Post examples of power creep over the years.
do you even know what power creep means?
1 requires no colours, 2 requires a single colour, 3 requires 3 colours.
Colourless into mono into tri. The more logical frame for the next step would be a five-coloured Rhino of Alara..
>>46355800
7 cmc for a 4/5 trample. 5 cmc for a 4/4 trample. 4 cmc for a 4/5 trample lifesteal 3.
>>46355809
Which would be a 6/6 trample with something like "Each opponent sacrifices a creature. You return a creature from discard to play for every creature sacrificed this way".
>>46355869
You cannot possibly be this dense. I've seen basalt less dense than you're acting.
>>46355903
Competitive play you can easily get three or four colors in a deck with the right lands since competitive is really the only place where you'll find tri-color decks.
>>46355958
this is both beside the point and factually incorrect
>>46355754
>card
>has no colored cost
>costs more as a result
>card
>has one colored cost
>doesn't have to cost that much as a result
>card
>requires three colors to be cast
>is cheaper as a result
I don't see the problem
Intentional rebalancing between instant-sorceries and creatures is not the same as power creep
>>46355958
Putting aside for the moment that you're spouting nonsense, even if this was true it is also irrelevant. More (non-dual) colours = harder to cast = has to be stronger to be competitive. How many colours tournament-goers use doesn't change this.
Volcanic hammer versus lightning bolt.
Counterspell vs Cancel
WAIT A SECOND
>>46356131
>later card is worse
How is this power creep?
>>46355754
will-forged golem and fusion elemental
OOOOOHHHHH POWER CREEP
Serra angel versus pic. New set has demons right?
We all know that Magic doesn't really have power creep so much as power pendulum. Sometimes we get a faster Standard, sometimes slower.
But it is true that rare creatures have gotten a lot better. I'd argue that common creatures nowadays are just as bad (or thereabouts) as the creatures in Ice Age, Legends, Mercadian Masques or whatever. Rare creatures, however, started drastically improving in power sometime around Onslaught - Mirrodin, and that power just increased over time.
Nowadays there is a huge gap in power between rarities. Take any set and look at what kind of creatures you can cast for, say, 4 mana at common, uncommon, rare and mythic rare. A common 4 mana creature is likely a 3/3 or 2/4 with a positive but often useless ability. A rare 4 mana creature is like 4/4 minimum, has evasion, gives you card advantage just by coming into play or attacking, and no drawbacks of any kind (except the price tag).
In the same block compare Phyrexian Hulk to Wurmcoil Engine, or Stitcher's Apprentice to Snapcaster Mage.
I'm not saying that those cards are totally broken or anything, I mean come on even Phyrexian Obliterator didn't really see any Standard play. I'm just saying it's kinda messed up when you look at the differences.
>>46356486
More examples of commons and rares of the same set with same mana cost doing completely different things?
>>46356547
Are you disagreeing with something? I know Limited commons have their uses... in Limited.
>>46356610
Nope. Just looking for examples from sets to see the disparity.
>>46355754
>power creep
>Magic
MTG has clearly decreased in power over the years, overall, which is made clear by the fact the most broken cards were all printed in Alpha, the first set, and most of the rest come from older sets.
This can be initially misleading to many new players who see the old creatures in comparison with the new and think WTF! These creatures are so much better and so much cheaper!
While this is true, what they often don't realise (I mean I certainly didn't) is that while creatures have increased in power over the years (most of the good creatures are modern legal[or at least have to be banned out of modern]) most other cards (most noticeable artifacts, instants and sorceries) have decreased massively in power with the best examples being NOT modern legal.
This isn't a hard and fast rule, sets and blocks increase and decrease in power as the years go by, and broken cards get printed by mistake, but overall the truly "broken" shit resides in the past.
>>46356670
Well it isn't hard to look up stuff like that in Gatherer.
For example. Ephara's Warden: 4 mana common, 1/2, totally useful ability in some games (though Theros limited tends to pump out single big creatures so Warden can't tap those). Dawnbringer Charioteers: 4 mana rare, 2/4 flying, grants you minimum of 2 life each time you swing, grows bigger when you cast spells on it. You might ask whether the tap ability and slightly easier mana cost really justifies -1/-2 and loss of flying and lifelink.
Or another example. Dutiful Attendant versus Grim Haruspex. One is 3 mana for a 1/2 creature that gives you a single Raise Dead. The other is 3 mana for a 3/2 creature that is also a card drawing engine and has morph so you can surprise your opponent with card advantage. Guess which one is common and which is rare.
>>46356700
Basically this. Early magic had no sense of right or wrong. Take an extra turn for 1U? What could go wrong with that?
>>46355754
>retard: the thread
>>46356946
Speaking of that, would a extra-turn spell and pic give you infinite extra turns?
>>46356946
Well Richard Garfield never thought that people would hoard enough cards to have several of those broken blue cards. They were rare. Besides it's pretty cool that Magic has these powerful relics.
>>46356422
Have fun vs Maze of Ith
>>46356983
yes
>>46356983
Yes, in Casual frustrate your playgroup with Exhaustion, Time Warp, Walk the Aeons and that kind of stuff. Win with Darksteel Reactor for maximum lulz.
>>46357044
Oh. Was it ever used in standard or modern to your knowledge?
>>46357022
Both Angels have the same interaction against Maze of Ith...
>>46357071
Beacon of Tomorrows was printed in the same block, so theoretically it was Standard legal for a bit.
But nobody played it, because it sucked. The sheer amount of anti-Artifact floating around just made it unplayable.
>>46357071
I think Standard only had Beacon of Tomorrows which was much too slow against Affinity, which was the reigning deck back then. Modern has a janky extra turn deck but it doesn't need Panoptic Mirror because there are so many extra turn effects that you can just play a new one each turn instead of recycling the same one with the Mirror.
>>46357134
Ah. Well beacon of immortality and pic would be an instant win right?
>>46357172
Sure and a combo like that was actually Standard legal with False Cure, but again, nobody played it because it was too janky.
>>46357172
Yes it would.
>>46357220
>>46357256
Thanks. Was trying to build a casual deck for my group from my dad's old massive card collection.
>>46357303
Good luck!
>>46357303
>my dad's old massive card collection.
>People young enough to have MtG-playing parents are old enough to post here
>>46357352
>1998 was 18 years ago
Where did all this time went?
>>46357352
Dad's been playing since 1996 and has at least 40,000 cards in the collection. I think he got hooked on it after meeting my mom.
>>46357414
So, you played MtG a lot in your childhood then?Polite Sage
One of the biggest spots in the "Power Creep" discussion is that cards aren't in a vacuum.
So for instance Craw Wurm is often seen as a 6/4 for 6. An under powered card for six mana. That you have to wait until turn six or later to player. Of course back in 1993, It was more like: Turn two for that 6/4. Land x2, Lotus. Turn three if you really had to grind it out and wait with only dark rituals. And these were not rare instances at all. Of course back then it was Clockwork Beast who was the chase card.
Card power level isn't in a vaccum. We don't have Lotus anymore, Modern doesn't even have Dark Ritual or show and tells to easily power out stuff. So now we're realizing that big creatures just AREN'T being cast without making them cheaper. Mid-power-level creatures weren't being played at all til.
WotC is countering this with the new "Better" creature wave in recent years.
>>46357436
Yeah. But I've never gotten a solid group since three or four years ago. It was mostly my mom, dad, and I picking out random decks from storage and playing a game together for family night.
Polite sage.
:^)
>>46355869
That's not how the mana curve works for multicolored spells.
First card is not limited to any color and can be played in any mono colored deck.
Second card is limited to having green mana spent to cast it.
Third card has three mana types for it. Now, when it comes to the mana curve, multicolored cards can tack on an additional mana to it's cost per adoption all color it has, due to the likelihood of having two or three or four different colors to cast said spell.
So, in the mana curve of a deck, Siege Rhino wouldn't be seen as a 4 cmc card. It would be seen as a 6 cmc card. As this accounts for you needing all three colors to cast this retard from your hand.
>>46357884
Why don't they just re-print lightning bolt?
>>46358065
because it is a pretty high power level card and would dominate standard
>>46358089
Doesn't it already dominate any deck that does damage in modern? Also I thank god that it's a common and only $2. I'd hate for it to have been a uncommon and the prices be $10 a pop.
>>46358140
Modern is actually bolt-free at the moment due to the Eldrazi menace.
Look at that power creep!
>>46358302
good riddance counterspells are so unfun :(
>>46358331
Agreed. They're the most powerful and convenient cards in the game.
>oh you wanna cast that 4/4 for 6 guy?
>Kills it for 2 mana
>Oh you wanna cast a instant?
>Blocked for one mana
>Oh you got your wincon out for he first time in four games?
