[SCD] Drannith Magistrate

[folding_music]

^^ "should be run in most, if not all, decks" is a suspicious statement when you're discussing a casual format with a million different power tiers, plus you can still draw a greedy hand or have your apparently decent hand be overworked by a multiplayer table and then not have the answer for the Magistrate the turn before you need to cast yr commander and it's going to feel terrible. The whole "dies to removal" angle is a bit dismissive

always kinda find on here that when people discuss Commander they are doing it from an almost competitive onlook and some arrogant statements slip out

[RxPhantom]

I think the card is fine. Comparisons to PoK or Iona don't play. PoK generated absurd amounts of value, and Iona could shut down opponents' ability to answer her. Magistrate does neither; and players should have other cards in their 99 to advance their game plans.

So compare a board wherein I have Ephara and am casting ephara spells and drawing 3-4 cards a turn cycle but no one else can have theirs out, and one where instead I have prophet of kruphix and everyone has their commanders out and is drawing an extra card or two a turn (roughly average for most good commanders).

It's not *that* different and it costs 2 vs. 5.

I'm tellin ya that the power disparity between one person having commander and 3 people not is quite substantial; commanders generally represent at least a card a turn, and some are a ton more (in my Feather build I copied from Rumpy, Feather often represents 5 cards a turn cycle).

Sure, but in this case, it's just a strong Magic card that can be dealt with, and unlike something like Prophet of Kruphix and Primeval Titan, doesn't permanently warp the game around it. I don't envision games in which it the focus becomes stealing, cloning, or reanimating Magistrate once it's dead. I could be wrong, but this card just doesn't have me too concerned.

I think @DirkGently's Peacekeeper comparison is more apt. Shutting down combat entirely hoses a bunch of decks, but nobody's calling for a Peacekeeper ban.

^^ "should be run in most, if not all, decks" is a suspicious statement when you're discussing a casual format with a million different power tiers, plus you can still draw a greedy hand or have your apparently decent hand be overworked by a multiplayer table and then not have the answer for the Magistrate the turn before you need to cast yr commander and it's going to feel terrible. The whole "dies to removal" angle is a bit dismissive

always kinda find on here that when people discuss Commander they are doing it from an almost competitive onlook and some arrogant statements slip out

I think you're way off. Even the most casual of decks run interaction and removal. From a deckbuilding perspective though, a deck shouldn't roll over and die just because it can't access its commander.

[folding_music]

sorry, I was responding to someone saying that everyone should be running _specific_ removal spells. of course running removal is a good idea at all levels!

[gilrad]

It'll be high on the salty-meter, but I don't think it'll get banned. I'd consider it closer to cabal conditioning effects that cause opponents to pass empty turns rather than Prophet effects that catapult you ahead of everybody in board development.

There's going to be a lot of games grumpily ending with this guy dropping post-wrath and players out of gas unable to recover through their commanders like they're used to. I wouldn't call it something that needs to be dealt with in the meta-sense, but I also would completely understand of players are not having fun when this card hits the table.

[Sinis]

I dislike it, and hope it gets banned for all the same reasons Karakas is banned.

1. Dies to removal is not a reasonable argument, here. I would venture that if you are kinda-sorta locking people out of the game until they have removal, you're basically turning games into a coinflip scenario. "Do you have removal? No? Okay, play with both hands tied behind your back." It's just kind of awkward.

2. It's going to be buckets of unfun in casual metas. I'm not of the school of thought where I feel like I should do whatever I want, but locking a player out of playing their Commander – which incidentally happens to be the name of the format – just seems contrary to the spirit of the format. For the same reason certain banned cards that prevent you from playing the game are unfun (Leovold, Iona, Erayo, Black Braids), Drannith Magistrate is going to be just as unfun.

3. What is this card adding to the format? Is it going to be some big ticket item against Flash Hulk (It doesn't interact with it), Reanimation (nope, doesn't affect that either), or other cheaty-cast shenanigans? Seems not. All it's going to do is crap on people's commanders and randomly destroy cards like Apex of Power, cards with Retrace/Flashback, etc. Will it do some good against Food Chain, Underworld Breach, etc.? Yeah, sure. I guess. But, the moment you are playing against people with Food Chain and Underworld Breach, you're getting into games where you should have had a discussion beforehand.

[Hermes_]

The art makes me want to have a Doctor Strange alt....

[DirkGently]

I dislike it, and hope it gets banned for all the same reasons Karakas is banned.

1. Dies to removal is not a reasonable argument, here. I would venture that if you are kinda-sorta locking people out of the game until they have removal, you're basically turning games into a coinflip scenario. "Do you have removal? No? Okay, play with both hands tied behind your back." It's just kind of awkward.

2. It's going to be buckets of unfun in casual metas. I'm not of the school of thought where I feel like I should do whatever I want, but locking a player out of playing their Commander – which incidentally happens to be the name of the format – just seems contrary to the spirit of the format. For the same reason certain banned cards that prevent you from playing the game are unfun (Leovold, Iona, Erayo, Black Braids), Drannith Magistrate is going to be just as unfun.

3. What is this card adding to the format? Is it going to be some big ticket item against Flash Hulk (It doesn't interact with it), Reanimation (nope, doesn't affect that either), or other cheaty-cast shenanigans? Seems not. All it's going to do is crap on people's commanders and randomly destroy cards like Apex of Power, cards with Retrace/Flashback, etc. Will it do some good against Food Chain, Underworld Breach, etc.? Yeah, sure. I guess. But, the moment you are playing against people with Food Chain and Underworld Breach, you're getting into games where you should have had a discussion beforehand.

1) Why not? It doesn't present a "remove or lose" situation. It presents a "remove or play around it" situation. Same is true with plenty of other stax cards. Seems fine.

2) It prevents you playing your commander, but there are plenty of other things to do for most decks. Leovold, black braids, and iona could fully lock you out of the game, or at least nearly. An important difference.

3) You could argue that about half of the cards in the format imo. I dislike lots of cards. Doesn't mean they should be banned.

[Wallycaine]

I think a big reason the "dies to removal" is a valid argument against this is because... if you don't have removal, but also don't have non-commander spells to play, what exactly are you holding in hand? Like, if not being able to have your commander out is shutting you out of the game, what do you do if your opponents pack counter spells or removal? The Magistrate is arguably nicer than that, since it's not even raising your commander tax, so once it dies to something (and it will eventually die to something), you can still cast your commander normally.

[RxPhantom]

I'm still of the mindset that a deck should be able to function without its commander. And in a four+ player game, it paints a target on itself and its controller. You have 99 other cards to advance your gameplan and, hopefully, interact with the board. If it had hexproof, indestructible, or some other kind of built-in protection, I'd be deeply concerned. It's a strong card, but I really feel that calls for the banhammer are way, way premature.

[toctheyounger]

I'm still of the mindset that a deck should be able to function without its commander.

This is one of the defining tenets I use to direct every deck I build. If your deck can't function without its commander you're building a glass cannon and you have no one to blame but yourself if you get shafted.

[DirkGently]

This is one of the defining tenets I use to direct every deck I build. If your deck can't function without its commander you're building a glass cannon and you have no one to blame but yourself if you get shafted.

Personally I think it's fine to make a deck that relies heavily on its commander (although it'd almost be difficult to make a deck that does actual nothing without its commander - even a creatureless voltron deck can throw in a couple manlands to pick up equipment, just in case). BUT if you're doing that, you should be planning ahead to prevent yourself getting locked out of the game. Cards like grave pact can already make it very difficult to keep a creature - especially a lone creature - on the board, so come prepared with ways to remove permanents of all sorts that might hinder playing or keeping your commander on the board, as well as packing recursion and protection for your commander.

And of course, be aware that some games, despite your best efforts, you'll get locked out at least temporarily. Whether you try to mitigate those situations by including a backup plan, or by just accepting that everybody is going to lose some games, is up to your personal preference.

[toctheyounger]

This is one of the defining tenets I use to direct every deck I build. If your deck can't function without its commander you're building a glass cannon and you have no one to blame but yourself if you get shafted.

Personally I think it's fine to make a deck that relies heavily on its commander (although it'd almost be difficult to make a deck that does actual nothing without its commander - even a creatureless voltron deck can throw in a couple manlands to pick up equipment, just in case). BUT if you're doing that, you should be planning ahead to prevent yourself getting locked out of the game. Cards like grave pact can already make it very difficult to keep a creature - especially a lone creature - on the board, so come prepared with ways to remove permanents of all sorts that might hinder playing or keeping your commander on the board, as well as packing recursion and protection for your commander.

And of course, be aware that some games, despite your best efforts, you'll get locked out at least temporarily. Whether you try to mitigate those situations by including a backup plan, or by just accepting that everybody is going to lose some games, is up to your personal preference.

Oh yeah totally, that's just part of how I try to build. It varies deck to deck, my Dralnu and Yidris builds are relatively commander dependent, although neither does nothing without them in play, and the latter deck it really doesn't matter overly, it's a theme deck, so winning games is not the metric I evaluate it's success with.

A deck does need options, in terms of removal, working around whatever speed bumps come up, and protecting your strategy. And then sometimes you do just have to accept that your commander is not going to last in play. You either have contingency plans, work around it or accept your lot and try again next time.

[Dunharrow]

On its own, Drannith Magistrate isn't backbreaking. It is a small creature that does not protect itself. It can be removed from the board with cards that should be run in most, if not all, decks, depending on color identity.

However, if combined with Possibility Storm or Knowledge Pool, it creates a soft lock for all of your opponents (lands are the only thing able to be played), which is far more abusive than just stopping you from casting your Generals.

I think this is a good point, but not by itself.

Anyone playing this card will be playing it to disrupt people from playing their commanders. They aren't playing it to stop graveyard shenanigans or cascade. It may come up, but the primary reason is to stop commanders because that is the effect that will come up in every game.

The second reason people will play it is to make easy locks with cards like Possibility Storm. These locks already exist with two Teferis and a couple white enchantments, so this isn't a new thing, but combined with the ability to stop all commanders I think it will become way more pervasive.

I am not expecting a ban, because I think the commander community will try to steer away from this.... but if it ever becomes an auto-include in white decks, I could see it being banned for interacting poorly with the structure of Commander. Think Griselbrand ban.

[umtiger]

Anyone playing this card will be playing it to disrupt people from playing their commanders. They aren't playing it to stop graveyard shenanigans or cascade. It may come up, but the primary reason is to stop commanders because that is the effect that will come up in every game.

The second reason people will play it is to make easy locks with cards like Possibility Storm. These locks already exist with two Teferis and a couple white enchantments, so this isn't a new thing, but combined with the ability to stop all commanders I think it will become way more pervasive.

I am not expecting a ban, because I think the commander community will try to steer away from this.... but if it ever becomes an auto-include in white decks, I could see it being banned for interacting poorly with the structure of Commander. Think Griselbrand ban.

Even if it becomes more pervasive in a combination with cards like Possibility Storm, are we also going to ban Teferi(s)? I mean, you say that Magistrate could earn play on its merits of stopping Generals. Doesn't the same context extend to the 3feri as well? I mean, you could play Magistrate without [completely] locking people out, but you can also play 3feri because it's just a strong card.

imo, Magistrate doesn't interact poorly with the format. I doesn't do anything in this format that it doesn't also do in 60 card formats. Griselbrand is just strong, it has nothing to do with the format being 40 life.

[cryogen]

Well I don't know where the price will settle, but unless I have a flavorful reason to not run him I can't imagine a white deck where I wouldn't try to find room for this.

[pokken]

It's probably the single most powerful thing you can do for 2 mana if you do it before people play their commanders and people don't answer it. You're denying 3 players - on average - at least 3 virtual cards each (given the average power level of commanders).

People are seriously misunderstanding how big of an impact denying commanders asymmetrically can be.

Think about the games when it sticks, not about the games it dies to doomblade. Prophet of Kruphix was much worse when it died to removal, but no one remembers that

[Dunharrow]

Anyone playing this card will be playing it to disrupt people from playing their commanders. They aren't playing it to stop graveyard shenanigans or cascade. It may come up, but the primary reason is to stop commanders because that is the effect that will come up in every game.

The second reason people will play it is to make easy locks with cards like Possibility Storm. These locks already exist with two Teferis and a couple white enchantments, so this isn't a new thing, but combined with the ability to stop all commanders I think it will become way more pervasive.

I am not expecting a ban, because I think the commander community will try to steer away from this.... but if it ever becomes an auto-include in white decks, I could see it being banned for interacting poorly with the structure of Commander. Think Griselbrand ban.

Even if it becomes more pervasive in a combination with cards like Possibility Storm, are we also going to ban Teferi(s)? I mean, you say that Magistrate could earn play on its merits of stopping Generals. Doesn't the same context extend to the 3feri as well? I mean, you could play Magistrate without [completely] locking people out, but you can also play 3feri because it's just a strong card.

imo, Magistrate doesn't interact poorly with the format. I doesn't do anything in this format that it doesn't also do in 60 card formats. Griselbrand is just strong, it has nothing to do with the format being 40 life.

I think you focused on the wrong part of my post. It would only get banned by being extremely present, and it would only do so with the main goal of disrupting people from playing their generals. I think this interacts poorly with the format.

Lockouts with PS et al have been around a long time, so I don't think it will push it over the edge, though it doesn't help. Magistrate will make this lockout more popular, and it is not fun at all.

If every white deck plays this then I am sure it will be heavily considered for banning.
I don't plan on playing it. Just paint a target on myself. But if 3 decks at every table are running it then we have a problem.

[folding_music]

I can't imagine entertaining anyone with it? it's just a negative piece of cardboard, I can't identify the situation where I'd be happy to draw it at all; just one of those "strictly correct for winners" things?

[Serenade]

Glad I got my Uba Mask a few months ago.

[Rumpy5897]

So I made a superfluous thread in the main forum when this one already exists I'll repeat my story from there, as it feels kinda relevant to bring up.

Just had my first sighting of him out in the wild on Cockatrice, and it went a little something like this - Sheila casts the Magistrate and passes. Xantcha doesn't have a lot going on, so casts Xantcha and pawns her off to Sheila. To this, Sheila points out that Magistrate stops commander casts. You can see Xantcha's face drop, and they are actually surprised that the card works this way. As such, I feel the card has some potential to get itself banned. It seems like a slightly secretive griefer card, the technical details of commander casting may not be something the invisibles are super aware of when Magistrate comes out to roost in some form. I'm not saying that this is a card that must get hammered immediately, but I'm picking up some vibes from it that seem like they might be the sort of stuff the RC pays attention to.

Sure, scrubs gonna scrub, but the fact someone enfranchised enough to go play EDH on Cockatrice was unaware of how this works is a bit of a warning as well. The fact this dies to removal is not enough, so does most other stuff on the ban list. Surgical stuff like Nevermore or Pithing Needle is just that - surgical. This is a super cheap dude that comes down and suddenly everyone who isn't the caster loses access to a likely important piece of their deck. It's not crazily busted and immediately deserving a ban, but its low-key antisocial nature that isn't as blatant as the openly hateful stuff makes it feel very weird.

[RxPhantom]

So I made a superfluous thread in the main forum when this one already exists I'll repeat my story from there, as it feels kinda relevant to bring up.

Just had my first sighting of him out in the wild on Cockatrice, and it went a little something like this - Sheila casts the Magistrate and passes. Xantcha doesn't have a lot going on, so casts Xantcha and pawns her off to Sheila. To this, Sheila points out that Magistrate stops commander casts. You can see Xantcha's face drop, and they are actually surprised that the card works this way. As such, I feel the card has some potential to get itself banned. It seems like a slightly secretive griefer card, the technical details of commander casting may not be something the invisibles are super aware of when Magistrate comes out to roost in some form. I'm not saying that this is a card that must get hammered immediately, but I'm picking up some vibes from it that seem like they might be the sort of stuff the RC pays attention to.

Sure, scrubs gonna scrub, but the fact someone enfranchised enough to go play EDH on Cockatrice was unaware of how this works is a bit of a warning as well. The fact this dies to removal is not enough, so does most other stuff on the ban list. Surgical stuff like Nevermore or Pithing Needle is just that - surgical. This is a super cheap dude that comes down and suddenly everyone who isn't the caster loses access to a likely important piece of their deck. It's not crazily busted and immediately deserving a ban, but its low-key antisocial nature that isn't as blatant as the openly hateful stuff makes it feel very weird.

I know I'm repeating myself but this thread has new activity. It's not only that it dies to removal. It doesn't generate the kind of value that Prophet did, it doesn't potentially shut down players' ability to answer it like Iona, and I just don't see it becoming the focal point of the game after it's dead. I think it'll be annoying though. No doubt.

[pokken]

I know I'm repeating myself but this thread has new activity. It's not only that it dies to removal. It doesn't generate the kind of value that Prophet did, it doesn't potentially shut down players' ability to answer it like Iona, and I just don't see it becoming the focal point of the game after it's dead. I think it'll be annoying though. No doubt.

Your definition of value is too narrow and too broad I think -- denying your opponents the card advantage of their generals is significant value. And prophet didn't really generate value, just mana and the flash capability most of the time.

[RxPhantom]

I know I'm repeating myself but this thread has new activity. It's not only that it dies to removal. It doesn't generate the kind of value that Prophet did, it doesn't potentially shut down players' ability to answer it like Iona, and I just don't see it becoming the focal point of the game after it's dead. I think it'll be annoying though. No doubt.

Your definition of value is too narrow and too broad I think -- denying your opponents the card advantage of their generals is significant value. And prophet didn't really generate value, just mana and the flash capability most of the time.

I'd call taking additional turns simultaneously with your opponents value. I'm not saying the card isn't powerful. It really, really is. I just don't think it needs to be banned. Also, a T2 Magistrate makes you the archenemy. If the other players at the table are powerless to stop it, then they may need to take a critical look at their decks.

Of course, this thing could become a ubiquitous menace, and perhaps in some undetermined point in the future I'll admit to underestimating its impact. My gut says no, though, but we'll see.

[pokken]

Also, a T2 Magistrate makes you the archenemy. If the other players at the table are powerless to stop it, then they may need to take a critical look at their decks.

That is literally *exactly* what people said about prophet of Kruphix, but T4 prophet "If you can't kill a 5 mana 2/3 then what's the matter with you" etc

And it made you archenemy etc.

[Wallycaine]

Also, a T2 Magistrate makes you the archenemy. If the other players at the table are powerless to stop it, then they may need to take a critical look at their decks.

That is literally *exactly* what people said about prophet of Kruphix, but T4 prophet "If you can't kill a 5 mana 2/3 then what's the matter with you" etc

And it made you archenemy etc.

The major difference here is that if you didn't remove it at instant speed before the next players turn, they were already getting a significant mana advantage out of it. If you don't remove the Magistrate right away... you... play your other cards? In order for it to even be disruptive, it needs to come down before your commander, not be removed, and be out at a point in the game where playing your commander is the right move. That's actually a fairly specific set of circumstances, and even when they come true, the delta between "play your commander" and "play the other cards you can play" is typically not so huge as to shut someone out of the game. It's not until you've completely run out of other cards to play that it becomes a huge problem, at which point... you probably weren't in good position anyways.