Are there any formats that restrict cards on financial bases?
Reason I ask is because I usually limit my supercasual deckbuilding to a format and cost (among other things), because I find it an interesting limitation, it produces things I might actually be interested in investing in, I get a sense of superiority for beating someone with a "subpar" deck, and I have a couple outs if accused of being "cheap" or etc.
How about Type 0.25 - no individual cards >$0.25 using TCGplayer's lows as of 2013-05-16.
or decks can't cost more than $20 total (excluding basic lands).
There's not really a format like the one you're talking about, but Pauper (commons-only) is very budget-friendly, and it has a fairly large player base. My LGS has Pauper tournaments once a week.
I spent some time making decks for modern with a limit of 40 dollars or so under the stipulation that they were only made to play decks of the same budget constraint. I found that you could build just about anything you wanted and it would be competitive with the other decks. It is a great format for prior standard staples (with the exception of Thragtusk, it is to powerful and crushes aggro decks), solid commons and uncommons, 1-2$ rares, and cards you have never seen before.
You just agree on an arbitrary banlist that is made based on price/power level before anyone goes out and makes a deck for the format.
If I did the banlist it would look like this (nearly 500 cards banned!):
(I forgot to add that this is in addition to the current modern ban list.)
I banned lots of lands so that players can be on relatively equal footing without investing hardly any money on their mana base, allowing them to spend their money on actual cards. This also makes single color decks more viable since a lot of lands you might play in a multicolored deck would etb tapped. I used a 4$ cap for cards except mythics at 6$ but that is only approximate because newer mythics I allowed more of unless they were likely 3 of's or 4 of's. I also banned cards that would go into control decks more than I did cards that would go into aggro decks because I think the format's structure favors control. But I also took into account relative power level. Since this format has never been played before it obviously would need tweaking, just like modern did when Wizards first started it.
This is a format I came up with for my casual playgroup that had a desire to play competitively, occasionally. Friend can agree to play with whatever ban list they want. It doesn't take that much investment financially to try out, and the list is completely arbitrary and anyone can change it however they want to as different people have fun with different things.
I banned Strionic Resonator because I didn't look at it very closely as it was in the later sets and I was a bit burnt out, lol. I've never played against that card, and looking at it now it looks like the kind of card I would actually want to see in the format. Unban!
I think the philosophy of the format is to allow people to play with and against decks of great variety without having to spend an exorbitant amount of money to do so. I have a playset of Creeping Tar Pits and they have taken a few people by surprise. Newer players tend to see lands as the cards that allow them to play their other cards. If you think about the cost of a manabase vs the rest of the deck like the cost of an item vs its shipping cost, its extremely high.
Mythics are even rarer than rares, so their prices are artificially high. There are a lot of mythic rare cards in the 4 to 6 dollar price range, and I thought there was a good chance that some players have random mythics that they've opened in packs. Increasing this arbitrary price cutoff means more of those people can use those cards in something other than an EDH deck. They are not cards I own as I haven't bought a booster pack since Return to Ravnica. Perhaps implimenting some sort of limited ban like legacy has might be a good idea.
To keep the cost of the format down, while allowing more cards to be played/viable at the same time. There are cards that just make sense to play in certain archetypes. Sometimes it makes sense to only play one or two of a card. Sometimes, it makes sense to play 4. A 6$ card that you will only play one of costs less torwards your deck total than a 5$ card that you will want to play 4 of. Arbitrarily banning those kinds of cards in the 4-6ish dollar price range means the cards that you end up wanting 3 and 4 of cost less than that, lowering the cost of entry into the format. At the same time, I would expect the cards to take the place of those banned cards in decks to be greater than the number of banned cards, widening the format.
You might be right about this if it were a format that lots of people played. I never expected it to be anything more than something I played within my group of friends.
Banning all these cards arbitrarily because of their price means what we have is essentially a new format. So you then do what Wizards does with any competitive format and ban the cards that are too powerful in comparison to the rest. I think Thragtusk is a good example. Also, I considered banning lightning bolt. I think there is a solid argument for it. I think it would mean a wider variety of interesting alternatives would be played instead. I also think there would have to be other commons and uncommons that fall into the same category. But since going through the massive modern cardpool to find cards that meet that criteria would take a lot of time, especially when no one is even playing this format outside of my playgroup, I have never done so. Banning Lightning Bolt or any other common, or uncommon, or any card for that matter because it would not only bring the price of the format down but diversify the format is totally in the spirit of this format.
My playgroup is going to be trying a $12.50 limit format. TCG mid prices, basics are excluded from price calculations. We have no banlist, games are played with ante, and silver bordered cards are allowed. We did this with vintage previously, but we wanted to play contract from below. If a tournament is run, decks lists are required in advance of the posted date for price verification. Barring tournaments, decks updates are encouraged every 3-6 months to maintain legality.
I'm totally hoping someone will do that. Most of our play group used to play tournaments but just don't care any more. I believe all drinks will be required to be purchased on premise to avoid a slow play violation.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
6*9=42
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Reason I ask is because I usually limit my supercasual deckbuilding to a format and cost (among other things), because I find it an interesting limitation, it produces things I might actually be interested in investing in, I get a sense of superiority for beating someone with a "subpar" deck, and I have a couple outs if accused of being "cheap" or etc.
How about Type 0.25 - no individual cards >$0.25 using TCGplayer's lows as of 2013-05-16.
or decks can't cost more than $20 total (excluding basic lands).
I'm curious what the meta would look like.
Legacy Gobbyboogers R
Legacy Gobbyboogers R
If I did the banlist it would look like this (nearly 500 cards banned!):
(I forgot to add that this is in addition to the current modern ban list.)
I banned lots of lands so that players can be on relatively equal footing without investing hardly any money on their mana base, allowing them to spend their money on actual cards. This also makes single color decks more viable since a lot of lands you might play in a multicolored deck would etb tapped. I used a 4$ cap for cards except mythics at 6$ but that is only approximate because newer mythics I allowed more of unless they were likely 3 of's or 4 of's. I also banned cards that would go into control decks more than I did cards that would go into aggro decks because I think the format's structure favors control. But I also took into account relative power level. Since this format has never been played before it obviously would need tweaking, just like modern did when Wizards first started it.
I banned Strionic Resonator because I didn't look at it very closely as it was in the later sets and I was a bit burnt out, lol. I've never played against that card, and looking at it now it looks like the kind of card I would actually want to see in the format. Unban!
I think the philosophy of the format is to allow people to play with and against decks of great variety without having to spend an exorbitant amount of money to do so. I have a playset of Creeping Tar Pits and they have taken a few people by surprise. Newer players tend to see lands as the cards that allow them to play their other cards. If you think about the cost of a manabase vs the rest of the deck like the cost of an item vs its shipping cost, its extremely high.
Mythics are even rarer than rares, so their prices are artificially high. There are a lot of mythic rare cards in the 4 to 6 dollar price range, and I thought there was a good chance that some players have random mythics that they've opened in packs. Increasing this arbitrary price cutoff means more of those people can use those cards in something other than an EDH deck. They are not cards I own as I haven't bought a booster pack since Return to Ravnica. Perhaps implimenting some sort of limited ban like legacy has might be a good idea.
To keep the cost of the format down, while allowing more cards to be played/viable at the same time. There are cards that just make sense to play in certain archetypes. Sometimes it makes sense to only play one or two of a card. Sometimes, it makes sense to play 4. A 6$ card that you will only play one of costs less torwards your deck total than a 5$ card that you will want to play 4 of. Arbitrarily banning those kinds of cards in the 4-6ish dollar price range means the cards that you end up wanting 3 and 4 of cost less than that, lowering the cost of entry into the format. At the same time, I would expect the cards to take the place of those banned cards in decks to be greater than the number of banned cards, widening the format.
You might be right about this if it were a format that lots of people played. I never expected it to be anything more than something I played within my group of friends.
Banning all these cards arbitrarily because of their price means what we have is essentially a new format. So you then do what Wizards does with any competitive format and ban the cards that are too powerful in comparison to the rest. I think Thragtusk is a good example. Also, I considered banning lightning bolt. I think there is a solid argument for it. I think it would mean a wider variety of interesting alternatives would be played instead. I also think there would have to be other commons and uncommons that fall into the same category. But since going through the massive modern cardpool to find cards that meet that criteria would take a lot of time, especially when no one is even playing this format outside of my playgroup, I have never done so. Banning Lightning Bolt or any other common, or uncommon, or any card for that matter because it would not only bring the price of the format down but diversify the format is totally in the spirit of this format.