[MCD] Wishes

[tstorm823]

The whole advantage to them is that you can stack them up with niche cards you don't want in your deck.
You can also look at wishes in these formats - Karn, Fae of Wishes, etc.
And you can see what kind of cards they usually tutor.
The cards of course could be in the main, but the advantage is that they don't clog up your main deck.

I don't think that's actually true. I'm by no means an expert on other formats, but in my passing knowledge of competitive formats, wishes are most frequently used to find extra win conditions. Wishes in legacy tutor for storm cards to bypass LED's downside. Wishes are sometimes used in combo decks with 1 copy of the card in the sideboard to allow effectively 7 copies of the crucial piece. Even Karn tutoring out Lattice is more of a win-con than a niche hate card. And all of this is in spite of the fact that wishes are pulling explicitly from sideboards, which are traditionally where you put silver bullets. Decks with wishes in other formats actually run fewer silver bullets because they use up their sideboard slots on other things.

[Impossible]

now, we would almost certainly put restrictions in place, but they're be philosophically poor

I fail to see how bringing EDH into line with basically every other format in existence, even BO1 on Arena, is philosophically poor.

[Legend]

It's becoming increasingly clear that the people who think they're against WISHING aren't actually against WISHING. They're against WISHERS. That is to say, they've concluded that the Commander community is too ignorant, too incompetent, too immature, and too inconsiderate to be allowed to WISH. Is that a straw man? Heh, only to those whom haven't been reading this thread (and others).

[Mookie]

The whole advantage to them is that you can stack them up with niche cards you don't want in your deck.
You can also look at wishes in these formats - Karn, Fae of Wishes, etc.
And you can see what kind of cards they usually tutor.
The cards of course could be in the main, but the advantage is that they don't clog up your main deck.

I don't think that's actually true. I'm by no means an expert on other formats, but in my passing knowledge of competitive formats, wishes are most frequently used to find extra win conditions. Wishes in legacy tutor for storm cards to bypass LED's downside. Wishes are sometimes used in combo decks with 1 copy of the card in the sideboard to allow effectively 7 copies of the crucial piece. Even Karn tutoring out Lattice is more of a win-con than a niche hate card. And all of this is in spite of the fact that wishes are pulling explicitly from sideboards, which are traditionally where you put silver bullets. Decks with wishes in other formats actually run fewer silver bullets because they use up their sideboard slots on other things.

Referencing stock decklists for Modern Amulet Titan, Eldrazi Tron, and Tron, the sideboard targets I see for Karn, the Great Creator are:

• Engineered Explosives
• Tormod's Crypt
• Walking Ballista
• Pithing Needle
• Grafdigger's Cage
• Soul-Guide Lantern
• Liquimetal Coating
• Ratchet Bomb
• Torpor Orb
• Ensnaring Bridge
• Crucible of Worlds
• Oblivion Stone
• Trinisphere
• Skysovereign, Consul Flagship
• Wurmcoil Engine
• Sundering Titan

Of these cards, I would say that Walking Ballista, Skysovereign, Wurmcoil Engine, Sundering Titan, and Liquimetal Coating can serve as win conditions (Mycosynth Lattice being banned). I would describe the others as silver bullets or narrow hate cards for Karn to tutor for when appropriate.

[pokken]

Legacy Epic Storm is probably the longest running wish deck (focused on making a crapload of mana and then Burning Wish'ing up a wincon). It's as far as I recall always run about 2/3rds wincons of some kind in the sideboard -- but interestingly the wincons are aimed at winning through different kinds of hate cards.

I'm not sure that translates to commander or not.

But I do think being able to play one card that defeats all the hate by acting as whatever wincon is not shut off is...lame. That's probably the lamest part about TES is that it's really hard to sideboard against since you need both sideboard cards *and* serious pressure or else they just go right around your hate pieces.

[DirkGently]

Never minding the two times that people played wishes against me before I knew the actual rules, we have a ton of evidence on how sideboards are used.
- They are used extensively in Standard, limited, Modern, Legacy, Vintage and Pioneer.

The whole advantage to them is that you can stack them up with niche cards you don't want in your deck.
You can also look at wishes in these formats - Karn, Fae of Wishes, etc.
And you can see what kind of cards they usually tutor.
The cards of course could be in the main, but the advantage is that they don't clog up your main deck.

I love your idealization of how people would utilize wishes, but you cannot convince me that they won't be used exactly how they are best used and how they are used in all other formats.

You do realize that there's a pretty significant difference between those formats and this one, right? Namely - those formats are all competitive tournament formats (they're also 1v1 which is pretty relevant too tbh). How they use sideboards might be somewhat indicative for cEDH but it's as irrelevant for normal commander as anything else they do.

We use largely the same banlist as vintage. Vintage is full of early-turns-combos and stax. Why don't we see the same thing in commander? Because commander is a casual/social format, and most people don't like that stuff, so most people don't play it, and I don't see any reason to think the same wouldn't be true for wishes. Especially with just 3 slots - it's a hell of a lot harder to reliably hit a narrow answer to your opponents deck when you've only got 3 slots.

[tstorm823]

Of these cards, I would say that Walking Ballista, Skysovereign, Wurmcoil Engine, Sundering Titan, and Liquimetal Coating can serve as win conditions (Mycosynth Lattice being banned). I would describe the others as silver bullets or narrow hate cards for Karn to tutor for when appropriate.

Right, but if the deck weren't playing Karn, every card in the sideboard would be a sideboard card, and those are all answers to specific opponents. On one hand, Karn gives them access to game one silver bullets, but on the other hand, the 75 actually plays fewer cards dedicated to hate than the average deck.

Like, an all purpose wishboard would never be all answers. Imagine a 7 card board like they've implemented for best-of-one on arena, what would I want there? I'd want probably a narrow synergy card or combo piece (or 2 or 3), probably a standalone threat, probably a card draw card, probably a board wipe, probably a targeted removal spell, maybe a pillow fort card, definitely a land if my wish can get one... like, unless I know with certainty what opponent I'm going to play against enough to justify a dedicated slot, I can't imagine having room for more than 1 or 2 silver bullets, and as said about TES decks, I'd probably use those slots for counter-hate rather than wishing to lock out my opponents.

[Mookie]

Some additional data points:
Burning Wish targets for TES:

• Grapeshot
• Galvanic Relay
• Empty the Warrens
• Tendrils of Agony
• Echo of Eons
• Pulverize
• Peer into the Abyss

Targets for Ruby Storm:

• By Force
• Gamble
• Grapeshot
• Bonus Round
• Firespout
• Empty the Warrens
• Past in Flames
• Reforge the Soul

If I were to characterize all of the cards in these wishboards (including the Karn wishboards from Modern), I would break them into four categories:

• Generically useful cards that are relevant for almost all matchups and board states (ex: Wurmcoil Engine)
• Situational win conditions (ex: Liquimetal Coating, Empty the Warrens)
• Silver bullets (ex: Pithing Needle, Tormod's Crypt, Firespout)
• Flexible answers / counter-hate (ex: By Force, Crucible of Worlds, Engineered Explosives)

Right, but if the deck weren't playing Karn, every card in the sideboard would be a sideboard card, and those are all answers to specific opponents. On one hand, Karn gives them access to game one silver bullets, but on the other hand, the 75 actually plays fewer cards dedicated to hate than the average deck.

Like, an all purpose wishboard would never be all answers. Imagine a 7 card board like they've implemented for best-of-one on arena, what would I want there? I'd want probably a narrow synergy card or combo piece (or 2 or 3), probably a standalone threat, probably a card draw card, probably a board wipe, probably a targeted removal spell, maybe a pillow fort card, definitely a land if my wish can get one... like, unless I know with certainty what opponent I'm going to play against enough to justify a dedicated slot, I can't imagine having room for more than 1 or 2 silver bullets, and as said about TES decks, I'd probably use those slots for counter-hate rather than wishing to lock out my opponents.

Yeah, regardless of wishboard size, I think it always starts with 1-2 standalone cards, either card draw or a threat. After that, I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all wishboard layout - some decks want more situational win conditions, some decks want flexible answers, and silver bullets will probably require a pretty specific meta. However, I do expect some classes of answers (specifically graveyard hate and artifact hate) to be pretty universal, if only because those strategies are so common.

[Legend]

Some additional data points:
Burning Wish targets for TES:

• Grapeshot
• Galvanic Relay
• Empty the Warrens
• Tendrils of Agony
• Echo of Eons
• Pulverize
• Peer into the Abyss

Targets for Ruby Storm:

• By Force
• Gamble
• Grapeshot
• Bonus Round
• Firespout
• Empty the Warrens
• Past in Flames
• Reforge the Soul

If I were to characterize all of the cards in these wishboards (including the Karn wishboards from Modern), I would break them into four categories:

• Generically useful cards that are relevant for almost all matchups and board states (ex: Wurmcoil Engine)
• Situational win conditions (ex: Liquimetal Coating, Empty the Warrens)
• Silver bullets (ex: Pithing Needle, Tormod's Crypt, Firespout)
• Flexible answers / counter-hate (ex: By Force, Crucible of Worlds, Engineered Explosives)

This would indeed indicate a potential problem if Commander decks could contain 7 copies of Burning Wish.

[RxPhantom]

now, we would almost certainly put restrictions in place, but they're be philosophically poor

I fail to see how bringing EDH into line with basically every other format in existence, even BO1 on Arena, is philosophically poor.

That's quite the arbitrary line you're drawing there. EDH is already out of line with basically every other format in existence. 100-card singleton with one, sometimes two, specially designated creatures to which players have constant access, is pretty far removed from 'regular Magic.'

[DirkGently]

Again, I think it goes back to which rules are important to the format, and which aren't. Having a commander is, obviously, extremely defining to the format, as is 100 card singleton decks. Getting rid of one of those and returning to the baseline constructed rules would change the format drastically, in a way that I think most people would agree to be negative. So those modifications to the baseline rules have a valuable purpose. But absent a particularly good reason for deviating - such as is the case with wishes, imo - philosophically I think the rules should follow the baseline.

[Dunharrow]

You do realize that there's a pretty significant difference between those formats and this one, right? Namely - those formats are all competitive tournament formats (they're also 1v1 which is pretty relevant too tbh). How they use sideboards might be somewhat indicative for cEDH but it's as irrelevant for normal commander as anything else they do.

Yes and no. While we are casual, a lot of people on this board aim to build their decks as 'perfectly' as possible. So even it if it casual, you still try to build as well as you can.

With only 3 slots, you aren't choosing random cards - you are choosing 3 really strong cards. I imagine most people will have at least one card that is always good - Card Advantage, for example.
then the other 2 slots really need to be hard hitting, but situational.
And I have to think one of those two slots will always be graveyard hate, unless you are a graveyard deck.

I think that's what bugs me the most. People skimp on graveyard hate all the time, and now they can safely tutor for it if needed without taking a slot in their 99.

[DirkGently]

Yes and no. While we are casual, a lot of people on this board aim to build their decks as 'perfectly' as possible. So even it if it casual, you still try to build as well as you can.

To the extent that this is true for me, and I assume true for most people in the same paradigm, I build my decks fairly optimally within the pretty narrow constraints I set for myself. Among which would be, no lame color hate cards or anything else that would be annoying in a wish situation. True in the 99 or the 3. Idk what sort of agent of chaos is building an optimal but fun and fair 99 and then jamming Deathgrip in the sideboard.

With only 3 slots, you aren't choosing random cards - you are choosing 3 really strong cards.

Why would cards in your 99 (as seen from, for example, Impulse) be any less strong or more random than cards in your wishboard? I guess you could ensure you have a more diverse set of effects, which avoids the possibility of hitting 4 lands off impulse, but I would think average card quality would be lower since otherwise you'd just put those cards in your deck.

And I have to think one of those two slots will always be graveyard hate, unless you are a graveyard deck.

What's the best graveyard hate for burning wish? Are we going to see the price of Morningtide spike? XD I'm not even sure there's anything that great for living wish either tbh. There's lands, but you could easily put those in the 99. And scooze being killable, mana intensive, and one-at-a-time makes him relatively weak - more of a 99 inclusion since he's a fine card even without needing gy hate, less of a seek-and-destroy on graveyard decks the way Rest in Peace is.

I think people are really overvaluing the strength of symmetrical hate cards in the sideboard. If you're going to play Rest in Peace in the 99, that better mean you've got very little or no graveyard synergy, which is honestly kinda hard to do these days. But maybe it's worth it, so you can run a powerful hate piece like RiP, fine.

But now we're talking about running it in the sideboard instead. Well, now you're likely to end up in a couple situations: (1) you've removed nearly all the grave synergy from your deck just for the rare occasions on which you draw your wish AND you need grave hate, which really doesn't seem worth the effort of not playing gy synergy. Or (2) you're running a bit of graveyard synergy because you don't have RiP in the 99 pressuring you to reduce it, and now when you draw your wish you have to weigh whether it's worth playing RiP knowing it's going to screw over your own synergy.

Same deal with symmetrical artifact destruction. You're going to go light/no artifacts just for the rare situations where you wish for symmetrical artifact destruction out of the board? That seems like a really big sacrifice relative to how rare that occurrence will be. For me, if I decide artifacts aren't important to my deck, I'll cut almost all of them and then pick my wipes to exploit that fact as much as possible by including multiple artifact wipes in the main because my deck makes them strong. Only being able to pull a wipe from the side seems like a really weak payoff.

I think that's what bugs me the most. People skimp on graveyard hate all the time, and now they can safely tutor for it if needed without taking a slot in their 99.

I don't wanna downplay your feelings but that seems like a really minor gripe to me. Especially if that's your biggest objection.

Wishes still impose a tax on the cost of whatever cards are in there. It's not a freeroll. You're paying for the flexibility. Besides which, you have to draw the wish to hit the grave hate. It's not like people would have reliable access to it every game just by putting in a wish and a hate piece in the board.

[onering]

It does replace what could be a dead draw with something that's always active, and with an unlimited wishboard the often paltry tax on Mana isn't enough to justify it. It let's you jam as many wishes as you can into your deck and then have a second deck filled with silver bullets, card advantage, and threats so no matter what wish you draw it can be whatever you need at the time. Why would you run gy hate main deck and risk drawing it when it's irrelevant when it could be a wish instead? Why run Shatterstorm main deck when it could be a wish so you don't draw it against decks that don't run many artifacts and can wish for a wrath instead? Why run anti token cards or nbl hate or any other sort of card that has the potential to be a dead draw main deck if there's a wish you could run to grab it instead? Unlimited wishing allows, for many decks, access to every answer without worrying about them being dead cards, and while freeing up more deck slots for more broadly useful spells or threats. That's a bridge too far, and wouldn't be healthy for the format.

I'm fully on board with smaller wish boards, and with playgroups allowing wishing via rule 0 and hashing out how to manage it, but not unlimited wishing. The reasons not to make the change outweigh the reasons to make it. I could not care less about arguments about the cleanliness of the rules or consistency with other formats, because they are entirely irrelevant to the health of the format, which is all that matters.

I think the RC is wrong to set up the unlimited wishing scenario as the only alternative to the status quo. They clearly don't see the outside the game space as worth making new rules to govern. Considering that the benefit is currently small, I can see why. But I think the benefit will continue to grow as wizards continues to expand the design space. It won't be wishes that change their mind, but stuff like Lessons. And I wonder if they'll keep their all or nothing outlook if we see multiple non wish outside the game mechanics. That's something that would actually change the equation from what it is now (and we'd be further along on that road if they didn't change the rule for companion).

[DirkGently]

It does replace what could be a dead draw with something that's always active, and with an unlimited wishboard the often paltry tax on Mana isn't enough to justify it.

I know I've had games where I drew demonic tutor and would have killed for it to just be a swamp instead. Sometimes even 2 mana is a pretty big tax, it just depends on the game.

That's not to say it isn't worth it. But I wouldn't call it "paltry", especially when most of the wishes cost 3+. Most cards are not very efficient when you add that much extra mana to them.

It let's you jam as many wishes as you can into your deck and then have a second deck filled with silver bullets, card advantage, and threats so no matter what wish you draw it can be whatever you need at the time.

That sounds really slow. Sure, you always "get what you need" but you're also paying 2-4 more mana for all those things. How many card advantage spells are still efficient when you tack on a 3 mana tax? How many of any spells?

Anyway, I'm sure some number of people would actually do this, but I think that number is probably really low. Most people just don't care enough to amass some huge collection of narrow answers for dubious benefit. And honestly, as a one-off, it might be interesting to play against the deck-of-many-answers and see what happens.

Why would you run gy hate main deck and risk drawing it when it's irrelevant when it could be a wish instead?

Because it's a lot easier to draw when the multitude of tutors, draw, filtering etc can hit it instead of just whatever wish meets the type criteria? As I've established, many card types have pretty limited options on grave hate.

I mean, we've got a colorless LAND that's effective, potentially reusable, grave hate, and only 1/20 decks are willing to make the huge sacrifice of playing a colorless land. You think people are going to be thrilled about wishing for grave hate? I really doubt it.

Why run Shatterstorm main deck when it could be a wish so you don't draw it against decks that don't run many artifacts and can wish for a wrath instead?

Because it's not a good card? No human being runs shatterstorm main deck so this is a weird question. I don't think I've ever seen anyone cast it. Maybe once, in like 2005. Also I kinda made my point about symmetrical wish answers in my previous post.

Why run anti token cards or nbl hate or any other sort of card that has the potential to be a dead draw main deck if there's a wish you could run to grab it instead?

Because all these things are a big pain in the butt that 95% of players wouldn't even think to bother with. And most of the others will hopefully realize that wishboarding Illness in the Ranks against squirrel tribal is going to make them look like a tryhard loser.

Unlimited wishing allows, for many decks, access to every answer without worrying about them being dead cards, and while freeing up more deck slots for more broadly useful spells or threats. That's a bridge too far, and wouldn't be healthy for the format.

All of this is purely hypothetical. Someone who had never played commander but looked over the ruleset could theorycraft about how all the powerful legal 2-card combos and tutors are going to allow people to build extremely consistent combo decks, and it's true that they COULD....except that the vast majority of players don't do that because either they don't want to, or because they're socially pressured not to, making it largely a non-issue in actual practice. I see no reason that same trend couldn't hold true for wishboards as well.

Not to say that I wouldn't prefer a small wishboard solution over an unlimited one. But I think even unlimited wishing probably wouldn't be a huge deal tbh, outside of cEDH (and they can all suck it anyway ).

I think the RC is wrong to set up the unlimited wishing scenario as the only alternative to the status quo.

Strong agree.

But I think the benefit will continue to grow as wizards continues to expand the design space. It won't be wishes that change their mind, but stuff like Lessons. And I wonder if they'll keep their all or nothing outlook if we see multiple non wish outside the game mechanics. That's something that would actually change the equation from what it is now (and we'd be further along on that road if they didn't change the rule for companion).

Strong agree.

[Dunharrow]

Living Wish can grab Angel of Finality
Burning Wish can grab Day's Undoing


Obviously the more color restricted you are the more limited you will be...

Also the 'tax' to play a wish is not that much of a deterrent. Sure, we all know of times when we didn't have the mana to tutor and play the card we needed, but that's just magic. That's not stopping Living Wish from being a must-play card.

[DirkGently]

Living Wish can grab Angel of Finality

I don't really think of angel of finality as being a hard counter to grave decks. Getting your graveyard exiled once is a totally normal thing that happens all the time in games that don't involve wishboards. And we're talking a 6 mana sorcery here, for an effect that's been printed on a land where the only downside is entering tapped. Not to mention all the infinite variants of Tormod's Crypt, many of which replace themselves so they're also never a dead draw. But less than 1% of decks are running Relic of Progenitus, because most people really don't care that much about trying to hate out somebody's graveyard deck. You think people are going to be excited to play living wish as a 6 mana sorcery when they won't even play a 2-mana cantrip?

Not to mention, if you're throwing living wish as your only grave hate in your GW deck...good luck with that, basically the only way you'll get it is to natural into your living wish. If you put angel (or whatever - even a land like Scavenger Grounds) into the mainboard you've got access to a plethora of tutors and can have access to it in almost every game. Especially with a limited wishboard, how is living wish ever going to be better than Eladamri's Call? Is eladamri's call a big problem card?

Burning Wish can grab Day's Undoing

Ew. No offense but I'll stick with Morningtide.

Also the 'tax' to play a wish is not that much of a deterrent. Sure, we all know of times when we didn't have the mana to tutor and play the card we needed, but that's just magic. That's not stopping Living Wish from being a must-play card.

Not much of a deterrent...based on what, exactly? The tax to cycle relic is 2, same as the cost to use living wish, but nobody plays relic because nobody cares that much about grave hate. Even a 2 mana tax is too much for most people to care about it. Just about the only piece of grave hate with a decent use % I can find is Bojuka Bog where the only downside is that it enters tapped, and it's still only at 30%.

Idk, I find it really hard to get worked up over one-shot answers like angel of finality or shatterstorm or whatever. Getting your strategy answered is a totally normal part of magic. Nobody is shocked when someone board wipes the elf deck. You don't overcommit, and you rebuild. At least when we're talking about stuff like Rest in Peace it's an ongoing lock on the grave deck until they find an answer, so even though I don't think it's super likely to come up I can at least appreciate the concern. But getting worried about someone paying 6 mana to exile a graveyard...I don't think I can really say much except "get over it".

[Dunharrow]

Living Wish can grab Angel of Finality

I don't really think of angel of finality as being a hard counter to grave decks. Getting your graveyard exiled once is a totally normal thing that happens all the time in games that don't involve wishboards. And we're talking a 6 mana sorcery here, for an effect that's been printed on a land where the only downside is entering tapped. Not to mention all the infinite variants of Tormod's Crypt, many of which replace themselves so they're also never a dead draw. But less than 1% of decks are running Relic of Progenitus, because most people really don't care that much about trying to hate out somebody's graveyard deck. You think people are going to be excited to play living wish as a 6 mana sorcery when they won't even play a 2-mana cantrip?

Not to mention, if you're throwing living wish as your only grave hate in your GW deck...good luck with that, basically the only way you'll get it is to natural into your living wish. If you put angel (or whatever - even a land like Scavenger Grounds) into the mainboard you've got access to a plethora of tutors and can have access to it in almost every game. Especially with a limited wishboard, how is living wish ever going to be better than Eladamri's Call? Is eladamri's call a big problem card?

Burning Wish can grab Day's Undoing

Ew. No offense but I'll stick with Morningtide.

Also the 'tax' to play a wish is not that much of a deterrent. Sure, we all know of times when we didn't have the mana to tutor and play the card we needed, but that's just magic. That's not stopping Living Wish from being a must-play card.

Not much of a deterrent...based on what, exactly? The tax to cycle relic is 2, same as the cost to use living wish, but nobody plays relic because nobody cares that much about grave hate. Even a 2 mana tax is too much for most people to care about it. Just about the only piece of grave hate with a decent use % I can find is Bojuka Bog where the only downside is that it enters tapped, and it's still only at 30%.

Idk, I find it really hard to get worked up over one-shot answers like angel of finality or shatterstorm or whatever. Getting your strategy answered is a totally normal part of magic. Nobody is shocked when someone board wipes the elf deck. You don't overcommit, and you rebuild. At least when we're talking about stuff like Rest in Peace it's an ongoing lock on the grave deck until they find an answer, so even though I don't think it's super likely to come up I can at least appreciate the concern. But getting worried about someone paying 6 mana to exile a graveyard...I don't think I can really say much except "get over it".

And thus the cycle starts again

The issue is not that Angel of Finality is too strong or that it's the only gy hate you will have access to.
It is not about one-shot answers and getting worked up over them.

It is about restrictions. You have 100 cards and you have to figure out how many hate card you want, how many answers you want.
Wishes present, albeit with a small tax, an all upside situation. And this will force people to play wishes.
Instead of putting Angel of Finality and Spirit of the Labyrinth in my main deck (where they used to be for my Karador deck), I can play a wish, move them to my wishboard, and now instead of having 3 slots for situational cards, I have one slot for 3 situational cards.
Maybe I don't want to draw redundant hate pieces once my better ones are already deployed. Now throw in a wish and instead of drawing an extra GY hate piece, I can instead play card advantage or removal.

That's the issue - wishes are so powerful in singleton that they become 'must play' cards. And that sucks.
Second issue is the people who decide to put narrow hate cards like Boil in their wishboards. It would be super strong. Sure they aren't making friends but I have 3 staxy decks as it is so why not push them the extra mile?
If Carpet of Flower is a cEDH staple then wouldn't one-sided land destruction also become a staple?
And from cEDH bleed into casual edh?
Sure this is just conjecture, but I just don't get the pros to making wishes legal. It would suck.


But these are all things mentioned a thousand times already in this thread. There is no convincing you so why bother having the discussion.

[onering]

Obviously all the potential negatives are conjecture. So are the positives. Should we reject out of hand the ideas about what wishes could potentially add to the format because it's just conjecture and there is literally zero evidence that wishes would be used in fun, fair ways? Of course not, that would be silly. The same is true for the potential negatives.

The only sensible thing to do is to way the potential positives against the potential negatives, figure how impactful they are, and estimate the likelihood of them happening. The positives to the format of allowing unlimited wishing are pretty damn small. There aren't many, and they don't add much to the format. I'd argue that it's about equivalent to bringing BaaC back just to all Rofellos, Braids, and Erayo in the 99. The negatives, on the other hand, are pretty severe by comparison. I personally think that the positive outcomes are more likely, but given that they are so minor in comparison to the potential negatives its not a risk worth taking. I see it as equivalent to a bet where you would win $1 70 percent of the time and lose $5 the other 30 percent. Its a lot more likely you win, and not the end of the world if you use, but the reward for winning is so meager that it's not a bet you should ever take.

A small wishboard changes the balance by both reducing the likelihood of a bad outcome and how bad the outcome can be. It's the only way I see the benefits of a rules change for outside the game effects can outweigh the negatives at this time. Another possibility would be for enough interesting outside the game effects that don't carry the risk associated with unlimited wishing get printed (think learn) which increases the benefit side of the equation enough to be worth the risk, or worth banning the actual wishes to allow those effects. There's a lot of other options that can work in playgroups, like putting a time limit on searching, or gentlemen's agreements about what's ok, or even just granting exceptions for pet decks like J's Bolas theme deck that wants to wish for mediocre cards or somebody's learn deck or a faeries deck that has a wishboard full of faeries for the wish faerie to grab. Not everyone will allow it, but that's the breaks.

[DirkGently]

It is about restrictions. You have 100 cards and you have to figure out how many hate card you want, how many answers you want.

I was hoping someone would bring this argument up, because it's quite bad.

Getting to play more than 100 cards does not make one's deck better even if one "has more options". There's a reason virtually all competitive decklists are precisely the minimum number of cards in every format in every game. We can go into more detail if you want, but that fact alone should probably tell you you're making a mistake.

Wishes present [...] an all upside situation.

oh boy, ALL UPSIDE! That's so exciting!

albeit with a small tax

......

You're not with the IRS, are you?

Okay, sorry, dumb jokes aside, I'll break down why this is entirely different from the Lutri situation since that seems like what you're comparing this to. With Lutri, there actually is no downside to including lutri in your deck. Having Lutri as a companion can never have any negative impact on your available options because there is no cost (yeah, yeah, you can't play relentless rats, but that doesn't really count). That is not true for a wishes. Wishes take up a slot in your deck. A flexible slot, yes, but it's still a card that you'll draw and sometimes really wish it was a different card. Just as demonic tutor is usually a good draw, but sometimes you'll really wish you drew something else. Except moreso because a limited-size-wishboard wish is way way way way weaker than demonic tutor. Sometimes the "tax" is a problem, because you're mana screwed and can't pay it, or because the play you want becomes too expensive. Sometimes the cards you set aside don't do what you need. Much like a charm, it's flexible, but it's overcosted and it doesn't do everything.

Now, you could argue that it's pure upside to include a wishboard, regardless of whether you actually play any wishes, because having a wishboard does give you additional options without costing anything, even if the wish itself DOES cost something. And that's true pedantically...but who gives a crap? How many people are actually going to feel like they need to make a wishboard just in case someone plays Cunning Wish into Hive Mind? It's technically an advantage, but it's so incredibly unlikely to come up that no actual human being is ever going to bother. If this was the format of the next pro tour then maybe it would be annoying, but this is a casual format played mostly by noobs. One extremely tryhard cedh player is going to build a wishboard without wishes and then spend all his time explaining how he's technically getting an advantage to a bunch of people who don't care and just want to drink beer.

And this will force people to play wishes.

I'll point out that this statement implies that you weren't arguing the true (albeit pedantically) point that the wishboard is technically optimal even if running wishes isn't necessarily, so my taxes point is entirely relevant.

Nobody is forced to run anything. And people sure don't act like they are, either. I keep going back to this because nobody seems to be paying attention. TWO CARDS are above the halfway mark on EDHrec. For those who don't know, that's only looking at cards within decks they can legally be run within. AUTOINCLUDES ARE A MYTH.

And wishes, while potentially good cards, aren't that strong. For the same reason Grim Tutor doesn't get played that much (6%, and recently reprinted). A 3 mana tax is a pretty significant downside, even for a ton of flexibility. Why would someone play cunning wish when they're not even playing grim tutor? Grim hits way more things, it hits better things, and it doesn't have type restrictions.

Instead of putting Angel of Finality and Spirit of the Labyrinth in my main deck (where they used to be for my Karador deck), I can play a wish, move them to my wishboard, and now instead of having 3 slots for situational cards, I have one slot for 3 situational cards.

And when the additional mana requires prevent you from making the play you wanted to make, you'll realize that flexibility comes at a cost.

Maybe I don't want to draw redundant hate pieces once my better ones are already deployed. Now throw in a wish and instead of drawing an extra GY hate piece, I can instead play card advantage or removal.

And you will pay for that flexibility with mana.

Is Down // Dirty an upgrade on Regrowth? It offers you more flexibility, after all. The fact that it costs 1 more is just a small tax, it's pure upside!

That's the issue - wishes are so powerful in singleton that they become 'must play' cards. And that sucks.

They're not that powerful, and even if they were people still wouldn't play them because people don't play optimal decks because the percentage of players trying to fully optimize is vanishingly small.

Second issue is the people who decide to put narrow hate cards like Boil in their wishboards. It would be super strong. Sure they aren't making friends but I have 3 staxy decks as it is so why not push them the extra mile?

Anyone who's going to play that way is almost certainly outside the scope of the intended rules. The format is breakable, but it's best when you choose not to.

Also tbh it's probably not even that good. Nobody plays Wake of Destruction. There's too much multicolor and nonbasics.

If Carpet of Flower is a cEDH staple then wouldn't one-sided land destruction also become a staple?

I kinda doubt it. Especially since they'd feel the tax much more strongly than your average 15-turn casual slog.

And from cEDH bleed into casual edh?

Ah, the good old slippery slope.

Sure this is just conjecture, but I just don't get the pros to making wishes legal. It would suck.

While I can appreciate the person who says "who cares, there aren't that many wishes, just play other cards" - and that is a fair argument - this position is incredibly hypocritical coming from you.

The fact remains that BaaC would allow people to play cards they like. I really like Braids
...
BaaC may cause people to dismantle decks, but if they like the card, they can still play it, and that's a big plus.

So when we need to modify the rules to let YOU play the cards YOU like, then it's a positive. But when it's cards that OTHER people want to play, now suddenly you can't see any positives.

(plus there are a whopping 4 potentially-baacable commanders on the banlist, and there are, by my count, nearly 40 cards that pull from outside the game, but having 10x the numbers is apparently irrelevant so long as they're not cards you personally want to play)

(btw, for anyone wondering how I justify being on the "free the cards!" side of this issue and the "keep them banned!" side of the BaaC argument, it's an issue of (1) rules elegance and (2) rules intuitiveness. Adding a BaaC list is pure added complexity, whereas replacing rule 11 wish a wishboard would be, imo, a lateral move in terms of complexity. And wishes just not doing anything is really clunky and weird. When someone looks at a wish and gets told "oh yeah, that just does stone nothing in commander" that seems weird and arbitrary. I know it does to me. Though I will be forthright and confess that while I have little interest in any of the banned commanders, I do have some interest in playing Cunning Wish in Phelddagrif, although that's probably the only wish I'd consider bothering with because I really don't think they're all that great and I also don't super feel like squeezing 3 more cards into my deckboxes. I don't think my slight interest in cunning wish is motivating my opinion on this issue, but it's hard to be sure.)

[Venedrex]

I think the three of you should make an hour long show where you call each other blithering idiots and compete in progressively more ridiculous MTG related challenges called Top Deck.

Warning issued for Trolling - benjameenbear

[DirkGently]

I think the three of you should make an hour long show where you call each other blithering idiots and compete in progressively more ridiculous MTG related challenges called Top Deck.

I don't think anyone in this thread is stupid. I hope that goes without saying.

I do think that people are vastly overestimating how often people will bother playing wishes, and how often they'll use them to find niche answers, and how strong those niche answers will be, as well as overvaluing the overall strength of wishes in the format.

I also do think it's pretty hypocritical for those who see value in allowing banned commanders to roam free in the 99 but don't see value in legalizing wishes.

Although, as I've said in the past, I'd personally prefer banning literally every wish if it meant we could remove rule 11. It's just so ugly and unintuitive, and it paints potentially dangerous cards with the same brush as fun cute stuff like lessons. If I'm super wrong and living wish is a big problem, then it's an easy fix - just ban it. The banlist is the way to solve problematic cards, not the ruleset.

