Is dual lands' scarcity the real monster in the wardrobe? or The Reserved List, again

[SilverGreen]

Number of cards in the top 8 of a major event. Data from the most recent SCG Open, Seatle, November 18, 2012:

Badlands 0
Bayou 5
Plateau 0
Savannah 6
Scrubland 3
Taiga 1
Tropical Island 7
Tundra 7
Underground Sea 8
Volcanic Island 5

Plains 6
Island 20
Swamp 2
Mountain 0
Forest 6

Bloodstained Mire 0
Flooded Strand 8
Polluted Delta 10
Windswept Heath 5
Wooded Foothills 0
Arid Mesa 0
Marsh Flats 3
Misty Rainforest 18
Scalding Tarn 9
Verdant Catacombs 11

Dual land count: 42
Basic land count: 34
Fetch land count: 64


I took the SCG Open Seatle just because it's the most recent tournament we can use data from, but we could be taking data from any tournament held up to 2-3 years back. The results doens't vary so much.

The numbers are clear. They always make me think about wether the stony statement that "the dual lands are the dorsal spine of the Legacy format" remains true.

The impossibility to reprint the ubiquitous dual lands and other not-so-stellar Legacy staples (and which ultimately led to the creation of the Modern format, right from Wizards of the Coasts' magical hat) together with Legacy player base's constant growth, are always alleged by the format's "detractors" as reasons for a slow, agonizing and inescapable death. "The Reserved List will kill Legacy", they say. "There's no dual lands for everyone". If every Legacy player has the intention to own the 40 dual lands, it could be true. But that's not the case. A complete set of duals isn't necessary, and is not the goal for the majority of players. Moreover, a complete collection with all the staples of any one format is not necessary and is not the goal for the absolute greater portion of Magic players, that exchange cards and decks periodically. As not every Standard player needs or wants a playset of M13 duals, not every Legacy player needs or wants a playset of Revised duals.

But that's not the case with the fetch lands. You do not need a full set of duals to play your better Magic, but you do need a playset of your in-color (or off-color too!) fetch land. They do everything for your deck, from mana fixing (fetching both that lone dual land you own or the basic land needed at the time), from deck manipulation (you can run Brainstorm without dual lands, but you can't do it without fetches), to improving your deck's card quality ("thinning" your deck with each activation). Fetchlands aren't merely mana producers, they're important and much needed spell-like cards. Hence they're becoming more and more prevalent in Legacy's deckbuilding, and more and more difficult to properly acquire.

Here's a personal example:

In the past couple years, three teammates from my previous (but still active) team decided to quit Magic. They sold their entire collections, each one complete with a playset of duals (one even with a dozen extra FBBs). And after many years frozen in plastic binders, those cards got back into circulation. In the meantime, I started another parallel team, composed exclusively with newcomers to the Legacy format. And these newcomers are now slowly - or not so slowly, in some cases - building entirely new Legacy collections, full with Wastelands, FoWs and, of course, dual lands. Dual lands are expensive, we know it. But a set of soon-to-devalue Thragtusks pays for an EX+ Tropical Island with ease, and these new Legacy players opted for taking the slowly paced, long-term route. But as none of them is in a hurry to complete sets of dual lands, they're having a tough time fulfilling sets of needed fetch lands. Deltas and Strands are now as dificult to find - if not more - as Seas and Tundras. It doesn't matter if you have the funds to buy a more expensive card, when you do not find the less expensive, more needed one.

Add to all of this the fact there's many Legacy decks running fetch lands with no dual lands, but there's no decks running dual lands with no fetch lands.

So I ask you: do you think the impossibility to reprint dual lands is the true reason that will make Legacy fade as a format in the short-to-medium term?

I don't think so. People willing to pay for a set of Angels of Serenity will always afford a pair of Wastelands or a copy of Tundra anyways. I really think the fetch lands are the real deal. They're the true dorsal spine of the Legacy format and, very important to note, they're not in the Reserved List.

[RaNDoMxGeSTuReS]

I swear excessively long thread titles belong on MTGSally. Wish the English was more concise.

To answer your question:

No.

Legacy will die when Wizards doesn't recognize it as a format.
Legacy will die when people stop playing MTG.
Legacy will die when the company goes out of business.

And other variations of the former.

[Jenni]

No. Legacy is, if anything, gaining popularity. The dual lands not being able to be reprinted sucks, but all 10 fetches are fair game, and I do expect the original (ally-colour) fetches to be reprinted for modern which will help legacy players get them as well.
I don't think legacy will die any time soon, and if it does it wont be because the lands are hard to find. Maybe the initial investment will kill it - not everyone is willing to spend 1000$ on a deck, but even that I don't think will happen.
What is most likely kill legacy, is lack of support. Even then, some community will persist in the same way there is still a vintage community - it's a small group, but there are still people playing vintage even though there is minimal support from WotC, and even though it's considered by most people I know at least to be a relic of the past, a dead format.

[FieryBalrog]

I'm puzzled as to how you think those numbers show that dual lands aren't as important as we think they are.

By the way, you mention how important fetch lands are. What makes fetch lands so important? The ability to fetch 5 different colors of mana with any single fetch, maybe? There are very few decks that run fetches without any duals at all, by the way. Among 2 color decks all I can think of is GW Enchantress, but even they usually run 1x Savannah. Mono color decks with no splash only run fetches when they really need shuffle effects, which is rare (usually they're running 3-4x Sensei's Divining Top, like MUC), or their pilots don't know what they are doing. Goblins, Merfolk, Burn, Death & Taxes, High Tide... the highest profile mono color decks don't run fetches when they're not splashing.

"Deck thinning" is also an outdated myth that's been busted for about 5+ years now by multiple analyses.

If Volcanic Island didn't exist, how amazing would Flooded Strand -> Steam Vents be for UW Miracles so they can splash those 3 REB in the SB? Not very. So, you say, we can give up that splash. It's just 3 cards, and UW can do fine. OK, well that's already a little suboptimal. But even then, how amazing is Flooded Strand -> Hallowed Fountain for important access to UUU/UUW on turn 3? Not very, and it matters even to the core of the deck.

[KobeBryan]

looks like "islands" are the real monster in the wardrobe.

[SilverGreen]

looks like "islands" are the real monster in the wardrobe.Some people got to this same inference about 15 years ago. Perhaps it's the time to finally ban them?

Ok, I concede. Joking titles and fancy text are not a hit here, so I'll try harder next time. That's a piety the site's not called "A Origem", so we could try Portuguese. Still with no concision, I'm afraid... :(

You can also read the thread's title as "Why People Could Stop Saying That Legacy Will Die Due to the Reserved List" or "Legacy Will Always Adapt". Or yet "Hey Wizards, Show Us Some Love and Realease an Eternal Masters For Us, Too! Moar Fetchlands Are Gud!".

[SilverGreen]

I'm puzzled as to how you think those numbers show that dual lands aren't as important as we think they are.Didn't say they aren't important. I said they're played in fewer numbers than fetchlands'. They are. Of course fetches would be nothing without the dual lands. That's not the point.

The point is: if Legacy "would die" in a given time period (I'm not complaining about it, but a zillion people is, you know that) due to the Reserved List, its "death" would be long delayed with the reprinting of non-reserved staples. And mana bases (reserved dual lands, specifically) was always the showcase of this complaining.

Better one scarcity than two, right?



What is most likely kill legacy, is lack of support. Even then, some community will persist in the same way there is still a vintage community - it's a small group, but there are still people playing vintage even though there is minimal support from WotC, and even though it's considered by most people I know at least to be a relic of the past, a dead format.Even that won't kill it, Jenni. We can't exactly call two GPs a year "official support", yet they're nice. Legacy always thrived on unnoficial supporters such as SCG in USA, some brave supporters in Europe, or Central Magic here in Brazil. And the host of the World's greater supporter published they'll keep their Legacy Opens as normal, so, no worries in this matter for us.

[HammerAndSickled]

Mono color decks with no splash only run fetches when they really need shuffle effects, which is rare (usually they're running 3-4x Sensei's Divining Top, like MUC), or their pilots don't know what they are doing. Goblins, Merfolk, Burn, Death & Taxes, High Tide... the highest profile mono color decks don't run fetches when they're not splashing.

That's not really true. Fetches have utility in so many different ways. High Tide runs some to shuffle after Brainstorms, Burn runs them to fuel Lavamancers. They make Goyfs and KoTR bigger, can be used to dodge wasteland, etc.

[Greenpoe]

Most decks don't even need all 4 duals of whatever colors they use. It's perfectly fine to run with 3 or even just 2 and extra fetches.

[joemauer]

Seems like now is a good time to play Stifle.

[Megadeus]

I run fetches and shocks in place of my duals. The fetches I think are more important just because you do have at least some kind of functional dual land that is cheap. You can't find a good budget fetch land. But sadly as Joe pointed out, more fetches leave you vulnerable to Stifle.

[TsumiBand]

I run fetches and shocks in place of my duals. The fetches I think are more important just because you do have at least some kind of functional dual land that is cheap. You can't find a good budget fetch land. But sadly as Joe pointed out, more fetches leave you vulnerable to Stifle.

I used to feel like shocklands would be an okay sub for duals in Legacy, until I tried rocking RGW Zoo with them and realized that I couldn't out-aggro Merfolk if I was going to take 6 - 9 damages trying to have the same speed as Zoo "should have" against such a deck. It's not impossible to use shock/fetch in the correct deck, but you're easily going to be in positions where you're going to need to not Bolt yourself, and that means lost tempo.

Has anyone ever actually attempted to revisit some of the other mana fixing things that have been printed? I don't think that fetchlands should ever NOT be the primary mana fixer in your deck, since really nothing else does what they do. Honestly though, m10 tap lands are not the worst things in the world, though I don't think you'd ever actually want to play four since having nothing but taplands in your first 7 is just as bad as a bunch of shocklands. And really the older painlands can actually see you take less damage than shockfetching, since if you draw enough other lands you may not even have to tap them for colored mana again. The Lorwyn filter lands don't entirely suck either, although again, 4-of would probably represent a stumbling block.

I know that there are decks which would never want to do this - bad example being Zoo, because Wild Nacatl and Kird Ape say hi, better example being "decks with Islands" since they probs want to play Daze, or at least fake like they can. But what does a deck like, I dunno, WB Deadguy care if it plays real duals. If you can play fetches and some other fixer, I'd bet you won't feel the difference, save maybe a point or two of life.

[Megadeus]

Never actually tried it out. I meanMiracles does run Glacial fortress as a means of getting around choke. It doesnt seem awful. I mean I think that newer players that are going to be playing in more local events should be fine with a bit more budget mana base. My roommate wanted to buy 3 Volcanics over 4 Force of will for UR delver and play without force. I told him that half the reason you are playing blue is for force. Otherwise you might as well just play burn. Buy the spells for it and run steam vents/Sulfur Falls or something. Unless you are playing Zoo or RUG where the basic land subtypes truly matter, I dont see any problem with newer players playing without Revised Duals on a local scale. I think they are just intimidated and think that Glacial Fortress is just a bad card. after T2 drawing a Glacial Fortress is just as good as drawing a Tundra.

[xeraseth]

Just going to point out, there are a lot more fetches in circulation than there are duals.

[SpikeyMikey]

No, the percentage points you lose from a subootimal mana-base aren't huge, numerically, at least. But you're not winning a Competitive REL event with a suboptimal Mana base. Players do all kinds of things to scramble for that extra little edge. Saying that a subpar Mana-base is inconsequential seems a little silly when you're doing all these other things to gain advantage. Are shocks or M10's or filters ok at the kitchen table? Sure. But then again, so are proxies. Glacial Fortress is acceptable on turn 2 if you had the turn 1 Tundra. Bit what if you don't have it? Now you're shipping a hand that would've otherwise been a snap keep. And let's stop talking about $1000 decks. That was a thing 2 years ago. Now, you're talking more like $2k. That's a significant barrier. Who wants to spend 4 months' rent on a game when you can get 14 years worth of WoW for the same price?

[Aggro_zombies]

Dual lands are pretty much the only cards on the Reserved List that see any significant amount of play; the other cards that do see play are either only played in specific decks (like Mox Diamond), or only see play in small numbers (like Moat or Volrath's Stronghold). The remainder of the expensive cards in the format - Force, Wasteland, Tarmogoyf, etc. - can be reprinted at any time and thus aren't a permanent barrier to entry like the dual lands are.

Banning the dual lands would have several benefits:

Manabases in Modern point to what decks in Legacy would look like; shocklands (whose numbers are now increasing), filterlands (part of a large recent print run), and fetches (not in short supply) would make up the bulk of nonbasics, and these cards are widely available, easy to acquire, reprintable, and significantly less expensive than white-bordered duals. Players already invested in Modern - or Standard, right now - would have already have access to many of these lands and thus would have an easier time slipping into the format.

It would also encourage more creative manabase construction on the part of players: because the dual-fetch model is head and shoulders above anything else you could possibly do, it has pushed many interesting and potentially playable lands out of the format. The correct balance of shocks, fetches, M10/filterlands, and other nonbasics would be a strategy-dependent thing that players would need to take into account during deck design.

The damage from shocks and fetches would also incentivize players to try faster aggro decks. 3-5 extra damage from lands makes it easier for a deck like, say, Speed Zoo to close out a game before a control deck can stabilize; alternately, letting shocks ETB tapped is a loss of tempo that would greatly benefit fast decks. It could open up previously-closed design space in the format.

The one issue I see - aside from the nerdrage of people disappointed to discover that Magic cards aren't government bonds - is that Wasteland might actually just be too powerful in this format. Wasteland on a shockland is painful no matter which mode the shockland was played under, and Wasteland against other, non-fetchable lands also seems very powerful. Players could play more basics, sure, but the incentives to start most decks with 4 Wasteland would be high and would like drive the price of the card further skyward. We would have to see what happens.

[Koby]

The one issue I see - aside from the nerdrage of people disappointed to discover that Magic cards aren't government bonds - is that Wasteland might actually just be too powerful in this format. Wasteland on a shockland is painful no matter which mode the shockland was played under, and Wasteland against other, non-fetchable lands also seems very powerful. Players could play more basics, sure, but the incentives to start most decks with 4 Wasteland would be high and would like drive the price of the card further skyward. We would have to see what happens.

This was the strongest point and should have been made before going off into Modern-land.

Modern can get away with singleton duals precisely because there is no good analog to Wasteland.

[Aggro_zombies]

This was the strongest point and should have been made before going off into Modern-land.

Modern can get away with singleton duals precisely because there is no good analog to Wasteland.
True. RUG with Wasteland and Stifle would probably be too strong against a Modern-style manabase, but Ghost Quarter and Tectonic Edge and far too weak in a tempo-style deck. Wasteland might need to be banned along with the duals, but it's possible there's some equilibrium.

Though maybe not. Wasteland is still very powerful right now when we have access to some of the best possible manabases you can make, so needing to rely on weaker lands could make Wasteland too oppressive.

[ELD]

Dual lands are valued highly because people want to play Legacy. It's a direct result of Legacy doing well.

[Einherjer]

Topic: Alternative Duals:
No, there are no serious alternatives. No matter what you say. I've been playing Miracles since the Miracle mechanic was released, I've been trying out pretty much everything, including Glacial Fortress. It was a liability. It was necessary in certain gaming-environments due to Choke being a heavily played card. And that's it. It was never a replacement for Tundra. It is worse than a Tundra, in any way. We play in a Format where Wasteland/Stifle-decks are a major pillar, why would I open myself to the possibility of getting screwed if I could just play the full playset of Tundra? Same reasoning for Shock-Duals. I could not imagine a deck that would never ever care about it'sl ife total, simply due to the reason that most games are won by hitting an opponent to 0. Not even aggresive decks like Zoo can use this alternative, as it's been outlined further above.
There will never be real alternatives to Dual lands. Not in competitive Legacy. I'd be rather building a Manabase without any Dual lands, before I'd take any of this terrible alternatives.

Topic: Fetchlands:
Yes, Fetchlands are important. They serve serveral purposes, such as Manafixing, Shuffling your Library (for Sensei's Divining Top, Brainstorm, Ponder) and thinning your library. Yes I know one Fetchland doesn't change the possibility of drawing a nonland next turn by alot, but all of you have played some long grindy Matches with/against Miracle or decks of this kind. And you will have realised that you drew significantly less Lands than you should, simply due to the fact, that you've already used about 5-6 Fetchlands already. Fetchlands have been a pillar of this format since they were printed.

Generally:
Could anybody tell me, why we are searching for a sign that should indicate the long awaited doomsday of our beloved Format? There are no real problems. Legacy is flourishing like never before. If all of us look for a problem in our Format, we will find it- not that hard though, but does this mean that our Format is dieng? By God, no. Not now.

Greetings

[Koby]

True. RUG with Wasteland and Stifle would probably be too strong against a Modern-style manabase, but Ghost Quarter and Tectonic Edge and far too weak in a tempo-style deck. Wasteland might need to be banned along with the duals, but it's possible there's some equilibrium.

Though maybe not. Wasteland is still very powerful right now when we have access to some of the best possible manabases you can make, so needing to rely on weaker lands could make Wasteland too oppressive.

I was going to make a comment that Wasteland and Beta duals exist in an equilibrium, but when I thought about it, they don't. Wasteland keeps greedy manabases in check. Duals don't keep Wasteland in check - only minimize its effect.

[Barook]

I was going to make a comment that Wasteland and Beta duals exist in an equilibrium, but when I thought about it, they don't. Wasteland keeps greedy manabases in check. Duals don't keep Wasteland in check - only minimize its effect.

The truely sad thing is that we aren't going to get any new, decent non-basic hate anytime soon, since Wizard prefers to cash in on shitty dual land variants.

[Aggro_zombies]

The truely sad thing is that we aren't going to get any new, decent non-basic hate anytime soon, since Wizard prefers to cash in on shitty dual land variants.
If by "decent," you mean, "comparable in power to Wasteland," I would argue Wasteland is too strong. The dual lands are also too strong, and the presence of cards tailored to hate on them doesn't really make up for the fact that they are better than basics almost all of the time. The current set of non-dual multicolor lands have strong enough drawbacks to make it so you don't want to automatically jam a ton of them into your deck and call it a day; it relieves some of the need to have a very powerful nonbasic hoser in the format to balance things.

The more I've thought about it, the more I agree with Koby: Wasteland would tear apart a Modern-style manabase. The standards for manabase construction would be warped almost entirely around how much your deck cares about timely Wastelands. This is only somewhat true in today's format because the only effective drawback to running more duals is Wasteland.

Reducing the power level of the mana makes things more challenging, which is good for strategic play. Think of it as the "taking combat damage off the stack" moment for manabases: you can no longer autopilot your mana configuration because there is now more than one possible correct answer in manabase construction.

[Barook]

If by "decent," you mean, "comparable in power to Wasteland," I would argue Wasteland is too strong.

Blood Moon-power level cards would be fine. At least anything more playable than 4 mana Stone Rains (Craterize).

Maybe a Null Rod-styled card:


Activated abilities of lands can't be played unless they're mana abilities.

That wouldn't ruin the mana development in Standard and could still be good enough for Legacy/Modern if given the right mana cost (and maybe a body).

[Megadeus]

Maybe a Null Rod-styled card:



That wouldn't ruin the mana development in Standard and could still be good enough for Legacy/Modern if given the right mana cost (and maybe a body).

I like this one a lot. It doesnt stop Tabernacle style of offects, but it seems like it would be a solid card. What like a 2 mana artifact?

Messed up the quote there... But yeah it seems like a solid card.

[mini1337s]

If people spent as much time solidifying their careers as they do complaining about the cost of magic, this wouldn't be an issue. :)

[TsumiBand]

If duals were banned and we're forced to play fetches and shocks, people will just bitch more when Price of Progress kills them on turn 4 for daring to play things.

Why isn't this the Show and Tell argument? Fetchlands are the real enablers here; they don't just get duals after all, suckers play around Wasteland with these bad boys too. In a world without Flooded Strands, you have to draw your Tundra (or Green can fetch it a billion different ways, but that's Green's niche, and no one cares). Wouldn't Wasteland vs. duals then just become a battle over whoever topdecks what when? I mean as long as the conversation goes toward Imaginary-Ban-Land, why aren't the tutors the cards in contention here. It's just like playing fat without Natural Order; now you just have to draw your bomb and play it. Granted duals have no cost associated, so okay now you have to draw them.

[lyracian]

Has anyone ever actually attempted to revisit some of the other mana fixing things that have been printed? I don't think that fetchlands should ever NOT be the primary mana fixer in your deck, since really nothing else does what they do. Honestly though, m10 tap lands are not the worst things in the world
The problem is that everything other than Duals/Shocks lacks a land type so they can not be fetched. You see decks running an occasional filter land or Core-Dual land to have extra mana fixing and I know a lot of people that run shock lands to have budget Legacy decks.

Friday Night Modern will promote the format and reprints like Modern Masters will continue to bring the price down until it eclipses Legacy. We already have 5-Card proxy tournaments running in the UK for Legacy so there is less and less incentive to actually own real cards. I already lend out decks at our weekly Legacy tournament and I expect sanctioned Legacy events will go the way of the last sanctioned Vintage event I saw where one person brings along decks for half the players.

[DLifshitz]

Friday Night Modern will promote the format and reprints like Modern Masters will continue to bring the price down until it eclipses Legacy.

I'm not so sure about this. Modern really doesn't have that Eternal feel to it. Right now people on the MTGS Modern Forum, as far as I know the largest Modern community on the web, seem to be weighing in on the side of banning something from Jund, either BBE or (gasp!) Bob. Introducing Modern to FNM, and consequently exposing it to a lot of lazy, ignorant players who hate control, hate lockdown, hate land destruction, hate combo, hate the current best deck, etc. might just lead to more bans, and Modern evolving to resemble Standard more than Legacy. Which is fine if that's what people want, but that will also ensure Legacy will maintain a steady following. Not to imply that FNM players in general are lazy or ignorant, merely that the more you want to popularize something, the more intellectually accessible it has to be.

Whether Modern Masters will actually bring prices down, the ones that actually matter, remains to be seen. I personally doubt it because of the small print run, cards being printed at altered, presumably higher, rarities, and general WotC risk avoidance.

[TsumiBand]

The problem is that everything other than Duals/Shocks lacks a land type so they can not be fetched. You see decks running an occasional filter land or Core-Dual land to have extra mana fixing and I know a lot of people that run shock lands to have budget Legacy decks.

I wouldn't advocate taking fetches out of the main. Fetches go further in mana fixing than just about any other card you can think of. They either get the dual, or get the basic to avoid getting Wasted, or get your off-color via a rando-dual that you weren't going to draw unless you drew a friendly fetch.

I'm saying, okay we know that duals are balls-fuck expensive, so what's so awful about using alternative mana fixing in a deck that isn't hung up on land types? Take your average Maverick list, which last time I checked does not need to control a Forest or a Plains for the sake of any of its technology; does Maverick shrivel up and die if it runs 4x Windswept Heath, 2 - 4 m10 taplands, a couple extra Horizon Canopy and something random like a Lorwyn filter or the old painland? I don't think it does. I understand that in a vacuum, fetch > Forest is less potent than fetch > Savannah, but when your next turn was probably going to be a basic drop anyway, what do you actually lose by playing that tapland/painland/filter land on turn 2, aside from cool points b/c you're not playing Beta lands. I don't see a major difference between those two turns. It's not like Wasteland is strictly worse for you at this point; your non-real-dual gets Wasted, you're still stuck with your basic and first turn play.

To restate; I don't think this works for every deck under the sun. Decks that want to Daze, or decks that count their land types for whatever reason, they will not want anything besides duals in their deck. But I think it would be interesting, and potentially beneficial to the growth of the format, to get a head count of the decks in the format that lose the least from finding alternatives to Beta duals. Anything that can reduce the foreseen entry fee of the format in a palpable way gets thumbs up from me. Let suckers run around with tapland Maverick for a while until they (hopefully) win enough Legacy tournaments to maybe throw one or two Savannahs in that shit. I think there are a non-zero number of decks that honestly don't care if they are playing bonafide duals.

