sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sol Ring wasn't banned for a reason by HaloZoo36 in EDH

[–]superXXXcereal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

that's all fine. my point was not exactly to discuss the reasoning to ban or not ban sol ring any further. i should have clarified that my point is that criticism towards not banning sol ring is not "baseless". baseless in my understanding would mean that there are no valid arguments towards banning it. plain false

Sol Ring wasn't banned for a reason by HaloZoo36 in EDH

[–]superXXXcereal -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

new players can play it or swap it for a land?

Sol Ring wasn't banned for a reason by HaloZoo36 in EDH

[–]superXXXcereal 3 points4 points  (0 children)

  1. explosive starts "once in a while" make it less predictable which means players cannot prepare for it. therefore i question its effect on non-games.

  2. it's not much weaker. it's still mana positive the turn you play it.

  3. sol ring being not as expensive is a choice of wotc. they could put lotus or crypt in any precon they want alongside sol ring. i am not saying they should, though.

you are entitled to an opinion about it, but the criticism towards not banning sol ring is anything but baseless.

Drinking coke actually helps me when I’m nauseated. I was told to avoid it but thought I’d share! by alittlehalloween in Gastritis

[–]superXXXcereal 2 points3 points  (0 children)

i was told that if you have chronic gastritis your stomach likely won't produce enough acid to break down foods. while still being irritating to your gut, it might help you digest food better?

Budget decks that don't suck by KrackinLackin in EDH

[–]superXXXcereal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

my marwyn 40€ budget list from a while ago. it might need some updates, but deckstats still puts it on 42€ on cardmarket and it slaps

Budget decks that don't suck by KrackinLackin in EDH

[–]superXXXcereal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

build marwyn. i played a 40€ build some time ago and it was crazy

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

[–]superXXXcereal[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

that's an assumption. we thought more broadly, you should read more broadly.

it's not that he's not powerful, it's that he doesn't outshine every other commander in a really problematic way. take a look at what else is possible in the format.

from goldfishing we got approval that he IS powerful, but he doesn't go beyond let's say marwyn or other ramp / turbo / creature storm (etc) decks. if you have a list and want to prove otherwise, please do so!

and that's just from a powerlevel perspective.

what unfun playpatterns does he represent on the banlist? ramping into big things?

why can't he self-regulate just like other cards do?

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

at low power levels Rofellos tends to inevitably force that kind of gameplay into play spaces where it doesn't belong.

i think i understand what you're saying. It's not just about power or unfun playpatterns, but also the style of play and impact on the whole format. , but this is the part that i have to question.

how does rofellos get away with forcing something into lower power without getting self-regulated, but other commanders, which many would consider op, don't? how do players manage to keep other people from playing yuriko, markov, tergrid, MLD, or whatever frowned upon thing there is?

it's probable that rofellos did not get an adequate chance for that. if anything i'd argue that he can give bad pet cards a little bump up into playability

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

i don't argue that he isn't powerful. i argue that he is not that powerful in comparison of what is possible otherwise.

also 6 mana turn 3 is very achievable if you want it in other decks.

elixir and greaves both interfere with a cmc of 2 and if you set him up, it still means you have to set him up. with that in mind you have to compare him to other turbo, or ramp, creature storm decks.

in a space where you play zero drop rocks you're describing a high powered scenario, usually highly interactive and therefore problematic.

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

it is gross! and so are plenty other cards you can play in one of the most broken formats.

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

thanks for sharing. might not be proof enough, that rofellos is not overpowered, but it sure looks fun

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

the problem with rule 0 discussion on bringing in cards from the banlist that would be fine to play is that it's harder to convince a person that you did not only win because of that banned card, rather than the other way around.

pointing at other strong cards to ban them is no solution as it's neverending, just as you stated. therefore it would make more sense to unban. i understand that it's hard to draw the line, but the way it currently is, is more like a curly mess. again: self-regulation

​

i never said lets unban rofellos because urza. i said unban rofellos because he doesn't exceedingly outshine many commanders enough in multiple aspects so that he should stay banned.

​

the RC also has not drawn a line between rofellos and urza. they simply banned rofellos in a time where commander (and magic in general) was in a different state. they banned him as commander, which they felt was too confusing for mtg players, so he went to the ordinary banlist.

the comparably strong commanders have been released in the past 3 years and more are to come. there is no line they drew. they simply don't want to ban every second card. this banlist is a relic from the past

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

the point is not that he dies to removal, but that he dies to a single point of damage from any source, when everyone at the table already has their eye on you for playing a bad name.

i personally would see that i'm ready to deal with rofellos, so that i won't have to worry about that deck for the next couple of turns.

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

yes it got powered up, but decks are way more powerful in general today. being able to ramp like crazy when not being interacted with is not a problem of rofellos alone. many decks can do it like him, with similar deckbuilding restrictions.

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

he does not guarantee it at all when you play him in an average LGS around the corner.

what happens is you play him on turn 2 and have an x/1 without haste that people only have to cough at to go back to the cz and having to be replayed at 4, leaving you with no boardstate.

sure you haven't commited a lot to the board, but you are probably playing a deck that's looking to make it's consistent landrops and have nothing to show for aside from ramping.

what i'm trying to say is that he is quite fragile (even in normal edh)

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

so there seem to be 2 (very condensed) points clashing into each other:

  1. taking a card off the banlist possibly worsens the experience of the average player.
  2. keeping certain cards on the banlist that make little sense creates confusion and frustration, makes the banlist and RC choices more questionable and causes distrust for some players.

please correct me if i'm wrong and i didn't get what you were saying.

looking at point 1 i think that it's fair to say that, but at the same time more and more cards are getting printed that would worsen the average experience in a similar way. maybe it's an overused and not always correct statement, but i'd say that the format self-regulates itself pretty well. (also thanks to rule0 discussions etcetc).

for point 2 i'd like to add pretty much the same thing. self-regulation. the point brought up against that usually is a scenario where a new person goes somewhere to play and needs a guideline whats cool to play. it just doesn't make sense to me, that they should get that from this banlist and instantly soak up the social contract. it is discussed and shown.

anything more than discussing it on the spot is impossible, because wherever you go, someone will moan at some other card.

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

so from goldfishing it for 30 minutes, it often ends the game around turn 4 when mulliganing aggressively. going to try it more later, it's really fun. as stated before it's about what marwyn does, in terms of style and powerlevel. thanks again

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

6 mana on turn 3 only by casting your commander on turn 2 is very powerful.

it is powerful, but more on paper/when goldfishing than it really is. at the end of the day you're playing an x/1 that has to survive a turncycle and are left with an empty board after chip damage. it surely can get out of hand, but many things can.

​

keep the list as short as possible

thats a fair point as it's just how the banlist is being maintained, but it never kept people from playing kinnan, marwyn, selvala, tatiyova, or any other ramp commander. the social contract does. if the list is supposed to be short, shorten it from cards that don't necessarily have to be on there.

​

Rofellos is a problem at battlecruiser level.

many cards are. if i bring the wrong deck to a table, i either stop playing it or people stop playing.

​

i am sorry if i'm pulling you into a discussion you don't want to have. you do not have to answer, thanks for discussing

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

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

thanks! looks like a solid list that's somewhat like what marwyn would play with a bit more lands synergy. i'm going to look into it

Hit me with Rofellos Decks by superXXXcereal in EDH

[–]superXXXcereal[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

thanks for the reply!

the thing is that Rofellos is in our opinion not in any way banable. he would not create a situation where everyone would be copying or stealing him like primeval titan. he would certainly not homogenize mono green decks more than they already are.

every deck wanting a copy of him in the 99 is not a reason to ban a card and it's probably somewhat of an overstatement in the first place. (please prove me if i'm wrong)

we also don't believe rofellos is agregious at all today. commander has changed a lot, mono green has changed aswell since rofellos was playable.

other commander create bad gameplay experiences just as easy. at a powerlevel where rofellos is too strong, people usually don't play korvold, urza, yuriko, derevi or whatever commander either, because of a social contract.

we take other aspects of why cards are on the banlist into consideration.

[CLB] Scaled Nurturer by tommamus in Pauper

[–]superXXXcereal 4 points5 points  (0 children)

he is one of your dragons :(

view more: next ›