there seems to be an inconsistency with coldsnap boosters and snow basics: basics have the rarity 'basic land'; basics show up in boosters; the booster field does not list 'land'.
So from my research, it appears that snow covered lands can sometimes replace a common in a booster of Coldsnap.
However I could not determine whether this is limited to 1 snow covered land max, or if you could potentially get more than 1.
Does anyone have any info on whether or not Coldsnap boosters can have more than 1 snow covered land?
I add new sets to MTGJSON once Wizards adds them to Gatherer. They have not yet done that yet for Dragons of Tarkir. They usually add new sets anywhere from a few days to a week or more before the official release date of a set. I usually have it on mtgjson within 24 hours of it hitting gatherer.
Quick question... In the wake of MTGImage going down, will the imageName field still be populated with a unique value?
I'm interested in this, too, as I found a way to use this field (not to mention UID's are based on this field).
Yes. The imageName field will remain just as is for all current and future sets. I will be populating it with a unique image name for future sets just as I have in the past, so yes, it can still be used as part of UIDS. So in short, the closing of mtgimage.com will not be affecting the 'imageName' field in any way.
MTGJSON doesn't currently support foreign language only cards. Thus MTGJSON only includes a set if an English version exists on Gatherer or MagicCards.info as this is where I get the data from. The set you mentioned does exist on magiccards.info but only in Japanese (http://magiccards.info/mps/jp.html) and mtgjson doesn't have support to parse this yet.
What about over sized cards, and gold bordered cards?
It's all about where I can get the data from. I don't want to be in the work of manually maintaining sets. So I only include data that I can automate to some degree by fetching the data programatically from an online source. Right now those two sources are gatherer and magiccards.info. I have a 'partial' parser for magiclibrarities but do not have support for exclusively using magiclibrarities as a source of card listings. I see that magiclibrarities does have info on the oversized cards so I could add support to MTGJSON for them. I've added it on the to-do list, but it's not a very high priority right now.
I'm going to have a Magic website up and running in about 2 months. I've been using your JSON and Image files and I'd like to thank you publicly on my website so I was wondering if I should put you up as Sembiance or if you wanted me to use another name?
Thank you for the awesome work!
Hello
You don't need to thank me by name, you can just say like 'thanks to mtgjson.com and mtgimage.com' Or if you don't want to put links, that's fine too, no need for thanks, your reply here is enough
Would it be possible to add to this database which sets have been release online? I know that there is an "onlineOnly" property, but I don't see any way to identify sets that have never been release online vs sets that have been release on both.
It's something I could think about adding in the future. I have added it to my to-do list.
I'm trying to do a statistical regression analysis on all cards to figure out the intrinsic cmc of all abilities and properties of cards and I'm basing this on your data. Is there any chance that rarity and set will be added to each card?
In the 'AllSets.json' file, every card has a rarity and each card is part of a set, so you have all the information you need right there.
Gatherer finally got around to adding "Duel Decks: Anthology" to the site. They did it a bit odd though, they split it up into four different sets with different set names and set codes:
DD3_DVD: Duel Decks Anthology, Divine vs. Demonic
DD3_EVG: Duel Decks Anthology, Elves vs. Dragons
DD3_GVL: Duel Decks Anthology, Garruk vs. Liliana
DD3_JVC: Duel Decks Anthology, Jace vs. Chandra
This is even stranger since they were not sold as separate sets, but all together as one boxed set.
I have two choices.
1. I can list them on MTGJSON and MTGIMAGE as separate sets
- I would continue the tradition of keeping the set names identical to those on gatherer (eg Duel Decks Anthology, Divine vs. Demonic)
- I would continue the tradition of keeping the set icon as official as possible (eg DD3_DVD)
- Each 'sub' deck has a different icon which after checking just one set, appears to be identical to the original duel deck icons they re-released
2. I can combine them into a "Duel Decks: Anthology" set:
- I would have to add new fields to the JSON at set level to represent the fact that this set is represented by multiple different sets on gatherer, probably "gathererNames" : ["Duel Decks Anthology, Divine vs. Demonic", ...] and "gathererCodes" : ["DD3_DVD", "DD3_EVG", ...]
- I would have to introduce a new field on MTGJSON per card that represents the 'deck' or 'subset' that the card belongs to. This is something that's been on my todo list for a while, to do for other cards in other boxed sets
- I would have to introduce a new way on MTGIMAGE to represent multiple different set icons for a single set. This would probably correspond to that new 'deck' or 'subset' field
- I would need to add aliases for each of the sub-set codes gatherer uses on both MTGJSON JSON download and MTGIMAGE zip downloads. I should also probably update the web page to reflect this.
I'm really not in love with either approach and I'm not sure why Wizards decided to make this change, a departure from previous boxed sets that contain theme decks.
I would like some opinions from some of you folks as to which option to go with.
Option #1 is the easiest, would keep things less complicate and would follow how gatherer does it, which is something my projects have always striven for in the past. I am leaning towards this option, but not entirely convinced.
Hey, have you thought any more about restructuring starter cards? I mentioned a while back how some M15 cards are only in starter decks, and how it might make sense to also integrate the 8th Editions starter cards with 8th Edition, and the same with 9th. Or at least have some way to distinguish M15 starter cards from the normal cards.
I have been on a VERY long extended active vacation out of town, almost 3 months, ugh that's a long time. So I haven't had much free brain cycles to give it much though. The vacation is finally coming to a close now, thank goodness. I sure do miss home and my computer workstation
I just gave it some more thought. and I am leaning towards putting the 8th and 9th starter cards into the 8th and 9th sets with a flag: "starter" : true
I would also give this flag to the M15 cards that are the starter cards and future sets that do the same thing.
It means deleting the 8th and 9th starter sets from the website, which might cause some minor headaches for those that use this data, but it's better than always having to create 'starter' sets for future core sets. Also I'll need to make a note for the 'booster' field in the docs that any cards marked 'starter' shouldn't be included in any booster generation.
Assuming nobody comes up with an argument to change my mind, I'll be doing this work in a about a week or so. Thanks again for pinging me on this and reminding me
Whoops! That one slipped through the cracks. It never appeared on Gatherer or MagicCards.info, so I didn't see it. I will add it in a few days, sorry for the delay.
So from my research, it appears that snow covered lands can sometimes replace a common in a booster of Coldsnap.
However I could not determine whether this is limited to 1 snow covered land max, or if you could potentially get more than 1.
Does anyone have any info on whether or not Coldsnap boosters can have more than 1 snow covered land?
I add new sets to MTGJSON once Wizards adds them to Gatherer. They have not yet done that yet for Dragons of Tarkir. They usually add new sets anywhere from a few days to a week or more before the official release date of a set. I usually have it on mtgjson within 24 hours of it hitting gatherer.
Yes. The imageName field will remain just as is for all current and future sets. I will be populating it with a unique image name for future sets just as I have in the past, so yes, it can still be used as part of UIDS. So in short, the closing of mtgimage.com will not be affecting the 'imageName' field in any way.
Added.
MTGJSON doesn't currently support foreign language only cards. Thus MTGJSON only includes a set if an English version exists on Gatherer or MagicCards.info as this is where I get the data from. The set you mentioned does exist on magiccards.info but only in Japanese (http://magiccards.info/mps/jp.html) and mtgjson doesn't have support to parse this yet.
It's all about where I can get the data from. I don't want to be in the work of manually maintaining sets. So I only include data that I can automate to some degree by fetching the data programatically from an online source. Right now those two sources are gatherer and magiccards.info. I have a 'partial' parser for magiclibrarities but do not have support for exclusively using magiclibrarities as a source of card listings. I see that magiclibrarities does have info on the oversized cards so I could add support to MTGJSON for them. I've added it on the to-do list, but it's not a very high priority right now.
Fixed.
It has therefore been shut down.
You can see details on: http://mtgimage.com
Hopefully they won't demand that mtgjson.com be shutdown as well, but who knows.
It has therefore been shut down.
You can see details on: http://mtgimage.com
Hello
You don't need to thank me by name, you can just say like 'thanks to mtgjson.com and mtgimage.com' Or if you don't want to put links, that's fine too, no need for thanks, your reply here is enough
It's something I could think about adding in the future. I have added it to my to-do list.
In the 'AllSets.json' file, every card has a rarity and each card is part of a set, so you have all the information you need right there.
Gatherer finally got around to adding "Duel Decks: Anthology" to the site. They did it a bit odd though, they split it up into four different sets with different set names and set codes:
DD3_DVD: Duel Decks Anthology, Divine vs. Demonic
DD3_EVG: Duel Decks Anthology, Elves vs. Dragons
DD3_GVL: Duel Decks Anthology, Garruk vs. Liliana
DD3_JVC: Duel Decks Anthology, Jace vs. Chandra
This is even stranger since they were not sold as separate sets, but all together as one boxed set.
I have two choices.
1. I can list them on MTGJSON and MTGIMAGE as separate sets
- I would continue the tradition of keeping the set names identical to those on gatherer (eg Duel Decks Anthology, Divine vs. Demonic)
- I would continue the tradition of keeping the set icon as official as possible (eg DD3_DVD)
- Each 'sub' deck has a different icon which after checking just one set, appears to be identical to the original duel deck icons they re-released
2. I can combine them into a "Duel Decks: Anthology" set:
- I would have to add new fields to the JSON at set level to represent the fact that this set is represented by multiple different sets on gatherer, probably "gathererNames" : ["Duel Decks Anthology, Divine vs. Demonic", ...] and "gathererCodes" : ["DD3_DVD", "DD3_EVG", ...]
- I would have to introduce a new field on MTGJSON per card that represents the 'deck' or 'subset' that the card belongs to. This is something that's been on my todo list for a while, to do for other cards in other boxed sets
- I would have to introduce a new way on MTGIMAGE to represent multiple different set icons for a single set. This would probably correspond to that new 'deck' or 'subset' field
- I would need to add aliases for each of the sub-set codes gatherer uses on both MTGJSON JSON download and MTGIMAGE zip downloads. I should also probably update the web page to reflect this.
I'm really not in love with either approach and I'm not sure why Wizards decided to make this change, a departure from previous boxed sets that contain theme decks.
I would like some opinions from some of you folks as to which option to go with.
Option #1 is the easiest, would keep things less complicate and would follow how gatherer does it, which is something my projects have always striven for in the past. I am leaning towards this option, but not entirely convinced.
Thoughts?
I have been on a VERY long extended active vacation out of town, almost 3 months, ugh that's a long time. So I haven't had much free brain cycles to give it much though. The vacation is finally coming to a close now, thank goodness. I sure do miss home and my computer workstation
I just gave it some more thought. and I am leaning towards putting the 8th and 9th starter cards into the 8th and 9th sets with a flag: "starter" : true
I would also give this flag to the M15 cards that are the starter cards and future sets that do the same thing.
It means deleting the 8th and 9th starter sets from the website, which might cause some minor headaches for those that use this data, but it's better than always having to create 'starter' sets for future core sets. Also I'll need to make a note for the 'booster' field in the docs that any cards marked 'starter' shouldn't be included in any booster generation.
Assuming nobody comes up with an argument to change my mind, I'll be doing this work in a about a week or so. Thanks again for pinging me on this and reminding me
Whoops! That one slipped through the cracks. It never appeared on Gatherer or MagicCards.info, so I didn't see it. I will add it in a few days, sorry for the delay.