A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
 
Exclusive: Sword of Truth and Justice
  • posted a message on diluvian primordial, meh or powerful sleeper?
    DP is definitely great value, but I don't expect it to be game ending in most situations. I usually don't see discard in my games outside of specific decks so any spells that are game ending got to the graveyard by ending the game. But normally there would plenty of tutors, card advantage, removal, and lots of utility available.

    Of course graveyard hate also varies wildly in usage. A single relic of progenitus can easily ruin your day. I find myself often tutoring for nihil spellbomb with my mishra deck online which has blanked plenty of graveyard plays in the past.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on The Hybrid Mana debate
    Quote from Yoishan
    Quote from windfall
    Quote from Yoishan

    I feel like your own argument is a bit flawed. Both of the examples you brought up Dark Ritual and Prodigal Sorcerer are not alone examples of those mechanics in those sets nor were they abandoned when the color pie was more enforced in later sets.

    Blue is obviously not primary or secondary in dealing damage, but it is part of their color pie, even if it is rarely. Doing a gatherer search you can come up with roughly 30 examples of blue dealing direct damage. While most of these ARE older cards there are quite a few newer examples (modern), such as Fledgling Mawcor and are roughly 18 or 19 examples of blue creatures being able to do this. Flavor wise it is their mastery of magic and the arcane that allow them to "bend" the rules a bit. I will not deny this is not a common treat but nor would I say it is incredibly farfetched. Some of the creatures are considered "multi-colored" in the purpose of color identity but I would say over half aren't. Some are even example of "pisionic" creatures which can deal damage at the cost of hurting themselves.

    Black's argument I would say is even sillier. Black cares about mana, I would say it is secondary for mana generation along with red, primary being green. Though Wizards has clearly chosen to move rituals out of black, for the most part, that isn't true completely and black has plenty of cards that give a huge burst of mana for a short time, especially when it involves sac creatures to fuel their "rituals". A rough gatherer search comes up with 40 different cards that black uses to generate mana, many of which that do appear in "newer" sets like Time Sprawl and Torment where the color pies were more defined at least compared to earlier magic. I wouldn't deny that typically black doesn't accomplish this without paying some type of price, in retrospec I am sure Dark Ritual doesn't convey the flavor of greatness at any cost, like cards like Promise of power in the respect that black can have an incredibly flexible color pie if they sacrifice a creature, land, or pay some life. I don't fee this invalidates previous arguments though.

    Early magic was rough, especially when it comes down to flavor. If a rule is made to try and capture flavor, in a card game, or any game, it is never going to be 100% accurate. Sometimes mechanics and balance can interfere or interrupt flavor in card design.

    Harmonize I feel isn't very farfetched either. It is spot on for flavor, you are harnessing mana from the land to communicate with nature or through mediation to receive this knowledge. Considering Green is secondary, with black, in the color pie to receive card draw I don't see that as much of a stretch. Many many green cards generate card advantage, though this is closely tied to flavor and mechanics in green. Green cares about lands and creatures mostly, so many of their card advantage abilities reflect this Mulch and Commune with Nature are good examples of this, even if its not "drawing" while cards like Regal Force provide straight card drawing without being specific on type, though it has requirements to meet. Planar Chaos was meant to be a set that delved into flavor if the color pie was envisioned slightly different, but not completely alien. Many of these cards fit flavor perfectly Damnation being one of them as you mentioned. Though it wasn't common for black to have boardwipes very often, or for so cheap. It was later allowed black to be a stronger board wipe color as it leeched in later in different cards like Life's Finale.

    In conclusion I just feel like people try to seek counter arguments using whatever they can find. No argument is ironclad and that is why in my first post I said you should look at "current" flavor of the color pie, I stated out many magic designers, including Maro didn't agree with the hybrid restriction in EDH, but when you get cards like Spitting Image or Dominus of Fealty or Drain the Well or even Sygg, River Cutthroat . Many of these cards work just fine in one of their colors as a mono but not very well in mono of the other or are weird combinations of their color pies. Green getting clone of anything and a token? Blue gaining control of something and giving haste for a turn? Green being able to destroy a land? Blue drawing cards based on suffering? Some of these cards honestly feel like they should be straight multicolored not hybrid based on their abilities.


    I wouldn't use any cards from Time Spiral block or outside of modern as examples of representing mechanics in colors. Modern represents about the last decade's worth of magic give or take a few months and about half of magic's lifespan. If anything is representative of the color pie and mechanics, it should exist there. Of course Time Spiral is the exception as it's a set that is based upon nostalgia and as such many cards will reference older ones. As such, they aren't examples of what is acceptable under the current philosophy. Thus I find your defense of blue direct damage and black rituals to be unsubstantial. Blue doesn't have direct damage anymore and black doesn't have fast mana. Black does still have slower and/or conditional mana though which I think you actually agree with.

    Anyways, your examples here regarding hybrid cards are also flawed. For the most part, hybrid cards can easily fall within either of the two colors. It's disingenuous to use the few isolated exceptions as a mark against the rest of the cards, not that the ones you listed even fall under the exceptions. Let's go through each of them:

    Spitting Image: Green regularly makes copies of creatures. Most of the time it happens with tokens. Doubling Season Parallel Lives and the populate mechanic. But it also happens with self replicating creatures as well as finding more copies of a specific creature. Giant Adephage Sprouting Phytohydra Spawnwrithe Essence of the Wild Doubling Chant Nissa Revane Working with creatures is green's forte. Straight up making copies of creatures is only a small step further than what green does on a regular basis. Also keep in mind that rare cards are allowed to have more leeway and less rigidity than commons and uncommons.

    Dominous of Fealty: Do you really have a problem with blue taking control of things temporarily? This limited duration is weaker than most blue control effects. If a color can do something, then why can't it do a weaker version of it? Granting haste is simply there to make the temporary control change actually useful in game play.

    Drain the Well: You really want to contest that green can't destroy lands? Acidic Slime Creeping Mold Feast of Worms Mwonvuli Acid-Moss Rain of Thorns Reap and Sow Rolling Spoil Bramblecrush Mold Shambler Rootgrapple Sylvan Primordial Terastodon Woodfall Primus

    Syg, River Cutthroat: Yes, because blue drawing cards from damage hasn't happened. Nope. Never. Not even once.


    The problem with Dominous wasn't with Act of Treason part it was the haste part. Each of those cards I mentioned feel more like a blend of cards than they do.

    Drain the Well: Was more the fact that Green typically doesn't get "just lands" Destroy non-creature permanent is a slightly different flavor. I indeed forget about Feast of Worms.

    Syg, that honestly didn't prove a point at all. The flavor behind ALL those cards is reconnaissance and scouting. Probing the enemy for weakness. Flavor wise Life loss and damage dealt are different. Syg's ability doesn't involve reconnaissance in essence because it can trigger without any creature "scouting"

    The Spitting Image: is another flavor fair. Clones and copies flavorwise are very different. Doubling Season isn't extra tokens not clones of other things. Same with ALL THE OTHER cards you mentioned, they are more about reproduction than they are mimics and clones. Furthermore none of those target your opponent's things.

    The main set of Time Spiral didn't violate any color pies, older sets can NOT be dismissed so easily. They all fit withing flavor. Honestly I would appreciate if you follow this by flavor wise not "Oh this looks similar so you are WRONG". Straight up destroying a land is very different than destroying a non-creature permanent both mechanically and flavorfully. So are scout abilities.


    Well, if you're insist on including older sets, then your points are even weaker.

    Magus of the Unseen Overtaker Ray of Command Reins of Power all give haste. Do you still have a problem with Dominus now?

    Ice Storm Thermokarst Winter's Grasp are green and only destroy lands. Happy? Seriously though, if something can do A, B, and C, why do you have a problem if it only does A without B or C once in a while?

    You are far over-dramatizing the flavor difference between loss of life and damage. It is true that they are different, but mechanically they play very similarly. Loss of life allows Syg to trigger in more situations, it can be an example of wotc wanting to push it's power level a bit. If you want to argue flavor, rogue and rogue behavior has a long tradition in blue. Syg's ability to draw cards comes from being a rogue. So what's wrong with Syg being in blue?

    If I'm understanding your issue with spitting image correctly, you have no problems with the card being mechanically green, but you do have a problem with the card being flavorfully green right? In any case, green can create copies.

    I agree that most of the cards from time spiral don't violate the color pie, but your examples of direct damage in blue comes from the only 2 cards in over 10 years that have that mechanic. Those two cards are clearly nostalgic references to old cards. Direct damage is not part of blue's color pie, neither flavorfully nor mechanically. A decade is a long time, and the modern cardpool is even slightly over half of magic's lifespan. If something hasn't been done by wizards in a decade, then it's pretty safe to say that they don't think it belongs in that color anymore.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on The Hybrid Mana debate
    Quote from Yoishan

    I feel like your own argument is a bit flawed. Both of the examples you brought up Dark Ritual and Prodigal Sorcerer are not alone examples of those mechanics in those sets nor were they abandoned when the color pie was more enforced in later sets.

    Blue is obviously not primary or secondary in dealing damage, but it is part of their color pie, even if it is rarely. Doing a gatherer search you can come up with roughly 30 examples of blue dealing direct damage. While most of these ARE older cards there are quite a few newer examples (modern), such as Fledgling Mawcor and are roughly 18 or 19 examples of blue creatures being able to do this. Flavor wise it is their mastery of magic and the arcane that allow them to "bend" the rules a bit. I will not deny this is not a common treat but nor would I say it is incredibly farfetched. Some of the creatures are considered "multi-colored" in the purpose of color identity but I would say over half aren't. Some are even example of "pisionic" creatures which can deal damage at the cost of hurting themselves.

    Black's argument I would say is even sillier. Black cares about mana, I would say it is secondary for mana generation along with red, primary being green. Though Wizards has clearly chosen to move rituals out of black, for the most part, that isn't true completely and black has plenty of cards that give a huge burst of mana for a short time, especially when it involves sac creatures to fuel their "rituals". A rough gatherer search comes up with 40 different cards that black uses to generate mana, many of which that do appear in "newer" sets like Time Sprawl and Torment where the color pies were more defined at least compared to earlier magic. I wouldn't deny that typically black doesn't accomplish this without paying some type of price, in retrospec I am sure Dark Ritual doesn't convey the flavor of greatness at any cost, like cards like Promise of power in the respect that black can have an incredibly flexible color pie if they sacrifice a creature, land, or pay some life. I don't fee this invalidates previous arguments though.

    Early magic was rough, especially when it comes down to flavor. If a rule is made to try and capture flavor, in a card game, or any game, it is never going to be 100% accurate. Sometimes mechanics and balance can interfere or interrupt flavor in card design.

    Harmonize I feel isn't very farfetched either. It is spot on for flavor, you are harnessing mana from the land to communicate with nature or through mediation to receive this knowledge. Considering Green is secondary, with black, in the color pie to receive card draw I don't see that as much of a stretch. Many many green cards generate card advantage, though this is closely tied to flavor and mechanics in green. Green cares about lands and creatures mostly, so many of their card advantage abilities reflect this Mulch and Commune with Nature are good examples of this, even if its not "drawing" while cards like Regal Force provide straight card drawing without being specific on type, though it has requirements to meet. Planar Chaos was meant to be a set that delved into flavor if the color pie was envisioned slightly different, but not completely alien. Many of these cards fit flavor perfectly Damnation being one of them as you mentioned. Though it wasn't common for black to have boardwipes very often, or for so cheap. It was later allowed black to be a stronger board wipe color as it leeched in later in different cards like Life's Finale.

    In conclusion I just feel like people try to seek counter arguments using whatever they can find. No argument is ironclad and that is why in my first post I said you should look at "current" flavor of the color pie, I stated out many magic designers, including Maro didn't agree with the hybrid restriction in EDH, but when you get cards like Spitting Image or Dominus of Fealty or Drain the Well or even Sygg, River Cutthroat . Many of these cards work just fine in one of their colors as a mono but not very well in mono of the other or are weird combinations of their color pies. Green getting clone of anything and a token? Blue gaining control of something and giving haste for a turn? Green being able to destroy a land? Blue drawing cards based on suffering? Some of these cards honestly feel like they should be straight multicolored not hybrid based on their abilities.


    I wouldn't use any cards from Time Spiral block or outside of modern as examples of representing mechanics in colors. Modern represents about the last decade's worth of magic give or take a few months and about half of magic's lifespan. If anything is representative of the color pie and mechanics, it should exist there. Of course Time Spiral is the exception as it's a set that is based upon nostalgia and as such many cards will reference older ones. As such, they aren't examples of what is acceptable under the current philosophy. Thus I find your defense of blue direct damage and black rituals to be unsubstantial. Blue doesn't have direct damage anymore and black doesn't have fast mana. Black does still have slower and/or conditional mana though which I think you actually agree with.

    Anyways, your examples here regarding hybrid cards are also flawed. For the most part, hybrid cards can easily fall within either of the two colors. It's disingenuous to use the few isolated exceptions as a mark against the rest of the cards, not that the ones you listed even fall under the exceptions. Let's go through each of them:

    Spitting Image: Green regularly makes copies of creatures. Most of the time it happens with tokens. Doubling Season Parallel Lives and the populate mechanic. But it also happens with self replicating creatures as well as finding more copies of a specific creature. Giant Adephage Sprouting Phytohydra Spawnwrithe Essence of the Wild Doubling Chant Nissa Revane Working with creatures is green's forte. Straight up making copies of creatures is only a small step further than what green does on a regular basis. Also keep in mind that rare cards are allowed to have more leeway and less rigidity than commons and uncommons.

    Dominous of Fealty: Do you really have a problem with blue taking control of things temporarily? This limited duration is weaker than most blue control effects. If a color can do something, then why can't it do a weaker version of it? Granting haste is simply there to make the temporary control change actually useful in game play.

    Drain the Well: You really want to contest that green can't destroy lands? Acidic Slime Creeping Mold Feast of Worms Mwonvuli Acid-Moss Rain of Thorns Reap and Sow Rolling Spoil Bramblecrush Mold Shambler Rootgrapple Sylvan Primordial Terastodon Woodfall Primus

    Syg, River Cutthroat: Yes, because blue drawing cards from damage hasn't happened. Nope. Never. Not even once.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on The Hybrid Mana debate
    Quote from MRHblue
    How would you decide to allow "all the flavorful choices" without removing Color Identity?



    To put it simply, I wouldn't. I know that I'm in the extreme minority when it comes to suggesting that rule 3 be removed, but all the suggestions of tweaking rule 3 to accommodate exceptions such as hybrid mana are just band-aid solutions to what I see as a major deficiency. So for me, removing it entirely is the best solution. People will still be restricted in what they can cast because of rule 4.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on The Hybrid Mana debate
    Quote from Zaphrasz
    Hybrid cards are multiple colors at all times. It seems akin to letting a monoblack deck run Iona, Shield of Emeria because it could Reanimate it.


    I would be okay with this. We already allow plenty of unflavorful card choices under the current rules while also disallowing some flavorful ones. My stance is that it's better to allow all the flavorful choices even if it means that we allow some more unflavorful ones. After all, the current line where we draw the flavor is based upon templating. I for one hope that wizards forces the issue. They certainly could have with the extort mechanic, but decided against it.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on The Hybrid Mana debate
    Well, I wrote up a long post about it, but it was just me reiterating things that I've posted many times in the past. So here's a summary. Rules 3 and 4 overlap and are largely redundant. I would be okay with either going away and getting rid of rule 3 would allow hybrids to be played which is the point of this thread. I have two major problems with rule 3. Rule 3 exists to enforce flavor; however it also creates situations where cards cannot be included in decks where they are flavorful. I find this deficiency to be unacceptable since flavor is the reason behind the rule in the first place. The second problem is that rule 3 is based upon templating. This means that wizards can print functionally identical cards that would not be allowed in the same deck.

