Its not complicated. People in this thread are literally saying they'll play this card when you are arguing they wont. Why ? Probably because....heres the shocker...its playable!
I'm going to make a bit of a bold statement here, but...it feels to me like Commander has evolved, but the RC has not. I saw a post from Sheldon a while back about a 4-mana instant he recommended to deal with voltron ommanders...and I'm starting to wonder, how many playgroups have evolved beyond the kind of game the RC has in mind? This isn't a format anymore where big plays and huge boardwipes rule the roost. Sure, they're still a part of it, but look at the stars of a few years back, like Verdant Force. While still a decent card, it's nowhere near as threatening anymore due to how decks have evolved.
This leads to the idea that the RC just doesn't know anymore what really causes issues in most Commander games. Don't get me wrong, the RC has done a great job in bringing Commander to where it is now, it just feels at times like the game is surpassing the RC, leading to a bit of a disconnect in the actual banlist and what are the real problem cards. I'm seriously wondering which cards (that are currently legal) are seen by the RC as the actual problem cards right now...or rather, the cards that deserve attention.
I'm not one to defend the RC...ever, but I can personally tell you from experience that the above statement does not apply to all members of the RC. While I personally feel that some members of the RC are holding on to archaic ideas, there is some method behind the madness that doesn't make it to the "Update" pages. There is tangible consequences for their decisions.
You may maintain that the format has evolved into a legacy type environment and I would agree, but that doesn't change the fact that above all else, they want to maintain the brand image of being casual/fun. This has and always will be the driving force behind the RC.
Just something to keep in mind before spouting off that the RC isn't in touch (at least some of them)
I have not once said that Sol Ring is not broken by design. I have not once said that it can't cause an early game advantage, up to a god hand scenario such as we could see in hundreds of different decks. But do not twist my words against me and claim that I said it warps games. That is just plain false.
You don't have to. Everybody already knows.
Luckily, you play in a format that's political, where if someone gets out of hand, the group can penalize them.
Quite frankly the only rule change that EDH needs right now regarding color identity is the ability to create and use mana that's not in your color identity. For example, If I'm playing Mono-Blue and steal something that requires red mana to activate, I should be able to use my Gilded Lotus to activate it.
Otherwise, on topic: giving mono color decks the ability to use hybrid mana cards seems/feels awful.
MM
Nope, I would not be a fan of that. Your commander doesn't know how to use red mana, how can you expect him to utilize fully that which he does not understand?
Its the same reason a Mono black deck can't use Unmake. The spell is white in addition to black, there fore he doesn't understand all the necessary components in using it. Sure spells like it are similar in outcome, but they are not this partially white spell.
Quite frankly the only rule change that EDH needs right now regarding color identity is the ability to create and use mana that's not in your color identity. For example, If I'm playing Mono-Blue and steal something that requires red mana to activate, I should be able to use my Gilded Lotus to activate it.
Otherwise, on topic: giving mono color decks the ability to use hybrid mana cards seems/feels awful.
I agree with his basic premise, but it doesn't mean that
A) I don't want to run answers in my Cube (because I definitely do)
or
B) Answers that are strapped on small bodies like Tuktuk Scrapper and Goblin Settler are bad.
Especially given that those bodies can themselves work into an engine that forms a threat. Landing a Settler along with a Kiki-jiki, Mirror Breaker and some untapping/ability doubling means you can start decimating opposing boards and put yourself into a winning position.
But that's not even the point. The main point is that drafting cards like Goblin Settler does nothing to put you ahead and benefits your opponents more then it does yourself. That's why cards like Acidic Slime are infinitely better because they double as protection and hit different types of targets. That might not be a fair comparison, but you get the point.
Do I think Red is a bad color ? No of course not. In terms of Power Level, Red is on par with any other color, they just don't have all the tools...yet.
So would you never pick a Murderous Cut? That does nothing to build your board state and benefits your opponents.
I never pick single target removal that highly, unless it's Swords or Path - and even then 1 for 1 trades are not that great. Cards like Comet Storm, Cyclonic Rift, Martial Coup, Ixidron all scale way better and are more dynamic, they allow for a better decision tree.
Ask yourself, what position what I need to be in to fully benefit in a 1 for 1 trade. Outside of "My opponent wins if I don't kill this creature" there's very few. It's much easier to deter an attack with your own creature on board. Just think, for your one creature on board, you've caused your opponent to attack someone else. That dynamic is huge. Your mana just paid for a creature on board, 6 damage to your opponent because another opponent attacked him instead of you and the opponent that got attacked is more likely to retaliate against him. Furthermore, those opponents are more likely to use the answer cards they're hoarding, so that in the future it's easier for you to take the game. Single target removal can't buy you that type of position in a game. Which brings us back to Prid3's initial comment that it's better to build yourself up, then worry about your opponent.
I agree with his basic premise, but it doesn't mean that
A) I don't want to run answers in my Cube (because I definitely do)
or
B) Answers that are strapped on small bodies like Tuktuk Scrapper and Goblin Settler are bad.
Especially given that those bodies can themselves work into an engine that forms a threat. Landing a Settler along with a Kiki-jiki, Mirror Breaker and some untapping/ability doubling means you can start decimating opposing boards and put yourself into a winning position.
But that's not even the point. The main point is that drafting cards like Goblin Settler does nothing to put you ahead and benefits your opponents more then it does yourself. That's why cards like Acidic Slime are infinitely better because they double as protection and hit different types of targets. That might not be a fair comparison, but you get the point.
Do I think Red is a bad color ? No of course not. In terms of Power Level, Red is on par with any other color, they just don't have all the tools...yet.
Wow, Prid3 got unfairly dumped on in the last few pages. Most of the best EDH players I know effectively play with the same logic Prid3 does:
Multiplayer, in my experience, is more about building yourself up than about taking others apart.
Very true. One of the players in our group always says "I'd rather force my opponents to deal with what I'm doing, then having to deal with them"
Drafting an end game with protection to back it up is the most successful way to win a multiplayer draft. Unless you're passed the cards for another comprehensive strategy, your almost always better off drafting bombs - anyone remember B.R.E.A.D ? The amount of 'answer now' cards in the cube far out weighs the amount of answers(This is good, because if you could answer everything every time, the game would get dull). If you're able to put out a threat and the table can't stop it, you win the game. If they can stop it, then you're no longer a threat and the game goes on to the next threat - assuming your table has proper threat assessment.
Lots of people all ready do this. I have Bolos at the head of Grixis in my EDHcube. I wonder if the blowback would be that significant. Seems like a serious consideration for the future. They must have known that if the trend became popular they would have to reevalute their position.
Removing the creature version in black wont be hard. It's the enchantments black has a hard time with, let alone indestructible ones. Outside of Karn and All is Dust, your options are really Perilous Vault and some good Politics.
PoK is much stronger then Seedborn Muse, common now.
Seedborn Muse is actually stronger in quite a few cases because it untaps Mana Vault, Grim Monolith, and Basalt Monolith (bypassing the need to pay to untap those), and also all of your regular mana rocks. This makes Muse quite a bit stronger in any situation where you aren't just trying to vomit creatures onto the board, since you can fuel a Capsize or Forbid lock even more quickly.
All creatures having flash > untapping artifacts IMO.
EDIT: Why ? because chances are you have enough mana untapping your lands that the extra mana from artifacts is useless during opponents turns anyways.
There is absolutely no difference between mtgcommander.com rules (your first paragraph) and randomcrapleague.com rules (second paragraph) except different restrictions. They both offer guidelines to play.
People exploit take advantage of the main rules just as much as some random league rules. Why so mad ? Is it because you want someone to play your way or not at all ? Seems.... anti-social.
If I, and the people I play with, set out rules by which we play, then yes, I would expect people to play our way. They've clearly been told how we play. It's up to them to decide whether thy want to be part of our group. Are we being anti-social? Not really, we're simply trying to let people understand whether they would fit in with us. Of course, I can't speak for the playgroup in the OP, but in general, even when I've come across groups with rules on how they play games - both Magic and others - they are willing to relax restrictions, they are willing to try new things, they are open to other ideas, provided those ideas are presented in a reasonable manner. Storming in, demanding everyone change, is not going to get them to change - indeed, given how people are, it will likely have the opposite result. Deliberately finding loopholes in their rules to spite them isn't going to get them to change either. People don't like that kind of thing. If you want a playgroup to change it's style, you're going to have to give it time, you're going to have to make smaller changes, you're going to have to compromise and most importantly, you're going to have to get the people on your side. Acting in an abrasive, confrontational, demanding manner is not going to so that. And if that's the way you're going to be towards them, don't even bother playing with them. It's wasting everyone's time. Just try to find people who like what you like.
As yes, rules are exploited. And I'm not even going to say it's always wrong. It depends on the context. But exploiting rules in order to "prove" that people who like different things to you are "wrong", the way many people here are suggesting, is IMO, wrong. If you don't like their playstyle, don't play with them, it's simple. Why go out of your way to mess up their rules?
Except he didn't say it was Wrong, he said it was Bad, which is completely different. His motive for joining the league is important here, because if he is just trolling to troll, there is little value in that. If he's joining the league because it's his only chance to play EDH and while doing so wants to have the best advantage for what I consider a really bad set of league rules, then wtf is the problem ?
If it's his only chance of playing EDH, then surely it's in his interest to play within the spirit of the rules, thereby avoiding the risk of alienating the other players?
And to be honest, my issue is less with the OP, and more with the posters here who are saying he should go and troll the league and build decks solely to annoy other people. And frankly, I can't see how there is ever an excuse for doing that.
It's a league, not a playgroup. If the store is willing to kick a player out of a league for following their rules, well that's just asinine. Regarding your second point, well, I'm of the opinion that oppressive decks are a lost art. The Winter Orb players of seasons past have all been hated out due to the above mentality. A whole sub-set of players wont even touch this format out of fear of being attacked by the most righteous of EDH players. It's quite sad. I'd much rather experience everything this format has to offer rather then this limited view that the so called "spirit of edh" attempts to enforce.
Every single ETB creature in the cube would be worth it. It's possibly the best card in C15 for EDH.
Also - Hydra Omnivore
I'm not one to defend the RC...ever, but I can personally tell you from experience that the above statement does not apply to all members of the RC. While I personally feel that some members of the RC are holding on to archaic ideas, there is some method behind the madness that doesn't make it to the "Update" pages. There is tangible consequences for their decisions.
You may maintain that the format has evolved into a legacy type environment and I would agree, but that doesn't change the fact that above all else, they want to maintain the brand image of being casual/fun. This has and always will be the driving force behind the RC.
Just something to keep in mind before spouting off that the RC isn't in touch (at least some of them)
MM
You don't have to. Everybody already knows.
Luckily, you play in a format that's political, where if someone gets out of hand, the group can penalize them.
That seems... very contrived... but sure.
Otherwise, on topic: giving mono color decks the ability to use hybrid mana cards seems/feels awful.
MM
I never pick single target removal that highly, unless it's Swords or Path - and even then 1 for 1 trades are not that great. Cards like Comet Storm, Cyclonic Rift, Martial Coup, Ixidron all scale way better and are more dynamic, they allow for a better decision tree.
Ask yourself, what position what I need to be in to fully benefit in a 1 for 1 trade. Outside of "My opponent wins if I don't kill this creature" there's very few. It's much easier to deter an attack with your own creature on board. Just think, for your one creature on board, you've caused your opponent to attack someone else. That dynamic is huge. Your mana just paid for a creature on board, 6 damage to your opponent because another opponent attacked him instead of you and the opponent that got attacked is more likely to retaliate against him. Furthermore, those opponents are more likely to use the answer cards they're hoarding, so that in the future it's easier for you to take the game. Single target removal can't buy you that type of position in a game. Which brings us back to Prid3's initial comment that it's better to build yourself up, then worry about your opponent.
Any decent card with Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker is just better then Goblin Settler or Tuktuk Scrapper because on their own, those cards are mediocre-bad.
But that's not even the point. The main point is that drafting cards like Goblin Settler does nothing to put you ahead and benefits your opponents more then it does yourself. That's why cards like Acidic Slime are infinitely better because they double as protection and hit different types of targets. That might not be a fair comparison, but you get the point.
Do I think Red is a bad color ? No of course not. In terms of Power Level, Red is on par with any other color, they just don't have all the tools...yet.
Very true. One of the players in our group always says "I'd rather force my opponents to deal with what I'm doing, then having to deal with them"
Drafting an end game with protection to back it up is the most successful way to win a multiplayer draft. Unless you're passed the cards for another comprehensive strategy, your almost always better off drafting bombs - anyone remember B.R.E.A.D ? The amount of 'answer now' cards in the cube far out weighs the amount of answers(This is good, because if you could answer everything every time, the game would get dull). If you're able to put out a threat and the table can't stop it, you win the game. If they can stop it, then you're no longer a threat and the game goes on to the next threat - assuming your table has proper threat assessment.
I'm all for it.
All creatures having flash > untapping artifacts IMO.
EDIT: Why ? because chances are you have enough mana untapping your lands that the extra mana from artifacts is useless during opponents turns anyways.
It's a league, not a playgroup. If the store is willing to kick a player out of a league for following their rules, well that's just asinine. Regarding your second point, well, I'm of the opinion that oppressive decks are a lost art. The Winter Orb players of seasons past have all been hated out due to the above mentality. A whole sub-set of players wont even touch this format out of fear of being attacked by the most righteous of EDH players. It's quite sad. I'd much rather experience everything this format has to offer rather then this limited view that the so called "spirit of edh" attempts to enforce.