@@Adrianovaz2007 No, actually, My Attractions Deck is still legal, they were being weird in their conference talking about how they wanted to print directly into (only) commander but couldn't find a way with stickers and attractions, but they can just do that, they don't have to go, Opp! it's legacy legal and then almost a year later, Opp! It's banned in Legacy. Goofy.
Yeah i remember when i built my Syr Konrad deck i went to check individual cards on edhrec to see if there were any remotely similar builds. There wasnt. My list was the only one of its kind there.
One thing that I started doing is that I try to give my opponents as much info about my boardstate as they need. For example when I see them looking over my cards I ask whether they need a refresher on what they do. While doing this I put different emphasis on „I get a 1/1 on my upkeep“ and „when I hit you with creature you lose the game“ so they know what cards are more important to my gameplan. Of course this allows them to target my most important piece, but I‘d rather lose a game because my opponent could remove my threat than win because they misinterpreted my boardstate. Also just reminding them of certain things can help like „I‘m dead on board but I have 3 mana open and two cards in hand“.
for me it's similar. Though i vary it for every deck i play. If i play my only Golem creature deck i tend to politik my win by telling them i'm not a threat. Because i just aint. Hardcasting for 10 mana normaly isn't that great and relies on flying under the radar for the most part to win games. And well it can not win on a whim. I do clear things. I swing with big creatures that don't untap on it's own xD. But every other deck i even tell them when i'm about to win and when i'm becoming the problem.
That's how my table does it too, we try to give everyone full information that's actually known so they can make good decisions and not feel screwed over by a complex board.
@@kennyrichardson3842I do it too. It wastes too much time making players read my board state instead of just summing it up for them. More games are more fun than long games IMO.
The "Deck Elevator Pitch" is my favorite way to help newer players understand what my niche builds are doing. "Yeah this Mary Read and Anne Bonny Deck looks to loot and ramp into a pirate themed Kikijiki/splinter twin/pestermite infinite wincon." "This is my Ashnod, Flesh mechanist decks, it's gonna do standard aristocrats stuff but it's a little aggressive because she's 1 mana" Then when they ask what a Splinter twin combo is you take the two iconic pieces and explain how it works together before shuffling up. having the table aware that that is the end goal of the deck, and how it works makes it all the more satisfying when you're able to sneak through their defenses and land it. And that interaction between my gameplan, and my opponents interaction/gameplan is the reason i play magic at all.
100% this! my favorite deck recently has been Raphael tribal and my pitch is "demons, devils and darkness oh my! I do just rakdos things. sac my own stuff to commit tax fraud, turn my opponents against each other while sneaking out big value engines" part of my enjoyment of edh is the creative deckbuilding process, being able to build a thing that ends up being more resilient than my opponents. Not just winning through a gotcha because I was comboing off and my opponents didn't stop me because they didn't even realize it was happening.
Seriously, right? I don’t understand the point of bringing a “secret” deck in a format with tens of thousands of possible cards, when it’s supposed to be “casual”… Like congrats, you really got me with a bunch of stuff I’ve never seen before and had no way to plan a strategy against, while I was just trying to engage in basic creature combat 😂
Absolutely my favourite way to explain what my deck does. I also tend to play commanders that require a little bit of additional knowledge or have weird interactions, so I’ll usually take the time to explain any weird rulings that commonly come up when I explain the deck. (i.e. The Muldrotha/Kess count resets when she leaves and re-enters, but I’m still limited to one land drop per turn unless I use other cards / Meren still gets experience if she dies at the same time as other creatures / Mizzix gains experience once the trigger resolves, but I can cast another spell of the same cost before that trigger resolves to gain an additional experience counter) I find that there’s usually a gap between new and experienced players who get how these work intuitively with a deep understanding of the rules, and I usually take it upon myself to know the specifics of how my commander and interactions work to reduce rule checking or mishandling interactions, and also to ensure that new players are kept informed on some of the nuances of my decks in particular and some conceptual information to stay informed about how to approach me. The best thing you can do for a new player to level the playing field is to give them information that isn’t too complicated while keeping them informed on what you’re doing and planning. This ruins the politics a little bit but I’m typically a very political player and I find that giving informed opinions and concepts (i.e. Storm/combo deck, the board doesn’t look scary but the win will come from hand once they have the setup, keep pressure on, they’re not spinning their tires or losing / They have a big board but they’re not that scary to those of us with blockers or board wipes, let them pressure the combo player / Their hand is small and they have relatively few threats right now, they’re likely not the biggest threat / I can Fact or Fiction and remove that threat if you give me an answer)
Yep. Riku: "This deck was gross once upon a time, but I've dialed it way back. Mostly I'm going to try to copy all your stuff and see what happens." Grand Warlord Radha: "She makes mana for every creature that attacks. My plan is to swing with lots of creatures and then play big stuff off of it."
@@Muhahahahaz I'm currently working on a goofy Urza, Lord High Artificer deck that isn't actually sweaty toxic CEDH. I want to use him as mana ramp for dumb giant cost spells with a "way too high" mana curve. Basically playing the insane cards nobody sees normally like Omniscience and the likes.
The trick is to play weak, exciting decks. You still don't get to anything in the game, but while you're being stomped you can fantasize about how cool it would be if your little tricks would work out.
@@Volkbrecht Why is this me? I know I'm going to lose most of the time, but I'm still riding the high of pulling off a Worldslayer + Darksteel Plate win. Once. Two years ago.
This video is interesting from a yugioh because it mirrors almost 100% 1. That one of the primary issues of the new player experience (that being getting thrust into an enormous cardpool with unintuitive interactions facing decks where the wincon and counterplay can feel completely alien until you've already lost to it), and 2. That the best way I've found to introduce players to the game is with a very limited cardpool with simple interactions and slowly ramp up complexity (though I've used a custom pack progression and provided some specific tools to make sure they also get a feel for deckbuilding as well).
I felt this experiamce too when i recently learnt a bit more about yugioh. I like playing control decks but i very quickly realised that i had no idea what to threat asses for removal since every deck is usually 90% its own unique cards for a prebuilt achetype, i had no idea what the "pendulum circus theme deck" cared about cardwise and especially when these cards had creatures in unusual zones
@@llamarama6976Until maybe a year ago I had only played YGO and my friend had only played MTG, so we've basically introduced one another to each game. One thing I told them about YGO is to think of it like you're playing against "Orzhov" or "Gruul"; you kinda get a feel for what a given colour combination *does* overall, right? You can apply that to YGO in a few ways. If I see a card with Despia in the name, even if we're not playing in a competitive setting (where I can guess 90% of your deck list by just knowing your core archetype) I can make a lot of assumptions about your deck. Like okay, Despia cards *love* to support Fusion Monsters, so much so that they often specifically ban you from summoning anything from the Extra Deck except for Fusion Monsters. Therefore I can make a bet that you won't be playing much or any Synchro, Xyz, Link, Pendulum, or Ritual cards, as the first three are essentially banned for you and the latter don't have much synergy. That's similar to how if I see you have a Gruul Commander, I'm not scared of you having Counterspells, forced discard, or Avacyn, and I'm reasonably confident you're not going to be trying to win via burn either. The tricky part is that there are a lot of archetypes and while you can go "Oh this archetype is a Synchro Archetype!" Synchro and Xyz (for example) aren't as mechanically different as White and Black in MTG; there's no 'colour pie' saying Fusion is usually good at X and bad at Y while Xyz gets more access to Z - the closest you can say is that Xyz can have stronger effects because they have a resource system (Detaching material), Rituals can have overpowered effects because their summoning mechanic sucks, and so on. Sadly, the end result for a long while was that every deck shared the same one mechanic: Negate. Every deck would just shit out as many negates as possible while being resilient enough to play through some in turn. It was basically cEDH: Everyone's playing Blue.
@@Carwinley yeah i picked up labrynth and i quickly got the general theme it was going for. The main issue is just so many named cards that unless i super scrutinise a card idk whats its plan until its happened and thus now know for next time
I've taught about a dozen people about Magic, and not one of them is interested in some unique synergy or rube Goldberg machine. They just see the 5/3 dinosaur that can immediately attack and swing into the 7-drop angel that gains 4 life.
@@treycuretThis is why I’m a little resentful hearing that people completely new to mtg’s rules are starting with commander. I fear many of those folks are making complaints that will affect the game when they really don’t know enough yet to be making those complaints. Then again, I know a few people who have been playing longer than me that still think counterspells, discard, and mill are the devil lol
Problem: my opponents keep winning games by pulling a 7 card combo out of their asses Solution: play baral and let literally nothing resolve for fear it might kill me later
I played in a pod that was, I think, 6 players. Everyone was gearing up for a long wacky game. After draws one player says something like "heh, my hand is $1200". Then proceeds to combo out of his graveyard really quickly. So we shuffle up and try again. Same player gets a combo piece in his graveyard and the table DESTROYS him before it can come back around to his turn. He WHINES incessantly every time someone attacks him as though it's a personal slight. Terrible attitude and sucked the fun right out of it for everyone
The classic. Threat assessment includes past experiences with the deck :) Personally, I don't mind people going after me when I play my trick deck. If they can repeatedly stomp me out before I get my engines going, that means I have to adapt my strategy to survive in the local meta. What it generally doesn't mean is that I have to abandon my pet trick. There is usually a way to keep the idea working.
Frankly this is the truth of most complaints about EDH. Magic was not designed as a multiplayer game. It can be a fun one, but it was never meant to be one. Lots of commander play groups should really just be playing traditional multiplayer board games. Or cube, if you have a few hours.
@@retronymph I find you using the example that more people should try multiplayer board games interesting, could you elaborate a little bit more about how you came to this idea?
I love making decks that are new and sometimes silly. My newest deck's theme is just "cards with creature types that got errata'd" like hounds, viashino, and cephalids.
my dad's an og player, I was thinking of making a zada deck that uses a bunch of bad stupid goblins he has a ton of bulk of, the old art is just a ton of fun
@@Unormalismidk why they didn't just errata it to have octopus as an extra creature type as well as its own. Then you get the advantage of it being more flexible but don't lose flavourful lore indicators. What they did was the equivalent of changing merfolk into just "fish" theres a clear distinction
I feel that Pauper Commander can really help the approchability of Commander. Because you're limiting yourself to a single uncommon creature as your commander and a pile of commons for the 99, you have a lot of simple cards that people are either already familiar with or can wrap their head around quickly. My most straightforward deck is my Kutzil deck, which can be summarized as such: play creatures that enter with +1 counters to hit people to draw cards to play more creatures that enter with +1 counters.
This isn't a long term solution. When a niche format becomes popular wizards can make money off it and proceed to print cards that increase the power and complexity until we have introduce another niche format built out of that one until we end up with a format that doesn't get popular, at which point its difficult to find people to play.
Idk if that really helps. For a little while I tried playing regular Pauper, and the experience was very close to what I had seen in Modern and Pioneer: a highly optimized format, only that when you come from the unrestricted card pools, you don't know most of the interactions, because the format's power sits in different corners of the card pool.
@@Unormalismor, you know… Just use Rule 0 It doesn’t matter what Wizards prints. They can’t force you to play busted cards that ruin the pod you’re looking for. But it does take a little human communication 🤷
@@Muhahahahaz well, what are "broken cards?" The reason you'd want to play something like pauper commander is that you can reasonably assume there are no broken cards. It is the rule zero that everyone agrees to before meeting and talking and building a deck. But if WotC intentionally prints cards to cater to pauper and power creep, you can't be as sure that one person isn't using the new cards broken for pauper. You can't just rule zero all the broken cards every time. If I had my choice of casual banned cards, it would invalidate the decks of a lot of people I usually play with. Also, I recently saw a Pleasant Kenobi video where he just threw a fit over a store's casual ban list, which was just full of infinite combo pieces, single card wins, and taxes.
Tbh I think the problem is how much Commander crowded out the other casual formats. I things people would benefit from maybe not a variety of decks, but just experimenting more with other casual formats. Overplaying Commander causes people to seek more and more complex decks to keep it novel if it is the only casual format you are playing while at the same time as people dedicate their collection to EDH it becomes easier to just fill your deck with EDH staples homogenizing decks.
Could not agree more. Commander is a great format and i'm glad its popular, but its driven all other casual formats to extinction and I think its suffered because of that. Part of what makes commander appealing is just how different it is from 60 card magic, it is its own wacky little environment as the only place a majority of cards have a home, but as a player you can't really grasp whats so novel about the format unless you have a strong foundation of magic outside of commander. Its harder for new players to understand magic at a fundamental level in commander, it gives warped ideas about tempo and creature stats since with 3 opponents and double life for each of them you need bigger, chunkier creatures, and, my personal biggest gripe, as the only viable casual format, it has to meet the needs of so many different kinds of players who otherwise may have distributed into a handful of casual formats better suited to individual types of players now all having to show up under one roof. It makes any given pod have to negotiate with itself and carry a good attitude in order to have a good experience, and on a gamestore, pick up game with strangers level, too few players are willing to do that imo. Hit the nail on the head with overplaying EDH and needing to further optimize just to keep things fresh, which just pushes staples
Yeah, but which format is "casual"? Standard has boat loads of complexity creep. Modern, Legacy, and Vintage are pricey and very complex. What, Pioneer? Brawl? Pauper maybe? MTG has grown so increasingly complex that I don't think you can point someone to any format and call it "casual". Unless you want to lose most of your games, you have to play meta decks or counter meta decks.
@@eightywight Pentagram/Star Magic, Rainbow Stairwell, 3 card-Blind, Emperor and Pack Wars are just a few examples of casual Magic formats. There are many, many more casual Magic formats out there.
@@eightywight The term "Casual Format" refers to any format not officially recognized by Wotc. This is everything Relux mentioned above, and more. Its kitchen table magic, its magic played by people who have a total of 300ish cards total and are only playing with what they have with a couple friends on their own. Obviously standard and modern and other sanctioned formats are not casual, they require keeping up with a metagame and playing with a large number of people regularly. The original complaint in regards to commander wasn't that commander was taking oxygen from those central pillar, sanctioned formats with huge metagames, but from the little, casual, fun-based formats all being played around kitchen tables.
It comes down to money, so to win people over try emphasizing approachable formats first like a draft cube from incredibly cheap cards or whatever popper is.
I love my Ilharg deck. It attacks, slaps down some big chunky beater, gets everyone's life totals lower. Wins about 25% of the time. Everyone knows exactly what Ilharg is going to do every time. I like how it makes greedier boardstate-based valuetown decks sweat, and no-one wants to blow removal on Ilharg until they know he's going to be attacking them. Very fun, and speeds up games a lot but doesn't remove decision-making.
I was toying with the idea of building Illharg but ended up going with Purphoros as I felt he was a bit more resilient and explosive. Did you explore other commanders for the type of deck you wanted to build?
That's very unlike the experience at my table. Ilharg never ever gets to attack *because* you don't know where it might go. And if it gets a pump spell it might just kill the entire table.
My friends say I have Arena Brain because when I put revealed cards in my hand, I have them flipped over so they can see it at all times. Yesterday I played a Land Tax and had four basic lands flipped over in my hand at one point 😅
Interesting… I was imagining the same thing during the video 😂 I haven’t had the chance to play commander yet, but I was wondering what the big deal would be about just playing with revealed cards permanently revealed (Of course, I realize the rules don’t require it, but it’s also not against the rules, as long as everyone can see them. Worst case they could just use a notepad to write down the revealed cards instead, but why make them do that? And I suppose Arena does it as a convenience/level playing field, because even if Arena itself didn’t have that feature, some players could theoretically add it through 3rd party trackers, at which point the trackers essentially become mandatory for competitive play, which wouldn’t be good)
What you're describing is common for any niche hobby that gains in popularity. The available resources become min/maxed by the ever expanding community, and the game becomes much more streamlined as a result. The only real way to avoid this is to avoid the community that grows and develops as a result of the hobby's popularity. And, well, that's not fun. That's part of the reason why tcg players are in love with alternate formats. The game they fall in love with changes over time, and new formats can rekindle that lost romance. If only temporarily.
Generally true. The gripe a lot of players have is that there is one aspect in this trend that was completely avoidable: WotC leaning in. Sure, the content creators streamlined the game knowledge, and yes, it probably was unavoidable that people would start to proxy the Reserved List. But it wasn't necessary to print three new commanders every other week, or to intentionally print relevant cards into the format. To me, the main need for weirdness came from a need to approach a stale format through creativity. Used to be that people at a table would almost cheer on a player with an unusual deck, just to see how it plays out. These days it's generally impossible to keep up with the format unless you're a hardcore fan.
I wholeheartedly agree with a lot of what you're saying. We've been encountering a lot of issues within our playgroup where people will say "I cast [Spell Name]" without telling anybody what it is or what it does, and sometimes it gets exhausting having to poke and prod to get an explanation every new card. When the fatigue sets in some new card inevitably slips under the radar without being described when cast, and then ends up being a lynchpin for the winning engine a few turns later, met by an outcry of "When did you even cast that? What does that card even do?"
In any rule 0 talk, I try to give: My commander, the theme, the sub theme, and number of turns till it gets going. E.g. "I'm playing Zur the Enchanter, its a cycling matters deck with a flicker subtheme, and takes about 8 turns to get going". I don't mind giving away information, and will usually call out my own "game winning" threats when I play them, because of this exactly. I rotate through strategies a lot, and 'waiting till people aren't paying attention' has never been an appealing win con. My decks are strong enough to win by their own merits, and getting my opponents help with probing their weaknesses only makes me a stronger deckbuilder.
Exactly. Commander=>Theme/mechanics=>Wincon=>wins at turn X=> any additional things people should be fairly warned about Using a number for power levels is completely ineffective at this point. This is the information people need to have a fun and balanced game. If people want to hide stuff, assume they're playing cEDH combos so they can pubstomp and go equally as hard, or whatever... In 60-card formats the metas are super well defined and players have that type of information available to them going into a game. Give your opponents in Commander the same level of courtesy and try to remember that everyone is there to have fun.
This is one of the few reasons that I prefer kitchen table Magic over attending my lgs. I'm someone who, despite wanting to win, will communicate clearly with my playgroup and actually say "I'm going to attempt to cast X, you should be looking to get rid of this asap, otherwise it allows me to do Y." I don't like surprise win-conditions where it feels as though the rug has been pulled from beneath you, and then you realise you should've used that counterspell after all. People at my lgs don't like my approach to EDH, they seem to dislike the transparency I have when it comes to talking about my decks, what they like to do and what they need to win. I think this is probably because it puts some sort of social pressure on them to also do the same, which they usually don't (that's fine, it's not a requirement to have a pre-match discussion.) There are a couple of players there who seem to enjoy EDH in a very similar way to myself, however I usually arrive an hour into the match-ups and everyone is already in established pods.
i do something similar but it is something that should be done in a subtle manner so as to not be annoying to the pod. the way you described how you do it seems a bit hand hold-y
They probably feel like you're being condescending. As if they don't know how to play the game. People often like to play card games for the same reason people like to gamble. If the slot machine told you up front what the odds are, nobody would want to play.
It's crazy how many downsides of EDH can be completely sidestepped if you just... you know... communicate with the people you're playing with... like you're friends, or something!
Tabletop RPGs, games which are almost entirely playing pretend with spreadsheets to manage conflicts, have this exact same core issue. Communication is a whole skill set that most people are only limited in proficiency. Magic doesn't explicitly require these skills to play it, and so it's no shock the new implicit skill set isn't as fully present.
@@jaredwright1655 It's true you might not have control over how much your opponents communicate, but you can always try to nudge them in the right direction by being the first one to open up about what type of deck you're running. I do agree communication is not a natural skill for everyone, but it's certainly one worth working on if you want to play a social game with other people. But that just goes back to what Snail's said before, about how Magic is a better game when you're not trying to play it like Solitaire, (i.e. like you're the only person playing the game)
@Phizax I do 100% agree. I have a weird hidden commander deck and I'm very open to my opponents about what the threats are. The fact that they are all creatures is also helpful for my opponents to see what's on the board. Not guess what's in my hand
But that's not always an option. When you play in public places, like in an LGS or at a Magic Fest (or whatever they are called these days), you generally don't know who you'll end up with at a table, and once you sit down people want to play, not gab about the game, so there is a certain pressure to fit in, if you want to enjoy your games.
Open-decklist tournaments are heralded as the best way to play for this exact reason. People knowing what your deck does leads to far more interesting interactive play and leads to less games ending in a Gotcha!
Being expected to read and process potentially dozens of 100 card decks. Doesn't really reduce the mental load, and honestly I don't expect it would even work. Its too much information, unless the meta is very homogenous.
@@lincolnreinert1205 if it is a competitive tournament, whether that is cEDH or high power commander or what have you, then yes. Thoracle Consult is the single best win con in the game, and it's available in Dimir. Thus, you should probably assume that unless a deck archetype runs directly contradictory to that strategy, they will have it in their deck. Same deal with Breach/Brain freeze in Izzet, or deck specific combos like Time Sieve Tivit and Kinnan Basalt Monolith. This logic can even apply to powerful cards that aren't necessarily game enders, like the One Ring, Rhystic Study, Dockside, or Ad Nauseum. If you are in a tournament, you are fundamentally playing to win, thus you should be prepared for your opponents to be using the most efficient and powerful strategies to do so. In casual LGS or kitchen table situations, that is a different story, but for tournaments or games that are explicitly competitive or high power, part of piloting skill is analyzing which opponents are threatening, who is building momentum, and when opponents may attempt to go for the win.
3/3 elk crossover. Also i can see an open decklist complimented with players giving a general explanation of the decks identity and gameplan the best solution so players don't have to sift through the entire decklist as mentioned here and focus on specific cards. Also ease of access to the decklist plus open honesty about what a card does for your deck if asked
Counterpoint: Losing to random luck cards is funny, makes the game more fun, and should be encouraged. Why yes I play a Coinflip deck how could you tell?
If that's how you like to play, that's a vibe, and that's awesome. I personally find that the novelty of total randomness wears off pretty quickly and gives way to frustration that I have no influence on how my own game is gonna go. At that point, I might as well play Yahtzee.
I love a full boardstate. Tha Mollusc will never talk me out of it. It's easy for the novice to assess. I turn my creatures sideways and attempt to thump them soundly about the neck and ankles. Classic battlecruiser. Although sometimes I will field a mere light cruiser. CL-58 ftw!
Same, it's why I fell in love with EDH. I've never quite clicked with the win out of nowhere style of gameplay that seems to be the more powerful end of the format - I like grindy, attrition based battlecruiser games that take forever, but it seems to have fallen out of favor.
@IronWilliam : eh. My parents both died in the last two months. I myself have about ten good years left. Considerations such as something 'being out of style' understandably don't carry a lot of weight for me. YMMV.
I love high-powered casual. I do get tired of mid - to low power players calling anything stronger than their decks "cEDH," "pubstomping," or invoking the ambiguous nature of the "social format." I never hide my deck's power level from opponents, but they just assume that I'm talking trash and throw tantrums when my deck does exactly what I told them it would. It's easily the worst part of the format.
As someone who tries to get friends to play magic or just card games in general this hits real close. My attempt to solve this was to make really simple decks with clear gameplans (like tribal, or a minimal combo) so that you could move more brain power in to reading others card and threat assessing. In doing this, at least for me personally there was also little confusion as to what I was doing to others because if I play a card in an elf deck for example its probably just to get more elf stuff. Either way, its always nice trying to get people to like and stick with magic because they understand it and want to play more.
I don't know about your friends, but I have a friend I mentor who is really good at magic (at least in my vacuum of knowledge), who put me on a very simple white deck high in synergy. I agree the majority of difficulty comes from misunderstanding opponent decks, not their own. He had to play the same deck 3 times just so I could understand what he was doing, I figured out mine much quicker.
I love edh specifically because of the variety in novelty decks to the point where I try to avoid running duplicate cards between my decks that share colours. And though I agree that there is a certain information overload, I find asking people to explain their decks usually clears it up well. I've made an active effort to start each game by literally reading what my commander does and then follow up with what my gameplan is and sometimes even how I win. It's just a nice atmosphere when people dont feel cheated out of a game because they realized too late what a deck did or was capable of.
Yeah explaining how you win is a very underappreciated style of rule 0. I'll add to that by submitting 'average turn I win by' as a very powerful piece of info for threat assessment since it lets people know generally what kind of threat to expect from you at a given time without having to know all your cards
Used to be that I saw it like you. But I stopped caring a while ago, the amount of new cards printed intentionally for the format just makes it impossible to keep up. I simply trust you are going to tell me when the game is over.
3:49 Had this *exact* experience yesterday; sat down to a game with three random folks and had NO idea what their decks did. (Fortunately, Golgari Battlecruiser provides.)
This is actually good topic and I'm glad you made this video. I have a similar off-meta mindset of trying to make a creative deck that features obscure/hidden cards, but I'm glad you posed that there's that cost of the other 3 players needing to decipher and understand every new card you play at the table. It can be as overwhelming as a spoiler season and trying to theorycraft and understand upcoming limited for that new standard set with ~300ish new cards (ie: the 300 cards you didn't brew that are at the EDH table). I'm also glad you posted that point about having a 10 deck pool which friends played amongst for games of EDH, because that's kind of a similar thing that I've kind of been theorycrafting for a while now. Essentially, commander meets duel decks. 32 different commander decks prebuilt and presleeved into a "battle box" with a friendly and approachable gameplan that's more optimized and identity focused than an off-the-shelf precon deck, but plays with a reduced power level due to restricted cost cap (per deck) and lack of tutors/infinite combos (since a random pickup player won't recognize esoteric tutor pieces or combos). Would especially be helpful to specifically use good, strong staple cards with very straightforward rules text and very legible threat assessments. A card doesn't need to be a Questing Beast in terms of rules text to have a very powerful and understandable ability like Sol Ring. If the question is: "why, when you can just play precons?" Because precons still pose a barrier of ~$50 or so (with sleeves) of entry, and often enough have two or three deck identities they're trying to go for that waters down its gameplan. Is it trying to create tons of value tokens, or just trying to do squirrel tribal beatdown shenanigans, or is it trying to do an aristocrats sacrifice thing with the food and squirrel tokens? There's actually something supremely satisfying with seeing a new player to EDH pick up a Talrand, the Sky Summoner commander deck they never brewed or played, and actually perform well because the gameplan is so straightforward and effective. Make mana, play commander, play instants and sorceries for value, use the drakes to block and win through combat with token army, while still leaving the player to have "Aha" moments of creating drake blockers at instant speed to bluff an overcommitted attack on board. While I can see the value in creating quirky decks with funky interactions, I think there's still a lot of room for "simple" but powerful strategies that can help create legible game states with intentional deck building principles.
You're putting out one banger take after another, packed into a wonderfully entertaining, explanatory and educating video. Thank you for the great content
I come straight from YuGiOh, the variety and the amount of chaos IS WHY I love this commander format so much. It's so much fun to have a "omg gotcha" moment or a hail mary. I absolutely love chaos and thrive in it. I keep goofing off and making decks permanently. This game and its goofiness and its variety is what makes it so good.
I think it is not just boring vs fun but rather simple vs complex, though they often overlap. I made a Goreclaw deck shortly before discovering these videos, and the core is as simple as it gets: ramp to commander, cast stompy green creatures, swing. That doesn't sound like much but it has become one of my favorite decks and is a lot of fun to pilot. Similarly I built Amalia/Lurrus with all permanents 2 mana or less. This is a serious restriction yet adds a flavor to the deck, while at the same time most 1 and 2 drops don't have much going on. I even went as far as to remove all instants as a way to emphasize transparency as well as better synergize with explore/recursion. I've found that most people equate complexity with power, to the point that I've seen people get upset over a deck being too strong by a flashy win on turn 15 while simple combat is fine even when closing games on turn 6. As such people try to make their decks more complex to "power up" even though I've seen it lower their chances of winning or just drag games on.
While I don't want to discourage edh play in general, your remarks regarding complexity/information overload are exactly the reason why I don't think edh is a good way to learn how to play magic for new players. I do think it is a great way to explore the game more in depth, once one has a good grasp of general gameplay, but getting to that point is easier done playing either limited (especially sealed) or standard.
I make a lot of back breaking misplays in my play group, and get chided by them for it. But like I'm a very casual, beer and pretzels player, against a pod of high power near Cedh players. I simply cannot keep track of what the hell is on board or what cards are keystones of their decks. I literally don't have the mental capacity these days to channel into magic gameplay
I, too, am drawn to the openness of deckbuilding in EDH and like to see how powerful I can make my brews with just scryfall and my experience. I also try to be open with information, explaining more or less what my intent is, how my deck likes to win, and try to really carefully explain combos so as to make sure people know where the chokepoints are in the interest of a fun competition. But you are absolutely huffing your own farts if you think it is unethical to play decks in a way that challenge your opponent's mental stacks, even as a thought experiment. If someone gets me with a combo I didn't see coming, I might ask them to explain how it works and maybe even ask about the particulars of its chokepoints, but I think getting randomed out in the most casual, just-for-the-vibes format is not only fine, but part of the fun. Decks doing unexpected shit should be encouraged. It's not "more ethical" to play Atraxa superfriends just because we've all seen it a hundred times. Complex board states, multiple opponents, stacks a mile long, and bizarre interactions are the lifeblood of the format. No one seems interested in balancing it, so I'm not sure why it falls on "guy with a commander you've never heard of" to make sure your head doesn't hurt in the interest of sparing 40th ur dragon deck you've seen this week. It's been said a lot but commander players are soft.
the format matters a lot less than the people you're playing with. playing commander with a steady group of people who tend to use the same decks and who are patient it's entirely fine to learn the game off of. But play any format with random people who aren't patient or good at making it clear what is happening and its gonna suck. Commander isn't necessarily harder to learn off of, but it does require the people teaching new players to be much more aware of the pain points that might come up
@@gwenyurick9663 that’s probably a good point. I will say that if possible I think it’s better to teach people with other formats if possible. Commander just has too much going on. I’ve even started carrying around 2 little pauper decks if we have new people to teach them the basics since pauper is a pretty simple way to learn the game.
It really isn't. But if you're just a group of friends who all bought precons, I think its fine to learn from. The issue is when you go to the LGS and play w/ randoms.
That's a moot point, everyone who thought about it for 5 secs knows that is true but WotC insists on it because it makes a bigger profit to have the Commander decks being sold instead of boosters. On the last year I've learned through experiences that Pauper ou a well-built pair of 60 card kitchen table decks are 100x better to teach and introduce people to the game. Then youca n branch out into other stuff.
When I teach people magic it's always with simple 60 card decks to learn basic mechanics. I'm sure as hell not going to teach someone with 0 prior experience with a 100 card singleton deck against other 100 card singletons. Just makes no sense to do that
Very interesting video! I’m also a brewer and love doing unique and weird things and have definitely run into these issues with people I don’t know playing pick up games. I’m going to try to talk about our decks more!
i think reducing information overload is really the key point you've struck here. i've been slowly introducing my partner to magic through edh. my attempt to solve these problems was to build them 2 relatively simple decks i thought would appeal to them, and then play 1v1 games where i play one deck, and they'll play the other. my idea was that in 1v1 there's less information to track, and they can learn how to their decks work by watching me pilot one, while they are hands on with the other. we've also played 2v1 with one of our friends, and I think archenemy/2hg games can really be a good way to teach new players because it removes a lot of the competitive tension inherent to a FFA format, even in a casual setting w friends. plus it makes it easier to answer questions, point out things about their hand, what to watch out for on board, etc. when i'm not their opponent. so far they've enjoyed it! much to their dismay lol
I definitely do a lot of explaining pre-game when I bring a new deck. "This is Obeka, Splitter of Seconds. She'll make a bunch of extra Upkeeps happen when she deals damage, so I'll be making her stronger and more evasive while trying to assemble upkeep value cards. Court of Emberth *will* kill the table in 6 upkeeps, as will Descent into Avernus, and the deck runs a lot of tutors for my equipments and game enders." Or "This is Estrid, the Masked. There's a ton of Enchantress effects, most of my removal package is Humility auras, and she wins with big/infinite mana through untap engines or Omniscience into drawing my deck for Thassa's Oracle. My creature density is low though, so if you should be able to Archenemy me if you force me to burn removal."
PSA that Obeka doesn't remove the "exile this card if it goes anywhere except exile" _delayed_ trigger from Unearth, only the "remove at end of turn" one. . . . I had to fight on this for forty-six minutes because my opponent didn't believe me.
aint no way im listening to all that yap before my edh game i dont understand whats with mtg players and being afraid of losing the game because their opponent did a synergy. why do we need 3 pregame essays before every match, i wont remember it all anyways, im fine with being comboed out and laughing while it happens
@@cronosdimitri4584 That's great for you! And I feel the same way if I personally bring something weaker than usual. But most players will want at least some idea of what to expect from your deck in terms of play speed etc
@@researchinbreeder tell that to my opponents five weeks ago, not me. I'm _more_ than well aware. Thanks for the independent corroboration, though! Fair cop on the version being wrong, though-I haven't gotten any new cards for quite some time, so I'd suppose you'd know better than me on that.
I really love the information dense environment of EDH. It’s one of my favorite things about it actually and the wierd “high power casual” is my fav way to play. I scroll edhrec as a hobby tho and the fact that’s kinda necessary is really unfortunate for new players
The first commander deck I ever made was kresh the bloodbraided. I got into magic shortly after m13’s release and there were so many cards in green, red and black from Innistrad and RTR that I wanted to use but didn’t have a home in my standard deck or were going to rotate out. As I continued to play, I ended up dropping standard and sticking to commander, but because of all the stuff that’s come out, I’ve had to rotate out old decks I use to play because they just can’t compete in the pods I encounter with strangers anymore. I do still have some decks that run some bizarre stuff and it always makes me happy to hear someone say “I’ve never seen anyone play this commander.” or “that’s a card that exists?!” when I play against them because I feel like I’m expanding another player’s horizons on what you can do with your deck
I am 100% a deckbuilding hipster; i dont really find combat damage wins that interesting, so I tend to build decks with weird combos and synergies. It makes me feel clever. I can honestly say I'd never considered how that would create an informational advantage against opponents unfamiliar with the cards. I have a convoluted combo kill in my Magnus the Red deck using Petal of Insight, a janky Arcane Sorcery from Champions of Kamigawa, and the cards never really turns heads until im killing the table with it. Next time i play, I'll make sure to point out that sort of thing ahead of time. Thanks Snail!
8:38 my wife Marchesa made your list. Instant Like from me. I enjoyed hearing your takes on the card pool selection being a factor for deciding to play cedh vs casual. I enjoy cedh and high power and I was just considering this the other day while watching a casual game and having to pause every few seconds to read the cards I'd never seen before. That generally doesn't happen in cedh. Great video
I think it’s worth a mention that cedh turns out to actually not be that fast a format. The meta game waxed and waned a while and had been more or less a turbo meta at times. It could even be the case still, and maybe we will see turn 2 and turn 3 decks become a sizable part of the meta again. I think this is unlikely for reasons beyond the scope of this post. People seem to think cedh games end quickly, twenty or ten minutes? A couple/few turns? It simply isn’t the case. For one thing, a three turn cedh game can easily last 40 minutes. The turns are not “land pass”. And the other reason is that WOTC continues to print broken card draw engines (or card draw engines that are broken in a 4 player game) and free interaction. That combination makes it pretty tough for a player to just say YOLO and put an unprotected win on the stack ten minutes into the game and get away with it very often. I know you didn’t directly say anything contrary to that info in this video but some of what you seem to be saying makes more sense if that is part of your set of assumptions about cedh. Here’s a statistic from Edh top 16 (a cedh tourney info hub).. the average win rate of a deck is roughly 22.4% Time limits vary but most cedh events use 75 minutes in Swiss then many move to no time limits either in top 16 and/or in the final pod. I trust you get my point but for anyone who may be reading this on your channel that means that many games end in a draw after an hour and fifteen minutes. Just FWIW🤷♂️
After 5 years of playing EDH & building over 200+ commanders….this is what ive concluded: 1.) some commanders are inherently busted no matter what you do. That said, having a stronger commander (not cedh) and a weaker 99 is better, than the opposite; a jank commander hiding a high power 99. 2.) unique commanders and deck themes/builds are very fun in edh. It will not always work but sometimes it pays off and you make a masterpiece. 3.) i dont like samey gameplay where everyone has an identical cardpool of cedh or where “edhrec staples” dot deck is considered the norm. Its good to use scryfall and have your own brews. 4.) most players are not super enfranchised with a perfect mana base, the best ramp/rocks, and value creatures. I dont think proxies are the answer, but rather play with what you got or what you find in a bulk box. Be creative and find an alternative for an effect you desire; it will still work just fine. 5.) have different power levels; keep a precon, something casual and straightforward, and if you want to something high power, or even cedh if that’s what your playgroup has. Always match others; dont be the guy no one wants to pod with at the lgs. Its a format for fun and there’s no prize.
I'm only 7:35 minutes in, and this man has completely changed how I view commander as a format, coming from a player that refused to play edh in the late 2000s-early 2010's, but being thrust into it as it has become the forefront of both casual and competitive magic as I know it in my area (as someone who works at a magic-centric LGS). It just seems so surreal coming from recently not being able to fire standard/modern/vintage events at all, to having *Modern* Horizons only having commander decks as the only supplementary products, I would've laughed at any of these notions 5 years ago working at a different game cafe where we only had the single one-off group coming in to play EDH every Friday, to now, where it's the only format I ever see. To be fair; it's also the only format I play at this point, but it feels like I'm never actually seeing the individual cards someone is playing as compared to modern. At this point I'm only looking at the board-state as an abstract situation that I need to act only at a reactionary basis, never revealing my strategy until I'm sure I can win (as it feels like the only way someone can win at this point), as compared to older formats where after you play 2-3 cards you know exactly what's coming and what to expect. My mind can definitely can be changed by this, but there's so much more nuance to commander than any other format, like for example, I've noticed that it's genuinely not worth it to run removal or counters in a deck as others usually have X amount of slots dedicated to it in almost every deck, so I'd rather let them stop someone else from winning and have those slots open for progressing my own wincon after they've spent everything in hand (and keeping card advantage), only to take the in after someone else is shut down. tbh I'm super drunk rn and don't even remember my original point that I was getting at, so if you read this far looking for a conclusion I apologize in advance, and it sucks to suck.
I continue to enjoy and appreciate your analysis of magic, hipster/atypical decks. My first 3 years of commander (2020-23) was just odd ball decks with 'low tier' commanders. Taking a shot in the dark, but if you ever want a backup 4th person, I'd love to find a way to get a game in with your group.
That hat is so good! Looks very stylish hehe I agree with your points and want to share a deck I’m building currently that I think is cool and I haven’t seen done before. I’m building Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar as my commander as well as damage multipliers and brash taunter like cards. The game plan is to give a stuffy doll or whatever food poisoning, triple the six damage from Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar’s ability twice and smack an opponent for 54 damage. Because it’s Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar deck is also has discard outlets and food producers but it’s just really neat so far and I think about it often
Great suggestions! I really do like the keeping things revealed rule. Technically that information is known, but it's easy to forget what you knew because of overload. If we all play that way, it keeps are minds more able to focus on what is important!
I love your content, and how deeply you think about this stuff. We’re having an issue in our playgroup of high power casual EDH where we’ve streamlined our decks so much and upped the power that we can all consistently win, or create an oppressive board state/often with countermagic up by turns 5-7. On one hand, it’s fine for higher power - but games can be too quick, swingy. Politics feel less impactful - so we think maybe powering down in the answer. Have you ever experienced something like this in your play groups?
The point made around 17:00 is definitely something I’ve come to terms with. I did that a few times with a storm deck against my friends and it really didn’t feel that good. And I realized it’s so much better to explain to my friends which card they really need to remove to stop the win, and guide them to get better. Rather than just get a quick win just to feel bad about it right after.
We talked about this recently on the EDHRECast but I'm an absolute believer in the power of playing things that appear less powerful. I do it primarily because it's way more satisfying (for me) to win a game with Dromoka the Eternal dragons than it is the Ur-Dragon, but I've discovered that there's a lot of power in not being the target. I've literally had people in pods acknowledge what I'm doing is a problem, but even knowing it's a problem they can't justify removing my thing over whatever the Yuriko player is doing. Excellent video btw, keep it up.
My Grenzo deck is one of my favourites as he is an utterly unique commander that plays differently to any other card that I am aware of. I have him built as a token/artifact combo that aims to fish for high cmc creatures that generate a bunch of tokens that I can use loop infinitley or play my whole deck. It is a very fun deck to pilot with a good deal of thinking involved but will never be the one i play against new players. It does not play convetionally (and arguably not fair) and if you have never seen it before it is very difficult to predict the combos (mostly since they use a bunch of cards that are really bad in most other decks).
The beginning of your video threw me for a bit, because I had the strangest relationship with both that hipster deckbuilding and the world's most boring deck a few months back. From deck doctoring, I have OPINIONS on how people build Orzhov aristocrats. A lot of things I see neglected, a lot of people not considering what kind of aristocrats deck they're trying to build, so they make a train wreck. So I made the ABCs with Teysa. A teaching deck that emphasizes a lot of the drums I bang. The importance of fodder, the value of strong finite sac outlets, high amounts of removal by integrating them into the engine and the land base, the value of creatures that are more self-contained, like by sacrificing themselves for their effect or having their own death triggers. It also had a bunch of restrictions. No combos, no infinite sac outlets, no tutoring, no ramp. The result was a deck that's as boring as it is hipster. It's exactly what you expect from aristocrats without any real surprises, yet isn't usually built like this, and most of the cards have, like, one sentence of text. Because it's well tuned for that 8-10 turn casual environment and doesn't hit many hot buttons, it's become my default deck for testing the waters with a new group.
I love trying out oddball ideas. It's just that everyone else is more interested in trying out winning, and I'll admit that having a losing streak isn't really fun. So often what I play ends up being a painful compromise that doesn't work either way...
I’m going fond of your analysis. That’s short, to the point and raise many points that I often implicitly consider as well as points that I have not consider yet. This format is to the point. Keep up the good work. ❤
I had a phase where I stopped trying to do the quirkiest thing and just make decks that just are those archetypes. BU Reanimator and Bant Enchantress were the big winners of this process. they're straightforward, do the thing you expect them to do, and are generally satisfying to play. It's nice to have those to fall back on when the weirder ones aren't quite working the way I want them to. Other big successes out of this phase were Dragon Aggro, RW Reanimator and 5 color tokens.
I've had this bite me in the ass a lot, as a gruul player mostly and primarily just wanting to throw around big creatures, threat assessment is very easy for others to do with my boardstate so often I get targeted when there is a bigger threat mine is just easier to see at a glance.
It's the (weird) deckbuilder's responsibility to brew with one, easy-to-explain goal for the deck. I have a Gruul deck that has 10 viable commanders, and I randomly pick one at the start of every game. I love how funky that is, especially for people I've never played with. However, during deck construction, I knew that my metric of success for every game should be the same--play big creatures. A new player can easily understand the goal, and how close to that goal I am just by glancing at my board. If you're bringing an odd, "off-meta" deck, you have to put in the work in building that makes it simple for other players.
16:10 honestly being open with information and just also being willing to call when a player misses a play goes a long way to assisting a games play experience. people at my local shop insist that not calling when a player misses a play forces them to pay attention and improve, which I recognize as being true in theory just ends up making people sound condescending and makes it feel all the more frustrating when a player just goes off and wins out of nowhere. this contrasts heavly with my experience at a convention where people actually called out when i missed a play or made a mistake in a way that felt like they were actually wanting me to perform to the best of my decks ability and that was...refreshing honestly.
I'll never forget drawing and keeping an INSANEly good hand/unlikely hand when an opponent i was playing against was trying their new [Zaxara] deck. One of the players in that pod was casting their commander [Kaalia of the vast] which we all knew meant trouble for us, so I tapped out to remove it. The following turn, the Zaxara player found their [Freed from the Real] and killed us on his turn 4 or 5. I was so sad I'd never get to see that hand through.
A large variety of possible cards is scary to people who mostly just want to draft or play T2. As a grognard, I'm personally super happy that finally there is a type of game you are allowed to play with your own decks, instead of either copying a deck from dojo, or drafting like the cool kids (I've gotten yelled at because "I play my own decks instead of pro players decks. What, you think you can do better than my guru?!?!"). People are weird. Theres a pretty good analogue to the difference between the games of chess and go. Some people never even try to play go, because "you can't learn all the moves by heart" or some such nonsense. Or to working from home during the lockdowns. You had your fun. Now you need to be in the office every day. You had your variety of decks Lil'Johnny, now its time to play what we tell you is good. Variety good. Remember manacurve, meat is best.
I think I had a problem grasping about telling what my decks do when I first played But now I am very open to explaining at least the core idea of my decks, I don't exactly want to give people a full on lecture about how to my deck, unless they are gonna pilot it, but I've found that it is indeed better to make everyone have some sense of idea what your deck does "This is an XXX tribal deck that's more midranged, it starts doing things at around turn 4-5, and threatens to kill one guy at probably around turn 6-7 if you do nothing about it" And telling people what my cards can do in the deck, and sometimes what they can't do in the deck, is also helpful/ It really just helps people figure out what the table is gonna have to be working with.
Whenever I need to reveal a card I read the name and the text for my opponents. The purpose of revealing cards game wise was to give your opponents the knowledge of what card it is in order to balance the cards effect. Otherwise it would just say “ look at the top card of your deck.”
At 16:10 you mentioned something I do in my playgroup. I play Approach of the second sun, and when I do put it into my deck 7th from the top, i place it face up in my library to help other players know when i could cast it again. Also, for the shapeshift bit. I always put my gamechanger spells as, "I put ____ on the stack." I play with many people who have just started mtg and using terms like the above gives them a chance to respond.
Personally, I think the information overload comes from cards being individually more complex, and great swathes of new cards being printed every year. I used to pretty much look up all the new cards when they came out, now I can't keep up. To make things worse, once the new cards are on the board, they have like four abilities, and they often make tons of tokens. Another thing is that with three opponents, it starts to get awkward to reach across the board to read all the cards they are playing, so I often just read a few of them and then just cross my fingers that the others won't kill me before someone throws in a board wipe. Having such a casual approach wouldn't have been my style in the past, but I want games to move along at a good clip.
I always just make it a point to keep the table informed about my deck. I tell people what my game plan is, and if I'm playing particularly game-winning combo pieces. It's a more fun game for ME if my opponents just understand what's going on properly, instead of having to stop and read every card I own twice over.
I like CEDH, because the "c" stands for consent. If you play cedh, everyone knows what they're in for. But in casual games, the reality is many times the intention is to play cards that opponent's wouldn't want to play against.
I like crafting wacky deck ideas too, even though I've built very few. One that I want to build is "Gisa and Geralf, but They Can't Find Their Zombies." It's a self-mill deck with zero zombies in it, playing off of the joke that you never hit a zombie when you cast the siblings. The idea is you have everyone laughing at the floundering zombies deck ... until they realize that you also have zero zombies on the board. Then it tries to mill out to a Lab Man/Oracle wincon. This could be unfun to play against, but explaining it ruins the entire concept. However, if I introduce it it has a lot of self-mill synergy for when I inevitably fail to mill a zombie, my opponents will expect some of the things I'll be up to, and it might be a better experience overall.
Started playing in March 2024 with 10 years of yu gi oh experience and the deck building experience with 90k cards is just amazing. It’s been a really steep learning curve but it’s so fun
A way that I enjoy using to keep decks unique while also keeping them easy to understand is to take archetypes that are commonly multicolor and reduce their number of colors. For example, I've built mono-white Planeswalkers and mono-blue Clues. That way, opponents will still see a lot of the most used cards in those archetypes, you get to play oddball cards, and those oddballs are easy to explain because they fit into well known archetypes. Bonus points, playing mono-color is a great way to reduce the price of a deck.
I like this video. I've certainly taken to trying to inform the other players things that can help them know what I'm doing. "Infinite Combo Teysa, No Blood Artists," at least gives an idea of what I'm trying for, a clear indication of what's not im there, and enough room to typically be a little curious.
Another banger video! I also love making unique decks or decks that try to push niche mechanics into viability. I also like the challenge of taking normally high powered commanders and building them in a way that is not necessarily high powered, for example the original Korvold with sagas
I think there's an additional layer here to consider in that winning the game isn't really the primary objective for casual multiplayer formats, rather than being the game being a medium for meeting new people, socializing, or just hanging out with your friends
ive started to kit up my zanier decks with a like, 10-20 pool of cards i tech in or out as a set to make them more or less resemble their traditional counterparts. shrines felt too solitaire to me and i didn't know how to fix that, so i started putting in Mana Flare and Awakening and Vernal Equinox to make the games more exciting. the play experience against shrines is pretty bad baseline (pillowfort enchantress in 5c is a casual table's version of CBT), and as a result I've never had anyone tell me they'd rather have played against the normal version of the list.
Another case for simpler decks is to reduce the amount that complex board states slow down the game. I have a couple play groups, and one of them is absurdly slow (think at least 2 hours for single game). Reducing board complexity helps slower players make decisions quicker. Being straight forward if my board is a threat to them helps them make a decision about where to target their removal, instead of spending a minute talking about what they should destroy. Simple and honest gameplay let's you play more games, and cuts back on the amount of time spent sitting there doing nothing at a table, which is the worst part of most board games imo.
Your video about Hans' Xyris deck inspired me to make my own Xyris deck. My first commander deck actually. But I've gone for a +1/+1 counters, unblockable, and combat oriented theme. I bought a 3 cards that can enable infinite combats if I have enough attacking creatures or deal enough combat damage. It's pretty jank and I've yet to play it with these cards since I got them after the last time I went to my lgs. Aggravated Assault (3 and RR untap creatures you control and after this phase there is an additional combat followed by an additional main phase), Neheb The Eternal (gives red mana in post combat main for each 1 life opponents lost this turn), and Grand Warlord Radha. (which gives red or green mana per attacking creatures) This all seems to fit nicely because of the tokens generated by Xyris and the other token makers in my deck. It's on Moxxfield as Xyris, buffs and stuff. Even though it's not really buffs at this point, mostly +1/+1 counters with a few other side strategies; which I plan to flesh out when I can buy a few more cards.
I think some of the problem is coming from the culture of competitive and "tight-meta" magic. There are certain norms there that don't translate well to commander as a social format. Assuming opponents know deck archetypes, or what certain cards do. Assuming opponents will remember or write down revealed information. These things are normal in comp-REL games, where the expectation is to "git gud" but many players have trouble code-switching to multiplayer. I once dumbfounded another play by making an agreement that would keep me around for another turn, it wasn't fully beneficial to me, but I wasn't going to win anyway and didn't want to leave the table yet, so one more turn seemed fun. I've played a lot of games that come to a point of one player becoming arch-enemy on the brink of winning and everyone (including the leading player) trying to piece together play lines to stop them. It's one of the coolest parts of EDH's social side, you can be as transparent as you want with the table. Reading the table vibe is super important for this though.
I've got a deck called "I've God Wurms" When I show up a table and they ask me what deck I'm playing my answer is "I've Got Wurms" My commander is Atla, and the entire deck is designed arround cheating out as many big wurms as fast as I can. It's not a very fast deck but it's really fun to play. It usually wins by getting people to underestimate the deck. It ramps up very very slowly and looks fairly weak at first, but then all of a sudden like a bomb it explodes. in one game I went from having 5 wurms on the table that took me about 10 turns to get, to the very next turn having over 60 wurms with an average power and toughness of 7/7. Most of them had both trample and hast. I won that game. I absolutely LOVE weird and funky decks.
I like to build underdog Commanders in unusual ways. Thats the freedom of EDH. In a format with a legal cardpool of nearly 30k cards, people should learn to deal with unknown cards. A short explanation for the pod what the deck does, is self explaining ofc.
As someone who plays both in an LGS and in a larger online discord, and thus sees a wide variety of decks, as well as anywhere from mid to cEDH power levels: It's much simpler than "Remember 27,000 cards". I don't need to remember *every* untap effect to know things that untap other things probably have combo potential. Things that can be repeatedly brought back from the graveyard have aristocrat loops. Any tutor is always scary. You identify combo archetypes, not always combo pieces. You might have the most popular versions of these memorized, think Exquisite Blood + Sanguine Bond, but if you see Vito, Thorn of the Dusk Rose or Marauding Blight Priest or any number of other "When you gain life opponents lose life" you can see that they do the same thing.
Honestly wish they would bring back duel decks or something similar to that. They need simple easy to understand pre-con decks to onboard newer players. I still shake my head that they stopped printing them "because they don't make enough money" or players were like "Oh they aren't strong enough/enough good cards" Like how short sighted do you have to be to not see that the money comes with time and not having simple on ramps just hurts player adoption? I still have a few of them laying around for teaching new players and they're really the best thing I've found for that besides making your own simple decks to teach with
I think the idea of finding the correct table is honestly the issue. Most tables end up in an arms race of deck power until everything but the peak meta is squeezed out. It's difficult to find people to play with a regular basis who prefer to keep things low powered.
I learned to play mtg through kitchen table magic and played some arena as well as modern, but EDH has taught me almost every mechanic. I think that the diversity in EDH is a good thing, not only for the old but also the new players. You will soon learn that there is a difference in cast vs etb-triggers, that wording matters, that everything in a single block of text resolved before you can interact and that blocks separated usually means separate triggers. I'd argue that a casual player that after the initial panic of learning how to play cards in EDH the casual experience is a good way to learn how a lot of cards work at a glance. You do not have to learn what every card is called or what they do as long as you can read the "language" of magic as well as knowing some common cards. TLDR large cardpool good actually for new players.
![[กูเพิ่งซื้อมึงปิดหนี] 20 นาที ผมรีวิวเกมที่แย่ที่สุดในโลก CONCORD](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XhC-3q3Ii7I/mqdefault.jpg)
0:22 Minor correction: Now that cards with Unfinity mechanics are banned outside of Commander, the card pool is actually WIDER than Vintage.
I was literally starting to comment that and I caught yours right under mine, Nice. Yes, correct. Thank You.
Oooh Ooh fdessssssssssssssssssssssswwwssssssswwwwwwwswwswwsseesssssssssssssessssss@@LithmusEarth
Weren't those banned in all eternal formats i.e.: Commander as well?
@@Adrianovaz2007 Nope, just everything except commander.
@@Adrianovaz2007 No, actually, My Attractions Deck is still legal, they were being weird in their conference talking about how they wanted to print directly into (only) commander but couldn't find a way with stickers and attractions, but they can just do that, they don't have to go, Opp! it's legacy legal and then almost a year later, Opp! It's banned in Legacy. Goofy.
I love making weird decks too! Someone playing the same deck as me annoys me a lot, not for any rational reason...
@@thetrinketmage hi trinket
You 2 planned your latest videos to come out simultaneously, didn't you 😂
We crave novelty, that's rational enough
That's why I only play decks that take cards from my opponents' decks, so every game is different. Plus if I lose I can blame my opponents.
Yeah i remember when i built my Syr Konrad deck i went to check individual cards on edhrec to see if there were any remotely similar builds. There wasnt. My list was the only one of its kind there.
One thing that I started doing is that I try to give my opponents as much info about my boardstate as they need. For example when I see them looking over my cards I ask whether they need a refresher on what they do. While doing this I put different emphasis on „I get a 1/1 on my upkeep“ and „when I hit you with creature you lose the game“ so they know what cards are more important to my gameplan.
Of course this allows them to target my most important piece, but I‘d rather lose a game because my opponent could remove my threat than win because they misinterpreted my boardstate.
Also just reminding them of certain things can help like „I‘m dead on board but I have 3 mana open and two cards in hand“.
for me it's similar.
Though i vary it for every deck i play.
If i play my only Golem creature deck i tend to politik my win by telling them i'm not a threat.
Because i just aint. Hardcasting for 10 mana normaly isn't that great and relies on flying under the radar for the most part to win games.
And well it can not win on a whim. I do clear things. I swing with big creatures that don't untap on it's own xD.
But every other deck i even tell them when i'm about to win and when i'm becoming the problem.
I even tell them things like "I have no blockers if you need an attack trigger" or "My only blocker is my commander who I am not going to block with"
That's how my table does it too, we try to give everyone full information that's actually known so they can make good decisions and not feel screwed over by a complex board.
Exactly this but occasionally it can be hard to determine when I should or shouldn’t remind ppl.
@@kennyrichardson3842I do it too. It wastes too much time making players read my board state instead of just summing it up for them. More games are more fun than long games IMO.
The "Deck Elevator Pitch" is my favorite way to help newer players understand what my niche builds are doing.
"Yeah this Mary Read and Anne Bonny Deck looks to loot and ramp into a pirate themed Kikijiki/splinter twin/pestermite infinite wincon." "This is my Ashnod, Flesh mechanist decks, it's gonna do standard aristocrats stuff but it's a little aggressive because she's 1 mana"
Then when they ask what a Splinter twin combo is you take the two iconic pieces and explain how it works together before shuffling up. having the table aware that that is the end goal of the deck, and how it works makes it all the more satisfying when you're able to sneak through their defenses and land it. And that interaction between my gameplan, and my opponents interaction/gameplan is the reason i play magic at all.
100% this! my favorite deck recently has been Raphael tribal and my pitch is "demons, devils and darkness oh my! I do just rakdos things. sac my own stuff to commit tax fraud, turn my opponents against each other while sneaking out big value engines" part of my enjoyment of edh is the creative deckbuilding process, being able to build a thing that ends up being more resilient than my opponents. Not just winning through a gotcha because I was comboing off and my opponents didn't stop me because they didn't even realize it was happening.
Seriously, right? I don’t understand the point of bringing a “secret” deck in a format with tens of thousands of possible cards, when it’s supposed to be “casual”…
Like congrats, you really got me with a bunch of stuff I’ve never seen before and had no way to plan a strategy against, while I was just trying to engage in basic creature combat 😂
Absolutely my favourite way to explain what my deck does.
I also tend to play commanders that require a little bit of additional knowledge or have weird interactions, so I’ll usually take the time to explain any weird rulings that commonly come up when I explain the deck.
(i.e. The Muldrotha/Kess count resets when she leaves and re-enters, but I’m still limited to one land drop per turn unless I use other cards / Meren still gets experience if she dies at the same time as other creatures / Mizzix gains experience once the trigger resolves, but I can cast another spell of the same cost before that trigger resolves to gain an additional experience counter)
I find that there’s usually a gap between new and experienced players who get how these work intuitively with a deep understanding of the rules, and I usually take it upon myself to know the specifics of how my commander and interactions work to reduce rule checking or mishandling interactions, and also to ensure that new players are kept informed on some of the nuances of my decks in particular and some conceptual information to stay informed about how to approach me.
The best thing you can do for a new player to level the playing field is to give them information that isn’t too complicated while keeping them informed on what you’re doing and planning. This ruins the politics a little bit but I’m typically a very political player and I find that giving informed opinions and concepts (i.e. Storm/combo deck, the board doesn’t look scary but the win will come from hand once they have the setup, keep pressure on, they’re not spinning their tires or losing / They have a big board but they’re not that scary to those of us with blockers or board wipes, let them pressure the combo player / Their hand is small and they have relatively few threats right now, they’re likely not the biggest threat / I can Fact or Fiction and remove that threat if you give me an answer)
Yep. Riku: "This deck was gross once upon a time, but I've dialed it way back. Mostly I'm going to try to copy all your stuff and see what happens."
Grand Warlord Radha: "She makes mana for every creature that attacks. My plan is to swing with lots of creatures and then play big stuff off of it."
@@Muhahahahaz I'm currently working on a goofy Urza, Lord High Artificer deck that isn't actually sweaty toxic CEDH. I want to use him as mana ramp for dumb giant cost spells with a "way too high" mana curve. Basically playing the insane cards nobody sees normally like Omniscience and the likes.
Playing weak boring decks is only bad if you complain that you didn't do anything cool and that you didn't win. You weren't trying to.
So, basically, playing weak and boring decks is only bad if you share those traits with your deck?
The trick is to play weak, exciting decks. You still don't get to anything in the game, but while you're being stomped you can fantasize about how cool it would be if your little tricks would work out.
complex =/= interesting =/= powerful
@@Volkbrecht Why is this me? I know I'm going to lose most of the time, but I'm still riding the high of pulling off a Worldslayer + Darksteel Plate win. Once. Two years ago.
@@PhoenicopterusRburn
This video is interesting from a yugioh because it mirrors almost 100% 1. That one of the primary issues of the new player experience (that being getting thrust into an enormous cardpool with unintuitive interactions facing decks where the wincon and counterplay can feel completely alien until you've already lost to it), and
2. That the best way I've found to introduce players to the game is with a very limited cardpool with simple interactions and slowly ramp up complexity (though I've used a custom pack progression and provided some specific tools to make sure they also get a feel for deckbuilding as well).
I felt this experiamce too when i recently learnt a bit more about yugioh. I like playing control decks but i very quickly realised that i had no idea what to threat asses for removal since every deck is usually 90% its own unique cards for a prebuilt achetype, i had no idea what the "pendulum circus theme deck" cared about cardwise and especially when these cards had creatures in unusual zones
@@llamarama6976Until maybe a year ago I had only played YGO and my friend had only played MTG, so we've basically introduced one another to each game.
One thing I told them about YGO is to think of it like you're playing against "Orzhov" or "Gruul"; you kinda get a feel for what a given colour combination *does* overall, right?
You can apply that to YGO in a few ways. If I see a card with Despia in the name, even if we're not playing in a competitive setting (where I can guess 90% of your deck list by just knowing your core archetype) I can make a lot of assumptions about your deck.
Like okay, Despia cards *love* to support Fusion Monsters, so much so that they often specifically ban you from summoning anything from the Extra Deck except for Fusion Monsters. Therefore I can make a bet that you won't be playing much or any Synchro, Xyz, Link, Pendulum, or Ritual cards, as the first three are essentially banned for you and the latter don't have much synergy.
That's similar to how if I see you have a Gruul Commander, I'm not scared of you having Counterspells, forced discard, or Avacyn, and I'm reasonably confident you're not going to be trying to win via burn either.
The tricky part is that there are a lot of archetypes and while you can go "Oh this archetype is a Synchro Archetype!" Synchro and Xyz (for example) aren't as mechanically different as White and Black in MTG; there's no 'colour pie' saying Fusion is usually good at X and bad at Y while Xyz gets more access to Z - the closest you can say is that Xyz can have stronger effects because they have a resource system (Detaching material), Rituals can have overpowered effects because their summoning mechanic sucks, and so on.
Sadly, the end result for a long while was that every deck shared the same one mechanic: Negate. Every deck would just shit out as many negates as possible while being resilient enough to play through some in turn. It was basically cEDH: Everyone's playing Blue.
@@Carwinley yeah i picked up labrynth and i quickly got the general theme it was going for. The main issue is just so many named cards that unless i super scrutinise a card idk whats its plan until its happened and thus now know for next time
I've taught about a dozen people about Magic, and not one of them is interested in some unique synergy or rube Goldberg machine. They just see the 5/3 dinosaur that can immediately attack and swing into the 7-drop angel that gains 4 life.
@@treycuretThis is why I’m a little resentful hearing that people completely new to mtg’s rules are starting with commander. I fear many of those folks are making complaints that will affect the game when they really don’t know enough yet to be making those complaints. Then again, I know a few people who have been playing longer than me that still think counterspells, discard, and mill are the devil lol
The magical mollusk makes magic once again
Magnificent
i am engaging with this content
Problem: my opponents keep winning games by pulling a 7 card combo out of their asses
Solution: play baral and let literally nothing resolve for fear it might kill me later
Problem: yoir opponent plays cavern of souls or allosaurus shepard.
@@Dragoncat224blue has no problem with uncounterable spells.
@@Dragoncat224That shepherd ain’t scary. Bounce, exile, burn, and destroy effects handle it easily.
@@Dragoncat224 it’s colossally over bros
@@Dragoncat224Just cast Pongify, it's monke now
I played in a pod that was, I think, 6 players. Everyone was gearing up for a long wacky game. After draws one player says something like "heh, my hand is $1200". Then proceeds to combo out of his graveyard really quickly.
So we shuffle up and try again. Same player gets a combo piece in his graveyard and the table DESTROYS him before it can come back around to his turn.
He WHINES incessantly every time someone attacks him as though it's a personal slight.
Terrible attitude and sucked the fun right out of it for everyone
The classic. Threat assessment includes past experiences with the deck :)
Personally, I don't mind people going after me when I play my trick deck. If they can repeatedly stomp me out before I get my engines going, that means I have to adapt my strategy to survive in the local meta. What it generally doesn't mean is that I have to abandon my pet trick. There is usually a way to keep the idea working.
Tbh that player seemed like a real obnoxious one to also throw in a flex about how expensive their cards are.
Having decks that have hands worth $1,200.00 is not the cringy part, announcing it to the table is.
@@MTG69 exactly. It comes across that you want them to be impressed by it.
I understand a *deck* costing that much but a hand? Yeesh, must’ve had dual lands and Lion’s Eye Diamond of something.
Edh player rediscovers what made 60 card formats good in the first place, admits commander has gotten out of hand
EXACTLY!!!!!!
Lol yeah this is literally why smaller decks need to exist to avoid bloat
Absolutely nailed it.
Frankly this is the truth of most complaints about EDH. Magic was not designed as a multiplayer game. It can be a fun one, but it was never meant to be one. Lots of commander play groups should really just be playing traditional multiplayer board games. Or cube, if you have a few hours.
@@retronymph I find you using the example that more people should try multiplayer board games interesting, could you elaborate a little bit more about how you came to this idea?
I love making decks that are new and sometimes silly. My newest deck's theme is just "cards with creature types that got errata'd" like hounds, viashino, and cephalids.
I love including cards like that as conversation pieces or weird anecdotes from magic's history.
my dad's an og player, I was thinking of making a zada deck that uses a bunch of bad stupid goblins he has a ton of bulk of, the old art is just a ton of fun
Can't believe they errata'd my favourite race into octopus. I have been wounded.
@@Unormalismyeah I feel you my man. It hurts.
@@Unormalismidk why they didn't just errata it to have octopus as an extra creature type as well as its own. Then you get the advantage of it being more flexible but don't lose flavourful lore indicators. What they did was the equivalent of changing merfolk into just "fish" theres a clear distinction
I feel that Pauper Commander can really help the approchability of Commander. Because you're limiting yourself to a single uncommon creature as your commander and a pile of commons for the 99, you have a lot of simple cards that people are either already familiar with or can wrap their head around quickly. My most straightforward deck is my Kutzil deck, which can be summarized as such: play creatures that enter with +1 counters to hit people to draw cards to play more creatures that enter with +1 counters.
This isn't a long term solution. When a niche format becomes popular wizards can make money off it and proceed to print cards that increase the power and complexity until we have introduce another niche format built out of that one until we end up with a format that doesn't get popular, at which point its difficult to find people to play.
Idk if that really helps. For a little while I tried playing regular Pauper, and the experience was very close to what I had seen in Modern and Pioneer: a highly optimized format, only that when you come from the unrestricted card pools, you don't know most of the interactions, because the format's power sits in different corners of the card pool.
@@Unormalismor, you know… Just use Rule 0
It doesn’t matter what Wizards prints. They can’t force you to play busted cards that ruin the pod you’re looking for. But it does take a little human communication 🤷
@@Muhahahahaz I'm not sure if I'm the person you meant to reply to.
@@Muhahahahaz well, what are "broken cards?" The reason you'd want to play something like pauper commander is that you can reasonably assume there are no broken cards. It is the rule zero that everyone agrees to before meeting and talking and building a deck. But if WotC intentionally prints cards to cater to pauper and power creep, you can't be as sure that one person isn't using the new cards broken for pauper. You can't just rule zero all the broken cards every time. If I had my choice of casual banned cards, it would invalidate the decks of a lot of people I usually play with. Also, I recently saw a Pleasant Kenobi video where he just threw a fit over a store's casual ban list, which was just full of infinite combo pieces, single card wins, and taxes.
Tbh I think the problem is how much Commander crowded out the other casual formats. I things people would benefit from maybe not a variety of decks, but just experimenting more with other casual formats. Overplaying Commander causes people to seek more and more complex decks to keep it novel if it is the only casual format you are playing while at the same time as people dedicate their collection to EDH it becomes easier to just fill your deck with EDH staples homogenizing decks.
Could not agree more. Commander is a great format and i'm glad its popular, but its driven all other casual formats to extinction and I think its suffered because of that. Part of what makes commander appealing is just how different it is from 60 card magic, it is its own wacky little environment as the only place a majority of cards have a home, but as a player you can't really grasp whats so novel about the format unless you have a strong foundation of magic outside of commander. Its harder for new players to understand magic at a fundamental level in commander, it gives warped ideas about tempo and creature stats since with 3 opponents and double life for each of them you need bigger, chunkier creatures, and, my personal biggest gripe, as the only viable casual format, it has to meet the needs of so many different kinds of players who otherwise may have distributed into a handful of casual formats better suited to individual types of players now all having to show up under one roof. It makes any given pod have to negotiate with itself and carry a good attitude in order to have a good experience, and on a gamestore, pick up game with strangers level, too few players are willing to do that imo.
Hit the nail on the head with overplaying EDH and needing to further optimize just to keep things fresh, which just pushes staples
Yeah, but which format is "casual"?
Standard has boat loads of complexity creep.
Modern, Legacy, and Vintage are pricey and very complex.
What, Pioneer? Brawl?
Pauper maybe?
MTG has grown so increasingly complex that I don't think you can point someone to any format and call it "casual".
Unless you want to lose most of your games, you have to play meta decks or counter meta decks.
@@eightywight Pentagram/Star Magic, Rainbow Stairwell, 3 card-Blind, Emperor and Pack Wars are just a few examples of casual Magic formats. There are many, many more casual Magic formats out there.
@@eightywight The term "Casual Format" refers to any format not officially recognized by Wotc. This is everything Relux mentioned above, and more. Its kitchen table magic, its magic played by people who have a total of 300ish cards total and are only playing with what they have with a couple friends on their own.
Obviously standard and modern and other sanctioned formats are not casual, they require keeping up with a metagame and playing with a large number of people regularly. The original complaint in regards to commander wasn't that commander was taking oxygen from those central pillar, sanctioned formats with huge metagames, but from the little, casual, fun-based formats all being played around kitchen tables.
It comes down to money, so to win people over try emphasizing approachable formats first like a draft cube from incredibly cheap cards or whatever popper is.
I love my Ilharg deck. It attacks, slaps down some big chunky beater, gets everyone's life totals lower. Wins about 25% of the time. Everyone knows exactly what Ilharg is going to do every time. I like how it makes greedier boardstate-based valuetown decks sweat, and no-one wants to blow removal on Ilharg until they know he's going to be attacking them. Very fun, and speeds up games a lot but doesn't remove decision-making.
I was toying with the idea of building Illharg but ended up going with Purphoros as I felt he was a bit more resilient and explosive. Did you explore other commanders for the type of deck you wanted to build?
That's very unlike the experience at my table. Ilharg never ever gets to attack *because* you don't know where it might go. And if it gets a pump spell it might just kill the entire table.
The disclosure and ethical communication you referred to at the end are worthy of a video of their own. Thanks.
My friends say I have Arena Brain because when I put revealed cards in my hand, I have them flipped over so they can see it at all times. Yesterday I played a Land Tax and had four basic lands flipped over in my hand at one point 😅
Interesting… I was imagining the same thing during the video 😂
I haven’t had the chance to play commander yet, but I was wondering what the big deal would be about just playing with revealed cards permanently revealed
(Of course, I realize the rules don’t require it, but it’s also not against the rules, as long as everyone can see them. Worst case they could just use a notepad to write down the revealed cards instead, but why make them do that?
And I suppose Arena does it as a convenience/level playing field, because even if Arena itself didn’t have that feature, some players could theoretically add it through 3rd party trackers, at which point the trackers essentially become mandatory for competitive play, which wouldn’t be good)
that's not just arena btw. official MTG rules states that any information that has been revealed stays revealed.
@@SumScrubIsUsingxPeke True. Tournament style magic used to require a pen and a notepad for this kinda stuff.
whys this kinda cute
@@beefbelly Thank you (✿^‿^)
What you're describing is common for any niche hobby that gains in popularity. The available resources become min/maxed by the ever expanding community, and the game becomes much more streamlined as a result. The only real way to avoid this is to avoid the community that grows and develops as a result of the hobby's popularity. And, well, that's not fun.
That's part of the reason why tcg players are in love with alternate formats. The game they fall in love with changes over time, and new formats can rekindle that lost romance. If only temporarily.
Generally true. The gripe a lot of players have is that there is one aspect in this trend that was completely avoidable: WotC leaning in. Sure, the content creators streamlined the game knowledge, and yes, it probably was unavoidable that people would start to proxy the Reserved List. But it wasn't necessary to print three new commanders every other week, or to intentionally print relevant cards into the format.
To me, the main need for weirdness came from a need to approach a stale format through creativity. Used to be that people at a table would almost cheer on a player with an unusual deck, just to see how it plays out. These days it's generally impossible to keep up with the format unless you're a hardcore fan.
@@VolkbrechtMark has been designing cards with multiplayer casual formats in mind since 2002, wotc has always been involved
I wholeheartedly agree with a lot of what you're saying. We've been encountering a lot of issues within our playgroup where people will say "I cast [Spell Name]" without telling anybody what it is or what it does, and sometimes it gets exhausting having to poke and prod to get an explanation every new card. When the fatigue sets in some new card inevitably slips under the radar without being described when cast, and then ends up being a lynchpin for the winning engine a few turns later, met by an outcry of "When did you even cast that? What does that card even do?"
In any rule 0 talk, I try to give: My commander, the theme, the sub theme, and number of turns till it gets going. E.g. "I'm playing Zur the Enchanter, its a cycling matters deck with a flicker subtheme, and takes about 8 turns to get going".
I don't mind giving away information, and will usually call out my own "game winning" threats when I play them, because of this exactly. I rotate through strategies a lot, and 'waiting till people aren't paying attention' has never been an appealing win con. My decks are strong enough to win by their own merits, and getting my opponents help with probing their weaknesses only makes me a stronger deckbuilder.
I finally found the casual Zur deck. Why Zur as commander though?
I'm just wondering how a zur deck can take 8 turns to get going
@@kazothearcanemy guess is as a tutor for sinergy pieces and/or a toolbox package, thats what i would do with the theme anyway
Exactly. Commander=>Theme/mechanics=>Wincon=>wins at turn X=> any additional things people should be fairly warned about
Using a number for power levels is completely ineffective at this point. This is the information people need to have a fun and balanced game. If people want to hide stuff, assume they're playing cEDH combos so they can pubstomp and go equally as hard, or whatever...
In 60-card formats the metas are super well defined and players have that type of information available to them going into a game. Give your opponents in Commander the same level of courtesy and try to remember that everyone is there to have fun.
This is one of the few reasons that I prefer kitchen table Magic over attending my lgs. I'm someone who, despite wanting to win, will communicate clearly with my playgroup and actually say "I'm going to attempt to cast X, you should be looking to get rid of this asap, otherwise it allows me to do Y." I don't like surprise win-conditions where it feels as though the rug has been pulled from beneath you, and then you realise you should've used that counterspell after all. People at my lgs don't like my approach to EDH, they seem to dislike the transparency I have when it comes to talking about my decks, what they like to do and what they need to win. I think this is probably because it puts some sort of social pressure on them to also do the same, which they usually don't (that's fine, it's not a requirement to have a pre-match discussion.) There are a couple of players there who seem to enjoy EDH in a very similar way to myself, however I usually arrive an hour into the match-ups and everyone is already in established pods.
i do something similar but it is something that should be done in a subtle manner so as to not be annoying to the pod. the way you described how you do it seems a bit hand hold-y
They probably feel like you're being condescending. As if they don't know how to play the game. People often like to play card games for the same reason people like to gamble.
If the slot machine told you up front what the odds are, nobody would want to play.
It's crazy how many downsides of EDH can be completely sidestepped if you just... you know... communicate with the people you're playing with... like you're friends, or something!
Tabletop RPGs, games which are almost entirely playing pretend with spreadsheets to manage conflicts, have this exact same core issue. Communication is a whole skill set that most people are only limited in proficiency. Magic doesn't explicitly require these skills to play it, and so it's no shock the new implicit skill set isn't as fully present.
Yeah not everyone gets that luxury
@@jaredwright1655 It's true you might not have control over how much your opponents communicate, but you can always try to nudge them in the right direction by being the first one to open up about what type of deck you're running. I do agree communication is not a natural skill for everyone, but it's certainly one worth working on if you want to play a social game with other people. But that just goes back to what Snail's said before, about how Magic is a better game when you're not trying to play it like Solitaire, (i.e. like you're the only person playing the game)
@Phizax I do 100% agree. I have a weird hidden commander deck and I'm very open to my opponents about what the threats are.
The fact that they are all creatures is also helpful for my opponents to see what's on the board. Not guess what's in my hand
But that's not always an option. When you play in public places, like in an LGS or at a Magic Fest (or whatever they are called these days), you generally don't know who you'll end up with at a table, and once you sit down people want to play, not gab about the game, so there is a certain pressure to fit in, if you want to enjoy your games.
The snail hoodie goes hard. Chill philosophy. I'm going to start giving away more free information in games now when using stronger decks
Open-decklist tournaments are heralded as the best way to play for this exact reason. People knowing what your deck does leads to far more interesting interactive play and leads to less games ending in a Gotcha!
Games ending in "gotchas" is a matter of poor risk mitigation and scouting. Do you play with an open hand too?
@@tinfoilslacks3750 should everyone be prepared for a thassa consultation at all times past 3 mana in any dimir+ color identity deck? I think not
Being expected to read and process potentially dozens of 100 card decks. Doesn't really reduce the mental load, and honestly I don't expect it would even work. Its too much information, unless the meta is very homogenous.
@@lincolnreinert1205 if it is a competitive tournament, whether that is cEDH or high power commander or what have you, then yes. Thoracle Consult is the single best win con in the game, and it's available in Dimir. Thus, you should probably assume that unless a deck archetype runs directly contradictory to that strategy, they will have it in their deck. Same deal with Breach/Brain freeze in Izzet, or deck specific combos like Time Sieve Tivit and Kinnan Basalt Monolith. This logic can even apply to powerful cards that aren't necessarily game enders, like the One Ring, Rhystic Study, Dockside, or Ad Nauseum. If you are in a tournament, you are fundamentally playing to win, thus you should be prepared for your opponents to be using the most efficient and powerful strategies to do so. In casual LGS or kitchen table situations, that is a different story, but for tournaments or games that are explicitly competitive or high power, part of piloting skill is analyzing which opponents are threatening, who is building momentum, and when opponents may attempt to go for the win.
3/3 elk crossover. Also i can see an open decklist complimented with players giving a general explanation of the decks identity and gameplan the best solution so players don't have to sift through the entire decklist as mentioned here and focus on specific cards. Also ease of access to the decklist plus open honesty about what a card does for your deck if asked
Counterpoint: Losing to random luck cards is funny, makes the game more fun, and should be encouraged.
Why yes I play a Coinflip deck how could you tell?
That's why I love cascade and discover, and I don't play tutors. Variance is fun.
If that's how you like to play, that's a vibe, and that's awesome. I personally find that the novelty of total randomness wears off pretty quickly and gives way to frustration that I have no influence on how my own game is gonna go. At that point, I might as well play Yahtzee.
Agreed. This game is born from the flavor of D&D, where the random critical hit became commonplace.
I love a full boardstate. Tha Mollusc will never talk me out of it. It's easy for the novice to assess. I turn my creatures sideways and attempt to thump them soundly about the neck and ankles. Classic battlecruiser. Although sometimes I will field a mere light cruiser. CL-58 ftw!
Same, it's why I fell in love with EDH. I've never quite clicked with the win out of nowhere style of gameplay that seems to be the more powerful end of the format - I like grindy, attrition based battlecruiser games that take forever, but it seems to have fallen out of favor.
@IronWilliam : eh. My parents both died in the last two months. I myself have about ten good years left. Considerations such as something 'being out of style' understandably don't carry a lot of weight for me. YMMV.
I love high-powered casual. I do get tired of mid - to low power players calling anything stronger than their decks "cEDH," "pubstomping," or invoking the ambiguous nature of the "social format."
I never hide my deck's power level from opponents, but they just assume that I'm talking trash and throw tantrums when my deck does exactly what I told them it would. It's easily the worst part of the format.
sounds like you need a pod of likeminded individuals
As someone who tries to get friends to play magic or just card games in general this hits real close. My attempt to solve this was to make really simple decks with clear gameplans (like tribal, or a minimal combo) so that you could move more brain power in to reading others card and threat assessing. In doing this, at least for me personally there was also little confusion as to what I was doing to others because if I play a card in an elf deck for example its probably just to get more elf stuff. Either way, its always nice trying to get people to like and stick with magic because they understand it and want to play more.
I don't know about your friends, but I have a friend I mentor who is really good at magic (at least in my vacuum of knowledge), who put me on a very simple white deck high in synergy. I agree the majority of difficulty comes from misunderstanding opponent decks, not their own. He had to play the same deck 3 times just so I could understand what he was doing, I figured out mine much quicker.
I love edh specifically because of the variety in novelty decks to the point where I try to avoid running duplicate cards between my decks that share colours.
And though I agree that there is a certain information overload, I find asking people to explain their decks usually clears it up well. I've made an active effort to start each game by literally reading what my commander does and then follow up with what my gameplan is and sometimes even how I win. It's just a nice atmosphere when people dont feel cheated out of a game because they realized too late what a deck did or was capable of.
Yeah explaining how you win is a very underappreciated style of rule 0. I'll add to that by submitting 'average turn I win by' as a very powerful piece of info for threat assessment since it lets people know generally what kind of threat to expect from you at a given time without having to know all your cards
Used to be that I saw it like you. But I stopped caring a while ago, the amount of new cards printed intentionally for the format just makes it impossible to keep up. I simply trust you are going to tell me when the game is over.
3:49 Had this *exact* experience yesterday; sat down to a game with three random folks and had NO idea what their decks did. (Fortunately, Golgari Battlecruiser provides.)
0:10 That spiral...is that a Sana reference? Those are her colors, her spiral theme, and it's even got her signature banana
This is actually good topic and I'm glad you made this video. I have a similar off-meta mindset of trying to make a creative deck that features obscure/hidden cards, but I'm glad you posed that there's that cost of the other 3 players needing to decipher and understand every new card you play at the table. It can be as overwhelming as a spoiler season and trying to theorycraft and understand upcoming limited for that new standard set with ~300ish new cards (ie: the 300 cards you didn't brew that are at the EDH table).
I'm also glad you posted that point about having a 10 deck pool which friends played amongst for games of EDH, because that's kind of a similar thing that I've kind of been theorycrafting for a while now. Essentially, commander meets duel decks. 32 different commander decks prebuilt and presleeved into a "battle box" with a friendly and approachable gameplan that's more optimized and identity focused than an off-the-shelf precon deck, but plays with a reduced power level due to restricted cost cap (per deck) and lack of tutors/infinite combos (since a random pickup player won't recognize esoteric tutor pieces or combos). Would especially be helpful to specifically use good, strong staple cards with very straightforward rules text and very legible threat assessments. A card doesn't need to be a Questing Beast in terms of rules text to have a very powerful and understandable ability like Sol Ring.
If the question is: "why, when you can just play precons?"
Because precons still pose a barrier of ~$50 or so (with sleeves) of entry, and often enough have two or three deck identities they're trying to go for that waters down its gameplan. Is it trying to create tons of value tokens, or just trying to do squirrel tribal beatdown shenanigans, or is it trying to do an aristocrats sacrifice thing with the food and squirrel tokens?
There's actually something supremely satisfying with seeing a new player to EDH pick up a Talrand, the Sky Summoner commander deck they never brewed or played, and actually perform well because the gameplan is so straightforward and effective. Make mana, play commander, play instants and sorceries for value, use the drakes to block and win through combat with token army, while still leaving the player to have "Aha" moments of creating drake blockers at instant speed to bluff an overcommitted attack on board.
While I can see the value in creating quirky decks with funky interactions, I think there's still a lot of room for "simple" but powerful strategies that can help create legible game states with intentional deck building principles.
You're putting out one banger take after another, packed into a wonderfully entertaining, explanatory and educating video. Thank you for the great content
I come straight from YuGiOh, the variety and the amount of chaos IS WHY I love this commander format so much. It's so much fun to have a "omg gotcha" moment or a hail mary. I absolutely love chaos and thrive in it. I keep goofing off and making decks permanently. This game and its goofiness and its variety is what makes it so good.
I think it is not just boring vs fun but rather simple vs complex, though they often overlap. I made a Goreclaw deck shortly before discovering these videos, and the core is as simple as it gets: ramp to commander, cast stompy green creatures, swing. That doesn't sound like much but it has become one of my favorite decks and is a lot of fun to pilot.
Similarly I built Amalia/Lurrus with all permanents 2 mana or less. This is a serious restriction yet adds a flavor to the deck, while at the same time most 1 and 2 drops don't have much going on. I even went as far as to remove all instants as a way to emphasize transparency as well as better synergize with explore/recursion.
I've found that most people equate complexity with power, to the point that I've seen people get upset over a deck being too strong by a flashy win on turn 15 while simple combat is fine even when closing games on turn 6. As such people try to make their decks more complex to "power up" even though I've seen it lower their chances of winning or just drag games on.
While I don't want to discourage edh play in general, your remarks regarding complexity/information overload are exactly the reason why I don't think edh is a good way to learn how to play magic for new players. I do think it is a great way to explore the game more in depth, once one has a good grasp of general gameplay, but getting to that point is easier done playing either limited (especially sealed) or standard.
I make a lot of back breaking misplays in my play group, and get chided by them for it. But like I'm a very casual, beer and pretzels player, against a pod of high power near Cedh players. I simply cannot keep track of what the hell is on board or what cards are keystones of their decks. I literally don't have the mental capacity these days to channel into magic gameplay
I, too, am drawn to the openness of deckbuilding in EDH and like to see how powerful I can make my brews with just scryfall and my experience.
I also try to be open with information, explaining more or less what my intent is, how my deck likes to win, and try to really carefully explain combos so as to make sure people know where the chokepoints are in the interest of a fun competition.
But you are absolutely huffing your own farts if you think it is unethical to play decks in a way that challenge your opponent's mental stacks, even as a thought experiment. If someone gets me with a combo I didn't see coming, I might ask them to explain how it works and maybe even ask about the particulars of its chokepoints, but I think getting randomed out in the most casual, just-for-the-vibes format is not only fine, but part of the fun. Decks doing unexpected shit should be encouraged. It's not "more ethical" to play Atraxa superfriends just because we've all seen it a hundred times.
Complex board states, multiple opponents, stacks a mile long, and bizarre interactions are the lifeblood of the format. No one seems interested in balancing it, so I'm not sure why it falls on "guy with a commander you've never heard of" to make sure your head doesn't hurt in the interest of sparing 40th ur dragon deck you've seen this week.
It's been said a lot but commander players are soft.
This argument just makes me think that commander shouldn’t be the format people get introduced to magic through
the format matters a lot less than the people you're playing with. playing commander with a steady group of people who tend to use the same decks and who are patient it's entirely fine to learn the game off of. But play any format with random people who aren't patient or good at making it clear what is happening and its gonna suck. Commander isn't necessarily harder to learn off of, but it does require the people teaching new players to be much more aware of the pain points that might come up
@@gwenyurick9663 that’s probably a good point. I will say that if possible I think it’s better to teach people with other formats if possible. Commander just has too much going on. I’ve even started carrying around 2 little pauper decks if we have new people to teach them the basics since pauper is a pretty simple way to learn the game.
It really isn't. But if you're just a group of friends who all bought precons, I think its fine to learn from. The issue is when you go to the LGS and play w/ randoms.
That's a moot point, everyone who thought about it for 5 secs knows that is true but WotC insists on it because it makes a bigger profit to have the Commander decks being sold instead of boosters. On the last year I've learned through experiences that Pauper ou a well-built pair of 60 card kitchen table decks are 100x better to teach and introduce people to the game. Then youca n branch out into other stuff.
When I teach people magic it's always with simple 60 card decks to learn basic mechanics. I'm sure as hell not going to teach someone with 0 prior experience with a 100 card singleton deck against other 100 card singletons. Just makes no sense to do that
Very interesting video! I’m also a brewer and love doing unique and weird things and have definitely run into these issues with people I don’t know playing pick up games. I’m going to try to talk about our decks more!
i think reducing information overload is really the key point you've struck here. i've been slowly introducing my partner to magic through edh. my attempt to solve these problems was to build them 2 relatively simple decks i thought would appeal to them, and then play 1v1 games where i play one deck, and they'll play the other.
my idea was that in 1v1 there's less information to track, and they can learn how to their decks work by watching me pilot one, while they are hands on with the other. we've also played 2v1 with one of our friends, and I think archenemy/2hg games can really be a good way to teach new players because it removes a lot of the competitive tension inherent to a FFA format, even in a casual setting w friends. plus it makes it easier to answer questions, point out things about their hand, what to watch out for on board, etc. when i'm not their opponent.
so far they've enjoyed it! much to their dismay lol
I definitely do a lot of explaining pre-game when I bring a new deck.
"This is Obeka, Splitter of Seconds. She'll make a bunch of extra Upkeeps happen when she deals damage, so I'll be making her stronger and more evasive while trying to assemble upkeep value cards. Court of Emberth *will* kill the table in 6 upkeeps, as will Descent into Avernus, and the deck runs a lot of tutors for my equipments and game enders."
Or
"This is Estrid, the Masked. There's a ton of Enchantress effects, most of my removal package is Humility auras, and she wins with big/infinite mana through untap engines or Omniscience into drawing my deck for Thassa's Oracle. My creature density is low though, so if you should be able to Archenemy me if you force me to burn removal."
PSA that Obeka doesn't remove the "exile this card if it goes anywhere except exile" _delayed_ trigger from Unearth, only the "remove at end of turn" one.
. . . I had to fight on this for forty-six minutes because my opponent didn't believe me.
aint no way im listening to all that yap before my edh game
i dont understand whats with mtg players and being afraid of losing the game because their opponent did a synergy. why do we need 3 pregame essays before every match, i wont remember it all anyways, im fine with being comboed out and laughing while it happens
@@alexanderhoclippiunus7644 Wrong Obeka. Also yeah, that's how delayed triggered abilities work
@@cronosdimitri4584 That's great for you! And I feel the same way if I personally bring something weaker than usual. But most players will want at least some idea of what to expect from your deck in terms of play speed etc
@@researchinbreeder tell that to my opponents five weeks ago, not me.
I'm _more_ than well aware. Thanks for the independent corroboration, though!
Fair cop on the version being wrong, though-I haven't gotten any new cards for quite some time, so I'd suppose you'd know better than me on that.
I really love the information dense environment of EDH. It’s one of my favorite things about it actually and the wierd “high power casual” is my fav way to play. I scroll edhrec as a hobby tho and the fact that’s kinda necessary is really unfortunate for new players
"Can I attempt to seduce the dragon?"
- Salubrious Snail, July 2024
The first commander deck I ever made was kresh the bloodbraided. I got into magic shortly after m13’s release and there were so many cards in green, red and black from Innistrad and RTR that I wanted to use but didn’t have a home in my standard deck or were going to rotate out. As I continued to play, I ended up dropping standard and sticking to commander, but because of all the stuff that’s come out, I’ve had to rotate out old decks I use to play because they just can’t compete in the pods I encounter with strangers anymore. I do still have some decks that run some bizarre stuff and it always makes me happy to hear someone say “I’ve never seen anyone play this commander.” or “that’s a card that exists?!” when I play against them because I feel like I’m expanding another player’s horizons on what you can do with your deck
I am 100% a deckbuilding hipster; i dont really find combat damage wins that interesting, so I tend to build decks with weird combos and synergies. It makes me feel clever.
I can honestly say I'd never considered how that would create an informational advantage against opponents unfamiliar with the cards. I have a convoluted combo kill in my Magnus the Red deck using Petal of Insight, a janky Arcane Sorcery from Champions of Kamigawa, and the cards never really turns heads until im killing the table with it. Next time i play, I'll make sure to point out that sort of thing ahead of time. Thanks Snail!
8:38 my wife Marchesa made your list.
Instant Like from me.
I enjoyed hearing your takes on the card pool selection being a factor for deciding to play cedh vs casual. I enjoy cedh and high power and I was just considering this the other day while watching a casual game and having to pause every few seconds to read the cards I'd never seen before.
That generally doesn't happen in cedh.
Great video
I think it’s worth a mention that cedh turns out to actually not be that fast a format.
The meta game waxed and waned a while and had been more or less a turbo meta at times. It could even be the case still, and maybe we will see turn 2 and turn 3 decks become a sizable part of the meta again. I think this is unlikely for reasons beyond the scope of this post.
People seem to think cedh games end quickly, twenty or ten minutes? A couple/few turns? It simply isn’t the case. For one thing, a three turn cedh game can easily last 40 minutes. The turns are not “land pass”. And the other reason is that WOTC continues to print broken card draw engines (or card draw engines that are broken in a 4 player game) and free interaction. That combination makes it pretty tough for a player to just say YOLO and put an unprotected win on the stack ten minutes into the game and get away with it very often.
I know you didn’t directly say anything contrary to that info in this video but some of what you seem to be saying makes more sense if that is part of your set of assumptions about cedh.
Here’s a statistic from Edh top 16 (a cedh tourney info hub).. the average win rate of a deck is roughly 22.4%
Time limits vary but most cedh events use 75 minutes in Swiss then many move to no time limits either in top 16 and/or in the final pod.
I trust you get my point but for anyone who may be reading this on your channel that means that many games end in a draw after an hour and fifteen minutes.
Just FWIW🤷♂️
After 5 years of playing EDH & building over 200+ commanders….this is what ive concluded:
1.) some commanders are inherently busted no matter what you do. That said, having a stronger commander (not cedh) and a weaker 99 is better, than the opposite; a jank commander hiding a high power 99.
2.) unique commanders and deck themes/builds are very fun in edh. It will not always work but sometimes it pays off and you make a masterpiece.
3.) i dont like samey gameplay where everyone has an identical cardpool of cedh or where “edhrec staples” dot deck is considered the norm. Its good to use scryfall and have your own brews.
4.) most players are not super enfranchised with a perfect mana base, the best ramp/rocks, and value creatures. I dont think proxies are the answer, but rather play with what you got or what you find in a bulk box. Be creative and find an alternative for an effect you desire; it will still work just fine.
5.) have different power levels; keep a precon, something casual and straightforward, and if you want to something high power, or even cedh if that’s what your playgroup has. Always match others; dont be the guy no one wants to pod with at the lgs. Its a format for fun and there’s no prize.
I'm only 7:35 minutes in, and this man has completely changed how I view commander as a format, coming from a player that refused to play edh in the late 2000s-early 2010's, but being thrust into it as it has become the forefront of both casual and competitive magic as I know it in my area (as someone who works at a magic-centric LGS).
It just seems so surreal coming from recently not being able to fire standard/modern/vintage events at all, to having *Modern* Horizons only having commander decks as the only supplementary products, I would've laughed at any of these notions 5 years ago working at a different game cafe where we only had the single one-off group coming in to play EDH every Friday, to now, where it's the only format I ever see.
To be fair; it's also the only format I play at this point, but it feels like I'm never actually seeing the individual cards someone is playing as compared to modern. At this point I'm only looking at the board-state as an abstract situation that I need to act only at a reactionary basis, never revealing my strategy until I'm sure I can win (as it feels like the only way someone can win at this point), as compared to older formats where after you play 2-3 cards you know exactly what's coming and what to expect. My mind can definitely can be changed by this, but there's so much more nuance to commander than any other format, like for example, I've noticed that it's genuinely not worth it to run removal or counters in a deck as others usually have X amount of slots dedicated to it in almost every deck, so I'd rather let them stop someone else from winning and have those slots open for progressing my own wincon after they've spent everything in hand (and keeping card advantage), only to take the in after someone else is shut down.
tbh I'm super drunk rn and don't even remember my original point that I was getting at, so if you read this far looking for a conclusion I apologize in advance, and it sucks to suck.
I continue to enjoy and appreciate your analysis of magic, hipster/atypical decks. My first 3 years of commander (2020-23) was just odd ball decks with 'low tier' commanders.
Taking a shot in the dark, but if you ever want a backup 4th person, I'd love to find a way to get a game in with your group.
That hat is so good! Looks very stylish hehe
I agree with your points and want to share a deck I’m building currently that I think is cool and I haven’t seen done before.
I’m building Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar as my commander as well as damage multipliers and brash taunter like cards. The game plan is to give a stuffy doll or whatever food poisoning, triple the six damage from Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar’s ability twice and smack an opponent for 54 damage. Because it’s Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar deck is also has discard outlets and food producers but it’s just really neat so far and I think about it often
Great suggestions! I really do like the keeping things revealed rule. Technically that information is known, but it's easy to forget what you knew because of overload. If we all play that way, it keeps are minds more able to focus on what is important!
I love your content, and how deeply you think about this stuff.
We’re having an issue in our playgroup of high power casual EDH where we’ve streamlined our decks so much and upped the power that we can all consistently win, or create an oppressive board state/often with countermagic up by turns 5-7.
On one hand, it’s fine for higher power - but games can be too quick, swingy. Politics feel less impactful - so we think maybe powering down in the answer.
Have you ever experienced something like this in your play groups?
Stuck at barber shop, stupid long wait, open yt and couldn't be happier!
Your titles always make me want to watch to leave a comment disagreeing with you but your videos are generally thoughtful and well parsed.
The point made around 17:00 is definitely something I’ve come to terms with. I did that a few times with a storm deck against my friends and it really didn’t feel that good. And I realized it’s so much better to explain to my friends which card they really need to remove to stop the win, and guide them to get better. Rather than just get a quick win just to feel bad about it right after.
We talked about this recently on the EDHRECast but I'm an absolute believer in the power of playing things that appear less powerful. I do it primarily because it's way more satisfying (for me) to win a game with Dromoka the Eternal dragons than it is the Ur-Dragon, but I've discovered that there's a lot of power in not being the target. I've literally had people in pods acknowledge what I'm doing is a problem, but even knowing it's a problem they can't justify removing my thing over whatever the Yuriko player is doing. Excellent video btw, keep it up.
My Grenzo deck is one of my favourites as he is an utterly unique commander that plays differently to any other card that I am aware of. I have him built as a token/artifact combo that aims to fish for high cmc creatures that generate a bunch of tokens that I can use loop infinitley or play my whole deck.
