Is it time to Retire Rule 0?

Rule 0 is a huge part of Commander's success and popularity, but might there be a better way to start the conversation around the experience you're looking to have, especially when playing without your regular group?

[T_Peazy]

I love this in theory. But magic players can't be trusted.

[Luciferius_]

I've actually been considering something similar to this, but instead taking a more story telling way of playing the game. Narrating plays similar to how I would see it be done in DnD, like turn one I summon from the forest a llanowar elves, then turn two, with assistance from my elf we proceed to cultivate our a swamp back to its prime, and find a mountain for our travels. Obviously this is in theory I still have yet to try it enough because writing this by itself was hard and wouldn't be able to done by everyone lmao

[Ratchetfan]

We always just followed the banlists and went with that. No need to house bans which is what rule zero is used for mostly

[Knives]

I get the point and I do think it's a fun idea to add, but I don't know how practical it is as a substitute for a rule 0 talk. For example, when you mentioned Atraxa and introduced the doubling of the poison required in a narrative manner, not everyone might get what you mean, which would lead to having to explain the intended purpose in a mechanic-focused manner anyway. Also, someone could play both Isshin or Wulfgar under the same story because their effects are so similar, but the decks might be entirely different with different power levels as a whole because their colours are so different.

I don't think a deck's story can replace the less "lore-friendly" parts of rule 0, but I do think it can work wonderfully as an addition to it for people to get more invested in each game and what story it tells.

[Theorak]

I think anything that adds to the ruleset of MTG, is by collegial use of the term a 'rule 0'. In your examples: 0.1 a non-creature legend, 0.2 poison counters up to 20, and I would add non-official partners or custom ban lists as well there. If it is agreed upon and creates an expansion of the rule set, it is a rule 0.
That said, nothing wrong about doing it flavourfully, beautifully describing your deck, that is all on the plus side of more communication. Since we are all awkward nerds though, keeping communication clear is also important, especially with those groups of random players.
Likewise, I don't like describing decks as just one thing or one number even, prefer to hear you describe your decks speed, consistency to reach critical mass and how flavour focused it is, to get a picture.

[lokumo]

This isn't exactly Rule 0 since the commander and the 99 are all legal, but I have a story deck. It's for Kelsien, the Plague. I've proxied the whole thing up with custom arts. It's a John Wick storyline. Kelsien is John, alongside some other XP Counter Legendaries in Mardu colors, who are other assassins from the franchise. Athreos, Shroud-Veiled is Winston, Sram is the Sommelier etc. I've used the art from the Tarot set John Wick 4 released for the cards. It was a fun project!

[Krunschy]

Sounds fun, but I reckon it'd be too indirect for some players, particularly if trust is an issue. Like that Atraxa introduction for example probably won't suffice if you rock up to your LGS to play with strangers, as they'd probably still like you to clarify that you're actually proposing to double the poison threshold and/or what else you mean by that. And at that point you'll be having a Rule 0 discussion anyways.

[Autumnsauce]

toggo, I like rocks! You can have some!

[W]

So replace rule 0 with rule 0 using fantasy words? Nah dawg I'm good.
"We were going to be chill like good friends and let you have fun with your deck, but after that long nerd ass story we decided against it."

Or am I rolling up to a random table setting my deck and fedora down and being like hello fellow planeswalkers, allow me to regale you with my tales. On the plane of Innistrad I came across the most mysterious of artif..., oh you would like me to leave now?"

[brainpower]

As interesting as the concept might be, this feels entirely impracticable for sitting down at a random Command Fest pod.

When someone shows up and says they want to tell the story about stealing treasures from my deck, that doesn’t give me the information I need to pick a deck of a similar power level. Are you running lots of free spells? Fast mana? Infinite combos? What turn does the deck intend to win on? Are you running an unusually large number of board wipes with a planeswalker commander? Maybe I shouldn’t pull out my token deck.

Please, yes, DOntell me your deck's story! It makes the game much more interesting! Just don’t expect that to supplant the basic social conventions of a random commande pod.

[shanedixon]

Happy belated birthday!

I like your idea so long as it's story driven. I do wonder if this video partially came about because of the LGS's ban list that's been circulating again. It's bizzare, but also creates conversation.

[thebigsquig]

Properly run commander requires prep-work like playing DnD. You wouldn’t play a pick up RPG with strangers that no prep-work was done for

[TopLevelJiuJitsu]

Cool idea. I'm not sure everyone has the storytelling gift that you do, but I would be delighted if someone inteoduced their deck that way

[AdamLenhart]

This is how I present my decks. I'm glad we're on the same page. I hope it catches on.

[Seraphimisdead]

Sorry but this just seems like a setup for miscommunication. "Resist Atraxa for twice as long to prove yourself worthy of her oily embrace..." is not the same thing as saying "Hey, I get why toxic counters as a mechanic can be frowned upon in this format, how about we double the amount needed for victory, that could be balanced, what do you think? I'd really like to play this deck."
The first statement is a flowery, unprecise tale. In its context, you are the author, everyone else is a reader. But that isn't the dynamic of a game table. You arent even stating it as a question of "Hey, this is experimental and difficult to say if its balanced, mind if I run it?" You're presenting a tale in a 'not open for discussion, let me tell you what's about to happen' type deal. You are literally telling a story, which is fun and all, but this is not a story, it's still primarily a game that needs to work, and if it does it can then also tell a story if you're into it, which also not everyone is.
The second statement is a clear communication about potential issues you see might be coming up. It's exactly what is needed when setting up the actual game to ensure everyone knows whats up and is good to go. I see no benefit of the first over the second. You can still craft that narrative to enhance the flavor and experience, but you can do that in addition to the actual clear discussion on rules and mechanics. No need to throw that out.

[stevenoneil]

If anyone would like to do this with decks they bring to a table instead of a more "standard" pre-game conversation, that's fine. It's definitely fun. But I feel like it ignores the fact that most decks simply aren't built to be ludonarrarively coherent. I very much would not want this to be the standard or the expectation, personally. Even as someone who likes the lore, I like it mostly on a separate level from gameplay and find trying to mix the two dissatisfying.

[TheElzingaiv]

Im currently working on an "Un" deck (Unstable, unglued, etc) and I will probably ask if folks are ok with it under "rule 0." I might try and jazz up my description to show why it might be fun, but i definitely want to be straightforward in my description since a lot of that stuff ca. Be a little wonky.

[masongrae]

I think the problem was people treating rule zero as a definitive ban list for their group instead of actually having an adult conversation about a game

[pitking]

I think rule zero is okay but the power scale for decks needs to go away cause everyones idea of whats a 1, 7, or 10 and everything in-between are different most of the time. Any time I play i just ask what does the deck do and most people are more than happy to give a few sentences to describe what it does or what its themed around and whether or not the decks have combos or fast mana in it so everyone can pick a deck accordingly.

[Irydion]

I think both can co-exist and don't serve the same purpose. Using rule 0 to use commanders that can't usually be commanders is just one of the infinite ways of using rule 0. With my group, we often use rule 0 during the game. For example, when someone is mana screwed (and it wasn't their own fault), we usually let them fetch some lands to get back into the game. I personally don't see how rule 0 is "confrontational" and why it would need to be changed.