Purpose
The purpose of this thread is to discuss the issue of the Mythic Rare rarity and Legendary card type and how I believe they should be one and the same.
Background
Since the creation of the Mythic Rare rarity in Shards of Alara, WotC had a great idea to "add in a new level of rarity without having to print cards at a higher rarity than [they] already print". Add in the abysmal Legendary types printed over the years and we have a match made in heaven. The recent change to the legendary rule gave WotC the perfect opportunity to capitalize on the "the legendary and Planeswalker uniqueness" and finally bring them together.
My proposal: all Legendary and Plansewalker type cards should also carry the Mythic Rare rarity and all Mythic Rare rarity permanents should be Legendary or Plansewalker type. In case this is confusing, I'm saying Instant and Sorcery cards can be Mythic Rare as well.
Justification
Logically speaking, if something is legendary, it should be so fantastic amazing that you must include it in the appropriate deck. In the same vein, if something is so rare, its mythic, one should expect the same level of quality. It's only natural these two should go together. I don't have a reference for this statement, but I remember reading somewhere that WotC makes some cards Legendary in order to limit board state manipulation by having multiple copies in play by the same player. I would argue the same thing about cards that have the Mythic Rare rarity. Let's look at some examples, both good and bad.
Good use of Mythic Rare Geist of Saint Traft - This guy is a BEAST! Also, the name indicates there is only one Geist of the person named Saint Traft. All is Dust - This is an epic event that really alters the board state. The name sounds powerful and it also includes a second card type, Tribal.
Poor use of Mythic Rare Platinum Archangel - Although this card provides a unique ability, you can have multiples in play. It doesn't bring a unique feel to the game, so it should be a Rare. Archangel's Light - I don't see any reason at all to make this card Mythic Rare. Terrible.
Good use of Legendary Melira, Sylvok Outcast - This is the epitome of a Legendary Creature type. This should have been printed as Mythic Rare. Akroma's Memorial - The reprint was given the Mythic Rare rarity, well done WotC!
Poor use of Legendary Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle - This is a single named mountain, why isn't this Legendary? Blind Seer - This is NOT a named person, place or thing. Why is this Legendary? Sure, the only other way to do the same thing is once use, but is that enough?
Well, as it turns out, Blind Seer is Urza. So that argument is broken. Also, if all legendaries are mythic, that decreases the chance that a person could get one, making it more expensive, making them harder to find/get/purchase, which tends to turn people off. Mythics are tough enough to get as is (Generally speaking), and if ALL new legends were mythic, people would throw a fit! Sets normally have 10-15 mythics, which is a good balance. Making the legends mythic would either; A) Decrease the amount of non-legendary mythics in a set (Which would make people sad), or B) Increase the mythic amount, thereby taking some space from rares, commons or uncommons.
To sum it up, this would not be a sound business model, no matter how flavourful.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A giant dork. Who likes to eat with forks. Never used a spork.
Decks: Casual R Burn R
EDH R Godo Voltron R RUG ETB Overload RUG BW Clerics Pain and Drain BW GW Spirits!!! GW RUG Landfall Silliness RUG
I would agree that cards that depict specific characters or places (Tajic, Blade of the Legion, Teysa, Envoy of Ghosts, etc) should be Legendary. But, are you arguing that these cards should be made more powerful so as to be made Mythic Rare? Cards like these have decently powerful effects, but their casting costs prevent their power level from rising to what I would consider Mythic Rare power level. There is no way that, in their current form, that cards like these should be Mythic Rare even though they are most certainly Legendary.
Well, as it turns out, Blind Seer is Urza. So that argument is broken. Also, if all legendaries are mythic, that decreases the chance that a person could get one, making it more expensive, making them harder to find/get/purchase, which tends to turn people off. Mythics are tough enough to get as is (Generally speaking), and if ALL new legends were mythic, people would throw a fit! Sets normally have 10-15 mythics, which is a good balance. Making the legends mythic would either; A) Decrease the amount of non-legendary mythics in a set (Which would make people sad), or B) Increase the mythic amount, thereby taking some space from rares, commons or uncommons.
To sum it up, this would not be a sound business model, no matter how flavourful.
Blind Seer is the name of the card, so the argument is not broken.
You proved my point, Legendary should be as rare as a Mythic Rare; or I argue it's not truly legendary, it's just rare. This has nothing to do with flavor and everything to do with being consistent.
Let's take Theros as an example. Of the Legendary cards in the set, 11/19 are not Mythic Rare. Now, from the opposite perspective, of the Mythic Rares in the set, only 4/15 are permanents that are not Legendary or Planeswalker types. From my perspective, WotC did a significantly better job on the Mythic Rare cards in the set than the Legendary cards.
I would agree that cards that depict specific characters or places (Tajic, Blade of the Legion, Teysa, Envoy of Ghosts, etc) should be Legendary. But, are you arguing that these cards should be made more powerful so as to be made Mythic Rare? Cards like these have decently powerful effects, but their casting costs prevent their power level from rising to what I would consider Mythic Rare power level. There is no way that, in their current form, that cards like these should be Mythic Rare even though they are most certainly Legendary.
In short: yes, the Legendary cards should be made more powerful to what everyone would consider the power level of a Mythic Rare.
I had a freakout in Commander playing against It that Betrays. I had a Hero's Demise in my hand and kept internally screaming 'why are you not legendary!? why wont you die?!".
For me a good Mythic is something you build a deck around. In other words it should not just be 'good', it should affect what cards you choose. That does not mean that a card that is 'just really damn god' is not a good mythic, but I think a card like Bloodlord of Vaasgoth are great because you pull him from a pack and instantly go searching your long boxes for vampires. Unfortunately a lot of those cards are not worth anything, because they are not cards you can put into any deck for an improved win chance.
There are always bad mythics and there always will be. most of these cards do have a huge effect on the game. if i gain 40 life from Archangel's light it has more than served the purpose of being a mythic. you do not want somebody with 3 of these in a draft you will never deal enough damage and you will draw out your library before them.
I agree. Any big time card you can build around is something worth the title of "Mythic" but sadly a lot of cards are just plain ridiculous (i'm looking at you Hellcarver Demon) or just bland (Apocalypse Hydra.) Cards like It That Betrays and Bearer of the Heavens should both be legendary and mythic. Those cards FEEL Mythic.
The main thing a Mythic should have is a "wow" factor. In that regard, I disagree with the idea that Platinum Angel is a bad Mythic. It may not be legendary, but the text "You can't lose the game" is incredibly striking.
The main thing a Mythic should have is a "wow" factor. In that regard, I disagree with the idea that Platinum Angel is a bad Mythic. It may not be legendary, but the text "You can't lose the game" is incredibly striking.
Fair point there, but it would still be just as striking as a Rare, think about Deathrite Shaman.
I agree. Any big time card you can build around is something worth the title of "Mythic" but sadly a lot of cards are just plain ridiculous (i'm looking at you Hellcarver Demon) or just bland (Apocalypse Hydra.) Cards like It That Betrays and Bearer of the Heavens should both be legendary and mythic. Those cards FEEL Mythic.
Thank you! I'm happy to see someone think in a similar fashion. Another example of a bad recent Mythic Rare is Prophetic Flamespeaker. I get the idea this got a Mythic Rare slapped on it for being the first card since Dragon Tyrant with Double Strike and Trample printed on the card.
I disagree with this, if only for the fact that allowing Legendaries at Rare opens up design space.
take, for example, Dragon's Maze, where you have 10 Legendary Maze Runners that you want to include for story purposes. If your proposal was accepted and implemented, then those Runners are now mythic. the problem is: you only have 15 mythic slots, and you already have an Izzet Planeswalker.
Do the Izzet not get a Maze Runner, or an extra Mythic? with the Runners at Rare, you sidestep this problem completely.
I agree that 'walkers should be mythic, because only 1 in a million actually can become a walker, and of them, only 1 in a million actually succeed in doing so.
But, Legendaries can just be rare, unless the person is incredibly exceptional (i.e. Rafiq of the Many) look at it this way: How likely are you to make a contract with someone like Teysa, Envoy of Ghosts? so long as she believes that you will benefit her, shell be happy to help you out. But, it would take quite a bit more convincing to get someone like Malfegor to help you out, and he even has a price!
plus, you can be a Legendary for story purposes. take Thalia, Guardian of Thraben. that effect just isn't a mythic effect. She probably did not start out as a Legendary Creature. but, Creative needed a Legendary Creature to represent Thalia, and that card did the best job, in their opinion. So, the story dictated that it be Legendary.
now, imagine if they only used Mythics for that: what card from Dark Ascension could they have used instead? and if they turned her Mythic, what would they downgrade to Rare? That would possibly require a complete reworking of the entire set, and would not be worth the trouble.
so, no. not every mythic permanent should be legendary, because that restricts design space, and not every legendary should be mythic, because it also restricts design space and restricts the creative aspect.
designing something is about leaving yourself as many outs as possible, not restricting the number of outs you have.
I think you're a little confused about Blind Seer, because it's not just some blind seer, it's a person referred to as Blind Seer in the story and it was one of the disguises Urza used. In other words, think of it as there's such a thing as death, and then there's the mythical character known as Death. Likewise, you can be a grim reaper, but there's only one Grim Reaper, and that's how Blind Seer is used in this context, but it's hard to tell as it's not something we commonly do in English and it's very story based.
So we get the enemy colored painlands and not the allied color ones? Well that's reverse of the norm, but I thought Wizards was planning to do full 10 land cycles from now on.
Enemy pains could indicate allied Fetches in the next set, to offset the colour imbalance. It would also make sense since it would allow Modern to have access to all 10 Fetches as opposed to only 5.
Or you could read the article, and now that's not true.
While I agree that there should be more much more overlap between mythics and lengendaries(though not always the same). However your not helping your argument when you list utility cards and effeicent beaters as "good mythics" and cards with a more unique effect as "bad mythics".
A 40 dollar mythic rare would constitute a must have 4 of that goes in many decks.
Stats About Mythics
-Mythics are on average 40% rarer than pre-mythic rares
(old blocks about 200 rares, Mythic blocks 35+ mythics)
-They are printing more new cards a year not less
(about 665 now vs. 630 in most pre-mythic block)
-To drop the value of a rare by $1 a mythic must go up $2
-In a 3 year time span deck prices doubled. I am petitioning for the removal of mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
While I agree that there should be more much more overlap between mythics and lengendaries(though not always the same). However your not helping your argument when you list utility cards and effeicent beaters as "good mythics" and cards with a more unique effect as "bad mythics".
Thanks for the reply so I now have your sig on mythics in this thread. Point of fact, I do support the removal of the Mythic Rare rarity, even if some may see this as a conflict of interest.
I don't follow your point of view that cards with unique effects aren't "bad mythics".
One thing you aren't considering here: Mythic Rarity allows for Wizards to print rare, powerful cards for Constructed without worrying much about their impact on Limited. Pushed cards like Master of Waves and Stormbreath Dragon can be printed without every draft pod being taken over by whichever players open one.
Similarly, Wizards wants us playing with the Theros God-weapons like Spear of Heliod in both Limited and Constructed, but doesn't want multiples out for one player at a time. Seems like good design to me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
One thing you aren't considering here: Mythic Rarity allows for Wizards to print rare, powerful cards for Constructed without worrying much about their impact on Limited. Pushed cards like Master of Waves and Stormbreath Dragon can be printed without every draft pod being taken over by whichever players open one.
you make a good point, but this could easily be resolved by instituting better quality control over multiple rares in a box.
Similarly, Wizards wants us playing with the Theros God-weapons like Spear of Heliod in both Limited and Constructed, but doesn't want multiples out for one player at a time. Seems like good design to me.
On this point, I will disagree. Leaving a card like this as rare doesn't add any value to the play environment or design space. A god is Mythic Rare, but his/her weapon is not? Not sensible to me.
One thing you aren't considering here: Mythic Rarity allows for Wizards to print rare, powerful cards for Constructed without worrying much about their impact on Limited. Pushed cards like Master of Waves and Stormbreath Dragon can be printed without every draft pod being taken over by whichever players open one.
you make a good point, but this could easily be resolved by instituting better quality control over multiple rares in a box.
Similarly, Wizards wants us playing with the Theros God-weapons like Spear of Heliod in both Limited and Constructed, but doesn't want multiples out for one player at a time. Seems like good design to me.
On this point, I will disagree. Leaving a card like this as rare doesn't add any value to the play environment or design space. A god is Mythic Rare, but his/her weapon is not? Not sensible to me.
I don't follow your reasoning on either point. There are only a finite number of Mythic slots per set, and if there weren't, it would cause drastic issues of card availability and price bloat. Double the number of Mythics per set, and you're halving the number of any single given Mythic, resulting in price increases. I'm sure that's not what you're suggesting.
What you're proposing necessitates a reduction in design freedom. If every legendary is mythic and every mythic is legendary, there are cards that simply could not exist. The cards I listed above wouldn't work. Master of Waves and Stormbreath Dragon would need to be arbitrarily made Legendary or demoted to Rare, and either option would have negative consequences for either Limited or Standard. The five God weapons are balanced nicely for Limited, but forcing them to be Mythic would make them virtually nonexistent in a Limited setting.
Wizards occasionally prints a card in the wrong rarity or fails to make something Legendary that should have been, but the solution is for them to learn from their mistakes and make better products. I'd suggest that they've demonstrated this in Theros block, as I've heard little to no grumblings on the subject of rarity or legendary status relative to, say, the RTR block.
Your proposal makes sense thematically, but sacrifices gameplay quality to realize that goal. That doesn't seem worthwhile to me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
The mythic rarity is a blight upon the game. Rarity should not be a reason to make cards more powerful. Wizards wants you to think that so you buy more packs.
I don't follow your reasoning on either point. There are only a finite number of Mythic slots per set, and if there weren't, it would cause drastic issues of card availability and price bloat. Double the number of Mythics per set, and you're halving the number of any single given Mythic, resulting in price increases. I'm sure that's not what you're suggesting.
What you're proposing necessitates a reduction in design freedom. If every legendary is mythic and every mythic is legendary, there are cards that simply could not exist. The cards I listed above wouldn't work. Master of Waves and Stormbreath Dragon would need to be arbitrarily made Legendary or demoted to Rare, and either option would have negative consequences for either Limited or Standard. The five God weapons are balanced nicely for Limited, but forcing them to be Mythic would make them virtually nonexistent in a Limited setting.
Wizards occasionally prints a card in the wrong rarity or fails to make something Legendary that should have been, but the solution is for them to learn from their mistakes and make better products. I'd suggest that they've demonstrated this in Theros block, as I've heard little to no grumblings on the subject of rarity or legendary status relative to, say, the RTR block.
Your proposal makes sense thematically, but sacrifices gameplay quality to realize that goal. That doesn't seem worthwhile to me.
Several points to discuss here.
First, if WotC truly wants to designate rarity for Standard legal sets based on Limited Formats, I strongly feel they should reconsider this position because it is detrimental to game design and profitability. Modern Masters and now Conspiracy are two products that are clearly designed for Limited Formats and are excellent. I expect to see this continue and I think it is fantastic and a step in the right direction for game development.
Next, your point on a finite number of Mythic Rare cards is arbitrary. WotC determines this and they can change it any time.
Finally, my suggestion has very little to do with themes and very much to do with the distribution and power level strategies. Mythic Rare cards should be very powerful, so should Legendary cards.
The mythic rarity is a blight upon the game. Rarity should not be a reason to make cards more powerful. Wizards wants you to think that so you buy more packs.
Agreed 100%. This is why I think the best solution other than getting rid of it is to align it with Legendary permanent cards.
Next, your point on a finite number of Mythic Rare cards is arbitrary. WotC determines this and they can change it any time.
You didn't read what he said did you? More mythics means less of each specific mythic for the same number of packs, resulting in a price increase of each one.
Also, you are seem to think rarity is about flavor alone, when most of the time it really is about how much the card would warp limited. Considering the power nine are too powerful for mythic (see vintage masters), without being legendary, your scenario would make the game difficult to control power wise, as mentioned above.
Furthermore, legends shouldn't be as rare as planeswalkers by default. Any civilization has its legendary creatures, even within our history there are a tonne of them. But the number of planeswalkers a civilization spawns is little to none, due to their origin. This is the flavor reason for why all planewalkers are mythic (The other reason is that they are very powerful, even Tibalt is a three star card on gatherer.)
I think that both planeswalkers and creatures should default to legendary, but legendary creatures can slip down to rare occasionally if this needs to occur in order for everything to fit. Which is pretty much what already happens. So.
BUT there's room for things that aren't legendary to go to mythic rare status. You say platinum angel isn't unique enough - obviously thats arguable but personally I think it is. Stuff like that can surely go to legendary.
What I agree on though is that stuff like valakut should be legendary. Wizards says it doesn't like making lands legendary though, so I don't think thats going to happen. Personally I think it should.
Basically I think the interaction between legends and plainswalkers & mythic rare status is alright as of now. That doesn't mean I think legends are done perfectly right now, or mythic rares are done perfectly right now, but there's about the right amount of push toward legends being mythic right now.
Also, you are seem to think rarity is about flavor alone, when most of the time it really is about how much the card would warp limited. Considering the power nine are too powerful for mythic (see vintage masters), without being legendary, your scenario would make the game difficult to control power wise, as mentioned above.
Furthermore, legends shouldn't be as rare as planeswalkers by default. Any civilization has its legendary creatures, even within our history there are a tonne of them. But the number of planeswalkers a civilization spawns is little to none, due to their origin. This is the flavor reason for why all planewalkers are mythic (The other reason is that they are very powerful, even Tibalt is a three star card on gatherer.)
Rarity should have nothing to do with flavor and everything to do with power level. I just double-checked this thread and I haven't stated anything at all about flavor being a consideration in this topic, except to say it isn't part of the consideration.
Legendary should be as rare as Planeswalkers. Isn't a Planeswalker a legend? Doesn't it follow the same rule set as Legendary cards? What's the difference between a guy named Albert Einstein and the Albert Einstein? One is a Legend, the other is just a guy with the same name as a legend.
You say platinum angel isn't unique enough - obviously thats arguable but personally I think it is.
If multiple can exist, then it isn't unique. Something that is mythic should be so powerful and important that only one can exist. Basically, this is the entire point of this thread in a very condensed sentence. The world can be filled with countless platinum angels, so they aren't that rare. Just because a card is printed with a powerful ability or never-seen-before combination of abilities doesn't mean it should be made Mythic Rare rarity.
One thing you aren't considering here: Mythic Rarity allows for Wizards to print rare, powerful cards for Constructed without worrying much about their impact on Limited. Pushed cards like Master of Waves and Stormbreath Dragon can be printed without every draft pod being taken over by whichever players open one.
you make a good point, but this could easily be resolved by instituting better quality control over multiple rares in a box.
Similarly, Wizards wants us playing with the Theros God-weapons like Spear of Heliod in both Limited and Constructed, but doesn't want multiples out for one player at a time. Seems like good design to me.
On this point, I will disagree. Leaving a card like this as rare doesn't add any value to the play environment or design space. A god is Mythic Rare, but his/her weapon is not? Not sensible to me.
Not having multiple in the same box wouldn't change the fact that far more games would be instantly won by a busted mythic. It's bad enough that it happens at all (which is why I still think Mythics should be bonuses in addition to the normal 15, like tokens, and shouldn't be limited legal), we don't need to make it multiple times more common.
Mythics are mythic because they're too pushed for limited or because they have unique effects. Legendary creatures are just creatures that are important in the story. They're completely unrelated as they should be. You can have rare legendaries, you can have mythic legendaries. It works just fine. Your entire argument is based around a false premise: who said legendaries have to be so stupidly powerful that they should be included in every on-color deck? Even in your own example, you see Melira is a great use of legendary, yet she obviously isn't very powerful. Not everyone who's important in the story is stupidly powerful.
PS: How does Platinum Angel not bring a unique feel to the game? 99.9% of the games you're at 3 and tapped out, I can bolt you for the kill. Not if Platinum Angel is around!
The purpose of this thread is to discuss the issue of the Mythic Rare rarity and Legendary card type and how I believe they should be one and the same.
Background
Since the creation of the Mythic Rare rarity in Shards of Alara, WotC had a great idea to "add in a new level of rarity without having to print cards at a higher rarity than [they] already print". Add in the abysmal Legendary types printed over the years and we have a match made in heaven. The recent change to the legendary rule gave WotC the perfect opportunity to capitalize on the "the legendary and Planeswalker uniqueness" and finally bring them together.
My proposal: all Legendary and Plansewalker type cards should also carry the Mythic Rare rarity and all Mythic Rare rarity permanents should be Legendary or Plansewalker type. In case this is confusing, I'm saying Instant and Sorcery cards can be Mythic Rare as well.
Justification
Logically speaking, if something is legendary, it should be so fantastic amazing that you must include it in the appropriate deck. In the same vein, if something is so rare, its mythic, one should expect the same level of quality. It's only natural these two should go together. I don't have a reference for this statement, but I remember reading somewhere that WotC makes some cards Legendary in order to limit board state manipulation by having multiple copies in play by the same player. I would argue the same thing about cards that have the Mythic Rare rarity. Let's look at some examples, both good and bad.
Good use of Mythic Rare
Geist of Saint Traft - This guy is a BEAST! Also, the name indicates there is only one Geist of the person named Saint Traft.
All is Dust - This is an epic event that really alters the board state. The name sounds powerful and it also includes a second card type, Tribal.
Poor use of Mythic Rare
Platinum Archangel - Although this card provides a unique ability, you can have multiples in play. It doesn't bring a unique feel to the game, so it should be a Rare.
Archangel's Light - I don't see any reason at all to make this card Mythic Rare. Terrible.
Good use of Legendary
Melira, Sylvok Outcast - This is the epitome of a Legendary Creature type. This should have been printed as Mythic Rare.
Akroma's Memorial - The reprint was given the Mythic Rare rarity, well done WotC!
Poor use of Legendary
Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle - This is a single named mountain, why isn't this Legendary?
Blind Seer - This is NOT a named person, place or thing. Why is this Legendary? Sure, the only other way to do the same thing is once use, but is that enough?
Previous Related Discussions
What defines a good mythic?
Worst Mythic(s) ever printed?
Worst. Legendary. Creature. EVER.
References:
The Year of Living Changerously
Legendary Rule Change
To sum it up, this would not be a sound business model, no matter how flavourful.
Decks:
Casual
R Burn R
EDH
R Godo Voltron R
RUG ETB Overload RUG
BW Clerics Pain and Drain BW
GW Spirits!!! GW
RUG Landfall Silliness RUG
You proved my point, Legendary should be as rare as a Mythic Rare; or I argue it's not truly legendary, it's just rare. This has nothing to do with flavor and everything to do with being consistent.
Let's take Theros as an example. Of the Legendary cards in the set, 11/19 are not Mythic Rare. Now, from the opposite perspective, of the Mythic Rares in the set, only 4/15 are permanents that are not Legendary or Planeswalker types. From my perspective, WotC did a significantly better job on the Mythic Rare cards in the set than the Legendary cards.
In short: yes, the Legendary cards should be made more powerful to what everyone would consider the power level of a Mythic Rare.
For me a good Mythic is something you build a deck around. In other words it should not just be 'good', it should affect what cards you choose. That does not mean that a card that is 'just really damn god' is not a good mythic, but I think a card like Bloodlord of Vaasgoth are great because you pull him from a pack and instantly go searching your long boxes for vampires. Unfortunately a lot of those cards are not worth anything, because they are not cards you can put into any deck for an improved win chance.
www.theconnoisseurs.com
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
Thank you! I'm happy to see someone think in a similar fashion. Another example of a bad recent Mythic Rare is Prophetic Flamespeaker. I get the idea this got a Mythic Rare slapped on it for being the first card since Dragon Tyrant with Double Strike and Trample printed on the card.
take, for example, Dragon's Maze, where you have 10 Legendary Maze Runners that you want to include for story purposes. If your proposal was accepted and implemented, then those Runners are now mythic. the problem is: you only have 15 mythic slots, and you already have an Izzet Planeswalker.
Do the Izzet not get a Maze Runner, or an extra Mythic? with the Runners at Rare, you sidestep this problem completely.
I agree that 'walkers should be mythic, because only 1 in a million actually can become a walker, and of them, only 1 in a million actually succeed in doing so.
But, Legendaries can just be rare, unless the person is incredibly exceptional (i.e. Rafiq of the Many) look at it this way: How likely are you to make a contract with someone like Teysa, Envoy of Ghosts? so long as she believes that you will benefit her, shell be happy to help you out. But, it would take quite a bit more convincing to get someone like Malfegor to help you out, and he even has a price!
plus, you can be a Legendary for story purposes. take Thalia, Guardian of Thraben. that effect just isn't a mythic effect. She probably did not start out as a Legendary Creature. but, Creative needed a Legendary Creature to represent Thalia, and that card did the best job, in their opinion. So, the story dictated that it be Legendary.
now, imagine if they only used Mythics for that: what card from Dark Ascension could they have used instead? and if they turned her Mythic, what would they downgrade to Rare? That would possibly require a complete reworking of the entire set, and would not be worth the trouble.
so, no. not every mythic permanent should be legendary, because that restricts design space, and not every legendary should be mythic, because it also restricts design space and restricts the creative aspect.
designing something is about leaving yourself as many outs as possible, not restricting the number of outs you have.
"normality is a paved road: it is comfortable to walk, but no flowers grow there."
-Vincent Van Gogh
things I hate:
1. lists.
b. inconsistencies.
V. incorrect math.
2. quotes in signatures
III: irony.
there are two kinds of people in the world: those who can make reasonable conclusions based on conjecture.
Oh... Ok... Clearly.
Stats About Mythics
-Mythics are on average 40% rarer than pre-mythic rares
(old blocks about 200 rares, Mythic blocks 35+ mythics)
-They are printing more new cards a year not less
(about 665 now vs. 630 in most pre-mythic block)
-To drop the value of a rare by $1 a mythic must go up $2
-In a 3 year time span deck prices doubled.
I am petitioning for the removal of mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
Thanks for the reply so I now have your sig on mythics in this thread. Point of fact, I do support the removal of the Mythic Rare rarity, even if some may see this as a conflict of interest.
I don't follow your point of view that cards with unique effects aren't "bad mythics".
You don't really seem to understand why both Mythic rarity OR legendary type even exists.
\\My Magic Blog//
And on that day, the people rejoiced for 12 moons.
This is confusing since the Mythic Rare predates Hearthstone.
Also, would you care to share your opinion on why Mythic Rare or Legendary exist?
Similarly, Wizards wants us playing with the Theros God-weapons like Spear of Heliod in both Limited and Constructed, but doesn't want multiples out for one player at a time. Seems like good design to me.
On this point, I will disagree. Leaving a card like this as rare doesn't add any value to the play environment or design space. A god is Mythic Rare, but his/her weapon is not? Not sensible to me.
I don't follow your reasoning on either point. There are only a finite number of Mythic slots per set, and if there weren't, it would cause drastic issues of card availability and price bloat. Double the number of Mythics per set, and you're halving the number of any single given Mythic, resulting in price increases. I'm sure that's not what you're suggesting.
What you're proposing necessitates a reduction in design freedom. If every legendary is mythic and every mythic is legendary, there are cards that simply could not exist. The cards I listed above wouldn't work. Master of Waves and Stormbreath Dragon would need to be arbitrarily made Legendary or demoted to Rare, and either option would have negative consequences for either Limited or Standard. The five God weapons are balanced nicely for Limited, but forcing them to be Mythic would make them virtually nonexistent in a Limited setting.
Wizards occasionally prints a card in the wrong rarity or fails to make something Legendary that should have been, but the solution is for them to learn from their mistakes and make better products. I'd suggest that they've demonstrated this in Theros block, as I've heard little to no grumblings on the subject of rarity or legendary status relative to, say, the RTR block.
Your proposal makes sense thematically, but sacrifices gameplay quality to realize that goal. That doesn't seem worthwhile to me.
I loathe creatures! Praise Prison and Land Destruction!
My Peasant Cube (looking for feedback)
First, if WotC truly wants to designate rarity for Standard legal sets based on Limited Formats, I strongly feel they should reconsider this position because it is detrimental to game design and profitability. Modern Masters and now Conspiracy are two products that are clearly designed for Limited Formats and are excellent. I expect to see this continue and I think it is fantastic and a step in the right direction for game development.
Next, your point on a finite number of Mythic Rare cards is arbitrary. WotC determines this and they can change it any time.
Finally, my suggestion has very little to do with themes and very much to do with the distribution and power level strategies. Mythic Rare cards should be very powerful, so should Legendary cards.
Agreed 100%. This is why I think the best solution other than getting rid of it is to align it with Legendary permanent cards.
Also, you are seem to think rarity is about flavor alone, when most of the time it really is about how much the card would warp limited. Considering the power nine are too powerful for mythic (see vintage masters), without being legendary, your scenario would make the game difficult to control power wise, as mentioned above.
Furthermore, legends shouldn't be as rare as planeswalkers by default. Any civilization has its legendary creatures, even within our history there are a tonne of them. But the number of planeswalkers a civilization spawns is little to none, due to their origin. This is the flavor reason for why all planewalkers are mythic (The other reason is that they are very powerful, even Tibalt is a three star card on gatherer.)
BUT there's room for things that aren't legendary to go to mythic rare status. You say platinum angel isn't unique enough - obviously thats arguable but personally I think it is. Stuff like that can surely go to legendary.
What I agree on though is that stuff like valakut should be legendary. Wizards says it doesn't like making lands legendary though, so I don't think thats going to happen. Personally I think it should.
Basically I think the interaction between legends and plainswalkers & mythic rare status is alright as of now. That doesn't mean I think legends are done perfectly right now, or mythic rares are done perfectly right now, but there's about the right amount of push toward legends being mythic right now.
Rarity should have nothing to do with flavor and everything to do with power level. I just double-checked this thread and I haven't stated anything at all about flavor being a consideration in this topic, except to say it isn't part of the consideration.
Legendary should be as rare as Planeswalkers. Isn't a Planeswalker a legend? Doesn't it follow the same rule set as Legendary cards? What's the difference between a guy named Albert Einstein and the Albert Einstein? One is a Legend, the other is just a guy with the same name as a legend.
If multiple can exist, then it isn't unique. Something that is mythic should be so powerful and important that only one can exist. Basically, this is the entire point of this thread in a very condensed sentence. The world can be filled with countless platinum angels, so they aren't that rare. Just because a card is printed with a powerful ability or never-seen-before combination of abilities doesn't mean it should be made Mythic Rare rarity.
Not having multiple in the same box wouldn't change the fact that far more games would be instantly won by a busted mythic. It's bad enough that it happens at all (which is why I still think Mythics should be bonuses in addition to the normal 15, like tokens, and shouldn't be limited legal), we don't need to make it multiple times more common.
Mythics are mythic because they're too pushed for limited or because they have unique effects. Legendary creatures are just creatures that are important in the story. They're completely unrelated as they should be. You can have rare legendaries, you can have mythic legendaries. It works just fine. Your entire argument is based around a false premise: who said legendaries have to be so stupidly powerful that they should be included in every on-color deck? Even in your own example, you see Melira is a great use of legendary, yet she obviously isn't very powerful. Not everyone who's important in the story is stupidly powerful.
PS: How does Platinum Angel not bring a unique feel to the game? 99.9% of the games you're at 3 and tapped out, I can bolt you for the kill. Not if Platinum Angel is around!