Is The Rules Committee Rule Zero Policy a Problem? | Commander | MTG

The Commander's Quarters is your Magic the Gathering source that helps you Command Your Budget! Today Eddie joins Mitch to talk about The Rules Committee Rule Zero "Issue".
----------
Support us directly, get rewards, and join The Commander’s Quarter’s community on our Patreon page: / commandersquarters
----------
When you are buying decks or individual cards, make sure you are using any of our TCGplayer affiliate links below to help support the channel!
Commander's Quarters general affiliate link:
tcgplayer.pxf.io/commandersqua...
Commander's Quarters decklists:
tcgplayer.pxf.io/tcq_all-deckl...
----------
Get your official Commander's Quarters swag at:
thecommandersquarters.com/
----------
Follow and reach out to us on social media!
Instagram: / thecommandersquarters
Twitter: / edhquarters
Facebook: / thecommandersquarters

[@henryjones8636]

That Saffron Olive tweet hits pretty hard but it's absolutely true. So many things about Commander are antiquated. The banlist doesn't make any sense at all and we have to stop pretending it does. Rule 0 is doing some seriously heavy lifting and the format is too big for that now.

[@sixtysixstyx]

Banning Golos was stupid really but the fact that they EVER thought stickers were a good idea is just mind baffling....

[@WraithOfSeral]

Commander became popular because it was a casual format and it isn't sustainable if the default expectation for every pod is that everything goes. I can bring a cEDH decklist to next FNM and crush it, but nobody will have a good time. If that was a common place occurrence people would just have to accept losing or turn to cEDH decks themselves. But, most people don't want to play cEDH as as mentioned commander for them is the fun casual format. Also, it would cause a huge P2W situation and a barrier to enter, as stores are in the business of selling cards, so they can't allow default assumption for EDH to be proxied cEDH lists, and without proxies EDH would become format comparable to vintage and legacy in price. As commander becomes more popular it will be harder to have a shared understanding of what goes, which the rule 0 is. At this point, due to its fundamental difference from regular 1v1 magic, EDH should be treated less as a format and more as different game mode of MTG for which different formats with different allowed cards could exists like standard, modern, legacy etc. are for 1v1 magic.

[@lVideoWatcherl]

Which is exactly why I wonder that the rules committee didn't do that yet. They could easily just make a 'recommendation power level' list, with ever more bans on them. This way, people could easily say "my deck adheres to list number 3" or something. And that would also not be strict bans, which you could uphold either way.

[@millenium1109]

Rule 0 doesn't work for anything other than small, static friend groups. Anything bigger than that needs to have something to default to so that people have a baseline to build off of. That way they can have plans and certain expectations going into games with people they don't know.

[@jacobesterson]

This is true. When people talk about rule zero not working I forget that they're talking about LGS' and such. Playing magic outside of a friend group is an entirely foreign concept to me. I'm perfectly happy in my small, highly refined casual-ish meta where we can ban/unban literally anything we want.

[@rhettknott9989]

Rule 0 is sometimes impossible to have when you have people in the group trying to actively not have it. My current playgroup has been being manipulated by one of the players before I joined. He plays pubstomper decks against their precons and janky strats and since i've joined I have been winning almost every game and I have been tryin to have a Rule 0 discussion to see if they want me to play something else, but they will say "nah it's cool play what you want" but will then offer me diffetent decks to play. Some people just can't come out and say they don't like this or that, and some people want to be able to get away with pubstomping and that's why Rule 0 is a bad concept to begin with.

[@leonandrews5746]

As an old-time player returning and just starting playing Commander, currently playing precons and its really not fun to play at my LGS. Supposedly its "casual rule 0" except we keep getting hammerd. Played fnm commander and turn 3 infinite. Why bother even playing. Sadly my lgs.is really only place i can play so debating whether to keep in commander. Looks fun when people play for fun not to auto win

[@diabeticmonkey]

That’s the main problem I have with it. I still play, but it’s only with friends and never at an LGS. Popularity has poisoned the heart of EDH. Hell, I remember years ago when we used to play at my old LGS and people used to turn their nose up to the idea of playing EDH. They wanted standard or modern.

[@Controlqueen31]

That's one big problem the format has: the noobstomp player. I write a comment to other person in this same video expresing my feelings about it, but the thing is, until that player stoped comming, new players never came back after the first time

[@lynxthewise7233]

I found a store / group that isn't completely obsessed with winning. I'm enjoying my games, now, win or lose.

[@ClayKBFP]

Exact same issue here, disliked dealing with standard or modern players because locally they would only care about winning at all costs or gaming the FNM bracket for the most $. Found out about commander, watched a few videos on it, got a rough understanding of the philosophy. Avoid infinites or win out of no where unless your in cEDH, don’t play solitaire, avoid constant board wipes. What greeted me in my first 2 weeks? Solitaire infinite combos out of no where with constant board wipes. Rule 0 is always a thing that’s being said to address that but because I don’t know every combo or commander in my local pools it’s impossible to have the rule 0 discussion in the first place without seeming like I just hate letting other people have fun. Which as a newcomer is not tenable if you want to form some relationships with other players to maybe not play at an LGS.

[@LightswornMagician]

Hot take(?): the Banlist should be an actual, comprehensive list, and "Rule 0" should be the rule that lets you play those cards anyway if you want to, if your group okays it.

[@chrisrushtonltd]

Rule zero is everything against the rules. Can I play this planeswalker as my commander kind of stuff.

[@lVideoWatcherl]

@chrisrushtonltd That isn't true. Rule 0 includes both going against the few established rules, but also is intended as a vehicle to _formulate_ additional rules for specific playgroups. And the second intention behind it doesn't work, is what is the claim - and generally, I would agree, just because if you're not playing with a fixed group all the time or discussing decks beforehand (likely also being in the same group), with more and more cards coming out it's nearly impossible to formulate a comprehensive list of cards everybody agrees upon not to play so all players have fun.

[@minispiel19]

True, it would probably be easier to get a group to allow a banned card than to pick on one player and say “we don’t like that so we don’t want you to play it.” There are a lot of pros and cons, and I am just glad I don’t have to make any of these decisions.

[@chrisrushtonltd]

@@lVideoWatcherl deck conversations are not rule zero. they're deck conversations.

[@lVideoWatcherl]

@@chrisrushtonltd Uhhh... what are you discussing with regards to rule 0 if not the cards you are playing _in your deck?_ If you're meaning to tell me that you discuss general strategies, then I would wager that there is still some simmering issues wherever/with whomever you play, because some players still might like specific cards or cards not easily fit into categories/cards some people don't fit into the same categories.

[@SkyFire2112]

They need to re institute the Banned as Commander list. There is no reason that Emrakul and Griselbrand should be banned. They are perfectly fine in the 99.

[@shadowm831]

I'm confused, every player I talk to said we just ignoring the Golos, Tireless Pilgrim ban. It was not accepted it we all just ignored it. 😂

[@madscientist2621]

I played a game of commander where a girl didnt even use a legendary creature for a commander. It was some squirrel tribal creature. It was a time before any good squirrel tribal commanders. No one at the table cared.

[@MentalCrusader]

An organized beta ban test would be fantastic

[@madscientist2621]

Bob the Skull has to be a reference to The Dresden Files book series

[@shawnmyer2747]

Rules committee needs to grow a pair and step up. We need ya'll to help the format.

[@MortonFMurphy]

To me, Rule 0 and the Ban list share a venn diagram space in the middle. The ban list is effectively a little pre-game agreement that you can expect when picking up a game with strangers. In my opinion, it stands in place of Rule 0 in an official context. I don't think really think Rule 0 should be referred to by Wizards or the RC at all when they have the ban list, which Rule 0 could repeal or reevaluate entirely.

[@asant1986]

Here’s the reality rule 0 does not work when there literally is a rule committee. The answer more often than not especially with strangers is going to be No. Mark is right in that it’s not practical for most people just going to play commander at their LGS. As long as you can point to something and say well thats allowed or not people will default to that.

[@cablefeed3738]

Which is why I love rule 0 cause it keeps the ban list small. The only people who say rule 0 sucks are people who want to ban cards, and I'm against that.

[@dimitriid]

@@cablefeed3738 That's not wrong, but the format would die out if all people had rule zero conversation 100% of the time: If there are no rules set in stone accessible by anyone then the game itself is no longer accessible by anyone: there is no Commander format, there's 'cablefeed3738's table commander' format which is whatever you guys agree upon meaning that every time someone might want to join you they'll need to know your own house rules and so on and so forth. Meaning if I tell someone 'You can't just bring a commander legal deck you have to review your cards and make sure you're compatible with us before you even sit down and play' I guarantee the commander popularity wouldn't have taken off like it did as the king of mtg. So I have to agree with the OP here: rule zero does not work.

[@asant1986]

​@@cablefeed3738 you're ignoring the whole point that literally no one uses rule 0 especially when its commander night at your LGS. Its as easy as me saying "the only people who don't want bans are the ones who want to play blatantly overpowered cards" we could go in circles all day. My point is we either have a rules committee that actually works on a ban list or we ban nothing at all and let people work it out themselves. The half measure solves nothing as the format grows, if Wizards is gonna have official support and events we should probably have a real ban list like every other format. ALSO if you don't want bans guess what you could just as easily rule 0 against bans then see how the argument doesn't work?

[@cablefeed3738]

@asant1986 If you want bans, you can easily rule 0 ban them. I prefer this way to rule zero unban. Also, everyone at my LGs uses rule 0. It's called a power level, discussion, and having multiple decks.

[@asant1986]

@@cablefeed3738 Ya I am telling you you are the minority saying "it works for me" anecdotally is not the case for MOST people. There are multiple videos on youtube with the express purpose of showing the power level conversation is totally meaningless because everyone's definition of what a 7 is is completely different. I'll say it again if you don't want bans you can rule 0 that just as easily. Why can you not also have this conversation on the other side? the solution works so well when it isn't your problem.

[@moonwitch5466]

At the two local game stores in my area there is a commander league at each shop- and each shop has a unique approach to how to regulate the games- the one I play at most the league has a points system where you get X points or loose X points depending on what you do and how you play- which I think does more good for the format that a “rule zero”

[@rquer7913]

Hot take on proxies: they accelerate the arms race if they allowed to the LGS. In your usual pod they are fine, but in the void, playing with random people, money investment in decks tends to slow down the power creep and the arms race.

[@snowmanO07]

Thank you!!! So many people cry when I say I don’t like proxies, and try to claim less-fortunate people must not be able to play then. In reality, expensive cards subconsciously help us know the power level of the deck. Printing off a list has a disconnect, and if everyone printed cards then it effectively makes commander lose it’s charm. 4 rhystic study, 4 the one ring, 4 arcane denial….all the staples in all decks at the table make the game boring and power crept.

