isn't the essence of language to communicate an idea? . . . How bout we replace the word creatures with animals? Even though they mean the same thing in some context they irrefutably mean different things. Or we can replace the word rules with the word guides. Same situation. So when I see the word mythic, regardless of how wotc sees mythics, wotc is recognizing the words meaning to an extent at the very least but how they are portraying mythics are anything but mythic. For all technicalities mythics are not truly mythic and you can only overlook their use for mythic if we overlook the purpose of communication. Just sayin
If you want to discuss literary and language theory, I'll break out the Derrida and de Man, and we can have that conversation, but I don't think this is the place to do it. As it stands right now though, you're just arguing semantics for the sake of having the argument. I don't find that to be particularly useful or productive. Words have different meanings based on their connotation and context. If you accept that mythic, as applied to this game, merely means "rarer than rare," you will solve all of your problems. Under no definition I can find does mythic mean what you seem to think it means. The word I think you're looking for is "epic," which today carries about as much weight as "literally," but I digress.
The idea that Wizards is attempting to convey is very clear to anyone who isn't fighting the definition. It's fine if you want to say that you don't like that mythics aren't more powerful. It's really not much different than me saying that I dislike how weak Standard is compared to Legacy. Those are just personal preferences, but they have nothing to do with what the word "mythic" is meant to convey in the common usage or in the context of the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
I'm fully aware some of these cards are what they are to balance the game...but for all sakes and purposes in the rarity ranking let alone the English definition of mythic.... the Mythic rares should at the very least try to embody that. But I know I'm asking too much now
Stop using the standard English definition of the term. That's not how Wizards has used it, and what you're wanting is never what they've intended mythic rarity to encompass. It's not that you're asking too much, but that you're asking for something entirely different from what they've defined as the purpose of mythic rarity. The vast majority of mythics (and all cards really), have always been unplayable outside of limited. That's just the nature of the game design and the necessity to balance limited play and constructed simultaneously while now also taking EDH into consideration.
While I agree with you isn't the essence of language to communicate an idea? So how is using a word that means a variety of legendary type ideas for something other than what the word is being used for an ok thing? How bout we replace the word creatures with animals? Even though they mean the same thing in some context they irrefutably mean different things. Or we can replace the word rules with the word guides. Same situation. So when I see the word mythic, regardless of how wotc sees mythics, wotc is recognizing the words meaning to an extent at the very least but how they are portraying mythics are anything but mythic. For all technicalities mythics are not truly mythic and you can only overlook their use for mythic if we overlook the purpose of communication. Just sayin
Replacing creatures with animals, monsters, etc. would be just fine. You're so accustomed to the word "creature" that your mind shortcuts to the current definition, but there's no reason they couldn't have used any number of other terms. And really, the M:TG definition of Creature doesn't strictly match the English definitions either, especially since - like most English words - there are multiple definitions. Here is what Merriam-Webster has to say:
crea·ture noun \ˈkrē-chər\
: an animal of any type
: an imaginary or very strange kind of animal
: a person usually of a specified type
Full Definition of CREATURE
1
: something created either animate or inanimate: as
a : a lower animal; especially : a farm animal
b : a human being
c : a being of anomalous or uncertain aspect or nature <creatures of fantasy>
2
: one that is the servile dependent or tool of another : instrument
Not one of those precisely and completely maps to the concept of creatures in Magic. Not all of them are animals (as opposed to people). Not all of them are imaginary or very strange. Not all of them are people. Some of them fall outside the boundary of any of those things. And there are some things that fall within those boundaries that are not Creatures (most notably Planeswalkers). This gets even worse for other card types. Most cards with the type "Instant" don't really match any precise English definition of that term. The Illusion creature type is present on cards that are perfectly real in every way, and have no relationship to perception or deception. "Legendary" is used to mean "Represents a unique, named character/location/object", which has no relationship to its English use; if we were going by common English, pretty much every card in Theros block would have been Legendary; every satyr or centaur is "a being described in legend".
The essence of language is indeed to communicate an idea, but it is not a rigid and inflexible communication. Language is contextual and fluid; I can replace "airplane" with "bird" and begin communicating in that context, and people who are familiar with that context will understand me just fine. In the case of a game, or any other such product of imagination, the designer gets to define the context. It seems unproductive to argue that Wizards is doing something wrong simply because their definition of Mythic Rare does not match the definition you would have come up with if you were in charge of defining it.
So I agree then. I see that mythics in MTG are unlike rares in other TCGs then. But still doesnt that look badat some point from a consumer perspective versus the will of the designers?
until now i haven't really thought about it. New players definitly like their rares ive drafted with enough young players and new player to see that just bc something is a rare they feel a need to draft it. i had one kid draft 2 arcane mastery in avacyn draft and i think that's proof enough. So the mythics will apeal to new players which will sell packs and the newer players are the ones who will be buying more packs than the expiernced players so you're spot on and it is bad from an expirenced player's point of view. I guess in some sense it is a way to simply sell packs.
Ive noticed what the OP says. They do seem to be getting less useful. And harder to work with.
For instance, Torrent Elemental.
Its a 5 cost for a 3/5 flyer. Im sorry but thats nothing to be amazed about. So already we have 1 strike against it.
Now if it was a 3 or 2 cost, you would definitely catch my attention, and it would definitel make it seem mythic, legendary, powerful etc. Isnt that the essence of mythic, omnipotent, etc?
Next whenever you attack, tap all opponents creatures, hey thats not bad. Sounds good. But for 5 mana, and can easily be burned, or bounced....that 5 mana is kinda hurting me now. Maybe if it was again 2 or 3 mana, I would mind as much.
And then not only can I play it as a 3/5 flyer for 5 mana, i can play it tapped at any time as a 3/5 flyer for 5 mana.Eh somewhat good but somewhat bad. Yea its gonna be played as an instant alot during the opponents turn, but I just feel that the main problem with this card is its high mana cost. since mana ramp for blue is nearly non existant, I dont see this card ever becoming very good. It might do ok in some late game scenarios, but the high mana cost has me saying why the hell is this mythic and not a rare?
Had this been rare this would have ruined a lot of limited games. 3/5 may not be great, but the reason this is mythic is because of the entire package. Coming back from exile has only ever been done on one card and is a very mythic effect. This can be used with Delve, then come back later, end up in the graveyard, and then used for delve again for the whole process to start over. In addition the tapping of creatures means that in a limited game you are probably looking at a lot of damage coming your way if you see this across the table. All of that put together is why this is mythic.
again 5 cost for a 4/4. what is with these high mana costs. I can get a 1/1 for 1 mana. a 2/2 for 1 or 2 mana. a 3/3 for 3 mana....etc... maybe not in standard necessarily, but shouldnt a MYTHIC rare stand the tests of time? and go down in history as something MYTHIC? LEGENDARY? something that makes me go yea, that was a good card. Everyone knows JTMS, but will everyone know Whisperwood Elemental in 5 years? I highly doubt that.
Lets break this card down outsite of the high mana cost.
We get to first manifest the top card of our library. I say nay. So i can potentially abuse lands and instants and sorceries as creatures. Great. That does me no good, as I might really need those cards to not be creatures. Or I can basically morph my 2/2 creatures for their mana cost, which might be worse than a 2/2. Manifest has some potential, but Im just not seeing it, unless you run creature heavy conditions for winning.
worh the 5 mana? maybe at this point, but is it worth the 5 mana in a whole? Im just not seeing it, unless again im running creatures heavily.
Or I can sack it and give all my creatures, basically regeneration with 2/2s. Wonderful, you better be hoping you play this in a lame game, with a creature heavy win con, or you just possibly wasted another 3rd or half of your deck as creatures...
worth the 5 mana? im only seeing it for creature heavy win con decks. Truly mythic? No, at best this is a Rare.
This card isn't just for creature heavy decks. Late game this will easily make some dead draws, like another land, into something that is semi useful, plus playing this early with some mana dorks and a Courser out means that after a board wipe you have some creatures to do things with, and some of those creatures may be able to be something else. I am pretty sure a 4/4 that pumps out a token every turn and can semi recover from a board wipe is mythic enough. And again this is mostly so limited doesn't become a mess with someone having more than one. Not to mention that the P/T on this is fine for what it does.
All this is is a level up creature. With ok abilities. Nothing Id wanna brag about. Easily burned. Worth the mythic rating? Hell no.
This probably could have been rare, but cards that reference past cards have been known to be mythic, like Lotus Cobra which was only a mythic because of the word Lotus in its name.
here we go again. 4 for a 3/3. ugh. ok so what are the effects, are they worth the extra mana?
Whenever a creature you control attacks, defending player loses a life and you gain a life. Not bad, but your gonna need to have a few of these on the field, to really abuse this power.
Creatures your ooponents control block this turn and you choose how they block. Not bad again. Great though? Im not seeing it. So I can make your beasties block my deathouchers and and your weenies block my tramplers, etc.. or I can make you double or triple+ block my creatures to try and wipe the board.
Not bad. Again though, is it worth the 5 mana? maybe? thats in total a 9 cost affect. Late in the game this card would be good, again for creature heavy decks is what I make of it. Like Ghastly Consciption, this card is somewhat worth the Mythic rating. Though thats pushing it.
This is basically Hellrider with an extra effect and a creature type that is more relevant. Hellrider saw play, although that was also because of the haste, but it isn't like it is impossible to already have 2-3 creatures out, with them most likely being warriors, by the time this comes down on turn 4. The ability to choose how they block can be huge by getting past a lot of things as you can just make them all block one thing and you get to alpha strike. Again, this is mostly mythic for limited.
2 mana for a 2/2. Now we are talking, though maybe for a 3/3 would be more mythic sounding. Lifelink, hey look at that. Not bad. lets continue.
Instant and socery spells you control have lifelink, dafuq? I have seen alot of talk and debate about this. If I manifest a instant or sorcery spell as a 2/2 does it have lifelink? but how would that be possible if i dont control an instant or sorcery spell, because I control a 2/2 creature instead?
Maybe I can burn you and get life out of it? Maybe this is a troll card. Hell if I know.
The next time you cast an instant or sorcery spell, when it resolved put it back in to your hand. Now we are talking. This reminds me of buyback, or the Unhinged card Stop That somewhat. But this effect cost 4 mana in addition to the mana of the spell we cast. Similar to buyback. But that will make this card a high target for removal or burn etc. So wouldnt we want to truly make this mythic by bumping it to a 2/4 at the very least, maybe a 2/5?
Good card but the low toughness given its abilities makes me see this card as a Rare, not mythic. Now we have 3 good mythics out of 7 cards.
Are you on something? A 2/4 for 2 with lifelink that gives your instants and sorceries lifelink and gives them buyback essentially would be absolutely broken. Hell, even a 3/3 for 2 with all of that would be just as bad in terms of power. Also, this shouldn't be that hard to understand from a rule standpoint. Nothing confusing about it.
Next we have Monastery Mentor, which theres been a lot of talk about.
3 mana for a 2/2 prowess. Ok not bad but you could have given me a 3/3 or a 2/3 to emphasize the mythic rarity.
Whenever you cast a noncreature spell, get a 1/1 prowess creature. Not bad.
I gotta ask. What's with you and P/T needing to make the cards rarity? This card is plenty strong as is without it needing to be even stronger.
Next we have Ugin, the Spirit Dragon. The only dragon ive seen since ive heard about dragons being in F/R
8 for a 7 loyalty counter. Not bad. Lets continue though.
+2 and I get to burn for 3. ok ok.
-X I get to exile each permamanent for a converted mana cost thats 1 or more colors. Again not bad not bad.
-10 I get to buffer my game for the number of 7 cards drawn, 7 life, and 7 permanents onto the battlefield.
All of this last effect is great, other than the lifegain. 7 life? thats it? not 10? not 7 times the amount of cards in my hand?
Ok maybe that last suggestion is pushing it, but I just took 10 counters off and all I get is 7 life? But people say you get to draw 7 cards too!
Now I potentially get to have to discard cards I might need. Its a give and take situation. But you get to put 7 permanents out, and what if I dont have any? What if I just drew into 7 cards not creatures, lands, or artifacts, or the majority arent? Seems underpowered if you ask me.
The ultimate isn't something that you should rely on when judging a PW, it is usually the other abilities that make them good. The best thing about this card is that it is a board wipe that will pretty much get everything that isn't a pure artifact EDH deck. The ultimate mirrors Nicol Bolas and the draw 7 is perfect. You don't need to use an ultimate as soon as you get it, but any deck will sure want an extra 7 cards no matter what you drew. If you are worried about having too many cards in hand at the normal turn of 9 when using that ultimate you are probably ahead anyways and Ugin is just burning things down with his +2, so I don't think you have to be worried.
Again his greatest strength is a board wipe that may be able to stick around to burn any new creatures or your opponent while threatening them with another wipe, loss from burn, or you getting so far ahead in card advantage that they may just have to scoop from that alone. Not to mention there isn't a whole lot of chance of not drawing into some sort of permanent, out of 7 cards getting 2 lands seems like it isn't asking much.
Thanks for taken the time for the write up. I agree with your card assessments. Monastery Mentor as a 2/2 should be a regular rare. Mentor as a 2/4, which would get it out of Bile blight and Anger of the gods range that would be Mythic.
Anything higher than a 2/2 and Mentor would have been absolutely insane. Low P/T doesn't make something not feel mythic.
if monastary mentor were a 2/4 it would be a mythic mistake. Talk about warping a format, every deck would play white to play that card. any archetype that doesn't even think about touching white, would ditch something to play white. Delver would go away from UR to UW or UWR and be disgusting. The only hope right now is sudden shock, but even then you're going to be hard fought to find an opening to do that with all the 0 and 1 cost spells out there...
Although i seem to be the labeled crazy guy here, theres a handful of other people on this thread that seem to agree with me more or less, many of them with a 100 posts or less. Now Ive touched on that before, that theres a consistent trend on this forum with regards to low post count users. They seem to be outright ignored. People skip right over their agreements and continue to attack me. Thats fine. do it all you want, but if you look at the big picture with this thread, theres 75% thinking im crazy and 25% agreeing with me, versus, if you dont look at the big picture, its easy to see 99% thinking im crazy vs the 1% that is me, easily dismissing my concerns. But if we blow this up into a bigger picture, and say we have this discussion on another 4 threads, there will undoubtedly be more agreements. Now lets be fair to all the nay sayers by saying each new thread will have a majority of people who disagree with my viewpoint.
thread 1: 75% against 25% (out of 100 people) each
thread 2: 75% against 25%
thread 3: 75% against 25%
thread 4: 75% against 25%
thread 5: 75% against 25%
that would leave us with 500 people total.
125 peope would agree with me more or less.
375 would disagree.
but 125 people, 125 individuals, both veteran and new, would side with me to some extent.
*Rant below related to topic*
(This doesnt need rocket science, or technicalities, though Im definitely thinking about going out and recording a 125 responses from out of 500 people to prove my point since i have no nice words left to say at this point to some of the i-have-nothing-nice-to-say-at-this-point on this forum.
You can throw a topic on here, disagree with it, and wether you provide legitimate evidence, syntax, context, historical trends, etc, people have to argue. It doesnt matter that Im telling people are wrong, cuz Im not attacking anyone. I making a point to make it a point that there a fair amount of people in this world that play MTG that think mythics are getting weaker.
Sure not everyone you are going to hear from. But they are out there. Its logical, common sense. Not everyone thinks the exact same way. We all have opinions that differ from each other. Not everyone agrees with me. But you cant stop and assert that the majority is right, just because they are the majority.
If everyone wanted to jump in front of a car, would you? Exactly.
I cant decide anymore if half the users here are trolls, imbeciles, individuals, or geniuses.
anyways I will continue below)
*Rant ends*
in the above hypothesis, 125 people out of 500 people who disagree is still a fairly large number.
Lets get even more hypothetical now, merely to pro ve my point that this should be a concern of Wotc, on how to design future mythics.
Hypothesis 1: Let say 125 out of 500 MTG players, quit supporting Wotc to an extent, and swore off buying any boosters from a new expansion.
A booster costing 4$ (3.99 Walmart retail average)
500 x 4$ =2000$.
So only 375 people buy boosters, and in this equation we are doing a booster per person.
this would equal 1500$, or a 500$ loss in sales. Doesnt seem like a big deal. Lets say instead now a Box of boosters was purchased, hell lets make it 5 boxes, because these are all very wealthy players.
Hypothesis 2: A box retails for roughly 120$ give or take.
5 boxes x 125$ = 625$ sale.
so at 625$ a person, we have 500 total, so if we achieved 100% sales we would reach
312,500$ in sales.
with only 375 people buying 5 boxes, that would be only 234, 375$, meaning we lost
312,500 - 234, 375 = 78, 125$. Now its a bit more noticeable.
What if the trend continued, and globally, sales started to decline because we ignored feedback for the majority?
It would be an alarming trend for sales plummeting.
Realistically, that could take years, while realistically, new players are always joining, so it might even it out. Realistically though, both new and veteran players get burned out on MTG at least 1 point usually in their lives, for a multitude of reasons. If we say that at least a 5th of magic players get burned out at some point in their lives on MTG globally, and a 3rd of those quit all together, or quit buying product of a certain type due to various reasons, we see the same trend. The reasons for loss of sales would vary, but the point is there would still be a noticeable loss of sales, and since this would be globally, this could be in the millions, over a decade it could be more.
Now im sure Im not the only person who has ever thought of this, wether its me or financial advisers for wotc, or some kid down the street. And Im sure this is already happening, as it has been happening for probably at least a decade already.
What im trying to say in the end, is wether mythics are getting weaker or not, wether the minority is right or the majority is right, wether we all are idiots and are too blind to see it or not...... shouldnt wotc aim to satisfy the majority and the minority, or is it just all about the money and damn the nay sayers, damn the critical thinkers?
There's really no point in asking any opinion questions at all if you're then going to Bah Humbug every counter-argument anybody makes. JTMS would have to survive untapping too; without lasting past turn four he's just a weak control spell. Had Hero's Downfall existed back when he was in Standard, his story might have been very different.
As for your original query, it's neither here nor there. Mythics have been both stronger and weaker than what's come out this set. When's the last time you heard somebody get excited about Cast Through Time, Time Reversal, or Eternity Vessel?
For another thing, Fate Reforged is a small set, it isn't intended to have a plainswalker or a big bomb for each color shard. Really, I think the cycle of dragons they do have this set feels kind of forced, like they weren't supposed to be until next set but the design team ran out of ideas.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This signature holds priority until end of comment.
There's really no point in asking any opinion questions at all if you're then going to Bah Humbug every counter-argument anybody makes. JTMS would have to survive untapping too; without lasting past turn four he's just a weak control spell. Had Hero's Downfall existed back when he was in Standard, his story might have been very different.
As for your original query, it's neither here nor there. Mythics have been both stronger and weaker than what's come out this set. When's the last time you heard somebody get excited about Cast Through Time, Time Reversal, or Eternity Vessel?
For another thing, Fate Reforged is a small set, it isn't intended to have a plainswalker or a big bomb for each color shard. Really, I think the cycle of dragons they do have this set feels kind of forced, like they weren't supposed to be until next set but the design team ran out of ideas.
I think the dragons in this set are more intended to set up for Dragons of Tarkir, and they're showing them off as what would happen if the khans didn't overpower the dragons. Dragons in general are meant to be these mythic beasts, that are sort of the end all be all. This translates to big mana, powerful creatures that do cool stuff. I think they nailed the head on the first two, and flopped on them doing cool stuff. I think they could stand to be a bit more powerful, or have their mana costs decreased a little bit, so they're at least somewhat playable in formats outside limited, where if the color fixing is right in drafts I can see the dragons being game winning bombs.
Although i seem to be the labeled crazy guy here, theres a handful of other people on this thread that seem to agree with me more or less, many of them with a 100 posts or less. . . .
You've consistently tried to paint yourself as a victim in repeated threads you've either started or participated in since you joined this forum, solely when people disagree with you. No one is labeling you as "the crazy guy." They're just disagreeing with some (many) of your premises, often with very good reasons. As you've said, others have agreed with you. That's how discussions work. If you think it's anything more than that, then that's on you.
Although i seem to be the labeled crazy guy here, theres a handful of other people on this thread that seem to agree with me more or less, many of them with a 100 posts or less. . . .
You've consistently tried to paint yourself as a victim in repeated threads you've either started or participated in since you joined this forum, solely when people disagree with you. No one is labeling you as "the crazy guy." They're just disagreeing with some (many) of your premises, often with very good reasons. As you've said, others have agreed with you. That's how discussions work. If you think it's anything more than that, then that's on you.
I give up. Crazy. Context here being the so many disagreement etc. U notice it too. So u notice the reason for crazy. Do we need to get into a word war again? I can't just say something even simple without someone having to get all technical and *****? Dude **** this forum. No one here sees just how ****ed up this place is. Half are trolls. Half are pompous ********s. With a sprinkling of nice people. Burn in hell
Public Mod Note
(cryogen):
Lumping this in with the other flaming post.
Obviously mythics originally had higher power levels like the famous Baneslayer Angel and the infamous JTMS. Now the mythics in the newest sets seem almost indistinguishable from regular rares.
Has anyone else noticed this?
Depends on your definition of weak, I guess. What do you consider to be a strong mythic? A card that is a standard staple? One that makes a splash in Modern? One that wins games in EDH? One that shakes up Legacy? Based on the two cards you mentioned in the opening post, it seems to be cards that either are or were considered broken/over powered. We all know Jace was a mistake. Baneslayer Angel was your typical "we want to sell a bunch of packs" mythic, aka a card that's blatantly pushed in terms of power level-to-mana-cost ratio. We still get those. Voice of Resurgence, Brimaz, King of Oreskos, Thundermaw Hellkite, Stormbreath Dragon, etc.
I think one reason that Mythics may appear weaker at the moment is the vast majority of Mythics that are Standard legal right now are Planeswalkers and legendary creatures (Theros Gods and Khans). Planeswalkers have become central to every new block's storyline and we've just had three back-to-back blocks that focused on a cycle of 10 mythic legendaries. Ever since the Jace TMS (and arguably Lili OTV) incident, Wizards has been very careful to scale back Planeswalker power and most seem to be geared towards more casual appeal. The majority of legendary creatures are also geared towards casual/EDH.
