Commander: Revised Edition

[Dudecore]

Yep. Multiplayer EDH with the "casual" elements removed. Basically competitive multiplayer EDH

[LinkCelestrial]

Cumulative commander damage is what is on offer. I can't say that I don't hate the idea. Besides, shouldn't all strategies be sufficiently difficult? I don't see anyone suggesting we lower the amount of cards a mill deck has to deal with. We're talking a combined 30 commander damage from ANY and ALL commanders is enough to kill. So you could get an ally to deal a couple of points if you want.

It solves the memory issue, instead of having to keep track of every commander and the damage dealt, but it also makes Voltron decks have to deal slightly more damage. It sounds like a win to me. But I Am Interested In some compelling arguments.

If tracking damage is a memory issue you might not want to sign up for magic. It's really not hard to track a couple extra numbers with some pen and paper. There's no reason to nerf a whole deck type just cause it's hard to remember things.

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

Cumulative commander damage is what is on offer. I can't say that I don't hate the idea. Besides, shouldn't all strategies be sufficiently difficult? I don't see anyone suggesting we lower the amount of cards a mill deck has to deal with. We're talking a combined 30 commander damage from ANY and ALL commanders is enough to kill. So you could get an ally to deal a couple of points if you want.

It solves the memory issue, instead of having to keep track of every commander and the damage dealt, but it also makes Voltron decks have to deal slightly more damage. It sounds like a win to me. But I Am Interested In some compelling arguments.

If tracking damage is a memory issue you might not want to sign up for magic. It's really not hard to track a couple extra numbers with some pen and paper. There's no reason to nerf a whole deck type just cause it's hard to remember things.

You really arent nerfing the deck type, but if lowering it to 25 helps, it can be done. Your comment is idiotic because most people really cant remember 16 numbers (just a 4 player pod, could get larger) while keeping track of the complex board state generated by multiplayer games. Not everyone uses pen and paper. In fact the majority of players use spindowns and keeping track of 21 on a spindown just doesnt work. So if you really wanted to keep track of a commander game you would need 32 spindowns, assuming no one gains life and goes above 40. A total combat damage rule would reduce that number to only tracking 8 numbers.

[Gocougs509]

I agree with this^

[Dudecore]

Cumulative commander damage is what is on offer. I can't say that I don't hate the idea. Besides, shouldn't all strategies be sufficiently difficult? I don't see anyone suggesting we lower the amount of cards a mill deck has to deal with. We're talking a combined 30 commander damage from ANY and ALL commanders is enough to kill. So you could get an ally to deal a couple of points if you want.

It solves the memory issue, instead of having to keep track of every commander and the damage dealt, but it also makes Voltron decks have to deal slightly more damage. It sounds like a win to me. But I Am Interested In some compelling arguments.

If tracking damage is a memory issue you might not want to sign up for magic. It's really not hard to track a couple extra numbers with some pen and paper. There's no reason to nerf a whole deck type just cause it's hard to remember things.

It's not a matter of not being able to do it, it's having to do it. It's a silly idea anyway, in and of itself. It is a non-sequitur. To be like "oh yeah, and if you take 21 damage from this one dude, you lose". It isn't poison counters, if you steal someones commander you have to keep track of that commander dealing 21 points of damage to someone (because it's considered separate, believe me. it has happened). The rule is there to negate life gain strategies (which is fine) and promote a new archetype unique to the format (also fine). It is implemented poorly due to the nature of how that damage is calculated and tallied.

I wouldn't call it a nerf exactly, because if the purpose of the rule is to negate infinite life gain strategies, then it should be able to do that at 30, right? The rule still ends games and keeps infinite life decks out of lengthy wars of attrition. Unless you think the point of the rule is to bypass everyone's life total, I don't agree. We are proposing to lower the life total. They have a 10 life head start, and all things considered - should be able to kill the players at the table without having to rely on commander damage. It can still function as intended having to deal 9 more life then it does now (in conjunction with all other players, or by yourself).

A positive is that every players commander becomes a threat.

[griffin131]

Cumulative commander damage is what is on offer. I can't say that I don't hate the idea. Besides, shouldn't all strategies be sufficiently difficult? I don't see anyone suggesting we lower the amount of cards a mill deck has to deal with. We're talking a combined 30 commander damage from ANY and ALL commanders is enough to kill. So you could get an ally to deal a couple of points if you want.

It solves the memory issue, instead of having to keep track of every commander and the damage dealt, but it also makes Voltron decks have to deal slightly more damage. It sounds like a win to me. But I Am Interested In some compelling arguments.

If tracking damage is a memory issue you might not want to sign up for magic. It's really not hard to track a couple extra numbers with some pen and paper. There's no reason to nerf a whole deck type just cause it's hard to remember things.

You really arent nerfing the deck type, but if lowering it to 25 helps, it can be done. Your comment is idiotic because most people really cant remember 16 numbers (just a 4 player pod, could get larger) while keeping track of the complex board state generated by multiplayer games. Not everyone uses pen and paper. In fact the majority of players use spindowns and keeping track of 21 on a spindown just doesnt work. So if you really wanted to keep track of a commander game you would need 32 spindowns, assuming no one gains life and goes above 40. A total combat damage rule would reduce that number to only tracking 8 numbers.

One person doesn't have to keep track of those numbers - it's really not difficult for you to keep track of who you've commander damaged. And keeping track if 21 on a spin down is trivial - use it as a spin up instead. Once you pass 20 it's over.

Heck, against most life gain decks, keeping track of their actual life is less relevant than their commander damage. "What are you at?  645?  I thought it was 732.. Oh, my bad."

[Ekann1]

You also only keep track of commander damage for commanders that will kill you, like Uril. For things like maybe Roon or Oloro who probably won't be killing you you don't need to keep track.

[Dudecore]

Cumulative commander damage is what is on offer. I can't say that I don't hate the idea. Besides, shouldn't all strategies be sufficiently difficult? I don't see anyone suggesting we lower the amount of cards a mill deck has to deal with. We're talking a combined 30 commander damage from ANY and ALL commanders is enough to kill. So you could get an ally to deal a couple of points if you want.

It solves the memory issue, instead of having to keep track of every commander and the damage dealt, but it also makes Voltron decks have to deal slightly more damage. It sounds like a win to me. But I Am Interested In some compelling arguments.

If tracking damage is a memory issue you might not want to sign up for magic. It's really not hard to track a couple extra numbers with some pen and paper. There's no reason to nerf a whole deck type just cause it's hard to remember things.

You really arent nerfing the deck type, but if lowering it to 25 helps, it can be done. Your comment is idiotic because most people really cant remember 16 numbers (just a 4 player pod, could get larger) while keeping track of the complex board state generated by multiplayer games. Not everyone uses pen and paper. In fact the majority of players use spindowns and keeping track of 21 on a spindown just doesnt work. So if you really wanted to keep track of a commander game you would need 32 spindowns, assuming no one gains life and goes above 40. A total combat damage rule would reduce that number to only tracking 8 numbers.

One person doesn't have to keep track of those numbers - it's really not difficult for you to keep track of who you've commander damaged. And keeping track if 21 on a spin down is trivial - use it as a spin up instead. Once you pass 20 it's over.

Heck, against most life gain decks, keeping track of their actual life is less relevant than their commander damage. "What are you at?  645?  I thought it was 732.. Oh, my bad."

The cumulative commander damage accomplishes what you said about life gain decks not actually caring about their life total. Imagine this scenario: Player A gains 1 billion life Player B, C and D do not play Voltron commanders. The likelihood of them killing Player A with commander damage is extremely unlikely.
Cumulative Commander damage gives players B, C and D a modicum of hope. Is the difficulty in the amount of damage on offer?

[Remillo]

Incoming WALL-OF-TEXT

Here's how I feel about commander damage:  I feel like it works fine the way it is, even if it could be improved upon.  Being able to stop 'infinite' lifegain from winning by default is a fairly reasonable thing, so General Damage exists.  21 just feels like the correct number for a few reasons - It's just more than half of your starting life total.  If that big of a chunk is taken out by a single card over the course of the game, it feels right that you should lose.  It adds the 'three-shot kill' requirement for most voltron commanders.  7 power (Maelstrom Wanderer, Ruhan of the Fomori as well as Thraximundar and Rafiq to an extent) gives these commanders an ability to kill a player in three quick shots, which can be crucial to closing out a game before an answer can be found.  That's what makes the Voltron strategy so powerful.  Increasing the magic number that they have to get to reduces their effectiveness.  When you're the only one playing any sort of Voltron or Aggressive plan with your commander, you're basically stuck at having to do a huge chunk of damage, by yourself, to eliminate one player.  But it also means that at a table of Voltron players, you could easily go from 0 to the 30 general damage in a single turn cycle just by being picked on.  Now, if the starting life total was also reduced, we could argue that 30 is the correct number, since it means that, without lifegain, it would have killed you on its own.  But I suppose it warrants testing.

As for keeping track of it, it's really not hard.  In our group, at least, everyone tracks their own life totals using dice that are publicly visible.  If a player needs to keep track of commander damage, we get out a Spin-down that we start at 1 and tick up.  If we run out of space on the die, they lose.  There are usually only ever one or two commanders at the table that will enter the red-zone with enough frequency that it might kill you.  Not everyone has to track stats for every single player, guys.  It's perfectly fine to ask the table "What're your life totals?"

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

As for keeping track of it, it's really not hard.  In our group, at least, everyone tracks their own life totals using dice that are publicly visible.  If a player needs to keep track of commander damage, we get out a Spin-down that we start at 1 and tick up.  If we run out of space on the die, they lose.  There are usually only ever one or two commanders at the table that will enter the red-zone with enough frequency that it might kill you.  Not everyone has to track stats for every single player, guys.  It's perfectly fine to ask the table "What're your life totals?"

But not all playgroups are the same, especially because there are groups that are more competitive. In addition, you may want to track opponent's life totals because not all players are honest. Many a times I have seen people "gain life" or "forget about that last attack".

[Anoobass]

If they "forget" enough, then maybe don't play with them anymore, or at least take it upon yourself to keep track.  how many decks do u carry with you when you go play with ur friends, if it's any more than 1 I done see how it would be so difficult to carry a pen and paper.  If u say that u forget, I'll ask you this, when you leave your house, do u check and make sure you have your phone/keys/wallet/ect...?  It becomes a habbit, so much so that you may not even notice that u do it.  All I'm saying is that it's not very difficult, spin downs are $1 each and you'll need 3 generally, 4 maybe if your commander gets stolen enough.  As for life total, this app has a great life counter for up to 10 people, even if ur lazy, it easily tracks 2.

[Remillo]

But not all playgroups are the same, especially because there are groups that are more competitive. In addition, you may want to track opponent's life totals because not all players are honest. Many a times I have seen people "gain life" or "forget about that last attack".

You should probably play with different people, then.  Unless you're just playing pick-up games at a store, you really only want to be playing with people you know and trust and just enjoy being around.  It's part of being a social format.  All the guys I play with regularly at my store are, for lack of a better phrase, people I'd enjoy having a beer with.  Maybe I'm just in a special place and am a bit naive when it comes to other people being enjoyable.

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

If I am not mistaken, these rules are intended to make Commander a more competitive and sanction-able format. (Post 2 or 3 on the first page). These aren't rules to play at the kitchen table with, these are rules for random pods at FNM where people aren't as familiar. In my normal playgroup, that's not a problem.

[Anoobass]

Then why are we having this discussion in the first place honestly?  If you were to go to a tournament, don't they supply notepads and such for life counting?

[Dudecore]

I like what Remillo is saying. Agrus is dead on with his assessment. This is to make Commander a competitive, sanctionable event. Keeping your own life totals with your friends is one thing, doing it against strangers is another.

Anyone who has played competitively knows that memory issues are a problem. Heck, even triggers are a problem. How many stories have you heard of {Dark Confidant} triggers being forgotten? Not even on purpose. The game states can get pretty complex.

All I'm asking is that we consider changing it. Or at least test it out with your friends. It's worth looking into. Change is always hard. We all know the way things are, we've been playing like it forever. I've pleaded my case about the benefits of cumulative commander damage, and on paper I think it is a solution to a bigger problem.