Commander only RL?
Economics forum
Posted on Aug. 14, 2021, 5:22 p.m. by RNR_Gaming
So, I'm sure we're all familiar with the gold boarder cards that aren't tournment legal. From time to time we'll see a discussion about making them edh legal but it'll always be met with the "rule 0", pay for your pubstomp or just proxy. Basically, what if wizards reprinted the RL cards but with additional text stating they could only be played in commander?
RNR_Gaming says... #3
TheOfficialCreator - if you look at other games like pokemon and yugioh, old cards get a reprint from time to time in unlimited editions or some weird reprinted 2nd edition. I'll use the example of the original base set Charazard - this card sees 0 play in any sanctioned pokemon format but a psa 10 still demands thousands of dollars. If a reprint were to kill the cost of an original collectors item, the item is probably too volatile to actually collect - I'll go out on a limb and say that slabbed psa cards would still retain most of their value and possibly increase 3 fold by removing the barrier to entry and increasing engagement.
August 14, 2021 5:49 p.m.
NinjaBunny01 says... #4
Those other games also don't have a list of cards the company swore not to reprint. Unfortunately, you cannot compare magic to other games this way. I would rather see functional reprints that odd text that kind if breaks a "contract" they made. Official proxies could also be a way to "reprint" those cards without breaking any agreements as the proxies could only be used in tournament play if you prove you have those cards
August 14, 2021 7:24 p.m.
Let's first understand the basic reason why Wizards cannot reprint RL cards. There exists a legal principle known as promissory estoppel which essentially means "if your breaking a promise causes a detriment to one who reasonably relied upon that promise you can be held liable for their losses." The Reserve List is a promise that many, many people are relying on--a breach of that promise likely could implicate promissory estoppel.
The operative language is the "Special-Purpose Reprints" section, which covers the exception for certain types of reprint of RL cards:
Wizards of the Coast may print special versions of cards not meant for regular game play, such as oversized cards.
"Regular game play" is not clearly defined, and an argument could be made that a format-specific use is a card not meant for "regular" play. However, you'll run into a few problems with this.
First and foremost, Wizards is very clear that Commander is their most popular current format--thus playable in commander only would be "regular" play for the majority of players.
Second, Wizards' exception listed in the rule is something which physically cannot be played with in any format. The other example we have seen in the past (which predates the current iteration of the rules) did not have a regular MTG card back.
Third, the rule does not say cards not designed for "tournament play" which is a different term of art Wizards uses in other context; it says "regular game play" which is a much, much more broad category.
Now, I could offer just as many arguments why your proposal would not constitute "regular game play" but those arguments are irrelevant. The fact remains that they would be in a rather precarious position, especially as, in the entire history of American jurisprudence, there has never been a single case directly or tangentially analogous to the Reserve List (I know--I've done the Lexis research myself). Wizards' legal team is not likely to take a gamble and invite litigation. Even if they could win at court--which is no guarantee--litigation is expensive and a public relations nightmare.
I know if I were Wizards' attorney, I would recommend against this proposal; I am guessing their actual attorneys' are just as risk-adverse.
August 15, 2021 12:58 a.m.
CasualCucumber says... #6
I have always wondered how they could get away with printing certain reserve list cards like Karn, Silver Golem and still keeping an RS.
August 15, 2021 7:19 a.m.
CasualCucumber - A prior version of the RL promise had a different exception that allowed reprints in a “premium version” - basically as a foil. This is why there are some judge reserve list cards, a Duel Decks, Phyrexia vs. The Coalition RL reprint, and the From the Vault Karn reprint you mentioned. At the time, these reprints did not violate any promises.
However, in 2010, Wizards made their promise more restrictive, cutting off their ability to do this type of reprint.
August 15, 2021 11:54 a.m.
FormOverFunction says... #8
I got my acronyms confused and thought this thread was going to be drawing parallels between using the photocopier at work and building a 100-card deck... oops
August 15, 2021 4:48 p.m.
RNR_Gaming says... #9
Bonus question - what if another company acquired the rights and ownership of MTG say Hasbro sold all their assets to the mighty overlord at Amazon. Would the promissory estoppel still exist? Or could the new CEO just decide to print secret lair RL list and basically print $100 Bill's.
August 15, 2021 6:10 p.m.
RNR_Gaming - They would be bound by the estoppel as well, since they would have privity with Wizards (a fancy way of saying they’re the legal successor to contracts and promises).
August 15, 2021 6:28 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #11
I wonder how this impacts other forms of play, such as online? It's not printing the card to make a digital copy, and the digital copy realistically should hold no sway over physical ones.
That would certainly drive an enormous portion online, which if WOTC ran the site and sales of digital copies, that's benefit from massive sales with essentially no real work, as a million digital copies are just as expensive to produce as one, meanwhile a million physical copies incur an outrageous cost and burden.
August 15, 2021 6:41 p.m.
TypicalTimmy - digital copies of cards are excluded explicitly from the RL:
This reprint policy only applies to physical, printed cards. It does not apply to cards released on Magic: The Gathering Online or in any other digital distribution.
August 15, 2021 7:04 p.m.
NinjaBunny01 says... #13
Yes, in fact, they have already printed online versions with updated artwork on MTGO
August 15, 2021 8:11 p.m.
While I agree with all of the details Caerwyn has provided on the topic of the RL, I will play devil's advocate for a moment to say that promissory estoppel is not quite as impossible to overcome as it would seem under the guise of WoTC potentially creating some sort of printed non-tournament legal versions of RL cards in the future. In the case of the RL specifically, the dilemma that promissory estoppel creates for an "investor" is that the plaintiff/investor would have to demonstrate financial harm as a result of the change to policy and printing of "new" versions of the RL cards. Should a lawsuit arise from a future change in the RL policy, the limit of the potential damages would be the difference in their investment cost and the diluted value of the asset, so if RL cards were to be reprinted in such a manner that values of the originals did not decline as a result, then the assumed breach of promissory estoppel would have no financial impact to the investor, so any lawsuit would ultimately be a waste of time and money for both parties.
While I still think it's extremely unlikely in today's litigious society that Hasbro would play with legal fire on the topic of the RL, I don't think the idea presented here is an impossibility. Some sort of set release with a spotlight on "the art of Magic" with various cards from Magic's long history using the original art of the dual lands and other RL cards highlighting the art and artist that they are fully aware would then be used as proxies by players would probably sell like hotcakes and preserve the RL simultaneously. I wouldn't be surprised to see something along these lines in the next few years to be quite honest.
August 15, 2021 8:26 p.m.
Azdranax - Art cards are not a real solution; they will not have a Magic card back and they almost certainly will not be permitted by the Rule's Committee as permissible--thus their only real effect would be "these are proxies that are allowed at some kitchen table games." That is to say, they will not have any real effect at all--the places that would allow the art cards as proxies are almost certainly the same places that already allow proxies.
Which is the problem: If you reprint a card in a manner that could see widespread playability, even if just in EDH, it is all-but-guaranteed prices will drop for EDH Commander staples (though high-graded Alpha cards would likely hold a fair deal of value), and thus you are inviting a number of lawsuits--we've already seen Wizards get hit with a (fairly stupid) class action over their War of the Spark set sale; you could bet they would be hit with a painfully expensive and highly embarrassing class action over any perceived threat to the RL. If you reprint the card that is little more than a proxy, you are not actually solving any problems because you're just catering to those who already decided proxies were A-okay.
The RL is a painfully stupid hole that Wizards placed themselves in--and which they made much worse in 2010 when they removed their ability to reprint premium versions of RL cards (otherwise we would almost certainly be seeing RL Secret Lairs and the like). Unfortunately, they have boxed themselves into a corner where both they and their players lose.
August 16, 2021 10:53 a.m.
Caerwyn I agree wholeheartedly, an art card series doesn’t solve any problems the RL has caused, but I’d be willing to place a large bet that it would cause a significant boost in sales, which we know is priority #1 for Hasbro. I think there’s a subtle difference between random proxies and an art series released by WoTC…while the sanctioned use would be unaffected, the implicit nod to players to use them as proxies would be a clear perception in my eyes…and a way to monetize their turning a blind eye to the violation of the IP locked up via the RL via high quality proxies. I think it’s just a matter of time before we see it, but I still agree with you on all counts.
August 16, 2021 11:45 a.m.
jethstriker says... #17
"From time to time we'll see a discussion about making them edh legal"
Sorry, not an EDH player so I have to ask, Gold bordered cards are not legal in EDH? I thought the format is casual that proxies most of the time is ok, but Gold bordered are not?
September 12, 2021 10:36 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #18
jethstriker, people say they aren't "legal" because they have a different back, and not the typical MTG one. But for groups who sleeve their cards, this is a non-issue, assuming you can use non-transparent sleeves.
Yet proxies largely have false backs, too.
If your table is mad that you have a $200 gold Gaea's Cradle but is fine with your $15 proxy off of ---------, then the issue isn't the card so much as your group.
Edit: Removed site name, for sake of not promoting sale of proxies in open forum, <3
September 12, 2021 10:46 p.m. Edited.
TypicalTimmy says... #19
By the way, I own both a $200 gold Cradle, and a $15 proxy with some of the most beautiful artwork I've ever seen.
One day I'll also own the real thing... Maybe. That's a hard thing to justify that much money on, if you're not an investor.
TheOfficialCreator says... #2
I thought RL cards were about collectors not wanting their valuable assets to plummet in value. If that's the case, then this would have much the same issue.
I like the idea of EDH-only cards, but the additional rules text would make it a bit clunky. The best they could do would be to change the rules on Commander sets to make them unplayable in Vintage, which would work around the problem without people's feelings getting hurt.
Still, the issue of collectors is a thing.
August 14, 2021 5:33 p.m.