People would also not care about unbanning Karakas if it only bounced your opponent's stuff.
I'm ignoring everything else at this point. It's pretty clear you understand how oppressive Karakas is but you're just playing devils advocate because it can potentially be used to do rather mundane things like save your own creatures. That's absurd and you know it. Black Lotus casting a Gray Ogre doesn't make it any less fundamentally broken. Karakas, merely by being in play, fundamentally alters the game in a way that is antithetical to the goals of the format.
I invoke the law of Tooth and Nail. In that it has potential for abuse and equal potential to be fairly used. The people who would abuse it would have done so anyway and the other players should be given the chance to decide for themselves in a more friendly and casual environment.
@Mercury01: Well what Impossible was focusing on was bouncing your opponent's creatures. You are focusing on bouncing your own in response to something an opponent did. Different view points.
Well a Karakas that is never tapped is better than one that is tapped when on the defense against potential attackers and serves the same purpose as a haven or maze. Also the mana costs in the later stages of the game become quite insignificant unless the controller of said lands has very few.
Why would I stop? If I have enough mana to cast my commander and other things I am not really concerned with your Karakas. More so if I have a way to flash in my just recently bounced commander during your turn.
And yet all the stories on the Commander boards about how about someone got snubbed or focused down for playing such a deck don't stop coming.
Also and most often are the poster children for Stax play. Linvala, Keeper of Silence stax decks would love a Karakas for their needs of bouncing enemy creatures. While for instance an Archangel Avacyn wants that same land for entirely different purposes.
People would also not care about unbanning Karakas if it only bounced your opponent's stuff.
They make mystifying maze, kor haven, maze of ith and a whole slew of commanders with activated targeted abilities do their job and become more inherently annoying than you might have been prepared to deal with.
Well in a 4-player game, if there are 3 legendary creatures out, one for each other player than yourself, how did you bounce all 3 enemy commandres back to the hand? As this is not nearly as taxing as the command zone.
I'm not. I'm using your own point against you. As you have a strong stance about always returning commanders back to the hand if you have a Karakas in play.
I can also ignore the player who plays stax or some other oppressive deck and/or talk to them and ask them not use that deck/card like a reasonable human being in a casual setting.
Ah now you are ignoring my points again. As you only focus on the oppression side.
That should be ignored, as it's largely irrelevant. Discussions about whether or not a card belongs in the game can't really take into account hypothetical political situations that may or may not arise in any specific game.
I must have been thinking of a different MTG multiplayer format that was a social game-like experience and how often many cards are brought up on their political usage within a given game. As that format would would more likely view that card with regard in that manner for its political usage.
The fact that the card is potentially very oppressive and that at the same time it also offers these other benefits is in fact a good example of why it is probably too strong to allow in the format
Wouldn't the opposite be more true however? That if it was nothing but oppressive that it would be worse for the format?
As what sounds better for this game? Primeval Titan or targeted Primeval Titan?
T. Primeval Titan4GG Creature - Giant (MR)
Trample
Whenever Primeval Titan enters the battlefield or attacks, you may have target player search their library for up to two land cards and put them onto the battlefield tapped, then they shuffle their library. 6/6
As where is the argument there? That the controller, in a 4-way game, is 4:4 always going to choose themselves for T.P.T? Same with Karakas. Is the argument really being made that every time the controller is only going to use it in an oppressive manner instead of the other three options given?
Yes it does get weaker. If you tap it to get rid of one commander from the board, you lack that defense for any future attacks or combos involving legendary creatures until you are able to untap it. Which Is why I said activating proactively is not necessarily the brightest idea either.
Also how about the fact that enemy legendary creatures that are commanders with ETB abilities would actually benefit from you using your Karakas in such a manner? Like Maelstrom Wanderer? I choose to attack with him, if you bounce it back to my hand, I gain value out of future cascading effects which is not necessarily beneficial to you either.
Did you miss the part where I said player 1 and player 2 made a truce or just ignored that part?
Karakas actually has four purposes:
1) Oppression.
2) Political leverage.
3) (ETB/LTB) effects.
4) Saving your own creatures.
I noticed a large body of talk about being against unbanning Karakas has only really regarded the first point, oppression. It was as if this land read to them:
Karakas Legendary Land (MR) T: Add W to your mana pool. T: Return target legendary creature you don't control to it's owners hand.
Then their would be no discussion if this were the correct version of the land. However? That is not what the land reads and yet that is how it is being treated and viewed by those against its unbanning.
I don't really desire for it to be unbanned or remain banned, as I merely want a consistent and regimented banlist that makes sense to the average EDH/Commander player. But I feel I needed to play devil's advocate because of the narrow views on display.
There are two sides to every coin and Karakas should also be viewed for how it can help its controller with their own creatures as its not just for bouncing enemy creatures.
There are also a ton of other cards that already do that. Crystal Shard, Cloudstone Curio, anyoftheGatingcreatures. Except none of those cards simultaneously lock out your opponents' generals plus some amount of their 99.
And a Crystal Shard does not possess that same capability? To perhaps even greater effect with the more numerous ways to untap an artifact and gnaw away at your opponent's mana.
Also I feel this bears mentioning, Karakas is weaker in multiplayer. In 1v1 it makes sense why its banned and these arguments for how it can feasibly lock out an opponent's commander. Yet in multiplayer, a Karakas that is by itself is weaker as for each additional player, its value diminishes. Using it proactively may not always be the smart decision and instead should be kept untapped in case of attacks and serve as a deterrence in its untapped presence. As then it also serves a similar purpose to Maze of Ith or Kor Haven or Mystifying Maze. It would also require the same sort of cards as the haven or mazes, Arcane Lighthouse and Glaring Spotlight.
It also has helpful political capability. Say you and a second player in a multiplayer game form a truce. Your buddy's commander is going to be negatively affected by a third player but you save their creature instead. By using your Karakas to help the second player, you use it as a political tool. As its not necessarily a tool to oppress others with, but for them to gain favor for you with as EDH/Commander is a social game.
Now consider Karakas, which can screw over those same players a lot more easily, and all on its own. I'm all about running answers and about checks and balances, and I still fail to see how this card would make for more memorable or interesting games, especially at the more typical Commander table.
Saskia the Unyielding swings wide at player 2 that is marked by Saskia and knocks them out. During their MP2 they activate an effect that grants them an additional combat phase and untaps their creatures. They use their Karakas to bounce Sasika back to hand and then recast her in order to mark the remaining player and swing at them and could be lethal. However the third player could have combat tricks like a Aetherspouts. This third player could also be a combo player and because of the time they bought with whatever combat tricks, they would have enough time to unleash their combo.
There are two sides to every coin and Karakas should also be viewed for how it can help its controller with their own creatures as its not just for bouncing enemy creatures.
The biggest factor with the Jackal being red is that she looks like she is about to hurl that spear-looking object. Which brings to mind Anhur who is a war god who wielded a spear or lance. None of the other deities have a spear or lance looking weapon.
As the cat has a bow, the bird has what looks like a halberd or Egyptian axe (not fan), the crocodile has a staff and the cobra finally has what looks like a variation of a fan axe. The last one is an Egyptian weapon commonly seen in hieroglyphics but archeologists have had trouble tracking an actual one.
Wouldn't the opposite be more true however? That if it was nothing but oppressive that it would be worse for the format?
As what sounds better for this game? Primeval Titan or targeted Primeval Titan?
As where is the argument there? That the controller, in a 4-way game, is 4:4 always going to choose themselves for T.P.T? Same with Karakas. Is the argument really being made that every time the controller is only going to use it in an oppressive manner instead of the other three options given?
Karakas actually has four purposes:
1) Oppression.
2) Political leverage.
3) (ETB/LTB) effects.
4) Saving your own creatures.
