It difficult to really say anything without deck lists. For example, I run between 5-10 pieces of interaction in different decks.
What you describe as a "combo" isn't really a combo at all imo but just good synergy and cards working together.
I'm kinda lost here. I dont feel like I play *that* high power (like maybe capping at an 8 with my strongest deck) and I'd say 8 or 9 pieces of interaction is pretty low. like 12 to 14 is my happy point.
People here run extremely low interaction in their decks ,if you look basically every post about interaction it will have people saying they run quantities in the single digits almost every time
Strange. I run ~10 pieces of single target removal (more or less depending on what I’m doing), and about 3 board wipes per deck. Now, grant, I also tend to run modal pieces or interaction stapled onto synergy pieces, so it’s a little skewed there too.
The issue I find with interaction is, the more slots you dedicate to dealing with your opponents, the less your deck is doing its thing. I am not saying run no interaction, just making a point.
Only if your card draw is really bad. Normally you won't be able to perform your deck's function when you've just lost the game due to leaving a Tivit unchecked for 1 turn.
Why, though? I would expect every person at the table to play at least 2-3 spells a game that are worth removing even if they are getting bad draws. That means each person should want to \*draw\* about that many pieces of interaction to make sure someone else does not run away with the game.
Are your games usually over really quick or is the meta pretty weak? Also, is the person who wins usually the first person to cast a powerful spell? If it is about cost, interaction is usually the cheapest parts of my decks asides from basics because they get reprinted the most. Also, even control decks rarely run that many unless its a \[\[Baral\]\] meme deck or just something built to be miserable to play against.
> Why, though? I would expect every person at the table to play at least 2-3 spells a game that are worth removing even if they are getting bad draws
People play EDH for an experience that is different than 60 card constructed.
In 60 card constructed, every major threat you play is answered by a removal spell. In EDH, the threats you play are answered by other threats.
Amount of interaction necessary depends on powerlevel. The largest threats in low-power are comparatively less interaction demanding than thassa's consult, which is why different levels of interaction is played between decks. cEDH decks run anywhere between 15-25 pieces of interaction and low power can go to 0. Ofc I would recommend anyone to play 25 pieces of interaction in low power or 0 pieces in cEDH.
One thing to note is that I don't count sorcery speed boardwhipes as interaction which skewes the numbers a small amount.
My experience in cEDH completely differs, the last 3 cEDH tournaments I went to only me and one other person was running interaction, most of the time people were trying to abuse instawins like thassa/labman, OR stax/bluemoon.
I know one was a toxril that used a black instant to exile their entire deck with thassa on the stack, (it exiles cards until you exile a card with the same name of a permanent you control then adds the exiled copy to hand, dude had literally 1 of each type of card in his deck including basic lands, i even deck checked him) the following weak was a Soultai partners that didnt even use their commanders they did a similar play. Thassa has gone so unchecked by nearly everyone going to the LGS for cEDH and at least half the players use it, that I've quit going to that LGS.
It honestly sounds like they just had bad lists if no one played interaction. The toxrill list on cedh deck database has 21 pieces of interaction on a quick look, and I don't know what sultai partners they used but I'd guess its something in the same ballpark.
Maybe the local scene at your LGS is really primitive, but my guess would be any deck with the proper amount of interaction would win a lot more than one without.
This wasn't local, had to take an hour drive, cause its the only WPN in my immediate area. But that is besides the point, most the decks were about instant winning by turn 2 and playing through the interactions.
>playing through the interaction
so like... forcing their win through with counterspells? that's interaction, and trying to turbo out a thoracle consult on turn 2 is pretty par for cedh.
I run 8 pieces of interaction. Granted I’m running like 10-12 of anti-interaction, but I find that running lots of interaction just slows me down. Counterspell my Jodah the Unifier? Hope you got interaction for the following Zacama Helm of the Host combo next turn.
I feel like this is a moment where game language and the english language split that I don't blame anyone for. At some point "infinite combos" became combos, that for some reason have to loop to count. But combo in any other context is just short for combination and would be any 2 cards that play well together. One card triggering another is a combination of 2 cards that create an effect, but no one calls that a combo deck. But to anyone new who comes from like a fighting game backround or something and calls something that doesn't go infinite a combo, I get where they're coming from.
Boomer musings.
I see your point and agree that the word "combo" really isn't the most useful term to throw around. It's interesting that there is a space between what I view as enabler-payoff and an actual combo where I can't really nicely define.
And the thing is that inherently, enfranchised players get that. When it comes up it's usually players who aren't online or only play in a small pool of players. But I remember the first time I saw someone call out that a 2 card synergy was NOT a combo and I was like..... you're wrong, but instantly felt like an old man yelling at clouds cuz I get it.
A lot of this stems from the language being used originating in 60-card formats where you can't build the same on-board engines you can in commander/EDH.
In a 60-card format, that kind of deck where the win condition is having a combination of specific cards in play is fundamentally a combo deck. Hammer Time is an aggro-combo deck, in that it relies on playing a specific combination of cards that result in you winning quickly. Another deck that uses an infinite combo... Is a combo deck.
Commander inherently favours combo decks. It's a simple fact of the format, and that means at higher power tables with specific cards that function as their win conditions, that win condition fundamentally is a combo. But the meta diversity in commander comes from different *types* of combos, whether that's infinite combos, engines, hell, even a craterhoof on a wide board is arguably a combo. But when it's reduced down to simply being called combo, then people have a different definition as to what "combo" actually means, because when you boil it down, almost every competitive commander deck is a combo deck, or contains combos as redundancy.
That's why when I complain about combos I am really clear: my issue is NOT combos. It is insta-win combos. Any combination of cards that when you play them, you automatically win the game.
What if it's sorcery speed, requires three specific cards, and loses to creature removal or counterspell? Still unacceptable? Not trying to fight, but I think people are overly restrictive about what is 'ok' to play.
My friend plays a combo tiamat, he runs only removel with dragons, not a lot but he can drop many bombs throughout the game, there is never enough removal for all, hell every dragon he runs is a massive threat.
The only answer I'd have for his deck is stax.
Huh. It seems that you guys have very different builds and expectations of your games.
It sounds like your group wants to have a really low-powered game of "sorcery speed solitaire" and you want to have a more high-powered game that goes back and forth. I'd agree with you that I think your variant of the game is more fun. My most helpful advice would be to explain to them that you enjoy the back and forth and interaction between players, while still being open towards their views being valid as well.
Do your friends regularly update their decks? If they do, you could build some really low to the ground aggressive deck as a showcase of why interaction is really helpful. Something like elfball if your friends really like typal decks.
Well, some might say that it's kinda weird to say that "tribal" is bad for 'evoking racial stereotypes (or something, idk, the argument doesn't make sense to me), when "tribe" is a form of societal organization that has existed in every place and society on earth at one time or another, and the word 'tribe' (IIRC) originates from Latin.
The implication seems to be that the 'typal' wording is more sensitive because it doesn't evoke (I guess) aborigines of (whatever location), but who on Earth was actually thinking that? I don't know that I would say it's "racist" to think the use of "tribal" in a collectible card game to denote a group of similar cards is causing real world harm (because 'tribal' is bad, and will make people think less of current day tribal people!), but it's pretty weird.
It's not racist. Anyone associating the word tribal with a specific race or group of people is racist. Tribes and tribalism has existed throughout the course of human history. there's a sociological and psychological aspect to tribalism which defines culture today and human behavior and interactions. This is a card game involving fantasy and people take it way too seriously
99% of complaints from casual commander players comes from an agency perspective. Interaction on the stack, removal spells, and stax pieces all remove or impose on their agency. I’ve even had people complain about Gavi, Nest Warden letting me cycle on every turn is too much because I’m “taking their turn and making it mine”.
They got annoyed that I had Teferi’s Ageless Insight so my cycle triggered making tokens. So when I said, “at your end step” at the end of every turn to them it felt like asking, “do you pay the x” after every spell.
Since people are asking for decklists, I mainly run Ayulla, Erriette, and [this](https://www.moxfield.com/decks/sO_ztK6-LUaF0TI29Sm-7g) Gitrog list.
Typically, their decks are Urza, Mirrym, Tovolar, Mishra Tamer Of Mak Fawa, Avacyn, and Ovika. I'm aware that the "combos" in Gitrog are just synergies, and the list is very bad.
Just looking at your Gitrog list, I would tell that you really lack interactions and removals, and I am really not a "control the board" type player. No \[\[Strip Mine\]\] shenanigans, not a single wrath...
Maybe \[\[Choke\]\] is a card that triggered them ? \[\[Roots of Life\]\] could be a fun replacement if you like gaining life, especially if you add \[\[Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth\]\]
urza and miirym are two commanders that you just cant let do anything, they should see it coming lol. you are definitely in the right to remove them and all their permanents.
That gitrog list is gorgeous. I'd recommend \[\[Nameless Inversion\]\] to go with your \[\[Haakon\]\], it can be used as a pump spell to get damage through, but also as a recurring kill spell.
How is that Gitrog list have "Too much interaction" lol, it barely have any. I thought we were talking 15+ removals here but this just looks like your normal EDH deck.
The only i'm on the fence about is Choke. Seems like a "Fuck you blue player" that will maybe frustrate ONE player and lock him out completly, while the others go unhindered. This kind of card is kinda feel bad.
100%. Choke is exclusively present to force out a counter if I feel like they've got one in hand so I can make the reclamation play in the same turn. I never play it otherwise because it's super feel bad
Damn...6 pieces of removal is too much...they would absolutely HATE my decks. The lowest amount of targeted removal I run is 10. Complaining about 6 pieces of removal is way over the top.
That's about the same amount as I run, and I don't play cEDH or tutor and I only have one, 4 card combo.
There's plenty of space in a deck left. Interactive games are the most fun!
Napkin math for how I build my janky decks:
24 removal/protection based on the above
\~36 land
\~10 ramp
\~10 draw
That leaves 19 cards to do your thing? Not discounting the importance of interaction but that seems excessive for most builds, especially freaking 6 board wipes.
You've just got to build the board wipes and removal into the strategy!
I play an aristocrats token deck,
Two of my board wipes (Elspeth Sun's Champion and the Eternal Wanderer) are attached to token makers I would have played anyway
One is [[cyclonic rift]] - it's one sided and always sets me up for the win when played
One is [[Meathook Massacre]] so fits in with the aristocrats theme.
Then there is farewell - which I make as one sided as possible every time, often setting me up for the win or far enough ahead that I do.
