Dear commander design team

[duducrash]

If I had one personal message to whoever designs stuff is : staples suck for the format.

If the reason of existing and driving force of the format, auto includes are antagonistic to our core values. They cant undesign older sets, but arcane signet and jeska's will that will go in every deck suck for the format imho

[DirkGently]

I think people overreact about staples.

For one thing, not every deck I've built wants arcane signet - if my commander costs 3 (or especially if it costs 2) then I'm probably not interested. There's very few cards that are universally useful.

For a second thing, it's not like arcane signet replaced an exciting, deck-defining card in any of my decks. It replaced some other slightly-worse mana rock that was similarly boring.

For a third thing, if you're actually finding your lists are getting overrun with "staples", imo that's on you. Don't let the strength of individual cards push you around on your deck's identity. You don't have to play anything if you don't want to. One example I remember from ages ago was putting Luminarch Ascension into some white deck I had - probably equipment or something. I had a game where I T2ed the ascension and then won via pumping all my mana into it without doing what my deck was intended to do. I immediately cut ascension and don't play it anymore except in decks where it's integrated into the plan.

god i love being contrarian

[duducrash]

.

For a third thing, if you're actually finding your lists are getting overrun with "staples", imo that's on you.

I dont brew the lists I play against unfortunately. Like I said, if the whole reason of being/driving force of the format is creativity and card diversity. A card being generally good in 3/4 of strategies its antsgonistic to the core values previoisly estabilished

[TheAmericanSpirit]

@DirkGently

I'm with you on the personal responsibility about staples bit, and I want to add on that I've seen a number of budget decks do some whomping over the course of my experience. A card like Dockside can deliver a lot of mana now, but so can Burnt Offering if you build with it in mind. Staples more or less reduce the onus on a player's deckbuilding ability to perform well by providing super solid glue to even the most ragtag concepts. Removing them instead presents the challenge of min/maxing a deck the hard way, but comparable power is achievable even at low budgets if you're sufficiently dedicated or talented.

Of course, none of this applies to cedh, but those people allow proxies so whatever.

[DirkGently]

I dont brew the lists I play against unfortunately.

Why not?

Maybe there's extraneous circumstances I'm not appreciating but it seems weird to complain that decks aren't creative enough while not making your own deck. It's like the guy that doesn't vote but then complains about politicians.

Like I said, if the whole reason of being/driving force of the format is creativity and card diversity.

And some boring staple existing doesn't prevent you from using that wide diversity. I've got a collection of 10K cards and I've used most of them in at least one deck.

A card being generally good in 3/4 of strategies its antsgonistic to the core values previoisly estabilished

I'd say depends on the card. Sol ring goes into almost every deck, but what would be there instead? Another land probably? Maybe another boring mana rock? There are cards like craterhoof that kind of reduce variety by being the default finisher for every green token deck, but still no one is making you use it if you'd rather use something more original.

[duducrash]

I dont brew the lists I play against unfortunately.

Why not?

Maybe there's extraneous circumstances I'm not appreciating but it seems weird to complain that decks aren't creative enough while not making your own deck. It's like the guy that doesn't vote but then complains about politicians.

Like I said, if the whole reason of being/driving force of the format is creativity and card diversity.

And some boring staple existing doesn't prevent you from using that wide diversity. I've got a collection of 10K cards and I've used most of them in at least one deck.

A card being generally good in 3/4 of strategies its antsgonistic to the core values previoisly estabilished

I'd say depends on the card. Sol ring goes into almost every deck, but what would be there instead? Another land probably? Maybe another boring mana rock? There are cards like craterhoof that kind of reduce variety by being the default finisher for every green token deck, but still no one is making you use it if you'd rather use something more original.

*Against* is the word that is causing confusion, since english isnt my primary language I'll assume I scewed up.

But I do not brew the decks other people play. The decksI play against

[DirkGently]

*Against* is the word that is causing confusion, since english isnt my primary language I'll assume I scewed up.

But I do not brew the decks other people play. The decksI play against

Nope, that's my bad lol. Rtfc(omment) I guess.

Personally, the variety I play against is usually satisfactory. There are overplayed staples, but there are also a wider variety of strategies with every set and precon release, so I think it balances out more or less. There are some cards I'd be happy to see go, but bland ramp spells like signet aren't the kind that bother me.

[TheAmericanSpirit]

Yeah, Dirk! Why don't you brew the decks you play against, eh? Heck, brew me up one while you're at it and I'll meet you on the field of honorable combat streamed live before the audience of Nexus itself.

The terms:

Each player must play DirkGently brewed deck, perhaps as seen in your signature and perhaps selected at random(?)

The format can be either 1v1, multiplayer, or 2HG (if chosen, we may choose our partner on the basis of preference and availability) and this choice is the sole discretion of the challenged.

The winner gets eternal bragging rights and determines the terms for future rematches and title matches. In the case of a draw, the previous champion will retain the title.

So what say you? Do you dare to face down that which is bourne of your own creativity?

(I'm mostly kidding, but at the same time, it does sound like fun. The Gently Cup, if you will. Gotta find a working webcam first though lol)

[DirkGently]

Funnily enough I don't usually like playing against my own decks. Not sure if that's because it feels like beating up my own children, or if it's just my general aversion to letting other people handle my cards.

That said, given my current dearth of options for playing commander, I'd be down to play some online and/or stream it. If someone wants to use one of my own decklists go nuts lol. It'd be kinda interesting playing against Phelddagrif tbh. No 2hg though, I'm all about that FFA.

(Oh god, 4 player all Phelddagrif match xD the game that never ends...)

[TheAmericanSpirit]

(Oh god, 4 player all Phelddagrif match xD the game that never ends...)

This is actually a great idea. We could even run it like one of those "last couple standing" dances and play for up to 24 hours live and maybe raise some good charity money if there was enough interest. I know at least a few people around here are running a copy of your brainchild (myself included) so it's surprisingly doable.

That being said, it does sound like a nightmarish %$#% storm of interaction and politics. Who has the least noticeable deck? How do four players all vie for the appearance of third place? How do we decide who gets hippos when we can all dole 'em out at will? Truly an experiment for the ages.

[NebulaMink]

I've almost entirely quit playing because I grew increasingly uncomfortable with the direction the format (and game as a whole) was taking. I don't think it's individual cards that're the issue (except Dockside), but I completely agree that there's been far too much emphasis on Shard/Wedge Commanders in the last few years of card design, and that this has negatively affected the format.

The main issue however, is that cards can't be 'unprinted', and the RC/CAG are naturally going to avoid shaking the boat where they can to avoid any untoward issues developing. This leaves the format in a situation where the RC/CAG can be like "This card seems unfun", but then have content creators openly encouraging the use of the card, thus slowly degrading the quality of game experiences over time.

As an individual, I ended up developing an unhealthy obsession with 'optimising' my decks as a result of previous negative experiences with some of the more 'problematic' recent Commander options. This ultimately killed all of the enjoyment of the format for me, as I ended up either dismissing a deck idea because "It couldn't beat a Turn 4 combo deck", or because it relied on heavy use of Stax effects (which I have a personal distaste against playing myself), or outright optimising a deck to cEDH levels, becoming disillusioned because of the optimising taking all the fun out of the original deck idea, and it becoming an increasingly stressful experience.

[DirkGently]

(Oh god, 4 player all Phelddagrif match xD the game that never ends...)

This is actually a great idea. We could even run it like one of those "last couple standing" dances and play for up to 24 hours live and maybe raise some good charity money if there was enough interest. I know at least a few people around here are running a copy of your brainchild (myself included) so it's surprisingly doable.

That being said, it does sound like a nightmarish %$#% storm of interaction and politics. Who has the least noticeable deck? How do four players all vie for the appearance of third place? How do we decide who gets hippos when we can all dole 'em out at will? Truly an experiment for the ages.

I think it'd be about as close to "Diplomacy" as magic can get. Everyone has the ability to give a big army to anyone else, most of the cards in their hand are useless (all the targeted removal, counterspells are of middling usefulness, and board wipes are either useless or important depending how the whole hippo token situation goes). The game could easily be narrowed down quickly if 3 people agree to give each other hippos to kill the 4th player and so forth...so it could be reasonably fast or mind-numbingly slow depending on how people politic and how wary of each other they are. If no one is willing to imbalance the scales a bit, then it could literally go to decking pretty easily (at which point it's whoever can resolve a nexus of fate I guess).

