mtg dad

@i-am-nickelbolt

gamer life as a dad since 2022 https://linktr.ee/nickelbolt

186 posts

You've said that staying on the same world for multiple sets causes some sales & enjoyment issues. Conversely, you have said in some State of Design articles that there were sets that should have been two sets (Kaldheim, Kamigawa Neon Dynasty, March of the Machine). I'm sure R&D and other teams are well aware of this. So in as vague terms as you need, how are y'all applying these lessons to try and balance these at-odds facts? And is there a pattern you see in when players want 2 vs 1 is enough?

The issue is there are sets that stuffed too much into one set, that the feedback from the players is this should have been two sets. As the bar to making two consecutive sets on the same world is so high, the solution is more often learning how to not overstuff the set in the first place.

i-am-nickelbolt

I had a thought...

What if every January set was Ravnica? (Yes I have also complained about being tired of Ravnica but just bear with me for a second...)

So I think a lot of people are worried for the identity of Magic, that it's not fantasy anymore, that it's going to all in on pop culture tropes, that UB is polluting the well, that it's jumping around and there's resonance whiplash between fuzzy animals and chainsaws and futuristic racing and space opera and hats and whatever. (And Spiderman.)

Whatever faults Ravnica might have, it is kind of the essence of the Magic experience for a bunch of reasons. From a thematic standpoint it is "classic fantasy" (yes I know this isn't technically true but it's swords, spells, low tech, etc.), the guilds are very resonant identities for the decks that people generally build: mostly picking two colors. And the guilds play in a very resonant way. Guild sets are great for drafting (pick two colors you like and go). Ravnica sets have great dual lands (would anyone complain if the shock lands were just permanently legal in Standard?)

And there's even a *good* storyline reason to keep coming back. Ravnica is trying to position itself as the hub of the multiverse. And as much as I love Foundations, being a "time agnostic set" (I believe it was called?) it's kind of a mishmash of stuff, and it's hard to parse the lore from the cards.

If you have Ravnica as the hub of the multiverse, you return every year, you have the story progress through Ravnica every year, maybe it's a travelogue set with Ravnica as one plane, or like if Avishkar and Ravnica get into a spat about who's the real hub, that's your January set. I think there's a lot of ways to do it so that it's not too *samey* but still focused on that resonant core magic experience. And I'm just using Ravnica as an example, it could be Dominaria or Zendikar, or maybe a new plane all together, but you really kind of shore up the core Magic experience with a familiar setting and familiar characters. You can sprinkle in some call-backs to recent sets, if the Omenpaths go through Ravnica you could easily have like, "Oh look, Mabel made it to Ravnica, here's a new card" or whatever, to kind of cement the idea that anything could happen in this game.

You can always point new players to the newest Ravnica set, that's where you start, that's where you pick up the story. It looks and feels like the core Magic experience. (And especially if shock lands just get printed every year, new players should just have relatively easy access to good *evergreen* mana.) It's sort of like how people interact with One Piece. One Piece has been going on forever but I don't think most new One Piece fans are going back to season 1 and watching 1000 episodes, they're just picking up with the start of whatever arc they're currently on, so, in Magic terms, that's the current Ravnica set (or whatever.)

Then you can go off and do your Duskmourns and Aetherdrifts and Edge of Eternities (and the UB stuff too) because you're always grounded by that core Magic experience coming around every January. And since it's always tied into the current story and it's not a reprint set, maybe it avoids both the "can't stay on the same plane" issue and the "core sets don't sell" issue.

Maybe this doesn't work in a world with 3 in-universe sets per year, maybe you need 4 (and just 2 UB sets) or who knows. I'm just trying to think of a way to solidify the core experience, still have room for the Duskmourns and return to Lorwyns, and still give players a good starting point.

I dunno, just a thought...

This question might be a bit of a deep cut: any insight as to why Pyroblast and Hydroblast are worded the way they are? "Target spell if it is red/blue" instead of the Red/Blue Elemental Blast wording "target red/blue spell"? It's a charming yet sometimes frustrating quirk that these nearly identical cards have really narrow metagame situations where one is better/worse than the other.

Early templating was just not consistent. It took us a few years to make default templates.

i-am-nickelbolt

I kind of figured that was the case, but it seemed kind of wild that Red Elemental Blast and Pyroblast were in consecutive sets (4th Edition and Ice Age) I just thought it was in the realm of possibility there could have been another reason.

Hi mark! I wanted to comment on your statement earlier about most planeswalkers being human so players can relate to them. That doesn’t make any sense to me. Maybe it’s just me, but planeswalkers resonate with me based on their character, not their appearance. Quintorius is one of my favorite magic characters of all time, and I can promise you I don’t look anything like him. I really don’t get why someone would have to look like a character in order to connect with them. Am I just an anomaly?

Making less human planeswalkers means making less planeswalkers that represent the diversity of humans. For people who are used to seeing themselves represented in media all the time, that might not seem like a big deal, but to people who don’t frequently have that opportunity, it can have a huge impact.

i-am-nickelbolt

Representation *is* more than just looks. However, to steal a line I saw elsewhere, it's frustrating when your representation is always metaphorical and some *always* get representation that is literal. Mark is right here.

And I see these arguments that "forcing" diversity is pandering and/or patronizing, and I get that, kinda, I guess? But then you're just arguing for the "natural" status quo. You have to force change now so that it becomes natural in the future.

A lot of this discussion has "I don't see color" vibes... Not a fan, honestly.

I noticed that you do not have a lot of planeswalkers that represent the characteristic races which is strange. There was never a prominent goblin planeswalker and daretti doesn't count because you never used him even in war of the spark. Both elves, nissa and Tyvar are no longer planeswalkers. Kiora is no longer a planeswalker so there is no merfolk. Sorin is an unknown and there is no zombie unless you count liliana as a necromancer. Why are the characteristic races not depicted as planeswalkers very often? On the other hand almost all planeswalkers are human. Humans are disportionately and unrealistically depicted as planeswalkers even over popular humanoid races.

Planeswalkers are are player analogs. And according to current data, 100% of them are human. : )

As much as possible, we want players to be able to see representations of themselves in planeswalkers.

When we have access to more planeswalkers most the popular humanoid creature types had some representation.

i-am-nickelbolt

I think human representation is important... First thing that comes to mind is something like Ashiok vs Niko or Alesha (I know Alesha isn't a Planeswalker) for gender fluid/trans representation. I think some of the representation gets lost in the case of Ashiok being not human, like it gets explained away by being non-human. That's why they're different, they aren't human. And I dunno, that feels kind of not cool? So it's good to see characters like Niko and Alesha as humans. Not having specifically human representations of diversity allows diversity to be a secondary trait, or explained by, or hand waved away by the obvious non-human nature of the character.

But at the same time, Ashiok is also really cool intrinsically, as are all non-humans in general (because they *aren't* human), so maybe it brings some eyes back over.

I would just say let's have both more human and non-human representation.

Gideon "Would wish you a good night's sleep with a kiss on the forehead" Jura and Liliana "would be passive aggressive about demanding a kiss on the forehead before going to sleep" Vess

i-am-nickelbolt

Seriously, I couldn't give a crap about Gideon the entire time he's in the game. Then he dies and he is dead *for years* and *now* I start seeing all these Liliana/Gideon shippers and now I feel sad and want Gideon back so this can just be how things are. Thanks jerks!!!

Good afternoon. I'd like to share a perspective on UB and competitive Magic.

In a previous answer, you had said that UB cards were something customizable, that you didn't have to play with them if they don't appeal to you. And that's true! What that doesn't take into account is competitive meta and the necessity of various cards. I think The One Ring is a good example; for a massive majority of Modern decks, you can significantly improve almost every deck with copies of The One Ring. If you're running an artifact-oriented deck or a control deck, you are actively hindering your deck by not playing it.

So for an audience that has been invested in formats like Modern who are faced with this power, what are they supposed to do? Personally I don't mind when my opponents play UB cards, but for players who do mind that, if they're in the same Venn overlap, they can't exactly tell an opponent in a high-stakes match to please play something else out of principle.

Thank you for listening, by the way, to all these various voices. I know that Marvel and comics mean as much to you as Magic does, and I also know you're going to get a lot of players who aren't going to be as kind in their opposition to UB. There's little middle ground at this point in Magic's present for how UB has impacted the game, but I hope that we as a player base can maintain an open perspective of personal wants vs. the larger schema.

I believe when you play competitively you accept that you'll be playing with people that are prioritizing efficiency of mechanics over creative execution.

i-am-nickelbolt

If you are really and truly invested in competitive Magic, lore should have exactly zero sway on your deck choices. A lot of "competitive Modern" players really just want to play their pet decks and complain about the state of Modern.

Does the existence of certain Magic slang affect naming? For example, would you ever create a card named Sad Robot even though that's the colloquial name for Solemn Simulacrum?

It doesn't technically prevent us, but it's a factor we'd take into account.

i-am-nickelbolt

This got me thinking... April Fool's Day Secret Lair, Universes Beyond: Magic The Gathering, where all the cards are Magic cards printed with their nicknames. Maybe do it white border? A man can dream. You can have that idea for free, Maro.

I heard a take recently; "Draft is not beginner friendly, it's definitely an enfranchised player format"

Do you think Draft is not beginner friendly?

I think Draft requires a lot of skills that beginners are traditionally weak at, but if it a new player is excited to do it, they'll figure it out. I wouldn't push a new player that isn't excited.

i-am-nickelbolt

Like all other modes of playing Magic, it depends how you approach it. If you drop a random new person into a random FNM draft, then yeah, maybe it's not great. If you are a new person and play quick draft on Arena, maybe it's better. If you are someone who wants to have fun with your friends and maybe some of them are beginners, you can draft and everyone can have a lot of fun. Table talk is only frowned upon at events with judges; talk about picks while drafting, send really good signals to the new players, let the guy next to you take back their pick if you're getting a bomb pick 4 or whatever. And don't spend much if any time talking about proper techniques and strategies. Nobody cares about that until you hook 'em.

I cube with novices pretty frequently and the first thing I tell them is, "We're all here to have fun, pick cards that make you feel happy. If you want help, ask the person next to you what they think." I want the person who goes 0-3 to have fun, and most of the time they're excited to try again.

I think people forget that this game is just intrinsically compelling. Let the game do the heavy lifting and work on facilitating fun.

Good advice.

I’ve seen people draft for the first time at FNM before, and I think the most useful things you can tell them to prevent a complete train wreck is to draft plenty of creatures, try to draft 2 colors, and play 17 lands and 23 nonlands. (And probably mention that they don't have to draft the lands for their deck — it's not obvious.)

That will set them up for having a chance to win some games.

i-am-nickelbolt

So, funny story, I was drafting Bloomburrow on Arena a month or so ago, just sitting down to pack 1 Pick 1 and my kid woke up crying. So I rushed up to comfort him and it auto picked the entire draft for me. The deck I ended up with was bad, I played it out for science (0-3) but it was functional. They just don't print unplayable cards anymore. Not to say that drafting is easy (it's not) but almost any pile you end up with will have a puncher's chance against a random opponent, and that just wasn't the case 10-15 years ago.

Before they were announced, I was hoping that if we ever got Monty Python UB cards, they'd be silver bordered. Are Universes Beyond Silver border/acorn cards doable outside the handful of MLP/Hasbro promos?

It's not off limits, but most licensees would prefer their cards have a wide a use as possible.

i-am-nickelbolt

Monty Python's Un-iverses Beyond. You can still have that one for free, Mark.

I heard a take recently; "Draft is not beginner friendly, it's definitely an enfranchised player format"

Do you think Draft is not beginner friendly?

I think Draft requires a lot of skills that beginners are traditionally weak at, but if it a new player is excited to do it, they'll figure it out. I wouldn't push a new player that isn't excited.

i-am-nickelbolt

Like all other modes of playing Magic, it depends how you approach it. If you drop a random new person into a random FNM draft, then yeah, maybe it's not great. If you are a new person and play quick draft on Arena, maybe it's better. If you are someone who wants to have fun with your friends and maybe some of them are beginners, you can draft and everyone can have a lot of fun. Table talk is only frowned upon at events with judges; talk about picks while drafting, send really good signals to the new players, let the guy next to you take back their pick if you're getting a bomb pick 4 or whatever. And don't spend much if any time talking about proper techniques and strategies. Nobody cares about that until you hook 'em.

I cube with novices pretty frequently and the first thing I tell them is, "We're all here to have fun, pick cards that make you feel happy. If you want help, ask the person next to you what they think." I want the person who goes 0-3 to have fun, and most of the time they're excited to try again.

I think people forget that this game is just intrinsically compelling. Let the game do the heavy lifting and work on facilitating fun.

Who/is there a mtg equivalent of Ronald Regan

(As in someone who fucked everything up and every issue leads back to in the lore)

Magic the Gathering tip:

i-am-nickelbolt

Well if this isn't the most factual thing I've seen today.

Why are we called "Question Marks" I thought you were the Mark here

Because you all question Mark. : )

i-am-nickelbolt

I also like the double entendre of the world "mark" in the pro-wrestling sense of being a "gullible fan," where we're all here marking out over Rosewater's ongoing Q&A.

Just wanted to say I thought Bloomburrow handled typal mechanics fantastically. I love how the creature types had impact but you didn’t feel useless playing other types with them. It both worked mechanically and fit the flavor of critters living and working together.

The secret to heavy typal appears to be building the archetypes around the type more than making "type matters" the connective tissue.

i-am-nickelbolt

I thought Bloomburrow draft was legit good. Most of the color pairs were draftable (and if you knew what you were doing, *all* the color pairs were draftable), there were sweet build-arounds, you could play more than two colors (thanks for putting in the work, Sam Black!) and I was still actively having fun after the nth draft. It's a strong set. Not an all-timer, but it was strong. B+ set.

If you just replicated this in return to Lorwyn, I'd be down for that.

There was a point where I believe you said that Kaladesh was the “most technologically developed” a plane would get. With Neon Dynasty and Duskmorn having more advanced technology and aesthetics, have these planes became the new top end for black boarder or should we expect more advanced stuff down the line?

I no longer have even a guess of what’s the top end of allowable technology.

i-am-nickelbolt

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” - Arthur C. Clarke

Why do you think early Magic had so many "mean" effects? Like, I understand underestimating the power or unfunness of single land destruction or wraths. But Winter Orb, Circle of Protection: Red, Stasis, etc. don't seem like they'd make any game fun, whether they turned out to be powerful or weak.

Richard designed the game assuming each person had access to a starter deck and six to eight booster packs. The as-fan of "mean" cards was either pretty low or the situation where it was "mean" was very conditional (meaning they were ineffective against a lot of decks).

i-am-nickelbolt

It's kind of amazing how strong color hosers are in every set, like, why would you keep printing cards like Boil and Choke? I can understand Alpha being heavy on this kind of thing, nobody knows what the game is going to turn into, there's no precedent. But like, 5 years after this game becomes a phenomenon, you're still printing Boil and Circle of Protections are still in the core sets?? You look at the early years of the game and sometimes you wonder how anyone ever had any fun...

Is mana leak too strong for standard?

Not a play designer, but my gut is yes.

i-am-nickelbolt

If all you cared about was power level, I think Mana Leak is pushy but fine. I think it's just too bad to have Mana Leak chewing up non-expert players. I've talked about how Lightning Bolt is similarly pushy but ultimately probably fine because it's just so satisfying to cast and nobody is out there complaining that Lightning Bolt is unfun. If we lived in a perfect world where most players knew how to play around Mana Leak, we could Mana Leak. But Mana Leak will cause people to quit playing instead of learn, so I would advocate against it.

How close do you think the line is between Mana Leak and Make Disappear? (There have been a lot of Quench-with-upside effects lately, but that’s the one that I think had the biggest impact on Standard.)

i-am-nickelbolt

I don't think they're particularly close. Mana Leak is a much more powerful card. I think if you swapped Mana Leak in for Make Disappear and reran that standard format, the results would be noticeably different. Would it be a worse format? Maybe a little, but maybe not? There are a lot of powerful cards in Standard these days. But I mean, that's going to be a risk of a Mana Leak format, there's a non-zero chance that it's going to be a problem. It *is* a top 50 Vintage cube card.

Is mana leak too strong for standard?

Not a play designer, but my gut is yes.

i-am-nickelbolt

If all you cared about was power level, I think Mana Leak is pushy but fine. I think it's just too bad to have Mana Leak chewing up non-expert players. I've talked about how Lightning Bolt is similarly pushy but ultimately probably fine because it's just so satisfying to cast and nobody is out there complaining that Lightning Bolt is unfun. If we lived in a perfect world where most players knew how to play around Mana Leak, we could Mana Leak. But Mana Leak will cause people to quit playing instead of learn, so I would advocate against it.

mtg dad @i-am-nickelbolt - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag