New block structure and set rotation changes

[Barook]

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mm/metamorphosis

Sure, we're playing an Eternal format, but in the end, these changes are going to affect us as well.

1) No more Core sets after 2015 (good change, because those were ass).

2) Instead of one 3-set block each year, we get two 2-set blocks each year with the 4th set occupying the previous Core set slot.

3) Blocks remain only 18 months Standard-legal instead of 24 months to keep Standard "less stale" (and forcing people to buy more packs :really: ). Doesn't really affect us aside from buying/selling future staples to keep that in mind.

[iamajellydonut]

1) Fuck the core.

2) I'm wondering how this works in terms of room for set development. Both in terms of mechanics and flavor (RIP Flavor).

3) So, that'll leave six sets in at any given time? More big sets should make a decent card pool.


Edit: Actually, I really don't like #2.
Edit: I'm back to not knowing how I feel about #2.
Edit: Eight sets. Woah
Edit: NOPE.

[Tylert]

1) and the draft environement of the last core set is horrible from my point of view (The UR tempo archetype doesn't work).

2) In terms of flavor, the small block with two sets is like the old three sets blocks.

3) less stale standard but smaller pool. SCG standard opens should be more interresting to watch i guess. poor standard players which will spend so much more money :(

[Ellomdian]

poor standard players which will spend so much more money :(

I have to wonder how a shortened lifespan of format-defining cards (and a shortened lifespan of the format they define) will affect things like peak-value - theoretically, it should suppress the peak value of cards across the board, since they aren't as good for as long.

Also, fascinating that this only actually affects Standard - outside of changes to the way they do design, Modern/Legacy/Vintage just yawned a lot.

[sjmcc13]

1) No more Core sets after 2015 (good change, because those were ass).
Core sets worked when they were basically re-prints of the cards new players needed, and staples that should always be available. After the M10 changes they kind of lost their purpose, as that relied on people wanting cards for constructed rather then just limited play. As making heavily played cards in small drafted sets when drafting is the primary source of opened packs because there is not enough value per booster to justify opening on a large scale to most players just leads to cards that cost to buy for Std.

This is a loss, but the loss occurred in stages.

2) Instead of one 3-set block each year, we get two 2-set blocks each year with the 4th set occupying the previous Core set slot.
If they do it right this will be fine, but it will require more reprints in larghe sets which is potentially worrysome.

3) Blocks remain only 18 months Standard-legal instead of 24 months to keep Standard "less stale" (and forcing people to buy more packs :really: ). This could easily lead to problems, one of Std's biggest problems for new players is the yearly rotation, they are not always aware of it, and an can get into problems when they buy cards right before rotation, or do not remove old cards from their deck, because they were not aware of it. Making it twice a year will increase these problems.

[Tylert]

I have to wonder how a shortened lifespan of format-defining cards (and a shortened lifespan of the format they define) will affect things like peak-value - theoretically, it should suppress the peak value of cards across the board, since they aren't as good for as long.



For each set there will be 6 months less of opening (If we refer to the normal structure of limted events with 1 big set 2 small sets in a block), so cards should be less available and therefore cost more :)

[cab0747]

Article is blocked at work.

Is there any speculation on why they did this? Were standard players complaining the format was stale?

[TsumiBand]

Yeah, the Core Set is/was always awkward. I thought it served a clear purpose though, namely to get people coming back to Standard. You're a control player; you got your Wraths, your painlands, etc... the Core Set used to keep such things from rotating out, so that you could come back and check out what Standard was doing lately. You still have to buy your planeswalkers and whatever else, but you're good in regard to the dumb stuff; if nothing else, you have a manabase.

It hasn't served that purpose for quite some time, so I say that's probably fine.

I always thought putting 50% new stuff into the Core Set was a stupid idea as well. Yes it was a dumb set of reprints but again, it kept stuff like BoP/Duress/lands/etc in Standard. It necessarily meant that one had to suffer the occasional Vizzerdrix, but who cares? At any rate, the kludgy nature of the Core Set was shown this last couple of years with the random inclusion of Slivers and trying to expand it across two Core Sets. Weird and weirder, especially concerning how trotting out Slivers is a big play for anyone who has a fondness of the old bastards (though executing them so strangely has been a mixed bag of its own weirdness. Weirdception)

I mean as long as it wasn't even serving the purpose it used to serve, so much the better; keep the new cards for new sets, and quit trying to get people to dream up themeless Core Sets that also appeal to the masses with stuff like Slivers and blah blah blah. It also probably makes life easier for the Modern Masters sets of the future; I mean really, what was MMA but a Core Set++? Fine reprints, some format staples, an interesting Limited environment -- everything that a Core Set wanted to be but never fully achieved.

Yeah, on the whole this is probably a good thing.

[cdr]

Article is blocked at work.

Is there any speculation on why they did this? Were standard players complaining the format was stale?

Why does Wizards do anything? They did this to sell more cards to sucker Standard players.

And well, this explains why no more block PTs.

[iamajellydonut]

Yeah, the Core Set is/was always awkward. I thought it served a clear purpose though, namely to get people coming back to Standard. You're a control player; you got your Wraths, your painlands, etc... the Core Set used to keep such things from rotating out, so that you could come back and check out what Standard was doing lately. You still have to buy your planeswalkers and whatever else, but you're good in regard to the dumb stuff; if nothing else, you have a manabase.

Agreed. I actually loved the core set when it was dedicated to staples. Unfortunately, profits come first.

[Barook]

Article is blocked at work.

Is there any speculation on why they did this? Were standard players complaining the format was stale?
Standard is especially stale right now (after Theros block, who would have guessed? :rolleyes: ), but it's a general problem.

One thing Maro mentions is the third set problem. It sells the lowest normally. They tried to migate that with JOU by putting all the interesting cards into it, ruining BNG in the process. Considering Dragon's Maze was a major failure, too, it makes sense to cut the third set. From a financial point of view, it's major win for Wizards:

- force people into drafting more and getting new cards more often due to more sets and rotations
- cut the least profitable set of the year

There's also Maro mentioning that with more blocks, they could revisit old planes more often, but how that plays out has to be seen.

[Richard Cheese]

I didnt' see it in the article, but assuming they're going to continue trying to introduce new mechanics in every block, this is going to lead to a bunch more orphaned and copycat mechanics.

They used to have a pretty well-defined policy of two new keyword mechanics per block, but I'm not sure if there's any rhyme or reason anymore. Khans has a new mechanic per shard, from Lorwyn to Eventide there was what...like 13 mechanics?

Hopefully they'll try to revisit more of the older mechanics that didn't get explored very well instead of "We put Chroma on 9 mediocre cards and none of them were super popular so clearly it failed as a mechanic. Devotion is way better because it's called devotion."

[cab0747]

Great! A 2 set block!

Fetches 100% confirmed in fall 2015!

</sarcasm>

[Barook]

Great! A 2 set block!

Fetches 100% confirmed in fall 2015!

</sarcasm>
I could see it helping them reacting to demand a bit faster, though, since they don't have to wait for a new block in fall and go with the second big block instead.

[Humphrey]

I thought the purpose for coresets were a lower powerlevel to attract new players. When every block becomes like the coresets its gonna suck for us competitve player. And it seems WotC goes that direction to attract the ("stupid") masses.

Well, I can see them doing a MastersEdition Set every year now.

[Ellomdian]

For each set there will be 6 months less of opening (If we refer to the normal structure of limted events with 1 big set 2 small sets in a block), so cards should be less available and therefore cost more :)

After the successive 3rd set retail mess that was DGM and JOU, I expect that the increased interest in May-September will offset that. Ask your local store how much RTR and THE they were selling a month after the blocks completed, or how much of last year's Core set they still have on hand.