But yeah I mean as soon as anyone gets too powerful (with what?), everyone else can give each other tons of draw, tokens, life, etc so unless someone goes rogue or people start forming lasting alliances there's be basically no way to win until people start counting the cards left in deck lmao. I'm betting that eventually it would come down to 1 person who has no chance to win vs two people who might, and that person basically gets to pick the winner by giving one of them resources or whatever...possibly some standoff situation could arise as I hypothesized ages ago (and everyone got mad at me for suggesting lol) where the kingmaker could try to parlay his deciding "vote" into some sort of chance to win an otherwise unwinnable situation - I.e. "I'll help you kill him, then we flip a coin and whoever loses forfeits". And then ofc the third player could create a counter-offer to convince one of them not to take that deal and round and round it goes with offers and counteroffers and odds and forfeits until it doesn't even begin to resemble "Magic" anymore.

Sounds excruciating.

Or if it's being played by scrubs then it just comes down to whoever draws the fewest cards because no one was paying enough attention. Probably better to be a scrub and keep your sanity tbh.

I'm going to be a bit busy for the next week or so studying for some tests I have coming up, but after that I'd be down to do some webcam-mander (not 4-griff, though, never ever). Is there a designated thread to set up games?

[Treamayne]

after that I'd be down to do some webcam-mander (not 4-griff, though, never ever). Is there a designated thread to set up games?

IIRC, most of the set-up and coordination takes place on the NPT Discord (or used to do so), which can also be used for communication during the game:

https://discord.gg/EyPdHUXU

[Jemolk]

The main issue however, is that cards can't be 'unprinted', and the RC/CAG are naturally going to avoid shaking the boat where they can to avoid any untoward issues developing. This leaves the format in a situation where the RC/CAG can be like "This card seems unfun", but then have content creators openly encouraging the use of the card, thus slowly degrading the quality of game experiences over time.

I think the "content creators openly encouraging the use of the card" bit hits the nail on the head for what the actual problem is. The whole "OMG, card so good, play it in every deck!" video spam messes with people's ability to maintain a relatively comfortable level of play (in more open environments like LGSs especially) whenever new, overpowered cards get printed. Doesn't help that social media algorithms heavily incentivise early and frequent hot takes over more reasoned, sensibly paced discourse, either -- I think that's a large part of what pushes the content creators to feed the problem like that.

[DirkGently]

I wouldn't put too much blame at the feet of content creators. No offense to any of them but none of them are all that big. While they contribute, I think most of the "powerful = good" mentality is primarily perpetuated by the players, especially those who have migrated from other formats where intentionally mediating power isn't part of the game. And the more popular that view becomes, the harder it is to stop since the opposition sounds more and more like salty losers who just can't compete. The only way out is to master the art of being passive aggressive - "Craterhoof? I wouldn't play it, but don't let me tell you how to have fun..."

[materpillar]

I wouldn't put too much blame at the feet of content creators. No offense to any of them but none of them are all that big. While they contribute, I think most of the "powerful = good" mentality is primarily perpetuated by the players, especially those who have migrated from other formats where intentionally mediating power isn't part of the game. And the more popular that view becomes, the harder it is to stop since the opposition sounds more and more like salty losers who just can't compete. The only way out is to master the art of being passive aggressive - "Craterhoof? I wouldn't play it, but don't let me tell you how to have fun..."

My preferred response to seeing Craterhoof Behemoth resolve is to roll my eyes so hard everyone a few tables over can feel it. The trick is to really put your neck into it.

[toctheyounger]

I wouldn't put too much blame at the feet of content creators. No offense to any of them but none of them are all that big. While they contribute, I think most of the "powerful = good" mentality is primarily perpetuated by the players, especially those who have migrated from other formats where intentionally mediating power isn't part of the game. And the more popular that view becomes, the harder it is to stop since the opposition sounds more and more like salty losers who just can't compete. The only way out is to master the art of being passive aggressive - "Craterhoof? I wouldn't play it, but don't let me tell you how to have fun..."

My preferred response to seeing Craterhoof Behemoth resolve is to roll my eyes so hard everyone a few tables over can feel it. The trick is to really put your neck into it.

For myself I let out an almighty groan so agonizing people think I have a kidney stone.

[kirkusjones]

Let them that hath never resolveth the Hoof cast the first…
…Behemoth? Stone Elemental? Don't fling $&@+ in glass houses? The train of thought has jumped the tracks, please stand clear of the closing doors.

[DirkGently]

Let them that hath never resolveth the Hoof cast the first…
…Behemoth? Stone Elemental? Don't fling $&@+ in glass houses? The train of thought has jumped the tracks, please stand clear of the closing doors.

I actually may have never cast craterhoof. I have all my old mtgsally decks in text files (copied them when it seemed like sally was going to be deleted) so they were easy to search, and only one deck has it listed, my Saffi deck from 2013 which I played maybe 3 times or so. Although it's also possible I cast it while borrowing a deck but I don't think that should count.

[kirkusjones]

@DirkGently, you may be the Andy Kaufman of EDH. I salute you.

[Venedrex]

Ha, I see this game of "I haven't cast a Craterhoof" and I raise you this: I haven't cast a craterhoof OR a cyclonic rift. Take that! This might be the only time my cheap habits allow for bragging rights, so here I am lol. Insert tapping forehead meme: "Can't cast staples if you're too broke to buy them". Plus I've been too chicken to play in person because of Covid so I haven't been playing much EDH either, although I really want to.

[TheGildedGoose]

Whining about staples is hilarious to me because no one ever applies it to manabases, particularly fetches, which are more egregious in tandem with shocks and duals than any other cards in the format not named Mana Crypt or Sol Ring. It is completely absurd to me that four and five color decks can exist with virtually zero color production issues and everyone is okay with that, but if you cast an eight mana creature that requires a %$#%$#% board state you become persona non grata.

Now I have the urge to build a blue-based mana denial deck, because %$#% your lands.

[Venedrex]

Whining about staples is hilarious to me because no one ever applies it to manabases, particularly fetches, which are more egregious in tandem with shocks and duals than any other cards in the format not named Mana Crypt or Sol Ring. It is completely absurd to me that four and five color decks can exist with virtually zero color production issues and everyone is okay with that, but if you cast an eight mana creature that requires a %$#%$#% board state you become persona non grata.

Now I have the urge to build a blue-based mana denial deck, because %$#% your lands.

Finally, someone who speaks my language. I despise fetches for that same reason. Oh no the best decks in the format have mana fixing that makes WUBRG look like CCCCC. Lol. The only reason not to play 4-5 color (from a I want to have the most strictly powerful deck standpoint) is because your mana might fail you. But with fetches duals, shocks, triomes, etc etc, that goes out the window.

Mono color decks need all the help they can get, but five color soup somehow is allowed perfect mana, thanks to the litany of options for ramp and fixing.
It should be hard to cast all your spells in five color. But it never is because every card fixes your mana and shoves you along. Rampant growth? Dryad of the Ilysian Grove? Arcane Signet? All examples of cards that don't need to fix mana. How about green just got Forests, instead of every type of land?

Oh no my five color goodstuff might not be able to slam Niv-Mizzet Reborn on turn four because my paradise druid just taps for G instead of any color. Meanwhile Mono R decks are just thankful to be able to play magic because of impulse draw.

Anyhow I just wish I could still play some fun games on Arena brawl vs Golos/Niv/Kenrith. Said no one ever. I have had enough five color soup in my time playing Magic to make me vomit thank you very much. It tastes a little too rich for me.

[Dunharrow]

I've almost entirely quit playing because I grew increasingly uncomfortable with the direction the format (and game as a whole) was taking. I don't think it's individual cards that're the issue (except Dockside), but I completely agree that there's been far too much emphasis on Shard/Wedge Commanders in the last few years of card design, and that this has negatively affected the format.

The main issue however, is that cards can't be 'unprinted', and the RC/CAG are naturally going to avoid shaking the boat where they can to avoid any untoward issues developing. This leaves the format in a situation where the RC/CAG can be like "This card seems unfun", but then have content creators openly encouraging the use of the card, thus slowly degrading the quality of game experiences over time.

As an individual, I ended up developing an unhealthy obsession with 'optimising' my decks as a result of previous negative experiences with some of the more 'problematic' recent Commander options. This ultimately killed all of the enjoyment of the format for me, as I ended up either dismissing a deck idea because "It couldn't beat a Turn 4 combo deck", or because it relied on heavy use of Stax effects (which I have a personal distaste against playing myself), or outright optimising a deck to cEDH levels, becoming disillusioned because of the optimising taking all the fun out of the original deck idea, and it becoming an increasingly stressful experience.

Put restrictions on the decks you build. Put a budget restriction. Put a creature type restriction. Limit yourself to creatures looking to the left.
Whatever it is, it will bring back the fun in the game, provided you are playing against people playing for fun. If you like commander as casual format, stay the hell away from cEDH.

[kraus911]

I commented this on their video. Be the change you want to see and all that. A lot of these issues are valid and their show exacerbated them by exhibiting decks using the problems they're pointing out. Here's hoping the show uses deck restrictions to slow down their games and use fewer overly expensive staples that aren't on the reserved list. Don't put the onus just on Wizards because your show drives a lot of people's deck building.