Expropriate

[ISBPathfinder]

Here I am, stirring the pot again. I often hear negative feedback about this spell. If not for social elements I feel like I would see and hear about it more. Its generally not used in cEDH level things because its too slow for them. This card tends to not need any board setup and the way to stop it is usually a counterspell. Effects like Brand, Brooding Saurian, and Stranglehold tend to not be popularly run effects due to how narrow they tend to be.

I didn't see a thread for it so, weeee another thread it is.

[Mimicvat]

I dislike extra turns, dislike powerful effects that can only be interacted with on the stack, dislike no setup "win conditions" as I've seen cards like this described as, and dislike big ramp payoffs. Not hard to extrapolate my stance on this card from all of that.

Despite all that, if it just didn't let the caster vote to get an automatic turn, that would see me arguing against its current soft ban in our playgroup.

[Mookie]

I'm not a fan of Expropriate, but I don't know if I would call for it to be banned. As a general rule, I really dislike extra turn spells in EDH. One of my key ethos for the format is 'let people play their cards', and if one player is going to take a bunch of extra turns, that stops the other players from meaningfully participating in the game.

On the other hand, I'm perfectly fine with Blatant Thievery. Blue doesn't have a lot of good answers to resolved artifacts and enchantments, and 7 mana seems pretty fair for this effect. It's not necessarily fun to have your stuff stolen... but it does create interesting board states, and the fact that it can only steal one thing per opponent means it isn't that oppressive to a single player. (I'm also of the belief that it's always perfectly reasonable to beat people with their own cards)

If I were to argue against Expropriate, I'd call out that its cost of 9 mana is misleading - you're always going to get at least one extra turn with it, which means that it is effectively free to cast (assuming you can cast it in the first place). It's probably one of the strongest finishers blue has, comparable to Insurrection and Craterhoof Behemoth... but while it may almost always win the game, it also takes significantly longer to do so than its alternatives, which sort of draws out the misery. I'll also call out that there isn't a lot of counterplay to it other than countermagic, which is certainly annoying for non-blue decks.

On the other hand, if I were to argue for Expropriate, I would call out that 9 mana is a lot. Additionally, unlike Nexus of Fate and many other Time Warp effects, this at least exiles itself to prevent looping.

Anyway, I'm not going to call for its banning, but wouldn't be sad to see it go either.

[onering]

I'm ambivalent on Expropriate. Its an undeniably strong card in casual play, a total haymaker that is "cheap" in that it requires no thought or setup to use, you just cast it and it does its thing. The variance in terms of what you steal isn't as important as with Blatant Thievery, as you'll get at least one extra turn so even if you just steal a few mediocre things its still a bomb.

The reason I'm ambivalent is because the correct counter play in most instances is to simply let this be a Blatant Thievery stapled to a Time Walk, by having all the opponents vote for the steal effect. Its going to suck, but Blatant Thievery plus an extra turn can be overcome. Its going to be a beating, but its rarely going to win on the spot and I've recovered from being on the receiving end enough to say that isn't ban worthy. The problem with this is that it requires people play smart. It seems, to some people, like a prisoners dilemma card. Everyone is screwed if it results in the caster getting 4 extra turns, that's obvious, so its obvious to everyone that at least some people have to give up permanents. The problem is that some people feel like they can beat the dilemma by being the one opponent to vote Time, and get to keep their permanent while the pain of the extra turns is spread evenly. Unfortunately, adding 2 extra turns to most of a Blatant Thievery is pretty damn nasty, and anything above that is game over. The only time anyone should ever vote Time is if their targeted permanent will win the caster the game (or maybe if it will cause the voter to lose the game, like a stolen Platinum Angel when their at 0 life for an easy example, though they'd better have a reasonable shot of dealing with the caster if they choose to stay in).

So basically, my experience is that if you can get the table to play smart, this doesn't have to be back breaking and won't really win out of nowhere, and that's been my experience. But I've heard enough from other's experiences that in practice it does often ruin games because people DONT play smart, and that reality should be taken into account. That's a pretty grey area for me, when a card isn't that bad when people react correctly but absurd when people don't and people of don't.. Its also important to note that the larger the table the grosser it is. Blatant Thievery scales with the number of players, and is a much bigger swing at a table of 6 than a table of 4. Slap an extra turn on it to guarantee you can leverage those acquisitions and that scaling becomes a problem. That also means that more people voting Time is also even worse the more players there are, because the caster gets more stolen stuff to leverage during those extra turns. Still, this probably can't actually hit the scales badly with multiplayer red flag due to being explicitly designed for multiplayer and released in a multiplayer set.

[toctheyounger]

I don't really know if it hits any of the marks to see banning, but I know for damn sure I wouldn't be sad to see the ass end of it. Extra turn effects are usually painful, and getting the choice between multiple confiscations or extra turns is just silly.

While it's not guaranteed to win you the game it sure doesn't win you any friends, and there's a good chance if you cast it your friends just scoop and play another game instead of sitting and watching you play. I think that's the aspect that speaks for its banning most, is the social aspect of the card; I have solitaire on my PC, I don't need to watch someone else play it.

All that being said, it's far from ubiquitous these days (bearing in mind I don't have any Yennett, Cryptic Sovereign or Kess, Dissident Mage that I regularly see in my meta, which is where extra turn spells most notoriously reside), but I think it's at that point where it's now notorious. Similar to Mindslaver, people consider it and go 'ooooh, it would fit so well.....but what's the point if I get booed off the table?' So ultimately I think the card self regulates its play by being exactly the sort of jerk play it is.

edit - hilarious story with this card. Guy casts it and gets like 3 extra turns, casts Reanimate and chooses the Kederekt Leviathan in my graveyard, without realising what it does. He bounces the entire table, realises his mistake and scoops. I win by being preoccupied with laughing myself into a hernia.

[duducrash]

I think commander is such a social format that my answer is.... depends on the social aspect.

If I'm playing where I ussually play, at the tables I usually do, we don't run much extra turns, its unfun to be on the other end of multiple, I run one
in one deck. Savor the Moment in my cantrip deck thats more often than not just ramp.

And dealing with other peoples property is weird. I've literally seen someone scoop after getting their Gaea's Cradle Role Reversal ed and after thinking about it they arent wrong, it's an entry payment on a car. It's rent on a very, very fragile cardboard.


If you are playing on a high end table that you want to optmize everything, I think everything goes. I suspect Expropriate isnt cEDH playable often but you get the point

[pokken]

I would shed no tears if it went away. I've seen someone lose after resolving it once and it was a horrible experience

The fact that it's ability doesn't target makes it horrendously awful from a play perspective. Means you aren't making an informed decision and can't really interact with it in any way.

Game wins on the stack are probably my least favorite thing in commander. Bad bad design. Never had a game that was good because of expropriate.

[Kelzam]

I hate it when this spell is cast because every time I see it cast, it does the following:

1.) Demoralizes the table. The effect is so potent that everyone automatically throws the towel in, just votes for time and says let's go to the next game. Nevermind that if everyone voted Money that many of those games could have continued. The psychology of a player stealing the best three permanents on the table then getting an extra turn is so demoralizing that emotionally everyone is ready to move on to a new game. That tells me that this is a card that is unhealthy for the format.

2.) It's usually copied on the stack or some such that whatever hope the table had of being able to manage the severe disadvantage they've been put at from one copy, the others seal the game.

At 10-mana, it's appropriately costed. It exiles itself, but can be copied on the stack. But I'm not going to lie that I've cast this on Turn 5 or 6 aided by a Mana Geyser or other ramp easily enough. I think given the reasonings behind Iona, Shield of Emeria being banned can easily apply to Expropriate. It doesn't necessarily prevent players from playing the game, but in a way it's worse in how bad the psychological effect is on the table.

[Magiqmaster]

There was a 2HG game about 3 years or so, where that spell was played then got copied by the partner, and I still painfully remember how disgusted I felt after all this time... This card was not designed for EDH in mind, and should not be played in that format, period.

I understand that you need a few wincons in your deck, but Expropriate isn't the card that will create one of those truly memorable moments for your opponents. It rather leaves a sour taste in your mouth.

[Outcryqq]

It's an annoying card, I hate when it gets copied, but it's a Blatant Thievery plus Temporal Manipulation, both of which I don't mind too much. I care more about the extra turns, but generally if the other players at the table are thinking clearly the caster should only get one extra turn per copy of the spell resolved. And I'd expect a 9cmc sorcery that self exiles to be a very powerful spell.

[Sharpened]

I think given the reasonings behind Iona, Shield of Emeria being banned can easily apply to Expropriate. It doesn't necessarily prevent players from playing the game, but in a way it's worse in how bad the psychological effect is on the table.

Big flashy spells that end the game are fine.

The difference between Expropriate and Iona, Shield of Emeria is no one is mistaking this big blue abomination for a fun, casual card. No one should make that mistake with Iona, but they do.

The social contract does a fantastic job with cards like Expropriate. It rarely accidentally ruins games. It's reputation is very well known.

If we had to ban all the cards that reasonable people respond to with "Please don't do stuff like that or I'll pass on playing with you again", the list would be unmanageable (and yes, unreasonable respond with that attitude to all sorts of things that are fine).

I think it's fine to let the social contract do what its supposed to do, and is succeeding in doing, in this case.

[toctheyounger]

I will say this much. I've seen plenty of people not win the game after resolving it, so it's not quite as fait accompli as, say, Craterhoof Behemoth. But yeah, the resounding vibe is it ain't fun at all. And personally I'm happy with just letting anyone who plays it know that the rest of us are in the game too and we're not happy to just sit and watch someone else play. It's usually enough to drive the point home. Still, it'd be nice if no one had to sit through it to make that point.

I think it's probably on the shy side of ban territory, but I wouldn't at all be sad if the RC just irrationally pulled the trigger on it.

[not-a-cube]

I don't hate expropriate, but if you can't close out the game with the extra turn and resources, you shouldn't have played it. Then it was just a huge timesink and leave everyone with a bad taste in their mouth. It's also an annoying card if you play with new players, who underestimate the cards power and don't want to give their "big beater" so they vote time. That's a mistake they only make once though.

I wonder if the card would be more acceptable if it targets a player instead of just "you", so you could redirect it with f.e Deflecting Swat? That would be a nice gotcha, although the whole timesink does come into effect again. And maybe needing to pick targets and then let ppl vote time or money would be better aswel, so you could sac in response, etc.

[materpillar]

I dislike playing against "oops, I win cards" that can only be efficiently answer by play blue. I've only encountered this card once in the wild. One of the more spikey players at my local game-store plays it in his Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder "all random spells deck". Every time he wins with that deck he wins by Mystical Tutoring for Expropriate. The amount of value he generates off his extra turn is usually insurmountable. If he isn't immediately killed by someone he'll end up casting this spell every game. Watching his deck cast this card extra biases me against it because his next turn usually takes so long since everything in his hand is cascading. Effectively everyone scoops upon him casting Expropriate because winning might technically be possible after it resolves, but waiting for him to finish his follow up 20 minute turn for a tiny chance at victory just isn't worth it.

This card occupies the same mental space for me as Craterhoof Behemoth and Cyclonic Rift. They're like the McDonald's of EDH. I can eat Mcdonalds. I can even enjoy the McDonalds when I'm eating it. But when I wake up the next day, I'm going to regret that I chose to eat McDonalds because I know the only reason I chose McDonalds was that I was feeling cheap and lazy.

On a side note: I've cast that player's Expropriate off Chaos Wand and it felt like the best karmic justice. As did countering it another game with Didn't Say Please.

[umtiger]

This card occupies the same mental space for me as Craterhoof Behemoth and Cyclonic Rift. They're like the McDonald's of EDH. I can eat Mcdonalds. I can even enjoy the McDonalds when I'm eating it. But when I wake up the next day, I'm going to regret that I chose to eat McDonalds because I know the only reason I chose McDonalds was that I was feeling cheap and lazy.

There are a lot more [non-blue] ways to stop a Craterhoof Behemoth though (Fog, etc.) and even then only "wins" when you have a board. Cyclonic Rift at its heart is a defensive spell, which only then "wins" if you have a board.

I think the case against Expropriate is much higher than for either of those cards.

[toctheyounger]

There are a lot more [non-blue] ways to stop a Craterhoof Behemoth though (Fog, etc.) and even then only "wins" when you have a board. Cyclonic Rift at its heart is a defensive spell, which only then "wins" if you have a board.

I think the case against Expropriate is much higher than for either of those cards.

I both agree and disagree. Expropriate does still need some playing around to win (unless you intend to force a scoop by stalling for time as that's what I've seen more often than not). It is possible not to win having cast this if you don't have a plan fleshed out. It probably does have a lower threshold for groans than Rift or Behemoth.

That being said, both of the latter are pretty groanworthy too; they're all in the same boat that we'd none of us be sad to lose them if they left the format, I feel. Of the three, Rift, to me, feels like the most constantly insta-win, purely because it puts you potentially that much further ahead of the rest of the board that even if you don't succeed right away you're already pulling ahead just on pure momentum. Expro has a similar feel, although there's a bit of variation in how much mileage you get from it and depends somewhat on how bold the rest of the table is feeling about letting their stuff get pinched. Behemoth definitely requires the most building around, although given it's native colour, the threshold for a reasonable alpha strike is lower than you might otherwise think. The other thing about it is removal doesn't work on it; you counter it on the stack, fog out or you're boned.

So yeah, you're probably right, but the margin for Expropriate's 'worseness' is slimmer than it looks.

[materpillar]

There are a lot more [non-blue] ways to stop a Craterhoof Behemoth though (Fog, etc.) and even then only "wins" when you have a board. Cyclonic Rift at its heart is a defensive spell, which only then "wins" if you have a board.

I think the case against Expropriate is much higher than for either of those cards.

You can resolve Craterhoof Behemoth, Cyclonic Rift and Expropriate and lose. Saying otherwise is absurdity. Alternatively you can also build Grizzly Bears tribal and throw all three into that deck with Tatyova, Benthic Druid at the helm and expect to actually win a handful of games solely based on these cards' absurd floors combined with the immensely narrow non-counterspell answers that are available to all of them. Heaven forbid you actually put even the most minuscule amount of thought into optimizing these cards at which point playing around any of them becomes a nightmare.

Slamming threats is much easier to do than holding up answers. I've lost more games to a resolved Craterhoof Behemoth than any other card and all of my decks have at least one or two answers to it.

Winning with them is lazy, uninspired and uninspiring. They're the most efficient and bland goodstuffy goodstuff that ever goodstuffed.

[umtiger]

I would be sad to see Rift go. It's a removal spell. I think that having the best card in the format be a removal spell is a good thing. I've played just as many games (if not more) where it's just an equalizer because one or two opponents got too far ahead.

And as for Craterhoof + board, there are too many Overrun effects available that banning Craterhoof doesn't make sense either. You know, Triumph of the Hordes does pretty much the same (it's doesn't have ETB abuse baked in).

You don't play either of those cards with absolutely nothing and then win. With Expropriate, you could. I wouldn't call it a margin. It's a significant difference.

Winning with them is lazy, uninspired and uninspiring. They're the most efficient and bland goodstuffy goodstuff that ever goodstuffed.

Got to say, I disagree with that sentiment. I'm sure that some of the generals are more easily good stuffed.

[JovialJovian]

Expropriate makes opponents feel bad, and that's the main strike against it. I have cast it in a 3-person game and proceeded to lose that game, the board was clogged from several turns of Braids, Conjuror Adept, and even though I got one Money and two Time, I wasn't able to punch through, and lost when the turn got back to the Maelstrom Wanderer player.

But I've also seen how extreme it can get. I actually drafted this with an Arcane Savant and managed to cast it on turn 5 with two extra votes. All opponents voted for Time, but as it was a draft, nobody scooped as I did not have a clearly winning board, even with 6 extra turns. I did win, but it was during the very last extra turn. It was ultimately a bad move, as in the following round, I was intensely ganged up on and got knocked out of prizes.

So, like Cookie Monster says, it's a sometimes food. Play it fairly and it will deliver some pretty epic moments, but play it too much, and expect your group to get wise to it and hammer you down, or to lose interest in playing with you. Or, maybe they'll step up to the challenge and start clobbering you right back with their own 9-mana game-enders.

[onering]

Expropriate and Rift are very different. Rift is a card that's capable of being a finisher if you have a strong board already, capable of providing a strong tempo advantage if you have a good board that won't immediately win, and capable of stopping combo wins or generally saving your bacon if your behind. Its so widely played and so good because its good at all of these things, but not absurd at any of them. Rift, as an answer card, does a lot to police the format. As a wincon, its ok. The format is better for having Rift in it.

[Magiqmaster]

If I may add, I guess Rift would be more accepted / balanced if it were a sorcery. Indeed, by being able to play it during an opponent's turn, or even better, at EOT just before your turn comes around, it gives you such an edge that it makes it quite difficult for others to rebuild and get back into the game.

It also should exile itself upon resolving, to avoid being able to fetch it back later and keep abusing it.

[Dunharrow]

I never faced this card. Not once. Looks like Blatant Thievery + Time Walk. Seems pretty strong, but not as strong as Tooth and Nail.

If someone is going to cast a 9 mana spell to try end the game, this does not seem so bad.

People are getting too focused on the extra turn as well. Blatant Thievery is good but easily negated by mass bounce, Homeward Path, sac outlets, mass removal...
I will say Expropriate looks like a card that performs inversely to the skill level of the table - a more beginner table people may vote for time instead of money, which seems really incorrect.

In any case, it's a very strong card, but if T&N is fair in Commander then so is this.

With how well white and red perform in this format I wish they would make these two cards:
W
Enchantment
Players cannot cast spells that cost 6 or more mana
If a player would search their library for a card, instead they search for a basic land.

R
Artifact
If an opponent would start an extra turn, they skip that turn and you take an extra turn instead.
At the beginning of each end step, return all permanents to their owners' control.

Basically, I just wish there were more answers to broken things.

[materpillar]

I never faced this card. Not once. Looks like Blatant Thievery + Time Walk. Seems pretty strong, but not as strong as Tooth and Nail.

If someone is going to cast a 9 mana spell to try end the game, this does not seem so bad.

I mean, it depends greatly on your metagame and what they commonly find with Tooth and Nail. In my experience the most common problems that pop out of Tooth and Nail can eat a Swords to Plowshares and be fairly mitigated. The advantage gained from Expropriate cannot be so cleanly resolved. Or stated another way, Expropriate doesn't have quite the same high ceiling of killing everyone immediately that Tooth and Nail does, but its worse case scenario is dramatically higher and it resolving is in the ballpark of killing everyone immediately.

I would be sad to see Rift go. It's a removal spell. I think that having the best card in the format be a removal spell is a good thing. I've played just as many games (if not more) where it's just an equalizer because one or two opponents got too far ahead.

Eh. In my experience Cyclonic Rift tends to playout and feel way more similar to Time Stretch than Swords to Plowshares.

And as for Craterhoof + board, there are too many Overrun effects available that banning Craterhoof doesn't make sense either. You know, Triumph of the Hordes does pretty much the same (it's doesn't have ETB abuse baked in).

I don't really have any experience playing against Triumph of the Hordes, I imagine losing to it could be annoying. I do know that Craterhoof Behemoth is dramatically more obnoxious because it's a creature and not a sorcery and thus it is extremely easy to tutor for. I'm also suspicious that craterhoof requires less of a board state at more points in the game for it to be lethal but I admit that that's only a gut feeling based on very little actual evidence.

Overrun effects by themselves aren't a problem. Beastmaster Ascension and Pathbreaker Ibex are both super fair and effective examples off the top of my head.

You don't play either of those cards with absolutely nothing and then win. With Expropriate, you could. I wouldn't call it a margin. It's a significant difference.

Sure, Craterhoof Behemoth's worse case scenario is that it's a 6/6 hasty for 8 and Cyclonic Rift is actively bad against a board of ETB value creatures.
Those are way lower than Expropriate's floor. That doesn't really matter since all three of these cards rarely hit that floor and usually migrate towards "you're all dead now since you're not playing u".

Got to say, I disagree with that sentiment. I'm sure that some of the generals are more easily good stuffed.

Let me rephrase, they're some of the most bland goodstuffy goodstuff cards you can sleeve up in your 99.

[Dunharrow]

I never faced this card. Not once. Looks like Blatant Thievery + Time Walk. Seems pretty strong, but not as strong as Tooth and Nail.

If someone is going to cast a 9 mana spell to try end the game, this does not seem so bad.

I mean, it depends greatly on your metagame and what they commonly find with Tooth and Nail. In my experience the most common problems that pop out of Tooth and Nail can eat a Swords to Plowshares and be fairly mitigated. The advantage gained from Expropriate cannot be so cleanly resolved. Or stated another way, Expropriate doesn't have quite the same high ceiling of killing everyone immediately that Tooth and Nail does, but its worse case scenario is dramatically higher and it resolving is in the ballpark of killing everyone immediately.

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.
Mike+Trike or another two card combo - often disruptable with StP

What you are saying is true, but I do not really see why Expropriate is being discussed. It is an annoying card... but I have had people scoop to Blatant Thievery many times. It's a 9 mana card, and since the format already accepts 9 mana to be a game-winning spell, then what makes Expropriate different?

Sometimes better than T&N is not really an argument for banning since T&N is not being banned.

When you see Expropriate played, ask yourself if Blatant Thievery or Walk the Aeons would be considerably worse at that point.

[ISBPathfinder]

@Dunharrow T&N can be responded to in many cases. Lots of the creatures it can get can be responded to with spot removal to stop a combo. I am much more in favor of combo cards that can be interacted with. T&N also usually requires other colors and specific cards to setup where as Expropriate is kind of self contained which means its more likely that a new player will Expropriate you not knowing how it feels than T&N and pull out an efficient combo.

Blatant also doesn't cut through hexproof / shroud and it doesn't untap all of your lands afterwards (and thats the worst case resolve scenario). Sure it requires two more mana, but it also is sort of free once you do cast it.

I am not convinced that any spell should just win the game regardless of the mana. There are a lot of things I wish were also banned but the RC doesn't agree with me and wants a low banned list number. 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 (EDIT: I meant to say that if they disagree with the meta or social contract view of the card.).