Why is WotC Reducing the Amount of Tutoring?

General forum

Posted on Oct. 27, 2024, 5:43 p.m. by DemonDragonJ

In this post, Mark Rosewater stated that WotC is reducing the amount of cards that allow players to search their libraries for two reasons: first, to prevent games from being too repetitive and to reduce the amount of shuffling that occurs, and I can understand that idea, but I wish for my decks to be consistent, because I would hardly feel motivated to play if my decks were unreliable. Also, I am not too upset with needing to shuffle, frequently, so that reason seems to be rather ridiculous, to me.

What does everyone else say, about this? What are your opinions, on this matter?

wallisface says... #2

Marks statement applies very well to competitive 1-v-1 formats, where shuffling can consume a decent chunk of the clock time, and generally be a detriment to the game.

From a commander perspective, the entire point of the format having a singleton card-restriction and requiring egregiously-large 100-card decks is to create variance in games and allow for a more casual play environment - and tutors push against that ethos. (note I don't play commander)

I am all for a reduction of tutoring effects in favor of them exploring more alternate card avenues. It's also worth noting though, that tutoring effects are still being made - we saw one in Duskmourn!

October 27, 2024 6:13 p.m.

DemonDragonJ says... #3

wallisface, what was the tutor in Duskmourn?

October 27, 2024 6:33 p.m.

wallisface says... #4

October 27, 2024 7:22 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #5

I realize that you don't play EDH wallisface, but I don't like to let this sentiment go unchallenged no matter who says it.

Tutors are not "against the ethos of commander" (or "against the spirit" or any other way of saying antithetical to the format). The commander format is about having fun and this is what makes it possibly the hardest format to regulate. Everyone's fun looks different, to some people "fun" might in fact be embracing the high variance caused by the formats rules. Others may find "fun" in making a deck as consistent as possible while operating inside the format's rules. Fun is in what you make of it and "high variance, board wipe once per round turns 4-6, battlecruiser" is one way to play EDH, but "Ramp, tutor, ramp, tutor, win turn 4" is an equally valid way to play EDH. You just have to make sure that everyone's expectations are the same within a pod.

October 27, 2024 7:44 p.m.

wallisface says... #6

Gidgetimer agree - but I believe the singleton-card nature of commander was created for a reason (i.e, there’s a reason the format deviated from the norm of allowing 4-of a card), same goes for having decks being 100 cards over any pre-existing number which would lead to higher-deck-consistency.

I’m not trying to poop on how anyone plays the game at all - and people are entitled to play however they want. My observation was that commanders rules appear specifically in-place to create more variance and chais, as opposed to consistency/reliability. At face value, tutors represent a way to circumvent that high level of variance (for better or worse).

October 27, 2024 8:33 p.m.

plakjekaas says... #7

Gidgetimer Still, a 100 card singleton deck was a choice over a 60 card with 4-ofs deck. That will, by definition and by design, make your decks less consistent, because you're now playing 60 different cards instead of 10-15. In the commander format philosophy is explicitly mentioned that format management decisions are made to maximize the available card pool. Every card that doesn't do anything itself except getting you another card in your deck, is literally minimalizing the card pool, and therefor antithetical to the philosophy of the format, wether you have fun with it or not. If playing the same 2/3 cards to win over and over again every game you play is your jam, there's better formats for you than commander to do so, that's all that says. And that's the part where cEDH becomes a subset of commander itself, because in that format, parts of the philosophy are ignored intentionally, like the part where they mention decisions are made to "promote an environment where players are not pressured to conform to any specific method of deckbuilding."

DemonDragonJ the shuffling part is not for you. You are not the only one to please while designing the game. There's people playing magic who are physically unable to shuffle well (because of things like hand injuries), that's why Yorion, Sky Nomad was banned in Modern, where your deck is shuffled 10 times a game due to the amount of Fetchlands being played there. It's very insensitive to call this showing of empathy to the less fortunate who still enjoy the game "Ridiculous" just because you have no problems with the issue.

October 27, 2024 8:55 p.m.

Gidgetimer says... #8

plakjekaas I'm going to need you to explain to me how tutors have anything to do with the card pool at all. They reduce the effective number of cards in your deck (not even the true number of cards in the deck) they do nothing to the format's card pool. Tutors ARE NOT antithetical to the the philosophy of the format. Prescribing a way that players should build their deck (like not including tutors) IS antithetical to the philosophy of the format.

I'm not saying that 100 card singleton wasn't a choice to make decks less consistent. What I am saying is that accepting that there will be variance, but attempting to minimize it is as valid a way to play as going full chaos goblin is.

October 27, 2024 9:44 p.m.

DreadKhan says... #9

While I think tutoring can be fine in Commander, but I'm pretty sure most groups would prefer limited tutoring in decks if they could vote on it (and I say this as a person who has multiple tutor based decks, including 2 'tutor in the CZ' decks). VERY few groups outside cEDH are fine with consistently ending games turn 4, most people would openly say that people who play that way (without being open about it!) are the biggest problem the format has, ymmv.

Tutors have a BIG effect on competitive play, arguably one of the biggest, tons of cEDH decks used to run one way to win the game, and they'd run tutors to find it (then we got Breach among other things). Tutors let decks be way more 'all in' on something like Ad Naus (or Flash back in the day) because they could count on finding it early consistently. For more casual games, every tutor you include is a card that 'does nothing', meaning you're only running 98 cards in the 99 if you run a Demonic Tutor, thus a higher percentage of your deck will have to be staples, because 'you always run the staples'. The less tutors you use the more likely you are to have a unique deck, in part because you are less likely to be combo dependent.

I hope this doesn't seem too disagreeable, but I don't know how you can argue Commander doesn't have some fairly strict rules about decks... I have multiple Stax decks, I understand I have to mention that before I play with those decks (outside cEDH), same with my Chaos/Wipes deck, this is why my Meren deck shaved a BUNCH of Merciless Executioner family cards (and avoided Grave Pact stuff), it was too consistently 'doing the thing', at which point nobody was having fun anymore, now I can just sit down and play with the deck.

I agree that part of improving most Commander decks is increasing their consistency (many popular decks are shockingly inconsistent, even with tutors Commander is a nuts format to play), but I think most people who give into their inner Chaos Goblin end up having a lot more fun playing Commander (but they're also more likely to be up until 3AM because their pod is terrible at winning games).

TLDR Tutoring has it's place in competitive play, but I think most people prefer to play Commander in a less competitive manner. Most pods would be happier if people only ran bad tutors, or just skipped them.

October 28, 2024 8:05 a.m.

RiotRunner789 says... #10

I would point out, that at least in commander, basic land tutors such as Rampant Growth tend to be benign. Players may notice excessive ramping but rarely get upset at the tutoring itself.

Personally, I think tutors (outside above mentioned) make my decks less fun to play. I'd rather include another good card than a tutor. Even my combo deck has minimal tutors and prefers to rely on card draw. Decks that play too consistently (looking at you Relentless Rats deck), even when not good, get boring to play quickly in a casual setting.

October 28, 2024 9:47 a.m.

Gidgetimer says... #11

"I hope this doesn't seem too disagreeable, but I don't know how you can argue Commander doesn't have some fairly strict rules about decks..."

My comment was in direct response to someone using the format philosophy to try and backup that Tutors are antithetical to the format and quoting "promote an environment where players are not pressured to conform to any specific method of deckbuilding" to me. I realize that the social contract imposes deck building restrictions. As a matter of fact I specified "You just have to make sure that everyone's expectations are the same within a pod".

If you don't want to include tutors, that is fine. If you don't want to play against tutors, let me know. If you want to act like you are somehow playing a more "pure" version of commander or that commander isn't for me because I run tutors, get out of here with that.

October 28, 2024 11:29 p.m.

Nermon says... #12

If you go back and read Sheldon's old articles you'll see that they've been on the fence of banning every single black tutor for years because the rules committee thought it was antithetical to the format. Because those other people are saying the format is meant to be a different game, every. single. time. If you are always winning with one combo you're kind of going against the entire purpose of the format

October 30, 2024 9:10 a.m.

smelly318 says... #13

For those of you talking about EDH and Tutors, those Tutors already exist in EDH. The future of Tutoring does nothing to disrupt the tutors that have already been printed.

This post really only seems relevant to the rotating formats.

October 30, 2024 9:47 a.m.

wallisface says... #14

smelly318 it might impact standard more (although generally standard metas haven’t bothered with tutors, they’re too slow/durdly), but its likely the case that the decision to reduce the amount of future tutor printings was a decision made with more than just Standard in mind

October 30, 2024 1:52 p.m.

smelly318 says... #15

wallisface regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that tutors already exist, unless they outright ban them

October 31, 2024 9:41 a.m.

wallisface says... #16

smelly318 correct but it does help them manage the density of tutors in formats. Particularly, imo, for commander, where it’s unlikely they want to be allowing decks to run 50 tutors, and Pioneer, where they want to limit shuffling in general. Its also unlikely they’d want to print many competitively viable tutors into modern, which is already plagued by shuffling.

October 31, 2024 1:54 p.m.

Please login to comment