You can still play a sanctioned cube draft using a list that has 20 fetches in it though. I don't think there's a defined set of rules for building a cube like there is for what constitutes a "legal" EDH deck for sanctioned play, is there?
Could someone please explain what purpose a sanctioning body for cube would serve?
The cube manager decides what is sanctioned in their cube. You can play any card in the cube that you drafted. You can't play any card not in the cube or that you didn't draft. I don't think we need an outside organization to tell us we're doing it right.
You can still play a sanctioned cube draft using a list that has 20 fetches in it though. I don't think there's a defined set of rules for building a cube like there is for what constitutes a "legal" EDH deck for sanctioned play, is there?
Sanctioned by who? Wizards of the Coast sanctioned cubes have never had 20 fetches in them.
I can collect planeswalker points playing with my cube. I can collect planeswalker points playing commander. But in order to play a sanctioned commander game, there's rules for the format. I don't think the cube has the same paramaters.
I want to see a clearly defined set of rules for what constitutes a cube, and if the singleton rule must be adhered to.
If you sit down and play Commander, you can look up a set of rules to determine what constitutes a legal deck for the purposes of tournament play. I don't think the cube has such paramaters. The current definition that describes the format as singleton only applies to those cubes. Not all cubes. Every Commander legal deck has specific rules it must adhere to to be EDH legal. Is there such a thing for a cube? I don't think there is.
Even Wizards of the Coast considers Cube a singleton format:
"One of the projects I've had the opportunity to use that voice on is the Magic Online Cube. Cubing is the art of designing and developing a large, singleton set from existing cards—typically among the most powerful ever printed—for use in various Limited formats, especially Draft."
If I were briefly teaching someone about constructed Magic, I would say that they'll need a 60 card deck, and aside from basic lands, are limited to a 4-of. I didn't tell them they can have more than 60, because it's so rarely optimal to have more. I didn't tell them that Relentless Rats is an exception to the 4-of rule, because that's a corner case (and if they ever read the card, they'll understand). I didn't tell them about the restricted list in Vintage, because it's unlikely they'll make a deck where that's relevant.
So, to me, that WotC article calling out the cube as singleton, I don't interpret that as an end-all decree that cubes must be singleton. The Magic Online cube (being discussed in the article) is singleton, and most cubes are singleton, so it's easier to make the assertion and move on with the article.
Back to the Overall Topic:
Personally, I think that there is some interesting design space to be explored by putting multiples of cards in a cube. Now, I don't think it should be anywhere close to every card; but making mana-fixing more consistent and even - I can get behind that, because variance in mana is something I look to eliminate when building a deck (either in a draft, or constructed). Duress? Not so much, as there have been plenty of variants that are nearly the same power level - so the variants will mix things up, make games play out differently; essentially adding fun. Same with Lightning Bolt. I like Lightning Bolt, it's a good card and it's fun, and I like seeing what version of it someone has included in their cube. But adding multiple copies of it would be boring - because having different spells makes you evaluate them in the draft individually, and also during deck building/playing. Note that I'm not talking about determining what's better - Lightning Bolt vs. Volcanic Hammer vs. Flame Javelin vs. Fireblast, but it's about evaluating Burn Spell X versus 3-Drop Y.
And sometimes there are other niches where having multiple copies of a card can more reliably "turn on" an archetype, bringing a strategy from nearly unplayable to good. Take Wildfire; that's an archetype that needs a few strong sweepers, with it's namesake card being the cream of the crop. It has an almost functional reprint, and there's a version for 1 more mana that's debatable on playability. So if you want Wildfire to be an archetype at higher cube sizes, you might need to include multiples of the card to maintain viability. Side note: for a cube, lets say you want both Armageddon and Ravages of War, because that's an effect you want white to have access to with some consistency. But for budget reasons, you don't own a copy of Ravages. A second copy of Armageddon is just as good as a proxy.
Then there's a card that has a synergy with itself: Gravecrawler. Black has a theme of small creatures that can come back from the dead. Unfortunately, most of them require a specific condition. Gravecrawler requires a zombie to be in play. A cube that wants to enable Gravecrawler's crawl-back will probably try and add more zombies. Now there definitely are some zombies that would see play regardless, and others that are close enough to functional swaps, but the coolest thing about Gravecrawler in constructed is the synergy with itself. A second gravecrawler allows you to return the first. This makes for interesting draft decisions: If you know there are X copies of Gravecrawler in a cube of Y size, how do you value them now? How many other zombies are in the cube? When does Gravecrawler become better for your deck than Bloodghast? I'd like to finish this section by saying that I only think multiple copies of Gravecrawler in a cube are interesting if you are otherwise thin on zombies. If you have lots of zombies and you are almost always getting full value out of a Gravecrawler, then having multiple is less interesting as the power level is nearly flat for each copy.
Then there is the case of self referencing cards. Aether Burst is a card that is weak (in general cube terms), but still a playable effect as a singleton, but grows much more powerful with each copy. Squadron Hawks is curious in that it underwhelms with only 1 copy, breaks about even with 2 copies, and gives huge value with 3+ copies.
I went over some of the higher profile cases here. In general, I think singles are probably the way to go for 99% of cubable cards. But if you can come up with a logical reason as to why your cube is more fun with specific cards in multiples, then I believe that's true to the spirit of Magic, and the format.
I choose to make my cube vintage legal and singleton legal. It's part of my design maxim. I don't run multiples because my playgroup doesn't want to. I don't think it's any more complicated than that.
I think that if a group wants to start running multiples because that's what's most fun for them, then they should absolutely do it. But it will always be a singleton format for me. The unique flavour of every deck is what I enjoy about the format. A cube that explores a lack of a singleton rule should be an entirely different beast. The possibilities are really endless. You could go for tribal packages quite easily. It is hard to draw the line though, and that would have to be up to each group. I mean, what cube wouldn't be improved by four Ancestral Recalls, etc.
I am in the process of building my first cube. It is Modern themed, so I can only use shock lands and zendikar fetches. I am doubling up each of those in the cube, as well as doubling up Tectonic Edge and Ghost Quarter. Everything else is singleton.
I don't think Wizards has a definition for Cube as a sanctionned format. It is possible to sanction Cube games even if the Cube is not a singleton, which clearly means Wizards does not limit Cube to singleton. Otherwise Cube would be defined in the Tournament Rules, as are defined a bunch of other formats.
This is kinda what I thought.
I also would prefer for them not to have clearly defined rules, because I think cubes can vary a lot from one to the other, and that's a good thing.
Whatever cards you pick, the main thing is that they serve a purpose. Thinking "what cards would be good in multiples?" is really missing the point. You should think about what you are tying to do and then figure out the most interesting way to do it.
For example, I don't think multiple Vengevines is particularly interesting. It basically only leads in one direction.
Now, multiple Buried Alives/Intuition (supported by other similar cards) with a plethora of divergent ways to take advantage of them seems to be a great use of multiples.
Why isn't supporting a strategy like 2010 Survival decks a good use of multiples to you? No restrictions, right? Don't the cards you mentioned work even better with Vengevines, btw?
Also, having multiple Intuitions would make me want to have a set of AK's.
Why isn't supporting a strategy like 2010 Survival decks a good use of multiples to you? No restrictions, right? Don't the cards you mentioned work even better with Vengevines, btw?
Also, having multiple Intuitions would make me want to have a set of AK's.
-AA
Obviously if my goal is to "support a strategy like 2010 survival", then multiple Vengevines would be a good use of multiples. But, other then that very narrow goal, I don't see why this would be a particularly good use of multiples. It seems like a dead end that really doesn't open up much interesting gameplay. Can you explain why this would be desirable?
"Cube is a singleton format, sanctioned, no discussion here. Thats the basic formula of cube and is a big part of why cube playes as it plays. Its the reason why people draft how they draft. You have to think about your pick: If I take this card I wont table this card and so on.
Why adding multiple cards? How to balance? Adding 2 more Gravecrawlers pushes one archetype. Why not adding 4 more JtMS? Where to draw the line? A bit randomn, isnt it? Maybe we can run 5 cards of each in standard in the future just because some cards are so good? Or my blue section will be 30 JtMS, 10 Cryptic Command and 10 Meloku?
Its dangerous to tweak at the basic rules of cubes. You decide to build a cube ... well then build a cube. Of course you can build also a limited environment with multiples, BUT that is a not a cube anymore. "
This is the best answer. Traditional Cube is a singleton format. See WotC power cube on MTGO. It's all singleton. Thus, one can infer that Wotc considers traditonal cube to be singleton. Cube does NOT simulate the limited environment you experience at FNM.
Multiples of cards are okay to add, but then it is not a traditional cube. In fact if you want to simulate the limited environment, simulate a booster box. 36 rares, 108 uncommons and 396 commons. Then create 3 packs with 1 rare, 3 uncommon and 11 commons. You should have 4 of each relavent common, 2 uncommon and 1 rare. If I built a non-traditional cube, and wanted to simulate the exact limited enviroment, that is what I would do.
Traditional cube is it's own format, just like standard, EDH, legacy, pauper etc.....
An interesting rule (house) that I have been thinking about is the "The human rule" - no 2 humans look exactly alike. However, if wizards prints a card with a different picture on it, it counts as a different card.
Thus, if you have a fallen empires cube, you can have 3 mindstab thrulls. If they face each other in battle, they know they are different.
"As we move closer to cube possibly becoming a somewhat official format, I think naming is important to think about. The MTGO Cubes have already gone a long way to cementing the standard idea of a cube in non-enthusiast's minds. So maybe we just keep using Cube as a base and then modify (which is basically what we already do).
Eg:
Cube - Singleton focused on power
Block Cube - Invasion Cube, Kamigawa Cube, etc.
Pauper Cube - Commons
Peasant Cube - Commons and Uncommons
Cuboid (or maybe Mube?) - Cubes with multiples (other names welcome!)
Tribal Cube - Features primary and secondary Tribe support
Custom Cube - Uses custom cards or large erratas (like the Rebel errata)
Pack Cube - Packs follow proper rarity distribution
Theme Cube - Artifact Cube, Spells Cube, Creature Cube, Core Cube, etc.
Etc.
I am just brainstorming. Maybe such names never make it past our own subforum, but I think they would certainly help. And I believe they would help designers out side of this forum too, should they ever reach that far.
They also help a ton for the player. There is an Invasion Cube at my local store, as well as a Pauper Cube, and a Theme Cube (and my Cube). As a player I really need that sort of info a head of time. A naming convention will help immensely. " posted by flutterguy
This is the solution to the problem. A cube is singleton and everything else is a variation shown above.
I'm pretty sure that's already done. The exception that I remember from top of my head might be some cube that use Errata just say "Cube" instead of errata cube.
Not sure if this has been done before, and I don't know what words would have been used for it if it has. Sorry in advance if I'm starting a new thread for an old topic.
So, I've seen cubes where people use multiple copies of ABU duals (Tundra, etc.), and I've seen cubes where people are allowed infinite copies of a certain card as if it were a basic land (Myr Servitor), but I've never seen a cube go the whole nine yards (in the direction of the lands, that is), and play multiple copies of the majority of the cards in the cube.
Has anyone explored this? While working on my cube, it piqued my interest for there to be a cube where cards like Deadeye Navigator among others could shine. The spirit, specifically, doesn't necessarily benefit from duplicates, but I feel like one could create a different kind of "interesting, custom limited format."
I have seen a core set cube, and that seemed pretty interesting. What I was imagining might be something along the lines of that. Duplicates of Sunpetal Grove and Isolated Chapel's cycles as the primary dual lands... Cards like Briarhorn being bombs that more than one green player might have...
I've run four copies of Cloudpost, Glimmerpost and Terramorphic Expanse as a part of the landbase in my cube, and forced people to draft the lot if they wanted (rather than having them pull one, and get four-for-one).
I culled the Posts when I dropped to 360 - they were fun, but people shied away from drafting them, as they were always worried there was some dude across the table drafting them hard too.
Terramorphic is still a four-of ATM, but that's only in lieu of me getting fetches for the cube (which isn't too far away).
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
The cube manager decides what is sanctioned in their cube. You can play any card in the cube that you drafted. You can't play any card not in the cube or that you didn't draft. I don't think we need an outside organization to tell us we're doing it right.
Sanctioned by who? Wizards of the Coast sanctioned cubes have never had 20 fetches in them.
Draft my cube!
Watch me stream!
I can collect planeswalker points playing with my cube. I can collect planeswalker points playing commander. But in order to play a sanctioned commander game, there's rules for the format. I don't think the cube has the same paramaters.
I want to see a clearly defined set of rules for what constitutes a cube, and if the singleton rule must be adhered to.
If you sit down and play Commander, you can look up a set of rules to determine what constitutes a legal deck for the purposes of tournament play. I don't think the cube has such paramaters. The current definition that describes the format as singleton only applies to those cubes. Not all cubes. Every Commander legal deck has specific rules it must adhere to to be EDH legal. Is there such a thing for a cube? I don't think there is.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
If I were briefly teaching someone about constructed Magic, I would say that they'll need a 60 card deck, and aside from basic lands, are limited to a 4-of. I didn't tell them they can have more than 60, because it's so rarely optimal to have more. I didn't tell them that Relentless Rats is an exception to the 4-of rule, because that's a corner case (and if they ever read the card, they'll understand). I didn't tell them about the restricted list in Vintage, because it's unlikely they'll make a deck where that's relevant.
So, to me, that WotC article calling out the cube as singleton, I don't interpret that as an end-all decree that cubes must be singleton. The Magic Online cube (being discussed in the article) is singleton, and most cubes are singleton, so it's easier to make the assertion and move on with the article.
Back to the Overall Topic:
Personally, I think that there is some interesting design space to be explored by putting multiples of cards in a cube. Now, I don't think it should be anywhere close to every card; but making mana-fixing more consistent and even - I can get behind that, because variance in mana is something I look to eliminate when building a deck (either in a draft, or constructed). Duress? Not so much, as there have been plenty of variants that are nearly the same power level - so the variants will mix things up, make games play out differently; essentially adding fun. Same with Lightning Bolt. I like Lightning Bolt, it's a good card and it's fun, and I like seeing what version of it someone has included in their cube. But adding multiple copies of it would be boring - because having different spells makes you evaluate them in the draft individually, and also during deck building/playing. Note that I'm not talking about determining what's better - Lightning Bolt vs. Volcanic Hammer vs. Flame Javelin vs. Fireblast, but it's about evaluating Burn Spell X versus 3-Drop Y.
And sometimes there are other niches where having multiple copies of a card can more reliably "turn on" an archetype, bringing a strategy from nearly unplayable to good. Take Wildfire; that's an archetype that needs a few strong sweepers, with it's namesake card being the cream of the crop. It has an almost functional reprint, and there's a version for 1 more mana that's debatable on playability. So if you want Wildfire to be an archetype at higher cube sizes, you might need to include multiples of the card to maintain viability. Side note: for a cube, lets say you want both Armageddon and Ravages of War, because that's an effect you want white to have access to with some consistency. But for budget reasons, you don't own a copy of Ravages. A second copy of Armageddon is just as good as a proxy.
Then there's a card that has a synergy with itself: Gravecrawler. Black has a theme of small creatures that can come back from the dead. Unfortunately, most of them require a specific condition. Gravecrawler requires a zombie to be in play. A cube that wants to enable Gravecrawler's crawl-back will probably try and add more zombies. Now there definitely are some zombies that would see play regardless, and others that are close enough to functional swaps, but the coolest thing about Gravecrawler in constructed is the synergy with itself. A second gravecrawler allows you to return the first. This makes for interesting draft decisions: If you know there are X copies of Gravecrawler in a cube of Y size, how do you value them now? How many other zombies are in the cube? When does Gravecrawler become better for your deck than Bloodghast? I'd like to finish this section by saying that I only think multiple copies of Gravecrawler in a cube are interesting if you are otherwise thin on zombies. If you have lots of zombies and you are almost always getting full value out of a Gravecrawler, then having multiple is less interesting as the power level is nearly flat for each copy.
Then there is the case of self referencing cards. Aether Burst is a card that is weak (in general cube terms), but still a playable effect as a singleton, but grows much more powerful with each copy. Squadron Hawks is curious in that it underwhelms with only 1 copy, breaks about even with 2 copies, and gives huge value with 3+ copies.
I went over some of the higher profile cases here. In general, I think singles are probably the way to go for 99% of cubable cards. But if you can come up with a logical reason as to why your cube is more fun with specific cards in multiples, then I believe that's true to the spirit of Magic, and the format.
"I'm the Best!"
Toad, Mario Kart 64
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
Good discussion though.
On spoiled card wishlisting and 'should-have-had'-isms:
Ux Whirza
Rb Goblins
Legacy
U Urza Stompy
Duel Commander
Sai, Master Thopterist
This is kinda what I thought.
I also would prefer for them not to have clearly defined rules, because I think cubes can vary a lot from one to the other, and that's a good thing.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 50th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from OTJ!
And with custom art, like Doc Brown on "A Bolt of Lightning!"
-AA
I use descriptive language. Assume that I'm being nice and respectful. (I'll tell you when I'm not.)
My Cube: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/9029
Juju Alters - Altered MTG Cards
For example, I don't think multiple Vengevines is particularly interesting. It basically only leads in one direction.
Now, multiple Buried Alives/Intuition (supported by other similar cards) with a plethora of divergent ways to take advantage of them seems to be a great use of multiples.
Also, having multiple Intuitions would make me want to have a set of AK's.
-AA
I use descriptive language. Assume that I'm being nice and respectful. (I'll tell you when I'm not.)
My Cube: http://cubetutor.com/viewcube/9029
Why adding multiple cards? How to balance? Adding 2 more Gravecrawlers pushes one archetype. Why not adding 4 more JtMS? Where to draw the line? A bit randomn, isnt it? Maybe we can run 5 cards of each in standard in the future just because some cards are so good? Or my blue section will be 30 JtMS, 10 Cryptic Command and 10 Meloku?
Its dangerous to tweak at the basic rules of cubes. You decide to build a cube ... well then build a cube. Of course you can build also a limited environment with multiples, BUT that is a not a cube anymore. "
This is the best answer. Traditional Cube is a singleton format. See WotC power cube on MTGO. It's all singleton. Thus, one can infer that Wotc considers traditonal cube to be singleton. Cube does NOT simulate the limited environment you experience at FNM.
Multiples of cards are okay to add, but then it is not a traditional cube. In fact if you want to simulate the limited environment, simulate a booster box. 36 rares, 108 uncommons and 396 commons. Then create 3 packs with 1 rare, 3 uncommon and 11 commons. You should have 4 of each relavent common, 2 uncommon and 1 rare. If I built a non-traditional cube, and wanted to simulate the exact limited enviroment, that is what I would do.
Traditional cube is it's own format, just like standard, EDH, legacy, pauper etc.....
An interesting rule (house) that I have been thinking about is the "The human rule" - no 2 humans look exactly alike. However, if wizards prints a card with a different picture on it, it counts as a different card.
Thus, if you have a fallen empires cube, you can have 3 mindstab thrulls. If they face each other in battle, they know they are different.
My take on it is that its your cube, your choice...... but I like the part knowing that if I dont pick a card, I may not see it again.
540 Peasant cube- Gold EditionSomething Spicyan interesting article on channelfireball on the subject.
Overall, you can break the rules to create a fun environment.
Eg:
Cube - Singleton focused on power
Block Cube - Invasion Cube, Kamigawa Cube, etc.
Pauper Cube - Commons
Peasant Cube - Commons and Uncommons
Cuboid (or maybe Mube?) - Cubes with multiples (other names welcome!)
Tribal Cube - Features primary and secondary Tribe support
Custom Cube - Uses custom cards or large erratas (like the Rebel errata)
Pack Cube - Packs follow proper rarity distribution
Theme Cube - Artifact Cube, Spells Cube, Creature Cube, Core Cube, etc.
Etc.
I am just brainstorming. Maybe such names never make it past our own subforum, but I think they would certainly help. And I believe they would help designers out side of this forum too, should they ever reach that far.
They also help a ton for the player. There is an Invasion Cube at my local store, as well as a Pauper Cube, and a Theme Cube (and my Cube). As a player I really need that sort of info a head of time. A naming convention will help immensely. " posted by flutterguy
This is the solution to the problem. A cube is singleton and everything else is a variation shown above.
My cube
My cube on Cube tutor
I'm OP_Forever. I'll be putting this in my signature for a while so everyone know I change my nickname.
So, I've seen cubes where people use multiple copies of ABU duals (Tundra, etc.), and I've seen cubes where people are allowed infinite copies of a certain card as if it were a basic land (Myr Servitor), but I've never seen a cube go the whole nine yards (in the direction of the lands, that is), and play multiple copies of the majority of the cards in the cube.
Has anyone explored this? While working on my cube, it piqued my interest for there to be a cube where cards like Deadeye Navigator among others could shine. The spirit, specifically, doesn't necessarily benefit from duplicates, but I feel like one could create a different kind of "interesting, custom limited format."
I have seen a core set cube, and that seemed pretty interesting. What I was imagining might be something along the lines of that. Duplicates of Sunpetal Grove and Isolated Chapel's cycles as the primary dual lands... Cards like Briarhorn being bombs that more than one green player might have...
Duplicate threads merged.
—Lanxal
My cube list on CubeTutor.
Both are very much under construction. Please stop by and talk about it!
Squadron Hawk
Timberpack Wolves
Gravecrawler
Cloudpost
Glimmerpost
Muscle Burst
Rune Snag
I've never followed through on it, so I don't know how well it would work out. Additional cards like Shock, Perilous Myr, Phantasmal Bear, and Raise the Alarm also were considered.
I culled the Posts when I dropped to 360 - they were fun, but people shied away from drafting them, as they were always worried there was some dude across the table drafting them hard too.
Terramorphic is still a four-of ATM, but that's only in lieu of me getting fetches for the cube (which isn't too far away).
My Stupidly Large Number of Current Decks
PucaTrade with me!
The Multiplayer Power Rankings
Cube: the Gittening (My Multiplayer Cube) - MTGS Cube List | @ CubeTutor
The N00b Cube (Peasant cube for new players) - MTGS Cube List | @ CubeTutor
It would be like saying "lets play EDH with the singleton rule removed"
its good to have rules to define a format.
You can also view it here at Cubetutor <---- please draft my cube!!
and you can also see it at DeckStats
https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/3pq