MDFC Sorcery in Strixhaven

Commander (EDH) forum

Posted on March 30, 2021, 6:37 p.m. by Mtg_Mega_Nerds

Hello all. Recently I have become aware that Wizards has created MDFC (modal double-faced card) that has one side as a sorcery: http://www.magicspoiler.com/mtg-spoiler/extus-oriq-overlord/. Since the front is a legendary creature, you can now essentially have a sorcery as your commander. Not only can you recast it over and over again, but it can cost only two mana if you have many creatures to sacrifice on the battlefield, and it has a somewhat powerful effect. This itself may not be a problem due to its medium power level, but I feel like it is violating Commander as a whole. (Commander being like the definition of commander.) here is the definition, "A person in authority, especially over a body of troops or a military operation." A person is not a spell. There is also another instance of this with Flamescroll Celebrant  Flip . What are your thoughts on this?

abby315 says... #2

Yeah, I'm not a fan of these MDFCs at all. They don't feel flavorful and it's messy to keep track of. I would support not allowing players to cast instants or sorceries from the command zone.

March 30, 2021 7:02 p.m.

griffstick says... #3

I dont think theres anything wrong with it. It reminds me of oathbreaker a lil bit and I think it's cool.

March 30, 2021 7:06 p.m.

Mtg_Mega_Nerds says... #4

Yeah but it isn't Oathbreaker. Commander is one thing that is separate from Oathbreaker. It isn't ment to be like that, and that is why Oathbreaker was created I assume, so that Commander wasn't so greatly altered.

March 30, 2021 7:12 p.m.

Erza420 says... #5

I don’t think anyone here can say for sure what commander was meant to be. I don't see anything wrong with having a sorcery as your commander. It’s just gonna make the creature side more expensive as well each time you cast it.

March 30, 2021 7:22 p.m.

enpc says... #6

"A person is not a spell"

Careful there, you'll upset all the people who identify as instants and/or sorceries.

I actually think this seems like a fun idea. In general (well compared to most other formats at least), commander is the format for big, splashy (overcosted) spells. So having a big, spalshy spell that you can cast over and over which bascially represents the deck's ethos feels pretty in line with commander.

And look, there will be a line that needs to be not crossed. Having something like Thrasios, Triton Hero with a Counterspell strapped on the back half is something that nobody wants (or at least wants to play against). But I think it opens up commander to a bunch of new options.

On top of that, I think it's agood way for WotC to create cards which have 2 or 3 colours in their identity while not giving players access to everything all at once. I also like that it's not just Side A: Creature, Side B: Boring creature who has different colours.

The best thing I would recommend is to wait until we see all of the cards and to then see the decks that follow. I'm not tied to loving the idea, but I wouldn't recommend tying yourself to hating it either.

March 30, 2021 7:32 p.m.

griffstick says... #7

If this mdfc cards can be your cmdr then why cant Elbrus, the Binding Blade  Flip / Withengar Unbound be your Cmdr?

March 30, 2021 7:46 p.m.

enpc says... #8

griffstick: Becuase you can never cast it as Withengar. It's kind of the same vein as saying "why can't Tomb of Urami be your commander?"

March 30, 2021 7:51 p.m. Edited.

abby315 says... #9

enpc Let's leave tired jokes in 2006 yeah?

These MDFCs, if any good, I think are just going to push the already prevalent trend of jamming as much value as possible in your command zone. Partners, Companion, and Eminence are the other two offenders. EDH was always going to go in this direction since the commander a free, always accessible card, but these mechanics really narrow down the available commanders for good archetypes because why NOT just run two Partners or a MDFC to have access to different cards in the command zone?

This makes it so that the most viable commanders are always either 1), a commander who is essentially a combo or engine piece for the rest of the deck; or 2), two partner commanders or a MDFC because it just gets you more value than any other option. The first one is always going to be a thing, but the second one pushes out a lot of other good options.

Luckily EDH is also about creativity so you can choose to just build flavorful decks instead of optimized ones, but it's pretty annoying to see WotC allowing the power creep of Standard to just leak into the command zone, IMO. Like Mtg_Mega_Nerds, I prefer the flavor of an EDH deck having one legendary commander at the helm of a thematic deck. And like, I'm also a person who also built a 4c Tymna/Thrasios combo deck, so.

Plus as a Vorthos player the MDFCs annoy me in that there's no flavor or mechanics between the two sides. It's just two things slapped together. No reason except that they're somewhat related, no mechanical or lore reason that they would "transform" from one to the other or be mutually exclusive. idk they're just weird cards

March 30, 2021 8:16 p.m.

enpc says... #10

abby315: I just don't see the problem here though? Sure, there are a bunch of mechanics like partner or companion or eminence, and yet we don't see 99% of decks gravitate towards that. Sure cEDH has a heavy run of Thrasios/Tymna decks, but in cEDH it's all about optimisation. But in regular commander, most peopel build becuase they're after a particular commander, or a particular deck theme.

On top of that, nobody is claiming that commander decks should be allowed to run a non-creature card as their commander. And unlike oathbreaker becuase you don't just get to jam a signature spell as well as your commander. Like, you're still forced to pick one of the MDFC cards as your only commander, it's not dealer's choice, so.

March 30, 2021 8:38 p.m.

It feels like WotC are just making MDFC cards as whatever they want. Like, "power creep is getting too difficult--everything's already perfect! What do we do?" and then "I know! Let's just literally put two random cards together with no canonical rhyme nor reason!"

And I don't like it.

March 30, 2021 9:18 p.m.

Mcat1999 says... #12

enpc did you just assume my typeline??

Personally, I have split opinions on the matter. And as some of you may have noticed, boy do I love to hear myself rant.

  • ahem

Actually I'm okay with MDFC cards. Why? Here's why.

We a love cards that give us options. Cryptic Command and Akroma's Will as examples, but also Boros Charm , Merciless Eviction and Kenrith, the Returned King as some more. Then there are Split cards, Fuse cards, Aftermath cards, Transform cards and let's not forget the wildly popular Adventure cards.

  • Those Ixalan flipland cards too. My God.

We, as players, have always loved more options literally (quite) at our fingertips. If a spell allows us to choose, we love that so much.

MDFCs are just the newest rendition of a very old and very well established "mechanic" of a card presenting more than we paid for. Just look at Planeswalkers. For the same mana value, you get several options to pick from.

In terms of Commander, I don't view it as an issue. Yes you an argue first and foremost that you now have "101" cards in deck. However, that still applies to all of the aforementioned types. For example, Breaking / Entering or Cut / Ribbons . Are these not several cards on one? What about Huntmaster of the Fells  Flip? Is that not two distinct creatures?

My point is, a card that offers more options beyond the first isn't anything new. Not by a very, very old Longshot.

Now how about MDFCommanders? Well... Is that really any different than Partner or Partners With? How about Companions?

We, as a community, also heavily engage in non-Legendary Creatures as Commanders all the time. Again, Dune-Brood Nephilim is the most prime example. There are decks for everything you could possibly want. You want to run a deck with Brutal Hordechief as your Commander? If you're table is okay with it, then guess what? He's your Commander.

We, as a community, play the game because of the lack of limitations. We get to build and explore in ways completely unattainable in literally every single other format in the entire recognized game.

And frankly, that's beautiful.

So, for me, if you want to play a Mardu Legendary Sorcery as your Commander... You know what I say?

I say shuffle up homie and let's draw.

March 30, 2021 9:39 p.m.

I, like Mcat1999, have mixed opinions as well on this matter, and agree with all of you. Just going to say that to prevent myself from rambling on and on ;)

March 30, 2021 9:48 p.m.

Mcat1999 says... #14

My "mixed" feelings is I am concerned, like abby315, that this will become the new "normal" and not a neat mechanic introduced where it fits. I assume a lot will be seen in our upcoming visit to Innistrad, where sure it might make sense.

Hopefully, albeit doubtfully, WOTC restrains themselves going forward.

March 30, 2021 9:54 p.m.

SynergyBuild says... #15

  1. Creatures are spells. All commanders in this game are spells. Ig if there was a legendary land creature or legendary land with the term "can be your commander" we could see a change in that but otherwise nope, all of them are. If I go out on a limb and say instant/sorcery is what you mean by spell,

  2. "Awaken the Blood Avatar" seems like something that could command your deck, a Blood Avatar. As instants/sorceries go it seems like it'd be a pretty good fit as a big ole' token is made by your commander as it's representation.

  3. Startled Awake  Flip I believe started this a while before this set, so maybe add that to the list of "a person is not a spell" being wrong.

March 30, 2021 11:58 p.m. Edited.

jaymc1130 says... #16

This is the kind of concern I don't really understand when it comes to commander. I'm a fan of the MDFC cards in general and certainly when it comes to commander. Oathbreaker is a nifty format and Commander having a few niche cards that provide a similar play style seems like a benefit to the format bringing some healthy diversity. These style of cards are certainly much much much more in keeping with the whole vibe of commander when compared to something like Opposition Agent that has completely and irreversible broken the format already in a way that can never be fixed.

March 31, 2021 7:33 a.m.

Erza420 says... #17

griffstick: these mdfc cards can be commanders because the creature side can be cast.

March 31, 2021 11:56 a.m.

TriusMalarky says... #18

Honestly

I like it

Anyways I have a promo Earl of Squirrel with alternate art and I am going to build around now

March 31, 2021 4:22 p.m.

RambIe says... #19

i would need to see a ruling before i am convinced it can be casted as a spell from command zone

from what i know these cards types are determined by the front of the card
if its a creature on front and a spell in the back it is considered a creature while its in the library / grave yard / command zone
so you cant Mystical Tutor it from your libary or Snapcaster Mage from the graveyard
last ruling i read was when you cast it from hand you may choose to cast it as the back side instead
i don't know how that applies to the command zone

Caerwyn723.1 can you help out with this ?

and if we can cast spells from command zone why cant we have Lutri, the Spellchaser unbanned in edh then ?

March 31, 2021 4:23 p.m.

RambIe says... #20

P.s. it seems the more wotc gets involved to "improve" edh the more interest i loose in continuing to play.
Between wife and i we used to buy 4-8 boxes every release
Then we stopped after they started printing the overpriced collectors versions killing the box values
And now that they have draft boxs we dont even buy booster packs anymore
its a better investment just to buy singles

they have just been killing every aspect of this format for me
so ofcourse im against casting anything other then a legendary creature from command zone
People havnt even solved the format yet and its already being reinvented

March 31, 2021 4:42 p.m.

FSims81 says... #21

I'm confused as to the main issue here, are people not using the MDFC Gods for Kaldheim as commanders? Or is the issue specific to this particular MDFC potential commander having a sorcery as it's second face rather than another creature, equipment, artifict, vehicle, or enchantment?

March 31, 2021 4:58 p.m.

FSims81, the problem is the MDFC being a sorcery. This itself is changing the aspect of commander a lot since previously, only creatures and planeswalkers were allowed to be a commander.

March 31, 2021 5:18 p.m.

RambIe says... #23

Personally im against all of it, they cant solve the format the way they want to so there just reinventing the format.

March 31, 2021 5:20 p.m.

This conversation is going on a lot. Thanks! If people are interested in emailing/chatting us for further things you can contact us at [email protected]

March 31, 2021 5:23 p.m.

TriusMalarky says... #25

Honestly this feels like yet another 'people hate it coz it's new' situation and it'll just turn out to be fine.

I mean, Partner was powerful definitely but nowhere near broken. Companion was quickly and easily balanced. Opposition Agent is playable but it didn't shatter any format.

It'll be okay, it will literally change nothing about commander.

March 31, 2021 5:24 p.m.

RambIe says... #26

I know seems everyone thinks im a troll becouse of these topics
Im not agaisnt it becouse its new
Im against these changes becouse the people making the changes dont understand how much of an impact there making to the format when they do these things
why not just make a new format ? Why break one that people have been enjoying for over a century?

March 31, 2021 5:29 p.m.

Caerwyn says... #27

RambIe

From the Commander Rules Committee, the third-party group that sets EDH’s rules:

If a Modal Double-Faced card has a legendary creature on its front face, the card can be your commander. You may cast either face from the command zone. Command tax is applicable to the card itself, regardless of which face you cast. For example, if you cast Valki, God of Lies and it then dies, casting Tibalt, Cosmic Impostor will cost 7BR and recasting Valki will cost 3B. If both faces are creatures, both faces will deal commander damage in combat.

March 31, 2021 5:49 p.m.

RambIe says... #28

It was said earlier in this thread
"I don’t think anyone here can say for sure what commander was meant to be."
I disagree, there is hundreds of websites and even a wiki that fully discloses what commander is supposed to be, were it came from, why it was made, and how it became so popular

It's was made for players to escape the usual 60 card grind
while giving collectors a place to play there old cards, and the only card that was ever ment to be consistently played was a legendary creature general.

So destroying collector value with reprints, adding consistency to cards other then the general, and forcing a hive mind preconstruct to the format is literally going against everything it was ment to be

March 31, 2021 5:56 p.m.

RambIe says... #29

@Caerwyn thank you.

March 31, 2021 5:57 p.m.

RambIe says... #30

what pisses me off the most, is as much as i am against all these changes i am still a competitive player and will take full advantage of every card possible
which makes me look like a hypocrite when i abuse these cards.
who knows maybe ill break one so badly they will have to ban it and ill get a sence of satisfaction

March 31, 2021 6:04 p.m.

Caerwyn says... #31

RambIe - How, pray tell, are they reinventing the format?

The RC clarified that MDFCs can be cast from either side... but that's not them making a new rule. That's simply how the rules work. Here's the two rules that are relevant:

903.1. "In the Commander variant, each deck is led by a legendary creature designated as that deck’s commander."

So long as the front face of a card is a legendary creature, it satisfies this rule--that's not something new in the slightest. In fact, we have seen this with the Origins planeswalkers, like Jace, Vryn's Prodigy  Flip.

711.7. "A player casting a modal double-faced card as a spell chooses which face they are casting before putting it onto the stack."

Nothing in this rule requires you to cast from your hand in order to choose the side of the card. When casting a card from the Command Zone, you are indeed casting it. Thus, following the letter of the rule, you get to decide what side of the card you are using before putting it on the stack.

Your complaint about them "changing" the rules is entirely without merit; the only remaining explanation for the vitriol is that you do not like them because they are new and you are not used to them.

March 31, 2021 11:16 p.m.

RambIe says... #32

in a word "consistency"
im not sure why none of you are grasping what i have been saying about this
ever since cedh has come out everyone has been treating edh like its a 60 card format
deck builds based of top cards and staple lists
you guys do realize that over 90% of the data collected for top commander decks and top played cards are from tournaments held in other countries right ?
people that have competed heavily in 60 card formats learned about cedh jumped on the wagon and setting the standard for the rest of us
meanwhile there are thousands of competitive edh players here in the states that have been competing off the record for years
everyone is just slapping together a bunch of 1 in 99 decks with a ton of tutors and calling it competitive but its all just junk

in edh staples and best in slot do not work
because to be competitive in edh you need utility, synergy, & consistency
the only way to build that is with redundancy and the only way you can accomplish that is by including the cards that are not best in slot
this limits you to how many functions can be in a deck which is why the synergy you build around is vital not leaving you any card slots left for "auto includes"

so to answer your question "How, pray tell, are they reinventing the format?"
by giving me consistent access to a specific spell function other then just my commander you just opened up 10-20 card slots
by adding a companion open up another 10-20 card slots

i think people fail to see how much of an impact these changes are having because there still building with a 60 card mindset

April 1, 2021 12:41 a.m.

Caerwyn says... #33

It's not that we are not "grasping" what you are saying--it's that what you are saying is based on mere conjecture and alarmism, without any actual evidence to back it up.

Let's look at the reality:

  1. There already exist terrifying things like Thrasios, Zur, Najeela, etc. I challenge you to find a single MDFC that comes close to one of the kings of cEDH. Quite frankly, Partner (and Wizards' terrible balancing with it) is several orders of magnitude worse for the game than MDFCs are.
  2. The MDFCs are designed to mitigate their flexibility by giving them slightly higher costs.
  3. Commander tax keeps you from being able to switch between the sides with impunity, decreasing their utility for what you call "consistency."

They're new, they're different, but they're really not all that scary--and certainly not that scary when compared to some of the other things that exist.

