not really, but they did die down in popularity. With the release of the first sliver, I plan to see a lot more decks to return.
Still I need like 200-250 bucks just to get the legends. (At least I have a hivelord)
Problem with slivers is that after a while people refuse to play against them or you are the archenemy.
Overlord is lame, tutor on a stick.
Hivelord is great, removes their weakness, but like makes you archenemy the moment you sit down to the table
Queen is the combo piece, got my for 30 euro, but now shes like 240... lol
We usually play with 30 HP in our playgroup. It makes aggro more relevant and all the combo decks have harder time to combo out before their life reaches 0.
I don't mind that change.
Also I am for bringing back BaaC.
We also houseruled that if all agree, PW's are available. If it proves the one being played is too strong, we will tell it after the game.
For now.
You never know, the opinions can change with time.
If not now, then when? I feel like this was the best shot that PW commanders had.
The moment has passed, and things only go down from here. If you want PW commanders, then make an exception with your playgroup or play Oathbreaker or the like.
You never know.
Wasn't there times where people said Metalworker will never leave the banlist?
I know it's not the same comparison.
But EDH started as Legendary creatures. Now you can have indestructible enchantments as general and people are ok with that. You have emblems in command zone which you don't ever need to cast. You have flip-walkers and some planeswalkers which can be your generals.
I doubt that when the format was created, they thought about these things as playable generals.
So that's why I said "for know".
You never know what Wizards will come up with. PW's are too popular and I have the feeling this was not the last set where there was so many PW's.
There will be more PW's printed with the line "can be your general".
maybe once we reach the point where all the PW's will be added. Maybe not.
But one thing that I learned though my life was "never say never".
Commanders that concern me (for various reasons) and that I think could end up being banned: 27
I'll try:
Ajani Vengeant --> ultimate sounds strong, but targets only one player and is not game winning. Annoying, yes, but you need 5 turns to activate it to make one enemy's life miserable. Not banable. Ajani, Valiant Protector --> you can tutor a specific creature if you have very few creatures in deck. Which is not a good strategy how to protect him, when you play almost creatureless deck. I don't doubt it could be somehow abused, but how is it different from Polymorph or Proteus Staff decks? Not banable. Chandra, Flamecaller --> 4 damage to each creature costing 6/8/10 mana. Wouldn't call it a wrath. I think the first 2 abilities are more interesting. Would it be a bit annoying and anti-aggro? Probably yes. Broken and banable? Barely. Dack Fayden --> why is stealing artefact a problem? Yes, he get's your Sol Ring. Or some signet. Not strong. The ultimate is the thing I would watch out for. Banable? Not outright, but definitely would be watching this PW. Dovin Baan --> so a Static Orb but needs 4 rounds to get going. Game winning? Could be, definitely annoying, but so is any stax deck. Would keep it on radar. Elspeth Tirel --> not sure how to evaluate this one. I don't find that wrath that problematic... Annoying? Yes. But does not reset games and doesn't destroy lands or tokens. In my group this wouldn't be a problematic general, but I can imagine why some people wouldn't like to play against it. Elspeth, Sun's Champion - technically a wrath, but it let's you keep all creatures with power 3 and less. So it kind of repeatable Retribution of the Meek. Again, just like Elspeth above, but the wrath is even weaker. Ultimate is nice, but still not game winning in itself. Gideon of the Trials - not so obvious actually. Yes, you can't lose while he is in play. And? you can still get -15 life and once someone blinks him, return's him to your hand, removes him or so, you immediately lost. Maybe I am missing something but I don't find this banable at all. Gideon, Champion of Justice - with token strategy, his ulti is game-winning. This would be BaaC. Jace, Architect of Thought - how does the ultimate wins the game? You will find 3 cards from 3 different decks and play them withou paying their mana costs. Could potentially lead to some combo, but the ultimate itself is not game winning and highly depends on what your opponents play. You use their cards against them. Totally not banable. Jace, Unraveler of secrets - Yes, the ultimate is strong. But again, not game-winning by itself. Annoying, yes. Not totally the same, but palyed against Kira, Great Glass-Spinner and it was not that horrible as it looked like. Yes his emblem is stronger and Erayo is banned, so I would keep him in radar as well. But wouldn't ban him right away. Jiang Yanggu --> what? He hit's the field and gives ONE creature +X/+X based on number of your lands and trample. How does the game ends when he hits the field? What two turns? I think you misread his ultimate. Because outside of ONE bug trample creature, which maybe won't even kill one player, hes not even a threat at all. Totally not banable. Karn Liberated --> restart the game would be the problematic part. But he's in colorless, needs 3 turns to do that, exiles 2 cards in the process which if they are permanents, the player keeps. So you reset yourself and everyone else to 0 lands, full hand, full life and hoping they exiled some permanents from their hands. But I understand why it would be annoying to get regular game restarts. So BaaC. Liliana of the Dark Realms --> had her as a general for several months as the head of my monoblack. Ultimate is not game winning by itself, but you need cardss like Exsanguinate or others. I think Sidisi, Undead Vizier is numerous times worse than this Lili. Not banable. Nahiri, the Harbinger --> yes the -2 is strong, but hits only tapped creature, tapped artifact or enchantment. Combo with Blightsteel Colossus sounds good, but then you realise anything with toughness 2 means you won't kill that player and also you need to return the creature back to your hand. How is Nahiri stronger than.. lets say Ilharg, the Raze-Boar who can do the same, but better? Yes she tutors, but is onetime attack. He doesn't but can do it every turn. Not banable. Narset Transcendent --> can imagine this in standard. But this is not standard. I think the -2 would be more used than the ultimate. Also, most creature-ehavy decks like Edgar Markov or Ruric Thar, the Unbowed would laugh at her ultimate and just kill her. But I would keep her on radar. Narset, Parter of Veils --> we can agree on this, Leovold 2.0. So BaaC Ral Zarek --> I don't understand why is his ultimate 'disproportionally powerful' in multiplayer. Yes, he can have 5 or 0 extra turns. Unless he kills the whole board in those turns or comboes out somehow, the ultimate is not game winning by itself. Mizzix, the Izmagus can combo out faster or give himself infinite turns as well. But would keep it on radar, just so people can test it and we could decide later. I don't find him broken. Sorin Markov --> setting life to 10 is not game winning, controlling player's turn also not. Magister Sphinx cost only 1 more and does it as well. Not from command zone, but does and I never saw it even discussed regarding the banlist. I think that Sorin would make archenemy games, not win them outright. But for the peace, let's put him BaaC. Tamiyo, Field Researcher --> again, Omniscience is not game winning by itself and unless you draw half of your library, the game is far from over. Keep it on radar. Teferi, Hero of Dominaria --> we can agree on this one, BaaC. Tezzeret the Seeker --> Ultimate is not gamewinning by itself and I would say he is slower Arcum Dagsson, who is not banned. So not banned. Tezzeret, Master of Metal --> those cards could, but you could only put 3 artefacts in your deck to get it 'consistently'. 6 CMC PW, taking 3 turns to find a 3 card combo. Well, now that is totally not banable. Tezzeret, Master of the Bridge --> ok, he looks storng. Would like to test him, but probably right BaaC. Ugin, the Spirit Dragon --> had him as a general for several games, turned back to Kozilek, The great distortion. Ugin looks broken, but he is in colorless, doesn't fill you the hand after you dump all your hand full of artefacts into play so you can cast him. Exile is strong, but ultimate is far from game winning. I find card draw with counterspells better than occasional colored exile. Tested it myself so from my view not banable. Venser, the Sojourner --> probably BaaC, just like Teferi above. Vraska, Relic Seeker --> Similar to Sorin, would like to test her first, but for the peace, let's put her into BaaC.
So out of your 27 generals:
Not banable - 14
On Radar - 5
BaaC - 8
But this would require to bring back Banned as a Commander.
Where things like Leovold, Braids, Erayo, Griselbrand or Rofellos could go as well.
While I agree that people would play more PW removal if they would become legal, I don't agree that there is plenty of removal for PWs a quick scryfall search reveals that there are <15 cards that deal with planeswalkers directly (and (semi)unconditionally) Mostly all in black.
Bounce doesn't really help as it's a delay and not many decks play many single target bounce cards anyway oh and those tend to be all blue just like the counterspells.
Direct damage is also limited in color and the ability to deal lethal damage to PW's.
Add in that most kinds of removal you will still get atleast one activation in anyways.
With creatures you have alot more ways to deal with them conditionally and unconditionally with pw's most of it is conditionally pretty much color limited. The few unconditional answers are even more color limited and alot of them aren't really playable.
Edit:
I dont even come close to the 18 you said looking through WAR
Hey, got 20 of them.
And to note, I did not write down exile which exiles a specific color/s.
Most of them are white, but some can be in any deck.
And that is only exile.
Now add destroy, counterspells or direct spell damage.
I would bet you can find another 60+ cards how to deal with a planeswalker...
But I don't want to spend next hour checking all counterspells, burn, direct or indirect PW destroy and so on.
As for the 18 cards from WAR, I checked all that destroy PW, exile them, deal damage, remove counters and so.
Planeswalkers do not live that long in the Commander games I play now, I don't think peoples desires to keep them down will lessen at all if you make them the Commander.
That is true, but I never had a problem of keeping daretti alive sililar with a friends freyalise. And by the time they are able to kill them you can play them again anyway maybe even twice. Without adequate numbers of PW removal it's easy to defend them long enough with blocks. If your deck is built around PW's you know to protect them if you only run pws in your 99 you are less likely to focus on their protection, just like with every other commander. If you build a Meren or a krenko deck you try to keep them alive and spend deckspace for exactly that, if you only run them in your 99 and your commander doesn't need the protection you are less likely to do so.
I wouldn't say that's a good argument. There is plenty of PW hate, destroy, bounce, counter removal, etc.
Just with WAR, there are like 18 cards in all colors which can deal with PW's, ranging from counterspells, removals, direct damage, destroy... Be it sorceries, instant, creatures.
Add all the other cards which were released up until now.
I would say people don't play that much of the PW removal because they don't have to. They usually use creatures to get rid of PW's.
I remember everyone playing all the 'shuffle into library' spells so you could get rid of enemy commander 'permanently'. Since the replacement rule for commanders, I don't see those effects anymore (except occasional Chaos Warp).
People would just packed more PW removal in their decks if PW's would ever become a legal generals. Then you would see how easy is to get rid of some Daretti or Freyalise.
You should read the past article linked, a few replies up. Arcum, Zur, Derevi all get special mention.
Nice article.
TBH I would not mind to bring BaaC back.
Also I wouldn't mind any of those to be put there and allowed only in the 99.
You could add few PW's there, allowing them only as 99, while letting all others be available as generals.
Also, I think there aren't that many OP planeswalkers which would be banned as generals.
The thing I don't get is why would they expand the banlist after they would bring BaaC back?
No reason for that..
You can't in the same breath as for people to explain what Planeswalkers people would like to build around or think would be fun and then dismiss it as another thing that does X Y or Z like that is a fair and not over harsh qualification to have. Commanders of all stripes are more than just the deck archetype they fit into I feel like this is pretty obvious and should need to be litigated.
And why not I will make a list (Alphabetical is the only order), also not gonna bother with WAR:
Now before you type that response that is something to the effect of that is 11 out of 178 planeswalkers what about all the other ones.
If I had to make a guess I have made Commander decks with probably 50 different Legendary Creatures and there are 838 of those so expecting one person to like or want to build with everything is and will always be foolish.
I am not sure you are getting my point. You are saying Ajani Vengeant would be fun... but why? Is lightning Helix fun? It's just a removal spell. Is the +1 fun? If you are thinking it would be fun for the ultimate then you are going about it all wrong. Alternate win cons in the command zone are highly unfun unless the hurdle to get there involves a lot. Playing a million board wipes and ultimating your planeswalker is not a fun or unique strategy.
Most of these other suggestions actually make a lot more sense. I could see building around the first two abilities.
So then the question becomes: Are you prepared for all the Ajani Vengeants and Tezzeret the Seekers and Liliana of the Dark Realms to be banned in Commander?
I honestly would be fine with making all planeswalkers legal if we brought back Banned as a Commander list. But because so many planeswalkers are self-contained win conditions that promote nothing but stalling the game and spamming the commander until you ult, I really think about 1/3 planeswalkers would need to be banned.
Maybe we should make a poll for the Banned as a Commander list. If we voted in favour maybe the RC would have to consider it.
I don't think any of the 3 cards you listed would have to be banned, not nearly close to it. I think everyone in this thread talking about bannings is way overhyping the power of these cards.
I think people should first build the decks and play against them, before calling for bans or "oh this is so OP broken".
So according to you Tezzeret the Seeker should be banned, yet Arcum Dagsson staying legal? Arcum is cheaper then Tezz and searches ANY artifact compared to max 4 CMC for Tezz.
This is only going to get worse with how well WAR is being received.
Expect more focus on plot and story and walkers in the future.
The best course of action is to make them legal now, which will encourage wizards to design walkers with EDH in mind.
You mean like they don't design legendary creatures with EDH in mind, giving us stuff like Narset and Leovold? Or do you mean like when they DO design with EDH in mind and give us Prossh and Teferi?
Because remember, Wizards mentality is to make the card and let the Rules Committee deal with it if the card is a problem. So allowing all planeswalkers doesn't mean that Wizards starts making ones.that won't be OP in edh, it just means that many more cards every set that need to be evaluated under a new light (the way it plays in the Command Zone as well as in the 99).
They definitely design legendary creatures with edh in mind. Not exclusively, as they design cards specifically for all sorts of formats from vintage to draft, but the designers do not just ignore the most popular casual format in their process. "It's a legendary creature, does this make an interesting general?"
Point is, out of all the PW's (140 now, 37 incomming), I could find around 20 which I find interesting and make a deck for them (11%+). I hardly find 11% (93 creatures) out of all the 844 which I find interesting.
I'd still take playing against Ashiok, Dream Render than against Derevi, Empyrial Tactician, Zur the Enchanter or other stax decks.
Actually I find his static ability interesting, a lot of people were requesting such ability on a boros legend. Well, Dimir got it.
Not sure about your meta, but ramp is prevalent among my friend and this would stop it. Also, if you can't use Evolving Wilds and it was your only help in your hand to fix your landbase, you should take a muligan...
As for the positives and negatives, I think that any change brings both of them.
A lot of people talked about negatives of having PW's as generals, but most of them can be summed up in "banlist would increase", "it brings nothing new" or "seems broken".
Lot of people argued that once the PW get his ultimate and emblem, the game is over. How is it different from people comboing out, winning via mass LD, lockdown, exiling/discarding your hand or other ways? You can always start a new game.
The thing in question is how fast could the PW generals get to their "broken" ultimates when compared to regular generals.
And also testing should be done, playing with them, against them, casual and cuthroat decks, seeing if they are really that strong and broken as people claim or if it are only unjustified concerns.
So does it works or not?
I would assume it does...
Better Anafenza, in best colors and works on enemy creatures as well.
Problem with slivers is that after a while people refuse to play against them or you are the archenemy.
Overlord is lame, tutor on a stick.
Hivelord is great, removes their weakness, but like makes you archenemy the moment you sit down to the table
Queen is the combo piece, got my for 30 euro, but now shes like 240... lol
Really?
I don't mind that change.
Also I am for bringing back BaaC.
We also houseruled that if all agree, PW's are available. If it proves the one being played is too strong, we will tell it after the game.
You never know.
Wasn't there times where people said Metalworker will never leave the banlist?
I know it's not the same comparison.
But EDH started as Legendary creatures. Now you can have indestructible enchantments as general and people are ok with that. You have emblems in command zone which you don't ever need to cast. You have flip-walkers and some planeswalkers which can be your generals.
I doubt that when the format was created, they thought about these things as playable generals.
So that's why I said "for know".
You never know what Wizards will come up with. PW's are too popular and I have the feeling this was not the last set where there was so many PW's.
There will be more PW's printed with the line "can be your general".
maybe once we reach the point where all the PW's will be added. Maybe not.
But one thing that I learned though my life was "never say never".
For now.
You never know, the opinions can change with time.
I don't think that is the point of the discussion...
Leovold is Legendary creature as well and he is banned.
I'll try:
Ajani Vengeant --> ultimate sounds strong, but targets only one player and is not game winning. Annoying, yes, but you need 5 turns to activate it to make one enemy's life miserable. Not banable.
Ajani, Valiant Protector --> you can tutor a specific creature if you have very few creatures in deck. Which is not a good strategy how to protect him, when you play almost creatureless deck. I don't doubt it could be somehow abused, but how is it different from Polymorph or Proteus Staff decks? Not banable.
Chandra, Flamecaller --> 4 damage to each creature costing 6/8/10 mana. Wouldn't call it a wrath. I think the first 2 abilities are more interesting. Would it be a bit annoying and anti-aggro? Probably yes. Broken and banable? Barely.
Dack Fayden --> why is stealing artefact a problem? Yes, he get's your Sol Ring. Or some signet. Not strong. The ultimate is the thing I would watch out for. Banable? Not outright, but definitely would be watching this PW.
Dovin Baan --> so a Static Orb but needs 4 rounds to get going. Game winning? Could be, definitely annoying, but so is any stax deck. Would keep it on radar.
Elspeth Tirel --> not sure how to evaluate this one. I don't find that wrath that problematic... Annoying? Yes. But does not reset games and doesn't destroy lands or tokens. In my group this wouldn't be a problematic general, but I can imagine why some people wouldn't like to play against it.
Elspeth, Sun's Champion - technically a wrath, but it let's you keep all creatures with power 3 and less. So it kind of repeatable Retribution of the Meek. Again, just like Elspeth above, but the wrath is even weaker. Ultimate is nice, but still not game winning in itself.
Gideon of the Trials - not so obvious actually. Yes, you can't lose while he is in play. And? you can still get -15 life and once someone blinks him, return's him to your hand, removes him or so, you immediately lost. Maybe I am missing something but I don't find this banable at all.
Gideon, Champion of Justice - with token strategy, his ulti is game-winning. This would be BaaC.
Jace, Architect of Thought - how does the ultimate wins the game? You will find 3 cards from 3 different decks and play them withou paying their mana costs. Could potentially lead to some combo, but the ultimate itself is not game winning and highly depends on what your opponents play. You use their cards against them. Totally not banable.
Jace, Unraveler of secrets - Yes, the ultimate is strong. But again, not game-winning by itself. Annoying, yes. Not totally the same, but palyed against Kira, Great Glass-Spinner and it was not that horrible as it looked like. Yes his emblem is stronger and Erayo is banned, so I would keep him in radar as well. But wouldn't ban him right away.
Jiang Yanggu --> what? He hit's the field and gives ONE creature +X/+X based on number of your lands and trample. How does the game ends when he hits the field? What two turns? I think you misread his ultimate. Because outside of ONE bug trample creature, which maybe won't even kill one player, hes not even a threat at all. Totally not banable.
Karn Liberated --> restart the game would be the problematic part. But he's in colorless, needs 3 turns to do that, exiles 2 cards in the process which if they are permanents, the player keeps. So you reset yourself and everyone else to 0 lands, full hand, full life and hoping they exiled some permanents from their hands. But I understand why it would be annoying to get regular game restarts. So BaaC.
Liliana of the Dark Realms --> had her as a general for several months as the head of my monoblack. Ultimate is not game winning by itself, but you need cardss like Exsanguinate or others. I think Sidisi, Undead Vizier is numerous times worse than this Lili. Not banable.
Nahiri, the Harbinger --> yes the -2 is strong, but hits only tapped creature, tapped artifact or enchantment. Combo with Blightsteel Colossus sounds good, but then you realise anything with toughness 2 means you won't kill that player and also you need to return the creature back to your hand. How is Nahiri stronger than.. lets say Ilharg, the Raze-Boar who can do the same, but better? Yes she tutors, but is onetime attack. He doesn't but can do it every turn. Not banable.
Narset Transcendent --> can imagine this in standard. But this is not standard. I think the -2 would be more used than the ultimate. Also, most creature-ehavy decks like Edgar Markov or Ruric Thar, the Unbowed would laugh at her ultimate and just kill her. But I would keep her on radar.
Narset, Parter of Veils --> we can agree on this, Leovold 2.0. So BaaC
Ral Zarek --> I don't understand why is his ultimate 'disproportionally powerful' in multiplayer. Yes, he can have 5 or 0 extra turns. Unless he kills the whole board in those turns or comboes out somehow, the ultimate is not game winning by itself. Mizzix, the Izmagus can combo out faster or give himself infinite turns as well. But would keep it on radar, just so people can test it and we could decide later. I don't find him broken.
Sorin Markov --> setting life to 10 is not game winning, controlling player's turn also not. Magister Sphinx cost only 1 more and does it as well. Not from command zone, but does and I never saw it even discussed regarding the banlist. I think that Sorin would make archenemy games, not win them outright. But for the peace, let's put him BaaC.
Tamiyo, Field Researcher --> again, Omniscience is not game winning by itself and unless you draw half of your library, the game is far from over. Keep it on radar.
Teferi, Hero of Dominaria --> we can agree on this one, BaaC.
Tezzeret the Seeker --> Ultimate is not gamewinning by itself and I would say he is slower Arcum Dagsson, who is not banned. So not banned.
Tezzeret, Master of Metal --> those cards could, but you could only put 3 artefacts in your deck to get it 'consistently'. 6 CMC PW, taking 3 turns to find a 3 card combo. Well, now that is totally not banable.
Tezzeret, Master of the Bridge --> ok, he looks storng. Would like to test him, but probably right BaaC.
Ugin, the Spirit Dragon --> had him as a general for several games, turned back to Kozilek, The great distortion. Ugin looks broken, but he is in colorless, doesn't fill you the hand after you dump all your hand full of artefacts into play so you can cast him. Exile is strong, but ultimate is far from game winning. I find card draw with counterspells better than occasional colored exile. Tested it myself so from my view not banable.
Venser, the Sojourner --> probably BaaC, just like Teferi above.
Vraska, Relic Seeker --> Similar to Sorin, would like to test her first, but for the peace, let's put her into BaaC.
So out of your 27 generals:
Not banable - 14
On Radar - 5
BaaC - 8
But this would require to bring back Banned as a Commander.
Where things like Leovold, Braids, Erayo, Griselbrand or Rofellos could go as well.
Quick search reveals something else...
Exile:
Anguished Unmaking
Archon of Justice
Ashen Rider
Banishing Light
Cast Out
Conclave Tribunal
Deputy of Detention
Despark
Detention Sphere
Exclusion Ritual --> Total lockdown on the selected PW
Fractured Identity
Hieromancer's Cage
Ixalan's Binding --> Total lockdown on the selected PW
Legacy Weapon
Mangara of Corondor
Oblivion Ring
Quarantine Field
Scour from Existence
Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger
Utter End
Hey, got 20 of them.
And to note, I did not write down exile which exiles a specific color/s.
Most of them are white, but some can be in any deck.
And that is only exile.
Now add destroy, counterspells or direct spell damage.
I would bet you can find another 60+ cards how to deal with a planeswalker...
But I don't want to spend next hour checking all counterspells, burn, direct or indirect PW destroy and so on.
As for the 18 cards from WAR, I checked all that destroy PW, exile them, deal damage, remove counters and so.
I wouldn't say that's a good argument. There is plenty of PW hate, destroy, bounce, counter removal, etc.
Just with WAR, there are like 18 cards in all colors which can deal with PW's, ranging from counterspells, removals, direct damage, destroy... Be it sorceries, instant, creatures.
Add all the other cards which were released up until now.
I would say people don't play that much of the PW removal because they don't have to. They usually use creatures to get rid of PW's.
I remember everyone playing all the 'shuffle into library' spells so you could get rid of enemy commander 'permanently'. Since the replacement rule for commanders, I don't see those effects anymore (except occasional Chaos Warp).
People would just packed more PW removal in their decks if PW's would ever become a legal generals. Then you would see how easy is to get rid of some Daretti or Freyalise.
Nice article.
TBH I would not mind to bring BaaC back.
Also I wouldn't mind any of those to be put there and allowed only in the 99.
You could add few PW's there, allowing them only as 99, while letting all others be available as generals.
Also, I think there aren't that many OP planeswalkers which would be banned as generals.
The thing I don't get is why would they expand the banlist after they would bring BaaC back?
No reason for that..
I think people should first build the decks and play against them, before calling for bans or "oh this is so OP broken".
Come on, there are lot of cards which are borderline ban-able, yet they are not on the banlist, like Tooth and Nail, Iona, Shield of Emeria, Winter Orb and I could go on.
Ajani Vengeant doesn't even come close to the banlist.
So according to you Tezzeret the Seeker should be banned, yet Arcum Dagsson staying legal? Arcum is cheaper then Tezz and searches ANY artifact compared to max 4 CMC for Tezz.
Liliana of the Dark Realms, ever tried her? I did. She was fun to play as general, but far away from OP and even further from even touching the banlist. If this is a problematic card for you, I am not sure what do you say for things like Palinchron, Deadeye Navigator, Derevi, Empyrial Tactician or Zur the Enchanter.
When I see legendary creatures like Tomik, Distinguished Advokist, Fblthp, the Lost, Tetzimoc, Primal Death, Verix Bladewing pr things like Dragonlord Kolaghan, I kind of doubt that they ask themselves "does this make an interesting general?"
Not like you can't make a deck for these creatures, but why would you?
On the other hand, I would play the heck out of Ashiok, Dream Render or Dovin, Hand of Control. And those are Uncommons. Out of the Legendary creatures at Uncommon quality, most interesting ones for me are Danitha Capashen, Paragon, but why would I play him when I have Sram, Senior Edificer, then Hallar, the Firefletcher, but there is low number of good kick spells and then maybe Slimefoot, the Stowaway, because Saprolings tribal.
Point is, out of all the PW's (140 now, 37 incomming), I could find around 20 which I find interesting and make a deck for them (11%+). I hardly find 11% (93 creatures) out of all the 844 which I find interesting.
Actually I find his static ability interesting, a lot of people were requesting such ability on a boros legend. Well, Dimir got it.
Not sure about your meta, but ramp is prevalent among my friend and this would stop it. Also, if you can't use Evolving Wilds and it was your only help in your hand to fix your landbase, you should take a muligan...
As for the positives and negatives, I think that any change brings both of them.
A lot of people talked about negatives of having PW's as generals, but most of them can be summed up in "banlist would increase", "it brings nothing new" or "seems broken".
Lot of people argued that once the PW get his ultimate and emblem, the game is over. How is it different from people comboing out, winning via mass LD, lockdown, exiling/discarding your hand or other ways? You can always start a new game.
The thing in question is how fast could the PW generals get to their "broken" ultimates when compared to regular generals.
And also testing should be done, playing with them, against them, casual and cuthroat decks, seeing if they are really that strong and broken as people claim or if it are only unjustified concerns.