3 fallacies I commonly see with deckbuilding in commander, courtesy of my Deck Doctor videos only available on patreon. Patreon / edhdeckbuilding TCGPlayer Affiliate Link www.tcgplayer.com/?...
The colloquial name for #2 is "Magical Christmas Land scenario". It's when you're focusing solely on the absolute perfect situation, and ignore all the other 99.9% of situations.
Which is the same realm that every "EDH turn 1 kill" video sits in. If you get this EXACT opening hand of independently bad cards, with no mulligans, you can win.
My question becomes, as I'm building a Muldrotha deck.. I'm trying to let it win with Jarad and throwing a couple large creatures in the deck. So does running Vampire Hexmage with Dark Depths fall into the same realm as #2? Tbf, it mills a fair amount so it can have more access to cards and tries to slow down the game with control anyway.
I love this term haha. I have an Izzet deck that has about 5 possible Magical Christmas Land Scenarios. It mostly just fires spells off in random directions, but at some point in the game it goes full Christmas mode and I win by accident
@@pascalsimioli6777 Confirmation bias is an entirely different thing. That's when someone believes something to be true, then either seeks out any new evidence in support of it while ignoring anything that refutes it, or misinterpreting new evidence as supporting their claim when it doesn't.
I have to disagree with the #1 point quite strongly here. While I agree that playing cards that are worse because they're on theme isn't going to produce the best decks. It will make all your decks feel more unique and fun, which will make building more different decks and strategies more fun instead of just recycling the same cards into every deck. Commander is still a casual format, not a competitive one.
I absolutely agree with this. Blasphemous Act is a great card for a Commander deck with Red, but if you're playing a very on theme Lorehold deck, the card just doesn't fit the theme. It's the same with cards that may fit a specific strategy better but you want to stay with a creature type; Merfolk and other sea creatures, not Birds, Spirits, Dragons and more. You know?
Another example; using Red again, you want to have a Dwarf Treasure themed deck but most people would suggest Goldspan Dragon or Dockside Extortionist, but you want to stay on theme, so stay on theme. Do what feels right for you and have fun. We don't have to have the most optimized decks, especially for a casual format.
I definitely don’t agree with #1. Sometimes half the fun of deck building is setting a limitation and figuring out synergy and attack vectors with what you have.
I sometimes do #1 intentionally. In some decks I don't want the BIS option. Sometimes I just want a fun, thematic deck wheere all the cards fit a certain theme, even if they re not the best. For me that usually makes playing the game more fun and prevents me from playing the same cards over and over again. Still a good tip though as it is important to being aware that you are doing that.
I often cut out cedh cards in favour of cheaper cards that are funner. No-one wants to sit on the end of a stax deck where everyone is doing nothing, we wanna have fun.
i do the same, both for theme and for limiting deck power I think its fine as long as youre aware why youre picking it, and not mistaking it for the strongest option
Commander is an amazing case study of “players will optimize the fun out of gameplay” Commander was started as a casual format, big flashy spells that will never see play in standard, modern or legacy. But so many people play it as “singleton modern”
Exactly. I hate the whole “10 draw spells, ten ramp spells, ten removal spells” rule. Because when you think about it, if you removed those cards +the extra lands you have in your commander deck, wow! It becomes 60 card constructed singleton! What’s the point?? Just play Legacy then.
I think the opposite is also true. People become too focused on their decks core strategy and they neglect proper balance towards the fundamentals: ramp, removal, interaction, card draw etc. Then they are flummoxed when their deck can’t recover from a boardwipe lol.
These are all great points. I have found myself making all these mistakes at times. Especially #3. I'll be building on theme and realize oh I can throw this win-con combo in here because it's the right colors. Then it can snowball from there and I realize that instead of one theme I've got 3 or 4.
I agree with everything you said, but i dont like the first point. I dont view brewing for flavour as a mistake. My wizard deck had ixodors will and my prosper deck is "exile tribal" so im running worse removal because it exiles. My will/lucas/lurrus deck runs lurrus as companion even tho it is worse for 2 drop flavour with the commanders. Not everything has to be brewed for power, and it kinda goes against the spirit of the format for me.
Not to mention, you get 1 copy of Counterspell. Okay, I included it, now I need another 4-5 counterspells at least and they can't just be Counterspell and probably need to be better than Cancel. Dissipate is pretty dope. That's 2. Where do I go from there? Well, it's wide open, especially if your deck is heavily themed. Lots of spell recursion and untapping going on? Include an Unwind or Rewind. Etc.
This vid is honestly what I needed right now. I’ve been stalled brewing my *Kardur Doomscourge* deck due Mistake Number 1. Yes, Kardur leans into Red/Black ETBs, but there are plenty of traditional, accumulated value cards are simply better than ETB effects. Thank you for helping reach this epiphany, my good man.
Love this video. Its nice to have the words to convey these issues to my playgroup. Another mistake I see alot especially with newer brewers is cutting land slots. They will cut just 1 or 2 at a time and then cant figure out why their deck doesnt do anything with 24 lands.
Man I do #3 a lot haha. I will say that it’s often fun to have an unfocused game plan, you fs will win less but it can make games feel more varied. I think a thoughtful chaos of synergies is what’s best bc too many irons in the fire is a recipe for dead draws. Great video, cheers!
I like the idea of that third deck and I think it could be a viable deck if you approach it primarily as a wheels deck. Like you said though, having wheels to support your cast from graveyard theme and then trying to add synergies with wheeling can complicate the deck too much. Ive seen that happen more than once with the milling altar where people will throw it in in an aristocrats deck as a free sac outlet that can also fill their graveyard for their recursion and then decide that they should start adding in cards that synergize with milling even though the altar is the only reliable source of mill in their deck.
These are very good tips 👍🏻... Myself I use generic options/staples for Removal and Ramp the vast majority of the time, while adjusting the creatures/artifacts/enchantments to the strategy... The other 2 tips are vey good explanation all about consistency and focus, which are traps/mistakes we've all fall for at some point Ps: that Dralnu deck was almost turning into a Varina deck 😅
For #3 I like to call "tertiary strategies". I think two directions is generally best when building a deck. Anything working from that second one is tertiary - as you said it's not guaranteed
I would argue that bone miser interacts with Dralnu pretty well if you build right, because it creates permanents that can be sacrificed when the commander is damaged, makes mana to falsh back powerful spells, and draws you cards for doing what you want to do anyway (putting instants in the yard) . I would say you don't need wheels to make good use of the bone miser and Dralnu, you just need a discard theme. Symmetrical discard effects, other discard pay offs and cycling could make it work really well.
Yeah, but in that scenario Bonemiser fits in the theme of your deck. Thats what he was saying. Stay whit a theme... If you build this deck as a Discard/Cycle deck, Bonemiser will be a golden pick. But if you go a different direction, Bonemiser might not beva good choice...
I think his point was that the deck didn't actually include a lot of discard cards so it was getting to be too unfocused on what it wanted to be doing, I believe the scenario you describe was meant to be covered by saying that you don't have to build around your commander specifically as long as you have a theme...so changing your deck to be discard-focused primarily WOULD suddenly make a card like bone miser on theme now.
I don't know if I'd call it a mistake, but one issue I find when deck building is that there are so many staples that I want to throw in that there doesn't really feel like there's that many cards doing the thing I want to be doing. Like, say I build a mono-blue artifact deck. Now I need to include Counterspell, Force of Negation, Cyclonic Rift, maybe Aether Spout, etc etc. Sure, these cards are powerful and some even necessary, like removal or card draw, but I find it's easy to go overboard with staples to the point where you neglect what your deck is trying to do.
This is really good! It reminds me of how many decks I've seen playing the Tron lands, and how high they are on EDHREC. I mean if you're playing a colorless deck and you just need something to fill the slots, go for it. But most decks aren't colorless. And most decks don't have a lot of nonbasic tutors. You're pretty much hoping for a one in a million chance. Any other colorless utility land is going to be better.
To piggyback off of the 3rd topic, in EDH the only constant is your access to your Commander. The initial cost, colors paid and effect are it. Everything else has a 1% chance to be drawn and less to be resolved or combo’d with another card. Therefore to build around your commander and with those themes that it accentuates is crucial.
regarding the first. Flavor always wins. Noone remebers the guy with the artifact deck that ran mana drain, but the one that actually had an artifact deck
This is really thoughtful. I only partially agree with the point about including things in your deck which work well with things which work well with your commander. It depends on how many of those things you have in your deck & how good the payoff will be. If it only needs to pay off once, then great it's more likely. For example I run Chainer, and there are a solid number of discard & sacrifice effects in that deck. So running Tergrid is a powerful addition. I think if you have to have good luck for something to go off, then it's risky to run it, but if you have to have bad luck for it not to, then it's worth running, especially with a big pay-off.
An example I have for the "What if" combo. I have an atla palani deck with ashnods alter and thornbite staff. Both are very good to have on the field solo but it creatures a loop if you have both out.
It's really easy to start thinking "if I get this card, then this card can do this" when you're deck building, but you need to think realistically. 2 cards is 2% of your deck. That's 2 out of 99 cards in your deck. Combos are cool, but your combo pieces should work in your deck on their own, outside of the combo. I like basalt monolith and Forsaken monument for infinite mana but it's not a combo that fits everywhere. Forsaken Monument is a fantastic card, but will largely be useless outside of a colorless heavy deck.
For the tribal themed cards fallacy, I would argue that Psychic Trance is still a good Wizard Tribal card, although using it as a counter spell is still bad. I would say that pre-emptively using it on a turn that you plan to combo off and win is an effective insurance policy, and allows you to have a very efficient level of protection (or proactively forces the use of an opponent's counter).
The only time that #2 is ever alright in EDH is if that "magical 2-card combo moment" involves your commander. You can reliably get ahold of your commander, and as long as the deck doesnt revolve around that one combo it's totally ok. You can have a Marwyn deck with Umbral Mantle and it will run just fine without the combo. You can do the same for a Prossh deck without relying on Food Chain. As long as the deck can stand on it's own without the miracle combo involving your commander, #2 is fine.
#1 I agree but it depends also on the power level your a aiming for : does it suit the power level of your play group to go the strictly better option or does tone it down a notch with "synergic" cards feels better overall when playing with your friends. Keep that in mind, heck! You could even bring a "sideboard" if your playgroup wants to crank the level up then :) #2 yeah, that's a common mistake but sometimes you just HAVE to play stupid cards because... because! muh baby! :c #3 remind me of a questing beast voltron I tried not that long ago... didn't go well as I was thinking "I need protection for my commander, I WANT fog effects to screw around, my beast needs power, I have a +1/+1 sort of thing going on for the deck, so proliferate it is, ..." long story short : it did not work. Waaaaaaay to many directions for the deck, not a stable strat, etc... I play tested 3 times and was baffled at how cluncky and bad it was! Then I remembered that I always wanted to try out Marwyn (as a legacy of Selvala who is to powerfull for my playgroup x) ) so I litteraly break Questing beast in two : +1/+1 counters went to Marwyn and focus on an unkillable machine for the beast. Results are : Questing beast is feared on my playgroup as an instant killer if you drop your guard just even once (trample/deathtouch/infect is what I call "mistake where made") and Marwyn is... special XD I have actually 30 lands in the decks after decreasing from 36 and then 33 and I STILL consider to go down more... I don't know HOW this oddity work but I'm always mana flood and with no cards in hand (no, the deck is not bad, it just seems to be able to play so fast that it can't even keep up with itself, neither my opponents though)
That last fallacy always ends with me making 2 decks one on the original idea and the other with left over cards in my build pool that just don't quite fit thr theme.
I don't even consider Counterspell anymore when making decks. Not only are there so many free counters now, but graveyard synergy is ever on the rise and graveyard hate more and more important. (plus I don't like decks that are _only_ counterspells, they're super boring for everyone involved) The only mono-blue counterspells I ever consider are Void Shatter / Dissipate / Faerie Trickery for the hard counter and exile, and Force of Will / Force of Negation / Fierce Guardianship because they're free.
Honestly, I just stopped playing counterspells because my playgroup feels bad getting countered most of the time... I think I like better seeing people do their stuff.
As good as the other advice is, I think that the first point raised is mute in casual. Optimal decks arnt the aim in casual. However, if your deck is under powered and you are not having fun because of that, then heck yeah optimise it slightly, but I try not to compromise on flavour, cause casual isnt competitive, and flavour makes it plus ultra for me personally. Its the only chance to use those less optimal cards sitting around in your collection gathering dust that arnt relevant in any other format. The other two points are very on point. 👌✌️
Yeah I think FUN is an underrated deck building consideration as commander decks seem to be getting more and more competitive. I like running more flavor than perfectly optimized.
I'm pretty proud of my most recent deck I built because it has a good balance of removal, combos, ramp, etc. The one thing I want to adjust is having better ways to protect my commander since the deck revolves around the commander. Command Beacon is there for sure, and I've got some ways to make it hexproof, but I really feel it might not be consistent.
If your strategy depends on having your commander out, and that fact is obvious to your opponent, theres not a lot you can do unfortunately. People really fear that commander damage lol
I think psychic trance has a lot more value than a basic counterspell in wizards tribal simply because you can basically shut down an entire turn if you have even just a few wizards to tap. Not to mention if you have ways to reuse the spell then you have to potential to shut down multiple turns
I like making sure to have spot removal enough to have at least 1 on hand every 7 cards or so. Not enough to always answer but enough to answer one big deadly situation
I do think one thing you didn't mention as part of #1 is that this is a singleton format, so sometimes you end up including not-so-great cards in your deck purely because you feel you really need more of something and are running out of the good options. I mean if you only have one Counterspell in a 99-card deck, the chances are pretty low that you're actually going to see it unless you're tutoring it somehow. Although off the top of my head I can think of 4 or 5 other okay counterspells that would probably work better than Assert Authority...I was just pointing out that you didn't mention that.
On point #1; I agree that the themed counters are not very good, but I disagree that you should run Counterspell instead. I'm honestly surprised to hear that from someone who doesn't like running Smothering Tithe and Cyclonic Rift. Counterspell is just another staple. It's not very interesting. Override and Assert Authority are much more thematic and interesting. We're not pretending they're better than Counterspell. We're playing them because they're more unique and on-theme. I feel that's the whole point of Commander.
The better thing to do is run okay counters that your theme makes great, not run bad counters that your theme makes okay. For instance, Spell Swindle is normally just a bad Mana Drain, but in a Galazeth Prismari (or Urza, for that matter) deck, it's straight up ramp.
for the obliterate thing, i honestly would consider it because of the indestructible lands from mh2. if the deck is high colours, like breya or 5c pile, then they probably have anywhere from 6 to 12 indestructible lands, along with darksteel ingot and other random darksteel cards. i kinda like it
I would, and do, do all three intentionally. As long as you know that you're doing it, you can maks the rest of the deck compensate. Instead of a card relying on 1 other card, it might rely on 3-4, for example. It makes decks more fun to me, and it helps limit power level, playing thematic counters makes a strong blue deck less oppressive, several weird, hard to find combos can make the combo deck more chaotic, amd its kinda fun to get 2/3 of a combo and spend a few turns trying to turn it into a win. Just, y'know, be aware of what youre doing, like running oet cards, its not wrong, just dont pretend its a powerhouse card that justifies itself
the Kiki example might be better than it seems since Imperial Recruiter often assembles the entire Kiki line, sometimes requiring more hoops than others but essentially that is how good the Kiki line is
The third one is related to the rule of thumb that actually made me a solid player in most games. "You should always be doing SOMETHING." In magic I always want to play a card, or cycle, or pay for an ability. Flexibility is a strength in its own right, and you should always plan with the possibility in mind that things don't go perfectly.
Your third advice is soo typical towards adhd brains like mine 😆 I almost allways derail from the main strategies because my brain just starts into hyperfocus and starts to seek the dopamine instead of the strategy 😂
I have an eligeth deck (the partner doesn't matter really for this) and it's definitely guilty of the spinning the wheels and not going anywhere sorta thing, it's wicons are only flying creature damage or flying commander damage. But it's actually really strong in 1v1 or 3 player games and I can't bring myself to change it because of that, which means it now tends to be saved/left waiting for those type of games.
i have the kiki jiki / deceiver exarch combo in my 3 color omnath deck. i draw a lot, so i'm fine with exarch not being so good by itself. it can tap a big commander that is a threat, or untap a beefy blocker like multani.
Yeah, Deceiver has been a weirdly useful tool for me in my Obeka deck. It can untap a couple good creatures of mine, but a lot of the time I end up tapping something my opponent wants to use, and it has actually stopped people from going off a few times. It's such an innocuous effect, it feels like a total nothing card when you're looking at it, but then... it just kinda puts in work when you least expect it :p
Great tips. Also remember to have fun. It doesn't have to cost a fortune. I'm building a gruul commander 50 deck 😆. Total cost 50 bucks for 100 cards. A few costed me a dollar or two but most cards are in the 20 to 40 cent range. Way better then the deck I had. Best part is its commander so if someone walks in with a 2000 dollar elite deck the other 3 players will likely gang up on them. Great way to play. That 1 vs 1 game play always felt like the person with more money into the deck usually won. Start a 50 cent league 😆 🤣. Got me interested again. Before I wouldn't say I gave up but its no fun with someone always mopping the floor with you with their elite deck. You would be really surprised of how many good cards there are under a dollar. You won't get the best of the best but usually there is a close alternative. Have fun.
"Oh if I get this I won't have to worry about spot removal" "My general theme doesn't mesh well with instants or sorceries for spot removal" I feel these are fallacies of their own too.
I'd love to see you make a how to make a lower power deck for playing against new people. I've seen alot of people that say they have a low power deck but they just run train on people running a fresh precon. I mean you could get a precon but everyone adds to it and then it's not playable with new people.
One deck I like running against new people gives me a ton of room to control my own active power. I can keep my side of the field fair while still letting it represent an obstacle, but also be easy to explain what's going on. The same deck can still compete in mid mid-high games by just utilizing it to its full potential. Imo a good newbie vs friendly deck needs to be playable at multiple levels by making active decisions to keep it in range while playing
ah, definately can be some good tips here, but i see some flaws, mostly with 1 and 2. so, with 1, the argument of certain cards being direct upgrades is kinda beaten out by a few things. often, people dont have access to every card avaliable, it takes away from the fun of building a deck if you can get any card you want, since then you arent going for "what i can make with what i have" and you are going for "whats the best X deck with Y colors that exist". then, remember you cant have multiple of a lot of cards in command and can only have 4 in standard formats, so if a deck bases around countering spells, then it cant just have 4 counterspells and no other countering. so, the flaws for 1 boil down to availability, fun, and what effects you need more of with 2, i kinda see what you are getting at, if a certain card cant synergize well on its own it sometimes isnt great, vut thats the thing with MTG, you never truly have a dead card after all, whats the point of obliterate without anything lined up for it? a panic button, since it nukes all non-enchamtment permanants, but keeps life, hands, graveyards, exile piles, etc, the same. and, decks tend to be centered around their combos, just cus one thing doesnt work on its own, doesnt mean it isnt strong a (somewhag stuipid) example is auras and equiptment they are litteraly useless on their own (with little exeption), so they need a creature or other permanent to latch onto, doesnt mean they are bad though! i agree with 3, it is good to have your deck not be too versatile, since the more cards you have that dont synergize, the less reliable the deck becomes. however, the opposite is also true, having some branching paths to introduce variety, versatility, and unpredictability can help. but yet again, its a very delicate balance. oh, and im open for debates if anyone wants to try to convince me otherwise ;3 still a good video! still brings up important points for deckbuilding.
Another mistake I would add after performing it myself many, MANY times, is "Building solely around your commander and having no plan B". If your commander eating Doom Blade, into a Wrath of God is enough that you might as well concede, you need to correct things.
I could see a argument for physchic trance. Because if you comander is a wizard and you have a couple more and your about to go off you essentially can counter a bunch of things if ppl try to stop you at the end step be4 your turn...
Ominous seas is good in any blue deck. Because if it's gonna be a dead card u cycle it and if u have nothing else t2 u drop it cause every deck plays card draw so it's gonna do work u get 1 8/8 out of it its worth it any more is value
but there is sometimes a Pet Card you like you want in your deck and commander is the place to get to play those sometimes fun can override logic. i play parhelion in my angel deck and it is a very bad card but I like the theme of it in that deck and sneaking it into a deck where prolyy could be a better card it is really only place feels like might fit. so for fun the dumb thing stays in.
Question for "Avoid dead cards", if you have a deck that has say, 5-10 ways of getting its second piece, would you still consider it a bad card? For instance, I have a creature-heavy Kaalia of the Vast [Mardu] Deck, which has several ways of giving its own creatures indestructible. (For instance; Sephara, Sky's Blade, Make a Stand, and a bunch of ways to tutor said cards). If I wanted to use Obliterate as an end-the-game-no-questions-asked combo, would that still be a dead card?
So... I'm not sure how to classify this deck building strategy of mine, but, I try to not go too far above my commander's casting cost, cmc,mana value,whatever, as I build the deck. Example: my Krenko,mob boss deck has exactly 4 cards that cost more than 4 mana, just to make sure that once I reach 4 mana,I can play the vast majority of my deck.
That's just keeping your mana curve low. If you really want to keep things that way, consider things that you can destroy your excess lands with, like Orcish Lumberjack and any number of other 'sacrifice a mountain' or land effects. If your mana costs are all low, you can afford to lose excess lands to get extra punch.
This is a good strategy... for some commanders. If you're going for an Animar stompy deck, for example, then most of your creatures are going to be (WAY) more expensive than your commander. Same for Cecily or Yennet, who want to cheat out big spells. In a Krenko deck, then yeah, solid strategy. You probably shouldn't cut cards purely based on the fact that they're high cmc though, one of the strongest decks I built played a 9-mana spell as top of curve, with the second-highest cost card in the deck costing 4.
@@Ceracio I try the same strategy in most of my decks, of course, the exception being Rakdos, lord of Riots!😁 It also helps keep the overall prices of my decks low,since I am on an extremely tight budget.
I can see a narrow situation in which Psychic Trance could be better. If your opponent is executing their combo and a single counter spell won’t stop them.
At the end of the day, a wizard that's unable to counter a single spell, because he has only bad spells at hand doenst even feel thaaat flavorful (unless you are trying to copy Rincewind, I guess)
I have scurry oak, and Ivy lane denizen in my phabine, boss's confidant precon. Yes the combo is nice but either card can be played with the decks strategy just fine My friends hates that I do it, cause he thinks putting a combo in is pointless for many of the reasons listed here but he's missing the point, both cards are great in my token deck. I don't need both of them to win a game with them. If I get them, great I just vomited 1,000 squirrels on the field. It's not any worse than losing to scute swarm. Which we lose to often. My other defense is ummm run more interaction.... If I win with that strategy it's cause not enough people are running murders/board wipes.
Number 1 isnt always a mistake. I have a myr deck that has bad cards In it just because their myrs. But the deck is fun and decently powerful. It's all about the goal.
I disagree with you on psychic trance, it has specific uses where its infinitely better than counterspell, you cast it on the opp's upkeep or in response to a threat and it gives you numerous counters for the turn, while it does suck early, later game its stupid good
Ominous Seas wouldn't have been bad in is deck and there is nothing wrong with a off Ominous Seas but your deck better have enough synergy to support the include. E.G. If you like lots of big draw in your deck and wheels. Go ahead and throw Ominous Seas, Smothering Tithe, and Psychosis Crawler in your deck. So long as your probabilities of it being a good card in had are up high then the off strategy is justified.
My problem is I'll build a deck 1 deck that 2 commander can be used for and not optimize the deck build from either.... Example....I seena thassa deck in action they stole an Urza lord high from the other opponent and the deck started going off.....so I started building a deck for both thassa & urza.....now I have too artifacts not enough blink creatures.....
I came up with a few ideas for myself when building Anemic This card needs at least 20 cards to synergize with or it just isn't good, even though it seems very helpful at first glance. Parasitic Wizards just didn't print enough cards to make this card/strategy work effectively enough to warrant a slot in the 99/98. (Thankfully with Baldur's Gate, MtG now has more dice roll cards for Farideh, more dungeon delving cards for Varis, and an Adventure focused commander.) Voracious/Hungry Without a supplemental strategy, this card/strategy will grind your game to a halt, or even eat away at resources you prefer to hold onto. 1 for 10 and Goes with Commander This card doesn't need too much of a push to really get going, or it just works due to your commander's ease of access. This can include boots/greaves, which can with plan B creatures if the commander isn't going to get the job done. Plan B Commander Typically a 6, 7, or even higher mana value commander, you're going to want to do stuff while you're waiting to get the mana to get your commander out of the command zone. With Kazarov (Sengir Pureblood), I still need ways to protect/recur him, so I do other things to keep opponents off of my life total. Cake This card is way too hungry for the 98/99, because you don't get the mana efficiently enough, it screws up your mana curve, and you're already likely to have it sitting with 5 other cards in hand with too high/inconvenient of a cost. It is likely a pet card, but also empty calories. Put it back in the fridge for another Birthday/Magical Christmas Land, because there's likely going to be more opportunities to use it again. One of the worst-case scenarios could have it be a non-bo, so be careful. Tactical Non-Bo This card/strategy acts as a divert power switch, just in case you can't or are getting ready to disrupt symmetry. It is helpful in group-hug/slug decks when you're getting ready to shift your strategy to the endgame.
I'm such a #3 person 😀 I really would love if my land destruction planeswalker super friends would work properly 😀 But one in a 100 games you are the king of the table destroying everything an doing ults like there is no tomorrow 😀
So here's my question... I'm playing an Old Stickfingers reanimator deck where the only creature is Cultivator Colossus. It only needs to fire once and get as many lands as possible for win-cons such as Torment of Hailfire. It also has the combo of Mausoleum Secrets/Assemble from Parts. My question is, is that worthwhile? Mausoleum can tutor up a few other cards, so it's reasonable without Assemble, but it's obviously conditional on having my creature in the gy. The Stickfingers trigger is pretty much unavoidable though can be responded to by gy hate (in which case my plan falls apart anyway). Assemble is a good card on its own because it's instant and can go around gy hate.
I kinda disagree with your first point. Commander is a casual format (supposedly), and gives you an opportunity to play those fringe effects that you would otherwise never get the chance to, where else are you ever going to play that Psychic Trance that's been in your folder since the 90's? Refining every deck to only use the most efficient spells means you just end up seeing and using the same cards over and over again, and the game quickly becomes a repetitive sweaty format. You might not win as often, but if you're going into a commander game just to win, you might want to try something else.
so in short. "use staples and avoid bad cards". on my humble opinion optimization is what ruins and kills creativity, is a card related to what youre doing but there is a strict upgrade from it that doesnt fit in your theme? just keep it it will make your deck worse? yes but most of the times you play to have fun not to win, and if you ask me its more fun to use a bad card amd people ask you about it than to just cast the same spell as everyone else just because "its better" the best card is the one you enjoy the most, regardless if its good or bad
