Vampiric TutorVampiric Tutor| art by Raymond Swanland

Game Changing Cards

Officially, they are defined by Gavin Verhey as "allowing players to run away with resources, shift games in ways that many players dislike, block people from play, efficiently search for their strongest cards, or have commanders that tend to take away from more casual games."

Players can self-regulate and find what works best for them when searching for a game that best suits them through this open-ended definition, but how can the average player determine what is game-changing on their own?

Two-Card Infinite Combos, Extra Turns, Mass Land Denial, and Tutors (for things other than lands... there's plenty to discuss about this later) are considered their own categories for a few reasons, with the most prominent being that the Game Changers List is meant to be easily accessible to new players and not a chore to complete when deckbuilding.

Instead of listing hundreds if not thousands of cards that are considered too warping, these subcategories are left open-ended with the same intent of allowing players to self-regulate.

But this abundance of interpretation challenges what it takes for something to undoubtedly be labeled a Game Changer and thus be limited to Brackets 3-5.

There is no question that the current 61 Game Changers are worthy of their status, but why not more? Verhey has been clear that the original 40 were identified out of convenience and that the most recent additions reflect what the community believes to be Game Changers, but these 61 set the tone for what is to be expected of a Game Changer.

What these cards share in common that sets them apart from the rest of the game is the heart of this problem, as the ability to identify this mysterious variable would help players understand why their Bracket 2 deck probably should not run Glacial ChasmGlacial Chasm.

If You Hear Hooves, Think Horses, Not Zebras

The easiest way to understand what distinguishes Game Changers from the majority of Magic cards is to first understand the distinction between Game Changers and cards on the Commander Ban List. Cards like GriselbrandGriselbrand and Emrakul, the Aeons TornEmrakul, the Aeons Torn are banned due to at least one of the following: their raw power or their potential to be exploited.

EmrakulEmrakul is the only legendary creature in existence that grants an immediate (and uncounterable) extra turn in the command zone, with next closest option being Medomai the AgelessMedomai the Ageless... not quite a far comparison.

This is insanely powerful on its own, and it does not require a player to expend much effort to exploit it. EmrakulEmrakul could not reside in the 99 even as a Game Changer as its presence would ultimately define how a deck operates: a player running EmrakulEmrakul resolves and immediately neuters, if not eliminates, their biggest threat and assumes the role of archenemy. Verhey states that it may be possible for EmrakulEmrakul to be unbanned and made a Game Changer as the Brackets mature, but now is not the time to make such a decision.

Similarly, GriselbrandGriselbrand is insanely valuable in a format where your starting life total is double that of the 60-card formats this card was originally designed for. If spending dozens of life points for dozens of cards wasn't warping enough, a player seeking to artificially draw value from an effect like "Pay 7 life: Draw seven cards" only needs to play cards worthy of being drawn; again, not exactly a hard choice to make. The closest legal comparison to GriselbrandGriselbrand would be NecropotenceNecropotence, which is already a Game Changer, but the steps necessary for exploiting GriselbrandGriselbrand are far less demanding than the hoops required to jump through to break NecropotenceNecropotence.

For every effort a player makes at exploiting these cards, they are compounding the already "game changing" effects these cards possess on their own.

What's important to understand is the difference between a card's raw power and how readily exploitable it is. EmrakulEmrakul does not require any additional help to be too much for Commander, but what about cards like Thassa's OracleThassa's Oracle?

In a vacuum, the card is most valuable as a Merfolk or for its progress in building one's devotion in blue, since this is a vacuum without consideration for players that intend to win primarily through The Oracle'sThe Oracle's triggered ability, but clearly the card reserves its Game Changing status due to how it is played.

The vast majority of the time, players that run "ThoracleThoracle" do so to exploit its triggered ability upon entering the battlefield. So many players have done so that decks that run The OracleThe Oracle are mainly higher power lists. One only needs to see the top commanders to understand that The Oracle'sThe Oracle's meta is evidence enough for its spot as a Game Changer.

The Changed, The Banned, And The Staples

Okay, so the ban list consists of cards that are both too powerful on their own and/or too exploitative, or in other words too easily broken. The difference between these cards and Game Changers is that Game Changers, while strong, are labeled Game Changers with Commander's social setting in mind.

Game Changers instead experience a "soft ban", so to speak. In an attempt to allow social games of Commander remain social, Game Changers and the four subcategories are "banned" from Brackets 1-2, with Bracket 3 only allowing 3 Game Changers as well as excluding Mass Land Denial and Extra Turns.

Those that wish to be more social can do so without having "feel-bads" against less social decks, and vice versa. This metric works well as a blanket, but it's still difficult to take a given card in a typical Commander night and distinguish between a really good synergy and a Game Changer.

Perhaps it is necessary to adopt a similar approach to the problem just as the Bracket system has attempted: what is the intent behind the card?

The Bracket system is a tool to be used in good faith, meaning that a player and their playstyle are to be categorized based on what they intend to experience. Want to play a Commander deck where all of the cards' arts contain horses? Bracket 1.

Want to push colorless artifacts to the limit? Bracket 4. Similarly, how is a player playing a given card? Is the Bracket 2 player's Mirkwood BatsMirkwood Bats just pure value or a serious threat? Honestly, just how powerful can ArenaArena be in Bracket 5?

Examples like these highlight that a card's warping effects rely on both its inherent power alongside how it's being used. Sure, you could exploit FastingFasting as much as your heart desires, but... why would you? How could you? No matter how hard you try, it will absolutely never be as valuable as, say, Dryad ArborDryad Arbor.

Intent plays an important role in deciding whether a card or an effect is too warping. A player that intends to exploit Norin the WaryNorin the Wary and his frequent enters-/leaves-the-battlefield shenanigans can be found in Brackets 1-4, depending on how exploitative the player intends to play.

Is the player planning on winning the game by infinitely looping NorinNorin somehow? Probably a higher Bracket deck as NorinNorin is intended to be used as though it were a Game Changer. Is the player running a Warrior- and Coward-themed deck?

Probably a lower Bracket deck since NorinNorin. A NorinNorin that is running a chaotic theme with cards like ScrambleverseScrambleverse is not necessarily as warping as a NorinNorin that runs effects like Purphoros, God of the ForgePurphoros, God of the Forge and Fiery EmancipationFiery Emancipation.

Follow The Yellow-Bracket Road

Exploring the Bracket System and its Game Changers is an important journey many players should engage with. Players who take the time to look at cards in the moment and appreciate how much of an effect they had on a game's course may learn that it is crucial to determine how strong a card is naturally and the potential to exploit it beyond what it could achieve on its own, both when playing against threats and building their own.

A player that understands what makes a card a Game Changer will be better equipped in their threat assessment and their ability to more strategically play their bombs, not only making them more likely to win but allowing for a more enjoyable Commander experience for the whole table.

But there's so much more to learn than just that! Should more cards be unbanned next year? Are the four subcategories effective in providing a desired play space? Will Sol RingSol Ring ever not be treated as the exception? This series will continue to dive into the nuances and minutiae that the new Bracket System presents, and in doing so explore the larger discussion surrounding Commander and how to be a better player both on and off the battlefield.

But what do you think? Found something important that was left out? Do you think that this approach fails in some way? Please, do tell! Commander is a social format after all, and its no fun practicing philosophy by yourself. Tune in next time to continue this deep dive in the Bracket system and more Commander Philosophy!