MTG: The Horror of MTG 2010

MTG: The Horror of MTG 2010

The rule changes for the new set are out of control! Hear just why these changes aren’t what MTG player want!

So, I was like everyone else- excited for the new core set. MTG 2010! How could you go wrong? It seemed like they were going back to the basics with this one. It was going to be awesome!

Well I was wrong! The set comes out in a month, but the new rule updates are out today. They did horrible things. They’re unspeakable… But I’m going to talk about them anyway! Some changes are ok, but I’ll touch on some possible problems there might be.

Problem One: The new terminology!

There are many changes in terminology in the new set. Removed cards are now exhiled cards, spells aren’t played, they’re cast, and there is no longer the “in-play” zone, but only the “battlefield”. These changes are somewhat minor and don’t present a large problem to game play. In fact, it isn’t that bad.

The reason I comment on this at all is that it seems to be a lot of new words for something that seemed to already work fine. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it! MTG staff said it was because some players were confused about things, but really, I’ve never met anyone who was confused about anything other the things being “put into play” vs. “played”. It will clear some things up, but overall seems unecessary.

The only problem this could present is that it will detur less nerdy players. My girl friend plays MTG, but only because it’s fun. She doesn’t like the “nerd” aspect of it. Adding these new terms, no offense, does make the game seem more nerdy and more like some RPG. Some may like it, and some may not. Overall, not the worst change.

Problem Two: Stats, stats, and more stats!

So lifelink and deathtouch are becoming static abilities. This is something that once again isn’t super terrible, but presents some problems. You can’t have multiple instances of each now, which sucks. Multiple lifelink was really cool and still made sense. It’s just more junk to remember. Static abilities make the game harder for new players! One way MTG is justifying many of these changes is that the game will be easier for casual and new players, so why then do something that’s in direct opposition to their reasoning? That’s crazy and makes no sense. Well, let’s move on. I’m getting into the big stuff now though, so be warned! Get ready for the storm.

Liked it
Mike1229, posted this comment on Jun 11th, 2009

Agreed. Depending on the setting mana burn will be missed (if they infact do change it)

I have a feeling mtg 2010 will be very 6th edition-esque in terms of acceptance and we will yet again adjust :)

Tricia, posted this comment on Jun 11th, 2009

Well you guys were kind of upset by the newer cards you termed “broken” but eventually thought they were pretty cool and fun to use, so maybe the new rules would be like that. You could just use them as an alternate way to play?

Drakdrium13, posted this comment on Jun 11th, 2009

Yes, we (as well as players outside our small circle) will certainly one day look back on this and laugh, however, I do feel enraged at the present moment

sweetestsadist, posted this comment on Jun 11th, 2009

Your last comment was the best I’ve ever heard on changes to the game. I and the people I play with are frustrated at the rules change too, but I seem to be the only one to realize that Wizard’s R&D department know what cards and mechanics are coming out for the next five years or so. I’ve been playing for 15 years and have heard Magic was being ruined every year. It’s always turned out fine. I still don’t like Planeswalkers.

Taj Palace, posted this comment on Jun 20th, 2009

it’s not the end of the world man, sheesh, lifelink should be static, it’s ridiculous that it stacks, if you think about it logically, if i come over and steel your piggy bank, i don’t get twice as much money just cause there’s two people that say i’m a good thief. And the lack of manaburn opens up new options as well as closing old. Even now with manaburn priest of titania is a great card, i’ve never suffered manaburn from it because if she’s in a deck i make sure there is always ways to spend unused mana. I agree with this post on the “lingo” changes however, it does feel much more nerdy going with “battlefield” and “Exiled”.

Drakdrium13, posted this comment on Jun 20th, 2009

Yes, I know Taj Palace, it isn’t the end of the world. The last paragraph did establish that it isn’t the end of the world. I think these changes aren’t going to ruin MTG, but they are a lot to handle at once. you’ve got to admit, the end of the stack in the damage step is a little crazy.

oh and double lifelink can make sense. i mean, lifelink is like when a creature can pull pull life from its strikes. isn’t double lifelink just like a creature that pulls life more effectively? i see where you’re coming from, but i can also see it both ways. in the grand scheme of things i don’t care about that all that much. mana burn and end of the stack is the big deal

Xaion, posted this comment on Jun 21st, 2009

Well, we’ll just have to take advantage of all the cards that no mana burn makes broken, and maybe then things will change. Spoils of Evil anyone, let’s make a list.

MTGplayer017, posted this comment on Jun 21st, 2009

I think it’s a terrible idea to get rid of the stack for the combat damage step, and yet keep it for every other step of combat and all the other phases. Now casual players and newbies are gonna have to learn the stack AND an entirely new combat system, seems more complicated, and kills some of the best instants. Everything else is a bit irritating but should be easy to accept and get used to.

Lee Marsh, posted this comment on Jun 30th, 2009

I think the biggest reason for all these changes is to try and attract the younger generation. The “yu-gi-oh and pokemon” kids. Over the past few years I’ve noticed that TCG gaming seems to have become a dying breed among kids and teens alike. I used to spend countless hours playing card games with my friends. These days it seems to be all about video games and such. This new generation see’s MTG as either too old and complicated, or just another boring TCG.

I think some of these changes are good, but overall I agree that its probably a mistake. I think they changed the terminology to keep up with all of todays TCG’s like ygo. Kids are used to “casting spells” and “The Battlefield”. If they see MTG is using this they’ll probably be more likely to consider it. This probably wont do much though, and I know my friends and I arent going to change our terminology. The lack of mana burn is sort of a good thing in my opinion. My friends and I never used it, because quite frankly we weren’t very good, and mana was usually scarce enough as it is.

Changing most of the games rules probably isnt the answer if they want to attract new players. What really drew me to YGO and DuelMasters was quite frankly the artwork. YGO and DuelMasters had all kinds of awesome looking images. MTG’s art always seemed kinda dated and uninteresting, which is why I didn’t get into it until everything else lost its luster. I think they would have a better time getting new players if they started using the same kinds of artwork as all the other TCG’s.

Puzzlefighter, posted this comment on Jul 30th, 2009

So how would these static abilities work with virulent sliver? If I had four of these fellas out, would the slivers have poisonous 4 in effect or would it be non-beneficial to have more than one out at a given time because only one instance of “All slivers have poisonous 1″ affects these cards?

Drakdrium13, posted this comment on Jul 30th, 2009

if poisonous became static then having four virulent slivers would do nothing beneficial. however, because poisonous currently is not static, it does stack. I love giving slivers poisonous 4! i hope that answered your question

azzcat, posted this comment on May 22nd, 2010

i hate the new writing phases they have on the cards. keep the burn, many decks relied on this and they should remake cards but don’t turn them into mythics. mythics should be a new thing. not old

BP, posted this comment on Apr 5th, 2011

I wanna Batlle U! :D

Grtz Amsterdam.

Leave a Response
comments powered by Disqus