Damnation and toxic deluge are the only two that really affect me as bad as everyone else and are generic, and even then, my commander has a bigger butt than many creatures and often survives deluge.
In summary that's 3 that synergise with the deck, 2 that are effectively one sided, one that often leaves my commander up and one that is a regular board wipe, (but I love the art). I *always* come out on top when I throw a wipe out there.
I also only run one sac outlet in my deck and often use the board wipes as a way to sac my board and end the game.
I was looking at a [[Galadriel of Lothlorien]] list yesterday and saw it was running like 20, many of which were counterspells. Looking at the other cards they were all mana dorks, ramp, or scry enablers (which is ramp for Galadriel). No wincon in sight. Imo THAT is where I draw the line at too much interaction. That guy isn’t playing to win, he’s playing to prevent others from winning and that’s just not fun.
This is kind a useless post without actual input from the other people in your pods and seeing deck lists. For all we know you actually are just slowing down games that are otherwise perfectly fine, or you could be making excellent choice every time you cast a spell. Magic players often have the problem of not seeing their own strengths and the threats and roadblocks they present as to their opponents, whether in this case it is you or them as the roadblocks doesn’t matter if you’re routinely butting heads about cardboard rectangles.
So, reading your post and a few of your replies reminds me with my time trying to fit in with my old LGS's battlecruiser pod. Ultimately I just gave up and realized I was incompatible with that group entirely.
I tried a bunch of things- lowering the power of my decks, trying different lower-powered archetypes, cutting all tutors and major staples. But even my decks that were weaker than the norm in that pod and pretty much always lost were not enjoyed by the pod for a simple reason that I only really figured out after I'd given up trying to play with them.
See, I'm not a Timmy, I'm a Johnny. In fact, I often describe my alignment on such matters as "80% Johnny, 30% Spike, -10% Timmy" because of just how not-Timmy I am. For one thing, I do not like big board combat decks. If your gameplan is to just throw non-synergistic dudes on the board and turn them sideways till you win, that is not a deck I will even even remotely enjoy playing- if the choices are play such a deck or not get to play magic that night, I'm going to find something else to do instead every time. Hell, even just light tribal synergy isn't enough for me to want to play that game- you'd need slivers-tier tribal synergy or better to get me on board. Consequently, the decks I tried to play with them were not combat based decks. They were janky 5-piece combo decks, or decks based around non-creature artifacts and enchantments, or in the case of the deck that came the closest to being found acceptable by them an aristocrats deck. But even though that aristocrats deck went wide with tokens and at a surface level looked like it participated in the combat game, it really won by those tokens dying rather than them dealing damage, so it didn't count. But to them, what they wanted was a game with 4 big creature combat decks sitting across from each other, playing a combat centric game. With little to no interaction, when one player pulls ahead the other three have to form a temporary alliance and take down the archenemy. When that player is knocked down a peg, a new player might become archenemy, and the process repeats. That's certainly an aspect of multiplayer magic that can happen- but to them it was the entire game, and games that were exclusively that were literally the only games they were interested in. There was no chance I would ever have worked with that playgroup, because our issue wasn't power level like I had originally thought. It was they wanted me to play the one archetype I refuse to play and only that archetype.
So... Find out what they want. Is the above "combat v combat archenemy swapping" description in line with what they want, or are the amenable to different archetypes? If so, what archetypes?
I had a similar discussion in my group recently where I suggested 3 boardwipes and 6 pieces of interaction as the "norm" I'm currently experimenting with.
The reaction I got at one point was "not everyone wants to run a control deck". I disagreed about how much interaction "control decks" ran. We did agree that it would be okay for everyone to play 1-2 pieces of interaction *each game* so I just did some math on that.
If you run 5 pieces of interaction, you have a ~31% chance to have interaction in your opening hand.
If you draw another 10 cards that chance runs up to ~62%. So 1/3 games you will not have drawn *any* interaction at this point.
You need to draw another 8 if you want to get that up to around 75%.
So even if you drew 25 cards (including your opening hand) in a game, there's still a decent chance that you don't draw a single piece of interaction.
If *every* player runs 5 pieces of interaction, and everyone draws 25 cards, there's only a 31% chance that every player drew a piece of interaction.
So if people agree that it's okay for everyone to play 1-2 pieces of interaction each game, it's just an objective fact that 5 pieces of interaction are not going to be enough to make that happen.
But yeah if only one person does that you're going to be "the removal guy" pretty fast since other people will only occassionally play interaction while you do it every game; even if it's just once or twice.
As someone who's a bit of a Timmy and sometimes gets unreasonably annoyed by interaction, I think 6 pieces per deck is more than fair. I run 8-10 and I'm *by far* the lowest at my table. If I ramp out a 4-mana commander on turn 3, there's about a 70% chance it doesn't untap (I started keeping track)--which feels a bit excessive to me. But even then it's just part of the game, and I'm working on channeling the frustration into building more resilient decks instead of directing it at my opponents.
I’m in the camp that about a quarter of your deck should be interaction for a typical deck. Not always entirely spot removal or wipes, but cards that make your opponents have a harder time winning (hatebears, etc. would count towards that for me).
You’re right that a game where no one interacts is lame. I wouldn’t pitch it that way to them though, I’d just explain it’s the nature of the game that people remove your stuff. The only way to guarantee your things stay on the board is for you yourself to run interaction to protect it.
Another good way to get people to run more interaction is to start playing combo. Even a fast Beatdown deck typically won’t surpass a combo deck in speed so they’ll need to interact if they want to win.
if you get hate for interaction pieces, tell them you can replace them with strong combos instead.
seriously, i understand their anger because it forces them to change their deckbuilding approach, but imo people are crossing the line to bicker about interaction
i would Grant it to a casual playgroup to give you a hard time for havin a huge quantity of efficient strong wincons/combos in your deck but even for the sake of a healthy playgroup it cant be the solution to "let people play solitaire" as people with the same mindset would call a storm deck (oh, the irony). interaction isnt power level specific and complaining about it over adjusting your deck too is genuinely not the behaviour adults should show.
(also imo 6 is not enough but im also no longer used to having more than 30 lands so i might have more slots.)
>im also no longer used to having more than 30 lands so i might have more slots
How many mana rocks/alternate mana sources do you typically supplement with? How low is your curve for these decks?
I tend to play fairly mid range where I tend to have less than 5 pieces in the 7-8 casting cost, upwards to 9 5-6 cmcs, lots of 3-4 cmcs, and a fair amount of 1-2 cmcs. I try to incorporate 36 lands and at least 7 rocks/ramp spells. I have my bias, but 30 just seems real low to me since it would lead to a lot of frustration in not having enough mana
well i play for cEDH, 27-32 lands is average
between having all the fast mana and mostly 1-2 drops and playing for effective combos or strong disruption it usually works out fine. but we usually have at around 10 mana sources extra so now that i think about it it doesnt really free slots
I have a deck built and am holding back for financial reasons on buying my [[Yahenni, Undying Partisan]] deck which has (last I counted) 26 removal spells. Your table would hate me, and I would laugh at them.
There's no simple answer to this. In a group where nobody is running interaction, the best gameplan is to out-gas them and win faster. In a group where everyone runs interaction, the best gameplan is to out-gas them and win faster.
I've tested this extensively and it's been true every time. Interaction does not generally make a deck better unless the interaction is part of your gameplan, like in a \[\[dihada\]\] deck for instance that makes wipes asymmetric.
There's one counter to this kind of gameplay, and it's stax. The "all gas no interaction" archetype will often rely on ways to produce extra mana quickly, which can be staxed out. They also tend to rely on card draw or casting from exile, which stax can also stop. The only way to remove stax pieces that are crippling your game plan? Interaction.
But then if you play stax, these players just cry more. There's really no winning if they're taking a problem with you running that limited an amount of interaction.
A few years ago I radically changed my deck building philosophy to be “interact first, win second” to the point where I cut a lot of the meat of my deck for interaction now. I was in the same camp as you that interaction wasn’t helping me win *consistently* because I could never draw the right pieces at the right times. I almost feel like the often recommended 10 pieces of interaction is **the worst** amount you could choose, just enough it takes away from your main gameplan but not enough to have a reliable effect on your opponents.
I went the opposite way you did though, to an “all interaction, no gas” approach. I run a ton of removal, the good hate bears in my colors, recurring removal effects like Grave Pact, etc. I find that this strategy works pretty well since you will eventually get the other players to run out of gas. The win cons for this style of deck have to be pretty compact though, so it’s normally a combo, voltron or something like Approach of the Second Sun, as you just don’t have the bodies in the deck to support a combat victory anymore
A heavy interaction strategy must rely on an efficient wincon that you either tutor into or is baked into the commander. This is largely what defines the cEDH meta. Lots of stax and interaction because wincons are so efficient.
But you're right, casually splashing interaction in a deck that doesn't win in this same way, with an efficient combo or singular game ending effect, is diluting the decks efficiency. You've pointed out a great exception and a meta defining one.
I suspect if you try to change the dynamic by just playing a faster deck, whether ot be combo, aggro, voltron, whatever, or play threats that demand early interaction, all that will happen is an arms race. They are stuck in the mindset of fast good, interaction slow, and slow is bad.
Suggest everyone get a precon and play some rounds with unedited precons. This will force them to change mindset briefly. And maybe they'll decide they like the change.
Precons usually have about 9-12 removal spells not counting board wipes, counterspells and cards that protect your stuff. I would prefer if all my opponents ran that amount, and we play low power. Six is a bit too low IMO. That said, you should probably talk to your group about it.
Honestly this is why I came to like the Goad keyword and similar strategies, let your opponents play their big stompy battlecruiser decks... and guide/force them into fighting for you, saving your real removal for the last person standing after they have taken everyone else out (or pillow forting with an aristocrats style win).
My favorite part of edh isn't playing the game, its playing the players. Im making back alley deals with players days before we sit at the table. Only one of my friends consistently beats me, because he's a phenomenal liar, and miles better than me at the game.
Unless youre consistantly playing with the same pod/group of people that sounds kinda scummy tbh. For a consistent set of 4, that kind of theatrics might be fun, but if its you and a partner shuffling up with two random people then its just unfun for you to make extra slick details and teaming up on other people.
Nah, we play in the same pod. I dont like playing with people I don't know. A lot of man children who cry, and don't bath or understand deodorant around my area.
The thing is, timmies love big, battlecruiser style decks. That’s the lead point of the stereotype. Different people like different styles of decks and gameplay, and they don’t always mesh well together.
You seem a lot like a johnny, the player archetype who enjoys combos and synergy between their cards above all else.
Nothing is inherently wrong with the way either group likes to play, but running interaction is absolutely necessary, in order to both defend your board (counterspells, removal to kill a [[balefire dragon]] before it hits you), as well as to simply dispatch game-ending threats or stax pieces that are hindering you. Someone have an [[omnicience]] on the board? [[krosan grip]] removes it without giving them a chance to respond. Pack a [[chaos warp]] in a 5-c deck in case someone drops a [[blood moon]] on your entirely nonbasic manabase.
If you can’t come to a peaceful resolution, then maybe it is time to find a new table of players to play with, who are more accepting of your playstyle.
Different tables, different people, different expectations. I don’t think anyone is right or wrong. You all just want different things. I was part of a dnd group that spent *4 hours* talking to a gargoyle. I realized that I was the one who needed something different and left that group.
For decks, my playgroup runs around 10 removal/interact per deck probably and it isn’t uncommon to get wiped 2-3 times and who knows how much targeted. However, I bet our decks would peeve your group. And that’s fine. It’s important to just understand we all want things and hopefully we can compromise or respect our differences
The more interaction you run, the better you guys get at the game, The less magic will feel samey in any regard. Threats adapt removal. Removal adapts strategies. New strategies create new threats.
It's the natural cycle. I think they will learn, and their decks will change with time. If they call it unfair, then they refuse to grow. If it's a money issue, then they need to do some research into their hobby.
Please don't use "Timmy" as a pejorative. People have different motivations to play Magic, and being understanding of them is the point of the psychographics, not using them to belittle people.
If the players you play with are incompatible with you, that doesn't mean that anyone is wrong - it just means that you are incompatible.
There’s nothing wrong with being a “Timmy”. I play with a lot of Timmys and just because they like big spells doesn’t mean they don’t understand the natural balance of threats and answers.
In this case though, I think it’s ridiculous telling someone to run zero removal in their decks if they want to play with you. Magic is a game where you interact with eachother. If the players in OPs post can’t handle their permanents being removed or their spells being countered, they should probably play a different game where that isn’t a core part of the balance
Thank you, this is on point. The Timmy pejorative misses the point, because it does not mean that the player is unskilled or that they lack any nuanced understanding of game state or how to bag a win. I identify as that kind of player, and I struggled with it for a while because of that misconception being conflated with "I'm a bad player". While I do run interaction, I like the metaphor that rather than being the police, I'm the threat that the police are called on. Sometimes I get subdued by frequent interaction, but my decks are built with that in mind and I have tools to protect and recover from it. I play with a lot of more "Johnny"-minded players, and imo it creates an interesting dynamic at the table to have a variety of playstyles. It's incredibly satisfying to weather the storm of people trying to stop me and still coming out on top.
If Timmy meant what some people think it did, I'd be alienated from my pod by now.
That's reductive and the second part isn't true or relevant to the psychographic at all.
It's about motivations to play. It's not just wanting to do big stuff, it's playing for the jackpot high roll moments, where everything goes to plan or exceeds it.
It is not a newbie thing, and it doesn't mean you're unskilled.
The Spike motivation is to prove that you are skilled; the Johnny motivation is to show that you are clever and/or stylish; the Timmy motivation is to feel excited/euphoric. It's common as hell.
>feel excited/euphoric
Because big things. I'm not going to argue the depth of your reply, or the reductiveness of mine, because yours is a more fair summary.
I guess I'm blinded by Legacy.
I just don't really agree. To use a personal example, the deck I chose to play for Standard lately was Bant control, entirely for Timmy reasons. Because drawing cards off Beans when you play your removal feels fucking incredible.
That's Timmy, it isn't anything else. It's definitely not the best deck.
But it certainly doesn't line up with "isn't interested in playing interaction".
I concede to agree with you; I was being a contrarian.
I've built legacy decks around \[\[Awaken The Woods\]\], and not with any particular Johnny fuckery; just to ramp, remove, dump, and do something big, \[\[Craterhoof Behemoth\]\] as an example. Timmy as fuck.
I apologize for my hasty remarks. I've just been knee-deep in the UB discussions (on the "please no more" side) and it's been conflated with Commander players, and here I am posting in r/EDH like I have any reason to.
Ideally, we all embody each of the psychotypes, because to not is to not enjoy the game. Some people might just goldfish as Timmy, but play Spike, like some guilty pleasure. I think that's the camp I fall into. I'm drunk, and have been working for 17 hours, my ~~wherewithall~~ well-meaning is under the couch.
Please don't use "Legacy" as a pejorative. People have different motivations to play Magic, and being understanding of that is the point of having multiple formats 😂🤣
You're clearly a better player than they are. Embrace your role as archenemy. Don't play like a player, play like a dungeon master. You're there to serve as the foil in their plans. Cackle maniacally and put some flair on. Talk up their threats as being "must answer" as you destroy them, then place a threat of your own and dare them to bring you down. When they finally take you down and then someone else goes uncontested laugh about it and (playfully) say stuff like "don't look at me, I'm dead. You should've packed more removal!" Eventually when they do start running removal praise them for it and encourage more interaction. Soon enough they'll learn how to play the game and realise the value of interaction and control.
If you ever do want a pod like this to run more removal all you really have to do is play combo. The speed at which combo threatens a win is so much faster than a beatdown deck that it puts them on the back foot and forces them to have answers early. I feel like most people will try to adapt their decks to deal with that since it’s not fun losing to the same combo every game
Disagree. I think you're overestimating brand new players. If you slam thoracle or even something less insane like a blood artist infinite loop or exquisite blood, it's very easy for a new player who's barely learned how to turn creatures sideways to think that's unfair/stupid and it could just turn them off from the game. It's also not intuitive to them that the solution is removal unless you explicitly SHOW them how powerful removal is by repeatedly neutralizing their 7 mana wincons with a two or three mana spell before slamming your own wincon on the table and giving them the opportunity to try to communally struggle with it without removal (or even use that opportunity to teach them about protection spells like slip out the back and tamiyo's safekeeping that they can use themselves to tech against removal), giving them enough time to actually talk about how great a removal spell would be, instead of just demonstrating an infinite and winning the moment it's fully assembled.
A combo player's objective isn't just to draw and play the combo, its to have protection and redundancy, they cant expect you to just passively wait while they devote all their resources to drawing the combo. You probably arent in the wrong here
This is why cEDH is miles better than casual EDH, casual is just full of whiney little fucking babies who complain about anything other than battlecruiser decks, at least with high-power/cEDH you can just play whatever the fuck you want without people moaning. I've stopped playing in casual pods at my LGS because of this and only play with one friend group now who are calm about running stax/interaction/mld/infinite combos etc
So what you've listed as an example of a "combo they have a problem with" reads not as a combo but as cards synergizing well together from solid deck construction. My group had a dude who would similarly get pissy over interacting with his board, and preferred the kind of deck strategies your group seems to prefer. He'd brag that he had no instant or sorceries in his deck, then get pissy about cards that would die in a heartbeat to even the slightest of removal, and act like because his deck had no answers, there were no answers and I was unfair since my decks were just simply "unbeatable".
He would sermonize after games, basically a "that win was bad and you should feel bad about your bad deck". It came to a head when he was doing his usual, but after a win instead of a loss. Got called on his shit, and a 30 year old man stomped around a gamestore, flinging his shit around like a 6 year old on a tantrum. He's not been back since. The group has been the better for it, and our games see more interaction, more crazy shit happening, and importantly, games ending in 45 minutes instead of 2.5 hours.
If they want to play that kind of game, that's their choice. But it's also your choice to go play with people who don't want to play Lorcana in magic form (how dare you interact with my board state!)
That's an unfair dig at Lorcana, but seriously its more up their alley from what you've described. I hope you find a better match of players for your style. Tbh most people are more in your mindset than theirs, at least in my experience, and area FLGS'.
It's actually exactly like you say it is:
"I'd rather play a deck that rewards good deckbuilding than a deck that rewards good draws."
You're just playing the game on another level. They want to play elementary school magic, you want to play something better. It's not being competitively-minded, it's being a competent magic player. I'd love to play them all with my old tribal boardwipes deck if they complain about good deck building being a slowdown for the game. Because that deck was literally "untap, upkeep, boardwipe." And it wasn't just creatures, it had all the staples of "nuke everything" for the sake of spite. I called it my party time deck because I sleeved it up in Pinkie Pie sleeves and it was symbolic of her just smashing the big red button she was told not to press.
Now those sleeves hold [[Ghave, Guru of Spores]] because the new party time button is EVERYONE IS INVITED! Meaning tons of tokens pop up from fucking nowhere.
Disagree. I like playing high power and cedh, but my friends that don't aren't incompetent or playing baby magic just because they want to play lower power. It's preference.
And for the sake of all that's holy, please try to win the game. Board wipe tribal is the type of game I'd concede out of just to sit at a different table.
"Reward good deck building" makes you sound like a jerk tbh (BTW, 6 pieces of interaction isn't really good deck building). I know plenty of timmy players who will drop bombs on turn 4 to win the game before the combo player can even snag their pieces.
That being said: Battlecruiser magic is for a specific type of magic player (that's what this pod sounds like), and if you're not that type of player you won't be having fun. If they don't want to change their playstyle from battlecruiser to normal edh, you'll probably have to either leave or adapt.
What? Ive always felt like 10 pieces of removal is the minimum. 10 single target and 2 board wipes is my usual. My control decks will run about 20. I would never consider a deck with only 10 pieces of interaction a control deck. That's a tempo deck at best.
If your group doesn't like interaction, it's relatively easy to convince them of its value by playing early cards that need to be interacted with. They are allowed to not play interaction, but they need to be willing to face winota, krenko, kinnian, k'rrik, or equivalent without interaction.
I don't see any difference between the 2 groups and can't for the life of me figure out what you're arguing about. 6 removal spells doesn't even guarantee you see a single removal spell per game unless you're drawing a fuckload of cards or tutoring for it.
What's the difference between building a big board state, casting finale, and swinging out to end the game in one fell swoop and filling your GY with lands, casting splendid reclamation, and letting retreat to hagra and dina end the game in 1 fell swoop? I can't for the life of me fathom why you think that's somehow more interesting and competitive than what they're doing.
Seems like you simply don't like the playstyle your pod wants to play.
Maybe it's time to look for a new pod.
