...from their perspective Brawl very much looks like a worse Commander, and that's a shame considering the actual gameplay is probably better.
As one of those Commander players, I have to ask what you mean by this. You're right, we do see it as a worse Commander, and I'm having a hard time equating a sub-optimal cardpool and bad mana-fixing with better gameplay. What makes Brawl gameplay better for you? Shorter play time? Less variance of deck power levels? I'm not trolling - I am legitimately interested to know what people prefer about Brawl, as I've been one of those guys who asked "Why not Commander?" when a person or two expressed interest in Brawl.
Casual players, the kind Brawl seems to be marketed towards, absolutely hate rotating formats, so from their perspective Brawl very much looks like a worse Commander, and that's a shame considering the actual gameplay is probably better.
Huh, that's not a generalization I would have expected to hold true. Why would casual players hate rotation? To me as a pretty casual player, the thought of having to buy old cards, or even to come up with a deck when cards from the whole vast history of the game are available, is so daunting as to make for a hard pass...But maybe I'm conflating "casual" with "new"?
Yeah, casual and new are not always the same. I've been playing over 15 years, and I consider myself a casual player (mostly only play Commander with a bit of Cube and Pauper). And rotation is what killed Brawl as soon as it was announced in my play group. We like being able to play cards we like for as long as we like, to run and tweak decks over years, and not to be forced to drop cards or decks just because the calendar says we have to. Personally, rotation was my biggest gripe when they announced it, even more so than a limited card pool lacking certain color combos and mana-fixing. Without rotation, I would have been more open to trying it - I've done other Commander variants like Pauper Commander and Tiny Leaders.
We like being able to play cards we like for as long as we like, to run and tweak decks over years, and not to be forced to drop cards or decks just because the calendar says we have to.
Ah. Yeah, I'm more of a "variety is the spice" player. Running the same deck for literal years sounds like a bore, to me!
Casual players, the kind Brawl seems to be marketed towards, absolutely hate rotating formats, so from their perspective Brawl very much looks like a worse Commander, and that's a shame considering the actual gameplay is probably better.
Huh, that's not a generalization I would have expected to hold true. Why would casual players hate rotation?
Hey, Ph03niX didn't write that. I did!
Yeah, at first, I didn't think rotation would matter to casual players either since rotation personally didn't matter to me. (I even saw it as a plus.) My observations, both in person and online, proved how wrong I was. Casual players just really seem to hate rotation. They generally dislike being unable to play with their favorite cards, especially given that many casual players are not that concerned with balance. (Again, casual.) This is perhaps one of the biggest reasons why we see virtually no overlap between casual players and Standard players as well. Building a casual format from the ground up focused on rotation just seems like a huge mistake in retrospect.
It's tough though. Without rotation, Wizards has an impossible task. They need to keep the format fresh, but when old cards can never leave, it becomes more and more difficult to find ways to bring new cards in (since the new toys will always be competing with an ever expanding pool of cards). With rotation, no one seems to want to play though.
As one of those Commander players, I have to ask what you mean by this. You're right, we do see it as a worse Commander, and I'm having a hard time equating a sub-optimal cardpool and bad mana-fixing with better gameplay. What makes Brawl gameplay better for you? Shorter play time? Less variance of deck power levels? I'm not trolling - I am legitimately interested to know what people prefer about Brawl, as I've been one of those guys who asked "Why not Commander?" when a person or two expressed interest in Brawl.
I would never accuse you of trolling, but I appreciate your demonstration of sincerity nonetheless.
Answering this question is difficult. I believe Brawl has a leg up on Commander in terms of gameplay because the cards legal in Brawl are all beholden to Wizard's modern design philosophies. Wizards, over time, has gotten better at making Magic more fun, not worse. Commander, for all its lovable quirks, suffers from the fact that everything is legal. Wizards does not have a flawless track record, and they have made plenty of mistakes over the years, printing numerous cards that ought to never have existed in the first place. In Commander, players are free to play these cards. (Many even see this as a perk as most players are selfishly motivated and are interested in exploring these otherwise forbidden avenues.) The reality of the situation is that not all cards are created equal though and that some cards are better than others at creating fun games of Magic. (And some cards, much better than others.)
In Brawl, there is no Sol Ring leading to explosive starts and potential non-games. In Brawl, there is no Stasis or Armageddon leading to grueling lockdowns wherein only a single player can enjoy the game. It's a more controlled environment, and all the cards that Wizards wants to be legal in Brawl can be legal in Brawl because they're the ones who ultimately get to decide what sees print or not.
Now, I'm not saying Brawl doesn't have its flaws. Brawl is certainly riddled with them. (Lack of appealing deck variety, poor support for multicolored manabases, etc.)In terms of sheer gameplay though? I have to give it to Brawl. Commander can be fun, but Brawl is engineered to be fun.
Whoops, sorry about that! I must have fumbled when trying to reduce a nested quote to a single.
In other news, though, it looks like I may have talked my LGS owner into playing some Brawl at the store between leagues. I don't expect it'll be a huge event, but hopefully we'll be able to get one or two four-player tables going!
In other news, though, it looks like I may have talked my LGS owner into playing some Brawl at the store between leagues. I don't expect it'll be a huge event, but hopefully we'll be able to get one or two four-player tables going!
Good luck to you with that. With Guilds of Ravnica on the horizon, I wouldn't expect anyone to build a Brawl deck given rotation is only a few weeks away.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WUBRGMr. Bones' Wild RideGRBUW Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Good luck to you with that. With Guilds of Ravnica on the horizon, I wouldn't expect anyone to build a Brawl deck given rotation is only a few weeks away.
There seemed to be a few interested players! Folks are looking for something to fill the time between the M19 league that just wrapped up and the Guilds release.
We like being able to play cards we like for as long as we like, to run and tweak decks over years, and not to be forced to drop cards or decks just because the calendar says we have to.
Ah. Yeah, I'm more of a "variety is the spice" player. Running the same deck for literal years sounds like a bore, to me!
Well, sure, if it's your only deck, it would be super boring. But I've built over 60 Commander decks over the years - some only survive a few games, some last for months, some for years, and some get stripped down only to be rebuilt and reimagined at a later date. I'm with you on the "variety is the spice of life" theory; I just feel Commander does that better than Brawl.
As one of those Commander players, I have to ask what you mean by this. You're right, we do see it as a worse Commander, and I'm having a hard time equating a sub-optimal cardpool and bad mana-fixing with better gameplay. What makes Brawl gameplay better for you? Shorter play time? Less variance of deck power levels? I'm not trolling - I am legitimately interested to know what people prefer about Brawl, as I've been one of those guys who asked "Why not Commander?" when a person or two expressed interest in Brawl.
I believe Brawl has a leg up on Commander in terms of gameplay because the cards legal in Brawl are all beholden to Wizard's modern design philosophies.
Makes sense. There's some pretty weird/bizarre cards out there that create odd interactions.
Wizards, over time, has gotten better at making Magic more fun, not worse.
I'm not so sure. Yes, you avoid some of the mistakes, but you miss a lot of the fun stuff they have created. With Commander, I can choose all the fun stuff. With Brawl, I'm beholden to the latest sets only, which can be great but can also be miserable. Maybe I'm just worried because I hear stuff like "Eldrazi Winter" and record number of bannings in Standard.
Commander, for all its lovable quirks, suffers from the fact that everything is legal. Wizards does not have a flawless track record, and they have made plenty of mistakes over the years, printing numerous cards that ought to never have existed in the first place. In Commander, players are free to play these cards. (Many even see this as a perk as most players are selfishly motivated and are interested in exploring these otherwise forbidden avenues.) The reality of the situation is that not all cards are created equal though and that some cards are better than others at creating fun games of Magic. (And some cards, much better than others.)
Yeah, that can be a problem. It really has to fall to the social contract. We've had people come in and destroy a game or two before we have a talk. Sometimes the talk is precipitated during the game, when everyone turns on the guy who nuked our lands (with no win condition) but not our creatures (with insufficient blockers).
Now, I'm not saying Brawl doesn't have its flaws. Brawl is certainly riddled with them. (Lack of appealing deck variety, poor support for multicolored manabases, etc.)In terms of sheer gameplay though? I have to give it to Brawl. Commander can be fun, but Brawl is engineered to be fun.
Thanks for the conversation. Maybe I should look into building a deck for the next time someone asks.
I think what it really comes down to is that, if you're an established commander player with a playgroup that has implicit boundaries you're comfortable with, brawl isn't really made for you. It's there if you want to try it out, but there's a good chance you'll find the limitations of card selection and the necessity of rotation frustrating.
