Where is the line between Brackets 2 and 3?

[DirkGently]

This isn't how they're defined though. There is room between stock-in-box and "plays busted resource engine cards" ultimately. And I think this is the most murky area where the brackets need more definition as a whole.

How do you define "busted engine cards"? Most powerful engines have been printed in a precon at some point or another (off the top of my head, i know skullclamp was printed into the mardu precon from dragonstorm). I don't think you can establish the power level of a deck from a single card. Of course, some cards (armageddon, for example) are nasty enough to be excluded from lower-powered, socially-oriented games, but engine cards are rarely in that category, so you need to know the context of the deck to determine what bracket they should be in.

Necropotence in a combo deck? Probably tier 3, 4 or 5. Necropotence in a mono-black demon tribal deck? Probably tier 1 or 2.

[3drinks]

There is indeed room between precons and busted resource engine based decks. I think the problem here is the assumption that bracket 3 automatically means busted resource engines.

The Game Changers are full of cards that create an egregious amount of resources, typically with one card (rhystic, smothering). Ergo when one is playing at B3 and beyond, one must expect to face said resource engines - even if you're not playing them.

How do you define "busted engine cards"? Most powerful engines have been printed in a precon at some point or another (off the top of my head, i know skullclamp was printed into the mardu precon from dragonstorm). I don't think you can establish the power level of a deck from a single card. Of course, some cards (armageddon, for example) are nasty enough to be excluded from lower-powered, socially-oriented games, but engine cards are rarely in that category, so you need to know the context of the deck to determine what bracket they should be in.

Necropotence in a combo deck? Probably tier 3, 4 or 5. Necropotence in a mono-black demon tribal deck? Probably tier 1 or 2.

Single cards that take over a game with little to no build around, typically notated by cards that single handedly shape the game (one might call these types of cards capable of...changing the game). Rhystic Study being the posterchild for this, Smothering Tithe, even Cyclonic Rift as an instant speed asymmetrical board wipe. Grave Pact totally fits into that category despite it's status as "not technically a game changer" while it quite literally changes the axis the game is played on. I'd argue Skullclamp isn't such as it does need a specific deck - try putting it in a deck of fat creatures and watch it flail, for example.

[DirkGently]

Grave pact has been in a precon. One of The first precons, in fact.

If someone has rhystic or tithe in an otherwise weak deck it's not necessarily a problem power-wise. Of course once you start stacking up strong cards it becomes more likely that the deck will be powerful.

[yeti1069]

I'm still thoroughly confused about where B2 becomes B3.

Played a game vs Satya, Aetherflux Genius. They had 2 Mother of Runes, Kairi, the Swirling Sky, and Guide of Souls making it incredibly difficult to build a board or affect their board. Their Combat Celebrant had gotten exiled and stolen by an Etali, but that's infinite combats if they have a way to ensure Satya and the CC copy don't die to blockers...much easier with the two Moms. Instead, on turn 7 they dropped Lightning Runner with some energy stockpiled. The Moms ensured Satya and Lightning couldn't be profitably blocked, and copied Kairi to bounce the remaining dangerous blockers on one player, then proceeded to infinite combats, giving Satya and the Lightning Runners more protections each time, until they were fully unblockable.

Admittedly, there was basically no interaction that game from anyone else, but I also would have had very few answers to 2 Moms other than one of my two wipes. I didn't see the whole decklist, but 2 different routes to infinite combats, two ways to protect or grant evasion, and an infinite combat win on turn 7 just feels like more than B2 to me.

It's not a matter of complaining about a mismatch, per se, but more just being baffled about what B2 looks like. Should I be building infinite combos into my slightly upgraded precons?

[3drinks]

Two card combos are typically late game B3 outcomes. But that's not what infinite combat is, especially the lightning runner setup. There's a lot of pieces working here - mom ×2, guide of souls, something that's giving combat (I can't read, the autocard isn't throwing up a preview), something I'm assuming is the commander? That's an at least five card combo on its own and I'm struggling to see the problem. That's like getting mad because someone attacked with five creatures. Reads a awful lot like sour grapes to me.

Savage Ventmaw + Agg Ass is a genuine two card combo. And if someone is walking into a B2 table with that, okay, let's have a post game conversation about it. But someone assembling 5+ cards through three people at multiple interaction points and no one had a response at any point? That's the table's fault right there. How else were you expecting people to win?

edit: On desktop so the auto card is throwing up previews again (so it's a mobile browser issue @Feyd_Ruin).

Played a game vs Satya, Aetherflux Genius. They had 2 Mother of Runes, Kairi, the Swirling Sky, and Guide of Souls making it incredibly difficult to build a board or affect their board. Their Combat Celebrant had gotten exiled and stolen by an Etali, but that's infinite combats if they have a way to ensure Satya and the CC copy don't die to blockers...much easier with the two Moms. Instead, on turn 7 they dropped Lightning Runner with some energy stockpiled. The Moms ensured Satya and Lightning couldn't be profitably blocked, and copied Kairi to bounce the remaining dangerous blockers on one player, then proceeded to infinite combats, giving Satya and the Lightning Runners more protections each time, until they were fully unblockable.

Let me try to parse this setup that's happening now that I can read the cards. Satya attacks and generates 2 energy (3 with guide of souls). A lightning runner + token lightning runner is four more energy (we're up to 7), so a token guide of souls would set this up. So three cards + two token copies and pray no one has any interaction (Settle the Wreckage is incredibly clean and efficient here but Aetherize does the job for 0.21¢). Your gripe is that no one else had interaction, and judging from your post you're light on interaction (I'd call two sweepers light). As a result you lost to a five piece vulnerable synergy pile because you hoped for someone else to cover your ass and they didn't have it. 100% sour grapes.

[Moxnix]

I think its pretty simple you can run necro in a casual demons deck but you cant run in it in a 1-2 deck well you could but i would assume if i saw a necro in a 1-2 the builder is either a complete noob who cant understand the idea behind the bracket or trying to min max beyond the intent of the bracket. We are past this could be weak in the deck in 2025 everyone knows the cards reputations its like if you want to min max for another set of rules do it like on mtgo where people say "sweaty 2" then you can play all the mana drains and combo loops you want. I dont mind playing b2 or b3 cedh style but like i dont need any measurable metric you can feel the intent and power of a deck as you see its lines unfold as it plays even a single game. So if its a noob with a necro or a veteran with a min maxed type of build will be incredibly obvious. You can play "Sphinx Tribal" but f your lines feel and play like a turn 5 high tide storm pile does it really matter if the other guys rocking a raw precon with 30 total hours played in the game? So sure the builds more important but the second i see a necro type card I instantly ask myself "noob or that guy?" But in some cases you dont know even me look at the guys post above i also made a aetehrflux deck just like that guy tossed in random energy cards had not tuned it at all and the first 2 games i won on turns 5-7ish both with infinite combats off lighting and btw when i added it i had no idea it had anyway of doing this it just looked strong and had energy on it. So in that case its entirely possible that guy also did the same thing but either way ive seen bracket 2 played as a t4 cedh format and the only time i ever see it as anywhere close to prevons is at my lgs with actual noobs more than 10 years younger than me with small collections and play times.

[yeti1069]

Two card combos are typically late game B3 outcomes. But that's not what infinite combat is, especially the lightning runner setup. There's a lot of pieces working here - mom ×2, guide of souls, something that's giving combat (I can't read, the autocard isn't throwing up a preview), something I'm assuming is the commander? That's an at least five card combo on its own and I'm struggling to see the problem. That's like getting mad because someone attacked with five creatures. Reads a awful lot like sour grapes to me.

Savage Ventmaw + Agg Ass is a genuine two card combo. And if someone is walking into a B2 table with that, okay, let's have a post game conversation about it. But someone assembling 5+ cards through three people at multiple interaction points and no one had a response at any point? That's the table's fault right there. How else were you expecting people to win?

edit: On desktop so the auto card is throwing up previews again (so it's a mobile browser issue @Feyd_Ruin).

