Deckstats Forum
English-language Forums => General Magic => Topic started by: mjb3102 on January 10, 2018, 09:36:41 pm
-
Hello Everyone!
My local playgroup and myself came up with a custom banlist based on what we felt was a needed change in direction of both WOTC's banlist and the French 1v1 banlist. Feel free to use for your own playgroup or to ask questions about why certain cards are/aren't banned.
Enjoy!
https://deckstats.net/deck-14905392-d1ea3c9956e38b6603b0ba35eef3b768.html
-
When you say WOTC ban list are you referring to the online list or the paper list? WOTC doesn't maintain the paper list.
-
WOTC has two lists that my group was following for a while; One was for MTGO (for 1v1) and the other is just a general banlist (I assumed multiplayer). Both of these lists had some cards we disagreed with so we moved to the French 1v1 banlist. That worked for a while but then they started to ban some questionable things so we just made our own.
MTGO: https://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-formats/banned-restricted/magic-online-commander
General: https://magic.wizards.com/en/content/commander-format
French 1v1: http://www.duelcommander.com/banlist/
-
The multiplayer commander banlist for paper play is not maintained by WOTC although they do recognize it, it's maintained by an independent rules committee that includes one of the founders of the format.
http://www.mtgcommander.net/rules.php
Back to your list, I agree with using "house rules" for commander since it's a casual format.
I like that you have a separate "banned as commander" list, I hate that the RC did away with it for multiplayer. Certains creatures (like Braids) is broken as a commander but is easily kept in check as one of the 99.
-
Your group bans like all the good cards for competitive EDH :c
-
Hermit Druid (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Hermit+Druid) isn't even that good.. things like Doomsday (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Doomsday), the cradle, and Food Chain (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Food+Chain) are only good in specific decks and i think bans shpuld be for general over poweredness
-
Is this for 1v1, multiplayer, or both?
-
That was something we really liked about the French List; some cards are only broken as commanders so we definitely took influence from that. Although you cannot see it on the post, if you view the actual page that the list is on you can see that some cards are only banned in multiplayer as well. This was another idea we felt necessary due to come cards getting MUCH better the more opponents there are.
Regardless, our group so far likes the list (we've been using it since November) because it gives a lot if archetypes breathing room while removing cards that would be too much "pay to win" or "I play this card and now I win." We can be very competitive and fairly large at times compared to other groups (we're ~12 people) so some limits are needed.
-
And things like strip mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) and mana crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) are EDH staples
-
Why Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) but not Dust Bowl (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Dust+Bowl)?
-
WWolfe, if I were to guess, I would suspect that it is due to the 3 mana activation cost on Dust Bowl (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Dust+Bowl), where Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) costs no mana. When you get Crucible of Worlds (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Crucible+of+Worlds) and multiple land drops per turn, you can easily decimate (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Decimate) an opponent's mana base at no mana cost. Then you still have your whole turn. At least with Dust Bowl (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Dust+Bowl) it would cost you a lot of mana to pull that off.
mjb, I applaud your playgroup's use of a local ban list.
Playgroups are each unique. What works for one may or may not work for another. For a variety of reasons.
Of course EDH staples are on the list. If no one is playing a card, there is no reason to ban it. When your playgroup are not prolific deck builders, things get stale seeing the same cards in similar decks over and over again. You need to force things to be less efficient and more creative.
Happy Brewing everybody :)
-
That's the explanation I was expecting, the mana cost for Dust Bowl (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Dust+Bowl) is a deterrent in running it and how you use it so it kind of polices itself.
-
Besides it's an edited version of the current ban list. The only problem is some cards are banned that shouldn't be because it's edited version of the 1v1 ban list.. multiplayer is different
-
The only problem is some cards are banned that shouldn't be because it's edited version of the 1v1 ban list.. multiplayer is different
If you go view the banlist page, it will show comments that say if bans are multiplayer only. We also took into consideration 3 different banlists listed above.
-
"Why Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) but not Dust Bowl (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Dust+Bowl)?"
ApothecaryGeist is correct with the activation cost. I would also like to point out that Dust Bowl (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Dust+Bowl) can only go after non-basics and Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) can go after ANY land.
mjb, I applaud your playgroup's use of a local ban list.
Thank You :)
If no one is playing a card, there is no reason to ban it.
The "staples" on the list have more to do with the range of skill that is in our play group; we have new comers to a magic collector that has access to any card he wants. Without boundaries, the new people would be at a significant disadvantage. Not to mention, we want everyone to be judged by skill and not by what they can afford.
Hermit Druid (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Hermit+Druid) isn't even that good...
Yes he is, google the combos you can hit with him :)
things like Doomsday (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Doomsday), the cradle, and Food Chain (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Food+Chain) are only good in specific decks and i think bans should be for general over poweredness
You got me on Doomsday (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Doomsday); the big combo with that card is a way to cheat Emrakul, however, we already have him banned (even though I personally love the card) so that is one we probably will revisit.
Cradle and Food Chain (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Food+Chain) is just simply out of price range for most people in the group. However, I would also argue that you wouldn't run them if they weren't a great fit for your deck and thus cause the deck to abuse those abilities.
things like strip mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) and mana crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) are EDH staples
I've already addressed Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) in another post, but as for Mana Crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) I would say that in a format that the loss of life for mana just simply doesn't matter makes this card broken. People still argue that Sol Ring (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Sol+Ring) should be banned so we felt a more powerful version of Sol Ring (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Sol+Ring) should be banned. This also is another card that some could afford and others can't (currently ~$70 on TCG).
-
From the sounds of it you might as well ban the original dual lands since price is such a factor in your ban decisions.
-
Dual lands are expensive, yes, but not broken. They mana fix, which there are other options without the price hike. Things like Mana Crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) or Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) are just plain broken, expensive or not.
-
Mana Crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) isn't broken just very good. Instead of banning the druid just ban combos in general and let people use what they want with that restriction
-
And strip mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) isn't "just plain broken" or particularly expensive.. if that's your definition of broken then you must just be playing underpowered decks
-
It's more that this list was created for 1v1 play where those cards have been banned forever. Multiplayer is less competitive and more about diplomacy than strategy so the bannings are less important. Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine)/Crucible is still pretty broken in multiplayer although I can see the argument for it being legal by itself in multiplayer since it's weaker when you're not disadvantaging all your opponents. Mana crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) at 40 life just lets ppl drop bombs way too fast. Sol Ring (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Sol+Ring) is almost too powerful but his group wanted it in since they all had it. If you don't think accelerating to 3 mana for nothing on turn one isn't broken then explain to me why all the Moxen are banned. If you're not abusing 3 mana on turn 1 your deck needs work.
-
I didn't mean that last post as snarky as it may sound, but I think you'll find a wide variety in what different players can afford in all play groups. In mine we have a huge disparity in income...ranging from an IT guru that makes well over 6 figures down to someone who makes a little over minimum wage (but I tell ya, you'd probably guess wrong if you picked which one enjoyed their job more).
I guess there's a part of me that just doesn't like price coming into the decision on whether or not a card should be banned (which is sounds as though it does in your group) because banning some cards with part of the rationale being their cost creates an uneven scale on why other cards aren't banned despite their price.
-
Aw come on! How can you ban Chaos Orb (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Chaos+Orb)? :p
-
Dexterity cards are no longer used in any normal Magic format. And things like Sol Ring (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Sol+Ring) and Mana Crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) are not broken because they're limited by being one ofs, produce colorless, and honestly everyone who can afford it runs it, so it evens the playing field. If you make more than enough to afford it and your friends don't, then buy everyone a copy if u care that much. Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) isn't OP in any circumstance other than Crucible soft lock. It's trading 1 land for 1 land. Yes it disadvantages them but it has an impact on you too. If your deck is built to abuse things like that then so be it, you should ban OP cards not entire strategies, just because you don't like them
-
For a casual format like Commander and for a local playgoups local banlist, card cost is certainly a factor in banning decision. If only a small factor. Even the Rules Committee has stated that the reason that the moxen remain on the banned list is due to price.
For cards like Emrakul, the Aeons Torn (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Emrakul%2C+the+Aeons+Torn) Prophet of Kruphix (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Prophet+of+Kruphix) Leovold, Emissary of Trest (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Leovold%2C+Emissary+of+Trest) it is all about raw power. But for mana producers and the like, it is only fair when everyone has access to that type of thing. As mjb mentioned, they considered banning Sol Ring (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Sol+Ring), but everyone had one. Everyone did not have a Mana Crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt). And it is expensive for some of their player to acquire (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Acquire) one.
Bannings are primarily about leveling the playing field.
-
It is all about their playgroup having fun the way that they want to.
Soren, are you suggesting that if I cannot afford all of the power cards in Standard that someone should else should just buy me a playset?
I would be all for that. But that isn't the way the world works.
:)
-
I didn't mean that last post as snarky as it may sound, but I think you'll find a wide variety in what different players can afford in all play groups. In mine we have a huge disparity in income...ranging from an IT guru that makes well over 6 figures down to someone who makes a little over minimum wage (but I tell ya, you'd probably guess wrong if you picked which one enjoyed their job more).
I guess there's a part of me that just doesn't like price coming into the decision on whether or not a card should be banned (which is sounds as though it does in your group) because banning some cards with part of the rationale being their cost creates an uneven scale on why other cards aren't banned despite their price.
No, I do agree with you that price shouldn't be a large factor in the decision to ban a card so I get it. Strip Mine (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Strip+Mine) was more of a casualty of a 1v1 focused banlist that was more intent on preventing multiplayer cards from being banned in single, like Balance (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Balance), than in making sure single player banned cards weren't banned in multiplayer. This is largely because the playgroup has 1v1 tournaments somewhat frequently and generally seem to take it a lot more serious than multiplayer.
-
I'm saying Mana Crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) isn't overpowered he's just mad that some can't afford a good card and others in his group can. I was just suggesting if that was such a big factor then why can't they buy the ones who can't afford it a mana crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) and call it a day
-
And I wouldn't be against situational rules. Maybe ban Mana Crypt (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mana+Crypt) only if your deck is running green, for example
-
Aw come on! How can you ban Chaos Orb (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Chaos+Orb)? :p
Lol, I know right? The only problem with Chaos Orb (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Chaos+Orb) is that if you allow players to respond to it by rearranging their board then they can just stack all their cards on top of each other with the least desirable permanent on top and then since it's only "touching" the top card Chaos Orb (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Chaos+Orb) isn't that good. If you don't allow for the rearranging then Chaos Orb (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Chaos+Orb) is pretty damn good : - P Honestly though, I'd want to go back to the old school method of allowing the player to rip up Chaos Orb (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Chaos+Orb) and throw the pieces all over their opponents board. The good old days...
-
Although I mentioned price, it wasn't a huge deciding factor on the banning of these cards. No card was banned without the approval of multiple players in the group. I apologize if I made it seem like a bigger deal than what it was.
I however completely agree with khurtz (who is one of the people that helped me make this list) with our intent on focusing more on 1v1 than multiplayer.
-
Even the Rules Committee has stated that the reason that the moxen remain on the banned list is due to price.
Little bit of difference in banning a $70 card because of price and banning a $2,000 card because of price. ;)
If there's going to be a threshold for price ban then IMO, it should be decided across the group AND if that's a thing than it needs to include all cards over that threshold if it's truly about financially evening the playing field.
-
Absolutely, everything needs to be decided upon by your local group. The "leveling the playingfield" that I mentioned is not just about finances. But about the game holistically. Taking into consideration everything from strategy (do you actually need one, or is it so broken that you play it and win), to mana investment (is the effect ok if it costs 9 mana?), to time investment (how many turns is it on field before payoff), to accessibility (how easily can anyone in the group obtain this card/effect).
-
Even the Rules Committee has stated that the reason that the moxen remain on the banned list is due to price.
Little bit of difference in banning a $70 card because of price and banning a $2,000 card because of price. ;)
If there's going to be a threshold for price ban then IMO, it should be decided across the group AND if that's a thing than it needs to include all cards over that threshold if it's truly about financially evening the playing field.
Hey hey hey, you can get an unlimited Mox Ruby (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Mox+Ruby) on ABUgames for $1150 so they're not THAT expensive ; P
Seriously though, it's starting to sound like the argument is more whether a given card will make you an automatic target in EDH, which isn't a problem, or win you the game through symmetrical effect. Most cards on the multiplayer banlist are banned due to symmetry such as Balance (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Balance), Sundering Titan (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Sundering+Titan) and Recurring Nightmare (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Recurring+Nightmare)/Kokusho. If you're logic is that playing OP cards is fine as long as you don't straight up win the game off them then why wouldn't the Moxen and cards like Recall (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Recall) be fine? You may get a severe early game advantage but if you have 2 or more other players ganging up on you because of it then you should still lose due to inferior resources.
It just makes no sense to me why you have cards like Painter's Servant (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Painter%27s+Servant) banned, who can only kill 1 player at a time with Grindstone (http://cards.deckstats.net/magiccard.php?lng=en&card=Grindstone) for a 6 mana initial cost, when you have Auriok Salavagers/LED legal that can kill every player, if your commander is Breya, for the exact same cost. Honestly just feels like the people who make the rules for multiplayer are lazy and stopped caring about the format years ago in order to keep it as casual of a format as possible.
-
I agree with your sentiment Khurtz, there's cards banned by the RC that I don't agree with while there's cards not banned that I don't agree with. Just like them doing away with the separate "banned as commander" list.
Absolutely, everything needs to be decided upon by your local group. The "leveling the playingfield" that I mentioned is not just about finances. But about the game holistically. Taking into consideration everything from strategy (do you actually need one, or is it so broken that you play it and win), to mana investment (is the effect ok if it costs 9 mana?), to time investment (how many turns is it on field before payoff), to accessibility (how easily can anyone in the group obtain this card/effect).
Oh absolutely! My playgroup rules to include our differences with the ban list, which I posted in another thread, are geared towards problems we had in our group. Even within our group there's some cards I feel like should be banned that aren't and there's cards banned that I don't necessarily agree with. Overall though I'm happy with the direction that my group is heading. If a time comes that I'm not, then I'll leave that group and find another.