March 2015 Banned Announcement - Goodbye Tucking!

[Ace/Homebrew]

BANNED LIST
No changes

RULES UPDATES
Hang onto your hats: we’re changing how tuck works for commanders.

If your commander would go into the library or your hand, you may choose to put it into the command zone. It’s as simple as that. Just like with the graveyard, if you want it to go into the library/hand, you’re more than welcome to let it. Note that this is a replacement effect, but it can apply multiple times to the same event.

There are four major points in how we arrived at this decision. None of them individually was the silver bullet; the combination of factors got us to where we ended up. In no particular order:

1) We want to engender as positive an experience as we can for players. Nothing runs the feel-bads worse than having your commander unavailable to you for the whole game.

2) The presence of tuck encourages players to play more tutors so that in case their commander gets sent to the library, they can get it back—exactly the opposite of what we want (namely, discouraging the over-representation of tutors).

3) While we are keenly aware that tuck is a great weapon against problematic commanders, the tools to do so are available only in blue and white, potentially forcing players into feeling like they need to play those colors in order to survive. We prefer as diverse a field as possible.

4) It clears up some corner case rules awkwardness, mostly dealing with knowing the commander’s locationin the library (since highly unlikely to actually end up there).

When FRF came out, manifest led us to talking about what it meant to be a commander—which is what got us talking about tuck in the first place. After a long discussion, we decided the best course regarding commander-ness was no change. Your commander is always your commander regardless of where it is or its status. That means enough hits from a face-down commander can kill you.

Source (http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=17560)

[Ace/Homebrew]

I'm bummed about the change in the sense that I personally exploited the rules loophole since I put Cromat together.
But this rules change has logic on its side in the sense that the intent was to always have access to your general and now that is possible.

I am reminded of the rules change that neutered Clone's ability to kill generals. I look back on that as a positive change because clones shouldn't have been able to do that really... and I haven't noticed the game is less fun without that silly loophole.

[audioslave]

This change just feels bad on all levels to me, and I am typically the person that is getting targeted by the 'tuck effect' type spells.

1) We want to engender as positive an experience as we can for players. Nothing runs the feel-bads worse than having your commander unavailable to you for the whole game.

-I don't agree with this on the basis that decks still do things regardless of what the commander is or does. While most decks won't work optimally under those conditions, I think many can and still function in different ways without their general. I think that is part of the fun in building a resilient and unique deck. It's the customization of a deck from the perspective of the color pie, the meta you play in, and the support system you build into the deck.

2) The presence of tuck encourages players to play more tutors so that in case their commander gets sent to the library, they can get it back—exactly the opposite of what we want (namely, discouraging the over-representation of tutors).

-False, I was playing those tutors anyways. Instead of getting card X, I picked up my General instead. Inferring that people wouldn't play those cards because they don't have to worry about their general ending up in their library is misleading at worst and probably just a poor conclusion to draw from whatever conversation the rules committee had at best.

3) While we are keenly aware that tuck is a great weapon against problematic commanders, the tools to do so are available only in blue and white, potentially forcing players into feeling like they need to play those colors in order to survive. We prefer as diverse a field as possible.

-Also not true. And for what it's worth, the color pie exists for a reason, other colors get things that blue and white don't have access to, and that's ok.

4) It clears up some corner case rules awkwardness, mostly dealing with knowing the commander’s location in the library (since highly unlikely to actually end up there).

-Like....?

When FRF came out, manifest led us to talking about what it meant to be a commander—which is what got us talking about tuck in the first place. After a long discussion, we decided the best course regarding commander-ness was no change. Your commander is always your commander regardless of where it is or its status. That means enough hits from a face-down commander can kill you.

-Whatever, so obscure who gives a shit, even if I disagree. If your general is face down, it's a 2/2 with no creature type, name, or any other identifying characteristics.

When I look at this update on the whole, they shoehorned in a new set of rules, at the cost of cards not playing how they read. That seems like a mistake all the way around.

[Davran]

Honestly, this change seems like a mistake to me.

Realistically, there are 2 reasons you'd tuck someone's general:

1. The general is problematic (e.g. Prossh, Zur, Maelstrom Wanderer etc.) or otherwise difficult to deal with (e.g. Theros block gods), thus limiting the amount of realistic ways to ensure that it stays good and dead.

2. You're being "that guy" and doing it because you can.

I suppose there is also a subset of incidental general tucking where you fire off a Hallowed Burial or whatever to hit the Maelstrom Wanderer and also get my general as collateral damage...but whatever.

My point here is that by attempting to keep things "feel good", they've made already powerful commanders even more powerful. This, in turn, makes the more "fair" commanders worse because now it's even harder to keep up with the big guys. I would be less dubious about the change if "banned as a commander" were still a thing, but in what universe does this change not lead to more banned cards because their power as a general is now too strong?

[TsumiBand]

I'm pretty ambivalent on it.

First a tangent: Tuck is stupid. AFAICT tuck started seeing more print at a playable cost as creatures in general became more resilient and more effectively costed, to the point where people were questioning whether or not traditional draw-go control could even exist anymore. It answers durdly guys with indestructible and/or hexproof; let us not forget that Terminus was printed in the same block as Geist of Saint Traft. I can only imagine that these insanely resilient creatures all just slipped under the radar a few at a time until someone looked around and said, "hey woah woah wait a minute, creature decks are almost as un-interactive as those old control decks now. How fix?" It exists for a clear reason, but I kind of despise the reasons that prompted tuck in the first place. I don't just mean like Plow Under type stuff, I do mean like Hallowed Burial/Condemn/all those things.

As for the subject at hand - I don't mind the idea that a deck should 'always' have access to its commander. The busted commanders that have no problem being recast are more annoying now, sure - but there are just as many decks that don't care if they ever actually cast their commander to win, and honestly I've always found those decks to be more abhorrent than the Scion of the Durp-Dragon insta-kill type. This is probably vicious anecdote but the majority of players I've seen that actually stroll in with 5-color Storm decks or whatever are honestly just there to troll the format with its typical lack of countermagic just to showcase how "stupid" EDH is. It's like, yeah man, great jorb you did there, you broke the format by turning a Vintage deck into an EDH deck, nobody cares, gosh how do you get dressed in the morning with a dick that big, etc etc...

So yeah, I guess stuff like Theros Gods become a bigger PITA and things that were already unfair might get a little worse. FTR while I'm talking about dumb things, it does make things really dumb to 'track' your commander as a 2/2 face-down creature, I don't know why they would even bother with that unless it totally screws with the commander rules that are already in place. And yeah there are some printings like Chaos Warp and Unexpectedly Absent that suddenly suck a bit more - but those are bad in EDH already because spot removal is generally dumb unless you're 1v1ing it.

I dunno it could just be that I'm not giving it the right read, I spent the last 24 hours with a nasty stomach bug and it's dicking with my brain power. On the whole though this feels like a neutral change to me.

[Ace/Homebrew]

I'm pretty ambivalent on it. *SNIP* On the whole though this feels like a neutral change to me.
I agree. My flagship deck runs 5 tuck effects (Terminus, Hallowed Burial, Hinder, Spell Crumple, and Bant Charm). Of them, I will probably only cut Bant Charm because of the new rules. The rest still do what I want them to do most of the time. Again I am reminded of the legendary rule change and how I cut Phyrexian Metamorph as a result. No biggie, now the game is played as intended and a loophole is closed. French rules EDH has handled tuck effects this way for a while now.

It is quite funny to see people's heads a'splode over at MtG Commander Forums:

Rules Committee Should Disband (http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17566)
More unnecessary changes (http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17563)
What ways do we, the player base, have for repealing rule? (http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17568)

[Baumeister]

I have actually played this ruling for a while as a house rule and it feels like a natural extension of the power of your commander. After a few games, it began to feel like the change that took place when clones were neutered. Yes, it sucks at first, but other cards fill the void that is created.

Also, go buy your Ixidrons before they shoot up in price!

[(nameless one)]

Does this affect Tiny Leaders?

[Aggro_zombies]

I think this ruling is, in general, not great.

That said, there are plenty of groups out there for whom this ruling is a godsend because the most prevalent use of tuck is, "Some asshole UW/x Control player tucked my Anax and Cymede because he's an asshole," and this change prevents those sorts of feel-bad moments. It's just a pity the rules committee adamantly refuses to actually balance the format competitively because the above situation has now been replaced with, "Some asshole Maelstrom Wanderer player roflstomped us and there was nothing we could do because we couldn't deal with Maelstrom Wanderer," which is feel bad in an entirely different way.

I suspect there's going to be a lot more crying about busted generals now. Always having access to a specific card in your list sounds great until you realize how incredibly broken it is to always have access to a specific card in your list.

[Ace/Homebrew]

"Some asshole UW/x Control player tucked my Anax and Cymede because he's an asshole."
This change is keeping with their banning philosophy as far as I see. Primeval Titan and Sylvan Primordial were banned because they were cards that made casual players into dicks (whereas broken stuff like Lion's Eye Diamond and Hermit Druid were only ever used by dicks, mostly to play cutthroat games against other dicks). Hey! My Mimeoplasm deck runs both those cards...

For example:
Jimmy the Dick runs a cutthroat Derevi list, so Timmy and Johnny run Hinder and Hallowed Burial (respectively) to keep Jimmy the Dick from dominating the local store. Unfortunately Timmy and Johnny don't only play against Jimmy the Dick... Sally and Kyle have commander precons and play with Timmy and Johnny more often than Jimmy the Dick does, so they have to deal with getting their commanders tucked more often than Jimmy the Dick.

Now Timmy and Johnny are dicks because of Jimmy the Dick. Sure Jimmy the Dick is going to win every game he plays now, but social pressure should solve that. I plan on being more vocal about not allowing decks that kill a pod in 4 or 5 turns in the games I play.

[Aggro_zombies]

I suspect social pressure will be the go-to solution now for broken commanders because I just can't see the rules committee going on a banning spree to handle those cards. I just hate refusing to play against people because it feels so juvenile.

[Ace/Homebrew]

I just hate refusing to play against people because it feels so juvenile.
Good point. But I'm talking about the guy who's deck consistently ends a 4 person pod by turn 4 or 5. If you can eliminate one player by turn 5, good on you! Maybe he deserved it. If I can't stop you by the time you get to me, let's shuffle up and try again, now it's 3 on 1. :tongue:

The games that go: sac Academy Rector to High Market, herp derp Omniscience, tutor, I win! on turn 4 are fun for no one.

[TsumiBand]

Jesus Fuck just play LD though.

Like seriously, they'll change the rules to make tuck suck but they just say "welp" when it comes to Geddon and friends. Dislike huge commanders, blow up they land

[Aggro_zombies]

Good point. But I'm talking about the guy who's deck consistently ends a 4 person pod by turn 4 or 5. If you can eliminate one player by turn 5, good on you! Maybe he deserved it. If I can't stop you by the time you get to me, let's shuffle up and try again, now it's 3 on 1. :tongue:

The games that go: sac Academy Rector to High Market, herp derp Omniscience, tutor, I win! on turn 4 are fun for no one.
My general way of dealing with this is to say, "Okay! Congrats. You won. Now we're going to play for second place." Winner McWinnerson then gets to sit there for the next 45 minutes to an hour or whatever watching the game and being bored while the rest of us enjoy ourselves. It's usually a pretty good way to send a message.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Tsumi, don't you know that LD is forbidden in EDH? Only Jimmy the Dick would play it, but he's far too occupied with his Vintage-into-EDH five-colors Druid combo.



My general way of dealing with this is to say, "Okay! Congrats. You won. Now we're going to play for second place." Winner McWinnerson then gets to sit there for the next 45 minutes to an hour or whatever watching the game and being bored while the rest of us enjoy ourselves. It's usually a pretty good way to send a message.
I hope you're not against wins at all. Because sometimes it's exactly what the table needs, an instanto win out of nowhere that ends the stalemate.

[Aggro_zombies]

I hope you're not against wins at all. Because sometimes it's exactly what the table needs, an instanto win out of nowhere that ends the stalemate.
No, I just don't want the game to be over on turn four every time. If I want to win brutally I'd rather play a format with an actually reasonable banned list that's designed for competitive play.

My ideal game length is probably in the neighborhood of 30-45 minutes. It's long enough that people can do cool things but not so long that it gets tedious.

[Davran]

I suspect social pressure will be the go-to solution now for broken commanders because I just can't see the rules committee going on a banning spree to handle those cards. I just hate refusing to play against people because it feels so juvenile.

The problem is some of the guys with the "broken" decks don't seem to get the hint - we had a guy show up at EDH night a couple weeks ago with his turn 3 Kozilek deck who couldn't fathom why everyone was blowing up his stuff and attacking him exclusively. Same deal with a different guy who resolves Iona naming a color 50% of the table is at least splashing who can't figure out why he's getting attacked - all he kept saying was "C'mon guys, everyone hates blue! Why are you attacking me?" Then Iona dies and he's rushing to find some way to reanimate it, because he needs to save us from ourselves or whatever.

My point is that the "social contract" is effective if your group is constant. Anyone with reasonable observation skills can easily tell when his buddies are having a bad time, and adjust his deck and/or play accordingly. Once you add a new element to that group with a different idea of what's "fair" or "fun", the whole thing goes to hell. Things like Hinder were broad enough to deal with whatever your group thinks is "fair" while also keeping the random turn 3 Kozilek in check.


Jesus Fuck just play LD though.

Like seriously, they'll change the rules to make tuck suck but they just say "welp" when it comes to Geddon and friends. Dislike huge commanders, blow up they land

Isn't running out a 'geddon because that one guy has a Maelstrom Wanderer or whatever a bit like punishing the whole class because little Timmy was late this morning? I mean, you're not wrong - LD is a perfectly valid solution to the "problem" we're all whining about. I suppose this will spur me to actually use my Strip Mines and Wastelands for more than colorless mana on occasion.

[TsumiBand]

Isn't running out a 'geddon because that one guy has a Maelstrom Wanderer or whatever a bit like punishing the whole class because little Timmy was late this morning? I mean, you're not wrong - LD is a perfectly valid solution to the "problem" we're all whining about. I suppose this will spur me to actually use my Strip Mines and Wastelands for more than colorless mana on occasion.

This one aspect of the 'gentleman's agreement' I have never gotten behind, and it is the primary reason why I have disliked certain bans from older times (namely giant Green things that get/blow up land) for the fact that people aren't willing to just accidentally the world. I play Kaalia of the Vast, in fact it was my firstest EDH deck and it is why I fell in love with the format - KotV is Goblin Lackey for giant fucking beatsticks! The obvious problem being that she is a candy-ass and dies to everything under the sun. So the obvious lines of keeping her around and making her stick are to get to 4 mana, start dropping fatties, and then being a cock and casting Bust or Geddon or Cataclysm or something. If I didn't play those spells that deck would be ass and could not offer anything over a longer game.

