Hey gang,
We need to decide on a constructed format for our March NBE. Here are your voting options:
1) Elder Dragon Highlander (apparently the rules are here. I don't know what kind of modifications we would have to make, but there's the basic idea.)
2) OneCC. We've added a lot of cards to Legacy since we last did this. Seems like it would be good to do it again.
3) Good old Peasant Highlander.
4) Good old Pauper Highlander. (Have we ever actually done Pauper before?)
5) Peasant Build-Your-Own Standard
Awesome. Those are the choices. Vote for some of them! (Don't rank, please.)
-Kyle
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
All are so tempting...
But my vote goes for Elder Dragon Highlander
Pauper > Peasant, EDH > all ; in short, Elder Dragon Highlander.
I have to second Elder Dragon Highlander. It sounds exciting. And I would definitely support the rules laid out on that website, it seems like the best list of legal cards.
I don't have a deck as of yet, but if anyone is interested in playing some games before the end of March, hit me up. Also, if anyone is interested in playing random casual games during the week, let me know.
You can reach me at BTodesca at (no spam) bu dot edu.
-Brandon
I guess I'll vote for EDH, assuming we actually follow the rules - which use Phelddagrif as an example General, and therefore imply that ANY legendary creature can be used as a general, not just 'named' creatures.
But if 1CC picks up some substantial votes, I vote for that instead.
You sure know how to make the voting tough Kyle, I want to do all of these.
I am, however, most intrigued by Elder Dragon Highlander.
Also, I would agree with Bob. Yes, Sliver Overlord is good, but it does still cost 5 colors, and in a highlander format that isn't easy to pull off. High risk, high reward.
Donny G votes for EDH and peasant highlander! Approval style!
I like EDH but I don't understand how each player will claim their own general, if we can't have two players with the same general. Just saying "I called it first" is childish. Do we have a better plan for picking generals?
vote = onecc
Elder Dragon Highlander seems like fun. Consider that my vote.
Yeah, I support Bob as far as using any general regardless of it's proper name. Then again, I would prefer to use a character with a proper name... but that's just me. I support the version that's on the site.
I think as far as choosing the generals, I think there are enough out there that people can be judicious as far as choosing. I'm sure there's some people that can be childish, but I think generally people can work things out... or at least they should be able to. :P I don't think "first come, first serve" is a bad starting point, if someone else is really bent on choosing the same general, then they can discuss.
First of all, thanks to everyone who's rallied to my cause here; secondly, in terms of 'claiming' general, I think FCFS is the way to go. We can designate a starting time - say a specific day, at 9:00pm or whatever - and from then on, it's whoever called it first. Each person can only call one general, and if you call it, you've gotta use it. There should also be a deadline for changing generals - maybe a week before the event? - so no one can stake a claim on a general and then change at the last minute just to screw someone else out of it.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Well... I am going to vote for #1 (Yes Kyle I will be there). I have a number of questions however, 1. Are we only allowed one Legendary creature per deck? 2. Can we eliminate the highlander rule?
I'd like to have a more structured way of picking generals. Why not just generate a random pick order, or better yet determine the pick order by the results of our next draft?
Anon,
You can only have one "general" per deck, and that means that other players can't share that general OR include that particular general in their deck. However, if a legendary creature isn't in use (as a general) by any players, then you can play other legendary creatures in your deck.... As many as you like as long as it doesn't interfere with generals.
As for the removal of the singleton rule, there wouldn't be a real point in playing the format, you might as well just play casual/legacy. :P
EDH it is!
Here's how selection of generals will work:
During each day, you can EMAIL me a choice of general. If multiple people ask for the same general during the same day, I'll randomly pick one of them to take that general, and I'll inform the "winners" and "losers" of whether they got it by posting here. Email me (don't post) because then people won't jump in on your idea :-P
You may email me starting at midnight tomorrow morning (Friday). Anything I receive before then I'll disregard! (I'm mean.)
We're going to stick to the rules laid out in the website. As usual, please feel free to break the format :)
When? It's likely that we will do this the last weekend in March. That means Sunday, March 30th. I need to make sure that works, but that's the date we're playing with now.
-Kyle
Quick question: will this be multiplayer or 1 vs 1?
I had assumed that we were doing duels (1v1). I'm going to keep assuming that ;)
Honestly, I think we should take a vote on whether we should play mutliplayer or 1v1. I think we should take a vote on it. It gives extra time for some people to think about different generals, and I think some people (myself included) would be more compelled to build a more casual multiplayer deck.
But if 1v1 is the ultimate decision, i'd be fine with that too
I thought it was multiplayer. Doesn't that site describe edh as a multiplayer format? Starting at 40 life in 1v1 makes no sense.
I was under the impression it would be 1 vs 1, but then I saw that on the site, so that's why I asked. Starting at 40 life still makes sense though because it gives more incentive to kill using your general.
Alright, after talking with people, it's become completely unclear what exactly we were supposed to do:-P
So... we need to have a vote. Please vote for either duels or multiplayer games. If we do multiplayer, I reserve the right to make it as wacky as I want :-P
Voting will close at the end of tomorrow (Friday). Because of all this nonsense, I am delaying the selecting of generals until next week. Please feel free to start emailing me about that as soon as 12:01am Monday morning, with otherwise the same rules as before.
-Kyle
My vote goes to duels, but that's mostly because I'm just not a big fan of multiplayer in general.
I vote multiplayer...more fun and a different play strategy than the normal 1v1
Why not both? Have some duels and a free-for-all, just for kicks. If we do that though, better start with the free-for-all to even the political playing field a bit.
Also, will we be permitted to use any proxies, since this is a mostly vintage event?
multiplayer please.
Alternatively I would most enjoy what I said last draft, playing the first game as one big chaos group, then decreasing the size of the groups each round until the 1v1 finals.
Although I'm a lover of 1vs1 matches in general, I'd vote on multiplayer in general. Unless that multiplayer format happens to be emperor.
My vote goes towards Multiplayer
But if there is someway to work in Kevin's idea: first a chaos game and then later it boils down to dual matches, my vote would go towards that. Building a deck suitable for multiplayer AND dual seems like a fun challenge.
I approve of duels.
I also approve of one round of multiplayer chaos followed by duels.
To clarify, I also approve of duels or one round of multiplayer followed by duels.
Also, what are people's thoughts on proxies?
Decision:
We will do a mix!!!!
We will start off with larger multiplayer games, then boil down to some duels. How will this work? I'm not sure. Will it be a complete disaster? Possibly.
Sounds like fun:-D
Please start emailing me your choices for Generals after midnight tonight.
:)
-Kyle
No proxies! It's a casual highlander format - you can only play one of a given card anyway.
Agreed, no proxies. A certain level of brokenness is fun, but giving everybody access to Timetwister, Bazaar, every dual, Grim Tutor, Imperial Seal, etc. would kind of limit creativity in my opinion.
Post a Comment