A 4th type of Booster Pack: Set Boosters
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on July 25, 2020, 4:06 p.m. by abby315
WotC has revealed that they're trying out a fourth type of Standard booster pack (the previous three being Draft, Theme, and Collector's): the Set Booster. More details can be found at the spoiler article.
Here are the basics:
- 12 cards in a booster
- One guaranteed Rare/Mythic and one guaranteed Foil per pack
- there's obviously no MSRP, but they expect it to sell for about $5/pack
- 30 packs to a box, rather than 36 (or 24 in the case of Masters sets)
- Art cards, a la Modern Horizons, are coming back
- Full-art lands are confirmed for Zendikar Rising
- A toned-down version of the original Zendikar Treasures are making a return: not backstock of the Power 9, but reprints a la Mystery Boosters of old cards
For the drop rates in each slot, please see the article, because it's pretty complicated. Basically, there's a chance to "upgrade" most of the slots into a rarer version.
To me, they're pretty obviously a mash-up of Draft packs and Collector's Boosters. As someone who likes to crack single packs occasionally, I think I'll be picking these up over Draft boosters. However, with Collector's Boosters for the set in circulation and driving down Standard card prices, they don't entice me to pick up a box or anything.
Also, it makes me laugh how much they're playing into the gambling side of pack-cracking.
What do y'all think?
WolfWitcher518 says... #4
MindAblaze: not sure who you're talking to since you didn't tag anyone, but i can guarantee the term "cardboard crack" did not originate from any sort of reference to "gambling".
July 25, 2020 4:19 p.m.
Omniscience_is_life says... #5
I would be intrigued as to what you'd rather call it, WolfWitcher518: here's an excerpt from wikipedia on gambling;
Gambling (also known as betting) is the wagering of money or something of value (referred to as "the stakes") on an event with an uncertain outcome, with the primary intent of winning money or material goods. Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize.
pretty much sums up the experience of cracking packs, does it not?
July 25, 2020 4:20 p.m.
MindAblaze says... #6
Cardboard Crack implies that there is an addiction involved. Gambling has a negative connotation because it is an addiction that ravages people’s lives, in the same way drugs and alcohol do. To say people are not addicted to magic is naive, IMO.
Anyway, I would prefer to spend my money on these over a draft booster because I am exactly the target market that Rosewater describes; losing interest in the draft chaff shortly after the rush of anticipation for the unknown that comes with ripping the pack open dissipates. It sounds fun.
July 25, 2020 4:24 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #7
Packs are gambling. It is exactly the same as loot box mechanics, which have been ruled to be gambling in many jurisdictions.
July 25, 2020 5:35 p.m.
I think these seem like a pretty good idea--there are those who love the random nature of opening packs, but are disheartened by how much junk they'll acquire. This seems like a good way to cater to those folks who just want to open the pack, not draft with it.
As for the discussion above, the simple fact is that Magic exists in a grey area where the law really is not settled. Does it look a lot like gambling? Yes it does. Is it? Not really clear. I did a fairly quick search through Lexis (caselaw database), and there really is no precedent anywhere in the United States on whether trading card games constitute gambling. Unless decided by statute or caselaw to the contrary, Wizards is going to happily say their product is not gambling, as you are always getting exactly what you pay for, no chance involved (X number of Magic cards and some other art cards or tokens thrown in).
July 25, 2020 7:09 p.m.
WolfWitcher518 says... #9
Omniscience_is_life & Gidgetimer: packs are not gambling. packs are a purchase. actual gambling includes the possibility of getting absolutely nothing back. a total loss. if anything, a purchase is the opposite. you are guaranteed some type of product. you are guaranteed some type of return on investment. this is quite the opposite of any casino experience.
July 25, 2020 7:59 p.m.
WolfWitcher518 says... #10
TypicalTimmy: i disagree. honestly, its a more than a little frustrating that i still have to fight this stigma after 15 years. i remember freshman year of high school when some buddies and I would get to school an hour before classes, just to play magic in the cafeteria. one day a teacher came in and told us we couldn't play because "card games are gambling". the rest of the group was ready to pack it up until i adamantly stood my ground against that teacher and subsequently the principal. luckily, i was able to convince him to let us play. granted this was playing the game and not opening packs, but the same principle of misguided thinking leading to the conclusion of mtg = gambling still applies imo. "addictive behavior" is not synonymous with "gambling".
July 25, 2020 8:57 p.m.
TypicalTimmy - You are correct that there the same conclusion could be drawn, but "could" is the operative word in that sentence. Though many of the operative factors are similar between the two, there are a number of reasons why governments and courts will, in reality, treat lootboxes and trading card games differently.
1) The problems with lootboxes get press. With lootboxes and trading cards existing in a legal gray area, it likely is going to take a legislative entity to act. However, legislatures generally do not act unless there is some sort of catalyst for action--there are a whole lot of issues governments have to address; they are not going to go out of their way to find new problems.
You are correct that some governments have banned or regulated lootboxes (and many more have looked at them, decided they were a problem, but collectively shrugged and decided they were not a big enough problem to actually address). All of these regulations were precipitated by some news story that went viral. The cost issues EA's Battlefront II lootboxes. Children racking up thousands and thousands on their parent's credit cards.
Without those stories making international headlines, lootboxes would have flown under the radar, as they had been doing for years and years before the first government crackdown.
We are unlikely to get one of those stories about Magic or other Trading Card Games. Why? Online games usually have a credit card account tied to them--children can spend on that account without additional approval, making for big headlines.
Shopping at online or physical stores means there are different safeguards in place preventing a child from quickly racking up thousands of thousands of dollars by just pressing buttons.
2) Magic and TCGs are inheritors of a long legacy of trading cards. The law loves things that are old and established; and hates things that are new and flashy. Many regulators--particularly old ones--are going to see Magic cards as just another step in the long history of baseball cards and the like. By virtue of being the long history of pack-based card products, Magic and other TCGs have a level of being grandfathered into a practice that has been around since the late 1800s.
3) Magic is not as addictive as online games due to the lack of instant gratification. You have to drive to the store to buy packs; you have to wait for your online order to go through the mail. There is a bit of a cooling down period for the addiction, unlike lootboxes where you can instantly access the purchase and receive the reward.
This cooling off period both makes them less addictive and less likely to result in large, headline-grabbing purchases, meaning TCGs are more likely to fly under the radar.
4) With TCGs you receive something corporeal, with lootboxes, you do not. Governments and the law are much more skeptical of products that do not actually exist--and for good reason. Once purchased, your TCG cards are something you can keep forever; with lootboxes, you are only getting something disappears with the game servers.
TL;DR: Though there are many similarities, TCGs have the advantage of flying under the radar, historical backing, being less problematic from an addiction stance, and providing the purchaser with something tangible.
Is it possible TCGs will get regulated? Of course; and I am sure Wizards and other companies are monitoring lootbox laws and cases very carefully. But, for the time being, there is no real reason for anyone to take on the issue of "is a TCG gambling" in any official capacity. Until that day, TCGs can happily exist in the permissible gray area.
July 25, 2020 9:08 p.m.
WolfWitcher518 says... #12
TypicalTimmy: my argument is from fact. again, addictive behavior is not synonymous with gambling. that friend of yours was not gambling, they were making a purchase. they were buying a product. the fact that the product is random does not suddenly make the purchase a gamble. do we also outlaw surprise merchandise bags from anime conventions? is that gambling? where do we draw the line?
agree to disagree. i'm out.
July 25, 2020 9:37 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #13
Gambling requires consideration (wager), risk (chance), and a prize. A possible total loss is not a requirement for gambling. There is no difference between my father-in-law losing a 50 cent wager on penny slots and me paying $4 for a pack and getting $3.50 worth of cards. They both required a buy-in, had chance as a determining factor, and could result in a profit if the result of the chance is favorable.
Do I think TCGs will ever be a legally restricted form of gambling? No.
Do I still feel it is gambling? Yes.
Do I see anything wrong with the act of gambling? No.
Gambling isn't a problem. Addiction and predatory practices are problems. I am sorry that you think gambling has negative connotations. I do not have these preconceived notions and no amount of trying to make up new definitions or anecdotes about you rising up against the man are going to change my mind.
Caerwyn makes some good points about legal definitions and regulation. I'm not talking in strictly legal sense though, even though I was the one that introduced that loot boxes have been legally considered gambling. I was trying to make a point that a similar system is widely considered to be gambling. It is like "gambling" on the stock market which is regulated against fraud, not as gambling; "gambling" that you will find your friend at some location they frequent; or "gambling" that it won't rain and riding a motorcycle to work. You are risking something (investment capital, time, comfort) on the chance that you will be rewarded (ROI, meeting up, a nice ride).
