We need to talk. It's about Iona...
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on April 19, 2015, 5:34 p.m. by TheBanlist
I am a proud owner of a monocolor EDH. Omnath, Locus of Mana is my pride and joy and I love him more than my hypothetical children. But recently, someone in my playgroup decided to build a Kaalia of the Vast deck...with Iona, Shield of Emeria in it.
This brings me to my point. Why is Iona not banned? If the Rules Committee decide to ban cards based on keeping the game mode (EDH) light-hearted and casual, then why keep one of the most non-casual and hateful cards legal? It makes players not want to play the decks they want (such as awesome monogreen Omnath decks) and makes players add cards to their decks just for one card.
I want to be able to actually play Magic, but I don't want to tell someone not to put a card in their deck. The even worse part is that the playgroup has accepted my use of Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary despite it being on the ban list. (By the way, Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary is banned, but not Felidar Sovereign?) Telling him not to use iona seems kinda dickish if I continue to use Rofellos, but...but mana.
I hope other people share this opinion. Please help me end Iona's reign of terror.
brokendwarf says... #4
Because most mono-colored decks have non-colored outs to Iona. Stuff like Oblivion Stone or All Is Dust
April 19, 2015 5:38 p.m.
TheBanlist says... #5
I feel I shouldn't have to put cards in just for one card. Sure All Is Dust is good on it's own, but having to buy a 15 dollar card just so I don't get locked out of a game isn't my idea of fun. If the rule committee got rid of tuck saying it made the format "more competitive and less fun", then why are cards like Iona still legal?
The RC makes new rules to preserve the light-hearted nature of the game mode. Iona isn't light-hearted.
April 19, 2015 5:41 p.m.
Why don't we ban everythign then. Every card annoys someone. Screw it. What I think is fun is OBVIOUSLY the most important thing, and I'm the most important person here, right?
April 19, 2015 5:43 p.m.
TheBanlist says... #7
No need to get hostile, I'm just trying to have a conversation. If you disagree, say so respectfully and kindly.
April 19, 2015 5:44 p.m.
brokendwarf says... #8
That's a great idea.
Kaalia in her entirety isn't fun and light-hearted. Most players can assume that if they see someone playing Kaalia they should know what to expect (i.e., Iona), and have ways to deal with it.
April 19, 2015 5:45 p.m.
SimicPower says... #9
Nevinyrral's Disk, Karn Liberated, Perilous Vault, Unstable Obelisk, and others can kill Iona, as well as just being useful utility (I see you already run Ugin). I hope this helps, as a ban is very unlikely. I believe the RC has stated that they have no plans to ban Iona, I don't remember their reasoning.
I do think Iona is oppressive enough to be bannable, but there are many other lockdown cards that have a similar effect that are not banned. Iona's 9 mana also makes it less likely to be banned.
As for Rofellos vs. Felidar Sovereign, Rofellos is a two drop while Felidar is a 6 drop that still has no evasion and due to the upkeep trigger even sorcery speed removal can stop him. Rofellos also qualifies as "dangerous as a Commander" which apparently is a new criteria for the banned list due to the removal of Banned as Commander.
April 19, 2015 5:46 p.m.
Because if they truly want to have a proper banlist, they need to pick either 1v1 or group matches. A ban list that applies to both would be awful and have far too many conflicting factors. Iona is strong in 1v1 against monocolored generals. She gets progressively weaker the more players there are and the more colors there are. She doesn't come in early enough or do enough in multiplayer games to require a ban IMO.
Seeing as she costs 9 mana and you're running a commander that allows you to generate an incredible amount of mana very quickly, surely you must have a way to deal with things like that. If not, that's a flaw in deckbuilding, not a flaw in the format.
April 19, 2015 5:46 p.m.
I'm not being hostile. I'm pointing out why your logic is flawed. Or at least the RC's is.
April 19, 2015 5:48 p.m.
Forgot to address Kaalia and can't edit posts T_T
Sorry about that. While it is true Iona can come in early with Kaalia, it really is to be expected from a Kaalia deck and it is your job as an Omnath player to either outrace her, or use colorless removal spells like the ones SimicPower listed. Or play multiplayer instead of 1v1 against Kaalia. She is a top tier 1v1 commander, a little less so in group settings since more often than not, someone at the table will have a problem with Kaalia sticking around.
