So I don't play Pauper, but have interest in the format. However, it's my understanding that the cards legal in the format need to have a printing at common at some point in their life. That being true, has anyone proposed using a different definition of what is legal? My thought is that the most recent printing determines the legality of the card. Has this been presented before? What's your take on this?
This would radically change the format as well as make understanding what is and isn't legal extremely complicated. adding unnecessary complexity sounds like a bad idea.
Sure, there is a chance of spending $4 on a booster and getting the Mythic Rare $30 super card. There is also a chance of surviving putting your tongue in a light socket.
This would radically change the format as well as make understanding what is and isn't legal extremely complicated. adding unnecessary complexity sounds like a bad idea.
While, I agree it would radically change the format, dismissing the idea because you think it's complicated signals to me you are against change over anything else. Furthermore, to suggest that the idea is complex is an exaggeration. Complexity, suggests that my idea is intricate and consists of many moving parts. My proposed metric for card legality basically says "when was the card last printed? what was its rarity for that printing?" To me, that seems like a very straightforward process.
Magic on the other hand, is actually a very complex game (as I am sure you are aware). Yet many people understand the game and play it without issue.
Now if I said that, every common, that also has a printing at uncommon is restricted, and if it's 3rd printing is also uncommon it's banned. While if it's printing after being printed an uncommon, is common, it is unrestricted. And finally if it was every printed at rare, it's banned outright. That to me seems "complex".
This would radically change the format as well as make understanding what is and isn't legal extremely complicated. adding unnecessary complexity sounds like a bad idea.
While, I agree it would radically change the format, dismissing the idea because you think it's complicated signals to me you are against change over anything else. Furthermore, to suggest that the idea is complex is an exaggeration. Complexity, suggests that my idea is intricate and consists of many moving parts. My proposed metric for card legality basically says "when was the card last printed? what was its rarity for that printing?" To me, that seems like a very straightforward process.
Magic on the other hand, is actually a very complex game (as I am sure you are aware). Yet many people understand the game and play it without issue.
Now if I said that, every common, that also has a printing at uncommon is restricted, and if it's 3rd printing is also uncommon it's banned. While if it's printing after being printed an uncommon, is common, it is unrestricted. And finally if it was every printed at rare, it's banned outright. That to me seems "complex".
Why would you change something just for the sake of it and mess up with its already established playerbase along the way? Given that there's enough confusion already between Paper legality vs Online legality, which is why the format hasn't been catching up to popularity until recent GPs that have been seeking to unify both using simply Online legality I would say that yes, your idea is indeed complex. Not to mention the amount of issues it would cause if a pillar of the format like Palace Sentinels, Gush, Gurmag Angler, Counterspell, Skred or Artifact Lands gets reprinted at Uncommon within days of some big event like Rags to Riches or a GP, both throwing entire decks and hours of testing into the bin for players that intended to play those decks and greatly shifting the meta for everyone else.
If you want a Pauper rotating format, there's always Pauper Standard I guess.
This would radically change the format as well as make understanding what is and isn't legal extremely complicated. adding unnecessary complexity sounds like a bad idea.
While, I agree it would radically change the format, dismissing the idea because you think it's complicated signals to me you are against change over anything else. Furthermore, to suggest that the idea is complex is an exaggeration. Complexity, suggests that my idea is intricate and consists of many moving parts. My proposed metric for card legality basically says "when was the card last printed? what was its rarity for that printing?" To me, that seems like a very straightforward process.
Magic on the other hand, is actually a very complex game (as I am sure you are aware). Yet many people understand the game and play it without issue.
Now if I said that, every common, that also has a printing at uncommon is restricted, and if it's 3rd printing is also uncommon it's banned. While if it's printing after being printed an uncommon, is common, it is unrestricted. And finally if it was every printed at rare, it's banned outright. That to me seems "complex".
Everyone should be against complexity for its own sake. If you want to increase the complexity you need to provide a legitimate reason why, not just making it harder for its own sake.
In this case the cons are huge. It kills most of the format staples, as they were printed at a time when commons were not deliberately trash (see New World Order), and have been reprinted at uncommon when reprinted at all.
Second it would kill pauper as an eternal format, it would become a fast rotating format like Yugioh or Standard. If people wanted that they could do so by playing those formats.
Third it would perversely reverse the desire for reprints, as any card that gets reprinted would have a chance of being removed from the format. Pauper is supposed to be budget friendly, this would eradicate that trait as the best decks would rely on a narrower band of good cards that could be removed from the format at any time (oubliette).
If you wanted a narrower version of pauper make modern pauper. Grab everything from NWOs conception forward and play using those, that would give you a radically different (and cheaper) metagame.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pauper: UB Wight Phantasm RB Burn UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Yeah, the proposed change would be horrible. If I have a collection of old cards that I use for pauper decks, the last thing I want to do is to look up every common to see if it's "still" a common. And having a deck collapse because crucial cards rotate out would just be a feel-bad. I've played casual pauper for over ten years, and the current way is simple and elegant. If it has ever been printed as a common, it's legal.
My question for the OP is: What do you gain by changing this? What positive does it add to the format? It makes card legality more complicated, it has the potential to cripple or destroy decks or even entire archetypes with a single rarity upshift, and it turns every release into a potential upset for the format - every single release of a set or a supplemental product. That's far worse than even standard, the format defined by the highest rotation frequency. All that negative better be offset by some amazing positive benefit for it to be worth it - so, what do you gain?
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
While, I agree it would radically change the format, dismissing the idea because you think it's complicated signals to me you are against change over anything else. Furthermore, to suggest that the idea is complex is an exaggeration. Complexity, suggests that my idea is intricate and consists of many moving parts. My proposed metric for card legality basically says "when was the card last printed? what was its rarity for that printing?" To me, that seems like a very straightforward process.
Magic on the other hand, is actually a very complex game (as I am sure you are aware). Yet many people understand the game and play it without issue.
Now if I said that, every common, that also has a printing at uncommon is restricted, and if it's 3rd printing is also uncommon it's banned. While if it's printing after being printed an uncommon, is common, it is unrestricted. And finally if it was every printed at rare, it's banned outright. That to me seems "complex".
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
Why would you change something just for the sake of it and mess up with its already established playerbase along the way? Given that there's enough confusion already between Paper legality vs Online legality, which is why the format hasn't been catching up to popularity until recent GPs that have been seeking to unify both using simply Online legality I would say that yes, your idea is indeed complex. Not to mention the amount of issues it would cause if a pillar of the format like Palace Sentinels, Gush, Gurmag Angler, Counterspell, Skred or Artifact Lands gets reprinted at Uncommon within days of some big event like Rags to Riches or a GP, both throwing entire decks and hours of testing into the bin for players that intended to play those decks and greatly shifting the meta for everyone else.
If you want a Pauper rotating format, there's always Pauper Standard I guess.
Thanks to DNC from Heroes of the Plane Studios for the sig
Check my Pauper Cube!
Everyone should be against complexity for its own sake. If you want to increase the complexity you need to provide a legitimate reason why, not just making it harder for its own sake.
In this case the cons are huge. It kills most of the format staples, as they were printed at a time when commons were not deliberately trash (see New World Order), and have been reprinted at uncommon when reprinted at all.
Second it would kill pauper as an eternal format, it would become a fast rotating format like Yugioh or Standard. If people wanted that they could do so by playing those formats.
Third it would perversely reverse the desire for reprints, as any card that gets reprinted would have a chance of being removed from the format. Pauper is supposed to be budget friendly, this would eradicate that trait as the best decks would rely on a narrower band of good cards that could be removed from the format at any time (oubliette).
If you wanted a narrower version of pauper make modern pauper. Grab everything from NWOs conception forward and play using those, that would give you a radically different (and cheaper) metagame.
UB Wight Phantasm
RB Burn
UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Legacy:
R Burn
CG-Post
My question for the OP is: What do you gain by changing this? What positive does it add to the format? It makes card legality more complicated, it has the potential to cripple or destroy decks or even entire archetypes with a single rarity upshift, and it turns every release into a potential upset for the format - every single release of a set or a supplemental product. That's far worse than even standard, the format defined by the highest rotation frequency. All that negative better be offset by some amazing positive benefit for it to be worth it - so, what do you gain?
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter