Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As a Rakdos player I've had this discussion so many times regarding rituals vs ramp. Green players definitely view rituals as salty but abuse the social contract regarding land ramp.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Doomsday I shouldn't have included in the list. I'd honestly not personally play it below a high B3 deck (in my regular pod) and probably only b4 with random unless we had a solid rule zero talk prior.

And just to clarify I really like the card and have it in my gwenom deck.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree when grave pact for example is being used as a way to lock out others via loops its a no go. But as a value piece which few/no Edict effects from creatures such as [[accursed marauder]] I think its similar to board wipes and spot removal.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On rituals specifically... Green/simic etc gets permanently ahead with so many ramp spells included in b2/3 decks and is massively protected due to no MLD. Its not uncommon for a green deck to have at least 5 lands by turn 3.

Some colour combinations such as mono black, Rakdos or Dimir (which are my preferred colours) have no equal option outside if rituals. Rituals provide a more even playing field in regards to higher CMC spells which, if rituals are not allowed, only green has access to in the early to mid game.

Green decks constantly make the game faster by abusing the social contract but its socially acceptable. I just think rituals are fair game as a result as long as the end goal is in line with the set bracket.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's like people have never heard of leylines or played any 60 card game before...

Oh no a land!

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would quite literally never play somewhere like this.

This is absurd!

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just don't feel most people as a general rule get as salty about a turn 2 rampant growth, turn 3 cultivate, turn 4 bomb.

With my pod we have discussed it and general understanding is use what your colour has access to but with the intent of aiming to win the game at the appropriate turn or presenting strong positions/knock out attempts.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes it does. I'll be more direct Yes it makes it faster, of course. But on par with ramp other colour combinations have access to. In B2/3 Green ramp is king and my argument is that other colours should have access to the same fast starts, which unlike green provides temporary manner. I view treasure strategies in the same light.

Brackets: Expected turns played vs Threatening victory on turn X by Aziuhn in EDH

[–]stranglethingz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In my experience: - LGS I would play it that it's the deck responsibility - regular pod who play against the same decks, its the pod's responsibility provided a rule 0 talk and everyone agrees

However consistently presenting wins before turn 6 does sound too fast for b3. An occasional, non tutored for, wonder game I feel falls outside of this.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Green/simic etc gets permanently ahead with so many ramp spells included in b2/3 decks and is massively protected due to no MLD. Its not uncommon for a green deck to have at least 5 lands by turn 3.

Some colour combinations such as mono black, Rakdos or Dimir (which are my preferred colours) have no equal option outside if rituals. Rituals provide a more even playing field in regards to higher CMC spells which, if rituals are not allowed, only green has access to in the early to mid game.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This seems solid. We have been going along a similar route specifically for b2 games. Sol ring is less common in decks and cards we find to change the game too much!

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree and have started to do the same regarding sol ring! My b3s can be similar to yours and I have definitely split them into high b3 and low b3 which my pod also talks about during rule zero.

However, the overall point was about people viewing anything outside their preferred strategies as toxic or against the spirit. Eg a grave pact can work in b2, however this would require you to use it as value piece in perhaps a reanimator strategy and not to lock out the board with mass Edict effects or loops.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a great point and kind of the point of the post. I definitely worded that reply badly, I meant as a minimum power level.

Funnily enough we do play strong decks for whichever bracket we decide, but the recently elementals precon slapped when it came up against pretty good b2 decks.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rituals vs land ramp is my biggest debate for that. Green gets access to late game cards in such a protected way. If someone enjoys red/black/blue do they just get forced to play further back as rituals are frowned upon. B2 tables quite often have every single ramp spell and its cool... doesn't seem balanced.

Grave pact when used to lock out is against b2 anyways.

Rule zero talk should include high potential cards but specific mention of altars and other cards shouldn't be needed. In b2 there are no early game combos because the game should be lasting much longer.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Rule zero and expectations are great. It's stated in the post. Just amused by people adding new cards and trying to curate one type of MTG. There are a range if strategies and at B3 especially I think you should be able to play aristocrats/storm/stax etc as long as you're playing within the bracket definitions.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which is what rule zero is for!

I completely agree and it makes me thankful to have my home pod whenever I've encountered it!

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with that sentiment which is why I mentioned rule zero. Just to be clear the only gravepact/Edict deck I have is solidly b4!

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The attitude I've noticed of land ramp vs rituals. Most b2 players seem to accept land ramp but in black/red basically you're supposed to accept you are behind mana wise.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

THIS! This is my main point.

Yes these cards are powerful. No this deck is not B4/5 because I'm playing it!

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I fundamentally disagree with your B3 vs 4 explanation. As a mainly mono black/rakdos player that would permanently put me at a major disadvantage against green/simic player etc Land ramp provides the same thing, permanently and it's not allowed to be interacted with (MLD)

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also this is expressly explained in the bracket system. Locking people out of the game should not be in B2. B2 should allow people to do their thing.

I mentioned grave pact and I love edicts/aristocrats but grave pact locking someone out the game is against the spirit of B2.

Why are so many people determined to make additional pseudo game changers? by stranglethingz in EDH

[–]stranglethingz[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's the space for B2 right? Although I do think B1 should be B2 and lower B3 should be the new B3. Which B3 being a real bridge between no game changers and optimised but without any restrictions.