When (not) to run Back to Basics | Blood Moon | Hall of Gemstone?

Where do you stand in this matter?

I don't want to see/run them ever.
0
No votes
I don't want to see/run them outside of top tier pods.
8
19%
I think they are fair game anywhere but in strictly casual pods.
11
26%
I consider them fair game anywhere.
14
33%
I think they are fair in pods with problematic lands, somewhat detached of tiers.
9
21%
 
Total votes: 42

User avatar
hyalopterouslemur
Posts: 3218
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by hyalopterouslemur » 3 years ago

My rule: Hosing nonbasics is always fair. Since every deck can have any number of basics, and a few fat packs or precons or the like gives you 40 of each basic, you did it to yourself. But Hall of Gemstone is a different story. I'm also not fond of Tsunami, Flashfires, Acid Rain, Conversion, Boil and the like.
Thanks to Feyd_Ruin for the avatar!

Tags:

User avatar
Toshi
ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ
Posts: 636
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Freiburg, Germany
Contact:

Post by Toshi » 3 years ago

I'd like to add to three insights about my Meta to the discussion:

1. Interesting, how people consider Hall of Gemstone as the most oppressive of the three (not counting Contamination as the unanimous top end). Our Meta is very keen on running instant speed removal, so it's always a matter of a few turns until someone takes one for the team/table and disenchants it, with its trigger on the stack. Plus, you can just choose the color of your most likely removal, let it resolve and react during your main phases. The other two don't allow that.
It mostly sees play in mono green decks with a ton of mana dorks, where its caster can tap out their lands and not lose much momentum, while slowing down multicolored players.

2. More importantly, our Meta is very conscious about fair match-ups. I am more than blessed to play within a group of people that put enjoyment and sportsmanship first. We wouldn't accept any of them in pods below 6/10 (with 10 being cEDH) in our adjusted tier system. From 6 upwards all decks have to come prepared to deal with virtually anything, in various nuances. Our top half of tiers isn't reflective of any of the casual pods i ever played in my LGS, at all.
Our lower levels are considered a safe space for budget builds, off the beat concepts and the likes. Sharking on aforementioned Chromium list in such a way would result in major criticism and a serious warning.

3. When playing with randoms i've always pointed out before a game that i'm running them and if they did agree on the power level but not that sort of card, i offered to remove it from my deck or replace it with something from my trade binder for the time being.

User avatar
3drinks
Kaalia's Personal Liaison
Posts: 4831
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Ruined City of Drannith, Ikoria

Post by 3drinks » 3 years ago

hyalopterouslemur wrote:
3 years ago
My rule: Hosing nonbasics is always fair. Since every deck can have any number of basics, and a few fat packs or precons or the like gives you 40 of each basic, you did it to yourself. But Hall of Gemstone is a different story. I'm also not fond of Tsunami, Flashfires, Acid Rain, Conversion, Boil and the like.
I kinda share this, but I won't hesitate to kick a u player in the junk with a Boil|7ed but that rests solely on just losing in the presence of islands if you don't play dirty 🙃👀

Modern
R{R/W} 87guide Burn
Commander
WRKellan, the Fae-Blooded // Birthright Boon (local secret santa gift)
RTorbran, Thane of Red Fell (Red Deck Wins)
WBRAlesha, Who Smiles at Death (Slivers)
WBRKaalia HQ

User avatar
Treamayne
Posts: 591
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Treamayne » 3 years ago

Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
At times I just can't understand some people's mentality. Ramping 7 mana by turn three, and I can't even punish you for overextension?
False analogy. If you want to punish the ramp player, do so. These do not accomplish that task. They are a minor setback to the ramp player, and ruin any casual deck. Last I checked EDH was not a spectator sport(*). If I'm sitting at a table, it's because I want to play, not watch a game of solitaire Magic, or a two-way battle (with 2+ spectators)
3drinks wrote:
3 years ago
... Now having said that, your fair and reasonable refusal to take such protective measures into practice does not invalidate the other players, because other players will play the greedy 3+ colour decks that cards like these are designed to reign in (emphasis mine). What you've created for yourself then, is collateral damage for the sake of the greater good. And that's unfortunate - but it doesn't make the metagame decision to run these cards any less inappropriate or ill-favored. The metagame got to that point by a reason, and it's a bit unfair to expect players to not use such cards on your behalf, when the other players forced them to become warranted by their own pushing of the envelope.
1) Can you honesty say you think that WotC designed Hall of Gemstone to reign in Ramp players back in Mirage, or Back to Basics in Urza's Saga? I contend that none of these cards are *designed* to counter ramp players, that's the story people tell themselves now to justify playing them. Yes Ramp needs viable answers. These are usually not those answers; since, in my experience, they are barely a speed-bump for most ramp players, but severely punish casual/budget players. Does that really sound like "the greater good?" In a 4 player group, you might slow one player, while effectively turning the other two into spectators.

If WotC cared enough to actually design cards to "reign in ramp players" we would be getting non-symmetrical answers (e.g. "If Target player controls more lands than you, that player sacrifices a non-basic land for each land they control greater than the number you control" or "Whenever enchanted player taps an artifact for mana, its controller sacrifices it").

2) When you say "metagame," that implies a playgroup. Is this what you meant? If a playgroup is fine with these cards, awesome. I think that in a random pick-up game - using a deck with these "because there might be a ramp player" is not so awesome.
3drinks wrote:
3 years ago
...At some point, one has to just accept that what they're doing is unoptimal, and accept losing to that if they don't wish to change....
Accept if a weakness leading to more game losses is worth the trade off of staying true to the theme...
You seem to think that the argument against these cards is about winning and losing. I can't speak for Materpillar, but I have no problem losing 95% of games, as long as I actually get to play - and hopefully be relevant once or twice. It's essentially being deprived of a chance to play that I dislike, and I would rather not start the game in the first place, than sit for game just to watch the ramp player and anti-ramp punisher duke it out.
3drinks wrote:
3 years ago
Fwiw all told I'd play against ya though. It's why I keep different decks with different aims, aesthetics, strategies, and even rarities around.
That's a great mindset.



*Note: Yes, YouTube videos, twitch streams, etc. are a "thing." That is not what I mean. When we are playing a game, I would like to play, not watch.
V/R

Treamayne

User avatar
Cyberium
Posts: 837
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Cyberium » 3 years ago

Treamayne wrote:
3 years ago
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
At times I just can't understand some people's mentality. Ramping 7 mana by turn three, and I can't even punish you for overextension?
False analogy. If you want to punish the ramp player, do so. These do not accomplish that task. They are a minor setback to the ramp player...
Yes it does. I set up my army and non-land mana while opponents land ramp, then wipe all lands and proceed to beat them with my army. It's obviously harder to accomplish in 100-card singleton than 60-card 4x, but certainly not undoable. I'm surprised how many players would go all out ramping without holding a spare land in hand, that was the first lesson I learned back during Tempest era.
Treamayne wrote:
3 years ago
Last I checked EDH was not a spectator sport(*). If I'm sitting at a table, it's because I want to play, not watch a game of solitaire Magic, or a two-way battle (with 2+ spectators)
Combo decks do solitaire all the time, and usually impossible to prevent without a Counterspell, yet people appear to have less "social rules" against it compare to MLD. If a player has his wincon on the table and wants to secure it with MLD, I don't see why it should be prohibited. Even without combo/MLD at the table, people get mana screwed/flooded all the time and had to watch others proceed on their own, it's not a torment, it's part of the game.

User avatar
Treamayne
Posts: 591
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Treamayne » 3 years ago

Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
.. I set up my army and non-land mana while opponents land ramp, then wipe all lands and proceed to beat them with my army. It's obviously harder to accomplish in 100-card singleton than 60-card 4x, but certainly not undoable. I'm surprised how many players would go all out ramping without holding a spare land in hand, that was the first lesson I learned back during Tempest era.
So, you agree. It's not about punishing the Ramp player for overextending, or "reigning" the ramp player in. It's about "protecting" a WinCon. I've already said that winning the turn of or turn after one of these is less bad then just dropping one and claiming "it's to reign in Ramp"

In your experience, if you MLD (or similar) and don't win that turn or the next, who recovers first? The ramp player or the casual player?
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
Combo decks do solitaire all the time, and usually impossible to prevent without a Counterspell, yet people appear to have less "social rules" against it compare to MLD.
And I have just as much preference to avoid games with 20 min durdle combo wins as I do with these kinds of effects. Are there really "less social rules" against combo wins than MLD, or is your perception skewed by history. I would say it's worth asking, but in my experience (games and social conversations like this), combo - when it is a 2 card (sometimes three card) power-out early win or a 20 min durdle inf. win draws as much or more hate as MLD (if only because we experience significant; more often). Though I would concur that a 4+ card combo that can be interacted with has much less social stigma.
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
If a player has his wincon on the table and wants to secure it with MLD, I don't see why it should be prohibited. Even without combo/MLD at the table, people get mana screwed/flooded all the time and had to watch others proceed on their own, it's not a torment, it's part of the game.
Again, you seem to have shifted to "protect my WinCon, MLD is okay in this usage" which is not what was being discussed. This kind of card (or Ruination or whatever) - for the sole purpose of "punishing the ramp player for over-extending" - usually does not accomplish that specific task in the long run. In two-three turns the ramp player will have recovered, but the casual decks are essentially ejected from the game. If every opponent is Ramp, have at it; but otherwise there are other tools for punishing a Ramp player (not many and not enough though) that better fill that role.

If the reason you are running these is to protect your WinCon and you are honest with yourself and the table about that; then Great Job!


PS: I am not trying to persuade you to change the way you play, I don't think I can/will change your opinion. I'm just hoping you can understand why there is a significant difference to many players.

Empathy breeds compassion.
V/R

Treamayne

umtiger
Posts: 394
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by umtiger » 3 years ago

materpillar wrote:
3 years ago
I have a Chromium deck. I want to cast an Elder Dragon while I'm playing re-skinned Elder Dragon Highlander, I'm not going to agree with letting that want be acceptable "collateral damage for the greater good"
I don't see how Blood Moon invalidates your Chromium deck. You have white and can play artifacts that make white mana. Having a single signet in play can end Blood Moon on the spot.

Realistically, Blood Moon doesn't lock many people out anymore. It's a speed bump and it's pretty fair when it comes to speed bumps.

User avatar
Ruiner
Posts: 604
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ruiner » 3 years ago

In 60 card magic, pre-dating the Commander format, the trade off for running a deck with multiple colors was always that your mana base was trickier to work with and more prone to disruption in return to having access to a wider cardpool, versus a 1 or 2 color deck which would be far more consistent in the mana department and harder to disrupt but with a smaller cardpool to work from.

For those who are against cards like Blood Moon in the Commander format, do you believe there should be any real downside to running a 3, 4, or 5 color deck that has access to a wider cardpool than the mono/dual color decks, beyond monetary concerns for the appropriate land base itself?

Please don't take this as being against goofy casual decks or anything, I run some pretty tuned decks and some less than optimal goofy decks for the fun of it (like a mono-red rogues and pirates deck, and a b/w cleric deck for example) because I enjoy some wacky themes myself. I'm just genuinely curious.

User avatar
ISBPathfinder
Bebopin
Posts: 2154
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: SD, USA

Post by ISBPathfinder » 3 years ago

These cards have a time and a place. I think Blood Moon is the one that like I tend to be more ok seeing it anywhere if someone wants to play it but really I think all of them tend to be effects that I am not that happy to see unless we are playing some more competitive magic. I tend to be in the camp of "don't mess with lands en mass unless you give a warning before choosing decks".

There was a time years ago where I have played with or against most of these effects and I just don't find that people have more fun for playing them. If we are going all out, I have no problem seeing them but outside of that I would prefer then be kept in binders rather than in play.
[EDH] Vadrok List (Suicide Chads) | Evelyn List (Vamp Mill) | Sanwell List | Danitha List | Indominus List | Ratadrabik List

illakunsaa
Posts: 251
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by illakunsaa » 3 years ago

These cards are pretty tame stax pieces. As soon as you blow them up their effect comes undone. People who complain about these cards usually are also running abur duals with off color fetches.

User avatar
Treamayne
Posts: 591
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Treamayne » 3 years ago

Ruiner wrote:
3 years ago
In 60 card magic, pre-dating the Commander format, the trade off for running a deck with multiple colors was always that your mana base was trickier to work with and more prone to disruption in return to having access to a wider cardpool, versus a 1 or 2 color deck which would be far more consistent in the mana department and harder to disrupt but with a smaller cardpool to work from.
There is... it's the same as before: a trickier manabase and more prone to disruption.

Lets face it, while every color has things it is good at and things it is weak at; there isn't really much anymore that absolutely *can't* be done monocolor (with colorless). They may not be ideal options, but the options are there. And unless a player is going full cEDH optimum landbase, the 3+ color deck is still going to experience color-screw as much or more often than a monocolor deck might be mana-screwed. For example, my Gahiji beast deck runs 39 lands and still gets colorscrewed now and then (but then it doesn't have the cEDH trinity of ABURs, Shocks and Fetches).
Ruiner wrote:
3 years ago
For those who are against cards like Blood Moon in the Commander format, do you believe there should be any real downside to running a 3, 4, or 5 color deck that has access to a wider cardpool than the mono/dual color decks, beyond monetary concerns for the appropriate land base itself?
Of course there is and should be downsides to multi-color. But that doesn't mean that the best answer is to pummel casual players to punish a ramper. Mogi bogo, kal baegi (Korean version of a Chinese proverb - it means "to see a mosquito and draw your sword"). How about more Volcanic Offering, less Blood moon, Or, WotC could finally start making answers to rampant rampers and give us some non-symmetrical nonbasic hate so that players that overextend can be dealt with, while not simultaneously ending the game for the players limping along with only 2 of 3 colors before your "hate" was cast.
illakunsaa wrote:
3 years ago
These cards are pretty tame stax pieces. As soon as you blow them up their effect comes undone. People who complain about these cards usually are also running abur duals with off color fetches.
Wow, how very absolutist and exclusive of you. I dislike these cards (and other cards/strategies whose primary effect is to prevent one or more players from actually playing), and I neither run ABUR duals, nor fetches (much less off color fetches).

Your sentiment would be similar to me saying that people who advocate these cards are pubstompers who can only boost their ego by playing a cEDH netdeck at a casual table. But that's as blatantly false as your statement.

I think we have been having a constructive, informative conversation. We welcome your good-faith contribution of thought-out discourse. However, if you don't want to contribute to the conversation, at least please don't detract from it by resorting to provocative, inflammatory statements.
V/R

Treamayne

illakunsaa
Posts: 251
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by illakunsaa » 3 years ago

Treamayne wrote:
3 years ago
Wow, how very absolutist and exclusive of you. I dislike these cards (and other cards/strategies whose primary effect is to prevent one or more players from actually playing), and I neither run ABUR duals, nor fetches (much less off color fetches).
You literally call me not inclusive while in the same sentence want people to stop playing you personally don't like.

There are a lot of cards I don't like but I also think people should be able to play those cards. I'm not responsible for you to be able to play. You are responsible for your deck. If it ceases to function after one obstacle that is your fault.

