module that balances for competitive play would be fruitless when combined with other modules. Leviathan/French already exist as banlists that fit this purpose, though those are for 1v1 while I assume you're talking about a list for traditional 40 life multiplayer. To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure what changes cEDH players would be looking for beyond perhaps the fast mana. My regular playgroup is more casual, and when you play online you rarely get a mix where everyone is running 100% decks, so I don't have enough experience actually playing at that level to have any suggestions, and I mostly follow ban list discussions from a casual perspective or 1v1 sub formats (which don't really translate well into multiplayer). What ideas do you have?
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!
Banning fast mana would probably be a bad idea for cEDH as it would push decks into green even more. Their style of play seems pretty healthy using the RCs banlist as a variety of decks and gameplans exist (except pure Agro which is bad even in casual because 90-120 life is a lot).
Please feel free to make suggestions. So far I haven't played much of it so I'd be starting with what the RC banned for the celebration, and adding Spike because of the confusion she causes (she doesn't work unless you agree to allow sideboards/outside the game cards, but her legality can make people assume that she works).
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!
At the very least, with some careful development of the idea, it's a novel idea that could make a nice alternative in niche circles where the general rules list doesn't quite lead to the desired "vibe".
It seems like most discussions of banned lists are generally on a slippery slope, and how far the discussion goes down that slope determines how much value the discussion has. This idea could, possibly, avoid that issue. I look forward to seeing what comes out of this.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
To me even discussing specific cards at this point is getting the horse before the cart. I think the best place to start is from a discussion of the broader points - which subsections of EDH community do you want to make banlists for? Following from that, what do you want the modules to look like in a broader sense? (how heavily do you ban? How much overlap do you have in the separate modules? Are they separate entities or is there bleedover?) From there you discuss individual cards in a modular context, not in terms of blanket coverage.
1) High power level creatures (Craterhoof, Sylvan Primordial, Iona, Avacyn, Angel of Hope, Deadeye Navigator etc.)
2) High power level tutors (Tooth & Nail, Gifts Ungiven, Vampiric tutor, demonic tutor, survival of the fittest, etc.)
3) Overpowered Due to Format Rules (multiplayer, life total, etc.) (Rhystic study, mystic remora, consecrated sphinx, sylvan primordial, serra ascendant, felidar sovereign/test of endurance, etc.)
4) Fast Mana (grim monolith, mana vault, mana crypt, sol ring, etc.)
5) Stax (Winter orb, static orb, tanglewire, stasis, etc.)
6) Problem commanders (Momir Vig, Arcum, Zur, Teferi PW, Prossh, probably others by now I'm sure)
Obviously all that's just at the idea stage and I wouldn't necessarily commit to those lists as is but they give an idea of the category.
"We use the stax and fast mana banlists because we only want to play green."
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
The list I put forth for my gorup is basically what the RC suggested with a location lock on Nerf War which is due to us playing at different places depending on the day of the week, here's what I added:
Mirror Mirror
Topsy Turvy ( we had enough trouble reversing the turn order, we don't need to add phases due to a plane in planechase)
Incoming! ( a little too crazy imo)
Infernal Spawn of Infernal Spawn of Evil
I think a format that puts so much stock in house rules should largely rely on them as the default answer to a problem. Commander is full of players adding additional cards to the banlist -- no mld, no stax, no "fast" combo, etc. If the format goes in a direction where this sort of thing is organized for us, it would be no problem at all to reduce the always-on banlist to only the cards whose ban required (almost?) no debate. All the bans that took a whole lot of back and forth, and all the cards on the shortlist of potentially safe unbans could be transferred to these modules that would be optional by definition rather than active by definition.