Expropriate

User avatar
toctheyounger
Posts: 3984
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post by toctheyounger » 3 years ago

ISBPathfinder wrote:
3 years ago
I personally think that relying on a social contract for people to not be %$#% to each other is a bad concept. Anyone who disagrees with this makes everyone have a bad time.
Basically the way it is now you have to sit through this at least once to know how much it sucks before you can say 'ok let's not ever do that again ever'. More if your group is transient. And that's where the social contract/rule 0 thing doesn't work for cards like this.
Malazan Decks of the Fallen
| Shadowthrone/Lazav | Raest/Yidris | T'iam / The Ur-Dragon |

User avatar
materpillar
the caterpillar
Posts: 1299
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Ohio

Post by materpillar » 3 years ago

Dunharrow wrote:
3 years ago
T&N targets I see the most often:
Avenger of Zendikar and Craterhoof Behemoth. StP is not going to save you from this most of the time.
I think the problem here is Craterhoof Behemoth not Tooth and Nail.
Dunharrow wrote:
3 years ago
Sometimes better than T&N is not really an argument for banning since T&N is not being banned.
I have a rather incredible dislike of cards that are immensely difficult to interact with outside of having Counterspell. Most of the creatures T&N pops out can be interacted with in a meaningful non-counterspell way. Hence I see Expropriate as way more of a problem.

T&N can be used in a huge variety of ways that are fair and interesting. Expropriate cannot.

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

Post by onering » 3 years ago

materpillar wrote:
3 years ago
Dunharrow wrote:
3 years ago
T&N targets I see the most often:
Avenger of Zendikar and Craterhoof Behemoth. StP is not going to save you from this most of the time.
I think the problem here is Craterhoof Behemoth not Tooth and Nail.
Dunharrow wrote:
3 years ago
Sometimes better than T&N is not really an argument for banning since T&N is not being banned.
I have a rather incredible dislike of cards that are immensely difficult to interact with outside of having Counterspell. Most of the creatures T&N pops out can be interacted with in a meaningful non-counterspell way. Hence I see Expropriate as way more of a problem.

T&N can be used in a huge variety of ways that are fair and interesting. Expropriate cannot.
Correct. T&N causes more problems than Expropriate, because it so often does just fetch up instant win combos (of which there are several, Avenger Hoof is actually a bit vulnerable but is mono green). It does have a more "fair" use in just grabbing a couple bombs, and that's a very EDH thing to do. Thus, despite it being a problem card, it has too much fair play potential to be banned. Hulk getting unbanned was the nail in the coffin of it being banned (they are similar in that they are both problem cards that are green, cost similar, and tutor for instant combo wins, but have fair uses and are also used for Timmy plays, but Hulk is stronger, so if the stronger effect is unbanned the weaker one that is otherwise similar won't be banned).

Expropriate's baselin (Blatant+Time Walk) isn't broken. Its a strong, swingy, Timmyriffic 9 mana play that doesn't win the game. If the table plays right, its beatable. T&N grabbing a couple of bombs that don't combo, lets say both Ulamogs or two big beefy dudes that also produce a ton of value like Jin Gitaxias + Great Whale, is similar. Played fair, T&N produces the same sort of advantage as 1 time vote Expropriate. They both dramatically alter the board in favor of the caster while conferring other advantage (a turn for Expropriate, whatever bonuses the critters bring to the table with T&N). 9 mana spells shouldn't just win the game, but they should put you in a position to win the game, or at least even the odds if you were behind. Expropriate with on Time vote when you are far behind is just going to get you back in the game. Expropriate with 1 time vote when everything is even is going to put you in the lead and give you a strong shot at winning. Expropriate with 1 time vote when you are already in the best position to win will likely win you the game, but not guaranteed. That's how a 9 mana spell should play out in those scenarios. The problem comes when casting that spell in any of those scenarios results in "you win if nobody has an answer." T&N actually does that. Expropriate with people other than the caster voting Time tends to do that. The difference is that whether T&N is an acceptable Timmy power play or a groan inducing combo win is entirely up to the caster, while whether Expropriate is an acceptable Timmy power play or a groan inducing extra turn fiesta is entirely up to the table. As an opponent, you have more agency in determining whether Expropriate ruins the game. Its the rare card where the social contract can actually effect the game (you actually vote on whether the card is going to be bullshiat or whether its going to just be what you should expect at 9 mana!).