Mimicvat
Posts: 172
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post by Mimicvat » 3 years ago

I love these cards. Anything to counteract the current paradigm of "more colors = always better". My only issues are that a) they punish mid-low tier manabases more than top tier ones (tapped duals vs fetches that can find basics) and b) they don't deal with the land ramp train that defines non-cEDH gameplay.
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
When I play red I use Ruination, so I don't see why not.

At times I just can't understand some people's mentality. Ramping 7 mana by turn three, and I can't even punish you for overextension? Draw 2~3 cards a turn minimum, and I can't play Eidolon of Rhetoric to counter that? Hoarding counterspells in your hand, then criticize me for using Grand Abolisher? And I'm suppose to stop using Aven Mindcensor simply because you love to tutor?

The double standard in EDH is rich.
The problem is, those mega-ramp decks are always green and basic heavy, so these types of answers don't do much to them.

Ruination is a bad card though imo. More a kingmaker card than a way to set back the ramp train - theres always some players who just can't do anything, and then others who play as normal, leading to "draw, pass turn, wait 40 minutes for next turn" play experiences for those pseudo-eliminated players. I love land destruction cards and would like to see a ton more of them printed (mainly in Red and White, give them something!) but not this one.
Currently building: ww Bruna, the Fading Light (card advantage tribal / reanimator)
Main decks;
r Neheb, Big Red Champion g Yeva's Mono Green Control, b Ayara's Aristocrats rb Greven, Predator Captain the One Punch Man, ugw Derevri, Empirical Tactician Aggro,rwbu Tymna & Kraum's Saboteurs, wbg Kondo & Tymna's Hatebears wugTuvasa's Silver Bullets, urBrudiclad does Brudiclad thingsgubSidisi, Brood Tyrant (lantern control)

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

I am not a giant fan of land destruction because it tends to hose the non-lands decks more than the lands decks, and I don't think non-green needs any more hosing :P

I'd rather see more surgical punishers. Cards like Archon of Emeria are brutal against ramp decks. We can get a lot more of that.

In one breath I kinda want more search hate but then on the other I wish they would stop printing insanely pushed stuff like Opposition Agent =P

As far as multicolor being where it's at, wizards is almost purely at fault for that in printing so many busted 4 and 5c options for commanders. They seriously should unprint Tymna, Thrasios, and basically every 5c legend from Ramos, Dragon Engine to Golos, Tireless Pilgrim. Sisay, Kenrith, etc. These guys are just too stupid.

If you want a 5c legend you should have to play hot garbage like The Ur-Dragon and Progenitus. :P

User avatar
Cyberium
Posts: 837
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Cyberium » 3 years ago

Treamayne wrote:
3 years ago
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
.. I set up my army and non-land mana while opponents land ramp, then wipe all lands and proceed to beat them with my army. It's obviously harder to accomplish in 100-card singleton than 60-card 4x, but certainly not undoable. I'm surprised how many players would go all out ramping without holding a spare land in hand, that was the first lesson I learned back during Tempest era.
So, you agree. It's not about punishing the Ramp player for overextending, or "reigning" the ramp player in. It's about "protecting" a WinCon. I've already said that winning the turn of or turn after one of these is less bad then just dropping one and claiming "it's to reign in Ramp"
I don't see why "securing wincon" and "punishing the ramp players" have to be two different things. Players who ramped and kept 0 lands in hand (or other resources, for that matter) would suffer more because they went all out without reservation. Land-ramp players tend to suffer more because they want as much mana as early as possible, getting all the lands out of their library and ended up drawing less of it when they had to top deck. Think of it like Mana Severance done too early.
Treamayne wrote:
3 years ago
In your experience, if you MLD (or similar) and don't win that turn or the next, who recovers first? The ramp player or the casual player?
If I have my field set up before MLD (which is the correct way to do it), my group-mates tend to concede on the spot, knowing that I'd win eventually, albeit slower than a combo deck would. There were cases where they make a comeback, such as drawing some 0~2 cc mana rocks, and I respect them all the more for it.

And no one holds a grudge. We're adults, after all.
Treamayne wrote:
3 years ago
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
Combo decks do solitaire all the time, and usually impossible to prevent without a Counterspell, yet people appear to have less "social rules" against it compare to MLD.
And I have just as much preference to avoid games with 20 min durdle combo wins as I do with these kinds of effects. Are there really "less social rules" against combo wins than MLD, or is your perception skewed by history. I would say it's worth asking, but in my experience (games and social conversations like this), combo - when it is a 2 card (sometimes three card) power-out early win or a 20 min durdle inf. win draws as much or more hate as MLD (if only because we experience significant; more often). Though I would concur that a 4+ card combo that can be interacted with has much less social stigma.
See above. If I have my board set up, my group (which is between 6~8 out of 10 on the scale) tends to acknowledge their defeat the moment I MLD, but there were exceptions. Mana rocks are less explosive than land ramps, but also suffer less from MLD as a whole, so people had come back from MLD at times, and even casual players use mana rocks these days.

Ultimately, because we accept combo/MLD as part of the game as much as blue using Counterspell, we don't see it as a problem.
Treamayne wrote:
3 years ago
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
If a player has his wincon on the table and wants to secure it with MLD, I don't see why it should be prohibited. Even without combo/MLD at the table, people get mana screwed/flooded all the time and had to watch others proceed on their own, it's not a torment, it's part of the game.
Again, you seem to have shifted to "protect my WinCon, MLD is okay in this usage" which is not what was being discussed. This kind of card (or Ruination or whatever) - for the sole purpose of "punishing the ramp player for over-extending" - usually does not accomplish that specific task in the long run. In two-three turns the ramp player will have recovered, but the casual decks are essentially ejected from the game. If every opponent is Ramp, have at it; but otherwise there are other tools for punishing a Ramp player (not many and not enough though) that better fill that role.

If the reason you are running these is to protect your WinCon and you are honest with yourself and the table about that; then Great Job!
Again, I don't think "securing wincon" and "punishing the ramp players" have to be two different things, it really depends on who's sitting at your table, no? Practically speaking, MLD IS rather punishing for players who want to hoard 7+ mana as quickly as possible to cast his Damia, Sage of Stone thinking he could refill his hand the next turn, only to never come back from it.
Treamayne wrote:
3 years ago
PS: I am not trying to persuade you to change the way you play, I don't think I can/will change your opinion. I'm just hoping you can understand why there is a significant difference to many players.

Empathy breeds compassion.
I understand it perfectly well. Just because I'm ardent with my point of view doesn't mean I'm blind to others, but thank you for your civility.
Mimicvat wrote:
3 years ago
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
When I play red I use Ruination, so I don't see why not.

At times I just can't understand some people's mentality. Ramping 7 mana by turn three, and I can't even punish you for overextension? Draw 2~3 cards a turn minimum, and I can't play Eidolon of Rhetoric to counter that? Hoarding counterspells in your hand, then criticize me for using Grand Abolisher? And I'm suppose to stop using Aven Mindcensor simply because you love to tutor?

The double standard in EDH is rich.
The problem is, those mega-ramp decks are always green and basic heavy, so these types of answers don't do much to them.

Ruination is a bad card though imo. More a kingmaker card than a way to set back the ramp train - theres always some players who just can't do anything, and then others who play as normal, leading to "draw, pass turn, wait 40 minutes for next turn" play experiences for those pseudo-eliminated players. I love land destruction cards and would like to see a ton more of them printed (mainly in Red and White, give them something!) but not this one.
I used Ruination as an example, since it's more... acceptable than Armageddon type cards for forum discussion.

And your description is usually the result of people not setting up their wincon before they nuke all lands. When a player MLD, he needs to at least be certain he could kill a player within 1~3 turns, so people don't feel "dull" watching it in progress. And, if by chance the MLD player also have things like Crucible of Worlds/Sun Titan/Strip Mine ready, then it'd be unwise to not surrender on the spot.
Last edited by Cyberium 3 years ago, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
3drinks
Kaalia's Personal Liaison
Posts: 4831
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Ruined City of Drannith, Ikoria

Post by 3drinks » 3 years ago

Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
And your description is usually the result of people not setting up their wincon before they nuke all lands. When a player MLD, he needs to at least be certain he could kill a player within 1~3 turns, so people don't feel "dull" watching it in progress. And, if by chance the MLD player also have things like Crucible of Worlds/Sun Titan/Strip Mine ready, then it'd be unwise to not surrender on the spot.
Exactly. Players need to stop blaming us responsible geddon users for every assclown with their "Durr hurr look what I can do I'm so funny" bullcrap play. With great power comes great responsibility, and we geddon players acknowledge that. The format wouldn't be near as insufferable if you stopped blackballing archetypes you don't like, and instead were all-inclusive to every archetype to let all the native checks and balances work as intended. Stop shouting at us because your pet deck got dumped on, and instead recognize it's a game and not everything goes according to plan. Every plan has strengths and weaknesses and failure to accept your deck isn't some god Thanos Bolas tier weapon of mass destruction is immature at the very least.

So let players play what they want, just as we let you play what you want.

Modern
R{R/W} 87guide Burn
Commander
WRKellan, the Fae-Blooded // Birthright Boon (local secret santa gift)
RTorbran, Thane of Red Fell (Red Deck Wins)
WBRAlesha, Who Smiles at Death (Slivers)
WBRKaalia HQ

User avatar
Myllior
Posts: 229
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Myllior » 3 years ago

Like others have said, these are fine in pretty much all situations, the exceptions being against jank or meme decks. For example, it's 100% fair game against my Shrines deck, but if these came out while I was playing "You lose the game" tribal then I'd be a bit dumbfounded. (Of course assuming the deck styles are known beforehand).

I've considered running Back to Basics in Kefnet before, but there are a number of more casual decks in my playgroup and only a few that abuse land-based ramp or access to more colours, so the negative impact it would have on the casual games is the more significant and I decided against it. It's a good spot to be in, where lands aren't being abused, so that you don't have to answer them and can avoid collateral damage.
Kefnet Voltron | Ayli Reanistocrats | Derevi Pod | Kodama//Ishai Blink | Jetmir Hatebears | Kess Storm | Smasher//Sakashima Control

User avatar
hyalopterouslemur
Posts: 3218
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by hyalopterouslemur » 3 years ago

Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
When I play red I use Ruination, so I don't see why not.

At times I just can't understand some people's mentality. Ramping 7 mana by turn three, and I can't even punish you for overextension? Draw 2~3 cards a turn minimum, and I can't play Eidolon of Rhetoric to counter that? Hoarding counterspells in your hand, then criticize me for using Grand Abolisher? And I'm suppose to stop using Aven Mindcensor simply because you love to tutor?

The double standard in EDH is rich.
It's called scrubism. Most of these cards are most annoying when played poorly, anyway.
Thanks to Feyd_Ruin for the avatar!

User avatar
3drinks
Kaalia's Personal Liaison
Posts: 4831
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Ruined City of Drannith, Ikoria

Post by 3drinks » 3 years ago

hyalopterouslemur wrote:
3 years ago
Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
When I play red I use Ruination, so I don't see why not.

At times I just can't understand some people's mentality. Ramping 7 mana by turn three, and I can't even punish you for overextension? Draw 2~3 cards a turn minimum, and I can't play Eidolon of Rhetoric to counter that? Hoarding counterspells in your hand, then criticize me for using Grand Abolisher? And I'm suppose to stop using Aven Mindcensor simply because you love to tutor?

The double standard in EDH is rich.
It's called scrubism. Most of these cards are most annoying when played poorly, anyway.
Scrubism. Ha. I love that term 🤣🤣

Modern
R{R/W} 87guide Burn
Commander
WRKellan, the Fae-Blooded // Birthright Boon (local secret santa gift)
RTorbran, Thane of Red Fell (Red Deck Wins)
WBRAlesha, Who Smiles at Death (Slivers)
WBRKaalia HQ

umtiger
Posts: 394
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by umtiger » 3 years ago

hyalopterouslemur wrote:
3 years ago
It's called scrubism. Most of these cards are most annoying when played poorly, anyway.
Careful, they don't like being called that.

Mimicvat
Posts: 172
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post by Mimicvat » 3 years ago

Cyberium wrote:
3 years ago
I used Ruination as an example, since it's more... acceptable than Armageddon type cards for forum discussion.

And your description is usually the result of people not setting up their wincon before they nuke all lands. When a player MLD, he needs to at least be certain he could kill a player within 1~3 turns, so people don't feel "dull" watching it in progress. And, if by chance the MLD player also have things like Crucible of Worlds/Sun Titan/Strip Mine ready, then it'd be unwise to not surrender on the spot.
I disagree. My description is the result of Ruination being Ruination, and those specific negative effects come into play from Ruination not from Armageddon. The argument of "don't armageddon unless your gonna win" is a very seperate one from "Don't armageddon some players and not others" due to what I mentioned and the fact that the non-geddon'd players can interrupt your attempted win-con.

For the record, I'm all for Armageddon at any time in any game over a certain moderate power level, and wish there were more armageddons printed as well as more partial armageddons (like that green one that sets everyone to five lands). You can 'geddon with a wincon or a crucible, or geddon to reign in the green player, or geddon to win off of artifact mana, or geddon to farm value off of some slow grindy enchantment - all good in my book. Geddon without any of those things, I'm still fine with as long as there is logic of some kind behind it beyond "it was in my hand".
Currently building: ww Bruna, the Fading Light (card advantage tribal / reanimator)
Main decks;
r Neheb, Big Red Champion g Yeva's Mono Green Control, b Ayara's Aristocrats rb Greven, Predator Captain the One Punch Man, ugw Derevri, Empirical Tactician Aggro,rwbu Tymna & Kraum's Saboteurs, wbg Kondo & Tymna's Hatebears wugTuvasa's Silver Bullets, urBrudiclad does Brudiclad thingsgubSidisi, Brood Tyrant (lantern control)

User avatar
hyalopterouslemur
Posts: 3218
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by hyalopterouslemur » 3 years ago

It's not, Ruination punishes players for spending over $1000 on their mana base.
Thanks to Feyd_Ruin for the avatar!

User avatar
ironic gesture
Posts: 58
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by ironic gesture » 3 years ago

hyalopterouslemur wrote:
3 years ago
It's not, Ruination punishes players for spending over $1000 on their mana base.
This used to be more true. However, so many budget dual lands have been printed that even budget players run a fair amount of non basics not to mention the ever-expanding supply of budget friendly utility lands.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

ironic gesture wrote:
3 years ago
hyalopterouslemur wrote:
3 years ago
It's not, Ruination punishes players for spending over $1000 on their mana base.
This used to be more true. However, so many budget dual lands have been printed that even budget players run a fair amount of non basics not to mention the ever-expanding supply of budget friendly utility lands.
My decks with expensive manabases always play around these cards better, Ruination included. If I'm against a heavy red deck I am fetching basics as much as I can.

User avatar
hyalopterouslemur
Posts: 3218
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by hyalopterouslemur » 3 years ago

ironic gesture wrote:
3 years ago
hyalopterouslemur wrote:
3 years ago
It's not, Ruination punishes players for spending over $1000 on their mana base.
This used to be more true. However, so many budget dual lands have been printed that even budget players run a fair amount of non basics not to mention the ever-expanding supply of budget friendly utility lands.
Run more basics? I can have a two-color deck run smoothly without a single dual; you just have to know Rushwood Elemental isn't being played, but how useful is that in Commander?
Thanks to Feyd_Ruin for the avatar!

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Commander”