Atraxa, Praetors' VoiceAtraxa, Praetors' Voice | Art by Victor Adame Minguez

Hello, everyone, my name's Jonathan and today I'll be talking about a topic I've grown attached to without even noticing it: modular deckbuilding.

Little by little, I've started liking this way of creating new decks and now it's always one of the first ideas that come to my mind when I think about how to craft a deck list.

But, what exactly is modular deckbuilding?

The Concept of Modular Deckbuilding

To give you an example of modular deckbuilding, we only need to go back to last month. At the end of July, I wrote an article discussing Trelane, Squire of GothosTrelane, Squire of Gothos. There, I wanted to highlight this card as an interesting Voltron option. To do so, I divided my deck tech into two sections.

First, I described the core of the deck, with cards such as Extraplanar LensExtraplanar Lens, Slip Out the BackSlip Out the Back and Turn AsideTurn Aside. These cards are the cornerstones of the whole list, providing what the deck needs the most: mana and protection. These are fundamental elements for every Voltron strategy; in fact, you always want enough mana to cast and/or equip your buffing spells and you want to protect your main attackers in as many ways as possible. What's important to notice is that this section only counted eighty cards out of the 100 needed for a full Commander deck.

What about the other twenty cards, you say? Well, instead of simply describing which Voltron options I included in the deck list, I decided to present two alternatives: either Auras or Equipment. To be more precise, I built two lists of twenty cards each, one for each card type. In this way, you could choose to run one version or the other of the same deck. Not only that, you could also decide to acquire all the cards needed for both versions and swap back and forth from one to the other depending on what you want to play in every given game.

This is exactly what I mean by "modular deckbuilding": decks with a central core completed by one or more groups of cards that can be swapped in/out between games.

The Pros and Cons of Modular Deckbuilding

Let's consider another commander that can be the object of modular deckbuilding: Kilo, Apogee MindKilo, Apogee Mind. In this case, we would establish a core made up of lands, ramp and interaction as usual, as well as a number of cards that allow us to tap and untap our commander, to take full advantage of its ability.

From here, we could swarm the board with +1/+1 counters with creatures like Steel OverseerSteel Overseer, Walking BallistaWalking Ballista and Hangarback WalkerHangarback Walker. Or we could use charge counters, thanks to their widespread presence on cards such as Lux CannonLux Cannon, Everflowing ChaliceEverflowing Chalice or Titan ForgeTitan Forge. Maybe we even want to play with energy counters, taking advantage of Guide of SoulsGuide of Souls, Satya, Aetherflux GeniusSatya, Aetherflux Genius and Wrath of the SkiesWrath of the Skies.

The main positive aspect of going down this deckbuilding route is variety. This is especially relevant when you particularly like a commander: in this way, you can keep on playing it even while always changing your strategy! Commander is a format that thrives on personal taste and expression and showing off all the various aspects of your favorite general could be the highlight of the night for someone.

This idea isn't free from negative sides. Above all, you'll be messing with your consistency. Having to create a core that works for two different, although similar, builds, you have to forgo specific pieces in favor of more generically good inclusions. For example, in the Kilo, Apogee MindKilo, Apogee Mind scenario, +1/+1 counters aren't necessarily tied to artifacts, and even some builds of energy deck do not favor this permanent type. So, in order to coordinate everything with the core of the deck, you might end up not including a card like DispatchDispatch, which would be a slam dunk in the charge counters build.

Open-Ended and Closed-Ended Commanders

Explaining what exactly characterizes a good commander for modular deckbuilding isn't as easy as it seems.

One could say that it should be open-ended, and by this I mean it shouldn't force the deck builder into an obvious strategy. For example, typal decks are usually not very open-ended. Think about the most popular typal commanders, like The Ur-DragonThe Ur-Dragon, Edgar MarkovEdgar Markov and Krenko, Mob BossKrenko, Mob Boss. Sure, you could run some specific subsets of creatures (like Conspicuous SnoopConspicuous Snoop lines in a Goblin deck), or maybe even different subthemes (like sacrifice or +1/+1 counters in a Vampire deck), but the main core of the strategy is usually well-structured and hardly ever changes. It would be very difficult to find enough flex slots to present two properly functional and actually distinct versions of a typal deck.

Nonetheless, we can find exceptions to this rule in cards like Kaalia of the VastKaalia of the Vast. This will always lead a typal strategy but it expands on this theme in a way that enables modular deckbuilding. You can create a stable core and alternate between Angels, Demons and Dragons as you like, easily going from one version to the other between games. The key here is taking a usually closed-ended style of deck and introducing just enough variables to reduce its specificity.

The Problem of Being "Too Generic"

But we can also find counter-counter examples just as easily. Let's take a look at the recently crowned most popular commander of all time: Y'shtola, Night's BlessedY'shtola, Night's Blessed. It's an undeniably beloved card but it's also as undeniably generic. Its two abilities synergize with each other, but neither of them is specific enough to foster a clear line of deckbuilding. The result is that it becomes a "control" commander which, as we say in Italy, significa tutto e niente (literally, "means anything and nothing"). Don't get me wrong, I really like this card and I thought about building it as a personal deck; still, it's almost impossible to outline the "core" of the deck and, as a consequence, the flex slots. In other words, if everything can be swapped in and out, we're no longer talking about modular deckbuilding, but rather about two completely different lists.

While Y'shtola, Night's BlessedY'shtola, Night's Blessed is a glaring example of this kind of "too generic" commander, it's far from being the only one. Mayael the AnimaMayael the Anima was my first approach to modular deckbuilding. The idea was creating a very deep pool of creatures with power greater than five and select a certain amount at random before each match. As impractical as it sounds (and actually is), it resembles the idea of having a main core and some flex slots around it. Yet, the randomness of the selection kind of invalidates the idea of modular deckbuilding, as you're not really choosing the version of the deck you're playing. Sure, you could create theme-specific or typal-specific packages and rotate them, but then you would also need to make space for synergies and interactions within the theme/creature type, thus eroding the main core more and more.

The Key to Modular Deckbuilding

In the end, I think that the whole modular deckbuilding debate revolves around one word: options. Just like branching paths in a video game, having multiple options fosters curiosity and the thrill of discovery, whereas linear worldbuilding can become boring and uninspiring. But too many options can create a daunting sensation of overabundance, leading to decision paralysis.

Before concluding this article, I wanted to highlight some more commanders that are precisely in the sweet spot between "too generic" and "too specific".

Magda, Brazen OutlawMagda, Brazen Outlaw is a cEDH powerhouse and it might feel like a "solved" commander. By this, I mean that it's been played and optimized to the point that nothing original can come from it. And to this I say: that's a lie. Once you've established the Dwarf core, you can go for at least four different builds. You could create a pure Dwarf deck, using the flex slots for typal synergies and some additional creatures of this type. But you could also care more about the second ability of your commander, going for either a dedicated artifact deck or a go-wide Dwarf deck with huge Dragons as finishers. Lastly, you could also go all-in on the Treasure-generating abilities and including token synergies.

Just like Magda, Brazen OutlawMagda, Brazen Outlaw, Atraxa, Praetors' VoiceAtraxa, Praetors' Voice is a commander that has been talked about a lot. A lot. But, just like Kilo, Apogee MindKilo, Apogee Mind, it can count on Proliferate as an extremely open-ended keyword. For this reason, rather than play one of the already-seen builds, you could be playing all of them! Access to four colors means you have all the tools you need to create a rock-solid core. From there, you can expand on the infinite number of counters that exist in Magic. +1/+1, loyalty, poison, -1/-1: whatever you like can fit in. Comically enough, no game will be the same as the previous one with a commander that many consider boring and repetitive.

Finally, a personal favorite: Eirdu, Carrier of DawnEirdu, Carrier of Dawn. Actually, this card is here to represent a whole group: double-faced creatures, especially those where it's easy to get access to both halves. I personally started to build a modular deck around it, with one configuration centered on the "convoke" part and the other on the "persist" part. This creates an interesting dichotomy, where the first option is easier to play, as it benefits from the default half of Eirdu, Carrier of DawnEirdu, Carrier of Dawn, but it's also easier to disrupt. The second option is trickier to pull off, as you'll need to flip your general first, but then rewards you with combos galore.

That's it for now! What do you think of this deckbuilding idea? Do you think there are other characteristics that help the modular deckbuilding of a commander? Would you try this approach yourself? Let me know in the comments below!