Planeswalker Points Announcement

182 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of the Planeswalker Points Announcement.
Finally, a great system that'll encourage pro and casual players to enter sanctioned events without repercussions for one's rating.
Doesn't this point system lead to pro players grinding out FNMs for points they may need to get byes at GPs, or invites to PTs, etc...?  And doesn't that go against what the casual environment that FNM is supposed to promote?
How does this work for qualifications if you can never lose points?  Also, this seems to encourage bulk playing over actually doing well in a few events.  I don't have time to play a ton of events in paper Magic, but you know what, I do well when I do play and so I can occassionally qualify for a PT on rating.  In fact, I've been slowly building my rating up again and am about 40-50 points away from what would have qualified me for Honolulu, although that work was all for naught.


The entire system did not need a terrible, casual slanted overhaul.  All that needed to be done was make it so  that you could lock your rating in earlier and not have to sit out FNMs and stuff.  (Or maybe just have FNMs not count towards rating).  Instead we get this bizarre system.
I agree whole heartedly with Sperry. I enjoy playing high level magic a few times a year. I perform well at the few real events I play in and my rating reflects that, earning me byes and invites to nationals, PTs, etc. I do like playing in an FNM every now and again if I am free, but I work a very hectic job an don't have time to play sanctioned magic 3 times a week. I enjoy preparing a month or so before a large tournament, then taking some time off to catch up on my real work. This seems like it rewards quantity over quality. It does not seem fair that someone who has more free time than I,  can play in a bunch of events and earn byes and invites, when in fact, I am a better player than he.
I like the positive side to this: having experienced players sitting on their ratings to protect them was bad for the game. So thumbs up there.

However...

I have been looking at my results, and it seems terribly skewed towards FNM.

For example, I went 1-2 and came 5th at FNM and scored 12 points. Then I went 3-0 and came 1st on a Sunday tournament and only got 10 points!

This puts players who live close to FNM locations at a big advantage (I lose out due to transport issues on Friday evenings, so can only attend FNM once a month). Local players will have no problem overtaking me, no matter how much I win Sunday tournaments, simpy by turning up for FNM every week. BIG thumbs DOWN Wizards.

~ Tim
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
The system is not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction.

As for doing well vs attending you only get a few participation points for playing whereas you get 9 points for each round win. While the more you play in the more points you get, winning is still important.
You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what I create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
Each event has a multiplier, people. FNMs only have a multiplier of three. The max points you can get from a single FNM are: 3 *((Max Wins*3) + (Draws*1)+Participation Points) Most FNMs have at most 5 rounds, so the max value is 45+3(Participation Points). That sounds like a lot, but when you reach Guildmage rank, each subsequent level takes 100 points, so you'd need to participate in two FNMs... and at the pro-level, its 1000 points or more per level.

Grand Prix have a multiplier of 8, and have many more rounds.
On first glance I like it quite a bit. I love the layout, I like that you dont lose points and I think the ranks are a nice touch.


But: I am not a very regular player. I play mostly casual. Organized play nothing but prereleases and FNM, sometimes a Game Day. I am not what you would call a competitive player.

Yet I do fairly well at the events, constantly finishing 1st or 2nd on FNM (which is Draft at our store), and finishing in the Top quarter on prereleases on average.

I believe the new system will not reward me as much for playing good as it will reward me for playing a lot. I don't have a huge problem with that since I like to play Magic and dont give as much of a damn about my rating as some other people do. But there are times when I dont get to play much, either because of work or because I simply have other things to do, and I assume that will impact my rating negatively in the future...

But overall, I like it quite a bit.

Another thing that came to my mind: Won't players in small FNM events have a disadvantage over players in bigger ones, given time? I have a feeling that your FNM performance is rewarded way heavier than other play, so the more rounds you play the more points you get?
does each of the levels have rewards or are they just classed for no reason?  like i am level 42 and i am unaware what that entitles me to or what i need to be aiming at to receive byes/invitions.  i do like that i am allowed to play fnm w/o rating penalty if i lose and what not. i just want an article that explains this a litte more indepth.
Lifetime rating means nothing right now. It is just a way to compare yourself with others. Would like to point out that FNMs are equal to the SCG circuit as it stands right now. That cannot be right.
ok but what about limited i know that was not talked about and that is the bread and butter of the shop the better player sell the pack and rares they win back to the shop and get what they need the shop sells those rares and in turn make money also this also rewards places that have a good judge presents cuz no sanction events with out them so it will be casual and u dont have any rating to go with it

i also have to say this cuz it is kind of needed the non conpetetive players dont want the big pros across from them they want there friends for me and my shop we live in harmony we non conpetetive players chat it up and throw cards down with the conpetive players all the time with out them having to worry about rating drop u are not going to make the pros show up at an fnm just cuz u want them to they are going to show up if they like the shop and the people that are there

ok now on to something that made me worried when i saw this ok  so what happens when all the pros end  up having points way up there ok so what are u going to do make more ranks i think u need one that is a conpetive number that goes up and down and a number for amount of play with that u can reward players that are good at the pro lvl and so they can get the byes but also show them them a score of there really ranking out in the world i looked at my ranking on this i just now on top of a dude that is like way up there in are area so keep the old one and use this to give invites and rewards  and the other for more high lvl things and it is only affected by the higher lvl things but the lower lvl things affect planewalker points is u can get players intersted in playing at higher lvls

yes this was a big rant but it is mine
I read that entire article hoping that it would be a new form of Player Rewards. I was disappointed.
why did I just lose my 2 byes for the gp'es I was planning to go to in the 1st few months?  I don't play irl any more because I play on MOL now and I know I play more than the average player with 2 byes is going to have.  I feel kicked in the nuts by this announcement, and I truly hope it gets changed.
I don't mind this change. At the very least it will get a few of my friends back at FNMs instead of sitting on their bye-awarding ratings.
The only thing that I do not like about this, is the name... Seems like something less childish could have been thought up...
MTG Rules Advisor Autocarding helps a lot -> [c]Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas[/c] = Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas "But keep in mind when the internet dies with the electrical system in 2012, you can still play paper magic, while digital cards will have gone the way of the dodo. In the post apocalyptic world, magic cards will be our currency!" - Samot, explaining to someone the ramifications of switching to MTGO!
I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both selfish and rational. I'm scheming, secretive and manipulative; I use knowledge as a tool for personal gain, and in turn obtaining more knowledge. At best, I am mysterious and stealthy; at worst, I am distrustful and opportunistic.
Lifetime rating means nothing right now. It is just a way to compare yourself with others. Would like to point out that FNMs are equal to the SCG circuit as it stands right now. That cannot be right.


Byes, Invitations, and FNM championships are based on Competative Points:
Points from competitive events count toward your Lifetime total and toward your Competitive total for the current Competitive Season. Depending on the type of event, points from competitive events may also count toward your Friday Night Magic total or your Professional total.


So depeding on the types of events you attend and earn points at, you will recieve benefits based on that for that season.  This is really great because you cannot milk FNM for points to get you to pro-tour, and you cannot milk sanctioned casual events to get a bye at Nationals.
All in all, I think this is an amazing change. I will start a long winded story below, but just a few point:
1.) This is awesome. I fully support a system that promotes playing rather than not playing.
2.) I think this is unfairly weighted to FNMs over weekly drafts/events. Many Magic players have social lives that generally take over their Friday Nights. I've had issues with the focus being on Friday in general, as I think it promotes a isolation of players from their non-player friends. "Punish" is probably too strong of a word, but I feel like this system almost punishes people for playing on other days of the week. We have an extremely competitive group of players that draft on Thursdays who have non-Magic social lives that causes committments on Fridays. Can't we enjoy Magic and have social lives as well? Magic shouldn't have to be your sole social life resource, in fact, it shouldn't.

My tale of ratings woe:

This ratings system sounds exciting. It may be too late to save me, but it could help others. I was a victim of ratings sitting. Understand, my rating wasn't amazing, but enough to get me some Byes at some GPs, etc. I learned quickly the role of variance and how punishing it is at casual more casual tournaments with players with much lower ratings. I recall going 3-1 or 4-1 and losing points. For the most part, it wasn't worth playing. However, when I had a fully powered deck, I would throw caution in the wind and lose some points. It was a cost of having fun.
However, I drifted out of the game, but made friends with fellow players. We played some casual games, but they tried to convince me to play in FNMs, which, are usually T2. As many know, getting back into the game through T2 can be extremely difficult due to T2 card costs over the last few years. But, with my rating as it was, to go 2-2 at such an event would be devastating to my rating. So, I sat out over and over again. Call me foolish, but I wanted to protect my rating, afterall, if I was going to get back in the game, I still wanted my GP Byes, etc. Well, I sat out too long and basically fell out of the game. Instead of playing a deck with Jace or whatever the current $40+ 4x rare was, I sat out, and then more or less left the game. I managed to protect my byes, but it cost me leaving the game. Foolish? Probably. Stubborn? Definitely. But from what I've heard, it happens a lot.
Over the last few months I've been doing some drafting. Maybe I'll be back, maybe not. Magic was a big part of my life that I really enjoyed. Things are very different now, different priorities, etc. But, if anything will have me back playing at a constructed event with a half-complete deck, this new system will do it.
Kudos to the DCI and friends. I hope this new system works well and is a huge success. Hopefully it keeps people playing and not sitting out.
Why not just have the rating system be driven by events instead of by match win/loss? So you win points for 51+% match win record, lose points for less, and have the number of points driven by the amount in either direction (e.g., 4-1 equals more points than 3-1), the level/size of event, and the average rating of your opponents. This would let a pro go 2-1 in an 8-person FNM draft and still not lose points---any Spike should have no objection to losing points for a losing record, and it has the same incentive not to 0-2 drop as the PW points, since 3-2 or 4-2 reverses the loss into a gain, even if Top 8ing is impossible.

I've only ever checked my DCI records out of curiosity about my sanctioned lifetime match record against specific regulars at my local FNM, so I basically don't care about my rating, but the event-record-driven over match-driven or participation-driven points seems better, and I haven't spent all that much time on it.

Oh well, either way, I hope this encourages people to play. We'll see how it goes.
At first glance , this system is silly.  I did play in a couple of Pro Tours, Grandprix and one Worlds. However I never actually achieved notable results.  But......  I play since 1994....  This means I am way up in the lists, I even almost make it to worldwide top 500.  When in reality I am more like around the top 5000 (or these days top 10,000 , as my level of play has dropped) 

I recognize more names like me. Old timers that kept playing. So take any life time list with a big grain of salt.    However, you can click on the ´Professional´ Tab.  Then you filter out people like me, so that gives a better result. (although such a list will still be full of  retired pros)

Anyway.  Being a lvl 43 or 44 won+t give me anything.  As I understand invites and other advantages will always be based on seasonal results and not on life time results.   So being good as this game in 2003 won´t give anybody anything in 2011.

Al together, after some thought  I kinda like  this system.  I´ll give it a chance.

 

I'm probably selling my cards (cardboard and virtual) and quitting magic because of this. I'm competitive, but I have a full time job.
why did I just lose my 2 byes for the gp'es I was planning to go to in the 1st few months?  I don't play irl any more because I play on MOL now and I know I play more than the average player with 2 byes is going to have.  I feel kicked in the nuts by this announcement, and I truly hope it gets changed.



No, your byes are safe in 2011, Only in 2012 they will use the new system for GP byes.
All in all, I think this is an amazing change. I will start a long winded story below, but just a few point:    




I agree with you that FNM events are too heavily weighted right now. 



About the rating..  Huh?   Did you actually EVER play in such a Grand Prix in these years?   Two things could happen:  A)  You suck and lose 100 rating points.  Great now you can play in FNM again.   B)  Hey, you still go it, made day two and won a few points or at least stayed at the same lvl.  Good for you.  So why not play? You are good at this game!   Was the Grand Prix limited?  No expensive Standard cards needed.  Just draft. you are good enough to go 2-1 , or 3-0 most of the time. 


I really really like this. As a starting player in Alara, I consistently came in last at every FNM, then recently have been coming in first. Before, I was a 1522, completely awful, because of my past. Now I'm a Guildmaster at level 28! I'm so happy!
First off, I kinda like this new system, and it does show some interesting promise.

Secondly, I'm not so sure about FNM/competitve points resetting every 4 months. I'm sure there was a reason Wizards picked that timeframe, but I don't see the reasoning right now. I'm willing to wait and see how it pans out, and hopeful that if that timeframe does cause any problems, Wizards will change it.

Thirdly, I personally will miss some way to track my performance at limited events. I don't think many people will miss the team or 2-headed giant rating categories - but limited (sealed/draft)?

Perhaps wizards can come up with a system that either tracks tournaments of this format, or offers more points for these formats (they do test more skills than constructed: card evaluation and deckbuilding to name a few).

- Cheers, - Dan R. (lv1 magic judge, Advanced organizer) http://butlerwpn.blogspot.com, my rather basic event blog.

Of course, there's an obvious unintended consequence:
With "slumming" at an FNM no longer being a risk of huge rating-loss, the sharks with those $1000 Standard decks will drive out the intended FNM audience even faster than before, quickly fragmenting any given FNM into pointmongers and walking pointbags.  The pointbags will quickly find something else to do after being repeatedly poached for "easy points" week after week.

I think the change is probably more attuned to Magic than the old algorithm.

However, the 'participation points' is an extremely worrisome part of this equation.

The difference between 31 and 32 may only be 1 player but the difference between 31 and 64 for a small store could be insurmountable and for normal organizers the difference between 256 and 512 in a big tournament is the difference between a hall they can afford and book and one that may not exist. Why are 511 people penalized just because 512 could have showed up but someone was sick?

It just seems like this one part of the puzzle has been added for all the wrong reasons. I can understand that it seems like a device to drive attendance, but a population doubled in size is not going to be double as patient to sit through more rounds of losses due to the larger turn out, or not drop because they might lose X points multiplied by the event value. People who feel bummed-out from losing will just get even more bummed out. Adding to their previous frustrations that they now have to suffer through more humiliation or risk losing X times the event multiplier. "oh well, I guess I'll just sit here and get my but kicked again when my friends over there want me to drop and join that 8-man draft."

What about the side events that organizers now run to make money with all the people who drop to be in side events? Won't this just force the halls into quiet submission as everyone grinds out their matches whether they really wanted to or not?

This seems like an emotionally draining addition with no real benefit. Even just looking at the arbitrary programmer-esque powers of 2 multiplication that was used. Last I checked Humans didn’t run in packs or 32, 64, 128 or 256.


Why give the community something to get angry over or lay blame on each other. Players will get upset with organizers for not having done a good enough job advertising, or getting a big enough location. Economically it adds a rift between players who can travel and those who cannot, though the K-rating did that already to some extent.


Remove the arbitrary participation points and this becomes fair again. As it is presented now it has a several flaws. It seems like people wanted to drive players to the larger tournaments. Or to try for some record numbers in attendance as they hope people will push past each marker on the list.

Players are smarter than that. They will look at local past event numbers then speak with their friends in the tourny areas to figure out before the tournament starts whether they think they can breach an attendance marker. If they feel they can't get that many people there will be no drive to get past any historical record.


Organizers will start labelling the tournies by size. Bet that they make them just 1 number higher than needed to breach a metric. “The (insert city name) 512 Open”


Well that how this strikes me however. I can’t see the future so maybe this will end well. If it doesn’t become a problem or the defining issue I will be surprised.

This really disappoints me.

I like to play competitively, but due to work I can only do so a few times out of the year. My rating has been enough for a couple byes at the one or two Grand prix events I go to each year. Now I will lose that. And also the Grand prix events won't offer any more Pro Tour Qualifications to top players? With all the Grand Prix events they are adding it's likely someone could win a grand Prix and never qualify for the Pro Tour.

Furthermore, now there will be no ELO system in place that I can use to compare my skill level to others in my region. I liked checking that to see myself go up and down relative to others around me. I like having a rating/number that represents my skill at this game. This new system does not reflect skill for players like me who do not play frequently but still play at a higher than average level of play.

Under the current system someone who goes to FNM once a month (which is more than I can usually manage) and places 4-0 will have the same number of points as the player who goes each week and finished each week with a 1-3 record. In fact, the 1-3 player is slightly higher rated because of the extra participation point. That doesn't seem right to me. If this is the new ranking system, then what's the point?

I'll keep playing Magic, but the stores likely won't see me at all anymore (though I suppose they don't see me much anyway). I've lost a lot of interest in any organized play since there is no longer a meanful number to me that I can associate to my performance and growth.
I agree with you Semioldguy. I have a busy life that includes me playing magic. This system rewards the ones who turn magic into their lifestyle. The ones who live, breathe, sleep and eat magic 24/7. I enjoyed playing in a few ptqs and scgs, 1 or 2 grand prix, and an occasional PT. Now if I want to do that I have to FNM every week and make sure I don't miss any big tourney within 500 miles of me.
The only thing that bothers me in this is that it's harder to see where I stand overall. Currently the leaderboards for lifetime points only show the top 500. I think there's only one leaderboard where I can actually see my overall position, but since the site won't let me log in I can't confirm that.
So Wizards has implemented ACBL (bridge) masterpoints.

It would take more time than I have to devote here to fully describe how the masterpoint system is widely regarded as a joke even as it is the only "official" ranking system.  Suffice it to say that no serious player talks in terms of the bridge equivalent of levels with the intent of them having any real indication of skill.

Future MTG joke under the new system: "I know level 30 players who play Kraken's Eye in Constructed."
I mostly like the idea of the new system, but I think FNM has too high a multiplier. I attended four events in the last two weeks: two Constructed FNMs and two drafts that are held weekly on Saturday at the same store. The player pool for the drafts is typically stronger than the pool for FNM, since many of the weaker players who do show up for FNM don't do the draft. In both FNMs, I went 1-X (my Constructed deck isn't that hot), and in the drafts I went 3-0-1 and 3-0 respectively. Yet I got more points for my absolutely horrible finishes in those FNMs than I got for my fantastic finishes in either draft. What?

FNMs have much more in common with Launch Parties, Game Days, and Prereleases than they do with Competitive-REL events such as GPTs. Heck, FNMs are currently handing out the same multipliers as WPN Premium tournaments--that's right, FNMs are handing out the same multiplier as a type of tournament that offers qualifying tournaments and which requires an L2+ HJ and 100-plus player capacity. Something is wrong with that picture.


Other than that beef, though, I do like the system.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

FNMs have much more in common with Launch Parties, Game Days, and Prereleases than they do with Competitive-REL events such as GPTs. Heck, FNMs are currently handing out the same multipliers as WPN Premium tournaments--that's right, FNMs are handing out the same multiplier as a type of tournament that offers qualifying tournaments and which requires an L2+ HJ and 100-plus player capacity. Something iswrong with that picture.



I don't see why there's anything wrong with that. Winning at FNM can award you an invite, which you won't get no matter how many pre-releases or launches or game days you win.

And it's always been a more competitive env. than any of the others.

Though I probably wouldn't have called them PW points.
Winning a 4 round FNM is worth MORE points than winning Legacy Champs.

There was a strech last year where I went
3 Legacy tournaments 9-1-1(ID) = 31 points
1 FNM round 1 bye (Which you get points for!?) then WLW = 33 Points

FMNs should not be worth 3x points. I am getting hosed hard for playing Legacy regularly instead of Standard.
Level 2 Magic Judge Lite a man a fire, warm him for a day. Light a man on fire, warm him for the rest of his life.
I am getting hosed hard for playing Legacy regularly instead of Standard.

That's the point, Consumer!
Why the hell should Wizards reward you for playing in events that don't require you to replace half of your collection every year?

Sounds like an important change for the better and Wizards said it is ready to make changes as needed after "live testing", so I am sure that all the feedback after the first season will allow them to tweak it.

Just one important question: Would this not be an excellent opportnity to aggregate MTGO into the same points system? Unfortunately not everyone is fortunate enough to live close to a shop or a city with events (even a country), or simply their life schedules do not allow them to attend physical events. So why not give all this people a chance to work on their points at the same time?


Just food for thought... 

And it's always been a more competitive env. than any of the others.

Not around here, it isn't.

Just one important question: Would this not be an excellent opportnity to aggregate MTGO into the same points system? Unfortunately not everyone is fortunate enough to live close to a shop or a city with events (even a country), or simply their life schedules do not allow them to attend physical events. So why not give all this people a chance to work on their points at the same time?

Yes.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

Just one important question: Would this not be an excellent opportnity to aggregate MTGO into the same points system? Unfortunately not everyone is fortunate enough to live close to a shop or a city with events (even a country), or simply their life schedules do not allow them to attend physical events. So why not give all this people a chance to work on their points at the same time?

Yes.


Agreed. Not having reasonable access to an FMN is an extreme detriment.
Level 2 Magic Judge Lite a man a fire, warm him for a day. Light a man on fire, warm him for the rest of his life.
FNM is stupidly overrepresented in this. I get why they want their flagship event to be worth a lot, but it just amazes me how I can look through my stats and see 20-40 points for FNMs and see less than 10 for Thursday night drafts that I did just as well in and, other than the day of the week, are the same damn thing.
blah blah metal lyrics
Seems like a reasonable change.  I don't think the level names are very good though - the order of progression is not at all intuitive in a lot of cases.  I guess people will just learn the order, but I wish they had come up with better, more varied names.
You made a system that rewards bad players that play everweekend, and punishes pro's who hate playing FNM because they get nothing but a FNM card out of it. Now if you want to be a pro in magic you have to work and goto FNM's to keep up with the noobs. thanks wizards for throwing the casual competive player under the bus. I will probly be selling of my stuff. i went from being the top rated legacy player for my state to a lvl 36 sorc......
I am glad that this new system will not discourage big name players from showing up at FNM.  It might even encourage them to try out more casual decks.  I'm nowhere near pro level myself, but I am at the point where a 3-1 record causes me to lose rating points, so I am discouraged from playing anything but a competitive deck at FNM.

That's the one good thing about the new system.  And it also acknowledges that the Elo system is not truly appropriate for a system with as much inherent variance as Magic.  Overall, I'm not really in favor of the new system, based on my previous experience with this system.

What previous experience?  Well, for about twenty years, the other side of the current DCI organized play system, the RPGA Network, used a points system for its tournament D&D (and other game system) play.  You would sit down at a table with five other players for a four hour game, and at the end of the round, all players would vote for the four best players (not voting for oneself), with 1st through 4th being worth 4, 3, 2, 1 points.  The judge also voted for the four best players, with his votes being worth 8, 6, 4, 2 points.  Add up these points, and you have a ranking from 1-6.  The voting was an attempt to identify who overall played the best, but in effect came down to who was the best role-player.

The table score and an overall judge rating then factored into the results that went into the RPGA's point system.  That formula was never published, but you got somewhere between roughly 100 points (if you got 0 points at the table) and 700 points (if you got 28 points).  There were then multipliers (x2 for a benefit [charity] game, x3 for Masters, x4 for Grand Masters, x5 for Paragon) applied to the points.  The points accumulated, and you attained levels, in a system similar to the AD&D level system, and similar to what we have in today's announcement.  Level 3 (5,250 points) was Masters, level 5 (23,250 points) was Grand Masters, and level 7 (98,250 points) was Paragon.  The named levels qualified you for ranked events, where you played with better players, and traditionally featured more unusual characters and role-playing situations.  (The first Grand Masters event had the players playing sentient magic items.)  There were three separate points categories circa 1997, one for judging, two for playing: Classic (events with pregenerated characters) and Campaign (events where you brought your own character).

You can see that, like the new Magic points system, you never lost points for playing a sanctioned RPGA event.  You accumulated points even if you finished in 6th place.  If you started play in the 1980s, there were few play opportunities, and to reach the named levels required both dedication and talent.  But by the mid 90s, play opportunities abounded.  I was far from the best at extemporaneous role-playing, but I played a lot.  By the time the points system was abandoned, I had the highest total levels (24) in the world, and was probably in the top 10 in total points.  The top-ranked Classic player was level 9, and reached that level with 460 events, placing first in about half of those.  I reached level 9 on the Campaign side, but that was with about twice as many games, and far fewer first place finishes.  This point system did not capture quality at all.

It appears that this Planeswalker Points system will also fail to address quality.  It appears that attending 8 Grand Prix tournaments (with 7 participation points) and finishing 6-3 (fail to make Day 2) will score you 1600 points, while attending 2 events and finishing 12-x (probable Top 32) will get you 688 points.  The only multipliers they mention are for Top 8 at a Pro Tour.  I think, at the very minimum, any event with a Day 2 cutoff needs to have an additional multiplier for those who make Day 2.  I'd also like to see additional multipliers for top 64/32/16, and Top 8 at the Grand Prix and Nationals level.
Sign In to post comments