A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
 
Exclusive: Sword of Truth and Justice
  • posted a message on Wishes
    The "clean" method is the third option purposed by Ava, even stated by Wednesday as being the "cleanest".

    Its also the option that provides the least power to wishes if given a purpose, its also the option that requires no card banned, its also an option that requires no wishboard, its also an option that is the least likely to cause a big price spike, its already had a precedent which means using those rules is not that out there really. Its literally the safest option if change were to occur.

    It can be argued the logistics of it, like what caused the social contract mess of an argument in the first place, but it still remains the better method purposed. Also that the only counter arguments to it are literally: Citing rules 0 and 13.

    Also Blue are you really going down this route? Because Karn, the Great Creator is a modern day wish spell, just like Coax from the Blind Eternities. They are wish spells that also retrieve from exile. That what they are doing is the modern equivalent of the very same function prior to magic 2010 like if a spell was RFG with swords to plowshares. Fancy that. Its almost like your argument about me not knowing how wishes worked was a hugely false statement in a poor man's attempt to discredit me.

    Also on the Shahrazad thing, don't talk about unrelated stuff that no bearing on the discussion, simple as that. Keep it on subject Blue or don't post it at all. If Blue wants to defend his unrelated topic to make it have relevance, they are contributing less than I was.

    In fact both MHRBlue and Kamino_Taka have contributed very little in this revived discussion aside from thanking each other as if that gives them credibility. The only ones who seem to be actually doing the legwork for this discussion are Ava, ForgottenOne, and CrimsonWings_3689. Which is two in favor of wishes, one against wishes. I don't include myself as I will admit that I mostly just been the peanut gallery for this discussion.

    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. Also that is fools talk to suggest unbanning Shahrazad as an equivalent to allowing a wish, one is an abusable minigame while the other is a tutor for exile and wishboarded cards. Man this thread is truly the one that keeps on giving.

    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Wishes
    This just keeps getting better and better.
    Quote from Kamino_Taka »
    If you allow this set of cards, then you allow people breaking the social contract and the normalization of that.
    Quote from MRHblue »
    MRHblue: "If you want to use these cards, use the social contract"

    Also MRHblue: "Its not about the social contract, nobody can agree on that."
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on Ilharg, the Raze-Boar (Let's Brew!)
    Quote from Crypt Rat »
    I'd say put Stuffy Doll on the list. Attacking with it has always been a good way to force through a ton of damage when wielded politically, but it always had the problem where it would be tricky to reset and it was often a bit too slow to react once it's clear who needs to be chunked. 0-mana haste Doll in the right spot can be big game, especially if the table is trying to chunk someone from under a Ghostly Prison. Additionally, if you don't need that precise immediate utility it can still be deployed as a wall to hold the fort while you jam sideways with your commander. I would imagine that a mono-red deck would be leveraging looting effects to filter its draws so with a sufficient critical mass of these, the Doll can be ditched when it's too early for it to make relevant plays. Any sort of Goblin Welder / Daretti shell could also recur it later in those cases if there were an existing artifact creature shell to build onto (Steel Hellkite?).
    Added the voodoo doll of doom to the list.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Wishes
    Don't mind me I'm just getting the popcorn for this.
    Quote from Ava »
    Quote from MRHBlue »
    Players should behave by asking.
    Players should behave in general in the format.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    Keep them in a separate kind of sleeves, maybe even penny sleeves, or maybe no sleeves at all to keep the card outside the deck. Also works in that you could have a penny-sleeved or unsleeved deck but you have a few sleeves like for your commander and now a few cards in your wishboard/lamp to differentiate them.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    The bigger of a wishboard/lamp, the more its going to just stagnate. After all, keeping it smaller keeps them from being the same. Having only 3 actual slots to use means you need to pick your cards more wisely instead of just shoving mostly goodstuff cards to fill in the slots. Also this is based on Sheldon's way of thinking, wanting to see less of the same for meta decks, but in this case with wishboards/lamps. After all the whole format is based on building off of restrictions unless you disagree with that.

    Also you know right? 3 wishes, magical lamp, genies, phenomal cosmic power. Those sort of tropes? It resonates a lot better in the mind and is easier to remember than 5 or 7 or 10 wishes.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Ramaz
    I did ask about how Ramaz fits within all this a few days ago, but got no reply from Doug and Mark.
    Posted in: Magic Storyline
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    I'm going to throw out a slightly modified version of what ForgottenOne designed.

    13. Since games of Commander are played without sideboards, abilities which refer to other cards owned outside the games (Wishes, Spawnsire, Research, Ring of Ma'ruf, etc.) function in Commander with the following rules:

    The player must have what is called a "lamp" of no more than 3 cards prepared before the start of the match so as to not delay the game.
    The cards in your "lamp" must conform to the color identity of your commander (see Rule 3)
    The cards in your "lamp" do not count as part of your 100-card deck (see Rule 4)
    The cards in your "lamp" may not be in your 100-card deck and vice versa (see Rule 5)
    The cards in your "lamp" must be legal in Commander.
    Sounds fun don't it? A magic lamp where you can get up to three of your magic wishes granted from a special item or benefactor. A special vault that could contain nearly anything.

    Outside of lore reasons, I prefer to view 3 as the right number. Its enough for you to pack the three cards you would truly need. Also that constraints build creativity. 10 or 15 cards feels excessive and would likely lead to stagnation of the lamp. With only 3 cards, you must 'word your wishes wisely', when in a familiar or unfamiliar meta. Do you store a more generic card in your lamp if uncertain, or do you risk it and store a more specific kind of card in the lamp that might never be played once that evening.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Ravnica Allegiance (RNA) and War of the Spark (WAR) General Discussion
    Chandra could probably make a more convincing half-human or even non-human based on her on-fire appearance than a lot of others. Perhaps shes a half-breed like half-efreet or half-flamekin, or maybe shes an entirely new race that simply resembles a human if they also had their hair on fire all the time. That is just me spitballing a couple ideas in a couple minutes of thinking about it not too deeply.

    Speaking of the two examples, can we get an efreet and/or flamekin planeswalker? Pretty sure Ashling is still alive and is no longer a cinder.
    Posted in: Magic Storyline
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    If the worry is anti-social use of a wish, then you use the gentleman's agreement in a non-CEDH non-Competitive environment. Simple as that. If it can be done with combo, stax, land destruction, and anything else in the format, a wish following this agreement won't break the metaphorical camel's back.


    Call me crazy, but your suggestion could easily be used in a non-competitive, friendly game of magic with the agreement to allow wish cards/boards. Every point arguing for the use of wishes can be alleviated with play groups agreeing to allow them. Almost like the RC/CAG didn't ban them to make it easier to facilitate that. The pro-wish group just doesn't want to be told no whenever they show up to a random group or LGS with wish cards and a sideboard for them; they want their view to be the norm and the current anti-wish ruling to be the unusual occurrence. Flipping the coin as it were.
    Because asking if you can use a wish for its actual intended purpose, instead of rule 13, puts it in a similar territory to asking if you can play with a planeswalker as your commander that isn't normally one.

    Yet like you quoted me but also skirted around what I said, you should still just use the Gentleman's Agreement, simple as that. If a person is being obnoxious with a particular type of deck or card, you ask them to swap the deck or card out. If they can't, someone at the table offers them a deck, if they won't take it then ask them to kindly sit out of the game. Like a reasonable human being. Now apply this to wishboards and wishes and its not hard to understand, downright simple in fact.

    In fact humor for me a bit.

    Hypothetical: I create a new rule, #111. "If you would search your libary for a land card and that card would be put it into any other zone, you fail to find the card in your search instead."

    There I just blanked every mana ramp card. If you want to play mana ramp spells, you got to ask the permission of the table first. After all, The pro-rampers just want to play their ramp spells without being told no; they want their view to be the norm and the current anti-ramp ruling to be the unusual occurrence. Flipping the coin as it were.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Ravnica Allegiance (RNA) and War of the Spark (WAR) General Discussion
    Fair enough, I am just also illustrating the point that the amount of non-humans is smaller than what is actually illustrated. Not that it goes the audience's expectations. Also just me thinking about it in how easily 5 of those 6 are humans turned into something less human, 1 was just born that way. Assuming anyway Ashiok was, not is, human prior to becoming what they are.
    Posted in: Magic Storyline
  • posted a message on April 2019 Banlist & Rules Updates
    If the worry is anti-social use of a wish, then you use the gentleman's agreement in a non-CEDH non-Competitive environment. Simple as that. If it can be done with combo, stax, land destruction, and anything else in the format, a wish following this agreement won't break the metaphorical camel's back.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Ravnica Allegiance (RNA) and War of the Spark (WAR) General Discussion
    Quote from 5colors »
    Arlinn is still human unless in werewolf form. Sorin Markov is a human whose spark ignited upon being transformed into a vampire.


    Here and the user commenting about dwarfs I think is really splitting hairs. Almost all of these races are based in existing fantasy lore and myth. We would except a werewolf to have a human and wolf form, we except dwarfs to just be short and often beard humans, we except elves are tall humans with pointy ears, we except a vampire to have once been human. Would it be better for Sorin to have once been an elf?
    You mean of the 20 supposed "non-human" walkers, 6 or 30% or close to 1/3rd of them are/were/maybe human? Really does sting don't it.

    Also I really hope you aren't using that "any fantasy race can be a human if you deconstruct it hard enough" argument. Because thats a game you will lose.
    Posted in: Magic Storyline
  • posted a message on [POLL] Planeswalkers as playable generals
    Quote from cryogen »
    What if they just created a new supertype called commander and used it instead of legendary for planeswalkers. That the rules with a commander planeswalker is that they follow the same rules as a legendary creature, but they can also be in the 99. However they can't be played in Vintage, Legacy, Modern, and Standard. Then they just do functional reprints of past versions of planeswalkers with this type that they reprinted before like those from the three mythic editions.

    Too many issues with that:

    - type line spacenis limited and would limit what other card type info you included
    - what do you do with the 700+ generals already? If you add the super type then you're doing functional errata
    Well if it was applied to every creature instead of legendary, the word commander is the same number of letters, 9 for 9. But I wasn't speaking of adding that to creatures, just using it on "new" planeswalkers that are a functional reprint of an older one but only legal for the commander format. Perhaps a simple visual demonstration of what I meant?

    Jace, Sculptor of Minds 2UU
    Commander Planeswalker - Jace (MR)
    +2: Look at the top card of target player's library. You may put that card on the bottom of that player's library.
    0: Draw three cards, then put two cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.
    -1: Return target creature to its owner's hand.
    -12: Exile all cards from target player's library, then that player shuffles his or her hand into his or her library.
    [3]

    Basically Jace, the Mind Sculptor but legal only for this format and can be the commander of a deck.
    Posted in: Commander Rules Discussion Forum
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.