[MCD] Rhystic Study & Mystic Remora

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago



These cards are different and tend to exist in slightly different metas, but both of them are cards I think somehow fly under the radar for banning despite that:

1) Literally everyone hates them to the point "did you pay 1/4?" is almost a meme
2) They provide way too much advantage for their mana cost
3) They interact poorly with the multiplayer nature of the format

I'm not 100% on the ban train for these and I'm sure it's probably the most controversial of various SCD/MCD's I've spun up over the years but I think there really ought to be a thread to discuss experiences with these cards.

If there is a banning criteria that fits it almost has to be interacts poorly with the nature of the format but there's also causes severe resource imbalances.

Is anyone out there having a really fun game on the receiving end of these?

Tags:

onering
Posts: 1227
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 3 years ago

First, interacts poorly with the format does not mean "gets better with multiplayer". Many cards get significantly better when you have multiple opponents. A card has to be particularly egregious for getting better with multiple opponents to be interacting poorly with the format. Prophet hit it because it was basically giving you an extra turn of Mana and creatures being cast for each of your opponents turns. Drawing more cards because you have more opponents really isn't enough.

So really, the question is "do these generate so much advantage, especially considering the Mana cost, as to be ban worthy."

Rhystic I'd say certainly not. It gets better when your opponents are casting a lot of spells or casting everything on curve. It really depends on the meta, and even the game, how it plays out. I've seen it draw tons of cards, and I've seen it perform worse than Phyrexian arena. If it comes down early and everyone is playing on curve, it's pretty sweet, and obviously early payoff is the most important, but if people can pay the 1 it falls off quickly. Overall I'd say Rhystic is about right for what it does. It's a skill tester for your opponents because there is no one size fits all correct answer for "do you pay the 1". Sometimes playing things on curve is worth letting your opponent draw. Sometimes the rest of the table just never pays and you don't want to be the one guy paying and still getting buried in CA. But if the table plays smart, Rhystic should be good not great, and occasionally a dud. When you look at it as what it actually is, an enchantment that adds a 1 Mana tax to it's controllers opponents spells that can be alternatively paid by allowing it's controller to draw a card, it's clearly fine. It gets out of hand when people get greedy. It's a card that punishes reckless play. Some people find it annoying. I personally like that, in paper, it forces people off their phones so they pay attention to the game. Sometimes people will forget to pay, and sometimes people will forget the "may" means that if they miss someone not paying they're out of luck.

Mystic is a lot spicier. 4 Mana makes it a lot harder to play around than Rhystic's 1 Mana tax. It will set you far back if you try to play around it and it's much harder to get the table to agree to play around it because the costs of doing so are much higher for many decks. It's also only 1 Mana so it comes down earlier, during a period when people are casting a lot of non creature spells in the form of ramp, so it can net a large number of cards quickly. The downsides are many, however. It's cumulative upkeep means that if you drop it when it's most likely to draw you a ton, you'll be unlikely to actually play the cards you draw and it effectively becomes looting as you'll discard to hand size. It also clearly means it won't last forever, and it's possible that you just won't see many non creature spells cast by the time you stop paying the upkeep. Some decks can easily play around it because they run a lot of creatures that they can spend their Mana on while waiting for it to go away, and later in the game some people will actually be able to pay the tax. Mystic is better the higher the power level, as the higher the power level the more likely your opponents will be casting non creature spells early and often, ensuring mystic remora draws you enough to justify it's investment. It's basically U: draw 4-6 cards with the option to pay 1 for another round ok your upkeep at the top power levels. It's still better than Rhystic in 75 percent at drawing you cards quickly. Mid power level and below it's starts to fall off a bit as people don't curve out as well and run higher creature counts. It's actually possible for it to go a couple turns without drawing anything there.

I'd say Rhystic isnt a problem at all, but mystic might be, because it's capable of generating it's resources more quickly and is harder to play around. It's definitely a problem at the power levels where it's comparable to an Ancestral Recall. I'd say a hard no to banning Rhystic, and a maybe but lean no for Mystic. After all, this is a format where Necropotence is legal. Rhystic might draw me 9 cards over 3 turns if everyone plays stupid or if my drawing cards isn't going to matter because the game is progressing quickly enough that I'll never play them all, but Necro is going to draw me 9 cards immediately (sort of), or 20, or 50 if I'm a life gain deck. If Necro goes, I'd take a harder look at Mystic Remora, but while Necro is out there it's the elephant in the room. Mystic could one day eat a ban, but if it does it will be alongside necro or some time after it.

