Welcome back to part two of my long awaited ban list article. In the first segment, I shared my feelings on what the function of the Rules Committee is as compared to to the function that the DCI and Wizard's Organized Play program serve and I gave you my thoughts on the necessity of a ban list.
In today's segment I will be looking at the cards on the banned list and the reasons they are banned (from what I can piece together from posts on the official site, forums, interviews with members of the RC, and my own speculation where necessary).
Note that I will not be addressing any of the cards on the Commander banned list that are ALSO on the Legacy banned list. Those cards, for various reasons, have an established precedent from the DCI as being bad for formats. Therefore, I am willing to concede that there is an argument for banning them.
I will revisit this issue in a future article and give you my thoughts on how Legacy and Commander differ and what implications it has for those specific cards because I think that is an interesting topic that deserves some discussion.
Due to the size of the Commander banned list, this article will be substantially longer than the previous segment so I ask that you bear with me. Without further ado, let's talk about some cards.
Biorhythm - This is banned because, and I am paraphrasing here: 'instant wins do not conform to the spirit of the format'. There are really two assertions that the RC are making here:
1. Biorhythm is consistent enough and powerful enough as a win condition that it has warped the format, leading to repetitive or abusive gameplay situations.
2. Cards that allow a player to win on the spot, even in multiplayer, such as Biorhythm, are not in keeping with the spirit of the format and should be banned in the interest of format health.
First, I do not feel that Biorhythm fits the definition of a card that has an abusive level of power or consistency. Can you win the game? Sure. I find it a bit unlikely, as you also need some set up; like a board sweeper or a bunch of creatures of your own. It is not like you just cast the card and proceed to the win phase. Also, Green has no way of tutoring a Sorcery, so they are most likely going to have to raw dog the wrath and the Biorhythm. In multicolor decks, tutors can provide access to the different parts of the Biorhythm puzzle and even add disruption to help insure that it resolves, but even in this dream case where you manage to 'have it all' there are still a dozen instant win combos that are easier to pull off. Most don't even require you to resolve a GIGANTIC sorcery, which trust me, is a task against a group of seasoned Commander vets.
This segues well into my next point. If shenanigans like instant win combos are indeed against the spirit of the format, why are the other offenders in this category not banned? This is a glaring inconsistency. Tooth and Nail is just as lethal than Biorhythm, but it is cheaper and also actually does something relevant when you can't insta-win. Felidar Sovereign is in a similar spot and heck, it can even attack. Note: I don't personall believe either of those cards, nor any other sort of instant-win nonsense should be banned.
The banned list page spells out what cards should not be played, but also tacks on a rider that you also shouldn't play "others like them". I won't abide this at all. Such a nebulous statement is simply too soft for an 'official ruling' by an 'official body'. A banned list should not require interpretation. A general guideline of what Sheldon Mennery thinks is un-fun is not sufficient material for the banning of a single card and certainly not an entire family of similar cards.
Verdict: Let my people dance! Unban Bro-rhythm.
Coalition Victory - I can only guess at why this is banned. It is a very similar instant win card, but it is restricted to only 5cc decks, which are admittedly pretty good in Commander, but Coalition Victory is approximately 10 times harder to win with than Biorhythm and I didn't even think that card was good at all. So what do you think I am going to say about this card?
Verdict: The Coalition isn't winning anything. Unban Coalition Victory, unless you agree to ban The Cheese Stands Alone.
Emrakul, the Aeons Torn - This card is certainly very powerful. It can lead to repetitive and abusive gameplay. It is easy to put in play on the cheap. It is tough to answer. The only things I will say in defense of Emmy are that it isn't a sure thing in multiplayer, it is colorless so anybody can fight fire with fire, and lastly there are plenty of other abominable threats that immediately dominate the board (I recommend Ulamog).
Sheldon Mennery mentioned in an interview at a pro tour that this card was banned largely due to the Eldrazis ubiquity in the format. So many people play them that every game had a good shot of ending with an Annihilator trigger regardless of which player, or Commander, was victorious when it was all said and done.
I cannot, CANNOT condone a ban based on ubiquity alone. Everyone is playing it because it is among the best cards in the format. That doesn't make it inherently unhealthy. I also do not condone drawing lines in the sand about an unhealthy power level. Especially without quantitative data proving that the format is suffering due to the influence of one card or strategy (data like the DCI collects constantly). If there must be a power ceiling and you have to make a cut off, then starting at the top seems logical. I'm not going to be happy about it either way, but Emrakul was Commander's big bad, not by much, but maybe that is enough.
Verdict: This is complex. I wouldn't ban Emrakul, but, if it is already banned, AND if there must be a power ceiling, then I recommend leaving Emrakul banned. Put the squid on ice. No sushi today. Keep Emra Watson banned.
Gifts Ungiven - I don't have precise information about why this was banned. If you told me it was banned on the basis of its power level I would grudgingly agree. It is extremely powerful. It is tough to lose after resolving a gifts and, as an instant, it is pretty easy to sneak past people's defenses. If you told me this was banned because of how it interacted with the deck construction rules, I would be inclined to argue the following point: Gifts isn't anymore powerful in a highlander format than it is in Legacy. Playing a deck with Gifts Ungiven carries the price of having a large package of 1-of's to begin with. That is simply how you have to play in order to maximize the effectiveness of the card. In my mind, this is a non-issue. Gifts does interact differently with the rules of Commander (a school of ban logic that I will address at a later date), but not in a significant way.
So, if I wouldn't ban it on the basis of its deck building interactions, I must assume it is banned because it is too powerful. Take a moment to think back to what I said about power level in regards to Biorhythm. Gifts doesn't dominate the format. It doesn't squash fun, limit the variety of viable decks in the format, or prevent creativity in deck building. My final thoughts are again about not wanting to draw arbitrary lines about what is 'too good'. Intuition is legal in Commander and Legacy. It sees only limited play in both formats and is very similar in power level.
Verdict: Take the gifts...and give them back to the people. Unban Gifts Ungiven.
Karakas - This is almost certainly banned because of how favorably it interacts with the myriad legendary creatures running around EDH games. Some decks are built with Commander centric strategies...and because people are reluctant to use land destruction, they can't ever beat Karakas. It is somewhat unfair that no other colors have an equivalent broad format hoser card, but that isn't a reason to ban something, even when it is this powerful. I promised further explanation of why I think it is, in fact, alright to ban cards that interact differently with the unique rules of Commander, but now is not the time for fear...that comes later.
Verdict: Big fan of Venezuelan politics. Not a big fan of Karakan politics. Keep Karakas banned.
Limited Resources - I am told that land destruction, especially mass land destruction, is not in the spirit of the format. I am going to put this simply: That is asinine. Disruption is a key piece of the game's strategy. Is it always fun to play against? Maybe not, but I don't get angry and throw my toys around just because I am only having 75% of the fun I wanted to have. Land destruction is one of the few types of disruption that actually works in favor of aggressive decks. In order for aggressive decks to be competitive in Commander they have to rely on back-breaking disruptive plays; usually something like Mind Twist or Armageddon. Speaking of old geddon: It is just as good as Limited Resources, but no one wants to ban it (although 'geddon is appropriately costed). Are you getting the idea about not drawing lines in the sand? Commander needs good land destruction in order to regain balance as a format.
Verdict: Un-limit the disruption. Learn to use it. As you become a better, more well-rounded player, you will see the wisdom of this decision. Unban Limited Resouces.
Sundering Titan - Look back at what I said about Emrakul and LR. The same arguments were made: over-powered, ubiquitous, against the spirit of the format. I make the same rebuttals: Titan does not substantially affect the metagame, it would continue to be healthy and diverse. There are more powerful threats certainly, but I will concede that Sundering Titan is unique in that is a highly disruptive colorless threat, but again, like Emrakul, everyone can play it. Its power scales down dramatically in 1v1. Ubiquity isn't a reason for a ban. The spirit of the format is limiting the diversity of the format...and is also laughable.
Verdict: Sunder the banlist. Unban Sundering Titan.
Primeval Titan - Sheldon Mennery is on record saying this was banned simply because too many games ended in Titan-vantage. I am flat out unwilling to accept that logic for banning a card. In the same interview, he purported that Sol Ring would never be banned because it is core to the spirit of the format. Sol Ring isn't unfair or ubiquitous at all.
Verdict: If you think this card should be banned you are the primeval one. Unban Primeval Titan.
Painter's Servant - I am grasping at straws trying to think of why this would be banned. It is a second class combo in legacy. It just isn't that good. Colorless or not, this card wouldn't get played. There are dozens of 2-card combos that win the game on the spot and are still legal in Commander. This is hardly worth a ban and I have never heard convincing logic about why this card isn't legal.
Verdict: Unban Painter's Servant. It serves the interest of improving the format.
Panoptic Mirror- I have very similar feelings about this card. A colorless, combo win condition that is barely playable in any other format. This card is significantly more expensive and more difficult to 'go off' with, but it has the added value of generating value in the absence of a combo. Not even close to powerful enough to ban. Do you guys at home seriously lose to this kind of junk? You see it once and you are surprised. The next time you are ready. Gimmick nonsense. This barely qualifies as a strategy. And also, Isochron Scepter is much more difficult to win through.
Protean Hulk - Spoiler: I never observe the official banned list in my normal playgroup. I find the idea patently absurd. I make the rules at my kitchen table and I say anything goes. Whenever I look over the banned list though, usually for the purpose of discussing its patent absurdity, I always laugh at this card. Banning Protean Hulk is like shooting at the Heavy in Team Fortress 2. It is just idiotic. YOU MUST kill the medic first. So I am just going to assume that the RC made a mistake and meant to ban Flash.
Verdict: You wouldn't like the Hulk when he is angry. Ban Flash.
Recurring Nightmare - I assume this was banned because of its power level and favorable interactions with popular threats like Kokusho, and now, the primordial cycle. Much like Emrakul, this feels like an arbitrary ban, but a logical place to draw the line if there must be one. I really don't get it though, isn't everyone packing graveyard hate by now?
Verdict: I don't think the nightmare should ever have ended, but I don't think we should let it recur. Keep Recurring Nightmare banned.
Sway of the Stars / Worldfire - I am just going lump these two together because I don't have anything to say about one that I couldn't say about the other. They are prohibitively expensive sorceries. The literal worst kind of win condition AND they each need additional help to win the game. Most people would think that this is the kind of stereotypical nonsense that Commander is ALL ABOUT! They do immediately warp multiplayer games when they resolve, but if you have 10 lands in play already...well let's just say it is about time things got weird don't you think?
Verdict: I am not starting a fire to ban Warp World or Reverse the Sands. It'd take quite the orator to sway my opinion on this one. Unban these cards.
Yawgmoth's Bargain - This is banned. Necropotence is legal. I swear, sometimes I think this is a joke.
Verdict: Unban Yawgmoth's Bargain before I start making puns.
Griselbrand - I haven't ever heard a member of the RC give a concise explanation of why this card was banned. Most of the conversation revolves around it being too powerful. It is too powerful, but in Commander that can be just as bad for you as it is for them. Bribery is a card. Desertion is a card. Games do tend to end when Grissly Bear hits the board, but not before things get interesting.
Verdict: I have no real opinion and could go either way, but banning a card without a reason is tough for me to chew.
Trade Secrets - Ahh the new guy. To be the hot topic. The villain du jour. Public Enemy #1. Trade Secrets was banned because it encouraged collusion in multiplayer. You don't say. Politics is the ONLY dynamic that sets multiplayer apart from single player games. Isn't that why people play it? If you don't like crony king-making then you shouldn't be entering into the Mexican standoff of multiplayer Commander. Trade Secrets is one of the rare cards that actually allows you to get ahead in a group game. Usually interacting with an opponent means that you are both going to be behind the table. Strip Mine for example. We each lose a land, but everyone else doesn't. If you can consistently convince your opponents to help you discover their trade secrets then you are awesome and deserve to win. This kind of behavior should be encouraged. If you can't stand your playgroup constantly teaming up and leaving you out in the cold then you have a social problem, not a gameplay problem.
Verdict: The secret is out, but the card is in. Victoria says: Unban Trade Secrets.
A quick note about the banned generals: I don't agree with this practice in general. People should be able to play what they want. In a competitive setting though, things change. I agree to bannig generals in that context. And in that context I believe that all 7 Tier 1 generals should be banned: Erayo, Sharuum, Niv-Mizzet, Rofellos, Azami, Braids, and Jhoira. I would also recommend that Edric, Arcum Dagsson, and Blue Braids be banned. It might even be necessary to ban some of the other overplayed 1v1 generals like Venser or Vendilion Clique, but I would need more intel before I commit to that position. This configuration of bans would, based on my logic, maximize the variety of viable generals in the format, but not necessarily the health of the format or the fun of playing it.
Well, that is all for today youngins'. This was a biggun, but I feel it was worth it. This is a topic that eats up a lot of my time both on the internet and away from the keyboard. I have been itching to pen an article about it for a good bit. Thanks for sticking with me zoners! Make sure to join me next week for the final installment where I will discuss what reasons I think ARE acceptable for banning a card and I will reveal the list of cards that Grandpa thinks should be kept off the kitchen table. Till then, make sure to share your thoughts on the ban list and this article in the comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment