Dragon's Desire: The Fixed Dockside Extortionist Commander Needed?

The September 2024 ban of Dockside Extortionist by Wizards of the Coast sent ripples through the Magic: The Gathering Commander community, a decision that, while perhaps overdue, left a specific design challenge in its wake: how to print a legitimate, yet fair, mana burst. Enter Dragon's Desire from The Lord of the Rings: Tales of Middle-earth – a card that many are eyeing as the spiritual successor, or perhaps, the *fixed* Dockside. As veteran players, we understand the nuanced impact of such changes, and it’s time to scrutinize if this new card truly fits the bill without breaking the format all over again.

Dockside Extortionist, for a mere two mana (1R), was an absolute terror. Its enter-the-battlefield trigger generated a Treasure token for *each* artifact and enchantment *your opponents* controlled. In a typical four-player Commander pod, even on turn three or four, this often meant a net positive in mana, routinely providing five, six, or even more Treasures. This wasn't merely a catch-up mechanic; it was a ritual effect disguised as a creature, enabling explosive combo turns far too early and consistently. It warped deck construction, becoming an auto-include in virtually any red-inclusive deck, regardless of its strategy, simply because the raw efficiency was unparalleled. It didn't ask you to build around it; it merely asked you to exist in a game where other players had permanents, which, let's be honest, is every game.

Dragon's Desire, also costing 1R, presents a similar, yet critically different, proposition. When it enters the battlefield, you choose *an opponent*. You create a Treasure token for *each* artifact and enchantment *that player* controls. Crucially, it also has a second ability: 'When Dragon's Desire enters the battlefield, goad that opponent.' This is the key. The treasure generation is limited to a single opponent, significantly reducing the floor and ceiling of its mana generation. No longer can you look at a board with three opponents sporting half a dozen artifacts each and expect to generate eighteen Treasures. Now, you pick the most artifact-heavy player and get, at best, six or seven Treasures, or perhaps three from a less developed board. The goad effect is an interesting addition, forcing the chosen opponent's creatures to attack a player other than you, if able. This provides a minor political angle and some board control, but it's secondary to the mana generation.

Lore-wise, Dockside Extortionist was a greedy goblin, driven by pure avarice, perfectly reflected in its indiscriminate mana grab. Dragon's Desire, hailing from the Universes Beyond Lord of the Rings set, embodies the terrifying, possessive greed of Smaug. The goad mechanic perfectly captures Smaug's manipulative, territorial nature – not only does he demand his due (treasures), but he also stirs conflict amongst others, forcing them to fight while he hoards. It's an elegant blend of mechanics and flavor that feels authentic to the source material and to Magic's design principles, a highlight of The Lord of the Rings: Tales of Middle-earth Collector Booster Box set.

So, is Dragon's Desire the 'fixed' Dockside? Absolutely. It retains the core appeal of a red burst of mana based on opponent's permanents, but it does so in a way that is far healthier for the Commander format. The restriction to 'an opponent' means it's still a powerful card, offering significant mana acceleration, but it no longer enables the utterly broken, game-ending turns that Dockside did. It requires more thought: which opponent do you target? Who has the most artifacts and enchantments? Who do you *want* to goad? These are strategic choices, not automatic value propositions. It encourages interaction and political play rather than simply enabling one player to rocket ahead. It's a strong card, perhaps even a staple in some aggressive or combo-oriented red decks, but it's not an objectively correct auto-include in every single deck. It promotes thoughtful deckbuilding and in-game decision-making, which is precisely what Commander needs. This is good design: a powerful effect, carefully tempered to prevent format-warping dominance. The Crit Sheet applauds this nuanced approach to power scaling.