9/11/2009 LD: "You Just Fell For The Trap"

39 posts / 0 new
Last post

This thread is for discussion of this week's Latest Developments, which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.

how many uses,other than cascade, are there for the mindbreak trap?

Hmm, 13 for 3CC?  Such an arbitrary number, yet I can't help feeling I've seen it before...


how many uses,other than cascade, are there for the mindbreak trap?





I think it works on storm cards as well.


how many uses,other than cascade, are there for the mindbreak trap?




Cascade, Multiplayer, many (most) combo decks, especially Storm-based ones.

Not a tremendous lot.  In more situations it will be an expensive Cancel, so I think it's probably fair at Mythic.

If you're on MTGO check out the Free Events via PDCMagic and Gatherling.

Other games you should try:
DC Universe Online - action-based MMO.  Free to play.  Surprisingly well-designed combat and classes.

Planetside 2 - Free to play MMO-meets-FPS and the first shooter I've liked in ages.
Simunomics - Free-to-play economy simulation game.


 




Cascade, Multiplayer, many (most) combo decks, especially Storm-based ones.

Not a tremendous lot.  In more situations it will be an expensive Cancel, so I think it's probably fair at Mythic.






 





I think it works on storm cards as well.




 yep both those make sense forgive me, its early.


 


edit: I broke your comments so................yea goodnight.

Mindbreak Trap really bugs me.  It's clearly a utility card that should not be Mythic.  They promised us when Mythics were created that they wouldn't make Mythic utility.

Thanks to everyone who helped with the design of the plane of Golamo in the Great Designer Search 2!
My Decks
These are the decks I have assembled at the moment:
Tournament Decks (4)
Kicker Aggro (Invasion Block) Sunforger/Izzet Guildmage Midrange (Ravnica/Time Spiral/Xth Standard) Dragonstorm Combo (Time Spiral/Lorwyn/Xth Standard) Bant Midrange (Lorwyn/Shards/M10 Standard)
Casual Multiplayer Decks (50)
Angel Resurrection Casual Soul Sisters Sindbad's Adventures with Djinn of Wishes Sphinx-Bone Wand Buyback Morph (No Instants or Sorceries) Cabal Coffers Control Zombie Aggro Hungry, Hungry Greater Gargadon/War Elemental Flashfires/Boil/Ruination - Boom! Call of the Wild Teysa, Orzhov Scion with Twilight Drover, Sun Titan, and Hivestone Slivers Rebels Cairn Wanderer Knights Only Gold and () Spells Captain Sisay Toolbox Spellweaver Helix Combo Merfolk Wizards Izzet Guildmage/The Unspeakable Arcane Combo Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind and his Wizards Creatureless Wild Research/Reins of Power Madness Creatureless Pyromancer Ascension Anarchist Living Death Anvil of Bogardan Madness Shamen with Goblin Game/Wound Reflection Combo Mass damage Quest for Pure Flame Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle/Clear the Land with 40+ Lands Doubling Season Thallids Juniper Order Ranger Graft/Tokens Elf Archer Druids Equilibrium/Aluren Combo Experiment Kraj Combo Reap Combo False Cure/Kavu Predator Combo Savra, Queen of the Golgari Sacrifice/Dredge Elf Warriors Eight-Post Sneak Attack Where Ancients Tread Zur the Enchanter with Opal creatures Tamanoa/Kavu Predator/Collapsing Borders Esper Aggro Mishra, Artificer Prodigy and his Darksteel Reactor Theft and Control Unearth Aggro Soul's Fire Vampires Devour Tokens Phytohydra with Powerstone Minefield Treefolk Friendly? Questing Phelddagrif Slivers Dragon Arch Fun I'm probably forgetting a few...

Anyone notice that Mindbreak doesn't actually COUNTER the spell... so it can in fact get rid of the ineffable stags

My biggest problem with mindbreak trap is the fact that you don't need blue mana to cast it. So every deck can sideboard it whenever a combo deck is doing well in the meta.

Am loving the use of grok. Go Heinlein!

Mindbreak Trap is almost perfectly designed - even without the trap portion, I think it's about time that there is a decently costed "counterspell" that both works around "can't be countered" (exile spells isn't countering them) and can counter 2 of them in one go. 2UU is an appropriate cost for this (compare to Dissipate and Dimiss, for examples of avoiding graveyard tricks and "in-built" card advantage).


Time stop did more and was more versatile but it cost 6 mana - it saw some play but I think for Time Stop 5 mana would have been correct. In this case 1UU would be too cheap, particularly with the excellent trap ability it has.


The trap cost is a good way to make the card relevant in eternal, and a great safety measure against combos everywhere (particularly storm-based, which has been a problem for permission - permission *should* be able to serve as a safety measure against combos IMO). Stuff like Duress, Orim's Chant or combo defense permission like Pact of Negation still works decently against this trap even if used in mid-combo (before the "storm kill" is on the stack, obviously) so I think it is not unfair for combo decks while still helping to keep them more reasonable.


One minor development flaw: every color can play the trap cost. Requiring an island in play might be a bit stringent, but revealing (not discarding) another blue card wouldn't be a severe drawback from the trap being used even against turn 1 combos on the play, and would limit the usage to actual blue decks. It would clearly fit on the card and makes sense.


One major flaw: they made this Mythic. Once again Magic the game suffers against Magic the product. This is very likely going to be a staple in eternal formats (and the "minor" flaw above makes this even more so - aggro decks without blue can side this in against combo), very likely an extended staple, and with cascade I wouldn't be too surprised to see it play a strong role in standard. This is not the kind of card that should be Mythic, and that is even according to what they said.


Ivo.

1. Thank you, Tom, for proving that you jumnped on the Yu-Gi-Oh bandwagon for traps. It was also possible to not use a subtype for them, use the evoke machinery to describe the ability, but you needed to allow people to also get to say "You fell for my trap card!" and then plugged it right in your title. I am bloody surprised no one else has replied on that point yet, given how many accusations of the YuGiOhification of the game Magic received following M10's release.


2. I am surprised that such an option as the last one in the poll was made available. Thinking outside the box? Concerned people are actually stopping to play this super fun awesome game, espeically after the issues with M10? I would like to see some discussion on whether this was an actual concern for the development of M10.

"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)

Mindbreak Trap really bugs me.  It's clearly a utility card that should not be Mythic.  They promised us when Mythics were created that they wouldn't make Mythic utility.

It will almost certainly be useful to supplement FoW against Tendrils decks, with no pitched card or no life lost. It's a FoW (but better, when you have no blue to pitch or are low on life and can't risk it) that also prevents recursion. In Standard, it will also be useful versus the Time Seive deck, as well as 5/4color Blood and Jund,  where a BitBlast, Bloodbraid, Leech Cascade could be badbadbad.

However, it seems clear that the stated reasons for the existence of Mythic are very, very limited. We were only given a promise on what would not be mythic, and what may generally be mythics. What is seems there are are the following:


  1. Mythics reduce the numbers of a given card in the card pool, removing a very limited or focused effect from being seen too often in sealed. It certainly makes it virtually unlikely to occur in Sealed save as a bomb moment (planeswalkers, for example).

  2. The price of mythics are related to both their numbers in the pool, and their utility, a string that is nonetheless productive to making limited profitable on their pulling (since a bad mythic is less likely to ruin a pull than a bad rare).

  3. Mythics make even powerful effects less common in constructed because they are harder to acquire/pull (at not direct cost to Wizards, only indirect pack-cracking).

None of these tell use that we will not get utility mythic, and it is clear that Baneslayer was a problem (Why isn't fellow preview Halo Hunter not also a Mythic?) because it became a must-have for several competitive decks.


Right now, points 1 and 3 above are the only reasons I can see to support Mythic. Is it enough? Wizards is clearly concerned about printing "bad rares," despite MaRo decrying why they must exist, yet players new and old do not like them for the most part. They appeal to such a small group that their existence cannot have a good impact on the game as a whole, especially when it seems clear Wizards is making combo decks for us, making obvious answers to them, and plugging several cards at rarioties that force buying/cracking in order to acquire them.


In this mentality, it is only providential to the bottom line: Money. Wizards makes more printing this stuff, so I doubt they will actually change their view on the matter and reverse Mythics on the whole. Personally, a transparent policy system on the cards would be nice. And so would less deckbuilding for us. You guys are scared of Clamp and the like, I understand, but you seem willing to promote decks you know are top of the line and force competitive to canalize to a narrow range of decks that change every three months. It is also clear that you could use this information to predict the top decks, and this promotes the players who see this (which is why Faeries still reigns as a King--or Queen--of tournaments, even if it's been demoted from its position as Empress by 5color-like decks ... again, promoted by you).


Mythic also pushes cards that reward thinking and consideration (the "bad" cards) into a place where they are hard to acquire (Sphinx Ambassador still pulls more money than Underworld Dreams) and thus hard to employ effectively. Placing a broad continuum on the same rarity allows the player (and not the rarity) to help make the deck. This, for example, would have allowed Rafiq to be more availabl;e, made removal a little more viable by placing high priority targets into more applicability, and not left us with a control/midrange/tempo dominated environment for the last two to three years.


Finally, I am not sure what lessons you guys are learning from these designs and set developments and changes to the game I fell in love with long ago, but it's clear that if you learned anything, you simply turned around and f**cked up royal on another issue instead of simply hedging bets and allowing the players to determine the format. You're making a game, but you design like you're promoters of a gambling ring.

"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)


how many uses,other than cascade, are there for the mindbreak trap?





Well, Tom pretty much put it right out there that this card was meant for Storm decks in the older formats. But if it makes you feel better, Minbreak Trap is still undercosted if you wish to hardcast it.

This gave blue some definition as the tricky color


Hey!  That's a great idea!  Blue totally needed help to be seen as the tricky color! /sarcasm


I'm also bugged by the fact that there is no restriction on the no cost cards.

These trap cards leave something to be desired in Blue. Whiplash Trap is a nice card, as it can be a sort of super Boomerang a lot of the time, but in the end, bouncing creatures isn't the strongest mechanic that blue has to offer. The Archive and Mindbreak Trapsare slightly better, however, but still they do not seem quite as powerful as many card that have been spoiled, much like Iona, Shield of Emeria or Devout Lightcaster.


In fact, most of the spoiled blue cards for Zendikar aren't really that great, especially when compared to much of the white and black. The uncommon quest counter card for blue, Quest for Ancient Secrets, is much more sub par to its kin, Quest for the Gravelord, for a variety of reasons, namely that a Reminisce is quite pathetic compared to a 5/5 beast that could arrive early. I could have lived with the blue card being a counter spell, given the effort needed to pop it off, and it would have at least equalized the playing field for blue.


Overall, Blue needs a lot more work in Zendikar before I can see it as having anywhere near as much power as the other colors in Zendikar, and hopefully, by the end of spoiler season, we will have seen some great new cards to add some power to the flailing entity that once inspired fear in anyone who played against it. I'm not saying break the color, I'm just saying to power it up some, as it is struggling to stay afloat after the abyssmal representations in M10.


P.S. Is anyone else getting tired of seeing the same tribes in Red and Green? I mean, Goblins and Elves are stereotypical fantasy and all, but seriously, printing them in every set gets a little old.

P.S. Is anyone else getting tired of seeing the same tribes in Red and Green? I mean, Goblins and Elves are stereotypical fantasy and all, but seriously, printing them in every set gets a little old.


Seconding this. It's always elves and goblins. Did players seriously react that negatively against the Nantuko and dwarves in Odyssey? I wouldn't mind a few cards for the "evergreen tribes" (merfolk, soldiers, and zombies included here), but making them the ONLY tribe for those colors in each block is kind of ridiculous. 


As for the trap deal, I feel like they are an idea that should have happened a long time ago. They are effectively counterspells that end up doing something other than countering spells (Mindbreak Trap notwithstanding). Instants like Unsummon and Lightning Bolt have been used for ages to respond to something else, going for that ever-loved two for one card advantage. These "official" traps just give you a mana discount when they have certain triggers fulfilled, but otherwise they are similar to instants that have been printed before. I'd hardly call it "Yu-Gi-Oh-ification" of the game, especially since trap cards in that game are purposed for the same effects as the aforementioned instants in Magic.

One side argued that it was wrong for the controller of a trap to have to alert the opponent that the trap was coming, which is exactly what the mechanic that required exiling a trap facedown does.


They said it : Yu-Gi-Oh design is WRONG ! Cool In all seriousness, I think the decision to not make the mechanic work that way might have been made in great part because it would have meant handing a giant axe to the "Magic is becoming Yu-Gi-Oh" naysayers. I think even I could have joined those naysayers because of that. But as is, the trap cards are a good design done in a perfectly Magic way.


On a side note, I'm excited by Archive Trap, as it's gonna be a giant boost to the fun legacy milling deck I've helped one my friends develop, and it's not gonna cost him much since it can only end up as a reject rare. Since nearly everyone is playing fetchlands in Legacy (and will especially with 5 more of them), Archive Trap is most often free. My friend plays Brain Freeze and Twincast in his deck, so that absence of cost is gonna make for ridiculous turns. "You fetch, you play a spell ? Then I'm gonna play Archive Trap for free, Twincast it, and Brain Freeze you with 3 storm copies. Mill for 38 !"

Magic The Gathering DCI Lvl 1 Judge Don't hesitate to post rules question in the Rules Q&A forum for me and other competent advisors to answer : http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75842/134778/Rules_Q38A

Zazel makes a good point.


 


I just think that in a combo meta this is just a "you lose" card. Just mull aggressively until you get it because all you have to do it just wait until they cast tendrils or whatever and that's game.


Interesting. We're going to have to see more Silence/Orim's Chant/Pact of Negation to force combo through.


 


hmmmm

The mindbreak trap is a spike-only card, and can be played in any color. It's the definition of what should NOT be mythic, from the player's perspective. It's even less defensible than everyone's new favorite 2cc gobin, which at least has an effect that Timmy will like.


Now, I only play pauper, so all of this is good news to me: People are going to be opening so many packs, that even the best commons are going to drop under 10 cents online. But I see how this money-grabbing tactics are not good to make people want to join the game. Does Magic really need more $30+ cards?


It also moves people towards singles. How many boxes of product would someone had to open to get a playset of both the goblin and the counterspell? Too many for almost anyone. The only solution is singles, and let people with the time to open cards stores be the ones trying to profit from all their card opening.

The commons online drop in value to almost nothing regardless of whether or not they throw a Spike mythic out there or not. I bottom-feed with every set and have since Morningtide. This won't have a notable impact on that.

maralen of the mornsong.

maralen of the mornsong.





? Maybe I am really braindead but I am not seeing the connection with her and this card.


maralen of the mornsong.





? Maybe I am really braindead but I am not seeing the connection with her and this card.



The connection there is to make is with Archive Trap, not Mindbreak Trap. I think I understand where he's getting at : Maralen can make sure the opponent searches his or her library every turn, and provided that he or she doesn't kill Maralen, you can yourself tutor an Archive Trap every turn and mill for 52 total over four turns, which should be enough. That's an interesting idea, but you'd have to make sure that Maralen stays alive with the opponent being able to tutor a removal spell every turn, that all Archive Traps resolve with the opponent being able to tutor a counterspell every turn, and that you don't die first with the opponent being able to tutor for whatever that could race your plan.  There's also the fact that there are a good number of better combos you could get if you were allowed to tutor with Maralen multiple times. Sexy, but probably not a viable deck. Depends on what other cards you'd put in there, though.
Magic The Gathering DCI Lvl 1 Judge Don't hesitate to post rules question in the Rules Q&A forum for me and other competent advisors to answer : http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75842/134778/Rules_Q38A


Mindbreak Trap really bugs me. It's clearly a utility card that should not be Mythic. They promised us when Mythics were created that they wouldn't make Mythic utility.

It will almost certainly be useful to supplement FoW against Tendrils decks, with no pitched card or no life lost. It's a FoW (but better, when you have no blue to pitch or are low on life and can't risk it) that also prevents recursion. In Standard, it will also be useful versus the Time Seive deck, as well as 5/4color Blood and Jund, where a BitBlast, Bloodbraid, Leech Cascade could be badbadbad.

However, it seems clear that the stated reasons for the existence of Mythic are very, very limited. We were only given a promise on what would not be mythic, and what may generally be mythics. What is seems there are are the following:


  1. Mythics reduce the numbers of a given card in the card pool, removing a very limited or focused effect from being seen too often in sealed. It certainly makes it virtually unlikely to occur in Sealed save as a bomb moment (planeswalkers, for example).

  2. The price of mythics are related to both their numbers in the pool, and their utility, a string that is nonetheless productive to making limited profitable on their pulling (since a bad mythic is less likely to ruin a pull than a bad rare).

  3. Mythics make even powerful effects less common in constructed because they are harder to acquire/pull (at not direct cost to Wizards, only indirect pack-cracking).

None of these tell use that we will not get utility mythic, and it is clear that Baneslayer was a problem (Why isn't fellow preview Halo Hunter not also a Mythic?) because it became a must-have for several competitive decks.


Right now, points 1 and 3 above are the only reasons I can see to support Mythic. Is it enough? Wizards is clearly concerned about printing "bad rares," despite MaRo decrying why they must exist, yet players new and old do not like them for the most part. They appeal to such a small group that their existence cannot have a good impact on the game as a whole, especially when it seems clear Wizards is making combo decks for us, making obvious answers to them, and plugging several cards at rarioties that force buying/cracking in order to acquire them.


In this mentality, it is only providential to the bottom line: Money. Wizards makes more printing this stuff, so I doubt they will actually change their view on the matter and reverse Mythics on the whole. Personally, a transparent policy system on the cards would be nice. And so would less deckbuilding for us. You guys are scared of Clamp and the like, I understand, but you seem willing to promote decks you know are top of the line and force competitive to canalize to a narrow range of decks that change every three months. It is also clear that you could use this information to predict the top decks, and this promotes the players who see this (which is why Faeries still reigns as a King--or Queen--of tournaments, even if it's been demoted from its position as Empress by 5color-like decks ... again, promoted by you).


Mythic also pushes cards that reward thinking and consideration (the "bad" cards) into a place where they are hard to acquire (Sphinx Ambassador still pulls more money than Underworld Dreams) and thus hard to employ effectively. Placing a broad continuum on the same rarity allows the player (and not the rarity) to help make the deck. This, for example, would have allowed Rafiq to be more availabl;e, made removal a little more viable by placing high priority targets into more applicability, and not left us with a control/midrange/tempo dominated environment for the last two to three years.


Finally, I am not sure what lessons you guys are learning from these designs and set developments and changes to the game I fell in love with long ago, but it's clear that if you learned anything, you simply turned around and f**cked up royal on another issue instead of simply hedging bets and allowing the players to determine the format. You're making a game, but you design like you're promoters of a gambling ring.




This. It is, however, worthy of note that those with money will make decks with whatever cards they like forever. Saying making a card not Mythic would have changed the environment is a flawed argument. It will, however, allow more players to engage in competitive play, which I can't possibly see as a bad thing. That said, making Rafiq easy to pick up is BAD (*BAD*) for Limited.


Be careful what you say though; I was reprimanded twice for posting something significantly more tame than this, and a third time when I complained about the reprimand


maralen of the mornsong.





? Maybe I am really braindead but I am not seeing the connection with her and this card.



The connection there is to make is with Archive Trap, not Mindbreak Trap.





Aha! I was indeed thinking of Mindbreak because it was the more recent conversation subject. I got my previews mixed up. Thanks

i'm not much of a deck builder, but i was surprised no one had mentioned it yet because it was the first thing that popped into my head when i read the card. i don't expect a top 8 deck to feature the interaction between those two cards but there's certainly a fun casual (and probably non-standard) deck to be made. although fun is probably relative here. Smile


i would probably put a lot of counterspells in, maybe silence or orim's chant, and probably additional tutors (mystical teachings might work well) so that i had the tools to deal with what they were tutoring up as well as making sure i had the mill trap. bouncing her strategically might also be a good idea.

Mindbreak Trap looks to be designed to hose the new Chandra.


If i pulled a Chandra in Limited, I'd hate it if her ultimate ability had a counter in every card pool. PWs are hard enough to use as it is, so a specific hoser would have to be in at least rare.


Mindbreak almost certainly will be used in eternal formats since it shuts down combo decks. ("Playing that Lion's-Eye Diamond from your graveyard again? In response...") I think mythic is appropriate here. Remember, mythic isn't any rarer than an old core set rare.


 


Maralen + Archive Trap made me smile. Nice thinking.

1. Thank you, Tom, for proving that you jumnped on the Yu-Gi-Oh bandwagon for traps. It was also possible to not use a subtype for them,


Bets on a "counter target Trap spell" card, either in Zendikar or Worldwake?


but you needed to allow people to also get to say "You fell for my trap card!" and then plugged it right in your title. I am bloody surprised no one else has replied on that point yet, given how many accusations of the YuGiOhification of the game Magic received following M10's release.


One of these days I'd really like to see someone explain what "YuGiOhification" is supposed to mean. "Broadening the game's appeal"? Horrors. Or is this an accusation that the game is being "dumbed down"? By a trick that forces your opponent to play around it by it's very existence, you know, the kind of thing that people were complaining that the M10 combat rule changes took away?


Also: you're complaining about the title of the article? Really? It's an obvious pop-culture reference for this target audience.


Mindbreak Trap really bugs me.  It's clearly a utility card that should not be Mythic.  They promised us when Mythics were created that they wouldn't make Mythic utility.

It will almost certainly be useful to supplement FoW against Tendrils decks, with no pitched card or no life lost. It's a FoW (but better, when you have no blue to pitch or are low on life and can't risk it) that also prevents recursion. In Standard, it will also be useful versus the Time Seive deck, as well as 5/4color Blood and Jund,  where a BitBlast, Bloodbraid, Leech Cascade could be badbadbad.

However, it seems clear that the stated reasons for the existence of Mythic are very, very limited. We were only given a promise on what would not be mythic, and what may generally be mythics. What is seems there are are the following:


  1. Mythics reduce the numbers of a given card in the card pool, removing a very limited or focused effect from being seen too often in sealed. It certainly makes it virtually unlikely to occur in Sealed save as a bomb moment (planeswalkers, for example).

  2. The price of mythics are related to both their numbers in the pool, and their utility, a string that is nonetheless productive to making limited profitable on their pulling (since a bad mythic is less likely to ruin a pull than a bad rare).

  3. Mythics make even powerful effects less common in constructed because they are harder to acquire/pull (at not direct cost to Wizards, only indirect pack-cracking).

None of these tell use that we will not get utility mythic, and it is clear that Baneslayer was a problem (Why isn't fellow preview Halo Hunter not also a Mythic?) because it became a must-have for several competitive decks.


Right now, points 1 and 3 above are the only reasons I can see to support Mythic. Is it enough? Wizards is clearly concerned about printing "bad rares," despite MaRo decrying why they must exist, yet players new and old do not like them for the most part. They appeal to such a small group that their existence cannot have a good impact on the game as a whole, especially when it seems clear Wizards is making combo decks for us, making obvious answers to them, and plugging several cards at rarioties that force buying/cracking in order to acquire them.


In this mentality, it is only providential to the bottom line: Money. Wizards makes more printing this stuff, so I doubt they will actually change their view on the matter and reverse Mythics on the whole. Personally, a transparent policy system on the cards would be nice. And so would less deckbuilding for us. You guys are scared of Clamp and the like, I understand, but you seem willing to promote decks you know are top of the line and force competitive to canalize to a narrow range of decks that change every three months. It is also clear that you could use this information to predict the top decks, and this promotes the players who see this (which is why Faeries still reigns as a King--or Queen--of tournaments, even if it's been demoted from its position as Empress by 5color-like decks ... again, promoted by you).


Mythic also pushes cards that reward thinking and consideration (the "bad" cards) into a place where they are hard to acquire (Sphinx Ambassador still pulls more money than Underworld Dreams) and thus hard to employ effectively. Placing a broad continuum on the same rarity allows the player (and not the rarity) to help make the deck. This, for example, would have allowed Rafiq to be more availabl;e, made removal a little more viable by placing high priority targets into more applicability, and not left us with a control/midrange/tempo dominated environment for the last two to three years.


Finally, I am not sure what lessons you guys are learning from these designs and set developments and changes to the game I fell in love with long ago, but it's clear that if you learned anything, you simply turned around and f**cked up royal on another issue instead of simply hedging bets and allowing the players to determine the format. You're making a game, but you design like you're promoters of a gambling ring.




I think WotC gave up managing the "constructed" type formats long ago. There's not much they can really do other than keep making less broken cards... and let's face it, people play the game and buy cards to get the "broken" ones!  What they've changed their focus to is the "sealed" formats, they've said so many times in the last 2 years. As a casual player, I find it much funner to play the constructed tournaments with more experienced players as it levels the playing field (and it helps WotC sell the cardboard!)


Card prices even for really good cards really aren't that bad.... 12 years ago good cards costed more than now, and they made fewer of them. (I remember when Underworld Dreams was a $40+ card.. stop whining) Cards like Mindbreak Trap are bombs nobody really needs more than one of in a deck... maybe more to be safe, but how many people really play at that level...(don't kid yourselfs boys and girl) Typically the tournament crowd is either in with the stores and paying half price for packs or many don't even bother collecting packs and run up the prices for the 10 good cards in each set they want.  Remember too, retailers only pay half price for packs... they only need 2 good cards to pay for opening the whole box.  That means the 10 good cards in a set get picked through (to cover the box) while average rares sell for the price of a pack or less... it skews prices of "average" cards way down (I remember when ANY rare was $5 minimum) because resellers pump up their inventory opening boxes trying to score. Realize the STORE opening by the BOX is the target customer, followed by players of sealed events, Tournament players don't really buy many packs so they're more for marketing than sales.


WotC at least adapted to the recession by reducing the number of rares and adding mythic for "better" ones. That reduces the number of packs a casual collector/player has to buy by half (55 R+M vs 120 R for Unlimited) even though the really good Mythics can be hard to score.


I do think the "traps" theme is very "that other game" in feel. My kids like that game but I can't stand it for the awful templating and constantly broken cards.... but the game style is a Japanese thing and the wording is probably really clever and slick... in Japanese. I like odd themes and doing things not seen... I don't like cards that name specific cards in their effects as it limits options. I think they can do some clever things in the next set with the "trap" type. Add the trap as triggers for Quests, or have creatures that can "block" traps, etc. Much better than the "other game" style of playing them. It's only going to last two sets anyway.

I think WotC gave up managing the "constructed" type formats long ago. There's not much they can really do other than keep making less broken cards... and let's face it, people play the game and buy cards to get the "broken" ones!  What they've changed their focus to is the "sealed" formats, they've said so many times in the last 2 years. As a casual player, I find it much funner to play the constructed tournaments with more experienced players as it levels the playing field (and it helps WotC sell the cardboard!)

I think Wizards has taken a very firm and close look at managing the constructed formats for Magic, simply because of their interest in performance of archetypes, printing cards to support them (e.g., lords in tribal and other "matters" cards) as well as hosers, the occassional efficient bomb spell, the finisher models and so on. These aspects make WotC almost certainly "involved" in predicating the tournament format that arises a year after the set is designed. Moreover, when development gets this, it seems odd that some of the leading developers are former pro-players? Design gets its pro-playerts, but not as much as development does. This ends up allowing the pros to develop the hole cards that are used to shore up Limited, Standard, Extended, etc.
I do think the "traps" theme is very "that other game" in feel. My kids like that game but I can't stand it for the awful templating and constantly broken cards.... but the game style is a Japanese thing and the wording is probably really clever and slick... in Japanese. I like odd themes and doing things not seen... I don't like cards that name specific cards in their effects as it limits options. I think they can do some clever things in the next set with the "trap" type. Add the trap as triggers for Quests, or have creatures that can "block" traps, etc. Much better than the "other game" style of playing them. It's only going to last two sets anyway.

I'll initially respond to this by citing Tom LaPille himself. To wit:
Many attempts at the traps were very high-concept; one even involved exiling the trap card face down with an "arm counter" on it, and later playing the spell from the exile zone. The correctness of this mechanic was a matter of much debate.

This mechanic is almost certainly similar to a variety of previous mechanics, such as Morph (which was a "surprise!" capability with a guessing component that spawned off of Illusionary Mask and leter gave us Summoner's Egg which are in and of themselves "trap" effects) and Time Spiral's Return to Dust/Careful Consideration cycle. Abilities that reward timing and condition "trap" those who walk straight into them. But placing a card face-down on the field, and "surprising" your opponent by being able to just flip it up and get this effect? Straight out of YuGiOh. And I am almost certain that that debate Tom mentions up there had that game's name in it at least once. I am, however, surprised that permanents that are also traps were not employed, as that is also a feature, as you don't cats pitfalls at your opponents' creatures, they are objects that trap creatures (such as Oubliete or Oring) especially in this perceived realm of the land strewn with temples and archeological mysteries and their concordant Indiana Jones-ness when it comes to traps. Some traps, though, do work as spells such as some token making traps, while the art certainly seems to show OBJECTS in which a person is "trapped" or encounters physically. It therefore does seem anachronistic from YuGiOhness in that aspect only.
"Possibilities abound, too numerous to count." "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) "Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion Backs)


 I think Wizards has taken a very firm and close look at managing the constructed formats for Magic, simply because of their interest in performance of archetypes, printing cards to support them (e.g., lords in tribal and other "matters" cards) as well as hosers, the occassional efficient bomb spell, the finisher models and so on. These aspects make WotC almost certainly "involved" in predicating the tournament format that arises a year after the set is designed. Moreover, when development gets this, it seems odd that some of the leading developers are former pro-players? Design gets its pro-playerts, but not as much as development does. This ends up allowing the pros to develop the hole cards that are used to shore up Limited, Standard, Extended, etc.



This. R&D has been the caretaker of the metagame for what is now the majority of Magic's existence.


For the general conversation on whether traps are or are not inspired by some other game: what really matters is that Magic is a good game for it and that traps are a good addition. Or not, depending on whether you like playing with this mechanic.


When I was beta testing Vista, one of the features that was new was the sidebar with the customizable gadget assortment. People wasted no time explaining to me that Apple came up with the concept first. I told them the same thing I tell people who claim that Magic is taking from some other game: it is not going to make me drop what I am doing. Whether or not "Gadgets" are directly taken from "Widgets" means pretty much nothing unless some copyright infringement took place, and even then it only matters to the courts. Only an insecure Mac user would think otherwise. If the Windows OS is not good, I make decisions based on that. And if Magic stops being good, I make decisions based on that. If Morph was or was not borrowed or taken from another game, all I care about is whether or not Morph is good and whether or not Magic is a good game with Morph. The same with traps. I don't play those other games and don't intend to, ever, but I am sure most of them are a lot better than what I hear on these boards and that many of their ideas are probably very interesting. Magic doesn't exist in a vaccuum and we don't need to pretend it does.

These Trap cards are neat; they're like better rhystic spells in that you have to watch for your opponent to leave themselves vulnerable before you cast them.  (But they're "better" since they're still castable if your opponent never gives you an opening.)


I do hope, though, that the term "Trap cards" was chosen despite the fact that it would remind people of Yu-Gi-Oh!, not because it would do so.  I know almost nothing about Yu-Gi-Oh!, but I know it has Trap cards!

Yeah, exactly. Who the hell even plays Yu-Gi-Oh? If you guys didn't tell me I'd never know it had trap cards and couldn't care less for that matter.

Manaug.gif | Manawu.gif | Manau.gif | Manaub.gif | Manaur.gif


Yeah, exactly. Who the hell even plays Yu-Gi-Oh? If you guys didn't tell me I'd never know it had trap cards and couldn't care less for that matter.



Well, Yu-Gi-Oh is the best-selling trading card game on the planet (its even in the Guiness Book of World Records for that accomplishment now), so it is a bit unfair to act like no one even plays it...

I dabbled in Yu-Gi-Oh when it first came out. It can be quite fun if you're in the mood for a fast game and don't mind it being a little swingy. In the end it was a combination of amateur card design and cost that put me off.


Early on, Yu-Gi-Oh would have benefited from a reboot and redesign. The worst problem is the rules text used on more complicated cards, which makes you appreciate the hard work Wizards put into making sure their cards are actually readable.


Other problems include the arbitrary "level" system - a throwback to the game featured in the comic book (which has little to do with the card game, and is surprisingly dark). So, one to four stars requires no tributes, five to six requires one tribute, seven to eight requires two tributes, etc.


They should have scrapped the levels and put an easy to spot tribute-symbol and number (to show number of tributes) on each card. Back at the beginning, little else even used the stars, though I understand recently they've printed cards that work with level X monsters, and such (which just seems arbitrary and clumsily designed).


Another problem was fusion monsters, which were completely worthless. You needed to have the right ingredient monsters and the right magic card to summon them, and it was almost always weaker than a regular tribute monster. 3+ cards for a crappy monster? Its like deliberately handicapping yourself. Maybe it was just so you could show off - "Haha, I won with a fusion monster!


But anyway, back to Magic...



Yeah, exactly. Who the hell even plays Yu-Gi-Oh? If you guys didn't tell me I'd never know it had trap cards and couldn't care less for that matter.



Well, Yu-Gi-Oh is the best-selling trading card game on the planet (its even in the Guiness Book of World Records for that accomplishment now), so it is a bit unfair to act like no one even plays it...



Seriously? I don't know a single person that plays it and I know people who play Magic, Duel Masters, Lord of the Rings, Doom Trooper and other CCGs. Maybe it's just here in Poland, because I haven't even seen Yu-Gi-Oh cards on the shelves of game-shops. I've seen a few cards on the internets though - who would torture themselves and play with them? They're ugly as hell, hard to read and have terrible artwork.
Manaug.gif | Manawu.gif | Manau.gif | Manaub.gif | Manaur.gif

Mindbreak Trap is an excellent card for outside of standard. It wastes the whole stack so combo decks are toast. In standard I think it will still see play, it's ability to be free and not actually counter the spell are redeeming qualities. I want a set of 2 just to stop the stupid sable stag (I lost to that card so many times) and other un-counterable spells. The mythic rating is high but I appreciate it because at rare it would seem much more useless. At mythic it draws attention to itself what kind of potential it has.

In this mentality, it is only providential to the bottom line: Money. Wizards makes more printing this stuff, so I doubt they will actually change their view on the matter and reverse Mythics on the whole.


SHOCK!! GASP!! Oh noes, Companies try to make money! By TAKING it from US!!!!


 


Seriously, saying that trying to make more money is morally bad is like saying its morally bad for politicians to want power. Its what they do, and its what we have invented them for.


If we do not want people who like power going after political careers or if we do not want companies to look at the bottom line (ie, money) first and foremost, we need to change the system, not say that they are bad people.


Its the way the system is designed that makes them behave like this. Its like saying pawns on a chess board should not move forward: Yes, a player can refrain from doing so, but under the rules of the game, it is vital for the player to move the bloody pawns forward, if it is morally good or not.


If you don't like pawns moving forward, don't complain to the players, but change the game.


[/rant]

[c]Forest[/c] gives you Forest
Sign In to post comments