MTG Commander/Elder Dragon Highlander
http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/

Rules Discussion forum rules
http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15686
Page 1 of 3

Author:  Ban Ki-moon [ 2013-Apr-08 10:02 am ]
Post subject:  Rules Discussion forum rules

The Rules Discussion forum is rather more purposeful than the rest of mtgcommander.com, and so users must abide by a stricter set of rules. The rules of the rest of the forums apply to Rules Discussion:

1. No guff, sass, flaming, effrontery or name calling. Remember that it's your opponent's argument that is stupid, not your opponent herself.

2. Cussing, cursing and swearing may be allowed, as long as it's tasteful in the context of the discussion. Heresy is broadly acceptable.

3. Gratuitously illegal, offensive or sexual material will be removed. Spam too.

Additional rules for this section of the forums:

4. No-content or low-content posts will be deleted. There are plenty of other places to practice typing. I'd recommend Random Chatter, or http://www.facebook.com.

5. An annoying game of Commander isn't a good reason to never play against someone again. Some bad games of Commander aren't a good reason to stop hanging out with pals, so don't bother offering that advice. Commander is about the power of friendship, big plays, and big hugs.

6. Don't attempt to discredit another user's argument by suggesting that he's trolling. If you see someone trolling, hit the report button and carry on. If you're not sure if someone's trolling and decide to respond anyway, respond to the 50% of him that probably isn't. I guess trolling isn't allowed either.

That's it. Enjoy yourself. Hit the report button if you see a scofflaw.

Image

Author:  Viperion [ 2013-Apr-08 10:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

You have a unique style sirrah; I like the cut of your jib.

+1 Internets for you!

Author:  cryogen [ 2013-Apr-08 11:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

Sally needs more rules like this.

Author:  crokaycete [ 2013-Apr-08 11:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

Ban Ki-moon wrote:
scofflaw
I wish all Magic-related policy used this term for a player committing an infraction.

Author:  trevor [ 2013-Apr-23 3:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

So just to be clear, people shouldn't say, "just stop playing with that guy" but the other obligatory answers (check my signature if unclear which ones I mean) are still ok?

Author:  Ban Ki-moon [ 2013-Apr-23 5:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

trevor wrote:
So just to be clear, people shouldn't say, "just stop playing with that guy" but the other obligatory answers (check my signature if unclear which ones I mean) are still ok?

no they have never been ok

Author:  green slime [ 2013-Apr-24 12:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

The "be better at this game" suggestion really, really gets my goat. It's like slapping someone with a wet fish and calling them a retard. To my knowledge, it never used to appear in this forum back when I started playing this format. Its just so damn rude and arrogant at the same time. Its increasingly frequent use (obliquely and directly) by a certain clique over the last year+ has really put me off this community. Which makes me kind of sad, because there are some damn good, friendly posters around here.

Author:  Cervid [ 2013-Apr-24 12:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

"Run more answers" isn't a good response if players are already running a reasonable amount of answers to common threats (creatures, artifacts, enchantments, lands, etc.). However, if players are forgoing answers/removal in favor of more ramp or more of their own threats, then it can be a valid suggestion. A cards power shouldn't be judged based on the fact that it can eat removal right away, but it also shouldn't be judged based on getting to stick around forever, or do whatever it wants.

Author:  Sheldon [ 2013-Apr-24 4:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

I believe officially, it's "Run more answers, n00b," but agree with the rest.

Author:  Artos [ 2013-Apr-24 4:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

green slime wrote:
The "be better at this game" suggestion really, really gets my goat. It's like slapping someone with a wet fish and calling them a retard. To my knowledge, it never used to appear in this forum back when I started playing this format. Its just so damn rude and arrogant at the same time. Its increasingly frequent use (obliquely and directly) by a certain clique over the last year+ has really put me off this community. Which makes me kind of sad, because there are some damn good, friendly posters around here.


Generally speaking I'm on board with you here. The problem is that in the last year+ it's become the norm to run 38-40 lands, 10+ ramp spells or extra lands depending on the general, and then fill the rest of the deck with bombs along the mana curve instead of running answers of any sort.

It's somewhat funny, as oftentimes you'll see people argue that we shouldn't be defining a 'meta' for EDH, but there is one that's pretty evident these days - ramp more and faster and just play more bombs than your opponents. Before the format got really popular, it was common to run significantly more answers than you see in most posted decklists these days. I hate to sound like the old guy yelling at kids to get off his lawn, but two single target removal spells and a sweeper or two are not going to get it done when everyone's playing heavy creature decks. You do need to adjust to what you're playing against at least a little.

Author:  Kemev [ 2013-Apr-24 6:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

Artos wrote:
Generally speaking I'm on board with you here. The problem is that in the last year+ it's become the norm to run 38-40 lands, 10+ ramp spells or extra lands depending on the general, and then fill the rest of the deck with bombs along the mana curve instead of running answers of any sort.


I encourage people to build their mana base that way, since it's roughly on par with how mana bases work in 60 card formats.

But that's more of a topic for the Decklists forum.

For Rules Discussion purposes, it's more about preventing argument along the lines of "There's nothing wrong with (current hot argument card) if you built your deck right," since there's no "right" way to build a deck that makes Biorhythym a better fit for the format.

The same applies for the "run more answers" argument. If Ted the New Guy asks for help with a decklist that's 40 lands, 10 Rampant Growths, and 49 Terra Stompers, I'm probably going to suggest that he adds a Naturalize to his deck. For the Rules Discussion though, there's nothing productive about arguing that the format would be more balanced if Ted would just be a better player and run more answers.

Author:  cryogen [ 2013-Apr-24 11:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

green slime wrote:
The "be better at this game" suggestion really, really gets my goat. It's like slapping someone with a wet fish and calling them a retard. To my knowledge, it never used to appear in this forum back when I started playing this format. Its just so damn rude and arrogant at the same time. Its increasingly frequent use (obliquely and directly) by a certain clique over the last year+ has really put me off this community. Which makes me kind of sad, because there are some damn good, friendly posters around here.

At what point does it become acceptable to tell someone they're bad if, for example, their meta contains numerous decks that utilize the graveyard as a second hand, they consistently complain about these decks always winning, yet they refuse to alter their deck to include more graveyard hate?

Sometimes players just make really stupid decisions in game, and during deck design.

Edit: And some players are too narrow-minded to see past their own vested interests and look at the format as a whole.

Author:  green slime [ 2013-Apr-24 6:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

cryogen wrote:
green slime wrote:
The "be better at this game" suggestion really, really gets my goat. It's like slapping someone with a wet fish and calling them a retard. To my knowledge, it never used to appear in this forum back when I started playing this format. Its just so damn rude and arrogant at the same time. Its increasingly frequent use (obliquely and directly) by a certain clique over the last year+ has really put me off this community. Which makes me kind of sad, because there are some damn good, friendly posters around here.

At what point does it become acceptable to tell someone they're bad if, for example, their meta contains numerous decks that utilize the graveyard as a second hand, they consistently complain about these decks always winning, yet they refuse to alter their deck to include more graveyard hate?


I don't think it is ever acceptable to tell other people they suck. There are some otherwise intelligent posters whom repeatedly abuse other people, over differences in opinion about how cards are played or what cards are "fun". Some people can be really obtuse. The posters who I respect, have never resorted to calling people "bad" or stated "you must really suck at this game if you think that..."

cryogen wrote:
Sometimes players just make really stupid decisions in game, and during deck design.


Everyone makes stupid decisions. Certain people seem to excel at this, while others may do so less frequently. Not just involving games. There are no perfect people.

cryogen wrote:
Edit: And many people are too narrow-minded to see past their own vested interests.
<= fixed. IF its true in all other aspects of life, you know its gonna be true in in this game.

Author:  crokaycete [ 2013-Apr-25 12:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

Cryogen is right-ish. At some point you have to tell people "You are making a terrible metagame decision. This terrible decision is the cause of your problems, not the cards you are actively avoiding stopping." Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but not all opinions are equally valid or useful. Continuing a discussion as if all parties' positions are on equal footing can be a big waste of time. There's no need to generalize from "your argument is dumb" to "you're dumb," but the former can be necessary.

Author:  trevor [ 2013-Apr-25 1:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Discussion forum rules

Kemev's right. "Run more answers," belongs in the strategy or deck building thread. Yet it always seems to pop up in the rules discussion thread the most. People say it with no context to the level of answers a person is running under the assumption that, since they've had no problem answering the card, it simply MUST be a lack of answers in your deck that's not allowing you to do the same.

What that simplistic idea ignores is that there's often a lot more to what causes a card to not be a problem than just answers for it. For example, you can play Avacyn or Darksteel Forge all you want but if I'm going to untap and Fireball you dead, I don't really give a crap. Metagame speed, or lack there of, is often enough to make certain difficult strategies seem better or worse than they actually are.

Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC - 7 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/