lol, your rebuttal is what is "horible wrong". While other colors have a smidgen of tuck, it is absolutely true that white/blue had the lion's share. Outside of those colors Chaos Warp was really the only great general-tucking option. Warp World kinda counts...but is a very different beast than the precision strikes in blue/white, requiring you to either build around it or risk getting hosed by its randomness just to fight a general. OTOH in UW you have Hinder, Crumple, Spin, Staff, Stalker, Condemn, Light, Terminus, Oblation...am I missing any?
I'd count Bant Charm too, since you have to be playing both blue and white to use it.
That seems more like a problem with the playgroup than anything else.
Unless of course, that happens to be the only counterspell you're holding in your hand at the time.
Right, but the point that Slarg is trying to make (assuming I'm understanding correctly) is that no one is forcing a player to respond to/counter the new player's general. Just because you're holding a Spell Crumple doesn't mean you have to use it.
If everyone in the playgroup all has Spell Crumple and Hinder, I can see how that would feel oppressive. But it would take a real jerk to use one against a need player without first ascertaining the level of his deck and the general's necessity to the game-plan. If a new player's deck warrants tuck, then that's probably a good thing. It means the deck is built well and that the general is an actual threat. But if the more experienced players are throwing around their tuck-removal all willy-nilly or "just because they have it," I must question their ability to assess threats AND be good sports in this *social* format.
Cryogen, you did raise the point about mass-tuck-removal earlier, which I can see as a bit of a kill-joy for new players.
Of course it's impolite to tuck the commander of a janky deck, but if the only removal you're holding is an Oblation, you're going to use it on my Kemba, not one of the equipments she's holding. You didn't put Oblation in your deck just to be a jerk to me, you put it in there to deal with another friend's Derevi and you're hitting Kemba because she's the biggest threat. Now, with the rule change, that Oblation will be an Oblivion Ring, that Spell Crumple will be a Counterspell, and that Spin into Myth will be... probably a Control Magic, which isn't a whole lot more fun than getting your commander tucked but has plenty more answers.
Overly specific hypotheticals notwithstanding, your logic is sound but is based on the assumption that everyone is as civil as you. Not everybody has a good sense of how to play in a way that's fun for everyone else, and that is why a ban list was necessary to begin with. I'm glad your playgroup follows common courtesy, but some people need a little extra nudge to play fair.
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.
That is a reasonable thing to assume, but it doesn't work that way in practice. As a new player, I got my janky commanders tucked quite frequently.
When the meta is full of degenerate commanders, players put all the tuck they can into their decks. Commander doesn't have sideboards, and even if it did nobody would sideboard those out; they're too useful. So when I cast my commander, are you going to stop me with a counterspell? Nope, you're only holding a spell crumple. Ordinarily you'd save that for a more frightening commander, but if there isn't one or you're not worried about that player this particular moment, that tuck is coming for the noob.
One other thing I will say in favor of this change: maybe now people will realize that Spin Into Myth is actually a bad card.
A thousand times yes! I used it in a few decks, but every time I drew it I was always like "Why am I playing this five-mana instant that gets rid of one creature?"
Hell, I barely even liked Oblation. In any case, my decks are so hard-pressed for cards to cut that I just love the realm of possibilities that opens when there's a clear thing I need to take out of my deck.
All the spikes upset about this rule need to take a moment of reflection and realize that no matter how many logical arguments they can make against this rule, it just simply wasn't made for them.
This statement, as well as the garbage that followed, was nothing more than colossal straw man. You assume that it's just diehard, competitive Spikes that are unhappy with this rule. That's patently false, and frankly, it insults the intelligence of anyone reading it. One does not need to be a cutthroat wannabe pro to like tucking commanders. Feel free to disagree, but do so politely and with a modicum of self-awareness. Straw men typically come from idiots, and they only work on bigger idiots.
Wow. Okay. You ask me to be polite when I disagree (which I felt I was), but it's sandwiched between calling my post "garbage" and then insinuating that I'm an idiot.
Thank you. If you had been nicer, I would have felt the need to debate with you.
Yeah, you're right. I typically proofread things to minimize my own jackassery and keep it polite. Not this time though, apparently. I am very sorry. My approach was pretty hostile, not to mention inconsistent. Again, I apologize.
It's all good. For what it's worth, reading my post back separated from the tone I intended, I can see how it may have come off as inflammatory, especially if one were already upset about the situation. I wasn't trying to ruffle anyone's feathers. I've just always hated the tuck rule and was so excited to hear that it had been changed, only to be immediately shocked to see so much outrage. In hindsight, I may have subconsciously blamed everyone who liked the tuck rule for all the times I was bored at a table because somebody tucked my commander.
All the spikes upset about this rule need to take a moment of reflection and realize that no matter how many logical arguments they can make against this rule, it just simply wasn't made for them.
This statement, as well as the garbage that followed, was nothing more than colossal straw man. You assume that it's just diehard, competitive Spikes that are unhappy with this rule. That's patently false, and frankly, it insults the intelligence of anyone reading it. One does not need to be a cutthroat wannabe pro to like tucking commanders. Feel free to disagree, but do so politely and with a modicum of self-awareness. Straw men typically come from idiots, and they only work on bigger idiots.
Wow. Okay. You ask me to be polite when I disagree (which I felt I was), but it's sandwiched between calling my post "garbage" and then insinuating that I'm an idiot.
Thank you. If you had been nicer, I would have felt the need to debate with you.
@@Action Jack: everyone's welcome to play at my group, with whatever legal cards they want to play. We seek to include, and not restrict people's card choices on our personal whim. That way anyone sitting down knows what to expect. Burn us with a hyper competitive deck, we'll break those out the next game. Playing your awesome Kemba with janky equips just to make cats, cool, I'll break out something like my pirate theme deck that only plays cards related to pirates and we can have some relaxed fun. The difference is I guess I'm the type of player that seeks to play in a way we can both enjoy, not just one or the other. If that makes me a jerk, so be it.
Why do you sound like I just personally called you a jerk? Being mindful of your opponent's power level and selecting the deck that you feel will be fun for the most people is the complete antithesis of everything I described. And I'm not sure why you insinuated that I only care about my own fun. I do the same gauging of what will be the most appropriate deck to play at a particular table, and when I want to play my most powerful deck I make sure my friends are running suitable matchups.
I did speak with a bit of hyperbole; of course not everyone with a powerful deck is a jerk. But my LGS is full of people with insanely powerful decks that I have no interest in playing against, so I seek out the ones who are want the same things out of Magic as I do. I don't personally hate someone who thinks it's fun to, say, take 5 extra turns in a row, but with enough other opponents to choose from I see no harm in doing my thing while they do theirs.
@Action Jack
That is the exact issue I take with this rules change. It encourages boring and linear deck design. Instead of adding alternate win conditions and interesting interactions, now you can just keep throwing out Kemba until she doesn't eat removal and stuff your deck with equipment.
I'll also add that house rules are a luxury which some playgroups cant really afford. My local group frequently has 15+ players on any given night; some are regulars, and others not. We simply cant have extensive house rules with such a large group and irregular group; assuming that we could ever come to such a consensus.
I saw a creature card I fell in love with and decided I wanted to devote a deck to doing one cool thing with it. Alternate win conditions would just water it down. Is a focused deck really more boring than rounding it out so that it does the same stuff that all the other monowhite decks do? If I want to use a different strategy, I'll play a different deck.
My other decks are more varied. But Supercat without Supercat is not a deck worth having.
And how many people do you have in a single game? Surely if everyone's so up in arms about this rule change you'll be able to find 2 or 3 other players who want to play with tuck.
All the spikes upset about this rule need to take a moment of reflection and realize that no matter how many logical arguments they can make against this rule, it just simply wasn't made for them.
The RC had to choose whether to cater to casual players or competitive players. They chose the former. If you think not tucking commanders ruins the balance, you and your friends are free to ignore it.
Much as you were free to ignore the rule prior to the change. If we are free to ignore rules that we don't like in this "casual" format, why bother with a ban list? Or rules at all?
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. If the tuck rule was fine even though I hated it on the basis that I could ignore it, then surely changing it is fine because everyone who liked it can still use it.
Merged triple-post. Please use the 'Multi-quote' button to respond to multiple posts. - cryo
All the spikes upset about this rule need to take a moment of reflection and realize that no matter how many logical arguments they can make against this rule, it just simply wasn't made for them.
The RC had to choose whether to cater to casual players or competitive players. They chose the former. If you think not tucking commanders ruins the balance, you and your friends are free to ignore it. It only means that when a group disagrees, the anti-tuckers overrule. And personally, I love that I can now take my stupid Kemba, Kha Regent deck to a table without worrying whether I'll be spending the entire game staring at a ton of equipment hoping that I'll luck into drawing my Supercat again; mono-white is not very good at finding her again. I didn't build that deck to win as often as possible, I built it so that I could load up an anthropomorphic lion with way more weapons and armor than she could ever hope to carry and charge in while leaving a litter of kittens to chump-block. Now I won't get screwed as collateral damage when people draw the Oblation they keep in their deck to combat broken commanders (or as I like to call them, "degenerals").
You can argue that there are things less fun than getting your commander tucked. And you'd be technically right, but you're thinking from the wrong perspective again. The people that are excited about this rules change don't encounter that stuff. We don't play Strip Mine with Crucible of Worlds. We don't play Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir with Knowledge Pool. And neither do any of our friends. If you make a Mikaeus, the Unhallowed deck whose only purpose is to tutor for Triskelion, we don't respond by tucking Mikaeus. We respond by making you use a different deck or not inviting you the next time we play. Nobody nerfed our ability to stop hanging out with jerks.
This is fantastic news. I build commander decks because I see creatures I love so much that I want to draw them every game. Sure, most of my decks can still win without their commander, but if you're going to make that argument you might as well say it's okay to steal my kidney because I can live with just one. Just because I can win without the sole reason I built my deck doesn't mean it'll be any fun, and if it's no fun I'm wasting my time.
Yes, some commanders are degenerate and will become stronger because of this change. But you know what? That makes no difference to me, because my answer to Kiki-Jiki was never to tuck him. It was to tell the player before the game, "Use a different deck or I'm finding a different table." If I don't think I'm going to have fun, I have the power to simply choose not to play with you.
I made a Tasigur commander deck. It's designed for maximum politics. No overblown cards that instantly turn the tables against me, such as eldrazi, praetors, ascensions, Damia, or extra turns; my goal is never to be in first place until I only have one opponent left. That means a lot of efficient single-use removal spells that the player in last place wants to give me back so that I can use it against the player in first place. There are also a few cards that can be used to help other players fight amongst themselves, such as Pharika or Rogue's Passage.
I could not justify space for Training Grounds, as Tasigur is my only creature with an activated ability. I went instead with Seedborn Muse and Prophet of Kruphix for those needs (the only two exceptions to my "no obvious threats" rule).
For those of you looking to force the opponent to make bad choices, why not just use Mindslaver? Activate Tasigur on the controlled player's turn, and you get to choose what they give you... which turns Mindslaver into a hard lock against a single opponent (if you have 14 mana, which is pretty easy in green EDH).
4. I have some major issues with using planeswalkers as commanders. Would kind of prefer that to just be a separate variant than have it get shoehorned into normal EDH. However, I reserve the right to completely change my mind if Jaya Ballard is the mono-red 'walker. Anyone else think we finally get cards for Freyalise and Leshrac?
I see your prediction, and raise you a Serra.
I'm a little disappointed in Teferi's abilities though. Where's the thought-provoking creativity of his puzzle box, his realm, or his veil? Not that I'm asking for a return to phasing, but I expect more amusing-but-abusable weirdness from Teferi. This card could just as easily be called Jace, Blue Guy Again.
