1) Why are the original moxen banned? Anyone who has played with these understand they are not strong draws after turn 5 or so.
2) Regarding secondary markets and I'm not implying anything by asking this but you said go for it so here goes. Have you ever bought or sold cards because you had knowledge that was not yet public information?
I currently have about 10-12 each of the KTK fetches and I continue trading for them every chance I get. I'll continue to trade for them as I can but I don't go out of my way to acquire them. The reason is I believe if they do begin to appreciate again and WOTC needs some sort of stimulus to keep selling cardboard, they'll just reprint them again and again. I'll dump all that I don't need if the price hits $25.
Just my 2 cents and I wouldn't suggest taking my point of view as advice.... especially considering I always seem to be wrong about future value of cards
Best:
Traded 4 goyfs, 4 dark confidant, 4 lili, 1 tropical island, 1 bayou, fetches, and another 20 cards between 5-20 dollars for a black lotus
Traded for foil liliana of the veil for 3 underground seas, 1 tropical island, 1 bayou, a playset of regular lilis, and a foil cavern of souls
Worst:
Traded Judge foil dark confidant for polluted deltas....two days before they were announced for a reprint....extraordinary.
I find it amazing whenever I'm trading how quickly some people will come off a reserved list card. When I'm trading a reserved list card, I'll only trade for other reserved list cards or for double the value against cards that will be reprinted. Needless to say, I don't part with my reserved list cards much anymore. That deal for the lotus is incredible! Well done!
I paid $300 for a box of magic cards containing the above lotus, a ton of dual lands and a bunch of other stuff worth a lot more today than it was back in 1995.
Thanks for helping me relive those days...
You're welcome
Amazing trade there! It certainly made up for what you've once lost!
Im still not sure if this thread should be in the EDH forums but i felt like it could fit quite nicely. In all formats we got people who have played for a different amount of time, it also depends on where they are from, what they played back then etc.
It also shows how funny and cruel time can be when it comes to a game like magic which has such a huge private market!
I like the thread here for the same reasons. I find EDH players to be among the most creative out there. However, when I've asked something in here not specifically related to EDH, it always got moved.
I paid $300 for a box of magic cards containing the above lotus, a ton of dual lands and a bunch of other stuff worth a lot more today than it was back in 1995.
I have had 2 decks fitting this theme. The one that is still built is a 5 color deck that has Richard Garfield, Ph.D. as the commander. Why a mono-blue commander and using all 5 colors? With the exception of lands, the entire deck was unglued or unhinged. Nothing about it was legal so why should the color identity be?
The other deck had as many walls as possible and as many ways to deal with threats as possible. Although the deck had a couple win-cons (because there was no way to avoid it), the whole purpose was to get to Divine Intervention as quickly as possible then protect it to make sure it goes off.
yeah, but they clearly communicate and the RC cares about how WOTC manages the format.
Oh absolutely. But I just don't believe that the Rules Committee would feel pressured by WotC to change a rule. Wizards designs cards to fit within the current rules, so they wouldn't have designed a mechanic that benefits from the new tuck rule. If anything, they would have designed cards to lessen the sting of tuck (such as a tutor for your general), and when the RC approached them to inform them of their upcoming change, there would have been some resistance from WotC back toward the RC.
I'd be interested in learning more about the relationship of the RC and WotC. Is there anywhere to find this information on how they work together for the good of the format?
I appreciate everyone's responses and am going to be using some of the language in here for my next game night. For example, I'll certainly be asking the player who "douche scoops" if he will consider playing it out instead of scooping because of reasons listed above. I appreciate the definition of douche scooping because I'd never heard of it before this thread and I can't help but laugh every time I see it.
But to be honest, I don't get the argument that has come up here a few times where people state you can just as easily break up a combo with the right card but then go on to argue against MLD. Because much like breaking up combo with the right card, you can also break up MLD with the right card. The only difference I can think of is that with combo, you can see it coming frequently before it happens because you see the pieces accumulating on the board. However, with MLD, you often don't see it coming because so few people play it that nobody expects to see it.
Conceding isn't stealing a win from someone. It's acknowledging the other player's imminent victory.
I personally find nothing more offensive then when one player decides to scoop because "they" cant win (more offensive than infinite combos and MLD). 1v1 scooping is fine, but normally EDH is a group game, and your decision to quit messes up the game for the other players. The game could completely change with just one spell from you, or requiring the supposed winner to spend one (or more) turn to have to kill you. If everyone agrees the game is over, then it is fine, but otherwise as long as one player still wants to play the game (which everyone agreed to play when they joined), then it is your responsibility to continue to the point you die (or possibly win).
Also scooping in response to a spell that could effect multiple players (and thus causing it to fizzle), or while any of your permanents are controlled by other players (basically ruining their board-state), is the jerkyiest thing you can due in a multiplayer game.
I couldn't possibly agree with this more. I had a control deck that I knew I couldn't take a creature from one specific player because if I did, he'd scoop. And when trying to convince him how his scooping screwed the entire game, he would respond, "I don't care."
Great points thus far. Thanks. I fully intend on keeping my mass land destruction only as a last resort to stopping combos but I will not remove it entirely. In terms of my aversion to tucking commanders, I play tuck cards in nearly every deck but kind of like my thoughts on MLD, I only tuck a commander when it is getting out of hand. Spell Crumple and Hinder are always auto-includes in my blue decks. I'm not against tucking commanders at all but in my opinion, I just feel it is more harsh than MLD. Really, the only thing I'm completely against is infinite combos. I try not to play in that game but I'll gladly watch it all unfold. I'm in no position to try to tell anyone their stuff is not fun.
Thanks for the input thus far and I'm looking forward to reading more responses.
1) Why is land destruction considered bad etiquette in this day and age of infinite combos and board lockdowns? I don't understand why it is ok for someone to go infinite with Prossh, Skyraider of Kher but then they give me a hard time when I'm playing my Avacyn, Angel of Hope deck and I drop an Armageddon. It has gotten to the point now that I will only play the Armageddon when I see an infinite combo building or a lockdown beginning. I guess that for me, tucking a general is more of a jerk move than destroying lands but I'm obviously wrong in terms of EDH etiquette as a whole because of the overwhelming disagreement with me.
2) How can the same people who hate land destruction then tell me during the next game that it was ok when I played my overloaded Cyclonic Rift at the end of the turn before mine then proceeded to play Timetwister on my turn which tucked 3 commanders and forced everyone to lose those cards they just put back into their hands. To me, this is even more of a jerk move than land destruction.
So to that end, I'm now more confused than ever as to what constitutes fair play. Why do I care? Because for me, MTG is a game for everyone to enjoy and I'm more interested in player interaction than being that guy nobody wants to play with. I don't need the win to feel good about myself.
Disclaimer: By no means in this thread am I trying to justify my play as the correct way to play. I'm just trying to understand things from a different point of view.
My favorite card would have to be Raging River. I am and have always been a casual player and I love building decks around cards that people rarely play. This card was rarely played back in 1994 and is rarely played today. But with the right deck, this card is a beast and can hand you a victory very quickly!!!
1) Why are the original moxen banned? Anyone who has played with these understand they are not strong draws after turn 5 or so.
2) Regarding secondary markets and I'm not implying anything by asking this but you said go for it so here goes. Have you ever bought or sold cards because you had knowledge that was not yet public information?
Just my 2 cents and I wouldn't suggest taking my point of view as advice.... especially considering I always seem to be wrong about future value of cards
I find it amazing whenever I'm trading how quickly some people will come off a reserved list card. When I'm trading a reserved list card, I'll only trade for other reserved list cards or for double the value against cards that will be reprinted. Needless to say, I don't part with my reserved list cards much anymore. That deal for the lotus is incredible! Well done!
I like the thread here for the same reasons. I find EDH players to be among the most creative out there. However, when I've asked something in here not specifically related to EDH, it always got moved.
(1) I traded a Black Lotus worth $275 for a Mox Jet worth $150, Forcefield worth $100 and a Jester's Cap worth $25.
(2) I traded ABUR dual lands all day long for Shivan Dragons
(3) I traded 8 revised dual lands for an unopened box of 4th edition
(4) I traded away so many Force of Wills to get my hands on a playset of Balduvian Horde
Best Trade:
I paid $300 for a box of magic cards containing the above lotus, a ton of dual lands and a bunch of other stuff worth a lot more today than it was back in 1995.
Thanks for helping me relive those days...
The other deck had as many walls as possible and as many ways to deal with threats as possible. Although the deck had a couple win-cons (because there was no way to avoid it), the whole purpose was to get to Divine Intervention as quickly as possible then protect it to make sure it goes off.
1) Overload a Cyclonic Rift at end of turn then proceed with a Timetwister on my turn.
2) Ashnod's Coupon + R&D's Secret Lair
I'd be interested in learning more about the relationship of the RC and WotC. Is there anywhere to find this information on how they work together for the good of the format?
With the exception of the specific verbiage of "Removal Spells," can't the same be said for MLD? There are plenty of ways to handle it.
But to be honest, I don't get the argument that has come up here a few times where people state you can just as easily break up a combo with the right card but then go on to argue against MLD. Because much like breaking up combo with the right card, you can also break up MLD with the right card. The only difference I can think of is that with combo, you can see it coming frequently before it happens because you see the pieces accumulating on the board. However, with MLD, you often don't see it coming because so few people play it that nobody expects to see it.
I couldn't possibly agree with this more. I had a control deck that I knew I couldn't take a creature from one specific player because if I did, he'd scoop. And when trying to convince him how his scooping screwed the entire game, he would respond, "I don't care."
Thanks for the input thus far and I'm looking forward to reading more responses.
2) How can the same people who hate land destruction then tell me during the next game that it was ok when I played my overloaded Cyclonic Rift at the end of the turn before mine then proceeded to play Timetwister on my turn which tucked 3 commanders and forced everyone to lose those cards they just put back into their hands. To me, this is even more of a jerk move than land destruction.
So to that end, I'm now more confused than ever as to what constitutes fair play. Why do I care? Because for me, MTG is a game for everyone to enjoy and I'm more interested in player interaction than being that guy nobody wants to play with. I don't need the win to feel good about myself.
Disclaimer: By no means in this thread am I trying to justify my play as the correct way to play. I'm just trying to understand things from a different point of view.