And yeah, I've had plenty of enjoyable games where someone else resolved Rhystic. It's not terribly hard to play around. At lower power levels you can typically just pay the 1, and it's not going to matter much because it's likely the only tax card in their deck. At high power levels, it's a bit too slow, you tap out for 3 to draw a few cards during your opponents turns, and the games don't last long enough for it to really shine. It's not bad, but it's not game breaking either, and people will pay when they can but when they need to use all their mana on their spells those spells are more impactful than at lower power levels, making it more likely that the game ends before the Rhystic player can leverage their cards in hand into actual advantage in play. Nothing like dying with a full grip. It does it's most damage in 75 percent where your spells are impactful enough and your deck streamlined enough that there is enough incentive to play your spells on curve rather than play around the tax, but the decks aren't fast enough to close out the game before the Rhystic player gets to actually cast a bunch of the spells they draw. It's also where your most likely to see people doing goofy crap where they cast storm like numbers of spells in a turn without winning on the spot. But even in 75 percent Rhystic can be tamed with counterplay.

User avatar
WizardMN
Posts: 1965
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 124
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Twin Cities
Contact:

Post by WizardMN » 3 years ago

I think onering hit the nail on the head for me on these cards. Neither is really to the point where the resource imbalance is unmanageable. Realistically, if people care, Study is just a Sphere of Resistance with the added "mode" of letting them draw a card to ignore the tax.

Remora is sort of easy to play around by just not casting anything you don't have to. It slows things down for everyone, including the caster. I had a game against it and while it was annoying, I think them taking 4 turns off even with the cards they drew sort of evened everything out.

Practically, I think they are just more annoying than anything which is why I don't play either one (even though I have a sweet judge foil Rhystic Study :) ). Having to ask every spell, as you mentioned above, is definitely a meme at this point.

User avatar
Mookie
Posts: 3461
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 47
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: the æthereal plane

Post by Mookie » 3 years ago

I've had games where Mystic Remora or Rhystic Study have been insane, and I've also seen games where they haven't done anything at all. They're inherently punisher cards, and while they definitely scale significantly in multiplayer, it's also possible for opponents to play around it. That said, they do definitely attract a disproportional amount of hate / removal for their mana cost, but I suspect that's largely a function of them being relatively notorious and annoying.

Mystic Remora definitely gets better the more competitive your meta is - it's stronger when lots of cheap spells are being flung around, and people aren't running as many creatures. However, it is (usually) balanced out by the fact that it will eventually go away. If you play it out early, it's going to eat up pretty much all of your mana to keep it around. And, again, people can just play creatures to ignore it.

Meanwhile, Rhystic Study is often an asymmetric Sphere of Resistance, but I don't see anyone calling for Grand Arbiter Augustin IV to be banned. It is a significant tempo loss for opponents, but it's also not hard to play around. It only gets particularly oppressive if you're planning to cast 3+ spells in a turn.

The delayed nature of these cards also makes them significantly less powerful - both because they can just be blown up immediately, and because they're less explosive. I don't mind cards that generate incremental value over the course of an extended game nearly as much as I mind cards that generate immediate value that allow for a sudden win.

...Mystic Remora is probably the card I have the most mixed feelings about reprinting though - on one hand, I really want the price to come down. On the other hand, I don't want to be running into it in every game. >.>

User avatar
toctheyounger
Posts: 3986
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post by toctheyounger » 3 years ago

Yeah, personally, I'm on the fence with this one. I've had games where Remora has been stellar and games where it's been a waste of resource to cast. Timing is key with that one given you're on a timer. Rhystic, I've never owned a copy. Its price is stupid, there's no way I'm paying $25 NZD for it.

I think the thing with these is the people that play them are the annoying part. Being bugged every 60 seconds with 'pay 1.4?' makes me want to reach other the table and show people how much I want to pay the cost. It's got to the point where when it's cast (and Smothering Tithe now, too) I'll announce to the table 'don't bug me about it - I'll let YOU know if I'm paying, otherwise leave me the f*&k alone and look out for your own triggers'.

