[Speculation] Ban List Update Prediction Thread

[cryogen]

Been a while since I asked everyone to break out their Magic 8-Ball, but figured I'd do it again.

What do you think we will see on Monday? Personally, I'm expecting a "no changes" announcement, but I won't be surprised if Flash gets the axe to help out the cEDH metagame.

[pokken]

I think flash is gonna go, but I don't think it is going to do nearly what they think, and I expect it will be the first and last experiment in banning for the competitive side.

I do think flash is a fundamentally broken template that is starting to pollute casual a bit with flash rectors of both types being pretty powerful. I've seen flash rector for omniscience more recently than I had ever expected. So I won't mourn it.

The super low likelihood thing I am seriously dreading the possibility of is a paradox engine unban. It gets talked about constantly in CEDH circles and it feels like the type of thing that might be done as similar appeasement. That's probably the most likely move to get me to sell out of magic I can think of. I had way more than enough of that card.

If I were crystal balling it I think No Changes is obviously the safest bet but I have a feeling it's flash for some reason, no real justification there.

[Hermes_]

I see either no changes or a flash ban

[pokken]

Okay I'm changing my answer to 100% sure recurring nightmare unban. Speak it into existence! Free RN!

Second choice Gifts unban Mmm.

[cryogen]

Okay I'm changing my answer to 100% sure recurring nightmare unban. Speak it into existence! Free RN!

Second choice Gifts unban Mmm.

I wholeheartedly endorse this good or service.

[Sharpened]

If you ban Flash , don't you have to ban Demonic Consultation as well? I honestly don't know, but that's another card that i see having no impact on casual commander that seems like part of the dominant winning strategy in cEDH, particularly if Flash disappears.

I expect no changes.

They could unban Coalition Victory. But aside from technically shrinking the banlist, I don' think it would add anything to format.

I question if the big resets need to be on the list - Upheaval, Sway of the Stars, and Worldfire. I don't know that any of them other than Upheaval would see play. While I don't particularly want to see it, I question how different it is from any of the other big game ending spells.

The two cards that are interesting are Gifts Ungiven and Recurring Nightmare.
Recurring Nightmare is fun, but I could definitely see how it could become overly centralizing. This one is dangerous, because it might be one of those cards that ruins games without the user trying to ruin games.
Gifts Ungiven is extremely powerful, but so is a lot of stuff people can do in this format. I think it would see heavy play, but I don't know that it would do anything to make games unpleasant.

[onering]

Worldfire, Sway, Biorythm, and CV are never getting unbanned. They all go against central tenets if the RCs philosophy. It can be debated whether or not they'd harm the format in practice, but Sheldon has been pretty explicit that those cards are poster children for the banlist and serve as blinking signposts letting you know what kind of games the RC discourages.

[Hermes_]

Also [mention]cryogen[/mention] will finally be banned.

[RxPhantom]

No changes, hopefully. Bending to the will of cEDH's vocal minority would set a bad precedent.

[pokken]

No changes, hopefully. Bending to the will of cEDH's vocal minority would set a bad precedent.

Y'know I don't want to get all sidetracked here but honestly I am a terrible waffler on this issue. On one hand I 100% agree with you, but I tell ya when you play some CEDH it's fairly fun and could probably be a really cool vintagesque format with a little care and feeding. It's hard not to want that.

[RxPhantom]

No changes, hopefully. Bending to the will of cEDH's vocal minority would set a bad precedent.

Y'know I don't want to get all sidetracked here but honestly I am a terrible waffler on this issue. On one hand I 100% agree with you, but I tell ya when you play some CEDH it's fairly fun and could probably be a really cool vintagesque format with a little care and feeding. It's hard not to want that.

Bolded for emphasis. Here's the thing: it is its own format, whether its fans want to admit it or not. The cEDH faithful want to have their cake and eat it too. If you love cEDH, have at it, but I don't want the overwhelming majority to be beholden to a small minority. They need to get off their asses, get their own banlist, and stop expecting the RC to magically cater to two groups with diametrically opposed viewpoints. I suspect that they don't want the formats to be formally delineated because it will spur diminished interest in the format.

Slippery slope arguments are considered logical fallacies for a reason, but if Flash is banned to appease cEDH, then they'll clamor for the next boogieman to be banned, and since there will have been a precedent set, they just might get it. I don't want that. I think it's bad for the format as a whole.

