Rule of Law

Enchantment

Each player can't cast more than one spell each turn.

Legality

Format	Legality
1v1 Commander	Legal
Archenemy	Legal
Arena	Legal
Block Constructed	Legal
Canadian Highlander	Legal
Casual	Legal
Commander / EDH	Legal
Commander: Rule 0	Legal
Custom	Legal
Duel Commander	Legal
Freeform	Legal
Gladiator	Legal
Highlander	Legal
Historic	Legal
Historic Brawl	Legal
Legacy	Legal
Leviathan	Legal
Limited	Legal
Modern	Legal
Modern Beyond Horizons	Legal
Oathbreaker	Legal
Pioneer	Legal
Planar Constructed	Legal
Planechase	Legal
PreDH	Legal
Quest Magic	Legal
Tiny Leaders	Legal
Vanguard	Legal
Vintage	Legal

Discussion (49)

DreadKhan on Why Are the Other Free …

3 months ago

Unless I misspoke without noticing I didn't say you don't want free interaction in Brackets 4 and 5 anywhere. My whole point was that you don't CARE about them in Brackets 1 and 2, that's a very different point. Similarly, I don't care that people play free interaction in Bracket 4 and 5, and I don't think people need or want hints to do so from the people managing the format. I think it's an equally valid point that "free interaction is associated with Bracket 5 in particular because it's conspicuously bad in lower Brackets". FoW and similar suffer from costing you cards (which are more precious in lower power metas), while Fierce and similar aren't very relevant because they don't interact on the right axis for those metas, because they're limited to non-Creature spells. It's INCREDIBLY bad form to ban or restrict cards that aren't even seeing play in a format/Bracket. This is why Trinisphere was taken off the GC list. For a great example of a card that's not a GC but meets the same standard as Fierce (is incredibly in high power and terrible at low) is Rule of Law; Rule of Law is a MUCH stronger stax effect in Bracket 5 than just about anything else, almost no decks can win around a Rule, other than decks built around it. Nobody wants Rule to be a GC because it's silly, but you don't live in fear of a Fierce in Bracket 2, you fear something like Bane of Progress or Blightsteel Colossus, some big honking creature that wrecks stuff.

I feel like it needs to be restated for some reason: what exactly are people countering in Brackets 1 and 2 with Fierce that would justify it being a GC there in particular, where GC are actually important? It being on the GC list has no bearing on Bracket 5, you yourself have said the GC list isn't meant to be a 'checklist'. Nobody should ever care if a card is played in Bracket 4 or 5 because it's a self-solving problem unless it also happens to be too good for Brackets 1 and 2. The only things that ever need to be GC are cards that aren't fun for Brackets 1, 2 and 3, that's all the GC list even does, it has ZERO impact on Brackets 4 and 5 because you should just be running the best cards there anyways.

I guess I wholeheartedly disagree with the premise that the GC list should be referenced by people building 4s and 5s, as both can just run anything that they want. They shouldn't need to reference a list other than the ban list. The GC list IMHO should only consider Brackets 1-3, with an emphasis on 1 and 2. Building a GC list around brackets that never care about them is both unnecessary and counter-intuitive.

Moondrop on favorite pet card(s)

3 months ago

yeah I see that Rule of Law being aggravating and fun just telling everyone hey we're playing some nice fair magic so lets enjoy it(more specifically their agony).

hyalopterouslemur on favorite pet card(s)

3 months ago

Rule of Law hinders combo decks and shuts down storm entirely.

legendofa on Mark Rosewater's Comments About Defensive …

6 months ago

Crystal Barricade, Myrel, Shield of Argive, High Noon, and Final Showdown are all pretty new, and {W}{U} and {U}{R}{W} have prominent Standard control decks. {W} and {U} would have an identity crisis if defensive strategies were reduced too much.

