Adding Colors to a Commander
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on Oct. 22, 2014, 6:34 p.m. by zerowner
What are your opinions about people adding another color to a commander's color identity?
I want to make a Selvala, Explorer Returned EDH deck and add blue to her color identity, and I'm wondering would people be very against that? I'm a fan of passive commanders like her, and I'd just like to hear some opinions on my doing this, and her casting cost would either become 1GWU or GWU (I wouldn't use her competitively obviously, I'm just wondering if you think people in general would people actually have a problem with it.)
Epochalyptik says... #3
I absolutely dislike the idea. Part of the challenge and strategy of Commander is having to think about both the strengths and weaknesses of your commander, including its colors. If you can just magically "fix" a commander's color identity, then you detract from the inherent balance of that card.
October 22, 2014 6:43 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #4
Just think about how many commanders would be broken as hell with the addition of either blue or green (whichever it doesn't already have).
October 22, 2014 6:47 p.m.
InfiniteParadoX says... #5
I have to say that kinda ruins commander. Commander is a format where building around the colours your commander gives you is part of the challenge. This is decent, but it's an decent new format, not commander at all.
October 22, 2014 6:55 p.m.
Broken as hell? Honestly, not many of them. I think as long as you don't spill into four colors you're fine, so simply buffing dual color commanders or mono color commanders up a color doesn't seem too bad in my mind.
If you think some commanders would become broken, please name a few, because I'm looking at the dual colored and single colored commanders lists and I can't actually see which generals would become broken with the addition of another color, or more broken than some tri-color commanders that already exist (like Animar, Oloro, Derevi or Zur)
October 22, 2014 7:21 p.m.
Cobthecobbler says... #7
I personally agree with epochalyptik here. I can't even count the amount of times I've said that a commander is in the wrong colors, or if it had x color it would be perfect, and I think this will create an unfun environment for your playgroup.
Like, simply adding blue to anything that doesn't already have it is really annoying for everyone else since blue can arguably make any deck better.
Stay within your commanders color identity, it's only fair to everyone else, but if your group is cool with it, then add blue if you really need to.
October 22, 2014 7:26 p.m.
NotSoLuckyLydia says... #8
Adding to the color identity is absurd. That means that you then pay the same amount of mana for the general, and it becomes strictly better. What if, say, Varolz could play intuition? Or if Edric could play the most powerful token generators in the format? The decks go from being balanced to the format being the same thing as legacy. The point of EDH is that restrictions breed creativity. Without restrictions, you aren't playing EDH.
(Also, if you want a Bant general that lets everybody else draw, just play huggy hippo)
October 22, 2014 8:01 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #9
@zerowner: I suppose your answer depends largely on your experience. I play competitively, and I've seen some very busted decks. Even if we're talking about semi-competitive play (that is, tuned decks outside of the tournament/event environment), I can tell you that adding another color to the color identity of many already-good generals is just asking for imbalance. Some decks only need that extra functionality to make themselves much more powerful.
Arcum Dagsson , Azami, Lady of Scrolls , Kozilek, Butcher of Truth , Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre with green.
Generals like Arcanis the Omnipotent (adding green), which don't see tournament play, would push the limits as well.
I guess if you're looking at it from a casual perspective, the playgroups are inherently less powerful, But even then, you can't really tell me that your buddy adding green to his Gisela, Blade of Goldnight or Avacyn, Angel of Hope deck would be fun to play against.
October 22, 2014 8:47 p.m.
NoPantsParade says... #10
Like everyone else, I think this is a bad idea. (1) Because it takes away from the creative aspect of commander and having those restrictions. You're simply taking away from the fun of building a deck by taking the easy way out. For the most part, I wish each commander I use had X color, but it doesn't, which makes the process of creating the deck more fun and challenging. (2) If one person in your group can add a color to his/her commander's color identity, then so will another person, then everyone will want to. It isn't fair for one person to add a color, and everyone else is stuck with his/her commander's colors. This will just end up with more conflict. Then you have to consider the person using a powerful commander, like Azusa, Lost but Seeking with blue. She's good enough as is. And (3), what if you came across another group that didn't allow you to add a color? Provided this is your only EDH deck, wouldn't switching the cards in and out get annoying? Not every group is the same, of course.
The only exception I can imagine is using the Nephilim or Chromanticore as your commander. I've seen both used in my group as well as others.
I agree with NotSoLuckyLydia. Why not use Phelddagrif as your commander to avoid conflict? It would be much easier.
October 22, 2014 8:51 p.m.
i mean its a rule for a reason. your group might not care, but then its just sort of like whats the point
October 22, 2014 9:47 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #12
@DarkHero: That's not a very convincing argument. Playgroups are encouraged to make house rules to modify the format to their tastes. It's more appropriate to argue against those modifications based on their impact rather than the fact that they're modifications.
October 22, 2014 9:57 p.m.
I was I just didn't elaborate on the same details everyone else was referencing. the reason its a rule is because things get broken and it takes away from the strategy. Just throwing my two sens ein without actually beating the subject to death
October 22, 2014 10:01 p.m.
Nigeltastic says... #14
I don't understand how this could be seen as remotely fitting the spirit of commander from basically any perspective other than "you can modify the rules"
October 22, 2014 10:41 p.m.
NotSoLuckyLydia The problem with playing the griff is that everyone but the person playing him gets to draw and it's 1 opponent at a time. Also if Varolz got intuition it wouldn't be game breaking in the least. He already has things like buried alive, entomb, Jarad's orders, and others that can easily be recurred, so gaining 1 more spell like that does the basically the same thing as buried alive wouldn't influence anything.
Note to everyone: If you actually think your deck couldn't stand up to a commander getting another color, you probably shouldnt be using it for competitive in the first place. Having another color, maxing out at 3, seems like a good idea and should bring new challenges to the format.
October 23, 2014 10:50 a.m.
NotSoLuckyLydia says... #16
The thing is, any time a general gets a new color, it becomes strictly better. Teysa gets blue? Strictly better. Saffi gets black? Strictly better. Azusa gets LITERALLY ANYTHING? Strictly better.
Restrictions and deckbuilding creativity are what this format is about. Adding things to make generals better takes away restrictions, allowing you to play decks that are better without forcing you to change the way the deck is built. I would rather play varolz with blue than without, but that doesn't mean I can.
If you want to play a deck like Selvela, play Huggy Hippo. Build your deck a little bit differently. Add in some howling mines. You're going into blue. It's not like you have some mystical shortage of card draw spells.
(Also, adding black to control decks and blue to reanimator decks, with Oloro, is mega overpowered.)
October 23, 2014 12:19 p.m.
Sounds really confusing and arbitrary idea... why blue in particular? So you could run some kind of goodstuff.deck?
October 23, 2014 1:39 p.m.
NotSoLuckyLydia You can't play the decks the same because they accomplish different things. Selvela adds mana to your mana pool and everyone draw, creating mana and card advantage. Griff is target opponent draws a card and you return it to your hand. And you keep saying it gets strictly better, but you still haven't given any examples where it makes the general strictly better. Buried alive in varolz is strictly better than intuition because all the cards go to your graveyard, which is more with the idea of scavenge. Sure if you add blue to him you get counter spells, but you can only run a limited amount, and is that really what you want in that type of deck. If the answer is yes, you shouldn't be playing competitively. And if you are playing competitively you should be playing blue and white yourself because they both have the strongest removal. So if you wanna try again go ahead, but make sure you add examples because otherwise it sounds like you're just mad and have no valid reason to argue against this.
October 23, 2014 2:44 p.m.
NotSoLuckyLydia says... #19
When you add a color, you get access to more spells. The more options you have, the more powerful your deck is. That can't possibly be difficult to grasp. That's why standard is higher power than block, modern is higher power than standard, legacy above that, and vintage above that.
I specifically said to build your deck a little differently with huggy hippo, because it IS a different deck. But again. The reason you can't just add colors to Selvela is that the format is about restrictions.
Again, using the instance of Varolz, blue gives you access to mystical tutor, another way to grab your broken cards like entomb and buried alive. It also gives you access to powerful cantrips and looting. I would be THRILLED to play way fewer creatures in my Varolz deck, and blue would make that hilariously easy. I could remove the worst creatures in the deck for cards like Mystical Tutor , Lim-Dul's Vault , Jace, the Mind Sculptor , Mystic Remora , Force of Will , Intuition (because a slightly worse version of by far the best card in your deck is still VERY good), Brainstorm , Ponder , or Preordain .
And if we're talking about competitve play, the mana doesn't get worse. At no point did I get angry or even upset.
Lastly, if you want to play this way, you aren't playing EDH. Feel free to come up with a new format with your playgroup, but very few people outside that will play with your decks, because they are better than any deck with that general normally would be.
October 23, 2014 6:41 p.m.
CastleSiege says... #20
I don't really know what to say that hasn't already been said. Adding another colour to your commander's colour identity that it didn't have before automatically makes it strictly better than it was without that colour. The point of only playing with colours that are in your commander's colour identity is to set restrictions on what cards you can play. It helps keep the game fair for everyone and prevents certain commanders from being totally busted. Where's the challenge in building around a 
commander when you can make it considerably better by adding 
for more card draw and counters?
October 23, 2014 9:25 p.m.
Everyone says that he cards get strictly better yet have given 0 examples. And its not like only you benefit. If your group agrees to this everyone gets to add to it and they get to play "broken" (even tho it really isn't) combos as well. It also adds more of a challenge than playing 2 colors on a commander. You need to spend more on your mana base. If anything being able to add another color to a commander makes it much more interesting than having a normal 2 or 1 color commander,
October 23, 2014 10:55 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #22
@Ravexburn: Zero examples? Scroll down the first page and stop wherever you see blue.
To your argument: the amount of money invested into a deck is completely irrelevant to the discussion. We're talking about the end result, which is the warping of the format for no convincing reason.
Also, there already exist plenty of balanced three-color commanders. It seems that you're rejecting that the proposal has consequences other than simply allowing players to have more options while deckbuilding. And the argument that everyone gets to do it really isn't a great argument in itself. Everyone doing broken things doesn't somehow mean that no broken things are being done.
October 23, 2014 11:01 p.m.
All I can think of is what would happen when Bruna gets red or black in her colors. Allowing her more ways to infect or just straight up fling her damage into a player after attacking... Does not seem fair.
No this should not be done. If you don't like what the commander does in its own colors then you either need to broaden your card knowledge and attempt to find a way to do it in your colors, or just pick another commander. In my personal opinion, Selvala would be way to consistent with blue added in. One of my playgroup runs a Selvala deck that consistently is capable of milling the table for 20+ cards a turn by turn 5 if there is no interruption.
October 23, 2014 11:21 p.m.
Seraphicate says... #24
Ravexburn usually, the only challenge that more colours in a commander deck would pose is the mana base, that's why there are people who run mono-coloured commanders, so they don't get colour-screwed, and because they like the playstyle.
There is no real need to explain why adding a colour to commanders would make them strictly better. If I were to give an example, I'd liken it to using Emrakul, the Aeons Torn as commander, and having access to all the ramp that green has to offer, all the control that blue does, and just generally all the best that each other colour has to offer. Using Emrakul as commander is against the rules? So is using cards outside your own commander's colours.
If your entire playgroup agrees to it, by all means, go ahead, kill the challenge of having to build within your colours.
October 24, 2014 1:26 p.m.
ThisIsBullshit says... #25
Yeah, if you want to add more colors you should probably pick a different commander. The whole point of having a general is being forced to build around their color scheme and create your deck with those restrictions. Putting blue in Selvala is like adding green to Kaalia so you can throw her even more quickly.
What does Selvala need blue for anyways? Control? Run a Bant deck with a different, more controlling commander if control is what your want.
Kravian says... #2
Ask the people with whom you intend to play. We could all speculate on whether it would be fitting or fair, but what matters is the people at the table with you. If they are cool with it then have at it.
I'd suggest explaining why you made that choice to whomever you play with, just to be clear, so that they don't get suspicious or confused.
October 22, 2014 6:39 p.m.