It's going to drop, especially non-foil. It can't maintain that price in a print to demand set. It's $40 for pre-order hype only.
As an example, Sliver Hivelord is ~$28, 4 years later. It was a sub $10 card for the longest time after release. Arguably one of the most important slivers to have in a deck, and it was that low for so long with the new sliver hype and playability in standard.
Even if it takes over as the new 5 color food chain commander of choice, Tazri and Niv-Mizzet aren't exactly breaking the bank, and weren't at any point. It seems unlikely that this will break $20 in the months following release.
Because this specific one doesn’t hold to the declared criteria for banning. Why is this fact being completely ignored, even by the CAD apparently? Every argument in this thread leveled against wishes fails when held to the actual, official reasons for banning. It would make more sense to try out the wishes and then, if any are problematic, ban the offenders. But don’t preban them. The irony of Rule 13 and the apparent hypocrisy that led to it is why I said anything at all. I applaud others in this thread who have done such a superb job of countering emotional arguments with logic and explaining why wishes should be a relevant part of EDH.
Well we have already established that the rules which define the format (exactly 100 different cards, color identity) only extend to the deck building phase. If you want wishes with no intervention then you have to concede that I can get any card that isn't banned. Doing this clearly violates the spirit of the deck building restrictions, unless you think that the RC should step in and make their own errata. Then we are back to the issue of needing a formal sideboard during sanctioned play, which must now be defined.
If you want to argue the actual philosophy as it applies to wishes, then it would fall under creating undesirable game states when players spend five minutes digging through their collection for that silver bullet.
Don't forget that with the rate at which buyouts happen, the price for these cards will spike if they unbanned them. If ever given functionality, it would certainly be a test phase. There is then the chance that things don't work out and an actual banning or returning them to their current functionality happens. Then the card prices drops like a stone, players lose value, and "feel bads" follow.
The likelihood of this occurring is high, otherwise the RC would have tried to enable them. Defining a side/wish board AND rules for wishes is too large a concession to make at this time for the ~10 cards that are impacted. They likely don't see the benefit of enabling all of this and then backtracking it after 6 months to a year.
If the worry is anti-social use of a wish, then you use the gentleman's agreement in a non-CEDH non-Competitive environment. Simple as that. If it can be done with combo, stax, land destruction, and anything else in the format, a wish following this agreement won't break the metaphorical camel's back.
Call me crazy, but your suggestion could easily be used in a non-competitive, friendly game of magic with the agreement to allow wish cards/boards. Every point arguing for the use of wishes can be alleviated with play groups agreeing to allow them. Almost like the RC/CAG didn't ban them to make it easier to facilitate that. The pro-wish group just doesn't want to be told no whenever they show up to a random group or LGS with wish cards and a sideboard for them; they want their view to be the norm and the current anti-wish ruling to be the unusual occurrence. Flipping the coin as it were.
Because asking if you can use a wish for its actual intended purpose, instead of rule 13, puts it in a similar territory to asking if you can play with a planeswalker as your commander that isn't normally one.
Yet like you quoted me but also skirted around what I said, you should still just use the Gentleman's Agreement, simple as that. If a person is being obnoxious with a particular type of deck or card, you ask them to swap the deck or card out. If they can't, someone at the table offers them a deck, if they won't take it then ask them to kindly sit out of the game. Like a reasonable human being. Now apply this to wishboards and wishes and its not hard to understand, downright simple in fact.
In fact humor for me a bit.
Hypothetical: I create a new rule, #111. "If you would search your libary for a land card and that card would be put it into any other zone, you fail to find the card in your search instead."
There I just blanked every mana ramp card. If you want to play mana ramp spells, you got to ask the permission of the table first. After all, The pro-rampers just want to play their ramp spells without being told no; they want their view to be the norm and the current anti-ramp ruling to be the unusual occurrence. Flipping the coin as it were.
Soooo, extreme example. But while I see what you were going for, you're leaving out the tiny detail of if blanking FAR more cards than the wishes account for, and you take away one of the defining areas of strength from an entire color (green). Exile is still technically an "in-game zone" with no sideboard as an extension of your deck, you cant even make the argument for the wishes to be legal. You're taking the text of the card and insisting on its legality, when its defying more rules that have been established and asking for additional rules to enable them to be incorporated.
Wishes, sideboards, running banned cards etc. Can all be used via a social contract and play groups that allow them. Nothing wrong with that. Further concessions to allow for breaking fundamental rules of what makes commander, commander, isn't acceptable
If the worry is anti-social use of a wish, then you use the gentleman's agreement in a non-CEDH non-Competitive environment. Simple as that. If it can be done with combo, stax, land destruction, and anything else in the format, a wish following this agreement won't break the metaphorical camel's back.
Call me crazy, but your suggestion could easily be used in a non-competitive, friendly game of magic with the agreement to allow wish cards/boards. Every point arguing for the use of wishes can be alleviated with play groups agreeing to allow them. Almost like the RC/CAG didn't ban them to make it easier to facilitate that. The pro-wish group just doesn't want to be told no whenever they show up to a random group or LGS with wish cards and a sideboard for them; they want their view to be the norm and the current anti-wish ruling to be the unusual occurrence. Flipping the coin as it were.
A question for everyone complaining about Rule 13 re: Wishes, etc.:
Nothing functionally changed in the rule with this update, so why is everyone getting all argumentative about it now?
Probably because they want wishes to work and this update showed that you guys discussed them and didnt reach a conclusion they liked.
^This.
The dialogue has been mostly civil, if a little argumentative. It hasn't reached the point of cursing, name calling or demeaning (I don't think it would anyway).
My guess is that for some, there was a different interpretation of the rules for those cards and their functionality in the format. My understanding has always been that they never worked, but perhaps this was the "nail in the coffin" for them? Outright stating that they don't work outside of play groups allowing them, but not being banned, is bothering some people. (They want an all or nothing approach)
I think it makes far more sense to simply outright ban any card that references "outside the game" (even if that means a little bit of collateral damage in the form of "oh no, now I can't play half of Karn, the Great Creator") than to relegate it to the last rule listed which some people may not even see because the only thing they check is if their cards are legal or not. Wishes are, for all intents and purposes, banned. Might as well list them as such.
Agreed 100% though as a distant second to them just functioning as intended.
Your more than welcomed to do it in your local play group.
People: “Refer to Rule 0 if you want to use wishes.”
Me: “Refer to Rule 0 if you don’t want to use wishes.”
So far not a convincing argument against wish effects actually working in Commander. Words like “floodgate” are just pessimistic conjecture, not reflective of any reality. Conjecture is all any of us, even the committee, have in this matter because wish effects haven’t even been given an official chance in Commander. I hope the committee will revisit the wishes sooner than later and work them meaningfully into the Commander paradigm.
In the meantime, I’ve modified my original list of imaginary rules concerning wish effects.
A player may wish for a card if:
1. The card is owned by the controller of the wish effect.
2. The card is legal in Commander. (Sorry Pikachu.)
3. The card is outside of the game.
4. The card is of the color identity of the deck.
5. The card is sleeved to match those of the deck of the controller of the wish effect, if necessary.
6. The card is not a duplicate of any card already in the deck of the controller of the wish effect, unless the deck can have any number of copies of that card.
* Still doesn't address you having more cards "in game" after the resolution of the wish than is legally allowed.
* Still doesn't address the potentially significant increase in time it will take to choose a card that meets your criteria (pulling out and searching a binder, etc)
- this is basically a case for a sideboard, which is also not a thing in commander. Whether the delay of game takes place between rounds of people proactively sideboarding or the use of wishes, there are too many concessions to be allowed for so few cards to see play.
* It encourages people to run specific hate cards or answers they otherwise couldn't justify mainboard. This is a negative effect on deck construction. The last 1-15 cards are among the hardest to cut, and a necessary part of the deck building process.
* Adding these numerous rules for what amounts to 12 of 16k+ cards is excessive.
Yet you're quoting a ruling for general unsanctioned play, as defined by WotC. Commander/EDH is still solely in the control of the RC/CAG. WotC just saw a market for it and now makes products for it as another revenue stream.
Please see rules:
4) A Commander deck must contain exactly 100 cards, including the Commander
* to pull cards in from outside the game effectively gives you more than 100 cards, which is against rule 4. Adding a rule to say that wished cards are exiled upon resolution is a less elegant way to handle it. The potential for 101 cards or more in game would violate deck construction and possibly result in a DQ.
13) Abilities which bring card(s) you own from outside the game into the game (such as Wishes; Spawnsire of Ulamog; Karn, the Great Creator) do not function in Commander.
* it now says they don't work to pull cards outside the game, into the game for use.
Seeing as how a large portion of EDH games are unsanctioned pick-up games, I felt it was appropriate to quote the segment about unsanctioned play.
As for the rest of your post, I don't really know what you're getting at. I'm aware that Wishes don't work in EDH, that was the whole reason I spoke up in the first place. I think it makes far more sense to simply outright ban any card that references "outside the game" (even if that means a little bit of collateral damage in the form of "oh no, now I can't play half of Karn, the Great Creator") than to relegate it to the last rule listed which some people may not even see because the only thing they check is if their cards are legal or not. Wishes are, for all intents and purposes, banned. Might as well list them as such.
Fair points. Commander/EDH is the brain child of the RC, and WotC is content to allow them to officially handle the rulings of the format because they created it and it's done exceptionally well to date. If the RC makes a ruling for their format, it holds above those of the regular rulings. Ex. 100 card singleton vs 60 card minimum with 4 copies of most cards being allowed.
This recent clarification of the ruling is just as much a practical decision as it is a long term one. If WotC decides to print more cards like Karn, the Great Creator that have more than a singular "wish" functionality, they would be auto-banned by your definition. Karn's pull from outside the game ability is effectively 25% of the card. The static ability, +1 and half of the minus are still usable in commander without the wish part. No reason to do the "throw the baby out with the bathwater" when the problem is the wish card functionality.
Paliano, the High City doesn't explain how it doesn't do anything either... Wishes specify outside the game, conspiracy cards specify drafting. I'm seriously not seeing any difference. You're granting that the average EDH player is smart enough to know that draft cards don't work when you don't draft but not that sideboard tutors don't work when there aren't sideboards?
Yet you're quoting a ruling for general unsanctioned play, as defined by WotC. Commander/EDH is still solely in the control of the RC/CAG. WotC just saw a market for it and now makes products for it as another revenue stream.
Please see rules:
4) A Commander deck must contain exactly 100 cards, including the Commander
* to pull cards in from outside the game effectively gives you more than 100 cards, which is against rule 4. Adding a rule to say that wished cards are exiled upon resolution is a less elegant way to handle it. The potential for 101 cards or more in game would violate deck construction and possibly result in a DQ.
13) Abilities which bring card(s) you own from outside the game into the game (such as Wishes; Spawnsire of Ulamog; Karn, the Great Creator) do not function in Commander.
* it now says they don't work to pull cards outside the game, into the game for use.
Tutors are already like the 3rd more reviled thing in the format.
...and I think wishes are worse that tutors.
...and people running wishes would be near the top of the most common complaints in the format very quickly.
I hear what you’re saying but don’t agree with this sentiment. There’s already well over 600 cards (and counting) that “search your library”. A dozen more shouldn’t hurt. Maybe they would. We can’t know without trying. Rules can be reversed.
Tell us, why is it that you take issue with the current ruling, knowing full well that a play group can opt to allow wish cards and/or sideboards? There's nothing "technically" stopping you from making a case to your group for the amendment of the official rules. It does require a bit of convincing and the effort to do so on your part, but it's still possible.
It seems like those in the court of "I want to play wishes" want the floodgates open. I can tell you with certainty that, at the very least, people will not want to wait for a wish user to pull out a binder to search for a card that fits the unique situation they're in.
Also, how will you rectify the singleton rule? Are you and your compatriots also suggesting that this "any card outside the game" also allow for a duplicate of a card in your deck? And if that's not what your're suggesting, how can anyone verify this without going through your deck to confirm it's not a duplicate?
The benefits of interactions with wishes would be outweighed by the rulings that would need to be added: they would only complicate the format further.
Muldrotha certainly is a "kill on sight" kind of commander. It falls in the same category as Atraxa for me, i.e. "commanders I hate because they just provide too much value".
I have to agree with you there. My initial impression of this is that it's the most easily broken Sultai commander since Leovold. Tasigur is strong for sure, but he loses efficacy with the larger a game gets. The value that Muldrotha is going to generate with self-mill is going to give the player 2 hands to work with. Being able to play up to: a land, a creature, an artifact, an enchantment and a planeswalker from your GY every one of your turns means that the games will very quickly get away from those against this. Fetches, Strip Mines, Fleshbag Marauders, Mindslicer, Mindslaver, etc. Not being able to exile problematic cards only delays the inevitable return of the same issue.
It's like Meren and Blue had an even nastier baby, and now it's absurd and will be difficult to out-value.
While this holds true that Planeswalkers follow the legality rule as any other cards, keep in mind that all the Planeswalkers from Lorwyn were reprinted in M10, and it is likely that some of/all of them will see reprinting in M11. That's not even to bring up the potential new versions of our current Planeswalkers we may get with the release of "Rise of the Eldrazi" and "Lights".
side note: no Planeswalker is going to become illegal for use in extended with the release of M11 or "Lights"
As an example, Sliver Hivelord is ~$28, 4 years later. It was a sub $10 card for the longest time after release. Arguably one of the most important slivers to have in a deck, and it was that low for so long with the new sliver hype and playability in standard.
Even if it takes over as the new 5 color food chain commander of choice, Tazri and Niv-Mizzet aren't exactly breaking the bank, and weren't at any point. It seems unlikely that this will break $20 in the months following release.
Don't forget that with the rate at which buyouts happen, the price for these cards will spike if they unbanned them. If ever given functionality, it would certainly be a test phase. There is then the chance that things don't work out and an actual banning or returning them to their current functionality happens. Then the card prices drops like a stone, players lose value, and "feel bads" follow.
The likelihood of this occurring is high, otherwise the RC would have tried to enable them. Defining a side/wish board AND rules for wishes is too large a concession to make at this time for the ~10 cards that are impacted. They likely don't see the benefit of enabling all of this and then backtracking it after 6 months to a year.
Soooo, extreme example. But while I see what you were going for, you're leaving out the tiny detail of if blanking FAR more cards than the wishes account for, and you take away one of the defining areas of strength from an entire color (green). Exile is still technically an "in-game zone" with no sideboard as an extension of your deck, you cant even make the argument for the wishes to be legal. You're taking the text of the card and insisting on its legality, when its defying more rules that have been established and asking for additional rules to enable them to be incorporated.
Wishes, sideboards, running banned cards etc. Can all be used via a social contract and play groups that allow them. Nothing wrong with that. Further concessions to allow for breaking fundamental rules of what makes commander, commander, isn't acceptable
Call me crazy, but your suggestion could easily be used in a non-competitive, friendly game of magic with the agreement to allow wish cards/boards. Every point arguing for the use of wishes can be alleviated with play groups agreeing to allow them. Almost like the RC/CAG didn't ban them to make it easier to facilitate that. The pro-wish group just doesn't want to be told no whenever they show up to a random group or LGS with wish cards and a sideboard for them; they want their view to be the norm and the current anti-wish ruling to be the unusual occurrence. Flipping the coin as it were.
^This.
The dialogue has been mostly civil, if a little argumentative. It hasn't reached the point of cursing, name calling or demeaning (I don't think it would anyway).
My guess is that for some, there was a different interpretation of the rules for those cards and their functionality in the format. My understanding has always been that they never worked, but perhaps this was the "nail in the coffin" for them? Outright stating that they don't work outside of play groups allowing them, but not being banned, is bothering some people. (They want an all or nothing approach)
* Still doesn't address you having more cards "in game" after the resolution of the wish than is legally allowed.
* Still doesn't address the potentially significant increase in time it will take to choose a card that meets your criteria (pulling out and searching a binder, etc)
- this is basically a case for a sideboard, which is also not a thing in commander. Whether the delay of game takes place between rounds of people proactively sideboarding or the use of wishes, there are too many concessions to be allowed for so few cards to see play.
* It encourages people to run specific hate cards or answers they otherwise couldn't justify mainboard. This is a negative effect on deck construction. The last 1-15 cards are among the hardest to cut, and a necessary part of the deck building process.
* Adding these numerous rules for what amounts to 12 of 16k+ cards is excessive.
Fair points. Commander/EDH is the brain child of the RC, and WotC is content to allow them to officially handle the rulings of the format because they created it and it's done exceptionally well to date. If the RC makes a ruling for their format, it holds above those of the regular rulings. Ex. 100 card singleton vs 60 card minimum with 4 copies of most cards being allowed.
This recent clarification of the ruling is just as much a practical decision as it is a long term one. If WotC decides to print more cards like Karn, the Great Creator that have more than a singular "wish" functionality, they would be auto-banned by your definition. Karn's pull from outside the game ability is effectively 25% of the card. The static ability, +1 and half of the minus are still usable in commander without the wish part. No reason to do the "throw the baby out with the bathwater" when the problem is the wish card functionality.
Yet you're quoting a ruling for general unsanctioned play, as defined by WotC. Commander/EDH is still solely in the control of the RC/CAG. WotC just saw a market for it and now makes products for it as another revenue stream.
Please see rules:
4) A Commander deck must contain exactly 100 cards, including the Commander
* to pull cards in from outside the game effectively gives you more than 100 cards, which is against rule 4. Adding a rule to say that wished cards are exiled upon resolution is a less elegant way to handle it. The potential for 101 cards or more in game would violate deck construction and possibly result in a DQ.
13) Abilities which bring card(s) you own from outside the game into the game (such as Wishes; Spawnsire of Ulamog; Karn, the Great Creator) do not function in Commander.
* it now says they don't work to pull cards outside the game, into the game for use.
Tell us, why is it that you take issue with the current ruling, knowing full well that a play group can opt to allow wish cards and/or sideboards? There's nothing "technically" stopping you from making a case to your group for the amendment of the official rules. It does require a bit of convincing and the effort to do so on your part, but it's still possible.
It seems like those in the court of "I want to play wishes" want the floodgates open. I can tell you with certainty that, at the very least, people will not want to wait for a wish user to pull out a binder to search for a card that fits the unique situation they're in.
Also, how will you rectify the singleton rule? Are you and your compatriots also suggesting that this "any card outside the game" also allow for a duplicate of a card in your deck? And if that's not what your're suggesting, how can anyone verify this without going through your deck to confirm it's not a duplicate?
The benefits of interactions with wishes would be outweighed by the rulings that would need to be added: they would only complicate the format further.
I have to agree with you there. My initial impression of this is that it's the most easily broken Sultai commander since Leovold. Tasigur is strong for sure, but he loses efficacy with the larger a game gets. The value that Muldrotha is going to generate with self-mill is going to give the player 2 hands to work with. Being able to play up to: a land, a creature, an artifact, an enchantment and a planeswalker from your GY every one of your turns means that the games will very quickly get away from those against this. Fetches, Strip Mines, Fleshbag Marauders, Mindslicer, Mindslaver, etc. Not being able to exile problematic cards only delays the inevitable return of the same issue.
It's like Meren and Blue had an even nastier baby, and now it's absurd and will be difficult to out-value.
That's not her tail, she has a demon's tail as a whip
side note: no Planeswalker is going to become illegal for use in extended with the release of M11 or "Lights"