In terms of play, they do have a high ceiling, but both can be pretty middling if cast at the wrong time or used in the wrong deck, so I'm not fazed personally. But yeah, Rhystic players - we will let you know if we want to pay, in the meantime sit down and shut up.
Is anyone out there having a really fun game on the receiving end of these?
To answer this, I've never had a game where the card itself was painful to interact with. Most games, it's an insignificant happening every turn that I barely notice. Worst case scenario it's something to be removed, but the really annoying part of the cards being in play for me really is the people playing them moreso than the card itself.
Malazan Decks of the Fallen
| Shadowthrone/Lazav | Raest/Yidris | T'iam / The Ur-Dragon |

User avatar
BeneTleilax
Posts: 1330
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by BeneTleilax » 3 years ago

ban them.

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

Post by ISBPathfinder » 3 years ago

Honestly, I am just sick of hearing "did you pay for that?". I would not be opposed to them being banned for the sole purpose of hearing that less. I also wouldn't hate it if Smothering Tithe joined them.

I don't actually think they need to be banned. But I do really hate the gamestate they put the board in and it does feel like you suddenly can't have a conversation through the insistent "did you pay for that" chatter.

I actually think they perform MORE as decks get more tuned. Paying an extra one when playing a titan isn't a big deal but paying one multiple times in a turn is far more detrimental. Tuned decks tend to chain spells and so it actually hurts them a lot more when your goal is to cast 2-4 spells in a turn.
[EDH] Vadrok List (Suicide Chads) | Evelyn List (Vamp Mill) | Sanwell List | Danitha List | Indominus List | Ratadrabik List

User avatar
Guardman
A Dog's Dream of Man
Posts: 1725
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: In a Turn-Based World

Post by Guardman » 3 years ago

ISBPathfinder wrote:
3 years ago
Honestly, I am just sick of hearing "did you pay for that?". I would not be opposed to them being banned for the sole purpose of hearing that less. I also wouldn't hate it if Smothering Tithe joined them.

I don't actually think they need to be banned. But I do really hate the gamestate they put the board in and it does feel like you suddenly can't have a conversation through the insistent "did you pay for that" chatter.

I actually think they perform MORE as decks get more tuned. Paying an extra one when playing a titan isn't a big deal but paying one multiple times in a turn is far more detrimental. Tuned decks tend to chain spells and so it actually hurts them a lot more when your goal is to cast 2-4 spells in a turn.
This.

These types of punisher cards just make the game annoying to play. One of the people I play with actually printed out Sponge Bob say "Did You Pay One?" and put it over his copy of Rhystic Study. It would be funny if it wasn't so true. I wouldn't mind it being banned solely for the fact it slows the game down with its constant triggers and is annoying. Basically sort of the same thing that got Sensei's Divining Top banned in Legacy and Modern (I know, different context, but...).

The same for Smothering Tithe as well. I've only played against Mystic Remora once so I can't speak to it, but I am assuming it has the exact same problem.

onering
Posts: 1227
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 3 years ago

I think something that makes Rhystic annoying with regards to "do you pay 1?" is that it seems like they are asking you to keep track of their triggers, but in reality they are attempting a courtesy. Both the pay 1 and the draw are mays. If you say "I'll tell you if I pay" that's fine, they can just draw once you do something else without paying. But if you don't say something like that, they need to clarify whether you are paying or not to see if they can draw. This is to both avoid missing their opportunity to draw, as well as to remind people of the trigger, because it goes on the stack regardless of whether the faster remembers it. Being asked makes it less likely you simply forget to pay. You should always accept shortcuts from people willing to provide them, as a Rhystic player, and try to minimize how annoying asking can be, but asking should be the baseline, as Rhystic's controller controls the trigger and is thus responsible for alerting other players.

It also protects against people trying to be shady, like casting a spell with an extra Mana floated, then letting the spell resolve without paying and saying you missed your draw trigger, or casting multiple spells in quick succession and hoping that the Rhystic player misses a trigger. Once someone gets burned by this, they'll be hyper vigilant about their triggers and making sure there is no question if 1 has been paid.

Online it's less annoying. The client asks you if you pay 1, and you click yes or no. No confusion, it happens every time. Maybe it's because you're already clicking through a bunch of crap anyway that this is less annoying, because it's exactly the same as Johnny McRhystic asking after every spell, or maybe it's because some people have annoying voices or ask in annoying ways. Personally, playing both online and in paper I can say that players tend to shortcut A LOT of things in paper, while online you can basically only shortcut yields by auto yielding, so playing online increases your tolerance for trigger reminders and the like. Shortcutting isn't bad, it's just generally not available online.

And a quick note on my notion that Rhystic's controller is responsible for announcing triggers: I'm not talking about in the rules because I'm not sure of the actual rules here. It's my philosophy that players should be cognizant of what's going on on their opponents side of the field, but also should ensure that their opponents are aware of what they are doing. This is to avoid arguments over triggers and shady play. This only applies to public info, and specifically to things like triggers that need to be responded to. If someone casts a 2 toughness critter because they forgot you control aether flash, that's on them, you don't have to warn them they are making a mistake, but it someone casts stuffy doll or an enrage dino with a may ability while you have aether flash, it's your responsibility to tell them that aether flash damages it, because they shouldn't miss their trigger because you didn't tell them about yours.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

ISBPathfinder wrote:
3 years ago
I actually think they perform MORE as decks get more tuned. Paying an extra one when playing a titan isn't a big deal but paying one multiple times in a turn is far more detrimental. Tuned decks tend to chain spells and so it actually hurts them a lot more when your goal is to cast 2-4 spells in a turn
It is definitely the case that Sphere of Resistance is vastly more powerful against tuned decks (see Legacy where it's fairly dominant in the various stax packages). So it goes with these cards in my experience. More tuned also tends toward lower creature ratio which means more Mystic Remora.

Generally speaking I think Mystic Remora is probably bannable from a power level perspective - its a better card than many cards on the banlist at a variety of power levels in EDH. It generates way too much advantage for its mana cost, and scales too dramatically.



re: the trigger management

There's a huge subset of the community who is like "manage your own triggers!" and that's what causes the "pay x?" comments.

In reality, the only smooth way for these to work is the person who is casting spells to manage it. This is how I play them; I pretend I am the MTGO computer and announce yes I paid 1 or no I did not every time I cast something, and then no one has to say anything. It's everyone's job to maintain the game state and often in EDH gameplay goes fast so people will miss spells being cast, especially early in the game when people are setting up.

It's annoying that this is essentially a mental tax on everyone when people play these spells (remora to a lesser extent since almost no one ever pays). Either get barbed to pay 1 or mentally manage other people's triggers.

I think this design is *terrible* for gameplay all around, and the more these effects become socially acceptable the more they will impact enjoyment.

User avatar
folding_music
glitter pen on my mana crypt
Posts: 2236
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: they / them

Post by folding_music » 3 years ago

I like that they nerf players more the more broken their deck is and I support cards of that type existing. I sympathise with the complaint against the way they interrupt conversation far more than any power considerations. if you wanna ban a card from Ice Age then may I recommend Demonic Consultation? That one is designed to end the game early and unfairly; these ones let you passively accrue value and nothing else.

User avatar
Hawk
Slayer of Threads
Posts: 1166
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Salt Lake City, UT

Post by Hawk » 3 years ago

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but for my wife and I's more questionable decks (like Sai, Master Thopterist or Alela, Artful Provocateur) can be divided into two kind of games:

- Games where we stuck an early Rhystic Study, which are almost always games won and at least games where we end up in a close second if we lose.

- Games where we never draw Rhystic Study, and die.

Games with Study are, in other words, unreal from a card advantage perspective, effectively giving unbounded cards for almost no cost. Now, maybe this is an example of "lol play more Disenchants nubs" but the card absolutely warps every game around itself.

onering
Posts: 1227
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 3 years ago

Hawk wrote:
3 years ago
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but for my wife and I's more questionable decks (like Sai, Master Thopterist or Alela, Artful Provocateur) can be divided into two kind of games:

- Games where we stuck an early Rhystic Study, which are almost always games won and at least games where we end up in a close second if we lose.

- Games where we never draw Rhystic Study, and die.

Games with Study are, in other words, unreal from a card advantage perspective, effectively giving unbounded cards for almost no cost. Now, maybe this is an example of "lol play more Disenchants nubs" but the card absolutely warps every game around itself.
What sort of decks do your opponents play? If your meta is pretty tuned then paying 1 to prevent the draw may set people back enough to not be worth it, as their best bet is to just try to win quickly so you don't get to actually play the cards, and if they cast 2-3 spells a turn regularly then Rhystic will go off. I'm always a little surprised when I draw more than 1.5 cards per round with Rhystic unless someone is playing 3+ spells a turn or its a high power table. Online, most people just pay the 1 most of the time, then 1 or 2 spells get cast a round without it because they really need to cast it.

User avatar
Hawk
Slayer of Threads
Posts: 1166
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Salt Lake City, UT

Post by Hawk » 3 years ago

onering wrote:
3 years ago
Hawk wrote:
3 years ago
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but for my wife and I's more questionable decks (like Sai, Master Thopterist or Alela, Artful Provocateur) can be divided into two kind of games:

- Games where we stuck an early Rhystic Study, which are almost always games won and at least games where we end up in a close second if we lose.

- Games where we never draw Rhystic Study, and die.

Games with Study are, in other words, unreal from a card advantage perspective, effectively giving unbounded cards for almost no cost. Now, maybe this is an example of "lol play more Disenchants nubs" but the card absolutely warps every game around itself.
What sort of decks do your opponents play? If your meta is pretty tuned then paying 1 to prevent the draw may set people back enough to not be worth it, as their best bet is to just try to win quickly so you don't get to actually play the cards, and if they cast 2-3 spells a turn regularly then Rhystic will go off. I'm always a little surprised when I draw more than 1.5 cards per round with Rhystic unless someone is playing 3+ spells a turn or its a high power table. Online, most people just pay the 1 most of the time, then 1 or 2 spells get cast a round without it because they really need to cast it.
"Casual" - definitely not 75%. I'd say that in our meta, players only pay maybe a third of the time because they want to play their decks and not be off-curve doing so. They pay 1 if they have it to spare, but don't change their play to account for the 1 - if their plan was a turn 4 Atla Palani, Nest Tender, they are playing Atla Palani turn four and not paying the one. No one in my playgroup is willing to accept changing plans to Rhystic Study and treating it as a Sphere of Resistance. As a result, Study is drawing a minimum of 2 cards per round until we reach the very end game and is often drawing 3-4 per round. So, Study has a warping effect is slammed out on turn 3 or 4 when the game is developing, and often is a "draw 10+" over the course of the game. Smothering Tithe, costing 2, is even worse - it's effectively "you can have as much treasure as you want".

Now, one could argue our playgroup just needs to get good and suck up playing Atla Palani a turn late since our decks are in no way calibrated to murderdeath people before turn 10...but I'd argue that's more in favor of a banning, as it means an early Rhystic Study "accidentally" warps the game in a way that the average player doesn't always draw a clear connection to. Not that I personally want it banned - I own like six, and I adore drawing cards for basically zero effort. But I think it is insidiously toxic.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

It has definitely been my experience that Rhystic Study is *dominant* in lower powered metas. I don't know why people don't pay but they don't. :P

(They're also less likely to be able to remove it)

It's also worth noting that it's very high on the salt list. Which is part of the reason for the thread - I never met anyone who liked it but blue control players :P

https://edhrec.com/top/salt

Wallycaine
Posts: 764
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Wallycaine » 3 years ago

Hawk wrote:
3 years ago
onering wrote:
3 years ago
Hawk wrote:
3 years ago
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but for my wife and I's more questionable decks (like Sai, Master Thopterist or Alela, Artful Provocateur) can be divided into two kind of games:

- Games where we stuck an early Rhystic Study, which are almost always games won and at least games where we end up in a close second if we lose.

- Games where we never draw Rhystic Study, and die.