April 1, 2021 1:20 a.m.

enpc says... #34

RambIe: No matter what format it is though, the average player is going to try and optimise their deck (to varying levels).

Functional reprints of cards exist, you can't hold it against someone for running both Nature's Lore and Three Visits in their deck. And these reprints have existed for a long time, so this isn't some sort of new argument.

And on top of that, while these cards provide value in their non-creature form, there is a very limited number of these effects that poeple are able to pick from. This isn't the same as just gluing a Demonic Tutor to the back of your favourite commander. We as players don't get to choose these effects, unlike formats like Oathbreaker where your choice is two separate cards.

If they start printing MDFC cards which are a broken creature on one side and a mana efficient tutor on the other, then by all means I could understand your concern. But that's not what we've seen thus far.

The whole point of Commander is that it's a social format. Unlike basically any other format, there exists the social contract which should be the number one thing used to regulate a play group's experience.

At the end of the day, cEDH doesn't give a crap about how you feel about a card. If it's legal, the cEDH community will use it to win, as that's the primary driver for cEDH. But everybody is on a common understanding there.

In casual, if you have a deck which is causing problems for the rest of the group because it's too consistent or it's making commander unenjoyable fo the rest of the group, then the social contract exists to help deal with that situation. You may not like having to have hard conversations but that's part of life.

I'm just failing to see the issue here. You talk consistency, but we had that via functional reprints already. Since day dot we have had this. And on top of that, we have seen slews of commanders who, without employing mechanics like companion, partner, etc, have still had stigmas associated with them because of their consistency. Take Najeela, the Blade-Blossom . Or Prossh, Skyraider of Kher . These card both hold reputations, yet still fit within the mold of "traditional commander". And as far as your concerns with companion goes, we just aren't seeing it. For all the hype that was made, peopel aren't just jamming companion cards in their decks left, right and centre. Maybe we see a few Kenrith, the Returned King decks with Zirda, the Dawnwaker but that's it. And they're not exactly at the forefront of cEDH.

April 1, 2021 1:40 a.m.

Erza420 says... #35

Ramble: using a double faced card as your commander isn't "opening another 20 slots". its 1 card. 1 extra slot at best. same with companion. if you're against double faced cards in the 99 as well (which i'm assuming is what you meant by "20 extra slots") because of their "consistency" (that's almost definitely the wrong word here, pretty sure you meant "versatility") then logically you'd have to hate "any" card that gives options, including things like Return to Nature as an example. might as well be 3 spells in one, whereas Assault / Battery is only 2 in one.

oh and regardless of where commander came from, i can certainly say that nobody can say what it is meant to be. to quote PleasantKenobi, "magic is many different things to many different people". even the creators of commander don't get to dictate what the format means to other players. to you it might mean "getting away from the 60 card grind", but to others it could mean "new way to compete".

April 1, 2021 1:56 a.m.

Mcat1999 says... #36

Question: What would someone consider a "cEDH" deck to be? Would it be a deck that has won against a 4-player pod on turn 2 on three separate occasions and has the (slight) chance of winning on turn 1 if you get the correct hand - a hand which can be built two different ways?

Because if so, Kinnan, The Simic Domri is cEDH. When I play this deck, I very rarely lose. The notable times I do lose is when someone goes infinite or I have all three opponents hitting me with everything they've got.

I own about 1/2 of the deck in paper. Proxied the rest as I save and buy the pieces one at a time.

Now I say this because, as a non-cEDH player, it would seem to me that cEDH falls into the same issue as Modern, in which the format appears "solved" from the inside, but looking in from the outside it really isn't. When I play against cEDH decks in person or online, especially with my Kinnan deck, I notice that many of them rely on combos to win the game. These combos tend to be fragile and can have pieces removed.

The issue that I have noticed is that a cEDH deck functions in two major facets:

  • Tutors
  • Wincons

Very few run ample removal. So it isn't a triathlon to the finish line. It's more like a 100-meter dash and whomever kicks off first, wins.

The problem, as an outsider looking in, is that all it takes is one single well-timed removal and the entire setup falls apart.

That being said, on the topic of consistency, I feel almost as though your own argument resolves itself. If the deck is designed for consistency, then having a single MDFC means nothing as those lack consistency. Sure you may find the odd one out that actually does give you some minor consistency, but it's not like you are seeing functional reprints of Dark Ritual or something. None of the MDFCs even come remotely close to such a thing. And again, even if they did, I'm sure there's always better options.

I could see an MDFC tutor being an issue, sure. Where one side is a big creature or even threat removal and the other side is a tutor. That's pretty dangerous and I hope WOTC doesn't print something like that. But, until they do (and they will), I don't see the issue.

Again, I am by no means a cEDH player. I built one deck that has stood its ground extremely well and has won something stupid like 90% of the matches I've been in. Yes. I know it sounds insane but seriously, it's a power-house.

  • You're not casting the creatures, so you can't be countered unless your opponent runs the very specific "counter target ability", which almost nobody does
  • Your Commander costs . Commander tax is a non-issue.
  • You don't need to rely on draw, since you rely on cheating off the top of the library
  • We abuse the + mana by having an outrageous amount of non-land sources of mana in the deck
  • By packing the deck full of clones, we can clone the biggest threats we have, such as Nyxbloom Ancient , Blightsteel Colossus and Terastodon
  • The deck has an extreme density of removal on creatures, meaning we don't just get a body on the field, we also take out any set pieces we want
  • On that topic and previous points, we get to literally take the best option of the top five. So we get to specifically hone in on what is the best possible play, at all times
  • The deck has numerous combos built in, such as abusing Deadeye Navigator with something such as Meteor Golem or Thorn Mammoth
  • One of my favorite combos, and the hardest one to pull off, is Woodfall Primus , Gigantoplasm and The Great Henge . You need Woodfall Primus out first, then you clone it with Gigantoplasm . After both of these are out, you bring into play The Great Henge . Now, what you do is pay into on Gigantoplasm . Giga dies as it becomes a 0/0. Since it was a copy of Woodfall Primus , it has Persist so it comes back into play with a -1/-1 counter on it. However, The Great Henge puts a +1/+1 counter on it and they cancel out. You have Gigantoplasm enter as a copy of Woodfall Primus again. You can now repeat this process an infinite number of times, destroying every single land, artifact and enchantment in play that you do not control. Now, no opponent can cast another spell for the rest of the game
  • We have several ways to generate infinite mana, including ways to produce faux infinite mana with several copies of Nyxbloom Ancient
  • You can use Basalt Monolith to generate infinite mana. Dump this into Cogwork Assembler to generate an infinite number of Simic Signet s or most other artifacts. Now, you have infinite colored mana. You can also use Grand Architect and Pili-Pala . There is also Basalt Monolith and Chromatic Orrery . I am also considering adding Prismat as another infinite colored mana combo as we can feed into it for either or . All of these options means we can effectively play our entire library that turn
  • We can react in response for everything. Hold up mana and pass. If you know how to do it, you can put an activation on the stack and when the ETB of the creature goes on the stack, put another activation on the stack ahead of it

The deck is extremely brutal. I had to stop playing it. So...

But again, I am not a cEDH player. All I am saying is, from the outside looking in, cEDH decks run very differently from traditional casual EDH decks. I can see MDFCs making a decent splash in casual EDH decks, but not in cEDH. So, I don't really see the issue here.

I can see, perhaps one or two, being used in cEDH. But to suggest it breaks the format? No, not at all.

April 1, 2021 2:24 a.m.

Mcat1999 says... #37

Sorry, not Prismat. The creature I meant to link is Prismite .

April 1, 2021 2:26 a.m.

plakjekaas says... #38

cEDH is more of a mindset entering the game, than it is a deck definition. cEDH tables will assume every other deck is as powerful as possible, and do anything necessary to efficiently end the game in their favour as soon as it's able to. That's why by far the most interaction in cEDH is counterspell-like more than wrath- and doomblade-like. There's plenty of cheap, two card combos that can end a game, currently the most popular and efficient wincon is Thassa's Oracle + Demonic Consultation / Tainted Pact . Put the oracle trigger on the stack, exile your deck, let the trigger resolve, and win the game even if they remove the oracle. Creatures beating face is a slow, inefficient way to win the game, gathering 120 damage on opponents just takes longer than tutoring out two cards and playing them.

Casual, focused, and even optimized decks usually just want to "do the thing" envisioned in deckbuilding; play tribal, play a janky 5-card combo, voltron someone to death with all the equipment, proliferate all your planeswalkers and collect the emblems, etc; as many objectives as there's players probably. Everyone steps into the game to have a fun time, see their cards at work, enjoy the game as much as trying to win. This is where the social contract and the salty cards lists come in.

A deck that combos off at turn 2, or blowing up all lands to prevent your opponents from playing magic, being able to counter every spell, Windfall + Hullbreacher ... These things offer a different kind of fun, the fun to try and win, or at least dominate, the game at any cost. Like you'd do in Legacy. That's where Ramble's 60 card grind objections originate. If that's the plan you expect from all opponents, you'll adjust the interaction you include to combat those strategies, just like you'd adjust the number of boardwipes in your deck if everyone around you will play tribal creature decks.

For deckbuilding decisions, this basically means you're going to ask yourself for every card: "is this the best card I can play to help me end the game in my favour?". You'll never play a Worn Powerstone if you could play Mana Crypt . You won't include your pet card Archangel Avacyn  Flip just because it makes you think of the time you dominated fnm in 2016. Every card has a purpose, and is optimised for that purpose. Even on a budget, that should be your guidelines for building your deck.

MDFCs, however, are seldom best in slot. Their strength lies in never being worst in slot, because if one side is terrible, the other one can be useful enough so you don't topdeck something useless when you really need to hit action. Bala Ged Recovery  Flip is a bad Regrowth on one side, and a bad Forest on the other, but will never be dead in hand because of the versatility. cEDH decks are usually not looking for effects like this, because taplands are horrible for swift and efficient play, and actually playing Regrowth would save you the mana to actually cast that winning spell you're getting back from the graveyard. So Mcat1999 's presumption of: one or two could be good enough, but they usually won't make that much of a splash on the highest power levels, is probably accurate, at least for the MDFCs printed until now.

April 1, 2021 5:08 a.m.

RambIe says... #39

my god this is alot to respond to first thing in the morning
no based on the responses everyone's posting i do not feel you are grasping what i am saying
commander tax is not keeping anything in check, there is just to many ways to bring a creature back from the graveyard, bounce a card to hand, or even flicker the back side of a card flip it to the front. looping any of these cards with out paying tax would be a simple task

i don't have facts or evidence and i'm just scared of new cards ?
i think its more that most of you are standard/modern players not real edh players so you don't understand what i am talking about

first. competitive is not a mind set. competitive is a deck that consistently ends the game before turn 5 hits every single time it plays. competitive edh games last on average 10-15mins

second. in order to build a deck that does this you need to start with a combo.. most competitive decks use 2 card combos but for the sake of argument lets use a 3 card combo in a competitive deck because 3 card combos are more abundant and standard players don't think that can be pulled off competitively in edh
in order to build consistency each card in the combo will need 14-19 other forms of redundancy or ways to tutor it
so combo card 1 takes 15-20 slots, again with cards 2 and 3
which puts you to a total of 45-60 cards in the deck dedicated to the combo in order to pull it of consistently with the first few turns of a game
2 card combo uses 30-40 slots in the deck
completive decks built this way consistently fire off every game before most there opponents have a chance to respond, even if you do stop it there's enough redundancy to fire off again the next turn

there is how ever a large number of good competitive players that feel that's to glass cannon and build there decks optimized for turn 5
3 card combo on turn 5 only takes 10-15 forms of redundancy
so card 1 9-14 redundancy/tutor and same with cards 2 and 3
in an optimized deck a 3 card combo only uses up 30-45 card slots
while a two card combo uses 20-30, leaving room to build in utility

but even a casual deck (designed to fire around 10) with a 4 card combo would still require 5-10 redundancy taking up 20-40 card slots

if you ever actually built a competitive edh deck and not just pasted a bunch of staples into a deck then you would fully understand how much of an impact it has to gain consistent access to any card other then your commander and i wouldn't have to keep trying to explain myself
and honestly its just here on tapped out, IRL i don't have to explain these things everyone else already gets it they all feel the same way i do

April 1, 2021 8:09 a.m.

RambIe says... #40

P.s. as for the kings of cedh
Thats called commander dependency
Its a weakness. Stop the commander stop the deck
Keep in mind we have been playing against turn 2 Sliver Queen decks years before cedh was even a thing.
and before anyone even says it. No the decks had nothing todo with slivers, the commander never had to leave the zone. It was just access to 5 colors and an optional mana dump

April 1, 2021 8:26 a.m. Edited.

plakjekaas says... #41

Ugh, the internet doesn't agree with the local definitions I came up with along with my friends. This must mean the internet is wrong! xD

April 1, 2021 8:49 a.m.

RambIe says... #42

Cute, but inaccurate
They have yet to even solve the land calculations for edh still basing it on same math and theories used in 60 card
If im so wrong then why does every cedh deck have to be mulliganed 2-3 times to get a playable hand?
None of you developed the formulas currently used, none of you understand where it came from, none of you tried a diffrent way. Yet all of you just group up copy it and dismiss any other way

the best question would be why do i care enough to try and explain
Which that i cant awnser so i just give up ya all have fun

April 1, 2021 9:30 a.m.

FSims81 says... #43

Ramble you just gave yourself the answer inadvertently. Stop the MDFC Commander, stop the deck.

If the kings of cEDH are so easily answered that you can brush them off with such a casual answer, so too will the MDFC you're concerned about.

Have any of the Kaldheim MDFC broken any form of EDH yet?

April 1, 2021 9:39 a.m.

Okay, I think we all need to calm down here. We have different responses and ideas. That is okay. I think we have figured out that people are conflicted about this and for a good reason. Thank you all for contributing to the post, but I think it is time to let go.

April 1, 2021 9:55 a.m.

RambIe says... #45

Mtg_Mega_Nerds its your topic, ill respect your wishes and walk away from this
Im done trying to explain anyways
Like i said more then 90% of the data is collected from other countries were edh wasnt popular its only a matter of time before we start getting tournaments in the states were the seasoned vets will jump in and everyone will see for themselfs.

April 1, 2021 10:22 a.m.

RambIe says... #46

What everyone is forgetting is the format was grown,howned, and solved. In the back corners of lgs's off the records. The decks and input of the players who spent years accomplishing that has been ignored and overlooked at this point in time.

April 1, 2021 10:31 a.m.

To weigh in as a competitive EDH player, Jeska already was something quite similar to the above described "non person in the command zone" being value and a wincon (thru infinite mana) in the CZ. She wasnt the first tho, remember the Chain Veil Teferi? cmon yall.

I really really like the design space Extus is in. I have hated many of WotC/hasbros recent decisions with UB / TWD, but I must say this card design knocks it outta the park. The sorcery side is an infinite mana wincon, and has value that is rough to obtain early. Excellent!! The front is able to be the value generation engine you want it to be! Heck yeah! In cEDH it isn't overly pushed, its slotting right into fringe as a Mardu reanimator alternative to Alesha. Its got pros and cons to consider that are legit. Its main benefit compared to Alesha is infinite mana wincon in the CZ, and her benefits compared to Extus include: Castable off jeweled lotus, recur more things & sooner.

So I like the card. Seems slick. Not too slick, though.

April 1, 2021 1:42 p.m.

RambIe says... #48

as a competitive edh player whats your take on Magecraft ?
were just having two copy spells target each other becomes a win con
Professor Onyx , Archmage Emeritus , Witherbloom Apprentice , Leonin Lightscribe

April 1, 2021 3:35 p.m.

Onyx, nah probably not competitive.

Emeritus... has some merit. Its worth testing in quite a few lists, and may be its own deck tbh.

Witherbloom is being tested in a few lists like Frog but it probably will find a home in slow stax lists if anywhere really.

Lightscribe would be okay in limited. Compared to Drannith its pretty weak imo.

Storm Kiln Artist is DOPE in Korvold

-I am a draw go, stax, and turbo naus player. My opinions are just that, opinions.

April 1, 2021 3:49 p.m.

RambIe says... #50

Klin in korvold really?
I was thinking nin Edit: klin in nin ftw! Haha

April 1, 2021 4:02 p.m. Edited.

Please login to comment