-
- Ph03niX
- Registered User
-
Member for 10 years, 3 months, and 7 days
Last active Fri, Jan, 10 2020 09:51:13
- 0 Followers
- 829 Total Posts
- 32 Thanks
-
Jun 20, 20193
Dusk707 posted a message on Omnath, Locus of the Roil - TCGPlayerJust wish he made elementals some howPosted in: The Rumor Mill -
Jun 16, 2019
3
Theoric posted a message on Non-Legendary Creatures that you wished to be Commander/Legendary.Posted in: Commander (EDH)
-
Apr 26, 2019
2
Carthage posted a message on [POLL] Planeswalkers as playable generalsPosted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from Kamino_Taka »there are literally more ways to get rid of purphoros than planeswalkers unconditionally, and purphoros is already a problem for alot of groups.
This is a very misleading way of putting it.
You cannot attack purphoros.
He's an indestructible enchantment. The amount of cards the average deck runs to answer an indestructible enchantment is probably between 1 and 2.
It doesn't matter if the cards exist, are people running them? Are they playable when purphoros isn't at the table?
Because almost every deck out there runs a myriad of ways to interact with a planeswalker. Any creatures, bounce, burn, planeswalker removal and/or permanent removal will all make it much harder to execute a planeswalker plan.
And yet there was no discussion about purphoros being legal when it was printed. It was just brought in no problem. -
Apr 26, 2019
1
Carthage posted a message on [POLL] Planeswalkers as playable generalsWhat do you mean you won't get a chance to attack liliana?Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
If the player is capable of maintaining complete board control against 3 opponents, I think they deserve a payoff. Even a llanowar elf can lock liliana out from ulting until it's removed. A lightning bolt means that ulting liliana will take so many turns as to not be a problem, by the time it's ticked up that high players will be hard casting eldrazi.
And if she dies once, suddenly you need multiple turns with your 6 mana planewalker, or 8 mana planeswalker.
If you want to talk about problematic cards that create unfun situations because they tick up to game enders, how about we talk about the *currently legal* ones like purphoros, god of the forge, which is legitimately almost impossible to remove and will end the game with ETB effects regardless of removal in about as many turns as it takes liliana to build up to her ult.
Commander can handle purphoros, but you think it can't handle walker ultimates? -
Apr 25, 20191
Dunharrow posted a message on [POLL] Planeswalkers as playable generalsMy Comments in boldPosted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
Quote from Ph03niX »Quote from Dunharrow »
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. I am not saying it is easy to ult, I am saying it is the only part of Ajani you can build around so the decks will all be centered around ruining one player's fun...
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. for one, those cards are not in the command zone
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. Agree that it probably would not be banned, but I think any repeatable wrath needs to be on the radar
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.By turn 3, how many mana rocks do your opponents have? How many value artifacts? The repeatable theft is what makes it annoying. Watch that commander VS is was brutal to watch
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.it is asymmetrical
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.again, just fearful of the way it can repeatedly wrath
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.ult is not necessarily game ending but often game ending. I think she makes it impossible to play if you are playing creatures that have more than 4 power... that seems powerful and unfun.
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. Are there any commanders that say you cannot lose? I think it is super dangerous text to have in the command zone
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.if this is your commander, your deck has mass bounce, extra turn spells, 1-2 big eldrazi, maybe a time stretch or Omniscience... I just don't see how you would build it without being able to come way ahead while picking your opponents' best 3 spells.
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. I am not saying anything gets banned right away. But this will be similar to Erayo
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. oops
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.I would like to see the meta. Because when I play her in the 99 the game warps around her
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.I will bend on this one, I guess... I just find the whole point is to race to ult which is not the kind of magic I like... still, it will probably be fine
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.Same argument as Iona? Some decks are not affected while others are? I think it would be discussed.
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.I was not 100% on this... but extra turn spells are worth more when it is 3 opponents skipping their turn
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. My concern is also how easy it is to get extra counters on her in these colours...
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.There was a post about a cEDH player who specifically mentioned this card being instantly bannable. Arcum has hoops to go through. Tezzeret can tutor mana rocks, Chain Veil, combo pieces.... nobody would use the ult.
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.it depends... if that is all people do with him, then yes. I imagine a chain veil would be in there too. All of this is with the caveat that it is present enough that it becomes a concern. This is on my radar as it makes games run very repetitively.
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. I think the repeatable board wipe would be unfun for most. Ult is good but not broken.
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.
Thanks for the discussion. Even if it was 8 bans (which I think is short, but that's opinion), I think the RC would have to weigh the pros and cons heavily. The pros include how many PWs actually make for new interesting decks. And it is not like 8 new decks compensate for 8 bans... we can play all these cards right now.
I agree that philosophically, PWs should be allowed as commanders. I also think that BaaC list is the only way to do this without causing a lot of EDH players a lot of grief.
