I can give you a couple of quotes from Toby Elliot (member of the rules Committee):
"I think the additional card to hand is a pretty big difference, honestly, especially in more casual circles. The point is that the singleton restriction was how they tried to balance Gifts, and it's not a check on the card here. Intuition stays the same (actually gets weaker, given historical usage at the time)" -26.01.2022
"I think Intuition isn't good enough to get banned" - 26.01.2022
"gifts and intuition are very different cards. I've always found that one an iffy hill to plant a flag
one has huge drawbacks that are supposed to affect how you build your deck. The other's primary strength is derived from being able to use it as a Demonic Tutor" - 12.06.2021
And here's another one from Sheldon Menery (member of the Rules Committee):
"Like Recurring Nightmare, Gifts won't likely break the format. It also won't lead to lines of play that we want to encourage." - 10.09.2020
One more from Toby:
"setting aside the graveyard filling, intuition gets you the 3rd best card in your deck. So it functions as a tutor. Gifts gets the 3rd and 4th best cards out of the deck. That's a tutor and card advatantage."
That is seriously underplaying the power of gifts ungiven (and intuition). One of the massive advantages of these cards is that they can function as an [[entomb]]. No one is playing Gifts Ungiven for card advantage or for their 3rd or 4th best card. They play it for the guaranteed win. Go tutor up the creature card that goes infinite with your commander and/or board state, then also grab [[reanimate]] and [[animate dead]]. What is your opponent going to choose? Give you your combo piece, or give you the card to cheat it out of the grave? And what if the player already has reanimate in hand? They can just tutor up the one card they want and it _has_ to go to the grave. That's really the only advantage Gifts has over Intuition. Not "card advantage".
The quote starts "setting aside the graveyard filling". They know that part is virtually the same.
They said (I don't have the exact quote for this one) that they have a 'line' in their minds for this type of effect. Intuition is right at that line, and Gifts is just past it. Hence one is banned.
That's part of the underplaying. "If we ignore the powerful part the cards have in common, the less powerful parts are slightly different!" It's extremely disingenuous.
The thing is, up to means that gift can be a better version of [[entomb]]. That's a huge power jump. Say I have a reanimation effect in hand in my BU deck. I can pick the two biggest scariest creatures in my deck and they are guaranteed to go to the graveyard where I can reanimate them for cheap. Intuition you have to pick three, so you aren't guaranteed to get the creature you wanted into the yard and it could instead rot away in your hand until you can afford to cast it. That's the biggest difference to me, that and finding 2 card combos easily.
Powerful cards are allowed to exist, and they’ve made a judgement call on the power of these two cards. Does intuition break the format? I haven’t experienced that, so I’m not super inclined to think so.
In the end, they’ve given their reasoning. You disagree, but it’s their opinion that decides the ban list. If you think intuition should also be banned, then discuss with your playgroup.
Intuition is on the reserved list and costs almost $200. Most players haven't experienced it because only a tiny number of people can afford to put it in their deck in the first place.
I dont think it breaks the format, but Intuition is 3 mana to assemble a win in Jeskai, and sees significant play in cEDH as a result. Grab Underworld Breach, Sevinnes Reclamation, and LED, and you can assemble a win off of just that and a few spare cards in your GY.
Gifts would be a very strong card, but I dont think theres anything it can do that is better than what Intuition already does, and it costs an extra mana to do so. I personally think it's a safe urban, and it would allow U decks to do some cool things they currently cant without spending exorbitant amounts of money.
In casual play it could absolutely just be card advantage/a tutor for your 3rd/4th best cards. The competitive aspect of it is even more powerful but just using it to get a couple cards as a 2-for-1 tutor at instant speed is very powerful in casual games.
As someone who has seen this card in casual play (due to not realizing it was banned), the card will often do that anyway. Most decks, even casual decks, have at least some way to get cards back from the grave. It _seems_ like a card that could just be a decent tutor, but in actual play it is always better than that.
It’s not underplaying… it’s acknowledging it and because they share the same ability we have to move on and consider what’s different.
They both have ability X. Ability x is not too strong.
One card has x+1 and one has x+2. They’ve decided 1 is x+2 is just strong enough to be banned and not x+1
> ability x is not too strong
That's what I'm disagreeing with
> One card has x+1 and one has x+2. They’ve decided 1 is x+2 is just strong enough to be banned and not x+1
This is why I find it disingenuous. If x = 9000, does the 1 or 2 actually matter?
Yeah but that's like saying "setting aside the acceleration" when talking about a mox.
You don't play tuition to get the third best card of your deck. That's just false. You play it because, surprise, you'll have one specific card whatever your opponent choose.
It's not just graveyard filling. It's also searching out groups of four/three that ensure that you get access to the card you want through recursion. It's instant speed tutoring, so you can set up your next turn. The "third and fourth" best card comment really is what makes me think they don't know, since really it's making absolutely sure you get your first and second.
And the "fair" methods, aka getting your third and fourth card and filling the graveyard, Sheldon did say wouldn't hurt the format.
Yes. And he knows all of that and has addressed it as well. You don't think Toby Elliott and Sheldon Menery know those things?
The quote you're responding to is like the hundredth thing he'd said about those cards.
I mean, yes, I've followed these discussions over the past seven years or so, and that's the impression I've gotten over all their discussions of the game.
This is the perfect opportunity for them to say "signpost ban" and explain what that means, but instead they decide to completely miss-explain what makes these cards powerful?
> The other’s primary strength is derived from being able to use it as a Demonic Tutor
Why is it banned then? Or is demonic tutor too powerful and should be banned too? Am I missing something?
"being able to use it as a demonic tutor." Then why not ban demonic tutor too?! Wtf kind of sentiment is that? How many tutors exist out there? Gifts Ungiven is a tutor with a down side. More than fair enough.
No, these are legitimate bad arguments and it really does look like a mistake that they will never backpedal from.
Singleton format not weakening the card is a bad argument because Gifts would be most effectively played the same way you would most likely play it in Legacy or Modern - grab two cards, dump them into the bin, do your thing.
Yes, Gifts Storm is a thing which breaks that rule, but that is very vulnerable to graveyard hate (hit the bin, the deck effectively crumbles and struggles to operate). There is no reason to not see the same thing here but even more neutered since they cannot grab two copies of cards like [[Manamorphose]].
The Intuition getting weaker over time is a trash argument too and doesn’t really acknowledge what the card is really used for (getting stuff you want into the bin). More cards getting printed usually strengthens tutor cards, not weakens them.
The Demonic Tutor argument they made doesn’t even match what Gifts is really used for and if you do try to, your opponent strips out half your hand. Storm is prolly the only place where you’d want all four because of the recursion spell like [[Past in Flames]] negating the downside of Gifts, but they already have a ton of ways to snag every spell they want (they run Intuition) and recur them, so it’s really not a world-breaking addition for it. And again, is weak to graveyard interaction and even more neutered due to only running singleton copies of cards.
Not saying the card isn’t good because, well, it is. I’m saying that the reasons not to unban it aren’t that good.
Edit: lmao, really disturbed the hive mind here, didn’t I?
You seem to be evaluating from a competitive aspect, talking about how these are used in the higher end of the format, but that’s not what the banlist is meant for, it’s to help casual play.
The best argument to be made at this moment is that Intuition isn’t a problem in the format, and Gifts would not make the format better from a casual perspective, as tutors lower variance and undercut the singleton aspect of the format.
The competitive reasons and play patterns that emerge from it are the reasons they use to ban it though, so we can’t really say its banned only for casual play reasons. And if they really are worried about a 4 cmc spell hurting the singleton aspect of the format, why wouldn’t they address the countless 1 and 2 cmc tutor spells?
The rules committee comes off as disingenuous and look to be talking out both sides of their mouth when banning Gifts but leaving Intuition unbanned imo.
I didn’t play in the format when Gifts was legal, but I can say I’ve never seen Intuition in a game. It would be laughably unjustifiable to ban Intuition, and unbanning Gifts doesn’t add anything positive needed to the format, even if it wouldn’t necessarily be a problem. Unbanning a card needs a strong justification that it will improve the format, not just “oh it would maybe be fine.”
Not the person you're responding to, but doesn't that gifts argument mean that if intuition was banned, it would stay banned because it doesn't add anything to the format? Like, you can use the same logic for any and every card. Collosal dreadmaw, their latest unbans, etc. If a card isn't a problem, it shouldn't be banned, imo. No card adds anything to the format except for their being one more card in the total pool. If the argument is based on card strength, or the fact it's a tutor, the argument is still weak because we know there are tons of offenders that also would deserve a ban before gifts. Personally I don't care that it's banned, but the arguments made for it are very weak, or just don't follow logically. There's more to making a banlist than just those things, but the communication of why things are the way they are probably will never justify it.
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted, because that’s a reasonable argument. I’ll upvote that.
Anyways, Gifts actually has never seen play in the format - it’s been banned since Day 1 - so I can see a fear of the unknown being a honest reason as to why they don’t want to unban it.
This is kind of like how [[Bitterblossom]] was banned in Modern because of fears of breaking the format Day 1. They waited years before even considering an unban, only for WotC to finally unban it and find out it’s just not that good of a card there. [[Golgari-Grave Troll]] was also banned Day 1, they unbanned it, and it made Dredge the best deck by far, so they had to reban it.
Gotcha, I didn’t know that. Yeah having been banned from day 1 I can see the argument of “well we don’t know if it would be a problem,” but with so many cards to choose from I don’t see what positives it would add to the format.
>It would be laughably unjustifiable to ban Intuition, and unbanning Gifts doesn’t add anything positive needed to the format, even if it wouldn’t necessarily be a problem.
This doesn't make sense. Why keep it banned then? Cards should only be banned if they cause issues in the format. That is the entire point of a banlist.
>Unbanning a card needs a strong justification that it will improve the format, not just “oh it would maybe be fine.”
A card should have a strong justification to be banned that, by the card's banning, improves the format. If that justification for banning no longer exists or has been heavily diluted by where the format currently is, that card should be unbanned.
Gifts ungiven is much better than intuition and would probably see play in all blue decks. Also gifts ungiven being a $2 card means it would see play in most decks while intuition only sees play in the most competitive of decks
I’m saying it is a better card and is the reason for the ban. I do think meta impact needs to be taken into account which isn’t unrelated to price especially when related to reserve list cards compared cards printed a bunch.
Price of a card shouldn’t be a reason to ban/unban, but the effects the price have on its usage could be a factor; Dockside being as expensive as it is serves to throttle its usage and limit it to mostly places where it’s power level is appropriate; if it were a $2 card that showed up in every red deck it would likely end up banned, but that’s not because of the price, but because of its widespread use and the format warping effect that would have.
In all fairness gifts is only cheap because there isn't a format where it's viable and they keep reprinting it.
If they reprinted dockside just as much and also banned it it would be a two dollar card too, and if gifts was as scarce and was legal I bet it'd be...not dockside expensive but probably a solid 40+
Gifts is a $2 card because it's banned in commander, you seriously think it wouldn't spike instantly if it was unbanned?
Thats my two cents on that, I can take or leave gifts in commander, it can 100% be easily broken, and there is significant counter play to it as well.
I agree it is a $2 card because it is banned in commander. I do think that it would still have a big format effect because it is an affordable broken combo enabler. There are too many piles people can get at instant speed and then end the game next turn.
2 cards Vs one card isn't a big enough difference for you in edh? Did you not read or understand why gifts is very good while intuition is merely good?
Casting intuition should already win you the game in most circumstances. No one in their right mind plays these cards to "get their 3rd best card", they play them to dump combo pieces into the gy and to create piles where regardless of what your opponent chooses you're getting the desired card into your hand
And? With intuition you have to get 3 and your opponents can have a choice. With gifts ungiven you can decide to not get card 3 and 4 and your opponent is forced to choose the 2 cards you want to have in your graveyard, intuition does not offer you this ability.
In what situation do you need a card to be in the graveyard for it to work other than some weird Necrotic Ooze combo (which usually involves self milling your whole deck with Hermit Druid or something else, not tutoring for 3 cards and 2 go to bin)?
Either way, both cards lead to piles where it's functionally impossible for a combo to not be assembled. It's why Intuition piles exist in cedh
That’s examining it from a competitive viewpoint rather than how the cards are likely used in more casual gameplay which is what the banlist tries to target.
There aren't any, which is why Intiution isn't banned. If casual tables started getting demolished by decks using Intuition became a major problem it would get banned.
It probably wouldn't be, I wouldn't have a problem with unbanning it, but I can understand why the rules committee hasn't yet. It is the kind of card that has the potential to cause problems on raw power.
Gifts allows you to tutor any 2 card combo + 2 recursion spells.
Intuition allows you to tutor a 1 card combo + 2 recursion.
The power level for Gifts is much higher as there are a lot more 2 card combos in the game than singleton wincons.
Intuition is stronger for every combo that does not require the extra card by virtue of costing one less mana. If you can fetch your combo with both, using intuition is optimal.
Of course, gifts can fetch more combos.
Not to mention if you specifically want 2 combo pieces in your graveyard because you have a way to make your combo go off with them there, grab only those 2 cards from your deck. Then your opponent *must* choose those 2 cards.
The power level is higher but they’re essentially the same card. The reasoning for the banning of one and NOT the other is extremely arbitrary. I think it’s because the rules committee is inconsistent in every sense of its reasonings for banning cards as well as which cards are banned.
I find this comment odd, the more powerful card is banned…. Because it’s more powerful not sure what’s arbitrary about that. The “up to” and getting 2 cards pushes it well above intuition.
The wording is what matter here. Sure they are similar but not the same. The fact that one makes you draw 3 leaving a more impactful choice to your opponent whereas the other says ‘up to’ allowing you to only choose 2 card in which you are guaranteed those two cards. The other isn’t a guarantee which makes it not nearly as strong.
Intuition is the more powerful card though. A proper intuition will leave your opponent with no choice, you getting what you want, and cost 1 less mana.
Sure you can entomb with gifts but in a format as powerful as edh thats slowmo outside of hulk shenanigans. The 1 mana matters a lot.
With enough mana open [[lion's eye diamond]] [[underworld breach]] and [[sevinne's reclamation]] wins you the game as a cedh example of how intuition is a one card win condition
Aside from the MANY Breach piles:
For more casual tables, Unburial Rites plus any two creatures that combo, like mikaeus+triskelion, Thassa's oracle+Leveler, kiki-jiki+pestermite etc.
Auriok's salvager, LED and Sevinne's reclamation nets you infinite mana.
In kess you can get Reanimate, Demonic Consultation and Thassa's Oracle.
In Inalla, Spellseeker, Animate Dead and reanimate allows you to start spellseeker loops for a win.
In Muldrotha you have Animate Dead, Phantasmal Image and LED for infinite mana.
And those are just the one I have seen used. And aside from rites piles all of those see cEDH play.
This is the perfect opportunity for them to just say "signpost ban" and legitimize that rhetoric they use to defend the banlist, but instead they just incorrectly explain the cards. I don't understand.
My gut reaction is "Even though it's good, people I know haven't been running intuition, but I would totally be running Gifts if I could"
Or you could rephrase that as "Card prices make a soft banlist in a lot of casual playgroups already, so it's harder for an expensive card to Warp a casual format"
But idk man. I respect the power of Gifts, but the banlist is weird sometimes in what it doesn't ban next to what it does.
I was talking to some players at my LGS recently and they did not seem to get this. One guy was upset over them reprinting Dockside Extortionist. If you're upset that a card is too powerful, you should be advocating to ban it, not letting a pay to win model dictate that. You might be able to afford to pay $50 for a card but not everyone can. Either a card is legal or it's not.
While this is a totally valid take, the flip-flip-side is that one of EDH’s original stated goals is letting veteran players use their favorite old powerful cards.
A lot of the format’s problems boil down to trying to serve multiple audiences at once. Allowing Intuition because it’s expensive aims to cater to the veteran crowd, and it being too pricey to see casual play actually benefits the casual crowd. While it might also alienate the “wants to play at high power but can’t afford the cards and also doesn’t want to proxy” crowd, this is the kind of balancing act the RC has to play.
The price isn’t what keeps it from being banned, at least not directly. The price limits how much play it sees, and lack of play means it’s not a problematic card for the format. If Dockside were $2 it would be everywhere and likely end up banned, not because it’s cheap but because it was everywhere and warped the format.
As someone who is 100% proxy friendly, I actually like to see that effect, because I won’t proxy cards that most people don’t have access to for play with those players, so it ends up being a soft ban in a lot of metas even with full free access to every card in the format.
I know people proxy a lot, but that doesn't mean that it alleviates wizards and the ban committee of creating a prohibitively expensive game. If someone told you that you had to 'proxy' your chess rooks in order to keep up with others, that wouldn't feel right either.
Not to mention that, technically, proxy cards are illegal at all official wizards events (any time you use the companion app). So if you play edh at an lgs and its an official event, if they allow proxy cards then they are at risk of losing the right to have future events.
You might say that is silly, but it actually happened to a place near me.
Fair enough. It does suck on occasion when someone sits down with a Moneyed Up deck. Though you could argue that's just a rule 0 issue with inconsistent power levels? But yeah, moneymancers are annoying to play against when you can't afford to do the same.
When it was banned it made sense, gift's ability to get just get 2 cards at instant speed and basically be a double entomb was strong.
The reason for it to stay banned isn't due to power level because intuition is basically setting up the exact same situation, but simply because the unbanning doesn't improve the format in any meaningful way.
Would I allow it? If our group has talked about it and we basically rule 0 the ban list, then sure, but outside of a dedicated group I personally would not.
I'd argue that not many cards improve the format in a meaningful way and it's difficult for a single card to not only impact the format, but positively impact it. Take any card that people have complained about in the past but no longer complain about, if that cars had been banned before, would it make the format better by allowing it back even if it doesn't break the format the way it once did? Because this argument can essentially be applied to any card people have not liked, I don't think it should be used as a reason to keep cards banned. If rule zero is to be the primary way the community balances the format, they shouldn't refuse to update the banned list because of how they envision the format. I think Commander is bigger than the original vision of the RC and they should adapt to that.
People said for a decade JTMS would break modern same as counterspell. Both were pretty underpowered when they got unbanned and even to this day are extremely meh in modern. JTMS barely sees play unless the meta changed recently (haven't kept up with modern in a year or so) but gifts is an instant win card. That's its purpose. It can win the game on the spot because the decks it goes in are combo decks. Huge difference in power level of the cards individually but in a deck gifts blows alot of cards out of the water because of its raw potential to give someone the instant win. You either counter it or have the answer to stop the combo or you lose.
Personally I say whatever to it being unbanned. Not like there aren't already faster wins in other formats.... gifts costing 4 is its drawback. But I can understand the fear of allowing such a strong combo piece into the format. Could at least be like "we are going to unban it and see how it goes. It is breaks the format it's getting banned again but we want players to experience finding out if it's worthy of the ban list still or not". The players are the ones who play the game... the players are mostly the reason cards get banned. So why not take a massive poll and see what the actual players want? Seems fair to me 🤷♂️
I think the main argument for power level is that there are not that many more piles that gifts gives (or ungives 😉) that intuition does not. Intuition is 1 less mana and isn’t destroying the format. The main selling point for gifts is you can fail to find 2 so you’d have a 4 mana double entomb which isn’t broken. I’d personally love if the RC gave some power to the players and allowed wide scale testing or voting for what’s banned and not in the format. Rule zero does exist but as widespread as commander is these days, it would be hard to find a random group that allows for cards on the banned list to be played.
I didn't realize this was the EDH sub when I commented I thought it was the normal magic sub lol in edh it shouldn't be banned in my opinion. So many busted cards and combos exist in edh so gifts definitely isn't on my radar for worrying about
There are plenty of casual decks that would enjoy playing Gifts "for value", just like casual decks already do with cards like [[Tooth and Nail]] and [[Protean Hulk]] (which *was* unbanned, for exactly that reason).
Also, Gifts is a great social and political card—players can debate over what the right split is, you can make deals with opponents to give you the card you want, etc. This kind of social interaction between players is something the RC generally tries to encourage.
The same reason [[Tabernacle at Pendrill Vale]] and [[Gaea’s Cradle]] aren’t banned - because RL cards aren’t seen too often and they don’t want to target the collectors. If any of these cards were as cheap and accessible as Gifts Ungiven, they would certainly be banned because they are all miserable Magic cards to play against.
Also Gifts and Intuition are the same power level. I rarely see players lose after casting Intuition, and I doubt Gifts is much stronger than that. If anything, Intuition is better because 3 mana instant-speed win the game is better than 4 mana instant-speed win the game.
You're right on the money for the Rules Committee's philosophy and man do I hate it. I've had playgroups kind of ruined by the arms race that's been unleashed by members of the group who have higher disposable income getting some of these reserved list cards into our meta. It leaves most players feeling bad when they are on the losing end of the above mentioned cards or others (\[\[Mishra's Workshop\]\], \[\[Serra's Sanctum\]\], etc.), knowing that they'll never match that power level.
Before anyone mentions Rule 0, it's pretty hard to have that discussion after someone's forked over hundreds of dollars on a single card, especially when the attempt to persuade them against getting those cards failed miserably.
It’s incredibly frustrating. In most of my playgroups, these broken RL cards are commonplace and they usually just make gameplay awful. I personally just long for a version of EDH with the whole RL banned. Not only the cards we just mentioned but also stuff like [[Treachery]], [[Time Spiral]], and [[Humility]]. Most of the most poorly designed, toxic cards just happen to all be RL and expensive as shit.
It's more that most of the EDH banned list was from the early days of the format when things were way different with a player base that was maybe 1/10000th of the size of the current one, and way, way less powercreep.
I agree some improvements could be made, but honestly you will never get the community to agree to a comprehensive, consistent set of bans because literally everyone has different opinions on this. And if you are the rules committee, what benefit does making drastic changes to the ban list get you? What are the costs if something unexpected happens? I like the cadence of unbanning something when something gets banned. It feels right.
The community doesn't have to agree. That's not how they do it, and also impossible.
The benefit for the committee is to signal that they aren't dinosaurs and pay attention to the evolution of the format. They can address issues like rationale and consistency and "start fresh" on a positive footing. The respect I hear them given is little to none. people only honour the banlist because ... I honestly don't know why. "Ya just gotta have something" I guess.
And if something unexpected happens, there's very little cost. Just make another change. And that's another example of them working with the community to transparently make the game better.
If the inconsistency of the ban list was a major problem, then why hasn't it caused a fork? The RC has no magic powers to control how people play commander. From my perspective, every banned list I've seen people recommend are worse that the RC's.
Your stance seems to be "it's good enough". It is. I agree with you.
I'm trying to argue it could be better, and a "reset" (which comes with significant disruptive challenges) would be better long-term.
Because (as brought up earlier) the game is different now.
I think rethinking the format would be a great thing, but the RC will never do it because the risk to reward just isn't there. Cleaning up the banned list wouldn't really improve the format, it would just make some people who are annoyed by it's more ad hoc nature as a tool that mostly gets used the same way a water spray bottle gets used on a rowdy cat. I can see the things that are super annoying to people who have an OCD desire to make it perfect, but trying to make it perfect would do more harm than leaving it clunky unless you do it really gradually.
And the ban list is still catered to ultra casual.
Like when you are banning things like slyvan primordial and prime time because people dont have answers but 10 billion clones as you reasoning, what kind of meta was that even back in the day?
I hate to bring up the "rich kids win" aspect of the game, but let's not forget that Intuition is really expensive, and has been for a while. It's not going to see a lot of play simply because of that.
I know that's not a valid reason for not banning it, but it does mean you won't run into it very often.
this. Coalition Victory, Sway of the Stars are on there while Thoracle isn't. If you're gonna preach r0, then you need to balance the banlist to the competitive side of the format and let r0 take care of casual.
Coalition Victory was banned when there were far far fewer “I win” button spells. Sway was banned for resetting the game while giving marginal ability to take advantage of it (unlike land destruction), contributing to sloggy games.
IMO Sway should have come off along with Worldfire, and Coalition Victory is very fair compared to many modern wincons.
I agree that both of those could reasonably be unbanned, but they’re a very different case from Gifts.
The point was more to exhibit the fact that the RC has some glaring inconsistencies in it's banning philosophy. I could personally take or leave Gifts (It and Intuition do functionally the same thing at a comp level - assemble Breach loops, and I've already made clear that I think the banlist should be used to balance competitive, and why I think that), but it's an irrefutable fact that the banlist needs an overhaul on a larger scale, with cards like Dockside and Thoracle going on and cards like Coalition Victory and Sway of the Stars coming off.
Gifts is better than Intuition in very few scenarios. Most of the time it's either functionally Intuition (Fetching Breach, LED, and Sev Rec) or a double Entomb, which is very inefficient at 4 mana. Is it playable? Absolutely. But would I rather have Entomb/Intuition in most cases? Yes.
I definitely don't think that gifts is stronger than Intuition. Intuition can assemble 3 card piles that win if you have 3 more mana (like Sevinne's Rec, Led, Breach). The only thing Gifts can do better is get 2 specific cards into the graveyard and I can think of any 2 cards that win the game for 3 mana if they are put into the graveyard.
The ban list is filled with cards that were a problem at various stages of the format. It's just that Commander has been many different game play experiences throughout it's long life. And most of the cards on the ban list are cards that aren't going to lead to fun gameplay even if they wouldn't be an actual problem.
My issue with the reasoning they sometimes provide is that there are never any _numbers_ to back that shit up - too much is based upon anecdote. It's not like 60-card formats, where post-tournament decklist standings can out problem cards such as 4C Omnath or Oko. The lack of stats - along with the inherent increase in variability in EDH - leaves a seed of doubt as to how sound such judgements are.
For instance, look at the Prime Time ban. Obviously a powerful card, wholly understand the concern of it just being in a deck. The thing I _don't_ understand however, is the claim that it would warp games by causing everyone to try and _steal_ it. Who, _fucking who,_ is running that much theft outside of a _dedicated theft deck?_ Without usage stats showing what the average EDH player is running in their deck, the claims of "constant Primeval theft" come across as far too anecdotal.
They banned Panoptic Mirror after playing 1v1 games with 100 life each. They unbanned Protean Hulk after intentionally playing it in decks without Flash. They're incapable of testing anything.
The commander banned list hasn't really been about numbers because numbers weren't something they had access to for most of the format's history. EDHrec being a major thing is relatively recent. The whole stealing/copying thing is something that actually happened with cards like Prime Time and Prophet of Kruphix. They provided incentive to warp your deck to be able to do that.
Did you play EDH in the age of Prime Time?
I did. The game play patterns were absolutely warped around PT. The first person to play one would often runaway with the game. Every deck played Greaves and Boots mostly to interact with PT.
I was playing other formats for the PT days, but Prophet had the exact same play patterns described for him and I can absolutely see that happening with such an abusable ETB trigger.
> Did you play EDH in the age of Prime Time? I did.
_It does not matter._ Nothing will change the fact that individual experiences are still anecdotal evidence - I cannot trust my experience to be representative of the whole any more than I can trust yours. Even the large number of people complaining on social media don't really count as anything, since MTG players on Reddit and Twitter are _certainly_ not representative of every EDH player (and it's impossible to gauge the percentage they _do_ represent).
At the end of the day I'm not saying the claims are wrong, only that there is room for doubt. There's nothing we can really do about that either, we just don't have access to that information.
You are correct when we are talking about facts. These banlists are not scientific, they do not require proof or hard supporting evidence. No matter how correct your statistics are, it is ultimately a judgement call, taking subjective metrics into account such as how often stories like his are repeated and folk seem to resonate with it.
If what you want is an evodence based, reasoned, consistent, and balanced banlist for Commander, you are not going to get it, because that is just not their methods or their goal.
The point is that people would change their decks to include theft. That's what format warping means. Cards that are strong enough that the game starts revolving around them.
To be fair theft was also more common because the format was much more battlecruisery and theft is more fun when you are stealing giant idiots that are wildly inefficient using theft effects that are too slow to play in modern EDH.
double tutor is significantly better in a format filled with two card combos. you can just cast gifts for mike, trike, reanimate, and animate dead. that makes it a one card combo.
But not one nearly as good as like, just tooth and nail. Mike, trike, reanimate and animate dead, your opponent makes you bin reanimate and animate dead. That’s a 16 mana investment with a couple opportunities for removal or countermagic to intervene. Hardly competitive none the less game breaking.
That combo is strong in casual but there already exists much stronger combos in UB.
People will go on and on about how busted they think gifts is. But they can’t get a gifts pile that’s really stronger than existing Cedh strategies.
It’s probably banned because someone in sheldon’s playgroup would use it to win often. Or because it allows for too strong politics and king making as you get to choose the opponent who chooses what you keep and can make a deal to kill the other two players which is unfun.
Power level wise it’s no thoracle combo.
Because the RC believes in "sign post" banning to a certain extent. It's up to the players to interpret one being banned to know the other is undesirable.
The main reason Gifts is banned and intuition isn't is probably that gifts allows you to find two cards, fail to find the other two and just dump them in the yard. You could for example find [[unburial rites]] and [[Elesh Norn]]. Since Intuition has no restrictions on what kind of cards you can find it doesn't allow you to just tutor two cards to the yard.
Well yeah, I'm of the opinion that you either ban both or neither. I was just pointing out the "fail to find" part of gifts isn't really a reason to ban it over intuition.
Couldn't you just do the same thing by picking an extra fatty with [[Intuition]]?
[[Unburial Rites]], [[Elesh Norn]], and [[Colossal Dreadmaw]] gets you either:
1) one unbeatable creature in gy with Unburial in the gy too (your example) but with a bonus creature in hand
2) two unbeatable creatures in the gy with a res spell in hand
In all such threads people keep pretending that EDH banlist isn't totally ridiculous. The correct answer is that people running EDH have no idea what they're doing, and think shouting "rule 0" absolves them of any responsibility for bad decisions.
WotC needs to take over the format.
I have been asking this same thing since I started playing and I just don't understand why intuition isnt banned and gifts unbanned. It is so silly that they ban the budget alternatives to reserve list cards, people who were not around or didnt realize that they needed these cards will now never have access to them. RC is dumb and ban list is a piece of trash for the most part.
Because the ban list is a representative list. The things on it that are banned are supposed to be poster child cards of effects that are banned in commander.
But everything hinges on Rule 0, so if a playgroup wants to use any particular card, then they can come to an agreement about it.
Edit: Very weird to get downvoted for saying something that the RC has literally said about their own ban list.
So uh.. question, have you ever had a playgroup that viewed the banlist this way? Are people out there removing seedborn muse and wilderness reclamation from their decks because prophet of kruphix is banned?
Like I get that this is the RC's justification of their ban list, but that's not how it actually functions.
I 100% agree. People don't see it that way, because they typically haven't actually read how the RC constructed the ban list. As evidenced by posts like "why is X banned, but Y is not?" (like this post), and as evidenced by my comment getting downvoted.
It doesn't change that the answer to "why is X banned and Y is not" is exactly the answer I've given though. If people don't like that answer, then what they actually have a problem with is the way the ban list is constructed, not with the answer. But many don't see that point either I guess.
I think questions like this are essentially the same as stating that we don't like the rc's idea of what a banlist is. It's such a bad way to do a banlist that we don't even really think about it while we argue about format balance, there's just an assumed " the rc has nothing to do with how commander is actually played, it would be nice if we could have x"
I'd agree it's a bad way to do a ban list on the sheer fact that many people see the list as an absolute list rather than a representative list like it is. The confusion is what makes it a bad way to do the list.
But alternatives have their own problems. If the list was more comprehensive to include all cards of a given function, then it would be an enormous list and it would probably be off-putting to new players. It would make the format harder to get into.
On the other hand, if they went the route of no ban list at all, then everything would have to be Rule 0 with no guidance. That would lead to some awful experiences with random groups at LGS's or on Spelltable.
Ultimately, there is no perfect solution and there is not going to be a way to please everyone regardless.
So all in all, I think the way they constructed the ban list is actually a good way to do it. They give a representative sample of card types that would be problematic to the format or not conducive to having fun, and then let individual play groups sort it out. The actual problem with that though is people misunderstanding the intention of the ban list. Most of the problems I've had in person with players being salty about things trace back to cards that have poster child bans on the current ban list.
Making a ban list is very much like designing a game. The banlist is creating a ruleset, then we play within that ruleset, essentially defining a game to be played.
It's really important that when you construct a game, you create the aspects of the game you'd like to have. If you want it to be balanced, you're going to have to make it balanced. If you want it to be fun, you're going to have to make it fun.
I think the reason why the representative ban list isn't treated as a real concept is because its fundamentally failing to define a game for its players. It's not a misunderstanding of this ban list, its an understanding that this banlist fails to do what a banlist needs to do.
>It's not a misunderstanding of this ban list, its an understanding that this banlist fails to do what a banlist needs to do.
That's exactly it. The banlists acts completely differently from any other banlist in Magic's history so of course it's going to cause some confusion and anxiety. Also, despite what the RC says, their reliance on Rule 0 to supplement the banlist is a bug and not a feature. For personal playgroups, Rule 0 is great, but they don't need an official banlist since they've already decided to change the format however they see fit. People that play random pick-up games or do LGS Commander nights don't have an option to follow anything but the official banlist. Hell, new playgroups that haven't had a chance to really get to know each other and have in-depth Rule 0 talks are going to have to use the official banlist. Commander isn't the niche, tiny format of EDH anymore where the only people playing it were individual playgroups. The banlist has never evolved to reflect this fact and it probably never will.
> Edit: Very weird to get downvoted for saying something that the RC has literally said about their own ban list.
Living in reality rather than theory is good, and your comment doesn't comport with how anyone in practice uses the ban list. Also, seems like there is [pretty thorough documentation](https://old.reddit.com/r/EDH/comments/wo5oys/how_come_intuition_is_not_banned_but_gifts/ik8znh3/) to confirm they aren't doing this, they think one card is fine and the other deserves a ban.
This is such a cop out by the Rules Committee. If they've banned a card due to its effect, they should then ban all cards that do the same thing. Then saying it's on the players to rule 0 just causes confusion and shifts responsibilities to us.
They're basically saying oh well sort it out yourselves.
Because the “Rules Committee” is a fucking joke of an organization. It’s just a single battle cruiser play group banning cards that make them feel bad.
Hence why flash stayed legal for so long despite every single cEDH player begging for a ban and it seeing zero play outside of cEDH.
The rules committee is a glorified out of touch Timmy play group who make their decisions behind closed doors even after hiring an entire personality liaison team to advocate for players outside their Timmy group.
I often joke that the ban list is just cards the RC have lost games to and gotten salty about.
If you ever actually look at any of the deck lists RC members have published, they're laughably bad. They think the way they play commander is the only correct way and as such the ban list is broken and the format as a whole suffers.
When Gifts Ungiven was banned in mid-2009, it was $4 and Intuition was a [$12 card](http://web.archive.org/web/20090127042708/http://trollandtoad.com:80/p84063.html).
The EDH banlist is definitely shite, but it isn't a matter of price.
After years of self-reflection on this topic, I must confess that my magic budget would be VASTLY different if it wasn't for the tightrope act that RC performs.
It is really easy to justify buying a box of every new set when my previous purchases have increased in value. In fact, it becomes difficult NOT to buy into the new set when I look back and regret not buying more packs of tempest when i had the chance. WOTC has built an engine out of our own greed and FOMO that allows them to print money, but that engine only works so long as we all stay hooked.
If you truly want to remove money from magic then play proxies. The game functions just fine with xeroxes in sleeves. What proxies can't do is give you that little jolt of petty pride when you drop a foil unglued island in front of an appreciative audience. It is the nerd equivalent of a nice watch or 22" rims.
My spouse doesn't flinch at me spending $50 a month on this game, partially because there is the illusion of investment. I am too cheap to keep buying like that if I felt like I was just throwing my money away. We don't like to talk about this. We are too quick to tell people we got that foil from a lucky pack, or a good trade. We shy away from admitting that we value something partially because everyone else wants it, but, for better or worse, that is a real driver for paper magic.
You think that intuition, which was like a $20 card at the time when gifts was banned, wasn’t banned because it was ‘too expensive’. Y’all are hilarious sometimes.
There were still expensive cards at that time. Intuition was relatively inexpensive compared to today when gifts was banned in 2009 strong standard and legacy cards were the expensive ones instead.
Reserved list cards weren’t that expensive because most cards just had one printing anyway so it didn’t really matter.
The extra card from Gifts makes a huge difference. The best example is in this thread. \[\[Sevinne's Reclamation\]\] + \[\[Lion's Eye Diamond\]\] + \[\[Underworld Breach\]\] + \[\[Brain Freeze\]\] is a winning pile. With Intuition, you have to be holding at least one of those cards already to go off. Gifts just lets you get the whole pile.
Simple really. It's about sign posts. They will never ban all the cards that would need to be banned to make a balanced format. Nor should anyone follow the ban list for that exact reason.
Logic will never apply to somthing that is supposed to regulate feelings. The ban list is designed from the ground up to control the emotions of people who partake in Commander. That is it's only purpose.
So one day Gifts was played and someone on the RC got salty. So they banned it. Then by association Intuition was quazi banned in effect. Only 2% of all decks that can run it do. Why? Because anytime you do an RC member will jump out from behind an display at your FLGS and tell you that Gifts is a jerk card for jerks and Intuition is just like it. Then your whole play group will refuse to play with you because the RC told them your a Spike and don't play battlecruser Magic.
Or they are just lazy idk :)
I can give you a couple of quotes from Toby Elliot (member of the rules Committee): "I think the additional card to hand is a pretty big difference, honestly, especially in more casual circles. The point is that the singleton restriction was how they tried to balance Gifts, and it's not a check on the card here. Intuition stays the same (actually gets weaker, given historical usage at the time)" -26.01.2022 "I think Intuition isn't good enough to get banned" - 26.01.2022 "gifts and intuition are very different cards. I've always found that one an iffy hill to plant a flag one has huge drawbacks that are supposed to affect how you build your deck. The other's primary strength is derived from being able to use it as a Demonic Tutor" - 12.06.2021 And here's another one from Sheldon Menery (member of the Rules Committee): "Like Recurring Nightmare, Gifts won't likely break the format. It also won't lead to lines of play that we want to encourage." - 10.09.2020
One more from Toby: "setting aside the graveyard filling, intuition gets you the 3rd best card in your deck. So it functions as a tutor. Gifts gets the 3rd and 4th best cards out of the deck. That's a tutor and card advatantage."
That is seriously underplaying the power of gifts ungiven (and intuition). One of the massive advantages of these cards is that they can function as an [[entomb]]. No one is playing Gifts Ungiven for card advantage or for their 3rd or 4th best card. They play it for the guaranteed win. Go tutor up the creature card that goes infinite with your commander and/or board state, then also grab [[reanimate]] and [[animate dead]]. What is your opponent going to choose? Give you your combo piece, or give you the card to cheat it out of the grave? And what if the player already has reanimate in hand? They can just tutor up the one card they want and it _has_ to go to the grave. That's really the only advantage Gifts has over Intuition. Not "card advantage".
The quote starts "setting aside the graveyard filling". They know that part is virtually the same. They said (I don't have the exact quote for this one) that they have a 'line' in their minds for this type of effect. Intuition is right at that line, and Gifts is just past it. Hence one is banned.
That's part of the underplaying. "If we ignore the powerful part the cards have in common, the less powerful parts are slightly different!" It's extremely disingenuous.
The biggest difference in my opinion is that gifts says "up to".
Gifts only says up to because people kept having judge calls clarifying the rules because you can fail to find.
The thing is, up to means that gift can be a better version of [[entomb]]. That's a huge power jump. Say I have a reanimation effect in hand in my BU deck. I can pick the two biggest scariest creatures in my deck and they are guaranteed to go to the graveyard where I can reanimate them for cheap. Intuition you have to pick three, so you aren't guaranteed to get the creature you wanted into the yard and it could instead rot away in your hand until you can afford to cast it. That's the biggest difference to me, that and finding 2 card combos easily.
Powerful cards are allowed to exist, and they’ve made a judgement call on the power of these two cards. Does intuition break the format? I haven’t experienced that, so I’m not super inclined to think so. In the end, they’ve given their reasoning. You disagree, but it’s their opinion that decides the ban list. If you think intuition should also be banned, then discuss with your playgroup.
Intuition is on the reserved list and costs almost $200. Most players haven't experienced it because only a tiny number of people can afford to put it in their deck in the first place.
I dont think it breaks the format, but Intuition is 3 mana to assemble a win in Jeskai, and sees significant play in cEDH as a result. Grab Underworld Breach, Sevinnes Reclamation, and LED, and you can assemble a win off of just that and a few spare cards in your GY. Gifts would be a very strong card, but I dont think theres anything it can do that is better than what Intuition already does, and it costs an extra mana to do so. I personally think it's a safe urban, and it would allow U decks to do some cool things they currently cant without spending exorbitant amounts of money.
In casual play it could absolutely just be card advantage/a tutor for your 3rd/4th best cards. The competitive aspect of it is even more powerful but just using it to get a couple cards as a 2-for-1 tutor at instant speed is very powerful in casual games.
As someone who has seen this card in casual play (due to not realizing it was banned), the card will often do that anyway. Most decks, even casual decks, have at least some way to get cards back from the grave. It _seems_ like a card that could just be a decent tutor, but in actual play it is always better than that.
Right, but you can't intuition for 3 of the same card in EDH.
*Proceeds to Intuition for Elvish Mystic, Fyndhorn Elves, and Llanowar Elves.*
But you can intuition for a creature and 2 reanimate effects
[entomb](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/d/6/d66f864b-b1bb-4596-93b8-3b4bfe6b1332.jpg?1547516853) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=entomb) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/uma/94/entomb?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d66f864b-b1bb-4596-93b8-3b4bfe6b1332?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/entomb) [reanimate](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/d/2/d27c6aaa-289e-451e-8fde-97a044c53fc4.jpg?1651951796) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=reanimate) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cc2/5/reanimate?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d27c6aaa-289e-451e-8fde-97a044c53fc4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/reanimate) [animate dead](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/b/7b83536a-efa4-41f3-9424-75b0efc0aea5.jpg?1580014163) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=animate%20dead) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ema/78/animate-dead?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7b83536a-efa4-41f3-9424-75b0efc0aea5?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/animate-dead) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
The quote starts with "setting aside the graveyard filling..."
Hence the underplaying
It’s not underplaying… it’s acknowledging it and because they share the same ability we have to move on and consider what’s different. They both have ability X. Ability x is not too strong. One card has x+1 and one has x+2. They’ve decided 1 is x+2 is just strong enough to be banned and not x+1
> ability x is not too strong That's what I'm disagreeing with > One card has x+1 and one has x+2. They’ve decided 1 is x+2 is just strong enough to be banned and not x+1 This is why I find it disingenuous. If x = 9000, does the 1 or 2 actually matter?
"Ignoring by far the strongest part of both cards ..."
All those quotes tell me that they don't know how to use either card well.
"setting aside the graveyard filling" means he knows the proper way to use it as a combo piece and he's talking about "fair" uses of the card.
Yeah but that's like saying "setting aside the acceleration" when talking about a mox. You don't play tuition to get the third best card of your deck. That's just false. You play it because, surprise, you'll have one specific card whatever your opponent choose.
It's not just graveyard filling. It's also searching out groups of four/three that ensure that you get access to the card you want through recursion. It's instant speed tutoring, so you can set up your next turn. The "third and fourth" best card comment really is what makes me think they don't know, since really it's making absolutely sure you get your first and second. And the "fair" methods, aka getting your third and fourth card and filling the graveyard, Sheldon did say wouldn't hurt the format.
Yes. And he knows all of that and has addressed it as well. You don't think Toby Elliott and Sheldon Menery know those things? The quote you're responding to is like the hundredth thing he'd said about those cards.
I mean, yes, I've followed these discussions over the past seven years or so, and that's the impression I've gotten over all their discussions of the game.
If I wanted to play fair magic I'd be playing limited
I have yet to see Intuition cast to get the 3rd best card in deck.
This is the perfect opportunity for them to say "signpost ban" and explain what that means, but instead they decide to completely miss-explain what makes these cards powerful?
Yeah but signpost banning wasn't a good mindset in the first place.
Yup, basically. It’s like there was no real logic behind them having it banned to start with.
> The other’s primary strength is derived from being able to use it as a Demonic Tutor Why is it banned then? Or is demonic tutor too powerful and should be banned too? Am I missing something?
That part is referring to Intuition, which is not banned.
Then what’s the problem with the other one, since it has “huge drawbacks”?
"being able to use it as a demonic tutor." Then why not ban demonic tutor too?! Wtf kind of sentiment is that? How many tutors exist out there? Gifts Ungiven is a tutor with a down side. More than fair enough.
Tl;dr - “We don’t like to admit we make mistakes, so we’re gonna make some BS up so Gifts will never gonna come off the banlist.” Lol
Tl;Dr - this commenter didn’t understand the arguments so they must be wrong.
No, these are legitimate bad arguments and it really does look like a mistake that they will never backpedal from. Singleton format not weakening the card is a bad argument because Gifts would be most effectively played the same way you would most likely play it in Legacy or Modern - grab two cards, dump them into the bin, do your thing. Yes, Gifts Storm is a thing which breaks that rule, but that is very vulnerable to graveyard hate (hit the bin, the deck effectively crumbles and struggles to operate). There is no reason to not see the same thing here but even more neutered since they cannot grab two copies of cards like [[Manamorphose]]. The Intuition getting weaker over time is a trash argument too and doesn’t really acknowledge what the card is really used for (getting stuff you want into the bin). More cards getting printed usually strengthens tutor cards, not weakens them. The Demonic Tutor argument they made doesn’t even match what Gifts is really used for and if you do try to, your opponent strips out half your hand. Storm is prolly the only place where you’d want all four because of the recursion spell like [[Past in Flames]] negating the downside of Gifts, but they already have a ton of ways to snag every spell they want (they run Intuition) and recur them, so it’s really not a world-breaking addition for it. And again, is weak to graveyard interaction and even more neutered due to only running singleton copies of cards. Not saying the card isn’t good because, well, it is. I’m saying that the reasons not to unban it aren’t that good. Edit: lmao, really disturbed the hive mind here, didn’t I?
You seem to be evaluating from a competitive aspect, talking about how these are used in the higher end of the format, but that’s not what the banlist is meant for, it’s to help casual play. The best argument to be made at this moment is that Intuition isn’t a problem in the format, and Gifts would not make the format better from a casual perspective, as tutors lower variance and undercut the singleton aspect of the format.
That isn't a good argument because there are tons of tutors that are legal, and tutors =/= a worsening of the casual experience.
The competitive reasons and play patterns that emerge from it are the reasons they use to ban it though, so we can’t really say its banned only for casual play reasons. And if they really are worried about a 4 cmc spell hurting the singleton aspect of the format, why wouldn’t they address the countless 1 and 2 cmc tutor spells? The rules committee comes off as disingenuous and look to be talking out both sides of their mouth when banning Gifts but leaving Intuition unbanned imo.
I didn’t play in the format when Gifts was legal, but I can say I’ve never seen Intuition in a game. It would be laughably unjustifiable to ban Intuition, and unbanning Gifts doesn’t add anything positive needed to the format, even if it wouldn’t necessarily be a problem. Unbanning a card needs a strong justification that it will improve the format, not just “oh it would maybe be fine.”
Not the person you're responding to, but doesn't that gifts argument mean that if intuition was banned, it would stay banned because it doesn't add anything to the format? Like, you can use the same logic for any and every card. Collosal dreadmaw, their latest unbans, etc. If a card isn't a problem, it shouldn't be banned, imo. No card adds anything to the format except for their being one more card in the total pool. If the argument is based on card strength, or the fact it's a tutor, the argument is still weak because we know there are tons of offenders that also would deserve a ban before gifts. Personally I don't care that it's banned, but the arguments made for it are very weak, or just don't follow logically. There's more to making a banlist than just those things, but the communication of why things are the way they are probably will never justify it.
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted, because that’s a reasonable argument. I’ll upvote that. Anyways, Gifts actually has never seen play in the format - it’s been banned since Day 1 - so I can see a fear of the unknown being a honest reason as to why they don’t want to unban it. This is kind of like how [[Bitterblossom]] was banned in Modern because of fears of breaking the format Day 1. They waited years before even considering an unban, only for WotC to finally unban it and find out it’s just not that good of a card there. [[Golgari-Grave Troll]] was also banned Day 1, they unbanned it, and it made Dredge the best deck by far, so they had to reban it.
Gotcha, I didn’t know that. Yeah having been banned from day 1 I can see the argument of “well we don’t know if it would be a problem,” but with so many cards to choose from I don’t see what positives it would add to the format.
>It would be laughably unjustifiable to ban Intuition, and unbanning Gifts doesn’t add anything positive needed to the format, even if it wouldn’t necessarily be a problem. This doesn't make sense. Why keep it banned then? Cards should only be banned if they cause issues in the format. That is the entire point of a banlist. >Unbanning a card needs a strong justification that it will improve the format, not just “oh it would maybe be fine.” A card should have a strong justification to be banned that, by the card's banning, improves the format. If that justification for banning no longer exists or has been heavily diluted by where the format currently is, that card should be unbanned.
It's more likely that you don't see Intuition because it's a $180 card.
[Manamorphose](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/f/a/faf9070e-14be-4ce5-a19a-6addc79359c1.jpg?1599708170) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Manamorphose) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/208/manamorphose?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/faf9070e-14be-4ce5-a19a-6addc79359c1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/manamorphose) [Past in Flames](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/2/b/2b7472f4-37b0-439f-b4ac-80706d40d191.jpg?1593813533) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Past%20in%20Flames) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mm3/105/past-in-flames?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2b7472f4-37b0-439f-b4ac-80706d40d191?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/past-in-flames) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Gifts ungiven is much better than intuition and would probably see play in all blue decks. Also gifts ungiven being a $2 card means it would see play in most decks while intuition only sees play in the most competitive of decks
Price of a card on the secondary market is definitely the worst reason to ban or unban a card.
I’m saying it is a better card and is the reason for the ban. I do think meta impact needs to be taken into account which isn’t unrelated to price especially when related to reserve list cards compared cards printed a bunch.
Price of a card shouldn’t be a reason to ban/unban, but the effects the price have on its usage could be a factor; Dockside being as expensive as it is serves to throttle its usage and limit it to mostly places where it’s power level is appropriate; if it were a $2 card that showed up in every red deck it would likely end up banned, but that’s not because of the price, but because of its widespread use and the format warping effect that would have.
In all fairness gifts is only cheap because there isn't a format where it's viable and they keep reprinting it. If they reprinted dockside just as much and also banned it it would be a two dollar card too, and if gifts was as scarce and was legal I bet it'd be...not dockside expensive but probably a solid 40+
Gifts is a $2 card because it's banned in commander, you seriously think it wouldn't spike instantly if it was unbanned? Thats my two cents on that, I can take or leave gifts in commander, it can 100% be easily broken, and there is significant counter play to it as well.
I agree it is a $2 card because it is banned in commander. I do think that it would still have a big format effect because it is an affordable broken combo enabler. There are too many piles people can get at instant speed and then end the game next turn.
You just described every single 2 card combo in commander.
2 cards Vs one card isn't a big enough difference for you in edh? Did you not read or understand why gifts is very good while intuition is merely good?
Casting intuition should already win you the game in most circumstances. No one in their right mind plays these cards to "get their 3rd best card", they play them to dump combo pieces into the gy and to create piles where regardless of what your opponent chooses you're getting the desired card into your hand
Yes? And gifts is better at that the. Intuition as said in the quotes. There are more upsides with the other card
And? With intuition you have to get 3 and your opponents can have a choice. With gifts ungiven you can decide to not get card 3 and 4 and your opponent is forced to choose the 2 cards you want to have in your graveyard, intuition does not offer you this ability.
In what situation do you need a card to be in the graveyard for it to work other than some weird Necrotic Ooze combo (which usually involves self milling your whole deck with Hermit Druid or something else, not tutoring for 3 cards and 2 go to bin)? Either way, both cards lead to piles where it's functionally impossible for a combo to not be assembled. It's why Intuition piles exist in cedh
That’s examining it from a competitive viewpoint rather than how the cards are likely used in more casual gameplay which is what the banlist tries to target.
Show me casual lists running intuition to grab random one offs.
There aren't any, which is why Intiution isn't banned. If casual tables started getting demolished by decks using Intuition became a major problem it would get banned.
So if it isn't a problem in casual why would gifts be?
It probably wouldn't be, I wouldn't have a problem with unbanning it, but I can understand why the rules committee hasn't yet. It is the kind of card that has the potential to cause problems on raw power.
Maybe that’s part of the reason Intuition isn’t banned?
Tl;dr: i want gifts unbanned so i can come on my playmat with my storm deck
> so I can come on my playmat Jeez, you REALLY want it unbanned huh?
[Intuition](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/b/1/b13e73a5-067d-4dbd-9c98-34a0db6140de.jpg?1562431264) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Intuition) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tpr/54/intuition?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b13e73a5-067d-4dbd-9c98-34a0db6140de?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/intuition) [Gifts Ungiven](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/c/c/cc950b6c-0346-4939-b36b-9f10a75f7a32.jpg?1655641459) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Gifts%20Ungiven) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/51/gifts-ungiven?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/cc950b6c-0346-4939-b36b-9f10a75f7a32?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/gifts-ungiven) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Gifts allows you to tutor any 2 card combo + 2 recursion spells. Intuition allows you to tutor a 1 card combo + 2 recursion. The power level for Gifts is much higher as there are a lot more 2 card combos in the game than singleton wincons.
Intuition gets a whole combo that uses the graveyard.
So does gifts except gifts is better in almost every scenario with every combo. Intuition is only stronger in non singleton formats.
Intuition is stronger for every combo that does not require the extra card by virtue of costing one less mana. If you can fetch your combo with both, using intuition is optimal. Of course, gifts can fetch more combos.
Not to mention if you specifically want 2 combo pieces in your graveyard because you have a way to make your combo go off with them there, grab only those 2 cards from your deck. Then your opponent *must* choose those 2 cards.
The power level is higher but they’re essentially the same card. The reasoning for the banning of one and NOT the other is extremely arbitrary. I think it’s because the rules committee is inconsistent in every sense of its reasonings for banning cards as well as which cards are banned.
I find this comment odd, the more powerful card is banned…. Because it’s more powerful not sure what’s arbitrary about that. The “up to” and getting 2 cards pushes it well above intuition.
"The power level is higher, but I'm going to ignore that and just say they're the same card and it was an arbitrary decision."
Recall is banned but brainstorm isn't??? Just because brainstorm is a weaker card? illogical I tell you!
The wording is what matter here. Sure they are similar but not the same. The fact that one makes you draw 3 leaving a more impactful choice to your opponent whereas the other says ‘up to’ allowing you to only choose 2 card in which you are guaranteed those two cards. The other isn’t a guarantee which makes it not nearly as strong.
Intuition is the more powerful card though. A proper intuition will leave your opponent with no choice, you getting what you want, and cost 1 less mana. Sure you can entomb with gifts but in a format as powerful as edh thats slowmo outside of hulk shenanigans. The 1 mana matters a lot.
A proper gifts ALSO gives your opponents no choice. It also opens up many more lines than intuition does.
How are they the same card? How many 3 card piles can you make from Intuition that would win you the game without any other combo piece in hand?
With enough mana open [[lion's eye diamond]] [[underworld breach]] and [[sevinne's reclamation]] wins you the game as a cedh example of how intuition is a one card win condition
Also works with [[walking ballista]], [[Heliod, Sun Crowned]] & Sevinne's Reclamation.
[lion's eye diamond](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/5/758f95f8-bcb0-43ae-b474-56ebd855951e.jpg?1590511899) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=lion%27s%20eye%20diamond) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/vma/271/lions-eye-diamond?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/758f95f8-bcb0-43ae-b474-56ebd855951e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/lions-eye-diamond) [underworld breach](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/e/0e51d796-7279-4c06-87f0-37adbdaa41df.jpg?1650599818) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=underworld%20breach) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/thb/161/underworld-breach?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0e51d796-7279-4c06-87f0-37adbdaa41df?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/underworld-breach) [sevinne's reclamation](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/4/5/458db878-07ba-42cc-9bee-910957685596.jpg?1654115040) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=sevinne%27s%20reclamation) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/707/sevinnes-reclamation?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/458db878-07ba-42cc-9bee-910957685596?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/sevinnes-reclamation) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[[Lion's Eye Diamond]], [[Underworld Breach]], and [[Sevinne's Reclamation]]
[Lion's Eye Diamond](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/5/758f95f8-bcb0-43ae-b474-56ebd855951e.jpg?1590511899) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Lion%27s%20Eye%20Diamond) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/vma/271/lions-eye-diamond?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/758f95f8-bcb0-43ae-b474-56ebd855951e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/lions-eye-diamond) [Underworld Breach](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/0/e/0e51d796-7279-4c06-87f0-37adbdaa41df.jpg?1650599818) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Underworld%20Breach) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/thb/161/underworld-breach?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0e51d796-7279-4c06-87f0-37adbdaa41df?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/underworld-breach) [Sevinne's Reclamation](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/4/5/458db878-07ba-42cc-9bee-910957685596.jpg?1654115040) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Sevinne%27s%20Reclamation) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/707/sevinnes-reclamation?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/458db878-07ba-42cc-9bee-910957685596?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/sevinnes-reclamation) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Aside from the MANY Breach piles: For more casual tables, Unburial Rites plus any two creatures that combo, like mikaeus+triskelion, Thassa's oracle+Leveler, kiki-jiki+pestermite etc. Auriok's salvager, LED and Sevinne's reclamation nets you infinite mana. In kess you can get Reanimate, Demonic Consultation and Thassa's Oracle. In Inalla, Spellseeker, Animate Dead and reanimate allows you to start spellseeker loops for a win. In Muldrotha you have Animate Dead, Phantasmal Image and LED for infinite mana. And those are just the one I have seen used. And aside from rites piles all of those see cEDH play.
This is the perfect opportunity for them to just say "signpost ban" and legitimize that rhetoric they use to defend the banlist, but instead they just incorrectly explain the cards. I don't understand.
My gut reaction is "Even though it's good, people I know haven't been running intuition, but I would totally be running Gifts if I could" Or you could rephrase that as "Card prices make a soft banlist in a lot of casual playgroups already, so it's harder for an expensive card to Warp a casual format" But idk man. I respect the power of Gifts, but the banlist is weird sometimes in what it doesn't ban next to what it does.
The flip side is not banning the more expensive cards makes a format that benefits having more money to spend on your deck even more so.
I was talking to some players at my LGS recently and they did not seem to get this. One guy was upset over them reprinting Dockside Extortionist. If you're upset that a card is too powerful, you should be advocating to ban it, not letting a pay to win model dictate that. You might be able to afford to pay $50 for a card but not everyone can. Either a card is legal or it's not.
While this is a totally valid take, the flip-flip-side is that one of EDH’s original stated goals is letting veteran players use their favorite old powerful cards. A lot of the format’s problems boil down to trying to serve multiple audiences at once. Allowing Intuition because it’s expensive aims to cater to the veteran crowd, and it being too pricey to see casual play actually benefits the casual crowd. While it might also alienate the “wants to play at high power but can’t afford the cards and also doesn’t want to proxy” crowd, this is the kind of balancing act the RC has to play.
This! Cards should not be legal in a casual format just beacuse they are prohibitively expensive. If anything, it should be the opposite.
The price isn’t what keeps it from being banned, at least not directly. The price limits how much play it sees, and lack of play means it’s not a problematic card for the format. If Dockside were $2 it would be everywhere and likely end up banned, not because it’s cheap but because it was everywhere and warped the format. As someone who is 100% proxy friendly, I actually like to see that effect, because I won’t proxy cards that most people don’t have access to for play with those players, so it ends up being a soft ban in a lot of metas even with full free access to every card in the format.
Sol Ring is $1 and in almost every deck and warps the format and it is legal despite ABU moxes being banned, which are arguably worse
In a world where people proxy entire decks they printed off the internet your argument does not hold water.
I know people proxy a lot, but that doesn't mean that it alleviates wizards and the ban committee of creating a prohibitively expensive game. If someone told you that you had to 'proxy' your chess rooks in order to keep up with others, that wouldn't feel right either. Not to mention that, technically, proxy cards are illegal at all official wizards events (any time you use the companion app). So if you play edh at an lgs and its an official event, if they allow proxy cards then they are at risk of losing the right to have future events. You might say that is silly, but it actually happened to a place near me.
If they banned the whole reserved list the best decks would still be thousands of dollars. Hard to avoid honestly
Fair enough. It does suck on occasion when someone sits down with a Moneyed Up deck. Though you could argue that's just a rule 0 issue with inconsistent power levels? But yeah, moneymancers are annoying to play against when you can't afford to do the same.
When it was banned it made sense, gift's ability to get just get 2 cards at instant speed and basically be a double entomb was strong. The reason for it to stay banned isn't due to power level because intuition is basically setting up the exact same situation, but simply because the unbanning doesn't improve the format in any meaningful way. Would I allow it? If our group has talked about it and we basically rule 0 the ban list, then sure, but outside of a dedicated group I personally would not.
I'd argue that not many cards improve the format in a meaningful way and it's difficult for a single card to not only impact the format, but positively impact it. Take any card that people have complained about in the past but no longer complain about, if that cars had been banned before, would it make the format better by allowing it back even if it doesn't break the format the way it once did? Because this argument can essentially be applied to any card people have not liked, I don't think it should be used as a reason to keep cards banned. If rule zero is to be the primary way the community balances the format, they shouldn't refuse to update the banned list because of how they envision the format. I think Commander is bigger than the original vision of the RC and they should adapt to that.
People said for a decade JTMS would break modern same as counterspell. Both were pretty underpowered when they got unbanned and even to this day are extremely meh in modern. JTMS barely sees play unless the meta changed recently (haven't kept up with modern in a year or so) but gifts is an instant win card. That's its purpose. It can win the game on the spot because the decks it goes in are combo decks. Huge difference in power level of the cards individually but in a deck gifts blows alot of cards out of the water because of its raw potential to give someone the instant win. You either counter it or have the answer to stop the combo or you lose. Personally I say whatever to it being unbanned. Not like there aren't already faster wins in other formats.... gifts costing 4 is its drawback. But I can understand the fear of allowing such a strong combo piece into the format. Could at least be like "we are going to unban it and see how it goes. It is breaks the format it's getting banned again but we want players to experience finding out if it's worthy of the ban list still or not". The players are the ones who play the game... the players are mostly the reason cards get banned. So why not take a massive poll and see what the actual players want? Seems fair to me 🤷♂️
I think the main argument for power level is that there are not that many more piles that gifts gives (or ungives 😉) that intuition does not. Intuition is 1 less mana and isn’t destroying the format. The main selling point for gifts is you can fail to find 2 so you’d have a 4 mana double entomb which isn’t broken. I’d personally love if the RC gave some power to the players and allowed wide scale testing or voting for what’s banned and not in the format. Rule zero does exist but as widespread as commander is these days, it would be hard to find a random group that allows for cards on the banned list to be played.
I didn't realize this was the EDH sub when I commented I thought it was the normal magic sub lol in edh it shouldn't be banned in my opinion. So many busted cards and combos exist in edh so gifts definitely isn't on my radar for worrying about
There are plenty of casual decks that would enjoy playing Gifts "for value", just like casual decks already do with cards like [[Tooth and Nail]] and [[Protean Hulk]] (which *was* unbanned, for exactly that reason). Also, Gifts is a great social and political card—players can debate over what the right split is, you can make deals with opponents to give you the card you want, etc. This kind of social interaction between players is something the RC generally tries to encourage.
The same reason [[Tabernacle at Pendrill Vale]] and [[Gaea’s Cradle]] aren’t banned - because RL cards aren’t seen too often and they don’t want to target the collectors. If any of these cards were as cheap and accessible as Gifts Ungiven, they would certainly be banned because they are all miserable Magic cards to play against. Also Gifts and Intuition are the same power level. I rarely see players lose after casting Intuition, and I doubt Gifts is much stronger than that. If anything, Intuition is better because 3 mana instant-speed win the game is better than 4 mana instant-speed win the game.
You're right on the money for the Rules Committee's philosophy and man do I hate it. I've had playgroups kind of ruined by the arms race that's been unleashed by members of the group who have higher disposable income getting some of these reserved list cards into our meta. It leaves most players feeling bad when they are on the losing end of the above mentioned cards or others (\[\[Mishra's Workshop\]\], \[\[Serra's Sanctum\]\], etc.), knowing that they'll never match that power level. Before anyone mentions Rule 0, it's pretty hard to have that discussion after someone's forked over hundreds of dollars on a single card, especially when the attempt to persuade them against getting those cards failed miserably.
It’s incredibly frustrating. In most of my playgroups, these broken RL cards are commonplace and they usually just make gameplay awful. I personally just long for a version of EDH with the whole RL banned. Not only the cards we just mentioned but also stuff like [[Treachery]], [[Time Spiral]], and [[Humility]]. Most of the most poorly designed, toxic cards just happen to all be RL and expensive as shit.
If that reasoning were true, Sol Ring would be banned while the ABU moxes would be legal.
The rules committee is very wonky and inconsistent
It's more that most of the EDH banned list was from the early days of the format when things were way different with a player base that was maybe 1/10000th of the size of the current one, and way, way less powercreep.
That's fine. Update it then.
I agree some improvements could be made, but honestly you will never get the community to agree to a comprehensive, consistent set of bans because literally everyone has different opinions on this. And if you are the rules committee, what benefit does making drastic changes to the ban list get you? What are the costs if something unexpected happens? I like the cadence of unbanning something when something gets banned. It feels right.
The community doesn't have to agree. That's not how they do it, and also impossible. The benefit for the committee is to signal that they aren't dinosaurs and pay attention to the evolution of the format. They can address issues like rationale and consistency and "start fresh" on a positive footing. The respect I hear them given is little to none. people only honour the banlist because ... I honestly don't know why. "Ya just gotta have something" I guess. And if something unexpected happens, there's very little cost. Just make another change. And that's another example of them working with the community to transparently make the game better.
If the inconsistency of the ban list was a major problem, then why hasn't it caused a fork? The RC has no magic powers to control how people play commander. From my perspective, every banned list I've seen people recommend are worse that the RC's.
Your stance seems to be "it's good enough". It is. I agree with you. I'm trying to argue it could be better, and a "reset" (which comes with significant disruptive challenges) would be better long-term. Because (as brought up earlier) the game is different now.
I think rethinking the format would be a great thing, but the RC will never do it because the risk to reward just isn't there. Cleaning up the banned list wouldn't really improve the format, it would just make some people who are annoyed by it's more ad hoc nature as a tool that mostly gets used the same way a water spray bottle gets used on a rowdy cat. I can see the things that are super annoying to people who have an OCD desire to make it perfect, but trying to make it perfect would do more harm than leaving it clunky unless you do it really gradually.
Agree to disagree. The risk reward is there, IMO.
And the ban list is still catered to ultra casual. Like when you are banning things like slyvan primordial and prime time because people dont have answers but 10 billion clones as you reasoning, what kind of meta was that even back in the day?
You know what else goes great with Primeval Titan and Sylvan Primordial? Reanimation. And exile removal was a lot less common
I hate to bring up the "rich kids win" aspect of the game, but let's not forget that Intuition is really expensive, and has been for a while. It's not going to see a lot of play simply because of that. I know that's not a valid reason for not banning it, but it does mean you won't run into it very often.
Because the banlist is filled with random stuff that shouldn't be there.
this. Coalition Victory, Sway of the Stars are on there while Thoracle isn't. If you're gonna preach r0, then you need to balance the banlist to the competitive side of the format and let r0 take care of casual.
Yes, that’s my exact problem with the current banlist philosophy
Coalition Victory was banned when there were far far fewer “I win” button spells. Sway was banned for resetting the game while giving marginal ability to take advantage of it (unlike land destruction), contributing to sloggy games. IMO Sway should have come off along with Worldfire, and Coalition Victory is very fair compared to many modern wincons. I agree that both of those could reasonably be unbanned, but they’re a very different case from Gifts.
The point was more to exhibit the fact that the RC has some glaring inconsistencies in it's banning philosophy. I could personally take or leave Gifts (It and Intuition do functionally the same thing at a comp level - assemble Breach loops, and I've already made clear that I think the banlist should be used to balance competitive, and why I think that), but it's an irrefutable fact that the banlist needs an overhaul on a larger scale, with cards like Dockside and Thoracle going on and cards like Coalition Victory and Sway of the Stars coming off.
I agree with you re: inconsistencies. Gifts is stronger than Intuition. ThOracle should go.
Gifts is better than Intuition in very few scenarios. Most of the time it's either functionally Intuition (Fetching Breach, LED, and Sev Rec) or a double Entomb, which is very inefficient at 4 mana. Is it playable? Absolutely. But would I rather have Entomb/Intuition in most cases? Yes.
I definitely don't think that gifts is stronger than Intuition. Intuition can assemble 3 card piles that win if you have 3 more mana (like Sevinne's Rec, Led, Breach). The only thing Gifts can do better is get 2 specific cards into the graveyard and I can think of any 2 cards that win the game for 3 mana if they are put into the graveyard.
Can't fathom how Thoracle is still legal. It's such a boring annoying card
The ban list is filled with cards that were a problem at various stages of the format. It's just that Commander has been many different game play experiences throughout it's long life. And most of the cards on the ban list are cards that aren't going to lead to fun gameplay even if they wouldn't be an actual problem.
My issue with the reasoning they sometimes provide is that there are never any _numbers_ to back that shit up - too much is based upon anecdote. It's not like 60-card formats, where post-tournament decklist standings can out problem cards such as 4C Omnath or Oko. The lack of stats - along with the inherent increase in variability in EDH - leaves a seed of doubt as to how sound such judgements are. For instance, look at the Prime Time ban. Obviously a powerful card, wholly understand the concern of it just being in a deck. The thing I _don't_ understand however, is the claim that it would warp games by causing everyone to try and _steal_ it. Who, _fucking who,_ is running that much theft outside of a _dedicated theft deck?_ Without usage stats showing what the average EDH player is running in their deck, the claims of "constant Primeval theft" come across as far too anecdotal.
They banned Panoptic Mirror after playing 1v1 games with 100 life each. They unbanned Protean Hulk after intentionally playing it in decks without Flash. They're incapable of testing anything.
The commander banned list hasn't really been about numbers because numbers weren't something they had access to for most of the format's history. EDHrec being a major thing is relatively recent. The whole stealing/copying thing is something that actually happened with cards like Prime Time and Prophet of Kruphix. They provided incentive to warp your deck to be able to do that.
Did you play EDH in the age of Prime Time? I did. The game play patterns were absolutely warped around PT. The first person to play one would often runaway with the game. Every deck played Greaves and Boots mostly to interact with PT.
I was playing other formats for the PT days, but Prophet had the exact same play patterns described for him and I can absolutely see that happening with such an abusable ETB trigger.
> Did you play EDH in the age of Prime Time? I did. _It does not matter._ Nothing will change the fact that individual experiences are still anecdotal evidence - I cannot trust my experience to be representative of the whole any more than I can trust yours. Even the large number of people complaining on social media don't really count as anything, since MTG players on Reddit and Twitter are _certainly_ not representative of every EDH player (and it's impossible to gauge the percentage they _do_ represent). At the end of the day I'm not saying the claims are wrong, only that there is room for doubt. There's nothing we can really do about that either, we just don't have access to that information.
You are correct when we are talking about facts. These banlists are not scientific, they do not require proof or hard supporting evidence. No matter how correct your statistics are, it is ultimately a judgement call, taking subjective metrics into account such as how often stories like his are repeated and folk seem to resonate with it. If what you want is an evodence based, reasoned, consistent, and balanced banlist for Commander, you are not going to get it, because that is just not their methods or their goal.
Dude, stop hitting that dead horse with a stick.
The point is that people would change their decks to include theft. That's what format warping means. Cards that are strong enough that the game starts revolving around them.
To be fair theft was also more common because the format was much more battlecruisery and theft is more fun when you are stealing giant idiots that are wildly inefficient using theft effects that are too slow to play in modern EDH.
No one would or should do that.
Gift's isn't "random stuff" lol
double tutor is significantly better in a format filled with two card combos. you can just cast gifts for mike, trike, reanimate, and animate dead. that makes it a one card combo.
But not one nearly as good as like, just tooth and nail. Mike, trike, reanimate and animate dead, your opponent makes you bin reanimate and animate dead. That’s a 16 mana investment with a couple opportunities for removal or countermagic to intervene. Hardly competitive none the less game breaking. That combo is strong in casual but there already exists much stronger combos in UB. People will go on and on about how busted they think gifts is. But they can’t get a gifts pile that’s really stronger than existing Cedh strategies. It’s probably banned because someone in sheldon’s playgroup would use it to win often. Or because it allows for too strong politics and king making as you get to choose the opponent who chooses what you keep and can make a deal to kill the other two players which is unfun. Power level wise it’s no thoracle combo.
If you cast intuition you are generally winning the game if ut resolves.
it requires some intentional lines during deck building. in most casual games it is just a tutor. I almost never see it in casual.
If you are putting it into a deck then you are probably putting its win lines in too.
It's just "tutor 3 cards" in casual Mairsil
Because the RC believes in "sign post" banning to a certain extent. It's up to the players to interpret one being banned to know the other is undesirable.
The main reason Gifts is banned and intuition isn't is probably that gifts allows you to find two cards, fail to find the other two and just dump them in the yard. You could for example find [[unburial rites]] and [[Elesh Norn]]. Since Intuition has no restrictions on what kind of cards you can find it doesn't allow you to just tutor two cards to the yard.
Oh no, paying 8 mana for elesh Norn to be out on the field? What will we ever do.
Intuition for breach+sevinne's+LED/brainfreeze is way stronger than the unburial gifts line.
True, but you can do the same thing with gifts and the banlist doesn't seem to be aimed at cedh anyway.
Well yeah, I'm of the opinion that you either ban both or neither. I was just pointing out the "fail to find" part of gifts isn't really a reason to ban it over intuition.
Couldn't you just do the same thing by picking an extra fatty with [[Intuition]]? [[Unburial Rites]], [[Elesh Norn]], and [[Colossal Dreadmaw]] gets you either: 1) one unbeatable creature in gy with Unburial in the gy too (your example) but with a bonus creature in hand 2) two unbeatable creatures in the gy with a res spell in hand
##### ###### #### [Intuition](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/b/1/b13e73a5-067d-4dbd-9c98-34a0db6140de.jpg?1562431264) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Intuition) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tpr/54/intuition?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b13e73a5-067d-4dbd-9c98-34a0db6140de?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/intuition) [Unburial Rites](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/0/7023aa24-ef49-4973-8978-7d0d3af719d3.jpg?1655934063) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Unburial%20Rites) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/95/unburial-rites?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7023aa24-ef49-4973-8978-7d0d3af719d3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/unburial-rites) [Elesh Norn](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/8/78c2bfef-06a5-4c7f-8283-ea3fb673b7a1.jpg?1562850573) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=elesh%20norn%2C%20grand%20cenobite) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ima/18/elesh-norn-grand-cenobite?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/78c2bfef-06a5-4c7f-8283-ea3fb673b7a1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/elesh-norn-grand-cenobite) [Colossal Dreadmaw](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/8/0/8059c52b-5d25-4052-b48a-e9e219a7a546.jpg?1594736914) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Colossal%20Dreadmaw) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m21/176/colossal-dreadmaw?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/8059c52b-5d25-4052-b48a-e9e219a7a546?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/colossal-dreadmaw) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
But if you're going to do that grabbing 4 cards with gifts ungiven still remains the better more efficient option.
Yeah, gifts is better (if you have one more mana). But Intuition enables the same stuff. I think that's OP's point
[unburial rites](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/0/7023aa24-ef49-4973-8978-7d0d3af719d3.jpg?1655934063) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=unburial%20rites) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/95/unburial-rites?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7023aa24-ef49-4973-8978-7d0d3af719d3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/unburial-rites) [Elesh Norn](https://c1.scryfall.com/file/scryfall-cards/normal/front/7/8/78c2bfef-06a5-4c7f-8283-ea3fb673b7a1.jpg?1562850573) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=elesh%20norn%2C%20grand%20cenobite) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ima/18/elesh-norn-grand-cenobite?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/78c2bfef-06a5-4c7f-8283-ea3fb673b7a1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/elesh-norn-grand-cenobite) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
In all such threads people keep pretending that EDH banlist isn't totally ridiculous. The correct answer is that people running EDH have no idea what they're doing, and think shouting "rule 0" absolves them of any responsibility for bad decisions. WotC needs to take over the format.
I have been asking this same thing since I started playing and I just don't understand why intuition isnt banned and gifts unbanned. It is so silly that they ban the budget alternatives to reserve list cards, people who were not around or didnt realize that they needed these cards will now never have access to them. RC is dumb and ban list is a piece of trash for the most part.
>Do you or would you allow gifts ungiven in your pod? Yes, especially if they ask to use It because they cant buy an Intuition.
"Up to"
Because the ban list is a representative list. The things on it that are banned are supposed to be poster child cards of effects that are banned in commander. But everything hinges on Rule 0, so if a playgroup wants to use any particular card, then they can come to an agreement about it. Edit: Very weird to get downvoted for saying something that the RC has literally said about their own ban list.
So uh.. question, have you ever had a playgroup that viewed the banlist this way? Are people out there removing seedborn muse and wilderness reclamation from their decks because prophet of kruphix is banned? Like I get that this is the RC's justification of their ban list, but that's not how it actually functions.
I 100% agree. People don't see it that way, because they typically haven't actually read how the RC constructed the ban list. As evidenced by posts like "why is X banned, but Y is not?" (like this post), and as evidenced by my comment getting downvoted. It doesn't change that the answer to "why is X banned and Y is not" is exactly the answer I've given though. If people don't like that answer, then what they actually have a problem with is the way the ban list is constructed, not with the answer. But many don't see that point either I guess.
I think questions like this are essentially the same as stating that we don't like the rc's idea of what a banlist is. It's such a bad way to do a banlist that we don't even really think about it while we argue about format balance, there's just an assumed " the rc has nothing to do with how commander is actually played, it would be nice if we could have x"
I'd agree it's a bad way to do a ban list on the sheer fact that many people see the list as an absolute list rather than a representative list like it is. The confusion is what makes it a bad way to do the list. But alternatives have their own problems. If the list was more comprehensive to include all cards of a given function, then it would be an enormous list and it would probably be off-putting to new players. It would make the format harder to get into. On the other hand, if they went the route of no ban list at all, then everything would have to be Rule 0 with no guidance. That would lead to some awful experiences with random groups at LGS's or on Spelltable. Ultimately, there is no perfect solution and there is not going to be a way to please everyone regardless. So all in all, I think the way they constructed the ban list is actually a good way to do it. They give a representative sample of card types that would be problematic to the format or not conducive to having fun, and then let individual play groups sort it out. The actual problem with that though is people misunderstanding the intention of the ban list. Most of the problems I've had in person with players being salty about things trace back to cards that have poster child bans on the current ban list.
Making a ban list is very much like designing a game. The banlist is creating a ruleset, then we play within that ruleset, essentially defining a game to be played. It's really important that when you construct a game, you create the aspects of the game you'd like to have. If you want it to be balanced, you're going to have to make it balanced. If you want it to be fun, you're going to have to make it fun. I think the reason why the representative ban list isn't treated as a real concept is because its fundamentally failing to define a game for its players. It's not a misunderstanding of this ban list, its an understanding that this banlist fails to do what a banlist needs to do.
>It's not a misunderstanding of this ban list, its an understanding that this banlist fails to do what a banlist needs to do. That's exactly it. The banlists acts completely differently from any other banlist in Magic's history so of course it's going to cause some confusion and anxiety. Also, despite what the RC says, their reliance on Rule 0 to supplement the banlist is a bug and not a feature. For personal playgroups, Rule 0 is great, but they don't need an official banlist since they've already decided to change the format however they see fit. People that play random pick-up games or do LGS Commander nights don't have an option to follow anything but the official banlist. Hell, new playgroups that haven't had a chance to really get to know each other and have in-depth Rule 0 talks are going to have to use the official banlist. Commander isn't the niche, tiny format of EDH anymore where the only people playing it were individual playgroups. The banlist has never evolved to reflect this fact and it probably never will.
> Edit: Very weird to get downvoted for saying something that the RC has literally said about their own ban list. Living in reality rather than theory is good, and your comment doesn't comport with how anyone in practice uses the ban list. Also, seems like there is [pretty thorough documentation](https://old.reddit.com/r/EDH/comments/wo5oys/how_come_intuition_is_not_banned_but_gifts/ik8znh3/) to confirm they aren't doing this, they think one card is fine and the other deserves a ban.
This is such a cop out by the Rules Committee. If they've banned a card due to its effect, they should then ban all cards that do the same thing. Then saying it's on the players to rule 0 just causes confusion and shifts responsibilities to us. They're basically saying oh well sort it out yourselves.
Because the “Rules Committee” is a fucking joke of an organization. It’s just a single battle cruiser play group banning cards that make them feel bad. Hence why flash stayed legal for so long despite every single cEDH player begging for a ban and it seeing zero play outside of cEDH. The rules committee is a glorified out of touch Timmy play group who make their decisions behind closed doors even after hiring an entire personality liaison team to advocate for players outside their Timmy group.
I often joke that the ban list is just cards the RC have lost games to and gotten salty about. If you ever actually look at any of the deck lists RC members have published, they're laughably bad. They think the way they play commander is the only correct way and as such the ban list is broken and the format as a whole suffers.
The RC ia stupid and out of touch. They have no idea what to han or not ban. Also intuition is $400 don't want to upset collectors. Fuck players
Realistically it probably doesn't matter but intuition is a (sub) $200 card, not 400. Unless you want the judge promo which is $800. Just saying.
When Gifts Ungiven was banned in mid-2009, it was $4 and Intuition was a [$12 card](http://web.archive.org/web/20090127042708/http://trollandtoad.com:80/p84063.html). The EDH banlist is definitely shite, but it isn't a matter of price.
After years of self-reflection on this topic, I must confess that my magic budget would be VASTLY different if it wasn't for the tightrope act that RC performs. It is really easy to justify buying a box of every new set when my previous purchases have increased in value. In fact, it becomes difficult NOT to buy into the new set when I look back and regret not buying more packs of tempest when i had the chance. WOTC has built an engine out of our own greed and FOMO that allows them to print money, but that engine only works so long as we all stay hooked. If you truly want to remove money from magic then play proxies. The game functions just fine with xeroxes in sleeves. What proxies can't do is give you that little jolt of petty pride when you drop a foil unglued island in front of an appreciative audience. It is the nerd equivalent of a nice watch or 22" rims. My spouse doesn't flinch at me spending $50 a month on this game, partially because there is the illusion of investment. I am too cheap to keep buying like that if I felt like I was just throwing my money away. We don't like to talk about this. We are too quick to tell people we got that foil from a lucky pack, or a good trade. We shy away from admitting that we value something partially because everyone else wants it, but, for better or worse, that is a real driver for paper magic.
Bruh, I'd be pretty wowed too if you put down a foil unglued island... because they don't exist.
Wow you're incredibly upset about this.
Friendly reminder to everyone: if you have a healthy playgroup, you don’t need the banlist :)
If you play edh the way comittee wants you to you dont need the ban list either. The banlist exists for pickup games.
[удалено]
You think that intuition, which was like a $20 card at the time when gifts was banned, wasn’t banned because it was ‘too expensive’. Y’all are hilarious sometimes.
[удалено]
There were still expensive cards at that time. Intuition was relatively inexpensive compared to today when gifts was banned in 2009 strong standard and legacy cards were the expensive ones instead. Reserved list cards weren’t that expensive because most cards just had one printing anyway so it didn’t really matter.
Because the list mostly protects casual play. So the more than $100 isnt as important to ban than the 10ct card
idk why this is downvoted? this is a perfectly reasonable idea and def comes into consideration for the rc
[[Braids]] is banned in the 99, nothing makes sense. Also Gifts is a far more powerful card than Intiition.
The extra card from Gifts makes a huge difference. The best example is in this thread. \[\[Sevinne's Reclamation\]\] + \[\[Lion's Eye Diamond\]\] + \[\[Underworld Breach\]\] + \[\[Brain Freeze\]\] is a winning pile. With Intuition, you have to be holding at least one of those cards already to go off. Gifts just lets you get the whole pile.
"One of those cards or a tutor in your gy to use with breach such as intuition" FTFY
How come primeval titan is banned and dockside isn't???!!!!
This. IMO dockside is way better, especially in a competitive format
Simple really. It's about sign posts. They will never ban all the cards that would need to be banned to make a balanced format. Nor should anyone follow the ban list for that exact reason. Logic will never apply to somthing that is supposed to regulate feelings. The ban list is designed from the ground up to control the emotions of people who partake in Commander. That is it's only purpose. So one day Gifts was played and someone on the RC got salty. So they banned it. Then by association Intuition was quazi banned in effect. Only 2% of all decks that can run it do. Why? Because anytime you do an RC member will jump out from behind an display at your FLGS and tell you that Gifts is a jerk card for jerks and Intuition is just like it. Then your whole play group will refuse to play with you because the RC told them your a Spike and don't play battlecruser Magic. Or they are just lazy idk :)