Battlefield.

[Zir]

So, as if the "Here I rule" campaign wasn't bad enough, they decided we had to look kiddy playing the game.
That's right, now we get to put things into the battlefield.
Source:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=164339

[jjjoness']

Yeah... this sucks balls. Also there will be no more RFG. "Ach Hans Runs it's the Exiled Zone".

[KillemallCFH]

I've stopped caring.

[TheRock]

Am I still allowed to use RFG? Exiled is fine but I don't think I'll ever get used to the change.

As for the other change and possible change to mana burn, I see the Yu-Gi-Oh kids now... It's not like Sen Triplets was any good anyway.

[from Cairo]

Clearly cards coming into play and being removed from the game is to disruptive to my Planeswalker role play. More summoning my legions into battle and exiling my foes ~

[Nihil Credo]

I'm surprised a civil war didn't break out between Templating and Creative. One of the most common words in the Oracle goes from four to ten letters? This can't possibly go wrong.

Incidentally, Golden Lotus looks like it has a fair bit of potential.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

So, as if the "Here I rule" campaign wasn't bad enough, they decided we had to look kiddy playing the game.
That's right, now we get to put things into the battlefield.
Source:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=164339

I don't mind the battlefield so much. I don't like it, since it blurs the line between playing a strategy game and engaging in fantasy, but I can live with it, I guess. I wouldn't be happy with "exile," however--hell, it doesn't even really properly describe what happens when something is removed from the game. People typically return from exile; cards, on the other hand, do not (save rarely, thanks to the Wish cycle).


As far as childishness goes, we lost that battle a long time ago, what with an onslaught of new keywords and silly-looking art. No worries.

[Dan Turner]

Honestly I can care less, I am going to use any terms I feel comfortable using.

I always say I am putting this card in my discard pile and no one complains when i dont use graveyard even though i been playing since '93.


So if your deck is your Library, is your hand your Tome LMAO

I mean C'mon remove 2 spells from your Tome has pretty good flavor applications.

And instead of cards we will call them Pages.

That way: Target player removes 2 pages of his tome at random. All pages removed this way are placed in the Graveyard.

And then I can pull out a d20 and roll for initiative to see if i go first next round or not.

[Forbiddian]

I'm surprised a civil war didn't break out between Templating and Creative. One of the most common words in the Oracle goes from four to ten letters? This can't possibly go wrong.

Incidentally, Golden Lotus looks like it has a fair bit of potential.

Put a 1/1 creature token into play.
Put a 1/1 creature token into the battlefield.

"Play" turns into "the battlefield" which is 11 extra letters.

Also, the grammar is fucked, too. You don't put anything into the battlefield. It's like the battlefield is a tossed salad bowl. "Put some more Insects into that battlefield!"

The battlefield is flat. You put shit ONTO the battlefield. "I fell ONTO the ground in despair as Wizards of the Coast announced its plan to shove its pedophilic dicks into the asses of classic MTG players everywhere with this change."



And I have one more complaint: I think it actually violates my perception of how the mechanics of Magic worked within the confines of flavor.

I always imagined that I was a Planeswalker (summoning Planeswalkers... ugh), and the other guy was another Planeswalker battling me from a great distance or even a different plane. When we attacked, we sent our summons on arduous missions deep into enemy territory to attempt to wound the enemy Planeswalker (or damage his castle, whatever).

I got this not only from the fact that it would make games of magic totally epic, but I also read at least one original M:tG concept story from Richard Garfield back in 1994 where Garfield describes a battle between two Planeswalkers for control of a land territory. I remember I thought it was a little contrived and tacky when I read it (and I was 5 or 6, so it must have been shit awful), but it gave me a general idea about what Wizards was thinking about, and she only is aware of the enemy Planeswalker through the spells that the enemy was casting.

Also combat and blocking made sense. How your opponent had to attack YOU and couldn't attack your creatures made sense. He only knows where you are, so he sends his guys on a mission to fight you. As the enemy creatures cross into your territory, you can tell your troops to hide and heroically take damage in their stead or you can send your troops over to block.

Some things obviously wouldn't make perfect sense with this depiction (soldiers have to make it back to your base just in time for your untap step every time!), but I'm ok with games having an abstracted depiction of flavor. Magic leaves players open to their own interpretations.

Now it seems like Wizards is shoving its Yu-Gi-Oh flavor down our necks. I'm sure everyone has seen clips from Yu-Gi-Oh (if not, watch Yu-Gi-Oh Abridged on Youtube), but on Yu-Gi-Oh, the players summon huge dragons to a battlefield the size of a basketball court.

It's like you're putting all of your creatures INTO a tiny arena. Then how do creatures NOT block? How are they not constantly in combat? Progenitus does NOT DO ARENAS.


See, the way Magic flavor is failing is Wizards themselves doesn't have a clear depiction about what the hell is going on. Garfield did. He had ideas like Summoning Sickness, Mana Burn, how combat works. Before he created the game, he had a clear idea about what his game was supposed to be representing.

Now we put our guys INTO a blender and press mixer until the Tarmogoyfs rise to the top.

[Solpugid]

Was there some relatively recent point in time where Wizards decided that things weren't going well? This change, honestly, makes a good deal of sense. The flavor is still there, as the concept of a battlefield is rather vague.

Still, this feels pretty alienating to veteran players, and I have to wonder why Wizards felt that things needed to change so drastically and so quickly (Battlefield, new card types, new core set naming schemes, etc.). I've taught dozens of people to play the game, and never once did the dual meaning of "play" hinder this introduction. Is "Battlefield" really going to generate more interest from new players?

[Jak]

This sounds horrible. I just don't understand the point of confusing new players as well as making older players angry. The change does nothing for the game.

[Waikiki]

YOU SUNK MY BATTLESHIP.... thats what battlefield triggers to me.

[dahcmai]

I guess they just thought it was confusing having cards that are variations of the word "play" in different circumstances. That or they plan on getting us used to it now so they can print shit like Raging River again and have it not sound as if you're repeating yourself when you read it.

Either way, it's stupid sounding and stupid to bother with such an old wording. Exiled is even worse in my book. There's entirely too many cards that say "remove from game" on them.

[leander?]

I guess they just thought it was confusing having cards that are variations of the word "play" in different circumstances.
But I don't understand why they needed to change both "plays" into something weird. Why isnt play -> cast enough?.. That solves the problem already, doesn't it?

[Forbiddian]

But I don't understand why they needed to change both "plays" into something weird. Why isnt play -> cast enough?.. That solves the problem already, doesn't it?

Yeah, tru stori:

Mark Rosewater was all like, "Dude, let me play this land."
And then Randy Bueller was all: "OMG, CONFUSION ALERT! We're already "playing" Magic! Could this game get any more confusing with all the double meanings?"
Mark Rosewater responded (All like), "Yeah, let's call it the battlefield, so that people who don't talk English good don't get confuzed.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Changes like this must be like a running joke at Wizards HQ... "So, what can we do to piss veteran players off? Oh, i know, Battlefield! Just tell them they've been confused for years because play doesn't actually mean play but battlefield, just as play doesn't mean play either but cast, those poor sods...".

They know we'll go with it in the end and keep playing the game (or just refuse to use the new words but keep consuming product nonetheless, which is what matters). They have had loads of players complaining several times (fifth edition rules modifications, the new frames, Planeswalkers, etc) but then will always print a cool card or two so we shut up and go back to our decks.

Gameplay won't change and we'll just sound a little bit stupider than we already do whilst playing Magic - "I attack with my 10/10 Lorescale Coatl. Oh yeah, i'll Swords your Coatl away from play, haha. Force of Will your Swords pitching Daze" doesn't quite sound like two adults discussing strategy, does it? I mean, try to convince your mom that somehow Battlefield would make that dialogue sound silly...

That said, i hate Battlefield.

[CallMeLiam]

I get the need to change from Play to Cast.

I also get the need to change In Play to On the Battlefield.

Both of them using play could be confusing, with effects triggering from spells being played and permanents coming into play. That same word there being used for two meanings has confused a few people I've played with. That said, when you change one of them the problem goes away. Changing both is a bit of overkill if you ask me. Plus I can't ever see me saying Battlefield. Throw in the HUGE Oracle changes that this will require, including the exiled zone's flavour being utterly ridiculous when used with older cards and it just sounds like a pretty firm shafting of the existing older playerbase in favour of trying to get new blood.

I don't like it. I won't quit the game over it, but I don't like it.

[Yi Gongbao]

Battlefield and friends - well, we have always known that Wizards are aware of the great allure of this game => they can direct their resources towards new players and screw old ones. Thus the wording.
After all:

I don't like it. I won't quit the game over it, but I don't like it.
I think that sums it up. And let us face it - 12-14-year-olds will love the battlefield, exile and whatever other teenage junk WOTC has to offer.

[Nihil Credo]

My big question for WotC would be: what was wrong with simply "on the field?" It's shorter, just as flavourful, just as unambiguous, doesn't sound nearly as stupid, and works well with noncreature permanents too.

Unless they were so absent-minded as to never think of that option, they must have had a reason to discard it. I just can't think of one.

[AngryTroll]

My big question for WotC would be: what was wrong with simply "on the field?" It's shorter, just as flavourful, just as unambiguous, doesn't sound nearly as stupid, and works well with noncreature permanents too.

Unless they were so absent-minded as to never think of that option, they must have had a reason to discard it. I just can't think of one.

This will probably be what everyone ends up saying, anyways.

[Barook]

My big question for WotC would be: what was wrong with simply "on the field?"

It simply doesn't sound cool enough compared to "battlefield".

[ScatmanX]

I really don't care about that change, once I'll keep on saying into play anyway.

But, what you gus think if they chaged the word Counter( a spell), to Cancel? Would it be just as unecessary,or would be usefull?
(I play with portuguese cards, so it won't change anything to me, once here Conter(spell)/Counter(like +1/+1, or charge, are two diferent words already).

[Dembones]

This will probably be what everyone ends up saying, anyways.

I honestly can't see anyone that has been playing magic for any amount of time adopting anything other than "Into play" and "Removed from game".

[Barook]

One of the main problem with Exile is that the very definition of the word makes sense for creatures, but not for other card types.

E.g. how exactly can you "exile" an Enchantment? From a flavor point of view, they are basically (magic) conditions or situations - how the hell can you "exile" that?

[CallMeLiam]

E.g. how exactly can you "exile" an Enchantment? From a flavor point of view, they are basically (magic) conditions or situations - how the hell can you "exile" that?

Have fun "exiling" your Brainstorms to cast Force of Will. :rolleyes:

[chmoddity]

Just thought that I would mention that Wizards is changing the rules to make them easier to learn for newcomers. The fact that it sounds kiddie to anyone here is really not their main concern.

Think about this, if you had to change "into play" to something else. What would you call it?

[Jak]

Just thought that I would mention that Wizards is changing the rules to make them easier to learn for newcomers. The fact that it sounds kiddie to anyone here is really not their main concern.

Think about this, if you had to change "into play" to something else. What would you call it?

This isn't a rule though. It is a named that has been used since the beginning a Magic. It just makes it harder for newcomers to understand since they will be confused about "in play" and "in the battlefield" when looking at newer cards and cards from Lorwyn (for example).

[Goaswerfraiejen]

What if these terminology changes are restricted to the core set for the time being, while the company conducts focus groups, feedback polls and the like? Their introduction may yet be more gradual than we're assuming.

[Brad Herbig]

I don't mind the change from play to cast, but battlefield and exile are just ridiculous. It won't affect how I speak magic, I just don't want to see it printed on the cards like that.

There is so much magic slang that gets thrown around anyway; I don't think these terms will change it. I mean, I always "swing" with my creatures instead of "attacking", but no one cares. I'm sure that's how it will be with in play or on the battlefield anyway.

Also, the name Path to Exile now has an in-game meaning. Let's rename it Path to Removed from the Game or something.

[Solpugid]

I would like to think that this is a temporary thing (a trial, if you will), but it seems very unlikely. Many Wizards employees have made statements along the lines of "we're making changes assuming the game will be around forever". With that mentality, nothing about the game's past (especially semantics) are sacred. That's kind of a worrisome thought.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

Also, the name Path to Exile now has an in-game meaning. Let's rename it Path to Removed from the Game or something.

Yeah, I was thinking of that as confirmation of our fears. Aside from the question of how one exiles anything that's not a creature, I dislike the term because it implies the possibility of return, which isn't currently built into the game (minus the Wish cycle, anyway). It may well suggest a willingness to delve back into the RFG zone in the future, and I dunno if I like that too much. I like having things clearly outside the bounds of the game.

Speaking of exile... how does one exile corpses (cards in the graveyard, as with Delve, Tormod's Crypt, etc.)? I guess it's not a big deal, but still. I'm bothered.

[DireLemming]

I dislike the term because it implies the possibility of return, which isn't currently built into the game (minus the Wish cycle, anyway). It may well suggest a willingness to delve back into the RFG zone in the future, and I dunno if I like that too much. I like having things clearly outside the bounds of the game.

There are a lot more cards than just the wish cycle that in some way moves stuff to and from RFG.

See: Oblivion Ring, Mesmeric Fiend, Worldgorger Dragon, ...

[jjjoness']

Golden Lotus

Legendary Land Mythic Rare
Shroud
Golden Lotus enters the battlefield tapped.
When Golden Lotus enters the battlefield, sacrifice it unless you sacrifice three untapped lands.
{T}, Sacrifice Golden Lotus: Add nine mana in any combination of colors to your mana pool.

Lord Jesus, tell me this isn't true...
Is Force of Will going to be:
Force of Will 3UU
Instant
You may pay 1 life and exile a blue card in your hand rather than pay FoW's manacost
Counter target spell.

I really really hope not.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

There are a lot more cards than just the wish cycle that in some way moves stuff to and from RFG.

See: Oblivion Ring, Mesmeric Fiend, Worldgorger Dragon, ...

Fair enough. But those have built-in temporality clauses that make the removal temporary. I'll fight to the death! :wink:

[Nessaja]

My big question for WotC would be: what was wrong with simply "on the field?" It's shorter, just as flavourful, just as unambiguous, doesn't sound nearly as stupid, and works well with noncreature permanents too.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images-10/yellow-field-8470-thumb.jpg

vs

http://www.eucatastrophe.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/helms-deep-compressed.jpg

It does spark the imagination a little better :rolleyes:
I think that Exile will be a new keyword for removing creature from the game, not so much replacing RFG on all instances.

[Ectoplasm]

I remember reading somewhere that the act of removing something from the game would be called exiling, while the zone would be called the void.

Which makes sense, since removing something from the game implies it cannot be interacted with, while a card like riftsweeper or clockspinning obviously disagrees. I don't know, but it's been a pet peeve of mine, removed from the game means REMOVED FROM THE GAME, you can't interact with something not in the game :rolleyes:

[rufus]

I remember a while ago there was the keyword bury for 'destroy without regeneration'.
They eventually decided it was stupid. Similarly, if exile is creatures only...

[puppektion]

I would like to think that this is a temporary thing (a trial, if you will), but it seems very unlikely. Many Wizards employees have made statements along the lines of "we're making changes assuming the game will be around forever". With that mentality, nothing about the game's past (especially semantics) are sacred. That's kind of a worrisome thought.

Look at portal. A good deal of things there were changed, only to return later on. I wasn't playing then, so I can't say why that happened, but I can say that it did happen.

It's a possiblility that this will pull a portal.

[coraz86]

I remember a while ago there was the keyword bury for 'destroy without regeneration'.
They eventually decided it was stupid. Similarly, if exile is creatures only...

I don't think they decided it was stupid so much as aggravating for new players. I learned to play between Weatherlight and Tempest, and I had some difficulty remembering the difference between 'bury' and 'destroy.' I wasn't a regular tournament-goer for a year or so after I started playing, but whenever they can make negligible differences disappear like that, they like to. (See also keywords like 'haste,' 'lifelink,' and 'vigilance,' all of which seemed blasphemous when they debuted, but now clearly streamline a lot of things.)

As far as Portal and it's resultant bastard children go; they were explicitly marked for beginners and set up as teaching tools. Until the creation of what we now know as Legacy, you weren't allowed to use cards unique to the Portal/Starter sets in tournaments, and most of the reprints were dumb things like Goblin Hero that you wouldn't use anyway. That's why they were templated differently, and words like 'interceptor' never made it into other sets. (Here's hoping they never make that mistake.)

[coraz86]

I should have mentioned that by 'that mistake' I meant dumbed-down keywords in general; I really think that part of the success of Magic is due to it being different for a long time. Magic used to be way different from Battletech, which was way different from Jyhad/The Eternal Struggle, which was way different from Star Wars. I really think that blurring of the lines is a bad idea, especially when it's an attempt to pander to Pokemon/Yu Gi Oh players (who typically are young kids and preteens, often without the capacity and/or patience to learn a more subtle and intricate game like Magic).

[voska]

Who cares if they call it battlefield or exiled? You're afraid of it sounding dorky? Keep in mind that you are playing Magic: The Gathering. If anything, they should change the name of the damn game so I don't have to tell my gf that I'm going to go play "cards." With this in mind I don't think changing some text in the cards will make the game any less nerdy. If the word changes make it easier for newbies to understand, all the better. You'll have a wider audience to play against instead of discouraging new players.

[pi4meterftw]

Wow... I'm usually for sacrificing flavor for anything useful, like mechanics and stuff, but this sacrifices flavor for nothing, and since flavor is worth more than nothing, I oppose this change.

[umbowta]

Whoooooaa! This totally opens up new possibilities and stuff. I can't want to hook up a new playmat with TEH BATTLEFIELD! printed on it...upside down just so my opponent knows my creatures are not, like, in the the mana zone or something.

"Exiled" sounds okay to me because I'm trying to teach my wife how Swords to Plowshares works. Might actually help.

[DragoFireheart]

Eh, it sounds really nerdy, but then again MTG is a nerdy game. Exile sounds cool, but what I don't understand is why these fancy new names are being brought in but Bury was removed.

Bury sounded so cool, you could be like "Ahah! I cast Terror and BURY your Shivan Dragon"!

Who here thinks bury sounds cooler than exile or lawlfield?

[keys]

I don't think this is going to be that big of a deal. We all love the game and want Wizards to stay in business, so I'm all for making the game more intelligible for beginners even at the slight annoyance of veterans.

That said, the words they chose to streamline the game mechanics do seem a bit awkward.

Exile seems fine as a keyword as long as it only pertains to creatures. We have Path to Exile already. As far as Exiling noncreatures is concerned, it does seem bit odd. I doubt they would start changing the oracle text of every card that uses RFG to this, though.

Battlefield is equally clunky. Something like "Realm" might have been better.

Cast vs. Play, however, seems appropriate and inoffensive.

[caiomarcos]

Yeah, bury was the best!
"BURY ALL CREATURES" does sound like something a pissed off god would say.

[leander?]

Yeah, bury was the best!
"BURY ALL CREATURES" does sound like something a pissed off god would say.
Just compare..

"Bury. All. Creatures."

to..

"Destroy all creatures. They can't be regenerated. Blabla."

You're so right.