This rules change was long overdue, especially in Commander. Killing other Legends or Walkers by playing the same card / same Walker type was just dumb. But as I expected, there are already people talking about "dumbing downthe game", which in this case is certainly not true.
Why do we have so many Poll threads in Magic General? There is a seperate Poll section.
It's not going to dumb the game down, or make it more complex, it's going to make planeswalkers 1,000 times more resilient.
Think about it, what's the most often used way to kill a mindsculptor? What about Lilliana?
These changes are NOT made for competitive play, but yet competitive play is going to suffer for them.
There is a single card that says 'destroy target planeswalker', and now the legend rule doesn't get rid of them.
This is going to be ****ing awful for competitive play.
This works if "dreadbore" type effects become a new permanent addition to the game, otherwise planeswalkers become to hard to deal with for some decks. (mostly non-"all dudes must go sideways" decks)
The other option is that (as they have done over the last block) wizards makes planeswalkers fairly irrelevant permanents that do not impact the board nearly as much as planeswalkers of the past. If the most playable planeswalkers are going to be capped out at Jace, Architect of Thought levels then this change really does not matter all that much for standard.
However, the impact of this rules change is going to be dramatic on modern and legacy. Affinity now has Burning Tree Emissary type draws because of Mox Opal. Liliana is MUCH better in Jund mirrors now. Show and tell can become the most awkward card in legacy as 2 Emrakuls happens. And this is just what my non-caffeinated early morning brain can think of, with mox opal probably easily getting the biggest upgrade.
Other than the flavour fail the changes are very good
I think that depends. Are we playing DOTP or very casual magic? It makes a ton of sense, then—new players probably thought the old legend rule was blah. But the moment you take a step into the more competitive side of Magic, suddenly a whole lot of legendary creatures lose their interactivity with legend removal, which is a bad thing. And as usual, rather than let new players learn something, WotC picks what makes sense for the new kids because, well, experienced players are probably on their ways out anyways. I mean, you were only ever going to play for around five years, right?
It sure makes Planeswalkers more resilient, but we will have to see how this turns out. I'm almost certain we will see some "get rid of Planeswalkers" - cards, besides, it seems like the next block features a lot of Legends (similar to alara block). This rules change is definitely good for competitive play when it comes to creatures.
No, it really isn't.
How often are clones used to kill legends in competitive magic?
Usually only the ones that are impossible to kill otherwise.
I'm not surprised, not since the change to slivers that make them only effect your own guys. This is part of the new direction the game is taken, and has been evident for awhile. There's been talks to changing the legend rule for awhile now, but it still seems pretty quick. They're trying to make the game as intuitive as possible, and Rosewater has stated multiple times that stuff get's changed during design and development to work how the playtesters think they should be working. Clones working properly now is just the most recent example.
I think the same people that lash out at this rule change are the same ones that complained about Mana Leak...making the game more interactive not in the combat step is for the best.
I think the same people that lash out at this rule change are the same ones that complained about Mana Leak...making the game more interactive not in the combat step is for the best.
What in the world are you talking about? The legend rule was interactive because it made the legends and clones you played have effects on the legends the other guy had. Those effects came outside of the combat phase. This change takes away the interactivity by making your legends not have effects on other players' legends. The change reduces interactivity to make the game more fun and intuitive for new players. The people lashing out at the change, then, are probably the same people who though Mana Leak was good for standard.
I'm still on the fence. I always hated how Clone or Phantasmal Image was a cheap way for Blue (of all colours) to handle any legendary creature, even if it had Lightning Greaves and Darksteel Plate. So I'm happy with that change.
But I don't like the gigantic flavour fallacy that arises. Odric, Master Tactician can be forever locked in an epic struggle with himself until judgment day and the trumpets sound? Okay that makes sense. Also, I'm worried that it makes certain legends a little too good, like Sigarda or Thrun.
The Planeswalker rule I'm OK with. I think it's within the realm of flavour (for the most part) that a Planeswalker like Chandra or Liliana could be on both sides of a conflict. Playing them off each other, as it were. Again, there are some flavour fallacies that worry me, like Chandra, the Firebrand pinging herself, or Gideon Jura attacking himself, but all in all I think it's more reasonable.
What worries me more is that the new legend rule is just another step in the road of WOTC catering to "new / dumb" players and taking all the downsides out of the game. I'm not sure if simultaneously assuming that the majority of your customers are idiots, pandering to whiny neophytes and alienating your most loyal supporters is good for business. We shall see.
I think they should've gone full-bore and made separate battlefields for all players. I know, it's sort of Yu-Gi-Oh'ing it up, but it reduces confusion another way: You control all permanents on your battlefield. It also reduces wordiness on cards: instead of "enters the battlefield under your control", a card can just read "enters your battlefield." If a card cares about all battlefields, it can read "enters a player's battlefield". Other variations from cards already printed include "enters an opponent's battlefield" and "enters its owner's battlefield" or "return it to its owner's battlefield." Effects that change a permanent's control also change which battlefield it's on.
I think they should've gone full-bore and made separate battlefields for all players. I know, it's sort of Yu-Gi-Oh'ing it up, but it reduces confusion another way: You control all permanents on your battlefield. It also reduces wordiness on cards: instead of "enters the battlefield under your control", a card can just read "enters your battlefield." If a card cares about all battlefields, it can read "enters a player's battlefield". Other variations from cards already printed include "enters an opponent's battlefield" and "enters its owner's battlefield" or "return it to its owner's battlefield." Effects that change a permanent's control also change which battlefield it's on.
Yeah, and while we're at it, let's remove casting cost and do away with every format but vintage.
What worries me more is that the new legend rule is just another step in the road of WOTC catering to "new / dumb" players and taking all the downsides out of the game. I'm not sure if simultaneously assuming that the majority of your customers are idiots, pandering to whiny neophytes and alienating your most loyal supporters is good for business. We shall see.
I agree with this sentiment, I personally don't care too much about the new legend rule, I just learnt the current legend rule 2 years ago in the middle of a game - I still remembered the old legend rule and insisted that he just couldn't play his card if I already had a legend in play.
What I do care about is that Wizards thinks that this is something worth expending time and energy on AND I'm concerned that the incremental removal of complexity coupled with increase in individual card power is slowly turning this game into War (card game).
What in the world are you talking about? The legend rule was interactive because it made the legends and clones you played have effects on the legends the other guy had. Those effects came outside of the combat phase. This change takes away the interactivity by making your legends not have effects on other players' legends. The change reduces interactivity to make the game more fun and intuitive for new players. The people lashing out at the change, then, are probably the same people who though Mana Leak was good for standard.
I'm pretty much one of those guys; I dislike this rules change, I liked Mana Leak while it was in Standard even when I wasn't playing it. I understand the reasons for the constant shifts towards overall casual appeal - the same reasons the video game industry has been heading that way for a long time - but I really don't like it. But I don't think it's the end of the world. I can live with it.
And also, on the other hand, one side of me delights at some of the outright stupid and ridiculous things I can pull off now. Excuse me while I go Liquimetal Coating someone's Bolas, use Agent of Bolas to animate it, Clone the animated Bolas, and use my newly Cloned Bolas to blow up their Bolas... and now I don't lose my copy of Bolas before I get to actually do anything.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sigpic by me, 'Angel of Despair' by Todd Lockwood, 'Kaalia of the Vast' by Michael Komarck, 'Defiler of Souls' by Paul Bonner
i just feel like we go back to that JTMS era in standard when they didn't put a o-ring in the format. there were vertually 0 way to destroy them except with creatures and that legend war. (attacking vs a deck that play Wall of Omens Baneslayers and *** was near impossible for aggro.)
i can only HOPE that wizard plan to put more PW removal in M14 to fix this for legacy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Kakwann, Lvl 39 Sorcerer
Currently Playing
Standard:GWRU 4C Collected Company Modern:GUWRB Bloom Titan Legacy:BUG SHARDLESS BUG
EDH : GR BORBORYGMOS ENRAGED GU PRIME SPEAKER ZEGENA UWR ZEDRUU THE GREATHEARTED UBR MISHRA ARTIFICER PRODIGY B SHEOLDRED WHISPERING ONE R ASHLING THE PILGRIM
I do not like this change, at all; the "legend rule" and "planeswalker uniqueness rule" were both perfectly acceptable as they were, for they were fair and balanced. Now, however, it is entirely one-sided, and violates the balancing aspects of the original rule, and it also makes absolutely no sense from a flavor perspective; how can two different players control the same legendary creature or planeswalkers with the same type? Those cards represent unique, individual beings, so how can such beings possibly be in multiple locations simultaneously?
Legendary creatures are one of my favorite aspects of this game, and I shall admit that rarely ever have I encountered situations in which the "legend rule" actually mattered, but I still do not like this change, at all. However, one possibly positive aspect of this announcement is that it may hint at the Theros block having a strong focus on legendary permanents (which makes sense, as it is likely inspired by Greek/Roman mythology), since the last time that WotC revised the "legend rule" was before the Kamigawa block, which focused strongly on legendary permanents, as well.
I am overall displeased by this change, but I shall wait and see how it affects my game playing before I make any further judgements about it.
However, one possibly positive aspect of this announcement is that it may hint at the Theros block have a strong focus on legendary permanents (which makes sense, as it is likely inspired by Greek/Roman mythology), since the last time that WotC revised the "legend rule" was before the Kamigawa block, which focused strongly on legendary permanents, as well.
this means, that for having a good "Kamigawa 2.0" they have to screw all other formats?... i dislike those kind of changes because they effect the power level of older card in legacy, like Gaea's Cradle or in modern like Mox Opal or Geist of Saint Thraft (not even talking about PWs like Liliana/Jace)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Kakwann, Lvl 39 Sorcerer
Currently Playing
Standard:GWRU 4C Collected Company Modern:GUWRB Bloom Titan Legacy:BUG SHARDLESS BUG
EDH : GR BORBORYGMOS ENRAGED GU PRIME SPEAKER ZEGENA UWR ZEDRUU THE GREATHEARTED UBR MISHRA ARTIFICER PRODIGY B SHEOLDRED WHISPERING ONE R ASHLING THE PILGRIM
My favorite format is Legacy and I really dislike this change because it will make Jace and Jitte even more unstoppable than they already are.
From a flavor standpoint, this makes less than 0 sense. You're telling me that I can't have two of the same legend on my field because they are a unique person, but there can be two of the same legend on the battlefield because they are NOT a unique person? We have to just accept the legend type as being purely arbitrary from this point forward.
From a "interactive" standpoint, this change is terrible. People seem to be making the claim that this change makes the game MORE interactive because it allows both players to play all their cards. They're wrong. Interactive Magic is where you have to look at your opponent to form your strategy and decide what you can and can't play. It's where what you're doing has an (interactive) effect on your opponent's stuff. Not interactive magic is when you can ignore what your opponent is doing and just play solitaire throwing stuff from your hand to the field. This change is a move away from interactive Magic.
The thing that bothers me is...from a flavor perspective...before I could live with Clones blowing up legends because it was a true highlander "There can only be one." Now...I play Geist, and so does my opponent, and all is cool. I play Geist and I clone it, OMG PARADOX, PANIC FREAK OUT, and one dies. I never did like that little flavor fail, and I like it even less now.
thespian's stage + dark depths sounds good...and uncounterable
also double serra's sanctum...gaea's cradle...double mox opal, double flagstands of trokair....nah i don't like this change :\
also, people will lose A LOT MORE to mighty mind sculptor ultimatum
It seems a lot of people misunderstand the changes.
NEW LEGEND RULE SIMPLY SAYS EACH PLAYER'S PERMANENTS ARE CHECKED SEPARATELY FOR THE LEGEND RULE. THIS MEANS THAT YOU CAN STILL ONLY HAVE ONE OF EACH LEGENDARY PERMANENT ON YOUR SIDE OF THE BOARD. NO DOUBLE MOX OPAL OR ANYTHING BROKEN LIKE THAT
The biggest change is being able to legend out other things on your opponents side of the board. I think this was a big deal for EDH decks that could result in a change for the worse. However, I do like that you can't just play a liliana to kill my liliana anymore. So I think from a competitive stand point, the rule is a lot better. But I didn't vote, because i'm not sure how I feel about that.
I don't like it... MTG is slowly becoming a multi-player solitarie game...
"Oh, you cannot counter my spell because it cannot be countered"
"Oh, you cannot target my dude... but surely I can"
"Oh, you cannot kill my Legend but I get to chose the one I want"
"Oh, you cannot kill my PW but I get to chose the one I want"
And yet, people still dislike combo
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Common sense is the most fairly distributed thing in the world, for each one thinks he is so well-endowed with it that even those who are hardest to satisfy in all other matters are not in the habit of desiring more of it than they already have. - René Descartes
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's not going to dumb the game down, or make it more complex, it's going to make planeswalkers 1,000 times more resilient.
Think about it, what's the most often used way to kill a mindsculptor? What about Lilliana?
These changes are NOT made for competitive play, but yet competitive play is going to suffer for them.
There is a single card that says 'destroy target planeswalker', and now the legend rule doesn't get rid of them.
This is going to be ****ing awful for competitive play.
The other option is that (as they have done over the last block) wizards makes planeswalkers fairly irrelevant permanents that do not impact the board nearly as much as planeswalkers of the past. If the most playable planeswalkers are going to be capped out at Jace, Architect of Thought levels then this change really does not matter all that much for standard.
However, the impact of this rules change is going to be dramatic on modern and legacy. Affinity now has Burning Tree Emissary type draws because of Mox Opal. Liliana is MUCH better in Jund mirrors now. Show and tell can become the most awkward card in legacy as 2 Emrakuls happens. And this is just what my non-caffeinated early morning brain can think of, with mox opal probably easily getting the biggest upgrade.
Standard - N/A
Modern - Infect, Scapeshift
Legacy - TES, High Tide
I think that depends. Are we playing DOTP or very casual magic? It makes a ton of sense, then—new players probably thought the old legend rule was blah. But the moment you take a step into the more competitive side of Magic, suddenly a whole lot of legendary creatures lose their interactivity with legend removal, which is a bad thing. And as usual, rather than let new players learn something, WotC picks what makes sense for the new kids because, well, experienced players are probably on their ways out anyways. I mean, you were only ever going to play for around five years, right?
No, it really isn't.
How often are clones used to kill legends in competitive magic?
Usually only the ones that are impossible to kill otherwise.
Glad I have a foil set of geists, though.
What in the world are you talking about? The legend rule was interactive because it made the legends and clones you played have effects on the legends the other guy had. Those effects came outside of the combat phase. This change takes away the interactivity by making your legends not have effects on other players' legends. The change reduces interactivity to make the game more fun and intuitive for new players. The people lashing out at the change, then, are probably the same people who though Mana Leak was good for standard.
But I don't like the gigantic flavour fallacy that arises. Odric, Master Tactician can be forever locked in an epic struggle with himself until judgment day and the trumpets sound? Okay that makes sense. Also, I'm worried that it makes certain legends a little too good, like Sigarda or Thrun.
The Planeswalker rule I'm OK with. I think it's within the realm of flavour (for the most part) that a Planeswalker like Chandra or Liliana could be on both sides of a conflict. Playing them off each other, as it were. Again, there are some flavour fallacies that worry me, like Chandra, the Firebrand pinging herself, or Gideon Jura attacking himself, but all in all I think it's more reasonable.
What worries me more is that the new legend rule is just another step in the road of WOTC catering to "new / dumb" players and taking all the downsides out of the game. I'm not sure if simultaneously assuming that the majority of your customers are idiots, pandering to whiny neophytes and alienating your most loyal supporters is good for business. We shall see.
I don't always post about Rafiq of the Many, but when I do, I cardlink to the original artwork, and not the supplementary product version.
"I trust myself to do my duty, even unto death. It's what comes after that I'm afraid of."
"Just fight without fear. Your soul is protected by the hand of Avacyn and will never submit to evil."
Yeah, and while we're at it, let's remove casting cost and do away with every format but vintage.
I agree with this sentiment, I personally don't care too much about the new legend rule, I just learnt the current legend rule 2 years ago in the middle of a game - I still remembered the old legend rule and insisted that he just couldn't play his card if I already had a legend in play.
What I do care about is that Wizards thinks that this is something worth expending time and energy on AND I'm concerned that the incremental removal of complexity coupled with increase in individual card power is slowly turning this game into War (card game).
I'm pretty much one of those guys; I dislike this rules change, I liked Mana Leak while it was in Standard even when I wasn't playing it. I understand the reasons for the constant shifts towards overall casual appeal - the same reasons the video game industry has been heading that way for a long time - but I really don't like it. But I don't think it's the end of the world. I can live with it.
And also, on the other hand, one side of me delights at some of the outright stupid and ridiculous things I can pull off now. Excuse me while I go Liquimetal Coating someone's Bolas, use Agent of Bolas to animate it, Clone the animated Bolas, and use my newly Cloned Bolas to blow up their Bolas... and now I don't lose my copy of Bolas before I get to actually do anything.
Sigpic by me, 'Angel of Despair' by Todd Lockwood, 'Kaalia of the Vast' by Michael Komarck, 'Defiler of Souls' by Paul Bonner
Should Blue Be Banned?
- U/W/r Control
MODERN
- N/A
LEGACY
- LED-less Dredge
I collect Phyrexian Ragers! (currently 41 nonfoils, 0 foils)
i can only HOPE that wizard plan to put more PW removal in M14 to fix this for legacy.
Standard: GWRU 4C Collected Company
Modern: GUWRB Bloom Titan
Legacy: BUG SHARDLESS BUG
EDH :
GR BORBORYGMOS ENRAGED
GU PRIME SPEAKER ZEGENA
UWR ZEDRUU THE GREATHEARTED
UBR MISHRA ARTIFICER PRODIGY
B SHEOLDRED WHISPERING ONE
R ASHLING THE PILGRIM
Legendary creatures are one of my favorite aspects of this game, and I shall admit that rarely ever have I encountered situations in which the "legend rule" actually mattered, but I still do not like this change, at all. However, one possibly positive aspect of this announcement is that it may hint at the Theros block having a strong focus on legendary permanents (which makes sense, as it is likely inspired by Greek/Roman mythology), since the last time that WotC revised the "legend rule" was before the Kamigawa block, which focused strongly on legendary permanents, as well.
I am overall displeased by this change, but I shall wait and see how it affects my game playing before I make any further judgements about it.
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
this means, that for having a good "Kamigawa 2.0" they have to screw all other formats?... i dislike those kind of changes because they effect the power level of older card in legacy, like Gaea's Cradle or in modern like Mox Opal or Geist of Saint Thraft (not even talking about PWs like Liliana/Jace)
Standard: GWRU 4C Collected Company
Modern: GUWRB Bloom Titan
Legacy: BUG SHARDLESS BUG
EDH :
GR BORBORYGMOS ENRAGED
GU PRIME SPEAKER ZEGENA
UWR ZEDRUU THE GREATHEARTED
UBR MISHRA ARTIFICER PRODIGY
B SHEOLDRED WHISPERING ONE
R ASHLING THE PILGRIM
From a flavor standpoint, this makes less than 0 sense. You're telling me that I can't have two of the same legend on my field because they are a unique person, but there can be two of the same legend on the battlefield because they are NOT a unique person? We have to just accept the legend type as being purely arbitrary from this point forward.
From a "interactive" standpoint, this change is terrible. People seem to be making the claim that this change makes the game MORE interactive because it allows both players to play all their cards. They're wrong. Interactive Magic is where you have to look at your opponent to form your strategy and decide what you can and can't play. It's where what you're doing has an (interactive) effect on your opponent's stuff. Not interactive magic is when you can ignore what your opponent is doing and just play solitaire throwing stuff from your hand to the field. This change is a move away from interactive Magic.
The could be at the same place, they couldn't occupy the same space.
Why do I remember this? I haven't seen this movie in over 10 years.....
Cyriss07
The creator of Maro's Magic 8-Ball!
It seems a lot of people misunderstand the changes.
NEW LEGEND RULE SIMPLY SAYS EACH PLAYER'S PERMANENTS ARE CHECKED SEPARATELY FOR THE LEGEND RULE. THIS MEANS THAT YOU CAN STILL ONLY HAVE ONE OF EACH LEGENDARY PERMANENT ON YOUR SIDE OF THE BOARD. NO DOUBLE MOX OPAL OR ANYTHING BROKEN LIKE THAT
The biggest change is being able to legend out other things on your opponents side of the board. I think this was a big deal for EDH decks that could result in a change for the worse. However, I do like that you can't just play a liliana to kill my liliana anymore. So I think from a competitive stand point, the rule is a lot better. But I didn't vote, because i'm not sure how I feel about that.
Modern Junk Primer
Legacy ANT Primer
L1 Judge
"Oh, you cannot counter my spell because it cannot be countered"
"Oh, you cannot target my dude... but surely I can"
"Oh, you cannot kill my Legend but I get to chose the one I want"
"Oh, you cannot kill my PW but I get to chose the one I want"
And yet, people still dislike combo