Last week, I looked at the changes in core sets on a broad level. Today, I want to crunch some numbers with Constructed in mind. Let’s see whether the new core set and rotation policies help or hurt Constructed.
Overall, I think it will be okay, but my wallet will definitely feel the hit.
Availability of Cards
In every core set, there are a number of cards that see play in Standard. Some of these are commons, and simple to obtain (Incinerate or Rampant Growth, to name just two that have been reprinted a dozen times.) Others are a bit harder, although long-time players may already have them (think Treetop Village.) And, every so often, the base set reprints something that requires a not-insignificant trip in the Wayback Machine to even see. These cards (think Yawgmoth’s Demon or Skull of Orm) are generally not in the collections of even fanatical card keepers like myself. If you need them, you often end up ordering from a big dealer, like StarCityGames. Fortunately, these cards have not been tournament staples, at least not so far.
One problem has been that the base sets have never been widely opened or drafted. This means that the relative numbers of singles in circulation has been much higher for an expansion than for the base set. That should change.
Another problem has already been fixed. In the past, core set cards were white bordered. Frankly, white bordered cards are ugly. Keeping the cards white bordered was deliberate, to maintain the value of the original versions. With Tenth Edition, however, Wizards decided to put black borders on the core set cards, too, and that will continue.
The new schedule should also mean that players will open more boosters of the core set. I have watched drafters for years, now. In general, people become bored with a draft format after a couple months, and look for a change. Under the new schedule, people will draft Shards plus Conflux for a few months, then draft Shards / Conflux / Alara Reborn for a few months starting in May. By August, people may be getting a bit bored with that — but M 2010 will be available. I expect to see FNM drafting M10, even in the most hard-core pro stores.
The fact that a couple Grand Prix — possibly as many as five this year — will use M10 will not hurt, either. Pros will want to practice the format. More cards drafted = more boosters opened = more singles available for Constructed at a lower price.
Cost of Cards: How Available?
The new rotation policy, combined with printing brand new cards in the core set, will affect the cost of the cards needed to play in Constructed. Let’s try to estimate that impact.
First, we can assume that every set — including the core sets — will have at least one chase rare that sees some play in Constructed. (In standard, those chase cards — based on the decklists for PT: Kyoto — include Glorious Anthem, Siege-Gang Commander and Wrath of God, among others.) Chase cards will include Mythic rares, in sets that have them. Looking at a recent online Shards block PE, only one Top 8 deck ran just a single Mythic, while the others ran up to three, and complete playsets of at least some of the Planeswalkers.
If we assume that every set will provide at least one Mythic rare that will see four-of play in Constructed, we can also calculate how many packs will have to be opened to provide that playset. Note that I am not saying that the packs have to be busted just for the cards — they could be opened in a sealed, in drafts, in packwars, whatever. The point is that, somehow or other, the packs have to be opened. (Singles which do not come from packs are called “forgeries,” and are not legal in sanctioned play.)
For example, to produce a playset of Sarkan Vol, for example, approximately 480 boosters had to be opened. That’s four cards per playset, times 15 Mythics in the set, times one Mythic per eight booster packs. For comparison, we should get a playset of any particular Shards non-Mythic rare by opening 212 boosters, a playset of a given uncommon by opening 80 boosters, while the 480 boosters opened to produce a playset of Sarkan Vols will also give us just under 12 playsets of every common in Shards. (That’s why they are called commons.)
Conflux and Alara Reborn will require opening 320 boosters to produce a playset of Mythic rares, since these sets have just ten Mythics. M10, which is supposed to have 15, will again require 480 packs to be opened to generate a playset of any given Mythic.
Note that the fact that some of the Mythics are reprints does not affect this calculation. It would only matter if alI the Mythics are reprints. If even one Mythic is both new to M10 and playable in Constructed, then we need someone to open 480 packs, on average, to produce a playset of that one non-reprint. It would actually be worse — as in the cards would be more expensive, if only one or two of the Mythics were not reprints. In that case, 13 or 15 Mythics would be less valuable reprints, while only 2 in 80 packs would contain a high-value card. That sort of economics would make it more difficult to profitably draft the core set, leading to a shortage. We can clearly see that online, where MEDII and Mirage are rarely drafted, despite containing $30+ cards.
I calculated just how many packs needed to be opened to produce playsets of the most difficult to obtain cards, based on the number of rares (or Mythic rares) in each set. Here are the results.
M2010: 480
Tenth: 484
Ninth: 440
Eighth: 440
Seventh: 440
Sixth: 440
Fifth: 528
Fourth: 484
Lorwyn: 320
Morningtide: 240
Shadowmoor: 320
Eventide: 240
Shards of Alara: 480
Conflux: 320
Alara Reborn: 320
Time Spiral: 320
Planar Chaos: 200
Future Sight: 240
Ravnica: 352
Guildpact: 220
Dissension: 240
Coldsnap: 160
Champions of Kamigawa: 352
Betrayers of Kamigawa: 220
Saviors of Kamigawa: 220
Mirrodin: 352
Darksteel: 220
Fifth Dawn: 220
Onslaught: 440
Legions: 180
Scourge: 176
Odyssey: 440
Torment: 176
Judgment: 176
To summarize, we can count the number of booster packs that have to have been opened per playset of cards for each block. In other words, on average, how many packs would have to be opened to have playsets of everything (assuming no three and no fives of the highest rarity).
Shards block: 1120 packs
Lorwyn & Shadowmoor blocks, combined: 1120
Time Spiral (ignoring Timeshifted reprints): 760
Ravnica block plus Coldsnap: 972
Champions: 792
Mirrodin: 792
Onslaught: 796
Odyssey: 792
Let’s look at it one more time. Let’s assume that a competitive player started playing during Alpha and has never sold cards, so she doesn’t have to worry about obtaining reprints. That also addresses what to do about the previous year’s card sets in Standard and Extended — we assume she got the cards the year before. Let’s also assume that she plays Tier 1 decks, and that the decks have playsets of chase cards from each set. So, basically, she needs to acquire the new cards each season. We’ll do the calculation for August of each year, when full blocks and summer sets are in the format.
To get those new cards, the following number of boosters had to be opened.
August, 2003: 792
August, 2004: 796
August, 2005: 792
August, 2006: 972
August, 2007: 760
August, 2008: 1,120
August, 2009: 1,600
By next fall, the number of boosters that will have to be opened to produce the playsets of new cards will be almost twice the number that we needed to open a half decade ago. That will have an impact. Even in terms of drafts needed to open that many boosters, it is significantly more. In years past, 33 drafts — not counting prizes — would open, on average, a playset of everything. With M10, we need approximately 67 drafts to create enough singles to make playsets of chase cards.
Having seen the costs of single online and in paper, I am noticing the difference. A few years ago, between my Magic budget, my winnings and the product Ingrid and I received for judging, I could manage to afford to play competitively both online and in paper. That is a lot harder now.
Cost of Cards: The Lands
The new dual lands will be a clear cost driver, but the effect is impossible to gauge until we see a sample. At best, we can lay out the ends of the spectrum. Here are the lowest cost and highest cost options.
Low cost: Wizards does a functional reprint of the Ice Age depletion lands. Those lands totally suck, so they would not be played and the cost effect would be zero.
High cost: Wizards reprints the true duals, as Mythic rares, but with new names. The demand would be incredible, since almost every deck in every format* would want copies. The price would be stratospheric.
The reality probably lies somewhere in between. The new multi-colored lands should be good, but not unbelievable. They will probably be tournament staples, in Standard at the very least, so they will be chase cards. They will have a significant price, and the cost of getting playsets will be a real concern. On the other hand, Aaron Forsythe did mention, in a podcast interview, that he expected the new lands to stick around for at least another core set. That will help, a rotation or two from now.
Reissued but Renamed
One of my largest concerns stems from Aaron Forsythe statement that some cards were perfect, from a design standpoint, but had names that made no sense to new players. His example was Kavu Climber. I will agree that a 3/3 cantrip creature for 3GG is a fine green common. I also agree that the “Kavu” name made some sense back in Invasion, where Kavus were part of the standard fauna. However, if you hadn’t paid attention to the Invasion storyline, Kavus make no more sense than Fongalls** do.
I expect that one of the brand new cards in Magic 2010 will be a 3/3 cantrip creature for 3GG, but with a name like Beastling Spellbearer. (Okay, there is a reason Wizards hasn’t hired me to write names and flavor text.)
This will have little impact in limited, of course, and I can’t think of any constructed decks that run Kavu Climbers. This name change, therefore, should be all to the good. Where the change can get a bit messy is if the card changed is a staple. Changing the name means that the old version is no longer legal in the format — only those cards with the new name can be played.
The question is whether Wizards will change the names of tournament staples because they are too obscure. For example — and I’m choosing this one purely because I think is extremely unlikely — suppose Wizards wanted to reprint Rishadan Port in the base set. If they did, would it get played? Of course. Would they rename it? Probably — Rishadan is a term from the Masques block saga. If they did, it would be pricey. It was one of the most expensive cards in Masques.
Would they make it Mythic? Depends on whether they wanted to just poke us in the eye, or whether they wanted to poke a really sharp stick really deeply into our eyes.
I expect that some renames will happen. The impact will depend a lot on the cards renamed, and on their rarity. I will be happy with renamed commons — after all, we had no problems adjusting and acquiring cards when Rushwood Dryad became Zodiac Monkey. The issue is only relevant if they change the names of staple rares. Let’s look at some of the recent cards in core sets, and see what might need renaming.
First of, I am going to ignore cards with classic fantasy names. Things like Rukh Egg and Mahamoti Djinn are part of folklore, and need no changes. I would also think the same about cards like Zur’s Weirding . New players may not know that the Zur are a group from the Ice Ages, but that should not matter. If they think Zur’s Weirding is a strange spell cast by some guy called Zur, that’s fine.
I also don’t see any problems with cards like Coat of Arms, Evacuation or Defense Grid. They simply describe what they do. The more problematic names, I would assume, would be things containing “Phyrexian” or “Rath” or even “Llanowar.” These all refer to specific planes or lands, and have no meaning outside the storyline. (Shivan Reef and so forth could be problematic, but lands like that are already ruled out.)
First, I’ll list the cards based on individuals that have moved from storyline into the core set. These are mainly legends.
Ambassador Laquatus
Arcanis the Omnipotent
Kamahl, Pit Fighter
Mirri, Cat Warrior
Molimo, Maro-Sorcerer
Reya Dawnbringer
Squee, Goblin Nabob
Offhand, I don’t see any real problem with keeping them. Characters in fantasy novels often have strange names.
A few artifacts or spells also have names associated with characters in the stories. Frankly, they are rarely important, and I sort of hope they are not reprinted at all. They are not staple cards, and their disappearance would not be a big loss. At most, I might miss Teferi’s Puzzlebox.
Feroz’s Ban
Jandor’s Saddlebags
Jalum Tome
Jayemdae Tome
Skull of Orm
Teferi’s Puzzle Box
Urza’s Armor
Yawgmoth’s Demon
Moving on, we find a number of creatures or jobs that are linked to particular locals. Again, the location names will mean little to new players, but it might not matter. New players might not know exactly what a Sage of Lat-Nam actually is, but the name is okay on a standalone basis. In any case, that’s another card I would rather not see reprinted.
Ascendant Evincar
Cephalid Constable
Kjeldoran Royal Guard
Paladin en-Vec
Phyrexian Plaguelord
Quirion Dryad
Rathi Dragon
Sage of Lat-Nam
Sengir Vampire
Verduran Enchantress
Some of these are almost playable, but we can probably either live without them, or afford a renamed version. They should not cost much.
Finally, we have a catch-all category — all the stuff that did not fit into one of the above slots. This catch-all includes a few cards that might actually matter. Loxodon Warhammer is played, albeit in ones and twos. Phyrexian Arena, however, was a staple, and people used full playsets. Of all the rares that might reappear with new names, that is about the only rare printed in the four recent core sets that could have a significant cost that would have to be renamed.
Here’s the list:
Furnace of Rath
Hammer of Bogardan
Loxodon Warhammer
Phyrexian Arena
Phyrexian Colossus
Thran Golem
Of course, there is no limit to what Wizards could rename. Wizards could reintroduce Tarmogoyf or Thoughtseize into Standard, under a new name. That sort of cash grab would create a lot of resentment, but it would sell packs. I doubt that something like that would be necessary, however. Wizards can sell plenty of packs off cards like Silence and the new dual lands.
Fixing Problems
Let’s move on to a positive impact of the new core set policies. As I mentioned last week, having new cards in the core set allows another opportunity for Wizards to fix problems. Wizards will be able to print hosers. Now, hosers have rarely actually shot down their intended targets, but sometimes cards like Kataki, War’s Wage actually work. The core set is a good place to put them, for two reasons. First, the expansions have flavor, theme and cycle concerns, which can make inserting random hosers difficult. Secondly, the time from start of design to market is much lower with a core set than an expansion. In a recent interview on a podcast, Aaron Forsythe noted that work on Magic 2011 had not yet started, unlike the future expansion sets that will be released long after that. A shorter time to market means that needed cards can be inserted more easily, and that they can bring relief to sick formats more rapidly.
Conclusions
Constructed is going to cost more. On the plus side, I will have much more incentive to draft M10, so I will open more cards, and the cards I need to buy as singles won’t be quite as scarce as they would have been in an old, rarely opened or drafted core set.
Overall, I still think this the announced changes are a positive. I really am looking forward to M10.
PRJ
“one million words” on MTGO
* Okay, maybe not Pauper
** Don’t get the reference? My point exactly.