I don't think it's as much de-emphasizing defensive strategies as reducing stalemates. Between tournament time restrictions and the subjective "fun" factor, there's several reasons to avoid a board state where nothing happens. Going off High Noon, they're also including ways to break a deadlock within the cards that set the deadlock--Rule of Law that breaks its own parity. It should be possible to at least outline a dynamic prison deck at this point, something that keeps the board state advancing while still playing like a traditional hard control deck.

The game's not really here to model real-world military tactics. It's an entertainment product, so entertainment comes first. And as someone who likes control and prison effects, it's kind of a hard sell when the gameplay goes into stasis for more than a turn.

hyalopterouslemur on Any Ideas in how to …

11 months ago

Teferi's Ageless Insight can actually draw net cards (well, one net card) off your Frantic Search. (You will need a lot more card draw to get the key cards to a storm deck.)

Might I recommend Snapcaster Mage? Think of him as a second copy of whatever your favorite instant is.

Also, being an eternal format does mean that storm has to worry about cards like Alms Collector and Rule of Law that can ruin our day, so pack some answers.

legendofa on Good uses for bad cards

1 year ago

Knowledge Pool + High Noon/Rule of Law/something like that is a hard lock. Cast a spell, exile it, can't cast the replacement spell because you already cast your spell for the turn.

Or just put it in a chaos deck and make a big mess.

DreadKhan on I'm semi-giving up magic

1 year ago

I'd suggest Kresh the Bloodbraided if you're limited to one deck, it can be dirt cheap and Kresh often gets hilariously big. You don't have Blue control, but Jund is awfully good at removing problems, arguably more efficiently than Blue control. More people are fine playing against Jund control than Blue permission, so you might avoid 'do you have something else?' coming up right away.

Another option might be Sisay, Weatherlight Captain, this can be incredibly 'samey' between games, but if you have several lines of wildly different power included it's possible to make a Sisay list that is fun vs a huge range of decks. I have a Progenitus in my Sisay list, so it technically has a huge terrifying monster I can fetch out if I want. If you want a more control heavy option you can lean into Hatebears with Sisay, she's a cEDH level Commander that often uses Rule of Law to great effect.

I have a deck built around each if you want some ideas.

DreadKhan on What makes a card or …

1 year ago

I like to build some fairly toxic Commander decks, though I try to warn people if a deck dips too deeply into any of the elements I've noticed that cause toxicity. In Commander most people consider decks that take away player agency to be toxic, so that includes; -excessive permanent removal (clearing each opponent's board repeatedly, or Obliterate/Jokulhaups) -things that limit what you can do (like Rule of Law or Collector Ouphe) -excessively pushed Commanders in Casual (stuff where they throw Ward on for no reason, most of these are also the payoff and enabler in one card) -Chaos effects that turn the game on it's head (Thieves' Auction and Grip of Chaos for example) -stuff that prevents untapping (Static Orb and Winter Orb) -stealing everything strategies (flickering Agent of Treachery infinitely, Insurrection late game) -excessive discard (multiple Necrogen Mists and Bottomless Pit effects) -'win on the spot' effects that don't have an upkeep trigger (there is a few of these on the banlist, like Biorhythm and Coalition Victory) -counter everything strategies (Dovescape) -overly efficient tutoring (Zur the Enchanter *f-etch* fetching out Necropotence, and people are weirdly salty about Vampiric Tutor) -faster elimination strategies that encourage you to target a specific opponent (think anything Infect, and lower to the ground Voltron decks) -I think the last one I can think of is optional tax effects that encourage people to screw their pod and play into the Rhystic Study, if the tax is just a tax, like Thalia, Guardian of Thraben people tend not to mind as much, it's the ability to king make if you're dumb.

In 1v1 I don't think it really matters, unless you only have 1 deck to play kitchen table with just changing decks should generate enough novelty to avoid the build up of bad feelings, and if you're playing competitively it's your call if you want to play nightmarish stuff like Nadu, or something traditionally 'fun' like Aggro... only if everyone plays decks that aren't fun, more people will quit, so it's a 'tragedy of the commons' scenario too if you have a fairly small meta each player needs 'fun to play against' decks, even for 1v1.