I get what youre saying, but I think the two groups come from very different point of views. The first group will always comment on modern, standard, edh or w/e their format is. That's just the inherent nature of spoiler season. The latter isnt referring to playability, formats, or how pushed any one command may be, but its more of the Magical type A personality where you like nice clean definitions and consistency. Atarka's command and dromoka's command muddle the lines between charm and command to some people.
I personally tend to agree with the "theyre like charms" crowd. There had seemed to be a prescedent that commands were whatever color(s) with at least in the mana cost and charms simply cost 1 of each necessary color. The overlap just bothers me. Now the only difference between charms and commands is choose 1 of 3 vs. choose 2 of 4.
I agree with this and would like to add that those two groups aren't mutually exclusive. One argument is based on mechanics/playability and the other is more of a flavor/semantics issue. I can think a command isn't pushed enough and think it's too much like a charm. If they made them cost more and gave them stronger effects for the cost, they could potentially meet both criteria, but they didn't think that was a good idea.
I often play cards I don't like and vice versa. It just goes to show how hard it is to design a cards that fits players' expectations/desires AND is competitively costed for the effect.
To me the Commands were big expensive sorceries (Cryptic being the exception), not piddly little instants.
They feel more like Charms to me.
As much as I like these Commands, I do agree that the cheap ones feel almost too much like charms. I was kinda hoping they'd all have 4cmc when Ojutai's Command was introduced, and I'm not convinced that wouldn't have given them a more solid identity.
I know they don't usually design with Modern in mind, but it's hard to imagine this Dromoka's Command wasn't aimed specifically at common cards in the format.
I know they don't usually design with Modern in mind, but it's hard to imagine this Dromoka's Command wasn't aimed specifically at common cards in the format.
For a dragon with corrosive breath, he sure does have some pearly white teeth. I wonder if "the Dragon's Mouth" is also responsible for his dental work.
And I never said flexibility always cost rarity. Something something strawman...
I apologize if I incorrectly attributed your reasoning. Without presenting your reasoning, I don't think it's unreasonable to imply from what you posted that you thought it should literally cost half of a card that presents it as an option. Your new argument is much more thorough. (Although I don't agree that Negate is unconditional. It requires a timing restriction and does nothing against a resolved walker if drawn after the fact.)
Ultimately, I think we're agreeing but quibbling over minutiae, so I'm going to give it a rest. If anything we've proven they probably have no need to ever print removal that only targets planewalkers, so this is a fool's errand.
Back on topic: Silumgar's Command is a fairly-costed card no matter how you parse out the effects.
I think I set a poor tone last night when evaluating this card. I'd like to apologize for that and state my opinion with a clearer mind and a more level head.
I LOVE this card. It's everything a card like this should be. Fairly costed. Useful. Flexible. Even vaguely reminiscent of an old favorite of mine, Blightning. (yes, I know it's not fair to compare to blightning in terms of playing the card, but the effects at least evoke the nostalgia of the card for me, and that's a plus).
However, none of the above means it will "definitely" see play in Modern (I won't pretend to speak for Standard, and anything that can kill a morph is super playable in limited). I agree with some sentiments that it should be tested as a 1-of main due to potential 2-for-1s, but this is not a sideboard card. In modern you don't want to bring in 3-mana artifact hate, even if you get a generic effect of your choice tacked on. In matches where you need to destroy artifacts, doing so at an efficient rate is paramount.
I think this card shines most when you really want a Disentomb effect because this lets you run one that can still generate advantage in boardstates where a disentomb would just sit useless in your hand. As someone pointed out earlier, this is often better than drawing a card because you can plan for what you get back, and if you plan well, it's usually worth more than a card. And the interaction with Snapcaster Mage is pretty sweet, but time will tell if it's too clunky or not.
I plan on jamming this in many kitchen table and FNM decks. I doubt it'll show up at many modern GPs or PTQs.
tl;dr Good card doesn't always mean competitive card, and just because I'm saying it's not competitive enough in my competitive format of choice doesn't mean I don't LOVE this card. Because I do. I want 2 playsets.
You have no artifact hate in your SB? I can't imagine that is a route to success, especially given the fact that you have no way to answer either enchantments or artifacts. This card is extremely flexible. Can see it pulling a lot of weight against MU's like Blood Moon/Shackles as well. This card does what you want your SB cards to do in modern. Be relevant and powerful against multiple different decks. Also, there is a concept called saturation. Sure, electrolyze is good, but the existence of electrolyze doesn't mean that you don't also want/need other versatile cards that overlap in function. Anyways, great SB card in Modern. Take it or leave it, your choice.
Damage is very nearly artifact removal against most of affinity's creatures and there is better artifact hate available. Only one mode on this card is really sideboard material - its other modes aren't really that powerful against popular archetypes. Smash to Smithereens does a solid impression of the command for less. This card will likely see minimal play in competitive modern sideboards.
Also, this card does nothing against enchantments? And I have counters. And I can generally play around most commonly played enchantments.
Seems like a good SB card against Affinity and potentially Infect for RBx decks (Jund/Grixis) in Modern. Will probably replace Rakdos Charm because there really aren't that many GY-based decks seeing play.
I kinda want to try it in my Grixis deck, but Electrolyze already basically does what this card does in those matchups, all while never being dead and occasionally killing 2 threats on board.
A SB card is never 'dead' unless you don't play the MU you have it for, and this can always be a 'shock' at worst. Seems like a fine card against Burn as well. Kill a duder, make them discard a usually relevant card. So I can see it seeing play against 3 different decks that see quite a bit of play right now (Infect/Affinity/Burn), and can certainly replace Rakdos Charm. This is not a MB card, and I never indicated as such.
Yeah, but I could just keep running Electrolyze main and use that sideboard slot for something else. Affinity and Infect really aren't bad matchups for me.
You have no artifact hate in your SB? I can't imagine that is a route to success, especially given the fact that you have no way to answer either enchantments or artifacts. This card is extremely flexible. Can see it pulling a lot of weight against MU's like Blood Moon/Shackles as well. This card does what you want your SB cards to do in modern. Be relevant and powerful against multiple different decks. Also, there is a concept called saturation. Sure, electrolyze is good, but the existence of electrolyze doesn't mean that you don't also want/need other versatile cards that overlap in function. Anyways, great SB card in Modern. Take it or leave it, your choice.
Damage is very nearly artifact removal against most of affinity's creatures and there is better artifact hate available. Only one mode on this card is really sideboard material - its other modes aren't really that powerful against popular archetypes. Smash to Smithereens does a solid impression of the command for less. This card will likely see minimal play in competitive modern sideboards.
Also, this card does nothing against enchantments? And I have counters. And I can generally play around most commonly played enchantments.
Seems like a good SB card against Affinity and potentially Infect for RBx decks (Jund/Grixis) in Modern. Will probably replace Rakdos Charm because there really aren't that many GY-based decks seeing play.
I kinda want to try it in my Grixis deck, but Electrolyze already basically does what this card does in those matchups, all while never being dead and occasionally killing 2 threats on board.
A SB card is never 'dead' unless you don't play the MU you have it for, and this can always be a 'shock' at worst. Seems like a fine card against Burn as well. Kill a duder, make them discard a usually relevant card. So I can see it seeing play against 3 different decks that see quite a bit of play right now (Infect/Affinity/Burn), and can certainly replace Rakdos Charm. This is not a MB card, and I never indicated as such.
Yeah, but I could just keep running Electrolyze main and use that sideboard slot for something else. Affinity and Infect really aren't bad matchups for me.
Seems like a good SB card against Affinity and potentially Infect for RBx decks (Jund/Grixis) in Modern. Will probably replace Rakdos Charm because there really aren't that many GY-based decks seeing play.
I kinda want to try it in my Grixis deck, but Electrolyze already basically does what this card does in those matchups, all while never being dead and occasionally being a 3-for-1.
Nope, literally somewhere between. In card form, "Destroy target planeswalker" would likely cost 1B, but that is because the game doesn't deal in fractional mana outside of silver border land. The 2 mana planeswalker removal spells we have seen have been spells that the ability to destroy a planeswalker tacked on. Vampire Hexmage was a solid 2/1 first striker for 2 (nothing exciting, but still a reasonable rate for a black weenie creature) that had the ability to off itself to destroy a planeswalker as well as having other utility with it's activated ability. Dreadbore was a "post can't regenerate world"'s terminate that traded instant speed and rarity for the ability to hit walkers. As another poster mentioned, Hero's Downfall is strictly better Murder that hits walkers for no additional mana cost, just moved to rare because it says planeswalker.
They're alternative effects, not added effects. "Destroy target planeswalker" would only cost exactly half of Hero's Downfall or Dreadbore if you got both effects. By your logic, "Destroy all non-dragon creatures" should cost 2.5 mana because of Crux of Fate or "Target player discards a card" should only cost 1/3 of a single mana because of Funeral Charm. The bump in rarity from Murder to Hero's Downfall (or the drop in speed from Terminate to Dreadbore) is the cost you pay for FLEXIBILITY, for having the option to choose, not the entire value of the effect.
For the effect of A and B, you pay A + B
For the effect of A or B, you pay the greater value of A or B (sometimes with a flexibility tax of up to 1 mana, but usually resulting in timing restrictions or more color-intensive costs)
Since this effect hasn't existed by itself before, all we can say is that destroying a planeswalker can cost 2 mana and should probably cost no more than 3, but since it's an incredibly powerful but incredibly narrow effect, evaluating it's cost by simple division is extremely unlikely to be accurate.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying your result is necessarily wrong. I think printing "Destroy target planeswalker" is probably safe at 1B. But you can't evaluate an effect by saying "I can pay X for A or B, so A is worth half of X." If I can choose to spend $7 on either a sub sandwich or a movie ticket, that doesn't mean I should be able to see Chappie for $3.50
I didn't say anything about Zurgo, especially not me liking him, his story or his parents. (So much for seeing what you want to see. Sometimes you even see things that aren't there in the first place.)
I just commented on the UR being a bit dull this time - from a "readers who what's to read something interesting" - point of view. I haven't read anything about Zurgo, and if you say it's like Narset, I am quite happy I missed it.
That was my bad. Thought you were Saandro. My point wasn't that it was a thrilling story, just that it establishes that she has at least as many emotions and motivations as Zurgo.
Cunning Sparkmage, especially in conjunction with his favorite toy, Basilisk Collar. I used this combo in one of my first competitive standard decks (Boss Naya), and I’ve been plaguing my friends’ kitchen tables with him ever since. Even without the equipment, Sparky is arguably the best pinger. At worst he’s a virtual 1/1 haste unblockable that can attack creatures without taking damage back. At best he eats mana dorks and assorted utility creatures, finishes other creatures' combats, and keeps swords off of spirit tokens. Not to mention, I’m also a bearded red mage.
I agree with this and would like to add that those two groups aren't mutually exclusive. One argument is based on mechanics/playability and the other is more of a flavor/semantics issue. I can think a command isn't pushed enough and think it's too much like a charm. If they made them cost more and gave them stronger effects for the cost, they could potentially meet both criteria, but they didn't think that was a good idea.
I often play cards I don't like and vice versa. It just goes to show how hard it is to design a cards that fits players' expectations/desires AND is competitively costed for the effect.
As much as I like these Commands, I do agree that the cheap ones feel almost too much like charms. I was kinda hoping they'd all have 4cmc when Ojutai's Command was introduced, and I'm not convinced that wouldn't have given them a more solid identity.
How could I forget about Bogles!? Plus countering a bolt and taking out an Eidolon makes this even more appealing against burn than I realized.
Mode 1: "Counter" target Lightning Bolt/other burn spell.
Mode 2: Target player sacrifices Splinter Twin.
Modes 3/4: Break open a Tarmogoyf/Siege Rhino/Tasigur stalemate.
That's how I read the card, anyway.
I apologize if I incorrectly attributed your reasoning. Without presenting your reasoning, I don't think it's unreasonable to imply from what you posted that you thought it should literally cost half of a card that presents it as an option. Your new argument is much more thorough. (Although I don't agree that Negate is unconditional. It requires a timing restriction and does nothing against a resolved walker if drawn after the fact.)
Ultimately, I think we're agreeing but quibbling over minutiae, so I'm going to give it a rest. If anything we've proven they probably have no need to ever print removal that only targets planewalkers, so this is a fool's errand.
Back on topic: Silumgar's Command is a fairly-costed card no matter how you parse out the effects.
I LOVE this card. It's everything a card like this should be. Fairly costed. Useful. Flexible. Even vaguely reminiscent of an old favorite of mine, Blightning. (yes, I know it's not fair to compare to blightning in terms of playing the card, but the effects at least evoke the nostalgia of the card for me, and that's a plus).
However, none of the above means it will "definitely" see play in Modern (I won't pretend to speak for Standard, and anything that can kill a morph is super playable in limited). I agree with some sentiments that it should be tested as a 1-of main due to potential 2-for-1s, but this is not a sideboard card. In modern you don't want to bring in 3-mana artifact hate, even if you get a generic effect of your choice tacked on. In matches where you need to destroy artifacts, doing so at an efficient rate is paramount.
I think this card shines most when you really want a Disentomb effect because this lets you run one that can still generate advantage in boardstates where a disentomb would just sit useless in your hand. As someone pointed out earlier, this is often better than drawing a card because you can plan for what you get back, and if you plan well, it's usually worth more than a card. And the interaction with Snapcaster Mage is pretty sweet, but time will tell if it's too clunky or not.
I plan on jamming this in many kitchen table and FNM decks. I doubt it'll show up at many modern GPs or PTQs.
tl;dr Good card doesn't always mean competitive card, and just because I'm saying it's not competitive enough in my competitive format of choice doesn't mean I don't LOVE this card. Because I do. I want 2 playsets.
I'm not actually saying that. No. I'm saying none of those are very good sideboard cards.
Damage is very nearly artifact removal against most of affinity's creatures and there is better artifact hate available. Only one mode on this card is really sideboard material - its other modes aren't really that powerful against popular archetypes. Smash to Smithereens does a solid impression of the command for less. This card will likely see minimal play in competitive modern sideboards.
Also, this card does nothing against enchantments? And I have counters. And I can generally play around most commonly played enchantments.
Yeah, but I could just keep running Electrolyze main and use that sideboard slot for something else. Affinity and Infect really aren't bad matchups for me.
I kinda want to try it in my Grixis deck, but Electrolyze already basically does what this card does in those matchups, all while never being dead and occasionally being a 3-for-1.
They're alternative effects, not added effects. "Destroy target planeswalker" would only cost exactly half of Hero's Downfall or Dreadbore if you got both effects. By your logic, "Destroy all non-dragon creatures" should cost 2.5 mana because of Crux of Fate or "Target player discards a card" should only cost 1/3 of a single mana because of Funeral Charm. The bump in rarity from Murder to Hero's Downfall (or the drop in speed from Terminate to Dreadbore) is the cost you pay for FLEXIBILITY, for having the option to choose, not the entire value of the effect.
For the effect of A and B, you pay A + B
For the effect of A or B, you pay the greater value of A or B (sometimes with a flexibility tax of up to 1 mana, but usually resulting in timing restrictions or more color-intensive costs)
Since this effect hasn't existed by itself before, all we can say is that destroying a planeswalker can cost 2 mana and should probably cost no more than 3, but since it's an incredibly powerful but incredibly narrow effect, evaluating it's cost by simple division is extremely unlikely to be accurate.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying your result is necessarily wrong. I think printing "Destroy target planeswalker" is probably safe at 1B. But you can't evaluate an effect by saying "I can pay X for A or B, so A is worth half of X." If I can choose to spend $7 on either a sub sandwich or a movie ticket, that doesn't mean I should be able to see Chappie for $3.50
That was my bad. Thought you were Saandro. My point wasn't that it was a thrilling story, just that it establishes that she has at least as many emotions and motivations as Zurgo.