It's true that a poorly timed Armageddon effect will prolong a game, but so does any "spell flailing", which is my least favorite attribute about PUGs; you get those randoms that just wanna cast dat Terminate, and so they target some random fucking thing of yours, even though there is no reason to do so except "I did something! I did something! Wheeeee" So yeah if you do that with your LD, then of course the game goes stale.

I mean the RC is clear on excising things that aren't "sportsmanlike" as demonstrated by their rules changes from previous times including this one, so if they didn't honestly want some amount of LD around then they would ban the hard stuff. And it doesn't have to be all lands all the time; Wildfire is still a card, and it keeps people from topping out too quickly while also punishing a quick start with Green ramp spells. Impending Disaster is still a card for that matter; sure fine, Explosive Vegetation away, Maelstrom Durpener. Seems strong.

And a lot of this doesn't even apply to more competitive tables, right - but that isn't the point. The point is, the earlier statements regarding "dicks play cards ABC, other guys play cards XYZ" is totally right, and that's really the motivator behind a lot of the question marks of the RC list - they're banning and changing rules in ways that appeal to all parties instead of trimming the fat by catering to one group. Ultimately, it pushes the little Venn diagram of cards that both groups play a little closer together, and so ultimately the 'little kids' have to start realizing that control is Not A Bad Thing, and that they should expect some lands to get blowed up from time to time in order to preserve some actual sanity. And for God's sake, casting
your spells in the right order helps too.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

No, I just don't want the game to be over on turn four every time. If I want to win brutally I'd rather play a format with an actually reasonable banned list that's designed for competitive play.

My ideal game length is probably in the neighborhood of 30-45 minutes. It's long enough that people can do cool things but not so long that it gets tedious.

Then we can agree to agree. :smile:

Thing is that an occasional combo is fine as long as it isn't the linear combo deck that wins 99% of time with the ever same play. I'd love to build a GW EDH full of small combos (like Melira-Primus-Altar, Mike/Trike, Rip+Helm, etc.) just for the fun of playing a combo deck in the least combo colors. In a 100-cards deck and with lots of interchangeable pieces, this might be different every time, moreover I guess it could be easily disrupted due to the fact of no protection included (ok, other than City of Solitude effects.)

But I do understand why this is frowned upon and in fact I'd be extremely dishonest if I'd leave Legacy with its streamlined boring repetitive gaming only to defend the streamlined boring repetitive EDH decks.

One memory I got in mind, though, is when we played a pentagram and we left a friend of us completely unchecked coz reasons... and he went like Demonic Tutor, Entomb, Eternal Witness, SotF, Vampiric and then killed us with infinite Shivan Hellkite, all this over a few turns (so it wasn't a "real" combo) and in context of an old-frame only EDH plus an extreme stalemate. "Congrats man, this was hilarious, brilliant, well-played and relieving!" was what could be heard all over the table.

[Davran]

It's true that a poorly timed Armageddon effect will prolong a game, but so does any "spell flailing", which is my least favorite attribute about PUGs; you get those randoms that just wanna cast dat Terminate, and so they target some random fucking thing of yours, even though there is no reason to do so except "I did something! I did something! Wheeeee" So yeah if you do that with your LD, then of course the game goes stale.

"Spell flailing" is the perfect description for my most frequent complaint about the format. I can't tell you the number of times someone has killed my "scary" thing while the guy to my left has drawn some stupid amount of cards and has a dominant board position simply because "well, his guy has hexproof...and I wanted to do something...so yeah, kill your thing I guess". It's like the cardboard in their hand is on some sort of ticking clock or whatever and it'll blow up if they don't windmill it onto the table...but I digress.


I mean the RC is clear on excising things that aren't "sportsmanlike" as demonstrated by their rules changes from previous times including this one, so if they didn't honestly want some amount of LD around then they would ban the hard stuff. And it doesn't have to be all lands all the time; Wildfire is still a card, and it keeps people from topping out too quickly while also punishing a quick start with Green ramp spells. Impending Disaster is still a card for that matter; sure fine, Explosive Vegetation away, Maelstrom Durpener. Seems strong.

And a lot of this doesn't even apply to more competitive tables, right - but that isn't the point. The point is, the earlier statements regarding "dicks play cards ABC, other guys play cards XYZ" is totally right, and that's really the motivator behind a lot of the question marks of the RC list - they're banning and changing rules in ways that appeal to all parties instead of trimming the fat by catering to one group. Ultimately, it pushes the little Venn diagram of cards that both groups play a little closer together, and so ultimately the 'little kids' have to start realizing that control is Not A Bad Thing, and that they should expect some lands to get blowed up from time to time in order to preserve some actual sanity. And for God's sake, casting
your spells in the right order helps too.

The stigma and the salt from 'geddon is definitely real. Hell, I once had to sit through a 10 minute rant about how much of an asshole I was because I had the balls to disrupt someone's "combo" with an Obliterate and kill him 3 turns later with a fatty of my own. Apparently having the foresight to play a spell that neatly interacts with the otherwise untouchable as a win condition makes me a jerk or whatever...I guess I should stick to the usual 2 card combos like 99% of the rest of the world.

Point is, I don't think that the RC is always acting with everyone's best interests at heart. This change in particular seems squarely out of left field, and addresses a "problem" that I personally have never seen. I'd feel the same way if they came out against LD, or Storm, or any other "feel bad" component of the game simply because some subset of the playerbase can't be arsed to figure out how to work around the cards that exist.

[Ace/Homebrew]

My general way of dealing with this is to say, "Okay! Congrats. You won. Now we're going to play for second place." Winner McWinnerson then gets to sit there for the next 45 minutes to an hour or whatever watching the game and being bored while the rest of us enjoy ourselves. It's usually a pretty good way to send a message.
I like this strategy and will adopt it. :laugh:

On Combo-Win: BDP is correct, sometimes the game just needs to end. If a half hour has passed, anything is fair game. I wouldn't ever complain about a game winning combo requiring 4 or more cards. If it requires 3 cards and the game has gone on long enough, I'm good with it too!

I can finally combo off with Planeswalkers but it requires The Chain Veil, Rings of Brighthearth, big mana like Gilded Lotus or Xenagos, the Reveler, and an untapper like Tezzeret the Seeker, or Ral Zarek... Along with something that does damage like Sorin Markov or Ajani Vengeant. If I can assemble all that and you can't disrupt me, I deserve the win. :tongue:


I'd feel the same way if they came out against LD, or Storm, or any other "feel bad" component of the game simply because some subset of the playerbase can't be arsed to figure out how to work around the cards that exist.
I think those feel-bads are safe. None of them directly involve your general.

[TsumiBand]

My general way of dealing with this is to say, "Okay! Congrats. You won. Now we're going to play for second place." Winner McWinnerson then gets to sit there for the next 45 minutes to an hour or whatever watching the game and being bored while the rest of us enjoy ourselves. It's usually a pretty good way to send a message.

+46

I like this approach. "urr you won, have a pizza trophy. rest of us play crds now kthx"

[Amon Amarth]

I don't know how to feel about this change.

[Ace/Homebrew]

Posting for completion's sake:

Tuck (http://www.starcitygames.com/article/30542_Tuck.html) - An article by Sheldon Menery hosted at Starcitygames.com.


We believe this change will open opportunities for deckbuilders and players, not shut them down. I've been very happy to read over last several days folks saying things like "Now I feel like I can dust off that janky deck I've been wanting to play." I find they're more representative of our target player base than those who predict gloom and doom because of commander-tuck's disappearance. A few players have threatened that they're going to go out and build oppressive decks just to demonstrate how bad they think this change is. Although I suspect that's mostly wind, I'll argue that it's not the change or any card which makes oppression in this case, it's the player making a conscious choice to be oppressive. I've long said that it's not difficult to break this format. The secret is in not breaking it.

[Aggro_zombies]

One of the significant arguments for this change was that tuck (and bounce, although that's kind of a non-factor here since it's generally better for you for your commander to go into your hand instead of the command zone because then you won't have to pay the command tax) wasn't in line with going to exile and graveyard. Tuck and bounce worked one way; exile and graveyard worked differently. We thought it was worthwhile to provide consistency across the board.
Honestly, this is literally all they had to say about this change. All the other reasons they gave are weak or have obvious counterarguments, but this is a good, solid reason to make the change.

[TsumiBand]

I do sort of appreciate the fact that SM constantly reminds that the goal is not to hone the format in the same way as a typical Constructed format ban/restrict list. That person who builds Thraximundar-But-Actually-Storm-Combo-lolz EDH deck is always going to be "that guy", there's nothing you can do about that (except use Aggro_zombie's strategy of basically exiling the winner from the game and letting those poor plebes play to 2nd, boohoo for them who don't realize they aren't #1).

If Commander is fundamentally to be about experience crafting through deck building, then it follows therefore that any change which empowers more people to do that is positive. It's true that previously "bad" commanders are worth another look; I'm going to re-approach Skullbriar and give some consideration to other card choices in other decks now knowing that the commander can safely pop back to the command zone under virtually all circumstances.

I also like what he said about tutors in general, since they do seem to clash with the Highlander nature of the format:


We like to discourage the over-representation of tutors, believing that the singleton nature of the format is best enjoyed when you don't have the same kind of repeatability and regularity that you have in other Constructed formats. The whole idea of this format is to be different, not just a variant version of the same. I never wanted this format to be alt-Vintage, and as long as I'm part of the decision-making process, I'll try to keep that from happening. I get that some folks simply can't wrap their heads around that, that the only way they see things is to optimize their efficiency. That's just not the direction we want to head. We think the presence of tuck encourages players to play more tutors than they might otherwise so that in case their commander gets sent to the library, they can get it back-exactly the opposite of what we want. Some people have misinterpreted this as us thinking that the primary reason people play tutors is tuck. That's not the case at all. We considered it an additive/contributing factor, and a little extra discouragement is worth the effort.

Some folks have responded with "well, if you're so worried about tutors, then ban them all." This isn't sawing the board, this is sanding the cut. We're not panicky about tutors; this explanation was a nudge in the direction of getting players thinking about running them in great numbers. Discrete use of tutors is generally fine, but there definitely isn't a method of being objective about it. I can't tell you "two tutors is okay, but three isn't." My general rule, which is confessedly pretty broad, is don't tutor to just win, tutor to do something cool, deal with a threat, or to survive. I swear to you that I'm having more fun with the format the fewer tutors I play. I get that your mileage is certain to vary.


I don't necessarily envy the guy's position; he's got to try to moderate a format to work for a *lot* of different kinds of groups. We're accustomed to windmill-slammed control from the DCI; "Cards X, Y, and Z are banned in this format because Spike flat out owns this format and defines its legitimacy through and through, and Spike breaks those cards which break the format and so we removed them." EDH cannot ever actually do that, because it is for so many more people and aimed at a much different experience.

I had this talk with my LGS owner a little while ago; I know exactly what I'm doing when I go to the store and look for singles that say "Outlast" on them so I can build a new deck. I get it. I really do. It isn't 'real Abzan' like those decks with the $20-per-card mana fixers and $10 rhinoceroses and so on. I fucking know. I also fucking know that I'm building a deck that I think is going to be entertaining for me to play. Yes, Hardened Scales + Phantom Centaur is a fucking joke (but those centaurs are going to be HUGE, I don't even care). No, I'm not a moron who has no sense of real synergy - I'm just a guy who has had his relationship with the game change from trying to play higher tier Eternal stuff and then watching my community fall away, so I pivoted to playing with the guys at work and fueling up the roflcopter when it comes time to build a deck. I think I can play bad cards well, and I know what I'm doing, and that's the end of it.

I said that to say this - that I think, and I'm starting to think it more than previous, that the RC knows exactly what they are doing and are willing to leave the kinds of moderation people crave in EDH to its own members, in smaller and smaller affinity groups, precisely for this reason. That players know the game they want to play, and that players have a choice in signing on to play competitive Spike Magic, and that if a group of players get together and have some concept of that Magic they'd like to be playing and yet someone at the table insists on making life shitty by playing something contrary to that, it's a localized problem and not an issue that can be solved by edict from a foreign governing body. Spike was always going to break the game, lower the fundamental turn, decrease interactivity, win more. That's what Spike does. If that is the goal, then the rules are literally not the issue in this instance.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Honestly, this is literally all they had to say about this change. All the other reasons they gave are weak or have obvious counterarguments, but this is a good, solid reason to make the change.

Yes, that's it. I like this change.



I had this talk with my LGS owner a little while ago; I know exactly what I'm doing when I go to the store and look for singles that say "Outlast" on them so I can build a new deck. I get it. I really do. It isn't 'real Abzan' like those decks with the $20-per-card mana fixers and $10 rhinoceroses and so on. I fucking know. I also fucking know that I'm building a deck that I think is going to be entertaining for me to play. Yes, Hardened Scales + Phantom Centaur is a fucking joke (but those centaurs are going to be HUGE, I don't even care). No, I'm not a moron who has no sense of real synergy - I'm just a guy who has had his relationship with the game change from trying to play higher tier Eternal stuff and then watching my community fall away, so I pivoted to playing with the guys at work and fueling up the roflcopter when it comes time to build a deck. I think I can play bad cards well, and I know what I'm doing, and that's the end of it.
Tsumi, I'd love to meet you in person.

[Ace/Homebrew]

I'm going to re-approach Skullbriar and give some consideration to other card choices in other decks now knowing that the commander can safely pop back to the command zone under virtually all circumstances.
Skullbriar will still occasionally result in feel-bads if an opponent can get a -1/-1 counter on him. :tongue:

[Phoenix Ignition]

I'm not a player of the format, so have just been reading this thread so people can tell me how to think. This last response from Sheldon sounds exactly like what I'd want it to be. They know shits as broken as you let it be, tutors are the best in singleton, there's no disputing that, but it's nice to see them try to push players away from it.

Anyway, I came here to ask, what do you guys think about EDH with a house-ruling of no tutors allowed? Including anything that may involve shuffling in general. I'm not against shuffling (though 100 card decks that are double sleeved do suck to shuffle if you do it every turn), I just have had mostly mediocre experiences with EDH in the past, usually because of power level concerns.

You guys probably know what I mean, you want to discourage the infinite turn combos, but how about the 2 card Mycosynth Lattice + Karn commander to blow up all your lands? The defense is always, "Well I only get that if the other opponent is using an oppressive strategy, and I don't have an infinite win combo in here." Sure, that's true, but if you have 50 ways to tutor up your "nuke all lands" combo then I don't want to play more than like 2 games against you, because you'll just wait until I'm in a winning state and then blow up everything. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love competitive magic, but EDH is not that, and never should be that.

Other thing I have against tutors is that we're playing highlander for a reason. I want to make a single deck with a lot of deckbuilding decisions and have like 500 different boardstates against other decks that do the same. I don't want to see, to use that example again, every turn 6 be Mycosynth Lattice + Karn. What's the point of highlander if you're going to do that anyway.

So, EDH Gurus, what do you think? Does no tutor restriction make for what I want to happen? Or am I not seeing some glaring oversight?

Also, part two of the question, would it be less fun to just say 100 or 60 card highlander with no commanders at all? Or maybe "random rotating" commander that you need to have like 3 viable commanders in your deck and you randomly get one for each game.

[TsumiBand]

it's not so much the tutors that's the problem, it's the targets.

I mean fetchlands are tutors, but banning those would royally suck because mana fixing is crucial in three-color decks. SFM is a tutor, and unlike Black or Blue she is not just another in a sea of them in White and is super-narrow compared to like Mystical Teachings or whatnot.

So yeah if someone's taking the 2-card combo angle and winning the cheesedick key to the city, then the issue isn't the tutors right, it's their dumb MikeTrike or whatever. This is precisely why I removed the 2 card combos from my Sedris deck; the clear paths to victory were already defined and so it was just a question of which one was the best to kill the table with (Hellkite + DEN, MikeTrike, DENchron + BSZ, etc etc). By just removing the easy buttons and keeping the modest tutors I had in there, the deck already played so differently - I actually needed to search for other things and got to play Cruel Ultimatum and Nucklavee and shit.

As for the rotating commanders idea, I dig it and in fact I tend to build with extra maindeck Legendaries just to see how a deck plays with different commanders. Seems good.

[kombatkiwi]

I'm not a fan of house rules.
I can agree that tutors often result in games turning out similarly each time, which gets boring, but I dislike having non-optimised decks, which means that either

a) You pick a commander with a limited colour identity so you can't play many tutors
b) You play cards like Mindlock Orb and build your deck around them so that you have a strategic reason for not playing tutors

It's normally easier to do a) than b), but playing fewer colours limits the number of fun interactions you can create due to the reduced cardpool, so it can be hard to find a balance that's enjoyable.

[Ace/Homebrew]

There's nothing wrong with house rules, just don't expect them to extend to stores or other areas Magic players gather. There is also nothing wrong with setting personal restrictions for deck building.


Nucklavee is baller shit! It should be Creature - Potato Beast though. :wink:

[Bed Decks Palyer]

It's normally easier to do a) than b), but playing fewer colours limits the number of fun interactions you can create due to the reduced cardpool, so it can be hard to find a balance that's enjoyable.
This is not true. I found it extremely fun to build (and even to play) a GW EDH deck. There are what, 4000 possible cards to play alongisde Karametra. I don't find that pool too small, moreover it's nice how the two colors limit the deckbuilding and force/help to play the deck differently. I'm not a fan of the usual 5C Good Stuff decks and the mono/stereocolored decks are challenging to build and really unusual to see in action.
A frined of mine, datanaga on Source, plays a five-colors deck with a money limit, no tutors. It's pretty funny and it's pretty speedy gameplay-wise, as there's far less shuffling and other stuff that hinders from the actual gameplay. Also, it's nice to see the deck without the usual suspects (DT, VT, MT, ET, GT), and the occasional WT is not that hard to bear.

[AngryTroll]

Anyway, I came here to ask, what do you guys think about EDH with a house-ruling of no tutors allowed? Including anything that may involve shuffling in general. I'm not against shuffling (though 100 card decks that are double sleeved do suck to shuffle if you do it every turn), I just have had mostly mediocre experiences with EDH in the past, usually because of power level concerns.

The problem with this is that all of the green ramp falls into the "tutor" category. Green would be much, much worse if it had to play mana rocks like all of the other colors. Kodama's Reach, Cultivate, Sakura-Tribe Elder, Yavimaya Elder, and Krosan Tusker are all pretty good reasons to play green that cost less than $1 each.

Fetchlands are also tutors, but your manabase isn't that much worse if you leave out the good fetchlands, and the comes-into-play-tapped fetchlands might not make it into your deck even without the good fetchlands. Obviously this is less painful if you would only play the on-color fetchlands (Verdant Catacombs but none of the other green or black fetchlands in a Golgari deck, for example).

[Bed Decks Palyer]

The problem with this is that all of the green ramp falls into the "tutor" category. Green would be much, much worse if it had to play mana rocks like all of the other colors. Kodama's Reach, Cultivate, Sakura-Tribe Elder, Yavimaya Elder, and Krosan Tusker are all pretty good reasons to play green that cost less than $1 each.

Fetchlands are also tutors, but your manabase isn't that much worse if you leave out the good fetchlands, and the comes-into-play-tapped fetchlands might not make it into your deck even without the good fetchlands. Obviously this is less painful if you would only play the on-color fetchlands (Verdant Catacombs but none of the other green or black fetchlands in a Golgari deck, for example).

Yep, exactly.
On the fetchlands proposal: that's exactly what I do. I dislike off-color fetches (except for Foothills in RUG Delver, those rule) and when in GW, it really helps that we got the best fetch ever, Krosan Verge.

[Phoenix Ignition]

I mean, green would still have the originals, like Wild Growth, Birds of Paradise, and Fertile Ground, but I guess it restricts cool cards like Yavimaya Elder or Sakura-Tribe Elder.

The main point is that I think it would be interesting to have a format where there aren't 3+ ways to draw any card in your deck. This would probably just solidify blue's card drawing as clearly the best strategy, though, so probably isn't want I was looking for.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

I mean, green would still have the originals, like Wild Growth, Birds of Paradise, and Fertile Ground, but I guess it restricts cool cards like Yavimaya Elder or Sakura-Tribe Elder.

The main point is that I think it would be interesting to have a format where there aren't 3+ ways to draw any card in your deck. This would probably just solidify blue's card drawing as clearly the best strategy, though, so probably isn't want I was looking for.
I wouldn't compare Kodama's Reach to Demonic Tutor. Imho the green ramp spells are fine (except for the fact that geddon-and-friends are forbidden thus making the land-tutors far more appealing then the manadorks), and they cost quite a lot compared to the "real" tutors.
Fact is that every search/shuffle stuff makes the game less enjoyable and far more longer (imagine the usual 4-men seats with each participant that fetches/tutors/plays Intuition at least once per turn) without nay real action. It's not like the most thrilling experience ever.
Otoh, it's a bout the particular group. Some ppl like broken things, and then they need tutors and such.
ymmv

[Mystical_Jackass]

I've been playing EDH/Highlander or whatever since like 2007 or so, it's been a long time either way. Back then there were no Gods, the planeswalker count was minimal, no Praetors and Titans galore. General damage actually MATTERED back then, since using the Invasion and Planar Dragons and Elder Dragons was fairly common (I'm glad they're repringing more Dragons btw).

The fundamental issue with the format is that ramp is out of hand, and lands are "no touchy". This leads to players having near "unlimited cast" Generals, like Prossh and Wanderer or Child. The Rules either needs to make a limit of like 5-6 recasts then the Commander is gone for good, or they should allow for more definite answers. Tuck was a strong answer to stop players from like... just keep recasting Kaervek over and over, until you eventually die 'cause you can't stop them from continually putting it back into play.

The thing that bothers me is that there's so many players that'll just play Gods, Planeswalkers and broken Praetors or Sphinx, just good stuff galore. I'm someone who likes to run a lot of responses in my deck, the issue is that there's just not enough good responses to deal with decks like that 'cause it's not cost effective to just StP or Capsize permanents, so many of them already create such CA when they hit the field and even if you try to target most players have sac outlets or lands-- which you can't be labeled someone who "goes after lands" or uses bloodmoon to destroy their high markets, miren or diamond valleys or they'll gang up on you and kill you and say "well you shouldn't have Blood Moon'ed".

Long story short, for someone like me who plays moderate powered planeswalkers like Tetsuo Umezawa, Sydri, Zedruu, Reaper King, Ixidor, etc. and plenty of responses to actually "play the board".... ultimately you're going to lose hard to players who simply ignore the board and tunnel all game, just play broken Creatures and Gods all game and win. It happens more times than not, because the power creep of some of these permanents and commanders and lack of good answers. And now we can't tuck Generals away, so I feel like it's one less good answer I can have against borderline broken Generals to compete.

[Aggro_zombies]

I mean, green would still have the originals, like Wild Growth, Birds of Paradise, and Fertile Ground, but I guess it restricts cool cards like Yavimaya Elder or Sakura-Tribe Elder.

The main point is that I think it would be interesting to have a format where there aren't 3+ ways to draw any card in your deck. This would probably just solidify blue's card drawing as clearly the best strategy, though, so probably isn't want I was looking for.
A friend of mine plays Prime Speaker Zegana tribal Merfolk, which sounds kind of derpy until you see him draw 6+ cards off of his general, clone his general for 7+ cards, and then put the original back in the command zone because of the legend rule. It turns out that it's really, really hard to kill people once they've drawn 13+ cards in one turn. Wrathing does nothing because he just untaps and plays the six creatures still in his hand, Mind Twisting does nothing to answer the huge board he has, and it's rare for the other players to be able to do all of that in one turn cycle (and not attempt to do it to each other, if the threat evaluation is poor).

So yeah, I don't think it would work out well. UG is already the best color combination in a "fair" metagame because it can ramp and draw so well.