one of the widely held tenets of commander deckbuilding is that the deck should adhere to some sort of overarching theme. For instance, see Blackjack86's philosophy of deckbuilding:
All my decks try to adhere to these guidelines:
1) Be able to win.
2) Be mostly true to a flavor and a theme.
3) Be fun to pilot or to play against and interactive.
4) Have multiple paths to victory.
5) Have lots of cool interactions and synergy.
6) Play out differently every game to keep it fun over a long time.
7) Be streamlined and fast to play without excessive upkeep, time-consuming play or overcomplicated boardstates.
8) Integrate the Commanders abilities into the strategy at least a little, but be able to win without ever playing the commander.
In my experience, the most popular way to go about choosing a theme is to focus on some game mechanic or strategy (e.g. stealing/copying, cheating out fatties, reanimator etc) that may or may not synergize well with your commander. Another somewhat similar approach is to pick a legendary creature and build a deck around their abilities. A second popular method is to build the deck in a way that exemplifies a certain flavor. In this case, the theme of the deck can be inspired by a specific element of an official set storyline, e.g. an Orzhov deck (one can choose to be very strict and exclude cards which do not feel like they belong to Orzhov, such as Tocatli Honor Guard). It can also be a more general fantasy theme, like necromancy. The second kind of flavor themes lend often go very well with mechanical themes. A third kind of deck theme that is sometimes seen is more extravagant, such as a Foglio artwork tribal deck, or a deck that aims to symbolize a certain album by a favorite band, or a deck which consists only of cards with the word "salt" in their name. The possibilities here are endless.
Recently, I tried a new method of finding and implementing a theme during deckbuilding. I began with thinking about a certain feeling or atmosphere that I want the pilot and their opponents to experience during a game, and then thought about cards and strategies that would be conducive to that feeling. For instance, my Vial Smasher the Fierce/Ishai, Ojutai Dragonspeaker deck wants to recreate the classic Evil Mastermind trope. Specifically, I was inspired by the countless sadistic choice dilemmas that supervillains from Lex Luthor to the Green Goblin have gleefully presented to their heroic adversaries, and hence included plenty of cards like Torment of Hailfire or Prince of Thralls. Another example is my (house-ruled as legendary) Tamanoa deck, where I wanted to create games that feel like my opponents are venturing into a hostile, verdant Jungle. I included plenty of global damage effects a la Pyrohemia, enrage dinos and Rite of Passage type cards. The idea is that the very same elements which make the jungle hostile and dangerous to outsiders (poisonous vines, wild animals, heat, humidity, quicksands etc) are the very fabric of life that make everything that belongs to the jungle grow and flourish. Both decks aim to evoke these feelings or atmospheres not just through their individual card artworks or mechanics, but through the very way they play out during a commander game by presenting my opponents with very specific choice situations that are meant to recreate the atmospheric clouds that inspired these decks.
I found this way of deck construction to be very rewarding and fun. It is neither looking for a pure flavor theme, nor starting out with abstract thinking about game mechanics, but sort of a synthesis of the first two ways of thematically guiding deck construction and play style I outlined above. It feels very much like painting a picture with your deck. In the ideal case, everything comes together in the end and results in a well-rounded deck that is more than the sum of its parts. While flavorful themes are often transmitted primarily via the artwork / flavor texts of the cards and not necessarily in terms of how the deck behaves during gameplay, and mechanical themes are expressed less via the flavor of the cards and more through what the cards actually do on the battlefield, this approach wants to combine both. The deck theme is not expressed only through artworks or the card mechanics alone, but rather through a certain kind of overall atmosphere that comes about during the act of playing a commander game with it. I have come to refer to these decks as "atmospheric decks".
Of course I do not claim to be the first one to build decks that work like that. On the contrary, I think the large majority of EDH decks are atmospheric decks to some degree. Nonetheless, formulating this concept and actively trying to implement it during deckbuilding changed the way I approached EDH deck construction. Instead of starting out with thinking about what I want the deck to do, I start with thinking about what I want playing (and playing against) the deck to feel like.
So, I am curious: How do you go about incorporating themes during deck construction and gameplay? Do you agree with my broad categorization of different kinds of themes? Do you think the concept of the atmospheric deck is convincing?
Riku of Two Reflections - Copy, then copy again | Shattergang Brothers - Token Sac&Recur | Gahiji, Honored One - Multiple attack steps | Karametra, God of Harvests - Landfall, Creaturefall, Shroud | Ruhan of the Fomori - Stop hitting yourself | Zurgo Helmsmasher - Equipment&Wraths | Crosis, the Purger - Dragon Tribal Reanimator | Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - No stax, just tap and untap fun | Anafenza, the Foremost - Enduring Ideal Enchantress | Sharuum, the Hegemon - Sphinx Tribal Control | Noyan Dar - Spellslinger | The Mimeoplasm - Counterpalooza
Lists can be found here.
Still convinced the guy on Beseech the Queen is wearing a Mitra-type hat. Wake up sheeple!
So, I am curious: How do you go about incorporating themes during deck construction and gameplay?
I build my decks purely off mechanics. I think that decks built from an atmospheric perspective, while well intentioned, are flawed in the sense that atmosphere is a near impossible element to convey through deckbuilding. Unless a deck's atmosphere is somehow masterfully executed, I believe virtually no player would ever consider the kind of atmosphere a deck was trying to convey without explicitly being told about it. There are a few reasons why.
For one, players aren't typically expecting other people to build decks from an atmospheric perspective. As such, they won't even think to look for that sort of thing. For two, every deck is going to give off its own vibe, even decks built solely from mechanics. Because of this, I don't think players would even be able to differentiate between decks built with an atmosphere in mind and decks built solely from mechanics when presented in the dark about it.
Decks built with an atmosphere in mind are further troubled by the fact that Commander forces players to play more unique cards than other formats. This "muddies the message" so to speak, as not every card will equally evoke the atmosphere a deckbuilder is trying to convey. Some cards will create a certain kind of atmosphere better than others, and there's no guarantee those cards will even show up when looking down a 99 card singleton deck. This could lead to wild misinterpretations of theme depending upon which cards saw play.
Do you think the concept of the atmospheric deck is convincing?
I'm not sure what you mean by this question. If you mean, "do I think players should build decks from an atmospheric perspective?" like, that's up them. People will build decks for whatever reasons they want. It isn't up to me to decide how someone should build a deck or not. Granted, there are plenty of deck premises that I think are absolute poppycock, but to each their own.
Alternatively, if you meant "do I think decks built from an atmospheric perspective will reliably convey the atmospheres they were built in mind with?" then no. I don't think atmospheric decks can reliably convey the atmospheres they were built with in mind. Barring only the most exquisitely built decks, I think the atmospheres those decks are trying to convey will largely only exist inside the heads of their creators.
EDIT: On an unrelated note, for more examples of atmospheric deckbuilding, I would look at some of 4Lark's old decks. I don't know if they're active much anymore, — haven't seen them around — but I believe I remember them building decks with an atmospheric perspective in mind.
I'm not sure what you mean by this question. If you mean, "do I think players should build decks from an atmospheric perspective?" like, that's up them. People will build decks for whatever reasons they want. It isn't up to me to decide how someone should build a deck or not. Granted, there are plenty of deck premises that I think are absolute poppycock, but to each their own.
Alternatively, if you meant "do I think decks built from an atmospheric perspective will reliably convey the atmospheres they were built in mind with?" then no. I don't think atmospheric decks can reliably convey the atmospheres they were built with in mind. Barring only the most exquisitely built decks, I think the atmospheres those decks are trying to convey will largely only exist inside the heads of their creators.
I did indeed mean the question in the second sense. Again, you make some fair points. I think it is not a failure if I have to tell people about my intention with the deck. And naturally, not everybody is receptive for these kinds of considerations. If the game goes well, it will still be fun for everybody regardless of any flavor or thematic considerations. If some people tell me they can see what I was trying to do with the deck, all the better. Until then, I am happy with having fun during deck construction and gameplay on more levels than just enjoying a mechanically creative deck. I think a big reason why I enjoy this approach is that, while I have refrained from strongly focusing on flavor in the past because it felt too restrictive in my card choices, with this approach I do feel like I am building a strong deck that is focused on gameplay and wanting to win, while at the same time creating something unique that goes beyond the "hard" play mechanics and incorporates "soft" storytelling elements. So yeah, maybe you are right and the atmosphere really only exists in my head.
Riku of Two Reflections - Copy, then copy again | Shattergang Brothers - Token Sac&Recur | Gahiji, Honored One - Multiple attack steps | Karametra, God of Harvests - Landfall, Creaturefall, Shroud | Ruhan of the Fomori - Stop hitting yourself | Zurgo Helmsmasher - Equipment&Wraths | Crosis, the Purger - Dragon Tribal Reanimator | Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - No stax, just tap and untap fun | Anafenza, the Foremost - Enduring Ideal Enchantress | Sharuum, the Hegemon - Sphinx Tribal Control | Noyan Dar - Spellslinger | The Mimeoplasm - Counterpalooza
Lists can be found here.
Still convinced the guy on Beseech the Queen is wearing a Mitra-type hat. Wake up sheeple!
As much as I dislike saying it, I sort of agree with ArrogantAxolotl - I think it's tough to convey a 'vibe' without having to explain that you've done it intentionally to your meta - unless they know the vibe you're going for, or its inherent in the commander/card choices.
That being said, a lot of the pleasure of theorycrafting, brewing and building a deck is being happy oneself with the end result - insofar as a deck is ever finished. Themed decks probably have a nearer endpoint than building around synergies and mechanics, but so long as a deck sticks around, there's always scope for the deck to evolve.
I guess what I'm saying is if you're building for theme, essentially that theme need only be pleasing to yourself. Sure you can show it off, post it here, present it to friends and play with them too, but at the end of the day you're definitely building it more for yourself than anyone else. That's true of any deck, but it's more true when you're crafting on the Altar of Vorthos.
As you know, I've built several Vorthos decks - most of them play well enough, but I doubt very highly that if I played any of them in a different meta the choices I've made would stand out enough for someone to say 'dude, is this a themed deck?'. That doesn't matter to me, because I'm aware of the themes inherent and I'm happy with the way they're represented in the build.
1. Both decks aim to evoke these feelings or atmospheres not just through their individual card artworks or mechanics, but through the very way they play out during a commander game by presenting my opponents with very specific choice situations that are meant to recreate the atmospheric clouds that inspired these decks.
2. a)I found this way of deck construction to be very rewarding and fun. [...] b)It feels very much like painting a picture with your deck.
3. The deck theme is not expressed only through artworks or the card mechanics alone, but rather through a certain kind of overall atmosphere that comes about during the act of playing a commander game with it.
4. How do you go about incorporating themes during deck construction and gameplay?
5. Do you think the concept of the atmospheric deck is convincing?
1. While that sounds entertaining, i don't think your opponents will have enough time to absorb each and every card, their flavor and interaction thoroughly enough to create a lasting impression - let alone the one you were aiming for. "A fierce but vivid and colorful jungle" on your side might be "random naya painbringers" for someone else. Plus with their concentration splitting to other boards and their own hand, whatever impression will be shaky and vanish fast.
2. a) I am pretty sure it is. I picture the research is one fun ride - and propably lots of work. b)While you're painting a picture, i'm usually sketching a blueprint. The gears and joints assemble themselves over time to form the final Rube Goldberg machine.
3. As said i'm very sceptic if there's enough time and room for anyone to get me hooked for a theme, as much as you hope to do. Unless you'd start commentating each and every one of your plays like an overly dramatic P&P player. And trust me, in that case the underlying theme i'd sense would be "getting on your nerves as hard as i possibly can".
4. When starting out with a blueprint i try to get a grasp of what part of my commanders' tech i'd want to maximize on. E.g. with Brago, King Eternal i didn't want to go Stax or infinites, but decided i wanted to double up on the etb thing through token generators, Cathars' Crusade and cards that reward me going wide like Coastal Piracy and Bident of Thassa. Same goes for my Mirri, Weatherlight Duelist deck, where i wanted to maximize her influence on combat behavior. Lots of Stompies with different concequences (see Giant Adephage) to make the decision harder on what to block and therefor take combat advantage out the defending players' hand. So with no apparent flavor theme, there's a technical theme.
5. As much as i'd like to say otherwise, i don't. The theory is nice, but i think it'll fall short for everyone but the player himself.
Decks built with an atmosphere in mind are further troubled by the fact that Commander forces players to play more unique cards than other formats.
This is another major flaw of your theory - at least in EDH. Tiny Leaders as another singleton format would be a lot more consistent as far as exposure of your flavorful cards goes. 60 card decks with 4 ofs are far more likely than either to create whatever mood you try to get across.
I guess what I'm saying is if you're building for theme, essentially that theme need only be pleasing to yourself. Sure you can show it off, post it here, present it to friends and play with them too, but at the end of the day you're definitely building it more for yourself than anyone else. That's true of any deck, but it's more true when you're crafting on the Altar of Vorthos.
I'm aware of the themes inherent and I'm happy with the way they're represented in the build.
Despite my criticism of the theory, this is a very good point. As long as you'll get something out of it, do your thing! If some- or everyone else does too, even better. Just try not rely on their feedback and enthusiasm to be content with what you created.
Despite my criticism of the theory, this is a very good point. As long as you'll get something out of it, do your thing! If some- or everyone else does too, even better. Just try not rely on their feedback and enthusiasm to be content with what you created.
Pretty much this. Theme decks become a passion project - especially when the theme is obscure. If its MTG related, it'll shine through, same if it's tribal. If it's obscure like mine, the theme is entirely for oneself - first and foremost at least.
I agree with the sentiments that who you play against are probably not going to get exactly what your deck is themed to do. Unless you go out of your way to explain things, but realistically probably only be interesting for yourself. Having an all foil deck, for opponents is a passing, "oh they have spent some effort on the deck". In the players mind its like "OMG MY DECK IS F**CKING AWESOME!!!!!". What matters is how you feel about the deck, and how it came to be.
I love making theme decks, around card mechanics or around a "story". Story meaning it's tribal or aims to have cards that are on theme with a particular thing, or even literally containing cards around particular events in the Magic the Gathering multiverse.
What matters is how you feel about the deck, and how it came to be.
This is exactly it. If you're able to marry up two passions in cards and another theme, that's awesome, enjoy it and revel in it. Not everyone will share the same passions, so as long as you love what you've made that's all that matters.
I love the challenge of aiming for a theme and seeing it get deeper and deeper the more you build. That's where the enjoyment is in a Vorthos build. My malazan decks are unrecognizable as such unless you know the content, and even then there's room for interpretation. But I'm happy with 3/4 as more or less finished products at present, and if someone asks about card choices I'm happy to elaborate.
I think the concept of atmosphere should be the last level of polish applied to deck construction. At the core, you decide what your deck is going to do, then filter the card options available to you for those that fit your theme and any artificial restrictions you might have, and when it's all done, go over the list with a fine-tooth comb to tweak individual cards that just don't feel right.
When I built Taigam, Ojutai Master, I knew I wanted the core of the deck to be cards like Talrand, Sky Summoner, Baral, Chief of Compliance and Noyan Dar, Roil Shaper, where I would be rewarded for casting instants and sorceries. I also knew I wanted every instant and sorcery in the deck to be bigger and splashier than the cool and efficient low-drops that comprise those decklists on EDHRec. Taigam, for example, heavily rewards extra turn spells. Rather than card draw, I wanted dig, and I didn't want efficient dig, I wanted powerful dig, so I sought out dig cards that dug more than three down. Ponder and pals had no place here. I didn't want free/cheap counter spells, I wanted big and flashy ones. I wanted value-town modal spells. I wanted "battlecruiser spellslinger". Half the deck was already built because I have what amounts to a stock mana and ramp base that I've preserved since going Azorius -- it just works for me. Its theme is that all the rocks have to produce Azorius mana. That did a good job of dropping the efficiency some whilst still keeping me on par with players who aren't the best of the best. The whole atmosphere of the deck sort of built itself. Honing in on the finished product is an ongoing project.
Personally I see decks falling into these general categories:
-decks built around synergy with a certain mechanic. i.e. a tribal deck, a +1/+1 counter deck, some combo, etc. The most common kind of deck.
-decks built around a certain mechanic (without synergy). i.e. theft. Theft doesn't really synergize with itself.
-decks built around strong cards with no mechanical or synergistic considerations. aka goodstuff.
-decks built around neither synergistic, mechanical, or power considerations. I group any kind of theme deck here - game of thrones flavor, artist decks, left handed decks, etc.
-decks built around creating a certain experience. This is a category I'm interested in exploring although idk if it's its own category or just a subcategory of #4. My best example is my tymna/kraum deck, which is full of cards I think make for exciting unexpected finishes. The goal is to win in a way that's satisfying, regardless of synergy, mechanics, or power, though of course there are some synergies and mechanical links. My Phelddagrif deck could also be considered in this way, as a deck built to try to make games as fair as possible no matter the power levels. Phelddagrif might also just be synergistic (category #1), but it's a weird sort of synergy that has nothing to do with how the cards interact with each other and more how the deck as a whole interacts with your opponents.
Personally I would consider what you're doing to be more #4 than #5. I think of #5 as having nothing to do with the art or flavor of the cards, and purely to do with the mechanics and the kinds of games they create.
[...]While you're painting a picture, i'm usually sketching a blueprint. The gears and joints assemble themselves over time to form the final Rube Goldberg machine.
4. When starting out with a blueprint i try to get a grasp of what part of my commanders' tech i'd want to maximize on. E.g. with Brago, King Eternal i didn't want to go Stax or infinites, but decided i wanted to double up on the etb thing through token generators, Cathars' Crusade and cards that reward me going wide like Coastal Piracy and Bident of Thassa. Same goes for my Mirri, Weatherlight Duelist deck, where i wanted to maximize her influence on combat behavior. Lots of Stompies with different concequences (see Giant Adephage) to make the decision harder on what to block and therefor take combat advantage out the defending players' hand. So with no apparent flavor theme, there's a technical theme.
I like the blueprint metaphor. I think this is very close to how I usually build my decks. I rarely start with a perfectly finished idea of what the final deck will look like, but instead tweak it and let it evolve over time (which is probably not an uncommon approach).
[...] As long as you'll get something out of it, do your thing! If some- or everyone else does too, even better. Just try not rely on their feedback and enthusiasm to be content with what you created.
These points (and the similar ones made by others in the thread) are well taken. Of course it would be a bit much to expect people to instantly get a theme that is not readily apparent and I think it is in the nature of EDH that there is lots of room to express yourself and build decks as creative projects that go beyond the pure gameplay. Of course, the feedback and enthusiasm of others is still very important when it comes to whether I like the deck, because I want my opponents to have fun while playing against it. But that goes without saying.
In my mind what you have built done is taken a themed based deck to the next level. Cudios if you can make it work as I imagine the card selection does get even smaller. Still I love the idea of building a themed deck like this, and would probably go as far to say as my idea for Gwafa Hazid, Profiteer deck will be following this route.
Only thing as others have mentioned is that most likely only you will truly get what you are trying to achieve with the deck, but hey if you had fun building it and playing it then that's what really matters.
Side note, if you give your decks names which match the theme, then that will help with the opponents understanding of the atmosphere behind it. I recommend your jungle style deck be called 'Welcome to the Jungle' which plays Guns N Roses as you start to shuffle up
Glad you like the concept. And yes, that is exactly the title that I gave to the deck haha (see my sig)
Personally I see decks falling into these general categories:
-decks built around synergy with a certain mechanic. i.e. a tribal deck, a +1/+1 counter deck, some combo, etc. The most common kind of deck.
-decks built around a certain mechanic (without synergy). i.e. theft. Theft doesn't really synergize with itself.
-decks built around strong cards with no mechanical or synergistic considerations. aka goodstuff.
-decks built around neither synergistic, mechanical, or power considerations. I group any kind of theme deck here - game of thrones flavor, artist decks, left handed decks, etc.
-decks built around creating a certain experience. This is a category I'm interested in exploring although idk if it's its own category or just a subcategory of #4. My best example is my tymna/kraum deck, which is full of cards I think make for exciting unexpected finishes. The goal is to win in a way that's satisfying, regardless of synergy, mechanics, or power, though of course there are some synergies and mechanical links. My Phelddagrif deck could also be considered in this way, as a deck built to try to make games as fair as possible no matter the power levels. Phelddagrif might also just be synergistic (category #1), but it's a weird sort of synergy that has nothing to do with how the cards interact with each other and more how the deck as a whole interacts with your opponents.
Personally I would consider what you're doing to be more #4 than #5. I think of #5 as having nothing to do with the art or flavor of the cards, and purely to do with the mechanics and the kinds of games they create.
Your distinction between different kinds of mechanical themes makes a lot of sense. I do think the atmospheric decks fall into the "experience" category, though - or at least that is my goal with them. They are decidedly not designed from a pure flavor perspective, but with a strong focus on the play experience and the underlying mechanics and strategy. Of course they want to win, but they also want to bring about specific game states that set up certain choices my opponents would not face against some of my other decks (e.g. "should I attack the Jungle deck even though he will profit from blocking with his enrage dinos?" - this question would never pop up when facing off against my Gahiji aggro deck).
With atmospheric decks, the flavor and the gameplay cannot be separated, even though the gameplay is primary. If other players will not get the atmospheric theme during our games, that's actually quite ok. It may just be that its main function is to inspire the deckbuilding process.
Riku of Two Reflections - Copy, then copy again | Shattergang Brothers - Token Sac&Recur | Gahiji, Honored One - Multiple attack steps | Karametra, God of Harvests - Landfall, Creaturefall, Shroud | Ruhan of the Fomori - Stop hitting yourself | Zurgo Helmsmasher - Equipment&Wraths | Crosis, the Purger - Dragon Tribal Reanimator | Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - No stax, just tap and untap fun | Anafenza, the Foremost - Enduring Ideal Enchantress | Sharuum, the Hegemon - Sphinx Tribal Control | Noyan Dar - Spellslinger | The Mimeoplasm - Counterpalooza
Lists can be found here.
Still convinced the guy on Beseech the Queen is wearing a Mitra-type hat. Wake up sheeple!
Up to now, building atmosphere decks has not gone well for me. Part of that has to do with still learning to build a balanced edh deck at the time. Dune was a horrible, horrible dumpster fire that also had one of the coolest themes and yet extremely limiting card selections. In any case, my latest attempt at an atmospheric-like deck is Yidris as Sauron, featuring a deck that covers the literal path the One Ring traveled after leaving Gollum’s cave, but also capturing evil’s side of the Lord of the Rings story, hence having things like the battering ram Grond represented even though the Ring did not go through Gondor. “The Path of Doom” and Yidris as Sauron is probably all I’ll explain and leave it to others to fill in what character/item/location that a given card represents. It’s totally a built-only-for-my-delight kind of thing. If someone else gets some fun from it while I’m trying to conquer Middle Earth (the table), then that’s gravy.
Is that what you were getting at with “atmospheric” as a descriptor?
Up to now, building atmosphere decks has not gone well for me. Part of that has to do with still learning to build a balanced edh deck at the time. Dune was a horrible, horrible dumpster fire that also had one of the coolest themes and yet extremely limiting card selections. In any case, my latest attempt at an atmospheric-like deck is Yidris as Sauron, featuring a deck that covers the literal path the One Ring traveled after leaving Gollum’s cave, but also capturing evil’s side of the Lord of the Rings story, hence having things like the battering ram Grond represented even though the Ring did not go through Gondor. “The Path of Doom” and Yidris as Sauron is probably all I’ll explain and leave it to others to fill in what character/item/location that a given card represents. It’s totally a built-only-for-my-delight kind of thing. If someone else gets some fun from it while I’m trying to conquer Middle Earth (the table), then that’s gravy.
Is that what you were getting at with “atmospheric” as a descriptor?
Not quite. I would group your decks (which sound really cool btw) with what I described in my original post as "more extravagant theme decks" - Vorthos decks which attempt to tell a story through their cards and put this endeavour over power concerns. They are willing to restrict themselves in their card choices in order to play cards that are meant as an hommage to something the deck creator cares about, like a book or a musical album for example.
The main difference between this kind of themed deck construction and atmospheric decks would be that atmospheric decks do not compromise in terms of playability. The theme functions as a guiding idea for deckbuilding, but the goal of the deck is still to be able to hold its own against "regular" commander decks. While the theme may influence card selection in a flavorful way, it doesn't strictly exclude any cards due to flavor reasons. The goal is not to convey the theme via card symbolism and imagery, but to use the theme as inspiration for the deck strategy.
Riku of Two Reflections - Copy, then copy again | Shattergang Brothers - Token Sac&Recur | Gahiji, Honored One - Multiple attack steps | Karametra, God of Harvests - Landfall, Creaturefall, Shroud | Ruhan of the Fomori - Stop hitting yourself | Zurgo Helmsmasher - Equipment&Wraths | Crosis, the Purger - Dragon Tribal Reanimator | Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - No stax, just tap and untap fun | Anafenza, the Foremost - Enduring Ideal Enchantress | Sharuum, the Hegemon - Sphinx Tribal Control | Noyan Dar - Spellslinger | The Mimeoplasm - Counterpalooza
Lists can be found here.
Still convinced the guy on Beseech the Queen is wearing a Mitra-type hat. Wake up sheeple!
Fair. But I will say I actually think that in my group at least, the Yidris deck will hold its own quite well. Sauron has some nasty stuff for a super casual deck. I mean, who plays with Mind Twist?
Haha oh sorry, I did not mean to imply anything about your decks! As I said, they seem pretty sweet (I just checked out the Sauron list). I was thinking of even crazier theme decks, like the salt deck I mentioned initially, which commit to a theme to the point where they are willing to play very niche cards which would commonly be considered subpar.
Riku of Two Reflections - Copy, then copy again | Shattergang Brothers - Token Sac&Recur | Gahiji, Honored One - Multiple attack steps | Karametra, God of Harvests - Landfall, Creaturefall, Shroud | Ruhan of the Fomori - Stop hitting yourself | Zurgo Helmsmasher - Equipment&Wraths | Crosis, the Purger - Dragon Tribal Reanimator | Derevi, Empyrial Tactician - No stax, just tap and untap fun | Anafenza, the Foremost - Enduring Ideal Enchantress | Sharuum, the Hegemon - Sphinx Tribal Control | Noyan Dar - Spellslinger | The Mimeoplasm - Counterpalooza
Lists can be found here.
Still convinced the guy on Beseech the Queen is wearing a Mitra-type hat. Wake up sheeple!
I'm Melvin/Vorthos, so I build decks with flavorful mechanics, preferably against the norm. Since this is EDH, I usually choose a general who could represent the ideal I want to present, and I believe it is possible to create an "atmosphere" with a deck full of cohesive mechanics, almost as if you're letting your general/actor play a different character to suit your current story. For example, with my God Pharaoh deck I uses all three fallen Gods and the deck built around how to maximize their synergy. My Jeleva is combat oriented so it includes many equipments and extra combat spells.
And if I want to generate additional atmosphere, I ask my playmates if they are interested in variant formats like Planeschase, Archenemy, or Explorers of Ixalan, which set up the "stage" for a group game.
one of the widely held tenets of commander deckbuilding is that the deck should adhere to some sort of overarching theme. For instance, see Blackjack86's philosophy of deckbuilding:
In my experience, the most popular way to go about choosing a theme is to focus on some game mechanic or strategy (e.g. stealing/copying, cheating out fatties, reanimator etc) that may or may not synergize well with your commander. Another somewhat similar approach is to pick a legendary creature and build a deck around their abilities. A second popular method is to build the deck in a way that exemplifies a certain flavor. In this case, the theme of the deck can be inspired by a specific element of an official set storyline, e.g. an Orzhov deck (one can choose to be very strict and exclude cards which do not feel like they belong to Orzhov, such as Tocatli Honor Guard). It can also be a more general fantasy theme, like necromancy. The second kind of flavor themes lend often go very well with mechanical themes. A third kind of deck theme that is sometimes seen is more extravagant, such as a Foglio artwork tribal deck, or a deck that aims to symbolize a certain album by a favorite band, or a deck which consists only of cards with the word "salt" in their name. The possibilities here are endless.
Recently, I tried a new method of finding and implementing a theme during deckbuilding. I began with thinking about a certain feeling or atmosphere that I want the pilot and their opponents to experience during a game, and then thought about cards and strategies that would be conducive to that feeling. For instance, my Vial Smasher the Fierce/Ishai, Ojutai Dragonspeaker deck wants to recreate the classic Evil Mastermind trope. Specifically, I was inspired by the countless sadistic choice dilemmas that supervillains from Lex Luthor to the Green Goblin have gleefully presented to their heroic adversaries, and hence included plenty of cards like Torment of Hailfire or Prince of Thralls. Another example is my (house-ruled as legendary) Tamanoa deck, where I wanted to create games that feel like my opponents are venturing into a hostile, verdant Jungle. I included plenty of global damage effects a la Pyrohemia, enrage dinos and Rite of Passage type cards. The idea is that the very same elements which make the jungle hostile and dangerous to outsiders (poisonous vines, wild animals, heat, humidity, quicksands etc) are the very fabric of life that make everything that belongs to the jungle grow and flourish. Both decks aim to evoke these feelings or atmospheres not just through their individual card artworks or mechanics, but through the very way they play out during a commander game by presenting my opponents with very specific choice situations that are meant to recreate the atmospheric clouds that inspired these decks.
I found this way of deck construction to be very rewarding and fun. It is neither looking for a pure flavor theme, nor starting out with abstract thinking about game mechanics, but sort of a synthesis of the first two ways of thematically guiding deck construction and play style I outlined above. It feels very much like painting a picture with your deck. In the ideal case, everything comes together in the end and results in a well-rounded deck that is more than the sum of its parts. While flavorful themes are often transmitted primarily via the artwork / flavor texts of the cards and not necessarily in terms of how the deck behaves during gameplay, and mechanical themes are expressed less via the flavor of the cards and more through what the cards actually do on the battlefield, this approach wants to combine both. The deck theme is not expressed only through artworks or the card mechanics alone, but rather through a certain kind of overall atmosphere that comes about during the act of playing a commander game with it. I have come to refer to these decks as "atmospheric decks".
Of course I do not claim to be the first one to build decks that work like that. On the contrary, I think the large majority of EDH decks are atmospheric decks to some degree. Nonetheless, formulating this concept and actively trying to implement it during deckbuilding changed the way I approached EDH deck construction. Instead of starting out with thinking about what I want the deck to do, I start with thinking about what I want playing (and playing against) the deck to feel like.
So, I am curious: How do you go about incorporating themes during deck construction and gameplay? Do you agree with my broad categorization of different kinds of themes? Do you think the concept of the atmospheric deck is convincing?
Tamanoa - Welcome to the Jungle
Lists can be found here.
For one, players aren't typically expecting other people to build decks from an atmospheric perspective. As such, they won't even think to look for that sort of thing. For two, every deck is going to give off its own vibe, even decks built solely from mechanics. Because of this, I don't think players would even be able to differentiate between decks built with an atmosphere in mind and decks built solely from mechanics when presented in the dark about it.
Decks built with an atmosphere in mind are further troubled by the fact that Commander forces players to play more unique cards than other formats. This "muddies the message" so to speak, as not every card will equally evoke the atmosphere a deckbuilder is trying to convey. Some cards will create a certain kind of atmosphere better than others, and there's no guarantee those cards will even show up when looking down a 99 card singleton deck. This could lead to wild misinterpretations of theme depending upon which cards saw play.
Yeah, I think you're pretty spot on.
I'm not sure what you mean by this question. If you mean, "do I think players should build decks from an atmospheric perspective?" like, that's up them. People will build decks for whatever reasons they want. It isn't up to me to decide how someone should build a deck or not. Granted, there are plenty of deck premises that I think are absolute poppycock, but to each their own.
Alternatively, if you meant "do I think decks built from an atmospheric perspective will reliably convey the atmospheres they were built in mind with?" then no. I don't think atmospheric decks can reliably convey the atmospheres they were built with in mind. Barring only the most exquisitely built decks, I think the atmospheres those decks are trying to convey will largely only exist inside the heads of their creators.
EDIT: On an unrelated note, for more examples of atmospheric deckbuilding, I would look at some of 4Lark's old decks. I don't know if they're active much anymore, — haven't seen them around — but I believe I remember them building decks with an atmospheric perspective in mind.
Trap your friends in an endless game with this 23-card combo!
I did indeed mean the question in the second sense. Again, you make some fair points. I think it is not a failure if I have to tell people about my intention with the deck. And naturally, not everybody is receptive for these kinds of considerations. If the game goes well, it will still be fun for everybody regardless of any flavor or thematic considerations. If some people tell me they can see what I was trying to do with the deck, all the better. Until then, I am happy with having fun during deck construction and gameplay on more levels than just enjoying a mechanically creative deck. I think a big reason why I enjoy this approach is that, while I have refrained from strongly focusing on flavor in the past because it felt too restrictive in my card choices, with this approach I do feel like I am building a strong deck that is focused on gameplay and wanting to win, while at the same time creating something unique that goes beyond the "hard" play mechanics and incorporates "soft" storytelling elements. So yeah, maybe you are right and the atmosphere really only exists in my head.
Tamanoa - Welcome to the Jungle
Lists can be found here.
That being said, a lot of the pleasure of theorycrafting, brewing and building a deck is being happy oneself with the end result - insofar as a deck is ever finished. Themed decks probably have a nearer endpoint than building around synergies and mechanics, but so long as a deck sticks around, there's always scope for the deck to evolve.
I guess what I'm saying is if you're building for theme, essentially that theme need only be pleasing to yourself. Sure you can show it off, post it here, present it to friends and play with them too, but at the end of the day you're definitely building it more for yourself than anyone else. That's true of any deck, but it's more true when you're crafting on the Altar of Vorthos.
As you know, I've built several Vorthos decks - most of them play well enough, but I doubt very highly that if I played any of them in a different meta the choices I've made would stand out enough for someone to say 'dude, is this a themed deck?'. That doesn't matter to me, because I'm aware of the themes inherent and I'm happy with the way they're represented in the build.
2. a) I am pretty sure it is. I picture the research is one fun ride - and propably lots of work. b)While you're painting a picture, i'm usually sketching a blueprint. The gears and joints assemble themselves over time to form the final Rube Goldberg machine.
3. As said i'm very sceptic if there's enough time and room for anyone to get me hooked for a theme, as much as you hope to do. Unless you'd start commentating each and every one of your plays like an overly dramatic P&P player. And trust me, in that case the underlying theme i'd sense would be "getting on your nerves as hard as i possibly can".
4. When starting out with a blueprint i try to get a grasp of what part of my commanders' tech i'd want to maximize on. E.g. with Brago, King Eternal i didn't want to go Stax or infinites, but decided i wanted to double up on the etb thing through token generators, Cathars' Crusade and cards that reward me going wide like Coastal Piracy and Bident of Thassa. Same goes for my Mirri, Weatherlight Duelist deck, where i wanted to maximize her influence on combat behavior. Lots of Stompies with different concequences (see Giant Adephage) to make the decision harder on what to block and therefor take combat advantage out the defending players' hand. So with no apparent flavor theme, there's a technical theme.
5. As much as i'd like to say otherwise, i don't. The theory is nice, but i think it'll fall short for everyone but the player himself. This is another major flaw of your theory - at least in EDH. Tiny Leaders as another singleton format would be a lot more consistent as far as exposure of your flavorful cards goes. 60 card decks with 4 ofs are far more likely than either to create whatever mood you try to get across. Despite my criticism of the theory, this is a very good point. As long as you'll get something out of it, do your thing! If some- or everyone else does too, even better. Just try not rely on their feedback and enthusiasm to be content with what you created.
Pretty much this. Theme decks become a passion project - especially when the theme is obscure. If its MTG related, it'll shine through, same if it's tribal. If it's obscure like mine, the theme is entirely for oneself - first and foremost at least.
I love making theme decks, around card mechanics or around a "story". Story meaning it's tribal or aims to have cards that are on theme with a particular thing, or even literally containing cards around particular events in the Magic the Gathering multiverse.
Niv-Mizzet Reborn
Feather, the Redeemed
Estrid, the Masked
Teshar
Tymna/Ravos
Najeela, Blade-Blossom
Firesong & Sunspeaker
Zur the Enchanter
Lazav, the Multifarious
Ishai+Reyhan
Click images for decks->
-Prime Speaker Vannifar
---------------------Will & Rowan Kenrith
This is exactly it. If you're able to marry up two passions in cards and another theme, that's awesome, enjoy it and revel in it. Not everyone will share the same passions, so as long as you love what you've made that's all that matters.
I love the challenge of aiming for a theme and seeing it get deeper and deeper the more you build. That's where the enjoyment is in a Vorthos build. My malazan decks are unrecognizable as such unless you know the content, and even then there's room for interpretation. But I'm happy with 3/4 as more or less finished products at present, and if someone asks about card choices I'm happy to elaborate.
When I built Taigam, Ojutai Master, I knew I wanted the core of the deck to be cards like Talrand, Sky Summoner, Baral, Chief of Compliance and Noyan Dar, Roil Shaper, where I would be rewarded for casting instants and sorceries. I also knew I wanted every instant and sorcery in the deck to be bigger and splashier than the cool and efficient low-drops that comprise those decklists on EDHRec. Taigam, for example, heavily rewards extra turn spells. Rather than card draw, I wanted dig, and I didn't want efficient dig, I wanted powerful dig, so I sought out dig cards that dug more than three down. Ponder and pals had no place here. I didn't want free/cheap counter spells, I wanted big and flashy ones. I wanted value-town modal spells. I wanted "battlecruiser spellslinger". Half the deck was already built because I have what amounts to a stock mana and ramp base that I've preserved since going Azorius -- it just works for me. Its theme is that all the rocks have to produce Azorius mana. That did a good job of dropping the efficiency some whilst still keeping me on par with players who aren't the best of the best. The whole atmosphere of the deck sort of built itself. Honing in on the finished product is an ongoing project.
-decks built around synergy with a certain mechanic. i.e. a tribal deck, a +1/+1 counter deck, some combo, etc. The most common kind of deck.
-decks built around a certain mechanic (without synergy). i.e. theft. Theft doesn't really synergize with itself.
-decks built around strong cards with no mechanical or synergistic considerations. aka goodstuff.
-decks built around neither synergistic, mechanical, or power considerations. I group any kind of theme deck here - game of thrones flavor, artist decks, left handed decks, etc.
-decks built around creating a certain experience. This is a category I'm interested in exploring although idk if it's its own category or just a subcategory of #4. My best example is my tymna/kraum deck, which is full of cards I think make for exciting unexpected finishes. The goal is to win in a way that's satisfying, regardless of synergy, mechanics, or power, though of course there are some synergies and mechanical links. My Phelddagrif deck could also be considered in this way, as a deck built to try to make games as fair as possible no matter the power levels. Phelddagrif might also just be synergistic (category #1), but it's a weird sort of synergy that has nothing to do with how the cards interact with each other and more how the deck as a whole interacts with your opponents.
Personally I would consider what you're doing to be more #4 than #5. I think of #5 as having nothing to do with the art or flavor of the cards, and purely to do with the mechanics and the kinds of games they create.
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 like the blueprint metaphor. I think this is very close to how I usually build my decks. I rarely start with a perfectly finished idea of what the final deck will look like, but instead tweak it and let it evolve over time (which is probably not an uncommon approach).
These points (and the similar ones made by others in the thread) are well taken. Of course it would be a bit much to expect people to instantly get a theme that is not readily apparent and I think it is in the nature of EDH that there is lots of room to express yourself and build decks as creative projects that go beyond the pure gameplay. Of course, the feedback and enthusiasm of others is still very important when it comes to whether I like the deck, because I want my opponents to have fun while playing against it. But that goes without saying.
Glad you like the concept. And yes, that is exactly the title that I gave to the deck haha (see my sig)
Your distinction between different kinds of mechanical themes makes a lot of sense. I do think the atmospheric decks fall into the "experience" category, though - or at least that is my goal with them. They are decidedly not designed from a pure flavor perspective, but with a strong focus on the play experience and the underlying mechanics and strategy. Of course they want to win, but they also want to bring about specific game states that set up certain choices my opponents would not face against some of my other decks (e.g. "should I attack the Jungle deck even though he will profit from blocking with his enrage dinos?" - this question would never pop up when facing off against my Gahiji aggro deck).
With atmospheric decks, the flavor and the gameplay cannot be separated, even though the gameplay is primary. If other players will not get the atmospheric theme during our games, that's actually quite ok. It may just be that its main function is to inspire the deckbuilding process.
Tamanoa - Welcome to the Jungle
Lists can be found here.
Is that what you were getting at with “atmospheric” as a descriptor?
The main difference between this kind of themed deck construction and atmospheric decks would be that atmospheric decks do not compromise in terms of playability. The theme functions as a guiding idea for deckbuilding, but the goal of the deck is still to be able to hold its own against "regular" commander decks. While the theme may influence card selection in a flavorful way, it doesn't strictly exclude any cards due to flavor reasons. The goal is not to convey the theme via card symbolism and imagery, but to use the theme as inspiration for the deck strategy.
Tamanoa - Welcome to the Jungle
Lists can be found here.
Tamanoa - Welcome to the Jungle
Lists can be found here.
And if I want to generate additional atmosphere, I ask my playmates if they are interested in variant formats like Planeschase, Archenemy, or Explorers of Ixalan, which set up the "stage" for a group game.
Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest WUR Voltron Control
Temmet, Vizier of Naktamun WU Unblockable Mirror Trickery
Ra's al Ghul (Sidar Kondo) and Face-Down Ninjas
Brudiclad, Token Engineer
Vaevictis (VV2) the Dire Lantern
Rona, Disciple of Gix
Tiana the Auror
Hallar
Ulrich the Politician
Zur the Rebel
Scorpion, Locust, Scarab, Egyptian Gods
O-Kagachi, Mathas, Mairsil
"Non-Tribal" Tribal Generals, Eggs