[@TheMinskyTerrorist]

You touched on it with Sol Ring. Commander players (and designers) have this idea in their heads about what CLASSIC EDH is. Sol Ring which is arguably better than the moxes is fine because some guy back in the day went "Woah you can play Sol Ring in EDH???" and now it can never be changed. Same for Rhystic Study, one of the most poorly designed irritating cards of all time, but it's CLASSIC EDH so nothing will ever happen and it's an auto include. And it happens faster and faster. Thassa's Oracle is considered pseudo-classic already even though it sucks and it turned almost every CEDH game into the same game. Anything that's popular now has this Classic nostalgia image so you can't touch it, and it forms a feedback loop because it's only popular because it's powerful.

[@red_spect3r833]

Well, the difficult thing for Thoracle in cEDH is that the format tries to stay strict to the rules committee’s banlist, and RC has shown their unwillingness to perform bans catered to competitive, like with how long it took for the Flash ban to happen

[@lVideoWatcherl]

I mean, what does it matter? Oracle could immediately be banned, so could Rhystic. The only really problematic card here would be Sol Ring, because it is actually in every precon, but the other cards never are. So that's not an availability issue. If they wanted to make a better game, they could just ban these two.

[@red_spect3r833]

@@lVideoWatcherl Well, OP is bringing up banning Thoracle under a competitive reason, which I argue that RC tries to avoid like the plague. If they banned Thoracle, it would most likely have to be because of impact towards casual play

[@ethanwetzel7]

I'd toss skullclamp in that pile too 😂 value city. My playgroup has mostly removed sol ring because it's so damn boring and limits design by making it a 98 card format.

[@madscientist2621]

I just don't see Sol Ring as a problem. Generally if only one player gets a sol ring early, they quickly become the archenemy and the rest of the pod acts accordingly.

[@SoftwareNeos]

Im a new player. Imma just sit back with the popcorn

[@BrunoStuff]

Before watching this video I was fairly against the "Rule 0 bad" discourse, but you guys managed to make me understand the point. Why have a rules committee if they are not doing anything? And if they are, as you say, preventing Wizards from printing toxic cards... they should be able to talk about that publicly. It feels silly otherwise.

[@WilliamAndRose1]

I had literally just bought Golos to build a deck with him right before the ban came out, and similarly I had bought Hullbreacher maybe all of a couple weeks before the ban for that one. Having been on the receiving end of that twice, and effectively wasting money, I really appreciate that they take their time and don't ban a lot of cards. In an ideal world, nothing would ever get printed that needed to be banned. And I personally really like fast mana and don't see a problem with it: if you have a hand full of it, you are likely going to run out of stuff to cast - and if you don't, you'll become archenemy and the group will balance things out (or try to - it can make for fun games and good stories).

[@crashka5860]

I think the current "power level" system that is often refered to in rule zero conversations also prevents rule zero from being effective. A better discussion is how fast do you present a win and how fast can you prevent an opposing win, IE, my control deck prevents a win turn 0 with zero mana interaction but doesnt present one until turn 3, that is a CEDH deck. example 2: my ur dragon deck prevents a win turn 3 with cheap interaction like stp, pte and assasins trophy/counterspell and presents a win on turn 6-7 with large creatures/premanent based value engines.

[@king.eternal5980]

So maybe this is just a boomer take...but let me cook for a sec.. EDH is fine as it is. Play the game you and your friends want to play. The rules are set.. we don't really need a committee or ban list imo. If Wizards wants COMMANDER to be the way people play their game now.. then honestly they need to make a new game, but for the sake of taking money that's already on the table... Wizards would need to maintain a ban list. EDH started as a game of back alley stick ball between friends. For better or worse Commander is now Wizards premier format, Major League status.. idk why I'm using baseball for this but I guess that's where we are.. You can call your friends and get a game of backyard ball going. Maybe there's some RULE 0 and you decide that you can't run more than 1 base per hit or there's a 5 point max per inning. Keep things fun and light-hearted. Not so in the Major League. The rules are for fairness and to uphold competitive integrity. And, if you're going to find some random people to play with, you can all fall back on THOSE universally recognised rules. Ultimately it's Wizards responsibility to care for the cow they're milking dry. Either treat Commander as a supported format or don't. /rant /dumb.analogy I love the format and I'm honestly amazed that it is enjoyed by so many others.. but there's a general misunderstanding about what it is. It wasn't built with the intention for you to be able to walk into an LGS, sit down at a random table, and just have it work. It's a labor of love.. not a streamlined, well oiled machine. The rules committee can't really change that, especially with the way wizards have their hands in it. But wizards certainly can. They print the cards. It can be whatever they want. That said, I think that wizards would ruin it and we'd go back to playing EDH like we were. Not necessarily because wizards wouldn't have the right intentions.. it's just hard to stare at a printer that's spitting out $1 bills and NOT ask yourself, "wonder if it can print bigger bills.." especially when you have a mob boss shaking you down.. 😕

[@Smo-G]

Split the format. EDH can be like legacy and have no ban list and Commander can be like Modern with new bans.

[@IOSALive]

The Commander's Quarters, I liked this video because it's awesome!

[@blairbrook1336]

I’m pretty sure if they banned that many cards I would stop playing period.

[@quequechanbushcraft1451]

The real problem is with proxies

[@kynnethpaullin9218]

I unfortunately agree with Saffron Olive. Even I used it to not make rules when running a casual fnm commander. It almost always was shot down but that way I wasn't the strict judge, and the players in the play group got to decide.

[@norrock1]

If it were up to me the only cards that would be banned would be cards that involved ante, cards that involved stickers, sliver border, acorn,and any card that created a sub game. After that it's on the player base, LGS, and tournament organizers to relegate the format

[@apocalypticsword5524]

Honestly I'm not a fan of rule 0. In my experience it's just been abused by players to learn exactly how beat others thus making any level mystery in decks nonexistent. Or as an excuse to ban decks they know they can't win against or have just had a bad time against in the past.

[@crtikhit2244]

I remember when I opend a golos card just the same day they banned the card. I still got the card because I like the art a lot.

[@joshfarley7584]

There needs to be a list of "Approved" Un-cards that are Legal in Commander, with no Rule 0. It is such a shame that perfectly functional cards like Krark's Second Thumb isnt allowed, just because it's an Un-Card. there are probably dozens more as well, KST is just the first one I thought of when i saw the video.

[@joshfarley7584]

To compound this, there also should be "Commander only errata" that fixes the broken things about a handful of cards. Primeval Titan? Errata it to Forest types lands only. Lutri? Ban it as a Companion, the card itself is perfectly fine on its own. Coalition Victory? Make it require five total lands with all 5 basic types so duals/triomes dont auto qualify. Not to mention the potential of reintroducing "Banned as Commander" which existed before the WotC acquisition, but now it's not ok? gtfoh.

[@ViroVeteruscy]

Could always make a format called Salty and it's based on the 100 saltiest cards. It's possible that the list could change over time so would have to stay up to date if running anything major >w>

[@SiphiliSx]

Why is your audio mix so bad? I had to turn my computer volume up to 80 to hear you guys.

[@MageSkeleton]

in these trying times i find it difficult to discuss "symptoms" of problems like Rule 0 conversation which while is preset in Cedh has almost no impact on the game versus the "greater picture" the "source" if you will of why corporations like HASBRO and WotC tends to make decisions they do. And this is the only way i could think to explain this without getting political.

[@dimitriid]

I think the current committee would be fine if we rename it the 'Competitive EDH Committee' and the basis of their rulings (Or rather, lack thereof) is the basis for the competitive format. A secondary 'Casual EDH' committee would then actually restrict a hell of a lot more to prevent most of the major gripes that create rule zero conversations to begin with: Fast Mana, infinite/Win-on-the-spot A + B combos, etc. This would still allow for really powerful synergies and gameplay if needed but it would limit the turn 1-4 wins that make most casual EDH players moan. If you think about it things are already largely aligned among the lines of cedh vs casual anyway. EDIT: case an point yes, banning fast mana from casual edh means not just mana crypt, vault and moxes but Sol Ring would be banned too: anything that's low-to-the-ground and mana positive would go.

[@noneyabizness6094]

Just play better magic, if you wanna run your shitty pet deck, no one's stopping you. It's no justification to create a separate rules committee, or go about banning staples

[@shawnpanzegraf5642]

Not going for it. Cede the point on Fast Mana, and the same people screaming to outlaw fast mana now will be after the good green ramp next. I’m certainly not going to help anyone cut my throat. Will never understand why Sol Ring gets lumped with the expensive fast mana. The variance alone doesn’t justify the treatment. At least not IMO. If you don’t want to play with a Sol Ring, don’t. Other people like the times they open with their Sol Ring.

[@WraithOfSeral]

@@noneyabizness6094 But it's not just about "playing better magic" and "shitty pet decks". Commander became popular because it was a casual format and it isn't sustainable if the default expectation for every pod is that everything goes. I can bring a cEDH decklist to next FNM and crush it, but nobody will have a good time. If that was a common place occurrence people would just have to accept losing or turn to cEDH decks themselves. But, most people don't want to play cEDH as as mentioned commander for them is the fun casual format. Also, it would cause a huge P2W situation and a barrier to enter, as stores are in the business of selling cards, so they can't allow default assumption for EDH to be proxied cEDH lists, and without proxies EDH would become format comparable to vintage and legacy in price. As commander becomes more popular it will be harder to have a shared understanding of what goes, which the rule 0 is. At this point, due to it's fundamental difference from regular 1v1 magic, EDH should be treated less as a format and more as different game mode of MTG for which different formats with different allowed cards could exists like standard, modern, legacy etc. are for 1v1 magic. As for banning stables, sol ring is just fundamentally broken card and it's role is a fundamental issue for EDH. While it is allowed it's a lot harder to reason why other fast mana should be banned as they are the same thing in game and the difference is only in price. Therefore, it being a stable alone is a very bad argument for why it should be treated any different.

[@dimitriid]

@@noneyabizness6094 That's what I usually hear from Modern and Legacy players tho: to them even cedh is laughably slow and bad by comparison. ​ @shawnpanzegraf5642 You are answering as if I said 'GET RID OF CEDH ENTIRELY, FORCE EVERYONE TO PLAY CASUAL ONLY' You can just keep playing the same stuff except now named cedh I know I would as believe it or not I am often on the side of hearing about my decks being 'too powerful/Not fun to play against' all the time. I just have social skills to know the attitude of guys like you isn't sustainable: there is a time and a place for people who want such a thing as longer games, non-competitive formats, etc. None of what I said would do a single thing to take away anything you already like: you can continue to play as if nothing at all has changed on the cedh version of the rules and let people have *the option* to organize and build something that's slower, longer, more casual if they wanted to.

[@TC-sl8ol]

Nah. Fast mana is good for fast games. How else are non-green decks gonna compete with green ramp? I run budget rocks but chuck enough in that I can be up two-three mana on turn 3/4. It feels good to play a faster game.

[@DavidBearCoto]

I think no cards should be band. As a new player. I like the idea of delving into these crazy cards and combos

[@snowmanO07]

Crazy cards and combos are used less in this game, there are over 27,000 cards. There are a select few that are very well known that suck the fun out of the game though, and that is where the ban lost came from. Essentially, the card was a mistake and should have never been printed, or it was made well before the idea of a 4 player game was considered and therefore is broken in the format. Still fun to read and learn about how they work and why they are banned, but having a ban list helps prevent new users like yourself quitting prematurely from the game.

[@lVideoWatcherl]

That's very short-sighted. Because you will get tried of seeing Thassa's oracle Combo eben after seeing it once.

[@DemonaruMusic]

Golos was not the most recent ban, what? Hullbreacher happened much more recently than Golos?

[@seandun7083]

They were both in 2021, but Hullbreacher was June while Golos was September.

[@mmartak]

If you ignore conspiracies and ante cards, and cards that are no longer legal for cultural sensitivity reasons (-oracle:ante -type:conspiracy (game:paper) banned:commander), the ban list is quite small at only 45 cards. Two of those are "manual dexterity" cards that don't really belong in the game at all, which puts the number down to 43 (if you consider that Shahrazad breaks the game of Magic entirely, we are down to really 42). That's out of the tens of thousands of card choices available. There are easy cases to make for making the ban list larger, smaller, or keeping it at exactly the same number of cards. The Commander Rules Committee, because of Rule 0, technically has no power at all in the matter. I imagine that even if I went to one of Mitch's or Eddie's games and showed up with Lutri or Balance, if I had a reasonable explanation and a Rule 0 conversation about it, they would probably be OK with it, assuming that I showed up with the honest intent to add fun. And so would any game with a random set of reasonable people. I do agree the "signpost banning" methodology is flawed, and personally I have no problems with several of the banned cards (Hullbreacher and Golos, for instance, have never "broken" anything in my playgroup or any game I've ever been a part of). What I would recommend, if I were in charge of the format, is to replace the ban list entirely with a "disclosure list" instead. This means that if your deck contains any cards on the disclosure list, you have to show up with a piece of paper disclosing that your deck contains those cards. It would be entirely up to the other players whether that deck belongs in the game you are about to play. Every player should be expected to either swap out cards on the disclosure list on demand with reasonable substitutions or to just play a deck with no cards at all on the disclosure list. I could envision such a list containing far more cards than what is currently on the ban list, but the idea of curating such a list would be to drive it entirely based around what cards have actually caused problems at games.

[@Hapkins-le6xf]

I think rule zero is fine. The dream: you can walk into any random LGS, sit down at a table, and have a great game without having to have any kind of rule zero convo. That's never going to happen consistently. People have diverse likes and dislikes and simply banning things until everyone is happy is never going to happen. What does need to happen is education and consistency in how to have a rule zero conversation, commander players growing a little thicker skin, and commander players learning when to concede and start the next game. I don't know why commander players are so bad at just conceding when the game is over, I think it's because many of them have never played other formats these days and they'll sit through a painful slow loss instead of just admitting the game is over. Everything you hate, mass land destruction, stax, stealing players permanents, all get better when you concede if the game is over. Now onto rule zero. I keep things simple. I start with, either we are doing precons with gentle mods, or everything is on the table. If everything is on the table, I ask how quickly your deck is trying to win, and I try to match that speed with one of my decks. That's it. Doesn't need to be more complicated then that, if someone plays a deck you hate, request a different one for round two.

[@drpepper998]

Your rule zero won't work with an inexperienced player that doesn't know how fast their deck can win. Also wouldn't work if it's a new deck and your still testing it.

[@Hapkins-le6xf]

@@drpepper998 perfection doesn't exist.

[@yubeeeep]

Still praying for a day for paradox engine to be unbanned. The artifact hate has grown so much that i think it can keep stop it. I do play a emry lurker of the loch deck

[@Skyfysh]

I feel the same way with Emrakul. Removal has come a long way since she was banned. Not being able to run the queen of Eldrazi in my tribal deck feels bad.

[@supersam5802]

I think the bigger issues with commander is the lack of side deck, why can’t commander have a 15-20 card side deck and allow for wish and study cards to pull from it. As for the ban list side, they need 2 lists, a cedh and an edh list, each with different expected power levels, and the bans should be allowed to target cards being in certain zones, like lutri being banned from side deck as a companion but allowing it in the 99 or in edh banning golos as commander. The cedh list should only ban the most aggressively broken stuff like the breakfast hulk ban, the casual list should ban stuff that is ubiquitous like sol ring while also picking up cedh’s ban list, both methods have their merits, both are fun for different groups of people, both are valid, but they are mutually exclusive philosophies for what can be played and the goal of the format, so constraining them both to a single list just feels bad.

[@Hapkins-le6xf]

No one stops you from having a side board and modding your deck for the situation. Possible exception: CEDH. You might need to register a decklist ahead of time in a competition. If you want to pull things in from outside of the game during the middle of a game, there a two ways that I am aware of. Karn the great creator and masterminds acquisition both pull cards from a sideboard.

[@supersam5802]

@@Hapkins-le6xf actually yeah, if you are playing by rule committee rules then there is no side deck, you can have a pile of cards you keep with your deck but there are no rules for swapping cards for a match, study/lesson cards do not work currently, and companions are included in the command zone, which makes no sense given that other formats came up with a very simple solution called a side deck. Yes casually you can do anything, if you wanted you could make a card game out of different card games entirely if you wanted, but that’s not what I want to do, I just want 2 banlists based on competitive and non competitive, and to have a side deck with rules for how it interacts with the game. Thanks for your permission though, for whatever that’s supposed to be worth.

[@DELTA-Gacha-Addict]

ngl power level is a alien concept to me since it became a thing. But is this power level thing like a skill issue excuse?

[@seandun7083]

Not really. If someone bought a preconatructed deck off the shelf, it's not going to compete with the tuned CEDH deck someone else brought that's capable of winning turn 3 with counter magic backup. The skill level of the pilots can only bridge that gap so much.

[@KindKraken]

Way back in the day war of the Spark Era this was already an issue. It has caused alot of people to leave the game cause of so few bans certain cards wont shine ever, lower the power and you will see more variety

[@vittoriosavian9964]

Its quite the contrary tbh

[@vittoriosavian9964]

For me, its dumb to have a banlist composed of signpost. The game is fine as it is, and honestly apart for broken stuff they could unban ceirtain cards, where we already have them but unbanned.

[@blightdragonMTG]

I don’t think we ban cards because they’re good. We ban cards that are egregious and most egregious cards are in Cedh which allows a player to play pretty much anything. If someone is playing non-Cedh with friends or at the LGS and they’re running egregious cards that’s a personal problem and says a lot about that person, but doesn’t always just warrant a ban. Just my opinion.

[@rgoblin34]

If its not an Ante or a Conspiracy card. The card is fair game to play. This is why its a singleton format. The rules committee is just a suggestive committee.

[@Pinpoint3621]

Let's suppose cEDH is its own thing for this comment. It seems that most commanders have typical decks, typical interactions, and typical combos. This is all cataloged on EDHrec. If all the deckposting sites they source data from allowed users to include the power level of their deck, that also could be gathered and averaged. Currently, power levels aren't usable because they are arbitrarily assigned by one player. However, the more players that submit a power level, the more the average will tend torwards its true (typical) rating. The ratings would need new names, as, for example, a 7.2/10 and a 7.6/10 are very different. But who cares? The level ranges don't have to be equal. Letters would work well. If the advisory board completed this criteria, we could establish "buckets" for each level of commander, then you could add a "power rating" and "playstyle" tag to commander search engines. This would give players an easy way to check each players commander at the start of a game. This is only really necessary in pickup games. Established groups should already be prioritizing the well-being and enjoyment of their friends over winrate (and if you aren't, you may want to chat with a therapist). Some will argue that this restricts "jank builds". So? You can still have a rule 0 talk. Fan your deck out, nerd out over MTGs great art while talking about the thing you built. But, as a former Yu-Gi-Oh! Player, I think we as a community have to boycott power creep products. Wallets where our hearts are.

[@JulesTesla]

Here’s a hot question for everyone here: Why is the Rule 0 conversation automatically about “house rules” and “banlists”? The moment you find the answer to that question, you’ll realize why most players have the wrong idea about Rule 0.

[@seanwechsler6783]

I would trash all of my Mass Land Destruction cards if all “free” spells were banned. Aka, spells that don’t cost mana from a permanent source. I have my problem cards, and I know players dislike my land destruction.

[@IBeScrappyDoo2]

Hey, here's an idea why not have WoTC buy back all the banned cards that people bought to play the game, then when they ban more cards and have to spend the money to purchase them back they might get the idea of not printing them in the first place !! I love my Golos !!

[@OGTahoe3]

Golos banned. Only reason i know this is because i took apart my deck cause of this

[@sinchuf3367]

Facts, the thing about commander is complaints about golos or sol ring, golos shouldnt have been banned. But alot of people want sol ring banned, why? 1st turn sol rings? There are first turn artifact destruct. Just get gud

[@xternalpunk]

What is rule zero?

[@ohnosmoarlulcatz]

Rule 0 is "whatever the people you're playing with says"

[@stephenlewis6922]

I think there should be no card bans in Commander. Wild West baby!

[@wobblefoot7607]

Same tbh

[@cablefeed3738]

The only people who complain about rule zero are people who want to expand the ban list. Therefore, I disagree on principle alone. I also disagreed that there should be no ban list. This is the perfect medium where the list is small enough. I can rule 0 unban a card.

[@ohsohm02]

Lol

[@diabeticmonkey]

Rule zero was never that good of an idea. It can’t replace house rules that playgroups used to establish, and it leads people to try and limit their decks to an arbitrary power level system that isn’t as clear as naming a deck casual or competitive.

[@darth-umbrex]

I dont get the hate for bowmaster. As long as wheels and study exist in the format a tool to punish them is welcomed.

[@lVideoWatcherl]

You can have a tool to punish draw strategies, or you can have a nuke on a stick accomplishing the same. Bowmasters could have had _only_ the ping-effect, already making it huge, or _only_ amass the token. Doing both is just absurd for a 2 mana creature.

[@hemogoblin3076]

If you banned the top 100 saltiest cards, I would have to redo all of my decks

[@bionicninja9110]

How about I just make my own rules and do what I want and find a group who agrees ok awesome

[@ErasMcras]

Now the rules committee either needs to step down or step up, I rather the latter. We know WOTC wants one thing, to make money. What’s to stop them from banning commanders out from under ppl to push sales and keep prices high in the “invisible” secondary market. No a group of players making decisions for players is much more what I prefer. Because the intentions are very important. Do I think wotc could do a better job than the rules committee? yeah. do I think they would? Not so sure.

[@codysorenson4298]

People need to explain their deck better and can we agree that the 1-10 power rating system is pointless when everything is a 7

[@chriswojnicki1205]

This just seems like people telling others what they can and cannot play. Seems unfair and childish. Easy solution is a find a playgroup that wants to play or build decks like you do. No one should CARE how other people or playgroups decide to play. Worry about your own circle.

[@danilom.2102]

Commander needs a casual banlist and a competitive banlist

[@chainerscalleri6931]

Commander was created as you correctly point out without WotC. The format shouldn't be interfered with by WotC from a rules or banlist perspective. Don't want to play against OP decks? Then don't play in that group - simple. LGS wants to run a tournament or comp they can set the rules. Banned cards can be countered or removed they aren't unbeatable it makes no sense.

[@seandun7083]

You do realize the Commander Rules Committee is not in fact run by WOTC right? They are the ones who control the banlist.

[@FatstaxMTG]

Rule zero is trash at best. 1 should start with bad precons and 10 should be the highest tier that is not cedh. Therefor a 1-5 system with labels I have found work the best for my play group

[@timtauber5557]

Rule zero is fine for casual edh. Cedh has no need for rule zero, and hopefully never will.

[@JakesFavorites]

Rule 0 always ends in charging $70-200 for a card and then kicking them out for playing with it. There must be a top-down banlist for the format to be healthy.

[@cablefeed3738]

No, that's just your excuse to ban cards other people wanna play.

[@ceeagelevair3630]

@@cablefeed3738 yeah just like america and russia played with nuke sin the 50´s whole world liked that.

[@janhollrigl1972]

The cards are only that expensive because they are in high demand. If the now $70-200 cards are banned, other cards will take the place. This will then go on until every single card is banned. People who like playing highly optimized lists will do so even after you ban all the cards you are now unhappy with.

[@daveczerwinski8816]

I'll start with a question. Why do people want other people controlling their fun? Rule 0 is the only way to play Commander. There should be no banned cards in the format and every pod, every LGS, every online game then has Rule 0. Here's every card we make, go play however you want, with whomever wants to play the game your way. You don't want to play against Rhystic studies, pod three over there is the anit-rhystic pod. Hate Tergrid, those four guys only play dragon decks. This server is the all Thassa/DemonCon combo server, who can win on turn three first with the the lamest combo of all time. Talk with the people at your LGS, maybe a store wide Sol Ring ban is worth a discussion. But for the love of all things, police yourselves. Too much reliance on any organization to watch over your life is tantamount to self-imposed incarceration. Talk to people, find your group then play and have fun. I recognize this isn't always a perfect solution, or certainly not always an easy one, (insert I'm shy, or not good at talking, or have some disorder excuse here) but then find the solution that works for you. Stop relying on others to do it for you. Does WoTC and the Commander Committee hide behind Rule 0, absolutely. I think they are cowards for it. But then they hide behind a lot of things and make a lot of stupid decisions that I disagree with. Not supporting Modern "professionally" while claiming it's your most popular format and then making cards for that format that no one plays because it is unsupported as a viable "pro" format, but putting those cards into Commander decks, which is not the format the cards you're making are supposed to even be for is ludicrous. I digress. In the meantime, I can't find an LGS anywhere near me in a major city of three million that has a robust standard night let alone a modern night, but tons of legacy nights, with $4000 decks with all the alpha duals, but whatever, MH3 here we go! Back on topic. Commander should not have a ban list. It should have Rule 0 and it should be up to us, the players, to play the game the way we want, with the cards we want to use. I am sick and tired of other people telling me how to have fun. I'm a big boy, I can do that for myself thank you very much. BTW, I don't play board wipes unless thematically correct because I don't like them. Do I lose more games because of it? I don't know and I don't care, I play for fun.

[@DarkMagicGamer]

I’m in the camp of either abolishing the Banlist or abolishing Rule 0.

[@noneyabizness6094]

There's no issue with rule 0, there's an issue with whiney commander players

[@bpfoley89]

Ban Treasures, Duathi Voidwalker, Opposition Agent, "Tevesh Szat, Doom of Fools", 101st cards, etc

[@reachingforthesun]

5 color decks should be banned/unbanned for odd-numbered years lol (e.g., 2025, 2027, etc). It will throw creativity and diversity into the game for goodness sake!!!

[@mathieubrebouillet714]

always said every card over 10 $ should be banned.

[@janhollrigl1972]

In the rock paper scissors scene I am known as “the rock guy”, Never ever have I chosen differently. But it is very frustrating if one keeps losing to paper over and over again… I am for splitting competitive rock paper scissors from casual rock paper scissors so in casual rock paper scissors we could bann paper, so that even casuals like myself have a fair chance of winning. Now Irony aside, I believe, if at all possible, banns should be avoided and instead wizards should, as they already do, print cards in order to push the strategy that is good against the card that would otherwise be banned. If for example Dockside is “the problem” wizards could push strategies involving cards like Collector Ouphe and Torpor Orb. If you are the type of casual player who wants to play a Zubera tribal and expects that deck to keep up with the other decks then there is nothing a rule comity or wizards can do for you. You can only hope to find friends who share your idea of what a fun game of EDH should look like. What I keep hearing from people who want EDH to “feel more casual” is, that they don’t feel like the strategies they like are viable against sufficiently powerful decks. Trust me I feel the same way sometimes, but I fortunately have a play group where if one player has a fun Idea, sometimes the other players build decks on a similar power level if it is communicated in advance. At the moment I like cEDH and there is basically nothing I would want banned that is not banned already.

[@vittoriosavian9964]

Sorry but the rock paper scissor analogy failed hard. you decide to ban paper, so now every guy that comes cannot play paper ever, every rock deck simply just win and scissor never wins...

[@janhollrigl1972]

My point is, that for me an interesting game of rock paper scissors is one in which there are no annoying paper players who make my strategy of always choosing rock suboptimal. Casual players often (at least in my experience) don’t want cards to be banned because those cards are the reason for an unhealthy meta game, but instead have a feeling that it is unjust if their pet deck doesn’t stand a chance. Tergrid for example just is not a thing in cEDH but even tho it is not winning tournaments left and right, people seam to not like that deck for whatever reason whereas I heard nobody complain about Tymna. Now what are the intentions of someone who wants to Bann Tergrid? To me this means that some vocal casual players have an idea about how commander should be played and want to force that idea upon everyone else. Some Precons are actually very usable and if you decide to play on roughly that power level, you will find plenty of players to play with. The same, to a lesser extent, holds true for cEDH. The real problem arises between those extremes. If you play a tribal Deck you might not like a meta where every deck plays 6+ wrath of god effects and the same holds true for every other strategy that can be hated. The philosophical question is whose responsibility it is to make sure you get to play your deck as intended? Is it your responsibility to select a playgroup that agrees with you on what a game of EDH should feel like, or is it someone else’s responsibility to Bann every card that could sufficiently hurt the strategy of your deck? I just don’t see how anybody could solve that problem on a formt scale. What is fun to one might be misery for someone else. If a card has reasonable counterplay I expect players to play the answers before calling for a Bann. I don’t expect them to bann paper just because I am not willing to choose scissors.

[@TheMaddmattbeast]

Ban the reserve list

[@ohnosmoarlulcatz]

I don't think Rule Zero is as much of a problem as their philosophy regarding the ban list. I think it would be better to just flat out ban certain mechanics. Cards that require coin flips and dice rolls like Mana Crypt should be banned for the same reason as cards like Chaos Orb or Falling Star. I feel the same regarding cards that allow you to untap during opponents' turns or manipulation of turn order. It shouldn't matter if it's a Seedborn Muse or Prophet of Kruphix. Poor optics just seem to mean "this card is too expensive".

[@vittoriosavian9964]

And thank you that you arent in the rule committee. Chaos orb and falling stars are banned because are based on manual dexterity, something some people might not be able to do, nothing in common with coin/dice cards... btw have you lost against a deck with seedborn muse?

[@ohnosmoarlulcatz]

​@@vittoriosavian9964 In case you forgot, you have to throw dice and coins too. That requires manual dexterity. Not to mention d20s also weigh a lot more than a card, making them more difficult to throw than flinging a card across the play mat. All those Ancient Dragons would be banned as well. And yes I have lost to Seedborn Muse before, but not a Prophet of Kruphix. You'd be surprised at what untapping during your opponent's turn combined with activated abilities during your opponent's turn can do.

[@iansperling4363]

Bring back banned as commander list since the number of legendary creatures has grown exponentially

[@wobblefoot7607]

Commander players are just giant babies. Can't change my mind. If you don't like something then either stop playing with that person or adapt. Simple as. Why NOT allow 5 color good stuff? Why can't a card be popular and not be up for the chopping block. Are we just going to see the top % cards of each color and archetype and nuke those too? Fast mana? Dockside? Thoracle? Rhystic? If you don't want to play with a fast combo player? don't play with them. If you don't want to play against a stax player? don't play with them. Gonna ban my dual lands too? People DO play these cards. Not all play groups are the same.

[@noneyabizness6094]

100% just the casual commander players

[@poisonouschemicals2220]

I am tired of seening atraxa decks

[@Sakura_Matou]

And Teysa Karlov.

[@ErasMcras]

“Do rule 0, unless that rule 0 talk says you can play Iona.”

[@CaptainGulasch]

Instead of signpost bans make a new ban tier "rule 0 bans" cards in this ban-tier are generally banned, but can be unbanned in rule 0 conversations. Making rule 0 less about what not to allow, which people are generally more uncomfortable with, and more about lenience.

[@chrisrushtonltd]

honestly i don't play commander with anything other than a well known playgroup anymore. it's just not an enjoyable experience. too many egos to be managed, decks are too complicated, players don't know how to pilot them, and games are WAY too long. only rule zero i'm interested in is can we play with a 15 minute game clock, so games don't last much more than an hour.

[@bladebrave2866]

Commander players just need to get over themselves. The amount of discussion that's based purely on feelings and personal dislike is insane, only mechanically broken cards should be banned. If you are unable to perform that's a skill issue on your part. It's always the same people moaning at you for just playing the game and trying to win. Trying to control how people play, In a format like commander is incredibly bad for the format. People will yap on about how commander is a casual format then have a melty when you doomblade their turn 4 evasive 10/10 with haste.

[@Hapkins-le6xf]

The disparity between acceptable strong strategies and unacceptable strong strategies is something I find particularly annoying. A strong segment of the commander population only wants to play kaiju fight with zero interaction, simply racing to see who can ramp/cheat out big stuff the fastest or put the most counters on things.

[@vittoriosavian9964]

​@@Hapkins-le6xf then play solitaire. Jokes aside, that is ok. But you cannot force others to not play removal, because you with your Ghalta are threatening to remove me from the game. Its survival, i need to kill your galtha otherwhise i die and cannot play the game. Im not forcing you to, but i advise you to have some kind of protection for your pieces

[@zamorvex]

i love how hypocritical wizards are coz they say they hate proxies but then try to scam the comunnity by trying to sell proxies for over 100 bucks. and they wonder why everyone is mad. i would love the job to manage the banning coz i dont give a toss about banning around cards. if a card is a problem, deal with it dont beat around the bush. if u arent sure about a card, post the card to the public and ask if this card can be broken easily, there is no shame in asking the comunity questions. infact asking the community questions might actually increase their reputation because the customer feels involved and cared about. and not feel like they are being screwed over every new set. and then they say "but rule zero" "but u know what people do and dont like" its bloody rediculous. if you dont like 5 colour good stuff dont print 5 color leg creatures. if you dont like people playing a certian way DONT THEN PRINT CARDS THAT DO THAT. talking to wizards is like glueing rusty nails onto a brick wall then covering urself in petrol and lighting urself on fire then running into said wall.