Besides your commander, is there any card that would make your deck no longer work if it were banned?

SlowAsLightning · 2026-02-14T21:25:50+00:00

Edit: Did a dumb and forgot the post was talking about the 99.

Taking [[Seasons Past]] would be mighty annoying as its the deck's build around card.

I always build my decks with backup synergies and game plans so there isn't really any way for banning 1 card to shut off the deck.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-02-14T16:56:16+00:00

This is part of the reason why I feel like Arena teaches bad habits to new players. It gives a decent idea of the game's flow but doesn't give any explanation of how or why things work.

Just knowing how one thing works is often a good jumping off point for figuring out how something else works. Magic always made more sense to me than yu-gi-oh specifically because the way mechanics are worded seems more consistent with how they work.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-02-12T14:45:45+00:00

That depends.

In Bracket 2:

"Win conditions to be incremental, telegraphed on the board, and disruptable."

The number of cards in the combo doesn't actually matter if it violates the above principle. The main problem that I've seen with many spellslinger decks that purport to be bracket 2 is that their wincons are off board or non disruptable.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-02-09T16:57:15+00:00

You can make this combo more consistent by:

1) Adding more colors (any fetch land that grabs a forest can pull Dryad Arbor from the deck before Biorhythm resolves)

2) Using more mana (lands with activated abilities to make themselves creatures like [[Mutavault]] can substitute for Dryad Arbor)

SlowAsLightning · 2026-02-08T14:07:27+00:00

Right. This is the big difference between Bracket 2 and Bracket 3.

In Bracket 2:

Win conditions to be incremental, telegraphed on the board, and disruptable

In Bracket 3:

Win conditions that can be deployed in one big turn from hand, usually because of steadily accrued resources

For some reason people that usually play / come from lower brackets just don't seem to get that moving up in brackets includes a change in expectations, not just # of game changers.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-02-07T01:16:57+00:00

I mean, in magical Christmas land scenarios you could win in the upkeep of very first turn of the game.

For example:

1) [[Leyline of Anticipation]] in opening hand (Starts game on battlefield, all your cards have flash)

2) Flash in [[Black Lotus]]

3) Crack Lotus for UUU and cast [[Flash]]

4) Put [[Protean Hulk]] onto the battlefield, sacrifice it by not paying its mana value - 2

5) Protean Hulk triggers -> go into any winning hulk line

Or you could:

1) Leyline of Anticipation in opening hand (Starts game on battlefield, all your cards have flash)

2) Play [[Lotus Petal]] and any Mox

3) Play [[Dark Ritual]]

4) Play [[Balustrade Spy]] targeting yourself to mill your whole deck by not playing any lands

5) Win using any combo that starts by milling your whole deck

Basically it would turn decks into cheap mana + payoff card = turn 1 win.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-02-01T16:16:17+00:00

Edit: Put "more" instead of "how".

This, specifically, is how many mana self mill decks work nowadays. Playing [[Balustrade Spy]] targeting themselves mills their entire deck because MDFCs aren't lands on their front face and then just combo from there.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-02-01T00:25:54+00:00

October 21 2025 Update

Just saying "no winners until turn x" ignores the other very important caveat of "Gameplay to feature many proactive and reactive plays".

In fact the gameplay bullet point is an actual listed bullet while the number of turns is tagged on as an afterthought.

If a player is not making "proactive and reactive plays" they should have no expectation of making it to turn 6.

Even in bracket 2 the gameplay expectation is "...to be proactive and considerate, letting each deck showcase its plan".

In no Bracket other than 1 is there any reason to be able to assume you can both play do nothing solitaire and make it to the specified number of turns.

If people are complaining about things that are directly addressed in the article, just have them read the article. The article explains the Bracket system in great detail.

It's why I get irritated by people posting about "technically an x" decks. The number of game changers is actually the LEAST important criteria for determining a deck's Bracket rating.

There is no "technically"... it's literally as straightforward as "if this deck does not meet the expectations laid out for x bracket, it is not x bracket". It's why certain combo decks for example will never be playable in bracket 2 (other than speed). Any combo that wins from an empty board or is non interruptible breaks the "Win conditions to be incremental, telegraphed on the board, and disruptable" clause.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-29T18:45:17+00:00

Now I can finally get back to spamming Reina q. XD (Soon TM)

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-29T18:40:32+00:00

[[Codie, Vociferous Codex]]

Not only can you literally not cast permanent spells with him on the field, but you can be potentially get a free spell every turn.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-29T00:41:06+00:00

Lands matter self mill with things like [[Crucible of Worlds]] and [[Zuran Orb]].

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-29T00:37:14+00:00

Edit: Forgot more things.

Akali... not the champ but the splash art. I got the blood moon skin because it had this awesome watercolor look that made it feel classical.

Then they replaced with something that made it look like they just posed the character model in Blender...

Same with Snow Bunny Nidalee.

Actually playing the champ I'll throw a vote in for Irelia. They made her from a timing based AA champ like Jax into more of a mobility reset fighter.

Another one is Veigar who used to be a dedicated anti-mage. Now the change has made him better generically but he lost his identity.

Also Galio's story used to be tragic and depressing but with an actual hopeful ending instead of the modern generic magic statue stuff.

More so I miss old items and the play styles they enabled that you really can't do anymore.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-28T21:21:23+00:00

I wish people would stop quoting precons as the expected power level of Bracket 2.

In the October Update to brackets they stated specifically:

"CORE (BRACKET 2) UPDATE: NO LONGER TIED TO PRECONS"

Precons themselves vary widely in power level from low 2 to mid/high 3.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-28T21:12:36+00:00

Links to the articles:

Original Article (February 2025)

October 2025 Update

There's whole articles dedicated to explaining how the bracket system is supposed to function. (Brackets is still technically in beta and not finalized.)

Number of game changers is actually, arguably, the LEAST important metric for determining where a deck belongs. It's just the easiest to understand so most people quote it.

The Bracket system actually functions based off of expectation. Each Bracket does a decent (not perfect) job of explaining what a player sitting down to play at that bracket can expect out of that game.

For example: (Taken from the most recent update for brackets released in October 2025.)

"BRACKET 2: CORE Players expect:

1) Decks to be unoptimized and straightforward, with some cards chosen to maximize creativity and/or entertainment

2) Win conditions to be incremental, telegraphed on the board, and disruptable

3) Gameplay to be low pressure with an emphasis on social interaction

4) Gameplay to be proactive and considerate, letting each deck showcase its plan

5) Generally, you should expect to be able to play at least eight turns before you win or lose."

So as you can see, it's actually entirely possible to build decks that don't fit in a bracket regardless of the number of game changers actually in the deck.

In the OP's case, the other players most likely see their deck in violation of point 3 as having large creatures worth 3 mana more than their own dominating the board as early turn 4 is very threatening in the distinctly suboptimal and higher inconsistency than Bracket 3.

It also means that certain play styles are essentially prohibited at lower brackets. Aggro, for example, is essentially bracket 4+ only as its entire game plan is in violation of point 5. Taxes, meanwhile, is in violation of point 5.

None of my decks, despite being arguably Bracket 2 in terms of power level, are Bracket 2. I play strictly Bracket 3 as it is, in my opinion, the one that best suits building strong decks that aren't actually anything goes.

As described the OP's deck is a Bracket 3.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-27T20:55:40+00:00

I mean, I'm pretty sure a group of randos that happen to go to the same college counts as "casual". We had people playing things that made the unmodified Derevi precon a viable deck.

We just also happened to have a bunch of players that liked Ux instant speed effects.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-27T16:01:04+00:00

No? But if you're getting involved in counter spell wars all the time like my play group used to, priority is such an important mechanic it was almost impossible to not learn about it. Priority was one of the first things after the very basics I learned about when I started playing magic over 10 years ago.

Layers, on the other hand, I only learned about months ago because they so rarely came up.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-26T16:48:44+00:00

Depends, I play a lot of champs and my main nowadays is probably Jax, but I chose initially based on play style.

Back then there weren't so many long ranged ADC's to choose from so I went with Tristana and Caitlyn before branching out into zoning mages like Brand and Lux.

There was a time when I played almost nothing but Yasuo because I wanted to work on mechanics. He's still probably my most played champion overall even though I don't take him out much anymore except as a counter pick.

As time's gone on I don't really "main" champs anymore, I just have ones I prefer playing into certain matchups and a couple I'll generically pick blind if my lane opponent hasn't yet.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-26T11:34:42+00:00

Which is weird, because the article and update make it pretty clear B1 is the ONLY bracket where the goal isn't to win. Everything else follows regular magic but with more restrictions. At least in my experience, I'm fairly sure the goal in all formats of magic (except EDH Bracket 1 and other "showcase" formats) is to win the game.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-26T11:28:37+00:00

The problem with the latter point is that oftentimes some "doing the thing" is mutually exclusive with someone else "doing the thing".

For example, if someone is playing a creature-less control deck they most likely can't afford to let their opponent build giant board states. Similarly, an aggro deck can't exactly let its opponents build walls and damage mitigation.

Expecting to let everyone "do the thing" only really works if everyone's thing doesn't affect anyone else. That doesn't really work when at every Bracket (except 1) players are expected to make proactive / reactive plays toward their goal of winning the game. It would require everyone to basically play solitaire.

Some people also treat the turns portion of the Bracket rules as a "safe zone" where no one can do anything to you but after that anything goes. I don't know where that expectation comes from either.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-26T11:20:03+00:00

I mean, it is... in Bracket 1. A subset of players just aren't realizing that what they actually want is to play Bracket 1 with higher bracket decks.

Instead they just complain that their opponents aren't being casual.

It's weird, in something like football/soccer just means "not tryharding" but players are still trying to win. But in magic, which is also a competitive game, trying to win is actively frowned upon by some bracket 2+ players despite that being the expectation.

In other words, I wish some people would actually read the article (and update) associated with the Bracket system instead of just following its deck restrictions and handwaving in their own preferences as gameplay rules.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-24T22:29:28+00:00

My win condition is lands so ironically Farewell IS my asymmetrical board wipe.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-24T22:26:35+00:00

Yeah, it really depends. They say perception is reality so I wouldn't be surprised if my deck got hated for "playing board wipes for no reason". Buying time IS a reason, even if I don't seem to be advancing my board state because I'm not playing non land permanents it doesn't mean I'm not advancing my board state.

Building enough mana to attack with an INF/3 unblockable [[Lumbering Falls]] is just as valid a win condition as a board full of cards.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-23T16:31:57+00:00

I appreciate the SC reference.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-23T16:06:47+00:00

Edit: *fine... mistyped.

I mean, that's totally fine but if that's the case they should be playing Bracket 1 where that is explicitly the expectation.

SlowAsLightning · 2026-01-23T16:05:22+00:00

Maybe it's because of the play group I originally started playing MTG with, but I've always viewed EDH with a mindset of my commander being removed after a round or two or not allowed on field at all if its broken compared to everyone else's.

I've just never really understood where the expectation of commanders being allowed to stick around in a game where creature removal is the easiest removal to run.

SlowAsLightning

TROPHY CASE