I'm a lover of older commanders especially those still viable. My [[mikaeus, the unhallowed]] still puts in the work 15 years after building him, same sleeves too. I remember Lazar being a nightmare back in the day and I feel like he might still be today. I'm interested in seeing your oldie but goodie degenerate decks.
I want a deck that draws a lot of cards. I like [[Nekusar]], but I think he’s kinda lame. I want something a little more interesting than just spam wheels and ping people to death.
I’ve always liked [[Azami]], but I’ve never seen a decklist that looked fun.
[[Xyris]] looks neat and multi-faceted. You can win through Lab Man or Overrun effects.
What’s your favorite draw-cards commander? How does it typically win? Is it still fun to play after a million games? Does it always do the same lines?
This past Monday I sat down at my LGS to play some Commander. My pod was a father and his two sons. A fantastic thing, sharing this game with ones kids, I did the same thing with my own two lads.
Over the course of our sessions we played a few different games, but one stuck out in my mind.
The player to my left, son #1, was playing with the new Hobbit set, using many of the new full art variants which were brilliant to see, especially as I missed the prerelease. Across from him, Dad was playing a precon where counters mattered: +1/+1, Planeswalker loyalty counters, shield counters, and so on. Next to dad was son #2, who was playing Goblin tribal, making loads of goblin tokens, and swinging wide and often. A fun deck, and easier to pilot for less seasoned players. I was playing my [[Kibo, Ukatabi Prince]] deck, making banana tokens for everyone, destroying as mana artifacts as I could (after all, Apea go Smash), and being aggressive as Gruul could be.
During our game I played a an old enchantment, one that no one at the table had seen before, a simple piece of graveyard hate in green.* As I explained the card and that this was my preferred art it got me thinking.
A Long Time Ago there, when Magic was played head to head without sleeves, on kitchen tables, and decks were not optimized so well...
A small set about the rise and fall of kingdoms on Domineria was produced, well over-produced into near oblivion. Fallen Empires. This set introduced a few new things which deeply changed the world of Magic forever.
This set was an abject failure in nearly all measure able ways. The packs were small, only 8 cards per pack. The number of cards in the set was also quite small comparably, with just 187 different cards printed. The power level in the set was weak even by early standards in Magic. Finally the set was over printed, supply was so far outpacing the demand that even now packs of Fallen Empires go for less than $10 a pack.
There is an excellent YouTube video about the set by the great "Rhystic Studies." Well worth a watch. Link here: https://youtu.be/SakRUkDPxn4?is=5eY36lGc9StBseKr
Wizards did learn a few things from this set that in time altered Magic, and that continue to impact EDH now.
First, Multiple Art offerings for the same card were produced - marking a change in collecting and purchasing habits of players. Now players could pick the art they liked best from a set for a particular card and play just those, or they could play one of each of the four art choices. Little did we players know then that this would lead to later sets making chase cards/altered art cards in each set - creating a whole new reason for cars hunting, collecting, and cracking packs.
Second, counters on cards. In previous sets in Magic there was a sprinkling of cards here and there that had an ability revolving around counters but they were so few in number it was hardly important to game play. But then there were the [[Thallid]] cards. These goofy walking fungus cards required counters and counting/up ticking them each upkeep. All of the cards in the Thallid tribe cared about this, and soon if someone was playing thallids they needed to keep a piece of paper for tearing up into little pieces, or dice/those little glass counters the look like flat marbles. Thallids made counters important, and made them a regular part of the game, if only for a little while, but the concept was one Wizards ran with on later sets. (Thallids were not a great tribal choice then but they have been boosted a bit now, and few cards from back in the day went as hard as [[Thallid Devourer]] .)
Speaking of Tribes (third in this list). Fallen Empires added new tribes, at least one for each color. marking not only a slight shift in the focus of color specific creature types, but also opening the door to more and much more interesting tribes to be built out in the future. The tribes in Empire were as follows:
Black - Clerics, Thrulls,
Blue - Merfolk and Homarids
Green - Elves and Thallids
Red - Goblins, Orcs, Dwarfs
White - Cleric and Citizen/Humans
Sure as Magic sets continued to be produced there would be an increase in different tribal archetypes but this was the first time they really pushed the idea beyond the original main tribes. Now nearly every creature type could have a tribal commander deck, and many are quite strong to build around.
Finally, also from Thallids was the production of tokens. In their case this was beginning of [[saproling tokens]] . Back then it took three turns to get one Thallid creature to create a simple 1/1 saproling, but then the meta was quite a bit slower. Fastforward 25+ years and token creation was literally exploded. Cards can create numerous tokens each turn or through multiple triggers, quickly taking over a board state and making answering them a top priority.
Tokens now are not limited to just creatures with treasure/food/clue tokens being wildly viable strategies - so much so that one of the most out of control token makers [[dockside extortionist]] was banned back in September of 2024.
Anyway, just some thoughts on one of the less desirable Magic sets, but in my mind one of the most important/influencial sets Wizards ever produced.
*The enchantment played was [[night soil]] a fantastic piece of tech, if you are unfamiliar: 2Green, enchantment. 1 colorless, remove two creatures from a graveyard (errataed to must be in the same graveyard) and create a 1/1 saproling token. Can be done at instant speed. A card I so often include in green decks.
Look, I know what you're thinking.
"Marvel??? We're still talking about Marvel? Didn't that come out in June? Doesn't this guy know that was like 12 sets ago?"
Listen - you're not wrong. But you know, life happens. Had another kid. Work's gotten busy. I haven't even gotten my Strixhaven cards yet (pretty sure they got lost in the mail)! So please excuse me while I back the calendar up a few months to talk about the Marvel set.
I finally got around to going through this set, and the most interesting thing I found out was that a significant number of in-demand cards come just from jumpstart packs. Like [[Swordsman's Steel]] or [[Ultron the Annihilator]]. But for some reason, those cards are MSC - Marvel Super Heroes Commander? But they don't come in the commander precons? And other sets had specific jumpstart codes (like Avatar)?
I'm not a product designer, but that shit is just confusing.
Anyways! I write articles on sets and decks and earn some mild commission when people click card links to go to TCGPlayer and buy stuff. Someone recently bought an $8 Sol Ring and brought this year's commissions up to $2.49 so, in my quest to earn enough to buy a happy meal, I was motivated to finish this article specifically about the MSH set; as in, the cards you can open in play boosters, with a focus on cards that fit well in existing decks as opposed to new commander options.
https://easygoinggaming.com/set-review/avengers-sleeve-up-the-best-msh-cards-for-the-99/
Since this set's been out a while, what cards do you think deserved the hype and which ones have stayed under the radar?
Some of my picks:
I really like [[Hawkeye, Young Avenger]] as a [[Torbran]]-adjacent card that can significantly amplify your spell-pinger decks. Throw a one-mana red pump spell like [[Monstrous Rage]] on her, or play her in a [[Balmor]] deck and she can help you close out games in a single turn.
[[Worlds Within Worlds]] is also pretty unique as a [[Living Death]]-style card for the Simic bros out there, turning their mana dorks into Dinos or Eldrazi or something.
I also think [[World War Hulk]] deserves a spot in high-mana-value commander decks like [[The Ur-Dragon]] or [[Progenitus]] as it can basically get your commander out several turns early without even needing to have all the right colors.
Obviously [[King T'Challa]]'s incredible, and really nice that you can proc him yourself; I think that hype's well deserved.
What about you? What's not been as good as advertised and what's surprised you in its effectiveness?
Like the title says, I’m sitting on some CardKingdom credit and I’m considering getting a [[Boseiju, Who Endures]] . I’m wondering if it would be a worthwhile investment to go ahead with it. Due to the amount of green decks I play, blessing one with a Boseiju for some good spot removal would be great. That being said, most of the pods I play in are fairly casual, never going above a bracket 3. I’d wonder if the Boseiju would be somewhat breaching that level, especially if I have no intention of going anywhere near any kind of B4/5 pod.
Keep in mind as well that I’ve only been playing for about a year or so (since EoE), so there’s still a decent chunk of cards that I’ve never played with or against.
Sometimes those decks end up being the biggest surprise. After a few games, you realize they’re way more fun than you thought they would be, even if they don’t look that impressive on paper.
I’ve noticed those kinds of decks often stick around much longer than the ones I built just because they were supposed to be “good.”
I’m upgrading my Miracle Worker precon and I added around 25 cards. Many of them have multiple reprints, finishes, and so on. I was thinking “it would be cool to have all addition borderless where they are” but decided against it as it would push l too much over budget. I have a thing for borderless / extended arts.
But I’m curious to hear your opinion: do you actually think about aesthetic themes when you build your decks, or you just go with the cheapest print?
I was watching an episode of MTGGoldfish in which they were discussing some fake group hug cards and the Temp with THING cards came up and specifically [[Tempt with Bunnies]] and Phil mentioned its synergy with [[Marneus Calgar]], they were confused about it a bit, unsure if it really worked the way Phil said. Later in the video around the 22:46 mark they mention how they got an answer from a judge about the interaction and the answer they were given is one that I disagree with. So, I did some digging and found that a lot of people believe the same wrong answer their judge gave them is correct, posts on r/askajudge and rules pages on Facebook have people stating what I believe is the wrong answer. So, I made THIS VIDEO to explain the correct result and provide some extra context and scenarios that look similar but are different. I know videos are not for everyone, so here is the written basis for this and I hope anyone in the future looking for this answer stumbles to this post/video rather than one with an incorrect answer.
PERSPECTIVE
In the Comp Rules, there is this one (CR 700.1) that explains how the same event can be interpreted or treated differently based on slight wording differences. An example I like to give is if you equip your [[Infiltration Lens]] to your [[Anzrag, the Quake-Mole]] and then you attack and the opponent double blocks it with two creatures. There will be a total of 3 triggers, two from the Lens and 1 from the Anzrag, and this is all due to how their trigger is worded.
THE SCENARIO
So the scenario that came about in that Goldfish video and that I have seen a lot of debate over is this, you control Calgar and then you cast the Temp with Bunnies and when it resolves all 3 of your opponents took the tempting offer to draw and make a token. This means that the TwB will by itself net you a total of 4 cards drawn and 4 tokens made, but the question is over how many times this triggers Calgar. Some players believe it’s 2 triggers, once for the token you always create from the TwB effect and then the other 3 are created at the exact same time which falls into the "or more" part of Calgar’s ability and therefore only get one additional trigger from him. Others believe that you get 4 triggers from Calgar, 1 from the token you make and then 3 other individual triggers from each of the tempted opponents that netted you to make 3 additional tokens.
THE CONFUSION
I think that the confusion over this stems from the fact that for a lot of Magic cards and their effects, you can tell how many times an event happens by reading the number of times the action word shows up. If a card like [[Snort]] deals 5 damage to 3 different opponents based on the choices they made, it's not dealing the damage 3 different times because it only says the word "deals" once in the instructions. Compare this to cards like [[Collective Defiance]] and [[Fiery Confluence]] that do have the word "deal" multiple times and now you do have a situation of damage from a single effect being dealt multiple different times.
So, there is another "Tempt" card out there, [[Tempting Contract]] and it looks oh so similar to TwB, one obvious difference is that you don't always make your own token, this one only has the 'get things based one what your opponents chose' part, but there is also something else different about it that is the biggest difference and I think this is the largest reason for confusion.
THE ANSWER
So, if you controlled Calgar and resolved that Tempting Contract with all 3 opponents taking the temptation, Calgar would only trigger a single time. The reason is that there is a single event of you creating 3 Treasure tokens and that hits the "or more" aspect of Calgar's ability, so only one card drawn from Calgar. From this, we can extrapolate that the TwB should be 2 triggers for Calgar, once because the TwB instructs you to "create" a token and then later in the effect it instructs you to again "create" tokens, so that's two mentions of the word "create"... BUT... that isn't what actually happens.
The answer is crazy enough 4 triggers for Calgar. The reason for this is because the TwB also has your opponents and more importantly you draw cards as part of its effect. So we now need to check out CR 121.2 as well as CR 121.2 because they have some rules that make it so that all cards in Magic are drawn only 1 at a time, they can never be drawn in mass simultaneously. To which we then have to seek out CR 608.2f which has a ton of text, so I'll summarize that it basically says we normally do handle instructions like this simultaneously but if we're unable to do that then we break the instructions down into parts we can legally do. Because of the card draw aspect of TwB, we have to break it up into individual parts.
So TwB is telling us to "create N tokens and draw N cards" with N being 3 in this case, but due to the rules it ends up becoming "create 1 token and draw 1 card and do this N times". I made THIS IMAGE to help visualize what is actually happening here, so I hope that helps if this GIANT WALL OF TEXT was a little much. So, if someone is looking for a TL:DR part, I guess that image is it with the context that card draw as part of TwB effect is the reason it unfolds this way.
I built an all-elf combo deck on just a $50 budget and it kicks all kinds of ass:
https://moxfield.com/decks/CcKHjeUqOkmYnAaVPq4Uag
[[Thranduil, the Elvenking]] makes for an awesome intro to combos for newer players and makes for a different kind of elf deck than the elfball or aggro decks we've all played against before. I like this one for a different approach and a different deck in my collection.
And I want to give a copy of the WHOLE DECK away! You can check out the details in the deck's full deck tech over on my channel, but this one's a freebie, on me. Check it out now:
I've recently invested into a Selesnya Gluntch list that has not scratched that itch that I anticipated. I'm hoping to salvage some of the manabase and cards for another deck, and I really love the group hug/politics aspect of the commander. The problem is closing out games and the salt from the lone player that doesn't receive any resources. [[Sergeant John Benton]] has piqued my curiosity, but I've heard he can be too strong for casual pods. So my question is for people that have played and/or played against a John Benton deck; is the deck fun? I'd appreciate any insight, thank you!
Hey, im looking for a fun to play (and if possible fun to play against) commander for a deck build around combat tricks. I want a deck that beginners can easily understand (which isnt the case of my Mycotyrant mill combo aristocrats).
If its possible I'd like blue or/and red or/and white in it, to change from my Myco deck.
Could you please give me some suggestions ? ^^
Howdy! Had an interaction with a friend in a private, casual game. Strong 3 / bracket 4 style game.
Long and short of it. Opponent on [[Kotis, the fangkeeper]]
I misremembered what Lavaspur boots did until the spell had already resolved. I thought it only gave haste the turn it landed - I had it confused with Silver Shroud Costume. My bad completely, I missed the opportunity to counter it, and was dwelling in my stupidity with an Arcane Denial in hand. Opponent had [[Delighted Halfling]] on board, so I knew his commander was being cast and swinging next turn without my interaction helping.
On their turn, they tap the 6 mana (4+commander tax) and play Kotis, without tapping the Delighted Halfling. I waited a couple of seconds, and said
“In response, arca….”
“No, I mean, I tap delighted Halfling to cast.” I appeal to the fact that if I let that go, he’s just made me reveal that I have a counterspell for free, and if I’m able to track his board he should be able to, too. Typically the casual play group is fine with renegs and missed triggers etc if it doesn’t change the game state, but this wasn’t the case here for me.
He allowed it to be countered, with some choice words and accusations thrown.
However, now we’re a few days on, he’s claiming that technically you cast a spell and then pay for it, so he could still claim to have tapped delighted Halfling for one of the mana, and float the land mana he tapped. I've asked a rules group what they think of this situation, and they've said the spell was paid for, if the spells on the stack its too late to change how you pay for it. "Announce, pay, cast, resolve." Friend should just take the L, but in casual games we can be more relaxed if we choose to be. Others suggested asking if I had priority, but for me, at least in our pod where we don't formally pass priority unless the situation gets tense, that would essentially be telling him "I have a counterspell." and probably give him the opportunity to reassess his board and change how he paid for the spell despite it already being on the stack.
I've asked the other friend at the table if he felt I rushed to respond, or if I remember correctly waiting a few seconds. "I think you could've waited 1 second more to really solidify the wait. You were quick, but there was a definite pause."
He's suggested maybe waiting until the player with priority tried to do something else to solidify the fact that they've attempted to finish resolving Kotis.
He's still not taking the judges rulings well regarding changing the way a spell was paid for while it's on the stack.
"We don't do the announce step, so that means I could be anywhere between paying and casting until I pass priority" is the crux of his rebuttle, which the judges have denied; but that's not a question for this group. My question is about the social interactions here.
What are ya'll doing in this situation? Are you letting a friend fix their mistake here even if you had to reveal you had a counterspell in a bracket 4 game? At the time I didn't know if there's a more powerful creature he wanted to cast after Kotis or not. I don't think for a second he was being deceitful and fishing for free info, or saving the Delighted Halfling for a future spell while holding plausible deniability; our group doesn't roll like that. But at the same time, I would've been very annoyed to have revealed an arcane denial for nothing in the face of their mistake.
like the title says, what's your favorite secret weapon cards. I am not talking game changers, or famous stables. I mean cards which are just fun.
Mine is [[Tainted Remedy]] , have it in a few black decks and it always hits hard when i get it out. Maybe just my personal meta has alot life gain lol
Is communicating that hard? Setting boundaries? I want to read content on the actual game itself not the interpersonal drama you're unable to navigate through. Oh, Player A is trying to break the rules with a Rule 0 discussion and some people are okay with it but I'm not. Cool, then don't play with them or communicate why you're uncomfortable with that level of compromise. Oh, Player B acts aggressive and whines when we stop their wincons. Cool, then don't play with them or tell them no one is entitled to winning without others trying to stop them. Oh, Player C has messy proxies and plays decks that are way too strong and also likes to underplay how strong their decks are so they can pubstomp. Cool, then don't play with them or actually talk to them about your perspective and why they aren't good at the game if they have to resort to petty tricks to secure a win.
If the root of your post is how you engage with another person in a social dynamic, then there are better resources for self-confidence and communication than the EDH subreddit.
As title says, Im wondering if a deck focused on the Arcane spells mechanic may be viable or not. I took a quick look at the EDH legal arcane spells and... well, most of them are powercrept out of viability in my opinion, but I still feel like "Splice onto arcane" is such a cool mechanic that I wanna know if anyone was succesful at making it work in a commander deck.
Since in my pod and from what I've heard many others, going first is a lot better than going last and I've been wondering if for my games I could change the rules a little bit.
I've been thinking about the person going first not drawing, and the person going last scrying for one at the start.
Also what I think could be interesting: the person going last gets the monarch from the start.
Has anyone tried something like this and can share the experience?
I have a [[Lord Windgrace]] deck that I am considering converting to a [[Hearthhull]] deck.
These two commanders are obviously very similar. They both let you put extra lands into play, both draw cards, and both help you put lands into the graveyard. I’m sure they could helm virtually identical 99s, but there are a small number of cards I am running in Lord Windgrace that are not quite so effective in Hearthhull, which I plan to cut.
An obvious example is [[Nevinyrral’s disk]], which is probably a mediocre board wipe in Hearthhull, but quite a bit better in Windgrace because it leaves planeswalkers alone.
As a longtime Windgrace player it’s easy to identify which cards I want to cut, but I’m not as familiar with the cool tech that might be specific to Hearthhull.
So I ask this question to longtime Hearthhull pilots, what are the best cards in your Hearthhull deck that you probably wouldn’t put in a Windgrace deck?
I still have 1 card slot left to add to my World Shaper precon, and I'm deciding between Dryad of the Ilysian Grove and Scute Swarm.
Which one would you choose and why?
For the World Shaper precon specifically, which do you think is the better addition?
Dryad or Scute Swarm?
https://archidekt.com/decks/25461118/bird\_is\_the\_word
I’m working on building a budget Zinnia bird creatures deck. The goal is to offspring as many birds as possible and swing wide with big commander damage. A lot of my creatures have baked in abilities to give me card draw, buffs, and some removal. I just realized however, that I don’t have a lot of targeted removal. Mostly just counter spells and board wipes. My current list is at 109, so I need to cut 9 cards. My only restrictions are that I want to have 30 total creatures (the 28 in my creature section, my commander, and an Ornithopter of Paradise), and I want to keep my deck within the $100 range.
I was looking at one of my deck's bracket on Archidekt and wondering why it said B4. It said I had multiple 2-card combos. I go and check them more in detail and they all say there's one or more prerequisites.
Like putrid goblin and goblin bombardment as a B4 combo... but then it shows you need a way to add +1/+1 counters... so a 3 card combo.
I got curious and started digging and there's so many bad "combos" and so many decks are getting ranked B4 because they see two cards and class them as a 2 card combo despite the missing piece.
Is this an issue they're working on?