Tribute MageTribute Mage | Art by Scott Murphy

Combos are an easy and popular means of closing out Commander games. Three opponents with a collective 120 life points and 300 cards can often require more than just your average aggro, midrange, or control list to combat.

The simplest way to unilaterally combat three opponents simultaneously is to assemble a combo that can end the game with you on top, but how can we determine which combo to run? How do the Brackets affect which lines to run?

We'll start by defining what we mean when we say "combo" and use this framework to discuss how combos differ from one another and why that matters. All of this will help determine which, if any, combos are best suited for which situation.

Defining What Combos Are

As Senior Game Designer Melissa DeTora once wrote, "A combo refers to cards that interact with each other in a way that's significantly stronger than the sum of their parts. For example, a single PestermitePestermite by itself isn't very impactful. A single Splinter TwinSplinter Twin by itself doesn't do anything. However, these two cards in combination create an infinite number of creatures. That interaction is significantly stronger than the two cards individually."

This is a good starting point since it's as brief as it is intuitive. You take one card, put it next to another, they build upon one another's presence, and now you've found a combo. Yet there's a clear difference between cards being synergistic and being combo pieces.

Perhaps what separates cards simply building off of each other and combos is the scale at which they build. Krenko, Mob BossKrenko, Mob Boss synergizes well with Moria MarauderMoria Marauder, but combos very easily with General Kreat, the BoltbringerGeneral Kreat, the Boltbringer.

Where synergy may describe a more generalized cohesion between cards, if not a whole deck, combos tend to seek specific conditions that, when met, end the game.

The average typal deck may seek to generate value through amassing card advantage, swinging hordes of bodies at its opponents, or gradually bleeding opponents dry by a thousand paper cuts. Such general concepts form a synergy often exemplified by a commander, hoping to form an endgame through more generalized techniques as previously mentioned.

A combo typal deck will often seek to end games in very specific manners with very specific cards. The deck may contain synergies like the average typal deck would, but it'll focus less on general ways of closing games and divert more attention towards assembling the combo.

Tutors can be a massive signpost when determining whether a deck is simply synergistic or intends to combo. If you ever need to determine whether a deck would like to combo or not, determine first what the two most optimal cards to tutor for would be.

If the deck is more synergistic, chances are that two free tutors would be used in more of a toolbox manner. Many synergy-focused decks, if given two tutors, would determine what they search for depending on their board state: Do they need to build more value? Should they find a way of protecting their board until the next turn? Can they find a finisher and try to end the game?

For a combo deck, odds are the two cards tutored for would be the same the majority of the time, regardless of board state. Even if the combo requires more pieces, the combo will more often than not be what's tutored for if given the opportunity.

But enough about what makes a combo. Despite the general umbrella term that is combo, not every combo is equal. Why are some combos different from others?

Different Flavors of Comboing

Many combos can be operated infinitely and end the game doing so, but that's not a requirement of being a combo. Some combos simply end the game upon completion or generate sufficient value as to effectively end the game.

Others intend to lock opponents out from playing the game.

Others still may not win or lose and instead end the game due to a draw (whether unintentionally or intentionallyintentionally).

Point is, there are plenty of different ways to form a combo. Some combos require a lot of setup or ask for a lot of deference from your opponents interacting with them while others are only touchable when on the stack and thus have few little prerequisites to complete.

While being able to recognize why some combos are more beneficial or stronger than others is handy, determining which combo is worth building into your Commander deck is an additional problem that requires a bit more caution.

Ask Not if You Could, but if You Should

At the end of the day, deciding whether a combo belongs in a Commander deck is up to its pilot. If you feel like it belongs and it creates a better experience for everyone involved, there isn't much more to discuss.

With that in mind, here I'll offer some variables to consider if you're on the fence or are otherwise interested in building/removing combos from your decks.

For lower Brackets, combos are typically limited to either being more than two cards or require assembly to occur after "the early game." Additionally, subcategories like Mass Land Denial (MLD) further restrict which combos are generally permissible.

For example, while more than two cards and is only accessible late-game when played fairly, the following combo can easily fall into MLD and can arguably fall into Chaining Extra Turns, thus excluding it from Brackets 1-2.

I've been a big advocate for adding more removal when deckbuilding; one, because it's often the right deck building choice (eat those vegetables please and thank you) and two, because it reduces the competitiveness of a deck.

The more interactive the deck, the less focused it is on winning the game, and thus creates a more socially aware board state. The same can be said when evaluating combos in lower Brackets.

The more opportunities your opponents have of stopping your combo from ending the game, the more likely they'll be open to the idea of engaging with combos in lower Bracket experiences.

It may be best if your Bracket 3 combo, while just two cards, can be answered with more than just a strategic CounterspellCounterspell.

For higher Bracket experiences that are absent such restrictions, the determining factors are often found off the battlefield. Just because your Y'shtola, Night's BlessedY'shtola, Night's Blessed deck could run an Approach of the Second SunApproach of the Second Sun line and be stronger for it doesn't mean it should.

Even at a higher Bracket experience, your opponents' experiences are still valued (unless this is a cEDH deck, in which case go nuts). Commander being a socially inclined format suggests that accounting for your opponents expectations and desires should be a part of the deckbuilding experience.

Does the table benefit from a one-turn kill (OTK) combo being readily accessible at almost any point in the game? Would your opponents seek to play with this deck again after it's done its thing and its combos have ended the game?

It's easier for an established group to come to the agreement that, say, some OTKs are permissible while others aren't, but for a pod of random players, a thoughtful but brief discussion is what's prescribed.

Rule Zero is the best defense against "feel bads" occurring. Be open with what the deck expects of its opponents and how well equipped its opponents proclaim to be against it. We don't need to specifically target a combo deck when properly power-matched.

The easiest way to prevent someone feeling like they ran away with the game or never had a chance against said combo deck is to stay vigilant against power mismatching and speak up about what's expected in a Commander game.

Once you determine what your table is comfortable facing, then you can start tinkering with how interactable or fast your combo is, if you believe a combo's presence is needed at all.

But what do you think? How do you feel about building with combos? What are some of your favorite combos to run? Do you think there's more to be said about Brackets accounting for combos?

I hope this article was an interesting discussion about combos. 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 into the Bracket system and more Commander Philosophy!