Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Jul-21 6:15 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-08 11:59 pm 

Joined: 2019-Mar-15 1:06 pm
Age: Wyvern
I don't disagree with the fact that Painter's Servant can be played creatively, but I am absolutely positive that such plays are going to be the extreme minority of play that the card sees in Commander. This is especially true now that the price spiked, because I doubt that people are going to drop $100 to do something eccentric.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 12:15 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2016-Nov-27 2:39 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
papa_funk wrote:
The CAG made strong arguments that there were a lot of interesting Johnny applications, most of which fell within the boundaries of what we think is acceptable for Commander, and that the people who would choose to take advantage of the more worrying interactions were already doing worse things. That tipped the scales on a borderline card.

Thanks for the explanation. I'm interested to see how it pans out.

Gath Immortal wrote:
papa_funk wrote:
The CAG made strong arguments that there were a lot of interesting Johnny applications.


and yet no one has actually managed to give me one specific example that strikes me as novel or interesting, I would genuinely love for a more exhaustive explanation of what painter's servant is supposed to do as a positive good for the format to drown out what looks really bad about it.

I think several have been provided at this point. You in particular may not strike them as novel or interesting, but that's OK—not all interactions were made for all people. I like Rith getting its new combo piece and I hope Rith players enjoy it too.

_________________
Decks: Chaos colored dragons, Mathas, the Instigator (politics and mayhem).
Beloved precons: Atraxa, Praetors' Voice; Saskia the Unyielding; Freyalise, Llanowar's Fury.


Top
 Online Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 3:51 am 

Joined: 2010-Mar-10 1:31 pm
Age: Dragon
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
To be honest, I don't get the backlash at all. Two incredibly annoying and oppressive cards got banned, and the most overdue unban in the history of Magic has finally been implemented. I guess kirkus was right: some people want nothing in life but to be an old man yelling at a fucking cloud.


I AM NOT complaining but mainly going "why now brown cow?" and Papa gave the answer

papa_funk wrote:
The CAG made strong arguments that there were a lot of interesting Johnny applications, most of which fell within the boundaries of what we think is acceptable for Commander, and that the people who would choose to take advantage of the more worrying interactions were already doing worse things. That tipped the scales on a borderline card.


The existence of the CAG.

_________________
onlainari wrote:
trappedslider wrote:
EDIT: so if i somehow manged to get down to 1 life,played Repay in Kind followed by Decree of Annihilation then it owuld be bad evil juju?

That's not how magic works. You can't equate cards and situations linearly like that!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 7:13 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
kirkusjones wrote:
Take a breath, enjoy the fact that cards people have been pissing and moaning about for years have been banned and then resume running up and down the street naked, banging pots and pans together and screaming "THE END IS FUCKING NIGH!!!" at the top of your lungs.
People can ask thought out questions, with actual quote support, without it being what you describe.

I really have to second the question asked in the OP: What changed.

And please stop with Iona and PE in here, this is a thread with a subject.

EDIT:
papa_funk wrote:
The CAG made strong arguments that there were a lot of interesting Johnny applications, most of which fell within the boundaries of what we think is acceptable for Commander, and that the people who would choose to take advantage of the more worrying interactions were already doing worse things. That tipped the scales on a borderline card.

Such as? I mean quotes like 'nail in the coffin' and the fact people could 'accidentally' blow up all lands seems pretty un-fun

_________________
sir squab wrote:
My... history of buying Magic cards is probably a tapestry of bad financial decisions >_>
niheloim wrote:
No, I think he's right. I'm just all butt-hurt over prophet.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 8:04 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Dec-25 1:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I am personally very happy for the update to the format's philosophy, as well as the changes in the ban list.

But this comment made me scratch my head a little…

papa_funk wrote:
The CAG made strong arguments that there were a lot of interesting Johnny applications, most of which fell within the boundaries of what we think is acceptable for Commander, and that the people who would choose to take advantage of the more worrying interactions were already doing worse things. That tipped the scales on a borderline card.


First of all, from what I've read in the first post, it looks naive to assume Servant was a "borderline card". Your comments make it look like it was never on the table to unban Servant.

Second, I would like to know what these "strong arguments" were. Particularly, I would like to know how they differed from everything else that's been said in this forum (and probably other discussion platforms) previously. Because this discussion is not new: many people have been advocating for years to unban Servant and ban Iona for the reasons mentioned in Monday's announcement. It's a little insulting to these people that suddenly the opinion of six people that recently started providing feedback to the Rules' Committee is more valued than the entire feedback of the Commander community that has spanned ages.