>Nope
The only way to beat it is to either play a green hexproof counter-immune deck or play a blue deck.
>>46357172
For awhile this was in standard alongside \tainted remedy.
>>46358473
>>46358331
Wizard's target audience nowadays, ladies and gentlemen.
EDH players man...
I used to have to play against a deck with multiples of this piece of shit. Go ahead and tell me power has increased over time.
Post the most famous fuckups wizards have committed by printing a overpowered card.
>>46356934
It's almost like they balance cards around limited. Shocking I know.
>>46360486
>>46360486
in order of level of fuckup
Memory Jar
the entire Urza's block
Power Nine
Jace the Wallet Sculptor
Skullclamp
Arcbound Ravager
Sensei's Top
(on a side note, Jitte is banned in modern? When did that happen?)
>>46360851
>on a side note, Jitte is banned in modern? When did that happen?
Since the format was announced.
This card was probably the best thing that happened to RG decks back when it was standard legal. Just blast your own creatures to buff them up.
>>46360486
>>46360851
Honorable mentions:
Delver
Treaure Cruise
Dig Through Time
Snapcaster Magefetchlands
>>46356946
It wasn't broken then though, you simply attacked with craw wurm again. It's because of power creep, and because of new cards that are extremely ridiculous with a few of the old cards that people think the original is broken.
>>46360486
Tarmogoyf, that is all
>>46355754
Except this isn't an example of power creep, it's an example of cost and the importance of the color wheel.
Colorless always costs more for the same effect because it allows you to ignore the color wheel. Certain colors shouldn't have access to large creatures at low cost without a major drawback (ie. black and red) so to balance this out they make colorless cards cost in line with the slowest colors. Also colorless means it goes into any deck. That ease of play means it should be slower to play.
Green is cool with big creatures at 5 mana. It's actually there thing. So no real issue here. And the fact that it costs 1G means you have to splash green or limit your deck to 1 color. Drawbacks to compensate for 2 colorless off the cost
Multi-color is hard. This card asks for 3 specific mana meaning it works in very specific decks or works irregularly. That drawback reduces the cost because it's very possible you will have 4 or 5 mana and still not be able to play the card.
/tg/ too baited to turn this into a funny meme. shaking my head at you all
>>46361056fetchlands are fucking cancerous but people won't agree to that as the whole decks revolves around stacking fetches.
>>46355754
Force of Rhino
3UU
Flash, trample
You may discard a blue card from your hand and pay 1 life instead of paying its mana cost
When flash of rhino enters play counter target spell and target player loses 3 life and you gain 3 life
4/5
>maro plz
>>46361056
>>46361633
I hope to one day see fetchlands banned in Modern.
First to basking in the wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Then to witness the format improve once the cancer is cut out.
Suddenly different archetypes will have to weigh the decision of which types of duel lands best synergizes with their deck, instead of sticking to the same cookie-cutter approach of tons of fetches, a few shocklands, and just enough basics to guarantee that you get a land when your creatures get pathed and to provide a plan B to bloodmoon.I know that they will never be banned.I also already have my playsets of fetches and shocklands. I just know cancer when I see it
>>46358473
I don't like you
> most powerful and convenient cards in the game.
Except no
Counterspells are very specific forms of defensive play with a lot of drawbacks outside of their costs.
Counterspells are not* threats in their own. They are reactive. Your 4/4 for 6 will win you the game. My 2 cost counter can never win me the game, at best it can slow your win long enough for me to play another card that can win. (*I say mostly because there are some exceptions like mythic snake. But these aren't threats because they are counters, but because they are also something else. ie.creatures).
Counterspells also require predictive play and holding back resources on the hope your opponent plays a threat when you are prepared for it. You hold back 2 (or more) mana each turn so you can cast the counter. Meaning control players are often faced with the choice of holding back their own threats to have the chance to counter an opponent's threat. Unlike say removal which can be done at any time after a card is on the table.
So counters aren't threats like creatures, aren't flexible like removal. They require skill to play predictively. They are FAR from the most powerful and convenient
>>46355809
>>46355890
Also needs lower CMC, which will be hard to do in five colors.
So like (W/U)(R/B)G or something.
>>46360851
You forgot pic related.
>>46360721
I still can't believe they printed this on a card. What were they thinking?
>>46362853
Not to mention a permission control deck flat looses to things like sligh, and for the most part storm. People who dont like countermagic should not be playing this game.
>>46360721
I have one of these in foil. Shit is cash money.
>>46356983
This combo is in the Duels of the Planeswalkers 2013 "Crosswinds" deck. You can also imprint during your upkeep in response to the trigger. You can also imprint Rite of Replication and still pay the kicker. Another combo in that same deck is Archaeomancer and Followed Footsteps getting back Time Warp.
>>46357884
That smily face is quickly becoming one of the most infuriating things on this site.
>>46365782you expected smiley face didnt you?
>>46365806BUT IT WAS ME, DIO
>>46365832
did you expect dio?BUT IT WAS ME BATTO
>>46358473
Or play Cavern of Souls.
>>46365868
sorry, meant to spoiler image
>>46361633
>>46362813
Well to be fair there are decks that don't play fetches in Modern.
>>46361056
Fetchlands, if they were uncommon or (god forbid) common, would have been fine. As they are, I have no desire to shell out 80 dollars for 4 lands cards. However, because I do not want to shell out 80 dollars for 4 land cards, my decks are markedly worse.
>>46361267
I recon you haven't seen anyone playing 15mins to retake their turn and untapping all the moxes and play some more ancestral recall and some more time walks and maybe finally will grand slam your ass.
I would say it was pretty broken even then.
>>46356422
Vigilance really is that good, dude.
>>46365936
Generally those are outliers like mono-colored decks, or decks whose most prominent cards are basically colorless like affinity, tron, and eldrazi.
If you're running multi-color, and you're not running some jank budget build, then you're running fetch/shocks 99% of the time.
>>46360486
Jace, Vryn's Prodigy is standard legal and $100.
That's a fuck up, impossible to deny.
>>46356296
Exactly, fuckwit.
>>46357884
I like lightning strike desu
>>46365320
mono green is the only color that doesnt have a counterspell, its not a coincidence counterspells arent getting reprinted. Wizards is rebalancing the game around a fairbcolor like green instead of the old paradigm of blue being artificially important.
>>46367998
>>46367998
>>46368036
In fact Mono Green had a Stifle before Blue did.
Red's best one mana cost drop?
>>46369547
Doesn't have haste.
Useless outside of standard rotation and casual.
??
:^)
>>46369547
dies to mogg fanatic
>>46369662
everything dies to mogg fanatic
doesn't mean birds of paradise is a bad card
>>46356422
>Mythic vs uncommon
Really? Goddamm I hate this board sometimes
>>46362853
I don't like counter spell because ofthat one asshole who never played to win and just to keep me from winning. I put up with that shit for two months before his work schedule changed and started forcing him to miss. Good riddanceKyle, our games are much more fun without you.
Yes I am still a pillar of salt over this
>>46370117
>excusing power level based on rarity
I hate this board sometimes too.
>>46357089
Maze specifically needs to untap the creature, vigilance negates it.
>>46370366
The whole point of rarity is (apparently) to print more powerful cards. You can't really judge rares/Mythics on the same scale as commons/uncommons.
>>46370386
I don't care that this is bait.
You're wrong. Vigilance has no bearing on Maze of Ith.
Why isn't anyone posting actual creep?
Durkwood Boars -> Charging Rhino -> Tajuru Pathwarden
http://magiccards.info/query?q=mana%3D4G+tou%3D4+r%3Acommon+c%21g&v=card&s=cname
Or this: Berserkers of Blood Ridge -> Bonebreaker Giant -> Cinder Hellion
http://magiccards.info/query?q=mana%3D4R+tou%3D4+r%3Acommon&v=card&s=cname
>>46370536
>human berserker
>giant
>hellion
One of those types doesn't have tribal synergy, try again.
First one is legit powercreep though, which is a good thing because the old sucked dick.
Why people compare commons to mythic?
>>46360688
They don't though. They put tons of shit that breaks limited in half at rare instead of mythic (see Pack Rat) because it's not as desirable for constructed. Limited is just a useful smokescreen to draw attention away from how bad they're ass fucking you.
>>46370610
Goblin Hero -> Goblin Roughrider -> Boggart Brute
http://magiccards.info/query?q=r%3Acommon+t%3Acreature+mana%3D2R+tou%3D2+t%3Agoblin&v=card&s=cname
Riot Piker -> Zada's Commando
http://magiccards.info/query?q=r%3Acommon+t%3Acreature+mana%3D1R+o%3Afirst+pow%3D2&v=card&s=cname
>>46370117
Serra Angel was a rare in seventh through tenth edition. It was also once considered too good for standard.
>>46370117
>serra angel
>uncommon
how new are you
>>46370610
Common creatures are getting stupid big.
>>46370386
>remove it from combat
It doesn't matter if the creature untaps or not. It's removed from combat. End of story.
>>46362947
No, that makes it easier to cast, not harder. That's just tri-colored
>>46372478
The creature isn't actually removed from combat. Damage to and from it is prevented.
>>46366807
Nope. Price aside, fetches cause a ludicrous amount of shuffling in every damn game. Even players who are actually good at shuffling lose 2-3 minutes per round, and poor shufflers can take up to a cumulative 5 minutes shuffling off of fetches. That's a full 10% of your match time just fapping away with your library. And the power of fetches is such that even poor shufflers have no real choice but to use them.
I've recently been playing a near mono-blue deck whose only non-basics are a few of the m10 checklands, and the difference is night and day. Shuffling is the big problem with fetches, on top of their price and ubiquity.
>>46358065
Given the average intelligence of posters in this thread, this is probably bait, but on the off chance it's not: Lightning bolt is the strongest burn spell they're comfortable printing. The problem with having lightning bolt in a format is that every other burn spell will always be second best, and most decks will only run bolt. It's more interesting to have a variety of burn spells with different roles, so control decks may play magma jet, while burn decks may favour lightning strike, while midrange decks are more into roast.
>>46370690
>>46372420
So because a shitty card that was literally never played in any format it was ever legal in -even the one it was first printed in- exists, printing strictly better cards is bad? The fact that Brute is still barely playable in draft speaks volumes about how utterly, irredeemably shit Goblin Hero is.
The existence of shitty cards should not prevent them from printing slightly less shitty cards (heaven forbid they print good cards).
>>46373021
Magic should be about slamming vanilla 2/2s into each other. No spells, no interaction. :^)
>>46358033
No, if I'm laying out a curve, in putting siege rhino at four. Mana bases are consistent enough that your color argument is irrelevant to the format as it is today.
what the fuck is up with this
>>46373222
>unplayable junk
>stapled to an overcosted, mediocre spell
I don't see a problem here. Having choices is good for magic as a whole.
>>46373021
Power creep is power creep. Bonebreaker for example was a perfectly acceptable late pick in draft.
Commons getting bigger means people expect more from commons. Which means commons have to become even better to keep up. That's power creep for you.
Commons really only matter for limited, but if your commons end up being as big as your rares, people expect rares to be even bigger.
>>46373375
>Commons getting bigger means people expect more from commons. Which means commons have to become even better to keep up.
No, it really doesn't.
>>46358302
>>46357884
>>46359244
power has increased over time
>>46373652
Gauntlet is arguably better. Being harder to remove and all.
>>46373706
Artifact removal is usually cheeper than creature removal. Crypt Ghast isn't EASIER to remove: it's MORE LIKELY to be removed, since it's a creature (and thus a better card)
rarity difference aside
explain this planeswalkertards
>>46373554
You say that as though they don't print strictly better sorceries and instants at common.
Like, look at Inspiration or Weave Fate vs. Comparative Analysis.
Or Slaughter Cry Vs. Sure Strike.
>>46373885
That one is actually pretty easy, protection from multicolored isn't all upside, you can't enchant him with Armadillo Cloak for example.
And Gideon is legendary, a big drawback on a 1 drop, ask Isamaru.
>>46373885
Its like magic has been around for 20+ years and the game slowly evolves or something! You're really onto something here anon.
>>46356296
lightning bolt was in alpha, dumbass
>>46373939
Really depends on your definition of power creep, and whether you're looking at individual strictly better' cards, or the power level across the game as a whole. Pretty much every example in this thread so far are underpowered cards given a boost. If you look at the level of power in competitive decks, it's remarkable consistent. There are a few 'strictly betters' printed most sets, but the game overall keeps a very even course.
Mtg is the best tcg by far at managing power creep, which is probably a major contributing factor to its longevity.
>>46374019
Thereby proving his point...?
>>46374019
Did you respond to the wrong post or something?
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/starting-over-2015-01-26
[Mark Rosewater having a hypothetical conversation with Richard Garfield"
"...Power-levelwise, you misjudged the power level for spells and creatures. You made the first much too high and the latter much too low. We spent over fifteen years just trying to get those two to the same level."
I think this is a fair summary of power creep. Can anyone find examples of instants or sorceries that are as good as some of the earlier stuff?
>>46355754
Power creep exists on creatures but this is a terrible example of it. These are not at all analagous to one and other.
>>46374107
True! I can't deny that. Competitive decks are however not usually full of commons. And I know Cinder Hellion isn't gonna do shit to Standard even, but the only reason I think they can get away with Cinder Hellion is because of power creep.
Stone Golem was an uncommon, a 4/4 for 5, artifact creature. No real synergies in that limited with being an artifact, so it was just an okay end game card for the two colors that don't get big dudes or any other deck that is short on creatures.
But in this set, they wanted Eldrazi and they wanted it to be legit. So, they created Kozilek's Channeler and put him at common.
Suddenly, Bonebreaker Giant and Stone Golem look like utter trash. Better strap some abilities and call it Cinder Hellion.
Now Red gets a creature that is normally green (see Charging Rhino) and Green has to up the ante even more, so they get Tajuru Pathwarden.
All this because they have suddenly decided that any color deserves a 4/4 for 5 with upside. From now on, every card that is less than a 4/4 for 5 with upside is automatically garbage (even at common, even in limited), all because of Kozilek's Channeler.
This is a very long term thing. Very long term, but that's what power creep is.
>>46367594
I like Vigilance too but the Lifelink closes much of that gap.
>>46373885
kytheon isn't even strictly better than soldier of the pantheon, being legendary and all
>>46374204
Dig through time is better than most of, but not all of, the result stuff.
>>46374204
Obviously they don't compete with the likes of Ancestral Recall, but...
Ponder, Preordain, Thoughtseize, Abrupt Decay, and Mental Misstep are examples of fairly recently printed powerhouse instant/sorceries.
>>46374204
Expedite is a strictly better Accelerate.
Consume Spirit is a strictly better Drain Life.
Aerial Formation is a strictly better Jump.
Smelt is a strictly better Shatter.
Back to Nature is a strictly better Tranquility.
Those last 4 are all alpha cards.
>>46362007
I actually really like it, because it requires a second card, flash of rhino, to do its actual effect.
>>46370468
I can definitely compare mythics to commons and uncommons because once youre done opening the pack theyre both just cards that have to compete with one another. Once baneslayer is out of the pack it could be any rarity, but its still a 5 drop. This is all considering thay when wizards announced mythic rares in Alara block they said that they wouldnt just be better versions of what already existed, but that theyd be flavourful first, and competitive second. Now every set has numerous mythics that are the most competitively viable cards in the set (whether that be standard or modern). So in short it is petfectly fair to compare different rarities.
>>46370468
That was part of Richard Garfield's original vision for the game -- so things like the Power Nine were OK. He didn't predict that the game would become as popular as it has, nor that people would buy boxes of product and spend thousands on singles. However, once you look at Magic as a game, rarity ceases to matter (constructed tournament players don't care what rarity a card was printed at). So basically, this:
>>46374599
>>46374273
>Suddenly, Bonebreaker Giant and Stone Golem look like utter trash.
Because they were always trash. Bottom of the barrel in terms of cards people wanted to play. The bottom moving up a bit isn't so much of a problem when the top stays consistent. Furthermore, stone golem and bonebreaker are both in core sets, which operate on a lower power axis relative to 'expert level expansions'.
More to the point, power creep is a constant temptation for all tcgs. You want to sell the new set, not have people spending their money chasing cards from old sets (although you do want people to feel their old cards will retain some value, it's a balance), and the easiest way to move a new set is to have more powerful cards than the previous set. Further, not printing powerful cards means the game stagnates around the same cards. The trick then is how to manage power creep in a way that keeps the game going. Wizards is actually pretty good at this, as there's always a few cards they push to the higher power levels to be their marquee cards for a set (like gideon up here >>46373885) while the rest play it safe at a lower overall level (like your Bonebreaker Giant and Stone Golema and Cinder Hellion). Depending on the needs of the format and the mindset of R&D at the time (regarding spells vs creatures, format speed, etc), those lower level cards can be tweaked and adjusted to various levels, as long as they stay safely below the 'top level' reserved for pushed cards meant to showcase the new hotness of a given set. Next set they could print Bonebreaker Giant or Cinder Hellion, depending on what red needs in the next set, but it doesn't really matter to overall power levels because they will never, in any format, be the strongest cards you can get for 5 cmc in red (excluding perhaps pauper, and red in pauper doesn't care for 5 drops regardless).
TLDR: Yes, it's there, but to the game overall it's irrelevant, and can swing up and down as required by the set in question.
>>46361267
Dude time walk didn't even make it to revised edition
They knew it was busted right from the beginning
>>46374536
kek
>>46370628
Because after you open the pack, theyre both competing for the same slot. Or are you telling me youd use Assasinate over Heroes Downfall because Assasinate is a common?
>>46369547
Not the best, but the first 2 power red one drop without a drawback
>>46374829
I'll admit, they printed Shatter despite Smelt being fine, because they didn't want to hurt the random artifacts in that limited environment.
But I don't think "9th pick" limited card is trash. Trash are cards clearly designed to weaken a color in limited by eating up slots. Like, they confirmed Evil Presence and Defensive Stance was useless in Scars or whatever, but were printed because U and B were proved too powerful and consistent in limited.
Those cards don't even make it into decks. They go from boosters directly into the trash. Any card you would actually be willing to run, even if it is only in a limited format where you had a mediocre pool, isn't trash.
I'll admit, power creep is fine if it ebbs and flows. But the fear that they will print something like Sui-Chi at common a few sets down the line is real to me.
>>46374992
If it is sealed, you run both. If it is draft, you hope the Assasinate tables, but it won't.
If you play constructed, you bought the play set of Hero's Downfall and didn't interact with a pack at any point in time.
>>46374599
>when wizards announced mythic rares in Alara block they said that they wouldnt just be better versions of what already existed, but that theyd be flavourful first, and competitive second.
Yeah, the reason that they changed that? Market data. The "big splashy mythic that sees no competitive play" is popular and exciting for a specific subset of the player base, but there's also a portion of the player base that finds them dull. Getting a mythic instead of a rare is supposed to be exciting, not frustrating, so they moved up cards that other demographics found exciting.
Plans change. Pretending that they swore a blood oath to never have any competitive cards at Mythic is just damn stupid, especially since we know what happens when they DO swear a blood oath.
>>46373741
>it's MORE LIKELY to be removed
That's literally what easier means in this context: the odds of your opponent having a suitable answer to it are higher than with something else therefore it's easier. The manual part of placing a card for everyone to see from your hand, saying you're playing it and paying its cost etc isn't difficult.
>>46375894
What they said was that mythics wouldn't just be a list of the best cards in every set. People misunderstood that to mean 'mythics won't be good cards' and then got mad when, surprise surprise, some of them WERE when that wasn't what was said.
Wizards never changed shit with what they said about mythics, people just never actually read what they said.
Just like how they said Theros was the Greek Mythology Block that happened to have an enchantment subtheme and everyone decided that meant it was The Enchantment Block where are all the Enchantment Matters cards HOW DARE YOU LIE TO US
>>46371956
Older than you, apparently. It was uncommon for the first several appearances.
>>46375910
>It's easier to be killed by a shark than by a coconut
>It's more likely to be killed by a coconut than by a shark
They're not the same thing.
>>46370497
huh, when did that happen?
The original ruling was the opposite
>>46355754
but that's perfectly fine
>>46378195
It actually IS the same as gaining life, by the rules. 'Double target player's life total' is treated exactly the same as 'target player gains life equal to their life total', only uses a lot less words.
It's even in the Rulings section on Beacon of Immortality
>>46377949
Since 1995 senpai
>>46378285
incredibly odd given how anal MTG is about wording.
given there is a difference between life damage, and life loss.
I vaguely remember a ruling that actually is the opposite of beacon of immortality, but I cant remember what card.
>>46378455
Well the difference between damage and life loss is that damage causes life loss but life loss isn't necessarily damage.
In other words, if a player's life total goes down, then that player has lost life -- however, that loss of life wasn't necessarily caused by damage.
It's a little bit different with life gain, as we aren't using a word with baggage like 'damage' when we talk about life gain. So if a player's life total goes up, then that player has gained life. Doubling your life total is increasing your life total, thus it is life gain.
>>46378455
Damage can be prevented
Life loss cannot
>>46378993
>>46379052
I am quite aware of the difference, I was just using it to point out that MTG has very specific terms,and are usually very clear on the functionality of cards.
>>46378392
I'm pretty sure that's not true. there was a point at which untapping a creature intrinsically removed it from combat, this was alongside mono artifacts and other goofy shit of a bygone era. I'm pretty sure the sixth edition rules change undid this.
>>46379097
If you treat magic text as if every word is it's own specific keyword, magic becomes a lot easier to understand.
>>46379115
Fourth Edition changed the way this sort of thing worked.
>Can target a non-tapped attacking creature such as the Serra Angel. Both parts of the effect will happen even if one part fails. So if it fails to untap the card, it will still make the creature unable to deal or receive damage. [Duelist Magazine #5, Page 22]
http://www.wizards.com/magic/generic/official/Rulings/rule-cards.html
Duelist #5 came out June 1995
>>46367998
http://magiccards.info/query?q=c%21g+o%3A%22counter+target%22&v=card&s=issue
>>46369547
That's not Goblin Guide, anon.
>>46355754
Yes, let's discuss power creep over the years.
>>46381065
Dispatch is dope as fuck though. Getting metalcraft is easy as hell in the right decks.
>>46381065
>Last Breath
>Newer than Dispatch
>>46381423
I'm not saying it isn't dope in the right deck. Anything outside of affinity-type decks and it's shit though. Sorry.
>>46381485
Forgive my trangressions, and take pic related.
>>46357352
my kids got awesome cards from me
>>46360721
>le island is op meme
god damn, this board.
I hope you slip and fall while doing laundry, and you accidentally swallow a mouthful of bleach.
I hope you wake up tomorrow with cancer in your dick, and they have to chop your dick off.
I hope your family wakes up with a flesh eating virus tomorrow and the only cure is incest while you watch.
I hope you get a papercut on your wrist while playing magic and bleed out.
I hope your roof collapses while you're sleeping and slowly suffocates you.
I hope you get incurable testicular torsion.
Kill yourself. Honestly.
>>46355789
>>46355800
>>46355903
>>46355989
>>46356009
ITT: Autism
Power creep literally just means power creeping ahead. You cannot fucking say that no-name rhino is equal to a card with wide spread competitive play. Your whole "strictly better" better thing is useless. It is just a meme that you discovered when you were 15 years old and now you jerk yourself off over it so you can feel LOGICAL or something.
Deathrite shaman is not "stictly better" than slitherhead, but it is a million times ACTUALLY better. Elite Vanguard is "strictly better" than Eager Cadet, but is only slightly more useful.
But this is really gonna blow your mind and crush your logic-faggotry: If there was a 4/4 for W, it would not be strictly better than Eager Cadet. W-w-why? Dies to Smite the Monstrous. There. You have tiny case in which the worse card is better. Suddenly the 4/4 isn't "strictly better" by your own underdeveloped child-logic. You can't judge cards in vacuum because the criteria upon which they are better are worse cannot fucking exist in a vacuum. "Strictly" speaking all of the cards in the game are completely equal. But if one card is better than another in most situations and in high level play, then it is definitely literally better.
Don't go calling people dense when you yourself are obsessed with some little abortion of logic that you rabidly shill all over the Internet on anyone who dares to claim that Tarmogoyf is a power creeped Grizzly Bear ("how dare you? It is technically a sidegrade. Ugg you are so dense").
>inb4 mods reward my world-class philosophy lecture with a ban
>>46382143
In a vacuum, wouldn't Dryad Arbor or Memnite be the best cards since they're the only 2 cards that can kill the opponent without requiring any other cards?
>>46382143
>gets collectively BTFO by /tg/
>yous guise r on the autism spectrum xD
>I'm gonna ignore card building logic and talk about how some other card dies to removal, that means you guys are talking about cards in a vacuum!
Go ahead and try to make whatever rhino you think would be appropriate to come next in the Custom Card General. I'm sure you'll be corrected until you find what you're looking for there.
>>46382143
>If there was a 4/4 for W, it would not be strictly better than Eager Cadet. W-w-why? Dies to Smite the Monstrous.
But then your opponent just wasted four mana to kill a one mana creature. Even in a vacuum that's still a better card.
>>46382355
>responding to one samefag shitting up a small part of a thread
>COLLECTIVELY BTFO
>I don't understand what you wrote
>that means you were wrong
>>46382210
Kek :^) well done
>>46382408
You can't play the game in a vacuum.
>>46364802
They thought it was a good idea at the time. They thought a 0-mana counterspell might be healthy for the format. They might've been right. Thurns out, though, that a colorless counterspell is a bad idea. As usual the game falls the fuck apart when you bypass the color pie.
>>46381864
dude chill
>>46382143
>>inb4 mods reward my world-class philosophy lecture with a ban
>expecting to be banned for being le mean to other people
>on 4chan
What website are you even from? I think they probably miss you there.
