When you sit down for a game of Commander, one of the first things you'll do is discuss power levels. When we do we often talk about some specific things: Fast Mana, Free Spells, and Infinite Combos. Someone has brought to my attention that there is another pesky topic in this series I need to cover. I can't believe I didn't mention before: What are the Pros and Cons of Tutors in your decks?
What is a tutor? A Tutor is a spell which searches your library for another card. Some put that card into hand and sometimes it puts it on the top of the deck. Sometimes the tutor is specific, which means it needs to be revealed. Naturally, the ones you can keep secret and go straight to your hand are probably the best. Before we can discuss the politics of tutoring we have to cover the meta of tutoring.
What are some of the best tutors in Magic and why? Here are some of the best tutors in Commander.
Why do we play tutors? What most of them have in common is their mana value. 1-2 mana to get any card in your deck to your hand in insane work. Turning one card in your deck to exactly what you need in any situation in the game is goated. Usually for all tutors, what you get for what you pay is disparate, benefiting you greatly. It's an Insurrection when the board is filled with juicy creatures, or a Beast Within when there is a pesky Elesh Norn, Mother of Machines, turning off all the enter effects in your deck. And a majority of these are instant speed searches. You can put the answer into hand or near into hand. It's the answer to any problem whenever you need it too.
Considering this, why do players try to filter them out of games? I have a few theories.
- The most common concern about these is their costs. Enlightened Tutor will cost you $25; Mystical Tutor will cost you $12; Natural Order will cost you $14; Vampiric will cost you $45; and Demonic will cost you $45. Not all tutors are equal in their cash cost, but they are on the pricier side. Building a budget deck feels like you'll hit the financial barrier to making a more efficient deck. I can understand wanting to balance power. However, not nearly as pricey as a Mana Crypt had been pre-ban, but players seem more comfortable with that card or better yet Urza's Saga into a Sol Ring. Sol Ring isn't a particularly expensive card, yet tutoring for it still feels bad.
- Some consider them overpowered, inherently. Any card you need, whenever, is undeniably a strong thing you could do. I've had this argument with my partner before, but would you prefer to tutor for one card you need right then or draw 35 cards? It's a gamble that you might draw the card you need, but ultimately you have secured more access to more lines of play. One card could be countered, but 35 cards in your deck not being able to get you out of a situation might be a bigger deck building issue. Drawing seems like a typical game action that is exploited in games of Commander which is frowned upon much less. It's something we definitely try to stop, but not something we inherently salt out about in pre-game discussions.
- Some say that tutors take the fun out of a 100-card singleton format. The intention of Commander versus Standard, in my humble observations, was to create a more casual, less consistent, less competitive version of the game. Having one-of's makes it hard to create a singular, or somewhat singular, method of play. I get that, but have you seen CEDH or to a lesser extent a high-power Zombie or Elf or any typal deck? Cards with consistent and recurrable effects is what makes a long game format like Commander efficient and playable. Exploiting cards with similar text is what makes most decks viable. And a tutor is one to maybe 5 cards in your deck that go and get 5 other cards. Usually decks need more than one piece to win. They might win with 5 pieces though so I understand the feeling of feeling over tutored into a win, but is it any more egregious than an Aesi, Tyrant of Gyre Strait playing a land and drawing and playing a land and drawing and playing a Nature's Lore and drawing and playing a Crop Rotation and drawing and then Lotus Field-ing and drawing?
I don't know if there is a true answer to this question, but I'll share my take. Tutors suck, but they don't always--or even consistently-- in casual games of Magic, secure a win. More animosity comes up for a Demonic Tutor than a Razaketh, The Foulblooded. It tutors for a crazy amount of things, but costs 5BBB and $10. This is a weird sort of cope about balancing. Razaketh tutors more but feels less bad? I guess, it should feel earned to tutor a card, right. It shouldn't feel like a cheap, expensive money card that wins you the game the moment you tutor for it. I think that is what feels bad: I lost to a $50 card, not strategy.
But there are so many hoops we jumped through just then. Tutoring for protection when you're about to lose the game seems like a very reasonable thing to do. Tutoring for fast mana when you're behind feels justifiable. It's a bit nuanced about when a tutor feels stinky. I don't think it's the tutoring, necessarily that irks us, potentially, but a game that feels unwinnable due to the price point of the competitors cards. It's a price power imbalance that we try to assess by saying that "tutors" are something you don't want in your Commander Pod.
But enough of me yapping, let me hear your thoughts, though? I'm @strixhavendropout on Blue Sky. Thank you so much for taking the time to read. I hope this helps in your next deck-building session!