The Biggest Mistakes You Can Make in Commander | Commander Clash Podcast 149

[@RCCrisp]

Wonder if Richard is going to say "playing good cards so you annoy the rest of the table and get yourself killed."

[@RyanMclain]

ROF'nL

[@Todesnuss]

Literally the Tempo segment lel.

[@JimPea]

Beautiful.

[@kurowasanabe]

Looking forward to the top comment being skipped again next week.

[@noahfriedrich4686]

​@@kurowasanabeWell it does make a once really fun aspect of the podcast into part that I now just skip because the top comment is basically the exact same thing every time

[@plaidpoet]

Guesses before watching: Seth: not playing enough Hedron archives. Tomer: a reasonable enough take ignored by the others. Richard: running any removal or wraths at all. Crim: playing forests.

[@spawn9892001]

pretty much spot on for Richard

[@Zoggiii]

Being Phil, playing Sol Ring on Turn one & saying stuff like "Next Turn is gonna be huge" :D

[@tierfunmtg]

Richard: How good is any given card if you add a mana to its cost? Also Richard: Run taplands, tempo doesn’t matter.

[@kevinthecarpathian]

Richard: Inkshield is unplayable Also Richard: I am fine not casting my commander and leaving all of my mana up

[@zweis]

The problem is no one is full swinging at an Orzhov deck with 5 untapped mana. They'll just chip you down

[@kevinthecarpathian]

@@zweis Even setting aside the casting the commander argument, Richard's whole philosophy is having cheap blockers and grinding out games. A lot of variables obviously but grindy games last at least until turn 9-10 and even not including any ramp that is a lot of available mana while also being able to deploy cheap chumpers to stop the worst chip damage. Also if you aren't deploying huge threats and leaving mana open there are probably bigger threats than you at the table. He also loves fogs which means he is totally fine with leaving 1-3 mana open anyways. All of this leaves me very confused why he wouldn't play the fog that can actually win games.

[@ethancoyne7059]

Richard at this point your gonna just need an entire podcast about the topic the comment was talking about or its just gonna be the top comment every week forever

[@smtyke]

Yes! Appease the Comment Gods!

[@noahfriedrich4686]

Except his point is made and he won't change his mind, they already discuss the topic almost every podcast so I'm not sure what else they would say.

[@JonReid01]

@@noahfriedrich4686 I agree, it wouldn't be a discussion we haven't heard a million times already

[@discoviolenza1984]

Lol. Seth mentions waiting to cast Henzie one of the few creatures that gets better the more he dies.

[@Bstone410]

Henzie comes down ASAP, I dont run mana dorks in that deck for any other purpose. Same with Rocco, I need to be generating food and +1+1 fast as possible.

[@jacobstarbrow6288]

lmao exactly. My Henzie comes down as soon as I can cast him and I love when he gets removed, those non existent blitz cost win the game basically.

[@dee-wreck]

@@Bstone410 Rocco is a good counterexample because half of its value is generated on the end-step.

[@shaunwilliams8943]

Exactly, henzie pretty much never gets killed on my board because my pods understand the value of me just recasting him. It’s a catch 22 in a lot of ways though because it would slow me down but they just see potential future value, so I usually end up iust getting to play my Ojer Kaslam or Ilharg and cheating in something terrible on turn 4

[@DrMeisterBabylon]

Pantslava does that for me because she always discovers into a 2 land ramp spell or a draw engine.

[@jmnaccount]

I think a better way of putting Crim's point is distinguishing between your deck "doing the thing" and actually winning. Your deck can absolutely do it's thing without winning, and once you realize that, games get a lot more fun.

[@Bleuchz]

Crim is the voice of the comments today haha. Richard saying he doesn't need to run interaction is ABSOLUTELY only because other people at the table do.

[@LunaLasceria]

But that's exactly it, Crim saying that Seth and Richard benefit from him being in the pod is actually perfectly missing the point -- If other people are BENEFITING from your presence, then you're clearly actually not playing to maximize your own win percentage. Which is totally fine, if it's a playstyle / fun thing! Crim doesn't play control because he thinks that he's mostly likely to win that way; he does it because he enjoys it. But then you don't get to say that other people are making the "mistake" of not playing enough interaction and only "getting away with it" because you pick up the slack. That's the opposite of a mistake -- it's them CORRECTLY exploiting your preferred playstyle.

[@dee-wreck]

The Tempo conversation just made me think I have no idea what people mean by Tempo. My best instruction of it was from a Rebell Lily video, where "Tempo is the effective mana's worth of effect you've invested in your board." Example, a Delver of Secrets is really good Tempo because it's a 1 mana investment that turns into a 4 mana value creature. With that frame of mind, I think Tempo is still valuable to learn to leverage. Slivers, for example, is a Tempo deck. You play a bunch of 2-3-4 manavalue creatures but your board ends up looking like a bunch of 5/6/7 mana value creatures.

[@electric_dream_machine]

People think lands are worthless during deckbuilding but you cast one Armageddon and all of a sudden lands are the most important thing on the planet

[@LunarWingCloud]

I love Tomer's rants this episode. Peak Tomer this episode, we love to see it

[@colecarmichael5724]

Richard is calling for help with all these takes

[@OGTahoe3]

If a commander gets removed it only costs mana to get back. If anything else gets removed it usually costs a minimum of 1 card and mana to get back. So if you have a card in hand and commander that helps you draw then I'd rather use the commander because if it gets removed, there is 1 less removal for the next card

[@JonReid01]

This is usually my strategy too

[@totakekeslider3835]

Yup, it’s a free resource that you always have access to. Even if it’s 9 mana after dying twice, you’ll still have access to it later in the game. And who knows? It might even *gasp* live for a few turns without getting removed and you can do something with it, unlike in fairy tale Richard-land where everything you do always gets removed every time.

[@Jerhevon]

I remember this from another streamer I watched ages back. Of course it helps if your commander is one of the value ones. Such as Pantlaza. Where deploying it doesn't just save resources and spend mana, but actively gathers resources for you. I can't say the same for Neyam Shai Murad. Very little impact, not even defensive impact like say Vorosh as my commander and plan C. (Large flying defense when I may not have enough of that.) Neyam though? Unless I'm poised to cheat in something notable, it's just a finicky little value engine.And not even a swift one :)

[@JonReid01]

@@Jerhevon I think you're missing the point a bit tho... It's about having a threat for people to waste removal on. I'd much rather someone burn a removal spell on something I can get back from the command zone vs something getting exiled forever or in my graveyard where I can't get it back. I'm happy when people remove my commander because I'm confident I'll draw into stuff they wish they would have saved that spell to remove.

[@Jerhevon]

@@JonReid01 That's fine. I was mostly chiming in in support of casting commander to eat removal. And as with everything, some types of commanders are also just better at that. :)

[@cheesehuffa9791]

Biggest mistake is building a deck that doesn't fit your playgroup. Fun is the most important part of commander!

[@seanedgar164]

This fr, these guys don't seem to realose that their nonsense only works because they all have strange takes. Tomer is the most reasonable and he's struggled to enjoy games so much

[@shazaaaaaam]

what is fun

[@ethanglaeser9239]

Seth "I don't want to feel guilty about attacking people". What is this guilt thing? I feel no remorse.

[@holstenmason]

I think mistakes are a matter of perspective in some respects, I enjoy being archenemy way more than I enjoy winning

[@crazyvikingboy2856]

I feel too many people will have decks and not run sufficient redundancy. I play Henzie and I’ll have other creature cost reductions, I’ll play sneak attack to have the same haste plays and EOT death triggers, and otherwise. In Talrand I run poppet stitcher and the new Geralf and the Ravnica wizard that makes birds, etc. Unless your commander is entirely unique, play more redundancy.

[@imaginarymatter]

Running too many utility lands -- particularly colorless utility lands. The usual justification for utility lands is that they have a low opportunity cost but a low opportunity cost is still an opportunity cost. For example, Reliquary Tower is the most played colorless land seeing play in ~28% of all decks and this card should see significantly less play. Having to discard to hand size is not a common occurrence throughout the game. Even if you do have to discard to hand size your effective hand size is larger than seven since some number of those cards are going to be excess lands, early cards that are no longer relevant or impactful, interaction you don't need, and/or cards you can't play because mana costs limit once you can play per turn. The opportunity cost of Reliquary Tower is that it's a colorless land and players slot it into three color decks, color intensive decks, mono black (i.e. Coffer decks), etc. If you watch gameplay videos people play an early game Reliquary Tower and then get color screwed. If you play Reliquary Tower keep track of the number of times you can't follow through on a line of play because the land is colorless versus the number of times discarding to hand size is relevant. Another example is Field of the Dead -- a utility land that has no utility until you reach at least seven lands. Decks with no land ramp (e.g. UBx zombie decks) erroneously run Field of the Dead. And it rots on the battlefield until the late game where the one or two zombies it produces aren't relevant. Cabal Coffers is another example. I think it goes unnoticed by many players but Coffers needs 4 swamps in play before it actually mana positive. Every non-Swamp in a Coffers deck runs a significant opportunity cost. The usual justification is that Urborg fixes all Swamp problems. However, getting both of those lands into play usually requires spending your precious tutors to find the other half. As an aside, when playing the greedy mono-black deck consider using land removal on the Urborg instead of Coffers -- because Coffers requires a critical number of Swamps in play sometimes blowing up the Urborg causes the Coffers to become mana negative because of a lack of Swamps.

[@danielsniff6405]

Atleast field of the dead is a thematic inclusion in a zombie deck, instead of a generic staple in good stuff lists.

[@egoish6762]

All great points, reliquary tower should see play in 0% of decks as it's a functionally useless utility land if you have any decision making capabilities. I've been stung by my field of the dead in zombies but i keep it in for theme and i make sure to run 20 swamps in my coffers deck.

[@danielsniff6405]

@egoish6762 I don't know about that. I have a mono green deck that draws a lot of cards, and reliquary tower hasn't ever hurt my mana. Discarding ten cards at the end of turn is also pretty tedious. I think it's fine in any 1 - 2 color deck that consistently draws above hand size.

[@egoish6762]

@@danielsniff6405 yes 0% of decks

[@danielsniff6405]

@@egoish6762 have you played a blue deck before?

[@spawn9892001]

the biggest mistake that a lot of players make is evaluating cards based on playing them on cruve. In most games, you will not see a specific card on a specific turn. That's why we stress running so much ramp and card draw.

[@crawdaddy1234]

I think your argument is self-defeating. Mana isn’t just about playing a 1-drop on turn 1 and playing a 4-drop on turn 4. You run Night’s Whisper, so on turn 4 you can draw two cards and then cast a Cultivate (assuming you played a Ramp spell previously). Casting multiple spells in a turn is usually more powerful than casting one big spell (USUALLY, yes I realize Expropriate exists). I run cantrips, so I have more control over my game plan.

[@ich3730]

@@crawdaddy1234 Also because dealing with 2 medium things is harder then dealing with one big thing. If someone counters or kills the 6 drop bomb you played, you just got time walked behind the barn. If someone counters one of your two 3-drops, you still have the second thing.

[@spawn9892001]

​@crawdaddy2004 I'm not entirely sure how my logic of "don't evaluate how good a card is based solely on cruving out into it" is disproven by taking about how double spelling is the way to go. perhaps I wasn't clear. I'm referring to the large number of creators that look at a 3 drop and say it's bad because you want to ramp on turn 3, not play xx card. As opposed to going, "This 3 drop is perfect for turn x when I can drop it with something else."

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

@@crawdaddy1234 You're misunderstanding what the OP is talking about, pretty substantially. OP is saying that "this is good for a 1 mana spell" is the wrong way to look at a commander deck. You need to be able to say "this is a good card, if it resolves". Not when you cast it on curve. Whenever you cast it, ever. And the reason I can confidently say you misunderstood what the OP was saying is that you literally repeat that idea in a different manner, as if it contradicts that idea.

[@crawdaddy1234]

@@dontmisunderstand6041 @spawn9892001 Now I feel dumb - rereading it, you are absolutely correct.

[@andyspendlove1019]

What Seth describes at 46:54 is literally the meaning of tempo. Thats the tempo play style, playing threats and doing the thing instead of durdling or sweatily trying to interact with everything.

[@Savagely1]

There should be a week where the pod all plays past Richard decks (including Richard), then we can see whether it's correct to play no interaction.

[@prod.fffeedback7679]

it's not a matter of testing it, if you know how to count it is easy to understand Richard's argument about 1 for 1s

[@James-mm8pr]

I’m all for playing more lands. The more infrequent one plays, hitting land drops becomes more important. I play a few times every couple of months. During those games I want to make sure I give my deck a chance to do its thing.

[@shadowpsyke]

Refusing to sweep the leg. Specifically in a game with high powered decks. Simic value commander? Take it out immediately. 5 Color goodstuff? Bloodmoon. Elfball? Boardwipe. Combo player? Attack them first. If people are going to jam their decks with the best staples in the format, I'm not going to wait for them to "do their thing", because I've already lost by that point.

[@danylerasu4917]

I don't think "Getting to do your thing" should be synonymous with "popping off." In my muldrotha deck, "doing my thing." Isn't milling the rest of my library with hermit druid after casting thoracle. "Doing my thing" is having out a merfolk looter type card, and a dredge card in grave, or casting an animate dead on some big creature. If I get to play Muldrotha and cast something impactful from my graveyard, I did my thing. A better example is probably my Preston Garvey deck. The deck is built around enchanting enough of my lands that I can go infinite with Aggravated assault, but that's not "doing my thing". Sure if I get to go for the line, I'm hyped, even if I don't win. But "doing my thing" is getting my commander out, and playing enchantments, then swinging with my commander and playing more enchantments. "Doing my thing" should not be the same as "popping off" and it definitely isn't the same as winning.

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

A single combo is never "doing your thing". If "your thing" is an extremely improbable game-winning combo, you didn't build a deck at all. That's a pile of garbage. "Doing your thing" is more like... ok, this is a taxation deck. Or this is an aggro deck. Or this is a recursion loop deck. Those are things. "I have to cheat out Omniscience or I can't cast spells" is not a thing your deck does.

[@danylerasu4917]

@@dontmisunderstand6041 This is my point exactly. Players seem to think if they don't do some ridiculous Rube Goldberg that essentially (or sometimes literally) wins them the game, they didn't do their thing. Obviously if you build that way, no, you're not going to be able to do your thing. If you're playing a winota deck, and you don't get to swing with a non-human with her on the battlefield, that's not getting to do your thing. Playing a self mill deck, and someone starts the game with leyline of the void on the field is not getting to do your thing if no-one can remove it before someone wins. Not getting to combo off is NOT, not getting to do your thing

[@austinmairet1772]

I think tempo as a concept is not the same as tempo as a deck archetype. The concept of tempo is I spend one mana to trade with the a card you spent 2+ mana on. It takes advantage of you spending your mana more efficiently than your opponent. Tempo decks often reverse tempo themselves after they have stuck a threat because they don't want to tap down unless they have to. Mana goes to waste a lot in heavy counterspell match ups.

[@NoNo-qt4ov]

Cant believe Richard showed a picture of the top 8 comments calling him and Seth out for their "your opponents will just kill you" argument and then just didnt really discuss it, only to them use the same argument this episode. Absolute classic 😂. Edit: Spelling

[@ohfish9499]

Because Richard has explained it so many times lol. He’s been saying this for literal years, it’s “juice isn’t worth the squeeze” argument and it does make some sense even if I don’t fully agree with it. It comes down to don’t play something too scary in your deck if you don’t have the ability to back it up and use that advantage. Like for example you’re playing a sygg river cutthroat dimir deck and you accidentally reveal a Thassa’s Oracle on like a fact or fiction. Maybe you’re playing it just as a low mana value merfolk, but smart players will just kill you if they can because they see Thassa’s Oracle and expect you to be some sort of combo deck.

[@zgmfx42ssaviour]

Sorry Richard, tempo is an actual deck type in edh. Tomer mentioned Edric, but the signpost commander for me is Yuriko- the better Edric. You stick a threat on turn two, draw cards and kill people with it, and play an insane amount of cheap/free interaction that protects your cheap threats and stops your opponent's gameplans. If that isn't the exact plan that the infamous mono blue tempo deck from a few years ago, idk what is. Edric largely does the same thing, and some people include Gix, but I think blue is basically a must-have for the strategy.

[@alancrow7325]

Crim's comment about baiting out removal using your commander is something I agree with and do often. Yes I lose the commander and it is taxed, but at least I can recast it for 2 more. I prefer to let my recurrable threats to eat removal

[@baltosstrupelos302]

Crim is 100% right on the Faerie deck; Tempo is when you mix aggro and control, to edge out your win. You don't notice the aggro, because of the big life totals, and other, more distracting things happening, so it looks like Control only.

[@maximilianlopez196]

Pretty sure one of the only true tempo decks in edh is Edric.

[@hugovellver5114]

Tempo decks means you outpace your opponents with cheap general interaction(bounce, etb tap, etc) and close the game while doing so , you make them go slower , having a deck that runs faster is also another kind of tempo wich acceleration is for , constant plays , Ramp is one explossive play that is hard to interact, control is card advantage in every solution and do not die , combo is a one turn interaction that ends in a win or concede

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

Stax is a tempo strategy.

[@Jerhevon]

And even outside the tempo decks themselves, the game itself has a rythm. If your removal costs 3, and must be played now, but also prevents you from casting your Solemn to build up your board state, that's a real cost to what you can do as opposed to your opponents.

[@BoardWiped]

The best part of playing more lands isn't that you mulligan less, its that you can mulligan MORE to find your better spells!

[@SmashCentralOfficial]

37:12 Real Tempo in EDH is hitting all your land drops.

[@jaredwright1655]

I swear every game comes down to who had the most mana or cheated the most mana in play. Reanimator for example

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

@@jaredwright1655 That's generally how resources work. If you have more resources you can accomplish more things. That's not even an mtg thing that's just everything.

[@neonron8812]

Rolling dice for attacks is one of the worst things in commander. Stop it! Just declare the attack.

[@RyanEglitis]

At the very worst, attack the player who went first if you really can't decide.

[@wesleywyndam-pryce5305]

I have never seen that, it sounds terrible

[@Jerhevon]

Sometimes there just isn't enough information. I take full account for my attacks, but it's not enough impetus for me to overly care. True most times I do chose whoever ramped or whatnot. And sometimes, you just went first, got a 2-mana critter, and need an initial target. And following turn, if some how nothing changed, hit another person.

[@ethanhughes3515]

Tomer going off and representing the comments at Seth and Richard

[@seanedgar164]

Tempo normally requires disrupting your opponents' plays so that they fall behind or struggle against your threats. Mostly counterspelling to clear the way for or protecting your attacks

[@sixfourteen614]

They gotta rename this podcast to the "Dunk-on-Phil-Cast"

[@mikaeljordan]

I do often feel that Phil gets undeserved heat

[@henrye3935]

My one to add to this would be that people overvalue their opponent's threats and undervalue their value. For example, someone might see a Court of Grace and destroy it thinking, "One 4/4 a turn is insane!" but then they leave alone the Fecundity that's quietly drawing its controller three cards a turn. Also, regarding lands and ramp: If you don't play a land the same turn as your ramp, then you didn't ramp. You paid mana for your land drop.

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

The actual biggest mistake people make in Magic The Gathering (not just commander) is refusing to learn how to utilize hypergeometric distribution to improve their deckbuilding.

[@atk9989]

Way to much sweat for a casual format.

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

@@atk9989 That's not "sweat", that's just the fundamental basics of deck construction. It's just a thing you have to know in order to build a deck that functions the way you want it to. Neither you nor your opponents are going to have fun if you can't play the game due to not having built your deck in a way that lets the game be played.

[@Woozychu]

@@atk9989nah he’s right, playing 40 lands sucks if you don’t need it, calculator smoothes all my mana bases out

[@tierfunmtg]

Nothing has upped my EDH deck building skills more than that calculator’s cold, hard math

[@Jerhevon]

@@dontmisunderstand6041 And it just takes a lot of finessing things. Playing games and then going I could use a little/lot of X, and then taking out the cards that frankly keep disappointing you when you draw them in that deck.

[@zeroisnine]

Richard doesn't understand tempo and just globs it with aggro/rush. Tempo isn't about being the fastest, it's about being faster.

[@matthewpatton9221]

Tempo is a reference to chess Tempe' which is essentially gaining another turn. Turning a big move into nothing with minimal resources is a tempo move. Maybe a toxic proliferation deck could actually tempo in commander. Bounce something proliferate, counter proliferate, draw proliferate. It's really hard to effectively gain turns on multiple people, thus the 1v1 part.

[@jakecarlson3709]

Tempo is a music term that has existed since before Beethoven, and refers to the speed at which the music is played (usually measured in beats per minute). This was brought into games and refers to the pace of play. High tempo decks (typically referred to as either aggro or just tempo decks) focus on winning as early as possible, make plays that commit large portions of their resources, and typically run out of gas relatively quickly if they don’t win early. Low tempo decks (usually called either control or value decks) typically slow down the pace of play with lots of interaction, attempt to maximize the value of each individual card, and typically win late through having the most resources available to them.

[@matthewpatton9221]

@jakecarlson3709 Tempo was a word long before the mathematics of music was discovered. Do you really believe that the first thing the word "speed" or "pace" got applied to was music?

[@savinobalducci6148]

​​@@matthewpatton9221 having an infect deck in a tempo style is a really clever idea, get everyone a poison counter and then just slow down everybody while incidentally proliferating

[@bennettpalmer1741]

I'm convinced Richard doesn't actually know what "tempo" is. He was talking about "outdrawing the opponent" or "trading 1 for 1 doesn't work in commander, because you have multiple opponents who will collectively draw more cards and cast more spells than you" But those concepts have nothing to do with tempo. Tempo is all about time management. If you have a 3 turn clock, for example, you only need to keep your opponents from interfering for 3 turns. It doesn't matter if you are trading resources 1 for 1 with the entire table, or even casting 0 for 1 cards like unsummon. If you have the resources to hold them off for 3 turns, you win, even if doing so puts you "behind" on cards in hand or available mana or whatever. That's tempo. This is an extraordinarily powerful concept in commander, if anything it's significantly stronger in commander than it is in conventional 60 card formats. Casting cyclonic rift doesn't actually lose your opponent out on any cards. They all go back to their hands where they can recast them in the future. The only thing it gains you is tempo - your opponents are slowed down and need to waste time setting up again before they can influence the game, while you can spend that time snowballing and winning. Fogs are also tempo cards - you don't actually destroy any of your opponents creatures by fogging most of the time - but what it does is buy you some additional time to recover and deal with their board or push through your own lethal attack. "The fog meta" is fundamentally about understanding that in a format where you cannot realistically expect to outvalue or overpower your opponents, you can still out tempo them, and that's typically the key to winning a game.

[@barrelrollio]

This is a perfect breakdown. Mono-Blue Tempo (2019ish) was a great deck for understanding tempo - lay down effective cheap beaters (set the clock), buff them or add resources (curious obsession), and protect them by any means necessary (counterspells).

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

Tempo is why you play an untapped land instead of a tapped land. Card advantage is why you play a surveil land instead of a shock land. Card advantage is not tempo, tempo is not card advantage.

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

I do think it's worth noting... you can indeed plan to outvalue and then overpower your opponents in a 4 player free for all. You can build to be the archenemy and still win, without the decks being dramatically different power levels. It just requires a fundamentally different approach than building and piloting a deck that factors politics into its game plan. As an example, you will NEVER run enough removal to win a 1v3. But you can certainly run enough threats to force the 3 to team up. We see evidence of this in both directions in Commander Clash almost every game. So, to optimize for the plan to outvalue and overpower in a 1v3, you ditch all of the 1 for 1 removal instants. You ditch most of your board wipes too. If it doesn't do more than just the one thing one time, it's not a great card for this strategy. Ideally you want every card to do multiple things, whether that's in the form of turn by turn incremental advantage or modality. And you want each of those cards to synergize, so that each new card you play is a larger and larger amount of incremental value.

[@christopherlee2828]

Making smarter attacks is the biggest mistake i see around my playgroup. Rolling a dice to atk, or attacking the life gain player. Even if the random 3 damage is being dealt to someone with 100+ life. While the mono black krrik player whos on ad naus is at 12 or whatever idk, i 110% agree with that mistake.

[@adambick9837]

Played against a guy who was running 23 lands in a ramos deck, no basics, a few mana rocks, and lands like lotus field that got rid of his lands. We had to convince a buddy to not play the card Wave of Vitriol to not send this guy to the absolute shadow realm.

[@bryanstrahm9961]

Ah, I see Crim is finally learning about Richard's sandbag strat to win.

[@andrewtaylor5883]

My biggest mistake is forgetting I can't see the big picture [of the active player]. More often than not I [regrettably] have questioned other's decisions because I am judging the play off of what I know. It's hard to remember that the same I am playing is only 25% of the full picture at any given point

[@zweis]

1:07:01 Seth "It's a tempo play" line is the funniest thing I've heard since the last time I commented about him saying the funniest thing ever

[@gbort1]

Biggest mistake you can make would probably be eating the cards. They tend to be expensive vs their nutritional value so you lose out there. Plus they are not very tasty,

[@ebonezra8073]

13:56 This is exactly how you guys rate cards: "Hedron Archive is bad. If you're spending 6 mana to draw a card, you've already lost. I'd literally rather spend that mana in any other way." Well, what if you don't have any other thing to spend it on, and all you have is a Sol Ring sitting around doing nothing? "Castle Ardenvale isn't good. You have already lost if you're spending 5 mana for a 1/1." Well, what if you were holding up a counter spell but your opponent drops Supreme Verdict? Your deck doesn't always just work because you built it "correctly." You shouldn't rate cards because "you'd be much better off playing something else."

[@ianleggett8429]

I think here there are two different definitions of tempo here. One the deck archetype and one is your own ability to play cards and use your mana efficiently. One looks at your opponents tempo and the other is more concerned with your own tempo.

[@empurress77]

Playing anything early is in expectation of removal, True story. Here's the thing: When i play an early creature i'm fishing for removal so something else can be more likely to remain in play. Commanders are quite good for this because of the ease of replating them.

[@electricblue2920]

I've always opted for protection cards over removal

[@ebonezra8073]

13:37 "Think about what your commander/X is doing;" can summarize most decisions in EDH. It's easy to say always run 37+ lands, but if you just think about what your deck is doing, you may only require 35 (or less- oooohhh!). Don't just do things because you can - be strategic. Would you cast Open the way if you're behind on lands but your opponent has blood moon - and you don't have basics to grab? Maybe someone will destroy blood moon, but you have to think through decisions, not just make them blindly because you can.

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

Your commander is not relevant to the decision of how many lands to run. The rest of your deck is. Because the focal point of your land count is on probabilities with the opening hand. Because you will necessarily always be including more lands than your deck functionally needs or wants, in order to make the probability of your opening hand being playable higher. The spells in your deck determine how many lands are in an acceptable opening hand, which is the the most important factor in determining how many lands your deck needs to run.

[@ebonezra8073]

@dontmisunderstand6041 would you have still responded if you realized I was saying, "Think about what X is doing." I was talking about the thought process, not specifically about the commander. Don't misunderstand me. My argument is not about lands either.

[@sweatyluxury4701]

I gotta talk about tempo. Having the ability to control your tempo in a game of commander, is the strongest thing you can do. Whether you're playing 'Alela', 'The First Sliver', or whichever commander, holding second place up until you can take first - is a win.

[@rquer7913]

If this would be an anime, Tomer would be the cocky protagonist, Seth the chill buddy, Richard the wise mentor and Crim... we all know that Crim would be the wannabe villan that sacrifices himself at the end to save the day.

[@foxrogge6298]

I agree with the lands, I was playing a Kenrith deck and I was hitting a land each turn, and I got enough that I played Pir's Whim for Field of the Dead into Hour of Promise for Dark Depths and Thespian's Stage and activated it to make a 20/20 and gave it haste with Kenrith.

[@welbenn]

There's no absolute rule that makes sense 100% of the time in Magic. For example, this first "mistake" of casting your 3 mana commander on turn 3 is a complete nonsense in my case. Just because I play Shorikai as my commander, and it is way harder to kill an artifact than kill a creature. If I wait to cast Shori on turn 6 because so I'll have a counters Pell to protect it's cast, I'll lose lots of draws. And that not to talk that is waaaaay better to counter the shannaningans that Shorikai will throw at you than Shori itself.

[@jakecarlson3709]

I’m in the same boat playing grist. My commander is a planeswalker that generates tokens and mills me. My deck is built to play out of my graveyard. There is a reason that “dies to doom blade” is a meme in this community

[@Jerhevon]

I will say I would try to hit 5 mana for Shorikai so I can get at least one activation out. Not done it as a commander yet, just in the 99 of a couple decks. It's such a cracked resource engine.

[@haroun1760]

Tomers face when Seth was talking about resolving a Conflux was priceless and then saying Sea Gate Restoration is a MDFC had me pauze the video untill I stoped laughing 😅

[@jerzNC]

The biggest mistake i most commonly see is decks not running enough redundancy and synergy with the commander. A lot of new players or inexperienced players fill their decks with non synergetic draw, ramp, creatures, and spells because those cards are "generically good".

[@ich3730]

Weirdly, i have the opposite experience. Generic, good cards consistently perform in most games. Thats why they are called good after all. Most new players i see often are way too obsessed with synergy. Like playing a 5 mana counterspell that makes three clue tokens over something like OG counterspell because "it makes clues, this is a clue deck, so the card must be better because the same words appear on all of my cards"

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

@@ich3730 Consistency at the cost of effectiveness is bad, because fundamentally you will NEVER achieve a level of consistency that matters in more games than having a higher ceiling. That's just how the math behind a randomized deck of cards works. You don't need to play a single staple to build a deck that does everything it wants to, where every card synergizes with each other to create more benefit than any 2 cards would individually, and where every spell is a spell you want to cast if you can.

[@DylanHunter64]

The biggest mistake I see people make is not doing much to take the heat off of themselves. So many fears or worries by the table (even justified) can be explained away with truth just by describing anything else that's scary in the game or by simply underselling what you're actually doing.

[@jaredwright1655]

I'd follow that up with a similar player, the one that doesn't explain how they win or what the combo pieces are, so they get killed out of fear and confusion. I always tell people "this thing is what I really need to go off. I have cards to get it back later, but it takes time." As long as you don't lie about what your deck does, you'll die when you deserve it and not when you don't!

[@Jerhevon]

Like just accepting responsibility for your plays. I'm sorry, your commander is scary. Bad things happen if you untap with it. We're not just ganging up on you for no reason. (Also mind the hyperbole, 3 attacks from 1 person with a 3/3 are attacks of opportunity, not a complete assault. Though sometimes my only answer is indeed player removal.)

[@imaginarymatter]

I think a big mistake is suffering from Keyword-itis -- an affliction in which players build decks or decks around Commanders with a particular keyword by filling the deck with cards with that keyword with no regard for any other considerations. Let's use Padeem, Consul of Innovation as an example. This card sees heavy play in the 99 of artifact decks. On the surface level this makes sense: it gives artifacts hexproof and even might draw you cards. It's perfect, right? However, not all artifact decks are the same. Look at popular artifact Commander decks like Breya or Urza, Chief Artificer. These are artifact decks but they want a particular type of artifact. Breya wants lots of artifacts because she is sacrificing them, Urza wants lots of artifacts because it discounts his mana cost and makes the Karn-structs bigger. These demands lean very heavily towards going wide with artifacts. The best cards in these decks often produce a large amount of artifact tokens -- tokens which have 0 cmc created from non-artifact cards. Padeem, however, is a snob. He doesn't care about artifact tokens, he cares about singular artifacts with high mana values -- the opposite of what Breya and Urza want in their 99. The error here is that because Padeem says artifact in his rules text he automatically goes in the 99 of artifacts decks. But many artifact decks have incredibly low top-end mana values for their artifacts so Padeem often only handing out Hexproof to less than half the deck. A broader example is Tribal decks. Let's use the case of Sidar Jabari of Zhalfir. This card practically shouts knight tribal: he has a knight creature type, he has an eminence ability that says knight, a combat trigger that says knight, and even has very knightly looking armor in his card art. However, Sidar Jabari is not a knight deck at least in the sense that he is a Commander that scales with the number of knights in a players deck. Let's look at the Eminence ability. It only requires a single knight to trigger. It doesn't matter if you have 1 knight or 100 knights, that effect will only trigger once per attack step -- Sidar Jabari attacking alone is enough to trigger that ability. Additionally, his combat damage trigger can only bring back a single knight; because of that you likely only want to reanimate the highest cmc knight available in the graveyard. The Sidar is not a knight deck -- he's simply a Commander that wants to play some knights in the 99. Limiting the deck to knight tribal makes for a weaker deck since there is no benefit to running almost exclusively knights.

[@amatheuslc]

Crim actually brings up an example of it in his Alela deck. She's a faeries deck, but her best ones are Mana Drain, Consider and Deadly Rollick.

[@imaginarymatter]

@@amatheuslc I was considering about ranting about Newlela just because that's one I personally play. She really is a Flash/Instant deck and running Sorcery speed faeries hoovers up the mana you could have used to play at Instant speed on your opponents' turns which also makes faeries, so playing the sorcery speed faeries don't even break Faerie parity -- not that Alela particularly cares about Faeries being the three you need to max out on goading. The only non-flash faerie I run is Tegwyll, ironically, just because of how many cards he can draw.

[@glensimpson1934]

@imaginarymatter I agree with your stance on Padeem, but you take on Sidar Jabari is a hot one. I've been piloting that deck for almost a year know and it's definitely knight tribal, and it definitely wants lots of knights. If you don't have a lot of knights he doesn't function, because he requires knights to do his thing. If you have a lot of non knights you won't get his powerful triggers. You also don't always want to reanimate the highest cmc knight back. Getting our knights that provide protection, like Knight Exemplar, or give him double strike, like Silverblade Paladin are often what you want to bolster your strategy and board. Sidar IS a knight deck, through and through.

[@MrGeoghagan]

Richard is 100% spot on with the tempo argument. It gets exhausting hearing things like "I don't want to use my removal and risk losing tempo". You never had tempo, and unless the decks are way too different in power level, no player will ever truly have tempo.

[@dontmisunderstand6041]

Not in multiplayer, no. The existence of multiple people effectively guarantees that tempo is irrelevant.

[@wesleywyndam-pryce5305]

if you out tempo 3 players your deck is stronger than the table. that's why tempo as we understood it in 60 card does not translate for 1v1v1v1 from 1v1.

[@Jerhevon]

Sometimes games just go weird. A couple weeks back I basically had a T3 Mist-Syndicate naga solo a table. No relevant interaction early on. And then no board wipes cast once I was swinging with 5+ of them. Oh and still a counterspell in hand just in case.

[@PalPlays]

It's always an enigma to me how someone can say "spot removal and boardwipes are bad" and then follow it up with "I don't like casting my commander because it will just be removed." Say what you will about Crim's takes, but at least they're logical...and machiavellian. Tomer is the only sane one on the podcast.

[@jameslove90]

This has been one of the funniest and entertaining podcasts you've ever done. Great topic, great energy and Tomer was really on fire 😂 Also, many things you guys have said are indeed true.

[@koolaiddude7685894]

Lol never imagined my sarcastic comment about Crim being in the thumbnail would make headlines 😂😂

[@Woozychu]

Richard is actually just insane

[@baltosstrupelos302]

My Tempo in 60 card was that flash deck from standard way back, with Brineborn cutthroat. The goal: build up a beater, and hit the opponent, protecting my threat, and countering/bouncing their threats/answers. My commander Tempo deck is much the same. I went all instants, with Derevi as CMDR. I put +1/+1 counters on my commander, phasing, protecting, countering etc, while dealing my 21 CMDR damage. Even if they get removed, Derevi always comes back cheap, and we build up again. It's the same play pattern as in 60 card, but you need to pick your counter battles, and attack targets carefully. Oh, and politic a ton.

[@fabiogliosci8305]

thank you for all the fun podcasts and videos you guys do. They are all great in their own way

[@Alikaoz]

Finally a podcast where the answer is "to listen to Richard"

[@austinbrown2833]

One of my favorite things I’ve heard that I use for when I play commander is the Blue shell in Mario cart never hits the guy in second, if you can coast in 2nd or third then make a push for game after a board wipe or something feels good

[@T_Peazy]

Richard, tempo in commander (as crim said) is playing a card that generates you multiple instances of multicard value. Rhystic study. Planeswalkers. Bitterblossom.

[@T_Peazy]

Armageddon is s tempo card. It's anything that breaks the 3 to 1 disadvantage

[@ericschartenberg7592]

Hi, it was great to see Richard while I was volunteering on Monday. It made my day! Great podcast as always.

[@eon2330]

The biggest mistake mtg players make.... Is doing high threat low immediate impact plays that don't win the game the turn someone is threatening to win the game. For example. Casting your commander, or sea gate restoration, or dropping any of your combo pieces on the board without the winning piece. Why? Because now every opponent sees you and is like.... nah I an okay losing to eldrazi not your pathetic combo. Or they drop a farewell. Or they look at you and assume you have answers since you just sea gated and play their wincons/power plays. Then everyone lets the card stick around and bam. Games over. You trying to slide under the radar won't. It just won't and if the threat is crippled, guess who gets the creatures turning sideways and the wrath of the has no defense to the only lethal previous winner. If they don't have protection(which you didn't force out), they usually have removal. And now you just got rekt.

[@kaemonbonet4931]

The example richard had on screen for, "dont play your commander early" was one of the worst examples of that rule. Lol. Tolsimir is great to play early if you have a couple attackers on board. If you have the choice between tolsimir and ramp, maybe you still play ramp but casting on turn 3 or 4 to draw two cards is great.

[@eon2330]

As for holding interaction..... seth removing interaction from his deck honestly makes sense.... since he always never pays for rhystic study or rhystic study like effects, so like... the opponent always has tons more questions than he ever has answers. Tempo decks in commanders usually are power level x decks when everyone else is playing much lower power level y decks. The commander is USUALLY the engine that allows this style of deck to function. For example Kenrith+ leyline + rhystic study+ seed borne muse.... Yeah you can call that "tempo". Its an insane amount of power that shouldn't have been allowed to exist and usually only exists because someone didn't pay the 1 a bunch of times so someone got 9 free counter spells. Its far easier to win, than it is to do 4x as much as others every turn consistently.

[@talonjansen8926]

It needs to be said: tempo is a play-style, and both the term and concept are slightly ambiguous. Tempo does look different depending on the format. In Commander, you might find yourself making a tempo play without knowing it. Likewise, you might end up playing Modern and think you're "playing tempo" when you're actually playing a different "archetype".

[@Razokk]

Yuriko is the one and only tempo-viable commander, and shes broken as hell. Consistently early threats to the whole table that eat away at everyone, backed up by permission and removal and an infinitely replayable commander.

[@MadMax-3494]

Couldn’t agree with Tomer’s last point more, so tired of the life total argument for why someone gets attacked. What about the board state?! Look at it, LOOK AT IT!

[@cheesyz81]

Richard I tried some fogs in a few decks, and this weekend I won a game directly because of the fogs one being Dawn Charm and Obscuring Haze stopped someone trying to hit me with Boros Aggro and artifacts. Fogged em 2 times back to back after helping them clear the table and always kept 3 mana up so they were afraid to target me because of Teferi's Protection. They had Winds of Abandon the table to mana was not an issue at the time and I was drawing so many cards a turn the extra mana was helpful in the long run.

[@mattlawton11]

Seth saying Commander is playing 100 singleton cards reminds me: put more basics in my decks

[@RobiousIllyrian]

We need Phil on the cast to defend himself as example #1 for everything XD

[@winter945]

I find it funny being told I may not being running enough lands by Tomer, then running the formula on my deck and discovering that actually 35 lands is too many, thanks Tomer!

[@ArtoPOE123]

you can tempo 1 vs 3 by making sure that those 3 cant play the cards, its called stax, and it really cares about tempo

[@ben_clifford]

Richard had the best hot takes this time (somewhat surprisingly)

[@midnalight6419]

TOMER WITH THE CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS LET'S GO

[@juliangrace-martin1740]

I have an idea about the tempo discussion: in 1v1 the definition for a tempo deck most always be a deck that uses answers for opponent's cards that are more mana efficient and gets ahead on mana in every other way it can to get ahead on board, so you can't play the full tempo strategy in commander against 3 opponents. The Edric and tymna style cares more about maximizing advantages from having better board presence than opponents so you aren't winning by getting ahead then stopping your opponents just long enough, but you are just using that as a way to get better engines going. It seems like it does use an aspect of tempo since it needs to be ahead on board but it doesn't need to be harming the opponent if they are spending resources on ramp and drawing.

[@LordoftheSandwiches]

Sorry Richard, dockside for 3 is still busted. You said best card.

[@SterileSauce]

The biggest mistake that’s easy to make is feeling rushed to take your turns and ending up missing triggers or being as efficient as possible. People can be patient and respect your time. Just be sure to goldfish your deck when you can if it’s complex

[@orpheos9]

Counterpoint. Sometimes in casual tables it’s fine to rush a little bit and potentially lose a bit of percentage points of winning so that everyone has a better time.

[@SterileSauce]

@@orpheos9 I fully agree. There’s definitely a good middle ground between sweaty 5min turns and not stressing about being as optimal as possible

[@ryanmann5497]

30:26 I’ve been told I had to run more lands because I play between 31 and 34 for most of my decks… thing is that even with 31-34 I find myself drawing too many lands when I need spells… if I go higher to like 37-40 lands, yes I have to mulligan less but I also end up drawing too dang many lands more frequently… for me personally, 31-34 is the right number of lands, though I also tend to play green in most of my decks so I have not only mana rocks and draw but also extra ramp spells like natures lore, rampant growth, farseek etc. tends to balance out for me. Now I won’t lie, there are times when I just don’t hit my mana and I get blown out, but it’s actually fairly infrequent, plus it was happening at about the same rate with the extra lands.

[@Lord_lost13]

So in my decks i run 34 lands base i don't have any more the only time i had more was in a deck with a high curve. but i have never had issues with lands so i might just be lucky but is having close to 40 more correct? I think that with more then 36 you will get mana flooded. any feed back would be great

[@coreysierchio4650]

I like the idea of not expecting to win every game. *Thanks for the Content!*

[@Asteris-r7o]

I think biased threat assessment is not always bad. If you don't play cEdh, sometimes removing a hated card and letting another opponent win can be funny

[@_claymore]

commander is not a 1v3 format. it is a 1v1v1v1 format. yes, that does make a big difference, especially considering the option of "politics".

[@Grief111]

We have a term in our play group for the person that might not have the highest life total, but they're in the lead. We call it "theoretical throne" vs the "throne".

[@drkatz1192]

I’d hate to pick on Richard AGAIN, but it’s pretty clear he doesn’t understand Tempo when he’s talking about The One Ring, and Card Advantage. Tempo originates from chess and has nothing to do with CA, it’s pacing/control of the game. It is harder to do in EDH, but possible in the decks Crim & Tomer mention. Millicent, Alela, Malcolm, and Edric are examples of the archetype.

[@AlthalusKanemtg]

14:30 Crim says about expecting the deck to do its thing. I have won quite a few games tbis year because my deck hasn't done what it was meant to and my opponents have left me alone to keep one creature. They do all of the hard work and I just sweep up.

[@elijahwalker323]

@29:00 I think I suck at shuffling or something though, depending on the deck I get around 36 from that formula, I run like 37-38. And Even after muligans, or vegas muligan, my hand is still barely keepable.

[@gabriellecureux5528]

man the first thing I think about with Seth making mistakes was when he forgot the play siege rhino in his 100 rhino that was hilarious

[@codywilson4938]

Does power creep and card draw affect running more lands being better somehow? Youll draw cards more often now so its important to get to the place where youre drawing them?

[@mildtotemperate]

Richard seems like the happiest guy ever. When he talks he's always smiling or giggling.

[@loch1694]

I’d be pretty happy with his career!