[Ace/Homebrew]

It also probably makes life easier for the Modern Masters sets of the future; I mean really, what was MMA but a Core Set++? Fine reprints, some format staples, an interesting Limited environment -- everything that a Core Set wanted to be but never fully achieved.

This makes a lot of sense. Having a MMA set every other year is basically what the old core sets were anyways.

I suspect they are going to try to bring back Extended... again... :rolleyes:

And the return of Horsemanship for the new Portal products designed for beginners!!

[Rizso]

After the successive 3rd set retail mess that was DGM and JOU, I expect that the increased interest in May-September will offset that. Ask your local store how much RTR and THE they were selling a month after the blocks completed, or how much of last year's Core set they still have on hand.

DGM and JOU had almost 0 playable cards also reduces the sales :P

[Koby]

DGM and JOU had almost 0 playable cards also reduces the sales :P

You take that back. Sire of Insanity is hell-on-wheels, also Eidolon of the Great Revelry has caused me many match losses since May. *grumble grumble*

[iamajellydonut]

You take that back. Sire of Insanity is hell-on-wheels

AAAAWW YISS. Roll that out!

Seriously though. I have like thirty of these things floating around from random trades and redrafts. I don't regret picking them up. Too sexy. And I still say it would have been a major player had devotion not taken over.

[Lemnear]

Does this mean the end of bad 2nd or 3rd sets where WotC runs out of ideas every damn time? I apprechiate

[ReAnimator]

As someone who has played and still sometimes does still play standard, this is pretty much all upside. I have literally no problems with any of it. The financials won't really be that big of a change, this certainly isn't sky is falling, gouge out the player base tactics. 3rd sets always sucked and you didn't really need to buy any of it, and same with core sets.

The different lengths that things are legal isn't really that huge because usually the last part of a standard cycle (like we are in now) with 8 sets legal for 3 months is usually super awful and not as many people play during that time anyway.

Copy and pasted from someone else:


Under the old system a year consisted of 4 sets:

1 - Standard legal for 24 months
2 - Standard legal for ~20 months
3 - Standard legal for ~17 months
4 - Standard legal for ~15 months

Your average cards you buy are now legal in Standard for around ~18-19 months. (PLUS MORE because Core sets had a lot of reprints).

New system is like this:

1 - Standard legal for 18 months
2 - Standard legal for ~15 months
3 - Standard legal for 18 months
4 - Standard legal for ~15 months

Your average cards you buy will be legal in Standard for around ~17.5 months.

[DLifshitz]

2) Instead of one 3-set block each year, we get two 2-set blocks each year with the 4th set occupying the previous Core set slot.

3) Blocks remain only 18 months Standard-legal instead of 24 months to keep Standard "less stale" (and forcing people to buy more packs :really: ). Doesn't really affect us aside from buying/selling future staples to keep that in mind.

2) - I suspect this means the steady stream of five-faction fantasy theme park versions of various cultures from around the world will continue, because there won't be enough time to create anything else in between design cycles.
3) - Possibly idea is not just to get people to buy more cards, but also to make counterfeiting more difficult and less profitable. This change will certainly cause many people to switch to formats other than Standard, not so much because of the possible extra expenses, but to hold on to their old cards - which will now include some cards that are less than 2 years old!

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Agreed. I actually loved the core set when it was dedicated to staples. Unfortunately, profits come first.
+1 here. and I'd love to say that Tsumi once again sorted out my own thoughts in a way I'd never would, could or should.
I'm quite surpruised with what they've done to Standrard. There's so much turmoil inMtG in last few years, a new non-rotating format, a death - maybe expected one - of Extended, this whole change of how Std will look like, the smaller blocks (and hopefully tighter with less garbage), MMA. This may be pretty thrilling times for the people who enjoy Magic (both players and designers) and it seems to me like this major shake up will open many new possibilities.Will some of the m be good? Hopefully. Will some of them suck? i guess so. No matter what, even from the view of a most-stationary-format-ever-specialist, this is pretty thrilling.
I got itches i never had in last fifteen years. I'd love to play Standard.

[Aggro_zombies]

These changes will burn players out on Standard faster, and possibly on competitive play faster as well. Rotations usually wipe out a bunch of players who get tired of the rat race of dropping $100+ on cards when new sets come out so they can keep current, only for 90+% of those to plummet in value to near-nothing once the rotation happens. Rotations happening faster means second-tier cards - the ones that aren't the absolute most powerful but nevertheless integral to mid-tier decks - will lose value much faster now since there's a greater chance that a fast rotation will neuter your deck and a lower chance the card will make the jump to playability in a bigger format.

However, barring a massive reprint-o-palooza, Modern is too expensive for a lot of these players to want to enter and the Eternal formats are basically gated country clubs with burly security guards that won't admit you unless you have at least six figures of salary per year. That means players who burn out on Standard are more likely to attrition out of the game or at the very least revert to casual formats like EDH where they buy maybe half a dozen cards per set at most, and then most likely not the most expensive ones.

Magic is more popular than ever right now but that just means there's more people playing who realize that Standard is for chumps with more disposable income than common sense. However, any individual casual player isn't going to drive sales figures the way Standard players do - they only matter in the aggregate since they're the largest section of the player base, but they don't have the buying habits or individual budgets needed to, say, support local LGSes or keep WotC's profit margins rising for a long time without some insane growth in the game.

[Richard Cheese]

Could the shorter rotation mean they might be willing to push the power level of Standard cards a bit by giving us some reprints of Legacy/Modern staples? I'm going to assume not, but it's a nice thought.

[Aggro_zombies]

Could the shorter rotation mean they might be willing to push the power level of Standard cards a bit by giving us some reprints of Legacy/Modern staples? I'm going to assume not, but it's a nice thought.
Actually... (http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/95740068403/core-sets-are-the-primary-vehicle-for-old-set-reprints)

[Barook]

Actually... (http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/95740068403/core-sets-are-the-primary-vehicle-for-old-set-reprints)
Having powerful cards for less time in Standard might be a positive side effect that makes the experiment more with bringing old favorites back, but I read that as actually putting more reprints into the block sets.

Edit: It also looks like they're going to recycle old mechanics more often:

http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/95748267538/the-only-thing-i-am-worried-about-with-the-new-block#notes

Not necessarily a bad thing - I would take an old, working, popular mechanic over new, uninspired, useless crap every day.

[Arsenal]

Shorter Standard could mean that powerful cards, by mistake or design, are tolerated as they're only there for a few months instead of a year. This could trickle down to eternal formats as Standard could potentially have an overall higher power level (ie. Jund/Cawblade Standard era).

[ESG]

Fantastic changes. I'm really impressed. The Core set was filler, so good riddance to that. Two-set blocks rather than three-set blocks means that more storylines and worlds will be involved, which is desirable from a flavor standpoint. It will also keep things fresher. One of the problems with Standard is that the card pool is so small that it's pretty easy for a few powerful decks to dominate. This will increase the size of the card pool, making it less likely that a deck will conquer unchecked; it will reduce the timeframe that any dominant deck can reign supreme; and it will allow new decks to be designed because rotation will be more frequent. Also, as mentioned, this could enable WOTC to print higher-powered cards or even to reprint something like Force of Will.

[Lord Seth]

Why does Wizards do anything? They did this to sell more cards to sucker Standard players.

And well, this explains why no more block PTs.Honestly, I think the complete lack of interest in block constructed had a bigger reason for no block Pro Tours. Granted, some of that is their own fault for providing no support to the format, but I don't think it was that popular to begin with. I think block constructed kinda suffered from a cycle of people not being that interested->less support given->now even less people are interested->even less support is given->people lose even more interest until it finally just got to the point that the only time anyone cared about it at all was the Pro Tour, and even that wasn't that exciting because no matter how cool the decks were, there wasn't anywhere to really play them.

As for this, the removal of the core set does bring up one issue in regards to reprints: Cards specific to certain planes. The core set was where you could throw stuff like Shivan Reef (a location specific to Dominaria) without having to go back to Dominaria (which honestly they should already, but that's another matter). There's also Modern Masters and the like, but those don't have print runs the size of Standard sets.

[Aggro_zombies]

Edit: It also looks like they're going to recycle old mechanics more often:

http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/95748267538/the-only-thing-i-am-worried-about-with-the-new-block#notes
Recycling old mechanics? Man, Lemnear is going to have a stroke.

[samurai_socks]

Deleted.

[Lemnear]

Recycling old mechanics? Man, Lemnear is going to have a stroke.

Why? I absolutely prefer them taking another spin on some old and popular keywords rather than introducing new names for the basically ever same creature-kicker mechanic. There are quite some keywords which would welcome a second spring and now as there are no more core sets to reprint those, they have to find their way into the regular expansions.

[Dice_Box]

I love when I see Standard players whom, when they ask why I don't play the format laugh when I say it's too expensive. In a vacuum they look at my Legacy collection and think I am out of my mind. I still ain't laughing and that format of yours still ain't getting cheaper. I am happy to help you transition the moment you guys wake up. Maybe more of you will now.

[ShiftyKapree]

I'm looking forward to these changes, I now plan on playing standard again, which hasn't happened since Shards block. As far as prices are concerned with cards having less time in standard prices could go up or down depending on how the print run of these cards are out in the economy. With them being able to test the waters of cards I see massive mistakes being made, giving us even more external staples. Which I'm fine if it brings KotR back haha. As far as the coresets go I did enjoy those and was able to transition back to standard easier when I got back into it, but I recently graduated college so I will now have more time to play and more importantly money. I will still consider myself a legacy player majority of the time but it is fun to play the game on how it was intended to be played by burn spells, turning creatures sideways and counterspells. Not the busted ass decks we see today in legacy, also drafting seems like I will enjoy that the most.

[btm10]

7. I have seen some players comment that Wizards may be willing to print more powerful cards because they will be legal for less time. I personally do not think Wizards will go down that round due to the knock on effects of Modern/ Legacy.

-Cheers-

I'm not sure where I come down on this point. It's a useful counterargument to the optimistic point that less time to deal with means more space for powerful cards/engines, but MaRo has also said that one of the things that more frequent rotation will allow for is more power. The most optimistic part of me says that this would even allow for reprints of non-Reserved staple because they could be slipped in to sets that minimize thier adverse impact on Standard. I have Wasteland in a Standard full of monoclolred spells in mind as I write this, but there are likely other examples that wouldn't impact Modern that may work better, like making Force of Will the only counter in Standard or putting it in a block's small set where the theme is 'cares about number of cards in hand' or something. Again, neither of those scenarios is likely to happen, but something similar might be.

[BBG|Scott-Spain]

This pretty much prices me out of ever playing Standard again. Purchases would be way too frequent for me. On the brighter side, if they ever get another "Stoneblade" situation on their hands, they have the option of waiting it out since they will rotate out faster.

[lyracian]

It seems all sales driven. What does not sell well Core sets and Third Block set therefore lets get rid of them.



I love when I see Standard players whom, when they ask why I don't play the format laugh when I say it's too expensive. In a vacuum they look at my Legacy collection and think I am out of my mind. I still ain't laughing and that format of yours still ain't getting cheaper. I am happy to help you transition the moment you guys wake up. Maybe more of you will now.
I agree Standard is expensive the problem becomes though what options do you have to play competitive Magic other than Standard? Locally we have Monday Draft; Legacy Tuesday (if we can get 8 players); Modern Thursday (8-16 players); Friday 3 Shops running FNM (20-32 players).I try and go as many Thursdays as I can just so I get the chance to play.

[TsumiBand]

Unless the life-span of the average Magic player has increased -- and last I heard, it was 18 months, but that's a very old figure -- keeping up with a season or two of Standard is typically far less than buying into competitive Legacy. Barring any "aw shucks, another cross-format staple, whoops" issue like JtMS or Goyf or what-have-you, in which case the price jumps up as everyone scrambles to acquire the card, thus preserving the myth of Expensive Eternal.

I mean sure you could make the argument that in 18 months any purchase you make into Legacy would potentially be worth much more because the price point of duals/Forces/Wastelands/etc continues to rise, but then you've got people trying to convince players to spend high hundreds or low thousands of dollars to get in, in a format with high power, low variance, and a less-coherent visual appearance or UX or whatever you want to call it (multiple card frames, multiple wording approaches, etc).

The fact that they can exercise a higher degree of control over the Standard experience is probably what makes it more attractive to new players - from the mechanics to the art to the card face, the experience is unified, and that's more meaningful than I think a lot of Vintage & Legacy players acknowledge. There are no Rock Hydras to deal with, no re-translated Oracle wordings ("what do you mean, these tokens disappear during the cleanup step. These are the only fucking creature tokens in the game that disappear during the cleanup step."), no ignoring the oddly shapen mana symbols from your Legends cards next to the Guildpact MacOS card frames with their clean and precise symbols, next to that goofy-ass Tarmogoyf from an alternate future with a wonky border that looks like a knuckleduster... (btw, I would love to see Progenitus try to live on that FS border. I say, it cannae be done! It cannae!)

[rufus]

On some level it seems like they'd be better off if they overlapped blocks by one set. That would push up value in the 3rd set.

I also think they'd be better off going into an 'experimental period' where they tried more variations on block structures. I guess that's what they were doing with the big/small games.

[Barook]

On some level it seems like they'd be better off if they overlapped blocks by one set. That would push up value in the 3rd set.

I also think they'd be better off going into an 'experimental period' where they tried more variations on block structures. I guess that's what they were doing with the big/small games.
Lorwyn/Shadowmoor was considered a (major) failure from Wizards' standpoint.

But how did Rise of the Eldrazi and Avacyn Restored fare in terms of sales?

And I don't see only sunshine when people think Wizards could experiment with new, powerful mechanics - sure, they last shorter in Standard, but we're stuck with them forever. And said sets brought us Annihilator and Miracles.

[Meekrab]

It seems all sales driven. What does not sell well Core sets and Third Block set therefore lets get rid of them.

Sure, but having sets sell well is better for Wizards AND better for players.

[rufus]

Lorwyn/Shadowmoor was considered a (major) failure from Wizards' standpoint.

Weren't both of those the 2-set blocks - more or less what MaRo says WotC is switching to?

Just to clarify, what I meant was that they could set up things so that the blocks would be something like:

Lorwyn-Morningtide-Shadowmoor
Shadowmoor-Eventide-Shards

So that Shadowmoor spans two blocks so it's worth something as both the third set, and the first set of the next block.


And I don't see only sunshine when people think Wizards could experiment with new, powerful mechanics - sure, they last shorter in Standard, but we're stuck with them forever. And said sets brought us Annihilator and Miracles.
New mechanics dangerous, but as long as things don't warp too much, a shifting metagame is a nice thing to have.

[btm10]

Lorwyn/Shadowmoor was considered a (major) failure from Wizards' standpoint.

But how did Rise of the Eldrazi and Avacyn Restored fare in terms of sales?

And I don't see only sunshine when people think Wizards could experiment with new, powerful mechanics - sure, they last shorter in Standard, but we're stuck with them forever. And said sets brought us Annihilator and Miracles.

I can't comment on sales for Rise of the Eldrazi and Avacyn Restored, but Miracles gave Legacy a new spin (ha!) on the Counter-Top archetype, and a pretty sweet deck at that. While Annihilator makes Emrakul a little extra obnoxious, it's hardly the biggest problem we have.

[lyracian]

Sure, but having sets sell well is better for Wizards AND better for players.
I have nothing against sets selling well I just dislike the 25% reduction in life span. I dislike having to replace cards like Searing Spear with Lightning Strike when they are functional reprints. I am not a fan of standard but I do play it from time to time since it can be a fun night out (and there is not much other choice for MTG). I think as far as Standard is concerned I will have a look at Netrunner or what the EDH crowd are up to.

[Barook]

I can't comment on sales for Rise of the Eldrazi and Avacyn Restored, but Miracles gave Legacy a new spin (ha!) on the Counter-Top archetype, and a pretty sweet deck at that. While Annihilator makes Emrakul a little extra obnoxious, it's hardly the biggest problem we have.
Miracles isn't a problem by itself (it's definitely not ban-worthy) and I can see some people enjoying the Durdle-Control decks aside from the people who just play it because it's the best deck of the format.

It's still a retarded mechanic with over-the-Top (ha!) library manipulation and it's extremely miserable to play against, even with decks that have a positive match-ups against it.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

It's still a retarded mechanic with over-the-Top (ha!) library manipulation and it's extremely miserable to play against, even with decks that have a positive match-ups against it.

Frankly, playing against UW control was miserable ever since the day I know this game, it's not like "Counter your every spell, Disk, Wrath, Mahamoti, go" was that more thrilling back in the days. If not for the Jace, it'll be a fair deck, and Jace is a retarded design miracles or not.

[Meekrab]

I have nothing against sets selling well I just dislike the 25% reduction in life span. I dislike having to replace cards like Searing Spear with Lightning Strike when they are functional reprints. I am not a fan of standard but I do play it from time to time since it can be a fun night out (and there is not much other choice for MTG). I think as far as Standard is concerned I will have a look at Netrunner or what the EDH crowd are up to.

I'm sorry you were inconvenienced by having to buy a playset of a common to keep up with rotations. :'(

[TsumiBand]

I'm sorry you were inconvenienced by having to buy a playset of a common to keep up with rotations. :'(

It's just stupid because there was this Incinerate > Searing Spear > Lightning Strike progression, and it was like, why fucking bother?

I bet no one would have much cared if there wasn't like some minor hubbub about it from one of the MtG related "official" sites, can't remember which exactly. But there was this whole thing about how it just made sense from a flavor standpoint, like... who gives a shit! Why are lightning strikes more "in-universe" in Theros Standard than spears? Spears are a crucial part of a phalanx, which is a very Greco-Roman-Hrrnda-Hrrrnda thing to have lying around. But nah, Lightning's more better even though the humans are all RW and if anyone would have a spear it'd be a character in Red or White, but we didn't have any of those, did we? (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=373524) Hurp durp magurp

Like I know, it's $.40 cents, but it's just a clumsy rotation thing and it adds insult to injury when it comes to building against the next Standard season. Like, one already knows the chase rare chase is on, so why fuck around with re-naming Searing Spear? Just why are you touching that. Put it back. No it isn't expensive sweetie, it's just annoying. Stop. Put it back. Leave it.

[Lord Seth]

My problem with renames like Searing Spear->Lightning Strike is that it means they wasted a name. Lightning Strike could've been a name used on a new card. Wasting it on a functional reprint just makes it so that they're one name shorter for new cards. If it's for some kind of flavor reason it makes sense (e.g. Elvish Mystic is more generic than Llanowar Elves and thus be used in more sets), but that doesn't apply to Searing Spear/Lightning Strike.

[Meekrab]

Why are lightning strikes more "in-universe" in Theros Standard than spears?
You know the whole theme of the block was Gods, right? I mean come on.

[lyracian]

I'm sorry you were inconvenienced by having to buy a playset of a common to keep up with rotations. :'(
It is not just a playset of commons though; you have to replace Hellrider, Lightning Mauler and all the other cards that are rotating out. I liked the fact that the core set had cards like Shock and Chandra's Phoneix that I already own. I understand rotation is designed to sell packs but since I play standard less than once a month I am not willing to spend money on either packs or expensive standard cards like Stormbreath Dragon. The new format with out Core sets make me think there will be lots more examples like Searing Spear designed to force players to buy functional reprints just to be able to play.

[TsumiBand]

You know the whole theme of the block was Gods, right? I mean come on.

To be fair - the theme wasn't Gods, the theme was "top-down Greek flavor". Gods were in the set, sure.

I'm just saying that they're similarly 'in-universe' and it's a lousy waste of a name. It means that "Lightning Strike" can't be a different card, it's now just a durdly reprint.

There was an article like, foreeeevvveeeerrrr ago, talking about how some of the early names on Magic cards were just thrown away on poor effects, or even just plain mislabeled. I think Invulnerability was one of them, because in the grand scheme of things, damage prevention is nowhere near being invulnerable in Magic (even during Tempest, this was clear).

It was a minor point, but it matters because if you toss out names like "Crushing Despair" it can't be a 5 mana Sorcery that has target player discard a nonland card - it doesn't make sense, and now that name can't be paired with a great card that's in the testing phase down the pipe.

I mean I get why it would be so - there's a natural progression there I guess, moving from Lightning Bolt to Lightning Strike, and just tacking :1: on to the cost. Makes sense. It's really not the literal worst thing ever, but it's also not a clear "flavor decision" because RW was chock full of Hoplites - that's a lift from the ancient Grecian military, and their formation was the phalanx - a wall of shields and spears which allowed the army to attack and defend and advance more or less at once, and it was good at what it did. So no, I don't think that spear < lightning even with God cards running around in the set.

I make it sound like I care more than I do, I mean really it is just a playset of commons, it just feels clunky is all.

[rufus]

...
So no, I don't think that spear < lightning even with God cards running around in the set.

I make it sound like I care more than I do, I mean really it is just a playset of commons, it just feels clunky is all.

Maybe they had Thunderbolt all lined up, but moved it forward for some stupid reason.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

The biggest mistake of all these also-reprints is that they add an immense amount of ballast into already congested game with 20k different cards. It took me over sixteen years to finally understand the reason why my friends did quit back in late 1990's. I'd love to write some wall of text about this phenomenon, but then again I'm not willing to write much more important things, so why care...

[Humphrey]

Those functional reprints help EDH, Highlander and Cube players to add more consistency if they chose to. And theyre not eating up design space.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Those functional reprints help EDH, Highlander and Cube players to add more consistency if they chose to. And theyre not eating up design space.
Of course. I'm not saying that it's bad. But I loved the good old days, because the game was more or less limited. Maybe I should switch to Old School, but then again nobody plays it.

[Humphrey]

Of course. I'm not saying that it's bad. But I loved the good old days, because the game was more or less limited. Maybe I should switch to Old School, but then again nobody plays it.

start cubing yourself if you have a playgroup who likes drafting

[Richard Cheese]

Of course. I'm not saying that it's bad. But I loved the good old days, because the game was more or less limited. Maybe I should switch to Old School, but then again nobody plays it.

I think Old School is too limited. I'd like to see a format called "Classic" where only old-bordered, non-foil cards are allowed, and using a banlist-only approach like Legacy.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

I think Old School is too limited. I'd like to see a format called "Classic" where only old-bordered, non-foil cards are allowed, and using a banlist-only approach like Legacy.

Yes, this is nice idea. In fact some Italians already started that, but in a bit strange - though logic - way; they play by the old rules, which is a bit bothersome, especially considering the "combat dmg on stack" and such stuff.
I wouldn't forbid foils, people like them. What I find nice about the Quantum Leap format is it's static nature. You'll simply acquire whatever you want for your deck and are done with the thing for good.