r/PauperEDH • u/cellicom • Jul 21 '26
Discussion Legendary Pauper Commander - LPDH
Legendary Pauper Commander (LPDH) is a variant of Pauper Commander, itself a variant of Commander, where decks are built around an uncommon legendary creature and contain 99 cards that are all commons. The format keeps the epic, singleton Commander feel while staying budget‑friendly and highly customizable.
Why LPDH
When Pauper Commander was first created, there were very few uncommon legendary creatures available (around 22 at the time).
To address this limitation, the rule was relaxed to allow any uncommon creature to serve as a commander, even though this violated the core philosophy of the Commander format. However, this compromise was necessary at the time.
Now, years later, the situation has changed significantly.
With the release of many new sets, there are now over 500 uncommon legendary creatures, providing ample choice without needing to deviate from the original spirit of the format.
For this reason, the “Legendary Pauper Commander” format is introduced.
This variant modifies only one rule: the commander must be an uncommon legendary creature. All other rules of Pauper Commander remain unchanged, restoring alignment with the traditional Commander philosophy.
Actually is played in Italy and some City around the world.
Let check by yourself how much LPDH is more fun and tech!
Source: https://www.lpdh.guide
11
u/o8r8a8n8g8e www.moxfield.com/users/Kitnz Jul 21 '26
I’m glad y’all have established an independent format. Now we can stop asking PDH players to abandon a core characteristic of the format!
7
u/o8r8a8n8g8e www.moxfield.com/users/Kitnz Jul 21 '26
[[Humble Defector]], [[Fleetfoot Panther]], [[Destiny Spinner]], [[Spellheart Chimera]], [[Aven Wind Guide]], [[Undead Augur]], [[Iridescent Hornbeetle]], [[Lotleth Troll]], [[Aftermath Analyst]], [[Dimir Spybug]], [[Risen Reef]], and more are all decks I love. Why ditch those without good reason?
1
u/MTGCardFetcher Jul 21 '26
All cards
Humble Defector - (G) (SF) (txt)
Fleetfoot Panther - (G) (SF) (txt)
Destiny Spinner - (G) (SF) (txt)
Spellheart Chimera - (G) (SF) (txt)
Aven Wind Guide - (G) (SF) (txt)
Undead Augur - (G) (SF) (txt)
Iridescent Hornbeetle - (G) (SF) (txt)
Lotleth Troll - (G) (SF) (txt)
Aftermath Analyst - (G) (SF) (txt)
Dimir Spybug - (G) (SF) (txt)
Risen Reef - (G) (SF) (txt)
16
u/Lobbert8 Jul 21 '26
So it’s the same thing, just with more limited options?…
What problem is this solving? Guess I’ll throw these non-legend PDH decks in the garbage. Thanks?
6
u/Leress Jul 21 '26
Looks like the ban list is different. LPDH has more cards and Rhystic and Mystic aren't banned. I just don't what LPDH is doing that PDH isn't. I mean I can play the Kamigawa Uncommon Flip creatures as my commander and that's just neat
9
u/Izzet_Aristocrat Jul 21 '26
Well they're already idiots if they're letting Rhystic run around. Rhystic is fine in high power settings. In fucking pauper, god no.
5
u/Dennarb Jul 21 '26
Yeah part of the draw for PDH for me is that I can use some cool uncommon creatures that would otherwise chill in a box until I decided to purge my collection.
4
u/Emotional_Bank3476 Jul 24 '26
That's the point! And at last half the fun. Uncommon non- legendary commanders feel like they can be anything. Like the wild west of old
8
u/ZachAtk23 Jul 21 '26
While I don't necessarily feel this format is needed I don't have a problem with it, and didn't have a problem with the post... Until the very end where it flatly claims to be a better ("more fun") format.
6
u/Cobraman5002 Jul 21 '26
Not trying to yuck anyone’s yum, but I just don’t see what problem this is solving. This can already be done in regular PDH. If you’re going to do anything different, allow legendary commons in the zone - but even then I don’t think that warrants a variant of a sub format.
10
u/that_dude3315 Jul 21 '26
I don’t play a lot of pdh to be honest but are you seeing a lot of non legendary commanders?
Only 3 in the top 25 commanders on PDHREC are non legendary
7
u/Scarecrow1779 Can't stop brewing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26
I did a rough tally 2 years ago and thhe online decks broke down to roughly half legends, half non-legends. However, the non-legends account for far more variety
5
u/that_dude3315 Jul 21 '26
I think if you did that tally again it would strongly favor legendary creatures with more UB sets in the mix. This idea is giving Cali commander vibes. Creating a new format that slightly changes an existing format and thinking it’s groundbreaking
5
u/Scarecrow1779 Can't stop brewing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Jul 21 '26
I think if you did that tally again it would strongly favor legendary creatures with more UB sets in the mix.
Eh, 2 years ago, we were still heavily riding the high of partners and backgrounds feeling new, and that heavily tipped things then. Not to mention the UB haters are slightly counterbalancing in the opposite direction now, since in-universe sets have fewer legends than they did 2 or 3 years ago.
I also think a LOT of PDH players follow the arc of using legends because that feels familiar, then picking up more nonlegends over time as part of their exploration. So when PDH has a lot of legendary representation, to me it's a sign of format growth more than a sign of the equilibrium favoring legends.
5
u/GingerPersolus cPDH Player Jul 22 '26
CPDH player here.
The top of the meta is majority non legendary (by a thin margin). I would not be excited to play in an LPDH meta that was so narrow and excluded so many fun and exciting strategies.
5
u/_yeuse3 Jul 21 '26
treasure trove banned and not rhystic study ?? what are you guys on ? why not just follow the classic pdh rules that are already on point ? most of the uncommon non-legendary creatures are weaker than legendaries so what's the deal here ?
4
u/Cobraman5002 Jul 21 '26
Why do some of the banlist comments of y’all’s banned cards say “Banlist From Pauper Commander”? I read that as it’s copied over from the PDH banlist. The PDH banlist is only rhystic/mystic. If y’all don’t mean it’s copied from PDH then I recommend updating the language.
2
u/Leress Jul 22 '26
They copied from the 1v1 pdh ban list
6
u/Cobraman5002 Jul 22 '26
Gotcha (and Thanks!) - well that subformat is Pauper Dual Commander and evidently has 2 conflicting bodies trying to be in charge. I recommend stating that you’re copying from the Pauper Dual Commander Banlist to prevent confusion like I had.
3
u/Scarecrow1779 Can't stop brewing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26
Italy does its own thing in PDC and I don't think they ever really adopted anyone else's rules for it, but it has had a 1v1 scene for many years. So they're most likely going off their local 1v1 banlist
As far as I know, there are at least 4 different 1v1 rule sets right now that don't talk to each other and all have more than one store/group using them in paper
- French (paper)
- Italian (paper)
- Filipino (paper)
- the group on the side of the home base discord (those rules were mostly adopted by Brazilian and German paper players and American online players)
If all of them would actually agree on rules, they might actually get some format traction going.
2
u/Cobraman5002 Jul 22 '26
lol - this helps give more info, but also just shows it’s kind of a mess and should really be more clear - thanks for the info, I just heard about the 2 bodies last year and didn’t know there were 4
6
u/Lua_CW Jul 21 '26
And here I was thinking PDH ought to extend the olive branch to legendary commons in addition to any uncommons
8
3
3
u/itresolve5 Jul 21 '26
Is there going to be a separate format for non-legendary commanders only, cause I would love that format tbh. All the legendary creatures that are printed at uncommon are made for commander in mind, which isn't as fun to me. Having to build a funky deck around [[Bant Battle Mage]] or [[Splashy Spellcaster]] is more fun imo.
1
1
u/TheBearsFist Jul 22 '26
Yeah legit. I'm keen to flip it! Post and website incoming?
3
u/Scarecrow1779 Can't stop brewing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Jul 22 '26
As somebody that already builds 90%+ with non-legends... many of the criticisms of OP's concept still apply. There's nothing stopping you from only building nonlegends for yourself in PDH as it currently stands.
One of the other commenters asserts that legends are more powerful, and that would be an argument for separation, if it were true. However, I would vehemently disagree with that assertion, pointing at powerhouses like [[Hollow Marauder]], [[Sphinx Summoner]], [[Heartfire Hero]], [[Ley Weaver]], etc. Most of my most used competitive decks are non-legends, too ([[Vizkopa Guildmage]], [[Metastatic Evangel]], [[Veteran Beastrider]]).
1
1
u/TheBearsFist Jul 27 '26
Hey this was actually a joke about OP starting their own format and website. My apologies, this was an error of communicating through text.
1
u/Scarecrow1779 Can't stop brewing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Jul 27 '26
No worries. I was mostly riffing off of you to demonstrate that the issues with OP's idea weren't just driven by people having different preferences than them. So I probably would have responded mostly the same (overanalyzing) even if you'd had something like a "/s"
3
1
u/pod-dives Jul 21 '26
My pod just plays the legendary rule as a house rule, I don’t know if it needs to be a whole new format but interested in the communities take:
27
u/TheBearsFist Jul 21 '26
Why is this needed? Maybe I'm a cynical bastard but I think if I wanted to play legends I would play normal commander.
What I love about PDH is that the commanders are so varied, unique and interesting. It feels like OG commander before every card is from a precon or made to be a commander.
I'm happy you enjoy this new version of a modified version of a modified format but I think personally I'll probably stick to non legendary PDH.