New Format: 100 points
The Kitchen Table forum
Posted on Jan. 29, 2017, 2:25 p.m. by MorteCerta
Pretty straight forward:
- Common = 1 pont
- Uncommon = 2 points
- Rare = 3 points
- Mythic rare = 4 points
And, as you probably have figured by now, you have 100 points to build your deck (including sideboard, which have to have 15 cards in it). Aside from that, it follows the rules of modern.
I've been thinking about this for a while and the idea is to make a more competitive and cheaper eternal format. When we talk about modern, we are talking about money (although i really like modern), especially when it comes to the mana base. I believe this point system will prevent people from abusing fetch/dual lands and things like planeswalkers, bringging down the price of the decks.
Do you really need all those rare lands? Or that mythic rare planeswalker? They come with a cost, choose wisely
Advices and suggestions are welcome!!
Falkenstein says... #3
I think this is a really cool idea but definitely needs to be worked out a little bit more. I've never had any interest to play with randoms because I don't put much money into this hobby which limits my competitiveness so this would be a great way to keep things on a level field.
January 29, 2017 3:01 p.m.
MorteCerta says... #5
Atony1400
I think that for reprinted cards we count the newest reprint.
For the amount of points of each rarity, i think we need more test, but if you build a deck in this format you will see that 100 point are already very punishing for rare and mythic rare. With 10 point it would be almost impossible to make a deck with any mythic rare.
January 29, 2017 3:04 p.m.
MorteCerta says... #7
"I think this is a really cool idea but definitely needs to be worked out a little bit more."
Definitely! Hope this comunity will give some insights.
I don't really play that much magic either. I usually test ideas like this on xmage with some friends.
January 29, 2017 3:09 p.m.
Inn order for a format to be viable, legality needs to be easy to check. Imagine having to count points before events. How about shop stuff? Who's gonna count your deck? This seems too complex to be viable. It also invites confusion. Its a lot easier to tell newer players anything after battle for zendikar is legal, for example.
January 29, 2017 3:40 p.m.
Izu_Korasu says... #9
MorteCerta there are existing formats that fulfill your needs.
Pauper is a powerful and popular format that uses only cards that were ever printed as commons. That way reprints don't ruin the entire format or make cards illegal (these are eternal formats afterall).
Peasant and Noble are other fringe formats that use additional rules and allow for uncommons, rares and even a mythic or two, but level the playing field with specified counts of each rarity.
The point value system is an interesting idea for deckbuilding, but becomes overly complex for validating decks legality before play (as TheDevicer also mentioned. Even with decklists/counts its a whole extra step of complexity that will dissuade people from playing/hosting the format.
if your main goal is budget modern, or you cant stand seeing people pay life to crack fetches to get shocks, there are numerous budget modern decks that reasonably competitive, and there are formats like pauper and frontier that are more suited to your desires.
January 29, 2017 4:37 p.m.
If you're going to do points, do it how Canadian Highlander does it: have specific cards have points, and change the point limit to reflect this.
This is their point list if you want to take a look: https://canadianhighlander.wordpress.com/rules-the-points-list-and-deck-construction/
January 29, 2017 6:11 p.m.
MorteCerta says... #11
I do not think that counting the points would be a big deal. If you are playing competitive, every deck has to be checked to be sure that they fit the format anyway, the points would be just one more stuff to check; If you are playing online, its very easy to check, most of the programs already check the rarity of each card (like xmage when checking for pauper); And if you are playing casual, well, you do not check your friend's deck to see if you have less then 60 cards or more then 4 copies of one card, you just trust them . What I'm saying is, I belive that the task to count the points of the deck will be worth the balance and price of the format.
Yeah, i tried pauper but i do not really like the format, i know it's cheap but it's also too restrictive. Sometimes you need that card to close the deck, but you cannot use if it's not common. This point system would enable more flexibe decks, without the abuse of power/expensive cards that we see in modern. Not saying it's better than pauper, it's just different.
About the peasant and noble ... never heard of that, i will take a look.
January 29, 2017 6:31 p.m.
So, let me get this straight - you think that rarity equals power level. By all means, play 4 Gonti's Aether Heart while I play Mutagenic Growths and Lightning Bolts.
If you look at older formats, most of the powerful cards are actually commons and uncommons, rather than new-age mythics.
Additionally, this means you can have a maximum of 8 mythics in your whole deck and that is if you play only commons in the rest of the slots. Or 15 rares (I thick dredge can easily fit into 15 rares). This is so restrictive as to not be worth it, I think.
Additionally, there will be no 3 or more colors in a deck since mana fixing comes at a steep price.
Additionally, this is on top of modern's already extensive banlist. Making a modern-lite does not really pander to any particular audience. Who is this format for?
Finally, it has already been mentioned, but check out Can Highlander points system with no ban list.
January 30, 2017 3:08 a.m.
Boza has a point.
Limiting by price would be more acurate, but it would be a bitch to check price of your deck before every game. One way to solve that would be to have price "checkpoints" where you freeze the time and and use the price list for 3-6 months before updating the list, with emergency updates if needed.
But still.. modern is established, fun, pretty stable and less fuss..
January 30, 2017 3:49 a.m.
MorteCerta says... #14
rarity is not necessarily determinant to power/price, but it is a important factor, that tends to dictate those properties (common sense guys, use it)
About Canadian Highlander; it's cool and all, but it's quite different of what im trying here. I prefer my format, but that's just my opinion of course
btw, this amount of points is just the first aproach, hope you help to tune it
January 30, 2017 5:55 a.m.
While rarity is a component to complexity of a card, it is not a component of power level - rarity affects only draft and impacts none of the constructed formats.
You are correct that Wizards states that some effects are not allowed in lower rarities (New World Order simplyfying commons and determining that things like planeswalkers and extra turns should be "mythic only" even if they are terrible (ie Gonti's Aether Heart).
The most recent newly banned card in Modern was Gitaxian Probe, a common. Before it, it was Treasure Cruise. 1/3 of the modern banlist is comprised of commons.
Rarity has no effect on the power level, rarity only defines drafting and what could be printed on the card (since New World Order took effect).
Formats work when they are simple - Canadian Highlanders point system requires just a few cards to be checked for the deck to be valid, not every single one.
The problem with the idea is it has little audience - people who play modern, but want a limited version of it for some reason. Good games allow every player to feel like he/she is doing something overpowered, not the other way around.
January 30, 2017 7:57 a.m.
Izu_Korasu says... #16
Rather the best modern-lite this format seems to be a pauper heavy, (again look into peasant and noble)
The question does really become, who is format for?
Casual players who feel overwhelmed by modern? The point system Complexity may deter them.
Pauper players who want more broken decks? odds are they will play modern.
There's a niche here, but between the pauper, modern banlists (that you would need to have) and the point system, it starts to just sound like a set of house rules for casual rather then its own format
January 30, 2017 11:38 a.m.
- "it follows the rules of modern"
This is a big no-no. When making a new format, do not try to emulate too much existing ones. Another idea would be:
I would suggest to have this as your starting point to avoid some complexity issues that come with weird 8th edition cards in Modern like Blood Moon and Ensnaring Bridge.
"more competitive and cheaper eternal format" - that is a mutually exclusive statement. There cannot be a format that is both cheap and competitive.
"I believe this point system will prevent people from abusing fetch/dual lands" - sure, but it will also kill 3+color decks. A format lives and dies by its manabase. Standard contains mostly 2 color decks, because that is how the mana is structured. 3+ colors are only for slower decks or those that have slots for mana fixing. Pauper is a 1-2 color format because it has a poor manabase.
Manabases are good starting point to start designing a format.
"and things like planeswalkers" - there is exactly 1 planeswalker played competitively in Modern and 2 in Legacy. Walkers are non-issue.
"bringging down the price of the decks." - if the format is popular, its staples will be worth a lot, regardless what its strongest card is. Consecrated Sphinx is almost only played in commander, but it is so popular there that is worth more than the most expensive standard cards. When Tiny leaders became a thing for a while, Leonin Shikari jumped more thna 5 times its pre-TL price.
Regardless of format, if it is popular enough, its staples will be expensive unless printed into oblivion (ie Brainstorm in Legacy). No format can guarantee that so creating a format with the premise of "I want this to be a cheaper version of X" is a bad idea that is bound not to work. Start from a different place to create your format.
Additionally, unless you are playing top-level competitive tournaments, price should not be an issue in any format due to existence of proxies.
February 1, 2017 9:58 a.m.
The best way to do a format like yours would be to assign points to each individual card, not only by rarity. It would be a lot of work initially, but i think most card could be assigned points based on a formula like Price/10 * X (rarity). Then you could change the point cost for cards like you would update a banned list. If, say, Siege Rhino becomes too powerful in the format, change its points from 3 to 5 for example. That way, you have the option to weaken the other cards in the deck to be able to play the rhinos.
Maintaining the format would require dedication from a small group of people, as well as a site where you can post your decklist and calculate its total points. Oh, and by posting list to the site to calculate points you will get statistics for what cards are overplayed..
But... the question remains.. is there a need for a format like this?
Atony1400 says... #2
I think you should bump mythic up to 10, and specify what cards have what rarities. Do they go by first standard legal print? What if cards are reprinted? Please elaborate.
January 29, 2017 2:49 p.m.