I'm talking more about the people who are basically like "I'm going to play lands and counterspells and nothing else just to piss off my opponent!
Piss them off, but clearly not beat them :p. I don't really think anyone actually ever sleeves up griefer decks with no win con designed purely to lose very very very slowly. Or maybe I just haven't come across enough douchebags yet.
Really? You honestly believe that if you find yourself in a playgroup with five other people, all of whom have finely-tuned competitive EDH decks, that the onus is on THEM to make their decks worse to suit you?
Yes. It's called being a sensible human being, and a friend. If you have a friend, and you want to spend time with him or her, for example playing a game, you don't show an elitist attitude like "what? You don't have as many cards as I do? Well, sucks being you. Live with it or gtfo."
If you have more resources and/or skill than your friend, you don't just crush him with everything you got so that you can have fun while your friend feels miserable losing all the time, especially since everything that it takes to make the game actually fun is to build a fun deck (rather than a competitive one). That's not being a friend. That's being an elitist, selfish douche.
Look, no offense, but you are completely off base here, man.
If you want to only play casual decks, that's totally cool. But if you honestly believe that every other Magic player is morally obligated to only play at your level to ensure that you're having fun, then you're the selfish douche.
Can you not grasp the nuances here? If a playgroup is overwhelmingly composed of competitive players, then that's the norm, and you coming in and expecting everyone to change what they're doing just to suit you is ridiculous. Likewise, if a group is overwhelmingly composed of casual players, an Ultra-Spike walking in and locking the board on T2 is ridiculous.
The essence of EDH's "social" aspect is to respect the group dynamic, whatever that dynamic happens to be. If your group is causal, great. If it's competitive, also great. Different strokes for different folks.
Once again, I have to remind you that you don't get to decide what's fun for everyone else. Some players don't like janky casual decks, but you seem fine proclaiming that competitive play isn't necessary to have fun. Well, sorry, but for some people it is, and I'm not going to be the jerk who tells them they're wrong because they like to push the limits of the game.
And again, if your group is too competitive for you, then find another group. Simple as that. Don't expect that every new player you meet is going to alter their experience of the game just to suit your demand that everyone play casually without any expensive cards.
I'm not really that well-versed in American IP law (Canadian law student here), but I assume that this is going to come down to the old "concept/execution" debate.
Looking at the document from the OP, Wizards' argument seems like a bit of a stretch. Sure, they can copyright the rules system and individual pieces of artwork, but I highly doubt they can claim copyright over a particular in-game effect, like destroying a creature or removing cards from an opponent's deck. These seem like general concepts that you can't reasonably protect under IP law. But specific things related to how the game is structured (how permanents interact with the battlefield, how players deal damage to each other and win) should fall within WotC's copyrights.
At a glance, it looks like Hex's rules system is pretty similar, but other posters who know it have claimed it's not as similar as it seems. I'd hazard a guess that that'll be the key. Just saying "look, their 'Murder' card does the same thing as ours!" isn't good enough unless you can prove that their rules system is so close to yours that they're not simply conceptually similar.
Oh I'd agree, but really, we had already spent half an hour on that trade (What can I say, I needed those two Innistrad lands), he finally decided on some cards (And note, the value in my binders doesn't go over 1000 bucks - all cards combined) and THEN spends ten minutes using the piss-poor wifi at the place, and goes immediately YOU'RE SHORTCHANGING ME, ADD SOMETHING OR IT WON'T GO THROUGH. See, if you'd request it in a friendly way, sure, I'll toss in a $1 rare. But no, he didn't see anything of low value he wanted, so he cut off the deal altogether. That is the kind of stuff that irks me.
That's pretty silly. But sadly, more and more players are acting this way when it comes to trading. There are so many guys at my LGS who I will simply not even acknowledge, because any time they trade with you they insist on getting at least $3-4 extra value out of you, just because. But at the same time, if you're $0.50 up on them they freak out like you're trying to rip them off or something.
And I can't stand people who will straight up make offers that insult your intelligence. I still remember a trade I was involved in where this dude was $6 up on value, and was cherry picking stuff out of my binder for Modern speculation. He got upset when I said I wanted something else from him (apparently him winning by $6 was "fair"). Then he grudgingly suggested that I take his foil Terramorphic Expanse, and then we'd be even. I laughed in his face, took my stuff, and never spoke to him again.
And that's the attitude I don't understand. It's antisocial elitism.
I would certainly not play in that kind of playgroup. Not because they play with superstrong decks, but because of their attitude. "What, you don't own as many cards as we do? Sucks being you."
Really? You honestly believe that if you find yourself in a playgroup with five other people, all of whom have finely-tuned competitive EDH decks, that the onus is on THEM to make their decks worse to suit you?
I don't understand that attitude at all. It seems selfish and egocentric. Demanding that everyone else conform to your level of play just so you can have fun (which in this context seems to mean "win regularly") is basically saying that your enjoyment of the game trumps everyone else's. What if they've been playing together for a while and LIKE playing high-level competitive games? Does that not matter to you? Doesn't their fun merit any consideration?
When I started playing EDH way back in the day, one of the guys I played against was a total Spike who crushed me all the time. But instead of complaining about it, I used it as an opportunity to learn more about the game and about making good card selection and deckbuilding choices. And I became more competitive myself. I know lots of people who only play EDH in a very casual, underpowered way, and if I got sick of losing to Mr. Spike I could easily have gone and played with them. I never whined or complained or demanded that he stop playing a good deck.
The fact of the matter is that yeah, sometimes people have better cards than you. Oh well, that's life. Back when my collection was miniscule I just had to make due with what I had. Sure, it's not ideal that MtG has a very prohibitive cost barrier to high-level competitive play, but it is what it is. And anyway, among my group of friends we don't care if people use proxies for stuff they don't own. You see, for us, part of the fun comes from seeing just how competitive we be, and how creatively we can tune decks to win against other high-level players. I don't see that as social elitism, I just see it as our way of enjoying the format.
You deserve an award for reading too much into people's opinions, dude.
When did I say *I* want to crush people all the time? When did I say you ought to bow before my expensive cards? I never expressed any personal preference. I enjoy casual and competitive EDH equally.
Here's what I *actually* said: if people WANT to build super-competitive EDH decks, that's THEIR prerogative. If you don't like it, play with other people.
Sure, if your group is like, five casuals and one Spike, then the Spike should find somewhere else to play or should adapt to the general sensibilities of the group. But if your group is five Spikes and you, then you should find somewhere else to play, or just accept that people are going to play competitive decks.
It's not up to other people to change how they play the game just because you don't like it.
EDH as a format doesn't belong to you exclusively.
Also, not knowing how to build a good EDH deck is hardly an excuse for whining about other people's decks being better than yours. There are a ridiculously huge number of resources at your disposal to learn about building EDH decks, and specifically building on a budget. Or why not try Pauper EDH? I think it's actually more fun the the regular iteration, and no expensive cards are involved whatsoever.
My point is, Magic has room for everyone. If you're not having fun, the best solution is to explore your options, rather than to hate on everyone ELSE for "ruining" your Magic experience.
I don't get when people aren't patient with new players. There's no reason to get upset when a new player is asking questions or reading cards in a timely fashion. We're all new some time.
This is my number one pet peeve. I hate it when Magic players (though this also happens a lot in geek/gaming culture in general) are ruthlessly insulting and exclusionary to new players.
I think it mostly stems from a lot of Magic players being insecure d-bags. They harbour the delusion that the game is somehow "theirs," and that they have the right to act like an ******** to "outsiders" who are trying to learn. It's the same kind of mentality that underlies MMORPG players who hate on "casual" gamers and idiots who rant about "fake geek girls." They're a bunch of insecure little children with emotional problems who attack others because it makes them feel less powerless.
The new "sliver" visual design is one of the biggest blunders Wizards did in recent years! And this is not an opinion, this is a fact. You can't establish the look of a species over almost 16 years and three different blocks, making players love that distinctive look, making the look one of the defining characteristics of the species, making it unique from all other fantasy creatures... then present creatures that share (almost) nothing with that look and claim that they are the same species! MaRo is talking about the need to fulfill people's expectations rather than working against them. How could the art department of the same game make such a horrible blunder?
Um, no. That IS an opinion. We're discussing fictional creatures in a fantasy-themed card game. In fact, the designers can establish one look for them and then change that look later. Because we're talking about fiction. To demand that the creative forces behind a certain product remain 100% internally consistent with previous iterations (especially as regards things that don't even affect the gameplay, like aesthetics) just because you say so is the height of neurotic pedantry, and is the kind of attitude that stifles creativity and innovation. Creators of fictional universes don't owe you anything.
I love EDH as much as anybody else, but what I don't love is when some people forget that it's supposed to be a fun format, not a "crush your opponents with your fine-tuned-to-death deck full of super-expensive rare cards" format.
I like EDH because it allows me to just throw a bunch of semi-random cards in a deck, and the games are extremely varied due to the reason that it's effectively a singleton-100.
THIS is what I can't stand or comprehend. Since when did you become the arbiter of what EDH is or isn't "supposed to be"? That's not your call. People can play whatever they want. If you don't like the power level in your playgroup, then find a different playgroup. Don't complain that other people "aren't doing it right" because they're not doing it the way YOU think it should be done.
EDH is not "supposed" to be anything. If you want to play it casually, great. If you want to play it competitively, also great. It's a set of rules. That's all any format is. Whether games are casual or competitive is up to the individual players involved in each game.
The biggest head-scratcher for me is people who cleave so tightly to their ideas of what a specific format/deck/card is "supposed to be." I always find this especially frustrating given how much lateral thinking and creativity it takes to excel at Magic.
A common example of this that I run into is people who hate on 1v1 EDH because "EDH is supposed to casual, not competitive." Like honestly, if you don't like playing competitive and/or 1v1 EDH, then DON'T. But whizzing in other people's Cheerios just because you don't think they should be playing their 100-card singleton decks in a certain way is stupid and nonsensical.
There's also Legacy players who incessantly complain about Modern being "Legacy lite," as if somehow the mere existence of Modern harms them in some way even though they don't play it. I mean yeah, Modern IS basically "Legacy lite," but so what? If you'd rather play Legacy, then do that. And if other people want to play Modern, who cares?
Basically, I can't understand why so many people get personally offended when other people play formats/decks/cards/power levels that they don't play. Magic has room to be lots of things to lots of people, so I've never understood the mentality "Magic IS X, and ONLY X."
That being said, I legitimately don't understand (mostly for the already-expressed financial and stability reasons) why people play Standard when they could just play Limited :P. But I don't get ANGRY at people for playing Standard, as if they're somehow hurting me by doing so.
Well, Scourge often feels a bit limited, just because I'm playing so few basics, so the absolute max for his trigger is toughness 6 (if I find every single Island in the deck), but if he comes out before the board is clogged with fatties, he wrecks stuff. And of course, token decks basically auto-lose to him + Roon.
Have any of the other Roon players tried out Brago, King Eternal in their deck? His effect is really strong, and in most games it shouldn't be too hard to get a 2-power flyer in against at least one person at the table every turn.
Also, can anyone vouch for the general EDH effectiveness of Restore? I've never drawn it in any of my games so far, but it seems like such a great, cheeky effect to steal an opponent's fetch for your own ramp, or waste out their powerful nonbasic then steal it. I certainly like it better than Nature's Lore or Farseek because getting back a fetch can fix your mana much better than finding a basic or a Gdual.
Oh wow, I have been blatantly misreading Ixidron for a long time! That's waaaaay more interesting... And seems more useful to deal with problematic hexproof/shroud creatures.
Also, I was completely ignoring Angel of Serenity's ability to get stuff from graveyards. I really need to RTFC.
From the games I've played so far, Scourge of Fleets utterly destroys creature swarm decks, and can often hit bigger stuff too, so I'll probably stick with that instead of Spike Weaver for now.
Oh yeah, not sure why I didn't put Bloom Tender in this list (it's in the other deck I'm tinkering with). I'd normally balk at a mana dork with 3CMC, but Somberwald Sage might be something I try.
I was using Venser, Shaper Savant; I normally want to play him in every U EDH deck I build, but I always wind up feeling like his effect just isn't strong enough for his CMC. At least not in multiplayer. In 1v1 he's great as a tempo play, but here I feel like he's outclassed by most other stuff.
@Outcryqq:
Angel of Serenity certainly has a strong effect, but I'm not sure if I want to put another high CMC creature in here. I certainly realize it has the potential to be really broken since you can get multiple ETB triggers at once by blinking it, but it seems kind of mana intensive and win-more. I could be wrong. I'll definitely try it out once or twice and see how I like it.
Mangara of Korondor seems like pretty strong way to abuse Roon's ability. I'm not sure though; I don't want to have too many creatures that require Roon to be great. Mangara is okay on his own, but without Roon out he's just a one-time thing.
Aura Shards should probably go in. I felt like Harmonic Sliver and Reclamation Sage were enough A&E removal, but it makes sense to replace one of them with Shards, since it turns every creature into a Harmonic Sliver.
It could just be that the guys I play with are more ruthless than your average Spikes, but I've always felt like Rhystic Study is an overrated EDH card. Whenever I've used it, it draws the table's hate towards me, or everyone just plays around it. Spike Weaver is interesting, but I feel like his fog effect isn't really good enough here. If I've gotten to the point where I need a repeatable fog, something has probably gone very wrong. Also, Meadowboon seems like a better way to put +1/+1 counters on stuff.
Ixidron is crazy good. I was a little hesitant to put him in because he would shut off Roon, but I suppose he's worth it as a way to get a bunch of free ETB triggers when someone inevitably kills him.
I know the Hydra doesn't synergize with Roon, but he provides pretty insane value late game, so I'm trying him out anyway. Especially when everything else has an ETB effect, casting him for X=8 late game can find some pretty good stuff.
Ghostway is a good suggestion (normally I wouldn't play it, but with ETB creatures it's definitely worth it), but wouldn't Ghostly Flicker not serve much purpose with a wrath on the stack? It returns creatures to play immediately instead of at EOT. I guess I could see it as just redundancy for the flicker effect.
Speaking of which, do you find that having extra flicker outlets like Mistmeadow Witch and Deadeye Navigator (thinking of him not as a combo piece, but just for his flicker ability) is necessary? In the few games I've played, even when opponents have kept me off Roon, the general strength of all my ETB effects was still enough to win, so I figured I didn't need to load up on redundant options.
Saffi Eriksdotter is a good option. I usually never play her because I dislike playing combo, and she's usually only ever mentioned as the centerpiece of a Lark/Mirror Entity/Guide/etc combo. Good to be reminded that she does have value outside of abusing her in a combo.
Looking over your list, I think I might want to add Bane of Progress as a catch all solution for A&Es. I also have to say, Parallax Wave (I assume you use it on your own creatures) is totally brilliant. I'd never thought of using it on my own stuff, but it would be incredibly versatile in this kind of deck.
Perplexing Chimera looks great; I wasn't aware of it at all, so thanks for the suggestion.
This is the second of two decks I've been tinkering with and mulling over before I head to GenCon next week (first one is here).
It's been a while since I've played multiplayer EDH at all regularly (I normally only play 1v1 EDH), so comments and suggestions are welcome (as long as they're not dumb).
I've always loved ETB effects and Bant, so Roon is pretty perfect for me.
I'm treating this deck mainly as toolbox control leaning towards plain and simple goodstuff. I've played the deck a few times, and each time I won just by playing out solid ETB creatures, getting extra value out of them with Roon, and just letting the win come to me. The best part of the deck is that Roon is really just gravy; a deck full of efficient ETB creatures is pretty good on its own; getting to blink stuff is a helpful bonus, but not necessary to win.
Piss them off, but clearly not beat them :p. I don't really think anyone actually ever sleeves up griefer decks with no win con designed purely to lose very very very slowly. Or maybe I just haven't come across enough douchebags yet.
Look, no offense, but you are completely off base here, man.
If you want to only play casual decks, that's totally cool. But if you honestly believe that every other Magic player is morally obligated to only play at your level to ensure that you're having fun, then you're the selfish douche.
Can you not grasp the nuances here? If a playgroup is overwhelmingly composed of competitive players, then that's the norm, and you coming in and expecting everyone to change what they're doing just to suit you is ridiculous. Likewise, if a group is overwhelmingly composed of casual players, an Ultra-Spike walking in and locking the board on T2 is ridiculous.
The essence of EDH's "social" aspect is to respect the group dynamic, whatever that dynamic happens to be. If your group is causal, great. If it's competitive, also great. Different strokes for different folks.
Once again, I have to remind you that you don't get to decide what's fun for everyone else. Some players don't like janky casual decks, but you seem fine proclaiming that competitive play isn't necessary to have fun. Well, sorry, but for some people it is, and I'm not going to be the jerk who tells them they're wrong because they like to push the limits of the game.
And again, if your group is too competitive for you, then find another group. Simple as that. Don't expect that every new player you meet is going to alter their experience of the game just to suit your demand that everyone play casually without any expensive cards.
Looking at the document from the OP, Wizards' argument seems like a bit of a stretch. Sure, they can copyright the rules system and individual pieces of artwork, but I highly doubt they can claim copyright over a particular in-game effect, like destroying a creature or removing cards from an opponent's deck. These seem like general concepts that you can't reasonably protect under IP law. But specific things related to how the game is structured (how permanents interact with the battlefield, how players deal damage to each other and win) should fall within WotC's copyrights.
At a glance, it looks like Hex's rules system is pretty similar, but other posters who know it have claimed it's not as similar as it seems. I'd hazard a guess that that'll be the key. Just saying "look, their 'Murder' card does the same thing as ours!" isn't good enough unless you can prove that their rules system is so close to yours that they're not simply conceptually similar.
That's pretty silly. But sadly, more and more players are acting this way when it comes to trading. There are so many guys at my LGS who I will simply not even acknowledge, because any time they trade with you they insist on getting at least $3-4 extra value out of you, just because. But at the same time, if you're $0.50 up on them they freak out like you're trying to rip them off or something.
And I can't stand people who will straight up make offers that insult your intelligence. I still remember a trade I was involved in where this dude was $6 up on value, and was cherry picking stuff out of my binder for Modern speculation. He got upset when I said I wanted something else from him (apparently him winning by $6 was "fair"). Then he grudgingly suggested that I take his foil Terramorphic Expanse, and then we'd be even. I laughed in his face, took my stuff, and never spoke to him again.
Really? You honestly believe that if you find yourself in a playgroup with five other people, all of whom have finely-tuned competitive EDH decks, that the onus is on THEM to make their decks worse to suit you?
I don't understand that attitude at all. It seems selfish and egocentric. Demanding that everyone else conform to your level of play just so you can have fun (which in this context seems to mean "win regularly") is basically saying that your enjoyment of the game trumps everyone else's. What if they've been playing together for a while and LIKE playing high-level competitive games? Does that not matter to you? Doesn't their fun merit any consideration?
When I started playing EDH way back in the day, one of the guys I played against was a total Spike who crushed me all the time. But instead of complaining about it, I used it as an opportunity to learn more about the game and about making good card selection and deckbuilding choices. And I became more competitive myself. I know lots of people who only play EDH in a very casual, underpowered way, and if I got sick of losing to Mr. Spike I could easily have gone and played with them. I never whined or complained or demanded that he stop playing a good deck.
The fact of the matter is that yeah, sometimes people have better cards than you. Oh well, that's life. Back when my collection was miniscule I just had to make due with what I had. Sure, it's not ideal that MtG has a very prohibitive cost barrier to high-level competitive play, but it is what it is. And anyway, among my group of friends we don't care if people use proxies for stuff they don't own. You see, for us, part of the fun comes from seeing just how competitive we be, and how creatively we can tune decks to win against other high-level players. I don't see that as social elitism, I just see it as our way of enjoying the format.
When did I say *I* want to crush people all the time? When did I say you ought to bow before my expensive cards? I never expressed any personal preference. I enjoy casual and competitive EDH equally.
Here's what I *actually* said: if people WANT to build super-competitive EDH decks, that's THEIR prerogative. If you don't like it, play with other people.
Sure, if your group is like, five casuals and one Spike, then the Spike should find somewhere else to play or should adapt to the general sensibilities of the group. But if your group is five Spikes and you, then you should find somewhere else to play, or just accept that people are going to play competitive decks.
It's not up to other people to change how they play the game just because you don't like it.
EDH as a format doesn't belong to you exclusively.
Also, not knowing how to build a good EDH deck is hardly an excuse for whining about other people's decks being better than yours. There are a ridiculously huge number of resources at your disposal to learn about building EDH decks, and specifically building on a budget. Or why not try Pauper EDH? I think it's actually more fun the the regular iteration, and no expensive cards are involved whatsoever.
My point is, Magic has room for everyone. If you're not having fun, the best solution is to explore your options, rather than to hate on everyone ELSE for "ruining" your Magic experience.
This is my number one pet peeve. I hate it when Magic players (though this also happens a lot in geek/gaming culture in general) are ruthlessly insulting and exclusionary to new players.
I think it mostly stems from a lot of Magic players being insecure d-bags. They harbour the delusion that the game is somehow "theirs," and that they have the right to act like an ******** to "outsiders" who are trying to learn. It's the same kind of mentality that underlies MMORPG players who hate on "casual" gamers and idiots who rant about "fake geek girls." They're a bunch of insecure little children with emotional problems who attack others because it makes them feel less powerless.
Um, no. That IS an opinion. We're discussing fictional creatures in a fantasy-themed card game. In fact, the designers can establish one look for them and then change that look later. Because we're talking about fiction. To demand that the creative forces behind a certain product remain 100% internally consistent with previous iterations (especially as regards things that don't even affect the gameplay, like aesthetics) just because you say so is the height of neurotic pedantry, and is the kind of attitude that stifles creativity and innovation. Creators of fictional universes don't owe you anything.
THIS is what I can't stand or comprehend. Since when did you become the arbiter of what EDH is or isn't "supposed to be"? That's not your call. People can play whatever they want. If you don't like the power level in your playgroup, then find a different playgroup. Don't complain that other people "aren't doing it right" because they're not doing it the way YOU think it should be done.
EDH is not "supposed" to be anything. If you want to play it casually, great. If you want to play it competitively, also great. It's a set of rules. That's all any format is. Whether games are casual or competitive is up to the individual players involved in each game.
A common example of this that I run into is people who hate on 1v1 EDH because "EDH is supposed to casual, not competitive." Like honestly, if you don't like playing competitive and/or 1v1 EDH, then DON'T. But whizzing in other people's Cheerios just because you don't think they should be playing their 100-card singleton decks in a certain way is stupid and nonsensical.
There's also Legacy players who incessantly complain about Modern being "Legacy lite," as if somehow the mere existence of Modern harms them in some way even though they don't play it. I mean yeah, Modern IS basically "Legacy lite," but so what? If you'd rather play Legacy, then do that. And if other people want to play Modern, who cares?
Basically, I can't understand why so many people get personally offended when other people play formats/decks/cards/power levels that they don't play. Magic has room to be lots of things to lots of people, so I've never understood the mentality "Magic IS X, and ONLY X."
That being said, I legitimately don't understand (mostly for the already-expressed financial and stability reasons) why people play Standard when they could just play Limited :P. But I don't get ANGRY at people for playing Standard, as if they're somehow hurting me by doing so.
Have any of the other Roon players tried out Brago, King Eternal in their deck? His effect is really strong, and in most games it shouldn't be too hard to get a 2-power flyer in against at least one person at the table every turn.
Also, can anyone vouch for the general EDH effectiveness of Restore? I've never drawn it in any of my games so far, but it seems like such a great, cheeky effect to steal an opponent's fetch for your own ramp, or waste out their powerful nonbasic then steal it. I certainly like it better than Nature's Lore or Farseek because getting back a fetch can fix your mana much better than finding a basic or a Gdual.
Also, I was completely ignoring Angel of Serenity's ability to get stuff from graveyards. I really need to RTFC.
From the games I've played so far, Scourge of Fleets utterly destroys creature swarm decks, and can often hit bigger stuff too, so I'll probably stick with that instead of Spike Weaver for now.
I was using Venser, Shaper Savant; I normally want to play him in every U EDH deck I build, but I always wind up feeling like his effect just isn't strong enough for his CMC. At least not in multiplayer. In 1v1 he's great as a tempo play, but here I feel like he's outclassed by most other stuff.
@Outcryqq:
Angel of Serenity certainly has a strong effect, but I'm not sure if I want to put another high CMC creature in here. I certainly realize it has the potential to be really broken since you can get multiple ETB triggers at once by blinking it, but it seems kind of mana intensive and win-more. I could be wrong. I'll definitely try it out once or twice and see how I like it.
Mangara of Korondor seems like pretty strong way to abuse Roon's ability. I'm not sure though; I don't want to have too many creatures that require Roon to be great. Mangara is okay on his own, but without Roon out he's just a one-time thing.
Aura Shards should probably go in. I felt like Harmonic Sliver and Reclamation Sage were enough A&E removal, but it makes sense to replace one of them with Shards, since it turns every creature into a Harmonic Sliver.
It could just be that the guys I play with are more ruthless than your average Spikes, but I've always felt like Rhystic Study is an overrated EDH card. Whenever I've used it, it draws the table's hate towards me, or everyone just plays around it. Spike Weaver is interesting, but I feel like his fog effect isn't really good enough here. If I've gotten to the point where I need a repeatable fog, something has probably gone very wrong. Also, Meadowboon seems like a better way to put +1/+1 counters on stuff.
Ixidron is crazy good. I was a little hesitant to put him in because he would shut off Roon, but I suppose he's worth it as a way to get a bunch of free ETB triggers when someone inevitably kills him.
Ghostway is a good suggestion (normally I wouldn't play it, but with ETB creatures it's definitely worth it), but wouldn't Ghostly Flicker not serve much purpose with a wrath on the stack? It returns creatures to play immediately instead of at EOT. I guess I could see it as just redundancy for the flicker effect.
Speaking of which, do you find that having extra flicker outlets like Mistmeadow Witch and Deadeye Navigator (thinking of him not as a combo piece, but just for his flicker ability) is necessary? In the few games I've played, even when opponents have kept me off Roon, the general strength of all my ETB effects was still enough to win, so I figured I didn't need to load up on redundant options.
Saffi Eriksdotter is a good option. I usually never play her because I dislike playing combo, and she's usually only ever mentioned as the centerpiece of a Lark/Mirror Entity/Guide/etc combo. Good to be reminded that she does have value outside of abusing her in a combo.
Looking over your list, I think I might want to add Bane of Progress as a catch all solution for A&Es. I also have to say, Parallax Wave (I assume you use it on your own creatures) is totally brilliant. I'd never thought of using it on my own stuff, but it would be incredibly versatile in this kind of deck.
Perplexing Chimera looks great; I wasn't aware of it at all, so thanks for the suggestion.
I also forgot Ancient Tomb isn't banned in multi EDH; I should be playing that, and Minamo, Schol at Water's Edge as well. Archaeomancer needs to be in here too, especially since my list is more heavy on spells.
This is the second of two decks I've been tinkering with and mulling over before I head to GenCon next week (first one is here).
It's been a while since I've played multiplayer EDH at all regularly (I normally only play 1v1 EDH), so comments and suggestions are welcome (as long as they're not dumb).
I've always loved ETB effects and Bant, so Roon is pretty perfect for me.
I'm treating this deck mainly as toolbox control leaning towards plain and simple goodstuff. I've played the deck a few times, and each time I won just by playing out solid ETB creatures, getting extra value out of them with Roon, and just letting the win come to me. The best part of the deck is that Roon is really just gravy; a deck full of efficient ETB creatures is pretty good on its own; getting to blink stuff is a helpful bonus, but not necessary to win.
5 Roon of the Hidden Realm
CREATURES (28)
1 Birds of Paradise
2 Coiling Oracle
2 Genesis Hydra
2 Gilded Drake
2 Snapcaster Mage
2 Stoneforge Mystic
3 Banisher Priest
3 Eternal Witness
3 Fiend Hunter
3 Harmonic Sliver
3 Reclamation Sage
3 Wood Elves
4 Ephara, God of the Polis
4 Glen Elendra Archmage
4 Mystic Snake
4 Phyrexian Metamorph
5 Acidic Slime
5 Karmic Guide
5 Mulldrifter
5 Prophet of Kruphix
5 Seedborn Muse
5 Thragtusk
6 Prime Speaker Zegana
6 Sun Titan
7 Diluvian Primordial
7 Luminate Primordial
7 Scourge of Fleets
ARTIFACTS (6)
0 Mana Crypt
1 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Sol Ring
3 Sword of Feast and Famine
4 Birthing Pod
SORCERIES (3)
1 Green Sun's Zenith
2 Restore
4 Supreme Verdict
INSTANTS (18)
1 Brainstorm
1 Enlightened Tutor
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Path to Exile
1 Swords to Plowshares
2 Counterspell
2 Cyclonic Rift
2 Eladamri's Call
2 Into the Roil
2 Remand
2 Simic Charm
3 Bant Charm
3 Dissipate
3 Dissolve
3 Dream Fracture
3 Hinder
3 Spell Crumple
4 Cryptic Command
ENCHANTMENTS (3)
2 Sylvan Library
3 Detention Sphere
3 Oblivion Ring
PLANESWALKERS (3)
4 Garruk Wildspeaker
4 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
4 Kiora, the Crashing Wave
LANDS (38)
1 Savannah
1 Tropical Island
1 Tundra
1 Hallowed Fountain
1 Temple Garden
1 Glacial Fortress
1 Hinterland Harbor
1 Sunpetal Grove
1 Adarkar Wastes
1 Brushland
1 Yavimaya Coast
1 Flooded Grove
1 Mystic Gate
1 Wooded Bastion
1 Arid Mesa
1 Flooded Strand
1 Marsh Flats
1 Misty Rainforest
1 Polluted Delta
1 Scalding Tarn
1 Verdant Catacombs
1 Windswept Heath
1 Wooded Foothills
1 Cavern of Souls
1 Command Tower
1 Dust Bowl
1 Flagstones of Trokair
1 Kor Haven
1 Yavimaya Hollow
2 Forest
4 Island
2 Plains