Yay Snail is back! I’ve never commented before but listened to nearly every episode and I really appreciate everyone’s unique perspective. Has improved my deck building philosophy and ideas greatly. Love what yall do ❤
I actually commented on the EDHRecast video: "I used to tutor for Etali, Primal Conqueror in my Slimefoot and Squee deck. When I got bored of it, I cut Etali, not the tutor". I am happy to see my point mirrored here.
I also love the point that building toolboxes is really fun and interesting. My favorite tutor has become Trophy Mage with Micromancer as an honorable mention.
@@ethanglaeser9239 toolboxes are the best. My 2 favorite cards in commander are birthing pod and artisan fiend because i can choose how i play a game but still not have hard tutors
This, so much this. Its gine if u want to play optimally, theres pods and groups for that, but i hear time and tine again people building decks with infinites and many tutors saying "i thought this deck would be more fun to play, ill try another one" and then make the same mistake bc they think you have to build optimal versions of decks. Normally for these people, i have them test one of my goofy brews and see if thats more their style, and while a few still had a dislike for that game, a decent chunk ask me why those decks felt more fun than their volo deck that they put every tutor in simic in. Imo its typically fue to every game playing almost the same, theres little chaos and changeup when your searching every card u want.
I'm fine with tutors. Sunforger is one of my favorite cards in the game, but at the same time, if you cast demonic tutor and don't reveal what you tutored for, I always assume that you have a win condition on hand. I had one person get salty after I countered some of his spells after he cast demonic tutor. He asked why am I focusing my counterspells on him when I don't even know what he tutored for. To which, I replied, "Exactly."
I think another idea with tutors people dont even mention is the mass amount of efficient card draw engines that are being printed. People complain about tutors, but commanders that generate an insane amount of value and card advantage just by playing the game reduce variance a ton as well
thats so very true. The result is kind of the same. I avoid both of those in my casual decks. I like cards that can get 1 card per turn and some that can get 4 cards max per turn cycle and maybe 1 or 2 burst draws. Though i rather self mill and recur. Shuffling is a pain after all.
Good chat that I’d mostly agree with. HOWEVER. I wish you guys spent more time on the price barrier. Especially when it comes to the more powerful tutors. An easy way to trim the power and consistency of your deck a little while also being more budget conscious is cutting tutors. Won’t always matter, but that can be a deciding factor in matching a table or group’s power and expectations
While equivalent substitutes for the proper "X-tutor" tutors that everyone covets are hard to come by, I think there are definitely a healthy amount of cheap alternatives to even decent/good tutor effects. It's just sort of a matter of putting up with certain restrictions and in-game costs for that. Depending on what you might consider expensive or not, I think one of the best value-for-quality tutors out there right now is Diabolic Intent. Generally under 10€ for a pretty damn good imitation of Demonic Tutor with a sac-requirement which depending on the deck can be a downside or a benefit. Gamble is another one. The cost is way more risky, but as a result is cheaper to boot. Profane Tutor I think also gets slept on for the suspend, but a turn 4 tutor played for free is definitely pretty nice and it's decently affordable. Depending on the deck you run, Transmute cards can also be perfectly reasonable tutors. They're narrow, but if your deck has a good toolbox at a certain mana-cost or if you have one particular card you love having consistency on, go for it. Then, of course, there is the GOAT itself. The Commander all-star (Status pending), that immediately makes tables pog with excitement: Wishclaw Talisman, baby! For just 1€, you can turn tutoring into a fun mini-game at the table. It's definitely not "strong" in the traditional sense, but I think it only serves to push the agenda, that tutoring can be fun and casual-friendly.
Proxy, from what I've seen and heard by talking to multiple sections of the edh community is that those against proxies are the vast minority or the few LGS employees running primarily sanctioned edh events.
Tutors can be fantastic for just making sure you get to have a game at all. Using a turn 2 demonic tutor for an Urza's Incubator for a turn 3 play to smooth out your goofy frog tribal deck with Glarb as a commander
I think the next episode should be Elk and Trinket Mage asking about snails opinions on every single topic they discussed without him and every question.
Two things: First the card I like to throw into this type of conversation about tutors is always Goblin Recruiter. Technically a conditional tutor but it sets up your next few turns. Or in my case usually setting up a Muxus combo to win the game. Second, for 3/3 Elk, I just made Kenessos and it's extremely fun. Running Scroll Rack, Mirri's Guile, all the versions of Brainstorm, Ancestral Knowledge and my favorite Cream of the Crop. And just in case people board wipe you a lot Hua Tuo, Honored Physician is also fun. Also just remember there are two Koma now!
my kenessos is on my moxfield, i built it as a gift for a friend and i still regularly update it. tons of fun to play online though rare simic commander w.
MFW im being told that my toolbox deck that runs tutors to find the extremely situational cards in my deck is not in the spirit of the format of being inconsistent by the person running 20 mechanical same copies of the same card in their deck (*_____*)
Mirror Mirror, I sacrifce ten Eldrazi spawn to beseech thine wisdom: What subtype of enchantments (curses, auras, sagas, etc) do you find the most interesting or in need of support? I find that the stranger an enchantment behaves/inflences the field the more I am drawn to them.
Tutors, plural are a chance to put a clock on the game. Everyday I hear complaints being added on to casual rulesets the more I'm leaning toward comp mander
Throwing my hat into the ring I loooove enchantment tutors like moon blessed cleric and Heliod's pilgrim, a body and a creature? What fun! They also tend to be tool boxy often getting me what I need but because they're like 3 mana it's quite an incentive. I love transmute for the same reason. (Wizard cycling is also hella funny especially step through though sometimes that card is craaaaazy, instant speed demonic tutor for wizards is underrated)
I'm personally not a big fan of tutoring the same wincons every game, but that's because I am also a toolbox deck enjoyer. My favorite deck is mono-white planeswalkers, originally helmed by Djeru, With Eyes Open (tutor on a stick). At first, I was excited that I could curve Djeru into Elspeth, Sun's Champion, because it was the deck's best wincon and therefore the best card to get in most situations. But if I'm gonna have the same wincon every game, I may as well make it my commander (currently Akroma, Angel of Wrath). Now, I can actually use my tutors to adapt to the current game state, and my tutors in-game can have decision making behind them. Mirror mirror, I tap an untapped legendary permanent to ask: What is everyone's favorite Magic character?
Howdy thanks for the answer! The commander in question is Gornog, the Red Reaper. My problem is the average mono red player problem where I just ball out too fast and start swinging. As it turns out people don't enjoy being hit with multiple haymakers.
Before I listen to the podcast: I tend to not field tutors, this is twofold, in my experience higher tutor density creates faster deck burnout from either myself or local metas. I also don’t find myself building decks that require tutors to pad out the 99, we’ve seen an explosion of cards the last few years and I’d sooner run a thematically or mechanically significant card over one where the table has to wait for me to tutor shuffle and present so I can try pull of the same combo I did last Tuesday night.
In that case I say maybe don't run combos in decks with tutors. My deck with walking balista combos in it has zero tutors specificly to prevent me from just going "i tutor for x card to combo with x card in play or in hand do u have a response" every game with the deck. Basicly if the deck has a i win the game combo don't run tutors in the deck if u dont want the deck to get stale because that's all u do each game. If the deck doesn't have anything like that then they are fine to run since they can provide a lot of utility as well as help catch u up when behind for one reason or another.
I've always been a big fan of toolbox style strategies personally. I never get tired of my Sisay deck because even though it's the exact same set of cards I've been using for years each legendary permanent has a specific purpose and use case for when I grab it. I'm not just trying to combo or get a cheap win every time, I'm responding to the table and accruing value to my boardstate. It's only when you look at Tutors as just a way to enable combos and wincons that it becomes unappealing. Pod decks are the same way, they can absolutely be fun if you're just their to turn wheels for fun cards.
I think I understand the frustration towards tutors because the flexibility they add IS a significant power boost that can absolutely win you games but like idk man it's an eternal format with a lot of busted stuff legal in it so why not play some of the powerful stuff so long as your deck isn't super overtuned for the pod? imo this falls into the long list of "things that commander only players get really mad about that 60 card players are fine with" right up there with scooping when you're far behind and running a ton of interaction
It's cool to get your Guys's thoughts on this so close after the EDHRec cast posted a video on this topic! Wonder what is causing the sudden discussion across the community. I don't tend to run tutors in my edh decks just because I don't need them to play my game and interact with my opponents effectively.
The thing about unconditional tutors. They're the only kind of tutors black has. If you are playing phage and you need one of the 6-7 cards that can let you play your Commander.... You don't really have a choice.
I would say that 75% of tutors in my experience seem to get the removal piece that is needed in that situation for like a blightsteel or an avacyn even a counterspell. I think that tutors make game play way more interesting and gives the game more variance. When the tutor comes up at any point in any game, that game will always be in a different state at that moment.
Tutors are any card that allows to search for another card. Even if it's just for lands. Lands are some of the most important aspects of a deck. Green gets card draw, creature search, and efficient land search. White gets efficient catch-up land search and enchantments/artifacts. Black gets card draw and any card for a price. Blue has efficient card draw, scrying, and instant/sorcery search. Red receives chaotic card search and chaotic card draw. If you have problems with tutors, do you like playing green or blue? Just curious
My first deck was a Yusri coin flip deck, and it's theme was "luck-bending". Artifac tutors for thumb and other critical equipment constitute a third of the deck. But, like: I'm coin flipping 😂
I dont mind a tutor or 2 in decks weather they are on theme ones like for example one that only tutors for a specific type of creature or one that requires certain conditions to freely tutor or has drawbacks. Even if it's a demonic tutor I'm fine with it until it becomes tutor dot deck where they just tutor for combo pieces. I run tutors in my lower end decks usually they are narrow ones that search for something specific. Usually because the deck doesn't have enough or good card draw.
I think the argument against tutors makes way more sense as self-justification rather than direct advice for others (but obviously if someone's self-justification resonates you can do as they do). You guys spotlighted the real issue IMO which is the thing that gets tutored up! That said I wonder if WotC has printed a critical mass of cards with "look at/reveal the top N cards and pick one" type effects so that you could run an entirely tutor-free deck that is nevertheless about as consistent as one with tutor effects.
I think something that Bandai does that MtG and Yugioh doesn't are effects that peak the top few cards of the deck for archetype cards, like "look at the top 5 cards of your deck and add a 'archetype' card from among them to your hand and bottom the rest." Green does a bit of this, but I don't think they're nearly a prolific as a means to have a powerful search but somewhat inconsistent search for a lower cost or on a body.
Fantastic note about weird/specific tutors! I've always found them boring but usually not because I was getting the same thing, I was just able to get anything. I much prefer just running cards that are a second/third copy of a specific effect
Power brackets will probably solve the tutoring issue. The example brackets include Vampiric Tutor as a bracket 4 card and Fabricate as a bracket 2 card. Since most casual games will probably play bracket 1 the generic tutors will essentially be banned.
I think as with most things when it comes to hated magic cards in a play group it comes down to the cost. Most people see the best cards as being unfair if only because of their price. Proxies solve almost all of that.
Tutors are a second copy of your best version of the card they can get with the additional cost of the tutor. Part of the problem is that so many commander decks is just ramp + card draw and the mana and card inefficiency most tutors is minimized. At higher power resources are much more constrained so even unrevealed tutors are much lower power. Also consistency is a good thing. a deck playing bad combo that sometimes wins on turn 5 or does nothing ever is a much worse experience than playing a combo deck presents a wins on turn 5 through 7.
I have a "true goblins" list that is a muxus deck that plays in the true chaos that you should with goblins, it runs all like the really bad ones or the really cool value ones that you don't run in krenko lists, for awhile I had krenko mob boss in the 99 a long with kiki jikki and like staff of dom, and I found I always use recruiter or matron to get it, so I just replaced those cards with like more fun actually interesting goblins to play as muxus wants like more value on your creature or just puts more funny little guys on the table I actually had been alot of fun to just recruit random stuff to the top
What are y'all's thoughts on commanders that tutor, I'm thinking of cards like Zur, Sisay, Arcum Dagsson, etc? Do you/would you play those? Do you think these commanders promote fun play experiences?
One of the most valid anti-tutor arguments I can think of is that some players do not play them quickly. It doesn't feel great to play against when a person spends 5 minutes looking through their whole deck to find the perfect option.
as a certified combo enjoyer, it would take too long to win without tutors. my main commander is tameshi, reality architect and to win the game i need at least 5 cards from my 99 to win. its not realistic to draw all the pieces i need even with the premium card draw engines like rhystic study and trouble in paira
I don't know if you mentioned it, I don't think you did, but even if you did it's worth reiterating: There's a huge difference between inconsistent and varied decks. The latter is what people want, generally, even if they complain that a deck is "too consistent". What they mean then, is that the deck is same'y, nigh-on deterministic in its gameplay, which is a fair point. If you feel like "Ugh, is it the last 4 games already?" there's something wrong. Another point that has been brought up before (I think it was by the Commander Pod guys) is that inconsistent decks makes for bad matchups. If a deck, on average, plays as a focused budget brew (6'ish), it might be that it plays like a slightly upgraded precon half the time (4), and like a very optimized, near-competitive deck half the time (8). It makes it impossible to matchmake with that deck, without risking someone getting trampled into the dirt or winning by default, depending on how chance hits. One should build one's decks with a clear plan in mind: Not just in terms of strategy, but in terms of level of play, and be consistent about that. You can have a few power outliers in a deck without ruining the whole, but when you reach a certain concentrations of outliers your deck becomes impossible to play a fair game against. It's better to build decks in a way that avoids outliers pretty much altogether.
Mirror mirror, I shuffle Etrata the Silencer into my library and land my third hit counter to ask: how do I help my friend build a deck that actually works? They love the game so much, and are very active on the scene socially - but they are still the only person I’ve seen take three reasonably powerful precons and make every single one of them worse. This is especially frustrating because a precon is pretty much the ground floor of what anyone expects in power level nowadays, so this friend ends up being a total non-threat and doesn’t interact with the board. I understand that not everyone enjoys brewing or understands what gives certain cards more value. But this friend of mine is also sensitive about brewing every deck themselves, even though they don’t really like to do it - so I don’t know what to do. I want our main play group to be at least a little bit closer in power level, but I also don’t want to hurt my friend’s feelings or make them feel like they have to play cards with art they don’t like (art is a very big deal to them, definitely a bigger deal than what the cards do mechanically). Is there a more subtle way to encourage this player to interact more, or to be motivated to reach for their fighting chance at winning? Please help. Thanks for listening.
As my pod has become more familiar with my commander, I've gotten easy wins by never casting him. They hold counterspells and removal waiting for him while I play value engines and build the rest of my board.
why don't land tutors count as tutors?? they do the thing - I killed somebody with Urza's Cave tutoring up Sejiri Steppe to nope removal and make my lethal commander unblockable a couple weeks ago - if they're limited to just basic lands they're bad tutors, but so is a card that can only tutor for a narrow set of cards like Aurochs Herd
We never said this! When we said that we meant cards like nature’s lore, three visits, rampant growth. We all agree crop rotation sylvan scrying etc are tutors. Rampant growth is definitely not catching the ire like other cards.
This is just false, while i think you should play a few, once u go above 5, your deck is going to feel stale. Why play more copies of the best card in your deck, when u can lower their numbers and play more cards u would want to tutor for?
Mirror Mirror, I baragin the 5,000,000 eldrazi Rosie and basking broodscale made for me last turn after I chorded in Rosie on your end step. Glad to see Snail feeling well enough to be back. What is each of your local metas like? Each of you has a unique deck building style, and I would like to hear about the decks you each play against.
I have a super jank big dumb spells Saruman, The White Hand deck that runs a demonic tutor just for utility and to trigger Saruman to amass my orc boiz. Best case scenario for this deck I am hard casting Time Stretch so I can have an extra two turns beating my opponents to death with a massive orc army. I was in a Five Star game against two opponents who played rhystic study and smothering tithe and one of them implied my deck was overpowered because I ran a demonic tutor. I didn't even tutor for a good card with it because one of them milled half my deck and the game was almost over. I ended up winning for various weird reasons but the tutor had noting to do with it. Still I think that player came away with a reinforced impression that tutors are OP because that is the impression people already have about them.
I think tutors are bad when it is just to get the one card every time to get the same card that easilly combos with the commander and the other cards to just win in a way that would be hard to interact with. I think fine if it is more of a weird combo that is more fun than instant win. Or if thr choice will be varied. One deck I have thought about is Caterer Rocco, where you can put any creature in play from your library for the excess mana paid. The idea would be a deck made of many different and interconnecting combos that can be started by low cost creatures. You would have difficulty in a deck that does that with creatures that are not blue or black. Whatever that looks like will still depend on the luck of what is drawn and knowledge about the pieces.
I completely agree with most things that elk said. Vamp and denonic are a bit too powerful for me to play and even mystical tutor seems a bit too unrestricted. I looooove the deck building restriction muuuch more than the gameplay decisions. My favorite tutor is waterlogged teachings. Not the most restrictive but it's also a land. Very sexy.
My problem with tutors is that if you play one, you should probably actually have 3-5 or more, this is mainly with the generic ones since you need to run a decent amount to make them good and more consistent, and all the cheaper mana value tutors cost quite a bit of money or having to specific of a deck theme/restriction for most decks. If you want to play them so you can also find outs, you really need the cheaper mv tutors, since with the more expensive mv tutors it can be pretty much your whole turn searching for a card you might not even cast that turn, so it ends up feeling worst casting them to find a out vs finding something that can win me the game. If im buying a semi expensive card I would rather buy a land or a cool/big creature or spell then a tutor
Mirror mirror, I skipped my next turn to ask: What are your favorite big Timmy plays that don’t end the game immediately, but satisfy your desire to make a grandiose play?
One of the problems I have with tutors in general is that it opens up your whole deck all at once and the options are too much xd Of course that you should know what you are getting when you play it. But as they rest in your hand it feels distracting to me in a casual game. I also enjoy playing some bombs in my decks, and i like these bombs to feel like a reward. I understand that some decks are too inconsistent without them though. But if im building a deck that is too inconsistent without tutors, it means the deck is actually fragile and I will be tutoring for the same cards everytime. And in that case Id just rather build something else.
What do you guys think of the philosophy "you can have tutors or you can have infinites. It's lame to have both" I think it's should be pretty fair middle ground but people will still get salty if they see either
Mirror Mirror, on my screen, can you answer my question: What deck do you think your viewers associate with you the most? (For me, it's Pharika for Elk, Sharuum and Rada for Snail, and Tawnos and old Heliod for Trinket Mage.) (And I apologize for the bad rhyme.)
demonic tutor for combo gets super boring in casual games. theres almost no reason NOT to run combos if your deck has tutors. and yea take the tutors out, the combo deck becomes "draw your whole deck take 15 extra turns, durdle and control the entire game or lose miserably". combos are the source of the problem for sure, but nobody bans combos in commander or our pod so, if anyone has a tutor they're playing it with combos.
I disagree that the black good tutors don't require any thought, particularly in mono-black. Because black doesn't have answers to everything and doesn't have very many of those answers (we just got a 3rd enchantment removal spell) you need to be relatively creative with your black selections. Further like you said they let you play less of particular types of cards in your deck construction leading to higher compactness but also interesting decisions about which deck functions you skimp on (one less ramp vs one less board wipe vs one less single target removal, etc). I'm generally in the tutors are okay camp, but a couple of years ago I took out the majority of the "good" tutors because they made my decks seem even more powerful and they were eating up a bunch of the budget for the deck. As a result I've had to play more redundant effects and more card draw to make up for it and honestly I'm not even sure the deck is worse off now. It would, though, be very odd to play mono-black without any tutors. That's one of black's strengths and I would rather not handicap it for no reason.
I PERSONALY prefer some level of consistency in my game plan. Not as much as to always end the game with the same combo, but enought to be able to relly on certain cards or effects... That said, I believe tutors are in fact against the "spirit" of Commander. The format was DESIGNED to create variety and ensure that each match will play out verry diferently to one another, even with the same decks and players.
Mirror mirror, i sacrifice two treasures to demonic tutor for beseech the mirror: i can't understand why other colors are allowed to tutor because it's cool. But the color who's good at tutoring shouldn't. Because it's boring that they're too good. What should black players do to be allowed to actually tutor.
I personally feel like tutoring in general is fine but playing every tutor you can, tends to lead to the same game different day feeling that kills peoples enjoyment in card games. I tend to say 1 uncom tutor, and 1-2 thematic tutors. Its a hard balance, but it depends on what form of edh u wanna play, if u wanna play slightly upgraded precons and that upgrade is 7 tutors, while u are more optimized, you lose alotta the variance that can lead to more wild and exciting games.
That's easy. Reveal what you tutored for. Conditional tutors makes you reveal the card. Black tutors don't. If I don't know what you tutored for, then I'll assume the worse like it's maybe a combo piece or a 1-side board wipe or a stax lock piece.
@@justintolentino9222 i dont think this is right, revealing isnt required, the main issue casuals have with tutors is the same they have with counterspells, and its lack of moderation. Most monoblack decks i see run at least 7 different omnitutors, which can lead to every game feeling the same. While revealing is cool, its worth considering that not revealing adds a lil intrigue into the game depending on the turn
@@daltronius Well yes, they don't have to reveal, but at the same time, when I cast a Demonic Tutor and not reveal what I tutored for, I need to be prepared to have a high threat assessment assigned to myself. From the other players perspective, I just got the best card of my deck in my hand so if somebody casts Silence on my upkeep, that should be fair.
Yeah it really depends on what you are doing with it. 7+ years ago making forced combat decks was tough because your options were incredibly limited and so you needed tutors. Now though I remove them because all the goad cards mean i have enough options and tutors now just make the deck feel samey.
I feel like someone on the opposing side could benefit the discussion a lot, since you three are of the same mind about tutors you're all kinda saying the same thing in different ways and one sidedly bashing imaginary opposing arguments. I do agree with most of what's been said, but i felt like it didn't make into a discussion, there was a pattern of "what do you think about this argument that i don't like? - Oh, i hate that argument, it doesn't apply to decks i build and my style" i think most of the complaints about tutors really don't apply to you because yu're mindfull of its issues. Most players will have difficulty gauging what makes fun, and it's very easy to defaut into going after whats the strongest option available. I sometimes don't like having easy combos in my decks because it's very easy for the whole deck to end up revolving around it, and that's a concious decision of watering down the deck to cater to a desired experience, but it's very hard to see this. It's like armageddon is a perfectly fine card if it's used to secure a wincondition, but it's heavly frowned upon because it's possible to create miserable experiences with it (and sometimes it is the correct play, but most people will not refrain from doing the "correct play" and throw win % away, even while playing casually, with the mindset of preserving the fun experience)
I would say the way most ppl talk about casual is like that of playing a UU league of random battle in pokemon, its not really fun though because you are just blocked off from a lot, just to save someone's mental from booming
I posted similar opinions on EDHRecast's most recent video on the topic and they basically said, "Na'ah." It was a bit more polite than that, but it was frankly dismissive given the fact that I based my argument on numbers and their argument always came down to vibes. Without re-explaining the math because frankly I assume you guys already know, tutors increase player agency, and give more space in deck construction for different cards.
The problem with a secret commander is noe you've got TWO cards you have access to every game. Hence partner, companion, doctor's companion, background etc. are all against the spirit of the format ;D
secret commander isn't something you necessarily have access to, you still have to either draw into it or tutor for it. Secret commanders is the true goal of your commander deck with your commander being a vehicle to either streamline getting to your secret commander or help maintain the secret commander's presence through color identity offering good colors to enable the secret commander or enabling the secret commander with effects from the main commander. Another thing, partner, Doctor's Companion, and Background are all exclusive to a limited pool of cards which offer a variety of different playstyles by mixing combinations. It's not much different to Planeswalker commanders or Shorikai being a commander. Companion is the closest argument you have considering the fact that it's a guaranteed 101st card in a format with the understanding that everyone is playing and building a 100 card deck.
Remove the card draw engine. It's the same with Enchantress. If they are the archenemy, ask the 2 other players to hold removal for the card draw piece. MLD is not really the answer unless you can make it one-sided because the landfall deck will still be the fastest to rebuild when you reset the lands to 0. They'll have Crucible of Worlds type of effect to recur lands anyway.
5:43 So, gatekeeping isn't inherently a bad thing. Adopting a communal game like Magic is as much about the people around you as it is about making it your own, and if new people want to change what you've grown to love to fit their preferences, you're going to defend that. And, to Snail's point here, EDH is really to only space for casual constructed Magic. So, those of us who actually enjoy a low-power game are going to be the advocates for that style of play--especially when someone says their deck is low power, and then proceed to win the game on turn 3. And--to be clear--I agree with some of the points you're making! My favorite deck is a higher-power Naya toolbox deck built around a 4-card combo. I've found a great pod, and I've gotten much better at not targeting the Johnny's of our group, and appreciating things other than just the jankiest thing I can find. And, more importantly, I appreciate your perspectives on this topic! You guys have broadened my understanding off EDH a lot with your content--especially Snail. I just wanted to push back a little bit on this one thing, because it seems to me that a lot of people breeeze past the line between CEDH and regular commander--just because they're both fun in their own ways. A topic for a different time, I guess. 😅
Gatekeeping is a good thing sometimes. This is why it's important to goldfish decks for consistency if you want a certain speed, test and know where your deck sits and be super honest about it (test a lot to flatten the curve and get good data). Match the table or if people don't understand their deck enough start slow and see where they all sit in the pod. I chill with a precon in unknown pods and see if I need to bust out better decks. It cuts out some salt that is inherent with casual to show you're putting in effort.
I think the entire point of them mentioning the gatekeeping element tho was to highlight that the spirit of the format differs wildly from group to group and person to person. There is nothing gained from gatekeeping other than trying to force your idea of what "casual" means on those who have a different idea of it
@melr.5492 It's less forcing your idea as getting the table on similar footing/speed/"competitiveness". Gatekeeping as a word is very charged to put it lightly but the principle of keeping the pod to be similar/even in power is by definition gatekeeping. There's many if's around it and too much to write about without getting too wordy for a youtube comment section. But that's the gist.
Mirror Mirror, I sacrifice a non-token green creature as an additional cost to ask this question. What advice do you have for building around a commander in a way that goes against the popular trend? I really love Indominus Rex Alpha, but I want to do something different than voltron. Her effects feel like they offer a wide range of playstyle options beyond just voltron. Since everyone is only building her as a voltron deck, I cannot really reach out to online ideas for help.
I guess it depends? Do you still plan to win with the deck or just showcase a theme? In my experience, if winning is still a major objective of the deck, the more fringe the theme is, the higher the need is for your high power staples (Smothering Tithe, Cyc Rift, Demonic Tutor), since I assume that there will be less card support for what you're trying to do. If you're just forgoing winning, then usually, people just notifies the pod that it's a theme deck, then more often than not, others just leave you alone until the "theme" is online.
Mirror, Mirror, I float 100 mana as a hecatomb in request for your divine wisdom. I've noticed that a lot of Commander content specifically and Magic content in general focuses on advice for newer players, and with good reason. However, I am what you might call a Magic boomer (though I'm not nearly old enough to be an actual boomer): I played competitive 60-card Magic for years and years and came to Commander about ten years ago (so, by that metric, I'm also a Commander boomer). Here's my question: what advice do you have for long-time Magic/Commander players beyond "Stop flexing so hard by playing your OG duals that you got for ten bucks during the Clinton administration?" I love teaching younger/newer players about the game but, as a teacher, I would really appreciate feedback from younger Magic players about how the old guard of Magic players can be helpful to more up-and-coming players.
I don't really have issues in casual with non black tutors. If you're playing black tutors your deck is probably high power by default. Those don't have to just get combo pieces. They're entirely too versatile. All that being said.. If the pod is trying to go for high power casual.. Who cares what you're doing outside of cedh strategies?
spree cards/dual faced cards/multiple effect cards are typically over costed by 1, giving you the choice of a couple abilities. Demonic tutor basically reads “choose 1 of 85 abilities” with an over cost of 2. It’s lame asf in commander
I don't agree with your viewpoint that spot removal against an opponent who tutored (for another tutor) to a combo piece is a 2 for 1. It's still a 1 for 1. It's more like their mana was taxed. This reminds me of arguments of milling being card disadvantage. An interesting thing about tutors is that you can trim some of your core card packages. Like you could probably get away with cutting a 2cmc ramp, a single target interaction, and a board wipe if you put in 2 tutors, specially if it's one of the premium black ones. Repeat adding tutors to continue freeing up slots. Another aspect of tutors reminds me of how some people consider a perfect mana base not being that influential on the power level of a deck. They're enablers just like how mana crypt is an enabler. I think it's obvious that most EDH players lack restraint and aren't running decks that need cards like crypt to "compete". Tutors are more of a gray area since you can tutor for a pet or sub-optimal card at the moment rather than a repetitive staple card from game to game. It can also enabler hidden commanders as you mentioned. I think they're worth keeping around if only because of that.
Regarding the topic of "secret commanders", I asked one of my play groups about that and I got very negative feedback. To them, the idea of a secret commander in the 99 is just an excuse to get away with running a card that is otherwise seen as too powerful to be chosen as the actual commander. It's a misleading and manipulative strategy to abuse the spirit of the game. It's breaking game balance because a card is in the colors it's in for a reason. If you want to play a certain card as the commander, play it as the commander. Don't try to leverage more power from it by putting into the 99 just so you can run additional colors. I can understand what they're saying, but I have a disagreement on that. What is the difference between a secret commander, and a focused win condition? My Slimefoot and Squee deck sees me aiming to win with Etali Primal Conqueror. Since Etali is the goal each game, does that mean Etali is actually a secret commander?
But both of the examples we gave as hidden commanders were both not legendary creatures. So it’s not like we are hiding some crazy powerful legendary creature in the 99. But even if I was, like I’m playing a 5 color commander but really have urza as my hidden commander. Is that actually better than playing an urza deck? I’m not sure I agree with that. And if one urza in the 99 of a 5 color artifact deck is sooooo strong it can’t be beat in your playgroup that might not be urza’s fault alone
@@thetrinketmage I understood what you were saying. I'm just repeating what my play group said. As for my own opinion part, perhaps I missed the point actually. But no worries, I'm not disagreeing with you per say. At least nothing rude that is.
At 22:00 Snail brings up an excellent point about how good top-decking the right card can feel, and I think he's on the right track that it's something you're, at least partially, conditioned into by the game. I play Yu-Gi-Oh, which markets itself on "believing in the heart of the cards", and in the original show this would make the main character top-deck so well he could win from any situation. For most of last year, the top-deck that would have probably made the most Yu-Gi-Oh players pop-off was probably "Bonfire", which is a tutor. I don't wanna go into boring details, but I think Yugioh conditions people to enjoy tutors. There are iconic tutors in Yugioh (RotA, Terraforming, Stratos) that feel exciting to top-deck, even in situations where the search target is always a given. Maybe it's just me though. There's definitely nuance to it.
i think a of people with these takes against tutors and the like are in essence trying to play a broken format as if its not broken. theres a reason cedh is even possible. 100 cards, multiplayer of a game not originally meant to be multiplayer, eternal format, and access to 1-2 spells AT ALL TIMES… stop pretending edh isn’t what it is.
You’re wrong. EDHREC kinda disproves that. Some people do use tutors in their jank piles because it’s one of the few ways to get it off the ground consistently. There were people playing Mana Crypt in their casual decks, you really gonna assume that jank piles don’t sometimes run tutors?
There was a recent EDH gameplay video I watched where all of the players involved were playing black and the deck that ended up winning was the only deck to play tutors, Vampiric Tutor and Case of the Stashed Skeleton specifically. Pretty much every comment brought this up, and most relevantly to this video specifically, cited the EDHRecast episode against tutors. Judging from the comments a lot of those people didn't actually watch the EDHRec episode since, naturally, people tend to hear what they want to hear and not what's actually said. I have my own complicated feelings on tutors (more pro-than-anti like a lot of y'all are) but beyond the comments that are genuinely off the mark (like assuming every time a player is tutoring for a card its their finisher or a perfect answer at instant speed rather than any number of possible options and god forbid a card game have a little tension or suspense) I didn't realize a lot of magic players consider it not JUST "against the spirit of the format" to run cards that have existed in the game since 1993 but also consider it emotionally abusive to all parties at the table to run them and that the player that ran them should not be played with but or allowed back onto the channel. To those people, I suggest that they go back to the original ethos of Elder Dragon Highlander. Where every commander had a first come first serve policy and things like Shahrazad are legal or basic lands are subject to the singleton rule as well. Whatever that game night looks like, at least those players can rest comfortably in the knowledge that they truly "get" commander and would NEVER subject other players to such a miserable play pattern as an enchantment card that makes a skeleton and turns into a tutor after you don't own any skeletons and also costs 60 cents. They could also play Pokemon or YuGiOh, since tutors don't exist in either of those games, right? In all seriousness though the point made that "tutor targets are often more problematic than the tutor" is spot-on. I play a mono black political control deck with Gix at the helm and my favorite card to play in that deck is Scheming Symmetry. For the deck to work, I have to incentivize my opponents to focus on each other rather than myself since all I have are evasive 1/1s. Symmetry is the perfect distillation of the deck since "Swing at this other guy and draw a card and I'll let us both get ourselves a little something extra" is a deal very few players would turn down, even if they know how the deck works! That deck would function without it (or other tutors!) but would it be as enjoyable? Not at all.
Yay Snail is back! I’ve never commented before but listened to nearly every episode and I really appreciate everyone’s unique perspective. Has improved my deck building philosophy and ideas greatly. Love what yall do ❤
I actually commented on the EDHRecast video: "I used to tutor for Etali, Primal Conqueror in my Slimefoot and Squee deck. When I got bored of it, I cut Etali, not the tutor". I am happy to see my point mirrored here.
I also love the point that building toolboxes is really fun and interesting. My favorite tutor has become Trophy Mage with Micromancer as an honorable mention.
@@ethanglaeser9239 toolboxes are the best. My 2 favorite cards in commander are birthing pod and artisan fiend because i can choose how i play a game but still not have hard tutors
"Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game."
- Soren Johnson
This, so much this. Its gine if u want to play optimally, theres pods and groups for that, but i hear time and tine again people building decks with infinites and many tutors saying "i thought this deck would be more fun to play, ill try another one" and then make the same mistake bc they think you have to build optimal versions of decks. Normally for these people, i have them test one of my goofy brews and see if thats more their style, and while a few still had a dislike for that game, a decent chunk ask me why those decks felt more fun than their volo deck that they put every tutor in simic in. Imo its typically fue to every game playing almost the same, theres little chaos and changeup when your searching every card u want.
I'm fine with tutors. Sunforger is one of my favorite cards in the game, but at the same time, if you cast demonic tutor and don't reveal what you tutored for, I always assume that you have a win condition on hand. I had one person get salty after I countered some of his spells after he cast demonic tutor. He asked why am I focusing my counterspells on him when I don't even know what he tutored for. To which, I replied, "Exactly."
I think another idea with tutors people dont even mention is the mass amount of efficient card draw engines that are being printed. People complain about tutors, but commanders that generate an insane amount of value and card advantage just by playing the game reduce variance a ton as well
thats so very true. The result is kind of the same.
I avoid both of those in my casual decks. I like cards that can get 1 card per turn and some that can get 4 cards max per turn cycle and maybe 1 or 2 burst draws.
Though i rather self mill and recur.
Shuffling is a pain after all.
Elk is trying to get cuter anx cuter with there hello. When will it go too far. He must ask not just if they can, but if they should.
It caught me off guard😂
I swear each episode they sound more and more like a different person with each hello
Good chat that I’d mostly agree with. HOWEVER. I wish you guys spent more time on the price barrier. Especially when it comes to the more powerful tutors. An easy way to trim the power and consistency of your deck a little while also being more budget conscious is cutting tutors. Won’t always matter, but that can be a deciding factor in matching a table or group’s power and expectations
Proxies fix this problem as long as you play with people who allow it
@ sure, and I think most people are ok with proxies at this point. Though a lot of people would rather play with real cards
What is there to spend time on? The most efficient tutors tend to be expensive, but price doesnt inherently make a card more problematic to run
While equivalent substitutes for the proper "X-tutor" tutors that everyone covets are hard to come by, I think there are definitely a healthy amount of cheap alternatives to even decent/good tutor effects. It's just sort of a matter of putting up with certain restrictions and in-game costs for that. Depending on what you might consider expensive or not, I think one of the best value-for-quality tutors out there right now is Diabolic Intent. Generally under 10€ for a pretty damn good imitation of Demonic Tutor with a sac-requirement which depending on the deck can be a downside or a benefit. Gamble is another one. The cost is way more risky, but as a result is cheaper to boot. Profane Tutor I think also gets slept on for the suspend, but a turn 4 tutor played for free is definitely pretty nice and it's decently affordable. Depending on the deck you run, Transmute cards can also be perfectly reasonable tutors. They're narrow, but if your deck has a good toolbox at a certain mana-cost or if you have one particular card you love having consistency on, go for it. Then, of course, there is the GOAT itself. The Commander all-star (Status pending), that immediately makes tables pog with excitement: Wishclaw Talisman, baby! For just 1€, you can turn tutoring into a fun mini-game at the table. It's definitely not "strong" in the traditional sense, but I think it only serves to push the agenda, that tutoring can be fun and casual-friendly.
Proxy, from what I've seen and heard by talking to multiple sections of the edh community is that those against proxies are the vast minority or the few LGS employees running primarily sanctioned edh events.
Tutors can be fantastic for just making sure you get to have a game at all. Using a turn 2 demonic tutor for an Urza's Incubator for a turn 3 play to smooth out your goofy frog tribal deck with Glarb as a commander
Tutors are both fair and good for the game 😊
I think the next episode should be Elk and Trinket Mage asking about snails opinions on every single topic they discussed without him and every question.
Two things:
First the card I like to throw into this type of conversation about tutors is always Goblin Recruiter. Technically a conditional tutor but it sets up your next few turns. Or in my case usually setting up a Muxus combo to win the game.
Second, for 3/3 Elk, I just made Kenessos and it's extremely fun. Running Scroll Rack, Mirri's Guile, all the versions of Brainstorm, Ancestral Knowledge and my favorite Cream of the Crop. And just in case people board wipe you a lot Hua Tuo, Honored Physician is also fun. Also just remember there are two Koma now!
my kenessos is on my moxfield, i built it as a gift for a friend and i still regularly update it. tons of fun to play online though rare simic commander w.
MFW im being told that my toolbox deck that runs tutors to find the extremely situational cards in my deck is not in the spirit of the format of being inconsistent by the person running 20 mechanical same copies of the same card in their deck (*_____*)
The topics more so about combo or i win decks that run tutors then toolbox decks that run them.
@ I know, it’s a comment about the people who look down on tutors regardless of the deck
Got an ad right after “black the only color with a snail in it” and thought that was the end of the video lmao
Mirror Mirror, I sacrifce ten Eldrazi spawn to beseech thine wisdom: What subtype of enchantments (curses, auras, sagas, etc) do you find the most interesting or in need of support? I find that the stranger an enchantment behaves/inflences the field the more I am drawn to them.
Tutors, plural are a chance to put a clock on the game.
Everyday I hear complaints being added on to casual rulesets the more I'm leaning toward comp mander
Throwing my hat into the ring I loooove enchantment tutors like moon blessed cleric and Heliod's pilgrim, a body and a creature? What fun! They also tend to be tool boxy often getting me what I need but because they're like 3 mana it's quite an incentive. I love transmute for the same reason. (Wizard cycling is also hella funny especially step through though sometimes that card is craaaaazy, instant speed demonic tutor for wizards is underrated)
I'm personally not a big fan of tutoring the same wincons every game, but that's because I am also a toolbox deck enjoyer.
My favorite deck is mono-white planeswalkers, originally helmed by Djeru, With Eyes Open (tutor on a stick). At first, I was excited that I could curve Djeru into Elspeth, Sun's Champion, because it was the deck's best wincon and therefore the best card to get in most situations.
But if I'm gonna have the same wincon every game, I may as well make it my commander (currently Akroma, Angel of Wrath). Now, I can actually use my tutors to adapt to the current game state, and my tutors in-game can have decision making behind them.
Mirror mirror, I tap an untapped legendary permanent to ask: What is everyone's favorite Magic character?
Howdy thanks for the answer! The commander in question is Gornog, the Red Reaper. My problem is the average mono red player problem where I just ball out too fast and start swinging. As it turns out people don't enjoy being hit with multiple haymakers.
Before I listen to the podcast: I tend to not field tutors, this is twofold, in my experience higher tutor density creates faster deck burnout from either myself or local metas.
I also don’t find myself building decks that require tutors to pad out the 99, we’ve seen an explosion of cards the last few years and I’d sooner run a thematically or mechanically significant card over one where the table has to wait for me to tutor shuffle and present so I can try pull of the same combo I did last Tuesday night.
Totally agree, I get bored of decks faster the more tutors I run.
In that case I say maybe don't run combos in decks with tutors. My deck with walking balista combos in it has zero tutors specificly to prevent me from just going "i tutor for x card to combo with x card in play or in hand do u have a response" every game with the deck. Basicly if the deck has a i win the game combo don't run tutors in the deck if u dont want the deck to get stale because that's all u do each game. If the deck doesn't have anything like that then they are fine to run since they can provide a lot of utility as well as help catch u up when behind for one reason or another.
I've always been a big fan of toolbox style strategies personally. I never get tired of my Sisay deck because even though it's the exact same set of cards I've been using for years each legendary permanent has a specific purpose and use case for when I grab it. I'm not just trying to combo or get a cheap win every time, I'm responding to the table and accruing value to my boardstate.
It's only when you look at Tutors as just a way to enable combos and wincons that it becomes unappealing. Pod decks are the same way, they can absolutely be fun if you're just their to turn wheels for fun cards.
Coincidentally, ijust bought a Demonic Tutor at my new LGS to show support.
I think I understand the frustration towards tutors because the flexibility they add IS a significant power boost that can absolutely win you games but like idk man it's an eternal format with a lot of busted stuff legal in it so why not play some of the powerful stuff so long as your deck isn't super overtuned for the pod? imo this falls into the long list of "things that commander only players get really mad about that 60 card players are fine with" right up there with scooping when you're far behind and running a ton of interaction
It's cool to get your Guys's thoughts on this so close after the EDHRec cast posted a video on this topic! Wonder what is causing the sudden discussion across the community. I don't tend to run tutors in my edh decks just because I don't need them to play my game and interact with my opponents effectively.
😶🌫️maybe sometimes correlation means causation
The thing about unconditional tutors. They're the only kind of tutors black has. If you are playing phage and you need one of the 6-7 cards that can let you play your Commander.... You don't really have a choice.
I would say that 75% of tutors in my experience seem to get the removal piece that is needed in that situation for like a blightsteel or an avacyn even a counterspell. I think that tutors make game play way more interesting and gives the game more variance. When the tutor comes up at any point in any game, that game will always be in a different state at that moment.
Tutors are any card that allows to search for another card. Even if it's just for lands. Lands are some of the most important aspects of a deck. Green gets card draw, creature search, and efficient land search. White gets efficient catch-up land search and enchantments/artifacts. Black gets card draw and any card for a price. Blue has efficient card draw, scrying, and instant/sorcery search. Red receives chaotic card search and chaotic card draw.
If you have problems with tutors, do you like playing green or blue? Just curious
My first deck was a Yusri coin flip deck, and it's theme was "luck-bending". Artifac tutors for thumb and other critical equipment constitute a third of the deck. But, like: I'm coin flipping 😂
I dont mind a tutor or 2 in decks weather they are on theme ones like for example one that only tutors for a specific type of creature or one that requires certain conditions to freely tutor or has drawbacks. Even if it's a demonic tutor I'm fine with it until it becomes tutor dot deck where they just tutor for combo pieces. I run tutors in my lower end decks usually they are narrow ones that search for something specific. Usually because the deck doesn't have enough or good card draw.
Glad to have you back snail! I built your Xyris deck and have been enjoying the restrictions a bunch!
I think the argument against tutors makes way more sense as self-justification rather than direct advice for others (but obviously if someone's self-justification resonates you can do as they do). You guys spotlighted the real issue IMO which is the thing that gets tutored up!
That said I wonder if WotC has printed a critical mass of cards with "look at/reveal the top N cards and pick one" type effects so that you could run an entirely tutor-free deck that is nevertheless about as consistent as one with tutor effects.
I think something that Bandai does that MtG and Yugioh doesn't are effects that peak the top few cards of the deck for archetype cards, like "look at the top 5 cards of your deck and add a 'archetype' card from among them to your hand and bottom the rest." Green does a bit of this, but I don't think they're nearly a prolific as a means to have a powerful search but somewhat inconsistent search for a lower cost or on a body.
Fantastic note about weird/specific tutors! I've always found them boring but usually not because I was getting the same thing, I was just able to get anything. I much prefer just running cards that are a second/third copy of a specific effect
Power brackets will probably solve the tutoring issue. The example brackets include Vampiric Tutor as a bracket 4 card and Fabricate as a bracket 2 card. Since most casual games will probably play bracket 1 the generic tutors will essentially be banned.
Khan the talk of Wild Research has me wanting to run a Jeskai research deck, thank you so much.
also, trinket mages favorite tutor isnt trinket mage. flavor fail loljk
I think as with most things when it comes to hated magic cards in a play group it comes down to the cost. Most people see the best cards as being unfair if only because of their price. Proxies solve almost all of that.
Tutors are a second copy of your best version of the card they can get with the additional cost of the tutor. Part of the problem is that so many commander decks is just ramp + card draw and the mana and card inefficiency most tutors is minimized. At higher power resources are much more constrained so even unrevealed tutors are much lower power. Also consistency is a good thing. a deck playing bad combo that sometimes wins on turn 5 or does nothing ever is a much worse experience than playing a combo deck presents a wins on turn 5 through 7.
This podcast is already great without snail but with them it’s even better!
I have a "true goblins" list that is a muxus deck that plays in the true chaos that you should with goblins, it runs all like the really bad ones or the really cool value ones that you don't run in krenko lists, for awhile I had krenko mob boss in the 99 a long with kiki jikki and like staff of dom, and I found I always use recruiter or matron to get it, so I just replaced those cards with like more fun actually interesting goblins to play as muxus wants like more value on your creature or just puts more funny little guys on the table I actually had been alot of fun to just recruit random stuff to the top
What are y'all's thoughts on commanders that tutor, I'm thinking of cards like Zur, Sisay, Arcum Dagsson, etc? Do you/would you play those? Do you think these commanders promote fun play experiences?
I gave Zur a 10/10 on my ranking ever legendary creature series
@thetrinketmage I must've missed that one, I'd better go watch them all to see what else I missed 😉
One of the most valid anti-tutor arguments I can think of is that some players do not play them quickly. It doesn't feel great to play against when a person spends 5 minutes looking through their whole deck to find the perfect option.
Meh, take your time, the outcome doesn’t matter since it’s casual.
as a certified combo enjoyer, it would take too long to win without tutors. my main commander is tameshi, reality architect and to win the game i need at least 5 cards from my 99 to win. its not realistic to draw all the pieces i need even with the premium card draw engines like rhystic study and trouble in paira
I don't know if you mentioned it, I don't think you did, but even if you did it's worth reiterating:
There's a huge difference between inconsistent and varied decks. The latter is what people want, generally, even if they complain that a deck is "too consistent". What they mean then, is that the deck is same'y, nigh-on deterministic in its gameplay, which is a fair point. If you feel like "Ugh, is it the last 4 games already?" there's something wrong.
Another point that has been brought up before (I think it was by the Commander Pod guys) is that inconsistent decks makes for bad matchups. If a deck, on average, plays as a focused budget brew (6'ish), it might be that it plays like a slightly upgraded precon half the time (4), and like a very optimized, near-competitive deck half the time (8). It makes it impossible to matchmake with that deck, without risking someone getting trampled into the dirt or winning by default, depending on how chance hits.
One should build one's decks with a clear plan in mind: Not just in terms of strategy, but in terms of level of play, and be consistent about that. You can have a few power outliers in a deck without ruining the whole, but when you reach a certain concentrations of outliers your deck becomes impossible to play a fair game against. It's better to build decks in a way that avoids outliers pretty much altogether.
Mirror mirror, I shuffle Etrata the Silencer into my library and land my third hit counter to ask: how do I help my friend build a deck that actually works? They love the game so much, and are very active on the scene socially - but they are still the only person I’ve seen take three reasonably powerful precons and make every single one of them worse. This is especially frustrating because a precon is pretty much the ground floor of what anyone expects in power level nowadays, so this friend ends up being a total non-threat and doesn’t interact with the board.
I understand that not everyone enjoys brewing or understands what gives certain cards more value. But this friend of mine is also sensitive about brewing every deck themselves, even though they don’t really like to do it - so I don’t know what to do.
I want our main play group to be at least a little bit closer in power level, but I also don’t want to hurt my friend’s feelings or make them feel like they have to play cards with art they don’t like (art is a very big deal to them, definitely a bigger deal than what the cards do mechanically).
Is there a more subtle way to encourage this player to interact more, or to be motivated to reach for their fighting chance at winning? Please help. Thanks for listening.
9:29
Trinket: "you're playing your commander every single game right?"
Me with a Drannith Magistrate: "Riiiiiight"
As my pod has become more familiar with my commander, I've gotten easy wins by never casting him. They hold counterspells and removal waiting for him while I play value engines and build the rest of my board.
why don't land tutors count as tutors?? they do the thing - I killed somebody with Urza's Cave tutoring up Sejiri Steppe to nope removal and make my lethal commander unblockable a couple weeks ago - if they're limited to just basic lands they're bad tutors, but so is a card that can only tutor for a narrow set of cards like Aurochs Herd
We never said this! When we said that we meant cards like nature’s lore, three visits, rampant growth. We all agree crop rotation sylvan scrying etc are tutors.
Rampant growth is definitely not catching the ire like other cards.
The more tutors the better
This is just false, while i think you should play a few, once u go above 5, your deck is going to feel stale. Why play more copies of the best card in your deck, when u can lower their numbers and play more cards u would want to tutor for?
Mirror Mirror, I baragin the 5,000,000 eldrazi Rosie and basking broodscale made for me last turn after I chorded in Rosie on your end step. Glad to see Snail feeling well enough to be back. What is each of your local metas like? Each of you has a unique deck building style, and I would like to hear about the decks you each play against.
I don't like shuffeling so I avoid tutors most of the time. But I do like to mill myself and pick what I need from the graveyard. ^^
I have a super jank big dumb spells Saruman, The White Hand deck that runs a demonic tutor just for utility and to trigger Saruman to amass my orc boiz. Best case scenario for this deck I am hard casting Time Stretch so I can have an extra two turns beating my opponents to death with a massive orc army. I was in a Five Star game against two opponents who played rhystic study and smothering tithe and one of them implied my deck was overpowered because I ran a demonic tutor. I didn't even tutor for a good card with it because one of them milled half my deck and the game was almost over. I ended up winning for various weird reasons but the tutor had noting to do with it. Still I think that player came away with a reinforced impression that tutors are OP because that is the impression people already have about them.
I think tutors are bad when it is just to get the one card every time to get the same card that easilly combos with the commander and the other cards to just win in a way that would be hard to interact with.
I think fine if it is more of a weird combo that is more fun than instant win. Or if thr choice will be varied.
One deck I have thought about is Caterer Rocco, where you can put any creature in play from your library for the excess mana paid. The idea would be a deck made of many different and interconnecting combos that can be started by low cost creatures. You would have difficulty in a deck that does that with creatures that are not blue or black. Whatever that looks like will still depend on the luck of what is drawn and knowledge about the pieces.
Episode on proxies when ?
The Trifecta has assembled!!
I completely agree with most things that elk said. Vamp and denonic are a bit too powerful for me to play and even mystical tutor seems a bit too unrestricted. I looooove the deck building restriction muuuch more than the gameplay decisions. My favorite tutor is waterlogged teachings. Not the most restrictive but it's also a land. Very sexy.
My problem with tutors is that if you play one, you should probably actually have 3-5 or more, this is mainly with the generic ones since you need to run a decent amount to make them good and more consistent, and all the cheaper mana value tutors cost quite a bit of money or having to specific of a deck theme/restriction for most decks. If you want to play them so you can also find outs, you really need the cheaper mv tutors, since with the more expensive mv tutors it can be pretty much your whole turn searching for a card you might not even cast that turn, so it ends up feeling worst casting them to find a out vs finding something that can win me the game. If im buying a semi expensive card I would rather buy a land or a cool/big creature or spell then a tutor
Mirror mirror, I skipped my next turn to ask:
What are your favorite big Timmy plays that don’t end the game immediately, but satisfy your desire to make a grandiose play?
One of the problems I have with tutors in general is that it opens up your whole deck all at once and the options are too much xd
Of course that you should know what you are getting when you play it. But as they rest in your hand it feels distracting to me in a casual game.
I also enjoy playing some bombs in my decks, and i like these bombs to feel like a reward.
I understand that some decks are too inconsistent without them though.
But if im building a deck that is too inconsistent without tutors, it means the deck is actually fragile and I will be tutoring for the same cards everytime.
And in that case Id just rather build something else.
mirror mirror I cast a tutor to ask, what are some commanders that you have tried to build but the deck did not work out?
I just don't like running them to much I like the randomness of commander personally
This is why I took Crater hoof out of my Mina and Denn deck
What do you guys think of the philosophy "you can have tutors or you can have infinites. It's lame to have both"
I think it's should be pretty fair middle ground but people will still get salty if they see either
Mirror Mirror, on my screen, can you answer my question: What deck do you think your viewers associate with you the most?
(For me, it's Pharika for Elk, Sharuum and Rada for Snail, and Tawnos and old Heliod for Trinket Mage.)
(And I apologize for the bad rhyme.)
demonic tutor for combo gets super boring in casual games. theres almost no reason NOT to run combos if your deck has tutors. and yea take the tutors out, the combo deck becomes "draw your whole deck take 15 extra turns, durdle and control the entire game or lose miserably".
combos are the source of the problem for sure, but nobody bans combos in commander or our pod so, if anyone has a tutor they're playing it with combos.
50:23 Trinket then Niv Mizzet Supreme is the PERFECT COMMANDER if you want to play 5 color counrrpsells
Mirror mirror, I pay {q} and sacrifice my panoptic mirror to ask. How do you reccomend making budget land bases for 3 color decks?
yall are doing god’s work. jaded gatekeepers beware.
I disagree that the black good tutors don't require any thought, particularly in mono-black. Because black doesn't have answers to everything and doesn't have very many of those answers (we just got a 3rd enchantment removal spell) you need to be relatively creative with your black selections. Further like you said they let you play less of particular types of cards in your deck construction leading to higher compactness but also interesting decisions about which deck functions you skimp on (one less ramp vs one less board wipe vs one less single target removal, etc).
I'm generally in the tutors are okay camp, but a couple of years ago I took out the majority of the "good" tutors because they made my decks seem even more powerful and they were eating up a bunch of the budget for the deck. As a result I've had to play more redundant effects and more card draw to make up for it and honestly I'm not even sure the deck is worse off now. It would, though, be very odd to play mono-black without any tutors. That's one of black's strengths and I would rather not handicap it for no reason.
I PERSONALY prefer some level of consistency in my game plan. Not as much as to always end the game with the same combo, but enought to be able to relly on certain cards or effects...
That said, I believe tutors are in fact against the "spirit" of Commander. The format was DESIGNED to create variety and ensure that each match will play out verry diferently to one another, even with the same decks and players.
Wishclaw Talisman is a great tutor and politics piece. It's in my favorite deck
Mirror mirror, i sacrifice two treasures to demonic tutor for beseech the mirror: i can't understand why other colors are allowed to tutor because it's cool. But the color who's good at tutoring shouldn't. Because it's boring that they're too good. What should black players do to be allowed to actually tutor.
I personally feel like tutoring in general is fine but playing every tutor you can, tends to lead to the same game different day feeling that kills peoples enjoyment in card games. I tend to say 1 uncom tutor, and 1-2 thematic tutors. Its a hard balance, but it depends on what form of edh u wanna play, if u wanna play slightly upgraded precons and that upgrade is 7 tutors, while u are more optimized, you lose alotta the variance that can lead to more wild and exciting games.
That's easy. Reveal what you tutored for. Conditional tutors makes you reveal the card. Black tutors don't. If I don't know what you tutored for, then I'll assume the worse like it's maybe a combo piece or a 1-side board wipe or a stax lock piece.
@@justintolentino9222 i dont think this is right, revealing isnt required, the main issue casuals have with tutors is the same they have with counterspells, and its lack of moderation. Most monoblack decks i see run at least 7 different omnitutors, which can lead to every game feeling the same. While revealing is cool, its worth considering that not revealing adds a lil intrigue into the game depending on the turn
@@daltronius Well yes, they don't have to reveal, but at the same time, when I cast a Demonic Tutor and not reveal what I tutored for, I need to be prepared to have a high threat assessment assigned to myself. From the other players perspective, I just got the best card of my deck in my hand so if somebody casts Silence on my upkeep, that should be fair.
Yeah it really depends on what you are doing with it. 7+ years ago making forced combat decks was tough because your options were incredibly limited and so you needed tutors. Now though I remove them because all the goad cards mean i have enough options and tutors now just make the deck feel samey.
I feel like someone on the opposing side could benefit the discussion a lot, since you three are of the same mind about tutors you're all kinda saying the same thing in different ways and one sidedly bashing imaginary opposing arguments. I do agree with most of what's been said, but i felt like it didn't make into a discussion, there was a pattern of "what do you think about this argument that i don't like? - Oh, i hate that argument, it doesn't apply to decks i build and my style" i think most of the complaints about tutors really don't apply to you because yu're mindfull of its issues. Most players will have difficulty gauging what makes fun, and it's very easy to defaut into going after whats the strongest option available. I sometimes don't like having easy combos in my decks because it's very easy for the whole deck to end up revolving around it, and that's a concious decision of watering down the deck to cater to a desired experience, but it's very hard to see this.
It's like armageddon is a perfectly fine card if it's used to secure a wincondition, but it's heavly frowned upon because it's possible to create miserable experiences with it (and sometimes it is the correct play, but most people will not refrain from doing the "correct play" and throw win % away, even while playing casually, with the mindset of preserving the fun experience)
I would say the way most ppl talk about casual is like that of playing a UU league of random battle in pokemon, its not really fun though because you are just blocked off from a lot, just to save someone's mental from booming
I posted similar opinions on EDHRecast's most recent video on the topic and they basically said, "Na'ah." It was a bit more polite than that, but it was frankly dismissive given the fact that I based my argument on numbers and their argument always came down to vibes. Without re-explaining the math because frankly I assume you guys already know, tutors increase player agency, and give more space in deck construction for different cards.
The problem with a secret commander is noe you've got TWO cards you have access to every game. Hence partner, companion, doctor's companion, background etc. are all against the spirit of the format ;D
secret commander isn't something you necessarily have access to, you still have to either draw into it or tutor for it. Secret commanders is the true goal of your commander deck with your commander being a vehicle to either streamline getting to your secret commander or help maintain the secret commander's presence through color identity offering good colors to enable the secret commander or enabling the secret commander with effects from the main commander. Another thing, partner, Doctor's Companion, and Background are all exclusive to a limited pool of cards which offer a variety of different playstyles by mixing combinations. It's not much different to Planeswalker commanders or Shorikai being a commander.
Companion is the closest argument you have considering the fact that it's a guaranteed 101st card in a format with the understanding that everyone is playing and building a 100 card deck.
Mirror mirror how do I punish a landfall deck without using mass land destruction.
Remove the card draw engine. It's the same with Enchantress. If they are the archenemy, ask the 2 other players to hold removal for the card draw piece. MLD is not really the answer unless you can make it one-sided because the landfall deck will still be the fastest to rebuild when you reset the lands to 0. They'll have Crucible of Worlds type of effect to recur lands anyway.
5:43 So, gatekeeping isn't inherently a bad thing. Adopting a communal game like Magic is as much about the people around you as it is about making it your own, and if new people want to change what you've grown to love to fit their preferences, you're going to defend that. And, to Snail's point here, EDH is really to only space for casual constructed Magic. So, those of us who actually enjoy a low-power game are going to be the advocates for that style of play--especially when someone says their deck is low power, and then proceed to win the game on turn 3.
And--to be clear--I agree with some of the points you're making! My favorite deck is a higher-power Naya toolbox deck built around a 4-card combo. I've found a great pod, and I've gotten much better at not targeting the Johnny's of our group, and appreciating things other than just the jankiest thing I can find. And, more importantly, I appreciate your perspectives on this topic! You guys have broadened my understanding off EDH a lot with your content--especially Snail. I just wanted to push back a little bit on this one thing, because it seems to me that a lot of people breeeze past the line between CEDH and regular commander--just because they're both fun in their own ways. A topic for a different time, I guess. 😅
Gatekeeping is a good thing sometimes. This is why it's important to goldfish decks for consistency if you want a certain speed, test and know where your deck sits and be super honest about it (test a lot to flatten the curve and get good data). Match the table or if people don't understand their deck enough start slow and see where they all sit in the pod. I chill with a precon in unknown pods and see if I need to bust out better decks. It cuts out some salt that is inherent with casual to show you're putting in effort.
Based take
I think the entire point of them mentioning the gatekeeping element tho was to highlight that the spirit of the format differs wildly from group to group and person to person. There is nothing gained from gatekeeping other than trying to force your idea of what "casual" means on those who have a different idea of it
@melr.5492 It's less forcing your idea as getting the table on similar footing/speed/"competitiveness". Gatekeeping as a word is very charged to put it lightly but the principle of keeping the pod to be similar/even in power is by definition gatekeeping.
There's many if's around it and too much to write about without getting too wordy for a youtube comment section. But that's the gist.
Mirror Mirror i sacrifice my next turn and my first born to ask you this one question, what is your favorite and least favorite mechanic in magic?
Mirror Mirror, I sacrifice a non-token green creature as an additional cost to ask this question. What advice do you have for building around a commander in a way that goes against the popular trend? I really love Indominus Rex Alpha, but I want to do something different than voltron. Her effects feel like they offer a wide range of playstyle options beyond just voltron. Since everyone is only building her as a voltron deck, I cannot really reach out to online ideas for help.
I guess it depends? Do you still plan to win with the deck or just showcase a theme? In my experience, if winning is still a major objective of the deck, the more fringe the theme is, the higher the need is for your high power staples (Smothering Tithe, Cyc Rift, Demonic Tutor), since I assume that there will be less card support for what you're trying to do. If you're just forgoing winning, then usually, people just notifies the pod that it's a theme deck, then more often than not, others just leave you alone until the "theme" is online.
But there’s a 1% chance of drawing that tutor … so how fast is it ?
Mirror, Mirror, I float 100 mana as a hecatomb in request for your divine wisdom. I've noticed that a lot of Commander content specifically and Magic content in general focuses on advice for newer players, and with good reason. However, I am what you might call a Magic boomer (though I'm not nearly old enough to be an actual boomer): I played competitive 60-card Magic for years and years and came to Commander about ten years ago (so, by that metric, I'm also a Commander boomer). Here's my question: what advice do you have for long-time Magic/Commander players beyond "Stop flexing so hard by playing your OG duals that you got for ten bucks during the Clinton administration?"
I love teaching younger/newer players about the game but, as a teacher, I would really appreciate feedback from younger Magic players about how the old guard of Magic players can be helpful to more up-and-coming players.
the snail has returned!
I personally just don't like searching through around 70-80 cards for one specific card. Im fine with others playing it. I just don't want to lol
I don't really have issues in casual with non black tutors. If you're playing black tutors your deck is probably high power by default. Those don't have to just get combo pieces. They're entirely too versatile. All that being said.. If the pod is trying to go for high power casual.. Who cares what you're doing outside of cedh strategies?
second favorite podcast fr
spree cards/dual faced cards/multiple effect cards are typically over costed by 1, giving you the choice of a couple abilities. Demonic tutor basically reads “choose 1 of 85 abilities” with an over cost of 2. It’s lame asf in commander
I don't agree with your viewpoint that spot removal against an opponent who tutored (for another tutor) to a combo piece is a 2 for 1. It's still a 1 for 1. It's more like their mana was taxed. This reminds me of arguments of milling being card disadvantage.
An interesting thing about tutors is that you can trim some of your core card packages. Like you could probably get away with cutting a 2cmc ramp, a single target interaction, and a board wipe if you put in 2 tutors, specially if it's one of the premium black ones. Repeat adding tutors to continue freeing up slots.
Another aspect of tutors reminds me of how some people consider a perfect mana base not being that influential on the power level of a deck. They're enablers just like how mana crypt is an enabler. I think it's obvious that most EDH players lack restraint and aren't running decks that need cards like crypt to "compete". Tutors are more of a gray area since you can tutor for a pet or sub-optimal card at the moment rather than a repetitive staple card from game to game. It can also enabler hidden commanders as you mentioned. I think they're worth keeping around if only because of that.
I like survival of the fittest
It’s funny bc same people who cry about tutors have like 20 cards that do the same thing and say it’s a singleton format.
Regarding the topic of "secret commanders", I asked one of my play groups about that and I got very negative feedback. To them, the idea of a secret commander in the 99 is just an excuse to get away with running a card that is otherwise seen as too powerful to be chosen as the actual commander. It's a misleading and manipulative strategy to abuse the spirit of the game. It's breaking game balance because a card is in the colors it's in for a reason. If you want to play a certain card as the commander, play it as the commander. Don't try to leverage more power from it by putting into the 99 just so you can run additional colors.
I can understand what they're saying, but I have a disagreement on that. What is the difference between a secret commander, and a focused win condition? My Slimefoot and Squee deck sees me aiming to win with Etali Primal Conqueror. Since Etali is the goal each game, does that mean Etali is actually a secret commander?
But both of the examples we gave as hidden commanders were both not legendary creatures. So it’s not like we are hiding some crazy powerful legendary creature in the 99. But even if I was, like I’m playing a 5 color commander but really have urza as my hidden commander. Is that actually better than playing an urza deck? I’m not sure I agree with that. And if one urza in the 99 of a 5 color artifact deck is sooooo strong it can’t be beat in your playgroup that might not be urza’s fault alone
@@thetrinketmage I understood what you were saying. I'm just repeating what my play group said. As for my own opinion part, perhaps I missed the point actually. But no worries, I'm not disagreeing with you per say. At least nothing rude that is.
sail is baaaaack!!!!!!
At 22:00 Snail brings up an excellent point about how good top-decking the right card can feel, and I think he's on the right track that it's something you're, at least partially, conditioned into by the game. I play Yu-Gi-Oh, which markets itself on "believing in the heart of the cards", and in the original show this would make the main character top-deck so well he could win from any situation. For most of last year, the top-deck that would have probably made the most Yu-Gi-Oh players pop-off was probably "Bonfire", which is a tutor. I don't wanna go into boring details, but I think Yugioh conditions people to enjoy tutors. There are iconic tutors in Yugioh (RotA, Terraforming, Stratos) that feel exciting to top-deck, even in situations where the search target is always a given. Maybe it's just me though. There's definitely nuance to it.
SNAIL!
i think a of people with these takes against tutors and the like are in essence trying to play a broken format as if its not broken. theres a reason cedh is even possible. 100 cards, multiplayer of a game not originally meant to be multiplayer, eternal format, and access to 1-2 spells AT ALL TIMES… stop pretending edh isn’t what it is.
Nobody ever mentions academy I win rector :) sigh.
Gatekeeping is good and should be more frequent.
Sneeel 😊❤
Remember, if you have removal then tutors dont really matter. Counter what the tutor finds, not the tutor.
buddy, noone has tutors in a deck of crap. Thats just a viewpoint that has no place, and here its driving your opinion
You’re wrong. EDHREC kinda disproves that. Some people do use tutors in their jank piles because it’s one of the few ways to get it off the ground consistently. There were people playing Mana Crypt in their casual decks, you really gonna assume that jank piles don’t sometimes run tutors?
FIRST! :D
There was a recent EDH gameplay video I watched where all of the players involved were playing black and the deck that ended up winning was the only deck to play tutors, Vampiric Tutor and Case of the Stashed Skeleton specifically. Pretty much every comment brought this up, and most relevantly to this video specifically, cited the EDHRecast episode against tutors. Judging from the comments a lot of those people didn't actually watch the EDHRec episode since, naturally, people tend to hear what they want to hear and not what's actually said. I have my own complicated feelings on tutors (more pro-than-anti like a lot of y'all are) but beyond the comments that are genuinely off the mark (like assuming every time a player is tutoring for a card its their finisher or a perfect answer at instant speed rather than any number of possible options and god forbid a card game have a little tension or suspense) I didn't realize a lot of magic players consider it not JUST "against the spirit of the format" to run cards that have existed in the game since 1993 but also consider it emotionally abusive to all parties at the table to run them and that the player that ran them should not be played with but or allowed back onto the channel. To those people, I suggest that they go back to the original ethos of Elder Dragon Highlander. Where every commander had a first come first serve policy and things like Shahrazad are legal or basic lands are subject to the singleton rule as well. Whatever that game night looks like, at least those players can rest comfortably in the knowledge that they truly "get" commander and would NEVER subject other players to such a miserable play pattern as an enchantment card that makes a skeleton and turns into a tutor after you don't own any skeletons and also costs 60 cents. They could also play Pokemon or YuGiOh, since tutors don't exist in either of those games, right?
In all seriousness though the point made that "tutor targets are often more problematic than the tutor" is spot-on. I play a mono black political control deck with Gix at the helm and my favorite card to play in that deck is Scheming Symmetry. For the deck to work, I have to incentivize my opponents to focus on each other rather than myself since all I have are evasive 1/1s. Symmetry is the perfect distillation of the deck since "Swing at this other guy and draw a card and I'll let us both get ourselves a little something extra" is a deal very few players would turn down, even if they know how the deck works! That deck would function without it (or other tutors!) but would it be as enjoyable? Not at all.