(Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood | Art by Cynthia Sheppard)

One card that sends me into a blood-rage is Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood.

It's not because it's part of a two card combo. My combo rage is reserved for anything using Peregrine DrakePeregrine Drake or Food ChainFood Chain.

I fly into a rage when I see Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood because it is a very political card. I love a little politics in my games, like a Tempt with DiscoveryTempt with Discovery, but the reason I can't handle the politics of Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood is because most of my opponents don't recognize it's a political card.

Even if someone utters, "I'm not running the combo," it's a card that reads, "Whenever an opponent loses life, you gain that much life." That means when any of my opponents attack each other, a huge life advantage will be given to the Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood player.

We all should know what that means. We have to to eliminate the Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood or the player. This shift might not be noticed early enough, making that player gain too much life by their next turn.

If they are running Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood, they likely are running life as a resource cards, which could be very bad for us. Waiting for a Generous GiftGenerous Gift or Beast WithinBeast Within to remove the Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood might be tough even though according to EDHREC Generous GiftGenerous Gift is in 637,047 of decks and Beast WithinBeast Within is in 975,995.

The easier, most relevant game action might actually be player removal. No player, no Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood, no player with the combined life of your opponents after you eliminate them.

The Etiquette of Player Removal

When is it socially acceptable to remove a player? Some things I've noted, talking with other players:

• How long a game of Commander is and how long the eliminated player will have to wait for the next game?
• How it feels to be removed from a game before you're able to to do "the thing."
• What is optimal for those on the back foot in a game versus the archenemy?
• Isn't Commander supposed to be casual and fun?

This is by far no the most exhaustive list. Let us know if you've personally encountered any others.

Early Elimination

We all know it feels bad to get mana screwed or mana flooded in a game of Commander and have to basically take zero to one game actions before passing the turn.

On average, a game of "healthy" Commander is between 1 hour to 2 hours. The only thing worst than zero to 1 game actions is getting removed from the game before a board wipe like FarewellFarewell.

You play for maybe 40 minutes, you lose gloriously, and then have to play on your phone or spectate a game for another hour or so while players rebuild after a FarewellFarewell.

Hey, I'm not arguing that it doesn't suck. It does, but this probably divides players into two categories: Win-at-any-cost players and Fun-at-any-cost players. Some players when left with the Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood player's necessary removal will choose to remove them, while others won't for the overall enjoyment of the table.

I'm not sure which I personally prefer, but there has to be some kind of middle ground, right? The sneaky thing about Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood is that every piece of damage you deal to another player become double duty, you'll have to deal that damage again to the Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood player.

Any ounce of compassion you show, you'll pay back double.

Before Archenemy Status

It's doubly rough to remove a player when they become a threat before they become archenemy. I played a game where someone played an Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood to just keep their life total up while attacking their their three or four creature cards. They'd mentioned they'd stopped playing Magic because of how hostile and mean players could be.

They talked about the subtle bullying in the game. This put me in a pickle because I needed to eliminate the Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood and I'd used the only removal I had already (Pro-tip: don't use your removal as early as I used to, which is to say before turn five).

So I swung into them ruthlessly. They started to get a little salty, understandably, and my partner had to tell me to chill out. I sighed and agreed. It does feel like bullying to swing out everything I have on one player that isn't going to win next turn cycle. Unfortunately, other players felt the same.

We all swung at each other, putting the Exquisite BloodExquisite Blood player from a manageable 9 life to 50. It's tough. How do I win over that kind of emotional pressure?

If you're wondering what I'd do, I'd remove the the player. If you don't want to get targeted in a game of Commander, don't play a card that puts a huge target on your back with huge obvious advantage.

This might seem harsh, but with no choice in a format with a winner, it might be the only option for a win. However, my mind and heart are at odds. Sometimes I will be compassionate, and let that player live, like in my example above.

I ALWAYS lose and regret it, but having a soft heart makes me a more fun player to have in a pod, I like to think. Ruthlessness is mercy upon ourselves.

Timing of Removal

It also comes down to something that I don't think we talk about enough, and that's timing/context. If someone is playing a Stella Lee, Wild CardStella Lee, Wild Card deck and goes from a PonderPonder, holding priority to a Mystical TutorMystical Tutor, you have to remove Stella Lee on the stack.

The next card cast is going to be Twisted FealtyTwisted Fealty and that's going to be game. Threat Assessment tinglies should be telling you to remove or counter. It's weird though because imagine if this is the fourth time you've removed Stella Lee, imagine it's in the wake of the third board wipe.

What do we do? This is where the etiquette gets weird. We want the game to be over, but we still want to win. Do we remove the Stella Lee, do we counter the Tutor?

If you're asking what I'd do? If I can win, I'm going to try to stop Stella Lee, but if it's just removal for the sake of potentially digging into my deck for a win, then I'm not removing it. I'll shuffle up and play another, hopefully, less miserable game. Like so many players have echoed, Commander is meant to be fun.

It's not fun after tons of board wipes, extended gameplay, and a miserable crawl to win, at least for me. I don't know if casual is the right word for the game anymore even on Bracket 3-4, though.

There is a deep desire for competition even at those levels. Players fight for their wins, with optimal cards, threat assessment, politics, and interaction.

Etiquette of Targeted Removal in Commander

Kaalia of the VastKaalia of the Vast. Yeah. 23,955 decks on EDHREC. 8th most popular commander right now. They all know, after reading the title of this section, the question I'm going to ask. How many times can I remove Kaalia of the VastKaalia of the Vast before I'm the mean one. Turn 4 Avacyn, Angel of HopeAvacyn, Angel of Hope.

Turn 5 Master of CrueltiesMaster of Cruelties? I know the trigger doesn't go off with Kaalia putting it into play, but oh how are you going to remove it with Avacyn on board? You can't counter it entering. I know I'm basically ranting at this point, but the point is right there. How many times is it socially acceptable to targeted remove Kaalia before I'm the bully?

I played a game against a Kaalia player a few years ago. She was up against my Arcades, The StrategistArcades, The Strategist deck, which stood no chance. The other player was playing a Mizzix of the IzmagnusMizzix of the Izmagnus Control deck. You best believe Kaalia was countered, bounced, and PongifyPongify-ed.

The Kaalia player got so upset that he picked up his cards and went home mid-game, ranting that everyone comes to this shop for a fun time, not a "whatever this was".

I can understand getting upset when your commander is removed a ton of times, but maybe that's the only solution to the commander or the deck?

Amount of Targets

Similarly, when you Druid of PurificationDruid of Purification, how many targets do you all, collectively, pick from one player? If I'm playing against an Anikthea, Hand of ErebosAnikthea, Hand of Erebos deck or ANY artifact synergy deck, should we be picking down one player into oblivion?

How many pieces of removal should we use on one player even if they are the archenemy. I don't mean in the technical sense to secure your win. I mean, ethically. If you have tons of interaction to protect your own board state, how much of it should go into dismantling one player's board? It's tough.

I want to say that it has to be whichever brings you closer to your win, while holding back. You shouldn't spend all your removal on one player and not win: spread it out.

Don't think another player is out for the count just because they aren't going off yet. That and the table feels a little better about it. It protects against saltiness. I'd spread it out every time, except against Anikthea or Ironman-types, but that's just me.

The Last Bit of Removal

So, I've been going on and on about how this might make others feel in a game of Commander. The ecosystem of a good friend group or pod of Commander comes down to the communal feeling of the group about these things.

These scenarios are conversations we should be having as we develop our play groups to see if we're a good fit for each other, or how we can better cater to our pods.

A compromise might be that Kaalia can only be removed a certain amount of times a game or she can only be played in high power tables that don't care about removing her (Gonna be honest, I don't know if either of those solutions solves the Kaalia problem, but I thought I'd give it a shot).

Either way, I'm not sure there is a one rule above all with this kind of thing, like cultural etiquette outside of card games, it depends on your playgroup to figure what's acceptable. For more of that in depth, check out Mike Carrozza's Column Am I the Bolas? And let me know what you think at @strixhavendropout on Bluesky, we'll see you next time when we chat about the etiquette of conceding the game!