Infinite Rulings
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on Feb. 25, 2025, 5:17 p.m. by tonylomas
Hi ! my friends...theyre trying to organize an edh tournament with no "infinite tokens/dmg/milling" you know, no "insta killing everybody", however theyre saying that for example, mindslaver everyturn somebody its also an infinite combo (wich i dont agree with) how would you write YOUR tournament rules to be very extremely clear about no infinite combos in a way people wont get confused? and i ask this cuz some interactions may lead to kill 1 or more players in 1 swing without goin infinite.
Crow_Umbra says... #3
My friends and I did an EDH "tournament" for someone's birthday about 3-4 years ago. I'll have to ask if any of them still have the scoring rubric around, but I vaguely remember that infinites weren't outright banned or limited, but were slightly discouraged by giving players a -1 to their overall score if they won a game via an infinite combo. We've all changed our views since and welcome just about anything now.
I agree with wallisface regarding threat assessment and not discouraging a major archetype of the game. Not all combos are created equally, but most "casual" (not-cEDH) level ones are fairly telegraphed in advance. Once you know what common combo pieces are, it can shortcut what to save your removal and instant speed interaction on.
Instead of outright banning, or at least limiting the number of triggers, I'd encourage you and your friends to still include combos. As a step further, if you all haven't already, I'd recommend sharing your deck lists with each other for full transparency of what combos could be present. I check out my friends' deck lists that they publish before we get together for sessions to get a sense of updates and other pre-game threat assessments.
February 25, 2025 7:14 p.m.
My playgroup doesn't do infinite combos. If anyone wants to play them, we're 100% open to it, but none of us enjoying the infinite combo style of playing/winning. However, this doesn't mean people don't have infinite combos in their decks without realizing etc. Or combos they enjoy that they aren't looking to win by going infinite with. In our case, we changed the rule to basically "If an infinite combos would occur, that combos occurs once per turn instead."
Now BEFORE YOU BRING OUT THE PITCHFORKS AND TORCHES- This has actually worked fairly well for us. Yes no one in our group is a big combo player and that's part of it. But we've had guest players and (to my surprise) they've all been ok with it, even if one player was a little grumbly. I asked after if the games felt too long or boring and the response was largely "No not to long or unengaging, just felt like a different kind of mtg to play". So it works for us and we enjoy it. I think the "trigger 3 times instead" would be a good start but ultimately, the best thing to do is consult all of your players and see what they think.
We chose this because we all play for fun, and combo decks tend to focus on winning as fast as possible or setting up so that you can't interact with their wincon- none of us play CEDH and we find games that only go 3-5 turns boring. This is what I explained to people when I suggested the idea, and they were on board. Ask your players how they feel about it, and ask them what kind of games they like to play and that will be a good starting point. I asked everyone to keep the rules as we play and see how things may need to change, but we've been playing infinite combo free for at least 2 years and it's been fun
February 26, 2025 12:11 p.m.
wallisface says... #5
I’m glad your playgroup has found something that works for you. But i’ve got some follow up questions:
-
a vast majority of combos aren’t actually ”infinite” but just ”quite a lot”. If someone can only Grapeshot the table for 127 is that ok or no? Where’s the line drawn?
-
a bunch of plays aren’t looping combos at all, but effectively end the game on the spot. Reanimating some kind if obnoxiously powerful creature on turn 2 basically wins the game in a lot of situations… is this ok?
-
historically aggro decks are about as-fast as combo, and while commander life-totals and player counts make this harder, an aggro deck should still easily be able to remove at least one opponent by turn 5… is this also not allowed?
-
with combo neutered and by-the-sounds-of-things games going quite long, isn’t the winner of your table just ”whoever resolves the bug spell first”? Many big-mana spells in magic are strong enough to effectively end a game
February 26, 2025 1:28 p.m.
If it was me, I'd prioritize making the rules easy and clear rather than trying to fit every situation. There are two ways that I can think of that might be fun to play out:
One that I've done is having a combat damage wincon tourney. Something like mindslaver or infinite tokens would still be legal in combat damage only, but at the same time players know what to expect and can prepare. You don't need Force of Will when you know threats will be most often permeants, and can run lots of flexible removal instead. I don't even think Mindslaver would be a problem because more players would have space in their decks for artifact removal if they know they don't need to worry about instant speed combos.
Or maybe having a limit to how many times cards can resolve per turn cycle. I'm sure it would cause a ton of interactions to change, and I don't really know how it would look, but say, you can still resolve Rhystic Study but the effect can only trigger 2 times before your next upkeep. It's still a broken card, but there would be a more finite light at the end of the tunnel. Again, this might drastically alter some commanders/playstyles, but I think overall having a 2 trigger limit for every card name per 4 player turn cycle could bust 99% of infinite grossness.
February 26, 2025 1:29 p.m.
wallisface says... #7
I would also suggest, if your intention is to keep games fun, that locking someone out of the game with a recurring Mindslaver is waaay more miserable than just ending the game through a combo.
February 26, 2025 1:38 p.m.
-
Usually if an interaction can occur 3 or more times, the player will already know and bring it up themselves ahead of time when we bring up the combo rules. Everyone understood "infinite" is a shorthand for something roughly along the lines of "instant win condition people can't respond to" or "taking a long turn to combo kill the whole table". This is where it helps to talk to your table first and see what they're playing. If someone wants to dome the table for 127, I'd say go for it as long as its not doing either of the things quoted above.
-
This sounds like CEDH to me. We do not play CEDH, and we make that clear. If the reanimate target on turn two is a big threat, that'd be ok. If it's Kozilek or Emeria, then make it clear to that player that you're not doing CEDH stuff like that. To do this consistently by turn two they'd need a LOT of tutors, fast mana, etc. If someone is playing with a deck like this, they need to be up front about it. If they claim it's "casual" I'd begin by asking how many tutors and fast mana they run in the deck - this should make it clear to them the difference between your decks and theirs. For example, even though people in my group can have some crazy turn 2-3 plays - those are rare occurrences because we all run limited tutors suites so the game is more fun/casual/full of variety.
-
Turn 5 isn't turn 3, people should have time to respond by then. Usually if one player can remove someone by then they are already the enemy/target of everyone else at the table by then and the game goes quick. I had though aggro might be too strong in our meta but even with some insane aggro decks (Edgar, HA Zinnia, Arcades Walls, etc.) but it really hasn't been an issue.
-
I'm not sure what you mean, games don't usually go to long and we've had regularly anywhere from 4-6 people in a game. And I am not sure if you meant who resolves "big" spell first but I guess I'd just say... Counter spells and removal exist? Our games have never become "cast big spell first to win"
February 26, 2025 2:20 p.m.
griffstick says... #9
A tournament with no infinite combo's? Tough in today's game. Permanent lock isn't an infinite combo, mass land destruction isn't infinite.
I love the saying "You don't need to go infinite, you just need to go a lot".
The "no instant kill" thing is harder to rule out if you ask me. There's so many casual ways to instantly kill a player without doing a combo.
Here is an example. I'm playing Multani, Maro-Sorcerer and I have Hall of the Bandit Lord untapped 7 mana and a player who's totally unable to stop an attacker. Me and all the other players have have enough cards in hand to make Multani, Maro-Sorcerer big enough to one shot a player. Oh let's pretend it's turn 3 or 4. An i do attack that player and instant kill that player. That's breaking the rule.
Here's what my last lgs did. They hosted a tournament that lasted a few weeeks. They had a point system that added points for doing things "fair and fun" and deducted points for doing "unfun and infinite things". This list of things had been printed out on paper and given to the players. And lastly they had a voting after the game to vote for your favorite deck that somebody else played. The points where tallied up and prizes where handed out at the end to the player with the most points
February 26, 2025 6:56 p.m. Edited.
wallisface it sounds like Tsukimi's playgroup took the approach of setting this rule in good faith with each other. It is super vague, but why does that matter if everyone is working together to achieve it? If someone is angle shooting by saying something like "I'm not drawing an infinite amount of cards, just 99," they're probably not the kind of person who would agree to this rule in the first place.
February 26, 2025 7:39 p.m.
wallisface says... #11
Epidilius it doesn’t matter at all if the group is working in good faith. But the premise of this thread being created in the first place was that the group were wanting to define specific rules around this for a tournament, presumably precisely because they couldn’t assume good-faith would suffice.
February 26, 2025 7:53 p.m.
Sure we're casual about it but that doesn't mean we don't have rules. To be more concrete:
- Limit tutors and fast mana
- No mass land destruction
And fwiw I did mention the rule of if a combo can occur infinitely, it can only occur once per turn instead. It's not perfect but it's a good start for what they're looking to set up.
February 27, 2025 8:12 a.m.
Sorry, wasn't trying to come off as dismissive of the whole reason for the post. But, well, even those rules you've listed now are vague. Even just the "No MLD" rules brings up a ton of questions. Does that include Bearer of the Heavens, or Life and Limb + Yavimaya, Cradle of Growth + Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite, or even just a bunch of "You get an extra land drop" cards + Crucible of Worlds + Ghost Quarter?
Trying to change the fundamentals of Magic gameplay is complicated. The MTG comp rules is 905 "main" rules (plus who knows how many sub-rules) for a reason haha.
If I were asked to write the rules for this tournament, I would say
"We want battlecruisery and unoptimized Magic, like we played when we first started. This is the spirit of what we are aiming for. No efficient tutors, no fast mana, no MLD, and combos can only trigger once per turn. Here some decks that showcase the level of power we are aiming for (each with a different archetype):
- Example Deck 1
- Example Deck 2
- Example Deck 3
If you are unsure if something crosses the line (eg, Farseek, Increasing Ambition, etc), ask and the entire playgroup can weigh in. If something comes up during a game, we'll figure it out then."
But even with all that, these rules wouldn't affect one of my close friend's Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder
deck. It doesn't combo, doesn't have tutors, doesn't have Mana Vault, but it can get a quick Ydris into play and start generating tons of value pretty early, by casting multiple expensive spells every turn cycle. It violates the spirit of the ask, but unless I write a multi page document it won't violate the rules as written. Unless, of course, he were to play in good faith and say "I know this deck meets the rules as written but not as intended," which I believe he would.
February 27, 2025 11:23 a.m.
Epidilius My response was mainly to Wallisface, I just wanted to mention that I did give some rule suggestions.
I see where you are coming from I'm just trying to offer advice on a good place to start - not a be all end all. Everything you mention is a lot different than just eating Armageddon, and imo would not fall under the category of MLD.
Similarly, efficient tutors are fine but should be limited. I wouldn't say it's "battlecruisery and unoptimized like when we first started playing" that part did sound a bit dismissive. I'd say we're all playing fairly optimized decks and there's a lot of variety and not just battlecruiser.
February 27, 2025 11:34 a.m.
FormOverFunction says... #15
I usually include cards like Copper Tablet and Dingus Staff to put a semi-cap on infinite loops. This doesn’t stop them necessarily, but gives them a cost that makes them riskier. It makes getting looped out of a game less unpleasant, because there’s a chance that you actually kill the looper first. Only one way to deal with an ambush: attack into it ;p
February 27, 2025 3 p.m.
Tsukimi You're right, that was poorly worded, sorry. It is how I would approach my group with something like this though, I really do miss that kind of Timmy magic lol. Sacrificing Bottle Gnomes with Glissa, the Traitor *oversized* and Grave Pact was peak Magic for our group way back when.
But for the "Is it mass land destruction" thing, imo that is the problem that needs to be solved for every restriction. Is it MLD if I can recur and activate Ghost Quarter 80 times a turn? Is it MLD if I sacrifice Bearer of the Heavens while I have Avacyn, Angel of Hope in play? Where is the line drawn? That is why it is also my opinion that the best way to handle things would just be "Hey guys, no MLD or MLD like effects please" and trust the group.
I'm also not really trying to find a definitive solution, as I don't think there is one, but discussing Magic is fun haha
February 27, 2025 5:21 p.m.
Epidilius yes exactly I've enjoyed brainstorming and discussing this with you, it's a fun puzzle! (:
The Mass land destruction is tricky, but I'd say all those things require a fair bit more work than casting stuff like Armageddon. If no one is running insane fast mana or so many tutors then if they get all that (Avacyn AoH, Worldbearer) and don't get anything exiled I feel like they've earned that victory at that point.
This can be managed by introducing a specific tutors and fast mana limit. But you're right - this doesn't prevent ghost quarter recurring and going off 80 times or the 127 grapeshot so that's the third rule to figure out next
wallisface says... #2
The easiest blanket approach is to say that no spell or effect can resolve more than X times (say, 3 for example). This will also hinder a bunch of non combo strategies, while also letting some incredibly niche and convoluted combos maybe still able to perform. But it’s a fairer approach to what is effectively an incredibly biased topic.
On a side note, I disagree heavily with the premise of this threads intention - magic decks are built on one of 4 pillars in control, aggro, midrange, and combo… effectively disabling one of those options feels like a big detriment to the game. If your playgroup is actually having problems with combo, its more a big sign that your group should all be playing a lot more interactive spells to combat that threat.
February 25, 2025 6:58 p.m.