Landscape with a Church by Jacob van Ruisdael (1640's).

Adorned Pouncer Eternalize Token Art by Slawomir Maniak.

Many of you are familiar with the "75%" theory of deck-building. It's an theory pioneered by Jason Alt in February of 2014 in his groundbreaking GatheringMagic.com article "Building a 75% Commander Deck". In December of the same year he wrote a follow-up article entitled "8 Simple Rules for Playing in My Commander Group" in which he clarified his thoughts on the matter. Both are well worth a read.

My basic understanding of it is that you should not build decks with the lone goal of being as competitive as possible. Instead, you want your deck to be competitive enough to be able to hang at tables with really good decks, but not so oppressive that you simply can't play with precons and new players because the games would be pointless. The articles mentioned above have lots of examples of ways you can build "scalable" decks that are able to compete at a "75% level". Jason has put a lot of effort into exploring this theory and it has a lot of supporters in the community. His articles are well worth reading if you want to learn more about his thoughts on "75%" deck-building.

The fact that I'm not 100% sure that I properly understand his theory is in itself a bit of a problem. Jason's theory is easily misunderstood. I find myself asking questions like . . .  Is a 100% Isamaru, Hound of Konda deck really just a 50% deck because of the fact that Isamaru's ceiling is relatively low? Is a Tier 1 deck built at 100% the target for measuring your own build, or are you measuring your own deck's percentage against a 100% version of a deck built around the same commander? These things aren't self-evident. While Jason could surely clear this up for us, it got me thinking that it might be time for a new way to look at how we try to make sure that our games are fun and the power level at our tables is balanced.

The theory of building "75%" decks made a lot of sense four years ago, but the landscape of the format has changed. Players often now have lots of decks at varying power levels. Since Jason's December 2014 article we have seen 24 Preconstructed Commander decks hit the market, and scores of new legendary creatures enter the card pool.

At a time, when a player would probably only have one or two Commander decks, it was a great idea to build them at 75%. It's 2018 and it's worth asking if it's time for a new approach, either to replace, or more likely to supplement the 75% theory of commander deck-building.

Nice Six-Pack

Sorry to be a tease, but we're not talking about hot guys with killer abs today.

When I go to my LGS I tend to pack five or six decks into an old laptop bag. I almost always bring a "six-pack", carefully chosen from my collection of around 20 playable Commander decks. I know I'm probably going to be playing anywhere from two to four games, so bringing six decks means I'll have some variety to choose from.

Instead of having six "75% decks", I bring a range of decks that reflect the variety of things I think I might be looking for from my games that night.

I might want to have at least one really good deck, but I might also have a project I'm working on that I want to play just to see how it fares in a game. I might bring at least one tribal or janky deck so that if I'm lucky enough to win a few games in a row, I can choose to drop my power level down. None of my "bad" decks are toothless group hug affairs, but they're usually slower and less consistent, with fewer combos and are often led by a commander who just isn't that dangerous.

Everyone likes to win, but I'm not greedy. I'm not throwing games, but I'll gladly mix things up so that another player on a run of bad games or just bad luck will have games where they have a better chance at doing well.

One key concept behind the "six-pack" approach is that nobody should feel like they can't build whatever power deck they want to build.

With so many of us sporting robust collections of Commander decks, we can bring a range of decks and play to the level of the table by picking our deck carefully rather than forcing our decks to be anything other than the decks we want them to be.

Responsible players will bring a range of decks, possibly including decks that are much more powerful than anything that would fit into the 75% philosophy. Players who would use this as an excuse to bring six highly tuned Tier 1 (or Tier 1.5) decks to their LGS aren't the sort of players who would have listened to Jason Alt in the first place. Trolls are going to troll. This isn't about winning 6 games in a row with 6 different Tier One decks. It's about giving yourself the freedom to build what you like but also taking the responsibility to work together to try to have fun, balanced games.

Time to Crack a Brew

Since we're talking six-packs, let's talk beer.

I'll never resign myself to having to buy a 6-pack of Bud Light. Nothing against Bud Light -- it's just not my thing, and also -- I like variety. If I want to buy beer, I'm going to buy what I want to buy, and one of my favorite things is to build my own 6-pack.

I might grab a Sam Adams Boston Lager, a Narragansett, a Guinness, a Sam Smith's Imperial Stout, a Dixie Blackened Voodoo Lager, and maybe even that Bud Light. I'm a bit of a lightweight so I'm probably not going to drink them all but it'd be nice to have a range of options. I might even need to hook up a friend or a new player, so having extras is always good.

It's probably not fair to equate 75% decks with Bud Light. You'd never bring six identical Commander decks to your LGS. Maybe it would be more accurate to suggest a six-pack made up of a Bud Light, Michelob Lite, Miller Lite, and three more "lite" beers that would probably never find their way into my own shopping cart.

As I said, I like variety, but I'm also a lightweight. I might throw together a six-pack with a stout, a lager, an IPA and three root beers because I'm not that into drinking.

My basic point is simple. Buy the beers you want to drink and build the decks you want to build. Have fun with Commander, and if that means building a deck or two that is just stupidly powerful, that's fine. It's up to you to talk to your friends so you can try to have games that are fun for everyone. It's also up to you to be prepared to play with anyone who turns up at the LGS, no matter the power level of their decks.

Building My Six-Pack

My goal is to try to make sure I can have a fun game with everyone no matter how good or bad their decks are. Instead of trying to build decks to meet all challengers, I build whatever I want. Some of these builds might be "75%" decks, but some could be Tier 1 and others might be incredibly inconsistent and in dire need of work.

A quick rundown of how I might fill up my own "six-pack" using examples from my own deck collection might look like this:

1: A great deck -- Narset, Enlightened Master

This slot could be for a tier one build or just my strongest deck, but it's the one I'm going to pull out when I want to try for a fast game, I know I'm at a really strong table, or when I just haven't won a game in far too long and want to notch a victory. My Narset build is far from perfect, but it's a guilty pleasure and it does fairly well. Folks hate Narset for a reason. She can be simply brutal to play against.

2: A good deck -- Marath, Will of the WIld

This used to be a much more combo-focused Marath deck, but I've reworked it to be enrage-dinosaur-tribal. This might be where a 75% build would belong. It isn't my best deck but I'm confident in it being able to perform at most tables and even win the occasional game.

3: An unfair deck -- The Mimeoplasm

This would be a higher tier combo deck if built properly, but for me it's so far been an inconsistent combo deck that is capable of winning early and winning out of nowhere. It definitely pushes my own boundaries for "playing fair", packing both a Flash Hulk combo and a Hermit Druid wincon. This is the slot I'm most likely to just merge with the "great deck" slot so I can bring an extra deck that's worse but more fun to play against.

4: A fair deck -- Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa & Tana, the Bloodsower

Sometimes there are games where you just smash creatures together until only one player is left standing. This deck is one that will win on the battlefield. It has its own clever shenanigans but the overall approach is one that doesn't rely on combo or anything most players would look at as being unfair. It's got a decent win rate, but folds to certain strategies and definitely can't keep up with fast, top-tier builds.

5: A fun deck -- Grenzo, Havoc Raiser

This slot is for something silly and fun. It might be a tribal build or something with a unique and whimsical feel to it. My Grenzo deck has a great time in the early game goading my opponents' creatures, but once I get to the mid or late game it's impossible to keep up with everyone's growing boardstate. I get to cause trouble early on, but my opponents usually remember and make me pay for it.

6: A project -- Ramos, Dragon Engine

This last slot is for a deck that's still coming together. In Ramos' case, this is a rebuild. Sure, it's got 100 cards and a commander, but I'm usually far from done with the last deck in my bag. I may be planning to go look through cards if I get knocked out of a game early, and I certainly don't expect this one to win any games. It might do well, but I may not even know how competitive the deck is going to be because it's a work in progress.

All six of these decks have won games at one point or another (even Grenzo and Ramos). They're all very different and play at different power levels. On any given night I'm probably going to pack a completely different lineup of decks to play. I could probably go months without bringing the same six decks twice in a row.

Building Your Own Six-Pack

For your six-pack you need to think about who you'll be playing with, what decks they're likely to bring and what kind of experience you want to have. You'll do well to bring a range of power levels, but your recent games might impact that. If you're in a rut, you might want to bring better decks, but if you just killed it last time you might find yourself willing to bring some of your weaker decks.

You might always want to have a tribal deck with you, so maybe one or two of those slots will be devoted to tribal builds. Maybe you buy and keep a set of precon decks intact without changing them, or without changing them much, and one of those slots will always be your "precon slot".

The goal is to be able to show up and have as good a chance as possible to play at the level of whatever table you wind up sitting at. That means you'll need to have a conversation if you're playing with strangers, and you'll have to decide whether or not to trust them when they tell you how good or bad, fast or slow, and fair or unfair their decks are.

It might seem safer just to play your best deck and then bring the power level down if it turns out the table's not up to the challenge. As long as you're not a jerk about it, that's fine. If you're bringing a range of decks, you'll be able to adjust and still get in some good games even if the first one happens to be a little one-sided.

One last thing to mention is that it is really OK to have a "bad" deck in your collection. You don't have to try super hard to win every single game. If you let yourself keep one deck that is intentionally meant to be a lower-tier jank-fest you might discover that you have a lot of fun with it. You'll probably feel freer to mess around with the decklist and experiment with new strategies or convoluted wincons. If you find yourself sitting down to play with a bunch of brand new players with obviously terrible decks and you only brought 3 choices: a highly-tuned Prossh, Skyraider of Kher deck, a nasty Narset, Enlightened Master extra turns & combats deck, and a brutal Animar, Soul of Elements Morph deck, you'll be wishing you had brought that "bad" deck so you can have a fun game where everyone actually has a chance at winning.

Beyond 75%

Four years ago, 75% made a lot of sense. It still makes sense, but Commander has come a long way since 2014. I do think the theory of building 75% decks still has a lot of value, especially if you only have one or two decks in your collection.

Many players don't want to be told that they shouldn't build their favorite deck(s) to be as strong as possible. I can't blame them for feeling that way. Many players now have so many decks that they can bring an assortment so they can adjust to the table not by having a scalable deck but by talking to their opponents and putting thought into which of their decks they choose to play.

With the "Six-Pack" approach, you build whatever you like.

There is glory in having the best, fastest, most ridiculously powerful deck in the store.

There is also glory in having a midrange deck that is so hilarious, goofy or unpredictable that players tell stories about it because it was so much fun to play against.

Neither of those decks might be built in a way that would qualify them as a "75% deck".

Both of those decks would fit into a "six-pack" really nicely, and would give you the ability to have a fun, varied and fantastic night of Commander without necessarily breaking any "unwritten rules" of Commander etiquette.

Why Just Six?

It should come as no surprise that my choice of six has a lot to do with the laptop bag I use to carry my decks around. It fits six decks, or five decks and a tokens box.

I still think it's a pretty good number to go with.

Six is enough decks for most any day or night of Commander. I rarely get to play four games in a session, much less six games, so it's enough for me to have options without having so few that I have to play the same deck twice.

A bag with six decks in it means that I will have left over two dozen decks at home.

If my bag ever got stolen, I wouldn't have lost my entire collection. Thieves may not be everywhere, but they're out there. Bringing only five or six decks means that if you have a lot of decks and the unthinkable happens, you'll still have decks. You might be angry. You might have lost your best deck but things could be worse. Your deck collection won't have been reduced to zero.

You should really just bring as many decks as you want to bring. I think "six-pack" has a nice ring to it, but as long as you are trying to bring a range of decks and play balanced, fun games of Commander that's what really matters.

Final Thoughts

I don't want the Commander community to stop using the 75% method of deck-building and to start carrying around six-packs.

What I want is for players to feel free to build what they want, even if that means occasionally having games where you inadvertently crush a table of decks that are just ridiculously outclassed. It happens and it even happens with "75% decks". When and if it does, don't be a jerk. Try to win with humility and grace, a sense of humor and the understanding that nobody else probably had fun. Then power down for the next round and try to have a more balanced game that everyone can enjoy.

What I'd really love to know is what YOUR six-pack would look like.

Would you run a wide range of power levels?

Do you have a more interesting way than I've suggested to mix things up?

Thanks for reading and please leave me your six-pack in the comments below!

If you'd like to keep up with how I'm doing in my casual and Commander League games, feel free to visit http://dantesdad.wixsite.com/commanderruminations. My month of playing Red goodstuff, led by Ashling the Pilgrim, is going pretty well so far. I share stories about both my league and casual games on that site every Sunday morning.