April 19, 2015 5:50 p.m.
TheBanlist says... #13
Totally forgot about Ugin, the Spirit Dragon...I am satisfied.
But in defense of the Felidar Sovereign, It, unlike Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary is a win-card. Considering you start at 40 life, all you have to do is not take damage before turn 6 (and that's WITHOUT ramp) and you win at upkeep. Plus, considering he is in white, you will have numerous ways to give yourself a cushion of life past 40 until you get Sovereign out. All you have to do is build a deck around that and you just win. Now, I understand what ChiefBell said, though he could've been a tad more civil saying it. Banning everything that even slightly annoys people is not a way Magic should be ruled. But if cards like Coalition Victory are banned, it just doesn't make sense to me that Felidar Sovereign isn't banned.
April 19, 2015 5:53 p.m.
FinchFalcon says... #14
Iona isn't really your problem... Kaalia getting it in for free on turn five is.
April 19, 2015 5:54 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #16
Why not house ban it instead of wanting it enforced across all playgroups?
You're effectively arguing that you want something banned because you don't want to be bothered to make your deck more resilient. I know that perhaps sounds harsher than I'd like, but it's basically where we are right now.
Cards like Oblivion Stone and All Is Dust are good, flexible answers to a variety of threats. It's not like we're telling you to run something that only has one legitimate use and only applies in corner cases.
April 19, 2015 5:58 p.m.
TheBanlist says... #17
Yes, I completely agree with that, and have accepted that answer.
Now, please tell me why Felidar Sovereign isn't banned. Everyone seems to have a better grasp of the situation, and I just want to be educated.
April 19, 2015 6 p.m.
SimicPower says... #18
Coalition Victory wins the game as it resolves, while Felidar Sovereign wins an entire turn later if no one removes it. Almost any board wipe or kill spell can stop it, or they can just Lava Axe to your face to stop the trigger.
I'll agree ChiefBell was being somewhat hostile with that sarcasm and all, but his points are valid.
As for Iona, remember there are a lot of cards that also lock down the game very efficiently. Winter Orb and Stasis to name a few. These cards, however, are much less mana.
April 19, 2015 6 p.m.
The difference is again, the upkeep trigger. Felidar gives your opponents and entire cycle of turns to get rid of him, Coalition Victory does not. Aside from counterspells, if the conditions are met before Coalition is played, the game is won with no chance to respond, meaning only blue players can reliably stop Coalition Victory.
But the banned list isn't made by WotC and commander is typically riddled with house rules, like yours to allow Rofellos.
The biggest issue here is that you clearly don't agree with the banned list, hence why you play Rofellos, and yet you still try to argue something else should be on the banned list? Just make a house ruling. If popular opinion says Iona should go, then so be it. Can't just selectively choose which rules to follow and expect everyone else to go along with it though.
April 19, 2015 6 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #21
Because Felidar Sovereign is an expensive, low-representation card that's easily handled over the course of a normal game without demanding the use of any silver bullets.
April 19, 2015 6:02 p.m.
TheBanlist says... #22
Here is the moment everyone has been waiting for:
I, IzzetGolgariLovechild, admit that I was wrong and am a whiney man-child. I have seen the error of my ways and submit to the higher logic of my peers.
This is an act of desperation, but I'm not that bad at Magic...I...I promise.
April 19, 2015 6:04 p.m.
Your argument is basically that Iona is not fun because it forces you to add specific, expensive (which i believe might be the real issue here), cards to your deck so you don't get blown out. However, I have to assume that the player using Iona finds this a lot of fun, especially because you refuse to add non-colored answers to your deck. The question then becomes, why is your experience of the game more important than his? Why is your fun of higher value than his fun? The answer is that it's not. Magic is a competitive game, and as such someone is going to lose / become annoyed at how a game played out.
I don't like the RC. At all. But complaining about a card that blows you out because of the specific build of deck you are running is not something you can legitimately complain about. You can easily fix the issue by adding non-colored answers. You just chose not to. As such, Iona isn't broken, your deck just isn't consistent/ resilient enough.
I know i'm being blunt, but that's what it really comes down to.
April 19, 2015 6:08 p.m.
Iona isn't fair. Then again, an omnath deck winning turn 6 via Helix Pinnacle isn't either. Plus, Omnath can be a beat you down very fast card. Omnath can old fashion race out a lot of decks, most decks in fact, if built and played well.
I feel your pain, I hate Iona, I love Omnath. But frankly, a lot of people who play Iona are thinking the following: I keep losing to Omnath, and now that tuck is gone, Iona's the only solution I've got.
April 19, 2015 6:08 p.m.
And just saw your post. Ah, oh well. Still. If you want a cheap artifact answer, Perilous Vault is still relatively inexpensive.
April 19, 2015 6:09 p.m.
SimicPower says... #26
It's okay IzzetGolgariLovechild. I acknowledge it won't be, but I think Serra Ascendant should be banned. It isn't broken and doesn't win games on its, it just happens to be made super unbalanced due to the nature of the format.
Before anyone responds to me with a wall of text saying that Serra Ascendant shouldn't be banned, just know I have heard it all before, and understand that realistically she isn't bannable.
April 19, 2015 6:10 p.m.
TheBanlist says... #27
PValBlanc, that is an excellent point. I hadn't thought of it that way.
But I'm not an butthead and I don't run Helix Pinnacle. I'll kill you with good ol' fashioned damage.
April 19, 2015 6:11 p.m.
Also just to point it out, you shouldn't feel bad about including something like Helix Pinnacle if your opponent uses Kaalia to get a turn 5 Iona. In fact, Helix actually makes that into quite an interesting race: can Kaalia kill the Omnath player before they can funnel literally all their mana into a full Helix Pinnacle.
April 19, 2015 6:27 p.m.
TheBanlist says... #29
That would be a fun thing to watch...I may put it in, but just for that butthead Iona
April 19, 2015 6:28 p.m.
Also, Kallia can drop iona on turn 3 with Lightning Greaves and Sol Ring. I have done so once, and drop other creatures on turn 3 or 4. But iona is not hated near as much as Master of Cruelties in Kaalia decks.
April 19, 2015 6:46 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #34
Necrotize Unless the Helix player has some reaaaaally crazy amount of mana sources (not really the case on T4-5), Kaalia's definitely going to win that race.
April 19, 2015 7:21 p.m.
Fictions_Reality says... #35
I will admit I feel cards that say 'you cant play magic at all sit down until you draw your single colorless kill spell in a 100-card singleton format' should be considered for the banlist. Mana cost yes its expensive, but with a format full of Show and Tell, Reanimate, and Quicksilver Amulet effects floating about I think wizards should most definetly consider banning Iona at least in 1v1 play.
This is coming from someone who pays a fairly competitive Abzan Reanimator and have cheated an iona into play turn 2-3 numerous times. Every time it resolves the entire multiplayer pod scoops, or if its 1v1 its onto the next game. That isnt fun magic Not even for the winner. Thus why its since been house-rule banned in our playgroup.
April 19, 2015 7:37 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #36
What is with all the people thinking Wizards runs EDH?
April 19, 2015 7:38 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #37
Wizards runs MTG therefore logically Wizards runs EDH.
Which is false, of course.
April 19, 2015 7:41 p.m.
Because wizards don't determine the ban list.
Because the ban list isn't designed for competitive play.
Because people who use the multiplayer ban list for 1v1 games are silly.
April 19, 2015 7:42 p.m.
There's already a banlist for 1v1 Commander. The French Banlist. The RC banlist I believe is centered around casual multiplayer, which makes little sense but that's a conversation for another thread. The reason Iona isn't on the French list is because they centered theirs around a more competitive environment in which decks either easily deal with Iona, or win before she's an issue.
And also, if a multiplayer pod scoops the second Iona hits the field, they either need a lot more diversity or need to strengthen their decks and gang up on that player. That's the checks and balance system of multiplayer EDH.
April 19, 2015 7:49 p.m.
TheBanlist says... #40
Ima quick unsubscribe from my own post.
Just...Just reaaaal quick
April 19, 2015 8:11 p.m.
RussischerZar says... #41
Well, there's also the problem of being the only [chosen color] player on the table. You're effectively out of the game while the other player's don't really care about Iona, except maybe as a big blocker.
Not fun.
April 19, 2015 8:11 p.m.
CommanderOfBolas says... #42
I didn't read through all the comments, so maybe some one has said this already. But, your statement is essentially "i feel like a dick telling him not to play it, so the RC should tell him instead"
let's assume for a moment that she got banned, Shouldn't that kalia player still get to play her considering that you play at least one banned card? my guess is that your answer will be no. When put into perspective, your argument is childish (not trying to be rude, just honest).
April 19, 2015 8:20 p.m.
The thing is though there are a bucket load of colourless removal staples that basically every mono coloured deck should be running. And hell, two of them were reprinted in he lastest commander decks: Unstable Obelisk and Spine of Ish Sah. Then there is Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre who is perfectly at home in a mono-green deck.
Basically if your playgroup runs an Iona and you have a mono-coloured deck, the onus is on you to adapt.
April 19, 2015 8:27 p.m.
contracrostipunctus says... #44
Look at this from a different perspective. Your deck has a clear weakness. How can you respond? Iona is just one card and we've got ways to handle her in Green.
Arashi, the Sky Asunder who can Channel Iona a new one. You might also up your graveyard hate, which typically is how Iona is cheated out. Scavenging Ooze is your friend here. Situationally Arena can do the trick.
April 19, 2015 8:41 p.m.
SimicPower says... #45
Okay everyone, he understands. He already admitted so in comments 16 and 21. He has even unsubscribed.
April 19, 2015 8:52 p.m.
My post was more directed toward RussischerZar's comment.
That being said, you're right in that this can turn very quickly into flogging a dead horse. Epochalyptik, would it be worth closing this?
April 19, 2015 8:57 p.m.
It's unlikely that everyone at the table is going to be playing the same colors and locked out of dealing with Iona. Plus the RC has already banned Painter's Servant to deal with Iona (and a host of others). It's a very powerful effect but not one a table of four can't handle.
April 19, 2015 9:56 p.m.
SimicPower says... #48
Fun fact: On the official EDH website forums, the majority of commenters approve of banning Iona. Source. Only a few commenters and, of course, the RC members are against it.
April 19, 2015 10:32 p.m.
SimicPower: I had a read over some of that thread. There were a few things I noticed:
Somebody made the claim that people don't run mono-coloured decks soley due to this card. Clearly thats not true, becasue a) people run mono-coloured decks and b) people run dual+ coloured decks to get access to an effect, not to play around Iona.
People are complaining about having to run colourless removal to deal with her. This is a bad arguement. The ONLY colour which doesn't struggle with removal is mono-white. This would be the corner case. But for every otehr colour, they struggle with permanent reomval in some way. Red, Blue and Black have next to no non-creature permanent removal and Green (which has non-creature permanent removal coming out the wazoo) struggles to deal with creatures. Sure, there are a SMALL handlful of playable fight cards but other than that the options are very limited. Basically put, mono-coloured decks shouldn't be running colourless removal to deal with Iona, the should be running colourless removal to deal with the other stuff. It's just a bonus that it hits Iona too. If your deck runs little to no removal and just plays big stompy creatures, then a Blazing Archon will make your game just as unfun.
form the way people are talking on the forum (I have seen similar arguement patterns) it comes across not so much as Iona specifically being a problem, but more people's inability to build a deck that can handle problems. Its usually the people who build inflexible decks that complain the loudest. Cards like Iona, although "unfun" to play against force players to rethink their decks in terms of "ability to deal with threats". And I say this just playing against an Iona this weekend. My opponent named green and my deck was white green. So intead of complaining, I started to think about the ways in my deck to deal with Iona and what I needed to do to get to them.
Don't punish the card because of the player - this is something I've seen A LOT. "There's a guy in my playgoup who runs X and is unfun" is an arguemtn I've seen time and time again. At this point, its not the card thats the problem, it's the fact the a certain person is abusing it. There's a really good article by Epochalyptik found here that discusses the social format that is Commander. If a player is abusing the social format, its not about removing access to certain cards, its about communicating with that player what the play group is after gameplay/deckbuilding wise.
April 19, 2015 11:55 p.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #50
For what it's worth I appreciate your post enpc, thanks.
Iona, Shield of Emeria was really tough to deal with when I started playing Commander. Now that I've been playing it over a year weekly, I see her limitations better, and agree she's not worth banning.
ChiefBell says... #2
This is when the slippery slope fallacy becomes less of a fallacy.
April 19, 2015 5:36 p.m.