Grand Arbiter Augustin IV

Legendary Creature — Human Advisor

White spells you cast cost {1} less to cast.

Blue spells you cast cost {1} less to cast.

Spells your opponents cast cost {1} more to cast

Legality

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

Discussion (49)

DreadKhan on Commander Deckbuilding Advice - A …

1 week ago

I mean there is always Roon of the Hidden Realm that blinks stuff and is in Bant, some of the best blink colours? It used to be a real house of a Commander, but now we have stuff that's just way quicker and with a better top end, so you don't have to be stuck in Bracket 4. If you blink something like Yorion, Sky Nomad you can blink a bunch more stuff. You can also throw in good old Brago, King Eternal as a value piece (every time he sneaks in he blinks all your relevant stuff). A real feature of Roon is that Green can help you tutor up creatures, meaning you can find your Archaeomancer more reliably.

The other option I'd suggest is Grand Arbiter Augustin IVGC, and you'd be more into using flicker spells and benefiting from the discount to make them better, while slowing down everyone else. This would be a higher power deck potentially, but would also be harder to run.

I'd go with Roon if you want a less pushed deck (Bracket 2 or 3), or something like GAAIV if you want Bracket 4 blink to work.

This discussion reminds me of a deck of mine a bit, if you're in mono-Blue and you have enough mana and tutoring you can easily set up a game state where you can constantly return stuff from your graveyard to your hand (where you can recast), I used Talrand, Sky Summoner and instead of Fogs I used stuff like Aetherspouts and AEtherize (and Polymorphist's Jest haha) to ruin people's days, I used a mix of Proteus Staff and a low creature count (and having those creatures draw extra cards) to set everything up, and then juggled Stream of Thought and Call to Mind to get anything I want back into my library, where Proteus Staff can reorder my library to then draw said card. FWIW if you have infinite mana (I used Dramatic Reversal and Isochron Scepter for infinite mana) I think you can just infinitely replicate your Stream of Thought to mill out everyone but you, not quite winning on the spot but very close.

legendofa on The New Commander Brackets Beta

3 weeks 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 OracleGC 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 StudyGC or Smothering TitheGC. This group often also includes oppression, since a lot of them tax the opponent. Another group is cheap (1-2 mana) tutors, like Vampiric TutorGC, Enlightened TutorGC, or Survival of the FittestGC, that increase a deck's reliability for very little opportunity cost. Most game changers can be sorted into one of these four categories. Ancient TombGC and Gaea's CradleGC are speed and resource generation, Drannith MagistrateGC and Force of WillGC 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 IVGC, 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 TitheGC or Trouble in PairsGC, 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:

• Bracket 2: But if you smash one helm...

• Bracket 3: Above such mortal concerns

• Bracket 4: Arrogant. Ruthless. Oppressive. Victorious.

legendofa on Testing brackets with Merfolk combos

1 month ago

I just finished detailing this deck.

---

Clear Waters

Commander / EDH legendofa

10 VIEWS

---

It has an infinite turns combo with redundancies. Wanderwine Prophets + Deeproot Pilgrimage + Merfolk Sovereign

It has land denial. Opposition + Seedborn Muse, Quicksilver Fountain

It has a game changer. Grand Arbiter Augustin IVGC

It has multiple relevant tutors. Forerunner of the Heralds, Idyllic Tutor, Merrow Harbinger, Seahunter, Sterling Grove

By all measures, this deck falls under Bracket 4. But I think it better fits Bracket 3, because Wanderwine Prophets is the most expensive card. It simply can't compete with decks whose individual cards are worth more than this whole thing, or decks with six game changers and "I win" combos that land on turn 3. It just isn't up to that level. The turns combo in particular is slow and highly telegraphed, since Prophets needs to survive a turn cycle before it can go off.

So where does this fall? Bracket 3? Low-end Bracket 4? The fuzzy gray area in the middle? Would you accept a Bracket 3 match with potential infinite turns and land locks?

SufferFromEDHD on Oh My Gizzard, It's a Zombie Wizard (Nekusar)

1 month ago

I used to play Legacy so I'm familiar with the tempo advantage of Strix but still... Nekusar needs supportive friends.

I like Mana Leak! Solid card but it fits better in Grand Arbiter Augustin IVGC. My suggestions fit into the Nekusar strategy.

amarthaler on EDH Geist of Saint Traft

1 month ago

Update!

Out: Thieving Skydiver... Curiosity... Wedding Ring... Commander's Sphere

In: Dorothea, Vengeful Victim  ^Flip... Combat Research... Trouble in PairsGC... Grand Arbiter Augustin IVGC

Reynan on Hit Me Baby One More Time! *PRIMER*

2 months ago

Awesome deck. Liked a lot the idea, I do love Azorius and flying theme. Would suggest Watcher of the Spheres and Warden of Evos Isle for lure removals and stack cost reduction with Grand Arbiter Augustin IV. What to you think about Settle the Wreckage?

Necramus on Zombies Ate My Neighbors (Zul Ashur)

3 months ago

Goldberserkerdragon Personally, Wilhelt, the Rotcleaver gets my money, if we're going Dimir. But, I wanted mono black. Counters and removal are fine, but like.. are you going to counter my Gravecrawler rather than something bigger or flashier? Also, the whole gimmick of the commander is to just replay the stuff from the graveyard. I could see Krenko being an issue for a deck like this, simply because it can likely keep pace. I think we're probably online before something like Grand Arbiter Augustin IV unless we're aggressively mulliganing to play him out t1 (my cEDH love was Grand Arbiter a few years ago when I was sweatier about the game).

Part of the strength of the deck is no one thinks mono black zombies are going to kill the table on t4. Ya know? Lol. The hardest thing I've found to deal with so far is Leyline of the Void and Rest in Peace style effects. It's difficult to get around replacement effects and, unfortunately, mono black's biggest weakness is targeted enchantment removal.

But yeah, it's been a blast so far!!

DemonDragonJ on Patriotic Pride

4 months ago

I have replaced Boros Charm, Izzet Charm, and Grand Arbiter Augustin IV with Prismari Command, Prosperous Partnership, and Sunhome Guildmage, which improved the color balance of this deck, because, as great as were, I feel that the newer cards are better suited for this deck.