I am sad. I really like Braids! I had a ton of fun with her.
Also, Sylvan Primordial created unfair early games and uneven late games. It got even worse with bant bouncing and black recursion. It more or less says, "Seek the Horzion + Destroy 3 Target Lands + a big old body on the field."
If the destroy non-creature permanent part was taken out, it would be strong, but not unbeatable.
I agree with you Paul. So what if they had said this in their ban announcement: "Someone at Wizards mentioned that MTGO was having a hard time with 'banned as Commander' and that got the RC thinking that this isn't something we really need. So we went over the pros and cons, and decided to get rid of it." That wouldn't have been so bad. Sure there would still be some people who complain that MTGO shouldn't be the reason behind changing the ban list, but at least we would have an idea of what happened, and it would make sense. The whole "streamlining" reasoning by itself is just nonsense.
My favorite Magic critter has always been the lowly spider. During Innistrad/RTR standard I won a lot of packs at my local store's FNM with a homebrew called Spiders with Guns. It was fun to play, win or lose.
They are likely not getting paid (as a group) by WOTC, and if they don't cowtow to WOTC they probably lose very little but at the same time many of them are probably well connected to the corp and feel obligated to accept mandates from them. After all this relationship is fairly fragile. Any time WOTC feels that the RC isn't doing the job they want it to do they can just pull the plug.
So while they aren't employees I doubt it is accurate to say they are outside the corporate structure. As for the ban changes, well they just plain don't make sense. So why bother explaining them?
I think your issues with the change to the ban list are worth discussion. However, to me, the bigger issue with the ban list change was how unnecessary it was, specifically changing the "banned as commander" rule.
The reasoning behind this ban just doesn't make sense. It was supposedly about "streamlining" the banned list. It was not about the fact that it was "confusing" though, as the RC made a point of specifically discussing this and saying that they knew that people understood the rule. So why are they doing it? Especially since just in July with their last ban announcement where nothing got banned, the RC noted that they were very happy with the format, and there was nothing they were thinking of banning at the time? Why the sudden change in tune?
Could it have had anything to do with the fact that MTGO v4 can't handle the "banned as Commander" rule? Specifically, you were able to play Rofellos as your Commander during the entirety of the existence of the Beta, despite several reports being filed by me and friends. MTGO not being able to handle this "banned as Commander" seems like the only reason that would cause such a sudden change in tune from the RC. If so, why are there changes being made to the ban list that should easily be handled by coding MTGO correctly? How much sway does Wizards actually have over the RC now, especially as the RC seems to pride itself as being "outside" the corporate structure?
It may be out there, but I haven't seen anything where the RC specifically denies this issue. Even more damning in my eyes, Sheldon made no mention of it in his articles over at Starcity. Each time there has been any change to the ban list, Sheldon uses his articles to talk about the changes and why they were implemented. He also talks about how long the cards in question have actually been problematic, or the process he has used to determine whether a card should be unbanned. But nothing from him this time. Not a peep. Why no discussion of the thought process behind these bans, Sheldon? Unless there is no legit reason besides a request from Wizards, and you don't want to show who is pulling the strings behind the scenes.
It just frustrates me because despite the fact that it only effects a few cards, each of these cards were valuable and served a purpose. And "streamlining" seems like a bogus excuse because I've never heard of anyone having a problem with "banned as commander." I have yet to hear any reasonable explanation for this change that appeared out of nowhere, with no player input. When the RC talks about how they aren't part of Wizards, this lack of transparency just stings. If MTGO is the problem, fix the problem! Don't just work around it by changing the format.
My guess is something like that. In the changed past where dragons continue to thrive, the 5 clans never become the way they are in Khans. Instead, the races are all one big "clan" that fights for survival. Each color keeps a clan mechanic:
White - outlast
Blue - prowess
Black - delve
Red - raid
Green - ferocious
That is one way to do it. They will probably have new mechanics instead, but if so, I expect them to play nicely with the ones I listed.
First, I got off easy because the Clan names are right there in the Charms. After writing them out a few times, I'm more familiar with the names and what colors they pertain to.
I used Mardu Control because I think the word Mardu is alright. As far as descriptions for WBR go, I like it more than Dega and there isn't any other competition. It's short and simple and has a smooth enough "flow" that I don't mind "saying" it.
Most of the others lack the simplicity and impact of the Alara Shard names. None of these new names have anywhere near the bluntness of Jund or Bant. The multi-syllable names don't have the repeating consonants like Naya or Grixis, or the smoothness of Esper. Over all, these new made up words feel artificial in a way that the previous made up words didn't.
Though,as a Modern writer, most of this is inconsequential. What really matters is whether the Clan names stick in Standard. It's not like the Shard names immediately became a thing in Extended and Legacy, or actually, even Standard really. That took time. The Shards trickled down from the format that they mattered most in and went from there. I'm certain the Clan names will do the same, eventually.
It's late here, so I will reply about Abzan Charm and Pod tomorrow!
I think it's going to be more that the clans lose a color or cease to exist in the same form rather than changing to a different 3 color mix. Another thing that has been stated is that Khans is a wedge set, but the block is not.
Kuma Josh essentially ordered writers to use the new names so as to reduce confusion and increase flavor across the site. This should mean that people who regularly read these articles will become fluent in the names and also if you have to deal with the charms for any length of time they should sink in.
As for the color combinations changing in each set, well change is to expected but I also expect some continuity. Without it any change would be without context and definitely more confusing.
Personally I think the names suck but I don't work for WOTC Creative so nothing I can do but say so. As I said on FFTR last week if the names resonate they will stick. Even if we hate them. I don't think these names do except for Sultai and maybe Temur, both of which hint at the flavors of their wedges.
Eh, that would make remembering what Sultai or Jeskai are even more confusing. I fear we're not looking at a definite name for the wedges, then. After Alara, it was pretty easy to associate the new shard names with the color shards. I see people (even Gio in this article) already trying to adopt the KTK names, saying for instance "Mardu deck" to mean a WBR deck. If that's not what Mardu will be come next Spring, it'll be a mess.
Mark Rosewater has said a number of times now that the centering of the clans on the colors they chose will make sense once the whole block is revealed.
I'm assuming it has to do with the time travel theme. I suspect that Sarkhan's actions in the past will change clan alliances, and therefore shift the colors they are in.
As the resident, self-proclaimed Pod expert, I have to say that Abzan Charm is very much NOT a card Pod decks want. And not just because the 3-mana slots are clogged, or WBG are the colors of Melira Pod, but not Kiki Pod.
Pod decks need to reduce non-creature inclusions to the bare essential (so you'll have 2-4 free slots beside Pods and Chords at best), because you never know when you'll have to re-start a Pod cycle from scratch. Drawing into a Charm after a sweeper is cringeworthy. As a result, you have to make creatures do everything for you.
Now, card-drawing is always good, but Pod decks don't particularly rely on random from-the-top drawing, because they have about 7 flexible tutors in the deck already. If card-drawing was needed in Pod combo builds, you'd see cards like Elvish Visionary, Phyrexian Rager or Sea Gate Oracle, that nobody uses instead.
Killing a 3-powered dude: There's a reason why you choose Abrupt Decay (actually, there's two: it's also because you need the tempo, or you'll end up wasting an early turn taking out a threat instead of developing the board, and Pod strategies are all about fast board development, or your mentioned 7 tutors will do exactly nothing). The reason is that Abrupt Decay kills Delver of Secrets. Abzan Charm doesn't. It looks like it does (at least when it's transformed, which, again, tempo), but it actually doesn't. Plus, you already kills them by podding Murderous Redcaps. For killing bigger dudes, you can fetch things like Shriekmaw.
Putting counters on creatures: I find very hard to believe a deck with 25-30 creatures would care enough to save a random Kitchen Finks very often, especially with a card that, in turn, made your creature density lower. If that's something concerning the Pod player, for the same 3 mana, and two color requirements less, you can play Bow of Nylea. Which also kills Delver(s), by the way. And fights self-inflicted life bleed and burn.
Any thoughts on the way they organized the clan colors, so that they are based on one color that however is not the central color of the wedge, making it harder to memorize the names? Like, Sultai is based on a black philosophy, but it's actually wedge green (green and its enemies). And Temur is very clearly "the green clan", but it's actually the wedge centered on blue. I find it a confusing decision.
Yeah the prizes when it paid in VMA didn't make any sense but during that time DEs fired. Many Vintage Championship Qualfiers fired. After the Championship was over more DEs stopped firing. It had been announced that M15 packs were coming to Vintage so people were maybe waiting for that because 3-1ing wouldn't be as bad.
M15 prizes came to Vintage and things stayed the same. The DEs would reach 10+ but most would not fire. On weekends they tended to fire more often. Now, most people have actually given up trying to even join because they were done with being there waiting for nothing.
I agree there is lack of incentive to play online. But we need to have everyday tournaments like DEs. And I don't think making the DEs just 5 tix or increasing the prizes by 1 pack would be enough or even a good thing.
I think we need those everyday tournaments and some bigger tournaments so people want to play. And when more people have a deck already, it's more likely that DEs will fire.
In addition to the poor management of the format, prices could also have moved down because of VMA speculation. Around the first announcement of when VMA was to stop, speculation also caused price disruption.
This time it could have been speculators cashing out, thereby causing the prices to drop. Speculators could cash out for other reasons than because Vintage has bombed on mtgo.
I can only speak for myself and I am still not playing beside drafting because of V4 - on another note, I like me some combat tricks, even seriously, in pauper.
I guess you're right. It is more expensive to buy shardless sultai on mtgo than (Legacy 1600) RUW control (Modern 1000) Splinter Twin (871) then it is to buy Dredge (287),Terra Nova (799) and Delver (663)
But those decks I listed do not need full power if any at all.
Vintage is not firing because the lack of incentive to play online. who wants to spend money for power nine and battle for m15 packs? Who wants to spend money on Undiscovered Paradises and battle for standard stuff?
I recommend you check out the prices of Modern staples before you assume they are much less than vintage. Lily alone costs over $100, so that's $400 right there for a playset, Tarmogoyf? Upwards of $100. It is disgusting to me as well but this is the reality. Demand > Supply. Supply may be being tweaked by the secondary marketeers in the form of speculation and hoarding but there isn't much we or wotc can do about that without making many people unhappy.
As for Vintage not firing because of cost? I have a fairly nice collection and could probably jump into queues but I just don't see the incentive due to prizes and I am not much of a spike (I am but it is not high among my attributes.)
The deck prices aren't even close. Vintage is around $600 just for power cards. If you add in the rest of the deck is probably close to $1000. Who in their right mind has $1000 to spend to play magic? They need to be realistic. I'd like to know the fool running things and this can't possibly be the best way to do it. Vintage isn't firing because 90% of the players can't afford a deck.
Modern decks have similar deck prices and those rarely fail to fire. Legacy is the same way. The prize structure that was made with VMA packs where it was clear 3-1s were better suited playing other formats is a starting point.
Miscommunication of when VMA went off sell. No consumer confidence. The format has been mismanaged.
Or even just offer decent dailies with prizes and don't have them crash, become untenable due to bugs etc. That is really part of the problem: The client not working as well as it should is driving players away. And even those who play regularly on it may be cutting back a bit.
Most DEs fired before the Vintage Championship. So, clearly, there were enough players with a deck. After that the problems started appearing. So maybe having an important tournamente with Vintage is the way to go? A Vintage MOCS season would be great.
I am sad. I really like Braids! I had a ton of fun with her.
Also, Sylvan Primordial created unfair early games and uneven late games. It got even worse with bant bouncing and black recursion. It more or less says, "Seek the Horzion + Destroy 3 Target Lands + a big old body on the field."
If the destroy non-creature permanent part was taken out, it would be strong, but not unbeatable.
The AD reference alone earns you all five stars. The rest of the article could be the word spider repeated 5,000 times and I wouldn't care....
...but it's not, the rest of it is amazingly well done too! Great job.
I agree with you Paul. So what if they had said this in their ban announcement: "Someone at Wizards mentioned that MTGO was having a hard time with 'banned as Commander' and that got the RC thinking that this isn't something we really need. So we went over the pros and cons, and decided to get rid of it." That wouldn't have been so bad. Sure there would still be some people who complain that MTGO shouldn't be the reason behind changing the ban list, but at least we would have an idea of what happened, and it would make sense. The whole "streamlining" reasoning by itself is just nonsense.
My favorite Magic critter has always been the lowly spider. During Innistrad/RTR standard I won a lot of packs at my local store's FNM with a homebrew called Spiders with Guns. It was fun to play, win or lose.
They are likely not getting paid (as a group) by WOTC, and if they don't cowtow to WOTC they probably lose very little but at the same time many of them are probably well connected to the corp and feel obligated to accept mandates from them. After all this relationship is fairly fragile. Any time WOTC feels that the RC isn't doing the job they want it to do they can just pull the plug.
So while they aren't employees I doubt it is accurate to say they are outside the corporate structure. As for the ban changes, well they just plain don't make sense. So why bother explaining them?
A++ for presentation. Also glad to hear your voice on this week's FFTR.
I think your issues with the change to the ban list are worth discussion. However, to me, the bigger issue with the ban list change was how unnecessary it was, specifically changing the "banned as commander" rule.
The reasoning behind this ban just doesn't make sense. It was supposedly about "streamlining" the banned list. It was not about the fact that it was "confusing" though, as the RC made a point of specifically discussing this and saying that they knew that people understood the rule. So why are they doing it? Especially since just in July with their last ban announcement where nothing got banned, the RC noted that they were very happy with the format, and there was nothing they were thinking of banning at the time? Why the sudden change in tune?
Could it have had anything to do with the fact that MTGO v4 can't handle the "banned as Commander" rule? Specifically, you were able to play Rofellos as your Commander during the entirety of the existence of the Beta, despite several reports being filed by me and friends. MTGO not being able to handle this "banned as Commander" seems like the only reason that would cause such a sudden change in tune from the RC. If so, why are there changes being made to the ban list that should easily be handled by coding MTGO correctly? How much sway does Wizards actually have over the RC now, especially as the RC seems to pride itself as being "outside" the corporate structure?
It may be out there, but I haven't seen anything where the RC specifically denies this issue. Even more damning in my eyes, Sheldon made no mention of it in his articles over at Starcity. Each time there has been any change to the ban list, Sheldon uses his articles to talk about the changes and why they were implemented. He also talks about how long the cards in question have actually been problematic, or the process he has used to determine whether a card should be unbanned. But nothing from him this time. Not a peep. Why no discussion of the thought process behind these bans, Sheldon? Unless there is no legit reason besides a request from Wizards, and you don't want to show who is pulling the strings behind the scenes.
It just frustrates me because despite the fact that it only effects a few cards, each of these cards were valuable and served a purpose. And "streamlining" seems like a bogus excuse because I've never heard of anyone having a problem with "banned as commander." I have yet to hear any reasonable explanation for this change that appeared out of nowhere, with no player input. When the RC talks about how they aren't part of Wizards, this lack of transparency just stings. If MTGO is the problem, fix the problem! Don't just work around it by changing the format.
My guess is something like that. In the changed past where dragons continue to thrive, the 5 clans never become the way they are in Khans. Instead, the races are all one big "clan" that fights for survival. Each color keeps a clan mechanic:
White - outlast
Blue - prowess
Black - delve
Red - raid
Green - ferocious
That is one way to do it. They will probably have new mechanics instead, but if so, I expect them to play nicely with the ones I listed.
A comment on Clan names, Marketing and writing:
First, I got off easy because the Clan names are right there in the Charms. After writing them out a few times, I'm more familiar with the names and what colors they pertain to.
I used Mardu Control because I think the word Mardu is alright. As far as descriptions for WBR go, I like it more than Dega and there isn't any other competition. It's short and simple and has a smooth enough "flow" that I don't mind "saying" it.
Most of the others lack the simplicity and impact of the Alara Shard names. None of these new names have anywhere near the bluntness of Jund or Bant. The multi-syllable names don't have the repeating consonants like Naya or Grixis, or the smoothness of Esper. Over all, these new made up words feel artificial in a way that the previous made up words didn't.
Though,as a Modern writer, most of this is inconsequential. What really matters is whether the Clan names stick in Standard. It's not like the Shard names immediately became a thing in Extended and Legacy, or actually, even Standard really. That took time. The Shards trickled down from the format that they mattered most in and went from there. I'm certain the Clan names will do the same, eventually.
It's late here, so I will reply about Abzan Charm and Pod tomorrow!
- Gio
I think it's going to be more that the clans lose a color or cease to exist in the same form rather than changing to a different 3 color mix. Another thing that has been stated is that Khans is a wedge set, but the block is not.
Kuma Josh essentially ordered writers to use the new names so as to reduce confusion and increase flavor across the site. This should mean that people who regularly read these articles will become fluent in the names and also if you have to deal with the charms for any length of time they should sink in.
As for the color combinations changing in each set, well change is to expected but I also expect some continuity. Without it any change would be without context and definitely more confusing.
Personally I think the names suck but I don't work for WOTC Creative so nothing I can do but say so. As I said on FFTR last week if the names resonate they will stick. Even if we hate them. I don't think these names do except for Sultai and maybe Temur, both of which hint at the flavors of their wedges.
Eh, that would make remembering what Sultai or Jeskai are even more confusing. I fear we're not looking at a definite name for the wedges, then. After Alara, it was pretty easy to associate the new shard names with the color shards. I see people (even Gio in this article) already trying to adopt the KTK names, saying for instance "Mardu deck" to mean a WBR deck. If that's not what Mardu will be come next Spring, it'll be a mess.
Mark Rosewater has said a number of times now that the centering of the clans on the colors they chose will make sense once the whole block is revealed.
I'm assuming it has to do with the time travel theme. I suspect that Sarkhan's actions in the past will change clan alliances, and therefore shift the colors they are in.
As the resident, self-proclaimed Pod expert, I have to say that Abzan Charm is very much NOT a card Pod decks want. And not just because the 3-mana slots are clogged, or WBG are the colors of Melira Pod, but not Kiki Pod.
Pod decks need to reduce non-creature inclusions to the bare essential (so you'll have 2-4 free slots beside Pods and Chords at best), because you never know when you'll have to re-start a Pod cycle from scratch. Drawing into a Charm after a sweeper is cringeworthy. As a result, you have to make creatures do everything for you.
Now, card-drawing is always good, but Pod decks don't particularly rely on random from-the-top drawing, because they have about 7 flexible tutors in the deck already. If card-drawing was needed in Pod combo builds, you'd see cards like Elvish Visionary, Phyrexian Rager or Sea Gate Oracle, that nobody uses instead.
Killing a 3-powered dude: There's a reason why you choose Abrupt Decay (actually, there's two: it's also because you need the tempo, or you'll end up wasting an early turn taking out a threat instead of developing the board, and Pod strategies are all about fast board development, or your mentioned 7 tutors will do exactly nothing). The reason is that Abrupt Decay kills Delver of Secrets. Abzan Charm doesn't. It looks like it does (at least when it's transformed, which, again, tempo), but it actually doesn't. Plus, you already kills them by podding Murderous Redcaps. For killing bigger dudes, you can fetch things like Shriekmaw.
Putting counters on creatures: I find very hard to believe a deck with 25-30 creatures would care enough to save a random Kitchen Finks very often, especially with a card that, in turn, made your creature density lower. If that's something concerning the Pod player, for the same 3 mana, and two color requirements less, you can play Bow of Nylea. Which also kills Delver(s), by the way. And fights self-inflicted life bleed and burn.
Any thoughts on the way they organized the clan colors, so that they are based on one color that however is not the central color of the wedge, making it harder to memorize the names? Like, Sultai is based on a black philosophy, but it's actually wedge green (green and its enemies). And Temur is very clearly "the green clan", but it's actually the wedge centered on blue. I find it a confusing decision.
Yeah the prizes when it paid in VMA didn't make any sense but during that time DEs fired. Many Vintage Championship Qualfiers fired. After the Championship was over more DEs stopped firing. It had been announced that M15 packs were coming to Vintage so people were maybe waiting for that because 3-1ing wouldn't be as bad.
M15 prizes came to Vintage and things stayed the same. The DEs would reach 10+ but most would not fire. On weekends they tended to fire more often. Now, most people have actually given up trying to even join because they were done with being there waiting for nothing.
I agree there is lack of incentive to play online. But we need to have everyday tournaments like DEs. And I don't think making the DEs just 5 tix or increasing the prizes by 1 pack would be enough or even a good thing.
I think we need those everyday tournaments and some bigger tournaments so people want to play. And when more people have a deck already, it's more likely that DEs will fire.
In addition to the poor management of the format, prices could also have moved down because of VMA speculation. Around the first announcement of when VMA was to stop, speculation also caused price disruption.
This time it could have been speculators cashing out, thereby causing the prices to drop. Speculators could cash out for other reasons than because Vintage has bombed on mtgo.
I can only speak for myself and I am still not playing beside drafting because of V4 - on another note, I like me some combat tricks, even seriously, in pauper.
I guess you're right. It is more expensive to buy shardless sultai on mtgo than (Legacy 1600) RUW control (Modern 1000) Splinter Twin (871) then it is to buy Dredge (287),Terra Nova (799) and Delver (663)
But those decks I listed do not need full power if any at all.
Vintage is not firing because the lack of incentive to play online. who wants to spend money for power nine and battle for m15 packs? Who wants to spend money on Undiscovered Paradises and battle for standard stuff?
I recommend you check out the prices of Modern staples before you assume they are much less than vintage. Lily alone costs over $100, so that's $400 right there for a playset, Tarmogoyf? Upwards of $100. It is disgusting to me as well but this is the reality. Demand > Supply. Supply may be being tweaked by the secondary marketeers in the form of speculation and hoarding but there isn't much we or wotc can do about that without making many people unhappy.
As for Vintage not firing because of cost? I have a fairly nice collection and could probably jump into queues but I just don't see the incentive due to prizes and I am not much of a spike (I am but it is not high among my attributes.)
The deck prices aren't even close. Vintage is around $600 just for power cards. If you add in the rest of the deck is probably close to $1000. Who in their right mind has $1000 to spend to play magic? They need to be realistic. I'd like to know the fool running things and this can't possibly be the best way to do it. Vintage isn't firing because 90% of the players can't afford a deck.
tons vintage championship qualifiers did not fill. There was worry on twitter that the championships would not have enough people qualified.
Modern decks have similar deck prices and those rarely fail to fire. Legacy is the same way. The prize structure that was made with VMA packs where it was clear 3-1s were better suited playing other formats is a starting point.
Miscommunication of when VMA went off sell. No consumer confidence. The format has been mismanaged.
Or even just offer decent dailies with prizes and don't have them crash, become untenable due to bugs etc. That is really part of the problem: The client not working as well as it should is driving players away. And even those who play regularly on it may be cutting back a bit.
Most DEs fired before the Vintage Championship. So, clearly, there were enough players with a deck. After that the problems started appearing. So maybe having an important tournamente with Vintage is the way to go? A Vintage MOCS season would be great.