MTG Salvation

Quote from cryogen »

Quote from madhatter00o »

There are lots of reasons that I disagree with the rule change, most of which have been stated, so I'm not going to rehash them.

The thing that gets me the most, however, and one that might be worth discussing (if it hasn't been already) is this generic "new player" who gets put out when his/her general gets tucked. To my mind, most new players or players who build thematic/casual (i.e. not cut-throat) decks don't typically use generals that warrant a Spell Crumple/Chaos Warp/Condemn. They *tend* to (obviously they don't always) choose a general that's relatively low-powered, but fun for them nonetheless. Honestly, unless they netdeck a top-tier general (and deck) for their first build, I just fail to see how anyone would waste tuck removal on it.

For example, my very first general was Jenara, Asura of War. It wasn't a good deck by any means, but I loved my general and probably would have felt hurt if someone *did* tuck her. But! She's not inherently a threat. She can be empowered to do some serious damage, sure, but no decent player is going to see Jenara and think, "Holy crap! I have to make sure that thing never sees the light of day!" (And if they do, that's a problem with the person, not the power-level of the general.)

And if a new EDH player *did* choose a top-tier deck for their first, they are probably already familiar with tuck-removal as a threat to their game-plan because 1) it's probably *in* their deck, or 2) they've been warned about it from outside (online) resources.

So, for example, has I chosen Zur, the Enchanter as my first general, it would be foolish of me to get sour when someone does tuck it. In fact, I should be expecting someone to tuck it somehow at some point in the course of the game.

While understand that the RC is trying to use the kid-gloves to help new players, I have trouble accepting that "new players don't like getting their generals tucked/always want access to their generals" argument because, frankly, they usually *do* have steady access to their generals.

Here's the thing though, the new player also won't know that there is a meta of powerful generals. I've seen many players online who run some jank deck they just built with their meager collection and can't understand why they are getting targeted. Mass tuck is also a thing, so you really can't even say they won't get targeted. Sometimes they're not but still get hit with collateral damage.

That's a fair point, but it ultimately emphasizes the social nature of the format. While I understand the convenience of online play, especially for those who are "geographically challenged" (like yours truly), playing with actual people with actual cards would give the new player who just built a pile around Narset, Enlightened Master because she's "sooooo cool" a chance to say, "Hey, I'm just getting into EDH. Please don't kill me first." So, I take any anecdotes from online game-play with a grain of salt..

As you mentioned also, mass tuck effects do cause collateral damage, as you put it, but that's merely part of the learning curve for EDH. A vast many play this format for the sheer amount of options there are. The banlist is relatively short when compared to the thousands of cards players can select. Players can use some of Magic's most powerful spells, even ones that are banned in other formats. Now, the new tuck rules don't make those effects entirely worthless; they're still perfectly good removal. However, by hamstringing the efficacy of tuck-removal spells, the RC has alienated the players who seek freedom of options as well as those who seek to play optimized decks. And all to protect the feelings of "sensitive" new players? That's a little fishy. Magic players are by and large (though certainly not always) mature human beings and can learn and adapt as we get accustomed to new environments (in this case, the format of EDH).

Let me provide my own anecdote. I was introducing a friend who already played Magic to EDH. He had a general grasp ofthe deckbuilding rules, so there wasn't any real problem there. When it came time to play, I picked out my least miserable-to-play-against deck (I play a lot of control, so I chose my mono-White angels aggro). Well, as the game gets on, my friend has built up a sizeable board and decided to bring out his general. When he eventually swings with it, I used Condemn, which I'd held on to for just such an occasion. Was my friend bummed that his general just got tucked? Maybe a little bit. But it didn't stop him from playing and finishing the game. (Afterwards, I gave him one of my extra Hinders to help build his burgeoning EDH collection. Because that's what you do.)

Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is that the RC is underestimating the emotional maturity of the player base. We are not 6-year-olds who will cry if someone breaks our favourite toy. (In writing that, I do realize the irony...)

I had him in Derevi, Empyrial Tactician because he was an awesome Captain Sisay target that made Derevi's job even easier. I eventually dismantled the deck, though, because I'm bad at Green. XP

There are lots of reasons that I disagree with the rule change, most of which have been stated, so I'm not going to rehash them.

The thing that gets me the most, however, and one that might be worth discussing (if it hasn't been already) is this generic "new player" who gets put out when his/her general gets tucked. To my mind, most new players or players who build thematic/casual (i.e. not cut-throat) decks don't typically use generals that warrant a Spell Crumple/Chaos Warp/Condemn. They *tend* to (obviously they don't always) choose a general that's relatively low-powered, but fun for them nonetheless. Honestly, unless they netdeck a top-tier general (and deck) for their first build, I just fail to see how anyone would waste tuck removal on it.

For example, my very first general was Jenara, Asura of War. It wasn't a good deck by any means, but I loved my general and probably would have felt hurt if someone *did* tuck her. But! She's not inherently a threat. She can be empowered to do some serious damage, sure, but no decent player is going to see Jenara and think, "Holy crap! I have to make sure that thing never sees the light of day!" (And if they do, that's a problem with the person, not the power-level of the general.)

And if a new EDH player *did* choose a top-tier deck for their first, they are probably already familiar with tuck-removal as a threat to their game-plan because 1) it's probably *in* their deck, or 2) they've been warned about it from outside (online) resources.

So, for example, has I chosen Zur, the Enchanter as my first general, it would be foolish of me to get sour when someone does tuck it. In fact, I should be expecting someone to tuck it somehow at some point in the course of the game.

While understand that the RC is trying to use the kid-gloves to help new players, I have trouble accepting that "new players don't like getting their generals tucked/always want access to their generals" argument because, frankly, they usually *do* have steady access to their generals.

I have a lot of things that might be considered a "collection": angels, planeswalkers, counterspells... but I only really collect 1 card. Knight Exemplar. I got back into MtG just after Zendikar, during M11, and the coolest deck I remember at the time was the White Weenie featuring Knight Exemplar and Day Of Judgment. I got my ass handed to me so many times by that deck. Anyways, I came out of that season with an irrational love for Knight Exemplar, so I've been collecting them ever since. (And I never buy them outright.)

Cool thing is, when I pulled 1 in a pack and a foil in another pack, I was stupid excited. Ah, life's little pleasures.

So I've been reading the arguments for and against the banning of Narset for a few pages now, and while I have yet to play against her myself, I think she should stay unbanned. Most of the arguments have been stated already, but for the sake of summation (so that anyone just waltzing through the thread can follow), I'll list the strongest ones here.

1. She costs 6 and requires 3 colours. In anything but a competitively tuned deck or meta, this is slow, especially since her colours don't have easy access to ramp. (You need artifact ramp, which is susceptible to any form of removal - spot removal or global removal.)
2. She doesn't "accidentally" create unfun or uninteractive game states. As one of the actual criteria of the banlist, this is pretty important. Biorhythm says, "No creatures? Oops, you're dead." Worldfire says, "Let's make everything in the game up to this point irrelevant." (And if the Worldfire player is clever, they'll have floated mana beforehand to cast a creature *cough*general*cough* to kill everyone with.) And this silliness is accomplished with just one card. You actually have to >try< to break Narset. Granted, you don't have to try very hard, but you do have to put in some effort with your card selections.
3. She isn't meta-warping. Primeval Titan and Sylvan Primordial epitomized the "who can cast/copy/steal it first?" gameplay (though I'd say this is more true for Prime Time than for his cousin Sylvan...). And if you weren't playing PT or SP, you needed to be able to respond to it immediately, either with counters, spot removal, or even theft/copy effects. Whether you were playing with or against them, they had a gravity that exerted some sort of force on every deck in the meta. Narset isn't like that. Not any deck can steal/copy her and get the same benefits. Yes, she should be answered, but then, so should any card that presents a major threat.
4. There <are> ways to interact with her. It's not as easy as a simple Swords to Plowshares or even Boomerang, but there are enough ways to destroy, tuck, burn, have her sacrificed, etc. as there always have been. Hell, Counterspell takes care of her for a few turns. (And please don't use the "But Cavern of Souls makes her uncounterable!" argument because you can say that for ANY general... >_>) Certainly, she's not as easy to interact with as most people are accustomed to, but a little creativity never hurt anyone.
5. She's really no different from most other combo generals, save for the hexproof (see "interactivity," above). All these stories about how someone played against a Narset deck that comboed in everyone's faces is quite similar to hearing about how Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind killed an entire table, or how Sharuum, the Hegemon got infinite turns, or how Jhoira of the Ghitu, dropped Eldrazi after Jokulhopsing. That's what those decks do when they're allowed to advance <according to plan>. Likewise, Narset can go infinite (attacks, turns, etc.) if allowed to set up <according to plan>. (I emphasize "according to plan" because opponents can and should be trying to stop those plans.) I don't like the idea or argument that Narset should be banned because some decks can win. Any deck, when built properly and with some luck, should be able to win.

Tl;dr

I really don't think Narset should be banned. Sure, she's a powerful combo general, but she's a bit of glass cannon. There are chances of her whiffing. Any tuck and she's probably gone for good (WUR doesn't have a lot of ways to search for creatures, even if you're counting artifact searches, like Planar Portal). There are loads of ways to deal with her if you think outside of targeted removal, too.