_________________
Name: Night of the Ninja
General: Yuriko, the Tiger's Shadow
Archetype: Aggro

Name: Enraged Wilds
General: Marath, Will of the Wild
Archetype: Aggro-Control

Name: Draconic Domination
General: The Ur-Dragon
Archetype: Midrange


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 12:21 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Maluko wrote:
Second, I would like to know what these "strong arguments" were. Particularly, I would like to know how they differed from everything else that's been said in this forum (and probably other discussion platforms) previously. Because this discussion is not new: many people have been advocating for years to unban Servant and ban Iona for the reasons mentioned in Monday's announcement. It's a little insulting to these people that suddenly the opinion of six people that recently started providing feedback to the Rules' Committee is more valued than the entire feedback of the Commander community that has spanned ages.

First off, I don't think there's anything to gain in nitpicking the wording of a short post by an RC member.

Secondly, as one of those people who's been advocating for Servant's unban since basically the instant I knew there was a banlist, I'll gladly say better late than never. Sometimes you hear an argument 100 times and hold your position steady, and then the 101st time causes a shift. And while there were a lot of people that wanted Servant unbanned, any serious discussion on it has been largely at a ceasefire since about 5 years ago. When you get badgered by the same argument over and over in a short period of time, it starts to sound like white noise. When you hear it again later after not encountering it for a while, you get to reconsider it as though it were the first hearing.

And that brings me to my third point, which is that I see nothing wrong with the RC valuing the input of the CAG more than the input of random forum posters. Especially as one of the functions of the CAG is specifically to try to bridge the gap from the average player to the RC and get just a teensy bit more representation.

It's also worth noting that the support for unbanning Servant was by no means unilateral. Based on papa_funk's phrasing, it seemed that Servant's unbanning was more or less a consensus among the CAG, something vastly different from the format at large. In that case, you've got the format as a whole divided on an issue and then have the six people you trust to give you solid feedback all supporting the same side of the division. I think that's a perfectly legitimate reason on which to base a decision. It'd be like if American citizens were divided on how a particular court case should be ruled, and despite that the SCOTUS ends up ruling 9-0.

_________________


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 1:35 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
Sometimes you hear an argument 100 times and hold your position steady, and then the 101st time causes a shift.
Or, people's opinions just change over time. As an example, if you look back through the threads here, you can see me defending Iona to be in the format. Now though? I'm sort of glad she's gone. (Just before the ban I was at a "I don't care, but probably better for the format if she's gone." stage.)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 2:00 pm 
EDH Rules Committee
User avatar

Joined: 2006-May-24 10:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
If we hadn't already considered Painter's Servant a borderline card, the CAG arguments would have had a tougher time swaying us. Even my "nail in the coffin" comment was wistful; I knew there were plenty of creative uses for PS, and didn't much like that they were undone by a few bad actors.

Another major argument was that in order to do bad stuff with PS, you'd have to play cards that you wouldn't otherwise be playing. No one plays Anarchyright now (or insert card of your choice). It doesn't seem like people are going to start just because of PS, which was one of the anxieties.

The next argument was that there are things way worse that are legal than PS + Grindstone. It's not an argument that I would hang my best hat on, but there's some value to it. PS + Ugin isn't really worse than Jokulhaups/Obliterate and it costs more mana. While banning something because there's less bad stuff on the list might not make sense (that could lead to the dreaded cascade of bans), unbanning something because there's worse stuff running around has some value. Not complete, limitless value, but it's a position worthy of consideration.

The PS unban will be contentious, as was banning it in the first place. As time goes on, I think we'll see that for the major part of our core demographic, unbanning it was the right call.

_________________
"Leave the gun. Take the cannolis."


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 2:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Feb-07 3:37 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Danbury, CT
Maluko wrote:
Because this discussion is not new: many people have been advocating for years to unban Servant and ban Iona for the reasons mentioned in Monday's announcement. It's a little insulting to these people that suddenly the opinion of six people that recently started providing feedback to the Rules' Committee is more valued than the entire feedback of the Commander community that has spanned ages.


If you reframe that statement it sounds like a positive. "We'd been trying to get this card unbanned for years, and now that we finally have the CAG we got it pushed through."

Now what else can we get the CAG guys on board with? (#unbanSway lol)

_________________
The deck-o-pedia


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 6:26 pm 

Joined: 2010-Mar-10 1:31 pm
Age: Dragon
Sheldon wrote:
If we hadn't already considered Painter's Servant a borderline card, the CAG arguments would have had a tougher time swaying us. Even my "nail in the coffin" comment was wistful; I knew there were plenty of creative uses for PS, and didn't much like that they were undone by a few bad actors.

Another major argument was that in order to do bad stuff with PS, you'd have to play cards that you wouldn't otherwise be playing. No one plays Anarchyright now (or insert card of your choice). It doesn't seem like people are going to start just because of PS, which was one of the anxieties.

The next argument was that there are things way worse that are legal than PS + Grindstone. It's not an argument that I would hang my best hat on, but there's some value to it. PS + Ugin isn't really worse than Jokulhaups/Obliterate and it costs more mana. While banning something because there's less bad stuff on the list might not make sense (that could lead to the dreaded cascade of bans), unbanning something because there's worse stuff running around has some value. Not complete, limitless value, but it's a position worthy of consideration.

The PS unban will be contentious, as was banning it in the first place. As time goes on, I think we'll see that for the major part of our core demographic, unbanning it was the right call.


Thank you for taking your time to answer, i appreciate it :D and hope everything goes well for you health wise

_________________
onlainari wrote:
trappedslider wrote:
EDIT: so if i somehow manged to get down to 1 life,played Repay in Kind followed by Decree of Annihilation then it owuld be bad evil juju?

That's not how magic works. You can't equate cards and situations linearly like that!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 7:08 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Dec-25 1:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
Secondly, as one of those people who's been advocating for Servant's unban since basically the instant I knew there was a banlist, I'll gladly say better late than never. Sometimes you hear an argument 100 times and hold your position steady, and then the 101st time causes a shift. And while there were a lot of people that wanted Servant unbanned, any serious discussion on it has been largely at a ceasefire since about 5 years ago. When you get badgered by the same argument over and over in a short period of time, it starts to sound like white noise. When you hear it again later after not encountering it for a while, you get to reconsider it as though it were the first hearing.

I understand this, and I understand positions and stances can change over time and with access to new information. But that kind of "extreme" positions, which are then revoked after some years, do not inspire trust in the Rules' Committee from the community. This is what then leads to comments like "the RC doesn't listen to the player base" or "the RC does listen to the player base… the player base they want to listen to, that is!". What I'm saying is, don't be so extremist in your positions next time (this is a lesson that I have learned the hard way). Because really, nothing has changed in the format for these bans/unbans to take as long as they did.

Uktabi_Kong wrote:
It's also worth noting that the support for unbanning Servant was by no means unilateral. Based on papa_funk's phrasing, it seemed that Servant's unbanning was more or less a consensus among the CAG, something vastly different from the format at large. In that case, you've got the format as a whole divided on an issue and then have the six people you trust to give you solid feedback all supporting the same side of the division. I think that's a perfectly legitimate reason on which to base a decision. It'd be like if American citizens were divided on how a particular court case should be ruled, and despite that the SCOTUS ends up ruling 9-0.

As a scientist, I know better than most not to listen to random people who have no idea what they are talking about. So okay, this argument makes sense to me :)

Sheldon wrote:
The PS unban will be contentious, as was banning it in the first place. As time goes on, I think we'll see that for the major part of our core demographic, unbanning it was the right call.

Fully agree with this!

_________________
Name: Night of the Ninja
General: Yuriko, the Tiger's Shadow
Archetype: Aggro

Name: Enraged Wilds
General: Marath, Will of the Wild
Archetype: Aggro-Control

Name: Draconic Domination
General: The Ur-Dragon
Archetype: Midrange


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-09 9:28 pm 

Joined: 2019-Jun-10 9:43 pm
Age: Egg
Hi, I've been playing Magic since 1999, chiming in because I don't own a single Commander deck worth less than $500 because it makes absolutely no sense to play Commander and not play with the best that the 25 year history of Magic has to offer. If the philosophy of Commander is about fun what's funner than using your entire collection and carrying around a bag of decks worth more than most used vehicles?

The reason why the rules committee is completely out of touch with reality is because it does nothing to ban decks that consistently win between turns 3-5. I feel like the rules committee spends its time playing with $50 garbage decks instead of looking at what people actually play and makes up its justifications for banning a card afterwards when it can't justify why it hasn't banned another.

For example, Iona does not win turn 3. Painter's Servant does. It does not make sense to ban Iona and not keep Painter's Servant banned.
For example, Iona doesn't encourage fun around the table. It does not make sense to ban Iona and not ban Stasis.
For example, Iona can lock one person from playing. It does not make sense to ban Iona and not Blood Moon and Back to Basics.
I'll save some time and be blunt though - it doesn't make sense to ban Iona, period.
Am I really supposed to take you guys seriously when you won't ban Lab Maniac or Food Chain, won't unban Recurring Nightmare, and think its appropriate to unban something worse than Iona?
Why are Prime Time, Sylvan and Rofellos still banned now that Staff of Domination is out of the bag?
The rules are inconsistent with the current level of play.

Really what it tells me is that the rules committee are playing at a low level of play. If you're a bunch of casuals it's all good, just admit you're a bunch of casuals and let the rules of commander be determined by people who are actually looking at high levels of play. Sheldon and the rules committee should never forget that just because they are in a position of power it doesn't mean they actually are an authority.

Do you understand, Sheldon? As Commander grows in popularity the tolerance for this "casual tabletop" gimping is diminishing, especially as Wizards creates more and more Tier 1 rank commanders that require more and more expensive decks to run. You had to have known this day was coming with Commander nights being a thing during sanctioned FNM events. Sooner than later you'll have to address cEDH as being the definition of the meta - that should have been abundantly clear back when cards like Derevi and Atraxa were printed. Don't let Iona and Painter's Servant be the hill you die on.

Also I'd like the say Uktabi is probably the most disingenuous people I have ever seen to refer to Paradox Engine as "annoying and oppressive" while simultaneously stating the unban on Painter's Servant is "overdue". I can only wonder what level of play he's at for Paradox Engine to not immediately end the game, but I can only assume it's low if he wants to play around with Painter's Servant purely for shenanigans. Never listen to casuals, kids, especially if they account for 1% of all the posts on an entire message board - it just means they like listening to themselves.
Really that just goes back to what I'm saying about casual players not being the ones making rules restricting the real players. If casuals can make any rules they want around the table anyway then there is really no reason to make any rules for them at all, and all rulings should be focused on competitive play like in Modern which in turn means the sole criteria for banning cards should be based on what conditions it makes you win under on turns 3, 4 or 5.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 1:10 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Oct-26 5:52 am
Age: Dragon
Sheldon wrote:
Ugin isn't really worse than Jokulhaups/Obliterate


uhh, it's basically sunder+ more, you can X = 0 to kill all the lands when you have a boardstate lead or just hit whatever number affects you the least and just win from there with your floating mana.

_________________
Maluko wrote:
We need a clear set of objective rules so that everybody always knows what to expect, and how to prepare for it. As of now, I think I spend more time arguing with players about the format than I do playing fun and interactive games of Commander. And last time I read, this was not the format's purpose.

QFT


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 2:51 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 12:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Oakland, CA
Magefire wrote:
If you're a bunch of casuals it's all good, just admit you're a bunch of casuals
There isn't anything to 'admit' here; this format IS intended for casual Magic players. If you and your playgroup want to have a format based on playing the most cutthroat cards and decks, you are free to adapt the rules of this format to whatever suits your needs, but it is absolutely NOT intended to cater to you.
Magefire wrote:
If casuals can make any rules they want around the table anyway then there is really no reason to make any rules for them at all
Any group anywhere on the spectrum of casual-to-competitive can make any rules they want around the table (if they can agree). Any tournament can be made with any rules its organizer wishes (although some will not be sanctioned by the DCI). The existence of rules does not require a competitive mindset, it is just how we know what game we are playing. If you think that authority should be only in the hands of players with competitive mindset, you could always try to start your own format and make yourself the Rules Committee.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: What has changed since Ugin was printed?
AgePosted: 2019-Jul-10 4:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-May-11 11:02 am
Age: Drake
Sheldon wrote:
...No one plays Anarchyright now (or insert card of your choice)...


I play Anarchy--and some cards like it--in most every mono red deck I've ever made

If it's a live card, fire it off! If it's not, pitch it to Tormenting Voice or whatever, it's all good

I'm fine with PS being unbanned, I just wish Iona hadn't had to die for it. Because that's my answer to the original forum question: PS was freed because Iona was getting canned. Otherwise PS stays banned.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 37 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: