So I've had this discussion twice on MTGS and figured it deserved its own thread. If you notice, with my Thrasios and Silas Renn decks, I don't partner any of my partner generals. I figure it's Commander, not Commanders. And I feel having 98 cards in the deck over 99 gives an advantage that shouldn't exist IMO. No matter how small or insignificant it seems. I prefer having just one Commander that is the star of the deck, and find it annoying when others suggest that I should pair them. Also, I'm not sure it's entirely fair to have access to two Legends and one card less for consistency in a singleton format.
Thoughts? It's a preference for me, and I don't mind others partnering, but it isn't for me.
Ironically though, I love the Partner mechanic since it delivered a large number of Legends in C16.
I personally have played 3 decks with Partner commanders and I enjoy that they give real options for 4 color decks. I also like some of their abilities and like some of the flexibility they give people in deck building.
However, I currently have none built for a variety of reasons. First, one of the biggest draws to them is the 4 color options and I have come to realize I dislike 4 color decks. I might as well just build a 5 color deck. Second, they are generally not what I want to be doing with my decks. I tried to switch Alesha into Partner Commanders and, while it was better, it just didn't work out the way I wanted. In the end, I found they are just not for me.
As to your points, I don't feel they are that big a deal. 99 vs 98 cards is pretty minimal regarding impact to the game and deckbuilding to it being pretty much non-existent. I guess I can see the idea of having access to multiple commanders as being somewhat unfair, but if people can run around with Animar, Narset, Maelstrom Wanderer, etc. then having 2 that, together, are weaker than those isn't really something to be concerned about. It is a boon for that player, but not so much (beyond maybe getting around the Commander Tax a little) for it to be a big deal to me.
I do respect the idea that the you have built decks around a single Partner card and refused to Partner them just because they *can* be. I think there are a few that can play well enough on their own that they don't have to be partnered.
Feel empowered to play them as singletons, if that's your jam. But I dislike it when people say it's "Commander" not "Commanders". Partner is an established and popular mechanic. It really added a dynamic to deck building which I've enjoyed over the years.
I know partner is some people's jam, but I'm not very interested in the mechanic. I was pretty annoyed seeing more design space used up in battlebond revisiting the mechanic, even if it was a 2hg focused format.
Personally the only interesting thing I find out of partners is if there is theme. Ludevic + Kraum is the only partner deck I've ever built, and I have zero desires to go build another.
If they had made thematic partners (like in battlebond) from the onset then I may have more interest. Specifically if they had made partners with already established stories that explain why the two creature cards would be partnered together.
But that desire is very small. In general I'm 2% for theme-specific partners, and 98% against partners. I just don't like building 98 cards and two commanders. It doesn't feel right with me.
I personally have built a Vial Smasher-only deck and a Thrasios-only deck, though I later partnered it with Kydele. In both cases, I just really liked that commander and wanted to build around it without diluting the deck.
However, I'm seriously considering a Gorm and Virtus deck, as well as a Bruse and Ishai deck. Clearly, I don't have any rules or flavor issues with the partner mechanic.
Let me ask - do you have an issue with Sisters of Stone Death or Sen Triplets or Pia and Kiran Nalaar or any other legends that use one card to represent multiple individuals? Because flavor-wise, that seems to violate the "It's Commander, not Commanders" philosophy, even if they are all smashed onto one card. I think I prefer they each be represented by their own card.
I’ve run Thrasios alone and a Kraum/Ishai deck. Best mechanic of these Commander products. Every year they should give us more of them.
Maybe these critical idiots are new to the format: If a card advances your game plan, and it can sit in the general zone, so that you have constant acccess to it...then you use it as a partner. If not, that’s a waste of a deck slot, and something else should be the 99th card. Very simple.
I have so far not built a partner deck. So far I've built only two four-color decks, and each (Atraxa, Saskia) is led by a single general. I don't have anything against the partner mechanic, but so far the options haven't really attracted me, though I continue to think about the possibilities.
If I ever do build a partner deck, I will probably select partners with overlapping colors (probably a 3-color combo) rather than doing the four-color deck, because four-color, unless built around a strong theme (which both Saskia and Atraxa offer), lend too easily to goodstuff deckbuilding and also require pricier mana bases.
None of them other than maybe Thrasios are particularly strong, and there are single commanders (Derevi, Leovold, Teferi) that are dramatically stronger in any meaningful sense of the word than any two partners are. Leovold was banned, but the other two are still around and kicking.
Clinging to the 'tradition' of the format is silly when the format itself is nontraditional. By default you don't have any command zone or cards therein, but commander has become so tremendously popular that people take that abnormality for granted.
So I'm fine with partners, I'm fine with eminence, I'm fine with planeswalkers, enchantments, artifacts, or even instants/sorceries being commanders as long as they're marked with the phrase "X can be your commander". I'm fine with players starting the game with emblems, or even starting the game with five different commanders, as long as it's balanced. It's certainly true though that some things are harder to balance than others, though. Thus far the only thing within those categories that I'm convinced they've earnestly screwed up with is Inalla, Archmage Ritualist since her ability is worse than strong: it's combo-y.
I still do play Inalla though, I just use her overpowered-ness to play an awful, gimmicky deck that would normally never work.
Would you feel better if the deck was 99 cards plus your commander(s) so whether you have partners or not you would still be running 99 cards? Why not just make it 100 card decks + commander(s)?
I like Battlebond partners, mainly because I know the pairs are canon pairing in the lore with synergetic mechanics, not to mention being very unique (coin toss, combat golgari, knight/dragon duo, etc) and allow each other being fetched within 99.
I appreciate 2016 partners because they give a lot of freedom in deck building beyond just colors. You could practically pair anyone of them together and would still have a doable deck theme; some are stronger than others, of course, but all within reasonable range. Some of them could perhaps use a little tuning to become viable standing by themselves.
In the end, I don't mind partners. OP preferring one commander over multiple, is no different from some people preferring only dragon as commander (EDH's name sake). The slight advantage gained from 99/98 is there, but not great breaking either.
I actually hope next year has Partner, because I have the option of not partnering them, but we'll probably get a high volume of legends out of it. But partnering them for the sake of it seems silly. I agree that I don't like the idea of 4-color decks when they could just be 5. Personally, I prefer Mono-color or at most, dual color decks, and I actually think several of them play really well alone. Thrasios clearly.
I've bumped into concerns over smaller deck advantages playing brawl against commander decks, and my response is basically this -
If you're building for maximum power (cEDH) and it's a significant advantage, then that's a problem.
But if you aren't, and the vast majority aren't, then everyone is self-policing power level already, and it's no different from any other advantage you might have - you just have to ensure that the overall power level falls within the acceptable range. If you feel having two commanders is a significant advantage (or that having one fewer card is...lol), then you'd just need to lower the power level of the rest of the deck a little to compensate.
Personally I've built a few partner decks, mostly to get to 4c combinations where I wasn't thrilled with the natural 4c option. Most of the partners aren't totally insane, so having an extra one for free isn't that amazing usually, though I'm sure the right combination (thrasios/tymna) could be a significant advantage.
I’d like to build a cleric tribal commander deck with Ravos and Tymna, but then both my commander decks would be illegal for 1 vs. 1 play.
I built my own Cleric tribal deck with Ravos and Tymna and it is hilariously effective. It's interesting to note how much history the Cleric and Demon creature types share too. I like running Conspiracy to make my Demons into Clerics as well! Not only hilarious in idea, but I included some utility for it too. I say go for it! Partner Clerics is honestly the main reason making a Cleric deck seemed viable to me.
and in response to OP, I have considered running a mono-partner deck with Vial Smasher the Fierce simply because I have had a really hard time liking the RB Legends... most of the excellent choices are 5-7cmc and at that point aren't as consistent as I would like (considering red's mana deficiencies) for build-around concepts...which I have a penchant for. Currently my Rakdos deck has two commanders because I couldn't even settle on any black bordered one and went with Grusilda, Monster Masher! The backup for purists is Tsabo Tavoc but I haven't had anyone object to Grusilda yet.
Let me ask - do you have an issue with Sisters of Stone Death or Sen Triplets or Pia and Kiran Nalaar or any other legends that use one card to represent multiple individuals? Because flavor-wise, that seems to violate the "It's Commander, not Commanders" philosophy, even if they are all smashed onto one card. I think I prefer they each be represented by their own card.
I meant having one card as a commander. I will say that I hope we get separate cards for Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis, preferably a UW Tiro that doesn't have a group hug ability. He can have Partner if you wish, but I'd just play him alone. Pia got an individual card, and Cymede probably should now. Not sure if Tiro ever will, sadly. But yeah, I'd rather have an individual Tiro. That's just me. Not that I have an issue with cards representing more than one character as a whole or anything.
Again, it's personal preference. I don't ban Partner or even complain about it. My issue actually is people insisting I do it. So I'm interested to see what people's preferences are for it.
Abilities befitting his status as an inventive necromancer, to start. He could've been the first Izzet reanimator, instead he's doing group hug. Not that group hug is bad, but it's not like him.
I don't think you have too use two partners in commanders, but I also don't see a reason not too, gives you excess to other colors (if you don't need them I guess I see point maybe) and adds another strategy for what you can do.
I currently run a Will and Rowan deck and its fun, they play off each other really well and if I could I think I'd have some fun putting together some comb of 4 color partner deck and I hope we see more both version of partner. Partner with could also be a safe way to do four color again since they don't need to try and check all the other partners first with it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“There are no weak Jews. I am descended from those who wrestle angels and kill giants. We were chosen by God. You were chosen by a pathetic little man who can't seem to grow a full mustache"
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
However, I currently have none built for a variety of reasons. First, one of the biggest draws to them is the 4 color options and I have come to realize I dislike 4 color decks. I might as well just build a 5 color deck. Second, they are generally not what I want to be doing with my decks. I tried to switch Alesha into Partner Commanders and, while it was better, it just didn't work out the way I wanted. In the end, I found they are just not for me.
So much this. I only kept one of my partner decks, the rest really felt like it took the multicolour format of EDH to a next level for splashing colours. I realized that the more colours I ran, the more boring efficient staples were in the deck at the cost of actually interesting cards, so canned a whole bunch of partner decks
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
EDH RRGrenzo plays your deck, GGYeva's mono green control, WW9-tails trys desperately for monowhite not to suck RWBUTymna and Kraum's saboteur tribal, UWG Kestia's Enchantress Aggro, RUB Jeleva casts big dumb spells, RGB Vaevictis' big critters can kill your critters hard
However, I currently have none built for a variety of reasons. First, one of the biggest draws to them is the 4 color options and I have come to realize I dislike 4 color decks. I might as well just build a 5 color deck. Second, they are generally not what I want to be doing with my decks. I tried to switch Alesha into Partner Commanders and, while it was better, it just didn't work out the way I wanted. In the end, I found they are just not for me.
So much this. I only kept one of my partner decks, the rest really felt like it took the multicolour format of EDH to a next level for splashing colours. I realized that the more colours I ran, the more boring efficient staples were in the deck at the cost of actually interesting cards, so canned a whole bunch of partner decks
I agree with that sentiment as well. In fact, even without Partner, I'm in the same position right now as I consider whether I want to switch my Ephara deck into a Kestia one, Azorious to Bant. Adding a third color alone feels like it's crowding out a lot of interesting design I had. So I am unsure about whether or not I'm going to do it. I am thinking dual color is the best way to go in Commander. I have Simic (Thrasios/Arixmethes), Dimir (Silas Renn) and right now, Ephara for UW. I feel like fracturing it across three dual color decks with base Blue was the best way to do it.
Abilities befitting his status as an inventive necromancer, to start. He could've been the first Izzet reanimator, instead he's doing group hug. Not that group hug is bad, but it's not like him.
Actually he was even more famous for being reclusive... and was very nice for someone reclusive (and likely nice in order to ensure him not being disturbed).
Geralf only met him many once years ago... and ever since all he got was... notes when he wanted that and an invite for a laboratory visit... when the owner wasn't around. By recluse standards that's very nice of Ludevic (he could easily just go radio-silent and Geralf would probably still never find him).
The mechanics didn't quite work out as intended, but I actually caught on the intention, so I'm actually less irritated by Ludevic's card than most others. The group-hug itself isn't a problem - he's "nice" for a reclusive character that doesn't want to be disturbed, it was the specifics of the group-hug that was (let's just say in-game he's getting way more disturbed by other players than he would ever be on Innistrad).
Anyway, on Partners: They just don't interest me from a myriad of reasons raised here. I'm not that desperate to want to play 4C and even if I was the non-partners actually seem way more fun. Beyond that, regardless of combination, they either bug me because they don't partner each other either mechanically or flavorfully as well on a scale of interest (meaning even those which mechanically fit each other aren't that interesting mechanically to me when played together... and on top of them most of them don't fit flavorfully...)
I think C16 should have done what C18 did, which was design past characters top-down. Look how celebrated Arixmethes and Xantcha's designs have been, for example. Even Varchild. If they had done that with Ludevic, I think he would be very much celebrated. Hopefully they pull a Taigam and release two versions, and the second new version is Izzet so the Ludevic fans can play both.
I’ve run Thrasios alone and a Kraum/Ishai deck. Best mechanic of these Commander products. Every year they should give us more of them.
Maybe these critical idiots are new to the format: If a card advances your game plan, and it can sit in the general zone, so that you have constant acccess to it...then you use it as a partner. If not, that’s a waste of a deck slot, and something else should be the 99th card. Very simple.
Keep in mind, I actually like partner, but I don't see "98 cards instead of 99" as a downside. This isn't the Yugioh anime.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
I don't think every Thrasios deck should be Thrasios/Kydele. Kydele would be waste in the deck. It's not a benefit to NOT play a card I want...and to use Kydele instead. Make sense?
Thoughts? It's a preference for me, and I don't mind others partnering, but it isn't for me.
Ironically though, I love the Partner mechanic since it delivered a large number of Legends in C16.
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
However, I currently have none built for a variety of reasons. First, one of the biggest draws to them is the 4 color options and I have come to realize I dislike 4 color decks. I might as well just build a 5 color deck. Second, they are generally not what I want to be doing with my decks. I tried to switch Alesha into Partner Commanders and, while it was better, it just didn't work out the way I wanted. In the end, I found they are just not for me.
As to your points, I don't feel they are that big a deal. 99 vs 98 cards is pretty minimal regarding impact to the game and deckbuilding to it being pretty much non-existent. I guess I can see the idea of having access to multiple commanders as being somewhat unfair, but if people can run around with Animar, Narset, Maelstrom Wanderer, etc. then having 2 that, together, are weaker than those isn't really something to be concerned about. It is a boon for that player, but not so much (beyond maybe getting around the Commander Tax a little) for it to be a big deal to me.
I do respect the idea that the you have built decks around a single Partner card and refused to Partner them just because they *can* be. I think there are a few that can play well enough on their own that they don't have to be partnered.
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
Personally the only interesting thing I find out of partners is if there is theme. Ludevic + Kraum is the only partner deck I've ever built, and I have zero desires to go build another.
If they had made thematic partners (like in battlebond) from the onset then I may have more interest. Specifically if they had made partners with already established stories that explain why the two creature cards would be partnered together.
I do have a very minor desire for some sort of partner rule to be created if the two creatures share a very unique theme or story. Like running the same commander but a timeshifted/universe variant like dragonlord kolaghan and kolaghan, the storm's fury, or both braids, both akromas, jeska, warrior adept and phage the untouchable, etc.
But that desire is very small. In general I'm 2% for theme-specific partners, and 98% against partners. I just don't like building 98 cards and two commanders. It doesn't feel right with me.
Links to my most current deck lists;
Primary EDH; Rakka Mar Token Perfection, Crosis Mnemonic Betrayal, Cromat Villainous, Judith Gravestorm, Rakdos Empty Storm, Exava Artifacts, Bant Trash, & Fumiko Voltron!
EDH kept at home; Ruzzian Isset & Rakdos LoR!
EDH (nostalgic/pimp/retired) in storage;
Latulla Burns, Akroma Smash, Jeska Voltron, Rakdos Storm, Bladewing Darghans, Lyzolda Worldgorger, Xantcha Steals your Heart, Jori Storm, Wydwen Permission, Gwendlyn Paradox, Jeleva Warps, & Sigarda Brick!
Legacy Showanimator and High Tide!
However, I'm seriously considering a Gorm and Virtus deck, as well as a Bruse and Ishai deck. Clearly, I don't have any rules or flavor issues with the partner mechanic.
Let me ask - do you have an issue with Sisters of Stone Death or Sen Triplets or Pia and Kiran Nalaar or any other legends that use one card to represent multiple individuals? Because flavor-wise, that seems to violate the "It's Commander, not Commanders" philosophy, even if they are all smashed onto one card. I think I prefer they each be represented by their own card.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
Maybe these critical idiots are new to the format: If a card advances your game plan, and it can sit in the general zone, so that you have constant acccess to it...then you use it as a partner. If not, that’s a waste of a deck slot, and something else should be the 99th card. Very simple.
TC is doing it right.
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'
If I ever do build a partner deck, I will probably select partners with overlapping colors (probably a 3-color combo) rather than doing the four-color deck, because four-color, unless built around a strong theme (which both Saskia and Atraxa offer), lend too easily to goodstuff deckbuilding and also require pricier mana bases.
Clinging to the 'tradition' of the format is silly when the format itself is nontraditional. By default you don't have any command zone or cards therein, but commander has become so tremendously popular that people take that abnormality for granted.
So I'm fine with partners, I'm fine with eminence, I'm fine with planeswalkers, enchantments, artifacts, or even instants/sorceries being commanders as long as they're marked with the phrase "X can be your commander". I'm fine with players starting the game with emblems, or even starting the game with five different commanders, as long as it's balanced. It's certainly true though that some things are harder to balance than others, though. Thus far the only thing within those categories that I'm convinced they've earnestly screwed up with is Inalla, Archmage Ritualist since her ability is worse than strong: it's combo-y.
I still do play Inalla though, I just use her overpowered-ness to play an awful, gimmicky deck that would normally never work.
- Rabid Wombat
UB Vela the Night-Clad BUDecklist
WBG Ghave, Guru of Spores GBW
WUBRGThe Ur-DragonWUBRGDecklist
I appreciate 2016 partners because they give a lot of freedom in deck building beyond just colors. You could practically pair anyone of them together and would still have a doable deck theme; some are stronger than others, of course, but all within reasonable range. Some of them could perhaps use a little tuning to become viable standing by themselves.
In the end, I don't mind partners. OP preferring one commander over multiple, is no different from some people preferring only dragon as commander (EDH's name sake). The slight advantage gained from 99/98 is there, but not great breaking either.
NOTE: Ludevic, Necro-Alchemist deserves a LOT better treatment than his current state.
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
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
If you're building for maximum power (cEDH) and it's a significant advantage, then that's a problem.
But if you aren't, and the vast majority aren't, then everyone is self-policing power level already, and it's no different from any other advantage you might have - you just have to ensure that the overall power level falls within the acceptable range. If you feel having two commanders is a significant advantage (or that having one fewer card is...lol), then you'd just need to lower the power level of the rest of the deck a little to compensate.
Personally I've built a few partner decks, mostly to get to 4c combinations where I wasn't thrilled with the natural 4c option. Most of the partners aren't totally insane, so having an extra one for free isn't that amazing usually, though I'm sure the right combination (thrasios/tymna) could be a significant advantage.
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
JundBGR
RW Blood MoonRW
Pauper
Delver U
Elves G
Control B
Commander
Edgar Markov BRW
Captain Sisay GW
Niv-Mizzet, Parun UR
Tymna and Ravos WB
I built my own Cleric tribal deck with Ravos and Tymna and it is hilariously effective. It's interesting to note how much history the Cleric and Demon creature types share too. I like running Conspiracy to make my Demons into Clerics as well! Not only hilarious in idea, but I included some utility for it too. I say go for it! Partner Clerics is honestly the main reason making a Cleric deck seemed viable to me.
and in response to OP, I have considered running a mono-partner deck with Vial Smasher the Fierce simply because I have had a really hard time liking the RB Legends... most of the excellent choices are 5-7cmc and at that point aren't as consistent as I would like (considering red's mana deficiencies) for build-around concepts...which I have a penchant for. Currently my Rakdos deck has two commanders because I couldn't even settle on any black bordered one and went with Grusilda, Monster Masher! The backup for purists is Tsabo Tavoc but I haven't had anyone object to Grusilda yet.
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/magic-general/334931-what-is-the-most-pimp-card-deck-youve-seen-or?comment=5361
Commander
RGOmnath, Locus of Rage Grenades! EDHGR
UWSygg's Defense, EDH - Voltron & ControlWU
BUGMimeoplasm EDH ft. Ifnir Cycling-discard comboBUG
WBTeysa, Connoisseur of CullingBW
BWSelenia & Recruiter of the Guard suicice combo EDHWB
UBRWGO-Kagachi - 5 Color Enchantments - EDHUBRWG
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'
Again, it's personal preference. I don't ban Partner or even complain about it. My issue actually is people insisting I do it. So I'm interested to see what people's preferences are for it.
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
Abilities befitting his status as an inventive necromancer, to start. He could've been the first Izzet reanimator, instead he's doing group hug. Not that group hug is bad, but it's not like him.
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
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'
I currently run a Will and Rowan deck and its fun, they play off each other really well and if I could I think I'd have some fun putting together some comb of 4 color partner deck and I hope we see more both version of partner. Partner with could also be a safe way to do four color again since they don't need to try and check all the other partners first with it.
"You can tell how dumb someone is by how they use Mary Sue"
So much this. I only kept one of my partner decks, the rest really felt like it took the multicolour format of EDH to a next level for splashing colours. I realized that the more colours I ran, the more boring efficient staples were in the deck at the cost of actually interesting cards, so canned a whole bunch of partner decks
RRGrenzo plays your deck, GGYeva's mono green control, WW9-tails trys desperately for monowhite not to suck
RWBUTymna and Kraum's saboteur tribal, UWG Kestia's Enchantress Aggro, RUB Jeleva casts big dumb spells, RGB Vaevictis' big critters can kill your critters hard
Arena Standard
UUUU Tempo, since before it was cool
Various Wx decks running Fountain of Renewal and Day of Glory
Anything I can cram Chaos Wand in to
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
Actually he was even more famous for being reclusive... and was very nice for someone reclusive (and likely nice in order to ensure him not being disturbed).
Geralf only met him many once years ago... and ever since all he got was... notes when he wanted that and an invite for a laboratory visit... when the owner wasn't around. By recluse standards that's very nice of Ludevic (he could easily just go radio-silent and Geralf would probably still never find him).
The mechanics didn't quite work out as intended, but I actually caught on the intention, so I'm actually less irritated by Ludevic's card than most others. The group-hug itself isn't a problem - he's "nice" for a reclusive character that doesn't want to be disturbed, it was the specifics of the group-hug that was (let's just say in-game he's getting way more disturbed by other players than he would ever be on Innistrad).
Anyway, on Partners: They just don't interest me from a myriad of reasons raised here. I'm not that desperate to want to play 4C and even if I was the non-partners actually seem way more fun. Beyond that, regardless of combination, they either bug me because they don't partner each other either mechanically or flavorfully as well on a scale of interest (meaning even those which mechanically fit each other aren't that interesting mechanically to me when played together... and on top of them most of them don't fit flavorfully...)
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
Ah, but you won't accidentally draw said waste; moreover, there's a slight benefit to having 98 instead of 99 cards in your library. Plus, some partners (Thrasios, Triton Hero, Kydele, Chosen of Kruphix, Kraum, Ludevic's Opus) are so goodstuff that you really don't need any synergies to make them good. Others (Bruse Tarl, Boorish Herder, Silas Renn, Seeker Adept, Ravos, Soultender, Reyhan, Last of the Abzan, Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa) are modular enough that while they have an ideal deck they can go in, nearly any deck can take advantage of their abilities.
Keep in mind, I actually like partner, but I don't see "98 cards instead of 99" as a downside. This isn't the Yugioh anime.
On phasing:
(U/B)(U/B)(U/B) JUMP IN THE LINE, ROCK YOUR BODY IN TIME
(R/W)(R/W)(R/W) RISING FROM THE NEON GLOOM, SHINING LIKE A CRAZY MOON
(U/R)(R/G)(G/U) STEALIN' WHEN I SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUYIN'