"From outside the game" -- But not a 'Wish'

User avatar
Impossible
Posts: 67
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Impossible » 4 years ago

onering wrote:
4 years ago
Your absolutist approach to argument is childish. I never said that everyone would suddenly be running Tsunami, and trying to exaggerate a position rather than engage with it is insipid.
Sorry, I assumed you were making a point instead of just uselessly announcing what is now possible if Wishes were legal. I didn't exaggerate your position, I took it at face value that for Wishes to be a problem a significant amount of the player base would need to adopt the Tsunami approach. If your argument is that only a few people would play Tsunami, why bother bringing it up in the first place? A tiny percentage of the population being jerks with Wishes isn't a serious consideration, just like the small percentage of people that abuse Stasis aren't a serious consideration for banning Stasis.
onering wrote:
4 years ago
I could see the RC revisiting their stance if we have more than a dozen wish effects. If wizards keeps on printing these effects with some regularity, then we'll eventually hit a point where the RC has to consider the benefit of allowing so many cards to function and may decide that it's worth complicating the rules to do it.
  1. Burning Wish
  2. Coax From the Blind Eternities
  3. Cunning Wish
  4. Death Wish
  5. Research // Development
  6. Fae of Wishes
  7. Glittering Wish
  8. Golden Wish
  9. Karn, the Great Creator
  10. Living Wish
  11. Mastermind's Acquisition
  12. Ring of Ma'rûf
  13. Spawnsire of Ulamog
  14. Vivien, Arkbow Ranger
Bold cards were first printed within the last 4 years. With the exception of Coax, all the current ones are from the previous Standard rotation or newer (2018 and forward). And I didn't include them but there are also Frontier Explorer and Wizened Arbiter (links because apparently the MTGNexus database doesn't have them) from the Mystery Boosters. It's not a hard trend to spot. They've almost printed as many in the last 4 years as they had in the preceding 15 years. And now they've printed a specific "outside the game" mechanic. The time to reckon with the lack of a sideboard isn't some far-off problem, it's now.
Image

MRHblue
Posts: 102
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by MRHblue » 4 years ago

Impossible wrote:
4 years ago
Pray tell, what exactly is the reason?
The multiple reasons are all over this thread. If you read them instead of straw-manning them, you would know.
Legend wrote:
4 years ago
The only reason Rule 13 exists because a couple of RC old heads don't like Wishes and not for any actual reason. #wishophobes
Rule 11 exists for reasons explained here and other places, now and in the past. Your whole 'they don't like them' is supported by nothing, as are many of your arguments it seems. Past your own opinion passed off as data.

onering
Posts: 1226
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 4 years ago

Impossible wrote:
4 years ago
onering wrote:
4 years ago
Your absolutist approach to argument is childish. I never said that everyone would suddenly be running Tsunami, and trying to exaggerate a position rather than engage with it is insipid.
Sorry, I assumed you were making a point instead of just uselessly announcing what is now possible if Wishes were legal. I didn't exaggerate your position, I took it at face value that for Wishes to be a problem a significant amount of the player base would need to adopt the Tsunami approach. If your argument is that only a few people would play Tsunami, why bother bringing it up in the first place? A tiny percentage of the population being jerks with Wishes isn't a serious consideration, just like the small percentage of people that abuse Stasis aren't a serious consideration for banning Stasis.
onering wrote:
4 years ago
I could see the RC revisiting their stance if we have more than a dozen wish effects. If wizards keeps on printing these effects with some regularity, then we'll eventually hit a point where the RC has to consider the benefit of allowing so many cards to function and may decide that it's worth complicating the rules to do it.
  1. Burning Wish
  2. Coax From the Blind Eternities
  3. Cunning Wish
  4. Death Wish
  5. Research // Development
  6. Fae of Wishes
  7. Glittering Wish
  8. Golden Wish
  9. Karn, the Great Creator
  10. Living Wish
  11. Mastermind's Acquisition
  12. Ring of Ma'rûf
  13. Spawnsire of Ulamog
  14. Vivien, Arkbow Ranger
Bold cards were first printed within the last 4 years. With the exception of Coax, all the current ones are from the previous Standard rotation or newer (2018 and forward). And I didn't include them but there are also Frontier Explorer and Wizened Arbiter (links because apparently the MTGNexus database doesn't have them) from the Mystery Boosters. It's not a hard trend to spot. They've almost printed as many in the last 4 years as they had in the preceding 15 years. And now they've printed a specific "outside the game" mechanic. The time to reckon with the lack of a sideboard isn't some far-off problem, it's now.
There's a lot of daylight between everyone running something, and hardly anyone running something. A small but significant number of people doing it is enough to get something that is egregious enough banned. I'd water that we'd see Tsunami type hosers ran in wishboards about as often as Iona. Most people wouldn't be doing it, but enough would to be a problem. The counter to that, as I said, is that I also feel that wishes bring more to the table than Iona in terms of positive gameplay. So strike two on your ability to actually engage with an argument instead of being histrionic.

I'll admit that I missed coax and Vivien. That brings the numbers up to 5 cards in 4 years. The trend is more likely to hold because of this. Bringing up secret lair cards to argue the point is really stupid, quite frankly, and while I shouldn't have to point out why, you probably need me to (and will probably dismiss it because that's your thing). Secret Lair cards are, quite obviously, not legal cards, and, quite obviously, meant to be experimental designs and things that didn't work out. They are, by their very status as secret lair cards, irrelevant to what magic design will be doing in actual black bordered sets, to an even greater degree than cards from unsets, which MARO at least tries to use as a beta test for mechanics. So we're still left, even with the two relevant additions, with about a dozen cards. That leaves me at the same place I was with my original post, that it would be a major rules change to do fairly little, and isnt worth it at this time. In a few years we might have over 20 cards, and if they are actually relevant then I'd be more expectant of changes, but as it stands there's more of an argument to be made for changing the rules to allow hybrid to count as mono color, and as much of an argument for changing the rules to allow squadron hawk type cards that lack the relentless rats ability to actually do things in commander.

Lastly, if a change comes, I'm calling that it will be in the form of adding a wishboard rather than a true sideboard. The RC is big on signalling, and a wishboard signals clearly what the intent is, while a sideboard evokes a more competitive, meta gaming mindset.

MrMystery314
Posts: 64
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by MrMystery314 » 4 years ago

Hot take: Wishes shouldn't be legalized in order to prevent so many long threads full of multi-paragraph arguments from appearing, which they certainly will if even the slightest indication is given that there could be a change in philosophy.

User avatar
Impossible
Posts: 67
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Impossible » 4 years ago

onering wrote:
4 years ago
Your absolutist approach to argument is childish.
onering wrote:
4 years ago
So strike two on your ability to actually engage with an argument instead of being histrionic.
onering wrote:
4 years ago
and while I shouldn't have to point out why, you probably need me to (and will probably dismiss it because that's your thing).
Ah, yes, now I remember why I stopped coming here. Sorry, I couldn't hear any part of your actual argument over the deafening sound of your condescension.
Image

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4536
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 4 years ago

onering wrote:
4 years ago
Lastly, if a change comes, I'm calling that it will be in the form of adding a wishboard rather than a true sideboard. The RC is big on signalling, and a wishboard signals clearly what the intent is, while a sideboard evokes a more competitive, meta gaming mindset.
This is another reason why I like the 3-card wishboard. Sends a pretty clear signal about not being a sideboard.

I can't really think of any of the traditional anti-wishboard arguments that would realistically hold against a 3-card wishboard.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

onering
Posts: 1226
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 4 years ago

Impossible wrote:
4 years ago
onering wrote:
4 years ago
Your absolutist approach to argument is childish.
onering wrote:
4 years ago
So strike two on your ability to actually engage with an argument instead of being histrionic.
onering wrote:
4 years ago
and while I shouldn't have to point out why, you probably need me to (and will probably dismiss it because that's your thing).
Ah, yes, now I remember why I stopped coming here. Sorry, I couldn't hear any part of your actual argument over the deafening sound of your condescension.
Its funny how you draw that out of people. Perhaps if you exhibited behavior worthy of respect, like the vast majority of users in this forum, you wouldn't be faced with condescension. When you act like you do, when you are aggressive out of the gate and and think the best counter to any argument is to declare it nuked because to you discussions are calvinball, then you aren't going to be treated with respect. Not by me at least, and from the look of things not by many people. Change your style if you want different results. I won't see it though, you'll be the only person on my block list, because you haven't changed since Sally.

User avatar
RxPhantom
Fully Vaxxed, Baby!
Posts: 1513
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Southern Maryland

Post by RxPhantom » 4 years ago

Impossible wrote:
4 years ago
onering wrote:
4 years ago
Your absolutist approach to argument is childish.
onering wrote:
4 years ago
So strike two on your ability to actually engage with an argument instead of being histrionic.
onering wrote:
4 years ago
and while I shouldn't have to point out why, you probably need me to (and will probably dismiss it because that's your thing).
Ah, yes, now I remember why I stopped coming here. Sorry, I couldn't hear any part of your actual argument over the deafening sound of your condescension.
*sigh*

I'm going to try and be as constructive as possible here. You're good at spotting condescension because you dispense it often. Your points of view are worth discussing, but you're often impolite and smug so I avoid engaging you. And that's a shame because you seem intelligent and articulate, and I love cordially debating someone who is equipped to defend their position.
Can you name all of the creature types with at least 20 cards? Try my Sporcle Quiz! Last Updated: 2/18/22 (Kamigawa: Neon Dynasty)

MRHblue
Posts: 102
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by MRHblue » 4 years ago

DirkGently wrote:
4 years ago
I can't really think of any of the traditional anti-wishboard arguments that would realistically hold against a 3-card wishboard.
A strong part of the argument is access to more than 100 cards. 'Silver bullets' that are not good enough for a slot most games? Even 3 makes those strongly possible, else the card would just be there. Add on top of that the questions that always come up : Do groups have to allow it? Are the CI restrictions in place? Singleton still? Do you have to reveal Wishboards prior to wishing? Face up or Face down?

So which " traditional anti-wishboard arguments" does 3 really answer?

MrMystery314
Posts: 64
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by MrMystery314 » 4 years ago

You'd think more people would be in favor of simple rules over complex rules. It is an extremely small amount of players who are willing to devote significant thought to these principles; if a rule cannot be summarized in a few sentences, including its rationale, there is something wrong with it. I do not think the 100 card rule adds complexity, as it is easy to remember, nor does saying "wishes are banned" create confusion. It's easier to remember that simple declarative statement than "wishes are allowed, but your wishboard needs to be...".

User avatar
Airi
Queen of Salt
Posts: 416
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: she / her

Post by Airi » 4 years ago

Chill out on the personal attacks guys. Discuss the topic at hand without insulting each other, and try to keep aggressive arguing to a minimum. I will start handing out infractions if this behavior continues, this will be my only warning in this thread.

onering
Posts: 1226
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 4 years ago

MRHblue wrote:
4 years ago
DirkGently wrote:
4 years ago
I can't really think of any of the traditional anti-wishboard arguments that would realistically hold against a 3-card wishboard.
A strong part of the argument is access to more than 100 cards. 'Silver bullets' that are not good enough for a slot most games? Even 3 makes those strongly possible, else the card would just be there. Add on top of that the questions that always come up : Do groups have to allow it? Are the CI restrictions in place? Singleton still? Do you have to reveal Wishboards prior to wishing? Face up or Face down?

So which " traditional anti-wishboard arguments" does 3 really answer?
3 doesn't give you enough room to just through in a bunch of brutal color hosers so that your wish becomes whichever is relevant. You'll never be able to cover all the bases, and your more likely to dedicate those slots to a few silver bullets that cover your deck's weaknesses that cards that can just randomly screw over a player. It makes you focus on covering your weakest base rather than being able to cover all your bases, or to simply include targets for cards like Fae of Wishes or Vivien so that their abilities aren't blanked, and I believe that answers the primary complaint against wishboards.

It doesn't address the concerns you bring up. I'm not sure I'd consider these anti wishboard arguments, they sound more like questions that would need to be answered if wishboards are implemented (excepting whether groups would have to allow it). CI restrictions, singleton, and allowing it being standard seeks to me like they would be obvious, but since wishboards would be new to the rules you would actually have to spell it out (as opposed to sideboards, which already have to abide by all deck building restrictions as the rest of the deck).

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4536
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 4 years ago

MRHblue wrote:
4 years ago
A strong part of the argument is access to more than 100 cards. 'Silver bullets' that are not good enough for a slot most games? Even 3 makes those strongly possible, else the card would just be there. Add on top of that the questions that always come up : Do groups have to allow it? Are the CI restrictions in place? Singleton still? Do you have to reveal Wishboards prior to wishing? Face up or Face down?

So which " traditional anti-wishboard arguments" does 3 really answer?
I don't know why people say "access to more than 100 cards" like it's self-explanatory why that would matter. 100 card maximum or no, I would hope people are aware than having more cards is generally a downside (ofc in this case, since they're in the SB/WB it wouldn't be, but that's what I mean about not being self-explanatory).

I think "silver bullets" in the sense of rest in peace would find their way into WBs. Probably not flashfires. For one, those are already generally hated out by the social contract. For two, they're not actually super effective in a world where most people are playing multicolor and thus won't be totally shut down by a single card and are also likely playing a combination of basics and untyped duals. For three, with only three slots you don't have enough room to cover all that many bases.

All the "arguments" are more "questions", as onering pointed out. I'd assume the answers would be:
unless they agree to change it, just like any other rule
yes
yes
the default as I understand it is no, but the RC could change that I guess
afaik only death wish and ring of ma'ruf let you take a card face down, assuming the RC didn't modify the normal functionality (EDIT: oh right, and mastermind's acquisition).

I think there's a lot of space in wishboard design that wotc is probably not using at least partially because it wouldn't work in commander, the premier casual format. I could imagine something like caller of the untamed but from the SB instead of drafted. That'd be pretty neat imo.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

onering
Posts: 1226
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 4 years ago

DirkGently wrote:
4 years ago

I think there's a lot of space in wishboard design that wotc is probably not using at least partially because it wouldn't work in commander, the premier casual format. I could imagine something like caller of the untamed but from the SB instead of drafted. That'd be pretty neat imo.
Wizards further exploring the design space would be interesting, and perhaps the best answer to the problem, as it would make action on wishboards more likely.

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

Post by ISBPathfinder » 4 years ago

I would like to see companions and wishboards on the same standing. I don't actually care which way they go, but I would like to see them on the same standing of usability. Its slightly cleaner to cut companions off as then the otter can be unbanned but outside of that, I don't really care I just want consistency.
[EDH] Vadrok List (Suicide Chads) | Evelyn List (Vamp Mill) | Sanwell List | Danitha List | Indominus List | Ratadrabik List

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4536
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 4 years ago

From a simplicity perspective (and because I like cunning wish) I'd like to see wishboards enabled (although I think they'd probably be more annoying than fun if they were the full 15 - 3 seems more fun to me hence why I'm trying so hard to sell it lol). Logistically that makes the most sense to me.

Disabling companions probably makes more sense than enabling them with the SB/WB disabled, considered completely dispassionately. That said, I think the coolness and fun factor counts for something, and I think it's worth creating a loophole for. I think companions will enable some really creative deckbuilding and some janky fun decks to play, and I am 100% down for that. Whenever my opponent sets down a companion at the start of the game, I'm immediately going to want to see that deck a lot more than your average brew.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

User avatar
Airi
Queen of Salt
Posts: 416
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: she / her

Post by Airi » 4 years ago

ISBPathfinder wrote:
4 years ago
I would like to see companions and wishboards on the same standing. I don't actually care which way they go, but I would like to see them on the same standing of usability. Its slightly cleaner to cut companions off as then the otter can be unbanned but outside of that, I don't really care I just want consistency.
I do agree they should work the same, although I'd specifically put that as "Don't work at all" (but still, even if legal they should be treated the same imo). Especially if WotC ever decides to expand on companion in future sets.

That said, them being treated differently leads to a whole mess of "But whyyyyyyyyyyy" on both sides of the argument (for wishes and against companion) and was entirely avoidable. My hope is that people forget about companion in four months, but it invites a whole lot of rules and philosophy messiness from us unwashed masses due to the different treatment.

User avatar
Sinis
Posts: 2034
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post by Sinis » 4 years ago

Airi wrote:
4 years ago
I do agree they should work the same, although I'd specifically put that as "Don't work at all" (but still, even if legal they should be treated the same imo). Especially if WotC ever decides to expand on companion in future sets.
This is basically my thinking. Some time ago, I made my peace that wishes would always be a house rule if it got to see play in my groups. I really am fine with that.

What sticks in my craw is that the whole time I had these debates on the official forums, it was "you're basically letting people play with more than 100 cards and we can't have that" and "it's too complicated ruleswise". This really craps on both those things. Obviously we'll see just how parsimonious/intuitive/elegant the rule really is, but, I'm sure it will be more wordy than simply having an "outside the game" zone with limited scope.

There are either cards outside the game you can access, or there aren't, and any principle that differentiates them makes the rule more complex than it ever needed to be.

CC: @ISBPathfinder, since you made this point first.

User avatar
UnfulfilledDesires
Posts: 128
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: they / them
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA

Post by UnfulfilledDesires » 4 years ago

I just want to pop in & stress how much I adore companions. I'd prefer elegant rules, but I'm fine with whatever contortions if it means I get to bond with cute critters & have a mechanical incentive to build my decks in exciting new ways. I applaud WotC for making companions & for persuading the RC to allow them. I support wishes as well, but please don't try to take that fox & that kitty & that elk away from me now that I've seen them & been told they function in this format.

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

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

UnfulfilledDesires wrote:
4 years ago
I just want to pop in & stress how much I adore companions. I'd prefer elegant rules, but I'm fine with whatever contortions if it means I get to bond with cute critters & have a mechanical incentive to build my decks in exciting new ways. I applaud WotC for making companions & for persuading the RC to allow them. I support wishes as well, but please don't try to take that fox & that kitty & that elk away from me now that I've seen them & been told they function in this format.
Lieutenants that live in the command zone but don't go back would have been far more, well, not ridiculous, from a commander perspective (in my opinion). I'd have been even more on board if they could not be used with partner commanders.

As is the deckbuilding constraints are starting to appeal to me, I just wish they interacted more cleanly with commander and didn't add a card to the deck.

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4536
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 4 years ago

pokken wrote:
4 years ago
Lieutenants that live in the command zone but don't go back would have been far more, well, not ridiculous, from a commander perspective (in my opinion). I'd have been even more on board if they could not be used with partner commanders.
The templating probably could have been a lot cleaner if they were commander-designed, but I think they're mostly aimed at standard. Adding to commander is obviously important, but I think their main goal (besides doing something cool and new) is using the most appealing part of commander to draw people into other constructed formats.

Of course that also precludes them from having any special partner interaction.

Personally, although the rules will be messier, I prefer it this way. I'd rather wotc added crazy mechanics to standard which have trickle-downs to commander, than doing crazy mechanics in commander where they sometimes go off the leash because they don't have to worry as much about ruining tournaments. If these applied only to commander I feel like we'd be a lot more likely to see extremely broken companions with very lax requirements since they wouldn't "need" to be balanced.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

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

Post by ISBPathfinder » 4 years ago

pokken wrote:
4 years ago
UnfulfilledDesires wrote:
4 years ago
I just want to pop in & stress how much I adore companions. I'd prefer elegant rules, but I'm fine with whatever contortions if it means I get to bond with cute critters & have a mechanical incentive to build my decks in exciting new ways. I applaud WotC for making companions & for persuading the RC to allow them. I support wishes as well, but please don't try to take that fox & that kitty & that elk away from me now that I've seen them & been told they function in this format.
Lieutenants that live in the command zone but don't go back would have been far more, well, not ridiculous, from a commander perspective (in my opinion). I'd have been even more on board if they could not be used with partner commanders.

As is the deckbuilding constraints are starting to appeal to me, I just wish they interacted more cleanly with commander and didn't add a card to the deck.
It actually makes me curious as to why they didn't put them in the deck and have it as a once a game search function. Obviously we can't answer the why on that but its an interesting thought.
[EDH] Vadrok List (Suicide Chads) | Evelyn List (Vamp Mill) | Sanwell List | Danitha List | Indominus List | Ratadrabik List

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4536
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 4 years ago

ISBPathfinder wrote:
4 years ago
It actually makes me curious as to why they didn't put them in the deck and have it as a once a game search function. Obviously we can't answer the why on that but its an interesting thought.
You mean, "if you fulfill (condition) you may search this from your deck at the start of the game?"

I would guess that doesn't work with how the rules function. You can't prove that you're allowed to start searching your deck until you've already done it. And searches don't require you to find things with specific qualities, so you could fail to find your companion. Depending on the timing, maybe it's not in your deck thanks to some face-down exile and you don't even know it.

I mean logically it could work at least in a casual setting (If you declare the search and don't find it, you're a filthy cheater who loses the game) but it might not be something wotc is allowed to do without some huge rules overhauls.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

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

Post by ISBPathfinder » 4 years ago

DirkGently wrote:
4 years ago
ISBPathfinder wrote:
4 years ago
It actually makes me curious as to why they didn't put them in the deck and have it as a once a game search function. Obviously we can't answer the why on that but its an interesting thought.
You mean, "if you fulfill (condition) you may search this from your deck at the start of the game?"

I would guess that doesn't work with how the rules function. You can't prove that you're allowed to start searching your deck until you've already done it. And searches don't require you to find things with specific qualities, so you could fail to find your companion. Depending on the timing, maybe it's not in your deck thanks to some face-down exile and you don't even know it.

I mean logically it could work at least in a casual setting (If you declare the search and don't find it, you're a filthy cheater who loses the game) but it might not be something wotc is allowed to do without some huge rules overhauls.
It was brought up as a discussion on how legal the current setup would be for tournament level play but it was deemed that if they ever proved that their deck didn't meet those conditions it would just be a reason to call a judge and give game losses or worse for that. (I can't remember where I was reading that so sorry if I am misspeaking)

I don't really see it as a problem. If you later prove that your deck doesn't meet the conditions I guess you lose right then and there. Its like forgetting to pay for a pact. If you are going to play certain things it requires you to have follow through to make sure you play them right.
[EDH] Vadrok List (Suicide Chads) | Evelyn List (Vamp Mill) | Sanwell List | Danitha List | Indominus List | Ratadrabik List

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 4536
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 4 years ago

ISBPathfinder wrote:
4 years ago
It was brought up as a discussion on how legal the current setup would be for tournament level play but it was deemed that if they ever proved that their deck didn't meet those conditions it would just be a reason to call a judge and give game losses or worse for that. (I can't remember where I was reading that so sorry if I am misspeaking)

I don't really see it as a problem. If you later prove that your deck doesn't meet the conditions I guess you lose right then and there. Its like forgetting to pay for a pact. If you are going to play certain things it requires you to have follow through to make sure you play them right.
Well, just to point out some obvious logistical issues - if you have to search it up at start of game, it becomes a lot worse since you'll have to discard something it you can't cast something T1. And if you can do it later, as mentioned it becomes a liability if it gets exiled and then you weren't allowed to do it.

I guess you could start-of-game only, search and exile, you may cast while it's exiled (from that effect).

Anyway as I said, it could work fine in a casual sense but as far as the technicalities I suspect it'd be a nightmare. Nothing in the game lets you take an action while it's in a hidden zone, for good reason.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Gollum - Lobelia - Minthara - Plargg2 - Solphim - Otharri - Graaz - Ratchet - Soundwave - Slicer - Gale - Rootha - Kagemaro - Blorpityblorpboop - Kayla - SliverQueen - Ivy - Falco - Gluntch - Charlatan/Wilson - Garth - Kros - Anthousa - Shigeki - Light-Paws - Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Rules and Philosophy”