(Griselbrand | Igor Kieryluk)

Grisel-banned As Commander

In February 2006, the now-disbanded Rules Committee made a new rule for a very young format. Heartless Hidetsugu, Kaervek the Merciless, and Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind were all banned as commanders only. While they could not lead your deck, you could still play them in the 99. Different legendary creatures went on and off this list as the years passed.

After three years, in February 2014, the "banned only as commander" rule was eliminated, and Braids, Cabal Minion, Erayo, Soratami Ascendant, and Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary became banned in the format, and so far, they have stayed there.

I wonder if they have remained for too long. Currently, there are ten legendary creatures banned in the format. I want to examine whether any of them should be the reason for bringing back the "banned only as commander" rule. Should they stay or go, or maybe some current creatures should be added to the list.

My name is Nick; this is Myth Realized - Should We Bring Back Banned Only As Commander?

Legendary Creature - Demon

All it does is draw a bunch of cards; how bad can it be? Life can be pretty bad for your opponents in a format where you start at 40. I'm choosing to start this adventure with the card I know best out of the bunch in Griselbrand. I would not call myself an expert, but I have used a Reanimate or Animate Dead to bring the card out of a graveyard thanks to a Dark Ritual a time or two in various formats.

While it is not the final factor for this card or any others yet to be discussed, there is a key point to address. How good is a card if it starts in your command zone? Something that makes a card strong is always having access to it in a game. Specifically with your commander, how much better does that card become than any other in the 99? Sometimes, it is much better, but this makes it worse in the case of Griselbrand.

In 60-card formats, the power of this card is often showcased by how fast you can get the card on the field, and usually, that is within the first two turns of the game. But that is only possible because of the ability to put the card into the graveyard and negate the need to spend 4 to cast the card.

First, let's look at how we might cast this card.

Casting Cost.

Black is a color in the Commander format that is no stranger to making a lot of mana to facilitate big plays. The classic Cabal Coffers + Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth, or if you have one lying around a Lake of the Dead can make all the mana for Griselbrand seem trivial.

Ritual effects like Dark Ritual and Cabal Ritual, and even a black version of High Tide in Bubbling Muck can do the trick. Even a slew of cards can help us cast our commander for free or put it into our hand to cheat it into play.

This is not to say that these cards are ineffective and you will never pull them off, but these are usually two or more cards you must find before you can cast your commander for the first time. If someone can remove your commander, who has no built-in protection other than being a big creature, you might never cast them again. This makes it seem like the big Demon is safe to take off the list, right? That might be the case, but what about moving it to a new list?

There is also precedent for a commander of a similar mana value that does see play.

They might not be super popular as there are only 929 Vilis decks, according to EDHREC. But with the same creature type, almost identical mana cost, and a powered-down version of the pay life to draw cards ability, Vilis decks are good baselines for a deck with Griselbrand at the helm.

New List, Who Dis?

So what might happen if we brought back "banned only as commander"? Would Griselbrand be on that list? I would have to argue no, but that is not the only argument I would make. Outside of the high mana cost, the next thing that checks the power of this card in Commander, is that it's mono-black.

There are four mono-black commanders in the top 100.

Looking at all of these, we can see that Griselbrand would do great in a Sheoldred, the Apocalypse deck, and vice versa. But mono-black is not the easiest color to win with outside of a Torment of Hailfire kill or an overwhelming force of rats. What concerns me is when you start branching out into other color combinations.

Rakdos.

Imagine the ability to run a Griselbrand in any of the following decks.

How would you like every spell to cost a minimum of seven less or potentially even 15 less after you bring out your big Demon with a Reanimate?

Put something into the graveyard and give your Grizzly B haste when it comes in to gain back the life you spent on drawing cards. I cannot imagine what you might do when you move to your discard step.

Use the high mana cost of Griselbrand for all kinds of value in a deck featuring a muscle-bound cowboy or a saddened window.

Any of these decks or any Rakdos deck can make use of Sneak Attack and other cards like it just to put Griselbrand into play, draw seven cards, and freely attack an opponent, all at the cost of a single mana.

Orzhov.

Maybe you don't like Rakdos, but instead, you have a more Orzhov vibe going with your decks.

Maybe one Griselbrand is not enough for you; Ratadrabik of Urborg can help with that.

Selenia would love to take effect of the pay life ability on Griselbrand, as it usually leads a deck that wants to kill opponents with cards like Repay in Kind. While Sorin and Karlov love the ability of a creature to gain a big chunk of life all at one time, neither one will complain about using life as a resource to draw cards.

More Colors.

The options only grow the more variety of colors are added to a potential deck. Going into treats us to Be'lakor, the Dark Master and demon typal. Beledros Witherbloom would love to have Griselbrand to regain most of the life used to untap your lands, and the pests that can be made with many cards in the Golgari color combination help offset paying life.

Satoru Umezawa in and the classic Kaalia of the Vast in would love another large creature to cheat into play.

So What Does It All Mean?

It is hard to see the exact impact that either unbanning or banning only as a commander a card like Griselbrand would have. If you asked me this question five years ago, I might have told you there is no way this card could ever be legal. If you asked me the same thing five months ago, I could see either as a possibility.

Unfortunately, this card has never seen the light of day in a way that can give us a good amount of data. There are 31 decks featuring Griselbrand as a commander, but they are just generic mono-black strategies like Demons, Reanimator, or Shadowborn Apostle.

What worries me is how ubiquitous this card would become inside the 99. I would immediately slam this card into my Ratadrabik of Urborg deck and my Dimir clone deck featuring Gyruda, Doom of Depths as a companion. I have no problem playing the "popular" cards and no issue with others not playing them. But this card has the potential to become so dull in the format.

There always seems to be a new big creature that will bolster a reanimator or reanimator-like strategy printed. Most recently, it was Valgavoth, Terror Eater, and before then, it was Atraxa, Grand Unifier. So the question is, how much do we need another one?

Rip off the Band-Aid.

After reviewing it all, I favor bringing back the "banned only as commander" rule, but unfortunately, I think Griselbrand will have to stay in its current state of illegality. Sometimes, when you are first, you are last but don't tell Ricky Bobby.

Griselbrand might be too strong to be removed from the banned list and placed on the banned only as a commander list, but I do not believe that will be the case for the other nine legends on the list.

What do you think, dear reader? Have you ever played when banned only as commander was a thing? Would you like to see the rule back? Do you believe that Griselbrand is safe to bring into the 99?

Let me know here or find me on social media @nicnax96, and stay tuned for more articles asking: Should We Bring Back Banned Only As Commander?