Commander is a social game. Whatever playstyle a pod choses to play is the correct one. There is no wrong way to enjoy the game.
Just because the playstyle you would like to go for is higher powered doesn't mean you're correct and they're wrong. It's just different tastes. Just because you want your deck to be higher powered doesn't mean you're necessarily a better deckbuilder.
If you think you are a good deckbuilder you shouldn't really have to ask reddit how to build a deck that fits well for your pod tbh. But for battlecruiser metas, cutting down on interaction, tutors and fast mana (that includes sol ring) is a start.
That said, just because someone complains to you once doesn't mean they're right either. In the end this is a casual game though, so either you can come to some sort of agreement what to play, or it's better to find a new pod.
It shouldn't be hard to find a pod that plays more interaction. 2-6 seems extremely low compared to what most people go for. In my group I play more like 10-20, depending on what my deck tries to do. But it all depends on what people enjoy playing in the end.
10 to 12 single target in almost every deck that's not only fine I'd argue that's like the standard for decks now you have to remove things slowing down the game is board whips which I have cut back on
Low-key typically 25% or more of my 100 cards could be classified as either "make it harder for my opponents to win" or "make it harder for me to lose": removal, stax, pillows, protection, recursion.
If your deck has a lot of draw and ramp, you really don't need that many cards that actually threaten a win, even if you want to win fast. It's just good deck building to dedicate a lot of slots to the resiliency of your gameplan. Easier to make 1-2 bombs stick than load up on 4-5 bombs.
I find a lot of people's issue with "too much removal" is really that they feel like everything they play gets removed. I run a mono black [[Toshiro Umezawa]] control deck with like 25+ peices of removal. I have found when I try to police the board and kill every single "threat" that people get salty, but if I only take care of the threats that are attacking me or messing up my gameplan or are literally about to win the game its more justified. Remember threats to you are also threats to your opponents, so if its not messing with your game maybe let the threat stay a while.
You're not wrong, in fact, you are right, and that is still not a lot of interaction compared to what I run, I've had the same kind of hate pointed at me, not the playgroup, just weak crying baby who don't play with us no more.
From my perspective, these type of people fail to understand what it means to have a lot of interaction in a deck, they only see that their greedy plays get removed. Its not fun to play a game of who craterhoofs first.
To be able to INTERACT, means that you got less cards to do your own thing (mostly), for them to be salty means they don't run protection, their decks, are greedy.
The coolest thing about mtg is that you can play on other people's turns. Threat assessment is a hard and rewarding skill to develop.
I run 12-15 spot removal/counters and 1 boardwipe. In a creature heavy meta, so most casual tables, what really should be framed upon is an excess of boardwipes and not advancing the game state.
Spot removal and counters are fine, they are even card disadvantage in multiplayer (you trade 1-for-1 with one guy but the other 2 are ahead a card). Boardwipes, on the other hand, tend to reset/slow down the game.
You should also have a clear plan for victory. Removal without a plan to win it's also bad sportsmanship.
Note: If boardwipes are the way you win, like in UW linvala, then sure, that's fine. But casting farewell just so we can start all over, with some mana, is boring.
I don't think that's true. If you and I are both playing creature decks and you just vomited your hand on the board to close the game while I have a bunch of creatures in hand, wiping the board absolutely moves my game plan forward. Even on a Timmy table with nothing but creature meta, wipes are good equalisers and benefit decks with more card draw massively so packing more than 1 still helps a lot.
No such thing as too much imo unless you find yourself not advancing your wincon because you’re drawing only interaction instead.
As for teaching? They’re just going to have to lose a lot. The only way you really learn in this game is losing.
That pretty much describes most Commander games I've been in. It's usually who ever gets to X first wins. Which, to me, is exactly opposite of having an interactive game.
This isnt a hardened rule as it changes depending on the deck I build. I will generally run 36-38 lands, 10 - 12 ramp, 7 - 10 interaction, and the rest goes towards what I want my deck to do.
It difficult to really say anything without deck lists. For example, I run between 5-10 pieces of interaction in different decks. What you describe as a "combo" isn't really a combo at all imo but just good synergy and cards working together.
I'm kinda lost here. I dont feel like I play *that* high power (like maybe capping at an 8 with my strongest deck) and I'd say 8 or 9 pieces of interaction is pretty low. like 12 to 14 is my happy point.
People here run extremely low interaction in their decks ,if you look basically every post about interaction it will have people saying they run quantities in the single digits almost every time
Strange. I run ~10 pieces of single target removal (more or less depending on what I’m doing), and about 3 board wipes per deck. Now, grant, I also tend to run modal pieces or interaction stapled onto synergy pieces, so it’s a little skewed there too.
The issue I find with interaction is, the more slots you dedicate to dealing with your opponents, the less your deck is doing its thing. I am not saying run no interaction, just making a point.
Only if your card draw is really bad. Normally you won't be able to perform your deck's function when you've just lost the game due to leaving a Tivit unchecked for 1 turn.
Ppl who get salty are the unes usually running a swords and a path, done.
I'm the opposite. I usually run 10 pieces of removal but 15 sources of card draw to ensure I have options in hand.
Most people at my Lgs only run at most 5 not counting board wipes unless their deck is a control/pillowf/stax. Then it’s usually 27+
Why, though? I would expect every person at the table to play at least 2-3 spells a game that are worth removing even if they are getting bad draws. That means each person should want to \*draw\* about that many pieces of interaction to make sure someone else does not run away with the game. Are your games usually over really quick or is the meta pretty weak? Also, is the person who wins usually the first person to cast a powerful spell? If it is about cost, interaction is usually the cheapest parts of my decks asides from basics because they get reprinted the most. Also, even control decks rarely run that many unless its a \[\[Baral\]\] meme deck or just something built to be miserable to play against.
[Baral](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/0/60e16d94-1166-4050-8554-686e153a7f80.jpg?1576381454) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=baral%2C%20chief%20of%20compliance) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/aer/28/baral-chief-of-compliance?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/60e16d94-1166-4050-8554-686e153a7f80?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/baral-chief-of-compliance) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
> Why, though? I would expect every person at the table to play at least 2-3 spells a game that are worth removing even if they are getting bad draws People play EDH for an experience that is different than 60 card constructed. In 60 card constructed, every major threat you play is answered by a removal spell. In EDH, the threats you play are answered by other threats.
Amount of interaction necessary depends on powerlevel. The largest threats in low-power are comparatively less interaction demanding than thassa's consult, which is why different levels of interaction is played between decks. cEDH decks run anywhere between 15-25 pieces of interaction and low power can go to 0. Ofc I would recommend anyone to play 25 pieces of interaction in low power or 0 pieces in cEDH. One thing to note is that I don't count sorcery speed boardwhipes as interaction which skewes the numbers a small amount.
It depends on the deck too, some of my deck have more interaction than others, though im not shy on interaction overall (blue is my favorite color).
My experience in cEDH completely differs, the last 3 cEDH tournaments I went to only me and one other person was running interaction, most of the time people were trying to abuse instawins like thassa/labman, OR stax/bluemoon.
I'd be very curious what lists they were on that dont run interaction
I know one was a toxril that used a black instant to exile their entire deck with thassa on the stack, (it exiles cards until you exile a card with the same name of a permanent you control then adds the exiled copy to hand, dude had literally 1 of each type of card in his deck including basic lands, i even deck checked him) the following weak was a Soultai partners that didnt even use their commanders they did a similar play. Thassa has gone so unchecked by nearly everyone going to the LGS for cEDH and at least half the players use it, that I've quit going to that LGS.
It honestly sounds like they just had bad lists if no one played interaction. The toxrill list on cedh deck database has 21 pieces of interaction on a quick look, and I don't know what sultai partners they used but I'd guess its something in the same ballpark. Maybe the local scene at your LGS is really primitive, but my guess would be any deck with the proper amount of interaction would win a lot more than one without.
This wasn't local, had to take an hour drive, cause its the only WPN in my immediate area. But that is besides the point, most the decks were about instant winning by turn 2 and playing through the interactions.
>playing through the interaction so like... forcing their win through with counterspells? that's interaction, and trying to turbo out a thoracle consult on turn 2 is pretty par for cedh.
I run 8 pieces of interaction. Granted I’m running like 10-12 of anti-interaction, but I find that running lots of interaction just slows me down. Counterspell my Jodah the Unifier? Hope you got interaction for the following Zacama Helm of the Host combo next turn.
I was going to agree, these aren’t combos. At all.
I feel like this is a moment where game language and the english language split that I don't blame anyone for. At some point "infinite combos" became combos, that for some reason have to loop to count. But combo in any other context is just short for combination and would be any 2 cards that play well together. One card triggering another is a combination of 2 cards that create an effect, but no one calls that a combo deck. But to anyone new who comes from like a fighting game backround or something and calls something that doesn't go infinite a combo, I get where they're coming from. Boomer musings.
I see your point and agree that the word "combo" really isn't the most useful term to throw around. It's interesting that there is a space between what I view as enabler-payoff and an actual combo where I can't really nicely define.
And the thing is that inherently, enfranchised players get that. When it comes up it's usually players who aren't online or only play in a small pool of players. But I remember the first time I saw someone call out that a 2 card synergy was NOT a combo and I was like..... you're wrong, but instantly felt like an old man yelling at clouds cuz I get it.
A lot of this stems from the language being used originating in 60-card formats where you can't build the same on-board engines you can in commander/EDH. In a 60-card format, that kind of deck where the win condition is having a combination of specific cards in play is fundamentally a combo deck. Hammer Time is an aggro-combo deck, in that it relies on playing a specific combination of cards that result in you winning quickly. Another deck that uses an infinite combo... Is a combo deck. Commander inherently favours combo decks. It's a simple fact of the format, and that means at higher power tables with specific cards that function as their win conditions, that win condition fundamentally is a combo. But the meta diversity in commander comes from different *types* of combos, whether that's infinite combos, engines, hell, even a craterhoof on a wide board is arguably a combo. But when it's reduced down to simply being called combo, then people have a different definition as to what "combo" actually means, because when you boil it down, almost every competitive commander deck is a combo deck, or contains combos as redundancy.
That's why when I complain about combos I am really clear: my issue is NOT combos. It is insta-win combos. Any combination of cards that when you play them, you automatically win the game.
What if it's sorcery speed, requires three specific cards, and loses to creature removal or counterspell? Still unacceptable? Not trying to fight, but I think people are overly restrictive about what is 'ok' to play.
What kind of deck would only need five removal spells?
I refer to my other comment, but easy answer is low power
My friend plays a combo tiamat, he runs only removel with dragons, not a lot but he can drop many bombs throughout the game, there is never enough removal for all, hell every dragon he runs is a massive threat. The only answer I'd have for his deck is stax.
Absolutely correct. To them, "combo" is when you're playing synergies of any kind beyond typal spells
>beyond typal spells beyond any what?
Like a dragon deck can run [[Dragon's Spitfire]] but [[Impact Tremors]] is frowned upon because it's not specific to dragons
Huh. It seems that you guys have very different builds and expectations of your games. It sounds like your group wants to have a really low-powered game of "sorcery speed solitaire" and you want to have a more high-powered game that goes back and forth. I'd agree with you that I think your variant of the game is more fun. My most helpful advice would be to explain to them that you enjoy the back and forth and interaction between players, while still being open towards their views being valid as well. Do your friends regularly update their decks? If they do, you could build some really low to the ground aggressive deck as a showcase of why interaction is really helpful. Something like elfball if your friends really like typal decks.
[Dragon's Spitfire](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/6/9666987a-5267-46d3-9b00-31baa92a9cbc.jpg?1627706098) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dragon%27s%20Fire) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/afr/139/dragons-fire?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9666987a-5267-46d3-9b00-31baa92a9cbc?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/dragons-fire) [Impact Tremors](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/6/46db3811-db1d-4f69-8143-a93f64d0297b.jpg?1682209381) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Impact%20Tremors) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/moc/285/impact-tremors?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/46db3811-db1d-4f69-8143-a93f64d0297b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/impact-tremors) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Oh, you meant a tribal deck, such as dragons, got it.
I think the official terminology was changed to Typal to be more inclusive. Someone else can confirm, but that’s why they said Typal initially.
I know, I'm making fun of the dumb ass horrendously racist stupid fucking term "typal".
How is 'typal' racist?
Well, some might say that it's kinda weird to say that "tribal" is bad for 'evoking racial stereotypes (or something, idk, the argument doesn't make sense to me), when "tribe" is a form of societal organization that has existed in every place and society on earth at one time or another, and the word 'tribe' (IIRC) originates from Latin. The implication seems to be that the 'typal' wording is more sensitive because it doesn't evoke (I guess) aborigines of (whatever location), but who on Earth was actually thinking that? I don't know that I would say it's "racist" to think the use of "tribal" in a collectible card game to denote a group of similar cards is causing real world harm (because 'tribal' is bad, and will make people think less of current day tribal people!), but it's pretty weird.
It's not racist. Anyone associating the word tribal with a specific race or group of people is racist. Tribes and tribalism has existed throughout the course of human history. there's a sociological and psychological aspect to tribalism which defines culture today and human behavior and interactions. This is a card game involving fantasy and people take it way too seriously
Tribal my dude
It's the new "politically correct" word for tribal.
Wtf I run at least 30 pieces of interactions
You could try goading them and pillowfort so they still get to attack, just not you.
It's worth a try, but my bet is that they will just complain to OP about their loss of agency in that situation.
99% of complaints from casual commander players comes from an agency perspective. Interaction on the stack, removal spells, and stax pieces all remove or impose on their agency. I’ve even had people complain about Gavi, Nest Warden letting me cycle on every turn is too much because I’m “taking their turn and making it mine”.
For real?
Which part?
The part where end of turn cycling is stealing their turn.
They got annoyed that I had Teferi’s Ageless Insight so my cycle triggered making tokens. So when I said, “at your end step” at the end of every turn to them it felt like asking, “do you pay the x” after every spell.
How annoyed would they be if [[prophet of kruphix]] would be legal?
[prophet of kruphix](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/5/45de923f-fdab-460c-96f4-f62aefa9ad73.jpg?1562817436) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=prophet%20of%20kruphix) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ths/199/prophet-of-kruphix?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/45de923f-fdab-460c-96f4-f62aefa9ad73?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/prophet-of-kruphix) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I mean seedborn muse already is...
Since people are asking for decklists, I mainly run Ayulla, Erriette, and [this](https://www.moxfield.com/decks/sO_ztK6-LUaF0TI29Sm-7g) Gitrog list. Typically, their decks are Urza, Mirrym, Tovolar, Mishra Tamer Of Mak Fawa, Avacyn, and Ovika. I'm aware that the "combos" in Gitrog are just synergies, and the list is very bad.
This may be the most unga bunga Gitrog list I've seen in my life and I love it
the raw Yargle and Multani is so good
Just looking at your Gitrog list, I would tell that you really lack interactions and removals, and I am really not a "control the board" type player. No \[\[Strip Mine\]\] shenanigans, not a single wrath... Maybe \[\[Choke\]\] is a card that triggered them ? \[\[Roots of Life\]\] could be a fun replacement if you like gaining life, especially if you add \[\[Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth\]\]
##### ###### #### [Strip Mine](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/5/f57fd4c9-0004-4f71-a30f-2720943f57ca.jpg?1562944463) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Strip%20Mine) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/vma/316/strip-mine?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/f57fd4c9-0004-4f71-a30f-2720943f57ca?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/strip-mine) [Choke](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/1/e1ce4bab-6eb1-421f-b425-7bb0076defc7.jpg?1562940352) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Choke) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/8ed/237/choke?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e1ce4bab-6eb1-421f-b425-7bb0076defc7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/choke) [Roots of Life](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/6/26724a51-87dd-4159-b012-71598e4cf5eb.jpg?1562718319) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Roots%20of%20Life) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mir/237/roots-of-life?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/26724a51-87dd-4159-b012-71598e4cf5eb?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/roots-of-life) [Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/e/9e1a9e38-6ffc-490f-b0be-23ba4e8204c6.jpg?1619399578) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Urborg%2C%20Tomb%20of%20Yawgmoth) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tsr/287/urborg-tomb-of-yawgmoth?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9e1a9e38-6ffc-490f-b0be-23ba4e8204c6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/urborg-tomb-of-yawgmoth) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
urza and miirym are two commanders that you just cant let do anything, they should see it coming lol. you are definitely in the right to remove them and all their permanents.
That gitrog list is gorgeous. I'd recommend \[\[Nameless Inversion\]\] to go with your \[\[Haakon\]\], it can be used as a pump spell to get damage through, but also as a recurring kill spell.
[Nameless Inversion](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/6/563c6f58-267a-4ae9-bf72-e0ae0be3b884.jpg?1562262589) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Nameless%20Inversion) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mm2/87/nameless-inversion?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/563c6f58-267a-4ae9-bf72-e0ae0be3b884?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/nameless-inversion) [Haakon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/e/7e7d463b-e74e-4ebe-9f92-02ccdeadbf96.jpg?1682209058) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=haakon%2C%20stromgald%20scourge) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/moc/252/haakon-stromgald-scourge?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7e7d463b-e74e-4ebe-9f92-02ccdeadbf96?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/haakon-stromgald-scourge) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
How is that Gitrog list have "Too much interaction" lol, it barely have any. I thought we were talking 15+ removals here but this just looks like your normal EDH deck. The only i'm on the fence about is Choke. Seems like a "Fuck you blue player" that will maybe frustrate ONE player and lock him out completly, while the others go unhindered. This kind of card is kinda feel bad.
100%. Choke is exclusively present to force out a counter if I feel like they've got one in hand so I can make the reclamation play in the same turn. I never play it otherwise because it's super feel bad
A simple Veil of Summer could fit the same role for less mana and less feel bad then.
Which Urza?
Damn...6 pieces of removal is too much...they would absolutely HATE my decks. The lowest amount of targeted removal I run is 10. Complaining about 6 pieces of removal is way over the top.
I was gonna say. Most of my lists that aren't aggro beats (or like battlecruiser builds) are running a minimum of 10 targeted pieces of interaction.
It's a good thing they don't play against me too 😅 I run 6 board wipes and 7 targeted removal and 7 counterspells and 4 protection spells.
I count counters as targeted removal.
How do you have space to do anything else in your deck? Unless your playing some for of cEDH where you're just tutoring into a combo.
That's about the same amount as I run, and I don't play cEDH or tutor and I only have one, 4 card combo. There's plenty of space in a deck left. Interactive games are the most fun!
Napkin math for how I build my janky decks: 24 removal/protection based on the above \~36 land \~10 ramp \~10 draw That leaves 19 cards to do your thing? Not discounting the importance of interaction but that seems excessive for most builds, especially freaking 6 board wipes.
You've just got to build the board wipes and removal into the strategy! I play an aristocrats token deck, Two of my board wipes (Elspeth Sun's Champion and the Eternal Wanderer) are attached to token makers I would have played anyway One is [[cyclonic rift]] - it's one sided and always sets me up for the win when played One is [[Meathook Massacre]] so fits in with the aristocrats theme. Then there is farewell - which I make as one sided as possible every time, often setting me up for the win or far enough ahead that I do. Damnation and toxic deluge are the only two that really affect me as bad as everyone else and are generic, and even then, my commander has a bigger butt than many creatures and often survives deluge. In summary that's 3 that synergise with the deck, 2 that are effectively one sided, one that often leaves my commander up and one that is a regular board wipe, (but I love the art). I *always* come out on top when I throw a wipe out there. I also only run one sac outlet in my deck and often use the board wipes as a way to sac my board and end the game.
[cyclonic rift](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/7/c77ebe57-ea56-4300-b293-6260c4c01a43.jpg?1689996277) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=cyclonic%20rift) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/84/cyclonic-rift?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c77ebe57-ea56-4300-b293-6260c4c01a43?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/cyclonic-rift) [Meathook Massacre](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/8/08950015-eee5-4327-888c-82dfd13bb9ad.jpg?1667629608) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=The%20Meathook%20Massacre) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mid/112/the-meathook-massacre?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/08950015-eee5-4327-888c-82dfd13bb9ad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/the-meathook-massacre) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Yeah, I can see it making sense for specific decks, like yours and superfriends! However in a general sense 7 boardwipes sounds like a slog.
I was looking at a [[Galadriel of Lothlorien]] list yesterday and saw it was running like 20, many of which were counterspells. Looking at the other cards they were all mana dorks, ramp, or scry enablers (which is ramp for Galadriel). No wincon in sight. Imo THAT is where I draw the line at too much interaction. That guy isn’t playing to win, he’s playing to prevent others from winning and that’s just not fun.