So, maybe Mythics are getting weaker, but you only gave two examples of what you consider to be a 'strong' mythic rare, one of which was completely broken. Maybe we haven't had a card that's on par with Jace, the Mind Sculptor, Primeval Titan, Griselbrand, Liliana of the Veil or Geist of Saint Traft lately. Personally, I think that's a good thing. I don't like format-warping $30+ mythics.
By the way, I forgot who said Avenger of Zendikar is a weak mythic, but that guy is an army in a can! He wins so many games in EDH and he was played in Valakut during his time in Standard.
I give up. Crazy. Context here being the so many disagreement etc. U notice it too. So u notice the reason for crazy. Do we need to get into a word war again? I can't just say something even simple without someone having to get all technical and *****? Dude **** this forum. No one here sees just how ****ed up this place is. Half are trolls. Half are pompous ********s. With a sprinkling of nice people. Burn in hell
A word war again? I didn't realize we had ever been in one before. Calling names and telling me (or anyone else) to burn in hell is not doing yourself any favors.
As for the rest of what you said, I'm sorry, but I can't really follow it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently playing:
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
I give up. Crazy. Context here being the so many disagreement etc. U notice it too. So u notice the reason for crazy. Do we need to get into a word war again? I can't just say something even simple without someone having to get all technical and *****? Dude **** this forum. No one here sees just how ****ed up this place is. Half are trolls. Half are pompous ********s. With a sprinkling of nice people. Burn in hell
A word war again? I didn't realize we had ever been in one before. Calling names and telling me (or anyone else) to burn in hell is not doing yourself any favors.
As for the rest of what you said, I'm sorry, but I can't really follow it.
go suck a ****
Public Mod Note
(cryogen):
Infraction for flaming.
I give up. Crazy. Context here being the so many disagreement etc. U notice it too. So u notice the reason for crazy. Do we need to get into a word war again? I can't just say something even simple without someone having to get all technical and *****? Dude **** this forum. No one here sees just how ****ed up this place is. Half are trolls. Half are pompous ********s. With a sprinkling of nice people. Burn in hell
A word war again? I didn't realize we had ever been in one before. Calling names and telling me (or anyone else) to burn in hell is not doing yourself any favors.
As for the rest of what you said, I'm sorry, but I can't really follow it.
go suck a ****
You call it disagreements, most people would call it "discussion." What do you want? A forum where people post things that are wrong/misguided, and rather than point those things out, everyone showers them with "good effort Bobby" posts? This is what a forum is. We discuss things with people who have different opinions in hopes of learning/improving/being entertained.
If you think this forum is full of trolls/pompous, I would advise that you don't browse...well the internet. This forum is extremely civilized in comparison. The moderators/admins don't allow personal attacks on other members, and even issue warnings for borderline levels of trolling and flaming. You say you are being attacked/the victim, but other people aren't making this personal. This is all about the arguments you're bringing to the table; those are what people are taking issue with. The only one attacking actual people would be you telling someone to "burn in hell" and "suck a ****."
I think the thing that people aren't understanding about a lot of mythics is that they don't necessarily have to be game breaking. The way I see it, the newer mythics are doing much better with their flavor, something I'm glad that Wizards seems to be getting back to. I'm happy that Treasure Cruise, Dig Through Time, and Siege Rhino aren't mythic. While flavor mythics aren't the most exciting to open, it's nice to have a higher chance of opening a usable card. I hope that one day Wizards figure out how to balance the two things so we can open super flavorful, good cards, maybe one day.
I'd say yeah, of course the mythics are getting weaker, as a whole ALL cards are getting weaker. It's the "Mercadian Masques Effect". Wizards is lowering the overall power level in an effort to curb power creep. That way when they inevitably start making things more powerful again, they'll have a fair bit of leeway before they start invalidating the old best cards.
Also, I don't know why, but I'm getting a very "former Yugioh player" vibe from the people who are complaining that Mythic rarity ISN'T just a list of the best cards in the set. Probably because that's very much the case for that game, and games that aren't Magic are generally perceived as a stepping stone toward actually playing Magic. Heck, wasn't that part of MaRo's justification for Mythic rarity? I seem to remember reading something about new players starting Magic and being confused that there wasn't a rarity above rare.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
L1 judge since 1/30/12 (lapsed as of 1/30/13)
My Friend Code is: 0146-9645-8893
Although i seem to be the labeled crazy guy here, theres a handful of other people on this thread that seem to agree with me more or less, many of them with a 100 posts or less. Now Ive touched on that before, that theres a consistent trend on this forum with regards to low post count users. They seem to be outright ignored. People skip right over their agreements and continue to attack me.
The people you seem to be referring to are generally posting things such as "yeah!" and "me too!" There isn't any content in those posts to respond to, so why would you expect a response?
For better or for worse, your posts do have content, and when people disagree with you, they have something to respond with.
Lots of differing opinions but it seems overall that the recent mythics are slightly overcosted in order to balance their semi-powerful effects. Monastery Mentor at 2 mana would be format defining across multiple formats. As of now it's just an unproven, overpriced mythic.
Lots of differing opinions but it seems overall that the recentmythics in general are slightly overcosted in order to balance their semi-powerful effects. Monastery Mentor at 2 mana would be format defining acrossdestroy multiple formats. As of now it's just an unproven, overpriced mythic.
I think trying to evaluate magic cards on a linear "weak to strong" scale is a really bad idea. Not only are formats and relevant deck strategies important for evaluation, but you also need to see what you're playing against to be able to make that call. In a vacuum, Tarmogoyf is a great card, but it loses a lot in a format that is hates against the graveyard very easily. Watchwolf might seem mediocre, but would shine in a format who's creatures rarely got to 3/3. I think there are very few universally good cards, and you can't sit there and say what is good or bad without context.
