Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Aug-18 3:51 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 11:17 am 

Joined: 2012-Sep-25 11:08 am
Age: Egg
I'm currently of the opinion that if we allowed decks larger than 100 cards, it would increase variance and fun. I'm struggling to think of the negative impacts, aside from shuffling? Thoughts?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 1:33 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Sep-01 2:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I think variance is being held back less by deck size and more by the vast array of tutors that are available in the game. Some people use tutors as a toolbox. Others use it as a way to win the game the same way every time. The latter causes variance issues.

_________________
Current decks: Sheoldred, Whispering One, Kaalia of the Vast
Working on: Vela the Night-Clad, Riku of Two Reflections, Zedruu the Greathearted


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 4:13 pm 

Joined: 2009-Apr-21 3:38 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Palm Springs Area, CA
Its a rule that could be done away with.

_________________
3DH4L1F3


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 4:56 pm 

Joined: 2011-Apr-28 9:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Damidhol, Tuhel
It's always been done this way, therefore it is RIGHT.

100 cards is one of the most basic tenets of Commander Magic. You are an insolent fool to broach this sancrosanct subject.

It is a rule of the founding fathers and should never be questioned without risking your manhood.

All commander decks started this way, they have always been this way, this is just the way it is and will always be, forever.

If you question this rule, you question the integrity of the founding fathers and are considered to be attacking them directly and you will be dealt with as such.

If you don't believe in this rule, you are not a believer in the Commander pantheon and shall be excommunicated with no hope of repatriation forevermore.

If you insist on asking why we must play with no more than 100 cards exactly, you are a very big, nasty problem and are not a part of the solution of quiet acceptance by the masses.

One hundred cards exactly is the dogma that we have bought into and MUST ALWAYS ACCEPT, forevermore, without further questions, FOREVER.

It is just the way it is, ACCEPT IT OR GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE.

(...obviously a trolling post, but I do think there is no real downside to letting people play more than 100 cards if they want to, personally. And obv I think this should be changed, especially as more and more cards enter the environment.)

_________________
Former StarCityGames.com writer.

Most famous article: Breaking Phage

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/misc ... Phage.html

Personal Favorite: pWN3D: Recollections of Spectacular Defeats in Multiplayer Magic

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/mult ... Magic.html


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 5:48 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Aug-06 1:54 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: USA
We play Standard/Legacy with a deck that isn't 60 cards are scoffed at and relegated to the trash bin (except where Battle of Wits is legal). It's *possible* to build bigger than 60 cards but now one does and is taken seriously.

So why is it ironic that the same community of people are asking to change the accepted number of cards allowed in a deck for a format?

IMO, any more than 100 and it's impossible to shuffle a deck. Screw that idea, 100 cards is already WAY enough.

_________________
A few of my EDH Generals:
~ Mayael the Anima - Mayael the 5-Power Stompy
~ Marath, Will of the Wild - An EDH Teacher deck (Tribal Beasts)
~ Rhys the Redeemed - Tokens... Why do they keep coming!?
~ Bosh, Iron Golem - Legend of the Iron Giants
~ Damia, Sage of Stone - All Creatures Great & Small


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 6:11 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Nov-08 5:27 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Canberra
I must say it's much easier to talk to new players unfamiliar with the format when the "number of cards rule" only takes 3 seconds to explain. More time for explaining the other things.

_________________
BAN WILLOW SATYR

DCI Level 1 Judge.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 6:13 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Aug-13 2:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
It's a valid question. The barrier to entry for Commander is pretty high, with color identity, commander tax, the "go to the command zone instead of the graveyard" rule, even a special mulligan. It's worth looking at rules that aren't pulling their weight, and the "no more than 99 cards", could very well be one.

To me, its primary effect seems to be forcing you to make tough cuts during deck construction ("duh!", I know, but hear me out). Cutting cards from a 60 card deck is both much easier, as you can always run 2-ofs instead of 3-ofs, and more rewarding, as one additional card skews the probabilities more, the smaller the deck is.

When making a new commander deck, I've often ended up with a list of 100 or 101 cards, agonizing over which cards to cut. It's very tempting to think, "I'll just play with one additional card, it'll hardly make a difference". The hard 99 rule forces some rigour where the format otherwise discourages it.

_________________
My Commander decks:
Damia, Sage of Stone - Non-obnoxious goodstuff
Ayli, Eternal Pilgrim - Tokens, recursion, and lifegain
Vorel of the Hull Clade - Abusing counters for fun and profit


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 6:27 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Nov-08 5:27 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Canberra
Interesting that you said the complete opposite to me Malekoda. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

_________________
BAN WILLOW SATYR

DCI Level 1 Judge.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 6:52 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Aug-13 2:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
onlainari wrote:
Interesting that you said the complete opposite to me Malekoda. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I wasn't actually sure from your reply which side you supported. But lengthwise, I don't see how "A Commander deck must contain exactly 100 cards, including the Commander" is in any way different from "A Commander deck must contain at least 100 cards, including the Commander."

_________________
My Commander decks:
Damia, Sage of Stone - Non-obnoxious goodstuff
Ayli, Eternal Pilgrim - Tokens, recursion, and lifegain
Vorel of the Hull Clade - Abusing counters for fun and profit


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 7:22 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Mar-15 2:19 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Denver, CO
I will admit that I find it a bit odd that every format has a minimum number of cards, but Commander is the only one with a maximum.

I don't think there's any real harm in making 100 cards a minimum rather than a hard requirement, but personally I prefer the set deck size. It's fun to have to think about every single cut, rather than shoving together 104 cards and calling it a day.

_________________


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 11:02 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Aug-17 12:14 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Nashua/Salem, NH
I have a friend who always plays more than 60 cards in his 60 card decks, more than 40 (more than 50) in his limited decks. He wants to play with > 100 in commander. I think it'd be fine (it'd just make his deck worse, of course).

_________________
Paper listed here (link)
Mayael the Anima
Kresh
Sharuum
Kazuul, Tyrant of the Cliffs
Garza Zol
Edric
Damia
Zedruu
Ashling the Pilgrim
Karona, False God
Grimgrin
Rhys the Redeemed
Kaervek
Wrexial
Bruna
Melek
Brigid
Stonebrow
Jor Kadeen
Mimeoplasm
Balthor
Yeva
Kira
Progenitus
Vish Kal
Animar
Kaalia
Ghave
Skullbriar


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-25 11:53 pm 
EDH Rules Committee
User avatar

Joined: 2006-May-24 10:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
One of the main ideas of the format is creating boundaries within which you have to work (singleton, color identity, exact number of cards). It's part of the intended challenge.

_________________
"Leave the gun. Take the cannolis."


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-26 1:25 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Jan-18 11:59 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I personally think the 100 card rule is a great rule for the format:

It maintains a set level of Variance:
While the format needs variance to keep games interesting, exciting and new, there needs to be a soft cap on the variance to keep the games moving. Answers need to have some possibility of being drawn when the next must answer threat hits table.

Games need some level of inevitability:
In a "Battle Cruiser Magic" format, games go long, fights are knock down drag out, resources of all manners get used (Be it life, mana, cards in graveyards, or cards in library...). This needs to have definite ending point. In a world where nothing is constant, life gain can be upwards in the millions, impregnable fortresses can be erected, and boards can be locked down to a state of nothing short of a complete quagmire, I believe the library to be the best line of inevitability.

Resources need to be kept in check:
I think we need to make sure the previously listed all resources will have a set limit. The size of the library sets a maximum for cards in hand, cards in library, cards on battlefield, as well as setting a limit on total mana available in a deck without going infinite. This also allows for Mill to be just as valid a strategy as commander damage and poison. In fact, there is one commander whom can only win with this "cap" set in place.

100 is a good round number:
I think this is just simply an ease of use thing, but honestly, if you wish to cast traumatize and player A, and they have 15 cards combined through their hand, graveyard and battlefield while their commander is in the command zone, and player B has 20 combined, then you'll want to know without having to count everyone's library how many cards you'll hit, and who to choose if you're simply going for more cards in the yard.

What will decks gain by disrupting the above?

_________________
"... the RC doesn't negotiate with terrorists. " - Sheldon Menery 9/14/2011


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-26 1:45 am 

Joined: 2011-Sep-30 6:08 am
Age: Elder Dragon
The difference between 60 cards and 61 with 4x of each is much bigger than 99 and 100 with 1x each. Especially with the number of tutors legal in the format, the opportunity cost for giving yourself more combo/threat/answer options by going to 101 or even 105 cards is pretty trivial. I am definitely strongly in favor of keeping the 99 + 1 limit to avoid rewarding excessive numbers of tutors even more than the format already does.

EDIT: To be clear, by "difference" I mean the loss of consistency. 61 is noticeably worse than 60 if you want uniform draws. 100 is almost no different than 99 in that regard.

_________________
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
Cryocerete (sp?)


Last edited by crokaycete on 2012-Sep-26 2:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why not allow more than 100 cards?
AgePosted: 2012-Sep-26 1:52 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2011-Jan-18 11:59 am
Age: Elder Dragon
crokaycete wrote:
The difference between 60 cards and 61 with 4x of each is much bigger than 99 and 100 with 1x each. Especially with the number of tutors legal in the format, the opportunity cost for giving yourself more combo/threat/answer options by going to 101 or even 105 cards is pretty trivial. I am definitely strongly in favor of keeping the 99 + 1 limit to avoid rewarding excessive numbers of tutors even more than the format already does.


Agreed with the trivial increase for 101 and 105, I feel what's being discussed though is 150-250+ sized decks.

_________________
"... the RC doesn't negotiate with terrorists. " - Sheldon Menery 9/14/2011


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 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: