To say that 5-Color Magic has been in turmoil would be a colossal understatement. As a result of one ballot – albeit a large one – we not only restricted (Contract from Below, Enlightened Tutor, Vampiric Tutor) and/or banned (Oath of Druids, Time Walk, Tinker) some of the most popular cards in the format, but we had numerous people threaten to leave and calls for people to break off into their own formats.
And then, for some strange reason, no one actually did anything – until now.
This is to announce that the 5-Color Rules Committee has appointed me as its speaker. In short, it is my job to present accurate, up-to-date information about what is happening with the 5CRC and to be available for people to ask questions about the process. I will begin with a breakdown of my duties and then deal with the Vote From Hell.
Information:
It is my job to keep up with what is going on, and to release that information as necessary. If there is something official going on committee-wide, it will be my job to inform you.
Conduit:
I am also here to be the place where people can ask questions of the 5CRC as a whole. If you want to talk to one specific person, talk to that person. But rather than mutter to yourself about what we were smoking when we banned X, ask me and I'll tell you.
Justifier:
It is my job to explain why anyone should care about the 5CRC… And that's simple enough that I'll do it right now:
The 5CRC runs 5-Color Worlds. This makes the rules we use for that event the default standard for 5-Color. There are many people who have their own ideas for what 5-Color should be. Any or all of these may be nice, but they have no bearing on what happens to 5-Color Worlds. As the committee that runs that event, we set our own rules on everything from card selection to who gets to be a member of the 5CRC.
Now for the November 2005 ballot that set off the fireworks. This was the first stage in a long plan to try to revitalize the format. There are two main camps that objected to the plan: The first was a group that didn't see the need for revitalization. The second was a group that wanted to adopt another approach to revitalization, such as limiting the number of Tutor effects in a deck.
To approach the first argument, let me step back and go over the basics of deck construction. To put it in real simple terms, you can divide cards into two main categories: Cards You Need and Tutors that Get Them. The cards that were most hit in the November ballot were the Tutor cards – the ones that support your main idea.
Why was that?
Well, Tutors have value based on what you have in the Cards You Need section. If you are a newer 5-Color player, chances are you don't have the best selection of Cards You Need. In many cases, the goal was to get better Tutors to hunt out the cards, and hitting them seemed like a blow to everyone.
Now, I won't deny that it was a blow. But also realize that each tutor removes a portion of the randomness element that was built into the fact that decks are 250 cards. My previous 5-Color deck wasn't the best of the best, but with enough tutor power, would approach the consistency of most casual sixty-carders, coming within a turn of winning most times, and actually pulling it off the rest – and that's before I added Contract from Below!
I've played with Contract from Below about as long as anyone here, having picked up a few in my first packs of Revised. It's nice to have those extra seven cards when you need them, all for a single black mana. The other drawback is one that is, at best, variable. I'm not just talking the variation in what card gets added to the ante; many events were run with fake ante, where the cards were simply removed from the game as opposed to being actually anted.
That's why, when you view the votes (click here for the exact breakdown), you'll notice that I'm the harshest on everything. Contract from Below, when played without true ante, is more overpowered than most cards on the Restricted list. That's why many people feel it needs to join the other cards of its power level, as opposed to its likeability level.
(Technical note: In the interests of full disclosure, the vote that was to deal with Contract wasn't phrased as such. I knew it was meant as such, but not everyone did, so a new vote was to be scheduled for it in December that never happened.)
While I would have preferred to see a broader sweep, the general consensus is that some of the weaker Tutors could survive. Time will tell who is correct on that.
As for the non-Tutor cards that were brought up for consideration (Oath of Druids and Time Walk), each of them proved to be so powerful that, from a tournament perspective, they warped the environment. Having a person get one extra turn with Time Walk is bad enough, but reusing it over and over again gets annoying. Also, since then, the evil Izzet Guildmage has arisen to make this even more of a possibility. Oath of Druids can make a control deck unto itself if done right, regardless of the number of cards in the deck. From that perspective, they both had to go.
There are still unresolved issues, such as when the next vote gets called (or even who has the authority to call one) – but we're just now crawling out of our bunkers and assessing the damage over the last few months, so please bear with us. For those who want to have input, I would suggest contacting me directly at speaker.5crc@yahoo.com. What I'm most interested hearing about is suggestions for additions or removals from the banned and restricted lists, and feedback about what may have angered people about the November ballot. Ways to get information out are also useful. I am not interested in the moment in trying to modify the core of the format (with either a Tutor cap or expanding the number of cards); please leave them for a time when we can discuss them in more detail (such as after 5-Color Worlds).
Just so you know, I am only the Speaker of the 5-Color Rules Committee. I have not taken over as dictator. But the idea of having speaker is to get all comments going to the same person. If ten people send the same request to each member of the 5CRC, that may not have the impact desired, and may in fact flood people with emails; instead, I can forward that request to the committee and everyone will know. By all means, if you want to talk to a specific member of the committee, you don't have to come to me first. Anything that you want the entire committee to know, however, should come to me.
Until then, keep in touch!
| 