Fetches, on the other hand, are very clutch, because they always read "This land is the color you need right now." It would be way, way more savage to lose those bad boys than to be denied access to dual lands.

[Jenni]

I'm not so sure about this. Modern really doesn't have that Eternal feel to it. Right now people on the MTGS Modern Forum, as far as I know the largest Modern community on the web, seem to be weighing in on the side of banning something from Jund, either BBE or (gasp!) Bob. Introducing Modern to FNM, and consequently exposing it to a lot of lazy, ignorant players who hate control, hate lockdown, hate land destruction, hate combo, hate the current best deck, etc. might just lead to more bans, and Modern evolving to resemble Standard more than Legacy. Which is fine if that's what people want, but that will also ensure Legacy will maintain a steady following. Not to imply that FNM players in general are lazy or ignorant, merely that the more you want to popularize something, the more intellectually accessible it has to be.


Ban Bob? Wow, that's just... sad..
Anyway, Modern has a different target audience than legacy. Modern is essentially just replacing old extended - it's a format that covers a larger chunk of magic's history than Standard or 2xStandard and lets the newer crowd play with their "Old"(by their standards) cards. The fact that it doesn't rotate might attract people who are scared to buy into legacy or vintage but want to play a non-rotating format, but again, those are people who weren't playing legacy anyway.
Of course some people like both modern and legacy, but they are not the same thing, and the reasons to play one format are not reasons to play the other.
Modern is more like old extended if all the good cards were banned, or more like standard (the decks all seem like old standard decks anyway) than it is like legacy.

Having modern become an FNM format really doesn't mean anything for legacy, if people want to play with real dual lands, Jaces, Counterspells, Hymns, sinkholes, force of will, swords, etc. etc. then they still have to play legacy or vintage. Modern won't, and honestly can't match the feeling of the actual eternal formats, because wizards is not printing cards like this anymore. Compared to legacy, everything in modern is sub-par at best.
The formats just can not be compared directly, because basically everything modern has, we have too, and we have so much more on top of that.

[csy]

Everything sucks if you can't afford it.

[FieryBalrog]

The main argument against banning the duals and/or Wasteland isn't about how powerful they are or aren't, it's that it takes away the single coolest thing about Legacy as a format. All you're left with is Modern + a pile of broken blue cards. Which were either banned from Modern or weren't printed.

Banning the duals is (made up number) 5x more damaging to the format's status than banning Force of Will.

[csy]

There is nothing wrong with the format!!! Seriously. It's just getting more crowded with more people complaining about prices. Legacy is happy and healthy, it has a hard cap, but who cares? It's not going anywhere in the near future. Getting rid of the most awesome mana in magic to make legacy a slightly better modern would be horrible. Modern is boring and falls short of its name 'eternal' it will die before legacy.

[phonics]

I'm not so sure about this. Modern really doesn't have that Eternal feel to it. Right now people on the MTGS Modern Forum, as far as I know the largest Modern community on the web, seem to be weighing in on the side of banning something from Jund, either BBE or (gasp!) Bob. Introducing Modern to FNM, and consequently exposing it to a lot of lazy, ignorant players who hate control, hate lockdown, hate land destruction, hate combo, hate the current best deck, etc. might just lead to more bans, and Modern evolving to resemble Standard more than Legacy. Which is fine if that's what people want, but that will also ensure Legacy will maintain a steady following. Not to imply that FNM players in general are lazy or ignorant, merely that the more you want to popularize something, the more intellectually accessible it has to be.

Whether Modern Masters will actually bring prices down, the ones that actually matter, remains to be seen. I personally doubt it because of the small print run, cards being printed at altered, presumably higher, rarities, and general WotC risk avoidance.

The reason modern doesnt feel like an eternal format is because eternal formats are pretty much characterized by being formats where people can play broken ass shit, and the broken things balance each other out. I modern they just banned or cut off anything that had an inkling for being broken so (for me) it feels really vanilla. They should be unbanning cards if anything.

And when was the last time some good manabase punishment was printed? Blood moon in 9th? Anathamancer in alara (though this was only in standard)?

[EpicLevelCommoner]

Funny thing about this whole death of Legacy thing . . . I asked one of the cashiers at a local card shop if they were going to be holding another Grand Prix qualifier for Legacy like they did two years ago (aside: I got stomped: 0-3-drop), and while they said they didn't know, they explained to me the problem with the Legacy format from a business standpoint.

1. Players do want to play legacy. They just don't want to play against other legacy decks.
2. Those that do want to play with and against legacy decks also more likely than not do not need to buy any cards themselves.

So, we got a two-pronged attack on the format: old veterans who have built up their collection from the start, and eager newcomers who have not. For one, cost and rarity means nothing because they rarely need to buy anything else; for the other, it means everything as it is a huge wall preventing them from getting into the format. In the end, few actually buy the cards, leaving shopowners wondering why would they even support the eternal formats.

Personally though, I'm glad SCG supports legacy like it does: it actually gives me hope that spending three years building my Nic Fit will be worthwhile ^_^.

[Jenni]

1. Players do want to play legacy. They just don't want to play against other legacy decks.

That is a very odd statement to me. what does that mean they want to play legacy, but not against legacy decks? How does that even work?

[EpicLevelCommoner]

They want the card pool not the archetypes I guess . . . it made sense when he said it, but I don't remember how he said it :/

[Barook]

That is a very odd statement to me. what does that mean they want to play legacy, but not against legacy decks? How does that even work?
As far as I understand it, they want to crush Modern, Standard and Casual decks with their Legacy machines.

[Shimi]

The question we should be asking ourselfs is: "Who is the NEXT wardrobe monster"?? I think it will be fetchlands..

[Einherjer]

As far as I understand it, they want to crush Modern, Standard and Casual decks with their Legacy machines.

Well, then these people are no "Legacy-players" by our standards, no competitive players.

Greetings

[xeraseth]

That is a very odd statement to me. what does that mean they want to play legacy, but not against legacy decks? How does that even work?
It means they want to bring their casual deck that happens to fall into the Legacy card pool and do well. But they end up playing against competitive Legacy decks and get stomped.

[GGoober]

The question we should be asking ourselfs is: "Who is the NEXT wardrobe monster"?? I think it will be fetchlands..

Won't happen because fetchlands are not constrained by the Reserved List.

Legacy may eventually go the way of Vintage, but the supply of Legacy cards (even if bottlenecked by duals) still far exceeds the supply of Vintage staples, and we will see that the format settle at a stable point of players. The same way Vintage players still continue to play the format despite the lack of support/tournaments, Legacy players will still continue to play the format for what it is, and play other formats if they're more interested in being in the more frequent and sanctioned competitive circuits.

[Megadeus]

Take your average Maverick list, which last time I checked does not need to control a Forest or a Plains for the sake of any of its technology; does Maverick shrivel up and die if it runs 4x Windswept Heath, 2 - 4 m10 taplands, a couple extra Horizon Canopy and something random like a Lorwyn filter or the old painland? I don't think it does.
ACtually with maverick you need the sub types so that your knight of the reliquary is actually useful.

[Jenni]

It means they want to bring their casual deck that happens to fall into the Legacy card pool and do well. But they end up playing against competitive Legacy decks and get stomped.

Oh. I guess that makes sense.
Playing a casual deck at an event is fine, sometimes it's fun to fight real decks with my bad Stasis deck, but I know the real decks are better, lol.


As far as I understand it, they want to crush Modern, Standard and Casual decks with their Legacy machines.

They aren't exactly legacy players if thats what they are doing, they're just... annoying, I guess.

[TsumiBand]

I'd hazard a guess that, for as many players as are showing up with Legacy 'casual' lists on purpose, just as many are falling victim to the misconception that "everything works". The field is certainly quite vast, but not e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g works. It's one thing to head into a tournament with knowledge of your metagame and a 'good enough' pet deck, but another to just show up with like 5-color Goblin Trenches and pee yourself when you go 0-3 drop. Still, if that kind of attitude is precluding the willingness of the TOs to actually throw together a tournament, how can they possibly stand to host an FNM? In my experience that is far and away the wookiest format of all time. I'll bet it's more to do with the second reason, the money bit. A legacy player's deck doesn't have to rotate aside from the occasional "oops, here guys jam Delver into your deck", so yeah I'd subscribe to that as being demotivational.

This is why I feel like the best venue for reprints is the Core Set! I'm pleased as punch that my crappy budgety shocklands that aren't amazing in Legacy are being reprinted, and I'm totally going to the next FNM b/c I already had the manabase. You rope in Legacy players by putting certain staples in the Core, you convince Standard players to try Legacy b/c the staples are, duh, in the Core. You get a lot of back-and-forth and new and old faces in both formats. Everyone buys cards. Stores win, players win, everyone wins.

[DLifshitz]

Modern is essentially just replacing old extended

It's not! Modern is nothing like Old Extended. Just have a look at these lists:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/worlds09/topextended

See what I mean? These lists have so much more oomph than current Modern. Old Extended had its banned list, of course, but that was much less restrictive. It may even have been just a little bit too combo-friendly, but that's irrelevant today.

Reading through these decklists actually made me sad. It was a good format.

[Jenni]

It's not! Modern is nothing like Old Extended. Just have a look at these lists:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/worlds09/topextended

See what I mean? These lists have so much more oomph than current Modern. Old Extended had its banned list, of course, but that was much less restrictive. It may even have been just a little bit too combo-friendly, but that's irrelevant today.

Reading through these decklists actually made me sad. It was a good format.

I know old extended was a better format, I was thinking more in the terms of how much of magic's history is covered by the format - extended was around 7 years, modern is about 10 years right now? so it's card pool is fairly close to old extended, and it fills in a lot of the gap between actual eternal formats, and the new extended, that was left behind by the rotation change.

[joemauer]

It's not! Modern is nothing like Old Extended. Just have a look at these lists:

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/worlds09/topextended

See what I mean? These lists have so much more oomph than current Modern. Old Extended had its banned list, of course, but that was much less restrictive. It may even have been just a little bit too combo-friendly, but that's irrelevant today.

Reading through these decklists actually made me sad. It was a good format.

Modern is a replacement for Extended. Most of the same people that did/would have played extended are same the people who may be interested in Modern.

Extended was a better format, especially in the days of old when you could play with Ice Age-Urza's Block cards.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Modern is a replacement for Extended. Most of the same people that did/would have played extended are same the people who may be interested in Modern.

Extended was a better format, especially in the days of old when you could play with Ice Age-Urza's Block cards.

So basically Extended was better when it had dual lands...

[joemauer]

So basically Extended was better when it had dual lands...

And Wasteland.

[Lord Seth]

What sets were legal in the first iteration of Extended?

[TsumiBand]

What sets were legal in the first iteration of Extended?

Something like Beta -> Invasion, and then the Dark through 4th rotated out - BUT, an exception was made for dual lands, and those did not rotate out until like October 2002. It happened right near the beginning of my entry into Magic, I remember the infinite sadness on Brainburst.com that they were losing dual lands and StP b/c Ice Age through 5th rotated out.

[FieryBalrog]

I'm saying, okay we know that duals are balls-fuck expensive, so what's so awful about using alternative mana fixing in a deck that isn't hung up on land types? Take your average Maverick list, which last time I checked does not need to control a Forest or a Plains for the sake of any of its technology;

Knight of the Reliquary? Last time I checked, Maverick was built around this card existing...

[Koby]

And Wasteland.

And Vampiric Tutor with Gush. Oh the fun times.

[TsumiBand]

Knight of the Reliquary? Last time I checked, Maverick was built around this card existing...

Guhhh, I probably could have been clearer in my statement. There's a much different operational dynamic between a deck like Maverick requiring land types for KotR versus, say, a deck like RGW Zoo requiring playable duals to function. KotR can grab Wasteland by eating a Plains; doesn't matter if it's a Savannah or not. I think that fundamentally there is a higher level of playability with a deck like Maverick if it adapts to not having Beta duals, versus a deck like Zoo which depends on having a Forest, Mountain and Plains in play on as many lands as possible in order to be as aggressive as it needs(needed) to be.

I mean again I don't think I can say it enough but I'm just thinking as a budget player who isn't going to be in a position to acquire anything better than a shockland in the near future. If your budget affects your personal cardpool and you're not terribly interested in trying to put together Burn or something, I think a Mav list can work out if you can at least get your hands on Wastelands and fetches - anecdotally speaking it sounds far, far better than trying to derp your way into a three-color aggro deck and thinking that shocklands are the only option to real dual lands, just b/c they are dual lands and work in the same way. Bolting your face every turn for the first 3 turns just to stay aggressive is really shitty.

[Megadeus]

Guhhh, I probably could have been clearer in my statement. There's a much different operational dynamic between a deck like Maverick requiring land types for KotR versus, say, a deck like RGW Zoo requiring playable duals to function. KotR can grab Wasteland by eating a Plains; doesn't matter if it's a Savannah or not. I think that fundamentally there is a higher level of playability with a deck like Maverick if it adapts to not having Beta duals, versus a deck like Zoo which depends on having a Forest, Mountain and Plains in play on as many lands as possible in order to be as aggressive as it needs(needed) to be.

I mean again I don't think I can say it enough but I'm just thinking as a budget player who isn't going to be in a position to acquire anything better than a shockland in the near future. If your budget affects your personal cardpool and you're not terribly interested in trying to put together Burn or something, I think a Mav list can work out if you can at least get your hands on Wastelands and fetches - anecdotally speaking it sounds far, far better than trying to derp your way into a three-color aggro deck and thinking that shocklands are the only option to real dual lands, just b/c they are dual lands and work in the same way. Bolting your face every turn for the first 3 turns just to stay aggressive is really shitty.
Maverick I honestly wouldnt play with out duals. You need the land subtypes for KOTR and Scryb Ranger and such. I do understand what you are saying though. I mean I feel like there is no aggro deck that really wants to Run shocks. Zoo would have too many and end up killing itself, RUG, Daze +Shocklands is awful, Zombardments already is awful against Burn. I could see a UR delver list do it, and I think Maverick could do it, with the amount of random lifegain that they have, like Jitte, and sometimes batterskull if you run stoneforge.

[MoxBropal]

This is a great topic. I think it's safe to say that Modern is definitely Wizards' pet project right now. When's the last time Legacy was a Pro Tour format? Also, Modern Masters? Really? An expansion designed to make Modern more popular??! Let's get the b/r list right first, then spew playable cards all over the place.

As long as SCG gets turnouts at Legacy opens, I don't think the format going anywhere.

I think the Reserve list was nothing but a knee-jerk reaction by Wotc in an attempt to keep their player/collector base after Chronicles came out. If they got rid of that thing, Legacy would absolutely explode.

[Dark Ritual]

This is a great topic. I think it's safe to say that Modern is definitely Wizards' pet project right now. When's the last time Legacy was a Pro Tour format? Also, Modern Masters? Really? An expansion designed to make Modern more popular??! Let's get the b/r list right first, then spew playable cards all over the place.

As long as SCG gets turnouts at Legacy opens, I don't think the format going anywhere.

I think the Reserve list was nothing but a knee-jerk reaction by Wotc in an attempt to keep their player/collector base after Chronicles came out. If they got rid of that thing, Legacy would absolutely explode.

I agree with the last sentence as long as you tack on that WotC reprints the dual lands en masse and isn't conservative in their printing but at the same time they don't saturate the market with them as that could be an issue potentially if underground sea went to $5 overnight.

Yeah I love how people absolutely loved old extended when it was essentially legacy back then. If WotC knew anything about competitive magic and what competitive players enjoy they would probably reprint the dual lands or something. I wish I had played in the good old days of old extended when that was a thing played at pro tours and such. Oh well. Such a thing will probably never happen and modern will never be close to legacy in terms of how fun it is unless WotC intentionally harms legacy using the B&R list or prints very degenerate cards in new sets that wreck legacy.

[Aggro_zombies]

Yeah I love how people absolutely loved old extended when it was essentially legacy back then. If WotC knew anything about competitive magic and what competitive players enjoy they would probably reprint the dual lands or something.
MaRo has said that Wizards gets quite a bit of pro-Reserved List opinions, but most of it is direct and not through forums (which tend to have a vocal anti-List crowd). Seeing the complaints from people about potential price drops from the limited Modern Masters print run convinced me more or less that player entitlement is more of an issue than the Reserved List at this point. Even if they got rid of that list, reprinting something like dual lands would piss off a lot of people.

It's not clear to me that the correct long-term option is to say, "Fuck 'em," which is probably what WotC has concluded. They may simply be counting on Legacy to have a long senescence based on third-party support while Modern grows in size.

[xfxf]

It's not clear to me that the correct long-term option is to say, "Fuck 'em," which is probably what WotC has concluded. They may simply be counting on Legacy to have a long senescence based on third-party support while Modern grows in size.

Agree completely.

[Barook]

MaRo has said that Wizards gets quite a bit of pro-Reserved List opinions, but most of it is direct and not through forums (which tend to have a vocal anti-List crowd). Seeing the complaints from people about potential price drops from the limited Modern Masters print run convinced me more or less that player entitlement is more of an issue than the Reserved List at this point. Even if they got rid of that list, reprinting something like dual lands would piss off a lot of people.
I fail to see how "massive" price drops are an valid argument from collectors. BoP isn't really played anymore and was reprinted a bazillion times. Yet the Alpha/Beta versions still hold tons of value. And I don't think Duals are going out of fashion anytime soon.

If anything, a reprint of dual lands would cause a small, temporary price drop that would be compensated by the long-term growth of the format, unless the market gets flooded with new copies (not going to happen).

[bruizar]

I fail to see how "massive" price drops are an valid argument from collectors. BoP isn't really played anymore and was reprinted a bazillion times. Yet the Alpha/Beta versions still hold tons of value. And I don't think Duals are going out of fashion anytime soon.

If anything, a reprint of dual lands would cause a small, temporary price drop that would be compensated by the long-term growth of the format, unless the market gets flooded with new copies (not going to happen).

Please look at beta birds of paradise compared to revised birds of paradise. White bordered duals would collapse.

Also, the only thing that can really kill legacy as a format is a ban on brainstorm, which was also the deathknell of vintage.

[Lemnear]

Please look at beta birds of paradise compared to revised birds of paradise. White bordered duals would collapse.

Also, the only thing that can really kill legacy as a format is a ban on brainstorm, which was also the deathknell of vintage.

To be honest, Vintage died because it evolved from an high-interaction-per-turn-format into a complete boredom in which you either locked Out turn 1 with Workshops, killed Turn 2/3 if your opponent has enough skill to drop and tap a land (Bazaar) or you play a painfully Slow U/x control deck with a mainboard and sideboard designed only to Battle the previous 2 which opts to accidently win with Time vault or Tinker

[Aggro_zombies]

Please look at beta birds of paradise compared to revised birds of paradise. White bordered duals would collapse.
This. Also, it's not just collectors who are an issue - it's players who spent a lot of money to buy into the format at its peak who would be angry that their investment is getting devalued. That may or may not be true depending on how you look at it, but the psychology is more of an issue than the exact value calculations; people's visceral reactions to the knowledge that the things it was hard for them to get are now easy to get is the enemy.

Of course, you could go the Modern Masters route with mythic rare duals and a small print run so that supply isn't really affected. But then that doesn't solve the scarcity issue while still ruffling feathers.

[bruizar]

This. Also, it's not just collectors who are an issue - it's players who spent a lot of money to buy into the format at its peak who would be angry that their investment is getting devalued. That may or may not be true depending on how you look at it, but the psychology is more of an issue than the exact value calculations; people's visceral reactions to the knowledge that the things it was hard for them to get are now easy to get is the enemy.

Of course, you could go the Modern Masters route with mythic rare duals and a small print run so that supply isn't really affected. But then that doesn't solve the scarcity issue while still ruffling feathers.

Here is some info about those sets.

Revised Edition
Released April 1994
Print run ~500,000,000

Unlimited Edition
Released December 1, 1993
Print run 40,000,000

Beta Edition
Released October 1993
Print run between 7,300,000/7,800,000

Alpha Edition
Released December 1, 1993
Print run 2,600,000


As you can see, there's only half a year between revised and beta and less than a year between alpha and revised. Age isn't the reason why these cards are valuable, its the size of the print run and the black border. This is also the reason why Portal 3 Kingdoms and Edgar are so extremely expensive (not the blackborder, since that's not available, but the print run size).

[Barook]

Here is some info about those sets.

Revised Edition
Released April 1994
Print run ~500,000,000

Unlimited Edition
Released December 1, 1993
Print run 40,000,000

Beta Edition
Released October 1993
Print run between 7,300,000/7,800,000

Alpha Edition
Released December 1, 1993
Print run 2,600,000


As you can see, there's only half a year between revised and beta and less than a year between alpha and revised. Age isn't the reason why these cards are valuable, its the size of the print run and the black border. This is also the reason why Portal 3 Kingdoms and Edgar are so extremely expensive (not the blackborder, since that's not available, but the print run size).

Revised already had a print run of 500 million cards? That's rather impressive. Are there any calculations/numbers how many duals exist (in theory, since some copies were lost/destroyed)?

Is there any info what print runs modern sets have today?

[bruizar]

500m/350=1428571 duals in existence which means 35714 sets of 40 duals. There are not even close to that amount of legacy players.

Even if half of them would be destroyed, that would still mean we can have 19K legacy players with 40 duals (not counting non-revised duals).

scarcity is all in our heads.

I don't think print run size information is made public anymore, because that figure is really the magic number that can make the entire system collapse. Finding out that your rares aren't actually rare at all could be disastrous for wizards.

[lochlan]

500m/350=1428571 duals in existence

Where is the 350 coming from? 350 what? But, anyway, I do not think this number can be correct.


Revised already had a print run of 500 million cards? That's rather impressive. Are there any calculations/numbers how many duals exist (in theory, since some copies were lost/destroyed)?

According to the Card Wizard's Black Book by Ross Edwards, there are about 600 million cards, with ~289000 of each rare, ~1 million of each uncommon, 3.7 million of each common, and 13 million of each basic land variant."

But we can figure this out (roughly) for ourselves.

Revised has 75 commons, 95 uncommons, 121 rares, and 15 basic lands. Complicating any estimate of commons and uncommons, the basics were distributed in the common and uncommon slots. But I'm only really interested in the rares, so that's OK.

Revised product was distributed in boosters and starter decks. According to the internet:
-Each booster pack contained 15 cards: 1 rare, 3 uncommon, and 11 common cards.
-Each starter deck contained 60 cards: 2 rare, 13 uncommon, 45 common
Now, I remember the starters containing 3 rares. I have read on the internet that earlier printings of Revised contained 2 rares and later ones had 3. According to Ross Edwards the Revised starters had 3 rares, so I'm going to assume the starters had 3 rares.

(Also) According to Ross Edwards, the printings were about 25% starter decks and 75% boosters. Let's assume this is correct.

Anyway, let's start with the 500,000,000 number, which means...
Boosters:
375,000,000 total cards distributed in boosters / 15 cards per booster = 25,000,000 boosters
25,000,000 boosters * 1 rare per booster = 25,000,000 rares
25,000,000 total rares distributed in boosters / 121 different rares = 206,612 of each rare distributed in boosters

125,000,000 total cards distributed in starters / 60 cards per starter = 2,083,333.3 starters
2,083,333.3 starters * 3 rares per starter= 6,250,000 rares
6,250,000 total rares distributed in starters / 121 different rares = 51,653 of each rare distributed in starters

So, there are about 260,000 of each Revised rare if we accept the 500,000 number and some assumptions about how product was distributed.


Is there any info what print runs modern sets have today?

No, Wizards doesn't release those numbers.

[Mojeh]

Fetchlands sees more play than Duals- Ok.
There's a reasonable number of Duals already- Ok.
Being an Eternal format is complicated, because many players don't want to sell staples unless they have to- Problem.
There's no substitute for Duals, not in competitive Legacy- Problem
The number of Duals will not increase, but the number of Legacy players are - Problem.

So, long history short, if you want to play competitive Legacy, you need Duals. You need cards that aren't going to be reprinted, and therefore are going to be less and less available. So there's no way the format can grow, because we don't have staples for everyone. In my view, the Duals are the monster in the Wardrobe...
If we run out of fetches, Wizards can always print more, but if we run out of Duals? Not mentioning that Wizards does not want to support Legacy, and that's a problem if we want more players.

[sdematt]

There;s 350 cards in the set.

-Matt

[Mr.C]

Where is the 350 coming from? 350 what? But, anyway, I do not think this number can be correct.



According to the Card Wizard's Black Book by Ross Edwards, there are about 600 million cards, with ~289000 of each rare, ~1 million of each uncommon, 3.7 million of each common, and 13 million of each basic land variant."

But we can figure this out (roughly) for ourselves.

Revised has 75 commons, 95 uncommons, 121 rares, and 15 basic lands. Complicating any estimate of commons and uncommons, the basics were distributed in the common and uncommon slots. But I'm only really interested in the rares, so that's OK.

Revised product was distributed in boosters and starter decks. According to the internet:
-Each booster pack contained 15 cards: 1 rare, 3 uncommon, and 11 common cards.
-Each starter deck contained 60 cards: 2 rare, 13 uncommon, 45 common
Now, I remember the starters containing 3 rares. I have read on the internet that earlier printings of Revised contained 2 rares and later ones had 3. According to Ross Edwards the Revised starters had 3 rares, so I'm going to assume the starters had 3 rares.

(Also) According to Ross Edwards, the printings were about 25% starter decks and 75% boosters. Let's assume this is correct.

Anyway, let's start with the 500,000,000 number, which means...
Boosters:
375,000,000 total cards distributed in boosters / 15 cards per booster = 25,000,000 boosters
25,000,000 boosters * 1 rare per booster = 25,000,000 rares
25,000,000 total rares distributed in boosters / 121 different rares = 206,612 of each rare distributed in boosters

125,000,000 total cards distributed in starters / 60 cards per starter = 2,083,333.3 starters
2,083,333.3 starters * 3 rares per starter= 6,250,000 rares
6,250,000 total rares distributed in starters / 121 different rares = 51,653 of each rare distributed in starters

So, there are about 260,000 of each Revised rare if we accept the 500,000 number and some assumptions about how product was distributed.



No, Wizards doesn't release those numbers.

Or, you can just have official info:

http://www.crystalkeep.com/magic/misc/rarity-info.php

Revised 289,000 sets

There were 289k of each dual land printed. 72.250 playsets of each dual land. That's a lot of Legacy players.

[troopatroop]

Snow Covered Duals aren't reprints. Taiga is NOT Snow Covered Taiga. It's just freaking NOT, OKAY?!?!


SNOW COVERED DUALS IN WINTERY THEMED CHRISTMAS EDH BOXES PLEASE!!!!


Edit: In Hindsight... Snow Covered Tundra? W.E., it's Wizards, they don't care about redundancy...

[Barook]

Snow Covered Duals aren't reprints. Taiga is NOT Snow Covered Taiga. It's just freaking NOT, OKAY?!?!


SNOW COVERED DUALS IN WINTERY THEMED CHRISTMAS EDH BOXES PLEASE!!!!


Edit: In Hindsight... Snow Covered Tundra? W.E., it's Wizards, they don't care about redundancy...
We have already discussed that in one of the many threads about reprinting duals.

Snow as a supertype doesn't work, you would need a suptype like Lair to make it a possible "reprint" according to the Reserve List rules. And Maro already said that they aren't going to that.

[TsumiBand]

We have already discussed that in one of the many threads about reprinting duals.

Snow as a supertype doesn't work, you would need a suptype like Lair to make it a possible "reprint" according to the Reserve List rules. And Maro already said that they aren't going to that.

This is the only relevant part of any discussion regarding functional reprints. May as well forget about reversing the Reserve Policy, as many many WotC staff have officially stated "I'd love to get rid of it, but we can't."

There are a hundred different ways to print things as playable as dual lands, they just aren't willing to do so. For my part I've never understood the unwillingness to put basic land types on more lands, as it's a simple way of adding functionality without necessarily adding text to the card. I think the Ravnica shocklands have proved that just putting the land types on a card doesn't immediately break them, since there are precious few people choosing to use them in Eternal formats unless there's literally nothing better playable (or it's EDH and either drawback is incidental). Printing Adarkar Wastes as a Plains Island would still keep it out of Legacy (unless you're me, and poor. lol) So I guess I don't see a reason not to. vOv Their only reason for not doing it is because they just don't, or because the thought of printing dual lands with their land types is enough to make them chase rares for a few Standard seasons, so why spoil the gimmick.

[lochlan]

There;s 350 cards in the set.

I'm pretty sure there are 306 cards in the set.


Or, you can just have official info:

http://www.crystalkeep.com/magic/misc/rarity-info.php

Revised 289,000 sets

There were 289k of each dual land printed. 72.250 playsets of each dual land. That's a lot of Legacy players.

You didn't actually read this "official info," did you? From your link:


Numbers for Revised, Fourth, Ice Age, Chronicles, Homelands and promo cards are guesses based on almost no information.

[DLifshitz]

There are a hundred different ways to print things as playable as dual lands, they just aren't willing to do so. For my part I've never understood the unwillingness to put basic land types on more lands, as it's a simple way of adding functionality without necessarily adding text to the card.

I'm not defending them or anything, but it's most likely the same reason they don't just reprint the original dual lands. Their interpretation of the Reserved List probably also covers hypothetical snow duals. They also don't seem to specifically target Legacy players with their products, except with Judge foils. And let's not forget this is the age of the $500 Standard decks. If WotC care about the financial cost of playing competitive-ish Magic at all, then Legacy is not their first concern. For them, Legacy is probably beyond saving, when good decks are routinely worth $2-3k, according to mtgdecks.net prices. Noone's going to notice if that changes to $4k, when $2k already feels like an absurdly large amount of money to spend on a tabletop game.

[Stoyrm]

Someone should have made a petition to get the reserved list off the face of this earth. I'm quite aware that some people suffer from entitlement to value in their cards. But Legacy showcases magic as a format and should be supported accordingly. Reprinting the duals would make interest for one of the greatest magic formats ever made explode. Would people loose out on value? Yes. Would many be angry? Yes. Would other people enjoy it? Yes. The question they need to ask themselves is, is it worth to piss off a few who have spent a lot of money on a trading card game versus showcasing their game from one of the best possible sides as well to making more people enjoy multiformat magic. Modern Masters is a great idea, and if they did something similar for Legacy it would be a huge hit.

[dragonwisdom]

Someone should have made a petition to get the reserved list off the face of this earth. I'm quite aware that some people suffer from entitlement to value in their cards. But Legacy showcases magic as a format and should be supported accordingly. Reprinting the duals would make interest for one of the greatest magic formats ever made explode. Would people loose out on value? Yes. Would many be angry? Yes. Would other people enjoy it? Yes. The question they need to ask themselves is, is it worth to piss off a few who have spent a lot of money on a trading card game versus showcasing their game from one of the best possible sides as well to making more people enjoy multiformat magic. Modern Masters is a great idea, and if they did something similar for Legacy it would be a huge hit.



Here's an idea. What if they made a rule that allowed the shock lands to act like the original duals just in legacy. That would get around the reserve list.

[Jenni]

Here's an idea. What if they made a rule that allowed the shock lands to act like the original duals just in legacy. That would get around the reserve list.

If they do that, they might as well allow proxies. It's basically the same thing.

[dragonwisdom]

If they do that, they might as well allow proxies. It's basically the same thing.


Good point, but proxies are fake. And that would be a slippery slope that WotC should not do. I am proposing a rule change. It's a proxy but a real card at the same time.

This would help legacy expand, while maintaining the reserved list.

[lochlan]

This would help legacy expand, while maintaining the reserved list.

Besides completely undermining the reserved list, your suggestion makes absolutely no sense from a rules perspective. What if somebody actually wants to use the Shocklands (e.g. they are playing Death's Shadow, or perhaps UB Dark Tide with Bubbling Muck)?

[MoxBropal]

I don't think reprinting duals is a necessity. Something as simple as a Force of Will or Wasteland reprint would help Legacy expand.

[TsumiBand]

I'm not defending them or anything, but it's most likely the same reason they don't just reprint the original dual lands. Their interpretation of the Reserved List probably also covers hypothetical snow duals. They also don't seem to specifically target Legacy players with their products, except with Judge foils. And let's not forget this is the age of the $500 Standard decks. If WotC care about the financial cost of playing competitive-ish Magic at all, then Legacy is not their first concern. For them, Legacy is probably beyond saving, when good decks are routinely worth $2-3k, according to mtgdecks.net prices. Noone's going to notice if that changes to $4k, when $2k already feels like an absurdly large amount of money to spend on a tabletop game.

Well sure, but there are so many variations on a theme that could be printed that the argument for being functionally identical wouldn't even apply anymore. My favorite example of this is Murmuring Bosk, because it's probably one of the neatest variations on "lands that work with fetchlands but tap for several colors" theme. It's a Forest that can function as a Caves of Koilos, and yeah it has a derpy additional drawback b/c it was printed in Lorwyn. I would argue that a cycle of these lands, without the Tribal clause, could be at least as playable as regular duals for a player that cannot acquire the actual Beta dual lands.

What about Grove of the Burnwillows? The only reason it doesn't have land types is because it doesn't. Outside of its interaction with Punishing Fire, a cycle of lands with this effect would probably be regarded as strictly worse than Beta duals, but man would that be a great boon to all kinds of people; budget Legacy ppl like me, Modern players looking for an alternative to shocks, Standard players that want to branch out into Eternal but aren't going to shell out for real duals, and so on.

Even something as simple as a land with a single land type but taps for a friendly color at a drawback would be fantastic. They aren't strictly better than basics, because they are fundamentally different in being non-basic. It's the same difference between a sorcery for 2G that puts a 3/3 token into play, and a creature spell that costs 2G and does the same thing. The end result is quite similar, but there are so many ways of differentiating between basics and non-basics that they really aren't even directly comparable.

I mean I hate to get all "You Make the Card" in the middle of a discussion because it's tantamount to inviting a huge derail since everyone has their own imaginary pet cards that would "fix so many problems". But something as simple as tacking a land type onto a two- or three-color producing land card to save a little space for some kind of distinguishing mechanic is sort of a no-brainer. They only don't exist because they just don't; WotC either hasn't thought of doing it that way (which they've already done, again in Murmuring Bosk) or they are simply not interested in doing it that way. It seems like a reasonable fix to the complaint that there aren't enough dual-like lands to go around.

[Jenni]

Even something as simple as a land with a single land type but taps for a friendly color at a drawback would be fantastic. They aren't strictly better than basics, because they are fundamentally different in being non-basic. It's the same difference between a sorcery for 2G that puts a 3/3 token into play, and a creature spell that costs 2G and does the same thing. The end result is quite similar, but there are so many ways of differentiating between basics and non-basics that they really aren't even directly comparable.


The shock lands essentially are just dual lands with a slight drawback. They have already made duals with a small drawback, and budget legacy players and casuals already use them, but it hasn't "fixed" anything, because no matter what drawback they give them, they still have a drawback, thus they will be strictly worse than the real duals.
They could give them an up-side, or a downside that can be turned into an advantage, but WotC already considers the original Duals too good, so improving them is not something I think is reasonable to expect of them.

[xeraseth]

Well sure, but there are so many variations on a theme that could be printed that the argument for being functionally identical wouldn't even apply anymore. My favorite example of this is Murmuring Bosk, because it's probably one of the neatest variations on "lands that work with fetchlands but tap for several colors" theme. It's a Forest that can function as a Caves of Koilos, and yeah it has a derpy additional drawback b/c it was printed in Lorwyn. I would argue that a cycle of these lands, without the Tribal clause, could be at least as playable as regular duals for a player that cannot acquire the actual Beta dual lands.

What about Grove of the Burnwillows? The only reason it doesn't have land types is because it doesn't. Outside of its interaction with Punishing Fire, a cycle of lands with this effect would probably be regarded as strictly worse than Beta duals, but man would that be a great boon to all kinds of people; budget Legacy ppl like me, Modern players looking for an alternative to shocks, Standard players that want to branch out into Eternal but aren't going to shell out for real duals, and so on.

Even something as simple as a land with a single land type but taps for a friendly color at a drawback would be fantastic. They aren't strictly better than basics, because they are fundamentally different in being non-basic. It's the same difference between a sorcery for 2G that puts a 3/3 token into play, and a creature spell that costs 2G and does the same thing. The end result is quite similar, but there are so many ways of differentiating between basics and non-basics that they really aren't even directly comparable.

I mean I hate to get all "You Make the Card" in the middle of a discussion because it's tantamount to inviting a huge derail since everyone has their own imaginary pet cards that would "fix so many problems". But something as simple as tacking a land type onto a two- or three-color producing land card to save a little space for some kind of distinguishing mechanic is sort of a no-brainer. They only don't exist because they just don't; WotC either hasn't thought of doing it that way (which they've already done, again in Murmuring Bosk) or they are simply not interested in doing it that way. It seems like a reasonable fix to the complaint that there aren't enough dual-like lands to go around.
Actually adding basic land types let it tap for that color with no draw back, they would need to design the land with that in mind. Perhaps something like "When ~ is tapped for mana it deals 1 damage to you".

If WOTC really wanted to print duals that could replace normal duals I think the cleanest solution would be to print the M10 lands with subtypes. They would trigger off themselves so only the 1st one is "bad" but even with 1 normal dual or basic they would work just as good as the duals.

[Barook]

Actually adding basic land types let it tap for that color with no draw back, they would need to design the land with that in mind. Perhaps something like "When ~ is tapped for mana it deals 1 damage to you".

If WOTC really wanted to print duals that could replace normal duals I think the cleanest solution would be to print the M10 lands with subtypes. They would trigger off themselves so only the 1st one is "bad" but even with 1 normal dual or basic they would work just as good as the duals.
Pseudo-legendary lands would probably work as well. Something like this:


Highlander Tundra

Land - Plains Island

If Highlander Tundra would enter the battlefield, put it into its owner’s graveyard instead if you control a land named "Highlander Tundra".

Actually functional different (so Reserve List purists can't complain) and as long as you run only one copy in your deck, there is literally no drawback. Works also great for EDH, meaning it could be jammed into Commander packages.

Since they can be fetched without drawback, they would be a nice stepping stone until one can acquire actual duals.

[TsumiBand]

I really didn't mean to invoke a think-tank on what COULD be printed, I just wanted to point out that WotC has experimented with X ideas so far and could maybe toss a bone to Eternal formats (any format with Odyssey-style fetchlands) and print mana fixers that have a land type, even if it's just one land type. I mean they've managed to print shocks and many, many variations of non-dual-dual lands, and as with any card they don't exist in a vacuum; the further back in Eternal's history one goes, the less and less any of these lands are worth sleeving up.

I would not expect anything on a higher power level than a Beta dual land to ever see print, especially concerning previous statements from WotC representatives regarding obeying the spirit AND the letter of their current reprint policy. I do find it difficult to believe that there's no way to legitimately toss a bone to Modern/Legacy/Vintage/EDH players without keeping their morals intact, though, and they've clearly been experimenting with ways of cozying up to the level of functionality without supplanting it.

I still firmly believe that the fetchlands are what make duals so good, which in turn makes and defines the oldest of Eternal formats, and the simple act of giving a multi-colored land a single land type would immediately give it the "Pitches to Force" +1 that a genuine alternative to duals would actually need - "Works with Fetches". Shocklands exist but they are so incredibly suicidal to run in multiples that it's embarrassing; the difference between 3 life and 1 life shouldn't be lost on any players here.