ok but whats the difference between locking the players out of a color temporarily and just removing them from the game in general? 9 mana is a lot and there are other cards that can just end it for people at that amount of mana. Sure after a few turns if she sticks the mono color person will lose but thats true with any other bomb that can end people and not dealt with right away.
Sure if they are mono color they may not be able to cast color spells but are still in the game (can still play lands and other color/colorless spells, attack/block, use ability's). Also Targeting a player with effects is not new. I have been targeted by LD to the point i could not do anything but still in the game, at least with Iona i have a chance of doing things once its removed, with LD if im not drawing land im not doing anything. and even if i am drawing land id be so far behind that id be most likly dead before i get up to speed. whats the difference between blowing up my land and not being able to cast one color
As far as other player's protecting Iona i have yet to see it, and if people are the mono color must have been a threat that they need to be removed/killed.
I get that the card can be strong and even overbearing at times but there are other cards that could just end the players. I find it hard to Ban a card that just dies to removal and dose not end games. As far as Meta's not suited to that card that goes back to adapt/updating your deck or change your power level of the deck to match others around you.
ok but whats the difference between locking the players out of a color temporarily and just removing them from the game in general? 9 mana is a lot and there are other cards that can just end it for people at that amount of mana. Sure after a few turns if she sticks the mono color person will lose but thats true with any other bomb that can end people and not dealt with right away.
Sure if they are mono color they may not be able to cast color spells but are still in the game (can still play lands and other color/colorless spells, attack/block, use ability's). Also Targeting a player with effects is not new. I have been targeted by LD to the point i could not do anything but still in the game, at least with Iona i have a chance of doing things once its removed, with LD if im not drawing land im not doing anything. and even if i am drawing land id be so far behind that id be most likly dead before i get up to speed. whats the difference between blowing up my land and not being able to cast one color
As far as other player's protecting Iona i have yet to see it, and if people are the mono color must have been a threat that they need to be removed/killed.
I get that the card can be strong and even overbearing at times but there are other cards that could just end the players. I find it hard to Ban a card that just dies to removal and dose not end games. As far as Meta's not suited to that card that goes back to adapt/updating your deck or change your power level of the deck to match others around you.
It’s not just oppressive to Mono-Colored decks. You can hit all of the decks at the table, depending on what’s being played. So, beyond just running colorless answers, you’d better have an answer at the table that isn’t the chosen color.
It’s asymmetrical hate that just sucks the fun right out of the table. It doesn’t need any more reason than that. You aren’t actively working to break the symmetry like you do with Stax, or MLD, or whatever else you want to compare it to.
I guess the best way to break it down is this. Would you slot Winter Orb into any deck? JustWinter Orb. Without BS’ing, the answer is going to be a resounding no. Because it doesn’t do nearly enough on its own to justify playing it by itself. Iona, though, does find its way into decklists not designed to be oppressive, like Angel Tribal. Or Ramp decks. Or Reanimator decks. Decks that routinely pop up at low to mid powered tables.
It’s one of the cards that just needs to be a casualty of the format being designed for casual play.
I dont think this is true. Many people play multicolors, and big costly angels seem cool and fun. Maybe after it ruins a few games people come around, but I can see for sure why new folks think it looks cool.
Her effect is 100% up front. It's not like playing, say, white Crovax for fun as an anthem that's hard to kill but then you realize, uh oh, I didn't mean to totally lock out the saproling player! Locking out a color is pretty unambiguous.
In my experience, the Timmy use is to runnit as blue protection in your jank deck. Only sometimes the best line of play I'd to name a different color that hits more players. Or maybe it's just to lock that one person out who is ahead. And you know what happens when one person is handicapped in the game and the other opponents aren't? "Phew, good thing that card doesn't affect me and I don't have to expend resources dealing with it!"
So yeah, it's a trap card, because the target audience isn't intentionally playing a prison deck, any more than they were playing MLD but still wanted to use Sundering Titam in order to keep ramp in check.
How is a card doing exactly what it says a trap? Because trap cards are things that seem cool but are more detrimental to your game plan than you realize, like a Temple of the False God in a rock-heavy deck without land ramp.
Also, the "target audience" of Iona is someone who wants to hit another player, possibly players, in the face with a brick. She does that very well. It's a big part of the reason why she just got banned. It's not that the Angels player wasn't playing prison; it's that they didn't need to play prison because they could just slot in an Iona and play her when they needed to make a sharp turn to prison town.
Her effect is 100% up front. It's not like playing, say, white Crovax for fun as an anthem that's hard to kill but then you realize, uh oh, I didn't mean to totally lock out the saproling player! Locking out a color is pretty unambiguous.
How is a card doing exactly what it says a trap? Because trap cards are things that seem cool but are more detrimental to your game plan than you realize, like a Temple of the False God in a rock-heavy deck without land ramp.
Also, the "target audience" of Iona is someone who wants to hit another player, possibly players, in the face with a brick. She does that very well. It's a big part of the reason why she just got banned. It's not that the Angels player wasn't playing prison; it's that they didn't need to play prison because they could just slot in an Iona and play her when they needed to make a sharp turn to prison town.
And that's supposed to be good for the format? "I'm not building a prison deck, but boy do I want to be able to lock one player out of the game if the opportunity arises."
And that's supposed to be good for the format? "I'm not building a prison deck, but boy do I want to be able to lock one player out of the game if the opportunity arises."
Who said it was good for the format? I entered into this thread to dispute her being a trap and an "accidental powerhouse" like your example of Sundering Titan. I think her and PS in the format simultaneously would be fine, but I'd also be fine with several of the banned cards in the format being let free. Back on topic, people ran Iona with the purpose of pain. They know what they did
My only real beef is with an argument that hasn't really come up in this thread so I won't bring it in here.
Who said it was good for the format? I entered into this thread to dispute her being a trap and an "accidental powerhouse" like your example of Sundering Titan. I think her and PS in the format simultaneously would be fine, but I'd also be fine with several of the banned cards in the format being let free. Back on topic, people ran Iona with the purpose of pain. They know what they did
My only real beef is with an argument that hasn't really come up in this thread so I won't bring it in here.
Ah, ok. 8 still think she is a trap in that the casual players were running her with good intentions, and either didn't realize that she was a fun suck or didn't care.
People need to stop claiming that Iona is fine because other players can solve the solitary monocolored player's problem. They might do so if they're nice, but they have no incentive to unless the board state calls for it in particular (which is rare).
People need to stop claiming that Iona is fine because other players can solve the solitary monocolored player's problem. They might do so if they're nice, but they have no incentive to unless the board state calls for it in particular (which is rare).
In my play group, unless the person getting locked out is approaching critical mass, we tend to let each other out of jail to team up on the warden.
I understand that this is not a universal experience, but it's also not an uncommon one.
People need to stop claiming that Iona is fine because other players can solve the solitary monocolored player's problem. They might do so if they're nice, but they have no incentive to unless the board state calls for it in particular (which is rare).
In my play group, unless the person getting locked out is approaching critical mass, we tend to let each other out of jail to team up on the warden.
I understand that this is not a universal experience, but it's also not an uncommon one.
The thing is, from a purely mechanical perspective, there is no real incentive for that kind of behavior. Sure, EDH is a casual, social format, but the banlist should deal with the most egrerious elements that would incentivize poor experiences. Infact, what you're basically doing in your playgroup is to enforce a social ban on the card, since you actively punish the player that ruins the game for another. It's just another argument for the ban. (Not saying that you necessarily disagree with the ban ofc.)
People need to stop claiming that Iona is fine because other players can solve the solitary monocolored player's problem. They might do so if they're nice, but they have no incentive to unless the board state calls for it in particular (which is rare).
In my play group, unless the person getting locked out is approaching critical mass, we tend to let each other out of jail to team up on the warden.
I understand that this is not a universal experience, but it's also not an uncommon one.
The thing is, from a purely mechanical perspective, there is no real incentive for that kind of behavior. Sure, EDH is a casual, social format, but the banlist should deal with the most egrerious elements that would incentivize poor experiences. Infact, what you're basically doing in your playgroup is to enforce a social ban on the card, since you actively punish the player that ruins the game for another. It's just another argument for the ban. (Not saying that you necessarily disagree with the ban ofc.)
The mechanical incentive is that, typically, the player doing the lockdown probably has a way to put you in a cage, too. So if you unleash the beast then the two of you can bop the offending player out of the game and move forward. One down, however many to go.
As for a social ban? Nah. If someone's starting to hand out Overwhelming Splendors and they pull it off, fine. Just pull it off; don't leave players flailing while the rest of the table goes on as normal. We don't care if you try to lock someone down so long as you win off of it. Armageddon? Sure, just win. Worldpurge? Sure, just win. Stasis? Sure, just win. Brine Elemental? Sure, just win. Don't drag it out, don't grind misery, just win so we can all move on.
That "just win" issue is why I don't mind seeing iona on the field, even if it's locking me out. If the player actually spent the mana to slam it, good for them for making it that far, but they could have resolved a bigger threat that could have ended the game. Same is true if they spent the resources to trick it into play. It could have been a game-ending card but instead it's a medium annoyance that doesn't end the game.
My playgroup isn't cedh, and while we do have competitive decks, iona isn't good enough for any of them. Our deck strength average is around a 6 and iona would never be good enough at our table. It truly is a medium-to-bad trap card. It's a learning experience that is eventually unsleeved and forgotten about. But hey this is what they think is a ban-worthy card.
This argument about running colorless answers is a joke. all is dust, ugin, the spirit dragon, perilous vault, and oblivion stone are better cards than iona. Others like duplicant and spine may even be synergistic for the deck, because most artifact decks I've seen run those too. If you're not already playing those, then either your meta is too quick and there isn't an iona, your meta is too weak and there still isn't an iona, or your choosing to not play obviously good cards that can answer any number of threats.
I love when modern bans occur because there are solid reasoning and you can actually follow the thought process as to why something was banned. For example bridge was just banned to tone down hogaack. Doesn't kill the deck, does affect dredge to the point that it's not overshadowed by hogaack, and the degenerate potential turn-1 wins from neoform were left alone because development looked at the % of players actually using the deck and its performance. Not the complaints but the performance.
Now then we have edh bans where painter was unbanned by someone who complains about combos in edh, and build-around cards like engine are banned when if he really understood how those decks worked then he could have just banned dramatic reversal - a card that only exists in the format to be abused.
Maybe he was just terrified that people would break urza (and to a lesser extent golos, tireless pilgrim) with engine. I'm so glad that infinite mana commanders can't be broken still in this format with other combos that cost less mana investment and card density to start up.
Here’s my thoughts on what you said, this was posted in another thread. By me.
At this point, it’s laughable for anybody not to see the Iona ban for what it really was.
Sheldon went so far as to say himself the banlist is expected to be kept short. Do you really think that it would be in the best interest of the format to ban a metric sh** ton of cards to make the point of “hey, don’t be a dick”? That’s what Iona is. A dick move. She adds absolutely nothing to the games she gets played in. Are there better, easier, more efficient options? Damn Skippy. But, when you’re crafting that deck to take out to some group of friends or to-be acquaintances, you should remember that Iona is banned because she’s a fun-suck. So don’t be a fun-suck. If the people you’ve played with for years don’t care about fun-sucking, or thrive on the sucking of fun, then go ahead, play Winter Orb and Friends. Hell, even ask if you can play Iona herself. There is literally nobody stopping you, not even the RC.
There doesn’t have to be an arms race. We are all out here competing for absolutely nothing. At least the people who the format is catered to, anyways.
It doesn’t address your points directly, but still relevant.
You can apply the same logic to the Paradox Engine ban, though I still believe there are worse offenders(and no, not Dramatic Reversal).
Engine is just one of many enablers in the game. It's a strong enabler but not at all near the best enabler.
The issue it causes players is when the pilot is slow at math, not what the card adds to the game. The fix to this problem is helping your friend, not banning a card.
There are many casual non-storm/combo decks that use engine fairly. The "fun-suck" is when those decks get weakened by random bans and drop below an acceptable playable strength. I wasn't the only person in my playgroup that had a casual deck that uses engine to untap a fun commander with a fun tap ability.
<Mod snip> -Ad hominem attacks are not acceptable on mtgs
I have yet to see or hear a single good excuse for unbanning painter. There are other cards on the banlist that can be set free. The before mentioned panoptic mirror, which is terribly slow compared to what kefnit+turns is capable of doing now. If they want to keep the list short, then unban braids, because banning a card using mtgo as an excuse was silly. Why not gifts ungiven (because intuition isn't), biorhythm when we have shaman of forgotten ways, or coalition victory which fails to a creature removal spell or strip mine and we have approach the second sun which is far easier to control?
Really why did they choose painter when there are multiple other safer options.
Really I'm going to just assume that sheldon was recently destroyed by some engine deck, got hosed by iona, and was trapped in a conversation by someone that wanted him to unban painter and he was too beta to do anything otherwise. That or he stockpiled painters and is using his role to get some cash.
These sorts of comments are exactly why the RC should never listen to people on the internet.
People love EDH while virtually spitting in the face of the people who brought it to us. It's sad, and predictable
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
The issue it causes players is when the pilot is slow at math, not what the card adds to the game. The fix to this problem is helping your friend, not banning a card.
I don't think most people are slow at math. Paradox Engine does a lot of things, and in a giant game of Commander, there are going to be a lot of moving parts. And a lot of it will include unknown information, such as drawing cards, and pre-planning actions gets harder.
To simplify things down to "people are bad at math" is quite honestly rather insulting, and a serious oversimplification of this game.
I have yet to see or hear a single good excuse for unbanning painter. There are other cards on the banlist that can be set free. The before mentioned panoptic mirror, which is terribly slow compared to what kefnit+turns is capable of doing now. If they want to keep the list short, then unban braids, because banning a card using mtgo as an excuse was silly. Why not gifts ungiven (because intuition isn't), biorhythm when we have shaman of forgotten ways, or coalition victory which fails to a creature removal spell or strip mine and we have approach the second sun which is far easier to control?
Really why did they choose painter when there are multiple other safer options.
Do any of these 'safer' options actually add anything to the game though? I don't know about you, but none of those seem exciting to me to build up, compared to the danger they add.
Painter's seems to have some added danger to being let loose, notably Ugin and All is Dust, but in that sense it compares to Enchanted Evening and Mycosynth Lattice. On the flip side though, it's been something a lot have been wanting, for some kooky color-matters shenaningans. Time will tell if it gets to be problematic, but it should likely be ok.
That said, I see no way in which Biorythm is a 'safe' unban. Shaman requires a lot more set up (haste, and a lot more creatures/power) to even come close to having the same effect.
Menery's name goes back in the formats history but he didn't "bring us the game." His original work for the game was pro tour league stuff.
I've been trying to keep my comments specifically about the banlist, not the integrity of the people who influence it. Believe me, I have a strong opinion on menery. I've played with him on two different occasions at larger events and would have absolutely had more fun at any neighboring table.
@bobthefunny the exact wording I said is "when the pilot is slow at math." I'm not sure how you took that and simplified it to "people are bad at math."
From my experiance, from multiple playgroups and public events ranging large to small, with power level ranging from 2 to 10, the most common complaint about engine is when the pilot is slow at figuring out how to deploy spells. This is easily fixed with either help or practice. Banning a card that may be too complex for people to enjoy honestly just dumbs down the format in a way it doesn't need to be.
I'm pretty much done with this topic. My main group has already adjusted the banlist to our own level. If relevant information as to why someone decided to unban painter surfaces then I'll revisit. Until then there isn't anything to gain here.
I'm pretty much done with this topic. My main group has already adjusted the banlist to our own level.
Well, seeing as that's the entire point of the vision and discussing with your playgroup, if you guys have found something that is enjoyable and makes you all happy, then I'd say you've actually achieved a job well done.
There is always someone who want to use the broken card for the easy win and finally games are over can't get over it and work a little to find a new broken toy.
I'm pretty much done with this topic. My main group has already adjusted the banlist to our own level.
Well, seeing as that's the entire point of the vision and discussing with your playgroup, if you guys have found something that is enjoyable and makes you all happy, then I'd say you've actually achieved a job well done.
that's the thing I don't get, though
The ban list is for the ground-level casual groups so that they get to kick back and sling cardboard without getting ambushed by sneaky good/overwhelming/meta-warping cards. LGS and cEDH players, while appreciated, are not the target audience.
Except the ground-level casual is the one who most likely plays with a steady group in a kitchen table environment, where the much-encouraged personalized rules can be discussed and implemented. Whereas LGS players overwhelmingly deal with the basic banlist without variation.
So the intended audience has the banlist suited for them, but they're the ones who need it least. Whereas LGS players are not the target audience of the banlist, but they're the ones that have to play with it whether they want it or not.
So the intended audience has the banlist suited for them, but they're the ones who need it least. Whereas LGS players are not the target audience of the banlist, but they're the ones that have to play with it whether they want it or not.
I actually believe LGS and GP people are the 'target audience' for the ban list. If you look at the rest of what you said, it seems to slide right into place.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
So the intended audience has the banlist suited for them, but they're the ones who need it least. Whereas LGS players are not the target audience of the banlist, but they're the ones that have to play with it whether they want it or not.
I actually believe LGS and GP people are the 'target audience' for the ban list. If you look at the rest of what you said, it seems to slide right into place.
absolutely false
Quote from papa_funk on another forum »
But I am addressing your issue. You made a statement about the vast majority of Magic players with nothing to back it up other than "I've been to a few shops". I'm genuinely trying to understand how you can extrapolate from that when the vast, vast majority (there's plenty of debate about exactly how much, but likely over 95%) is not played in shops. As you say, there are hundreds of thousands of players playing. Extrapolating from one audience is going to give you a very strange picture of the format.
This is at the core of the problem. Commander is not a good format for shops and certainly not a good format for tournaments, and we've said this all along. We can't stop stores from trying to make a quick buck, but it's on them to make it a good experience. It represents a very small portion of the Commander audience.
Sure if they are mono color they may not be able to cast color spells but are still in the game (can still play lands and other color/colorless spells, attack/block, use ability's). Also Targeting a player with effects is not new. I have been targeted by LD to the point i could not do anything but still in the game, at least with Iona i have a chance of doing things once its removed, with LD if im not drawing land im not doing anything. and even if i am drawing land id be so far behind that id be most likly dead before i get up to speed. whats the difference between blowing up my land and not being able to cast one color
As far as other player's protecting Iona i have yet to see it, and if people are the mono color must have been a threat that they need to be removed/killed.
I get that the card can be strong and even overbearing at times but there are other cards that could just end the players. I find it hard to Ban a card that just dies to removal and dose not end games. As far as Meta's not suited to that card that goes back to adapt/updating your deck or change your power level of the deck to match others around you.
It’s not just oppressive to Mono-Colored decks. You can hit all of the decks at the table, depending on what’s being played. So, beyond just running colorless answers, you’d better have an answer at the table that isn’t the chosen color.
It’s asymmetrical hate that just sucks the fun right out of the table. It doesn’t need any more reason than that. You aren’t actively working to break the symmetry like you do with Stax, or MLD, or whatever else you want to compare it to.
I guess the best way to break it down is this. Would you slot Winter Orb into any deck? Just Winter Orb. Without BS’ing, the answer is going to be a resounding no. Because it doesn’t do nearly enough on its own to justify playing it by itself. Iona, though, does find its way into decklists not designed to be oppressive, like Angel Tribal. Or Ramp decks. Or Reanimator decks. Decks that routinely pop up at low to mid powered tables.
It’s one of the cards that just needs to be a casualty of the format being designed for casual play.
Her effect is 100% up front. It's not like playing, say, white Crovax for fun as an anthem that's hard to kill but then you realize, uh oh, I didn't mean to totally lock out the saproling player! Locking out a color is pretty unambiguous.
How is a card doing exactly what it says a trap? Because trap cards are things that seem cool but are more detrimental to your game plan than you realize, like a Temple of the False God in a rock-heavy deck without land ramp.
Also, the "target audience" of Iona is someone who wants to hit another player, possibly players, in the face with a brick. She does that very well. It's a big part of the reason why she just got banned. It's not that the Angels player wasn't playing prison; it's that they didn't need to play prison because they could just slot in an Iona and play her when they needed to make a sharp turn to prison town.
And that's supposed to be good for the format? "I'm not building a prison deck, but boy do I want to be able to lock one player out of the game if the opportunity arises."
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Who said it was good for the format? I entered into this thread to dispute her being a trap and an "accidental powerhouse" like your example of Sundering Titan. I think her and PS in the format simultaneously would be fine, but I'd also be fine with several of the banned cards in the format being let free. Back on topic, people ran Iona with the purpose of pain. They know what they did
My only real beef is with an argument that hasn't really come up in this thread so I won't bring it in here.
Ah, ok. 8 still think she is a trap in that the casual players were running her with good intentions, and either didn't realize that she was a fun suck or didn't care.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
In my play group, unless the person getting locked out is approaching critical mass, we tend to let each other out of jail to team up on the warden.
I understand that this is not a universal experience, but it's also not an uncommon one.
The thing is, from a purely mechanical perspective, there is no real incentive for that kind of behavior. Sure, EDH is a casual, social format, but the banlist should deal with the most egrerious elements that would incentivize poor experiences. Infact, what you're basically doing in your playgroup is to enforce a social ban on the card, since you actively punish the player that ruins the game for another. It's just another argument for the ban. (Not saying that you necessarily disagree with the ban ofc.)
The mechanical incentive is that, typically, the player doing the lockdown probably has a way to put you in a cage, too. So if you unleash the beast then the two of you can bop the offending player out of the game and move forward. One down, however many to go.
As for a social ban? Nah. If someone's starting to hand out Overwhelming Splendors and they pull it off, fine. Just pull it off; don't leave players flailing while the rest of the table goes on as normal. We don't care if you try to lock someone down so long as you win off of it. Armageddon? Sure, just win. Worldpurge? Sure, just win. Stasis? Sure, just win. Brine Elemental? Sure, just win. Don't drag it out, don't grind misery, just win so we can all move on.
My playgroup isn't cedh, and while we do have competitive decks, iona isn't good enough for any of them. Our deck strength average is around a 6 and iona would never be good enough at our table. It truly is a medium-to-bad trap card. It's a learning experience that is eventually unsleeved and forgotten about. But hey this is what they think is a ban-worthy card.
This argument about running colorless answers is a joke. all is dust, ugin, the spirit dragon, perilous vault, and oblivion stone are better cards than iona. Others like duplicant and spine may even be synergistic for the deck, because most artifact decks I've seen run those too. If you're not already playing those, then either your meta is too quick and there isn't an iona, your meta is too weak and there still isn't an iona, or your choosing to not play obviously good cards that can answer any number of threats.
I love when modern bans occur because there are solid reasoning and you can actually follow the thought process as to why something was banned. For example bridge was just banned to tone down hogaack. Doesn't kill the deck, does affect dredge to the point that it's not overshadowed by hogaack, and the degenerate potential turn-1 wins from neoform were left alone because development looked at the % of players actually using the deck and its performance. Not the complaints but the performance.
Now then we have edh bans where painter was unbanned by someone who complains about combos in edh, and build-around cards like engine are banned when if he really understood how those decks worked then he could have just banned dramatic reversal - a card that only exists in the format to be abused.
Maybe he was just terrified that people would break urza (and to a lesser extent golos, tireless pilgrim) with engine. I'm so glad that infinite mana commanders can't be broken still in this format with other combos that cost less mana investment and card density to start up.
Links to my most current deck lists;
Primary EDH; Rakka Mar Token Perfection, Crosis Mnemonic Betrayal, Cromat Villainous, Judith Gravestorm, Rakdos Empty Storm, Exava Artifacts, Bant Trash, & Fumiko Voltron!
EDH kept at home; Ruzzian Isset & Rakdos LoR!
EDH (nostalgic/pimp/retired) in storage;
Latulla Burns, Akroma Smash, Jeska Voltron, Rakdos Storm, Bladewing Darghans, Lyzolda Worldgorger, Xantcha Steals your Heart, Jori Storm, Wydwen Permission, Gwendlyn Paradox, Jeleva Warps, & Sigarda Brick!
Legacy Showanimator and High Tide!
It doesn’t address your points directly, but still relevant.
You can apply the same logic to the Paradox Engine ban, though I still believe there are worse offenders(and no, not Dramatic Reversal).
The issue it causes players is when the pilot is slow at math, not what the card adds to the game. The fix to this problem is helping your friend, not banning a card.
There are many casual non-storm/combo decks that use engine fairly. The "fun-suck" is when those decks get weakened by random bans and drop below an acceptable playable strength. I wasn't the only person in my playgroup that had a casual deck that uses engine to untap a fun commander with a fun tap ability.
<Mod snip> -Ad hominem attacks are not acceptable on mtgs
I have yet to see or hear a single good excuse for unbanning painter. There are other cards on the banlist that can be set free. The before mentioned panoptic mirror, which is terribly slow compared to what kefnit+turns is capable of doing now. If they want to keep the list short, then unban braids, because banning a card using mtgo as an excuse was silly. Why not gifts ungiven (because intuition isn't), biorhythm when we have shaman of forgotten ways, or coalition victory which fails to a creature removal spell or strip mine and we have approach the second sun which is far easier to control?
Really why did they choose painter when there are multiple other safer options.
Links to my most current deck lists;
Primary EDH; Rakka Mar Token Perfection, Crosis Mnemonic Betrayal, Cromat Villainous, Judith Gravestorm, Rakdos Empty Storm, Exava Artifacts, Bant Trash, & Fumiko Voltron!
EDH kept at home; Ruzzian Isset & Rakdos LoR!
EDH (nostalgic/pimp/retired) in storage;
Latulla Burns, Akroma Smash, Jeska Voltron, Rakdos Storm, Bladewing Darghans, Lyzolda Worldgorger, Xantcha Steals your Heart, Jori Storm, Wydwen Permission, Gwendlyn Paradox, Jeleva Warps, & Sigarda Brick!
Legacy Showanimator and High Tide!
Links to my most current deck lists;
Primary EDH; Rakka Mar Token Perfection, Crosis Mnemonic Betrayal, Cromat Villainous, Judith Gravestorm, Rakdos Empty Storm, Exava Artifacts, Bant Trash, & Fumiko Voltron!
EDH kept at home; Ruzzian Isset & Rakdos LoR!
EDH (nostalgic/pimp/retired) in storage;
Latulla Burns, Akroma Smash, Jeska Voltron, Rakdos Storm, Bladewing Darghans, Lyzolda Worldgorger, Xantcha Steals your Heart, Jori Storm, Wydwen Permission, Gwendlyn Paradox, Jeleva Warps, & Sigarda Brick!
Legacy Showanimator and High Tide!
People love EDH while virtually spitting in the face of the people who brought it to us. It's sad, and predictable
I don't think most people are slow at math. Paradox Engine does a lot of things, and in a giant game of Commander, there are going to be a lot of moving parts. And a lot of it will include unknown information, such as drawing cards, and pre-planning actions gets harder.
To simplify things down to "people are bad at math" is quite honestly rather insulting, and a serious oversimplification of this game.
Do any of these 'safer' options actually add anything to the game though? I don't know about you, but none of those seem exciting to me to build up, compared to the danger they add.
Painter's seems to have some added danger to being let loose, notably Ugin and All is Dust, but in that sense it compares to Enchanted Evening and Mycosynth Lattice. On the flip side though, it's been something a lot have been wanting, for some kooky color-matters shenaningans. Time will tell if it gets to be problematic, but it should likely be ok.
That said, I see no way in which Biorythm is a 'safe' unban. Shaman requires a lot more set up (haste, and a lot more creatures/power) to even come close to having the same effect.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
I've been trying to keep my comments specifically about the banlist, not the integrity of the people who influence it. Believe me, I have a strong opinion on menery. I've played with him on two different occasions at larger events and would have absolutely had more fun at any neighboring table.
@bobthefunny the exact wording I said is "when the pilot is slow at math." I'm not sure how you took that and simplified it to "people are bad at math."
From my experiance, from multiple playgroups and public events ranging large to small, with power level ranging from 2 to 10, the most common complaint about engine is when the pilot is slow at figuring out how to deploy spells. This is easily fixed with either help or practice. Banning a card that may be too complex for people to enjoy honestly just dumbs down the format in a way it doesn't need to be.
I'm pretty much done with this topic. My main group has already adjusted the banlist to our own level. If relevant information as to why someone decided to unban painter surfaces then I'll revisit. Until then there isn't anything to gain here.
Links to my most current deck lists;
Primary EDH; Rakka Mar Token Perfection, Crosis Mnemonic Betrayal, Cromat Villainous, Judith Gravestorm, Rakdos Empty Storm, Exava Artifacts, Bant Trash, & Fumiko Voltron!
EDH kept at home; Ruzzian Isset & Rakdos LoR!
EDH (nostalgic/pimp/retired) in storage;
Latulla Burns, Akroma Smash, Jeska Voltron, Rakdos Storm, Bladewing Darghans, Lyzolda Worldgorger, Xantcha Steals your Heart, Jori Storm, Wydwen Permission, Gwendlyn Paradox, Jeleva Warps, & Sigarda Brick!
Legacy Showanimator and High Tide!
Well, seeing as that's the entire point of the vision and discussing with your playgroup, if you guys have found something that is enjoyable and makes you all happy, then I'd say you've actually achieved a job well done.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
They always ban my favorite toys:'(
Abzan
-EDH-
Riku of two Reflections| Xenagos, God of Revels| Meren of Clan Nel Toth| Jolrael, Empress of Beasts| Karlov of the Ghoust Council| Prossh, Skyraider of Kher| Memnarch| Rhys the Redeemed The Mimeoplasm| Atraxa, Praetor's Voice
that's the thing I don't get, though
The ban list is for the ground-level casual groups so that they get to kick back and sling cardboard without getting ambushed by sneaky good/overwhelming/meta-warping cards. LGS and cEDH players, while appreciated, are not the target audience.
Except the ground-level casual is the one who most likely plays with a steady group in a kitchen table environment, where the much-encouraged personalized rules can be discussed and implemented. Whereas LGS players overwhelmingly deal with the basic banlist without variation.
So the intended audience has the banlist suited for them, but they're the ones who need it least. Whereas LGS players are not the target audience of the banlist, but they're the ones that have to play with it whether they want it or not.
it's funny, that's all
absolutely false
link
Commander is aimed at the majority of players that don't engage with LGSs or organized play. That's who the banlist is set up for.