Tainted Pact
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
Gladiator Legal
Highlander Legal
Historic Legal
Legacy Legal
Leviathan Legal
Limited Legal
Oathbreaker Legal
Planar Constructed Legal
Planechase Legal
Premodern Legal
Quest Magic Legal
Tiny Leaders Legal
Vanguard Legal
Vintage Legal

Tainted Pact

Instant

Exile the top card of your library. You may put that card into your hand unless it has the same name as another card exiled this way. Repeat this process until you put a card into your hand or you exile two cards with the same name, whichever comes first.

legendofa on The New Commander Brackets Beta

1 month 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:

jsnrice on Atraxa, Grand Unifier

1 month ago

Deck Title: Ascension Through Unity – Atraxa cEDH Food Chain

Commander

Atraxa, Grand Unifier
Color Identity:

Introduction

Welcome to Ascension Through Unity, a competitive EDH build centered around Atraxa, Grand Unifier, the ultimate value engine and a uniquely powerful commander that bridges midrange resilience with combo potential. This list leverages the raw card advantage of Atraxa’s ETB trigger to dig for win conditions, interaction, and fast mana — all while supporting a Food Chain combo core.

This deck is tuned for high-level pods and aims to win fast, interact precisely, and grind smart when necessary.

Win Conditions

Primary Wincon:
- Food Chain + Eternal Scourge / Misthollow Griffin / Flesh Duplicate
Infinite creature mana via Food Chain and one of the exile-recurring creatures.
→ Cast Atraxa, Grand Unifier, dig for Thassa's Oracle or Tainted Pact / Demonic Consultation combo.

Backup Wincons:
- Thassa's Oracle + Tainted Pact / Demonic Consultation
- Finale of Devastation for lethal with infinite mana
- Displacer Kitten combos with The One Ring, Teferi, Time Raveler, or mana rocks for infinite value/actions

Notable Synergies

Staples and Interaction

This deck plays nearly every blue interaction spell you’d expect: - Free Countermagic: Force of Will, Force of Negation, Pact of Negation, Mindbreak Trap, Flusterstormfoil
- Removal: Swords to Plowshares, Abrupt Decay, Chain of Vapor, Toxic Deluge, Culling Ritual
- Tutors: Vampiric Tutor, Demonic Tutor, Worldly Tutor, Enlightened Tutor, Imperial Seal

And it runs every relevant fast mana: - Mana Crypt, Lotus Petal, Chrome Mox, Mox Diamond, Mox Opal, Mana Vault, Ancient Tomb

Why Atraxa?

While many commanders offer value, Atraxa’s Grand Unifier trigger is uniquely broken in a deck like this. With a proper build, she can hit: - A creature (e.g. Eternal Scourge, Deathrite Shaman)
- A non-creature spell (e.g. Demonic Consultation)
- An instant (e.g. Swan Song, An Offer You Can't Refuse)
- A sorcery (e.g. Finale of Devastation)
- An artifact (e.g. Sol Ring)
- An enchantment (e.g. Rhystic Study)
- A planeswalker (e.g. Teferi, Time Raveler)

This makes Atraxa a one-card value engine that refills your hand and pivots you into a win turn with proper sequencing.

Power Level & Goals

This deck is firmly cEDH (power level 9.5–10). It’s built for pods where interaction is heavy, turns are fast, and wins are clean.

You’ll thrive if: - You can protect Atraxa, Grand Unifier for at least one trigger
- You pilot your combo lines efficiently
- You mulligan aggressively for interaction or ramp

Mulligan Strategy

Look for: - Turn 1–2 dorks/rocks + tutor
- Food Chain + exile creature opener
- Strong card draw pieces + interaction
- Always mull away clunky high-CMC hands

Weaknesses

  • Susceptible to Drannith Magistrate (unless we remove it)
  • Hate for graveyard/exile recursion (Rest in Peace, etc.)
  • Heavy counterspell matchups if we stumble on mana

Closing Thoughts

Atraxa, Grand Unifier doesn’t just unify card types — she unifies power, control, and combo under one elegantly devastating package. Whether you’re tutoring with efficiency or slamming a turn 4 Food Chain win, this deck rewards mastery and punishes hesitation. Perfect for cEDH players who love versatility and inevitability.

Thanks for reading! Let me know if you want a sideboard package or metagame tweaks.

Djh3max on cEDH upgrade ideas for First …

3 months ago

Hi all,

I have been working for a while on my first cEDH deck and I am getting to a point where I know there is room for improvement but I am not sure where. I am working on a semi budget so I have made certain choices so far to reflect that. Here is the deck list:

https://moxfield.com/decks/K8ynmFMH8UiyiHjr5GCfUw

The deck aims to win with the food chain cast from exile combo for infinite mana to infinitely cascade through the deck with The First Sliver and casting Lavabelly Sliver to ping the opponents to death with the infinite etb triggers from the commander. The secondary win con is through cards like Demonic Consultation or Tainted Pact to exile the deck and win with either Laboratory Maniac, Jace, Wielder of Mysteries, or Thassa's Oracle. The rest of the deck consists of tutors to find my combo pieces, recursion spells in case I lose a piece, and counter spells. I also found that Transmute mechanic worked for extra tutors as well.

I know the land base needs a ton of work but i found that the filter/pain/fast lands were excellent budget friendly options. As far as the main deck goes, I am thinking that the first card to go should be Rhystic Study since it feels too slow for the pay off. I can consistently win on turn 5 with this list but I want to get that down to a consistent turn 4 win.

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated thank you!!

Balaam__ on Draw Wincon deck V1.1

4 months ago

I’ve seen a few Laboratory Maniac builds floating around (I think I may have one myself, I can’t recall) and one thing they tend to have in common is that they’re almost always entirely geared toward triggering the wincon as quickly as possible.

You have many different things going on in your deck that either inch slowly toward the Wincon (Bamboozle) or don’t contribute toward it at all (Cartographer's Survey).

Offering specific suggestions is slightly difficult as you did clearly state you built this using cards you have access to (perfectly understandable), so instead I can offer more general advice. You’ll want to either find a shell that can win on its own that you can seamlessly integrate Laboratory Maniac into (preferably something like Dredge or Mill, which could feasibly work toward that wincon), or else cut anything and everything not related to your goal and build strictly around him.

Cards like Demonic Consultation, Tainted Pact and Leveler are all ones you should be looking into, cards that more or less vaporize your own library immediately and can trigger Laboratory Maniac on the spot. I think Demonic Consultation is Restricted in Vintage so that can only be a 1-of, but I’d run the others in playsets if you go this route. It’ll be glass cannon territory so speed is of the essence.

hootsnag on Glarb Black Green Blue Creatureless Control

6 months ago

No Tabernacle this time due to my commander wanting to be out and useful. Not using Tainted Pact

SufferFromEDHD on Glarb Black Green Blue Creatureless Control

6 months ago

Tabernacle! You are fortunate enough to own a copy and you have both Urborg and Yavimaya making the mana flow.

Tainted Pact silver bullet tutor

legendofa on Rules Committee Gives Up Managing …

7 months ago

I know (or assume, or hope) that these questions will be answered, but I haven't seen anything that says what tier a deck is in if it has a mix of cards from different tiers. If it has like sixty tier 2 cards, thirty-eight tier 3 cards, and two tier 4 cards, how does that compare to a deck that's only tier 3? Will the tiers be subdivided to make a more continuous spectrum (High tier 2 vs low tier 3), or is it more discrete?

Is every tier 3 card considered to be equal and superior to every tier 2 card in all circumstances, or will combos and synergy be considered?Demonic Consultation and Tainted Pact are high-risk and not especially efficient tutors by themselves, but killer combo pieces with Thassa's Oracle. Can a tier 2 deck run Tainted Pact, assuming that it's a tier-4 card?

Will every card be tiered, or will each tier have a few representative cards, and the rest be assigned ad hoc? The first option would take forever and be incredibly arbitrary, while the second option doesn't resolve anything.

This, to me, is too loose and subjective to cover all but the broadest scenarios. Unfortunately, I can't say I have a better idea. Most people don't want to discuss power levels for half an hour before playing, and any discrete ranking system will necessarily be at least somewhat arbitrary and overly inclusive.

Niko9 on MASSIVE EDH RC ban list …

7 months ago

I mean, I don't mind these bans too much, but I do think they are kind of strange choices, just because they seem to be aimed at a more competitive meta, but not addressing the problems of competitive decks, just the enablers for those decks. I feel like other cards that don't function in commander as intended might have been better choices.

Thassa's Oraclefoil this seemed like it was designed to be a wincon for control decks that combo out in the end, but it turned into a turn 2-3 possible win out of no where.

Tainted Pact simply does way too much in a 100 card singleton deck

Ad Nauseam is gross in every kinda way : )

Necropotence is busted with 40 life

Rhystic Study is a turtley enchantment that doesn't do much in the format it was printed into

The One Ring was not intended to give you 3 turns of protection after being played

Nadu I am down with, just because it is almost impossible to make a non-combo Nady deck.

Really, I never ran any of the cards that got banned, I just think the mana cards there were more enablers for decks rather than the problem cards that come after being enabled. A dockside without some broken play after is kind of just a powered up deck, and it's easier to have a rule 0 convo about fast mana than it is to have a rule 0 convo about combo win that somebody's deck can't function without.

Load more
Have (1) Azdranax
Want (1) Jumping_Jordan