The Difference Between Bracket 4 and cEDH

<p style="text-align: right;"><em><span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Ad Nauseam" href="#" target="_blank">Ad Nauseam</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> | Art by <a href="https://scryfall.com/search?q=a%3A%E2%80%9CJeremy+Jarvis%E2%80%9D&amp;unique=art" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jeremy Jarvis</a></em></p>
<p>It's finally your one time in the week to sit down and enjoy a casual game of Commander with your friends. You're excited to test out your new mono-red <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="J. Jonah Jameson" href="#" target="_blank">J. Jonah Jameson</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> deck you've been brewing ever since he was previewed.</p>
<p>This is it! You've whittled you're two most threatening opponents down to less than 10 life. With the help of your third opponent agreeing to not engage with your game plan, you're just one turn away from effectively ending the game.</p>
<p>Unfortunately for you, your third opponent has just resolved both a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Sting, the Glinting Dagger" href="#" target="_blank">Sting, the Glinting Dagger</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> and an <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Impact Tremors" href="#" target="_blank">Impact Tremors</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> that is now seeing their <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Krenko, Mob Boss" href="#" target="_blank">Krenko, Mob Boss</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> tap and untap <em>just</em> enough for lethal. They've ended the game spontaneously without warning, setting each opponent's life to zero.</p>
<p>Experiences like this are common enough to leave players with a bad taste after a game.</p>
<p>Sure, it wasn't infinite and is <a href="https://edhrec.com/guides/edhrec-guide-to-commander-brackets" target="_blank" rel="noopener">technically legal for any Bracket</a>, so where did things go wrong? What makes this undesirable? We've got a lot of ground to cover.</p>
<h2>What Does "Comboing" Look Like?</h2>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Exquisite Blood"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Sanguine Bond"></div></div>
<p>First things first: Let's pinpoint what's meant by a combo. Traditionally, combos describe multi-card interactions that often end a game on the spot. <a href="https://edhrec.com/top/game-changers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Game Changers</a> like <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Thassa&#039;s Oracle" href="#" target="_blank">Thassa&#039;s Oracle</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> and <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Bolas&#039;s Citadel" href="#" target="_blank">Bolas&#039;s Citadel</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> are the epitome of what players envision combo cards looking like.</p>
<p>Whether the combo requires two cards or an entire deck, the idea is that a player seeks to win a game primarily by resolving some amount of cards that interact with one another in such a way that either makes everyone else lose the game, locks opponents out from playing the game, or makes yourself so impossibly out of reach that your opponents can do nothing that makes you lose the game.</p>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Kodama of the East Tree"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Tireless Provisioner"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Simic Growth Chamber"></div></div>
<p>Normally, the Brackets aim to limit what combos players have access to through rules like "No Two-Card Infinite Combos" or "No Chaining Extra Turns." Rules like these intentionally leave room for discussion, as not every combo wins the same way.</p>
<p>Were you ever unlucky enough to see your opponent throw a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Mycosynth Lattice" href="#" target="_blank">Mycosynth Lattice</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> alongside a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Karn, the Great Creator" href="#" target="_blank">Karn, the Great Creator</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>? Or perhaps you've seen a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Chun-Li, Countless Kicks" href="#" target="_blank">Chun-Li, Countless Kicks</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> phase out of existence with <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Teferi&#039;s Protection" href="#" target="_blank">Teferi&#039;s Protection</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> <em>way</em> too many times.</p>
<p>Point is that there's a lot of different ways someone could theoretically combo. The key takeaway is that 99% of combos being played seek to win regardless of what the other three players are doing. A combo is comfortable winning the game at just about any point, unlike traditional "battlecruiser" Commander experiences where victory is more of a journey than the destination.</p>
<p>Casual Commander games often share a similar timeline — that is, a time of set up (everyone's ramping), a time for build up (some threats are being played and removed), and a time for the climactic end (people have built up enough to start threatening victory).</p>
<p>Combos challenge this "expected" game experience in that they threaten victory irrespective of one's set-up or build-up periods. There's no need to play the game building towards your finishers alongside everyone else. Simply play your combo pieces and ask if anyone can stop you.</p>
<p>In fact, the less you engage with your opponents, the better. The fewer hoops your combo has to jump through, the greater the chance of the combo ending the game.</p>
<h2>Combo as a Playstyle</h2>