Played a game vs Satya, Aetherflux Genius. They had 2 Mother of Runes, Kairi, the Swirling Sky, and Guide of Souls making it incredibly difficult to build a board or affect their board. Their Combat Celebrant had gotten exiled and stolen by an Etali, but that's infinite combats if they have a way to ensure Satya and the CC copy don't die to blockers...much easier with the two Moms. Instead, on turn 7 they dropped Lightning Runner with some energy stockpiled. The Moms ensured Satya and Lightning couldn't be profitably blocked, and copied Kairi to bounce the remaining dangerous blockers on one player, then proceeded to infinite combats, giving Satya and the Lightning Runners more protections each time, until they were fully unblockable.

Let me try to parse this setup that's happening now that I can read the cards. Satya attacks and generates 2 energy (3 with guide of souls). A lightning runner + token lightning runner is four more energy (we're up to 7), so a token guide of souls would set this up. So three cards + two token copies and pray no one has any interaction (Settle the Wreckage is incredibly clean and efficient here but Aetherize does the job for 0.21¢). Your gripe is that no one else had interaction, and judging from your post you're light on interaction (I'd call two sweepers light). As a result you lost to a five piece vulnerable synergy pile because you hoped for someone else to cover your ass and they didn't have it. 100% sour grapes.

The key pieces are Satya and Runner. As long as Satya has enough energy banked, that can be infinite attacks so long as opponents don't have sufficient blockers up.

As a baseline, Satya on t3 makes 2e per turn for 10 by that attack on t7.
Runner adds 2 on the first combat (12).
Spend 8 for a second combat and untap (4).
Attacking copy of Runner.
2nd combat, swing with LRx2 making 4e and Satya (total 10).
Spend 8 for another combat (2).
Another copy of LR.
3rd combat, 3x LR + Satya is +8e.

The other energy producers just pad this total, and the Mother of Runes just ensure nothing can be blocked or interacted with. In this case, Satya has even more energy to start, so they could spend the first combat copying Kairi to bounce blockers.

My issue was that B2 tends to lean away from wins out of nowhere, and while the board was built up a bit, it was in no way especially threatening to any one player, let alone the table. It was also very difficult to interact with.
I get that the Runner comes in the precon, but the Combat Celebrant doesn't, and it could have gone infinite with Satya at 0 energy, so long as the Celebrant and copy survive each combat. Not a simple thing necessarily, but also not that big an ask, especially on the current board, where no one felt like they needed blockers back for Satya.

[Moxnix]

When i actually looked at my deck i think it had like 8 ways to loop lighting runner and i didn't even try to its just a palinchron like loop card. I only played the deck like 10 times and every win was a lighting runner infinite / close enough huge value play just a poorly designed card.

[onering]

Hot take: people cry too much about rhystic study. It becomes better the more cutthroat the meta is, because in more casual games where you aren't seriously handicapped by paying the 1, you just pay the damn 1. If people aren't being stupid, it really should be 1-2 cards a cycle, which is completely fair. Throw rhystic into bracket 2 and it's only going to be a problem if people just let them draw, or if it's a cutthroat bracket 2 meta that wants to be cEDH with a bigger banlist.

[aliciaofthevast]

Hot take: people cry too much about rhystic study. It becomes better the more cutthroat the meta is, because in more casual games where you aren't seriously handicapped by paying the 1, you just pay the damn 1. If people aren't being stupid, it really should be 1-2 cards a cycle, which is completely fair. Throw rhystic into bracket 2 and it's only going to be a problem if people just let them draw, or if it's a cutthroat bracket 2 meta that wants to be cEDH with a bigger banlist.

I think it's when you have those players that decide they're just never going to pay the 1 where rhystic study becomes a problem. It creates this situation where you lose because a different player just decided they would kingmake the game for everyone else. Otherwise, rhystic is just a three mana Sphere of Resistance which is totally fair no? And if rhystic was just a sphere, then it wouldn't be a problem. I think, your argument is like saying "Trade Secrets is fair because one player will draw two and the other will draw four" and we all know that's not how the card plays out. Same goes for rhystic study.

[Moxnix]

I agree pretending its all fine people will pay is not the realty the reality is they go nah i wont pay instead i play mirrormade and copy it or play card sphinx so your draw can be my 2 etc. Plus often players cannot pay the 1 or their assessment is i can pay the one but i will lose anyway as i cant afford the tempo loss foe whatever reason. In practice you drop it draws lots of cards you win its not as bad a necro but its easier to cast than necro and no its busted in any meta I've ever seen it played in as someone always doesn't want to pay.

[umtiger]

Hot take: people cry too much about rhystic study. It becomes better the more cutthroat the meta is, because in more casual games where you aren't seriously handicapped by paying the 1, you just pay the damn 1. If people aren't being stupid, it really should be 1-2 cards a cycle, which is completely fair. Throw rhystic into bracket 2 and it's only going to be a problem if people just let them draw, or if it's a cutthroat bracket 2 meta that wants to be cEDH with a bigger banlist.

I've played so many games where Rhystic Study and Orcish Bowmaster do less than nothing. Not everyone is double spelling every turn of every game.

Rhystic Study does absolutely nothing is precon games.

[3drinks]

*sniff* that's beautiful, Lish. You've come so far from when we first met.

[onering]

Hot take: people cry too much about rhystic study. It becomes better the more cutthroat the meta is, because in more casual games where you aren't seriously handicapped by paying the 1, you just pay the damn 1. If people aren't being stupid, it really should be 1-2 cards a cycle, which is completely fair. Throw rhystic into bracket 2 and it's only going to be a problem if people just let them draw, or if it's a cutthroat bracket 2 meta that wants to be cEDH with a bigger banlist.

I think it's when you have those players that decide they're just never going to pay the 1 where rhystic study becomes a problem. It creates this situation where you lose because a different player just decided they would kingmake the game for everyone else. Otherwise, rhystic is just a three mana Sphere of Resistance which is totally fair no? And if rhystic was just a sphere, then it wouldn't be a problem. I think, your argument is like saying "Trade Secrets is fair because one player will draw two and the other will draw four" and we all know that's not how the card plays out. Same goes for rhystic study.

No, that's faulty logic. You say "If Trade Secrets is banned because it creates an opportunity for collusion, then all cards that create an opportunity for collusion should be banned." You're if is wrong, leading to an incorrect conclusion. Your logic would result in a banlist a mile long, including Dirk's pet hippo.

Trade Secrets was banned because it created an opportunity for collusion, where collusion was always the correct choice, and resulted in almost drawing your whole deck, without any help whatsoever. All of those factors together are the problem, especially at three mana. Rhystic Study isn't anywhere close to that.

Someone misplaying and casting spells on curve when casting slightly below curve won't set them back significantly is not collusion.

Someone playing on curve because they absolutely need to is also not collusion.

Someone choosing to not pay the 1 because there is an archenemy and it's NOT the Rhystic Study player is collusion, but the sort that should be accepted as normal politics. It's "Player A is going to win unless we work together to stop him." It also doesn't create an overwhelming advantage unless it happens over the course of a few turns, or you decided to change 5-6 spells together in one turn, and that's STILL nowhere comparable to Trade Secrets.

"I'll let you draw a couple off of Rhystic if you kill that creature" is also an acceptable form of collusion. That's a deal, that doesn't create overwhelming advantage. If you think that's a problem, then so is the purple hippo.

What's neat about both of those is that you can just straight up lie. You can offer to not pay the 1 a couple of times in exchange for the Rhystic player doing something, when you already planned to not pay the 1 because your best plays wouldn't let you. You extract something from the Rhystic player at no cost to yourself.

Finally, playing something like Con Sphinx and choosing not to pay the 1 is also collusion, and goes beyond the normal politics of the other two examples. However, even this still doesn't approach the lopsided advantage of Trade Secrets. Furthermore, it requires two players to play two different cards, one of which costs six mana. That's twice the cards, three times the mana, and two different players casting them to achieve only a tenth of the power of Trade Secrets. Again, this is about the most broken sort of collusion you can pull with Rhystic Study, and it so pales in comparison to what Trade Secrets does on its own that its clearly not even in the same ballpark. Even further still, this benefits the Con Sphinx player more than the Rhystic player, whereas Trade Secrets benefits the one who is running it the most. The Rhystic Player is more likely to benefit from killing the Sphinx, because the Sphinx itself does not generate cards for the Rhystic player, only the promise that the Sphinx player not paying the 1 does, slowly, while both players are drawing cards of those two cards for other reasons. This means that there is significant pressure to break the pact, while the pact itself isn't even much more profitable than either card on its own, especially to the Rhystic player. Even if you where going to argue this interaction is problematic on a comparative level to Trade Secrets, Con Sphinx is by far the problem in the interaction, and provides many more opportunities for such collusion than Rhystic does.

The bottom line is that a resolved trade secrets would cause one of the two players to win the game. The card advantage vs the other players would be comparable to an Enter the Infinite. It's play pattern was to almost immediately make it a two person game, even in a casual meta where it wouldn't just draw a combo plus protection. The strongest cases of collusion involving Rhystic Study provide strong but not insurmountable card advantage, while requiring significantly more action and investment from the second player to even happen. Commander is a format where such interactions should come up from time to time, that has always been fine. What isn't fine is a single, three mana card causing everyone but it's caster and whoever they pick to lose 90% of the time.

[onering]

I agree pretending its all fine people will pay is not the realty the reality is they go nah i wont pay instead i play mirrormade and copy it or play card sphinx so your draw can be my 2 etc. Plus often players cannot pay the 1 or their assessment is i can pay the one but i will lose anyway as i cant afford the tempo loss foe whatever reason. In practice you drop it draws lots of cards you win its not as bad a necro but its easier to cast than necro and no its busted in any meta I've ever seen it played in as someone always doesn't want to pay.

As I say, if the tempo for your deck is more important than the card disadvantage, then your deck is strong enough that Rhystic is more than fair. If your deck isn't strong enough to overcome the card disadvantage when you are hitting perfect tempo, then you need to pay the 1 most of the time. It's really simple, and while there will be exceptions this rule will work the vast majority of the time. And the exceptions are usually pretty obvious (you don't pay the 1 when you cast a removal spell on it you know will resolve, you don't pay the 1 when you absolutely need the mana to stop someone from winning, etc).

That's why I say that, playing optimally, Rhystic should draw between 1 and 2 cards a turn, except at the highest levels where the tempo matters far more than the CA. I assume that every cycle there will be one or two spells where not paying the 1 is correct even when everyone is trying to pay as often as possible. This also assumes a 4 player pod, Rhystic is obviously much stronger in large pods and should be a rule 0 conversation in such cases.

[Moxnix]

I agree pretending its all fine people will pay is not the realty the reality is they go nah i wont pay instead i play mirrormade and copy it or play card sphinx so your draw can be my 2 etc. Plus often players cannot pay the 1 or their assessment is i can pay the one but i will lose anyway as i cant afford the tempo loss foe whatever reason. In practice you drop it draws lots of cards you win its not as bad a necro but its easier to cast than necro and no its busted in any meta I've ever seen it played in as someone always doesn't want to pay.

As I say, if the tempo for your deck is more important than the card disadvantage, then your deck is strong enough that Rhystic is more than fair. If your deck isn't strong enough to overcome the card disadvantage when you are hitting perfect tempo, then you need to pay the 1 most of the time. It's really simple, and while there will be exceptions this rule will work the vast majority of the time. And the exceptions are usually pretty obvious (you don't pay the 1 when you cast a removal spell on it you know will resolve, you don't pay the 1 when you absolutely need the mana to stop someone from winning, etc).

That's why I say that, playing optimally, Rhystic should draw between 1 and 2 cards a turn, except at the highest levels where the tempo matters far more than the CA. I assume that every cycle there will be one or two spells where not paying the 1 is correct even when everyone is trying to pay as often as possible. This also assumes a 4 player pod, Rhystic is obviously much stronger in large pods and should be a rule 0 conversation in such cases.

Its not 1:1 its FFA so if i think playing into rhystic changes my win % from 4% to 6% but it makes the rhystic players win go from 35 to 70% i dont care that i just ate the other 2 players win chances if I'm playing to win. So in practice this is what happens in fact its not the ones with strong decks who play into it as they can pay around it its the player who is weakest at the table generally who feels their pace is already too slow to win and hope the extra cards drawn are aimed elsewhere etc.

More importantly in the thousands of games I've played it almost Never plays out how you describe so its really not simple its a FFA game and if i think i can give a few cards and that you will pay then i will. I can type please dont feed remora in chat in a mtgo game on turn 1 and the second player will feed it 4 cards with no follow up. So i dont really care about what "could happen" as ive seen what "does happen" and that's it draws insane amounts of cards and wins the games. I dont think its more fair in a meta with less removal and slower curve like at all there it never dies and draws tons of cards over a longer period of time you would think in CEDH players would play around it and have removal for it but even in that meta they prefer to copy it and feed it for speed of lines so i dont know where your seeing rhystic not draw cards but for me thats in 1:1 because in fa in practice it always draws insane cards if not killed. So while its not the same Storm you cant go off with me here type card as in high power it does pretty much the same thing gets tossed out for a super cheap and easy 2U and draws 5-20 cards if not removed

[folding_music]

gawd I'd absolutely get rid of Rhystic Study in a heartbeat, not cos of kingmaking or any type of correct/incorrect play but because of the way it's literally a shibboleth one group of players uses to smack talk another

[onering]

Mox, I'm not talking about hypotheticals, I'm talking about what I've seen. We've had different experiences, simple as that, but you also frequently talk about how you prefer to play high power games, and those are the sort of games I said are more likely to result in people not paying the 1 because the tempo matters more. I expect people to never pay they 1 in cEDH, because the value of playing your lines on curve is far more important than a opponent drawing some cards off of it.

The only time Rhystic should be drawing anywhere near 20 cards is when people are prioritizing casting several spells a turn or the game is going long. If the former, the other decks should be strong enough that they are getting enough value from the temp to offset a lot of the CA, and if the latter there's literally no problem. I don't care if someone draws 20 off Rhystic because the game went to turn 14, nobody should. You'd have drawn 11 off Phyrexian Arena and that card sucks.

Feasibly, how many cards should you expect Rhystic to draw in a casual, not high power commander game by turn 10, if cast on curve? 10-12. If nobody removes it by then. Just unopposed, a couple of spells being cast without paying the 1 each cycle. Phyrexian Arena would draw 7. Phyrexian Arena sucks, it just straight up sucks. A three mana enchantment that doesn't get you the cards right away really needs to draw 1.5-2x the amount of cards to be worthwhile. Rhystic sure can draw a lot more, but it can also draw less, closer to what Phyrexian Arena draws, though it also taxes people while doing that.

It's a great card, but from what I've seen it's player error that makes it oppressive.

[Moxnix]

What I'm saying is it doesnt matter if its player error or not the reality is it draws tons of cards and wins games for too cheap it never draws less than arena and it doesnt need to draw 20 once its at 3 its better value than the standard draw and that's without taking into account how playing around it slowed players lines which is also a boon. I find it hard to believe your experience is people play around it as outside of dedicated groups who table talk 24/7 I've never seen this ever in hundreds of thousands of games lol. And your point about cedh is why the cards so good but its not limited to CEDH in FFA at any point in time if i think my win % goes up by even .01 im happy to toss every other player who doesnt own that studies in into the bin and that play pattern is not so great. I dont think it needs banned i never said that but to act like there is a world where people always pay for this card and it draws 2 or less than dies is which btw is still better than divination type stuff as they traded back a card and mana to remove it. Should be drawing doesnt really matter in practice it DOES draw 5-20 cards most games and often single handily wins them and part of the issue is its cost if it was say UUU like necro it would not be so bad but at 2U its often played on turn 1-2 and when i ramp into a draw engine and player 2 feeds me 2 cards ramping are you really telling me as player 3 your gonna pass on not play your ramp spell for on curve lines when I'm now up cards and on board mana the next guys up on board mana and your still on nothing? Like the cards stupidly good the FFA nature fo the foramt breaks it not only by virtue fo getting 3 times more action but the nature of FFA makes players MUCH less likely to pay as its not 1:1 its FFA. I dont even blame them i will blast into rhystic to make a win attempt and go well if they stop me they win but this is my best shot to win now dont care that players C and D auto lose to my line its my best line.

[onering]

Player error can be corrected, so yes that is a pretty major difference.

I haven't had much trouble getting people to pay the 1 as often as possible. At this point most people understand that anyway.


You keep insisting on what it does in practice and that I'm using a hypothetical when I've already told you that my estimate on what it should draw is based on what I've seen in practice. It's not pulled out of my ass. You have had a different experience. I'm not even sure you've played more than I have, but I am sure I've played more mid power games based solely on the games you describe playing. Remember, the core argument here is whether a Rhystic can be fine at the power level Bracket 2 is supposed to promote. At that power level, paying the 1 is usually the correct play. At higher power levels, it's often not, but higher power levels are irrelevant to the conversation because you can already play Rhystic there and those power levels can handle it.

Once again, you're giving a huge window for the cards it draws with no other context. If you mean it draws 20 cards over 3-5 turns, that is pretty overwhelming, but it also just should not happen outside of high power (maybe over 5 turns if people are playing risky). If it's happening over 10 turns, sorry that's fine. I reject out of hand the suggestion that is oppressive or just wins the game. If it's drawing 2 cards a cycle, that's strong but fair and gives the table plenty of time to remove it or even to just win before it ever gets close to 20 cards. Are you arguing that you expect it to draw 20 over 5 turns, at a casual table? I've never seen anything approaching that unless someone is being a straight up idiot and doesn't listen to the table. If it just draws 5, it needs to do so extremely quickly for it to be a big deal, and that's still not oppressive. Great rate, cool cool, that doesn't just win you the game.

Like, Necro I can understand, that actually draws you that many cards almost immediately. That actually is an oppressive card and I have rarely seen anyone lose after resolving it unless it immediately gets removed and they were using it conservatively (or they just don't know wtf they are doing). From my experience, landing a Rhystic certainly increases your chance of winning but I still expect the Rhystic player to be at least twice as likely to lose as to win when I see one drop, because they still have 3 opponents. That's an improvement from the baseline 3x as likely to lose, and a significant one, but nowhere near what would be oppressive. Hell, forget Necro, The One Ring has a greater shot of winning you the game (that round of protection is huge and it surpasses Rhystic on what I've seen to be the average draw rate by the third turn). If someone draws 6 off Rhystic over 3 cycles, I think they've done solid, The One Ring will draw the same but get them faster. Even playing on curve, by turn 6 both will have drawn you six cards. This doesn't even consider that the One Ring is much easier to synergize with, a single untap effect pulls you ahead of Rhystic a turn sooner. You need everything going your way for Rhystic to really be explosive, and that's offset by the times everyone just treats it as an obligatory tax of 1 most of the time and you come in under 2 per turn.

[Moxnix]

No it cant you cant make anyone do anything they play their own lines you can try but its not even error most the time that's what your missing. If my line is pass and asses i win 10% or all in and asses my wins 15% but that if i whiff the study player wins 84% of the time the correct play for me is to shove all in handing that payer the game for fee 8/10 times and its still my best line. So no its you who does not understand the nature of FFA and why its a bad play pattern card I've repeated it many times its really simple if rhystic is in play at least one of the players likely SHOULD be feeding it as from their objective winning perspective it still increases their own personal win%. So the play pattern is literally maybe 1-2 guys try adn play around it and one guy goes nope that's a losing way to push the game for me it only serves you two i dont care if wiffing kingmakes for that guy. that's a terrible play pattern and just the same in casual as cedh i think instead of thinking about what YOU THINK the optimal line is you should instead be focused on more relevant metrics like winrate with study in play vs not in any of the metas your trying to understand,

[onering]

Yeah, no, you're just flat wrong and assuming you're experience and you're experience alone is reality. I understand just fine, if you think handing the study player the game because you guess that it might give you a slightly better chance of winning, you don't understand ffa at all. You're misplaying by over focusing on your lines and not realizing that giving the Rhystic player another 40% win probability is directly coming at your expense.

Either that, or you are just flat out ignoring that the conversation is about mid power and that the dynamics of high power are irrelevant. Rhystic is already accepted in Bracket 4, and high level bracket 3 should absolutely be able to handle it even with people not paying the 1. Do you really expect me to believe Rhystic is regularly drawing nearly 20 cards in games that end by turn 6?

Idk man, maybe you should try talking to the table, it usually works in my experience. But sure, keep insisting you have an objective measure here when presenting ridiculous numbers. I know you like to exaggerate, but come on. You're literally falling for the prisoners dilemma and screwing yourself lol. But no, please explain how increasing one player's chances of winning from 25% to 80% increases your chances of winning. Even if you are the only other player with any chance of winning, you've just played yourself and dropped from 25% to 20%.

Oh no, one player fed the Rhystic some cards for a few turns while the others played around it, what did that do, draw fewer than the One Ring? Oh well, now the other two players are working together.

[Moxnix]

Its not misplaying like there are 4 players in the game its FFA. Lets make this hypothetical right lets assume we have a magic the gathering version of stockfish and it can calculate my exact win odds based on the lines i choose. If my personal odds of winning from any given position increase by handing another player 40% chance to win it is in fact my correct line of play if I'm playing to win. If you think everyone should always pay for study and that's always their best line your evaluation skills are very poor as that's almost never the case one of the three players will almost always have better personal win odds feeding the study. I cant even fathom having that narrow sight when it comes to lines of play that kind of shallow evaluation is weak. Why would I talk to the table I have no personal issue with the card at all I play on MTGO and in place with all noobs i crush them all anyway even with worse decks and worse lines of play. That doesnt mean i cant recognize the play pattern from the thousands of times I've seen it cast and my assessment is often the player who fed the study player was boned and would lose either way their line was fine and it was the nature of study not their choice that threw the game out of balance. You can have a differnt assessment but so far you have done a very poor job of presenting one as nothing you have said has been in the least bit compelling to me so far. The play pattern of the card is bad and it wins games on its own and i dont think it needs banned but to not recognize this and act like its fine this cards just like the one ring in terms of cards drawn and in lower power brackets devoid of things like man vault due to game changers perhaps even better though its reputation and not have indestructible kae them fairly comparable as the fog is not nearly as important as in high power and once your using combo cards like seedborn your outside the scope of the bracket anyway.

To me tho the everyone should pay for it and team them as that's all 3 of them's best line every time is a wild take in a game with 4 players and only 1 winner to me and speaks to its raw power anyway. So no i think its fine and honestly with a GC list in bracket games who cares you only get 3 if take study and one ring and necro you get no demonic tutors no fast mana etc. But simply put i see noobs at my LGS who literally play precons with rhystics jammed in as 3s do you want to guess just how much more they win when they land them on curve than normally? Like its staggering it will often draw 10+ cards over 5 turns and that players wins that's how it plays out most the time. About the only saving grace in low power is the mana curves are so clunky often they can play their lines AND pay and even then it still draws 10 for 3 all day.

[onering]

You've literally presented nothing in your argument other than numbers that show your win percentage going down based on your choice. I don't even need to see your games to know that you being ok with an opponent getting their chance to win up to 80% is going to almost always be the wrong choice. You need to be in a situation where you had like a 10% chance of winning and then you ended up getting it up to 15 based on the changed game state, but realistically being the only person to feed the Rhystic player is going to increase their chances at your expense, even if it comes at the greater expense of your other opponents.

I can see that I've run into your brick wall mode though, so I'll ignore you for awhile.

[Moxnix]

That fact your not even willing to engage with a hypothetical where feeding it is good for you personally speaks volumes as to your bias about it. Ignore me as long as you like rhystic will still have the same play patterns when your done.