Drannith Magistrate
Set Price Alerts

Combos Browse all Suggest

Legality

Format Legality
1v1 Commander Legal
Archenemy Legal
Arena Legal
Block Constructed Legal
Canadian Highlander Legal
Casual Legal
Commander / EDH Legal
Commander: Rule 0 Legal
Custom Legal
Duel Commander Legal
Freeform Legal
Gladiator Legal
Highlander Legal
Historic Legal
Legacy Legal
Leviathan Legal
Limited Legal
Modern Legal
Modern Beyond Horizons Legal
Oathbreaker Legal
Pioneer Legal
Planar Constructed Legal
Planechase Legal
Quest Magic Legal
Tiny Leaders Legal
Vanguard Legal
Vintage Legal

Drannith Magistrate

Creature — Human Wizard

Your opponents can't cast spells from anywhere other than their hands.

FauxFaux on Card creation challenge

1 month ago

We have several hate pieces that affect EDH primarily, such as the aforementioned Drannith Magistrate, but several others fit that list; formerly, Hullbreacher, Opposition Agent, and even the golden oldie, True-Name Nemesis. But what about a card that affects those abilities and says "Nuh-uh"?

Forgotten Lock

Artifact

, Exile ~: Spells and abilities of non-land permanents your opponents control lose all abilities until the end of turn. Activate this ability only during your turn, and as a sorcery. While this ability is on the stack, players cannot cast spells or activate abilities of permanents they control.

"Just as every thief dreams of a key to open any lock, so too does a locksmith dream of a lock that opens to no key."

Wild!

hiddengibbons on Card creation challenge

1 month ago

Phyrexian Retaliator

Creature - Phyrexian Horror

Trample, Infect, Afflict 7

Unlike my cousin, “The Obliterator” I am not “Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs”

5/5

Create a hate bear that messes up the Commander format like Drannith Magistrate

legendofa on Stax?

1 month ago

It's pretty much automatically going to be Bracket 4, if you care about that. Mass land denial's a pretty big thing.

Do you have any specific colors in mind? Blood Moon, Drannith Magistrate, No Mercy, High Noon, Opposition, and Pendrell Mists are all reasonably common options--at least, they're ones I've come into contact with. They're also higher budget than Winter Moon, if that's a concerns.

Lucatroopa on Watch the Party Die [Primer]

2 months ago

Mr. Umbra! Long time lurker, first time commenter! I love your deck building style; been playing your Isshin list for some years now. Question! If you ran this list without the 3 gnarly game changers (Drannith Magistrate, Underworld Breach & Opposition Agent) as a bracket 3 list, what would your personal swaps be? I've been considering Joshua, Phoenix's Dominant  Flip & Azra Oddsmaker but would love to hear your opinion!

Crow_Umbra on Commander/EDH Game Changers

4 months ago

I don't intend to come across as pointed or abrasive, but have you played against either Kinnan or Winota in extensive capacity, DemonDragonJ? I used to have both commanders in my main play group, and faced off against them on multiple occasions each. I run into them on occasion now.

Kinnan is 2 mana, and has built-in mana acceleration to more quickly achieve his own (powerful) activated ability, which to call back to one of your threads from earlier this week, is a "Do the Thing" type of design space. Kinnan is his own engine and payoff in one package. On top of all that, his Simic color identity grants access to efficient ramp in addition to his own ability, and counterspells. The times I've played against Kinnan, my opponents were typically dropping Eldrazi Titans or big curve toppers like Jin-Gitaxias, Core Augur or Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger.

Winota needs a bit more build intention with Humans to Non-Human ratios, but is still fairly powerful in terms of being able to dig for creatures. White has access to Stax-y Humans like Grand Abolisher and Drannith Magistrate, and also has tutors on bodies like Imperial Recruiter and Recruiter of the Guard to find additional answers. Beyond some of those efficient control and tutor effects on Human bodies that Winota can dig into, she can set up stax-y boards and break parity with her own ability. Throw Winota into the 99 for something like Isshin, Two Heavens as One and attack with a board of Non-Human creature tokens, and you can vomit up most if not all of the Humans in your deck. I'm speaking from recent experience on that last one lol.

Oko, Thief of Crowns could end up on the GC list, so definitely is more of a " not there for now".

Icbrgr on Boros Lockout

6 months ago

not yet im a little light on wildcards but definitely something i plan on including... once again really like this brew; i was trying to think of ways to help get Drannith Magistrate more consistently but came up short with practical suggestions; but i think the deck does a pretty stellar just with protecting it just by taxing the opponent; my aggro deck is really good at getting 3-4 mana in a game but between your own removal and High Noon it just does such a great job undermining the speed/efficency vs my gruul aggro... i think Possibility Storm is very cute and a neat lock to go for but I think is probably unnecessary and i think id consider Boros Charmfoil for its modes.

Apollo_Paladin on Boros Lockout

6 months ago

Icbrgr

Here's a list of the Boros version of the deck you helped me test out. I didn't get to show off the Drannith Magistrate + Possibility Storm combo, but it's game over against almost every deck once that happens.

The mono-white version of this deck is already on my profile (Mono-White Denial is the deck name, but these not-at-all-broken TappedOut links keep directing to someone else's Commander deck with the same name no matter how I attempt to format it)

Obviously the Boros version has the potential to be much more devastating with Possiblity Storm in there, but it's also less reliable since I'm hunting for 2 cards each game rather than just a Magistrate (plus no way to tutor/search for either card) so I'm still a bit on the fence which control form is best.

legendofa on The New Commander Brackets Beta

6 months ago

I've been struggling with this for a couple of my decklists recently, and I'm trying to summarize my thoughts here without starting a new thread. So this is semi-stream-of-thought, and I apologize if it gets a little rambly.

There are several criteria being tracked by the current bracket system, including resource generation, speed, reliability, and oppression, and possibly others.

Game changers: A combo like Demonic Consultation/Tainted Pact + Thassa's Oracle gets a key card on the game changers list, because it's fast and reliable, ending a match on turn 3-4. These are speed game changers. Other game changers generate resources just by playing the game, like Rhystic Study or Smothering Tithe. This group often also includes oppression, since a lot of them tax the opponent. Another group is cheap (1-2 mana) tutors, like Vampiric Tutor, Enlightened Tutor, or Survival of the Fittest, that increase a deck's reliability for very little opportunity cost. Most game changers can be sorted into one of these four categories. Ancient Tomb and Gaea's Cradle are speed and resource generation, Drannith Magistrate and Force of Will are oppression, and so on.

Bracket Guidelines: From Gavin Verhey's announcement article, here's what each of the brackets mean and expect. Important to note that the system is still in beta testing, so this is probably going to be different in the future.

  • Bracket 1: Decks with more focus on a gimmick than on winning. "Winning is not the primary goal here, as it's more about showing off something unusual you've made. Villains yelling in the art? Everything has the number four? Oops, all Horses? Those are all fair game!" This bracket doesn't allow extra turns, two-card infinite combos, mass land denial, or game changers, and restricts tutors.

  • Bracket 2: Decks that can win, but are not tightly focused, or slow to develop. "While Bracket 2 decks may not have every perfect card, they have the potential for big, splashy turns, strong engines, and are built in a way that works toward winning the game. While the game is unlikely to end out of nowhere and generally goes nine or more turns, you can expect big swings." This bracket doesn't allow any game changers, mass land denial, two-card infinite combos, or multiple extra turns in a row, and restricts tutors.

  • Bracket 3: Decks that are focused on winning efficiently, but are not optimized. "They are full of carefully selected cards, with work having gone into figuring out the best card for each slot. The games tend to be a little faster as well, ending a turn or two sooner than your Core (Bracket 2) decks." This bracket does not allow mass land denial or multiple extra turns in a row, and restricts game changers and two-card infinite combos, and allows tutors freely.

  • Bracket 4: Decks that are optimized for their strategy. "Bring out your strongest decks and cards... This is high-powered Commander, and games have the potential to end quickly. The focus here is on bringing the best version of the deck you want to play, but not one built around a tournament metagame." This bracket has no restrictions.

  • Bracket 5: Decks that expect to win at the most competitive levels. "There is care paid into following and paying attention to a metagame and tournament structure, and no sacrifices are made in deck building as you try to be the one to win the pod." This brackets has no restrictions.

Deck Analysis 1: The deck I've been struggling most with is Clear Waters. As I listed in another thread, it has an infinite turns combo (Wanderwine Prophets + Deeproot Pilgrimage + Merfolk Sovereign) and mass land denial (Opposition + Seedborn Muse, Quicksilver Fountain), and a selection of tutors to pull these together (Forerunner of the Heralds, Idyllic Tutor, Merrow Harbinger, Seahunter, and Sterling Grove). This should put it squarely into Bracket 4.

My concern is that it's neither high powered nor optimized. On the axes of speed, resource generation, reliability, and oppression, I would score it high on oppression, pretty good on reliability, and low on speed and resources generation. Looking at examples of other Bracket 4 decks around the internet, all four of those criteria need to be high in this bracket. The infinite turns combo is slow and easily removed, and the land denial is optional (Opposition can have other targets) or temporary (Quicksilver Fountain can remove its own effect).

It would be easy to simply add a big pile of game changers to improve all of these facets. Right now, it has one game changer in Grand Arbiter Augustin IV, and that one's not essential to the deck. That's not the direction I want to go with the deck, though--I want to keep it reasonably budget, and even adding the three least expensive of the game changers I'm considering would basically double the deck's cost.

I know that people in brackets under 4 want to be able to play their deck, and the infinite turns and land denial shut that down. These are clearly stated in the announcement article -"A single extra-turn spell can be fun and splashy. However, extra-turn spells take a ton of time away from other players and their ability to play the game and tend to be unfun when repeated."- that's why they're forced into brackets 4 and 5. But if a deck isn't able to compete against high power, optimized Bracket 4 decks, can it be considered Bracket 4?

Deck Analysis 2: Another deck that I've been struggling with is an enchantment deck, Do Not Mistake Peace For Passivity. The point of concern for this deck is land denial. Blood Moon is classic mass land denial, and the deck is designed to play around it with Abundant Growth, Fertile Ground, Prismatic Omen, and similar cards. It also has a combo that doesn't directly deny lands, but punishes their play and use: Manabarbs + Citadel of Pain. Otherwise, the deck fits all the criteria of a Bracket 2 deck--no game changers, no infinite combos, few tutors, and no extra turns.

This deck can be converted into a pure Bracket 2 deck without much effort by replacing Blood Moon and Manabarbs. But as it stands, a single card pushes the deck up two brackets, according to the guidelines. Again, I don't feel the deck is high powered or optimized, and would not be able to compete in a Bracket 4 match. It could probably survive in Bracket 3, since it's highly synergistic, but nothing any higher.

In this case, adding a bunch of game changers and power cards would somewhat dilute how the deck functions. A few, like Smothering Tithe or Trouble in Pairs, could slot in, but most others would be more gratuitous.

Conclusion: To quote the article again, "There's some wiggle room, and while playing against decks that are all inside your bracket is ideal, you can usually wiggle within one bracket away from you safely." "You should play where you think you belong based on the descriptions." All of this can be discussed in a Rule 0 talk. I strongly believe the brackets are intended to help this conversation, not replace it. As an example, for the Clear Waters deck, I would say that the deck is not optimized to Bracket 4, and I think it fits best into Bracket 3, but it's controlling and has a potential three-card infinite turns combo. I'm willing to announce when the combo is assembled and ready to start, to give everyone a turn cycle to react, and reduce the use of Opposition to creatures and artifacts.

I feel like the current setup is a little too restrictive of the kind of combo-control decks I like. I can have fun smashing big creatures into each other and outmaneuvering everyone else, but I will enjoy locking down the board and establishing my inevitability, and I'm having a harder time trying to find ways to do that in lower brackets. Some people have already offered me excellent feedback and suggestions that I'm taking into consideration, but I'd also like to see how people are responding to the bracket system so far.

For comparison, here's a few more of my decklists:

Load more