Hot Takes Double Down or Take Backsies | Commander Clash Podcast 154 

On this episode of hot takes; will Richard continue to say good cards are bad because they make you look like you are winning? Will Crim say bad cards are good because they make you look like you are winning and that’s fun? Will Seth be gaslight into thinking removal is bad? Tune in to find out!

The Codfather Paradox: A high number of good cards are not good enough to be played because they die to removal (Farewell), simultaneously, if I don't have the removal for your good card, I will just die. I will therefore not play removal. I don't think I'm even doing him an injustice here in that description

I’m 1 second into the video, and I 100% expect this to be nothing but the crew doubling down 😂

Richard: "I run no basics and 36 colorless utility lands because they're OP" Richard: "I can't find GGG to cast my 'tutor any OP land onto the battlefield' spell, it's trash."

Richard trying to convince the table that spot removal is bad so that he can win via no one but Crim having spot removal

Richard: Removal is bad, and Commander Clash runs tons of sweepers! Commander Clash episode S16 E22: Richard plays a snowballing one-drop that is not even attempted to be answered until turn 6. It leads to a game win.

Oh no, it's my comment. I'm not saying there's not enough removal in the games. There's just way more "dies to doomblade" discussion on the podcast. If people were firing off board wipes and picking off synergy creatures as often as Richard talks about Farewell, the games (and the comments) would be very different.

The Swords discussion drives me nuts. Of course single target removal is bad if everyone plays a must-kill Commander because that's not why you play single target removal. That's why you have sweepers in your deck. Single target removal is for when one person threatens to snowball the game because deck randomness means power level disparity between players will always exist and you need a backup plan if some people are drawing more live than you are. Especially since sweepers may set you as far back as well from both killing your stuff and committing your mana heavily. This is why Swords is particularly noteworthy. The discussion that "Swords gets stuck in your hand" is like...in what circumstance? It's 1 mana. If no one is going crazy in the game, just fire it the second you have a spare mana and move on. You lost a card in your hand, oh no, it's not like this is Commander where draw 3s are on the low end. It's to the point that the difference between 2-3 single target removals and like 5-6 single target removals in your deck is not going to magically kill your synergy package in your deck.

around 14:40 - if popping off Swords on someone's KoS commander only to get blown out by the next player who cast their commander is bad, wait until you see what happens when you actually spend a turn sweeping and then the next person has free reign to cast their must-kill: youre out of mana, didn't pack single-target-instant-speed removal, and now your other opponents won't have anything on board to either A) draw aggro away from you or B) help mitigate the threat - you just wrathed and passed, that's a pretty easy target to choose.

Honestly, the crew should do these episodes at the Beginning and end of each Clash season.

Can't believe we're in a universe where former spike modern jund player Richard thinks fogs are better than removal.

Richard saying you should be running 0 removal in higher power pods is insane but on brand for him unfortunately 💀

oh boy I'm sure this video will be completely uncontroversial and the comments will be totally polite and reasonable

Richard's concept that "higher power" means no interaction is baffling to me.

Every spell in your deck is a tool designed for a specific purpose. There's pros and cons to every card. What Sword lacks in versatility, it makes up for in efficiency. The grave hate aspect of Swords is also super relevant. Even if they're not a dedicated graveyard deck, most experienced players take advantage of the graveyard in some capacity. Feels bad to hold up 3 mana, Gift something into a 3/3 elephant, just for them to recure that threat. This entire discussion regarding Swords is just a different form of "dies to removal".

I’m similar to Seth; stopped playing swords for more versatile spells, but came back to it recently. Nowadays most decks draw so many cards that I’m just looking for mana efficiency from my spells rather than catch-alls, because I’ll probably have both options anyway. Sometimes it’s better to run swords and a good disenchant, rather than two beast within.

Hot take: utility lands are overrated. 90% of their costs are too high to feel good about and/or are redundancies for effects you don’t need. Basics>most utility lands.

Targeted removal is still incredibly effective in Commander. Using it correctly gets harder every power crept set, however. Interrupting people's combos, taking out someone's defense against your winning stuff, just clearing the way for you to swing for lethal, all winning, game-changing effects targeted removal can do for you. If you don't use it in a way that changes the game towards you winning, targeted removal is one of the most wasteful ways to spend a card in Commander. I play a good bit because I find engaging the game in that predictive way is extremely satisfying to me. If you aren't that kind of player, targeted removal probably isn't something you want to run a lot of. It's not going to help you win games.

Love to see an episode of them breaking down their deck building philosophies. Percentages of interaction (and how much of that is sweepers, single removal, fogs etc)

Richard is wrong about single target removal, yes the average power level is that most commanders have to be removed BUT someone will be targeted more, someone will be effected more. Single targeted removal is a scalpel for when you're the one being targeted.

After listening to Richard's removal rant, Seth just needs to play Consecrated Sphinx and Seedborn Muse in every deck until Richard learns his lesson.

The arguments against spot removal seem to me like "force of will is bad in legacy because it's card disadvantage." Snowballing value engines are so prevalent now that eating a small amount of card disadvantage now can easily prevent a much bigger disadvantage later (or just straight-up losing). Also, being minus 1 card often isn't going to matter--either you have a functioning, powerful engine of your own to keep up (and therefore easily recoup that spot removal effect) or you don't.

Richard you did it. You are a meme. Now let's talk about real Magic. Crim is right, your group plays a bunch of theme decks where not many big threats are played and also you don't play combos where a spot removal is much better Are we really blaming Wotc that NOW we have to play swords to plowshares? How about you should've should and in the futurest ever should always play Swords.

Listening to their talk about swords, can really feel the disconnect in how their pod works compared to mine. No one in our group needs to kill 4 commanders, even if its all must kills. We’re in a group, my other players can deal with it if i don’t have it. Its in all our interests to stop things lol. Every game is a Xv1, and a 1vX at the same time. You play on both sides, sometimes you have team mates, not enemies. Sometimes you play the archenemy.

Richard - basic lands are done, in the future we will only play utility lands. Also Richard - wHy CaNt i cASt aRcHdrUiDs cHaRm?!?

"More often than not Fog saves you" HUGE citation needed.

Who can leave up 5 for Inkshield. Well usually you look at the board and if its going to kill you next turn maybe leave up 5. You wouldn't leave up 5 with a board that isn't pressuring you. Tomer is right. And most decks don't suddenly have a lethal board out of nowhere.

I want to mention, Richard, if you’re looking for a blue fog, Misleading Signpost is a hilariously good option. Yes, 3 mana sucks, but it’s a mana rock the other half of the time. It’s a rock early, and a fog late, which seems to match your ideal playstyle.

Richard: "Blue has no fogs" Cue the currently staring down aetherize, aetherspouts, cyclonic rift, reins of power, illusionist's gambit & Mirror Match Blue has a lot of fogs, They cost a lot more but they are faaarrr more devastating on resolve than the usual fogs, often bouncing all creatures or devestating an opponent in exchange of saving your life.

OBLATION?! Richard done lost his mind

I love people talking about Sowing Micospawn as "Oh look at this great non basic land ramp" when it's literally just a slightly powercrept card from 15 years ago, Reap and Sow

If Crim isn't talking, he's looking out his window or to the side like he just saw someone get shot. Respectfully.

Richard: Confidently beats Nadu/Life gain combo/Eldrazi nonsense with an Ajani aggro deck Also Richard: "Aggro can't win without combo"

Hear me out, the fog meta is over with the inclusion of everlasting torment. Crim needs to show us the way of “damage can not be prevented”

I've won games because people make decks that don't function without their commander in play. They ramp out their commander turn 3, and I swords it on the spot. Then they rage quit saying I'm being unfair 😂

I'm surprised they didn't mention voltron decks in their aggro talks. Something like light-paws or slicer will kill opponents so fast if left unchecked.

Will Richard take back a single one of his insane takes, I doubt it lol

Richard sounds like a certified lunatic talking about the bounce lands.

Blue has tons of fogs -- it is the best fog color. For example, Cryptic Command is a fog. When your opponent moves to combat you respond by tapping down all their creatures... and then draw a card. Blue has many spells that can tap down your opponents' creatures and prevent them from attacking at all which is better than preventing combat damage since they don't get attack triggers and it removes blockers. If you think about it Fogs are the worst version of fog effects,

The Archdruid’s Charm take from Richard is the most narrow-sighted perspective he’s ever presented hahaha

Jfc ... as a person who started watching their videos recently, i have to agree with Crim saying that their play group is a meme/low power group. Richard's statement about everyone trying to turbo out a win feels very 2020 cedh mentality. Cedh is now about grinding out an overwhelming advantage that your opponents cant get back from. Sure cedh decks might runn less removal than alot of other decks but the fact remains that removing a balue engine before it gets online will always be important and you want to do it with as little mana as possible. Trading 3 mana to remove something means you probably didnt do anything during your turn, while 1 mana might mean you did something even if it was less optimal, which still progresses your board state while setting someone else back. My favorite analogy of this is races in cartoons where the characters are trying to reach the finish line while trying to trip up each other.

Crims take on Aggro is 100% correct in my experience. Most combat decks have this "spread the love" mentality and that's not right. You gotta unalive 1 person and then move to the next. It's how you remove the threat. It's called player removal. :)

March of the Machines is one of my favorite sets in last 10 years. Crim nailed it! Not to mention, MOM cards that combined characters was a great way to celebrate Magic’s past.

Aggro definitely exists in casual/focused edh, it’s just a bit more midrange than something like mono red decks in 60 card formats. It’s probably closer to old jund in pacing. As a frequent aggro player the difficulty is that you will often be on the receiving end of poor threat assessment because you are dealing damage and contributing to board presence instead of just drawing cards, deploying engines and getting ready to combo.

Calling Grand Abolisher an "anti-fog" antimeta card is like calling a machine gun useful in war bc you can use it as a walking stick so your troop's legs don't get tired. Like yeah, I guess technically you can use it that way but it clearly has much more direct benefits than what you're using it for!

Well, the situations where swords is better is : efficiency in high tempo/very fast games, dealing with indestructible creatures and dealing with some of the ward creatures with ward 2 and more, where you realistically wont want to spend 5+mana to deal with them using versatile removal. Meanwhile sitting there with a swords while an absurdly powerful enchantment/artifact has the game locked down feels awful

Black does not only have one fog. Sudden Spoiling effectively functions as a fog, but is also a little bit more flexible.

In regards to the previous comment of the week they do play more wraths than most play groups but it's still not enough to justify their paranoia around them. You're not seeing 3 or 4 Farewells or Ondu Inversions a game and even if they did the answer would be to play effects that protect you from that rather than not advancing your game plan or playing other removal. Especially since the effects that protect you tend to make an opponent's wrath a blowout in your favour.

Putting the bounty on him: If you play Richard at an event and you have Swords in your deck, everyone just use it on him until he stops talking about it 😂

"I'm not putting Archdruid's Charm in my mono-G decks" HOW IS RICHARD REAL HOW ARE THESE REAL OPINIONS AHHHHHHHHHH

RE: Swords - My philosophy is that you use this only if you sniff out a combo happening soon or if you are about to get hit for a huge amount of damage from one hit. I think both of these are scenarios that happen often enough that saving one spot for spot removal is worth it.

Capenna and March have been great sets for commander. Very underrated sets.

The apperance of Urzas Cave makes Archdruids Charm even more consistant. I don t build my deck around 1 possible action. As richard mentioned with Crop Rotation as another instant im OK now to run Glacial Chasm and Talon Gates of Madara in nearly every deck. And the Archdruid Charm does so much more then fog or phase out. It could also exiles the one ring or any other thread and if thats not enough, have a fight spell with +1/+1 synergie. Obviously Archdruids Charm gets an interaction slot in my decks, i don t wnat to ramp with it, but if i have to, i could even do that with it.

I get Richard's about removal. With current powercreep, you kinda want to remove everything. But if that's the case perhaps running more stax like Crim does, is the solution. Stax is a sort of preventive removal that keeps getting value for every spell it prevents the opponent from playing. So you don't run into the issue of needing to have bazillion swords for the threats.

The UB comment is weird: “We want to bring in new blood and turn them into lifelong players…at the cost of frustrating the already existing lifelong players”

I'm okay with minor take backsies in my play group (especially with newer players) but any mistakes I make I double down on

I think part of Richard's philosophy (re: spot removal) springs from the reality that the playstyle of many EDH players is parasitic. Go back and watch games of clash. How often is it Richard who identifies a threat and petitions for someone to have an answer? How often is he willing to be the answer? Why have answers when someone else in your playgroup will have them?

I'm completely with Crim on MoM. I have atleast 10 cards in Each of my 8 decks from the set.

If you can't cast Archdruid's charm in a monogreen deck, you need to stop playing. Yes, you will need utility lands for whatever your strat is. But in a 38+ land deck, which is what CC has been suggesting, like 28 of those lands should produce green mana. It's monoGREEN

Seth is wrong. Now excuse me while I watch the episode.

I feel like the only reason Richard gets away with playing such bad cards is that half the games the dude doesn't even get a chance to play and everyone knows if he does present a win, all they have to do is have an answer for that one turn and he crumples

Isn't the targeted removal thing like deck specific? Like Seth said, there's a lot of commanders that generate tons of value and you can lose to them if you don't take them out... But that's sort of based on the assumption that you're playing defensively. I feel like the deck that's generating tons of value and drawing all the cards and ramping a ton might need less targeted removal (or maybe none?) vs a more defensive deck

We NEED two headed-giant: Seth+Richard vs Tomer+Crim!

Richard’s take on archdruids charm is wild. He seems to have no concept of how useful flexibility is. And the fact that he compares it to worldly tutor without considering that it draws the card and that that cycle of tutors is already on the super high end of power…

20:36 I think MOM suffered from oddly generic marketing. That is what hit me initially with the set. The branding wasn't apocalyptic and Phyrexian it was like 90's sharp corners but neon/highlighter. I like March!

I've figured it out. Richard's takes are only true if you're trying to build the sweatiest and most brutally efficient version of a deck. People aren't all playing the most efficient versions of their decks. Otherwise, everyone would play fast mana, og duals, tutors, and the like. Richard says "Oh but I play birds all my decks are memes." But like he has said in the past,"when you play a tight restriction like budget or all birds, you have to play the most powerful versions of every card in those spots. So your deck is busted."

The difference between stax and aggro is that stax is trying to stop people from playing entirely to eek out a late game win, whereas aggro is trying to slow other people down while rushing to get ahead on board. If you're playing hate bears while swinging in as much as possible, that's still aggro. If you're playing a deck with 65 artifacts and enchantments that lock down players, and 1 Approach of the Second Sun, that's stax. Also, voltron, generally, would be considered aggro. I personally have at least three aggro decks. My Adeliz the Cinder Wind wizards tribal spellslinger deck is definitely aggro. My Subira, Tulzidi Caravanner suprise infect deck is aggro as well. And my Wyleth, Soul of Steel deck is voltron enough to feel decidedly aggro. My Cadira, Caller of the Small deck can feel aggro, depending on which cards I have early, and I used to have a Tjic, Legion's Edge deck that would play out aggro unless it found its secret commander and comboed off instead. I think the problem is, in 60 card formats, you can devote every single slot to an aggro card and reliably get a fast kill. In commander, you can't guarantee that you'll be able to build and maintain a threatening board early and consistently, so aggro will typically play at least some cards that hold back their opponents or protect theor board or help them bounce back from a boardwipe or whatever. When you do that, even just a little around the edges of a clearly aggressive deck, people start to say, "That's not aggro, it's playing ______!"

Basic lands are great as long as you are playing either mono or 2c decks. 3c and up can get clunky with a ton of basics. In my monocolored decks I run 90% basics.

I agree with the sentiment that basic lands suck, but really, the number of times I've run into Winds of Abandon and not had anything to fetch out is nonzero and it wasn't fun in any way. I agree with not wanting to waste slots on them only in 3+ color decks though. My most efficient working casual decks in 1+2 color have probably 70% basic land content and they don't let me down. Typically do about 2-3 colorless utility lands, 4-5 dual color access lands, then an equal amount of basics for each color to fill the rest. Are there better choices? Yes. But I find that basic content roughly equates to game consistency for me.

This was a nice idea for an episode. I hope you guys revisit this for the other 2 hosts when they're back. It would be nice to hear from them too.

The Doctor Who stuff certainly brought some of my friends *back* to magic. I now get to play commander with people I had previously played MtG with at college way back during Zendikar and Scars Blocks

listening to richard about swords: "he's making some good points" listening to richard about archdruid's charm: "this guy is out of his mind"

Crim is absolutely right about MoM. It’s kinda insane how many staple toolkit piece came from that set.

I really dont wanna talk about richards takes again week after week can we talk about anything else? You guys watch any good movies lately?

Little does Seth and Richard know that basic lands cost pocket change and a land base of 35+ "good" utility lands is hundreds of dollars depending on color count

The feels bad thats unique to agro is you have to basically choose who doesn't get to play the game. And often the best choice is the more durdely deck that missed a land drop. There _are_ agro decks that don't need to choose but then you're playing Slicer or Winota which is a whole other bag of problems.

Love this combination of perspectives fellas, keep up the fantastic work!

If there's anything I agree on the most. It's that the bounce lands are incredible!

Idea for a game, all 4 players run a must-kill Commander, but no decks can run a single removal spell. No targeted removal nor board wipe. Let the chaos run rampant.

My biggest problem with bounce lands is that I seem to always have to discard because of them. Also my brother strip mines them if I play them.

Richard talking about the UB's setting and the connection of the cards to the media we consume. I got back into magic off the back of playing the Riders of Rohan commander deck and I remember the sheer glee I felt when I cast Forth Earolings and could hear the music of Rohan playing in my head as I charged them over my opponenets. I say it's a net positive, but we'll see if and when wizards bungles it by pushing too much.

Question: Is the number of new MtG players that came from Universes Beyond higher than the number of people who have stopped playing because of it? I almost sold my collection twice because of that and only haven't yet because of the content creators I've watched for years.

Not sure where all these new players are Crim is talking about but they're not in my area. If anything UB has driven more players from the game than brought in.

Man, the Commander Clash Podcast sure does love talking about the same 5 things

Universes Beyond is short-sighted and will not benefit magic long-term.

Richard with the worst Swords to Plowshares evaluation I've ever heard.

I love how Richard justify half his points by saying "Imagine you are in 4 and 5 colors decks!", ok, me agreeing or not, I have to say, "Imagine you are in the great majority of =< 3 colors decks!"

If Richard considers getting a revealed card to hand as drawing a card, does he consider the "explore" mechanic always drawing cards?

If I had to bet for why Richard doesn’t like removal is probably because he either plays everything on curve and agros or ends up at turn 7, 7cards in hand so either is trying to gas out a win with removal being dead card or he holds the removal meant for a snowball piece waiting for someone else to remove the problem letting it get out of control

I think Phil of TrabenU described Archdruid's Charm somewhat perfectly (albeit from a cEDH perspective). You have diversity in choosing the right mode for your situation, but you also need to look at each thing the spell does on it's own in relation to the mana cost. It is an overcosted and hard to cast tutor, an overcosted and hard to cast fight spell and an overcosted and hard to cast artifact/enchantment removal. Not really a problem for casual commander, but in a somewhat higher power environment (and I don't mean cEDH) this becomes suspect. E Especially if you try to play it mainly as a ramp spell for t3.

Richard is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT SPOT ON with the bounce lands. I'm not normal about this. Listen. If the Temples said "draw a card" instead of "scry 1", EVERYBODY would be playing them. And that's without even looking at synergies! Or the fact that they make so many more hands keepable that would otherwise have been a mull.

The idea of Richard playing bounce land/MDFC tribal tickles me. *Thanks for the Content!*

Crims aggro take is correct. Richards take as always is "you need a perfect hand or you lose."

10:10 Richard was literally talking about Dress Down, a card that only answers creatures He then proceeds to talk about non-creature stax pieces wut

3 mana rocks are great if your commander is 5mv. But if your commander is 3mv or 4mv they don't actually help you ramp into the only card you know you'll have every game. If you're at 6mv or 7mv, they're okay, but you need other ramp spells to get there. at 6 I'd ramp on 2 and 4 ideally. At 7 I like to ramp on 3 and 5. (mana, not turn count)

Across 3 different lgs in my area, edh pods/players can be drastically different: Half are considered casual, some pubstompers & combo players, and some removal dot deck players. Most pods i play in are casual, run lower counts of removal, and average 0-2 wraths per game. The opposite end games with 4 board wipes, no one having a board, or one player taking all the time on their turn is just miserable. I think an edh game should be 30-60min with some outlier of a crazy battlecruiser pod, and last at least 8-10 turns minimum. Games that end before turn 7 feel like a do nothing waste.

40:53 the problem with aggro in casual EDH is that you can't play "too fast". Then people get all salty and direct you to play cEDH. Unfortunately if your strategies revolves around turning creatures sideways it's not going to be as efficient as the combo decks in cEDH. Aggro decks fall into this weird limbo where it's too slow for cEDH but too fast for regular EDH.

A good example of aggro is Edgar Markov, _because_ he can apply the pressure, _and_ recover after the wrath. Of course, people don't like it, because who really likes playing against aggro, but that's what the deck does best. The eminence ability is kind of needed when you realize you need to beatdown through 120 life. And yes, aggro needs wraths, because it is quite easy to get stuffed on board, and it's easier to wrath and rebuild than try and fire off 2-3 spot removal spells.

Bouncelands are like the cultivates that cost one more than the rampant growth other lands but secure you a land drop.

Nobody: Richard: *Insert strategy* sucks because it loses to *insert specific interaction that doesnt happen every game*