A new proxy system (hypothetical)

[Iron_Chef]

So here's the current proxy system:

Players can use 10-15 proxies in their deck, there are no limits on what to proxy (aka I can proxy a basic island on my basic plains, etc)

Here is a system that I was considering, since I think it would allow people to play a wider range of decks.

Unlimited Proxies, but here's the catch.  You are only allowed to proxy the following

Black Lotus
Mox Sapphire
Mox Jet
Mox Ruby
Mox Emerald
Mox Pearl
Time Walk
Ancestral Recall
Timetwister
Time Vault
Bazaar of Baghdad
Mishra's Workshop
Library of Alexandria
Mana Drain
Imperial Seal
Revised Dual Lands
Force of Will

and any other card that I'm forgetting that sells on SCG (or some other arbitrary site) for at least $100  Revised Duals and Force of Will don't meet this criteria, but I'm including them anyway because of their playability and use as building blocks for so many decks.

Vote and give me your thoughts!

-Nick

[Klep]

This system wouldn't affect me personally, but it seems like a fine thing to try.

[Slayn001]

I am having a hard time coming up with a deck other than Minus Six that would have more than 15 proxies chosen exclusively from that list. I suppose if someone had no forces or duals at all this might be helpful (and i feel like that is a corner case), but once you remove those from the list, there is nothing that couldn't be made under the current system. Also, as much as we like to rib people who come to an event with beta power but they are proxying  stuff like magus of the moon, sometimes you need those random rare ( scarcity, not value ) cards, that dealers just don't seem to have.

[Prospero]

How would you handle players who arrived to an event looking to purchase a card that you didn't have, and were thus looking to proxy it?  Let's say that, for some strange reason, you're out of (Joe's example) Magus of the Moon.  If a player couldn't buy a Magus of the Moon from you and they wanted to proxy it, would they be able to?

[burnenator]

What about that, plus being about to buy up to 5 proxies for $1 each

[mikekilljoy]

So, to play Noble Fish (or something like that), I still need to spend close to $300 on Tarmogoyf or I can't play it? Not 100% buying it.

[Womba]

I like the system but I think one of the other issues you may run into is someone who already has those cards but may not necessarily have some of the newer cards or want to experiment with a different archetype and need to proxy cards that are just under the $100 limit such as Goyf, Jace, Dark Confidant, and even Wasteland. Allowing proxies for different cards gives people the option to experiment with decks they might not own or otherwise try while providing them a chance to play it in a tournament before they want to own the cards....

[Ruboonia]

How does this allow you to play a wider range of decks?

I am opposed to the method you are proposing because, in my opinion, this hurts players that don't get to play vintage very often. I don't have a great community around here, but when a tournament comes up, I'll try to make it. I have all of the power cards, Drains, Bazaars, Shops, etc, but I proxied Snapcaster Mages, fetch lands, and other less-expensive standard cards at my last few tournaments. Often times, I have to travel a few hours to get to the nearest vintage tournament--when I get there, how am I to be sure the cards I need will be available (and at a reasonable price/trade value)?

Other than my decks, I don't have a very extensive collection, so trading for cards that I need is often a challenge. This is where the proxies come in.

[Demonic Attorney]

I get what you're trying to do here, but I think it might have the unintended effect of (further) diminishing the incentive to own these cards, which account for the lion's share of prize support in Vintage tournaments, since players will always be able to proxy those specific cards and only those specific cards.

On a more personal note, I approach the issue of proxies from the opposite vantage point of many other Vintage players. I own all of the Power and most of the traditionally expensive cards. I do not try to keep up with the newer sets and the endless production of chase rares and mythics that occasionally intersect with Vintage, like Snapcaster Mage and Jace.

Owning the power cards frees up proxy slots for me that I can use to play with whatever Flavor of the Month in Standard is selling for $50 apiece. One of the primary appeals for Vintage, for me, is the ability to assemble a set of Power and then use proxy slots to get off the merry-go-round of buying, trading, collecting, and selling chase rares in the other formats. I barely have enough time in my life to keep up with the Vintage metagame; if I lost my ability to proxy mid-range cards, and was forced to once again "Collect 'em all!" to play with the cards I wanted to use, I would be significantly less likely to play Vintage.

I realize many other players might have a different perspective, but that's how I would react to such a system if it were introduced.

[XxtSundaybxX]

While this new proxy system would not affect me at all, others above make very valid points. There are often times when I myself would be trying out a deck(I would personally borrow the cards) that I wasn't sure if I wanted to invest the funds to purchase, until I knew it was was tournament conpetitive. Not everyone has the option to borrow cards from friends, etc so they might be less inclined to try out a new deck, therefore possibly less willing to play in the tournament. Cards like Mark mentioned are the cards that would cause the most problems, but where would you draw the line? Cards often spike in value, would you have to consistently refresh and add/remove cards from the list? Or is it just a tough love situation? If you wanna play, you buy the cards. It's possible maybe people would be less greedy with their money if they knew they had to purchase to play in the tournament. I think the tough love approach would certainly keep the diehard players, but it could scare off the ones attempting the break into the format. All of that being said, it would be refreshing not to see my opponent with a proxy that said "misty rainforest". I also think most of the cards on the borderline are cards that are very versatile. Fetchlands are not extremely expensive but even if purchased they're never useless. Often times most blue decks can run off "x" number of fetchlands as long as they're blue. The same can be said for wasteland, it's played in shops, landstill, fish, dark times, and even random
"jank" decks. These cards are transferrable, so they're a reasonable investment.

[mijah]

While currently this system would hurt my ability to play certain decks, I am planning on getting the few cards that I do not have that are of value but would be considered "not-proxyable". For those who are not intending on getting those cards, it would be a bigger issue I believe because while most legacy players have the duals and forces, they may not have some of the other, smaller stuff like people mentioned with Snapcaster, or even Tarmogoyf which is still a beating to the wallet as it stands.

[Smmenen]

I've come to believe that the deterrents to Vintage are already so substantial, that it makes no sense whatsoever to allow any other barriers to exist.   I would prefer unlimited proxy systems without reservation. 

[AmbivalentDuck]

I've come to believe that the deterrents to Vintage are already so substantial, that it makes no sense whatsoever to allow any other barriers to exist.   I would prefer unlimited proxy systems without reservation.

QFT 

Adding a financial barrier to Vintage is a "bad thing."  Whether or not an incentive to own power aids in retention, it seems that a lot of people who own power leave it in the closet anyways while they're working weekends trying to climb the corporate ladder or chasing toddlers.  Bringing new folks into Vintage is easiest without a financial barrier to entry, recently exacerbated by Modern and Legacy making things like Dark Confidant $50 cards.

[Smmenen]

Anyone who wants to know why Vintage is hard to get into should read Maro's article this week. 

[LordHomerCat]

I'm with DA, why would you punish people who already own power/duals/etc but don't have Snapcaster or Goyfs or Jaces?  I don't really follow the logic.  If people can't build decks because they only have 15 proxies, then just let them use more proxies.

[Daenyth]

Another vote for unlimited proxies. It's how I run my tournaments, and judging by the people who come to them, we'd get at least 10% fewer people if it were not unlimited. The last duals event I ran, someone came and made top2 when his first time ever playing vintage was round 1. He told me afterward that he loved the way the format works and will be coming to all my future events. I don't think people avoid coming because proxies are allowed. Some complain a little bit about it, but honestly it's a lose-lose situation with allowing vs disallowing. If you allow them, people complain about how they look awful, etc, and if you don't allow them, you lose players.

[ed0]

rather than limiting the number of proxies i would enforce some kind of quality standards for those proxies.

at least in my experience the main reason why people don't want to play with someone using proxies is that it's a major distraction to remember what scribbled on islands are supposed to be at the moment.

[The Atog Lord]

I would not be impacted by this system myself. However, I dislike it in theory. One of the things that I love about Vintage is how expansive the format is -- how there are so many card combinations there are to assemble. Sure, most of them aren't worthy of being played in a tournament, but I do like the fact that if I wanted to sleeve up some absurd contraption, I would be allowed to do so. Having this limited set of proxy cards inhibits that, pushing the player base to use those cards in particular. Are those cards some of the best in the format? Sure thing. But at the same time, I think that a system like this will provide a strong nudge to players to sleeve up these cards.

Beyond that, I feel that any such listing of cards will be arbitrary. Do we go by playability? Then Island should surely be on this list. Do we go by value? Then where are Candelabra and Zodiac Dragon?

Overall, I think that this system won't contribute to new players playing Vintage, and will lead to confusion.

[Iron_Chef]

Remember folks, this is just a hypothetical exercise.  I am not implementing this system, or planning on implementing this system.  I was posing this question to hopefully stimulate discussion.  I've had more then a few folks PMing or texting me saying "OMFG when is this happening" in both the positive and negative.  It is not happening.

"Hypothetically"

-Nick

[Valorale]

I think a better incentive to get people who dont normally play Vintage (this is the goal yes?) would be to charge money for people who play with proxies and use that money to support a prize pool for unpowered decks. I think this is one of the reasons that Bazaar of Moxen attracts so many players, there is a decent prize structure for those who dont play with power.

[Daenyth]

I think a better incentive to get people who dont normally play Vintage (this is the goal yes?) would be to charge money for people who play with proxies and use that money to support a prize pool for unpowered decks. I think this is one of the reasons that Bazaar of Moxen attracts so many players, there is a decent prize structure for those who dont play with power.

I don't like this approach. People I've talked to at my store don't either. You're basically punishing people who don't have tons of money to spend on cards by making them spend money to play with fake cards. Doesn't work.

[Will]

In my opinion, this system wouldn't help increase Vintage's appeal at all.  While  the system currently doesn't influence my ability to play in a tournament as my 6 proxies are Workshops/Moxen, there are certainly situations where this is not the case.  For instance, consider someone who came into the format from legacy.  They arrive at the tournament with cards to play R/G Beats as they have Tarmogoyfs already.  After one tournament they do poorly and decide they want to switch to Dredge, but don't have any of the cards.  Normally, Dredge is a good budget option because the number of cards that it has which are expensive is limited, however under the new Proxy structure they have to buy a Lion's Eye Diamond and 4 Bridge from Below as well as all of the other cards before they can play the deck in a tournament.  Since they are new to the format and don't have the money to buy the new cards; rather than trading away their Legacy and Vintage deck for one that is better suited for the current Vintage landscape they decide not to play Vintage.  

Sure this anecdote does not apply to everyone and of course this potential Dredge player could play missing a few cards or slowly accumulate cards but I think this change would influence the landscape of Vintage by too much.  Decks that play Tarmogoyf would no longer be considered budget options and as noted earlier players would have less proxies than before.  I also find that players having power but not wanting to buy Dark Confidant or the like but this system essentially negates the perceived benefit of making large "investments" into the format (Power).  

If the problem is that players aren't buying cards before the tournament then maybe change the proxy structure to 5 Proxies free and 10 more for $1 each, but I still don't think that will work.  Overall, it seems that the number of proxies is comparable to whether the tournament scene is perceived as growing or whether the TO wants to get more from the playerbase.  When  tournament struggles to get a 4-5 round tournament each time around, worrying about how many proxies and therefore how much players spend ought to be a secondary issue.  However, once the tournament has become established asking for more in return from the players is very reasonable.  The tournament organizer has clearly put in time in effort and asking players to further invest themselves so that they can keep playing is logical and reasonable.  Once this happens, the tournament scene has seemingly become very established, as can be seen in part by the consistently large turnouts for no Proxy Vintage in Europe.  

Right now I feel the Blue Bell tournament scene is in an in between period between a fully developed (No Proxy) and a young (Unlimited Proxy) environment.  My solution to this which is hypothetical would be to slowly reduce the number of free proxies, ultimately moving to none, which if done gradually certainly could work.  I don't think that changing the proxy structure would make a positive difference because of the issues with card availability as well as changing what is by definition a budget deck.  

[Ravager Sam]

Me and my friends proxy the dumbest shit and in many cases I would be unable to play the exact list I want and they would be unable to play if this new proxy system was in effect.

Often times we're willing to buy w.e. it is we need, but in some cases you (Nick) just don't have it.

[LemonLyman]

I do not like the hypothetical system.  I like giving people 15 proxies and allowing them to manage them as they choose.  If it's Moxes and Duals, so be it.  If it's Samurai of the Pale Curtain and Tin Street Hooligan, so be it.

People audible decks at the last minute sometimes and don't always bring their entire collections to tournaments.  They should be allowed to use their proxy limit to build a new deck.
I am also not in favor of unlimited proxies.  Being forced to read every card an opponent plays makes matches tough to play.  15-20 is a reasonable limit. 

This system would be a deterrent to me playing in events.  If I couldn't proxy the cards I wanted and were forced to buy them, I would probably stay home and save an entry fee and an after event dinner plus the cost of a few cards and be on my way to a piece of power.

I just think it's better to allow people 15 cards to use as they want.   

[Bibendum]

Why not give an unlimited amount in the list but have a stipulation of 3-5 off the list

[CHaPuZaS]

Knowing the exact date of the tournament by at least a week, having some friends with card pools, internet and physical stores... I see absolutely no reason to allow cheap proxies. You just can't ask the judge of a GP to proxy your Verdant Catacombs because "They are not available at the store", if you cant have your deck in advance then it's your fault.

But in the end, I won't (And I don't) allow proxies in my tournaments, so this is all about points of view and not facts, as usual.

[T00L]

I've come to believe that the deterrents to Vintage are already so substantial, that it makes no sense whatsoever to allow any other barriers to exist.   I would prefer unlimited proxy systems without reservation. 

[Ten-Ten]

unlimited proxies without a catch, I say.
This format should always be about skill and not the cards.

[CHaPuZaS]

unlimited proxies without a catch, I say.
This format should always be about skill and not the cards.

Any game should be about skill in a perfect world, but this is not chess. This is a collectible card game, where chance, collectability and skill matter the same.

[JACO]

Anyone who wants to know why Vintage is hard to get into should read Maro's article this week. 

I don't believe "complexity creep" has anything to do with why Vintage is hard to get in to. There are so few mechanics that are actually used in Vintage, relative to other formats. The only true complexity sits at the tutor/manipulation level.