As mentioned before, it's not a particularly great choice if you're looking solely for flying-removal, but it's one of the rare direct damage finishing spells mono-green can get. So chances are it doesn't make the cut in multicolored decks, but it'll be a contender for mono-green decks as a finisher with a bonus.
It's as conditional as Ryusei, but at least it's a lot more controllable. Also, it can control Ryusei
It is indeed the same as what's found in Clash Packs, Duel Decks, and Avacyn Restored (for some reason),
but not the same as MM1 (which used "normal" card stock).
I agree with the above posters who like it, but disliking it seems more common.
It is kind of problematic though, because now I feel the need to buy second foils of expensive cards like Karn and Emrakul
Now that you mentioned it, I do remember Avacyn Restored foils being of the "metallic" kind.
Actually I do prefer this kind of foiling. Yes, it's a bit more dull, but you can still tell it's a foil without the card entirely glaring back at you, which happens on some cards with "regular foiling". I'm not particularly sure whether it's me (I haven't checked any of the Avacyn Restored ones), but does the "Metallic Foiling" also make the card "bend" less than the "regular" foils?
That's fine, and again, I didn't say they should definitely do this. I was simply making the point that there is a way to have "better" packs without the price of packs skyrocketing over MSRP.
As a player, I would prefer that they did print to demand, but I was also simply pointing out that since they already mentioned "Limited Print Run" as one of the first few things, that's pretty much them acknowledging that they know that there is a way to print "value packs" and not have them skyrocket in prices, but they won't be doing it and therefore will be exploring other options.
They definitely overdid all their options with MM2 though, by "devaluing" the set and raising the price at the same time - they should have done one of the steps first and observed the results, it's not like the market will crash either way since the "Limited Print Run" will ensure that anyway.
They could print to demand so that price per pack and EV regressed closer to MSRP while still having lots of value cards.
But they already refused. Among the first few things when they did when they announced MM1 was "Limited Print Run" and MM2 was "More than MM1, but still Limited Print Run". So, as much as you think "They could print to demand", that's the very first thing they thought the opposite of when they thought of reprinting Modern Staples.
So the entire thing becomes a juggling game of the set's construction with that restriction of Limited Print Run. The first time they did it, they put lots of value into the packs and people complained that MM1 ran out of stock and the price spiked up as a result. The second time they did it, they spiked the price first to prevent the "Imagery" of prices spiking up later (not that any of us approved anyway) and then reduced the value of the packs to make sure stock lasts longer (which also falls in line of what I think they have a vision of "Limited: the Gathering").
The problem is that they did both - they raised the prices and reduced the value of the packs/set. That is why MM2 feels so bad, although price-wise MM1 went up to the point they have the same prices, technically speaking.
I think it is a female dragon. I know kokusho is and I thought yosei was as well. So I just assumed they all were. I could be wrong, but I think we all know I'm very seldomly wrong about anything.
Konda referred to Yosei as a male ("He") in the novels, so I'm pretty sure Yosei is male, unless there's contradicting information elsewhere.
Minamo Academy refers to Keiga as a female.
Jugan was summoned in the novels as well, but the Orochi didn't mention anything other than the name.
Kokusho and Ryusei weren't summoned in the novel, although Kokusho was mentioned once simply as "The Dark Dragon of Takenuma" and that's about it.
Back to the card, as conditional as it is, it is technically the first card I got when I started playing because I started out at the Champions of Kamigawa Pre-release and I can't remembered the rares I opened then. (There was probably a deck swap after registration since it was sealed, so that makes it even harder to remember), so the pre-release Ryusei has the "first card" place for me in that sense.
Maybe I should try building a deck with Ryusei at the helm. After all it will turn out to be a lot less conditional if I can control whether the damage happens or not with the "Return to Command Zone" rule.
In the 12 packs I had (The 6 opened and the 6 passed to me), there were 2 value cards: Spellskite in the pool I passed, Leyline of Sanctity in the pool I recieved. The rares in my play pool were:
Leyline of Anticipation
Hurkyl's Recall
Nobilis of War
Creakwood Liege
Endrek Sahr, Master Breeder
Chimeric Mass
Now ain't that a kick in the face? Oh, it gets worse. Thought I could perhaps make a RW deck with the Nobilis as kingping? Fuggedaboutit, only 2 white creatures. Green/Black tokens? Sure, except aside from Endrek and the Liege, I only had a few of the Eldrazi Drones and nothing to DO with those tokens. Maybe something with artifacts? Nah, very few of those too. Removal? All in white, one Combust, and that was it.
So I cobble together some Jund Aggro, and what happens?
Round 1:
Game 1: Turn 7 Elesh Norn demolishes my field and gives him the win.
Game 2: Turn 8 Elesh Norn demolishes my field and gives him the win.
OK, nut draws happen, on to round two...
Game 1: Primeval Titan into Comet Storm kills you.
Game 2: Comet Storm into Vengeful Rebirth into Comet Storm kills you.
Thanks for the feelbad Wizards. It may be a lot of fun to draft, but stuff like this? Yeah, it kind of ruins one's GP experience pretty badly. So you can add that up to the reasons MM2 is a huge disappointment.
Oh well, at least the side events and the trading was fun.
To be fair, Sealed always has a chance of ending up like this. Sure, MM2 made it a lot more obvious since the power of the Mythics is demonstrably there, but Sealed in any set is still going to be a flunk if you get a mediocre pool and either useless rares or rares "in the wrong colors/all over the place".
Which is I think why Draft is usually always the better Limited format. Maybe except in Cube formats.
Doesn't excuse MM2 for being such a "Lottery Set" for the sake of "Limited: the Gathering" though.
I disagree. I think Ryusei is actually the worst of the five dragons. 5 damage to all nonflying creatures is... meh at best - it feels like it misses the marks of dealing with correct threats on the board for a mass removal effect. It's probably not dealing enough to deal with the singular big threat on the board, does nothing to that army of fliers on the opposing board and chances is that token deck was indestructible to begin with. But the most annoying thing is that while you still can control when to trigger the effect (sacrifice outlets), removal simply means your opponent can also control the effect as long as you're still waiting for the correct time (which may backfire on you even, depending on the deck.)
If I wanted mass removal, I'll probably take stronger, more controllable options.
Jugan, on the other hand, while a lot more narrow in application, only has the requirement on having another creature. He works a lot better with +1/+1 counter modifiers, which are a lot more common than damage amplifiers in deck themes. The only time an opponent is inclined to destroy it is when you have no other creatures, whereas with Ryusei, it's basically anytime they can get an advantage over any other player with minimum losses on their side.
Either way, both of them aren't the top 3 of the 5 dragons though.
I don't understand; the lottery aspect of MM15 has been mathematically demonstrated and the low count of modern-playable commons and uncommons is not something that can be argued around.
And that's pretty significant. When you draft the latest standard set, even you you don't open the money-mythic, you end-up with cards that are standard-playable. The problem with the MM15 set is that outside of rare slot, you draft it and then almost all the cards you ended-up with are throw-away immediately. A beginner cannot draft MM15 a few times and end-up with the skeleton of a modern deck that would bring you to want more of modern. The number of feel-bad rares and the status of light-on-fire of the rest of the chaff you end-up with does not make the set desirable.
Making the set good in draft makes for nice camera time at MM15 weekend-end GP bash, but given the limited-run and high-price of the packs, is it really that important? It's not like the set will be drafted for months. Already, no one wants to draft it at the LGS I go to, ever since the release week-end. Praise it, praise it, praise it all you want, I know people here *are* voting with their wallet, they don't find the 40$+ experience worthwhile.
I'm running on assumptions that I made from the recent "feel" and vibes Wizards have given out concerning Magic, I might be wrong, but I still think the situation can't be that far off what I think it is like.
This is a core issue with MM2 - I feel that Wizards has a "silent" "every set must be a great Limited format" policy running about. The first MM ran out of stock pretty fast because they were restricted to a Limited Print Run, and it didn't run out because people were drafting them fast, they ran out because people were rushing to buy boosters to open for value. To us, it isn't much a problem (well, except that the stock ran out and prices rose because of that), but I think Wizards felt that lack of Limited played felt like the set "failed as a set" since it wasn't "played" in "Limited: the Gathering".
In Standard, you will more or less end up with playables because in the end, most cards are "playable" in Standard (other than the obvious created-for-solely-limited-cards). In Modern, the number of such cards (at common/uncommon) isn't that much and that creates quite the price discrepancy between playables and non-playables past rotation. It probably won't happen at Common (MM1 proves that), but at the uncommon level, it is possible for the uncommons alone to "pay for the pack". It won't happen every pack, but it does reduce the incentive to draft since the rate of "paying for the pack through uncommons" is greatly reduced in draft.
Imagine the highly-wanted cards like Serum Visions, Path to Exile, Inquisition of Kozilek and more were in the set. MM2 packs can now range of "Uncommons do nothing value-wise" to "Uncommons pay for the pack". You don't want to be the person to open the later pack in a draft and having to pass the cards. You're more motivated to risk between the 2 types of packs by simply opening the pack instead.
People become less motivated to play Limited if the Limited format itself demolishes the value they could have gotten. There are probably people out there who don't play MM2 Limited solely by the possibility of opening a expensive rare and expensive foil, since every pack has a foil and on average a box does yield 1-3 foil rares/mythics.
Yes, this can happen in Standard drafts as well, but the rate is a lot lower for most sets (perhaps except Innistrad and Dark Ascension due to flip cards), because the uncommons don't usually hold enough value to support the pack (If it does, it's only usually 1 or 2 cards a set).
This may be why we only got Remand (and Lightning Bolt, but it was upshifted in rarity).
I'm not saying I'm happy with this either, but I think that was the rationale behind the whole thing. I also don't approve of the price increase and I can't find any reason for it especially since they "nerfed" the set for Limited already other than "Wizards read the "Players couldn't draft MM1 due to lack of stocks regardless of price due to others just opening packs" memo rather than the "Players refuse to pay raised prices to draft MM1 due to lack of stocks from others opening packs" memo" and really thought lots of people would have drafted MM1 at increased prices if it didn't ran out of stock.
We've already reached the point all of us agree MM2 is a "Lottery Set" if you're buying packs/boxes just for opening and it is still one even if it is for Limited, except it depends on how you value the Limited Experience.
To be fair, though, all sets/packs/boxes work like this as well. MM2 is just a high-stakes version of it. The only reason the whole situation for Magic looks so complicated is because Magic has a trading component to it, hence you see everyone trying to profit/out-value the entire system on a whole. The mindset is pretty much the same though.
In a "game" of chance like this, one needs to expect and accept the chance of lowest possible factor before it happens.
Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and get a 50 cent rare (and a worthless foil)? If not, then don't buy the pack - it's as simple as that.
It's easy to look at the same point of view at a different angle as "Who's stupid enough to pay $10 for a 50 cent rare?" But that view is the opposite of "Who wouldn't pay $10 for a $100+ rare?", which translates into a question at the other end of the spectrum of "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and open a Tarmogoyf?", which we all know only has 1 answer and that is why the question is redundant.
But taking that angle of view means you're taking the equation of chance out - why would someone ask a question like "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and get a 50 cent rare (and a worthless foil)?" if there wasn't an accompanying question of "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and open a Tarmogoyf in it?"
The same point of view works the other way round - "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and open a Tarmogoyf?" - people always seem to take the perspective of chance out, and the accompanying question "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and get a 50 cent rare?" disappears. They never answer the question and then complain when reality (which is both questions at the same time before it happens) happens.
"Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and open a Tarmogoyf in it?" alone is a redundant question, since it only has 1 answer, so the real decision of buying a pack lies with the answer to the question of "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and get a 50 cent rare (and a worthless foil)?" accompanying it.
Just modify it accordingly with any set or from a pack to box/case, the formula is more or less the same.
Your argument with "you can open expensive cards" is just wrong. What does it affect drafting experience? Is drafting for you playing the slot machines? Hate to break it to you but: The bank always wins. Same goes for MM15 and hoping for the foil goyf.
And that's the problem: We think it is stupid to pay 3x the amount for drafting, just because they have put Tarmogoyf in. Cut him, cut Clique and Bob and Mox opal and sell it for regular price, so you can have the same drafting fun for 1/3 of the price! Detach the lottery from drafting (or better: scale it back to normal size) and make another set with the value cards that is not for drafting then.
Give the drafters a "limited masters" and the constructed people a real modern masters without these tons of limited chaff.
And after watching the GP a bit last evening I can really say: Those were quite mundane, regular run of the mill decks, which could have been had with any standard set.
"Limited Masters" was more or less Conspiracy. MM2 felt like an attempt making MM into a Conspiracy-like set, since I think it felt like more people were opening MM1 packs for value more than Limited purposes.
If they created packs solely for value-opening, those packs would need to go under a very Limited Print Run. Remember when MM1 was released and the major complaint was "not enough stock" and "prices going up because of it"? Their "solution" to the "Limited Print Run" is to turn the thing into a Lottery and not a Value-Pack, so people will be less inclined to buy the packs and MM2 will last longer.
Basically, as much as players don't want it, the "value" of each pack is more or less inversely proportional to its print run limit for sets like Modern Masters.
Besides, if the value of almost every pack "breaks even", stores will be more tempted to just open more of the product themselves and sell the singles to control the prices again. Which is what I think might have happened to MM1 to some degree as well.
Ultimately, I think it's the "Limited Print Run" that got MM2 into its current situation. Yes, it may have a bigger print run than MM1, but I think they were trying to go for "Make MM2 last as long as Conspiracy", which I see that many shops still have quite an abundant stock of, while still producing a "Limited Print Run" to not "upset the market".
A lot of the following is a take on what I think WotC wanted with MM from various perspectives and it is just all assumption (although the assumption does come derived from what I feel they were trying to do from the "vibe" WotC has given off so far to me.)
It is likely from their point of view, MM is intended to bring in a controlled number of "desirable" cards into the market, so the Limited Print Run exists to put a cap on the number of those cards doing so, effectively controlling it. MM did that alright (to be fair to MM1, it was because of MM1 that interest and demand in Modern spiked after it was announced, so that was a result they did not foresee to that extent, hence the rise of the prices of the Mythics in MM1).
Now, they might want it to have a "longer shelf life for Limited" while still on a "Limited Print Run", given how fast MM1 went out and the prices rose and rose for packs/boxes. It didn't create the Limited experience they wanted people to play because people were either just opening packs or hoarding them - leaving not much left to draft, nor anybody that wanted to, due to the increasing prices. I think something along the lines Conspiracy was somewhat what they wanted to go for, except Conspiracy was more "Casual-Orientated", and they wanted MM to be "Tournament-Orientated" (There wasn't a Conspiracy Weekend with 3 GPs, at least.)
Here is where I think they went downhill. They couldn't increase the print run drastically (even if they did increased it), so the eventual cap is there. A repeat of MM1 with a slightly increased print run is going to end up the same. So basically they needed to discourage people from opening packs just for opening packs, which people did for one reason - value.
I don't think I need to explain the rest of the story, it's basically what everyone is complaining here - missing pricey commons/uncommons, missing mid-priced rares. The only improvement was the Mythics, but I think they shoved everything good (except Comet Storm) up to Mythic in an attempt to make it up for the rares, turning MM2 into a technical lottery system compared to the first so people would draft it rather than open them directly. People would be more inclined to open packs than draft the set if you're going to see Dark Confidant, Remand, Path to Exile, Lightning Bolt and a foil Serum Visions in the same pack. Basically, "good" commons/uncommons discourage drafting, since the entire pack is value.
Then they went ahead and raised the price. Guess they didn't get the "We didn't draft MM1 because prices went up the roof after stocks went out" memo and read the "We didn't draft MM1 because there was no stock despite the price" memo instead.
If there wasn't a "Limited Print Run", I doubt most of this would have happened. Sometimes I think the Mythics are the "reason" behind this. The commons/uncommons need a lot more printing than they are receiving (or not even receiving now), but they are capped by the "Limited Print Run" caused by the Top Mythics (and to control their entry). Imagine a MM2 with a few more good commons/uncommons, no Mythics, replaced with a mid-priced rares and priced down to regular Standard-Booster packs with no "Limited Print Run" since there's no Mythics to "control". Suddenly, you're still more motivated to draft even if none of the 15 Mythics were in the set, right? At the very least, you don't lose out that much due to pricing.
As for the current situation of MM2, the best choice (on the assumption one wants to experience some MM2, so I'm ruling out not getting any as an option in this case) in my opinion is to get a box and draft it with some friends. You stand to "even out" when you get an entire box for yourself than a single draft of 3 packs due to variance and opening packs directly is a no (which is what they intended I would think). Then go buy the singles you need for Modern after you for the "MM2 experience".
No it doesn't have to be about "Now." It just has to be cards that I've opened from packs myself that belong to the original, core Magic: The Gathering game. Core sets and expansions. And beyond 9th Edition even the core sets don't feel totally authentic to me, as they took on black borders and began reprinting cards like Phage, which did not belong in core sets. But the core set is over now, and that makes sense.
When I first began my current collection last year, I started with boxes like Legions, Scourge and Planeshift, and then moved onto the more current stuff.
Anyways, you say that not every product has to be collectible. I agree. I wasn't saying they shouldn't have printed Modern Masters. I was just saying that those cards are reprints with an expansion symbol on them that doesn't belong to any set from the Magic: The Gathering game, so you're made very aware all the time that you're holding a reprint-for-the-sake-of-easy-accessibiliy card in your hand, rather than one that came from a set that Wizards printed to continue the lineage of the game.
Okay. So, as the core sets beyond 9th Edition have already shown, there are plenty of sets that don't feel authentic to you.
You're not wrong for feeling that way, because Modern Masters Cards were reprinted specifically for the the sake of easy accessibility, so you're not wrong. Just like how Planechase/Archenemy/Conspiracy/Commander/Duel Decks cards are printed for the purpose of play and not for (by your definition of) collection.
At the end of a day, if a card from Modern Masters feels like a reprint-for-the-sake-of-easy-accessibility card (Which it is) and not an "authentic" card that came from a set that Wizards printed to continue the lineage of the game, you can simply not collect it (which, well, is what you're doing).
I see you got the general idea behind the purpose of supplementary products correct, so I'm moving on to what I think is the cause of the heated discussions many of us are having here. I'm going to be slightly more blunt about this topic to get the point across: The way you phrased and defined your collection.
"Real/Authentic" aren't the best words to define cards you deem ideal for your collection, because the usage of the word implies cards that don't fit the ideal mold are "fake" (the opposite), which gives rise to quite the impression you feel that the cards don't deserve to exist. You probably didn't mean that, but that doesn't stop the natural impact the words themselves would give away.
I can't fault you for the choice of words, there probably isn't another word as short to describe the same feeling and you probably went for the shortest option. In fact, when you described the same feeling in the quote above in terms of "reprints-for-the-sake-of-easy-accessibility" and "printed to continue the lineage of the game", you were publishing the same feelings in a different term, but one less piercing while getting the point across.
It's not helping that your "restrictions" for your collection is not one majority of the forums has the same for, so the usage of the term "Authentic" would also immediately create the impression you think people who collect or play cards you didn't feel were "real" were playing with "false" cards. Like I said, you didn't mean that, but the usage of the word would resonate its opposite meaning when applied from the other point of view.
On top of that, in the first post, you stated "If Wizards wanted to do this properly" - that gives the others the impression you think that Wizards caters every product to the your definition of a "real" collection, which as I mentioned above, people already don't agree with. Well, from the post quoted, I can see that you understand that not all products cater to your collection.
Your point of view is not wrong, but you need to recognize that your point of view is certainly in a minority here (this thread itself proves it) and therefore you need to be a lot more precise in your wording - to be expressing your opinion that resounds the message of "Cards from Modern Masters are false cards and I do not feel that they are real Magic cards" is definitely going to get a lot of people running against your point of view, even if your original point of view would have been a largely neutral one.
Besides, most collectors would set a restriction on their collections (otherwise we'll be collecting everything), the a game constantly producing main and supplementary products (as well as promos), there are bound to be cards that don't meet our criteria and therefore don't feel "worth collecting". To word these cards as "not authentic/real" would get people who either have the card under their definition of collectible or playable (and a lot of players deem everything printed legally as playable, mind you) is going to get people up against your point of view.
I am picking on your choice of words and being very blunt about it because I can see your "actual" point of view when it comes to your collection and products (Modern Masters) that don't fall under it and that its mainly you choice of wording that's attracting a lot of opposing views.
Just take from the quote above the sentence "doesn't belong to any set from the Magic: the Gathering game". The word "game" is too broad - you have a specific definition of it that's defined by your collection, but to others, the MTG game consists of everything they can use. By their definition, Modern Masters definitely is a set that belongs to the game - their definition of "game".
Edit: Lastly, people keep asking how I feel about Conspiracy, Planechase, etc. I don't invest in or collect anything that doesn't belong to the standard rotation of the game. I hardly have an inkling of what exactly is in a Conspiracy pack, it doesn't really register in my mind as part of the Magic collectible card game. Same for any cards from any products like Dual Decks, Commander Decks, etc. These products are all well and good for people to play with and have fun, but as they are full of reprints with symbols on them that don't belong to any actual Magic: The Gathering expansion set, they don't fall within the game from the authentic collectors perspective.
I've already addressed this issue in my previous post:
So basically you're saying Modern Masters (and Supplementary Products, as well as some Core Sets) don't feel authentic to some collectors. So it just means some supplementary products aren't for some collectors.
Wizards has its main printers running for 4 sets per year to continuously run the "Main Storyline Authentic Magic Game" you are collecting. As the main printers are always busy, there is no way to ever reprint a past set in its entirely. Wizards caters the "side-printers" to the people you've mentioned - those who just want to play Magic and have fun.
Magic is a very large game, with many players moving in and out of the game. There are bound to be people who missed certain eras of the game and new players that never experience anything before some point. Supplementary products exist to cater to this people.
As mentioned earlier, it's impossible to replicate the experience of the "Main Storyline Authentic Magic Game" from the past - that process is still present and continuous right now in the form of Standard Sets and the printers are all busy with that. To replicate the authenticity of the past would require stopping the present authenticity to cater to that, both logistics-wise and flavor-wise (I, for one would be quite confused if we were supposedly on Zendikar and Mirrodin at the same time.) In fact, if anything, even a full direct reprint wouldn't feel real - what are we doing on Mirrodin when it's supposed to be New Phyrexia now? Okay, perhaps re-living the authenticity then wouldn't feel bad, but it's jarring since it's happening alongside the present events and we already know the results.
You are already collecting what you deem as the "Authentic Collector's Magic", which consists of the sets that rotate through Standard. You also said:
Interestingly enough, I build my collection exclusively via opening packs. I do not buy singles. It doesn't make sense to me to display a cool card in a binder which I paid someone else to rummage through packs to get for me. Also, you cannot technically buy cards brand new unless you buy packs.
In addition to investing in sealed product (the origin of my username here), I purchase a modest number of boxes of each set to open, sort, and keep indefinitely simply in the interest of collecting the cards. It was a no brainer that any collection I would build would have to be made up entirely of cards I pulled from packs myself.
So you are a collector that determines your "Authenticity" of your collection through the "Now": Cards must be relevant to the current storyline and opened new from booster packs.
Supplementary Products don't serve this purpose - they exist either for play (Planechase/Archenemy/Conspiracy) or reprints for the sake of reprints (Modern Masters). There has never been a supplementary product catered to "the present/now" because that's what the main printers are doing. No Supplementary Product enters Standard, which is the benchmark of what you determine to collect.
Magic may be a Collectible Card Game, but that doesn't mean every product printed by Magic has to be "Collectible", the same way not every card printed will be "Playable".
I feel that Modern Masters cards are not real, authentic Magic cards. To reprint cards in that manner is to completely undermine a very central tenet of the nature of a collectible card game like Magic. I have no desire to get a single booster of Modern Masters and would not feel the slightest bit of awe or excitement over the cards inside no matter what I pulled. If I got something really "good" I would say "that's great, if only it were the real one from Zendikar, etc."
Does anybody else feel this way? I'm guessing there aren't many of you based on the prices of Modern Masters packs, but I would love to know if there are others out there who see this the same way I do. To me the cards in a Modern Masters pack don't even look or feel like real Magic cards. Their expansion symbol does not belong to any of the official MTG expansions, they are not real cards from a real expansion.
If Wizards wanted to do this properly, they should have opened product from sets ranging from 8th Edition to Alara Reborn (or Magic 2012 in the case of MM2015), and repackaged them in "Modern Masters" packs, allowing people to actually purchase a "best of" compilation via booster packs. Now that would be cool. But what they've done is just create fake cards and say that they are the same as the real ones from the actual sets.
I really hope there's at least one other person who feels the same way I do.
I read through the thread, this post refers to various different points you've raised in the thread, I'm just quoting the first post for convenience.
So basically you're saying Modern Masters (and Supplementary Products, as well as some Core Sets) don't feel authentic to some collectors. So it just means some supplementary products aren't for some collectors.
Modern Masters was clearly not created for collectors like you, who feel that the cards they play and collect should be in line with the game's growth. But not everyone is like that. There are players who will gladly play the cheapest alternative of a card as long as it is determined legal by Wizards. There are people find fun in simply "playing" - whether it is casting Emrakul, the Aeons Torn in Rise of the Eldrazi sealed or from Modern Masters 2015 sealed makes no difference to them.
Yes, Modern Masters isn't technically an expansion set in terms of expanding the gameplay itself, but it is an expansion set if you look it from a "meta" point of view, the expansion is not in the internal factors of gameplay, but the external factors (more people playing Magic, growth externally), Modern Masters serves to expand the game to more people. That is very real.
Magic, as a game, has been growing in recent years. There are plenty of new players who are interested in Modern, but weren't around when the sets of Modern were in Standard printings. They just want to play Modern, they don't have any emotional attachments to the sets they didn't experience in Standards past. Modern Masters was designed to cater to these players.
The same way you see original card printings as a proof of your experience with the game of that time past, Modern Masters can be same mark of pride for new players "This expansion symbol marks the era Wizards made it possible for me to join the Modern format". A repeat that may not "feel real" to you may be someone else's first time playing with the format and it is very real to them.
I'm not a new MTG player, having started playing since Champions of Kamigawa. I'm not exactly an outdated returning player, since even during my inactive periods of playing MTG, I try to attend at least pre-release events and keep up with the general updates of Magic. I'm not new to MTGS either, I had accounts during the separate periods of time when I was active (or tried to be active) in MTG, but still ended up lurking more than posting each time, eventually forgetting about them. I'm thankful for MTGS for not having a strict one-account policy, so I could rejoin this great community each time.
The last time I played Standard was during Alara-Zendikar Standard, with a Jund deck. Modern-wise, I intended start off with a Pod deck since I had most of the cards (from the "leftovers" which I didn't sell when they were released and in Standard) and slowly acquire the remaining ones, but with the banning of Birthing Pod, that plan was halted. I was an active EDH player when the first set of Commander Decks were released. Eventually, due to several factors, I ended up building more decks than playing, and then conceptualizing more decks than even building them. Admittedly, I got lazier to attempt to rejoin constructed formats over time.
I fared slightly better in Limited, where I at least attended one pre-release per set. Nothing like what I used to do (All the available pods as long as I had the time that day), but considering the recent changes to the pre-release formats, I doubt I'll regain that level of playing for the time being. I seldom do pack-drafting, but I'm in a small group that manages its own cube, so I do get drafting experience, just not often with the traditional packs.
Several factors had made me decide to be less active in Magic then, and even after those factors weren't around, laziness crept in and I didn't really bother returning to active Magic. I'm trying to change that and so here I am (again). At least this time I returned with a plan of some sort after observing the overall Magic scene:
- I'll probably opt for a "Podless Pod" deck for Modern, likely leaning towards the Collected Company decks. Eventually, I might build a proven Tier-1 Deck, probably Affinity, but that's further down the line.
- For Standard, I might just go for something cheap but viable, most likely a Mono-Red deck of sorts (those are usually the cheaper ones regardless of era).
- Well, I consolidated my EDH ideas and decks before I dared to take this step, so I'm left with acquiring some cards I need for those decks.
- I'm not going to increase my Limited play by that much, since I want to concentrate on boosting my Constructed Magic Activeness.
Okay, this turned out to be more of a self-motivation post for myself to get back to active Magic than an introduction, but still, whatever it takes to get the engine going.
It's as conditional as Ryusei, but at least it's a lot more controllable. Also, it can control Ryusei
Now that you mentioned it, I do remember Avacyn Restored foils being of the "metallic" kind.
Actually I do prefer this kind of foiling. Yes, it's a bit more dull, but you can still tell it's a foil without the card entirely glaring back at you, which happens on some cards with "regular foiling". I'm not particularly sure whether it's me (I haven't checked any of the Avacyn Restored ones), but does the "Metallic Foiling" also make the card "bend" less than the "regular" foils?
As a player, I would prefer that they did print to demand, but I was also simply pointing out that since they already mentioned "Limited Print Run" as one of the first few things, that's pretty much them acknowledging that they know that there is a way to print "value packs" and not have them skyrocket in prices, but they won't be doing it and therefore will be exploring other options.
They definitely overdid all their options with MM2 though, by "devaluing" the set and raising the price at the same time - they should have done one of the steps first and observed the results, it's not like the market will crash either way since the "Limited Print Run" will ensure that anyway.
But they already refused. Among the first few things when they did when they announced MM1 was "Limited Print Run" and MM2 was "More than MM1, but still Limited Print Run". So, as much as you think "They could print to demand", that's the very first thing they thought the opposite of when they thought of reprinting Modern Staples.
So the entire thing becomes a juggling game of the set's construction with that restriction of Limited Print Run. The first time they did it, they put lots of value into the packs and people complained that MM1 ran out of stock and the price spiked up as a result. The second time they did it, they spiked the price first to prevent the "Imagery" of prices spiking up later (not that any of us approved anyway) and then reduced the value of the packs to make sure stock lasts longer (which also falls in line of what I think they have a vision of "Limited: the Gathering").
The problem is that they did both - they raised the prices and reduced the value of the packs/set. That is why MM2 feels so bad, although price-wise MM1 went up to the point they have the same prices, technically speaking.
Konda referred to Yosei as a male ("He") in the novels, so I'm pretty sure Yosei is male, unless there's contradicting information elsewhere.
Minamo Academy refers to Keiga as a female.
Jugan was summoned in the novels as well, but the Orochi didn't mention anything other than the name.
Kokusho and Ryusei weren't summoned in the novel, although Kokusho was mentioned once simply as "The Dark Dragon of Takenuma" and that's about it.
Back to the card, as conditional as it is, it is technically the first card I got when I started playing because I started out at the Champions of Kamigawa Pre-release and I can't remembered the rares I opened then. (There was probably a deck swap after registration since it was sealed, so that makes it even harder to remember), so the pre-release Ryusei has the "first card" place for me in that sense.
Maybe I should try building a deck with Ryusei at the helm. After all it will turn out to be a lot less conditional if I can control whether the damage happens or not with the "Return to Command Zone" rule.
To be fair, Sealed always has a chance of ending up like this. Sure, MM2 made it a lot more obvious since the power of the Mythics is demonstrably there, but Sealed in any set is still going to be a flunk if you get a mediocre pool and either useless rares or rares "in the wrong colors/all over the place".
Which is I think why Draft is usually always the better Limited format. Maybe except in Cube formats.
Doesn't excuse MM2 for being such a "Lottery Set" for the sake of "Limited: the Gathering" though.
I disagree. I think Ryusei is actually the worst of the five dragons. 5 damage to all nonflying creatures is... meh at best - it feels like it misses the marks of dealing with correct threats on the board for a mass removal effect. It's probably not dealing enough to deal with the singular big threat on the board, does nothing to that army of fliers on the opposing board and chances is that token deck was indestructible to begin with. But the most annoying thing is that while you still can control when to trigger the effect (sacrifice outlets), removal simply means your opponent can also control the effect as long as you're still waiting for the correct time (which may backfire on you even, depending on the deck.)
If I wanted mass removal, I'll probably take stronger, more controllable options.
Jugan, on the other hand, while a lot more narrow in application, only has the requirement on having another creature. He works a lot better with +1/+1 counter modifiers, which are a lot more common than damage amplifiers in deck themes. The only time an opponent is inclined to destroy it is when you have no other creatures, whereas with Ryusei, it's basically anytime they can get an advantage over any other player with minimum losses on their side.
Either way, both of them aren't the top 3 of the 5 dragons though.
I'm running on assumptions that I made from the recent "feel" and vibes Wizards have given out concerning Magic, I might be wrong, but I still think the situation can't be that far off what I think it is like.
This is a core issue with MM2 - I feel that Wizards has a "silent" "every set must be a great Limited format" policy running about. The first MM ran out of stock pretty fast because they were restricted to a Limited Print Run, and it didn't run out because people were drafting them fast, they ran out because people were rushing to buy boosters to open for value. To us, it isn't much a problem (well, except that the stock ran out and prices rose because of that), but I think Wizards felt that lack of Limited played felt like the set "failed as a set" since it wasn't "played" in "Limited: the Gathering".
In Standard, you will more or less end up with playables because in the end, most cards are "playable" in Standard (other than the obvious created-for-solely-limited-cards). In Modern, the number of such cards (at common/uncommon) isn't that much and that creates quite the price discrepancy between playables and non-playables past rotation. It probably won't happen at Common (MM1 proves that), but at the uncommon level, it is possible for the uncommons alone to "pay for the pack". It won't happen every pack, but it does reduce the incentive to draft since the rate of "paying for the pack through uncommons" is greatly reduced in draft.
Imagine the highly-wanted cards like Serum Visions, Path to Exile, Inquisition of Kozilek and more were in the set. MM2 packs can now range of "Uncommons do nothing value-wise" to "Uncommons pay for the pack". You don't want to be the person to open the later pack in a draft and having to pass the cards. You're more motivated to risk between the 2 types of packs by simply opening the pack instead.
People become less motivated to play Limited if the Limited format itself demolishes the value they could have gotten. There are probably people out there who don't play MM2 Limited solely by the possibility of opening a expensive rare and expensive foil, since every pack has a foil and on average a box does yield 1-3 foil rares/mythics.
Yes, this can happen in Standard drafts as well, but the rate is a lot lower for most sets (perhaps except Innistrad and Dark Ascension due to flip cards), because the uncommons don't usually hold enough value to support the pack (If it does, it's only usually 1 or 2 cards a set).
This may be why we only got Remand (and Lightning Bolt, but it was upshifted in rarity).
I'm not saying I'm happy with this either, but I think that was the rationale behind the whole thing. I also don't approve of the price increase and I can't find any reason for it especially since they "nerfed" the set for Limited already other than "Wizards read the "Players couldn't draft MM1 due to lack of stocks regardless of price due to others just opening packs" memo rather than the "Players refuse to pay raised prices to draft MM1 due to lack of stocks from others opening packs" memo" and really thought lots of people would have drafted MM1 at increased prices if it didn't ran out of stock.
EDIT: Fixed some sentence errors.
To be fair, though, all sets/packs/boxes work like this as well. MM2 is just a high-stakes version of it. The only reason the whole situation for Magic looks so complicated is because Magic has a trading component to it, hence you see everyone trying to profit/out-value the entire system on a whole. The mindset is pretty much the same though.
In a "game" of chance like this, one needs to expect and accept the chance of lowest possible factor before it happens.
Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and get a 50 cent rare (and a worthless foil)? If not, then don't buy the pack - it's as simple as that.
It's easy to look at the same point of view at a different angle as "Who's stupid enough to pay $10 for a 50 cent rare?" But that view is the opposite of "Who wouldn't pay $10 for a $100+ rare?", which translates into a question at the other end of the spectrum of "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and open a Tarmogoyf?", which we all know only has 1 answer and that is why the question is redundant.
But taking that angle of view means you're taking the equation of chance out - why would someone ask a question like "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and get a 50 cent rare (and a worthless foil)?" if there wasn't an accompanying question of "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and open a Tarmogoyf in it?"
The same point of view works the other way round - "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and open a Tarmogoyf?" - people always seem to take the perspective of chance out, and the accompanying question "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and get a 50 cent rare?" disappears. They never answer the question and then complain when reality (which is both questions at the same time before it happens) happens.
"Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and open a Tarmogoyf in it?" alone is a redundant question, since it only has 1 answer, so the real decision of buying a pack lies with the answer to the question of "Are you willing to buy a $10 pack and get a 50 cent rare (and a worthless foil)?" accompanying it.
Just modify it accordingly with any set or from a pack to box/case, the formula is more or less the same.
"Limited Masters" was more or less Conspiracy. MM2 felt like an attempt making MM into a Conspiracy-like set, since I think it felt like more people were opening MM1 packs for value more than Limited purposes.
If they created packs solely for value-opening, those packs would need to go under a very Limited Print Run. Remember when MM1 was released and the major complaint was "not enough stock" and "prices going up because of it"? Their "solution" to the "Limited Print Run" is to turn the thing into a Lottery and not a Value-Pack, so people will be less inclined to buy the packs and MM2 will last longer.
Basically, as much as players don't want it, the "value" of each pack is more or less inversely proportional to its print run limit for sets like Modern Masters.
Besides, if the value of almost every pack "breaks even", stores will be more tempted to just open more of the product themselves and sell the singles to control the prices again. Which is what I think might have happened to MM1 to some degree as well.
A lot of the following is a take on what I think WotC wanted with MM from various perspectives and it is just all assumption (although the assumption does come derived from what I feel they were trying to do from the "vibe" WotC has given off so far to me.)
It is likely from their point of view, MM is intended to bring in a controlled number of "desirable" cards into the market, so the Limited Print Run exists to put a cap on the number of those cards doing so, effectively controlling it. MM did that alright (to be fair to MM1, it was because of MM1 that interest and demand in Modern spiked after it was announced, so that was a result they did not foresee to that extent, hence the rise of the prices of the Mythics in MM1).
Now, they might want it to have a "longer shelf life for Limited" while still on a "Limited Print Run", given how fast MM1 went out and the prices rose and rose for packs/boxes. It didn't create the Limited experience they wanted people to play because people were either just opening packs or hoarding them - leaving not much left to draft, nor anybody that wanted to, due to the increasing prices. I think something along the lines Conspiracy was somewhat what they wanted to go for, except Conspiracy was more "Casual-Orientated", and they wanted MM to be "Tournament-Orientated" (There wasn't a Conspiracy Weekend with 3 GPs, at least.)
Here is where I think they went downhill. They couldn't increase the print run drastically (even if they did increased it), so the eventual cap is there. A repeat of MM1 with a slightly increased print run is going to end up the same. So basically they needed to discourage people from opening packs just for opening packs, which people did for one reason - value.
I don't think I need to explain the rest of the story, it's basically what everyone is complaining here - missing pricey commons/uncommons, missing mid-priced rares. The only improvement was the Mythics, but I think they shoved everything good (except Comet Storm) up to Mythic in an attempt to make it up for the rares, turning MM2 into a technical lottery system compared to the first so people would draft it rather than open them directly. People would be more inclined to open packs than draft the set if you're going to see Dark Confidant, Remand, Path to Exile, Lightning Bolt and a foil Serum Visions in the same pack. Basically, "good" commons/uncommons discourage drafting, since the entire pack is value.
Then they went ahead and raised the price. Guess they didn't get the "We didn't draft MM1 because prices went up the roof after stocks went out" memo and read the "We didn't draft MM1 because there was no stock despite the price" memo instead.
If there wasn't a "Limited Print Run", I doubt most of this would have happened. Sometimes I think the Mythics are the "reason" behind this. The commons/uncommons need a lot more printing than they are receiving (or not even receiving now), but they are capped by the "Limited Print Run" caused by the Top Mythics (and to control their entry). Imagine a MM2 with a few more good commons/uncommons, no Mythics, replaced with a mid-priced rares and priced down to regular Standard-Booster packs with no "Limited Print Run" since there's no Mythics to "control". Suddenly, you're still more motivated to draft even if none of the 15 Mythics were in the set, right? At the very least, you don't lose out that much due to pricing.
As for the current situation of MM2, the best choice (on the assumption one wants to experience some MM2, so I'm ruling out not getting any as an option in this case) in my opinion is to get a box and draft it with some friends. You stand to "even out" when you get an entire box for yourself than a single draft of 3 packs due to variance and opening packs directly is a no (which is what they intended I would think). Then go buy the singles you need for Modern after you for the "MM2 experience".
Okay. So, as the core sets beyond 9th Edition have already shown, there are plenty of sets that don't feel authentic to you.
You're not wrong for feeling that way, because Modern Masters Cards were reprinted specifically for the the sake of easy accessibility, so you're not wrong. Just like how Planechase/Archenemy/Conspiracy/Commander/Duel Decks cards are printed for the purpose of play and not for (by your definition of) collection.
At the end of a day, if a card from Modern Masters feels like a reprint-for-the-sake-of-easy-accessibility card (Which it is) and not an "authentic" card that came from a set that Wizards printed to continue the lineage of the game, you can simply not collect it (which, well, is what you're doing).
I see you got the general idea behind the purpose of supplementary products correct, so I'm moving on to what I think is the cause of the heated discussions many of us are having here. I'm going to be slightly more blunt about this topic to get the point across: The way you phrased and defined your collection.
"Real/Authentic" aren't the best words to define cards you deem ideal for your collection, because the usage of the word implies cards that don't fit the ideal mold are "fake" (the opposite), which gives rise to quite the impression you feel that the cards don't deserve to exist. You probably didn't mean that, but that doesn't stop the natural impact the words themselves would give away.
I can't fault you for the choice of words, there probably isn't another word as short to describe the same feeling and you probably went for the shortest option. In fact, when you described the same feeling in the quote above in terms of "reprints-for-the-sake-of-easy-accessibility" and "printed to continue the lineage of the game", you were publishing the same feelings in a different term, but one less piercing while getting the point across.
It's not helping that your "restrictions" for your collection is not one majority of the forums has the same for, so the usage of the term "Authentic" would also immediately create the impression you think people who collect or play cards you didn't feel were "real" were playing with "false" cards. Like I said, you didn't mean that, but the usage of the word would resonate its opposite meaning when applied from the other point of view.
On top of that, in the first post, you stated "If Wizards wanted to do this properly" - that gives the others the impression you think that Wizards caters every product to the your definition of a "real" collection, which as I mentioned above, people already don't agree with. Well, from the post quoted, I can see that you understand that not all products cater to your collection.
Your point of view is not wrong, but you need to recognize that your point of view is certainly in a minority here (this thread itself proves it) and therefore you need to be a lot more precise in your wording - to be expressing your opinion that resounds the message of "Cards from Modern Masters are false cards and I do not feel that they are real Magic cards" is definitely going to get a lot of people running against your point of view, even if your original point of view would have been a largely neutral one.
Besides, most collectors would set a restriction on their collections (otherwise we'll be collecting everything), the a game constantly producing main and supplementary products (as well as promos), there are bound to be cards that don't meet our criteria and therefore don't feel "worth collecting". To word these cards as "not authentic/real" would get people who either have the card under their definition of collectible or playable (and a lot of players deem everything printed legally as playable, mind you) is going to get people up against your point of view.
I am picking on your choice of words and being very blunt about it because I can see your "actual" point of view when it comes to your collection and products (Modern Masters) that don't fall under it and that its mainly you choice of wording that's attracting a lot of opposing views.
Just take from the quote above the sentence "doesn't belong to any set from the Magic: the Gathering game". The word "game" is too broad - you have a specific definition of it that's defined by your collection, but to others, the MTG game consists of everything they can use. By their definition, Modern Masters definitely is a set that belongs to the game - their definition of "game".
I've already addressed this issue in my previous post:
Wizards has its main printers running for 4 sets per year to continuously run the "Main Storyline Authentic Magic Game" you are collecting. As the main printers are always busy, there is no way to ever reprint a past set in its entirely. Wizards caters the "side-printers" to the people you've mentioned - those who just want to play Magic and have fun.
Magic is a very large game, with many players moving in and out of the game. There are bound to be people who missed certain eras of the game and new players that never experience anything before some point. Supplementary products exist to cater to this people.
As mentioned earlier, it's impossible to replicate the experience of the "Main Storyline Authentic Magic Game" from the past - that process is still present and continuous right now in the form of Standard Sets and the printers are all busy with that. To replicate the authenticity of the past would require stopping the present authenticity to cater to that, both logistics-wise and flavor-wise (I, for one would be quite confused if we were supposedly on Zendikar and Mirrodin at the same time.) In fact, if anything, even a full direct reprint wouldn't feel real - what are we doing on Mirrodin when it's supposed to be New Phyrexia now? Okay, perhaps re-living the authenticity then wouldn't feel bad, but it's jarring since it's happening alongside the present events and we already know the results.
You are already collecting what you deem as the "Authentic Collector's Magic", which consists of the sets that rotate through Standard. You also said:
So you are a collector that determines your "Authenticity" of your collection through the "Now": Cards must be relevant to the current storyline and opened new from booster packs.
Supplementary Products don't serve this purpose - they exist either for play (Planechase/Archenemy/Conspiracy) or reprints for the sake of reprints (Modern Masters). There has never been a supplementary product catered to "the present/now" because that's what the main printers are doing. No Supplementary Product enters Standard, which is the benchmark of what you determine to collect.
Magic may be a Collectible Card Game, but that doesn't mean every product printed by Magic has to be "Collectible", the same way not every card printed will be "Playable".
I read through the thread, this post refers to various different points you've raised in the thread, I'm just quoting the first post for convenience.
So basically you're saying Modern Masters (and Supplementary Products, as well as some Core Sets) don't feel authentic to some collectors. So it just means some supplementary products aren't for some collectors.
Modern Masters was clearly not created for collectors like you, who feel that the cards they play and collect should be in line with the game's growth. But not everyone is like that. There are players who will gladly play the cheapest alternative of a card as long as it is determined legal by Wizards. There are people find fun in simply "playing" - whether it is casting Emrakul, the Aeons Torn in Rise of the Eldrazi sealed or from Modern Masters 2015 sealed makes no difference to them.
Yes, Modern Masters isn't technically an expansion set in terms of expanding the gameplay itself, but it is an expansion set if you look it from a "meta" point of view, the expansion is not in the internal factors of gameplay, but the external factors (more people playing Magic, growth externally), Modern Masters serves to expand the game to more people. That is very real.
Magic, as a game, has been growing in recent years. There are plenty of new players who are interested in Modern, but weren't around when the sets of Modern were in Standard printings. They just want to play Modern, they don't have any emotional attachments to the sets they didn't experience in Standards past. Modern Masters was designed to cater to these players.
The same way you see original card printings as a proof of your experience with the game of that time past, Modern Masters can be same mark of pride for new players "This expansion symbol marks the era Wizards made it possible for me to join the Modern format". A repeat that may not "feel real" to you may be someone else's first time playing with the format and it is very real to them.
EDIT: Fixed some spelling errors.
I'm not a new MTG player, having started playing since Champions of Kamigawa. I'm not exactly an outdated returning player, since even during my inactive periods of playing MTG, I try to attend at least pre-release events and keep up with the general updates of Magic. I'm not new to MTGS either, I had accounts during the separate periods of time when I was active (or tried to be active) in MTG, but still ended up lurking more than posting each time, eventually forgetting about them. I'm thankful for MTGS for not having a strict one-account policy, so I could rejoin this great community each time.
The last time I played Standard was during Alara-Zendikar Standard, with a Jund deck. Modern-wise, I intended start off with a Pod deck since I had most of the cards (from the "leftovers" which I didn't sell when they were released and in Standard) and slowly acquire the remaining ones, but with the banning of Birthing Pod, that plan was halted. I was an active EDH player when the first set of Commander Decks were released. Eventually, due to several factors, I ended up building more decks than playing, and then conceptualizing more decks than even building them. Admittedly, I got lazier to attempt to rejoin constructed formats over time.
I fared slightly better in Limited, where I at least attended one pre-release per set. Nothing like what I used to do (All the available pods as long as I had the time that day), but considering the recent changes to the pre-release formats, I doubt I'll regain that level of playing for the time being. I seldom do pack-drafting, but I'm in a small group that manages its own cube, so I do get drafting experience, just not often with the traditional packs.
Several factors had made me decide to be less active in Magic then, and even after those factors weren't around, laziness crept in and I didn't really bother returning to active Magic. I'm trying to change that and so here I am (again). At least this time I returned with a plan of some sort after observing the overall Magic scene:
- I'll probably opt for a "Podless Pod" deck for Modern, likely leaning towards the Collected Company decks. Eventually, I might build a proven Tier-1 Deck, probably Affinity, but that's further down the line.
- For Standard, I might just go for something cheap but viable, most likely a Mono-Red deck of sorts (those are usually the cheaper ones regardless of era).
- Well, I consolidated my EDH ideas and decks before I dared to take this step, so I'm left with acquiring some cards I need for those decks.
- I'm not going to increase my Limited play by that much, since I want to concentrate on boosting my Constructed Magic Activeness.
Okay, this turned out to be more of a self-motivation post for myself to get back to active Magic than an introduction, but still, whatever it takes to get the engine going.