Tymna the Weaver
Legendary Creature — Human Cleric
At the beginning of your postcombat main phase, you may pay X life, where X is the number of opponents that were dealt combat damage this turn. If you do, draw X cards.
Partner (You can have two commanders if both have partner.)
Combos Browse all
|Commander / EDH||Legal|
|Commander: Rule 0||Legal|
Recommendations View more recommendations
Latest Decks as Commander
Tymna the Weaver Discussion
1 week ago
@1empyrean, My bad, I felt like it was redundant to rattle on about something I thought there was a consensus on, but I'll take your comment as asking, "what's so bad about having 4-color partner pairings?"
I have my own negative opinions about the subject, but one of the two things I can point to outside of my own views is that dual-color partner commanders can be found on the upper tiers of any given commander tier lists which I believe says a lot about the community's perception of them.
Its rather hard to find dual-color partner commanders such as Thrasios, Triton Hero, Tymna the Weaver and Vial Smasher the Fierce on the bottom of any list if at all and most of the time they're placed so highly because they have the capacity to become stronger over time than most other commanders. If you have a low tier commander and a new card is printed that really boosts that commander's potential, it likely won't be enough to boost them to the next tier because that new card is put into a deck of 99 cards where it likely won't be drawn most of the time. In order to make it to the next tier bracket a considerable number of effective cards have to be printed to change out any particular general's standard decklist. It also should be stated that if a new commander is printed that outperforms the older commander that can instantaneously lower its standing on the tier list, because why would you run that commander if a better one exists? Partner commanders are different in that the number of cards needed to reach the next bracket is one, that being if a new partner commander is printed that increases the potential of all the others, and since that new card is being put in your commander slot you can expect to see it every game and having a better commander in slot can make the rest of your cards in the 98 also synergize better with it than before or provide alternatives card switches that you wouldn't be able to make before. And of course a better partner commander can make another inferior, but unlike the last example it makes the other half of your commander all the better unlike making the whole thing a waste. And of course you can argue that's a problem with the Partner mechanic itself and has nothing to do with running a 4+ color deck, but I would argue it does because if you're running a 4+ color pairing it becomes much more difficult to replace one of your commanders if only single color partners are being printed to contest one of them. You could have a single color general actually be a decent upgrade to one of your dual-color ones, but then you'd also have to consider slotting out all the cards that make up the color you would be losing for possibly more inferior cards in return which results in a much higher barrier of entry and is a big reason why color, especially running +4 color matters a lot regarding power with the Partner mechanic.
And my second point further backs up that notion. C16 came out November 11th, 2016 and since then Wizards has not been eager at all to expand upon the mechanic itself as I think they even know +4 color partners pairings are too strong. Battlebond came out June 8th, 2018 where they introduced "Partners with" which is a straight downgrade to the Partner mechanic where EDH is concerned. You could give any of the "Partners with" commanders Partner and it wouldn't hurt their ability to perform together in an EDH environment as the tutor effect is meaningless if both of them are your commander, but perhaps you could say this wasn't a downgrade caused by 4+color partner commanders but that Battlebond was meant to be a two-headed giant set and not an EDH set. I would even agree with that, if not for Commander 2020 which was scheduled for release April 24th, 2020. As an EDH centered product we again returned with the "Partners with" mechanic as if Partner itself had become a taboo keyword yet the concept itself was still worth pulling up again. To me it feels obvious Wizards is behaving as if they made something busted and was trying to dial it back. ~2 years after C16 they test dual-color partners-with and then after reviewing the power level they inch it up ~2 years later with tricolor partners-with commanders almost as if the two-commander mechanic was something they really wanted to work with, but the number of colors was the inherent problem that needed balancing.
Commander Legends came out half a year after Commander 2020, November 20th 2020, 4 years and a week later after C16 before deciding to return back to Partner itself in a draft environment in probably the most awkward fashion possible if you think about it. In Battlebond's draft environment they made it so if a pack would contain one of the Partners-with commanders it would always contain the other and that your team would pick two cards at once before passing the packs. The exact same thing could have been implemented in Commander Legends, every pack would have a dual or triple color pairing of partners-with and you could pull them both before passing the pack. But if not Partners-with surely it would have been better to make dual-color partners in a drafting environment. If you needed a color you'd be more likely to find it on a wide selection of dual-color partners than would be the case for the number of mono-colored ones and it would be far less punishing if you ended up drafting too many cards away from your main two colors as well given how color-restricting the EDH format can be. Surely mono-colored partners and the time it took to revisit the mechanic after numerous watered down attempts paints a pretty clear picture. Heck the C16 partners have 2 cycles for enemy color partners and 1 cycle of allied color partners, so at bare minimum there would be an incentive to make an extra allied set to balance off that difference and it seems like even that was too questionable to put in Commander Legends despite embracing the Partner mechanic heavily in that set. Perhaps Wizards felt like they already printed that second cycle of allied partners in Commander 2020, but I don't think any of the players feel the same way about that. Clearly all the mono-colored partners wouldn't have been printed if Wizards felt the new 3-color pairings they would have made with the C16 commanders would have been a problem as they could have just given the set the Battlebond treatment by making them all partners-with and having the drafting rules be just like how they had it in the recent Double Masters that had came out a few months before it.
I personally would love to see more dual-color partner commanders, but it seems to me that they might be too much of a good thing and that they can easily drive out other non-partner commanders from being viable in most circles given how their power level can scale much more rapidly than other commanders over time if we ever see more dual-color partner commanders. I'm proposing this idea because I don't think we ever will and I don't want to feel chained to a product that's 5 years old if I ever want to build three-color partner pairings moving forward. If new 4-color pairings are dead and they aren't going to be returned to then I think my idea should be what takes place moving forward.
2 weeks ago
I've built a couple of odd decks, my personal favorite is a naya superfriends deck, helmed by Gahiji, Honored One. Its not too out there, but the entire deck is built around Primal Surge, so there are no instants or sorceries at all.
Personally, I'd also think about a deckbuilding restriction, something that really makes you think about how you have to build the deck. Best example, I've got a wheel deck built around 2 partner commanders and a companion Tymna the Weaver/Kraum, Ludevic's Opus/Obosh, the Preypiercer All odd CMC in 4 colors with a wheel/combo based wincon.
For a weird recommendation/challenge: Ich-Tekik, Salvage Splicer/Sakashima of a Thousand Faces/Keruga, the Macrosage creatureless summoner tribal. All your spells and support makes creature tokens, but beyond the commanders there are no creatures in the deck.
1 month ago
At present I run a Thrasios, Triton Hero / Tymna the Weaver combo control deck: Triton Weaver, however having access to red (for haste effects and a few key cards) has always seemed like a decent idea.
For a while now I have pondered about if Kenrith, the Returned King would be a better commander for the list. I have put together a WIP list here: Hail to the king, baby which is very similar in concept but takes advantage of a few key red cards.
The biggest selling point for Kenny has been than he adds red. But at the same time the biggest drawback has been that you need blue mana for his draw card (one of the big pros for Thrasios).
So I wanted to get peoples' thoughts, which one do they prefer and why?
2 months ago
tgood4 as you may have surmised, I don't play this deck anymore unfortunately. With the rise of partner commanders I disassembled it for The First Sliver and when I still couldn't beat 'em I joined 'em and now play Thrasios, Triton Hero / Tymna the Weaver .
Yavimaya, Cradle of Growth is a very tempting card on paper, but I think that it likely runs into the very same issues I outlined above for Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth . So for those reasons I probably wouldn't run it. I did make some other minor changes after looking at the list again. See the new update
2 months ago
darkseid4nk Yeah, it seems like that deck leans more towards creature control. It also uses some high cost critters that I personally think slow the deck down. That said, I think that deck is very good, but the lack of Boonweaver Giant combo is disappointing, while understandable because that deck hasn't been updated in several years. I was also honestly baffled to not see Necropotence in that list because it is far and away the strongest card advantage effect in these colors.
Another thing you might consider looking into is decks based around Nethroi, Apex of Death. While not identical, the decks often play similar strategies, and functions similarly. If you like the hate/control cards from the Junkus deck though, you might consider looking into creature toolbox decks that helm Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa and Tymna the Weaver , because they lend themselves to utility creatures that control the board. Check out EDHRec to see what I mean: EDHRec Tymna//Sidar
3 months ago
For a very long time, I ran Damia, Sage of Stone as my primary commander and even resisted switching to Tasigur, the Golden Fang . With the release of Thrasios, Triton Hero and Tymna the Weaver there was enough incentive to change over, but it was still a hard choice.
As for the examples you've given though, I still feel like there's a bit of a disconnect between your existing commanders and the new example commanders. Sure, Zacama, Primal Calamity is naya an interacts with lands, but it's still a very different deck than Hazezon Tamar .
Just like how using Chainer, Dementia Master is about being able to abuse reanimation (which may or may not be abusing discard ETB effects). So while the deck may have a heavy discard theme (which on quick inspection looks like it does) however a lot of the card choices in the deck would still look different with someone like Tegrid, God of Fright leading it.
I also think that there are two distinct questions here:
1) When do players feel it's the right time to replace cards in the 99, and;
2) When do players feel it's the right time to replace their commander
I feel like question 2 is a lot more difficult of a question, as geenrall you're not just swapping a pet card in/out - you're effectively restructuring the deck at this point (even if you are keeping the theme the same).
4 months ago
Of course, but with 1134 legal legendary creatures and 13 planeswalkers that can be your commander in the format, it can be intimidating to start looking from scratch for what you'll find fun. The budget request in the OP narrows it down a slight bit, but still. Learning how other people choose their way to have fun and why, can at least point in a right direction to be inspired.
It's a pretty open-ended request, and I'm having fun learning how others have fun. I'm not much of a budget player, I have a habit of overinvesting in an idea I'm hyped for. Which doesn't mean my decks are the most powerful, I don't get that hyped for cEDH, although I dabbled in that a bit. But usually, I'm making expensive versions of janky archetypes. Mono W +1/+1 counters, with a Cleansing subtheme; mono G storm; Rakdos Magecraft Aristocrats; Temur landfall without ramp spells, just additional lands from hand; they're just ideas that get stuck in my head until I brewed a decently functional deck around them.(I'm a big mtgGoldfish Against The Odds fan)
I especially love hilarious unexpected plays; like yesterday, in a 1v1 cEDH game, I played Naru Meha, Master Wizard against a Tymna the Weaver / Kraum, Ludevic's Opus Thoracle Consultation deck, I was able to Narset's Reversal the first attempt at Ad Nauseam , and when the next turn my opponent tried to Silence me before going again, I had a Twincast ready. We both had a great laugh about that one.