deckstats.net
You need to be logged in to do this.
The buttons above will open in a new window. Please return to this window after you have logged in. When you have logged in, click the Refresh Session button and then try again.

Author Topic: cEDH and EDH: an analogy  (Read 955 times)

dexflux

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Karma: 26
  • Decks
cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« on: January 12, 2020, 04:45:11 pm »
Let's start with the following: I think that cEDH and EDH are essentially the same format in the way that Legacy and Kitchen Table Magic with old cards are the same format, or how a Modern meta deck and a Modern legal deck belong to the same format, despite vastly different power levels. Decks are build with the same legality, yet are so harshly different that they might just be different formats, yet they aren't, technically; or so I think.

At which point does a format change into another? If you aren't already familiar with it, please read up on the Ship of Theseus, because it's a similar case that has been discussed for a long time.

Time to discuss the following question:

> What constitutes the identity of the EDH format?

At first, the answer seems simple. The EDH format is what the RC has made it out to be when they created it. They laid out a philosophy that specifies what EDH is supposed to be. Let's take a look at its current state and see if its components still hold true for cEDH:

Quote
Commander is for fun. It’s a socially interactive, multiplayer Magic: the Gathering format full of wild interactions and epic plays, specifically designed as an alternative to tournament Magic.

I don't see how cEDH would violate this principle. It is played for fun and social interaction, as it also is a multiplayer format, just like EDH. "Wild interactions and epic plays" most certainly happen, as anyone who has seen a gigantic stack of spells and triggers being built can attest.

As for being an alternative to tournament Magic, this is debateable, as far as I'm concerned, since cEDH lends itself well to being a tournament format (let's assume that cEDH and EDH are different formats, at least as long as this argument is ongoing). But it's also a format that is being played in side events of formats like Legacy or Modern, since it *is* an alternative and isn't officially supported for tournaments.

Quote
[...] Commander focuses on a resonant experience. Each game is a journey the players share, relying on a social contract in which each player is considerate of the experiences of everyone involved--this promotes player interaction, inter-game variance, a variety of play styles, and a positive communal atmosphere.

For the sake of brewity, I'll treat "resonant experience" and "social contract" as the same thing. cEDH holds this up as all players involved are playing to win and to demonstrate playing and deckbuilding skill, as would be expected from a format where the c stands for competitive. This is where cEDH players resonate and the base they form their social contract on. One might say that it comes down to "playing to win", in the David Sirlin way. (Recommended reading, although not further necessary for this discussion). We can check this box, as well. It's a social contract, albeit a short one.

Quote
The addition of a commander, larger life total, and deck building restrictions emphasize the format’s flavor; they increase deck variance and add more opportunities for participation and expression.

This is where cEDH diverges from EDH. Flavor is nice, but doesn't contribute to competitiveness in any way, therefore it doesn't contribute to cEDH. Decks are still build within the same set of rules, but the only flavor is the winning flavor, which conflicts with the RC philosophy.

Quote
The goal of the ban list is similar; it does not seek to regulate competitive play or power level, which are decisions best left to individual play groups. The ban list seeks to demonstrate which cards threaten the positive player experience at the core of the format or prevent players from reasonable self-expression. The primary focus of the list is on cards which are problematic because of their extreme consistency, ubiquity, and/or ability to restrict others’ opportunities.

A direct contradiction to the nature of cEDH, right on the banlist. Although cEDH playgroups could always make house rules, this does not help unify it as a format or as a healthy part of EDH, since without proper bannings, brokenness will ensue. The addition of Thassa's Oracle or the unbanning of Protean Hulk make that clear as day. Similar things could be said about the ban of Paradox Engine, but that is another discussion.

But, if we're going by the second bold statement, banning based on competitiveness can be implied: "[...] because of their extreme consistency, ubiquity, and/or ability to restrict others’ opportunities.". The current landscape of cEDH has combos and cards that fulfill those criteria. It's a problem EDH may have, just on another scale. A card that is problematic on the kitchen table might be worthless in high level play or vice versa. It's essentially the same problem, just from another perspective. 

Quote
We encourage groups to use the rules and the ban list as a baseline to optimize their own experience. This is not license for an individual to force their vision onto a play group, but encouragement for players to discuss their goals and how the rules might be adjusted to suit those goals. The format can be broken; we believe games are more fun if you don’t.

And here is where I think cEDH and EDH diverge, too. While it has been discussed to create a seperate banlist (and therefore seperate rules for cEDH), it's what would end cEDH, since it would no longer be EDH - sharing the same rules (not necessarily the same philosophy) is what makes it competitive *EDH* and not another format entirely.

As the goal of any competitive format should be to break it so hard that cards need to be banned (until it stabilizes), the second statement is akin to a death sentence when it comes to cEDH belonging to EDH in terms of philosophy. Although it's just a statement of the RC and the cEDH community obviously likes to break stuff, it's problematic since the RC doesn't actually ban problematic cards, therefore never stabilizing the meta.

---------------------------------

Considering the above, cEDH shares the same set of rules as EDH, but does not share the same philosophy when it comes to play experience. If we're being technical, we can consider cEDH to be the same format by design and rules, but not the same format by nature. The only solution I can offer is to start incorporating necessary bans into the RC banlist, as they often don't touch on casual, non-competitive play, while ensuring a healthy format of the top level of play.

cEDH differs from EDH in how Modern differs from Kitchen Table Magic with Modern legality. It's the same game, driven to it's logical conclusion, since the goal of the game is to win. Everything else is secondary, although those secondary natures of the game are to be found in EDH, they have mostly no place in cEDH, since it *is* competitive and nothing else.

---------------------------------

Please share your opinions and arguments. I'm interested what others have to say about this problem. I think that cEDH and EDH are inherently the same format, playing by the same rules, yet to other goals, and a direct comparison of the RC EDH philosophy and the competitive nature of cEDH proves that, I think.

Slyvester12

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
  • Karma: 540
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2020, 05:37:31 pm »
I'm not exactly sure what you're hoping to discuss here. It seems like the argument is whether to separate cEDH into another format with its own RC / banlist, but you're conclusion seems to be making an ontological argument about whether they're currently the same format.

If you're arguing the former, I think cEDH needs to remain part of EDH to remain relevant, or it'll just become another branch format like the other highlander varieties.

If you're arguing the latter, I don't think anyone believes cEDH is inherently a different format. It's just that RC seems to think that EDH isn't inherently competitive, despite there being a "winner" and "losers" and the point is to beat everyone.
Elves and infect are the best things in Magic.

Morganator 2.0

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2628
  • Karma: 2486
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #2 on: January 13, 2020, 05:32:08 pm »
Props to you Dexflux. You've given a good compare and contrast of competitive Commander and casual Commander.

The philosophy document states that Commander should have a wide variety of play-styles. Which is something that casual Commander sometimes frowns upon. Mass land destruction, lock-out stax, infinite combos; these are all things that Sheldon has spoken up against, and has gone as far as saying they are against the spirit of the commander format (particularly stax).

But there is a place for these decks within the Commander format: cEDH. No gives a damn if you're plan is to play degenerate stax. It's a legitimate strategy that has its own flavor to it, and encourages interaction and inter-game varience. You know... the other parts of the philosophy.

I think that there would be a much wider variety of decks in the competitive side if there were some small adjustments made to the banlist. Just one really.

Ban Flash
Commander should be the format for everyone. So if stax is that much of a taboo, give cEDH just a small amount of support, and those decks will have a place.

Soren841

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5088
  • Karma: 606
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #3 on: January 13, 2020, 05:54:29 pm »
Nils is the God I worship

dexflux

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Karma: 26
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2020, 12:39:37 am »
As I've thought a little bit more about this, a solution would be to abolish the entire banlist in its current form and start banning based on competitiveness. Kitchen tables will regulate themselves then, as they do now. For example: Armageddon isn't banned, yet it is rarely played in a casual setting. Those regulate themselves quite easily, I think. They are doing it right now and will continue to do so. House rules are a thing and will continue to be.

Meanwhile, truly problematic cards like Flash can be banned without touching on casual play in any way - casual tables might ignore the ban altogether, since house rules are encouraged and probably healthy for casual tables. If it works for all other formats, why wouldn't it work for EDH? It's not like there are sanctioned tournaments (yet?). Of course, that would also mean the RC has to gather data regarding top level play, but MTGO and maybe YouTube channels like Playing With Power could make that possible, especially in coorperation with WotC.

Kitchen table jank and tournament meta decks are different, of course. We have to embrace that, I think. Since EDH is a social experience, players should make clear what they are out to do, communicate more with each other and accept the different archetypes as valid. Just because something is not fun to someone, it does not mean it's not fun to everyone. Communication is key.

(Properly assessing one's deck is, too, but that is another discussion. I despise the "75%" system or x/10 system that has been established. How about Sirlin Tier Lists for a change?)

I might add that, in addition to bannings for top level play, the RC could keep a list of suggestions for lower level play bans and unbans. It might be more complicated than just a straight banlist, but the ramifications of a list of suggestions are less extreme than those of a banlist, since it, by design, starts actual discussion as they are suggestions and not prohibitions. Those suggestions can also provide a baseline for assessing powerlevels. How useful that baseline would be is a question for another day.

EDH is about having fun. I think we should strive to maximize that fun, even if it means using more complicated constructs to do so.

Marshstepper78

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 214
  • Karma: 113
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2020, 01:09:25 am »
Maybe the solution is to have WotC take over the banned list and leave it out of the hands of a rules committee governed by nostalgia and emotion. There is no illusion that EDH is one of the most popular formats right now - look at all the new product coming in 2020 - and there is more and more of a Commander presence at sanctioned events (which will undoubtedly grow in the next year or two).

WotC handles the official banned list designed to encourage competitive play and let friends auto-regulate their own little metas at the kitchen table. I've never played at an LGS or a sanctioned event, only playing with my good friends of 20+ years, and we do a fine job managing our meta so we all have fun. The banned list is there for the health of the format at large; no one says we can't add or unban cards at home amongst friends. If you decide to play amongst strangers, the banned list is fundamentally there to ensure we all 'speak the same language'.

I can understand that the group of people that created this once-fringe format is upset that it has evolved into the entity it is today and is no longer exclusively the whimsical, fun format they played back then, but things have clearly changed. Not everyone is happy with change, but we all have to live with it; some tides are just too strong to resist.

Just a thought really.

Yeah, Flash needs a proper banning.


Slyvester12

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
  • Karma: 540
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2020, 05:06:04 am »
I'm with Marshstepper. I think WOTC taking control might actually be desirable. They're already monetizing EDH as hard as they can; if they started running tournaments or even just released an official banlist for side tournaments, we might see real consideration for cEDH.

Of course, with how things have been going, they might also just ban all non-standard cards, fiddle with the rules a bit, and call it something silly, like "brawl."

In all seriousness, though, I very much doubt the RC will ever consider cEDH when banning.
Elves and infect are the best things in Magic.

Soren841

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5088
  • Karma: 606
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2020, 05:45:20 am »
WotC will totally fuck up EDH if they control the banlist. I dislike Sheldon and some RC decisions but their banning philosophy is way better, and they HAVE added the advisory committee thing.
Nils is the God I worship

Red_Wyrm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 785
  • Karma: 170
  • I'm the boss of the forums.
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2020, 06:07:30 pm »
Is there any cEDH representation on the RC or advisory board? Or do cEDH players just have to hope these people take into account their mini format?
My King Baby said yes!
I thought you'd never ask
Also, I always spell your name correctly, Red_Wurm.  :)

Please, it is Red

Soren841

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5088
  • Karma: 606
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #9 on: January 14, 2020, 06:37:08 pm »
The advisory board has people that are somewhat connected to cEDH yes, but obviously the Paradox Engine banning shows that they either suck or are ignored
Nils is the God I worship

dexflux

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Karma: 26
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #10 on: January 14, 2020, 08:11:11 pm »
Is there any cEDH representation on the RC or advisory board? Or do cEDH players just have to hope these people take into account their mini format?

As far as I know, Rachel Agnes has some ties to cEDH. I'd count out Josh Lee Kwai regarding cEDH (according to what I heard him say on The Command Zone; nice podcast/format, but largely uncompetitive), no idea regarding the rest.

Morganator 2.0

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2628
  • Karma: 2486
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2020, 09:19:34 pm »
After clicking the link you've posted, I'm not too sure about that.

dexflux

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
  • Karma: 26
  • Decks
Re: cEDH and EDH: an analogy
« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2020, 01:47:37 am »
After clicking the link you've posted, I'm not too sure about that.

She's considered the Spike among the CAG. Or at least the one with the most Spike-like tendencies. If have my doubts when it comes to ties to the cEDH community, though. Wouldn't someone like ShaperSavant or Lerker be suitable? They are moderators on the cEDH subreddit and give a lot to the community.