3 Methods For Choosing Your Commander

[@turtle_stew_Lukas]

I like the way Salubrious Snail approached your type 3 method in one of his videos. Where you chose your commander to shore up a deck's weaknesses. Missing non-creature removal? Put it in your command zone Your go wide deck, just falters to board whipes? Put something that gives protection or recursion into the command zone. Now you've always got an answer to one of your main weaknesses every game you play.

[@yurplethepurple2064]

One of the biggest issues with lots of small creatures is the inability to keep up in the late game because of low mana coat. So for my dimir faeries list, I decided to run talion for a consistent draw engine even though he doesn’t synergize with faeries at all

[@satchmosanzabar9023]

shoutouts to snail

[@InsomniaticVampire]

That video inspired me to build some decks where the commander completely changes the strategy. Mishra EO, Korvold Fae cursed, Saskia give immediate value and change your threat level.

[@mfitkin]

I always appreciate your insights. If I may offer a suggestion, methods 1-3 are nice concepts but the name is not descriptive. “Commander focused,” “theme focused,” and “commander agnostic” or some names like that could work. You were onto something using terms like monolithic.

[@uhfrank]

your three suggested names are substantially better imo. i dont need to research or have to explain what any of those mean to anyone while arbitrary number values to describe the deck building does a poor job to communicate it to anyone unfamiliar or less familiar with code assignment to things. not to mention assigning numbers may elude to a cognitive bias for some people where they either think 1's are better than 3's or 3's are better than 2's are better than 1's. i'd much rather adopt a naming convention that is self-explanatory

[@nelsikegaming]

Hey Demo just wanted to stop by and say that your videos are my favorite. No doubt my number one choice for Commander content. Keep up and the good work. Your approach to content creation and this format is refreshing.

[@fridayfreed7287]

I notice you mentioned that there isn't really a Boros Lands commander, but I've managed to make a pretty decent one recently with Toggo and Ardenn as the partner commanders. I abuse landfall triggers with land sacrifice and "Brought Back" effects to burn my opponents out with Reckless Fireweaver and Spitfire Lagac type effects. It's basically a burn deck disguised as a landfall deck and it really puts in work.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

yeah that's an interesting technique. my version isn't really a landfall strategy though.

[@eliasmartin9689]

I did a similar approach, but with Quintorius, Field Historian as the commander. It's very much a battle cruiser style where it's a massive power swing in one turn for the win.

[@okgut2033]

imo method 3 can be interessting if its not just generic goodstuff but instead buys you time, eg. nelly borca or breena. they help with distraction. same goes for planeswalker commanders or creatures with big butts or deathtouch.

[@JushakF]

My deck building is pretty much: 1 - Rip a cool commander from a booster or see one mentioned in a video and immediately decide I want to build a deck for them, AKA Method 1. 2 - Decide I want to build a tribal deck and check what commanders would be available AKA Method 2. Also method 1.2, where seeing a cool commander card inspires me to build a tribal for it. Honestly, most of my decks are this type. From the top of my head I currently have dragon (Ur-Dragon), phoenix (Syrix), bear (Wilson+Criminal past), sea monster (Aesi), Eldrazi (unmodified precon one currently) and shrine (Go-Shintai of Life's Origin) tribals built and have Hydra (Zaxara) and dinosaur (undecided on commander) tribals in the works. For method 1 I have handful built and way too many in varying states of being built, from "being on the list of commanders I really need to build at some point" to "actually bought some of the cards, but never got around finishing".

[@andrewtaylor5883]

This is why your channel needs more recognition [hitting the 'Like' as I type]. I am [for the most part] a Method 1 builder. I started with the idea of playing a Flamewar Brash Veteran deck I chose to focus on the 'Discard Hand' ability as the build around and after realizing that it wasn't as good as Rakdos good with a hint of discard using: Bag of Holding, Library of Leng, Shadow of the Grave and Bonemiser I changed. Thankfully I did not attribute my failure in those first games to the commander or I wouldn't have found my way into the finalized version. I knew Flamewar was AMAZING but I had the focus wrong and I had to change that focus up to allow for the deck to shine.

[@matthewhettel8316]

Sharing this with a friend, who's new to the game. Solid outline and video essay.

[@jaredcrawford923]

Most of my decks end up being a variant of method 2, I find a card that I think is really cool while deckbuilding and come back later to make a deck based around the effect. For example I really liked Braid of fire when I found it so I came back to it later and made a Firesong and Sunspeaker X-spell burn deck around it.

[@benmansfield2066]

I play Velomachus Lorehold as a land destruction commander. He can cast your land destruction spells for free on attack, and he's a pretty good win condition, too.

[@dakotacouch5642]

People gotta hate that... Not me but other folks hate land destruction for whatever reason.

[@benmansfield2066]

@@dakotacouch5642 they do lol

[@THEN00BINATORX3]

i built all the strixhqven elder dragons using cards printed only in strixhaven. velomachus was prolly my fave next to shadrix

[@thelunchlady8276]

Well, thanks for finding my new commander for me. Of course, I'll only play it with people I don't like. (Of course.)

[@Zendrig]

At that point in the game, when he's hitting the board, land destruction shouldn't be too much of a problem.

[@Thessik73]

I usually build exclusively with method one, but had an idea for a mono-green deck and built it using method two. Then I realized how important the Commander was for my theme, and tweaked it accordingly, so it's a mix of the two now.

[@Lootsweeper]

This is the content I'm here for

[@thomaspetrucka9173]

I'm actually glad you made the distinction. Commanders like Sophina are definitely enablers rather than payoffs, but there's a fine line between fitting your commander the deck and just using your commander for colors.

[@roddy_ricch9392]

I'd love to see a Niambi Deck Tech video!

[@Spyyrozniper]

I love that you are considering niambi. I have a niambi self bounce creature storm deck. I think she is very versatile and fun to play

[@Badassest]

All decks are good stuff decks. No matter what method you choose. Because they never truly are complete until they have all the good stuff. Eventually the amount of good stuff exceeds the slot capacity of the deck. This is the only point where your 3 method theory works. Deck one is pure good stuff. Whether you leave it at that or not. So let's say you build another. But you don't want that to be a duplication. That's when good stuff actually changes. Either it becomes a different good stuff deck or it starts having unique attributes. There is an inherent problem with method one decks. Predictability. All intent is announced by the commander and consistent removal of that commander can destabilize the entire goal of the deck. Method two is safer. The deck idea will progress with some benefit of the commander. Method three (which I prefer) is not either safe or predictable. It adds an element of mystery. Sometimes it plays out as an absolute threat and makes me the archenemy. Other times it has no synergy and just does wacky crap. The reason I prefer method three is because it keeps the game interesting. It's not interesting to me to watch an opponent constantly looking for a aetherflux reservoir. My deck isn't the same Just because the commander is. Last week it may have been legendary tribal but this week it's an equipment deck. It's not my fault there isnt a 5c equipment commander not is it that there isn't a 5c capenna crimeboss. This subliminal animosity against "good stuff" is only because people want predictability and they don't like a little chaos. That's sad af tbh. Don't be mad when I know what your weakness is and I remove those key elements. Linear deck design ceases to create challenges. I like Iname. But if you're only going to play it one way, then doesn't it make sense that my response is to pack my deck with answers? It's irresponsible to act like I'm "playing fair" when the truth is the boredom caused by a linear deck is actually unpleasant. That's what salt is. Knowing what a problem is and being too nice to challenge it. If it's not an "experimental" deck it's obviously good stuff. Just a thought. I'm sure it will be ignored. Challenge is taboo.

[@tygiffin8131]

I have an Eruth deck. I thought it was method two because I wanted a spell slinger deck but it became quickly obvious it was a storm deck. I think the initial deck building was method two but ended up being a method one deck.

[@shorewall]

I always start by looking at the commander, and concepting a deck based around what it does. But I rarely try to build a deck where I need my commander, or the deck can't function. The commander is always a card in hand, so you need to build around it being there. But you also need to build around if it doesn't stick.

[@ZenTeT]

agreed

[@AlluMan96]

I would definitely say that I also prefer the method 2 deckbuilding mentality. When I make decks these days, I want my commander to be important to the strategy, yes, but I don't want him to be *the* strategy of the deck. The way I like thinking about my commanders is that they are the lubrecant to set my wheels spinning. Basically, choosing commanders is me answering the question "What card in this deck would I 100% always want to draw into in my opening hand?", because that's basically what having a commander is. Think of it as a 1.5 method, I suppose, where my Commander is the star of the show, but the show goes on even without him, he's just there to either crank it to 11 or get the show on the road. I just recently built two decks that really adhere to this mentality and I really enjoyed both. One was my attempt to convert my Historic Orzhov sacrifice deck from Arena and while I originally tried it with Extus, I soon came to realize the extra colours and hoops I had to jump through were actually diluting my focus, so I just swapped to a mono-black build with Jadar, Ghoulcaller of Nephalia and that one worked out super good. For a sacrifice deck, Jadar is as close to self-sufficient as you can get at that mana-rate. It generates a constant stream of bodies that sacrifice themselves, so all I really need after summoning him is a payoff to death-triggers and I'm well on my way. The rest of my deck is built around doing alot of the same with additional sac-outlets and efficient creatures to supplant Jadar in his absence, but Jadar is my commander above everything else, because it's the one thing I always always always want to have access to. The second started with the idea of a Simic value-engine that absues alot of ETB effects. Very quickly I turned to Lonis, Cryptozoologist as a super efficient dude that just sits there, enjoys the endless ETB value and then cashes out with deck-robbing. That deck is admittedly a little more reliant on Lonis being there to get started, but I find every way to make those tokens count. Using Jaheira and Urza to make my clues ramp, using affinity and improvise cards to get even more value and if all else fails, the clues are still draw-power.

[@Lazydino59]

I built a WU Tameshi landfall deck that sounds really similar to what you are trying to do at the end and it was a blast but also a tad underpowered. I’d say for my deckbuulding method I build it method 1 but modify it to method 2 once I have the “core” of what I want to do fleshed out. Every deck I have can play fine without the general, but the general definitely is “why” I want to play the deck I’m playing and several key design choices are due to the commander and not the other way around. Makes my decks feel more unique to me and to each other without always being glass cannons

[@edsainmuramasa4751]

My current casual boros commander was made from the free starter decks they gave out like ten years ago as a base. I wanted to jeep the colors and made Anam Pakal the initial comm. But it wasn't working, she was too frail for my deck to do her job. A friend asked why I wasnt using my caparocti as the comm instead and when I looked at it it just wasn't clicking. My creatures were too big and nothing facilitated the comm attacking. So I looked at another legendary I had, Kwende, who gave double strike to first strikers. New plan, a first strike deck that gives fs or ds to creatures so the commander can pull off the mechanic. So now it's an in progress discover, first strike, artifact production deck that gives me an army of first/double strikers.

[@BASALISK123]

Method 4: Secret Commander. Commander that's in the 99. Usually secret deck tech that doesn't have to be a creature. Method 5: Multi commander. 1 as the official and 2 inside the deck you can swap to when you are bored. Less focused, but can bring your deck to interesting routes.

[@GonzoEDH]

Method 0. Building with what you have. People that have been playing for a while or buys a stupid amount of boosters/someone elses excollection can build many many decks with whats around. Because Ive played with Atraxa so much I can pretty much build whatever proliferate deck I want except if it has red 😅. Because I played My Uril deck since 2012 I can Naya voltron pretty hard. Same with Esper control. Some Part of my collection are weaker but I can always make new decks with the cards I already own, even if it means retiring a deck once in a while.

[@Akario3]

Same tbh. I've started just making silly 99 unsleeved piles for mid to low power fun tables and hand them around to other people to enjoy.

[@InsomniaticVampire]

Top down, bottom up, or pick a commander that helps where your deck is weak(draw, interaction, ramp) or one that takes your deck in a different direction.

[@JessBritvec]

I think most of my decks are method 2, with the exception of Zevlor, which is such a cool way to play cards you normally don't get to play in commander and the card advantage it provides is great. I've built it several different ways (burn, mill, pure control), but ended up going back to the way I originally built it as a treachery deck that wins by Insurrection. Maybe its only method 1, because it's a very versatile method 2 commander for me, not sure.

[@Morrodin182]

I am a bit too lazy to check 42 decks but I know that the way I used to construct decks heavily leans into method 1. I got excited about a commander and then want to build around it. I do have a rats deck which is about discard which actually doesn't care about it's commander and my very first ever deck was a method 2 deck... sort of. Well, it started out as a classic EDH deck (so no commander at all), then commander became popular and I looked for a commander which just happened to be white/blue/black and then I hit Merieke Ri Berit which 'on accident' happened to support the theme I was going for. The deck had many variations over time but none of them were really fun to play against as it was very much a control deck at heart with stax elements in it, lots of tutoring and so on. So I do no longer have this deck.

[@otterfire4712]

I've been running Niv-Mizzet Guildpact for the past couple sessions, building the deck towards God Tribal (predominantly Theros with some additional dual color gods from other blocks). I've been finding myself not playing Niv-Mizzet at all since he'd at most see one or two pairs and the value isn't worth it, or if I played it players would kill him before he got a chance. With this, I'm swapping to Niv-Mizzet Reborn, pulling color pairs from the top of my deck on play would help me fetch multiple gods to play on the next few turns and nothing short of countering Reborn will stop him from seeing value.

[@timtrio9862]

I like the -1 counter theme and was on ziatora for a long time being in jund. I rarely actually put -1 counters on creatures most games. So i rebuild the deck couple of times now and settled on adding in blue (kraum and reyvan partners) added alot of draw with proliferate on it to find more often the -1 cards. It plays better but the support for the -1 theme is still a very small pool :/

[@riukenavatar8625]

I've seen some discussion of what might be a 4th method, which is essentially you pick a commander to fill a hole in your deck or cover a weakness. Such as using Rhada, Heir to Keld in a gruul deck to ensure ramp on turn 2, and then generally not play any other ramp in the deck. Or Baird to pillowfort while your deck does something else. This seems like the "fixed" version of method 3 where it doesn't really fit your deck, but it isn't pointless either.

[@Dragon_Fyre]

There are really just the two methods. Are you building a deck around a Commander or building a deck around a concept and just selecting a Commander that works with the concept. The 3rd or your 4th method are just a variation on building the deck around a concept. Do you add a Commander that has synergy within that concept due to an ability, due to colour affinity, due to weaknesses in the concept etc. or perhaps all of the above. They are all just different reasons for why you chose that Commander but the core methodology remains the same. You want to do something but it’s not centred around the Commander but rather the deck.

[@johnpratts2856]

I have Edgar Markov and Rafiq of the Many. Rafiq is pretty straightforward for the 21 commander damage, while Edgar I constantly need more focus on which goals I want to do with my Vamps.

[@EricThexD]

There's 4 actually.... You can play a Deck, that's dependent on a specific strategy, like prowess/spellslinging or snow for example and have a Commander like Isu the Abominable or Elsha of the Infinite als amplifiers for that strategy. In this case your Deck isn't dependent on your Commander, but he opens you a Path to new Strategies. For further expamles, I play Amareth in my Isu deck and with Amareth in my hand I know that I have an opening to insane card advantage, provided I can peotect them, which the deck ist build around, get good snow creatures out and protect them. Or the Elsha Deck is a thematic Jeskai Clan Deck which runs on it's own but Elsha opens up the possibility to flash Enchantments like Jeskai acendency, quiet contemplation, teachings of the skywise + any instant to catch an opponent offguard. Dunno if some would classify this as a kind of monolith commander, but to me these are seperate things

[@dreyfus37_65]

Most of my decks are method 1. Some are a cross between 1 and 2 in the sense that there’s so much redundancy that if my commander isn’t on the battlefield, it’ll probably still work the same anyway. I am, however, I’m the process of building a method 2 deck. I found a card I really want to build around, currently looking for cards in different colors that support it so I can narrow down what colors I want. Next step is pick a commander

[@T4N7]

Of the 7 decks I have, Yisan n Scion of the Ur-Dragon r both method 1, with my new Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind being 1.5 I'd say as it was designed around him with draft 1 but by draft 2 I have it set up where he doesn't need to be in play to do wut the deck does, my Rhys, the Redeemed is more method 2 along with my Relentless Rats (Marrow-Gnawer) n Shadowborn Apostles (Shirei), n the only method 3 deck I have is my colourless simply cuz for a long time there weren't many options so I run Hope of Ghirapur but need to update it n when I do ima put Liberator instead. I like having a commander for it that is 3 or less mana cuz that deck was designed to be able to cut 40 cards n have a colourless tiny leaders too.

[@BarbeqdBrwniez]

Method 4. Similar to method 3, except you specifically pick a commander that is 1. In your colors, and 2. Attacks on a different axis than your 99. An example would be a combo-focused 99 that has a commander that has high power and haste or some kind of flying or trample so that you can threaten a commander damage win with just the commander.

[@tygiffin8131]

I feel like the best way to build a deck is method one that plays like a method two. I have a Kestia deck. I’ve had that card from day one of playing Magic when I was gifted bulk. It’s foil and one of my favorite cards. I also really like Theros enchantment creatures. The commander is why I built it but if it’s not on the board it’s still a Bant enchantment deck. So it still runs decent enough.

[@virgilhoward9071]

Before the new outlaws decks came out, I had a Hazezon deck designed around sacrificing deserts and making creatures..

[@argentbast]

Hey Demo, this is a really good overview of the different types of deckbuilding. I always appreciate your insight and perspective as an experienced commander player. My one point of elaboration is what "themes" mean. As category In the broadest term it can include anything mechanical, color-identity, to something silly like tribal. As someone who is coming in after 25 years away the state of play and win cons have changed so much that it's a bit overwhelming. Do you have any recommendations of videos or sources that goes over a description of these "themes?" It'd be helpful to have a starting point to go over the win cons of decks and how to identify what other decks are attempting to do.

[@mtggodzilla7308]

I use method 1 and sometimes the method 2. But i gonna suggest a 4th method. Instead of choose a commander you like, choose a commander thats away of your confort zone. For example if u never play Selesnya, pick a Selesnya commander, an underrated it if its possible; and try to do a deck. It have great result because you experiment new ways to play the game and get a creativity boost because you are exploring something new to you. Try it😊

[@dreddbolt]

I always **intend** to build "Method 1" decks, but I like to have a plan B strategy for when my commander becomes too difficult to cast, or isn't viable enough to cast. This becomes also apparent when the commander is six mana value or higher. Shoot, even Nekusar is steep at five mana value. So, perhaps a fair amount of higher mana value commanders I've built around have some "Method 2" aspects to them, and I don't always ramp like crazy to get to them like a "Method 1" deck would do. I instead like to get a good observation of how the game is going, then I probably board wipe turn five or six, then play my big mana commander afterwards. The easiest example of a "Method 3" brew in my collection is my Rubinia Soulsinger, because Wizards won't print enough viable faerie tribal for Bant colors. The deck is currently on en-Bant-tress life support, and with the amount of years I've had it, I might as well call it en-Bant-tress dialysis.

[@cread13]

Personally as a big fan of 5 color decks i often build what u would call method 3 decks. I have a 5 color giants deck that uses kenrith mainly cause hes just a good Commander for creature decks. I have a 5 color dino deck with morphon as the leader. And final 1 that would fit your criteria is my 5 color land types matter deck, basicly its full of creatures like wild nacatl and kird ape. It used to be lead by golos since he could get me my missing land type and provide late game power with his activated ability but he got banned so i put cromat in charge just so i wouldnt have 2 kenrith decks since he was the only other option

[@tripprozier8955]

Use Tameshi as your nee lands commander! Some neat stuff you can olay around with her aswell!

[@Dragon_Fyre]

I think that Commander went through 3 phases. The first was a synergy phase, where you had some powerful Commanders and you built a synergistic deck around them. Then, due to power creep, came the staples phase, where people just wanted to play 5-color Commanders and good stuff. Now, due to further power creep, there are far more staples, so you build a deck with synergy like previously but largely can overlap that with staples, so that you are getting the best of both worlds. There is still a massive gap between OP Mythics and uncommons/rares but there just seem to be a lot more options among those OP Mythics to choose from.

[@El_Chico_des_Galos]

I specialize in tribal decks, so most of mine are type 2, with the exception of 2 land themed decks that are both type 1

[@norrock1]

My mono black deck could be considered method 3. Although that was more or less intentional. I'm currently running Kokusho the Evening Star as the commander but only because I didn't want Tergrid in the command zone and be an instant target

[@lemonsq2767]

Isshin is a great example of both strategies combined.

[@BeWrong666]

Top to bottom Bottom to top Sideays That's it. I think it was already covered a few months back by a mtg youtuber as well

[@cread13]

My build method is basicly random lol. Sometimes I have a clear idea of who I'm building and how sometimes it's just 1 of those and finding the other half as I go. Or on the rare occasion it's just a good stuff deck either cause there's not a good theme for the commander or I don't have a good Commander for the theme I built so I just put a good stuff leader in it.

[@ivanniezgocki5236]

It’s funny. I always thought of myself as a method one deck builder, but as I was watching this it dawned on me that I have built at least two decks using method two, including my latest deck.

[@martaneon5310]

My Shadrix Deck is a option 1. My strategy kinda relies on me getting him out and having him stick to the board. My Karlach deck is unintentionally a option 2 deck. I built the deck with her in mind, but the deck is just a gruul stompy deck and can function without her. I almost treat her like a finisher.

[@crawdaddy1234]

My Sliver Queen deck is… sort of a combination of method 1 and method 3. I have never once cast it… ever. But it is based on Sliver Queen. It’s a cycling deck, because Freddie Mercury wants to ride his BIIIICYCLE, BIIIICYCLE!

[@PattyGoesZoom]

There's another important aspect of how people approach deck building. Mechanically, thematically, or for optimised consistency. I definitely fall into the mechanical theming, I find a cool interaction, then I build a deck around that. You would fall into this category. My partner is definitely a thematic builder. Big hydras, seafood, or all art has a hat in it. Optimisation is the more competitive crowd. Your CEDH'ers. Mechanical themes and thematic consistency are irrelevant. I sometimes dabble in it, but it feels too restrictive at times.

[@brugernavnhvaderdet]

I personally like to build my decks so my commander is there to boost the theme, but isn't necessary for the deck to function

[@Ramm1602]

I built a Josu Vess, Lich Knight (mono black) knight tribal midrange deck with same thoughts in my head!

[@KittenSprinkledDonuts]

I’m just learning MTG so I am gathering cards and hope they work together. Of course jumping into a commander league when you don’t understand the game is kind of like throwing yourself at the wolves😂

[@patrickridenour6546]

Most of my decks are actually built in a pretty unique way I'd say. I actually choose 2 commanders, one that's strong or optimal, and the other not so much. But I build my deck with BOTH in mind. No dead cards either way kinda forces you away from some staples and it makes me make my decks more versatile in general. Again not all my decks are like this, but most. Like volo and mazirek are pretty cemented. But it's an easy way to play against weaker decks without having to sandbag!

[@patrickridenour6546]

Oops to answer your question tho, most of mine I guess are method 1? Just method 1 twice over haha

[@moof9994]

Maybe this would fit within one of the others methods, but I've been thinking a lot about decks that function well on their own and the commander is more of a "gasoline on the fire" card.

[@kosadamirinichi5888]

Method 3 isn’t a bad deck style if you don’t go just for this color “good stuff.” I love my Josu Vess deck which is just an amalgamation of Liliana’s family tree. I rarely bring him out because of his high kicker cost, but he’s the commander for flavor reasons. Since commander is such a laidback format, I don’t see why you should build exclusively around your commander if you have reasons to do otherwise like for flavor or secret commander.

[@mattd3978]

Hey Demo, is you're looking at Azorius for a few lands deck. Maybe Tameshi might be a better choice than Niambi. Plus gives you more permanent recursion to mesh with loot effects Edit: Deck count by method, this is looking at the decks as they are now, not past iterations. One of the method 1s may better qualify as a hybrid Method 1: 7 1 & 2 hybrid: 1 Method 2: 8 Method 3: 1

[@BrootalMetalBanjo]

I started method 1 for all my decks and even more so Tribal themes. However as I’ve evolved as a player and watching videos like these my decks have changed with me. While I still have Strefan Vampires, it’s evolved into a blood token aristocrat strategy. Glass Cast Heart with Agent of the Iron Throne is 27 life loss to all opponents. Then I have a Jeskai deck that is the evolution of my boros goad, I started full method 2, but after I chose the commanders, Donna Noble she shaped more of the deck. So not really sure how to define them.

[@theodoregeorgiou4565]

My Kudo deck was similar to the case of Lulu, kind of, hahah. At first i had made a Shanna deck which was selesnya creature focused deck, rather than voltron tokens which i had seen around, and cheap creatures to put down (and had started with a bit of human tribal but it got off course pretty fast), but then it became a +1/+1 counter theme with Kudo just equalizing all creatures, and became very much creature focused. Could the deck now play with Shanna? Well, honestly yes, the deck had ways to do it before as well, since it had ways to buff creatures, and even with the changes post-Kudo, it can still play around Shanna (minus some cards, which would be switched out, like Lulu's case). If anything, I put Shanna in the 99 since she is actually buffed by Kudo, and she can still be a beast when she hits the field, and with her protection which blocks out some effects.

[@cmghaman1712]

Method 4 = how many cards is yr cmdr worth? Have to use a average deck with 37 land 10 ramp 10 removal 10 draw as reference. Eg. Edric is worth 10 cards, u hardly see edric draw run card drawing. Eg 2. Jetmir is worth 7 cards, typically it replaced the craterhoof and big finisher

Merci bcp pour l'analyse ❤❤😂

[@NickArmas]

I wonder if using Zedruu to gift lands to opponents would work with your strategy? Giving away lands isn't great but at least you'd get some card draw and there are probably some pretty bad lands you can give out so its not as much of a disadvantage.

[@jeffreytenney4833]

Does anyone have experience with Rocco the Street Chef? I’ve been getting in my own head for the past 2 weeks about whether or not I should buy the deck I want to build around him.

[@jacobbest398]

Hey Demo, have you considered Togo and Akiri for your Boros Land strategy?

[@QuasiGame0]

I normally choose Colors that i want to play and a deck idea, then i search for a synergistic commander

[@abdiz1]

Method 4?: storyline. I am currently building a storyline/art deck of the continued story of Garth One-Eye, Norreen and Hammen. Only cards with art thats fits the story will be used. Jank.. Maybe 😇

[@neimaddamienjackson9256]

I play Vial Smasher/Kodama East for my treasure deck. Method 2

[@shmackydoo]

I don't mind a method 3 deck. I feel the line between 2 and 3 is kinda blurry

[@ZenTeT]

i build my deck around my commander style but i dont need my commander to be the finisher of my deck i have AlterNet win cons as a back up usually

[@benjamingermain4307]

I'm trying to bulid a Loot Key to Everything deck but trying to focus on a voltron deck with auras but a sub theme with the casting things from exile do you have some ideas that could help. I feel Loot can do any theme that fits Temur Style due to his ability is basically card advantage.

[@jacobbest398]

Maybe use auras that make other permanent types like sticky fingers or curse of opulence, then use that mana to feed things like rain of riches to cast from exile

[@andersrolig]

I have another method. I have around 200-300 presleeved commanderstaples sorted by color, artifacts, lands, multicolor. Plus presleeved basics. Then at the LGS i sit down. Open a booster, hope it has a legend in it, speed build a deck and play it then and there. Then after the game I take it apart. 😂

[@andersrolig]

Cant remember all the one build like this. But I know I have build: Urgh spawn of thurg. Hinata, marcus mutant mayor, thrun breaker of silence, urbrask from the phyrexia set. And some other ones. I have a method 2 jund dragon deck. 3-4 interchangable commanders.

[@RollingCalf]

I'm a looks guy. If i like the art or name, I'll play it. If the abilitu is at keast playable, thats just gravy.

[@SeekerOf7ruth]

Method 3, as per the video, really does feel like you're playing Canadian Highlander with 'color restrictions' and more opponents.

[@chrisdomingo9143]

I always wanted to build a deck where your commander wins by commander damage straight janky … counter everything voltron haster

[@THEN00BINATORX3]

within the last few months, ive become exclusively a phyrexian tribal player, and they all are built to not need my commander to win. its incredible watching people waste their removal on my commander yet leave my Realmbreaker alone, only to watch me fetch 2-5 praetors out of my deck onto the battlefield

[@jjarema75]

Built 2 method 1 decks dimir grimgrin making zombies to sac to grim and orzhov elenda dusk rose making vampire token to die to buff elenda

[@Zectari]

It feels weird to label the commander as method 1, 2 or 3 tho. The commander might be method 1 in one deck, but method 3 in another. It's the deck, as a package, that uses one of these methods? :D Anyway. I don't like method 1 decks, I always end up needing like 8-10 or even 12+ cards dedicated to some form of protection. There are so many different ways of removing a creature, indestructible and hexproof isn't always enough.

[@W4llh4k]

Is this repeat upload, or update?

[@DoctorWhoBlue]

Update

[@MrSzymonpik]

Algorythym boosting comment.

[@MrSzymonpik]

My metod to deckbulid now is: -find a way to win -find a way to preasure oponents -find a way to controll -find a way to ramp -find a way to draw a cards -find a way for my commander and 99 to do as many of those things at the same timer as its is possible. -just fit everything to this idea. There is a flow to it, but the way to win is my base for decbuliding now. And my winrate skyrocketed.

[@Turn140]

To be fair most boros legendaries can just swap for commander anytime lol

[@firewheels748]

cEDH player be like third method sounds really good lol 😂

[@benjamintrottier2855]

Method 3 seems like what people use for deckbuilding cedh decks and that's why I'm less interested in the competetive side of edh. Always the same cards and they don't cast their commanders

[@shundo8460]

It’s really a shame to dismantle such a unique deck just because there isn’t a good commander for it. I feel like if you look at the actual history of EDH you could easily argue that the original elder dragons were not build around. So the idea that commander has to be built around your commander feels like it’s actually against the original idea of the format. But, to each his own.