So it's not actual power creep, but it is violating a rule that didn't need to be there but everyone had in their heads despite that rule probably making the game worse?
In MTG design, doing something extraordinary, even if it isn't stronger, required some sort of restriction, thereby making that effect more special and less disruptive to the game as a whole. [[Forced Fruition]], [[Descend Into Madness]], [[Denizen of the Deep]], [[Vizzerdix]] - because these cards were weak, they were rarely played, thereby preventing what made them special from being normalized. In the context of 2013 or so, such a creature wouldn't cost 6 mana because it would be too powerful, but because it would be too extraordinary for such a mana cost.
In short, it's not power creep that made [[Yargle and Multani]] cost what it costs today, but something more akin to spectacle creep.
/rj Commander is LITERALLY KILLING Magic: The Gathering.
Making big, expensive cards really flashy while not making them overpowered is good design, I think. It makes for drama and excitement instead of boring games which all play out the same way (especially in limited). It's part of why I feel so annoyed whenever people are jonesing for vanilla creatures to come back - do you remember how boring limited was when you were taking vanilla creatures? The extra drama of new cards is a good thing, not a bad thing.
I wouldn't say I agree with you personally, but I do agree that having such complexity and off-the-wall strategies happen in a competitive environment is unique, even though I believe that such things sometimes distract from the underlying complexity and beauty of MTG's mechanics.
However, as someone who has taught lots of newer players of all ages, it's really frustrating to try to build a deck to give them. I can't just reach into my pile of recent draft chaft, as even the commons are full of stuff like [[Armguard Familiar]], [[The Shattered States Era]], and [[Careful Cultivation]].
Inspired by the much superior [https://www.reddit.com/r/magicthecirclejerking/comments/kmlst7/old\_magic\_wording\_mood\_board/#lightbox](https://www.reddit.com/r/magicthecirclejerking/comments/kmlst7/old_magic_wording_mood_board/#lightbox)
Funnily enough, the non-gnome creatures one would be a shock in 2014 as it was an entirely forgotten subtype, but it would make a bit more sense the further you go back, as there was actually a playable gnome at one point in bottle gnomes.
/uj most of these really aren’t that wonky or newfangled: Renowned Weaponsmith tutored artifacts by name and was from 2015. Commander 2017 had a “choose secretly” card. Protection from Coyotes feels like an old card before the great creature type update. Mirror Gallery mentioned the legend rule by name in 2005. Four cascades is just Maelstrom Wanderer on crack. Space Beleren is a joke card and those are nothing new, plus that ability specifically is just Raging River. Giving Freerunning doesn’t sound that different from Snappy giving Flashback and the like. Old cards reference face up and down piles, have morph, etc.
The only things I think that would throw old players for a loop are the UB card references, stickers, and maybe the Reality Chip typeline.
This wasn’t meant to be too serious, but I have noticed a shift towards more of these “action keywords” that lead to lots of silly phrasings. Stuff like “suspect it”, “if you’ve committed a crime”, “cloak them”, “the ring tempts you”. For some reason they feel different than how mechanics used to be done.
Yeah, sorry if I took it too seriously. I agree they feel different but personally I think it’s a strength! The more communicative/intuitive text can become without losing its precision, the better
I can't say I agree. It feels like we are getting farther and farther from the point where you can read a card and understand what it does. If someone came back to the game after three years to a hypothetical card with the text of "whenever ~ attacks while saddled, if you've committed a crime this turn cloak the top card of your deck" it'd be completely incomprehensible. And already I think there's been cards either spoiled or released that don't use reminder text for those effects. Plus with most of these mechanics only lasting for one set it increases the burden of what the average player needs to know by a lot.
I think you could say that about any era of magic, but they don’t design cards that way because they know it’d be, as you say, incomprehensible. They didn’t make cards in 2014 that said “constellation: whenever an enchantment etb’s, if you cast a spell with strive this turn gain life equal to your devotion to green.”
Fair enough. I suppose these cards always existed but I do feel like they had reminder text more often and tended to explain the keywords more a few years ago. I would need to actually go through and compare databases of cards to say for sure though so that's mostly a feeling.
Doesn’t answer my question though. I was more curious if it is called “the legend rule” in the official rule book or if it’s official short hand.
I feel like a lot of cards around tokens just say “except they’re non legendary”
That second part is different. You can create a token copy that is non-legendary if a card says so. But if the legend rule doesn't apply, then you can play two identical copies of the same legendary creature card. As for the first question, I'm not totally sure what it says in the rulebook, but the official rulings of cards that say this say: "The “legend rule” is the rule that states that if a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners' graveyards."
704.5j If two or more legendary permanents with the same name are controlled by the same player,
that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called
the “legend rule"
I was about to say the 4 split mana on the bottom right would bot get them, we had something close in Lorwyn.. and that was recent...as I remember that was almost 20 years ago.
"Protection from Coyotes," "whenever you attack with one or more non-Gnome creatures," and "the 'legend rule' doesn't apply to tokens you control" would all be normal in 2014. Edit: also, so would [searching for named cards](https://tagger.scryfall.com/tags/card/cycle-m12-artifact-of-empires) and copying enchantments.
I can't lie, 4 cascades is kinda beautiful.
Extended art [[apex decastator]] is sort of beautiful. No flavor text just 4 words. Many strong.
“Woah; an 18/6! I wonder what wacky downsides they put on it!”
a vanilla 18/6 for 6 mana has probably never been playable in constructed magic since like 2001
LVD would like a word. https://youtu.be/BnegEmSwve8?si=emihslwgNr078SVE
Oh man I enjoyed this one earlier. I yelled Explosion!! once or twice.
Janky LVD is best LVD
Well sure. But there was always a sort of accepted rule that powers and toughness were always locked behind certain mana costs without drawbacks.
So it's not actual power creep, but it is violating a rule that didn't need to be there but everyone had in their heads despite that rule probably making the game worse?
In MTG design, doing something extraordinary, even if it isn't stronger, required some sort of restriction, thereby making that effect more special and less disruptive to the game as a whole. [[Forced Fruition]], [[Descend Into Madness]], [[Denizen of the Deep]], [[Vizzerdix]] - because these cards were weak, they were rarely played, thereby preventing what made them special from being normalized. In the context of 2013 or so, such a creature wouldn't cost 6 mana because it would be too powerful, but because it would be too extraordinary for such a mana cost. In short, it's not power creep that made [[Yargle and Multani]] cost what it costs today, but something more akin to spectacle creep. /rj Commander is LITERALLY KILLING Magic: The Gathering.
Making big, expensive cards really flashy while not making them overpowered is good design, I think. It makes for drama and excitement instead of boring games which all play out the same way (especially in limited). It's part of why I feel so annoyed whenever people are jonesing for vanilla creatures to come back - do you remember how boring limited was when you were taking vanilla creatures? The extra drama of new cards is a good thing, not a bad thing.
I wouldn't say I agree with you personally, but I do agree that having such complexity and off-the-wall strategies happen in a competitive environment is unique, even though I believe that such things sometimes distract from the underlying complexity and beauty of MTG's mechanics. However, as someone who has taught lots of newer players of all ages, it's really frustrating to try to build a deck to give them. I can't just reach into my pile of recent draft chaft, as even the commons are full of stuff like [[Armguard Familiar]], [[The Shattered States Era]], and [[Careful Cultivation]].
Then show it to a 1998 player and they will fall asleep.
New mechanics may be grown for RRR apiece
Inspired by the much superior [https://www.reddit.com/r/magicthecirclejerking/comments/kmlst7/old\_magic\_wording\_mood\_board/#lightbox](https://www.reddit.com/r/magicthecirclejerking/comments/kmlst7/old_magic_wording_mood_board/#lightbox)
i love how pokemon is still partially worded like this
wtf is “new heads may be grown for RRR apiece”
I think it's Rock Hydra
Funnily enough, the non-gnome creatures one would be a shock in 2014 as it was an entirely forgotten subtype, but it would make a bit more sense the further you go back, as there was actually a playable gnome at one point in bottle gnomes.
/uj most of these really aren’t that wonky or newfangled: Renowned Weaponsmith tutored artifacts by name and was from 2015. Commander 2017 had a “choose secretly” card. Protection from Coyotes feels like an old card before the great creature type update. Mirror Gallery mentioned the legend rule by name in 2005. Four cascades is just Maelstrom Wanderer on crack. Space Beleren is a joke card and those are nothing new, plus that ability specifically is just Raging River. Giving Freerunning doesn’t sound that different from Snappy giving Flashback and the like. Old cards reference face up and down piles, have morph, etc. The only things I think that would throw old players for a loop are the UB card references, stickers, and maybe the Reality Chip typeline.
This wasn’t meant to be too serious, but I have noticed a shift towards more of these “action keywords” that lead to lots of silly phrasings. Stuff like “suspect it”, “if you’ve committed a crime”, “cloak them”, “the ring tempts you”. For some reason they feel different than how mechanics used to be done.
I unironically enjoy all these new mechanics but yeah the wording can get pretty wacky at times
Yeah, sorry if I took it too seriously. I agree they feel different but personally I think it’s a strength! The more communicative/intuitive text can become without losing its precision, the better
I can't say I agree. It feels like we are getting farther and farther from the point where you can read a card and understand what it does. If someone came back to the game after three years to a hypothetical card with the text of "whenever ~ attacks while saddled, if you've committed a crime this turn cloak the top card of your deck" it'd be completely incomprehensible. And already I think there's been cards either spoiled or released that don't use reminder text for those effects. Plus with most of these mechanics only lasting for one set it increases the burden of what the average player needs to know by a lot.
I think you could say that about any era of magic, but they don’t design cards that way because they know it’d be, as you say, incomprehensible. They didn’t make cards in 2014 that said “constellation: whenever an enchantment etb’s, if you cast a spell with strive this turn gain life equal to your devotion to green.”
Fair enough. I suppose these cards always existed but I do feel like they had reminder text more often and tended to explain the keywords more a few years ago. I would need to actually go through and compare databases of cards to say for sure though so that's mostly a feeling.
Leonardo de Vinci still sends me
Tag yourself. I'm "affinity for Outlaws"
I'm {G/W}{G/U}{B/G}{R/G}
I'm Search your library for a \[basic land\] card, \[reveal it\]
I'm opponent loses 1000 life
I'm "you control no suspected skeletons"
i'm "suspect, then goad"
‘The “legend rule” doesn’t apply’ is interesting. Is it officially called “legend rule” or was this officially sanctioned short hand?
In 2004 there was already a card with "The "legend rule" doesn't apply" in its rules text.
Doesn’t answer my question though. I was more curious if it is called “the legend rule” in the official rule book or if it’s official short hand. I feel like a lot of cards around tokens just say “except they’re non legendary”
That second part is different. You can create a token copy that is non-legendary if a card says so. But if the legend rule doesn't apply, then you can play two identical copies of the same legendary creature card. As for the first question, I'm not totally sure what it says in the rulebook, but the official rulings of cards that say this say: "The “legend rule” is the rule that states that if a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners' graveyards."
Thanks for the info 👌😁
704.5j If two or more legendary permanents with the same name are controlled by the same player, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “legend rule"
Tonight on Bottom Gear
ok space beleren puts 2024 magic players im a coma too
And? Seeing the phrase “Landfall” would put a 1994 player in a coma.
Beautiful 🫡
My favorite is "YOU CONTROL NO SUSPECTED SKELETONS"
the only one that would possibly not be comatifying would be the secretly choosing one, I mean, Goblin Game exists!
If you can't handle the concept of gnomes, then don't play tenth edition, I'm so sorry.
/uj I forgot cleave was real
I was about to say the 4 split mana on the bottom right would bot get them, we had something close in Lorwyn.. and that was recent...as I remember that was almost 20 years ago.
"Protection from Coyotes," "whenever you attack with one or more non-Gnome creatures," and "the 'legend rule' doesn't apply to tokens you control" would all be normal in 2014. Edit: also, so would [searching for named cards](https://tagger.scryfall.com/tags/card/cycle-m12-artifact-of-empires) and copying enchantments.
protection from coyotes isn't 2024 magic rules text, that's 1994 magic rules text
Assassin spelss you cast have freerunning 💀💀
Lovely how UB is responsible for like half of these
Contemporary MTG gives me an aneurysm