"We choose to reprint cards because we believe (a) the cards we reprint make for enjoyable game play, and (b) all Magic players deserve an opportunity to play with these cards. Any card that isn't on the reserved list may be reprinted."
This is official policy, last updated in 2010. It's easily findable on their website, and is WotC's stance on reprints. Hard to argue any type of "implied" behavior when it's directly contradicted by public statements the company has made.
It's quite easy to argue an implied contract exists despite this, because there's a pretty hefty difference between "we may choose to reprint these cards if we like" and "we may engage in behaviour that will adversely affect the value of stores' inventory and collectors' portfolios."
Soooo... It's all about intent, then? You admit that Wizards has retained the right to reprint whatever they want, whenever they want, and yet think they are somehow bound by an implied promise to not do exactly that? It seems to me that you're basing it entirely on intent, which is hard to prove, and has to overcome a very basic statement: "We believed that [whatever card] was important to reprint in Standard. We reprinted that card specifically to get it into the Standard metagame."
When everything you have rests on intent, then any muddying of the waters, including there being other, valid reasons for an action, really hurts your chances of being successful.
Or are you saying that the OUTCOME, regardless of intent, is enough? In which case, I'd like to remind you that Wizards does not sell cards individually, and does not involve themselves with the secondary market at all. Price fixing is illegal, after all, so ANY action Wizards takes with an exclusive eye towards influencing the secondary market is dangerous territory for them. Notice that in all the MM and MM2015 articles, they never mention price: always availability.
Either way, Wizards will likely never reprint a card with the exclusive purpose of driving a price down: another, valid reason will always be attached, and that valid reason has to be strong enough to stand on its own, to avoid price-fixing allegations. If it's strong enough to stand on its own, then implied contract is probably not going to be enough to beat it, especially with Wizards having gone on the public record as saying that reprinting any card is a right they retain.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cards are game pieces, and should be treated as such, easily replaceable.
Cards are not money, investments, or a retirement fund, and should never have been treated as such.
Wizards made a mistake caving to speculators once, and we still pay for that mistake 2 decades later.
"Entitled:" the entire ad hominem fallacy condensed into a single word. It doesn't strengthen your argument to attack motivations, it just makes you look like you don't understand the argument.
Notice that in all the MM and MM2015 articles, they never mention price: always availability.
That argument works the other way, too. They don't want to lower format prices all that much (claiming to want to do so would be a huge can of worms they certainly don't want to open), but they pay lip service to the players by talking about increased availability.
If we ever see a card like Tarmogoyf in a $4/pack, unlimited print run product, I will find a hat and eat it. You can quote me on that.
Tarmogoyf comes from a bygone era, where stupid bombs could be printed since they would only impact standard for a couple of years, Extended for slightly more, and Legacy if they were good enough. Tarmogoyf is one of these bombs. Modern appeared much later and at the time nobody expected a second non-rotating not using FoW and ABU lands format pushing demand for such cards. So yeah, I agree with Teia, we won't likely be seeing such historic cards again in the standard product line-up, but rather always in specialties like MM, commander & co.
I think "too good for Standard" is a massive BS term that WotC have invented for themselves when they're afraid of popular cards coming back. I think it's an extremely disrespecting term too; it disrespects the ability of the game to handle cards it has by definition handled before, and it disrespects the players by making it seem like we need to be mollycoddled and protected. Like an overprotective parent slapping the back of a child's hand - don't touch that, you'll only break it. I know WotC is trying to adjust the game right now, and I appreciate things like Piledriver and Thoughtsieze and the fetches, but it seems more common for requests for old cards like Goyf and LOTV to be slapped down for being "too good" and they need to stop being so broad.
They've done a pretty good job of explaining, in articles, what they mean when they something is too good for Standard. Simply put, a card being too good for Standard, means it will warp the format and designs of the surrounding cards around the problem card. As an example, in the design Warleader's Helix was originally Lightning Helix, but it made Snapcaster, which was already seeing tons of play, that much better.
They want Standard to be a format where the meta ebbs and flows, in order for that to be the case they try to avoid cards that are good in every deck. They try to make cards good against different matchups instead, that way when one deck starts seeing play it's relatively easy to hate it out with another brew.
That argument works the other way, too. They don't want to lower format prices all that much (claiming to want to do so would be a huge can of worms they certainly don't want to open), but they pay lip service to the players by talking about increased availability.
If we ever see a card like Tarmogoyf in a $4/pack, unlimited print run product, I will find a hat and eat it. You can quote me on that.
I am curious as to the list of non-"reserved list" cards that you say they would not reprint in a standard set for this purposes?
