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

Rules Committee Should Disband
http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17566
Page 5 of 10

Author:  Tim Proctor [ 2015-Mar-24 9:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Willbender wrote:
Daramath wrote:
Tucking doesn't take a commander away permanently. Just temporarily with proper cards in a deck. Just saying.
OK, I'm playing mono red. What are my options, again? Is there a lot in mono-white? How about a creatureless voltron mono-green? How about colorless?

Gamble, a Harbinger effect, or a real boss move of Possibility Storm.

I like the change for one reason, rules simplification.

Author:  salems24 [ 2015-Mar-24 11:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

but why is simplification always a good thing? if I wanted a simple game where I don't need to think I would play snakes and ladders xD

Author:  Willbender [ 2015-Mar-24 11:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

salems24 wrote:
but why is simplification always a good thing?

Simplification is always good, as understandability and approachability are always desirable qualities in a game. There are often reasons that encourage or necessitate complexity, and rules changes always have to weigh these two factors.

In this case, it was a loophole getting around rules as intended. It was not deemed to be vital enough to be required. The simpler version of the rule caused a return to intended functionality. Q.E.D.

Author:  Daramath [ 2015-Mar-24 11:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

JJackson wrote:
Daramath wrote:
This "social agreement" is total garbage. The format is open to a competitive nature and to some people thats whats fum about MTG playing your best against theirs and seeing who can foil who's plans first.

That's the social contract in action. If everybody is having fun playing super cutthroat, there is nothing wrong with that. The problems crop up when a mix of hardcore and casual decks are in the same game.

Tucking doesn't take a commander away permanently. Just temporarily with proper cards in a deck. Just saying.


Then why complain about the tucking rule being changed, if it was not a big deal anyways?[/quote]

I'm not complaining about it changing, I think the reasons given were poorly stated. I think some of the secondary effects such as more mass LD or the rampaging of degenerate commanders is going to be the larger issue, which may make players more upset but that is left to be seen.

Author:  Daramath [ 2015-Mar-24 11:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Willbender wrote:
Daramath wrote:
Tucking doesn't take a commander away permanently. Just temporarily with proper cards in a deck. Just saying.
OK, I'm playing mono red. What are my options, again? Is there a lot in mono-white? How about a creatureless voltron mono-green? How about colorless?

Daramath wrote:
The deck should be able to win on its own, and the commander simply be a tool to help gain some competitive advantage but not a necessity.
Two problems with that argument: First, that is against the stated flavor of the format. Second, even if you do build your deck to work without the Commander, your deck becomes inherently weaker than every other deck at the table if your Commander has been tucked - and the blue/white player can do this consistently for 2-3 mana, and the black/red/green players can not.


Other than Gamble you have Planar Portal, Ring of Three Wishes, Mangara's Tome.

Author:  Willbender [ 2015-Mar-24 11:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Daramath wrote:
Other than Gamble you have Planar Portal, Ring of Three Wishes, Mangara's Tome.
So, basically, a bunch of overpriced crap that you would never put in your deck except specifically to fight tuck.

Thank you for proving my point.

Author:  Daramath [ 2015-Mar-24 12:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Willbender wrote:
Daramath wrote:
Other than Gamble you have Planar Portal, Ring of Three Wishes, Mangara's Tome.
So, basically, a bunch of overpriced crap that you would never put in your deck except specifically to fight tuck.

Thank you for proving my point.


I do play Planar Portal in several of my commanders as instant speed recurring tutor is good and I dont typically worry about tuck as I also play plenty of ways to avoid it and build my decks so they dont have to play the commander to function. I typically run 4-5 tutors in a deck sometimes more depending on colors, because tutoring is an extremely powerful tool to be used as you can find your answers to whats happening to board state or to progress my board state further. Red has limited options, but tutoring is never a bad play. So I run what I can access for my best chances of winning. If that proves your point then so be it. Tutors are easily some of the strongest plays in commander due to the nature of the format being a 100 card singleton.

Author:  Joz [ 2015-Mar-24 3:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Willbender wrote:
Daramath wrote:
Other than Gamble you have Planar Portal, Ring of Three Wishes, Mangara's Tome.
So, basically, a bunch of overpriced crap that you would never put in your deck except specifically to fight tuck.

Thank you for proving my point.



Uh....I used Planar Portal and Ring of Three Wishes in several decks - maybe they are just too expensive for your ultra-competitive and ultra-deficiency-demanding ways?

Author:  Sid the Chicken [ 2015-Mar-24 3:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Joz wrote:
ultra-deficiency-demanding

Yes! Down with adequate solutions! I demand deficiency!

In all seriousness, Planar Portal and Ring of Three Wishes are fine. Especially if you're in red and/or white. That said, the implication that basically all R/W decks should be running these to fight tuck is as good a reason as any to fix tuck. The environment basically requiring a very small subset of artifacts is bad.

Author:  Kemev [ 2015-Mar-24 4:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Buthrakaur wrote:
I imagine if I went to one of any of the nearby LGS, I would find many ranting against this change like so many on this forum.


At our stores at least, reactions so far have ranged from, "Hey, I can Helmsmash people with Zurgo way better," to "Meh, whatevs," to "There was a rules update this week?"

...

Main take-away from this thread?

Helldagriff 2016!!!

Author:  MrCool [ 2015-Mar-24 4:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Willbender wrote:
salems24 wrote:
but why is simplification always a good thing?

Simplification is always good, as understandability and approachability are always desirable qualities in a game.

"Dumbing down a game is always good for the game." ok dude... :roll:

Author:  bigred [ 2015-Mar-24 4:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

salems24 wrote:
if I wanted a simple game where I don't need to think I would play snakes and ladders xD


You take that back.

Author:  BanDeadeyeNavigator [ 2015-Mar-24 6:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

DarksteelElephant wrote:
Daramath wrote:
JJackson wrote:
This "social agreement" is total garbage. The format is open to a competitive nature and to some people thats whats fum about MTG playing your best against theirs and seeing who can foil who's plans first.

That's the social contract in action. If everybody is having fun playing super cutthroat, there is nothing wrong with that. The problems crop up when a mix of hardcore and casual decks are in the same game.

All the RC does is establish a baseline of what people can expect. "Nothing will take your commander away forever" is a pretty reasonable baseline.


Then why complain about the tucking rule being changed, if it was not a big deal anyways?


From what I read, Daramath doesn't seem against the rule change so much as he, and Joz, and several others on this thread as concerned about the RC in general, and their reasoning for doing things.

Someone posted early in this thread that the rules change was to prevent a loss of fun, and how ProphKru and DEN are still in it. Personally I have less problem with ProphKru then I obviously do with DEN. But ProphKru doesn't make herself completely invulnerable to anything after a turn of being out, and DEN does.

Author:  Willbender [ 2015-Mar-24 8:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

MrCool wrote:
Willbender wrote:
Simplification is always good, as understandability and approachability are always desirable qualities in a game.
"Dumbing down a game is always good for the game." ok dude... :roll:
Nice way to pull the quote out of context, or did you just not read the next sentence where I commented on the simplicity needing to be balanced against complexity where required?

Author:  Sid the Chicken [ 2015-Mar-24 11:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Rules Committee Should Disband

Kemev wrote:
Helldagriff 2016!!!

I hereby accept your nomination, and your endorsement of the "Deficiency for all" platform!

Willbender wrote:
Nice way to pull the quote out of context, or did you just not read the next sentence where I commented on the simplicity needing to be balanced against complexity where required?

He is simply invoking his right to deficient reading. How dare you attempt to take that away! :evil:

Page 5 of 10 All times are UTC - 7 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/