COMMANDER/EDH BANNED LIST ANNOUNCEMENT: January 2016
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on Jan. 18, 2016, 11:39 a.m. by Ender666666
Summary:
- Commander-specific mulligan rules are removed
- Rule 4 (mana generation restriction) is removed
- Prophet of Kruphix is banned
Mulligans:
We promised in the last update that, with the advent of the Vancouver Mulligan, we'd be evaluating the mulligan process in Commander. This announcement is the culmination of that research. After examining several popular options, and coming up with a few of our own, we've concluded that the Vancouver Mulligan (with the standard first-one-free in multiplayer and a scry once you go to 6 or fewer) is the best option. The RC continues to use and recommend the Gis ("Mulligan 7s to a playable hand. Don't abuse this") for trusted playgroups, but that's not something that can go in the rules.
Ultimately, the goal of mulligans in Commander is to ensure that you start the game with enough lands to be a participant. With Commander games running an hour plus, it's unfortunate if you can't play anything because you miss land drops and get run over quickly.
We didn't want to solve the problems of Magic itself - mana screw and mana flood are part of the game - and players need to make a reasonable effort with their land counts, but we wanted a mulligan rule that tried to minimize unplayable opening hands. So, we brainstormed, and ran computer simulations. And what ultimately came out was... it didn't much matter. Nothing provided a clear enough upgrade to justify having additional rules for mulligans. For example, with 37 lands, Partial Paris was "successful" (which we defined as playing a 4th land on turn 4) 89% of the time versus Multiplayer Vancouver at 86%, but it came at a cost of about a fifth of a card on average. On the whole, 86% success is a rate that seems reasonable.
If you find yourself playing 1v1 (perhaps while waiting for a friend to show up), you should still use the free multiplayer mulligan. With a deck this size, variance is high enough to make not having the free mulligan potentially punishing - without the free mulligan you drop down to about 80% success rate, which, combined with being the only opponent to focus on, leads to too many unfortunate games.
Finally, its not an official rule, but we recommend setting aside the hands you're mulliganning away until you get a keeper. That saves shuffling time, and we're all for minimizing shuffling 100-card decks.
Rule 4:
We still love Rule 4. It's a nice piece of flavor and reinforces the idea that this format goes beyond simple mechanical restrictions into a deeper philosophical approach around color and mana symbols. Its effect on the game was pretty small, but that flavor message made it worthwhile to preserve.
However, the mana system of Magic is very complicated, and trying to insert an extra rule there has consequences in the corners. Harvest Mage. Celestial Dawn. Gauntlet of Power. And now, colorless-only mana costs.
Being able to generate colorless mana more easily in Commander wasn't going to break anything. But, it represented another "gotcha" moment for players, who were now likely to learn about Rule 4 when someone exploited the colorless loophole. We could paper over it (both "mana generated from off-color sources can only pay generic costs" and "you can't pay a cost outside your color identity" were considered), but a lot of the flavor would be lost in the transition, defeating the purpose. Without the resonant flavor, Rule 4 was increasingly looking like mana burn - a rule that didn't come up enough to justify it's existence.
We don't expect removing the rule to have a big impact. Some Sunburst and Converge cards might get a bit more of a look. Sen Triplets works more like you'd expect, as does Praetor's Grasp. The clone-and-steal deck, already one of the most popular archetypes, gets better, but less than you might think. It turns out there really aren't that many impactful non-blue activated abilities on cards that commonly get stolen in Commander. It's OK if you can regenerate that creature you just stole, and you'll need to work for it a bit anyway.
One side benefit to the removal of both the color production and mulligan rules is that, in terms of game play, Commander becomes a normal game of multiplayer Magic with a higher life total and a set of additive rules to bring a new piece (your Commander) into the game. That's good streamlining in terms of teaching people the format and reducing gotcha moments while still preserving the essential flavor of Commander.
