This is the second Profile in the Pilot Archetype series, where I discuss four major archetypes I have identified, across two specific questions:

1. How aggressive is your threat assessment?

This question aims to understand not the quality of a player’s threat assessment, which is more closely tied to their experience with that skill, but rather how a player responds to threats. Are players proactive in their threat assessment, targeting certain decks, commanders, and playstyles, or are they reactive, targeting only problematic permanents, varying how quickly they respond?

2. How flexible are your card choices?

This question aims to understand whether you pick more synergistic or functional cards. This is not a question necessarily about the cards themselves, although that certainly plays a factor, but more about what the pilot prioritizes.

These two questions, together, provide a spectrum of information that can be understood as archetypes. The four major archetypes that I have mapped out are as follows:

• Assassin

• Opportunist

• Snowballer

• Field General

I believe they can be mapped out across quadrants, like so:

The Opportunist is a pilot with passive threat assessment and makes card choices to achieve specific functions.

Because the Opportunist has passive threat assessment, I describe them as more proactive than reactive. They might remember what threats exist in their plan, but how they build decks isn’t to interact with those threats, but to outplay them. My original term for Opportunist was Terrorist, which didn’t hold for obvious reasons, but the term gives a more immediate image of the pilot. Think of it this way: if you are going to build and use a bomb, you don’t need to consider too many threats to your plan, because you make your plan in such a way that counters to it will not be able to react to the bomb going off, and even if they do, you can just make another bomb.

This is why the Opportunist's threat assessment is passive. What obstacles lie in the way don't matter much, so long as the bomb goes off. Flexible removal is great for Opportunists.

When asked, “How aggressive is your threat assessment?”, the Opportunist shrugs. When asked, “How flexible are your card choices?”, they will likely explain all the elements they need for their bomb, or deck, to go off. Their deck is a collection of specific functions designed to outpace others to make the bomb quickly enough, or get the resources to build another if the first attempt fails.

How does the Opportunist differ from the Assassin?

Assassins and Opportunists differ on the opposite end of the threat assessment spectrum. Still, the broad spectrum of how pilots respond to threats allows for an equally wide spectrum of players. It is important to concede that neither is the" e “writing way to assess threats. Magic is complicated, and the nature of hidden information alone can recontextualize threat assessment in every game.

That said, an ideological value of removal defines these different takes on threat assessment. Assassins value removal as the means to remove threats to your game plan, while Opportunists value removal to keep the pilot ahead enough to build the bomb.

How does the Opportunist differ from the Field General?

Field Generals monitor the table and evaluate the board states to inform their tactics. An Opportunist monitors the table and evaluates board states to stay ahead. Opportunists are trying to finish a race, but Field Generals are trying to be the last man standing.

These differences in playstyle are the driving motivators in card choices. A Field General will value cards that allow them to do the most while losing the least. Opportunists will value cards that enable them to maximize the potential of a single moment, whether it’s a combo or a perfect attack.

In a future Part Two, I will list the strengths and weaknesses of Opportunists and potential commanders that Opportunists enjoy.

I also understand a trend emerging as I write about these pilot profiles: the concept of card value. I’ll discuss that in a future post.

Bonus Card Review: Valley Questcaller

There is a lot to love about Bloomburrow, and one of the things I like most is the Valley Caller cycle. But I wanted to bring Valley Questcaller to your attention for two reasons:

1. Hare Apparent decks are pretty popular these days, and for good reason. It’s an enjoyable mechanic, and there are a variety of commanders that can support the strategy. I think every deck can benefit from a Valley Questcaller, if only because if you play a Hare Apparent into it, it can generate some great card selection that is exponentially parallel with Hare Apparent's effectiveness. The anthem is also a nice touch to help this strategy finish out games.

2. The fact that the scrying triggers off Birds means that there is a vast swathe of cards that can use Valley Questcaller as well. Plenty of cards in Commander generate bird tokens, and many interesting Bird commanders would love a buff and scry every time they enter for two mana.