Precisely. And this is the OP's complaint. If you raredraft a Vraska, you get a Vraska for your collection. But if the person next to you raredrafts a Vraska which you could have used in your deck, you lose both a Vraska for your collection and a Vraska for your draft deck. The loss is a bigger negative than the gain is a positive.
In that case, I think that the OP's problem is a misplaced sense of entitlement. Why should he feel that he DESERVES to get planeswalkers that other people open? Why does he feel that he DESERVES to go 3-0?
No, the number of winners is only part of the total amount of win. The other factor is the amount of win each winner gets.
I completely agree. And I think that the optimal way to divvy it up is so that as many people get it as possible, even if the amount of win each individual gets is less.
My problem with people who complain about rare drafters is that they're all lying hypocrites.
They complain when people rare-draft cards from them, but in the same situation would slam the 20 dollars without a second thought.
They're also the people who complain about the "idiot" who passes their round one opponent Armada Wurm and Trostani.
Exactly. These people have cancerous attitudes and actively decrease the amount of enjoyment that other people at the tournament would have, both in terms of extinguishing fun for other people and in terms of demanding inequitable distributions of unshareable prizes (the prizes, rares etc).
They are so locked in to the win-lose mentality that it's almost like anything that is a loss for their opponent becomes a win for them.
So maximizing winning overall (if that is indeed your goal; you do appear to be arguing from a utilitarian philosophy here) is not as simple as maximizing the number of people who win in some way. All forms of winning are not equivalent; by adding more, you often reduce the value of others.
Sorry, I skimmed over this earlier, but it deserves it's own comment. In a nutshell, I agree.
One thing that I think hasn't been explicitly said so far in this thread is that I think that winning is only an intermediate goal. The REAL goal is fun.
That's what I was driving at with my post on many different ways to win. I think it's inarguable that having fun playing magic is not a zero sum game, and I think that the prize structure of tournaments should be slated at maximising fun for the tournament participants.
In that case, I think that the OP's problem is a misplaced sense of entitlement. Why should he feel that he DESERVES to get planeswalkers that other people open? Why does he feel that he DESERVES to go 3-0?
Does it really matter if the OP has a misplaced sense of entitlement or not? The point remains valid either way: you get more total win if the cards end up in the hands of those who will play them.
I completely agree. And I think that the optimal way to divvy it up is so that as many people get it as possible, even if the amount of win each individual gets is less.
So you would be for the abolishment of prizes (in the traditional sense) completely, to be replaced with the equal distribution of the prize pool among all players in the event?
Sorry, I skimmed over this earlier, but it deserves it's own comment. In a nutshell, I agree.
One thing that I think hasn't been explicitly said so far in this thread is that I think that winning is only an intermediate goal. The REAL goal is fun.
That's what I was driving at with my post on many different ways to win. I think it's inarguable that having fun playing magic is not a zero sum game, and I think that the prize structure of tournaments should be slated at maximising fun for the tournament participants.
Yes, ideally you want to maximize fun. However, that's not an easy thing to do since everyone has a different idea of fun.
Take prize structure as an example. If you change it from flat to top-heavy (or vise-versa) you will almost definitely make it more fun for some and less fun for others. Finding the point of maximum fun isn't easy.
And fun is often zero-sum or close to it. Suppose you opened your most insane Sealed pool ever at your next PTQ. I'm sure that would be lots of fun for you. But for your opponents? Not so much, I'd expect.
So you would be for the abolishment of prizes (in the traditional sense) completely, to be replaced with the equal distribution of the prize pool among all players in the event?
Well, our FNM drafts don't give out prize packs, so in one sense that already happens.
For some players, they want to play for the packs, and have a tangible sense of achievement. I just think that a very flat prize structure accomplishes that better than a top heavy prize structure.
Well, our FNM drafts don't give out prize packs, so in one sense that already happens.
For some players, they want to play for the packs, and have a tangible sense of achievement. I just think that a very flat prize structure accomplishes that better than a top heavy prize structure.
Winning a lot of packs gives you a much larger sense of achievement than winning a few packs.
The point remains valid either way: you get more total win if the cards end up in the hands of those who will play them.
This is what I don't like about rare drafting. I understand people taking the more valuable rares in a draft because the prizes are usually worth less than a good rare or two. The people I don't understand are the ones who take every rare that gets passed to them. Either they try to use all the rares and end up with a deck with too many colors and no focus or the rares just sit in the sideboard and are never played because most of them are useless outside of limited.
I pretty much only play limited at this point, so I would rather have interesting games instead of just easily beating the person who took all the rares and only a few playable cards.
Winning a lot of packs gives you a much larger sense of achievement than winning a few packs.
Speaking personally, I'm not sure that's true. I get a sense of achievement from beating other good players. More so than beating three less experienced players in a row.
What you are saying is the same thing as someone who has a bigger salary enjoying their job more, and that's just not correct.
Speaking personally, I'm not sure that's true. I get a sense of achievement from beating other good players. More so than beating three less experienced players in a row.
These aren't mutually exclusive, though. You get (or don't) a sense of achievement from each individual game/match, then an additional sense of achievement based on what you win at the end.
What you are saying is the same thing as someone who has a bigger salary enjoying their job more, and that's just not correct.
I think it is correct in cases where your salary is closely tied to what you do, such as when you're working on commission. I think most people would get more satisfaction from closing a big deal and getting a $10000 commission than closing a smaller deal and getting a $1000 commission.
*You're
And he already picked a couple Abrupt Decays and didn't play them, he's just being greedy.
do you also find it kind of sad that your best come back is to grammatically correct me? who cares if he already has a couple of abrupt decays? money rares are money rares.
Such an incredible amount of whining in this thread. If players couldn't keep money rares in a draft, the incentive for let's say, "less experienced drafters" (people who don't spend their time on a Magic forum) goes way down. And here we have an OP complaining that fellow drafters didn't pass them cards that were worth $15-20, more than the cost of the draft itself. One of which was a Temple Garden. Which will make your deck what, 1% better? Maybe quitting Magic is the best option.
Also, I'm not sure if this has been pointed out, but I'm gonna say it.
People bring up ante as a counterpoint to rare-drafting, as its "another way to win."
While this is true, its a different kind of winning than rare drafting, and one that isn't healthy for the game IMO.
In rare-drafting's case, it allows players to "win" without having to win, it takes some of the risk out of drafting and playing. This is good as you're able to feel good about spending your time drafting if you opened a Jace even if you didn't win.
Ante, on the other hand, only rewards the winner. Its the literal definition of "win more." You're punishing the player who just LOST by making them lose again. And rewarding a player who just got rewarded with a win.
Most people whining about rare/hatedrafting probably don't pay for their own cards. In a battle of real world vs. card game, real world is always going to win it for me. If I am drafting and get passed a 20 dollar bill or an Auger Spree, I'll take the $20, thank you very much.
Such an incredible amount of whining in this thread. If players couldn't keep money rares in a draft, the incentive for let's say, "less experienced drafters" (people who don't spend their time on a Magic forum) goes way down. And here we have an OP complaining that fellow drafters didn't pass them cards that were worth $15-20, more than the cost of the draft itself. One of which was a Temple Garden. Which will make your deck what, 1% better? Maybe quitting Magic is the best option.
This is the part that really bothers me... OP is complaining because a guy took a card on pure value. So, now OP feels that he got *cheated* out of a card. I don't go digging through people's trade binders before standard saying "I need this for my deck tonight." He either opened it or was passed it before you. He took it and now it's his.... you don't get to make your deck 1% better or get that bomb you may not even see in a single game. That's just the way it goes, you can't start laying claim on other people's stuff just because you want it.
I drafted a "good enough" (2-0 and ID for prize split) WGb deck last night, but P2P1 was Steam Vents and P3P1 was a foil Niv Mizzet. Why *wouldn't* I take the Niv? He'll fit wonderfully in my multicolor-focused cube. The Steam Vents was our (me + hubby) tenth one, but I'll be able to trade it for one we need more of...again, why wouldn't I take those cards? (disclaimer: I might actually have taken a Call of the Conclave over the Vents at that point...well, maybe)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Rules Advisor and Generally Happy Person
iamBGS on MTGO, strictly casual (Standard, Commander, mine is Oros, the Avenger and an occasional draft to get new cards. Your spare commons are also welcome! (kidding!...mostly)
also like how people think if you do rare draft 1-2 money rares that your deck will suck... lol what?
It's the same concept as hate drafting. By taking a pick that doesn't actively boost your odds of winning over something that does it hurts your deck's strength. It's like taking a Steam Vents over that Stab Wound p3-p1 even though you're deep in black and not running U/R. You're down a solid playable for one you aren't playing.
It's the same concept as hate drafting. By taking a pick that doesn't actively boost your odds of winning over something that does it hurts your deck's strength. It's like taking a Steam Vents over that Stab Wound p3-p1 even though you're deep in black and not running U/R. You're down a solid playable for one you aren't playing.
Depends on how many stab wounds you already have. If you already have a play set and only need one or two creatures to finish out your deck, hell yeah I am taking the double digit dollar land. If you are scratching for removal in an already solid deck, yeah I take the stab wound. Its not really that cut and dry each draft would be different. One draft I may pass a shock, the next I might take everyone I see reguardless of color combo.
Depends on how many stab wounds you already have. If you already have a play set and only need one or two creatures to finish out your deck, hell yeah I am taking the double digit dollar land. If you are scratching for removal in an already solid deck, yeah I take the stab wound. Its not really that cut and dry each draft would be different. One draft I may pass a shock, the next I might take everyone I see reguardless of color combo.
Hell, I'd run 10 stab wounds if I saw them... that card just wrecks everyone.
Hell, I'd run 10 stab wounds if I saw them... that card just wrecks everyone.
First draft I got 6 of them and went 0-2 drop, never won a game. Every time I dropped one on one of his dudes, he had a way to take care of it before it did any damage to him.
I have found they just make race math a bit more complicated, but they can be played around quite easily.
If you want to win the draft AND get rares. Bring a friend, pay for his/her entry fee and tell them to draft the rares. That way you get to build an awesome deck AND get the rares.
The re-drafting technique sounds like a bad pyramid scheme to me. I don't think I would ever do it.
If you want to be a rare hog then get 7 friends, buy yourself a box of boosters and let everyone draft with your packs, everyone builds the best deck possible and you keep all the cards at the end. But your fronting the costs so its win-win.
Edit:
Original Poster: I saw you said that that guy lost his 2 rounds and then decided to leave and then left his commons on the table. This actually does bother me a bit. I may rare-draft alot but I also go to drafts to PLAY magic. I hate getting a BUY because that usually means I sit around for 20min. BUY's might be a free 'win' when there's and odd number of people.
My store plays 4 rounds so we usually get some people starting to leave after 3 rounds, but its also AFTER 9:30pm, sometimes 10ish by this point. Its understandable when people gotta go.
One time I Rare-Uncommon drafted. Heh, I had a pretty crappy deck. I was tempted to take some commons towards the end but I stuck to my guns. First match wasn't bad, I had a cool cellar door / graveyard shovel combo going. A few games my opponents faces were like "whats this guys deck doing!!! and how is it working???" but it was totally random I lost every match.
If you want to be a rare hog then get 7 friends, buy yourself a box of boosters and let everyone draft with your packs, everyone builds the best deck possible and you keep all the cards at the end. But your fronting the costs so its win-win.
I knew a guy who did this with a case of Lorwyn. It was definitely a lot more fun than just opening the case for the rares and it gave all the Magic players in the dorm something to do for a few weeks.
There is a very sophisticated economy involved in playing Magic. If you don't know it, or don't like it, you best get out of the game.
Try drafting on MTGO... The payout supports playing to win, but if you open or get passed a bomb card you better take it. I once took a Bonfire of the Damned on P3P1 when I was very much not playing red. I still found a way to splash it and went 3-0 in the draft.
There are other times when on the 4th pick you get passed a rare and its better than anything else in the pack. I hate opening a pack in a core set draft and having my rare be a dual land... But, if it gets passed to me on pick 3 or after I'll likely take it.
Except for Battle of Wits... I think that is the only rare I've ever seen come back around the table to me when I did not open the pack myself.
Here's an idea for the OP... Stop trying to re-write other peoples' definition of fun.
Standard (KLD):UR Thermo-Thing Modern:UR Delver, URB Delver, URB Control, G Elves, WB Soul Sisters Legacy:UR Delver, URB Delver, G Elves EDH:GWTrostani, Selesnya's Voice, UBOona, Queen of the Fae
Find me on MTGO and Twitter with the same username
I knew a guy who did this with a case of Lorwyn. It was definitely a lot more fun than just opening the case for the rares and it gave all the Magic players in the dorm something to do for a few weeks.
We used to do that in my college dorm too. That is until Magic got banned in the lobby... (Turns out people got tired of loud magic players taking over the whole lobby. Who knew?!)
I knew a guy who did this with a case of Lorwyn. It was definitely a lot more fun than just opening the case for the rares and it gave all the Magic players in the dorm something to do for a few weeks.
For a prize you could have everyone pitch in a 1 or 2 dollars. 2nd place gets his anti back, 1st takes the rest.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
They complain when people rare-draft cards from them, but in the same situation would slam the 20 dollars without a second thought.
They're also the people who complain about the "idiot" who passes their round one opponent Armada Wurm and Trostani.
In that case, I think that the OP's problem is a misplaced sense of entitlement. Why should he feel that he DESERVES to get planeswalkers that other people open? Why does he feel that he DESERVES to go 3-0?
I completely agree. And I think that the optimal way to divvy it up is so that as many people get it as possible, even if the amount of win each individual gets is less.
Exactly. These people have cancerous attitudes and actively decrease the amount of enjoyment that other people at the tournament would have, both in terms of extinguishing fun for other people and in terms of demanding inequitable distributions of unshareable prizes (the prizes, rares etc).
They are so locked in to the win-lose mentality that it's almost like anything that is a loss for their opponent becomes a win for them.
Sorry, I skimmed over this earlier, but it deserves it's own comment. In a nutshell, I agree.
One thing that I think hasn't been explicitly said so far in this thread is that I think that winning is only an intermediate goal. The REAL goal is fun.
That's what I was driving at with my post on many different ways to win. I think it's inarguable that having fun playing magic is not a zero sum game, and I think that the prize structure of tournaments should be slated at maximising fun for the tournament participants.
Does it really matter if the OP has a misplaced sense of entitlement or not? The point remains valid either way: you get more total win if the cards end up in the hands of those who will play them.
So you would be for the abolishment of prizes (in the traditional sense) completely, to be replaced with the equal distribution of the prize pool among all players in the event?
Yes, ideally you want to maximize fun. However, that's not an easy thing to do since everyone has a different idea of fun.
Take prize structure as an example. If you change it from flat to top-heavy (or vise-versa) you will almost definitely make it more fun for some and less fun for others. Finding the point of maximum fun isn't easy.
And fun is often zero-sum or close to it. Suppose you opened your most insane Sealed pool ever at your next PTQ. I'm sure that would be lots of fun for you. But for your opponents? Not so much, I'd expect.
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Well, our FNM drafts don't give out prize packs, so in one sense that already happens.
For some players, they want to play for the packs, and have a tangible sense of achievement. I just think that a very flat prize structure accomplishes that better than a top heavy prize structure.
Winning a lot of packs gives you a much larger sense of achievement than winning a few packs.
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
This is what I don't like about rare drafting. I understand people taking the more valuable rares in a draft because the prizes are usually worth less than a good rare or two. The people I don't understand are the ones who take every rare that gets passed to them. Either they try to use all the rares and end up with a deck with too many colors and no focus or the rares just sit in the sideboard and are never played because most of them are useless outside of limited.
I pretty much only play limited at this point, so I would rather have interesting games instead of just easily beating the person who took all the rares and only a few playable cards.
Speaking personally, I'm not sure that's true. I get a sense of achievement from beating other good players. More so than beating three less experienced players in a row.
What you are saying is the same thing as someone who has a bigger salary enjoying their job more, and that's just not correct.
These aren't mutually exclusive, though. You get (or don't) a sense of achievement from each individual game/match, then an additional sense of achievement based on what you win at the end.
I think it is correct in cases where your salary is closely tied to what you do, such as when you're working on commission. I think most people would get more satisfaction from closing a big deal and getting a $10000 commission than closing a smaller deal and getting a $1000 commission.
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
do you also find it kind of sad that your best come back is to grammatically correct me? who cares if he already has a couple of abrupt decays? money rares are money rares.
People bring up ante as a counterpoint to rare-drafting, as its "another way to win."
While this is true, its a different kind of winning than rare drafting, and one that isn't healthy for the game IMO.
In rare-drafting's case, it allows players to "win" without having to win, it takes some of the risk out of drafting and playing. This is good as you're able to feel good about spending your time drafting if you opened a Jace even if you didn't win.
Ante, on the other hand, only rewards the winner. Its the literal definition of "win more." You're punishing the player who just LOST by making them lose again. And rewarding a player who just got rewarded with a win.
This is the part that really bothers me... OP is complaining because a guy took a card on pure value. So, now OP feels that he got *cheated* out of a card. I don't go digging through people's trade binders before standard saying "I need this for my deck tonight." He either opened it or was passed it before you. He took it and now it's his.... you don't get to make your deck 1% better or get that bomb you may not even see in a single game. That's just the way it goes, you can't start laying claim on other people's stuff just because you want it.
iamBGS on MTGO, strictly casual (Standard, Commander, mine is Oros, the Avenger and an occasional draft to get new cards. Your spare commons are also welcome! (kidding!...mostly)
It's the same concept as hate drafting. By taking a pick that doesn't actively boost your odds of winning over something that does it hurts your deck's strength. It's like taking a Steam Vents over that Stab Wound p3-p1 even though you're deep in black and not running U/R. You're down a solid playable for one you aren't playing.
Depends on how many stab wounds you already have. If you already have a play set and only need one or two creatures to finish out your deck, hell yeah I am taking the double digit dollar land. If you are scratching for removal in an already solid deck, yeah I take the stab wound. Its not really that cut and dry each draft would be different. One draft I may pass a shock, the next I might take everyone I see reguardless of color combo.
Hell, I'd run 10 stab wounds if I saw them... that card just wrecks everyone.
First draft I got 6 of them and went 0-2 drop, never won a game. Every time I dropped one on one of his dudes, he had a way to take care of it before it did any damage to him.
I have found they just make race math a bit more complicated, but they can be played around quite easily.
The re-drafting technique sounds like a bad pyramid scheme to me. I don't think I would ever do it.
If you want to be a rare hog then get 7 friends, buy yourself a box of boosters and let everyone draft with your packs, everyone builds the best deck possible and you keep all the cards at the end. But your fronting the costs so its win-win.
Edit:
Original Poster: I saw you said that that guy lost his 2 rounds and then decided to leave and then left his commons on the table. This actually does bother me a bit. I may rare-draft alot but I also go to drafts to PLAY magic. I hate getting a BUY because that usually means I sit around for 20min. BUY's might be a free 'win' when there's and odd number of people.
My store plays 4 rounds so we usually get some people starting to leave after 3 rounds, but its also AFTER 9:30pm, sometimes 10ish by this point. Its understandable when people gotta go.
One time I Rare-Uncommon drafted. Heh, I had a pretty crappy deck. I was tempted to take some commons towards the end but I stuck to my guns. First match wasn't bad, I had a cool cellar door / graveyard shovel combo going. A few games my opponents faces were like "whats this guys deck doing!!! and how is it working???" but it was totally random I lost every match.
I knew a guy who did this with a case of Lorwyn. It was definitely a lot more fun than just opening the case for the rares and it gave all the Magic players in the dorm something to do for a few weeks.
Try drafting on MTGO... The payout supports playing to win, but if you open or get passed a bomb card you better take it. I once took a Bonfire of the Damned on P3P1 when I was very much not playing red. I still found a way to splash it and went 3-0 in the draft.
There are other times when on the 4th pick you get passed a rare and its better than anything else in the pack. I hate opening a pack in a core set draft and having my rare be a dual land... But, if it gets passed to me on pick 3 or after I'll likely take it.
Except for Battle of Wits... I think that is the only rare I've ever seen come back around the table to me when I did not open the pack myself.
Here's an idea for the OP... Stop trying to re-write other peoples' definition of fun.
Modern: UR Delver, URB Delver, URB Control, G Elves, WB Soul Sisters
Legacy: UR Delver, URB Delver, G Elves
EDH: GWTrostani, Selesnya's Voice, UBOona, Queen of the Fae
Find me on MTGO and Twitter with the same username
We used to do that in my college dorm too. That is until Magic got banned in the lobby... (Turns out people got tired of loud magic players taking over the whole lobby. Who knew?!)
For a prize you could have everyone pitch in a 1 or 2 dollars. 2nd place gets his anti back, 1st takes the rest.