    For example:

    Bant Bear A 1G
    Creature - Bear
    You may only spend only W, U, G, or colorless mana to cast Bant Bear A
    2/2

    and

    Bant Bear B 1G
    Creature - Bear
    You may not spend B or R mana to cast Bant Bear B

    So because of these reasons, I would be perfectly happy to see Rule 3 removed. Rule 4 still imposes heavy restrictions on deck building. Sure it would allow the phyrexian mana cards and 2 mana hybrid cards to be played in off color decks, but so be it.

    I suppose a good way to put it is that I'd rather have some unflavorful cards allowed along with all flavorful cards rather than excluding some flavorful cards along with the unflavorful ones. Also let's face it, there are plenty of unflavorful cards that can be played even with rule 3 in place as it currently is.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[MCD]] Official Primordials thread
    Quote from donfuan

    That's true. What happened to good old tap symbol ? I'm fine with creatures having activated or passive abilities, but all that etb crazyness is getting out of hand really. :/


    It's because removal is really efficient* which results in having to make creatures that give immediate value so that people will play them. Well even the activated abilities these days are super efficient. Hello Scavenging Ooze and Deathrite Shaman.

    *(The existence of such mana efficient creatures that have super mega value etb effects also contributes to this issue. Wotc can't really lower the power level of removal since that would result in creatures being unstoppable. I'm sure you can even people that agree that creatures are already unstoppable even with the removal that wotc prints nowadays.)
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[MCD]] Official Primordials thread
    Quote from Zeri
    Quote from liquid_water
    And yes, bribery is OP, that's all i've been hearing about for the last 5 years. Seriously, 99% of the time "card x seems fun, but then someone casts bribery and then it becomes bad."


    Bribery is a deterrent to creatures like titans and Primordials....its only as good as the targets your opponent run.


    I do feel EDH has become about these super value ETB creatures...and that is a bad thing IMO, because the better these creatures become the archtypes that stop them keep getting worse and worse new cards.


    Wotc just needs to stop pushing the power level of creatures and making everything a sorcery or instant with legs.

    Honestly, would a 7 mana sorcery that read "destroy 3 target noncreature permanents, search your library for 3 forests and put them onto the battlefield tapped" ever see print? I sure wouldn't think so given what sorcery cards have seen print and how they are costed. If that wasn't enough, imagine if it also made a giant token with reach that puts a copy of the spell onto the stack everytime it gets blinked. Seriously, what were they thinking?

    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[MCD]] Mindbreak Trap vs Time Stop
    Quote from Monkmiroku
    Correct! Sundial is OP, but limited that it can not be used n your tyen


    Time stop won't effect "next end strp" stuff, as when you stop the turn you skip the current end step, but then during the next players end step, the effect will fall off. At "end of turn" effects, you never see the end of your turn, so it lasts indefinitely.

    Otherwise sundial would be useless look at Unearth and sundial if your not convinced. Sundial is a pretty big staple for Sedris (even though I don't use sundial in my sedris)

    This is incorrect.

    It is impossible for an "until end of turn" effect to last past the current turn, except in silver border land.

    Here's the relevant portion from the comp rules:
    Quote from comp rules »

    713.1. Two cards (Time Stop and Sundial of the Infinite) end the turn. When an effect ends the turn, follow these steps in order, as they differ from the normal process for resolving spells and abilities (see rule 608, "Resolving Spells and Abilities").

    713.1a Exile every object on the stack, including the object that's resolving. Remove all creatures and planeswalkers (including those that are phased out) from combat. All objects not on the battlefield or in the command zone that aren't represented by cards will cease to exist the next time state-based actions are checked (see rule 704, "State-Based Actions").

    713.1b Check state-based actions. No player gets priority, and no triggered abilities are put onto the stack.

    713.1c The current phase and/or step ends. The game skips straight to the cleanup step. Skip any phases or steps between this phase or step and the cleanup step.

    713.2. No player gets priority during this process, so triggered abilities are not put onto the stack. If any triggered abilities have triggered between the spell or ability resolving and the cleanup step ending, those abilities are put onto the stack during the cleanup step, then the active player gets priority and players can cast spells and activate abilities. Then there will be another cleanup step before the turn finally ends. If no triggered abilities have triggered during this process, no player gets priority during the cleanup step. See rule 514, "Cleanup Step."

    713.3. Even though the turn ends, "at the beginning of the end step" triggered abilities don't trigger because the end step is skipped.


    As stated in 713.1c, the game skips to the cleanup step. This is when "until end of turn" effects are removed. In your example regarding unearth, the effect is a delayed trigger at the end step and not "until end of turn." Since you skip to the cleanup step when resolving "end the turn" the end step is skipped altogether so anything that would trigger at the the beginning of the end step doesn't.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Was not expecting the hate on MTGO
    Definitely sounds like an extreme case. Although I think it's fair to say that Talrand looks suspiciously threatening when playing a lot of cantrips and generally going through a lot of cards. Even if you're not playing a combo, it can appear that you are to other players.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Question: How to deal with Brewer's Block?
    I'm currently stuck at step 2 actually...

    I find my biggest problem is that I don't have a live person to talk to, toss ideas around, help test, etc. When I do have someone to actually interact with the process goes much faster for me.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from Ryujin
    If we're going to start banning "broken" engines we're going to be here a while.
    Maybe we can just trade Iona for Servant, as she's terrible anyway?


    The only real problem when people bring up Iona and Servant is when they're fetched off of Tooth and Nail. In other situations they're not any better than any of the other 2 card combos that exist out there. When people call for a ban on Iona, my point is that it would be far more productive to simply ban Tooth and Nail.

    I'm not advocating for a ban on engines in general and it's disingenuous to imply that I'm doing so. That being said, I certainly wouldn't shed any tears if many of the combo engines out there did get banned.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from Wildfire393




    Your post is incredibly difficult to read so I'll just address the main question:
    Why is it important that all T&N combos have a removal-based answer?
    So that there is interaction with the card other than just countermagic.

    I strongly believe in the power of self-regulation, and having the option to break up T&N combos with removal makes it a very regulatable card. With Iona-Servant, it's not, and that's pretty toxic to the format in my opinion.


    Wizards learned a long time ago that the best course of action when banning cards is to simply take out the engine and not the win conditions. Tooth and Nail is the real problem here. Taking that card out of the equation will solve a lot more problems than taking Iona out.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from Tazriel
    Colorless answers are by default less efficient than colored answers. The threat presented by Iona's mere existence in the format, regardless of how often you see her, requires mono color decks to run these inefficient solutions. Why the hell would I run Duplicant or god forbid Spine of Ish Sah in a mono-red deck, which has no way to copy (Kiki is a glaring exception) or recur it? Before you say Ulamog, I would counter that red's abundance of threaten effects, combined with lots of sac outlets are a much better answer to giant scary beatsticks. That's playing to red's strengths. No such solution exists for Iona -- you have to run clunky colorless removal instead.

    And hope that you can actually draw it without using tutors or non-colorless card draw.

    And hope you didn't already use it on another threat.

    Mono colored decklists that want to compete are already pretty rigid, because you don't get the same cardpool depth as multicolor decks. Add a suite of "run this or die to Iona" cards and I'd say you've seriously stifled deck diversity. Couple all this with the fact that mono colored decks are inherently underpowered compared to multicolor decks. In fact, the strongest mono color, blue, is best equipped to deal with Iona because they can interact with her on the stack (I don't mean to Dash Hopes but Withering Boon and Mana Tithe are too narrow).

