Monday Night Magic #161 – M10 Mopery
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:13:38 — 33.7MB)
“You read it somewhere else, but you heard it here first!”
We are brought to you by CardHoarder.com and MTGOTraders.com!
Get your own MTGCast t-shirt today! – www.zazzle.com/mtgcastshirts
Check us out on MTGSalvation, Star City Games, MyMTGO.com and TCGPlayer.
This Week in Magic
Tom, Conley and Jack go through the slew of new cards on the M10 unofficial spoiler and Conley gives a great break down on the new card ratio being potentially misleading and some missed design facets. Check out the new judge promos for Nationals of Stifle and Windswept Heath. The next textless MPR promos will be Terminate and Negate. We also hear from Mark Rosewater’s twitter that Tiago Chan’s invitational card (Denying Channel) has been pushed back from Zendikar to the “Lights, Camera, Action” block.
Listener Emails
Tons of great emails, kudos to the listeners!
MTGCast News
Thank to Marshall of magiclifecounters.com for a sweet Sorrow’s Path life counter. Try and keep voicemails to 30 seconds or less so we can play all that we get! Tom asks the listeners for thoughts on the new look for MTGCast.com and also if you have any recommendations for WordPress themes to let him know. We have a new article from Conley about M10 on the site, a new series of articles titled “Dear Blossom” from Shannon of the Deck Builders and new audio podcast titled “MTG Radio”. Also, the Deck Builders have a new website, www.themagicarena.com.
Leave a voice mail on our phone line – 469-277-2278
So why wait? Call in with any questions, news items, hints, tricks, combos, or anything!
Subscribe to the MTGCast Monday Night Magic RSS feed!
RSS feed for Monday Night Magic
iTunes feed for Monday Night Magic
iTunes feed for all shows on the MTGCast network
RSS feed for all shows on the MTGCast network
Twitter for MTGCast
Contact Us!
Call us and leave a voice message at 469-277-2278, that’s 469-277-CAST!
Join the MTGCast Facebook Group – Discussion, Photos, Videos and More!
Tom at pitimp@mtgcast.com or papabear@mtgcast.com
Gavin at lesurgo@mtgcast.com
Jack at jack@mtgcast.com
Eric at eric@mtgcast.com
Conley at conley@mtgcast.com
Tom & Gavin & Jack & Eric & Conley – Your Monday Night Magic news team!
I hate to do this but….
FIRST! =D
That was truly amazingly fast!
Still no good counterspells in m10 spoiler. Im starting to really dislike this core set
The black 1/1 flying was a misprint on the part of the spoiler. See the newly updated spoiler. By the way, there is *no* lost countermagic over 10E. Wait until Zendikar for countermagic. By the way, most of the functional reprints are such, but Vanguard’s creature type is incredibly relevant in the current meta. Some of the ones are annoying, but Wizards is simply trying to get the game’s core flavor back from the mixture of ‘real’ stuff (Grizzly bears, savanna lions), basic fantasy, and cards that were flavorfully isolated and confusing (Counsel of the Soratami). As a high-level player, that is annoying, but in order to give the game a coherent flavor, it was necessary(and flavor is very important to attracting new players).
Also, magebane armor’s loses flying part is more a “we don’t want a nearly unkillable blue flier”, and the rare part is certainly a limited balance issue. It’s not loxodon warhammer powerful by any means, but again, making any creature nearly impossible to kill through combat, in a format with limited non-damage-based removal, and little artifact kill is too warping at uncommon. (Even a bear becomes a 4/6).
Also, I found it rather ridiculous when Conley started mouthing off about how “new players don’t know that they aren’t being catered to”. The point of making these players is to attract and keep new players based on the set, if they aren’t catered to, then they simply aren’t going to be interested in it. Just found that to be some really badly expressed rage, I get a good bit of the disappointment, but going on a tirade about how new players aren’t important and Wizards somehow know less about what is important to new players than yourself isn’t the proper thing to do.
Also, the baneslayer vs serra angel is definitely a limited balance issue. Serra at uncommon is to boost white in M10 limited. Baneslayer’s point is to maybe finally print a standard-worthy angel (although I doubt it), and a powerful, splashy new mythic. They serve completely different purposes within the set despite one being strictly better than another. Saying that “Well that’s not a choice if I open that in limited” is true of any number of cards from any number of sets.
The demonstration of older creatures being worse than the newer ones was not to show that there are some card sin limited better than others, but rather to show power creep. Serra Angel and Air Elemental (or Mahomati Djinn) were awesome back in the day, now in their new reprintings they stand side by side with strictly better cards.
Also my comments regarding new players apparently was miscontrued. I did not say new players should not be catered to, but rather that they don’t realize they are being catered to. They just think the game is that way through and through etc. They should absolutely by catered to to an extent, I just feel Wizards has gone about it wrong. They have appealed to them in s wsy thst I don’t think will attract extra players. As far as a new player knows that, everyone plays because cards are more flavorful or whatever the reason they play is.
“How does a magical bear not just own a regular bear?” I agree with you Conley. Especially on the Remove Soul issue. I have a ton of full art Remove Souls that I can’t play with because they changed the name. This is, however, a pure money making scheme. Changing the name of a card forces the player to aquire new copies. The flavour excuse is a nice cover story, but in this instance in particular, it is transparent.
“Serra Angel and Air Elemental (or Mahomati Djinn) were awesome back in the day, now in their new reprintings they stand side by side with strictly better cards”
For those who don’t remember back that far, those 3 creatures were considered viable finishers back in the day.
Great show that I was looking forward to.
It’s great to hear that Conley is settling in the show!
I agree with Conley’s view with the new cards not really being new cards. And the fact that Wizards is trying to wow us with a few good oldies. But I can’t say I don’t enjoy the set thus far, and I can’t say without seeing the next few sets whether Wizards are going downhill. I think M10 despites its flaw (and what is perfect?) is still definitely better than 10th edition, do you not agree? In that sense, Wizards are making progress.
In addition, you must see this set from a beginner’s view point and how they would feel opening these packs. It’s probably not 100% possible for us to this because we have experiences with this game. But I can certainly feel excitement for newbies who cracked open the 5/5 angel or the 9/9 behemoth. I don’t think they would mind not getting a Counterspell.
I think seeing a runeclaw bear is somewhat refreshing than seeing grizzly bear for the 10th time, but saying it’s a new card is misleading to me.
Power creeping is surely taking place, but when was the last time a 1/1 black flyer or a 2/1 for 1U seeing any serious constructed play? I don’t think it’s as bad as you are calling it.
Also when did it ever make when “Birds of Paradise carried a Jitte”?
Again, good show guys, it went really smoothly this time without much dead air or crazy voice overlaps! Cheers Tom, Jack and Conley!
when did it make sense… me got the dumb dumb
It is a good thing Imissed the show this week. It would have been 2 hours.
Functional reprints: the good: Wizards is trying to give a definite Magic and unified feel to the core set so that people can tell its Magic by flavor.
the bad: it is also a way to help sales because you can not use older cards of the same function.
As far as the flavor goes look a Flying Men and the new u 1/1 pixie thing. Although both have a magical feel the Flying Men have a much more middle eastern flavor the flavor in base magic. the little Pixies are mor in line with that. Example 2. Master Decoy is more militant and puts a more war games feel than his mage replacement.
On the % it does not surprise me that they did not count the basic lands in the % because I don’t think most people even think about them when concidering new cards. I mean in a large set don’t you think of that a 100% new cards even though it has the basic land reprints?
Lets not lose sight of the fact that a large % of the core set will be brand new cards and it has given us a reason to pay attention to it again. Also freking lighting bolt is comming back. That is a crad that I thought would be gone forever, the same as Duress. It is possible that Couterspell could come back. It is possible that if creatures get ramped up significantly enough, to bring control back arround they will start printing better counterspells again.
Remember control has still be viable in standard even if some varrieties have been not blue.
All and all I don’t feel the hysteria.
On Jack not feeling the excitment anymore I would say that is the reason that Wizards does not like unofficial spoilers.
-Eric
PS. Sorry I missed the cast.
One thing I think some of us are missing in regards to the lack of stellar blue cards in the core set is that, if I am not mistaken, the core set is typically rated a “beginner” set. Thus, my own uneducated guess is that WotC is going to shy away from printing anything but a basic spell like Cancel. (Despite what some may say, running a strong counter-based strategy is definitely not something at the beginner level.)
The block releases are all rated “expert” (I think) which explains why they’ve given us cards like Cryptic Command, Rune Snag, Broken Ambitions, etc. While on their face, they’re not extremely complicated cards to grasp, knowing how to play them properly is definitely something above the introductory skill level I think. A lot of newer players really do not see the value in the staples of blue; card draw and countering. Everyone just wants to bash with dudes. (Which is fine by me, I like to foil those strategies.)
That said, having no real viable control archetype makes the prospect of M10 Limited seem somewhat unappealing. Seems like the format will be largely defined by hitting your creature drops on-time in the early turns.
Who knows, though. Time will tell.
I see some potential for strong controling decks in M10 limited: Black in particular seems like it’ll be much better at playing the controling game (3 good common removal spells, card advantage through Sign in Blood/gravedigger and evasion). I can see black-based control being quite viable.
for the love of god no more jack plz.
gavin conley eric done.
It seems like they are pushing EDH with the functional reprints.
@Binman: Pure moneymaking scheme? Get real. Remove Soul/Essence Scatter is a common.
If they had renamed Hypnotic Specter to Despotic Specter or something, than you could call them greedy bastards, but making you shell out a nickel for new commons has got to be the worst business plan ever.
Too lazy to use email.
One last thing…
I just want to thank Tom, Jack and Conley for the great show! And Conley’s juices have fueled some interesting discussion on M10, Nothing is worse than a show we forget as soon as we switch it off!
@quetzilla it is part of Hasbro’s/WotC’s business plan is to make money by selling packs of cards. So while you are correct about changing the name of a common to a different name may not cause a person to file bankruptcy, a single common does however represent a pack of cards that someone paid money for. And packs are all that WotC is interested in. That is why the limited aspect of magic has been becoming more and more important to develop correctly. A better limited environment = more packs being sold.
Also great show guys. Tom glad you could get the juices flowing. Also no one entered the logo design contest.
So after we bust open the cases I will send you some common/uncommon sets you can give away as you please.
KHAN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Glad everyone liked the show more than I anticipated. I know I turned into a ranting fool for moments this time, which is part of the downside to doing a live show. I will keep it a bit more on a leash next week
Great show, but I’d just like to point out something on the Remove Soul vs Essence Scatter change.
Remove Soul doesn’t always make sense, because creatures don’t always have souls. I’m assuming that artifact creatures don’t have souls, I think zombies can be safely assumed not to have souls, and, just for good measure, there’s at least one definite example I can think of…
“I cast Remove Soul on Soulless One.” X-D
I’m pretty sure that this was the motivating factor for the flavor change with Essence Scatter.
Great show, though, guys. I’m a big fan. Keep it up!
Does anyone else ever notice the reoccuring theme of control players whining about every new set release, yet control decks continue to dominate std? I guarantee that control will stay dominate after m10 release. The reason people play control is that they find aggro “mindless”, so figure out the strategy that control needs to win. Again there WILL be and always will be a control deck to play.
I think Conley and Tom both hinted at the root of the cause for Jack’s and others’ lack of excitement over M10. Wizards billed M10 as a set with 50% brand new cards, but, even not counting the lands, there are still a bunch of unexciting functional reprints. Seeing all those reprints is kind of a let down when you’re expecting new cards. Also, because Wizards tried to design flavorful but simple new cards, a lot of the cards that are not strictly functional reprints are still very similar to previous cards and thus not that exciting.
I think the way M10 was introduced as being a big revamp of the Core Set with new cards and new rules got people to take this set seriously as a new set (the expectations thing similar to what Conley brought up). However, this is still a core set and, like Tom mentioned, in the past people were usually interested to see what was rotating in/out of the core set because of the implications for Constructed formats but I don’t remember anyone really being excited about the core set as a set that you would crack packs of or use for Limited. A lot of people approached M10 thinking of it as a new expansion and now that we have the full spoiler we see that despite the new naming system, new cards, and new flavor, in a lot of ways it is still just another core set.
I think this explains why I was kind of disappointed went I went over the full spoiler. An additional factor for me was that I just don’t like a lot of the functional reprint flavor names — Persuasion was much cooler than the clunky “Mind Control,” Threat is much more red than the black sounding “Act of Treason,” Terror is flavorful whereas “Doom Blade” sounds like a Maple Story card, etc.
With the exception of Wrath, I would not extrapolate the cards in M10 into the future of Magic — think about what’s leaving Standard and what’s entering it that’s playable. There’s not going to be that big of a change (eg control as an archetype is not losing that much). That said, losing Wrath is scary. Standard is already pretty heavily creature based and removing Wrath should just push that aspect even further.
I totally agree with Conley on his assessment of MTG’s billing of M10 as a 50% new set. When one sees a lot of functional reprints, we feel jilted and lied to. Some don’t even make sense i.e. Runeclaw Bear vs Cylian Elf (and now the spoiled Civic Wayfinder vs Human Civic Wayfinder). So here we see not only functional reprints, but functional reprints that don’t make sense within the context of the set! We’d rather have elves for the M10 elf lord, yet here we see a bear, and the ubiquitous (well, except in Lorwyn) Human race showing up.
I feel lied to about the set. I was excited about it and am less so now. Interesting cards / space that could be mined (the Raise Dead now going back to only your graveyard instead of previously spoiled any graveyard to that player’s hand) was just left out. Very sad about this.
It’s the right direction, but totally dropping the ball seems to be on par with WOTC actions over the past year (Gleemax & Digital Games?)
P.S. – They also do have some hits. Duel of the Planeswalkers I hear is great, as well as the M10 rules changes are overall good changes (if you haven’t played casual games with them, then you don’t know how good they actually are and how fun and interesting they make the game)
P.P.S. – Except for ‘battlefield’. Please, let’s just all ask WOTC to call it ‘field’ and save the mouthful and six letters per mention on cards. “When Civic Wayfinder enters the field” vs “When Civic Wayfinder enters the battlefield”. Which one sounds better? Which one would you rather be saying?
To comment on the ‘money grubbing’ thoughts of the name changes.
It is 100% a money move, and a brilliant one.
Renaming a chase rare gets a high cost card but not many of those change hands.
Renaming commons and uncommons creates new low cost cards.
10,000 players paying $1 for new commons/uncommons is as good as 1,000 paying $10 for a new rare.
WotC has a huge casual player base. The type of players who will fork over $10 for a bunch of commons/uncommons while shunning a $10 rare. To get their cash opens up a lot of money making opportunities that doesn’t actually impact the tournament players at all.
Freakin’ brilliant by WotC, really.
I agree, it is good business sense. Unfortunately, as players our pockets suffer, in however small a way. I see it as more of a frustration than financially crippling. I have four copies of that card, all perfectly playable, but now I have to get four more because they changed the name. It’s a little slap in the face, rather than a kick in the stones.
If you’ve never been interested in the core sets before, and you never really bothered to notice them before, then why are you all upset about this one? Jeez, it’s just a core set, no matter what kind of crazy marketing stuff they’re doing with it. There aren’t going to be a stupid number of overpowered cards. They’re not going to print all the best counterspells either.
Here’s my main complaint with all the bitching and moaning about “control not getting any love”. Control isn’t supposed to get a stupid amount of love from a core set. All those counters that Conley rattled off before were from expert-level sets except for Mana Leak. And they were all from at least 2 years ago, and yet control decks have been around since then. It’s weird how that works. And it’s weird that “control is dying” and yet it keeps surviving, even though apparently Wizards has been actively trying to kill it for years now.
Why don’t you guys just quit bitching and whining about it and start planning what kind of control decks you’re going to run in the new meta? “Control” and “Permission” are not one in the same you know. Branch out for Christ’s sake. Get out of your freakin’ comfort zone and play something different. And if you’re just going to complain about playing something different every second you’re doing it, perhaps you shouldn’t be playing at all.
Okay, rant over.
Here here! I fervently agree with what Chewie said.
A core set is a thing to build a solid base for the following sets. And control always gets its boost in the expansions, not in the base sets, if memory serves.
I also agree with the people who are saying that control is impossible to kill. As long as Magic exists, so will control. Control and permission are based in blue, black and red and all of these cards got enough love in M10 that the death of control seems a long way off. Yes, aggro got a boost, but that’s because aggro is less popular than control.
And as for the marketing, Wizards is a company that needs to make money, first and foremost. If Wizards goes out of business, control WILL die. As will aggro, combo and Magic in general. If you’ll kindly look around, you’ll see these times are economically difficult. Therefore, Wizards is putting a higher emphasis on making money. However, they’re not doing it in a way that will bankrupt all of you people who buy expensive decks for tournaments. All you’ll have to do is shell out a dollar or so to get these functional reprint commons. THEY’RE COMMONS FOR URZA’S SAKE! GET OVER IT. It’s not like they’re reprinting valuable rares and calling them something else, like the specter example above.
…And on the 7th edition thing…wasn’t 7th relatively TERRIBAD?
And to anyone (most notably Tom, who is an innocent bystander) who feels offended by my last post, I would like to apologize. But I should point out that I have been offended, both as a casual player and as a player in general, at least 3 or 4 times over the past couple episodes.
Just sayin’…
When does M10 rotate out? When M12 comes in?
No, core sets will come out once per-year, I think. So we’ll have brief periods where 2 core sets are legal, like right now.
Well, 10th will rotate out with M10. However, M10 will rotate with shards in the fall, and M11 will rotate with zendikar. By the way, I believe it was Aaron Forsythe who pointed out that Conflux had 7 reprints despite having an implicit promise to be entirely new. The same goes with shards (No one complained about Cylian Elf, cancel, Jhessian lookout, and infest despite it being a new set). Functional reprints happen all the time, and as long as they’re not doing that with money cards, then it is fine. By the way, Wizards doesn’t actually get that money from the secondary market, and I seriously doubt that people needing to buy essence scatter is going to have a large effect on M10′s sales.
Actually, people DID complain about those reprints. Both the functional and the identical, it’s just that it’s been over six months since it happened and the typical effect of forgetting the past from the new shiny is in effect.
It was even asked about in one of the developer chats they’ve done in the past.
They also never announced that the set would be 100% new. We simply assumed it would be. I only have a problem then they lie to us, by giving out numbers and falling drastically short of that, attempting to cover it up with “new” reprints.