MTGCast #161: M10 Mopery

[pitimp]

This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, MTGCast #161: M10 Mopery. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.

[lord_of_obscurity]

Jeez. Such haters.

The guy who never stops talking has no sense of flavor. He is just a spike. Very narrow view. Please open up more.

Remove Soul actually had horrible flavor. It sounds like a kill spell. Essence Scatter is a fine name. And definitely preferable to remove soul. Runclaw bear replaces grizzly bears because it fits a typical fantasy setting better, and it makes no sense for a GROUP of bears to only be a 2/2.

EDIT: Prevention is not worse with the new rules. There is a time to play spells after blockers are declared, and the damage order for multiple blockers is immediately declared when blockers are. Prevention is essentially unaffected by the new rules.

[bateleur]

"If they wanted to, they could get us to play worse creatures"

"Creatures have got entirely out of hand"

You do have to pay some attention to what Wizards have said on the subject, though. Magic is supposed to be "about creatures". Historically the weakness of most creatures (the occasional Jackal Pup excepted) was a problem. So a certain amount of powering up was reasonable.

More expensive creatures have started becoming even stronger, but that's again because Wizards had come to understand that they were too weak to be relevant at a competitive level.

Look at it this way: spot removal still kills Baneslayer Angel.

It's perfectly reasonable to disagree with this policy, of course, but in discussing it you should at least address the issue rather than implying that the increased power of creatures is somehow an accident.

Wrath had to go. It was just ridiculous. I've been hoping Wrath would go for years. At the very least they should print a variant that doesn't hose Regeneration.

The power creep I'm more worried about is the reprinting of Lightning Bolt. I cannot think of a single valid excuse for that besides flavour.

Re: Runeclaw Bears - The reason is, Wizards know that people will continue to call any 2/2 for 2 "a bear". So the canonical one has to be an actual bear.

[JeroenC]

I'm not a fan of the functional reprints. Some names on cards already sound far-fetched, if they're locking out names already, this is just locking out further naming potential.

Also, where do I find how to subscribe to the podcast? I looked for a while last week, but couldn't find it.
Edit: well, I found how to subscribe to all of MTGCast's podcasts, but I'd prefer to only have this one (atm).

[Herooftime7888]

That ending was... creepy.. to say the very least.
Conley definitely vented the control player's perspective on things well. Creatures are definitely getting out of hand (except for blue ones they're still bad). I do often find myself sighing at the spoiler since the only card I really like is Gargoyle's Castle since I like good man lands, this one is out of Bolt range and it can kill the 3/3 pro blue black uncounterable that I think i still think is too good.
Anyways great show as always

[Dranoel]

The 1/1 black flyer does not exist. It was a spoiling mixup with the Flying Men reprint. The real guy is the 0/1 for B that has T,1B: target player loses 1 life, which is ironically below the power curve.

[hypercast]

Originally Posted by Herooftime7888

That ending was... creepy.. to say the very least.
Conley definitely vented the control player's perspective on things well. Creatures are definitely getting out of hand (except for blue ones they're still bad). I do often find myself sighing at the spoiler since the only card I really like is Gargoyle's Castle since I like good man lands, this one is out of Bolt range and it can kill the 3/3 pro blue black uncounterable that I think i still think is too good.
Anyways great show as always

"M10 isn't bad...it seems like it's a gateway to bad..."

Yeah, pretty creepy. But I am pretty sure Wizards--and they should--will bring out something in Zendikar that will turn it all around.

But honestly, not too horrified. Just...hoping.

[Grim Lavamancer Joe]

it's JOE from houston, not jeff. I'm extremely angry (because I just smashed my finger in the door, and it REALLY hurts), but it is a great podcast!

[desCoures]

Originally Posted by bateleur

You do have to pay some attention to what Wizards have said on the subject, though. Magic is supposed to be "about creatures". Historically the weakness of most creatures (the occasional Jackal Pup excepted) was a problem. So a certain amount of powering up was reasonable.

More expensive creatures have started becoming even stronger, but that's again because Wizards had come to understand that they were too weak to be relevant at a competitive level.

Look at it this way: spot removal still kills Baneslayer Angel.

It's perfectly reasonable to disagree with this policy, of course, but in discussing it you should at least address the issue rather than implying that the increased power of creatures is somehow an accident.

I happen to disagree on the statement that 'Magic is supposed to be about creatures'. That's a more recent party line, and certainly nothing close to the original concept of the game. If Magic is now 'supposed to be about creatures', it's probably so as to be 'in line with industry standards' -- because almost every single other CCG out there has creature/hero/monster/whatever combat as it's central focus, from WoW to VS to the oft-and-deservedly-derided Yu-gi-oh to arcade card games.

The problem is that, to me, that takes away more and more from what makes Magic Magic. It shouldn't be about laying your cards on the table and having 'kill this thing on the table' and 'make this thing on the table tougher' as it's mainstay.

If Magic was supposed to be about creatures, they might as well just have called it 'Summoner: the Gathering' and concepted everyone as Garruk-lookalikes. And then I would probably have jumped to VS System until it died.

Originally Posted by bateleur

The power creep I'm more worried about is the reprinting of Lightning Bolt. I cannot think of a single valid excuse for that besides flavour.

Re: Runeclaw Bears - The reason is, Wizards know that people will continue to call any 2/2 for 2 "a bear". So the canonical one has to be an actual bear.

Actually, the reprint of Lightning Bolt is very valid -- it doesn't kill 'anything' the way it used to, and is unlikely to negatively impact Standard thanks to being a one-for-one replacement for Incinerate. (Extended had better watch out, though.)

The problem, as I see it, is this -- that while bringing back Lightning Bolt in the current format makes sense, it does so not because Lightning Bolt was ever fair, but because creatures have become far more unfair. How many games these days have been lost to turn 1 Wild Nacatl/Figure of Destiny, or turn 2 Tarmogoyf/Putrid Leech, or Turn 3 Woolly Thoctar/Rhox War Monk/Chameleon Colossus (assuming mana ramping)? In other words, if Lightning Bolt seems like a fair inclusion in today's meta, it does so not because Lightning Bolt isn't too powerful, but because creatures have gotten too powerful. And as far as I can tell from Wizards' articles, they appear to be using current creature power to push the inclusion of spells like Lightning Bolt and Path to Exile, when in fact that such spells need to be included to keep creatures in check in the first place should be raising some warning signs.

Right. That's it for the rationality...


[begin mini-rant]

Also, Honor of the Pure, as spoiled, is disgustingly broken. And Great Sable Stag? WTF? Wasn't it just during Coldsnap, not terribly long ago, that Karplusan Strider was initially tested with pro-blue pro-black and found to be too powerful? And now we have... a cheaper version, that loses one toughness, but gains uncounterability and the ability to utterly hose two of the three central control colours? At least Karplusan Strider could be taken out in creature combat -- this is a 3 mana 3/3 that is out of Infest range and can't be killed by blue or black creatures. And guess what? No Razormane Masticore anywhere.

Also, unless Zendikar is mostly devoid of pointy-eared annoyances, expect Elvish Archdruid to be broken, and fast.

And black gets... emo vampires. And blue gets... nothing at all.

[/end mini-rant]

[bateleur]

Originally Posted by desCoures

That's a more recent party line

Sure, but originally Magic wasn't even supposed to be about tournament play, so I think we can safely ignore ancient history.

The problem is that, to me, that takes away more and more from what makes Magic Magic. It shouldn't be about laying your cards on the table

There's no "should" about it. People like different things in a game. For me, Magic has no defining feature as a CCG so much as "first mover advantage". No amount of clever card design could make it play as well as Netrunner or VS, but the compensating advantage is that it's easy to find opponents.

Actually, the reprint of Lightning Bolt is very valid -- it doesn't kill 'anything' the way it used to

Irrelevant. I'd be quite happy with a card for that killed literally anything targettable. The problem is that it also goes to the face for three. That's overpowered.

Great Sable Stag? WTF?

You're not alone on that one. No big deal, though. Just means control decks won't be U/B until it rotates out. You can always Lightning Bolt it!

[mateus]

hey now! the vamps are not emo!
there awesome for us casualites who love them dearly.