Top is banned in Modern. You ain't seeing it in this set.
Oh. Welp, guess I've tipped my hand for how much I follow modern
Fine then, I'm excited because maybe they'll print Damnation again? It... lacks the shoddy detective work of my above statement, but makes up for it with the fact that I'd really rather own that than a top.
Holy crap y'all, I was excited before but now I'm even more so. You all probably guessed it a long time ago, but the revelation of Etherium Sculptor and the presence of storm, all at common, has convinced me that Sensei's Divining Top is coming back as well. And given the patterns we've seen of good stuff being printed at its original rarity, I'd bet the top will be an uncommon.
This should make for a VERY interesting limited. I've never played standard or legacy and I had a big gap (I didn't play from Ice Age until Kamigawa), but I've heard a lot about these infamous archetypes (like Faeries and Storm) and now not only will I have a chance to see them all duke it out, I'll get to see imperfect versions of them duke it out. And probably pick up some good cards in the process!
I'd count Bant Charm too, since you have to be playing both blue and white to use it.
Of course it's impolite to tuck the commander of a janky deck, but if the only removal you're holding is an Oblation, you're going to use it on my Kemba, not one of the equipments she's holding. You didn't put Oblation in your deck just to be a jerk to me, you put it in there to deal with another friend's Derevi and you're hitting Kemba because she's the biggest threat. Now, with the rule change, that Oblation will be an Oblivion Ring, that Spell Crumple will be a Counterspell, and that Spin into Myth will be... probably a Control Magic, which isn't a whole lot more fun than getting your commander tucked but has plenty more answers.
Overly specific hypotheticals notwithstanding, your logic is sound but is based on the assumption that everyone is as civil as you. Not everybody has a good sense of how to play in a way that's fun for everyone else, and that is why a ban list was necessary to begin with. I'm glad your playgroup follows common courtesy, but some people need a little extra nudge to play fair.
That is a reasonable thing to assume, but it doesn't work that way in practice. As a new player, I got my janky commanders tucked quite frequently.
When the meta is full of degenerate commanders, players put all the tuck they can into their decks. Commander doesn't have sideboards, and even if it did nobody would sideboard those out; they're too useful. So when I cast my commander, are you going to stop me with a counterspell? Nope, you're only holding a spell crumple. Ordinarily you'd save that for a more frightening commander, but if there isn't one or you're not worried about that player this particular moment, that tuck is coming for the noob.
A thousand times yes! I used it in a few decks, but every time I drew it I was always like "Why am I playing this five-mana instant that gets rid of one creature?"
Hell, I barely even liked Oblation. In any case, my decks are so hard-pressed for cards to cut that I just love the realm of possibilities that opens when there's a clear thing I need to take out of my deck.
It's all good. For what it's worth, reading my post back separated from the tone I intended, I can see how it may have come off as inflammatory, especially if one were already upset about the situation. I wasn't trying to ruffle anyone's feathers. I've just always hated the tuck rule and was so excited to hear that it had been changed, only to be immediately shocked to see so much outrage. In hindsight, I may have subconsciously blamed everyone who liked the tuck rule for all the times I was bored at a table because somebody tucked my commander.
Wow. Okay. You ask me to be polite when I disagree (which I felt I was), but it's sandwiched between calling my post "garbage" and then insinuating that I'm an idiot.
Thank you. If you had been nicer, I would have felt the need to debate with you.
Why do you sound like I just personally called you a jerk? Being mindful of your opponent's power level and selecting the deck that you feel will be fun for the most people is the complete antithesis of everything I described. And I'm not sure why you insinuated that I only care about my own fun. I do the same gauging of what will be the most appropriate deck to play at a particular table, and when I want to play my most powerful deck I make sure my friends are running suitable matchups.
I did speak with a bit of hyperbole; of course not everyone with a powerful deck is a jerk. But my LGS is full of people with insanely powerful decks that I have no interest in playing against, so I seek out the ones who are want the same things out of Magic as I do. I don't personally hate someone who thinks it's fun to, say, take 5 extra turns in a row, but with enough other opponents to choose from I see no harm in doing my thing while they do theirs.
I saw a creature card I fell in love with and decided I wanted to devote a deck to doing one cool thing with it. Alternate win conditions would just water it down. Is a focused deck really more boring than rounding it out so that it does the same stuff that all the other monowhite decks do? If I want to use a different strategy, I'll play a different deck.
My other decks are more varied. But Supercat without Supercat is not a deck worth having.
And how many people do you have in a single game? Surely if everyone's so up in arms about this rule change you'll be able to find 2 or 3 other players who want to play with tuck.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. If the tuck rule was fine even though I hated it on the basis that I could ignore it, then surely changing it is fine because everyone who liked it can still use it.
Merged triple-post. Please use the 'Multi-quote' button to respond to multiple posts. - cryo
The RC had to choose whether to cater to casual players or competitive players. They chose the former. If you think not tucking commanders ruins the balance, you and your friends are free to ignore it. It only means that when a group disagrees, the anti-tuckers overrule. And personally, I love that I can now take my stupid Kemba, Kha Regent deck to a table without worrying whether I'll be spending the entire game staring at a ton of equipment hoping that I'll luck into drawing my Supercat again; mono-white is not very good at finding her again. I didn't build that deck to win as often as possible, I built it so that I could load up an anthropomorphic lion with way more weapons and armor than she could ever hope to carry and charge in while leaving a litter of kittens to chump-block. Now I won't get screwed as collateral damage when people draw the Oblation they keep in their deck to combat broken commanders (or as I like to call them, "degenerals").
You can argue that there are things less fun than getting your commander tucked. And you'd be technically right, but you're thinking from the wrong perspective again. The people that are excited about this rules change don't encounter that stuff. We don't play Strip Mine with Crucible of Worlds. We don't play Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir with Knowledge Pool. And neither do any of our friends. If you make a Mikaeus, the Unhallowed deck whose only purpose is to tutor for Triskelion, we don't respond by tucking Mikaeus. We respond by making you use a different deck or not inviting you the next time we play. Nobody nerfed our ability to stop hanging out with jerks.
Yes, some commanders are degenerate and will become stronger because of this change. But you know what? That makes no difference to me, because my answer to Kiki-Jiki was never to tuck him. It was to tell the player before the game, "Use a different deck or I'm finding a different table." If I don't think I'm going to have fun, I have the power to simply choose not to play with you.
I could not justify space for Training Grounds, as Tasigur is my only creature with an activated ability. I went instead with Seedborn Muse and Prophet of Kruphix for those needs (the only two exceptions to my "no obvious threats" rule).
For those of you looking to force the opponent to make bad choices, why not just use Mindslaver? Activate Tasigur on the controlled player's turn, and you get to choose what they give you... which turns Mindslaver into a hard lock against a single opponent (if you have 14 mana, which is pretty easy in green EDH).
I see your prediction, and raise you a Serra.
I'm a little disappointed in Teferi's abilities though. Where's the thought-provoking creativity of his puzzle box, his realm, or his veil? Not that I'm asking for a return to phasing, but I expect more amusing-but-abusable weirdness from Teferi. This card could just as easily be called Jace, Blue Guy Again.
Oh. Welp, guess I've tipped my hand for how much I follow modern
Fine then, I'm excited because maybe they'll print Damnation again? It... lacks the shoddy detective work of my above statement, but makes up for it with the fact that I'd really rather own that than a top.
This should make for a VERY interesting limited. I've never played standard or legacy and I had a big gap (I didn't play from Ice Age until Kamigawa), but I've heard a lot about these infamous archetypes (like Faeries and Storm) and now not only will I have a chance to see them all duke it out, I'll get to see imperfect versions of them duke it out. And probably pick up some good cards in the process!