Why Do Some People Wish to Eliminate the Concept of Color Identity?
Commander Deck Help forum
Posted on Jan. 30, 2024, 8:29 p.m. by DemonDragonJ
On a recent post on Mark Rosewater's Tumblr account, Rosewater himself stated that he wished that he could change how EDH handles hybrid cards, which again triggered the never-ending debate of hybrid cards in that format (and, for the record, I believe that hybrid cards are multicolored, and should not be allowed in decks whose general does not contain that color; i.e., Hearthfire Hobgoblin would not be allowed in a deck with Akroma, Angel of Wrath as the general), but some users were even saying that the entire philosophy of color identity should be abolished and players should be allowed to use any cards in their decks.
I most vehemently disagree with those players, since the philosophy of color identity is the very foundation of EDH format (combined with its singleton nature); it is a restriction that promotes creative deckbuilding and encourages players to think strategically, so eliminating it would entirely ruin the format, and I hope that the majority of other players and/or users on this forum shall agree with me on this matter.
What does everyone else say about this? Why do some players wish to eliminate the concept of color identity, and do you agree that it is important to keep that philosophy in EDH?
plakjekaas says... #3
Players who don't want to adhere to color identity in EDH don't want to play EDH. Simple as that. You could as well ask: "Why can't I kick the ball in basketball?"
There's a defined set of rules to the game, if you don't want to follow them, you're not going to have fun playing with people who do. Better play a different format then. Some Canadian Highlander maybe, or a 60 card constructed format. Magic is versatile enough to offer ways to play any way you want, as long as you can find people to play with.
Color identity did something right for the game. I don't even care why that's the case, Commander became the biggest format with color identity ingrained into it. Eliminating a core principle lijst that, will at this point disappoint way more people already playing, than it will help attract new players.
Also, there's so many 5-colored commanders in existence, that people who don't like color identity should have no problem building the deck they want anyway.
January 31, 2024 1:04 a.m.
Coward_Token says... #4
IIRC Maro's suggestion was instead making it so that when you add mana outside of your commander's color identity, it's automatically filtered into that much . (Sorry, Sen Triplets!)
January 31, 2024 1:19 a.m.
Gidgetimer says... #5
Coward_Token: I've not read the post in question, but that is how mana production worked in EDH prior to BFZ. The rules committee changed it, rightly in my opinion, with the introduction of colorless specific costs. Changing mana outside your color identity into colorless trivializes colorless production.
January 31, 2024 6:02 a.m.
Coward_Token says... #6
Yeah I also feel it would just be more confusing.
As for making all colors available, I think that would just make decks even more homogenous as everyone who can afford it goes ahead and grabs all the best cards of each color from Magic's long history.
I'll admit I'm still in the hybrid-inclusive club tho.
January 31, 2024 11:42 a.m.
wallisface says... #7
Mark Rosewaters comment around hybrid mana is due to the fact Wotc make hybrid costs intending to represent ”one colour or another”, not ”one colour and another”.
For example, Kitchen Finks is intended to be a card that is either green or white - either colour could have this card and it’s not necessary for it to be multicoloured (indeed you only need one mana to cast it).
Mark Rosewater believes that because Kitchen Finks is a card that is green or white (not green and white), that a mono-green (or mono-white) commander should be able to field it.
———
Disclaimer: as a non-commander player I don’t care either-way. Just relaying Marks viewpoint on this.
January 31, 2024 12:46 p.m.
plakjekaas says... #8
The counter-argument to that is: as a possible mono-green creature, it has no business being in a deck helmed by a commander like Amalia Benavides Aguirre, just like a Llanowar Elves wouldn't. It's a shame that doesn't fit the intention of the mechanic for this one specific format with a quirk about color legality, but it's what is printed on the card, and by every interpretation of the rules as written, that's how it works.
I don't think specifically opening up hybrid mana allowing to work like Maro would want it to, will impact the game too heavily, but it opens the door to other rule changes because "Players feel it should work that way". I'd love to play Bedlam Reveler in a pauper deck, because it would fit so well. Now I know it never was printed at common, but let's flat out deny what color of set icon is printed on the card because I feel it should work that way and it would fit my deck, right?
No. Not right. Printed as common is a hard rule for pauper, just like color identity is for commander. If you don't want to play according to those rules, you don't want to play pauper/commander.
January 31, 2024 3:35 p.m.
wallisface says... #9
plakjekaas your counter-argument seems to be overlooking a point here, that the card is also a possible mono-white creature.
Maros definition of hybrid cards is that the card could be either of those colours, and so printing it to fit either of those colours saves them having to print the same card twice (once for each mono-colour).
I think Maros suggested change would create some confusion around deckbuilding - for example Deathrite Shaman has a mana cost of green-or-black, but activated abilities in both colours, and this could conceivably trip people up.
I think the whole situation illustrates how confused players are in general by the application of hybrid mana - though i think that confusion exists whether-or-not any change is made to the format - and neither approach seems intuitive, especially for newer players.
At the end of the day, it’s a casual format and pods can rule-0 whatever they want. I don’t see the rules committee making any official changes around this at-all.
January 31, 2024 3:53 p.m.
Coward_Token says... #10
plakjekaas: Putting the slippery slope fallacy aside, your arguments seem to largely be an appeal to tradition. One can imagine a world where EDH always had a hybrid-inclusive rule, with the defenders of it using the same kind of "that's just the way it is" reasoning as you are. The rules of a fan-made format of a trading card game aren't laws of physics. People can just agree to change them whenever.
But yeah, the CRC isn't going to budge any time soon.
January 31, 2024 6:15 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #11
Here is a link to the post that inspired me to start this thread, and I am very sorry that I did not provide it, earlier.
January 31, 2024 9:27 p.m.
It seems like only one or two people are discussing completely removing color identity. I can't speak for them, but they seem to be in a distinct minority, and one person in particular seems to be generally incorrect about the history and relevance of color in general means and has meant for Commander.
While hybrid mana is a point of contention, I doubt there's any serious movement to completely remove the idea of color identity.
February 1, 2024 12:31 a.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #13
legendofa, I am very glad to hear that, as color identity is one of the central concepts of EDH.
February 3, 2024 9:11 a.m.
DarkKiridon says... #14
If I'm not mistaken a card like Blind Obedience can legally be in a mono white or any other EDH deck that does not even use black correct?
But a card like Torrent Elemental which I used in my toughness matters/defender modern bant deck that did not even use black but I legally couldn't use in my Arcades EDH deck kinda made me sad as it was like a pet card to me.
February 4, 2024 1:57 p.m.
DarkKiridon That's all correct. Officially, reminder text (like this, italicized in parentheses) is not rules text and has no bearing on color identity, but Torrent Elemental uses the symbol in rules text.
It never hurts to keep Torrent Elemental on hand and ask your group if you can run it. Some groups will be flexible, as long as you let them know what you're trying to to do ahead of time.
legendofa says... #2
Could you please link the post?
Color identity became a thing in late 2010, just before Commander 2011. I remember a lot of discussion about whether Memnarch and Bosh, Iron Golem could even be commanders, since the first rules limited what could be in a deck by mana cost, and both those cards were colorless with colored activated abilities. By the rules of the time, they were colorless as commanders, which meant that the and symbols weren't allowed in the deck.
I agree that color identity has helped Commander and made deckbuilding decisions relevant. Of course, there are a few decks I want to at least outline that don't have a relevant commander available, but this difficulty is more than outweighed by the fairness that color identity restrictions offer.
January 30, 2024 9:56 p.m.