2015-05-06



I live in London, a pretty wealthy city and one of the largest MTG hubs in the UK. About a month ago Tiny Leaders suddenly exploded all over my social media, the player base responded favourably and three tournaments were organised in quick succession.

By comparison, I originally found about Duel Commander a few years ago while trolling (in the wandering sense) my way through MtGSalvation’s Commander subforum (Which is a bit like blindly thrusting your hand into a sweaty garbage can and somehow coming out holding a polished ruby). Hardly anybody in my local playgroup seems to have heard of DC, or if they have, reserve for it the sort of sideways glance normally given to men wearing trench coats in public parks during summer.

Superficially, the two formats are remarkably similar, looking like competitive variants of EDH. Yet one has taken off, even if only briefly, while the other is hardly mentioned in polite company. My immediate reaction was to wonder why.

Let’s have a look at the differences and similarities.

Ban Lists

This is what I tend to look at first to decide if a format is worth playing. Both TL and DC have pretty rational ban lists (unlike EDH’s, which is frankly the height of lunacy). You don’t get to use Crucible of Worlds in DC, you do however get to play Demonic Tutor and vice versa. These seem mostly cosmetic at first glance, though you must then take into account that TL has a defacto ban list that’s enormous when the 3cc rule is accounted for.

It must be said that DC hasn’t always had a completely sane ban list over the years though. It’s been through various fits and starts before settling into its current groove. Back to Basics and Bitter Blossom were once cards non-grata, but Zur the Enchanter perfectly fine? Sure. The current list looks okay, with the exception of Sensei’s Divining Top, which is probably a bigger time sink than Candy Crush.

Deck Construction

TL obviously has some rather unique stipulations: 50 card libraries, all cards 3cc or less. No Birthing Pods or Bloodbraid Elves here. Which is rather the point; it’s what gives the format its unique flavour. At first this opens up your mind. ‘Wow, how can I make an effective deck without access to X, Y & Z?’ Then you realise that mostly what you want to do is port a comparable existing Legacy deck. Legacy is, after all, the spiritual home of hyper competitive decks of 3cc or less. There’s a reason Ezuri’s taken the top slot at each of our tournaments.

The other knock on effect the 3cc rule has is on commanders and archetypes. No Wydwen, no Sidisi, Daretti or Griselbrand and their respective ‘build around me’ strategies. It also means the death of ramp or reanimator – there’s simply no point to either strategy when the beefiest creature you can race out is Tarmogoyf. The lack of available generals really feels like it’s hurting the format at the moment, as there are too few effective ‘build around me’ generals outside the likes of Geist and Ezuri. The format’s limited deck sizes combined with highlander’s signature lack of consistency means you often simply pick a general that allows a particular colour combination and then cram in as much good stuff in as possible.

By comparison Dual Commanders metagame is… pretty wild to be honest. You have the usual suspects with their unimaginative Clique and Geist nonsense, but also have some room for some mad outliers. Check out the Philippines Super Series Top 8 here.

Of course that’s purely from a competitive standpoint. Duel Commander doesn’t even have a casual scene, which I feel is partly due its nature and partly due to its image as the Saint Helena for all those Spikes that ruin multiplayer games with their Winter Orbs and Tangle Wires. By comparison TL has quite a vocal casual contingent. Just what do casual players want from a format? After I’ve finished herding some cats I might have the answer, but outside a trite pronouncement like “fun,” probably room to experiment and one of these:



As I see it there’s a hell of a lot of growth potential for casual players, as it’s a fresh brew space that they can adapt and colonise that runs parallel to their mainstay home EDH.

Sideboards

Tiny Leaders has sideboards and sideboards are so good. In fact, you may not be aware, but playing magic without sideboards is actually only a short hop from cannibalistic barbarism. By comparison, knowing you can side out all of your targeted removal for edicts and sweeper effects vs Geist in game 2 is… deeply moving, somewhat like visiting the Sistine Chapel for the first time.

So why no sideboards in DC? According to the DC’s rules committee there are two major reasons. The first being the contention that games would devolve into a case of “Will I draw my hate before you draw yours?” Now I don’t know what format they’re playing, but competitive highlander is pretty much the definition of “let me draw my horror before you draw yours.” Turn 1: Swamp, Dark Ritual, Entomb Iona, Reanimate Iona. Oh sweet format, variance is thy name.

The second is that sideboards are a further and unacceptable departure from the format’s spiritual forefather, EDH. Hmm, so we’ll alter the ban list, the life totals, the general/library zone rule and the very ethos of the format, but not the sideboard rule: that’s a bridge too far.



Hmm.

The biggest irony of all is that sideboards are an option (though not a widely publicised one) in EDH, so I really have no idea where the DC committee are coming from. Format confusion does seem to be a bit of a thing with DC though – for two years it actually shared the EDH multiplayer banlist, including innocuous fluff like Biorhythm.

Can’t help but feel most players aren’t as fanatical about sideboards as I am though, so how about…

Budget!

How much more expensive is Duel than TL? The obvious assumption is much more. Even my limited grasp of maths tells me 100 is bigger number than 50 after all. In practice though it’s actually not that much of an increase (as long as you’re not playing blue). The largest price sink for highlander decks will nearly always be the mana base and if you’re willing to sink $200 into an Underground Sea then it’s not really much of a stretch to add in a City of Brass and a Tainted Isle. In for a penny in for (500) pound. There simply aren’t that many effective cards with CC 4 or higher that are actually worth much money.

Again though, that only applies to competitive. If you play casual or build on a budget TL is miles more accessible than DC. Fifty additional cards, even if capped at 75 cents a card, still adds up. In TL you could probably carve something fun to play for $20.00. An attractive price tag, especially if you happen to be a magic novice (Hell, who am I kidding? It’s an especially attractive price tag for me and I’m a wizened old magic gargoyle).

Social Media & the English Language

Even on closer analysis there’s not that much ground lost between the two formats, either mechanically or financially, so let’s get a bit more eclectic.

DC is an old(ish) idea, TL is a new one. Raised in the eye of the social media generation TL has massive brand awareness attached to it. This is partly due to the times – the information age pushes media awareness into the forefront faster and faster – but also due to the clarity of its vision. It’s like this format that you love, but with this unique rule! No strings attached! Gogogo! Which has certainly struck a chord. The facebook page alone is absolute hive of friendly activity, from decklist critiques to alter show-boating. New cards are rigorously examined for any application they may have for the format.

By comparison, as we’ve seen above, DC has been and is… muddled. When DC was first founded pushing products or ideas via social media was still in its infancy for people outside of marketing departments. Even the founders themselves don’t seem to have been quite sure what their format was. A spin-off? Something unique? It’s taken a long time to get to the position it’s in now and its distinct identity still doesn’t seem finally settled on. I mean, there’s even some confusion about just what exactly DC is called; officially it may be DC, but others refer to it as French EDH, or 1vs1 EDH. While there isn’t even a unified facebook page of the format as far as I’m aware, just a series of small (and private) local playgroups. Not something conducive to building brand awareness.

Just look at this snapshot of a questionnaire posted on the TL facebook page; you may notice something by its absence.

With that said, the really bizarre thing is that DC is a popular format. Just not in English speaking territories. Let’s have a look at the useful meta-game website MTGtop8, which collects and publishes results from DC tournaments.

Of the last ten major events 0 were held in an English speaking country. Frankly I’m stumped and have neither the time or language skills to even begin to delve into why this is, and due to a lack of results, I can’t say how well TL has taken off in non-English speaking countries. I think I’m going to go out on a limb here toward the traditional English fall-back and blame the French. It may be a suspect hypothesis and ludicrous one, but that’s life and the limit of my word count.

Share this Post

About the Author

Andrew Gregory
Twitter

Andrew writes about a variety of subjects in a self-disparaging way, especially if they happen to be life experiences. He once top 8’d a 6-man FNM.

Show more