I’ve been considering a budget format that I was hoping people would be interested in. The rules are fairly simple. Players build regular 60-card constructed decks. All cards that are modern legal are legal in this format, but the total price of the deck must be $30 or less (I’m not married to this particular number, various price points could be set for different experiences). The price of a card is considered to be the medium price on TCGPlayer.
This format is designed to offer a solution to two problems that I believe exists in most other formats: accessibility and creativity.
Accessibility is addressed through the budget restriction. By placing a strict cap on the budget, far more players will not only purchase a deck that is legal in the format, but one that is actually competitive. As someone who has been a budget player for years, I’ve received many comments along the lines of “That deck is actually pretty good, considering the budget.” While I know wizards has been concerned about the barrier to entry in Magic for new players, I have found that the far more restrictive barrier is the one between beginner and intermediate level play. When I go to an FNM or other local low-stakes tournament, I find that nearly all other decks are expensive, tournament-competitive decks. I can’t speak to every single FNM or local event, but I can say this has been the case in my experience across several different stores and a few years. Creating a format that allows a far larger pool of players to be competitive will allow more players to become deeply involved in the game, which I expect would increase the average level of gameplay and sell more cards.
Creativity is encouraged by creating a new format that is self-regulating, and I expect will change frequently. Additionally, the low budget encourages experimentation. When a deck costs $30 maximum, it is not a Herculean task to acquire it, as it can be for many popular decks in any format. This should encourage players to frequently buy new decks and try new strategies. What’s more is that by cutting out staple cards and archetypes, players must start from scratch in discovering the new format. Of course, this happens in any new format, such as when standard rotates, but what is unique to this format is the self-regulating aspect. While in other formats cards and archetypes become established, prices rise, and competitive strategies become inaccessible. If this format were to catch on, if any strategy became too popular the key cards would simply price themselves out of the format, and new strategies would have to be discovered.
Why play this format instead of pauper?
I believe pauper suffers from problems in both accessibility and creativity, which this format is meant to address. In terms of accessibility, while significantly less expensive than other formats, does not have particular budget restrictions, and some of the more popular cards have risen to significant prices. As of the time I’m writing this, pauper UR Delver, one of the most popular decks in the format costs about $138 on MTGGoldfish. While this deck is on the more expensive side, it seems that many pauper decks exist around the $80 range. This seems insignificant when compared to the astronomical prices of modern or legacy decks, but is still represents a significant expense for someone in a limited budget, especially younger players. The larger issue with pauper in my opinion is on the creativity side. It is an established principle of Wizards to increase complexity with rarity. By limiting card choices to commons, pauper eliminates several effects that are unique and potentially powerful, but were slightly too slow or required too much set-up for other constructed formats. I think it makes sense to have a format in which players are encouraged to find ways to utilize undervalued/undiscovered cards that didn’t quite make it in other formats.
Why not just play MTGOnline? Prices tend to be lower.
I enjoy the face to face social interaction of paper magic. For me, it’s far more satisfying to play a game across from a live opponent than online. Additionally, while less expensive than paper, buying a deck online can still be expensive. Playing pauper online might not be too restrictive, but pauper has other issues on the creativity side that I pointed out above.
Why not build a deck over time, investing in a couple cards when you can and eventually creating a competitive deck?
First, many format staples are expensive, and in some cases buying a single copy of one can be as expensive as buying multiple budget decks. Additionally, it’s pretty unsatisfying to be buying expensive cards for a deck that you hope will be competitive in two years. Furthermore, I find deck building to be one of the most enjoyable parts of Magic, and I would rather have the ability to experiment with being able to try several different strategies which might or might not be effective or enjoyable than buying one that might not work out.
We're twins as far as this idea goes. I've been brewing on an idea exactly like this for awhile now, but the budget cap I wanted to work with was $100. $30 seems too restrictive as far as choices go, just as restrictive as Pauper is, I'd say, while $100 opens up some cards that have a lot of potential, but are not quite viable.
One of two barriers for this idea is how much maintenance would need to be done to track prices. Do you price check each and every deck each event? Or just whenever someone challenges it?
Barrier #2: how annoying it would be to build a, say $85 deck, and it suddenly be a $120 deck in a month and you have to start over or revise it into something sub-par. Also, imagine how frustrating it would be to be unaware of that price flux, show up to a group/tourney and get disqualified or turned out because someone pointed out that some of your cards bloated in price. At least in standard, you know exactly what cards are rotating out and when.
I love this idea, but I think these two issues need a little something to appease the issues they cause before this idea would catch on.
Have you heard of Penny Dreadful? This is an MTGO-run format that is basically the same thing as what you're describing. No cards over $0.01 can be played. The format shifts every three months to update the card pool. Decks that became popular suddenly become out of price range, requiring adaptation on the part of the player.
It's a really cool idea, but it does require of lot of adaptation on the part of the player. Unless they are fully enfranchised in the format, it can be very daunting to have to update/change decks so frequently.
That being said, Penny Dreadful players developed many good tools for tracking card prices that you would most likely be interested in. Perhaps they could be changed/adapted to fit your "IRL" model. Instead of "Penny Dreadful", it could be "Dime Dreadful", haha.
I think price tracking would be to big a barrier for extended interest in the format.
I do think there could be room for a "Prince" Format where just commons and uncommons were legal. If a certain uncommon is over say 10 dollars it can be banned and if it dips under then an unban.
Think of it as Pauper plus Uncommons and it would be a cheap format with more options. It would be easier for a player to keep track of as well. Its why I don't play Penny Dreadful, you have to keep up on an everchanging daily format. Just a thought.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
As stated, constant price tracking would be a massive pain. If the format got popular, it would start affecting its own prices and a popular deck would suddenly price itself out of the meta. But even worse, it would be completely at the whim of every other format in existence. A card becomes popular in Commander or Modern - boom, price spike pulls it from this format. A lot of times, I quit price-tracking cards once I acquire them. And then I get completely surprised that the cheap jank I bought years ago (sometimes even for 5 cents) is suddenly worth $20 (at which point I usually unload them all happily and just wait in case reprints eventually make it affordable again). It's happened countless times - Splinter Twin, Dark Depths, Simian Spirit Guide, Manamorphose, Chromatic Star, Baleful Strix, etc.
When Dominaria was released, I decided to build a budget Tatyova, Benthic Druid Commander deck because I thought her ability was so strong that she could do well even on a severe budget restriction. So I grabbed a bunch of cheap cards that I had acquired for $0.05-0.25 and put together a deck. But when I entered the list online, I found most of those cards were now worth $1-3 instead, blowing the "budget" far higher than I had imagined. Just good staple cards like Sakura-Tribe Elder, Rampant Growth, Kodama's Reach, Cultivate, etc. I still run it as a budget deck, but it turns out budget is very relative, and I have no interest in tracking the ever-changing price of cards, especially ones I already own.
I find this to be the Achilles-heel of such a format. I can't speak for everyone else, but it would eliminate interest for me.
I remember I used to own a playset of Manamorphose that I got from some lots of common/uncommons on ebay for $15 per 1,000. I was shocked at how much they were worth several years later.
But yeah, that's what keeps me from pushing for this format. No one wants to invest that kind of time into keeping up with an ever-changing format.
My only idea right now is that maybe, regardless of price at any given moment, cards are only banned/unbanned at 6 month intervals. So every December 1st and July 1st the card prices are checked and legality is updated accordingly. It would be like a super affordable standard with over 15,000 cards to build from.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This format is designed to offer a solution to two problems that I believe exists in most other formats: accessibility and creativity.
Accessibility is addressed through the budget restriction. By placing a strict cap on the budget, far more players will not only purchase a deck that is legal in the format, but one that is actually competitive. As someone who has been a budget player for years, I’ve received many comments along the lines of “That deck is actually pretty good, considering the budget.” While I know wizards has been concerned about the barrier to entry in Magic for new players, I have found that the far more restrictive barrier is the one between beginner and intermediate level play. When I go to an FNM or other local low-stakes tournament, I find that nearly all other decks are expensive, tournament-competitive decks. I can’t speak to every single FNM or local event, but I can say this has been the case in my experience across several different stores and a few years. Creating a format that allows a far larger pool of players to be competitive will allow more players to become deeply involved in the game, which I expect would increase the average level of gameplay and sell more cards.
Creativity is encouraged by creating a new format that is self-regulating, and I expect will change frequently. Additionally, the low budget encourages experimentation. When a deck costs $30 maximum, it is not a Herculean task to acquire it, as it can be for many popular decks in any format. This should encourage players to frequently buy new decks and try new strategies. What’s more is that by cutting out staple cards and archetypes, players must start from scratch in discovering the new format. Of course, this happens in any new format, such as when standard rotates, but what is unique to this format is the self-regulating aspect. While in other formats cards and archetypes become established, prices rise, and competitive strategies become inaccessible. If this format were to catch on, if any strategy became too popular the key cards would simply price themselves out of the format, and new strategies would have to be discovered.
Why play this format instead of pauper?
I believe pauper suffers from problems in both accessibility and creativity, which this format is meant to address. In terms of accessibility, while significantly less expensive than other formats, does not have particular budget restrictions, and some of the more popular cards have risen to significant prices. As of the time I’m writing this, pauper UR Delver, one of the most popular decks in the format costs about $138 on MTGGoldfish. While this deck is on the more expensive side, it seems that many pauper decks exist around the $80 range. This seems insignificant when compared to the astronomical prices of modern or legacy decks, but is still represents a significant expense for someone in a limited budget, especially younger players. The larger issue with pauper in my opinion is on the creativity side. It is an established principle of Wizards to increase complexity with rarity. By limiting card choices to commons, pauper eliminates several effects that are unique and potentially powerful, but were slightly too slow or required too much set-up for other constructed formats. I think it makes sense to have a format in which players are encouraged to find ways to utilize undervalued/undiscovered cards that didn’t quite make it in other formats.
Why not just play MTGOnline? Prices tend to be lower.
I enjoy the face to face social interaction of paper magic. For me, it’s far more satisfying to play a game across from a live opponent than online. Additionally, while less expensive than paper, buying a deck online can still be expensive. Playing pauper online might not be too restrictive, but pauper has other issues on the creativity side that I pointed out above.
Why not build a deck over time, investing in a couple cards when you can and eventually creating a competitive deck?
First, many format staples are expensive, and in some cases buying a single copy of one can be as expensive as buying multiple budget decks. Additionally, it’s pretty unsatisfying to be buying expensive cards for a deck that you hope will be competitive in two years. Furthermore, I find deck building to be one of the most enjoyable parts of Magic, and I would rather have the ability to experiment with being able to try several different strategies which might or might not be effective or enjoyable than buying one that might not work out.
One of two barriers for this idea is how much maintenance would need to be done to track prices. Do you price check each and every deck each event? Or just whenever someone challenges it?
Barrier #2: how annoying it would be to build a, say $85 deck, and it suddenly be a $120 deck in a month and you have to start over or revise it into something sub-par. Also, imagine how frustrating it would be to be unaware of that price flux, show up to a group/tourney and get disqualified or turned out because someone pointed out that some of your cards bloated in price. At least in standard, you know exactly what cards are rotating out and when.
I love this idea, but I think these two issues need a little something to appease the issues they cause before this idea would catch on.
It's a really cool idea, but it does require of lot of adaptation on the part of the player. Unless they are fully enfranchised in the format, it can be very daunting to have to update/change decks so frequently.
That being said, Penny Dreadful players developed many good tools for tracking card prices that you would most likely be interested in. Perhaps they could be changed/adapted to fit your "IRL" model. Instead of "Penny Dreadful", it could be "Dime Dreadful", haha.
UGTurboFogGU
BRSacrificial AggroBR
16The Paper Pauper Battle Bag16
EDH
BRRakdos, Lord of PingersBR
GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
UB Ramses OverdarkUB
Sig by Ace5301 of Ace of Spades Studio
I do think there could be room for a "Prince" Format where just commons and uncommons were legal. If a certain uncommon is over say 10 dollars it can be banned and if it dips under then an unban.
Think of it as Pauper plus Uncommons and it would be a cheap format with more options. It would be easier for a player to keep track of as well. Its why I don't play Penny Dreadful, you have to keep up on an everchanging daily format. Just a thought.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
When Dominaria was released, I decided to build a budget Tatyova, Benthic Druid Commander deck because I thought her ability was so strong that she could do well even on a severe budget restriction. So I grabbed a bunch of cheap cards that I had acquired for $0.05-0.25 and put together a deck. But when I entered the list online, I found most of those cards were now worth $1-3 instead, blowing the "budget" far higher than I had imagined. Just good staple cards like Sakura-Tribe Elder, Rampant Growth, Kodama's Reach, Cultivate, etc. I still run it as a budget deck, but it turns out budget is very relative, and I have no interest in tracking the ever-changing price of cards, especially ones I already own.
I find this to be the Achilles-heel of such a format. I can't speak for everyone else, but it would eliminate interest for me.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
But yeah, that's what keeps me from pushing for this format. No one wants to invest that kind of time into keeping up with an ever-changing format.
My only idea right now is that maybe, regardless of price at any given moment, cards are only banned/unbanned at 6 month intervals. So every December 1st and July 1st the card prices are checked and legality is updated accordingly. It would be like a super affordable standard with over 15,000 cards to build from.