Why Did WotC Discontinue Core Sets, Again?
General forum
Posted on Aug. 29, 2021, 4:28 p.m. by DemonDragonJ
Mark Rosewater has said that core sets are on hiatus, again, which contradicts what he previously said; when core sets were reinstated for Core Set 2019, Rosewater stated that WotC realized how vital core sets were for the game, and that WotC was very unlikely to discontinue them for a second time. Furthermore, since core sets were reintroduced, the last several installments were amazing, especially Core Set 2021, so I fail to see what possible reason there could be for discontinuing them a second time. Did the most recent set not sell many copies, despite the large number of awesome cards that it contained?
What does everyone else say about this? Why has WotC discontinued core sets for a second time?
Last_Laugh says... #3
They're flooding the market with too many products and don't see the correlation between that and some products not selling well. They just assume that it's the products fault instead of realizing it's good old fashioned wallet fatigue.
August 29, 2021 5:42 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #4
Last_Laugh, I agree with that completely, and I actually am feeling the effects of market saturation (which is definitely a subject that deserves its own thread); when a spoiler season begins, I check various websites very frequently, and, when a spoiler season ends, I feel a sense of deflation and listlessness, eagerly awaiting more spoilers. WotC has spoiled their players, and both they and the players are feelings the effects of that spoiling, so I feel that WotC may need to wean the players off from a near-constant influx of new products.
August 29, 2021 6:19 p.m.
Omniscience_is_life says... #5
My guess is that the requirement for a core set to be more underpowered (read: have fewer staple/chase cards) makes WotC view it as a poor investment.
August 29, 2021 6:27 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #6
Omniscience_is_life, that really bothers me, when only a single card or a certain few cards in a set are highly desirable, leaving all other cards in that set to be deemed "bulk" cards; in my mind, WotC needs to actively ensure that every card in a set has value and is useful in a wide variety of scenarios, not merely in a small number of unusual situations.
August 29, 2021 7:37 p.m.
Omniscience_is_life says... #7
DemonDragonJ I agree with the sentiment, but in practice that's a near unachievable goal. Wizards' design ethos for commons is to keep them extremely simple--thus, many of them have effects simply far too underwhelming to merit play in any but the most niche situations.
Since Core Sets generally keep most of their cards simple, most follow the same path as the commons of other sets.
August 29, 2021 7:59 p.m.
yeah or just relevant in a draft, or just for flavor. high bar to make them all useful!
August 29, 2021 8:01 p.m.
@yeaGO - MaRo talks about this issue pretty frequently and your comment highlights the issue with the wish that "every card has value". To appeal to the largest audience, tons of cards are created that aren't "traditionally" valuable. Cards that are weak but support a weird archetype, or small tribe, or whatever. Different people find different things valuable, so it's tough to say "cut out the cards that aren't valuable".
Personally, I'm more of a Spike than anything, so sometimes I have trouble sympathizing with folks that like cards that are not traditionally valuable, but these people exist and I think have just as much a right to getting cards that meet their idea of fun as I do.
August 29, 2021 10:08 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #10
If I had to guess? It's not new and shiney enough. WOTC is going down, in my opinion, an incredibly dark road of lack-luster mechanics every 3 or 4 months. They keep pushing for the new shiny toy to sell, rather than refine and polish the shiny gifts they've already given us. Long since are the days where mechanics meant something and we had enough cards to build decks around. Now, everyone picks the top 2 or 3 best of the 10 or 14 printed and the rest collect dust because they lack synergy or aren't competitive enough.
Core Sets do not typically breath new mechanics into the game and are often rife with reprints. So it'd be like giving players gold and silver for months on end, then telling them that they can buy some tarnished copper for the same price.
It's a calculated decision, as it'll lose them money. They'll make money, sure, but not nearly as much as a new set would yield. The same time and energy are put into making a Core Set as a brand new world, so why do the same amount of work for less results?
August 29, 2021 10:21 p.m.
ClockworkSwordfish says... #11
Short answer: they're stupid.
Long answer: theeeeey're stuuuuuuuupiiiiid.
August 30, 2021 1:54 a.m.
TypicalTimmy - "in my opinion, an incredibly dark road of lack-luster mechanics every 3 or 4 months. "
This is an opinion I hear a lot, but I think it is generally unfounded. This game has been releasing a series of lack-luster abilities for years and years. Amplify, Provoke, Sunburst, Offering, Transmute, Hellbent and dozens of others were limited to a single set or block, and never received the support they needed to leave too big of a mark on the game. Some, like Bushido, get lucky and might see a nod in a Modern Horizons or Commander set, and a very limited few, like Convoke, might actually see some major adoption.... but the vast majority of set-specific mechanics throughout the game's long history languish in obscurity.
There's actually a good chance that the new more aggressive release schedule will alleviate this problem, since it creates more supplemental products where these languishing abilities might find a home.
As for getting rid of Core Sets, Wizards has said that players are increasingly entering the game through other products--usually EDH or things like Jumpstart. It does not make sense for them to create "intro sets" that are mechanically stale for older players, if fewer and fewer new players would use an intro set as their starting point.
August 30, 2021 3:01 a.m. Edited.
Caerwyn As you said, people are using Jumpstart and Commander products to get into the game. But what's the next step? If a new player wants to start drafting, or building their own deck, is it reasonable to throw them directly into a world of double-faced cards, dungeons outside the game, or even Companion, a mechanic that literally doesn't work the way the cards say it does? And that's just the last couple of years.
There's a huge complexity gap between intro products and premier products. Highly experienced players were never the intended audience for Core sets, any more than Modern players are the target audience for Commander sets. Removing them does nothing but steepen the learning curve, unless the designers make a conscious effort to reduce complexity in premier sets or create a new second-step product.
August 30, 2021 1:16 p.m.
legendofa - I think the "What about if they want to move to draft" argument for Core Sets is overblown. For it to be an effective argument, one has to ignore how people draft.
There are two general types of drafting--those that occur between friends and those that occur at an LGS. LGSes almost exclusively draft with the most recently released Standard set, or they have special events with supplemental sets like Double Masters for those who want a different drafting experience. I have never seen an LGS who holds onto Core products year-round so they can do a "Beginner Draft" during the 3/4ths of the year where the Core Set was not the most recent standard set.
With friend groups there is a bit more leeway, but they also tend to play with whatever the most recent set is released. Sure, they could decide they want an easier time and seek out Core products, but they would need the entire palygroup of multiple people to decide collectively "we want to play a more boring, simple draft environment."
So, you have a set that tends to be less popular for veterans and only performs its intended purpose of helping new players for a few months out of the year. Not exactly the ideal type of product if your players are getting introduced to the game elsewhere.
August 30, 2021 1:59 p.m.
Caerwyn Let's say you've taught one of your friends the basics of the game: color theory, steps and phases, and some evergreen mechanics. They're getting into it and are interested in learning more. What product would you use or recommend to help them advance? I assume you would help them out in person if you could--offer advice, watch their play, and so on. But what sets or expansions would you recommend to someone ready to take the next step? That's a genuine question, since I'm not sure what the right answer is at this point.
Putting drafts and formats aside (because you're right on how people draft), and looking at just going to the local retailer, either LGS or megastore, and buying booster packs to mess around with. In the next few weeks, I would reasonably expect to see both Kaldheim and Midnight Hunt available. That means that the new player likely will have to learn rules for both MDFCs and TDFCs, which have no similarities aside from basic layout. That's a huge step up from the Tree-Hugging Unicorns or Devilish Goblins or whatever they learned with.
What would you recommend to help ease the learning process? The only other option I see is to go immediately to buying singles, which supposes that your interested friend knows exactly what they want to do.
August 30, 2021 3:54 p.m.
I think players generally overestimate the jump from the precon level to the current iterations of main-sequence Standard sets. Frankly, in a lot of regards, Core Sets are a step down from many of the Commander precons, which tend to have a large number of mechanics tossed in there, even if they are all focused around a singular theme.
MDFCs and Adventure might be confusing, but they are still an extension of the basics one would learn from precons. There are lots of ways for players to learn and understand these mechanics--from playing with their friends who introduced them to the game, playing at their LGS, reading the numerous online resources that are available, or just looking at the reminder text (which, having started playing before reminder text, I think is the single best update this game ever received).
Core sets do not really offer a step between introductory products and more advanced products. They are, at best, a lateral move, which do not really get players closer to learning the game's more advanced mechanics.
August 30, 2021 4:38 p.m.
Maybe I've just had different teaching experiences. 2020 was a bad year for for the sort of in-person teaching I like, but Jumpstart -> M21 -> Zendikar Rising -> other sets felt like a very natural and easy curve to teach and learn off, for rules, strategy, and deckbuilding. (Sample size: only one. Not ideal.)
I have to admit, my advice for teaching Commander beyond the basic rules is basically "Buy a precon and see if you like it." It's a much more personalized experience for a lot of people, and I don't take it that seriously.
August 30, 2021 5:20 p.m.
legendofa - I think a lot of that progression might have been simple luck - you happened to introduce them to Magic right when M21 came out. Let’s change the hypothetical some and shift Jumpstart forward two slots, so it fell between Theros and Ikoria, rather than M21 and Zendikar.
Do you think you would have purchased M20 products from the prior year or waited another quarter until M21? Probably not - I am guessing you would have done the same thing you did, start with Jumpstart, go to the current standard set of Theros, and then add on with the next standard set, Ikoria. And that probably would have worked just as well - sure, Mutate in Ikoria is a bit of a rules nightmare, but that really would be the only sticking point from those two regular standard products.
August 31, 2021 12:08 a.m.
Caerwyn In that case, I would have let them use one of my "training" decks to make sure they were comfortable before moving on to Theros. None of the mechanics there are completely outrageous, but Sagas take a little explaining, and if we got some throne of Eldraine mixed in, we get the Adventures you alluded to. Actually, Theros Beyond Death would be a good place to get into the higher levels.
By the way, I appreciate the mature and responsible conversation, and you're bringing up some good points.
legendofa says... #2
Short answer, I have no clue and I'm not sure it's a good idea.
Jumpstart is the new intro product, but to paraphrase myself in another thread, there needs to be a low-complexity, neutral setting set fairly regularly, in my opinion. It kind of feels like th designers expect a new player to pick up a couple of Jumpstart products, run a few games, then jump straight into what fifteen years ago were called Expert-level sets, now known as premier sets. There's a lot of new product out now, so I might just be overlooking something, but there doesn't seem to be a good learning tier system anymore.
Jumpstart is a very good introductory system, but there needs to be a middle ground between "super-simplified and predictable" and "new mechanic that only shows up in one set and needs three lines of reminder text". Core sets fill(ed) that role, with a lot of evergreen and returning mechanics. Now, it's straight from flying to mutate.
August 29, 2021 4:46 p.m.