I'm not going to say this card is great, but I do think it is playable. I also think the design is pretty good.
This card is only really usable in a proactive strategy, but it is very versatile in this respect. The +1 is better with creatures on board. The +0 does not work well with reactive cards (answers besides burn). The design is cool because it gives red a planeswalker that is good, but won't be used in traditional blue decks.
In an aggro deck (disclaimer: I don't play aggro), it isn't the fastest threat, but it is a good hedge as it's strong against multiple answer types. If the other decks plays a blocker, bypass it. If they use removal on your threats, ping or dig for burn. It won't close like a hellrider, but the +1 can sneak in the last bit of damage sometimes, and the +0 can help aggro when it is weakest (the long game).
I'll let the guys who turn guys sideways be the judges of the card on the table, but at the very least it can help diversify threats.
This was really well written, so let me start with that. I respect your opinions and, for all I know, you may even be right.
But this is the bottom line for me.
I don't want to plat MTGO. For me, Magic is shuffling cards and being with my friends. When the day comes that all we have in online eternal formats, that is the day I quit playing Magic.
And unless the RL is done away with, and old staples are reprinted, that day WILL come. The only ones playing Legacy will be the ones who have always played Legacy because cards are just impossible to get for new players.
I made a post in Magic General in response to "Should FoW Be Reprinted" that you probably don't want to read. I was quite vocal and used quite a bit of bad language. In short, I think the RL should be done away with and every Vintage and Legacy staple should be reprinted in a decent sized set (not some FTV piece of crap that will still see prices astronomically high anyway) and put an end to some of the insane prices that we have in this game.
Do you realize that FoW is a $100 uncommon?
Roll that around in your head for a while.
It's out of control. The whole structure. And it needs to end NOW.
Will it? Of course not.
But it does. Because we're almost at the point of no return.
In regards to mtgo, I can defeinitely tell where you're coming from. I recently started an account and messed around with pauper and cheap modern. Is it better than the real thing? Not even close. The reason why I chose to try it out was because I am currently living overseas and it is difficult to play magic from a language perspective. It doesn't come close to replacing the awesome in person experience. You'll notice that I explicitly said that in my post. Still, mtgo has a few advantages (play anytime, quick shuffles, rules enforcement).
As for the reprint policy, you and I will likely have to agree to respectfully disagree. I think we have several years, minimum, until there is truly a legacy doomsday scenario. At this point I believe that mtgo maybecome a better experience, or wizards will just release a paper legacy masters. Either way, I'm not too worried. I obviously have no proof, but wizards does a good job of managing the game.
As for the argument that cost itself is the problem, I would disagree. How much should a dual/force/jace cost? I would say it is worth what a buyer will give for it. Every transaction has two sides, so merely blaming the seller is not warranted. Let's say that wizards did reprint legacy staples. Would you want them to be comparable to standard prices? This is going to draw some hate, but this would likely hurt the game more than help it. There's a reason why standard is the cheapest format to start with, and it is because it isthe easiest one to mentally process. If reprinting legacy cards is the cash cow panacea for wizards that many claim it is, why haven't they done it already? Could it be that wizards does not agree with this course of action?
By all accounts it looks like wizards is treading very lightly with modern masters. Keep in mind that they said when modern was born that it would be a format where they would and could reprint any card. The small print run and high msrp indicates that wizards is still very cautious with reprints even when there is no agreement holding them back. Depending on how the market reacts this could be a test run for a legacy masters. What is evident is that wizards does not share the view that greater accessibility to eternal formats is good for the health of the game.
We're very focused on legacy health, but I don't think that legacy should gain if magic itself does not. I don't know what legacy reprints would do overall, but I do know where wizards is aiming with its reprint policy. They clearly want standard to remain the cheapest in the short term, with modern eventually being more cost effective in the long term. Legacy has to, I belive rightfully, be less accessible than either. It's the best magic there is, and it will always be intriguing. Unfortunately, its role is to be the premium format. We'll just have to live with that.
All this being said, I don't think wizards will allow legacy to die. (It basically did this to vintage, but I can say with experience that legacy is a much richer format.) While wizards won't ever let legacy go away completely, they will also never let it be even close to as cheap as modern. It's wizards' world and we just live in it, but at least they've proven that they are good stewards.
I know that you're a prolific member, and I am just some lurker, but I tend to highly value and respect your opinions (for what that's worth). This is why I found your post that contained the six step doomsday plan for legacy kind of jarring. I think it ignores a really big part of the price/demand of cards in legacy. None other than Aaron Forsythe said that the idea that no one will play once prices becomes too high is kind of absurd, because what about all the people that already own the cards?
Furthermore, if staples keep selling well even at high prices it would imply that even more people are in possession of these cards. The fact that they paid a pretty sum for them would also imply that they are more likely to play with them.
I was a legacy (and magic in general) early adopter, and I'm pretty sure you are too. People like us were able to get into this format for relatively cheap because we supported it way before it became popular. A lot of legacy players are like this, and I'd dare say they make up the core of the legacy player base at this time.
The rise in prices is indicative of interest in the format. Right now, if supply and demand is to be believed, more people want in than out. Many are even willing to pay a handsome sum to get in.
Prices may eventually become a problem and halt format interest, but I don't think that time is now or in the near future to be honest. I think we'll start seeing the death of legacy when it is actually difficult (not just expensive) to find the staples. Recall if you will the death of legacy groaning in 2011 during the first big price jump. Availability has never actually been a problem, and price has actually been a harbinger of legacy success. Once availability is a problem, then the format will have serious issues.
Here's where I predict that rabbit hole goes. If available supply of legacy staples is basically zero, then, it is worth noting, plenty of players will have their hands on them. So there will be a peak amount of paper legacy players, but I don't think that will be the most important part of the equation. At this point, the reserved list still won't budge, and here's why. MTGO will be better before this happens and many players will migrate to it naturally. MTGO does not suffer a reserved list.
Use your imagination for a second. What do you think will happen first, the day I type tundra into ebay and get zero results (or >$500 for a revise copy), or the day that computing and interactivity over the internet will grow to a point where the online experience may start to approximate the best of both worlds? Now, imagine logging into magic online and seeing and manipulating by touch the virtual cards on the table. Imagine seeing and interacting with the opposing avatar. Would this not be awesome? It may sound like science fiction mumbo jumbo, but I feel that as time goes by the improvement of magic online will start to make the paper reserve list less of an issue.
Sure there will still be old timers like Steve and I who will want to own the old cards and play paper legacy too. There may still be tournaments large and small. There will still be the irreplaceable bond of true human interaction and shuffling tangible objects and putting back a few brews (or in the case of us elitists legacy players, swirling a stiff cognac and shining our monocles).
Magic is an awesome game right now, and its best format has never been stronger. Call me an optimist, but I truly believe that things will get better before they get worse. Wizards has done an awesome job (and made a tidy profit - greed?) of providing this game where grown men will exchange hard earned money to enrich their lives with frivolous flights of fancy. The much maligned star city has done an awesome job (and made another tidy profit) of breathing life of providing and showing high level legacy play every week and exposing countless players to the best format ever.
I apologize for going a bit long, and I'm afraid way off topic. The title of this thread is "Complain about Legacy prices and availability." I came to the wrong place I guess. This game is a blast, and playing legacy is the most fun you can have with cardboard squares. We're in a good spot now, and I think we'll be pleasantly surprised when we see this game in the future. So we can complain about legacy prices and availability, or we can reflect upon how awesome our lives must be if we truly have time to worry about such a thing.
Thanks for keeping up a good dialogue. I don't think we disagree much at all. You are saying that playing less than optimal cards makes a small difference. I was just stating that at high skill levels a small difference would make up a big portion of the aggregate difference. I don't feel that at the level of play we're discussing that we're looking at good players vs bad players. When we're devating a one-of in a sideboard of an establish deck, this level of scrutiny is to increase the odds while playing against a good player with a good deck. Basically the only justifying reason for running worse cards is that you don't own the better ones. I'm sure we've all done this, and I have no problem with it.
On another note, I think your english is great. I may have misunderstood your point to a degree, but if so I am to blame. I can sympathize with you. I'm an American who lives and works abroad, and am not nearly as good at communicating in the local language as you are in English. I'm glad that you didn't take what I wrote as insulting (I did not intend it to be) and commend your commitment to good, rigorous debate.
I'm sorry, but I'll definitely not enter into a pi***** contest. The amount of time I'm into this game simply doesn't matter considering the plausibility of my arguments.
But if you're so sure about the "card quality - win chance" equivalance (which I won't doubt exists, yet to a significant lesser extent than you do), would you send me some substantial evidence or authorative research on that topic, please?
Nonetheless, I agree with you on another aspect: Banning the duals would be the most elegant way considering fairness, although it would ultimately disgruntle a lot of collectors.
Some are wont to say, "GerryT (LSV, Finkel, Kai) could win with a ham sandwich." It may be true, but we'll never know because they bring awesome, well tuned decks to tournaments. I didn't see any watery graves in Gerry's invitational list (legacy). Apparently good players believe that better cards improve their chances.
Please, don't take this the wrong way, but isn't it kind of self evident that some cards are almost always worse than others (dare I say strictly, duals vs shocks). Even if the difference is negligible, there would still be no reason to intentionally hinder yourself.
Not using the best card because you don't own it is an acceptable snd resourceful decision. Trying to rationalize it as irrelevant to winning doesn't make sense.
Steve is saying that there is a mountain of evidence supporting better cards equating to better results. I honestly don't even believe there is, because at high level play availability is a non-issue. But there doesn't need to be any evidence because better cards equating to better results is a simple tautology.
I don't know if I agree here. First of all, if they wanted a color pair to not have access to that kind of fixing, it should of been enemy colors. This is a principal philosophy of the game. As many people have already said, wedge and enemy color decks are at a huge advantage here when it needs to be the other way around, if anything.
Secondly, I do enjoy not having to worry about being more resilient to wasteland, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have something to keep mana bases in check. If we don't, goodstuff.dec decks become too prevalent, and the format is essentially everyone playing different combinations of the most all-around good cards (much like standard at the moment).
As many have already said, printing allied color fetch doesn't enable greedier mana bases than we already have. Half the time I ghost quarter someone they can't find a basic. My ghost quarter is a wasteland half of the time I use it. That's not okay. Wizards ought to reprint the onslaught fetch, but keeping greedy mana bases in check is an entirely different problem that won't be any better or any worse with allied color fetch in the format. Onslaught fetches just give allied color decks what they deserve: the ability to fetch their own basics.
I do agree that from a flavor standpoint that allied colors should have more fixing options. I would argue that they already have two really good cycles that enemies do not (manlands and fastlands). Also, they will likely outpace enemy pairs with future cycles.
There does need to be some way to punish greedy mana bases in modern. Wasteland, in my opinion, may be too efficient for what it does. Wasteland is much more punishing to a shockland format than a dual land format. I have also seen ghost quarter be a better wasteland, but in matchups where this is not the case it is much worse. Because of the lack of consistency, ghost quarter can not establish itself as a pillar, which means that people can feel relative safety with greedy mana. While there are cases where ghost quarter is a serious beating, it doesn't rise to the level where it plays a role in general deck construction (like wasteland in legacy).
I think everyone can agree that five color good stuff is not where any healthy format should go. Right now the bottleneck seems to be decent non-basic hate. Ghost quarter, tec edge, and moon effects are pretty much all that's available. Until there is more hate, I think that mana fixing shouldn't get significantly better. I don't foresee a modern legal wasteland reprint, but there could be other measures. What about a back to basics hate bear? That might be too painful, but it would create a nice boogie man to reign in the greed.
From a format creation perspective I would support leaving out the allied fetches. First, there is no wasteland to punish greedy mana bases (not advocating wasteland either). Second, the next best duals, manlands and speedlands, only come in allied. I actually think the one part of modern deck construction that is more interesting than legacy is the mana base. There is some tension in the land selection and not just nearly strictly better choices. Legacy has its own constraint in wanting to play wasteland or be better against it. Modern doesn't have this so it needs more ways to make choices interesting. Not letting each color pair have access to each type of land helps with this.
I understand that allied fetches are part of the much maligned legacy price barrier. This is the modern forum, and I don't think that focusing on legacy prices really does justice to the question as it pertains to modern. Even a reprint of allied fetches on the scale of ravnica shocks would not necessarily reduce the price of legacy by much or even at all. There's always someone jumping to point out "duh, increase supply, lower cost." But what about the far less predictable demand variable? When the price of force or jace goes up it seems to take everyone by surprise. Starcity is often blamed. Who has a better handle on demand than the world's largest seller of singles? Lowering the price of some legacy staples, will increase demand for others (look at clique, bob, goyf, cryptic in modern).
Bottom line is that I don't think that putting the allied fetches in modern would necessarily be a plus for the format. Additionally, the cry for legacy reprints have nothing to do with modern format construction, and may not even be productive in their intended purpose.
Welcome to Legacy and playing the best magic around. Maverick is a fine choice and the meta is shifting where Maverick can be quite strong.
Modern isn't for everyone, myself included. But it doesn't mean its a "bad format" its just not Legacy and an impossible expectation to live up too. I've already witnessed many players who dipped their toes into modern who have hopped for a Legacy experience come to the realization that if you want a Legacy experience, you have to play Legacy.
The Legacy community is strong group and quite welcoming of new players. On Legacy nights I bring 4-6 decks to encourage others to play. Happy to welcome a new member to the Legacy family.
Welcome aboard. I don't get to play legacy much at all (these days), but I never regret the buy in. I started playing in 94, but sold all my stuff in 99. This included a playset of all duals, moats, tabernacles, a stack of forces and wastelands and such... The friend who bought it from me still has them in the binders I sold them in. In 2005 I started the long process of buying back in to Magic (specifically legacy). At first I only played mono-blue, because I didn't want to shell out $15 for a dual, hahaha. I eventually did buy them back, and I'm glad I didn't wait too long in retrospect.
Now I have an awesome legacy collection that includes everything besides the P3k stuff, but I look back fondly to the two times when I was starting fresh. As Maro is wont to say, "restriction breeds creativity." There is a thrill to playing with what is available that is notably absent from proxies or cockatrice. Maybe I'm some weird anachronism, but I like the sweat and toil of brewing and also the sweat and toil of having spent real resources on obtaining the cards in said brew. Legacy is actually the perfect format for brewing and for 'investing' in cards.
Maverick is a nice place to start. A lot of the cards are newer, and may already be in the collections of modern players. The old staples aren't in danger of loosing value either. If you like the maverick style, you can also branch out into bant, junk, or naya by getting a few new duals and fetches (which will also hold value). The way you go will depend on the playstyle you prefer. If maverick tickles the itch, you'll just have to occasionally buy a few singles for new sets as you see fit. It's actually an awesome place to be, and why I love legacy. Your decks can evolve over time based on the acquisition of new cards, and the cards generally don't tank in value. I'd say this is the hidden secret of legacy. Standard is kept fresh by rotations, and while legacy can see shifts with the printing of new cards, each individual player has sort of a 'personal journey' that keeps things fresh.
I started off with a mono-blue stasis deck in 2005 (don't laugh). Then I moved to a mono-blue stifle naught control deck (stop laughing). When I got my hands on some duals and goyf I went to thresh, which the morphed into a natural order bant build. I had fun the whole time, and I never dropped like 2k on a deck at once, which seems to be everyone's first complaint. In my opinion the problem with legacy is not really the price, but people's expectation that enjoying a format can only mean stomping large tournaments.
Legacy is by its nature is best suited to people who take the long view. I've spent thousands on cards over the years. Unless I were to sell off my collection, I would never recoup the money I put into it. I just love this game, and have fun playing and brewing. If your goal is to make money, or even make your money back, I recommend reading Kibler's articles on the state of competitive play. It requires a ridiculous time and money commitment to do so, and is achieved by very few. Frankly, my time is better spent focusing on my regular job and playing magic for fun. It's what funded my playing and collection over the years not winnings.
I'm not going to tell you how to enjoy yourself with this game, but just remember to keep your expectations in check in regards to money. The game can be expensive, and difficult to result in a net monetary gain even for the world's best. One thing us legacy players have is that we don't have to chase card pricing trends like standard, and ones we do buy tend to keep stable or increase in value.
I know it may seem daunting at the beginning, but the journey can be just as fun (or more) as the destination. As far as the cost, take the long view and make smart purchases, and you won't break the bank. Also, if you're a good player, chances are that you're smart and can get a decent job (I understand this is certainly not automatic in this day and age). That's where the real 'EV' is. Spend what your budget will allow, make good life choices, and have fun. If this sounds at all like your outlook, I think legacy will give you countless hours of joy.
So who wants to make a guess at the likelyhood jace gets an unban?
Here's my rather exhausting take on this question. I apologize in advance...
I have been playing magic since 94, and was never a standard player. When a new set comes out I just scan the spoiler for possible legacy playables. This includes any cards that have a unique effect as they may become viable when something new is printed (and we all know what happens then). If a card that could possibly be played in legacy was also a standard staple, I'd just wait until rotation ($24 for a dark confidant playset). I only played legacy and magic was a cheap hobby. I also had a ton of cards that I usually bought for less than $5 a playset that were always on the 'almost good enough' bubble of playability (in legacy).
Then around the time of the survival ban, legacy exploded and the prices doubled. I saw JTMS on the worldwake spoiler shortly thereafter, and snap bought a playset for around $90. That was the only time up until then that I spent 'standard staple' money on any card, but with the popularity of legacy on the rise, I couldn't see a scenario where Jace would ever be worth less than that. (I would later repeat this for Liliana and Snapcaster.)
Fast forward another year and modern is announced. I wasn't really interested in the format, but I happened to have a vast majority of the staples already due to legacy and those 'bubble' cards that I mentioned. While I wasn't very interested in playing at the time, my 'portfolio' value increased a large amount again.
Eventually the thought of playing a lot of those cards that were almost good enough for legacy intrigued me enough to give it a try. The format is good, but legacy is still my darling. The thing I think is positive about modern is that it makes viable a lot of cards that are out of standard and not quite good enough for legacy a home.
So you're probably asking what's the point of this story, and what does it have to do with Jace. We now have two popular, non-rotating formats that don't actually share too many staples. Throw in EDH and there are another pile of bulk jank that suddenly became in demand. What this means is that the secondary market is a lucrative place for stores in the long term, because almost any card that is remotely playable somewhere will not be totally worthless over time. When the stores flourish, the game flourishes too. If wizards deliberately designed a scenario where such a variety of cards could be playable somewhere, I tip my hat.
Back to Jace. Right now he's awesome in legacy. He was too awesome in standard. He'd also be a house in modern. In fact people are playing with lesser jaces in modern now. Which, if my analysis of what wizards wants is correct, is a good thing. They don't want legacy and modern to share the same staples. If they unban JTMS, then the architect will be totally gone after rotation. In summary, my theory is that some cards are banned in modern not due to sheer power but because wizards wants the most amount of cards to be playable somewhere.
PS - I am sympathetic to Mr. Durward when he wrote in his article that he wants Jace unbanned so that he can 'love the format.' Force of will is my favorite card of all time, but Jace is the most fun I've ever had playing magic. He's like a blue deck in one card. Blue mages love maximizing every decision, and he delivers in spades. Good thing we can still play him in legacy...
1. The new client sucks.
2. MODO is a lot less fun than playing paper MTG.
3. MODO would be very, very expensive if not for set redemptions. If eveyone played online and almost nothing was redeemed they would have to lower pack prices or do something else to support card prices. Prices on non-Mythics already are a fraction of paper 95% of the time.
I agree with 1 & 2. Number 3 I have some difficulty understanding as I am not a modo guy, and am not caught up on its economics. I personally think that the experience of live magic is by far superior. I just think that, unfortunately, modo will eventually overtake it. The fact that you can play whenever you want is a huge selling point. I was playing since 94, but attrition will remove us old timers. There are already people today who started with dotp and migrated directly to modo. People just expect to be entertained on screens these days. I know I sound like a curmudgeon, but I am just calling it the way I see it. One day modo's popularity will overtake paper. If I were wizards I'd want to take as many people (customers) as long as possible.
Then again I could also envision a scenario where the online economy crashes when paper loses its popularity. The physical cards are like the precious metal backing a currency. Who knows. I just think wizards should hedge by incentizing people who already bought into paper to try modo.
I'm an Izzet at heart, and was very excited for the prospect of a UR planeswalker. I brainstormed an idea for how this would work. This is what I came up with. It's based off of the Jace Beleren/Liliana of the Veil prototype only as UR.
Ral Zarek (M)
1UR
Planeswalker - Ral
+1: Discard a card, then draw a card.
+1: ~ deals 3 damage to target creature, its controller draws a card.
-9: ~ deals 5 damage to target player, draw 5 cards.
I like how his + abilities are card neutral, but can be set up to add card advantage. The first is good if you have no cards, and you can use the second on an x/4 creature you control. Also like Liliana and Jace 1, this design of Ral does not win outright with his ultimate. Ral as shown above is built in the mold of a 3 CMC planeswalker with a nice UR feel.
This is pretty off the wall, but I had an interesting idea. It's based off of three related premises.
- Eventually nearly all magic will likely be played digitally.
- MODO will in turn eventually be a better product and playable on tablets.
- Many shy away from MODO because they don't want to buy into paper and online.
Basically, my idea is a 'reverse redemption.' For some amount of time wizards could set up booths at particular venues (mostly GPs, but also other large events). At these booths you could 'register' your physical cards on MODO.
The logisitcs would be somewhat of an issue, but I could see a small, clear decal used on the card with a barcode/serial number. Removing the barcode would cause damage to the card. Wizards could charge .10-1.00 per card to pay for the manpower required to do this. It would also prevent people from showing up with an infinite amount of cards.
I'm not a MODO guy, and I'm sure this would seriously disrupt the online economy. It would also seriously increase the value of people's physical cards (particularly non-redeemed cards). There will definitely be issues with implementing this, and the predictable losers would be people who have high equity in MODO cards. On the other hand, this would also decrease the value of expensive cards, so they might also have a method of gaining overall. The effect on wizards profit models would be hard to predict.
Also, there could be new rules for the current online redemption. Make it similar to the offline system where the digital cards are clearly 'flagged' as having already been redeemed.
This would cause a significant disruption in the online and offline magic economies, but it might be like pulling off a band-aid. It would forever link the online and offline games. Wizards could even schedule these events at recurring times. This would just become the new reality. Essentially, both systems would have some overlap.
Right now I'd venture to guess that MODO has a significantly lower player population than paper. This would create an incentive for people to start playing online, which is likely where wizards will eventually want to go. Wizards can also make 'infinite' money online compared to paper product, so getting a large injection of players couldn't hurt too badly. Eventually, it might even be the only way anyone plays.
In my estimation magic will eventually be a mostly, if not completely, online game. Better start preparing for the day...
It's a pretty audacious idea, but I present the themes as food for thought.
Just some theorycrafting, but using the third ability on someone who missed an early land drop could spell disaster. Of course this is subject to variance, but you also have the other two abilities.
This card is only really usable in a proactive strategy, but it is very versatile in this respect. The +1 is better with creatures on board. The +0 does not work well with reactive cards (answers besides burn). The design is cool because it gives red a planeswalker that is good, but won't be used in traditional blue decks.
In an aggro deck (disclaimer: I don't play aggro), it isn't the fastest threat, but it is a good hedge as it's strong against multiple answer types. If the other decks plays a blocker, bypass it. If they use removal on your threats, ping or dig for burn. It won't close like a hellrider, but the +1 can sneak in the last bit of damage sometimes, and the +0 can help aggro when it is weakest (the long game).
I'll let the guys who turn guys sideways be the judges of the card on the table, but at the very least it can help diversify threats.
Cheers,
Backseat Critic
In regards to mtgo, I can defeinitely tell where you're coming from. I recently started an account and messed around with pauper and cheap modern. Is it better than the real thing? Not even close. The reason why I chose to try it out was because I am currently living overseas and it is difficult to play magic from a language perspective. It doesn't come close to replacing the awesome in person experience. You'll notice that I explicitly said that in my post. Still, mtgo has a few advantages (play anytime, quick shuffles, rules enforcement).
As for the reprint policy, you and I will likely have to agree to respectfully disagree. I think we have several years, minimum, until there is truly a legacy doomsday scenario. At this point I believe that mtgo maybecome a better experience, or wizards will just release a paper legacy masters. Either way, I'm not too worried. I obviously have no proof, but wizards does a good job of managing the game.
As for the argument that cost itself is the problem, I would disagree. How much should a dual/force/jace cost? I would say it is worth what a buyer will give for it. Every transaction has two sides, so merely blaming the seller is not warranted. Let's say that wizards did reprint legacy staples. Would you want them to be comparable to standard prices? This is going to draw some hate, but this would likely hurt the game more than help it. There's a reason why standard is the cheapest format to start with, and it is because it isthe easiest one to mentally process. If reprinting legacy cards is the cash cow panacea for wizards that many claim it is, why haven't they done it already? Could it be that wizards does not agree with this course of action?
By all accounts it looks like wizards is treading very lightly with modern masters. Keep in mind that they said when modern was born that it would be a format where they would and could reprint any card. The small print run and high msrp indicates that wizards is still very cautious with reprints even when there is no agreement holding them back. Depending on how the market reacts this could be a test run for a legacy masters. What is evident is that wizards does not share the view that greater accessibility to eternal formats is good for the health of the game.
We're very focused on legacy health, but I don't think that legacy should gain if magic itself does not. I don't know what legacy reprints would do overall, but I do know where wizards is aiming with its reprint policy. They clearly want standard to remain the cheapest in the short term, with modern eventually being more cost effective in the long term. Legacy has to, I belive rightfully, be less accessible than either. It's the best magic there is, and it will always be intriguing. Unfortunately, its role is to be the premium format. We'll just have to live with that.
All this being said, I don't think wizards will allow legacy to die. (It basically did this to vintage, but I can say with experience that legacy is a much richer format.) While wizards won't ever let legacy go away completely, they will also never let it be even close to as cheap as modern. It's wizards' world and we just live in it, but at least they've proven that they are good stewards.
Cheers,
Backseat Critic
I know that you're a prolific member, and I am just some lurker, but I tend to highly value and respect your opinions (for what that's worth). This is why I found your post that contained the six step doomsday plan for legacy kind of jarring. I think it ignores a really big part of the price/demand of cards in legacy. None other than Aaron Forsythe said that the idea that no one will play once prices becomes too high is kind of absurd, because what about all the people that already own the cards?
Furthermore, if staples keep selling well even at high prices it would imply that even more people are in possession of these cards. The fact that they paid a pretty sum for them would also imply that they are more likely to play with them.
I was a legacy (and magic in general) early adopter, and I'm pretty sure you are too. People like us were able to get into this format for relatively cheap because we supported it way before it became popular. A lot of legacy players are like this, and I'd dare say they make up the core of the legacy player base at this time.
The rise in prices is indicative of interest in the format. Right now, if supply and demand is to be believed, more people want in than out. Many are even willing to pay a handsome sum to get in.
Prices may eventually become a problem and halt format interest, but I don't think that time is now or in the near future to be honest. I think we'll start seeing the death of legacy when it is actually difficult (not just expensive) to find the staples. Recall if you will the death of legacy groaning in 2011 during the first big price jump. Availability has never actually been a problem, and price has actually been a harbinger of legacy success. Once availability is a problem, then the format will have serious issues.
Here's where I predict that rabbit hole goes. If available supply of legacy staples is basically zero, then, it is worth noting, plenty of players will have their hands on them. So there will be a peak amount of paper legacy players, but I don't think that will be the most important part of the equation. At this point, the reserved list still won't budge, and here's why. MTGO will be better before this happens and many players will migrate to it naturally. MTGO does not suffer a reserved list.
Use your imagination for a second. What do you think will happen first, the day I type tundra into ebay and get zero results (or >$500 for a revise copy), or the day that computing and interactivity over the internet will grow to a point where the online experience may start to approximate the best of both worlds? Now, imagine logging into magic online and seeing and manipulating by touch the virtual cards on the table. Imagine seeing and interacting with the opposing avatar. Would this not be awesome? It may sound like science fiction mumbo jumbo, but I feel that as time goes by the improvement of magic online will start to make the paper reserve list less of an issue.
Sure there will still be old timers like Steve and I who will want to own the old cards and play paper legacy too. There may still be tournaments large and small. There will still be the irreplaceable bond of true human interaction and shuffling tangible objects and putting back a few brews (or in the case of us elitists legacy players, swirling a stiff cognac and shining our monocles).
Magic is an awesome game right now, and its best format has never been stronger. Call me an optimist, but I truly believe that things will get better before they get worse. Wizards has done an awesome job (and made a tidy profit - greed?) of providing this game where grown men will exchange hard earned money to enrich their lives with frivolous flights of fancy. The much maligned star city has done an awesome job (and made another tidy profit) of breathing life of providing and showing high level legacy play every week and exposing countless players to the best format ever.
I apologize for going a bit long, and I'm afraid way off topic. The title of this thread is "Complain about Legacy prices and availability." I came to the wrong place I guess. This game is a blast, and playing legacy is the most fun you can have with cardboard squares. We're in a good spot now, and I think we'll be pleasantly surprised when we see this game in the future. So we can complain about legacy prices and availability, or we can reflect upon how awesome our lives must be if we truly have time to worry about such a thing.
Cheers,
Backseat Critic
Thanks for keeping up a good dialogue. I don't think we disagree much at all. You are saying that playing less than optimal cards makes a small difference. I was just stating that at high skill levels a small difference would make up a big portion of the aggregate difference. I don't feel that at the level of play we're discussing that we're looking at good players vs bad players. When we're devating a one-of in a sideboard of an establish deck, this level of scrutiny is to increase the odds while playing against a good player with a good deck. Basically the only justifying reason for running worse cards is that you don't own the better ones. I'm sure we've all done this, and I have no problem with it.
On another note, I think your english is great. I may have misunderstood your point to a degree, but if so I am to blame. I can sympathize with you. I'm an American who lives and works abroad, and am not nearly as good at communicating in the local language as you are in English. I'm glad that you didn't take what I wrote as insulting (I did not intend it to be) and commend your commitment to good, rigorous debate.
Cheers,
Backseat Critic
Some are wont to say, "GerryT (LSV, Finkel, Kai) could win with a ham sandwich." It may be true, but we'll never know because they bring awesome, well tuned decks to tournaments. I didn't see any watery graves in Gerry's invitational list (legacy). Apparently good players believe that better cards improve their chances.
Please, don't take this the wrong way, but isn't it kind of self evident that some cards are almost always worse than others (dare I say strictly, duals vs shocks). Even if the difference is negligible, there would still be no reason to intentionally hinder yourself.
Not using the best card because you don't own it is an acceptable snd resourceful decision. Trying to rationalize it as irrelevant to winning doesn't make sense.
Steve is saying that there is a mountain of evidence supporting better cards equating to better results. I honestly don't even believe there is, because at high level play availability is a non-issue. But there doesn't need to be any evidence because better cards equating to better results is a simple tautology.
Cheers,
Backseat Critic
I do agree that from a flavor standpoint that allied colors should have more fixing options. I would argue that they already have two really good cycles that enemies do not (manlands and fastlands). Also, they will likely outpace enemy pairs with future cycles.
There does need to be some way to punish greedy mana bases in modern. Wasteland, in my opinion, may be too efficient for what it does. Wasteland is much more punishing to a shockland format than a dual land format. I have also seen ghost quarter be a better wasteland, but in matchups where this is not the case it is much worse. Because of the lack of consistency, ghost quarter can not establish itself as a pillar, which means that people can feel relative safety with greedy mana. While there are cases where ghost quarter is a serious beating, it doesn't rise to the level where it plays a role in general deck construction (like wasteland in legacy).
I think everyone can agree that five color good stuff is not where any healthy format should go. Right now the bottleneck seems to be decent non-basic hate. Ghost quarter, tec edge, and moon effects are pretty much all that's available. Until there is more hate, I think that mana fixing shouldn't get significantly better. I don't foresee a modern legal wasteland reprint, but there could be other measures. What about a back to basics hate bear? That might be too painful, but it would create a nice boogie man to reign in the greed.
Cheers,
Backseat Critic
I understand that allied fetches are part of the much maligned legacy price barrier. This is the modern forum, and I don't think that focusing on legacy prices really does justice to the question as it pertains to modern. Even a reprint of allied fetches on the scale of ravnica shocks would not necessarily reduce the price of legacy by much or even at all. There's always someone jumping to point out "duh, increase supply, lower cost." But what about the far less predictable demand variable? When the price of force or jace goes up it seems to take everyone by surprise. Starcity is often blamed. Who has a better handle on demand than the world's largest seller of singles? Lowering the price of some legacy staples, will increase demand for others (look at clique, bob, goyf, cryptic in modern).
Bottom line is that I don't think that putting the allied fetches in modern would necessarily be a plus for the format. Additionally, the cry for legacy reprints have nothing to do with modern format construction, and may not even be productive in their intended purpose.
Cheers,
Backseat Critic
Welcome aboard. I don't get to play legacy much at all (these days), but I never regret the buy in. I started playing in 94, but sold all my stuff in 99. This included a playset of all duals, moats, tabernacles, a stack of forces and wastelands and such... The friend who bought it from me still has them in the binders I sold them in. In 2005 I started the long process of buying back in to Magic (specifically legacy). At first I only played mono-blue, because I didn't want to shell out $15 for a dual, hahaha. I eventually did buy them back, and I'm glad I didn't wait too long in retrospect.
Now I have an awesome legacy collection that includes everything besides the P3k stuff, but I look back fondly to the two times when I was starting fresh. As Maro is wont to say, "restriction breeds creativity." There is a thrill to playing with what is available that is notably absent from proxies or cockatrice. Maybe I'm some weird anachronism, but I like the sweat and toil of brewing and also the sweat and toil of having spent real resources on obtaining the cards in said brew. Legacy is actually the perfect format for brewing and for 'investing' in cards.
Maverick is a nice place to start. A lot of the cards are newer, and may already be in the collections of modern players. The old staples aren't in danger of loosing value either. If you like the maverick style, you can also branch out into bant, junk, or naya by getting a few new duals and fetches (which will also hold value). The way you go will depend on the playstyle you prefer. If maverick tickles the itch, you'll just have to occasionally buy a few singles for new sets as you see fit. It's actually an awesome place to be, and why I love legacy. Your decks can evolve over time based on the acquisition of new cards, and the cards generally don't tank in value. I'd say this is the hidden secret of legacy. Standard is kept fresh by rotations, and while legacy can see shifts with the printing of new cards, each individual player has sort of a 'personal journey' that keeps things fresh.
I started off with a mono-blue stasis deck in 2005 (don't laugh). Then I moved to a mono-blue stifle naught control deck (stop laughing). When I got my hands on some duals and goyf I went to thresh, which the morphed into a natural order bant build. I had fun the whole time, and I never dropped like 2k on a deck at once, which seems to be everyone's first complaint. In my opinion the problem with legacy is not really the price, but people's expectation that enjoying a format can only mean stomping large tournaments.
Legacy is by its nature is best suited to people who take the long view. I've spent thousands on cards over the years. Unless I were to sell off my collection, I would never recoup the money I put into it. I just love this game, and have fun playing and brewing. If your goal is to make money, or even make your money back, I recommend reading Kibler's articles on the state of competitive play. It requires a ridiculous time and money commitment to do so, and is achieved by very few. Frankly, my time is better spent focusing on my regular job and playing magic for fun. It's what funded my playing and collection over the years not winnings.
I'm not going to tell you how to enjoy yourself with this game, but just remember to keep your expectations in check in regards to money. The game can be expensive, and difficult to result in a net monetary gain even for the world's best. One thing us legacy players have is that we don't have to chase card pricing trends like standard, and ones we do buy tend to keep stable or increase in value.
I know it may seem daunting at the beginning, but the journey can be just as fun (or more) as the destination. As far as the cost, take the long view and make smart purchases, and you won't break the bank. Also, if you're a good player, chances are that you're smart and can get a decent job (I understand this is certainly not automatic in this day and age). That's where the real 'EV' is. Spend what your budget will allow, make good life choices, and have fun. If this sounds at all like your outlook, I think legacy will give you countless hours of joy.
Cheers,
Backseat Critic
Here's my rather exhausting take on this question. I apologize in advance...
I have been playing magic since 94, and was never a standard player. When a new set comes out I just scan the spoiler for possible legacy playables. This includes any cards that have a unique effect as they may become viable when something new is printed (and we all know what happens then). If a card that could possibly be played in legacy was also a standard staple, I'd just wait until rotation ($24 for a dark confidant playset). I only played legacy and magic was a cheap hobby. I also had a ton of cards that I usually bought for less than $5 a playset that were always on the 'almost good enough' bubble of playability (in legacy).
Then around the time of the survival ban, legacy exploded and the prices doubled. I saw JTMS on the worldwake spoiler shortly thereafter, and snap bought a playset for around $90. That was the only time up until then that I spent 'standard staple' money on any card, but with the popularity of legacy on the rise, I couldn't see a scenario where Jace would ever be worth less than that. (I would later repeat this for Liliana and Snapcaster.)
Fast forward another year and modern is announced. I wasn't really interested in the format, but I happened to have a vast majority of the staples already due to legacy and those 'bubble' cards that I mentioned. While I wasn't very interested in playing at the time, my 'portfolio' value increased a large amount again.
Eventually the thought of playing a lot of those cards that were almost good enough for legacy intrigued me enough to give it a try. The format is good, but legacy is still my darling. The thing I think is positive about modern is that it makes viable a lot of cards that are out of standard and not quite good enough for legacy a home.
So you're probably asking what's the point of this story, and what does it have to do with Jace. We now have two popular, non-rotating formats that don't actually share too many staples. Throw in EDH and there are another pile of bulk jank that suddenly became in demand. What this means is that the secondary market is a lucrative place for stores in the long term, because almost any card that is remotely playable somewhere will not be totally worthless over time. When the stores flourish, the game flourishes too. If wizards deliberately designed a scenario where such a variety of cards could be playable somewhere, I tip my hat.
Back to Jace. Right now he's awesome in legacy. He was too awesome in standard. He'd also be a house in modern. In fact people are playing with lesser jaces in modern now. Which, if my analysis of what wizards wants is correct, is a good thing. They don't want legacy and modern to share the same staples. If they unban JTMS, then the architect will be totally gone after rotation. In summary, my theory is that some cards are banned in modern not due to sheer power but because wizards wants the most amount of cards to be playable somewhere.
PS - I am sympathetic to Mr. Durward when he wrote in his article that he wants Jace unbanned so that he can 'love the format.' Force of will is my favorite card of all time, but Jace is the most fun I've ever had playing magic. He's like a blue deck in one card. Blue mages love maximizing every decision, and he delivers in spades. Good thing we can still play him in legacy...
I agree with 1 & 2. Number 3 I have some difficulty understanding as I am not a modo guy, and am not caught up on its economics. I personally think that the experience of live magic is by far superior. I just think that, unfortunately, modo will eventually overtake it. The fact that you can play whenever you want is a huge selling point. I was playing since 94, but attrition will remove us old timers. There are already people today who started with dotp and migrated directly to modo. People just expect to be entertained on screens these days. I know I sound like a curmudgeon, but I am just calling it the way I see it. One day modo's popularity will overtake paper. If I were wizards I'd want to take as many people (customers) as long as possible.
Then again I could also envision a scenario where the online economy crashes when paper loses its popularity. The physical cards are like the precious metal backing a currency. Who knows. I just think wizards should hedge by incentizing people who already bought into paper to try modo.
Ral Zarek (M)
1UR
Planeswalker - Ral
+1: Discard a card, then draw a card.
+1: ~ deals 3 damage to target creature, its controller draws a card.
-9: ~ deals 5 damage to target player, draw 5 cards.
I like how his + abilities are card neutral, but can be set up to add card advantage. The first is good if you have no cards, and you can use the second on an x/4 creature you control. Also like Liliana and Jace 1, this design of Ral does not win outright with his ultimate. Ral as shown above is built in the mold of a 3 CMC planeswalker with a nice UR feel.
Let me know what you think.
Tokens much? I feel like r&d uses a 'when in doubt, make a token' philosophy with cards these days. Not scientific, just saying.
- Eventually nearly all magic will likely be played digitally.
- MODO will in turn eventually be a better product and playable on tablets.
- Many shy away from MODO because they don't want to buy into paper and online.
Basically, my idea is a 'reverse redemption.' For some amount of time wizards could set up booths at particular venues (mostly GPs, but also other large events). At these booths you could 'register' your physical cards on MODO.
The logisitcs would be somewhat of an issue, but I could see a small, clear decal used on the card with a barcode/serial number. Removing the barcode would cause damage to the card. Wizards could charge .10-1.00 per card to pay for the manpower required to do this. It would also prevent people from showing up with an infinite amount of cards.
I'm not a MODO guy, and I'm sure this would seriously disrupt the online economy. It would also seriously increase the value of people's physical cards (particularly non-redeemed cards). There will definitely be issues with implementing this, and the predictable losers would be people who have high equity in MODO cards. On the other hand, this would also decrease the value of expensive cards, so they might also have a method of gaining overall. The effect on wizards profit models would be hard to predict.
Also, there could be new rules for the current online redemption. Make it similar to the offline system where the digital cards are clearly 'flagged' as having already been redeemed.
This would cause a significant disruption in the online and offline magic economies, but it might be like pulling off a band-aid. It would forever link the online and offline games. Wizards could even schedule these events at recurring times. This would just become the new reality. Essentially, both systems would have some overlap.
Right now I'd venture to guess that MODO has a significantly lower player population than paper. This would create an incentive for people to start playing online, which is likely where wizards will eventually want to go. Wizards can also make 'infinite' money online compared to paper product, so getting a large injection of players couldn't hurt too badly. Eventually, it might even be the only way anyone plays.
In my estimation magic will eventually be a mostly, if not completely, online game. Better start preparing for the day...
It's a pretty audacious idea, but I present the themes as food for thought.