Abolish the Reserve List Petition

[Michael Keller]

Because you care. (https://www.thepetitionsite.com/130/114/505/abolish-the-reserved-list-to-support-the-integration-of-new-eternal-players/?taf_id=64278161&cid=twitter#bbfb=123033037)

[thecrav]

lol

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

*rubs crystal ball*
I am seeing a headline: "WOTC TO PLAYERS: DROP DEAD"

[Michael Keller]

*rubs crystal ball*
I am seeing a headline: "WOTC TO PLAYERS: DROP DEAD"

The doctrine of promissory estoppel allows a party to recover the benefit of a promise made even if a legal contract does not exist. Use of this doctrine relies on how significant the promisee's loss is in the absence of the fulfilled promise.
Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel
So, what happens when someone makes you a promise, you rely on this promise, act on the promise and the person does not come through? In our personal lives, nothing will happen. We will move on and be more cautious next time. Legally speaking, when one party promises to perform and the other party relies on that promise, the injured party can sue, even in the absence of a signed contract.

An example will help. Suppose you are the principal of a small high school. A musician approaches you to discuss implementing a music program on campus. Excited about the possibilities this will bring to your students, you begin planning for the program. You order construction of a new building complete with soundproofing and a stage. Next, new furniture and fixtures, drums and tubas are delivered. You may even hire staff to manage the new music program. Then, in one fell swoop, the promise is retracted. The musician simply changes his mind. You might think that, without a contract, there is no recourse to recover not only the expenses but the embarrassment of having this promise broken.

Well, the law cannot help you with the embarrassment, but the doctrine of promissory estoppel can help you to recover your losses. It states that an injured party can recover damages if those damages were the result of a promise made by a promisor and the promise was significant enough to move the promisee to act on it. There are specific elements that must be present:

Promisor made a promise significant enough to cause the promisee to act on it
Promisee relied upon the promise
Promisee suffered a significant detriment
Relief can only come in the form of the promisor fulfilling the promise

The onus is on the collector to PROVE that, under DOPE, that the abolition of the RL was the only DIRECT cause of whatever financial impact they have suffered. That is tremendously hard to do with the secondary market playing a huge factor in collectibles.

I've already spoken to litigation (twice) about this offline, and they concur.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

The doctrine of promissory estoppel allows a party to recover the benefit of a promise made even if a legal contract does not exist. Use of this doctrine relies on how significant the promisee's loss is in the absence of the fulfilled promise.
Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel
So, what happens when someone makes you a promise, you rely on this promise, act on the promise and the person does not come through? In our personal lives, nothing will happen. We will move on and be more cautious next time. Legally speaking, when one party promises to perform and the other party relies on that promise, the injured party can sue, even in the absence of a signed contract.

An example will help. Suppose you are the principal of a small high school. A musician approaches you to discuss implementing a music program on campus. Excited about the possibilities this will bring to your students, you begin planning for the program. You order construction of a new building complete with soundproofing and a stage. Next, new furniture and fixtures, drums and tubas are delivered. You may even hire staff to manage the new music program. Then, in one fell swoop, the promise is retracted. The musician simply changes his mind. You might think that, without a contract, there is no recourse to recover not only the expenses but the embarrassment of having this promise broken.

Well, the law cannot help you with the embarrassment, but the doctrine of promissory estoppel can help you to recover your losses. It states that an injured party can recover damages if those damages were the result of a promise made by a promisor and the promise was significant enough to move the promisee to act on it. There are specific elements that must be present:

Promisor made a promise significant enough to cause the promisee to act on it
Promisee relied upon the promise
Promisee suffered a significant detriment
Relief can only come in the form of the promisor fulfilling the promise

The onus is on the collector to PROVE that, under DOPE, that the abolition of the RL was the only DIRECT cause of whatever financial impact they have suffered. That is tremendously hard to do with the secondary market playing a huge factor in collectibles.

I've already spoken to litigation (twice) about this offline, and they concur.

Source your quotes.
Also this would, uh, make your petition worthless if true.

[Michael Keller]

Source your quotes.
Also this would, uh, make your petition worthless if true.

No it wouldn't, because people do not want to act proactively because they feel intimidated or plain lazy. I'm not dealing with that. Under no circumstances should these formats restrict people based on their economic status, which is what they're doing. We invest hundreds of thousands into these formats, but they...quietly...start to fade? As a player, I feel cheated because they purposely kept this list in place knowing what the repercussions were/are.

People don't act out of fear. They don't want change because they don't care. This petition simply reflects the desire of people to want change so they can afford and play these formats, nothing more. If I'm a player and I've invested money into this format and Vintage and I can't play them because the RL is causing an upswing in pricing (which, it is), as both player and investor I don't see a silver lining here.

[Mr. Safety]

...that, under DOPE...

I see what you did there...

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

No it wouldn't, because people do not want to act proactively because they feel intimidated or plain lazy. I'm not dealing with that. Under no circumstances should these formats restrict people based on their economic status, which is what they're doing. We invest hundreds of thousands into these formats, but they...quietly...start to fade? As a player, I feel cheated because they purposely kept this list in place knowing what the repercussions were/are.

People don't act out of fear. They don't want change because they don't care. This petition simply reflects the desire of people to want change so they can afford and play these formats, nothing more. If I'm a player and I've invested money into this format and Vintage and I can't play them because the RL is causing an upswing in pricing (which, it is), as both player and investor I don't see a silver lining here.

What am I missing here.
You post a petition asking wizards to abolish the reserve list.
Then you copy and paste some law stuff on why there is a legal case against abolishing the reserve list
Now you're saying they promised to keep the format alive?

Are you actually a sentient rubber ball? It explains how you're bouncing all over the place.

[Michael Keller]

What am I missing here.
You post a petition asking wizards to abolish the reserve list.
Then you copy and paste some law stuff on why there is a legal case against abolishing the reserve list
Now you're saying they promised to keep the format alive?

Are you actually a sentient rubber ball? It explains how you're bouncing all over the place.

What are you talking about? I'm giving perspective as to why it exists. Some people are possibly signing a petition to end something they don't have familiarity with but understand it could have something to do with them not being able to play Legacy or Vintage. The point of the post is to explain, in detail, why the onus is on COLLECTORS to PROVE that the abolition of the RL is the cause of their suffering and damages.

That's black and white.

I'm saying they're keeping the format(s) "alive" under the guise of, "Well, we'll keep it going, but as you can see based on price barrier, SCG dropping it and the secondary market crashing, we still kind of have these for you to look at - but move right along to Pioneer." People aren't stupid. They see this is what's happening and every other post in this forum is someone talking about Legacy "dying." The point is to give perspective to those unfamiliar with the law and how it works some idea as to how it actually DOES work, in addition to reversing the way the brain has been wired with the "Remove Reserved List = Collectors will Sue" mentality.

They need proof. And my other point is that I don't think you understand how serious the situation is for these formats. It's very serious.

[Purple Blood]

What are you talking about? I'm giving perspective as to why it exists. People are signing a petition to end something they don't have familiarity with. The point of the post is to explain, in detail, why the onus is on COLLECTORS to PROVE that the abolition of the RL is the cause of their suffering and damages.


I don't see that being too difficult:

Exhibit A: 11/12/19 $350 market price for a Revised Volcanic Island
Exhibit B: 1/1/20 announcement of Reserve List Masters Set by WOTC
Exhibit C: 1/3/20 $50 market price for Revised Volcanic Island

[Michael Keller]

I don't see that being too difficult:

Exhibit A: 11/12/19 $350 market price for a Revised Volcanic Island
Exhibit B: 1/1/20 announcement of Reserve List Masters Set by WOTC
Exhibit C: 1/14/20 $50 market price for Revised Volcanic Island

Can you prove that V.I. will be $50.00 a card? I could argue they would go up (counter-productive) based on history with Modern Masters, staples and the fact that a massive, MASSIVE influx of new players would skyrocket these.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Can you prove that V.I. will be $50.00 a card?

If they didn't depreciate in value what would be the point of suing?

[Cire]

I tried to make this clear in the other thread, but you only need proof if your goal is to win a lawsuit for promissory estoppel. That wouldn't be the goal of a class action suit. The goal would be to get wizards to settle, which as a big company it is predisposed to do. In order to settle the suit will only need to be (1) not thrown out (doubtful it would be thrown out, they can make a case that with evidence they can prove their case, so judge will let them search for evidence), and (2) take up wizards time (and money due to billable hours). The nature of promissory estoppel means that the suit will requires months of evidentiary requests, depositions, etc. This isn't the case of wizards thinking they have an air tight case and so why the hell not, this is a case of wizards thinking they do not want to allocate resources to something that isn't necessarily going to make them more profit compared to what those resources could've been used for.

[Michael Keller]

That's a good question. And that comes down to what the actual, quantifiable loss is for the collector. Let's say, for example, they abolish it and something like V.I. goes from 350 a card to 150 a card. As a collector, you have to PROVE to me as a judge that the 150 dollar value is not only market-mid accepted, but that the R.L. abolition was the CAUSE of this happening - not people in the secondary market dictating pricing.

You have to show that the R.L. itself did this and was SOLELY responsible for it happening.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

That's a good question. And that comes down to what the actual, quantifiable loss is for the collector. Let's say, for example, they abolish it and something like V.I. goes from 350 a card to 150 a card. As a collector, you have to PROVE to me as a judge that the 150 dollar value is not only market-mid accepted, but that the R.L. abolition was the CAUSE of this happening - not people in the secondary market dictating pricing.

You have to show that the R.L. itself did this and was SOLELY responsible for it happening.

Here is a print out of prices from the day before the annoucement
Here is a print out of prices from the day after the annoucement.

[Michael Keller]

I tried to make this clear in the other thread, but you only need proof if your goal is to win a lawsuit for promissory estoppel. That wouldn't be the goal of a class action suit. The goal would be to get wizards to settle, which as a big company it is predisposed to do. In order to settle the suit will only need to be (1) not thrown out (doubtful it would be thrown out, they can make a case that with evidence they can prove their case, so judge will let them search for evidence), and (2) take up wizards time (and money due to billable hours). The nature of promissory estoppel means that the suit will requires months of evidentiary requests, depositions, etc. This isn't the case of wizards thinking they have an air tight case and so why the hell not, this is a case of wizards thinking they do not want to allocate resources to something that isn't necessarily going to make them more profit compared to what those resources could've been used for.

So, let's assume they abolish the R.L. and calculate preemptively loss versus gain. If money is the be-all, end-all, and they opt to abolish it, you don't think that would open the floodgates for hundreds of thousands of new players to buy packs hoping to rip a foil Underground Sea? Do you have any idea how much money they would make off that?

[Michael Keller]

Here is a print out of prices from the day before the annoucement
Here is a print out of prices from the day after the annoucement.

Again, there's no way to know for sure what will happen. This is my entire point. It's fear-based, that's it. And showing a judge that proves nothing - those cards are always fluctuating.

One could show a judge what investors and collectors are doing and have been doing to the secondary market jacking these up with the buyouts and the tanks (like Alpha Investments are talking about as we speak) right now prior to any would-be RL abolition. You think that wouldn't have any weight in a court of law? That's been the story of Magic for the last three years.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Again, there's no way to know for sure what will happen. This is my entire point. It's fear-based, that's it. And showing a judge that proves nothing - those cards are always fluctuating.

One could show a judge what investors and collectors are doing and have been doing to the secondary market jacking these up with the buyouts and the tanks (like Alpha Investments are talking about as we speak) right now prior to any would-be RL abolition. You think that wouldn't have any weight in a court of law? That's been the story of Magic for the last three years.

If it doesn't happen no one will sue. If it does they will. This isn't hard!

[Purple Blood]

Now you're talking about a whole different idea which is whether RL card prices will drop if the RL is abolished. Obviously if you don't have any tangible losses you won't be suing. But you are moving the goalposts from your original point:



The onus is on the collector to PROVE that, under DOPE, that the abolition of the RL was the only DIRECT cause of whatever financial impact they have suffered. That is tremendously hard to do with the secondary market playing a huge factor in collectibles.

Plus its just nonsense to suggest reprints won't tank prices. Do you have any example of a reprint not lowering prices (at least in the short-term)?

[Cire]

So, let's assume they abolish the R.L. and calculate preemptively loss versus gain. If money is the be-all, end-all, and they opt to abolish it, you don't think that would open the floodgates for hundreds of thousands of new players to buy packs hoping to rip a foil Underground Sea? Do you have any idea how much money they would make off that?

Of course "money is the be-all, end-all" . . .

And presumably wizards did the math on "how much money they would make off that" and decided not enough.

[Michael Keller]

Now you're talking about a whole different idea which is whether RL card prices will drop if the RL is abolished. Obviously if you don't have any tangible losses you won't be suing. But you are moving the goalposts from your original point:



Plus its just nonsense to suggest reprints won't tank prices. Do you have any example of a reprint not lowering prices (at least in the short-term)?

This move would be unprecedented. RL cards have been and already are tanking exponentially, if you’ve been following. If these hit unprecedented lows (which they have), in addition to this unprecedented would-be decision, how is there any way to determine the outcome? Underground Sea has NEVER been reprinted. Force of Will was - and the reprint is worth MORE than the original.

[sco0ter]

Yet (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?31400-Petition-to-end-the-reserved-list-policy) another (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?31877-Contact-WotC) attempt (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?20825-A-Sensible-Approach-To-Breaking-the-Reserved-List) to abolish (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?16396-can-you-say-Bye-Bye-Reserved-List-Hopefully) the Reserve List (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?27170-Making-a-public-complaint-on-the-Reserved-list)....? :eek: It's getting old.

Last petition (https://www.change.org/p/wizards-of-the-coast-wizards-of-the-coast-end-reserve-list-policy?recruiter=23903751&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=des-md-share_petition-no_msg) got 2571 signatures, let's see where this one is going.

[Michael Keller]

Yet (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?31400-Petition-to-end-the-reserved-list-policy) another (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?31877-Contact-WotC) attempt (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?20825-A-Sensible-Approach-To-Breaking-the-Reserved-List) to abolish (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?16396-can-you-say-Bye-Bye-Reserved-List-Hopefully) the Reserve List (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?27170-Making-a-public-complaint-on-the-Reserved-list)....? :eek: It's getting old.

Last petition (https://www.change.org/p/wizards-of-the-coast-wizards-of-the-coast-end-reserve-list-policy?recruiter=23903751&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=des-md-share_petition-no_msg) got 2571 signatures, let's see where this one is going.

So, just so we’re clear: What exactly are you in favor of instead of belittling the efforts of others to entice change? Can you share?

[sco0ter]

So, just so we’re clear: What exactly are you in favor of instead of belittling the efforts of others to entice change? Can you share?

People try to convince the responsibles, WotC, Hasbro, ... to make something happen about the RL since many, many years, not only here, but in literally any Magic forum, in podcasts, in articles, in blogs.
Even MaRo failed to change anything (https://twitter.com/maro254/status/812041301361184768).

My impression is, that during the recent years, efforts to abolish the RL have faded away, because people have proabably resigned on this topic.

Your efforts in all honors, I just have little hope, after so many people already have tried and failed.

I'd rather followed the idea of an reserved-list less Legacy (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?30166-Article-No-Reserved-List-Legacy), or the Trinity format (https://www.mtgtrinity.com/), or a new format which is the love child of Premodern and Modern, i.e. everything from 4th edition onwards.
It's more likely that Wizards picks such a format up, like they did with Commander, than they would abolish the reserve list.

[Smuggo]

I'm fine with the reserved list. If you wanna play Legacy you better be prepared to invest, as I did.

[Tylert]

I'm fine with the reserved list. If you wanna play Legacy you better be prepared to invest, as I did.

Why should it be that way?
Does it make a better game experience to have invested thousands of dollars in cards??
Or Do you want to exclusively play with a certain category of people (The ones that can afford to play legacy)?

If legacy was not "Dying", I would say yes, i'm fine with the reserved list. However it is "Dying", we need more players, more events, etc...
The cost entry is the only reason why we have less and less players each year.

Perhaps you should not say "i'm fine with the reserved list", but something along the lines "I can't bear loosing money if my valuable cardboard is reprinted" That would probably represent your opinion more accurately.

(I have dual lands and legacy staples).

[Smuggo]

Why should it be that way?
Does it make a better game experience to have invested thousands of dollars in cards??
Or Do you want to exclusively play with a certain category of people (The ones that can afford to play legacy)?

If legacy was not "Dying", I would say yes, i'm fine with the reserved list. However it is "Dying", we need more players, more events, etc...
The cost entry is the only reason why we have less and less players each year.

Perhaps you should not say "i'm fine with the reserved list", but something along the lines "I can't bear loosing money if my valuable cardboard is reprinted" That would probably represent your opinion more accurately.

(I have dual lands and legacy staples).

Magic costs money to play, that's just how it is. Legacy requires a fairly high investment vs other formats, but then the cards hold or increase their value so the net cost of getting it into is actually low or even profitable over the long-term. Also Standard is easily the most expensive format over any reasonable length of time, yet is popular, which makes me doubt the claim that price is a major factor in how much people play.

I actually think the high barrier to entry makes it a better format. Legacy players are more invested in the format I find and this makes them more interesting to play against. They tend to be better versed in the meta and more experienced players in general which makes for good, skill-intensive games. When you play a legacy event you don't tend to face opponents with no idea what they're doing or who are children. I don't think making the format more accessible will result in improved play.

Sure, the value of my cards matters as well. I saved and traded for years to build my deck, playing various budget options as I did so. Maybe you're happy to see your card values written down to nothing by reprints, but many people will not be.

So as I said, I'm fine with the reserved list. It makes the format's player pool better and preserves my card values, two things I care about.

[sco0ter]

Why should it be that way?
Does it make a better game experience to have invested thousands of dollars in cards??


Yes. Playing Standard feels like holding a piece of wood in hands, which you know will decay during the next months.

I never played Pauper, but I can't imagine a good experience, even if had a good metagame, decision making, complexitiy, interaction... (that's why I never to interest in it).

Playing Legacy feels like holding a gold barren in hands. Usually there's a lot of history and affection in your deck, unlike a Standard deck. You hold your memories (e.g. to good tournaments) and your hard work (e.g. to trade for those bb duals) in your hands. This comes with a price of course, which younger players probably aren't willing to pay, because they don't have any nostalgia attached to expensive old cards.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Magic costs money to play, that's just how it is. Legacy requires a fairly high investment vs other formats, but then the cards hold or increase their value so the net cost of getting it into is actually low or even profitable over the long-term. Also Standard is easily the most expensive format over any reasonable length of time, yet is popular, which makes me doubt the claim that price is a major factor in how much people play.

I actually think the high barrier to entry makes it a better format. Legacy players are more invested in the format I find and this makes them more interesting to play against. They tend to be better versed in the meta and more experienced players in general which makes for good, skill-intensive games. When you play a legacy event you don't tend to face opponents with no idea what they're doing or who are children. I don't think making the format more accessible will result in improved play.

Sure, the value of my cards matters as well. I saved and traded for years to build my deck, playing various budget options as I did so. Maybe you're happy to see your card values written down to nothing by reprints, but many people will not be.

So as I said, I'm fine with the reserved list. It makes the format's player pool better and preserves my card values, two things I care about.

On the other hand, being priced into a deck because you can't afford to switch makes for poor quality of play and a shrinking legacy player base means that while card prices hold value their velocity decreases so while you might get their full value you'd rather not wait a year for someone to be looking for them.

[Smuggo]

On the other hand, being priced into a deck because you can't afford to switch makes for poor quality of play and a shrinking legacy player base means that while card prices hold value their velocity decreases so while you might get their full value you'd rather not wait a year for someone to be looking for them.

A fair point, though neither of those issues particularly bothers me.

[Final Fortune]

Just get them to print snow covered dual lands, easiest work around.

[morgan_coke]

Can we just sticky one of these like the B&R Thread? So everyone can just keep rehashing the same arguments there over and over again?

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

A fair point, though neither of those issues particularly bothers me.

You should talk to you who said the opposite in the post I was replying to.

[Smuggo]

You should talk to you who said the opposite in the post I was replying to.

How exactly did I say the opposite?

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

How exactly did I say the opposite?


So as I said, I'm fine with the reserved list. It makes the format's player pool better and preserves my card values, two things I care about.
Players who can't play good decks makes the pool worse, and values you can't ever redeem are not preserved.

[Smuggo]

Players who can't play good decks makes the pool worse, and values you can't ever redeem are not preserved.

But that's not the point you made and that I agreed with.

You said you can't easily switch decks, which I agree with. But I like the archetype I have no desire to change decks, so it doesn't affect me.

You said it might take time to shift cards for optimal price, and I agree, but I have enough headroom to cut price if I need a fast sale but am similarly unlikely to need to sell in a hurry, so it also doesn't affect me.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

But that's not the point you made and that I agreed with.

You said you can't easily switch decks, which I agree with. But I like the archetype I have no desire to change decks, so it doesn't affect me. So do you care about the player pool or not?

You said it might take time to shift cards for optimal price, and I agree, but I have enough headroom to cut price if I need a fast sale but am similarly unlikely to need to sell in a hurry, so it also doesn't affect me. So do you care about your cards values or not?

[TsumiBand]

Cool, this thread again

This is never happening. I hate that, I really do. But it's not happening. We've all seen Rosewater commenting both in text and on camera that they're essentially legally bound to honor the RL. We've seen what happens when they break it in spirit, and it is a loose definition of "spirit" to be sure, because collectors are also hip to the notion of functional reprints, so it's not just the Phyrexian Negators that trip their triggers, it's the Reverberates that traipse too close to Fork functionality that also grinds the gears of those who stand to lose on an undermined Reserve List. Rosewater and others have commented on the fallout from printing Reverberate as well. I'm not linking to it because I'm on my phone and at work, y'all have Google.

You also have to recall that the Reprint Policy directly contributed to the innovation that is the rotating format. Magic has Standard and a Pro Tour because they had to work around the constraints of the Reprint Policy. The reason the RP exists in the first place was because "professional collectors" had been burned by too many collectibles that had the bottom drop out and they wanted someone to guarantee their next investment was actively trying to stay valuable and collectible. NPR did a pretty good story about this a few years back. The RP may well be a stumbling block for Eternal players but it's also the thing that led to the biggest cash cow Magic could ever have hoped for. What possible incentive could you offer Hasbro to interfere with this?

[Smuggo]

So do you care about the player pool or not?
So do you care about your cards values or not?

You've made an unsubstantiated link between the ability to easily switch decks and player quality which I don't believe exists.

Yes I care about the values, but saying that firesales require price cuts is applicable to literally everything of value and is entirely unrelated to the reserve list.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

You've made an unsubstantiated link between the ability to easily switch decks and player quality which I don't believe exists.

There's no link between player quality and deck selection? Ried Duke Playing 60 islands is the high quality play you're looking for?

Yes I care about the values, but saying that firesales require price cuts is applicable to literally everything of value and is entirely unrelated to the reserve list.
If I want to sell a modern staple, the wait is trivial. I see the same listings for grim monolith on ebay for months.

[Smuggo]

There's no link between player quality and deck selection? Ried Duke Playing 60 islands is the high quality play you're looking for?

If I want to sell a modern staple, the wait is trivial. I see the same listings for grim monolith on ebay for months.

A bizarre comment. People will have a recognisable archetype within the meta, or an interesting brew using cards common in the meta. My concern is that they play intelligently with what they have. As for deck innovation, that is not typically a high-cost excercise. I constantly change and develop my U/R delver deck, but that is not a costly thing to do because the main cash expense of the deck is the landbase which doesn't really change, and this applies to the vast majority of legacy archetypes.