It is a very fun deck to pilot with a good deal of thinking involved but will never be the one i play against new players. It does not play convetionally (and arguably not fair) and if you have never seen it before it is very difficult to predict the combos (mostly since they use a bunch of cards that are really bad in most other decks).
The beginning of your video threw me for a bit, because I had the strangest relationship with both that hipster deckbuilding and the world's most boring deck a few months back.
From deck doctoring, I have OPINIONS on how people build Orzhov aristocrats. A lot of things I see neglected, a lot of people not considering what kind of aristocrats deck they're trying to build, so they make a train wreck.
So I made the ABCs with Teysa. A teaching deck that emphasizes a lot of the drums I bang. The importance of fodder, the value of strong finite sac outlets, high amounts of removal by integrating them into the engine and the land base, the value of creatures that are more self-contained, like by sacrificing themselves for their effect or having their own death triggers.
It also had a bunch of restrictions. No combos, no infinite sac outlets, no tutoring, no ramp.
The result was a deck that's as boring as it is hipster. It's exactly what you expect from aristocrats without any real surprises, yet isn't usually built like this, and most of the cards have, like, one sentence of text.
Because it's well tuned for that 8-10 turn casual environment and doesn't hit many hot buttons, it's become my default deck for testing the waters with a new group.
I love trying out oddball ideas. It's just that everyone else is more interested in trying out winning, and I'll admit that having a losing streak isn't really fun. So often what I play ends up being a painful compromise that doesn't work either way...
I just played a Vanilla Pauper Jasmine deck last night, and it was a very fun time.
I’m going fond of your analysis. That’s short, to the point and raise many points that I often implicitly consider as well as points that I have not consider yet.
This format is to the point. Keep up the good work. ❤
I had a phase where I stopped trying to do the quirkiest thing and just make decks that just are those archetypes. BU Reanimator and Bant Enchantress were the big winners of this process. they're straightforward, do the thing you expect them to do, and are generally satisfying to play. It's nice to have those to fall back on when the weirder ones aren't quite working the way I want them to. Other big successes out of this phase were Dragon Aggro, RW Reanimator and 5 color tokens.
I've had this bite me in the ass a lot, as a gruul player mostly and primarily just wanting to throw around big creatures, threat assessment is very easy for others to do with my boardstate so often I get targeted when there is a bigger threat mine is just easier to see at a glance.
I'm soooooo happy that this channel is growing. Only creator worth turning notifications on.
It's the (weird) deckbuilder's responsibility to brew with one, easy-to-explain goal for the deck. I have a Gruul deck that has 10 viable commanders, and I randomly pick one at the start of every game. I love how funky that is, especially for people I've never played with. However, during deck construction, I knew that my metric of success for every game should be the same--play big creatures. A new player can easily understand the goal, and how close to that goal I am just by glancing at my board. If you're bringing an odd, "off-meta" deck, you have to put in the work in building that makes it simple for other players.
16:10 honestly being open with information and just also being willing to call when a player misses a play goes a long way to assisting a games play experience.
people at my local shop insist that not calling when a player misses a play forces them to pay attention and improve, which I recognize as being true in theory just ends up making people sound condescending and makes it feel all the more frustrating when a player just goes off and wins out of nowhere.
this contrasts heavly with my experience at a convention where people actually called out when i missed a play or made a mistake in a way that felt like they were actually wanting me to perform to the best of my decks ability and that was...refreshing honestly.
I'll never forget drawing and keeping an INSANEly good hand/unlikely hand when an opponent i was playing against was trying their new [Zaxara] deck.
One of the players in that pod was casting their commander [Kaalia of the vast] which we all knew meant trouble for us, so I tapped out to remove it. The following turn, the Zaxara player found their [Freed from the Real] and killed us on his turn 4 or 5. I was so sad I'd never get to see that hand through.
A large variety of possible cards is scary to people who mostly just want to draft or play T2. As a grognard, I'm personally super happy that finally there is a type of game you are allowed to play with your own decks, instead of either copying a deck from dojo, or drafting like the cool kids (I've gotten yelled at because "I play my own decks instead of pro players decks. What, you think you can do better than my guru?!?!"). People are weird.
Theres a pretty good analogue to the difference between the games of chess and go. Some people never even try to play go, because "you can't learn all the moves by heart" or some such nonsense. Or to working from home during the lockdowns. You had your fun. Now you need to be in the office every day. You had your variety of decks Lil'Johnny, now its time to play what we tell you is good.
Variety good. Remember manacurve, meat is best.
I think I had a problem grasping about telling what my decks do when I first played
But now I am very open to explaining at least the core idea of my decks, I don't exactly want to give people a full on lecture about how to my deck, unless they are gonna pilot it, but I've found that it is indeed better to make everyone have some sense of idea what your deck does
"This is an XXX tribal deck that's more midranged, it starts doing things at around turn 4-5, and threatens to kill one guy at probably around turn 6-7 if you do nothing about it"
And telling people what my cards can do in the deck, and sometimes what they can't do in the deck, is also helpful/ It really just helps people figure out what the table is gonna have to be working with.
Making a theme and using cards that never see play is one of my fav parts of commander.
Whenever I need to reveal a card I read the name and the text for my opponents. The purpose of revealing cards game wise was to give your opponents the knowledge of what card it is in order to balance the cards effect. Otherwise it would just say “ look at the top card of your deck.”
Amazing video, I can’t get over how friggin’ articulate this snail is! 😳 ❤
At 16:10 you mentioned something I do in my playgroup. I play Approach of the second sun, and when I do put it into my deck 7th from the top, i place it face up in my library to help other players know when i could cast it again.
Also, for the shapeshift bit. I always put my gamechanger spells as, "I put ____ on the stack." I play with many people who have just started mtg and using terms like the above gives them a chance to respond.
Personally, I think the information overload comes from cards being individually more complex, and great swathes of new cards being printed every year. I used to pretty much look up all the new cards when they came out, now I can't keep up. To make things worse, once the new cards are on the board, they have like four abilities, and they often make tons of tokens.
Another thing is that with three opponents, it starts to get awkward to reach across the board to read all the cards they are playing, so I often just read a few of them and then just cross my fingers that the others won't kill me before someone throws in a board wipe. Having such a casual approach wouldn't have been my style in the past, but I want games to move along at a good clip.
This is quickly becoming my favorite Magic Channel
I always just make it a point to keep the table informed about my deck. I tell people what my game plan is, and if I'm playing particularly game-winning combo pieces. It's a more fun game for ME if my opponents just understand what's going on properly, instead of having to stop and read every card I own twice over.
I like CEDH, because the "c" stands for consent. If you play cedh, everyone knows what they're in for.
But in casual games, the reality is many times the intention is to play cards that opponent's wouldn't want to play against.
I like crafting wacky deck ideas too, even though I've built very few.
One that I want to build is "Gisa and Geralf, but They Can't Find Their Zombies." It's a self-mill deck with zero zombies in it, playing off of the joke that you never hit a zombie when you cast the siblings. The idea is you have everyone laughing at the floundering zombies deck ... until they realize that you also have zero zombies on the board. Then it tries to mill out to a Lab Man/Oracle wincon.
This could be unfun to play against, but explaining it ruins the entire concept. However, if I introduce it it has a lot of self-mill synergy for when I inevitably fail to mill a zombie, my opponents will expect some of the things I'll be up to, and it might be a better experience overall.
Started playing in March 2024 with 10 years of yu gi oh experience and the deck building experience with 90k cards is just amazing. It’s been a really steep learning curve but it’s so fun
12 minutes in, I'm thinking that's what, 700 Card Knowledge Maximum, not 1000 (100x10) because 30% are probably duplicates, with basic lands and such.
A way that I enjoy using to keep decks unique while also keeping them easy to understand is to take archetypes that are commonly multicolor and reduce their number of colors. For example, I've built mono-white Planeswalkers and mono-blue Clues. That way, opponents will still see a lot of the most used cards in those archetypes, you get to play oddball cards, and those oddballs are easy to explain because they fit into well known archetypes. Bonus points, playing mono-color is a great way to reduce the price of a deck.
I like this video. I've certainly taken to trying to inform the other players things that can help them know what I'm doing. "Infinite Combo Teysa, No Blood Artists," at least gives an idea of what I'm trying for, a clear indication of what's not im there, and enough room to typically be a little curious.
I'm at the state where I have over 110 decks. Are the good? Great question, probably not. Do I enjoy building more than playing? Maybe!
Another banger video! I also love making unique decks or decks that try to push niche mechanics into viability. I also like the challenge of taking normally high powered commanders and building them in a way that is not necessarily high powered, for example the original Korvold with sagas
I think there's an additional layer here to consider in that winning the game isn't really the primary objective for casual multiplayer formats, rather than being the game being a medium for meeting new people, socializing, or just hanging out with your friends
ive started to kit up my zanier decks with a like, 10-20 pool of cards i tech in or out as a set to make them more or less resemble their traditional counterparts. shrines felt too solitaire to me and i didn't know how to fix that, so i started putting in Mana Flare and Awakening and Vernal Equinox to make the games more exciting. the play experience against shrines is pretty bad baseline (pillowfort enchantress in 5c is a casual table's version of CBT), and as a result I've never had anyone tell me they'd rather have played against the normal version of the list.
Another case for simpler decks is to reduce the amount that complex board states slow down the game. I have a couple play groups, and one of them is absurdly slow (think at least 2 hours for single game). Reducing board complexity helps slower players make decisions quicker. Being straight forward if my board is a threat to them helps them make a decision about where to target their removal, instead of spending a minute talking about what they should destroy.
Simple and honest gameplay let's you play more games, and cuts back on the amount of time spent sitting there doing nothing at a table, which is the worst part of most board games imo.
Your video about Hans' Xyris deck inspired me to make my own Xyris deck. My first commander deck actually. But I've gone for a +1/+1 counters, unblockable, and combat oriented theme. I bought a 3 cards that can enable infinite combats if I have enough attacking creatures or deal enough combat damage. It's pretty jank and I've yet to play it with these cards since I got them after the last time I went to my lgs.
Aggravated Assault (3 and RR untap creatures you control and after this phase there is an additional combat followed by an additional main phase), Neheb The Eternal (gives red mana in post combat main for each 1 life opponents lost this turn), and Grand Warlord Radha. (which gives red or green mana per attacking creatures) This all seems to fit nicely because of the tokens generated by Xyris and the other token makers in my deck. It's on Moxxfield as Xyris, buffs and stuff. Even though it's not really buffs at this point, mostly +1/+1 counters with a few other side strategies; which I plan to flesh out when I can buy a few more cards.
I think some of the problem is coming from the culture of competitive and "tight-meta" magic. There are certain norms there that don't translate well to commander as a social format. Assuming opponents know deck archetypes, or what certain cards do. Assuming opponents will remember or write down revealed information. These things are normal in comp-REL games, where the expectation is to "git gud" but many players have trouble code-switching to multiplayer. I once dumbfounded another play by making an agreement that would keep me around for another turn, it wasn't fully beneficial to me, but I wasn't going to win anyway and didn't want to leave the table yet, so one more turn seemed fun.
I've played a lot of games that come to a point of one player becoming arch-enemy on the brink of winning and everyone (including the leading player) trying to piece together play lines to stop them. It's one of the coolest parts of EDH's social side, you can be as transparent as you want with the table. Reading the table vibe is super important for this though.
I've got a deck called "I've God Wurms" When I show up a table and they ask me what deck I'm playing my answer is "I've Got Wurms" My commander is Atla, and the entire deck is designed arround cheating out as many big wurms as fast as I can. It's not a very fast deck but it's really fun to play.
It usually wins by getting people to underestimate the deck. It ramps up very very slowly and looks fairly weak at first, but then all of a sudden like a bomb it explodes. in one game I went from having 5 wurms on the table that took me about 10 turns to get, to the very next turn having over 60 wurms with an average power and toughness of 7/7. Most of them had both trample and hast. I won that game.
I absolutely LOVE weird and funky decks.
I like to build underdog Commanders in unusual ways. Thats the freedom of EDH.
In a format with a legal cardpool of nearly 30k cards, people should learn to deal with unknown cards.
A short explanation for the pod what the deck does, is self explaining ofc.
This is your most helpful video yet! Gonna keep watching every video though for sure
As someone who plays both in an LGS and in a larger online discord, and thus sees a wide variety of decks, as well as anywhere from mid to cEDH power levels: It's much simpler than "Remember 27,000 cards". I don't need to remember *every* untap effect to know things that untap other things probably have combo potential. Things that can be repeatedly brought back from the graveyard have aristocrat loops. Any tutor is always scary. You identify combo archetypes, not always combo pieces. You might have the most popular versions of these memorized, think Exquisite Blood + Sanguine Bond, but if you see Vito, Thorn of the Dusk Rose or Marauding Blight Priest or any number of other "When you gain life opponents lose life" you can see that they do the same thing.
I made a Wick, the whorled mind focusing on using changling, using tutors for tribals, and stealing my opponents creatures to sack to wick. :3
Honestly wish they would bring back duel decks or something similar to that. They need simple easy to understand pre-con decks to onboard newer players. I still shake my head that they stopped printing them "because they don't make enough money" or players were like "Oh they aren't strong enough/enough good cards" Like how short sighted do you have to be to not see that the money comes with time and not having simple on ramps just hurts player adoption? I still have a few of them laying around for teaching new players and they're really the best thing I've found for that besides making your own simple decks to teach with
My Deck is fairly simple It's a Human tribal that goes wide with an Indestructible cat that get's fat by eating humans
I think the idea of finding the correct table is honestly the issue.
Most tables end up in an arms race of deck power until everything but the peak meta is squeezed out. It's difficult to find people to play with a regular basis who prefer to keep things low powered.
I learned to play mtg through kitchen table magic and played some arena as well as modern, but EDH has taught me almost every mechanic. I think that the diversity in EDH is a good thing, not only for the old but also the new players. You will soon learn that there is a difference in cast vs etb-triggers, that wording matters, that everything in a single block of text resolved before you can interact and that blocks separated usually means separate triggers. I'd argue that a casual player that after the initial panic of learning how to play cards in EDH the casual experience is a good way to learn how a lot of cards work at a glance. You do not have to learn what every card is called or what they do as long as you can read the "language" of magic as well as knowing some common cards.
TLDR large cardpool good actually for new players.
This is why clearly the most ethical deck is maelstrom wanderer with 97 lands