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

Rules Committee Should Disband
http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17566
Page 2 of 10

Author:  gunkookshlinger [ 2015-Mar-24 2:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Ziontific wrote:
Idea: Play cards that are fun for your friends and fellow magic players have fun playing against instead of requiring them to run cards that keep you in check so everyone can try to have any fun at all?


That's why I have multiple decks. Abusive decks and casual decks. Before every game me and my playgroup decide what kind of game we want to play and choose our decks accordingly.

Author:  Spectrar Ghost [ 2015-Mar-24 2:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

The assumption in a casual format is that playgroups will be self-policing. It seems that people are crying that abusive commanders are only kept in check by tuck. Abusive commanders should instead be kept in check by the social contract. Is it not possible that abusive commanders will be less prevelant when tuck is no longer an option? Players no longer have the excuse that "If you don't like my general, run some tuck". That would lead to more active discussion about what commanders, and more generally deck types, are acceptable.

Author:  Willbender [ 2015-Mar-24 2:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

gunkookshlinger wrote:
What about not being able to do it would draw people to EDH? With the new rule I can now play more efficient torture magic with cards like Zur and Derevi
So, basically, you're saying under the previous ruleset you played to be as much of a dick as possible to the black and green players who had no way to tuck?

Author:  Sid the Chicken [ 2015-Mar-24 2:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

gunkookshlinger wrote:
What about not being able to do it would draw people to EDH?

Nothing, but I didn't say that "Generals can't be tucked" made the format awesome and special now, did I? You stated that tucking generals is what you liked about EDH... which is a strange thing to say.
gunkookshlinger wrote:
When a rule makes like 10 cards obsolete at a time (some of them staples), I think it's the perfect time to discuss repealing it.

10 cards out of the tens of thousands in print? So 0.01% of the available card pool has had its functionality in EDH slightly altered? OH NOES! And let's be clear - these cards are not banned and did not suddenly stop working, they just can't put a commander into the library unless the owner wants it to. And they still increase the commander tax in the process. So saying the cards are "obsolete" is a load of BS as well.

Author:  gunkookshlinger [ 2015-Mar-24 2:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Willbender wrote:
gunkookshlinger wrote:
What about not being able to do it would draw people to EDH? With the new rule I can now play more efficient torture magic with cards like Zur and Derevi
So, basically, you're saying under the previous ruleset you played to be as much of a dick as possible to the black and green players who had no way to tuck?


See my post above^ That's why I have multiple decks. Abusive decks and fun/casual decks. Before every game me and my playgroup decide what kind of game we want to play and choose our decks accordingly. If I'm playing some crazy deck, other people will also play crazy decks or decks that can at least deal with it. If your not then you don't! If you go overboard and play stuff like Hermit Druid combo or complete lock out type decks no one is going to play with you regardless of rules.

Author:  zimagic [ 2015-Mar-24 2:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Ziontific wrote:
Idea: Play cards that are fun for your friends and fellow magic players have fun playing against instead of requiring them to run cards that keep you in check so everyone can try to have any fun at all?


Revolutionary? Visionary? Or just downright insane? Can't decide......

I like the cut of your jib, you whipper-snapper!!

Author:  Sid the Chicken [ 2015-Mar-24 2:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

zimagic wrote:
Ziontific wrote:
Idea: Play cards that are fun for your friends and fellow magic players have fun playing against instead of requiring them to run cards that keep you in check so everyone can try to have any fun at all?


Revolutionary? Visionary? Or just downright insane? Can't decide......

It's MADNESS!!!! MADNESS I SAY!!!!!

Author:  Carthain [ 2015-Mar-24 2:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

gunkookshlinger wrote:
See my post above^ That's why I have multiple decks. Abusive decks and fun/casual decks. Before every game me and my playgroup decide what kind of game we want to play and choose our decks accordingly. If I'm playing some crazy deck, other people will also play crazy decks or decks that can at least deal with it. If your not then you don't! If you go overboard and play stuff like Hermit Druid combo or complete lock out type decks no one is going to play with you regardless of rules.

Commander can be broken. This is a well known fact. Deal with it and get over it.

If you want to play super-cutthroat-kill-as-soon-as-you-can decks, then go for it ... but realize that the rules are not intended for such games, so there may be things that don't work for you.

When you and your group play that way, you are not the intended audience for the format. By all means, play it and enjoy it, but the default standard isn't intended for you. So, have houserules with your group that when you're playing cuthroat, that tuck can tuck commanders. Maybe also allow some cards that are normally banned to be played, your group may enjoy that as well.

Author:  Willbender [ 2015-Mar-24 2:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Sid the Chicken wrote:
zimagic wrote:
Ziontific wrote:
Idea: Play cards that are fun for your friends and fellow magic players have fun playing against instead of requiring them to run cards that keep you in check so everyone can try to have any fun at all?
Revolutionary? Visionary? Or just downright insane? Can't decide......
It's MADNESS!!!! MADNESS I SAY!!!!!
No, It's SPARTA AKROS!

Author:  Netsphere [ 2015-Mar-24 2:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

I'd rather them retract the rule.
But if they can't do it, maybe WOTC needs to handle Commander.

Author:  Matt [ 2015-Mar-24 2:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Netsphere wrote:
I'd rather them retract the rule.
But if they can't do it, maybe WOTC needs to handle Commander.


Again I ask you why? What would WOTC do that is different? Guy buys commander product with Prosh in it. Prosh has TOS status and gets tucked all the time. Guy stops spending money on Commander. Why would WOTC not make the same rule change to keep squeezing money out of Guy?

Author:  Joz [ 2015-Mar-24 3:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

I can't say I totally agree with the premise this thread states - but lately, the last few changes the RC has implemented have been met with massive negative criticism.

The problem with the current RC in my opinion:

1. Its stale. The members only represent a small, tiny, insignificant fraction of the player population and all seem to be of the same general demographic of player.

2. Only a few of them actually post anymore - and of those two we get a general idea of how they "view" EDH; and it seems that new members of the RC recently have similar views. This means that there is very little range of view within the committee itself.

3. In an effort to "make everyone happy" they instead weaken the format for casual players and competitive players. Tuck is a vital part of strategy in MTG - when you make the decision to base your entire strategy around your general, your opponents should be allowed to disrupt that strategy with common tools. No longer allowing that is tantamount making all children walk at recess because one person is in a wheelchair. A terrible analogy as it is, but I hope my point gets across. We can't cripple a strategy just to appease people who want full and unfettered access to their commander - playing a commander isn't just a privilege, it's also a deep strategical issue - and all strategies have to have a weak point or you're playing as a god and that's boring.

4. No representation of players in the committee. Two members of the community with no relation to the rules committee, but whom represent different psychographic and demographics, need to be added[ - I'm talking about myself]. I would like to see two members of the forum who have good-communication skills or can at least present themselves well, the RC is to static and homogeneous in ideals - , Sid the Chicken, kaldare, Willbender, niheloim, etc... - but people that are "different" than the RC and can provide counterargument to things. Yes, there are most likely "counterarguments" already, but I feel from the description of given changes that the games the RC plays aren't the same games a lot of other players play. Sheldon especially.

5. To little communication from the rules committee. Like, what happened here? If we want to understand your decisions better, give us some information over the course of the YEAR of what exactly it is that lead you, the particular rules committee member, to this change. So far, all we have is "we want you to always have access to your commander." My well-upvoted post on reddit paraphrased, but "did someone tuck Sheldon's general one too many times?"


Now to be blunt, and honest. Yes, I think the committee needs a rotation in its membership. And failing that - I want to know exactly how their (the members of the rules committee) metas are constructed - generals, play styles, group size, game length (turns and minutes), personal issues with the format, and cards in it, etc....

Because frankly, after the removal of the "banned as commander list", this new change, the lack of ban on Prophet of Kuphrix and Deadeye, I'm seriously starting to wonder....
- Are they just inept?
- Are they pandering to the lowest common denominators?
- Is there some pressure from WotC on any of these changes?






My preferred solution would be a yearly, rotating council, voted in - 5 members. Three Current RC's, and 2 members voted in. The current RC chooses three of its current members to remain, the other(s) would leave the committee and only be allowed to voice their opinions as the rest of us are able to do so. Then, after that year period - The 3RC choose one of their number to be either replaced by a previous RC; or by one of the voted in members; and two more "Commons" are voted in my majority vote to the committee.

Lastly - some record keeping of discussions behind closed-does. The mark of a great governing system is in its accountability; and being able to enforce that. In the lack of such - dictatorships were only the powerful are happy.

Author:  Sid the Chicken [ 2015-Mar-24 3:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Thanks for the tangential vote of confidence Joz, but what you're proposing would turn the EDH RC into the US House of Representatives. And if you think THAT'S an effective governing body...

Author:  Cody [ 2015-Mar-24 3:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Joz wrote:
you're playing as a god and that's boring.


Image

Author:  ToBeFrank [ 2015-Mar-24 4:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Normally I don't support the lunatic fringe but when I know that the only reason Rafiq of the Many isn't banned as a commander (despite being freaking insane) is someone on the rules committee plays him there is some validity to this notion.

Page 2 of 10 All times are UTC - 7 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/