Thank you for the answers! It sounds about what I would expect, although I do hope that stores will run some conspiracy drafts, as it looks to be interesting, and not all of us have large numbers of friends that play MTG to draft with.
I would think the new draft would be JOU/THS/THS since they would not typically have a double small set in a draft. Not sure what it will be with M15, but Conspiracy is a separate stand alone set (meant to be drafted) that will not be used in regular draft environments except to draft as a set unto itself.
I get what you're saying, but that is why I was asking the question. Will the Theros block be drafted throughout the summer and early fall, or at some point will most stores likely switch to drafting Conspiracy or Magic 2015 on draft nights? Will many places have a second draft night for those, or will they replace Theros block drafting after a couple of months?
As a player who has only been drafting since the winter, I was wondering how drafting will work over the summer and into the fall.
I know that for the next few weeks it will be Jou/Bng/Ths, but what happens in the summer, when Conspiracy and then Magic 2015 are released? Will most gaming stores continue the Theros block draft or will there be a switch for Conspiracy and then again for the core set (or will those be held different days)?
I am aware that different LGSs can do things differently, but I was wondering if there is a "typical" way of doing things. Thanks in advance!
What kind of doc are you? I hope my story serves as a cautionary tale for you. No.
I am boarded in family medicine, and practice in a small emergency department.
Yes, your post did make me think a bit about being involved in this time and money consuming hobby! Ultimately though, I think it comes down to individuals, and as others have posted, what is right for one, is not for another. If you become so obsessed with a hobby that it interferes with everything else, then it is a problem, regardless of the particular hobby. Just be careful not to trade one obsession for another.
For me, I tend to get borderline obsessed with one thing for a while, then switch. I had been playing video games in my free time, and now it's mostly magic at the moment :). That being said, I try to ensure I spend time with my wife, and to do other things. Work certainly takes up plenty of time and mental effort ;). I also set aside a certain amount of money each month, and the rest goes to savings. With my free amount I let myself spend what I wish, but cannot go over the monthly amount (for all expenses). Hopefully I won't end up in the same situation you find yourself in, and I certainly hope you find what works best for your life and family. Best of luck to you!
Interesting post. I was intrigued by your post, as I am actually a 34 year old physician who is recently returning to magic after playing in high school many years ago!
I can see what you're getting at, and I think that if magic ever becomes such an overpowering obsession that it is overtaking my life, I would want to have the wisdom to see it and step back also. However, is there some reason you've decided it's all or nothing (I'm assuming you feel your personality will not allow this)? It really sounds like there may be some issues aside from the game of magic itself. For example (and not really asking you to tell us online, more of a question for introspection), WHY does your wife hate magic? Does she hate it because it's a fantasy themed CCG, or because she feels it cuts into your time with her and your family? Will switching to another hobby (even just playing guitar) simply be trading one obsession for another?
There is a big difference between playing casually once in a while, and needing to travel to tournaments, and collect every card ever printed. Perhaps taking a break and then returning casually is possible, but if you think not, then perhaps getting rid of most of your collection would prevent a "relapse"?
Also, teaching your children is not necessarily a bad thing, as one can have a, "nerdy" hobby and yet not be a social leper. Balance in all things, as it were. Perhaps you can teach them to play the formats you enjoy, and you can play once in a while, and not have to bother with the morons online (like me! :p)
Anyways, I wish you luck with your decision, and hope you find the right thing for you. I am hoping to not end up in your shoes in a few years time from spending waayyyy too much on pieces of cardboard!!
Finally, the obligatory InterWebz quote: "Can I haz your stuffs???!!"
I guess at this point it feels a lot like many players I have seen have binders full of cards for trade, and I was having a hard time seeing how they can have a personal collection AND all of the cards for trade as well. I will continue to draft when I can and I do sometimes buy some packs (it's a lot of fun, and my wife and I can make decks out of the new cards afterwards), and just see how it goes over time. Thanks again!
I have seen this discussed to some degree in threads on this forum, but I am still confused and looking for advice.
As a recently returning player (played many, many years ago), how do players typically build up a collection for trading, as opposed to one simply for playing.
I ask this because many players seem to frown on buying sealed products, and emphasize buying singles. In doing this, certainly one can build any deck desired, but there will be no cards for trading. Unless you completely dismantle your old deck and trade it away, you will never have things to trade.
On the other hand, if one buys sealed product, often you will obtain enough cards to trade some for what you need to complete a deck, but considering the average worth of your pulls from packs, it seems it would again, be difficult to amass extra cards of any value for future trading.
So my question really is this: when you see players with a whole binder (or more) full of multiples of valuable cards (not trash rares), how the heck did they get them all AND still have their own decks. Did they just buy hundreds of singles to trade, did they open hundreds of packs, did they shark other players in trades to amass more cards, or what? (i.e. what do each of you feel is the most efficient way to build a trading collection, while also maintaining a personal collection for use as opposed to just making a deck to play with?)
I ask this in all sincerity as someone who really enjoys the cards and would like to have a collection of decent cards, as well as just a deck or two. Thanks in advance for your advice!
I also don't see much problem with Tarmogoyf and Dark Confidant's price tag Confidant sees more play in Legacy than it does in standard.
... wait what?
@Comment above
The reason these cards fetch these prices though is because people are paying them, if Stores were selling 0 Tarmogoyfs at 150+ bucks they would lower the price period. We already have a self-adjusting system, that is why prices fluctuate and don't just go up and up and never drop, for instance look at Jace, the Mind Sculptor he is at almost an all-time low in price lately. Just because Tarmo is at an all time high doesn't mean the card will only be worth more and more as the years go by.
Yes, people are buying them, and the market DOES have the potential to reverse. At some point, the price of a card will be to high to be practical, and people will stop buying, causing the price to go down. However, what I am potentially advocating is not a self-regulating market, but an artificially regulated market (by WOTC) for the benefit of the game and format as a whole. Correctly done, reprints have the potential to artificially keep prices within a certain boundry (and I am arguing that this should be done to some degree). I am not sure if I believe this or not, but I think it DOES strike a nice balance between the two ideologies of: 1. Make all cards cheap so we can all play; 2. Keep prices high to protect my investment on the game.
Sure, high-priced cards will eventually hit a peak, and possibly decline on their own. However, at what price point? Will it be at a level that allows a large number of players, potentially providing an active and vibrant format? Or, will it be at a price point that only the 1% of elite magic players will buy in, keeping modern a format much more....well, limited?
All of this really depends on what WOTC intends modern to really be, and how accessible they want it compared to standard. I just think they should shoot for the middle-ground in terms of cost vs. accessibility.
(As an aside, it's great you were comfortable taking a hit on your thoughtseizes. I just have a feeling that many of the vocal advocates of keeping high prices are those that did not actually pay high prices for their "investments".)
There are fair points on both sides, but I think that the bottom line is that individual card prices (should) have at least a relative cap (adjusted for inflation if needed). Arguably, no single card, with the exception of those on the reserve list, should top $100, and most should be well below that. It's nice to think that the random rare you bought for a dollar could one day be valued at several times it's original worth, but it's also asking a bit much to expect to sell cards for what some are going for currently.
This is all the more apparent, when one stops to consider this: who are the people so enamored of keeping certain cards' value at very high levels? Is it mostly the people who bought their (for example) 'goyf for $170 last week, or those who were a part of the game when it was available for $20? While the answer is likely both, I suspect that many of the most vocal are in the latter group. Unfortunately on both sides of the argument it is likely that those who protest do so in the name of their own personal gain.
I honestly believe that there should be a cap on the prices of cards other than the reserve list, and that WOTC should reprint cards as needed to bring prices to those levels (be it through supplementary products, core sets, etc). Heck, they could even have a singles store, and when needed run temporary reprints of said card(s) until secondary market prices normalize. The price caps could be made public knowledge, thus that no one would buy above that level (because they know they can get what they want for that price elsewhere).
With a reasonable cap (numbers for example: $50 for most, $75 for the absolute elite), cards will still be worth plenty of value, and will still be collectible. People would still want to pull that $30 chase rare from a pack, or trade for their competitive decks, but those who want to buy their way into modern would be able to reasonably well....And face it, if you paid $200 for a card that can be reprinted, and expect to make a long-term profit from it (or even not have it drop), then you are deluding yourself. The best part is that if modern decks change so rarely, people can spend a finite amount and then make only small, affordable tweaks on occasion as needed.
At the end of the day there is no reason that WOTC cannot have modern be accessible and yet protect collectors' reasonable investments. The reserve list and legacy can still serve all of the true high-value, elitist collectors' needs, with card values that can increase without bounds.
TL;DR - both sides of the, "cost of modern", argument are partially right. There should be a middle ground with cards that are valuable, yet not inaccessible for the average-income player.
Good decks have disruption of some sort, either mainboard or in the sideboard. Thats magic. Disruptive elements is one of the major differences between it and other card games. As well as attrition. There is no way to get around it. And I feel any competitive game worth its salt contains disruptive elements. Its not a do what you want, however you want and no you cant stop me gaming world. So, there is no point in complaining. Face it, if the game was simply a race without disruption, it would be terrible. Thats for childish people who feel like the world owes them something. Take your I want it now attitude whomever they are and change it, or get demolished.
I'm not sure if you were replying to my post above, but if you were, you're making assumptions that are not there.
I happen to agree that decks do need disruption, and it's certainly part of the game. However, pure control decks can be irritating because, when you win, it's 1/4 luck (mana draws, etc), and 3/4 either having a deck that is able to overrun all the counterspells and disruption, or managing to outmaneuver your opponent. The latter being up to player skill, certainly, and the former simply highlights the inherent imbalances between certain deck types. Subjectively, even a win in said situation is not as fun, as you generally are abandoning any specially designed mechanics of your deck and just managing to get SOMETHING out on the board. Your opinion differs, but is no more valid. It has to do with personalities and preferences, and unfortunately, the differing viewpoints will likely have to agree to disagree as it were.
As for using what "I" want when "I" want it - well, that's part of the game toO. Obviously there will be tradeoffs and one can choose to play what one likes but will have to understand that sometimes it will get beaten. However, there is a difference between losing sometimes and all the time. It's an unfortunate side-effect of competitive play that only the "best" cards are considered useful. Some of us don't want a game where there is no disruption/interaction, but would rather be able to use the cards we find interesting. That doesn't make us scrubs or Noobs or anything but, well, casual players really. Where this becomes a problem is trying to play at FNM or similar event a store where others are trying to hone their competitive decks. As I said, building a netdeck and learning to use it isn't any harder for me than anyone else, just not as interesting.
Sorry if this was rambling, I'm on break at work and my attention was skewed. Basically, don't make the assumption that just because not everyone likes to play in the same manner you do, does not make them wrong, nor whiny and self-entitled (not more than anyone else with an opinion).
First, boring is subjective, but that's irrelevant to this discussion. If you knowingly admit that cards you select by your own choice are cards you think are suboptimal, then why complain? That makes no sense.
This is really a separate issue from playing vs. control, but it absolutely does make sense. As you said, boring is subjective. Magic is a CCG, and part of the allure of the cards is the design/theme of the cards (the art, creature/type of card, etc). For some, perhaps many, the ability to use the cards they find attractive is important to their "fun". These players are more likely the "Timmy" type players.
That being said, such players don't want to ALWAYS lose. Unfortunately, the way the game is played, especially at higher levels, lends itself to they type of play that justifies only winning, and thus, only a limited selection of cards is viable. As Frostraven mentioned, learning to build "better" decks frequently consists of advice consisting of, "throw away your deck and make this deck consisting of only XZY competitive cards."
This is why, as a player recently returning to the game after an (approximately) 17 year hiatus, I am much more likely to stick to strictly casual and limited play. That way I can play the way I want (within reason), and yet still not have a 0% win rate. I can netdeck as well as the next person, and if I chose, acquire playsets of all the best cards, but what's the point? Of course, your opinion may differ, and that's perfectly fine.
As for playing against control, it certainly can be frustrating, mainly because certain decks are much better equipped to deal with control decks. For example, a low-cost creature deck (aggro is the correct term?) has a much greater chance of beating out a control deck than a deck that specializes in fewer, larger creatures and/or spells, even if both decks are well-designed in their own rights. There is no way around it, and it will aggravate some people. No way around that either, others will have to adapt to that fact as well.
That being said, I find that in my older age (compared to when I played magic as a teenager), I find it easier to deal with control decks, and have more willingness to put a few contingency cards in place, and am more willing to play patiently, waiting for an opportunity to take back control of the game. Of course, there are still situations with control decks where, unless your deck is made in just the right way, you really have no chance. (although this could be said for numerous other types of deck as well)
I have always enjoyed Nightmare. It was an early example of a continuously growing creature, and the original art by Melissa Benson was just beautiful!
I get what you're saying, but that is why I was asking the question. Will the Theros block be drafted throughout the summer and early fall, or at some point will most stores likely switch to drafting Conspiracy or Magic 2015 on draft nights? Will many places have a second draft night for those, or will they replace Theros block drafting after a couple of months?
I know that for the next few weeks it will be Jou/Bng/Ths, but what happens in the summer, when Conspiracy and then Magic 2015 are released? Will most gaming stores continue the Theros block draft or will there be a switch for Conspiracy and then again for the core set (or will those be held different days)?
I am aware that different LGSs can do things differently, but I was wondering if there is a "typical" way of doing things. Thanks in advance!
I am boarded in family medicine, and practice in a small emergency department.
Yes, your post did make me think a bit about being involved in this time and money consuming hobby! Ultimately though, I think it comes down to individuals, and as others have posted, what is right for one, is not for another. If you become so obsessed with a hobby that it interferes with everything else, then it is a problem, regardless of the particular hobby. Just be careful not to trade one obsession for another.
For me, I tend to get borderline obsessed with one thing for a while, then switch. I had been playing video games in my free time, and now it's mostly magic at the moment :). That being said, I try to ensure I spend time with my wife, and to do other things. Work certainly takes up plenty of time and mental effort ;). I also set aside a certain amount of money each month, and the rest goes to savings. With my free amount I let myself spend what I wish, but cannot go over the monthly amount (for all expenses). Hopefully I won't end up in the same situation you find yourself in, and I certainly hope you find what works best for your life and family. Best of luck to you!
I can see what you're getting at, and I think that if magic ever becomes such an overpowering obsession that it is overtaking my life, I would want to have the wisdom to see it and step back also. However, is there some reason you've decided it's all or nothing (I'm assuming you feel your personality will not allow this)? It really sounds like there may be some issues aside from the game of magic itself. For example (and not really asking you to tell us online, more of a question for introspection), WHY does your wife hate magic? Does she hate it because it's a fantasy themed CCG, or because she feels it cuts into your time with her and your family? Will switching to another hobby (even just playing guitar) simply be trading one obsession for another?
There is a big difference between playing casually once in a while, and needing to travel to tournaments, and collect every card ever printed. Perhaps taking a break and then returning casually is possible, but if you think not, then perhaps getting rid of most of your collection would prevent a "relapse"?
Also, teaching your children is not necessarily a bad thing, as one can have a, "nerdy" hobby and yet not be a social leper. Balance in all things, as it were. Perhaps you can teach them to play the formats you enjoy, and you can play once in a while, and not have to bother with the morons online (like me! :p)
Anyways, I wish you luck with your decision, and hope you find the right thing for you. I am hoping to not end up in your shoes in a few years time from spending waayyyy too much on pieces of cardboard!!
Finally, the obligatory InterWebz quote: "Can I haz your stuffs???!!"
I guess at this point it feels a lot like many players I have seen have binders full of cards for trade, and I was having a hard time seeing how they can have a personal collection AND all of the cards for trade as well. I will continue to draft when I can and I do sometimes buy some packs (it's a lot of fun, and my wife and I can make decks out of the new cards afterwards), and just see how it goes over time. Thanks again!
As a recently returning player (played many, many years ago), how do players typically build up a collection for trading, as opposed to one simply for playing.
I ask this because many players seem to frown on buying sealed products, and emphasize buying singles. In doing this, certainly one can build any deck desired, but there will be no cards for trading. Unless you completely dismantle your old deck and trade it away, you will never have things to trade.
On the other hand, if one buys sealed product, often you will obtain enough cards to trade some for what you need to complete a deck, but considering the average worth of your pulls from packs, it seems it would again, be difficult to amass extra cards of any value for future trading.
So my question really is this: when you see players with a whole binder (or more) full of multiples of valuable cards (not trash rares), how the heck did they get them all AND still have their own decks. Did they just buy hundreds of singles to trade, did they open hundreds of packs, did they shark other players in trades to amass more cards, or what? (i.e. what do each of you feel is the most efficient way to build a trading collection, while also maintaining a personal collection for use as opposed to just making a deck to play with?)
I ask this in all sincerity as someone who really enjoys the cards and would like to have a collection of decent cards, as well as just a deck or two. Thanks in advance for your advice!
Yes, people are buying them, and the market DOES have the potential to reverse. At some point, the price of a card will be to high to be practical, and people will stop buying, causing the price to go down. However, what I am potentially advocating is not a self-regulating market, but an artificially regulated market (by WOTC) for the benefit of the game and format as a whole. Correctly done, reprints have the potential to artificially keep prices within a certain boundry (and I am arguing that this should be done to some degree). I am not sure if I believe this or not, but I think it DOES strike a nice balance between the two ideologies of: 1. Make all cards cheap so we can all play; 2. Keep prices high to protect my investment on the game.
Sure, high-priced cards will eventually hit a peak, and possibly decline on their own. However, at what price point? Will it be at a level that allows a large number of players, potentially providing an active and vibrant format? Or, will it be at a price point that only the 1% of elite magic players will buy in, keeping modern a format much more....well, limited?
All of this really depends on what WOTC intends modern to really be, and how accessible they want it compared to standard. I just think they should shoot for the middle-ground in terms of cost vs. accessibility.
(As an aside, it's great you were comfortable taking a hit on your thoughtseizes. I just have a feeling that many of the vocal advocates of keeping high prices are those that did not actually pay high prices for their "investments".)
In general I enjoy the art of Melissa Benson, Christopher Rush, Jason Chan, and a few others I can't bring to mind right now.
This is all the more apparent, when one stops to consider this: who are the people so enamored of keeping certain cards' value at very high levels? Is it mostly the people who bought their (for example) 'goyf for $170 last week, or those who were a part of the game when it was available for $20? While the answer is likely both, I suspect that many of the most vocal are in the latter group. Unfortunately on both sides of the argument it is likely that those who protest do so in the name of their own personal gain.
I honestly believe that there should be a cap on the prices of cards other than the reserve list, and that WOTC should reprint cards as needed to bring prices to those levels (be it through supplementary products, core sets, etc). Heck, they could even have a singles store, and when needed run temporary reprints of said card(s) until secondary market prices normalize. The price caps could be made public knowledge, thus that no one would buy above that level (because they know they can get what they want for that price elsewhere).
With a reasonable cap (numbers for example: $50 for most, $75 for the absolute elite), cards will still be worth plenty of value, and will still be collectible. People would still want to pull that $30 chase rare from a pack, or trade for their competitive decks, but those who want to buy their way into modern would be able to reasonably well....And face it, if you paid $200 for a card that can be reprinted, and expect to make a long-term profit from it (or even not have it drop), then you are deluding yourself. The best part is that if modern decks change so rarely, people can spend a finite amount and then make only small, affordable tweaks on occasion as needed.
At the end of the day there is no reason that WOTC cannot have modern be accessible and yet protect collectors' reasonable investments. The reserve list and legacy can still serve all of the true high-value, elitist collectors' needs, with card values that can increase without bounds.
TL;DR - both sides of the, "cost of modern", argument are partially right. There should be a middle ground with cards that are valuable, yet not inaccessible for the average-income player.
I'm not sure if you were replying to my post above, but if you were, you're making assumptions that are not there.
I happen to agree that decks do need disruption, and it's certainly part of the game. However, pure control decks can be irritating because, when you win, it's 1/4 luck (mana draws, etc), and 3/4 either having a deck that is able to overrun all the counterspells and disruption, or managing to outmaneuver your opponent. The latter being up to player skill, certainly, and the former simply highlights the inherent imbalances between certain deck types. Subjectively, even a win in said situation is not as fun, as you generally are abandoning any specially designed mechanics of your deck and just managing to get SOMETHING out on the board. Your opinion differs, but is no more valid. It has to do with personalities and preferences, and unfortunately, the differing viewpoints will likely have to agree to disagree as it were.
As for using what "I" want when "I" want it - well, that's part of the game toO. Obviously there will be tradeoffs and one can choose to play what one likes but will have to understand that sometimes it will get beaten. However, there is a difference between losing sometimes and all the time. It's an unfortunate side-effect of competitive play that only the "best" cards are considered useful. Some of us don't want a game where there is no disruption/interaction, but would rather be able to use the cards we find interesting. That doesn't make us scrubs or Noobs or anything but, well, casual players really. Where this becomes a problem is trying to play at FNM or similar event a store where others are trying to hone their competitive decks. As I said, building a netdeck and learning to use it isn't any harder for me than anyone else, just not as interesting.
Sorry if this was rambling, I'm on break at work and my attention was skewed. Basically, don't make the assumption that just because not everyone likes to play in the same manner you do, does not make them wrong, nor whiny and self-entitled (not more than anyone else with an opinion).
This is really a separate issue from playing vs. control, but it absolutely does make sense. As you said, boring is subjective. Magic is a CCG, and part of the allure of the cards is the design/theme of the cards (the art, creature/type of card, etc). For some, perhaps many, the ability to use the cards they find attractive is important to their "fun". These players are more likely the "Timmy" type players.
That being said, such players don't want to ALWAYS lose. Unfortunately, the way the game is played, especially at higher levels, lends itself to they type of play that justifies only winning, and thus, only a limited selection of cards is viable. As Frostraven mentioned, learning to build "better" decks frequently consists of advice consisting of, "throw away your deck and make this deck consisting of only XZY competitive cards."
This is why, as a player recently returning to the game after an (approximately) 17 year hiatus, I am much more likely to stick to strictly casual and limited play. That way I can play the way I want (within reason), and yet still not have a 0% win rate. I can netdeck as well as the next person, and if I chose, acquire playsets of all the best cards, but what's the point? Of course, your opinion may differ, and that's perfectly fine.
As for playing against control, it certainly can be frustrating, mainly because certain decks are much better equipped to deal with control decks. For example, a low-cost creature deck (aggro is the correct term?) has a much greater chance of beating out a control deck than a deck that specializes in fewer, larger creatures and/or spells, even if both decks are well-designed in their own rights. There is no way around it, and it will aggravate some people. No way around that either, others will have to adapt to that fact as well.
That being said, I find that in my older age (compared to when I played magic as a teenager), I find it easier to deal with control decks, and have more willingness to put a few contingency cards in place, and am more willing to play patiently, waiting for an opportunity to take back control of the game. Of course, there are still situations with control decks where, unless your deck is made in just the right way, you really have no chance. (although this could be said for numerous other types of deck as well)