In order to establish a common ground for people who are interested in Pauper Commander, a set of rules must be established in order to communicate effectively, build decks fairly, and experience Pauper Commander in a way that will not undermine the format, or cause confusion. This is an attempt to combine two Magic Online formats into one offline format in the best way possible. Much of the information in this rule set is taken, or edited, from the official Commander and Pauper resource pages on the wizards.com website.
I attempted to get all of the information correct, or at least how I intended it to be. Please feel free to correct, or offer advice or changes on even the smallest details of the rules. These rules have the possibility of change throughout their existence.
Test Group 1:
Cakins (CST)
d0su
Macius
Zombie Shakespeare
Undetermined Time
The Unofficial Official Pauper Commander Rules
Pauper Commander is an offline Magic format in which all cards used must have been printed at the common rarity in an offline Magic set or product, excluding a player's commander, which must have been printed at the uncommon rarity in an offline Magic set or product. A common or uncommon promotional card is only legal if the card has been printed at the common or uncommon rarity in an offline Magic set or product, respectively.
A player constructs their deck with a 100-card main deck, and an optional 10-card sideboard. One card in the main deck must be an uncommon creature, which is that player's commander. Only cards with a color identity that contains only colors the commander's color identity contains can be put into the main deck or the sideboard (a card's color identity is the set of colors the card is, and the colors of any mana symbols appearing on any common version of the card for normal deck construction, or uncommon version of the card as a commander plus any colors defined by its characteristic-defining abilities or color indicator). With the exception of basic lands, no two cards in the main deck and sideboard may have the same English name.
Rather than strictly 1v1, Pauper Commander can be played as a variant of Two-Headed Giant, Emperor, or multiplayer free-for-all. At any REL, it can be played as a best of 1, best of 3, or best of 5. Time limits may be set individually based on the type of game, REL, and how many games are to be played. Players mulligan using the modified "Partial Paris" method.
Each player has a starting life total of 40. A player who has 0 or less life, 10 or more poison counters, or has been dealt 21 or more combat damage by a single opponent's commander loses the game; this is a state-based action.
Before a game begins, each player's commander is put into the command zone, then players may make 1 for 1 substitutions with cards from their main deck with cards from their sideboard. If a player's commander would go to the graveyard or exile from anywhere, that player may chose to return it to the command zone instead. A player may cast their commander from the command zone for its normal cost, plus an additional 2 for each previous time it has been cast from the command zone.
If a player would add mana to their mana pool that is not mana of a color that player's commander's color identity contains, that much colorless mana is added to that player's mana pool instead.
There are currently no cards banned as commanders in Pauper Commander. There are currently no cards banned for normal deck construction in Pauper Commander.
General as in General, or General as in... umm... General? You get the point. You can't play Sinkhole as a 'General'. Keep in mind, I will be adding to the list as cards come up that really need to be banned. Also keep in mind that under my rules Sinkhole is NOT legal, as it is not legal in Pauper, which is officially an online only format. It is not online as a common, and therefor is not legal.
From what I understand, alternative costs for commanders (like evoke) don't get around the additional 2 tax for recasting the card from the command zone. This came up while playing a friend with Qasali Ambusher as his commander who thought he could just keep casting it for free every time I attacked. Turns out that was wrong, per many discussions like this:
The first two were banned because of power level, and the other two because I think they misunderstood how evoke doesn't get around the 2 tax. I saw some mentioning of banning Invisible Stalker too.
From what I understand, alternative costs for commanders (like evoke) don't get around the additional 2 tax for recasting the card from the command zone. This came up while playing a friend with Qasali Ambusher as his commander who thought he could just keep casting it for free every time I attacked. Turns out that was wrong, per many discussions like this:
The first two were banned because of power level, and the other two because I think they misunderstood how evoke doesn't get around the 2 tax. I saw some mentioning of banning Invisible Stalker too.
Edited the post to reflect more opinions on more overpowered Generals. Yes, Phantasm was the original 'this card is dumb' General in my thoughts. Sadly I feel as thought the ban list for Generals might have to be large, as many generals simply completely overpower any other card in Pauper by a longshot.
Why the rush to ban cards? Just like normal EDH if you don't run removal or shroud expect consequences. You need double the normal spot removal to be competitive in pauper and answers to generals. Even Pacifism effects are amazing, try get rid of that Jace's Phantasm without using/wasting your own spells general.
I also play Weiss Schwarz, Chaos, Vanguard and Wixoss.
Weiss Schwarz Sets
Accel World, Angel Beats, Familiar of Zero, Gargantia on the Verdurous Planet, Guilty Crown, Kill La Kill, Robotics;Notes, Sword Art Online.
Chaos Partners
Arpeggio of Blue Steel: Iona, Kirishima, Kongou.
Dangan Ronpa: Asahina, Togami.
Freezing: Vibration: Chiffon, Satelizer.
Vanguard Clans Favoured
Angel Feather, Dark Irregulars, Genesis, Neonecter, Pale Moon, Shadow Paladins, Tachikaze.
I agree that we should decide on a set of rules, but creating a ban list would be nonsensical at this time in my opinion. Besides EDH being a casual format, (meaning playgroups can make their own banlist) there isn't nearly enough data yet to accurately say whether a card is too powerful. Even then, many playgroups like playing with cards that are powerful. (see regular EDH and Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, Primeval Titan, Consecrated Sphinx, etc)
There being so few wraths at the common rarity, I'm sure many hexproof things would eventually need to be looked at, but no reason to rush into that. It's often harder to remove something from a ban list than add it.
In our play, we've tried using anywhere between 25 and 40 starting life, with 15-21 general damage and 10-15 poison. I thought 35 life with 18 general damage or 10 poison damage needed to kill was the most fair, which I see are the same numbers from another poster. We haven't had to ban anything yet.
@ Cakins
I'm not too familiar with MTGO - which cards would your first suggestion ban from the format? Which generals would your second suggestion ban?
EDIT: While these types of small changes to starting life/general damage seemed to provide additional balance for the format, I'm uncertain whether they'd be the healthiest for it. Keeping as many rules the same from regular Commander may be best.
I dont see what the big fuss is here guys. Pauper EDH is even more casual of EDH games than regular. It is an unofficial format for an unofficial format. Personally, I have yet to experience a single commander that I have been unable to deal with. There are a lot of strategies that are overtaken by other types of removal or strategies so simply adapt and change your decks appropriately and build more decks.
I have yet to be convinced that a single card requires banning in pauper EDH.
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 think this set of rules should be pushed as 'Official' so that we can try and define this format.
Uncommon, non-legendary creatures (possibly Common, seems harmless) seems fairest so long as a banned list is maintained. We definitely need a group of people who discuss/handle which cards should be banned - things like Azorious Guildmage and Mistmeadow Witch can be way too degenerate. Lorescale Coatl seems really good...
Opening up Rares/Mythics makes things feel lopsided. You have very powerful cards as your commander, that further define the strategy. Decks would be too focused on the commander - because they introduce effects into the pool that are so far superior than the 99 commons each player plays.
It would also likely have a larger banned list.
Do we consider allowing any uncommons played maindeck? I think it could be fine running 5-10 so long as we pick a number and stick with it. Otherwise lets maintain 99 common rule.
I'm not a fan of the additional rules suggested in the original post. I would like to hear an explanation for the differing starting life total as well as the poison/general damage win conditions. They don't seem necessary and I imagine could lead to confusion for those coming into Pauper EDH from regular EDH.
Opening up Rares/Mythics makes things feel lopsided. You have very powerful cards as your commander, that further define the strategy.
Isn't that one of the hallmarks of EDH though? Building a deck around your general? Limiting the Generals to just uncommons or commons limits certain color options tremendously. Esper in particular as seen in your own thread.
Decks would be too focused on the commander - because they introduce effects into the pool that are so far superior than the 99 commons each player plays.
What type of effects are you concerned would be introduced that commons can't handle?
Do we consider allowing any uncommons played maindeck? I think it could be fine running 5-10 so long as we pick a number and stick with it. Otherwise lets maintain 99 common rule.
Zero. Any more would blur the lines into Peasant which defeats the purpose of Pauper. In my albeit limited experience with Peasant, the uncommons end up defining the theme of the deck and the rest is built to maximize those.
My two cents. I know I'm probably in the minority but I'm fine with that.
Personally, it doesn't make sense to adhere to MTGO Pauper Rules simply because the format originated from MTGO. While it is true that the format was born from MTGO, there is little reason to follow those rules, especially since many pauper games are played in real life using physical cards rather than digital versions. As we port the format from the digital version to its real life counterpart, I don't see any reason why we couldn't amend the MTGO pauper rule from: -
Quote from Pauper Deck Construction »
Pauper is a Magic Online format in which all cards used must have been printed at the common rarity in a Magic Online set or product.
to: -
Quote from Suggested Amendment »
Pauper is a Magic Online format in which all cards used must have been printed at the common rarity in a Magic Online set or product.
This changes a few things, most notably the fact that cards that are not printed as common on MTGO can be played (the website gives Hymn to Tourach as an example).
2.) A Pauper Commander General can be any common creature card legal in the Magic Online Pauper format, or any uncommon creature card legal in the Vintage format.
My playgroup uses a legendary creature (of any rarity) as the commander. We agree that this will help improve compatability of Pauper EDH when playing in conventional EDH playgroups.
The reality is that EDH is, in itself, a niche format in its own and having another subset of rules which deviates from the official EDH rules will mean that it may not be as easy to find another EDH play group who would be willing to accept this exception. In most playgroups I go to, players are more willing to accept an odd rare commander rather than a non-legendary creature as a commander.
Besides, it is worth noting that the use of an uncommon creature (which may not be legendary) as the general has no actual rules legitimacy beyond playgroup-specific agreements while the usage of a legendary creature is at the very least supported by the Official Commander rules -- that said, feel free to run Morinfen.dec or Ramirez DePietro.dec if needs be.
3.) Players start at 30 life, require 16 general damage to kill them, and require 15 infect counters to kill them.
Again, there is no legitimacy or basis behind this rule. The changes in these values seem arbitrary so it would be great if the reasonings are provided.
At first glance, I am assuming that the OP used 16 general damage because he/she lowered the starting life totals to 30 (i.e. three-fourths) which means that the general damage has been somewhat proportionately lowered by three-fourths to 15.75 ≈ 16. On the other hand, required poison damage has been arbitrarily increased to 15, which somehow doesn't make sense.
Jace's Phantasm - run graveyard hate and lockdown enchantments. There are like 20+ variants of Pacifism available and its all that it takes to stop this bugger. Beyond that there are tons of things like Master Decoy that can just tap him down as well.
Bloodbraid Elf - cascade isn't even good in EDH because the target that you get is so unpredictable. Even if you build around that in mind he is still little better than a draw effect on a creature with haste. You need to kill and recast him a lot to really benefit from the cascade much. I am not convinced in the least with this pick. This creature is far better in a 1v1, 20 life setting. There are too many things that delute it for multiplayer 30 or 40 life formats whatever you want to play it as.
Psychatog wait.... what???? this format lacks huge draw engines, he has no evasion, and there is no mass bounce to hand effects. He was only good because Upheaval was so crazy in 60 card magic. He lacks evasion and the card draw in this format is lacking. The only way I could even see this taking off is in some sort of self mill deck where nobody hates on their graveyard and lacks the ability to block / spot remove it.
Mistmeadow Witch solid by all means but I dont have any reason in particular that I think it is banworthy other than being a good value engine. Keep in mind that if you are playing with ETB creatures they cant really defend themselves with it's blink. Rush them first and dont let them establish a manabase.
Invisible Stalker very slow in general. If the deck runs a ton of ramp effects to power him up then target the artifacts / enchantments with your removal and just 3v1 them. This isnt a commander that can fight off 3 opponents and in general if you play the whole you can touch me game then opponents will curb stomp you for being lame. There are a ton of commanders that can race this guy for faster damage in general. Sure it is lame that it is so un-interactive but it also isnt that solid.
Azorius Guildmage - really nice solid control but I dont get how you get banworthy from this. Keep in mind that it takes tons of mana to keep abilities up and even then, if you are playing multiplayer you really cant control everything. Shroud / hexproof blow this guy up and you always have the option of just using spot removal before it flips to your turn and rolling through them.
Izzet Guildmage - possibly.... I have had a blast playing him and if considering banning him it would be for his ability to go infinite. Even then remember that you can push on him early and the heavy mana requirement abilities he has are hard to use.
Overall though I would like to hear reasoning for anything going on this list. Just having a strong board presence and a good set of abilities alone doesn't make any sense to ban them for that. The point of this format is to be able to use cool commanders that you couldn't otherwise play and if you take that away then you are just playing bad uncommons. If you can give me a reason as to why they should be banned perhaps I would listen.
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.
Also, allowing rares increases the power level gap between commander and its deck drastically. In worst-case scenario, commanders could steal the spotlight from their decks to the point where choosing the right commander matters more than building a good deck for it.
Perhaps but that's the case in regular EDH as well. Under the current rules of Pauper EDH if a player wanted to create a deck using three colors they are very limited for their choice of general. In the case of enemy color wedges (WRB, URG, GWB, RUW) their ONLY option is to just play all five colors which seems to defeat the purpose.
It, as many other things, should be tested though. I might be wrong, perhaps rare generals won't be bad for the format. It would be interesting to hear about it if some playgroup has played like that.
True. Based on the response from my Merieke EDH list, some in my area are working on Pauper EDH lists with regular generals. Once we've had an opportunity to play those decks I will report back with any findings.
Here is a draft of a rules document I made earlier this month while fleshing out how my playgroup wants to get into this format. It isn't definitive, and it is intentionally ambiguous in spots where issues were still open to debate (like life totals, banned generals, etc.) but it gathers up all the different approaches to format that I've seen:
Pauper and Peasant Commander
Pauper and Peasant Commander follow normal Commander rules with some exceptions.
Life Totals and Commander Damage
As “underpowered” formats, they are preferably played 1v1, otherwise games are hard to end due to lack of sweepers and bombs. To accommodate this, players start with 30-35 life, and the 21 commander damage rule can be lowered to 18 if it’s found matches take too long.
Legal Commanders
One of these standards for allowing commanders needs to be followed:
Any Legendary creature (normal Commander rules)
Any uncommon Legendary creature (technically legal in all formats but awful)
Any uncommon creature
Any uncommon or common creature
Determining Rarity
Players need to decide if rarity will be determined by lowest printed rarity (allowing cards that were common (at some point even if they have also been rare) or the highest rarity (banning cards that were ever printed as rares).
Deck Building
Pauper - All 99 main deck cards must be common (commander may be subject to other rules).
Peasant - Some amount of uncommons (usually 8-10) are allowed.
Potentially Banned Cards
These commanders tend to be banned based on power level:
If the intention is also to create a format that is inexpensive, then cards like Force of Will and Mana Drain could be banned, or a maximum price limit could be set (e.g. $30 or $50).
Should the format be geared toward multiplayer, 1v1 or both/no preference? I see the format being more fun as 1v1 because commons only multiplayer tends to bore me since it feels like everyone just sits around with crappy creatures and nothing swings the game around. But that's a matter of personal preference.
My group wants to try uncommons (and maybe commons too) as generals because we've played a lot of EDH and like the idea of opening a new pool of cards for commander selection while also forcing ourselves to use a different pool of cards for deck construction (commons only).
My personally feelings are that none of the uncommon or common generals should be banned until there is a greater consensus on certain ones being unfun or overpowered. I can see the likelihood that Psychatog and Bloodbraid Elf being "too good" but I'd like to play with them more to really get a sense of it. Multiplayer would tend to dilute their power too.
For me the big reason to go to any uncommon for the commander was opening up new deckbuilding options. I really don't want to take my favorite commander and then getto the crud out of their deck. Opening pauper up to uncommon commanders opened new deckbuilding options which I personally find to be very fun.
Also, I think I like the idea of having somewhere in the range of 30ish life for pauper. The diminished creature power makes 40 life feel like a lifetime that really benefits the control type commanders a lot. I dont know where I would put commander damage at if scaling life down to 30 though but in general the decrease in life seems like a good move.
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.
A massive overhaul of the rules was done on 8/21/2012. PLEASE read through all of the rules, so that we can get serious about Pauper Commander being a format. It is my intention to get Pauper Commander separated from the rest of the Variant Commander Decklists forum page, and to do so, we need to nail down a solid set of rules.
My notes on generals, as of now there are only 3 banned commanders on my rule set. Here are my two underlying thoughts about why a commander should be banned in Pauper Commander:
1.) If a commander is on a completely different level of power compared to literally every other card in the format, it should be banned.
2.) If a commander is incredibly hard to deal with, or impossible to deal with in the format, whether it be the card or the deck doing so, it should be banned.
Also, please feel free from this point on to ask me about any part of my reasoning, or about any rule I made, as I want it to be known; however there is a lot, so I can't simply explain everything at once. If there is something you want to know, ask.
I don't understand the latest commander ban list. Have you played with and against these cards enough to have a developed opinion on them? Same goes with 10 versus 15 poison. I haven't seen 10 poison be a problem in normal EDH, so I don't know why it's a problem here where there are even fewer infect creatures and ways to proliferate.
I am glad to see someone is taking initiative on this. Thanks, Calkin.
What is the verdict on stuff like Strip Mine, Merchant Scroll, Maze of Ith, etc.? There are a handful of cards that were printed on common sheets back in the day, but when everything was imported to Gatherer, some of the rarities were arbitrarily changed to uncommon, while others were left at common. Strip Mine is especially confusing since four versions were printed in Antiquities, but only one of the versions was common while the rest were uncommon.
Since we are no longer going by the MTGO pauper rules, can we talk about this issue?
EDIT: Actually, this becomes interesting. Magiccards.info tells Merchant Scroll is uncommon, even though in Gatherer it's common (in Homelands). Gatherer is the official database so it should probably have the last word, but still...
I have brought this up once before but nobody seemed to overly care. I might have to bring it up to the scite owner to get it changed and even then I think it will be sort of a low item on his change list. Still I believe this to probably just be an oversight on magiccards.info
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.
My two cents on the unofficial official pauper rules:
I like the 30 life, somewhat like the 16 GD, and dislike the poison. Fusion Elemental is a very real general (and also one of two choices for 5c generals) and with 16 GD he one-shots people with a Runes of the Deus. As others have said, why change poison if regular EDH hasn't addressed it yet?
As for the banned generals, I can see why they're powerful, but two of them stick you in monoblue, and the other forces you to stay below 4cc. How much testing have you done? Have these been problem generals in your games? I'd like to see a banned list as small as possible initially and grow from there.
I attempted to get all of the information correct, or at least how I intended it to be. Please feel free to correct, or offer advice or changes on even the smallest details of the rules. These rules have the possibility of change throughout their existence.
http://mtgcommander.net/rules.php
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/TCG/Resources.aspx?x=magic/rules/100cardsingleton-commander
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/TCG/Resources.aspx?x=magic/rules/Pauper
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=441729
1 Bloodbraid Elf
Lands:
1 Command Tower
1 Gruul Turf
1 Smouldering Spires
1 Teetering Peaks
1 Turntimber Grove
1 Terramorphic Expanse
1 Evolving Wilds
1 Naya Panorama
1 Jund Panorama
17 Forest
12 Mountain
Ramp:
1 Gruul Signet
1 Manalith
1 Darksteel Ingot
1 Mind Stone
1 Sisay's Ring
1 Ur-Golem's Eye
1 Cultivate
1 Kodama's Reach
1 Ranger's Path
1 Silverglade Elemental
1 Wood Elves
1 Farhaven Elf
1 Mwonvuli Acid Moss
1 Bloodthorn Taunter
1 Fierce Empath
1 Wickerbough Elder
1 Tin Street Hooligan
1 Mold Shambler
1 Gorilla Shaman
1 Aerie Ouphes
1 Deadshot Minotaur
1 Flamewave Invoker
Utility Spells:
1 Hull Breach
1 Gleeful Sabotage
1 Prey Upon
Stompy Improvement:
1 Rancor
1 Dragon Breath
1 Dragon Fangs
1 Bladed Pinions
1 Horned Helmet
1 Whispersilk Cloak
Big Stompy:
1 Alpha Tyrannax
1 Beacon Behemoth
1 Cavern Thoctar
1 Crash of Rhinos
1 Durkwood Baloth
1 Fangren Marauder
1 Giant Warthog
1 Gorger Wurm
1 Havenwood Wurm
1 Jungle Weaver
1 Kindercatch
1 Krosan Tusker
1 Loamdragger Giant
1 Molder Beast
1 Morselhoarder
1 Moss Kami
1 Mosstodon
1 Oakgnarl Warrior
1 Pathbreaker Wurm
1 Ridge Rannet
1 Rootbreaker Wurm
1 Scaled Wurm
1 Ulamog's Crusher
1 Shambling Strider
1 Siege Wurm
1 Streetbreaker Wurm
1 Thundering Tanadon
1 Valley Rannet
1 Wirewood Guardian
1 Yavimaya Wurm
1 Psychatog
Lands - 39
1 Halimar Depths
1 Bojuka Bog
1 Haunted Fengraf
1 Quicksand
1 Esper Panorama
1 Grixis Panorama
1 Terramorphic Expanse
1 Evolving Wilds
1 Seat of the Synod
1 Vault of Whispers
1 Command Tower
1 Dimir Aqueduct
1 Rupture Spire
1 Transguild Promenade
1 Shimmering Grotto
15 Island
9 Swamp
Creatures - 7
1 Crypt Rats
1 Drift of Phantasms
1 Trinket Mage
1 Sea Gate Oracle
1 Mulldrifter
1 Mnemonic Wall
1 Ulamog's Crusher
Counter Spells - 17
1 Condescend
1 Power Sink
1 Syncopate
1 Counterspell
1 Essence Scatter
1 False Summoning
1 Remove Soul
1 Mana Leak
1 Muddle the Mixture
1 Negate
1 Exclude
1 Faerie Trickery
1 Cancel
1 Stoic Rebuttal
1 Soul Manipulation
1 Bone to Ash
1 Rewind
1 Ghastly Demise
1 Executioner's Capsule
1 Innocent Blood
1 Doom Blade
1 Echoing Decay
1 Geth's Verdict
1 Victim of Night
1 Grasp of Darkness
1 Diabolic Edict
1 Crippling Fatigue
1 Eyeblight's Ending
1 Murder
1 Rend Flesh
1 Snuff Out
Mass Removal - 2
1 Evincar's Justice
1 Pestilence
Card Advantage - 15
1 Brainstorm
1 Preordain
1 Train of Thought
1 Treasure Hunt
1 Impulse
1 Think Twice
1 Ior Ruin Expedition
1 Compulsive Research
1 Consult the Necrosages
1 Forbidden Alchemy
1 Oona's Grace
1 Deep Analysis
1 Foresee
1 Inspiration
1 Mystical Teachings
1 Duress
1 Ostracize
Utility - 3
1 Nehil Spellbomb
1 Capsize
1 Recoil
Test Group 1:
Cakins (CST)
d0su
Macius
Zombie Shakespeare
Undetermined Time
Where are you getting the banlist from? Is this just your group's or just a start?
RMárton Stromgald
BPhage the Untouchable
WHokori, Dust Drinker
URGWInk-Treader Nephilim
1vs1 EDH
RBOlivia Voldaren
RZo-zu The Punisher
Legacy
RBGoblins
General Ban List:
Shriekmaw
Briarhorn
Glareweilder
Meadowboon
Nevermaker
Offalsnout
Spitebellows
Walker of the Grove
Sinkhole
And still growing.
Why all the evoke creatures on the banlist? General tax still affects other casting costs. See Akroma, Angel of Fury.
RMárton Stromgald
BPhage the Untouchable
WHokori, Dust Drinker
URGWInk-Treader Nephilim
1vs1 EDH
RBOlivia Voldaren
RZo-zu The Punisher
Legacy
RBGoblins
General as in General, or General as in... umm... General? You get the point. You can't play Sinkhole as a 'General'. Keep in mind, I will be adding to the list as cards come up that really need to be banned. Also keep in mind that under my rules Sinkhole is NOT legal, as it is not legal in Pauper, which is officially an online only format. It is not online as a common, and therefor is not legal.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=352509
What's the reason for banning Jace's Phantasm as a commander? Just power level?
Someone on these boards posted that his Pauper EDH group banned these generals:
The first two were banned because of power level, and the other two because I think they misunderstood how evoke doesn't get around the 2 tax. I saw some mentioning of banning Invisible Stalker too.
Edited the post to reflect more opinions on more overpowered Generals. Yes, Phantasm was the original 'this card is dumb' General in my thoughts. Sadly I feel as thought the ban list for Generals might have to be large, as many generals simply completely overpower any other card in Pauper by a longshot.
@Cakins, which generals are you talking about? I can't really think of any.
If anything Pestilence/Crypt Rats/Evincar's Justice and Capsize are two most unbalancing cards and I love using them.
Main Decks
Diaochan, Iroas, God of Victory, Kaalia, Marton, Ulasht, Volrath,
Kaervek, Prossh, Titania
Amusing or Themed
Progenitus
Pauper Guildmages
Azorius Boros Dimir Golgari Gruul Izzet Korozda
Orzhov Rakdos Rix Maadi Selesyna Simic Skarrg Zameck
I also play Weiss Schwarz, Chaos, Vanguard and Wixoss.
Accel World, Angel Beats, Familiar of Zero, Gargantia on the Verdurous Planet, Guilty Crown, Kill La Kill, Robotics;Notes, Sword Art Online.
Chaos Partners
Arpeggio of Blue Steel: Iona, Kirishima, Kongou.
Dangan Ronpa: Asahina, Togami.
Freezing: Vibration: Chiffon, Satelizer.
Vanguard Clans Favoured
Angel Feather, Dark Irregulars, Genesis, Neonecter, Pale Moon, Shadow Paladins, Tachikaze.
Wixoss - Just trial decks for now!
There being so few wraths at the common rarity, I'm sure many hexproof things would eventually need to be looked at, but no reason to rush into that. It's often harder to remove something from a ban list than add it.
In our play, we've tried using anywhere between 25 and 40 starting life, with 15-21 general damage and 10-15 poison. I thought 35 life with 18 general damage or 10 poison damage needed to kill was the most fair, which I see are the same numbers from another poster. We haven't had to ban anything yet.
@ Cakins
I'm not too familiar with MTGO - which cards would your first suggestion ban from the format? Which generals would your second suggestion ban?
EDIT: While these types of small changes to starting life/general damage seemed to provide additional balance for the format, I'm uncertain whether they'd be the healthiest for it. Keeping as many rules the same from regular Commander may be best.
I have yet to be convinced that a single card requires banning in pauper EDH.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Uncommon, non-legendary creatures (possibly Common, seems harmless) seems fairest so long as a banned list is maintained. We definitely need a group of people who discuss/handle which cards should be banned - things like Azorious Guildmage and Mistmeadow Witch can be way too degenerate. Lorescale Coatl seems really good...
Opening up Rares/Mythics makes things feel lopsided. You have very powerful cards as your commander, that further define the strategy. Decks would be too focused on the commander - because they introduce effects into the pool that are so far superior than the 99 commons each player plays.
It would also likely have a larger banned list.
Do we consider allowing any uncommons played maindeck? I think it could be fine running 5-10 so long as we pick a number and stick with it. Otherwise lets maintain 99 common rule.
Isn't that one of the hallmarks of EDH though? Building a deck around your general? Limiting the Generals to just uncommons or commons limits certain color options tremendously. Esper in particular as seen in your own thread.
What type of effects are you concerned would be introduced that commons can't handle?
Zero. Any more would blur the lines into Peasant which defeats the purpose of Pauper. In my albeit limited experience with Peasant, the uncommons end up defining the theme of the deck and the rest is built to maximize those.
My two cents. I know I'm probably in the minority but I'm fine with that.
to: -
This changes a few things, most notably the fact that cards that are not printed as common on MTGO can be played (the website gives Hymn to Tourach as an example).
As for the rest of the amendments: -
My playgroup uses a legendary creature (of any rarity) as the commander. We agree that this will help improve compatability of Pauper EDH when playing in conventional EDH playgroups.
The reality is that EDH is, in itself, a niche format in its own and having another subset of rules which deviates from the official EDH rules will mean that it may not be as easy to find another EDH play group who would be willing to accept this exception. In most playgroups I go to, players are more willing to accept an odd rare commander rather than a non-legendary creature as a commander.
Besides, it is worth noting that the use of an uncommon creature (which may not be legendary) as the general has no actual rules legitimacy beyond playgroup-specific agreements while the usage of a legendary creature is at the very least supported by the Official Commander rules -- that said, feel free to run Morinfen.dec or Ramirez DePietro.dec if needs be.
Again, there is no legitimacy or basis behind this rule. The changes in these values seem arbitrary so it would be great if the reasonings are provided.
At first glance, I am assuming that the OP used 16 general damage because he/she lowered the starting life totals to 30 (i.e. three-fourths) which means that the general damage has been somewhat proportionately lowered by three-fourths to 15.75 ≈ 16. On the other hand, required poison damage has been arbitrarily increased to 15, which somehow doesn't make sense.
I find it difficult to either agree or disagree with these choices for a few reasons including: -
My own feelings for each that you highlited:
Jace's Phantasm - run graveyard hate and lockdown enchantments. There are like 20+ variants of Pacifism available and its all that it takes to stop this bugger. Beyond that there are tons of things like Master Decoy that can just tap him down as well.
Bloodbraid Elf - cascade isn't even good in EDH because the target that you get is so unpredictable. Even if you build around that in mind he is still little better than a draw effect on a creature with haste. You need to kill and recast him a lot to really benefit from the cascade much. I am not convinced in the least with this pick. This creature is far better in a 1v1, 20 life setting. There are too many things that delute it for multiplayer 30 or 40 life formats whatever you want to play it as.
Psychatog wait.... what???? this format lacks huge draw engines, he has no evasion, and there is no mass bounce to hand effects. He was only good because Upheaval was so crazy in 60 card magic. He lacks evasion and the card draw in this format is lacking. The only way I could even see this taking off is in some sort of self mill deck where nobody hates on their graveyard and lacks the ability to block / spot remove it.
Mistmeadow Witch solid by all means but I dont have any reason in particular that I think it is banworthy other than being a good value engine. Keep in mind that if you are playing with ETB creatures they cant really defend themselves with it's blink. Rush them first and dont let them establish a manabase.
Invisible Stalker very slow in general. If the deck runs a ton of ramp effects to power him up then target the artifacts / enchantments with your removal and just 3v1 them. This isnt a commander that can fight off 3 opponents and in general if you play the whole you can touch me game then opponents will curb stomp you for being lame. There are a ton of commanders that can race this guy for faster damage in general. Sure it is lame that it is so un-interactive but it also isnt that solid.
Azorius Guildmage - really nice solid control but I dont get how you get banworthy from this. Keep in mind that it takes tons of mana to keep abilities up and even then, if you are playing multiplayer you really cant control everything. Shroud / hexproof blow this guy up and you always have the option of just using spot removal before it flips to your turn and rolling through them.
Izzet Guildmage - possibly.... I have had a blast playing him and if considering banning him it would be for his ability to go infinite. Even then remember that you can push on him early and the heavy mana requirement abilities he has are hard to use.
Overall though I would like to hear reasoning for anything going on this list. Just having a strong board presence and a good set of abilities alone doesn't make any sense to ban them for that. The point of this format is to be able to use cool commanders that you couldn't otherwise play and if you take that away then you are just playing bad uncommons. If you can give me a reason as to why they should be banned perhaps I would listen.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
Perhaps but that's the case in regular EDH as well. Under the current rules of Pauper EDH if a player wanted to create a deck using three colors they are very limited for their choice of general. In the case of enemy color wedges (WRB, URG, GWB, RUW) their ONLY option is to just play all five colors which seems to defeat the purpose.
True. Based on the response from my Merieke EDH list, some in my area are working on Pauper EDH lists with regular generals. Once we've had an opportunity to play those decks I will report back with any findings.
Should the format be geared toward multiplayer, 1v1 or both/no preference? I see the format being more fun as 1v1 because commons only multiplayer tends to bore me since it feels like everyone just sits around with crappy creatures and nothing swings the game around. But that's a matter of personal preference.
My group wants to try uncommons (and maybe commons too) as generals because we've played a lot of EDH and like the idea of opening a new pool of cards for commander selection while also forcing ourselves to use a different pool of cards for deck construction (commons only).
My personally feelings are that none of the uncommon or common generals should be banned until there is a greater consensus on certain ones being unfun or overpowered. I can see the likelihood that Psychatog and Bloodbraid Elf being "too good" but I'd like to play with them more to really get a sense of it. Multiplayer would tend to dilute their power too.
Also, I think I like the idea of having somewhere in the range of 30ish life for pauper. The diminished creature power makes 40 life feel like a lifetime that really benefits the control type commanders a lot. I dont know where I would put commander damage at if scaling life down to 30 though but in general the decrease in life seems like a good move.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
A massive overhaul of the rules was done on 8/21/2012. PLEASE read through all of the rules, so that we can get serious about Pauper Commander being a format. It is my intention to get Pauper Commander separated from the rest of the Variant Commander Decklists forum page, and to do so, we need to nail down a solid set of rules.
My notes on generals, as of now there are only 3 banned commanders on my rule set. Here are my two underlying thoughts about why a commander should be banned in Pauper Commander:
1.) If a commander is on a completely different level of power compared to literally every other card in the format, it should be banned.
2.) If a commander is incredibly hard to deal with, or impossible to deal with in the format, whether it be the card or the deck doing so, it should be banned.
Also, please feel free from this point on to ask me about any part of my reasoning, or about any rule I made, as I want it to be known; however there is a lot, so I can't simply explain everything at once. If there is something you want to know, ask.
What is the verdict on stuff like Strip Mine, Merchant Scroll, Maze of Ith, etc.? There are a handful of cards that were printed on common sheets back in the day, but when everything was imported to Gatherer, some of the rarities were arbitrarily changed to uncommon, while others were left at common. Strip Mine is especially confusing since four versions were printed in Antiquities, but only one of the versions was common while the rest were uncommon.
Since we are no longer going by the MTGO pauper rules, can we talk about this issue?
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
I have brought this up once before but nobody seemed to overly care. I might have to bring it up to the scite owner to get it changed and even then I think it will be sort of a low item on his change list. Still I believe this to probably just be an oversight on magiccards.info
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
I like the 30 life, somewhat like the 16 GD, and dislike the poison. Fusion Elemental is a very real general (and also one of two choices for 5c generals) and with 16 GD he one-shots people with a Runes of the Deus. As others have said, why change poison if regular EDH hasn't addressed it yet?
As for the banned generals, I can see why they're powerful, but two of them stick you in monoblue, and the other forces you to stay below 4cc. How much testing have you done? Have these been problem generals in your games? I'd like to see a banned list as small as possible initially and grow from there.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg