Stop ThatStop That | Art by Anson Maddocks

The Brackets are the Commander Format Panel's (CFP) best attempt so far to cultivating game experiences each player in a pod would like to engage in. That said, there's still plenty of room for improvement.

Game Changers and sub categories like Chaining Extra Turns or Mass Land Denial (MLD) are categories of cards that players are expected to defer to when deck building.

This way, players can increase the odds that the game experience they're building for is the experience they'll engage with on the battlefield.

But just how much should players expect when sitting down with random opponents? While there's an assumption that our opponents are playing with legal Commander decks, should we automatically expect the same when it comes to Brackets and their expectations?

For now, let's focus on just how much exposition is required or expected from players when determining what kind of Commander game a pod wishes to experience.

What Needs To Be Public Information

Typically, there's hasn't been much of a pregame discussion required by players other than the occasional Rule Zero talk when a player wished to play with what would normally be an illegal Commander deck.

Whether it involved an illegal commander or banned cards, many Rule Zero discussions talked about how a deck either broke Commander deck building rules or broke Commander game play rules in the name of a social benefit.

There're innumerable examples of players engaging with Rule Zero in order to secure a flavor win or to improve the overall social experience of the pod, but Brackets are now suggesting that players use Rule Zero in a more tactical sense.

What before may have been just salty cards, Brackets suggest players pinpoint specifically what strategies and playstyles decks will engage with throughout a game, down to individual cards.

This is generally a Bracket 3 problem only as Brackets 1-2 are pretty straightforward with what's allowed or not and Brackets 4-5 don't require players to do anything other than defer to cEDH's meta.

In Bracket 3, you could run infinite combos, but just what determines a Two Card Combo being too accessible too early and thus being excluded by Bracket 3?

Conventional advice tells us to talk with our playgroup, but doesn't this necessitate exposing our game plan down to individual cards in a Bracket that seeks to be somewhat competitive?

Technically speaking, combos (or simply winning the game) aren't to be expected before everyone's played at least six turns, after which games can end in a single turn, from anyone's hand directly.

But does this mean a combo have the potential of being played before turn 6, or are combos in Bracket 3 required to be accessible only as early as turn 6?

I have my answer, and you have yours. Either way, we'd need to talk about it before we play the game, thus compromising the small competitive side of Bracket 3.

This problem is more pronounced to strangers playing rather than established Commander pods, but this problem being localized to larger Magic events doesn't make it any less of a problem.

What Kind of Bracket 3 Deck Is It?

Imagine you've built a Commander deck that you're happy with and are taking to your next convention. You've bought all the cards with all of the special arts you admire, you've done your homework to ensure it's a suitable Bracket 3 experience that can still threaten to win games, and now you're only problem is finding an open seat to claim.

You sit down, exchange pleasantries, start shuffling, when one of your opponents starts asking specific questions about how your deck plans on winning.

You intend to give an unspecific answer that talks about your win con vaguely, but your three Game Changers are your primary win conditions — Bolas's CitadelBolas's Citadel, Thassa's OracleThassa's Oracle, and Underworld BreachUnderworld Breach.

On one hand, you feel compelled to tell everyone what your three Game Changers are as, well, this is a Bracket 3 game. It's casual to a degree, so maybe telling your opponents is best practice as that's what you've been doing in lower Bracket games.

On the other hand, revealing this information is a very poor tactical decision as now your opponents know precisely what your weaknesses are and how to counter your attempts to close the game.

The clearest answer is to choose whichever ending to this adventure you prefer. If you're looking for a more competitive Bracket 3 experience, do just that by clearly communicating that this is the experience you're looking for and won't divulge this information.

If you're fine with disclosing such information, then there's no further problem unless your opponents refuse to do the same and do so for an advantage.

Ultimately, it seems that there may be unofficial sub Brackets depending on what kind of experience you're seeking to play in.

How Many Bracket 3's Are There?

For Brackets 1-2, there isn't much wiggle room. Bracket 1 is explicitly playing a deck that doesn't seek to win in order to achieve some sort of flavor victory or some other social experience.

Bracket 2 is effectively everything that doesn't include the ban list(s), Game Changers, the sub categories (MLD, combos, Chaining Extra Turns, etc.), and only threatening victory after everyone's had eight full turns.

For Bracket 3, there's mainly two camps you could fall into: high or low Bracket 3. While the line is a bit gray, the spirit of whether you fall into the lower or higher category is best summarized by whether or not you're comfortable revealing certain information.

If you're ok revealing explicitly which Game Changers you're running and/or which combos you're justifying as being Bracket 3 friendly, odds are you're looking for a more socially inclined Bracket 3 experience. If not, you're likely looking for a more competitive game.

There isn't a problem on the player's part for choosing whether or not to share this information, rather the Brackets are vague when it comes to cleanly separating the social experiences from the competitive ones.

Bracket 4 has a similar problem. There's a much wider range of Bracket 4 decks then there are Bracket 3 decks. Simply put, Bracket 4 is everything that goes beyond Bracket 3 that doesn't consider the cEDH meta game.

Bracket 4 can be anything from the fastest, most glass-cannon experience that focuses only on winning without touching anyone else's board to the slowest of the slow decks that can stax opponents into lock outs or asymmetric WorldfireWorldfire effects that destroy everything, hoping to not lose rather than outright winning.

However, since Bracket 4's only requirement is for players to aim to win after everyone's played at least four turns, such a variety of experiences isn't nearly as problematic. It's Bracket 4, anything and everything can go (except for cEDH's decks and meta).

In the end, Bracket 3 suffers from being the ugly middle child that's torn between catering both casual and competitive experiences.

Conclusion

To be clear, Bracket 3's problems don't necessarily point towards Brackets being added or removed. Another Bracket that splits Bracket 3 into two new Brackets would only further complicate how the CFP defines Game Changers, the ban list, sub categories, and Bracket expectations.

That could prescribe players how to play as opposed to describing how players already play.

Instead, players have the opportunity to reflect on what kind of experience they'd like to foster and allow them the opportunity to self police such experiences.

Hoping to play stronger games? Odds are that the decks you're running already necessitate a certain playstyle from your opponents and so the players that agree to oppose said deck are of a similar mindset.

Brackets can and should only do so much before players proactively curate the Commander experience they seek.

In many cases, it's best to build a deck and seek out a particular Commander experience before using Brackets to describe such an experience.

But what do you think? How do you feel about Brackets containing sub Brackets? What are your thoughts on adding or removing Brackets? Do you think Bracket 3 is outright a more casual or competitive environment?

I hope this article was an interesting discussion about the Brackets and their nuances. Find me on BlueSky at @ajwicker4.bsky.social, I'd love to hear from you and what your thoughts are.

Tune in next time to continue this deep dive in the Bracket system and more Commander Philosophy!