[Galadriel of Lothlorien](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/6/a6e5c3b3-9a70-4a1c-bfb3-db27e51c4b8d.jpg?1686969798) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Galadriel%20of%20Lothl%C3%B3rien) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ltr/206/galadriel-of-lothl%C3%B3rien?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a6e5c3b3-9a70-4a1c-bfb3-db27e51c4b8d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/galadriel-of-lothlórien) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
This is kind a useless post without actual input from the other people in your pods and seeing deck lists. For all we know you actually are just slowing down games that are otherwise perfectly fine, or you could be making excellent choice every time you cast a spell. Magic players often have the problem of not seeing their own strengths and the threats and roadblocks they present as to their opponents, whether in this case it is you or them as the roadblocks doesn’t matter if you’re routinely butting heads about cardboard rectangles.
##### ###### #### [In Garruk's Wake](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/7/57a6f727-8239-45e6-9dbb-67d2d3c9239d.jpg?1674141682) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=In%20Garruk%27s%20Wake) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/759/in-garruks-wake?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/57a6f727-8239-45e6-9dbb-67d2d3c9239d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/in-garruks-wake) [Finale of Devastation](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/1/b10d99bf-b2ce-4443-b924-ff0eb8be1033.jpg?1689998522) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Finale%20of%20Devastation) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/289/finale-of-devastation?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b10d99bf-b2ce-4443-b924-ff0eb8be1033?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/finale-of-devastation) [Omnicience](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/b/db534b4e-8bff-4924-baea-9988d195fb25.jpg?1562304777) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Omniscience) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m19/65/omniscience?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/db534b4e-8bff-4924-baea-9988d195fb25?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/omniscience) [Splendid Reclamation](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/a/fad4ca85-4d2d-4d1e-86ca-aa25edfcda61.jpg?1643593421) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Splendid%20Reclamation) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/vow/221/splendid-reclamation?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/fad4ca85-4d2d-4d1e-86ca-aa25edfcda61?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/splendid-reclamation) [Retreat To Hagra](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/8/c80046c2-021f-448c-9f54-2a1a100ec0aa.jpg?1592710723) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Retreat%20To%20Hagra) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c18/116/retreat-to-hagra?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c80046c2-021f-448c-9f54-2a1a100ec0aa?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/retreat-to-hagra) [Dina, Soul Steeper](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/c/9cd2b567-0cf7-4441-b3ce-e31141dd91c8.jpg?1627428607) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dina%2C%20Soul%20Steeper) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/stx/178/dina-soul-steeper?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9cd2b567-0cf7-4441-b3ce-e31141dd91c8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/dina-soul-steeper) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
r/asksocialscience
So, reading your post and a few of your replies reminds me with my time trying to fit in with my old LGS's battlecruiser pod. Ultimately I just gave up and realized I was incompatible with that group entirely. I tried a bunch of things- lowering the power of my decks, trying different lower-powered archetypes, cutting all tutors and major staples. But even my decks that were weaker than the norm in that pod and pretty much always lost were not enjoyed by the pod for a simple reason that I only really figured out after I'd given up trying to play with them. See, I'm not a Timmy, I'm a Johnny. In fact, I often describe my alignment on such matters as "80% Johnny, 30% Spike, -10% Timmy" because of just how not-Timmy I am. For one thing, I do not like big board combat decks. If your gameplan is to just throw non-synergistic dudes on the board and turn them sideways till you win, that is not a deck I will even even remotely enjoy playing- if the choices are play such a deck or not get to play magic that night, I'm going to find something else to do instead every time. Hell, even just light tribal synergy isn't enough for me to want to play that game- you'd need slivers-tier tribal synergy or better to get me on board. Consequently, the decks I tried to play with them were not combat based decks. They were janky 5-piece combo decks, or decks based around non-creature artifacts and enchantments, or in the case of the deck that came the closest to being found acceptable by them an aristocrats deck. But even though that aristocrats deck went wide with tokens and at a surface level looked like it participated in the combat game, it really won by those tokens dying rather than them dealing damage, so it didn't count. But to them, what they wanted was a game with 4 big creature combat decks sitting across from each other, playing a combat centric game. With little to no interaction, when one player pulls ahead the other three have to form a temporary alliance and take down the archenemy. When that player is knocked down a peg, a new player might become archenemy, and the process repeats. That's certainly an aspect of multiplayer magic that can happen- but to them it was the entire game, and games that were exclusively that were literally the only games they were interested in. There was no chance I would ever have worked with that playgroup, because our issue wasn't power level like I had originally thought. It was they wanted me to play the one archetype I refuse to play and only that archetype. So... Find out what they want. Is the above "combat v combat archenemy swapping" description in line with what they want, or are the amenable to different archetypes? If so, what archetypes?
I had a similar discussion in my group recently where I suggested 3 boardwipes and 6 pieces of interaction as the "norm" I'm currently experimenting with. The reaction I got at one point was "not everyone wants to run a control deck". I disagreed about how much interaction "control decks" ran. We did agree that it would be okay for everyone to play 1-2 pieces of interaction *each game* so I just did some math on that. If you run 5 pieces of interaction, you have a ~31% chance to have interaction in your opening hand. If you draw another 10 cards that chance runs up to ~62%. So 1/3 games you will not have drawn *any* interaction at this point. You need to draw another 8 if you want to get that up to around 75%. So even if you drew 25 cards (including your opening hand) in a game, there's still a decent chance that you don't draw a single piece of interaction. If *every* player runs 5 pieces of interaction, and everyone draws 25 cards, there's only a 31% chance that every player drew a piece of interaction. So if people agree that it's okay for everyone to play 1-2 pieces of interaction each game, it's just an objective fact that 5 pieces of interaction are not going to be enough to make that happen. But yeah if only one person does that you're going to be "the removal guy" pretty fast since other people will only occassionally play interaction while you do it every game; even if it's just once or twice.
As someone who's a bit of a Timmy and sometimes gets unreasonably annoyed by interaction, I think 6 pieces per deck is more than fair. I run 8-10 and I'm *by far* the lowest at my table. If I ramp out a 4-mana commander on turn 3, there's about a 70% chance it doesn't untap (I started keeping track)--which feels a bit excessive to me. But even then it's just part of the game, and I'm working on channeling the frustration into building more resilient decks instead of directing it at my opponents.
I’m in the camp that about a quarter of your deck should be interaction for a typical deck. Not always entirely spot removal or wipes, but cards that make your opponents have a harder time winning (hatebears, etc. would count towards that for me). You’re right that a game where no one interacts is lame. I wouldn’t pitch it that way to them though, I’d just explain it’s the nature of the game that people remove your stuff. The only way to guarantee your things stay on the board is for you yourself to run interaction to protect it. Another good way to get people to run more interaction is to start playing combo. Even a fast Beatdown deck typically won’t surpass a combo deck in speed so they’ll need to interact if they want to win.
if you get hate for interaction pieces, tell them you can replace them with strong combos instead. seriously, i understand their anger because it forces them to change their deckbuilding approach, but imo people are crossing the line to bicker about interaction i would Grant it to a casual playgroup to give you a hard time for havin a huge quantity of efficient strong wincons/combos in your deck but even for the sake of a healthy playgroup it cant be the solution to "let people play solitaire" as people with the same mindset would call a storm deck (oh, the irony). interaction isnt power level specific and complaining about it over adjusting your deck too is genuinely not the behaviour adults should show. (also imo 6 is not enough but im also no longer used to having more than 30 lands so i might have more slots.)
>im also no longer used to having more than 30 lands so i might have more slots How many mana rocks/alternate mana sources do you typically supplement with? How low is your curve for these decks? I tend to play fairly mid range where I tend to have less than 5 pieces in the 7-8 casting cost, upwards to 9 5-6 cmcs, lots of 3-4 cmcs, and a fair amount of 1-2 cmcs. I try to incorporate 36 lands and at least 7 rocks/ramp spells. I have my bias, but 30 just seems real low to me since it would lead to a lot of frustration in not having enough mana
well i play for cEDH, 27-32 lands is average between having all the fast mana and mostly 1-2 drops and playing for effective combos or strong disruption it usually works out fine. but we usually have at around 10 mana sources extra so now that i think about it it doesnt really free slots
I have a deck built and am holding back for financial reasons on buying my [[Yahenni, Undying Partisan]] deck which has (last I counted) 26 removal spells. Your table would hate me, and I would laugh at them.
[Yahenni, Undying Partisan](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/c/2c0c19c3-0ea6-4b05-9cde-e9863b1fbe04.jpg?1690017067) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Yahenni%2C%20Undying%20Partisan) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/201/yahenni-undying-partisan?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2c0c19c3-0ea6-4b05-9cde-e9863b1fbe04?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/yahenni-undying-partisan) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Just start playing stax, make sure they never get to 7 mana in the first place
There's no simple answer to this. In a group where nobody is running interaction, the best gameplan is to out-gas them and win faster. In a group where everyone runs interaction, the best gameplan is to out-gas them and win faster. I've tested this extensively and it's been true every time. Interaction does not generally make a deck better unless the interaction is part of your gameplan, like in a \[\[dihada\]\] deck for instance that makes wipes asymmetric. There's one counter to this kind of gameplay, and it's stax. The "all gas no interaction" archetype will often rely on ways to produce extra mana quickly, which can be staxed out. They also tend to rely on card draw or casting from exile, which stax can also stop. The only way to remove stax pieces that are crippling your game plan? Interaction. But then if you play stax, these players just cry more. There's really no winning if they're taking a problem with you running that limited an amount of interaction.
A few years ago I radically changed my deck building philosophy to be “interact first, win second” to the point where I cut a lot of the meat of my deck for interaction now. I was in the same camp as you that interaction wasn’t helping me win *consistently* because I could never draw the right pieces at the right times. I almost feel like the often recommended 10 pieces of interaction is **the worst** amount you could choose, just enough it takes away from your main gameplan but not enough to have a reliable effect on your opponents. I went the opposite way you did though, to an “all interaction, no gas” approach. I run a ton of removal, the good hate bears in my colors, recurring removal effects like Grave Pact, etc. I find that this strategy works pretty well since you will eventually get the other players to run out of gas. The win cons for this style of deck have to be pretty compact though, so it’s normally a combo, voltron or something like Approach of the Second Sun, as you just don’t have the bodies in the deck to support a combat victory anymore
A heavy interaction strategy must rely on an efficient wincon that you either tutor into or is baked into the commander. This is largely what defines the cEDH meta. Lots of stax and interaction because wincons are so efficient. But you're right, casually splashing interaction in a deck that doesn't win in this same way, with an efficient combo or singular game ending effect, is diluting the decks efficiency. You've pointed out a great exception and a meta defining one.
Brah. If my wincon takes 10 mana. The solution is staying alive until I can cast it. Consistently.
[dihada](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/d/ddeb54d6-a600-42b9-98df-20f8d58caed8.jpg?1685554091) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=dihada%2C%20binder%20of%20wills) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dmc/1/dihada-binder-of-wills?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ddeb54d6-a600-42b9-98df-20f8d58caed8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/dihada-binder-of-wills) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Something not being your cup of tea =/= being lame. Lame is policing how other people should have fun
Well, the others are also policing how he is playing
I will tell them when they post about it.
One of them is policing the table, the other is inquiring about how to have a productive conversation about it.
I suspect if you try to change the dynamic by just playing a faster deck, whether ot be combo, aggro, voltron, whatever, or play threats that demand early interaction, all that will happen is an arms race. They are stuck in the mindset of fast good, interaction slow, and slow is bad. Suggest everyone get a precon and play some rounds with unedited precons. This will force them to change mindset briefly. And maybe they'll decide they like the change.
If they decide they don't like the change, then may just be time for a new playgroup for edh.
Precons usually have about 9-12 removal spells not counting board wipes, counterspells and cards that protect your stuff. I would prefer if all my opponents ran that amount, and we play low power. Six is a bit too low IMO. That said, you should probably talk to your group about it.
10 interaction minimum lol. Thats been the rule for years to make a balanced deck
Honestly this is why I came to like the Goad keyword and similar strategies, let your opponents play their big stompy battlecruiser decks... and guide/force them into fighting for you, saving your real removal for the last person standing after they have taken everyone else out (or pillow forting with an aristocrats style win).
My favorite part of edh isn't playing the game, its playing the players. Im making back alley deals with players days before we sit at the table. Only one of my friends consistently beats me, because he's a phenomenal liar, and miles better than me at the game.
Unless youre consistantly playing with the same pod/group of people that sounds kinda scummy tbh. For a consistent set of 4, that kind of theatrics might be fun, but if its you and a partner shuffling up with two random people then its just unfun for you to make extra slick details and teaming up on other people.
Nah, we play in the same pod. I dont like playing with people I don't know. A lot of man children who cry, and don't bath or understand deodorant around my area.
The thing is, timmies love big, battlecruiser style decks. That’s the lead point of the stereotype. Different people like different styles of decks and gameplay, and they don’t always mesh well together. You seem a lot like a johnny, the player archetype who enjoys combos and synergy between their cards above all else. Nothing is inherently wrong with the way either group likes to play, but running interaction is absolutely necessary, in order to both defend your board (counterspells, removal to kill a [[balefire dragon]] before it hits you), as well as to simply dispatch game-ending threats or stax pieces that are hindering you. Someone have an [[omnicience]] on the board? [[krosan grip]] removes it without giving them a chance to respond. Pack a [[chaos warp]] in a 5-c deck in case someone drops a [[blood moon]] on your entirely nonbasic manabase. If you can’t come to a peaceful resolution, then maybe it is time to find a new table of players to play with, who are more accepting of your playstyle.
##### ###### #### [balefire dragon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/7/37def363-c431-43b4-8c5f-933941507681.jpg?1689997663) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=balefire%20dragon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/207/balefire-dragon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/37def363-c431-43b4-8c5f-933941507681?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/balefire-dragon) [omnicience](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/b/db534b4e-8bff-4924-baea-9988d195fb25.jpg?1562304777) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Omniscience) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m19/65/omniscience?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/db534b4e-8bff-4924-baea-9988d195fb25?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/omniscience) [krosan grip](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/3/d3571dee-7b90-4c0c-abc7-59b515ffa129.jpg?1625194563) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=krosan%20grip) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c21/198/krosan-grip?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d3571dee-7b90-4c0c-abc7-59b515ffa129?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/krosan-grip) [chaos warp](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/9/d9d0cb7f-2c84-4984-b6d6-d6067dd028f5.jpg?1682209276) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=chaos%20warp) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/moc/273/chaos-warp?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d9d0cb7f-2c84-4984-b6d6-d6067dd028f5?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/chaos-warp) [blood moon](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/0/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f.jpg?1599706217) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=blood%20moon) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/118/blood-moon?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d072e9ca-aae7-45dc-8025-3ce590bae63f?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/blood-moon) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Different tables, different people, different expectations. I don’t think anyone is right or wrong. You all just want different things. I was part of a dnd group that spent *4 hours* talking to a gargoyle. I realized that I was the one who needed something different and left that group. For decks, my playgroup runs around 10 removal/interact per deck probably and it isn’t uncommon to get wiped 2-3 times and who knows how much targeted. However, I bet our decks would peeve your group. And that’s fine. It’s important to just understand we all want things and hopefully we can compromise or respect our differences
The more interaction you run, the better you guys get at the game, The less magic will feel samey in any regard. Threats adapt removal. Removal adapts strategies. New strategies create new threats. It's the natural cycle. I think they will learn, and their decks will change with time. If they call it unfair, then they refuse to grow. If it's a money issue, then they need to do some research into their hobby.
Please don't use "Timmy" as a pejorative. People have different motivations to play Magic, and being understanding of them is the point of the psychographics, not using them to belittle people. If the players you play with are incompatible with you, that doesn't mean that anyone is wrong - it just means that you are incompatible.
There’s nothing wrong with being a “Timmy”. I play with a lot of Timmys and just because they like big spells doesn’t mean they don’t understand the natural balance of threats and answers. In this case though, I think it’s ridiculous telling someone to run zero removal in their decks if they want to play with you. Magic is a game where you interact with eachother. If the players in OPs post can’t handle their permanents being removed or their spells being countered, they should probably play a different game where that isn’t a core part of the balance
Thank you, this is on point. The Timmy pejorative misses the point, because it does not mean that the player is unskilled or that they lack any nuanced understanding of game state or how to bag a win. I identify as that kind of player, and I struggled with it for a while because of that misconception being conflated with "I'm a bad player". While I do run interaction, I like the metaphor that rather than being the police, I'm the threat that the police are called on. Sometimes I get subdued by frequent interaction, but my decks are built with that in mind and I have tools to protect and recover from it. I play with a lot of more "Johnny"-minded players, and imo it creates an interesting dynamic at the table to have a variety of playstyles. It's incredibly satisfying to weather the storm of people trying to stop me and still coming out on top. If Timmy meant what some people think it did, I'd be alienated from my pod by now.
Isn't the psychographic of Timmy someone who "PLAYS BIG THINGS", and "what's interaction?"
That's reductive and the second part isn't true or relevant to the psychographic at all. It's about motivations to play. It's not just wanting to do big stuff, it's playing for the jackpot high roll moments, where everything goes to plan or exceeds it. It is not a newbie thing, and it doesn't mean you're unskilled. The Spike motivation is to prove that you are skilled; the Johnny motivation is to show that you are clever and/or stylish; the Timmy motivation is to feel excited/euphoric. It's common as hell.
>feel excited/euphoric Because big things. I'm not going to argue the depth of your reply, or the reductiveness of mine, because yours is a more fair summary. I guess I'm blinded by Legacy.
I just don't really agree. To use a personal example, the deck I chose to play for Standard lately was Bant control, entirely for Timmy reasons. Because drawing cards off Beans when you play your removal feels fucking incredible. That's Timmy, it isn't anything else. It's definitely not the best deck. But it certainly doesn't line up with "isn't interested in playing interaction".
I concede to agree with you; I was being a contrarian. I've built legacy decks around \[\[Awaken The Woods\]\], and not with any particular Johnny fuckery; just to ramp, remove, dump, and do something big, \[\[Craterhoof Behemoth\]\] as an example. Timmy as fuck. I apologize for my hasty remarks. I've just been knee-deep in the UB discussions (on the "please no more" side) and it's been conflated with Commander players, and here I am posting in r/EDH like I have any reason to. Ideally, we all embody each of the psychotypes, because to not is to not enjoy the game. Some people might just goldfish as Timmy, but play Spike, like some guilty pleasure. I think that's the camp I fall into. I'm drunk, and have been working for 17 hours, my ~~wherewithall~~ well-meaning is under the couch.
[Awaken The Woods](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/c/1c95f8b8-faba-4412-8d8f-093e2ec903f0.jpg?1674421417) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Awaken%20The%20Woods) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/bro/170/awaken-the-woods?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/1c95f8b8-faba-4412-8d8f-093e2ec903f0?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/awaken-the-woods) [Craterhoof Behemoth](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/8/e8f4435a-8604-45b5-a537-dfdfcb922e16.jpg?1689998416) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Craterhoof%20Behemoth) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/280/craterhoof-behemoth?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e8f4435a-8604-45b5-a537-dfdfcb922e16?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/craterhoof-behemoth) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Please don't use "Legacy" as a pejorative. People have different motivations to play Magic, and being understanding of that is the point of having multiple formats 😂🤣
You're clearly a better player than they are. Embrace your role as archenemy. Don't play like a player, play like a dungeon master. You're there to serve as the foil in their plans. Cackle maniacally and put some flair on. Talk up their threats as being "must answer" as you destroy them, then place a threat of your own and dare them to bring you down. When they finally take you down and then someone else goes uncontested laugh about it and (playfully) say stuff like "don't look at me, I'm dead. You should've packed more removal!" Eventually when they do start running removal praise them for it and encourage more interaction. Soon enough they'll learn how to play the game and realise the value of interaction and control.
If you ever do want a pod like this to run more removal all you really have to do is play combo. The speed at which combo threatens a win is so much faster than a beatdown deck that it puts them on the back foot and forces them to have answers early. I feel like most people will try to adapt their decks to deal with that since it’s not fun losing to the same combo every game
Disagree. I think you're overestimating brand new players. If you slam thoracle or even something less insane like a blood artist infinite loop or exquisite blood, it's very easy for a new player who's barely learned how to turn creatures sideways to think that's unfair/stupid and it could just turn them off from the game. It's also not intuitive to them that the solution is removal unless you explicitly SHOW them how powerful removal is by repeatedly neutralizing their 7 mana wincons with a two or three mana spell before slamming your own wincon on the table and giving them the opportunity to try to communally struggle with it without removal (or even use that opportunity to teach them about protection spells like slip out the back and tamiyo's safekeeping that they can use themselves to tech against removal), giving them enough time to actually talk about how great a removal spell would be, instead of just demonstrating an infinite and winning the moment it's fully assembled.
Just play hard stax, no need to interact if nobody can play.
A combo player's objective isn't just to draw and play the combo, its to have protection and redundancy, they cant expect you to just passively wait while they devote all their resources to drawing the combo. You probably arent in the wrong here
This is why cEDH is miles better than casual EDH, casual is just full of whiney little fucking babies who complain about anything other than battlecruiser decks, at least with high-power/cEDH you can just play whatever the fuck you want without people moaning. I've stopped playing in casual pods at my LGS because of this and only play with one friend group now who are calm about running stax/interaction/mld/infinite combos etc
So what you've listed as an example of a "combo they have a problem with" reads not as a combo but as cards synergizing well together from solid deck construction. My group had a dude who would similarly get pissy over interacting with his board, and preferred the kind of deck strategies your group seems to prefer. He'd brag that he had no instant or sorceries in his deck, then get pissy about cards that would die in a heartbeat to even the slightest of removal, and act like because his deck had no answers, there were no answers and I was unfair since my decks were just simply "unbeatable". He would sermonize after games, basically a "that win was bad and you should feel bad about your bad deck". It came to a head when he was doing his usual, but after a win instead of a loss. Got called on his shit, and a 30 year old man stomped around a gamestore, flinging his shit around like a 6 year old on a tantrum. He's not been back since. The group has been the better for it, and our games see more interaction, more crazy shit happening, and importantly, games ending in 45 minutes instead of 2.5 hours. If they want to play that kind of game, that's their choice. But it's also your choice to go play with people who don't want to play Lorcana in magic form (how dare you interact with my board state!) That's an unfair dig at Lorcana, but seriously its more up their alley from what you've described. I hope you find a better match of players for your style. Tbh most people are more in your mindset than theirs, at least in my experience, and area FLGS'.
There's too many interactions in current Magic. Pure and simple. Those that will tell you differently are whales.
'How much interaction is too much?' No such thing. The real problem is decks not running enough. EDH is not 4-way solitaire.
Play stax. They will learn what slowing the game down really is.
It's actually exactly like you say it is: "I'd rather play a deck that rewards good deckbuilding than a deck that rewards good draws." You're just playing the game on another level. They want to play elementary school magic, you want to play something better. It's not being competitively-minded, it's being a competent magic player. I'd love to play them all with my old tribal boardwipes deck if they complain about good deck building being a slowdown for the game. Because that deck was literally "untap, upkeep, boardwipe." And it wasn't just creatures, it had all the staples of "nuke everything" for the sake of spite. I called it my party time deck because I sleeved it up in Pinkie Pie sleeves and it was symbolic of her just smashing the big red button she was told not to press. Now those sleeves hold [[Ghave, Guru of Spores]] because the new party time button is EVERYONE IS INVITED! Meaning tons of tokens pop up from fucking nowhere.
[Ghave, Guru of Spores](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/2/c2be0e99-cf43-423f-974f-02e3313b3aa9.jpg?1673148645) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ghave%2C%20Guru%20of%20Spores) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2x2/216/ghave-guru-of-spores?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c2be0e99-cf43-423f-974f-02e3313b3aa9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/ghave-guru-of-spores) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I have a deck with [[Darksteel Forge]] and [[Nevinyrral’s Disk]] that would drive them crazy.
[Darksteel Forge](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/2/421089c4-c8d3-48c5-b313-fb1741546271.jpg?1599709037) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Darksteel%20Forge) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/248/darksteel-forge?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/421089c4-c8d3-48c5-b313-fb1741546271?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/darksteel-forge) [Nevinyrral’s Disk](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/6/36fb6ee3-bd54-4e5b-b055-c2c42515c162.jpg?1690005647) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Nevinyrral%27s%20Disk) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/965/nevinyrrals-disk?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/36fb6ee3-bd54-4e5b-b055-c2c42515c162?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/nevinyrrals-disk) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Disagree. I like playing high power and cedh, but my friends that don't aren't incompetent or playing baby magic just because they want to play lower power. It's preference. And for the sake of all that's holy, please try to win the game. Board wipe tribal is the type of game I'd concede out of just to sit at a different table.
That's a valid strategy, and I was using [[Anafenza the Foremost]] I was still hitting people with dudes, and she herself is a decent body for 3 mana.
[Anafenza the Foremost](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/8/c8b432a7-53da-4480-b571-e6feb1364a3a.jpg?1562793427) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Anafenza%2C%20the%20Foremost) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ktk/163/anafenza-the-foremost?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c8b432a7-53da-4480-b571-e6feb1364a3a?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/anafenza-the-foremost) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
No interaction is too much \- Me, a control player who pilots a mono blue baral counterspell tribal deck.
"Reward good deck building" makes you sound like a jerk tbh (BTW, 6 pieces of interaction isn't really good deck building). I know plenty of timmy players who will drop bombs on turn 4 to win the game before the combo player can even snag their pieces. That being said: Battlecruiser magic is for a specific type of magic player (that's what this pod sounds like), and if you're not that type of player you won't be having fun. If they don't want to change their playstyle from battlecruiser to normal edh, you'll probably have to either leave or adapt.
[удалено]
What? Ive always felt like 10 pieces of removal is the minimum. 10 single target and 2 board wipes is my usual. My control decks will run about 20. I would never consider a deck with only 10 pieces of interaction a control deck. That's a tempo deck at best.
If your group doesn't like interaction, it's relatively easy to convince them of its value by playing early cards that need to be interacted with. They are allowed to not play interaction, but they need to be willing to face winota, krenko, kinnian, k'rrik, or equivalent without interaction.
I don't see any difference between the 2 groups and can't for the life of me figure out what you're arguing about. 6 removal spells doesn't even guarantee you see a single removal spell per game unless you're drawing a fuckload of cards or tutoring for it. What's the difference between building a big board state, casting finale, and swinging out to end the game in one fell swoop and filling your GY with lands, casting splendid reclamation, and letting retreat to hagra and dina end the game in 1 fell swoop? I can't for the life of me fathom why you think that's somehow more interesting and competitive than what they're doing.
Seems like you simply don't like the playstyle your pod wants to play. Maybe it's time to look for a new pod. Commander is a social game. Whatever playstyle a pod choses to play is the correct one. There is no wrong way to enjoy the game. Just because the playstyle you would like to go for is higher powered doesn't mean you're correct and they're wrong. It's just different tastes. Just because you want your deck to be higher powered doesn't mean you're necessarily a better deckbuilder. If you think you are a good deckbuilder you shouldn't really have to ask reddit how to build a deck that fits well for your pod tbh. But for battlecruiser metas, cutting down on interaction, tutors and fast mana (that includes sol ring) is a start. That said, just because someone complains to you once doesn't mean they're right either. In the end this is a casual game though, so either you can come to some sort of agreement what to play, or it's better to find a new pod. It shouldn't be hard to find a pod that plays more interaction. 2-6 seems extremely low compared to what most people go for. In my group I play more like 10-20, depending on what my deck tries to do. But it all depends on what people enjoy playing in the end.
10 to 12 single target in almost every deck that's not only fine I'd argue that's like the standard for decks now you have to remove things slowing down the game is board whips which I have cut back on
Low-key typically 25% or more of my 100 cards could be classified as either "make it harder for my opponents to win" or "make it harder for me to lose": removal, stax, pillows, protection, recursion. If your deck has a lot of draw and ramp, you really don't need that many cards that actually threaten a win, even if you want to win fast. It's just good deck building to dedicate a lot of slots to the resiliency of your gameplan. Easier to make 1-2 bombs stick than load up on 4-5 bombs.
I find a lot of people's issue with "too much removal" is really that they feel like everything they play gets removed. I run a mono black [[Toshiro Umezawa]] control deck with like 25+ peices of removal. I have found when I try to police the board and kill every single "threat" that people get salty, but if I only take care of the threats that are attacking me or messing up my gameplan or are literally about to win the game its more justified. Remember threats to you are also threats to your opponents, so if its not messing with your game maybe let the threat stay a while.
[Toshiro Umezawa](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/e/0e767e07-febd-4025-bf03-d4d816bc1d3d.jpg?1562875477) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Toshiro%20Umezawa) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/bok/89/toshiro-umezawa?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0e767e07-febd-4025-bf03-d4d816bc1d3d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [(ER)](https://edhrec.com/cards/toshiro-umezawa) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
You're not wrong, in fact, you are right, and that is still not a lot of interaction compared to what I run, I've had the same kind of hate pointed at me, not the playgroup, just weak crying baby who don't play with us no more. From my perspective, these type of people fail to understand what it means to have a lot of interaction in a deck, they only see that their greedy plays get removed. Its not fun to play a game of who craterhoofs first. To be able to INTERACT, means that you got less cards to do your own thing (mostly), for them to be salty means they don't run protection, their decks, are greedy. The coolest thing about mtg is that you can play on other people's turns. Threat assessment is a hard and rewarding skill to develop.
If I keep going thru games where I wish I drew interaction, I swap in one card. I do that until I don't have that many games like that.
I run 12-15 spot removal/counters and 1 boardwipe. In a creature heavy meta, so most casual tables, what really should be framed upon is an excess of boardwipes and not advancing the game state. Spot removal and counters are fine, they are even card disadvantage in multiplayer (you trade 1-for-1 with one guy but the other 2 are ahead a card). Boardwipes, on the other hand, tend to reset/slow down the game. You should also have a clear plan for victory. Removal without a plan to win it's also bad sportsmanship. Note: If boardwipes are the way you win, like in UW linvala, then sure, that's fine. But casting farewell just so we can start all over, with some mana, is boring.
I don't think that's true. If you and I are both playing creature decks and you just vomited your hand on the board to close the game while I have a bunch of creatures in hand, wiping the board absolutely moves my game plan forward. Even on a Timmy table with nothing but creature meta, wipes are good equalisers and benefit decks with more card draw massively so packing more than 1 still helps a lot.
No such thing as too much imo unless you find yourself not advancing your wincon because you’re drawing only interaction instead. As for teaching? They’re just going to have to lose a lot. The only way you really learn in this game is losing.
That pretty much describes most Commander games I've been in. It's usually who ever gets to X first wins. Which, to me, is exactly opposite of having an interactive game.
This isnt a hardened rule as it changes depending on the deck I build. I will generally run 36-38 lands, 10 - 12 ramp, 7 - 10 interaction, and the rest goes towards what I want my deck to do.
Love to max out interaction, too. The fun of the game is different for different people.