Magosi, the Waterveil seems like it would auto win if you had re-usable Proliferate.
Re-read the card. Part of the cost to get the extra turn is bouncing Magosi. Proliferate isn't enough to go infinite with it. Rings of Brighthearth, Amulet of Vigor, and two copies of Magosi can get you infinite turns, but two Magosis isn't possible without cloning (Vesuva, Liquimetal Coating + Phyrexian Metamorph).
Edit:
T1: Island, Amulet of Vigor
T2: Magosi, the Waterveil, add an eon counter to Magosi
T3: Skipped
T4: Island, Vesuva copying Magosi, Rings of Brighthearth
T5: Island, remove an eon counter & bounce Magosi, copy with Rings (2 extra turns), add an eon counter to Vesuva, play Magosi
T5.1: Skipped
T5.2: Remove and eon counter & bounce Vesuva, copy with Rings (2 extra turns), add an eon counter to Magosi, play Vesuva copying Magosi
T5.2.1: Skipped
T5.2.2: etc.
@Artificer Andy. I think to new or casual players counterspells seems really unfair. I was the first person in my play group to start playing Blue when all I played was casualand my friends hated it.
I can't get over the people who moan about someone countering their creature, but shrug and move on if their opponent kills it with a Doom Blade at EoT. Even for creatures without some sort of CiP ability. The net result is identical (1:1 trade, no use out of the creature), but somehow the counterspell is bad, while the removal is just something to deal with.
That implies one of two things, either you're knowingly wasting your own time, or you're cheating. If you are sufficiently randomizing the deck, then you're wasting your time, because you know that the weave has no effect. If you feel that it is having an effect, then, because its intentional its a cheating offense (specifically, Manipulation of Game materials), which is a DQ at all RELs.
Believing that it has an effect does not mean that it does have an effect. Manaweaving before (sufficiently) shuffling is basically a placebo.
basically he'll get a higher turnout if its standard rather than legacy, more money for the shop.
Yup. I would be shocked if a newbie grabbed first place in a tournament of any format with a significant prize like that. Newbies rarely get first in a regular FNM where the prize is a few packs of the newest set (probably worth $30 at most), plus the FNM promo. This tournament is giving out a $300 prize, an entire order of magnitude greater than a large FNM top prize.
So then the question of format comes down to who you want to see competing, rather than who you want to see winning. A Standard tournament is going to see many more players than a Legacy tournament. In most areas, the only way you might get more people to show up would be to make it Limited, but Limited tournaments almost always require that you pay for the product you're opening in addition to the entry fee, which would reduce access compared to Standard.
Ok, thank you. I didn't know whether effect was classified as a trigger or anything including spells.
When Doubling Season uses the word 'effect', it's using the English meaning of the word. The effect of some card. If DS were to only work on triggered abilities (or abilities in general), it would specifically say "triggered ability" or "ability" instead of "effect".
Rather than filling every deck with banal responses, it is preferable to allow some flexibility in the composition of a deck.
Players may bring a 10 card sideboard in addition to their 99 cards and 1 Commander.
After Commanders are announced, players have 3 minutes to make 1-for-1 substitutions to their deck.
Any cards not played as part of the deck may be retrieved by "wishes".
Reasoning:
Highly tuned threats piloted by skilled opponents mandate efficient answers. The minimum number of response cards required to ensure they are available in the early turns can easily overwhelm the majority of an EDH deck's building space.
Sideboards allow players to respond to the "best" strategies in a timely fashion . They should be strongly considered as a necessary defense against brokenness and degeneracy in an environment where no gentlemans agreement on style of play exists.
I am curious why the 2HG rules influenced EDH rules in your group?
Because that rules change was before Commander was released. I suppose you could argue that if they wanted 20 poison with Commander they should have released that rule along with Commander, but Wizards is also trying to take more of a hands-off approach to Commander rules.
It's really a moot point in general, because I'm the only one in the group with a poison EDH deck at all, and I've been playing it less and less in favor of my Glissa voltron deck.
I just do not understand why someone would take the "double the life, double the poison" stance, but not double other aspects of the game. And, why the line was drawn at Poison... it just seems so random.
Magic has 3 loss conditions that are part of the rules, rather than the ability of a card: life at 0 (starting from 20 for normal games), drawing when your deck is at 0 (starting from 60 for normal games for most players), and reaching 10 poison (for normal games, starting from 0).
Two-Headed Giant modifies two of these rules, to start at 1.5x normal life, and ending at 1.5x normal poison.
EDH modifies two of these rules, to start at 2x normal life, and to start at 1.65x normal cards. The logic in also doubling the required amount of poison is that it's extending the duration required to lose a game. That's why it's silly to suggest things like doubling a creature's power; doubling poison isn't about doubling everything, it's about making the game take longer.
Also, 10 poison marginalizes General damage, which is one of the unique aspects of the format.
Edit:
T1: Island, Amulet of Vigor
T2: Magosi, the Waterveil, add an eon counter to Magosi
T3: Skipped
T4: Island, Vesuva copying Magosi, Rings of Brighthearth
T5: Island, remove an eon counter & bounce Magosi, copy with Rings (2 extra turns), add an eon counter to Vesuva, play Magosi
T5.1: Skipped
T5.2: Remove and eon counter & bounce Vesuva, copy with Rings (2 extra turns), add an eon counter to Magosi, play Vesuva copying Magosi
T5.2.1: Skipped
T5.2.2: etc.
Humans are not rational beings. Spock taught us that.
Agreed, with one exception: Shahrazad. Not really broken, it just makes tournaments take too long.
Fatespinner also amuses me.
Tempest edition of Time Warp is awesome, simply because it's a Squee/Rocky mashup.
So then the question of format comes down to who you want to see competing, rather than who you want to see winning. A Standard tournament is going to see many more players than a Legacy tournament. In most areas, the only way you might get more people to show up would be to make it Limited, but Limited tournaments almost always require that you pay for the product you're opening in addition to the entry fee, which would reduce access compared to Standard.
It may be an optional rule, but it's official.
It's really a moot point in general, because I'm the only one in the group with a poison EDH deck at all, and I've been playing it less and less in favor of my Glissa voltron deck.
Magic has 3 loss conditions that are part of the rules, rather than the ability of a card: life at 0 (starting from 20 for normal games), drawing when your deck is at 0 (starting from 60 for normal games for most players), and reaching 10 poison (for normal games, starting from 0).
Two-Headed Giant modifies two of these rules, to start at 1.5x normal life, and ending at 1.5x normal poison.
EDH modifies two of these rules, to start at 2x normal life, and to start at 1.65x normal cards. The logic in also doubling the required amount of poison is that it's extending the duration required to lose a game. That's why it's silly to suggest things like doubling a creature's power; doubling poison isn't about doubling everything, it's about making the game take longer.
Also, 10 poison marginalizes General damage, which is one of the unique aspects of the format.