MTG Salvation

Quote from headminerve »

The white one is quite a bend, I can't recall a white spell dealing damage somewhere in the Modern environment (out of combat)... Those lands are great for limited anyway, the format will be full of fun shenanigans !

I could only find Summary Judgment (and Sunlance but that's from Planar Chaos)

Quote from Courier7 »

Traumatize.

They'll still have 25% of their library left though.

Given that Richard Garfield has come back to designing Magic for the Dominaria set in 2018, I highly doubt he was thinking of Magic when making this article so I don't really get why this manifesto is making a comeback recently?

Quote from ColossalDreadmaw »

90 bucks for a booster is too damn much, imagine anyone who buys some and ends up with mythics/rares like the tree of perdition, yikes

Remember, it's double rares, double the fun! You'll get Tree of Redemption to tag along with it!

Well well, what do we have here? Hang on to your seats, for the low low price of $92,5 each, you can get 4 VIP boosters!
Fancy a draft, anyone?

Quote from Marl Karx »

Quote from Dragoon91 »

Quote from NGW »

This is something the mechanic already went through when it was originally tested 20 years ago when Maro first found out that this ***** is busted and not good for the game, as he detailed in an article he posted five years ago. Then he said "fug it" and did it anyways for Ikoria. And look what happened...

Out of curiosity, do you have a link to that article?

Here is one:

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/gimme-hand-2010-08-13

Ctrl+F "Draw #2" to get straight to the right subsection if you are lazy

Thank you! If I understand that bit correctly though, it was broken because MaRo made basically "companion" lands that will always be in your opening hand. It doesn't mention them being restricted to one copy per deck or them being legendary. Obviously, something like that would be utterly broken. Just play four of those lands and your deck doesn't even need other lands in it! Companion isn't anywhere near that level of power.

Quote from NGW »

This is something the mechanic already went through when it was originally tested 20 years ago when Maro first found out that this ***** is busted and not good for the game, as he detailed in an article he posted five years ago. Then he said "fug it" and did it anyways for Ikoria. And look what happened...

Out of curiosity, do you have a link to that article?

Quote from Macabre »

Per coalition victory;

I have three 5-color decks and would never add coalition victory. Sure my mana in the decks is perfect for the card, but I would have to force myself to include duplicate 5-color creatures next to my general. And if I ever did display a coalition victory win then it's just another approach of the second sun effect where everyone is aware of it's presence and then gangs up on you. Your commander would be kill-on-site, and you make yourself the auto-target for random strip mine effects at all points in the game, which is awful for 5-color to deal with. If you include combo enablers like dryad of the ilysian grove/prismatic omen and chromanticore/transguild courier then building around coalition victory is no longer just an "I-win" card, it's a combo taking multiple dedicated slots in the 99.

TLDR - a half good approach of the second sun deck will function far above a very good coalition victory deck.

This is not a question of power level, it's the fact that it doesn't really require anything specific that made it banned imo. Sure, your general might be the only 5-colors creature in your deck but it's still there, and having two 3-colors creatures might also do the trick. Also, the power level of your playgroup might be higher than most casual tables. When you analyse the banlist, you should probably ask yourself: "What kind of play does this card promote? How is it likely to show up in decks that can run it color-wise? Can it accidentally ruin games and leave a bad taste in people's mouths?" You don't need to win consistently with Coalition Victory, it can be there just as a plan B, or plan C, or even plan D. And if your whole playgroup has to gang up on you to compensate the fact that you run it, then maybe it is worth it to have it on the banlist?

Quote from Macabre »

I may not be remembering this correctly, but one of the primary reasons braids & erayo were banned was due to complications with multiple ban-lists for MtGO.

Okay, that would make sense.

Quote from Macabre »

I've also gone on many rants about paradox engine already. Yes it's strong, but there were better options to ban for "unfun" situations. PE was one of the few enablers for tap-matters generals, and banning it took a large chunk of creativity and fun away from exploring commanders with tap abilities. The banning of PE opposed to so many other better options was what really shook my primary metas trust and faith in the committee, and was the spark that drove us to house-rules.

The fact that it helps tap-matters generals is certainly an upside, but the card was too susceptible to degenerate plays. If a majority of the players were playing it with combo in mind, or were comboing often enough without even wanting to do so in the deckbuilding process (again, accidental unfun situations), then banning the card was likely the right choice.
There's also no reason to feel bad about having to house-rule some stuff. That's the essence of EDH: keep the core rules and adjust the details to your meta. The banlist is there to give you a general idea of what might cause problems in your game, nobody is pointing a gun at you to make sure you follow it.

Quote from Macabre »

It's 2020. We live in an EDH world where God-Eternal Kefnet infinite turns exists - a near cEDH quality deck that can easily be made obnoxiously consistent and oppressive even when built on a budget since it only requires two expensive cards for the combo to function (JtMS & scroll rack).

There is no current good reason for the mirror to remain banned. There are a number of cards on the banlist that shouldn't be in this day & age (braids, cabal minion when Urza stax is far more oppressive, Coalition Victory which fails to multiple types of targeted removal, Erayo, Soratami Ascendant when stasis & winter orbs are easier to work with, Lutri, the Spellchaser as a commander or in the 99, paradox engine when dramatic scepter is quicker and more powerful)

edit; just to clarify - I'm not for adding cards to the banlist. IMO it should be as small a list as possible.

It's not necessarily about how effective the card is. It's more about how it can easily generate awkward and unfun situations. There are tons of ways to win via combo or stax in EDH, the point of the banlist is not to prevent those strategies from working. It's to prevent people from accidentally generating those situations when they just thought they were adding cool, non-oppressive cards.

• Braids, Cabal Minion as a general can be quite annoying (although I also think it'll be fine), they just banned it when they got rid of the "banned as a commander" banlist, which was imo a mistake.
• Paradox Engine can totally lead to unfun situations if you're just running a few rocks, without even thinking about comboing off.
• Lutri, the Spellchaser was totally banned because they don't want multiple banlists.
• For Erayo, Soratami Ascendant and Coalition Victory, I'm not sure. It might because they look harder to enable than it is in reality? Also Coalition Victory might be run in almost every 5-colors deck, which does not encourage diversity.

Quote from Ryperior74 »

But point is I’m sure Sheldon and the committee will still listen to casual and not ban cards particually for cedh

If it's the only one, sure, I don't mind. But will it really be the only one? In my experience, if you give in once, you're doomed to give in multiple times. The fact that it creates room for jurisprudence is what scares me the most.

Quote from Ryperior74 »

Quote from Dragoon91 »

That's the beginning of a slippery slope. Now that they've done it once, cEDH players will be more and more likely to ask for other bans... What about Hulk? What about Thassa's Oracle? What about Ad Nauseam? etc. This creates a bad case of jurisprudence that will make the cEDH community way more inclined to pester the RC at every occasion, way more than they've done it until now.

You are aware that casual players were also asking for flash to be banned right?

I’m sure Sheldon and the other rules committee will listen to the casual community as well not just the CEDH (they take casual into factor with bans)

But they don't mention it anywhere in their communiqué:

Flash
Speaking of exceptional decisions, we are banning Flash (the card, not the mechanic). Enough cEDH players who we trust have convinced us that it is the only change they need for the environment they seek to cultivate. Though they represent a small fraction of the Commander playerbase, we are willing to make this effort for them. It should not be taken as a signal that we are considering any kind of change in how we intend to manage the format; this is an extraordinary step, and one we are unlikely to repeat.

We use the banlist to guide players in how to approach the format and hope Flash’s role on the list will be to signal “cheating things into play quickly in non-interactive ways isn’t interesting, don’t do that.”

We believe Commander is still best as a social-focused format and will not be making any changes to accommodate tournament play. Taking responsibility for your and your opponents’ fun, including setting expectations with your group, is a fundamental part of the Commander philosophy. Organizers who want to move towards more untrusted games should consider adding additional rules or guidance to create the Commander experience they want to offer.

Flash was clearly banned because of cEDH. While I don't care about the card itself, I do care that they are backtracking in their approach of the banlist, especially after having made their Philosophy Document not so long ago.

That's the beginning of a slippery slope. Now that they've done it once, cEDH players will be more and more likely to ask for other bans... What about Hulk? What about Thassa's Oracle? What about Ad Nauseam? etc. This creates a bad case of jurisprudence that will make the cEDH community way more inclined to pester the RC at every occasion, way more than they've done it until now.

Quote from Kryptnyt »

They could basically have named any price they wanted to for these and found buyers, I think. I'm not saying that they were being merciful and benevolent overlords with their choice to give us a "bargain" price of 165. But it is an opportunity for someone looking to buy fetches, since 1 of each costs about 100 more than the WOTC price. I think honestly buying these just to flip them is a very good call unless they do in fact reprint them into a set. If it was 40 dollars a set, the secret lair site server would implode from scalpers, but maybe that's gonna happen anyway.

You can't buy that Secret Lair from Wizards anyway so there's no need to worry about the server. I feel like they should have just gone the old FTV route with those, put them at a standard price and let the LGS sell them however they want.

Quote from Kryptnyt »

Oona might be female, but it seems about as odd a choice for National Women's Day as Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, considering that she's not a woman. In fact, she's always been a violently unimpressive card, and has already gotten tons of reprint love. Card carries a ten-ish dollar price tag for some reason though. Willow Priestess shenanigans? Dunno.

Well, she has been reprinted twice in 12 years, I don't know if that qualifies as "tons of reprint". Meren has already been reprinted that many times in only 5 years (not that I'm complaining). Oona also seems to be quite loved in the Commander community, so there's that.

Depending on your meta and your deck, I would also suggest Surveyor's Scope. Although its efficiency decreases the more land ramp you play, it can still be good, especially in non-green decks.