<p>Now this is obviously something people have and will continue to exploit, for better or worse. <a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/whats-the-difference-between-commander-brackets-4-and-5" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Brackets 4-5</a> are lawless zones that don't come with any expectations other than "Don't feel bad about what my deck is about to do." The more nuanced discussion about combos in Commander is found in the lower Brackets.</p>
<p>Brackets 1-3 have an expectation that players will in some way telegraph that they're attempting to win the game, often showcased by someone's commander. This telegraphing of intentions doesn't seem to intuitively jive with a combo player's interests, as a combo aims to immediately end the game.</p>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Jodah, the Unifier"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Raggadragga, Goreguts Boss"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Rin and Seri, Inseparable"></div></div>
<p>Even if you were to withhold from playing your combo until turns 8-10, a fair amount of players will still feel robbed of the Commander game they expected to play.</p>
<p>Brackets 1-2 prohibit Two-Card Infinite Combos, but what about non-infinite combos? Is it acceptable for someone to resolve <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Calamity, Galloping Inferno" href="#" target="_blank">Calamity, Galloping Inferno</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> turn five and <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Craterhoof Behemoth" href="#" target="_blank">Craterhoof Behemoth</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> turn six, generating at minimum three creatures with trample and 28 total power?</p>
<p>Sure, you may not win this turn, but you've <em>vastly</em> accelerated towards the endgame with yourself on top with arguably no prelude to doing so.</p>
<p>While the aforementioned Mycosynth + Karn combo would probably be excluded from Brackets 1-3 due to Mass Land Denial, how should other "lock out" combos be ruled? Should interactions like Chun-Li and Teferi's Protection be their own sub-category alongside Chaining Extra Turns?</p>
<p>While it's undeniably impossible to create a perfect Bracket system, especially for something as amorphous as the Commander format, players should have a greater understanding about what to expect in a game.</p>
<p>As much effort as the Commander Format Panel puts into maintaining the Brackets, there's evidently plenty of wiggle room. So what are the hows and whens of playing with combos?</p>
<h2>Brackets and How Players Combo</h2>
<p>As mentioned before, not all combos are infinite, nor are they as simple as playing just two cards. <em>If</em> you're seeking to add ways for your deck to reliably end games while ignoring what walls your opponents are hiding behind in the lower Brackets, there are certainly ways to do so that don't involve misusing the Brackets' guidelines.</p>
<p>Combos generally grow in power the fewer opportunities your opponents have to interact with them, so you can swap out a single card for two or more depending on how "weak" you'd like your combo to be. The more cards, the harder the combo's assembly.</p>
<p>Additionally, the more cards that are required, the more telegraphed your game plan becomes and thus is more in line with what the lower Brackets suggest for an optimal game experience.</p>
<p>Try switching from something as easy as this:</p>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Chain of Smog"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Witherbloom Apprentice"></div></div>
<div id="326-2522" style="width: 100%; position: relative; overflow: visible; display: flex; justify-content: center;"><img decoding="async" id="csbLoad" src="https://commanderspellbook.com/images/gear.svg" alt="csb logo" width="300" /><br />
<script id="326-2522" src="https://commanderspellbook.com/embed.js?v=1&uses=%5B%22Chain%20of%20Smog%22%2C%22Witherbloom%20Apprentice%22%5D&requires=%5B%5D&produces=%5B%22Infinite%20lifegain%22%2C%22Infinite%20lifegain%20triggers%22%2C%22Infinite%20lifeloss%22%2C%22Infinite%20magecraft%20triggers%22%5D&id=326-2522&color=BG&extraRequirementCount=0"></script></div>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" src="." width="0" height="0"></iframe><br />
To something slower and more challenging like this:</p>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Necropotence"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Soul Conduit"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Platinum Angel"></div></div>
<div id="253-3591-4591" style="width: 100%; position: relative; overflow: visible; display: flex; justify-content: center;"><img decoding="async" id="csbLoad" src="https://commanderspellbook.com/images/gear.svg" alt="csb logo" width="300" /><br />
<script id="253-3591-4591" src="https://commanderspellbook.com/embed.js?v=1&uses=%5B%22Platinum%20Angel%22%2C%22Soul%20Conduit%22%2C%22Necropotence%22%5D&requires=%5B%5D&produces=%5B%22Target%20player%20loses%20the%20game%20on%20each%20of%20your%20turns%22%5D&id=253-3591-4591&color=B&extraRequirementCount=0"></script></div>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" src="." width="0" height="0"></iframe><br />
If you're satisfied with how your combo(s) play and still want to decrease the deck's power, try running more removal spells. The more interaction a Commander pod plays, the less likely someone will feel that the game has ended out of nowhere.</p>
<p>Similarly, if combos get stronger the more your game plan resembles solitaire, then we should aim to increase how interactive our deck is (and look less like solitaire), both by allowing spots for our opponents to engage with us and by adding interaction of our own.</p>
<p>That's right! Playing more removal isn't just generically good Commander advice. While it's often used in response to players complaining that they had no way of dealing with their opponent's board, it's provably beneficial for improving the social aspect of a Commander game. A little unintuitive, but let me explain.</p>
