I understand that lantern control is a more viable way to get this effect, and I do plan on playing that once I get all the pieces. However, the weirding is still one of my all time favorite cards, and I'm not above using a brew if it means I can play it, even if it does end up a bit less successful. I fully recognize that the weirding will probably never be anything better than t2 at best
Right now I'm thinking using things like the aformentioned bloodchief ascension and other blue filtering effects (things like anticipate perhaps?). I'll post a list when I have one.
Hello. I am becoming increasingly interested in the modern format, and I recently realized that zur's weirdingis modern legal. Since I hate other people having fun, this is one of my favorite cards of all time. What would be the best way to use this modern, especially seeing as how it's nearly a one card lantern combo? Obviously a deck built around this will never be tier one, but hopefully I'll be able to make one that can at least somewhat compete. Can a (semi)viable deck be made using this, or is it to forever be unplayable in constructed?
So I'm interested in this deck. were there any cards in origins that help it out? I'm mostly thinking of pyromancer's goggles While it's really awkward to play it, having all your red spells be doubled for free seems like a extremely powerful effect in this deck.
Even if you want to use him "fairly" you can still get incredible value out of him. "Will you counter the first spell I play this turn?" "Will you block with X creature if I attack you?" "Will you play a spell during combat?" "Will you cause my creature to die?". These kinds of questions can all force your opponent into specific paths of action that you can then take advantage of.
According the MTG top8 vintage and legacy are a bit closer currently, but there was a time about 4 months ago that it was like 30/39/30 or something ridiculous like that.
I guess my issue with the French list is only a few cards, was not aware of the update. The top severely bothered me because I knew that was the reason they banned it and disagreed heavily with the rationale. Also at the time Food Chain was not banned and it was really perplexing to see Prossh get away with using it when cards like Oloro was banned. I gotta really look into this Oloro business, but I just have never had issue with those decks in multiplayer or 1v1...mind you I'm playing Derevi, but often "bant good stuff" just has answers for days and 2 life a turn is non issue. I've always felt Oloro is a B tier deck, so I find it perplexing to be on the ban list when I fear other generals way more. I see some really fast S tier decks completely unchecked by the list such as Arcum Dagsum and Narset. The French list to me just seems rather unrefined and showcases some bias. I also feel people put a stigma on commanders that mention a direct interaction with the command zone...but give a free pass to cards like Marath and Prossh that arguably do as well since the Commander Tax directly impacts their abilities.
That would be why you never had any problem. Derevi is absurdly powerful and also rightfully banned, as it's ability to gain a stupidly huge resource advantage is one of the few ways that you can combat oloro. Arcum and Narset actually aren't that big of a problem. Arcum is relatively fragile, and while it can get nutty draws, it's often disruptable enough that it's not a huge issue, especially since it doesn't usually turn on before turn 4. Narset, while good if it gets going, is much less scary without all the broken fast mana you see in multiplayer.
Marath is a top tier deck, and prossh was the reason that food chain got banned in the first place. People put a stigma on oloro and derevi because they interact with the command zone in a way that is much more powerful than the other command zone generals. Oloro just plain never leaves while providing a passive advantage and derevi is impossible to get rid of. While Prossh and Marath are very good, they're not nearly as powerful as those two in the way they benefit from the commandzone.
Overall the french banlist is amazing, and has lead to a hugely diverse meta, with not just a near perfect balance between aggro/combo/control but also a huge diversity within each of those archetypes. Having played a bunch of games with both, it feels better than the multiplayer one in pretty much every conceivable way.
Can someone explain why people bring up Oloro as ban worthy? I'm constantly perplexed by why it's banned in 1v1 and the occasional comment in multiplayer games when someone references the French list as to how it's OP...but no explanation of what make Oloro broke.
Oloro was banned for several reasons. The first was that control builds just utterly shut down aggro decks. Being able to gain 2 life a turn for no investment that you can never turn off in the best control colors made it so hard to win with creatures, and oftentimes gaining 20+ life for free was good enough to win the race against other control decks as well. This then lead to combo versions of the deck where they could include more redundant combo pieces over things like removal, because the passive life cushion that they received was enough to stall until they got their combo out. There is no one broken Oloro list because there were multiple lists that did vastly different things, and combined they were ruining the meta.
Like I have yet to see broken 1v1 Oloro deck to see where this spawned from (would love to see one if anyone has a link, particularly multiplayer capable...and I mean like wreck a tournament broken, not casual kitchen). Also I don't agree with the French ban list at all...some of the cards make no sense (Sensei's Divining Top)...For me I feel the biggest sins of commander is often fast mana and low CC easy 2 card infinites. Many cards people complain about are slow enough that you're expected to have an answer for it or something equally devastating.
Ok I'll look into it a bit more
the top is no longer banned, but it was banned because it makes tournaments take much longer. From all the games I have played the 1v1 list is far superior to the multiplayer one. Many of the cards that are on the multiplayer list just aren't a problem without the broken fast mana that the format encourages.
I think it's weird that you hate the 1v1 banlist and then say that biggest sin of the format is the fast mana and combo. The 1v1 banlist doesn't do much else aside from take out the broken fast mana and some of the more broken combo engines.
But what it does in general is only average at best given the amount of creatures that people are getting out in standard. Edict effects on their own are actually pretty mediocre in such a creature heavy environment. It's a much less powerful than a card like thoughtseize, which has much greater potential for disruption for the exact same mana cost, with a comparable drawback. It's also almost useless lategame, when the control player does have their threat out. It would certainly be powerful, but it's certainly more printable than a card like path.
[*]Innocent Blood - it seems like an unlikely thing for wizards to ever print again in a standard set release. Its one of the more powerful Legacy removal effects out there. I think asking for an edict is probably fine but do you really think we would get this?
[/list]
I don't think this is true at all, and in fact I hate the argument that "it's strong in format X, therefore it's good in format y". Just because it's strong in legacy doesn't mean that it's strong in standard. Legacy decks play far far fewer creatures on average, and the fewer creatures that are playe the stronger innocent blood is, as it has both a greater affect on your opponent, and a lesser affect on you. Considering all the deathmist raptors, tokens, mana dorks and mastery of the unseens that are played in standard, especially with the shift to creature centric gameplay that wizards has been encouraging, it becomes much weaker. While I agree that it would be a strong piece of removal (likely the go-to black removal for it's standard lifespan) I think it's a weaker card than something like thoughtseize overall, and even more so with a creature centric format, such as the one that currently exists.
You can't blindly say that just because something is strong in vintage/legacy/modern it's too strong for standard. By that logic things like monastary mentor, young pyromancer, ingot chewer, lodestone golem,mental misstep and elctrickery can never be reprinted, and treasure cruise and dig through time should be banned in standard simply because they're good in other formats. You have to look at what makes it good and how it interacts with other cards in the format.
List tags are malformed.
I would actually start by looking at the french banlist. Having played a lot duel commander tournaments I find it to be a great banlist, and one that encourages a hugely diverse metagame. In fact, there is very little I would change about it. It manages to be quite powerful, and yet not feel broken. I feel with a few slight adjustments it would be a great starting point for a competitive multiplayer list.
Really the biggest problem with competitive EDH is the multiplayer aspect of it, both in determining how tournaments work and in preventing collusion.
Let's say my opponent has a whisperwood elemental and a courser of kruphix out, so that I see what is manifested by the whisperwood. They manifest another whisperwood elemental. Several turns later I draw a roast. Am I allowed to say something to effect of "Target your manifested whisperwood" or am I the one that is required to keep track of which manifest is which? If several nonwhisperwood elemental manifested creatures have died in the turns between the whisperwood elemental and the roast (so that the creatures on their side of the board have been rearranged some) is this answer still the same? Similarly, if I know what the manifests are (again, from a previous courser) and know that they are 3 different creatures and a land, and my opponent attacks with them, am I able to ask them which manifest is which for purposes of blocking? How would these answers change at various REL?
then how is that different from the delve example above? Why would delving seven cards for a treasure cruise not be considered an alternate cost in the same way?
I have a related question then. Does phyrexian mana count for the sphere too then? If I play a dismember, and if I choose to pay the 4 life, would I still have to pay 3 mana?
What happens when you use animate dead to bring back a mogis, god of slaughter with less than 7 devotion? Since the gatherer wording for animate dead reads "When Animate Dead leaves the battlefield, that creature's controller sacrifices it." would you have to sacrifice the mogis after the animate dead becomes unattached? I can see arguments either way. It depends on if the "that creature" is shorthand for "the permanent that animate dead was attached to" or if it's taken literally. What is the correct answer?
Right now I'm thinking using things like the aformentioned bloodchief ascension and other blue filtering effects (things like anticipate perhaps?). I'll post a list when I have one.
stasis
strip mine
counterbalance
chalice of the void
winter orb
smokestack
armageddon
erayo, soratami ascendant
braids, cabal minion
hokori, dust drinker
mindslaver
shahrazad
zur's weirding
That would be why you never had any problem. Derevi is absurdly powerful and also rightfully banned, as it's ability to gain a stupidly huge resource advantage is one of the few ways that you can combat oloro. Arcum and Narset actually aren't that big of a problem. Arcum is relatively fragile, and while it can get nutty draws, it's often disruptable enough that it's not a huge issue, especially since it doesn't usually turn on before turn 4. Narset, while good if it gets going, is much less scary without all the broken fast mana you see in multiplayer.
Marath is a top tier deck, and prossh was the reason that food chain got banned in the first place. People put a stigma on oloro and derevi because they interact with the command zone in a way that is much more powerful than the other command zone generals. Oloro just plain never leaves while providing a passive advantage and derevi is impossible to get rid of. While Prossh and Marath are very good, they're not nearly as powerful as those two in the way they benefit from the commandzone.
Overall the french banlist is amazing, and has lead to a hugely diverse meta, with not just a near perfect balance between aggro/combo/control but also a huge diversity within each of those archetypes. Having played a bunch of games with both, it feels better than the multiplayer one in pretty much every conceivable way.
Oloro was banned for several reasons. The first was that control builds just utterly shut down aggro decks. Being able to gain 2 life a turn for no investment that you can never turn off in the best control colors made it so hard to win with creatures, and oftentimes gaining 20+ life for free was good enough to win the race against other control decks as well. This then lead to combo versions of the deck where they could include more redundant combo pieces over things like removal, because the passive life cushion that they received was enough to stall until they got their combo out. There is no one broken Oloro list because there were multiple lists that did vastly different things, and combined they were ruining the meta.
the top is no longer banned, but it was banned because it makes tournaments take much longer. From all the games I have played the 1v1 list is far superior to the multiplayer one. Many of the cards that are on the multiplayer list just aren't a problem without the broken fast mana that the format encourages.
I think it's weird that you hate the 1v1 banlist and then say that biggest sin of the format is the fast mana and combo. The 1v1 banlist doesn't do much else aside from take out the broken fast mana and some of the more broken combo engines.
I don't think this is true at all, and in fact I hate the argument that "it's strong in format X, therefore it's good in format y". Just because it's strong in legacy doesn't mean that it's strong in standard. Legacy decks play far far fewer creatures on average, and the fewer creatures that are playe the stronger innocent blood is, as it has both a greater affect on your opponent, and a lesser affect on you. Considering all the deathmist raptors, tokens, mana dorks and mastery of the unseens that are played in standard, especially with the shift to creature centric gameplay that wizards has been encouraging, it becomes much weaker. While I agree that it would be a strong piece of removal (likely the go-to black removal for it's standard lifespan) I think it's a weaker card than something like thoughtseize overall, and even more so with a creature centric format, such as the one that currently exists.
You can't blindly say that just because something is strong in vintage/legacy/modern it's too strong for standard. By that logic things like monastary mentor, young pyromancer, ingot chewer, lodestone golem,mental misstep and elctrickery can never be reprinted, and treasure cruise and dig through time should be banned in standard simply because they're good in other formats. You have to look at what makes it good and how it interacts with other cards in the format.
List tags are malformed.
Really the biggest problem with competitive EDH is the multiplayer aspect of it, both in determining how tournaments work and in preventing collusion.