As for price... so what? If you cut the asking price of grim monolith, you will sell it quickly. If you don't want to cut the price, you accept it will take longer to sell. This is completely irrelevant to long-term price erosion which could result from WotC deciding it was going to reprint grim monolith.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

A bizarre comment. People will have a recognisable archetype within the meta, or an interesting brew using cards common in the meta. My concern is that they play intelligently with what they have. As for deck innovation, that is not typically a high-cost excercise. I constantly change and develop my U/R delver deck, but that is not a costly thing to do because the main cash expense of the deck is the landbase which doesn't really change, and this applies to the vast majority of legacy archetypes.Again: Is good players playing bad decks the kind of high quality play you were looking for?



As for price... so what? If you cut the asking price of grim monolith, you will sell it quickly. If you don't want to cut the price, you accept it will take longer to sell. This is completely irrelevant to long-term price erosion which could result from WotC deciding it was going to reprint grim monolith.

Cutting prices is the literal opposite of preserving prices.

[Smuggo]

Again: Is good players playing bad decks the kind of high quality play you were looking for?



Cutting prices is the literal opposite of preserving prices.

Why are these hypothetical good players playing bad decks?

Your first response was regarding the potential for reduced player pool to cause reduced demand which might affect prices. I agree, it might, but only if you wanted a quick sale. The evidence so far is that prices are stable or rising despite the supposedly catastrophic loss in player population caused by the reserve list. Abolishing the reserve list would create a completely different effect as it would cause a long-term loss of value.

[non-inflammable]

Again: Are good players playing bad decks the kind of high quality play you were looking for?

that's a straw-man leading question and you know it. ask your question using different words.
there are several avenues to play any deck you want; from proxies to cockatrice.

and if you must play in a sanctioned tournament there are many different ways to compete;
borrow cards (friends?), play a niche meta-game deck or even play (gasp) shocks... i.e. dark depths hogaak costs about $400.

and here's my favorite: get a job, sell stuff or save money and go buy that dual land that you feel you "need" to compete.
i want 4 guardian beast. i know if i save a little and sell off extra stuff, i can probably buy one in a month.
I guess i'm just a good player playing a bad deck?

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Why are these hypothetical good players playing bad decks?
The people you already agreed are priced into certain decks?


Your first response was regarding the potential for reduced player pool to cause reduced demand which might affect prices. I agree, it might, but only if you wanted a quick sale. The evidence so far is that prices are stable or rising despite the supposedly catastrophic loss in player population caused by the reserve list. Abolishing the reserve list would create a completely different effect as it would cause a long-term loss of value.
A sale that takes a billion years to complete isn't relevant.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

that's a straw-man leading question and you know it. ask your question using different words.
there are several avenues to play any deck you want; from proxies to cockatrice.
Oh, we're at the part where the debate pedants throw out logical fallacies? Nice.
First, it's not a straw-man because the whole premise of the thread is that cards have value. What you're doing here is called a red herring: Obviously we're not talking about playing online, or without real cards. Obviously we're not including proxies. Bringing up methods to play magic beyond the topic of the conversation is irrelevant.


and if you must play in a sanctioned tournament there are many different ways to compete;
borrow cards (friends?), play a niche meta-game deck or even play (gasp) shocks... i.e. dark depths hogaak costs about $400.
Now this fallacy here is called the one of a "false premise" namely that the $400 dollars is supposed to be cheap.


and here's my favorite: get a job, sell stuff or save money and go buy that dual land that you feel you "need" to compete.
i want 4 guardian beast. i know if i save a little and sell off extra stuff, i can probably buy one in a month.
I guess i'm just a good player playing a bad deck?
Ok, boomer.

[Smuggo]

Ok, boomer.

Glad we can now firmly establish you aren't interested in having a serious discussion.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Glad we can now firmly establish you aren't interested in having a serious discussion.
It was that or explain to someone so out of touch with normal people that actually when 40% of Americans can't afford a $400 dollar expense them saying "just save harder" for the $375 card they listed is just fucking stupid but that would have been frowned upon.

[PirateKing]

It was that or explain to someone so out of touch with normal people that actually when 40% of Americans can't afford a $400 dollar expense them saying "just save harder" for the $375 card they listed is just fucking stupid but that would have been frowned upon.

Okay, but then, what is the budget? I mean if the numbers put forward aren't to your liking, then what would be?

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Okay, but then, what is the budget? I mean if the numbers put forward aren't to your liking, then what would be?

I don't know, but 1500 for a play set of 375 cards ain't it.

[PirateKing]

I don't know, but 1500 for a play set of 375 cards ain't it.

Okay, well, for clarity, the deck non-inflammable referenced was ~$400 for 75 cards, not 1 card

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Okay, well, for clarity, the deck non-inflammable referenced was ~$400 for 75 cards, not 1 card

Okay, well, for accuracy the post non-inflammable made said they wanted four copies of Guardian Beast, which when I googled was $375 each. That's $1500 for four copies, to say nothing of the cost of the remaining 71 cards in the deck.

[PirateKing]

Okay, well, for accuracy the post non-inflammable made said they wanted four copies of Guardian Beast, which when I googled was $375 each. That's $1500 for four copies, to say nothing of the cost of the remaining 71 cards in the deck.

Right that's fair, but, reading the whole of the post, are we then entertaining the merits of the argument that a deck needs to have (4) copies of Guardian Beast to compete in Legacy?
I could see some position one could come at thinking $400 is a lot for a whole deck, and we could talk about what that means, but if that's not what we're doing, then I'll withdraw the point.

[thecrav]

Hey mods, can we just get a dedicated section of the forum for talking about reprints, finance, and the reserved list so I don't have to read this garbage in every fuckin thread?

[sco0ter]

Hey mods, can we just get a dedicated section of the forum for talking about reprints, finance, and the reserved list so I don't have to read this garbage in every fuckin thread?

You can go here. (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?16162-Official-Bitching-About-Prices-Buyouts-and-Reprints-Thread)

[Seymour_Asses]

It was that or explain to someone so out of touch with normal people that actually when 40% of Americans can't afford a $400 dollar expense them saying "just save harder" for the $375 card they listed is just fucking stupid but that would have been frowned upon.
Who are these hypothetical "normal people" you're talking about? I'm poor as shit, but I can afford to save up for a few months to buy a Legacy deck. Not to mention the fact that I recently bought one in Manaless Dredge, which cost me about $80 and is certainly viable even if it's not Delver.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Who are these hypothetical "normal people" you're talking about? I'm poor as shit, but I can afford to save up for a few months to buy a Legacy deck. Not to mention the fact that I recently bought one in Manaless Dredge, which cost me about $80 and is certainly viable even if it's not Delver.
The 40% who can't afford a $400 expense that I mentioned right after the words you fixated on. Read the whole post next time, k?
And amazing how you're using a deck that you admit is an inferior archetype, and you built it bad (no forces?) As evidence that anyone can save their way into legacy.
Basic lands are legacy legal and free anyone can build this lands brew I have that uses discount lands. I call it "basic lands dot dec" oh! And if you have all the pieces you can add four copies of battle of wits and now you have TWO legacy decks.

[Tylert]

Who are these hypothetical "normal people" you're talking about? I'm poor as shit, but I can afford to save up for a few months to buy a Legacy deck. Not to mention the fact that I recently bought one in Manaless Dredge, which cost me about $80 and is certainly viable even if it's not Delver.

It's not only a question of being poor. I think it is also a question of putting that much money into a game.
Any normal person who doesn't know TCG's would probably be amazed by the amount of money we put into it especially knowing that the product can be reprinted for a tiny amount of money...
There is probably a virtual line that some people will not cross in order to play a game.
I mean, I have the money to buy any legacy deck, but i'm just reluctant to spend so much money while we're trying to be reasonnable when buying stuff for the house for example.
If duals were available at 20 or 40 a piece, that would be another story.

Also, about the quality of players, more players would mean more bad players, but also more good players. It would be balanced. Being able to afford a legacy deck that costs thousands of dollars doesn't mean you're smart and that you play the game well. It just means that you have money.
So if the format is democratized thanks to a less expensive entry point, that would probably be beneficial because the competition would be harder!

For me the only real problem is the value of cards which i can understand if people would be upset to loose money.

[PirateKing]

The 40% who can't afford a $400 expense that I mentioned right after the words you fixated on. Read the whole post next time, k?
And amazing how you're using a deck that you admit is an inferior archetype, and you built it bad (no forces?) As evidence that anyone can save their way into legacy.
Basic lands are legacy legal and free anyone can build this lands brew I have that uses discount lands. I call it "basic lands dot dec" oh! And if you have all the pieces you can add four copies of battle of wits and now you have TWO legacy decks.

Right, so what is the dollar amount then?
What should Legacy cost?
$400 too much? So then what isn't too much?

We need a baseline to move from.

[Michael Keller]

Right, so what is the dollar amount then?
What should Legacy cost?
$400 too much? So then what isn't too much?

We need a baseline to move from.

The baseline should, in theory, be predicated on the cost of dual lands and what would happen if they were reprinted. All of the other stuff is mainly fluff (I get it that stuff like Candelabra, Nether Void, etc. are all expensive and niche), but duals are what define Legacy.

So you'd need to look at three things:

1. What deck you want to build.
2. What duals you'd require to build it.
3. What the theoretical drop in price on a dual land would be if the RL were abolished and what it would wind up costing.

A lot of this is theory-crafting, because this would be unprecedented if it were to happen. People can say they'd go down, but no one knows with 100% certainty they would because existing metrics on pricing are for cards that could be reprinted already.

[non-inflammable]

you can add four copies of battle of wits and now you have TWO legacy decks.

i don't know why you are being so obtuse that the "best players" have to have expensive decks and that the RL is why we can't have nice things.
your entire point keeps locking you into "it has to be a sanctioned event" for my premise to be relevant.

my post (which you are deliberately parsing) about buying guardian beast is more of a lark because the deck will probably be bad (i'm a good player?)

$400 for dark depths hogaak with shocks can win or borrow cards or play where proxies are allowed or on MTGO or cockatrice?

and i can play my bad or good deck (i can't tell) with 4 proxy guardian beasts.

https://i.imgur.com/n5FlWlD.jpg

[Seymour_Asses]

The 40% who can't afford a $400 expense that I mentioned right after the words you fixated on. Read the whole post next time, k?
And amazing how you're using a deck that you admit is an inferior archetype, and you built it bad (no forces?) As evidence that anyone can save their way into legacy.
Basic lands are legacy legal and free anyone can build this lands brew I have that uses discount lands. I call it "basic lands dot dec" oh! And if you have all the pieces you can add four copies of battle of wits and now you have TWO legacy decks.
Yeah, the "40%" that I was obviously indicating I belong to.

I said that my deck isn't Delver. I'm playing 4 Forces of Vigor in my sideboard, the only Forces that matter in a Manaless Dredge deck. Also, I wasn't using Manaless as an example of a deck that I could buy by saving up for it. I was clearly saying that although I am quite poor, I can still save up to buy a Legacy deck (using $400 as a threshold in response to your post).

I guess "reading the whole post" (if you even did that) doesn't include understanding it or not coming across like a jackass.

[PirateKing]

Mike the baseline I'm trying to find stems from the common argument I hear that's played out here in as it has before, basically reading like this:

M: "I want to play Legacy, but the Decks are TOO expensive! $X for a deck? Ridiculous!
B: "Well here is a sample deck that did okay, it costs much less at $Y and you can improve it over time"
M: "$Y!?! You got to be kidding me, that's crazy!"
B: "Okay well here is a budget deck that is only $Z"
M: "Get out of here with $Z, I don't have that kind of money!"

On and on.
If the number gets all the way down to zero, then well there's always Cockatrice.
But guys, SANCTIONED, they say.
Okay well, so what is the number?

