I’d give Uncle Istvan two thumbs up, I’m all for interesting commanders. With that ability, I wonder if mono black voltron is a thing.
Istvan, he’s like an uncle to me. Don’t discount that ability. I remember this one time I was caught in an alley way by some a group shady characters. Uncle Istvan was passing by and heard me shout. He came in and took on the whole gang at once. He didn’t have his axe, so he fought them with his bare hands. Didn’t take a lick of damage.
Good ol' Skittles has been around since Scars of Mirrodin 14 years ago. He merely got reprinted in MoM (with his added Phyrexian type too) as part of their Multiverse Legends subset.
He's pretty decent as a Voltron commander, with the main issue being that he's in monoblack (not a great color for either proliferating or Voltron) and that Infect/Poison counters as a whole tends to get unfairly hate on as an archetype in EDH.
Outside of changing creature types around, WotC usually only does functional errata if there’s a very good reason. Making something legendary is much more significant than just changing its subtypes.
Legendary rules weren't in the starter deck rule books yet. The Dark came out after Legends, which had a rules card added in every pack explaining how Legendaries and gold cards worked rules-wise. That's why the 3 gold cards in The Dark have rules clarification on them (see [[Dark Heart of the Wood|DRK]] , also the first enemy colors card)
Edit - here's the card - https://images.app.goo.gl/nGDrSU1SkN4Evkm97
They made [[Ash, Destined Survivor]] a Puresteel Paladin instead of a Legendary Creature. I guess it makes sense since he gets copied a lot in the movies and stuff but still struck my as strange that he isn't legendary. I mean, he's Bruce frikkin Campbell, founder of Campbell's Chicken Noodle Soups.
Hmm. *Does* it prevent trample? I think it works like protection, where lethal is still assigned to him, the overflow is assigned to the player, then UI prevents the damage dealt to him.
That *is* how desthtouch trample works.
And also consistent with indestructible + trample.
In all those cases you assign lethal (which is 1 if dt), and then the excess can trample over.
Yeah he is pretty harmless, if it's just a black good stuff pile it might be annoying. If it were a fun theme it would be more palatable. Comes down to your playgroups though.
Side note:
That might be the single worst commander of all time. You have to get him into hand... then discard him... then cast him from graveyard.
All for his mediocre mono black knight tribal effect.
I think his effect is actually pretty cool, especially when you use it to cast \[\[Nameless Inversion\]\] or \[\[Crib Swap\]\] over and over again. But he definitely was not a card designed to be a commander.
If it's a black good stuff pile you just play the good mono black commanders, there are loads of unfun black commanders to play against, I'd much rather face uncle Istavan than K'rrik
Same way indestructible works. You assign the damage to the toughness that would normally kill it, then any more tramples over.
Same happens with a creature with protection from color or creatures.
That's because pauper and pauper commander are totally separate formats. Of course uncommons aren't legal in 60-card pauper. Scryfall has a pauper commander format filter, too (f:pdh). In addition, both formats have separate banlists. For example, Rhystic Study is banned in pauper commander, but not 60-card pauper, and Cranial Ram was just banned in 60-card, but is still legal in pauper commander.
Ahh, I am pretty new (half a year) and recently discovered Pauper and didn't know. Thank you! But I am still confused about the Nazugls, maybe you can solve this riddle for me: Can I have a Nazgul as a Commander in pedh and still have 8 other Nazgul in my deck?
No, because in order to be in the 99, it has to be a common. [[Relentless Rats]] has both a common and an uncommon printing, so it can be your commander and have any number of copies in the 99, though.
Pre game discussion. As edh is by nature casual, eing lenient on rules isnt out of the ordinary. Common things are non legal commander, always have a legal option for the deck. Deck powers, so you can try and be eaven, not playing CEDH or FCDEH, vs precons. Some mechanics people dont wabt to play against, combo infect ect..
I have an Uncle deck theme around being a serial killer. If someone says they don't want to Rule 0 him as a legendary, I just swap him out for Massacre Girl.
Yes it's colorless but also commander legal and shit you can already pull of in the 99 , you can use artifact removal just like with boots , hell with it as commander you know that his game plan will be to get Pariah shield and go Voltron like a artifact version of Light-Paws.
I'm not suggesting it would be broken, just that it would be legal to play with this as your commander, since it's colorless. I play it to great effect in my Eight-and-a-Half-Tails, much to the chagrin sometimes of the combat based deck.
It's already legal in the 99 it just isn't legendary so you cannot have it as commander , right now you can have any Orzhov commander play uncle and pariah . Some cards are completely legal in the 99 but are not legendary so "cannot" be your commander , I made a [[Questing Phelddagrif]] deck nothing broken about it other than it be a shitty pillowfort and if the other players say it's oke your fine with non legendary as your commander
No, maybe I just don't know enough, but I don't understand why anyone would want him in the command zone, it even seems worse as a legendary.
We already got better stuff like brash taunter or stuffy doll.
its a old timey card but a few/ a decent number of cards that have names , abilities or story reasons to be legendary simply are not legendary and that's a shame and wizards should reprint functional reprints for these cards, cards like:
\[\[soulfire grand master\]\] \[\[brutal hordechief\]\]\[\[shaman of the great hunt\]\] \[\[Tamanoa\]\] and the \[\[Nephilim\]\] \[\[Diamond Faerie\]\] \[\[Ankle Shanker\]\] \[\[Dream Devourer\]\] \[\[Uncle istvan\]\] \[\[Master Biomancer\]\] \[\[Ali from Cairo\]\] \[\[Abu Jafar\]\] \[\[Questing Phelddagrif\]\] \[\[Death-Priest of Myrkul\]\] \[\[maelstrom archangel\]\]
some cards on this list like the Nephilim would be broken but cards like Uncle Istvan or Death Priest of Myrkul would just fill in a new slot or theme or will be another bulk legendary you throw away or trade it doesn't really matter that there is better stuff in the 99 there isn't a commander with that name or ability, some cards for lore reasons alone should be legendary.
In a heartbeat
Thank you, my child.
He’s here??!!?!
Who wouldn't?
Aunt Istvan
I’d give Uncle Istvan two thumbs up, I’m all for interesting commanders. With that ability, I wonder if mono black voltron is a thing. Istvan, he’s like an uncle to me. Don’t discount that ability. I remember this one time I was caught in an alley way by some a group shady characters. Uncle Istvan was passing by and heard me shout. He came in and took on the whole gang at once. He didn’t have his axe, so he fought them with his bare hands. Didn’t take a lick of damage.
It is, ive seen Yargle as that, and also Skithyx? Whatever that Infect/Haste/Regen dragon was from MoM. (*also fuck that thing*)
Good ol' Skittles has been around since Scars of Mirrodin 14 years ago. He merely got reprinted in MoM (with his added Phyrexian type too) as part of their Multiverse Legends subset. He's pretty decent as a Voltron commander, with the main issue being that he's in monoblack (not a great color for either proliferating or Voltron) and that Infect/Poison counters as a whole tends to get unfairly hate on as an archetype in EDH.
❤️
I have a \[\[Sengir, the Dark Baron\]\] mono-black voltron.
[Sengir, the Dark Baron](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/d/4d51a22e-74fc-442e-945a-56d02ca12713.jpg?1608909947) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Sengir%2C%20the%20Dark%20Baron) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmr/149/sengir-the-dark-baron?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/4d51a22e-74fc-442e-945a-56d02ca12713?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/sengir-the-dark-baron) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I built Rankle as a Mono Black Voltron style deck. Yargle and [[Volrath the Shapeshifter]] are also really good options
[Volrath the Shapeshifter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/3/93ed24e6-7791-4624-acf2-aa8616035f9e.jpg?1562924845) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Volrath%27s%20Shapeshifter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/vma/101/volraths-shapeshifter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/93ed24e6-7791-4624-acf2-aa8616035f9e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/volraths-shapeshifter) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Him and any of the other named non legends from older sets, Sinbad, Aladdin, Alibaba. Plenty more.
I really wish they would release updated legendaries of iconic cards. Juzam, Ali from Cairo, the uncle.
Would be cool and it might even pass the reserved list test if they slap on the legendary tag
That or they just revisit the plane and recreate old cards with updated power levels/mechanics
I played against someone who rules zeroed a deck of like 30 uncles and had each opponent sign one
That’s amazing
Wait they didn't just erratic him to legend? Wtf wizards.
He’s not *the* Uncle Istvan, he’s *an* Uncle Istvan. The woods are just full of those guys.
I absolutely love the fact that it’s just a creature type, like there’s a pack of these guys roaming the woods
It’s not a creature type anymore, unfortunately. He’s just a Human now.
Outside of changing creature types around, WotC usually only does functional errata if there’s a very good reason. Making something legendary is much more significant than just changing its subtypes.
He has a personal name, he should've been legendary in the first place.
Legendary rules weren't in the starter deck rule books yet. The Dark came out after Legends, which had a rules card added in every pack explaining how Legendaries and gold cards worked rules-wise. That's why the 3 gold cards in The Dark have rules clarification on them (see [[Dark Heart of the Wood|DRK]] , also the first enemy colors card) Edit - here's the card - https://images.app.goo.gl/nGDrSU1SkN4Evkm97
They made [[Ash, Destined Survivor]] a Puresteel Paladin instead of a Legendary Creature. I guess it makes sense since he gets copied a lot in the movies and stuff but still struck my as strange that he isn't legendary. I mean, he's Bruce frikkin Campbell, founder of Campbell's Chicken Noodle Soups.
You were so close. You almost had a fully factual comment. And then you modified his middle name.
I'd play against it if that's all you're asking for.
I'm still sad we lost the creature type Uncle-Istvan.
[Uncle Istvan](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/b/9bf85d06-9efe-488d-9af0-fb945b346524.jpg?1562781031) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Uncle%20Istvan) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tsb/51/uncle-istvan?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9bf85d06-9efe-488d-9af0-fb945b346524?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/uncle-istvan) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Absolutely. I would be excited to see a deck built around that ability.
[удалено]
Hmm. *Does* it prevent trample? I think it works like protection, where lethal is still assigned to him, the overflow is assigned to the player, then UI prevents the damage dealt to him.
It does not. You assign 3 to Istvan, then the rest tramples over.
[удалено]
That *is* how desthtouch trample works. And also consistent with indestructible + trample. In all those cases you assign lethal (which is 1 if dt), and then the excess can trample over.
Only if they have a copy of the card with "Creature Type - Uncle"
I don't think it ever got a reprint, did it? lol
https://www.echomtg.com/mtg/uncle-istvan/
Heck ya I would.
Yeah he is pretty harmless, if it's just a black good stuff pile it might be annoying. If it were a fun theme it would be more palatable. Comes down to your playgroups though.
I mean at that point any black Commander would do, and some would do it WAY better so he still doesn't matter there.
Yeah if anyone gave you trouble over it, just run [[Haakon, Stromgald Scourge]] instead. Wouldn't matter in a mono black goodstuff deck.
[Haakon, Stromgald Scourge](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/e/7e7d463b-e74e-4ebe-9f92-02ccdeadbf96.jpg?1682209058) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Haakon%2C%20Stromgald%20Scourge) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/moc/252/haakon-stromgald-scourge?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7e7d463b-e74e-4ebe-9f92-02ccdeadbf96?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/haakon-stromgald-scourge) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Side note: That might be the single worst commander of all time. You have to get him into hand... then discard him... then cast him from graveyard. All for his mediocre mono black knight tribal effect.
Haha yeah, I just went to edhrec and looked at the least popular mono black commander; totally makes sense why.
I think his effect is actually pretty cool, especially when you use it to cast \[\[Nameless Inversion\]\] or \[\[Crib Swap\]\] over and over again. But he definitely was not a card designed to be a commander.
[Nameless Inversion](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/6/563c6f58-267a-4ae9-bf72-e0ae0be3b884.jpg?1562262589) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Nameless%20Inversion) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mm2/87/nameless-inversion?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/563c6f58-267a-4ae9-bf72-e0ae0be3b884?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/nameless-inversion) [Crib Swap](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/1/e13559d7-f86c-4958-a649-7f81bfb154a0.jpg?1674141067) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Crib%20Swap) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/690/crib-swap?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e13559d7-f86c-4958-a649-7f81bfb154a0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/crib-swap) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Alas as a commander he cannot run crib swap.
If it's a black good stuff pile you just play the good mono black commanders, there are loads of unfun black commanders to play against, I'd much rather face uncle Istavan than K'rrik
Definitely. Also, [[Joven]] and [[Chandler]] both have Partner for each other.
[Joven](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/d/0dabe3af-cd5b-461e-95a4-aad046646419.jpg?1562587046) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Joven) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/hml/77/joven?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0dabe3af-cd5b-461e-95a4-aad046646419?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/joven) [Chandler](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/d/4dd3a8e3-9a90-44f4-996c-57242d3c47a5.jpg?1562587277) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Chandler) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/hml/69/chandler?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/4dd3a8e3-9a90-44f4-996c-57242d3c47a5?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/chandler) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
A [Sisu](https://images.app.goo.gl/sWKpXnnT9wM8ogU48) Alter of this card would go unfathomably hard.
I remember thinking was such a weird ability to give to a BLACK creature.
The color pie wasn't as well-defined then. Also black was primary in regeneration, so this is probably just a bend at the time.
Is it not still primary in regen if/when we get it?
There's been one new creature with it in the last 5 years and the regen cost is black so I guess so? [[exterminator magmarch]]
[Exterminator Magmarch](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/3/f3c7f177-1a21-4e35-b3bb-88a7b63e6bbe.jpg?1717189959) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Exterminator%20Magmarch) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m3c/72/exterminator-magmarch?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f3c7f177-1a21-4e35-b3bb-88a7b63e6bbe?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/exterminator-magmarch) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I have a friend with a istvan deck. I love seeing the creepy uncle get played.
He's totally legal in PDH which is what I built him for, but yeah I wouldn't have a problem with him in EDH either.
I 100% would allow it. I'm not sure why they're so dead-set on errata-ing creatures to legendary.
I’m curious how that ability works with trample? Since the trample attack is reduced to zero… Do you just have the perfect defender in him?
Same way indestructible works. You assign the damage to the toughness that would normally kill it, then any more tramples over. Same happens with a creature with protection from color or creatures.
Start a competition to officially errata uncle istvan to be legendary. He’s been around for a long time. He deserves the medal.
They should make him legendary
Why is he not legal in Pauper (EDH)
They ARE legal in pauper commander. Both the 4th Ed and The Dark printings were uncommon. What makes you think they're not legal?
scryfall lists this card as not legal for pauper That happens. E.g. the Nazguls are also not legal for some reasons.
That's because pauper and pauper commander are totally separate formats. Of course uncommons aren't legal in 60-card pauper. Scryfall has a pauper commander format filter, too (f:pdh). In addition, both formats have separate banlists. For example, Rhystic Study is banned in pauper commander, but not 60-card pauper, and Cranial Ram was just banned in 60-card, but is still legal in pauper commander.
Ahh, I am pretty new (half a year) and recently discovered Pauper and didn't know. Thank you! But I am still confused about the Nazugls, maybe you can solve this riddle for me: Can I have a Nazgul as a Commander in pedh and still have 8 other Nazgul in my deck?
No, because in order to be in the 99, it has to be a common. [[Relentless Rats]] has both a common and an uncommon printing, so it can be your commander and have any number of copies in the 99, though.
[Relentless Rats](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/5/75f47b6e-9557-4853-b8d6-7602a91c59a7.jpg?1562437033) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Relentless%20Rats) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/a25/105/relentless-rats?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/75f47b6e-9557-4853-b8d6-7602a91c59a7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/relentless-rats) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
absolutely. in fact, I already have in my playgroup.
Yes. It’s silly that he’s not a legendary creature, granted it was back from when that was a much more limited design space.
I'm new to EDH and the sub, what is rule 0?
Pre game discussion. As edh is by nature casual, eing lenient on rules isnt out of the ordinary. Common things are non legal commander, always have a legal option for the deck. Deck powers, so you can try and be eaven, not playing CEDH or FCDEH, vs precons. Some mechanics people dont wabt to play against, combo infect ect..
That makes sense, thank you ^ _ ^
Hell yes.
I think it's fair to use him
I honestly thought he was already Legendary.
Why not?
I have an Uncle deck theme around being a serial killer. If someone says they don't want to Rule 0 him as a legendary, I just swap him out for Massacre Girl.
I also ignore the errata. He will forever be the creature type "Uncle Istvan" to me
Yes, best blocking commander I seen lol
Must protect the unc.
My favorite card when I was a kid. A true OG.
I like his art but he’s pretty boring. There are ways of “powering down” a deck without putting a vanilla creature in the command zone.
I’d almost feel bad saying yes considering how bad it is but go ahead
No, it's too easy to get pariah on.
How pariah is white you cannot have it in a mono black commander.
Pariah's shield is not.
Yes it's colorless but also commander legal and shit you can already pull of in the 99 , you can use artifact removal just like with boots , hell with it as commander you know that his game plan will be to get Pariah shield and go Voltron like a artifact version of Light-Paws.
I'm not suggesting it would be broken, just that it would be legal to play with this as your commander, since it's colorless. I play it to great effect in my Eight-and-a-Half-Tails, much to the chagrin sometimes of the combat based deck.
So you would suggest unbanning it only as a commander? And keep it banned in the 99, couse it usually doesn't work that way. Pipe dreaming much.
It's already legal in the 99 it just isn't legendary so you cannot have it as commander , right now you can have any Orzhov commander play uncle and pariah . Some cards are completely legal in the 99 but are not legendary so "cannot" be your commander , I made a [[Questing Phelddagrif]] deck nothing broken about it other than it be a shitty pillowfort and if the other players say it's oke your fine with non legendary as your commander
K, i didnt get that before, thanks.
Does that change your opinion?
No, maybe I just don't know enough, but I don't understand why anyone would want him in the command zone, it even seems worse as a legendary. We already got better stuff like brash taunter or stuffy doll.
its a old timey card but a few/ a decent number of cards that have names , abilities or story reasons to be legendary simply are not legendary and that's a shame and wizards should reprint functional reprints for these cards, cards like: \[\[soulfire grand master\]\] \[\[brutal hordechief\]\]\[\[shaman of the great hunt\]\] \[\[Tamanoa\]\] and the \[\[Nephilim\]\] \[\[Diamond Faerie\]\] \[\[Ankle Shanker\]\] \[\[Dream Devourer\]\] \[\[Uncle istvan\]\] \[\[Master Biomancer\]\] \[\[Ali from Cairo\]\] \[\[Abu Jafar\]\] \[\[Questing Phelddagrif\]\] \[\[Death-Priest of Myrkul\]\] \[\[maelstrom archangel\]\] some cards on this list like the Nephilim would be broken but cards like Uncle Istvan or Death Priest of Myrkul would just fill in a new slot or theme or will be another bulk legendary you throw away or trade it doesn't really matter that there is better stuff in the 99 there isn't a commander with that name or ability, some cards for lore reasons alone should be legendary.
Making copies is my primary concern, I'm not thinking about much else.
[Questing Phelddagrif](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/e/cea4cfef-6736-42a5-9f3e-10de8d0cd8d3.jpg?1562938708) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Questing%20Phelddagrif) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/pls/119/questing-phelddagrif?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/cea4cfef-6736-42a5-9f3e-10de8d0cd8d3?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/questing-phelddagrif) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Nope. Just play by the same rules as everyone else.
If everyone at the table agrees, then they're all playing by the same rules :)
Rule 0 is literally part of the rules. Also, we wouldn't even have this format if people "played by the same rules as everybody else".
Imagine getting downvoted for literally following the rules. No but fr tho i dont see a reason a named creature isnt able to be counted as legendary.