2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on [SCD] Sun Quan, Lord of Wu
    I have been dying to make the Sun Quan aggro/control deck for a while now I have just haven't done it yet due to thinking it would probably flop... if someone else has done it, how has it worked? What type of decks do you play against and anyone have a decklist? Grin
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Best Mono-U or U/W "Pillow Fort" Generals
    Do people actually like group hug generals in other metas? I always see them as the number one target because you might be helping me but you're helping my 3 opponents just as much. Group hug in my meta is almost always a bad way to go...
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [MCD] Mono-black Rattlesnakes
    Vengeful Pharaoh seems like it would fit really well. Can discard to Volrath and use it as protection if someone decides to hit you. Then you can do it all over again.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on [GMAD] Budget Stonebrow
    Gotta have some Boartusk Liege
    Posted in: Multiplayer Commander Decklists
  • posted a message on Death Throes
    Quote from Macius
    My group has a weird way to concede. Lets say that im facing lethal Exsanguinate, and it would leave another foe at a loss of 10 life, if I concede, its assumed I took the damage.

    The only time I'll trully conced personally is when I know im dead and dont want to work out the math, and that usualy means we pick a large number that sounds right and thats what it is.....

    but nuking the field as you die? Pitiful
    Twice? Sad
    Three time? Yup, overkill for sure. I'd say do it.


    Conceding to stop someone from winning is not permitted in our play group. If you ult Garruk, Primal Hunter and drop 10x 6/6 wurms into play and the next guy casts Insurrection on his turn you aren't allowed to concede to stop that person from winning. That's just being childish.
    I think nuking the field as you die is lame but retaliating against the person killing you is perfectly reasonable. Maybe it's personal opinion but say if someone Banefire's me for lethal and in response I cast Rout or an instant Armageddon effect that targets everyone and simply slows the game down to a crawl, that would be me just being an ass.

    Then again I would be dead and the game would be moving at a snails pace so really who am I hurting more than myself, considering I would need to sit out longer. Smile
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Looking to make an explosive Mono Red EDH deck
    Ok so I am looking to make a mono red Rakka Mar deck that is horribly painful and destructive. I have a deck list put together and was hoping for some input on what to add/remove.

    I know mono red is weak in a number of areas and is generally considered to be a bad idea in EDH but the color really appeals to me.

    Our EDH games have been lasting 2+ hrs per game and I am looking to speed them up with some heat.

    The deck is elemental/shaman themed and if you notice a card missing that is $10+ I've probably left it out intentionally.

    So here is the list and thanks in advance to anyone willing to help Smile

    Posted in: Multiplayer Commander Decklists
  • posted a message on Zombie Beatdown EDH?
    Green Black also works well for zombies, you could use Glissa, the Traitor or Skullbriar, the Walking Grave as your general.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Duel/Multi Tier List
    Yea, for the most part the general isn't the deciding factor in what "tier" the deck fits into. There are plenty of players who make decks with "tier1 and 2" generals but don't fill in the deck with "tier 1 and 2" cards.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Examples of poor behaviour during games
    Quote from MrPink343
    I would agree that speed is the real key here. If your route to victory involves infinite combos or Winter Orb lock-down or mass LD, just make sure you can actually win with those cards and I'll at most grumble a bit before shuffling up for the next game. But dropping Winter Orb with no immediate win-con in sight just because it's technically a "good play" is incredibly irksome imo. Sure, you've given yourself a huge advantage and you may very well translate that advantage into victory long term, but at the cost of ensuring that you are the only one having fun. And in a format that is rarely played for tangible prizes, what's the point of that? To prove that you care about winning so much that you're willing to grind an otherwise entertaining game of Magic to a crawl for some fleeting logistical advantage? It just strikes me as unbelievably selfish.


    I agree completely.
    We have one guy in our 6 player EDH games that has built a deck that doesn't win... all it does is grief. The deck consists of counterspells, board wipes, extra turns, and chaos cards. He also doesn't understand why he is always the first target during our games. When confronted about it and how it isn't fun to play against, he says that is the type of deck he has fun with and if the point is for us all to have fun shouldn't he be able to play the deck type he enjoys? I guess I have no recourse at that point.

    I personally build my decks to be fun for myself and I try to avoid cards that really irk people. Maybe it's just me but I find that if the people I am playing with aren't having fun neither am I...
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Examples of poor behaviour during games
    Quote from Napoleon
    Actually I drop winter orb about every game I play using my sygg deck. I have only had one person rage over it. And I have played it atleast ten times.


    Dropping winter orb without a clear way to win the next couple turns is about as lame as using mass LD with no way to win the game.

    It's a griefer move and I'd understand people being annoyed.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on How often do you go for the Win?
    Quote from crstisalie
    Well, I have to admit that the people in my playgroup are all super competitive (as am I), so I play to win at all costs. However, if my playgroup were more casual oriented, I would try to adjust my style of play to that of a more casual nature.

    I do admit, though, that I might have a hard time not going for the win each and every game where the opportunity presents itself. I'm always thinking to myself while I play. I'll ask myself, 'Okay, what is the best thing to do in this situation?' Sometimes it's an obvious answer; sometimes it's not so obvious (I used to play a lot of competitive Magic years ago, so maybe that's where I get this mentality from). I mean, if anyone here had the option to make the game last longer by making the wrong move/playing the wrong card, would you do it (I hope I'm making sense)? Because the more I think about it, the more I am not sure if I could intentionally hold off a game ending play to make the game last longer. Why not just end the game and move on to the next? I'm sure if other players found out that someone at the table could have won X amount of turns earlier, but they held back for some reason, they would/could get pretty irritated. I know I would. Especially if I had been the one to win the game, but later found out that an opponent of mine was intentionally holding back the winning play. I would feel pretty cheated, and it would make the win unsatisfactory (I hope I haven't gone too far off topic).

    I just don't see the point in ever intentionally holding back the game ending play. As I aforementioned, if you can end the game outright, why not just end it, and move on to the next game.

    Are people like me and my playgroup, people who play to win at all costs, the minority in Commander?


    I agree with most of what you said here. It infuriates me when someone says "I could have won at such and such a time, if only I had done this" It's total BS because I'm sure at lease one person had something to stop whatever it is you are convinced would have won you the game.

    /rant
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Triumph of the Hordes: Cheap or Not?
    It's the same thing as overrun and similar cards. It's not cheap in the least. Now if you want to talk cheap, look at infinite combo shenanigans.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Attacking Multiple Players and EDH
    Quote from CarstenHaese
    That's incorrect.

    802. Attack Multiple Players Option

    802.2. As the combat phase starts, the attacking player doesn't choose an opponent to become the defending player. Instead, all the attacking player's opponents are defending players during the combat phase.

    802.3. As the attacking player declares each attacking creature, he or she chooses a defending player or a planeswalker controlled by a defending player for it to attack. See rule 508, "Declare Attackers Step."

    903.2. A Commander game may be a two-player game or a multiplayer game. The default multiplayer setup is the Free-for-All variant with the attack multiple players option and without the limited range of influence option. See rule 806, "Free-for-All Variant."


    Thanks Carsten, I guess I was looking at an outdated rule set that was refering to rule 602 which is now about activated abilities. Seems the one I was looking for has moved to 802.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Attacking Multiple Players and EDH
    No need to explain it any further, "yes" is all the answer I needed. Thanks much!
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Attacking Multiple Players and EDH
    I found the rule corresponding to attacking multiple players in one combat phase(602) but haven't been able to find a definitive answer on whether or not it applies in EDH...

    So can someone attack multiple players in one combat step in EDH? Smile

    Thanks in advance.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.