MTG Salvation

Quote from MRHblue »

Quote from DigitalFire »

cEDH player checking in with some of my thoughts, though it sounds like we're all at least mostly in agreement.

Firstly, combos are easier, faster, more available, and more resilient nowadays. That's just going to happen as you print more cards. But would I say combo is more prevalent? No. I don't think so at all. If people are going down the combo route now, they would have done so before. Arms race was happening in my playgroup in 2011, it's the natural progression of things. Why is Sheldon talking about it now? Because he's starting to actually play EDH with people outside his niche and realizing that a large percentage of people don't play the game the way he does. Immediately after, he started the Commander Advisory Group as a way to combat being so out of the loop.

Anyone pretending Sheldon just now started playing with people outside "his niche" really have not been paying attention.

I thought he played with a group of empty wine bottles.......

Quote from Leaf »

Somebody pick up the phone because I called it!

Quote from Pokken »

They don't start out empty

instead of a life total, the bottle is defeated when it's empty? *deals 5 damage,takes five sips* like that?

Quote from JqlGirl »

Your toil was not in vain! Huzzah!

What insight can you give that changed the stance of what looks like everyone on the RC given the following:

2015 was when ugin was printed and at the time Sheldon said the following:

Ugin, the Spirit Dragon: Sure, it will leave artifacts and Eldrazi, and sure, it will hit only stuff below a certain converted mana cost, so it's not a complete World Slayer, but it's close enough. I've said before that it probably provided the final nail in the coffin making sure that Painter's Servant never comes off the banned list. I have no reason to move off that stance.

and Papa funk said this back in '13

PS is a card where most of the benign interactions are griefy and the less benign ones really suck. The number of OK interactions that aren't basically irrelevant is teeny and nobody can claim with a straight face that those are the ones that'll be used. Sounds like a totally awesome card to have in casual play.

and Ban Ki-moon said this

Painter's Servant is banned, and should stay banned, because almost every purpose it can serve reduces interaction between players and/or removes lines of play as options. Painter's Servant almost always moves the game into a more linear, forced state, taking away from "Player A beat Player B" while building on "Player A's deck beat Player B's deck." Building a Painter's Servant deck is way more fun than playing with the card in a game.

Painter's Servant is definitely my least-favourite card to talk about, since the factors that keep it banned are rarely addressed directly by the people who want to play with it. Please note that power level, as always, isn't all that relevant to this issue.

Maybe it's because I'm not a card guru but what

We feel as though there are now more weird and fun uses for the card than there are dangerous ones.

were you all thinking of?

Quote from Gashnaw II »

No stop dont give them ideas,

I read that in this tone

Quote from cryogen »

Quote from papa_funk »

Crap, who left the banning-Cryo part off?

It must be how I charmed Sheldon and Scott at Roanoke. I was hoping to make it to gencon but that's not happening. Really wanted a chance to meet you as well.

On topic, A+ announcement, mad if the CAG had as much influence as I suspect, they should all get a pat on the back as well.

well you didn't charm them enough recurring nightmare is still banned

Here's a comment that Sheldon agreed with on FB's thread on his page:

T-"But what Sheldon's saying here, I believe, is that he takes issue with people moving more and more towards using those infinite combos as the primary way of ending games overall, and those combos happening a little sooner every time.
A lot of my decks have an instant "I win" button for when the game's been going way too long and we need to wrap up, but nobody will concede, and that's fine- the issue is when people increasingly reach for that game-over button as the PRIMARY way to end every game, and reach for it sooner and sooner and sooner. Using a last-resort combo to end the game 2.5 hours in so you can all go eat something is way different than comboing off on turn 5 because you can"


-Sheldon "Yeah, what T said"

Quote from cryogen »

Quote from Hermes_ »

I don't recall where I saw it but I think we're going to get an announcement on the 8th regarding the philosophy document along with other bits from both the RC and the CAG.

Sheldon mentioned a while back on a podcast that looking at the philosophy document was one of the first tasks for the CAG. I dont think there is an official date for this to be completed, but next ban list announcement seems like a reasonable guess.

I found it the full quote is

We should have an updated philosophy document for the 8 July release.

http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19154&start=0

From his FB page today "A Commander game trend I noticed both at #SCGCon and in the few times I've been to my new LGS is "descent to the infinite." I'm not talking about competitive decks that want to go infinite as quickly as possible, but even more casual builds--and most of them have an eventual infinite combo of some kind. It's not "go infinite," it's "do some stuff for a while, then go infinite."

This is not a healthy trend for the format. It's probably a natural progression of things, but it's still leading in a bad direction. In Commander, it's easy to fall into the trap of spiraling upward--going infinite is the easy way to win multiplayer games. It's the efficient way, even. The problem comes from the tendency to want to do it a little earlier next time because someone beat you to it. And then earlier after that. Arms races lead to bad places.

I'm not demonizing combos here. What's of concern is that when they're the primary win condition, the format devolves. Games need to end at some point, so having a Backup Plan isn't all that bad. When the nuclear option becomes the first choice, then we get into trouble."

Can I have worldfire unbanned...I'd totally use it fairly....I promise *shifty eyes*

Quote from illakunsaa »

I'm pretty sure the ban criteria is a joke. Sol ring has hit all criteria for years and it's still legal.

just as mishra's workshop hits all the restricted criteria for vintage; brainstorm for legacy. But each format needs their 'signature' card(s) that help define the format. It just so happens that sol ring is that card for EDH.

....and wait a minute; does sol ring really break all of these points?

• Cause severe resource imbalances (i'd severely debate the qualifier severe)
• Allow players to win out of nowhere (not by itself)
• Prevent players from contributing to the game in a meaningful way. (it's not a hoser)
• Cause other players to feel they must play certain cards, even though they are also problematic. (yes; though on any given game, there's usually some number of other artefacts i'd rather be stealing)
• Are very difficult for other players to interact with, especially if doing so requires dedicated, narrow responses when deck-building. (every colour can deal with artefacts - though mana abilities can't be interacted with easily)
• Interact poorly with the multiplayer nature of the format or the specific rules of Commander. (not really?)
• Lead to repetitive game play. (sol ring does this, but in the same way that basic island does.)

I think that many EDH players are a bit too hung up on not having structure to the rules. Maybe a larger emphasis on a social agreement is needed? Maybe as a part of the official rules, before the game starts, players need to describe their deck and what they expect to contribute/expect from the upcoming game.

An aside - I played with randoms one day at the local LGS some months ago, and i started the game by saying that i got a rakdos suicide aggro deck that's somewhat tuned ~75%-90% probably. one other person described their deck as a warrior tribal, another as a nearly unmodified precon, and the 4th kept tightlipped. The table got crushed on turn 3 or 4 by human tribal. By calling it human tribal, it's like he was deliberately hiding the fact that it's a hermit druid combo. the fact that it and najeela are humans is irrelevant.

At that point, everyone's playing the game by the rules, but the 'human tribal' guy was not playing by the spirit of the format, or at least how i saw the format to be. If i want to crush my opponent, i have legacy for that. If i wanna play magical cardboard wizard with a pet lord of tresserhorn who leads my pile of old-school rubbish, i got EDH for that. But if my mates want to play magical cardboard wizards with a more 'serious' bent to it, i'd wanna know so i'd know to choose a gun over a toothpick to the gunfight.

I don't think the banlist is the problem; it's the ideals and principles/philosophy of the format not being well understood by some players.

Quote from Hermes_ »

What insight can you give that changed the stance of what looks like everyone on the RC given the following (many quotes)?

There has been strong and virtually unanimous support among CAG members for unbanning this card since the inception of the group.
I can only speak for myself and not for the rest of the RC/CAG, but my own personal reasons for wanting Painter's Servant unbanned are because I felt that it was unfairly banned because it was a strong enabler rather than the dangerous part of any potential combo. No other cards are banned for this reason, so it was out of place on the ban list. While I understand the past concerns of the RC, I feel like the format has changed to be much more interactive in the past few years, with a ton more quality options for removal and counterspells and the like to fight combos. Additionally, short of Tooth & Nail into Iona and Painter, there's no truly busted interaction with the card that can't be better replicated cheaper and with fewer cards in other ways. Additionally, Painter's Servant is such a unique card that it opens up a ton of space for casual brewers to really figure out interesting interactions for the card. The revision to the format's philosophy document also opened up more space to set it free.

The easy answer to all of the "Why Paradox Engine and not [OTHER CARD]?" questions is that there was support for banning Paradox Engine and not those other cards among the members of the Rules Committee. Many of the other cards mentioned like Tooth and Nail were discussed, but the will wasn't there to ban them at the most recent meeting.

Also, stop focusing on the bullet points in the philosophy document. The "banning criteria" section was taken out of the philosophy document because people focus too much on the letter of the law over the spirit of the format. Don't look at cards just related to those bullet points, look at them in light of what the philosophy document talks about and the types of games of Commander that we're trying to encourage.

Crap, who left the banning-Cryo part off?

Quote from JqlGirl »

Don't mind me, just enjoying the speculation

Lol, if it turns out there are no changes, I'm going to be so salty.

Quote from Hermes_ »

Is this you cryo? https://twitter.com/GosseMuijzer/status/1146323918178967552

I can neither confirm nor deny that I own 9 copies of that card in anticipation for it being legal one day.

If this thread proves anything, it's that this group of people who cares a lot about this format can't agree on how combo should fit into the format. Banning combo or combo cards would alienate a large portion of players, and yet there is a large portion of players who want to play without it.

I live in Portland where it's not hard to find a combo-friendly or non-combo playgroup. I'll usually ask when sitting down to a new group of players which they are. I also get that some people have limited options as far as people to play with. I suppose if I was in that scenario and wanted a non-combo game I might ask if we could have a combo game and a noncombo game, maybe I could borrow someone's combo deck if I wasn't into building such a thing myself. Or if I am a combo player and nobody wants to play combo maybe I'd ask if we could do 1 combo game a night and here's some fun fast combo decks for you guys to borrow, don't worry this'll take less than 30 minutes probably.

I think this discussion is healthy because we see how many different types of game people like, but it's pretty damn clear we're never never never all going to agree on what the ideal EDH/Commander game looks like.

Quote from Taleran »

That still doesn't make sense because combo is one of the pillar archetypes of the format and of magic the gathering and magic cards are deigned to interact together in combos.

Some combo just make crucial commander things, like the number of players, completely irrelevant, so yeah, i'd like to see combo player discussing about this kind of "interactions" instead of always screaming how much legit combo is.

People seem to be purposely missing his point. He didn't say 'don't play combo' or anything that approached that. His issue was with going straight for combo every time as option #1, perhaps your only win-con. And again, only in an unknown group, where such a thing should have social consequences.

People straight up straw-manning his stance is a sad thing on MTGS.