Toralf, God of FuryToralf, God of Fury | Art by Tyler Jacobson

I'm a little -no, a lot- late to being a Rhystic Studies fan. I started watching his content maybe four or so months ago. A video of his that lives rent free in my head is RED DECK WINS. Even that capitalization of the title means so much to me. The attention grabbing and loud energy from full capitalization is so apt.

The description starts with, "For those that go all-in."

Sam discusses the insidiously direct and effective strategy of true Aggro. He says things like, "I used to think the red deck was cheap and simplistic, but the older I get the more I understand the attitude of those that play with a bunch of basic Mountains and a grip full of fire."

I feel similarly; anyone can punch face, but not everyone who punches face wins.

The Inspirations

I'm glazing Rhystic Studies, but there's a reason. This RED DECK WINS video inspired me to talk about a contentious subject in Commander: player removal.

At my very first MagicCon, Chicago, I played in a lovely pod with some creators. Notably, someone was playing an Ojer Axonil, Deepest MightOjer Axonil, Deepest Might. I was on a Bracket 4-ish Tivit, Seller of SecretsTivit, Seller of Secrets (The deck had one tutor and it was Tezzeret the SeekerTezzeret the Seeker and a bad mana base -nearly all basics. No Deadeye NavigatorDeadeye Navigator loops either).

I was in a tough spot because someone was playing Coram, the UndertakerCoram, the Undertaker and was filing his graveyard. I'd managed, through sheer luck, to draw Time SieveTime Sieve. With only three players left, after I'd eliminated one, the Sieve wasn't that good. Don't get me wrong, it was still good. But I had to get creative.

I could maybe get there. My life total was low because the Axonil player had a Razorkin NeedleheadRazorkin Needlehead out and no commander. All those draws looking for Time SieveTime Sieve burned me down on life.

I activated Time SieveTime Sieve and in response the Coram player channeled Boseiju, Who EnduresBoseiju, Who Endures and destroyed it. I didn't have a way to recur it so I was on a time limit. The Aggro decks were after my late game Tivit.

I had a choice: Destroy the combat driven combat deck or the burn player. Ultimately I lost, so it didn't matter. But the question had a simple answer in my mind: Always remove the mono-red Burn player.

Burn Strategy

Anyone who doesn't see the power, consistency, bravery, and artistry of a Burn deck will lose to it over and over. The strategy is simple: Produce such an ungodly amount of damage on your turn that you can't help but win.

While Krenko, Mob BossKrenko, Mob Boss is more a typical mono-red Aggro deck that aligns with Rhystic Studies's video, Solphim, Mayhem DominusSolphim, Mayhem Dominus, Ojer Axonil, Deepest MightOjer Axonil, Deepest Might, and Toralf, God of FuryToralf, God of Fury are very effective at just removing players in that mono-red Aggro way.

Part of the strategy here surrounds cards like Fiery EmancipationFiery Emancipation, City on FireCity on Fire, and Gratuitous ViolenceGratuitous Violence. These are all asymmetrical damage doublers and triplers. Players want to storm off with cards like Dragon's ApproachDragon's Approach or stack group slug effects like ManabarbsManabarbs. They want to eke out damage however they can.

The pesky thing about Burn is nearly every card in their deck deals damage or doubles it. Life totals are never high enough to let a Burn player "do the thing." Their "do the thing" always eliminates players. There isn't enough removal in any deck to hold down burn spell after burn spell. One of the only things we can reasonably do is out-Aggro them.

This is where things get a little hairy, socially. In these situations, the table is hit by burn damage as a group, which is unifying in Commander. You don't want that as a Burn player. 3 v 1 is insurmountable in this archetype, usually. You really have to fly under the radar to survive, dealing all that damage.

If you don't, your life total as the Burn player won't survive. So the table will often rally to bringing down the Burn player.

Bullying

I talked about the effect of an Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood on anyone's battlefield in my article, "The Etiquette of Removal." I spoke at length about how player removal can feel like bullying when you use all game actions on a singular player until they're eliminated. It might even seem irresponsible, but in this particular situation it's actually the best way to threat assess, if you can't remove the piece.

Burn players are no different from an Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood, but actually worse. I can find removal for the Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood and be done with it for the most part. If I can manage to remove any of the Burn effects, the deck will heartily supply more. Burn is so incredible this way, with some of the sleekest reduction of life totals.

I guess the question at this point is if you should remove it. Does it matter if everyone has a good time at the table and gets to do the thing? Usually I would give you an annoying answer like, "It depends on your goals as a player." This is different. Burn players only really "do the thing" when they eliminate a player.

If any ounce of you wants to win, then the Burn player cannot live. I exaggerate a little here, but if you want to win, you will have to focus the most threatening player. If the burn deck is strong enough, quick enough, it will be them.

Combo Strategy

I was really locked into Burn decks at the start of this, but they're not the only deck that brings seemingly irrational hate from me. I was inspired by Aggro decks, but Combo decks have a similar, if not equally as difficult situation. At least with a Burn deck you have some indication when they're going to kill you. If their commander is out and they untap with six mana, you're probably cooked.

Combo decks give you false sense of security and an even falser sense of time. Without a deeply entrenched understanding of every combo ever, you might miss an irregular or new combo piece in a combo deck. The philosophy of combo is either: innocuous little pieces that build up to an unstoppable engine, or two low cost pieces that can be easily played in a single turn. Usually there's some blue in there for protection.

Bullying

The false sense of security is the thing that makes me go a little insane. Do they have it? Can I eke out another turn to handle another player? Is the Aggro strategy getting too aggressive or is this our last turn cycle with the Combo player?

This unknown information is what makes Thassa's OracleThassa's Oracle and Demonic ConsultationDemonic Consultation such a consistent win-con in cEDH. It's a low cost, two-card combo that just wins the game. If it resolves, everyone else loses.

So when do you know when they've become the threat? They've drawn a lot of cards or you've seen them tutor for something. Some of the most effective combo decks I've experienced are the ones that can go infinite with a ham sandwich. There are often no indicators of what they could be up to or what they have in hand or how they intend to protect their win.

What do we have to do when we can't accurately threat assess? I'm telling you, it's player removal. Do not let them draw cards and do not let them gather mana. If they do those things, they will combo.

This is harder to sell though, this kind of threat assessment. The table will always say they aren't doing anything yet. Sure, but when they actually do, it'lll be much too late for us. Flying under the radar in Combo is part of the strategy.

I sound like a conspiracy theorist when I say it, but trust me, it's true. Unless you're a midrange-y Control deck and see the line, they will get away with being left alone long enough to combo. You've got to target them early if no one is threatening a win on the spot, because Combo players are threatening simply by declaring themselves a Combo player

Conclusion

There's this unspoken rule in Commander that everyone wants to sit, have a balanced game where everyone gets a chance at a win, where everyone gets to be scary, and gets to "do the thing." I want to say I mostly abide by this rule when deciding how I want to play and what I build. It can be salt inducing to be removed over and over without the ability to win; I've been there. I just wonder if Burn and Combo is for you, then.

These decks bring heat, and rightfully so, from those who play against it. I'm not sure if accurate threat assessment is needed all the time, and sometimes the mono-red Burn player runs out of cards in hand or the Combo player just doesn't see a tutor or doesn't draw enough cards to sink it. Sometimes you can see there isn't a possible way for them to win and you can let off the gas. But my advice to you is to be very sure about that.

Anyway, what do you think? Am I being too cautious around our beloved Burn and Combo decks? Let me know! I'm @strixhavendropout on BlueSky.

Read More: