I wouldn't. While I appreciate Sheldon and what he does for the the format, he isn't the type of person I foresee having fun interacting with, in a game setting. I would just share a drink or two with him and have a conversation/debate. I don't care to play games of EDH with people who dictate to others how to have fun/what is fun/etc. The fact that he says he would need to know about MLD prior to playing is silly. If your deck isn't built to be resilient against a strategy, then you lose to it. Big deal. His views on STAX are small minded. If it isn't in Sheldon's playstyle, it isn't fun.
My group all have numerous decks (I personally have 52 currently, and building my 53 and 54). They range in power from silly to second tier broken (no one plays Narset or Zur). They all range in tools from Stax to MLD to zero removal. The variety here is incredible fun, and our decks have to be prepared for it.
Like holding ad Nausuam it's so stupid it's like if they tap out to irrelevant stuff ad Nauseam win if they represent counters repass if they play a must be countered spell IE Armageddon you stop it then still instant win on turn off the mana.
What the hell did I just read? I am pretty sure you had a point, but whatever it was...is a mystery locked in this puzzle of a sentence.
Among other things, Animar gives you access to blue, self-protects, and doesn't require holding back mana for his ability (though you have blue, so you may be holding back for some instants). Animar gives lots of value to smaller creatures, and your deck can survive if animar is tucked into your library. Animar can also give you a plan B by getting there with general damage.
Mayael plays like a slot machine most of the time. Its fun to snag a handful of fatties and get to windmill slam one down. You get access to lots of fun creatures in white too to protect yourself, or give some longevity to your fight. It's also great fun to use her ability in response to an attack or spell and ruin their plans. Mayael spends a lot of time setting up her "library summon" to be effective. She also requires a significant portion of the deck to protect her so that she can actually do her thing.
I would probably recommend Animar, as I currently have more fun with him, it's less linear, and more interactive.
Rosheen Meanderer is my favorite Hydra Tribal commander. While not a hydra himself, he shares more in common with hydras mechanically than any other card. Then, since hydras can't completely fill a deck you can then extend the them to [x] spells. Which I did, here.
I have been constructing an Oona deck with the sole purpose of exiling crap from peoples decks. I thought about going WUB for this, so that I would have access to White's exiling, but Oona, as a general, is much better.
So far I have this as a list. Clearly I am missing some cards, and may have some ineffective cards in there. What cards am I missing that fit the theme?
I am in the process of altering an Ice Age Snow-Covered Island and I am having a horrible time color matching. Does anyone have any tips on color theory and matching here?
1. I'm looking at this objectively. Yes, I probably have some bias because my favorite color is green, but that's why we have discussions. That's why I list examples. Everyone has a little bias.
Then you aren't objective. Quit lying to yourself and attempting to present a case objectively. It's dishonest.
If you compare cards like Mana Drain, and Necropotence to ANY card in the naya shard. Tell me a card that is on the same power level as those cards. Kiki-Jiki? He is strictly a win condition and requires another card to go off. Hardly broken.
Mana Drain isn't a win condition. Neither is Necropotence. They both require another card to "go off". You're losing ground here. Unless I'm wrong here... tell me how I'm gonna win with Mana Drain by itself? How am I gonna win with Necropotence by itself?
Sylvan Primordial is nuts but it can be dealt with on the stack, which is what blue is great for, but thats also its downfall. You spend X amount of turns ramping into this guy or finding a way to cheat him in early then he gets countered?
Well if you're cheating him into play you're likely using an activated ability or a triggered ability. Which I'm pretty sure there are only 12 cards in all of magic that can stop that. (many of which, by the way, are in green)
Oooops thats some serious tempo loss. I can't even think of anything white has that is close to that power level. White is pretty much the color of "I play fair," which in this format isn't very good.
Terminus, Wrath of God, Final Judgment, and friends all disagree with you. To use your example. I ramp out and get a bunch of fatties into play, or I cheat a bunch of fatties into play, and then you wrath, tuck, or exile all my stuff? That's some serious tempo loss and an INSANE amount of card advantage for you. In this format wraths aren't very good? Time to pack it in guys! We have all been playing EDH wrong for a number of years. Mass removal sucks. We have all been really dumb.
2. As someone who piloted mayael for 2-3 years, if SHE is the most winning-est thing in your meta, then your meta is probably a lot more casual than you think.
I never claimed my meta is competitive. I think that casual vs competitive argument is asinine. However, since that seems to lend weight to this argument, in your opinion, my meta does include a Zur, Sharuum, Azami, Azusa, etc., on and on. For the record my Tariel STAX deck, has never lost to a deck that has blue in it. Maybe my Tariel deck is more tuned that the U/x decks I have played against? But that's not likely. Tariel isn't hated either. I get requests to play it all the time because it is FUN. Blue just can't handle STAX very well. And finally, my Tariel deck isn't even tuned to shut down blue. It just does it incidentally by doing what it already does.
Which is perfectly okay. This is probably why you think I am being a whiner.
1) I didn't ask for your approval. 2) Your tone, the way you describe cards you don't like as "obscenely stupid", your reply about being objective, your willful ignorance of the color pie, the fact you made this post, and your attitude are what make me think you're being a whiner.
1) If you're dropping 3 grand on a single deck, I would think you would understand the game of Magic at least a little more than you're proving evident. 2) If you're dropping 3 grand on a single deck, you're far, far in the minority of Magic players, and your experiences are not respective of the greater Magic population and as such your opinion on what is or isn't "fair" simply isn't viable from a design standpoint.
It doesn't have access to the same power level of cards.
Card power level is not the only variable. I can beat my girlfriend using only commons, while she runs rares. Why? Player experience. In a multiplayer game the advantage powerful cards give a player is mitigated more and more by how many players are at the table. That is further mitigated by the respective skill of each player.
Sometimes the only way to win with that deck was to pit people against each other while you go, "don't mind me look at the zur player... oh and Lurking Predators trigger..."
Welcome to multiplayer games. And you know what? If an azami deck is beating a table 3v1, those are some terrible players. Play one game against Zur, Azami, Azusa, Mayael, Sharuum, etc. and you know what they do. If your meta lets that happen that's your problem.
3. The notion that we are the problem is completely ludicrous.
No it isn't. Magic is a social game. If it wasn't you, or me, or Galspanic that is the problem, why don't I share your views? Why do so many people in this thread disagree with you, or disagree with me for that matter. We are simply not in a vacuum, there are no absolutes.
Lets say I'm playing Video Game X. Video Game X has one weapon that lets the wielder do pretty much whatever they want and kill whoever they want unless they get unlucky.
Every single player has access to this weapon, so eventually, everyone packs this weapon in their arsenal so they don't die to other people wielding said weapon. Sounds like a design issue to me.
Not everyone has access to Mana Drain (not that, that card is an instant win anyway). Aaaaaand. There is only one Mana Drain. Wizards doesn't print that anymore. You know what they did do? They printed a similar card in Blue AND Green, but hey I don't see you complaining about that.
2. White already has card draw in its color pie. Just not a whole lot of it.
That's because it isn't the best at card draw. You know it is awesome at? Killing stuff. Where blue lacks severely. As another poster commented, White gets card advantage in other ways. Embrace that each color is unique, they do different things, appeal to different kinds of people and players. homogeneity is NOT a good solution.
If the card draw is mostly enchantment based especially then its DEFINATLEY in the color pie.
You don't understand the color pie. Just because something is an enchantment doesn't make it white's domain in the color pie. Mana Reflection, Necropotence, Sneak Attack all say hi.
Never going to happen. Not possible. Even the Euro board games that are designed from the ground up to be exercises in equivilancy and "balanced" aren't completely balanced. And they don't have the kind of interactivity and growth that Magic does. Honestly, man, it just sounds like Magic isn't the game for you. You don't seem to like or appreciate the things that are so beautiful about Magic and its design. Of course that could just be you not appreciating the things that I find compelling, so this is more of a simple observation rather than a submittal for argument.
I'm not a professional card designer. I just wanted to illustrate my point.
Exactly. There are people who do this way better than you, who rely on the color pie, and the way it dictactes the creation of cards, for their livelihood. They do a very good job of it too. If you think you can do better, next time they do a Great Designer Search, apply and see how far your intrepretation of balance, the color pie, and how you want to redefine it, get you.
if we are all wrong- being non objective then whats right- objective? I was hoping you could expand on your point, I'm not trying to be a passive aggressive jerk (it might sound like this but tone is hard to pick up in a purley text based format). I am interested in EDH as a whole how do you break the colors down? How would you fix the power level?
As for the color identity I get what that is about. But you can not sit there and tell me that in a vacuum blue isn't the most broken color for EDH, and I'm not a person who hates on blue. All my edh decsk contain the color.
My point is that he is attempting to appear logical, and knowledgable, about the subject. However, it is clear that he has just had a bunch of bad experiences, and is now attempting to dictate how the game should be built, from design on up to play.
I never said anything about being non-objective being "wrong". What I do find fault in the OP's statements is the logical fallacies he presented in order to APPEAR objective. The dishonesty inherent in the statement bothers me.
How would I fix the power level? I wouldn't. Do I think the colors are balanced? No, I don't. You're right, "in a vacuum" blue is the best. It's no secret a significant chunk of the power-9 are blue, and there have been some really bonkers cards printed in blue. However in, easily, over 20,000 games of EDH I haven't ever experienced a "vacuum". Player ability, politics, threat assessment, deck-building skill, wallet-size, card availability, previous grudges, runaway leader, and "that-guy-at-the-table", all contribute the events of an EDH game. There is nothing vacuous about a game of EDH.
My core issue with the OP is that his post is whiny. I quote "These are my favorite 3 colors in magic. Why? They are fair. You can't find anything in these three colors that are obscenely stupid, infuriating, or broken." (Talking about Naya)
Actually, HE can't find those things. Probably because he has a point to make, and isn't capable of that kind of objective observing. I can find any number of cards in those colors that are infuriating and broken. "Obscenely stupid?" Excuse me? That's not even a relevant adjective. If we are talking about the definition of stupid, well I just found Craw Wurm and Grizzly Bears. Those are pretty dumb creatures. If we are talking about what HE finds stupid, well then we aren't in interesting discussion or constructive design philosphy territory anymore, we are back to the OP just whining about something HE thinks is unfair that happened to him.
Back to the Naya colors discussion point, the most winning-est deck in my meta? Mayael. My buddy has a Mayael deck that is bonkers. It does a lot of really "unfair" and "broken
" things. But I find no reason to get online and say that those three colors are unfair, and that they can do anything and everything, and that all colors should have access to their side of the color pie.
Gosh, blue really needs a way to destroy enchantments, artifacts, and exile creatures. White, Green and Red, are just so unfair! They can literally do anything!
Like Galspanic said, it's not the cards, or the game, it's the players. It's us. It's the OP. The only people any of us have to blame for a bad experience playing this game, is ourselves and the people we play with. There was just another topic recently about someone complaining about a turn 5 win, but the complainer didn't pack an answer! That's not the cards fault for being able to combo out, or even the player who assembled the combo (There are many, many, many people who enjoy combo. Who are WE to dictate what is or isn't fun for other people?), is the fault of the person who refuses to play answers and then whines that something unfair happened to them.
Some argue that Blue should never have had card draw as part of its color pie identity because it is a necessary function of the game. Well by that rubric, green should never be able to ramp, because putting one land into play a turn is a necessary limiting function of the game. The game of Magic is a set of fairly simple rules. The cards are created to purposefully let us break those rules in an interesting way. Blue gets to break the card draw rule (techinically so does Black and Green). Green gets to break the 1 land a turn rule. That is the beauty of the game and the color pie and the inherent inequality in the colors.
Sorry, that went on quite a bit longer than I intended. I hope that answers your question?
Man... this is the most effort I have seen put into a QQ thread. This is so obviously not objective, despite its intense effort to appear so. It's one logical fallacy after another, and the longer I read, the more it became evident that the OP has no clue what magic design, the color pie, and how those make the game what it is.
So I am in the process of making a Cromat deck that simply uses cards like Last Stand, Door to Nothingness, etc. I am just looking for things that embody 5cc. It doesn't need to be competitive at all. I just ran out of ideas. Help me out!
I guess I was taking my own idea of fun and interactive into account, since I didn't know yours The thread title implies it's impossible to have fun in mono-white, which I obviously don't have a problem with.
But, if you're looking for a deck that either has multiple different wincons, or something with synergy between all the cards or some really complex combos (Not necessarily infinite) then I don't really think it's doable with mono-white, you need to add a color in. White does several things incredibly well, and you can win in several different ways as evidenced in this thread, But the focuses tend to be kind of linear.
