<a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions|tla|339" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a> | Art by <a href="https://www.sijahong.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sija Hong</a>
Hello! Welcome back to another article aimed at improving your Commander deckbuilding and gameplay. I was inspired to write this article based on a situation I encountered while I was reviewing one of my personal decks, and thought to myself "Self, this would make a great article, because if I'm doing it, I'm sure other players are, too."
The fallacy I'm talking about is Best Case Scenario Mentality (BCSM) and how it relates to setup cost on cards.
BCSM is a common topic in other Magic formats. I first heard about it listening to <a href="https://lrcast.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Limited Resources</a>, the fantastic podcast about Limited hosted by Marshall Sutcliffe and Luis Scott-Vargas. BCSM, as it relates to Magic, is a way of thinking about cards in their best possible light. The idea that they will always "do the thing" perfectly and consistently.
Typically, these cards have a high setup cost. In order for them to perform in their best case scenario, a lot of things need happen before the card is played.
Before we get into the example, I want to add a caveat. A lot of what's next is why certain cards might not be worth playing in your deck. However, it's your deck, so if you want to play a card, go for it.
Commander is about self expression and playing cards that spark joy for you, not just about optimizing and winning. But if you're feeling frustration with how your deck is performing, BCSM and setup costs might be a reason why.
<h2><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a> - A Case Study</h2>
Here's the scenario that inspired this article. I was prepping for a night at my local game store, and I had decided that I was only going to play one deck that night: my favorite deck, <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Ratadrabik of Urborg" href="#" target="_blank">Ratadrabik of Urborg</a>. If you've followed my writing for a while, I've done a <a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/brew-for-your-buck-the-legend-persists" target="_blank" rel="noopener">few</a> <a href="https://edhrec.com/articles/rebrew-for-your-buck-ratadrabiks-rings" target="_blank" rel="noopener">articles</a> on Ratadrabik, including the first one I ever wrote for EDHREC!
Anyways, it had been a while since I played the deck, so I was reviewing the list and making a few swaps for cards that I had picked up from the store a few weeks earlier. One of those cards was <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a>.
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Ratadrabik of Urborg"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Foggy Swamp Visions"></div></div>
This card has some silly potential in a Ratadrabik deck. First of all, my deck makes a lot of tokens thanks to Ratadrabik's ability, a high density of legendary creatures, and token doublers like <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Mondrak, Glory Dominus" href="#" target="_blank">Mondrak, Glory Dominus</a> and death trigger doublers like <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Teysa Karlov" href="#" target="_blank">Teysa Karlov</a>. These tokens could easily help pay the additional waterbending cost on <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a>.
It's also an <a href="https://edhrec.com/tags/aristocrats" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Aristocrats</a> deck, so a lot of creatures end up in my graveyard. Not only that, <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a> can also target creature cards in opposing graveyards as well. Now the best part: for each legendary creature card that I targeted, I would make a token copy which would then get sacrificed at the end of my turn, and Ratadrabik would make another token copy of it. So much value!
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Mondrak, Glory Dominus"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Teysa Karlov"></div></div>
The above paragraph is a perfect example of BCSM. Let's now break down the paragraph to illustrate the setup cost for Foggy Swamp Visions.
<ul>
<li>I would have a lot of tokens on the battlefield to help pay the additional waterbending cost.</li>
<li>I would have a lot of creatures, specifically legendary creatures, in my graveyard.</li>
</ul>
These two points are somewhat controllable, since I've built the deck to do these things. However, I also added these points to the scenario:
<ul>
<li>My opponents would have creatures, hopefully legends, in their graveyards.</li>
<li>Ratadrabik or a doubler effect will be on the battlefield.</li>
</ul>
These two points are far less controllable.
My opponents won't necessarily be filling their graveyard as fast as me. On average, it'll probably be slower unless they're specifically playing a graveyard-based strategy. And they certainly won't have as many legendary creatures as I will.
The tokens created from <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a> get sacrificed on end step, and it's not like they gain haste so they can attack. So really, the best things to target are creatures with enters or dies triggers. As the Ratadrabik deck, I've got plenty of candidates that this'll work with, but no telling what my opponents' creatures will do.
Also, Ratadrabik is my commander. It's my engine piece. The ward helps, but he still becomes a target for removal. The doubler effects are probably even higher on the threat assessment lists for opponents. Chances are, my opponents will want to get rid of these threats before they can be abused, so we shouldn't just assume we have a way to abuse the tokens available all the time.
All three opponents can bring their interaction to bear with when the threat is high enough.
All of the sudden you can see how <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a> becomes a lot less attractive. <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a> is powerful in my Ratadrabik deck if I have tokens on the battlefield to pay for the additional cost, if there are creatures in graveyards that have good enters and dies triggers, and if I have a way to abuse the tokens with Ratadrabik or something else.
That's a lot of ifs.
I ended up replacing <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a> with <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Junji, the Midnight Sky" href="#" target="_blank">Junji, the Midnight Sky</a>.
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Junji, the Midnight Sky"></div></div>
Junji might have less upside, but let's look at the setup cost. Junji needs to die, and it needs any non-Dragon creature in any graveyard to reanimate something. Both of those things are easily controllable for me, and there's additional synergy with the rest of the deck with Junji being a legendary creature. It even has the other option of forcing opponents to discard cards and lose life.
Junji has fewer "ifs" associated with it, leading to greater consistency each time Junji is played in a game compared to <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Foggy Swamp Visions" href="#" target="_blank">Foggy Swamp Visions</a>.
<h2>How to Evaluate Setup Cost</h2>
So how can you apply this to your own deckbuilding? I actually think the "ifs" exercise is a good technique. Look at a card and imagine yourself casting it in the best case scenario, then break down that scenario and keep track of the individual conditions needed to reach that point. The more conditions you get, the higher the setup cost for the card.
You can also evaluate each condition and how likely it is to occur. If the condition is something you can control with your deckbuilding and gameplay, it's way more likely to happen than if it's something you need from your opponents.
<h3>Setup Cost Red Flags</h3>
To use the "ifs" technique, it's important to identify some red flags in card design that indicate a card might have a higher setup cost than others. An obvious red flag is anything with an additional casting cost.
Let's compare <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Tormenting Voice" href="#" target="_blank">Tormenting Voice</a> and <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Romantic Rendezvous" href="#" target="_blank">Romantic Rendezvous</a>. In this very simple example, Voice has a higher setup cost because you need a card in hand to discard so you can pay the additional cost. With Rendezvous, you can cast it even if you're empty handed.
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Tormenting Voice"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Romantic Rendezvous"></div></div>
Another red flag is if a card needs other cards to make it effective. <a href="https://scryfall.com/search?q=o%3Aundergrowth&amp;unique=cards&amp;as=grid&amp;order=name" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Undergrowth</a> cares about the number of creature cards in your graveyard. This mechanic happens to be on a pet card of mine, <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Mausoleum Secrets" href="#" target="_blank">Mausoleum Secrets</a>.
I'm a strong advocate for MausRets in heavy black decks, but I won't deny that it has a setup cost. In order for it to do literally anything, you need creatures in the graveyard. Since it doesn't self mill, self discard, or otherwise enable getting creatures into the graveyard, you'll need to use other cards in your deck to fuel it. While you can control this in deckbuilding, it does require something, compared to <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Demonic Tutor" href="#" target="_blank">Demonic Tutor</a>, which explains the price difference and <a href="https://edhrec.com/top/game-changers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Game Changer</a> status for DT.
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Mausoleum Secrets"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Demonic Tutor"></div></div>
For creatures specifically, the requirement to attack or deal combat damage for an ability to trigger can be prohibitive as well. The BCSM is that you cast your creature, and you have a way to give it haste and a form of evasion so it can connect right away. But if your creature doesn't naturally have haste or evasion, now you're relying either on other cards or your creature surviving a turn cycle and your opponents having no blockers.
If your creature is a big enough threat, say the new <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Fire Lord Azula" href="#" target="_blank">Fire Lord Azula</a>, your opponents should act accordingly and eliminate it. Maybe you'll get lucky, but if I'm staring down an Azula deck, I know what I'm saving my removal for.
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Fire Lord Azula"></div></div>
<h3>Timing</h3>
It's not just the card design that can have an effect on its setup cost. Another way to fight BCSM is to remember that you won't always get to cast cards exactly when they'll perform the best.
One example I like to bring up is <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Rampant Growth" href="#" target="_blank">Rampant Growth</a> versus <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Edge of Autumn" href="#" target="_blank">Edge of Autumn</a>.
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Rampant Growth"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Edge of Autumn"></div></div>
It's a simple example, but demonstrates the point well. In the best case scenario (turn two) these cards perform exactly the same. But quickly run through the "ifs" exercise for <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Rampant Growth" href="#" target="_blank">Rampant Growth</a>.
If you cast it on turn two, it's great. But what happens if it's turn ten and you're empty handed? Rampant Growth is a horrible card to draw at that point in the game. Edge of Autumn though, lets you cycle for no mana investment and might dig you to a better card that could make a difference.
<h2>Wrap Up</h2>
Like anything in Commander, all of this theory has exceptions and nuances. As I said at the top, your card choices are up to you. Your reasons to play them are your own. Though hopefully this gave you something to think about as you're brewing and evaluating your decks, especially if they aren't running the way you think they should.
Magic is a complicated game! It's hard to keep track of all of this stuff, especially if you're new to the game.
Check out our <a href="https://edhrec.com/guides" target="_blank" rel="noopener">guides</a> for other tips written by my amazing colleagues. Let me know what you think in the comments below, especially if you made some revisions to your deck with BCSM and setup costs in mind.
Until next time, happy brewing, and happy playing!

Best Case Scenario Mentality and Setup Cost in Commander

<h6 style="text-align: right;"><a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Call the Spirit Dragons" href="#" target="_blank">Call the Spirit Dragons</a> | Art by <a href="https://www.artstation.com/liiga" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Liiga Smilshkalne</a></h6>
Hello, and welcome to How To Be New, where I give a new player's perspective on how to start playing Commander before the <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Jumbo Cactuar" href="#" target="_blank">cactus</a> makes everyone quit.
As this series makes the jump from Commander's Herald to EDHREC proper, this week's article addresses both new and veteran players, and it concerns my biggest, most persistent frustration since beginning my journey into Commander last October.
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Abzan Ascendancy"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Jeskai Ascendancy"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Mardu Ascendancy"></div></div>
Okay, so Tarkir: Dragonstorm has just come out. The new set takes place on the plane of Tarkir, a place where a lot of things have happened in Magic's history. For instance, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/@Spice8Rack/featured" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Spice8Rack</a>, one of my favorite MTG YouTubers, has a <a href="https://youtu.be/dAksq3bCjLY?feature=shared" target="_blank" rel="noopener">four-hour-long video about Tarkir</a>. Now, Spice has been known to run long, but their videos usually (and by "usually" I mean "always") end up much shorter than that.
Suffice it to say that Tarkir is an important place for Magic players. From what I gleaned from Spice's video (which I had open on my second monitor as I grinded daily MTG Arena quests), a lot of the things in Tarkir have to do with five Clans. Each of these Clans are associated with a combination of three of Magic's five colors of mana, and the names of these Clans, first introduced in 2014, are still used as shorthand by many Magic players when describing these combinations of colors.
This is a mistake.
For you, a new player who still groups your lands in a way that feels inefficient but that you don't know how to improve upon, these color combination names are absolute gibberish, and why wouldn't they be?! The other five three-color combos were named in a different set in 2008! And the ten two-color combos were named all the way back in 2005, when planeswalkers were still just a glint in Mark Rosewater's eye.
Between all of those, that's 20 unhinged words to have to learn, plus the four four-color combo names (you thankfully don't hear them as much, and honestly, just based on word count alone, those I actually am fine with abbreviating). That's too much information to be expected to learn, especially considering you're supposed to learn it alongside at least one 100-card (without repeats!) deck, plus the most frequent cards played by other players, plus so many different mechanics. It's like studying for the ACT, but somehow more useful.
Any veteran players reading may be surprised to hear this, but please do hear these words: the color combination names are the hardest thing to learn as a new player, especially because very often they're said casually in conversation without an actual card on hand that one could actually look at for reference. By the time your brain has processed the sounds you've made into an unfamiliar word which you find yourself unable to derive further meaning from, the conversation has long moved on. It's truly like hearing another language. Or the word "nonplussed." It's a conversational stun counter for new players.
To tell you the truth, the two-color pairings are much more palatable for me. Maybe it's because they're just so well-written to convey the general vibe of the pairing they represent. Across the board they have a real <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouba/kiki_effect" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Bouba/Kiki</a> thing going on. Izzet sounds like the aggressive chaos of . Boros sounds warm but regal in a very sort of way. Golgari () sounds like the exact noise Swamp Thing would make. They're perfect.
<div class="edhrecp__cards"><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Boros Charm"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Rakdos Charm"></div><div class="edhrecp__card-container" name="Simic Charm"></div></div>
As a newer player, those two-color names will be some of the first things you pick up. You'll definitely learn the name for the color identity of your first couple of decks. But past that, you might as well make flash cards. Or just ignore them until you pick them up through osmosis... which I assume must happen at some point? Unless every veteran Commander player actually did make flash cards... which, I mean, I wouldn't put it past them. I firmly believe that if Wizards released a card which required the player to recite a Shakespearean soliloquy for three free mana, we'd all know "To be, or not to be" as well as we know "Do you pay the one?"
So I say all of this, not just to provide you a warm, comforting blanket over your shoulders after you've gone numb at hearing the word "Jund" one too many times, but because Tarkir: Dragonstorm is here, and with it, an unprecedented chance to internalize some of these color combinations. Because I've been playing Commander for six months now, and "just picking them up as I go along" has not been cutting it.
Check out your local game store for any leftover prerelease kits. There are five different kinds, each of which relate to one of the three-color Clans in Tarkir. Each box will contain an extra pack of cards specific to the color combination you've selected, and given that I can identify Temur () since I play a commander in that color combination; I should know Grixis , which accounts for two of my Commander decks, but it simply doesn't stick in my brain; I guess "Temur" is more fun, and I can associate it more closely with my boi <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Flubs, the Fool" href="#" target="_blank">Flubs, the Fool</a> than I can associate "Grixis" with these two <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="The Valeyard" href="#" target="_blank">absolute</a> <a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Don Andres, the Renegade" href="#" target="_blank">bastards</a>) maybe this will help you get one or two of these crazy combo names down.
So keep faith, friends. You may not know all these gibberish color words, but as long as you're learning to say "<a class="edhrecp__link-a" content="Swords to Plowshares" href="#" target="_blank">Swords to Plowshares</a>" with a confident yet conciliatory tone, then your Commander education is coming along just fine.

advice

Best Case Scenario Mentality and Setup Cost in Commander

Why Do the Magic Color Combinations Have Names?