Quote from boombox_smk »Play this off of our Boar god, Ilharg and cast Colossus on it. Potentially save it and give it trample.
Quote from umtiger »I have 3 decks without Sol Ring and I'm sure that I built them in optimal ways.
Quote from umtiger »Your main complaint against tutors (repetitiveness) happens have with or without tutors. Because the root causes of repetitiveness aren't tutors.
Quote from umtiger »I guess it's "rarely true" just because you say so. "10 tutors" is really pushing it. Can you name all ten of them?
I find that powerful legendary creatures from Commander sets has done more to damage deck variety than tutor cards by far. Demonic Tutor goes into all decks that have black and that has never limited the variety of decks that I see. But Meren merely existing means I see Meren everywhere.
Quote from RedGauntlet »I'm curious in how Painter will be used in a fair way, the card is very unique
Quote from MRHblue »Your argument was without nuance.
Quote from MRHblue »Are you on the RC or CAG? As I assume not, what exactly is your idea about 'doing something'?
Quote from MRHblue »What a ridiculous reduction of the conversation being had. There are at least 2 or 3 other cards that easily sub into those scenarios with the same outcome.
Quote from MRHblue »This line of reasoning makes no sense. First, it implies the ban list changed is easy and alleviates this scenario, neither of which is true.
Quote from cryogen »As pokken said, ask yourself what unbanning CV adds to the format. Are there going to be cool stories about how it got played?
Quote from cryogen »EtI, Tooth and Nail, Ad Nauseam, etc., are all similar in the sense that when you resolve these you SHOULD win the game on the spot if you are building your deck competitively, but they don't HAVE to win you the game.
Quote from cryogen »But that's just it. CV literally does nothing else and there isn't any interesting use for it. I don't know if that in of itself should merit banning, but most of the other "I win" cards that come up in comparison can at least lead to interesting game states that don't end the game.
Quote from cryogen »Oh wait. Crap. Nothing to see here.
Quote from cryogen »(Side note, if there were any reason to unban CV, this makes a strong argument against it.)
Quote from Dunharrow »Can you map out for us the kind of start that would be problematic? Because if your worry is Urza tapping artifacts to activate his ability, I feel like you are just going to get a lot of 2-3 mana artifacts when you activate him.
That is why Rofellos is better. You don't need to put a ton of enablers in the deck. Just lands and spells. Urza is going to have a lot of duds if you just plan to play a million artifacts.
It is like Maelstrom Wanderer. If you always hit your great 7 drops, the card would be unfair. But you have the same odds of hitting Cultivate as you do Blatant Thievery.
There are only 2 artifact lands he can pay. There are only so many 1-3 mana artifacts you want to play that are not ramp.
The only problem Urza will have is the Orbs... and I just think people will tire of that the same way they tired of Derevi.
Quote from AUTUMNTWILIGHT »Chandra is not more interesting then Jace. They are both generic.
Quote from Carthage »True, but casting a random card from your library for 5 mana is not banworthy, nor is it even particularly strong.
The card as a whole is obviously strong, but that line of play isn't.