[pokken]

Slippery slope arguments are considered logical fallacies for a reason, but if Flash is banned to appease cEDH, then they'll clamor for the next boogieman to be banned, and since there will have been a precedent set, they just might get it. I don't want that. I think it's bad for the format as a whole.

I generally agree with you, even so much that I'll jump in to proactively refute your self-censoring with the slippery slope fallacy

The slippery slope fallacy is trotted out pretty regularly and aggressively by the pro-fallacy crowd, and almost always wrongly. Sometimes there really is a slope and it really is slippery

Most people are not using their argument as a formal proof but as a risk to consider, and when stated as a potential risk it's quite a bit different.

When you say "since there will have been a precedent, they just might get it" you're making a pretty well justified analysis of the history of well, humans, that they really care about precedent.

Anyone who's ever let their kids stay up late can attest, I'm sure.

[cryogen]

Can confirm. Also I agree with pokken in that I'm waffling on it.

[RxPhantom]

I understand the waffling. I just think the format is better off adhering to its original vision, and cEDH can either work within those confines, invoke Rule 0 in their groups, or strike out on their own.

A common argument for banning Flash is that it's only used to do degenerate things in cEDH, and not much else. That's not enough to justify a ban. I use it in a deck that revolves around abusing death triggers. You know what's awesome? Flash-ing in Keiga, the Tide Star to steal a Blightsteel Colossus that's headed straight for you.

So sure, Flash is a niche card in the larger context of the format, but this is the format for niche cards.

Also, shout-out to [mention]pokken[/mention] for always providing thoughtful, well-written debate or conversation. It's always a pleasure.

[TheGildedGoose]

I don't want the overwhelming majority to be beholden to a small minority.

Slippery slope arguments are considered logical fallacies for a reason, but if Flash is banned to appease cEDH, then they'll clamor for the next boogieman to be banned, and since there will have been a precedent set, they just might get it. I don't want that. I think it's bad for the format as a whole.

This is textbook slippery slope, though. The implication here is that there will always be another boogieman, and that is speculative at best. I can think of cards I would like to see get axed to better balance the format, but outside of certain outliers the casual aspect of the format is fine.

I understand the waffling. I just think the format is better off adhering to its original vision, and cEDH can either work within those confines, invoke Rule 0 in their groups, or strike out on their own.

Its original vision including the original conception of color identity? Or of tuck? Or of the command zone? Or of the CAG not existing?

Things change. EDH is big enough for cEDH, and this is coming from someone who thinks cEDH is analogous to racing tricycles. Personally, I think power level should be accounted for in the EDH banlist philosophy, and wouldn't mind seeing fast mana and other disproportionately powerful cards go. Flattening the power level leads to more interesting and engaging games.

On topic: Ban Flash, no other changes.

[KitsuLeif]

Well, the RC has Thassa's Oracle on their radar, but hopefully they will not ban this interesting cards itself but one of the two cards that are causing problems with it: Flash or Demonic Consultation. Or both?
I feel like both cards are being very problematic.

It wouldn't surprise me, though, if they just let them run wild for the next months and ban them later, when they become a problem too big to handle.

[cryogen]

Well they won't ban a card before it's even been released, so Thassa's Oracle is safe for at least another three months.

[KitsuLeif]

Well they won't ban a card before it's even been released, so Thassa's Oracle is safe for at least another three months.

That's why I'm pretty certain it will hit Flash and/or Demonic Consultation.

[onering]

No changes, hopefully. Bending to the will of cEDH's vocal minority would set a bad precedent.

Y'know I don't want to get all sidetracked here but honestly I am a terrible waffler on this issue. On one hand I 100% agree with you, but I tell ya when you play some CEDH it's fairly fun and could probably be a really cool vintagesque format with a little care and feeding. It's hard not to want that.

Then there can be a special cEDH format with its own banlist. That's honestly the only solution that's workable if the goal is to expand cEDH into vintage lite. It needs more than just the occasional banning with it in mind, it needs its own banlist, not just to ban cards that shouldn't be banned in casual but to unban cards that probably shouldn't be banned in competitive (like probably prophet, sylvan, prime time, etc). In short, it should have its own banlist to set its own philosophy.

[onering]

I don't want the overwhelming majority to be beholden to a small minority.

Slippery slope arguments are considered logical fallacies for a reason, but if Flash is banned to appease cEDH, then they'll clamor for the next boogieman to be banned, and since there will have been a precedent set, they just might get it. I don't want that. I think it's bad for the format as a whole.

This is textbook slippery slope, though. The implication here is that there will always be another boogieman, and that is speculative at best. I can think of cards I would like to see get axed to better balance the format, but outside of certain outliers the casual aspect of the format is fine.

I understand the waffling. I just think the format is better off adhering to its original vision, and cEDH can either work within those confines, invoke Rule 0 in their groups, or strike out on their own.

Its original vision including the original conception of color identity? Or of tuck? Or of the command zone? Or of the CAG not existing?

Things change. EDH is big enough for cEDH, and this is coming from someone who thinks cEDH is analogous to racing tricycles. Personally, I think power level should be accounted for in the EDH banlist philosophy, and wouldn't mind seeing fast mana and other disproportionately powerful cards go. Flattening the power level leads to more interesting and engaging games.

On topic: Ban Flash, no other changes.

And then later in the thread the slippery slope argument is, in this case not a fallacy, as the next boogeyman's music plays and he jumps into the ring, revealed to be Demonic Consultation.

Look, slippery slope is a fallacy when its used to just assume that things will continue down a path once a precedent is set without actually backing up why that would logically follow. It is not longer a fallacy once you can actually logically back up why it would happen. A slippery slope fallacy would be that banning Coalition Victory would lead to banning all alt win cards. It would, in proof form, result in something along the lines of "If Coalition Victory is an alt win card, and if Coalition Victory is banned, then all alt win cards will be banned." You could use that to argue that once you ban an alt win card, you get on a slippery slope that leads to the banning of the next worse alt win card until none are left. It is a fallacy because being an alt win card is not why CV is banned. If the RC, when banning CV, or subsequently while reaffirming its banning, said that being an alternate win card was a primary reason for it being banned, then it would not be a slippery slope fallacy to argue that this would likely lead to other alternate win cards being banned, as it would logically follow that "If CV was banned because it is an alternate win card, then other alternate win cards will be banned." It follows the same as "If card X is banned for reason Y, then other cards that fit reason Y will be banned." And, indeed, that has played out. CV was banned for invalidating everything that happened in the game before it and being a cheesy, win out of nowhere card that had little opportunity for interaction, and other cards similar to it, like worldfire, were also banned for the same reasons. Thus "If Flash is banned primarily for cEDH considerations, then other cards will be banned primarily for cEDH considerations" follows without being a fallacy. Banning Flash for cEDH reasons will introduce a new reason to ban cards, and doing so means that, unless that reason is later repealed, said reason will be used to evaluate other cards in the future. There is no reason to use cEDH considerations to ban a card and then not do so in the future: if cEDH considerations are important enough to ban one card, they are important enough to ban others. That doesn't necessarily mean that another card will be banned, it is possible that those standards stay in place but no other card rises to the level of needing a ban, though this is very unlikely. It does, however, mean that the precedent has been set, and that the reasons for banning have gotten a new category that needs to be considered and that can lead to bannings that would not have been possible in the past.

The RC has a way to avoid setting this precedent however, and thus rendering the argument that banning flash creates a slippery slope into a logical fallacy: rely on Flash's casual impact to ban it. This would require stuff like Flash Rector into Omniscience to get more prevalent. I think that combo running rampant in casual has a chance of eating a ban, and if the RC wanted to through cEDH a bone without setting a precedent they could be a little more aggressive than usual in judging Flash's ability to cause problems in casual. The ban criteria is already established as subjective, so this sets no new precedents, at least not officially.

[pokken]

So, coalition victory argument is not really the same as flash, because CV had already violated existing criteria. The committee has stated they will not ban cards for adjacency; e.g. they won't get drawn into "If CV is banned, why not ban felidar sovereign?" arguments until the card meets enough criteria to be banned on its own merit.

I don't recall what criteria were used to ban CV, but by the current criteria Flash is unlikely to meet the threshold for a ban - despite being a violator of almost every category, it doesn't likely mean the baseline threshold of:

it does not seek to regulate competitive play or power level

problematic because of their extreme consistency, ubiquity, and/or ability to restrict others' opportunities

So the primary concern people have I think is based on the idea that banning Flash would be adding a new criteria of "A problem in competitive play." or something, or changing that philosophy materially. And that is a valid concern for sure.

I will say, however, that Flash is a violator of almost every banning criteria they have, other than the explicit reluctance to address competitive play.

Here's a list (which they did say not to use as a checklist, lol):

• Cause severe resource imbalances Check - +5 mana on turn 2
• Allow players to win out of nowhere Check - instant speed turn 1 win
• Prevent players from contributing to the game in a meaningful way. Check - requires counterspells
• Cause other players to feel they must play certain cards, even though they are also problematic. OK, not really this one
• Are very difficult for other players to interact with, especially if doing so requires dedicated, narrow responses when deck-building.Check - requires counterspells and stupid narrow hate pieces
• Interact poorly with the multiplayer nature of the format or the specific rules of Commander. Not so much
• Lead to repetitive game play. Check - The play patterns of hulk are toxic as hell, like Splinter Twin in modern x50

So it violates almost everything except the implicit "problematic omnipresence" one that honestly I think is the secret gateway to bans and has been forever. It's got to be everywhere.

flash is currently nowhere near that, at 2% of possible decks.

The only exception I can think of in recent memory is where Iona, shield of emeria was banned despite almost no play simply for causing bad games now and then. I'm still not really sure on that ban and what it means.

So I think there is real concern that some part of the commander philosophy has to change to address Flash, and that is a problem to be aware of. I am not sure how you can change it without opening the door.

[pokken]

Reading the mean spirited entitled whinging on reddit about no flash ban makes me ever more certain the rc is doing the right thing (in going very slowly at the minimum).

Statements like "well I guess we have a two deck solved format now" leapt out at me.

Much like vintage without the restricted list (that is designed for competitive play) cedh was doomed to be solved and extremely narrow. It was solved last year and nonblue decks existed only through delusion.

I think rx is 100% right this is a give an inch take a mile scenario.

[RxPhantom]

Reading the mean spirited entitled whinging on reddit about no flash ban makes me ever more certain the rc is doing the right thing (in going very slowly at the minimum).

Statements like "well I guess we have a two deck solved format now" leapt out at me.

Much like vintage without the restricted list (that is designed for competitive play) cedh was doomed to be solved and extremely narrow. It was solved last year and nonblue decks existed only through delusion.

I think rx is 100% right this is a give an inch take a mile scenario.

I think you're spot on, especially with that last bit

But I bolded that quote because I think it finds the crux of the problem: cEDH is its own format, yet its proponents want the stewards of an entirely different format to manage it for them. Also, [mention]onering[/mention] made a good point earlier that there are plenty of banned cards that probably shouldn't be banned in cEDH.

cEDH players want a markedly different play experience that is incongruent with that of Commander. They should be able to have it, but they should also be the ones to manage it.

[KitsuLeif]

cEDH players want a markedly different play experience that is incongruent with that of Commander. They should be able to have it, but they should also be the ones to manage it.

The problem I see is, with prize support at MagicFests, the social contract of EDH won't matter that much anymore. Players will optimize their decks for the best chances to win, rather than to have fun and the decks will drift into cEDH range very soon. And if that means, more casuals get stomped by FishHulk on events that were meant for casual players, the RC has to act. They have the difficult task now of managing two different things at once: A ban list for the kitchen table and local play groups, but also the ban list for official events. And if the ban list should stay the same for both, they probably have to ban more to keep the power level on the top end a bit lower and align cEDH with EDH, even if it's just a little bit, like banning Flash.

[pokken]

cEDH players want a markedly different play experience that is incongruent with that of Commander. They should be able to have it, but they should also be the ones to manage it.

The problem I see is, with prize support at MagicFests, the social contract of EDH won't matter that much anymore. Players will optimize their decks for the best chances to win, rather than to have fun and the decks will drift into cEDH range very soon. And if that means, more casuals get stomped by FishHulk on events that were meant for casual players, the RC has to act. They have the difficult task now of managing two different things at once: A ban list for the kitchen table and local play groups, but also the ban list for official events. And if the ban list should stay the same for both, they probably have to ban more to keep the power level on the top end a bit lower and align cEDH with EDH, even if it's just a little bit, like banning Flash.

And that's a common theme I've heard but I think it continues to ignore the whole "does not seek to regulate competitive play" line in the philosophy document.

Also from what I'm hearing from people who attend the magicfests, people seem to be having those rule 0 discussions in a lot of pods and trying to play to the spirit. But I'm not sure how universal that is.

I for one hope that the RC does not get bullied into changing their philosophy document over a few low stakes tournaments.