Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Sep-16 6:14 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 133 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-18 4:07 pm 

Joined: 2010-Nov-16 6:55 am
Age: Wyvern
It being on the banned list wouldn't be an issue if our playgroup remained a consistent size. Last year we had maybe 6-8 people playing magic, in any form. This year (currently in a university so by "year" I mean fall through spring, not jan-dec), our playgroup jump to over 30 people, and continues to increase. Additionally, we started playing EDH, with just 4-5 people at first, now over half the playgroup is making/ has an edh deck and even more are building them. If it were just a few of us, then house ruling it would suffice, but with a much larger group, making decklists which adhere to the RC's ban list, it becomes much more difficult to house rule something, not because they disagree with it being legal, but because usually all 30 aren't together at once to be notified of the change and adjust their decks accordingly. Additionally, there is the issue of going to another LGS and playing the deck there.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-18 4:17 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Oct-18 8:52 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Oz
Beanman1000 wrote:
It being on the banned list wouldn't be an issue if our playgroup remained a consistent size. Last year we had maybe 6-8 people playing magic, in any form. This year (currently in a university so by "year" I mean fall through spring, not jan-dec), our playgroup jump to over 30 people, and continues to increase. Additionally, we started playing EDH, with just 4-5 people at first, now over half the playgroup is making/ has an edh deck and even more are building them. If it were just a few of us, then house ruling it would suffice, but with a much larger group, making decklists which adhere to the RC's ban list, it becomes much more difficult to house rule something, not because they disagree with it being legal, but because usually all 30 aren't together at once to be notified of the change and adjust their decks accordingly. Additionally, there is the issue of going to another LGS and playing the deck there.

I'm pretty sure you all have email or something.
As for playing at other LGS, yeah, you'd have to take it out again, and replace it with whichever card you cut to fit it in. Oh noes.

_________________
Kalterwolf wrote:
Shatter and Bloodshot Trainee may be confirmed via Orb of Insight, but dont quote me on it.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-18 6:47 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Oct-14 7:43 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
paperwarrior wrote:
"X card is banned" means, "Ask permission before playing X." Before starting a game, ask the people you're playing with, "I've got Painter's Servant in this deck, which I know is on the banned list, but I'm not playing either Iona or Grindstone. Are you all okay with that?" And unless they've got a particular hatred of the card (it's interaction with Llawan can be annoying), you should be good to go. My friend's got a color hacking deck where Servant is an absolute necessity, so we don't have any problem with letting him play it.

The ban list is very much a hard-and-fast restriction for online Commander.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-18 8:22 pm 

Joined: 2010-Sep-08 9:21 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
The real drag about Painter's Servant is that scarecrow decks only have a few to work with as is, even including changelings.

_________________
Current generals:

Thraxiumundar - Sacrifice Effects
Sachi, Daughter of Seshiro - Shaman Tribal Ramp
Darien, King of Kjeldor - Go Ahead and Attack
Talrand, Sky Summoner - Nothin' but Counters, Bounce & Draw


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-18 10:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2008-Feb-29 5:57 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Duvall, WA
FinalLogic wrote:
The real drag about Painter's Servant is that scarecrow decks only have a few to work with as is, even including changelings.


Dont forget Straw Soldiers!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-18 10:24 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Jul-13 6:05 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Monmouth, OR
If Iona was banned instead of Painter, I can almost guarantee there would be a hell of a lot of complaining about All is Dust + Painter, especially when ANY deck can run that combo.

The reason I agree with banning Painter is that it keeps the ban list small. What happens when another card comes later down the road that combos ridiculously well with Painter like Iona did? Are we going to have to then ban that card as well just so we can keep Painter in the format? If we did go that route, we would have at least two cards banned (Grindstone and Iona) because of their interaction with a single card. It is better just to ban the engine of the shenanigans rather than the cards that piggyback off it.

_________________
onlainari the ragequitter: http://www.mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewt ... 199#p72199

CommanderCast: Community, Strategy, and Technology: http://www.commandercast.com/

Occupy Kokusho


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-19 10:20 am 
EDH Rules Committee
User avatar

Joined: 2006-May-24 10:14 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
That's pretty accurate. Painter's Servant has the potential to break so much cards for whom there is still lots of open design space. We'd really like the list to stay as small as possible.

_________________
"Leave the gun. Take the cannolis."


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-19 10:47 am 

Joined: 2008-Aug-02 10:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Sheldon wrote:
That's pretty accurate. Painter's Servant has the potential to break so much cards for whom there is still lots of open design space. We'd really like the list to stay as small as possible.


It seems to me PS is banned for possible future broken things. I understand the call, but right now what would have to be banned if PS was legal? Grindstone and Iona. The first is absolutely useless in EDH without PS and the latter only annoying.

If the list was longer you would have a very valid point, but right now EDH loses a lot of fun interactions and gains a really annoying card that drains a lot of interactivity out of the game.

I liked Iona better when PS was still legal. At least then you all knew the game was over, now you have to painstakingly wait for 5 rounds to see the Iona player masturbate into his win, hoping to draw an Oblivion Ring before that happens.

_________________

Teneb, the Harvester
Heartless Hidetsugu
Ob Nixilis, the Fallen
Reaper King
Ruhan of the Fomori
Hanna, Ship's Navigator
Ol
oro, Ageless Ascetic
Roon of the Hidden Realm
Nekusar, the Mindrazer



Sapling of Colfenor
Wrexial, the Risen Deep
Niv-Mizzet the Firemind
Ghost Council of Orzhova
Scion of the Ur-Dragon
Momir Vig, Simic Visionary



Child of Alara
Karrthus, Tyrant of Jund
Rith, the Awakener
Brion Stoutarm
Experiment Kraj
Razia, Boros Archangel
Grand Arbiter Augustin IV
Wort, Bogart Auntie
Kaalia of the Vast
Tariel, Reckoner of Souls


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-19 12:27 pm 

Joined: 2010-Nov-16 6:55 am
Age: Wyvern
Surging Chaos wrote:
If Iona was banned instead of Painter, I can almost guarantee there would be a hell of a lot of complaining about All is Dust + Painter, especially when ANY deck can run that combo.

The reason I agree with banning Painter is that it keeps the ban list small. What happens when another card comes later down the road that combos ridiculously well with Painter like Iona did? Are we going to have to then ban that card as well just so we can keep Painter in the format? If we did go that route, we would have at least two cards banned (Grindstone and Iona) because of their interaction with a single card. It is better just to ban the engine of the shenanigans rather than the cards that piggyback off it.

Possibly, but I don't think there would be more complaining than jihora + Obliterate, which is uncounterable and doesn't require 2 cards out of your deck. And both are far better than being hit with annihilator, where only you are set back. One more card on the banned list, Iona not being used much in multiplayer, is a good exchange, imo, compared to the interactions unbanning PS allows.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-19 2:03 pm 

Joined: 2010-Jul-01 3:15 am
Age: Drake
As an Oona player, I would love to see Painter's Servant unbanned. That way I could make X tokens every time i use the ability, something more epic than broken. Grindstrone/painter's servant and iona/painters servant arent good reasons to ban as there are plenty of 2 card infinite combos not banned and painters servant isnt good outside of random interactions, making it no better than combos that kill all players outright (infinite damage), rather than mill 1 player a turn. Same goes for iona, which is even worse given that iona costs 9 mana, and is a rather effective lock with PS, but still not as good as infinite. Which is better, a 2 card combo that wins the game 100% of the time with2 2cmc pieces or a combo that wins the game 90% of the time with 1 of the pieces costing 9 mana. Its inconsistent to ban some combo pieces but not ones that are strictly better. And before somebody tries to use that stupid $ rule, PS only costs $2.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-20 7:43 am 

Joined: 2008-Aug-02 10:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Bksuperdl wrote:
As an Oona player, I would love to see Painter's Servant unbanned. That way I could make X tokens every time i use the ability, something more epic than broken. Grindstrone/painter's servant and iona/painters servant arent good reasons to ban as there are plenty of 2 card infinite combos not banned and painters servant isnt good outside of random interactions, making it no better than combos that kill all players outright (infinite damage), rather than mill 1 player a turn. Same goes for iona, which is even worse given that iona costs 9 mana, and is a rather effective lock with PS, but still not as good as infinite. Which is better, a 2 card combo that wins the game 100% of the time with2 2cmc pieces or a combo that wins the game 90% of the time with 1 of the pieces costing 9 mana. Its inconsistent to ban some combo pieces but not ones that are strictly better.


Any player trying to kill you before you've had your second or third turn should play Vintage, not EDH. PS/Grindstone is a combo that you cannot honestly put in a deck and not intend to ruin someone else's chance of a good game. If Grindstone is in, PS is out and visa versa. If it where me, Grindstone (though I loved the card in 4/60 casual) would be out since it's as useful as Mishra,

The inconsistencies you keep seeing in the banning policy I think comes from the vacuum you look at the cards. Genomancer has a good post on this issue here, maybe it might clarify some things for you. :)

Bksuperdl wrote:
And before somebody tries to use that stupid $ rule, PS only costs $2.

Is this frustration not dealt with or a serious remark? :roll: :lol:

_________________

Teneb, the Harvester
Heartless Hidetsugu
Ob Nixilis, the Fallen
Reaper King
Ruhan of the Fomori
Hanna, Ship's Navigator
Ol
oro, Ageless Ascetic
Roon of the Hidden Realm
Nekusar, the Mindrazer



Sapling of Colfenor
Wrexial, the Risen Deep
Niv-Mizzet the Firemind
Ghost Council of Orzhova
Scion of the Ur-Dragon
Momir Vig, Simic Visionary



Child of Alara
Karrthus, Tyrant of Jund
Rith, the Awakener
Brion Stoutarm
Experiment Kraj
Razia, Boros Archangel
Grand Arbiter Augustin IV
Wort, Bogart Auntie
Kaalia of the Vast
Tariel, Reckoner of Souls


Last edited by 24x30cl on 2010-Dec-20 5:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-20 12:37 pm 

Joined: 2010-Jul-01 3:15 am
Age: Drake
No, just emphasis on the fact that none of the banning principles, even the one I hate and oppose, support PS being banned. And also an attempt at humor.

Yes, I completely agree that the PS/Grindstone combo is unfun. But as the RC hasnt banned all of the similarly unfun combos (probably because there are hundreds of them and many of the pieces are fair, cool cards like PS), they shouldnt single out one of the not as gamebreaking ones (relatively) and ban a piece of it that is quite a fun card with certain other generals (ie oona). When I first started EDH and picked oona as my general,before I built my decks optimal, my brother helped me build my deck and we built it around fun interactions with PS thinking that Grindstone was the banned card (this was right after the ban of PS), only to realize later that PS was banned. It was extremely disappointing to me. And it forced me to switch to a far more degenerate/unfun combo that eliminated all the players at once (G. Monolith/Power Artifact) removing everyones deck from the game with oona.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-20 12:56 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Jun-12 7:46 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Bksuperdl wrote:
we built it around fun interactions with PS thinking that Grindstone was the banned card, only to realize later that PS was banned. It was extremely disappointing to me. And it forced me to switch to a far more degenerate/unfun combo that eliminated all the players at once


How exactly did the knowledge that a "fun" card was banned force you to play an unfun combo? Those two things really don't have much to do with each other.

_________________
Cheethorne


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-20 1:04 pm 

Joined: 2010-Jul-01 3:15 am
Age: Drake
You're right, maybe "force" wasn't the right word. I like my decks to have a combo to tutor for; that makes the deck more fun for me, to have an objective to get off. I was merely commenting on the irony that the combo I found to replace it was less fun as the objective of banning PS was to prevent an unfun combo. So the banning had the opposite effect on my deck. However, since I began to optimize (I didnt back then), fun became less important to me. If PS was unbanned, I would run it, but it wouldnt be the central theme of my deck anymore.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argument for Painter's Servant.
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-20 1:27 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Jun-13 2:13 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Memphis, TN
Quote:
Yes, I completely agree that the PS/Grindstone combo is unfun. But as the RC hasnt banned all of the similarly unfun combos (probably because there are hundreds of them and many of the pieces are fair, cool cards like PS), they shouldnt single out one of the not as gamebreaking ones (relatively) and ban a piece of it that is quite a fun card with certain other generals (ie oona).
This is a fair argument. It might go a long way toward convincing folks (like me) to lay out the data. Can you list as many two card instant win combo's as you can think of that are comparable to Painter's Servant/Grindstone? Keep in mind that PS/G is colorless, costs only 6 mana, and requires no set up. (But it does only kill one player at a time.) Other combo pieces might be justifiably unbanned because they are colored and therefore fit into fewer decks, or because they take more mana or require set up to initiate.

_________________
CR 905.1. Haters gonna hate. It's not a may ability.
Were you blown away by the insight and hilarity of this post? Damn. Try CommanderCast anyway!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 133 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], Sinis and 50 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:  
cron