Randy B on Time Vault Errata

[rbuehler]

So far I've been discussing this mostly with Team Meandeck, but obviously you guys are very interested as well. I will cut and post my two posts on the subject so you guys can read them too:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope you're saying "wow" because of how closely Forsythe's logic matches Gottlieb's. Somehow I don't think you are, which is unfortunate, but if you actually read what both guys are saying, it amounts to the same thing. We do not errata to fix power level. We only issue errata when cards are so confusing that we are forced to clarify how they actually work. In pretty much all cases of errata, we look at the printed wording and do our best to assess what that wording seems to say and then fix it so the card actually functions in the way the wording seems to imply it should function.

Worldgorger Dragon works exactly the way it seems to work to anyone who reads the printed wording (and knows the rules halfway decent). Time Vault does not. (Well, "did" not anyway.) Kevin seems to grok this logic pretty well ... if you look at the printed wording of the card and try to figure out how it should work under modern rules, you arrive at what both Gottlieb and Kevin wound up with. I could imagine a case that Twiddle should be a good combo with it, but I think the phrase "to untap it, you must skip a turn" is straight-forward enough (in English) that the time counter stuff is called for. I just don't see a case for a wording that supports a Flame Fussilade combo other than "The current Oracle wording must be respected even if it's dumb" or maybe "You shouldn't change Oracle wordings on cards that affect tournaments" which pretty much amounts to the same thing. Our actual policy is to try to keep Oracle up to date as the way we would word cards now if we were reprinting them. (And we always try to preserve the functionality of the previously printed wordings whenever we reprint something.)

Why are you guys so convinced that this errata was intended to bust up the combo when we said the exact opposite Friday, have previously said the opposite, and our actions (for at least the last 6 years) support a consistent policy of using the B&R list to address power-level while reserving errata to address confusion?

Randy

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AH -- good, thank you, I understand your complaints much better now. I'm glad we could get by the "where the hell did this wording come from" stage so quickly and I'm also delighted to see how much faith you guys have in our ability to (usually?) figure out what's in the best interests of the game. Hopefully I explain explain how this too makes sense when you apply the full utilitarian calculus to it ...

There seem to be four basic questions:

1) Who benefits from this decision? (Also known as "Why the f*&% would you do something that you know is bad for the secondary market value of my Time Vaults when the deck isn't a problem?!")

2) Why is the printed wording given such special status?

3) Why now?

4) How do I know you aren't going to do this again?

I will deal with these one at a time but my answer to 1 is going to blur into my answer to 2 and my answer to 3 is goign to blur into my answer to 4.

I like Steven's suggestion of a utilitarian calculus being applied to decisions to make sure that they maximize total happiness once added up across all players. We don't usually do each calculation from scratch, of course. What we actually do is to adopt the policies that we think will maximize happiness in the long run and then make decisions based on those policies. Because our fans have clearly indicated over the years that they like to understand why we do what we do, it turns out that adhering to coherent policies is better than making seemingly arbitrary decisions on a case by case basis anyway. I could defend the TV errata based just on adherence to policy, but that would be too easy. You guys have demanded, and deserve, a more sophisticated answer.

The person that benefits from this errata is the person who does not currently play Eternal formats, but might someday in the future. Think about the next ten years of Magic ... future players are going to discover Legacy and Vintage all the time and when they do, if they discover a bunch of crazy rulings that don't make any sense to them, they're more likely to walk away. If, on the other hand, they can look at the cards and understand what they do, the format will be perceived as much more accessible. In other words, we think synching up the wording of Time Vault with the printed wording of Time Vault is good for the long-term health and growth of Eternal formats. I will grant you that it is bad for you guys in the short term. But I honestly believe the short-term pain is justified by the improved happiness of future generations of players. You can't really think it's good for the format when your opponent asks you what a card does and you answer "You won't believe me ... let's go ahead and call a judge."

The segue into my answer to question #2 should be pretty obvious -- in general, we believe it is good for Magic if players can trust the printed wordings. It sucks that our game requires a giant databse of "real" card wordings that one must learn and it would be way better if people could just look at the card wordings and be confident that that's all the information they need to figure out what happens in a given situation. Whenever possible, we try to make sure that Oracle matches the functionality that a reasonably intelligent player would deduce based on the printed wording of a card. I think this is a tremendously important goal for the long-term health of the game. (Important enough to out-weigh the short-term pain of this TV errata, for example.)

"Why now?" is a question I don't have a great answer to, but I do have an ok aswer. The truth is that we only update Oracle when new sets come out. The details of database management mean we can't realistically implement a change, run it through editing, get Gatherer updated, etc more often than about every three months. So we accumulate changes and release them all at the same time whenever we are adding a new set worth of cards to Oracle anyway. By the time we learned about the TV-Fusilade combo it was too late to get anything into the Ravnica Oracle update. We probably should have gotten this into the Guildpact Oracle update, but we didn't get around to sorting through the situation in time for it. So it wound up in the Dissension update. In my mind, we only really missed one opportunity to do this and, truth be told, I didn't realize how rare our Oracle updates actually were at the time or I would have pushed this issue a little harder in December so it could have been resolved with Guildpact.

I actually think that last sentence implies an answer to question #4 ("How do I know you won't do this again?"). It is extremely rare for Oracle updates to affect tournaments. It's so rare that not only do you guys not know our schedule for updating Oracle, but *I* didn't even know the schedule. I can't give you any guarantee that we won't affect you with some future decision, but hopefully by clarifying our policies and the logic behind them, I have restored some faith. You only need to worry when a card's functionality seems not to match its printed wording.

Randy

[The Atog Lord]

Randy,

I understand perfectly well why the text on the card was changed. What I don't understand, and don't agree with, is why the entire business of a time counter was added.

our actions (for at least the last 6 years) support a consistent policy of using the B&R list to address power-level while reserving errata to address confusion

If you read the card itself, it seems perfectly clear that Twiddle should result in a timewalk when the card is in play. The card itself mentions nothing about a time counter. And someone just reading the card before seeing any errata would assume Twiddle would work to give you a free turn.

In other words, Randy, it does not feel like you are actually reverting to how the card per se is worded. Rather, it feels like you are changing the wording to be something which is neither the current errata nor what the text of the card would lead its reader to believe.

I think the phrase "to untap it, you must skip a turn" is straight-forward enough (in English) that the time counter stuff is called for.

I think this phrase clearly refers to untapping it outside of a normal untap step. Further, if you look at Mana Vault, it has a similar wording. In fact, many cards which do not untap in the untap step are worded as such. Therefore, by this logic, Mana Vault and many other cards shouldn't be able to untap without having their actuall costs paid -- Voltaic Key on Mana Vault shouldn't work. However, to me at least, it really feels as though the entire matter of time counters is contrived to fix power levels -- exactly what you said errata shouldn't do.

Further, may I ask if the purging of cards which differ from their actual wording will end here? What about Great Whale and Priest of Gix? These cards were clearly errata'd for power reasons. Will they be restored to their actual wording, or will their power-altering errata stand?

Thank you

[Moxlotus]

Randy, I thank you for taking the time to respond to the TMD community.

However, if it wasn't for this article, your words would have more impact:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/feature/133

For the most part, such combos are at the core of what we, as Magic players, should be trying to find. What fun would it be to play every card the way the R&D team envisioned? We should be trying to break things! Some of the most interesting decks use cards in ways that others--even people here at WotC--never envisioned. I assure you that Squee, Goblin Nabob was not meant to be part of an abusive card-drawing engine, and that Squirrel Nest was not meant the namesake of a turn-three kill, but once players get their hands on the cards, crazy things happen. That's what makes Magic cool.

The flipside of breaking things is that sometimes real damage is done. Tournaments suffer when combos start getting way out of whack, and at that point we have to step in and change things. Sometimes a card gets restricted or banned, and sometimes errata is issued. Neither is pretty.
 

It is quite clear that tournaments didn't suffer.  It is also quite clear from this article that you WANT us to use the cards Wizards prints in ways you didn't intend.

Issuing errata isn't even really a consideration anymore, as we feel that doing so is more damaging than it's worth. Casual players really, really hate errata. (In fact, the Casual Players Alliance was formed because of the errata issued to Waylay in August of 1999. True story.) Our policy has changed in recent years. We don't want to errata cards, and will only do so under certain circumstances. We'll issue errata on cards that work in ways that most players find confusing. We'll issue errata on cards that don't work inside the rules of the game. But we won't issue errata on cards to "correct" power levels, especially older cards that people are used to playing with. If they turn out to be problems, restrict or ban them.

The DCI will continue to watch Dragon, Trix, and Mask decks to see if they are becoming real problems, but at the time of this writing, I don't think that is the case. Yes, the way these decks play is offensive to some people, but one man's meat is another's poison.
 

I'm pretty sure it is quite clear that everybody understood the combo and it wasnt confusing.  It is much easier to understand than the Dragon combo!

So, should Phyrexian Dreadnought have some clumsy clause about turning face up jammed onto it? Some of you think so.

Should Illusions of Grandeur be made to say "If you lose control of Illusions of Grandeur, you lose 20 life?" Some of you think so.

Should Worldgorger Dragon be given the classic "if you played it from your hand" text?
 

You could easily add "Should Time Vault be errata'd to only be untapped once each turn" to that list of questions.  

You only need to worry when a card's functionality seems not to match its printed wording. 

Yes, Gorger works exactly as it should, but do the Animate spells?  There were no 187 effects in alpha so I would consider Animate spells' original intent to bring big guys into play--"comes into play" could easily be changed to "put into play" and the original intent of the card would likely be saved, at the cost of killing the combo.  Or was dragon meant to be abused as a combo?  Could you add the "if it comes into play from your hand" exactly the way Great Whale is?  I don't think Dreadnought's original intent was to find a way to bypass the additional cost--as errata from Pandemonium shows that you really want us to sacrifice 12 power worth of guys to get him into play.  I doubt DReadnought's combo with Mask is functioning the way the printed wording wanted it to.

This article is a big reason I feel betrayed.  Your actions go against some of the policies (policies isn't the right word, but I can't think of a better one) stated in this article.

[Necrologia]

I'm going to have to agree with The Atog Lord. What makes Time Vault so out of sync with it's printed wording is the addition of the time counter. I've seen countless people first read Time Vault and go, "Wow! so that's why Voltaic Key is restricted!" I don't think I've ever seen someone have trouble grasping the way Time Vault interacted with Fusillade past the first time they see it. The combination results in a card that says: Tap: deal 1 damage, and Skip your next turn: untap. It's really not that difficult to understand.

If the object of the errata was really to make the oracle match the printed wording, then get rid of the time counter clause, restrict it in Type 1, and ban it in Legacy for power reasons. The card was originally banned due to the Time Vault+Animate Artifact+Instill Energy combo correct? Hard to get more to the original intent than a combo that worked circa 1994.

One last point I'd like to make. The reason people have started fearing for their Masks, Dragons, and Animate spells, is because this really is a huge change in policy.

Sometimes in the past, a card was given errata to make it do what it was supposed to do, the card remained good enough to be played anyway, and everyone was happy. The changes to Parallax Wave, Thawing Glaciers, and Palinchron worked out like that in the long run. But what was more often the case was that cards were errataed from "This card is insane" to "This card is unplayable," which no one enjoyed. Great Whale, Karmic Guide, Waylay, Iridescent Drake, and Time Vault are among the cards relegated to the unplayable pile as a result of changed wordings.

We don't want to do that anymore. Clearly, the issuing of errata helps the greater good of that particular play environment, but it has lasting ramifications outside of it. I cannot tell you the number of emails I get from casual players asking about the interactions of some of the cards listed above, and it really sucks to have to say, "Your deck doesn't work the way you want it to because we changed the wording on that card." For players not plugged into the tournament scene, the idea of errata borders on repulsive.

Not wanting to errata cards into oblivion is something that's apparently no longer taboo. Thus people are beginning to fear for their other cards that fall into some grey areas of the rule book. Every once in a while a thread is started in the rules forum here about going infinite, typically due to dragon. Every single time people get like 5 different answers, and eventually concludes that it's up to the head judge.

For reference: here, here, and here

Some interesting quotes from those links:

There are no provisions in the rules for this kind of thing

I really hate that this isn't more clear.  I don't like rules to have to come down to opinion.

The Time Vault combo was nuked because you needed to call a judge due to the wording discrepancy. Compare that to Dragon combo. It's more difficult to understand in almost every way. Heck, the animate cards don't even have the same card type as printed anymore. It's extremely easy to say that getting infinite mana from an Animate spell was not part of it's original intention. Adding that to the fact that Dragon is far harder to understand, why shouldn't Dragon players fear for their deck?

[PucktheCat]

I'm pretty sure it is quite clear that everybody understood the combo and it wasnt confusing.  It is much easier to understand than the Dragon combo!

Worldgorger Dragon works exactly the way it seems to work to anyone who reads the printed wording (and knows the rules halfway decent). Time Vault does not. (Well, "did" not anyway.)
...
You can't really think it's good for the format when your opponent asks you what a card does and you answer "You won't believe me ... let's go ahead and call a judge."

In other words, Dragon is difficult to process because it is complicated, but Flame Vault is just an example a card that doesn't work anything like how it is written.  Those cards are definately bad for newer players, and it is WotC's judgement that the new players that will eventually find our format (over the next X years) will be helped enough by this change to make the short term frustration worth it.  It's exactly the same reasoning that was used to justify the 6th ed. rules changes, which changed the value of tons of cards in all formats.  Mirror Universe owners complained just as loudly as everyone is here, but 6-7 years later, the game is thriving because WotC of the decision not to let an archaic rules structure continue to burden the game.

If you read the card itself, it seems perfectly clear that Twiddle should result in a timewalk when the card is in play. The card itself mentions nothing about a time counter. And someone just reading the card before seeing any errata would assume Twiddle would work to give you a free turn.

In other words, Randy, it does not feel like you are actually reverting to how the card per se is worded. Rather, it feels like you are changing the wording to be something which is neither the current errata nor what the text of the card would lead its reader to believe.

Why shouldn't they make a common sense distinction between power-level errata, which is "grandfathered" into the modern game, and clairity/rules errata?  The former defies the text of the card by its very nature.  The later is intended to make a card work as closely to that text as it can within the rules.  Power errata is more akin to a banned/restricted list than it is to clairity errata.  I see no reason why a decision to continue to revise clairity/rules errata to make the game more straightforward for new players should dictate an almost entirely seperate policy concern about power level errata.

If you want to get rid of power-level errata the process should be more akin to the unrestriction process than errata revision.

[o]

If you read the card itself, it seems perfectly clear that Twiddle should result in a timewalk when the card is in play. The card itself mentions nothing about a time counter. And someone just reading the card before seeing any errata would assume Twiddle would work to give you a free turn.

In other words, Randy, it does not feel like you are actually reverting to how the card per se is worded. Rather, it feels like you are changing the wording to be something which is neither the current errata nor what the text of the card would lead its reader to believe.

I agree with this sentiment exactly.  Where is the consistency in this interpretation of the card?

Look at a beta Mana Vault for example:
"Mana Vault doesn't untap normally during untap phase; to untap it, you must pay 4 mana.

Compare to a beta Time Vault:
"Time Vault doesn't untap normally during untap phase; to untap it, you must skip a turn."

Yet, for some reason I have always been able to use a Voltaic Key to untap my Mana Vault but not my Time Vault.  The two cards have nearly identical printed text, and yet errata determines that Richard Garfield was trying to say that you can untap a Mana Vault with a twiddle and not a Time Vault.

[roberts91rom]

All arguements that Wizards has put out to explain the change in Time Vault is in my opinion complete bull. I agree that TV did not work as originally intended with the old errata. Now, Wizards made people lose hundreds of dollars and they STILL haven't fixed Time Vault. People keep bringing up Gorger as a threat for the "Errata". The dragon won't get the errata, the animate spells will. The problem now is that whenever a new card has a good interaction with cards from ABU, people will not buy into it. This is a major blow to the vintage community, as combo seems to be getting axed. Many cards do not work as they are supposed to. If you guys expect me to swallow all this crap about "caring how cards work", I excpect to see a full list of all 10,000+ cards in Magic with either the words, "Works as intended" or "Getting an Errata, changes coming soon". I also don't believe that load of crap about "It wasn't a problem so we didn't fix it in Guildpact." You KNEW that people were going to stock up on Time Vaults. Yet you let this go without a warning. You could have EASILY done an article or even a God damn "Ask Wizards" column stating that: "We are going to change Time Vault and give it an Errata. This combo will no longer be in effect as of either (insert Guildpact release) or (insert Dissension release). You Allowed people to stock up on Vaults, didn't temporarily ban it until proper wording was released, and didn't tell anyone that you were going to change the wording on the card. This is despicable, and it is the equivalent of releasing a card that costs 0, says "Target player wins the game" and then letting the card roam freely for a year until you secretely ban it.

I also agree that the whole Time Counter clause is stupid. Change Mana Vault to have a special counter. While your at it, give Brass Man one also. Hell, give that whole set of cards that untap during the upkeep a special counter. This is an example of WotC manipulating it's power over the cards. This has nothing to do with the original card, nor will it spawn a deck using 20xTwiddle effects and Time Vault. Stop feeding us this crap.

I do not own any Time Vaults, nor have I ever. However, maybe you can tell me how many Time Vaults were sitting in the binders of WotC employees? Then tell me how many you had Randy, because it must be more than just 1.

[PucktheCat]

Richard Garfield was trying to say that you can untap a Mana Vault with a twiddle and not a Time Vault.

"Richard Garfield was trying to say" isn't what this revision is about.  Although Gottlieb used the word "intent," it is pretty clear that he isn't talking about any individual's intent but rather the intent that seems apparent from the text of the card.  A lawyer might call this "textualism." 

The time counter, to my mind, is an entirely seperate issue from this.  If we want to peition WotC to remove all the power level errata that accumulated before their decision to stop issuing it, we should do that.  But the fact that they have a policy of trying to make the game easier for new players to understand shouldn't mean that 10 year old power level decisions should be overturned.  That, to my mind, is the definition of "a petty consistency."

I excpect to see a full list of all 10,000+ cards in Magic with either the words, "Works as intended" or "Getting an Errata, changes coming soon"

I think that is Gottlieb's job.  Maybe that explains why he didn't catch the Time Vault fix as quickly as he would have like.

[roberts91rom]

All arguements that Wizards has put out to explain the change in Time Vault is in my opinion complete bull. I agree that TV did not work as originally intended with the old errata. Now, Wizards made people lose hundreds of dollars and they STILL haven't fixed Time Vault. People keep bringing up Gorger as a threat for the "Errata". The dragon won't get the errata, the animate spells will. The problem now is that whenever a new card has a good interaction with cards from ABU, people will not buy into it. This is a major blow to the vintage community, as combo seems to be getting axed. Many cards do not work as they are supposed to. If you guys expect me to swallow all this crap about "caring how cards work", I expect to see a full list of all 10,000+ cards in Magic with either the words, "Works as intended" or "Getting an Errata, changes coming soon". I also don't believe that load of crap about "It wasn't a problem so we didn't fix it in Guildpact." You KNEW that people were going to stock up on Time Vaults. Yet you let this go without a warning. You could have EASILY done an article or even a God damn "Ask Wizards" column stating that: "We are going to change Time Vault and give it an Errata. This combo will no longer be in effect as of either (insert Guildpact release) or (insert Dissension release). You Allowed people to stock up on Vaults, didn't temporarily ban it until proper wording was released, and didn't tell anyone that you were going to change the wording on the card. This is despicable, and it is the equivalent of releasing a card that costs 0, says "Target player wins the game" and then letting the card roam freely for a year until you secretely ban it.

I still can't think of a reason for not telling players that Time Vault was going to be changed. I can understand that maybe everybody simultaneously went on a month-long alcohol binge. Then maybe you forgot until a major vintage tournament. But at that point you should have realized that Time Vault was going to be a BIG problem. The only way I can see WotC making it up to the players is to do a cash-for cards trade giving everybody $200 US for their Time Vaults. Other then that, I think Vintage players will be pisssed for a VERY long time. Way to lose our trust WotC.

[LotusHead]

First of all, Thanks to Randy Beuhler for taking the time to talk to TMD.

I think the phrase "to untap it, you must skip a turn" is straight-forward enough (in English) that the time counter stuff is called for.

I think this phrase clearly refers to untapping it outside of a normal untap step. Further, if you look at Mana Vault, it has a similar wording. In fact, many cards which do not untap in the untap step are worded as such. Therefore, by this logic, Mana Vault and many other cards shouldn't be able to untap without having their actuall costs paid -- Voltaic Key on Mana Vault shouldn't work. However, to me at least, it really feels as though the entire matter of time counters is contrived to fix power levels -- exactly what you said errata shouldn't do.

I readily accepted Time Vault's "Time Counter Erratta", which I assumbed to make the card "work" the way it was supposed to, and not be "abusable" by, say, Twiddle.  Twiddle would get around the "Cost" of untapping Time Vault to gain the "benefit" of Time Vault withouth paying the "cost" of skipping a turn.  This errata made the card "Not Banned" which was good.  

This additional, barely anounced errata came out of nowhere and does affect T1.  My next tourney is Sunday the 23rd. Flame Fusilade and Lodestone Myr are involved. So is SmokeStack.  The option of untapping my Time Vault at the end of my opponent's turn will be gone the next day.

Thank you again for responding to TMD.

[Tin_Mox5831]

Here's the thing:

I didn't buy Vaults, so I'm clearly not sore and arguing over the simple matter of money. Also, I never switched to the combo in my BMG deck, so I'm clearly not arguing for the simple sake of my deck's playability. The reason I'm upset is because the excuses given to us to explain this move can all be completely unraveled by reading past articles/posts by the same people delivering the company line to us. I would rather have someone dislike me/disrespect me to my face than have someone feign friendliness and be that way deep down. The sad, sad parallel that I'm seeing is between Wizards and our current leaders of state. When the people want to know what's going on and why, a representative comes out and gives us the "explanation" which is really just spin wrapped in blatant bullshit, encased in a few half-truths. We can sit here all day showing quotes from all these same people that completely contradict what they're trying to force-feed us. I know that the current explanations are bullshit, and just like the current government, all I really want is the plain truth from them. It seems like we can't get that from either of these parties, so I'll just save my trust for the next regime of each one. It's lost, and it can't be recovered without coming clean. I'm afraid to buy any obscure A/B/U/AN/AQ/LG card due to this move, and that's not right. After all, we should have the freedom to live and game without fear. If we can't do that, then the terrorists have won! 

Later,
Dave

[Methuselahn]

The person that benefits from this errata is the person who does not currently play Eternal formats, but might someday in the future. Think about the next ten years of Magic ... future players are going to discover Legacy and Vintage all the time and when they do, if they discover a bunch of crazy rulings that don't make any sense to them, they're more likely to walk away. If, on the other hand, they can look at the cards and understand what they do, the format will be perceived as much more accessible. In other words, we think synching up the wording of Time Vault with the printed wording of Time Vault is good for the long-term health and growth of Eternal formats. I will grant you that it is bad for you guys in the short term. But I honestly believe the short-term pain is justified by the improved happiness of future generations of players. You can't really think it's good for the format when your opponent asks you what a card does and you answer "You won't believe me ... let's go ahead and call a judge."

Randy

Alright, I started to buy your explanation until I read what I have bold-texted above.  

Future players will not be turned away from Eternal because of errata.  Get real.  People will turn away because of the ludicrous costs of the cards needed to play sanctioned play.  And sanctioned play is what we have to talk about because your company does not condone proxies.  People will turn away from Vintage because there are no sanctioned tournaments.  People will turn away from Vintage because the format is inherently broken.  People will turn away from Eternal because of Maro making quotes like "Vintage can handle it."  People will turn away from Magic because the people who make the rules decide to change them apparently at their own whim.

You speak of the "health of the format."  I have a hard time believing you know what is best for this format.   Your company goes back on the precedents for setting errata, but adheres to the Reserved list.  The Reserved list is the cancer that is holding back Eternal formats from truly growing.  10 years down the road?  How is the Reserved list going to affect Vintage then?  I'm guessing it won't make the format healthier because of the reduced cost of cards.  The health of the format is directly tied to the secondary market and your company openly ignores the secondary market.  10 years down the road?  HA! there is no future Vintage generation.  It is the current generation that holds all the resources.  In 10 years down the road, the prices will be far, far too high for a newcomer to want set foot in the formats.  

I also want to vomit because these notions of 10 years down the road and 'future happiness' completely rely on proxied tournaments sustaining the health of the format, something that you should be opposed to, yet seem to endorse when it's convienient.  

Understanding the Flame Vault combo is was a very small growing pain to understanding the heart of the Eternal Formats. New players do not come into the format and spend thousands of dollars, pick up Power and then (Time Vaults) only to be dissuaded from the format because they don't want to do a litte research.  Understanding how to play these formats is by far much more difficult than understanding a simple 2 card combo.

Oh, and to top it off, this non-degenerate combo gets nerfed while Tinker and Will, both one card combos, still run rampant and define the Vintage format entirely. 

Basically, you are fixing a problem that doesn't exist in a format that is and will always be broken.

[dicemanx]

The hypocrisy is astounding.

They tell us that cards are ideally supposed to match the written text as closely as possible. And yet this is not the actual case on cards like Time Vault or Mana Vault (charge counters? untapping only once during upkeep?).

And why not? Because of power reasons.

And yet they tell us that cards don't receive errata because of power reasons.

So.what.the.fuck.
 
Also, the idea of not being able to pay with something you don't have is a lame attempt at deflection of the issue. You want to solve this issue? Move the cost (sacrificing the turn) before the colon to an effect after the colon. Just like Meditate or Chronatog. Gee, that was tough.
 

[PucktheCat]

And yet they tell us that cards don't receive errata because of power reasons.

I don't think they have ever denied that cards received errata for power reasons for years and years.  They just don't do it any more.  But the policy has never been that they would undo all the power level errata, just that they wouldn't make any more.  Undoing all the power level errata would be a process on the same order as deconstructing the restricted list and rebuilding it from the ground up.

Priest of Gix was clearly errataed because of power.  No one disputes that that card doesn't work the way it says it should.  Barring that clear exception, which can and should be evaluated on its own merits, WotC's policy is clear and coherent.  Cards that don't do what they say they do are bad for the game.  Getting rid of them (by not printing them and by fixing old ones) is good for the game.

Future players will not be turned away from Eternal because of errata.  Get real.

If you don't think that shit turns players away from T1, and from Magic in general, you need to "get real."  The turn-off effect was the reason they stopped power-level errata in the first place.

[o]

Future players will not be turned away from Eternal because of errata.  Get real.

If you don't think that shit turns players away from T1, and from Magic in general, you need to "get real."  The turn-off effect was the reason they stopped power-level errata in the first place.

No you're absolutely wrong there.  Casual players hate errata because they want a card to do what it says when they played it.  Errata does turn players away from Magic in general.

However, a player who would start playing tournament-level Eternal is not going to be bothered to remember a few important cards that work in odd ways.  Knowing the popular card interactions and rules is part of any format, from Vintage, to Extended, to Block Constructed.  The average tournament player couldn't care less about errata.

[Methuselahn]

Future players will not be turned away from Eternal because of errata.  Get real.

If you don't think that shit turns players away from T1, and from Magic in general, you need to "get real."  The turn-off effect was the reason they stopped power-level errata in the first place.

o restates what I have said, but that statement that I made could really be read as:

"Future players will not be turned away from Eternal because of errata. (They will first be turned away from all these other reasons that I list, not ~this~ absurd reasoning. Learning the errata is trivial)  Get real."

[PucktheCat]

Say what you want, but learning errata is not trivial.  It seems trivial to us because we are well grounded in the fundamentals of the game and learn things incrementally.

Casual players hate errata because they want a card to do what it says when they played it.  Errata does turn players away from Magic in general.

Exactly.  The only thing I would add is that a significant portion of Vintage players are "casual players."

[the19inchgecko]

I have read many threads on this topic one many different forums and I do not think it is solely Wizards fault.  Personally I think that Starcity Games bought time vaults for more then they have before and got a lot of them and then a month ago when Wizards was going to make the formal announcement SCG got greedy and paid off Wizards to delay the announcement so they could get rid of their excess supply of Time Vaults at a much higher price.  Because face it Wizards and Starcity are both businesses and they will do whatever they can to make an extra buck off us consumers, especially starcity games.

[Methuselahn]

Say what you want, but learning errata is not trivial.  It seems trivial to us because we are well grounded in the fundamentals of the game and learn things incrementally.

yeah, umm. no.  Magic is a game of meritocracy.

Let's say you own no power cards, no duals, no vintage cards whatsoever.  At this point, you've seen people play Vintage and are interested in it.  What is the larger obstacle to joining in on the fun?  Acquiring these cards or figuring out how Time Vault works??

[PucktheCat]

I owned no Vintage cards not too long ago, and I now play Gifts in tournaments regularly.  CCGs are addictive - once people decide they want to play the usually don't go away.  But that's beside the point.  There is no reason not to elminate a small problem just because there is a larger more intractable problem.

[Godder]

If the object of the errata was really to make the oracle match the printed wording, then get rid of the time counter clause, restrict it in Type 1, and ban it in Legacy for power reasons.

Personally, I'd prefer to see that, since it would eliminate the complaints - the card would do what it says it does, and that would be that.

One last point I'd like to make. The reason people have started fearing for their Masks, Dragons, and Animate spells, is because this really is a huge change in policy.

Unlike Time Vault and its Time Counters, Animate Enchantments do roughly what they say they do. The interaction with WGD is unfortunate, but I don't see any other parallels here. Illusionary Mask also does roughly what it says it does - Mask Counters are there to detect/prevent cheating, not to change the card's intent. In casual settings, not knowing about Mask counters won't change the card that much. The errata in these cases were issued for templating reasons, and are unlikely to attract further attention.

[Matt]

Saga rotated out of Extended. I might just have to go buy Priest of Gix and those cards, because if Wizards is serious about cards' Oracle wordings matching their text, they have no reason not to revert the "from your hand" errata, which is clearly for power reasons. And with these cards no longer in any sanctioned format, they might well say "Eternal can handle it" and let the Saga demons back into the world.

[Prometheon]

I put this in the other thread too.

I think the best possible wording that would keep it in line with the original 'intent' (and nerfed it) would have been this:

Time Vault    2
Artifact
Time Vault comes into play tapped.
If Time Vault would untap, instead it doesn't unless you skip your next turn.
Tap: Take another turn.

None of this 'time counter' or 'only during your upkeep' bullshit. The current oracle wording seems very very heavy with unneccesary text. My version seems clean, simple, and very difficult to abuse.

[Godder]

Saga rotated out of Extended. I might just have to go buy Priest of Gix and those cards, because if Wizards is serious about cards' Oracle wordings matching their text, they have no reason not to revert the "from your hand" errata, which is clearly for power reasons. And with these cards no longer in any sanctioned format, they might well say "Eternal can handle it" and let the Saga demons back into the world.

Conceivably that would now be safe, since understanding of combo, engines and acceleration (and thus, appropriate bannings) has improved substantially since the days of Urza's Block being printed. If any of them caused serious problems, they could be banned in Legacy, but I doubt that it would be an issue any more.

That said, an argument could be made that while errata was issued for power reasons back in the day, understanding of design has improved substantially, and thus, certain coming-into-play effects should only happen if they are played from hand, so errata to that effect is just updating the cards with modern templating.

[Glix]

I think that Prometheon's version of the card is most definitly the best I have seen.

Time Vault as a card has, imo, always been a mistake and regarded as such.  It should have been fixed with Prometheon's errata long ago.  However, it wasn't.  I do believe it needs to be errataed now, though, before it is allowed to carry on any longer.

When I first took a time vault deck to TMD, about half of my opponants did not know what Time Vault was.  One player, at least, read it, look quizickly at it, and then left it be, not realizing what it really did.  A few turns later, when fussilad came rolling along, and I cast it, he once agian let it resolve.  I then pronounced him dead, and he were alarmed and called a judge, who explained the complicated errat which made the card quite different from how it read.  Needless to say, this particular player was disgruntled.  At my local card shop, this happened to a much lager degree to a point where no one (there aren't really any competent, tourament players) understood it, and sever labeled me as a cheater (I later showed them the errata). 

Needless to say, for players who don't look on TMD every day, this combo doesn't exist.  As the card it writen, it shouldn't.  It was by a fluke that it occured in the first place.

In my opinion, erratas really occur because of two reasons:  To clear up rules or to save the game.

This is a case of clearing up rules.  Many point to the orignal erata of Time Vault, but remember that that was given because, had it not, time vault would have single handedly destroyed the game (back then).  Urza's block experienced similare errataing.

This issue was obviously caused by the wording of text when the game began, which has drastically changed, causing necessity for errata so the game may function.  Only this particular clean up has left splash back.

I would encourage furthure research to be done (this combo was blatently obvious to anyone who had seen hyper mud, it shouldn't have been to hard to discover).  When erratas effect the tourament scene, it is an unavoidable drawback.  However, had Time Vault been unplayed, would anyone have cared?

The fact of the matter is the players are not upset about the game state, but rather the sanctatiy of their collections.  They assumed that making an investment would pay off.  However, unfortunatly, this is a collectable card game, and just as one may collect stocks, cards can gain in value, but also loose value.  It is a risk one must be willing to take.  What if you purchased a stax deck and a set came out that neutered it with new cards?  Your deck would decline in value.  I believe that the concern here is the artifciality of this decline.  However, I personally believe that Wizards has the player's best intrest in mind, as it is their best intrest.

What I find amusing is how players are enraged about this change that alters the tourament scene in a negative manner, but I would bet that if Wizards had the orracle as it will be, and changed it to how it has been players would be very happy.  One must admit that in this case, economics are the direct and primary concern of players.  Yes, it does suck, however, for the sake of Magic in the long run, these changes must occure, imo.

Wizards would not aribtrarilly destroy cards.  They would not decree anything like "Black Lotus now costs 3 mana, sorry folks!"  They are trying to make the game better as a whole, and many of you do not see that.  Honestly, most of the cards that we have work essentially the way they are worded.  Ancestral Recall draws three cards, Mana Drain counters and gives you mana.  Those cards are safe.  Time Vault can untap infinitly for no apparent reason... where'd that come from?  An obsolete errata that has existed for too long.

These are unfortunate circumstances, and economic pain will be delt.  However, in the long run, players new to vintage will not have to have a manuscript of what every card actually does, and can simply read the card.  Time Vault now can be done as such (or at least with Prometheon's errata, the best so far).  Before, it did strange things fo reasons that I would be none of you can really explain.

Wizards has fixed one of its own mistakes on fixing a mistake.  That is progress, imo.  I would hope, however, that Wizards would consider the secondary market a bit more when making such sweeping judgements, and perhaps maybe do a tiney bit of research on vintage cards.

Oh, and I would like to thank Randy sincerly on replying to this comunitys concerns, and for giving intelligent arguments as to why this action is being carried out.

[Gabethebabe]

The card was broken, so they fixed it.

What´s the problem? Why are you all whining so much? Is it just because you like to whine?

-You´re whining because the combo is dead? Gifs is not going to die, it´s just going back to where it was before they printed Flame Fusillade. Other decks have gotten the axe before, generally by restricting cards (which is another way of fixing things) there is nothing special or new about this.

- You´re whining because your Time Vaults have decreased in value? Yeah, I haven´t heard the people complain about the THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS that their collection has increased in value the last years. So this time you lose out a bit. Take it like a man.

-You´re whing because WotC has the power to make decisions that affect your game? Dude, it has been like that ever since they invented the game. if you don´t like it, feel free to quit.

[Tin_Mox5831]

You're right to that extent, but there is a right way and a wrong way to do things. That's the way everything in life is. Everytime you make a decision, you arrive at a crossroad. You can either explain your intent clearly and be truthful in what you're saying or doing, or you can be underhanded and make excuses for that decision. They took the latter road in this case, that's all I said. I didn't lose money on this change, nor did I have to change my deck. I just feel that if I give my money to these people, ultimately putting their kids through college, paying their mortgage, etc by proxy, I at least deserve the truth: Cut and dry. If that simple courtesy can't be given, why should they get my money? That's all I said.

Later,
Dave

[roberts91rom]

Everybody who is sticking up for WotC is yet to answer my VERY simple question.



IF WIZARDS OF THE COAST KNEW THAT THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE TIME VAULT BACK WHEN RAVNICA WAS RELEASED, WHY DID THEY NOT TELL ANYBODY? WHY DID THEY ALLOW PLAYERS TO STOCK UP ON TIME VAULTS BEFORE ANNOUNCING ITS CHANGE? THEY CLAIM THEY KNEW THE CARD WOULD BE CHANGED BACK BEFORE RAVNICA!



THAT is the reason players are pissed. Stop bringing up bullshit about "ZOMG, stop complaining for losing money you greedy bastards." It is a God damn TRUST ISSUE. I know now that after this crap I'm never buying into "Coincidental interactactions with older cards." This has nothing to do with players losing hundreds of dollars, its about the fear that they will lose THOUSANDS if this crap happens again. It looks like you people are letting WotC manipulate you, and it's pretty sad.

"We care about what Garfield was thinking about over ten years ago all of the sudden for no apparent reason. We realized that we need to change Time Vault and other old untapping cards for no apparent reason. Despite our claim of consistancy, and the fact that TV and MV are worded exactly the same, we see no reason not to word them differently. Sure we just lost the trust of any Vintage player with a decent collection, but $&#* them. Our secretive ways will not be known to the world."

                                                                                                                                 -Generic bitch who helped scam Vintage

[Matt]

The trust of the vintage community and 50 cents will buy you a phone call.

[diopter]

Magic is first and foremost, a game. When cards don't work or don't fit the purpose that they're supposed to serve, then they should be fixed. My best interpretation of the in-game purpose of Time Vault is that it you pay a turn, storing it into Time Vault so you can use it later. The bases for my interpretation is the name of the card, and the original wording (the text "to untap it, you must skip a turn" and then the tap ability being "take an additional turn"). Before the new errata, Time Vault did not do this; the previous errata allowed you to store many turns into Time Vault, which to me is just clunky.

This is, of course, only my opinion; feel free to disagree, as long as you make a strong case. If you believe that, say, that a different wording should be used because the "time counter" clause is clunky, or if you honestly think that you should be able to pay many turns, then that is fine; however, I have seen some weak arguments in this thread. Some have argued that "skipping a turn should have been moved from cost to ability" which, to me, make the card even clunkier, because you aren't actually *paying* a turn.

As for the people who are upset about the fact that WotC delayed the errata without telling people beforehand that errata was impending, my response is this: why should they have? WotC has NO obligation to the secondary market, whatsoever. People on this board cite the Reserved List a lot as the reason that WotC has a duty to protect the value of cards. However, let's not forget that WotC created the Reserved List out of their own volition, and promised us that there would be no reprints from that list out of their own volition. If they broke this promise, then there would be due cause to mistrust them. However, they have never promised that they would inform us of impending errata.

To head off any arguments that might come regarding their stance on power-level errata, I will say this. They have given us their stance that they would try to avoid issuing errata due to power-level reasons, and as a result, many players have been clamoring that they have broken their word, because of Time Vault's decrease in power level. However, I would argue that the decrease in power level is an incidental effect of the errata, and not the primary reason behind it. I don't think that anyone can honestly and objectively say that this was a power-level errata. We only need to look at the Worldgorger Dragon combo (which has existed since 2002, and has not been errata'd into obsoleteness)... one can argue that Dragon combo is just as viable as Flame Vault combo, and no one can dispute that Dragon combo is just as bogged down by errata, if not more. However, WotC's approach to Dragon was to ban it in Legacy and leave it alone in Vintage. If they had been worried about Flame Vault in either of the Eternal formats, then they could and would have taken this action.