Expropriate is so much better than most cards on the ban list. I can't take this ban list seriously and it's irony that they now offer these criteria - it all just looks even more random
Expropriate should typically be worse than Time Stretch. Blatant Thievery is a good card, but Time Warp is better, and I'd rather have 2 Time Warps than a Time Warp plus a Blatant Thievery most of the time, especially when the former comes at a lower cost. It's a great splashy card, but it only becomes a problem when someone other than the caster votes for time. That's a problem that you should head off before it resolves by explaining how stupid it is to vote for time. 3+ time walks is usually going to be insurmountable, but a timewalk plus a Blatant Thievery should not be (at least when Time Warp wouldn't win on its own).
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!
Expropriate should typically be worse than Time Stretch. Blatant Thievery is a good card, but Time Warp is better, and I'd rather have 2 Time Warps than a Time Warp plus a Blatant Thievery most of the time, especially when the former comes at a lower cost. It's a great splashy card, but it only becomes a problem when someone other than the caster votes for time. That's a problem that you should head off before it resolves by explaining how stupid it is to vote for time. 3+ time walks is usually going to be insurmountable, but a timewalk plus a Blatant Thievery should not be (at least when Time Warp wouldn't win on its own).
I can't agree here. Time Stretch provides you an additional extra turn, but doesn't steal permanents. I doubt that you can establish as much power in your additional turn on the board as if you steal the best permanents of your opponents. Also, Time Stretch is not a solution, it doesn't remove a threat on your opponents side, Time Stretch can also be a dead card if you don't draw gas after casting it. Expropriate is just so much more of a "I win" card because of the combination of things it does.
ALso, Expropriate is better than Blatant Thievery, because it doesn't target and can steal even the scariest stuff.
Regarding the "but Expropriate is exiled"-argument: 1) if you want extra turn loops, you do not play Time Stretch but one of the cmc5 variants. Also, I have never seen a game where you would even need to use another Expropriate, if it resolves, that it's game over in 99% of cases. It's the very definition of a game ending spell.
I bet that Biorhythm has a lower quote of winning games compared to Expropriate, it's a dead card in many more cases...
I'm pretty sure the ban criteria is a joke. Sol ring has hit all criteria for years and it's still legal.
just as mishra's workshop hits all the restricted criteria for vintage; brainstorm for legacy. But each format needs their 'signature' card(s) that help define the format. It just so happens that sol ring is that card for EDH.
....and wait a minute; does sol ring really break all of these points?
• Cause severe resource imbalances (i'd severely debate the qualifier severe)
• Allow players to win out of nowhere (not by itself)
• Prevent players from contributing to the game in a meaningful way. (it's not a hoser)
• Cause other players to feel they must play certain cards, even though they are also problematic. (yes; though on any given game, there's usually some number of other artefacts i'd rather be stealing)
• Are very difficult for other players to interact with, especially if doing so requires dedicated, narrow responses when deck-building. (every colour can deal with artefacts - though mana abilities can't be interacted with easily)
• Interact poorly with the multiplayer nature of the format or the specific rules of Commander. (not really?)
• Lead to repetitive game play. (sol ring does this, but in the same way that basic island does.)
I think that many EDH players are a bit too hung up on not having structure to the rules. Maybe a larger emphasis on a social agreement is needed? Maybe as a part of the official rules, before the game starts, players need to describe their deck and what they expect to contribute/expect from the upcoming game.
An aside - I played with randoms one day at the local LGS some months ago, and i started the game by saying that i got a rakdos suicide aggro deck that's somewhat tuned ~75%-90% probably. one other person described their deck as a warrior tribal, another as a nearly unmodified precon, and the 4th kept tightlipped. The table got crushed on turn 3 or 4 by human tribal. By calling it human tribal, it's like he was deliberately hiding the fact that it's a hermit druid combo. the fact that it and najeela are humans is irrelevant.
At that point, everyone's playing the game by the rules, but the 'human tribal' guy was not playing by the spirit of the format, or at least how i saw the format to be. If i want to crush my opponent, i have legacy for that. If i wanna play magical cardboard wizard with a pet lord of tresserhorn who leads my pile of old-school rubbish, i got EDH for that. But if my mates want to play magical cardboard wizards with a more 'serious' bent to it, i'd wanna know so i'd know to choose a gun over a toothpick to the gunfight.