Jibsea
Posts: 8
Joined: 3 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Jibsea » 3 years ago

I'm with Dunharrow. It's a 9 mana card that often, though not always, wins the game. Sure, extra turns suck to sit through and no one likes their stuff getting stolen. If your playgroup doesn't like either of those things, your probably not playing it anyways, or you won't be in the future.

People who have been playing commander for awhile now get bored of seeing the same ol' wincons again and again. They roll their eyes at Craterhoof Behemoth or Tooth and Nail because those cards tend to end games and they're so good at what they do, so efficient, that many people looking to win play them. I have no problem with them - people will gravitate to what's efficient in terms of wincons, unless they're building jank or playing for fun and don't care about winning, or have a theme they're attempting to stick to, etc.

Big splashy 9 mana spells that win the game is what EDH is all about for my playgroup. This card fits right in.

Charles_M_Wolf
Posts: 2
Joined: 10 months ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Charles_M_Wolf » 10 months ago

Expropriate should 1000% be banned, it is far more demoralizing then any card currently on the banned list.

its appropriately costed, but it is way too easy to cheat in, and its effect is way too strong.

people can lose after casting it, but generally that only happens because the rest of the table chooses to turn that player into public enemy number 1 and spend all their resources into immediately removing that player, assuming that player does not win with the 1-4 extra turns they get.

this is a card that should have never been printed in the first place. given how if its not countered, you basically either give up a permanent of the player castings choice, or they get extra turns.

even 1 extra turn can end games, but up to 4 with one casting? and its not on the ban list, baffles me.

Charles_M_Wolf
Posts: 2
Joined: 10 months ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Charles_M_Wolf » 10 months ago

onering wrote:
3 years ago
materpillar wrote:
3 years ago
Dunharrow wrote:
3 years ago
T&N targets I see the most often:
Avenger of Zendikar and Craterhoof Behemoth. StP is not going to save you from this most of the time.
I think the problem here is Craterhoof Behemoth not Tooth and Nail.
Dunharrow wrote:
3 years ago
Sometimes better than T&N is not really an argument for banning since T&N is not being banned.
I have a rather incredible dislike of cards that are immensely difficult to interact with outside of having Counterspell. Most of the creatures T&N pops out can be interacted with in a meaningful non-counterspell way. Hence I see Expropriate as way more of a problem.

T&N can be used in a huge variety of ways that are fair and interesting. Expropriate cannot.
Correct. T&N causes more problems than Expropriate, because it so often does just fetch up instant win combos (of which there are several, Avenger Hoof is actually a bit vulnerable but is mono green). It does have a more "fair" use in just grabbing a couple bombs, and that's a very EDH thing to do. Thus, despite it being a problem card, it has too much fair play potential to be banned. Hulk getting unbanned was the nail in the coffin of it being banned (they are similar in that they are both problem cards that are green, cost similar, and tutor for instant combo wins, but have fair uses and are also used for Timmy plays, but Hulk is stronger, so if the stronger effect is unbanned the weaker one that is otherwise similar won't be banned).
yes, T&N is more powerful then Expropriate when it comes to direct wins, but the fact is that there are more points of interaction, with what comes out from it, and because its often used to dig up instant win combos, actually makes it less demoralizing then Expropriate.

