Lowering life totals serves multiple purposes. Starting life totals definitely matter. Look no further than one of the premier win-cons, Aetherflux Reservoir. That card is so dangerous because even non-combo decks can get to 50 incredibly fast because we all start at 40.
Even if your argument is that lower life totals wouldn't allow aggro decks to flourish, it would still make it tougher for combo decks to operate since life is a valuable resource. It's cliche to say that only the last point of life matters. The game is way more nuanced than that. Life has to be balanced to fix mana (fetch/shock/talismans/mana crypt/mana vault), draw cards, and buying time via combat.
Those of us advocating lower life totals aren't asking to make aggro tier one. We're not delusional about attacking with Savannah Lions, but combat needs to be more meaningful in the early stages of the game. I also don't think we're advocating lower life totals solely because of combo either. I whole-heartedly believe games would just be better with players at 30 life, regardless of combo.
What that tells you is - if you sit down at a table with 2 scrubs, a competitive combo deck, and a competitive aggro deck, the aggro deck can kill the combo deck first most of the time, if you fix the life totals so it's not as outrageous as it is now. At 25 life, that combo player is going to be feeling some serious pressure if the aggro player is gunning for him. And sure, the aggro player still has to kill the other 2 players if he wins, whereas the combo player just wins...but that seems a reasonable tradeoff in strategies to me. Aggro gets to control the flow of the game by choosing who gets eliminated first but has to make sure they have the resources to finish the job, whereas combo is slower but doesn't have to worry about the other players.
This is very important to consider. Players with less powerful decks have a better shot with everyone starting lower. No one person has to do all of the work. Which, coincidentally enough, is why infect sucks in EDH (even at 10).
Starting life total being lower also means crack-backs are more noticeable part of the game. Vigilance being a meaningful keyword in EDH would be nice.
21 cmdr damage is still important though because the cdmr is essentially a free card that's always present.
I hope they finally decide to just lower the starting life total from 40 to something reasonable like 25-30. Lower CDMR damage to 20 instead of 21. That 1 extra point is very crucial. It makes games turnover faster and give tables a better shot at archenemy'ing a dirty-combo player.
Give attacking and chip damage more meaning by lowering life totals. Force players to do something the first 3 turns of the game besides mindlessly ramping. If anything, having it be at 20 life would get rid of the stupid argument people have for poison being something other than 10. I've had to tell people, "Poison is still 10 because Lightning Bolt still deals 3." CMDR damage is still a good alt-win con even with starting life lowered.
Could also ban all CMDR set generals as commanders...but that's just me.
The cards they print now are just over the top (especially the threats and CMDR-set legendaries). You can have all the fast mana and build an EDH deck using only pre-modern sets. And I don't think it'd beat EDH decks without fast mana constructed from Modern-legal sets. Fast mana actually makes games fun, that's why people like group-hug. But fast mana isn't Shivan Dragon anymore, it's Enter the Infinite.
I don't have a defined meta. I just show up to 1 of 3 different LGS to play depending on the day I have available. Lately, my opponents have mostly been unable to recover from just the first Child trigger. It's just the luck of how the pods assemble. I can see how an even more recurrable Child would shut people out.
I feel like those ones are open-ended in a good way. Not that flexibility is always good, but it does give commanders more durability in these days of edhrec.
6 out of 7 are non-commander set generals! MUCH respect for that.
It's been a long time since I have played a game where commanders from normal sets out-numbered commanders from Commander sets and/or supplemental (i.e. Battlebond/Conspiracy) sets.
That new Golos guy will probably get more people playing Maze's End. I've won a lot of games with Maze's End in the last 5 years. I'm glad to see more Lands.dec support and I hope that Golos at least replaces Windgrace. I hate PWs too much.
So this guy got spoiled. From now on, Golos will probably be the go-to-guy for new Lands.dec players. But those in the know, understand how gamebreaking a Planar Cleansing is in the command zone.
You'll will probably get laughed at for sticking with Child of Alara instead. Heck, when I tell people I'm running a Lands.dec, they always ask how come I'm not using Windgrace or Omnath.
Golos does seem like a great add for the 99. I might even build an entirely separate 99 with Golos at the helm. It would be a completely different build and I would get to actually get to play Sol Ring and Mana Crypt.
This is also another interesting card. It's kinda like a Valakut that you wouldn't need Prismatic Omen. And if you have Prismatic Omen, you could even Scapeshift for this and Valakut. It's always nice to have a back-up plan for when a gate gets exiled. I know people suggest Riftsweeper, but that has always been a non-starter for me.
About back-up plans, Avenger of Zendikar has been a monster for me lately.
On turn 7, I played an Avenger for 8 plants. Opponent on my immediate left senses trouble and steals Avenger with a Dragonlord Silumgar.
On turn 8, I played Jace, the Mind Sculptor and bounced Silumgar. Then resolve a Splendid Reclamation for 3 fetchlands and a cycle land. My plants had 8x +1/+1 counters and it was game.
Jace TMS + Avenger = Best buddies from Worldwake.
LIke I said, we must play at a different power level, because whenever I play, there will 100% be creatures on the board within the firt 3 turns.
I do agree that it is miles better then Bringer of the Black Down.
I would define a pet card as a card that you know isn't good enough to be in that specific deck, has little synergy with the rest of the deck, but you play annyway. I think most people would agree with me when saying Jace isn't good enough to be played in MOST commander decks, and certainly not in this one.
Actually Jace is not played in Cedh, non of the top-decks are running him.
Ofcourse he's better when you have creatures laying around to block, but we're arguing over playing him in Lands.dec, in which he doesn't belong, because we're not a typical control deck that runs 6-10 Creature-wrath's, or a Stax deck that locks everything down, or an extra turns deck, or a superfriends deck,... For sure he will be better in any of those decks, can we at least agree on that?
To me it seems to boil down to our differences in playgroups. Jace would'nt make it around 1 Cycle where I play, except for after a COA wrath. Can we agree that 2UU for 1 Brainstorm (sometimes 2) is just bad? Because if so, Jace would be bad in my meta.
I don't think we play at different power-levels, just different metas. I also said that Jace TMS is bad in cEDH, kinda like how Jace TMS is hard to tap-out for in Modern.
Jace is never just 2UU for only one Brainstorm when I play. Yes, I agree with you that 2UU for Brainstorm is poor. But since I always get more than that, I will continue to play Jace. Brainstorm synergizes extremely well in my shuffle and tutor heavy deck. It's better than getting a land back each turn.
However, if you can't ever get more value than one Brainstorm, I can see why you wouldn't play it. If Jace TMS can't make one round in your group, why bother with Wrenn other than just to try new cards?
You can play Wrenn and Six without putting down Jace TMS.
In a lot of EDH games, there just aren't any creatures in play turns 1-3. So if I play Jace TMS on curve, I'll get two uses. If I can get a Maze of Ith, it goes even further. Most of the time, Jace TMS isn't played on curve. If I play it after a Child of Alara trigger, it will also get two uses. So while Jace TMS is a card that I personally aim to play as much as possible, it's definitely not just a "pet" card. I know you called it that, but it's leagues above something like Bringer of the Black Dawn.
Jace TMS is only underwhelming in EDH compared to his reputation in constructed, his price-tag, and cEDH. Many players also build their decks wrong with him. Jace's vulnerabilities are well over-stated in EDH. He's not going to win the game on his own like he would in 1v1. But he's solid and I reliably activate him over and over in my Momir Vig and Brago decks (decks prepared with creatures to block).
If you don't think Jace is good, that's fine. But it's still better than Wrenn. Wrenn has a lower cmc and a better ultimate. Play new cards if you prefer to.
a.) 2UU for 2 Brainstorms and life > RG for 2 Raise Deads and life.
b.) In fact, any combination of activations of any of Jace's abilities > the same number of activations of Wrenn's abilities.
c.) Wrenn only has an advantage over Jace TMS early, but if you play him early you might get 0 value (especially in low-fetch builds).
d.) When you play against exile effects (one of Lands.dec vulnerabilities), Wrenn might get 0 value.
Yes, you should try Wrenn and Six if you want to. But it's not Regrowth since it only gets lands. The card that I most want to ever return with Eternal Witness/Sun Titan is usually Exploration or Azusa, Lost but Seeking.
Opponents will attack Wrenn even if it's not good though. So you shouldn't use that as a measure of its worth. You'll likely have no blockers, and attacking without scaling is poor in a 40 life format. So why attack for chip damage, when you can attack and remove a card? Either way, if you push people to commit to the board, it's more devastating when you trigger Child of Alara. It's one reason why Jace, TMS has been so good for me.
For those of you considering Wrenn? I just want to know what your take is on Jace, TMS? It seems like I'm the only one playing it.
Just to clarify, I like Wrenn's ultimate but not the +1 enough, even though it only costs RG to play. I'll stand on my assertion of planeswalkers though. For their mana costs, most of them are not impactful enough (without enablers) to play without their ability to threaten an ultimate. That is, if you're not scared of the ultimate or building around the static ability, the PW is not worth including most of the time. I just don't think grinding is where it's at anymore.
If I take nine from Bringer, so what? That's just the cost of doing business (running a pet card). Now if I take 9 + 8 from Bringer and Borborygmos Enraged...then I lose. Got to admit, that's why I took Bobo out. But EDH is about having fun.
A raise dead each turn for a land in your graveyard is not good enough to play on its own. Without the incredible ultimate, would you consider Wrenn and Six? If you were going to, would you consider playing Nissa, Vital Force? Her return ability is leagues stronger than Wrenn's and her ultimate is even more incredible.
I think it's definitely time to consider ultimates when grading walkers for EDH. Commander is very different now. Grinding value to win games is pretty tough when any given opponent can just win in one turn. Might as well have an insane pay-off for that grind. Ultimates are also way more achievable than people seem to think (proliferate, extra turns, etc.). A planeswalker threatens to ultimate in about a third of the games I play. The only walker whose ultimate I don't consider is Jace, TMS because he's really that good.
I have revealed Bringer off of Ad Naus so many times. But I still haven't cut him because he's cool and it's a 40 life format. It makes me feel good when people have to read the card.
Even if your argument is that lower life totals wouldn't allow aggro decks to flourish, it would still make it tougher for combo decks to operate since life is a valuable resource. It's cliche to say that only the last point of life matters. The game is way more nuanced than that. Life has to be balanced to fix mana (fetch/shock/talismans/mana crypt/mana vault), draw cards, and buying time via combat.
Those of us advocating lower life totals aren't asking to make aggro tier one. We're not delusional about attacking with Savannah Lions, but combat needs to be more meaningful in the early stages of the game. I also don't think we're advocating lower life totals solely because of combo either. I whole-heartedly believe games would just be better with players at 30 life, regardless of combo.
This is very important to consider. Players with less powerful decks have a better shot with everyone starting lower. No one person has to do all of the work. Which, coincidentally enough, is why infect sucks in EDH (even at 10).
Starting life total being lower also means crack-backs are more noticeable part of the game. Vigilance being a meaningful keyword in EDH would be nice.
21 cmdr damage is still important though because the cdmr is essentially a free card that's always present.
Give attacking and chip damage more meaning by lowering life totals. Force players to do something the first 3 turns of the game besides mindlessly ramping. If anything, having it be at 20 life would get rid of the stupid argument people have for poison being something other than 10. I've had to tell people, "Poison is still 10 because Lightning Bolt still deals 3." CMDR damage is still a good alt-win con even with starting life lowered.
Could also ban all CMDR set generals as commanders...but that's just me.
The cards they print now are just over the top (especially the threats and CMDR-set legendaries). You can have all the fast mana and build an EDH deck using only pre-modern sets. And I don't think it'd beat EDH decks without fast mana constructed from Modern-legal sets. Fast mana actually makes games fun, that's why people like group-hug. But fast mana isn't Shivan Dragon anymore, it's Enter the Infinite.
With Hall of Heliod's Generosity, I included Gift of Immortality and Journey to Eternity, more enchantments! Let's see how it plays differently.
I don't have a defined meta. I just show up to 1 of 3 different LGS to play depending on the day I have available. Lately, my opponents have mostly been unable to recover from just the first Child trigger. It's just the luck of how the pods assemble. I can see how an even more recurrable Child would shut people out.
I just wished you'd titled your thread "Legends of the Grave"
It's been a long time since I have played a game where commanders from normal sets out-numbered commanders from Commander sets and/or supplemental (i.e. Battlebond/Conspiracy) sets.
That new Golos guy will probably get more people playing Maze's End. I've won a lot of games with Maze's End in the last 5 years.
So this guy got spoiled. From now on, Golos will probably be the go-to-guy for new Lands.dec players. But those in the know, understand how gamebreaking a Planar Cleansing is in the command zone.
You'll will probably get laughed at for sticking with Child of Alara instead. Heck, when I tell people I'm running a Lands.dec, they always ask how come I'm not using Windgrace or Omnath.
Golos does seem like a great add for the 99. I might even build an entirely separate 99 with Golos at the helm. It would be a completely different build and I would get to actually get to play Sol Ring and Mana Crypt.
This is also another interesting card. It's kinda like a Valakut that you wouldn't need Prismatic Omen. And if you have Prismatic Omen, you could even Scapeshift for this and Valakut. It's always nice to have a back-up plan for when a gate gets exiled. I know people suggest Riftsweeper, but that has always been a non-starter for me.
About back-up plans, Avenger of Zendikar has been a monster for me lately.
On turn 7, I played an Avenger for 8 plants. Opponent on my immediate left senses trouble and steals Avenger with a Dragonlord Silumgar.
On turn 8, I played Jace, the Mind Sculptor and bounced Silumgar. Then resolve a Splendid Reclamation for 3 fetchlands and a cycle land. My plants had 8x +1/+1 counters and it was game.
Jace TMS + Avenger = Best buddies from Worldwake.
It's less to remember and learn and to keep track off.
I don't think we play at different power-levels, just different metas. I also said that Jace TMS is bad in cEDH, kinda like how Jace TMS is hard to tap-out for in Modern.
Jace is never just 2UU for only one Brainstorm when I play. Yes, I agree with you that 2UU for Brainstorm is poor. But since I always get more than that, I will continue to play Jace. Brainstorm synergizes extremely well in my shuffle and tutor heavy deck. It's better than getting a land back each turn.
However, if you can't ever get more value than one Brainstorm, I can see why you wouldn't play it. If Jace TMS can't make one round in your group, why bother with Wrenn other than just to try new cards?
In a lot of EDH games, there just aren't any creatures in play turns 1-3. So if I play Jace TMS on curve, I'll get two uses. If I can get a Maze of Ith, it goes even further. Most of the time, Jace TMS isn't played on curve. If I play it after a Child of Alara trigger, it will also get two uses. So while Jace TMS is a card that I personally aim to play as much as possible, it's definitely not just a "pet" card. I know you called it that, but it's leagues above something like Bringer of the Black Dawn.
Jace TMS is only underwhelming in EDH compared to his reputation in constructed, his price-tag, and cEDH. Many players also build their decks wrong with him. Jace's vulnerabilities are well over-stated in EDH. He's not going to win the game on his own like he would in 1v1. But he's solid and I reliably activate him over and over in my Momir Vig and Brago decks (decks prepared with creatures to block).
If you don't think Jace is good, that's fine. But it's still better than Wrenn. Wrenn has a lower cmc and a better ultimate. Play new cards if you prefer to.
a.) 2UU for 2 Brainstorms and life > RG for 2 Raise Deads and life.
b.) In fact, any combination of activations of any of Jace's abilities > the same number of activations of Wrenn's abilities.
c.) Wrenn only has an advantage over Jace TMS early, but if you play him early you might get 0 value (especially in low-fetch builds).
d.) When you play against exile effects (one of Lands.dec vulnerabilities), Wrenn might get 0 value.
Opponents will attack Wrenn even if it's not good though. So you shouldn't use that as a measure of its worth. You'll likely have no blockers, and attacking without scaling is poor in a 40 life format. So why attack for chip damage, when you can attack and remove a card? Either way, if you push people to commit to the board, it's more devastating when you trigger Child of Alara. It's one reason why Jace, TMS has been so good for me.
For those of you considering Wrenn? I just want to know what your take is on Jace, TMS? It seems like I'm the only one playing it.
Just to clarify, I like Wrenn's ultimate but not the +1 enough, even though it only costs RG to play. I'll stand on my assertion of planeswalkers though. For their mana costs, most of them are not impactful enough (without enablers) to play without their ability to threaten an ultimate. That is, if you're not scared of the ultimate or building around the static ability, the PW is not worth including most of the time. I just don't think grinding is where it's at anymore.
If I take nine from Bringer, so what? That's just the cost of doing business (running a pet card). Now if I take 9 + 8 from Bringer and Borborygmos Enraged...then I lose. Got to admit, that's why I took Bobo out. But EDH is about having fun.
I think it's definitely time to consider ultimates when grading walkers for EDH. Commander is very different now. Grinding value to win games is pretty tough when any given opponent can just win in one turn. Might as well have an insane pay-off for that grind. Ultimates are also way more achievable than people seem to think (proliferate, extra turns, etc.). A planeswalker threatens to ultimate in about a third of the games I play. The only walker whose ultimate I don't consider is Jace, TMS because he's really that good.
I have revealed Bringer off of Ad Naus so many times. But I still haven't cut him because he's cool and it's a 40 life format. It makes me feel good when people have to read the card.
That being said, I don't know why Urza would spike this card. Urza is strong, but it doesn't mean that you need to run Thran Turbine.