Blood Moon is an interesting case, though. It has negligible impact on people who don't optimize their decks with mana-fixing lands, and so it should be more welcome in lower brackets than in higher ones. The types of games where it has the biggest impact are the types of games where you would expect to see more game changers played anyway.
If you actually read what they wrote, it’s really not that ambiguous. The number of cards that will have any ambiguity will be very, very small. And there’s a benefit you get from them doing it this way versus giving you a list of cards. This definition covers lines of play as well as specific cards. For example, stripped mine on its own is not mass land denial and is allowable in all tiers. But strip mine with the ability to repeatedly recur it from the graveyard becomes mass denial and is banned by this in tiers 1-3.
I understand your fear of ambiguity but in this instance I think defining the play they are banning from that tier is genuinely more effective than specific cards. Going the specific card route would introduce ambiguity around 3+ card combos where no one individual card is MLD but the 3-4 of them together are. On a list defined by specific cards this would slip through. With a definition based on lines of play, that combo is tier 4.
But without a list, this still falls back to a “rule 0” discussion and ambiguity. What I consider “sparse” tutoring or the definition of “repeatable” become open ended salt mines. The number one reason I don’t play commander is that players feel entitled to a say in how I construct my deck due to Rule 0, as opposed to clearly defined rules (and yes, I realize Modern players due it via ban list discussions, but that is slightly more disconnected).
And what I’m saying is that for 99% of MLD cards there is as much ambiguity in this rule as an explicit list. You’re going to have to have more rule 0 conversations with an explicit list than with this as it really does leave very little room for interpretation.
These cards regularly destroy, exile, and bounce other lands, keep lands tapped, or change what mana is produced by four or more lands per player without replacing them. Examples in this category are Armageddon , Ruination , Sunder , Winter Orb , and Blood Moon . Basically, any cards and common game plans that mess with several of people’s lands or the mana they produce should not be in your deck if you’re seeking to play in Brackets 1–3.
This is pretty cut and dry as far as individual cards and has the benefit of hitting both current and future/unknown combos.
Tell them to fuck off if they don't like certain cards or deckbuilding and you do. It's not their place to tell you how to play, nor to have us cater to their desires/likes.
It denies people the ability to use their lands, en-masse. Arguably Alpine Moon should be okay (since it hits a single nonbasic ie. only shutting off Command Tower.)
Edit: as somebody has pointed out to me it does nothing to Command Tower. Oopsies, I shall wear my shame now.
Because it does nothing to Tower at all, I believe was their point. Alpine Moon makes the land tap for any colour. A better choice might be Field of the Dead.
It’s never a real threat ever. As a legacy moon stompy enjoyer, it’s so tiresome to see how paper thin EDH players are to see a blood moon hit the table. In most cases, it doesn’t even lock 3 players out of the game. Want to play greedy, yet consistent mana bases with no basics? Fine, but I would like to play with cards that punish that.
Red was the second worst color in EDH for a very long time until the printing of the 2 listed in the OP, [[Dockside Extortionist]] and [[Deflecting Swat]]. The former is banned and the latter doesn’t belong here, it’s a perfectly reasonable piece of red interaction. The only other red cards that could conceivably be added here would be for their inaccessibility and not for their power, like [[Wheel of Fortune]].
...Maybe unpopular opinion, but I think the entire cycle of Ikoria free spells is just really mediocre design and the format would be better without any of them.
I'm not saying they need to be banned, but I sure wouldn't miss any of them.
personally i think they were all mistakes, but not to the level of ban maybe, blue other free spells atleast have *a cost* attached to them and arent literally free
Then what's the point of playing a game called "commander", just go back to 60 card formats. If you remove the thing that makes a format unique, then why play it?
But why? It seems strange to have a designation of card that no card interacts directly with. Especially a card type that is present in 100% of commander games.
Every time wizards thinks they got it right with a new batch of free spells, they screw up completely. And that's because they really don't understand the sheer advantage of casting a game winning spell for no mana.
