Evan years after the Golos ban, I still think it was an overreaction that is more than due to be undone. The arguments supporting the ban are flawed. Especially the apparently unquestioned RC guideline " we don't compare to other cards". But we absolutely should! I still can't get over reading "Golos saves on commander tax" when at the same time eminence, Derevi and Yuriko exist. Why on earth would I not compare these cards when Golos' ramping ability is used as an argument to ban him? There are commanders that go two steps further by even cheating on casting cost altogether. No interaction possible. With Golos, interaction is possible - especially removing him before the activated ability is used.
What is true for Magic in general is also true for the 5-color-pie: power creep. with the current rate of new cards, the pool of "really" playable cards will multiply in no time. There have been several 5c commanders popping up since the ban, leaving less and less room for the 5c world domination argument that is also cited again and again.
Looking at the Commander card pool, I see no reason to keep Golos banned and I wish the RC would show more activity when it comes to actually managing and adapting the banlist to the incredibly fast evolving format.
For me, that ability is strong, but jts not that in a vacuum.
Unlike Yuriko, he lets you run five colors. The way he ramps allows you to fix your colors AND cast other big threats, which Derevi and Yuriko don’t do.
And if we compare the playability of Derevi to Golos, Golos monopolized the format and Derevi did not.
I agree power creep is an issue, but I think the RC believes they can’t fix power creep, that’s in the hands of Rule 0, the players, and WotC.
Sure, more pieces of the color pie is nice. However, Derevi and Yuriko are still much more likely to win despite their smaller shares. They can't fix colors, but don't need to in the first place. And along the way, they are making fun of casting cost and abilities that only cut tax in half instead of just avoiding it.
I agree that the RC will not be able to keep power creep out and I would not expect a banlist for EDH to accomplish that. But unbanning parts that have been overtaken by power creep would make the list look less detached.
I'd also argue that the thing that should be in player's hands first and foremost is the decision of what they deem too heavily represented. If the RC trust the players to self-regulate power then why aren't the players able to self-regulate overly use of cards? That guy playing the legal pubstomper decks in the lgs is trusted to be enlightened or pushed to build more in line with his fellow players - but Golos players are too numb to get that?
The Golos ban is unique in this regard: in terms of power and abilities, there are loads of stronger cards. Golos has been axed because he has been played to often. I think THAT decision should be down to the players, not the RC. Unbanning Golos and letting pods who dislike him rule-0 him OUT would be the logical approach - especially much more in line with the other reasons used for bans. And it does make a difference whether you have to rule him in or out, especially for pods with random people.
"Being boring due to ubiquity" is not a reason to ban - or again, there'd be an enormous list of cards that would need to go before Golos does. There's no fun and inventive way to play Sol Ring, still everybody is free to put it in literally any deck, no matter what color pie, and improve the deck by doing so. Tutors do a lot - but adding diversity surely is not one of their features. Golos had to go for exactly that reason. I think the lack of logic and consistency in that ban is what strikes me again and again when I think about it.
Sure. They may have a higher winrate. But commander was never about being competitive, it was specifically created to get away from more competitive formats. Derevi and Yuriko don’t “consume” other decks the way Golos does. No one with a vampire tribal deck is thinking “maybe Yuriko is better in the command zone” the way the players did, en masse, with Golos.
This is because of a lot of features. Golos ramps. Golos cheats tax. Golos is five colors. Golos has a mana sync in the command zone. Golos fixes. Golos lets you get problem lands. Golos doesn’t need any fixing to be cast. Golos has a lot of little power bumps that make it strictly better than other options.
The Golos ban isn’t a power ban. It’s that people’s fun was actively being ruined by how popular it was, and how it often felt like “the wrong choice to play anything else.” Virtually every game included him unless it was specifically rule 0’d out. That threatens the diversity and nature of our format.
If you don’t agree, we will have to disagree and disagree.
Having started mtg and edh during Amonket, this was a fun read on cards I always wondered about on the banlist. I knew Golos could wreck when he premiered and I was tempted to make a deck with him but never did. Thank you for this
Evan years after the Golos ban, I still think it was an overreaction that is more than due to be undone. The arguments supporting the ban are flawed. Especially the apparently unquestioned RC guideline " we don't compare to other cards". But we absolutely should! I still can't get over reading "Golos saves on commander tax" when at the same time eminence, Derevi and Yuriko exist. Why on earth would I not compare these cards when Golos' ramping ability is used as an argument to ban him? There are commanders that go two steps further by even cheating on casting cost altogether. No interaction possible. With Golos, interaction is possible - especially removing him before the activated ability is used.
What is true for Magic in general is also true for the 5-color-pie: power creep. with the current rate of new cards, the pool of "really" playable cards will multiply in no time. There have been several 5c commanders popping up since the ban, leaving less and less room for the 5c world domination argument that is also cited again and again.
Looking at the Commander card pool, I see no reason to keep Golos banned and I wish the RC would show more activity when it comes to actually managing and adapting the banlist to the incredibly fast evolving format.
For me, that ability is strong, but jts not that in a vacuum.
Unlike Yuriko, he lets you run five colors. The way he ramps allows you to fix your colors AND cast other big threats, which Derevi and Yuriko don’t do.
And if we compare the playability of Derevi to Golos, Golos monopolized the format and Derevi did not.
I agree power creep is an issue, but I think the RC believes they can’t fix power creep, that’s in the hands of Rule 0, the players, and WotC.
Sure, more pieces of the color pie is nice. However, Derevi and Yuriko are still much more likely to win despite their smaller shares. They can't fix colors, but don't need to in the first place. And along the way, they are making fun of casting cost and abilities that only cut tax in half instead of just avoiding it.
I agree that the RC will not be able to keep power creep out and I would not expect a banlist for EDH to accomplish that. But unbanning parts that have been overtaken by power creep would make the list look less detached.
I'd also argue that the thing that should be in player's hands first and foremost is the decision of what they deem too heavily represented. If the RC trust the players to self-regulate power then why aren't the players able to self-regulate overly use of cards? That guy playing the legal pubstomper decks in the lgs is trusted to be enlightened or pushed to build more in line with his fellow players - but Golos players are too numb to get that?
The Golos ban is unique in this regard: in terms of power and abilities, there are loads of stronger cards. Golos has been axed because he has been played to often. I think THAT decision should be down to the players, not the RC. Unbanning Golos and letting pods who dislike him rule-0 him OUT would be the logical approach - especially much more in line with the other reasons used for bans. And it does make a difference whether you have to rule him in or out, especially for pods with random people.
"Being boring due to ubiquity" is not a reason to ban - or again, there'd be an enormous list of cards that would need to go before Golos does. There's no fun and inventive way to play Sol Ring, still everybody is free to put it in literally any deck, no matter what color pie, and improve the deck by doing so. Tutors do a lot - but adding diversity surely is not one of their features. Golos had to go for exactly that reason. I think the lack of logic and consistency in that ban is what strikes me again and again when I think about it.
Sure. They may have a higher winrate. But commander was never about being competitive, it was specifically created to get away from more competitive formats. Derevi and Yuriko don’t “consume” other decks the way Golos does. No one with a vampire tribal deck is thinking “maybe Yuriko is better in the command zone” the way the players did, en masse, with Golos.
This is because of a lot of features. Golos ramps. Golos cheats tax. Golos is five colors. Golos has a mana sync in the command zone. Golos fixes. Golos lets you get problem lands. Golos doesn’t need any fixing to be cast. Golos has a lot of little power bumps that make it strictly better than other options.
The Golos ban isn’t a power ban. It’s that people’s fun was actively being ruined by how popular it was, and how it often felt like “the wrong choice to play anything else.” Virtually every game included him unless it was specifically rule 0’d out. That threatens the diversity and nature of our format.
If you don’t agree, we will have to disagree and disagree.
Having started mtg and edh during Amonket, this was a fun read on cards I always wondered about on the banlist. I knew Golos could wreck when he premiered and I was tempted to make a deck with him but never did. Thank you for this
I’m glad you enjoyed the read! Thank you for commenting.