I wanted to suggest a new format. This format would be very novel, and it addresses the complaints of players have about mana flooding and randomly lost games.
So Magic games are supposed to be duels between mighty, powerful, planeswalking magicians and beings like Dr. Strange versus Thanos. Yet, the game is based around random card draws as if you cannot decide which spell you are planning to cast. It is as if Strange and Thanos could only interact with each other via random attacks. Who knows what you can do next? One could say that every game is won purely through luck instead of skill. That is not a duel.
So I have an idea called MTG: Duelist. It is MTG with just three new rules:
1. A player's opening hand of seven cards consists of whatever cards they want from their deck.
2. The beginning-of-turn card draw is whatever card the player wants to draw from their deck.
3. Sideboards can be used before game one.
These rules apply to both players of course, and they allow the game to actually be a duel between powerful wizards who truly plan their next moves. This fixes the game so that the duels are intelligent instead of a bunch of random attacks and responses. These three simple rules also allow card draw effects and tutors to remain powerful by affecting the game as little as possible.
The trouble is it's a game of turn 0-1 wins. Combo is everything, and you have to play blue for Force of Will and other free counterspells. Basically, you have to force of will their first turn 0 combo, then make them counter your turn 0 combo. Then on turn one, whichever player gets to go first has a massive advantage.
Both players will end up playing the same (only viable) deck with 4 force of will and whatever the fastest combo they can find is. And eventually somebody isn't able to counter something, or it's a slog where someone wins with (an uncounterable) Mutavault or something.
If you make it standard only, maybe it would be fun for a little while, but it would still be very easily solved.
Thanks for entertaining the idea. First, I did not know that turn 0 existed. I did not know it did, but your criticisms apply to turn 1 anyway.
So let's assume that MTG: Duelist just applies to standard or is modified to include a banlist. Fast mana is mana dorks, the fastest counterspell is Counterspell or Cancel. Remove Leylines, etc.
You said that it would still be easily solved in this scenario. Essentially, this is the "chess objection" that I have received against MTG: Duelist before. MTG: Duelist would be solved like chess extremely easily. Like chess, a perfectly optimized and predictable strategy would be identified and adhered to.
But I believe that MTG: Duelist's evolution could still free it from becoming chess. First, an optimal, deterministic strategy will be identified from a group of cards in Duelist. But that strategy will be accounted for by other decks. Then clever players will subvert expectations with their own personal twists. And no one will really know what the other player is up to.
And even chess games are never perfectly optimized and predicted in practice. This is true even though the information in a chess game is perfectly transparent to both players. Every chess move is, technically speaking, perfectly perceivable and perfectly predictable. Yet, this is the supposed weakness of MTG: Duelist. It would be like chess.
MTG: Duelist would still be different. Hand opacity would still exist. Deck opacity would still exist. Subversive strategies would still exist. Deception would still exist. And bad guesses would still exist. It would not become like chess.
If you wanted to test it (and you have someone willing to test it with you), the thing to do would probably be to brew within standard, or to otherwise use a given standard environment (it wouldn't have to be the current standard). That way you have a reasonably sized, but limited card pool. If you have someone willing, I encourage you to give it a go: play experiments often feel very different than you expect them to.
Categories you may wish to exclude (some mentioned already):
Fast mana (Simian Spirit Guide)
Free counterspells (Force of Will)
Cheat targets that win win they hit the board (Griselbrand)
Color hosers (Boil)
Storm (Grapeshot)
Cards that generate a lock (Ensnaring Bridge)
Infinites (consider instituting a policy that no action can be repeated more than 3 times per turn)
Again, most of this stuff can be avoided by using a standard environment as a basis.
Disruption is going to be key, since your opponent always has access to their best on-curve threats. But you also always have access to the best answers. Any threat you play is likely to get removed immediately, so winning (without an auto-win combo) will be a matter of obtaining advantage through that. Everything you play needs to pass the removal test (did it still grant value even if immediately removed).
Another big thing is the color pie. You have no reason here not to play every color to gain access to the best effects of each. And you always draw the mana fixing you need. In order to foster more deck diversity, you need to be choosing colors. I would honestly suggest simply instituting a two-color (or maybe three-color) maximum to color identity.
Other thoughts:
Deck size needs a maximum. If you can play more cards, you have more options.
A lower power level really may make the format more fun. Consider peasant as an environment to apply this to.
Carefully consider how many copies of a card should be allowed per deck. The best answer may not be singleton, but it may also not be 4.
I think this should be a format without sideboard. You already have access to a lot of options.
But hey, you can try the idea on any decks. Just pick up any two decks and try the idea out. See how a game feels when every draw is a Demonic Tutor.
I appreciate that you fleshed this out, and I am encouraged that you think it is worth experimenting with.
Disruption is going to be key, since your opponent always has access to their best on-curve threats. But you also always have access to the best answers. Any threat you play is likely to get removed immediately, so winning (without an auto-win combo) will be a matter of obtaining advantage through that. Everything you play needs to pass the removal test (did it still grant value even if immediately removed).
Got it. I can see that threats will be removed quickly. Maybe Duelist can only work in a game with costly removal or ubiquitous hexproof.
Another big thing is the color pie. You have no reason here not to play every color to gain access to the best effects of each. And you always draw the mana fixing you need. In order to foster more deck diversity, you need to be choosing colors. I would honestly suggest simply instituting a two-color (or maybe three-color) maximum to color identity.
Maybe a Blood Moon effect could discourage five-color decks, but I see what you mean. And a person could just draw into basic lands. Obviously, testing in a standard environment is in order. Duelist might need to be its own TCG that heavily encourages commitment to one "color" or "element."
Other thoughts:
Deck size needs a maximum. If you can play more cards, you have more options.
A lower power level really may make the format more fun. Consider peasant as an environment to apply this to.
Carefully consider how many copies of a card should be allowed per deck. The best answer may not be singleton, but it may also not be 4.
I think this should be a format without sideboard. You already have access to a lot of options.
Thanks for bringing up that sideboards may not be necessary. I will have to test the theory that sideboards should be kept to increase deck opacity in order to make games more unpredictable.
But hey, you can try the idea on any decks. Just pick up any two decks and try the idea out. See how a game feels when every draw is a Demonic Tutor.
I like the Demonic Tutor comparison, because it illustrates my fundamental grievance with Magic. It is not a duel. The planeswalker-players are just randomly firing off spells and looking for land-mana with no foresight. Yet, the characters in the game do not act like that: they can at least choose the specific spell they need for the situation.
And none of them ever cry out: "I can't do anything! I don't have mana!" before they can even cast one spell. Characters apparently have the ability to use their own internal magical reserves to fight.
Chandra also never needs to tell Nissa: "Hold them back! I am still looking for a Fireball!" The characters also do not need to look for their own spells. But that is what actual MTG games make players do to greater or lesser degrees.
Now I tell you why this can't work. All games (at least in eternal formats) would just turn on who cast any combo that wins as fast as possible with counterspells backup and thats it, because is simply the most efficent way to win. Thassa Oracle combos literally everywhere. In EDH, Legacy and Vintage you can win as fast as turn one super easily with the right sculpted hand. All games would be of who just got the higher amoount of free counterspells in hand. It's literally terrible.
Chandra also never needs to tell Nissa: "Hold them back! I am still looking for a Fireball!" The characters also do not need to look for their own spells. But that is what actual MTG games make players do to greater or lesser degrees.
And that's why gameplay always trumps flavor. A Headless Horseman shouldnt be able to die from a Go for the Throat but you can't make a clunkier gameplay only to allow every possible exception to work perfectly with the flavor, it's literally impossible. Every mechanic can be in every color with enough flavor reasons (but this would completely destroy the sense of a color pie in the first place), in fact thats why direct damage was in blue on early magic, because was seen as psychic damage. Thats why using only the flavor as an excuse to justify your own mechanic or design is always a bad idea.
*Facepalm*
Before suggesting something so ridiculous, please ask yourself...
Is there even a single card game which has ever been created where players get to choose their opening hands?
The whole point of card games (and board games which include cards like Clue, Risk, etc) is random draws and/or initial distribution!
If you want to play a simplified game with predetermined outcomes, try Tic-Tac-Toe
If you really want a format where you can always choose what spell you want then you need to scrap the entire concept of a deck. It may not seem like magic if you scrap the deck but it can still use the same framework.
You'll need to ask you're self how do players get resources? Do they start with them? Must they exchange one resource for another?
How many different spells do players have access to? Are they limited in how many similar spells they have?
How are resources replenished?
If you can answer those questions reasonably then you can create not a format but an alternative means of playing Magic.
I respect the loyalty to the original game's design. It adds variability to matches. I get that. Magic is fun.
But I wonder if we are being too accepting of the fact that games do not actually imitate planeswalker battles. Mana swamp and mana screw are not the only issues. There is also the thematic issue of being a pyromancer and never finding a fireball to cast for example. Like I pointed out, characters never act like that in the story. "I can't find my Lightning Bolt!" Ral Zarek yelled.
I suppose my idea is to essentially turn the game into chess with a great deal more variability. Chess has variability, so MTG: Duelist will actually have a great deal of variability.
But I wonder if we are being too accepting of the fact that games do not actually imitate planeswalker battles. Mana swamp and mana screw are not the only issues. There is also the thematic issue of being a pyromancer and never finding a fireball to cast for example. Like I pointed out, characters never act like that in the story. "I can't find my Lightning Bolt!" Ral Zarek yelled.
You are using the wrong media. What you really want is a D&D version of Magic characters (and WotC made them), not a card game. Card games by their own nature, are random, and you want an RPG experience that is not suitable with how MtG was designed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So Magic games are supposed to be duels between mighty, powerful, planeswalking magicians and beings like Dr. Strange versus Thanos. Yet, the game is based around random card draws as if you cannot decide which spell you are planning to cast. It is as if Strange and Thanos could only interact with each other via random attacks. Who knows what you can do next? One could say that every game is won purely through luck instead of skill. That is not a duel.
So I have an idea called MTG: Duelist. It is MTG with just three new rules:
1. A player's opening hand of seven cards consists of whatever cards they want from their deck.
2. The beginning-of-turn card draw is whatever card the player wants to draw from their deck.
3. Sideboards can be used before game one.
These rules apply to both players of course, and they allow the game to actually be a duel between powerful wizards who truly plan their next moves. This fixes the game so that the duels are intelligent instead of a bunch of random attacks and responses. These three simple rules also allow card draw effects and tutors to remain powerful by affecting the game as little as possible.
Both players will end up playing the same (only viable) deck with 4 force of will and whatever the fastest combo they can find is. And eventually somebody isn't able to counter something, or it's a slog where someone wins with (an uncounterable) Mutavault or something.
If you make it standard only, maybe it would be fun for a little while, but it would still be very easily solved.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
So let's assume that MTG: Duelist just applies to standard or is modified to include a banlist. Fast mana is mana dorks, the fastest counterspell is Counterspell or Cancel. Remove Leylines, etc.
You said that it would still be easily solved in this scenario. Essentially, this is the "chess objection" that I have received against MTG: Duelist before. MTG: Duelist would be solved like chess extremely easily. Like chess, a perfectly optimized and predictable strategy would be identified and adhered to.
But I believe that MTG: Duelist's evolution could still free it from becoming chess. First, an optimal, deterministic strategy will be identified from a group of cards in Duelist. But that strategy will be accounted for by other decks. Then clever players will subvert expectations with their own personal twists. And no one will really know what the other player is up to.
And even chess games are never perfectly optimized and predicted in practice. This is true even though the information in a chess game is perfectly transparent to both players. Every chess move is, technically speaking, perfectly perceivable and perfectly predictable. Yet, this is the supposed weakness of MTG: Duelist. It would be like chess.
MTG: Duelist would still be different. Hand opacity would still exist. Deck opacity would still exist. Subversive strategies would still exist. Deception would still exist. And bad guesses would still exist. It would not become like chess.
Categories you may wish to exclude (some mentioned already):
Fast mana (Simian Spirit Guide)
Free counterspells (Force of Will)
Cheat targets that win win they hit the board (Griselbrand)
Color hosers (Boil)
Storm (Grapeshot)
Cards that generate a lock (Ensnaring Bridge)
Infinites (consider instituting a policy that no action can be repeated more than 3 times per turn)
Again, most of this stuff can be avoided by using a standard environment as a basis.
Disruption is going to be key, since your opponent always has access to their best on-curve threats. But you also always have access to the best answers. Any threat you play is likely to get removed immediately, so winning (without an auto-win combo) will be a matter of obtaining advantage through that. Everything you play needs to pass the removal test (did it still grant value even if immediately removed).
Another big thing is the color pie. You have no reason here not to play every color to gain access to the best effects of each. And you always draw the mana fixing you need. In order to foster more deck diversity, you need to be choosing colors. I would honestly suggest simply instituting a two-color (or maybe three-color) maximum to color identity.
Other thoughts:
Deck size needs a maximum. If you can play more cards, you have more options.
A lower power level really may make the format more fun. Consider peasant as an environment to apply this to.
Carefully consider how many copies of a card should be allowed per deck. The best answer may not be singleton, but it may also not be 4.
I think this should be a format without sideboard. You already have access to a lot of options.
But hey, you can try the idea on any decks. Just pick up any two decks and try the idea out. See how a game feels when every draw is a Demonic Tutor.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
Disruption is going to be key, since your opponent always has access to their best on-curve threats. But you also always have access to the best answers. Any threat you play is likely to get removed immediately, so winning (without an auto-win combo) will be a matter of obtaining advantage through that. Everything you play needs to pass the removal test (did it still grant value even if immediately removed).
Got it. I can see that threats will be removed quickly. Maybe Duelist can only work in a game with costly removal or ubiquitous hexproof.
Another big thing is the color pie. You have no reason here not to play every color to gain access to the best effects of each. And you always draw the mana fixing you need. In order to foster more deck diversity, you need to be choosing colors. I would honestly suggest simply instituting a two-color (or maybe three-color) maximum to color identity.
Maybe a Blood Moon effect could discourage five-color decks, but I see what you mean. And a person could just draw into basic lands. Obviously, testing in a standard environment is in order. Duelist might need to be its own TCG that heavily encourages commitment to one "color" or "element."
Other thoughts:
Deck size needs a maximum. If you can play more cards, you have more options.
A lower power level really may make the format more fun. Consider peasant as an environment to apply this to.
Carefully consider how many copies of a card should be allowed per deck. The best answer may not be singleton, but it may also not be 4.
I think this should be a format without sideboard. You already have access to a lot of options.
Thanks for bringing up that sideboards may not be necessary. I will have to test the theory that sideboards should be kept to increase deck opacity in order to make games more unpredictable.
But hey, you can try the idea on any decks. Just pick up any two decks and try the idea out. See how a game feels when every draw is a Demonic Tutor.
I like the Demonic Tutor comparison, because it illustrates my fundamental grievance with Magic. It is not a duel. The planeswalker-players are just randomly firing off spells and looking for land-mana with no foresight. Yet, the characters in the game do not act like that: they can at least choose the specific spell they need for the situation.
And none of them ever cry out: "I can't do anything! I don't have mana!" before they can even cast one spell. Characters apparently have the ability to use their own internal magical reserves to fight.
Chandra also never needs to tell Nissa: "Hold them back! I am still looking for a Fireball!" The characters also do not need to look for their own spells. But that is what actual MTG games make players do to greater or lesser degrees.
And that's why gameplay always trumps flavor. A Headless Horseman shouldnt be able to die from a Go for the Throat but you can't make a clunkier gameplay only to allow every possible exception to work perfectly with the flavor, it's literally impossible. Every mechanic can be in every color with enough flavor reasons (but this would completely destroy the sense of a color pie in the first place), in fact thats why direct damage was in blue on early magic, because was seen as psychic damage. Thats why using only the flavor as an excuse to justify your own mechanic or design is always a bad idea.
Before suggesting something so ridiculous, please ask yourself...
Is there even a single card game which has ever been created where players get to choose their opening hands?
The whole point of card games (and board games which include cards like Clue, Risk, etc) is random draws and/or initial distribution!
If you want to play a simplified game with predetermined outcomes, try Tic-Tac-Toe
I used to be a demigod, but now I'm an omnimage
You'll need to ask you're self how do players get resources? Do they start with them? Must they exchange one resource for another?
How many different spells do players have access to? Are they limited in how many similar spells they have?
How are resources replenished?
If you can answer those questions reasonably then you can create not a format but an alternative means of playing Magic.
But I wonder if we are being too accepting of the fact that games do not actually imitate planeswalker battles. Mana swamp and mana screw are not the only issues. There is also the thematic issue of being a pyromancer and never finding a fireball to cast for example. Like I pointed out, characters never act like that in the story. "I can't find my Lightning Bolt!" Ral Zarek yelled.
I suppose my idea is to essentially turn the game into chess with a great deal more variability. Chess has variability, so MTG: Duelist will actually have a great deal of variability.
You are using the wrong media. What you really want is a D&D version of Magic characters (and WotC made them), not a card game. Card games by their own nature, are random, and you want an RPG experience that is not suitable with how MtG was designed.