Subject: Issue Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 11:06:35 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Nevitt To: fkusumot@ix.netcom.com -------------------------------------------------------------------- Suggestions for Wizards. Frank, Lately, there has been a great deal of talk on the boards surrounding the rules changes for 6th Edition. One recent article was bold enough to suggest that the R&D team at Wizards should work with its players (the Magic Community) to see how they would like to see the game evolve. I agree. Wizards should not work in a vacuum. Like many, I have speculated as to why Wizards would feel that handing out seemingly arbitrary changes would be "better" for the game. However, thoughts like: less money spent on customer service lines, fewer judges and judging decisions, more product to market, etc, are all somewhat irrelevant. Instead, I would like to simply offer my suggestions as a player, and hope they take my comments as constructive suggestions. 1. Rule changes. Don't do them. Interrupts are easy to understand. The mana pool works. The Damage Prevention Phase can be weird, but once learned it leads to a number of very interesting interactions. Tapped artifacts should follow the same rule as any card with a continuous effect. That is: tap Karma (an enchantment) and it shuts off as well. Simplified rulesshould be left to Portal (aka Magic Lite), or any of the many other CCG's Wizard's has created. 2. Type II. Outside sealed deck, which I understand to be the most popular format, Type II is the most common tournament format. While many would argue that Type II is a cheap gimmick to keep players constantly purchasing cards, I feel it rightly forces people to remain creative. They have to examine new sets for strengths and weaknesses and develop analytical skills to uncover strong deck concepts and new cards interactions. However. This cannot happen in a three month period. That is how long Exodus was allowed to interact with the Mirage Visions Weatherlight block. While the argument is made that more tournament formats exist, they fail to account for the recent rigorous development of Magic. The block format, by definition, will not allow players to explore the block to block card interaction that is so intriguing about Magic. And after block comes, Extended? Whoa. Now we get to go back and use cards who are undercosted for the power of their effects, the very reason for the development of the Type II format. 3. Cost. At present, Wizards is developing one block per year. This block consists of 600-700 cards (well, 636 to 684). Without using statistical models, to get a 'complete' set of cards under current tournament rules (no more than 4 of any card) simply take the cost per pack, $3, times the rares in a set, times the 4 card limit to get investments of $792 for Tempest block and $840 for a Mirage block. While trading and purchasing can offset some of the cost to get the 'tournament quality' rares, statistical modals demonstrate that you will pay consistently at least 2 times this amount to be able to construct a full set of tournament quality decks. Is $1500 too much for a hobby? How much does Go or Chess cost? For my part, I like seeing this many new cards per year, and while expensive, it is interesting. Therefore, I feel the development cycle is aggressive, but correct. 4. Rotation. Don't rotate blocks out of Type II so quickly. As a rule, give the last set of a block 6 months in Type II before the preceding block is dropped. So, for example, Exodus would interact with MVW for 6 months in type II. Also, the new set should be introduced as it is currently. That gives an interesting window for decks to use phasing and flanking and Urza's Saga. Well, that is my two cents. Assuming that Wizard's does not have a business formulae for the churn of Magic players, the release of sets, and the rotation of the Type II format, we of the Magic community really are worth listening too. Thanks, Robert G. Nevitt Send comments or suggestions to: rnevitt@cea.berkeley.edu