Games with Study are, in other words, unreal from a card advantage perspective, effectively giving unbounded cards for almost no cost. Now, maybe this is an example of "lol play more Disenchants nubs" but the card absolutely warps every game around itself.
What sort of decks do your opponents play? If your meta is pretty tuned then paying 1 to prevent the draw may set people back enough to not be worth it, as their best bet is to just try to win quickly so you don't get to actually play the cards, and if they cast 2-3 spells a turn regularly then Rhystic will go off. I'm always a little surprised when I draw more than 1.5 cards per round with Rhystic unless someone is playing 3+ spells a turn or its a high power table. Online, most people just pay the 1 most of the time, then 1 or 2 spells get cast a round without it because they really need to cast it.
"Casual" - definitely not 75%. I'd say that in our meta, players only pay maybe a third of the time because they want to play their decks and not be off-curve doing so. They pay 1 if they have it to spare, but don't change their play to account for the 1 - if their plan was a turn 4 Atla Palani, Nest Tender, they are playing Atla Palani turn four and not paying the one. No one in my playgroup is willing to accept changing plans to Rhystic Study and treating it as a Sphere of Resistance. As a result, Study is drawing a minimum of 2 cards per round until we reach the very end game and is often drawing 3-4 per round. So, Study has a warping effect is slammed out on turn 3 or 4 when the game is developing, and often is a "draw 10+" over the course of the game. Smothering Tithe, costing 2, is even worse - it's effectively "you can have as much treasure as you want".

Now, one could argue our playgroup just needs to get good and suck up playing Atla Palani a turn late since our decks are in no way calibrated to murderdeath people before turn 10...but I'd argue that's more in favor of a banning, as it means an early Rhystic Study "accidentally" warps the game in a way that the average player doesn't always draw a clear connection to. Not that I personally want it banned - I own like six, and I adore drawing cards for basically zero effort. But I think it is insidiously toxic.
Out of curiousity, would you also consider Nevinyrral's Disk to be game warping? I mean, it gets incredible value if people play into it the same way you're describing them play into Rhystic Study, just continously sticking to their "game plan" even in the face of on board tricks. Or maybe Patron Wizard is tearing things up, since nobody bothers to pay the 1.

The above is only partially in jest. As you note, one can argue quite successfully that the playgroup needs to just "get good" and actually pay the 1 more frequently. That's... not really a point in favor of a ban, that's just how having a game with the ability to learn and different skill levels works. It would be like arguing that Fact or Fiction should be banned, because your group is always creating bad piles.

User avatar
Hawk
Slayer of Threads
Posts: 1166
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Salt Lake City, UT

Post by Hawk » 3 years ago

Wallycaine wrote:
3 years ago
Hawk wrote:
3 years ago
onering wrote:
3 years ago


What sort of decks do your opponents play? If your meta is pretty tuned then paying 1 to prevent the draw may set people back enough to not be worth it, as their best bet is to just try to win quickly so you don't get to actually play the cards, and if they cast 2-3 spells a turn regularly then Rhystic will go off. I'm always a little surprised when I draw more than 1.5 cards per round with Rhystic unless someone is playing 3+ spells a turn or its a high power table. Online, most people just pay the 1 most of the time, then 1 or 2 spells get cast a round without it because they really need to cast it.
"Casual" - definitely not 75%. I'd say that in our meta, players only pay maybe a third of the time because they want to play their decks and not be off-curve doing so. They pay 1 if they have it to spare, but don't change their play to account for the 1 - if their plan was a turn 4 Atla Palani, Nest Tender, they are playing Atla Palani turn four and not paying the one. No one in my playgroup is willing to accept changing plans to Rhystic Study and treating it as a Sphere of Resistance. As a result, Study is drawing a minimum of 2 cards per round until we reach the very end game and is often drawing 3-4 per round. So, Study has a warping effect is slammed out on turn 3 or 4 when the game is developing, and often is a "draw 10+" over the course of the game. Smothering Tithe, costing 2, is even worse - it's effectively "you can have as much treasure as you want".

Now, one could argue our playgroup just needs to get good and suck up playing Atla Palani a turn late since our decks are in no way calibrated to murderdeath people before turn 10...but I'd argue that's more in favor of a banning, as it means an early Rhystic Study "accidentally" warps the game in a way that the average player doesn't always draw a clear connection to. Not that I personally want it banned - I own like six, and I adore drawing cards for basically zero effort. But I think it is insidiously toxic.
Out of curiousity, would you also consider Nevinyrral's Disk to be game warping? I mean, it gets incredible value if people play into it the same way you're describing them play into Rhystic Study, just continously sticking to their "game plan" even in the face of on board tricks. Or maybe Patron Wizard is tearing things up, since nobody bothers to pay the 1.

The above is only partially in jest. As you note, one can argue quite successfully that the playgroup needs to just "get good" and actually pay the 1 more frequently. That's... not really a point in favor of a ban, that's just how having a game with the ability to learn and different skill levels works. It would be like arguing that Fact or Fiction should be banned, because your group is always creating bad piles.
I don't disagree - but this thread has me thinking a lot about Biorhythm.

When I first learned how to play EDH, I was surprised to see Biorhythm banned. My understanding then and now is because it is a card that breaks the game "on accident". As in, a player may include it and not realize until playing that it makes the game super unfun in ways they can't really articulate.

Rhystic Study is like that, in a way that Disk, Patron Wizard, or even Necropotence (the actual best comparison I can think of a 3 CMC enchantment that is effectively "draw infinity" in the hands of a skilled pilot especially versus a bunch of greenhorns) are not - those cards sort of tell you what they are doing, and no one uses them by accident. Study is easy to miss until you lose to it a billion times, and even those playing it may not realize it creates these toxic snowbally effects.

Again, I think I'm overall in favor of players learning to play around it and/or treating it and the players that play it much like they treat GAAIV players who curve STAX effect into more STAX effect...but I see a real argument for banning it and why it is different than other spells too.

Wallycaine
Posts: 764
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Wallycaine » 3 years ago

Hawk wrote:
3 years ago
I don't disagree - but this thread has me thinking a lot about Biorhythm.

When I first learned how to play EDH, I was surprised to see Biorhythm banned. My understanding then and now is because it is a card that breaks the game "on accident". As in, a player may include it and not realize until playing that it makes the game super unfun in ways they can't really articulate.

Rhystic Study is like that, in a way that Disk, Patron Wizard, or even Necropotence (the actual best comparison I can think of a 3 CMC enchantment that is effectively "draw infinity" in the hands of a skilled pilot especially versus a bunch of greenhorns) are not - those cards sort of tell you what they are doing, and no one uses them by accident. Study is easy to miss until you lose to it a billion times, and even those playing it may not realize it creates these toxic snowbally effects.

Again, I think I'm overall in favor of players learning to play around it and/or treating it and the players that play it much like they treat GAAIV players who curve STAX effect into more STAX effect...but I see a real argument for banning it and why it is different than other spells too.
That's interesting, because that was never my understanding of why Biorhythm was banned. The way I understood it, it fell into the same catergory as Sway of the Stars, Worldfire, and other such cards in creating an "abrupt end to the game regardless of what came before". Some of that was due to the ability to "accidentally" include those cards, but an important element of the reasoning was that they basically immediately ended the game, often unsatisfyingly. Rhystic Study doesn't do that, and in fact can lengthen the game. So that's where I feel it falls short of meeting the same criteria as Biorhythm.

onering
Posts: 1227
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 3 years ago

Biorythm et all were partially banned for accidentally breaking the game in addition to what WallyCaine said. Where Hawk is mistaken is that accidentally breaking the game doesn't mean someone plays a card knowing exactly what it will do and then his opponents play very poorly in response and the person running the card gets more out of it than he expected. Accidentally ruining the game is reserved for either cards that will randomly combo with a bunch of things unintentionally, and especially big splashy spells that look fun, spells that look like the sort of big plays that make battlecruiser style commander fun, but they just end up ruining things when played. Biorythm accidentally ruins games because a player may see an 8 Mana sorcery that works based on creatures and say "this might be neat in my tokens deck" and then at some point in the game realize they can cast it and they are the only one with creatures and they just win on the spot, or they cast it as intended when everyone has a few creatures and they have 10 and find out that the effect is really crappy to have resolve. What looked like silly fun or an epic play on paper turns out to be the equivalent of flipping the table, whether it wins or let's the game limp on ruined it feels bad. Nobody puts in Rhystic Study thinking it's going to be an epic play and then gets disappointed when they draw a bunch of cards from it,they put it in hoping it slows people down a bit and draws them some cards then get pleasantly surprised when nobody pays and they draw a ton.

umtiger
Posts: 394
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by umtiger » 3 years ago

We have all seen Rhystic Study do a lot and do nothing. A lot is depending on the players sitting at the table. Rhystic Study is a reasonable speed bump for people doing ridiculous things.

I know people have plans to "play on curve," but in most games I have played at all power-levels people rarely play on curve. In most games, people have mana to spare. Many people have 4 mana by turn 3 or 7 mana by turn 5 and it gets even more gross from there.

Rhystic Study isn't in the same class of cards with Biorhythm or Sway of the Stars (e.g. cards that invalidate most of the game actions up that point). I also don't think you can make a case to ban it on power-level. Does it also immediately make the game about itself? I also don't think so because a late or even mid-game Rhystic Study can have little or no effect.

Mystic Remora's 4 tax is definitely more difficult to play around...but your opponents could just play creatures. Sit down at the wrong table with the fish and it's not that great anymore. If you're going to sit down at a cEDH table, powerful cards are just par for the course.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

umtiger wrote:
3 years ago
Mystic Remora's tax is definitely more difficult to play around...but your opponents could just play creatures. Sit down at the wrong table with the fish and it's not that great anymore. If you're going to sit down at a cEDH table, powerful cards are just par for the course.
It's not like there are not a ton of casual decks that are creature light and turn remora into a free win for U.

That happens with other cards like Aura Shards or Bruna, Light of Alabaster vs. enchantress decks, but "non-creature spell" is quite a bit more general.

Wallycaine
Posts: 764
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Wallycaine » 3 years ago

pokken wrote:
3 years ago
umtiger wrote:
3 years ago
Mystic Remora's tax is definitely more difficult to play around...but your opponents could just play creatures. Sit down at the wrong table with the fish and it's not that great anymore. If you're going to sit down at a cEDH table, powerful cards are just par for the course.
It's not like there are not a ton of casual decks that are creature light and turn remora into a free win for U.

That happens with other cards like Aura Shards or Bruna, Light of Alabaster vs. enchantress decks, but "non-creature spell" is quite a bit more general.
Does drawing 1 card per spell the non-creature player plays for... what, 2 maybe 3 turns automatically turn into a win? Especially if the non-creature player plays smart and sticks to playing their more expensive spells until the remora is gone or they're going off?

UnNamed1
Posts: 146
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by UnNamed1 » 3 years ago

None of the tax effects really need banned IMO. It is honestly just another way to mess with resources. Sure it can slow the game down, but that can also result in Rhystic being useless. Only when people aren't playing smart and recognizing when they need to pay the taxes, or when they can play their spells is the problem.

For example, a Reclamation Sage hit the field, and they mainly had a choice between my Mana Crypt or someone's Rhystic. They choose the Crypt, I warned them it wasn't the proper target, but this is a lower power group and "expensive card = power" so bye bye Crypt. Rhystic proceeded to draw the other play everything he needed and locked down and won the game 2 turns later.

Decision making is an important part of magic, and many don't seem to realize it. You play the game how you want, but when you make incorrect decisions and then lose because of those decisions, you can't blame the cards.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 3 years ago

Wallycaine wrote:
3 years ago
Does drawing 1 card per spell the non-creature player plays for... what, 2 maybe 3 turns automatically turn into a win? Especially if the non-creature player plays smart and sticks to playing their more expensive spells until the remora is gone or they're going off?
In my experience it does one of two major things:
1) Drives the non-creature heavy person out of the game entirely (u: kill target player) by making them give up turns as long as you feel like paying for it)

2) People just sling spells and feed the fish and you draw 5 or 6 cards for 1U, which creates a high likelihood of winning

2a) One of the guys is Sai, Master Thopterist or some other stormy deck and they let you draw a billion cards and you definitely win.

Every so often you get an entire table colluding to not feed the fish, happens most in CEDH. In casual people just let it rip because it's not worth being set back so hard to them.

Depends on the table and the deck, and sometimes it just does nothing. But it's definitely been the exception for me; the failure mode has typically been 1U: draw 3 cards, which is not busted but still quite a ways above rate.

The entire table taking two turns off of casting non-creature spells for 1U is definitely better, as I'm still casting spells during that time.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Rules and Philosophy”