It also seems that the reserved list, and them explicitly not adding anything new to it would be enough to show that anything not on the list is fair game.
I'd say a 4/5 or better for 1G is pretty ridiculous. With fetchlands, it's almost a given that you'll get instants, sorceries, lands, and creatures in your graveyard, leaving enchantments and artifacts. Just put in a few auras, and now you're looking at a 5/6. See the problem?
Planeswalkers are probably the better bet. Since they are often at least playable in Standard.
In the current Standard, there's also Courser of Kruphix. There isn't really a Standard-legal artifact, either one that can be sac'd or one that is or can become a creature, that strikes me as a candidate for this hypothetical Standard goyf.dec. But a 4/5~6/7 for 1G is still huge.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Card advantage is not the same thing as card draw. Something for 2B cannot be strictly worse than something for BBB or 3BB. If you're taking out Swords to Plowshares for Plummet, you're a fool. Stop doing these things!
It's not too good for standard. Just like Counterspell, Wrath of God, Dark Ritual, Ponder, etc aren't too good either. It's just it doesn't fit with what they feel players want.
Tarmo is NOT too good for standard. The problem is that Wizards "doesn't care about the secondary market", and at the same time acts in such a way so that the total cost of a single deck almost never ever goes down over time, at least in eternal formats. I saw an article a couple of days ago that pointed out even /with/ mm1, mm2 and the onslaught fetches, only a single modern deck went down in price.
In RTR/INN standard, they printed thragtusk in like, THREE event decks and tanked the price to 10 dollars. Why can't they do that with other cards?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy
Death and Taxes Pauper
UB Teachings
Tortured Existence
Murasa Tron Modern
Pod (RIP)
Bloom(RIP)
Merfolk
Are they not willing to take this (small) risk, given how well a set with Goyf would sell? KTK was the best selling set of all time, likely due to the onslaught fetch reprint.
Khans of Tarkir was the best-selling set of all time because the game is constantly growing in popularity. The fetches had a significantly smaller impact on sales in comparison.
Before Khans, the best-selling set of all time was Theros.
Before Theros, the best-selling set was Return to Ravnica.
The problem with defining this format by what is "fun" is that everyone seems to define fun as what they don't lose to. If you keep losing to easily answered cards, that means you should improve your deck. If you don't want to improve your deck, then you should come to peace with the idea that you are going to lose because you chose to not interact with better strategies.
Tarmo is NOT too good for standard. The problem is that Wizards "doesn't care about the secondary market", and at the same time acts in such a way so that the total cost of a single deck almost never ever goes down over time, at least in eternal formats. I saw an article a couple of days ago that pointed out even /with/ mm1, mm2 and the onslaught fetches, only a single modern deck went down in price.
In RTR/INN standard, they printed thragtusk in like, THREE event decks and tanked the price to 10 dollars. Why can't they do that with other cards?
Thragtusk was a new card. Those event decks were likely planned out even before Thragtusk was spoiled. I can't think of many occasions where they blatantly tried to tank an older card's price. Like Thoughtseize obviously dropped when it was reprinted, but not by a lot.
It wouldnt be. If a standard doesnt have fetches in it and cant reliable grow the goyf out of the "fair" realm, you could easily see it in standard. But you know what? Expecting a reasonable reprint like this wont happen, remember that WOTC made goyf a mythic despite being a terrible limited card. I think this speaks volumes on its own.
We already have Ancestral Recall's cousin in Standard, Treasure Cruise. I think it is quite possible to have a Standard format with Tarmogoyf. The reason this is likely never to happen is that Goyf has been the headliner of Modern Masters twice, and it is poised to do that again in the next Modern Masters.
Without touching on the financial implications of reprinting Tarmogoyf in a normal set for standard, normally I would say there are very few reasons in terms of power that prevent Tarmogoyf being printed....However current standard, filled with a fetchlands and Thoughtseize puts the card straight into the realm of overpowered as hell as it is simply too efficient too be handled with standards current removal suite.
Simply put, it would force the meta to be centered almost entirely around G/x variants, such as Abazan, and would likely be unstoppable. It really does not help that enchantment creatures are still around from Theros.
Without touching on the financial implications of reprinting Tarmogoyf in a normal set for standard, normally I would say there is actually very little in terms of power that Tarmogoyf being printed....However current standard, filled with a fetchlands and Thoughtseize puts the card straight into the realm of overpowered as hell as it is simply too efficient too be handled with standards current removal suite.
Simply put, it would force the meta to be centered almost entirely and G/x variants such as Abazan would likely be unstoppable. It really does not help that enchantment creatures are still around from Theros.
Something else to keep in mind is that Wotc prolly doesnt want goyf in standard for the simple reason that it IS so expensive. Even a reprint at rare would still leave the card around the 60 dollar mark or something, which is really high. Standard players might get mad about that.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy
Death and Taxes Pauper
UB Teachings
Tortured Existence
Murasa Tron Modern
Pod (RIP)
Bloom(RIP)
Merfolk
One problem I heard about the last time goyf was in standard was that a lot of people were splashing green for it. That might happen again if it's reprinted in a standard set. Even when Extended was cut short to 3-4 years worth of sets instead of 7 years, the best deck was UG with goyf and Jace.
Because it's $150+, don't be fooled, that's the reason.
Tarmogoyf's power in Modern and Legacy comes from the cards you play along him: Dark Confidant, Liliana of the Veil, Abrupt Decay, Force of Will, Daze, Jace the Mindsculptor, Hymn to Tourach, Deathrite Shaman, Fetchlands.
Each and every single card you play in a deck with Tarmogoyf is literally the best at what it does. That won't and can't be the case in standard. In a fetchless standard, Tarmogoyf is a turn 2 1/2 for 1G that may grow by the late game into a 3/4, not a turn 2 3/4 that may grow into a 6/7.
And "dies to removal" does matter in standard because there you won't have free counterspells or the best hand disruption ever to protect a creature that does notthing when it comes into play or dies.
"We choose to reprint cards because we believe (a) the cards we reprint make for enjoyable game play, and (b) all Magic players deserve an opportunity to play with these cards. Any card that isn't on the reserved list may be reprinted."
This is official policy, last updated in 2010. It's easily findable on their website, and is WotC's stance on reprints. Hard to argue any type of "implied" behavior when it's directly contradicted by public statements the company has made.
LotV was too strong for a Standard where mono-black devotion was already a strong deck, but she was fine the whole time Innistrad was in Standard. Strong? Undeniably, but not format-warping. Tarmogoyf is the same: it will always be strong in a format, but it requires certain specific things to really shine. Standard doesn't always have those things, and won't always have them in the future.
The person talking about the "implied contract" isn't talking about Wizards reprinting cards. It's reprinting cards in a way that completely tanks their value.
Brick and Mortar stores take a lot of risk buying singles from people and they don't do it purely for their own financial gain. If Wizards makes those risks insanely unpredictable (printing cards in full runs with uncommon Goyfs or something like that), they're violating the sort of implied contract that the brick and mortar stores will take risks in order to continue to keep the MTG community large if Wizards reduces those risks.
Obviously there's a lot more subtle legal stuff going on, but it's not as simple as just whether they can reprint a card or not.
Brick and Mortar stores (And online stores, come to think about it) are also the type who will sell you a $40 Oblivion Stone because "that's what it's worth" while not letting you sell them a $40 Oblivion Stone because "It's not actually worth that much, it's just a spike".
As long as Wizards could sell packs to Walmart/other big retail stores, they have no fear of getting the product to the customer. While I understand business enough to know that Wizards gets all of their money selling product to B&M shops for THEM to sell, B&M shops can't sell things if there isn't an interest in product.
I keep saying, if Wizards wanted to make everyone happy, they need to reprint Goyf at Rare in a Standard set, give it a third art, and let everyone who wants to play it have four while everyone who wants to have the wow factor can keep their TS/MM art.
The third art's price will tank, but the other two shouldn't go lower than $100 due to price memory and relative rarity.
One problem I heard about the last time goyf was in standard was that a lot of people were splashing green for it. That might happen again if it's reprinted in a standard set. Even when Extended was cut short to 3-4 years worth of sets instead of 7 years, the best deck was UG with goyf and Jace.
RAV-TSP had a large number of decks that didn't even play Goyf, and Goyf came really late into the format. Dragonstorm, Angelfire/Jeskai, and UB Control were the biggest decks at the time. At the very end of the format we got a Gruul deck that used Goyf pretty well.
TSP-LOR was more Goyf territory, but Goyf was held in check because the UB Faeries deck was ridiculously unfair (Bitterblossom, Cryptics, Scions, Mistbind Cliques) and Reveilark combo had the right mix of tempo/late game to crush Goyf decks. It was still played in some decks but it wasn't dominant in the way that other cards have been in Standard.
It was a "good card" but not even the format defining card of that Standard, which has to go to Bitterblossom.
but Wizards has been reprinting goyf several time and they have gone on record and stated that they would reprint"agressively" if need be. I don't think an "implied contract" can be brought to court here:
Basically the case is going to be:
"We sue you for breach of implied contract when you reprinted "tarmogoyf" despite the fact that you have done it twice before and despite the fact that you have said that you will reprint agressively. Also you have reprinted several other cards - which we did not protest - so we really seriously feel we have a case here"
The court will answer: "case groundless"
You're still missing the distinction that people are making between reprinting Goyf and printing Goyf at uncommon just for the sake of driving down the price.
but Wizards has been reprinting goyf several time and they have gone on record and stated that they would reprint"agressively" if need be. I don't think an "implied contract" can be brought to court here:
Basically the case is going to be:
"We sue you for breach of implied contract when you reprinted "tarmogoyf" despite the fact that you have done it twice before and despite the fact that you have said that you will reprint agressively. Also you have reprinted several other cards - which we did not protest - so we really seriously feel we have a case here"
The court will answer: "case groundless"
You're still missing the distinction that people are making between reprinting Goyf and printing Goyf at uncommon just for the sake of driving down the price.
And "just for the sake of driving down the price" is NEVER a reason you will hear, from Wizards or one of their employees. They might have it as ONE reason among many, but if they chose to reprint it in Standard, they would officially say it was because they wanted the card in the Standard environment. That would be the messaging, It would even be true, to be honest.
Wizards has resisted reprinting a lot of high-value cards in Standard because they believe it would be bad for Limited, bad for Standard. IF they were to reprint a card in a Standard-legal set, they can legitimately claim that they believed it would be good for the Standard environment. They can also claim that shaping the Standard environment is their prerogative, even when it comes to the decision to reprint or not reprint any given card. They would never reprint a card just to drive down the price, but if it happens to drive down the price, they're pretty much unassailable because of both their policies and their precedents.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cards are game pieces, and should be treated as such, easily replaceable.
Cards are not money, investments, or a retirement fund, and should never have been treated as such.
Wizards made a mistake caving to speculators once, and we still pay for that mistake 2 decades later.
"Entitled:" the entire ad hominem fallacy condensed into a single word. It doesn't strengthen your argument to attack motivations, it just makes you look like you don't understand the argument.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's quite easy to argue an implied contract exists despite this, because there's a pretty hefty difference between "we may choose to reprint these cards if we like" and "we may engage in behaviour that will adversely affect the value of stores' inventory and collectors' portfolios."
When everything you have rests on intent, then any muddying of the waters, including there being other, valid reasons for an action, really hurts your chances of being successful.
Or are you saying that the OUTCOME, regardless of intent, is enough? In which case, I'd like to remind you that Wizards does not sell cards individually, and does not involve themselves with the secondary market at all. Price fixing is illegal, after all, so ANY action Wizards takes with an exclusive eye towards influencing the secondary market is dangerous territory for them. Notice that in all the MM and MM2015 articles, they never mention price: always availability.
Either way, Wizards will likely never reprint a card with the exclusive purpose of driving a price down: another, valid reason will always be attached, and that valid reason has to be strong enough to stand on its own, to avoid price-fixing allegations. If it's strong enough to stand on its own, then implied contract is probably not going to be enough to beat it, especially with Wizards having gone on the public record as saying that reprinting any card is a right they retain.
Cards are not money, investments, or a retirement fund, and should never have been treated as such.
Wizards made a mistake caving to speculators once, and we still pay for that mistake 2 decades later.
"Entitled:" the entire ad hominem fallacy condensed into a single word. It doesn't strengthen your argument to attack motivations, it just makes you look like you don't understand the argument.
That argument works the other way, too. They don't want to lower format prices all that much (claiming to want to do so would be a huge can of worms they certainly don't want to open), but they pay lip service to the players by talking about increased availability.
If we ever see a card like Tarmogoyf in a $4/pack, unlimited print run product, I will find a hat and eat it. You can quote me on that.
They want Standard to be a format where the meta ebbs and flows, in order for that to be the case they try to avoid cards that are good in every deck. They try to make cards good against different matchups instead, that way when one deck starts seeing play it's relatively easy to hate it out with another brew.
I am curious as to the list of non-"reserved list" cards that you say they would not reprint in a standard set for this purposes?
It also seems that the reserved list, and them explicitly not adding anything new to it would be enough to show that anything not on the list is fair game.
In the current Standard, there's also Courser of Kruphix. There isn't really a Standard-legal artifact, either one that can be sac'd or one that is or can become a creature, that strikes me as a candidate for this hypothetical Standard goyf.dec. But a 4/5~6/7 for 1G is still huge.
On phasing:
edit: the one I found on wiki is fairly vague
In RTR/INN standard, they printed thragtusk in like, THREE event decks and tanked the price to 10 dollars. Why can't they do that with other cards?
Death and Taxes
Pauper
UB Teachings
Tortured Existence
Murasa Tron
Modern
Pod (RIP)
Bloom(RIP)
Merfolk
Khans of Tarkir was the best-selling set of all time because the game is constantly growing in popularity. The fetches had a significantly smaller impact on sales in comparison.
Before Khans, the best-selling set of all time was Theros.
Before Theros, the best-selling set was Return to Ravnica.
Thragtusk was a new card. Those event decks were likely planned out even before Thragtusk was spoiled. I can't think of many occasions where they blatantly tried to tank an older card's price. Like Thoughtseize obviously dropped when it was reprinted, but not by a lot.
http://mtgadventures.blogspot.com/
Please check out my youtube channel at:
http://www.youtube.com/user/rubiera22/videos?flow=grid&view=0
Simply put, it would force the meta to be centered almost entirely around G/x variants, such as Abazan, and would likely be unstoppable. It really does not help that enchantment creatures are still around from Theros.
On the other hand people could jump right into Modern after rotation in that case by owning several BG/x staples already like Thoughtseize, Tarmogoyf, Siege Rhino and Windswept Heath
Death and Taxes
Pauper
UB Teachings
Tortured Existence
Murasa Tron
Modern
Pod (RIP)
Bloom(RIP)
Merfolk
Tarmogoyf's power in Modern and Legacy comes from the cards you play along him: Dark Confidant, Liliana of the Veil, Abrupt Decay, Force of Will, Daze, Jace the Mindsculptor, Hymn to Tourach, Deathrite Shaman, Fetchlands.
Each and every single card you play in a deck with Tarmogoyf is literally the best at what it does. That won't and can't be the case in standard. In a fetchless standard, Tarmogoyf is a turn 2 1/2 for 1G that may grow by the late game into a 3/4, not a turn 2 3/4 that may grow into a 6/7.
And "dies to removal" does matter in standard because there you won't have free counterspells or the best hand disruption ever to protect a creature that does notthing when it comes into play or dies.
Brick and Mortar stores (And online stores, come to think about it) are also the type who will sell you a $40 Oblivion Stone because "that's what it's worth" while not letting you sell them a $40 Oblivion Stone because "It's not actually worth that much, it's just a spike".
As long as Wizards could sell packs to Walmart/other big retail stores, they have no fear of getting the product to the customer. While I understand business enough to know that Wizards gets all of their money selling product to B&M shops for THEM to sell, B&M shops can't sell things if there isn't an interest in product.
I keep saying, if Wizards wanted to make everyone happy, they need to reprint Goyf at Rare in a Standard set, give it a third art, and let everyone who wants to play it have four while everyone who wants to have the wow factor can keep their TS/MM art.
The third art's price will tank, but the other two shouldn't go lower than $100 due to price memory and relative rarity.
RAV-TSP had a large number of decks that didn't even play Goyf, and Goyf came really late into the format. Dragonstorm, Angelfire/Jeskai, and UB Control were the biggest decks at the time. At the very end of the format we got a Gruul deck that used Goyf pretty well.
TSP-LOR was more Goyf territory, but Goyf was held in check because the UB Faeries deck was ridiculously unfair (Bitterblossom, Cryptics, Scions, Mistbind Cliques) and Reveilark combo had the right mix of tempo/late game to crush Goyf decks. It was still played in some decks but it wasn't dominant in the way that other cards have been in Standard.
It was a "good card" but not even the format defining card of that Standard, which has to go to Bitterblossom.
EDH:
UBGThe MimeoplasmUBG
You're still missing the distinction that people are making between reprinting Goyf and printing Goyf at uncommon just for the sake of driving down the price.
And "just for the sake of driving down the price" is NEVER a reason you will hear, from Wizards or one of their employees. They might have it as ONE reason among many, but if they chose to reprint it in Standard, they would officially say it was because they wanted the card in the Standard environment. That would be the messaging, It would even be true, to be honest.
Wizards has resisted reprinting a lot of high-value cards in Standard because they believe it would be bad for Limited, bad for Standard. IF they were to reprint a card in a Standard-legal set, they can legitimately claim that they believed it would be good for the Standard environment. They can also claim that shaping the Standard environment is their prerogative, even when it comes to the decision to reprint or not reprint any given card. They would never reprint a card just to drive down the price, but if it happens to drive down the price, they're pretty much unassailable because of both their policies and their precedents.
Cards are not money, investments, or a retirement fund, and should never have been treated as such.
Wizards made a mistake caving to speculators once, and we still pay for that mistake 2 decades later.
"Entitled:" the entire ad hominem fallacy condensed into a single word. It doesn't strengthen your argument to attack motivations, it just makes you look like you don't understand the argument.