Quote from nightwyrm »

Having a reputation as a complete psycho who will retaliate against any attack on his board/life even at the cost of the game can also be a long term strategy for discouraging early aggression against him.

Lol. I think you're right: we're looking at this the wrong way. Poor threat assessment isn't a problem; it's a strategy!

To contribute to the thread, though, threat assessment really is an acquired skill. I'm sure I've told this story a billion times, but it's worth mentioning again. I was playing 4-man FFA with my mono-White angels/equipment against Radha, Teferi, and Sharuum. Radha was not only ramping but also dropping small creatures that either got bigger or multiplied. Radha also had Stranglehold and Vexing Shusher, so he could easily make his spells incounterable while preventing us from finding answers. Teferi was on the board, but besides that, no one besides Radha had much of a presence beyond a few mana rocks.

I had instant-speed spot removal in hand, but Radha's board was overflowing. And Teferi was out anyways, so I would have had to cast it on my turn regardless. I finally drew a Wrath and cast it.

Me: "Aha! Finally! Take that!"
Radha: "I thought that might be coming soon." (Starts to pick up creatures.)
Sharuum: "Phew, thanks."
Teferi: "Counterspell."

We all -- yes, even the Radha player -- look at him, utterly bewildered.

Me: "W-why? Can't you see he's going to kill us all next turn?"
Teferi: "Because I can, and because I don't want Teferi to cost more..."

Radha puts his creatures back on the board and proceeds to kill Teferi. (Sharuum and I scooped because we had no other answers.)

Some people can't be reasoned with; some people just want to watch the world burn.

Don't worry, man, I feel ya.

I come from a very competitive meta, myself. Zur, Azami, Doran, and Scion are all optimally built. I've had to construct two highly tuned decks to hang with them. (I run Grand Arbiter control and Niv 1.0 combo in that meta.) When I moved to Japan, I had to switch to Cockatrice, and people on 'trice are notorious for being either hyper-compeptive or hyper-casual, as you may know. Anyways, one evening online, I was playing a game with a group of strangers, obviously, so I had no idea of their "casual level" since it was still t2. I drew a Strip Mine, so I played it and took out someone's Ravnica karoo, leaving them landless. The entire board lit up on me as if I'd kicked a puppy and then drowned it. In my meta, that kind of play is "correct." It's not simply acceptable; it's expected. To all their complaints, I just replied, "That's why you don't play those lands." That didn't help, and I seriously thought I was going to get kicked. Luckily, they let me stay, but out of consideration for their (hyper)sensitivity, I toned down the rest of my game.

Anyways, if you can't find a group of people within your LGS or group of friends to play with at the more cut-throat level that you desire, I've found that there are two main routes to take to maintain your sanity.

1) Make a personal goal for each game that isn't just "kill all the players" (that one's a given). Usually something political or manipulative ("make player X kill player Y") or very particular ("exchange [permanents, life totals, etc.] with at least two players before winning") tend to be fun. Rather than imagining this as a "handicap", consider it a personal prerequisite for winning. Your basic strategy (and answers/protections) shouldn't change, but the "optimal" plays might shift in light of your new goal. It will also keep the game interesting for you, especially if your level of play is higher than those of your opponents.

2) Change your perspective from "I'm going to blow everyone out of the water as fast as I can" to "I'm going to blow everyone out of the water with as much style as I can". There's a difference between comboing out t5 when no one has a board position let alone answers, and comboing out t15 after taking care of some threats, protecting your hand or deck from others' ill intentions, and letting people think they have a chance before exploding. If you're confident you can win anyways, see how far you can let opponents go before feeling you need to pit an end to everything. Again, neither your deck nor strategy needs to be changed, but your experience should become a bit more interesting if not fun.

I'll jump on the "Seriously?!" wagon here... I mean, it's just a Consecrated Sphinx. If the deck is worth anything, which it apparently is given it has a bloody Mana Crypt in it, then losing a C-Sphinx t3 isn't that much of a setback. I might imagine a tongue-in-cheek whine along the lines of "aww... my pretty card-drawing sphinxie-poo is gone!", but not a full-blown argument about the Spirit of EDH.

Your friend needs to 1) grow up, and 2) learn that removal is utterly necessary to prevent shenanigans so that you (as a pilot) can try to win as well. MtG isn't about having someone to watch you fishbowl; it's about each player trying to win, which necessitates answers to anything that inhibits one's own plans. (I believe the OP mentioned this particular argument in his post.)

It just occurred to me, that your friend's deck must not be that great if, in spite of running (at least) UB AND aggressive mana ramping, he's not running counters and kill spells. Like, really?

Anyways, if your friend won't listen to reason, then run the uber-pillowfort-durdle deck. All the taxing; all the staxing; no win-con. See if your friend can likes having his hands tied (i.e., unable to do anything because of his "no removal" policy) and no end in sight. Maybe that's a little too spiteful, though.

Quote from Jeff2302 »

Hi there,
If you had an unlimited budget, would cards such as Moat, the Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Mana Crypt and Forcefield make your list?

Also, do you have suggestions for a 1v1 build?

If money were no object, I would definitely include Forcefield (subbing out Ghostly Prison or Propaganda), The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale (subbing out a colourless utility land), and maybe Moat. I'm hesitant about Moat since a lot of nasty creatures/fatty attackers don't fly, so it would depend on how my meta changes, if at all, in light of the new C14 decks and Khans block.

I actually already have Mana Crypt, but I don't feel it's entirely necessary in this deck. GAA4 needs coloured mana more than it needs colourless, due mostly to the fact that the CMCs of creatures and spells tend to be low already and the Judge usually "takes off" the colourless mana cost of the spell in his discounts. (For example, a 1U spell will turn into a U spell. Having 2 available won't really help in these cases.) If the deck focused more on early, fast mana, I'd consider Mana Crypt more intently, since to include it would necessarily demand other mana rocks to play into. (At least in my opinion.)

Anyways, for 1v1, I think this deck is pretty good as it is. But then again, my group doesn't play with French banlist for 1v1... If your group does, though, first remove any cards on the French banlist (Sol Ring, etc.) and include that many more prison pieces, draw, removal/counters, and/or land, depending on how you want the deck to run. Personally, if I had, say, 5 spots open, I'd include 1 prison piece (probably Static Orb or [if I actually had money] Forcefield), 1 decent draw spell (Stroke of Genius or something), 1 counter/removal spell (probably Unexpectedly Absent), and 2 lands (the UW fetchland and a basic land). This reinforces the basic structure of the deck while ensuring good access to mana.

The really nice thing about 1v1 Control decks is that they're a lot easier to pilot, since you have one target (player) to focus your counters/removal on. You have a little more freedom in what you can counter, since you don't have to police the entire table, waiting for someone to try to make a major play just so that you can stop it. Of course, this doesn't mean you should waste your counters/removal, either, but it is significantly easier to take control and lock one person out than it is to take control of an entire table and lock 3-4 people out.

I'm totally getting the mono-White deck and mono-Blue decks! The 'walkers are gonna be so crazy in my Bant Superfriends deck! Also, the White deck has a bunch of angels that are more than suitable for my mono-White angels deck. OMGOMGOMG! Soooo excited.
**********

Now on to OFFICIAL CLAN BUSINESS: SECRET SANTA

Bur and I are tag-teaming to get everything organized.

Present Price Limit
Like last year, we are setting the price range at $5 (/international currency equivalent). This means that when you receive the wishlist of the person for whom you will be Santa, you should select from that list cards whose total comes out to about $5, more or less. And, for the sake of consistency, please use magic.tcgplayer.com average price when you are choosing what to send.

Shipping
Before committing, please remember that each sender will be responsible for shipping the present to the gift-ee. (This cost is considered separate from the cards/present you will be giving.) Luckily, shipping costs for cards, which are light, tend to be pretty manageable, so I don't think it's a terribly weighty expense.

Also, consider whether or not you would like to ship outside of the United States or not. Either is fine. We do have an international community here, though, so just think about it.

Wishlists
We aren't asking for any wishlists yet, since we want to give you all time to think about what you want. Ultimately, a good wishlist will have around 5-10 cards on it (depending on prices, probably) so that the Santa has a variety of things to choose from but not an overwhelming amount. Since we're not asking for anyone's official wishlist yet, don't limit yourself to 5-10 cards; if you notice something you'd like, take notes! Just, when submitting your list, please try to edit it to the cards you'd really like, can't find in your area, etc. We will be asking for your wishlists shortly, though, so feel free to start writing anything and everything down for yourself!


For now, I need everyone who is interested to do a few things for me.

- Please PM me stating:
1. that you will participate in the [Spirit of EDH] 2014 Secret Santa.
2. whether or not you would mind shipping outside of the US. (This will help when it comes time to assign Santas.)

Cheers, guys!

The number before each commander represents the number of decks of that commander in the decklist database that have been posted and/or updated in the past year.


In the following decklists, the number before each cardname represents the number of decks of that commander in the decklist database that play that card.