Subject: Re: Proposed 6E rule changes Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 08:41:41 PST From: Chris Warren To: MTG-STRATEGY-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM >I fail to see how making the game easier will force veteran players >to quit. Making the game easier won't force people to quit. Making changes that aren't necessary for the game to remain logically consistent, and that force existing players to relearn a good part of the rules for no good reason >I am sorry that you and your friends don't want all MTG players to >completely understand the rules, but that is too bad. I think it is Wait, who said that? I think the thinking is among the existing set of serious players that the people who really want to know the rules more or less know them. Yes, there is a wee bit of really nasty tricky stuff running around, but you can learn that on a case-by-case basis depending on whether there are decks around that need the rule. On the most part, though, if you memorized the 5E rulebook (and how hard would that be?) and learned a handful of extra rulings, you'd be fine for the vast majority of opponents in terms of rules knowledge. There are a LOT, I'll repeat, A LOT of people who play Magic who have no clue what's in the rulebook. Take a look at the mtg-l list or rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules, or stop by IRC sometimes and watch what rules questions come in. A very few are extremely-tricky rules-lawyery stuff that'll likely never see the light of a real game. A handfull are reasonable rulings-type questions (can I play a second academy and tap it for mana before it dies?) But most, by a pretty good majority, are questions you could answer by reading the rulebook. A huge part of these are things that just involve telling them "yes, do what the card says." Does Armageddon kill all lands? yes, that's really what it says. all means yours too. All. Can a circle of protection stop damage to my creature? no, it doesn't say creature, it says you. And you know what? That's fine. Magic's cool in that there are kind of three ways you can look at it: * Obsession: This is my life * Hobby: this is a neat (even preferable) way to spend my spare time * Game: look, a dragon. ROAR. The Magic:Gamers ask these rulebook questions. Maybe they're confused, they don't have one, or they don't bother looking. Fine. I think the big illusion the rules team is laboring under is this: "If we simplify the rule structure, everyone will understand all the rules" more or less. It's just not true. What happens is this: * Magic:Gamers ask a few less questions but still a lot since they don't want to bother looking stuff up and don't want to put a lot of effort into just a game. * Magic:Hobbyists have to relearn the rules, get upset, and probably end up with a better understanding of the obscure stuff they maybe didn't get. * Magic:Obsessives understood the rules before, understand the new rules, and are highly steamed at having the rules changed for no visible effect since the first gang is still asking questions that are pretty much obvious. >great what WOTC is doing. I do think some of the changes are >dumb but if that is what it takes to make the game easier then I am >all for it. Consider the effects and then ask yourself... is it REALLY worth it? --Chris btw, on a side note. I don't know if most of that report is true, but the part about there being no interrupts in 6E is 99.99% likely to be accurate. I've had this confirmed from MULTIPLE sources. However, this does NOT mean countermagic is going away. There will still be counterspells, however Counterspell will now be spell type "Instant" and the timing rules, probably including priority rules to some extent will be modified to accomodate that. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com