M10

[Van]

Yet another thing tht is going to kill Magic? YOU BE THE JUDGE :V

[Van]

For the record, I was making fun of the fact that every change to magic is followed by "omg magic is dieing", including every thread about changes on this forum :V

I too welcome the change. It actually makes me want to consider drafting a core set. I tried an 10th edition draft and it made me want to throw up by how glaringly terrible and vanilla every card in that set is.

Shady: http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/27a

[Zerg]

My biggest problem with coreset drafting 10th was that most of the cards were just soooooooooo bad that oh look i opened cone of flame i win.Serra is going to tear up limited at uncommon. There better be 1-for-1 answers to her other than terror. >.>

[Naga]

I saw the new cards coming, when they printed a 2/1 for 1U and 2/2 for 1G in Shards of Alara. With Grizzly Bears out of the way, they needed something else to fill the coresets with.

The name change is just stupid. Two "Ten" editions in a row?

[Zindaras]

The whole "we want to keep the game names newer" is utterly ridiculous, but meh, whatever. Let them use their silly marketing ploys. They'll probably work, too.

To be honest, I like. A lot. It's a shame my two beautiful rare Serra Angels get downgraded to uncommon though. >.>

[Naga]

Oh, what about the rumoured change to "in play" to "battlefield"?

[Zindaras]

Oh, what about the rumoured change to "in play" to "battlefield"?

OMFG THEY'RE KILLING MAGIC!!!!

[Naga]

They already did change "play" to "cast", via Silence.

[Zindaras]

Yeah, but, seriously, battlefield? At least play-->cast is a relatively minor change (both are short words). Next thing we know, we'll be referring to the RFG-zone as "the Void" and we'll have to wave magic wands every time we try to cast a spell. A lot of these spells I don't even see myself casting on an actual battlefield.

[Fonzy]

Half the set being new is cool.

[RC]

Good changes all around. How they managed such is anyone's guess.

They already did change "play" to "cast", via Silence.

In all fairness, "cast" was commonplace pre-sixth, and changing it back will hopefully alleviate some confusion between "play" and "put into play" that some people seem to suffer.

Changing the name of the "in-play" zone is a good idea, but I haven't heard any rumors of it. Link?

[Van]

In all fairness, "cast" was commonplace pre-sixth, and changing it back will hopefully alleviate some confusion between "play" and "put into play" that some people seem to suffer.

Changing the name of the "in-play" zone is a good idea, but I haven't heard any rumors of it. Link?I like cast a lot better than play. It really does sound more flavorful and distinguishes between playing, putting into play, and casting. You play a land, you cast Shock.

And the rumors are just that, I think. It would be a step in the wrong direction that would severely alienate current fans of the game. Calling the in play zone a "battlefield" would require a shit-load of unnecessary errata for a marginal flavor difference that would probably end up being more confusing in the long run. If it was called that since Magic's inception, no one would have a problem. But it just sounds way too silly and SO geared towards new players that it will be the final straw to all those still bugged about Mythic rares.

[quadibloc]

It is good that the core set will be more interesting, since that means an additional interesting product.

But it's also kind of sad that the core set is becoming just like the sets in the blocks. It would be nice if there were sets that were genuinely different, serving the needs of different kinds of player.

[Jenius]

It is good that the core set will be more interesting, since that means an additional interesting product.

But it's also kind of sad that the core set is becoming just like the sets in the blocks. It would be nice if there were sets that were genuinely different, serving the needs of different kinds of player.

Stop necroing shit.