Rarely is the question asked, is our children learning?

[pokken]

The fact is, nobody is playing Flashfires in the 99 unless they have something weird going on. You guys saying that people who would put it in the wishboard would anyway be playing tutors to get it in the 99, that's silly. They would tutor armageddon maybe but not flashfires.

Pretty much the first time someone wished for Tsunami would be the last time I ever play with that person, and probably the last time I ever tolerated a wishboard

(there's ample evidence to think that's what people would do, play stupid narrow color hosers)

[JWK]

The fact is, nobody is playing Flashfires in the 99 unless they have something weird going on. You guys saying that people who would put it in the wishboard would anyway be playing tutors to get it in the 99, that's silly. They would tutor armageddon maybe but not flashfires.

Pretty much the first time someone wished for Tsunami would be the last time I ever play with that person, and probably the last time I ever tolerated a wishboard

(there's ample evidence to think that's what people would do, play stupid narrow color hosers)

The one time I have seen Acid Rain played was from a wishboard. Also the last time I saw Lifeforce.

[Dragoon]

... Meanwhile, I've been thinking for quite some time about a color-hoser deck exploiting Alter Reality and Glamerdye effects, but there is sadly no real general for it (I've tried with Old Urza but it wasn't really effective)

[JWK]

... Meanwhile, I've been thinking for quite some time about a color-hoser deck exploiting Alter Reality and Glamerdye effects, but there is sadly no real general for it (I've tried with Old Urza but it wasn't really effective)

As someone who used to build (really bad) decks based around things like Magical Hack and Sleight of Mind, I think it would be fine if someone could build an actually-functional commander deck built around color-hosing cards. That's a whole different thing than wishboarded answers, though.

[Airi]

Not a fan of wishes, lessons, companions, etc. Pretty much any of the outside of the game shenanigans. If people want to work something out within their group, more power to them but it's not really something I would want to deal with on the regular.

That said, I would also just generally appreciate it if the RC were more consistent on their stance about it in either direction.

[Treamayne]

Didn't answer the poll because "other" wasn't an option.

I would like to see "outside the game" allow wishes/learn to pull from exile. So, if you really want that wish-for-a-color-hoser, you'll need to eat a spot in the 99, pack effects to exile it, then wish it up. Otherwise, it lets the cards have a use in the game and enables some fun possibilities (e.g. thanks Wrexial for milling then exiling my <card>, I'll wish it back to hand now). For lessons, if you want to use things like Sword-Point Diplomacy, Diminishing Returns, etc (self-exile effects) to get lessons where you can "learn" them, that sounds like it could be an interesting game.

After all, I don't think Coax from the Blind Eternities (which has both clauses) is breaking the format...

[JWK]

I don't think Coax from the Blind Eternities (which has both clauses) is breaking the format...

That card is legal in Commander, but the "outside the game" aspect of the card simply does nothing in the format. I will still let you get an exiled Eldrazi from exile, though.

[capitacommunist]

Didn't answer the poll because "other" wasn't an option.

I would like to see "outside the game" allow wishes/learn to pull from exile. So, if you really want that wish-for-a-color-hoser, you'll need to eat a spot in the 99, pack effects to exile it, then wish it up. Otherwise, it lets the cards have a use in the game and enables some fun possibilities (e.g. thanks Wrexial for milling then exiling my <card>, I'll wish it back to hand now). For lessons, if you want to use things like Sword-Point Diplomacy, Diminishing Returns, etc (self-exile effects) to get lessons where you can "learn" them, that sounds like it could be an interesting game.

After all, I don't think Coax from the Blind Eternities (which has both clauses) is breaking the format...

I was reading through the thread and was exactly thinking that this should have been an option in the poll. For both learn and wishes I think it creates interesting extra play lines if you can find cards in exile, and I think it helps clarify all of these types of cards once and for all.

[DirkGently]

I was reading through the thread and was exactly thinking that this should have been an option in the poll. For both learn and wishes I think it creates interesting extra play lines if you can find cards in exile, and I think it helps clarify all of these types of cards once and for all.

Not sure if adding poll options will erase the data I already have? Anyone know how this works? It looks like I do have the ability to change the poll but I don't want to screw anything up.

[Daylit]

I voted for "learning must be strictly rummaging", but I find that commander rules are complicated enough not to have weird extra rules for certain mechanics over others (such is the case with companions). So if I had my way I wouldn't allow any outside of the game mechanics to work in commander, but the next best option would be to allow for a wishboard that works with wishes and learn and companion and anything else that might come up. Its just simpler especially for newer players.

[Rumpy5897]

JWK/Dunharrow have normal wishing on point. In 2015/2016, a guy in the playgroup I was in decided to abuse the then-muddy wish wording in the rules and interpret it that he could use wishes to pull cards banned in the format. He pieced together a list where the pivotal card was Time Vault, plus I'm pretty sure that there was a wide selection of silver bullet hosers to go with it. I refused to play against the deck.

That said, learn/lesson does not seem to be anywhere near as egregious. The learn cards are not great, the lesson cards are not great, the pool of available options is quite narrow. I went with option 2 - I'd likely allow this, as if you're rocking a cute STX themed deck then you're probably not going to cause misery. However, I'd prefer not to set precedent and have this remain a thing you can easily rule zero in.

I have no problem with companions - we've already got a commander, what's the problem with shoving an extra card to hang out with them? What does it matter if the formal implementation is sideboard or command zone, the holistic idea still stands, and the construction stipulations are nontrivial. The only companion I've seen in the wild is Gyruda.

Since we're touching on format rules, I wouldn't mind the 100 card deck size turning into a 100 card minimum instead. If you want to rock a huge singleton Battle of Wits deck, be my guest. It's a nice callback to kitchen table piles, back in 2005 I was jamming a ~70 card heap of Plated Slagwurm et al. because I found too many cool cards. No other format has an exact size requirement, and going over 100 is rarely going to be actively beneficial for you. I doubt Yorion would suddenly become the scourge of the format, but that would be the only thing that would require some amount of monitoring.

[Treamayne]

I don't think Coax from the Blind Eternities (which has both clauses) is breaking the format...

That card is legal in Commander, but the "outside the game" aspect of the card simply does nothing in the format. I will still let you get an exiled Eldrazi from exile, though.

That was my point. A current card with both "modes" (wishing from outside the game and "wishing" from exile) where the ability to grab a card from exile hasn't caused a huge problem in the format.

Since we're touching on format rules, I wouldn't mind the 100 card deck size turning into a 100 card minimum instead. If you want to rock a huge singleton Battle of Wits deck, be my guest. It's a nice callback to kitchen table piles, back in 2005 I was jamming a ~70 card heap of Plated Slagwurm et al. because I found too many cool cards. No other format has an exact size requirement, and going over 100 is rarely going to be actively beneficial for you. I doubt Yorion would suddenly become the scourge of the format, but that would be the only thing that would require some amount of monitoring.

Seconded. I would love for the deck size to change to 100 card minimum. Not just for the occasional egregious BoW deck, but sometimes the deck just wants 105 or 110 cards...

[Sinis]

I would never, ever, ever play with Burning Wish and sideboards. But I kinda like lessons. They're weak, expensive, and narrow for the most part.

I definitely respect this stance. I understand people are not going to be as free with wishes as I would, but Lessons are very innocuous so far.

[Sinis]

I was reading through the thread and was exactly thinking that this should have been an option in the poll. For both learn and wishes I think it creates interesting extra play lines if you can find cards in exile, and I think it helps clarify all of these types of cards once and for all.

Not sure if adding poll options will erase the data I already have? Anyone know how this works? It looks like I do have the ability to change the poll but I don't want to screw anything up.

Adding a new option will reset the poll. This happened in ban-list related thread in a subforum here (ironically, the change in the poll was wish-related).

[BeneTleilax]

I feel like keeping it outside the rules allows greater discretion, and because wishes can vary greatly case-by-case, that discretion is needed. The way the format has shaken out, something being "against the rules" generally means the player just has to ask the group, and people generally say yes, but if something is allowed, people feel entitled to use it to the fullest extent. Even just knowing that playgroups are gonna look at their wishboard before letting them play with impacts people's deckbuilding in my experience; people are much more likely to be considerate of whether the rest of their table will enjoy what they're bringing.

[Treamayne]

I feel like keeping it outside the rules allows greater discretion, and because wishes can vary greatly case-by-case, that discretion is needed. The way the format has shaken out, something being "against the rules" generally means the player just has to ask the group online players continue to get the shaft, while tabletop players have some way to experiment if they can find an accommodating playgroup.

FTFY

[Guardman]

After thinking about it some more, I decided to change my answer from "8) I think 4-6, but would have a restriction based on size outside of the traditional 15-card limit (or something else?)" to "4) I think the official rules should allow a stipulation for a lesson-board and it should be default legal to fetch cards with learn spells." Basically I would like to see learn be able to fetch things. All of the lesson cards are very tame, and it would be a cool way to help mono color decks (also would be cool if mono-colored decks could play hybrids, but that is a different topic). But being able to get cards with Burning Wish is probably too much now that I think about it.

[BeneTleilax]

I feel like keeping it outside the rules allows greater discretion, and because wishes can vary greatly case-by-case, that discretion is needed. The way the format has shaken out, something being "against the rules" generally means the player just has to ask the group online players continue to get the shaft, while tabletop players have some way to experiment if they can find an accommodating playgroup.

FTFY

I presume you can also talk to your fellow players online. I've done as much over the pandemic. If you're just slotting into games with no conversation or agreement, then that's not really the playstyle the RC designs for.

[Rumpy5897]

Whenever I try to do that on Cockatrice, I get greeted with MY DECK IS A SEVEN. Also, I can't imagine you can rule zero your way past MODO's programming, if that's where you're going to get your EDH.

[BeneTleilax]

Whenever I try to do that on Cockatrice, I get greeted with MY DECK IS A SEVEN. Also, I can't imagine you can rule zero your way past MODO's programming, if that's where you're going to get your EDH.

Yes, but I don't think the format would be well-served by the RC catering to that playstyle, especially as much of the world is moving out of quarantine. In places where there are no table norms, there are no table norms, but in places where there are, it is easier to allow cards or types of cards than it is to disallow them at a given table. So, to the extent to which wishboards represent a grey area best settled case-by-case, the format would be better served by giving tables more leeway to decide for themselves.

[Treamayne]

Whenever I try to do that on Cockatrice, I get greeted with MY DECK IS A SEVEN. Also, I can't imagine you can rule zero your way past MODO's programming, if that's where you're going to get your EDH.

Precisely, MTGO primary: where Rule 0 is only "do we play together or not" (if that). There's no way to allow alternate rules (though there used to be options for things like: attack left, attack right, FFA, spell range, etc.)

Yes, but I don't think the format would be well-served by the RC catering to that playstyle, especially as much of the world is moving out of quarantine. In places where there are no table norms, there are no table norms, but in places where there are, it is easier to allow cards or types of cards than it is to disallow them at a given table. So, to the extent to which wishboards represent a grey area best settled case-by-case, the format would be better served by giving tables more leeway to decide for themselves.

I'm not saying the RC should "cater" to online play. I'm just saying that I would like to have the consideration as part of the discussion. Not everybody (online or physical) has the option to use "Rule 0" discussions to allow something that is normally disallowed. But everybody can use rule 0 discussions to disallow something normally allowed.

[BeneTleilax]

Not everybody (online or physical) has the option to use "Rule 0" discussions to allow something that is normally disallowed. But everybody can use rule 0 discussions to disallow something normally allowed.

How is it the case for the one but not the other? If you're playing Cockatrice pubs with total strangers where no-one wants to talk before the start of the game, how is that any more amenable to allowing cards? Also, when, outside of friends you already know, have you been able to *disallow* not just a single card, but a whole mechanic, like Partners or Planeswalker generals? I know any time I've suggested something like that I've been overruled at best and called a fun-hating grognard at worst.

[DirkGently]

I think in any public group, rule-0ing this sort of thing can get tricky.

I know for me, it feels different to allow X at a table because it enables some very specific archetype - for example, an un-commander - versus allowing something that provides advantage broadly. I think it comes down to whether or not I'd want the opportunity to also use it (or at least consider it).

For example, someone at an LGS had a deck with a library of Alexandria in it and asked if he could play it. I said no, because if I knew we were playing a "library of alexandria is legal" game, I would have played it too. Same for something like lessons - if I knew lessons were legal (I mean legal as intended), I likely would have included some in my deck, so I feel weird giving someone else that advantage.

Whereas, if someone wants to play Acornelia, Fashionable Filcher, that doesn't bother me because I wasn't planning to play an un-commander, so I'm not missing out. I'm not giving them an advantage in deck construction. But un-cards in the 99 would bother me a lot more since I could have included some myself.

As far as lessons go, I'd likely allow them at least initially, because the power level is clearly not of the library-tier, and because I'm curious to see them in action. But if the game gets serious, I'd likely be against them unless I was in a stable meta where it was established that we could all use them, and I had built my decks with that in mind.

Does that make any sense?

[duducrash]

I voted wrongly because of my poor english skills. But I think lessons should be legal a special lession board. As in companions

[BeneTleilax]

I think in any public group, rule-0ing this sort of thing can get tricky.

I know for me, it feels different to allow X at a table because it enables some very specific archetype - for example, an un-commander - versus allowing something that provides advantage broadly. I think it comes down to whether or not I'd want the opportunity to also use it (or at least consider it).

Whereas, if someone wants to play Acornelia, Fashionable Filcher, that doesn't bother me because I wasn't planning to play an un-commander, so I'm not missing out. I'm not giving them an advantage in deck construction. But un-cards in the 99 would bother me a lot more since I could have included some myself.

As far as lessons go, I'd likely allow them at least initially, because the power level is clearly not of the library-tier, and because I'm curious to see them in action. But if the game gets serious, I'd likely be against them unless I was in a stable meta where it was established that we could all use them, and I had built my decks with that in mind.

Does that make any sense?

It does. And in my experience, having it be Rule-0'd means people are more conscious of how they use it. When wishboards aren't legal, people tend to ask for them for specific reasons, for instance I knew a guy who just wanted to use Spawnsire of Ulamog in his janky Eldrazi Spawn tribal deck. When they become broadly legal, people tend to use such things for consistency/value instead.