Your description of Revolt is flawed. Your permanents don't need to go to the graveyard to trigger Revolt (like for an Aid from the Cowl), a permanent must just have left the battlefield to trigger it. Returned to your hand? Revolt is on. Exiled? Revolt is on. Put on top/bottom of your library? Revolt is on. Even though creatures dying is the easiest way to trigger Revolt, the definition is a bit wider than even you described.

Icbrgr the two pieces you named are banned because of their interaction with other cards, that aren't legal in Modern or Pioneer.

If Basalt Monolith was legal in Modern or Pioneer, Zirda, the Dawnwaker would be banned there too. Same goes for Brainstorm and Dreadhorde Arcanist.

Uro is banned because it doesn't actually need any other cards to be constant value, a late-game & recurring threat, and repeated lifegain to hose most aggro strategies. Because the presence of the card by itself distorts the metagame around it, you need to either be playing Uro, or have a plan to combat Uro, or your deck is not viable at all. That's what format warping means.

It single-handedly eliminated aggro as a strategy, I really hope it doesn't

legendofa your deck is very light on red permanents for Kederekt Parasite to be on a lot, maybe find some room for Razorkin Needlehead?

EDHREC has the salt score, because people become salty when they play against the cards.

I think the nomer Toxic does stem from the modern discussion about toxic people and toxic relationships.

In science, a toxic substance is biologically harmful. Nowadays it's become acceptable to call something toxic if it's mentally harmful as well. But the word is losing it's meaning quickly, in the modern vocabulary, toxic just means that you don't like it. So a toxic card or archetype is a piece of MTG that most people dislike to play against.

Tocasia's Welcome as well

Sepultura, right? '^^

I've seen Korn perform live this summer, very solid concert still.

Gidgetimer Still, a 100 card singleton deck was a choice over a 60 card with 4-ofs deck. That will, by definition and by design, make your decks less consistent, because you're now playing 60 different cards instead of 10-15. In the commander format philosophy is explicitly mentioned that format management decisions are made to maximize the available card pool. Every card that doesn't do anything itself except getting you another card in your deck, is literally minimalizing the card pool, and therefor antithetical to the philosophy of the format, wether you have fun with it or not. If playing the same 2/3 cards to win over and over again every game you play is your jam, there's better formats for you than commander to do so, that's all that says. And that's the part where cEDH becomes a subset of commander itself, because in that format, parts of the philosophy are ignored intentionally, like the part where they mention decisions are made to "promote an environment where players are not pressured to conform to any specific method of deckbuilding."

DemonDragonJ the shuffling part is not for you. You are not the only one to please while designing the game. There's people playing magic who are physically unable to shuffle well (because of things like hand injuries), that's why Yorion, Sky Nomad was banned in Modern, where your deck is shuffled 10 times a game due to the amount of Fetchlands being played there. It's very insensitive to call this showing of empathy to the less fortunate who still enjoy the game "Ridiculous" just because you have no problems with the issue.

Icbrgr what trample does with deathtouch is that to not take any combat damage from the creature, you need as many blockers as it's power. So if you give trample to a 6/6 deathtouch creature, you can put down 3 different 9/9s in front, and still 3 damage tramples over. Without trample, all remaining damage is dealt to the last creature in the blocking order.

DemonDragonJ weren't you the one stating in another thread this week that creatures are your favourite card type? Worried that interaction on the stack would disappear after reading most people like permanents in play? WotC emphasizing a single change in an article or post dedicated to that change does not mean the whole game is just that change afterwards. even when they say people like permanents more than spells, Wizards printed and released over 800 instants and sorceries out of the 4000 cards printed and released in just the past year.

In 99% of all combat, this rule change won't matter, and combat will look the same. In the one percent where it's different, the blowout-potential of the situation has been deflated, and the outcome will be more fair. It's easier and more clear, less to keep track of. It will lead to less discussion about combat math, an easier explanation to new players, and a higher quality of life while playing. So yeah, it's probably a good thing.

The most important thing this does, is making combat tricks less defensively usable.

A 5/5 attacks, defending player blocks with 2 3/3 creatures:

Old: defending player waits until the blocking order is assigned, then casts Giant Growth on the first one, saving both his creatures.

New: defending player has to cast Giant Growth to save one before damage, then the attacking player will divide the damage among blocking creatures, still able to kill the creature without the Giant Growth on it.

Without the rule change that was also the case. How it used to work:

Creature attacks, defending player assigns blockers. Attacking player "stacks" the blockers in order of which he wants his attacker to deal damage to. Attacking player assigns damage to those creatures in that order, but must deal lethal damage to the first creature before they can go to the next one. You could still deal more than lethal to the first creature (maybe you didn't want the second one to die). Then state-based actions are checked, and creatures with lethal damage marked on them, die.

Deathtouch is defined as: any amount of damage dealt by this creature is lethal damage to that creature. So in your example, the 2/3 deathtouch can assign 1 (lethal) damage to each of the creatures. If there were 3 blocking 0/4s, two of them die and one survives.

How it will work with foundations:

Creature attacks, defending player assigns blockers. Attacking player chooses the amount of damage dealt by the attacker to the blocking creatures. Damage is dealt. State-based, creatures with lethal damage die.

For deathtouch it works exactly the same, because every damage is lethal. A 4/4 blocked by 2 3/3s, now has options it didn't have before, you could in the new way, assign 2 damage to each blocker and kill none of them. That option didn't exist in the old way, there you have to deal at least 3 damage to the first blocker before you could deal any to the second.