Metamorphosis
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on Aug. 25, 2014, 11:14 a.m. by spyroswiz
According to today's article in Daily MTG, Mark Posewater announced the new structure of blocks. We are going to have 2 rotations each year( one in fall and one in spring). Also, in summer 2015 its going to be the last core set. From then we are going to have 2 blocks each year. Whats your thoughts about the new model? For more informations: http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mm/metamorphosis
More shit which will become cheaper because
1/ Faster rotation means people won't be willing to pay as much for singles, meaning people won't be able to charge as much for singles.
2/ Three distinct blocks in standard at a time means more diverse strategies, means fewer cards that are "must have" to be successful. Spreading out the playable decks across archetypes means less chasing per chase card, lower prices again.
3/ Fewer sets leaving during each rotation means fewer cards in a deck which need to be replaced in a given rotation. Helps encourage point 2 above, and in general means that you will have to spend less money at once on new cards.
August 26, 2014 2:50 p.m.
We know wizards make money primarily from casuals and new players. These are the guys that buy packs.
Wizards are going to put out a greater number of superficially more exciting sets (no core sets). Having said that core sets recently have been very good in terms of card quality.
Wizards are going to make rotation occur more often.
The guys that buy boosters will feel compelled to buy boosters more often. This is evidently true because were visiting more worlds, with fewer weak sets.
That's all.
Its not necessarily that they'll be releasing quality products, theyre just essentially making everything seem shinier by removing what has traditionally been seen as boring.
August 26, 2014 2:53 p.m.
Regarding point 1 - that's not necessarily true, we don't know. People are just assuming this.
Regarding 2 - again, it might not pan out that way. More sets doesnt necessarily mean theyre all equal in power level etc. Again, people are just assuming. I mean, just because there are more sets doesnt necessarily mean that there arent a few obvious archetypes that just do better than the rest.
Regarding 3 - true and false. Sometimes you'll find that the vast majority of a deck rotates, sometimes not. That really just depends on the meta, and again isn't necessarily something that wizards have taken into account.
August 26, 2014 2:58 p.m.
AngryBearTony says... #5
I'm excited about the change. The three-set blocks have been a tad clunky, with the audience unhappy with usually at least one portion of the block for whatever reason, and core sets that just seem to filler until the next block. I think the idea just makes more sense monetarily (for them and us), creatively, and in a way to try to adjust the tournament format. Realistically we're not getting much new by dropping core and making a three part block into two blocks. But I can picture this being an easier transition for many people. And while I'm no economist, I don't think this will cause much of a spike in pricing (on the other hand, probably not much of a drop, either). I'm all for the changes.
August 26, 2014 3:01 p.m.
Agree with ChiefBell on all of the points.
On point one, I would bet on that being false. I don't see any reason to believe the chase cards of the format will be any less expensive simply because they have a shorter lifespan. They may be more potent (and expensive) because of the shallower pool.
I would have much preferred it if they had opted for increasing the card pool by making it four 2-set blocks per standard.
August 26, 2014 3:07 p.m.
@ChiefBell - "We know wizards make money primarily from casuals and new players. These are the guys that buy packs."
You realize that store owners open up a ton of boxes to fill up their case, and even sell their extra commons/uncommons as full quad sets at a low price to not be overloaded with useless cards. Stores get boxes relatively cheap, so they don't need to wait for the kids to open up packs, they just open them up themselves, get the chase rares, and profit. The casual players are more apt to buy the bulk rares which makes it all around profitable. Definitely not the new players that make the money wheel spin, it's the secondary market. For there to be a secondary market, there needs to be interest in specific cards which will make owners open tons of product to make sure they are fully stocked.
August 26, 2014 3:10 p.m.
Four sets rotate in each year. Four sets rotate out each year. It will be the same in the future. They are rotating out 2 sets twice a year instead of 4 sets at once. I don't see how this will have a gigantic impact on anything.