    So what does she contribute to the format? What useful role does she fill?

    As far as I'm concerned, unban Painter and ban Iona. Ban grindstone if you must. Painter is just a much more interesting card, which actually allows for creative interactions. Iona is just a boring card which hurts the weakest decks.

    There's nothing forcing you to run any colorless removal. If you don't want to include any of the available answers in your deck then don't. But doing so in mono color decks means that you accept the fact that sometimes you'll run into Iona and you won't be able to deal with her. Iona isn't even the only problematic card out there. What happens when you run into a Sphinx of the Steel Wind as mono red, concede?
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on [[Official]] General Discussion of the Official Multiplayer Banlist
    Quote from frodooftheshire
    Ahh darn was typing to fast and never even thought which enforces my pint even more. And reallly why would any green deck run all is dust or disc? Most green decks rely on their boards remaining and maturing over the period of the game to do well and requiring a player to put cards into a deck just to combat a single card is another reason for banning anyway. I wouldn't need to put any colorless removal into my deck for any reason besides her. And to people saying that it is more unlikely for mono colored decks I can personally say that from my experience 30% of decks are mono colored 40% are dual and %30 are tri. Therefore this card shuts down 30% of decks majorly messes up %40 of decks and is mediocre but strong against the last %30. Back to my original point though, Primeval Titan is banned when Iona is not. PT does not cause anyone to ahve to play certain cards to stop it, he doesn't shut people out of games, has trample instead of flying, doesn't have haste whiche would be nuts, and is played in decks 80% of the time that can't counter your targeted removal. So tell me, how is his banning justified when a card like Iona is not?


    Just think about your position for a moment. You're asking for a card that's not played in nearly every deck of it's color and good against less than 1/3 of the decks in your particular field to be banned. If you are playing a mono color deck, there is plenty of reason to include colorless and artifact answers besides Iona. What happens when someone drops a Sphinx of the Steel Wind and you're mono green or red? Do you just scoop on the spot? I'm not a fan of the old "run more answers" argument, but I do think that it's appropriate if you have to run some answers instead of being able to completely ignore the card pool and consequences of running a deck with certain colors.

    Also, I have no idea why you keep comparing Iona to PT, the only similarity between them is that they're both creatures. The raw power level of PT is astronomical when compared to Iona. PT is a 3 for 1 at a minimum when it hits the battlefield.

    To address your points more specifically, PT does in fact cause people to run certain cards in order to stop it. In fact, the cards that do stop it are for more specialized and fewer in number than the cards that a deck can use to stop Iona. Outside of Torpor Orb and Humility, how exactly do you propose a deck stop PT without running certain cards?

    It also shuts players out of the game more insidiously than Iona. Unlike Iona which is overt and direct in its effect, PT appears more innocent; however the result of its existence is anything but innocent. PT isn't a card that hits battlefield, eats removal, and then the game moves on. No, PT is a card that will be Bribery'd, Cloned, Reanimated, Kiki-Jiki'd, Tooth and Nail'd (usually along with its best buddy Avenger of Zendikar), Blinked, etc. Anyone that doesn't have those effects on hand will fall extremely far behind. More often than not, those players have no chance at getting back into the game. Being 2-4 turns behind everyone else is not a good place to be.

    Having Trample instead of Flying is largely irrelevant. Connecting with PT is far less important than simply being able to attack with it in the first place to trigger its ability.

    Yes, it doesn't have haste, except when it does.

    Finally, "dies to removal" is not exactly a compelling or novel argument. It's a creature, the most easily abused card type in magic. The thing about PT is that you don't have to protect it to gain value. You simply have to let it hit the battlefield. Getting to attack with it is just a nice bonus. Killing it is rarely effective as recursion is so prevalent. Exile is the ideal solution but hard to achieve against certain decks that are built to handle it. Sacrifice outlets makes exiling from the battlefield pretty much impossible and graveyard exile are generally one shot effects or on board tricks which aren't difficult to play around.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.