I don't think the banlist is the problem; it's the ideals and principles/philosophy of the format not being well understood by some players.
I'm pretty sure the ban criteria is a joke. Sol ring has hit all criteria for years and it's still legal.
just as mishra's workshop hits all the restricted criteria for vintage; brainstorm for legacy. But each format needs their 'signature' card(s) that help define the format. It just so happens that sol ring is that card for EDH.
....and wait a minute; does sol ring really break all of these points?
• Cause severe resource imbalances (i'd severely debate the qualifier severe)
• Allow players to win out of nowhere (not by itself)
• Prevent players from contributing to the game in a meaningful way. (it's not a hoser)
• Cause other players to feel they must play certain cards, even though they are also problematic. (yes; though on any given game, there's usually some number of other artefacts i'd rather be stealing)
• Are very difficult for other players to interact with, especially if doing so requires dedicated, narrow responses when deck-building. (every colour can deal with artefacts - though mana abilities can't be interacted with easily)
• Interact poorly with the multiplayer nature of the format or the specific rules of Commander. (not really?)
• Lead to repetitive game play. (sol ring does this, but in the same way that basic island does.)
I think that many EDH players are a bit too hung up on not having structure to the rules. Maybe a larger emphasis on a social agreement is needed? Maybe as a part of the official rules, before the game starts, players need to describe their deck and what they expect to contribute/expect from the upcoming game.
An aside - I played with randoms one day at the local LGS some months ago, and i started the game by saying that i got a rakdos suicide aggro deck that's somewhat tuned ~75%-90% probably. one other person described their deck as a warrior tribal, another as a nearly unmodified precon, and the 4th kept tightlipped. The table got crushed on turn 3 or 4 by human tribal. By calling it human tribal, it's like he was deliberately hiding the fact that it's a hermit druid combo. the fact that it and najeela are humans is irrelevant.
At that point, everyone's playing the game by the rules, but the 'human tribal' guy was not playing by the spirit of the format, or at least how i saw the format to be. If i want to crush my opponent, i have legacy for that. If i wanna play magical cardboard wizard with a pet lord of tresserhorn who leads my pile of old-school rubbish, i got EDH for that. But if my mates want to play magical cardboard wizards with a more 'serious' bent to it, i'd wanna know so i'd know to choose a gun over a toothpick to the gunfight.
I don't think the banlist is the problem; it's the ideals and principles/philosophy of the format not being well understood by some players.
I'd say most of those players understand just fine, they just take advantage because they're dicks. That dude knew he intended to combo before turn 5, and knew that the purpose of describing the decks was to give everyone an idea of the power level to expect in the game, and he knew the power level of everyone else's deck was lower than what he was rolling with, and still made a decision to describe his deck in a way that understated it's power level and hid that it was a combo deck. He knew he was going to get an in game advantage from doing so, and knew that doing so would go against what everyone else in the group was trying to do, namely to have a social game where people were being honest about power level. That's just a dick move.
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 pretty sure the ban criteria is a joke. Sol ring has hit all criteria for years and it's still legal.
• Cause severe resource imbalances (i'd severely debate the qualifier severe)
• Allow players to win out of nowhere (not by itself)
• Prevent players from contributing to the game in a meaningful way. (it's not a hoser)
• Cause other players to feel they must play certain cards, even though they are also problematic. (yes; though on any given game, there's usually some number of other artefacts i'd rather be stealing)
• Are very difficult for other players to interact with, especially if doing so requires dedicated, narrow responses when deck-building. (every colour can deal with artefacts - though mana abilities can't be interacted with easily)
• Interact poorly with the multiplayer nature of the format or the specific rules of Commander. (not really?)
• Lead to repetitive game play. (sol ring does this, but in the same way that basic island does.)
Commander is a rather unique format due to the fact that you always have access to a card (your commander) so unlike in other formats having mana plays much bigger role than normal. Sol is the poster child of degenerate mana acceleration. Having +2 more mana than your opponent is a huge boon.
There is almost no hate cards for an early sol ring. If somebody plays sol ring and taps it for mana there is literally nothing you can do to stop it. Pretty much all "answers" cost more mana (null rod), are counters spells (force of will) or are pretty weak (nature's claim)
Sure, I can get behind that. But sol ring being s problem is a mindset that stems from a competitive “I gotta win at all costs” frame.
Sol ring isn’t nearly as bad when it’s thought more of as a “I’m establishing myself as being the furthest ahead and therefore archenemy”, and sculpting interesting play around that.
I think that’s where the argument about sol ring starts to break down. Sure it’s a powerful enabler, but it really isn’t format-warping.
On the other hand, biorhythm and coalition victory can come in and ‘win out of nowhere’. I’m wondering if stuff like mirrodin besieged should also be included on a watchlist for this effect.
75% of edhrec decks plays sol ring. If that is not format warping then I dont know what is. If you look at most played cards in other formats nothing reaches close to similiar numbers. In addition most played card in other formats are interactive spells while edh is filed to the brim with nothing but noninteractive ramp. Pretty sad for format that wants to promote interactive social games.
The high number on sol ring has multiple reasons. Sure it is a good card but more important is the accessibility of the card. Look at Mana Crypt . The card is very similar to sol ring and has only 9% on edhrec. Why? Because Mana Crypt is harder to get. Sol ring was reprinted like a million times. I think every commander product has one. Ancient Tomb has 8%.
I think Sol Ring is the Faithless Looting or Brainstorm of EDH, it is probably too powerful, but it remains legal because it is a good portion of the identity of the format. And Faruel is exactly right, every deck can play it, every player can afford it. It doesn't give one color or strategy an advantage that is just beyond what the rest get. if you want to play it, you can, without any caveat. it is too powerful, but it is also the perfect example of being perfectly fair in context.
As far as 'allows players to win out of nowhere', that is a bad joke, and the RC should be ashamed. Every EDH deck is playing a card that does that, it's how decks win. even the most casual deck has to have something that can win before it is removed. if they ACTUALLY banned every card that meets that criteria, the list would probably be 200 cards. at least with Wizards, they are somewhat consistent in what they ban in the other formats, anyone could have told you most of the banned cards were being banned. this announcement was like the Stoneforge Mystic of the banlist 'We are banning this because it keeps us from making good Equipment. We are also never going to make good Equipment gain.....okay yeah, it's banned because we feel like it, no other reason'
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
White is really the worst color for such cards if you ask me. There are of course many other possible candidates. Just think of Exsanguinate and stuff like that.
The thing that we should not forget: Powerlevel varies tremendously. Some people play with just precon decks, some people play with 3000 Dollar decks. The precon deck will not win just because it plays some banned I-win cards. But in the hands of the 3000 dollar decks, some cards like Paradox Engine become broken.
So the problem is, the same is true for stuff like Sol Ring. The casual guy can play Sol Ring and nothing horrible happens. The progamer will use it to win out of nowhere turn 4 or so. That's why some cards become problematic.
White is really the worst color for such cards if you ask me. There are of course many other possible candidates. Just think of Exsanguinate and stuff like that.
The thing that we should not forget: Powerlevel varies tremendously. Some people play with just precon decks, some people play with 3000 Dollar decks. The precon deck will not win just because it plays some banned I-win cards. But in the hands of the 3000 dollar decks, some cards like Paradox Engine become broken.
So the problem is, the same is true for stuff like Sol Ring. The casual guy can play Sol Ring and nothing horrible happens. The progamer will use it to win out of nowhere turn 4 or so. That's why some cards become problematic.
I'd agree up to an extent; the real problem i see is when those two players meet to play a game with those specific decks.
If players are able to meet each other on a vaguely similar 'expectation of the game', then it doesn't really matter. I have a selenia, dark angel, which has an ~$50 budget, which can combo off and win relatively early, like turns 4-6; and a rakdos the defiler deck that's probably worth over a thousand, with badlands, wheel of fortune, and so on, but it's only a balls-to-the-wall-funsies deck that often loses to itself more than it wins. The budget isn't really a problem; it's the difference between what the players bring to the table that creates the problem.
The 'i win out of nowhere' cards you mentioned, they all have more 'fair' applications. There's the guy who played standard in mirrodin, who's got that green card who just tries to ramp into it, only to land a bunch of lands and some big beaters... but not really game-winning out of nowhere as such. Cards like coalition victory, it literally just wins when it resolves, and there's a tiny window of interaction.
i'm not really for nor against this as a criteria, but the way how i see it, it's the social bit of the format that players really need to be more aware of to make the format work. No banlist will 'fix' EDH for everyone. We have to accept that. As players who like the game, we gotta take responsibility for ourselves and make it work in our local groups where possible. If you don't have a local group, it becomes even more important for us to chat to other players we play with to make it work.
The only other card in recent memory that evoked a similar notion of breakability on release is Bolas's Citadel, and I'm hoping requiring colored mana saves it from a similar fate.
On the other hand, I would have preferred to see Citadel go long before Engine.
Have you been seeing it regularly? What are people doing that makes you want it gone?
Yes. I play Commander on Wednesdays and Sundays, with mostly distinct groups of people, and see it frequently in both groups. A resolved Citadel that isn't destroyed immediately has meant victory for that player roughly 70% of the time in my experience. The last time I saw Citadel not win, the player was already at 9 life because the aggro player had been focusing on him the entire game.
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.
Expropriate should typically be worse than Time Stretch. Blatant Thievery is a good card, but Time Warp is better, and I'd rather have 2 Time Warps than a Time Warp plus a Blatant Thievery most of the time, especially when the former comes at a lower cost. It's a great splashy card, but it only becomes a problem when someone other than the caster votes for time. That's a problem that you should head off before it resolves by explaining how stupid it is to vote for time. 3+ time walks is usually going to be insurmountable, but a timewalk plus a Blatant Thievery should not be (at least when Time Warp wouldn't win on its own).
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!
I can't agree here.
Time Stretch provides you an additional extra turn, but doesn't steal permanents. I doubt that you can establish as much power in your additional turn on the board as if you steal the best permanents of your opponents. Also, Time Stretch is not a solution, it doesn't remove a threat on your opponents side, Time Stretch can also be a dead card if you don't draw gas after casting it. Expropriate is just so much more of a "I win" card because of the combination of things it does.
ALso, Expropriate is better than Blatant Thievery, because it doesn't target and can steal even the scariest stuff.
Regarding the "but Expropriate is exiled"-argument: 1) if you want extra turn loops, you do not play Time Stretch but one of the cmc5 variants. Also, I have never seen a game where you would even need to use another Expropriate, if it resolves, that it's game over in 99% of cases. It's the very definition of a game ending spell.
I bet that Biorhythm has a lower quote of winning games compared to Expropriate, it's a dead card in many more cases...
just as mishra's workshop hits all the restricted criteria for vintage; brainstorm for legacy. But each format needs their 'signature' card(s) that help define the format. It just so happens that sol ring is that card for EDH.
....and wait a minute; does sol ring really break all of these points?
• Cause severe resource imbalances (i'd severely debate the qualifier severe)
• Allow players to win out of nowhere (not by itself)
• Prevent players from contributing to the game in a meaningful way. (it's not a hoser)
• Cause other players to feel they must play certain cards, even though they are also problematic. (yes; though on any given game, there's usually some number of other artefacts i'd rather be stealing)
• Are very difficult for other players to interact with, especially if doing so requires dedicated, narrow responses when deck-building. (every colour can deal with artefacts - though mana abilities can't be interacted with easily)
• Interact poorly with the multiplayer nature of the format or the specific rules of Commander. (not really?)
• Lead to repetitive game play. (sol ring does this, but in the same way that basic island does.)
I think that many EDH players are a bit too hung up on not having structure to the rules. Maybe a larger emphasis on a social agreement is needed? Maybe as a part of the official rules, before the game starts, players need to describe their deck and what they expect to contribute/expect from the upcoming game.
An aside - I played with randoms one day at the local LGS some months ago, and i started the game by saying that i got a rakdos suicide aggro deck that's somewhat tuned ~75%-90% probably. one other person described their deck as a warrior tribal, another as a nearly unmodified precon, and the 4th kept tightlipped. The table got crushed on turn 3 or 4 by human tribal. By calling it human tribal, it's like he was deliberately hiding the fact that it's a hermit druid combo. the fact that it and najeela are humans is irrelevant.
At that point, everyone's playing the game by the rules, but the 'human tribal' guy was not playing by the spirit of the format, or at least how i saw the format to be. If i want to crush my opponent, i have legacy for that. If i wanna play magical cardboard wizard with a pet lord of tresserhorn who leads my pile of old-school rubbish, i got EDH for that. But if my mates want to play magical cardboard wizards with a more 'serious' bent to it, i'd wanna know so i'd know to choose a gun over a toothpick to the gunfight.
I don't think the banlist is the problem; it's the ideals and principles/philosophy of the format not being well understood by some players.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
I'd say most of those players understand just fine, they just take advantage because they're dicks. That dude knew he intended to combo before turn 5, and knew that the purpose of describing the decks was to give everyone an idea of the power level to expect in the game, and he knew the power level of everyone else's deck was lower than what he was rolling with, and still made a decision to describe his deck in a way that understated it's power level and hid that it was a combo deck. He knew he was going to get an in game advantage from doing so, and knew that doing so would go against what everyone else in the group was trying to do, namely to have a social game where people were being honest about power level. That's just a dick move.
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!
Commander is a rather unique format due to the fact that you always have access to a card (your commander) so unlike in other formats having mana plays much bigger role than normal. Sol is the poster child of degenerate mana acceleration. Having +2 more mana than your opponent is a huge boon.
There is almost no hate cards for an early sol ring. If somebody plays sol ring and taps it for mana there is literally nothing you can do to stop it. Pretty much all "answers" cost more mana (null rod), are counters spells (force of will) or are pretty weak (nature's claim)
Sol ring isn’t nearly as bad when it’s thought more of as a “I’m establishing myself as being the furthest ahead and therefore archenemy”, and sculpting interesting play around that.
I think that’s where the argument about sol ring starts to break down. Sure it’s a powerful enabler, but it really isn’t format-warping.
On the other hand, biorhythm and coalition victory can come in and ‘win out of nowhere’. I’m wondering if stuff like mirrodin besieged should also be included on a watchlist for this effect.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
As far as 'allows players to win out of nowhere', that is a bad joke, and the RC should be ashamed. Every EDH deck is playing a card that does that, it's how decks win. even the most casual deck has to have something that can win before it is removed. if they ACTUALLY banned every card that meets that criteria, the list would probably be 200 cards. at least with Wizards, they are somewhat consistent in what they ban in the other formats, anyone could have told you most of the banned cards were being banned. this announcement was like the Stoneforge Mystic of the banlist 'We are banning this because it keeps us from making good Equipment. We are also never going to make good Equipment gain.....okay yeah, it's banned because we feel like it, no other reason'
Finale of Glory
Expropriate
Rise of the Dark Realms
Insurrection
Genesis Wave
White is really the worst color for such cards if you ask me. There are of course many other possible candidates. Just think of Exsanguinate and stuff like that.
The thing that we should not forget: Powerlevel varies tremendously. Some people play with just precon decks, some people play with 3000 Dollar decks. The precon deck will not win just because it plays some banned I-win cards. But in the hands of the 3000 dollar decks, some cards like Paradox Engine become broken.
So the problem is, the same is true for stuff like Sol Ring. The casual guy can play Sol Ring and nothing horrible happens. The progamer will use it to win out of nowhere turn 4 or so. That's why some cards become problematic.
I'd agree up to an extent; the real problem i see is when those two players meet to play a game with those specific decks.
If players are able to meet each other on a vaguely similar 'expectation of the game', then it doesn't really matter. I have a selenia, dark angel, which has an ~$50 budget, which can combo off and win relatively early, like turns 4-6; and a rakdos the defiler deck that's probably worth over a thousand, with badlands, wheel of fortune, and so on, but it's only a balls-to-the-wall-funsies deck that often loses to itself more than it wins. The budget isn't really a problem; it's the difference between what the players bring to the table that creates the problem.
The 'i win out of nowhere' cards you mentioned, they all have more 'fair' applications. There's the guy who played standard in mirrodin, who's got that green card who just tries to ramp into it, only to land a bunch of lands and some big beaters... but not really game-winning out of nowhere as such. Cards like coalition victory, it literally just wins when it resolves, and there's a tiny window of interaction.
i'm not really for nor against this as a criteria, but the way how i see it, it's the social bit of the format that players really need to be more aware of to make the format work. No banlist will 'fix' EDH for everyone. We have to accept that. As players who like the game, we gotta take responsibility for ourselves and make it work in our local groups where possible. If you don't have a local group, it becomes even more important for us to chat to other players we play with to make it work.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)