<p>Simply put, the strongest deck theoretically would want a starting hand that wins them the game as soon as possible. Therefore, the more cards that simply <em>can</em> win the game are more desirable than anything else, specifically interaction.</p>
<p>Whenever someone tries to end the game in Commander, they're at a significant disadvantage compared to, say, a Standard player, as they have two additional opponents that are also seeking to stop them from winning. The more opponents you have, the less likely your chance of winning.</p>
<p>Interestingly, just as more opponents naturally lower your odds of victory, your odds are further decreased whenever you try to interact with an opponent.</p>
<p>If your opponent tries to win the game and you stop them, you may have done the right thing, but your other opponents have received the same benefit as you have, just without spending any resources. You've sacrificed resources that benefit your two other opponents more than it benefits yourself.</p>
<p>Therefore, the strongest Commander deck would seek to minimize our plays benefiting our opponents while maximizing the chance a single card shifts the game in our favor.</p>
<p>This can be accomplished by swapping every <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Deflecting Swat" href="#" target="_blank">Deflecting Swat</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> and <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Deadly Rollick" href="#" target="_blank">Deadly Rollick</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> for cards that just <em>win</em>, like another combo using <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Powerstone Shard" href="#" target="_blank">Powerstone Shard</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> and <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Cogwork Assembler" href="#" target="_blank">Cogwork Assembler</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>.</p>
<p>For more casual experiences, this means we should try building <i>fewer </i>ways that outright win and instead focus on engaging more with our opponents, thus promoting an interactive and social Commander experience. <em>This</em> is why you should be running more removal.</p>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Chaos Warp"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Rakdos Charm"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Toxic Deluge"></div></div>
<h2>Trying Something New</h2>
<p>Combos ultimately can't be given a blanket categorization about where they belong. Sometimes casual games <em>ought</em> to end spontaneously without a climactic buildup where everyone is throwing their biggest punches.</p>
<p>While I wouldn't suggest building a deck solely of interaction pieces and very few actual ways to win the game, I'm totally on board for something new to be played with. Try building something so wildly different than what you're used to playing.</p>
<p>Let's go beyond just trying a different colored commander or switching Brackets. Try winning in a single turn if that's relatively unexplored grounds for you, or vice versa.</p>
<p>Or what if you played some super powerful combo, but it's only active when all seven pieces are right where you need them? Maybe try removing every combo in your deck to add flashier and more bombastic ways to end the game. See what it's like!</p>
<p>Start brewing decks and see just how many game actions you can take all at once (please make it worth your opponents' time), or find which single action you could take in a turn for the most impactful result. Just start piloting your deck in weird ways and see where it takes you. This way, you can come to better understand your biases and where you stand on open-ended problems like combos in casual Commander.</p>
<p>But what do <em>you</em> think? How do you feel about combos? What are your thoughts on including combos in lower Brackets? Do you think regularly playing with/against combos is a fair expectation for any Bracket?</p>
<p>I hope that this article is helpful in exploring what playing with combos entails, but 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 <em>Commander Philosophy</em>!</p>
<h3>Read More:</h3>
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="ZZnivkle6K"><p><a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/commander-philosophy-when-does-upgrading-go-too-far/">Commander Philosophy - When Does Upgrading Go Too Far?</a></p></blockquote>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden;" title="&#8220;Commander Philosophy - When Does Upgrading Go Too Far?&#8221; &#8212; EDHREC" src="https://edhrec.com/articles/commander-philosophy-when-does-upgrading-go-too-far/embed/#?secret=a9VaphoMYo#?secret=ZZnivkle6K" data-secret="ZZnivkle6K" width="500" height="282" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></p>
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="tHuxR64tWR"><p><a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/when-do-lands-become-more-than-a-mana-base/">When Do Lands Become More Than a Mana Base?</a></p></blockquote>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden;" title="&#8220;When Do Lands Become More Than a Mana Base?&#8221; &#8212; EDHREC" src="https://edhrec.com/articles/when-do-lands-become-more-than-a-mana-base/embed/#?secret=5xmmDqHTlW#?secret=tHuxR64tWR" data-secret="tHuxR64tWR" width="500" height="282" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></p>
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="PANm5W6FWe"><p><a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/commander-philosophy-sol-ring-isnt-good-for-commander/">Commander Philosophy - Sol Ring Isn't Good For Commander</a></p></blockquote>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden;" title="&#8220;Commander Philosophy - Sol Ring Isn&#039;t Good For Commander&#8221; &#8212; EDHREC" src="https://edhrec.com/articles/commander-philosophy-sol-ring-isnt-good-for-commander/embed/#?secret=LYfd6mCnsg#?secret=PANm5W6FWe" data-secret="PANm5W6FWe" width="500" height="282" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></p>


