Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Nov-17 4:26 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 187 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 2:31 am 

Joined: 2014-Dec-16 6:04 am
Age: Drake
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
But MaRo has said he didn't like tuck either, as have other senior WotC employees. So it sounds like WotC and the RC are in agreement here.

I don't think OD made any demands; he said they could ban generals, OR WotC could print Nevermore-type effects balanced for commander.

Did tuck ever truly keep problem commanders in line consistently, or did it just incentivise non-commander centric deckbuilding?


Maro literally lives in Magical Christmas Land where everyone he plays with is the kind of person that gets paid to play the game instead of paying to play it like all the rest of us. I have found tuck to be an extremely useful tool to use against people that play problem commanders. It isn't destroyed by random board wipes like Never More.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 2:41 am 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
zimagic wrote:
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
But MaRo has said he didn't like tuck either, as have other senior WotC employees. So it sounds like WotC and the RC are in agreement here.

I don't think OD made any demands; he said they could ban generals, OR WotC could print Nevermore-type effects balanced for commander.

Did tuck ever truly keep problem commanders in line consistently, or did it just incentivise non-commander centric deckbuilding?


Small detail: they have stated that they didn't like the way tuck interacts with commanders, not that they didn't like tuck. Tuck is a niche ability predominantly in W & U that will continue regardless of the interaction or not with commanders.


You're right, that was what I meant, but the shorthand didn't make that clear.

What about the others in WotC that share MaRo's opinion, matt? Do their opinions not count because you disagree with their conclusions as well? We all know MaRo is no true Scotsman.

_________________
Deepglow Skate
Antis wrote:
I'm seriously suspicious of any card that makes Doubling Season look fair and reasonable.


Last edited by Spectrar Ghost on 2015-Mar-30 2:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 2:48 am 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Matt wrote:
Here's my problem with your argument. WOTC printed Spell Crumple and Chaos Warp specifically for us. They printed Prosh for us, and probably printed Maelstrom Wanderer and other tuck cards like Terminus with us in mind, but we know the first 3 were part of the 153 cards in products for us. Tuck is not, in any way at all, a 'weird little loophole'. It is an aspect of the format officially supported by the printing of the cards for us. You have the gall to demand WOTC print more cards like Never More instead-knowing red pretty much can't answer them?

I am in no way in favor of WOTC running this show, but you have some serious balls to make demands like this. WOTC is running it one way and it isn't how you like. You need to find a way to take that up with them, and not on a message board or through changing rules that didn't need to be changed. Besides, what happens when 10 versions of Never More exist and Captain Douchebag has indestructible untargetable enchantments naming everyone's general in play? That is going to happen when there are enough never mores to do it. In reality, it sounds like when the time comes that whatever nickname we give these cards suddenly gets to that point, you'll consider them 'weird loopholes' instead of official WOTC ways of keeping ass hats in line as tuck had been in the past.

They also printed True Name Nemesis for "us" and you see how well that worked out. If they wanted SC and CW to only work on commanders they would have written the card as such.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 2:53 am 

Joined: 2014-Dec-16 6:04 am
Age: Drake
Maro has very little to do with Commander products. The people that got tapped to make cards for us have made tuck cards for us. They didn't make more Never Mores. Maybe they regret it, but that doesn't change the fact that those people made problem commanders and made answers for problem commanders for us in the form of tuck spells. Red got one. What does red have now? Land destruction? Fun times.

All True-Name Nemesis did was make a deck expensive if people knew what they had. If you could walk into Wal Mart, buy a commander deck, sell one card and get your money back, it was kind of a good deal for us. Same went with Scavenging Ooze in its day. Who doesn't like getting cheap cards from Wal Mart?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 2:58 am 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
You know, there's this bunch of guys who do vet all the commander products WotC puts out. I think they're called the RV. Maybe the RP? I dunno.

Edit: I think they did say something about commander tuck being a mistake or loophole recently.

Edit2: and potentially banning problem commanders if neccessary.

_________________
Deepglow Skate
Antis wrote:
I'm seriously suspicious of any card that makes Doubling Season look fair and reasonable.


Last edited by Spectrar Ghost on 2015-Mar-30 3:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:02 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Matt wrote:
Tuck is not, in any way at all, a 'weird little loophole'. It is an aspect of the format officially supported by the printing of the cards for us. You have the gall to demand WOTC print more cards like Never More instead-knowing red pretty much can't answer them?

I am in no way in favor of WOTC running this show, but you have some serious balls to make demands like this.

Actually, it's fully within their right. The RC are the gatekeepers of the format. Something that WotC knows and respects, as they constantly say that the governing of the format is by a 3rd party (the RC). So, as gatekeepers of the format, if they see something is going wrong, it is actually their duty to find the best way to correct it. Simply because you don't feel that it is wrong doesn't mean that the change was wrong.

Matt wrote:
WOTC is running it one way and it isn't how you like.

No, WotC is supplying tools for a format that is under someone else's jurisdiction. They look at the format and say "Oh, this is how it works" and then they create new tools to help that. The reason they were printing tuck effects in commander is because the RC has let tuck last for so long that it seemed to be an intended part of the format, so they built upon that. The biggest issue I have with this change is that it took them so long to do it that people (and WotC) feel that tucking commanders was an intended aspect of the format.

Matt wrote:
Besides, what happens when 10 versions of Never More exist and Captain Douchebag has indestructible untargetable enchantments naming everyone's general in play?

Council of the Absolute, Medding Mage, Null Chamber, Nevermore, Voidstone Gargoyle. Add in some things like Mycosynth Lattice and Darksteel Forge to make the stuff indestructible....

So there's already enough stuff to do what you are talking about -- can take a 6 player game and lock all opposing commanders out of the game. Yet, I've never heard of anyone doing that so I'm not seeing that as a problem going forward.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:06 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Sep-16 3:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Tuck is still a valid source of General removal, as much as an exile card is. There is a Avacyn who you don't like, tuck her, she goes to the Command Zone just like if she was exiled. Tuck is still effective especially against indestructible Generals, it just doesn't have a weird rules manipulation anymore.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:09 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-May-24 10:53 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: OH
Carthain wrote:
Matt wrote:
Besides, what happens when 10 versions of Never More exist and Captain Douchebag has indestructible untargetable enchantments naming everyone's general in play?

Council of the Absolute, Medding Mage, Null Chamber, Nevermore, Voidstone Gargoyle. Add in some things like Mycosynth Lattice and Darksteel Forge to make the stuff indestructible....


Even with Privileged Position/Darksteel Forge et al. in play to protect those creatures and enchantments Carthain listed, cards like Wash Out, Oblivion Stone, Capsize still work on them (Depending on whether they're shrouded/indestructible or both). There are plenty of answers.
If there's a guy trying to do something like that in your playgroup, find the right answers, run them, and evolve your metagame.

_________________
Fugu wrote:
"You promised me that we would phase out, away from all this violence and strife!" Teferi pleaded.
"We shall, but not before those who have wronged you are driven to hell," Kaervek replied mercilessly.




Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:13 am 

Joined: 2014-Dec-16 6:04 am
Age: Drake
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
You know, there's this bunch of guys who do vet all the commander products WotC puts out. I think they're called the RV. Maybe the RP? I dunno.

Edit: I think they did say something about commander tuck being a mistake or loophole recently.

Edit2: and potentially banning problem commanders if neccessary.


The mistake, if there is one, is that they printed too many tuck cards. Now they aren't special and no longer need to be saved to prove the point to the person that has a commander that demands that kind of answer. Now you can tuck someone's general just to do it. The RC is using the rules to fight an arms race they can't win. With more Never More effects, people will just tutor for All is Dust to be able to play their commander again.

Commanders demand answers. When they produce effects just for being cast, sometimes that answer is to prevent it from being cast in the first place. That is Magic. People play Karador and need a good, full graveyard. People have tons of options to make sure that never happens and the commander does nothing. Why is it OK to have hate for that commander and not ones that do dumb stuff just by being cast? Why should I have to play ethersworn canonist and rule of law instead of spell crumple to stop Maelstrom Wanderer? Then I need a way to keep Prosh's tokens for being a problem and I need another set of narrow answers instead of just that same spell crumple.

I get the idea behind the change, but they are treating a symptom, not the disease and I also find it awkward that they call these cards 'weird loopholes' when they are from commander products, not all from sets like Legends where odd corner cases like a black fog exist.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:17 am 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
You always could tuck a general just to do it. That's one of the problems with tuck, if there wasn't a worthy general you had a spell to burn on the nearest general. Now you can't tuck generals at all, and that threat has disappeared.

_________________
Deepglow Skate
Antis wrote:
I'm seriously suspicious of any card that makes Doubling Season look fair and reasonable.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:29 am 
EDH Rules Committee

Joined: 2006-May-18 5:21 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
You know, there's this bunch of guys who do vet all the commander products WotC puts out. I think they're called the RV. Maybe the RP? I dunno.


I don't know why this rumor has sprung up. We don't see the cards in advance much. They talk to us about things they want to get our input on (e.g. Planeswalker Commanders), but I'm watching spoiler season as closely as anyone.

Matt wrote:
Commanders demand answers.


Commanders *demand* answers in a tiny portion of games, played by players who are already pushing the format well beyond the design vision. It's great that they want to explore that way, but we're quite up front that there be dragons about when they do.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:37 am 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
papa_funk wrote:
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
You know, there's this bunch of guys who do vet all the commander products WotC puts out. I think they're called the RV. Maybe the RP? I dunno.


I don't know why this rumor has sprung up. We don't see the cards in advance much. They talk to us about things they want to get our input on (e.g. Planeswalker Commanders), but I'm watching spoiler season as closely as anyone.


Interesting. I'll file that tidbit under Common "Knowledge" then, shall I?

Does this mean that you had no control over the tucks being printed in the precons then? Had you known would you have advised against it?

_________________
Deepglow Skate
Antis wrote:
I'm seriously suspicious of any card that makes Doubling Season look fair and reasonable.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:42 am 

Joined: 2014-Dec-16 6:04 am
Age: Drake
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
You always could tuck a general just to do it. That's one of the problems with tuck, if there wasn't a worthy general you had a spell to burn on the nearest general. Now you can't tuck generals at all, and that threat has disappeared.


You can always never more a general just to do it. I don't own these cards because I don't really want to play them. I own the tuck stuff for when I need it. Now I have to buy never more.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:43 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Mar-12 3:20 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
The main issue with the tuck change is that the RC waited too long to do it. Whatever the RC may think, Tuck ceased to be a rules loophole and become a very real part of the format as soon as the first tuck card was specifically printed for commander. That doesn't mean it couldn't (or shouldn't) be changed, but it does mean pretending it was a "quirky rules loophole" is being naive at best and disingenuous at worst. That logic would have worked five years ago, but it doesn't pass muster today.

I (and a lot of other people I'd wager) would like to know why the heck it took the RC so long to come to this decision, if, as many of them have implied, they never really intended tuck to be a thing to begin with.

papa_funk wrote:
Commanders *demand* answers in a tiny portion of games, played by players who are already pushing the format well beyond the design vision. It's great that they want to explore that way, but we're quite up front that there be dragons about when they do.

No. Just no.
I can't even remotely agree with that statement. "Pick a powerful commander and build around them" is an extremely common deckbuilding tactic, and it applies to just about every type of commander player, from the most casual of kitchen table casual players to the most hardcore spikes. And with the power level of many recent commanders (including many of the precon commanders, which is how many players start playing), a deck build around them will quite often demand an answer. If that's "beyond the design vision" of the format as the RC sees it, then something is very, very wrong.

_________________
Current Commander Decks:
Alesha, She who Smiles at Death.....Atraxa, Praetors' Voice.....Eight-and-a-Half-Tails.....Gonti, Lord of Luxury.....Karametra, God of Harvests.....Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker.....Kozilek, the Great Distortion.....Prime Speaker Zegana.....Rubinia Soulsinger.....Thrasios, Triton Hero + Vial Smasher the Fierce

My general commander philosophy: Using your opponent's degenerate cards against them is far more satisfying than playing degenerate cards yourself.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: obsidiandice on Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-30 3:49 am 

Joined: 2014-Dec-16 6:04 am
Age: Drake
papa_funk wrote:
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
You know, there's this bunch of guys who do vet all the commander products WotC puts out. I think they're called the RV. Maybe the RP? I dunno.


I don't know why this rumor has sprung up. We don't see the cards in advance much. They talk to us about things they want to get our input on (e.g. Planeswalker Commanders), but I'm watching spoiler season as closely as anyone.

Matt wrote:
Commanders demand answers.


Commanders *demand* answers in a tiny portion of games, played by players who are already pushing the format well beyond the design vision. It's great that they want to explore that way, but we're quite up front that there be dragons about when they do.


You are misunderstanding me. You can't honestly tell me you don't run graveyard hate when you know people are living out of their yards can you? That's what makes scavenging ooze so great. You can keep Karador from being overpowering and have a big creature at the same time.

The Prosh precon is pretty good right out of the box. All you have to do is add Purphoros and Dictate of Erebros to it and it can become a monster, and the deck suggests strongly that you do so given the release dates of the cards involved. The more general the answers are, the better as long as they prove their point. Why should the rest of the table have to sit around under a Rule of Law because one guy needs to learn that Maelstrom Wanderer isn't going to win anymore?

And why is it that tuck is suddenly a weird loophole in 2015 when WOTC has been exploring it explicitly in the Commander space since 2011?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 187 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  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: