Subject: regarding 6ed changes. Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 18:37:03 -0700 From: "Juel Iwaasa" To: Dear Peter, Thank you for your reply. Please know that both your letter and this repsonse will eventually get to the Dojo. Let's see, you asked for replies if we had further qualms... In principle, I agree with what you are projecting for the game of magic. However, the single most difficult part of magic is not the basic rules or timing or classes of cards. It's reconciling older card templates with modern wordings and keeping up to date on errata on cards. Essentially the same problem. Knowing when what is written on the card is not true in the game. Teaching the game is simple. My 4 year old son understands how to play. He even grasps card interactions and secondary strategies. Timing and phases and straight forward, when explained clearly. Only in odd situations do the rules get sticky (ball lightning and lifeline for instance) The most frustrating part is teaching someone the game and then having to explain errata and template changes. "Okay, counter with Arcane Denial".... next turn.... "...upkeep draw my extra cards" ..."uh no, you should have done that at the beginning of the round..." "why?" "well, because...." "Counter your dark ritual."You can't, it's a mana source." "No, it says it's an interrupt.." "Well, that's because it's a revised card..." "Now why did you tap that millstone?" "Oh well you have to, to use it." "Why? There's no tap symbol. It just says "mono artifact." "Oh, well they changed that. You have to use the most current version." "So everything on the left of the colon is a cost, yes?" "Yes. Unless it's an Ice Age block card. The template reads differently then. Oh and that doesn't necessarily apply to post rath either. Apparently they switched the template on cards like 'raze' and such." And now you are going to change interrupts into instants and artifacts will stay on when tapped unless it has something written on the card to the contrary? Will there be a broad brush errata to all the older artifacts that we will have to remember too? In doing these "simplifications" to the mechanics, you will make a huge list of things we have to remember and adjust mentally (no, "Oh well, what does the card say?") both in templates and mechanics. I speak English, French and Japanese and let me tell you, Japanese is the easiest to learn to speak hands down! The reason? When you learn grammar principle is applies almost unilaterally to the whole language system. There only 3 basic kinds of verbs in common usage, and their conjugations are related if not similar. French and English both have literally 1000's and 1000's of irregular verbs and exceptions to all the major grammatical standards. A nightmare comparatively to learn to speak well as a second language. This is the real bane in learning magic. Not the timing or categories of cards. Not the intricacies of the game mechanics. That's the fun. The real stumbling block for learning the game of magic is staying current with all the unwritten (yes they are written, but not on the cards) "exceptions" to the basic rules and principles. Especially when the text written on the cards is incongruent with how the current, modern game is played. So, we can't undo the past. There is no way to trade in our old cards (nor would many of us want to) for new, consistently templated/errata'd cards. But why should we want to exponentially expand the number of text and template "exceptions" for the sake of a conceptual "streamlining?" Won't the results be contrary to what the good doctor wants? If it's will truly make the game better than I am for it. I am not tryng to be contrary to the establishment. So far, however, these changes seems more detremental than healing. Perhaps I have misunderstood your words. I would welcome a response. Sincerely, Juel Iwaasa. -----Original Message----- From: Peter Adkison To: Juel Iwaasa Date: Thursday, November 19, 1998 3:38 PM Subject: Re: 6th ed changes >First of all, apologies in advance for sending you back a "form letter" >response. If you still have concerns after reading this, write again. But I >really think this is a non-issue and I hope this note clears it up. > >Let's start with a quote from the good doctor. > >"I have been following and participating in Classic Rules (6th Edition) >development and have been happy with the trimming of needless complication >from the rules that distract from the strategy of the game. The rules are >getting closer to my original concept of simple, clear rules with strategic >play depth introduced through cards." >-Richard Garfield > >Folks, there really isn't any secret here. We've been saying for a long >time that our goal is to make Magic: the Gathering a classic game like >Chess or Go. What makes Chess and Go classic is that they have very deep >strategy while having relatively easy rules. I'm sure that many of you >would agree that Magic has very deep strategy, while many of you would also >agree that the rules are not easy. > >With this goal in mind, our staff set out to do some minor house cleaning >of the Magic rules. The intent was not to reduce the amount of strategy in >Magic, but to make it more intuitive and easy to learn for people who had >never played the game and make it easier for expert players to resolve >rules disputes. Most of the rules "changes" that we are planning will not >even affect the way Magic is being currently played, but rather will simply >make the rules easier to understand. > >The rules changes that will occur in 6th Edition were never meant to be >some big secret that we were going to spring on you (the players) the day >that 6th Edition was released. We are planning to explain the rules >changes next year before the set even comes out. We were intentionally >refraining from releasing information on new rules until shortly before 6th >Edition is released so that players, both tournament and casual, would not >get confused by which set of rules they should be using. The rules changes >will not go into effect until after 6th Edition is released, in accordance >with DCI rules. > >None the less, we wanted to clear up some rumors about possible rules >changes that have been discussed here. > >1. No more interrupts. >This is true. But this doesn't mean that counterspells will go away. >Counterspell and all other old interrupts will be played as instants. This >has very little effect on game play. >2. No more Damage Prevention Phase. >This is true, but it doesn't mean no more damage prevention. You'll still >be able to play Healing Salve in response to my Lightning Bolt and prevent >the damage. >3. No more Mana Pool. >This is incorrect. You'll still have a Mana Pool. However, if you wish, >you'll be allowed to play a spell then tap your lands to pay for it. >4. Tapped artifacts will function normally. (A tapped Winter Orb will >still be turned on and have its normal effect.) >This is true. We've decided to remove the rule from the rulebook and >instead add it to the cards. Expect to see artifacts like "As long as this >card is untapped, creatures can't attack." > >We apologize for any confusion or panic that any posts about 6E rules >changes might have caused you. The rules changes have been made with the >help of many external play testers as well as certified judges so that we >wouldn't suffer from ivory tower disease. I realize that we are now a big >corporation, but when you peel away that corporate façade, there remain a >large number of gamers here who love this game as much as you do. We are >not trying to alter the game for the sake of fiddling or to cater to >beginner players at the expense of our valued and loyal long time players >and fans. I hope that players can understand and respect why we wouldn't >want to introduce or discuss the rules changes at this time since it would >cause confusion in the play environment. I also hope that players >understand and support our goal to make Magic: the Gathering a classic game. > > >Stay on target, >Peter D. Adkison >CEO, Wizards of the Coast >