If you could make one change in Commander...

[cryogen]

On Twitter Rachel Agnes (of the CAG) posed this question. Thought it would be interesting to open it up here to see what other people thought. Please be respectful of anyone else's change, as usual.


===

For me, I gave it a lot of thought. I mulled over my usual opinions, namely banning Sol Ring, unbanning Nightmare, Gifts, and Library. I also toyed with the idea of banning tutors except for ones that fetched lands. For various reasons which I'll briefly discuss I opted against all these changes, and instead chose to change the replacement effect rule to allow generals to get their dies triggers before being given the option of going back to the command zone.

The reason I chose this change is because it would have a net positive change to the format by letting existing commanders work as intended while also allowing Wizards more design space in future legendary creatures (they've acknowledged that this current rule is something they have to take into consideration due to the popularity of Commander, and it is unlikely that a template like we saw on Gerrard, Weatherlight Hero could become the norm because of its wordiness). The current downside to this change is minimal. Of the legendary creatures which would be meaningfully impacted by this (cards that have The Scarab God style template can be disregarded), there are only three problematic ones that I saw: Child of Alara, Kokusho, the Evening Star, and Yosei, the Morning Star. Of these three, Kokusho is more degenerate outside of the command zone since you would be relying on basically an infinite mana combo, and both Child and Yosei require a specific deck which you know exactly what you're doing when you build it.

Now for the things I decided against:

Sol Ring - This card is similar to Primeval Titan in that it's ubiquitous and a lot of decks would need to be altered. It also subtlety changes the game in a way that the casual player doesn't attribute to Sol Ring. So while some people may be able to notice how games have changed in a post-SR environment, more often it would be the negative change that people notice and attribute to SR being banned.

Recurring Nightmare - This card does not add anything new to the format that the decks which want this card are already doing. It would just add redundancy and the ability to do it better.

Gifts Ungiven - I think this card could potentially give cEDH players a few new lines and maybe some more variety to their meta, but I could be wrong and it might be the wrong kind of attention (plus it may just further solidify the dominance of blue). For most of us, it is a neat card which works great in a fair number of decks without being broken. There is some combo potential, but to the best of my knowledge it isn't anything more broken or cheaper than what we can currently do. Ultimately though, I wanted the change I propose to have an impact on the format, and I don't think it would be found here.

Library - This is an unbanned aimed solely at the 0.1%ers of the format. Despite it not needing to remain banned from a power level aspect (my opinion) and Potential Barrier to Entry not being a thing any more, there is nothing positive to be gained from unbanning this that would offset the negative backlash.

Banning (most) tutors - Tutors are bad for the format. They break the spirit of the one-of rule, and they frequently are used irresponsibly to find part of a game-ending component. However, this is a horrible change because it would effectively or outright ban hundreds of cards, most of them innocuous. It would also give blue a huge boost because that vacuum would be filled with card draw. It also makes green stronger, since you could still tutor for lands and that would still be very strong card advantage. And I think most people can agree that U/G doesn't need any more advantage.

So yeah, those are my thoughts. What are yours?

[ConstantMists]

I opted against all these changes, and instead chose to change the replacement effect rule to allow generals to get their dies triggers before being given the option of going back to the command zone.

I for one could live with that change. I currently run a deck helmed by Elenda, the Dusk Rose that would get much better if I didn't have to run so many ways to recover my commander from the graveyard to cast her again.

My choice for a change though would be this: change the infect/poison death total to 21. Just this past week I saw the same unfortunate player eliminated in 3 different games through poison damage. In a 1 on 1 game 11 makes sense because it is 1 more than half your starting life total, so in a format where you start at 40, 21 (which is also the commander damage total) makes more sense.

In a 1 on 1 game there is not usually enough mana floating around to cast a hasty Blightsteel Colossus after a boardwipe. In Commander it is not unusual. That is something that should not equal an automatic loss. Just one man's opinion.

[folding_music]

Banning (most) tutors - Tutors are bad for the format. They break the spirit of the one-of rule, and they frequently are used irresponsibly to find part of a game-ending component. However, this is a horrible change because it would effectively or outright ban hundreds of cards, most of them innocuous. It would also give blue a huge boost because that vacuum would be filled with card draw. It also makes green stronger, since you could still tutor for lands and that would still be very strong card advantage. And I think most people can agree that U/G doesn't need any more advantage.

agree entirely with this. I dislike tutors but my solution to that is to not run tutors; I don't like telling other people how they should be using their collections so all I can do is influence the game's power level from my own seat! if shuffleless ever became a big variant of Commander I'd rejoice but it's not something you can force with an iron fist.

I honestly think I'd experiment with unbanning Limited Resources - ramp is huge, stompy almost nonexistent, and although I know this card is a major villain thing as soon as there's a third player in the game, the more players in the game equals the more ways to remove the card. I know this is an easily shouted down opinion, though, since the card is very powerful.

(I think of Commander as a nebulous ring of a million variants rather than its core rules anyway, so in the end anything you change is a house rule and not an edict from on high.)

[BaronCappuccino]

One change: If a permanent can become a legendary creature that would be a legal commander, through its own, "on the card" means, I would make it a legal commander by default. Granted, there isn't a playgroup worth playing in that would refuse Elbrus as a commander, for example, but why not save the question.

[pokken]

Yeah I am on board with the dies triggers happening for sure.

If I were to get to make one change, it would be hybrid mana (the perfect rule fix that excludes the twobrid stuff).

If you wanted me to get on another soapbox, I would probably change the mulligan rule officially to Gis Exile (7, 7, 6, 5, etc.). Seriously tired of people shuffling up 3 times for a game and the unintended interaction with known info on the bottom of the library is also bleh.

[onering]

The death triggers happening is the best suggestion I've heard in a long time. It could elegantly be done as well without a special rule. You just change the replacement effect to "When your commander dies, choose whether to send it to the command zone." Or something along those lines. It would hit the yard, triggering effects, then immediately be sent to the cz if you choose without the option for responses (like a token that hits the yard).

[cryogen]

From what I understand talking with @papa_funk about this, the trigger it would create is what makes this so tricky.

[pokken]

From what I understand talking with papa_funk about this, the trigger it would create is what makes this so tricky.

I can see it being pretty awkward with Athreos, Shroud-Veiled for example, if you said the dies trigger happens it it would return the commander from the command zone under Athreos' player control.

Hmmmm.

[BeneTleilax]

ban flahs

[cryogen]

From what I understand talking with papa_funk about this, the trigger it would create is what makes this so tricky.

I can see it being pretty awkward with Athreos, Shroud-Veiled for example, if you said the dies trigger happens it it would return the commander from the command zone under Athreos' player control.

Hmmmm.

That's actually pretty cool.

[pokken]

I can see it being pretty awkward with Athreos, Shroud-Veiled for example, if you said the dies trigger happens it it would return the commander from the command zone under Athreos' player control.

Hmmmm.

That's actually pretty cool.

I'm not really sure what to think of it--all the other colors get ways to deal with problem commanders, not sure why grave betrayal et al effects shouldn't do it in black/white. I think there's a white card that might suddenly work too.

I feel like there's probably a way to make commanders interact a bit better with those effects. But I can't think of a way to live my dream of using mimic vat to punish problem commanders.

[WizardMN]

Changing it to a trigger just means it works oddly with everything else. Sure, if we focus solely on the "battlefield to graveyard" aspect it looks like it would mostly work in a vacuum. But, how would "hand to graveyard" work? Or "battlefield to exile"? Or, probably worst of all, "hand to library"?

If we don't do triggers for those, then now you have 2 rules in place for zone changes. If you do change them to triggers, "hand to library" doesn't work. At least, it wouldn't work with Timetwister or other Twister effects.

And, not that it matters a ton I suppose, but making it a trigger means things like It That Betrays can't steal them. Though, with the combination of changing how Banishing Light works (if they made "battlefield to exile" a trigger too) it might be overall easier to understand some of the weirder interactions the current replacement effect creates.

I am more on the side of not trying to make it work, though I don't really care too much one way or the other. But a trigger starts to introduce other issues that make the zone change stuff less elegant overall I think.

[pokken]

Making it a trigger is completely unworkable imho due to the counterspells and other things that interact with the trigger. You'd need some kind of derpy rule that makes the triggers uncounterable and unchangeable by static effects like hushbringer or to just accept that weird interaction.

A replacement effect could be worded such that triggers that would happen do happen by creating a copy of the commander that dies or changes zones in its place and then is removed when state based actions are checked (as tokens do). This would also prevent the death theft effects but allow blood artist and such.

In some ways I like the idea of making the copies permanent so that once a commander is cast it has to follow the rules of the game and recasting becomes a new object but this would be quite cumbersome.


edit:
Nevermind, I don't think that a copy would work even if you specified a non-token copy. You'd need something hamfisted that specifies that the creation of the copy doesn't trigger abilities otherwise someone could sac their commander and get an extra warstorm surge trigger or similar. And you'd need to specify non-token copy to prevent doubling season from working.

Too clunky.

[Dunharrow]

I would ban the top 10ish tutors in the format. They really fly in the face of the singleton format and they are too mana-efficient. I don't want to get Diabolic Tutor and Fierce Empath and Eye of Ugin banned. I just want these 1-2 mana tutors with hardly any drawback or restrictions to leave the format.

Every white deck should have an Enlightened Tutor. Every black deck should have a Demonic Tutor. Many people don't play these cards because they don't want to play with tutors.... but then what happens? You play people who have 14 creature tutors in their deck and combo out the same way every game.

[illakunsaa]

I would remove the color identity rule.
Lot of people like the rule but I think it does more harm than good. I think most people agree that when each player's deck is at the same power level you get a lot more enjoyable play experience. If you limit what people can play you naturally make the game unbalanced. Color id is the biggest limiting factor in deck building. In other formats when the meta changes you at least get the option to adapt your deck to a new meta but in edh you are just %$#% because your mono red deck can't play disenchant.

[schweinefett]

I'd format-level errata back how wishes used to work (i.e. how karn, the great creator works).

The exile zone was added to the game to simplify rules text on cards and to officially signify that the cards aren't somehow dangling in a timeless and spaceless void. Why can't wishes just grab cards from exile? That'd be pretty cool. Reusing flashback cards, or grabbing that amulet of unmaking-ed card back..

....also, if you look at the original wishes, it refers to getting a card that's removed from the game, the zone that the exile zone basically is.

It's a lot less "against the spirit of EDH" than tutors are, and they're all over the format like the plague.

[Maluko]

I am completely against the dying change for both flavor and mechanical reasons. It makes no sense to have a commander "die" but then it actually doesn't and you can cast it again later. In a normal game of Magic, you can't spend mana to cast dead creatures. I always thought the replacement effect was akin to the protagonist of a story being knocked out temporarily, but later coming back when the story (i.e. you) need him the most. And that's beautiful flavor. And I disaprove this change mechanically, for the same reason I approved the elimination of mana burn and the the restriction that you can only produce mana in your commander's color identity: you are creating a new rule that people must take into account that will actually matter very little for gameplay. You are adding unecessary complexity to a game that's already very complex. And you're only going to impact, like, five commanders out of 926. The current replacement rule is fine and easily understandable by players. And the cherry on the cake is I'd rather that opponent's Grave Pact did not trigger an additional time, thank you.

The one change I would like to see tested in Commander is the reduction of the starting life total to 30 life. Aggro is still underrepresented in the format, and this can clearly be seen from players continuing to complain about red and white being the weakest colors of the format, the two colors that actually excel at being fast. Midrange-control and (in cEDH) combo decks are overrepresented and out of control, and power creep is making its way into the format. I should also note the 40 life total was arbitrarily chosen several years ago without any actual testing and as a means to make games last longer for a better play experience. But things have changed a lot since then, and I think the RC, together with the CAG, should test if decreasing the life total would be more healthy to the format by promoting a more balanced strategic environment.

Other than that, I would be on board to ban the pre-Odissey tutors and broken mana rocks for the reasons that have already been mentioned. And Cyclonic Rift. Especially Cyclonic Rift. But I would still prioritize testing a reduction in life totals first.

[RxPhantom]

I want tuck back. I like being able to deal with commanders in a more permanent way, and liked the deck building challenge of having alternative gameplans.

[BaronCappuccino]

Not so much a strictly commander change, but my recent dabbling in Rakdos 1.0 as a commander had me thinking that walkers should have a tribal subtype. Thematically, Ob Nixilis Reignited aught to pass by Rakdos's sac half your nondemons clause.

[schweinefett]

I can also see a space/niche for a "vintage" EDH. Think the entire cardpool of Magic (minus un- cards and conspiracies... but yes to ante- cards), and have at it.
Sure, UB would be amazing, but it'd be great for those crazies who'd be wanna orb-flip-loop their opponent to smithereens, or contract front below their black lotus into the ante, or lich into rebirth or something nutty!

[onering]

I would remove the color identity rule.
Lot of people like the rule but I think it does more harm than good. I think most people agree that when each player's deck is at the same power level you get a lot more enjoyable play experience. If you limit what people can play you naturally make the game unbalanced. Color id is the biggest limiting factor in deck building. In other formats when the meta changes you at least get the option to adapt your deck to a new meta but in edh you are just %$#% because your mono red deck can't play disenchant.

In other formats, if you are mono red and need to deal with enchantments, you change your deck so that it's no longer mono red. In commander, you do exactly the same thing. It's a moderately higher bar to clear because you have to change your commander, but once your going from 1 to 2 color you are probably making more significant changes to your deck than splashing a single answer card. I get wanting to keep your commander because many commanders aren't easily replaceable when branching into different colors, but that's kind of the point. Color identity is one of the few things promoting two color and mono color decks, as it takes the classic trade off between reliability and flexibility and adds commander quality and uniqueness to the equation.

[Krishnath]

Increase the number of Poison counters needed to 15.

[Toshi]

I'd have to decide between:

• Lower Commander Damage from 21 (3x7) to 18 (3x6).
• Ban Sol Ring and Mana Crypt.
• Unban Biorhythm and Gifts Ungiven

In the end i would choose to ban Mana Crypt and especially Sol Ring. Whenever i play outside my playgroup - where both were house-banned unanimously - i quickly become bored of seeing it in each and every game. Same goes for Field of the Dead, which doesn't have that much of a bad influence on the format and Cyclonic Rift, which is at least limited by the decks that can run it.

As far as commander variety goes i'd love to see Commander Damage lowered from 21 (3x7) to 18 (3x6). Making Voltron more viable would be great, since those decks struggle to overcome the usual pods of midrange control et al.

Of the current banlist Biorhythm and Gifts Ungiven would be fine to get unbanned. I don't see either of them being more degenerate than what we have in the format already and would consider it fair game to allow them too.

I like the thought of banning overly efficient tutors, but my playgroup isn't combo-centric at all, so subjectively i'm fine as things stand.

[Card Slinger J]

I want tuck back. I like being able to deal with commanders in a more permanent way, and liked the deck building challenge of having alternative gameplans.

The tuck rule has always been the biggest issue with Voltron. It's so easy to base one's entire deck around particular Commander abilities that there's not enough emphasis on alternative gameplans. Rather the challenge then becomes, what cards are symmetrical and synergistic with the rest of my deck to where I can still win without my Commander? Restriction does breed creativity but what If the necessary cards just aren't available yet?

There's some Commanders that are tailor made for Voltron strategies and it's hard to take that away from them where the alternative gameplan ends up becoming less exciting on a deck brewing perspective. Feather, the Redeemed is a great example of this as she's arguably the only reason why Boros is actually viable in this format. Her abilities are so narrow that it's hard to focus away from her with an alternate win condition that's just as exciting.

Being stuck building off of the weakest two color combination makes it all the more tempting to branch out into other colors where there's more options available to help optimize your gameplan. When you're stuck having to rely more on colorless sources for overall consistency rather than the colors you're given to work with then it's probably time to focus on building a new deck off of colors that rely less on colorless sources in order to function properly.

[Myllior]

I'd unban of Gifts Ungiven, for the selfish reason that I'd love to have a deck that can recreate the feel of Gifts Storm from Modern. Maybe this is already possible, considering Intuition is in the format, but I don't think it would feel the same without the deck's titular card, and it would certainly be more effective with it.