If an effect allows an opponent to play anything off the top of my library and they play a land for example, when that player leaves the game that land would revert control back to me correct?
Hi I am doing a project for a class analyzing standard decks and I was wondering if anyone had a list of the names of tier 1 decks over the past few years
it's funny, most of our playgroup has this unwritten rule as well, and there's no single card or combo in my deck that is specifically unfun, but every deck i seem to make seems to fall under this category. Apparently, even a mono green deck that runs 6~7 mana flare effects and untaps its lands multiple times to swing with several large hastey, flying green fatties is the definition of unfun and not timmy. (and no, it's not a rofellos deck either)
This has literally led me to believe that the unfun rule is bull☺☺☺☺ and people just don't like losing.
I say the opposite of this should happen. If someone wants to play absolutely nothing but land and creatures and all they think should be allowed is just playing dudes and swinging, they should not be allowed to play in the group.
The problem is there are countless degrees of "unfun" ranging from the type of player I just gave an example of to the hardcore combo player that basically just goldfishes against the group. I would much rather play against the combo and hope that I have ways to disrupt it because atleast if they do combo, the game isn't going to last 4 hours. Bleh.
We are not that extreme in our definition of "unfun" it's more of cards like Teeg or other stuff that slows the game down unnecessarily or massively shuts down to most of the table. And of course infinite combos and mass land destruction.
There's a very simple way to express disapproval towards a given card or combo: don't play games with the guy using it. They'll get the message pretty quickly. After all, EDH is a fun casual format, so if this combo is runing your fun, there's no reason to expose yourself to it.
We have adopted this policy in my playgroup to great effect. If anyone wants to play griefer combos/cards they can play them elsewhere and so far nobody has tried to play super unfun cards/combos
Me and my playgroup are currently arguing about Oust. We are trying to decide whether "second from the top" means that it is 2nd from the top card, meaning it is 3 cards down or if it is right under the top card of your library
800.4. Unlike two-player games, multiplayer games can continue after one or more players have left the
game.
800.4a. When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the
game, all spells and abilities controlled by that player on the stack cease to exist, and any
change-of-control effects which give that player control of any objects end. Then, if there are
any objects still controlled by that player, those objects are exiled. This is not a state-based
action. It happens as soon as the player leaves the game. If the player who left the game had
priority at the time he or she left, priority passes to the next player in turn order who’s still in the
game.
Thank you very much!
We are not that extreme in our definition of "unfun" it's more of cards like Teeg or other stuff that slows the game down unnecessarily or massively shuts down to most of the table. And of course infinite combos and mass land destruction.
We have adopted this policy in my playgroup to great effect. If anyone wants to play griefer combos/cards they can play them elsewhere and so far nobody has tried to play super unfun cards/combos