What if (insert old rule) came back?
General forum
Posted on Sept. 23, 2017, 12:38 a.m. by cgomes
I've been playing magic longer than I'd like to admit and for the most part, I think the changes that were made to the rules of the game were ultimately positive--that is, they made playing the game more intuitive and thus easier for all players, particularly new ones. That said, every now and then I get myself wondering about old rules (e.g., tapping artifacts to turn them off, mana burn, stacked damage, etc.) and how some of them would impact contemporary decks and formats if they still applied.
In my case, I really miss the concept of mana burn. I like the idea of mana burn because it adds another layer of complexity to casting spells and floating mana. Suddenly, casting a Mana Drain in response to a spell with high CMC doesn't look all that good if you cannot use the mana; control decks start to crumble when a Power Surge hits the battlefield on turn 2; tapping workshop for less than 3 now starts hurting you, which might be relevant in a deck that also runs Ancient Tombs (vintage shops). Flavorwise, there's something about the idea that 'excess mana now vanishes into the aether' that never seemed right to me.
How about you? Is there a particular aspect of the old rules that you miss nowadays? And if it came back, how would it impact the decks and formats you play the most?
aeonstoremyliver says... #3
I really miss mana burn, too. I designed an entire deck around it back in the day and it was very effective. The flip side of that is that you would be able to float mana as different steps of the turn ended, which could be very relevant and we could do some broken things. See 12 Post for reference.
I hate the Legend and Planeswalker uniqueness errata. Not cool.
I really miss being able to mulligan a full seven if you had no lands or all lands in your hand. Reveal your hand and take seven.
September 23, 2017 9:34 a.m.
I had completely forgotten about the tap blocker thing. Mishra's Factory block and tap to pump itself wouldn't be a thing then.
But what about the cards that were not designed with old rules in mind? I don't keep up with Standard and Modern nowadays but I'm sure tapped blocker, stack damage, etc., would affect how good some of them are.
Say, Death's Shadow would be really busted with mana burn lol.
September 23, 2017 9:50 a.m.
xDestroyerXIII says... #5
I love mana burn, especially when exchanging life totals lol I really miss the difference in speed between interrupts and instances,I disagree with everything basically being a interrupt. Split second isn't a justification either. At home we also play with no stack. sooo much more fun,but i do enjoy the feeling of tournaments. MTG is great no matter the rules. Just adapt and destroy :D
September 23, 2017 12:27 p.m.
filthyc4sual says... #6
aeonstoremyliver I would like to abuse the shit out of that mulligan rule in belcher
September 23, 2017 6:22 p.m.
gnarlicide says... #7
the second legend rule would be nice to have back, (the one where you can play a Thalia, Guardian of Thraben and then if your opponent plays one, they both die). I had a deck back in 2006 that capitalized on that rule with Leyline of Singularity. Good times.
September 24, 2017 8:39 a.m.
@xDestroyerXIII: Do you mind reminding us about the differences between interrupts and the split second ability? It's somewhat tricky because the idea of stack was not there when people played with instants and interrupts.
September 24, 2017 11:35 a.m.
xDestroyerXIII says... #9
Split second is like hitting the pause button on the game. Since all instances can be responded to by just playing another instance or ability, split second is basickly the same as an inturrpt, except you can't respond to s.s. except with static triggered abilities. Inturrupts could only be answered by another inturrpt. The "stack" basically makes everything an inturrpt, making the "inturrupt" text out of date, and dimming down the power level of previous interupts. The stack just makes the game more simplified, especially for new players and making it easier to judge and play tourniments. I enjoy both tourniment and organs style of play, house rules being my favorite since we can eliminate the stack. Hope that helped! :D
ClockworkSwordfish says... #2
I agree that losing mana burn is a loss for the most part. The logic was that it didn't come up often and fairly enough, but... well, neither do a lot of things. The problem is mostly that removing mana burn didn't add any strategic depth. But there is a void now where it once was - for all of the reasons you listed, and then some.
What really peeves me are the cards that have been rendered useless since they were designed with mana burn in mind. Citadel of Pain and Pygmy Hippo are chief examples, but I also liked the added utility on Spectral Searchlight and Valleymaker. Master of Arms was also neutered by a rules change (tapped blockers not dealing combat damage) and yet they swept in and errata'd him to compensate. Where's the love for the Hippo, huh?
Other rules losses I dislike are combat damage no longer using the stack (that's more arbitrary; there are arguments for both versions having advantages) as well as the new legend rules (it makes more sense balance-wise but I dislike it flavour-wise.) The one that probably leaves the worst taste in my mouth is the new 'waterfall' style for handling combat damage in gang blocks! Jesus, I thought they were trying to make the game more streamlined - what the heck is this about guys lining up to take hits until the attacker decides he's handed out enough? It's less intuitive and lowers the power of trample, which could kind of use the help considering it's the worst form of evasion there is. Plus the whole "deathtouch has a secret second ability where it lets you use the old style of damage" both suggests it wasn't a necessary change and also results in weird rules baggage that isn't obvious from looking at a card, kind of like the original Walls being unable to attack without any reminder text saying so.
September 23, 2017 3:53 a.m. Edited.