I noticed a large body of talk about being against unbanning Karakas has only really regarded the first point, oppression. It was as if this land read to them:
Then their would be no discussion if this were the correct version of the land. However? That is not what the land reads and yet that is how it is being treated and viewed by those against its unbanning.
I don't really desire for it to be unbanned or remain banned, as I merely want a consistent and regimented banlist that makes sense to the average EDH/Commander player. But I feel I needed to play devil's advocate because of the narrow views on display.
What about [Basic] Devotion? Like: "Sobek is not a creature while you control less than 5 swamps."
Also I feel this bears mentioning, Karakas is weaker in multiplayer. In 1v1 it makes sense why its banned and these arguments for how it can feasibly lock out an opponent's commander. Yet in multiplayer, a Karakas that is by itself is weaker as for each additional player, its value diminishes. Using it proactively may not always be the smart decision and instead should be kept untapped in case of attacks and serve as a deterrence in its untapped presence. As then it also serves a similar purpose to Maze of Ith or Kor Haven or Mystifying Maze. It would also require the same sort of cards as the haven or mazes, Arcane Lighthouse and Glaring Spotlight.
It also has helpful political capability. Say you and a second player in a multiplayer game form a truce. Your buddy's commander is going to be negatively affected by a third player but you save their creature instead. By using your Karakas to help the second player, you use it as a political tool. As its not necessarily a tool to oppress others with, but for them to gain favor for you with as EDH/Commander is a social game.
There are two sides to every coin and Karakas should also be viewed for how it can help its controller with their own creatures as its not just for bouncing enemy creatures.
As the cat has a bow, the bird has what looks like a halberd or Egyptian axe (not fan), the crocodile has a staff and the cobra finally has what looks like a variation of a fan axe. The last one is an Egyptian weapon commonly seen in hieroglyphics but archeologists have had trouble tracking an actual one.
1 Tamanoa
Ramp: 8
1 Overabundance
1 Kodama's Reach
1 Cultivate
1 Explosive Vegetation
1 Far Wanderings
1 Sol Ring
1 Boundless Realms
1 Rampant Growth
Regrow Effects: 9
1 Regrowth
1 Eternal Witness
1 Naya Charm
1 Restock
1 Volcanic Vision
1 Praetor's Counsel
1 Vengeful Rebirth
1 Charmbreaker Devils
Face Damage: 7
1 Acidic Soil
1 Treacherous Terrain
1 Mana Barbs
1 Burning Earth
1 Price of Progress
1 Aetherflux Resevoir
1 Anhk of mishra
Dude Damage: 6
1 Lightmine Field
1 Blasphemous Act
1 Magmaquake
1 Chain Reaction
1 Starstorm
1 Aether Flash
1 Molten Disaster
1 Comet Storm
1 Squall Line
1 Hurricane
1 Sphinx-Bone Wand
1 Searing Meditation
1 Incite Rebellion
Protection: 8
1 Swiftfoot Boots
1 Magebane Armor
1 Darksteel Plate
1 Mark of Asylum
1 Light of Sanction
1 Comeuppance
1 Shield of the Oversoul
1 Memory Lapse
Card Draw: 4
1 Harmonize
1 Well of Lost Dreams
1 Staff of Nin
1 Mind's eye
Double/Copy Spells: 5
1 Wild Ricochet
1 Mirari
1 Reverberate
1 Pyromancer's Goggles
1 Chandra, the Firebrand
Token Generators: 4
1 Young Pyromancer
1 Blaze Commando
1 Assemble the Legion
1 Hornet Nest
1 Wear // Tear
1 Hull Breach
1 Return to Dust
1 Fiery Confluence
1 Beast Within
1 Sylvan Reclamation
Land: 37
1 Command Tower
1 Brushland
1 Battlefield Forge
1 Karplusan Forest
1 Jungle Shrine
1 Naya Panorama
1 Temple of the False God
1 Shivan Gorge
1 Krosan Verge
1 Grand Coliseum
1 Tarnished Citadel
1 City of Brass
12 Mountain
4 Plains
9 Forest