Fandom Legends: Magic Arena
Treasure Cruisin' Amulet's End
Magic Market Index for April 19, 2019
  • posted a message on Wishes
    Quote from schweinefett »
    Here's an interesting thought: Errata all wishes BACK to its original tempting.

    As in, there was no exile zone when the wishes came. There was only 'removed from the game'. So if all wishes were templated like how the new karn does it. So now, the wishes read: "You may choose an XXXXX card you own from outside the game or in exile, reveal that card, and put it into your hand"

    How does something like that sound? it actually captures the original intent/use of the wishes, and harkens back to the pre-exile days.

    That still leaves the question about what does outside of the game entail.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on [Rules Tinkering] TEST: Sparked Commander
    Saheeli is on his watchlist as well, for good reason.
    think you meant this as the guy you are talking to is the OP :D.
    But I agree that dack creates unfavorable gamestates if hes in the CZ. While not easily abusable his +1 and -2 are always useful, and there are still some cards that can makepretty good use of his abilities. If Vraska, Relic Seeker is on the watchlist I really thing Dack should be too.

    My Playgroup agreed to try that out for one or two weeks but it will take the guys a while to build their decks. Since we pretty much dissolve our themed decks after we played a couple of games with them most of us will use what they have and not go out of their way to get new stuff. So I thought about going either Tezzeret, Master of the Bridge,Kiora, Behemoth Beckoner or Nissa, Steward of Elements.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Wishes
    There would be no contradiction between that rule and the 100-card deck rule. Cards outside the game are not in your deck. Bringing a card from outside the game with a Wish doesn't make your deck illegal all of the sudden.

    Actually it does commander is the only format with a maximum card size(brawl?) and if you enforce commander restrictions on the cards that way that counts. And if you dont you would be able to get any card as the card outside of the game as the rules enforcing the deck construction (Identity singleton etc.). Since if the cards don't count towards your deck they also don't count towards the singleton rule. Same with commander Identity since cards outside are not in your deck but must adhere to format rules. So the only thing youd limit would be banned cards.

    My Wishboard would vary in PUGs esp. mtgo it would probably be half silver bullets like hosers since the powerlevel varies alot. in my local playgroup it would be more powered down hosers and niche answers.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Wishes
    as long as the card is legal in the format you are playing (such as Two-Headed Giant, Commander, Brawl, etc.) and conforms to any rules or restrictions for that format (such as Singleton, Color Identity, Unified Construction, Block Constructed, etc.)",

    I mean I understand what you are proposing here and what you had in mind but technically that is what Rule 13 does as well. One of those restrictions is a Maindeck of exactly 99 cards so no additional card you can get conforms to rules and restrictions so with that Wording you would still essentially blank wishes. If the intent is to be able to only grab "legal" cards I think the RC would still need to rework the rules. It is very difficult to get a simple reworking on the term "Outside of the game" to such a degree that it works "as intended" without changing Deckbuilding rules.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Wishes
    Each player must have a Wishboard before the game starts.

    I think even though the format would become mostly like that with WB it should still be may.

    Each player may choose to not to reveal the contents of their Wishboard to the other players.

    I think this is Implicit as you don't have to show them your Maindeck either.

    A Wishboard must be on the table and visible for all players.

    Interesting anti cheating tech but I think this isn't needed either, if you feel someone is cheating in casual play you probably won't wanna play with them anyways.

    Wishboards consist of 10 cards exactly.

    Like the first Rule that will be most likely the standard but would soften to up to 10. (My Old playgroup played with 15)

    The Wishboard and the cards within the Wishboard don't count towards the 100 cards between your main deck and commander.

    This is implicit for the main deck so not needed there, but it is also implicit that it will count towards (complete) deck construction

    All the unmentioned ones seem fine, and seem more or less like the way we did it back then.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Wishes
    2) Games of Commander are unsanctioned, so I don't know why the RC has to have any rulings on what a sideboard is. The concept of a sideboard is unnecessary for Commander play. The idea of people revealing their commanders and people siding in cards before a game starts seems awfully unnecessary and kinda lame, so I understand why people wouldn't want sideboards. But you don't need a sideboard for a wish to work; you just need to define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game". I will repeat this again; if calling it a Wishboard is somehow problematic because of a Wishboard's association with a sideboard for sanctioned, competitive play, then call it something different.

    If you define the parameters in Form of numbers it is a Wishboard, sure we can call it something else to but it functions like one even if you take away the sideboard aspect so you have to have a ruling on what a wishboard is instead of a sideboard which is kinda the same problem.
    And even without that you need a special ruling to "define the parameters that a player must follow to get a cards from "outside the game".". And I think the easiest ways of doing that is by Sideboard / Wishboard or whatever you would call it, or not set parameters for it at all. If there is another way of doing that (without extending the rules definiton to much(lengthwise)) that I overlooked I would like to hear it.

    3) The biggest reason that I am opposed to the concept of "If you don't like Rule 13, then see Rule 0 and ask your playgroup" is that for every other class of cards that might come up under Rule 0, the default is that they are legal and allowed. We don't have a rule that says "Cards that destroy more than two lands do nothing in a game of Commander.", we ask before we start whether people are playing Mass-LD or not and go from there. We could do the same thing with Stax cards, infinite combos, extra turn cards, or whatever players might find objectionable, but the default is that these cards are legal and do exactly what they say they do. For some reason, Wishes are treated differently.
    I think in the gist this is also part of Impossibles Main reason for not liking the current rule 13.
    As I stated before IMO we already give special treatment to cards be it that it still has a function on box but not one in Game with Battle of wits.
    Or WOTC errataing Fractured powerstone. Or even give more funtionality to card groups like Legendary Creatures being able to be in the command zone.
    So one more group shouldn't be so different. I personally wouldn't mind Wishboards as general Rule but I see the Issues People have with that, I would mind the grab anything Part or even the grab anything with X parameters part, because of the added searchtime and the bigger silver bullet problem that wishboards already have.

    4) The biggest reasons why Wishes are treated differently has nothing to do with most of the reasons people bring up in this thread. The biggest reason is that the Oracle Card Rulings for Wishes are totally wishy-washy on what "outside the game" should mean for non-sanctioned play. The more I think about it, the more it makes a certain degree of sense for the RC to be equally vague on the subject. I just think that we have enough smart people in the room to figure this out so that we can fix this issue. And if it comes down to all the smart people coming together and saying that this issue is either not worth solving, unsolvable, or the issue are insurmountable, then so be it. I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker yet.

    I partly agree with that statement even tough it is pretty clearly specified (Card you own from outside the game meaning exactly that) since it is a nonsanctioned event you could technically go home rummage trough your pile of cards get back to the LGS with the card you were looking for and It would be perfectly legal, and that to most would be unacceptable. But WOTC let the people themselves decide what is and what isn't acceptable. But unfortunately the players have different things they demm accepable. Which is why "I just haven't heard anything that is a true deal-breaker [for me] yet." is IMO the proper response since for others some of their arguments are true dealbreakers for them. That alone puts me more in the camp of "not worth solving" at least for general settings.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Wishes
    The "clean" method is the third option purposed by Ava, even stated by Wednesday as being the "cleanest".

    So then your cleanest option is that you can only grab stuff from exile from it? You think that is the cleanest answer but Forgottet One and Impossible would argue that that version is not the cleanest at all (Impossible by saying special rules for certain cards is not a clean cut answer at all e.g. not getting cards from outside the game, just from exile)(Forgotted one by "there is no rule that blanks its text box" as it doesn't blank all but still blanks part of it.)

    Its literally the safest option if change were to occur.
    I agree that it would be among the safest option if change were to occur, no change would still be at least equally safe if not safer because of the status quo.

    Also that the only counter arguments to it are literally: Citing rules 0 and 13.

    And the general magic rules just because the streamlining of rules and zones have gotten rid of wish funktionality doesn't mean they get an automatic errata to get stuff from exile. Just because Anya, Merciless Angel exists doesn't mean that Serra Ascendant is automatically erratad to "10 more than your starting total" it is still 30 life. Sure Wotc is aware that future wishcards should behave that way but even they dont errata the old ones even when they had the chance

    Blues point about Sharazad was an example against the "3) If a player would hypothetically misbehave with using wishes, they are obviously violating the social contract / gentleman's agreement." argument stating that that argument can be used against anything be it banned cards or wishes.

    In fact both MHRBlue and Kamino_Taka have contributed very little in this revived discussion
    if you percive it this way fine I came in from the other thread and chimed in with my own arguments and reasoning for/against proposed solutions, and reasonings to why I agree/disagree with certain arguments. So at least I think I contributed to this discussion whether you agree or disagree with my agruments/reasoning is a different matter. And that goes for most people here, just because you disagree with them doesn't mean they didn't contribute, just because somethings for you are a non argument doesn't neccesairly mean it is a non argument in general.

    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Wishes
    People can't agree on what the social contract is, much less a set of cards even when handed to them with a silver platter that provides the cleanest answer.

    First of all at least you don't just add snarky comments and misquotes anymore so welcome back to the discussion.
    And for you it seems like the cleanest answer if not everybody can agree that one this "cleanest answer" then it just stays that "your opinion" of a clean answer.

    Then I want to know your cleanest answer since you put forward the 3 card wishboard rule, the regular sideboard rule, including a General magic rule reversion back to when they were able to get exiled cards. I aslo assume (but for this I couldn't find a post you did confirming this ) that you wouldn't mind them being able to grab anything.

    A great example for how each individual/individual group has their own social contract, and its difficult to come to a consensus is MTGO.
    Some people say no X in the comments some say no X/Y some just say no Y some say nothing and are fine with anything some say nothing and scoop when one of the things they thought "were obviously against the social construct and they shouldn't have to mention it".

    With X/Y including but not limited to:
    MLD, Extra turns, Counterspells, Monocolored commanders (Yes it seems some peole take issue with that), Infinite, Purphoros(and singling other commanders out purph is just the one I see most often), Infect, Planeswalkers, Tribal (also seeing some thatjust want tribal), Tutors.

    With wishboards included that list will grow as it seems to be that not all people are in favor of that.
    Sidenote In MTGO irregardles of tournament non tournament you can only search your sideboard with wishes, so implementing a grab anything further divides MTGO Commander from Paper commander.

    one is an abusable minigame
    yeah he said so himself but thats exactly his point it is abusable but you dont have to abuse it. Same with wishes they are abusable but you dont have to abuse them.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Wishes
    If a player would hypothetically misbehave with using wishes, they are obviously violating the social contract / gentleman's agreement.

    Defining misbehaving and social contract is a Whole task in it self, wishes not working without rule 0 gets around that by basically putting the definition of misbehaving / social construct on the individual playgroup. If you make it legal for everyone then you make it more difficult for Pick up games as what one sees as misbehaving with wishes another one sees as fine.
    On the other hand getting in a Pick up game with rule 13 in place there is no chance for that.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    Quote from Legend »
    Why is anyone acting like having wishes conform to the Commander format would be complicated and unwieldy? It’s so intuitive a caveman can understand it.

    If you go for the get anything you want argument sure it is intuitive. But seeing as there are multiple proposed ways of wishboard rules it seems like that is not intuitive at all.

    Why is anyone acting like having wishes conform to the Commander format would be complicated and unwieldy
    It isn't complicated or unwieldy IMO. If you go for the wishboard plan add construction rules for that done. If you go for the get anything you want get rid of rule 13.
    The bigger questions are 1. Is it neccesary for the format to be able to do either of those things (In case of spirit of Commander (which is rather vague anyways), Powerlevel, enjoyment for the majority)
    2. In case of Wishboard reconstructing the deckbuilding rules for the inclusion of 12 Cards but not other cards (Batlle of wits), why prioritise one ver the other.
    3. In case of get anything you want do you want possible longer search times, get people the ability to search for duplicates banned cards etc. and all that just to be hold in place of a social contract which is different for each group. (Pick up games would become worse with this)
    3. Is it neccesary for all people to adapt to a wish working/nonworking system, or is houseruling enough? Why one over another?

    It’s just as reasonable to assume that wishing will take about as long as tutoring.
    Depends If wishboards are a thing I do think wishes will be faster than tutoring (Less cards to choose from smaller pile to look through) if you are able to get anything you want it will most likely be longer (More cards to choose from larger pile/binder to look trough). And from expierience (far from factual evidence, but noteworthy nonetheless) with actually playing both with a wishboard in commander and wishes in unsanctioned (albeit non commander) the get anything takes up way way more time than a regular tutor.

    They’re meant for Magic as a whole
    such are the first two un sets, and the ante cards in the beginning you dont have to shoehorn everything in. Also just because stuff has been made specifically for one format does not mean they were only designed for that format with that format in mind. Fractured Powerstone is a legacy legal card and it does other things to (just like draft matters cards and ante cards), just like some of the wishes do more than wish.
    Also battle of wits is older than the commander format so basically even though that is probably not what they intended they made a format to invalidate a card that was "meant for magic as a whole". Same with stuff like Accumulated Knowledge.

    To me finances are also almost a nonissue, as a spike in price or a devaluing of cards hardly affect gameplay. Sure if a card spikes and you cant play it because you can't afford it makes deckbuilding more difficult, but since that can happen to any card not just wishes, and wishes not being on the reserved list I hardly think that that is/will become an issue.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    Yes you wont get a legal deck with 45 cards and 15 cards sideboard but you also wont get a legal deck with 60 cards and 20 cards sideboard. So The sideboard is part of the deck construction just because you dont use it in g1 doesn't mean you wont in g2. Just as a wishboard will be part of the deck construction rule if it exists limiting the maximum number of cards you can put in. So I think it very well breaks the 100 card rule by expanding it in to a 100 cards + A maximum of WB number cards, that is something you factor in when building a deck. Sure your Maindeck is still 100 cards but your maindeck in the case of wishboards/sideboards is just one part of your overall deck.
    "A Commander deck must contain exactly 100 cards, including the Commander." not a "Commandermaindeck must contain exactly 100 cards" for me is already a sign that there are no sideboards in this format.
    If I knew nothing about Rule 13, there would be no reason to think that I couldn't use a Wish to get the appropriate card from my trade binder since a game of Commander is clearly an Unsanctioned event. What we are asking for is to make that happen, but clarify exactly how it will work to avoid confusion.
    If you don't allow someone to get any card they can stated on the wish you are essentially doing the same as the RC, making a special rule just for the wishes. "Clarifying exactly hot it will work to avoid confusion" is the same thing they want to achive with rule 13 and if you don't know about rule 13 but don't know about the clarification it will still boil down to get anything the card states.

    The oracle on fractured powerstone (at least to me) is the same as rule 13 it is to clarify what to do in the event that the ruled thing occurs, and in both cases it is it does nothing.

    The reason it doesn't work is because the game it is played with isn't the that is used in Commander, just like Paliano, the High City isn't meant for this format.
    and apparently for the RC wishes arent mean't for commander. They don't like neither the wishboard solution nor the get anything solution. So just like wizards did to specify that Fractured powerstone does nothing instead of rolling the die, the RC ruled (not with oracle but with rules) that they do nothing. (That is actually done on purpose as there IS something that happens when a planar die is rolled rules wise specifically the planeswalk symbol as it activates the planeswalk ability and there is no rules governing that if that ability (which doesn't exist since its not a planechase game) gets triggered. Sure everybody would be guessing that it does nothing so they would play as if it didn't happen but tecnically you need that oracle to not get into weird ruling issues)

    EDIT:'s the Tournament Rules. That's it. In any other setting Wishes are, by the rules of the game, allowed to get any card you own from outside the game. Except in EDH, where they have format-specific errata that says they do nothing.

    What is so different from a tournament Ruling to a format specific ruling as a tournament is just a type of format anyways.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    both options can be made to work within the rules of Commander
    so special ruling is needed, esp. in the case of a wishboard because.
    as someone stated before in unsanctioned games you can get the card from anywhere not just your sideboard. Also being able to grab anything not just cards that fit your normal commander deckbuilding rules.
    Wishboards do have something to do with the 100 card rule just as a regular sideboard has to do something with the deckbuilding rule. A deck must have a minimum of 60 Cards adn may have a sideboard of 0 to 15 cards. Your normal deck isnt just your deck its your deck + SB. So the same appklies to commander if you do a wishboard the new deck construction rule is 100 + 0- max wishboard size. So if you are advocationg for a wishboard you are breaking the 100 card deckbuilding rule and making it a 100 + WB rule.

    exactly how they are supposed to
    Thats the problem with wishes They are not working how they are supposed to in sanctioned events (Wotc uses a format specific errata as in only sideboard cards) and the RC want to use the same errata whilst having no sideboard.

    Why do you want it on the banlist if they don't allow for search all though? You said Fractured Powerstone works as intended but it does not its a special errata for the card that says "In non-Planechase games, Fractured Powerstone’s second ability will have no effect. " because if it works as intended you should be able to roll the planar die anyways since that is exactly what the card says.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Talk - It is conceading fair play to you?
    Even while though i disagree with him, he did state the "benefits" of doing so, he even makes the distinction of if you don't do it with any benefit then it is not tactical scooping.

    I agree that the psychological and in the current game things are different but if you want to use EVERY edge you can that doesn't matter since overall you will most likely loose more than you gain.

    I also agree that sometimes its best to not attack /kill someone but that is "usually" not because of a tac scoop threat, because if it were the psycological aspect will be "most likely" the death of that player.

    But I think we are at the point where we all put our opinions forth and start to repeat ourselves more and more.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    Either Wishes are fine and should be legal to work how they work, or they're not and they should be banned. There's no middle ground here.

    The Problem with that approach is the cards that do more than just wish and that part is fine. You wouldn't wanna ban Fractured Powerstone just because the second ability has no effect , same with Mastermind's Acquisition or Research // Development. So a blanket ban is undesirable. And a specific ban on those who only wish is the single card errata on those that don't. Banning all is only a "clean" solution if you do the same for Fractured Powerstone, draft matters cards.

    And even tough I am currently building a Rat colony deck I think that too is something that shouldn't be able to be something that can be done universally and should stay in local playgroups.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [Rules Tinkering] TEST: Sparked Commander
    I think there are way to many planeswalkers on the watchlist that are not even remotely problematic compared to currently existing generals.

    It is just the watchlist so I think if they really do nothing you can remove them, better save than sorry.
    Even tough I wouldn't like the change for allowing pw's in general (my reasons for that are in the threat linked by OP). I will ask my playgroup if we can play one or 2 nights with that rule active as I agree with Onerings Statement

    I encourage playgroups who want to test this to do so, and this thread is at least a well thought out starting point. Arguing about it is beating a dead horse, and I strongly doubt that OPs experiment is going to uncover anything the RC or CAG won't, but it CAN help give some extra perspective, and it CAN help hammer out the best practices for playgroups who want to take advantage of rule 0 to allow PW commanders (that is, what steps should be taken to make the change work the best that it can).

    And seeing that my Playgroup already has Themed weeks sometimes might as well try PW's out. It might help those who want to housrule it if many people tried it before and gather best practices.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.