Commander Philosophy - To Combo or Not to Combo

<p style="text-align: right;"><em><span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Trash for Treasure" href="#" target="_blank">Trash for Treasure</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> | Art by <a href="https://www.larsgrantwest.com/">Lars Grant-West</a></em></p>
<p>Commander decks may be Eternal, but the majority of players are demonstrably eager to add a new card or two to their favorite decks with every new set that's released. It's only natural for players to want to play newer and stronger cards.</p>
<p>I can't remember the last time I've heard anyone recommend saving room for a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Solemn Simulacrum" href="#" target="_blank">Solemn Simulacrum</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, an artifact that was almost reprinted as much as <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Sol Ring" href="#" target="_blank">Sol Ring</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> in Commander precons. It's not even as popular as <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Commander&#039;s Sphere" href="#" target="_blank">Commander&#039;s Sphere</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, which has repeatedly been discussed as a shell of what mana rocks are expected to do today.</p>
<p>Clearly cards are stronger than before and will only continue to get stronger. Players are seemingly expected to upgrade their older cards for newer ones, lest they be unduly disadvantaged.</p>
<p>But how does this work with Brackets? Sure, players are to upgrade their decks periodically, but isn't there a point when someone upgrades their deck "too much"?</p>
<p>I believe there is a distinction to be made between players seeking to <em>upgrade</em> their decks to stay as competitive as their intended game experience demands and players seeking to <em>optimize</em> their decks to increase their competitive edge.</p>
<p>Since these are seemingly very similar terms, let's discuss each on their own and learn where the line is drawn between <em>upgrading</em> and <em>optimizing</em> any given deck.</p>
<h2>What Upgrading Looks Like</h2>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Doom Blade"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Infernal Grasp"></div></div>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Tormenting Voice"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Romantic Rendezvous"></div></div>
<p>Upgrading is something everyone is familiar with. This is where players finally take out their <em>Theros</em> <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Temple of Malady" href="#" target="_blank">temple lands</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> and swap in their new <em>Murders at Karlov</em> Manor <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Commercial District" href="#" target="_blank">surveil lands</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, or their outdated <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Divination" href="#" target="_blank">Divination</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> for a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Quick Study" href="#" target="_blank">Quick Study</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>.</p>
<p>Players taking a moment to specifically improve a card slot or two is what constitutes upgrading. There's less of a focus on thinking about how a new card will dramatically improve a deck and instead improves upon what a deck already accomplishes.</p>
<p>Very rarely would a player simply upgrading their deck find themselves crossing the Bracket barrier. They could upgrade their lands-matter deck to include as many <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Evolving Wilds" href="#" target="_blank">Evolving Wilds</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> effects as they please and never worry about how this affects their Bracket placement.</p>
<p>Upgrading also constitutes swapping out a larger portion of the deck in order to better focus the deck's gameplan. This is especially noticeable with players upgrading Commander precons by removing the secondary Commander and cards relating to its secondary strategy in order to add cards more cohesive with the deck's primary Commander, or vice versa.</p>
<p>There's not a lot upgrading doesn't touch. Whenever a player is switching out a card for something they believe is better, the player has categorically upgraded their deck. Players can upgrade as little or as much, as rarely or as frequently as they see fit.</p>
<p>A player that feels like their deck as been upgraded "too much", however, most likely has gone further than just upgrading. Upgrading "too much" often takes the form of a player going further than just improving a handful of cards. This is where I believe optimizing is found.</p>
<h2>What Optimizing Looks Like</h2>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Archdruid&#039;s Charm"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Summoner&#039;s Pact"></div></div>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Counterspell"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Pact of Negation"></div></div>
<p>For this discussion, optimizing can be seen as a form of upgrading that seeks to dramatically improve a deck's power, consistency, influence, etc. Where upgrading is a broader term, optimizing highlights changes to a deck that take it to a new level of gameplay, perhaps requiring a noticeable shift in what the deck demands from a player.</p>
<p>Optimizing a deck can be demonstrated best by a player upgrading their deck so extensively that their deck seeks to play in higher Brackets. It's here that players can move from swapping individual cards for slightly better ones to swapping their deck's "vegetables" for "super foods".</p>
