The Official Magic the Gathering card game Rules, Questions, and General Discussion Thread

[Space Lynx]

Hey everyone if you want to be an idiot, WotC now has preorders up for a lotto ticket called the One Ring, a magic the gathering card only going to be printed once! Already the bid is up to 1 million dollars for who finds it first!

Packs to find it cost $45 a pop! Have fun everyone! Brought to you by the lottery for the rich get richer project, in association with Wizards of the Toast and Hasfkyoubro Incorporated!

 

[Vayra86]

Hey everyone if you want to be an idiot, WotC now has preorders up for a lotto ticket called the One Ring, a magic the gathering card only going to be printed once! Already the bid is up to 1 million dollars for who finds it first!

Packs to find it cost $45 a pop! Have fun everyone! Brought to you by the lottery for the rich get richer project, in association with Wizards of the Toast and Hasfkyoubro Incorporated!

Yeah its horrible. Have you seen that lotr set though. The cards! Theyre so bad! We still have some spoilers to go but.. wow. This set looks aimed at new players entirely. It says to contain new stuff for Modern as it is legal there but I struggle to see anything for it except Reprieve

 

[Space Lynx]

Yeah its horrible. Have you seen that lotr set though. The cards! Theyre so bad! We still have some spoilers to go but.. wow. This set looks aimed at new players entirely. It says to contain new stuff for Modern as it is legal there but I struggle to see anything for it except Reprieve

yeah Wizards has lost their mind. it will be a collapsed company the way things are going. they got some new executives or something awhile ago, and they are the type to milk something to death for the glory of short term profits.

magic had a longer run than most though, I enjoyed it for 23 years. RIP magic, i will miss you

 

[Vayra86]

yeah Wizards has lost their mind. it will be a collapsed company the way things are going. they got some new executives or something awhile ago, and they are the type to milk something to death for the glory of short term profits.

magic had a longer run than most though, I enjoyed it for 23 years. RIP magic, i will miss you

You know Im more optimistic about mtg's survival But like you I dont get the rationale either. The amount of releases is literally mind numbing. I stopped caring, I just cherry pick singles but even that... All I want so far from lotr sets are a few commons and uncommons. Many of the cards are walls of text that lead to inconsequential nonsense effects, or something too niche for use in any more than one kind of deck. And the larger archetype synergies like say 'artifact matters' isnt really influential in the meta altogether ; a card like Skrelv's Hive for example is stupid good... outside of standard where it got released for. It all adds to a super messy feel to things.

Wotc did explain the new strategy in a blog post once, explaining it as 'something for everyone, pick what you like' but thats just not how it works as they deliberately release crossformat nonsense. That fucking acorn on Unfinity for example. Its absolute crap.

 

[Space Lynx]

You know Im more optimistic about mtg's survival But like you I dont get the rationale either. The amount of releases is literally mind numbing. I stopped caring, I just cherry pick singles but even that... All I want so far from lotr sets are a few commons and uncommons. Many of the cards are walls of text that lead to inconsequential nonsense effects, or something too niche for use in any more than one kind of deck. And the larger archetype synergies like say 'artifact matters' isnt really influential in the meta altogether ; a card like Skrelv's Hive for example is stupid good... outside of standard where it got released for. It all adds to a super messy feel to things.

I used to be optimistic, I am optimistic in the short term they will continue to do well, eventually all these newcomers will burn out though and it will just be another fad/phase for them, and when that happens, these types executives tend to lose their mind and go batshit crazy to please the shareholders. That day will come eventually.

 

[Vayra86]

I used to be optimistic, I am optimistic in the short term they will continue to do well, eventually all these newcomers will burn out though and it will just be another fad/phase for them, and when that happens, these types executives tend to lose their mind and go batshit crazy to please the shareholders. That day will come eventually.

Oh yeah definitely. A reality check incoming is not even a question...

march of the madness wasn't all that good, I did a couple free drafts on Arena. not going to waste my time on it. hopefully a future expansion looks interesting. starting to get bored, but i still do my daily quests to stack my gold, so eh.

Nope. Another set I practically skipped card wise.

 

[dragontamer5788]

So Hasbro is pretty bad recently. But... I don't think this LoTR set is bad.

There's a number of very interesting things going on. The 9 Nazgul cards for example. The One Ring artifact. Etc. etc. "The Ring Tempts You" mechanic, the story interleaved with the cards. It helps solidify players that yes, a story happens in Magic the Gathering. And in this case, we all already know the story of LoTR (rather than the opposite, where the cards show us a story that we don't really know and have to dig in deeper to the books or blogs to find the official story).

IMO, the main problem with Hasbro's current treatment of MtG is the online vs in-person split, now that there are "online only" cards. There's over printing of absurd money grabbers (see the $1000+ proxy card set they released a few months ago), etc. etc.

--------

LoTR is closer to the old form of MtG, focusing on telling a story through cards and artwork and gameplay. We need more of this back in Magic IMO.

 

[Space Lynx]

So Hasbro is pretty bad recently. But... I don't think this LoTR set is bad.

There's a number of very interesting things going on. The 9 Nazgul cards for example. The One Ring artifact. Etc. etc. "The Ring Tempts You" mechanic, the story interleaved with the cards. It helps solidify players that yes, a story happens in Magic the Gathering. And in this case, we all already know the story of LoTR (rather than the opposite, where the cards show us a story that we don't really know and have to dig in deeper to the books or blogs to find the official story).

IMO, the main problem with Hasbro's current treatment of MtG is the online vs in-person split, now that there are "online only" cards. There's over printing of absurd money grabbers (see the $1000+ proxy card set they released a few months ago), etc. etc.

--------

LoTR is closer to the old form of MtG, focusing on telling a story through cards and artwork and gameplay. We need more of this back in Magic IMO.

I don't remember, but can this LOTR expansion be played in Standard mode? or is this considered a different mode? I can't keep up with all of it anymore

 

[dragontamer5788]

I don't remember, but can this LOTR expansion be played in Standard mode? or is this considered a different mode? I can't keep up with all of it anymore

I've never played virtually. I'm in-person only.

Not against the video game or anything. But... I've got a huge video game backlog. MtG always was a social event to meet up with my friends rather than a thing I play on my computer.

 

[Space Lynx]

I've never played virtually. I'm in-person only.

Not against the video game or anything. But... I've got a huge video game backlog. MtG always was a social event to meet up with my friends rather than a thing I play on my computer.

yeah I used to like meeting up with friends to play MtG, but then too many of them became dbags and would just play illegal cards and win on turn 3 in games... which is why I only play Standard mode now as at least there is some effort at balance.

pauper standard is more fun to me than expensive decks/modes.

I just googled it btw, and the answer is no the LOTR cards can not be played in standard mode.

Modern and Commander only.

 

[Vayra86]

So Hasbro is pretty bad recently. But... I don't think this LoTR set is bad.

There's a number of very interesting things going on. The 9 Nazgul cards for example. The One Ring artifact. Etc. etc. "The Ring Tempts You" mechanic, the story interleaved with the cards. It helps solidify players that yes, a story happens in Magic the Gathering. And in this case, we all already know the story of LoTR (rather than the opposite, where the cards show us a story that we don't really know and have to dig in deeper to the books or blogs to find the official story).

IMO, the main problem with Hasbro's current treatment of MtG is the online vs in-person split, now that there are "online only" cards. There's over printing of absurd money grabbers (see the $1000+ proxy card set they released a few months ago), etc. etc.

--------

LoTR is closer to the old form of MtG, focusing on telling a story through cards and artwork and gameplay. We need more of this back in Magic IMO.

Good point tbh, I did get that throwback vibe with some of the cards too. Just not always in a good way - a white 3/2 creature with no keywords for 2c1w is just silly in 2023, those power/toughness numbers below the mana cost are really typical for way back when. But yeah, it has a page of backstory on it. I think you got that conclusion right.

But that's really the only strong point I can give it. Its a set that needs to clearly live in isolation to be of any semblance of importance to anyone. I mean. 9 Nazgul cards, interesting you say, perhaps in a draft yes, but otherwise? I don't see it. You have one in hand, you play it, players know you've got eight more. Okay. Similarly The One Ring, feels like an awfully meh artifact akin to dungeons or initiative in a previous set. And then there is the art. Not just all of the things wrong with the actual likeness of characters, let's leave that wherever it needs to go, but the quality of the art. 90% is, imho, utterly forgettable and the border art is out of place. Even and perhaps especially the cards where some fantastic things should have been going on. It all feels dull, samey. Those full art basics with the regions hardly make sense and you have to read the card to discover what you're looking at. I had a completely different feel with lots of other recent releases too, so its strange to me; the Warhammer 40K decks were in a great place for example, the Necrons just oozed what they actually are, everything from the border to the art and card texts - including the abilities on them. Similarly, compare Squad mechanic with Amass Orcs; a new token etb that you can scale with mana versus a renamed keyword. Your explanation was a more story based angle; sure, but isn't most of this just pretty lazy?

And then beyond the individual cards. The set's mechanics in a general sense. I don't know man. Its heavily creature focused, so you get those big battles I guess with amassed Orc armies and whatnot. Again - cool idea, in isolation. If you step anywhere outside that creature board meta, you're going to annihilate the board. Its so vulnerable, so incredibly weak.

 

[dragontamer5788]

a white 3/2 creature with no keywords for 2c1w is just silly in 2023

Perfectly playable in Draft though. Which is the primary format I play.

And then beyond the individual cards. The set's mechanics in a general sense. I don't know man. Its heavily creature focused, so you get those big battles I guess with amassed Orc armies and whatnot. Again - cool idea, in isolation. If you step anywhere outside that creature board meta, you're going to annihilate the board. Its so vulnerable, so incredibly weak.

But there's no bounce spells in this set. So the amassed Orc Army isn't easily countered in the draft set, it seems.

I don't think that every set needs to be meta-defining. Innistrad was pretty low power, but it became a fan-favorite due to its heavy emphasis on lore, storytelling, and art. But ask anyone who knows a damn about MtG, and Innistrad block was one of the lowest power sets in years. It was _NOT_ meta-defining, and came out in a time of a great power uncreap (cards like Lightning Bolt were rotating out of the meta, Birds of Paradise was rotated out, etc. etc).

I don't think the typical MtG player cares about powerful cards. I think the community largely cares about art, lore, and "fun", which is intangible but Innistrad had it.

But that's really the only strong point I can give it. Its a set that needs to clearly live in isolation to be of any semblance of importance to anyone. I mean. 9 Nazgul cards, interesting you say, perhaps in a draft yes, but otherwise? I don't see it. You have one in hand, you play it, players know you've got eight more. Okay. Similarly The One Ring, feels like an awfully meh artifact akin to dungeons or initiative in a previous set. And then there is the art. Not just all of the things wrong with the actual likeness of characters, let's leave that wherever it needs to go, but the quality of the art. 90% is, imho, utterly forgettable and the border art is out of place. Even and perhaps especially the cards where some fantastic things should have been going on. It all feels dull, samey. Those full art basics with the regions hardly make sense and you have to read the card to discover what you're looking at. I had a completely different feel with lots of other recent releases too, so its strange to me; the Warhammer 40K decks were in a great place for example, the Necrons just oozed what they actually are, everything from the border to the art and card texts - including the abilities on them. Similarly, compare Squad mechanic with Amass Orcs; a new token etb that you can scale with mana versus a renamed keyword. Your explanation was a more story based angle; sure, but isn't most of this just pretty lazy?

Are we talking about the same set here? IMO, the art is fantastic.

I'll have to play the set to see if its any good. But as a primarily "Draft" player, my focus is obviously on a very different kind of game than you.

 

[Space Lynx]

Perfectly playable in Draft though. Which is the primary format I play.



But there's no bounce spells in this set. So the amassed Orc Army isn't easily countered in the draft set, it seems.

I don't think that every set needs to be meta-defining. Innistrad was pretty low power, but it became a fan-favorite due to its heavy emphasis on lore, storytelling, and art. But ask anyone who knows a damn about MtG, and Innistrad block was one of the lowest power sets in years. It was _NOT_ meta-defining, and came out in a time of a great power uncreap (cards like Lightning Bolt were rotating out of the meta, Birds of Paradise was rotated out, etc. etc).

I don't think the typical MtG player cares about powerful cards. I think the community largely cares about art, lore, and "fun", which is intangible but Innistrad had it.



View attachment 299990View attachment 299991View attachment 299992View attachment 299993View attachment 299994


View attachment 299996View attachment 299997View attachment 299998View attachment 300000View attachment 300001

Are we talking about the same set here? IMO, the art is fantastic.

I'll have to play the set to see if its any good. But as a primarily "Draft" player, my focus is obviously on a very different kind of game than you.

do you know what "the ring tempts you" means, its mentioned on a few cards, but doesn't seem like it actually triggers anything to occur? I am a bit confused by that.

 

[dragontamer5788]

do you know what "the ring tempts you" means, its mentioned on a few cards, but doesn't seem like it actually triggers anything to occur? I am a bit confused by that.

The "Ring-bearer" grows more powerful each time they are tempted by the ring.

------------

Finally, many creatures gain benefits from being tempted by the ring.

-------------

EDIT:

Naturally, if you got Frodo up to its final level, you win the game if you've been tempted 4-times AND strike the opponent with Frodo.

 

[Space Lynx]

well, I have 3 draft tokens saved up I bought with gold, so I probably will use them for LOTR drafts. could spend them on a worse expansion that's for sure. I am interested in the one ring mechanic, reminds a little bit of the dungeons in dungeons and dragons expansion

 

[Vayra86]

Perfectly playable in Draft though. Which is the primary format I play.



But there's no bounce spells in this set. So the amassed Orc Army isn't easily countered in the draft set, it seems.

I don't think that every set needs to be meta-defining. Innistrad was pretty low power, but it became a fan-favorite due to its heavy emphasis on lore, storytelling, and art. But ask anyone who knows a damn about MtG, and Innistrad block was one of the lowest power sets in years. It was _NOT_ meta-defining, and came out in a time of a great power uncreap (cards like Lightning Bolt were rotating out of the meta, Birds of Paradise was rotated out, etc. etc).

I don't think the typical MtG player cares about powerful cards. I think the community largely cares about art, lore, and "fun", which is intangible but Innistrad had it.



View attachment 299990View attachment 299991View attachment 299992View attachment 299993View attachment 299994


View attachment 299996View attachment 299997View attachment 299998View attachment 300000View attachment 300001

Are we talking about the same set here? IMO, the art is fantastic.

I'll have to play the set to see if its any good. But as a primarily "Draft" player, my focus is obviously on a very different kind of game than you.

We'll agree to disagree I suppose But those five lands. The island hasn't got islands on it; there's a little corner body of water and a river which is a feature prominently shared with 3 other lands. The Swamp is half forest and mountain, just like the other lands. Three of those other cards you selected are alternative art versions with unique border, not the regular set - and they all come at inflated prices not in your draft boosters. The alternate arts are indeed quite often pretty good and you know why?! They're stylized. Shame it takes away any and every semblance of actual art on the regular set. I'm betting future regular set art will just push a bunch of AI generated nonsense on us, and alternates are still sourced from actual you know, artists.

They're not ALL bad I agree. Frodo up there is quite alright, has a nice flow to it. Sauron otoh above it? Yawnfest. Another way you can tell this isn't much of high quality art is the composition of every piece. Almost every character is displayed at a distance, close ups are rare (faces be difficult ) and the vast majority is mostly recognizable not from being a good drawing but from a movie shot. Boromir for example, getting shot in the woods. The only way you know its him, is because it says it on the card and there's that shot everyone knows of him sitting on his knees with a few arrows in his chest. Its cheap, its easy, its fucking lazy. Aragorn takes the cake, especially with two fiery blades on a dark background... what the fk is that even related to. And again: no close up, no interesting angle, nothing. Just a full body character in a generic environment or background. Legolas: similar. An elf with a bow in a forest. Wow

Here's the alt art Boromir, incase we were hoping that does it better... a close up? mmmyeahno. Mandatory arrows, check. Horn, check. Any sort of emotion like you'd have in the movie? Nah. Its a guy with a horn and three arrows in his chest for god knows what reason. Note how the face is handily turned away from us.

<-- and then this one. Okay. Generic Knight, Hobbits in background, forest scene, shield with emblem, and no likeness between the two Boromirs we see here whatsoever apart from both being male. Apparently he turned into an Aragorn copy complete with ranger outfit overnight and shot himself. Explain the madness pls

Though interestingly, content wise we fully agree. This is a set that needs to live in isolation, draft works for it indeed. I do like drafting though, I just need to turn off all my complexity sliders I guess to get into this one. This is utter noob territory if you ask me, draft wise. That's fine too. But yea. You also said it right with the Innistrad block. Its NOT about power level. Its about card interactivity. The problem here though is that Lotr is a one shot set and not a multi set release. It'll be out of juice after two drafts.

 

[Selaya]

yeah i have to agree here - short of a few (notable) exceptions the art (direction) of this set's more of a travesty, tbh ...

 

[dragontamer5788]

Here's the alt art Boromir, incase we were hoping that does it better... a close up? mmmyeahno. Mandatory arrows, check. Horn, check. Any sort of emotion like you'd have in the movie? Nah. Its a guy with a horn and three arrows in his chest for god knows what reason. Note how the face is handily turned away from us.

I mean, which movie are we talking about here?

I'm not doubting that Peter Jackson did a decent job with LoTR, but I think its a good thing that MtG has gone in a different direction. Historically, all book to movie and/or art translations have to add a huge number of details. The above picture is who we had for Boromir for decades prior to the Peter Jackson films, for example.

Ultimately, the books just don't have a complete picture of Boromir, or any of these characters for that matter. There's a huge amount of variation available to the artists with regards to how they can be rendered.

------------

Apparently he turned into an Aragorn copy complete with ranger outfit overnight and shot himself. Explain the madness pls

Aragorn's cape is always white in this set. With regards to the artistic style of the _set_, Aragorn does not look like Boromir at all. Not in skin color, not in costume, not in anything. There's no reason why Boromir has to look like his 1978 version, or in his 2001 version.

In any case, art style between cards is never perfectly consistent, because MtG can only make these large number of cards by contracting many, many different artists. Going back to Innistrad... lets take a look at Saint Traft.

Characters look different when drawn by different artists. Keeping the same hairstyle and costume is usually the best we get with regards to the same character over multiple cards, especially if they're a character of secondary importance.

 

[Vayra86]

View attachment 300073

I mean, which movie are we talking about here?

I'm not doubting that Peter Jackson did a decent job with LoTR, but I think its a good thing that MtG has gone in a different direction. Historically, all book to movie and/or art translations have to add a huge number of details. The above picture is who we had for Boromir for decades prior to the Peter Jackson films, for example.

Ultimately, the books just don't have a complete picture of Boromir, or any of these characters for that matter. There's a huge amount of variation available to the artists with regards to how they can be rendered.

------------



Aragorn's cape is always white in this set. With regards to the artistic style of the _set_, Aragorn does not look like Boromir at all. Not in skin color, not in costume, not in anything. There's no reason why Boromir has to look like his 1978 version, or in his 2001 version.

In any case, art style between cards is never perfectly consistent, because MtG can only make these large number of cards by contracting many, many different artists. Going back to Innistrad... lets take a look at Saint Traft.

View attachment 300078

View attachment 300079

Characters look different when drawn by different artists. Keeping the same hairstyle and costume is usually the best we get with regards to the same character over multiple cards, especially if they're a character of secondary importance.

Good example because exactly Saint Traft in those two cards is definitely the same thing despite being from different artists. They share features.

Now compare those two boromirs. The only feature they share is being white.

The art direction of this set is to me an all time low, the average art quality is way below par, and between the same characters there are just many different versions of them. It doesnt help either that they borrow typical 2001 movie scene shots here and there while elsewhere it has no relation whatsoever. King Theoden for example... weird. Out of place. Also, put Theoden and Aragorn side by side. They definitely share their barber, it seems. Iconic? Unique? I struggle here.

And then this Aragorn. Maybe its a piece of lore I missed somewhere but why is he on fire here?


It gets even weirder now that the first commander set spoilers are coming out

 

[dragontamer5788]

Now compare those two boromirs. The only feature they share is being white.

And the triangle beard. And the Green Cape. The nose seems similar if not identical. Etc. etc.

The top of the hair is different, and they removed the breastplate so that the arrows would stick I guess.

I dunno. I feel like MtG was always rather inconsistent with the artstyle of its characters.

Like, what is Chandra as an MtG concept? She's a red head girl with goggles and vague fire powers. There's not much else consistent with her. Hair-length changes, facial features change, costume changes. Etc. etc.

Would I like it if Boromir were more consistent? Sure. But... I've long accepted that MtG is drawn by a collection of contractor-artists. Its just part of the medium. Inconsistency happens, especially given the huge amount of work they ask for per set. Saint Taft there only has the ghost-ness kinda similar between those two cards.

Now some characters obviously get more focus. I feel like MtG has done a good job with Jace and Liliana Vess for example. But even a major planeswalker like Chandra has variations between different artists.

 

[Vayra86]

And the triangle beard. And the Green Cape. The nose seems similar if not identical. Etc. etc.

The top of the hair is different, and they removed the breastplate so that the arrows would stick I guess.

I dunno. I feel like MtG was always rather inconsistent with the artstyle of its characters.

View attachment 300084

View attachment 300085

View attachment 300086

View attachment 300087

Like, what is Chandra as an MtG concept? She's a red head girl with goggles and vague fire powers. There's not much else consistent with her. Hair-length changes, facial features change, costume changes. Etc. etc.

Would I like it if Boromir were more consistent? Sure. But... I've long accepted that MtG is drawn by a collection of contractor-artists. Its just part of the medium. Inconsistency happens, especially given the huge amount of work they ask for per set.

Yeah apart from the minor detail these are all from different sets and different times in the canon so... every chandra is definitely a chandra, much like Jace being Jace every time. Sorry man... cant follow your logic here and honestly you seem to struggle too. beard? Nope. Its defo a different one, including the hair color. The armor... yes. And the 'forest Boromir' is then wearing an armor that isnt feasible in said forest. Good luck running with that. It all highlights an overarching theme of weak sauce art and artists.

Its just the tip of the iceberg too. Scenes without characters in them are arguably worse...

 

[dragontamer5788]

Yeah apart from the minor detail these are all from different sets and different times in the canon so... every chandra is definitely a chandra, much like Jace being Jace every time. Sorry man... cant follow your logic here and honestly you seem to struggle too. beard? Nope. Its defo a different one, including the hair color. The armor... yes. And the 'forest Boromir' is then wearing an armor that isnt feasible in said forest. Good luck running with that. It all highlights an overarching theme of weak sauce art and artists.

Its just the tip of the iceberg too. Scenes without characters in them are arguably worse...

MtG has done a much better job with Jace than they have done with Chandra's art consistency. Its not even close.

Liliana probably was the most consistent, long-running female character though, especially given the huge amount of art she's had. (Nissa probably is the most consistent but that's easier cause Nissa has fewer cards than Liliana).

Anyway, maybe your eyes don't see what is inconsistent to my eyes. But I stopped caring about MtG consistency between art a long, long time ago.

 

[Vayra86]

MtG has done a much better job with Jace than they have done with Chandra's art consistency. Its not even close.

Liliana probably was the most consistent, long-running female character though, especially given the huge amount of art she's had. (Nissa probably is the most consistent but that's easier cause Nissa has fewer cards than Liliana).

Anyway, maybe your eyes don't see what is inconsistent to my eyes. But I stopped caring about MtG consistency between art a long, long time ago.

Its not that I care a lot about consistency. Its just all an indicator to me of something that feels like it struggles with its assignment and function. Mechanically and in its art, up to and including its placement between formats (Modern legal... Lol). To my perception of course, I realize that too. Its just that no single card really gave me that 'okay, this is neat' vibe. And March of the Machine was in fact the same to me too. It all feels a little desperate or something. Filler content.

Compare these sets to, say, the recent Phyrexia one. That one had its own signature in a totally diff way.

 

[dragontamer5788]

I'll say that I think MtG has been coming out with too many sets recently, and maybe that's where your feelings are coming from.

These sets cannot differentiate themselves from each other if MtG / Hasbro prints this many cards. They need to slow down, give us time to digest and learn the mechanics and play with a set.

And maybe the artists / designers in charge of the sets will figure out more mechanics that differentiate sets as well if they gave them more time to playtest.

 

[Vayra86]

I'll say that I think MtG has been coming out with too many sets recently, and maybe that's where your feelings are coming from.

These sets cannot differentiate themselves from each other if MtG / Hasbro prints this many cards. They need to slow down, give us time to digest and learn the mechanics and play with a set.

And maybe the artists / designers in charge of the sets will figure out more mechanics that differentiate sets as well if they gave them more time to playtest and design sets.

Exactly. Less is more