August 26, 2014 3:11 p.m.
darthfrog - Future Sight taught us anything but that is true. Many chase rares, poor new player support - lost money.
August 26, 2014 3:14 p.m.
As far as core sets lately, they have been the same as any core set in the past: safe. When was the last time core sets pushed boundaries? Made new mechanics? Used old mechanics in a way that didn't belittle their original sets? How many multicolored cards have been in core sets? I can think of two, and they were both planeswalkers whose images were stamped on every product package related to the core set. It's easy to say that card quality was good when you take into account that they took very few chances with anything.
Core sets used to serve a better purpose. Those cards were the absolute foundation of your deck. You didn't have a green deck back in the day without a set of Llanowar Elves and Giant Growth s. Since Magic sets have pushed so many boundaries and crossed so many lines, the number of really viable core set cards is almost laughable compared to what it used to be.
August 26, 2014 3:27 p.m.
i still find it bad. Newer players are going to find it more difficult to start playing, as core sets were mainly for beginners, more money will have to be spent to stay in standard due to more frequent rotations, and less older cards (such as Llanowar Elves and Wrath of God ) will probablyt ont see a reprint, the latter ever again
August 26, 2014 3:38 p.m.
Why on earth would you think that no core set means less reprints? Faster rotation means it is much safer to print old powerful cards, because they'll have overall less time to interact with Standard, and can therefore be more frequently reprinted.
August 26, 2014 3:40 p.m.
If core sets were mainly for beginners then why print them with old, complex mechanics?
August 26, 2014 3:44 p.m.
core sets allow for easier cards and a better introduction to Magic. This loss honestly upsets me, because I found m15 and m13 to be great sets with more then just a few chase cards. You didn't respond to me pointing out it will be harder getting into magic because of no core sets, which were designed to let newer players have a better time trying to learn and adapt to magic
August 26, 2014 3:45 p.m.
Devonin - Sorry, what I meant was that they might do reprints more frequenty but because sets cycle out faster the reprints will be opened in lower quantities. As it stands at the moments wizards stop printing a block when the next one comes out. If they start printing more blocks, more often then they'll print each individual block less. This means you might get different reprints more often, but each individual reprting might be printed fewer times in its own set. Do you sort of see where I'm coming from?
Jaxis - not even wizards know who the core set was catered to. All that happened was they ended up being generally a bit crap.
August 26, 2014 3:46 p.m.
and by what "complex" mechanics do you mean? core set cards rarely have more then one or two abilities, which are usually keywords, and have an explanation following. This is what can make them bad, but usually (I.E. 9/10 times, m14 kinda sucked) they do good through the painlands, Chord of Calling , Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker , Nissa, Worldwaker , and Thundermaw Hellkite
August 26, 2014 3:50 p.m.
Asher18 That's why MaRo was talking about a new product line specifically for beginners. Imagine the Starter set back in the 90s.
August 26, 2014 3:53 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #19
It is the opposite Asher18. Removing the core sets actually increases the amount of newer players that want to continue playing. New players quickly learn that the core sets don't have very good cards in comparison with the block sets, in which they then swap to buying the block sets. Having them start with the block sets makes them much more interested as the mechanics flow from card to card and the flavour and lore keeps them intrigued at the world of magic. They also are guaranteed potential money cards which they can then use to either get more bulk product, or attempt to try and get a good deck going.
A good product for new players are actually the duel decks, deckbuilder toolkits and starter decks. Since these come pre-assembled, they are excellent new player material in that they provide the lands necessary to get them started, but they also show a new player some of the basic guidelines for deckbuilding. The mana curve, the mana base, consistency, resiliency ... and a lot more.
August 26, 2014 3:53 p.m.
that's also why they revamped them and made them more simple. M10-M15 were fine, and i'm sad to see no more magic core sets
August 26, 2014 3:54 p.m.
I was at the M15 prerelease. You wouldn't beleive how bad Convoke was misunderstood and misinterpreted by people who didn't play it back in Ravnica.
August 26, 2014 3:54 p.m.
I believe you on that. It was slightly confusing to me too
August 26, 2014 3:56 p.m.
AngryBearTony says... #23
I think the argument that with no core sets it will be harder for beginners is just horse crap. With the amount of intro decks, event decks, duel decks, and other products out there specifically geared towards newer players or people who want an investment into a set without buying a bunch of boosters with cards they may not want, the core sets were becoming almost superfluous. Will each set of a block have intro decks? Almost definitely. For someone to say taking away the core set is a roadblock to new player introduction is just silliness.
August 26, 2014 4:19 p.m.
I agree with @AngryBearTony. There are already intro decks for every set, not to mention all the other various pre-made decks you can buy. Maro also stated in the article that they would make a new product just for beginners, which would more than make up for the lack of a core set.
As for reprints: not having a core set actually gives them more freedom to spread reprints out among all the sets, rather than just print one core set with a bunch of reprints and then have next to none in the expansions. This does mean that we will see less plane-specific reprints, like Llanowar Elves , but that's what they made less plane-specific cards (Elvish Mystic ) to take their place. That doesn't mean we'll never return to Dominaria and see the Llanowar Elves again, just that Elvish Mystic will be far more common now, instead.
All in all, I'd expect us to get about the same amount of reprints each year, with some of them being relegated to beginner products. Sort of like what they did this year, with some cards being standard legal but not actually appearing in packs, just the beginner decks.
I expect the change will be a good thing, overall. Rotation is one of the reasons I like playing standard rather than modern or legacy; I like that the meta shifts around far more often and far more drastically than the eternal formats. This change will put more of an emphasis on those shifts, and keep the meta from stagnating (like it has been since after Theros came out).
Speaking of eternal formats, I think people are underestimating what this change could do for those as well. Expansion set in place of a core set means more new mechanics and more new cards every year. Core sets, in general, have a far lower power level than expansions, and rarely print anything (other than chase reprints) that is viable in eternal formats, so this also increases the likelihood of them printing new cards that are viable in those formats, rather than one or two new cards coming out every year, we could get five or more. This will increase the rate at which the meta changes in eternal formats. It won't effect them nearly as much as it will standard, but it will still effect them.
The only thing that I'm unsure of is how this will effect the secondary market. It's something wizards doesn't like to talk about, but is important to the game none the less. I feel like the initial price on cards will still be about the same, as tournament level players will still need playsets of all the good cards right away, just like they do now. However the cards value will depreciate faster because they leave standard sooner. This could ultimately lead to an overall price drop, but could also just lead to the prices changing more rapidly. Right now card values for standard staples usually drop at a slow rate until they bottom out right after rotation. Cards being in standard for a shorter time frame could cause them to start out just as high, but bottom out at faster rate than before, which could lower consumer confidence and decrease sales of individual cards.
tl;dr : We won't really know the impact this has for at least a year or two, probably more before we really see all the ramifications of the change. I'm mostly optimistic, but I guess we'll see.
August 26, 2014 4:55 p.m.
They also mention in the article that there has already been things in the works about a new product specifically geared towards new players. Like they say in the article, it wasn't really obvious if core sets were specifically geared toward beginners or they were trying to still cater them towards experienced players as well. It was like they were trying to satisfy two different needs (and doing it poorly at that). So lets say everyone is right and core sets were designed for newer players so that means and not having them will hinder beginners. Well they've already had something long in the works for beginners to provide them a better entry level product anyways, so getting rid of the core set helps them try to correct the specific problems they discuss in the article and it clears way for them to introduce this new product they've already been working on. Basically it's irrelevant if they hurt beginners by taking them away because they've already been working to put out a better product for beginners. It just now takes the place of core sets instead of along side them since most of the time core sets just hinder R&D by creating these gaps in the story line which slows down story development and it all ties into what they said they're trying to fix.
