GeneralDamageControl.Com

Defending the Commander Social Contract

Author: mtgtaikomint (Page 1 of 2)

Lens of Clarity – April 2016 (Shadows Over Innistrad Edition)

I’ve never had the chance to live in a country that enjoys four different seasons, but I’m sure it doesn’t take much to understand what a wonderful season spring is. The harsh cold of the winter makes way for the crisp chill of spring, life starts to flourish again…and the smell of fresh new Magic cards is in the air!

Yes, the much-hyped Shadows Over Innistrad hits shelves Friday, and though I can’t say the same for the people of Innistrad, I’m so looking forward to it!

Read More

Lens of Clarity: March 2016 – The Grand Pinata

I’ve been surfing a lot of Tumblr and Reddit recently, and I’ve noticed two variants which are similar to each other in some ways. The concepts seem quite interesting, and promising, so for this article, I’d like to channel my judge mojo and see if I can marry the two and create a fun variant!

Pinata

Here’s quoting the original writeup:

This is quite possibly my favorite EDH variant. Each player plays their deck as usual, but players can’t attack each other and can’t deal damage to each other, but they can block each other. In the center lies a Piñata. The Piñata begins the game with 25 life for each player in the game, and whoever deals the final blow to the Piñata wins the game. It’s an interesting combination of teamwork in the early game and sheer terror in the late game.”

– “EDH Variants: A Guide” by generally-edh (http://generally-edh.tumblr.com/post/137057192421/edh-variants-a-guide)

 

I’ve always been enamored by the concept of Archenemy, and this variant has that feel to it – just that instead of everyone teaming up to defeat a common enemy, this time it’s every man for himself, looking to land the fatal blow for all the honor and glory.

This variant looks very promising, because it’s simple to understand and can scale up very easily. The author put the number of players at 3-8, but there’s no reason why this cannot be increased, albeit with the trade-off of turnover time between turns.

Unnamed Three-Player Variant

I took my reference from this Reddit thread which itself is an attempt to codify the rules for this variant first brought up in another Reddit thread.

Essentially, each player has his/her designated punching bag to deal damage to, and can’t deal damage to the other players. Instead of reducing the life totals of other players to zero or below, the aim is to pulverize his/her punching bag by reducing its life total to zero or less, or by dealing sufficient Commander damage to it – pretty much the same as a normal game of EDH.

Having looked through the discussions in both threads, I’ve come to the conclusion that this one would be much more challenging to codify, and then certain categories of cards might work unintuitively. That said, some of the replies that tried to write up a ruleset were quite well-thought out, and I’ll be borrowing from some of them for this article.

NEXT LEVELLING – THE GRAND PINATA

Here’s my attempt on what I would call The Grand Pinata, paying homage to the name from which I drew inspiration.

The rules are essentially the same as in Commander, with the following exceptions:

 

  • The Grand Pinata (GP) starts with 40 life for each player in the game.

Remember that in classical free-for-all, your objective is to reduce everyone’s life total to zero or less, so this is essentially similar to what everyone would be trying to do to the table as a whole. Feel free to adjust this life total to suit the needs of your group!

 

  • You win the game if the GP’s life total is reduced to 0 or less by a source you control that would affect another player’s life total. You also win the game if you deal 21 points of Commander damage to the GP. All other rules for ending the game also apply.

The first line looks complicated, but what it’s trying to say that you can’t suicide your way to victory with cards like Ad Nauseam, or Sign in Blood with the GP at one life. Let’s say Cass grabs a bunch of cards with Ad Nauseam, dropping GP to -10. He doesn’t win on the spot; instead, the game continues. Then, Dave casts Healing Salve, targeting Cass. GP’s life total becomes -7…and Dave wins, because his effect caused the GP’s life total to become less than zero, even though it was a life-gain effect! Interestingly enough, if Dave were to target himself instead, then the game would still continue!

Weird stuff eh?

Overall, it’s one step up, one step down from your normal free-for-all, in the sense that although you now have to reduce “your” life total to 0 as well, but at the same time you just have to deal lethal Commander damage to one target.

And of course, you can always beat the table by milling everyone out, or dealing 10 poison counters to the GP, or…well, you get what I mean.

 

  • Any life cost that you pay would come from the GP’s life total. You can’t pay a life cost equal to or greater than the GP’s life total.

This rule might easily be the most controversial, simply because of cards like Necropotence. I mean, who’s to stop you from paying 75 life to put 75 cards into your hand?!

The way I see it, with any variant, there are bound to be some cards that are overpowered at worst or holy-crap-this-is-broken at best – Serra Ascendant comes to mind as one such offender. That said, I believe that there’s no good way to police the format, other than our trusty Social Contract.

 

  • If you would gain or lose life, instead the GP gains or loses that much life. You can choose the GP as a target for effects that would affect a life total.

Cass casts Banefire for X = 10, targeting the GP. The GP takes ten damage, simple.

Dave casts Fall of the Titans for X = 10, targeting the GP and Kaka. Kaka doesn’t lose life; instead the GP takes ten and ten, for a total of twenty.

Kaka casts Exsanguinate for X = 10. Cass and Dave don’t lose life; instead the GP loses twenty and gains twenty. Kaka is a sad panda.

For that last scenario, I meant for it to be this way because a spell like this is zero-sum, but I’d be happy to hear alternative takes on this.

 

  • During the declare blockers step, each other player may declare blockers. To do this, follow the rules for declaration of blockers. Once a creature is designated as a blocker, it cannot be undesignated. Declaration of blockers is complete when each other player passes without designating at least one blocker

For instance, Cass attacks the GP with two 8/8 Kraken tokens, with the GP facing lethal damage. Unsure if Kaka will declare blockers, Dave chooses to play safe, and uses one of his 5/5 Dragon tokens to chump-block. Kaka then chumps the other with his 3/3 Elephant token. Seeing this, Dave decides to instead block the Kraken that Kaka’s Elephant is blocking.

“No more blockers, “ says Kaka, and Dave echoes.

Now Dave and Kaka discuss whose creature to put in front of the firing line first. Once the order is decided, declaration of blockers is completed, and Cass gets priority to continue doing his nasty things.

Now, let’s talk about two specific categories of cards (that immediately popped into my head) and how they might work in this variant!

Propaganda VS Norn’s Annex VS War Tax

  • Propaganda is pretty much a dead card in this format since you can’t be directly attacked by creatures.
  • Norn’s Annex will still retain some of its functions by taxing anyone that tries to attack your planeswalkers.
  • War Tax works very well because of the way it’s worded. Stop the attackers cold in their tracks even before they move out!

Purphoros, God of the Forge and other cards that affect “each opponent”

In the interest of consistency, since the GP and your opponents can be targeted for life loss, the GP will be counted as an opponent. In a three-player game, one Purphoros trigger will deal 6 damage to the GP!

So there you have it! If nothing else, this was a wonderful thought exercise for me, and I hope it’s been the same for you. Feel free to leave comments for me, tell me what you feel needs improvement, and most importantly, give it a shot! Who knows, this variant might turn out to be more fun than you thought!

-CK

Lens of Clarity – February 2016

Wow…it’s been a while since I last wrote here!

As with Cass and Dave, I had to let Real Life(™) take the front seat some time towards the end of last year, although mine was more because of positive developments. I bade bachelorhood a fond farewell last December, but the real tedium came in the months prior to that. The wedding preparations themselves had already taken a toll on my attention; throw in the responsibility of having to oversee the renovation work for our future nest, and all game time got thrown out of the window.

The last time I signed off (late June last year), Pro Tour Magic Origins (Spoiler: this has something to do with what I’m going to write about today!) hadn’t happened yet. Now, look what we have (and don’t)!

The Vancouver Mulligan

Alright…back when I read here  about an upcoming change to the mulligan rules, I immediately thought about its possible application in the realm of EDH. Specifically, I thought about how feasible and format-breaking it would be to tack on a ‘scry 1’ to the then-existing Partial Paris mulligan variant, and Dave helped me put up an article to sound it out for you readers.

Since then, I’ve convinced my group to adopt this variant of a variant, and here’s a long overdue summary of the feedback I gathered from my friends:

It made no difference.

You see, my group is pretty casual, and (I think) we’re all responsible adults who know how to exert great control over the tremendous power that we wield. As Sheldon Menery would say, “It’s much harder to not break the format.” This one line acts as the principal guideline behind how we build our decks. As such, none of us are racing one another to see who can win on turn 0; I exaggerate, but even then the idea is still there: when there’s no need to consistently execute a game-winning combo, scrying one card deeper to reach an optimal state becomes a luxury.

That said, having a ‘scry 1’ was viewed as useful because it can dig you out of potential mana screws – this was unanimous among the group.

With the recent announcement, we talked about adopting the official ‘Vancouver’ mulligan going forward. It took us all of ten seconds to decide that we liked the Partial Paris well enough (how much of it being due to inertia I can’t tell…) to stick to it, and the ‘scry 1’ addition helped to cut down the number of games being un-fun due to mana screw.

Tl;dr – We’ll still be sticking with “My Variant”. Go me!

Removal of Rule 4 – aka The “Tap Birds of Paradise to Produce {C}” Rule

Two words sum up my sentiments about this change – good riddance.

Now, I’ll readily admit that I’m not anal-retentive when it comes to EDH deck flavor. I’m a solid Melvin when it comes to deck construction, with just that teeny-weeny touch of Vorthos – no Eldrazi Displacer in my General Tazri Allies tribal deck, for instance. As such, I welcome this rule change with all my heart, as it banishes the inelegance and counter-intuitiveness of having a card that’s capable of producing any color of mana churn out one crystal-clear drop of condensed magical energy instead.

As a side note, I regret not picking up a foil copy of Sen Triplets when it was affordable. Oh well, you can’t win ‘em all, I guess. (Apparently I bought in about ten minutes before prices exploded – ED)

Prophet of Kruphix, Squished by the Banhammer

I present to you this young lady’s portfolio in my organization (of decks):

• A stalwart Ally in my Tazri deck mentioned above
• An Elemental in disguise in my Horde of Notions deck
• A cheap beater in my Edric, Spymaster of Trest deck
• An indispensable cog in my Damia, Sage of Stone lands engine
• A flash enabler in my Rafiq of the Many morph deck (my kingdom for a foil Winding Canyons!) and my Riku of Two Reflections clone deck

I was a vocal advocate against banning the prophet, and there I was, powering her out left, right and center. In my pet Tazri deck, I’d consistently tutor for her with Green Sun’s Zenith or Chord of Calling, her importance secondary only to Harabaz Druid. Inwardly, I resented this, but I convinced myself that it was all for the good of forwarding my game plan. Truth be told, I was silently counting down to the day when I’d finally take her out for someone more…flavorful, and less omnipresent.

I’m sad to see her banned, but I’m also glad for the excuse to remove her from my decks. It was about time.

________________________________________

To close this post, I’d like to sketch out my writing direction coming into the new year:

While it’s true that I took a lengthy break due to real life commitments, a significant reason was also because I encountered a severe case of writer’s block. Maybe it was due to how I overly constrained my content, but I found myself unable to keep up with producing noteworthy content.

As such, I’m going to remove the limitation I placed on myself.

I’m still going to be the resident judge within the team, and I’ll still cover any interesting rules interactions and developments. That said, I’ll also find time to write about other things less rules-specific – perhaps I’ll devote one article solely to rave about my pet Tazri deck. (I should, seeing as how I name-dropped her every now and then…)
See you all soon!

-CK
@ElderDragonMint
“Before I was a judge, I was a player.”

Lens of Clarity 6: I think It’s Catching

Disclaimer: every now and then, I run out of rules content to cover, because there’s only so much space for that in EDH. I believe I hit the ball out of the park in the beginning, with articles which I thought really helped answer some doubts frequently raised during EDH games. But just in case, I prepared a stockpile of ideas for when the well runs dry. This seems like one of those times.

I’d love to answer your (EDH Rules) questions, so feel free to hit me up at ongchinkai AT gmail DOT com if you have any. For now, enjoy!

Read More

Lens of Clarity 5: The Mega Events

Editor’s Note. CK submitted this a while ago and we editors didn’t post it in a timely manner. I’ve updated some of the language to make sense, but some of it will just feel weird now, a kind of “how we used to look at the future back in the past” type piece. But a lot of the ideas are so awesome that it’s still worth reading now.

This past weekend has gone down in Magic history as one of the grandest, if not the biggest, grandest Magic event, ever. Tens of thousands of players converged upon three locations across three continents to celebrate the release of one of the most coveted sets by engaging one another in high-level competitive play.

Read More

Lens of Clarity: My Playgroup Rules

As I was thinking about what I should cover for this month’s Lens of Clarity, my mind wandered (as it always does) to the two missing color identities in my personal Project Chromatic – Mardu (WBR) and Grixis (UBR). I don’t know if it’s just me, but it’s hard to come up with interesting ideas for them.

I was messing around with a Mardu Grand Melee blueprint with Zurgo Helmsmasher at the helm (hehe), where everyone has to attack, nobody can block, and general bloodthirsty chaos reigns. I was thinking of going for a stock Kaalia deck stocked with the iconics of each color. In the worst case scenario, I could fall back on a Mardu Good Stuff list with Oros, but that’s the last place I’d like to go.

Read More

Lens of Clarity: I Have Seen the Future

I look through my March Lens of Clarity. I have seen the future.

Read More

Lens of Clarity Two: The Afterlife

Hey there everyone! CK the resident Man In Black is back with this latest installment of Lens of Clarity. I’m not one to write lengthy intros so without further ado…hang on tight, everyone, it’s going to be a wild ride down the rabbit hole!

Read More

Lens of Clarity – Examining the Command Zone

Hey folks! Welcome to Lens of Clarity; the name for my regular monthly article, where we look under the morph overlay card to see whether that pesky 2/2 creature is an Akroma, Angel of Fury, a Willbender, or a Scornful Egotist!

…Okay, more accurately, we’ll look at how some of the interactions we love and hate work under the hood. I like the image of examining something by peering intently through a monocle, and somehow the art for Lens of Clarity appealed to me, so I thought it might be apt to use it as my column name.

Read More

2015 Resolutions – Hatching My Plans

Hello everyone!   It’s the start of a brand new year…that time of the year when everyone makes grand plans about the next 364 days to come. Hatching Plans

You may have a short list, or you may have a long list; on New Year’s Eve 2016, you might look back at this year and reflect on the resolutions you’ve made, and on those that you’ve missed. Whatever the case is, I strongly believe in having a set of goals to achieve, because then you have a direction in which you proceed. 

With that, I’d like to share my MTG-related goals for this year!

Read More

Page 1 of 2

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén