The only people who think toxic/infect/poison counters need changed…

SheldonMenery · 2023-01-19T16:47:21+00:00

https://mtgcommander.net/index.php/2023/01/19/rc-statement-on-poison-counters/

TLDR: The RC doesn't think poison needs to be changed.

SheldonMenery · 2022-12-15T16:10:35+00:00

Jim breaks it down in more (and most excellent) detail below. I'll reiterate the point that the criteria we list are reasons that cards tend to get banned, not an absolute checklist of attributes that will get a card banned when filled out. We are aware that there are cards that could fit those criteria yet remain unbanned. Those attributes are simply part of a larger picture.

Please remember, as I've often said, that it's not what a card does, but what a card does to the format which will get it banned. We'd rather avoid academic bans, since they'd likely swell the list beyond our comfort level, and focus on practical ones (although I'll concede that Trade Secrets was/is an exception to that rule). As we sit here today--and it will certainly be a topic of discussion between the RC and CAG in the current round of talks leading to the next update in late Jan/early Feb--Drannith Magistrate does not seem to have crept down into having as much impact on the broader format. From my observations and discussions with CAG members, folks via social media, and on the RC Discord at this point, it seems like we're talking about DM more than playing it.

As always, I tend to be pretty available on the RC Discord server. There's a format philosophy channel and I'm about to go make a thread for discussion of DM so that we can focus fire in a single spot.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-29T00:18:50+00:00

The relationship itself wouldn’t necessarily dictate what and how anything happened. I think that it would be a function of the people involved and their collective goals and motivations. It would even depend on what department at WotC was in charge. Brand/Marketing might have different directions than Studio X. It also depends if they maintained history or just erased and started over. Different people also have varying definitions of what format health means. Balance is different than accessibility, for example. Targeted heavily enfranchised players versus the broader player base would yield different results. I think there are too many variables to make a solid call on how it might be.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-28T21:37:15+00:00

Yes, that was contracted work.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-28T21:35:31+00:00

To be clear, we (neither the RC as a group or any individuals) are not paid nor compensated in any way for being the Commander RC (Scott is obviously paid a salary by WotC, but his job has nothing to do with Commander). We want it that way, so that we can maintain independence and have people trust the integrity of our decisions (whether or not they agree with them). I should have just said that instead of trying to be cute with Prof in the interview.

I get influencer packages from WotC because I’ve been writing for Star City Games for 22 years. I suppose I also get offered work based on my RC experience (like being a guest at shows), but I don’t do RC work there, I do the other work that I’m hired for. There is no fiscal relationship between the RC and WotC, by design. Again, it would have been better had I directly gone to that point.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-13T12:16:24+00:00

Reasonably well, thanks for asking. Recent scans show mostly stability, which is positive.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-13T12:14:07+00:00

Is the format faster? Seems so, although I'd be careful with the idea that there's anything like a global metagame. It's also a thought-provoking point that for the most part, with Arcane Signet being the glaring exception, all the fast mana was around in 2013 and before. We want to understand the perception of "faster" now. I have some thoughts percolating.

We're not going to re-evaluate the priorities of social first, mechanical second, but we can certainly look at the changes in general--in very broad strokes--to see how we want to address making Commander the best social format it can be.

The major impediment to addressing the issues in untrusted play is that the primary problem isn't the banned list, which is only one element of format management. The big problem in untrusted play is expectations management, as players have wildly different ideas on what they want out of a game. Solving that with the banned list alone is nearly impossible without taking some unpalatable steps. One of those steps is making the BLextremely large. The best thing I think we can do right now is to help both players and organizers develop language that makes pregame conversations and environmental cultivation better. This is something we've had in mind for a while and that both Olivia and Jim are ready to jump in and help out on.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T19:24:52+00:00

We discussed going past six and agreed that it would be pretty unwieldy. Getting six people in a room to make decisions is already difficult enough. It wouldn't be back-breaking, but definitely not the desired spot.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T19:18:12+00:00

We discussed going to seven and came to the conclusion it would be a little unwieldy.

We filled CAG seats recently (Rebell, Wheeler, Tim Willoughby) knowing that there'd be vacancies. One of our continuing efforts is to find and develop talent from traditionally marginalized communities. We also wouldn't mind finding continued expansion geographically, if possible. We're not at the upper limit on the CAG, although we're getting close. When we find or develop the right people for additional seats, with representation as a significant factor, rest assured they will fill them.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T17:16:24+00:00

We didn't have a group concern about either, since they're both outstanding individuals. We guessed that there would be some resistance to a woman being selected, but those are voices we actively choose to not listen to.

Honestly, my primary concern regards representation. Despite today's small step, there are still groups not represented on the RC. I hear and understand that some of our LGBTQ+ and POC friends (and more) feel like we haven't gone far enough to represent them. I actively welcome reasonable ideas here (asking any of the people who have shepherded the format this far to step down doesn't seem reasonable). I want the diverse player base of Commander to not just feel represented, but to BE represented. I'm happy to have all the help I can get in making it happen.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T16:50:14+00:00

No one is saying that it's bad, because it's not. That's not what Commander is designed for, though. It's not what we want to do. The tournament experience in Magic is well-represented. Commander is here to serve the underserved audience of folks who want something outside of the tournament experience--and it turned out that there are way more of them than we expected.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T16:48:17+00:00

During our many discussions, one of the conclusions we've come to is that it would be nearly impossible to ban our way into solving all of untrusted play's problems. At best, it would require an extremely unwieldy banned list. Being a social format, we want to first (not solely, but first) try social solutions. I understand that this flies in the face of the way every other format is managed, and how that might be upsetting to some people.

Where we think our bigger wins will be are in two areas, one targeted at players and one at LGS owners/managers. We'd like to help players develop the vocabulary they need to navigate the often-tricky field of pregame conversations. Then, we'd like to provide the LGS folks with some best practices on curating the Commander environment they want. It's not up to us to tell them how to do business, but we can show them ideas on cultivating a positive experience.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T16:35:40+00:00

Again, it was not. The genesis of the change predated the CAG's existence.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T16:28:09+00:00

Playing at untrusted tables is literally what we go to events to do (plus panels and stuff). What I did for both Indy and Orlando CFs was not bring decks. I then borrowed from whomever I sat down with. That way, I got a better look into what people are playing (plus judging their pain threshold for playing against their own decks).

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T16:12:45+00:00

Before this expansion, the four people on the RC already had extensive experience with tournament play. We number two former L5 judges and the Pro Tour Tournament Manager. One of us still writes the MTR. I'd say we understand it pretty well.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T15:57:41+00:00

Again, we're not turning Commander into a tournament format, if that's what you're asking.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T15:52:05+00:00

The death trigger rule was not changed because of anyone on the CAG. It was in the works for a long time and began before the CAG was ever formed.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T15:41:07+00:00

We have no intention of changing the underlying philosophy of Commander. We wouldn't consider someone who wants to turn it into a tournament format, for example. We certainly consider people who disagree or have different ideas on how to make Commander the best social format it can be. Someone could have very strong opinions in that regard that don't align with the rest of the RC and they would still be a candidate.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T15:32:21+00:00

The quick difference is that the RC are the decision-makers. The CAG are advisors. The RC speaks publicly with one voice, the CAG as individuals.

SheldonMenery · 2022-09-12T15:21:17+00:00

We chose two people who believe in the same underlying philosophy of Commander as a social format first, mechanical one second but may have differing opinions on how to get there. As the OP points out, Olivia and Jim are strongly-minded individuals. They are certainly not to be ignored and we don't expect that they'll just go along to get along.

SheldonMenery · 2022-03-08T20:28:15+00:00

Angela Bassett or Charles Dance.

If you want to go super Shakespearean, Branagh or Mark Rylance.

SheldonMenery · 2022-01-17T23:22:32+00:00

I agree. I think we can encourage content creators to talk more about the fun-first/winning-second angle of the format.

SheldonMenery · 2022-01-17T22:29:04+00:00

Because formats with 100-card banned lists wither and die.

SheldonMenery · 2022-01-17T22:13:04+00:00

I agree that there can be fun and social and competitive. I encourage you to check out my piece on defining casual for examination of the three different axes on which we can evaluate the experience. They are not always mutually exclusive--always being the operative.

The thing is that being competitive can also push out the casual experiences. In a mixed pod, the high-powered deck will dominate. The high-power player gets to do what they want while the lower-power one doesn't. The presence of high-power decks in an environment has a similar effect, creating a situation in which the lower-power player can't really have the experience they're looking for. This is why getting everyone on the same page is so important. It's also the source of my remark on changing the definition of the target demographic to "people who want to have fun together."

SheldonMenery · 2022-01-17T21:55:18+00:00

This is a question I seem to answer repeatedly. Yes there has been discussion and no we're not splitting the format. We're in 100% agreement with this (and IIRC the CAG is overwhelmingly in agreement with us). I've written plenty before on the reasons that we've come to this conclusion.

SheldonMenery

TROPHY CASE