How to Evaluate Cards for Commander: A Deckbuilder's Framework

Card evaluation in Commander is different from every other Magic format. A card that dominates in Standard might be unplayable in Commander, and a card that nobody drafts in Limited might be a Commander all-star.

The reason is context. Commander is a multiplayer format with 40 life, 100-card singleton decks, and games that last 8-12 turns. Cards need to be evaluated through that lens, not through the lens of 1v1, 20-life, four-copy formats.

Here is a practical framework for evaluating any card for your Commander deck.

The ACES Framework

When considering a card for your Commander deck, evaluate it on four axes: Adaptability, Cost-efficiency, Effect on the game, and Scalability in multiplayer.

A - Adaptability

Question: In how many game states is this card useful?

Cards that are only good in one specific situation are worse than cards that are useful in many situations. In a 100-card singleton deck, you cannot predict which cards you will draw. Every card needs to pull its weight in most games, not just the perfect scenario.

High adaptability: Beast Within (destroys any permanent, always useful), Swords to Plowshares (kills any creature, always relevant).

Low adaptability: Noxious Revival (only good when you have a specific card in your graveyard and need it back), Relic Crush (only relevant when artifacts/enchantments are problematic).

Rule of thumb: If a card is dead in your hand more than 30% of games, consider replacing it with something more flexible.

C - Cost-Efficiency

Question: Is the mana cost appropriate for the effect?

Commander games go long, but that does not mean expensive cards are automatically good. In fact, mana efficiency is more important in Commander than in most formats because you need to do more things per turn (develop your board, hold up interaction, advance your strategy).

Efficient: Swords to Plowshares (1 mana, exile a creature), Sol Ring (1 mana, produces 2), Skullclamp (1 mana + 1 equip, draws 2 cards).

Inefficient: Staff of Nin (6 mana, pings and draws one card per turn), Spine of Ish Sah (7 mana to destroy one permanent).

The test: Compare the card to others at the same mana cost. If a 5-mana card does less than other 5-mana options in your colors, it is not worth including.

Exception: Cards that win the game can be expensive. Craterhoof Behemoth costs 8 mana but ends the game. That is worth the cost.

E - Effect on the Game

Question: Does this card meaningfully change the game state?

Cards that look powerful on paper but do not actually change the trajectory of the game are traps. A card that gains you 5 life sounds nice but rarely matters in a format where players start at 40.

High impact: Board wipes that reset losing positions. Combo pieces that win the game. Card draw engines that ensure you never run out of options.

Low impact: Vanilla creatures with no abilities. Lifegain without payoffs. "Pillow fort" cards that discourage attacks but do not progress your gameplan.

The test: After playing this card, is the game noticeably different than if you had not played it? If the answer is "not really," cut it.

S - Scalability in Multiplayer

Question: Does this card get better or worse with more opponents?

This is the axis that most separates Commander evaluation from other formats. In a four-player game, effects that scale with the number of opponents are dramatically better than effects that target a single player.

Scales well: "Each opponent" effects (drain each opponent, each opponent sacrifices), board wipes (hit all opponents' creatures), Rhystic Study (triggers off any opponent's spell).

Scales poorly: "Target player" effects (deal 3 damage to target player is 3 damage out of 120 total life), single-target mill, one-shot lifegain.

The multiplier: A card that affects all three opponents is effectively three times as powerful as one that affects a single opponent. Gray Merchant of Asphodel draining each opponent for 8 is 24 total damage, not 8.

Additional Evaluation Criteria

Does It Need Other Cards to Be Good?

Cards that need specific other cards to function are riskier in a singleton format. You only have one copy of each card, so counting on drawing a specific combination is unreliable.

Self-sufficient cards (good on their own): Phyrexian Arena (just play it and draw), Beast Within (always useful), Cultivate (ramp is always good).

Dependent cards (need support): Coat of Arms (amazing with a full board, dead with an empty one), Gravecrawler (needs other Zombies), Doubling Season (needs token or counter generation).

Dependent cards are not bad - they are the heart of synergy decks. But you need enough redundancy that the supporting cards are reliably available.

Is It Proactive or Reactive?

Proactive cards advance your game plan: creatures, card draw, ramp, combos.

Reactive cards respond to opponents: removal, counterspells, board wipes.

A good Commander deck needs both, but the balance matters. Too proactive and you cannot handle threats. Too reactive and you are always responding to opponents instead of winning.

Guideline: 60-70% proactive, 30-40% reactive. Adjust based on your strategy (control decks lean more reactive, aggro more proactive).

Does It Play Well Politically?

Commander is a political format. Cards that affect only one opponent create enemies. Cards that affect everyone equally or help multiple players can buy you time and alliances.

Politically good: Curse of Opulence (encourages opponents to attack someone else), Ghostly Prison (discourages attacks without removing threats), group draw effects.

Politically bad: Targeted stax (locking out one player), excessive counterspells aimed at one person, repeated single-target disruption.

This does not mean you should avoid targeted effects. But be aware that how you use your cards affects how opponents treat you.

Common Evaluation Traps

The "Win More" Card

A card that is amazing when you are already winning but terrible when you are behind. Coat of Arms with twenty creatures is devastating. Coat of Arms with two creatures is a wasted card.

How to spot them: Ask "Is this card good when I am losing?" If the answer is no, it might be win-more.

The "Cool but Impractical" Card

A card with an exciting ability that almost never actually happens. A seven-card combo that instantly wins. A 10-mana spell that you will never have the mana for.

How to spot them: If you have to explain three other cards that need to be in play for this card to work, it is probably too impractical.

The "Better in Theory" Card

A card that sounds incredible on paper but underperforms in practice. Often these are cards that are amazing in 1v1 formats but mediocre in multiplayer.

How to spot them: Playtest. Theory only goes so far. If a card consistently underwhelms over 5+ games, trust your experience over the theory.

The "Pet Card"

A card you include because you like it, not because it is good. Pet cards are fine - Commander is about fun. But be honest about which cards are pet choices so you know what to cut when upgrading.

Putting It Together

When evaluating a card for your Commander deck, run it through the ACES checklist:

1. Adaptable: Useful in most game states?
2. Cost-efficient: Worth the mana investment?
3. Effect: Changes the game meaningfully?
4. Scales: Gets better with more opponents?

A card that scores well on all four axes is almost certainly worth including. A card that fails on two or more is a candidate for cutting.

For help evaluating cards in the context of a specific deck, try Manacove - the AI considers synergy, mana curve, budget, and power level when suggesting cards for your commander.