July 25, 2020 10:04 p.m.
WolfWitcher518 says... #14
Gidgetimer: your definition is wrong. i did not make up a new definition. your definition is metaphorical at best. period. no amount of your anecdotal evidence is going to change my mind. "you" may not have these "preconceived notions", but many other people do.
July 25, 2020 10:17 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #15
Find a single definition that says gambling requires the chance of total loss.
July 25, 2020 10:27 p.m.
RiotRunner789 says... #16
Well... I feel like that was answered thoroughly. MTG has, at the very least, elements of gambling.
But, back to the original topic...
I'm happy for Set boosters. I like the odds of better chance for rares and more relevant cards for a similar price. I've started to spend less on magic, so this is a welcome addition for me personally. Now, I'd like to know if they will switch out the draft boosters in bundles for set boosters. Now that, that would make my day.
July 26, 2020 12:18 a.m.
Is it gambling if I buy packs and boxes full of packs and let them sit in my basement for 20+ years to accrue in value just to sell them at a profit later?
For the record I do agree a lot with what has been said. If you try to open packs to get a specific card you are gambling, but I was wondering what you all think about buying these products just to sell them back after an extended period of time.
July 26, 2020 3 a.m.
SteelSentry says... #18
Why are they adding more types of boosters? I have only heard universal confusion about what cards are in what product, and this one being so close to regular boosters but not, I feel like it's getting worse. I feel bad for people trying to gift that don't play Magic.
In addition, draft and sealed were one of the main defenses of how booster packs aren't gambling, and now they've added a product solely designed for those who are addicted to cracking packs to purchase and rip open for a dopamine hit and gamble their money on pulling the card they want.
July 26, 2020 3:45 a.m.
RiotRunner789 That will be interesting to see; I think it depends on whether they find people buy Bundles just to open the packs, or if they think people are playing Sealed with the bundles. Obviously it's the former, so I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually made the switch. I think it'd be fun, but I wouldn't want to see the Bundles get even more expensive. I'd take fewer packs, like 8, of Set Boosters in a bundle to keep the same price point.
Also, it may have gotten buried in the release article, but each Zendikar pre-release kit will have a Set Booster in it. No word on whether it's legal in your sealed pool. I wouldn't be surprised if they do half and half Draft/Set boosters in a lot of sealed product going forward, until a clear audience winner stands out.
July 26, 2020 9:30 a.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #20
I do not wish to seem ignorant, but was it really necessary to have yet another type of booster pack? And why are there even multiple types of booster packs, anyway? What was wrong with the original model of having only one type of booster pack?
July 26, 2020 11:12 p.m.
DemonDragonJ: It all comes down to what WotC sees consumers doing with the Booster packs. The original Booster pack was designed for limited play, which is why it has the concentration of commons, uncommons, and rares that it does. As the game evolved WotC found that players were using them instead to just open and add to their collections.
The various additional types of Boosters so far were mostly targeted at that audience to try and suit their needs. The Theme boosters were aimed at an audience of mostly new-ish players who were opening boosters to create a Constructed deck, and thus might want mostly green cards, or Boros cards. The Collector's Boosters are aimed at an audience who opens packs to try and get cool and rare collectibles (and, I'd argue, high-roller buyers). Therefore, they have only rare cards at a higher price.
The new Set Boosters seem to be aimed at the audience who picks up a box or a Bundle every set release and opens them just to see and have some of the new cards. If you read the article, they talk a lot about this type of consumer who opens packs for the fun of it.
July 27, 2020 11:26 a.m.
I am 99% sure that WotC refuses to acknowledge the secondary market for just this reason. Currently, legally, they sell a product of randomized cards for a set price. Each card has the same value. Therefore, there is no monetary gain or loss, everyone gets the exact same thing every time.
If they admit that these cards have value, then opening packs provides a monetary gain or loss, which puts it more into the "this is gambling" territory.
WolfWitcher518 says... #2
please do not refer to packs as gambling. it carries a negative connotation that doesn't need to be associated with this game.
July 25, 2020 4:10 p.m.