Kellan, the KidKellan, the Kid | Art by Magali Villeneuve
Hello, and welcome to Am I the Bolas? This week, what am I supposed to do?!
This column is for all of you out there who have ever played some Magic and wondered if you were the bad guy. I'm here to take in your story with all of its nuances so I can bring some clarity to all those asking, "Am I the Bolas?"
I'm ready to hear you out and offer advice. All you have to do is email amithebolas@gmail.com with your story, a pseudonym you want to use, and of course, only include details you don't mind in the column! You might see your story below one day. You might even hear it on the podcast. Which podcast?
I'm Mike Carrozza and I hate the name of this card.
Come on! "I'll level up Does MachinesDoes Machines!" COME ON!
(Post edited for brevity, clarity, and then some.)
SUBMISSION
Hi Mike,
Long time reader, first time writing in. I played a game about a month ago and I'm still finding myself wondering if there was something I should have done differently.
I have been playing Commander with some friends for a couple years, and while I have previously drawn some ire for certain removal, stax, or infect pieces, we generally get along fine and have a good time. Recently, we have added a few new people to our group, and although I haven't interacted with them much, they seem pretty chill.
On the day in question, I found myself in a pod with three of the new people. Player A was running Fire Lord AzulaFire Lord Azula, Player B had Kruphix, God of HorizonsKruphix, God of Horizons and Player C was running Marrow-GnawerMarrow-Gnawer. These players had previously been very vocal about their dislike of all things poison, control, and disruptive interaction.
With this in mind, I decided to try out my newly made Kellan, the KidKellan, the Kid deck. Whilst it does have two of the Praetors to close out the late game, there are no other stax pieces and very little removal. The deck mostly tries to find ways to generate value with Kellan. I explained briefly that the deck was a value engine play style and then we shuffled up.
All four of us found solid starts and generally built up our board states. I got out Kellan, Chulane, Teller of TalesChulane, Teller of Tales and a Wondrous CrucibleWondrous Crucible, but the general concern at the table was the Azula player. A couple of turns go by, my deck is starting to trigger Kellan and Chulane multiple times a turn, but the only removal I've attracted was losing my Deep-Sea KrakenDeep-Sea Kraken.
Player A dumps all their mana into a Comet StormComet Storm, copied by Azula to take us all out. I defend with Prismatic StrandsPrismatic Strands and the table collectively picks off Player A's combo pieces as they're tapped out.
Another few turns go by, and I have now played over half my deck. I get out Vorinclex, Voice of HungerVorinclex, Voice of Hunger, and then Wondrous CrucibleWondrous Crucible lets me cheat Jin-Gitaxias, Core AugurJin-Gitaxias, Core Augur in my end step. It's clear that I'm now running away with the game.
Play passes with people fishing for removal, and the Marrow-GnawerMarrow-Gnawer player finds and casts Swarmyard MassacreSwarmyard Massacre. I flash in Glorious ProtectorGlorious Protector to save my creatures but players A and B are wiped out and concede. I flashback Prismatic StrandsPrismatic Strands to stop Karumonix, the Rat KingKarumonix, the Rat King killing me with poison and player C also concedes.
I apologized after the game about getting both Praetors out at once. I was told that this was relatively minor, but they now really objected to value engine decks in general. In particular, the idea of a deck where you had to preemptively remove value pieces rather than waiting until after the deck has done it's thing seemed to really upset them.
For the next game, I swapped to a Rebbec, Architect of AscensionRebbec, Architect of Ascension and Silas Renn, Seeker AdeptSilas Renn, Seeker Adept artifact deck. Rebbec defending my board state drew a lot of complaints - I'm used to some, but player A mentioned they didn't think I should be allowed to have her in the command zone, which felt a bit extreme. Despite Rebbec and my board in general eating a massive amount of removal, I was able to sneak a kill on the Azula deck by copying Magister SphinxMagister Sphinx, winning me the game.
I feel slightly bad for winning twice against the newer players. Both games were close, and I feel my decks were fairly matched against the Fire Lord AzulaFire Lord Azula and Marrow-GnawerMarrow-Gnawer decks, but I worry it was an unintentionally demoralizing experience. The other problem I have is that I'm unsure what to play against them in future. If they object to me slowing their play with stax or removal, and to me helping my own with efficient protection and engines then I'm not sure what I can do that won't upset them other than just sit there and lose.
Hopefully you can help me see where I'm going wrong and offer some guidance. Am I the Bolas?
Thank you,
Nevinyrral
VERDICT
Thank you for writing and asking me to weigh in on your story. As I mention every week, if folks don't write to me, there's no column, so if you, the reader, want to send me a story, whether it's your own or one from Reddit or a friend's, please send it to amithebolas@gmail.com and I'll get to it here.
When new players join a playgroup, it's been my experience that they have to meet the power level established before they joined. Before they hop in, there's a reason the group worked and played together for years and often it's that folks are on the same page about power level and Bracket. In this case, it feels like three new players plus you being the only one from the original crew really is one of the odd configurations that played out like a mismatch and you looking like a stomper. It's bound to happen.
This submission really highlights the growing pains a playgroup can experience. If these types of decks are acceptable with the older members of the group, this is the power level that seems to be what folks should be aiming for in the group. I mentioned earlier that when someone new joins a playgroup, often, it is up to that player to adapt. If one new player joins the playgroup, they change it by simply engaging. If they aren't playing at the strength of the rest of the pod, the group will morph to either accommodate this or challenge the new player to join the level of the rest of the pod. If the new player is playing stronger than the pod, a conversation can be had with the new player about powering down or whether the group wants to kick it up a notch. And that's all just with one player!
However, with an influx of new members, you'll all need to revisit how you take on deckbuilding. It sounds like these new players can appreciate a battlecruiser experience, but need these to be disruptable. When Prismatic StrandsPrismatic Strands was used to save the table from a killing blow from Azula, did the other two players celebrate? If the Azula player had countered your spell, would they have been equally upset with the Azula player? Who can say?
It feels like an "eat your cake and have it, too" situation, but is it? If one player is pulling ahead and might end the game for all and they don't seem to get admonished, why do your plays get so much attention? The one reason I can think of is that it's because you're playing things that prevent their ability to do anything about what's happening on your side of the table while also controlling the plays they actually do get to make.
When you win because players scoop to your deck rather than taking the win through game actions, this will leave a bad taste in players' mouths. Scooping in Commander is simultaneously a declaration that they've seen the writing on the wall, but that also they're saying "It's not fun anymore." Having no way out of something is a bummer. And you know this, too. You said "these players had previously been very vocal about their dislike of all things poison, control, and disruptive interaction."
You did describe the decks as well-matched in early turns and I think you've built your decks to defend your plan better than your opponents. This might fly with the rest of the crew, but these new players definitely weren't into this.
That said, this part really got to me:
"If they object to me slowing their play with stax or removal, and to me helping my own with efficient protection and engines then I'm not sure what I can do that won't upset them other than just sit there and lose."
I understand your sentiment here. It sounds like someone is trying to restrict your fun and to an extent, there's an element of that happening, I reckon. "If you don't like this, or that, then why do I bother playing?" This is where the deckbuilding revisit should happen. It seems like the whole gang needs to be on the same page about what kind of Magic they want to play. I suggest a discussion in person or in the group chat about this incident and how you feel like what the others are asking of you is to, as you say, "sit there and lose" - which blows, by the way. This feeling is awful.
I think the core of the discussion should be that while everybody's deckbuilding style is their own, there should be potentially some house rules or an understanding of what everyone's expectations and no-gos are. Remind everybody that this discussion only happens because you like hanging out and playing together, this'll make sure we get to do this for a while.
I get that you describe your deck as a value engine build and you're protecting it, but unfortunately, two Praetors at once is a huge blow and is more than just value when you consider they were both on the initial Game Changers list. It's brutal that your lands tap for half and you lose your cards every turn. They said they don't like stax and control, you opted to play these cards despite that. You can draw cards and not play them sometimes, too. I get that that seemed minor to them, but I think that if your value engine led to things that didn't bleed the hope dry from the table, they'd be less likely to decide that they don't want to play against "value engine decks" again.
Time for a chat with everybody!
Ah, yeah, I think Bolas for the two Praetors against the crew that says they didn't want to play against stax. Although, I'll say that I think Rebbec in the command zone is fine and that player was definitely salty about the inability to target your board.
Mike Carrozza
Mike Carrozza is a stand-up comedian from Montreal who’s done a lot of cool things like put out an album called Cherubic and worked with Tig Notaro, Kyle Kinane, and more people to brag about. He’s also been an avid EDH player who loves making silly stuff happen. @mikecarrozza on platforms.
Your opinions are welcome. We love hearing what you think about Magic! We ask that you are always respectful when commenting. Please keep in mind how your comments could be interpreted by others. Personal attacks on our writers or other commenters will not be tolerated. Your comments may be removed if your language could be interpreted as aggressive or disrespectful. You may also be banned from writing further comments.