<p>"Vegetables" in Commander refers to the stuff in a deck that help it function at a base level. Specifically, ramp, draw, protection, and interaction fall into this category. Without your vegetables, all your left with are your big splashy desserts (<span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Craterhoof Behemoth" href="#" target="_blank">Craterhoof Behemoth</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Ancient Copper Dragon" href="#" target="_blank">Ancient Copper Dragon</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Rise of the Dark Realms" href="#" target="_blank">Rise of the Dark Realms</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>) with no reliable way of doing your deck's thing.</p>
<p>Going along with this metaphor, I'll argue that swapping out your <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Harmonize" href="#" target="_blank">Harmonize</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> for stronger cards like <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Worldly Tutor" href="#" target="_blank">Worldly Tutor</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> is swapping these veggies for super foods. Really, you're greatly improving your deck's ability to not only do its thing but to close out games.</p>
<p>Optimizing can be seen as greatly upgrading your deck with the intent of making the deck noticeably stronger. Adding Game Changers is an easy example, but optimizing doesn't have to be limited to just this.</p>
<p>Perhaps your initial <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Svella, Ice Shaper" href="#" target="_blank">Svella, Ice Shaper</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> decklist includes a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Sword of the Paruns" href="#" target="_blank">Sword of the Paruns</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> that was originally intended to capitalize her <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Icy Manalith" href="#" target="_blank">Icy Manalith</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> generation, but now you'd like to take things a step further and add more ways to exploit your sword's untapping abilities with mana dorks like <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Fanatic of Rhonas" href="#" target="_blank">Fanatic of Rhonas</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>.</p>
<p>What if your Jund (<span class="mana-container-container"><span class="mana-container"><i class="ms ms-cost ms-b" style="margin-left: inherit !important;"></i></span><span class="mana-container"><i class="ms ms-cost ms-r" style="margin-left: inherit !important;"></i></span><span class="mana-container"><i class="ms ms-cost ms-g" style="margin-left: inherit !important;"></i></span></span>) lands-matter deck has been really good at moving your lands from your graveyard to the battlefield, but you were missing a good way of moving large quantities of lands from your battlefield to your graveyard? <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Zuran Orb" href="#" target="_blank">Zuran Orb</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> is a very classic means of tossing lands back and forth and is very easy to exploit into Bracket 3 or higher shenanigans.</p>
<p>Optimizing is not found in any single card being upgraded; rather, a player optimizes their deck when they alter their deck in such a way that their new deck outclasses their old deck to some extent. If your old deck cannot be found in the wild playing against its improved version, odds are it's been optimized.</p>
<h2>Why Is This Worth Discussing?</h2>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Krenko, Mob Boss"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Kaalia of the Vast"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Kenrith, the Returned King"></div></div>
<p>The difference between upgrading and optimizing will most likely never be so important that you find yourself discussing about it with your opponents. I'm hoping that this concept acts as a helpful guide for how you seek to improve your Commander decks.</p>
<p>Whenever I'm looking to make a deck stronger or a friend asks for advice, I always ensure that the deck's intentions are made clear before new cards are added. This way, I don't have to give the generic advice of "Oh, you want a stronger deck? Just run stronger cards!"</p>
<p>I believe doing otherwise would devolve a lot of deckbuilding advice into simply looking at the Game Changer list and picking which ones suit the deck best.</p>
<p>Use this distinction between upgrading and optimizing as a way of self-checking what your deck aims to do. We would all like our decks to win to some extent, but how much does winning with a given deck mean to us? The less we seek for our deck to win, we should find ourselves focusing more on generic upgrades rather than finely tuned optimizations.</p>
<p>In fact, if you wish to de-power a deck the same advice can apply. Start by removing the strongest optimizations to your deck and swap them for generically strong upgrades instead. Tutors can be replaced by one-off draw spells or your strong pieces of interaction can be switched for weaker-but-equally-playable instances of interaction.</p>
<p>Think about taking out a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Deflecting Swat" href="#" target="_blank">Deflecting Swat</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> for a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Bolt Bend" href="#" target="_blank">Bolt Bend</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, or switching <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Teferi&#039;s Protection" href="#" target="_blank">Teferi&#039;s Protection</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> for <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Mandate of Peace" href="#" target="_blank">Mandate of Peace</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>. However, just as optimizing goes further than just a single card being added, properly depowering a given deck will most likely include removing more than just a single Deflecting Swat or Teferi's Protection.</p>
<p>You could easily remove every Game Changer, Two-Card Infinite Combo, Mass Land Denial, Extra-Turn chain, and Tutor from a deck and still be left with something worthy of Bracket 3, if not 4. As always, intent plays a large part and should serve as a guide when deciding what to add or remove from a deck.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Surprise, upgrading a deck is relative to a player, their expertise, and their intent. Determining if a deck has been built too strong during a game relies on whether the deck's pilot is aware of what went wrong or is playing in bad faith. Nevertheless, I have found this self-report handy when determining what my deck's intent and thus power is.</p>
<p>As was said before, I cannot imagine someone looking across the table and saying "I won't play against you, you've upgraded too much." This distinction is really just meant to align your intent. If someone believes there has been a mismatch of sorts and their deck is not appropriate for the game, the issue isn't what new cards you've added from the latest set.</p>
<p>That's what Rule 0 intends to do! Talk about what your deck wants to do and what it expects to go up against. You don't have to explain how to beat your deck, just what you hope to see your deck do. This will prevent the vast majority of problems that come from people feeling like their deck is too strong/weak in a given game.</p>
<p>But what do you think? How do you feel about the difference between upgrading and optimizing? What are your thoughts on making a deck stronger? Do you think such a distinction is worthwhile?</p>
<p>I hope that this article is helpful in determining how to better improve a deck, but 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 <em>Commander Philosophy</em>!</p>


Commander Philosophy - When Does Upgrading Go Too Far?

<div class="d-flex flex-column gap-2">
<p style="text-align: right;"><em><span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Weathered Wayfarer|2x2|578" href="#" target="_blank">Weathered Wayfarer</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> | Art by <a href="https://dermotpower.com/wizards-of-the-coast" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dermont Power</a></em></p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Lands. The single most prominent card type found in every <em>Magic</em> deck that has ever existed. Despite newer cards pushing the power level higher and higher every set, lands seem to be the one spot everyone knows to not push too much.</p>
</div>
<div class="ArticlePage_content__j0Z44 wp-content" data-content-ads-inserted="true" data-slot-rendered-content="invalid">
<p>Odds are our mana bases haven't changed too much since... well, forever ago. The last time I remember actively searching for new lands for Commander was during Ikoria's release and I was hunting each Triome, despite not having a deck for any of them to call home.</p>
<p>Most recently, players would be cracking packs for the new <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Commercial District" href="#" target="_blank">surveil lands</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, but these are just a strict upgrade over Theros's <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Temple of Malady" href="#" target="_blank">Temples</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, as opposed to Ikoria's five Triomes being completely new.</p>
<p>It seems nowadays that any deck can secure its colors reliably without mana rocks to compensate. There are enough <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Indatha Triome" href="#" target="_blank">Triomes</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Evolving Wilds" href="#" target="_blank">Evolving Wilds</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Fabled Passage" href="#" target="_blank">Fabled Passage</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>s, <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Prismatic Vista" href="#" target="_blank">Prismatic Vista</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>s, and other cheap <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Riveteers Overlook" href="#" target="_blank">fetch lands</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> for any and every deck to have reliable access to all five colors at any given moment.</p>
<p>So what does this mean? Weren't precons specifically designed with poor mana bases in mind? Should players be constrained by mana fixing in order to create a more social environment? Are the Brackets asking players to specifically cut lands to "be legal" for a given Bracket?</p>
<h2>Mana Bases Are Bracketless</h2>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Badlands"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Bayou"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Plateau"></div></div>
<p>Your mana base is everything that can generate you mana reliably; <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Arcane Signet" href="#" target="_blank">rocks</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Llanowar Elves" href="#" target="_blank">dorks</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Seething Song" href="#" target="_blank">rituals</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>, and lands are all what form this base to build your game around. For this discussion, we'll be highlighting the lands portion of the mana base, but the points found here can be generalized for the other portions as well.</p>
<p>Gavin Verhey of <em>Wizards of the Coast</em> and the Commander Format Panel has detailed this a few different times, but ultimately the CFP's stance is this: A Bracket 5 deck's lands are perfectly OK for a Bracket 1 game.</p>
<p>Essentially, the lands that form the mana bases most commonly found in Bracket 5 aren't considered to belong to Bracket 5. The Brackets aren't aiming to place an arbitrary restriction on someone's lands as to artificially create a weaker deck.</p>
<p>There is no fundamental reason why a Bracket 2 deck couldn't run all five dual lands if able. The lands themselves are just a means for a player to play the game. <em>How</em> they use the mana their <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Volcanic Island" href="#" target="_blank">Volcanic Island</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> generates is what regulates which Bracket they should play in.</p>
<p>Yes, Bracket 2 decks have been compared to being as powerful as Commander precons. Yes, WoTC's precons historically have had fairly lackluster lands. It makes sense that Bracket 2 decks being portrayed as precons gives players the impression "if it's not in a precon, I shouldn't play it."</p>
<p>But this is a very vague description of what makes something Bracket 2-friendly. Not only is it hard for players to compare their decks to any one precon, but not every precon is equal to one another. I couldn't count how many recent precons <a href="https://edhrec.com/precon#warhammer40,000commander" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the <em>Warhammer</em> decks</a> would breeze over.</p>
<p>Additionally, Commander precons' mana bases take into consideration the secondary market and whether or not WoTC is willing to reprint certain cards for financial purposes. Precons' poor mana bases have more to do with WoTC's business model and less to do with what a precon can handle.</p>
<p>It's more than okay for your Bracket 2 deck to run whatever lands you feel are necessary to secure your mana base. Issues begin to arise when your lands start doing other things - things more powerful than just producing mana (and free mana is pretty hard to beat).</p>
<h2>That's No Mountain...</h2>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Cabal Coffers"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Urza&#039;s Saga"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle"></div></div>
<p>Aside from the <a href="https://edhrec.com/top/game-changers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Game Changing</a> lands, there are plenty of ways your lands could be viewed as too much for Bracket 2. While running a <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Boseiju, Who Endures" href="#" target="_blank">Boseiju, Who Endures</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> isn't hurting anyone, and a stray <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Inventors&#039; Fair" href="#" target="_blank">Inventors&#039; Fair</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> helps with consistency, repeating these effects excessively or otherwise further exploiting similarly powerful lands can be what breaks the Bracket barrier.</p>
<p>Players engaging in a Bracket 2 game come to the table assuming that their opponents are looking for a game focused more on the social aspects of Commander that often finish with flashy and dramatic ways. As long as your mana base reflects this, there's no harm in running only the most efficient lands possible.</p>
<p>The big distinction here is what do you <em>intend</em> to do. If you intend to build a Bracket 2 deck, chances are your deck is already 90% of the way to becoming a Bracket 2 deck.</p>
<p>Do you intend to run <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Cabal Coffers" href="#" target="_blank">Cabal Coffers</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> alongside <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth" href="#" target="_blank">Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> specifically to resolve some game-winning X spell early? Probably not Bracket 2 safe. Do you intend to run Cabal Coffers alongside Urborg because you're playing a mono-black Zombie kindred deck and would like your lands to be more than just 37 swamps? Probably ok.</p>
<p>The hard part is realizing when you've transitioned from, say, upgrading basic lands to shocklands and instead begin actively optimizing which nonbasic lands can outright lead to a game ending, such as with the Coffers + Urborg example.</p>
<p>Is your <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Urza&#039;s Saga" href="#" target="_blank">Urza&#039;s Saga</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> going to tutor for something valuable or something that threatens victory? Does your <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle" href="#" target="_blank">Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> seek to immediately threaten lethal, if not victory, or does it simply fit into you mono-red Goblins deck?</p>
<p>The lands themselves are often not the problem. As long as any given land doesn't border Game Changer status, there's no unilateral reason for it to be excluded from a particular Bracket for this reason alone.</p>
<h2>The Lands Aren't the Problem — Your Deck Is</h2>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Simic Growth Chamber"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Kodama of the East Tree"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Meloku the Clouded Mirror"></div></div>
<p>Any given Bracket 2 Commander deck shouldn't be concerned with trying to find the amorphous Bracket barrier. If this is what your deck is doing, you've already lost the point.</p>
<p>The Brackets are to be a set of tools, guidelines that direct deckbuilding and game play in a desired direction. These tools can be used for better or worse, and actively stress-testing these tools at the expense of your opponents is for the worse.</p>
<p>For example, let's say someone seeks to build their first ever Commander deck for Bracket 2. They don't have an established play group, which is precisely what the Bracket system aims to help with.</p>
<p>They've reviewed all of the relevant Bracket descriptions and Game Changers and are left with what lands to play.</p>
<p>In theory, they would never encounter a problem with their lands being considered outside the scope of Bracket 2 since, as a new Commander player, they aren't familiar with fully optimizing their lands to act as more than just lands.</p>
<p>They've built the deck with the expressed intent of learning <em>Magic</em> through a different format and are ready to have Commander impress upon them a whole slew of perspectives.</p>
<p>Once they've played for long enough and have learned the faults with their first deck, they may seek to upgrade the deck to better challenge their opponents. At this point, it's possible this player has an established play group, at which point the Bracket system has completed it's function and is no longer required.</p>
<p>But let's say this isn't the case and this player is upgrading their lands to play against strangers. It's at this point the player begins to ask questions like "What's the difference between Bracket 2 and Bracket 3? How many upgrades are considered 'too many?'"</p>
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Deserted Temple"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Scorched Ruins"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Rings of Brighthearth"></div></div>
<p>It's here, right here, that their deck has most likely crossed the Bracket barrier. They've started searching for a line to act as a limit they wish to approach but never cross.</p>
<p>A player shifting Brackets can be a definitive moment of development in their <em>Magic</em> experience, but it needs to be recognized as a shift. It'd be detrimental to everyone involved if this player were to start actively optimizing with Cabal or Boseiju or Urza's Saga with victory in mind and try to convince themselves that their deck isn't "that deck."</p>
<p>The lands you run can look as optimized or as janky as you please. Just make sure you're running them for the right reasons.</p>
<h2>Final Thoughts</h2>
<p>To be honest, I don't remember the last time I looked at someone's lands and thought "Man, I should've played another deck." That's what the Commander is for!</p>
<p>It'd be foolish of me to play against strangers, let alone my established play group, and tell them that their deck is too strong or weak because our lands look different.</p>
<p>While most of my decks don't run the most optimized lands for their mana bases, I think it has less to do with me actively trying to power down a deck and is instead due to outside factors such as prices and availability.</p>
<p>Would my <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Szarel, Genesis Shepherd" href="#" target="_blank">Szarel, Genesis Shepherd</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span> Bracket 2 deck love the <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Commercial District" href="#" target="_blank">surveil lands</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>? Absolutely. Can I be bothered to drop $30-$40 just to fetch <em>slightly</em> better lands than my <span class="edhrecp__link"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Sheltered Thicket" href="#" target="_blank">cycling lands</a><span class="edhrecp__link-image"></span></span>? Nope.</p>
<p>In fact, running fewer nonbasics has helped cut down time spent deciding which land is the best land to fetch. The more basics I've started run... the more basic my turns have become...? It forms a pun, therefore it's good!</p>
<p><span style="font-size: 16px;">But what do you think? How do you feel about lands being "Bracketed"? What are your thoughts on precons going up against powerful lands? Do you think precons should start including stronger lands?</span></p>
<p>I hope that this article is helpful in discussing why lands ought to be generally unrestricted, but 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 <em>Commander Philosophy</em>!</p>
<h3>Read More:</h3>
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="G2emUKUqAr"><p><a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/commander-philosophy-sol-ring-isnt-good-for-commander/">Commander Philosophy - Sol Ring Isn't Good For Commander</a></p></blockquote>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden;" title="&#8220;Commander Philosophy - Sol Ring Isn&#039;t Good For Commander&#8221; &#8212; EDHREC" src="https://edhrec.com/articles/commander-philosophy-sol-ring-isnt-good-for-commander/embed/#?secret=8B7JQYooa5#?secret=G2emUKUqAr" data-secret="G2emUKUqAr" width="500" height="282" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></p>
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="8iEymH1iIR"><p><a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/what-planetary-annihilation-means-for-commander-precons/">What Planetary Annihilation Means For Commander Precons</a></p></blockquote>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden;" title="&#8220;What Planetary Annihilation Means For Commander Precons&#8221; &#8212; EDHREC" src="https://edhrec.com/articles/what-planetary-annihilation-means-for-commander-precons/embed/#?secret=Od13oXvIKq#?secret=8iEymH1iIR" data-secret="8iEymH1iIR" width="500" height="282" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></p>
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="XjVl3ALq88"><p><a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/lots-of-new-landfall-toys-where-do-we-go-from-here/">Lots Of New Landfall Toys — Where Do We Go From Here?</a></p></blockquote>
<p><iframe loading="lazy" class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden;" title="&#8220;Lots Of New Landfall Toys — Where Do We Go From Here?&#8221; &#8212; EDHREC" src="https://edhrec.com/articles/lots-of-new-landfall-toys-where-do-we-go-from-here/embed/#?secret=bXxG9Ei3aN#?secret=XjVl3ALq88" data-secret="XjVl3ALq88" width="500" height="282" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></p>
</div>


playing with power

The Difference Between Bracket 4 and cEDH

Commander Philosophy - To Combo or Not to Combo

Commander Philosophy - When Does Upgrading Go Too Far?

When Do Lands Become More Than a Mana Base?