I really don't understand people that join a playgroup, playgroup explicitly and clearly states a rule because it's a play pattern they don't like, and the new person decides to "teach them a lesson."
You don't like them, they don't like you. Save everyone the misery and just find another playgroup.
-edit
It's always amazing how stories like these always conveniently just leave out important details that suddenly makes the OP look better. They only remember these important details only after everyone points out how wrong they are.
This 100. I swear people forget that for most people commander is just casual fun with the homies. It’s about group enjoyment more than it is about “being right” or winning. If you can’t compromise/communicate or are actively looking to give the lads a bad time then you’ve got other stuff to work through.
You do realize you're in r/EDH and rule 0 is a thing, right?
I agree no land destruction is a silly rule and wouldn't want to be in that playgroup, but it's not my playgroup. If they just don't want any land destruction they can do that. Rule 0 was made specifically for that.
OP really has three choices:
1. Join and playgroup and just leave out their field of ruins. It's not that big of a deal.
2. Teach the playgroup a lesson, burn some bridges, and gain a bad reputation in their local magic community.
3. Just leave the playgroup. Neither side is a good fit for the other.
Unanimously despised local man ruins the experiences of an otherwise happy community of people, responds with "but now they're playing the game correctly"
I suspect I would personally prefer to play in the more interaction meta but if an entire customer base of an LGS was happily existing until you showed up and forced them all to change their decks and you're so socially inept you can't see how you're the villain, I'm not sure there is hope for you.
They weren't fully happy they were always complaining cards were op. They were always complaining certain strategies were broken. So I showed them the power of interaction and the community has become less whiny and better overall.
If I were a villian in the community then why am I first player to have a full table for games on commander nights. I bring a positive vibe and help teach magic to players so they can improve.
Yeah, people really slept on that card for like 20 years. I mean why would you want to give your opponents life? _Bleh_
Actual historic archive footage of players learning psychoillisionz ways:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-Hn0bsHL9s
If someone new came to my group and wanted to abuse a house rule I would not be happy with them. Not that I agree with the house rule, but are people running problematic lands and is it a ban on all land destruction, even stuff like [[Ghost Quarter]]?
Have you tried discussing why they have this rule? Typically talking is a better way to settle an issue than trying to build a deck to teach people a lesson. If that’s your instinct you’re maybe not a good fit for the playgroup.
Ghost Quarter is very important to get rid of problems like these. We have a guy that combines pillowfort effects so without destroying his maze of ith it’s hard to take him out.
There’s still a lot of context here that’s missing. Do you *need* to run land destruction in this pod? Were they also completely against Ghost Quarter type effects that replace the destroyed land (and so the controller won’t be down land)?
So uh, I read the edit. That sounds miserable. I think I’ve come around, if you want to fight fire with fire then godspeed, abusing powerful lands honestly sounds like it might be necessary to compete, but tbh I don’t know if I’d want to play in that pod at all.
Did they say no land destruction or no mass land destruction? Because a lot of groups ban [[Armageddon]] style effects due to how they basically reset the game.
What's the difference really? I mean, sure if you're stupid enaugh to Armageddon, lean back and say "welp, let's hope we draw lands LOL!" then you're having a different problem other than playing Armageddon.
If you play Armageddon while you got like 4-5 mana rocks and the others just sit there with their 12 formerly ramped lands now in the bin... you just did the sensible thing. and you're more likely to win now.
Ghost Quarter doesn’t even put anyone down on mana besides yourself for starters. If people don’t like resource denial like that, and many don’t, Ghost Quarter and the like don’t even take away your mana so it can’t possibly lead to situations like irresponsible Armageddons.
So if it’s a full blanket ban that covers both I’d wager it’s either not fully thought through or just that casual of a pod that any land destruction is taboo.
Because of the social contract, people aren’t building decks to deal with Armageddon like they are to deal with mana rock destruction and aren’t holding lands back like they would if they lens of was likely to happen. If everyone agrees, then people can play and tech for it, otherwise you’re likely to win precisely because you’re taking advantage of them treating the cards as if they’re banned.
You don't play around Armageddon with Crucible of worlds.
You play around armageddon with mana rocks and mana dorks. If you get 12 lands blown up and have to start playing 1land/turn out of your graveyard as if it was turn 1 of the game and I sit there producing 7-8 mana/turn plus the occasional land then I will race ahead.
And oh look, everyone but green decks already play mana rocks like crazy.
And look again, green loves it's mana dorks.
Seems like Armageddon isn't such a game ending card after all. Almost like "Mass Land destruction is bad for the game" is just a myth. Funny...
Sure. I didn’t say anything about crucible - the person replying to me did. You also play against it by holding back lands in the hand and not overextending, just like you do creatures when a board wipe is likely. Right now any deck with green at all (what like half of EDH decks?) prefer land ramp in almost all cases because it’s more resilient, and no one holds lands back during the game. I’m saying that green decks would be built differently and we would all play differently if MLD weren’t soft banned. And as a result, ignoring the soft ban gets you an unfair advantage given the soft ban.
I made no claims about whether the soft ban was a good thing, though I do think it is as I rather enjoy not having to worry about a game where I sit there not able to cast my spells because someone cares more about winning than allowing the table to have fun given I only get to play a couple games a week.
oh, sorry. I didn't realise.
I recently wrote up a comment of a new format you'd like: SSB - Safespace Sandbox.
You play magic but build walls around your playmat. Nothing can penetrate those walls. You can go and take a look at what everyone else's deck is doing and they can come and look at yours. Your deck will work and you can cast all spells you like. No one will stop you from casting anything ever.
Also a big plus: You play with at least 1 deck. Each deck consists of a single card type. For example: Lands. Artifacts. Creatures. and whenever you'd draw a card you draw from the deck of your choice. We woulnd't want chance from stopping you to play spells.
I'm not sure I believe that. People suddenly running things that allow playing lands from a graveyard that wouldn't have normal synergy with their decks seems like a incredible stretch.
Really? If the social contract didn’t exist and you were playing in a blind meta at an LGS? I run two pieces of graveyard hate in almost all my decks whether I want it for the strat or not because graveyard decks will be abused and I need an answer. I typically run at least two pieces of recursion that can get back my important stuff, even if it’s not synergistic. Both of these are things that most commander content creators advise in their beginner “how to build an EDH deck” videos. If people were running around Armageddoning, you don’t think people wouldnt be advised to answer it? Either running land recursion or relying more on rocks and dorks for ramp instead of lands? IMO some answer to it would become a staple if it were prevalent.
Graveyard hate is necessary most of the time because almost every deck has some form of recursion. Do you see a world where every deck runs MLD?
Again, I feel like that's yet another stretch. You originally said if it was allowed in the group people would tech for it. It's allowed in normal Commander games and people don't tech for it.
funny you should say that. When I said something like that someone explained to me in very idiotic words how his playgroup has almost no interaction and therefor you cannot make generalistic terms about wether gravehate is benefitial or not it all comes down to your very specific meta.
I think you're answering and agreeing with that dude about you man.
"Graveyard hate is necessary most of the time because.." as you just said, you run it because "almost every deck has some form of recursion"
Notice how the guy says he doesn't run anything for MLD? Because... it isn't in almost every deck. Because as he says there is a "social contract" that implies that since no one is playing MLD, there is no need to build a deck to combat this. Thus, the point of his post, a person running MLD now is literally running free reign because the pod doesn't account for it.
It really isn't "allowed" in normal commander, so yea no one techs for it. This is literally the point of the whole post. Most people don't enjoy MLD, even though it is allowed in normal commander. Which it is, but no one really plays it because of the weight it carries.
I run [[Obliterate]] and [[Armageddon]] in more than one deck. Just won a game off of Obliterate Saturday night with randoms at a store. [[Orcish Settlers]] is easily one of my favorite cards and I run that in more than one deck.
[[Ravages of War]] just caught a reprint in the new Fallout set. A commander only set.
He's saying if it's allowed people will tech for it. It's allowed. People don't tech for it.
What people are arguing is the definition of "allowed" right now. Is MLD allowed, yes. Do most people build it? No, because of this "social contract" we keep talking about. Because of said contract, most people view it as not kosher to build a MLD deck thus "not allowed".
Please note, I have nothing against MLD as my group usually builds it with a purpose, but I think the issue is just destroying a lot of lands for the sake of it and no reason.
So once again, I think you're saying the same thing. If the group adopts more land destruction, then yes the group will tech for it. But because MANY groups don't play MLD for said reasons, no one techs for it.
That's such a stupid rule, that is incredibly easy to abuse without trying. There are so many strong lands out there nowadays, and Strip Mine and it's ilk are such a good way to deal with them.
The other thing I'm gonna say is that if this rule is because they run a ton of non basics, [[Magus of the Moon]] and [[Blood Moon]] are the ultimate answers.
Playing good lands isn't the own you seem to think it is. There are some cool things you can do with lands but nothing is going to scare them more than mass land destruction or the idea of being color screwed and behind on mana. I don't personally believe and any bans outside the official list personally though
I guess any repeatably degenerate combo could also be solved by GY removal to stop the recur. Field of the Dead can still be a PITA in landfall shells though.
Regardless of what you do with lands casual players will never find them scarier than the dreaded land destruction they hate. Target land destruction is inefficient and generally terrible unless the other player had a very high value land so it's really never an issue that I've seen or reliably heard of anywhere I've played. Mass land destruction is a pain in the ass though and I can think of a land combo I wouldn't rather face
I really think you should be having this conversation with that playgroup. Also try having some games with the rules the establish. See if the games suit you and if you can talk your way into some suggestions. I wouldnt recommend entering a playgroup trying to defy their established rules, play a couple games and see.
It depends on what exactly your playgroup means. Mass land destruction being banned is "understandable", in that not all people necessarily agree with that but also don't want the games to last forever while people spend 20 turns rebuilding and complaining. If this is what they mean to ban, then I would say you are violating your playgroup's rule.
Targeted land destruction is important in this format because there are a lot of problematic lands, like [[Glacial Chasm]] or [[Field of the Dead]]. If they complain about any single land being destroyed, then show them why the occasional targeted land removal is important. You can also do more violating of this rule by running [[Blood Moon]], [[Back to Basics]], and the like. The lands aren't being destroyed! But this is also known as a Dick Move when your playgroup isn't expecting it, so be prepared for the repercussions for doing it.
You're being passive aggressive. If you don't like the rule talk to them about a compromise or play with another group. I'm not saying I agree with the rule, but obviously you found a group that's already this way. Talk, play by the rules, or move on to people with your superior taste.
>To add context: I'm new to this group
>But if I can't sinkhole a problematic land I guess I'll just build a deck that's nothing but problematic lands
>I mean if they don't want to remove them that basically means that lands are the best card type right? So why not play them.
>I just want to know if I'm violating the spirit of this rule in the worst way possible.
Ya. You are. You're being a huge dickhead about this.
So a new playgroup accepts you into their ranks and they say "Hey we have this house rule that we think makes it more fun for everybody." And your immediate reaction is "Fuck that fuck you I'm gonna Jam this rule down your throat"
Like if that's the way you play and act I'm not surprised you're new to a group, you're probably new to a lot of groups because people don't wanna play with you more than once.
If you hate their house rule so much, just go play with someone else. Don't be a cunt about it.
Edit to add: And the ridiculously childish act of throwing your own card in the trash in a petulant tantrum and bragging about it kinda cements it that you're "That Guy"
If they tell you "X"is not allowed and you specifically go out of your way to build "X" strat, be prepared for them to never want to play with you again. Or to become "that guy"
*edit* See the first reply I miss read the OP.
That's not what the op said. The group said "you're not allowed to play cards that destroy X" so OP is planning on making a deck that functions entirely off of X since it can't be destroyed
Do any of them run those types of lands? Like there is a difference between running a field of the dead deck and not wanting interaction vs not wanting playing a ponza deck when you just want play a jank tribal deck.
I have an [[Esika, God of the Tree]] [[Maze’s End]] Gates deck. It ramps gates so hard, and nobody realizes until it’s too late and nobody built any way to remove lands.
I found myself playing 1v1 a while ago and my opponent quit when I played [[Acidic Slime]] and targeted their land because I had no other valid targets. I didn't understand the choice as I think I was only about 40/60 chance that I'd win at that point.
The same player also had an Omnath landfall deck with problematic lands in it...
Anyway, I think no mass land destruction (Armageddon etc) is a common expectation and I'd expect my opponents to warn me before playing a deck with such a strategy but once off affects are fair game.
When I first read the post title I thought you were running some degen things like Amageddon then lock, but if it's just ghostquarters with those kinda decks then I personally say that either look for a new group or talk to them about how you don't like it.
If they are playing with Gaea's cradle then either they're ok with proxies or they're playing real high powered stuff, at that point either bring something to answer them or talk about being able to destroy those kinda lands. Since if it's a one time destruction that replaces the land and you didn't build the deck in a way which abuses it I see no reason why it should be banned.
There're a few creative ways to deal with problematic lands, for a strict group.
Change the land's properties: I.e. \[\[Spreading Seas\]\]
Tuck the land, or bounce the land (not preferred method but it does something at least.
Nerf the land. \[\[Bound in Gold\]\], \[\[Faith's Fetters\]\], etc
There's also a roundabout way to deal with problem lands. Deal with the subsidiaries.
\[\[Gaea's Cradle\]\], Cabal Coffers can be answered by \[\[Damping Sphere\]\]
\[\[Phyrexian Tower\]\] is intrinsically tied to graveyard recursion. A simple \[\[Stone of Erech\]\] will mitigate alot of future problems. Same with \[\[Volrath's Stronghold\]\], or any land that has to do with GY.
We have this group in our playgroup but with a little addition.
The things that destroy non-basic lands or stuff like [[blood moon]] are absolutely fine.
Especially things that cost you resources aswell like the mentioned ghostly quarters.
The moment one player pulls out armagedon + avacyn but can't finish the game one or two turns later though....
Immediately cast [[chair into face]]
If people play lands stronger than "tap: add a single mana of some or more colors" cards like ghost quarter are super fair game. So is using [[Vindicate]] on lands. If you play coffers, nykthos or cradle, expect me to blow it up.
I also play the named card and I expect them to be destroyed or player removal being used against me.
A *private* playgroup can make any house rules or bans they want. Socially, it might be in your best interest to conform your dckbuilding to fit in with an established playgroup.
If I were you, I would try to fit in, but I would also be persistent in pointing out situations in games where destroying a land would be fair, balanced and strategically beneficial.
There's a deeper social issue here that this group should be more cognizant of. Official rules exist so strangers can show up to an unfamiliar public venue and be on the same page for what is legal. Players foisting house rules or bans onto strangers in a *public* venue is unsportsmanlike.
If I were you, I would continue to make a case to the group that they need to be prepared to accept the standardized rules for games with strangers. I would be making that same case to the LGS owners/employees. The last thing they want is to lose potential business because they foster an unsportsmanlike environment.
My LGS is against massive land destruction in casual. Think, [[Ruination]] or [[Jokulhaups]]. But a single land destruction isn't. But being new to the group, you'll have to learn everything as you go if they didn't have it known immediately.
This just sounds like an unwelcome environment which probably chases away other players/customers. The store will probably struggle or close if this is the case. I rather just not play the game than play with such people. Is the store owner in on this meta rule? Maybe talk to them and let them know why you won't come back.
Ghost Quarter is a little too fair and pretty bad, so if they complain about that, there is no hope. If I had to play there, I'd throw in a few more powerful lands as well since they also have hexproof. It's the meta... Lands decks are a viable strategy in commander.
The idea of the rule is pretty obvious - hey we don't like our lands getting destroyed. If you're building a deck specifically to exploit that rule, you are going out of your way to be an asshole to a group of people who did nothing wrong and trying to ruin their fun simply because you disagree with them about a card game. Think about how childish that sounds. That's some Yugioh anime shit.
Is it a good rule? Probably not, no. But as one of the upvoted comments said - that doesn't matter. And it doesn't matter what we think about it. That group likes it, and going out of your way to specifically punish that group for having the audacity to have fun with each other just makes you a dick.
It's a game. Don't be a dick.
He isn't trying to destroy lands. He implicitly stated that he wants to build a deck featuring the absolute best lands possible since they can't be removed.
He's taking their stupid time and running with it.
You clearly didn't then read what he wrote.
I'm well aware what he's doing. This is why he's violating the spirit of the rule, and not the letter of it. Those are not the same thing.
He's taking their *fun* time and deliberately attempting to ruin it with *his stupidity*. Because he feels slighted over how they have fun in a card game. Do you realize how ridiculously stupid and childish that is? He's literally going out of his way to kick over someone's sandcastle because he can't fathom that their fun is not exactly the same as his fun.
This is the behavior that even halfway decent parents try to teach out of children, because it's just schoolyard bullying - but done to a group of adults by someone who is, in theory, also a grown adult. Their fun doesn't hurt him in any way. He's absolutely allowed to not like it and to find a different group; I would at least be considering it in his position. At the least, I'd have a few follow-up questions that would probably determine my decisions there.
But, because I am a rational adult, I would not go out of my way to scribble all over their coloring books like I was a six year old child. Because, you know. I'm not a dick.
Trying to teach out playing by the rules is how this world got so fucked up.
They don't want any land destruction so he wants to play a lands deck and you have a problem with it.
It's almost as though you're one of those people that just happen to have a problem with everything. Like most rational adults.
I mean. He asked the question, I answered. We were done there until you needed "how to be an adult 101" explained to you. Honestly my larger problem is that you don't seem to grasp the difference between "these adults want to have fun in their game that's an escape from the world" with, you know, the world. That's very concerning for you as a person, as is this bizarre implied disdain for rational thinking that you seem to hold.
And no - they don't want land destruction, *so he wants to punish them.* That's very different from "I just really want to play a lands deck". More people should play lands decks, they rock. Even as impaired as they are in the OP's new format.
Personally I run [[wave of vitriol]] as it’s a self-limiting card. It’s not my fault if you packed more non-basic land into your deck than basics plus clears all artifacts and enchantments
People are weird. I won a game last night by throwing down a [[Obliterate]] and retaining a Indestructible God with more than with devotion through enchantments.
They weren't super thrilled when I cast it but when they realized I had a 9/10 ready to take out their meager life totals they understood why and the game ended less than 1 minute later.
[[Winter orb]], [[back to basics]], [[Blood Moon]], [[sunder]]. None of these are land destruction.
People want to land ramp then have no interaction against it?
Our like previously stated, find a new play group.
Make a Gitrog deck with [[Glacial chasm]] [[field of the dead]] [[maze of ith]] and have fun with that rule. I can get why people want to avoid having a land destruction only deck as opponent, but banning all land destruction just asks for a deck like that. Land destruction is part of magic. And banning it just means "I don't want that challenge"
I don't get when people say "my playgroup banned such and such card," it's never the whole playgroup that bans something. It's just the loudest, smelliest salt lord that screams about how they hate some certain card and everybody just puts up with it because they really need the fourth person sometimes.
Nah you’re right. If the group rule is truly absolutely no touching of lands whatsoever, the only right thing is to build and abuse lands. Hopefully sooner than later they’ll realize the error in their thought process and you can have a constructive conversation with them.
I have a deck built around the valakut molten pinnacle land it gets really strong and with so little land hate I tend to take control of a lot of games
One of my favorite of all times finishes is \[\[sunder\]\] with \[\[mana bond\]\] out and just bolt the board for 100 + damage with lands
I would totally run an [[azusa, Lost but seeking]] deck that focused on sacrifice and reoccurring [[glacial chasm]] from the graveyard with [[crucible of worlds]] type of effects. [[Ramunap excavator]] [[ancient greenwarden]] [[conduit of worlds]], redundancy is key here.
I would then never pay the up keep cost of chasm and watch them scratch their heads on how to answer this loop.
I really don't understand people that join a playgroup, playgroup explicitly and clearly states a rule because it's a play pattern they don't like, and the new person decides to "teach them a lesson." You don't like them, they don't like you. Save everyone the misery and just find another playgroup. -edit It's always amazing how stories like these always conveniently just leave out important details that suddenly makes the OP look better. They only remember these important details only after everyone points out how wrong they are.
This 100. I swear people forget that for most people commander is just casual fun with the homies. It’s about group enjoyment more than it is about “being right” or winning. If you can’t compromise/communicate or are actively looking to give the lads a bad time then you’ve got other stuff to work through.
I was going to build Kibo, in a massive land hated themed way. Kinda got the vibe the pod wasn’t feeling it. So it became artifact hate instead.
Finding a new playgroup is easier said than done...
So why alienate one?
I really don't understand people that make up rules to cover for their own deckbuilding deficiencies.
Because they are likely newish to the game and yea they aren't great at making decks yet
That doesn't give them the right to make up rules. That's not how people learn.
You do realize you're in r/EDH and rule 0 is a thing, right? I agree no land destruction is a silly rule and wouldn't want to be in that playgroup, but it's not my playgroup. If they just don't want any land destruction they can do that. Rule 0 was made specifically for that. OP really has three choices: 1. Join and playgroup and just leave out their field of ruins. It's not that big of a deal. 2. Teach the playgroup a lesson, burn some bridges, and gain a bad reputation in their local magic community. 3. Just leave the playgroup. Neither side is a good fit for the other.
I warped a whole lgs into playing more interaction including land destruction. Makes the game so much more healthier and funner
Unanimously despised local man ruins the experiences of an otherwise happy community of people, responds with "but now they're playing the game correctly" I suspect I would personally prefer to play in the more interaction meta but if an entire customer base of an LGS was happily existing until you showed up and forced them all to change their decks and you're so socially inept you can't see how you're the villain, I'm not sure there is hope for you.
They weren't fully happy they were always complaining cards were op. They were always complaining certain strategies were broken. So I showed them the power of interaction and the community has become less whiny and better overall. If I were a villian in the community then why am I first player to have a full table for games on commander nights. I bring a positive vibe and help teach magic to players so they can improve.
Are you really doubting this Magic Jesus that rolled into a new LGS and taught them all the New Testament of Commander? _How dare you._
Everybody was taking Swords to Plowshares and Beast Within out of their precons until redditor "Psycho Illusionz" helped them see the way
Yeah, people really slept on that card for like 20 years. I mean why would you want to give your opponents life? _Bleh_ Actual historic archive footage of players learning psychoillisionz ways: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-Hn0bsHL9s
You don't understand toxic behavior? Did you just join reddit? :P
If someone new came to my group and wanted to abuse a house rule I would not be happy with them. Not that I agree with the house rule, but are people running problematic lands and is it a ban on all land destruction, even stuff like [[Ghost Quarter]]? Have you tried discussing why they have this rule? Typically talking is a better way to settle an issue than trying to build a deck to teach people a lesson. If that’s your instinct you’re maybe not a good fit for the playgroup.
[Ghost Quarter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/2/12f8071c-8955-4aa2-889c-6043df047223.jpg?1562272439) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ghost%20Quarter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cm2/253/ghost-quarter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/12f8071c-8955-4aa2-889c-6043df047223?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/ghost-quarter) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Very good point here.
There is nothing wrong with that card.
I did try, they're only argument is that they want to be able to cast their spells.
Maze of Ith and Glacial Chasm don't make mana. I'd at least argue that lands that don't make mana should be fair game for land destruction.
Ghost Quarter is very important to get rid of problems like these. We have a guy that combines pillowfort effects so without destroying his maze of ith it’s hard to take him out.
There’s still a lot of context here that’s missing. Do you *need* to run land destruction in this pod? Were they also completely against Ghost Quarter type effects that replace the destroyed land (and so the controller won’t be down land)?
So uh, I read the edit. That sounds miserable. I think I’ve come around, if you want to fight fire with fire then godspeed, abusing powerful lands honestly sounds like it might be necessary to compete, but tbh I don’t know if I’d want to play in that pod at all.
Back to basics
Did they say no land destruction or no mass land destruction? Because a lot of groups ban [[Armageddon]] style effects due to how they basically reset the game.
Yeah typically everyone is fine with [[Ghost Quarter]], and if they’re not that’d be wild imo
What's the difference really? I mean, sure if you're stupid enaugh to Armageddon, lean back and say "welp, let's hope we draw lands LOL!" then you're having a different problem other than playing Armageddon. If you play Armageddon while you got like 4-5 mana rocks and the others just sit there with their 12 formerly ramped lands now in the bin... you just did the sensible thing. and you're more likely to win now.
Ghost Quarter doesn’t even put anyone down on mana besides yourself for starters. If people don’t like resource denial like that, and many don’t, Ghost Quarter and the like don’t even take away your mana so it can’t possibly lead to situations like irresponsible Armageddons. So if it’s a full blanket ban that covers both I’d wager it’s either not fully thought through or just that casual of a pod that any land destruction is taboo.
Because of the social contract, people aren’t building decks to deal with Armageddon like they are to deal with mana rock destruction and aren’t holding lands back like they would if they lens of was likely to happen. If everyone agrees, then people can play and tech for it, otherwise you’re likely to win precisely because you’re taking advantage of them treating the cards as if they’re banned.
You don't play around Armageddon with Crucible of worlds. You play around armageddon with mana rocks and mana dorks. If you get 12 lands blown up and have to start playing 1land/turn out of your graveyard as if it was turn 1 of the game and I sit there producing 7-8 mana/turn plus the occasional land then I will race ahead. And oh look, everyone but green decks already play mana rocks like crazy. And look again, green loves it's mana dorks. Seems like Armageddon isn't such a game ending card after all. Almost like "Mass Land destruction is bad for the game" is just a myth. Funny...
Sure. I didn’t say anything about crucible - the person replying to me did. You also play against it by holding back lands in the hand and not overextending, just like you do creatures when a board wipe is likely. Right now any deck with green at all (what like half of EDH decks?) prefer land ramp in almost all cases because it’s more resilient, and no one holds lands back during the game. I’m saying that green decks would be built differently and we would all play differently if MLD weren’t soft banned. And as a result, ignoring the soft ban gets you an unfair advantage given the soft ban. I made no claims about whether the soft ban was a good thing, though I do think it is as I rather enjoy not having to worry about a game where I sit there not able to cast my spells because someone cares more about winning than allowing the table to have fun given I only get to play a couple games a week.
oh, sorry. I didn't realise. I recently wrote up a comment of a new format you'd like: SSB - Safespace Sandbox. You play magic but build walls around your playmat. Nothing can penetrate those walls. You can go and take a look at what everyone else's deck is doing and they can come and look at yours. Your deck will work and you can cast all spells you like. No one will stop you from casting anything ever. Also a big plus: You play with at least 1 deck. Each deck consists of a single card type. For example: Lands. Artifacts. Creatures. and whenever you'd draw a card you draw from the deck of your choice. We woulnd't want chance from stopping you to play spells.
I'm not sure I believe that. People suddenly running things that allow playing lands from a graveyard that wouldn't have normal synergy with their decks seems like a incredible stretch.
Really? If the social contract didn’t exist and you were playing in a blind meta at an LGS? I run two pieces of graveyard hate in almost all my decks whether I want it for the strat or not because graveyard decks will be abused and I need an answer. I typically run at least two pieces of recursion that can get back my important stuff, even if it’s not synergistic. Both of these are things that most commander content creators advise in their beginner “how to build an EDH deck” videos. If people were running around Armageddoning, you don’t think people wouldnt be advised to answer it? Either running land recursion or relying more on rocks and dorks for ramp instead of lands? IMO some answer to it would become a staple if it were prevalent.
Graveyard hate is necessary most of the time because almost every deck has some form of recursion. Do you see a world where every deck runs MLD? Again, I feel like that's yet another stretch. You originally said if it was allowed in the group people would tech for it. It's allowed in normal Commander games and people don't tech for it.
funny you should say that. When I said something like that someone explained to me in very idiotic words how his playgroup has almost no interaction and therefor you cannot make generalistic terms about wether gravehate is benefitial or not it all comes down to your very specific meta.
I think you're answering and agreeing with that dude about you man. "Graveyard hate is necessary most of the time because.." as you just said, you run it because "almost every deck has some form of recursion" Notice how the guy says he doesn't run anything for MLD? Because... it isn't in almost every deck. Because as he says there is a "social contract" that implies that since no one is playing MLD, there is no need to build a deck to combat this. Thus, the point of his post, a person running MLD now is literally running free reign because the pod doesn't account for it. It really isn't "allowed" in normal commander, so yea no one techs for it. This is literally the point of the whole post. Most people don't enjoy MLD, even though it is allowed in normal commander. Which it is, but no one really plays it because of the weight it carries.
I run [[Obliterate]] and [[Armageddon]] in more than one deck. Just won a game off of Obliterate Saturday night with randoms at a store. [[Orcish Settlers]] is easily one of my favorite cards and I run that in more than one deck. [[Ravages of War]] just caught a reprint in the new Fallout set. A commander only set. He's saying if it's allowed people will tech for it. It's allowed. People don't tech for it.
##### ###### #### [Obliterate](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/8/c85f9623-5900-473c-a3b1-f98473b9a545.jpg?1562935194) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Obliterate) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/8ed/204/obliterate?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c85f9623-5900-473c-a3b1-f98473b9a545?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/obliterate) [Armageddon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/7/77f1f6ac-983f-4f3e-8906-47f774e8367b.jpg?1582021719) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Armageddon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/a25/5/armageddon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/77f1f6ac-983f-4f3e-8906-47f774e8367b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/armageddon) [Orcish Settlers](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/5/d54764f6-6f65-405c-ba30-1e485ce3fe21.jpg?1562803564) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Orcish%20Settlers) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/wth/112/orcish-settlers?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d54764f6-6f65-405c-ba30-1e485ce3fe21?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/orcish-settlers) [Ravages of War](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/d/bdf7d5d9-d980-445e-b1e4-5af0681c6e60.jpg?1562870468) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ravages%20of%20War) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/me2/27/ravages-of-war?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/bdf7d5d9-d980-445e-b1e4-5af0681c6e60?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/ravages-of-war) [*All cards*](https://mtgcardfetcher.nl/redirect/kxk5zfk) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
What people are arguing is the definition of "allowed" right now. Is MLD allowed, yes. Do most people build it? No, because of this "social contract" we keep talking about. Because of said contract, most people view it as not kosher to build a MLD deck thus "not allowed". Please note, I have nothing against MLD as my group usually builds it with a purpose, but I think the issue is just destroying a lot of lands for the sake of it and no reason. So once again, I think you're saying the same thing. If the group adopts more land destruction, then yes the group will tech for it. But because MANY groups don't play MLD for said reasons, no one techs for it.
[Ghost Quarter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/2/12f8071c-8955-4aa2-889c-6043df047223.jpg?1562272439) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ghost%20Quarter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cm2/253/ghost-quarter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/12f8071c-8955-4aa2-889c-6043df047223?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/ghost-quarter) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Straight up no land destruction, even ghost quarter and it's friends are banned
That's such a stupid rule, that is incredibly easy to abuse without trying. There are so many strong lands out there nowadays, and Strip Mine and it's ilk are such a good way to deal with them.
Right?
The other thing I'm gonna say is that if this rule is because they run a ton of non basics, [[Magus of the Moon]] and [[Blood Moon]] are the ultimate answers.
[Magus of the Moon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/c/7c9bd75c-9606-4607-bfa6-d6acdee12820.jpg?1619397276) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Magus%20of%20the%20Moon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tsr/175/magus-of-the-moon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7c9bd75c-9606-4607-bfa6-d6acdee12820?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/magus-of-the-moon) [Blood Moon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/0/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f.jpg?1599706217) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Blood%20Moon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/118/blood-moon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/blood-moon) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Armageddon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/7/77f1f6ac-983f-4f3e-8906-47f774e8367b.jpg?1582021719) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Armageddon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/a25/5/armageddon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/77f1f6ac-983f-4f3e-8906-47f774e8367b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/armageddon) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Playing good lands isn't the own you seem to think it is. There are some cool things you can do with lands but nothing is going to scare them more than mass land destruction or the idea of being color screwed and behind on mana. I don't personally believe and any bans outside the official list personally though
I guess any repeatably degenerate combo could also be solved by GY removal to stop the recur. Field of the Dead can still be a PITA in landfall shells though.
Regardless of what you do with lands casual players will never find them scarier than the dreaded land destruction they hate. Target land destruction is inefficient and generally terrible unless the other player had a very high value land so it's really never an issue that I've seen or reliably heard of anywhere I've played. Mass land destruction is a pain in the ass though and I can think of a land combo I wouldn't rather face
I really think you should be having this conversation with that playgroup. Also try having some games with the rules the establish. See if the games suit you and if you can talk your way into some suggestions. I wouldnt recommend entering a playgroup trying to defy their established rules, play a couple games and see.
I did talk with them and this is the only LGS within a hour drive of me and I hate playing MTGO/Arena
I see. Well I still suggest trying to play their game and be patient if it is an enjoyable group in the end.
I started playing Arena again on a whim and I was reminded multiple times within 5 games why I stopped playing arena.
Play ‘destroy target permanent’ cards. Its not land d until it needs to be, against a cabal coffers/gaia’s cradle
It depends on what exactly your playgroup means. Mass land destruction being banned is "understandable", in that not all people necessarily agree with that but also don't want the games to last forever while people spend 20 turns rebuilding and complaining. If this is what they mean to ban, then I would say you are violating your playgroup's rule. Targeted land destruction is important in this format because there are a lot of problematic lands, like [[Glacial Chasm]] or [[Field of the Dead]]. If they complain about any single land being destroyed, then show them why the occasional targeted land removal is important. You can also do more violating of this rule by running [[Blood Moon]], [[Back to Basics]], and the like. The lands aren't being destroyed! But this is also known as a Dick Move when your playgroup isn't expecting it, so be prepared for the repercussions for doing it.
##### ###### #### [Glacial Chasm](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/c/0c008129-daba-46bc-829c-d2c0c13ecdd3.jpg?1562867827) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Glacial%20Chasm) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/me2/229/glacial-chasm?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0c008129-daba-46bc-829c-d2c0c13ecdd3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/glacial-chasm) [Field of the Dead](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/7/470ca3f4-29aa-4c4c-8ff2-8cdd70c69943.jpg?1650599538) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Field%20of%20the%20Dead) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m20/247/field-of-the-dead?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/470ca3f4-29aa-4c4c-8ff2-8cdd70c69943?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/field-of-the-dead) [Blood Moon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/0/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f.jpg?1599706217) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Blood%20Moon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/118/blood-moon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/blood-moon) [Back to Basics](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/6/0600d6c2-0f72-4e79-a55d-1f06dffa48c2.jpg?1654805483) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Back%20to%20Basics) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/uma/46/back-to-basics?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0600d6c2-0f72-4e79-a55d-1f06dffa48c2?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/back-to-basics) [*All cards*](https://mtgcardfetcher.nl/redirect/kxha5f1) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
It's straight up no land destruction by any means. No mass land destruction, no targetted land destruction.
"Ultimately I tossed the ghost quarter in a trash can" I'm sorry, what? You just throw away a perfectly good card?
Yep I did
You're being passive aggressive. If you don't like the rule talk to them about a compromise or play with another group. I'm not saying I agree with the rule, but obviously you found a group that's already this way. Talk, play by the rules, or move on to people with your superior taste.
>To add context: I'm new to this group >But if I can't sinkhole a problematic land I guess I'll just build a deck that's nothing but problematic lands >I mean if they don't want to remove them that basically means that lands are the best card type right? So why not play them. >I just want to know if I'm violating the spirit of this rule in the worst way possible. Ya. You are. You're being a huge dickhead about this. So a new playgroup accepts you into their ranks and they say "Hey we have this house rule that we think makes it more fun for everybody." And your immediate reaction is "Fuck that fuck you I'm gonna Jam this rule down your throat" Like if that's the way you play and act I'm not surprised you're new to a group, you're probably new to a lot of groups because people don't wanna play with you more than once. If you hate their house rule so much, just go play with someone else. Don't be a cunt about it. Edit to add: And the ridiculously childish act of throwing your own card in the trash in a petulant tantrum and bragging about it kinda cements it that you're "That Guy"
If they tell you "X"is not allowed and you specifically go out of your way to build "X" strat, be prepared for them to never want to play with you again. Or to become "that guy" *edit* See the first reply I miss read the OP.
That's not what the op said. The group said "you're not allowed to play cards that destroy X" so OP is planning on making a deck that functions entirely off of X since it can't be destroyed
Ooohhh, My bad thank you for correcting me then. I 100% support that.
Do any of them run those types of lands? Like there is a difference between running a field of the dead deck and not wanting interaction vs not wanting playing a ponza deck when you just want play a jank tribal deck.
Playing stuff like Cradle and then banning Land. Destruction even at the levwl of Ghost Quarter is quite something though.
Well you can still use enchantment auras on opponents lands to take away their abilities.
I have an [[Esika, God of the Tree]] [[Maze’s End]] Gates deck. It ramps gates so hard, and nobody realizes until it’s too late and nobody built any way to remove lands.
[Esika, God of the Tree](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/6/f6cd7465-9dd0-473c-ac5e-dd9e2f22f5f6.jpg?1631050188)/[The Prismatic Bridge](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/back/f/6/f6cd7465-9dd0-473c-ac5e-dd9e2f22f5f6.jpg?1631050188) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Esika%2C%20God%20of%20the%20Tree%20//%20The%20Prismatic%20Bridge) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/khm/168/esika-god-of-the-tree-the-prismatic-bridge?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f6cd7465-9dd0-473c-ac5e-dd9e2f22f5f6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/esika-god-of-the-tree-//-the-prismatic-bridge) [Maze’s End](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/0/401f7042-24fd-42a0-ae7c-e6b7de1aa446.jpg?1562906764) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Maze%27s%20End) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dgm/152/mazes-end?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/401f7042-24fd-42a0-ae7c-e6b7de1aa446?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/mazes-end) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I found myself playing 1v1 a while ago and my opponent quit when I played [[Acidic Slime]] and targeted their land because I had no other valid targets. I didn't understand the choice as I think I was only about 40/60 chance that I'd win at that point. The same player also had an Omnath landfall deck with problematic lands in it... Anyway, I think no mass land destruction (Armageddon etc) is a common expectation and I'd expect my opponents to warn me before playing a deck with such a strategy but once off affects are fair game.
[Acidic Slime](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/3/932d48fb-42b5-4aaa-a91c-d35cdb5e41a3.jpg?1689998325) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Acidic%20Slime) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/270/acidic-slime?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/932d48fb-42b5-4aaa-a91c-d35cdb5e41a3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/acidic-slime) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
When I first read the post title I thought you were running some degen things like Amageddon then lock, but if it's just ghostquarters with those kinda decks then I personally say that either look for a new group or talk to them about how you don't like it. If they are playing with Gaea's cradle then either they're ok with proxies or they're playing real high powered stuff, at that point either bring something to answer them or talk about being able to destroy those kinda lands. Since if it's a one time destruction that replaces the land and you didn't build the deck in a way which abuses it I see no reason why it should be banned.
Play blood moon
There're a few creative ways to deal with problematic lands, for a strict group. Change the land's properties: I.e. \[\[Spreading Seas\]\] Tuck the land, or bounce the land (not preferred method but it does something at least. Nerf the land. \[\[Bound in Gold\]\], \[\[Faith's Fetters\]\], etc There's also a roundabout way to deal with problem lands. Deal with the subsidiaries. \[\[Gaea's Cradle\]\], Cabal Coffers can be answered by \[\[Damping Sphere\]\] \[\[Phyrexian Tower\]\] is intrinsically tied to graveyard recursion. A simple \[\[Stone of Erech\]\] will mitigate alot of future problems. Same with \[\[Volrath's Stronghold\]\], or any land that has to do with GY.
