Dark Ascension Spoiler

Can anyone explain to me how it makes sense that one of these cards is legal in a Mono-green Commander deck but the other isn’t?

>One has non-green mana-symbols on it and has a UWG color identity.
Yes, but I know that. I’m a level 1 judge and I run EDH tournaments were I follow and instruct other’s on the Rules Council‘s rules as to be fair. I am asking how it makes SENSE.

>Well, color identity was instituted to allow generals that had off color mana symbols to be played.
Yes, I know, I’ve been playing magic since revised. I was around when that happened. But the rule prohibiting off color cards existed before and that still doesn’t explain how the it makes sense.

>Just make up your own house rules.
I could, but then people that play in other stores would have to make different decks for different places. I was under the impression that it was the rule’s council’s job to make rules that were fair. If they can’t justify this rule, then why have it? Why should I have to correct them? It certainly doesn’t feel right to have to do so.

>It’s the rules set we wanted from the beginning, based on a basic founding flavor principle: General hates those colors. Refuses to work with them.
This does seem to be a major point. Can I ask: Do you play Warhammer 40k? Because this very much sounds like a Space Marine attitude. All of the Space Marines think that way. They must or Chaos would win.

However, in Magic you don’t get such a uniform way of thinking across every Legend. Most characters in the story -in fact- are very open to using whatever tools available in achieving their goals, much like Magic players themselves. But, every tool isn’t always available.
A character that only had mana ties to mountains can only use red mana. This is a limiting factor based on the very rules of the Magic universe. You’d think a Legend would only have mana bonds with lands of his/her/its color; this makes sense. From there that Legend would build his/her/its repertoire of spells accordingly. Only having access to mana of your colors means you would only use spells of your color. Additionally, each collection of spells would reflect the personality of the one using it (which is true whether we are talking fiction or nonfiction). Some Legends would indeed do what you say and shin ‘blasphemous’ colors, but many would use all the tools they could to achieve their goals.

One rule (not being able to generate off color mana) has strong flavor ties to the Magic universe, and -in my opinion- should be an universal rule. It is also a very limiting rule and greatly affects how one builds ones deck, which is a good thing.

The other rule (not being able to put off color cards in your deck) seems to be based on an attitude some Legends might have. While it does cover cases the aforementioned rule does not, it becomes superfluous to have two rules that do just about the same thing. Also this can often upset new players when they think they understand one rule, but then find out there are two.

We have two rules. 1) You can’t make mana that’s not in your general’s color identity. 2) You can’t run cards that has a color identity not shared by your general.

Isn’t 1) OR 2) sufficient. Why have both?



[O]fficial Dissociation