[COMMUNITY] What cards do you wish were banned or unbanned?
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on Aug. 17, 2019, 8:48 p.m. by SynergyBuild
Changes to the Banlist?
The format of the comments should be simple:
Ban: Ad Nauseam
Reason: I believe cards like Ad Nauseam that take abuse of the excess of life to win the game nearly on the spot in decks built around it with or without combos like Angel's Grace make games too easy.
(I don't believe this, but it is just an example.)
You may discuss all other people's suggestion, but you cannot write to ban something or unban something, without a clear reason.
Any other suggestions to this post? Just write them!
SynergyBuild says... #2
SakuraStorm don't like fast mana? Mox Opal , Jeweled Amulet , Lotus Petal , all 0-drops and Urza, High Lord Artificer/ Krark-Clan Ironworks also are fast mana xD
August 23, 2019 7:17 a.m.
So I have a question for this forum, that I kind of want to hear thoughts on: should cards be banned for the fact that they're extremely expensive in addition to their power level?
For example, something like Mana Drain , which is an extremely powerful tool and can pretty much set you completely ahead in some cases, is $130 dollars according to tappedout and can be difficult to get a copy without either a) having tons of money, b) having a family member who plays who has a copy or c) theft. Do you think that cards like it could or should be banned for those reasons?
August 23, 2019 10:45 a.m.
SynergyBuild says... #4
dbpunk it's 84 dollars according to tappedout. On even your comment xD
Anyway, this post isn't meant to say what should or shouldn't be banned or why, but simply to bring about the discussion to decide such a thing.
August 23, 2019 10:54 a.m.
Sorry I was looking at the Force of Will cost, but I also think what I stated was a relevant thing to talk about in terms of banning things.
August 23, 2019 10:57 a.m.
SakuraStorm says... #7
In fact i do like fast mana, it enables all kind of fun nonsense.
But it can be abused to no end and having the right threatassessment, as in targeting the turn 1 Sol Ring -Guy, isn't always to be expected.
Would be really nice that people getting hated on for brewing decks that can pull off an early kill(turn 1-3) or general a gap in power could be avoided.
Also i'm very aware of the stuff you mentioned, but none of it can speed your game up to the same level as the power4 and other rocks can.
Also these require a setup, let me explain:
-Urza, High Lord Artificer is 4CMC and you need 5 untapped artifacts to plus.
- Krark-Clan Ironworks is also 4CMC and you need 3 more artifacts to sac for plus.
- Mox Opal , Jeweled Amulet require obvious time or setup.
- Lotus Petal is saced so this makes it far inferior to let's say Mox Diamond .
While we're at it, also pls ban High Tide ;)
August 23, 2019 11:07 a.m.
@dbpunk - Banning cards based on price doesn't work and only introduces insane uncertainty into MtG prices. You'll have MASSIVE buyouts for cards people think will rise in popularity after new bannings as well as people rapidly liquidating their collections because they're unsure if they should hold on to their cards. Basically, you'd end up hurting the playerbase considerably.
It's easy enough to find cost effective replacements for staples right now in EDH because of how deep the pool of cards is and people who play EDH competitively almost universally allow people to proxy. After all, there'd be no innovation at the top end if experimentation cost potentially thousands of dollars.
Basically, as things stand, cost of cards isn't a significant barrier of entry into the format for new players while also not affecting balance.
Also, for cEDH, you can also play grindy, value-based decks that play a heavy disruption plan in the form of permanents. Basically, it's not so necessary for you to play removal if you're dropping stuff like Null Rod every turn. You don't NEED removal like you seem to suggest.
August 23, 2019 12:43 p.m.
dbpunk Banning cards for cost is a pretty bad idea in the scheme of Commander as well. This is almost the only format where some of those cards see play at all. One example being cards like earlier mentioned Force of Will which is only legal in vintage, legacy, and commander.
Banning cards just based on their price is just not a great idea since you can simply just talk with your game group to play on a budget or just ban troublesome cards as a local thing. Besides in most groups I would imagine you aren’t running into too many Mana Drain or other crazy cards because a lot of people simply don’t play them due to their price. Now I would imagine in online magic the expensive cards are seen a lot more than in paper since they are easier to acquire, but I still can’t ever see them banning cards just because they are viewed as being too expensive since where exactly do they draw the line at being too expensive.
August 23, 2019 1:33 p.m.
Nerdytimesorwhatever says... #10
Proxies are so widely accepted that banning on the premise of price is inherently deleterious to the format. Use proxies, or don't. The cards are old as all heck and if you're mad some cards out of 16k are expensive, you should probably look at the price of stuff like Imperial Seal , Nether Void , The Abyss , Chains of Mephistopheles . All of these cards are legal and that's just fine. They are good cards more people should have access to.
And high mana cost combos aren't worth banning smh. Cool they do a lot, leave them legal. None are anywhere as silly as Consultation/Flash Hulk and those arent being discussed for a ban.
There are legitimately problematic things in the format (Tymna), but 3 card 4 or 5+ mana combos are fine even if they literally win you the game. Why? You gotta find those cards and cast them without being interacted with. Good luck.
August 23, 2019 2:11 p.m.
Joe_Ken_, Nerdytimesorwhatever thank you for giving me a decent answer. I agree with both your points, I was more looking to see what people thought.
Also like I play with War's Toll and there's an easy response to it: tap out and play everything you can during that main phase too. It's disruptive, but easy to avoid.
August 23, 2019 2:21 p.m.
I think your misunderstanding how wars toll works. They still get the mana they just have to tap all of the lands at once
August 23, 2019 2:22 p.m.
Tyrant-Thanatos says... #13
@StopShot, Iona is an unusual case though, that has received wild backlash for exactly these reasons.
And this: "presuming a card should not be put onto the banlist due to its high casting cost is erroneous thinking in of itself as there are ways to cheat high cost cards into play as well as the fact that a high casting cost alone is not enough of a downside if its effect heavily warps the game in detrimental ways." is a bogus statement anyhow. It goes both ways, you can't selectively ban X and Y cards that cost a lot and win the game, but leave out literally hundreds of other cards that are the same. Additionally, cheating in creatures is ridiculously easier, cheaper, and more common than cheating in enchantments.
Enter the Infinite doesn't offer any level of protection when it comes to putting your whole deck in your hand while also offering each opponent a turn to respond.
I'm not seeing here how your opponent has any more time with Enter the Infinite than they do with Griselbrand. If you Omniscience into it it absolutely does not.
A lot of this seems to hinge on Griselbrand being in your command zone, which A) We used to have a banned-as-commander list, where he would fit nicely, but we got rid of that because I guess people are just too stupid to understand what banned-as-commander means, and B) If you sit down at an EDH table with Griselbrand in your command zone, good luck getting to a state where you actually resolve him.
And a lockdown combo as a problem with it? When there are plenty of other, cheaper, legal lockdown combos in the format?
I don't know why I'm even humoring this comment. Trying to defend the RC's banning decisions is positively insane.
This entire thread is nuts. I really need to make it a rule to just not discuss bans with people ever.
August 24, 2019 3:25 a.m. Edited.
SynergyBuild says... #14
Tyrant-Thanatos I am sorry to see you go, I hope you don't feel all of this was useless conversation, but I understand your position.
August 24, 2019 9:32 a.m.
Tyrant-Thanatos says... #15
SynergyBuild: I wouldn't call it useless. Far from it. If anything this was a fantastic exercise in the futility of trying to please a playerbase. Even with only a handful of players responding to this thread, it's clear that no single banlist would please even more than one of us, much less all of us. This is why establishing a regular playgroup, and discussing your mutual goals out of the game is so important.
It served as an excellent reminder to me of why I tend to avoid these kinds of discussions as well. I don't mean to offend or direct this at anybody, as its really just representative of a greater problem of Magic: the Gathering as a whole; but it's amazing how often I see people advocating to ban cards they don't understand.
August 24, 2019 9:32 p.m. Edited.
SynergyBuild says... #16
Tyrant-Thanatos I think overall, you are right, playgroup-moderated banlists are smart, but I don't think even they are perfect. I have heard many stories of playgroups singling out individuals, constantly banning cards in their deck just because they don't like the player.
I think there is no true answer, but like with most things, I think hearing different opinions, evaluating each position, and averaging things to judge the general players' rational is better than assuming no answer is the best.
August 25, 2019 7:24 a.m.
every store should ban 50 or so cards, with a vote. That would be my method.
August 25, 2019 7:28 a.m.
SynergyBuild says... #18
Fellin22 noonononono... Then if you ever go to another gamestore, you have to check and change like 20 things xD
SynergyBuild says... #1
StopShot due to fast mana into Jace, Wielder of Mysteries , I have never seen someone resolve Enter the infinte and not win the same turn. Using Pact of Negation , Force of Will , etc. for protection, it is easy to say that Enter the Infinite , due to colors, is MORE protection than the easily killable Griselbrand . I am by all means not saying Griselbrand isn't better, due to being able to be reanimated easier than you can cheat out an instant/sorcery, but given the option of free-casting either, Enter the Infinite is by far a much better choice.
August 23, 2019 7:15 a.m.