Prophet of Kruphix:
This was challenging. Prophet is not a traditionally obvious problem card for Commander, so we chose to take a conservative approach and see if casual groups could adapt. In the past, we've seen unpopular cards generate a lot of outcry, but be handled reasonably well. Powerful cards existing is OK and exploring them responsibly is an essential part of Commander.
This didn't happen with Prophet. Casual groups haven't been able to work around it and problematic play has not dropped off in hoped-for ways. Instead, the primary approach has been to steal it, clone it, run it yourself, or get run over. Ultimately, it seems the card is too perfect - it does everything U/G Commander players want to be doing and it does it in a way that makes counterplay difficult. With traditional boogeymen such as Consecrated Sphinx, you're forced to expend a lot of your mana to cast it and will have a challenge protecting it as the turn goes around the table. With Prophet, it has virtual protection built in, negating that disadvantage almost immediately.
Prophet becomes only the second multicolored card on the banlist (after the structurally-problematic Coalition Victory). It's telling just how pervasive Prophet is despite such a restriction. Yes, U/G is the most popular color combination in Commander, but we've reached the point where Prophet is driving U/G deck choice, rather than vice-versa. That's centralizing in ways we can't ignore, so it's time for Prophet to take a break.
Whenever we decide to ban a card, we take a long look at the current list to see if any cards can come off, as we believe a casual format is better served by a minimalist banlist. After extensive discussion, however, we concluded that everything on the list served a purpose, so we won't be unbanning anything. It's been two years since the last (non-consolidation) card got banned, which is an acceptable growth rate!
http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18057
There seems to be some confusion about what the removal of Commander Rule #4 means, so here is some clarification.
The normal Commander rules regarding Colour Identity still apply. You may only include Spells, Artifacts, Planeswalkers, Creatures and Lands in your deck that match your commander's Colour Identity. The ONLY exception is with cards where mana symbols show up in reminder text which explain a mechanic, for example, cards with the "Extort" mechanic. Crypt Ghast is an example of a card that is purely Black, even though there is a 
symbol in the reminder text that explains how the "Extort" mechanic works.
Your commander's Colour Identity is determined by each and every COLOUR of mana symbol, printed anywhere on it (Again, with the exception of reminder text).
Cards with the mechanic of "Devoid" are colourless, but still fall under the normal rules in Commander when determining its legality for your deck. Want to play Transgress the Mind, but your commander is Green? Sorry, you can't. Transgress the Mind may be colourless, but it has a Black Colour Identity when you are determining if you can legally include it in your deck because it has 
in its casting cost.
What the removal of Commander Rule #4 means is that lands like Forbidden Orchard, Mana Confluence, City of Brass, and cards like Birds of Paradise can now legally make you mana of ANY colour (
), regardless of your Commander's Colour Identity. In the past, if something caused a mana of a colour that wasn't part of your Commander's Colour Identity to be added to your mana pool, it INSTEAD added that many 
to your mana pool.
Oh, and IS NOT A COLOUR. Got it?
So what about Command Tower? Can it create any colour of mana now? NOPE. Because of the wording on Command Tower, it will still only create 1 mana of any colour IN YOUR COMMANDER'S COLOUR IDENTITY
I hope that this helps clarify things for anyone who might be confused.
Robiveli305 says... #2
@Epochalyptik...what's the different...if it's social or causal the format or who created it? Better yet explain the difference between the both of them (causal vs social), please?
January 18, 2016 6:14 p.m.
lemmingllama says... #4
@Robiveli305 Also to address another of your points that Epoch didn't, EDH does have prize support. It is now supported as one of many formats that sanctioned tournament play and FNM play can hold.
January 18, 2016 6:28 p.m.
Megalomania says... #5
Happy with the mulligan rule, a bit dissapointed about the mana color one.
I'm in the process of building a Zedruu deck and Celestial Dawn was supposed to be in it.
sighs
January 18, 2016 6:29 p.m.
DiamondFlavor says... #6
enpc I'm not sure I buy the argument that Deadeye Navigator is a combo-only card, and that it isn't jammed into nearly every blue deck. In fact, I think exactly the issue with it is that it is not only a resilient combo piece, but also a worthy value-engine outside of combos.
