It should be noted that Iona, Shield of Emeria got put on the banlist at the same time Painter's Servant got taken off; they very specifically did not want those two cards to be legal together but they thought Servant was fine as a combo piece without Iona to exploit it.
For those who don't get why: The combo would prevent your opponents from casting _any_ spells while you would be free to play as normal. While a win in that situation is almost inevitable, it will often take several turns to execute. Iona also shuts down mono-colored commanders outside Devoid and Artifact cards.
@@airagog umm it would be like a 3 card 3 mana combo. Reanimate then cast painter's servant. 4 cards if you want to count a way to dump her in the grave. But you're in black, so tutors galore
@fallendeus5641 no its 2 cards. Cast painters Servant. Declare white. Cast iona. Declare white. No one can Cast anything now. But at the same time... hi dead eye navigator exists and is a 2 card win the game combo WITH evasion
They banned Iona for two reasons 1) They wanted to unban the card Painter's Servant, a card that makes all other cards one color and can be used with Iona to "end the game without ending the game". The RC and the CAG both agreed that Servant was an overall more positive addition to the format than Iona and that the two could not be allowed to exist together. 2) Iona necessitated mono-colored cards running colorless removal in case Iona locked them out because there is nothing fun about being told you can't play because you brought a mono-black deck and begging the other two players at the table to let you play by removing Iona goes beyond politics.
@icansavehiphop again, provide your source.provide some actual backing to your statment. Better, actually talk to the RC. They actually tend to converse with people, and are very open about stuff
@@icansavehiphop I see this claim flying around a lot. "It was a spite ban because the one guy kept losing to it and got fed up!" And, despite all my best efforts to find *any* proof of it . . . I can never find anyone claiming this. Or even *hinting* at it . . . besides people like you, who just make the claim without proof. With that said . . . if this one member was frustrated with it . . . don't you think far *more* players were also frustrated? Let's look at the facts here: The only decks that wouldn't be *heavily* affected by Ionia being in place are 3+ color decks. It's *possible* a Two Color Deck can still work just fine, but being cut out of an entire aspect of your deck is just . . . not fun. Ionia is absolutely a problem. And, with Painter's Servant unbanned, Ionia literally *can not be unbanned.*
I'm convinced that anyone who wants Iona unbanned has never played commander with it at lower power levels. Mono-colored decks may be uncommon in CEDH, but in casual, they appear frequently. Using a single card to lock one or more opponents out of the game entirely is insane. I used to run several mono decks at my college's MTG club and had to specifically alter my decks just to not lose to Iona for the 50th time. (It should also be noted that this was during a time when Kaalia of the Vast was one of the most played commanders.) Playing a single color is already very difficult in the format so you really don't need to be further punished for doing so. I'm also not opposed to adding more stax pieces to the banlist. But calling Iona one of the least impactful is just entirely incorrect.
It’s the kind of card where the worst case scenario is so bad that it outweighs any positives. If you’re the mono-colored player shut down by it you’re basically a captive audience to the rest of the game unless someone else at the table is feeling generous.
I think with Iona, she was mostly banned (minus the painters servant combo) because it basically makes it so one player at the table can’t play. If you sit down with a group of 4 people, usually at least one person is playing mono colored or 2 colors. If you shut off one color, one person just can’t play for the rest of the game. Locking one person out of the game is just a really mean thing to do
Yeah but it would usually be used to lock down the player who’s ahead. Which is good because it stops him from winning next turn unless his board is that much better
@@tefnutofhoney2832 Nobody's playing a 9-mana win-more card when they're ahead. If they're winning they should be putting the resources into closing out the game rather than playing a disruption piece.
I think Iona is banned because it reads "Fuck you in particular!" If you name a color only 1 player plays only that player can put down their hand while not technically dead
@@delathenleso5793 I can't provide those sources, but it does seem like something Gavin might do. This is a guy who wanted to ban Tainted Bond because it was supposedly "game warping."
@@mikebott6940 I appreciate the energy, but we keep on hearing "oh the Rules Committee is just salty" constantly, without one iota of proof, not one statement of verifiable fact, and almost always about cards whose absence does tend to improve the quality of the game. Keep in mind, Gavin absolutely said that Elesh Norn, Mother of Machines, "should be banned" the day she was revealed... and would you look at that: six months later, she's not banned, it turns out that while she is powerful, she's naturally rule 0'd out of many games, and ETB decks are learning that they need non-ETB interaction. I used to think similarly to you, that the CAG and Rules Committee would ban cards based on feels over reals, but the more I've actually read their statements, looked at what they've actually done and why they say they've done it... I've really come around to them. I think they do great work, and genuinely have a vested interest in keeping the game fun for as many people as possible. Does that mean that disgusting trolls don't get to cause misery at a casual table of strangers as often? Sure. That's what we call a Feature, not a Bug.
An important thing to add with hullbreacher. it doesn't just do the combo it gives you a lot of mana meaning you can use your new hand right away and get even further ahead
This. The ideal play pattern is Turn 1 Ramp, Turn 2 hold up mana, on the end step before Turn 3 flash in Hullbreacher, on Turn 3 Wheel, and then use your 21 Treasures to win the game on that turn or the next one. Sadly, the ideal rarely happened, and it was usually a turn 5-6 Wheel, 21 Treasures, and then 6 more turns while the Hullbreacher played solitaire looking for a way to close out the game.
I have been brewing up an “Inception” deck that mostly plays Hive Mind, copy spells effects, and Wish effectsto try and play a game within a game within a game. And sense there no “official” Commander Leauge or other official events. I see the “banned” list as a suggestion more than a hard rule, and I have a play group that wants to see my inception troll deck go off exactly one time. We are going deeper Leo
@@unstopable_rob It's just a bad play pattern. There's nothing more to say about it: it makes games take too long for no benefit, and the meme is only "funny" the first time.
Seeing Leovold in the thumbnail makes me think you need to do a video similar to the YGO one about "cards that have become memes, either in or out of the community"
One consideration for the Commander banlist is the RC is generally careful about cards that cause players to make significant shifts in the ways that players build their decks. Meaning something like Iona may cause players to feel they need to run cards that are colorless removal, like Meteor Golem, that they wouldn't normally run just to deal with this one potential threat. That was one reason why many people have speculated that cards like Elesh Norn, Mother of Machines will be banned, since cards that provide removal from ETB triggers suddenly can't interact and would need to add other forms of removal to interact in meaningful ways.
The thing is, unlike Iona, that's only really an issue for decks that don't play noncreature removal. Boardwipes, good targeted removal, ability removing, etc. all stop Elesh. But if your single color (or color that contains most of your relevant removal in a multicolor deck) is named by Iona? You're just completely screwed, especially if you're the only one playing that particular color at the table other than maybe the player using Iona.
This is an excellent post. To add to it, the reason Elesh MoM *hasn't* been banned yet is because, like Thassa's Oracle, she's been fairly effectively Rule 0'd to higher power decks. She still makes regular appearances at lower power tables, but often in the hands of less experienced players that don't have the other lock pieces or play patterns down to truly make the suffocating oppressive atmosphere that a well-laced MoM can provide. Iona was banned because she was too easy and prolific, while MoM is only being watched because she requires more than just herself to be problematic.
I think you're downplaying the problems with iona. First, it can be a commander, second if one guy is playing mono color (which is already limiting yourself and shouldn't be punished further) you can literally lock them out of the game. If the rest of the table is ok with it they can literally just bully them out of the game. I mean, I think unbanning it wouldn't be as bad as people would rule 0 it out, but I think you missrepresented the problems the card brings to the table
It also forced mono color decks to run colorless removal just to deal with her (like oblivion stone), and even with super limited removal options, the commander could just be replayed again.
Yeah the mono-white Iona deck is really gonna threaten to lock that other mono-color player out of the game when they get up to 9 mana on turn 12, five turns after the green player has destroyed the entire table.
@@HakureiIllusion Have you heard of wraths and board wipes, because white has plenty to survive, also mana ramp exists in white (extraplanar lens, gauntlet of power, ect).
Also, even if there isn't a good reason to ban it, there's also no good reason to unban her. I mean, no one is missing out on an interesting archetype or specific strategy from Iona being banned. I don't think there is a person who actually wants to play her without the intention to disrupt. It's not the same as unbanning something like coalition victory which you might have the intention to just play a janky strategy and win by using it. Iona doesn't unlock any interesting strategies or unique creative concepts. The card literally just disrupts. So if it isn't good competitively and it doesn't bring anything good to the table casually, does it really matter it's banned?
10:05 very important note: only green/ white can deal with enchantements in a proper way. Imagine if only half of the table even has even more than 2 enchantment removal spells in their deck.. and even then, you just recast your commander and it starts all over again : )
Another thing with upheaval: it returns them to your hand, meaning that if you don't have no max hand size, you can kiss 3/4th of your previous board state goodbye
Here’s the difference between Iona and other stax pieces. For one, most stax pieces require you to build your deck in a certain way, and that’s not fun for most casual players to play. Iona doesn’t really do that, you can play it in almost any reanimator or polymorph deck. And that’s what players did. Iona is very similar to hullbreacher or Leovold in that it was just a powerful lock piece that casual decks were running, and wasn’t being policed as well as other cards of their kind. Also, mono color decks already have a hard time, having a card that doesn’t require any build around and says “you can’t play the game while everyone else can” is just something that really shouldn’t be allowed in commander.