August 26, 2014 5:08 p.m.
The first block of each standard will still be around for 18 months. I don't play standard, bit I don't see the issue.
August 26, 2014 5:46 p.m.
NobodyPicksBulbasaur says... #27
Meh. It's already been covered that beginners will still have product to look forward to.
To be honest, I don't think core sets even bring in beginners. Players aren't drawn in by the simplicity of core sets. They're brought in by the intrigue of new sets. I started playing competitively again around Innistrad block because HOLY SHIT VAMPIRES AND SHIT! Fun mechanics and themes make the game worth learning in the first place, even if you do have to learn an extra keyword or two.
August 26, 2014 5:46 p.m.
my point was that losing core sets isn't the end of the world and it's not going to eliminate new players. People seem to really be over reacting about it. Every time something new is announced, be it this or spoilers for new sets, all you hear is negativity. People have no faith in the company that has been making this game they obviously enjoy for 20 years. If all the negative nay-sayers were right even 10% of the time we wouldn't be sitting here having this discussion because this game would have failed long ago. We're talking about intelligent people who know what they're doing. Far more than anyone on the outside knows about what is going on. If they believe this will help them put out a better product for everyone, then I have faith that's what we'll get. If unforeseen events happen and this is a complete failure I also have faith that do what it takes to correct their mistakes. This is a company that has shown it's not afraid to admit mistakes and is always striving to put out a better product for it's customers. I'm just not assuming the worse, simply because they announced something was happening like others appear to be.
August 26, 2014 5:58 p.m.
aeonstoremyliver says... #29
I think that reprints of older cards may be more difficult without the core sets. Core sets allow R&D to put out cards that don't fit thematically, within flavor, storyline, etc. That being said, unless we happen to see many more "Return to XYZ" planes in the future, reprints may be few, far, and in between.
August 26, 2014 9:23 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #30
We may however, get effective copies of those cards. Because there is nothing saying WotC can't take a current card, put a different name on it, change the art, and then release it like that. Like Dismember could have a 1B equivalent. Are they the same? No, but it is an effective copy that can deal with most indestructible creatures.
August 26, 2014 9:39 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #31
Keep forgetting about these mana symbols we've got implemented >.<
August 26, 2014 9:41 p.m.
NobodyPicksBulbasaur says... #32
How do you type that? Didn't know it existed.
Also, it is extremely unlikely that there will be functional reprints of the best Modern staples because those "reprints" would also be Modern-legal. Imagine if they reskinned Tarmogoyf . You'd be able to play 8 copies of him in a deck, which would be absolutely bonkers.
Sometimes it's smarter to simply do a straightforward reprint and damn the consequences.
August 26, 2014 9:50 p.m.
Pretty simple! Just do the standard brackets arond the symbols in a mana cost! 
Pain mana: PB PW PR PG PU
Hybrid mana in order. Other than that, pretty straightforward.
August 26, 2014 9:57 p.m.
How about a new format featuring the new card frames... I vote for its name to be Post Modern, and Modern will be locked in at everything from 8th Edition to Journey Into Nyx. That way, functional reprints of the Goyf will not be in the same format.
....or we could just reprint the Goyf. Dealer's choice.
August 26, 2014 9:59 p.m.
how do you do the hybrid mana symbol, Jaxis? The other were straight forward and i can do them. I thought I understood what you meant when you said in order but it's not working so I must be doing something wrong.
August 26, 2014 10:04 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #37
Actually, you have to use the symbol syntax. Otherwise it will occasionally link to decks. This mainly is an issue with hybrid mana.
[ [symbol:T] ]
August 26, 2014 10:24 p.m.
PreZchoICE1 says... #38
Standard players overreacting? Hogwash. Thats never happened before!
August 26, 2014 11:14 p.m.
Femme_Fatale that's what the preview button is for! If it links to a deck, change it. Otherwise, be lazy. _
I am sad that 
is as high as the numbered mana costs go, though. I wanted to be able to spam that CMC of Gleemax
in some sort of twisted pseudo DBZ reference.
August 27, 2014 1:12 a.m.
IRollTwnties says... #42
you get to play any individual card in standard for 18 months, instead of 24. boo freaking hoo. the new system means we get six months less of being absolutely bored to death of 'durdle durdle verdict durdle rev durdle do i win yet?' no more core set means we get more interesting cards printed instead of wasting space on shitty reprints that noone actually cares about. a shorter standard season means more high-powered cards are going to get printed, which will make eternal formats cheaper. if you are so worried about 'wasting' money on a deck you play for six months less, trade off your value a month before rotation and get credit to pick up new staples after the release.
August 27, 2014 1:23 a.m.
PreZchoICE1 says... #43
Personally I cant get enough of playing hard into a Durpreme Verderp. Keeps my mental state healthy. I especially like to do it when my opponents first 3 land drops are island plains plains. Did I mention I dont play a lot of standard in this thread already?
August 27, 2014 1:30 a.m.
Modern will conceivably be cheaper. I don't see how Legacy and Vintage will be, because even cards like Counterspell are too powerful to be reprinted in standard. Legacy and Vintage reprints will only be available in special sets like FTV once a year.
August 27, 2014 10:42 a.m.
I for one am a fan of this, and I pretty much only play standard. I like the fact that we won't see the redundancy of core sets accompanied with 2 or 3 good cards.
August 27, 2014 11:28 a.m.
GoldGhost012 says... #46
With the removal of core sets, do you guys know what this means?
No more reprints of the boring basic lands!
August 27, 2014 11:52 a.m.
GoldGhost012 But island is still around.....just ban it already!
August 27, 2014 12:27 p.m.
I'm excited about the change. Sounds like it will spice things up in standard. Mostly though, I'm happy the story pace increasing. A year is a long time to be dwelling on the same short story.
August 27, 2014 2:44 p.m.
jlwalker20 says... #50
The new rotation format will be better for everyone. It's as if MTG is going on a high-fiber diet and eating Activia like Jamie Lee Curtis. Here's how I see it going down, so long as they stick to their guns:
Regulation of spend. In September, one block (two sets in the new format) will rotate out, compared to the current format's block+core (for a total of four sets). That means not needing to blow a ton on cards in September when half your deck rotates out and the thing ends up wholly "broken." It's a constant gradual evolution, rather than a series of one-off, annual metagame shifts.
Intentional design working against a "solved" metagame. This means more than your typical 4-5 archetypes will be viable in competitive play, scaling from local FNM all the way up through Grand Prix Top 8s. In turn, there will hopefully no longer be 3-4 "money cards" per set that command a ridiculous price simply because they fit into those 4-5 imbalanced archetypes. Design parity means competitive parity AND value parity. This is supported by the intention that no set will be a "weak set" with lots of cards filling space for the sake of completing a block.
Actually buying product from WotC (and not just singles) just got a lot more worthwhile, as card parity means you're not opening packs and crossing your fingers for those 3-4 "money cards" that Wizards sees no return from.
Drafting just got a whole heck of a lot more incentive, as a result.
More people buying sealed product? Cool! More trade bait and individual-to-individual sales in circulation, even lower demand for select singles, lower price for said cards.
Lower shelf life on singles? Lower price, because like in World of Warcraft, MTG has its own economy that operates with most basic laws of economics.
So yeah. They should've headlined with parity rather than metamorphosis. Card parity and gradual metagame evolution means Standard is more accessible, more people will buy product and lower individual card prices. Everyone wins (except resellers). It's brilliant, get hype.
ManaPoolChewie says... #1
Yeah, because every Standard-legal card or deck is always viable and maintains its value for the ENTIRE time it's legal in the format. Before this, no one EVER had to spend money on new cards once they had a good deck. Not even once.
August 26, 2014 2:49 p.m.