I think the goal is brawl is to create a casual format for new players, which doesn't really exist in a good state right now. Commander has largely devoured 60-card-casual at most LGSs I've been to. Standard, as a tournament format, has implicit competitiveness. Draft and sealed, same deal. Commander has the benefit of multiplayer balance and casual construction and play for most groups and players...but it has a vast card pool, complicated interactions, lots of money involved in the top-end cards, and is just generally a confusing mine-field for new players. I see brawl as an attempt to remedy that, to take the things that new players like about commander - picking a favorite card and building around it, the spirit of brewing, the less-competitive nature of the format, multiplayer, etc - and merging that with a card pool that's more friendly to new players, while streamlining a few rules that make the game easier to track (commander damage) and let people do the things they want to do (planeswalkers).
Having played a fair bit of brawl, it is fun, but I still tend to drift back to commander because of the greater variety of decks I can build. That's sort of the nature of the beast. Unfortunately I'm not sure that brawl can succeed at bringing new players together with as little store support as we've been seeing, at least locally. New players in a new format are going to have a hard time getting together on their own, so stores really need to be the glue that holds these new communities together, and I don't think that's what's been happening. At least here in Seattle.
I think the goal is brawl is to create a casual format for new players, which doesn't really exist in a good state right now. Commander has largely devoured 60-card-casual at most LGSs I've been to. Standard, as a tournament format, has implicit competitiveness. Draft and sealed, same deal. Commander has the benefit of multiplayer balance and casual construction and play for most groups and players...but it has a vast card pool, complicated interactions, lots of money involved in the top-end cards, and is just generally a confusing mine-field for new players. I see brawl as an attempt to remedy that, to take the things that new players like about commander - picking a favorite card and building around it, the spirit of brewing, the less-competitive nature of the format, multiplayer, etc - and merging that with a card pool that's more friendly to new players, while streamlining a few rules that make the game easier to track (commander damage) and let people do the things they want to do (planeswalkers).
I agree with this assessment 100%. As a newbie here, the thought of getting into Commander is about as appealing as getting into Modern--expensive, elite, daunting. It doesn't seem like a "casual" format in the slightest, looking in from outside. It doesn't help that the few times I've brushed up against my local Commander clique, the vibe I've gotten from them is the sort of haughty competitiveness that made me for a while reluctant to try paper Magic at all: the "you're playing that card? What's wrong with you?" sort of attitude. And Brawl is just more interesting than by-the-book kitchen-table constructed, on the other end.
I guess the question is, how big is the target audience for Brawl? Casual players on a budget, scared off by big card pools, but not too fazed by the prospect of having to retire some cards every so often? It fits me on every point, but maybe I'm a rare breed.
I agree with this assessment 100%. As a newbie here, the thought of getting into Commander is about as appealing as getting into Modern--expensive, elite, daunting. It doesn't seem like a "casual" format in the slightest, looking in from outside. It doesn't help that the few times I've brushed up against my local Commander clique, the vibe I've gotten from them is the sort of haughty competitiveness that made me for a while reluctant to try paper Magic at all: the "you're playing that card? What's wrong with you?" sort of attitude. And Brawl is just more interesting than by-the-book kitchen-table constructed, on the other end.
I guess the question is, how big is the target audience for Brawl? Casual players on a budget, scared off by big card pools, but not too fazed by the prospect of having to retire some cards every so often? It fits me on every point, but maybe I'm a rare breed.
I think part of the issue is that the core demo - new players looking to play casually - are not likely to be on mtgsalvation posting tons of decklists and going to great lengths to organize playgroups. If you want to get it going, I'd suggest pressuring your LGS to create a brawl night, to make it easier for new players to find each other. The other thing I think WotC ought to do if they actually want the format to succeed, is to make brawl precon decks. With some commanders, like Kumena, they could stay viable for literally the entire time the commander is legal in standard.
How actually big the demo is, I'm not sure. But I see a lot of new players at FNMs, and I see a lot of casual players on commander nights. So I'm sure there have to be a decent number of new, casual players. I think the biggest issue is rotation - but unfortunately it's sort of a necessity if the format is to continue to be accessible to new players and not turn into commander 2.0. I think some new players think "eww, rotation, I don't like that" - and then try to force themselves into eternal formats where they get burned out because it's too complex.
I will say - playgroups vary. Some commander players can be pricks, but there are lots of good groups out there too, in my experience. Maybe try looking around on social media to find other local groups, you might have more luck. If you can't find a brawl group.
As one of those Commander players, I have to ask what you mean by this. You're right, we do see it as a worse Commander, and I'm having a hard time equating a sub-optimal cardpool and bad mana-fixing with better gameplay. What makes Brawl gameplay better for you? Shorter play time? Less variance of deck power levels? I'm not trolling - I am legitimately interested to know what people prefer about Brawl, as I've been one of those guys who asked "Why not Commander?" when a person or two expressed interest in Brawl.
I think that Commander has the eternal format problem (because it is one) the number of cards that are just too got not too use has slowly risen over time so trying to play a new card generally just feels bad, like I could play Slimefoot EDH, but it would generally just feel worse compared to Meren/Gitrog. Commander just has..lots of "required" cards like Sol Ring, Signets and the like that feel like they just restrict Deck Building.
As one of those Commander players, I have to ask what you mean by this. You're right, we do see it as a worse Commander, and I'm having a hard time equating a sub-optimal cardpool and bad mana-fixing with better gameplay. What makes Brawl gameplay better for you? Shorter play time? Less variance of deck power levels? I'm not trolling - I am legitimately interested to know what people prefer about Brawl, as I've been one of those guys who asked "Why not Commander?" when a person or two expressed interest in Brawl.
I think that Commander has the eternal format problem (because it is one) the number of cards that are just too got not too use has slowly risen over time so trying to play a new card generally just feels bad, like I could play Slimefoot EDH, but it would generally just feel worse compared to Meren/Gitrog. Commander just has..lots of "required" cards like Sol Ring, Signets and the like that feel like they just restrict Deck Building.
I think you're seeing what you want to see here as opposed to considering how vast EDH truly is as a creative and dynamic format. Consider Donald's Drederic deck over in the multiplayer decklists: No sol ring, extreme concessions to color restrictions, and yet he built simic dredge... well, because. That's the beauty of EDH that brawl lacks; the sheer immensity of the cardpool means anything is possible, whereas brawl can only ever be singleton standard. Sure, a few players are just going to jam what's good, but most players are trying to sculpt some weird expression of self through their card choices and playstyle, and being able to access more resources only adds finer detail to that expression.
I think you are seeing this from the viewpoint of an experienced player though. Someone getting into Commander is going to spend months, if not years, getting suddenly blindsided by cards they never heard of and will never be able to afford. Nether void into Armageddon is something that very few new players are going to enjoy happening to them.
Heck the first year I played my group told me to never play removal, discard or counters because they weren't fun.
As one of those Commander players, I have to ask what you mean by this. You're right, we do see it as a worse Commander, and I'm having a hard time equating a sub-optimal cardpool and bad mana-fixing with better gameplay. What makes Brawl gameplay better for you? Shorter play time? Less variance of deck power levels? I'm not trolling - I am legitimately interested to know what people prefer about Brawl, as I've been one of those guys who asked "Why not Commander?" when a person or two expressed interest in Brawl.
I think that Commander has the eternal format problem (because it is one) the number of cards that are just too got not too use has slowly risen over time so trying to play a new card generally just feels bad, like I could play Slimefoot EDH, but it would generally just feel worse compared to Meren/Gitrog. Commander just has..lots of "required" cards like Sol Ring, Signets and the like that feel like they just restrict Deck Building.
I think you're seeing what you want to see here as opposed to considering how vast EDH truly is as a creative and dynamic format. Consider Donald's Drederic deck over in the multiplayer decklists: No sol ring, extreme concessions to color restrictions, and yet he built simic dredge... well, because. That's the beauty of EDH that brawl lacks; the sheer immensity of the cardpool means anything is possible, whereas brawl can only ever be singleton standard. Sure, a few players are just going to jam what's good, but most players are trying to sculpt some weird expression of self through their card choices and playstyle, and being able to access more resources only adds finer detail to that expression.
Add me to the list of people who can anecdotally report that my FLGS has no more Brawl going on. It only lasted a month or two. That combined with the very low traffic on this forum seems to support the impression that the format isn’t doing well.
And maybe it’s partly Wizards’ fault since they haven’t supported it very well. After a few early articles, in which they fiddled with what cards were legal far more than one would hope for a limited card pool, they’ve stopped really talking about it. It’s not even supported in MtG Arena!
So all that remains is to speculate why. Rotation killed it for me, as others have also said. I also think it’s very hard to achieve an interesting balance. With a standard-sized card pool, I think it will always be solved pretty quickly. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect tons of diversity, with all the various legends being viable commanders. Casuals may not think they care about this until they play at their FLGS and get curbstomped by the consensus best deck of the current Brawl season.
I do think the ideas of Brawl are interesting and could be adapted in cool ways for individual game groups. For example, I’d like to play “Ravnica Brawl,” where all three Ravnica blocks are legal. Even more interesting, only allow cards with guildmarks and leave out the random unthemed cards like Dark Confidant.
Brawl is still going (if not going strong exactly) at my LGS thanks to my own advocacy, hah. It continues to be an ideal filler event to bridge the gaps between sealed Leagues, which here run for about 2 months immediately after the release of a new set. Doubly so because going through a League or two is just about right for getting you a card pool you can build a handful of fun Brawl decks from--where if it were EDH, I'd stay home knowing anything I'd build would be an absolute joke.
Rotation rescued the format, not killed it, here. We were all deeply relieved to see the Amonkhet gods go bye-bye.
Rotation made it difficult for me and another buddy to Brawl. I dragged my feet for a month before building a new deck, and my buddy has not tried updating his. He and I were the only ones who consistently played.
Brawl is my go-to Constructed format now for playing with my 8-year old (we do 2HG pre-releases as well).
I do think that the format would work a lot better for casuals if it had a 3 or 4 year rotation window. That would still prevent the format from getting too expensive as most of the sets in that timeframe are pretty easily obtained. It would also largely mitigate the fears of your favorite card not being usable so quickly.
Our LGS has a new stretch of Brawl planned starting Monday. I've seen at least one of our previous players siphoned off by KeyForge tho, so we'll see how turnout is this time around!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
Yeah, at first, I didn't think rotation would matter to casual players either since rotation personally didn't matter to me. (I even saw it as a plus.) My observations, both in person and online, proved how wrong I was. Casual players just really seem to hate rotation. They generally dislike being unable to play with their favorite cards, especially given that many casual players are not that concerned with balance. (Again, casual.) This is perhaps one of the biggest reasons why we see virtually no overlap between casual players and Standard players as well. Building a casual format from the ground up focused on rotation just seems like a huge mistake in retrospect.
It's tough though. Without rotation, Wizards has an impossible task. They need to keep the format fresh, but when old cards can never leave, it becomes more and more difficult to find ways to bring new cards in (since the new toys will always be competing with an ever expanding pool of cards). With rotation, no one seems to want to play though.
I would never accuse you of trolling, but I appreciate your demonstration of sincerity nonetheless.
Answering this question is difficult. I believe Brawl has a leg up on Commander in terms of gameplay because the cards legal in Brawl are all beholden to Wizard's modern design philosophies. Wizards, over time, has gotten better at making Magic more fun, not worse. Commander, for all its lovable quirks, suffers from the fact that everything is legal. Wizards does not have a flawless track record, and they have made plenty of mistakes over the years, printing numerous cards that ought to never have existed in the first place. In Commander, players are free to play these cards. (Many even see this as a perk as most players are selfishly motivated and are interested in exploring these otherwise forbidden avenues.) The reality of the situation is that not all cards are created equal though and that some cards are better than others at creating fun games of Magic. (And some cards, much better than others.)
In Brawl, there is no Sol Ring leading to explosive starts and potential non-games. In Brawl, there is no Stasis or Armageddon leading to grueling lockdowns wherein only a single player can enjoy the game. It's a more controlled environment, and all the cards that Wizards wants to be legal in Brawl can be legal in Brawl because they're the ones who ultimately get to decide what sees print or not.
Now, I'm not saying Brawl doesn't have its flaws. Brawl is certainly riddled with them. (Lack of appealing deck variety, poor support for multicolored manabases, etc.)In terms of sheer gameplay though? I have to give it to Brawl. Commander can be fun, but Brawl is engineered to be fun.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
In other news, though, it looks like I may have talked my LGS owner into playing some Brawl at the store between leagues. I don't expect it'll be a huge event, but hopefully we'll be able to get one or two four-player tables going!
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
Makes sense. There's some pretty weird/bizarre cards out there that create odd interactions. I'm not so sure. Yes, you avoid some of the mistakes, but you miss a lot of the fun stuff they have created. With Commander, I can choose all the fun stuff. With Brawl, I'm beholden to the latest sets only, which can be great but can also be miserable. Maybe I'm just worried because I hear stuff like "Eldrazi Winter" and record number of bannings in Standard. Yeah, that can be a problem. It really has to fall to the social contract. We've had people come in and destroy a game or two before we have a talk. Sometimes the talk is precipitated during the game, when everyone turns on the guy who nuked our lands (with no win condition) but not our creatures (with insufficient blockers). Thanks for the conversation. Maybe I should look into building a deck for the next time someone asks.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
I think the goal is brawl is to create a casual format for new players, which doesn't really exist in a good state right now. Commander has largely devoured 60-card-casual at most LGSs I've been to. Standard, as a tournament format, has implicit competitiveness. Draft and sealed, same deal. Commander has the benefit of multiplayer balance and casual construction and play for most groups and players...but it has a vast card pool, complicated interactions, lots of money involved in the top-end cards, and is just generally a confusing mine-field for new players. I see brawl as an attempt to remedy that, to take the things that new players like about commander - picking a favorite card and building around it, the spirit of brewing, the less-competitive nature of the format, multiplayer, etc - and merging that with a card pool that's more friendly to new players, while streamlining a few rules that make the game easier to track (commander damage) and let people do the things they want to do (planeswalkers).
Having played a fair bit of brawl, it is fun, but I still tend to drift back to commander because of the greater variety of decks I can build. That's sort of the nature of the beast. Unfortunately I'm not sure that brawl can succeed at bringing new players together with as little store support as we've been seeing, at least locally. New players in a new format are going to have a hard time getting together on their own, so stores really need to be the glue that holds these new communities together, and I don't think that's what's been happening. At least here in Seattle.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I guess the question is, how big is the target audience for Brawl? Casual players on a budget, scared off by big card pools, but not too fazed by the prospect of having to retire some cards every so often? It fits me on every point, but maybe I'm a rare breed.
How actually big the demo is, I'm not sure. But I see a lot of new players at FNMs, and I see a lot of casual players on commander nights. So I'm sure there have to be a decent number of new, casual players. I think the biggest issue is rotation - but unfortunately it's sort of a necessity if the format is to continue to be accessible to new players and not turn into commander 2.0. I think some new players think "eww, rotation, I don't like that" - and then try to force themselves into eternal formats where they get burned out because it's too complex.
I will say - playgroups vary. Some commander players can be pricks, but there are lots of good groups out there too, in my experience. Maybe try looking around on social media to find other local groups, you might have more luck. If you can't find a brawl group.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I think that Commander has the eternal format problem (because it is one) the number of cards that are just too got not too use has slowly risen over time so trying to play a new card generally just feels bad, like I could play Slimefoot EDH, but it would generally just feel worse compared to Meren/Gitrog. Commander just has..lots of "required" cards like Sol Ring, Signets and the like that feel like they just restrict Deck Building.
Dragons of Legend, Lead by Scion of the UR-Dragon
The Gitrog Monster
Gonti, Lord of Luxury
Shogun Saskia
Hive World
Atraxa hates fun
Abzan
I think you're seeing what you want to see here as opposed to considering how vast EDH truly is as a creative and dynamic format. Consider Donald's Drederic deck over in the multiplayer decklists: No sol ring, extreme concessions to color restrictions, and yet he built simic dredge... well, because. That's the beauty of EDH that brawl lacks; the sheer immensity of the cardpool means anything is possible, whereas brawl can only ever be singleton standard. Sure, a few players are just going to jam what's good, but most players are trying to sculpt some weird expression of self through their card choices and playstyle, and being able to access more resources only adds finer detail to that expression.
Heck the first year I played my group told me to never play removal, discard or counters because they weren't fun.
And his deck would be better with those staples.
Dragons of Legend, Lead by Scion of the UR-Dragon
The Gitrog Monster
Gonti, Lord of Luxury
Shogun Saskia
Hive World
Atraxa hates fun
Abzan
And maybe it’s partly Wizards’ fault since they haven’t supported it very well. After a few early articles, in which they fiddled with what cards were legal far more than one would hope for a limited card pool, they’ve stopped really talking about it. It’s not even supported in MtG Arena!
So all that remains is to speculate why. Rotation killed it for me, as others have also said. I also think it’s very hard to achieve an interesting balance. With a standard-sized card pool, I think it will always be solved pretty quickly. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect tons of diversity, with all the various legends being viable commanders. Casuals may not think they care about this until they play at their FLGS and get curbstomped by the consensus best deck of the current Brawl season.
I do think the ideas of Brawl are interesting and could be adapted in cool ways for individual game groups. For example, I’d like to play “Ravnica Brawl,” where all three Ravnica blocks are legal. Even more interesting, only allow cards with guildmarks and leave out the random unthemed cards like Dark Confidant.
Rotation rescued the format, not killed it, here. We were all deeply relieved to see the Amonkhet gods go bye-bye.
I do think that the format would work a lot better for casuals if it had a 3 or 4 year rotation window. That would still prevent the format from getting too expensive as most of the sets in that timeframe are pretty easily obtained. It would also largely mitigate the fears of your favorite card not being usable so quickly.