The Community Speaks! Power Brackets DEFINED! Top 100 Cards

Check out the Paragon: Monsters & Mayhem Kickstarter!
www.kickstarte...
----------
The Commander's Quarters is your Magic the Gathering source that helps you Command Your Budget! The Community Speaks! Power Brackets DEFINED! Top 100 Cards! Where was Mitch right and where was he wrong?
----------
Top 100 Card List Link:
tcgplayer.pxf....
----------
Support us directly, get rewards, and join The Commander’s Quarter’s community on our Patreon page: / commandersquarters
----------
When you are buying decks or individual cards, make sure you are using any of our TCGplayer affiliate links below to help support the channel!
Commander's Quarters general affiliate link:
tcgplayer.pxf.i...
Commander's Quarters decklists:
tcgplayer.pxf.i...
----------
Get your official Commander's Quarters swag at:
thecommandersqu...
----------
Follow and reach out to us on social media!
Instagram: / thecommandersquarters
Twitter: / edhquarters
Facebook: / thecommandersquarters

[@TheCommandersQuarters]

Check out the Paragon: Monsters & Mayhem Kickstarter! www.kickstarter.com/projects/paragon-tcg/paragon-monsters-and-mayhem-tcg-founders-edition?ref=f06pa5

[@Lord_lost13]

so, in my Opinion. "Salt factor/ feels bad" should NEVER EVER be what makes a card in a higher bracket. I get that some cards folks dont like to play against but it doesn't mean that its objectively powerful. so every card in the brackets should be based off power and never be based off of feelings players have on it.

[@byoutifulmonster]

It's shit like that that made people think Armageddon is a cedh card

[@Lord_lost13]

@@byoutifulmonster yes hot take, I don't care what someone else thinks when i play the game, i just what to play, win or lose I'm having fun because i am playing. anyone who gets butt hurt over someone playing a card/commander or combo etc you are a baby. period end of story

[@ramiroelganame3610]

True. Everyone feels different about every card. I cannot build a deck around people's feelings.

[@necroticgaming2150]

I agree. I get super salty over Internal Darkness BUT it's not as broken or powerful as Bloodmoon lol

[@Lord_lost13]

@@necroticgaming2150 see it’s fine to not like certain cards, but to say to someone you shouldn’t play that because of that, that’s not OK. I may not like a card but guess what I have something called removal.

[@cobberhambone9484]

This shows just how shitty the community’s ability the threat assess is. People just put shit they don’t like in higher tiers, not what’s stronger.

[@Robert-vk7je]

Well, then tier 4 becomes the bracket of the most hated cards, so what?

[@ChloeMarketable]

That's also why I believe Wizards will provide a better sum of what cards go in which brackets. I don't trust the community because most people will tell you the cards they hate go in the lower brackets and the cards they love in the higher brackets.

[@Cyberium]

Those who sent death threat to RC were probably those who'd rate Mana Crypt and Jeweled Lotus at bracket 1.

[@PapayuhSam]

If you showed this list to me with no context i could tell from a mile away that it's just all the cards reddit doesn't like not the most powerful/competitive nor are they balanced within the brackets at all.

[@nestormentoso]

To be fair, I don't think actual players cared that much, but people that invest in cardboard and barely play

[@Hologhost69]

The thing that kills me is that most players do not run any interaction and then get upset about cards they could easily stop if they were willing to just run a few cards in their deck.

[@BushRat253]

THIS!!! It drives me nuts. I'm always telling people to play answers. Now I'll just let the entire table die rather than save everyone over and over.

[@FirePhoenix103]

While yes, I think people should have removal when expecting a threat of some kind, saying to have more removal isn't a valid argument. You could have 40 removal and not draw 1 in your opening hand. Or you have a decent amount but can't find one in your hand, are you forced to mulligan down to 4 just for a removal spell? Also, there is an argument that one can't allows play around the idea that someone has a specific card.

[@DommyXMommy]

@@FirePhoenix103nah it’s called building your deck in way that it can either draw or search for removal spells. It’s all about deck building. If you don’t build your deck right, your rng doesn’t matter

[@FirePhoenix103]

@DommyXMommy well yeah obviously you have to have a balanced deck. However even a perfectly balanced deck can be plain unlucky.

[@mikotagayuna8494]

@@FirePhoenix103 If the entire pod runs removal, you can easily count on someone having an answer even when you don't. It requires the table to be on board with answering obvious threats. Otherwise, the table deserves exactly what it gets.

[@badley91]

If we arent putting sol ring in bracket 4 the integrity of the list is undermined. What youre really saying is that affordability and accessibility plays a factor when it should be irrelevant to a tier structure based on power level of a given card.

[@vivianvicious]

its so bad. this system better tank because its dumb to think someone with a farewell is auto 3. thats so fucking dumb

[@doodooballs80]

thank you

[@Shawn-f3x]

I think it’s hilarious that all the White Good Stuff that dominates games are 2’s and 3’s. People are obviously just voting personal preference. Sure, pay no attention to my Trouble In Pairs. It’s clearly weaker than Rhystic, lol.

[@nickmckeehan2428]

Justify putting sol ring in bracket 4 plz. It makes zero sense. It's not a free cast. It doesn't create exponential mana... (like dockside)

[@jmets112]

The only argument for Sol Ring is it helps every deck. It is kind of like a lottery card for Commander.

[@zehmyan]

I really dread this. the thing I always enjoyed about Commander was the ease of construction. Now it's going to become a whole ordeal of checking lists, and considering what good cards I want to play I'll have to swap out for cards I don't just to power my decks down. Where I used to play with my collection and occasionally got new cards to power things up, I can forsee a future where I'm forced to buy inferior cards to the ones I've already collected in order to limit the power of my deck. that 100% sounds like the opposite of fun.

[@keleitas150]

Ease of construction? Really? I mean, if by that you mean take 99 random cards that fits into commander colors then I could understand. But a somewhat functional deck is definitely not easy to build. Especially in a format like commander where you can take cards from EVERY block in mtg history.

[@zehmyan]

@@keleitas150 yes child, I know. I’ve been playing since Alliances, ages before Commander was a twinkle in Sheldon’s eye. Building Commander decks is a fun challenge, but the ease comes in the form of it being every card in my collection, and only needing a single copy. Remember when there wasn’t a ban list? I do. Remember when everyone was playing fun Jank and making it strong by being clever? I do. Now every card is both sides of the combo, if not more… and hell why not give it Ward 2 while you’re at it. And the banned list grows and grows. The idea that having this increased, more complex structure we’ll have to build around, swapping things out to fit into brackets doesn’t feel like commander. It feels like Standard, where you’re told what cards you are going to be playing with.

[@keleitas150]

@@zehmyan i don't find it bad tbh, and also you can always choose to just do whatever you want either way, if your table is OK you can just play with no banned cards. Brackets on paper are a good change cause it aligns the table to a similar power level. But since it is mostly played by people in their house and less in tournaments what exactly stops you from playing without ban list?

[@zehmyan]

@@keleitas150 After seeing the Professor’s proposal adapting points instead of tiers, and seeing the other thoughts on the internet these past two weeks, I think the Tolarian Community approach is the way to go, and if WOTC drops the ball here, the community aught to go with that instead. Descriptive, not restrictive!

[@bingbong14191]

I’m just gonna play with whatever is not banned and not worry about brackets. They are just making things harder than it has to be.

[@keleitas150]

Is it hard to just Google the brackets and see what cards are in it after your table decided in which one you all are going to play? Isn't that just looking at banned cards with a an extra step in the end? What's so damn hard about it?

[@ACertainGuy0]

@@keleitas150 Because the system is new, barely fleshed out and has barely any explanation of how the system works, its rhyme or reason to each tiering and the fact that they pulled the "Grandfathering" of fetches and sol ring to the lowest bracket. Add on, I dont plan to have a discussion of "My deck is a 1 but has 2 bracket 2 cards, 3 bracket 3 cards and a bracket 4 card. The followup is now "ok what are the bracket 2, 3 and 4 cards?" and we have to do this for EVERY PLAYER AT THE TABLE? You can do that by yourself, imma put my deck on the table, shuffle up and play. This new system as it stands is hot cheeks. Im gonna skip out on acknowledging it for a fun time.

[@tym6217]

Gonna be real, I think this bracket system is stupid as hell and I'll be completely ignoring it. I expect it to flop.

[@krevin543]

Ditto friend.

[@akilianl.8313]

This will be another way the gatekeeping 'casual' crowd can alienate and shame players for getting better at the game. When will it end as well? Are they going to use these cards as comparisons to lesser or newer cards to further shame you even if you're playing by the brackets?

[@keleitas150]

So, you're playing bracket 4 games. Good for you buddy. 😂

[@skillboom2]

Buying powerful cards does not equal "getting better at the game" imo ​@@akilianl.8313

[@bulletproofchunkdion]

@@keleitas150everyone will be playing tier 4 buddy.

[@crb320]

Bracket system needs a lot of improvement. Starting off it doesnt take commander selection into consideration at all. Cant wait for people to build Kinnan bonder prodigy decks with all tier 1 cards and playing them alongside precons. Not a problem in sight. 🤡

[@CptnHowdy2475]

So the community says reanimate is a three, but fast mana through dark ritual is a two?? All this came to light because of fast mana, but now it's okay? The bracket can't account for synergy, so I'm going to stick with the 1-10 power level.

[@TarotNathers]

I’m willing to bet more people have been absolutely broadsided by a bomb being Reanimated than a bomb being Dark Ritualed into play, judging by the community votes.

[@christianmoore8898]

I think the bracket system needs to be way more nuanced and CAN work but so many factors; Starting with putting commander's in brackets. For instance, most ninjas are not great but in Yuriko they are insane and the same goes for Dragon in an Ur-Dragon deck. Then Synergy's need to be taken into account etc. I still think 1-10 is bad because in my experience a precon is considered a 5 so what is the point of 1-4. At least if all these cards have a bracket score you can average out a deck instead of the top card determining the power of the deck.

[@blackvneckux228]

If a 1-4 bracket can’t account for synergy, neither can power level 1-10. They are both linear number scales with no universally agreed-upon qualities. Most people do zero synergy analysis and just say “my deck is about a 7”. The difference is we’re going to get some standardized guidance with the brackets to help us have conversations using common language. Will it be perfect? Not even close. But the 1-10 system is ineffective to the point of being useless.

[@safersephiroth943]

@@christianmoore8898nobody considers a precon a 5. That’s nonsense

[@jonlamoreaux2228]

​@@TarotNathers really? By your logic more people have been broadsided by an early commander because they banned jeweled lotus... Dark ritual does the same thing.

[@jonathanensley4836]

My struggle with this whole bracket system is that it seems to have a very narrow scope. When I started Magic, I walked into an LGS on Friday with my wife, opened a precon and told the table we were new. A guy sits down with a "power 7" fairy deck and turn 5 infinite fairies and death. He may have had a rhystic study, but cyclonic rift was probably the highest power card. I don't like to lose, but I had no idea what cards cost, so I built several budget decks built my collection and eventually pulled some high dollar cards. As soon as crypt and lotus were banned, all of my decks essentially got more powerful. I don't play with a lot of these power 4 cards, but almost all of my decks play like archenemy. I have beaten a $3000 azami deck with basic forest tribal. There are so many powerful synergies that exist between cards, that a card like twiddle in an orvar deck becomes really good. Good deck building that suits the pilot will always be able to compete in a high power environment. Getting a list from edhrec seems to be what a lot of players are doing and it stifles creativity. In a rule 0 conversation with some decks I just tell my friend group that I want to play a deck that is evil. Either we escalate or they and I understand that I am going to be targeted. My point is on this kind of scale most of my most insidious decks are still technically a two or three. However, honestly they are going to play like a 4. So right now I can argue they are 7's but the conversation has to go a lot deeper than I have a vampiric tutor in my 5 color belly button tribe or if Kaalia survives you will probably lose to a horde of dragons.

[@edwardtravis903]

The bracket suggestion is so we dont have to have this conversation an can jus sit down and play.

[@astrograph7875]

I'd say the narrow scope is actually really good. It really helps define your deck power level for pods. There's also no rule saying you can't use cards from different brackets. Just let your playgroup know ahead of time. Also you gotta remember the power bracket is based on how powerful the card is overall. Not just very specific interactions.

[@jonathanensley4836]

@edwardtravis903 the problem is that the conversation is necessary. If I have a bracket 2 deck that plays as a 4 because of card interaction, my bracket 2 pod is probably going to feel pretty bad.

[@joedoe7572]

​@@edwardtravis903The bracket system isn't meant to replace the pregame conversation/rule 0, it's meant to be a good place to start that conversation. And the RC+WotC has specified this in the article they introduced the concept of the bracket system in

[@youkirosewarne1516]

@@edwardtravis903 they’ve said it and it’ll be reiterated on many times but the bracket system isn’t meant to replace the rule zero conversation but help streamline the whole process

[@Moose00019]

Could someone please convince wotc to flip the bracket numbers? Tier1 has been considered "top tier" for years. So could we please refer bracket 1 as the top power bracket?

[@istovall2624]

Yep the whole thing is stupid

[@shirohawke9413]

Ban worthy cards go in Bracket 0 for their busted game breaking power.

[@BrendanPatrickGrace]

For the non math-types, mean is the average (add everything up and divide by the total amount), median is line up all numbers in numerical order and find the true middle (for instance if you’ve got 2,3,4,5 the median is 3.5 because you have an even number for this list, with even numbered set of data you take the numbers on either side and find their middle) and mode is find the most frequent thing in the group in this case, the person took all the rankings they got from 1-4 found the most frequent number used and ta-dah the mode. There can be more than one mode, but that’s just your math basics.

[@jolteon345]

The problem with the community voting on the bracket system is that they will inherently be inclined to try to downplay their staples and decks, just like they already do when they tell people "My deck is a 7" at a LGS. The bracket system needs an unbiased, objective tiering system. Something like Vampiric Tutor can be strong, but how strong it is completely depends on your deck. That screams a very strong "3" to me but I see the argument for 4. Meanwhile, something like Sol Ring is objectively broken, yet it's not in even in bracket 2...because why? Availability and cost? How iconic it is? We got freaking DARK RITUAL in 2, but no Sol Ring or Mana Vault. Smothering Tithe isn't in 4 yet it should be up there with Rhystic Study. The community does NOT know how to bracket the cards and it makes me think that the bracket system won't work, especially since people would need to find how cards are ranked and then check their decks so they can tell the table "Yeah my deck is a 4 because it has Demonic Tutor but it's Demons/Liliana tribal so it's really a 2" - if people already go to an LGS wanting to play one deck, that's what they're gonna do. That's why rule 0 has struggled to work, and now WotC wants to implement a system that's rule 0 but more work and needing extra knowledge.

[@ryanhefner2011]

Smothering Tithe is not a 4. 3 is perfect.

[@JohnnyYeTaecanUktena]

The bracket system needs to be done by turn count not by individual cards. Sure sounds competitive but calling it brackets already makes it sounds competitive as fuck

[@BigMikePlays]

@@jolteon345 Bracketing is dumb. They can do a point system. Assign a point value to a card... and decks must have a total range of points to be valid in specific tiers for official tourney play.

[@jolteon345]

@@BigMikePlays The problem with a point system is that it still relies on the players to know the point value of cards. Without an official website and app that keeps track of it all, it’s not reasonable for players to make a 100-card deck within a certain range. I’ll take a massively flawed bracket system over a points system when there’s no current guidelines. The reason why a point system works in 40k is because the game was designed with it in mind.

[@snarlbuckle]

That's why I argue for brackets based on total deck cost. $1000+ decks are full of high demand cards, and +30 decks are full of commonly available (if powerful) cards. We know which one wins 90% of matchups. It is a relatively objective measure that adjusts with shifts in meta.

[@controlaltdeleteish]

Vamp tutor is a rampant growth in my black deck when I miss my land drop 😅

[@robstuk1]

2 card infinite tie combos should be 4’s when together.

[@Hiro53Axel]

Definitely agree any 2 cards that can infinite should be in the highest tier.

[@davidrosenberg9615]

​@Hiro53Axel Infinite what? Like, 2 card infinite damage? Yes. That ends the game. Infinite mana? Needs an outlet unless one is in the command zone. Infinite card draw? Depends if they have a built-in win in the deck. Infinite life? There's a reason commander damage is a thing. Not all infinites are created equal.

[@Hiro53Axel]

@@davidrosenberg9615 Infinites are typically built with intention. Sure you could have instances where someone builds a deck and they stumble into an infinite combo. Most cases I've encountered playing don't play out this way. All of the instances you pointed out could easily win you the game. For life Sanguine Bond/Vito would easily win you the game in that instance. There are several examples of infinite mana winning the game. Drawing your deck or nearly your whole deck could allow you to stall the game until you get your win or allow you to play options like laboratory maniac or Thassa's Oracle. I think bringing light to these infinite combos also could help newer players to either build around or stay away from these combos depending on what they are going for. Tiering them in the highest tier gives more emphasis on their power potential. I also think the current thought process of tiering things as individual cards is dumb as you could easily never draw and play the "tier 4" card. I think examining known combos or counting the amount of powerful cards in a deck makes a lot more sense than going by individual.

[@florianserres1590]

Also 2 cards combo 3 mana total different than 2 cards combo 9 mana total.

[@Arctanis-vt3hl]

@@davidrosenberg9615 Disagree, because even if you dont' win on the spot, most infinites that you mentioned give you such a huge advantage that you'll win eventually once you get what you need.

[@Treps1]

This sounds way too complicated. Most players don't even use deck building websites how are they expected to know all this now too?

[@keleitas150]

Google?

[@michaelcornell5138]

How are they supposed to know what is banned? They check, same as this.

[@mikotagayuna8494]

Most players play Commander, the most complicated format there is with tons of text on the table at any point in time. This sounds like complaining for the sake of complaining.

[@wchenful]

Yeah so this is a good example of why the bracket system is very unlikely to work well. You have cards like Smothering Tithe and Farewell in the same place. Smothering Tithe is basically (4 mana - if this card isn't countered or destroyed within 3 turns, you win the game) - easy candidate for b4 and more powerful than half of the other cards listed in b4. Meanwhile, Farewell is more like (6 mana - skip your own turn and slow the game down by 3 turns) - basically just an expensive / thorough sorcery speed sweeper.

[@Arctanis-vt3hl]

it doesnt' say skip your turn, because you play it first, then redeploy. No one is playing this on turn 6

[@wchenful]

@@Arctanis-vt3hl The issue is how fast the redeployment happens. What turn are you playing Farewell then? Because assuming you're at mana parity with your opponents, you are almost always putting yourself in a poor position. Here's a generic scenario: Let's say everyone has access to 10 mana and has 10 mana's worth of permanents on the field. You play Farewell, followed by a 4 drop. Now each of your opponents will be able to deploy up to 10 mana's worth of value. After this turn cycle, you have 4 mana's worth of permanents on the field vs. your opponents' 10. You're way behind. Meanwhile with Cyclonic Rift, you cast it at the end of your opponent's turn, untap on your turn and deploy up to 10 mana's worth of value. On each opponent's turn, they deploy 10 mana's worth of value. After this turn cycle, you have 20 mana's worth of value vs your opponents' 10 (not to mention any additional opportunities at alpha striking etc. that you had on your turn vs. a clear board). And this is for a low power casual game. In a higher-power game, the game is often over before you can even cast Farewell.

[@jonlamoreaux2228]

​​@@wchenfulif you aren't casting farewell with modes that barely affect your board state but hose your opponents, you are playing the card wrong lol. Also, how does one "redeploy" after a farewell? Shits gone, your opponents just dumped their hands and you sent their cards to the shadow fricking realm. Farewell is all about timing, just like cyclonic rift.

[@wchenful]

@@jonlamoreaux2228 You're either describing the best case scenario for Farewell which is highly situational. It requires you to have plenty of gas in hand (and mana to deploy), opponents to overcommit to the board and for Farewell to resolve (ie. opponents have no counters etc.) AND for your opponents to be relatively oblivious to the fact that you're going to wipe the board. If this happens for you regularly, then you're most likely playing in a very durdley low-power environment (which is what most people consider Bracket 1). If you're discussing Bracket 3, you should expect stiffer competition. Games may not even get to turn 6. You may have to fight through 1-2 pieces of countermagic to resolve a 6cmc spell. Players will combo off at sorcery speed on their turns. Farewell's effect is always powerful, but not conducive to winning - and it's sitting dead in your hand the majority of the time.

[@BigMikePlays]

​@@Arctanis-vt3hlhe meant you spend all of your mana and do nothing else

[@zero380kyle]

Video that you clicked for starts at 1:03

[@TeaHauss]

Ngl, I love the Mode list. This is basically exactly how've I seen it too. I do think there should be a "forgiveness" limit of like, your deck can have up to three cards and/or the sum of higher bracket cards adds up to 8 or less (ex, your B1 deck can have two B4's, or two B3's and a B2). Your skulls tribal deck can run a vamp tutor for example, and if you want to still play Rhystic Study you can, but you should mention it anyway. Edit: Perhaps commanders should count for double on the "forgiveness" limit?

[@joedoe7572]

That's a great way to have flexibility! Love it! You don't actually need a full on points system, just an allowance of *_difference_* of points

[@MrMoronicMind]

That's just a CH points system

[@doodooballs80]

terrible idea.. stop policing people on deck building

[@exiledark6573]

So cards less than $1 are tier 1, cards $1-$10 are tier 2, $20+ is tier 3, and $50+ is tier 4. Not sure why we’re wasting time listing individual cards when the idea is pretty obvious.

[@JamesJohnson-eo2ql]

And that is the absolute stupidity of this system

[@erok080]

I hate the bracket system. It’s very subjective and differs. So what, is Wizards going to go through the entire mtg library of cards and rank them…? Seems doubtful and dumb

[@frankmagyar5532]

I think you mean subjective and yes I agree this is ridiculous

[@jkoe3349]

been playing commander for over 10 years and i dont understand what i just watched...... what happened to just good old discussion before the game

[@legionparadise2397]

Wotc happened

[@joshuarempel6497]

I feel rhystic study is viewed as way more powerful than it is… it’s SO easy for the table to just agree to pay the 1 mana until removal happens. I have been at so many tables where someone plays a rhystic and never draws a card from it cause everyone just knows to pay the 1 until someone removes it. The scenario where it DOES take over games is when players at the table are greedy with bad threat assessment and they leave it unchecked until it snowballs. In which case…. I say that’s a skill problem and they deserved to loose.

[@joshuarempel6497]

If you can literally prevent the effect of the card by simply interacting with it in a manner the card PROVIDES YOU with (it literally tells you HOW to stop it dead in its tracks) Then it shouldn’t be in power level 4. You can’t tell me rhystic and necropotence are on the same level… it’s not even close.

[@kalem1527]

Thank you some one gets it. Not paying the one is no different than you not using removal and then being mad when people's decks do "the thing" unmitigated. There are so many enchantments that are brutal and don't have a "do X to turn off" written on it.

[@mike1134]

At really high power and cedh tables it is very oppressive card. A turn 1 rhystic means that player gains huge advantage. You don't get to dump any of your fast mana because now they draw a bunch but then you are behind in mana. When games end in usually 5 turns, you can't afford to wait and hope to remove it, the person who played the rhystic will win from the mana advantage they built up. I think the power level of the card really depends on the power level of the table.

[@Lynn3011]

Honestly, not the worst list I've seen. There's obviously some cards missing that I think should also be bracketed (mainly the mana neutral mana rocks and busted lands like gaea's cradle or ancient tomb and the other commonly used free counters force of will, force of negation and pact of negation aswell as the current cEDH cornerstone combo of Thorcale consultation), but just aren't in the EDHrec top100. Though I have to admit that I don't really care too much about what's banned in Brackets 2 and 1, since I mainly like the higher powered, but not quite cEDH-speed/efficiency format.

[@OriginalNeckbeardicus]

I am convinced the only reason Swords to Plowshares is in one is the same reason Sol Ring is.

[@chainerscalleri6931]

Lol Reddit is now the "community" what a joke. Once again all this proves is that most people are using pure EMOTIONAL responses vs actual data to determine what bracket cards would be in under this new system that we don't even know much about yet. This card is "annoying", "I dont like this card", "its too poweful". All purely subjective nonsense.

[@HavingAnAverageWeeke]

Exactly!, look at the tutors, they're only as powerful as your deck

[@thomasantonellos6014]

Didn’t they say bracket 1 was regular precon printings? Reanimate has been in like 3+ precons in the last couple years

[@Layjus123]

My friend just showed me the Duskborn commander precon he bought today, and it was in there.

[@lonnyraye]

Farewell is a 1, it is actually needed to combat some decks. It costs a ton and is sorcery as well as being in the color that does board wipes. Cyclonic Rift is a 3 you can back it up with Windfall with rhystic or smothering in play. Bracket 1 is "fair magic" and Sol Ring is not power level 4 for Casual players that can't really take advantage of it, in fact the amount of times I see turn 1 land/ Sol Ring followed by turn 2 no land drop is so common in casual.

[@lonnyraye]

I pitch Farewell so often, and never want it in my opening hand.

[@abeybaebe2514]

🗿

[@jonlamoreaux2228]

This is such an objectively bad take, and a perfect example of why the bracket system won't work lol. Sol ring is a 1 because some deck pilots are bad? This card is arguably better than mana crypt, and you think it's a 1 because you've witnessed poor pilots keep one land hands? The bracket system should be about the objective power of the card, plain and simple. Farewell is often times at least a 4 for one, if not more, often times one sided when the correct modes are chosen, and gets around all sorts of protection (ward, hexproof, indestructible, shroud, protection) . That is about as efficient of a true sweeper as you can get. The selective modes makes it almost always one sided in the hands of a decent pilot, and if you combo it with teferis protection, you get to just ruin everyone's board states but your own.

[@lonnyraye]

@@jonlamoreaux2228 Sol Ring is a zero. Enchanted Evening/ Aura Thief beats Farewell/ Toddler Protection Settle the Wreckage dominates Farewell

[@AfterSchoolSpecialTCG]

So there still has to be some kind of balancing to the system, I have a red/black deck that is by all means ass tier and can probably never win at any table, but it has Vampiric Tutor so it's a 4? 🤣 There's going to be a lot of math involved, you can't just say your deck is top tier, you can't play it because it has 1 or 2 tier 4 cards....

[@rngsusgodoflootanddraws9147]

Wow. Miraris wake on the list but not doubling season. Smh 😂 nah i know this is just a fun guessing list for what wizards will do but i think there needs to be a hard scale to at least ballpark certain cards. Maybe like a list of 10 questions about the card that are scored out of 10 and then averaged. Something like what the card does vs how well it does it vs downsides vs cost vs balance (ex cyc rift and garruks wake are unbalanced wipes vs wrath of god). Not a fleshed out idea but worth throwing out there.

[@MarkFMB]

It's a list with the 100 most played cards in the 99 from edhrec i think. Doubling Season isn't in the top 100 so that's the only reason it's not listed, not cause people consider it low power.

[@Shimatzu95]

Largely agree with the list (which suprises me) but lets wait for the offical statement to see whats realy up. All in all between this and the recent bans it looks like we finally get a bit of structure in the format.

[@safersephiroth943]

This is the video when I realized Mitch has no idea how to grade power levels of cards and why this entire idea is dumb. Putting enlightened/mystic tutor in four is absurd.

[@ez6039]

Grading cards is stupid, putting all of the “level 4 cards” into a precon does not make that deck broken all of the sudden. Additionally I don’t see Zur the Enchanter into Necropotence or Kinan into Dramtic Scepter or Urza Static Orb being ruled out from level 1 evaluating individual cards this way.

[@kainbrightman198]

There's cards that are not on the list which makes no sense, and there's cards that are on the list which make no sense.

[@calesmart435]

Your Jhoira example from a previous example shows the need for commander bracket rankings.

[@kylejones5518]

I disagree with basically all of these. I don't think anything except for cards that prevent players from playing entirely deserve to be in bracket four, and everything else is three or less. So basically leovold abd Armageddon are about the only bracket 4 cards

[@OriginalNeckbeardicus]

Some commanders NEED to be automatic 4. Just look at Tergrid.

[@cookie8415]

To be honest what is stopping people using the old power level system when playing casually. especially with all of the complaints of the power bracket system already.

[@OriginalNeckbeardicus]

The old system was literally a joke. I mean literally literally a joke. Every deck was a “7”

[@keleitas150]

Exactly. You can have all bracket 4 games at your table and everyone that is on board with that is happy. Then there could be people that would like to experiment with other brackets and see how those games would work. And they may have fun too. That's why I don't understand why people are so upset with brackets. If they want they still can play like there's no bracket. But if some people would like to tone the power of the table down with official rules they can now.

[@slashersoul2380]

​@@OriginalNeckbeardicusdw the new System is just as much of a joke. Cause all my Decks are 3s now.

[@JohnnyYeTaecanUktena]

@@keleitas150 don't worry my deck that can win turn 4 is definitely a 2 as all the cards in it are 2's....the system needs something to account for card synergies like a hard turn limit no matter what all the cards in your deck are as card synergies not necessarily combos or tutors but synergistic cards will power up a deck out the ass very fast especially newer cards and interactions that no one accounts for. Card interactions is the most important thing to take into account which they are not doing and it quickly devolves into Tribalistic mindsets since the main focus is on individual cards and not "How fast can your deck win or stop a win?" Remember new players to the game are never going to be able to judge their decks accurately no matter what system they use as they don't know what they are doing so they need someone to tell them how to rate their own decks and don't make it convoluted otherwise you will get this "My deck is a 7" all over again. Power levels and tier lists are for already existing players that can accurately judge their decks At the end of the day it becomes a segregation of "You are playing more expensive cards even though we are both the same power level and turn wise fast winning decks go to a higher bracket you try hard" it really is a rich vs poor thing here because you are not taking into account card synergies you are only focused on the price of a card and combo

[@keleitas150]

@@JohnnyYeTaecanUktena I mean, of course if I draw Thassa's Oracle, dark consultation and mana to make it happen I will win turn 2 or 3 whatever bracket I'm on. It's the consistency that changes. If you put the combo in your tier 2 deck but have no strong tutors, mana ramp and what not you're still going to deploy your combo later or with less consistency. That's what's all about. There's a reason why the most valuable cards in mtg are not the combo pieces or the big strong effect cards. But what enable those cards. So no, I think you're quite mistaken. I would argue that some strong 2 pieces combo should be put in bracket 3 at least, but even in bracket 2 without strong enablers you're gonna see those cards 1 in 10 games if your lucky

[@steventyler3582]

How is Rhystic study power 4. I get the others in that bracket but that card belongs more at like 3.

[@nhojpodge]

Currently my yuriko deck is a ninja tribal with one or two spells above a 4/5 mana value.... Then since I pulled the future frame urza, i'm trying to think of a fun deck for him. I decided to keep things fair, I'm removing unwinding clock, isochron scepter, and that spell that was 2 mana untap all permanents you control. Instead focusing on luck bobble heads, and just trying to make a mana ramp system to get a bunch of copies of luck bobble in mono blue. (woulda gone with tawnos, solemn survivor if I didn't pull urza) My Atraxa, Praetors' Voice is a millennium calendar deck, where I would only cast the commander if I have mana and really need a blocker (+plus to proliferate the calendar counters.) I'm just glad my 3 "high bracket" commanders are all jank decks for fun :). I don't think I'll be building much under bracket 3 from the looks of it. But more power to the people who only want to play low power. I still feel like brackets could still quickly become overrun with some fairly sweaty decks, and are harder to respond to with some of the higher brackets being excluded... Brackets do feel on point for the philosophy of commander, but I think will still fall short of what bans were trying to do, and what power levels and rule 0 was trying to do.

[@cowoljarwoff]

SO wish Sol Ring made the 4. That would have been so funny, man.

[@dasfabelwesen]

Rhystic Study is probably the strongest coloured card after the dockside ban. I do not understand how interactive spells hit the bracket 4 mark. Usually people do not want to play against strong combos, which would bump up all tutors and fastmana to 4, not the stuff you need to play to stop that.

[@danaholland6686]

I think smothering tithe is stronger

[@joedoe7572]

Both the strongest combos and the strongest interaction you need to stop them should be in the highest tier. If you don't need to stop those strongest combos, then why are you playing Fierce Guardianship? To stop a Grave Titan? That's not going to be fun if everyone's things are getting counted out of nowhere. Just has not fun as the strongest combos

[@Arctanis-vt3hl]

@@joedoe7572 The strongest interaction is good because it breaks the rules. It's still good an any tier because you're saving mana. So even if your opponent isn't playing necropotence or a combo, you can still counter something after tapping out.

[@davidrosenberg9615]

Nah. If it was 2U "your opponents spells cost 1 more to cast" it wouldn't be the strongest card, and it's worse than that.

[@joedoe7572]

@@davidrosenberg9615 Rhystic Study is way better than that theoretical card, because you don't want people to be responsible and pay the 1. And much of the time they don't.

[@coleminton5204]

The power level of a deck is more complicated than individual cards in the deck. I think the bracket system gives newer players a way to understand staples and generally powerful cards but should not be used as a means to tell someone they can't or shouldn't play a deck. For example if you're like "My deck only has power bracket 2 or lower cards. So you can't play against me with any decks that have higher power bracket cards" and it's a highly synergistic land destruction deck without armageddon, the other players will probably pull out their precons, get stomped, and no one will have a fun game. A powerful deck is powerful whether that player happens to draw into their vampiric tutor or not in a given game. I think a better way to discuss power is to explain how quickly and consistently your deck is capable of attempting to win the game and how difficult interacting with and setting up your win conditions is.

[@8Smoker8]

Farewell is bracket 4 and should be BANNED. It's insane powercreep. Way, way ahead of any other boardwipe, yes even of Toxic Deluge.

[@purpl3nurgle]

I think the commander tier list should be based around how splashable a card is for example: Tier IV: any card that slots into nearly every 4 or 5 color deck and by not including it, you're making your deck worse. Tier III: any card that is genericly good and will show up in every 3 color and under list that can run them but doesn't show up often in the 4 or 5 color decks built for meta play. Tier II: can be all the salty cards that aren't included in the previous two tiers and Tier I is everything else. I get it's not a perfect system because affordable staples that aren't super powerful like wayferers bauble might end up in Tier III, but the lower you go in tiers, the more creative decks will become and I think that is an overall positive for the format as a whole.

[@mikotagayuna8494]

Very interesting that they even bothered to include Dockside on a bracket when it is already banned. Are we expecting mass unbannings in the near future?

[@FatstaxMTG]

I’m ngl the bracket system seems not great however I think there is a chance we loose our “casual” game and make it more competitive with the introduction to the bracket system.

[@marcodaddario3965]

instead of competitive and casual we are going to get competitive bracket 1, competitive bracket 3 etc. Never underestimated the ability of sweaty tryhards to make it all about them.

[@FatstaxMTG]

@@marcodaddario3965 exactly what I’m thinking is going to happen like teir 2 is going to be a meme teir then the other 3 are going to have tournaments basically. Its a smart cash grab by wizards if I was a shop I’d be happy ngl.

[@PrattleFuzz]

the bracket system is quite strangely gonna do what a lot of people suggested early on in the conversation, essentially putting a points cost to the individual cards a la CanLander. so players will be able to do the math (those who want to) and come up with pretty much the spot on point of their deck in terms of bracket. 100 cards/ bracket of each card in the deck added up gives you your bracket for that deck. not opposed to it as a system and allows for the " my deck is about a 2.5, High cards are Cyc Rift, rhystic and phyrexian altar at 3" pregame talk.

[@InsomniaticVampire]

So the way that the design team said they were going to look at this is based on play experience. Think of it as bracket 1 containing battlecruiser decks, precons, and jank players who might play interaction but aren't thinking about winning. Bracket 4 will be for players who don't like ban lists or don't care as much for the social aspect as the others. Think of it as the players closer to B1 are less likely to want to play with players who play cards in higher brackets. It was never about power. It's about how salty will you feel when i wheel us for the 5th time. The player base judges cards far too wildly for a single card to accurately determine a decks play pattern. The top 6 cards in a deck would be enough. Even if you have a deck full of B1 cards, if your top 6 are two B1s, one B3, and three B4s, your deck is a 2.8 on average. Search cards should count as additional copies of the best things they can get from your deck. If you have a single B4, but you have 6 cards that can search it up, then you essentially have 7 B4 cards.

[@TheDirtyPineapple]

I'm thinking about trying to use the bracket scores as a points system. If you have a single bracket 4 card in a deck, I don't think that makes it a bracket 4 deck. 1 bracket 4 card =4 points. 1 bracket 3 card =3 points. 1 bracket 2 card =2 points. Bracket 1 cards don't add to your deck total. I believe this would make pregame conversations about power levels more clear. Everyone would know that a 100 point deck vs precons wouldn't be fair.

[@TarotNathers]

The problem with bracketing some of the cards (Notably Reanimate/Tutor effects) is that they are judged based on what you are getting with their effect. Tutoring for a boardwipe to stop the player who is going wide and might kill you and the other two players? Probably a bracket 2, that move doesn’t put you ahead but keeps you from being behind. Reanimating an Iona you milled or used another spell to put her there? Bracket 4 type behavior right there.

[@wolfshui]

I think you have to rank commanders, take Magda for example, according to this data, a Magda deck would be a 1??? (Estimating) but is definitely a CEDH Deck. Also, I feel like this system misses combo potential.

[@Rococorico]

The worst thing going for the bracket system is it being called a "power level" system. Subjective perceptions will bring up endless discourse while the 4 layers should work just fine as play design tools, meant to direct you to your optimal experience. A slow battlecruiser match is not necessarily "less powerful" than a highly interactive fast match, nor hyper efficient competitive decks will necessarily result in a fast, explosive and/or closely disputed game.

[@paulbuckley2301]

I like the brackets concept, but I don't believe there is a real and practical way to quantify the exact power level of any deck. Because omitting all the 3 and 4 tier cards does not mean you can not build a very powerful deck. My suggestion is to keep the Power Level concept we have already, but change it from 10 power levels that nobody can accurately use, to the new four they are suggesting. 1 - Jank/meme decks 2 - Average/Casual/Precon 3 - High Power 4 - CEDH Maybe that doesn't do justice for describing your general power level? Maybe add a tier in between each of those to say your deck is Jank, but decently strong, 1.5. This is a Precon, but it's Brother's War Urza, 2.5, or Precon but pretty loosely focused and not that good, 1.5

[@TwintailNami]

What's the point of that high bracket if it's going to have such few cards

[@thecasualcommander]

My personal take on the power levels 1: These cards are actively not very good. They are over costed, under statted, niche or restrictive in some way that makes them difficult to play with or have minimal effect on even the current board state. (Common pack fodder that people don't even remember the name of.) 2: A good or at least passable rate for what it does, 1 for 1 removal, mana dorks, maybe over costed board wipes, creatures that are solid but don't have much synergy or combo potential (I'd put tarmogoyf here, for example, it's good but kind of vanilla, it doesn't have any keywords or do anything besides be a decently large dude.) 3: Combo pieces that rely on other parts to function, above rate ramp spells/rocks/dorks, lands that have powerful effects or generate a lot more mana than normal, (I'd honestly put Gaea's Cradle here since it does require a player to build a board to tap for any mana, but it's easy to break) spells and permanents that have sweeping impact on the board, (good rate board wipes, creatures, artifacts or enchantments that have a strong influence on the board state - dangerous stuff that will draw attention but not demand an immediate answer) and highly flexible cards like Vindicate. 4: These end the game on the spot or are otherwise so above rate or power level for what they do that they demand immediate answer or else WILL take over the game by themselves. Things like Necropotence, Ancient Copper Dragon, Smothering Tithe, Demonic Tutor, Mana Drain, free counterspells, free removal spells, etc. It's not enough to merely be potent (like Sheoldred, Whispering One - I'd put that at a 3) it needs to be easy to cast or put into play and have an immediate warping effect on the game state.

[@brian243]

I noticed that a lot of cards that people say are strong, but I honestly think it's more salt that anything. Yes, the tutors should be up there and I agree with some of the choices, but just because you have one or two of these cards in your deck should mean that it is of that level. If you have a theme deck for a movie and is more for fun, for example, it wouldn't be given a higher score if it had a tutor or a rift even though it barely functions. I think they need to look at the interactions instead of individual cards. Heliod, Sun-Crowned isn't bad until the Walking Ballista comes down and the game's done on turn 2 or three with the right deck.

[@AlexRedStar]

Are they gonna make brackets based on IQ as well? Lol this just started and its already a dissaster.

[@nathanpytlarz6261]

Underrated comment!!

[@Nick-rc2lr]

If it was based on IQ 99% would be in bracket 0 lmao.

[@jordangriffith1960]

Its going to be really interesting to see where certain cards end up. Like Dualcaster Mage probably seen as a 1-2 in a bubble, Twinflame also 1-2, but put them together and you win the game and get kicked from the casual tables its so absurd

[@adriano7444]

"The community speaks" The only thing the community wants, is more cards banned.

[@liammanning8334]

I'd rather everything get unbanned. The problem with the community is they think they speak for everyone but they hardly do

[@SlongestKongest]

​@@liammanning8334that's an awful idea. Games at lgs where the rules actually matter will get very annoying as ppl will play busted cards even more. Rule zero doesnt work that well at lgs so people end up miss matched anyways so having a bigger ban list can help with those issues. Also everyone would lose trust if they banned then un banned cards

[@Arctanis-vt3hl]

@@liammanning8334 neither do you or anyone! It's impossible. There definitely needs to be a banlist as with any format. I hate rule zero and would just rather follow what the banlist says.

[@adriano7444]

@@liammanning8334 "I'd rather everything get unbanned" If you don't like rules, why don't you let everyone play with 10 copies of the same card? or their Uno cards? Why not proxy all the five moxes and put it in your decks? Right now you're saying things that you have no idea what it entails. Some people don't know how to evaluate card power, and it shows. You would refuse to play against the Nadu deck after losing 4 or 5 times to it.

[@johanneskaramossov5103]

I see farewell up there.. why? because you can decide what to wipe so its less equal, its removing so indestructable doesnt help, its untargeting so hexproof doesnt help, it can deal with the graveyard at the same time the only thing that it doesnt get is lands.. and yes there are wipes that rfp lands too but they dont exile the gy and cost way more.

[@PoorlyHandled]

There is a problem with tiered lists that I have not seen anyone bring up yet. If you have tiered brackets and a ban list, the ban list effectively becomes an additional teir.

[@ajora90]

Am I the only person that thinks land tutoring (Ramp) is way better than any other tutor? A green player hunting out lands and playing 2-3 lands a turn just seems more threatening than "I search for one card, you can't see it. I may or may not be able to actually play it right now"

[@empurress77]

Hard to think of a Commander that's a power level 4 ever not being a power 4 level deck. Had to say it. THAT said, a card that's mid (even low) in some decks and very high in others like (eg) Kaalia can reasonably be seen as having their power lever affected by the deck they command. With all that said: Take Ursa as an example: I'd challenge you to try building a power level 3 Ursa commander deck. That may be possible. However, when over the years i've found that in the attempt to build very bad low level decks they can end up being extremely powerful. Once our group got a weird plan to build decks that we'd then switch with at the start. Fun build concept. Turns out though the deck i had a Shaouku in, is still one of the cheesiest decks i have. I'd say the example of cards that can totally have variable power is Illusions of grandeur (that i have cast and given to my opponent on turn two) and Sorrows Path. (a card i also have in my "Donate" deck) Give Sorrows Path to opponent and proceed to tap/untap it a bunch. Guess what i'm saying is, no rating system is ever going to be %100 perfect. (Maybe a perfect guide is possible for CEDH?) Some guide is great. I'd say a guide being just a guide is most important in casual. A guide being THE guide is more important for CEDH.

[@jasongarcia7731]

Being new to magic the gathering and learning that there is a bunch of cards that are banned from the game sucks. It would be awesome to see them come back into existence.

[@AaRoNiAnnn]

Just play them anyway lol.. casuals don’t care. If you’re playing with randoms you’d want to disclose to them first what you are running in your deck so they may be able to match that energy or decide to not play 😊

[@metalthrashingnerdpodcast9864]

In commander a ban list exists for a guideline. It's power scaling for rule zero conversations. If your group is cool with playing a card then go for it. My suggestion is to keep a few. Cards to the side of your deck for swapping out if a group doesn't like any of those cards.

[@vanilliachill3643]

The problem I have with this system is that you can make high power decks and still be in bracket 1, or vis versa and have bunch of good cards in janky decks, just being in a bracket doesn't fully convey how weak or strong your decks is, just that it's using or not using commonly known strong cards

[@RedCornix]

That this is even being approached as "This card puts you in this bracket" Is ridiculous. This should be top down where bracket 4 allows for basically anything, 3 allows for cedh meta, 2 is casual friendly, & 1 is for newbies & people playing with them. It should just be cumulative ban lists. The difference is that it's less cards to keep track of & a better mentality to consider cards under.

[@ControlledCh4os]

I don't like the idea of a deck being "bracket 4" if one or two in it are at the level. gives a false sense of the deck. You could have 2 "4s" in deck but the could be 0-2s and I don't think it would be a crazy powerful deck. I feel like you have to use a total system to get a true assessment of a deck i.e. deck is 197 worth of cards. Just saying its a 4 or whatever doesn't mean much honestly.

[@joedoe7572]

I just saw another comment with a great idea that's a lot simpler than a total point system. A point-difference system. For example, say a tier 1 deck can have an 5-point difference. So it can either have five tier 2 cards, or one tier 4 card and one tier 2 card, or any combination in between

[@erikst.5220]

But If your Deck only plays 1-2s and you have one or two 4s in it that do Not improve your Deck, why would you keep them in your Deck? The brackets are all about setting expectations. If you dont Like free interaction for example and all free interaction is in Bracket 4, Play Bracket 3 or 2 and Match your Deck with that. If you really cannot live without your two Bracket 4 cards, Play Low Power Bracket 4. Those brackets are Not meant to communicate Powerlevel, but to be a shortcut to communicate certain Sets of expectations.

[@cruthius6154]

Sol Ring is now in every pre-con deck. EVERYONE has access to it if you buy any commander deck now. Mana crypt and jeweled lotus were hard and expensive to get so not everyone had access to it. Put those cards in every commander pre con and now everyone has access to them putting everyone on the same playing field like sol ring. If everyone had sol ring in their opening hand then everyone is still on equal footing. I can ramp faster with elves than having a Sol Ring on the battlefield.

[@killbotgamma]

If Teferi's protection is bracket 3, I'm wondering if similar effects like everyone lives, Dawn's Truce, and heroic intervention will be bracket 3 as well.

[@victorperezurbano9504]

They are not comparable in terms of power level. Teferi's Protection protects you and all your stuff from basically anything for an entire round and almost everytime someone plays it in a mid power table it means they win. The others protect your creatures from a single spell or a wrath effect, and not t from sacrificing or -1-1 counters, and they do so for only one turn

[@Hologhost69]

@@victorperezurbano9504 Teferi's protection is just salt from the players who like to play wipes and they get denied or salt from the players who let someone cast Teferi's and wipes on the same turn. Run some dang interaction if this upsets you. Why just blame the guy running something you do not like when the game provides answers to these issues. Why is it that all of these players complain about cards and never run anything to stop or hinder these cards? It is why I hate casual Commander, everyone just sits around solo casting their stuff and no interaction till everyone is tired of playing and one guys sweeps through with a milllion tokens and wins.....it is so boring.

[@victorperezurbano9504]

@@Hologhost69 bro, that's exactly why Teferi's Protection is busted in a casual setting but not in hogh power and deserves a 3. Thank you for making the case for me.

[@victorperezurbano9504]

@@Hologhost69 so basically what you said is that in a mid power/low power setting, either someone has a counterspell the exact turn that Teferi's Protection is played (because wiping the board or interacting with them a turn later is not possible) or it's game over. Great way to say that I am right man, thank you

[@teknyte-1]

Hot take(?): ppl have been saying for years that cedh is an entirely different game style from regular edh. Perhaps its time to officially split them off, then ban all the most salt inducing cards from edh and not cedh. Then ppl can still play in their kindergarten pods without cyclonic rift, and the rest of us can play Armageddon

[@meliodus1087]

Ok…long time white player here. The reason smothering tithe is so powerful is because white had nothing for so long. Even average spells in blue help blue so much more. This bracket system needs so much work…because I can see every mono white deck being a level 4 just buy power of individual cards, but the deck strength overall is still lower than others that work more synergistically

[@jibbyjackjoe]

I don't know how they're resolving the discrepancy of putting a soul ring in every deck but not bumping the power level of of those decks up to the next tier. I don't think this really works

[@HUNT4EVER30]

This is so good. If they make a system that lets you plug in your deck telling you what tier you’re in wow. To all the people complaining, idk why you are complaining, figure out your tier and play your tier that’s it.

[@HUNT4EVER30]

If you are in a tier and losing, just get better at the game. Play more, learn about synergy and get better.

[@kapiatgatas]

Power in MTG means nothing. If your playing against a bunch of players who does not know how to build a deck correctly? Does not understand synergy? Just adds spicy, powerful or expensive cards without rhyme and reason. Can be beaten by any precon commanders. Take any card from any bracket to form your first seven cards? Draw your first card, it's a LAND. What's next? My commander decks I ranked it's power at 7+ or lower than a CEDH. I often times have the best starting hand. LAND, SOL RING, ARCANE SIGNET, MANA CRYPT, JEWELED LOTUS, MOX OPAL and MOX AMBER/MOX DIAMOND or MANA VAULT. Then what? Topdecking? I had this experience many times and lose many times over. What if your commander is URZA, LORD HIGH ARTIFICEER? Then that's probably a CEDH power.

[@ThePencilWizard]

The Reddit Community Speaks*

[@MageSkeleton]

i have more respect for Fierce Guardianship than i do Mental Mistep, Force of Will, and Force of Negation which can be cast with ZERO resources on board and only needing cards in hand. Seeing Swan Song, Mana Drain, and An Offer you can't Refuse in a higher bracket than cards that can literally be free cast with ZERO resources amazes me. i'd rather not do a play based on if an opponent has one or two blue mana available, not "oh no, they have two cards in hand. That could literally be Force of Will or Force of Negation and a blue card to exile." And At least Mental Mistep can only target 1 CMC spells. in my opinion, WotC should just go off the rarity of the card. Common is bracket 1, uncommon is bracket 2, rare is bracket 3, and mythic is bracket 4. Then reprint cards that should be upscaled or downscaled in rarity appropriately based on the last reprinting of the card unlike in pauper.

[@robbiegranatir6467]

I’ve never cared what “power level” a deck someone has. I play to play. If they have a better deck it makes me want to come back to my deck and rebuild it to have a way to get around whatever it was that was giving me issues. It’s helps with creativity in my opinion. And I mean people bought the cards let them play the game with them. It’s a game that has game pieces. Play it.

[@Beaut2013]

it took a while, but I have a group that are pretty realistic... I am now good friends with all of them. The competitive players in our group know not to keep pub stomping the table for the people who can't afford to make a deck that's competitive against theirs. They also realize that people like to use different strategies or try to play different mechanics, even if they aren't backed up by a meta- card list... AND they don't get hostile with me for asking to be allowed to enjoy the game. ( very happy I found people like that.. it was hard) I am more grateful for some sort of ranking system when playing with strangers. I do wish commander was a little less competitive.

[@Infernofist666]

So generally speaking card advantage is better than more mana . Being able to get more cards or specific cards are great extra mana is best when it comes from gaining card advantage like mana drain . The main reason the black tutors are in a bracket higher it’s not because of the specificity it’s that it doesn’t disclose what you have . When you search with the others you have to reveal for rules reasons but not in black . The lack of information helps your opponents not plan for your plan

[@jasonclarkson3246]

What this shows is that CEDH needs it’s own tier. You’re going to have people running a normal blue deck that just runs mystic/rhystic going up against CEDH blue decks that try to win turn 2.

[@jasonclarkson3246]

Also, not to mention that every rule 0 you’re going to have to defend how you’re deck isn’t tier 4 and/or that you pulled/bought these cards just to have fun with.

[@Slo-Mode]

I think this shows how hard the bracket system is to work with. There are so many not great decks I've played/against that have these tier 3 cards in them

[@benjaminking3677]

I feel like wotc is making a mistake not taking into account redundancy of powerful cards in decks. These tiers will lead to lots of arguments and confusion because some people will pull a vampiric tutor out of a pack and throw it into one of their decks that can use it. Thats not the same as someone purposely running a full suite of powerful tutors in their deck.

[@ivancondeling9299]

Can we all agree to rule 0. Let's all not be lazy and put the necessary removals/answers to our decks. I for one always put at least several 1to1 and wipes for all types in my deck.

[@EddieSmyth-oh7fu]

Stopped playing mtg while ago,crazy to see what has come of it. Wotc finally got thier greedy claws on EDH huh? Well,good luck with your brackets guys✊

[@Deadpool-tc2wj]

I don't think Vampiric Tutor is a 4, at least not on its own. With 99 Bracket 1 cards Vampiric Tutor is a two at best. Sure you an get the best card your deck has to offer for the current situation, but that just gives you two chances to draw the right card, which is quite powerful but it does not change the powerlevel of the whole deck. I think tutors should have their own category, because they scale with the deck they are in/ rely heavily on the other cards in your deck. If you can tutor for a card that goes infinit with your commander and / or instantly wins you the game, than yes it is extreamly powerful, especially if you have more than one tutor in your deck, but if you throw one into an average precon commander deck, the deck will not get significantly stronger, just because it has a tutor now.

[@videomasterdos]

Ok, so, you are telling me, that the deadly disguise precon, red green white, that has jeska's will in it, is more powerfull than the jumpscare simic precon because it doesn't have any tier 3 OR 2 cards? This system will be ignored most of the time if not all the time, whoever thought this was a good idea needs to re-evaluate things

[@JimmyEscajeda]

The problem with democracy is that you will only ever arrive with average results. More opinions means more bad opinions along with good opinions as well. Sorry but that's a FACT. That is the main reason that the founding fathers opted for a republic rather than a Democracy. This is officially the most complex game in existence. It is by default above average. That does not mean that only above average people play it so are those the people that you think should manage it? I don't. That's why I don't like democratic vote management. Sorry. If you find yourself in agreement with a democratically managed list, CONGRATULATIONS! You have just found out that you are undeniably AVERAGE! (Intellectually speaking of course) The more we go down this road, the less complex this game, and less intellectually stimulating etc., it will become.

[@BLKCLVR]

I can't imagine a bracket system that doesn't include commanders. Yes, any Urza deck should be a 4. Yes, and crappy deck that throws in a Vamp Tutor is a 4. Rule 0 isn't going away, it exists to unbracket cards so you can play them along with your jank. The world in which commanders have no bracket despite being a synergy piece that you build your deck around and always have access to? Those cards need brackets the most by far. Bad take.

[@youkirosewarne1516]

Just me or does it seem like the system is only going to cause more confusion since all the cards being categorized so far are the support cards like tutors, generic draw engines, board wipes and so on whilst what really determines a ‘casual’ vs ‘Cedh’ deck is the combination of the support cards with the power synergies/pay offs

[@darthskidmarkz4570]

My issue is why does black gets it's best tutors B4 but every other color has is 1 mana tutor safe from B4, I understand it's the best of the 1 mana tutors but it feels unbalanced color wise like mono black gets really messed up by this.

[@mirak5604]

in my opinion the salt factor shouldn't be included in a grade, but I would say the price of a card could tilt it slightly. for example I know that cyclonic rift and teferi's protection are powerful but not so much to be graded 4, but when those cards could take up a third or more of the price of a deck I would put them to a 3.5 almost reaching grade 4

[@adamgarcia5616]

Ruinous ultimatum can only be played in Mardo or greater, it shouldn’t be considered anything other than normal power level. Gets played in every white deck, and say clonic rift is played in every blue deck. These are not the same thing lol

[@jankreitzscheck9914]

From a statistical standpoint wouldn't the SD of the top end and the bottom end just mechanically be lower? I can't deviate downward from a one and upward from a four in my answer.

[@ProphetofEndTimes]

People who consume mtg/commander community is a tiny subset of the community and likely are the only people who "spoke" up on this survey

[@jester2720]

Why not use this system but with points!!! So u could use a bracket 4 card in a tier 3 deck? EXAMPLE- Tier 3 decks can only use x bracket 4 cards for a total max score of 300 points to remain a tier 3 deck anything over 300 makes it a tier 4. Bracket 4 cards being 4 points and Bracket 3 Being 3 points and so on. Example my tier 1 deck has 150 points to play with in its construction and a max of 5 bracket 4 cards that can be played but if my points pass 150 it raises it up to a Tier 2 deck with a max point build of 200 and a max bracket 4 cards limit of 10. This would allow players a better system to gauge power while still letting them play with cards they like across the board.

[@huddleaw]

Here's how I would do it. Take the average EDHRec salt score of your 99 plus 10x your Commander's salt score. The 10x for your commander's salt score is because you always have access to it. Then divide by 109. The salt score should be equivalent to your bracket considering there is 4 of each.

[@Arctanis-vt3hl]

The problem is analytics don't tell the whole story and the salt rating is objective.

[@huddleaw]

@@Arctanis-vt3hl true but there's always going to be an issue a commander player has. Just give us something to present to the table on an app or whatever to give everyone a general idea.

[@jonwaters3401]

it crazy not seeing a single partner mentioned in the cmdr bracket lol. people also have this weird obsession with Edgar Markov as being some massive powerful villain of a strong deck.

[@steveolie985]

So Im new to commander.. If I have some of these cards, what would be decks power level be ? confused by ratings.