If it's a reasonable budget; okay, let's talk.
But if the demands are to play an eternal format for loose change, I'm not sure there is a discussion to be had.

So it's just an attempt to break they cycle of "guess my finances" and cut straight to tangible working numbers.

[Michael Keller]

Couldn't tell you. I guess it comes down to what people are willing to pay in a similar way to Modern and what their economic status is. I think a Legacy deck featuring multiple dual lands and overall deck cost hitting $3-4K is pretty absurd when you consider the huge majority of that cost...is on...lands. But a RL abolition, assuming it drops the price of duals, could drop the price of those decks in half - maybe more.

I honestly think that it depends on what you're building and what you can afford personally.

[Seymour_Asses]

It's not only a question of being poor. I think it is also a question of putting that much money into a game.
Any normal person who doesn't know TCG's would probably be amazed by the amount of money we put into it especially knowing that the product can be reprinted for a tiny amount of money...
There is probably a virtual line that some people will not cross in order to play a game.
I mean, I have the money to buy any legacy deck, but i'm just reluctant to spend so much money while we're trying to be reasonnable when buying stuff for the house for example.
If duals were available at 20 or 40 a piece, that would be another story.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. While playing a format like the vacuum cleaner that is Standard will probably be more expensive over time, if you want to play Legacy (assuming you're using real cards) you have to throw down more money up front. But there are several cheap ways to try out Legacy or a specific deck (Cockatrice, Xmage, proxies), and if you like what you see you can make the investment. Honestly I think of this as a basic quality of the format.

[PirateKing]

Couldn't tell you. I guess it comes down to what people are willing to pay in a similar way to Modern and what their economic status is. I think a Legacy deck featuring multiple dual lands and overall deck cost hitting $3-4K is pretty absurd when you consider the huge majority of that cost...is on...lands. But a RL abolition, assuming it drops the price of duals, could drop the price of those decks in half - maybe more.

I honestly think that it depends on what you're building and what you can afford personally.

Well not you specifically.

You and I have sat at events where you'll overhear a conversation between some kids trading around their draft pulls and lamenting that some card is 4 bucks now; at the same time another group is talking about how they got a good deal on a foil textless Gaea's Cradle, only $1,400. The two worlds are so fart apart yet somehow still connected by this silly card game.

[Smuggo]

Couldn't tell you. I guess it comes down to what people are willing to pay in a similar way to Modern and what their economic status is. I think a Legacy deck featuring multiple dual lands and overall deck cost hitting $3-4K is pretty absurd when you consider the huge majority of that cost...is on...lands. But a RL abolition, assuming it drops the price of duals, could drop the price of those decks in half - maybe more.

I honestly think that it depends on what you're building and what you can afford personally.

What's the relevance of them being lands?

I see similar discussions among standard players, especially on Arena, saying "I can't believe I have to spend rare wildcards on lands". But lands are probably the most fundamental part of a deck and the most flexible cards. If you're gonna spend on anything, good land should be the thing you're more willing to spend money on than any of the other stuff which is usually more limited in application.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Yeah, the "40%" that I was obviously indicating I belong to.So it't's just a classic FYGM? K.


I said that my deck isn't Delver. I'm playing 4 Forces of Vigor in my sideboard, the only Forces that matter in a Manaless Dredge deck. Also, I wasn't using Manaless as an example of a deck that I could buy by saving up for it. I was clearly saying that although I am quite poor, I can still save up to buy a Legacy deck (using $400 as a threshold in response to your post).

"I said my deck isn't the good deck, and the only forces I'm playing aren't the necessary "of will", but let me tell you how you're just not saving money right!"


I guess "reading the whole post" (if you even did that) doesn't include understanding it or not coming across like a jackass.
Post shit get hit. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

i don't know why you are being so obtuse that the "best players" have to have expensive decks and that the RL is why we can't have nice things.
If you're really going to make me defend "good players play good decks" then just use the ignore button and save yourself the effort.


your entire point keeps locking you into "it has to be a sanctioned event" for my premise to be relevant.
My premise is that in a discussion about reprinted cards we should only talk about real cards. Yes.


and i can play my bad or good deck (i can't tell) with 4 proxy guardian beasts.
Why are you even posting about card prices if you don't actually buy cards?

[Seymour_Asses]

So it't's just a classic FYGM? K.

"I said my deck isn't the good deck, and the only forces I'm playing aren't the necessary "of will", but let me tell you how you're just not saving money right!"

Post shit get hit. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
So... let me get this straight, you're:

1. Not even going to acknowledge that I refuted your point.

2. Saying that there is only one good deck in Legacy.

3. Telling me that Force of Will is necessary in Manaless Dredge.

4. Finding the concept of "saving money" to be ridiculous.

5. Completely validating my first impression of you by acting like a total clown.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

So... let me get this straight, you're:

1. Not even going to acknowledge that I refuted your point.

2. Saying that there is only one good deck in Legacy.

3. Telling me that Force of Will is necessary in Manaless Dredge.

4. Finding the concept of "saving money" to be ridiculous.

5. Completely validating my first impression of you by acting like a total clown.

1. No you didn't.

2. No I didn't.

3. It's better with it.

4. No I didn't.

5. Don't care.

[Seymour_Asses]

1. No you didn't.

2. No I didn't.

3. It's better with it.

4. No I didn't.

5. Don't care.
So, "nuh uh."

You, sir, are obviously a paragon of enlightening, civil conversation.

I look forward to our many future interactions, which will no doubt be likened by internet historians to exceedingly well played games of chess.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

So, "nuh uh."

You, sir, are obviously a paragon of enlightening, civil conversation.

I look forward to our many future interactions, which will no doubt be likened by internet historians to exceedingly well played games of chess.

Just putting in the same effort you did.

[bruizar]

If the main case is duals, then first determine the % loss between the delta of original duals vs shock duals for each matchup. Certain metagames lend themselves well for shock duals, such as the current one which is very heavy on combo. Burn is nowhere to be seen with Oko/Food around and Death & Taxes got royally screwed.

Ancient Tomb is played in A LOT of legacy decks, and it too deals 2 damage. Yes, it is used for specific game plans, but the damage is the same. The question becomes, do you really need original duals for your deck? Play a match 50 to a 100 times with OG duals and shock duals and compare.

[Seymour_Asses]

Just putting in the same effort you did.
Ah, a scathing retort!

You once again demonstrate your boundless wit and a depth of thought that is nigh unrivaled, even among the fabled users of r/mtglegacy!

Touché, sir, touché!

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Ah, a scathing retort!

You once again demonstrate your boundless wit and a depth of thought that is nigh unrivaled, even among the fabled users of r/mtglegacy!

Touché, sir, touché!

Man, am I good at this or what.

[Seymour_Asses]

Man, am I good at this or what.
If, with so little effort, a living legend like yourself can impart such deep wisdom to those of us clearly functioning miles below your hallowed personage in the mental realm, then I say:

Yes, indeed! You are good at this!

[Michael Keller]

What's the relevance of them being lands?

I see similar discussions among standard players, especially on Arena, saying "I can't believe I have to spend rare wildcards on lands". But lands are probably the most fundamental part of a deck and the most flexible cards. If you're gonna spend on anything, good land should be the thing you're more willing to spend money on than any of the other stuff which is usually more limited in application.

Lands are required to play Magic games - for the most part. They’re an essential part of optimal deck building. Duals are synonymous with Legacy and Vintage.

Dropping ten or fifteen bucks a shock to play Modern versus 400 for a land in Legacy is a huge problem.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Yes, indeed! You are good at this!

ty

[Seymour_Asses]

ty
You are certainly most welcome.

Although truly it is I, sir, who should be thanking you. Not only for your incredible insight, but also for the amazingly cerebral and well thought out manner in which you have delivered your responses. You honor me.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

You are certainly most welcome.

Although truly it is I, sir, who should be thanking you. Not only for your incredible insight, but also for the amazingly cerebral and well thought out manner in which you have delivered your responses. You honor me.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/YYfEjWVqZ6NDG/source.gif

[Watersaw]

What's the relevance of them being lands?

I see similar discussions among standard players, especially on Arena, saying "I can't believe I have to spend rare wildcards on lands". But lands are probably the most fundamental part of a deck and the most flexible cards. If you're gonna spend on anything, good land should be the thing you're more willing to spend money on than any of the other stuff which is usually more limited in application.

There's nothing "cool" about lands. If someone is paying a premium for something, they want it to have some visceral impact. Producing 2 differnt (edited) colors of mana doesn't have that in the same way that, say, Emrakul does. Gaea's Cradle and Nykthos have more shock value for a player than Volcanic Island

EDIT: tl;dr, dual lands don't have a big, splashy effect so it throws people off when guildgates that come in untapped are over $100 each

[Megadeus]

There's nothing "cool" about lands. If someone is paying a premium for something, they want it to have some visceral impact. Producing 2 differnt (edited) colors of mana doesn't have that in the same way that, say, Emrakul does. Gaea's Cradle and Nykthos have more shock value for a player than Volcanic Island

EDIT: tl;dr, dual lands don't have a big, splashy effect so it throws people off when guildgates that come in untapped are over $100 each it's like American football. Nobody is excited to see their team draft or spend big money on an offensive lineman instead of a speedy wide receiver or an insanely talented running back, but the line is the foundation of consistency and dictates your ability to execute plays properly

[Seymour_Asses]

it's like American football. Nobody is excited to see their team draft or spend big money on an offensive lineman instead of a speedy wide receiver or an insanely talented running back, but the line is the foundation of consistency and dictates your ability to execute plays properly
Also you can use your linemen to create new teams without paying any money.

[JDK]

Although the petition site is web cancer, I did my part.

[Smuggo]

Lands are required to play Magic games - for the most part. They’re an essential part of optimal deck building. Duals are synonymous with Legacy and Vintage.

Dropping ten or fifteen bucks a shock to play Modern versus 400 for a land in Legacy is a huge problem.

Sure but they're also the core of every deck and useable in multiple decks, so why does them being lands matter specifically in regards to cost? If anything, surely the lands should reasonably be the most expensive bit as they're the most essential and flexible cards you have.

[Smuggo]

You are certainly most welcome.

Although truly it is I, sir, who should be thanking you. Not only for your incredible insight, but also for the amazingly cerebral and well thought out manner in which you have delivered your responses. You honor me.

He's proven he's incapable of polite or sensible discussion. He wants to play legacy for less than the price of a cup of coffee. You're wasting time engaging with him.

[Seymour_Asses]

He's proven he's incapable of polite or sensible discussion. He wants to play legacy for less than the price of a cup of coffee. You're wasting time engaging with him.
Hahaha yeah I might've noticed that. I may just be entertaining myself at this point.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

He's proven he's incapable of polite or sensible discussion. He wants to play legacy for less than the price of a cup of coffee. You're wasting time engaging with him.
Oh no, the guy who would rather hold cards than play with them is mad at me.

[Michael Keller]

Sign the petition!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nVjoU_8LH8

[Ronald Deuce]

Signed.

[Strawberry Dwarf]

I am not going to sign:

- Not having all wanted/needed cards immediately available is exactly the way Magic has been intended to be played. Players are expected to trade cards and play for prizes/bets/ante, try various things and tune their decks in the process gradually.

- Deckbuilding on RL cards isn't a must, it's only an option. From my experience I can create decks and play eternal formats without them.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

I am not going to sign:

- Not having all wanted/needed cards immediately available is exactly the way Magic has been intended to be played. Players are expected to trade cards and play for prizes/bets/ante, try various things and tune their decks in the process gradually.

- Deckbuilding on RL cards isn't a must, it's only an option. From my experience I can create decks and play eternal formats without them.

What's your record with white suspend aggro control? Post yer list.

[Emurian]

Make a petition to allow proxies on official legacy tournaments and il sign, chances are much higher WoTC goes with that, solves the problem for the newer players, helps older players too, keeps RL intact, every1 happy win/win

[bruizar]

Make a petition to allow proxies on official legacy tournaments and il sign, chances are much higher WoTC goes with that, solves the problem for the newer players, helps older players too, keeps RL intact, every1 happy win/win

Aah, Vintage 2.0. We all know how that ends.

[Strawberry Dwarf]

What's your record with white suspend aggro control? Post yer list.

Does the AI opponent count? If so, my guess is about 80%, mainly vs Miracles and BUG_Delver.

[Fox]

Yeah suspend is really strong into opposing Teferi. :tongue:

Reserve List abolishing would be quite nice; would allow Dual land reprints and Fetchland ban. Immediately unbans DRS and Dig; but can't really unban Cruise b/c of single :u: requirement on it (too easy to cheese with Fireblast as gain 3 mana).

[TsumiBand]

What's your record with white suspend aggro control? Post yer list.

Does the AI opponent count? If so, my guess is about 80%, mainly vs Miracles and BUG_Delver.


Finally, some good fucking food

[JDK]

Seems like the trolls and RL hoarders are some of the last people left on The Source. What a shame.

I'd rather see my Tabernacle drop to 10€ (spoiler: it won't, even with the fall of the RL...not even with an actual reprint) than to not have Legacy at my FNM.

[Michael Keller]

Seems like the trolls and RL hoarders are some of the last people left on The Source. What a shame.

I'd rather see my Tabernacle drop to 10€ (spoiler: it won't, even with the fall of the RL...not even with an actual reprint) than to not have Legacy at my FNM.

Exactly.

[Smuggo]

Seems like the trolls and RL hoarders are some of the last people left on The Source. What a shame.

I'd rather see my Tabernacle drop to 10€ (spoiler: it won't, even with the fall of the RL...not even with an actual reprint) than to not have Legacy at my FNM.

Ahhh... the old "people I disagree with are trolls" argument.

[Glass House]

Ahhh... the old "people I disagree with are trolls" argument.

To be honest, "Does the AI opponent count?" cannot be interpreted as anything other than trolling.

[JDK]

Ahhh... the old "people I disagree with are trolls" argument.

Do you even read, bro?

[Meekrab]

I don't see that being too difficult:

Exhibit A: 11/12/19 $350 market price for a Revised Volcanic Island
Exhibit B: 1/1/20 announcement of Reserve List Masters Set by WOTC
Exhibit C: 1/3/20 $50 market price for Revised Volcanic Island
I would argue there's no actual damages to be claimed, owner of said Revised Volcanic Island still owns exactly 1 (one) Volcanic Island from the Revised Edition of Magic: The Gathering a Deckmaster Game. No legally acknowledged market exists for Revised Edition Volcanic Island thus Exhibit A and Exhibit C are inadmissible.

[Erdvermampfa]

One recent sign that makes an abolishment of the Reserved List more likely is that things at Wizards have apparently changed in a way that they aren't super reluctant of banning highly valuable and recently printed money cards like W6, Oko and Once anymore. It seems that guaranteed price stability of their chase cards isn't their ultimate goal anymore and that they aren't afraid of losing customer/speculator faith that way like they have been in the past. This might increase the likelihood that the RL might be somewhat weakened in some way or the other.

[LeoCop 90]

I don't think it will change anything but i signed the petition.
You shouldn't even be shocked that many people are so attached to their money they think the desire to play legacy without spending thousands dollars is foolish.
It's not a problem of magic the gathering, it's a problem of society and capitalism.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

I would argue there's no actual damages to be claimed, owner of said Revised Volcanic Island still owns exactly 1 (one) Volcanic Island from the Revised Edition of Magic: The Gathering a Deckmaster Game. No legally acknowledged market exists for Revised Edition Volcanic Island thus Exhibit A and Exhibit C are inadmissible.

what?

[Ronald Deuce]

It doesn't take a lawyer to punch a billion holes in the promissory estoppel argument.

You have to prove—legally—that you purchased the card.
You have to prove exactly how much money you spent on the card.
You have to prove that any third party from which you purchased the card had set a reasonable price and had not misled or falsely advertised/arbitrarily set the purchase price.
You have to prove that it's reasonable to consider the card an investment rather than a simple game piece.
You have to prove that you purchased the card as an investment, not as a game piece or other retail product.
You have to prove that the investment has/had appreciated by a concrete, non-arbitrary amount. (Good luck demonstrating the real market value of a mint-condition Lotus or any heavily played/damaged RL card.)
You have to prove that the company made a promise in good faith and not under duress.
You have to prove that the promise hadn't been broken before because if it were, any subsequent breach is of a voided contract. Alternatively/additionally, you have to prove the promise holds weight and that it's reasonable to expect the company to abide by it. (This is literally impossible because Feroz's Ban, etc.)
You have to prove that your alleged investment was impacted by the breaking of the promise. (See above.)
You have to prove that you are owed a specific sum for the depreciation of your alleged investment.

If you've done all of those things (and maybe more), you just might get something out of a lawsuit.

Of course, there's no law against filing a ridiculous lawsuit, as long as it's not frivolous. Probably explains the persistence of the list.

[Backseat_Critic]

I seriously doubt this will ever happen. Wizards is fine with what happened to vintage and they’re more than comfortable with the same thing happening to legacy.

They not so secretly want the formats to be tiered. They expect people who stick around to ‘graduate’ into older formats. This really helps long term player retention. Even modern wasn’t really cutting it any more for that purpose. It will join vintage and legacy as niche formats.

Even if a lawsuit was not an issue, the consumer confidence backlash would bbe substantial and unpredictable in its scope. They likely don’t want to open a chronicles level pandora’s box.

One point I haven’t seen made is the discovery phase of the lawsuit and the potentially lethal damage it could inflict on the game. A question that will need to be answered will be ‘what was the motive for abolishing the banned list?’ Lawyers will be able to subpoena internal company communications. Who wants that? What they will likely find is a lot of private talk about card values and EV. This could cause wizards to find themselves on the wrong side of gambling laws.

Abolishing the reserve list could be an extinction event for the profitability of magic, with basically no upside for wizards. You’re delusional if you think that letting more players access this niche formats would be considered anything close to a bottom line upside.

Let the zen take over and rest easy knowing legacy will only ever be what it is. If we ever see a reserve list break, it will likely signal the end of supporting paper at all. Enjoy the best format in the game as much as you can. No petition will ever change this.

[Michael Keller]

It doesn't take a lawyer to punch a billion holes in the promissory estoppel argument.

You have to prove—legally—that you purchased the card.
You have to prove exactly how much money you spent on the card.
You have to prove that any third party from which you purchased the card had set a reasonable price and had not misled or falsely advertised/arbitrarily set the purchase price.
You have to prove that it's reasonable to consider the card an investment rather than a simple game piece.
You have to prove that you purchased the card as an investment, not as a game piece or other retail product.
You have to prove that the investment has/had appreciated by a concrete, non-arbitrary amount. (Good luck demonstrating the real market value of a mint-condition Lotus or any heavily played/damaged RL card.)
You have to prove that the company made a promise in good faith and not under duress.
You have to prove that the promise hadn't been broken before because if it were, any subsequent breach is of a voided contract. Alternatively/additionally, you have to prove the promise holds weight and that it's reasonable to expect the company to abide by it. (This is literally impossible because Feroz's Ban, etc.)
You have to prove that your alleged investment was impacted by the breaking of the promise. (See above.)
You have to prove that you are owed a specific sum for the depreciation of your alleged investment.

If you've done all of those things (and maybe more), you just might get something out of a lawsuit.

Of course, there's no law against filing a ridiculous lawsuit, as long as it's not frivolous. Probably explains the persistence of the list.

Exactly. There's been this years-long belief that somehow it's only protected because collectors will sue. Claiming P.E. when it comes to cards that have existed since 1993 is not easy to prove in a court of law. Nor would it, in my belief and discussions with litigators I know very well, likely get anywhere.

[TsumiBand]

I seriously doubt this will ever happen. Wizards is fine with what happened to vintage and they’re more than comfortable with the same thing happening to legacy.

They not so secretly want the formats to be tiered. They expect people who stick around to ‘graduate’ into older formats. This really helps long term player retention. Even modern wasn’t really cutting it any more for that purpose. It will join vintage and legacy as niche formats.

Even if a lawsuit was not an issue, the consumer confidence backlash would bbe substantial and unpredictable in its scope. They likely don’t want to open a chronicles level pandora’s box.

One point I haven’t seen made is the discovery phase of the lawsuit and the potentially lethal damage it could inflict on the game. A question that will need to be answered will be ‘what was the motive for abolishing the banned list?’ Lawyers will be able to subpoena internal company communications. Who wants that? What they will likely find is a lot of private talk about card values and EV. This could cause wizards to find themselves on the wrong side of gambling laws.

Abolishing the reserve list could be an extinction event for the profitability of magic, with basically no upside for wizards. You’re delusional if you think that letting more players access this niche formats would be considered anything close to a bottom line upside.

Let the zen take over and rest easy knowing legacy will only ever be what it is. If we ever see a reserve list break, it will likely signal the end of supporting paper at all. Enjoy the best format in the game as much as you can. No petition will ever change this.

+1

I've wanted the RL gone for a decade and some change, and I'm definitely not even the oldest of the old guard when it comes to Magic. When I started playing around '01 you could buy a dual - any dual - for $10 at the LGS. I bought my playset of LEDs at $4 a pop when the Legacy format was announced. Dig that. $16 for that playset. I can't believe what's happened.

The fact is though, the RL is a foundational policy that directly led to the need for Standard. It's tough to sell people on a game where they have to swap their pieces every 18 months without it (and a Pro Tour to convince people that "the pros play Magic this way, you wanna play like a pro, riiiiight?"). Standard is far and away their most profitable format and doing anything to undercut it is going to be a non-starter. Legality is a red herring at that point. Convince the people making the most money that their primary vehicle for cash needs to be destabilized to sate older players who represent a sliver of the consumers and you'll see the Reprint Policy torn down faster than a Tom LaPille article on Legacy.

[Michael Keller]

Convince the people making the most money that their primary vehicle for cash needs to be destabilized to sate older players who represent a sliver of the consumers and you'll see the Reprint Policy torn down faster than a Tom LaPille article on Legacy.

In 2019, the Reserved List has nothing to do with Standard, or Modern, to any degree.

The abolition of the Reserved List ideology isn't to satiate older players, it's to enable the influx of newer players into the format (or formats, including Vintage) so that the player base for these formats will increase exponentially and it can become exactly like its counterparts in that it gets part of the spotlight and isn't held back by a relic of the past.

To do it isn't doing existing players really much of any favors - it's doing a favor to people that want to play the format that can't because of the cost of the format's most prolific staples.

[Backseat_Critic]

In 2019, the Reserved List has nothing to do with Standard, or Modern, to any degree.

The abolition of the Reserved List ideology isn't to satiate older players, it's to enable the influx of newer players into the format (or formats, including Vintage) so that the player base for these formats will increase exponentially and it can become exactly like its counterparts in that it gets part of the spotlight and isn't held back by a relic of the past.

To do it isn't doing existing players really much of any favors - it's doing a favor to people that want to play the format that can't because of the cost of the format's most prolific staples.

Monday’s article said that 2019 was more or less what they wanted from power w of new sets, barring some obvious mistakes and dialing back 3cmc walkers.

Grant me sone speculative stats if you will.

Standard could drive pack sales of new sets by itself. Player population is largest.

Pioneer is great so far and could drive demand for standard cards at about of 25% of standard. Player population is probably around 60% of standard.

Let’s say modern could create demand for 10% of new cards. Player population is about 35% of standard.

Legacy would be around 2-3%. Player population is maybe 1%.

Vintage maybe a few cards a year. Player population could be counted in the low thousands, total.

These are the tiers I was referring to. They don’t want legacy and vintage (soon modern) to be too accessible or popular. It would ultimately cut into their bottom line. I’m of the opinion that modern horizons was not an indication of future support, but more of a send off. Now modern is pretty close to no RL legacy. Pioneer will be their new eternal baby for another decade.

They’ve crafted this play environment on purpose to make the largest amount of money. If, for instance, legacy costs close to standard (or even pioneer) this would create a real problem. Let’s say 10% of pioneer players decide to jump into legacy instead. Great, you can sell them RL reprint products, but you’ve also supplied an incentive to consume less standard cards.

The meteoric rise of commander is obviously a welcome surprise and doesn’t really cut into this model on the constructed side. There are a vocal group that decries the RL in commander too, but the format doesn’t really need it. Don’t worry, brawl was the 1.0 attempt to make a commander experience that is more affected by standard cards...

[Michael Keller]

Monday’s article said that 2019 was more or less what they wanted from power w of new sets, barring some obvious mistakes and dialing back 3cmc walkers.

Grant me sone speculative stats if you will.

Standard could drive pack sales of new sets by itself. Player population is largest.

Pioneer is great so far and could drive demand for standard cards at about of 25% of standard. Player population is probably around 60% of standard.

Let’s say modern could create demand for 10% of new cards. Player population is about 35% of standard.

Legacy would be around 2-3%. Player population is maybe 1%.

Vintage maybe a few cards a year. Player population could be counted in the low thousands, total.

These are the tiers I was referring to. They don’t want legacy and vintage (soon modern) to be too accessible or popular. It would ultimately cut into their bottom line. I’m of the opinion that modern horizons was not an indication of future support, but more of a send off. Now modern is pretty close to no RL legacy. Pioneer will be their new eternal baby for another decade.

They’ve crafted this play environment on purpose to make the largest amount of money. If, for instance, legacy costs close to standard (or even pioneer) this would create a real problem. Let’s say 10% of pioneer players decide to jump into legacy instead. Great, you can sell them RL reprint products, but you’ve also supplied an incentive to consume less standard cards.

The meteoric rise of commander is obviously a welcome surprise and doesn’t really cut into this model on the constructed side. There are a vocal group that decries the RL in commander too, but the format doesn’t really need it. Don’t worry, brawl was the 1.0 attempt to make a commander experience that is more affected by standard cards...

So what you're insinuating is that there's no logistical cross-pollination of players between formats allowed? I fail to see how a theoretical unified policy on all formats (assuming Legacy and Vintage lose the Reserve List - which is clearly holding them back) would equate to a loss in sales because of the "push" on these other formats. We're talking about a theoretical push to Legacy in order to revitalize it and showcase it, as opposed to letting it sit in the background and slowly fade due to inaccessibility and support.

Since something like this would be unprecedented, there's no way to tell what would wind up happening. What I personally believe is that assuming in this alternate universe where they actually would get rid of the Reserved List, I believe Legacy would immediately become the most popular format (next to Standard, I suppose) and sales would be flooding for format staples on the secondary market - contrary to the belief that the prices would "tank" (which they wouldn't, in my opinion, not on older versions).

Any secondary market belief that the Reserved List would go away would equate to massive buyouts of Reserved List staples and you would - then hope to see - some congruent action between an announcement it is gone with a new set that will reprint some of those cards (i.e. Dual Lands). Continuing the suspension of belief for one more second, at that point, would you really care about the price of the Dual Lands you currently own versus the fertile landscape that would become a dreamworld of massive Legacy tournaments around the country (probably world) and the assimilation of the the format into top vendor tournament structures?

[H]

Since something like this would be unprecedented, there's no way to tell what would wind up happening.

Which is the whole crux of this thread and what, no matter now many times I seem to try to explain it, falls on purposively deaf ears.

Harbro is not interesting in anything particularly unprecedented because that is risk and risk does not sit well with share-holders.

The RL is predicated on legal action taken, not won. It's completely irrelevant, in the grand scheme of things, if the case of the collectors is actually won. The far more likely "damaging" aspect is the discovery for and in the trial itself. There will be disclosure, depositions, and information that is let out which Wizards/Hasbro is not interested in having public.

No one wants to really consider this and still just continues to nonsensically argue the merits, or lack thereof, of the case itself, where there is little reason to assume that is the matter at hand.

Nor is the matter at hand if Legacy/Vintage support with (or without) the RL is a viable business model, because Wizards has already decreed it is not, so it is not. In some alternate universe, or some hypothetical future, maybe it is, or maybe it still isn't. In this one though and in our direct, foreseeable future, it's nothing more than idle speculation, unprovable theory with unprovable conclusions to suppose one way or the other.

If, some some reason, Wizards changes their mind, then there is a productive conversation to be had. But, as I point out above, there is little to no reason to suppose they ever would and it's not at all because they'd "lose the case" the collectors on the merit of PE.

[Michael Keller]

Which is the whole crux of this thread and what, no matter now many times I seem to try to explain it, falls on purposively deaf ears.

Harbro is not interesting in anything particularly unprecedented because that is risk and risk does not sit well with share-holders.

The RL is predicated on legal action taken, not won. It's completely irrelevant, in the grand scheme of things, if the case of the collectors is actually won. The far more likely "damaging" aspect is the discovery for and in the trial itself. There will be disclosure, depositions, and information that is let out which Wizards/Hasbro is not interested in having public.

No one wants to really consider this and still just continues to nonsensically argue the merits, or lack thereof, of the case itself, where there is little reason to assume that is the matter at hand.

Nor is the matter at hand if Legacy/Vintage support with (or without) the RL is a viable business model, because Wizards has already decreed it is not, so it is not. In some alternate universe, or some hypothetical future, maybe it is, or maybe it still isn't. In this one though and in our direct, foreseeable future, it's nothing more than idle speculation, unprovable theory with unprovable conclusions to suppose one way or the other.

If, some some reason, Wizards changes their mind, then there is a productive conversation to be had. But, as I point out above, there is little to no reason to suppose they ever would and it's not at all because they'd "lose the case" the collectors on the merit of PE.

One has to try - that's the purpose of the thread. Regardless of how many times it has been done before, who has done it, etc. If you want my honest opinion, I don't think the petition will do anything. But that's not the point. The point is that as long as people see it exists and know, the seed of doubt or thought can be planted into the heads of whomever "important" may see it. And that's okay with me.

This also may sound wrong, but I think the masses have a louder voice than A.F. or any of the Wizards cronies do. We're the ones putting the cash on the table for the product, not them.

There is no fault or harm in speaking on behalf of those who share the same affiliation or thought in order to attempt to reinvigorate some life into the format they love playing, regardless of consequences.

[H]

One has to try - that's the purpose of the thread. Regardless of how many times it has been done before, who has done it, etc. If you want my honest opinion, I don't think the petition will do anything. But that's not the point. The point is that as long as people see it exists and know, the seed of doubt or thought can be planted into the heads of whomever "important" may see it. And that's okay with me.

This also may sound wrong, but I think the masses have a louder voice than A.F. or any of the Wizards cronies do. We're the ones putting the cash on the table for the product, not them.

There is no fault or harm in speaking on behalf of those who share the same affiliation or thought in order to attempt to reinvigorate some life into the format they love playing, regardless of consequences.

I'm not telling you to do, or not do, anything. I'm merely explaining how and why your efforts will likely be wasted. The likely fact is there are plenty of people in Wizards that hate the RL and want it gone, but if wishes were fishes, right?

Some things just don't work out solely because we desire them, even if those desires have noble intentions. I believe that Legacy is, in fact, the best competitive format in Magic. But Magic isn't just an idealistic card game, as it is for us. It's a real, practical business operation for Hasbro. And part of that necessitates certain approaches.

Unless you can somehow unshackle Wizards from the corporate beholdings of Hasbro, unless you can unburden Wizards from the capitalistic paradigm it necessarily must be in, unless you can actually make a business case, all the idealism, deontological concerns are well and good, but will fall on largely deaf corporate ears because money talks and nobody walks.

So, fight the good fight, but as I said all that time ago, Wizards won't support us. We are on our own, for better or worse, no matter how hard we shake our fist at the clouds.

[bruizar]

I’m of the opinion that modern horizons was not an indication of future support, but more of a send off. Now modern is pretty close to no RL legacy. Pioneer will be their new eternal baby for another decade.


Truth was told /thread

[Strawberry Dwarf]

To be honest, "Does the AI opponent count?" cannot be interpreted as anything other than trolling.

But I wasn't trolling. I just play (and enjoy playing) vs the AI-bot a lot, so I asked a question. I know the AI isn't fully competent opponent, I am not that naive, but it is not completely worthless either. And no, I am not obliged to keep myself silent, when I have very little credentials in "real" Magic. I know MtG for 22 years since Tempest and I am quite experienced.

- Keeping or abolishing the RL list does not directly affect me.
- Disappearance of "serious" Legacy and Vintage tournaments does not directly affect me.
- I like reading reports, articles and forums about eternal, casual and historic formats, I want them remain.
- I really dislike being called a troll, a n00b or whatever, especially from a guy I have never met.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

But I wasn't trolling. I just play (and enjoy playing) vs the AI-bot a lot, so I asked a question.

Where is the AI magic bot that lets you play legacy?

[Michael Keller]

- I really dislike being called a troll, a n00b or whatever, especially from a guy I have never met.

You really shouldn't let it affect you - there are more important things in life to concern yourself with rather than being concerned about being called a "troll" on a Magic: the Gathering forum.

[Glass House]

Well I am sorry, Strawberry Dwarf, I was too quick to call you insincere, but you have to understand that when you make the claim that one can build decks without RL cards (a statement that I do not disagree with, btw) and, when asked to substantiate it with results, you answer that you are playing against bots, that weakens your argument significantly.
I am all for new brews, the New and Developmental Decks section of this forum is by far the one I browse the most. I am also legitimately interested in seeing your list, and even the other ones in your signature.

[Meekrab]

what?
There's no regulated market for Magic the Gathering cards, there's no "market price." You can't claim damages based on eBay sale prices changing.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

There's no regulated market for Magic the Gathering cards, there's no "market price." You can't claim damages based on eBay sale prices changing.

What makes you think any of the three claims here?

[Purple Blood]

There's no regulated market for Magic the Gathering cards, there's no "market price." You can't claim damages based on eBay sale prices changing.

Except in reality it's quite easy to show there is a market and there are market prices.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

I'm sure the joke will be on me when I file an insurance claim and they turn around and inform me that actually cards have no value so you can't lose any when they burn up or whatever

[bruizar]

I'm sure the joke will be on me when I file an insurance claim and they turn around and inform me that actually cards have no value so you can't lose any when they burn up or whatever

https://axaxl.com/insurance/products/fine-art-insurance
Joke will be on you indeed for having a terrible insurance company.

Also see Lloyds of London

[UseLess]

Signed, though sadly doubt it will make any difference.

[Artemis]

I'd pay to make someone put sign in front of Wizards HQ like someone did with sensei's top...

[Lord_Mcdonalds]

You can’t get rid of the reserved list, think of the guy with a binder full of Juzam Djinns, his investment into underpriced collectibles in need of price correction will be ruined.

[Ronald Deuce]

What makes you think any of the three claims here?


Except in reality it's quite easy to show there is a market and there are market prices.

There's no evidence to suggest many of the going prices for high-end reserved-list cards are set by anyone but the sellers. If you look at, e.g., prices for Alpha Underground Seas on tcgplayer, you'll see that the company's not confident to set a market price; I suspect that's (at least partially) because the vendors who use the site list prices that vary by literal thousands of dollars.

The higher the supposed value of the card, the greater the variance and paucity of indices, as well: Alpha Lotuses (of which TWO are listed on the site) differ in price by $7,000. With such a lack of data, I don't think appraisers or other "rating" entities can make an accurate judgment, and I doubt they think they can do it themselves, either.

I know it's preterition, but I'm not even gonna touch Ebay prices. It's the Wild West over there. That's indicative of a demonstrably unstable market—prices are arbitrary in the absence of a reliable rating system like you have for stocks, bonds, etc.

AGAIN, though, that doesn't mean the RL is going anywhere because there's no reason to think people wouldn't sue anyway. Ben_Bleiweiss's solution is a good one and one I've supported for a long time. Another good one would be to abolish the list and not reprint anything until everyone's settled down, but I don't expect they have the foresight to do that.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

There's no evidence to suggest many of the going prices for high-end reserved-list cards are set by anyone but the sellers. Other than any sale, of course. Which we actually can look up!

If you look at, e.g., prices for Alpha Underground Seas on tcgplayer, you'll see that the company's not confident to set a market price; "Unavailable" dosen't mean "not confident to set a market price" It means "unavailble." Unless you see their code you can't actually tell me why, but I'm sure you'll try to anyways...

I suspect that's (at least partially) because the vendors who use the site list prices that vary by literal thousands of dollars.
I actually suspect it's because no one is buying them on TCG player and only trusting services with built-in authentication for such big ticket items therefore rather than suggest the market price is infinity dollars when they divide the average by zero sales their storefront instead yields "Unavailable".


The higher the supposed value of the card, the greater the variance and paucity of indices, as well: Alpha Lotuses (of which TWO are listed on the site) differ in price by $7,000. With such a lack of data, I don't think appraisers or other "rating" entities can make an accurate judgment, and I doubt they think they can do it themselves, either.
And yet I can value a classic car or any other collectible. No two classic Mustangs are the same and may differ in price by thousands and yet appraisers or other "Rating" entities still manage an accurate judgement and if you damage a classic car you're not going to say "Um, you still own one (1) 1955 Bel Air Chevy with a 327 engine. So I did no damages!"


I know it's preterition, but I'm not even gonna touch Ebay prices. It's the Wild West over there. That's indicative of a demonstrably unstable market—prices are arbitrary in the absence of a reliable rating system like you have for stocks, bonds, etc. Yeah, why touch the marketplace where prices are public and sales are public. Then we might be able to create trendlines beyond MTGOldfish histograms!

[Ronald Deuce]

Other than any sale, of course. Which we actually can look up!

That doesn't make any sense. Sellers still set the prices, and those prices vary greatly, which means there's not a reliable market price for Damaged Alpha Mox Whatever. At this point, you're arguing to argue.


I actually suspect it's because no one is buying them on TCG player and only trusting services with built-in authentication for such big ticket items therefore rather than suggest the market price is infinity dollars when they divide the average by zero sales their storefront instead yields "Unavailable".

In other words, they're not able to value the cards. And you just contradicted yourself.


And yet I can value a classic car or any other collectible. No two classic Mustangs are the same and may differ in price by thousands and yet appraisers or other "Rating" entities still manage an accurate judgement and if you damage a classic car you're not going to say "Um, you still own one (1) 1955 Bel Air Chevy with a 327 engine. So I did no damages!"

I'm not really sure what this is supposed to mean given that it's rather different from promissory estoppel (and given that you're assuming the car appraisal is accurate to the point that it holds up in court), but assuming the first part of what you said is correct and applicable to a court case—which I doubt outside of insurance claims, though it's obvious neither of us is a lawyer—you're saying that you can go get your cards appraised, then sue Wizzerds on the basis that you've lost out on your "investment" based on the word of your appraiser instead of the company's appraiser? You're posing more questions than you're answering (e.g., "What qualifies you to appraise cardboard?" What makes the cardboard in question a reasonable investment, Cardy McAppraiser?" "What makes this appraisal grounds for you, Mr(s). DogsInAHorseSuit, to make investment decisions?"), which weakens legal cases. Incidentally, card graders grade for condition, not value.

And if your 1955 Bel Air Chevy [sic] was rear-ended by a Yugo in 1982, that makes it pretty tough to appraise. Kind of like my friend's torn Bayou.

I could go on, but given that I'm tired, none of this matters, and you're probably going to keep arguing regardless of what anyone says, I'd rather drink.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

That doesn't make any sense. Sellers still set the prices, and those prices vary greatly, which means there's not a reliable market price for Damaged Alpha Mox Whatever. At this point, you're arguing to argue.
And are you forced at gunpoint to accept that price? Or do you, perhaps, not buy the item? Maybe you you click the "best offer" button sitting next to "buy it now?"



In other words, they're not able to value the cards. And you just contradicted yourself.
That's not what it means. Nice try!



I'm not really sure what this is supposed to mean given that it's rather different from promissory estoppel (and given that you're assuming the car appraisal is accurate to the point that it holds up in court), but assuming the first part of what you said is correct and applicable to a court case—which I doubt outside of insurance claims, though it's obvious neither of us is a lawyer—you're saying that you can go get your cards appraised, then sue Wizzerds on the basis that you've lost out on your "investment" based on the word of your appraiser instead of the company's appraiser? You're posing more questions than you're answering (e.g., "What qualifies you to appraise cardboard?" What makes the cardboard in question a reasonable investment, Cardy McAppraiser?" "What makes this appraisal grounds for you, Mr(s). DogsInAHorseSuit, to make investment decisions?"), which weakens legal cases. Incidentally, card graders grade for condition, not value.
It means that if you can value a car, you can value a card. The whole point of promissory estopple is that you're losing value, but you seem to think that this requires some magic market and keep moving the goalposts every time it's pointed out that valuing things is as simple as looking at the last time they were purchased.


And if your 1955 Bel Air Chevy [sic] was rear-ended by a Yugo in 1982, that makes it pretty tough to appraise. Kind of like my friend's torn Bayou.
I will inform the insurance company when they go to pay out.


I could go on, but given that I'm tired, none of this matters, and you're probably going to keep arguing regardless of what anyone says, I'd rather drink.
You're on a forum, idiot. If you don't want people to reply don't post!

[Cire]

You don't have to prove anything. First, there will not be a "you" or even "a collector". There will only be an entrepreneurial lawyer. One thing weird dumb thing about the legal system is that it gives a prominent role to such lawyers. If a company is dumping poison in a lake, the people who will hold it to account are not really the people who drink the poison lake water; they’re the lawyers who notice the poisoning and decide to bring a lawsuit. In general those lawyers aren’t sitting by the phone waiting for poisoned victims to call them; they’re going out looking for cases, and then trying to round up victims to act as their clients. It’s not that the lawyers are bringing lawsuits because clients want them to; the clients sign up for the lawsuits because the lawyers want them to. The lawyers are the ones actively pursuing the lawsuit. Wizard's worry is clearly such entrepreneurial lawyers. Such a big move will bring such persons from the woodwork, who will then bring these suits. Second, you only need proof for a trial. As I said before there will not be a trial. Large corporations always seek to settle such lawsuits, especially when such lawsuits are for "nuisance value". Any case regarding the list would definitely be a nuisance value lawsuit, in that it could easily be settled. So combining the above, getting rid of the reserved list would almost automatically cost wizards money and time due to entrepreneurial lawyers bringing suits that wizards is predisposed to settle. Whether you could prove promissory estoppel is essentially a non-issue. Litigating it and winning against a lawsuit brought for promissory estoppel may even cost more than a quick settlement. As such the only issue on the table is that wizards thinks it can make more money with the reserved list intact compared to the money and the costs it takes to get rid of the reserved list. This is not a legal consideration and simply a business consideration.

[the Thin White Duke]

... the only issue on the table is that wizards thinks it can make more money with the reserved list intact compared to the money and the costs it takes to get rid of the reserved list. This is not a legal consideration and simply a business consideration.

This 100%. People need to accept that the RL is not going anywhere. It's not worth it for WoTC to touch it. If Legacy needs "saving", there had to be a Plan B. Handle this at a community level. Have proxy tournaments, whatever. Save yourselves the mental anguish of hoping and dreaming for the RL fairy to wave the magic wand and destroy the List.

[Ronald Deuce]

That's not what it means. Nice try!

No, that's exactly what it means. There's really no point in addressing most of what you wrote because it's either off topic or on Mars, but here, you're categorically and emphatically wrong and contradicting yourself.

The company has no logical reason not to post a price for cards on their site if they're able to do so. The reason they're not doing it is that they don't have the data to make that determination—they're not comfortable setting a price.


Other than any sale, of course. Which we actually can look up! . . . I actually suspect it's because no one is buying them on TCG player and only trusting services with built-in authentication for such big ticket items therefore rather than suggest the market price is infinity dollars when they divide the average by zero sales their storefront instead yields "Unavailable".

For the record, that's where you contradicted yourself.

All that said, Duke and Cire are largely right. I have no problem debating and discussing things like this, but you're answering reasoned argument with circular logic, vitriol, and "But I paid for that!" None of that wins you a lawsuit, though from your behavior, I don't doubt that you'd bring one anyway.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

No, that's exactly what it means. There's really no point in addressing most of what you wrote because it's either off topic or on Mars, but here, you're categorically and emphatically wrong and contradicting yourself.

The company has no logical reason not to post a price for cards on their site if they're able to do so. The reason they're not doing it is that they don't have the data to make that determination—they're not comfortable setting a price.



For the record, that's where you contradicted yourself.
How dumb where you think "we can look up sales" and "tcg player doesn't have recent sales" are contradictory phrases?
What a small world you live in where there's only one place to look up sales and no "show completed items only" option on your rendering of ebay dot com.

[Michael Keller]

You're on a forum, idiot. If you don't want people to reply don't post!

You're also on a forum, and calling people names isn’t going to give you credibility or the ability to be taken seriously.

[Seymour_Asses]

This 100%. People need to accept that the RL is not going anywhere. It's not worth it for WoTC to touch it. If Legacy needs "saving", there had to be a Plan B. Handle this at a community level. Have proxy tournaments, whatever. Save yourselves the mental anguish of hoping and dreaming for the RL fairy to wave the magic wand and destroy the List.
Yep. The RL isn't going anywhere unless it's financially beneficial for WoTC, which will never happen (unless MTG sees a huge drop in popularity and they need some "big event" to rekindle people's interest).

Whether or not it's a good idea to get rid of the RL is entirely academic at this point.

[Ronald Deuce]

How dumb where you think "we can look up sales" and "tcg player doesn't have recent sales" are contradictory phrases?
What a small world you live in where there's only one place to look up sales and no "show completed items only" option on your rendering of ebay dot com.

First of all, this isn't 4chan. Secondly, you're literally saying that you didn't say what you said and that it didn't mean what it means.

Be my guest if you're confident you can appraise any number of cards in any number of different conditions remotely based on extremely paltry current data and sparse [EDIT: and still quite varied] data from previous transactions. I'm done.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

You're also on a forum, and calling people names isn’t going to give you credibility or the ability to be taken seriously.

Then put me on ignore.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

First of all, this isn't 4chan. Secondly, you're literally saying that you didn't say what you said and that it didn't mean what it means.

Be my guest if you're confident you can appraise any number of cards in any number of different conditions remotely based on extremely paltry current data and sparse [EDIT: and still quite varied] data from previous transactions. I'm done.

Super confident because that's literally how appraisal works: thing sold for X, therefore thing is worth x. Normal people call that a market.

[Cire]

Interestingly enough, the issue of valuation is one of the reasons corporations like wizards is predisposed to settle. Just to evaluate a single card you will have to go through depositions and expert testimony, and opposing testimony why the other expert was wrong and no instead you use this other valuation and then counter testimony and depositions, etc. Valuations are nightmares in litigation even when dealing with public markets like stocks. When dealing with a private market such a magic cards, dear god you will be arguing back and forth over whether your ebay sale set the price or you need to take the average of all such sales and which sales are in that segement, etc. In short you (the corproation) will have to pay so many lawyers and experts so much money just on this one issue. That is why for a corporation it is better to just side step this whole mess and settle. They just do the math (settlement < $billable hours*time expected to be spent on litigation). 9 times out of 10 settlement will be less.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Interestingly enough, the issue of valuation is one of the reasons corporations like wizards is predisposed to settle. Just to evaluate a single card you will have to go through depositions and expert testimony, and opposing testimony why the other expert was wrong and no instead you use this other valuation and then counter testimony and depositions, etc. Valuations are nightmares in litigation even when dealing with public markets like stocks. When dealing with a private market such a magic cards, dear god you will be arguing back and forth over whether your ebay sale set the price or you need to take the average of all such sales and which sales are in that segement, etc. In short you (the corproation) will have to pay so many lawyers and experts so much money just on this one issue. That is why for a corporation it is better to just side step this whole mess and settle. They just do the math (settlement < $billable hours*time expected to be spent on litigation). 9 times out of 10 settlement will be less.

But to do that that have to value the time, which of course requires an evaluation on the value of the evaluation, which just kicks off an evaluation of the value of the evaluation...

[Cire]

But to do that that have to value the time, which of course requires an evaluation on the value of the evaluation, which just kicks off an evaluation of the value of the evaluation...

I mean . . . the lawyers are pretty explicit about their billable rates :tongue:

[the Thin White Duke]

I just watched a video from Rudy at Alpha Investments about recent RL card values dropping. One tid bit he threw out was the idea that LGSs sitting on inventory are having to (or need to consider) moving cards to keep up buying newer Magic products. With Wizards' recent release schedule it must be tough, especially for smaller stores to keep pace buying product.
I thought it was an interesting point. Anyone else have thoughts if this may cause an appreciable effect on Eternal card prices?

[Seymour_Asses]

I just watched a video from Rudy at Alpha Investments about recent RL card values dropping. One tid bit he threw out was the idea that LGSs sitting on inventory are having to (or need to consider) moving cards to keep up buying newer Magic products. With Wizards' recent release schedule it must be tough, especially for smaller stores to keep pace buying product.
I thought it was an interesting point. Anyone else have thoughts if this may cause an appreciable effect on Eternal card prices?
Makes sense. The comic book industry is going to shit so a lot of smaller shops might have to lower prices to buy into other areas (manga, board games?) or just to keep the lights on.

[Purple Blood]

First of all, this isn't 4chan. Secondly, you're literally saying that you didn't say what you said and that it didn't mean what it means.

Be my guest if you're confident you can appraise any number of cards in any number of different conditions remotely based on extremely paltry current data and sparse [EDIT: and still quite varied] data from previous transactions. I'm done.

Even if we assume everything you say is correct, the fact that TCG doesn't make sales data publically available doesn't mean that data doesn't exist. In the context of a lawsuit such information can easily be obtained by subpoena.

Furthermore, in this hypothetical lawsuit, the plaintiff will simply call an expert who can provide testimony on how cards are appraised, how there is an existing secondary market, etc..

Everything you're writing in this thread just shows you are ignorant of basic notions of discovery and evidence in the legal system. You should probably refrain from taking such strong positions on things you don't understand even on a basic level.

[Purple Blood]

This 100%. People need to accept that the RL is not going anywhere. It's not worth it for WoTC to touch it. If Legacy needs "saving", there had to be a Plan B. Handle this at a community level. Have proxy tournaments, whatever. Save yourselves the mental anguish of hoping and dreaming for the RL fairy to wave the magic wand and destroy the List.

I continue to believe the long-term way to save the "spirit" of Legacy (i.e. the metagame) is ironically through Modern Horizons. Deep Forest Hermit is exemplary of the fact that they are quite willing to push the limits of the reserve list to the brink. So all they have to do is:

(1) reprint all of the non-RL cards in a MH set (e.g. BS, Daze, FoW, Wasteland, etc.);
(2) create the Deep Forest Hermit versions for the important RL cards (e.g. LED); and
(3) unban all of the cards that are now in line with the new power level of the format

Under those conditions, suddenly the Modern metagame would be relatively the same as Legacy.

[Ronald Deuce]

Even if we assume everything you say is correct, the fact that TCG doesn't make sales data publically available doesn't mean that data doesn't exist. In the context of a lawsuit such information can easily be obtained by subpoena. . . . Everything you're writing in this thread just shows you are ignorant of basic notions of discovery and evidence in the legal system. You should probably refrain from taking such strong positions on things you don't understand even on a basic level.

When the evidence shows that the ascribed value of an item varies by literal thousands of dollars depending on who's appraising it, that's not good for your case. And it's unlikely that this problem won't crop up in private data, too, even within a single organization. I don't see how I've shown ignorance of the discovery process; I actually pointed out that the data you and pals seem to think is so absolutely revelatory is really just a scatter-plot (with very few data points for many cards) in one of my first posts in this exchange. It's entirely possible that discovery would reveal internal communications from people at, e.g., TCGPlayer saying, "Don't buy/sell an Alpha Lotus for more/less than $X,000 regardless of its condition," but that doesn't build a case against WotC—it actually gives them an excuse to say that the price's being set by third parties is arbitrary and has nothing to do with their actions.

(You'll notice I'm not bringing up whatever might come out of Wizards during the discovery phase, but that's because it's outside the scope of the point I was making about third-party vendors. It's entirely possible Wizards shot itself in the foot in internal communications.)


Furthermore, in this hypothetical lawsuit, the plaintiff will simply call an expert who can provide testimony on how cards are appraised, how there is an existing secondary market, etc.

And WotC can do exactly the same thing. Or they can just say, "We value the card at the appropriate fraction of the $10(?) MSRP for an Alpha starter deck" and shitcan the whole discussion. Or they can say, "We broke our promise in 1997. [That's fact, btw, not conjecture.] There is no reason to ascribe validity to a voided and hypothetical contract." Ultimately, it's up to the plaintiff's lawyers to prove that he or she is owed a specific sum, and that's a really steep hill to climb given how uncertain all the pricing is and that the company broke the promise that's claimed to be the basis of an unwritten contract literally 22 years ago.

[Lemon]

I continue to believe the long-term way to save the "spirit" of Legacy (i.e. the metagame) is ironically through Modern Horizons. Deep Forest Hermit is exemplary of the fact that they are quite willing to push the limits of the reserve list to the brink. So all they have to do is:

(1) reprint all of the non-RL cards in a MH set (e.g. BS, Daze, FoW, Wasteland, etc.);
(2) create the Deep Forest Hermit versions for the important RL cards (e.g. LED); and
(3) unban all of the cards that are now in line with the new power level of the format

Under those conditions, suddenly the Modern metagame would be relatively the same as Legacy.

I disagree with this outlook. The spirit of Legacy isn't in casting FoW or Brainstorm, but in the idea that you can play with almost any card. It's finding that obscure niche card that hasn't seen the light of day in 20 years but is perfect for what you need that gives legacy it's spirit. No number of Modern Horizon style sets will ever give this to Modern.

Realistically I think that the only thing WotC needs to do is print a fetchable single-opponent version of the Battlebond duals. The vast majority of the format would become very affordable overnight in a way that just saying "we've decided we may reprint these cards" won't do. Plus this will still leave the original promise intact, so collectors will still feel special owning their rare cards.

[Seymour_Asses]

I disagree with this outlook. The spirit of Legacy isn't in casting FoW or Brainstorm, but in the idea that you can play with almost any card. It's finding that obscure niche card that hasn't seen the light of day in 20 years but is perfect for what you need that gives legacy it's spirit. No number of Modern Horizon style sets will ever give this to Modern.

Realistically I think that the only thing WotC needs to do is print a fetchable single-opponent version of the Battlebond duals. The vast majority of the format would become very affordable overnight in a way that just saying "we've decided we may reprint these cards" won't do. Plus this will still leave the original promise intact, so collectors will still feel special owning their rare cards.
Sinkhole!

[Purple Blood]

I disagree with this outlook. The spirit of Legacy isn't in casting FoW or Brainstorm, but in the idea that you can play with almost any card. It's finding that obscure niche card that hasn't seen the light of day in 20 years but is perfect for what you need that gives legacy it's spirit. No number of Modern Horizon style sets will ever give this to Modern.

Realistically I think that the only thing WotC needs to do is print a fetchable single-opponent version of the Battlebond duals. The vast majority of the format would become very affordable overnight in a way that just saying "we've decided we may reprint these cards" won't do. Plus this will still leave the original promise intact, so collectors will still feel special owning their rare cards.

That's a fair point. I just don't see WOTC supporting Modern and Legacy long-term at this point with Pioneer and Historic in the picture. One of those formats will probably go by the wayside and my bet would be on Legacy. Maybe I'm wrong. And maybe it just means paper Legacy dies off and it continues to live on MTGO.

I suppose irrespective of the Legacy conversation I would hope they do something to Modern to make it play more like Legacy because it frequently just feels like a format waiting for the next degeneracy to pop up without any self-regulation.

[Mr. Safety]

WOTC, realistically, can't ever actually remove formats from the game. Each represents a particular time-period of card availability. They can stop supporting it, but the momentum of playing a format for a long time will sustain it. Look at Vintage, which still has a die-hard community. WOTC will only ever add formats to the game, by necessity. Pioneer is an attempt to bridge Modern and Standard, just like Modern was an attempt to 'fix' Extended, which bridged Standard and Legacy. In 7-10 years there will be another format that bridges Pioneer with Standard, and so forth, ad nauseam. It is inevitable: WOTC won't support Legacy and Modern forever, outside of a banlist.

I'm not saying I like the reserved list, I actually hate it. However, this trend of creating new formats and printing product to support those formats will be how it sustains it's business model. That doesn't mean Legacy or Modern are going away, it means that they will stabilize into a bandwidth of players that is reliant on their own contribution to the format to sustain it. I see what Leaving a Legacy is doing for Legacy in the northeast US and what the Legacy Pit is doing for events, which is driving interest into the format in a way that SCG used to do. Legacy is just too popular for it to die out, the community will take up the mantle.

TL;DR - It's up to us to make Legacy what it's meant to be, WOTC will eventually stop supporting the format outside of a banlist.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

WOTC, realistically, can't ever actually remove formats from the game.

Tell that to extended, prismatic, spiral star, or any other format removed that you've never heard of.

[Mr. Safety]

Tell that to extended, prismatic, spiral star, or any other format removed that you've never heard of.

If people wanted to still play extended, they could. Modern and Pioneer have functionally replaced them at the sanctioned level, but unsanctioned formats don't rely on WOTC.

I think my post was pretty clear, the intent was to reinforce the idea that legacy doesn't need official WOTC support to survive. Stop being obtuse.

[Seymour_Asses]

Tell that to extended, prismatic, spiral star, or any other format removed that you've never heard of.
Yeah, Legacy doesn't have a WOTC sanctioned format waiting to replace it, and what would be the point anyway? The Reserved List isn't going anywhere so it's not like they could change it significantly.

Legacy is not Extended. You're right that I haven't heard of the other two though.

[Teluin]

So? Did this thread work?

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

If people wanted to still play extended, they could. Modern and Pioneer have functionally replaced them at the sanctioned level, but unsanctioned formats don't rely on WOTC.

I think my post was pretty clear, the intent was to reinforce the idea that legacy doesn't need official WOTC support to survive. Stop being obtuse.

You can't actually because house rules aren't a format, and without official rules extended is just a house-rule game.
Your post was pretty obtuse itself because the idea that a format doesn't need official rules to survive was demonstrated false by the counter-examples of all the defunct formats that lose their support.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Yeah, Legacy doesn't have a WOTC sanctioned format waiting to replace it, and what would be the point anyway? The Reserved List isn't going anywhere so it's not like they could change it significantly.

Legacy is not Extended. You're right that I haven't heard of the other two though.

My point is that either a format goes viral and becomes offical or it dies. The other two were examples of the later, cool ideas that didn't go anywhere and have been officially dropped from sanctioned play and as a result no one's heard of or remembers them.

[Seymour_Asses]

So? Did this thread work?
AHAHAHAHAHAHA Yeah the the RL is gone.