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.
MentalBlok says... #2
@PookandPie Land Equilibrium? That's just cruel--this is why I'm super glad I don't play at a high level :P
January 19, 2016 3:46 a.m.
I don't like the change to rule 4 and I doubt I'll follow it.
Why? For the simple reason you can now cast ALL the devoid cards in your commander even if there's a color in their casting cost that's different from the one in your Commander...
January 19, 2016 4:11 a.m.
No T2 Land Equilibrium in Dual Commander. (No Sol Ring or Mana Crypt) but you do have Limited Resources, which really isn't nearly as bad as it is in multiplayer.
January 19, 2016 4:12 a.m.
lol Chandrian did you just miss all the previous drama in this thread? Devoid only affects colour, not colour identity. And yes, text on a card trumps rules, but the text is talking 'bout colour only, not colour identity.
January 19, 2016 4:19 a.m.
RussischerZar says... #6
I have a deck that used to run Prophet of Kruphix before she was locally banned at my LGS (about a year ago) and I think it's the only deck where Prophet was remotely fair, since it's such a durdle deck that playing Prophet was kind of "catching up with the power level" of the regularly encountered decks everywhere else.
People still hated on Prophet hard even though the deck pretty much only used it to cast a single additional creature (at most) in the preceding player's end step to somewhat protect it against sorcery removal. :P
But make no mistake I also have a Prime Speaker Zegana deck where Prophet wrecked face and I totally understand the reasons for the ban.
I remember a game way back with my Zegana deck, when I had Prophet of Kruphix, Sylvan Primordial, 2 Deadeye Navigators (one was a Clone), Eternal Witness and 18ish lands on the field and a bunch of counterspells in my yard. The other players agreed amongst themselves to scoop even though I didn't actually plan on blowing up all lands and countering every single spell. But then again, there was little chance I wouldn't have won the game in the end. :P
After that game I removed Deadeye Navigator and Sylvan Primordial from the deck.
January 19, 2016 5:36 a.m. Edited.
Ender666666 says... #7
Seems like there is a lot of confusion here around Colour identity and the dropping of Rule 4.
As other members have so nicely stated, just because your lands can now technically make any colour of mana the they would in a normal game of magic, it doesn't mean you can start jamming spells of any colour you like into your deck.
Unfortunately the dream of mono-blue Door to Nothingness combo control decks is still impossible. Sorry to smash everyone's hopes and dreams.
January 19, 2016 6:56 a.m.
I could agree on some points that explains why Prophet of Kruphix was banned. It is no secret that the card is very strong especially in a multiplayer format. But my experience was that a busted deck got more busted with Prophet, while a fun deck became more fun with it. I felt that because it required two colors and was a pain to keep alive and under your control, it sort of balanced itself in a strange way. But then again, my playgroup isn't painfully cutthroat, so I could see it be more of a problem in more competetive circles with hardcore control decks.
Cards I want to be observed and hopefully adressed in the future is cards that eat away a lot of time for minimal progression, like Scroll Rack and Sensei's Divining Top, and Narset, Enlightened Master since 90% of games with/against her warps the game into archenenmy.
January 19, 2016 7:02 a.m.
But if you steal that Door to Nothingness as a mono player you could now activate it quite easily..
January 19, 2016 7:55 a.m.
EpicFreddi says... #10
kengiczar how is "producing double 4 colors" easy? You still can't play offcolor cards - you can just produce off color mana. So if you steal a r/g signet as a mono u player, you can now activate it for actual r/g.
January 19, 2016 8:15 a.m.
Yoshi_Sama says... #12
nobu_the_bard Deadeye Navigator is widely accepted as the "enabler of creatures", almost any ETB effect can be utilized with Deadeye Navigator. The statement over how easy Deadeye Navigator can be removed from board is the equivalent to saying "you can respond to Prophet of Kruphix on the same turn or after they flash creatures in before the next turn!". Deadeye Navigator can generate as much or more value then a Prophet of Kruphix and requires just as much attention.
Being one more mana and only requiring blue, Deadeye has a long list of utilization in countless decks, almost a must include for any multicoloured decks. Response to Deadeye tends to be unexpected, you don't know when a player will play it as it combos with anything and arguing people should just "have" removal before Deadeye's value has peeked and beyond is the same as telling people they should build more control while I do nothing at all and enjoy OP combos.
January 19, 2016 8:36 a.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #13
@Yoshi_Sama - Yeah I should have thought about my comment more before posting it. Thank you for that note.
I still think he's good, just not ban-worthy good.
January 19, 2016 8:40 a.m.
Ender666666 says... #14
kengiczar AHA! The dream still lives!!! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
January 19, 2016 8:49 a.m.
DiamondFlavor says... #15
So one of the main arguments in terms of keeping Deadeye Navigator is that he "needs something else" to function.
I think, to a large extent, the same is true of Prophet of Kruphix. It's been said that it "protects itself", while it really only facilitates the use of other cards to protect it. You can't just slam Prophet on an empty hand and roll out. You still generally need multiple ways to protect it, since everybody else will make their best attempt to kill it. And then you need creatures to play to make a profit from the Prophet ;) and you need the land base to be able to play the creatures.
If that sounds picky, it's because that's how to "DEN needs other creatures" argument sounds to me. Any card is bad if you blatantly mishandle it. But DEN often only needs one creature to get rolling, and he can actually be the game-winning mechanic, whereas Prophet just gets you set up for one.
Deadeye is not more degenerate than Prophet; they serve different functions. But I keep finding that the reasons to ban one are similar enough to the would-be reasons for banning the other, and continue to be similar enough to warrant ongoing discussion.
January 19, 2016 10:46 a.m.
Ender666666 says... #16
DiamondFlavor, I agree that DEN should also be banned, or is at least worthy of consideration for banning. Perhaps they only banned one to prevent mass hysteria, and an epidemic of aneurysms, heart attacks, and suicides. Seeing the reaction to PoK being banned, can you just IMAGINE if both PoK and DEN were banned at the same time? It would be utter bedlam!
January 19, 2016 10:51 a.m.
DiamondFlavor says... #18
Ender666666 true that!
I play Simic and if both were banned, I would probably be done with that deck and move on to something new. But the PoK banning won't hurt the deck nearly as much as a DEN banning would have. And I essentially still have to play DEN to compete with the Azorius, Dimir, and Izzet combo decks in the playgroup.
I have no complaint about PoK being banned as an individual card; I just have a hard time believing that it was having a larger impact on the format than DEN has been having for years.
January 19, 2016 11:24 a.m.
canterlotguardian If every single person in your playgroup agrees with you that Prophet shouldn't be banned, then you don't actually have to take it out of your decks. In casual games of Magic, house rules exist for this very reason. But the fact of the matter is, in a competitive EDH deck, an unchecked Prophet will end the game almost every time. The fact that you aren't using it that way doesn't make the card not broken, it just means you're ignoring its potential.
Maybe your playgroup isn't full of Spikes, and you all just play to have fun. That's wonderful, I'm not knocking you for it... but for the most part, the official banlist isn't really created with you in mind.
January 19, 2016 11:31 a.m.
I like these changes a lot. Prophet is ridiculous (coming from a UG player here). I just hope they put the banhammer to Consecrated Sphinx and Deadeye Navigator soon.
January 19, 2016 11:32 a.m.
Yeah I'll be honest Consecrated Sphinx is nuts in 4 player.
I quit running it for awhile but then other crazy decks came along like Narset plus everybody I know is getting much better at EDH and playing the strongest cards they know about so I figured I should go back to using Sphinx.
January 19, 2016 11:41 a.m.
Ender666666 says... #22
I really think I'll just finally build a Sakashima the Impostor deck with every playable clone, steal, and copy effect. That way my deck is balanced to whatever I play against, and never OP.. Essentially self-regulating.
January 19, 2016 11:47 a.m. Edited.
I feel as though everyone is still avoiding the fact that the bans really only tend to effect competitive players. How many casual groups do you know that actually follow the banlist? It is my personal experience that casual players don't really know what cards are on the banlist except for a select few cards. Even with that knowledge they continue to play the cards.
Bans effect competitive/tournament play. The RC should not keep introducing bans based on casual play. One of the best aspects of EDH is its limited banlist.
On the argument of DEN and PoK, DEN is far more powerful. At least in top tier play DEN won't even be attempted to cast unless they are going Infinite that turn. It still usually doesn't resolve but when DEN does resolve it goes infinite and wins games.
DEN always means infinite combo, always. When talking strength, it far surpasses PoK. PoK has nothing on infinite mana, infinite life, infinite tokens, sometimes all in the same combo.
That said, I don't support the banning of either. I feel that bans are justified when they are format warping. Neither PoK nor DEN are format warping and thus don't deserve a ban.
January 19, 2016 11:51 a.m.
Eh Clones aren't that good versus control though. I mean for multiplayer it'll probably work out since it's unlikely none of the other 3 players are running creatureless decks but 1v1 you're rolling the dice.
January 19, 2016 11:52 a.m.
DiamondFlavor says... #25
I think the "casual players ignore the banlist" argument only works if you have an insular playgroup.
I only play with friends, but I go between at least two playgroups. It's nice to know that there are official, impersonal guidelines for the format.
It's any given playgroup's prerogative to ignore or amend those guidelines, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't exist.
If you are playing in a setting that has strict adherence to the rules, such as "competitive/tournament" play, the loss of Prophet shouldn't be that big of a deal. In fact, I believe many top-level decks do not play PoK because it doesn't actually win the game on the spot or enact direct control over opponents.
January 19, 2016 11:58 a.m.
iAzire - So you want the RC to ignore the stated market for Commander? Regardless of the fact that Commander is a social format, it is marketed as a casual one. So the RC wholly ignoring the casual players would be like Wizards banning a card in Standard ignoring GP and Pro Tour results. It's just silly.
January 19, 2016 11:59 a.m.
iAzire: Deadeye Navigator does not always mean infinite combo. Examples: Yasova Dragonclaw and Sedris, the Traitor King
January 19, 2016 12:13 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #28
To anyone who thinks DEN ought to be banned, my argument for why it shouldn't is identical to Epochalyptik's earlier in this thread. You can go back and read it, he states it much better than I could.
And no, it doesn't do to games what PoK does.
@iAzire: Except that's not even remotely true. The banlist is a starting ground for people going into new playgroup. As DiamondFlavor points out, some people (myself included) don't have consistent playgroups. When I sit down for a game of EDH I don't want to spend a bunch of time figuring out what's banned and hoping I don't have a "banned" card in my deck. I just want to play some damn EDH. So the banlist absolutely does affect me and many other casual players.
January 19, 2016 12:15 p.m.
Ender666666 says... #29
kengiczar I rarely play 1v1, so it doesn't factor into how I build my decks very often, but your point is valid and I get where you're coming from.
DiamondFlavor I agree with you wholeheartedly. I move from store to store and interact with various types of players, and playgroups. It's hard enough to have a deck that is properly tuned to handle varying metas (and believe me, a deck that is a brickhouse with one group sometimes is wimpy against another). So if I do manage to find a list that is strong enough taking that into mind, I don't want to then have to worry about wildcards that are OP that have been banned, suddenly showing up, and having my list be unprepared. EDH decks shouldn't have sideboards.
tl:dr The ban list allows me to move between various groups with a common understanding of how the game works, and what is fair game.
January 19, 2016 12:25 p.m.
Raging_Squiggle says... #30
@ Ender666666 I had that exact thought, and have already made a deck of it. ;)
Mrs steal yo' cards
Commander / EDH*
SCORE: 1 | 0 COMMENTS | 15 VIEWS
@ iAzire
Also, I am a casual EDH player, (contrary to what some people say, (ComradeJim270)), but I follow the ban list for the format as everyone else should. If you're going to play the format, play it with a legal deck. There's no excuse for "not knowing" that it's banned. There's a thing called Google that would happily show you the ban list. If I play against someone who has a Prime Time, Sylvan Primordial, Trade Secrets, or now a Prophet of Kruphix I will tell them, albeit nicely, to remove it.
January 19, 2016 12:35 p.m.
Ender666666 says... #31
Raging_Squiggle Very nice! I wish there was a way to +1 users, cause I'd +1 your username! yeaGO?
January 19, 2016 1 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #32
@Raging_Squiggle: Hey, hey! I never said you weren't a casual player, I just said you tend to build asshole decks that troll people. Some of which are hilarious, by the way.
I'm one to talk, given some of the stuff my decks have done.
Anyway, right with you on this. I follow the RC's rulings unless there's a prior agreement not to.
January 19, 2016 1:06 p.m.
Raging_Squiggle says... #33
I have a couple new decks that you might enjoy, or hate terribly but end up finding funny. lol. Clerics and God Squad. Now my current project is sexy Merieke Ri Berit now that Rule 4's gone.
January 19, 2016 1:13 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #34
Rule 4's absence is going to affect one of my decks; Lazav's copied and stolen creatures being able to produce and utilize Naya-colored mana is going to be fun, especially if there's an elfball deck at the table.
January 19, 2016 1:23 p.m.
Raging_Squiggle says... #35
I considered putting Lazav, Dimir Mastermind at the helm, but I've already made him before, so I wanted something new. So he's in the 99 instead.
January 19, 2016 1:25 p.m.
I understand that there is no excuse for not knowing the banlist. I just find that the majority of casual players I know and meet don't follow the rules. As they are casual players, they play just to have fun and banned cards don't really pose much of an issue.
I also see tons of people play with proxies in their deck. It doesn't matter for casual players because they don't follow the rules. It is generally acceptable to play with these things, (either banned or proxied cards), because it isn't a competitive environment. At least that is what I have seen at my LGS. I go between three stores.
There is a significant difference between playing casual and competitive play. The entire deck structure is different. In casual playgroups my competitive decks absolutely wreak. Of course my LGS have social games where competitive decks are played but if I am playing casual players then I know not to use a competitive deck. With my Kaalia of the Vast deck I can destroy casual playgroups and can consistently even if everyone gangs up on me. In competitive playgroups, Kaalia will get shut out relatively easily. Obviously relative to the strength of the other decks. Kaalia can and has won tournaments for me before but her strength diminishes quickly.
Perhaps this is all just my personal experience that is nothing like anybody else's. It is my experience that casual players play for fun. They include what they want, they proxy what they want and life is good. It is often that before someone sits down they will say, "I have banned cards, is everyone good with that?" Usually there is no problem because people are playing for fun.
It is only in the competitive setting where people care. No proxies, no banned cards. Again maybe my experience is different.
January 19, 2016 1:41 p.m.
iAzire - I think we've finally hit the crux of your position: "It is only in the competitive setting where people care. No proxies, no banned cards. Again maybe my experience is different." Your experience is just that, your experience. My EDH experience is likely vastly different from yours. However I have found that the banned list is overall a positive thing and helps regulate the playgroup. Currently my LGS is happy about the banning of Prophet of Kruphix despite the fact that some people (including myself) will be upset at having to take her out of our decks. The effect that PoK has on a game is quite large, and having it survive to your end step usually means it will never leave the field in a competitive list. Now, your mileage may vary, but I have found PoK inordinately warps games around it and has an overall negative effect on the game. But, once again, that is my experience in the game.
January 19, 2016 1:47 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #38
@iAzire: Your experience is different. I've found that most casual playgroups I've been in are absolutely not ok with people running banned cards. Exceptions are made on occasion and on a case-by-case bases, but "I have banned cards, is that ok?" would be met with suspicion or refusal. Proxies aren't a sure thing either, a lot of people I've played with get upset if they're used too often and more than a few (myself included) refuse to use them.
January 19, 2016 1:52 p.m.
Spark0fPrimus says... #39
Y'know, if there were places around where I live that ran competitive Commander events, I might care....but as it stands, Prophet is staying in my Animar deck and no one will say otherwise! Never had a problem with it in my group. If it sticks, it's quickly dealt with by the time a full table rotation ends, and that's IF it sticks.
The off-color mana thing, though...that's actually some good news, and really does make Sunburst and Converge much more viable in Commander.
January 19, 2016 2:02 p.m.
DiamondFlavor says... #40
If somebody sits down and says "I'm packing Sylvan Primordial and Recurring Nightmare" I'm definitely not cool with that.
January 19, 2016 2:08 p.m.
Raging_Squiggle says... #41
With that logic, someone in your group might as well run/proxy the Power 9 too then. Since the ban list would be out the window. A banned card is a banned card, and as DiamondFlavor said, I wouldn't be ok with that either.
January 19, 2016 2:11 p.m.
Spark0fPrimus says... #42
Like I said, my group has never had a problem with the Prophet. If I sit down to play one night and they decide that, since it's banned, I shouldn't be running it anymore, I'll take it out no questions asked. But let's remember that Commander is a CASUAL format first and foremost. And with that, is it not up to each individual's own play group to decide for themselves what cards are okay and what cards aren't? I rarely play outside of my group, so if they are fine with it, what's the problem? Let's try to look at one's own situation before jumping down his throat for something like this, no? Of course if I sat down to play with someone outside my group I'd swap the card out. Hell, I rarely play my Animar deck outside of my group anyway.
January 19, 2016 2:23 p.m.
Raging_Squiggle says... #43
Epochalyptik made this handy article regarding Commander not being a casual format first and foremost.
Who's jumping down who's throat? You expressed your opinion and we expressed ours. House rules are certainly a thing for each playgroup, and if you all say you don't care about cards on the ban list, more power to ya.
January 19, 2016 2:30 p.m.
Cards that I was referencing were less Power 9 and more like Tolarian Academy, Primeval Titan and Library of Alexandria. Proxies run rampant where I play. People play them because they can't afford the real card, ABUR duels for example but also cheap cards like Mana Echoes, people proxy to test new cards in decks, or they proxy an entire deck.
Personally I run proxy of ABUR duels, I own them but don't like playing with them due to price. It is usually okay to run the proxies because everyone knows I actually own the cards so they find it fair. I only have to swap the real thing in for tournament play. I haven't met anybody that won't allow proxies if you can prove you own the card.
But in casual, random LGS play, proxies can be used for a number of reasons. Testing a new deck before buying the cards and using proxies of cards you own are the main reasons.
I concede though, I just really didn't realize that other playgroups were so much different than what is standard for my area. As I said I play at three different stores and have personal groups I go too and I've never heard of such hate for banned cards and proxies outside of tournament play.
January 19, 2016 2:34 p.m.
Raging_Squiggle says... #45
Banned cards don't equal proxies. Usually. If you proxy a bunch of cards with no intention of buying them, and having the thought process of "I can just print whatever I want and not have to spend money", that's not cool.
If you, myself included in this, make proxies to test a deck or parts of a deck, to see if it synergizes or works well, before throwing the money down for the real cards, that's ok.
If you make proxies because you have the card already but it's in another deck, and you don't want to keep swapping the card back and forth, or it's in the mail, that's ok.
If you make proxies for the security/safety of your very high value cards, that's ok.
January 19, 2016 2:42 p.m.
Raging_Squiggle says... #46
That's my opinion on proxies though, not actual rules/facts by any means.
January 19, 2016 2:43 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #47
I'm pretty much of the same mind as Squiggle, here.
Regarding banned cards, it's both playgroup and LGS dependent. My LGS has a Vintage scene, so if someone says banned cards are in their deck it could mean anything up to and including the power 9... because people who play there actually own those cards. So of course I'll have to ask, "what cards?"
My personal preference is to adhere to all RC rulings, for convenience.
January 19, 2016 2:52 p.m.
PookandPie says... #48
Look, if his playgroup can come to a mutual understanding about what they feel is an unnecessary ban, then that's between him and his playgroup.
Arguing here certainly isn't going to change his mind, is it?
The slippery slope fallacy, "Well just use power 9 if you're throwing out the ban list" created one digression on top of another, and I doubt you're going to convince this fellow to adhere to the ban list if his playgroup actually allows that sort of thing. Those individuals would need to enter this discussion for it to be meaningful, they're not in it, so this is probably going to go nowhere for 15 more posts if it keeps up.
Just my two cents. Do as you like though.
January 19, 2016 3:09 p.m.
Norn's Annex isn't nearly as dumb anymore!
Still kinda dumb, but a lot easier to work around.
January 19, 2016 3:38 p.m.
SilverIronMan says... #50
So, with Rule 4 gone, can I run and use Vault of the Archangel in my Captain Sisay deck?
PookandPie says... #1
I'm replacing my Prophet with a land, probably Forbidden Orchard, due to the mulligan change.
I would have said that I'm replacing it with Defense of the Heart, since my Roon of the Hidden Realm deck runs Seedborn Muse and Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir, but it's already running all three because that's my most casual deck, lol.
Sliver Overlord is getting Seedborn Muse, which basically serves the exact same purpose as Prophet in that deck (since Quick Sliver is a thing). That was already a pretty bad deck, so I'm pretty satisfied that deck isn't getting worse.
Prophet was a very strong card, but it doesn't affect higher level play at all. It definitely doesn't warp a game like second turn Land Equilibrium off of a Mana Crypt, Talisman of Dominance, and an Island. So, I'm also glad to see that most people get to enjoy a different version of 'warping' when it comes to Commander than I sometimes have to deal with, lol.
January 19, 2016 3:36 a.m.