-
Apr 24, 20192
Taleran posted a message on [POLL] Planeswalkers as playable generalsAnother reason that BaaC list is very weird is how often honestly do see a Commander like Derevi in the 99 of a deck anyway? Saying that if this is reinstated we will have to ban these Commanders who are just fine now feels very strange, also don't see many Arcum's running around not in the Commander spot.Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
Holding cards legality hostage that if that article is being honest they already have huge problems with.
Quote from Dunharrow »Quote from Carthage »Quote from Dunharrow »I do think Ajani Vengeant would be a bad card to build around. You can't build around the first two abilities... they are just controlling abilities. If you want to build around the ultimate, then that is the problem.
I think any planeswalker with a gamewinning ultimate would have to be banned as a commander. Since there is no BaaC list, they would be outright banned. Sheldon mentioned this in his article about this thread - making all walkers commanders would also force them to ban a large portion of them.
Ajani Vengeant or Liliana of the Dark Realms are cards with generic uninteresting abilities when they are cast. I assume if you are building them it is to abuse the ultimates. So if 95% of their commander decks are made to force the ultimates, I think that they need to be banned as a commander.
Braids, Cabal Minion is not a terribly broken card. It just makes broken decks. And the RC doesn't want those decks around.
I am very much against PW generals that can win the game by themselves. If they combo with one other card - fine, it is the same as many other combos in the format. But being a self-contained win con is very frustrating.
My 'rule' for PW commanders would be: "if you can build around the first 2/3 abilities, it's good - if you can only build around the ultimate, it is not good for the format because all of the decks it will enable will be the same"
I don't understand this point of view at all. It just sounds like creating weird arbitrary rules.
What's wrong with building towards a game ender with your general? Are we worried that people might win a game after establishing complete board control? That sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
They take their 4/5 mana walker and untap with it repeatedly, I'd hope they get some huge play off of it, because their + abilities are usually very small effects.
Keep in mind there are a number of generals that people just run for the colors and almost ignore the general outright.
I find that knowing that the ultimate will end the game warps the game around that general. I think that certain generals, like Ajani Vengeant and Liliana of the Dark Realms, or Dovin Baan, will focus entirely on the getting to the ultimate. There will be no variability - they will all be those decks. It is hard to deal with a commander that can win the game by itself and is immune to boardwipes. You can hope to attack it... but these walkers only enable one deck - Spam boardwipes until you ult.
I don't think it's fun. I don't think it helps Commander.
Quote from Impossible »
So, better ban every commander that can turn sideways and win with general damage? Ack, watch out for those dreaded Elder Dragons! After 3 whole turns of uninterrupted attacking, they'll kill you all by themselves! Clearly too powerful for EDH. Ban plz.Quote from Dunharrow »I am very much against PW generals that can win the game by themselves. [...] But being a self-contained win con is very frustrating.
Combat is easy to interact with. you can block.
That is the difference. Two legendary creatures going at it is a race, or combat math....
Planeswalker commanders do not need combat damage, they can just keep the board clear and fog until the game is over.
I don't know... I think there are a lot of unfun generals that only enable turbo fog decks.
I think you are being extremely not generous to how people build decks to assume that all Walker led decks will be the same, we already have a bunch of Walkers that can be Commanders and those don't all turn into board wipe fests.
Like in the case of Dovin specifically
You are saying with that bit about him that you are more worried about someone paying 3 mana and not being disrupted for 4 turns in a row than someone playing the same effect of that accumulation for just the 3 mana in an artifact? If someone wants to take that much time to build to that effect sure why not, that doesn't seem like it is that much value or that powerful even.
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. So much speculation and assumption that just feels off with how the cards are used at present.
-
Apr 24, 2019
2
Taleran posted a message on [POLL] Planeswalkers as playable generalsPosted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from Dunharrow »Quote from Taleran »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:
Ajani, Mentor of Heroes, Ajani Unyielding, Ajani, Valiant Protector: All would make incredible GW Commanders of a midrange / hatebear variety.
Ajani Vengeant would make an incredible Boros Control commander it is shame the stigma that exists around destroying lands.
Angrath, the Flame-Chained: Would lead a sweet Rakdos theft deck that can also punish long games / GY strategies
Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver: This form of Blue/Black control would be fun.
Dack Fayden: The Greatest Thief Deck in the Multiverse
Daretti, Ingenious Iconoclast: RAKDOS ARTIFACTS sign me right up
Dovin, Grand Arbiter: Sweet Azorious token based Commander
Kaya, Ghost Assassin: Orhzov Control hell yes
Saheeli Rai: Izzet Tokens on a lower CMC Commander with so much potential.
Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas: Dimir artifacts has a lot of space open in it and a lot of the Tezzes fill that role.
Xenagos, the Reveler: A second great RG High Tide Commander
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. -
Apr 18, 2019
3
Taleran posted a message on [POLL] Planeswalkers as playable generalsPosted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from papa_funk »I would stop thinking in terms of "these cards would be broken" and start thinking in terms of "these cards would make for fun and interesting decks to face." Right now, there isn't enough reason to make the change to worry about why we shouldn't make the change. The positives are almost entirely centered around "these are cool characters from lore" rather than "these are cool cards to build around". That's a plus, but it's not enough to justify a major gameplay change, even before you get to the downsides.
On the bright side, WAR suggests that maybe they'll be looser about planeswalker designs in the future. Maybe there'll be fun, quirky ones to build around. But right now, when I hear "I want to build a Kiora deck!" it's solely driven by Kiora's backstory, not because the Kiora cards are interesting.
I feel like this is a mischaracterization of a lot of the thread that gets drowned out in this spoiler season specifically with "oh this and this planeswalker is broken" talk
People are only gonna come in and list off the P/Ws they think would be cool and create interesting deck archetypes once, arguments in the thread about what is or is not too strong can and probably will last forever, I have read a lot of cool posts in this thread about new archetypes that get spawned by both the existing walkers prior to WAR and some of then new ones.
And also as arrogantAxolotl said, peoples desires for picking a Commander are generally first I like this card and those reasons can be vast and varied even within the same card, then figuring out the deck comes second and if the deck is interesting or fun to play is third.
It feels very all of a sudden that so quickly every addition to the format has to be "worthwhile". -
Apr 15, 2019
3
Carthage posted a message on [POLL] Planeswalkers as playable generalsPosted in: Commander Rules Discussion ForumQuote from toctheyounger77 »So, like Leovold Emissary of Trest? Absolutely. I don't need to be there to watch someone else play solitaire.
Otherwise, give examples of creatures that would be similar.
Oloro, Nekusar, Kaalia, Ydris, Animar, Derevi, Narset, Prossh, Krenko
There's a few to start off with, there are many more. -
Apr 15, 20197
Impossible posted a message on Ashiok, Dream Render and their Skulker - Nizzahon Magic spoilerOne card being able to mill 20 is no joke in Limited.Posted in: The Rumor Mill - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1
Yes, but you compare Common vs Rare.
1/3 common for 3 vs 2/3 rare for 2, but you need to crew it.
That card is just plain bad...
1
So a legendary creature can lead an army, but legendary Planeswalker can't?
What kind of logic is that?
And by the way, the one sentence says otherwise, there are already PW's leading the armies.
Yes, the sentence is only on a few PW's. But it is. With the current trend, the amount of PW's with the rule will grow, so you will end up with an increasing pool of PW's as playable generals.
So maybe in 3 years, there will be another 15+ playable PW's just from the Commander20XX editions, not counting things like Battlebond 2.0, which gave us PARTNER PLANESWALKERS.
You cannot just pretend this is not an issue, will just vanish or is something that won't be questioned in upcomming years, because the pool of playable PW's will grow and grow.
As said before, only reason why Wizz did not include the specific sentence onto the current standard walkers is because it would confuse standard players. Otherwise it would be there...
1
Was it originally Elder DRAGON Highlander?
So shouldn't we only play with Dragons as generals?
4
1
Still he needs 4 turns to activate.
Unless you play a lot of proliferate.
Also he doesn't have access to green, so no Doubling Season to ultimate off right away.
How is he stronger than Arcum Dagsson who can regularly combo out in T3 or T4 and end the game?
Or Yisan, the Wanderer Bard, Zur the Enchanter or Baral, Chief of Compliance?
There are dozens and dozens generals who can end the game before Bolas even hits the battlefield.
Is he a weak card, no, definitely not. But there are a lot stronger and more consistent generals out there.
1
I would like to play, but sad there is no brawl tournaments here. I think the rotating format is keeping people away. As those who like it play standard and those who don't stick to commander or duel commander.
1
It is justified. Both enable plays which would be done a lot later in game. Nobody cares about Sol Ring or Crypt after T5. But when someone starts with Land --> Ring --> Signet and T2 he plays 5 CMC general when others are on 1 mana, that is the problem. Add Crypt and you can cast down Damia, Sage of stone on T2. Yep, totally fair. T1 artifact destroys exist, but I won't pack my deck only with artifact hate just to counter sol ring. Also, in deck of 100 cards, even if you pack 10 to counter artifacts, doesn't mean you will have it in opening hand, rng works.
Pod of Ur-dragons? Modified or not? If not, you are really comparing 3 pre-made decks with almost no answers to anything to your fine tuned Memnarch? Also, maybe they are casual players, not cutthroat like you. Maybe the ashamed one should be you.
1
1
Bought a copy for 8 euro (about $9), 3 days later he jumps to 15 and 2 days later to 40.
Sucks I didn't get my hands on liliana cheaper..
Back to topic, I think Emy 2.0 is quite good, won 2 games just by casting it and enemies forfeited because I would wreck their hands and boards.. I think he is strong in the right deck.
1
Still, I miss the "banned as 99" and "banned as commander" thing, Emrakul is no harm as general and also in 99, she is not that brutal or broken as many people say.