Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Oct-20 7:07 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 176 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 1:54 pm 

Joined: 2015-Mar-23 1:51 pm
Age: Wyvern
I am having an extremely difficult time believe most players are okay with this rules change.
I do not believe this is a good idea. I would really like to see some polls on the playerbase.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 3:29 pm 

Joined: 2015-Mar-23 3:26 pm
Age: Hatchling
since when has magic been about being nice, being a jerk has been the core gameplay mechanic forever. Removing tuck is stupid.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 3:45 pm 

Joined: 2010-Sep-11 12:19 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
redmag3 wrote:
since when has magic been about being nice, being a jerk has been the core gameplay mechanic forever. Removing tuck is stupid.


I disagree with the first part of your comment - EDH is a social format, you're supposed to at least try and make the game fun and enjoyable for everyone involved.

But I 100% agree with Tuck being removed as a stupid decision.

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 3:51 pm 

Joined: 2015-Mar-23 3:43 pm
Age: Egg
I couldn't agree more that this rules change is ill-conceived. How many times has Chaos Warp been printed in Commander products?! "The Rules Committee".... LMAO, you [Rule 1.]

#fuqMtGiquit


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 3:53 pm 

Joined: 2010-Dec-07 9:07 pm
Age: Hatchling
So does this mean that Derevi is on the watch list now? You took removed two weaknesses of the general. Now outside of fragile plays like Pithing Needle and Containment Priest it's almost impossible to stop. Heaven forbid they get a prison piece into play.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 4:12 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Mar-24 12:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Oakland, CA
EVERYBODY PANIC.

I like the subject of this thread, I think encouraging discussion is always great, but the first post doesn't really have any discussion in it, just "I think most players disagree with the RC."

. . .

If all I say with this post is that, I would be a total hypocrite. So even though it's way past my bedtime, and even though I'm usually just a toadie for the RC, here goes:
I think the reasons Sheldon listed are pretty weak, or at best oversimplifications. Here are my problems with the post:
  • The fact that Sheldon glossed over the nonwhite, nonblue tuck effects (Chaos Warp, conditionally Deglamer)
  • The implication that white needed nerfing because of its shared advantage with blue over the other colors in respect to this slice of the color pie
  • The implication that by removing the possibility of tuck, white and blue now have less of an advantage in permanently dealing with problematic Commanders, when, in fact, they are still the very best colors at permanently stealing or permanently Humiliating (meaning Humility, Darksteel Mutation, Faith's Fetters, etc.) a Commander, which are effectively the only two remaining ways of somewhat permanently dealing with a Commander. Well, there's also Mindslaver + tuck, but let me address that separately . . .
  • The implication that this rule change eliminated tricky corner-cases in which a Commander's known position in the library is an issue. It did make them much rarer, but they still exist and will probably come up thanks to Mindslaver.

All that said, I probably won't really care a few months down the road. The Commanders that were problematic before aren't significantly more problematic now, and if they are they can be banned or house-banned. The Commanders that weren't problematic before are less likely to be victims of collateral damage (either a Hallowed Burial situation or a "well, I have this Chaos Warp in my hand and even though your Daxos of Meletis really isn't a problematic card, you attacked me and nobody is playing a more degenerate Commander than I am anyway, so into the library it goes." situation).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 4:26 pm 

Joined: 2009-Apr-21 3:38 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Palm Springs Area, CA
Stupid rule change is stupid.

_________________
3DH4L1F3


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 4:35 pm 

Joined: 2014-Feb-23 12:59 pm
Age: Wyvern
Another step in the wrong direction.

So, it's time to start with Nevermore, making sure the commander gets killed so many times so they can't play it again cooupled with LD.

Yes, this will bring extremely fun play for everyone!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 4:38 pm 

Joined: 2009-Oct-28 10:55 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Right now, people feel like removal against commanders isn't good enough because the only loss is 2 mana of tempo.

Why don't we add something to the commander tax?

I would not be averse at all to changing it to "Each time you cast your commander from the command zone, if it's not the first time each game, as an additional cost to cast that commander you must exile a card from your hand and pay an additional 2X mana where X is the number of times it has been cast from the command zone this game."

Make it so that one-for-one removals are actually one-for-ones. Make it cost a card to keep summoning that Commander.

It has to be exile, IMO, or else it will be used to enable weird strategies with recursion or madness.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 4:39 pm 

Joined: 2010-Sep-11 12:19 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Kall3m0n wrote:
Another step in the wrong direction.

So, it's time to start with Nevermore, making sure the commander gets killed so many times so they can't play it again cooupled with LD.

Yes, this will bring extremely fun play for everyone!

Time to Stax up, you bring the $ and I'll bring the tax.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 4:45 pm 

Joined: 2014-Jun-23 11:09 am
Age: Hatchling
As someone who spent their first game with Commanders Anax and Cymede stuck in the library since turn 3, I welcome this change. Tucks can deal with problematic Commanders, but they can just as easily take out completely fair ones. I would rather be pulverized by Zur the Enchanter than see a blue milk-drinker giggle smugly while Spell Crumpling my dreams.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 4:50 pm 

Joined: 2010-Sep-11 12:19 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Dragon of Freedom wrote:
As someone who spent their first game with Commanders Anax and Cymede stuck in the library since turn 3, I welcome this change. Tucks can deal with problematic Commanders, but they can just as easily take out completely fair ones. I would rather be pulverized by Zur the Enchanter than see a blue milk-drinker giggle smugly while Spell Crumpling my dreams.



This has some elements I agree with - some things shouldn't be tucked just for the sake of tucking them.

But being in a game with Zur just makes me hate this format.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 5:04 pm 

Joined: 2014-Jun-23 11:09 am
Age: Hatchling
Joz wrote:
Dragon of Freedom wrote:
As someone who spent their first game with Commanders Anax and Cymede stuck in the library since turn 3, I welcome this change. Tucks can deal with problematic Commanders, but they can just as easily take out completely fair ones. I would rather be pulverized by Zur the Enchanter than see a blue milk-drinker giggle smugly while Spell Crumpling my dreams.



This has some elements I agree with - some things shouldn't be tucked just for the sake of tucking them.

But being in a game with Zur just makes me hate this format.

Funny thing, I've never even actually faced Zur. Which brings me to a point against the "Tucks deal with problematic Commanders" argument. You know what also deals with problematic Commanders? Not agreeing to play against problematic Commanders. Another player and I once greeted a proposed Oloro with a simultaneous chorus of "NO! NO! NO!" until he was replaced by a Commander you actually need to cast to benefit from.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 5:10 pm 

Joined: 2015-Mar-23 5:04 pm
Age: Egg
Created an account just to politely voice my opinion that this is the most unnecessary, potentially damaging change possible to this format and that my playgroup will not be following this change.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 3/23 Rules update. Pro-Tuck or No-Tuck
AgePosted: 2015-Mar-23 5:20 pm 

Joined: 2010-Sep-11 12:19 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Dragon of Freedom wrote:
Joz wrote:
Dragon of Freedom wrote:
As someone who spent their first game with Commanders Anax and Cymede stuck in the library since turn 3, I welcome this change. Tucks can deal with problematic Commanders, but they can just as easily take out completely fair ones. I would rather be pulverized by Zur the Enchanter than see a blue milk-drinker giggle smugly while Spell Crumpling my dreams.



This has some elements I agree with - some things shouldn't be tucked just for the sake of tucking them.

But being in a game with Zur just makes me hate this format.

Funny thing, I've never even actually faced Zur. Which brings me to a point against the "Tucks deal with problematic Commanders" argument. You know what also deals with problematic Commanders? Not agreeing to play against problematic Commanders. Another player and I once greeted a proposed Oloro with a simultaneous chorus of "NO! NO! NO!" until he was replaced by a Commander you actually need to cast to benefit from.


If only more people were like that....most people I've met aren't. The Social Contract means little and less to the overall and overwhelmingly vast majority of players I've played with.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 176 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 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: