Iteration 6 of the Armada Games EDH League begins later this week, so before we get back into the play-by-play action, I’d like to talk about the dreaded Power Creep, how it impacts your group, and what you can do about it.
First of all, power creep is simply the slow escalation of the power of decks in a given environment. It’s inevitable in Eternal formats, because the number of cards available to deckbuilders continues to increase. Even if the power of the cards doesn’t significantly increase (which is an argument you can’t make in the post-M11 world, but that’s a different story for a different day), the number of card interactions increases and new mechanics are added, meaning things are just going to get bigger, better, and faster.
Creep implies a slow and steady rise in power, not significant and immediate change. It’s not “ZOMG, Baneslayer Angel will dominate you all!” but each release adding a tiny bit more power to the card pool. You then wake up a year later to realize that what passed for acceptable twelve months ago gets steamrolled today.
Creep can also happen in relatively closed environments even when there aren’t new cards released. The biggest factor in EDH environments is when people build casual or “friendly” decks, then get stomped by more competitive decks or players. They decide that in order to enjoy themselves a little more by getting crushed a little less, they notch up the power a little, although perhaps sometimes a little too much. This is reasonable, common, and for the most part, truly organic. When creating the game, Richard Garfield envisioned an ever-shifting landscape of play, with people always looking for new answers to new cards introduced to their groups. He significantly underestimated the scope of that landscape. I’m relatively sure he didn’t envision a world where every player basically had access to as many copies of every card as they needed or wanted. The point is that the environmental responsiveness was built into the design of the game, and it is part of what gives us that creep.
Before we continue, this is where I briefly sidebar. The targeted audience for this article, and most everything I’m going to write about EDH, is the casual EDH crowd. As we continue here, I’m going to talk about groups, and what’s in the best interest of groups. I wholly support groups that play together frequently – even those that “compete,” like in leagues – setting their own tone, whether it’s Super Timmy or Super Spike or somewhere in between. What I mostly want is everyone to have fun when they show up to play EDH. Doing my best to avoid moral judgment (because other than cheating, I don’t really think there’s a morality to playing Magic), and hoping to avoid another forum war about play style, it only takes one real Spike to upset a Timmy group. The converse isn’t true. One Timmy in a Spike group is just a speed bump. What’s strategically good in normal, competitive, 1v1 Magic is often contrary to the enjoyment of a multiplayer group. Again, if everyone is on the same page, Spike it up and race to the third turn kill all the time. There can be a kind of electric adrenaline rush to that kind of game that I understand some folks really loving, but that’s not what we’re talking about here. We’re talking about the as-designed, slightly socialist, let’s-give-folks-a-chance-to-have-some-fun vision of the format. In 1v1 Magic, if only one person in the event is having a good time, that’s perfectly acceptable. In the EDH world that I want to talk about, it’s not. I get that you might not agree, or that’s not the EDH game you want to play, but that’s the EDH I’m going to cover. Your mileage is certainly welcome to vary, but as I’ve said recently, I want to stop having the argument over right or wrong ways to play. I’m going to talk and write about a particular way, a way that many groups are playing, and a way that I’d like to encourage more groups to play. If it’s not your cup of tea, I truly hope you enjoy the coffee (I also hope you enjoy my rubber-banding of a metaphor).
So much for the brevity of the sidebar.
I’ve seen obvious evidence of the power creep in the Armada League. We play in pods of four or five, with each pod getting 30 minutes per player. In the first few seasons, most of the games went to time. Often, one or two players per pod may have been eliminated, but games still stretched to the time limit. Recently, there have been many times when a table is completely done in 10 minutes, or the whole of the first round is done in less than an hour (and we’re talking four to six tables).
I also saw some evidence of it when I was gunslinging at GenCon. I saw enough decks built to end games very quickly and very early to make me notice. Fortunately for me, there were also enough folks that just wanted to do wacky or epic things that made it an enjoyable time. I was scheduled to be there two hours per day, but I was having such a good time that I daily spent about six hours in the Champion’s Challenge booth.
Time for another sidebar (maybe the title of this article should be “Sidebars and You”), and this is one about something I’m just having trouble understanding. I’ve said before that EDH isn’t meant to be all things to all players, but I get that what you want out of the format may be different than what I want. No problems there. What I don’t get is people wanting to come gunsling with me (or other advocates of the casual nature of the format, such as Scott Larabee or Bennie Smith) who don’t share the same vision we do. Scott told me the story of a kid who waited a long time at GP: DC to play him, then Zur-locked him almost immediately. My response to that story was “Really?” I mean, I guess I see where someone might want to brag that they beat an EDH “celebrity” (talk about your micro-niche), but I’m just failing to grasp the appeal of wanting to play with a specific someone who has clearly presented a differing view on what makes a good game. Again accepting there are different goals for different people playing the format, if you want to play specifically with me, why wouldn’t you want to play somewhere near the way I’ve said I like a game to be? Why would you intentionally choose to play with me when we have radically different ideas of what constitutes a good time? Is it really about the one free booster? I’m completely failing to understand, and I say that with no sense of sarcasm or irony. I simply don’t get it.
One of the roots of power creep is overkill in the response to it. Adding some graveyard hate because you’re tired of losing to Living Death is perfectly reasonable, and quite honestly, only sensible. You can’t continue to do things identically and expect different results, after all. You have to adapt to what you see every time you play. Overkill would be to run out the aforementioned turn 3 kill deck. Sure, that turn 15 Living Death didn’t kill you, but you didn’t exactly play that much either, and neither did anyone else.
Another power creep factor, one I think that is rarely considered, and one that’s not at all detrimental to your game, is that players just get better. Especially in environments that attract casual and beginning players, there can be a significant development of an individual’s play skill in a short amount of time. The more I play, the slightly better I get (despite the fact that there’s lots of room for improvement), but I’ve been playing a long time, and the percentage quality increase isn’t all that great. I doubt there are going to be many significant advancements in the quality of my play. The casual or part-time player, however, has the chance to vastly improve his or her skills. That player’s improvement in understanding board situations, grasping the politics of a multiplayer game, or simply evaluating card choices when building their deck, will make the game they play in stronger. Where before you could count on not having to worry about them until later, after you had dealt with other players, they have become a more immediate threat and warrant more of your focus. Each player who gets better raises the level of play of your group, so it’s in somewhat of your own best interest to help them improve – but you also have to help them improve their understanding of the group dynamics.
The term “power creep” seems to have some negative implications (I did call it “dreaded” in the intro), but unless it gets extreme, it probably isn’t the end of the world for a group. It’s definitely something to watch out for, though. Some power creep is likely to make your game better. Inertia is likely to be much more of a downside. In games of all stripes, nothing is worse than the game being the same over and over again. If Magic environments didn’t stay fresh and dynamic, the game would wither and die. Imagine if we were all still playing Brian Weissman’s “The Deck” or the Necropotence decks of Black Summer. In fact, I’m relatively sure that one of the draws to EDH is that the games you play with any one of your decks can be wildly different owing to the hundred-card singleton nature. Consistency and repeatability is the hallmark of a good competitive deck. In competition, you want your deck to do the same thing over and over again in order to win. In EDH, it’s sometimes like Christmas – you never know what you’re going to get! I actually know a few players who have resolved to not put any kind of tutors (except land fetches) into their decks just so that they can have the more random experience.
Power creep itself isn’t the enemy. It’s extreme power creep that will wreck your game. I’ve seen large groups break down because a few players have taken things to the extreme. It doesn’t matter whether they didn’t like losing or they already won their fair share and decided that they wanted to win even more often. The motivation is less significant than the result. In a social setting, once the majority of the people in it aren’t enjoying themselves, the group falters. Players who aren’t interested or capable of such a power ramp will drift away. That means it’s in the best interest of even the more competitive player to not go overboard. A player winning frequently will not chase away other players. A player winning frequently without the other players having the opportunity to play will.
So what can you do to prevent extreme power creep? This is a far more difficult question to answer than to ask, because there is certainly no objective measure of what’s “too much.” It’s likely that you might not know you’ve gone too far until you find yourself without others to play with, or that when you sit at the table and pop out your Niv-Mizzet deck, there’s a good deal of eye-rolling.
This is a problem that I know many Magic players have with EDH. People like objective measures. They like seeing an obvious, well-marked line. In normal Magic, it’s “win” (well, “win without cheating”). If you want to be part of a social group, you have to accept that the lines aren’t so clear. The more people you add, the more blurry those lines become, since the group ethos is an amalgam of the individuals. Being part of a successful EDH group, even if it’s as large as the 20-30 players that frequent your local shop, means understanding the goals and preferences of the other players nearly as well as understanding your own.
Balance is part of the answer. Find a way to balance good times and winning. If at the end of a game that you’ve won, you find the other players grumbling (we’ll discount those people who are always malcontents), you’ve missed your mark. If at the end of a game you’ve won, you find the other players going “that was cool!” then you’ve probably struck the balance. The thing is you have to find what that balance is for the situation you’re in. There are definitely no objective measures here, since each group or meta-group is different. Again, look for finding the common space between your goals and the other folks’. It’s there if you care to search for it.
Positive encouragement and development of good relationships can help keep power creep to a minimum. Make the people that you play with more than people you just play with. Have conversations with them that involve more than “how many cards are in your hand?” People that are interested in each other on more than one level are more likely to want to help find that enjoyable equilibrium.
I’ve seen negative reinforcement work in the short term, but not in the long. Gang-piling the Turn 3 combo guy might get him to rethink his position, but unfortunately his rethinking is likely to be “how can I kill everyone on Turn 2 instead?” It might be an interesting intellectual challenge, but it’s not going to lead to wide scale enjoyment of the format. It creates bad blood and a completely adversarial relationship in not-completely-adversarial environment.
You have a great deal of say in keeping power creep in check, by being a part of the solution from both sides: keeping an eye on your own power level, and positively encouraging others to do the same. It’s fine to strive to be the best in your group, but the degree by which you’re the best is the important factor. The real trick is to be just better enough to be as successful as you want without alienating others. Again, there’s no flowchart I can draw here. You have to evaluate the environment you play in and figure out how to help everyone – which includes but isn’t limited to yourself – have the best possible time. Even those of you who really don’t care if anyone else enjoys themselves can see the value in not chasing away potential fellow gamers.
Given the nature of the format, power creep is inevitable, and left unchecked can ruin your game. The good news is that you have plenty of tools and opportunity to keep it from getting out of hand, and all it takes is to care about making sure that it doesn’t.
Next week, we’ll be back to Embracing the Chaos in the Armada Games EDH League, perhaps with some brand new tech!