New Format: Rule 0
TappedOut forum
Posted on Sept. 10, 2021, 1:21 a.m. by TypicalTimmy
Thanks to the work of tiffanyann for this idea.
We often talk about "Rule 0"; What your deck does, what it's power level is, who your Commander is, if there are any infinite combos, etc.
But sometimes, Rule 0 is to ask the table if using an Unset Commander is okay. If using a Legendary Enchantment or Artifact or Planeswalker in the Command Zone is okay. If running Gisela, the Broken Blade  Meld Partnered with Bruna, the Fading Light  Meld is okay. Other examples are Stitcher Geralf and Ghoulcaller Gisa as Partners, or Hans Eriksson and Saffi Eriksdotter. Maybe you want to run Sword of Dungeons & Dragons in your D&D themed set. Maybe you want to run Surgeon General Commander. But there's more; Sometimes you want to play with a banned card. Maybe you have this killer Griselbrand build and want to see if it can withstand three opponents.
Rule 0 is important. It doesn't often "require" its own hub, but there are times when it could be useful. And, if the community accepts it as a unique hub, it could also open up more creativity because it pushes up against the boundaries of the RC.
After all, as long as your table is okay with it, then it's fine. If your table is fine with you running Iona, Shield of Emeria or Primevals' Glorious Rebirth, Garruk, Apex Predator or Grimlock, Dinobot Leader  Flip then there is absolutely no reason why you can't or shouldn't be able to. All of these are not legal for use as Commanders within the Command Zone, but if your table is okay with it, then suddenly they are. Similarly, Iona and Grimlock can't be in the deck, even in the +99. If your table is okay with it, then it's fine.
Similarly, sometimes players build decks that run non-legendary creatures as Commanders. One very popular build is Shaman of the Great Hunt, and to a lesser extent Brutal Hordechief. In fact, one of the most popular decks on this site itself would be classified as Rule 0: Dune: He Who Can Destroy a Thing, Controls a Thing, by FenIsABasicSwamp.
So with that said, I propose Rule 0 as a hub. Since we need to be able to describe it in one or two short sentences;
- "There are many rules to EDH. Rule 0 decks ask the table beforehand if it is okay to run silver-bordered cards, banned cards or cards that would otherwise be 'illegal' in the Command Zone."
TypicalTimmy says... #3
Omniscience_is_life, they are not legal Commanders ;)
I'll update to clarify. Wanted to add some zest to the thread anyway.
September 10, 2021 1:56 a.m.
Omniscience_is_life says... #4
I am quite possibly stupid. Sorry about that, heh.
Anyways, I like this idea for a few reasons:
-
It makes for fewer comments saying "you can't run that!" or "that's banned!", etc.
-
It lets people know that this is a place to show off whatever kind of deck you want
-
I can run Long-Finned Skywhale in the CZ and have a premade justification XD
September 10, 2021 2:05 a.m.
I like it and well justified. On a slightly different topic to me the ban list and rule 0 live in opposition of each other and its always bothered me. Anyway I dig the idea. I've seen decks on here that run both Rhys and commander. One ran them as partners and the other as flip commanders. Totally illegal but a fantastic idea and I loved it.
September 10, 2021 9:38 a.m.
I'm totally on-board for this idea! My 5 color Scion of Draco deck would utilize that for sure.
This would also be a good hub for folks who use custom commanders could use as well. As it stands, it's very difficult to find other users/decks that run more 'rule-bent' lists.
September 10, 2021 10:13 a.m.
Sounds like a good idea to me. I've been wanting to make a Serra the Benevolent deck since MH1 came out.
September 10, 2021 10:14 a.m.
EleshNornsFs says... #8
I think this might cause a formatting issue with the site's coding when it comes to legalities. I propose that we introduce, rather than a Rule 0 hub, a new deck format entirely, called Commander/Rule 0.
September 10, 2021 11:42 a.m.
It would be simpler but just to be clear, there is basically no legality checking?
September 10, 2021 12:59 p.m.
I'll be the guinea pig; I just changed one of my decks over to the new Rule 0 Format. Looks like everything is marked illegal right now, just as a head's-up.
September 10, 2021 3:43 p.m.
EleshNornsFs says... #13
I just got here to say the same thing.
I think the only legality checks should be that there is a commander, and that it is 100 card singleton. If it doesn't meet those standards, it really just goes under casual.
September 10, 2021 3:48 p.m.
tiffanyann says... #15
I have been summoned! A few of my Rule Zero decks include, Genju of the Realms (Group said yes if I didn't include creatures...it became all enchant lands and lands that turn into creatures etc.) Phoebe, Head of S.N.E.A.K (I had a Lazav deck and just switched him for her one game, group loved it.) & Stabwhisker Racks.
My favorite "illegal" deck is one that has Westvale Abbey at the helm. After yesterday's spoilers...the deck has a new perfectly legal commander.
We also have a bunch of planeswalker commander decks that use walkers without the "this can be your commander" rule (I have a Geyadrone and a NikkiBobo God Pharoah deck) but we mainly use those for planechase or Archenemy games.
Rule Zero is super important. We're all playing a made up format anyway, the whole point is to have fun.
Now we do have a group member who built all of the banned manders, Leovold, Iona and Rofellos. He can go to hell.
September 10, 2021 4:30 p.m.
tiffanyann says... #16
I'm currently trying to convince them to let me use The Cinematic Phoenix...
September 10, 2021 4:36 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #17
tiffanyann, you have become too powerful and must be stopped.
I'm at work now but I'll post on break who I want to run.
September 10, 2021 4:48 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #19
I'm actually building a Sanctum of All Shrine Tribal. It'll have all 11 Shrines plus Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx because while the Shrines are important and beautiful, a Shrine is worthless if you don't have a God to answer your prayers... ;)
September 10, 2021 5:08 p.m.
I have a pre-con i swapped 20 unstable cards into, i suppose that would fall into this category?
September 10, 2021 7:12 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #21
Scytec, as long as those aren't basic lands, then yes.
September 10, 2021 7:17 p.m.
I wish, the lands would be worth more than the pre-con. Haha
September 10, 2021 7:40 p.m.
yeaGO: Is having rule zero commander as a separate format going to affect deck searching much? Or if people leave the form at blank and enter a non-legal commander will it just hit both commander and rule zero commander?
TypicalTimmy: if you want to create a forum thread spruiking this in the commander forums, myself or one of the other mods will pin it for you.
September 10, 2021 7:41 p.m.
Might finally get around to adding it to the site then.
September 10, 2021 7:41 p.m.
We would have to see but i think they may appear in a general commander search. There's lots of things people consider search.
September 10, 2021 7:48 p.m.
TheOfficialCreator says... #26
Omniscience_is_life Long have I pined to have a Mindless Null as the commander. And yet, something always halts me, deep within my heart. I cannot confine such a great object to such a.. low position.
All jokes aside, glad it got added, and you might be seeing a Gleaming Overseer deck pop up at some point in the future.
September 10, 2021 10:01 p.m.
Omniscience_is_life says... #27
TheOfficialCreator Those are good ones!
Glad Rule 0 got supported by the site, this sort of thing is why I love T/O :3
September 10, 2021 11:09 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #28
enpc, I'm clocking into my second job now, but I'll do it when I get home later.
Omniscience_is_life says... #2
I like this idea, but the main reason I'm commenting is because of you mentioning Primevals' Glorious Rebirth and Garruk, Apex Predator in a list of presumably "illegal" cards--those are both perfectly legal EDH cards, last time I checked ;)
September 10, 2021 1:47 a.m.