Mythic rarity is for limited primarily, and I think I would be pretty happy to first pick any Mythic in Fate. Outside limited, rarity doesn't matter.
Wizards should just make a 10/10 for 5CMC just to appease those who like big shiny stuff, because MYTHIC! Not MYTHIC enough? It has flying/haste/doublestrike/hexproof and can not be countered. Yet somehow, it still wouldn't be good enough.
In seriousness, there are always going to be bad mythics, just how there is bad rares. Can you imagine how busted the game would be if all rares were good and the mythics were even better? Not only is the game going to be flipped upside down, but the secondary market too.
Wizards should just make a 10/10 for 5CMC just to appease those who like big shiny stuff, because MYTHIC! Not MYTHIC enough? It has flying/haste/doublestrike/hexproof and can not be countered. Yet somehow, it still wouldn't be good enough.
In seriousness, there are always going to be bad mythics, just how there is bad rares. Can you imagine how busted the game would be if all rares were good and the mythics were even better? Not only is the game going to be flipped upside down, but the secondary market too.
Also, MYTHIC!
Well theres Etched Monstrosity which is awfully close to what you said as a joke ;P
It even draws you cards !
How insane is that ? (Not too much is the answer, even if the advantage is huge, it still just dies to removal most of the time)
And down the rabbit hole we go...
myth·ic
ˈmiTHik
adjective: of, relating to, or resembling myth; exaggerated or idealized; fictitious.
There's your textbook definition. I don't see anything about "variety of legendary type ideas."
If you want to discuss literary and language theory, I'll break out the Derrida and de Man, and we can have that conversation, but I don't think this is the place to do it. As it stands right now though, you're just arguing semantics for the sake of having the argument. I don't find that to be particularly useful or productive. Words have different meanings based on their connotation and context. If you accept that mythic, as applied to this game, merely means "rarer than rare," you will solve all of your problems. Under no definition I can find does mythic mean what you seem to think it means. The word I think you're looking for is "epic," which today carries about as much weight as "literally," but I digress.
The idea that Wizards is attempting to convey is very clear to anyone who isn't fighting the definition. It's fine if you want to say that you don't like that mythics aren't more powerful. It's really not much different than me saying that I dislike how weak Standard is compared to Legacy. Those are just personal preferences, but they have nothing to do with what the word "mythic" is meant to convey in the common usage or in the context of the game.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
Not one of those precisely and completely maps to the concept of creatures in Magic. Not all of them are animals (as opposed to people). Not all of them are imaginary or very strange. Not all of them are people. Some of them fall outside the boundary of any of those things. And there are some things that fall within those boundaries that are not Creatures (most notably Planeswalkers). This gets even worse for other card types. Most cards with the type "Instant" don't really match any precise English definition of that term. The Illusion creature type is present on cards that are perfectly real in every way, and have no relationship to perception or deception. "Legendary" is used to mean "Represents a unique, named character/location/object", which has no relationship to its English use; if we were going by common English, pretty much every card in Theros block would have been Legendary; every satyr or centaur is "a being described in legend".
The essence of language is indeed to communicate an idea, but it is not a rigid and inflexible communication. Language is contextual and fluid; I can replace "airplane" with "bird" and begin communicating in that context, and people who are familiar with that context will understand me just fine. In the case of a game, or any other such product of imagination, the designer gets to define the context. It seems unproductive to argue that Wizards is doing something wrong simply because their definition of Mythic Rare does not match the definition you would have come up with if you were in charge of defining it.
until now i haven't really thought about it. New players definitly like their rares ive drafted with enough young players and new player to see that just bc something is a rare they feel a need to draft it. i had one kid draft 2 arcane mastery in avacyn draft and i think that's proof enough. So the mythics will apeal to new players which will sell packs and the newer players are the ones who will be buying more packs than the expiernced players so you're spot on and it is bad from an expirenced player's point of view. I guess in some sense it is a way to simply sell packs.
BWTeysa, Orzhov Scion Combo
GUEzuri, Claw of progress Morph
GUBSidisi, Brood tyrant
RWGisela, Blade of Goldnight Random red white cards i dont use.dec
GBLoam Pox
Modern
UBFaeries
GBWGoyfless Abzan
On Squirrels
On Risen Executioner
Had this been rare this would have ruined a lot of limited games. 3/5 may not be great, but the reason this is mythic is because of the entire package. Coming back from exile has only ever been done on one card and is a very mythic effect. This can be used with Delve, then come back later, end up in the graveyard, and then used for delve again for the whole process to start over. In addition the tapping of creatures means that in a limited game you are probably looking at a lot of damage coming your way if you see this across the table. All of that put together is why this is mythic.
This card isn't just for creature heavy decks. Late game this will easily make some dead draws, like another land, into something that is semi useful, plus playing this early with some mana dorks and a Courser out means that after a board wipe you have some creatures to do things with, and some of those creatures may be able to be something else. I am pretty sure a 4/4 that pumps out a token every turn and can semi recover from a board wipe is mythic enough. And again this is mostly so limited doesn't become a mess with someone having more than one. Not to mention that the P/T on this is fine for what it does.
This probably could have been rare, but cards that reference past cards have been known to be mythic, like Lotus Cobra which was only a mythic because of the word Lotus in its name.
This is basically Hellrider with an extra effect and a creature type that is more relevant. Hellrider saw play, although that was also because of the haste, but it isn't like it is impossible to already have 2-3 creatures out, with them most likely being warriors, by the time this comes down on turn 4. The ability to choose how they block can be huge by getting past a lot of things as you can just make them all block one thing and you get to alpha strike. Again, this is mostly mythic for limited.
Are you on something? A 2/4 for 2 with lifelink that gives your instants and sorceries lifelink and gives them buyback essentially would be absolutely broken. Hell, even a 3/3 for 2 with all of that would be just as bad in terms of power. Also, this shouldn't be that hard to understand from a rule standpoint. Nothing confusing about it.
I gotta ask. What's with you and P/T needing to make the cards rarity? This card is plenty strong as is without it needing to be even stronger.
The ultimate isn't something that you should rely on when judging a PW, it is usually the other abilities that make them good. The best thing about this card is that it is a board wipe that will pretty much get everything that isn't a pure artifact EDH deck. The ultimate mirrors Nicol Bolas and the draw 7 is perfect. You don't need to use an ultimate as soon as you get it, but any deck will sure want an extra 7 cards no matter what you drew. If you are worried about having too many cards in hand at the normal turn of 9 when using that ultimate you are probably ahead anyways and Ugin is just burning things down with his +2, so I don't think you have to be worried.
Again his greatest strength is a board wipe that may be able to stick around to burn any new creatures or your opponent while threatening them with another wipe, loss from burn, or you getting so far ahead in card advantage that they may just have to scoop from that alone. Not to mention there isn't a whole lot of chance of not drawing into some sort of permanent, out of 7 cards getting 2 lands seems like it isn't asking much.
Anything higher than a 2/2 and Mentor would have been absolutely insane. Low P/T doesn't make something not feel mythic.
thread 1: 75% against 25% (out of 100 people) each
thread 2: 75% against 25%
thread 3: 75% against 25%
thread 4: 75% against 25%
thread 5: 75% against 25%
that would leave us with 500 people total.
125 peope would agree with me more or less.
375 would disagree.
but 125 people, 125 individuals, both veteran and new, would side with me to some extent.
*Rant below related to topic*
(This doesnt need rocket science, or technicalities, though Im definitely thinking about going out and recording a 125 responses from out of 500 people to prove my point since i have no nice words left to say at this point to some of the i-have-nothing-nice-to-say-at-this-point on this forum.
You can throw a topic on here, disagree with it, and wether you provide legitimate evidence, syntax, context, historical trends, etc, people have to argue. It doesnt matter that Im telling people are wrong, cuz Im not attacking anyone. I making a point to make it a point that there a fair amount of people in this world that play MTG that think mythics are getting weaker.
Sure not everyone you are going to hear from. But they are out there. Its logical, common sense. Not everyone thinks the exact same way. We all have opinions that differ from each other. Not everyone agrees with me. But you cant stop and assert that the majority is right, just because they are the majority.
If everyone wanted to jump in front of a car, would you? Exactly.
I cant decide anymore if half the users here are trolls, imbeciles, individuals, or geniuses.
anyways I will continue below)
*Rant ends*
in the above hypothesis, 125 people out of 500 people who disagree is still a fairly large number.
Lets get even more hypothetical now, merely to pro ve my point that this should be a concern of Wotc, on how to design future mythics.
Hypothesis 1: Let say 125 out of 500 MTG players, quit supporting Wotc to an extent, and swore off buying any boosters from a new expansion.
A booster costing 4$ (3.99 Walmart retail average)
500 x 4$ =2000$.
So only 375 people buy boosters, and in this equation we are doing a booster per person.
this would equal 1500$, or a 500$ loss in sales. Doesnt seem like a big deal. Lets say instead now a Box of boosters was purchased, hell lets make it 5 boxes, because these are all very wealthy players.
Hypothesis 2: A box retails for roughly 120$ give or take.
5 boxes x 125$ = 625$ sale.
so at 625$ a person, we have 500 total, so if we achieved 100% sales we would reach
312,500$ in sales.
with only 375 people buying 5 boxes, that would be only 234, 375$, meaning we lost
312,500 - 234, 375 = 78, 125$. Now its a bit more noticeable.
What if the trend continued, and globally, sales started to decline because we ignored feedback for the majority?
It would be an alarming trend for sales plummeting.
Realistically, that could take years, while realistically, new players are always joining, so it might even it out. Realistically though, both new and veteran players get burned out on MTG at least 1 point usually in their lives, for a multitude of reasons. If we say that at least a 5th of magic players get burned out at some point in their lives on MTG globally, and a 3rd of those quit all together, or quit buying product of a certain type due to various reasons, we see the same trend. The reasons for loss of sales would vary, but the point is there would still be a noticeable loss of sales, and since this would be globally, this could be in the millions, over a decade it could be more.
Now im sure Im not the only person who has ever thought of this, wether its me or financial advisers for wotc, or some kid down the street. And Im sure this is already happening, as it has been happening for probably at least a decade already.
What im trying to say in the end, is wether mythics are getting weaker or not, wether the minority is right or the majority is right, wether we all are idiots and are too blind to see it or not...... shouldnt wotc aim to satisfy the majority and the minority, or is it just all about the money and damn the nay sayers, damn the critical thinkers?
-Made By PortalWish Studios-
As for your original query, it's neither here nor there. Mythics have been both stronger and weaker than what's come out this set. When's the last time you heard somebody get excited about Cast Through Time, Time Reversal, or Eternity Vessel?
For another thing, Fate Reforged is a small set, it isn't intended to have a plainswalker or a big bomb for each color shard. Really, I think the cycle of dragons they do have this set feels kind of forced, like they weren't supposed to be until next set but the design team ran out of ideas.
I think the dragons in this set are more intended to set up for Dragons of Tarkir, and they're showing them off as what would happen if the khans didn't overpower the dragons. Dragons in general are meant to be these mythic beasts, that are sort of the end all be all. This translates to big mana, powerful creatures that do cool stuff. I think they nailed the head on the first two, and flopped on them doing cool stuff. I think they could stand to be a bit more powerful, or have their mana costs decreased a little bit, so they're at least somewhat playable in formats outside limited, where if the color fixing is right in drafts I can see the dragons being game winning bombs.
And what if someone Combusts your Baneslayer Angel? Creatures die to removal, get over it.
"A Plague on All Your Houses!" - Thespian's Stage Pox
You've consistently tried to paint yourself as a victim in repeated threads you've either started or participated in since you joined this forum, solely when people disagree with you. No one is labeling you as "the crazy guy." They're just disagreeing with some (many) of your premises, often with very good reasons. As you've said, others have agreed with you. That's how discussions work. If you think it's anything more than that, then that's on you.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
I give up. Crazy. Context here being the so many disagreement etc. U notice it too. So u notice the reason for crazy. Do we need to get into a word war again? I can't just say something even simple without someone having to get all technical and *****? Dude **** this forum. No one here sees just how ****ed up this place is. Half are trolls. Half are pompous ********s. With a sprinkling of nice people. Burn in hell
-Made By PortalWish Studios-
Depends on your definition of weak, I guess. What do you consider to be a strong mythic? A card that is a standard staple? One that makes a splash in Modern? One that wins games in EDH? One that shakes up Legacy? Based on the two cards you mentioned in the opening post, it seems to be cards that either are or were considered broken/over powered. We all know Jace was a mistake. Baneslayer Angel was your typical "we want to sell a bunch of packs" mythic, aka a card that's blatantly pushed in terms of power level-to-mana-cost ratio. We still get those. Voice of Resurgence, Brimaz, King of Oreskos, Thundermaw Hellkite, Stormbreath Dragon, etc.
I think one reason that Mythics may appear weaker at the moment is the vast majority of Mythics that are Standard legal right now are Planeswalkers and legendary creatures (Theros Gods and Khans). Planeswalkers have become central to every new block's storyline and we've just had three back-to-back blocks that focused on a cycle of 10 mythic legendaries. Ever since the Jace TMS (and arguably Lili OTV) incident, Wizards has been very careful to scale back Planeswalker power and most seem to be geared towards more casual appeal. The majority of legendary creatures are also geared towards casual/EDH.
Mixed in with that you have your classic, flash, quirky do-something-unique-but-usually-not-constructed-playable mythics like Medomai the Ageless, Worst Fears, Ashen Rider, Godsend, Clever Impersonator, etc.
So, maybe Mythics are getting weaker, but you only gave two examples of what you consider to be a 'strong' mythic rare, one of which was completely broken. Maybe we haven't had a card that's on par with Jace, the Mind Sculptor, Primeval Titan, Griselbrand, Liliana of the Veil or Geist of Saint Traft lately. Personally, I think that's a good thing. I don't like format-warping $30+ mythics.
By the way, I forgot who said Avenger of Zendikar is a weak mythic, but that guy is an army in a can! He wins so many games in EDH and he was played in Valakut during his time in Standard.
Trades
Pucatrade with me!
(Signature courtesy of Argetlam of Hakai Studios
A word war again? I didn't realize we had ever been in one before. Calling names and telling me (or anyone else) to burn in hell is not doing yourself any favors.
As for the rest of what you said, I'm sorry, but I can't really follow it.
Standard: I, for one, welcome our new rhinoceros overlords
Modern: Pod's dead, Bob's back.
Legacy: Lands, Deathblade, Death and Taxes, Elves, MUD
Retired Legacy: Merfolk, Goblins, Jund, Delver, Reanimator
go suck a ****
-Made By PortalWish Studios-
If you think this forum is full of trolls/pompous, I would advise that you don't browse...well the internet. This forum is extremely civilized in comparison. The moderators/admins don't allow personal attacks on other members, and even issue warnings for borderline levels of trolling and flaming. You say you are being attacked/the victim, but other people aren't making this personal. This is all about the arguments you're bringing to the table; those are what people are taking issue with. The only one attacking actual people would be you telling someone to "burn in hell" and "suck a ****."
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Cheeri0sXWU
Reid Duke's Level One
Who's the Beatdown
Alt+0198=Æ
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Also, I don't know why, but I'm getting a very "former Yugioh player" vibe from the people who are complaining that Mythic rarity ISN'T just a list of the best cards in the set. Probably because that's very much the case for that game, and games that aren't Magic are generally perceived as a stepping stone toward actually playing Magic. Heck, wasn't that part of MaRo's justification for Mythic rarity? I seem to remember reading something about new players starting Magic and being confused that there wasn't a rarity above rare.
My Friend Code is: 0146-9645-8893
For better or for worse, your posts do have content, and when people disagree with you, they have something to respond with.
Neither ranting nor making up numbers whole cloth is helpful.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
http://magiccards.info/query?q=r:mythic&v=card&s=cname
More accurate.
Mythic rarity is for limited primarily, and I think I would be pretty happy to first pick any Mythic in Fate. Outside limited, rarity doesn't matter.
In seriousness, there are always going to be bad mythics, just how there is bad rares. Can you imagine how busted the game would be if all rares were good and the mythics were even better? Not only is the game going to be flipped upside down, but the secondary market too.
Also, MYTHIC!
Standard: BG Golgari Midrange
Modern: U Merfolk GWUBR 5 Color Humans UBW Esper Gifts GW Bogles
Well theres Etched Monstrosity which is awfully close to what you said as a joke ;P
It even draws you cards !
How insane is that ? (Not too much is the answer, even if the advantage is huge, it still just dies to removal most of the time)
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