To be honest, that's what most decks seem to do though, IMO. Most decks that I come up against are fairly linear in their idea, that being to win. Zur toturs enchantments and plays counterspells, Saffi recurs everything, Azusa ramps, Mirri the Cursed is aggro/control, Thalia is Stax... Any deck that builds around a specific general or set of mechanics is going to be a linear deck focused on those mechanics. White is good at removal, Stax, voltron and REcursion, and that's what the deck I posted does. I find it fun, and interactive, (Doublestrike with Jitte? O.o if you haven't tried it, it's absurd XD) But that's just me.
Most decks that I see are fairly competitive, in that they are built to win. Once a deck has too many ideas or focuses, it's win cons tend to be less potent, therefore making the deck less likely to be victorious. Hence most, if not all mono-white decks are going to be fairly straightforward, somewhat simple and a lot of times brutally effective. But yes, they are not amazingly "interactive" and obviously "fun" is completely subjective
I honestly don't think you're going to find a mono-white deck that meets your exacting specifications because it seems most decks are built to win, not to be crazily "interactive". I don't really know of too many decks, even multicolor, that meet those specifications. The only one that i know of off hand is Schondetta's Teysa primer found here. You might want to take a look at that one, it seems to be a lot of fun.
Good luck, I hope you find what you're looking for!
I don't necessarily think that building to win and building to be fun are mutually exclusive. For example, I have a Sedris deck that has multiple paths to victory, doesn't tutor, is interactive, competitive, and still doesn't lock the rest of the table out. I'd say almost every deck I come across, in my area, meets those specifications, excepting my buddy's Kaalia deck. They each do something different and interesting most games.
Those generals you listed are obviously the most egregious offenders of linear play, of course they are boring :D.
If Isamaru is great fun for you, then perfect. I think the list looks like it could have some fun moments, but like I said, it looks to play the same every game. (Which also, is a reason I don't ever include any tutors in my decks, and still win most of my games.) It looks like it could be a lot of fun to race against the other players and try to get your damage in before running out of gas. Maybe I'll give Isamaru a shot. But yes, my original post was about finding Mono-W generals that scream build around me in interesting ways. That provide multiple win cons and an interesting game. Like you said though, "interesting" is different to everyone. I appreciate the reply.
I've been playing EDH for a while now, and my mono-white deck is now my go-to deck for most games. I love it. The Thread is here if you want to take a look at it, I'm working on primer-ing it if the primer committee gods smile upon me. (That thread is far from finished, for the record, but the basics are there)
While it is true that White suffers from a sever lack of card draw, card advantage is something that can be done without a drop of just plain old draw. I find that the best sources for CA in white are it's amazing recursion, the best in MTG (Sun Titan, Reveillark, Karmic Guide, Emeria, the Sky Ruin, Marshal's Anthem) and it's removal which almost always is at least a 2 for 1, if not better.
The problem that I had when originally building white was that while I had an explosive start, I really didn't know where to go from there. That's where that list above came from. It comes out incredibly fast and then attempts to lock up the board with an Orb or an Armageddon to put everyone on an equal footing with the weenies. It's been working out really well, I'd suggest taking a look
Locking people up with an Orb or Geddon is totally fine, and I have done that plenty of times with other decks but it is the exact opposite of interesting and interactive. Honestly, and I mean no offense, but that decklist looks around horribly linear, and completely noninteractive. The antithesis of what I am looking for. But that also comes from my own personal preference which disdains voltron as too linear, and lockdown as too boring.
A couple of my buddies and I have all been talking about Monowhite after we have each tried 2-4 mono white decks. The consensus is that it just isn't all that interactive and fun. Runs out of card advantage too quickly, doesn't interact in interesting ways. Etc. We have tried:
Brigid
Jareth
Elesh
Lin Sivvi
8.5
Akroma
Avacyn
Atalya
Celestial Kirin
Kemba
Konda
Mageta
All of them are boring, uninteractive decks. And we are no deck-making slouches either. The only one that was really kind of fun was Lin Sivvi and she was brutal, but still spent most of her time just reusing the same threats over and over and they got exiled or something. It had energy but still wasn't a whole lot of fun for anyone at the table, for either the pilot or the other players.
What are YOUR experiences with Mono white, and what generals say "build around me in creative ways"?
My group all have numerous decks (I personally have 52 currently, and building my 53 and 54). They range in power from silly to second tier broken (no one plays Narset or Zur). They all range in tools from Stax to MLD to zero removal. The variety here is incredible fun, and our decks have to be prepared for it.
What the hell did I just read? I am pretty sure you had a point, but whatever it was...is a mystery locked in this puzzle of a sentence.
I have both a Mayael of the Anima and Animar, Soul of Elements deck. They both do ridiculously broken things, and both are incredibly fun to play.
Among other things, Animar gives you access to blue, self-protects, and doesn't require holding back mana for his ability (though you have blue, so you may be holding back for some instants). Animar gives lots of value to smaller creatures, and your deck can survive if animar is tucked into your library. Animar can also give you a plan B by getting there with general damage.
Mayael plays like a slot machine most of the time. Its fun to snag a handful of fatties and get to windmill slam one down. You get access to lots of fun creatures in white too to protect yourself, or give some longevity to your fight. It's also great fun to use her ability in response to an attack or spell and ruin their plans. Mayael spends a lot of time setting up her "library summon" to be effective. She also requires a significant portion of the deck to protect her so that she can actually do her thing.
I would probably recommend Animar, as I currently have more fun with him, it's less linear, and more interactive.
So far I have this as a list. Clearly I am missing some cards, and may have some ineffective cards in there. What cards am I missing that fit the theme?
1 Oona, Queen of the Fae
//Creatures
1 Lord of the Void
1 Nightveil Specter
1 Fiend of the Shadows
1 Raven Guild Master
1 Scalpelexis
1 Shimian Specter
1 Grimoire Thief
1 Circu, Dimir Lobotomist
1 Dark Impostor
1 Thada Adel, Acquisitor
1 Thoughtpicker Witch
1 Duplicant
1 Phyrexian Ingester
1 Thassa, God of the Sea
//Instants & Sorceries
1 Extract
1 Dimir Machinations
1 Bitter Ordeal
1 Denying Wind
1 Sadistic Sacrament
1 Praetor's Grasp
1 Neverending Torment
1 Nightmare Incursion
1 Psychic Intrusion
1 Reap Intellect
1 Mindbreak Trap
1 Dissipate
1 Faerie Trickery
1 Gild
1 Eradicate
1 Ashes to Ashes
1 Curse of the Swine
1 Leyline of the Void
1 Power Artifact
1 Descent into Madness
1 Psychic Surgery
//Artifacts
1 Jester's Cap
1 Nihil Spellbomb
1 Tormod's Crypt
1 Crucible of Worlds
1 Mindslaver
1 Phyrexian Altar
1 Ashnod's Altar
1 Basalt Monolith
1 Grim Monolith
1 Thran Dynamo
1 Gilded Lotus
1 Coalition Relic
1 Darksteel Ingot
1 Whispersilk Cloak
//Planeswalkers
1 Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver
1 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1 Jace, Architect of Thought
1 Karn Liberated
//Lands
1 Bojuka Bog
1 Volrath's Stronghold
1 Academy Ruins
1 Tolaria West
1 Buried Ruin
1 Cabal Coffers
1 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
1 Underground Sea
1 Watery Grave
1 Polluted Delta
1 Sunken Ruins
1 Temple of Deceit
1 Command Tower
1 Reflecting Pool
1 Dimir Guildgate
1 Drowned Catacomb
1 Frost Marsh
1 Salt Marsh
1 Reliquary Tower
9 Island
9 Swamp
Then you aren't objective. Quit lying to yourself and attempting to present a case objectively. It's dishonest.
Mana Drain isn't a win condition. Neither is Necropotence. They both require another card to "go off". You're losing ground here. Unless I'm wrong here... tell me how I'm gonna win with Mana Drain by itself? How am I gonna win with Necropotence by itself?
You have two windows to get rid of Necropotence. You have two windows to get rid of whatever your opponent ramped out with that Mana Drain.
Well if you're cheating him into play you're likely using an activated ability or a triggered ability. Which I'm pretty sure there are only 12 cards in all of magic that can stop that. (many of which, by the way, are in green)
Terminus, Wrath of God, Final Judgment, and friends all disagree with you. To use your example. I ramp out and get a bunch of fatties into play, or I cheat a bunch of fatties into play, and then you wrath, tuck, or exile all my stuff? That's some serious tempo loss and an INSANE amount of card advantage for you. In this format wraths aren't very good? Time to pack it in guys! We have all been playing EDH wrong for a number of years. Mass removal sucks. We have all been really dumb.
I never claimed my meta is competitive. I think that casual vs competitive argument is asinine. However, since that seems to lend weight to this argument, in your opinion, my meta does include a Zur, Sharuum, Azami, Azusa, etc., on and on. For the record my Tariel STAX deck, has never lost to a deck that has blue in it. Maybe my Tariel deck is more tuned that the U/x decks I have played against? But that's not likely. Tariel isn't hated either. I get requests to play it all the time because it is FUN. Blue just can't handle STAX very well. And finally, my Tariel deck isn't even tuned to shut down blue. It just does it incidentally by doing what it already does.
1) I didn't ask for your approval. 2) Your tone, the way you describe cards you don't like as "obscenely stupid", your reply about being objective, your willful ignorance of the color pie, the fact you made this post, and your attitude are what make me think you're being a whiner.
There's no such thing.
1) If you're dropping 3 grand on a single deck, I would think you would understand the game of Magic at least a little more than you're proving evident. 2) If you're dropping 3 grand on a single deck, you're far, far in the minority of Magic players, and your experiences are not respective of the greater Magic population and as such your opinion on what is or isn't "fair" simply isn't viable from a design standpoint.
Again, nothing is 100% optimized, and I would beg to differ regardless.
Card power level is not the only variable. I can beat my girlfriend using only commons, while she runs rares. Why? Player experience. In a multiplayer game the advantage powerful cards give a player is mitigated more and more by how many players are at the table. That is further mitigated by the respective skill of each player.
Welcome to multiplayer games. And you know what? If an azami deck is beating a table 3v1, those are some terrible players. Play one game against Zur, Azami, Azusa, Mayael, Sharuum, etc. and you know what they do. If your meta lets that happen that's your problem.
No it isn't. Magic is a social game. If it wasn't you, or me, or Galspanic that is the problem, why don't I share your views? Why do so many people in this thread disagree with you, or disagree with me for that matter. We are simply not in a vacuum, there are no absolutes.
Speaking of absolutes... *sigh*
Not everyone has access to Mana Drain (not that, that card is an instant win anyway). Aaaaaand. There is only one Mana Drain. Wizards doesn't print that anymore. You know what they did do? They printed a similar card in Blue AND Green, but hey I don't see you complaining about that.
That's because it isn't the best at card draw. You know it is awesome at? Killing stuff. Where blue lacks severely. As another poster commented, White gets card advantage in other ways. Embrace that each color is unique, they do different things, appeal to different kinds of people and players. homogeneity is NOT a good solution.
You don't understand the color pie. Just because something is an enchantment doesn't make it white's domain in the color pie. Mana Reflection, Necropotence, Sneak Attack all say hi.
Never going to happen. Not possible. Even the Euro board games that are designed from the ground up to be exercises in equivilancy and "balanced" aren't completely balanced. And they don't have the kind of interactivity and growth that Magic does. Honestly, man, it just sounds like Magic isn't the game for you. You don't seem to like or appreciate the things that are so beautiful about Magic and its design. Of course that could just be you not appreciating the things that I find compelling, so this is more of a simple observation rather than a submittal for argument.
Not very good rules.
Exactly. There are people who do this way better than you, who rely on the color pie, and the way it dictactes the creation of cards, for their livelihood. They do a very good job of it too. If you think you can do better, next time they do a Great Designer Search, apply and see how far your intrepretation of balance, the color pie, and how you want to redefine it, get you.
My point is that he is attempting to appear logical, and knowledgable, about the subject. However, it is clear that he has just had a bunch of bad experiences, and is now attempting to dictate how the game should be built, from design on up to play.
I never said anything about being non-objective being "wrong". What I do find fault in the OP's statements is the logical fallacies he presented in order to APPEAR objective. The dishonesty inherent in the statement bothers me.
How would I fix the power level? I wouldn't. Do I think the colors are balanced? No, I don't. You're right, "in a vacuum" blue is the best. It's no secret a significant chunk of the power-9 are blue, and there have been some really bonkers cards printed in blue. However in, easily, over 20,000 games of EDH I haven't ever experienced a "vacuum". Player ability, politics, threat assessment, deck-building skill, wallet-size, card availability, previous grudges, runaway leader, and "that-guy-at-the-table", all contribute the events of an EDH game. There is nothing vacuous about a game of EDH.
My core issue with the OP is that his post is whiny. I quote "These are my favorite 3 colors in magic. Why? They are fair. You can't find anything in these three colors that are obscenely stupid, infuriating, or broken." (Talking about Naya)
Actually, HE can't find those things. Probably because he has a point to make, and isn't capable of that kind of objective observing. I can find any number of cards in those colors that are infuriating and broken. "Obscenely stupid?" Excuse me? That's not even a relevant adjective. If we are talking about the definition of stupid, well I just found Craw Wurm and Grizzly Bears. Those are pretty dumb creatures. If we are talking about what HE finds stupid, well then we aren't in interesting discussion or constructive design philosphy territory anymore, we are back to the OP just whining about something HE thinks is unfair that happened to him.
Back to the Naya colors discussion point, the most winning-est deck in my meta? Mayael. My buddy has a Mayael deck that is bonkers. It does a lot of really "unfair" and "broken
" things. But I find no reason to get online and say that those three colors are unfair, and that they can do anything and everything, and that all colors should have access to their side of the color pie.
Gosh, blue really needs a way to destroy enchantments, artifacts, and exile creatures. White, Green and Red, are just so unfair! They can literally do anything!
Like Galspanic said, it's not the cards, or the game, it's the players. It's us. It's the OP. The only people any of us have to blame for a bad experience playing this game, is ourselves and the people we play with. There was just another topic recently about someone complaining about a turn 5 win, but the complainer didn't pack an answer! That's not the cards fault for being able to combo out, or even the player who assembled the combo (There are many, many, many people who enjoy combo. Who are WE to dictate what is or isn't fun for other people?), is the fault of the person who refuses to play answers and then whines that something unfair happened to them.
Some argue that Blue should never have had card draw as part of its color pie identity because it is a necessary function of the game. Well by that rubric, green should never be able to ramp, because putting one land into play a turn is a necessary limiting function of the game. The game of Magic is a set of fairly simple rules. The cards are created to purposefully let us break those rules in an interesting way. Blue gets to break the card draw rule (techinically so does Black and Green). Green gets to break the 1 land a turn rule. That is the beauty of the game and the color pie and the inherent inequality in the colors.
Sorry, that went on quite a bit longer than I intended. I hope that answers your question?
I don't necessarily think that building to win and building to be fun are mutually exclusive. For example, I have a Sedris deck that has multiple paths to victory, doesn't tutor, is interactive, competitive, and still doesn't lock the rest of the table out. I'd say almost every deck I come across, in my area, meets those specifications, excepting my buddy's Kaalia deck. They each do something different and interesting most games.
Those generals you listed are obviously the most egregious offenders of linear play, of course they are boring :D.
If Isamaru is great fun for you, then perfect. I think the list looks like it could have some fun moments, but like I said, it looks to play the same every game. (Which also, is a reason I don't ever include any tutors in my decks, and still win most of my games.) It looks like it could be a lot of fun to race against the other players and try to get your damage in before running out of gas. Maybe I'll give Isamaru a shot. But yes, my original post was about finding Mono-W generals that scream build around me in interesting ways. That provide multiple win cons and an interesting game. Like you said though, "interesting" is different to everyone. I appreciate the reply.
Locking people up with an Orb or Geddon is totally fine, and I have done that plenty of times with other decks but it is the exact opposite of interesting and interactive. Honestly, and I mean no offense, but that decklist looks around horribly linear, and completely noninteractive. The antithesis of what I am looking for. But that also comes from my own personal preference which disdains voltron as too linear, and lockdown as too boring.
Brigid
Jareth
Elesh
Lin Sivvi
8.5
Akroma
Avacyn
Atalya
Celestial Kirin
Kemba
Konda
Mageta
All of them are boring, uninteractive decks. And we are no deck-making slouches either. The only one that was really kind of fun was Lin Sivvi and she was brutal, but still spent most of her time just reusing the same threats over and over and they got exiled or something. It had energy but still wasn't a whole lot of fun for anyone at the table, for either the pilot or the other players.
What are YOUR experiences with Mono white, and what generals say "build around me in creative ways"?
For example, do the Familiar cycle lower the costs of kickers?