It doesn't need a combo to be very good with Solemn Simulacrum, Duplicant, Wood Elves, Sun Titan, Avalanche Riders, Rune-Scarred Demon, clones, etc.
It's arguably the best flicker-effect in the format, dramatically increasing the value of every ETB/LTB effect creature (which is a huge amount of commonly-played cards, especially in casual play), as well as providing flexible, instant-speed protection to itself and other creatures.
Sure, it has to resolve Soulbond, but it's more a chink in the armor than a glaring weakness. Every form of protection has a weak spot, but I'd argue that Deadeye's is among the most resilient.
Not to get off-topic, or dwell unreasonably on the lack of a Deadeye ban. But it seems at least as good, as common, and as warping as Prophet, at least in my experience, so this banning raises (I think) a legitimate question about DEN.
Disclaimer: I love DEN, but, as with PoK, I would totally understand if it had to go.
January 18, 2016 6:30 p.m.
Robiveli305 says... #7
@simicpower...he really didn't...furthermore Casual and social...is basically the same thing. If you'll would like I can define both of them in a post as written on dictionary.com ...but I can see that you all are friends who just hell bent on back up each other's opinions and dont care enough about other's opinions outside your friend circle...night waste of time
January 18, 2016 6:37 p.m.
Robiveli305: ...Except SimicPower linked to an article Epochalyptik wrote about EDH as a social format. In which he gives a definition for both casual and social formats, and further discusses the differences between the two. Didja click the link, or didja just dismiss Simic's statement out of hand as circlejerking?
January 18, 2016 6:41 p.m.
Megalomania says... #9
DiamondFlavor, DEN doesn't provide you with any advantage on its own. PoK gives you that in spades.
Furthermore, every time PoK hits the board, the game becomes a game of killing, copying, or stealing PoK. The same cannot be said of DEN so I don't think DEN is at the same level as PoK.
January 18, 2016 6:42 p.m.
Not really okay with the second change... personally I will stick to the colors of my commander, but I think it's a wrong idea, that rule brought some flavor that the other formats doesn't have. I understand the colorless rule changes things, but to get to that extent? I hope they will find something else.
EDIT : Seems I didn't understand how that worked. It seems fine for me after arguing with someone.
January 18, 2016 6:49 p.m. Edited.
I agree with canterlotguardian. I never ran the Prophet so I could make an insanely powerful deck to bash peoples faces in or to be a royal dick. I ran it because it would help balance out the field and keep people from targeting me. I do not understand why it is considered so overpowered in a multi-player game. With so many people playing there are many chances for someone else to remove it. It is no different than a Consecrated Sphinx going unchecked for multiple turns. The card, like many other powerful cards out there, forces people to respond to it or things will get crazy. What about the Meren of Clan Nel Toth shenanigans happening with constant sacrifice? Meren can be played multiple times and create a lot of advantage on is own, but Prophet can only be played once and is considered too overpowered? Maybe I am a little biased because the Prophet was one of my favorite cards, but I also realize there are a lot of other cards that create crazy advantage as well that could easily be banned. Isn't the part of EDH to be social and have fun? I think taking cards away like that takes the fun out of it because people cannot play what they like to play. I may be way off base with this as well too, but this is how I feel.
January 18, 2016 7:08 p.m.
Angry_Potatoes says... #13
I can't say I'm thrilled that Prophet got banned, as one of my favorite EDH decks is Zegana, but I ALSO can't say I don't understand where this ban is coming from. Untapping all your lands/creatures AND all your creatures having flash is just too damn powerful and so hard to deal with. Prophet, I'll miss ya, but this was bound to happen sooner or later.
January 18, 2016 7:12 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #14
Consecrated Sphinx and other draw engines generate potential advantage. They give you more options in hand.
Prophet of Kruphix, by allowing you to untap for every other player in the game and by allowing you to cast creatures on those players turns, generates actualized advantage. It greatly increases your ability to actually cast things.
Those are two very different kinds of advantage, and one is much more powerful and impactful than the other.
Further, the "dies to removal" argument is rarely applied correctly. This case is no exception. The fact that you can remove it tells us nothing (realistically speaking) about how good or bad it is.
The Meren of Clan Nel Toth comparison is completely off base because it works on a single triggered ability that isn't unprecedented.
January 18, 2016 7:14 p.m.
@canterlotguardian
Just tell your playgroup that and you won't have to fuss. You should also be glad it's the majority because in real life, a minority of people causing a problem causes everyone to suffer.
January 18, 2016 7:17 p.m.
Robiveli305 says... #16
@erabel ...yes I read it did you read my 1st post...I'm going to quote what I read ..."An official ban list exists, but the RC recommends that it be used as a suggestion and not an absolute unless playing outside of your playgroup (we will address that particular situation later). Players are allowed, and even encouraged, "to change the ban list and other format rules as they see fit". Why? To provide a more enjoyable experience for those playing the game." do u see my point
January 18, 2016 7:23 p.m.
lemmingllama says... #18
@Robiveli305 You are allowed to play EDH however you want. If you enjoy games such as casting Channel into Emrakul, the Aeons Torn and your playgroup is ok with that, more power to you. However, there has to be some kind of structure for tournaments and such. This is why the RC exists. They created the format, and they maintain things such as the EDH specific rules and the EDH ban list to ensure that there is a base set of rules and restrictions that players can use to play EDH. This way, I can go to any playgroup and we can still play games without someone getting mad about things being "unfun" or "unfair".
Anyways, back to the original point. Casual formats are formats where people don't care about winning, they simply want the fun experience. Social formats are ones where people care about winning, but they want to have fun with the other players while trying to achieve that goal. EDH is a social format, since people try to win and also try to have a good time with their fellow players.
January 18, 2016 7:44 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #19
It isn't even so much for tournaments. EDH was never meant to be played in tournament environments; it was envisioned for a casual atmosphere. However, the boundaries of a social format are defined by the players, and some players are competitive. Therefore, competitive playgroups and even competitive events and systems sprang up within the community.
Anyway, the basic premise is that, as lemmingllama described, playing a format casually implies that you're interested in seeing what crazy interactions or funny scenarios can be realized without as much interest in whether you win or lose while playing a format socially is about the bond you form with other players and the way you collectively shape the gaming experience for yourselves.
Whereas casual and competitive can be listed as the ends of a spectrum of player preferences or priorities, social isn't on that spectrum. Social is another value that governs the context in which you choose a point on the spectrum and proceed.
Further, the fact that Commander is a social format does not preclude there from being an oversight body. Every format needs to be managed in some way if it is to be balanced and mechanically feasible. In social formats, the oversight body is also responsible for establishing the "norm" that governs player expectations when they play outside of their playgroups. These expectations are a common baseline for how a game in an unfamiliar environment is expected to be played, even if it's not wholly representative of how the game is intended to be played or how it could possibly be played.
You're welcome to disregard the RC's rules and modify the format locally within your playgroup (you're encouraged to do so; that's the function of the playgroup in a social format), but that doesn't mean that the RC shouldn't exist, and it certainly doesn't mean that Commander is a casual format. To suggest either of those is to betray an ignorance of how the format operates and why it can function in the manner that it does.
January 18, 2016 7:54 p.m.
so, does the removal of rule 4 mean that you can use colors not in your commander?
January 18, 2016 7:55 p.m.
Robiveli305 says... #21
I don't play in in tournaments nor did I mention any competitive playing... casual or social game state of EDH being that you can play whatever you feel like within your playgroup I hate when people turn an ant hill into a mountain and force feed you words that you did not say
January 18, 2016 7:56 p.m.
Megalomania says... #22
So what exactly does robi want? I'm really not getting what he is trying to say.
January 18, 2016 8:01 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #23
Tonight's going to be a long night kids, full of thread porn and salt. And they don't always come separated...
The banlist/rules are only strictly enforced at a competitive tournament. Everywhere else, your playgroup decides what they think is best for them. That's the whole point. But Epoch is probably talking about competitive settings.
January 18, 2016 8:03 p.m.
Robiveli305 says... #24
Why do people feel like they should put shackles on having fun...?? What if I told you all ..you can only have fun on Tuesdaya... Between 1 pm to 6 pm because we need to balance your level of fun; because your fun is upsetting other people's fun... You all will laugh at me...Edh banning of cards is doing just that...controling people deck building and labelling it balance or fair play...cause other people fun is more important than one's own enjoyment
January 18, 2016 8:05 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #25
Talking about competitive settings in what sense?
January 18, 2016 8:06 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #26
...but the point is that you don't have to follow those rules in your playgroup, so that everyone has the most fun. However, you have to expect that the bans and such will be enforced at competitive tournaments, because people go there to win, not to sit and talk and have fun (though that happens anyways, obviously).
@Epoch See above. Or never mind, I wasn't quite sure what Rob was saying anyways.
January 18, 2016 8:07 p.m. Edited.
Epochalyptik says... #27
@Robiveli305: You're welcome to overrule the decision within your playgroup. However, the RC has an obligation to manage the format in a way that addresses serious, format-level concerns. If a card becomes universally oppressive or problematic, it deserves to go under scrutiny. If it needs to be banned, it should be.
Having an open format doesn't necessitate the extreme (which is to say that it doesn't necessitate having no controls whatsoever). In this case, a card was evaluated based on its power, representation within the format, and applications and deemed to be detrimental to the health of the format.
If the decision were baseless, then I would agree that the ban shouldn't have been made. But in this case, there's good reasoning (insofar as I can tell) for the ban. And that goes for any change. Change needs a reason when it comes to format management. If there exist sufficient reasons and insufficient counters to them, then the change may proceed.
January 18, 2016 8:12 p.m.
Megalomania says... #28
So the guy essentially wants to do away with the ban list. Next thing you know, he'll want commander to be a non-singleton format. Sheesh.
January 18, 2016 8:21 p.m.
Robiveli305 says... #29
Never once did I stated.. I was talking about competitive tournament Edh...I was merely stating how a ban list is a joke in everyday causal play of Edh. My play group can handle ban cards with no problem...we are just tired of all the cry babies who likes single edh games to take 5 hour to end...so they can basically pull off their 6 card going no where combos and say how they got there 40 turns later...but get mad when other's won't let those things happen. Because their decks aren't very good so they cry for certain cards to be ban; stating their not fair or "balance"...lol...win or lose I have fun with my group...it's not the cards or decks I'm focus on it my play group...only people I see crying is the people who wants to invite themselves into my playgroup and can't hang with the big dawgs...
January 18, 2016 8:22 p.m.
Choo-choo...derail train. I prefer to play EDH like a 100 card game of War, highest mana cost wins the hand.
No not really.
Anyways, despite removing some of the format flavor by revoking Rule 4 (debatable I guess), will this have significant economic impact on lands that produce multiple types of mana? Obviously time will tell but any predictions?
January 18, 2016 8:23 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #31
To be fair, wanting less regulation is more realistic and justifiable than wanting to change fundamental format rules. Let's not distort that. But the cry for no bans or effectively no bans is still not realistic in and of itself.
January 18, 2016 8:23 p.m.
lemmingllama says... #32
@GearNoir I can see an increase in the number of players who run City of Brass and Mana Confluence. However, the real movers will be Chromatic Lantern and Prismatic Omen.
January 18, 2016 8:25 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #33
@GearNoir: Hard to say. It certainly nerfs the viability of cards like Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth or City of Brass when it comes to enabling payments, but those cards also gain functionality where effects concerning off-color payments are involved. Some people might lose out on specs on Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth, but that might be the extent of it.
January 18, 2016 8:25 p.m.
THe removal of rule 4 isn't even that much of a flavor fail. We've seen that characters can use mana outside their color. Hell, Teysa was using lawmagic in the uncharcted realms a month or two back.
January 18, 2016 8:30 p.m.
Darn...you mean to tell me my hopes of Rupture Spire and Savage Lands shooting up to $100 each are unrealistic?
Guess I shouldn't have bought out TGC after all... :)
January 18, 2016 8:32 p.m.
DiamondFlavor says... #36
When Epochalyptik says EDH is "social", he means that playgroups are capable of and encouraged to dictate the terms of play in a way that ensures the health of the format for them. A social group can (and should) refer to the RC's rules as a guideline and make appropriate changes that suit them. Any given group may not agree with every single rule, and it is the group's prerogative to make changes. However, personal distaste for a rule does not necessarily make the rule itself ill-advised. Trust that the RC does in fact put a lot of thought into bans and rule changes before enacting them. They do so for the overall health of the format, and to ensure that players can move between groups with some baseline understanding for what is legal and acceptable.
"Social", in Epoch's terms, is meant to explain something different than "casual", which (for better or worse) has taken on a fairly specific meaning in the MtG community as the anti-thesis for "competitive". Many people who play MtG, EDH specifically, do not like infinite combos because they find them to be too cutthroat, anti-climactic, or against their envisioned spirit of the game. However, many people enjoy combos because they push the tension of a game to its limits, creating a struggle of opportunity, response, timing, and resources wherein any player could conceivably take the win at another's misplay. Both ends of the spectrum can be enjoyed in a social setting. It is important to not conflate "social" and "casual".
I play EDH only with my close friends. We chat and sometimes drink and we can discuss and agree on meta- or group-specific bans and others rules minutia. It is a social setting in every respect. But some would not consider our gameplay to be casual; most games end with an infinite combo loop that kills the opposition instantly.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Epoch, but it felt important to summarize the difference for those who don't understand.
January 18, 2016 8:32 p.m.
Megalomania says... #37
My group abides by the RC rulings. It is much more impersonal than having one or two guys convince other members of the group to come up with a ruling that deters another guy in the group's gameplay.
January 18, 2016 8:37 p.m.
DiamondFlavor says... #38
Same. The impersonal aspect is potentially the most important role of the RC rulings.
January 18, 2016 8:41 p.m.
canterlotguardian says... #39
FAMOUSWATERMELON define "thread porn". I have never heard that term before.
January 18, 2016 8:55 p.m.
blazingscout says... #41
I can understand prophet being banned, it's the argument of having one card that does two very powerful abilities, versus having Yeva, Nature's Herald or any card like that and a Seedborn Muse (Tooth and Nail these girls out!). I'm sorta disappointed that she got banned but I understand the reason.
January 18, 2016 9:23 p.m.
MrEggCream says... #42
They always decide to ban/change the stupidest things.
January 18, 2016 10:33 p.m.
Ender666666 says... #44
Whelp.... It was bound to happen eventually... There's now a petition you can sign on Change.org demanding that Prophet of Kruphix be unbanned. I think it has like 10 signatures...
January 18, 2016 10:44 p.m.
MrEggCream says... #47
@CanadianShinobi I just think that some of the things they decide on that are "Overpowered" are a little off. Like Serra Ascendant is not banned or even changed in any official capacity, It should be 50 life. But prophet is to much. The mulligan rule or the mana rule is not a problem to me. Just some of the things that they don't see. They need to unban primetime.
January 18, 2016 11:11 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #49
@MrEggCream: The problem there is that you're sort of just saying things and hoping (or assuming) that we'll take them for granted. Why is Serra Ascendant banworthy? Why should Primeval Titan be unbanned?
January 18, 2016 11:14 p.m.
MrEggCream: format warping card is format warping. I highly doubt they will unban Primeval Titan anytime soon...
ae0n5105 says... #1
@gahiji_price like i said before - I already have a seedborn muse and like 4+ ways to cast during opponents turns. i literally see no difference now than when i used to use the prophet other than i'll now be the only guy with this tech in my local group since seedborn muse is kind of unknown/not highly present.I mean it is literally what we all did (prophet players) pre-Theros block.
January 18, 2016 6 p.m.