onering wrote:
3 years ago
Expropriate's baselin (Blatant+Time Walk) isn't broken. Its a strong, swingy, Timmyriffic 9 mana play that doesn't win the game. If the table plays right, its beatable. T&N grabbing a couple of bombs that don't combo, lets say both Ulamogs or two big beefy dudes that also produce a ton of value like Jin Gitaxias + Great Whale, is similar. Played fair, T&N produces the same sort of advantage as 1 time vote Expropriate. They both dramatically alter the board in favor of the caster while conferring other advantage (a turn for Expropriate, whatever bonuses the critters bring to the table with T&N). 9 mana spells shouldn't just win the game, but they should put you in a position to win the game, or at least even the odds if you were behind. Expropriate with on Time vote when you are far behind is just going to get you back in the game. Expropriate with 1 time vote when everything is even is going to put you in the lead and give you a strong shot at winning. Expropriate with 1 time vote when you are already in the best position to win will likely win you the game, but not guaranteed. That's how a 9 mana spell should play out in those scenarios. The problem comes when casting that spell in any of those scenarios results in "you win if nobody has an answer." T&N actually does that. Expropriate with people other than the caster voting Time tends to do that. The difference is that whether T&N is an acceptable Timmy power play or a groan inducing combo win is entirely up to the caster, while whether Expropriate is an acceptable Timmy power play or a groan inducing extra turn fiesta is entirely up to the table. As an opponent, you have more agency in determining whether Expropriate ruins the game. Its the rare card where the social contract can actually effect the game (you actually vote on whether the card is going to be bullshiat or whether its going to just be what you should expect at 9 mana!).
it is broken, in that it can demoralize pods instantly by it being played. your talking about a card that can be cheated in easy enough to give players up to 4 extra turns, or the BEST permanents of their opponents boards. it is the very fact that it is not an instant win that makes it needing to be banned. if you look at the things people hate the most in commander pods, its not the infinite combo win, its having something like an infinite combo WITHOUT the win condition. its having infinite turns but no way to use them. this card, Solely on its own, does not win the game, but puts the player in an infinitely dominant position that takes almost any pod focusing that player down immediately to prevent them winning. it turns what can be a 4 player FFA into a 3 v 1 in order to prevent the win. when you get the infinite combo that ends the game instead, players are just like 'okay next game'. expropriate just makes a prolonged loss for the rest of the pod, it makes the player who played it a darksouls boss, where the rest of the party can only struggle, if the boss did not immediately bring its big weapon down on their heads.

it should be banned because its an unfun, bad card.

ChazA4
Posts: 21
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by ChazA4 » 10 months ago

Charles_M_Wolf wrote:
10 months ago
it should be banned because its an unfun, bad card.
If we went with that logic, Winter Orb, Armageddon, and the mass Chaos Warp spell that I can't remember the name of for the life of me would be banned too, as well as Worldfire remaining banned.
Yeah, it sucks when it gets pulled off, but generally one of two things happens afterwards(sometimes both): 1)the caster is eyeballed pretty heavily for quite a while, perhaps eating some hate more often than normal, and 2)they are informed that such things are, as you say, 'bad times'.
But onering called it, and Sheldon seconded the thought with Worldfire's unbanning; it's a big, expensive spell that is part of the reason we still play EDH. You would never see this type of spell in T2 or other 20 life formats. This format is Timmy's playground, and that reason also makes big spells a bit of a draw.

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

Post by DirkGently » 10 months ago

ChazA4 wrote:
10 months ago
If we went with that logic, Winter Orb, Armageddon, and the mass Chaos Warp spell that I can't remember the name of for the life of me would be banned too, as well as Worldfire remaining banned.
Yeah, it sucks when it gets pulled off, but generally one of two things happens afterwards(sometimes both): 1)the caster is eyeballed pretty heavily for quite a while, perhaps eating some hate more often than normal, and 2)they are informed that such things are, as you say, 'bad times'.
But onering called it, and Sheldon seconded the thought with Worldfire's unbanning; it's a big, expensive spell that is part of the reason we still play EDH. You would never see this type of spell in T2 or other 20 life formats. This format is Timmy's playground, and that reason also makes big spells a bit of a draw.
I think there's a pretty big difference between expropriate and winter orb. Winter orb doesn't really see play outside of cEDH metas or nearly so, at least in my experience. Warp World and Worldfire don't see much play at all. Expropriate is a LOT more likely to come down in a casual meta.

