As an example for further rule 0 discussion.ĭirectly from the EDH philosophy document. That means if you had 3 slight variations of Hull Breacher, only one of them would land on the list. It doesn't seek to be comprehensive either. It serves as examples for effects and cards the RC thinks can be unfun or problematic and fit in at least one of the given categories for a ban. It doesn't and has never thought to ban cards that are too powerful. Unlike the lists in other formats it is NOT a balancing tool. Maybe your third sentence was the best fitting one. But that is in no shape or form the intention behind the EDH banlist. The banlist is a bad banlist if it had the same goals in mind as the Modern ban list for example. TL DR (alternative): for the love of god ban Mana Crypt But right now, what we seem to have is a confusing mess based largely on gut feelings that implicitly or explicitly allows many of the most broken things in the format and in Magic in general. Do we want a regulated competitive space? Then make a ban list that works for that space. Do we want a casual format? Then get rid of the ban list, or expand it in ways that make sense. It would make sense to completely reevaluate the list with a clearer goal in mind. TL DR: the commander ban list targets cards that are not problems if you have good pre-game discussions while ignoring many of the most powerful cards, combos, and interactions in the format. a lot of these cards just aren't super relevant. Yeah, I shouldn't show up rocking Yarok with Prime Time and Sundering Titan against your precon, but that's not just because Prime Time is ridiculous, but because my deck's power level is too high for the table. have conversations around power level and what you feel like playing against. But if you're playing casual EDH, you can just.
The ban list also feels heavily biased towards cards that are a "problem" in battlecruiser if not handled, while completely ignoring cards that are a problem in. Will ] make the ban list? Because it creates similar shutout scenarios, is cheaper, and is being played in Legacy reanimator over Iona. ] shuts out players, and is banned because of that. ] or ] are built almost exclusively for doing unfair things? ] costs less to play and activate and often wins the game on the spot when it resolves.
It's pretty backbreaking to cheat out ], but it is often far more backbreaking to cheat out ], because doing so just wins the game on the spot most of the time. ] does extremely degenerate things on 2 mana. Prime Time does some degenerate things on 6 mana. Island, Mana Vault, Sol Ring, Signet, Rhystic Study, pass if we're worried about it getting out early and ruining games, why are we okay fine with openings that play like this:
I get that Prime Time is a very strong creature, but. ] and ] are legal and popular in higher power decks. Or how about mana? ] is seen as a defining staple of the format for some reason. That's weird, right? Like, if I'm spending 8 mana on a spell, that spell could be ] or ] both are very often functionally equivalent to an "I win" card. But ], an 8-mana spell that requires at least some non-trivial setup? That's banned. That's a two-card, 3-mana combo which, barring interaction, wins the game on the spot. The most powerful things you can do in EDH right now revolve around ] and ]. It seems massively arbitrary and in desperate need of overhaul.Ĭase in point. Cards are present or absent seemingly independent of actual power level or format health. It seems to serve virtually no purpose other than having a default "house rules" list to work off of. The commander ban ist is extremely silly.
0 kommentar(er)
