big changes to the core set!

[Matt]

http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/27

and the explanation

http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/27a

Still reading through, will give my take when I'm done...

[Lurker101]

Looks really exciting and promising. I like the new "Silence" card and from a flavor standpoint I also like the new Efreet but I think it won't see much constructed play. I'm also looking forward to seeing what these new duel lands are like too.

[Matt]

Naming sets after years: eh, I can't really muster an opinion about this.
Naming the 2009 set after the year 2010: this seems like the most incredibly foolish decision they've made in a long time. What were they thinking? Magic is not cars, and this is NOT a standard in your industry. Whatever.

Releasing core sets every year: I am fine with this.

New cards in core sets: I hesitate on this. It could work, but it also very well could be bungled. Having to make cards simple enough for the core set ought to make spotting overpowered cards pretty easy, but...well you can't ever be sure. I have to assume that after 11th edition, they'll only be including a handful of these cards per core set.

Planeswalkers in core sets: I guess they're serious about making the game focus on planeswalkers. You know what? I'm fine with this. 'Walkers are cool, people like them, why not give it a shot? This is also my reaction to the inclusion of mythic rares. I hope these specific guys won't be continued into M11, or T2 players are going to be REALLY fucking sick of them.

All-black-bordered: Well duh, this should be so obvious that I can't believe we ever had to see white-bordered cards in the first place.

High-level tournaments with core set: I'm predicting massive failure, but I would be happy to see this not be the case.

New core set rotation schedule: Sorry but this looks like a bad idea. It's pretty counter-intuitive that core sets are treated like part of a block. It's not like you can use the core set cards in block constructed. :/

New dual lands: I'm intrigued. Could be a continuation of one of the Future Sight lands? Not Horizon Canopy or Grove of the Burnwillows, since those involve life changes, and not the hybrid Graven Cairns (plus that one's already been done). I'm guessing of the remaining two options, the Nimbus Maze cycle is more likely to be completed than River of Tears.

[The Atog Lord]

Ha! Wizards continues its pattern of never ever having Extended rotate the same way twice. For years, WotC has promised that it finally decided how Extended would rotate and that it would stick to it. And it never has. I'm not at all surprised by this, and told everyone that this would happen when they announced their previous "permanent" extended rotation policy.

Beyond that, it looks like we're back to Casting spells, not Playing them.

And overall, I think this is a solid change. I'm not one to embrace the vast majority of changes to the game (new card faces et al), but I like where they're going with this one.

[zeus-online]

I like the "new cards in core sets" thing....but the rest is Meh.

And since one of their other policies in regards to prereleases (or whatever it's called now) has shut down the local stores ability to even have on...well i guess i won't be going to the M10 edition/11th core set prerelease.

Anyway, hope the new duals are good...and i like the silence card...although it's merely a slightly worse Orim's chant.

Still not comfortable with mythic rares, although i don't really care since i only buy boosters for draft...Planeswalkers are alright, although i'm still not sure if i feel they fit in.

/Zeus

[Ulthrion]

Overall I must say that I really like these changes.

NamingI don't like the naming, but I can understand that it would be odd to have Xth edition being followed by M9. I agree with Matt that in the long run release year would have been better. Other than that, I kinda dig the expansion symbol with the original magic-style M.

Frequency & Organized Play Initially I thought we would have 100 cards with a very short shelf- and standard life, but when I thought about it, the third set of a block also has around 15 months of shelf- and standard life and it has about 60 more new cards in general. The Rotation changes for standard seem odd and a little bit like an artificial way to make the core set more relevant for standard (12 months seems an aweful short time for new cards to live in standard).

Set Content New cards in the core set are the least it needs. The only problem I forsee is with over 100 older cards in the set anyway, interest in the core edition will still be low compared to the block sets, making the new cards of the core editions possibly hard to get. Also, they initially said to have reduced set sizes because of collectibility issues, but with 100 new cards per year added, we're pretty much back on track with the original number of new cards per year. Black bordered cards seem trivial and mythics was pretty much expected anyway as it was introduced as a permanent structural change and I'm fine with that combined with the smaller set sizes. Planeswalkers are also not much of a surprise, as they've shown the intention to make them an integral part of the game, so printing them in a core set is a neccesity for that.

Some other random comments:
- Silence is awesome! It will be a staple for multiplayer combo decks. Worse than Orim's Chant in a duel, better in multiplayer as a combo protector.
- Serra Angel is back as an uncommon! I was sad when she left after 4th edition, and when I came back to magic after a hiatus, one of the biggest shocks for me was that staples like serra angel and hypnotic specter werer suddenly rare. I never really drafted, so that was no concern of mine, and those two were ways for new players to get their hands on some pretty good cards back during 4th edition. Obviously, those arguments don't hold nowadays, but it still satisfied me to see that the angel is back at uncommon. I hope that Hippie is also back at uncommon.
- Same holds for black knight. It's nice to see some loosening of the color pie to include old favorites and flavorfull cards.
- I would have hoped to see some new planeswalkers with the introduction of the new cards in the core set, but the lorwyn ones are solid. I just get fed up with Jace being the poster child and being available in seventeen different versions.
- I hope the new duals inspire some new deck types by adding some mechanism onto lands.

Overall, I think this will make for some interesting changes, and I think they will turn out for the better.

[Godder]

I was just saying tonight that playing a card gets confused with put into play because they use the same word in a different way (similar to +1/+1 counter and counter a spell) and it would be easier to get the difference across by going back to "casting" spells... Apparently someone at Wizards agrees with me!

Also, biannual = twice a year, while biennial = every two years. It's a common mistake, but one would think they could avoid it.

[Anusien]

When they introduced difficult ratings on sets, I was always worried they were going to make non-Expert level expansions.

I always wanted new cards in core sets, but now that we're doing it, I wonder if I agree.

[Ulthrion]

Naming sets after years: eh, I can't really muster an opinion about this.
Naming the 2009 set after the year 2010: this seems like the most incredibly foolish decision they've made in a long time. What were they thinking? Magic is not cars, and this is NOT a standard in your industry. Whatever.

After thinking about it some more, I can only say that I more and more agree with this. Wizards should feel confident enough to set the standard in this industry instead of following the standard of unrelated industries.

New cards in core sets: I hesitate on this. It could work, but it also very well could be bungled. Having to make cards simple enough for the core set ought to make spotting overpowered cards pretty easy, but...well you can't ever be sure. I have to assume that after 11th edition, they'll only be including a handful of these cards per core set.

I think that they have been saying a couple of times since 10th that they are comfortable with increasing the complexity levels for the core set, as they realized that many new players weren't introduced to the game throught the starter-level sets but rather with the expert level sets. That's why they felt comfortable with legendary creatures in Xth and planeswalkers in M10. If they continue this trend (not up to expert-level though) they give themselves more breathing space.

[LordHomerCat]

Wait, I must have misread the actual article.  So, Magic 2010 is coming out in 2009?  That is really stupid.

[Smmenen]

Also, biannual = twice a year, while biennial = every two years. It's a common mistake, but one would think they could avoid it.

It's not a mistake.   The word "biannual" actually has both definitions, and the intended meaning and context determines which one is operative.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/biannual
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/biannual

There was a program on NPR last year where dictionary editors discussed this word at some length. 

[Oath of Happy]

Seems like Wizards has been turning magic into Yugioh lately.  I miss the old cards that were so original, had real art on them and had card named and pictures that didn't depict exactly what the card was doing.  The names of the cards are terrible, the pictures are much worse, and all the new mechanics, plus the new border starting mirrodin suck.  From a Vintage standpoint, Wizards have been ruining the format also by making so many bombs and vintage playables.  They've taken away the originality of the format and turned it into type 2 plus the restricted list and Drain Ritual Shop or Bazaar.  Making the reprinted cards black bordered is also just another way to make the cards more sought-after.  This is just another money-maker for them.  I always thought printing a few new cards in the core sets would be nice, but I was thinking 5 or 10, just a little bonus to add to the set, but this is a bit ridiculous.  Sure, all these changes are fine for type 2 players, but this is why the old-school players have left the game and vintage is dying.

[Troy_Costisick]

This is just another money-maker for them.

Personally, I hope it makes a bucket load of money for them so we can continue to enjoy Magic for many years hence.

Peace,

-Troy

PS: The simplicity and synergy of the types of cards they want to put in the Core Sets (e.g. Silence) can only be good for the game.  I look forward to this set immensely.

[Dr. Sylvan]

Wait, I must have misread the actual article.  So, Magic 2010 is coming out in 2009?  That is really stupid.

This is not stupid. There is a reason that car companies have done this in such an absurd fashion (i.e., 2009 Toyota Corolla becoming available in US dealerships January 31, 2008). Potential customers who are unfamiliar with the product may hesitate if they think they are buying an out-of-date version. This is the problem faced by the first-time Magic buyer looking at an array of expert-level expansions with inscrutable names in some card store. With no other inputs, they might buy the cheapest one, and we can agree that Saviors of Kamigawa is a suboptimal introduction. They might also buy nothing.

"Tenth Edition" is little better, because they have no way of knowing whether that is current, even if they bother to see the Advanced label on the side. Asking a card store employee might result in Too Much Information---anything about Standard rotations is too much for someone looking at their first booster. "Magic 2010" is kinda ugly, for sure, but the name chosen must act as both a magnet for first-time eyes AND an edition-distinction so that they can update it simply AND imply current-ness even though a given box might be on shelves for months after initial production. "Magic 2010" implies:

(1) That it is the current product, because customers feel safe assuming there's no 2011 until partway through 2010;
(2) That it is a good first choice (e.g., you buy Starcraft before Starcraft: Brood War);
(3) That it has been updated recently, even after the store has had it in stock for months.

It is a good name.

PS: I also endorse the resurrection of "cast" as rules-meaningful.

PPS: I had to manually check the Reserved List in order to convince myself that Forsythe wasn't implying they are reprinting the original duals. I am now baffled how they'll make this happen. Forsythe pumps them up as "awesome"---he is not dumb, so he would not say this about Invasion tap-duals or Tempest untap-duals, which are provably not awesome. These will work every turn, but not cost life. He mentions risk-averse new players, so they will not cost discards or library removal or sacrificing permanents. WTF. Anyone have ideas?

[vartemis]

This is not stupid. There is a reason that car companies have done this in such an absurd fashion (i.e., 2009 Toyota Corolla becoming available in US dealerships January 31, 2008). Potential customers who are unfamiliar with the product may hesitate if they think they are buying an out-of-date version. This is the problem faced by the first-time Magic buyer looking at an array of expert-level expansions with inscrutable names in some card store. With no other inputs, they might buy the cheapest one, and we can agree that Saviors of Kamigawa is a suboptimal introduction. They might also buy nothing.

This also makes sense because the majority of the life of the product will be in 2010.

j

[Matt]

Also, they initially said to have reduced set sizes because of collectibility issues, but with 100 new cards per year added, we're pretty much back on track with the original number of new cards per year.

They didn't say they would be making 100 new cards every base set. Almost certainly they are just making all the simplest versions of effects, where the simplified version doesn't already exist (like Silence), just this once, and will repeat them in future editions, instead of slowly releasing them in expansion sets. This has two advantages:

1. They don't have to take up expert-level cardslots with basic-level effects. See Demystify, Prodigal Pyromancer, etc.
2. They don't have to WAIT for slots in an expert-level set to open up in order to print things they want in the basic set.

They've probably had a lot of these simplified cards in the queue for YEARS and got sick of waiting and are just going to print the lot of 'em.

Forsythe pumps them up as "awesome"---he is not dumb, so he would not say this about Invasion tap-duals or Tempest untap-duals, which are provably not awesome. These will work every turn, but not cost life. He mentions risk-averse new players, so they will not cost discards or library removal or sacrificing permanents. WTF. Anyone have ideas?

Yes.

One, complete the Nimbus Maze cycle.

Two, Rupture Spire mechanic, but not CIPT, but for only two colors. This may be too complicated though.

Three:

Fplains
Land - Forest Plains
~this~ can only be played if you control a [basic?] forest card or a [basic?] plains card.

Four:

Green Washland
Land
Tap an untapped forest you control: Add or to your mana pool.
: Add to your mana pool. Play this ability only if you control a basic Forest.

Five: Terramorphic Expanse, for only two colors, but comes into play untapped.

Six: ": Untap target Forest or Plains." (omg combo w/ wild growth!)

I could continue. In fact, I might.

[The Atog Lord]

Wow, Matt. That's a really cool list.

[Matt]

Thanks, they were all off the top of my head. #6 is my favorite.

[Troy_Costisick]

I could see the duals being something like this:

User-Friendly Land
Land
: add to your mana pool.
: add to your mana pool.
: add to your mana pool.

They're pretty close to the "Cairns" cycle of lands, but can single handedly make any basic produce mana of two types.  However it's useless for colored mana on its own.  But honestly, if the new duals are just a cycle of any of the Future Sight lands I'll be disapointed.  It's clear they want to do something different and "awesome" according to Forsythe.  None of the FS lands really impressed me.  The filter lands probably came close and we know it won't be them.

Peace,

-Troy

[wiley]

Judging by his description of marketing to cost adverse players I would think he would be fleshing out the gain lands from future sight (eg: Grove of the Burnwillows).

It was very well received by most people and I would think that they are competitive playable for non-aggro decks (or aggro decks that can circumvent the drawback).

[Nefarias]

Judging by his description of marketing to cost adverse players I would think he would be fleshing out the gain lands from future sight (eg: Grove of the Burnwillows).

It was very well received by most people and I would think that they are competitive playable for non-aggro decks (or aggro decks that can circumvent the drawback).

That seems unlikely. Newer and more casual players value life gain very highly, and giving your opponent life to them is about as bad as taking damage yourself. There are still casual players that think Swords to Plowshares is a bad card because it lets your opponent gain life.

[Yare]

PPS: I had to manually check the Reserved List in order to convince myself that Forsythe wasn't implying they are reprinting the original duals. I am now baffled how they'll make this happen. Forsythe pumps them up as "awesome"---he is not dumb, so he would not say this about Invasion tap-duals or Tempest untap-duals, which are provably not awesome. These will work every turn, but not cost life. He mentions risk-averse new players, so they will not cost discards or library removal or sacrificing permanents. WTF. Anyone have ideas?

Well, they don't involve losing life and they don't involve CIPT because that sucks. My guess is your opponent gains life or they're just the original duals only not fetchable (i.e., they don't have the basic land types).

[Troy_Costisick]

PPS: I had to manually check the Reserved List in order to convince myself that Forsythe wasn't implying they are reprinting the original duals. I am now baffled how they'll make this happen. Forsythe pumps them up as "awesome"---he is not dumb, so he would not say this about Invasion tap-duals or Tempest untap-duals, which are provably not awesome. These will work every turn, but not cost life. He mentions risk-averse new players, so they will not cost discards or library removal or sacrificing permanents. WTF. Anyone have ideas?

Well, they don't involve losing life and they don't involve CIPT because that sucks. My guess is your opponent gains life or they're just the original duals only not fetchable (i.e., they don't have the basic land types).

That might be a possibility.  I just can't believe they would print something that is strictly better than pain lands.  But maybe the game has moved on beyond them.

[zeus-online]

It probably won't matter for new players anyway, they hate having their rare card being a land. They want huge effects or impressive creatures...not lands that merely tap for mana.

Like when i started, i immediately saw that the original duals where awesome, but when i saw the price tag on them i was like "Woah, why would i ever pay that much for a LAND?".

That said, i hope it's the org. duals...but i doubt it.

/Zeus

[Anusien]

Beyond that, it looks like we're back to Casting spells, not Playing them.

That was a mistake.  We're still going to be playing spells well in 2010.

I will accept this change if we can have real-world flavor text again.

[Matt]

Well, they don't involve losing life and they don't involve CIPT because that sucks. My guess is your opponent gains life or they're just the original duals only not fetchable (i.e., they don't have the basic land types).

That would be pretty much strictly superior to a basic land, I seriously doubt they'd ever do that.

[Godder]

Well, they don't involve losing life and they don't involve CIPT because that sucks. My guess is your opponent gains life or they're just the original duals only not fetchable (i.e., they don't have the basic land types).

That would be pretty much strictly superior to a basic land, I seriously doubt they'd ever do that.

I think you could get away with it in an environment where cards negatively affecting non-basic lands are common. Extended and bigger formats have Fetchlands + real Dual Lands, so basic lands are just something you add at the end for the most part anyway.

[chrissss]

Perhaps this is the set where Tarmogoyf comes back, it would certainly increase the number of people buying boosters. I can´t remember the last time I bought anything from a core set, because most cards were bad or I had playsets from them.

[LordHomerCat]

Tarmogoyf is a design mistake.  Why would they reprint it?  It's not like they are just aching to bring back things like Skullclamp or Jitte or other flawed cards.  Why do people think Goyf should get reprinted?

[Smmenen]

My guess is because it was a card 'from the future.'   That doesn't mean it should be reprinted, but it at least gives a reason to do so.