The aim of the banlist, as I understand it, isn't just to ban the most annoying cards, otherwise many stax pieces would probably make the cut. The difference is that those cards LOOK annoying. No timmy ever looked at winter orb and went "oh wow that looks so fun!" If a card isn't seeing play at casual commander tables, there's no need to bother banning it. Cards like emrakul, grislebrand, prime time, paradox engine, sylvan primordial, etc. are more the wheelhouse of the banlist because they were widely played at casual tables before they were banned, because they "look fun".

Of course, there are many cards on the banlist that don't fit that criteria - those are generally what I would consider legacy (not the format) cards. Would Balance get played at casual tables in 2023 if unbanned? We'll never know because it's been banned since 2005. Most of those cards will stay on the banlist forever because there's little upside to unbanning them, and potentially a big blowblack if they end up causing a lot of problems. Maybe one day the RC will take a chance on my beautiful Library of Alexandria....but probably not :cry:
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
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
Maybe one day the RC will take a chance on my beautiful Library of Alexandria....but probably not
maybe when Timetwister hits $10k ;)

ChazA4
Posts: 21
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by ChazA4 » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
Cards like emrakul, grislebrand, prime time, paradox engine, sylvan primordial, etc. are more the wheelhouse of the banlist because they were widely played at casual tables before they were banned, because they "look fun".
Are you attacking me? lol I seriously can't believe Paradox Engine took so long to get banned, even as I added to the problem by using it.

Fair points all around, but your point of 'looking fun' is again why some/most/all? of these big splashy cards that can generate 'unfun' results is why they will likely remain. Obviously, things will change per future developed cards, but overall this format is Timmy's playground, 'looks fun' cards and not.

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

Post by onering » 9 months ago

Charles_M_Wolf wrote:
10 months ago
onering wrote:
3 years ago
materpillar wrote:
3 years ago

I think the problem here is Craterhoof Behemoth not Tooth and Nail.


I have a rather incredible dislike of cards that are immensely difficult to interact with outside of having Counterspell. Most of the creatures T&N pops out can be interacted with in a meaningful non-counterspell way. Hence I see Expropriate as way more of a problem.

T&N can be used in a huge variety of ways that are fair and interesting. Expropriate cannot.
Correct. T&N causes more problems than Expropriate, because it so often does just fetch up instant win combos (of which there are several, Avenger Hoof is actually a bit vulnerable but is mono green). It does have a more "fair" use in just grabbing a couple bombs, and that's a very EDH thing to do. Thus, despite it being a problem card, it has too much fair play potential to be banned. Hulk getting unbanned was the nail in the coffin of it being banned (they are similar in that they are both problem cards that are green, cost similar, and tutor for instant combo wins, but have fair uses and are also used for Timmy plays, but Hulk is stronger, so if the stronger effect is unbanned the weaker one that is otherwise similar won't be banned).
yes, T&N is more powerful then Expropriate when it comes to direct wins, but the fact is that there are more points of interaction, with what comes out from it, and because its often used to dig up instant win combos, actually makes it less demoralizing then Expropriate.

onering wrote:
3 years ago
Expropriate's baselin (Blatant+Time Walk) isn't broken. Its a strong, swingy, Timmyriffic 9 mana play that doesn't win the game. If the table plays right, its beatable. T&N grabbing a couple of bombs that don't combo, lets say both Ulamogs or two big beefy dudes that also produce a ton of value like Jin Gitaxias + Great Whale, is similar. Played fair, T&N produces the same sort of advantage as 1 time vote Expropriate. They both dramatically alter the board in favor of the caster while conferring other advantage (a turn for Expropriate, whatever bonuses the critters bring to the table with T&N). 9 mana spells shouldn't just win the game, but they should put you in a position to win the game, or at least even the odds if you were behind. Expropriate with on Time vote when you are far behind is just going to get you back in the game. Expropriate with 1 time vote when everything is even is going to put you in the lead and give you a strong shot at winning. Expropriate with 1 time vote when you are already in the best position to win will likely win you the game, but not guaranteed. That's how a 9 mana spell should play out in those scenarios. The problem comes when casting that spell in any of those scenarios results in "you win if nobody has an answer." T&N actually does that. Expropriate with people other than the caster voting Time tends to do that. The difference is that whether T&N is an acceptable Timmy power play or a groan inducing combo win is entirely up to the caster, while whether Expropriate is an acceptable Timmy power play or a groan inducing extra turn fiesta is entirely up to the table. As an opponent, you have more agency in determining whether Expropriate ruins the game. Its the rare card where the social contract can actually effect the game (you actually vote on whether the card is going to be bullshiat or whether its going to just be what you should expect at 9 mana!).
it is broken, in that it can demoralize pods instantly by it being played. your talking about a card that can be cheated in easy enough to give players up to 4 extra turns, or the BEST permanents of their opponents boards. it is the very fact that it is not an instant win that makes it needing to be banned. if you look at the things people hate the most in commander pods, its not the infinite combo win, its having something like an infinite combo WITHOUT the win condition. its having infinite turns but no way to use them. this card, Solely on its own, does not win the game, but puts the player in an infinitely dominant position that takes almost any pod focusing that player down immediately to prevent them winning. it turns what can be a 4 player FFA into a 3 v 1 in order to prevent the win. when you get the infinite combo that ends the game instead, players are just like 'okay next game'. expropriate just makes a prolonged loss for the rest of the pod, it makes the player who played it a darksouls boss, where the rest of the party can only struggle, if the boss did not immediately bring its big weapon down on their heads.

it should be banned because its an unfun, bad card.

If Expropriate resolves and everyone votes money, it's just Blatant Thievery with and extra turn stapled on. That's pretty good, bordering on great, but far from broken. Naming money is absolutely the correct play unless something you have will ensure the caster wins if it gets stolen.

This baseline, which the table has full power to control, is on the same level as T&N for two Ulamogs. I doubt anyone but the whiniest anti theft players would be calling for a ban if had no voting and just stole something from every player and granted an extra turn.

With Expropriate, the table can ensure this is the outcome. The table controls whether Expropriate is just a big fun Timmy play or a miserable instant win. The caster controls how T&N plays. Does it feel bad to choose the lesser of two evils? Sure, but it's all about perspective, because you should be looking at it as forcing the caster to take the lesser benefit.

Seriously, either Expropriate is fine or it needs a ban along with T&N. There really isn't "more interaction" against T&N because you can just vote money then kill whatever the caster steals, and you can even use a sac outlet if you only have one thing worth stealing.

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

Post by pokken » 9 months ago

onering wrote:
9 months ago
This baseline, which the table has full power to control, is on the same level as T&N for two Ulamogs
I disagree with your comparison of Tooth and Nail because Tooth and Nail is a card that is dependent on how good the cards are in your deck *and* typically dies to creature removal.

Tooth and Nail for Craw Giant and Tornado Elemental is an option here :P

I'd also add that an extra turn + a Blatant Thievery on the same card is often greater than the sum of its parts; it's not Time Stretch where it's completely dependent on what you're playing, it's "get the three best things on the table forever and take an extra turn" -- and often is jacking the commanders from all three players! That's one of the reasons it is a completely crap experience.

Recovering from a resolved Tooth and Nail typically requires two removal spells of the most common type and sometimes some kinda answer for Craterhoof Behemoth (but that's more of an indictment of Craterhoof Behemoth, which has a lot more in common with Expropriate than Tooth and Nail does---winning on the stack).

Recovering from expropriate even in the best state requires 3 removal spells and having to soak whatever value was accrued during that extra turn.

In general comparing tutors with time warps and theft effects is not a good comparison I don't think.

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

Post by BeneTleilax » 9 months ago

Yeah, T&N has fair uses, which has kept it off the banlist, and when it's not, it and Thoracle are probably the most (in)famous instant wins in the format. Expropriate *isn't* technically a win, so it dodges around rule-0 conversations at the start of games. It adds nothing of value and further pushes the dominance of blue. It's not the end of the world, I won't flip the table if someone plays it, but the format would be better with it gone.

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

Post by onering » 9 months ago

So two common removal spells wouldn't render Expropriate with 1 time and 3 money votes much weaker? Yeah, if you can kill a dude's combo T&N isn't so bad, but the same is true if you kill the two best permanents stolen.

People can downplay T&N all they want, but the same arguments apply to Expropriate, except that the table controls whether Expropriate is bs and the caster decides whether T&N is nonsense.

When the chips are on the table, which is more likely to win if it resolves, a T&N or Expropriate with everyone voting money? Best case scenario T&N grabs goofy trash and nobody has anything great for Expropriate to steal (which is fairly possible since synergy matters so much these days). Worst case scenario, Expropriate gets an extra turn and three really good things while T&N is a one card infinite combo. Medium scenario, Expropriate grabs a few decent things and and extra turn while T&N grabs two bombs that threaten to win the game. In the best case scenario, Expropriate is better. In the medium case, their equal. In the worst case T&N is better.

These are really equal cards and the difference is up to preference. I get it, people don't like theft effects and like to lie to themselves about how realistic it is for an obvious problem card to get used to do goofy low power crap. You could do a lot of fun crap with Golos, I built a deck that used him to windmill slam legends from Legends and other overcosted jank because it was funny to actually have a chance at winning with a literal pile of trash. That didn't change the fact that Golos was cancer.

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

Post by ISBPathfinder » 9 months ago

@onering both can be toxic but I don't see how they are the same at all. The axis of interaction is so much higher against T&N. Don't get me wrong both are lame cards but I would much rather play against T&N but I tend to play with interaction and there is a much higher chance of having interaction for T&N than expropriate.

If I am being honest though I almost can't even be mad at these lame expensive cards when we have some really broken legal stuff that is breaking the game for 2 mana right now. I still would like to see some of these lame expensive cards banned but they are down my list right now behind a lot of other busted crap right now.
[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 » 9 months ago

@onering Personally I find T&N for a combo to be less egregious since you have to commit to playing that combo and a all-in-one tutor for it in your deck. It's the same reason I don't really have many problems with consult oracle - the people who are playing it are not trying to play the games I want to play in the first place.

Expropriate I think is more insidious because it doesn't look as obviously bad. Most people will mention that easy-to-assemble combos are not something they enjoy in commander.

That said, I think extra turns is fairly well known as an obnoxious thing at this point, and expropriate doesn't see TOOO much play, presumably for that reason.

I do think the voting aspect makes the card more obnoxious than a blatant thievery + time warp (though I 100% agree with @pokken's assessment that the sum of those two is much greater than its parts). You can have players that refuse to give up their permanents, plus it just feels bad to have to choose to give away your thing. Also, while I guess it's a minor note, it makes the card stronger versus sac effects, for example. Versus Blatant Thievery, if you sacrifice the target in response, they don't get anything. You can sac your best permanent versus expropriate but then they just get the second best thing.

I don't think the format is suffering horribly from expropriate because I don't see it that often, but I do think it's skirting the line of what an acceptable amount of usage for a really unfun card is. Honestly I'd be pretty happy if WotC never printed the words "take an extra turn" on any card ever again.
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
pokken
Posts: 6276
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 9 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
9 months ago
I don't think the format is suffering horribly from expropriate because I don't see it that often, but I do think it's skirting the line of what an acceptable amount of usage for a really unfun card is. Honestly I'd be pretty happy if WotC never printed the words "take an extra turn" on any card ever again.
Agreed that it's not really a blight; most people have moved on. Part of that is that there's a lot higher ratio of Swan Song in the game these days and it's a massive blowout :P

I'm also kinda over extra turns non-deterministically in commander as well. It's fine in a competitive heads up game but man in a 4 player game it can be bad. I had to take 5 in a row the other day to try to eke out a win and it was not the best, and made me rethink the deck :P
onering wrote:
9 months ago
When the chips are on the table, which is more likely to win if it resolves, a T&N or Expropriate with everyone voting money? Best case scenario T&N grabs goofy trash and nobody has anything great for Expropriate to steal (which is fairly possible since synergy matters so much these days). Worst case scenario, Expropriate gets an extra turn and three really good things while T&N is a one card infinite combo. Medium scenario, Expropriate grabs a few decent things and and extra turn while T&N grabs two bombs that threaten to win the game. In the best case scenario, Expropriate is better. In the medium case, their equal. In the worst case T&N is better.
I think the most likely scenarios with each card, in a reasonably powered meta, are:
1) someone T&N's for two huge value pieces and someone kills one of them, or breaks up the combo, and life moves on.
2) Expropriate - at least one numbnuts has a huge card that is instant death on the table, so has to vote time, so the person gets 2 extra turns and a double theft, and plays 2 extra turns out which takes forever and the game sucks and they almost surely win. Because they're playing Expropriate they have other time magic, so another Time Stretch hits. And because they're the kinda guy to play Expropriate , they probably have other stack based win condititions, but hey no one was interacting anyway.

Scenario 2 is by far what happens for me the most...but it's not that often anymore thankfully.

Still, I would shed no tears if Expropriate was banned. Tooth and Nail I honestly wouldn't cry over either, but I think it's a *significantly* more fair card. Creatures die to removal. Extra turns don't.

ConstantMists
Posts: 54
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Charlotte, NC

Post by ConstantMists » 9 months ago

It's 9 mana at sorcery speed, so I have no issues playing it or facing it. In my playgroup, people are fine with Cyclonic Rift winning the game for 6 mana at instant speed right before their turn so I will continue to play this. I am a firm believer that Cyclonic Rift should be banned long before Expropriate . Talk about winning out of nowhere.

That all said I won't cast this without at least 1 counter in my hand. If I'm going to spend 9 to try to win the game, I need to ensure that: A) no one counters it, and B) no one copies it. One of these resolving is bad, more than one is torture for those that aren't resolving one.
Current Commander decks: Zurgo Helmsmasher - Borborgymos Enraged - Elenda, the Dusk Rose - Doran, the Seige Tower - Sliver Overlord - Yarok, the Desecrated - Scion of the Ur-Dragon - Hazoret the Fervent - Purphoros, God of the Forge - Gisela, Blade of Goldnight - Marath, Will of the Wild - Ramos, Dragon Engine - Ruhan of the Fomori - Narset, Enlightened Master - Kokusho, the Evening Star - Mizzix of the Izmagnus - Dragonsoul Knight (Pauper) - Kalemne, Disciple of Iroas (Precon)

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

Post by pokken » 9 months ago

ConstantMists wrote:
9 months ago
It's 9 mana at sorcery speed, so I have no issues playing it or facing it. In my playgroup, people are fine with Cyclonic Rift winning the game for 6 mana at instant speed right before their turn so I will continue to play this. I am a firm believer that Cyclonic Rift should be banned long before Expropriate . Talk about winning out of nowhere.
Yeah play groups with a decent chunk of countermagic at higher power level always seem to be fine with Expropriate because it's a lot worse in a meta that plays Swan Song.

Cyclonic Rift is 7 mana, and the thing to remember about it is that if Cyclonic Rift wins the game immediately on untap, then Akroma's Will would have won it for 4 and Venser, the Sojourner for 5 (or a single removal spell, if what you're worried about is anti-combat stax like Sphere of Safety)

If you let someone pass the turn without spending any mana, and have lethal attacks on the entire board, then resolve a Cyclonic Rift, you deserve what you get -- people can still kill some of your attackers and stop it.

I understand complaining about Cyclonic Rift less and less these days. I've started cutting it from decks because it underperforms consistently; if you have a board state that will for sure win after resolving a Cyclonic Rift it probably would have won anyway. And if you just rift defensively, people are going to rebuild super fast nowadays.

The other day someone defenisvely rifted against an Etali, Primal Conqueror // Etali, Primal Sickness deck. Etali just replayed his mana rocks and then replayed etali and back to square one :P

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

Post by ISBPathfinder » 9 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
9 months ago
@onering Personally I find T&N for a combo to be less egregious since you have to commit to playing that combo and a all-in-one tutor for it in your deck. It's the same reason I don't really have many problems with consult oracle - the people who are playing it are not trying to play the games I want to play in the first place.

Expropriate I think is more insidious because it doesn't look as obviously bad. Most people will mention that easy-to-assemble combos are not something they enjoy in commander.

That said, I think extra turns is fairly well known as an obnoxious thing at this point, and expropriate doesn't see TOOO much play, presumably for that reason.

I do think the voting aspect makes the card more obnoxious than a blatant thievery + time warp (though I 100% agree with @pokken's assessment that the sum of those two is much greater than its parts). You can have players that refuse to give up their permanents, plus it just feels bad to have to choose to give away your thing. Also, while I guess it's a minor note, it makes the card stronger versus sac effects, for example. Versus Blatant Thievery, if you sacrifice the target in response, they don't get anything. You can sac your best permanent versus expropriate but then they just get the second best thing.

I don't think the format is suffering horribly from expropriate because I don't see it that often, but I do think it's skirting the line of what an acceptable amount of usage for a really unfun card is. Honestly I'd be pretty happy if WotC never printed the words "take an extra turn" on any card ever again.
Its also worth mentioning that the more casual the player the more that there is almost a 100% chance of them choosing extra turns as well. Its funny because a lot of times their steal options aren't amazing but holy hell if you steal a land or some irrelevant creature from them all hell is gonna break loose.

My experience has always been that the best player at the table is going to get absolutely railroaded regardless of what happens by it but it isn't necessarily game over. Its just game over for the best player assuming they aren't playing blue.

I never really understood the cyc rift argument. If someone has super tons of lethal and they cyc rift how is it different than if they had just dropped some big overrun effect? If they built up to the point that cyc rift lets them close the game out immediately then everyone kind of failed in that nobody is holding up responses or wrathed the board facing down 120+ power of board position. But I am also the kind of player that likes to build the decks that doesn't care if you offensive cyc rift me. For an offensive cyc rift to work in the first place a lot of people opted to proactively play and not run answers. Its not like that card single handedly or even 2 card combo wins the game. I get that its an option for offense and defense but with the problematic combo cards we are facing down right now I just can't come up with half a complaint about cyc rift right now.
[EDH] Vadrok List (Suicide Chads) | Evelyn List (Vamp Mill) | Sanwell List | Danitha List | Indominus List | Ratadrabik List

User avatar
WizardMN
Posts: 1963
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 124
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Twin Cities
Contact:

Post by WizardMN » 9 months ago

I just played against a player who cast Expropriate on Turn 5. One player, for some reason, voted Time (which led to 2 time votes including the casters vote). They used the first extra turn to cast Omniscience into Kozilek, Butcher of Truth which basically just ended the game.

The second extra turn allowed them to attack right away. Or, it would have if we hadn't all scooped. But I don't think there was any getting out of that no matter what. I do think the extra time vote was absolutely relevant to a certain degree especially since they did take one of my lands to put me down to 4 which would have made any interaction very difficult.

I don't really know whether I think the card should be banned or if it is a big problem but it is on the edge at least. At worst, it is a Time Warp after stealing 3 permanents which is pretty damn good and as soon as someone gives them even another turn it becomes pretty close to insurmountable.

yeti1069
Posts: 1178
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by yeti1069 » 8 months ago

My problem with Expropriate is that it's such an enormous upgrade over Blatant Thievery for only +2 mana (and one less in the cost!). It not targeting for the thefts really annoys me.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Rules and Philosophy”