Login | Register

All times are UTC - 7 hours

It is currently 2019-Oct-19 6:08 pm

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: The Banning Criteria
AgePosted: 2008-Feb-29 1:11 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2007-May-22 9:25 am
Age: Drake
Location: The Internet
Having thought through the banning criteria (triggered by Kokusho/RN argument), I have come to the belief that the first banning criteria is vague and could encompass cards that it doesn't need to. Criteria 2 and 3 are cut and dry, and are fine as they stand.

1. It's power level in multiplayer EDH is significantly higher than both what's expected for its mana cost AND it's power level in other formats (due to different rules or game sizes). [Examples include Panoptic Mirror and Biorythm]

The first half of this is again rather cut and dry. However, the second one half can be open to a multitude of interpretation when defining what another format is. Is it single player competetive formats? How about non-highlander multiplayer? Would other multiplayer highlander formats be considered "other formats"? Further, looking at this point of the criteria, cards like Mind's Eye, Rhystic Study, and Eye of the Storm are clearly significantly more powerful in a multiplayer highlander format (these are just ones I had floating around on the top of my head - there are probably many others, and I myself cannot say anything about how they play in non-highlander multiplayer). Here is where I assert my belief that Kokusho is broken in EVERY multiplayer format, and that as the second half of criteria one currently can be interpreted as checking a card's power level in any other multiplayer format, Kokusho does not meet that criteria (please don't debate this point - I am merely using it as an example of how the criteria can be vague and does not work as it is currently employed).

Please don't post to argue about the specific examples mentioned - they are not there to for debating whether or not they meet banning criteria, but rather to illustrate my point that the criteria is vague and could potentially ban staple cards that are not format breaking.

 Offline Profile  
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Feb-29 3:30 pm 

Joined: 2007-Jun-04 6:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Gainsville, FL
That's a good point.

Cards like Tsabo Tavoc and Empress Galina are obviously much more powerful in EDH as opposed to other highlander multiplayer formats, or other two player formats, especially as generals. I got a lot of outcry in my playgroup about Tsabo because he just caps generals left and right, but I got more flack when it was a Kaervek deck because there were never any creatures on the board because with each spell I would kill one. This lead to very boring games.

Growing Darkness, taking Dawn; I was me, but now he is gone - Metallica, "Fade to Black"

 Offline Profile  
 Post subject:
AgePosted: 2008-Feb-29 8:26 pm 
EDH Rules Committee

Joined: 2006-May-18 5:21 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
I think you're reading way too much into the criteria. They aren't rules - as Genomancer goes to great lengths to point out, they're guidelines and reflect his opinion on how it should be done. If Sheldon wants to ban cards based on how far he can fling them, more power to him.

Trying to derive any rules beyond "this card is messing up the format" is a nice exercise, but doesn't and shouldn't have any predictive value. It's to the rules committee's credit that they go to the extent that they do to explain their thinking.

Publishing official criteria merely boxes them out of the ability to take action where needed. That's presumably the reason Wizards has never done it.

 Offline Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 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: