This is a problem I've been struggling with in building my decks; I'll pick a commander, and it'll present some options to me on how to build it. I start pulling cards to put in the deck buuuuut then I end up with WAY too many synergistic cards (because they're on theme and I have no judgment) and I have to pare them down so I can have more utility. But then I hate having to run utility cards because they're necessary, but predictable and boring.
I find this is the worst part of deckbuilding: striking the right balance. In theory, utility trumps synergy, because utility has the potential to re-enable synergy after synergy has been disrupted. But by running nothing but utility, you run the risk of becoming the big target, because your deck is built for any kind of threat.
So what do you do? What are your opinions? Is it more important to have a strong theme and rely on it, or is it more important to have answers to threats?
Mine is really wholesome and not so doggedly competitive so there's a feeling of enjoying seeing other players' decks do their thing, so to speak. That, plus we're all largely budget players, means that we can all get away with more synergistic cards that may not provide the best utility for the cost. And we can get away with decks that aren't as finely tuned so there's less stress about utility.
I'm a bigger fan of being on theme, but I'm also not competitive at all and get more enjoyment out of doing fun things than actually winning. And one of our players has the most fun slowing games down and helping underdogs win (or at least not lose). So my situation is a bit different.
At the end of the day, though, the game supports an array of approaches. I say do you, have fun, and don't worry about what's most ideal or 'right'.
My playgroup is variable because we have a pretty large pool of players, around 14-15
that are always at our LGS and a dozen or so more that show up inconsistently.
So, I always maintain 3 commander decks.
A casual level deck, usually themed. Currently it's tribal Merfolk. Kumena, Tyrant of Orazca
An intermediate deck, with plenty of staples and a few powerful cards, but no combos or instant wincons. Currently Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis
And finally, a deck that's as competitive as I can make it. Lots of utility, lots of power cards. Currently heavy control Azor, the Lawbringer
I try to play whatever fits with the general power-level of the playgroup. Sometimes we even discuss which commanders we will be using beforehand.
Utility cards (removal, ramp, cantripping, and color-fixing for multicolored decks) are necessary, even if it means cutting out a few elves or whatever which you wanted to include in your tribal deck. I currently have 23 commander decks built and most are fine tuned. I would even argue that certain cards are auto-includes for all decks or each color (or color combination) assuming you have copies of them to include. No deck which is all threats and no answers will win consistently, because it won't always start the game or be the early aggressor.
I find this is the worst part of deckbuilding: striking the right balance. In theory, utility trumps synergy, because utility has the potential to re-enable synergy after synergy has been disrupted. But by running nothing but utility, you run the risk of becoming the big target, because your deck is built for any kind of threat.
So what do you do? What are your opinions? Is it more important to have a strong theme and rely on it, or is it more important to have answers to threats?
Mine is really wholesome and not so doggedly competitive so there's a feeling of enjoying seeing other players' decks do their thing, so to speak. That, plus we're all largely budget players, means that we can all get away with more synergistic cards that may not provide the best utility for the cost. And we can get away with decks that aren't as finely tuned so there's less stress about utility.
I'm a bigger fan of being on theme, but I'm also not competitive at all and get more enjoyment out of doing fun things than actually winning. And one of our players has the most fun slowing games down and helping underdogs win (or at least not lose). So my situation is a bit different.
At the end of the day, though, the game supports an array of approaches. I say do you, have fun, and don't worry about what's most ideal or 'right'.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
Literally this.
My playgroup is variable because we have a pretty large pool of players, around 14-15
that are always at our LGS and a dozen or so more that show up inconsistently.
So, I always maintain 3 commander decks.
A casual level deck, usually themed. Currently it's tribal Merfolk. Kumena, Tyrant of Orazca
An intermediate deck, with plenty of staples and a few powerful cards, but no combos or instant wincons. Currently Kynaios and Tiro of Meletis
And finally, a deck that's as competitive as I can make it. Lots of utility, lots of power cards. Currently heavy control Azor, the Lawbringer
I try to play whatever fits with the general power-level of the playgroup. Sometimes we even discuss which commanders we will be using beforehand.
I used to be a demigod, but now I'm an omnimage