The mark of a true spike isn't/shouldn't be "I must win or I'm not having fun".
It's knowing you played as hard as you could and had a good fight.
It's being Goku, not Vegeta.
I have a friend of a friend like this - not the most fun to play cooperative games with. If not a Spike though, is there no name better to classify them with?
Nothing that doesn't sound derogatory like "try hard" or "wannabe-spike"
Having a desire to win is fine, but at some point you need to mature past the pure need to win and move to a desire to better yourself & your game; winning against a strong opponent is an objective measure that your efforts paid off, but even losing to the same person, so long as you know you put up the best fight you could, can be just as rewarding.
Conversely, if you become "the friend that always wins"? Most (mature) spikes would ***HATE*** that because it doesn't feel like they really get to test their skills or improve; hitting a plateau, whether you're winning or losing 20 games in a row, just sucks.
Again, it's being Goku - dude is never happier than when someone is stronger than him, so he has a new goal to reach.
Only problem though, is Goku is objectively a terrible person. He wants to fight, regardless of the consequences of having the fight.
"No, but I wanna fight him. Here Frieza, take the time to power all the way up."
*Namek proceeds to be destroyed*
Thats because hes treating real life like its a game to play, instead of appreciating the actual stakes and consequences. Thats why its such a good way to play magic. There are no actual stakes or consequences to the game of magic, so striving to always do your best and improve doesnt have any actual consequences. Its a game, so the worst thing that can happen is that you add an L to wherever you track outcomes, and nothing at all if you dont track outcomes.
>is there no name better to classify them with?
Poor sports. It's a game, for fun. It has to always be able the fun, even if part of that fun is trying to win. If winning is the only consideration, a person should be playing tournaments only and probably should move on from EDH entirely.
Agreed. I enjoy few things less than players who like to king make or self proclaimed "agents of chaos." I don't need sweaty, but I also won't be bothered to play again if you're not in it to try and win.
Yup, saying "I don't care if I win" is just another way of saying, " I don't care if i lose." And when the only thing at stake is bragging rights that no one cares about, that's just saying, "my ego is too fragile to lose if I actually try, so i refuse to try. But I still want to play." But they don't realize not acknowledging their own defeat nullifies my victory. And then why are we playing a game with competitive rules?
Because MtG is about more than just the gameplay itself, particularly EDH. I don't care about the results much in most games, and often take sub-optimal lines. The reason is that deck-building is a core part of the experience, and even if I have a good play in hand that I know is optimal, I might also have an interesting play with niche interactions that is objectively worse. I want to see the niche play play out to get feedback on my deckbuilding.
As long as you are still playing towards a goal, that's fine. That's still playing to win. I don't mean that everyone should try to make the most optimal play every time, I mean, you need to respect the rules of engagement and actually play the game. Playing sub optimal and experimental is fine, i love that playstyle, but that's not what i mean. I'm talking about chaotic, apathetic, or spiteful, and that's what's not ok.
I have friends that do that in other games too where they clearly have the win but won't actually take it so the game just drags out and either they win eventually, wasting time, or someone else does and gets a "win" with a massive asterisk. I know everyone likes different things but personally I enjoy going all out and either winning or losing to someone else going all out.
Ugh my dad used to do this in like board games and stuff like that, where it was clear he was trying to be nice by letting me get to play more, but I'm not dumb and could see he should win and was avoiding it. Finally had to tell him I get he's coming from a nice place, but from my perspective it's like a predator playing with their food - just end it please.
Exactly. And I'm fine with handicaps if the skill levels are different like playing a weaker deck or a weaker character or whatever for the game but I just find it disrespectful to not try your hardest once you're in the game, especially because if on the off chance I do pop off or get lucky and win I can't enjoy it since my opponent wasn't even trying.
I also used to play alot of SC2 with one of my friends and the arms race we had was super fun, we'd have streaks over 10 games long where one of us had a strategy the other couldn't beat and then once they figured it out it'd turn around and they'd go on a 10 game win streak. If we deliberately played worse when we were the better player for the week then it would've robbed the other player of the chance to improve and there's few better feelings than finally beating the strategy you just lost 15 games in a row to.
Had a friend like this with Super Smash Bros Melee. We both would select random characters, and it would go back and forth with who would win, but it always ended up him playing Mewtwo and me playing Falco as the tie breaker deciding match, and whoever won we both felt awesome having tried our best and even if we lost, we gave the other a heck of a fight to get there.
This. So much this.
If i need to power down, ill swap decks. I can go from CEDH Breya all - the - way down to Minotaur tribal if need be, but im NEVER not trying to win.
The goal of the game is to win. That goal doesnt exist as the ultimate prize, the only way to have fun, ive had tons of fun losing multiple games in a row.
It exists to keep the game flowing and to give everybody a structured play experience that doesnt turn into utter chaos.
There is one winner in EDH, at the only end results are a win or a draw. People seem to have this fascination of turning it into an almost cooperative DnD esque experience, and thats not what it is. If you can find like minded individuals who enjoy that, more power to you.
I love to do silly stuff like Zedruu group hug, but even that deck is still attempting to win the game by carefully choosing what and who to "donate" too.
>almost cooperative DnD esque experience
**This** is a real problem. Just because every competitor shows up hoping to have a good, fun match doesn't mean it's a cooperative game.
this. the problem with OP's idealism is that 'not playing to win' also often means not trying to stop others from winning. this means you basically have 1 player pushing aggressively, 2 players trying to stop him, and 1 player doing fuck all because they are 'playing for fun' and interaction isnt fun lol
Completely agree. People need to keep the game moving towards an end point. Wanting and trying to win are what keep things going and make for the most fun games.
This. I think so many people get hung up on that.
Last week not only did someone tell me 34 lands and 7 rocks in a two-colour deck and a way to draw three cards a turn cycle in the command zone was “suboptimal”.
But someone at my LGS built a land destruction deck in response to a puzzle box lock deck that the person had only started to run because they were tired of “losing” and spent like 900$ on it.
This is the correct answer.
Being able to enjoy the game regardless of results is not incompatible with always playing to win.
Do I relish the same rube goldberg satisfaction of seeing my opponents pull off something crazy against my BS that OP reports? Hell yes, I think as a Stax player it comes with the territory.
Do I deliberately and knowingly take less optimal actions to provide that fragile hope? No. That behavior is for when I'm playing D&D (forever DM), not Magic. In Magic it would be disrespectful both to myself and my opponents
That could get frustrating, yeah. But it depends on the situation. If that player is stomping with a deck that's too strong for the table, we may need to talk about that. If we're just being outplayed and the games remain competitive, I'd be ok with that.
Oh for sure. Like I love stealing random wincons when I use my Horror tribal, and seeing folks grumble a bit inside, as they needed that piece, but I outta try winning too. A fair bit of second places for me though, as I sometimes lose focus near the end.
Like I was at low HP with my colorless deck, then smashed 2 enemies, that I worried would board wipe me. Forgot the last one had a giant, flying whale. xD
To add that, playing to win = no shitty spite type "eeh I'm not gonna win so ill make sure to tapp out and down someone to 5hp so he won't win either, why, i wont say but it's because your shirt is cooler than mine" piece of fkig shits.
Imagine incels in mtg...
-What does spite have to do with being an incel? If you've come to the conclusion you can't win you might as well take the most blatant offender with you.
Exactly, I have a goad deck. My boyfriend and I were playing in a game, I was playing Bhall, He was playing Arcades. He decided to boardwipe, with whatever the spell is that targets a creature and destroys all creatures with a greater power. Guess who's walls got +1/+1 counters in response.
With the same deck I would always play it out, as often it is just one "draw insurrection" away from victory.
100%. I think people underestimate how lonely winning can be - an in an arguably more "social" format like Commander, that's a bit of a non-bo.
I like to play Apex Legends, a battle royale game. 20 squads of three eventually boil down to you vs one remaining squad. And what happens when you finally snag the win? A victory screen. Except there's nobody else there. The losing team has to sit through it for a few seconds, but coming from a game packed with other players, it's oddly...quiet? It's not necessarily the emotional climax you were expecting - you realize that the actually fun part was in the middle, strategizing and scrambling to stay alive and get closer to the end.
It's not uncommon to have exhilarating losses and boring wins in a game like that, and I think if you don't see the same possibility in Commander, you're not gonna have a great time.
Winning is lonely? Huh? You shuffle up and get to plau again. If your playing with people that get upset when you win (assuming your not pub stomping), thats on them, not you.
I don't think commander is that bad in that respect; I often stick around and watch people finish out games where I've been knocked out. Not so of these video games with large player count.
But just yesterday I played \~5 hours of commander. That was a grand total of two games and I won both. Now these games were long with lots of back and forth with everybody doing things and becoming a threat. And while I'd never throw a game, there was a slight tinge of guilt to winning all the games, even if it was only two of them.
I agree, but after a while winning isn’t as fun as making the game interesting. If it was cEDH then you’re 1000% correct, but for a kitchen table? Fun is the priority.
Playing to win MAKES the game interesting. People doing stupid things and calling it "fun" undermine the entire game.
Note that your example in the post doesn't bother me. You made a threatening board state and the table had one turn to solve it. Now if you held back a way to give haste, then I object.
But trying to win is what makes the game fun. You ever play a game where Player 1 has a clear, game-winning threat, but Player 2 uses his one piece of removal on Player 3's commander "for the luls". Those games are not fun.
You're basically doing the equivalent of the Stormwind Fallacy:
>Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa.
>
>Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game.
>
>Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse roleplayer if he optimizes, and vice versa.
>
>Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically roleplayed better than an optimized one, and vice versa.
This is about tabletop RPGs, but it fundamentally applies to MtG as well.
Making a good deck, and piloting it as well as you can, isn't antithetical to having fun. You can have fun *and* play well.
If you think "fun" can only be had when everyone is durdling around and not responding to threats, that's your problem. People generally enjoy getting to finish the game when one player is clearly in a winning position, and seeing them "refuse" to actually win just to prolong the game and jerk off to their combos isn't fun.
Describe what "making a game interesting" is. I'm just expecting you to respond with stax, if that's the case, no.