Ya, he really missed the point with Iona and Stax pieces. Stax pieces are well.... pieces, multiple cards that slowly lock your opponent out of playing the game. And as its a combo of multiple cards, its a lot easier to see coming and prepare for. With Iona, its all on one card, worst case scenario the card says "Surprise! You cant play the game anymore". Also a HUGE thing is Iona can be you commander, unlike Winter Orb, you can just pay 2 extra mana to bring it back. As a mono-colored player even if you do load up your deck with colorless removal, AND have some in your hand, its not going to do anything. They just need to pay 2 more mana to bring Iona out again.
Additionally, when Iona is your commander, you start out with access to it, unlike stax pieces in the 99 To me, the argument against unbanning Iona is to ask what the format gains from having her unbanned. As a commander, the only thing that makes her unique is the ability to arbitrarily lock out players from being able to play the game. The format is better off for not having a commander that inherently leads to bad play experiences while also signaling that completely shutting off your opponents is not something desired in a social format
Love seeing the commander banlist. I always love the idea of discussing whether some of the cards could come off the list considering new cards and combos that exist
Small amount of additional context for iona: There exists a card known as painters servent. It was on the commander banned list previously. I won't go into what it does here, but it's commonly agreed servent and iona can not exist in commander together. Servent came off the banned list at the same time iona went on. Servent allowed you to do more with its inclusion then iona did. You an argue whether or not it was a good choice. But it at least gives some additional context.
@icansavehiphop and your evidence? You make the claim, provide the burden of proof. Every article I have found, including the original banned announcement, actually gives an explanation. I at least can point to the exact banned list, and what came off and on it at the same time. Also, no one RC member has Veto power. Perhaps actually talk to the RC and CAG, Learn how they make decisions.
Iona won me a game once. Casted her on a table where everyone was playing multicolor with blue (except my deck, a *borrowed* WBR angel tribal), baited them into tapping out and/or burning coubters and played Iona on a battlefield where I already had a couple decent angels in play. Everyone else played one more turn and conceded rather than being dragged into a "topdecking my only response, if any, while you pummel us" situation. It was an absurdly specific set of circumstances, it required at least some strategy to pull off, and it *still* left a bad vibe at the table. There are worse offenders, yes, but casual tables still resent losing to not being able to play.
For Leovold: Since Leovold is a legendary creature, it can be the commander of the deck. Which means, very few cards can deal with it while still being in the command zone like Declaration of Naught, Drannith Magistrate or counter spells if any of the aforementioned cards are in hand to deal with Leovold while being cast or still in the command zone. For Hullbreacher: Depending on the deck, it mostly had to do with the ability that gives the controller of the card temporary mana at worst. A lot of people are gonna wonder if you have a counterspell in hand, which you probably do, instead of Hullbreacher whenever you hold up at least three mana. Hullbreacher can be put in any deck that utilizes the draw restriction like in Leovold or in decks with a lot of draw spells or wheel effects.
iona sounds like a nightmare. I dont care if my opponent is locking everyone out of the game, but as soon as they turn to my mono green, black, or red deck, you better believe I'm scooping at instant speed because fuck that
The reason Iona is banned is because she’s targeted. It doesn’t affect everyone…just the one player that chose a mono-colored commander. Remove the color identity restriction, and she’d be unbanned in a flash! But it’s NOT just because she’s a stax piece.
As someone who has the vast majority mono color decks, I would probably stop playing commander at my power level if Iona was unbanned. I love the challenge of building and piloting mono color decks and at the power level my pod is at, Iona would slot into practically every deck that includes white...
It’s actually worse that she doesn’t say that. If you lost the game at least you can go to a different pod and start a new one. Instead you’re stuck as a captive audience, hoping that another player will take pity on you. A lot of the time they won’t because shutting you down benefits them too.
I don't believe it should be banned, but Sway is incredibly powerful, especially in decks that were peak power during the time of its banning. Effects like Jhoira to suspend spells, or combined with cards like Detention Sphere empower Sway to close games out. That said, at a prohibitively high mana cost and niche commander synergy doesnt merit a ban imho.
As someone who play monoblack decks, I absolutely hate Iona. I can dealt with winter orb, stasis, woid winover or armageddon, but not her. Once my opponent name my color and I''m done. Little i can do, other then beggin others for help.
Another thing with Erayo counting all players’ spells is that if you interact with the Erayo player to prevent them from flipping the card but don’t succeed, you probably just helped flip it faster.
Idk if anyone else has said this (and I'm pretty surprised YOU didn't say this, normally your videos are very whollistic and documented) but you left some important stuff out of the Ionia section: 1) Ionia does not make the player who cast her win the game, she just makes other players unable to play. It's very similar to the previous entry in that regard 2) She actively punches down on mono-colored decks, which are already not terribly viable; when Ionia is a legal card, it is actively a bad decision to build a mono-colored deck. 3) Unlike the other cards you compared her to (except Void Winnower, but ill get to that in a sec), Ionia is Assymetrical; there is no tactical decision to playing her, since you don't have to deal with any of the draw backs. She's easy to run, easy to cheat out, and the only thing she does is punch down on your opponents. (On a side note, I understand why you compared her to Void Winnower, but unless you have a portion of your deck dedicated to being even CMC, you probably aren't worried, since Path, Swords, Pongify, Beast Within (or song of the dryads for a bandaid solution), chaos warp and murderous rider are all odd mana cost. Where as with Ionia, theres mitigating her effect. Just wanted to respond to your "I have no idea what the rules committee was thinking" comment 🤷♂️
There are a couple of notes to be made about Iona that justify her ban even if Void Winnower and the Orbs are still unbanned. The first is, none of the other cards feel as bad when they hit. Virtually no deck will have ONLY cards with even mana value, so it's difficult for it to actually shut down any deck, and the orbs do have counterplay. However, mono-colored decks exist and are not rare, and if Iona hits one of them it shuts them down entirely, which makes it an unfun experience, plain and simple. It being asymmetrical also allows you to hit other mono-white decks as well. It also has a combo with Painter Servant, since the two of them together mean that your opponent can't cast spells full stop, but do not actually win the game, creating one of the combos that you don't want around. Of the two, the less problematic spell is Iona, since it has the other cases and the feel-bad that Servant lacks, with it being banned for its milling combo. However, once it was decided that the milling combo wasn't that bad anymore, it became obvious that there was no sense to keep Servant banned instead of Iona, so they took Servant off and banned Iona instead.
Upheaval is fine, I would argue. It's a big, splashy, and expensive sorcery that effectively says "win the game" on it, and I'm fine with those existing in EDH. Sure, when you have 9-10+ mana and you get to Upheaval and replay and land and some mana rocks you're very ahead and likely to win, but you *already* had 9-10+ mana available. How many cards are there in EDH that will basically win you the game if you have at least 10 mana? I mean, just in blue there's Expropriate, Time Stretch, Onniscience, Enter the Infinite, (sometimes) overloaded Cyclonic Rift, etc. Really, the only reason I can see for Upheaval being banned is so people don't just cast it willy-nilly with no plan to use it to win the game, because that *would* suck, but I would argue that applies to lots of other cards that are legal, and thus is more of a problem for the social contract aspect of EDH to handle as opposed to the ban list.
Upheaval is not that powerful. The ban is specifically because most players are salty about land removal….which was a common thing back in early MTG. Only reason for the ban is because Wizards makes more money off faster paced cards.
Because Iona is not symmetrical, and most of the Armegeddon or Orb effects are, it's much easier to just lock someone out completely. When was the last time you put Universal Solvent in your commander deck to destroy Iona? Exactly.
Add in the extra context of what came off the banned list at that time. Painters servent managed to come off. At the time, it was firmly believed those 2 shouldn't exist in the same format
Iona can target certain (or all) players way too easily, which is usually the player(s) that represents the biggest threat, making it a versatile Stax piece, whereas the Winter Orb and Stasis affect all players, including it's controller, necessitating very specific deck construction to be effective, while Iona doesn't affect it's controller negatively in any way. I've played against it many times and it most often signaled win condition for the player using it, and it's about as un-fun as a card gets.
Iona could be unbanned as you are right that there are objectively more powerful effects but the fact that it's very likely to just lock a specific player of your choice out of the game and the other players have little to no incentive to target it makes it much worse for the social part of the game. winter orb is horribly broken and mean in commander but at least you know that everyone at the table wants it gone and someone will likely have something to destroy it, Iona is likely just a kick a player out of the game piece that has inherently limited removal options when used this way
"I'm sure we can come to an arrangement." "The arrangement is you either banhammer or you can't play." Dinkleberg: "Well, who can argue with that logic?"
The only reason I'd want Iona unbanned would be to give all the 30+ counter spell blue mages at my locals a taste of their medicine. But that being said, I don't want her off the list for the simple fact that it's waaay more oppressive than you're letting on. I played when she was in standard back in OG zendikar block and the sheer number of times I saw people, myself included, get locked out of a game on turn 4 was unreal. Since she's a commander it really wouldn't be that difficult to turbo her out on turn 3-4. I main mono red control with Jaya Ballard who regularly hits 7+ mana turn 4. So i know it's possible to hit that much mana that quickly in mono white.
I don't feel like your analysis of Hullbreacher is...correct? Like it having flash is really important but Notion Thief ALSO has Flash so its worth noting there are two other really big things that set Hullbreacher apart 1) Hullbreacher is 2U, not 2UB. Being able to come down a mana earlier is hugely impactful in terms of how quickly it can be a threat, and it can even respond to other draw effects pretty quickly before you decide to wheel. 2) Hullbreacher in a multiplayer game produces tremendous amounts of mana. If you Wheel of Fortune, you draw a new hand of 7 cards AND 21 treasures. In a game like cEDH, that's pretty likely to end the game on the spot, especially if you draw into more wheels or Timetwister style effects. It essentially turns every wheel into both card draw, hand control, AND a massive ritual whose mana can be stored. It breaks the symmetry of the card in a really massive way, and if you have cards like Demonic Tutor, Underworld Breach etc it wins you the game because of it. That's honestly why its the most powerful of the bunch.
Erayo would be really interesting in cEDH games. It would probably get desroyed with its transform trigger on the stack a lot, which would be interesting.
Surprised you didn't mention the Treasures part of Hullbreacher more in your explanation. It doesn't just negate draws, it replaces each draw that would have happened with a Treasure being generated _on your_ (the player who played Hullbreacher) _side of the field_ A wheel with Hullbreacher out not only forces all opponents into being Hellbent, it also gives the HB player a ton of mana to be able to play out whatever they drew in their new hand and/or whatever cards they are able to draw going forward, essentially making the card be a Narset (a card that many people call to be banned for the discussed wheel interactions) and Dockside Extortionist (a card many people agree generates way too much mana advantage far too easily and may be deserving of a ban in the future) combined And unlike Dockside you don't need additional pieces, like Blink spells or to sacrifice and reanimate it, to continue getting value from HB. In addition to stopping your opponents from casting draw spells moving forward, there are lots of mandatory draw triggers like Enchantress effects, Beast Whisperer, Vedalken Archmage, etc. that if present on the battlefield essentially turns HB into a soft Stax effect against one of more players, as now by just playing their deck they compound the advantages that the HB player already has
I still believe that, if Hullbreacher had given you treasures but still allowed other people to draw their cards, it wouldn't have been banned. It's funny how much power a single word in the card text box can have.
@@HakureiIllusion It's very similar, yes. I don't think a second Smothering Tithe would be that big of an issue. Plus, in traditional fashion, the White version of the card would be significantly weaker lmao
cards that punish players for only playing one colour of mana are inherently unbalanced in commander, and I'm not talking about cards like choke or boil, those punish mono blue decks, Iona can punish *any* mono colour deck, and nothing is quite as rude as that one ahole player (and every lgs has one) who is all too happy to purposefully lock out one player in a multiplayer game if anything Iona proves there needs to be a separate banlist for CEDH, it's fine there, you should expect to run into miserable prison decks, but it should not be legal in the format as a whole
Sorry, but Void Winnower is not "just as disruptive" as Iona. Iona should remain banned forever. The fact that Color identity exists in commander means Iona should never be unbanned.
I would like to see hullbreacher unbanned but with the wheel thing I get it. I have a Kwain deck that is super fun but the major downside is I will be giving everyone cards constantly and in blue/white aside from narset I haven’t found a real solid way to stop everyone else from profiting off my crackhead tap untap stuff the deck does. Hullbreacher in my deck wouldn’t feel too oppressive would still suck for sure but would give me something to hunt down and let me use my commander to draw for only me. I get it though just wish I could use it would fit so well without being a combo
l find it hilarious that in a set literally called "Commander Legends", they printed a card which they immediately banned because it was deemed unfun. In my opinion, if Hulbreacher should stay banned, then Dockside Extortionist should also be banned. ln higher power CEDH tables, almost everyone without exception plays a combination of Blue/Black, and l don't think that anyone in the table wouldn't have an answer to HB. As for lower powered tables, honestly, l think it's the same thing. All colours have a way of dealing with creatures so l don't think it would be such a big deal. Now as for the arguments for wheel effects. While l agree that with Hullbreacher down it basically becomes impossible to play, wheels in CEDH aren't that well spread, and if you're playing casually then your play group should've already set some rules of what NOT to play.
Just a side tangent and venting here, but what also makes a legacy legal card STOP players from playing the game is an unreasonable price. i don't care how good Wheel of Fortune is, i'd rather use Magus of the Wheel. i don't care how good Lions Eye Diamond is, i'll do my best to make use of Diamond Lion which i still think should had been designed to be a ONE casting cost spell not two. Linvala, Keeper of Silence is a commander option where depending on what your playing can read "Target player can't play the game" while everyone else seems to have only ETB effects and combat triggers. BUT, you can still do something to advance your boardstate and potentially interact with your opponents, including remove Linvala, Keeper of Silence. Iona, Shield of Emeria however, because the COMMANDER format is entirely built around playing a color identity, the Iona player can literally just name your color, and suddenly you can't play the game anymore. And if you had access to removal you can't play them. Static Orb, Winter Orb, and Stasis each have a "stipulation" for the card to be in effect or otherwise it also effects the player who played it. Reason why i don't like Drannith Magistrate, but unlike Iona which can completely shut down a players ability to play, Drannith Magistrate only limits your opponents ability to play. Notion Thief is difficult enough to cast especially at four cmc that it's a balanced card. Narset parter of veils is never going to get banned because itself is a noncreature spell and being a planeswalker you can directly attack it if able to. Hullbreacher especially deserved to be banned because it not only allowed you to remove your opponents hands, but also give you mana for doing so.
I mean, the guy clearly doesn't get it, and wants to be making videos about Modern and Legacy, but lives in a world where everyone plays Commander instead because Commander is more fun than Modern or Legacy. It's like watching an increasingly out-of-touch boomer trying to connect with the hip kids, being sincere about it, but just... not getting it.
@@tinfoilslacks3750 *wasn't* designed for Commander. Since about 2020, WotC has focused intently on putting out made-for-Commander products, designs 10-20 Commander Decks each year, with made-for-Commander cards, and created multiple mechanics, like Goad, that only work in 3+ player... of which only Commander has widespread adoption. Stop being salty about Commander being the most commonly played form of Magic. The dude making these videos might be salty about it, but even if he's bad at it, he acknowledges that Commander is Magic these days.
The scriptwriter certainty gets way more sassy when talking about Commander, which is probably a testament to how much that format has divided the MtG community
It's more because he doesn't understand Commander very well, and is trying to approach it from a competitive magic mindset. This is the exact wrong way to approach the Commander community, and it shows in his hilariously bad takes.
...Stasis and Winter orb both have playable ways around them. Enchantment removal for Stasis, and other untap bans and/or artifact removal for Winter Orb. Ions doesn't really have a workaround like that. It's a 7/7, which outside of removal spells can be difficult to remove by the simple act of keeping it out of combat, and colorless has very few outright removal effects. As for Armageddon, its a lot less permanent than untap banning is. It doesn't prevent new lands from being used like an untap ban, and it doesn't prevent specialized gravegrabbing from getting those lands back. Iona does, by making those new lands almost entirely useless. I don't generally like bans in EDH and am a MASSIVE proponent of Rule Zero - hell, I'd let someone use Emrakul Aeons Torn as their commander without a second thought - but I absolutely support this particular ban.
I saw the similarity right away. Fiber Jar + Life Equalizer = Start The Duel Over As The Usual Anime Duel Since It's The Same But With 4000 Life. How to play: Take damage as you find these 2 cards until you can cast both of them, if you do, start the duel over. _Alvida knows how much easier this is without her in place of that floating tree castle. She has taken her Fiber to etb but it doesn't help as often as the jar would etbing itself._
This ignores the fact that commander is actually how a lot of players are learning nowadays. While I agree with banned as commander being a separate list being a good thing, it's still needless added complexity.
I remember back in 2015 when this dude was sleeving a commander deck and I asked him "oh whats the deck/ command". Shows me Erayo and tells me its designed to be a blue stax deck to police the table and I mentioned "I think its banned". The dude decks his phone and was like "damn ..."
Some of these comments make me think several people here haven't faced down Iona in a competent deck. She doesn’t even need Painter's Servant to end a game. Putting aside mono color decks are often just done, and has a fairly good scoop rate for dual color decks: Turn one Show and Tell, turn two reanimate. Throw in Sakashima just for a two color block. Sneak attacked for insurance, and an extra 7 damage to a lethal swing, or to just ruin a turn for someone. Even hard cast late in the game no one is happy to see her. It's odd whoever wrote that script classes stacks as worse. Every color has an answer for artifacts, and enchantments. Several have options with spilt second that are almost impossible to stop. Iona says no, and it is so. Full disclosure: I don't support any bans at all. Accounting for the arguably cheap shit your play group goes for is part of the fun. It's just odd to see support for a ban list, and an argument to unban one of the biggest go fuck yourself cards ever printed.
Iona is the only one i would say to take off, its 9 mana. It doesn't win the game when you play it. Hit with 2 removal spells and its almost unplayable as a commander but i also think they should bring back the banned as commander list.
Banned as Commander list needs to come back, IDK why the RC can't figure out anything better than just banning a card full stop, it should be so easy. Like Lutri, its one of the worst versions of that effect, it should just be banned as companion but playable as your commander or in the 99, I think its so stupid that its not.
with sway of the stars i think the real thing is that while it's not at all powerful there's never an argument that resolving one makes the game more fun or interesting for anyone except some petty sadist who wants the game to last another hour
Erayo isn't as big an issue as people think it is, considering how simplistic it is to get around via "uncounterable" spells and effects or lands like Bosejiu, who shelters all being affordable lands that solve the issue entirely to deal with it. Its not a threat, it never was. As for Iona, the sole reason she was banned was painter's servant. the two simply can't exist together cause it buggers far too effortlessly on a very effortless curve. CEDH should -never- be a factor in bans/unbans, the format is basically poor mans canadian highlander and frankly, anyone playing CEDH should play that instead if they give a remote flying frig about competition and skill. this is at least, my opinion anyway. Especially on Erayo as someone who ran her exclusively up until she was banned all around. I for one, am all for a "banned as commander" list return. It was so small and barely anything would be added to it in current stand point, that it would hardly be confusing for new players IMHO.
The fact that Leonard and hullbreacher don’t end the game on the spot is the reason they’re so much better unbanned. If someone does that combo and grinds the game to a halt rather than winning on the spot, it suddenly becomes a game of tyrant. I think that’s a fun enough play pattern.
@@delathenleso5793 my dude, consider the game you beat someone that did a combo like that, it’s the kind of game you’d remember for a long time because the victory would feel so good. I played tons of monopoly as a kid, so perhaps I’m less annoyed by grindy games than most. Either way, I’m always interested in a rule 0 discussion, and further respecting what other people consider fun.
@@leotrollstoy2351 I'm not the kind of sadistic limp-dicked loser that has to get my jollies off of utterly ruining another person's day, all because I lack the capacity for normal human interaction that the play pattern you're suggesting so thoroughly embodies.
I remember i really wanted to get a Hullbreacher for my beckett brass deck and at the store was told it was banned, sorta disheartening but makrs sense
I'll be long gone before wizards unbans gifts ungiven but hey at least my grandkids can finally play it when a more power-crept version is released anyway!
Well, Hullbreacher gets 1 treasure per card that would have been drawn. So if someone has 6 cards in the hand, that is 6 cards and 18 mana whilst emptying each other player's hand.
No, read the card. Hullbreacher stops them from drawing more than one card as well. They can only draw that very first card. Literally the only difference between the two draw effects is that hullbreacher gives you treasure tokens. Unless there's been a very weird judge ruling that for some reason makes "more than one card each turn" mean "more than one card at a time"...
Iona is worse than Stasis/Orb/Armageddon purely because of how one-sided it is Stasis, Orb, and Armageddon disrupt ALL spells, not just one color... but that's just it. They disrupt ALL spells. Including yours. Stasis and Winter Orb affect your untaps. Armageddon destroys your lands. Iona doesn't block your spells, even if you're playing the named color. A monowhite deck could play Iona naming white and then merrily cast Path to Exile right after it because it only affects opponents.
Plus its a stricter and more persistent form of disabling than those cards. Armageddon is one-and-done and can be recovered from. While iirc both stasis and orb have upkeep costs that need to be maintained. Iona has none of that
@@tefnutofhoney2832 Orb doesn't (Though if you can somehow tap it it becomes disabled) Stasis, however, does require a blue mana per turn, to keep it on the field and since you don't have untaps, you can run out of blue mana with a swiftness
@@Merlewhitefire Nobody is running either of these cards without multiple ways to break parity. Either they've got Urza or Derevi in the command zone, or a Seedborn Muse or Unwinding Clock, or any of the massive amount of blue cards that can tap/untap things at instant speed, and they aren't putting these stax pieces out there until they're ready to work around them.
Sounds like Vanity's Emptiness. _I play the Iona trap and clip her wings my next turn. Now I special summon whatever you could have blocked with your own specials._
“Why is this asymmetric lockout card banned when these symmetrical stacks/land destruction cards aren’t, I have no idea” That’s when I unsubscribed. Even ignoring the clear disdain for Commander as a format, at least understand symmetrical vs. asymmetrical.
Upheaval should never be unbanned. Upheaval plus a card like fast bond means you will be near undefeatable after you resolve it. Tap all mana sources Upheaval, cast fastbond again. Replay all your lands cast a spell to recycle Upheaval and then so long as you have a way to gain life then it's impossible for your opponents to catch up
Fastbond is banned too. I'd like to see a video that mentions why that one's there, but not because I think it should be unbanned, just curious. But I also agree that Upheaval should also stay on the banlist as well.
I actually disagree here. Upheaval is a symmetrical Cyc Rift that also hits lands. Sure, you can play around it by setting yourself up, but that still requires some planning. You don't have to plan at ALL with Rift, because as the player casting it, there's nothing to play around. Losing the lands does certainly suck, but it's better to lose your lands than to immediately lose the game. Though, if it were up to me, I'd choose to ban Rift over unbanning Upheaval.
The other erayo issue: arcane laboratory. Opponents can’t remove it becuase their first spell is countered by erayo, and the lab prevents them from casting any more spells.
Yep. We will also add rule of law, if it's not your commander, but your in W/U. But I think it's stronger as the commander, even if you have less copies of the other part
All due respect but you are completely wrong on Iona. Its band cause it feels really bad to be the only player at the table locked out. If you get locked out you might as well get up and find a new table. There isn't any reason for anyone not effect to counter or remove her and the game will most likely continue for a long time. Cards that lock the whole table have less negative impact on the game since there are 3 players that will try to stop them. Cards that make a single player feel picked on are not good for the game.
Finally someone who understands. Iona is not a problem. I played Iona, but not as some reanimation target. She was more a tech choice in my mono white Thalia deck, because she gave me the ability to lock down a color. No other card I had access to could do that, and even when I could play her, she rarely survived more than a turn. Which was fine because most of the time that is what I needed. An since all the people I played had more than two colors, locking one color only slowed them down just enough so I could get something on the board.
She completely shut down any and all mono color decks. Not make it difficult, straight up said you can’t play the game unless you have a clunky colorless removal spell. It quite literally brings nothing to the format
@@kevinkennedy-8606this exactly. She basically says "monocolor decks must bring at least one garbage card and pray they draw it, or literally beg the rest of the table to solve it and not just take advantage of your inability to play"
It should be noted that Iona, Shield of Emeria got put on the banlist at the same time Painter's Servant got taken off; they very specifically did not want those two cards to be legal together but they thought Servant was fine as a combo piece without Iona to exploit it.
For those who don't get why: The combo would prevent your opponents from casting _any_ spells while you would be free to play as normal.
While a win in that situation is almost inevitable, it will often take several turns to execute.
Iona also shuts down mono-colored commanders outside Devoid and Artifact cards.
Because painter's servant was never the issue. It just made the issue worse.
Tbh Iona should be unbanned.
12 mana with a 2 card combo to win the game is so inefficient its laughable.
@@airagog umm it would be like a 3 card 3 mana combo. Reanimate then cast painter's servant. 4 cards if you want to count a way to dump her in the grave. But you're in black, so tutors galore
@fallendeus5641 no its 2 cards.
Cast painters Servant. Declare white. Cast iona. Declare white. No one can Cast anything now. But at the same time... hi dead eye navigator exists and is a 2 card win the game combo WITH evasion
They banned Iona for two reasons
1) They wanted to unban the card Painter's Servant, a card that makes all other cards one color and can be used with Iona to "end the game without ending the game". The RC and the CAG both agreed that Servant was an overall more positive addition to the format than Iona and that the two could not be allowed to exist together.
2) Iona necessitated mono-colored cards running colorless removal in case Iona locked them out because there is nothing fun about being told you can't play because you brought a mono-black deck and begging the other two players at the table to let you play by removing Iona goes beyond politics.
Iona was a spite ban. one of the members lost to a guy who played iona a lot and got fed up with it
@icansavehiphop again, provide your source.provide some actual backing to your statment.
Better, actually talk to the RC. They actually tend to converse with people, and are very open about stuff
@@icansavehiphop Citation needed
@@icansavehiphop I see this claim flying around a lot. "It was a spite ban because the one guy kept losing to it and got fed up!" And, despite all my best efforts to find *any* proof of it . . . I can never find anyone claiming this. Or even *hinting* at it . . . besides people like you, who just make the claim without proof.
With that said . . . if this one member was frustrated with it . . . don't you think far *more* players were also frustrated? Let's look at the facts here: The only decks that wouldn't be *heavily* affected by Ionia being in place are 3+ color decks. It's *possible* a Two Color Deck can still work just fine, but being cut out of an entire aspect of your deck is just . . . not fun. Ionia is absolutely a problem. And, with Painter's Servant unbanned, Ionia literally *can not be unbanned.*
Iona got banned because of salty blue players, can't change my mind
I'm convinced that anyone who wants Iona unbanned has never played commander with it at lower power levels. Mono-colored decks may be uncommon in CEDH, but in casual, they appear frequently. Using a single card to lock one or more opponents out of the game entirely is insane. I used to run several mono decks at my college's MTG club and had to specifically alter my decks just to not lose to Iona for the 50th time. (It should also be noted that this was during a time when Kaalia of the Vast was one of the most played commanders.) Playing a single color is already very difficult in the format so you really don't need to be further punished for doing so. I'm also not opposed to adding more stax pieces to the banlist. But calling Iona one of the least impactful is just entirely incorrect.
It’s the kind of card where the worst case scenario is so bad that it outweighs any positives. If you’re the mono-colored player shut down by it you’re basically a captive audience to the rest of the game unless someone else at the table is feeling generous.
I think with Iona, she was mostly banned (minus the painters servant combo) because it basically makes it so one player at the table can’t play. If you sit down with a group of 4 people, usually at least one person is playing mono colored or 2 colors. If you shut off one color, one person just can’t play for the rest of the game. Locking one person out of the game is just a really mean thing to do
Yeah but it would usually be used to lock down the player who’s ahead. Which is good because it stops him from winning next turn unless his board is that much better
@@Garl_Vinlandnah. Its usually used BY the player whos ahead. Its toxic, and should stay banned.
@@tefnutofhoney2832 Nobody's playing a 9-mana win-more card when they're ahead. If they're winning they should be putting the resources into closing out the game rather than playing a disruption piece.
@@HakureiIllusionyes they are 😂 if your behind your not going to waste your time playing this card 😂
@@HakureiIllusion maybe not for 9 mana. But nobody pays 9 mana anyways
I think Iona is banned because it reads "Fuck you in particular!" If you name a color only 1 player plays only that player can put down their hand while not technically dead
Iona was a spite ban. one of the members lost to a guy who played iona a lot and got fed up with it
@@icansavehiphop I can understand that guy very well and a lot of other people will have/would have had that same experience
@@icansavehiphop Sources or it didn't happen.
@@delathenleso5793 I can't provide those sources, but it does seem like something Gavin might do. This is a guy who wanted to ban Tainted Bond because it was supposedly "game warping."
@@mikebott6940 I appreciate the energy, but we keep on hearing "oh the Rules Committee is just salty" constantly, without one iota of proof, not one statement of verifiable fact, and almost always about cards whose absence does tend to improve the quality of the game.
Keep in mind, Gavin absolutely said that Elesh Norn, Mother of Machines, "should be banned" the day she was revealed... and would you look at that: six months later, she's not banned, it turns out that while she is powerful, she's naturally rule 0'd out of many games, and ETB decks are learning that they need non-ETB interaction.
I used to think similarly to you, that the CAG and Rules Committee would ban cards based on feels over reals, but the more I've actually read their statements, looked at what they've actually done and why they say they've done it...
I've really come around to them. I think they do great work, and genuinely have a vested interest in keeping the game fun for as many people as possible.
Does that mean that disgusting trolls don't get to cause misery at a casual table of strangers as often?
Sure. That's what we call a Feature, not a Bug.
An important thing to add with hullbreacher. it doesn't just do the combo it gives you a lot of mana meaning you can use your new hand right away and get even further ahead
This. The ideal play pattern is Turn 1 Ramp, Turn 2 hold up mana, on the end step before Turn 3 flash in Hullbreacher, on Turn 3 Wheel, and then use your 21 Treasures to win the game on that turn or the next one.
Sadly, the ideal rarely happened, and it was usually a turn 5-6 Wheel, 21 Treasures, and then 6 more turns while the Hullbreacher played solitaire looking for a way to close out the game.
This is why Shaharezad should be unbanned. If "not playing Magic" is bad, then having to play more Magic should be good.
I have been brewing up an “Inception” deck that mostly plays Hive Mind, copy spells effects, and Wish effectsto try and play a game within a game within a game. And sense there no “official” Commander Leauge or other official events. I see the “banned” list as a suggestion more than a hard rule, and I have a play group that wants to see my inception troll deck go off exactly one time. We are going deeper Leo
It was actually unbanned in legacy in I believe 08, they quickly rebanned the card
@@unstopable_rob It's just a bad play pattern. There's nothing more to say about it: it makes games take too long for no benefit, and the meme is only "funny" the first time.
@@thepoorgamer3208 that's a super healthy attitude, and exactly how you're meant to handle commander. Hope the deck works out dude.
Lmaooo 😂😂😂😂
Seeing Leovold in the thumbnail makes me think you need to do a video similar to the YGO one about "cards that have become memes, either in or out of the community"
Would you like to debate Steven Univserse with me?
One consideration for the Commander banlist is the RC is generally careful about cards that cause players to make significant shifts in the ways that players build their decks. Meaning something like Iona may cause players to feel they need to run cards that are colorless removal, like Meteor Golem, that they wouldn't normally run just to deal with this one potential threat. That was one reason why many people have speculated that cards like Elesh Norn, Mother of Machines will be banned, since cards that provide removal from ETB triggers suddenly can't interact and would need to add other forms of removal to interact in meaningful ways.
The thing is, unlike Iona, that's only really an issue for decks that don't play noncreature removal. Boardwipes, good targeted removal, ability removing, etc. all stop Elesh. But if your single color (or color that contains most of your relevant removal in a multicolor deck) is named by Iona? You're just completely screwed, especially if you're the only one playing that particular color at the table other than maybe the player using Iona.
This is an excellent post. To add to it, the reason Elesh MoM *hasn't* been banned yet is because, like Thassa's Oracle, she's been fairly effectively Rule 0'd to higher power decks. She still makes regular appearances at lower power tables, but often in the hands of less experienced players that don't have the other lock pieces or play patterns down to truly make the suffocating oppressive atmosphere that a well-laced MoM can provide.
Iona was banned because she was too easy and prolific, while MoM is only being watched because she requires more than just herself to be problematic.
I think you're downplaying the problems with iona. First, it can be a commander, second if one guy is playing mono color (which is already limiting yourself and shouldn't be punished further) you can literally lock them out of the game. If the rest of the table is ok with it they can literally just bully them out of the game. I mean, I think unbanning it wouldn't be as bad as people would rule 0 it out, but I think you missrepresented the problems the card brings to the table
It also forced mono color decks to run colorless removal just to deal with her (like oblivion stone), and even with super limited removal options, the commander could just be replayed again.
Yeah the mono-white Iona deck is really gonna threaten to lock that other mono-color player out of the game when they get up to 9 mana on turn 12, five turns after the green player has destroyed the entire table.
I mean, consider Tithe exists now, it’s not that hard to ramp with white.
@@HakureiIllusion Have you heard of wraths and board wipes, because white has plenty to survive, also mana ramp exists in white (extraplanar lens, gauntlet of power, ect).
Also, even if there isn't a good reason to ban it, there's also no good reason to unban her. I mean, no one is missing out on an interesting archetype or specific strategy from Iona being banned. I don't think there is a person who actually wants to play her without the intention to disrupt. It's not the same as unbanning something like coalition victory which you might have the intention to just play a janky strategy and win by using it. Iona doesn't unlock any interesting strategies or unique creative concepts. The card literally just disrupts. So if it isn't good competitively and it doesn't bring anything good to the table casually, does it really matter it's banned?
10:05 very important note: only green/ white can deal with enchantements in a proper way. Imagine if only half of the table even has even more than 2 enchantment removal spells in their deck.. and even then, you just recast your commander and it starts all over again : )
As a guy who often plays Dimir, I know just what you mean.
Another thing with upheaval: it returns them to your hand, meaning that if you don't have no max hand size, you can kiss 3/4th of your previous board state goodbye
Here’s the difference between Iona and other stax pieces.
For one, most stax pieces require you to build your deck in a certain way, and that’s not fun for most casual players to play. Iona doesn’t really do that, you can play it in almost any reanimator or polymorph deck. And that’s what players did.
Iona is very similar to hullbreacher or Leovold in that it was just a powerful lock piece that casual decks were running, and wasn’t being policed as well as other cards of their kind.
Also, mono color decks already have a hard time, having a card that doesn’t require any build around and says “you can’t play the game while everyone else can” is just something that really shouldn’t be allowed in commander.
Ya, he really missed the point with Iona and Stax pieces. Stax pieces are well.... pieces, multiple cards that slowly lock your opponent out of playing the game. And as its a combo of multiple cards, its a lot easier to see coming and prepare for. With Iona, its all on one card, worst case scenario the card says "Surprise! You cant play the game anymore". Also a HUGE thing is Iona can be you commander, unlike Winter Orb, you can just pay 2 extra mana to bring it back. As a mono-colored player even if you do load up your deck with colorless removal, AND have some in your hand, its not going to do anything. They just need to pay 2 more mana to bring Iona out again.
Additionally, when Iona is your commander, you start out with access to it, unlike stax pieces in the 99
To me, the argument against unbanning Iona is to ask what the format gains from having her unbanned. As a commander, the only thing that makes her unique is the ability to arbitrarily lock out players from being able to play the game. The format is better off for not having a commander that inherently leads to bad play experiences while also signaling that completely shutting off your opponents is not something desired in a social format
Love seeing the commander banlist. I always love the idea of discussing whether some of the cards could come off the list considering new cards and combos that exist
Small amount of additional context for iona:
There exists a card known as painters servent. It was on the commander banned list previously.
I won't go into what it does here, but it's commonly agreed servent and iona can not exist in commander together.
Servent came off the banned list at the same time iona went on. Servent allowed you to do more with its inclusion then iona did.
You an argue whether or not it was a good choice. But it at least gives some additional context.
Iona was a spite ban. one of the members lost to a guy who played iona a lot and got fed up with it
@icansavehiphop and your evidence? You make the claim, provide the burden of proof. Every article I have found, including the original banned announcement, actually gives an explanation.
I at least can point to the exact banned list, and what came off and on it at the same time.
Also, no one RC member has Veto power.
Perhaps actually talk to the RC and CAG, Learn how they make decisions.
Iona won me a game once. Casted her on a table where everyone was playing multicolor with blue (except my deck, a *borrowed* WBR angel tribal), baited them into tapping out and/or burning coubters and played Iona on a battlefield where I already had a couple decent angels in play. Everyone else played one more turn and conceded rather than being dragged into a "topdecking my only response, if any, while you pummel us" situation.
It was an absurdly specific set of circumstances, it required at least some strategy to pull off, and it *still* left a bad vibe at the table. There are worse offenders, yes, but casual tables still resent losing to not being able to play.
For Leovold: Since Leovold is a legendary creature, it can be the commander of the deck. Which means, very few cards can deal with it while still being in the command zone like Declaration of Naught, Drannith Magistrate or counter spells if any of the aforementioned cards are in hand to deal with Leovold while being cast or still in the command zone.
For Hullbreacher: Depending on the deck, it mostly had to do with the ability that gives the controller of the card temporary mana at worst. A lot of people are gonna wonder if you have a counterspell in hand, which you probably do, instead of Hullbreacher whenever you hold up at least three mana. Hullbreacher can be put in any deck that utilizes the draw restriction like in Leovold or in decks with a lot of draw spells or wheel effects.
iona sounds like a nightmare. I dont care if my opponent is locking everyone out of the game, but as soon as they turn to my mono green, black, or red deck, you better believe I'm scooping at instant speed because fuck that
As someone who played when she was legal, she was. Every kaalia deck would cheat her out first
The reason Iona is banned is because she’s targeted. It doesn’t affect everyone…just the one player that chose a mono-colored commander.
Remove the color identity restriction, and she’d be unbanned in a flash! But it’s NOT just because she’s a stax piece.
As someone who has the vast majority mono color decks, I would probably stop playing commander at my power level if Iona was unbanned. I love the challenge of building and piloting mono color decks and at the power level my pod is at, Iona would slot into practically every deck that includes white...
Well painters servant breaks iona on top of nullifing mono decks
I do not think ppl would be a bigger fan of iona if she said opponents can not play colloured spells.
Iona was a spite ban. one of the members lost to a guy who played iona a lot and got fed up with it
@icansavehiphop lol that sounds like Sheldon
Iona might as well say “target mono colored player loses the game”
It’s actually worse that she doesn’t say that. If you lost the game at least you can go to a different pod and start a new one. Instead you’re stuck as a captive audience, hoping that another player will take pity on you. A lot of the time they won’t because shutting you down benefits them too.
I don't believe it should be banned, but Sway is incredibly powerful, especially in decks that were peak power during the time of its banning. Effects like Jhoira to suspend spells, or combined with cards like Detention Sphere empower Sway to close games out. That said, at a prohibitively high mana cost and niche commander synergy doesnt merit a ban imho.
As someone who play monoblack decks, I absolutely hate Iona. I can dealt with winter orb, stasis, woid winover or armageddon, but not her. Once my opponent name my color and I''m done. Little i can do, other then beggin others for help.
Exactly. The one time someone has used her against me. They actually apologized.
The only possible answer in those cases would be All Is Dust...
@@mikebott6940 or universal solvent. Both absolute garbage cards. We should not have to worsen our decks. *markedly*, because one card is legal.
@@tefnutofhoney2832 I dunno... All is Dust has some downright mean applications in a Tergrid deck.
I’d also like to point out that Erayo, Sorotari Acsendant is a better version of Jin, progress tyrant.
Another thing with Erayo counting all players’ spells is that if you interact with the Erayo player to prevent them from flipping the card but don’t succeed, you probably just helped flip it faster.
Idk if anyone else has said this (and I'm pretty surprised YOU didn't say this, normally your videos are very whollistic and documented) but you left some important stuff out of the Ionia section:
1) Ionia does not make the player who cast her win the game, she just makes other players unable to play. It's very similar to the previous entry in that regard
2) She actively punches down on mono-colored decks, which are already not terribly viable; when Ionia is a legal card, it is actively a bad decision to build a mono-colored deck.
3) Unlike the other cards you compared her to (except Void Winnower, but ill get to that in a sec), Ionia is Assymetrical; there is no tactical decision to playing her, since you don't have to deal with any of the draw backs. She's easy to run, easy to cheat out, and the only thing she does is punch down on your opponents.
(On a side note, I understand why you compared her to Void Winnower, but unless you have a portion of your deck dedicated to being even CMC, you probably aren't worried, since Path, Swords, Pongify, Beast Within (or song of the dryads for a bandaid solution), chaos warp and murderous rider are all odd mana cost. Where as with Ionia, theres mitigating her effect.
Just wanted to respond to your "I have no idea what the rules committee was thinking" comment 🤷♂️
I remember the day Leovold got banned. My housemate called me in distress, despite me sleeping like two rooms away.
Leovold is the reason I purchased a timetwister. It took me months to perfect a deck and then it got banned. I was running hermit druid lines.
There are a couple of notes to be made about Iona that justify her ban even if Void Winnower and the Orbs are still unbanned.
The first is, none of the other cards feel as bad when they hit. Virtually no deck will have ONLY cards with even mana value, so it's difficult for it to actually shut down any deck, and the orbs do have counterplay. However, mono-colored decks exist and are not rare, and if Iona hits one of them it shuts them down entirely, which makes it an unfun experience, plain and simple. It being asymmetrical also allows you to hit other mono-white decks as well.
It also has a combo with Painter Servant, since the two of them together mean that your opponent can't cast spells full stop, but do not actually win the game, creating one of the combos that you don't want around. Of the two, the less problematic spell is Iona, since it has the other cases and the feel-bad that Servant lacks, with it being banned for its milling combo. However, once it was decided that the milling combo wasn't that bad anymore, it became obvious that there was no sense to keep Servant banned instead of Iona, so they took Servant off and banned Iona instead.
Any argument used against Leovold could be used against Tassa's Oracle, yet that card is still used and abused.
Hullbreacher also giving you mana when you wheel (in a 4 pod you'll get 21 treasures) allowing you to combo off (if possible). Just insane value
Upheaval is fine, I would argue. It's a big, splashy, and expensive sorcery that effectively says "win the game" on it, and I'm fine with those existing in EDH. Sure, when you have 9-10+ mana and you get to Upheaval and replay and land and some mana rocks you're very ahead and likely to win, but you *already* had 9-10+ mana available. How many cards are there in EDH that will basically win you the game if you have at least 10 mana? I mean, just in blue there's Expropriate, Time Stretch, Onniscience, Enter the Infinite, (sometimes) overloaded Cyclonic Rift, etc.
Really, the only reason I can see for Upheaval being banned is so people don't just cast it willy-nilly with no plan to use it to win the game, because that *would* suck, but I would argue that applies to lots of other cards that are legal, and thus is more of a problem for the social contract aspect of EDH to handle as opposed to the ban list.
Upheaval is not that powerful. The ban is specifically because most players are salty about land removal….which was a common thing back in early MTG. Only reason for the ban is because Wizards makes more money off faster paced cards.
Because Iona is not symmetrical, and most of the Armegeddon or Orb effects are, it's much easier to just lock someone out completely. When was the last time you put Universal Solvent in your commander deck to destroy Iona? Exactly.
Add in the extra context of what came off the banned list at that time.
Painters servent managed to come off. At the time, it was firmly believed those 2 shouldn't exist in the same format
You can play another lands after a Armagedom, but you can't remuve a Iona if It chose tour color.
Iona can target certain (or all) players way too easily, which is usually the player(s) that represents the biggest threat, making it a versatile Stax piece, whereas the Winter Orb and Stasis affect all players, including it's controller, necessitating very specific deck construction to be effective, while Iona doesn't affect it's controller negatively in any way. I've played against it many times and it most often signaled win condition for the player using it, and it's about as un-fun as a card gets.
Iona could be unbanned as you are right that there are objectively more powerful effects but the fact that it's very likely to just lock a specific player of your choice out of the game and the other players have little to no incentive to target it makes it much worse for the social part of the game. winter orb is horribly broken and mean in commander but at least you know that everyone at the table wants it gone and someone will likely have something to destroy it, Iona is likely just a kick a player out of the game piece that has inherently limited removal options when used this way
Sway has the exact same strategy as Upheaval, so you're starting off three or more mana on the new hands.
"I'm sure we can come to an arrangement."
"The arrangement is you either banhammer or you can't play."
Dinkleberg: "Well, who can argue with that logic?"
The only reason I'd want Iona unbanned would be to give all the 30+ counter spell blue mages at my locals a taste of their medicine. But that being said, I don't want her off the list for the simple fact that it's waaay more oppressive than you're letting on. I played when she was in standard back in OG zendikar block and the sheer number of times I saw people, myself included, get locked out of a game on turn 4 was unreal. Since she's a commander it really wouldn't be that difficult to turbo her out on turn 3-4. I main mono red control with Jaya Ballard who regularly hits 7+ mana turn 4. So i know it's possible to hit that much mana that quickly in mono white.
I don't feel like your analysis of Hullbreacher is...correct? Like it having flash is really important but Notion Thief ALSO has Flash so its worth noting there are two other really big things that set Hullbreacher apart
1) Hullbreacher is 2U, not 2UB. Being able to come down a mana earlier is hugely impactful in terms of how quickly it can be a threat, and it can even respond to other draw effects pretty quickly before you decide to wheel.
2) Hullbreacher in a multiplayer game produces tremendous amounts of mana. If you Wheel of Fortune, you draw a new hand of 7 cards AND 21 treasures. In a game like cEDH, that's pretty likely to end the game on the spot, especially if you draw into more wheels or Timetwister style effects. It essentially turns every wheel into both card draw, hand control, AND a massive ritual whose mana can be stored. It breaks the symmetry of the card in a really massive way, and if you have cards like Demonic Tutor, Underworld Breach etc it wins you the game because of it. That's honestly why its the most powerful of the bunch.
Erayo would be really interesting in cEDH games. It would probably get desroyed with its transform trigger on the stack a lot, which would be interesting.
Surprised you didn't mention the Treasures part of Hullbreacher more in your explanation. It doesn't just negate draws, it replaces each draw that would have happened with a Treasure being generated _on your_ (the player who played Hullbreacher) _side of the field_
A wheel with Hullbreacher out not only forces all opponents into being Hellbent, it also gives the HB player a ton of mana to be able to play out whatever they drew in their new hand and/or whatever cards they are able to draw going forward, essentially making the card be a Narset (a card that many people call to be banned for the discussed wheel interactions) and Dockside Extortionist (a card many people agree generates way too much mana advantage far too easily and may be deserving of a ban in the future) combined
And unlike Dockside you don't need additional pieces, like Blink spells or to sacrifice and reanimate it, to continue getting value from HB. In addition to stopping your opponents from casting draw spells moving forward, there are lots of mandatory draw triggers like Enchantress effects, Beast Whisperer, Vedalken Archmage, etc. that if present on the battlefield essentially turns HB into a soft Stax effect against one of more players, as now by just playing their deck they compound the advantages that the HB player already has
I still believe that, if Hullbreacher had given you treasures but still allowed other people to draw their cards, it wouldn't have been banned. It's funny how much power a single word in the card text box can have.
@@abderianagelast7868 In all fairness, we have this card, it's called Smothering Tithe.
@@HakureiIllusion It's very similar, yes. I don't think a second Smothering Tithe would be that big of an issue. Plus, in traditional fashion, the White version of the card would be significantly weaker lmao
You cant play around iona if your monocolored but you can possibly play around a card like stasis or winter orb.
cards that punish players for only playing one colour of mana are inherently unbalanced in commander, and I'm not talking about cards like choke or boil, those punish mono blue decks, Iona can punish *any* mono colour deck, and nothing is quite as rude as that one ahole player (and every lgs has one) who is all too happy to purposefully lock out one player in a multiplayer game
if anything Iona proves there needs to be a separate banlist for CEDH, it's fine there, you should expect to run into miserable prison decks, but it should not be legal in the format as a whole
Sorry, but Void Winnower is not "just as disruptive" as Iona.
Iona should remain banned forever.
The fact that Color identity exists in commander means Iona should never be unbanned.
I would like to see hullbreacher unbanned but with the wheel thing I get it. I have a Kwain deck that is super fun but the major downside is I will be giving everyone cards constantly and in blue/white aside from narset I haven’t found a real solid way to stop everyone else from profiting off my crackhead tap untap stuff the deck does. Hullbreacher in my deck wouldn’t feel too oppressive would still suck for sure but would give me something to hunt down and let me use my commander to draw for only me. I get it though just wish I could use it would fit so well without being a combo
l find it hilarious that in a set literally called "Commander Legends", they printed a card which they immediately banned because it was deemed unfun.
In my opinion, if Hulbreacher should stay banned, then Dockside Extortionist should also be banned. ln higher power CEDH tables, almost everyone without exception plays a combination of Blue/Black, and l don't think that anyone in the table wouldn't have an answer to HB. As for lower powered tables, honestly, l think it's the same thing. All colours have a way of dealing with creatures so l don't think it would be such a big deal.
Now as for the arguments for wheel effects. While l agree that with Hullbreacher down it basically becomes impossible to play, wheels in CEDH aren't that well spread, and if you're playing casually then your play group should've already set some rules of what NOT to play.
I think the main problem with Iona is shes one sided. You shut down all of your opponents from playing a certain color, while you are perfectly fine.
Just a side tangent and venting here, but what also makes a legacy legal card STOP players from playing the game is an unreasonable price. i don't care how good Wheel of Fortune is, i'd rather use Magus of the Wheel. i don't care how good Lions Eye Diamond is, i'll do my best to make use of Diamond Lion which i still think should had been designed to be a ONE casting cost spell not two.
Linvala, Keeper of Silence is a commander option where depending on what your playing can read "Target player can't play the game" while everyone else seems to have only ETB effects and combat triggers. BUT, you can still do something to advance your boardstate and potentially interact with your opponents, including remove Linvala, Keeper of Silence. Iona, Shield of Emeria however, because the COMMANDER format is entirely built around playing a color identity, the Iona player can literally just name your color, and suddenly you can't play the game anymore. And if you had access to removal you can't play them. Static Orb, Winter Orb, and Stasis each have a "stipulation" for the card to be in effect or otherwise it also effects the player who played it. Reason why i don't like Drannith Magistrate, but unlike Iona which can completely shut down a players ability to play, Drannith Magistrate only limits your opponents ability to play.
Notion Thief is difficult enough to cast especially at four cmc that it's a balanced card. Narset parter of veils is never going to get banned because itself is a noncreature spell and being a planeswalker you can directly attack it if able to. Hullbreacher especially deserved to be banned because it not only allowed you to remove your opponents hands, but also give you mana for doing so.
This channel once again proving it has a surface-level understanding of Commander and its design philosophy.
I mean, the guy clearly doesn't get it, and wants to be making videos about Modern and Legacy, but lives in a world where everyone plays Commander instead because Commander is more fun than Modern or Legacy.
It's like watching an increasingly out-of-touch boomer trying to connect with the hip kids, being sincere about it, but just... not getting it.
I’m wondering why they even try, the obvious disdain for the format comes through HARD, so like. What audience are you trying to get here
Commander doesn't have a design philosophy because the game isn't designed for commander.
@@tinfoilslacks3750 *wasn't* designed for Commander. Since about 2020, WotC has focused intently on putting out made-for-Commander products, designs 10-20 Commander Decks each year, with made-for-Commander cards, and created multiple mechanics, like Goad, that only work in 3+ player... of which only Commander has widespread adoption.
Stop being salty about Commander being the most commonly played form of Magic. The dude making these videos might be salty about it, but even if he's bad at it, he acknowledges that Commander is Magic these days.
The scriptwriter certainty gets way more sassy when talking about Commander, which is probably a testament to how much that format has divided the MtG community
And a lot less knowledgable, if im being honest
It's more because he doesn't understand Commander very well, and is trying to approach it from a competitive magic mindset. This is the exact wrong way to approach the Commander community, and it shows in his hilariously bad takes.
...Stasis and Winter orb both have playable ways around them. Enchantment removal for Stasis, and other untap bans and/or artifact removal for Winter Orb. Ions doesn't really have a workaround like that. It's a 7/7, which outside of removal spells can be difficult to remove by the simple act of keeping it out of combat, and colorless has very few outright removal effects.
As for Armageddon, its a lot less permanent than untap banning is. It doesn't prevent new lands from being used like an untap ban, and it doesn't prevent specialized gravegrabbing from getting those lands back. Iona does, by making those new lands almost entirely useless.
I don't generally like bans in EDH and am a MASSIVE proponent of Rule Zero - hell, I'd let someone use Emrakul Aeons Torn as their commander without a second thought - but I absolutely support this particular ban.
Sway of the Stars (MTG) is Fiber Jar (Yu-Gi-Oh!) on steroids.
Change my mind...
I saw the similarity right away.
Fiber Jar + Life Equalizer = Start The Duel Over As The Usual Anime Duel Since It's The Same But With 4000 Life.
How to play: Take damage as you find these 2 cards until you can cast both of them, if you do, start the duel over.
_Alvida knows how much easier this is without her in place of that floating tree castle. She has taken her Fiber to etb but it doesn't help as often as the jar would etbing itself._
WHY isnt the banned as commander a separate list. People who can understand a game as complex as magic can understand TWO LISTS!
This ignores the fact that commander is actually how a lot of players are learning nowadays.
While I agree with banned as commander being a separate list being a good thing, it's still needless added complexity.
I remember back in 2015 when this dude was sleeving a commander deck and I asked him "oh whats the deck/ command". Shows me Erayo and tells me its designed to be a blue stax deck to police the table and I mentioned "I think its banned". The dude decks his phone and was like "damn ..."
Some of these comments make me think several people here haven't faced down Iona in a competent deck. She doesn’t even need Painter's Servant to end a game.
Putting aside mono color decks are often just done, and has a fairly good scoop rate for dual color decks:
Turn one Show and Tell, turn two reanimate. Throw in Sakashima just for a two color block. Sneak attacked for insurance, and an extra 7 damage to a lethal swing, or to just ruin a turn for someone. Even hard cast late in the game no one is happy to see her.
It's odd whoever wrote that script classes stacks as worse. Every color has an answer for artifacts, and enchantments. Several have options with spilt second that are almost impossible to stop. Iona says no, and it is so.
Full disclosure: I don't support any bans at all. Accounting for the arguably cheap shit your play group goes for is part of the fun. It's just odd to see support for a ban list, and an argument to unban one of the biggest go fuck yourself cards ever printed.
Iona is the only one i would say to take off, its 9 mana. It doesn't win the game when you play it. Hit with 2 removal spells and its almost unplayable as a commander but i also think they should bring back the banned as commander list.
Banned as Commander list needs to come back, IDK why the RC can't figure out anything better than just banning a card full stop, it should be so easy. Like Lutri, its one of the worst versions of that effect, it should just be banned as companion but playable as your commander or in the 99, I think its so stupid that its not.
with sway of the stars i think the real thing is that while it's not at all powerful there's never an argument that resolving one makes the game more fun or interesting for anyone except some petty sadist who wants the game to last another hour
Yay been waiting for more of the commander bans
Erayo isn't as big an issue as people think it is, considering how simplistic it is to get around via "uncounterable" spells and effects or lands like Bosejiu, who shelters all being affordable lands that solve the issue entirely to deal with it. Its not a threat, it never was. As for Iona, the sole reason she was banned was painter's servant. the two simply can't exist together cause it buggers far too effortlessly on a very effortless curve. CEDH should -never- be a factor in bans/unbans, the format is basically poor mans canadian highlander and frankly, anyone playing CEDH should play that instead if they give a remote flying frig about competition and skill. this is at least, my opinion anyway. Especially on Erayo as someone who ran her exclusively up until she was banned all around.
I for one, am all for a "banned as commander" list return. It was so small and barely anything would be added to it in current stand point, that it would hardly be confusing for new players IMHO.
The fact that Leonard and hullbreacher don’t end the game on the spot is the reason they’re so much better unbanned. If someone does that combo and grinds the game to a halt rather than winning on the spot, it suddenly becomes a game of tyrant. I think that’s a fun enough play pattern.
Remind me to never play a game with you. It sounds like it would be a miserable experience.
@@delathenleso5793 my dude, consider the game you beat someone that did a combo like that, it’s the kind of game you’d remember for a long time because the victory would feel so good. I played tons of monopoly as a kid, so perhaps I’m less annoyed by grindy games than most. Either way, I’m always interested in a rule 0 discussion, and further respecting what other people consider fun.
@@leotrollstoy2351 I'm not the kind of sadistic limp-dicked loser that has to get my jollies off of utterly ruining another person's day, all because I lack the capacity for normal human interaction that the play pattern you're suggesting so thoroughly embodies.
Golos the tireless pilgrim because...it's to good in mid power level decks and too many people play him lol
Not good enough for CEDH though...
I remember i really wanted to get a Hullbreacher for my beckett brass deck and at the store was told it was banned, sorta disheartening but makrs sense
Banned as commander list needs to be back, they just threw a ton of cards in the regular banlist that are fine in the 99.
That dude in the thumbnail (Leovold) looks like elven version of Saul Goodman, lawl
I'll be long gone before wizards unbans gifts ungiven but hey at least my grandkids can finally play it when a more power-crept version is released anyway!
The 1st combo is just Trickstar Droll & Lock Birb. Get it?
Well, Hullbreacher gets 1 treasure per card that would have been drawn. So if someone has 6 cards in the hand, that is 6 cards and 18 mana whilst emptying each other player's hand.
🤓
Fourth spell means creatures aswell since its a summon spell
Top 10 Landfall cards
No, read the card. Hullbreacher stops them from drawing more than one card as well. They can only draw that very first card. Literally the only difference between the two draw effects is that hullbreacher gives you treasure tokens. Unless there's been a very weird judge ruling that for some reason makes "more than one card each turn" mean "more than one card at a time"...
Hullbreacher would've been a fine card if it was white
amen
You're nuts for wanting Iona unbanned lol
(0:22) Whoops, you put "1 White" in the text where it should say "1 Blue".
Amazing!!!!
Iona is worse than Stasis/Orb/Armageddon purely because of how one-sided it is
Stasis, Orb, and Armageddon disrupt ALL spells, not just one color... but that's just it. They disrupt ALL spells. Including yours. Stasis and Winter Orb affect your untaps. Armageddon destroys your lands.
Iona doesn't block your spells, even if you're playing the named color. A monowhite deck could play Iona naming white and then merrily cast Path to Exile right after it because it only affects opponents.
Plus its a stricter and more persistent form of disabling than those cards. Armageddon is one-and-done and can be recovered from. While iirc both stasis and orb have upkeep costs that need to be maintained.
Iona has none of that
@@tefnutofhoney2832 Orb doesn't (Though if you can somehow tap it it becomes disabled)
Stasis, however, does require a blue mana per turn, to keep it on the field and since you don't have untaps, you can run out of blue mana with a swiftness
@@Merlewhitefire Nobody is running either of these cards without multiple ways to break parity. Either they've got Urza or Derevi in the command zone, or a Seedborn Muse or Unwinding Clock, or any of the massive amount of blue cards that can tap/untap things at instant speed, and they aren't putting these stax pieces out there until they're ready to work around them.
@@HakureiIllusion True, but irrelevant. A cost you have to build your entire deck around is still a mitigating balancing factor which Iona lacks.
Sounds like Vanity's Emptiness.
_I play the Iona trap and clip her wings my next turn. Now I special summon whatever you could have blocked with your own specials._
Didn’t know Saul Goodman made the first entry on this list
Thank you, CZcams algohrithm. Surely I wanna watch Part 3 before I've watched Part 1.
smh.
I kinda wish Hullbreacher wasn't a replacement effect
I’m a cedh player and erayo might still be way to good for the format
Iona was banned so they could unban painter's servant
I love Iona, but I agree with her ban. She is way too easy to cast in commander.
“Why is this asymmetric lockout card banned when these symmetrical stacks/land destruction cards aren’t, I have no idea”
That’s when I unsubscribed. Even ignoring the clear disdain for Commander as a format, at least understand symmetrical vs. asymmetrical.
Upheaval should never be unbanned. Upheaval plus a card like fast bond means you will be near undefeatable after you resolve it. Tap all mana sources Upheaval, cast fastbond again. Replay all your lands cast a spell to recycle Upheaval and then so long as you have a way to gain life then it's impossible for your opponents to catch up
Fastbond is banned too. I'd like to see a video that mentions why that one's there, but not because I think it should be unbanned, just curious. But I also agree that Upheaval should also stay on the banlist as well.
I actually disagree here. Upheaval is a symmetrical Cyc Rift that also hits lands. Sure, you can play around it by setting yourself up, but that still requires some planning. You don't have to plan at ALL with Rift, because as the player casting it, there's nothing to play around. Losing the lands does certainly suck, but it's better to lose your lands than to immediately lose the game. Though, if it were up to me, I'd choose to ban Rift over unbanning Upheaval.
Tbh if the banlist was about fun and letting people play the game then 2/3 of blue 1/2 of white 1/2 of black would be banned 😂
Hullbreacher was fine. Players just need to play more interaction and removal.
I just want a Sultai Elf commander 😭😭😭
BOL-ASSES CITADEL 😂
The other erayo issue: arcane laboratory. Opponents can’t remove it becuase their first spell is countered by erayo, and the lab prevents them from casting any more spells.
Yep. We will also add rule of law, if it's not your commander, but your in W/U. But I think it's stronger as the commander, even if you have less copies of the other part
Cards that when used, a judge is legally allowed to summon the nearest blunt object and attack you directly ten million times with it.
Iona doesnt slow down, it shuts down
All due respect but you are completely wrong on Iona. Its band cause it feels really bad to be the only player at the table locked out. If you get locked out you might as well get up and find a new table. There isn't any reason for anyone not effect to counter or remove her and the game will most likely continue for a long time. Cards that lock the whole table have less negative impact on the game since there are 3 players that will try to stop them. Cards that make a single player feel picked on are not good for the game.
I just want to play Leovold as an Elf tribal deck, especially since LotR added a while Simic elf deck while Golgari elves is already really popular
Finally someone who understands.
Iona is not a problem. I played Iona, but not as some reanimation target.
She was more a tech choice in my mono white Thalia deck, because she gave me the ability to lock down a color.
No other card I had access to could do that, and even when I could play her, she rarely survived more than a turn. Which was fine because most of the time that is what I needed. An since all the people I played had more than two colors, locking one color only slowed them down just enough so I could get something on the board.
She completely shut down any and all mono color decks. Not make it difficult, straight up said you can’t play the game unless you have a clunky colorless removal spell. It quite literally brings nothing to the format
@@kevinkennedy-8606this exactly. She basically says "monocolor decks must bring at least one garbage card and pray they draw it, or literally beg the rest of the table to solve it and not just take advantage of your inability to play"
" Cards that stop Ur opponent from paying at all " .. of course YGO players know best since that is literally their game
Like cyclonic is much worse than upheaval....
Dang, no Sharazad :(
Also with regards to Iona, it's not too hard to cheat her out either.
Yeah, one of the top 20 commanders does it by herself
Leovold = Alan Partridge
Top x cards people want banned list?