Change has come to Magic the Gathering. For the first time in more than ten years basic rules of game play are being tweaked more than just a little bit. The purpose of Magic 2010 from the outset has been to involve and recruit more ‘casual’ players to the game. A not un-noble effort. In fact one we as dedicated MTG duelists should embrace and celebrate as it may mean more people in our own play groups. However that is not to say these changes should be ushered through our collective sieve into our casual environment without scrutiny. Indeed quite the opposite. We need to look at each change for what it is, and what it could be. In that spirit, here at GatheringMagic we are doing our part to see where this winding road is taking us and if we want to go there.
M10 is bringing more than just 150 new cards
Before we discuss specifics allow a brief descriptive paragraph. These rules vary in scope and importance. A few of them alter nothing but the words that come out our mouths during a match. Some shift the way we have played since Alpha, Beta, or whenever we first walked the various planes. In order to sort these rules, we offer a three category system. First, we have the cosmetic changes or rules and text base changes that don’t alter game-play in any manner. Second there are the strategic changes. These may not alter the core systems established within MTG, but they do alter many important high-level interactions within each duel. That is a kind way of saying they remove some strategic elements. Third, the fundamental changes that warp even our most deeply held understanding of the game for better or worse.
Cosmetic Changes - These are alterations in rules wording or game-text that do not make any difference in the way each game is played. In point of fact, they have been included to give the game itself a superficial make-over. Designed to bring in new players these rules are part of the effort to reconnect with MTGs fantasy roots. For example playing a spell is not longer referred to as ‘playing’. You are now ‘casting’ that spell. Hmm, seems familiar. That is because wizards were ‘casting’ spells long before WotC told them they were ‘playing’ spells instead. In the grand scheme of things the original change has become irrelevant and we are back to feeling a bit more magical about our craft.
not what it once was
Two other changes in wording involve game zones: the battlefield, and exile. The battlefield is basically what ‘in-play’ was up until about two days ago. Exile is the space where ‘removed-from-the-game’ cards lie, and is now wholly separate from cards that are simply not in the game at all. Basically there are now two groups of cards that are out of the game, and we have a new key-word to label one.
Lastly, we have a minor change to the final step of each turn. End of turn abilities now trigger/resolve during what is called the beginning of the end step. Meaning you can play spells during this time if you want. Yes, you always could but now we’ve captured that WotC key word ‘intuitive.’
Strategic Changes - Here we have the meat of these rules changes. Differences that can make a serious impact on who wins and loses. Well, except for the simultaneous mulligan rule. A piece of tournament fodder that corrects the perceived issue of, and I’m not making this up, time spent shuffling. If this beauty had been released by itself I don’t think anyone would have noticed. Although kudos to Wizards for fixing a problematic system no matter how insignificant.
Major stress may not result from simultaneous mulligans, but most certainly will from our next rule. Combat damage no longer goes on the stack with every other ability. Much like the untap step the damage phase just is. Say goodbye to blocking, waiting until damage is on the stack and then sacrificing/tapping a creature for some added ability. That means you Mogg Fanatic, oh and you too Greater Gargadon. No longer will you be the dumping grounds for creatures that have ‘died’ in combat. No more two-for-ones. This seems like the biggest change in the average game of Magic and one I hope WotC has thought out thoroughly.
why change the card to fit the rules when you can do the opposite
In a avalanche of rules tampering caused by this, there are now new ways to block, an exception for deathtouch, and another for lifelink. Blocking has a complicated new wrinkle that we do not have the space to explain. Again here is the link, scroll down about half-way for a closer look at the new assign blockers step. Simply put, you are no longer allowed as an attacker blocked by multiple creatures to assign damage any way you like. Meaning your 4/6 can’t divide combat damage equally between two other 4/4s and finish them off later with a Pyroclasm. All well and good. Except now deathtouch as an ability changes the way blocking damage is assigned. Basically, as long as your attacker has deathtouch the damage assignment works exactly the same as it once did for all creatures. This seems to be counter to the ‘let’s make it simple stupid’ game plan WotC adopted recently. Why did they make this change? To keep deathtouch relevant. Finally, because damage from combat no longer uses the stack, lifelink does not either. If you are at 4 life and your opponent attacks with an unblocked 5/5 that you previously lifelinked you no longer die before the life gain occurs. The gain/loss is simultaneous. (Ed note: my casual group played this way before because it always made more sense. Now we will enjoy having one less house rule.)
The last strategic change is another example of seemingly harmless errata with one big exception. Instead of banning a card (something WotC views as akin to admitting failure) they made a small tweak to the rules seemingly bent on nerfing a single card: Warp World. The old way? Tokens were owned by the player responsible for their existence. Rules change? Tokens are now owned by who ever has control of them when they come into play.
should i burn this now, or wait until july?
Fundamental Changes - It may seem overkill to have an entire separate category for a single change, but the change here is so foundation shaking one category may seem a tad small to fit it. Beginning with the release of Magic 2010 there will be no more mana burn. None. Tap your lands at will and suffer no consequences. Some cards, like Power Surge, are rendered useless. However, that is not the important point. Mana burn is one of the rocks MTG is built upon. It doesn’t matter that it rarely comes up in game play or that when it does it is usually being exploited. This is Wizards telling us to make fifty cards decks, or draw nine cards to begin play, or flip cards over instead of turn them on their side. Its chaos!
Panicked reactions aside, this is a good thing. As stated, mana-burn almost never rears its head and when it does the purpose is almost always evil. This is a friendlier game where a person can use as much or as little of his hard earned resources without fear of retribution from the math gods. A brave new world and we are living in it, let’s make the best of that.
In these next few days/weeks we at GatheringMagic will be playtesting these new rules and will bring you any an all updates of issues we have. Or hopefully issues that have been resolved. Please feel free to comment with feelings of your own, or stories about interactions with the new rules.
Loading ...Like this article? Try these:
[...] your craw, feel free to relieve your frustrations on the Gathering Magic Forum, or comment on them here. Alright self, enough shameless promotion already! Written by Leaf in: Deck Building, Magic [...]
You’re breaking the best thing about the game – turning a negative effect into a positive one. Please don’t do it.
I’ve been playing since 1994, and I can tell you that these new changes are fundamentally worse than the 6th edition changes (I’m referring to mana burn and combat/damage). Ten years ago, the playing community was divided over the formalizing of the stack and the retirement of interrupt, but the bottom line was this: IT OPENED UP THE GAME.
A handful of cards got worse and a couple became unplayable, but it made SO many cards better, gave rise to new and more interesting game-play styles, and the combat trick metagame suddenly became a game in itself.
The new changes shut down what was once opened up, makes HUNDREDS of cards worse if not unplayable, and in some ways it utterly fails to accomplish their stated goal: making the game easier for new players to pick up.
It makes the game somewhat more “intuitive” for the handful of math-averse focus groups they tested these rules on, but in failing to predict how experienced players (their bread and butter right now) would react, Wizards DID NOT think these changes through.
What they’ve done has seriously hurt the game, and they’ve shown that the either don’t really know what kinds of people buy and play this game (while knowing what styles of players they have, ironically), or they don’t care.
They’ve made a huge gamble for the sake of a demographic that “might” pick the game up at the expense of ppl who’ve been playing for years. I’m not saying these changes are going to kill Magic, but if Wizards doesn’t backpedal on this, the direction in which the game is going certainly WILL.
I’m surprised at the lack of new cards (2004-present) on this list. Many of the posts in our forum come from players who are fairly new.
Didn’t any of them go crazy the first time they pulled a Planeswalker?
I’ve been playing since 1994, The new rules are great. BUT FOR CHRIST SAKE, put one single rule into T1 format and make it the best thing Ever. Maximum of 10 restricted cards per deck.
Keep the P9 as as P9, but now EVERYONE can have fun playing T1. Fair, logical, amazing fun and the hard choice between that Sol Ring or the Demonic tutor you never thought you’d have to do!
That change would be the BEST THING EVER for us, old time players who only see the accumulation of new restricted things making t1 less and less a format(say, tinker).
The only time mana burn has ever come up for me was when I had to tap Azorius Chancery and an Island for enough blue mana to cast a much-needed Counterspell. So I willingly sacrificed 1 life due to mana burn rather than let my opponent’s spell through. I really think that getting rid of mana burn is a change for the better, since it comes up so infrequently. It’s just that mana burn was always such a flavorful, core mechanic in my mind, even if it was rarely an issue. That was the one rules change that made me say “Whaaaaat?” at first.
However there is one aspect of the rules changes to Deathtouch that I disagree with. The new combat system orders multiple blockers, forcing the attacking player to deal enough damage to the first one in order to continue on to the second. Yet Deathtouch arbitrarily ignores all of that, because it would be stupid for a 2/3 with Deathtouch to only kill the first creature when it is blocked by a 2/2 and a 1/1 (however the attacker orders them anyway, so couldn’t he… never mind). Instead, they should have simply stated that the minimum damage rule would be set to 1 for attacking creatures with Deathtouch that have multiple blockers. Damage would still be distributed in order, but the 2/2 with Deathtouch would only have to spend 1 point of damage on the first blocker before continuing to the second. It would make the ordering of multiple blockers actually MEAN something to creatures with Deathtouch.
i think that no mana burn is absurd, especially coming from a game that is based on the teachings of a math professor. Look it has nothing to do with keeping the game fair, lets just be honest. Duress costs B, i spend BB to play it not only am i an idiot but, yes, i should take mana burn. ok, lets go 1 more, if it weren’t fair(i.e. power surge, citidel of pain, and cards as recent as vallymaker) don’t they have a b&r list for that. it just doesn’t make sense, not in a game that is math oriented and in a game that says 13+ right on the pack.
[...] rules changes brought along with M10 far outweigh the impact of any particular card in the set. Harsh outcry [...]
Just stop buying the product. The only thing Hasbro cares about is your money; opinions and feedback are only a ruse perpetrated by WoTC to give players a feel of control over the product which they purchase. complaining < monetary impact
[...] has been roses for the new power color. Changes to the wording of Lifelink during the infamous M10 rules changes hurt quite a few white cards. Not nearly as much as red and black were damaged by changes in [...]
I’ve been playing since 1995, i am pretty sckeptical towards these new rules but i need gametime to actualy get the feeling of how they change the game.