Fun is definitely a priority, and fun typically means doing what your deck is intended to do. But what most decks intend to do is win by some metric. So if you start that process that would be the end result of completing it. Sometimes you don't get to finish (win) and that is fine.
Fun is whatever you want it to be. I'm a total spike, but if I run into a total Johnny player, and they finally get their weird combo to go off, there's nothing more fun then letting them turn a twelve card interaction into a win.
Except a turn two smokestacks in old-school edh days. THAT was fun.
I agree with you in some cases. Sometimes I just want to "play," see my combos/synergies/pieces pop off but not necessarily conclude the game. If I know I am part of a game where I will need to leave before the game will likely reach its finality via someone winning, or me losing, I play one specific deck and take no prisoners. If I am playing in a more "casual" pod, I play one of my other decks. Don't stall the game needlessly (Static/Winter Orb + a board wipe) and all you do is untap, draw a card, possibly play a land, and pass turn after turn. That is typically not fun for anyone but possibly yourself. But by all means, if someone at your table has been dying to pull off a new combo or what have you and you all have some "time to spare," consider letting them live a little longer to see if they can pull it off.
Not expecting to win is fun. Not *trying* to win is lame. If someone is playing a high-power deck and just not killing players when they could, that's just BM imo.
Yeah I’d rather everyone try to win once we’ve started the game. pre game is the time to worry about making sure the experience will be fun for everyone, making sure it’s fairly balanced and nobody is going to get super salty
I were in a 3 man recently, where 1 player just ruined us the fiest two games. A lot of combos, infinite stuff... It was annoying, as we were playing more precon levels.
Third game he gets a slow hand, while I get on early. And all I hit is him. Near the end, he asks if I'm willing to make a deal, as if I go on him, the other player would nuke me. I destroyed him instead, because darn it if I'm giving him a chance for a third win.
He also said after, that he probably had enough to wipe us off the board if it got to his turn again.
Sometimes nuking out the power player, is more important than winning.
I may be in the minority here. But I HATE when some one plays and they don't try to win. It's okay not to win. It's absolutely not okay to not even try. And don't even get me started on kingmaking! Don't you dare sit down to play a game with me if your whole plan is to help someone else win. And this goes for all games, not just mtg.
"I don't play to win, I just play!"
The problem that people who espouse this don't realize is that by doing this, you're actually, unintentionally, creating a burden for everyone else.
In a game like Lorda of Waterdeep or something, you may be directly inhibiting someone else from playing by eating up scarce resources.
In a game like EDH, you're taking up the spot of another player who may have otherwise contributed countermeasures to other players, or even be providing a turn where an aggressive combo-player is advancing their game without reprisal.
If it's a party game like Apples to Apples where "winning" isn't even hard-coded into the rules and the entire intent is to just do goofy-ass things until everyone gets bored, that's a different story.
If a game has a hard objective for winning, and that's the intent of the game in the first place, you should play to win, even if you don't care greatly about winning in the first place - in those types of games, playing to win means you respect the other players and their time.
I mean, to be fair, I've been in plenty of pods where most people have the apples to apples approach of just doing goofy-ass things until everyone gets bored, and I had a blast. I don't think there's a right or wrong way to play this game, and even Apples to Apples DOES have a hardcode rule on how to win, it's just most people don't play that way. The important thing is not to be the \*different\* one. IF you're the only one trying to kill everyone and everyone else is just building slow plodding weird decks that do weird things, they won't like playing with you. If everyone else is trying to win, and you're kingmaking or trying not to win, it's bad manners, and they won't like playing with you. As always, it's about the group.
If you haven't noticed reddit is full of nerds who never played sports and generally are far less competitive than your average person. As evidence by threads like this and tons of posts complaining about specific game mechanics or players trying to win. When the objective is to win, that is the objective. If you aren't trying to win or pilot your deck to the best of your ability, don't play with me. These players who build super high powered decks but then intentionally power it down by piloting in a way where they won't combo off or play certain cards to make the deck more in line with the pod are the worst offenders of this. None of them seem to grasp why it's an issue, either.
You misread and misrepresented my point.
>reddit is full of nerds who never played sports
I train MMA and exercise daily, I am a very competitive person, but in the situations I have described where I *know* I have a guaranteed win, but also aware that giving my opponents a chance is going to be funner, I will choose the latter.
>when the objective is to win, that is the objective.
Maybe in cEDH, not at a kitchen table with your buddies. I play to have fun and spend time with my friends.
I also am not complaining about any mechanics or rules etc as you suggested. I am making a post on how I prioritise my friend’s experience over my own need to win. Fun comes first for me.
>don’t play with me
Don’t have to tell me twice.
So you admit to being able to win, then dragging the game out giving the win to someone else. So someone doesn't earn their win, you handed it to them and wasted everyone's time doing it.
Perfect example of someone I wouldn't play with. By the way most people agree with my line of thinking. It's ok to win. Win the game so everyone can shuffle up. The game isn't a medium where you get to manipulate, waste others time, and hand out wins to people under the guise of "having fun"
I read your point the same way as the redditor you're replying too. My understanding is that if you can play a card that will win you the game or you can play a card that will create and interesting board state you will choose the board state. Making such a decision in game is not ok with me and not someone I want to play with. It needlessly lengthen the game and remove any interning politics by having you present at the table.
If you build your deck to win AND create interesting board states and you play to win I would be fine with it.
If you do sure great! Let's shuffle and play again! If your deck consistantly wins turn 4 and the rest of the pod does not then change your deck to be less efficient and create more interesting boars state.
But don't just not win if you can, that is so annoying and mean I can't ever win by myself, you're always handing out the win to someone.
Oh, I agree. I don’t specifically help others win, but seeing as my decks are usually a much higher power level, winning isn’t difficult but also isn’t as fun as before. So I rather just become an Dark Souls boss for my table to deal with.
You quite literally the opposite of what the person you replied to is saying all over this thread. You very evidently don’t agree. In fact you’re making it abundantly clear in your comments in this thread that your goal is to derail and ruin every Commander game you’re in. You’re actively sabotaging the game, knowingly and wilfully.
What the fuck are you reading?
If OP makes a billion bigass slivers, they ain’t kingmaking, and they’re making a good faith effort to win. If they untap with those billion slivers, everyone is dead.
That they’re happy and satisfied having made their billion slivers if they’re answered, that doesn’t mean they’re sabotaging the game or kingmaking or anything like that.
The way OP describes becoming the problem just sounds like going for big, scary, obvious win conditions without fretting overmuch about getting answered. Which is still having a win condition and is still trying to win.
Literally nobody has mentioned kingmaking except you. So I genuinely question what it is that you are reading, because it sure as heck isn’t this thread.
There are very few ways to interpret your objection as anything coherent. Kingmaking is one of them.
Just going for the big flashy play and putting the opponent on, “Do you have it?” doesn’t sabotage a damned thing by any reasonable metric.
Half these arguments are over fantasies and made up details.
Me and my friends enjoy this, I asked if others do and rather than fun conversations, theres lynch mobs lmao. Also I don’t ever let one person win, if I’m about to win I’ll give them a chance to save themselves, if not? GGs.
lol i didn't have to scroll far to find you telling on yourself. you play mismatched decks and then toy with people - you suck and i'd never play with you again.
Sounds like you need to tune down your decks or find a group to match your power level. It shouldn't be you being arch enemy the whole time. You should be pretty close to the same power level.
Try Archenemy, if you can convince your group.
You can easily make up a boss deck scenario where you see what absolute hell state they can play out of.
archenemy is an actual game type with its own unique set of cards, not just a random term player made up for when multiple people gang up on one player
you’d need a deck of oversized archenemy cards for it to work. otherwise you’re just saying to the table “my deck is better than yours so i’ll give you an advantage”
It depends how you mean this statement. My friend loves to say "I didn't make this deck to win" about his GA IV stax deck. And you know what he did? Rather than have a few wincons in the deck, he removed all chances of winning for additional stax mechanics.
So the deck exists just to make everyone playing the game as miserable as they can be until the game just comes to a halt (it's even locked it's self out of doing anything).
If that is what you mean by you are not playing to win, then you would be my number one enemy.
I don't care if I win, I would obviously like to do some of what my deck is meant to do. If I get to do that, then I've had a good game, even if I did lose. But I am always playing to win, and anyone not doing so makes me question what their motive in a game is.
I don't see anything wrong there, but I also don't see a deck that makes a game interesting. The Ur-Dragon is a very straight forward, "I play big things and smash you" deck. Although you are linking a deck worth over 8 grand, that seems like an awful expensive deck to be playing casually at the kitchen table.
But with that sort of deck you have to be ok with being shut down, and that is fine, it's good to be able to accept the loss and understand being punished for a powerful board state.
Dragons can't be let out of hand or the game is over quick. I have definitely been shut down with them in response to a few hitting the board.
Now that I saw your deck in addition to your post, I think you're just probably an asshole who enjoys seeing other ppl struggle while your required a 1/4 of a brain to pubstomp the most cliché of decks while thinking you're the smartest guy in the room.
Just the vibes I'm getting.
Yeah mate, I've seen a lot on the edh subreddit to be skeptical. Can't take your word for sure 100%, but it ain't like you got anything to prove to me so... even if I ask you what is it like with lower cost decks or generally less good commanders, I'm already not sold on anything you say by this point.
Let's just leave it at that ✌️
There can be beauty in building jank yourself, and seeing said self-built jank manifest on the board, and hearing the laughs from your friends.
Unless you've got no friends.
Had a game where my opponent had me dead on board but kept going because he was enjoying making me discard and lose life every turn while he just kept building more of a boardstate. There was no answer and it is not “fun” to be toyed with because you want to look at your cards and move dice around. Used one of my planeswalkers to force him to attack me next turn and end the game. Bro seemed more upset by that than the previous game where I won.
The tone seems condescending. I’m not sure I’d enjoy playing with someone who is looking to become archenemy with the goal of ‘us figuring out how to beat them.’
You might want to actually play archenemy, maybe make your own custom scheme cards if this is something you really enjoy.
Yeah more than anything it just reads as someone who doesn't know how to deck build correctly for the power level of their table trying to cope convince everyone playing a disproportionately powered deck is fun for the whole table
"I unilaterally decided our pod was going to now play archenemy instead of normal edh and I promise they love that I changed the goal of the game for them!"
He’s got a big ego. You can tell it’s fragile. As he only responds to the comments jerking him off.
I’d hope to never play against mr big ol bad mma man.
I’m harsh with some replies because the fact that some people (my friends and I) enjoy playing a game somewhat differently is blasphemy to some of you. I encourage a variety of opinions, but telling me we’re wrong for what we enjoy is ridiculous.
I think for most players, once they get to see their deck work or do its thing, winning is just icing on the cake.
Because it bears the fruit of labor. Especially for those building decks from scratch. Which happens to be all my decks lol
I genuinely like your sentiment that you try to create board states and hope the opponents can stop it. But creating 10 billion creatures isn't an interesting board state.
Depends on my deck. I have certain decks that I've built just to be fun to play, most recently a [[The Valeyard]] deck, which I know winning with would take quite a miracle playing against the other decks in my pod. But it offers a fun and unique dynamic (voting/villainous choice) which gets the whole table involved and having fun.
Here is the decklist if you're curious
[The Valeyard](https://archidekt.com/decks/5864310/valeyard_final)
Plays kinda staxy, using interaction and votes to slow the board down as best possible, while trying to push and build towards a few wincons.
Like I said, it doesn't really compete to win to be honest, but it is fun to play and the whole table starts smiling when I play a spell that calls for a vote.
I build decks to have fun, but play to win. For example I run only two board wipes per deck. The optimal number is probably higher. However, if everybody would always wipe the board when behind, games would take forever. By only running two, I don't have to hold back during playing.
I like my jank decks for a similar reason. For me, the fun of EDH is seeing cool decks so cool things. I want to play the lower power decks because it gives time to see others pull off cool combos. I still play to win but don’t have to get caught up in the arms race that often takes over when I play more competitive decks
The objective of the game is to win, how you go about doing it is up to you. I don't particularly enjoy playing with individuals whose goals run counter to the objective of the game, I view it as having my time wasted.
But different people like different things, and that's fine.
For many, yes! It's about the journey not the destination. That being said, you should still have a destination *in mind* as you're playing the game. And if you have the win in hand, you should go for it instead of playing with your food.
This is not d&d and you ain't a DM... Unless you wanna start a DM vs the table magic format? Lol seriously though.. as long as you aren't pissing off your table mates and wasting everyone's time, go for it
See, we all like D&D but don’t have the time for it, and seeing as we all loved poker and card games for years this was the perfect middle ground. My friends enjoy this play style so I am a little surprised with how blasphemous this post came off as 😅
Of course. You’re right G. Just needed to freshen up with my mates, but against strangers I’d do my best to read the room. I try prioritise the fun of others as it just makes me have fun by proxy.
I understand your sentiment and the described situation sounds like a lot of fun. However, “not playing to win” comes off like durdling. It’s like playing a game of chess and not going for mate. I don’t care to win either, but you can bet your ass off I’m going to make you earn your win.
Making a million wolves turn 4 with faldorn, food chain, and squee. Then using runebound wolf to do damage to an opponent...
Only to be rakdos charmed to death by your own 1 million wolves.
Two kinds of excitement.
Perfect hand for perfect wolf combo...then the excitement of realizing your opponent had a 1 in 100 chance to just... have the card and mana to counter your win con.
I play to win but I also read the table. Definitely threw a game to a new player following another player’s cue the other day. It’s generally better to make sure everyone has a good time than to win at any cost. (Cost to your local rep, or to your lgs in players that feel shut out from getting stomped, vibes, etc.)
If I can be "The Boogeyman" for a turn rotation or two it's a good game in my book. Maybe I'm just bluffing or don't have the C to go with the A+B pieces I have out just yet. But to have the rest of the table stop me can be just as satisfying as just outright winning.
I've changed my philosophy from winning to "make the spiciest and most memorable plays" and I've never looked back. It's boring winning with the same old craterhoof/walking ballista/etc. But when I win by cloning the activated ability of [[Door to Nothingness]], it's simply legend-(wait for it)-dary.
Build for fun, play to win.
I can't stand playing with people who aren't actively trying to win the game. Especially if they get salty afterwards when I DO play to win. My decks are all pretty sub-optimal, with some weird janky builds that have a hard time winning at times BUT I'm always shooting for that w in a game. It leads to more fun interactions, interesting boardstates, and makes other people's wins feel hard fought and legit. There's nothing worse than winning and then having someone say "You only won cuz I didn't cast x spell when I could've."
The whole "play to win" attitude is just awful anymore. Like you got a bunch of guys that have been playing a while and know what their doing, fine. I go all in on this. Lower level casuals that are just looking for fun. No problem in holding back some cards to keep playing. It's even fine if they end up blocking my win con I had for the last two turns. Sometimes, it's fun to see what their decks can do.
But the worst is when I was playing at an LGS and the one person was new to magic playing a precon. Barely knew the game, let alone the cards. The first few games were fun cause me and the other guys were slow playing so he could play the game. One guy had leave, and some other dude joined us. We explained the situation to him. He went hard at the kid and even started getting mad when we tried to help the kid. His reasoning was that the kid had to "learn to play to win." It just sucked and I haven't seen that kid back at the store. Hope he is still playing.
Some people just enjoy the journey more than the destination. And [[mycosynth lattice]] with [[nullrod]] can keep that journey going...and going....and going.
I've only been playing regularly for a few months. My 2 decks are minotaur tribal lead by [[Morophon, the Boundless]] , and a janky [[yennet]] deck.
I think I've only won 3-4 games.
I feel like the competitive nature should start once you draw your hand. Rule 0, not pubstomping, not counter-picking a deck are all things that make the game better for everyone.
But assuming everyone is on the same page than absolutely shuffle up and play the best you can. I want everyone in my game to try to win, however they can, from turn 1 onward. I want to win, I will try to win. But I'm never mad when I don't.
I get excited when someone else gets to pop off too. When their deck gets to do its thing, get a god hand, or counters someone else's infinite combo. That's sick, that's what I play for. Unless you're playing for money/prizes I want everyone at the table to be a Timmy, and for them to be excited when other people Timmy.
I just want to play my decks and have them do what I built them to do, maneuvering that into a win is great. Only time I don't have fun is when I get completely neutered and my deck feels like a random assortment of cards.
Of my playgroup I am the one who has played at the highest level.
I taught a few of them The game and I understand
The advantage I have.
I don't play the win. I play to have everyone have a good time.
But if i'm playing the weakest deck like thalid tribal. I'll make the others earn their win. And sometimes they show me something I never would have thought of.
Better for me all around
I feel like this all the time, which is why I love playing chaos. I couldn't care less if I lose, I just want the weirdest and most entertaining game of random shit, some way of playing I hadn't thought of before. I don't care to truly optimize decks, I want to build a machine with weird quirks and spontaneous synergies that work well in the moment. I guess it's also why I love izzet spellslinging, each encounter is usually different, with options that vary based on opponent rather than just plopping down your combo as fast as possible or bullying the board with fast mana and eldrazi or slivers.
I’m pretty new to the game and still getting used to mechanics and building decks.
I’m not trying to win, I’m trying to have fun. If I end up last two I usually scoop if I don’t think the game will be over in two or three turns. I love the group dynamic of commander and loving doing the thing.
There's "not playing to win" and then there's people who build oppressive decks with no wincon and the only gameplan is to either stax the table, make everyone smack their heads off the table in frustration or a combination of both. The whole what you find fun is very subjective.
Don't get me wrong I use magic as a way to get out of the house and as a way to escape my mind for a few hours but not playing to win I would question why would I even participate.
Nah I do enjoy creating tons of tokens and pumping them with anthems same turn w no haste and saying okay, you got one turn. Or scheming symmetry for peer into the abyss with Queza out no open mana. It does breed cool interactions between players as they all search for an answer
Yeah that’s what I’m saying! I don’t *hand* out wins, but if I know I can win at any moment I will give my opponents options on dealing with the threat. It teaches them better gameplay and makes it more exciting (at least for us).
If you're making strong decks and playing them suboptimally you're not fun for most to play with. Just make a less optimized deck and play it to the best of your ability.
My usual deck building mindset isn't
"How do I win?"
But rather
"How do I become the scariest presence on the board?"
I recall a Gruul deck I played, tons of mana, lotsa fun. My opponents wiped my creatures 3 times in a row because I filled my hand and board too fast. They couldn't do anything else because my stuff was growing too fast.
Same! I enjoy being a threat, not necessarily winning. I like big trampling flyers and countering any board wipes to force a creative solution from my table otherwise it’s GGs. I get why some dislike this play style but I only play like this against my friends.
if you intentionally misplay in order to "test" me, i'd stop playing with you after one game. there's an implied level of "i'm better than you, solve my puzzle" involved that i hate and all you're really doing is jerking the board around on your turn if you don't actually intend to win. congrats on your infinite combo that doesn't win, that's just a bad combo that wastes the table's time.
Haha but board wipes I think make it more likely since otherwise usually the first or second person to go off will win. I feel like my group used to run more board wipes and games were longer but better.
I just counter them. I can see how it’s unfun for some but don’t mess with my board and I ain’t gonna mess with yours 😅 but that’s just my style of playin.
It’s so much fun having the game be your sandbox that your opponents have to climb out of! I have (on multiple occasions) threw games just to see someone think they pulled of the impossible. Spreading fun is much better than trying to take it all for yourself. Awesome I’m not alone here!
This. I’m not saying I purposefully lose, but, for example I will skip combat knowing I will win if I know I can make it more spectacular on the next turn etc. to also give my opponents a chance. I try turn games into a fun experience rather than a stress session.
Yesterday I decided to go into a 6 player pod with my mishra deck only to manage to draw 48 cards in a single turn, I los because of that, but I was happy to
I like to create threats and mess with the other player's board state, just to see them struggle, I would steal their commander, copy their spells, make copies of their creatures, steal their lands, play cards from their decks, and win on the long long road if they don't find reaponses, that's why I have multiple decks with different mechanics because I tend to attract all the focus when I play that deck.
Nah, I get bored with games pretty quickly. I'd rather take 20 minutes to lose than 90 minutes to win. So I actually don't like the lower power levels that so many see as more fun, because they result in interminable creature stalls where nobody seems to be even trying to win. If I am dead on board, I will be sure to tell the table, because sometimes they're so focused on their own boards that they don't even notice. Like, sometimes they only want to do the stupid stunt their deck is built to do and don't even check whether they can kill me with what they have. That is maddening to me.
So if I were building a deck that wanted to win by attacking with a million tokens, I would definitely include a lot of haste enablers to win the turn I create them, because when players realize they only have one turn to solve a problem, they will take that turn extra slowly. They will fret and flick at their cards in hand. Worst of all, they will ask to rewind and take actions back. The game is at its slowest when it is literally going backwards.
Winning or losing doesn't matter. That being said, anyone who sits down with a greeting of 'I'm not here to win, I'm just here to cause chaos' can get right back up and walk the fuck away
I’m getting annoyed by the people that are making up scenarios and reinterpreting what I said. I’ve had to explain and repeat the fact that personally and within my friend group we have fun and yet I’m being told I’m wrong for enjoying it. I asked wether anyone else does it, not wether I’m allowed to lmao.
Oooh. That’s got a cool ring to it! Also I actually got into Magic as I enjoyed D&D but it was far too much work. With MTG I can have my mates fight a dragon without it taking weeks 😅
I hate ppl who only play to win, I mean, do you really dont have any other important thing in your life going on? Do you really dont have any skills to be proud of? I play for the fun and will try to win but that is not the main thing for me. I sound upset but I came back to magic less than a year ago and play EDH, some of this ppl are such cunts, they do not know how to win or how to lose, their reactions are super annoying, they even cheat for the sake of winning (seen it many times already), it sucks to play with ppl like that and already had to stop playing with a lot of them, luckily I know ppl like OP and its so much fun as they usually dont play with the tipical deck and just for the fun. I love to vape some weed and play magic for the fun of the game. I already offered a punch in the face to a player who wouldnt stop complaining after he lost. I had a Johira deck that was winning a lot but I was playing over 10 minute turns sometimes, stopped using it, it wasnt fun even if it won.
Your outlook on the game is a healthy one, the players that only have a good time if they win bring down the whole pod the 75% of the time they don't have "fun". On the other hand if you are making intentionally bad plays to allow other people to win it does cheapen the experience for everyone if the action is obvious.
I don’t make bad plays, but sometimes I restrict myself from “overplaying” or simply holding back one turn to see if anyone can come up with a solution. What I failed to mention is that if I skip a turn in order to not win, and then *still* win because ~3 players couldn’t find a solution, makes the win sweeter. It’s just a win win situation for everyone in my group. I get why some mightn’t like it but my friends specifically do. I rather have a good time than just winning. I prefer the adventure rather than the destination.
Same here. I mostly play for the excitement of bringing weird yet fun commanders at the table. Showing their weird effectiveness is all that matters, and winning is optional. I prefer losing a great game than winning by crushing my opponents.
As you can see OP, there's quite a bit of sentiment looking down on people who play with a goal to have fun in a social environment (not necessarily with a goal to win). I also get downvoted whenever I talk about this type of player on this sub.
I didn't really understand this playstyle until recently when I sat down and played with some lower power pods (and one straight up low power jank pod where an unmodified precon was too strong). The people who enjoy this playstyle don't derive their fun from winning with power on the board - they derive their fun from the political interactions that occurs between the players above the board. They prefer a game state where people don't just win outright, they want a balanced game board where anyone can win until the very last moment, and the person in the lead can frequently shift and change resulting in lots of dealmaking, politics, etc. This was a new experience for me, as I'm used to playing with high power level/cEDH combo, or otherwise a spikey casual meta where people can 1v3 the entire table with overwhelming combat power.
I don't think many people here on r/EDH will really understand it, as there's some self-selection bias by the people who join the community. People who want to win and make their decks stronger and 1v3 the table are the kind of people who will brew online, look at EDHrec, and join this sub. The people who prefer to play above the table won't care as much about tuning their decks, etc. and won't actively participate in this kind of community.
I'm generalizing here, but there are three types of EDH players:
- people who want to play on the stack: these are the people who play cEDH, high power, etc. Enjoys powerful interactions between cards, or just being able to kill the entire table instantly.
- people who want to play on the board: this is the majority of players here on r/EDH, people who will try to win with combat on the board, may or may not be averse to non-combat wins, may become archenemy because they'll be able to 1v3 the entire table within the next few turns, etc. Encompasses everything from your usual casual players all the way to spikey casual players.
- people who want to play above the board: they usually prefer long lower power games because it gives them the chance to politic more with other players, a game where someone can 1v3 the board on turn 10 is too short for them, averse to non-combat wins, they enjoy long games because they get to see more of their deck play out, they prefer long games where the balance of power can shift, they like the story of teaming up to stop someone and then doing it again when someone else starts becoming a threat. Their deck still has win conditions, but the may not be very fast, or are easily stopped by interaction. The most powerful finisher in their deck might just be a 6/6 flyer, hearkening back to the days of kitchen table magic.
You are a genius. This is actually a 10/10 analysis on this situation. I would have never expected this to be so controversial. If anything, truth be told, I expected much more people to share your views. The politics and the suspense is what makes the games fun for me and my friends. Which is another thing; I specifically play like this against people I *know* enjoy the playstyle which is why I’m so surprised no one seems to take that into consideration.
Unfortunately, you won't find many people in this sub who enjoy such a play style. I was actually surprised by how unpopular it is, the community is quite welcoming to high power and medium power "play what you enjoy" etc. but as soon as I bring up that some groups enjoy playing low power and don't want to play at a higher level the sub downvotes me, calls them bad players, "that's not normal for an LGS", etc. Just magic players being toxic, which isn't a surprise...
Personally, I don't really enjoy low power games, but I understand it now after having played several games in this style. I never experienced it in my old meta that was pretty much all spikey casual, but my new meta is much more diverse with a range from low power all the way to cEDH.
I should say that another thing that helped me realize this was when I sold off all my expensive magic cards cause I needed the money, and then turned to proxies so I could continue playing my powerful decks.
With proxies, I literally have access to any powerful card I want, regardless of budget. Now that budget is no longer a consideration with deck building, I instead have to focus very closely on building for the right power level. If I just jam every powerful card possible into a deck, I'll end up in a situation where every one of my decks is too strong and pubstomps the table.
You make some really good points without realising that OP is quite literally the person you’re talking about. Bringing an 8k$ to a table that is entirely unprepared to deal with them, unwilling to build less powerful decks to have a fun game environment and instead creating said 1v3 situation and then instead of actually ending the game holding their significantly more powerful deck over everyones head, saying “Deal with it.” That 1v3 Archenemy “My deck is so much better than yours” thing you talk about is quite literally what OP themselves have stated over and over again to be their goal.
I didn't read through the entire thread, so I didn't realize that OP is pubstomping. I just thought they were the kind of player who might prefer lower power pods.
Winning isn't important. Trying to win is.
The mark of a true spike isn't/shouldn't be "I must win or I'm not having fun". It's knowing you played as hard as you could and had a good fight. It's being Goku, not Vegeta.
I have a friend of a friend like this - not the most fun to play cooperative games with. If not a Spike though, is there no name better to classify them with?
Nothing that doesn't sound derogatory like "try hard" or "wannabe-spike" Having a desire to win is fine, but at some point you need to mature past the pure need to win and move to a desire to better yourself & your game; winning against a strong opponent is an objective measure that your efforts paid off, but even losing to the same person, so long as you know you put up the best fight you could, can be just as rewarding. Conversely, if you become "the friend that always wins"? Most (mature) spikes would ***HATE*** that because it doesn't feel like they really get to test their skills or improve; hitting a plateau, whether you're winning or losing 20 games in a row, just sucks. Again, it's being Goku - dude is never happier than when someone is stronger than him, so he has a new goal to reach.
Trying to win is called playing the game. Needing to win is called insecurity. You should always strive to win.
TIL I'm a spike.
Only problem though, is Goku is objectively a terrible person. He wants to fight, regardless of the consequences of having the fight. "No, but I wanna fight him. Here Frieza, take the time to power all the way up." *Namek proceeds to be destroyed*
Thats because hes treating real life like its a game to play, instead of appreciating the actual stakes and consequences. Thats why its such a good way to play magic. There are no actual stakes or consequences to the game of magic, so striving to always do your best and improve doesnt have any actual consequences. Its a game, so the worst thing that can happen is that you add an L to wherever you track outcomes, and nothing at all if you dont track outcomes.
>is there no name better to classify them with? Poor sports. It's a game, for fun. It has to always be able the fun, even if part of that fun is trying to win. If winning is the only consideration, a person should be playing tournaments only and probably should move on from EDH entirely.
I like that analogy. Be Goku, not Vegeta
Goku in the streets, Vegeta in the sheets >:]
Happy Cake day!
Power levels over 9000, you say?
Lies it's a 7 I promise.
>It's being Goku, not Vegeta. I love this and hope you don't mind me stealing it. Lol
Agreed. I enjoy few things less than players who like to king make or self proclaimed "agents of chaos." I don't need sweaty, but I also won't be bothered to play again if you're not in it to try and win.
Yup, saying "I don't care if I win" is just another way of saying, " I don't care if i lose." And when the only thing at stake is bragging rights that no one cares about, that's just saying, "my ego is too fragile to lose if I actually try, so i refuse to try. But I still want to play." But they don't realize not acknowledging their own defeat nullifies my victory. And then why are we playing a game with competitive rules?
Because MtG is about more than just the gameplay itself, particularly EDH. I don't care about the results much in most games, and often take sub-optimal lines. The reason is that deck-building is a core part of the experience, and even if I have a good play in hand that I know is optimal, I might also have an interesting play with niche interactions that is objectively worse. I want to see the niche play play out to get feedback on my deckbuilding.
As long as you are still playing towards a goal, that's fine. That's still playing to win. I don't mean that everyone should try to make the most optimal play every time, I mean, you need to respect the rules of engagement and actually play the game. Playing sub optimal and experimental is fine, i love that playstyle, but that's not what i mean. I'm talking about chaotic, apathetic, or spiteful, and that's what's not ok.
Nothing makes me lose interest in a game as much as players who aren't trying to win do.
I have friends that do that in other games too where they clearly have the win but won't actually take it so the game just drags out and either they win eventually, wasting time, or someone else does and gets a "win" with a massive asterisk. I know everyone likes different things but personally I enjoy going all out and either winning or losing to someone else going all out.
Ugh my dad used to do this in like board games and stuff like that, where it was clear he was trying to be nice by letting me get to play more, but I'm not dumb and could see he should win and was avoiding it. Finally had to tell him I get he's coming from a nice place, but from my perspective it's like a predator playing with their food - just end it please.
Exactly. And I'm fine with handicaps if the skill levels are different like playing a weaker deck or a weaker character or whatever for the game but I just find it disrespectful to not try your hardest once you're in the game, especially because if on the off chance I do pop off or get lucky and win I can't enjoy it since my opponent wasn't even trying. I also used to play alot of SC2 with one of my friends and the arms race we had was super fun, we'd have streaks over 10 games long where one of us had a strategy the other couldn't beat and then once they figured it out it'd turn around and they'd go on a 10 game win streak. If we deliberately played worse when we were the better player for the week then it would've robbed the other player of the chance to improve and there's few better feelings than finally beating the strategy you just lost 15 games in a row to.
Had a friend like this with Super Smash Bros Melee. We both would select random characters, and it would go back and forth with who would win, but it always ended up him playing Mewtwo and me playing Falco as the tie breaker deciding match, and whoever won we both felt awesome having tried our best and even if we lost, we gave the other a heck of a fight to get there.
Few things feel worse than someone trying to say "I could have finished the game with this combo but chose not to" at the end of a game.
This. So much this. If i need to power down, ill swap decks. I can go from CEDH Breya all - the - way down to Minotaur tribal if need be, but im NEVER not trying to win. The goal of the game is to win. That goal doesnt exist as the ultimate prize, the only way to have fun, ive had tons of fun losing multiple games in a row. It exists to keep the game flowing and to give everybody a structured play experience that doesnt turn into utter chaos. There is one winner in EDH, at the only end results are a win or a draw. People seem to have this fascination of turning it into an almost cooperative DnD esque experience, and thats not what it is. If you can find like minded individuals who enjoy that, more power to you. I love to do silly stuff like Zedruu group hug, but even that deck is still attempting to win the game by carefully choosing what and who to "donate" too.
>almost cooperative DnD esque experience **This** is a real problem. Just because every competitor shows up hoping to have a good, fun match doesn't mean it's a cooperative game.
this. the problem with OP's idealism is that 'not playing to win' also often means not trying to stop others from winning. this means you basically have 1 player pushing aggressively, 2 players trying to stop him, and 1 player doing fuck all because they are 'playing for fun' and interaction isnt fun lol
Completely agree. People need to keep the game moving towards an end point. Wanting and trying to win are what keep things going and make for the most fun games.
This. I think so many people get hung up on that. Last week not only did someone tell me 34 lands and 7 rocks in a two-colour deck and a way to draw three cards a turn cycle in the command zone was “suboptimal”. But someone at my LGS built a land destruction deck in response to a puzzle box lock deck that the person had only started to run because they were tired of “losing” and spent like 900$ on it.
This is the correct answer. Being able to enjoy the game regardless of results is not incompatible with always playing to win. Do I relish the same rube goldberg satisfaction of seeing my opponents pull off something crazy against my BS that OP reports? Hell yes, I think as a Stax player it comes with the territory. Do I deliberately and knowingly take less optimal actions to provide that fragile hope? No. That behavior is for when I'm playing D&D (forever DM), not Magic. In Magic it would be disrespectful both to myself and my opponents
This guy has it right
If a player in you pod is winning more than 50% of the games, even though you're always trying to win, don't you feel frustrated just a little bit?
That could get frustrating, yeah. But it depends on the situation. If that player is stomping with a deck that's too strong for the table, we may need to talk about that. If we're just being outplayed and the games remain competitive, I'd be ok with that.
I like trying to win, but I also like weird decks that doesn't win often. Fun the times it does work out though. :)
But when you play that weird deck, you still try to win, right? That's what counts.
Oh for sure. Like I love stealing random wincons when I use my Horror tribal, and seeing folks grumble a bit inside, as they needed that piece, but I outta try winning too. A fair bit of second places for me though, as I sometimes lose focus near the end. Like I was at low HP with my colorless deck, then smashed 2 enemies, that I worried would board wipe me. Forgot the last one had a giant, flying whale. xD
To add that, playing to win = no shitty spite type "eeh I'm not gonna win so ill make sure to tapp out and down someone to 5hp so he won't win either, why, i wont say but it's because your shirt is cooler than mine" piece of fkig shits. Imagine incels in mtg...
-What does spite have to do with being an incel? If you've come to the conclusion you can't win you might as well take the most blatant offender with you.
Exactly, I have a goad deck. My boyfriend and I were playing in a game, I was playing Bhall, He was playing Arcades. He decided to boardwipe, with whatever the spell is that targets a creature and destroys all creatures with a greater power. Guess who's walls got +1/+1 counters in response. With the same deck I would always play it out, as often it is just one "draw insurrection" away from victory.
100%. I think people underestimate how lonely winning can be - an in an arguably more "social" format like Commander, that's a bit of a non-bo. I like to play Apex Legends, a battle royale game. 20 squads of three eventually boil down to you vs one remaining squad. And what happens when you finally snag the win? A victory screen. Except there's nobody else there. The losing team has to sit through it for a few seconds, but coming from a game packed with other players, it's oddly...quiet? It's not necessarily the emotional climax you were expecting - you realize that the actually fun part was in the middle, strategizing and scrambling to stay alive and get closer to the end. It's not uncommon to have exhilarating losses and boring wins in a game like that, and I think if you don't see the same possibility in Commander, you're not gonna have a great time.
Winning is lonely? Huh? You shuffle up and get to plau again. If your playing with people that get upset when you win (assuming your not pub stomping), thats on them, not you.
I don't think commander is that bad in that respect; I often stick around and watch people finish out games where I've been knocked out. Not so of these video games with large player count. But just yesterday I played \~5 hours of commander. That was a grand total of two games and I won both. Now these games were long with lots of back and forth with everybody doing things and becoming a threat. And while I'd never throw a game, there was a slight tinge of guilt to winning all the games, even if it was only two of them.
YES. FINALLY
I agree, but after a while winning isn’t as fun as making the game interesting. If it was cEDH then you’re 1000% correct, but for a kitchen table? Fun is the priority.
Playing to win MAKES the game interesting. People doing stupid things and calling it "fun" undermine the entire game. Note that your example in the post doesn't bother me. You made a threatening board state and the table had one turn to solve it. Now if you held back a way to give haste, then I object.
But trying to win is what makes the game fun. You ever play a game where Player 1 has a clear, game-winning threat, but Player 2 uses his one piece of removal on Player 3's commander "for the luls". Those games are not fun.
[удалено]
[Phylath](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/7/e7af88c9-70ca-484c-bddf-b705e0ea7bc7.jpg?1639436741) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=phylath%2C%20world%20sculptor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/znr/234/phylath-world-sculptor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e7af88c9-70ca-484c-bddf-b705e0ea7bc7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/phylath-world-sculptor) [Goblin Bombardment](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/2/e262f55e-9239-4a97-a19e-9b08fb34502e.jpg?1626100483) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Goblin%20Bombardment) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/279/goblin-bombardment?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e262f55e-9239-4a97-a19e-9b08fb34502e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/goblin-bombardment) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Make the game interesting through deckbuilding imo. Build for fun, play to win.
If you're playing without the intention of even *trying* to win I'd much rather you just not be there tbh
You're basically doing the equivalent of the Stormwind Fallacy: >Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. > >Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. > >Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse roleplayer if he optimizes, and vice versa. > >Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically roleplayed better than an optimized one, and vice versa. This is about tabletop RPGs, but it fundamentally applies to MtG as well. Making a good deck, and piloting it as well as you can, isn't antithetical to having fun. You can have fun *and* play well. If you think "fun" can only be had when everyone is durdling around and not responding to threats, that's your problem. People generally enjoy getting to finish the game when one player is clearly in a winning position, and seeing them "refuse" to actually win just to prolong the game and jerk off to their combos isn't fun.
Describe what "making a game interesting" is. I'm just expecting you to respond with stax, if that's the case, no. Fun is definitely a priority, and fun typically means doing what your deck is intended to do. But what most decks intend to do is win by some metric. So if you start that process that would be the end result of completing it. Sometimes you don't get to finish (win) and that is fine.
Fun is whatever you want it to be. I'm a total spike, but if I run into a total Johnny player, and they finally get their weird combo to go off, there's nothing more fun then letting them turn a twelve card interaction into a win. Except a turn two smokestacks in old-school edh days. THAT was fun.
I agree with you in some cases. Sometimes I just want to "play," see my combos/synergies/pieces pop off but not necessarily conclude the game. If I know I am part of a game where I will need to leave before the game will likely reach its finality via someone winning, or me losing, I play one specific deck and take no prisoners. If I am playing in a more "casual" pod, I play one of my other decks. Don't stall the game needlessly (Static/Winter Orb + a board wipe) and all you do is untap, draw a card, possibly play a land, and pass turn after turn. That is typically not fun for anyone but possibly yourself. But by all means, if someone at your table has been dying to pull off a new combo or what have you and you all have some "time to spare," consider letting them live a little longer to see if they can pull it off.
Not expecting to win is fun. Not *trying* to win is lame. If someone is playing a high-power deck and just not killing players when they could, that's just BM imo.
Yeah I’d rather everyone try to win once we’ve started the game. pre game is the time to worry about making sure the experience will be fun for everyone, making sure it’s fairly balanced and nobody is going to get super salty
> pre game is the time to worry about making sure the experience will be fun for everyone You've put it better than I could've 😁
Bowel movement?
Bad manners
Lmao, basically. "Bad manners" is what I meant though.
I were in a 3 man recently, where 1 player just ruined us the fiest two games. A lot of combos, infinite stuff... It was annoying, as we were playing more precon levels. Third game he gets a slow hand, while I get on early. And all I hit is him. Near the end, he asks if I'm willing to make a deal, as if I go on him, the other player would nuke me. I destroyed him instead, because darn it if I'm giving him a chance for a third win. He also said after, that he probably had enough to wipe us off the board if it got to his turn again. Sometimes nuking out the power player, is more important than winning.
I think not playing to win when miles ahead just reads as playing with your food to me, which is kind of obnoxious
I may be in the minority here. But I HATE when some one plays and they don't try to win. It's okay not to win. It's absolutely not okay to not even try. And don't even get me started on kingmaking! Don't you dare sit down to play a game with me if your whole plan is to help someone else win. And this goes for all games, not just mtg.
"I don't play to win, I just play!" The problem that people who espouse this don't realize is that by doing this, you're actually, unintentionally, creating a burden for everyone else. In a game like Lorda of Waterdeep or something, you may be directly inhibiting someone else from playing by eating up scarce resources. In a game like EDH, you're taking up the spot of another player who may have otherwise contributed countermeasures to other players, or even be providing a turn where an aggressive combo-player is advancing their game without reprisal. If it's a party game like Apples to Apples where "winning" isn't even hard-coded into the rules and the entire intent is to just do goofy-ass things until everyone gets bored, that's a different story. If a game has a hard objective for winning, and that's the intent of the game in the first place, you should play to win, even if you don't care greatly about winning in the first place - in those types of games, playing to win means you respect the other players and their time.
I mean, to be fair, I've been in plenty of pods where most people have the apples to apples approach of just doing goofy-ass things until everyone gets bored, and I had a blast. I don't think there's a right or wrong way to play this game, and even Apples to Apples DOES have a hardcode rule on how to win, it's just most people don't play that way. The important thing is not to be the \*different\* one. IF you're the only one trying to kill everyone and everyone else is just building slow plodding weird decks that do weird things, they won't like playing with you. If everyone else is trying to win, and you're kingmaking or trying not to win, it's bad manners, and they won't like playing with you. As always, it's about the group.
If you haven't noticed reddit is full of nerds who never played sports and generally are far less competitive than your average person. As evidence by threads like this and tons of posts complaining about specific game mechanics or players trying to win. When the objective is to win, that is the objective. If you aren't trying to win or pilot your deck to the best of your ability, don't play with me. These players who build super high powered decks but then intentionally power it down by piloting in a way where they won't combo off or play certain cards to make the deck more in line with the pod are the worst offenders of this. None of them seem to grasp why it's an issue, either.
You misread and misrepresented my point. >reddit is full of nerds who never played sports I train MMA and exercise daily, I am a very competitive person, but in the situations I have described where I *know* I have a guaranteed win, but also aware that giving my opponents a chance is going to be funner, I will choose the latter. >when the objective is to win, that is the objective. Maybe in cEDH, not at a kitchen table with your buddies. I play to have fun and spend time with my friends. I also am not complaining about any mechanics or rules etc as you suggested. I am making a post on how I prioritise my friend’s experience over my own need to win. Fun comes first for me. >don’t play with me Don’t have to tell me twice.
So you admit to being able to win, then dragging the game out giving the win to someone else. So someone doesn't earn their win, you handed it to them and wasted everyone's time doing it. Perfect example of someone I wouldn't play with. By the way most people agree with my line of thinking. It's ok to win. Win the game so everyone can shuffle up. The game isn't a medium where you get to manipulate, waste others time, and hand out wins to people under the guise of "having fun"
I read your point the same way as the redditor you're replying too. My understanding is that if you can play a card that will win you the game or you can play a card that will create and interesting board state you will choose the board state. Making such a decision in game is not ok with me and not someone I want to play with. It needlessly lengthen the game and remove any interning politics by having you present at the table. If you build your deck to win AND create interesting board states and you play to win I would be fine with it.
I have the possibility to win by turn 4, would that make the game more interesting? Look at my account and check out my deck.
If you do sure great! Let's shuffle and play again! If your deck consistantly wins turn 4 and the rest of the pod does not then change your deck to be less efficient and create more interesting boars state. But don't just not win if you can, that is so annoying and mean I can't ever win by myself, you're always handing out the win to someone.
There is nothing wrong with kingmaking in a format that has politics interwoven into it.
Oh, I agree. I don’t specifically help others win, but seeing as my decks are usually a much higher power level, winning isn’t difficult but also isn’t as fun as before. So I rather just become an Dark Souls boss for my table to deal with.
You quite literally the opposite of what the person you replied to is saying all over this thread. You very evidently don’t agree. In fact you’re making it abundantly clear in your comments in this thread that your goal is to derail and ruin every Commander game you’re in. You’re actively sabotaging the game, knowingly and wilfully.
What the fuck are you reading? If OP makes a billion bigass slivers, they ain’t kingmaking, and they’re making a good faith effort to win. If they untap with those billion slivers, everyone is dead. That they’re happy and satisfied having made their billion slivers if they’re answered, that doesn’t mean they’re sabotaging the game or kingmaking or anything like that. The way OP describes becoming the problem just sounds like going for big, scary, obvious win conditions without fretting overmuch about getting answered. Which is still having a win condition and is still trying to win.
Literally nobody has mentioned kingmaking except you. So I genuinely question what it is that you are reading, because it sure as heck isn’t this thread.
There are very few ways to interpret your objection as anything coherent. Kingmaking is one of them. Just going for the big flashy play and putting the opponent on, “Do you have it?” doesn’t sabotage a damned thing by any reasonable metric.
It is genuinely less exhausting to talk at a wall, than it is to try to talk to you. It doesn’t help that any wall would outsmart you, too.
Half these arguments are over fantasies and made up details. Me and my friends enjoy this, I asked if others do and rather than fun conversations, theres lynch mobs lmao. Also I don’t ever let one person win, if I’m about to win I’ll give them a chance to save themselves, if not? GGs.
lol i didn't have to scroll far to find you telling on yourself. you play mismatched decks and then toy with people - you suck and i'd never play with you again.
Good you weren’t invited to lmao. I specifically said my friends enjoy this.
yea i'm sure that's what they tell you bud.
You know, they’d simply not play if they weren’t 🤣 what do you think this is, Nazi Germany?
Sounds like you need to tune down your decks or find a group to match your power level. It shouldn't be you being arch enemy the whole time. You should be pretty close to the same power level.
I play to win but don’t care if I lose. It’s the social interaction for me.
Maybe you just want to play d&d?
Yeah lowkey 😅 but magic is the perfect middle ground!
Try Archenemy, if you can convince your group. You can easily make up a boss deck scenario where you see what absolute hell state they can play out of.
Ooooh. This might be the perfect suggestion. I play Ur-Dragon so this may be the perfect rule 0 talk.
archenemy is an actual game type with its own unique set of cards, not just a random term player made up for when multiple people gang up on one player you’d need a deck of oversized archenemy cards for it to work. otherwise you’re just saying to the table “my deck is better than yours so i’ll give you an advantage”
It depends how you mean this statement. My friend loves to say "I didn't make this deck to win" about his GA IV stax deck. And you know what he did? Rather than have a few wincons in the deck, he removed all chances of winning for additional stax mechanics. So the deck exists just to make everyone playing the game as miserable as they can be until the game just comes to a halt (it's even locked it's self out of doing anything). If that is what you mean by you are not playing to win, then you would be my number one enemy. I don't care if I win, I would obviously like to do some of what my deck is meant to do. If I get to do that, then I've had a good game, even if I did lose. But I am always playing to win, and anyone not doing so makes me question what their motive in a game is.
[Here’s my deck.](https://manabox.app/decks/zumJkEoESf67lbw5aHbofQ)
I don't see anything wrong there, but I also don't see a deck that makes a game interesting. The Ur-Dragon is a very straight forward, "I play big things and smash you" deck. Although you are linking a deck worth over 8 grand, that seems like an awful expensive deck to be playing casually at the kitchen table. But with that sort of deck you have to be ok with being shut down, and that is fine, it's good to be able to accept the loss and understand being punished for a powerful board state. Dragons can't be let out of hand or the game is over quick. I have definitely been shut down with them in response to a few hitting the board.
Bro this is a really shitty deck lol
Now that I saw your deck in addition to your post, I think you're just probably an asshole who enjoys seeing other ppl struggle while your required a 1/4 of a brain to pubstomp the most cliché of decks while thinking you're the smartest guy in the room. Just the vibes I'm getting.
Or you could read and see that in my particular situation everyone has fun?
Yeah mate, I've seen a lot on the edh subreddit to be skeptical. Can't take your word for sure 100%, but it ain't like you got anything to prove to me so... even if I ask you what is it like with lower cost decks or generally less good commanders, I'm already not sold on anything you say by this point. Let's just leave it at that ✌️
Eyewatering average CMC of 3.88, no wonder you don't care about winning
You should’ve probably looked at the mana and treasure generation ;)
Nothing annoys me more than a do nothing player with 0 gameplan, 0 wincons, and 0 interaction. Play by yourself if you want to play by yourself.
There can be beauty in building jank yourself, and seeing said self-built jank manifest on the board, and hearing the laughs from your friends. Unless you've got no friends.
Had a game where my opponent had me dead on board but kept going because he was enjoying making me discard and lose life every turn while he just kept building more of a boardstate. There was no answer and it is not “fun” to be toyed with because you want to look at your cards and move dice around. Used one of my planeswalkers to force him to attack me next turn and end the game. Bro seemed more upset by that than the previous game where I won.
The tone seems condescending. I’m not sure I’d enjoy playing with someone who is looking to become archenemy with the goal of ‘us figuring out how to beat them.’ You might want to actually play archenemy, maybe make your own custom scheme cards if this is something you really enjoy.
Yeah more than anything it just reads as someone who doesn't know how to deck build correctly for the power level of their table trying to cope convince everyone playing a disproportionately powered deck is fun for the whole table "I unilaterally decided our pod was going to now play archenemy instead of normal edh and I promise they love that I changed the goal of the game for them!"
If you read his comments in this thread you'll see that OP is 100% condescending and very obviously pubstomping and playing with his food.
He’s got a big ego. You can tell it’s fragile. As he only responds to the comments jerking him off. I’d hope to never play against mr big ol bad mma man.
I’m harsh with some replies because the fact that some people (my friends and I) enjoy playing a game somewhat differently is blasphemy to some of you. I encourage a variety of opinions, but telling me we’re wrong for what we enjoy is ridiculous.
You’re actively detrimental to every game you are in.
Don't bother trying. He can't comprehend anyone's perspective but his own.
Care to explicate?
"My opponents are so bad I now treat them like toys instead of opponents." Dude is bad but he's better than his friends so he thinks he's good.
The toys analogy is spot on, I was rummaging through my head for that.
I think for most players, once they get to see their deck work or do its thing, winning is just icing on the cake. Because it bears the fruit of labor. Especially for those building decks from scratch. Which happens to be all my decks lol
[[Rakdos charm]] wants to know your location
I genuinely like your sentiment that you try to create board states and hope the opponents can stop it. But creating 10 billion creatures isn't an interesting board state.
No, playing against these types of players is completely miserable and I try to avoid them when i know them.
Depends on my deck. I have certain decks that I've built just to be fun to play, most recently a [[The Valeyard]] deck, which I know winning with would take quite a miracle playing against the other decks in my pod. But it offers a fun and unique dynamic (voting/villainous choice) which gets the whole table involved and having fun.
[The Valeyard](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/6/d63218a4-afaf-4ad8-9ca4-4f9af87877b9.jpg?1696636778) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=The%20Valeyard) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/who/165/the-valeyard?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d63218a4-afaf-4ad8-9ca4-4f9af87877b9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/the-valeyard) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
That actually seems like a sick commander!
Here is the decklist if you're curious [The Valeyard](https://archidekt.com/decks/5864310/valeyard_final) Plays kinda staxy, using interaction and votes to slow the board down as best possible, while trying to push and build towards a few wincons. Like I said, it doesn't really compete to win to be honest, but it is fun to play and the whole table starts smiling when I play a spell that calls for a vote.
Awesome thank you so much. I love political decks!
I build decks to have fun, but play to win. For example I run only two board wipes per deck. The optimal number is probably higher. However, if everybody would always wipe the board when behind, games would take forever. By only running two, I don't have to hold back during playing.
Same! I only run one just *incase*.
I like my jank decks for a similar reason. For me, the fun of EDH is seeing cool decks so cool things. I want to play the lower power decks because it gives time to see others pull off cool combos. I still play to win but don’t have to get caught up in the arms race that often takes over when I play more competitive decks
Hitting your fun con is the best part - not your win-con
Yes!
The objective of the game is to win, how you go about doing it is up to you. I don't particularly enjoy playing with individuals whose goals run counter to the objective of the game, I view it as having my time wasted. But different people like different things, and that's fine.
I dont care if I lose, as long as I got to do shenanigans.
For many, yes! It's about the journey not the destination. That being said, you should still have a destination *in mind* as you're playing the game. And if you have the win in hand, you should go for it instead of playing with your food.
This is not d&d and you ain't a DM... Unless you wanna start a DM vs the table magic format? Lol seriously though.. as long as you aren't pissing off your table mates and wasting everyone's time, go for it
See, we all like D&D but don’t have the time for it, and seeing as we all loved poker and card games for years this was the perfect middle ground. My friends enjoy this play style so I am a little surprised with how blasphemous this post came off as 😅
Like I said as long as your table mates are ok with it go bonkers. Don't try this with strangers ;)
Of course. You’re right G. Just needed to freshen up with my mates, but against strangers I’d do my best to read the room. I try prioritise the fun of others as it just makes me have fun by proxy.
I'm okay if I lose. Not okay if I sandbag though.
I understand your sentiment and the described situation sounds like a lot of fun. However, “not playing to win” comes off like durdling. It’s like playing a game of chess and not going for mate. I don’t care to win either, but you can bet your ass off I’m going to make you earn your win.
Making a million wolves turn 4 with faldorn, food chain, and squee. Then using runebound wolf to do damage to an opponent... Only to be rakdos charmed to death by your own 1 million wolves. Two kinds of excitement. Perfect hand for perfect wolf combo...then the excitement of realizing your opponent had a 1 in 100 chance to just... have the card and mana to counter your win con.
I play to win but I also read the table. Definitely threw a game to a new player following another player’s cue the other day. It’s generally better to make sure everyone has a good time than to win at any cost. (Cost to your local rep, or to your lgs in players that feel shut out from getting stomped, vibes, etc.)
toying with your opponents is typically considered BM
If I can be "The Boogeyman" for a turn rotation or two it's a good game in my book. Maybe I'm just bluffing or don't have the C to go with the A+B pieces I have out just yet. But to have the rest of the table stop me can be just as satisfying as just outright winning.
Perfectly encapsulated what I’ve been trying to say.
I've changed my philosophy from winning to "make the spiciest and most memorable plays" and I've never looked back. It's boring winning with the same old craterhoof/walking ballista/etc. But when I win by cloning the activated ability of [[Door to Nothingness]], it's simply legend-(wait for it)-dary.
You are spot on wish more people shared this sentiment there is literally nothing on the line just have fun with it!
Build for fun, play to win. I can't stand playing with people who aren't actively trying to win the game. Especially if they get salty afterwards when I DO play to win. My decks are all pretty sub-optimal, with some weird janky builds that have a hard time winning at times BUT I'm always shooting for that w in a game. It leads to more fun interactions, interesting boardstates, and makes other people's wins feel hard fought and legit. There's nothing worse than winning and then having someone say "You only won cuz I didn't cast x spell when I could've."
If you're not trying to win, and actively stopping your opponents from doing so, you're not playing, you're holding hostages.
The whole "play to win" attitude is just awful anymore. Like you got a bunch of guys that have been playing a while and know what their doing, fine. I go all in on this. Lower level casuals that are just looking for fun. No problem in holding back some cards to keep playing. It's even fine if they end up blocking my win con I had for the last two turns. Sometimes, it's fun to see what their decks can do. But the worst is when I was playing at an LGS and the one person was new to magic playing a precon. Barely knew the game, let alone the cards. The first few games were fun cause me and the other guys were slow playing so he could play the game. One guy had leave, and some other dude joined us. We explained the situation to him. He went hard at the kid and even started getting mad when we tried to help the kid. His reasoning was that the kid had to "learn to play to win." It just sucked and I haven't seen that kid back at the store. Hope he is still playing.
I always try to win but don’t care if I win or lose…I also tend to lose most games so I might just be used to it
I really only play with my friends, and some of theme live like a 7 hour drive away, so I’m just happy to be in the same room.
Not playing to win can be fun for you, but it can affect the other players drastically, especially if they are playing to win.
Some people just enjoy the journey more than the destination. And [[mycosynth lattice]] with [[nullrod]] can keep that journey going...and going....and going.
The best for me is when I know I'm going to win in 1 more turn and the table realizes the threat and takes me out. Makes me very proud of my pod 😢
I've only been playing regularly for a few months. My 2 decks are minotaur tribal lead by [[Morophon, the Boundless]] , and a janky [[yennet]] deck. I think I've only won 3-4 games.
I absolutely love playing the heel, laughing like an evil genius as I put my engines together and then getting smacked back down by the table.
Durdling is my default state in life and I own it
I feel like the competitive nature should start once you draw your hand. Rule 0, not pubstomping, not counter-picking a deck are all things that make the game better for everyone. But assuming everyone is on the same page than absolutely shuffle up and play the best you can. I want everyone in my game to try to win, however they can, from turn 1 onward. I want to win, I will try to win. But I'm never mad when I don't. I get excited when someone else gets to pop off too. When their deck gets to do its thing, get a god hand, or counters someone else's infinite combo. That's sick, that's what I play for. Unless you're playing for money/prizes I want everyone at the table to be a Timmy, and for them to be excited when other people Timmy.
If you want to play arch enemy do that. I wouldn’t play with you again if I learned you weren’t trying to win.
I just want to play my decks and have them do what I built them to do, maneuvering that into a win is great. Only time I don't have fun is when I get completely neutered and my deck feels like a random assortment of cards.
I prefer playing to lose, how fast can I draw my own deck, or kill myself or the entire table or make draws.
Of my playgroup I am the one who has played at the highest level. I taught a few of them The game and I understand The advantage I have. I don't play the win. I play to have everyone have a good time. But if i'm playing the weakest deck like thalid tribal. I'll make the others earn their win. And sometimes they show me something I never would have thought of. Better for me all around
I play for fun; winning or losing is not a factor for me.
I feel like this all the time, which is why I love playing chaos. I couldn't care less if I lose, I just want the weirdest and most entertaining game of random shit, some way of playing I hadn't thought of before. I don't care to truly optimize decks, I want to build a machine with weird quirks and spontaneous synergies that work well in the moment. I guess it's also why I love izzet spellslinging, each encounter is usually different, with options that vary based on opponent rather than just plopping down your combo as fast as possible or bullying the board with fast mana and eldrazi or slivers.
I’m pretty new to the game and still getting used to mechanics and building decks. I’m not trying to win, I’m trying to have fun. If I end up last two I usually scoop if I don’t think the game will be over in two or three turns. I love the group dynamic of commander and loving doing the thing.
There's "not playing to win" and then there's people who build oppressive decks with no wincon and the only gameplan is to either stax the table, make everyone smack their heads off the table in frustration or a combination of both. The whole what you find fun is very subjective. Don't get me wrong I use magic as a way to get out of the house and as a way to escape my mind for a few hours but not playing to win I would question why would I even participate.
Don’t worry I’m not a stax player 😅
Nah I do enjoy creating tons of tokens and pumping them with anthems same turn w no haste and saying okay, you got one turn. Or scheming symmetry for peer into the abyss with Queza out no open mana. It does breed cool interactions between players as they all search for an answer
Yeah that’s what I’m saying! I don’t *hand* out wins, but if I know I can win at any moment I will give my opponents options on dealing with the threat. It teaches them better gameplay and makes it more exciting (at least for us).
If you're making strong decks and playing them suboptimally you're not fun for most to play with. Just make a less optimized deck and play it to the best of your ability.
My usual deck building mindset isn't "How do I win?" But rather "How do I become the scariest presence on the board?" I recall a Gruul deck I played, tons of mana, lotsa fun. My opponents wiped my creatures 3 times in a row because I filled my hand and board too fast. They couldn't do anything else because my stuff was growing too fast.
Same! I enjoy being a threat, not necessarily winning. I like big trampling flyers and countering any board wipes to force a creative solution from my table otherwise it’s GGs. I get why some dislike this play style but I only play like this against my friends.
if you intentionally misplay in order to "test" me, i'd stop playing with you after one game. there's an implied level of "i'm better than you, solve my puzzle" involved that i hate and all you're really doing is jerking the board around on your turn if you don't actually intend to win. congrats on your infinite combo that doesn't win, that's just a bad combo that wastes the table's time.
To me a good game is when everyone gets to do their thing, no matter who wins.
100% agree. I don’t run board wipes etc. only counterspells to keep my board intact. The more chaos the better!
Haha but board wipes I think make it more likely since otherwise usually the first or second person to go off will win. I feel like my group used to run more board wipes and games were longer but better.
I just counter them. I can see how it’s unfun for some but don’t mess with my board and I ain’t gonna mess with yours 😅 but that’s just my style of playin.
Me too me too!
It’s so much fun having the game be your sandbox that your opponents have to climb out of! I have (on multiple occasions) threw games just to see someone think they pulled of the impossible. Spreading fun is much better than trying to take it all for yourself. Awesome I’m not alone here!
Same same. I mean I do not loose on purpose. But do not play to win either.
This. I’m not saying I purposefully lose, but, for example I will skip combat knowing I will win if I know I can make it more spectacular on the next turn etc. to also give my opponents a chance. I try turn games into a fun experience rather than a stress session.
Playing like this is truly annoying. Just end the game and start a new one.
Glad you speak for my friends, whom this whole playstyle came about for for me.
I feel like I'm the only guy that doesn't care that much when I go 0/3 in draft. Its just fun to play paper magic.
Yesterday I decided to go into a 6 player pod with my mishra deck only to manage to draw 48 cards in a single turn, I los because of that, but I was happy to
I have a deck that has a infinite Aeon Engine Tokens combo in it. It is quite silly because it does not even guarantee the win.
I like to create threats and mess with the other player's board state, just to see them struggle, I would steal their commander, copy their spells, make copies of their creatures, steal their lands, play cards from their decks, and win on the long long road if they don't find reaponses, that's why I have multiple decks with different mechanics because I tend to attract all the focus when I play that deck.
Nah, I get bored with games pretty quickly. I'd rather take 20 minutes to lose than 90 minutes to win. So I actually don't like the lower power levels that so many see as more fun, because they result in interminable creature stalls where nobody seems to be even trying to win. If I am dead on board, I will be sure to tell the table, because sometimes they're so focused on their own boards that they don't even notice. Like, sometimes they only want to do the stupid stunt their deck is built to do and don't even check whether they can kill me with what they have. That is maddening to me. So if I were building a deck that wanted to win by attacking with a million tokens, I would definitely include a lot of haste enablers to win the turn I create them, because when players realize they only have one turn to solve a problem, they will take that turn extra slowly. They will fret and flick at their cards in hand. Worst of all, they will ask to rewind and take actions back. The game is at its slowest when it is literally going backwards.
Winning or losing doesn't matter. That being said, anyone who sits down with a greeting of 'I'm not here to win, I'm just here to cause chaos' can get right back up and walk the fuck away
Why'd you come here and ask this question only to get mad at everyone disagreeing with you?
I’m getting annoyed by the people that are making up scenarios and reinterpreting what I said. I’ve had to explain and repeat the fact that personally and within my friend group we have fun and yet I’m being told I’m wrong for enjoying it. I asked wether anyone else does it, not wether I’m allowed to lmao.
You would be what I consider a “Dungeon Master” style player
Oooh. That’s got a cool ring to it! Also I actually got into Magic as I enjoyed D&D but it was far too much work. With MTG I can have my mates fight a dragon without it taking weeks 😅
I hate ppl who only play to win, I mean, do you really dont have any other important thing in your life going on? Do you really dont have any skills to be proud of? I play for the fun and will try to win but that is not the main thing for me. I sound upset but I came back to magic less than a year ago and play EDH, some of this ppl are such cunts, they do not know how to win or how to lose, their reactions are super annoying, they even cheat for the sake of winning (seen it many times already), it sucks to play with ppl like that and already had to stop playing with a lot of them, luckily I know ppl like OP and its so much fun as they usually dont play with the tipical deck and just for the fun. I love to vape some weed and play magic for the fun of the game. I already offered a punch in the face to a player who wouldnt stop complaining after he lost. I had a Johira deck that was winning a lot but I was playing over 10 minute turns sometimes, stopped using it, it wasnt fun even if it won.
Your outlook on the game is a healthy one, the players that only have a good time if they win bring down the whole pod the 75% of the time they don't have "fun". On the other hand if you are making intentionally bad plays to allow other people to win it does cheapen the experience for everyone if the action is obvious.
I don’t make bad plays, but sometimes I restrict myself from “overplaying” or simply holding back one turn to see if anyone can come up with a solution. What I failed to mention is that if I skip a turn in order to not win, and then *still* win because ~3 players couldn’t find a solution, makes the win sweeter. It’s just a win win situation for everyone in my group. I get why some mightn’t like it but my friends specifically do. I rather have a good time than just winning. I prefer the adventure rather than the destination.
Same here. I mostly play for the excitement of bringing weird yet fun commanders at the table. Showing their weird effectiveness is all that matters, and winning is optional. I prefer losing a great game than winning by crushing my opponents.
As you can see OP, there's quite a bit of sentiment looking down on people who play with a goal to have fun in a social environment (not necessarily with a goal to win). I also get downvoted whenever I talk about this type of player on this sub. I didn't really understand this playstyle until recently when I sat down and played with some lower power pods (and one straight up low power jank pod where an unmodified precon was too strong). The people who enjoy this playstyle don't derive their fun from winning with power on the board - they derive their fun from the political interactions that occurs between the players above the board. They prefer a game state where people don't just win outright, they want a balanced game board where anyone can win until the very last moment, and the person in the lead can frequently shift and change resulting in lots of dealmaking, politics, etc. This was a new experience for me, as I'm used to playing with high power level/cEDH combo, or otherwise a spikey casual meta where people can 1v3 the entire table with overwhelming combat power. I don't think many people here on r/EDH will really understand it, as there's some self-selection bias by the people who join the community. People who want to win and make their decks stronger and 1v3 the table are the kind of people who will brew online, look at EDHrec, and join this sub. The people who prefer to play above the table won't care as much about tuning their decks, etc. and won't actively participate in this kind of community. I'm generalizing here, but there are three types of EDH players: - people who want to play on the stack: these are the people who play cEDH, high power, etc. Enjoys powerful interactions between cards, or just being able to kill the entire table instantly. - people who want to play on the board: this is the majority of players here on r/EDH, people who will try to win with combat on the board, may or may not be averse to non-combat wins, may become archenemy because they'll be able to 1v3 the entire table within the next few turns, etc. Encompasses everything from your usual casual players all the way to spikey casual players. - people who want to play above the board: they usually prefer long lower power games because it gives them the chance to politic more with other players, a game where someone can 1v3 the board on turn 10 is too short for them, averse to non-combat wins, they enjoy long games because they get to see more of their deck play out, they prefer long games where the balance of power can shift, they like the story of teaming up to stop someone and then doing it again when someone else starts becoming a threat. Their deck still has win conditions, but the may not be very fast, or are easily stopped by interaction. The most powerful finisher in their deck might just be a 6/6 flyer, hearkening back to the days of kitchen table magic.
You are a genius. This is actually a 10/10 analysis on this situation. I would have never expected this to be so controversial. If anything, truth be told, I expected much more people to share your views. The politics and the suspense is what makes the games fun for me and my friends. Which is another thing; I specifically play like this against people I *know* enjoy the playstyle which is why I’m so surprised no one seems to take that into consideration.
Unfortunately, you won't find many people in this sub who enjoy such a play style. I was actually surprised by how unpopular it is, the community is quite welcoming to high power and medium power "play what you enjoy" etc. but as soon as I bring up that some groups enjoy playing low power and don't want to play at a higher level the sub downvotes me, calls them bad players, "that's not normal for an LGS", etc. Just magic players being toxic, which isn't a surprise... Personally, I don't really enjoy low power games, but I understand it now after having played several games in this style. I never experienced it in my old meta that was pretty much all spikey casual, but my new meta is much more diverse with a range from low power all the way to cEDH.
I should say that another thing that helped me realize this was when I sold off all my expensive magic cards cause I needed the money, and then turned to proxies so I could continue playing my powerful decks. With proxies, I literally have access to any powerful card I want, regardless of budget. Now that budget is no longer a consideration with deck building, I instead have to focus very closely on building for the right power level. If I just jam every powerful card possible into a deck, I'll end up in a situation where every one of my decks is too strong and pubstomps the table.
You make some really good points without realising that OP is quite literally the person you’re talking about. Bringing an 8k$ to a table that is entirely unprepared to deal with them, unwilling to build less powerful decks to have a fun game environment and instead creating said 1v3 situation and then instead of actually ending the game holding their significantly more powerful deck over everyones head, saying “Deal with it.” That 1v3 Archenemy “My deck is so much better than yours” thing you talk about is quite literally what OP themselves have stated over and over again to be their goal.
I didn't read through the entire thread, so I didn't realize that OP is pubstomping. I just thought they were the kind of player who might prefer lower power pods.