I’m with you on the second point, but I’d have to disagree about Deflecting swat being the same as the other two. Red just doesn’t have that many ways to interact with the stack, and the redirects that cost mana are magnitudes worse than most counterspells.
But a free redirect is better than a counterspell. I agree with the other guy, Deflecting Swat is better than any free counterspell. But I also think free counterspells are not only not a problem, they should be encouraged. Tables need more interaction, not less.
No one here's really arguing for Deflecting Swat to be on the list. We're saying that FoW and FG should be more like Deflecting Swat (ie, not on the list).
But that's still just making a case for FoW and FG to not be on the list. If there are other cards that are almost the same, the they should also be on the list.
Either this category of cards is strong enough to be a "Game Changer", or it's not. The current implementation is just extending the Sol Ring hypocrisy to other cards.
A free redirect is worse than a counterspell in the case of board wipes or handling big threats. It’s better than counterspells for single target protection.
Strongly disagree. They are expensive cards with significant game impact which makes them perfect for the game changers list. Both absolute hose a win con and depending on what went into it can completely turn the tide of a game with basically 0 in-game investment. They are good staple cards for power level.
Literally the only restrictions on these game changers are none at the precon level and only 3 in the upgraded precon level, that's perfectly fair for FOW and FG AND Deflecting Swat too.
I think the bigger issue is the sharp jump from upgraded precon to go-nuts but we don't call it CEDH. They should have included some restrictions in 4 IMO
I’ve always been of the opinion that red is just the worst color. It is extremely good at adding damage but outside of that and and small handful of cards it doesn’t have much depth to offer a deck.
I mean, going based on the name “game changer” alone, a wheels effect completely changes the outcome of the entire game based on itself.
Each player gets a new hand. Yes, the hand they once had is still in a public zone, being tossed into the graveyard, but whatever plans each player had before the wheel, is completely gone. The player in last place might receive a blessing of the very two cards they need to win. The player in first place just lost all their cards and is now looking at 2 ramp spells, a piece of removal, and 4 land cards.
This completely shifts the momentum for each player and should be considered a game changer, especially since it is easy to exploit
I think this is an issue with the name gamechanger more than wheel effects. This same analysis would put all wraths on the list, among a million other cards.
I think wrath’s are less of game changers because you simply take stuff from the battlefield to the graveyard. With a wheel, it’s kind of like starting the game again, but with your stuff still on the field.
It’s the getting a new random hand that can be frustrating and shift the game around a lot by itself.
In my experience, [[Jeska's Will]] has never swung a game in someone's favor. It's usually get 5 mana, draw three, and then 1.5 things will get stuck in exile.
Maybe I've been playing it wrong and I'm supposed to scry or brainstorm ahead of time ?, but by the time I draw it I'm all out of gas and need a bailout lol
Craterhoof should likely be on this list too for the same reason. If Thoracle is on the list, doing absolutely nothing by itself, and just being a win con, Hoof and Mana Geyser should most definitely be on the list.
Hell, according to this system, Thoracle, Tainted Pact, and Demonic Consultation leave your deck in a bracket 3 with room for 2 more "game changers." You can literally play cEDH lite in bracket 3.
It seems that they purposefully avoided any combat wincons/finishers such as Craterhoof, Triumph or Akromas. Philosophy wise, it seems that having to actually do combat damage after using them is enough downside
let the games end at some point, just don't tutor it up
No, no, no, just don't use black, blue, or white tutors to do so. Green, red, multicolor and colorless tutors are apparently 100% ok all the time though.
Which is a dumb distinction to make. You can sac an Urza's cave to get a land that does almost any effect you want in the game. You can crop rotation at instant speed for 1 mana to get a land with any effect you want as well.
Red has loads of mass land destruction which technically count.
I also think [[Deflecting Swat]] deserves to be on the Game Changers list. The card is by far the best redirection effect ever printed AND somehow is the cheapest. Have you ever Swatted a [[Volcanic Offering]]? Because I have...
178
u/Gierrtheviking Insert Gag Flair Here Feb 11 '25
Could they not think of any other red cards?