Major Rules Changes Announced!!!

[brainiac7]

The new changes aren't perfect, but overall are going to be positive for the game. In my estimation it's better to have a game that thrives for another 10 years versus a game that is 10% more to my liking. This statement comes from a player who played only Gifts and Doomsday in Vintage, has two new casual decks he was intending to play later this month in multi-player that use not only Master Transmuter, but Research // Development as well. I made a silly deck that cascades into R//D ( which is one of my favorite cards; woe to my 2x foil japanese versions that have just reached zero playability ) that I will have to scrap.

I'll just have to find some new favorite cards and mechanics to play with. *shrug*

I really hope they end up making a new R//D that's playable. I think there should be a way of getting cards from every zone, and I'm sure WotC and most players would agree.

R.I.P.
Doomsday.dec
Gifts.dec
Master Transmuter being able to be broken
Research // Development being playable...

[Wise]

While the rule changes will pass over in discussion on time & we will become use to them, I tend to agree with FlyFlySideOfFry  on the side of the poor explination on WOTC behalf, I also dont think "makeing it easyer" or "because players didn't know the rules we got rid of them" is a decent reason, as with the chess analisis, there are alot of tricky chess moves that the common player may not know of, for example "castling" but it doesent mean that world chess organization should remove that move or rule becasue standard Tom, Dick & Harry dont know how it works and get taken off guard when an experienced player uses it, hardly. moves like that in chess & magic are what sets the Grandamaster or Pro apart from the noob or even the good player at your local shop.

I forsee this making MORE issues for casual players then anything, all the casual players I know Love magic and have been playing for YEARS but they still dont even know all the modern rules, simply because they are casual players and just well Play magic how they remeber playing it, this will certainly be interesting to discuss with them haha

[Smmenen]

The Magic player is afflicted with Chicken Little Syndrome. 

[wiley]

This little tid-bit was brought up on the mothership's forums.  I laughed audibly >.>

From 8th Edition rule changes announcement:The other area that we could have changed in this way was the combat damage step. We could have split it into two steps – one for assigning damage and one for dealing it. But we didn’t, mainly because we didn’t want to take away the phrase “damage on the stack”(Here in R&D, we’re big fans of putting damage on the stack – for some people, it’s the highlight of their entire day.)

[oneofchaos]

The Magic player is afflicted with Chicken Little Syndrome. 

WOTC is starting to remind me of the scene in The Empire Strikes Back where Vader changes the deal.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

Overall I don't think these changes will really impact gameplay all that much. Mana burn is more relevant in eternal formats, combat tricks are more relevant in every other format. Exile-zone seems pretty stupid overall. Games will be less fun, oh well we'll adapt in a few weeks. Meh Magic is still a good game. Will the sky fall as a result of this? Hell no. Will people even quit? Maybe a dozen in the entire world across all formats combined. Am I one of them? God no. Does it seem like WotC is completely losing their minds? Hell yeah. Is that why I'm concerned? Double hell yeah. All those that think I'm overreacting have likely completely missed my point.

The Magic player is afflicted with Chicken Little Syndrome. 

I think I'm missing the point of this comment. I don't see anyone suggesting that these changes will cause the end of magic. In fact they're not even a speck compared to what 6th edition brought. The fact that they're comparing it to 6th edition is actually an insult to 6th edition.

This little tid-bit was brought up on the mothership's forums.  I laughed audibly >.>

From 8th Edition rule changes announcement:The other area that we could have changed in this way was the combat damage step. We could have split it into two steps – one for assigning damage and one for dealing it. But we didn’t, mainly because we didn’t want to take away the phrase “damage on the stack”(Here in R&D, we’re big fans of putting damage on the stack – for some people, it’s the highlight of their entire day.)

An excellent example of what I was talking about. Always good for a laugh I guess.

[Nigaud]

I always saw Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh as the "starter" games to get the younger kids involved in CCGs, now it seems like Magic is becoming more and more like those games. Magic is inherently complex yes, but it's not really that hard to grasp if you really want to learn to play. Is it that the newer generations are more afraid to use their brains to rationally think out situations?

What this all boils down to is that Magic players view Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh as simpler games to get people into CCG's while Wizards sees those games as competitors to Magic.  Anything that the "simpler" games do that seem to get people to buy packs, Wizards will mimic if they think it will increase the number of packs they can sell (foils and mythic rares come to mind).

Everyone is upset because they feel like Wzards is killing Magic, but Wizards is doing exactly what they have always done: whatever it takes to sell more packs.  If Wizards believed that they could make more money tomorrow by creating "Magic 2.0" and instantly banning all existing Magic cards, they would do it.  Yes, some of the rules changes are questionable, but don't forget that Wizards believes that there are more casual players than tournament players.  There are more players that don't check the Internets for Magic-related news than there are people on TMD/SCG/etc.

Wizards wants to sell more packs, thus they are changing rules to make it more appealing to more people.  This is their business strategy.  As business strategies go, its been the most successful one.  Look at Jihad/Vampire.  They kept rotating out entire sets of cards there were no longer legal in the game.  Look at Decipher SW:CCG.  They fell into the classic power creep trap and killed themselves.  I for one am not a fan of the new combat damage rules, but I will adapt.  At a minimum, I see this as a challenge: Is there some new best deck that can take advantage of the changes?

[Diakonov]

Does it seem like WotC is completely losing their minds? Hell yeah. Is that why I'm concerned? Double hell yeah. All those that think I'm overreacting have likely completely missed my point.

I understand your point, and disagree.  I don't think WotC are "losing their minds."  Also, if that were true, how can you expect people to not interpret that as saying the sky is falling?

The mulligan rule saves time, which is sensible.  The terminology changes might be annoying, but hardly make any difference in the end.  The mana burn rule, quite frankly, doesn't affect most other formats, and although we might be pissed that it does affect us I would hardly call that decision "crazy."  It's actually quite sensible if your goal is to minimize the minutiae of rules, especially ones that generally don't matter anyway.  The token rule is basically clarification, and the deathtouch/lifelink rules make sense.  

The only thing worth debating from a "losing their minds" perspective would the damage stacking rule, since it is a fun part of the game, but they vigorously explain it is intended to simplify and add flavor.  Of course we won't be happy with that, but why does that make it a nonsensical decision?  It is simpler, and, I think most would agree, more realistic.

[Duncan]

There are more players that don't check the Internets for Magic-related news than there are people on TMD/SCG/etc.

How will those people notice the changes if they don't check the internet ?

[FAVO!!!!1]

So if I have Serum Powder in my hand and I choose to mulligan, do I have to announce whether I am using Serum Powder to mulligan?

Serum Powder does not count as a mulligan. It counts as an activated ability that can only be triggered during the mulligan stage of the game.

[oneofchaos]

There are more players that don't check the Internets for Magic-related news than there are people on TMD/SCG/etc.

How will those people notice the changes if they don't check the internet ?

Wait people don't know about the internet?  Hearsay!

[Diakonov]

So if I have Serum Powder in my hand and I choose to mulligan, do I have to announce whether I am using Serum Powder to mulligan?

Serum Powder does not count as a mulligan. It counts as an activated ability that can only be triggered during the mulligan stage of the game.

Umm...I don't think that's true.  If it were anything, it would be a replacement effect.  I think this rule needs to be clarified still.

Serum Powder:

Any time you could mulligan and Serum Powder is in your hand, you may remove all the cards in your hand from the game, then draw that many cards. (You can do this in addition to taking mulligans.)

[FAVO!!!!1]

So if I have Serum Powder in my hand and I choose to mulligan, do I have to announce whether I am using Serum Powder to mulligan?

Serum Powder does not count as a mulligan. It counts as an activated ability that can only be triggered during the mulligan stage of the game.

Umm...I don't think that's true.  If it were anything, it would be a replacement effect.

After reading the card, your probably right.

[FAVO!!!!1]

The Magic player is afflicted with Chicken Little Syndrome. 

Chicken Little Syndrome 0
Enchantment
This card does not use the stack.
As an additional cost, change target game rule.
As long as this card has been cast, this affect will effect the rest of Magic: the Gathering's existence.

"This was an open proclamation from the Magic Clan TPFTW!, short for Timmy Power For The Win!"

P.S.: Can someone merge or delete this post... Sorry, I'm use to forums that have auto merging.

[Schonkreuz]

Although I would like to post a paragraph or two about how stupid I think most of these changes are I am going to refrain, instead I'm just going to say that I slapped my forehead in confusion and that I think this isn't the same game I started playing three years ago.

Sure sure change is good, but I believe that they are eliminating things that made players better, don't dumb down the game for new players make them learn so that they can get better. I <3 you combat tricks, and you will be missed >sniffles<

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

I always saw Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh as the "starter" games to get the younger kids involved in CCGs, now it seems like Magic is becoming more and more like those games. Magic is inherently complex yes, but it's not really that hard to grasp if you really want to learn to play. Is it that the newer generations are more afraid to use their brains to rationally think out situations?

What this all boils down to is that Magic players view Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh as simpler games to get people into CCG's while Wizards sees those games as competitors to Magic.  Anything that the "simpler" games do that seem to get people to buy packs, Wizards will mimic if they think it will increase the number of packs they can sell (foils and mythic rares come to mind).

Everyone is upset because they feel like Wzards is killing Magic, but Wizards is doing exactly what they have always done: whatever it takes to sell more packs.  If Wizards believed that they could make more money tomorrow by creating "Magic 2.0" and instantly banning all existing Magic cards, they would do it.  Yes, some of the rules changes are questionable, but don't forget that Wizards believes that there are more casual players than tournament players.  There are more players that don't check the Internets for Magic-related news than there are people on TMD/SCG/etc.

Wizards wants to sell more packs, thus they are changing rules to make it more appealing to more people.  This is their business strategy.  As business strategies go, its been the most successful one.  Look at Jihad/Vampire.  They kept rotating out entire sets of cards there were no longer legal in the game.  Look at Decipher SW:CCG.  They fell into the classic power creep trap and killed themselves.  I for one am not a fan of the new combat damage rules, but I will adapt.  At a minimum, I see this as a challenge: Is there some new best deck that can take advantage of the changes?

If WotC just came out and said "look we need to appeal to retards to keep this game alive" then I'd have said OK I understand. Obviously this is the reason that they're doing these changes. What I don't like is all the bullshit they've spun around it that makes them sound like they're insane. Not to mention MTG by very design is aimed at intellectuals. As Denzel Washington said in Training Day, "this shit is chess it ain't checkers." What exactly will these new rules accomplish? Those that don't play in tournaments will continue playing with whatever rules they feel like playing, and those that already play just got a stick shoved up their ass by WotC. "We don't give a crap about people who actually play the game, we need to focus on people that hate it." Not even a single point was backed with the reason "top competative players thought it was a good idea" or "we tested with tournament goers". Not even the mulligan rule can be counted as such because it isn't a matter of opinion, just a matter of statistics on time constraints.

MTG will never out-stupid yu-gi-oh and pokemon so why drag down this game by listening to people who don't give 2 shits about the game? Are they under some sort of delusion that the table-top players are up in arms over mana burn? People that can't do basic addition and subtraction will likely either be destroyed in tournaments anyways by people with an IQ>monkey or be disqualified for any one of the other 20+ ways you need basic math to play the game. Not to mention if you don't know how the stack works you'll be raped by anyone running instants whether they run creatures to do tricks with or not. The regular stack can get infinitely more complicated than the combat damage stack, should we get rid of that? What about the individual cards (Chains of Meph comes to mind) that can make shit way more complicated than entire stacks just by themselves? WTF is the flavor behind putting cards with Flashback or stuff brought back by Will into the "Exile zone". Its not like anyone has a problem with the basic shit like keywords and making lifelink/deathtouch static. Its just shocking that they're completely remaking entire systems based on zero feedback considering how stable MTG has been. This isn't going to attract new players overall. In fact I'm sure plenty of people got into Magic in the first place by looking over somebody's shoulder and seeing some cool ass combat trick.

I mean whats next, they decide appealing to stupid people isn't enough so they make their cards out of weed so you can just smoke the crappy cards from each pack? (Not that people would complain if they did. )

Does it seem like WotC is completely losing their minds? Hell yeah. Is that why I'm concerned? Double hell yeah. All those that think I'm overreacting have likely completely missed my point.

I understand your point, and disagree.  I don't think WotC are "losing their minds."  Also, if that were true, how can you expect people to not interpret that as saying the sky is falling?

The mulligan rule saves time, which is sensible.  The terminology changes might be annoying, but hardly make any difference in the end.  The mana burn rule, quite frankly, doesn't affect most other formats, and although we might be pissed that it does affect us I would hardly call that decision "crazy."  It's actually quite sensible if your goal is to minimize the minutiae of rules, especially ones that generally don't matter anyway.  The token rule is basically clarification, and the deathtouch/lifelink rules make sense. 

The only thing worth debating from a "losing their minds" perspective would the damage stacking rule, since it is a fun part of the game, but they vigorously explain it is intended to simplify and add flavor.  Of course we won't be happy with that, but why does that make it a nonsensical decision?  It is simpler, and, I think most would agree, more realistic.

Clearly missed my point as I was sure you did. The changes themselves aren't anywhere near as significant as the subtext.

As a side note the way combat damage works now is nowhere near realistic. Stacking damage as a way of showing a creature was mortally wounded in a long-standing fight is infinitely more realistic than the new "both our guys simultaneously chop each other's heads off" system. Don't even get me started on the whole shitty action movie single-file defenders system.

The Magic player is afflicted with Chicken Little Syndrome. 

Chicken Little Syndrome 0
Enchantment
This card does not use the stack.
As an additional cost, change target game rule.
As long as this card has been cast, this affect will effect the rest of Magic: the Gathering's existence.

"This was an open proclamation from the Magic Clan TPFTW!, short for Timmy Power For The Win!"

P.S.: Can someone merge or delete this post... Sorry, I'm use to forums that have auto merging.

Nice.

Chicken Little Syndrome
Land - Sky
Haste
{Untap}: Eat target Magic the Gathering card. You may use only one sauce per turn. If that card is on the reserved list you may tap Chicken Little Syndrome.
You may play an additional land on each turn that isn't your own. (This does not allow you to play lands any time you normally couldn't.)
If this card is in the Exile zone combat damage uses the stack.
At the beginning of the end of the beginning of the end step you may drop Chicken Little Syndrome from a hight of 2 feet. If Chicken Little Syndrome touches any cards as it is falling those cards are put in the removed-from-game zone. (This does not create a zone under the rules of Magic The Gathering.)
If Chicken Little Syndrome is not in your deck at the beginning of the game you must play for ante.
Chicken Little Syndrome is not a creature.
1/1

THE SKY IS FALLING!

[Smmenen]

By Chicken Little Syndrome I didn't just mean that people think that the game is coming to an end, but by exaggerating the negative consequences of any given change by WOTC: i.e. the sky is falling. 

In my view, it is absolutely essential that the game remain easy to learn as possible.   Go has the simplest rules, yet it's one of the most complicated strategy games.   While Magic necessarily has a barrier to entry in terms of the rules, Wizards has a duty to make sure that that barrier is as low as possible.

Whenever Wizards simplifies the game, I applaud them.   My fear is not that these rules simplify the game, but by trying to be more 'intuitive' they have actually increased its complexity.

Richard Garfield put it best: the game is supposed to be simple, it's the interactions that are supposed to be complex, and that's where the interesting part of the game is supposed to come from.   That's also why I dislike the Planeswalkers.  They are too complicated, and can't be understood -- even superficially - without outside rules knowledge.   

[LotusHead]

I guess I am actually happy that the internet wasn't so prevalent when 6th edition was released. I mean, all the changes from before then to 6th were good, right?

We survived the revised Legends rule (you used to NOT be able to play legendary spells that were already in play), and so forth. And we survived the Interrupt vs Instant + Stack rules.  We will survive this.

What is WRONG with these new rules other than "But I totally understood the old rules better than my noob opponents!"

I was never comfortable with blocking with a Sakura Tribe Elder, getting my damage in, then sacing to fetch a land (or whatever it did).

It's not like Wizards overhauls the rules that often.

[thecman]

After taking a day to digest the changes I don't have any problems with the way things will work under the new rules, however I don't think that the reasons Wizards gave for some of them are very good.

Mana Burn:
"Many players can't clearly distinguish between phases and steps."  That's part of how the game works, if you want to play at a competitive level (the only place these new rules make a difference) then you have to learn how the game works.

"Its existence impacts game play in a negligible way, whereas its existence impacts card design space somewhat significantly."  If it doesn't impact game play how can it impact card design?  The biggest limitation is in designing cards that care about life totals, but burning yourself to get more of an advantage form that card is a strategic decision (after all this is a strategy game) that will be removed because of this change.

"Discovering it exists, especially via an opponent manipulating his own life total for gain, can be jarring."  This negative situation will happen exactly once while learning the game and after that knowing the rule and potential situations where it matters will allow for a greater depth in game interactions.

Combat Damage:
"For starters, "the stack" is a difficult concept, even after all these years, so it is no wonder that many players go about combat without invoking it at all."  The stack is an integral part of the game and removing it from combat doesn't change this.  In fact removing the stack from combat will likely cause more confusion because now it doesn't apply all of the time.  Normally (because of the stack) you get a chance to respond to everything your opponent does, now the same thing is true except for in combat.  How is learning the rule and the exception any less "difficult" than just learning the rule?

"The intricate system via which combat is currently handled creates many unintuitive gameplay moments."  This happens in every part of the game not just combat and is due to the nature of the stack.  How can an Oblivion Ring that's not in play permanently 'exile' something?  How come his Lightning Bolt hit me first when I 'cast' mine before him?  If the intent was to eliminate unintuitive gameplay situations then something should have been done to change how the stack works.  If the intent was to make combat intuitive then this fails because there are still situations that don't make sense.  Why is my creature still blocked when the creature blocking it isn't there any more?

One last thing:
"To figure out exactly where the problems were, we got into the mind of the casual player—not the player knee-deep in regular sanctioned play or Magic Online, but rather the one who plays our game at home, at school, or at the small local shop."  These players that play without knowing the rules will continue to play without knowing the rules, changing the rules doesn't change that.  If these players decide they want to play competitively then they have to decide to learn the rules that go along with that.  The rules should be designed for the palyers that use them not for the players that don't.

[oneofchaos]

In my view, it is absolutely essential that the game remain easy to learn as possible.

Umm..go play crazy eights? (it's simple!)

Magic had a set of rules when it began.  Those rules needed to be changed at some point(s).  The game should not be inherently simple to learn.  Look, we have NINE different card types.  We have rules for when said card types can be played.  We have a stack where abilities go, and is clearly not a mess otherwise people would not be playing.  Magic attendance at tournaments have gone up.  Compared to other TCG's magic has a typically older crowd who are capable of learning the rules.  Because of so many interactions, magic had remained a game of skill and logic.  If we wanted to make the game easier, why the hell did we just add planeswalkers and tribal cards?

edit:  The best way to encourage more people to play the game is to make it more appealing.  Nothing is appealing about a bunch of gurus teaching new kids, "back in my day you tapped a land and passed the turn, you took a damage and liked it!".  If Wizards did really care, they totally turned the game upside down for casual players.  As the tournament players, we are usually more up to snuff on the rules/interactions/etc.  This was essentially the same as pulling the floor out from underneath the casual community.  The less somebody played magic, the more this is going to screw with them.  Just like the TV switch from analog to digital, it's nice to welcome in a new era, but there are going to be plenty of people left in the dark confused and upset.

[Wise]

In my view, it is absolutely essential that the game remain easy to learn as possible.

Umm..go play crazy eights? (it's simple!)

Magic had a set of rules when it began.  Those rules needed to be changed at some point(s).  The game should not be inherently simple to learn.  Look, we have NINE different card types.  We have rules for when said card types can be played.  We have a stack where abilities go, and is clearly not a mess otherwise people would not be playing.  Magic attendance at tournaments have gone up.  Compared to other TCG's magic has a typically older crowd who are capable of learning the rules.  Because of so many interactions, magic had remained a game of skill and logic.  If we wanted to make the game easier, why the hell did we just add planeswalkers and tribal cards?

QFT


Wizards does seem contradict itself quite a bit while in one instance they add more new complex cards which interact uniquely with already printed cards, yet the rules department seems to want to dumb it down, its all so confusing,

I wonder if they have a "goal" or "target" set in mind over at the Mothership, or if each department kind of does their own thing, just as was mentioned how the R&D Team LOVES Stacking Damage, the Rules Department seems to dislike "complex" rules as such,

I suspect there may be internal struggles between the folks at WotC on their ideas and what the "flavor" of magic is

[meadbert]

So if I have Serum Powder in my hand and I choose to mulligan, do I have to announce whether I am using Serum Powder to mulligan?

Serum Powder does not count as a mulligan. It counts as an activated ability that can only be triggered during the mulligan stage of the game.

Umm...I don't think that's true.  If it were anything, it would be a replacement effect.  I think this rule needs to be clarified still.

Serum Powder:

Any time you could mulligan and Serum Powder is in your hand, you may remove all the cards in your hand from the game, then draw that many cards. (You can do this in addition to taking mulligans.)

So when I am deciding to mulligan or not I can not yet mulligan thus I cannot use Serum Powder.  Then when it comes time to Mulligan that is presumably when I would use it unless "must mulligan" is not considered to a be a subset of "could mulligan."

Then there is this issue.  Does using Serum Powder substitute for the mulligan that I must take?  If not then after using Serum Powder I must mulligan the new hand anyway regardless of how much I like it.  Presumably they will errata Serum Powder to clear this up, but it is not at all clear to me how this will work.

[oneofchaos]

QFT


Wizards does seem contradict itself quite a bit while in one instance they add more new complex cards which interact uniquely with already printed cards, yet the rules department seems to want to dumb it down, its all so confusing,

I wonder if they have a "goal" or "target" set in mind over at the Mothership, or if each department kind of does their own thing, just as was mentioned how the R&D Team LOVES Stacking Damage, the Rules Department seems to dislike "complex" rules as such,

I suspect there may be internal struggles between the folks at WotC on their ideas and what the "flavor" of magic is

Exactly.  If the game was supposed to be easier, shouldn't we have seen less cards with flash, less instants, less combat tricks?  Look at cascade, you reveal cards from the top of your library until you hit a card with CMC X-1, where X is your original spells casting cost.  You may then play it.  If you don't or if you do, take everything and randomly shuffle it to the bottom of your library.  HOW IS THAT SIMPLE?   I have been teaching new players over what cascade does.  Mechanics have not been getting more simple.

edit:  Just because the rules are getting easier to understand, does not mean magic is.  It seems that mechanics are getting hard to comprehend, new card types are confusing with new interactions etc, but our rules are getting easier.  It seems status quo on how hard it is to learn how to play for the first time.

[yespuhyren]

Hurray for Su-Chi coming back to being even better than before for workshop aggro!

[patat]

So if I have Serum Powder in my hand and I choose to mulligan, do I have to announce whether I am using Serum Powder to mulligan?

Serum Powder does not count as a mulligan. It counts as an activated ability that can only be triggered during the mulligan stage of the game.

Umm...I don't think that's true.  If it were anything, it would be a replacement effect.  I think this rule needs to be clarified still.

Serum Powder:

Any time you could mulligan and Serum Powder is in your hand, you may remove all the cards in your hand from the game, then draw that many cards. (You can do this in addition to taking mulligans.)

So when I am deciding to mulligan or not I can not yet mulligan thus I cannot use Serum Powder.  Then when it comes time to Mulligan that is presumably when I would use it unless "must mulligan" is not considered to a be a subset of "could mulligan."

Then there is this issue.  Does using Serum Powder substitute for the mulligan that I must take?  If not then after using Serum Powder I must mulligan the new hand anyway regardless of how much I like it.  Presumably they will errata Serum Powder to clear this up, but it is not at all clear to me how this will work.

I don't think this is quite as complex as people are making it seem.  Serum powder can be used any time you could take a mulligan.  At the beginning of the game, each player draws seven cards.  At that point, each player, starting with the one who will take the first turn announces whether or not they would like to take a mulligan.  At that point, they 'could' mulligan.  The card does not ask whether or not they are going to mulligan, but if the opportunity is present.  There is also still an order to how mulligans are announced, and though this may be an assumption, I assume that the idea of any time a player could take a mulligan will be effectively changed to any time a player could announce taking a mulligan.


And I also want to say I feel that Steve's point is being taken incorrectly.  Simplifying the rules does not make the game as a whole less complex.  In fact, it may eventually make it more complex, because the interactions between the nine different card types, planeswalkers, and tribal cards will be more specific in how they can be applied to each gamestate. 

By simplifying the rules and how they are enacted, you make the concept of the game much easier to learn.  This is key in getting new players to play, and stay, in this game.  If MtG is to keep growing, then it is necessary that more and more new players be added to the pool of people who buy packs, and continue to buy packs. 

When teaching your new friend that when he is blocking a benalish hero with his lanowar elf (oldschool, i know =P ), the fact that they both should die makes sense.  What doesn't make sense is when your dead elf then taps for 1 mana, allowing you to cast giant growth on himself, and he somehow survives.  Understanding the latter is much harder to a new player.  However, even with the simpler rules, card interactions do not cease to create tricks you can use to your advantage.  I'm sorry if your mogg fanatics just went down in value because they're less tricky, but I'm sure the new rules will allow for much more interesting tactics.  In fact, attacking into a mogg fanatic isn't quite as intimidating any more, which is nice for a lot of different decks.

So, they're making magic easier for the newer players to understand.  That doesn't mean they're making it any simpler for the people making broken plays like we do.  It's not like you're the only one who these rules affect.  The person right across from you is forced to think about the same things in the same manner.  All they did to us vintage players is tweak the way we think a tad.  This is in no way simplifying the game at the level vintage players see it.

[xycsoscyx]

The only thing that I especially don't like (I dislike no mana burn, but can live with it), is that now if your attacking creature has multiple blockers, you have to line them up and deal leathal damage to one before moving on to the next.  That doesn't make much sense, if Batman is attacking a group of henchmen, he doesn't line them up and finish knocking one down before moving on to the next.  He throws a punch at one, a kick at another, an elbow to the right, then back with a headbutt to the first guy again!

Consider the situation where I have a 6/6, and my opponent blocks with 3 4/4's (fearing what's in my hand, which happens to be a Pyroclasm).  My best bet is to deal 2 damage to each blocker, then during my post combat main phase cast the Pyroclasm and wipe out my opponents creatures.  With the new rules, I have deal 4 damage to the first creature, 2 to the second, then none to the third.  I don't really understand why they would implement it like this (creatures with Deathtouch are the only thing able to split damage as desired according to the article).  It doesn't make sense in any way, other than trying to mimic Trample and honestly complicate damage assignment.

[DubDub]

I don't think this is quite as complex as people are making it seem.

Looks like you agree with the most logical way to order pre-game mulligans, as I had presented it on page three:

1. Person on the play resolves any/all Serum Powder effects, then announces keep or mulligan.  Proceed to step 2.
2. 'Next' player resolves any/all Serum Powder effects, then announces.  Repeat this step until all players have made an announcement, then proceed to step 3.
3. If a non-zero number of players announced mulligan, then all players who announced mulligan resolve that choice and proceed to step 4.  Otherwise proceed to step 6.
4. 'First' person to have taken a mulligan in the last round resolves any/all Serum Powder effects, then makes their announcement for this round.  Proceed to step 5.
5. 'Next' person to have taken a mulligan in the last round resolves any/all Serum Powder effects, then makes their announcement for this round.  Repeat this step until all players who took a mulligan last round have made an announcement then proceed to step 3.
6.  BEGIN.

So why is it important to make sure the intuition of players who love, love, love Magic but don't have the need or desire to devote themselves to learning all the ins and outs of the rules is most often correct? Aren't they content playing with their own messy version of the rules? They are—up to a point, and that point is when they leave their circles and joins the larger, more rules-compliant crowd. Maybe it happens at Friday Night Magic, or a Prerelease, or a convention. Maybe new players enter the group. However it happens, we want to make sure those players don't find out they've been doing it all wrong, find out the game doesn't make as much sense as they thought, find out that they don't like the way the rules really work.

I have an alternative: make the best game you can, and accept whatever reception it gets.  Pandering to the subpopulation of players who are least invested in the game seems like a very bad decision.

1) Simultaneous Mulligans - I think this is a good idea.  Practicality is king.
2) Terminology Changes - I can live with this, provided: Burning Wish gets unrestricted, and a set of 'Exile'-Wishes are printed.
3) Mana Pools and Mana Burn - I think these are unnecessary and unfortunate changes.  I would not make them.  I don't think the design space opened up by referencing life totals is worth it.  I don't think changing when mana pools empty makes it any more intuitive and so I would have by default not made a change.
4) Token Ownership - Completely 100% irrelevant to me.
5) Combat Damage No Longer Uses the Stack - This is a huge mistake.  Combat is now inconsistent with the rest of the game.  "The stack is hard" is an argument (an insufficient one), but "sometimes we use the stack and sometimes we don't" is even worse.  Not to mention reducing player control over combat (assignment of damage).
6) Deathtouch - Completely 100% irrelevant to me.
7) Lifelink - Completely 100% irrelevant to me.

Can't wait for the 'Combat Damage now uses the stack' announcement in 10 years!

[[supa_t(im)]]

Whenever Wizards simplifies the game, I applaud them.   My fear is not that these rules simplify the game, but by trying to be more 'intuitive' they have actually increased its complexity.

I completely agree here.

My problem with these new rules changes is that they are made under the presumption that they are making things easier.  I just cannot see how this is true.  Before we had The Stack that governed every part of the game.  Once you knew how the stack worked you knew how the game worked.  Anybody understands a "stack" because it is a tangible thing we can interact with in real life (what goes on top last comes off the top first).  With the new combat rules the game is disjointed and I feel ultimately MORE complex because of it.  They've failed to achieve their goal and ruined a great strategic part of the game.

However, besides the mana burn change I really don't feel the new rules will have a huge impact on Vintage.

[Moxlotus]

The only thing I dislike is removing mana burn.  That is not only simplifying the game, it is removing part of the strategy.  But it does not repalce it with a different strategy like the combat rules might.  It is making the game have less decisions.  It stops Chant from killing a storm player with 18 mana.  It lets people tap Shop for a sol ring and not burn.  Mana Drain has 0 possible downside.  It changes some fun decks--anyone remember Stupid Green from standard in 1999?  Eladamri's Vineyard was a huge part of the deck which burned your opponent for 2 every upkeep unless they had a cursed scroll or something.  I love that card and have it in casual decks but its utility is cut in half.  Braids of Fire has no drawback.  While I support simplifying rules, I do not support removing strategy to do so without adding new strategic point.

However, besides the mana burn change I really don't feel the new rules will have a huge impact on Vintage

Don't play with Welder, Trile, or Pentavus much do you?

This is in no way simplifying the game at the level vintage players see it.

Never Abeyanced anybody mid combo have you?  Or cast a 1 or 2 cc spell off a Workshop?

[M.Solymossy]

Or cast TFK off Mana Vault + Land, played a Mana Vault or Sol Ring off Mana Crypt, or sacked a lotus to drain something....