WotC does not care about the secondary market value of a card for one very simple reason: They do not make any money of the secondary market.
Therefore, the value of any given card has no bearing on whether or not WotC will reprint it.
To say that wizards does not care about secondary market value is nonsense. Its the C in CCG. The collectability is one of the factors that makes M:tG so appealing.
I think wizards already learned its lesson on what mass devaluation can do to the game from the death of vintage (i.e. when proxies were allowed and the costs of deck went from $2500 or more down to squat, along with the restriction of brainstorm, this killed the format).
This isn't Tarmogoyf (or insert other multi-format all-star here) that will change the landscape if reprinted. Just that decks that run black will want one. Kind of like Vampy and Demonic. It'll just have a price more in line with the actual value of the card instead of based on how hard it is to find.
I doubt wizards will risk upsetting the collector side of the game. Imperial seal is a niche card that is actually WORSE than its widely available counterpart.
It isnt like tarmogoyf or duals where those exist as barriers to entrance in the format. You could play EDH without an imperial seal for the rest of your life and be just fine.
Do you honestly think that wizards would destroy the value of an extremely collectible card in order for a few random people who play black in EDH to optimize their decks?
Not going to start a debate about the flaws of opinions (I assuming that's what you're getting at)
But when discussing magic, if i say "a 3/3 with flying for 3cmc is better than a 4/4 for 5cmc" am I correct or expressing an opinion?
If you're goblin token deck auto losses to moat, and I suggest you play cards that play around that, I'm not really expressing a opinion as much as a fact since "gives things flying" does invalidates the "things with out flying sit on their hands" card.
No, just saying this reminds me of a discussion about education. I research interactions between gifted students and teachers. And I am referring to the sentiments in this discussion, not so much what is said.
I am just saying that certain ideals, that some people hold, are found elsewhere besides magic. That is all.
This type of mentality is actually one of my biggest pet peeves in EDH. I'm not necessarily the most competitive player, but I still want my opponents to bring their A game. I hate finding out that someone was sandbagging or purposely not making the correct plays. I want to play against strategies that hose mine. It forces me to learn and adapt which in turn makes me a better player and deck builder.
I doubt you are a new EDH player sporting some random mono red goblin tribal under krenko...
And this is far easier to say that you enjoy playing like that in theory than in practice.
well, it sounds like your intentions are good which i respect, but i think we just fundamentally disagree about what makes a positive gaming experience. i have been in the same situation as you, playing against friends who were new to the game or had limited card pools. my solution was to build decks that had strict thematic limitations (tribal birds, with no non-bird creatures and no spells that don't have birds in the art, for example). with those decks, i'd play as cutthroat as possible, winning and losing authentically.
i bet you'll disagree, but to me that's COMPLETELY different from letting someone win. there's nothing wrong with building a less powerful deck to put yourself on the same level as your friends. but building a more powerful deck than everyone else and then just purposefully letting them win occasionally "to build confidence" is insulting to them and is a total violation of the social contract of gaming as i understand it.
so instead of pulling your punches, you fight with a hand tied behind your back.
that's exactly what i mean though. for you to put yourself in a position of puppet master, purposefully lose a game, and then walk away feeling all self satisfied that you've "made friends" -- by tricking them into thinking they won on their own... isn't that just you feeding your own ego according to your own weird agenda? that's NOT why i game. i game because it's really gratifying to find opponents who are on the same level, who will compete as equals, who will win and lose together and build a friendship through a shared experience.
no puppet masters in my play group, thank you very much.
hah, thats enough spin to make karl rove blush
I did not say I let him win, I said I chose to not play a card that would make it impossible for him to win. Would he have won through multiple board sweepers AND moat? Unlikely.
Since when has not playing to win been the same as being a puppet master? I play for interesting board states and fun games. If by choosing not to play an oppressive card fulfilled my "weird agenda" of having fun in a way that others can have fun too...well then, guilty as charged!
i find your perspective very compelling in a way, as i am also a guy with a huge collection who would waayyyy rather play 'fun' decks over 'tuned' decks, has found a very friendly, non-combo meta, and enjoys losing a wacky game way more than comboing out on turn 3.
but that said, if i was the krenko player here i would feel TOYED WITH, that my time was wasted, and i'd actually be pretty insulted that i was sitting there thinking i was winning when i was actually just being pittied. it would feel really negative, and i'd probably not want to play with you again.
for me, it's not fun if there isn't a certain level of baseline competition going on. i want to be able to laugh maniacally when i win in creative ways, and i want to express real enthusiasm (both despair and congratulations) when i'm defeated. to turn the game into such a farce that you're holding answers and not using them just ruins it.
for me.
The trick is to just not show the krenko player your hand :), or even mention that you let him win.
To be honest, ego is a pretty funny thing...it makes us see the world in such irrational ways
the whole t&n vs the hulk can be boiled down to this-
the hulk is a creature and t&n is not. The whole 2 mana less does not really matter, but the creature part sure does.
I am not saying that it isn't fun when you lose. I have lost some pretty spectacular games, and I had a blast playing them. I am simply saying that complaining because some guy won in a way that you don't like is pointless, that's all.
EDH is a game built upon a social contract or gentleman's agreement of sorts. Creating board states that inhibit the ability of other's to play (usually through resource denial or destruction) go against the gentleman's agreement of sorts. That is not to say that this does not happen, but usually, continually going against the gentleman's agreement of your group tends to bring out the passive-aggressiveness in people.
Personally, I prefer to just tell people that I did not enjoy playing against their decks and mention that they might have a bit better time if they shifted focus towards synergies within their own deck rather than trying to deny resources in others' decks.
But that is not how most M:tG players are. In particular, if someone is being exceptionally repressive on the saturday EDH night, I ask if people would like to cube instead. That usually calms people down, or at least gives them a choice.
There was one instance, where nothing else would work against a player who not only wanted to win, but to grief the other players while he was doing it. He would not want to play at the table with the other money decks with my friend and I, but always gravitated towards the casual deck players (all the while making snide comments about their decks and in general making play miserable for them...for example, play a jhoira deck and insisting that the group continue to play after he had nuked the board and dropped an eldrazi down. He would say he would not attack them with it...but always ended up attacking whoever started getting permanents on the board, and then just grinding the game out until everyone had had enough).
I tried flattering his ego and saying that he was too good and veteran to play with the budget players and should play at my table. He would have none of it and tell me that he didnt want to play with people whose "land bases were worth more than all his EDH decks combined".
When all else failed, I talked with the store owner and told him that this player was negatively affecting the player base (of course adding in that negative effects on burgeoning EDH players meant bad business). We ended up talking to the player together, he would have none of it, said he was never coming back, and for the most part kept up his side of the bargain (I am sad to say).
To be honest, I cannot help feel sorry for the guy. I can only imagine what sort of home life must have bred such narcissistic tendencies.
For what it's worth: the underlined what I feel EDH should be about. Good show.
Thank you, I personally think there is more to winning a game than actually winning. Take this guy for example in the OP, while he may have won the game, what did he actually win? Sounds like he may lose a playgroup.
Sometimes the big picture is more important. I like to say "when you win a game, think what you really have won". Its the whole battle vs war kind of ideology. Big picture-small picture. I consider "winning" a game when everyone has a good time, laughs are had, interesting board states are created, and everyone wants to stay to play "just one more". That to me is a "won" game.
Like I mentioned before, I have the resources to play whatever I want. The basic lands I use are all foil unhinged, I play with numerous rare foreign foils and high dollar cards (like the aforementioned moat or cards like imperial seal). When I first sit with a new group, sometimes I get the vibe that they think I will be "that guy". Usually by the end of the game, I have made 3 new friends. If they make a comment about my deck, I just say I am a collector (which I am) and EDH and Cube give me a chance to enjoy my collection.
Long story short- there is more to winning than winning.
To say that wizards does not care about secondary market value is nonsense. Its the C in CCG. The collectability is one of the factors that makes M:tG so appealing.
I think wizards already learned its lesson on what mass devaluation can do to the game from the death of vintage (i.e. when proxies were allowed and the costs of deck went from $2500 or more down to squat, along with the restriction of brainstorm, this killed the format).
I doubt wizards will risk upsetting the collector side of the game. Imperial seal is a niche card that is actually WORSE than its widely available counterpart.
It isnt like tarmogoyf or duals where those exist as barriers to entrance in the format. You could play EDH without an imperial seal for the rest of your life and be just fine.
Do you honestly think that wizards would destroy the value of an extremely collectible card in order for a few random people who play black in EDH to optimize their decks?
There are also the more interesting ways like Wild Ricochet and its brothers.
And of course, there is the much hated Ruination.
No, just saying this reminds me of a discussion about education. I research interactions between gifted students and teachers. And I am referring to the sentiments in this discussion, not so much what is said.
I am just saying that certain ideals, that some people hold, are found elsewhere besides magic. That is all.
One nice counterspell and thats the end of norin. Norin can roll through casual decks but tends to be too fragile otherwise.
You know, this conversation reminds me very much of one I had in regards to education.
It reminds me how "human" certain sentiments are, regardless of the topic.
I doubt you are a new EDH player sporting some random mono red goblin tribal under krenko...
And this is far easier to say that you enjoy playing like that in theory than in practice.
Its now what is done that is important (many things work) it is HOW it is done.
so instead of pulling your punches, you fight with a hand tied behind your back.
Apples and oranges...apples and oranges.
hah, thats enough spin to make karl rove blush
I did not say I let him win, I said I chose to not play a card that would make it impossible for him to win. Would he have won through multiple board sweepers AND moat? Unlikely.
Since when has not playing to win been the same as being a puppet master? I play for interesting board states and fun games. If by choosing not to play an oppressive card fulfilled my "weird agenda" of having fun in a way that others can have fun too...well then, guilty as charged!
The trick is to just not show the krenko player your hand :), or even mention that you let him win.
To be honest, ego is a pretty funny thing...it makes us see the world in such irrational ways
the hulk is a creature and t&n is not. The whole 2 mana less does not really matter, but the creature part sure does.
EDH is a game built upon a social contract or gentleman's agreement of sorts. Creating board states that inhibit the ability of other's to play (usually through resource denial or destruction) go against the gentleman's agreement of sorts. That is not to say that this does not happen, but usually, continually going against the gentleman's agreement of your group tends to bring out the passive-aggressiveness in people.
Personally, I prefer to just tell people that I did not enjoy playing against their decks and mention that they might have a bit better time if they shifted focus towards synergies within their own deck rather than trying to deny resources in others' decks.
But that is not how most M:tG players are. In particular, if someone is being exceptionally repressive on the saturday EDH night, I ask if people would like to cube instead. That usually calms people down, or at least gives them a choice.
There was one instance, where nothing else would work against a player who not only wanted to win, but to grief the other players while he was doing it. He would not want to play at the table with the other money decks with my friend and I, but always gravitated towards the casual deck players (all the while making snide comments about their decks and in general making play miserable for them...for example, play a jhoira deck and insisting that the group continue to play after he had nuked the board and dropped an eldrazi down. He would say he would not attack them with it...but always ended up attacking whoever started getting permanents on the board, and then just grinding the game out until everyone had had enough).
I tried flattering his ego and saying that he was too good and veteran to play with the budget players and should play at my table. He would have none of it and tell me that he didnt want to play with people whose "land bases were worth more than all his EDH decks combined".
When all else failed, I talked with the store owner and told him that this player was negatively affecting the player base (of course adding in that negative effects on burgeoning EDH players meant bad business). We ended up talking to the player together, he would have none of it, said he was never coming back, and for the most part kept up his side of the bargain (I am sad to say).
To be honest, I cannot help feel sorry for the guy. I can only imagine what sort of home life must have bred such narcissistic tendencies.
Thank you, I personally think there is more to winning a game than actually winning. Take this guy for example in the OP, while he may have won the game, what did he actually win? Sounds like he may lose a playgroup.
Sometimes the big picture is more important. I like to say "when you win a game, think what you really have won". Its the whole battle vs war kind of ideology. Big picture-small picture. I consider "winning" a game when everyone has a good time, laughs are had, interesting board states are created, and everyone wants to stay to play "just one more". That to me is a "won" game.
Like I mentioned before, I have the resources to play whatever I want. The basic lands I use are all foil unhinged, I play with numerous rare foreign foils and high dollar cards (like the aforementioned moat or cards like imperial seal). When I first sit with a new group, sometimes I get the vibe that they think I will be "that guy". Usually by the end of the game, I have made 3 new friends. If they make a comment about my deck, I just say I am a collector (which I am) and EDH and Cube give me a chance to enjoy my collection.
Long story short- there is more to winning than winning.