Ask Wizards, aka T1 in a Nutshell

[VGB]

"These cards are so powerful that games involving them often just come down to who draws theirs first. That's no fun, so Wizards doesn't print these cards anymore."

re: the Power Nine.

News flash - apparently R&D considers Alpha a design atrocity, even though it provided the foundation for the most popular CCG in the history of cardboard, and has cards with unprecedented secondary market value considering the relative youth of the game.

Also entertaining is the fact that this person considers T1 "no fun".  What about T2 dominated by Ravager Affinity, then?

[Moxlotus]

That quote and the one below it have been used so many times that they are typed with the quotation marks.  It's like the "R&D will have to get hit by a bus..."

[Saucemaster]

Wait, did I miss something?  Alpha is a design atrocity.  Can we get Dr. S in here to oracle up that great K-Run quote?

[VGB]

Wait, did I miss something?  Alpha is a design atrocity.  Can we get Dr. S in here to oracle up that great K-Run quote?

The fact remains that this goof has the temerity to insinuate T1 is "not fun".

I'll admit that Alpha is broken, but by no means is that a terrible thing; indeed, history proves that the original Magic set was the holy grail of CCG design.

[Komatteru]

The thing to remember is that Wizards.com is a casual site, not a tournament site, since the number of casual players greatly outnumbers the tournament players (and T1 players are a very small fraction of that).  Cards that are ridiculously powerful are not good for the bulk of the players--one can even argue that ridiculously powerful cards aren't good for the majority of tournament players, as degeneracy is very frowned upon in formats that aren't T1.  I mean, Ravager is overly powerful in T2, but not in the other formats, and look at all the complaints and general griping about all that.  In the opinion of the bulk of the Wizards.com readers, Legions and Prophecy are the best sets, because those are really the best casual sets available (some of the cards in those sets are just plain ridiculous in casual play, like Kilnmouth Dragon   ).  You need to keep that in mind when you read stuff from that site.

[theorigamist]

Saucemaster refers to this:

Face it, we're playing in a format of design atrocities and we love it.

[Jacob Orlove]

Isn't this a rerun week at mtg.com? I know I've seen most of those other questions before.

[M]

If this Q&A was a test, that guy would most certainly fail.
How can he design Magic for a living?

They're called the 'Power 9' because in formats where they are legal,...

There is only ONE format where they are legal.

...most people believe you must have 1 of each of them (they are all restricted, so you can't have more) in any top deck.

Timetwister goes in ANY top deck from now on.

All of these cards appeared in the original Magic set, nicknamed 'Alpha.'

They also appeared in 'Beta' and 'Unlimited', but let's forget about that.

These cards are so powerful that games involving them often just come down to who draws theirs first.

Ha, I drew my Mox Emerald first, gg!

That's no fun, so Wizards doesn't print these cards anymore.

But if it were fun, Wizards would print them again, right?

That means they are very expensive and hard to find, so not many people play with them now.

Also, it's NO FUN. So even if they could find these EXPENSIVE cards and buy them, they wouldn't play with them.

But for people who still have these old cards, there's 'Type I' (also called Vintage), which is the format in which all kinds of old cards are legal, including the now all-but-legendary 'Power 9.'

Not all kinds of old cards are legal in T1. (Ante cards, etc)

[Kowal]

nor portal!

[rocknrossi]

well wizards stance this issue to mean doesn't seem to left field. It makes very little sense to spend a lot of time hyping up vintage in general. The bottom line is even if old cards are worth a ton of money wizards isn't getting that money, with other formats of playing magic people have to constantly get new cards and keep up with things they get some money. If vintage made them more money then things would be different but, I am sure there quite a few vintage people who haven't bought a pack of magic in while especially compared to type 2 players. Vintage players are pretty much leftovers in wizard's eyes.

[rozetta]

But we do buy singles and if you notice, often when a new set comes out, the Type 1 playable singles are some of the first to shoot up in value. Buying singles means someone bought an opened packs to sell those singles, so WotC got their money from those packs. I think a lot of people snapped up a set of  Forbidden Orchards when CoK came out, and considering it's a rare, you have to open a lot of packs to get 4 of them. Also, I see a lot of people talking about having foil this and that. Again, it takes a lot of packs to produce foil rares. Although we don't directly buy packs on the whole, our spending habits do put money in WotC's pockets, albeit not as much as from those who play a lot of limited.

[Bram]

That's no fun, so Wizards doesn't print these cards anymore.

But if it were fun, Wizards would print them again, right?

LOL. Great post. <3 sarcasm.

[Raven Fire]

The bottom line is even if old cards are worth a ton of money wizards isn't getting that money, with other formats of playing magic people have to constantly get new cards and keep up with things they get some money.

While the secondary market doesn't generate hard revenue for WotC, it does act as an ad hoc form of advertisement.  The fact that a Black Lotus can sell for over a grand is certain to generate some interest in the game and entice new players to give the game a try (it's amazing how people are attracted to something they think can make them some money).  It also keeps customers attached to the product if they recognize that there is at least one format where their cards will maintain some play value.  Overall, supporting Vintage makes good financial sense for WotC.