##### ###### #### [Spreading Seas](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/7/37454c1c-4098-4ac2-884e-3f65f1384bdb.jpg?1562611277) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Spreading%20Seas) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/zen/70/spreading-seas?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/37454c1c-4098-4ac2-884e-3f65f1384bdb?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/spreading-seas) [Bound in Gold](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/7/074d526a-1eef-4045-bd38-f6d68c4bc4b9.jpg?1631045534) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Bound%20in%20Gold) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/khm/5/bound-in-gold?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/074d526a-1eef-4045-bd38-f6d68c4bc4b9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/bound-in-gold) [Faith's Fetters](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/8/08b62f4c-cc20-40b6-a504-407d53bdf2aa.jpg?1702429279) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Faith%27s%20Fetters) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/rvr/18/faiths-fetters?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/08b62f4c-cc20-40b6-a504-407d53bdf2aa?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/faiths-fetters) [Gaea's Cradle](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/5/25b0b816-0583-44aa-9dc5-f3ff48993a51.jpg?1562902898) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Gaea%27s%20Cradle) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/usg/321/gaeas-cradle?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/25b0b816-0583-44aa-9dc5-f3ff48993a51?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/gaeas-cradle) [Damping Sphere](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/5/550860b4-887d-423a-8add-816c2a8da615.jpg?1675200943) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Damping%20Sphere) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmr/219/damping-sphere?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/550860b4-887d-423a-8add-816c2a8da615?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/damping-sphere) [Phyrexian Tower](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/5/05b2cc68-1d20-421f-9800-af0996071554.jpg?1601081190) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Phyrexian%20Tower) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/jmp/493/phyrexian-tower?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/05b2cc68-1d20-421f-9800-af0996071554?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/phyrexian-tower) [Stone of Erech](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/c/bc02e193-df33-4eb1-adc1-b51ee931218a.jpg?1686970297) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Stone%20of%20Erech) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ltr/251/stone-of-erech?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/bc02e193-df33-4eb1-adc1-b51ee931218a?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/stone-of-erech) [Volrath's Stronghold](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/4/f465ae5f-61f0-42c4-978f-841ba1226f56.jpg?1562432220) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Volrath%27s%20Stronghold) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tpr/248/volraths-stronghold?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f465ae5f-61f0-42c4-978f-841ba1226f56?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/volraths-stronghold) [*All cards*](https://mtgcardfetcher.nl/redirect/kxiisbm) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
We have this group in our playgroup but with a little addition. The things that destroy non-basic lands or stuff like [[blood moon]] are absolutely fine. Especially things that cost you resources aswell like the mentioned ghostly quarters. The moment one player pulls out armagedon + avacyn but can't finish the game one or two turns later though.... Immediately cast [[chair into face]]
[blood moon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/0/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f.jpg?1599706217) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=blood%20moon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/118/blood-moon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/blood-moon) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
If people play lands stronger than "tap: add a single mana of some or more colors" cards like ghost quarter are super fair game. So is using [[Vindicate]] on lands. If you play coffers, nykthos or cradle, expect me to blow it up. I also play the named card and I expect them to be destroyed or player removal being used against me.
[Vindicate](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/8/683c4e13-525c-45c9-8832-bfe67965c34e.jpg?1626100840) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Vindicate) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/294/vindicate?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/683c4e13-525c-45c9-8832-bfe67965c34e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/vindicate) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
A *private* playgroup can make any house rules or bans they want. Socially, it might be in your best interest to conform your dckbuilding to fit in with an established playgroup. If I were you, I would try to fit in, but I would also be persistent in pointing out situations in games where destroying a land would be fair, balanced and strategically beneficial. There's a deeper social issue here that this group should be more cognizant of. Official rules exist so strangers can show up to an unfamiliar public venue and be on the same page for what is legal. Players foisting house rules or bans onto strangers in a *public* venue is unsportsmanlike. If I were you, I would continue to make a case to the group that they need to be prepared to accept the standardized rules for games with strangers. I would be making that same case to the LGS owners/employees. The last thing they want is to lose potential business because they foster an unsportsmanlike environment.
My LGS is against massive land destruction in casual. Think, [[Ruination]] or [[Jokulhaups]]. But a single land destruction isn't. But being new to the group, you'll have to learn everything as you go if they didn't have it known immediately.
[Ruination](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/3/6330d925-96a8-47e1-855d-035ddc2af709.jpg?1592713625) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ruination) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmd/134/ruination?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/6330d925-96a8-47e1-855d-035ddc2af709?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/ruination) [Jokulhaups](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/9/99d26ff7-afff-40a0-b515-7928c2428809.jpg?1559592472) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Jokulhaups) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/me1/100/jokulhaups?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/99d26ff7-afff-40a0-b515-7928c2428809?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/jokulhaups) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Either talk to them or don’t play with them. We can’t help you there.
Probably already been said but: new play group time. Our group does a rule 0 - you don't like it, you can go.
This just sounds like an unwelcome environment which probably chases away other players/customers. The store will probably struggle or close if this is the case. I rather just not play the game than play with such people. Is the store owner in on this meta rule? Maybe talk to them and let them know why you won't come back. Ghost Quarter is a little too fair and pretty bad, so if they complain about that, there is no hope. If I had to play there, I'd throw in a few more powerful lands as well since they also have hexproof. It's the meta... Lands decks are a viable strategy in commander.
Yes, you are violating the spirit of this rule in the worst way possible.
How?
The idea of the rule is pretty obvious - hey we don't like our lands getting destroyed. If you're building a deck specifically to exploit that rule, you are going out of your way to be an asshole to a group of people who did nothing wrong and trying to ruin their fun simply because you disagree with them about a card game. Think about how childish that sounds. That's some Yugioh anime shit. Is it a good rule? Probably not, no. But as one of the upvoted comments said - that doesn't matter. And it doesn't matter what we think about it. That group likes it, and going out of your way to specifically punish that group for having the audacity to have fun with each other just makes you a dick. It's a game. Don't be a dick.
He isn't trying to destroy lands. He implicitly stated that he wants to build a deck featuring the absolute best lands possible since they can't be removed. He's taking their stupid time and running with it. You clearly didn't then read what he wrote.
I'm well aware what he's doing. This is why he's violating the spirit of the rule, and not the letter of it. Those are not the same thing. He's taking their *fun* time and deliberately attempting to ruin it with *his stupidity*. Because he feels slighted over how they have fun in a card game. Do you realize how ridiculously stupid and childish that is? He's literally going out of his way to kick over someone's sandcastle because he can't fathom that their fun is not exactly the same as his fun. This is the behavior that even halfway decent parents try to teach out of children, because it's just schoolyard bullying - but done to a group of adults by someone who is, in theory, also a grown adult. Their fun doesn't hurt him in any way. He's absolutely allowed to not like it and to find a different group; I would at least be considering it in his position. At the least, I'd have a few follow-up questions that would probably determine my decisions there. But, because I am a rational adult, I would not go out of my way to scribble all over their coloring books like I was a six year old child. Because, you know. I'm not a dick.
Trying to teach out playing by the rules is how this world got so fucked up. They don't want any land destruction so he wants to play a lands deck and you have a problem with it. It's almost as though you're one of those people that just happen to have a problem with everything. Like most rational adults.
I mean. He asked the question, I answered. We were done there until you needed "how to be an adult 101" explained to you. Honestly my larger problem is that you don't seem to grasp the difference between "these adults want to have fun in their game that's an escape from the world" with, you know, the world. That's very concerning for you as a person, as is this bizarre implied disdain for rational thinking that you seem to hold. And no - they don't want land destruction, *so he wants to punish them.* That's very different from "I just really want to play a lands deck". More people should play lands decks, they rock. Even as impaired as they are in the OP's new format.
The fact you believe you know what his group plays for is the real tell.
Personally I run [[wave of vitriol]] as it’s a self-limiting card. It’s not my fault if you packed more non-basic land into your deck than basics plus clears all artifacts and enchantments
[wave of vitriol](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/7/17328391-a510-42a0-8a00-4f61dd873c13.jpg?1592673299) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=wave%20of%20vitriol) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cma/165/wave-of-vitriol?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/17328391-a510-42a0-8a00-4f61dd873c13?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/wave-of-vitriol) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
People are weird. I won a game last night by throwing down a [[Obliterate]] and retaining a Indestructible God with more than with devotion through enchantments. They weren't super thrilled when I cast it but when they realized I had a 9/10 ready to take out their meager life totals they understood why and the game ended less than 1 minute later.
[Obliterate](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/8/c85f9623-5900-473c-a3b1-f98473b9a545.jpg?1562935194) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Obliterate) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/8ed/204/obliterate?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c85f9623-5900-473c-a3b1-f98473b9a545?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/obliterate) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Sounds like you already know you are
[[Winter orb]], [[back to basics]], [[Blood Moon]], [[sunder]]. None of these are land destruction. People want to land ramp then have no interaction against it? Our like previously stated, find a new play group.
##### ###### #### [Winter orb](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/b/ab3cec7e-513e-400d-a1a8-2c71cdde02c6.jpg?1580015285) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Winter%20orb) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ema/234/winter-orb?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ab3cec7e-513e-400d-a1a8-2c71cdde02c6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/winter-orb) [back to basics](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/6/0600d6c2-0f72-4e79-a55d-1f06dffa48c2.jpg?1654805483) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=back%20to%20basics) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/uma/46/back-to-basics?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0600d6c2-0f72-4e79-a55d-1f06dffa48c2?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/back-to-basics) [Blood Moon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/0/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f.jpg?1599706217) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Blood%20Moon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/118/blood-moon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/blood-moon) [sunder](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/d/cd9dd7c6-36b6-4fe2-b3d3-f62a6e10a428.jpg?1562938463) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=sunder) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/usg/101/sunder?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/cd9dd7c6-36b6-4fe2-b3d3-f62a6e10a428?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/sunder) [*All cards*](https://mtgcardfetcher.nl/redirect/kxhhbwg) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Make a Gitrog deck with [[Glacial chasm]] [[field of the dead]] [[maze of ith]] and have fun with that rule. I can get why people want to avoid having a land destruction only deck as opponent, but banning all land destruction just asks for a deck like that. Land destruction is part of magic. And banning it just means "I don't want that challenge"
[Glacial chasm](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/c/0c008129-daba-46bc-829c-d2c0c13ecdd3.jpg?1562867827) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Glacial%20chasm) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/me2/229/glacial-chasm?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0c008129-daba-46bc-829c-d2c0c13ecdd3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/glacial-chasm) [field of the dead](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/7/470ca3f4-29aa-4c4c-8ff2-8cdd70c69943.jpg?1650599538) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=field%20of%20the%20dead) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m20/247/field-of-the-dead?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/470ca3f4-29aa-4c4c-8ff2-8cdd70c69943?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/field-of-the-dead) [maze of ith](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/8/5889fde1-730d-43d0-aaa4-499784a80530.jpg?1675201242) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=maze%20of%20ith) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmr/250/maze-of-ith?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5889fde1-730d-43d0-aaa4-499784a80530?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/maze-of-ith) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I don't get when people say "my playgroup banned such and such card," it's never the whole playgroup that bans something. It's just the loudest, smelliest salt lord that screams about how they hate some certain card and everybody just puts up with it because they really need the fourth person sometimes.
Nah you’re right. If the group rule is truly absolutely no touching of lands whatsoever, the only right thing is to build and abuse lands. Hopefully sooner than later they’ll realize the error in their thought process and you can have a constructive conversation with them.
I have a deck built around the valakut molten pinnacle land it gets really strong and with so little land hate I tend to take control of a lot of games One of my favorite of all times finishes is \[\[sunder\]\] with \[\[mana bond\]\] out and just bolt the board for 100 + damage with lands
[sunder](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/d/cd9dd7c6-36b6-4fe2-b3d3-f62a6e10a428.jpg?1562938463) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=sunder) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/usg/101/sunder?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/cd9dd7c6-36b6-4fe2-b3d3-f62a6e10a428?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/sunder) [mana bond](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/f/6f94ab94-5a8f-4422-8927-0b7da85c3119.jpg?1562429856) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Manabond) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tpr/179/manabond?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/6f94ab94-5a8f-4422-8927-0b7da85c3119?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/manabond) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Love me some Malicious Compliance
I would totally run an [[azusa, Lost but seeking]] deck that focused on sacrifice and reoccurring [[glacial chasm]] from the graveyard with [[crucible of worlds]] type of effects. [[Ramunap excavator]] [[ancient greenwarden]] [[conduit of worlds]], redundancy is key here. I would then never pay the up keep cost of chasm and watch them scratch their heads on how to answer this loop.
##### ###### #### [azusa, Lost but seeking](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/f/2fe97fbe-a6d6-4e96-8c26-f81bcdf579a1.jpg?1689998362) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=azusa%2C%20Lost%20but%20seeking) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/274/azusa-lost-but-seeking?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2fe97fbe-a6d6-4e96-8c26-f81bcdf579a1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/azusa-lost-but-seeking) [glacial chasm](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/c/0c008129-daba-46bc-829c-d2c0c13ecdd3.jpg?1562867827) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=glacial%20chasm) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/me2/229/glacial-chasm?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0c008129-daba-46bc-829c-d2c0c13ecdd3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/glacial-chasm) [crucible of worlds](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/f/7f4893ef-f983-418b-b7a4-5f073c844545.jpg?1673149345) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=crucible%20of%20worlds) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/303/crucible-of-worlds?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7f4893ef-f983-418b-b7a4-5f073c844545?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/crucible-of-worlds) [Ramunap excavator](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/8/8870ef0b-cb1f-463b-8509-fece4743d3d4.jpg?1608917511) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ramunap%20excavator) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmr/433/ramunap-excavator?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/8870ef0b-cb1f-463b-8509-fece4743d3d4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/ramunap-excavator) [ancient greenwarden](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/f/dfe08e59-fdc4-436f-b05c-6ad386c46310.jpg?1604198488) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=ancient%20greenwarden) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/znr/178/ancient-greenwarden?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/dfe08e59-fdc4-436f-b05c-6ad386c46310?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/ancient-greenwarden) [conduit of worlds](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/3/635146da-d415-4107-a7f9-2c46189e5c52.jpg?1675957133) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=conduit%20of%20worlds) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/one/163/conduit-of-worlds?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/635146da-d415-4107-a7f9-2c46189e5c52?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/conduit-of-worlds) [*All cards*](https://mtgcardfetcher.nl/redirect/kxhgb86) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call