[Sharpened]

Although, as I've said in the past, I'd personally prefer banning literally every wish if it meant we could remove rule 11. It's just so ugly and unintuitive, and it paints potentially dangerous cards with the same brush as fun cute stuff like lessons. If I'm super wrong and living wish is a big problem, then it's an easy fix - just ban it. The banlist is the way to solve problematic cards, not the ruleset.

Rule 11 is needed more for clarification than anything else. It doesn't do anything.

Wishes can only get cards from sideboards.
Commander decks have no sideboards, by the rules of the format.
When wishes resolve, they find nothing.

Rule 11 just explicitly states what the rules implicitly express.

And before Legend comes in her with "That's only in sanctioned matches", when you sit down to play a game of a specified format, you play by the sanctioned rules, unless otherwise specified. If you sit down to play a game of Legacy with someone, and cast a wish, the expectation would be it would get from your sideboard. If you sit down to play a game of Commander, the expectation is the sanctioned rules. Now Rule 0 encourages people to modify those rules as they see fit, but there is no way the default is going to change from sanctioned.

[Dunharrow]

It is about restrictions. You have 100 cards and you have to figure out how many hate card you want, how many answers you want.

I was hoping someone would bring this argument up, because it's quite bad.

Getting to play more than 100 cards does not make one's deck better even if one "has more options". There's a reason virtually all competitive decklists are precisely the minimum number of cards in every format in every game. We can go into more detail if you want, but that fact alone should probably tell you you're making a mistake.

LOL okay sir. I am not saying that wishes present the ability to play more than 100 cards. My point was that you turn 3 marginal slots into a wish and now you have gained two slots. 100 cards is a restriction many of us would do without, so gaining 2 slots is pretty enticing.

Wishes present [...] an all upside situation.

oh boy, ALL UPSIDE! That's so exciting!

All upside is not exciting. Golos is not exciting. Sol Ring is not exciting. All upside skews commander.

albeit with a small tax

......

You're not with the IRS, are you?

Okay, sorry, dumb jokes aside, I'll break down why this is entirely different from the Lutri situation since that seems like what you're comparing this to. With Lutri, there actually is no downside to including lutri in your deck. Having Lutri as a companion can never have any negative impact on your available options because there is no cost (yeah, yeah, you can't play relentless rats, but that doesn't really count). That is not true for a wishes. Wishes take up a slot in your deck. A flexible slot, yes, but it's still a card that you'll draw and sometimes really wish it was a different card. Just as demonic tutor is usually a good draw, but sometimes you'll really wish you drew something else. Except moreso because a limited-size-wishboard wish is way way way way weaker than demonic tutor. Sometimes the "tax" is a problem, because you're mana screwed and can't pay it, or because the play you want becomes too expensive. Sometimes the cards you set aside don't do what you need. Much like a charm, it's flexible, but it's overcosted and it doesn't do everything.

Wishes do not take a slot in your deck. They create two new slots.
And if your argument against wishes being ubiquitous is that Demonic Tutor is sometimes a bad draw, you can consider this conversation over. I am done with it. Demonic Tutor is one of the most powerful cards in the game. Sometimes Gaea's Cradle is a bad draw too.

Now, you could argue that it's pure upside to include a wishboard, regardless of whether you actually play any wishes, because having a wishboard does give you additional options without costing anything, even if the wish itself DOES cost something. And that's true pedantically...but who gives a crap? How many people are actually going to feel like they need to make a wishboard just in case someone plays Cunning Wish into Hive Mind? It's technically an advantage, but it's so incredibly unlikely to come up that no actual human being is ever going to bother. If this was the format of the next pro tour then maybe it would be annoying, but this is a casual format played mostly by noobs. One extremely tryhard cedh player is going to build a wishboard without wishes and then spend all his time explaining how he's technically getting an advantage to a bunch of people who don't care and just want to drink beer.

Not even sure what this is about. I would laugh so hard if someone had a wishboard without wishes in their deck. I supposed you could always cast other people wishes off of a Chaos Wand so maybe it would come up, but it's just hilarious.

And this will force people to play wishes.

I'll point out that this statement implies that you weren't arguing the true (albeit pedantically) point that the wishboard is technically optimal even if running wishes isn't necessarily, so my taxes point is entirely relevant.

And now we return to taxes - 2 mana is just not that bad. Fae of Wishes // Granted would probably not get played but that's like comparing Demonic and Diabolic Tutors.

Nobody is forced to run anything. And people sure don't act like they are, either. I keep going back to this because nobody seems to be paying attention. TWO CARDS are above the halfway mark on EDHrec. For those who don't know, that's only looking at cards within decks they can legally be run within. AUTOINCLUDES ARE A MYTH.

Okay let's focus on this for a second. If someone doesn't put Sol Ring in their deck, would you say it is a mistake? 99% of the time it is. Now, I would argue that Mana Crypt should also be an auto-include, but it isn't because of the price tag. That kinda sucks for people who can't afford a mana crypt. It's such an obviously powerful card.
Now, unless they start reprinting wishes like crazy, what do you think would happen to the price of wishes if they were supported in Commander? It will present another feels bad situation where you can't play obviously powerful cards in every deck even though really you should.
Just because a card is must-play doesn't mean people actually play it. I am betting a lot of people would not have played Lutri, the Spellchaser because of price and because of other reasons.
The issue is the weird pressure to make people feel like they have to play cards. Doesn't mean play of Living Wish would be 100% of green decks. The issue is that 99% of the time, the right thing to do is to play a wish in your deck. And that's weird.

And wishes, while potentially good cards, aren't that strong. For the same reason Grim Tutor doesn't get played that much (6%, and recently reprinted). A 3 mana tax is a pretty significant downside, even for a ton of flexibility. Why would someone play cunning wish when they're not even playing grim tutor? Grim hits way more things, it hits better things, and it doesn't have type restrictions.

Tutors take up slots in your deck. Wishes create slots in your deck. I would play Burning Wish over Vampiric Tutor.

Instead of putting Angel of Finality and Spirit of the Labyrinth in my main deck (where they used to be for my Karador deck), I can play a wish, move them to my wishboard, and now instead of having 3 slots for situational cards, I have one slot for 3 situational cards.

And when the additional mana requires prevent you from making the play you wanted to make, you'll realize that flexibility comes at a cost.

you like coming back to the added cost. In a format with as much ramp as commander, I feel like you overvalue the added cost. To me this is like saying 'don't play Craterhoof Behemoth because sometimes it will be stuck in your hand, instead play Overrun.' The value of wishes greatly outweighs the added cost. Also, you play one wish with a 3 card wishboard. So you pick the best one. Nobody is playing Fae of Wishes with a 3 card wishboard. In that sense, I think you have succeeded in making something more interesting than a bigger wishboard.

Maybe I don't want to draw redundant hate pieces once my better ones are already deployed. Now throw in a wish and instead of drawing an extra GY hate piece, I can instead play card advantage or removal.

And you will pay for that flexibility with mana.

yes because flexibility is worth a lot. Why do you think commands and charms are so popular?

Is Down // Dirty an upgrade on Regrowth? It offers you more flexibility, after all. The fact that it costs 1 more is just a small tax, it's pure upside!

In this case Down is so worthless is commander that the answer is no. But Eternal Witness is played more than Regrowth in my experience. A better comparison would be Bala Ged Recovery // Bala Ged Sanctuary, and yes, I think this is 100% better than regrowth.

That's the issue - wishes are so powerful in singleton that they become 'must play' cards. And that sucks.

They're not that powerful, and even if they were people still wouldn't play them because people don't play optimal decks because the percentage of players trying to fully optimize is vanishingly small.

You don't think they're powerful but you are willing to spend hours a day arguing that they should be in commander.......

Second issue is the people who decide to put narrow hate cards like Boil in their wishboards. It would be super strong. Sure they aren't making friends but I have 3 staxy decks as it is so why not push them the extra mile?

Anyone who's going to play that way is almost certainly outside the scope of the intended rules. The format is breakable, but it's best when you choose not to.

okay enjoy your playgroup where nobody plays stax or mld, but some of us encounter this regularly and have no issues with it.

Also tbh it's probably not even that good. Nobody plays Wake of Destruction. There's too much multicolor and nonbasics.

If Carpet of Flower is a cEDH staple then wouldn't one-sided land destruction also become a staple?

I kinda doubt it. Especially since they'd feel the tax much more strongly than your average 15-turn casual slog.

First, Boil hits dual lands, shocklands, etc. Second, cEDH plays more tutors than any format. This is the format that plays Grim Tutor. So ya, I am sure that people would make use of wishboards.

And from cEDH bleed into casual edh?

Ah, the good old slippery slope.

Sure this is just conjecture, but I just don't get the pros to making wishes legal. It would suck.

While I can appreciate the person who says "who cares, there aren't that many wishes, just play other cards" - and that is a fair argument - this position is incredibly hypocritical coming from you.

What - not sure what you are saying. When was I hypocritical?

The fact remains that BaaC would allow people to play cards they like. I really like Braids
...
BaaC may cause people to dismantle decks, but if they like the card, they can still play it, and that's a big plus.

So when we need to modify the rules to let YOU play the cards YOU like, then it's a positive. But when it's cards that OTHER people want to play, now suddenly you can't see any positives.

(plus there are a whopping 4 potentially-baacable commanders on the banlist, and there are, by my count, nearly 40 cards that pull from outside the game, but having 10x the numbers is apparently irrelevant so long as they're not cards you personally want to play)

(btw, for anyone wondering how I justify being on the "free the cards!" side of this issue and the "keep them banned!" side of the BaaC argument, it's an issue of (1) rules elegance and (2) rules intuitiveness. Adding a BaaC list is pure added complexity, whereas replacing rule 11 wish a wishboard would be, imo, a lateral move in terms of complexity. And wishes just not doing anything is really clunky and weird. When someone looks at a wish and gets told "oh yeah, that just does stone nothing in commander" that seems weird and arbitrary. I know it does to me. Though I will be forthright and confess that while I have little interest in any of the banned commanders, I do have some interest in playing Cunning Wish in Phelddagrif, although that's probably the only wish I'd consider bothering with because I really don't think they're all that great and I also don't super feel like squeezing 3 more cards into my deckboxes. I don't think my slight interest in cunning wish is motivating my opinion on this issue, but it's hard to be sure.)

And now we come to the part of your post I most wanted to address. Did you go back months to cherry pick this quote of mine from another thread? How long did you search for it?
Also, you miss my point. I want BaaC to come back for 2 reasons. Sure, I want to play braids. But mainly, I want the RC to feel more at ease banning problematic commanders like Golos and Kinnan. They feel bad banning cards, and I think BaaC is a good halfway measure so that people can still play with their pet cards, just not as commanders. I know this doesn't satisfy many people, but I think it is better than having ubiquitously strong commanders.

So ya, you want to play your wishes and I don't see the relation to BaaC, except you think I want 4 cards unbanned and you want 10x more, which is not something I care about, and also a completely fundamentally different kind of argument from any of the ones I have made against wishes.

[Legend]

...when you sit down to play a game of a specified format, you play by the sanctioned rules, unless otherwise specified.

Incorrect. The reverse is true. You might even say, "especially" in Commander. The rules of any given format, though "sanctioned", do not make a game, match, or tournament "sanctioned".