Will Partner be the End of EDH / Commander?

[Card Slinger J]

What do you guys think?

[DirkGently]

Having not watched the video: no, obviously.

But I look forward to watching this and having a laugh. Commanders quarters is one of those commander channels I mostly watch just to see how he's wrong.

[darrenhabib]

Apparently there are going to be 41 new mono colored partners. With 15 already (2016) this makes for 1540 combinations.
Now there are about 1000 commanders to choose from in Magic in general (1009 I think?), so the singletons are getting out numbered.
It's lonely being single sometimes, seeing all those loved up couples.

As far as thoughts on is partner a problem for the format? Not immediately, people like to play what they want of course.
But the reality is that your current much beloved commander just got worse. That is fact due to the disadvantages of paying commander tax on a single commander, and a single attacker/blocker during a game.
Now is your Zur the Enchanter better than pairing up Sengir, the Dark Baron and Ishai, Ojutai Dragonspeaker?
Probably right...so it's more or less about the power level of your commander rather than the duel nature of partner mechanic.
But still make no mistake all of your commanders just got a little worse when in a few years time you'll be playing against tables that will have a lot of duel commanders.

[Card Slinger J]

Now is your Zur the Enchanter better than pairing up Sengir, the Dark Baron and Ishai, Ojutai Dragonspeaker?

Wouldn't it be better to pair Sengir, the Dark Baron with Thrasios, Triton Hero instead?

[darrenhabib]

Now is your Zur the Enchanter better than pairing up Sengir, the Dark Baron and Ishai, Ojutai Dragonspeaker?

Wouldn't it be better to pair Sengir, the Dark Baron with Thrasios, Triton Hero instead?

Oh I wanted Esper colors.

[not-a-cube]

Now is your Zur the Enchanter better than pairing up Sengir, the Dark Baron and Ishai, Ojutai Dragonspeaker?

Wouldn't it be better to pair Sengir, the Dark Baron with Thrasios, Triton Hero instead?

Isn't everything better (more boring) paired with Thrasios, Triton Hero ? Just a card draw/ramp engine extra.

[Mimicvat]

Commander for me is pretty much 100% just the meta that I create with two groups of friends who play. If we don't like stuff, we don't play it. Very rarely do I go to a card store to play randoms, live just a little too far away and just a little too old to be bothered with that any more (not to mention it was nothing but salt, combo and generic high tier value at every table)

Now is your Zur the Enchanter better than pairing up Sengir, the Dark Baron and Ishai, Ojutai Dragonspeaker?

I've been wanting a flying commander, like as in, just a big dumb flier in the command zone with a bunch of other dumb fliers. This combo is sick because it's two dumb fliers instead of one. Confirmed for maximum strong - I'm actually a little excited for that

[Rumpy5897]

Mitch trying to transcend his deck techs has been a bit of a rocky road. I'm familiar with the struggle, as I've written a couple articles for the site and it's honestly hard to figure out what to talk about once freed from the confines of a commander. He wears his influences on his sleeve as well, which doesn't help matters much - the first couple episodes with Eddie were an imitation of a certain well-known podcast while touching on controversial topics, and the effects applied to card art in his gameplay episode were an unnecessary attempt to emulate those creators as well. However, Mitch has been doing better with this stuff recently. The stats'y episodes lacked the resources of EDHRECAST, but were quite insightful. His community-sourced comparison series has been interesting, as you can't slam the host for being opinionated when he's just reporting on polling. Bringing Eddie back in a more short-form manner has been good too, and the salinity episode was genuinely great...

...sheesh, inquired no one ever. Mitch is just a sympathetic everyman and it's nice to see him starting to find a voice.

On to the matter at hand. The guys actually laugh at the clickbait'y topic of the episode and Eddie, the more opinionated of the two, facetiously agrees. The overall consensus is the opposite though, which is the correct take. The damage was already done via the C16 cards, and Commander Legends took a lot of time to ensure the new partners it was introducing wouldn't break anything. And EDH already failed to die to Thrasios+Tymna, so I think we're good here

[DirkGently]

Ok so having actually watched this now, I mostly agree with what they said. It's not going to kill the format because nothing can really kill the format on its own - people self-regulate too much. If something awful gets printed, it'll become unpopular. But, enough powerful things get printed and it gets harder for people to avoid creating bad experiences. Death by a thousand cuts. Or maybe just change by a thousand steps, depending who you're asking.

I think a lot of the partner hysteria is way overblown.

Tymna Thrasios is OP at cEDH tables apparently, but if someone is playing a standard-fare deck, I'd probably rather play against T&T than atraxa, and definitely rather play against T&T than golos or chulane or Kess. The reason they're powerful in cEDH is because competitive formats tend toward low-to-the-ground advantages, and having a 2 and 3 drop commander with good abilities is way better than something like chulane that costs 5 and then doesn't do anything yet. If that gets countered or removed, you got owned. T or T gets countered or removed and you're probably laughing.

But in a more traditional, casual setting, someone getting a few extra cards is most likely not going to win them the game. The value off T&T might come down earlier, but in the late game chulane or golos is going to blow past them easily. Plus the value of thrasios as an infinite mana sink is less relevant (or ideally, irrelevant). By the same token, this "but they get a 9th card" thing is pretty minor. Getting one more card in a format where people are casting 20-card draw spells is not likely to decide a game, and partners sacrifice the ability to play something with a more impactful ability. If the T&T player is playing a deck that can exploit that early CA into a fast win, then the root of the problem is the deck itself and that player's intentions in building it, NOT the commanders.

Partners do present some risks, of course, but from the way wotc tends to design them - pretty generic abilities that aren't terribly synergistic (I mean, the most powerful and popular pair really has no synergy whatsoever) - I don't see it presenting any major problems. And I think most people build around an ability they find interesting, which partners usually aren't, so I doubt they're going to massively impact the meta beyond what any normal commander release would do. But I guess we'll see, there's still a lot of spoilers to go of course.

[ilovesaprolings]

Maybe they'll print some broken partners so they'll have to ban the mechanic like wotc did for 1v1. It would be a win situation for me.

[Serenade]

I just don't want to see anything that rewards using partners over a single general. Like a Propaganda that taxes {1} for each one or a Skyshroud Claim that finds a forest for each one. You're already getting access to multiple colors; that's the bonus!

[not-a-cube]

Echo Storm Empyrial Storm Fury Storm Genesis Storm Skull Storm already exist, but I agree, we don't need to give partners extra bonuses.

[Serenade]

Dang, I thought those tracked separately like general tax and damage....and hopefully Myth Unbound. Honestly, we just need cards that care about us playing the format (curse cycle, goad auras) but NOT naming "commander" on a card.

What I like about partners is that it reminds me of early EDH, where you wanted to build a certain shard/wedge...but no general fit your deck, so you made due with Numot, the Devastator. Sometimes I do want to build a nondescript Jeskai deck with what I have lying around, and Ishai, Ojutai Dragonspeaker/Kraum, Ludevic's Opus fit that better (and are a smaller target) than Kykar, Wind's Fury. Hopefully the new partners lean more towards the power level of our latest "partner with" combos.

[ISBPathfinder]

Ok, I watched a good bit of the video at this point. As long as they don't crate crazy off the wall partners like Tymna and Thrasios I think its fine. Their argument that partner is like extra card advantage seems not that relivant to me. You could play mono red in this format..... or you could have access to Necropotence. The choices of colors and deck design already makes up such a huge impact on card advantage that I often think that partners is negative tempo in that you have additional setup in a lot of cases and if you get wrathed it will take longer to get them both back out.

Partner as a mechanic does give some small bit of advantage in additional things you can do with your turn but it also adds more setup cost assuming you plan to build around both commanders being in play. Even being a mono color builder, I have a lot of decks that are even mono white where I don't run out of resources to play. Having an extra resource in the command zone only matters if you were burning out your hand and don't have more draw.

There will be decks where its relevant, but in large, I have seen partners be a liability in the time to set them up. As long as WoTc doesn't make them OP I think its an interesting deck design challenge that is perfectly fine.

[Sinis]

1. In the first 5 minutes, they say "They [Magic's Design team] realized that free-form partner was too powerful, and in Battlebond made 'Partner with'." I want to flat out disagree with that. I think they made 'Partner With' so they could have fun with the specific tutoring in teams, and having a blanket tutor with just 'Partner' was a rules change they would have never wanted to make. I had always anticipated they would return with generic Partners. Beliefs contrary to that would be like believing that 2014 had the first and last planeswalker commanders, or even that 2018 had the last ones with Aminatou/Windgrace/Saheeli/Estrid. 2016 sold well, and that's the only metric they need.

2. They say older commanders get hedged out because of partner; but this was always going to happen. When was the last time you saw a crappy old legend that was being played for the colours instead of for being that particular crappy old legend. Ramirez DePietro as the face of pirate tribal got supplanted by Admiral Beckett Brass.

3. Flavour fails - I'll buy that this part sucks. Partners hardly ever belong together thematically. But, this hardly seems like a format killer.

I hate how they continually temper their statement with 'people will play something other than the strongest thing' and 'the new Partners are mono-coloured' and then rotate back to Tymna/Thrasios as 'look how broken this can be' without ever addressing that these new ones will probably never reach that high watermark on colour access alone. They never make anything resembling a logical argument, and it's not surprising, given that their thesis is the tallest of orders.

Basically, this is crap clickbait and I'm glad I played it at 1.5x speed so I could waste less of my remaining lifespan on it. I don't think it's worth watching, because they don't say anything new and have few reasonable criticisms anyone should care about.

---

My bias is going to show here.

I, for one, welcome more partners. I want more customizability. I want more personalization. I don't want to have someone's Nth Muldrotha deck. I adored the first group crop in C16, and I'm excited for these new ones. I like that they're churning out awesome story characters like Halana and Alena.

[Hawk]

Short answer: No

Longer answer: As Dirk pointed out to me when I was whinging about the new partners, being mono-colored only makes these very safe. If you want raw power and optionality, no new partner they could possibly print is going to give you more than Thrasios, Triton Hero + take your pick of any of the Rakdos or Orzhov options. If those have not "killed the format", it's hard to conceive of anything new doing so.

I was originally afraid they'd break something with a creature that is "Partners with any Legendary Pirate" or "Partners with any Blue Legendary Creature of Converted Mana Cost 3 or more"; that is the sort of territory that's scary as it's unlikely they can both adequately test all current options and be wary of all future options. But it looks like for now we're safe, and these are mostly going to be "just for fun".

[umtiger]

Ok, I watched a good bit of the video at this point. As long as they don't crate crazy off the wall partners like Tymna and Thrasios I think its fine.

Neither Tymna or Thrasios are crazy or off the wall. They are just efficient.

Put two efficient commanders together > just one efficient commander.

The partner mechanic is what's off the wall and crazy high in power-level.

[ISBPathfinder]

Ok, I watched a good bit of the video at this point. As long as they don't crate crazy off the wall partners like Tymna and Thrasios I think its fine.

Neither Tymna or Thrasios are crazy or off the wall. They are just efficient.

Put two efficient commanders together > just one efficient commander.

The partner mechanic is what's off the wall and crazy high in power-level.

Have you had any issues with any of the other partners other than those two? I haven't. I have not even seen much of the other partners without one or both of those partners being involved. I remember a few decks where people were using some of the others but really I have never found them to be much of a problem.

[umtiger]

Have you had any issues with any of the other partners other than those two? I haven't. I have not even seen much of the other partners without one or both of those partners being involved. I remember a few decks where people were using some of the others but really I have never found them to be much of a problem.

To be fair, I don't have "issues" with any cards. I'm the person who'd run MLD if given the opportunity and don't mind playing through stax pieces because I find it more a challenge than the normal game (even though I don't MLD or run stax myself).

However, I do prefer when other people build with standard set legal commanders. Yet, players have less and less reasons to do so...unless they are Golos. Why play one general when you can play two?

[ISBPathfinder]

Have you had any issues with any of the other partners other than those two? I haven't. I have not even seen much of the other partners without one or both of those partners being involved. I remember a few decks where people were using some of the others but really I have never found them to be much of a problem.

To be fair, I don't have "issues" with any cards. I'm the person who'd run MLD if given the opportunity and don't mind playing through stax pieces because I find it more a challenge than the normal game (even though I don't MLD or run stax myself).

However, I do prefer when other people build with standard set legal commanders. Yet, players have less and less reasons to do so...unless they are Golos. Why play one general when you can play two?

You could use the same logic towards why play a less competitive commander when you could play a more competitive one. With this logic nobody would play any commanders that aren't cEDH commanders.

Lots of the existing partners (not partners with) are kind of generic or have a direction that most other commanders don't share. I am not saying that none of them do or will moving forward as we get more of them but in a lot of cases you sort of build around one of them and the second is for colors. It also takes time to play out two commanders and when both get swept it takes a lot more time to rebuild. An extra commander is an extra resource, but honestly there are a lot of insane pushed commanders these days so its hard for me to really be mad at any one of them.

[Card Slinger J]

I wonder If Paper Magic will ever get to the point where you end up having to run three Commanders instead of two just for a Three Musketeers reference?

[BounceBurnBuff]

I think a lot of the partner hysteria is way overblown.

Yup, pretty much this.

I feel like more often than not, the partner hate is like that "bike fall" meme where the gentleman puts a stick in his tire and blames something else for crashing. In this case, the stick is how the 98 is built (insert Rhystic Study, Carpet of Flowers and their ilk here) and everyone blames the 2 mana 1/3 with a 4 mana activated scry 1, ramp OR draw 1. Golos, Korvold and Chulane exist, Thrasios as a card isn't remotely broken in comparison.

[Dragoon]

I wonder If Paper Magic will ever get to the point where you end up having to run three Commanders instead of two just for a Three Musketeers reference?

Well, two partners + a companion is the closest we can get right now. I was sad to learn we can only play one companion though. When they were first spoiled, I already started theorycrafting a Ukkima, Stalking Shadow + Cazur, Ruthless Stalker + Keruga, the Macrosage + Umori, the Collector deck that could only play 3+ CMC creatures.

[Sinis]

Partners do present some risks, of course, but from the way wotc tends to design them - pretty generic abilities that aren't terribly synergistic (I mean, the most powerful and popular pair really has no synergy whatsoever)

I missed this in my first pass through this thread.

I think this is a very strong and clearly present design principle for WotC. The first planeswalker commanders in 2014 were monocoloured for a reason - it's less of a problem if you only have access to a small pool of cards. Wizards often uses cautious design for new mechanics.

I think Partner is just right. Sure Tymna-Thrasios is powerful and 4c, but, I can't say I mind. The real problem is what you're going to do with all those resources, and if it's some Consult-Thassa's Oracle line, I can't say I care. There's always going to be some 'best deck', and this just happens to be it for now.

[BounceBurnBuff]

The funny part about the anti-Tymna/Thrasios agenda is how very real Red has become in competitive games between Underworld Breach, Deflecting Swat and Dockside Extortionist.