A Proposal for Commander Brackets Beta Game Changers List

Random Thoughts from a Restless Mind

Published On: May 8, 2025

Alright, fellow spell slingers! Uncle Versace here, dropping in with some lukewarm takes from the world of Commander. Tonight's brainwave, fueled by the usual post-work exhaustion and THC haze, revolves around something near and dear to our hearts: Commander brackets.

Now, for those blissfully unaware (maybe you're still hung up on the banning of Mana Crypt, no judgment), Wizards has introduced a new bracket system to try and create more balanced and enjoyable play experiences. The core idea is to separate decks based on their perceived power level, often using a "Game Changers" list as a sort of binary litmus test. Is your deck packing [insert notoriously powerful card here, e.g., Cyclonic Rift]? Congrats (or commiserations?), you might be in a higher bracket!

And that's where my inner autist starts itching. While I applaud the effort to inject a bit more balance into the glorious chaos that is Commander, this current "Game Changers" list feels… well, a bit blunt, doesn't it? It's like trying to measure the sharpness of a sword with a "sharp or not sharp" sticker. Sure, a butter knife gets a "not sharp," and Excalibur gets a "sharp," but what about all those perfectly respectable, slightly pointy letter openers and machetes in between?

That, my friends, is the disparity I'm talking about. Take Fierce Guardianship. Solid protection spell, no doubt. But not really that game-changing in my mind. But then you have something like Drannith Magistrate. That card doesn't just change the game; it politely asks your opponents to sit down, shut up, and watch you play Solitaire instead. They're both on the same list? Seems a bit… off-kilter.

This got me thinking: wouldn't a point system be a much more nuanced and, dare I say, elegant solution? Imagine a world where instead of a simple "yes" or "no" to the "Game Changer" question, each card on a broader list is assigned a point value based on its perceived impact and oppressiveness. Fierce Guardianship? Maybe a simple 1 point. Drannith Magistrate? We're talking 3, maybe even a controversial 4 points (fight me in the comments! (once I add the ability to comment...)).

Then, instead of "Bracket 3 can have 3 Game Changers," the rule becomes, "Bracket 3 can have a maximum of 5 points," for example. Suddenly, deck builders have a bit more flexibility. You could run a couple of the slightly less oppressive "Game Changers" or you might have to make a tougher choice if you want to include one of the real heavy hitters. It adds a layer of strategic deck building beyond just ticking boxes.

Of course, before you start sharpening your pitchforks and yelling about turning our beloved casual format into some kind of hyper-competitive points race, I hear you. The biggest, honking elephant in the room is complexity. Let's be real, Commander is already a format with more rules and exceptions than the English language. Asking players to not only know a "Game Changers" list but also the point value of each card? That's a significant cognitive load. It requires more effort, more tracking, and potentially more arguments about whether [insert "Game Changer" card here] is really a 2 or a 3.

And honestly, that's a perfectly valid reason to stick with the current system. Sometimes, simplicity trumps perfect accuracy, especially in a format that prides itself on being a bit more laid-back (at least in theory). The binary "Game Changers" list is easy to understand and implement, even if it lacks the finesse of a point system.

So, where do I land on this? Honestly, I'm torn. My inner number-loving, balance-seeking brain screams for the point system. It feels like a more precise tool for the job. But my pragmatic side, the one that's witnessed enough Commander table arguments over rules interpretations and how the priority works, shudders at the thought of adding another layer of complexity.

Overall, I'd personally prefer a "Game Changers" list with a point or ranking system. But I don't get to make the decision, so I'll continue to use and test whatever system we have. Honestly, here in town, the bracket system is discussed more than it's used. People tend to still just sit down and play.

What do you think, fellow Commanderers? Am I onto something with this point system madness, or should I stick to brewing janky combos and leave the bracket balancing to the brave souls who organize these things? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below (seriously, I probably need to add comments to my blog, eh? I just know people tend to end blog posts with this kind of sentence... 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️)