What Reason Are You Putting These Cards In Your Deck?

[@celuiquirevient]

flexibility comes at a price... that i am willing to pay.

[@HanDaimond]

IF you have enough mana available, Fell the Profane is insanely expensive to cast for what it does.

[@murilonaldi]

​@@HanDaimondsometimes you need the land. You can't cast even low cost carts if you don't have enough lands.

[@JeffreyKramer]

If you have both available and you aren’t concerned about power level perceptions, Mana Drain will always be a better choice than Counterspell. Whether it nets you one mana or 5, it is still giving you something that Counterspell isn’t and can’r. Even if you are using it to counter a 0 mana value spell, which will sometimes be absolutely the right call, your deck was better running Drain because of the possibility it offered. People making bad play decisions says nothing about the cards. Also, a lot of the things mentioned in this video ignore the consideration of synergy over pure utility. If your deck cares about tokens, cards like Artifact Mutation and Aura Mutation will sometimes make the cut because while it isn’t the best at either removal or token generation, it can be the right call in a deck that wants both functions. This is an important consideration given the number of available card slots. And again, if someone is dumb enough to not blow up a Rhystic Study in favor of hoping someone casts Warstorm Surge in a couple of turns, that’s a commentary on them as a player.

[@alextelfer4215]

@@HanDaimond And yet a Swamp cannot remove a creature for any cost

[@HanDaimond]

@@alextelfer4215 4cmc single target killspell is still bad, there's a reason why no one plays Hero's Downfall either. I'd replace it with one of the better black MDFCs out there and add either a good killspell or a swamp, but it's functional in a budget or casual deck I suppose. It definitely shines in draft.

[@OniTreefolk]

When adding any card to your deck, you should be sure that the WORST CASE SCENARIO is still one you can be happy with.

[@Lootsweeper]

I value versatility extremely highly in commander games since I cannot predict what three other players might have up their sleeves. I am not playing cEDH where every mana pip in costs matters in games. I would much rather draw into a Collective Resistance over a Tamiyo's Safekeeping because I do not know what board state I could be looking at, I may not need a protection spell but I could need removal. And if I have extra mana I can 2 for 1. The dream scenario of protecting a creature and removing 2 things probably won't happen like you said, but the possibility is there. When adding cards to my decks I try to imagine them in the worst situation possible. If the card doesn't do much with an empty board or while behind I look for better options. I want to have cards that can be useful in as many board states as possible.

[@Dragon_Fyre]

I think actual versatility versus the illusion of such is important. I see Collective Resistance as truly versatile. It can get rid of an enchantment, an artifact, protect a creature or in the best case scenario, all three. This card will nearly always be useful. It is in my deck as a response to threats of all types. Tamiyo would be preferred in a deck where protecting the Commander is vitally important to the game plan and takes priority ie. Voltron.

[@Robert-vk7je]

Absolutely! Versatility is king in commander. I rather draw a slightly worse card, than a dead card.

[@fishinfromscratch5484]

Value is important. A card that cost more to do a certain thing but gives you more options is a better choice imo.

[@IzzetTempo]

Mana Drain is good because it can be ramp or a counter spell. I mean if it's a ritual that ramps me one or two mana and 1 for 1s and opponent, that is basically one of the best rituals in the game. And the fact that it's also strictly better Counterspell means it goes in a ton of blue decks

[@asteiner274]

Yeah, if you aren't running force and pact, mana drain ends up being one of the best counters in your deck. 2 mv is still the best rate for an unconditional counterspell.

[@twhite9615]

I agree. Mana Drain's floor is not low at all. Even draining a 2 or 3 mana value spell to ramp a bit next turn is still really good.

[@darthsnarf]

I play counterspell in some decks, if I owned any mana drains I'd be playing them too, the extra mana is a bonus, I'd counter a 1 mana spell if needed or even a free spell

[@facelessgames94]

Is it worth that extra price tag? Nah

[@jordanhoch6459]

I agree with your general point, but you missed the boat re: MDFCs, particularly the mono color bolt lands and 2-color tap lands. Those are close enough to "real" lands to fill a land slot in most decks, but the main reason to include them is to protect against drawing too many lands - or too few. Too many lands? Great, a few of them are also spells. Sure they're overcosted, but they do WAY more than a 3rd land rotting in your hand. Too few lands? Great, some of your spells are also lands - so you can make your land drops. You put up with the "worse" versions of both for the flexibility/versatility. To answer your question directly - for the MH3 MDFCs, I personally replaced lands with these. Generally other kinds of 2-color tap lands or mono color/colorless utility lands. I'm not playing all of them in all of my decks (left them out of my cascade deck, for example), but I'd say I'm playing most of them in most of my decks, and they're more consistent for it.

[@pkassad]

Not to mention if you have bounce lands in your deck you can bounce an MDFC to then play the back if you have fixed your mana problem by then.

[@hahahafunniness]

Except there are maybe 5 playable mdfcs. Would rather play utility lands before I play a crappy card just cause it's also a land. ​@@pkassad

[@guim3419]

Then Horizon lands are better than mdfc in terms of screw vs flood

[@xdelbarrio]

its a land first for me too, but by occupying a say, 5-6th removal spell slot it allows higher count mana bases with minimal drawback. they do much more than just replace that fringe removal spell, it smooths your mullingans and early game draws, didnt draw land early? its your third land drop. drew 3 lands in a row in the first 3 turns? its a removal spell now, its a better top deck than a swamp and it can be bounced back if you burun bounce lands. This all comes with very real drawbacks, tempo, life loss, bad mana rate, etc. but in a more casual format like commander I think the drawbacks are waaaay less impactful than the benefits.

[@faperito2389]

They are

[@StephenMeansMe]

I thought the MDFC logic is that you have the land in the early game, and the nonland in the mid to late game, all for the meta-cost of a tempo hit. That's not even necessarily a huge cost in casual EDH. That said, of course they should always be thought of as the backup option to a "normal" amount of those effects, it would be wrong to run Fell the Profane as the first or even second spot removal in a generic Bx commander deck.

[@Blacklodge_Willy]

That's how I play them.

[@Sweetguy1821]

Mdfc are great with bounce lands. Get that extra value when you need it.

[@MrXaoras]

Ye they are good because they are flexible. Lets' say for example im playing golgari and doing mulligans, i alrdy did my first free one because hand was unplayable (happens to everyone). My second one is 2 forests and fell the profane vs 2 forests and a swamp vs 2 forests and a snuff out and theres no turn 1 play in any of them. You wouldnt ever keep 2 forests and a snuff out because that has a chance of bricking your entire early game. This makes fell the profane obviously better than snuff out in this scenario while not being much worse than a swamp because you can just play it tapped when you have a dead turn anyway, or pay 3 life when you really need it untapped. Now theres another scenario where its endgame and you were drawing a lot of cards ( as you do in commander) and you used all your removals and all your creatures but whats left in your hand is 2 lands because you can only play 1per turn. In this scenario i would rather draw fell the profane than a swamp, It could even be potentially better than a snuff out because i could have plenty of mana and low life. If i had an option to transform my land at will into an even worse removal like Finishing Blow i would still do it sometimes.

[@15spidergel]

​@Sweetguy1821 I was going to exactly that. If you're playing a deck that is bouncing its own lands, your MDFC lands effectively become a land early game that you can "morph" into a spell in the late game once you get there. I also like them in a decks that care about card types like Baba Yasaga since you can suddenly have a land you don't mind sacrificing to her ability. If you play the few that have permanents on the front, then you can play the permanent type the best benefits you in a given situation.

[@JohnDoe-oc4rk]

I'd argue it's not even a tempo hit, necessarily. I'll often cut a tapped color-fixing land for a mono-color MDFC, so the cost there is the color fixing. If you cut a basic, then the cost is tempo. It's a question of how many tapped lands you want in your deck overall

[@scottslater5175]

Flexibility, sometimes homie need a land, and some times homie need a kill spell. Let’s see a swamp do that lol

[@GallantLee]

it depends on what you have replaced in your deck for that MDFC. At 4CMC, Fell the Profane doesn't get played much, or most of the time you can't even cast it unless you plan to take a turn off. That's not flexibility, it's just like Demo suggests the illusion of flexibility. If you needed that removal spell it's just better to play a more efficient removal spell, one which you can actually cast when you need it - unless you're the deck that just holds up 4cmc every turn with mana sinks to not let it go to waste. So again, he's not saying don't play it, but ask yourself why you are putting it in your deck. There's a reason why mana curve, and your average CMC of your deck matter.

[@scottslater5175]

I would not say any of them are staples and should be played in every deck, and is flexibility not a reason for including in my deck?

[@m916c]

Just because people dont use cards correctly doesnt mean the cards are bad

[@sdsquiresful]

Talking about MDFCs: “Remember, YOU CAN’T DO BOTH” Me, with my [[Thalia and the Gitrog Monster]] deck with land sac and recursion as a core theme: •__•

[@nontinteressamki419]

Dude you can't imagine how many times Fell The Profane saved me. You're right about its high mana cost but as a swamp replacement it does a good work. You always have 3 life to pay for play it untap if you need a land or maybe not, so just put it in play tapped and no bolt on you. At least it's a "bad" removal but a removal is NEVER a death draw.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

so doesn't that tell you something? maybe you just need more removal.

[@AlvaroPortillo-n6k]

Its just about the versatility, we understand it cant do both, but it COULD do either, being at a board state where 3 life matters in commander means 2 things, that swamp wasnt gonna save you, and you probably have mana. Great vid btw!​@@edhdeckbuilding

[@kongvue8940]

You are against paying slightly worst card for flexibility. I can't get on board with you on that. If I wanted to play super efficient, I would be playing CEDH

[@edhdeckbuilding]

efficiency for me only matters with removal. that's the only exception for me in a casual deck.

[@6litz585]

You sound like you need to play with wayyyy more MDFC’s… They are amazing. Makes hands more keepable, smooths out draws, and with BOUNCE lands you get that sweettttt value in the late game which happens often. Also the 1 mana cyclers and 1 mana “add a land and/or do X” apply here too.

[@hahahafunniness]

Except there are only like 5 playable ones

[@marcoottina654]

Also, Ruin Ghost will flip MDFC lands into "non-spell" stuff :D like Glasswing Grace (that gets around Shroud this way)

[@crawdaddy1234]

So I look at MDFC lands sorta like I look at charms, except one of the modes is a land. So the question becomes, “Which do I expect to use more?” If I expect to use it as a land more often, I will replace the land. If I expect to use the spell more often, I would replace the spell.

[@masonfreng3206]

For my purposes, MDFCs just are lands. Entering tapped is negligible the majority of the time, and the new ones can enter untapped in a pinch. After a few turns, their front side unlocks, and now I have bad spells or bad lands to choose between. Bad spells are still spells when you're flooding out.

[@victorburghi]

about the mdfc's: it's not about efficiency, it's about versatility. in a single piece of cardboard, you get the effect of two of them. so, effectively, you now have a 101 card-deck.

[@canoli62]

Your point on Mana Drain is valid, but I think the example of Mystic Remora is nuts. I cannot imagine a situation where I would ever counter a Mystic Remora with any Counter Spell. Counters should be used for DIRECT threats - spells that actively hurt you or your game plan. Slow card draw, no matter how mana efficient, does not fall into that category. Same goes for Sol Ring. It is another indirect threat. Unless you are playing a million counters, you simply do not have enough counter spells to respond to every indirect threat. Let these things make the player archenemy, or let them get swept up in board wipes. Otherwise you are playing a losing game.

[@GoriNapalm]

Countering a turn 1 remora or sol ring with mental mistep is huge. People like to not mulligan mediocre hands just because of those cards

[@ana-alyciajuarez5958]

@@GoriNapalmI agree, the tempo hit can be huge. So many people will keep a hand with few lands and remora trying to get those lands drops they should have mulliganed for.

[@canoli62]

As far as MDFCs go, I think you could not be more wrong. Yes, a lot of the effects are worse than their non-land counterparts. That is not really relevant to the issue. MDFCs are lands. You should almost always be playing the land side unless you have other lands in your hand. Skipping a land drop to hold an MDFC up is craziness. For this reason you should not put Fell The Profane in your removal slot. However, having am extra removal option, however janky, in hand when you do not need the land is infinitely better than having a grip of 3 lands you can't play and nothing to cast. There is simply no comparison. Finally, your statement "you can't do both" is just wrong. You absolutely can play the land side, bounce it back to your hand, then cast the spell. (This, by the way is one of the reasons why people should be playing more bounce lands than they do). You absolutely can cast the spell, recur it to your hand with E-Wit or something, and play the land. That is crazy good.

[@justin9420]

You certainly have a point there, but I see so many decklists that mostly rely on Mystic Remora, Rhystic Study or other Tax Effect for card draw. Maybe countering them is in some cases not a bad idea, as if they can't draw into the 'direct threads' you don't have to worry about them as much if they can't play it. But that's probably also due to bad deckbuilding and you should know your playgroup well to know when to counter carddraw or strong ramp spells

[@crawdaddy1234]

Would you use a removal spell on Mystic Remora? Counterspells are just proactive removal. It’s one thing if you have both a removal spell AND a counterspell in hand. But it’s another if you only have the counterspell. * Also, it’s very unlikely you can keep up two mana for the rest of the game. At a certain point, you just have to stop tempo. Additionally, countering cards that generate card advantage prevents THEM from finding answers to your removal spells. I realize we’re talking about a singleton format, but if I’m casting Painful Truths, and you don’t counter it, now I have an additional two cards you have to answer.

[@laughingskuls7000]

I think, you're hugely missing the point of MDFC, as what makes them very strong is their flexibility. Take Fell the profane / Fell mire as an example. You're saying each side is a strictly worse version of an already existing card, and since you will never be able to utilize both in the same game Fell the profane as a card is a strictly worse card to both Hero's downfall and a basic swamp. But what makes MDFC's good is the flexibility of being able to have the option to use whichever side when benefits you, in any given moment. In a situation where someone is swinging at you for lethal / need to remove a strong commander from the board, Fell the profane is infinitely better than a basic swamp. Vice-versa, in a situation where you have an opening hand with 2 lands, you would much rather see a 'Fell mire' than a 'Hero's downfall'. Both scenarios Fell the profane is better than a swamp and Hero's downfall. These circumstances illustrate the strength of flexibility in EDH. What makes MDFC's especially effective is they have such a small opportunity cost. Taking out a basic land for fell the profane essentially ups the removal count of your deck by 1 at the cost of what is essentially nothing. Only in the rare circumstance where you need to hit an untapped land AND losing 3 life is significant would a basic land better however, that is exceedingly rare. Almost always having an extra (removal) spell in your hand is better.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

i totally understand the point. but where do you draw the line? when wotc continues to print mdfc's do you just have those in your deck and nothing else?

[@laughingskuls7000]

​@@edhdeckbuilding I think that's a valid question. While I do think replacing say, 1 of 16 basic lands with an MDFC has marginally close to no opportunity cost, there is a question of diminishing returns in adding more and more MDFC's to the detriment of a deck's mana base. I think it's intuitive to understand that a deck with only modal lands has demonstrable downsides (can't run basic synergies, no path to exile targets, constantly bolting lands in etc.). I think the downside of MDFC has a compounding effect the more you add, if 2/3 lands you have is coming in tapped or dealing 3 damage to you it quickly adds up. I do think you are correct in identifying that there IS an opportunity cost in running MDFC's as lands, just like there is an opportunity cost to running any card over another one. I think what you correctly highlighted in your video is that; you have to be cognizant of what exact role a given card is doing in your deck, and versatile cards have risk of looking like they fit more slots than they actually do. If tomorrow I cut a removal card from my deck because I count Fell the profane as removal, then my deck is being stretched one slot thinner and is generally worse off. So, to answer your question, personally, it dependent on the deck: how many colors is the deck? how many (untapped) dual lands do need run? How good is the MDFC effect? etc. Overall it's a question weighing up versatility against efficiency against redundancy. How many of a certain effect do i need? How efficient should that effect be and how much of a given effect do I need?

[@GallantLee]

4CMC for a removal would never get played in one of my games, they will just sit in someone's hand or get played as a bad land (in which case it gets swapped for a better land, even a basic) - and if it did whoever cast it is likely to be losing. It says that person doesn't have anything left in their hand to play, or is forced to take a turn off. I mean to pass and hold 4 mana up is a lot to ask. They probably had a plan for the mana, and casting a bad removal means they cannot do what they wanted to do. If they had a 1cmc or 2cmc removal, then they likely still could have continued with their plan. If the games you are playing are casual low power then sure 4cmc removal is ok, but how many low power games pass their with 4cmc up? or if they did it's a very very low power jank game, in which case people are playing bad cards in their decks. All Demo is saying is these cards are bad cards. Think about why you are playing them, not don't play them.

[@jomarsantiago978]

If every land was an mdfc I'd play them all man. If they don't come in tapped or cost life to come in untapped, why not? This was a wild take

[@edhdeckbuilding]

@@jomarsantiago978 but they do come into play tapped and cost life. that's the point.

[@Nicolas0981]

You dont put Fell the Profane in as a Removal spell, you put it in as a land that CAN be a Removal Spell, it's not a "worse land" is the exact same thing as a swamp but essentially for 3 life you can have it act as a removal spell. 3 life isn't a huge downside, it's pretty okay for it to ALSO be a spell.

[@thesteve0345]

I think it's odd to see mana drain on this list. I concede that players can become prisoners to the ramp effect. However, mana drain is a direct upgrade over counter spell. I think you can swap out counter spell with mana drain 100% of the time and your deck is better. As long as you play it anytime you would have played counter spell at worst nothing changes (you hit a 0 cost spell). In every other case your up.

[@CharlesLeeRay812]

It's awesome how your upload times are perfect for my morning shifts at work. I get to listen to your videos while I'm working!!

[@bladethebeast2]

With MDFCs you can do both if you can play lands from the graveyard, sacrifice lands and cast spells from the graveyard, or simply play bounce lands.

[@Kitepyro]

I think sometimes in a commander game you need that flexibility. You do not know what decks you will be facing or what cards you have to deal with in the current game state. Yes there are cards that does it a lot better for cheaper, but the mdfc lands, model cards, and escalate cards are good if you need flexibility. I put some of the model cards and mdfc lands in my decks for flexibility since I do not know what decks I am going to face at my LGS.

[@Theanthill216]

Sure, you can use mana drain, a $40 counterspell that will most likely add 3 mana for you next turn BUT it’s unnecessary to. Any counterspell that sub $3 will work the same in casual edh. I truly dont understand needing the best cards in every slot for a casual commander game; or thinking of broken cards as “auto includes or staples” when they aren’t necessary to play the game.

[@jcstaff1007]

10:29 you can do both if you build around having mdfcs. Bounce lands can bring it back late game when you need them in your hand.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

so now we're converting our decks to make the mdfc's we're adding better?

[@jcstaff1007]

@@edhdeckbuilding actually yes. They’re that good. I put as many of the good ones as i can in mine. Bala ged recovery, sink into stupor, sejiri shelter are all auto includes in their respective colors. I play 2+ colors so a bounce land or two isn’t anything terrible to my mana base. They’re all on rate or only slightly above rate for the average effect and the fact i can use them early as a land and grab them back later is extremely useful. My favorite play is to crop rotation into a bounce land and pick up sink into stupor to bounce a spell/permanent. Very fun.

[@Soupangel44]

@@edhdeckbuilding Do you... not build decks with cards that make your other cards better?

[@edhdeckbuilding]

@@Soupangel44 my deck has a synergy or strategy. i'm not going to abandon that to shoehorn as many mdfc's into my deck that i can.

[@Soupangel44]

@@edhdeckbuilding I'm talking about bounce lands, which, like mdfc lands, have virtually no deckbuilding cost.

[@BatCaveOz]

Ruinous Intrusion is a fine spell in a *singleton* format (otherwise just run 4 x Nature's Claim). It does have a high casting cost... but Green generates tons of mana.... it also *exiles* cards (which can wreck an opponents combo strategy). Additionally, it adds +1/+1 tokens, (which suits Green stompy/trample decks). It isn't so good at removing an opponent's first round Sol Ring... but is solid mid or late game.

[@BigHat501]

Mana drain is just a strict upgrade from counterspell, which is why I play it. The added mana is just a nice bonus on top of counterspelling a problem card. Even if I only get one mana out of it

[@edhdeckbuilding]

i agree. however i find people counter the thing that will give them more mana rather than the best thing to counter.

[@BigHat501]

@@edhdeckbuilding 100% agree with you there. It does feel good to mana drain that big eldrazi. But it's definitely a problem with how people are evaluating the cards in their deck. This is a discussion we should definitely see more

[@BingbongRecto]

For every 2 mdfcs, remove 1 land and 1 spell. They act as buffer for mana screw and mana flood. They're lands in 2-land hands and gas in 6-land hands

[@FrankPalombo]

Aura mutation: Almost worst case scenario, target your high mana value indestructible enchantment just for the tokens.

[@natelagrassa9337]

I would say that’s a better case scenario the. A mystic remora honestly… it’s great for decks that play tokens, sac fodder, or need instant speed blockers. It has great utility but I have to say MANY of these cards are only bad in few circumstances or bad in certain decks. The mdfc creatures can be blinked or reanimated for multiple uses (easier to do than bajuka bog multiple times) and if it’s an spell you used and you’re playing lands from the grave you get a two for one. It’s all perspective and what you’re trying to do. PS- it’s aura mutation. Aura shards is probably one of the best removal enchantments you can run. 👍

[@this_is_america_speaking]

I use mana drain for the ramp primarily unless someone plays something that is so good that it twists my hand I play it in my giant tribal deck so ramp is pretty important

[@Dadandchicken]

My philosophy on cards like this is moderation and needs. It's like sugary foods, in that If you cram too much of it in there, you're just diluting the really good stuff around it. However, if you run 3-7 cards like this in your deck for the sake of flexibility, it can really round out an otherwise too hyper-focused deck. I just brewed a $120 budget Kinnan deck that is focused on interaction-first wincon-second. There are several cards in the deck like this where they can either synergize with what the deck is doing or be removal and it really goes a long way to helping the deck do what it needs to do when it needs to do it.

[@jcstaff1007]

6:26 right. That’s why it’s in my ramps slot. Lol. It objectively is a better ramp spell than anything else. But it’s great to hit a big threat like someone’s “Sauron the Dark Lord” that is hard to remove otherwise and get that fat chunk of mana. This card IS in my ramp slot but it’s also a counterspell so it’s not going to be used against a Mystic Remora. I don’t think I’ve ever bother countering that. Imma save it for the biggest avengers level threat ever. Like an exanguinate for 13. Like a combo piece. Like a commander. If it gains me anything more than 2 mana it’s already pretty worth, especially early game.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

thanks for actually answering the question.

[@manasync]

I think the big thing about Mana Drain that makes it crazy is when someone taps out for a big spell like omniscience, terastodon, a tapped out genesis wave or torment of hailfire, and you counter it with this. Like in those situations you've effectively time walked your opponent twice

[@jcstaff1007]

9:52 that’s the neat part about mdfc lands. You don’t need to pick right away. It’s a land when you need it and a removal spell when you need it. That’s why it’s good. The black kill spells are the worst of all them imo (apart from the ones that suck) but they’re still better than a basic land, except in mono black where cabal coffers matters.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

so on turn 7 you can make a land drop or leave fell the profane in your hand cause you might want to kill a creature? which do you choose?

[@jcstaff1007]

@@edhdeckbuilding both? I run enough card draw to not need to make that choice. But admittedly to me this is the least viable mdfc. 4 mana to kill a creature is bad and i already run free spot removal or fog instead of narrow spot removal. I’d take the other ones such as the counter spell, the regrowth, the sejiri shelter, heck even the fight spells over this one.

[@jcstaff1007]

@@edhdeckbuilding edit: my bad. I didnt answer that properly. Your question is a false dilemma. The good answer is: not enough information. If you need to use the kill spell more, you use it, if you need to use the land and hit your drop more you use it that way. It’s situationally dependent.

[@matheuscomparini1663]

The great thing about land-MDFCs it is that they are what you need in the situation, if you dont need the destroy spell or the gy exile you can never be sad with hitting a land drop. In the late game it prevents heavy mana flood because you can use it as a spell instead of a land. This flexibility makes them very valuable

[@edhdeckbuilding]

quick question: where do you draw the line? if wotc keep printing them (which they will) does your whole deck become mdfc's?

[@matheuscomparini1663]

@@edhdeckbuilding They are not all auto-includes, your deck still needs its sinergy pieces, and overloading your deck with them also have a cost in your mana base, you would be loosing too much tempo and life. The sweet spot, or where you draw the line its when the MDFCs are supplementing your deck's weaknesses (lack of removal or GY hate) without having a huge impact on your mana base and overall mana eficciency. Also a on-theme card for me its always a priority over them. I usually run from 3-5 of them in my decks, but i can see reasons for people to run about 8 in two to three color decks (another important aspect i forgot to mention: 4+ colors decks make them REALY bad, so maybe 2-3 green ones at best) Edit: nonbasic manabases are also increasingly getting stronger, so another land can be much more impactfull than a ordinary spell.

[@jimmybrooks7359]

because they're strong, next video

[@sunsfssb7699]

On the 10 cards you should be putting into your decks you usually describe niche situations where a trashy card can be good. And now you do the exaxt opposite.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

fell the profane isn't niche at all. neither is mana drain. they're powerful cards that everyone is playing. the niche situations that i describe in my 10 cards videos typically synergize with your deck, rather than just a good stuff card that is an auto-include for every deck.

[@sunsfssb7699]

​@@edhdeckbuilding oh, don't get me wrong, I like you 10 cards you should be playing series a lot! They are very inspirational. But as you are looking for niche situations on those videos where a bad card is good, in this video you are looking for niche situations that make good cards bad. Mana Drain usually is a Counterspell with upside (yes please use it like this!). Fell the Profane is a land with the upside that it can be used as a removal if you're flooded or in absolute danger. I see where you want to get with this video and the first example Aura Mutation was a good example, but the later ones probably are a bit to provoking! I keep enjoying your content. Keep it up!

[@TheDestroya88]

I run a lot of MDFCs. This is for a few reasons: A. Some of these are game winning to the extent they are auto includes. I.e. sea gate restoration, mystic peak, sink into stupor. B. I run 2-3 bounce lands in every deck. They are good by themselves but become nuts when you are picking up an mdfc. C. Land counts & flooding. I can run some MDFCs just to spike my land count from something like 38 to 41 without compromising the deck as a whole. Edit: I replace basic lands or in the case of cards like sea gate that is so good it’s a draw spell outright. MDFCs are much harder to include in 3+ color decks, which I rarely build.

[@satchmosanzabar9023]

Good reasons here for sure.. I need to tweak my commander decks to include more as well!

[@Wojtek36762]

I had Ruinous Intrusion in a deck, I pulled it for Collective Resistance. Cards that just protect my commander are often dead and I end up cutting them, I much prefer one that’s also removal. You *can* do all the stuff and any 2 makes it a pretty good rate. A lot of my decks have about 2 MDFC lands as lands 36 and 37. I’m trying Fell the Profane and Witch Enchanter in my new Shilgengar deck. I’ve cast it as a removal spell once and usually use it as a land, I’m relatively happy with it. Witch Enchanter I like better, there’s good synergy for removal on a creature entrance. I like that bounce lands allow me to get those back as cards. In other decks, I like the gruul bite spell and the red nonbasic land removal that keeps someone from blocking. The 1 mana golgari protection spell seems awesome. Again, never dead in my hand but gets me to run a protection spell like I know I really should. A 2 color tap land is a very small drawback for on-rate protection. Short answer to “what slot does the MDFC go in” is that it fills the gap between the 35 lands I usually have in an initial decklist and the number I know I should really be running. If there aren’t a couple that fit, I run the lands or more ramp usually. Spree cards I like Requisition Raid, the instant speed board wipe, and the extra combat one. I usually use multiple modes. The new Seasons from Bloomburrow aren’t mentioned here but those are great modal spells. I’ve been slotting Season of Weaving into a removal slot where I’m willing to raise my curve, so many white decks like the option to flood the board (5 1/1s for 5 is right on rate even if you do that) or to recur a cheap engine piece.

[@anfo3114]

I’m putting the MDFC lands instead of some regular basics in my Grenzo, dungeon warden deck. Some times it a bit slower but when I get that Goblin Charbelcher and say it’s mostly for fixing the bottom of my deck. Man are they in for a ride :)

[@c.d.7290]

3:30: Sunburst is the stronger enchantment, going for Rhystic is the troll game 5:50: Get ypur point, but people dont use the original counterspell for a mystic remora //that mana drain got bad plays is that many people just greedy. // 8:50 Fell the profane and the other stuff are mostly auto-include just for a saver land curve and have a backup card when you are flooded. The problem actualy that are you talking about, is that most single target removal are bad or I better say there is a for cclose every single removal another removal that hit every opponent. It is also an outclast sentimental beliving, that cards that were good in the time when they were printed (like hero downfall). Foraxample, your nature`s claim: Long played card even in side board in 60 card format. Many people know it. For some month pick your poison was printed and do so much more in edh, but just a few people know it. But the stronge MDFCS in edh that ist actualy auto-include is Disciple of Freyalise // Garden of Freyalise.

[@JohnDoe-oc4rk]

I run MDFC's in my land slots, so I would never think to cut one for a spell. They're extra density of card draw, removal etc. at minimal deckbuilding cost (cut some other tapped lands, so the deck doesn't have too many). I'll run MDFC's out early in the game as lands, only casting them when I definitely have enough lands already

[@DoctorCataclysm]

I think a lot of cards are included into decks because EDHREC says they are in a lot of decks.

[@MAndrews976]

I got three Bolt Lands for my Marchesa the Black Rose deck b/c they help Dethrone triggers. The spell side of the lands are bonus.

[@VesselAstras]

I love having the black and green mh3 mdfc lands in my willowdusk deck. Playing a land with my commander and a creature out just gives a creature 3 +1/+1 counters essentially for playing a land which is super good. You should try it in your deck too. So much so that the actual front side of the card doesn't really matter but can also be really good in some situations. Disciple of freyalise for example has insane late game draw potential in that deck.

[@guilhermereis4638]

About the MDFC I use them in Land slots, but only when it makes sense, my "Malik, grim manipulator deck" runs plenty of creature removal , so I dont need a Hagra Mauling in there. But since im killing a lot of stuff, Boggart Trawler is good to exile them from my opponents graves, so he goes in a swamp slot just like a bojuka bog would. My Teysa Karlov deck really appreciates both Witch Enchanter and the Trawler, since they can also be used as sac folder or brought back from the grave. I would argue that hagra mauling hitting only creatures and always entering tapped makes it a odd choice to include in most decks, now, fell the profane is REALLY good, a bad removal in one side, yes, but the 3 ways it could be played really makes the card shine. Do you need the mana now? : 3 life and it enters untapped Dont need the mana now but need the land drop ? : untapped with no life loss ( wich is like, 90% of bojukas bog in the early game ) Late game and your engine is already in place ? : a removal in desperate times. About drawing the line when Wotc prints a bunch of them... Well, there are like 50 of them now , and I dont really play that much Teysa Karlov : 4 Malik : 3 Chainer , dementia master : 4 Rocco, street chef : 1 It depends if they enter tapped, if my deck has enough lifegain, if the effect and cost are acceptable, if my deck search or cares for a lot of basics. I don't run mana drain since I dont own a deck with blue, but I think is just a better counterspell, who is already a great card. If people are using it as a ritual when they should wait to counter something more important, thats just a game missplay, not a deckbuilding one. Also, I do run Fell the Profane in my Malik deck. My Commander removes things (including hexproof ones) I also run 4 any permament removal 1 non creature removal 2 creature removals There is also 8-10 everyone sac/ my opponents sac effects 3 blink effects that trigger my commander removal ability again 2 direct reanimation effects and some more niche reanimation ( like Carmen and Technomancer) who can trigger his effect again 3 board wipes. And I still run fell the profane and Witch Enchanter. And I never once wished I had a swamp or plains instead in my hand.

[@radicard5193]

Regarding MDFCs: They make for better topdecks. Need your next land drop? Well your removal spell can be a land. Need removal? This removal isn't the best but it's better than drawing a basic land.

[@davewallace2992]

A thoughtful, if not thought provoking, analysis. My local game store has a “10/7” mulligan rule. It allows you to look at 10, then choose 7, at the top of the game. It has changed the meta of our local playgroups so that some players only have up to 30 mana sources in their deck. It’s a “good card” greed issue. I wonder if it’s similar to why people choose mdfc’s. They feel the loss of two better options gives them one MORE card they REALLY want.

[@Davulzz]

I usually put a few mdfc in my decks. And usually they replace the best covered spot. I'm removal heavy? I swap my worst removal spell for a slightly worse one that is my land drop if its my only land in hand. All in all making the deck run slightly more consistently

[@MattyL-o2e]

-I used to put the first few cards and cards like them in my decks when i first started, now i put cards that do just one thing really well, then add more draw sources to get them instend of having cards that do two things. -Mana drain and narsets reversal are my favourite counter spells, i generally only use those two with some niche on theme other ones depending on the deck, i don't like the idea of trying to control 3 other people or stop cool things, where as these counters when used right can give me a chance at winning where i otherwise couldn't. -Modal lands i used to use alot, now probably only 1 at most in any of my decks. I really love basic lands now XD. Alot of my games end up with big board states and alot of triggers from all players, ive been cutting back alot of such offenders, smothering tithe and such cards, and having lands be basic helps keep things more simple for me. -On that topic alot of the newer cards either have alot of text, alot of triggers, or do alot of things. As such i've only really been buying like one card per set from the last 8 or so sets.

[@Phonk-vo4oi]

It’s interesting on the MDFC lands. I actually like cards that have versatility over strictly better cards. The new cycle are great mid game cards filling out as either a poor tap land or giving you some extra interaction in the later game. The previous cycle also have great applications but it’s true they cant be an auto include and must be relevant to the play style. I really like the blue weird MDFC in my etb strategy. It’s good to have a land or a surprise spellskite

[@alextelfer4215]

I watch this channel to get perspective and learn from takes I disagree with (and I do, fairly often,) but this one absolutely takes the cake, had me shaking my head nearly the whole time, and I think gave me permanent frown wrinkles. I think MDFC lands are without a doubt the quickest and easiest auto include any deck could ever make. You're asking if I would rather run Fell the Profane or Sink into Stupor over a basic swamp or island? Uhhhhh yeah?? How often is a basic land EVER going to win me a game? I've won several game with Legion Leadership, and I broke my own no tapped land rule to include that in my decks, it's absolutely that worth it. Yes, they are only one side or the other, but I am more than willing to include a worse removal/mono colored land over a basic because despite there being better versions of those cards, it's the modality that makes them worth playing. No one is replacing removal with Fell the Profane, they replace lands so that they aren't dead land draws in the late game or lands if you need them in the early game. This is not even including the fact that they can be reused for their front side if you bounce land them to hand, or played as a land from the graveyard with the back side. I also think spree is one of the best commander mechanics to come out of last year. Again, I am more than willing to play a card with 3 sub par costed modes that can be stacked in the late game over a card that does one thing simply because of the modality. Three Steps Ahead offers 3 options that aren't very powerful on their own individually, but you have to think of it as paying a modality tax. You give up efficiency for the versatility of being able to use them for whatever the situation calls for. Same idea behind Collective Resistance. The single modes of it aren't the greatest, and I'd argue that the fully entwined version is absolutely worth the cost, but the true playability of the spell comes from being able to have different lines of play and options for the various things that the commander format throws at you.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

so where do you draw the line? wotc will continue to print them so will all the lands in your deck get replaced?

[@dariocampanella7992]

​@@edhdeckbuildingyes. That would be the case: people will swap all their lands for mdfc...and die from price of progress. I think you are mixing some valid points (how do you replace your cards) with some personal grudges against this continuous powercreep and product fatigue.

[@namdoolb]

I feel like "the line" is going to be in a different place for everyone, and indeed for different decks. For me it goes like this (barring any deck dependencies that might reduce this number) Mono colour or 2 colour: I can probably jam 5-6 mdfc's as long as there are enough out there that I want for that deck. 3 Colour: we're probably looking at 2-3 tops. I don't feel like there's a huge amount of room in the manabase, & I can't have them interfere with the fixing. 4 or 5 colour: here's the thing.... I don't generally do decks at more than 3 colours. (Just a preference) if I did, I imagine there might be 1 or 2 mdfc's, probably restricted to the dominant colour. Difficult to do much more unless you start replacing spells (which most mdfc's are not good enough to do).

[@AdmiralDoodad]

​@@edhdeckbuildingthis is an odd question, because yes if there are enough MDFC lands that are efficient enough to be worth the opportunity cost of running them collectively, you'd be stupid not to. In multi color decks this is already the case for dual lands, if you have a three color commander you're not likely to run as many basics because the utility of producing multiple kinds of mana precludes the cost and advantage of being basic. MDFCs are utility lands, There is no hard and fast rule for how many utility lands to run, only what your deck wants and what it can support.

[@hahahafunniness]

​@@edhdeckbuildingthis is how wotc is gonna psychologically trick people into playing battle cruiser magic again. Print a bunch of terrible cards that makes the community think are auto includes.

[@georgegeorgiev7057]

Good point. It makes you reconsider some of the trendy cards going around at the moment. A lot of people are probably replacing a basic land for a mdfc but one big flaw that I stumbled upon is with other lands that check for a land type (Castle Ardenvale, Mystic Sanctuary, etc) where it can be an issue once in a while. It seems it comes down to personal preferences and style of play but all these new versatile cards are definitely not "staples".

[@JuanFelipeCalle]

I play mostly Brawl on Arena, but I've faced the same decisions with those modal / multi-use cards. I took out Three Steps also -- it was too clunky -- but I love using Mana Drain early game, messing with my opponents turn 2 or 3 play, and getting ahead the next turn myself. I think the question for all these cards is how do they work with the rest of your deck?

[@ZeIose]

I came to the comments to say basically what every one else seems to be saying. When you have cards with modes and choices, the HAVE to be worse versions or they will become ubiquitous. There IS a cost to playing these, but they are almost always worth it. (Unless you’re just playing them wrong. More options do give you more opportunities to make mistakes.)

[@hahahafunniness]

Except we've only seen the beginning of these mdfcs. Or do you think we won't get untapped duals or at some point tri lands when we explore shards again. Until that day, jamming mdfcs for the sake of having a two in one is lazy and uninspired

[@ZeIose]

@@hahahafunniness I don’t think power creep is going to stop any time soon if that’s what you’re asking. I agree that playing cards that are just so good they are auto includes if you are in their colors is uninspiring, but much of the time players are trying to win a game of magic. This same argument could be said about sol ring which is in literally 85% of every EDH deck (according to edhrec). Lastly, it maybe lazy deck building to have modal or double faced cards, but playing them is far from it. Playing a card the does the same thing the same way every time is far more lazy than a card that gives you options you need to evaluate each time to chose what mode you’re going to play on that card this game. Which is then multiplied by how many modes there are on the card as well as how many modular cards you chose to put in the deck.

[@andrewfornes5320]

I recently put Arcum Daggson into my River Song deck. This has been the best idea I've ever had. Arcum, along with Liquimetal Torque puts in work. I can make any creature they control into an artifact creature, then tap Arcum & FORCE them to search their library for a noncreature artifact, then shuffle. Forcing them to shuffle is amazing in that deck, my only other way is with Crucible of Worlds & Field of Ruin. I really like doing damage with River Song while I having Virtue of Courage on the battlefield. I draw cards from the bottom of the library & exile cards to play from the top. I call the deck "Burning the candle at both ends".

[@regnarissad]

i don't run enough removal, so fell the profane is amazing bc it replaces a land and gives me more options to use removal. i've used it both as a land and a removal spell when playing, and bc i can bolt myself to have it untapped if it's completely necessary, i really don't think it's that bad

[@freondtd]

The removal on a land is worth the land replacement as a mid to late game draw otherwise you are correct

[@ricardardevol9720]

I do see your point, and indeed in most cases you are trading flexibility for efficiency... I honestly think that fine at lower power levels. But indeed, only relevant if you would really play both options in a game, and you make a conscious effort to choose the right call.

[@XionXLR8]

I love Mana Drain in either of my Jin Gitaxias decks. Costs one of my opponents some tempo and really aids in getting my 7 or 10 drop commander down ahead of curve.

[@jacobward3035]

I only use mana drain for the counter. The extra mana is just a bonus, if I remember that I have it when my turn comes back around. 😅

[@caasIsirhC]

Your videos make me want to leave very long replies! Great one. I recently changed Aura Mutation and the Gruul artifact counterpart for more flexible removal because I had included them as removal and they are narrow and hardly ever relevant as token makers. As far as MDFC's go, I'm replacing lands. I have a rule that they are not spells in my hand early-mid game. They are removal (or whatever value) is more relevant than a land in the mid-late game. I also like to play bounce lands to pick them up. I don't mind the slight tempo hit if it means I am at least hitting my lands or have a relevant spell. Three Steps Ahead and other cumulative modal cards are great. I want to use it to Clone a creature but I am also assuming that to do so, I need a board. So, I can counter a board wipe and regroup. If I had nothing to do on my turn I can do both but that is pretty unlikely. Essentially, I think one part of the spell should be doing something in line with your gameplan and the other part should be somewhat universal. Legolas for example gets a spell that targets them and/or gets rid of a problem with Collective Resistance. It's flexibility over efficiency because you don't know when or where you will need the counter spell but know you will want the copy. Likewise, when destroying the Bolas' Citadel, it's great having inefficient removal than no removal because you had chosen Tamiyo's Safekeeping over Collective Resistance. ...I still wouldn't say don't play Tamiyo's Safekeeping or another clone effect of course. But I think it could replace your second or third one.

[@MycobraII]

Excellent vid, a good thing to add would be the competetive level of your play group. If your playing a cedh group every piece of mana is going to be used more efficiently. In a casaul group versatility would benefit you more and you might not care if those spells cost a little more.

[@Atanar89]

Mana drain is really good ramp on turn 2/3. Because you get to use that mana on the next turn. Prismari Command is 3 mana for creating 2 treasures, but you only get to remove something OR create the treasures. And it is still a good card. Mana drain is just vastly better.

[@AlexOvTheAbyss]

What am I removing for Fell the Profane? A swamp. Why? Because Yuriko. Will most likely always be playing it as a land, and if it is revealed off Yuriko's trigger, that is every opponent losing 4 life vs 0 life for a swamp. Same reason for other MDFC's. Other decks? Yeah, don't run them much. As for Spree (and similar) cards, my take is that I have 3 different options. Would be nice to get more than one option off of it, but I don't expect to. I was going to build Brudiclad and run Three Steps Ahead. Main reason was for creating a token copy of something and turning all my tokens into that. Are there better options, sure, but there are also cases where those would just be a dead card in hand (nothing to copy, already have a token that works, etc), and this can be backup counter spell or card draw.

[@Trance2400]

The Spree cards, and modal cards like Collective Resistance, I just like playing these cards. There's something about looking at these cards in my hand and having more options in more scenarios that I really enjoy. I know that individually the modes are over-costed, but while you're staring at that very cost-efficient Tamiyo's Safekeeping in your hand, I've removed an opponents Rhystic Study with my Collective Resistance and prevented him from refilling his hand. Versatility at the expense of slower play seems like a reasonable trade-off for a casual format, I leave the hyper-efficient plays to the cEDH folk, they probably would have had a Nature's Claim in hand instead or something.

[@jfabre]

For manadrain it depends: -What are my oppenents are playin? \->it there a card I will really need to counter in the matchup? \->Yes-> I will keep my counter for that moment ( for example vs the hexproof Narset) I really need to counter the commander \->No ->I will counter a spell that will put me ahead of my opponents. like a dark ritual would Late game -> It is just a counterspell For deck building Manadrain will fitt where I need mana early because my commander is expensive or so... For MDFC land's for example I remove lands For my raffine deck I put +1/+1 counters if I discard nonland (wich is the case with mdfc ) and still the mdfc spells are not that bad! removal instead of lands, even bad removal is still good even though you have to pay 3life. and I think boggart if Far much stronger than bojuka bog, because, it is a body, you never need to exile a gy T1 or T2 and if you need an untap black mana it is still better than bojuka bog. The mdfc from mh3 are just bunker whenerver I needed a bojuka bog, I yould love to pay 3 mana instead and have a creature instead of a sad tap land bojuka bog is in fact not that good of a land Same is true for the witch that kill enchantment, if you can blink them at instant speed, they are just unmatch with other taplands For three step ahead, I realy like this card because for 6 mana you can counter a threat and make a clone, that is not terrible. and instant give you the opportunity to chose latest moment. I think it is a ok counterspell that also make you a clone whenever needed I play a lot of brawl on arena and this card is never a dead card, it saved me some games Do not hesitate to debate with me ;) Thanks for the video, I like your stuff!

[@marcellosalis5063]

I agree with the point in general. Not so much with some specific example.

[@RoyalGuardNo17]

When I was considering taking Three Steps Ahead into my deck, I've realised that in most cases Sublime Epiphany does the same plus more for cheaper, unless I only want to do one of the modes which in Commander is rarely the case. I want to get most of the value from my card and with the support for ramp and mana rocks/dorks in Commander, the mana value is not that big of an issue.

[@cody98533]

The only mdfc’s I run are the super synergistic ones for my deck. Like the card draw green mdfc in my wurm deck or sea gate restoration in minn wily illusionist

[@loversinjapan42]

I agree with most of what you said in this video. Especially with fell the profane. I am completely opposed to your thinking on collective resistance. It is a modal card so depending on the situation you are currently in, you can choose which one or two or all three options on the card are best to be used in that instance. And whether it’s commander or any other format, having all of those options on a single card makes it so you can fit more cards into your already limited deck size. Hope this lets you see clearly how this is better than a single removal or protection card and I don’t mean to be rude by any means.

[@edhdeckbuilding]

this video was less about individual cards and more about why you're putting them in your deck. what purpose are they supposed to serve? and where do you draw the line with modal cards? does you whole deck become modal cards and mdfc's?

[@loversinjapan42]

@@edhdeckbuilding yes it was a very helpful video in showing the error in thinking on the part of most players when building a deck

[@henrye3935]

I've tried Aura Mutation in my Jasmine deck because she makes the tokens unblockable. You have to think of it as a token card before it's a removal card, but ultimately I took it out because it was far too narrow. I switched to Season of the Burrow, which still makes tokens and is still removal, but with the upside of having recursion.

[@PackOpeningAddict]

So we hate situational versatility now?

[@edhdeckbuilding]

i don't hate anything. the question was "why are you putting these cards in your deck?"

[@GallantLee]

​@@edhdeckbuilding Demo, people don't get it. They think you're calling them out and taking it personally. One thing I've learnt from playing MTG at stores is despite being a extremely complex game, EDH attracts a lot of more players who do not care for efficiency or optimisation. Critical thinking and self-reflection isn't as high a priority for this format. People want to be told what to play in their decks, not be challenged on what they are playing. Further to this, the KZbin platform is designed to work as an echo chamber. What you are talking about is a consistent topic in podcasts etc, but not so much on KZbin. That's what a lot of KZbinrs have realised. So they run with it e.g. the hate for Smothering Tithe and Rhystic Studies, the "do you pay the 1/2?", it's practically non-existent outside of KZbin and some online forums. Also, the love for MDFC's is driven by a particular KZbin channel, and watching them play games I've only seen them play them in budget, very low power pods - more often as lands. The Command zone has said multiple times MDFC's are inefficient, and they don't play them unless there are no other options/need the density. They've literally said often a basic land is better in 1-3 colour decks.

[@charlieblocher7456]

I've generally found that those double effect cards aren't that great unless you're always going to get value out of the second effect - they're usually more expensive to cast or too limited by comparison. I disagree about Mana Drain - assuming you are willing to shell out the money. It's strictly better than a Counter Spell. But if people are using as ramp then they're not using optimally. The MDF lands aren't auto-includes, but the fact that it is a land on the back does make it a bit more useful, but it depends on a variety of factors. A worse removal spell is still better than a dead land in your hand when you really need removal, but it can slow you down. The more colors you have, the less you can afford to fiddle with your mana base for utility effects and flexibility, making MDF lands less useful. Collective Resistance is a strictly better Naturalize, and provides the same effect as several different commander protection spells for a similar cost, especially since it can give you extra card efficiency out of it. Those kinds of cards tend to get used the most because there are usually easy choices to pick for hot swaps. Two mana isn't terrible for single target removal in many color combinations - especially if you don't have White and/or Black. A deck can only run one Nature's Claim.

[@kl3r1k3r-7]

I play aura mutation in my galadriel light of valinor deck because it enables me more triggers in my opponents turns.

[@narkfly]

Demo seems pretty down on modal cards here. The rates on modal cards is higher because you're paying for the flexibility aspect of multiple options in a single card slot. If the floor of a modal spell doesn't jive very well with your deck, I'd agree with his assessment to probably skip it. If however, most or all of the modes offered are usually great in your deck, it can be worth it to keep in the 99. For example, both of the blue modal counterspells mentioned here are typically great in a spell slinger shell, because a counterspell that can do other things for the deck (card draw, "ramp", or clone effects) is often worth the slot if it's a redundant effect found elsewhere in the deck. You wouldn't want these to be your only counters, but they can make pretty good 5th or 6th counter effects if they're also your 10th or 11th card draw effect, say. The benefit of modal spells (besides the "veggies" effect of MDFC lands specifically smoothing out hands / draws) is you are opening up an additional slot for more synergy, an extra win con, another value engine, etc. If you can collapse your 8th removal effect into a land slot with an MDFC land, you're not only looking at the other removal spell or land it's replacing, but you're also thinking about the opportunity it creates for what can now be included. I don't think decks should run a ton of these effects - for the reasons Demo points out. I do think decks should run a couple to a few of them, though - because veggies can be boring; fun, interesting decks are fun and interesting to pilot. I'm looking to modal effects to open up the possibilities for the "core" of the deck itself. Collapse some card slots into modal effects to have a few extra options for the core of the deck to shine. Season to taste, of course; add too many and the deck won't hum.

[@harleydean5591]

Mdfc you can do both if you have bounce lands

[@haroun1760]

To much mdfc is bad but a few replacing a basic land ives you a spell when you have enough lands or a land if you need a land drop. But you are right dat you need one mode very much to include these cards

[@doctorterror1788]

I respectfully disagree about the mdfc lands. That is just taking the place of a land that in the late game is a spell. Yes, its a worse land, but what land lets you remove a creature in a bind? or what removal spell can you use as a land?

[@WawrzyniecTheIII]

Crucible of worlds you can do both. But then are you running that? (Referring to play it from your hand, then later from the gy as a land)

[@edhdeckbuilding]

you're playing your mdfc's from your graveyard? pretty sure that doesn't work.

[@WawrzyniecTheIII]

@@edhdeckbuilding I guess this got deleted from the link, but from Wizard's FAQ from Playing with Modal Double Faced cards. The example is basically with Crucible of worlds. "If an effect allows you to play a land or cast a spell from among a group of cards, you may play or cast a modal double-faced card with any face that fits the criteria of that effect. For example, if Sejiri Shelter / Sejiri Glacier is in your graveyard and an effect allows you to play lands from your graveyard, you could play Sejiri Glacier. That effect doesn't allow you to cast Sejiri Shelter."

[@edhdeckbuilding]

@@WawrzyniecTheIII wow, i did not know that.

[@JessBritvec]

I play Mana Drain pretty religiously, but as a non-conditional card that can counter anything that can be countered. I never even think of using it for ramp, and I will not think twice before using my Mana Drain on a low mana value card. If I put a versatile card in my deck I am picking one choice as the default, and if I wouldn't happily choose one of the options then I don't play it. I don't need every option to be a good one, I need one good option and everything else just needs to be feasible within the deck. I am an MDFC believer, at least any of the MDFCs that you can pay 3 life for it to come in untapped if needed. I play them as lands, but I won't put them in if don't want the effect on the other side. I like to have 40 lands in my decks unless they call for something outside the norm, so MDFCs help keep me from flooding out. It depends on how much damage I'm taking from my opponents, but most of the time I can spare 4-6 life to make sure my lands come in untapped on the turns I need, but I don't need every land to come in untapped every turn of the game, so there is a threshold number for each deck and each situation. In a lot of the cases where I would cast the spell side I'm in panic mode, so I might not have anything else to do with my resources anyway, or I want the effect enough I'll pay whatever cost to get it.

[@mjvane46]

I agree with a lot of what you said, even shared it in my local groupchat. I have argued for years that in deckbuilding mana drain is a ritual, not a counterspell, it has an overlap, but its usually not protecting your interests, its usually enabling a big mana turn. Aura mutation in deckbuilding is a token generator. If its a removal spell it will feel bad but sometimes necessary, but it fills the role of roken generator. I do want to mention a few things that bothered me from my point of view. Casual commander should probably prioritise flavour and synergy over efficiency, so i disagree with the +1 counter naturalise, assuming its in a counters deck Mdfcs are very useful, i think they need to be a relevant effect to your deck strategy. Kill spells are always relevant, recursion is always relevant, board wipes are always relevant. There is a maximum amount, but id rather sneak up to 45 lands, including 10 impactful mdfcs, so i get the versatility benefits of lands when i NEED them, and spells when i WANT them. I think my current general philosophy is that i want 39-40 lands in my decks, and relevant mdfcs count for half a land. Im sorry you are getting so much hostility in the comments, i think the nuance is hard to demonstrate

[@Trance2400]

The way I view the MDFCs is that they are a land. They aren't a good land, but they are inherently a land, and they fill a land slot. I'm willing to accept that this is a potentially slower land for the advantage of reducing the chance for a dead draw in the late game, in which the additional cost of the spells often doesn't matter. The additional advantage is that you can manipulate these with bounce lands; use the MDFC as a land in the early game, then use a bounce land later in the game so you can play the MDFC as a spell. It sounds like a rare interaction, but I've done it enough times that it does matter. One game I used Elvish Reclaimer to get a bounce land to bounce a Sink into Stupor to hand, then cast it to counter a Gary win off the stack and completely turned the game around. My playgroup still talks about that game now months later, and to me that's what EDH is all about.

[@Trance2400]

Another interaction that I use MDFCs for is playing them the opposite way around; casting them as a spell in the early game (admittedly an over-costed spell), but then it is a land in your graveyard for Crucible/Muldrotha etc. Again, it has mattered in multiple games, and in a lands-matters deck with combinations of bounce lands and graveyard recursion the interactions just become nutty.

[@REALSOLIDSNAKE]

In my opinion every card has its place. Generically, I agree that there are better cards than the ones show. For instance Fell Mire is not a great card, nice to have the option of instant removal or a land... But in a Rowan, Scion of War deck it fits like a glove. Great video, good work.

[@AEstud77]

I promise you that I will use mana drain correctly when I have one! XD For real though I'm happy you brought that card up. Good food for thought!

[@GallantLee]

I totally agree - I see people put cards in decks without reasons to make them good. I find a lot of these multi-purpose/modal cards are traps. The test is I only use them if I am happy paying that CMC for ONE of the effects in that particular deck. But also, I think the cards you mention are often bad not because how people play it, but because how people play them. Like in my saproling deck (I don't play aura mutation, because I have better ways of gettign rid of enchantments), but if I did I would be happy to get 1 saproling off it. But a lot of people hold off for more value - a lot of people don't play removal enough. Mana drain should be played as a counterspell, not a ramp piece or ritual. But as you mentioned people run them. I totally agree on MDFC's, there are youtubers who advocate for them and I think a lot of people don't think for themselves and build really bad decks without knowing it. I don't run most of them unless I really needed a high density of the effect - but they're often the very last one. Fell the profane I wouldn't play... I wouldn't cast a 4cmc removal. It's like taking a turn off to cast it. The only deck I might run them in is a landfall deck which bounce lands back to hand, but in general they're bad cards. The modality is a trap in my opinion. They need to be put into a deck for a very very good reason.

[@enso8379]

Easy answer to your question: Because opportunity cost is a thing. MDFCs ... At the start of the game people pay three life ALL THE TIME. People fetch for shocks on turn one all the time. Having mana you can use turns 1-3 is critical, drawing a three mana removal spell is dead weight. And at the end of the game when you have ramped or built out your mana base or you have a Cabal Coffers in play the difference between 3 mana removal and 4 mana removal is negligible. With the goblin, black more than any other color gets value off of disposable bodies. I can exile a graveyard and then I have a multitude of options of what I can do with a body attached to it. Bog does its thing and is just a swamp for the rest of the match. Multi-modal cards. Same deal. There are lots of 1UU counterspells that see play. In a format that has 400 cards at the table there are going to be so many interactions that come up. Yes I'll take a sub-par multi-modal counter to deal with a farewell, and if also potentially can copy something crazy I have that option too. There is nothing wrong with paying a tax for increased flexibility, it makes your deck more resilient and able to deal with more situations in the moment. I always dedicate 1-3 cards of any deck I make to MDFC or Multi-Modal effects for this reason.

[@TOOLandNINfan]

In a token deck with Yenna, Redtooth Reagant as commander, Aura Mutation has served me well. Usually by the time I cast it, I have Anointed Procession copied so even a small target yields a big payout. I've also hit my own Doubling Season after someone else main turn Wrath, giving me 10K+ tokens. But I think that's a strange Synergy that doesn't apply in most decks. Modal spells in trying in Riku of Many Paths, but haven't pay tested enough to see how well it does, but it hasn't really felt bad to do one mode only when he's out, the exile effect is highly profitable, especially if I know the top card.

[@TheObstalace]

IMO taking basics or even a duals (but definitely rather single color producing lands) out for MDFCs is always an upgrade. I just dont care when i start at 40 life if i have to pay 3 life to get an untapped swamp, when same swamp can be an answer to a must answer creature in the lategame. Same for the graveyard exile, it allows you to shift your need for including specific graveyard removals cards to your lands suite alone, just play trawler, bojuka bog, and scavenger ground and you already have 3 pieces of graveyard exile entirely in your landbase. Beats having to cut a cool syngeristic card for soulguide lantern instead.

[@DarkJusticeMetal]

I run MDFCs and modal spells because I love modality in my decks. Do I need a land now? Use it as a land. Do I need the spell side? Do that. If I *really* want to maximize the value of these cards, I can run bounce lands. They keep making them in every set! Take Drowner of Truth. He's in my big mana deck. If I need a big mana card to trigger my spells, I do that. If I need the land, I can do that too. Lorien Revealed is a good example of this. It's an overcosted Concentrate but I really value being able to tutor an island on demand if I desperately need it. It is important to understand why you're running cards and understanding your priorities as a player.

[@BatCaveOz]

Since the removal of Mana Burn from MTG, Mana Drain is definitively better than Counter Spell (ie the gold standard of all countering spells). 🤷‍♂

[@SWNJim]

I generally don’t add a card unless I can take advantage of all aspects of the card, because there usually is a cheaper version that does slightly less. Sometimes though you just need versatility and you have to accept that you’re going to be paying for that versatility.

[@obadijahparks]

I'd usually like the basic land over the potential upside at the price of a land that turn.

[@ericsanchz]

MDFC cards replace lands not spells in my deckbuilding experience…I don’t agree with going so hard into fell the profane being a bad card becuz 95% of the time it’s going to be a land and the opportunity cost of that 5% being a late game removal spell if you don’t need to hit a land drop is super nice…also there’s factors into using MDFCs like if you can afford having a one color land with 3+ color decks and if your mono color deck cares about basic land count(i.e cabal coffers) but if you can use an MDFC there’s almost no downside

[@crawdaddy1234]

This is super nitpicky, but Fell the Profane is not a “strict upgrade” to Hagra Mauling, as Hagra Mauling can TECHNICALLY be cast for only BB. That said, I have NEVER seen it cast for 1BB. So I would say that Fell the Profane is essentially/functionally a strict upgrade to Hagra Mauling.

[@henrytorr5810]

You’ve never seen it cast for BB because its minimum is 1BB

[@crawdaddy1234]

@@henrytorr5810 Oh wow, it’s even worse than I thought.

[@Vipertooth007]

You can absolutely do both with MDFCs because of bounce lands, which you can now get 2 colourless options now then with the two-colour bounce cards. Adding more expensive options that can do multiple things like Spree cards or Cryptic command lets you have more flexible cards so that you reliably have answers. Also, spree cards have insane value if you're copying them, as it copies all the options. So instead of running Counterspell, you could run Three Steps Ahead and then a copy spell like Dualcaster Mage or Return the Favor to win counter wars with extra value. Mana Drain is just a powercrept Counterspell, so why not run it? It'll be your last counterspell in hand that you cast if it's something important to counter like something killing your commander. Otherwise it will counter a massive 7-8 cost card probably and win you the game if unanswered, completely wasting a player's turn and giving you a big ritual. I've never seen a blue deck with only 1 counterspell in hand, if it's mana drain of course you cast it if you have nothing else to protect your pieces.

[@Jtsqueaker]

I might be misunderstanding what you're saying about spree cards. Are you saying that if you cast a spree card and pay for one mode, you get all the modes on the card if you copy it? If so, that is wrong. They work the same way as a spell such as Mystic Confluence when you cast it. The copy retains all the same modes chosen as the original spell, just with the option to possibly choose new targets. If you copy a Mystic Confluence that had counter, draw, draw for the three chosen modes, you don't get to choose counter, bounce, bounce as your three options. You are stuck with the chosen modes from the original spell because the other options on the card essentially disappear while the card is on the stack since the options are chosen on cast rather than resolution.

[@Vipertooth007]

​@@Jtsqueaker I was referring to paying 5 mana for Phantom Interference and then copying it to get another spirit and countering another spell. Or in the original example paying 8 mana for Three Steps Ahead and coping it again as a response to someone countering it to counter that spell and then draw and make tokens again. It works well specifically with spree cards that have counter target spell on them, but of course you can use it on something like Requisition Raid and destroy a bunch of things and buff your board. - - - The flexibility is just another part of these cards, you usually don't cast all modes unless you're in the late game and low on cards. It allows you to do more than 1 effect with a single card on like turn 8 or something and not only counter that game winning spell but maybe copy an evasive creature and also draw.

[@TheDestroya88]

People don’t know how broken bounce lands really are. I even play the desert one in standard.

[@Phe0nix1986]

Playing MDFC lands with bounce lands for more options in games!

[@Just-a-Canuck]

I use mana drain in 2 of my 4 blue decks, I have been guilty of countering a big ish spell just for the mana. But normally I just treat it as “Counterspell” with an upside 😆 Plus! There is nothing more fun then being the blue deck, and having two untapped blue mana sitting there making the rest of the table think

[@Shiningfreak98]

Typically, I use a card for its main purpose: (ie. Aura Mutation/Shards as removal) and the secondary effect as a bonus. I want tokens in my Rith deck, obviously more is better, but I will use the spell to remove the biggest threat (Mystic Remora) rather than hope to get more benefit later as if I wait until later they may have already won. That said, I know there are better enchantment removal, but I also benefit from the token. 1 mana to remove an enchantment, 1 mana to create a token. While a card that only does enchantment removal is limited, those are both decent mana rates for their effects.

[@kylelloyd4437]

I would say if people depend on mana drain as a ramp is playing it wrong. To me even getting 1 mana could help me get that one spell i need next turn.

[@cteal2018]

Ruinous intrusion IS a green EXILE effect and at instant speed, grren is not the best at targeted exile removal.

[@QuicksilverSG]

MDFC lands aren't intended to optimize your deck with best-case options. They're worst-case fallbacks that give you routes to recover from both mana burn and flood situations. For most decks, I'd rather pack 34 lands + 4 MDFC's than 34-38 lands. Particularly with spot removal, it's not crucial to have an optimal answer in hand, just a timely and useable one. In other cases where no suitable MDFC is available, I use 1-mana Cycling lands, since discarding a land doesn't use up your one land per turn.