Kirkusjones presents: DirkGently's polite debate corner aka the Thunderdome

[EonAon]

Realistically I'm going to play the card. Not even going to have tutors in the deck barring land fetch. Am I counting on just that particular card to win, nope I'm going to have at least 2 other combo/wincons in the deck so I will always have a backup plan. If anything, I think Tyrranids are UB slivers in some respects.

Also this felt more like the other guy was saying "Don't run that card" - bad since it seemed they were more down on combo than suggesting alternatives.

[tstorm823]

And since it's outside the command zone, if you're significantly warping the deck to exploit it I think the deck overall probably becomes worse.

You may not need to warp the deck at all if it incidentally lines up with what you're doing anyway. For example, I know in my Zedruu that if I cast Saheeli, Sublime Artificer with Venser, the Sojourner in my deck, I deterministically get Venser because I only run those two walkers, and Venser's flicker effect can eliminate Possibility Storm on only my turn, making the effect somewhat asymmetrical.

Is that enough of a contention or is that more or less in line with your thoughts on it?

Not terribly contentious, no. Pretty agreeable, to be honest.

Of course at a certain point it stops mattering as much - a thoracle cEDH deck will probably be able to combo out against a casual table even if everyone is holding up 100% of their answers. But I think a lot of scrubs - and by "a lot of scrubs" I mostly mean Jon - will power up their decks but find themselves treading water because the stronger they get, the more people will interact with them, even when they aren't currently capable of powerful things.

This is how I interpret the comment from the Discord user being discussed: "Yes, it's why I would remove it. It's a very basic combo, easier to pull off than Consult+Thoracle in a deck that is otherwise not at all competitive"

The "deck that is otherwise not at all competitive" is a not spontaneous condescension, it's a key part of the strategic argument being made, that adding in one exceptionally strong element to an otherwise medium powered deck forces attention onto the deck that it is nearly never going to be able to handle.

[DirkGently]

Realistically I'm going to play the card. Not even going to have tutors in the deck barring land fetch.

I mean, if you're not running tutors (for that card), isn't that kinda the same decision, just one step further along?

You may not need to warp the deck at all if it incidentally lines up with what you're doing anyway. For example, I know in my Zedruu that if I cast Saheeli, Sublime Artificer with Venser, the Sojourner in my deck, I deterministically get Venser because I only run those two walkers, and Venser's flicker effect can eliminate Possibility Storm on only my turn, making the effect somewhat asymmetrical.

That's a defeater for any argument around build-around requirements - if you were literally planning to build the deck exactly the same way without that card, then I guess the build-around requirements don't matter?

That said I've never really understood wtf your zedruu deck is trying to do so none of the decisions make any sense to me But I think that's a dead horse at this point.

The "deck that is otherwise not at all competitive" is a not spontaneous condescension, it's a key part of the strategic argument being made, that adding in one exceptionally strong element to an otherwise medium powered deck forces attention onto the deck that it is nearly never going to be able to handle.

I think it's pretty subject to human factors tbh. People might overreact with removal it if it wins once or twice, but putting one combo piece with no tutors into the deck is still pretty low odds of coming up, so it shouldn't generate too much targeting from a strictly logical perspective. Personally I'd maybe camp on removal until I figured they didn't have it, but I do that anyway for any number of reasons. I wouldn't be nuking the commander every time it hits the table, in the way I might for Niv-Mizzet, Parun which has multiple infinites plus countermagic protection plus massive value even without the combo.

To me the "can't handle it" issue would be bigger if, say, the deck had a bunch of tutors for the combo but no protective spells. Then your opponents are forced to treat you as an imminent threat, but you'll always get owned in the exchange. Having a 1-off game-winner in the deck doesn't force massive aggression in that way, so it's more likely that, if you get lucky, you'll resolve it since it's a rare occurrence.

It's tricky to think about how to make a deck stronger in ways that aren't largely offset by additional targeting, or which sorts of decks will draw more hate than they can handle. In principle hate should be proportional to power, so neither should really change things (within certain bounds) - but ofc how people will react always leaves a lot of room for variance.

[tstorm823]

That's a defeater for any argument around build-around requirements - if you were literally planning to build the deck exactly the same way without that card, then I guess the build-around requirements don't matter?

Fair point.

[DirkGently]

Not sure if anyone still wants to talk about this, but fair enough - the thunderdome is probably the correct place for it.

Tivit, Seller of Secrets - how good is he?

I'm mostly theorycrafting here since I've played against him...once? Not many times at any rate. So to some extent this is speaking from ignorance. But I want to break it down a bit.

First of all - I'm taking Time Sieve off the table. If you're playing time sieve, imo that means everything is on the table, which means you're playing cEDH. I don't play cEDH, so I don't evaluate cards in that context. I'm happy to accept that Tivit is a strong commander within that format...but I don't really care beyond idle curiosity.

So beyond that - I'm assuming that your opponents are basically 100% voting for clues every time, and you're voting for treasure every time (which, btw, is kinda lame from a design pov imo). My big issue with this is that clue tokens are pretty meh? Like, if Tivit didn't have all the voting business and just had "{2}: draw a card" - i.e. infinite "clues" - I wouldn't be very impressed for a 6-drop. I mean compare to Arcanis the Omnipotent, another 6-drop who draws 3 per turn without any mana investment at all. Aesi, Tyrant of Gyre Strait is drawing 2+ cards per turn plus ramping you. I'm not that hot on the new Rakdos, Patron of Chaos, and he will basically always draw 2 cards per turn with no mana investment. At the 6 mv price point there are so many much more efficient ways to draw cards, and I think most powerful decks should have a more efficient means available to them in most cases. So to me, unless you're packing a lot of cards that care about having random artifacts lying around, the clues are a bit of a nothingburger. So we mostly have etb/hit a player = 2 treasures. Which isn't nothing - it's nice that it gives you counterspell mana - but if I wanted treasure I'd play, idk, Malcolm, Keen-Eyed Navigator or Lotho, Corrupt Shirriff or Prosper, Tome-Bound or Mahadi, Emporium Master or Old Gnawbone or Emissary Green or Magda, Brazen Outlaw or Guild Artisan or Ognis, the Dragon's Lash...most of which are cheaper, sometimes much cheaper, than tivit, and don't primarily operate by needing to actually bonk people in the face.

Which is the other thing I don't like about him - bonking people in the face to get triggers tends to attract more attention than most other sorts of triggers. People don't like being bonked in the face, in my experience. Ward 3 is nice and all, but if you're hitting people in the face I think people are going to pay the 3. You could go blink, I guess, but then you're on par with Ramirez DePietro, Pillager and I don't find that super impressive.

All this is not to say that I think he's bad. I think he's pretty good. I just don't think he's amazing or anything. I think I said C+ earlier. Maybe B-? in that range imo. He does have a very good CI. I just want my 6-drop to do a bit more.

[Mookie]

I've played against Tivit, Seller of Secrets a bit, and my opinion of Tivit is that the floor is very high.

The biggest contributor is probably the fact that Tivit triggers on ETB - unless Tivit is countered (which is rare at more casual tables), its controller will always get value. As you called out, that will usually be in the form of a couple of treasures, with opponents voting for clues. Is six mana for two treasure tokens and three clue tokens good? It's not the most efficient, but it does mean that the Tivit deck rarely runs out of gas.

The second thing I'll call out is ward. Throwing Swords to Plowshares at it costs four mana. Tivit costs six mana, and can generate two treasures on ETB. This means that even if Tivit is immediately killed, it will still be neutral on mana - its controller paid four net mana, and it cost four mana to kill it (ignoring the 'kill in response to trigger to deny extra vote' option, which is often missed). This means Tivit is a pretty strong tempo play. Plus, there are plenty of times when people just don't have (or can't pay for) removal... and there are also times when someone pays for ward, only for Tivit's controller to use treasure mana for a counterspell. Tivit is hard to punish without countermagic or dedicated hate pieces.

Finally, I'll call out all the random synergies Tivit feeds into. Ignoring Time Sieve, you still have token doublers like Anointed Procession, blink effects like Panharmonicon / Ephemerate / Conjurer's Closet, and artifact synergies like Tezzeret, Betrayer of Flesh / Inspiring Statuary. Tivit triggers are pretty strong, and the decks I've seen are built to get as many of them as possible.

Overall, I feel like Tivit does a decent Maelstrom Wanderer impression - you ramp into it, generate a bunch of value in a way that is difficult to interact with... and if opponents throw removal at it, you happily do so again. Tivit also generates a bunch of card advantage and sort of cheats on commander tax via treasure, which makes it difficult to keep out of the game.... and if it ever is flickered or gets to connect, then additional triggers can snowball quickly.

That said, it may be meta-dependent - if your meta has a bunch of Torpor Orb / Null Rod / Counterspells running around, Tivit will be much worse. I've only played against a couple of Tivit decks, but I do think they're some of the stronger decks in my (admittedly relatively casual) meta.

[DirkGently]

The second thing I'll call out is ward. Throwing Swords to Plowshares at it costs four mana. Tivit costs six mana, and can generate two treasures on ETB. This means that even if Tivit is immediately killed, it will still be neutral on mana - its controller paid four net mana, and it cost four mana to kill it (ignoring the 'kill in response to trigger to deny extra vote' option, which is often missed). This means Tivit is a pretty strong tempo play.

In 1v1 sure, but in multiplayer I'm not happy about trading 4 mana for 4 mana with 1 opponent.

If tivit just vibed on the field and did his thing, then I could see people being deterred by the annoyance of the ward, but if he's hitting them in the face (which is presumably the goal) I feel like people will target him fairly aggressively despite the extra cost.

Finally, I'll call out all the random synergies Tivit feeds into. Ignoring Time Sieve, you still have token doublers like Anointed Procession, blink effects like Panharmonicon / Ephemerate / Conjurer's Closet, and artifact synergies like Tezzeret, Betrayer of Flesh / Inspiring Statuary. Tivit triggers are pretty strong, and the decks I've seen are built to get as many of them as possible.

Statuary and tezzeret seem okay, but the other stuff seems kinda meh? You probably already have way more clues than you can reasonably crack, so the only important part (barring other artifact synergies) is the 2 extra treasures, right?

I guess for me it depends how many good cards care about the number of artifacts you have, because I do see that he's among the more efficient commanders to dump a bunch of artifact tokens on the field. If we're just using clues as clues, though, seems kinda bad.

Overall, I feel like Tivit does a decent Maelstrom Wanderer impression - you ramp into it, generate a bunch of value in a way that is difficult to interact with... and if opponents throw removal at it, you happily do so again. Tivit also generates a bunch of card advantage and sort of cheats on commander tax via treasure, which makes it difficult to keep out of the game.... and if it ever is flickered or gets to connect, then additional triggers can snowball quickly.

MW does so much more tempo though. MW is going to dump perhaps 8 more mana worth of stuff on the field, even if he gets countered, with haste. And if he hits a ramp spell, that ramp spell can help recast him over and over. Whereas Tivit makes 2 single-use treasures, which can quickly become insufficient to cover his tax if he's dying repeatedly, and puts no additional tempo on the ground. So I don't really see the comparison tbh. Granted MW does cost 8 instead of 6.

[Mookie]

In 1v1 sure, but in multiplayer I'm not happy about trading 4 mana for 4 mana with 1 opponent.

That's true from both perspectives - 'I spend 4 mana to kill Tivit and my opponent just cast it again next turn with the treasure' also feels pretty bad. Four mana is also a hefty cost in the midgame - if two of my opponents play Tivit and some other threat without protection and I have a cheap removal spell and my own threat in hand I want to play, then I'm usually going to prioritize developing my own board over killing the scarier threat. Ward isn't hexproof, but it is extra friction that makes Tivit stickier.

...and, again, 'I throw removal at Tivit and its controller counters it after I pay the ward cost' is a play I've seen, and a massive tempo loss for the person trying to kill Tivit.

I guess for me it depends how many good cards care about the number of artifacts you have, because I do see that he's among the more efficient commanders to dump a bunch of artifact tokens on the field. If we're just using clues as clues, though, seems kinda bad.

Yeah, I'll agree that paying to crack clues it pretty underwhelming. It's not bad if you're topdecking, but that's rarely the case these days. Tivit does mean its controller doesn't need to run as much card draw in the 99 though.

I think the real value in clues / treasures is the sheer number - Tivit is capable of generating more artifact tokens than any other commander I can think of without needing any additional investment. Making a clue token isn't better than directly drawing a card, but I wouldn't say it is worse either - Krark-Clan Ironworks, Blinkmoth Urn, Academy Manufactor, Kappa Cannoneer... even jankier stuff like Arcbound Crusher. There are a lot of cards out there that reward you for playing lots of artifacts or for playing lots of tokens, and Tivit does both.

MW does so much more tempo though. MW is going to dump perhaps 8 more mana worth of stuff on the field, even if he gets countered, with haste. And if he hits a ramp spell, that ramp spell can help recast him over and over. Whereas Tivit makes 2 single-use treasures, which can quickly become insufficient to cover his tax if he's dying repeatedly, and puts no additional tempo on the ground. So I don't really see the comparison tbh. Granted MW does cost 8 instead of 6.

Yeah, not quite the same thing due to treasures being a 1-shot effect (unless you have Urza, Lord High Artificer or some other way to turn them into mana). Tivit does fall into the broader intersection of 'draws cards' and 'generates mana' though, and my experience is that commanders that do both tend to be quite strong.

[DirkGently]

That's true from both perspectives - 'I spend 4 mana to kill Tivit and my opponent just cast it again next turn with the treasure' also feels pretty bad. Four mana is also a hefty cost in the midgame - if two of my opponents play Tivit and some other threat without protection and I have a cheap removal spell and my own threat in hand I want to play, then I'm usually going to prioritize developing my own board over killing the scarier threat. Ward isn't hexproof, but it is extra friction that makes Tivit stickier.

I would never target a less important target based on the ward cost. Well, maybe not NEVER never, but functionally never. If I wanted to develop more than kill Tivit (assuming tivit is the bigger threat), then I would just hold onto the removal for later.

That said I probably wouldn't feel compelled to kill him unless he was attacking me specifically or was way ahead.

...and, again, 'I throw removal at Tivit and its controller counters it after I pay the ward cost' is a play I've seen, and a massive tempo loss for the person trying to kill Tivit.

Definitely annoying for the person targeting, I'm just not that psyched about tempo rolling one opponent in a 4p game.

I think the real value in clues / treasures is the sheer number - Tivit is capable of generating more artifact tokens than any other commander I can think of without needing any additional investment. Making a clue token isn't better than directly drawing a card, but I wouldn't say it is worse either - Krark-Clan Ironworks, Blinkmoth Urn, Academy Manufactor, Kappa Cannoneer... even jankier stuff like Arcbound Crusher. There are a lot of cards out there that reward you for playing lots of artifacts or for playing lots of tokens, and Tivit does both.

My issue with this direction for the deck is that the deck gets increasingly unwieldy in terms of functions. Tivit wants to be a control deck which already wants a lot of deck spots, and then he needs ramp becase he's a 6-drop, and a way to get through and/or blink to keep triggering, and now we also need "cards that care about number of artifacts". I don't like having a ton of different functions since it increases the risk I fail to draw something critical. That is partly my deckbuilding style, but I happen to think it's a pretty good style.

Yeah, not quite the same thing due to treasures being a 1-shot effect (unless you have Urza, Lord High Artificer or some other way to turn them into mana). Tivit does fall into the broader intersection of 'draws cards' and 'generates mana' though, and my experience is that commanders that do both tend to be quite strong.

I don't really think MW as "draw cards" - he creates a lot of tempo. Tivit doesn't really. I guess if you want to compare them directly, MW probably casts...idk, let's say 7mv on average worth of stuff? Maybe 6? I'll say 6. And he "draws" those 2 nonland cards. So he's rebating all but 2 of his mana (even if countered), plus drawing 2 cards immediately, plus giving it all haste plus himself with haste. Where tivit gives a rebate of 2 of his mana (all but 4 of his mana) and doesn't draw anything yet and doesn't give haste and can't attack yet. In terms of immediate impact MW seems way, way more aggressive to me. Again, not totally fair since MW costs 8 but you started the comparison.

I think the vast majority of my issue with Tivit would be resolved if he had a "etb or attacks" trigger instead of "etb of hit" trigger. Hit is way way less reliable imo.

[Mookie]

My issue with this direction for the deck is that the deck gets increasingly unwieldy in terms of functions. Tivit wants to be a control deck which already wants a lot of deck spots, and then he needs ramp becase he's a 6-drop, and a way to get through and/or blink to keep triggering, and now we also need "cards that care about number of artifacts". I don't like having a ton of different functions since it increases the risk I fail to draw something critical. That is partly my deckbuilding style, but I happen to think it's a pretty good style.

Yeah, that's fair - it's definitely possible to go too deep. The decks I've seen lean more towards the blink side of things, with a few of the more premium artifact synergies as a subtheme. There is plenty of overlap between the two themes though.

I think the vast majority of my issue with Tivit would be resolved if he had a "etb or attacks" trigger instead of "etb of hit" trigger. Hit is way way less reliable imo.

Again, I see Tivit more as a blink theme, trying to get as many Tivit triggers as possible. I'd estimate the ratio of ETB : damage triggers to be at least 3:1, largely due to the inclusion of flicker and Panharmonicon effects - you could remove the combat damage trigger entirely and I don't think it would change Tivit's gameplay that much. That said, I do think flying is sufficient evasion for most games - there's usually someone at the table without flying blockers or reach (or they just don't want to chump block a 6/6 with a smaller flyer).

...and of course, any instant-speed blink effects also make Tivit even more obnoxious to kill.

[DirkGently]

Yeah, that's fair - it's definitely possible to go too deep. The decks I've seen lean more towards the blink side of things, with a few of the more premium artifact synergies as a subtheme. There is plenty of overlap between the two themes though.

between blink and number-of-artifacts-matters? i can't think of any cards offhand that contribute to both themes but maybe i'm not thinking hard enough.

Or do you mean most decks use a mix of both themes?

Again, I see Tivit more as a blink theme, trying to get as many Tivit triggers as possible. I'd estimate the ratio of ETB : damage triggers to be at least 3:1, largely due to the inclusion of flicker and Panharmonicon effects - you could remove the combat damage trigger entirely and I don't think it would change Tivit's gameplay that much. That said, I do think flying is sufficient evasion for most games - there's usually someone at the table without flying blockers or reach (or they just don't want to chump block a 6/6 with a smaller flyer).

...and of course, any instant-speed blink effects also make Tivit even more obnoxious to kill.

Interesting. Is Tivit really the best choice for blinking though? I'll admit the ward does help a lot in terms of successfully resolving a blink, since people probably can't repeatedly target him with removal. But in terms of raw value, something like Etali, Primal Conqueror // Etali, Primal Sickness, Prime Speaker Zegana, Yorion, Sky Nomad, Phylath, World Sculptor, Atraxa, Grand Unifier, Tishana, Voice of Thunder, Sharuum the Hegemon, Lena, Selfless Champion, Soul of Windgrace, Niv-Mizzet Reborn...Hazezon Tamar lol...all those seem higher impact, or at least better for the cost. I guess as the power level increases, the safety of being able to blink without getting blown out my removal becomes more valuable relative to the raw power of something like etali. And ofc not all of those have access to good blink effects (though red has some copy stuff, black has some undying-type stuff, so I think it's mostly just green that's pretty SOL).

Looking at EDHrec, I do notice that I forgot Deadeye Navigator also goes infinite with him (ugh). It's kinda hard to get a bead on exactly how people are building him since fully 70% of decks are using time sieve, but also 46% of decks are using Plea for Power and 40% using Grudge Keeper so there's definitely some overlap between the combo builds and the casual vote-focused builds. I'd definitely be a bit annoyed if someone was fronting a gimmicky vote deck and then busted out time sieve but w/e =/ that's the cEDH blur that commander's rapid growth has created...sigh.

I guess I'm probably underrating him but I still have a hard time getting excited looking at him. To compare to Emissary Green, green's power is much more focused - his attack trigger is really strong, you're getting 8 treasures or Decree of Savagery or something in between. Simple as. Tivit's trigger seems pretty middling by comparison, plus you need to actually connect...oh but it triggers on etb as well...and he has ward...and he has flying...and he has a big body...and he improves your other vote cards...and he has a couple infinites...and you can get value from number of artifacts...idk, it just feels very scattershot to me. Like he's a crappy card that they kept tacking abilities onto until I guess he's good?

[duducrash]

Tivit is really strong, you could counter him, but I Imagine if you did everything right, you are probably waiting for a good situation to slam it on the battlefield. if it resolves, you could get at least 2 mana back to protect him. Then you have several good routes to go. in esper you could hard control and leave mana up. possibilities of counter, remova and or cracking the clues. Those tokens could also have other artifact synergies you could easily kill someone while also advancing your game. If they spend the 4 mana to Swords to Plowshares your commander and you blink it. they are down one spell, 4 mana and you get your ETBs again. I think tivits floor is a super strong deck, and as we know, his ceiling is among, if not the most powerfull decks in the format. I think both his abilities are good, second one being super interesting. And if thats not enough, he is virtually a 6/6 flying war 3 for 4Mana*

And thing is, this speciality tokens don't get much worse over time. we just got a bunch of clue support, and in a few years we will get a bunch more and so on and this gives him a even higher floor in casual.

[DirkGently]

Tivit is really strong, you could counter him, but I Imagine if you did everything right, you are probably waiting for a good situation to slam it on the battlefield. if it resolves, you could get at least 2 mana back to protect him.

I mean, if someone wants to kill him (and doesn't have counterspells) they're obviously going to kill him in response to the trigger. So you'll get 1 mana and you won't have it in time to protect him.

Don't speak to me of sorcery speed removal, it isn't real.

I think both his abilities are good, second one being super interesting.

Obviously this is purely personal preference but I think green has a much more interesting vote mechanic. Tivit, unless you're completely out of cards in hand, or have infinite mana, everyone else will probably always vote for clues and you'll always vote for treasure. So the whole "voting" thing is kinda fake and a waste of time, if he said "etb/hit = make 3 clues and 2 treasure" he'd practically be the same card. By contrast how people vote for green is going to depend heavily on your board state and what sorts of mana sinks you may have available.

And if thats not enough, he is virtually a 6/6 flying war 3 for 4Mana*

Yeah not really though. You can run a 4-drop commander and get it out in a reasonable time frame with no ramp, or minimal ramp. 6-drop kinda mandates a fair chunk of ramp to get onto the board in a reasonable time frame, even if it gives you some of the mana back afterwards.

And thing is, this speciality tokens don't get much worse over time. we just got a bunch of clue support, and in a few years we will get a bunch more and so on and this gives him a even higher floor in casual.

That's true of almost every commander though (except Lin Sivvi, Defiant Hero - she gets to become worse and worse for all eternity, apparently).

[duducrash]

Sorry about the double post, just wanted to highlight something else that could be usefull for a different debate

I'd definitely be a bit annoyed if someone was fronting a gimmicky vote deck and then busted out time sieve but w/e

I'm not judging if you are right or wrong. Just want to understand what is the the reason behind the dissapointment. As I see, the game has to end eventually, and I don't mind infinites at casual games if the rest of the game is casual enough. I think its the same as Craterhoof Behemoth . You think this is a "pre game" problem? because I think it would be ok to have a vote deck and an infinite wincon and stilll be casual, but maybe its how it is presented?

[DirkGently]

I'd definitely be a bit annoyed if someone was fronting a gimmicky vote deck and then busted out time sieve but w/e

I'm not judging if you are right or wrong. Just want to understand what is the the reason behind the dissapointment. As I see, the game has to end eventually, and I don't mind infinites at casual games if the rest of the game is casual enough. I think its the same as Craterhoof Behemoth . You think this is a "pre game" problem? because I think it would be ok to have a vote deck and an infinite wincon and stilll be casual, but maybe its how it is presented?

Trying to match power levels becomes much more difficult if someone's deck has a potentially massive disparity in how it could play out. He says "oh it's a dumb vote deck" "ok cool, I'll play my precon" and then he combos out on turn 5 because he happened to draw time sieve. Or he says "oh it's got time sieve combo" "okay cool, I'll play my tuned control deck" and then he plays a bunch of vote jank and puts up no real fight.

If I know you have a time sieve in your deck I am obligated to focus you pretty hard - once you have some random clues lying around, you could easily go infinite out of nowhere. But if the rest of your deck is incapable of putting up a serious fight, then it's going to be a pretty unsatisfying game for both of us.

If I don't know you have a time sieve, then it's going to be a bit of a sucker punch when I left you alone based on you seeming to play a casual deck, and suddenly you're taking infinite turns.

Time sieve is also just a really obnoxious card since it can often create "I haven't technically won yet but I will be taking 6 consecutive turns and making everyone sit on their hands" situations.

Infinite combos, like anything else, can be fine if it matches the expectation of the game. If you have the 4-piece station combo in your casual deck, awesome, no problem. If you have kiki-conscripts in your tuned deck, fair enough. If you have consult oracle in your cEDH, that's what I expect. But don't go putting consult oracle in your casual deck. That's obnoxious.

[Mookie]

between blink and number-of-artifacts-matters? i can't think of any cards offhand that contribute to both themes but maybe i'm not thinking hard enough.

Marionette Master and Urza, Lord High Artificer both come to mind as cards that care about being blinked and also like artifacts. Plus there are blink-friendly artifact creatures like Baleful Strix and Solemn Simulacrum that are reasonable blink targets before Tivit comes out.

I guess I'm probably underrating him but I still have a hard time getting excited looking at him. To compare to Emissary Green, green's power is much more focused - his attack trigger is really strong, you're getting 8 treasures or Decree of Savagery or something in between. Simple as. Tivit's trigger seems pretty middling by comparison, plus you need to actually connect...oh but it triggers on etb as well...and he has ward...and he has flying...and he has a big body...and he improves your other vote cards...and he has a couple infinites...and you can get value from number of artifacts...idk, it just feels very scattershot to me.

I guess my overall thesis here is: it may be better to attack with Green than with Tivit... but that doesn't matter because Tivit is all about the ETB trigger (which Green lacks).

Like he's a crappy card that they kept tacking abilities onto until I guess he's good?

Yeah, pretty much. I wouldn't necessarily say Tivit is bad, but every time I play against it I feel like it has too many abilities. It has ward, triggers on both ETB and combat damage, is a beefy 6/6 for 6, and has the static extra vote effect - take away any one of those things and it becomes much more manageable.

[DirkGently]

Marionette Master and Urza, Lord High Artificer both come to mind as cards that care about being blinked and also like artifacts. Plus there are blink-friendly artifact creatures like Baleful Strix and Solemn Simulacrum that are reasonable blink targets before Tivit comes out.

Fair enough.

I guess my overall thesis here is: it may be better to attack with Green than with Tivit... but that doesn't matter because Tivit is all about the ETB trigger (which Green lacks).

Imo it's a LOT better to attack with green, since he doesn't need to connect AND his trigger is significantly stronger in a vacuum. But fair enough I guess I wasn't taking blink as much into account as I should have.

Yeah, pretty much. I wouldn't necessarily say Tivit is bad, but every time I play against it I feel like it has too many abilities. It has ward, triggers on both ETB and combat damage, is a beefy 6/6 for 6, and has the static extra vote effect - take away any one of those things and it becomes much more manageable.

I guess you've talked me up to about a B? But the more I think about it the more I hate the design lol. So now instead of a C+/C+ he's like a B/D+.

I do like voting in the abstract but I think Tivit is a pretty bleh representative. Voting is interesting when different people will have different goals and vote differently. Green is a great example - not only may different players consider a fat board to be more/less threatening, but considering it's an attack trigger they'll likely have very different views on how threatening the +1 counters are in the immediate term. Whereas there's little reason for any of your opponents to vote differently than each other with Tivit. and everyone will almost always vote the exact same way.

[Mookie]

I guess you've talked me up to about a B? But the more I think about it the more I hate the design lol. So now instead of a C+/C+ he's like a B/D+.

I do like voting in the abstract but I think Tivit is a pretty bleh representative. Voting is interesting when different people will have different goals and vote differently. Green is a great example - not only may different players consider a fat board to be more/less threatening, but considering it's an attack trigger they'll likely have very different views on how threatening the +1 counters are in the immediate term. Whereas there's little reason for any of your opponents to vote differently than each other with Tivit. and everyone will almost always vote the exact same way.

Ha, that's roughly what I would rate Tivit too. The fact that WotC theoretically designed Tivit as a 'play lots of vote cards' commander but the best way to build it is to ignore voting and lean into other synergies certainly feels a bit egregious. I'll also agree that Green's trigger looks significantly more interesting, for the reasons you called out.

...I have mixed feelings about voting cards in general, but I do think they're more interesting when it isn't obvious how everyone will vote.

[yeti1069]

I'll just chime in to say:

I think voting on the whole is pretty bad as a mechanic.

For Tivit, I've played against in scenarios where voting treasure all around the table was the right call. It comes up rarely, but if Tivit is low on cards and doesn't (appear to) have another source of card advantage, the extra mana may be useless at the moment. That has mostly proven to be the right call in those situations.

[onering]

I think voting is a great mechanic with a lot of potential that can vary wildly in execution from garbage to broken, with plenty of good designs in between. Its a mechanic that can be utilized as an improved punisher (by making all opponents vote AND giving you some control over the outcome), an improved group hug mechanic, and politics mechanic depending on the design.

Tivit is a great example of it as an improved soft punisher mechanic. It gives you a ton of value, and you have some control over it, but your opponents can mitigate its value to you depending on their choices. I agree with Dirk that there's the Time Sieve problem, and I think it is a generally lame use, for the reasons he gives. As someone who likes to build quirky decks around little used mechanics, easy outs like that tend to turn me off of them. It does incentive you to go for it because it's the correct path to win the game, whether that's through deck building choices or through game play decisions. These sort of decks often want to be tutoring a lot to get the pieces needed to support the theme and actually deliver the intended experience, but having a card in your deck that combos with the commander makes those fun options technically incorrect. You can solve that by intentionally not including the offending cards, but that means committing to an intentionally worse deck. All the issues for opponents can be solved by pregame talk, provided the pilot is honest. If I saw this I'd ask directly whether the pilot is running the combo, and if not what the decks theme and power level is (because I also don't want to just assume based on it not going for the time sieve win, it could still be a pretty tuned artifacts deck). If they are running time sieve, they become a high priority target from the jump. As such I'm less worried about it ruining games (since it's not the only commander with that play pattern) and more concerned that it's a feel bad commander for the people running it. It seems like your choices are commit to the combo, include the combo as a side thing, or exclude the combo to focus on something else (votes, artifacts, or control). Committing to the combo is strongest but at 6 mana I doubt it's cut throat viability, having it in there incidentally is going to create a lot of bad games based on the play patterns it creates, and excluding the combo feels like kneecapping yourself (though its probably the best route for actually enjoying the mechanics the card provides). Having the combo incidentally in a tuned artifacts build is probably the only way including it incidentally won't lead to bad games since that build will be strong enough on its own to deal with the pressure and will command pressure even if the table doesn't suspect the combo.

[Avacyn Believer]

@Avacyn Believer You mean bad experiences and bad power level? They're not mutually exclusive, they're just completely different questions. Something could be both, either, or neither. But I don't have any stance on whether voltron is a bad play experience, only that it's not a very powerful strategy, which I think is difficult to argue against. Afaik there aren't any high-tier voltron cEDH decks, for example. That's not to say it can't be viable in the right meta, but the power ceiling is relatively low.

If you'd like to discuss it further, we could always take it to the thunderdome :D

All right, go on then. I think first we need to establish some common ground; I do not believe cEDH is a good way to judge what is and isn't a good strategy because cEDH is its own format with different goals than casual Commander. Also I can't say what Cameron Wise-Maas was referencing specifically when they wrote "Voltron sucks" in the paragraph about Anzrag, the Quake-Mole, but my interpretation was that it was a general statement like "Voltron sucks in Commander".

I disagree, and admittedly I am biased since it is my preferred way to play.

You say experience and power level are different questions, but I don't think you can objectively claim something "sucks" without considering everything. I'd say there are at least three things to consider, power level, piloting experience and playing against experience, because they all matter in Commander games.

I can agree that on paper Voltron does not have a high power level because it requires interacting with all opponents, relies on one creature card (the commander) and it is open to disruption. I don't know where I'd rank it among the multitude of archetypes but Voltron isn't alone in relying on cards on the board. In power level, strategies that can win without interacting with opponents except like doing burst damage to win (like massive X in Torment of Hailfire) are arguably more "powerful" because it is harder to disrupt them but I don't think Voltron is the weakest. Though there are less Commander options that offer higher power ceiling.

Piloting and playing against are subjective to personal experiences, so don't know how objective I can be about those, but I'd make a case that Voltron fits well into the spirit of Commander. In Voltron the Commander is an important piece, you are rarely (if ever) winning out of nowhere by pulling off a quick combo and you don't grind the game to a halt because in theory you are attacking nearly every turn and there is a hard limit on when the game ends if you keep dealing commander damage. I do believe there are many archetypes that make the game experience lot worse than Voltron.

Overall I'd say Voltron is perhaps not considered powerful on paper, but it is not the worst; it is fun and relatively easily to pilot; and playing against Voltron should not leave a sour taste in your mouth after the game finishes, like other archetypes can do.

So no, I cannot agree that Voltron sucks.

[DirkGently]

All right, go on then. I think first we need to establish some common ground; I do not believe cEDH is a good way to judge what is and isn't a good strategy because cEDH is its own format with different goals than casual Commander.

I do agree to a certain extent. There are certainly commanders that are powerful in normal commander while being mediocre in cEDH. So I don't think that being weak in cEDH is case closed on voltron being bad. But it is a data point, and afaik the data is that essentially zero voltron builds are high-tier cEDH.

Of course, I say that alongside all my arguments for why I think voltron is weak in normal commander as well.

Cameron Wise-Maas

Rude.

was referencing specifically when they wrote "Voltron sucks" in the paragraph about Anzrag, the Quake-Mole, but my interpretation was that it was a general statement like "Voltron sucks in Commander".

I can see how that statement is somewhat vague, so I'll clarify - I intended it to be a comment on the power level of the archetype, not a statement about any other aspect.

I disagree, and admittedly I am biased since it is my preferred way to play.

Pretty sure I've got at least a dozen or two voltron decks on my roster. I enjoy the difficulty of making it work.

You say experience and power level are different questions, but I don't think you can objectively claim something "sucks" without considering everything. I'd say there are at least three things to consider, power level, piloting experience and playing against experience, because they all matter in Commander games.

I've clarified what I meant above so this isn't really relevant.

That said, I think I would argue that voltron can be pretty tetchy when it comes to creating good play experiences. It's pretty easy to make voltron decks that either aren't fun to play, or aren't fun to play against. (I'll elaborate more later)

I can agree that on paper Voltron does not have a high power level because it requires interacting with all opponents, relies on one creature card (the commander) and it is open to disruption. I don't know where I'd rank it among the multitude of archetypes but Voltron isn't alone in relying on cards on the board.

It's not just "cards on the board", it's specifically the commander on the board. That makes voltron significantly more predictable than most other archetypes that use cards in the 99 as the core part of their wincon.

In power level, strategies that can win without interacting with opponents except like doing burst damage to win (like massive X in Torment of Hailfire) are arguably more "powerful" because it is harder to disrupt them but I don't think Voltron is the weakest.

Counterspell-only wincons can definitely be very strong, but are fairly rare. A more broad example would be any 2-card combo that can be deployed in a single turn, or something like Craterhoof Behemoth that requires an existing board presence, but where the most important piece of the wincon isn't visible until it's too late. For voltron the most important piece is the commander itself, which is always known.

Though there are less Commander options that offer higher power ceiling.

I'm not sure what you meant by this.

Piloting and playing against are subjective to personal experiences, so don't know how objective I can be about those, but I'd make a case that Voltron fits well into the spirit of Commander. In Voltron the Commander is an important piece, you are rarely (if ever) winning out of nowhere by pulling off a quick combo and you don't grind the game to a halt because in theory you are attacking nearly every turn and there is a hard limit on when the game ends if you keep dealing commander damage. I do believe there are many archetypes that make the game experience lot worse than Voltron.

There are definitely plenty of archetypes that are more unpleasant.

That said, I do think building a voltron deck that's enjoyable for all parties can be somewhat difficult. The predictability inherent to the archetype means that it's easy to create a deck that almost never wins against savvy opponents. That typically means an unsatisfying deck for the builder, or they ramp up the power level until they're able to win despite being predictable, which can be unsatisfying for the opponents if there's basically nothing they can do to stop them. If everyone can see their loss coming from a mile away, but even working together they're unable to stop it, that's probably not a good power balance.

Of course, there is a solution to this - the voltron deck needs to have some unpredictability. This is why, for example, in my Kellan, the Fae-Blooded // Birthright Boon build, I included a bunch of protective instants, rather than the more typical Swiftfoot Boots etc. Swifties tend to create games where everyone knows they're going to lose, but can't do anything to stop it. Whereas with instants from hand, people will give you some leeway assuming their removal will be an effective delaying tactic, and then get blown out when you counter it, thus avoiding the predictability problem.

But a lot of voltron decks get played as "a bunch of equipment/auras and not much else" and that tends to be much too predictable. I've certainly made that mistake in the past.

So does voltron suck (to play with/against)? Not necessarily, but it does have some pitfalls that can create negative experiences for a lot of players I feel.

Overall I'd say Voltron is perhaps not considered powerful on paper, but it is not the worst;

There are definitely weaker archetypes...mill comes to mind...but just because there are worse things doesn't mean it's still not a weak strategy.

[Avacyn Believer]

the data is that essentially zero voltron builds are high-tier cEDH

Sounds like a challenge

Rude.

Pardon? That is what the article shows as author. "Cameron Wise-Maas | 9 DAYS AGO"

It's pretty easy to make voltron decks that either aren't fun to play, or aren't fun to play against.

No disagreement there, but the same could be said about every archetype, well I suppose with some the challenge would be to make them fun to play against.

I'm not sure what you meant by this.

I meant there are fewer commander options that can make Voltron achieve higher power ceiling. Some commanders are objectively stronger as Voltron than others.

That said, I do think building a voltron deck that's enjoyable for all parties can be somewhat difficult.

But a lot of voltron decks get played as "a bunch of equipment/auras and not much else" and that tends to be much too predictable. I've certainly made that mistake in the past.

I suppose that is where different experiences come in. I can see how people would fall into equipment/auras only and not consider other alternatives. Thinking about it, I don't come across many Voltron decks, part of that could be that I play them so often myself. Though undoubtably it is also because it is not a popular archetype.

I do not feel like my Voltron decks are unsatisfying to pilot or overpowering to play against. That could also be attributed to having different expectations to "I need to always win". Commander is a social hobby for me, my deck building goal is to make decks that work and have impact in the game, winning is somewhere at the bottom on the list. That is not to say I don't play to win, but I am not upset when I don't.

I can see how that statement is somewhat vague, so I'll clarify - I intended it to be a comment on the power level of the archetype, not a statement about any other aspect.

If you wrote those opinions, I suppose where we disagree is the terminology. Maybe I am being pedantic but to me there is a difference between "weaker strategy" and "it sucks".

[DirkGently]

Sounds like a challenge

I can't claim to be an expert, but if Slicer, Hired Muscle // Slicer, High-Speed Antagonist isn't a high-tier cEDH commander (which the list I looked at said it wasn't) I cannot imagine what it would take to make voltron viable. Good luck.

Pardon? That is what the article shows as author. "Cameron Wise-Maas | 9 DAYS AGO"

I use my real name in case I want to use my articles for my CV, but I don't otherwise use my real name when I'm posting on here. Everyone else here goes by their screen name, so being addressed by my real name is kinda weird. I'd prefer you used my screen name as well.

It's pretty easy to make voltron decks that either aren't fun to play, or aren't fun to play against.

No disagreement there, but the same could be said about every archetype, well I suppose with some the challenge would be to make them fun to play against.

I do think voltron have a somewhat specific difficulty because of their predictability. Of course other archetypes have different issues, but few are as inherent.

I meant there are fewer commander options that can make Voltron achieve higher power ceiling. Some commanders are objectively stronger as Voltron than others.

Sure. I do think slicer and light paws are pretty insane. Outside of those I think the power level is a lot flatter though.

I can see how that statement is somewhat vague, so I'll clarify - I intended it to be a comment on the power level of the archetype, not a statement about any other aspect.

If you wrote those opinions, I suppose where we disagree is the terminology. Maybe I am being pedantic but to me there is a difference between "weaker strategy" and "it sucks".

Yes, I think this is a semantic argument at this point. I think with my position clarified we don't have much of a disagreement.

[Avacyn Believer]

I use my real name in case I want to use my articles for my CV, but I don't otherwise use my real name when I'm posting on here. Everyone else here goes by their screen name, so being addressed by my real name is kinda weird. I'd prefer you used my screen name as well.

That's fair, didn't know until you clarified it.

You mentioned Slicer and Light-Paws before, and it is a different topic at this point, but I had a look at both I wouldn't consider playing either of them. I have no attachment to Transformers and playing one as my commander would feel so weird, and Light-Paws just reads to me like way too much tutoring, which to me rarely makes for good games. Sram, Senior Edificer is high on my list of higher power Voltron commanders, maybe even Bruna, Light of Alabaster. Calix, Guided by Fate I've seen get pretty silly as well.