M10 (Magic 2010) Rule changes.

blkaznguy4 · Joined: 04 Jun 2005 Posts: 83

Fuck them.

Good bye Combat Damage Stack ...

Throw away your mogg fanatics everyone

everything else is fine

but this is a game of complex strategies (use your brain?) ... not dumb it down for some crying dipshits.

clayparson · Joined: 04 Sep 2004 Posts: 68

I too am sad to see combat damage leave the stack, and i have greater misgivings about the limited number of options for attacking players, but these changes won't be that big a deal. People flipped out at the 6th ed. rules change, but everything worked out.
The change so that mana pools empty at end of phases and steps is interesting though.

BUT most importantly, astral slide has some goofy sounding text with the new terminology.

FAKE1 · Joined: 07 Jun 2009 Posts: 7

Can someone post a link to where i can see these rule changes?

gypsy · Joined: 15 Jun 2007 Posts: 1671

these changes pushed me over the edge to quitting magic

http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/42a

Eldariel · Level 3 Judge Joined: 15 Jun 2006 Posts: 277

Gotta learn the fucking game again. For the third time. Well, whatever.

Seriously, I don't get this. Do they really think there are tons of magic players out there without a shop with a proficient judge in it? Seems rather unlikely seeing most shops are run by certified judges... I just don't see what they hope to accomplish with this? Surely the fact that millions already play the game and have learned to play it by the rules in tournaments speaks for the present system being sufficiently simple?

There are a few changes that seem reasonable (I'd count Deathtouch, Lifelink, EOT wordings & possibly the new mulligans as ones), but the removal of manaburn is a bitch, along with the fact that manapool empties between steps. Removes a lot of strategic flexibility from the game, not to mention, manaburn is pretty damn flavourful - removing it seems to go against their general line here.

And Exile is the best word they could come up with for RFG? Really? It doesn't even make any sense most of the time: "I exile all the cards in your graveyard" TF? Also, the Token Ownership; they specifically defended many of their choices as "that doesn't come up that often" - how friggin' often does token ownership come up? Only in casual decks specifically built around the mechanic. Boo-friggin'-whoo, is it really wrong? I mean, who the f cares? All they did was kill some casual decks. Way to go.

I still have no idea how the new "damage dealing" works.

EddDydoo · Joined: 31 Aug 2004 Posts: 35

yeah this shit makes me want to quit

ik · Level 1 Judge Joined: 11 Sep 2007 Posts: 335

Some of these changes are so fucked up... like multiple instances of lifelink not stacking? Sad

magus · Joined: 21 Mar 2005 Posts: 4

lifelink's not the fucked up part, combat damage is the fucked up part.

i really do not understand the reasoning behind this change. mogg fanatic is completely worthless now, as a constructed card. so many intricate interactions that made the game fun are now lost. denial is now incomparable to pump spells. call to heel sucks hard now. you can't deal 1 less damage to a creature in order to kill it after combat with a sorcery anymore.

the examples are numerous, and probably worthless at this point. other changes, not that big a deal; maybe some good will come out of them, these combat changes are definitely for the worse.

stall_19 · Joined: 26 May 2007 Posts: 10

With the no mana burn rule Wake Thrasher and Mana Drain sure got much better.

Ggerg · Joined: 04 Sep 2005 Posts: 632

idk what the big fuss is about. if we stop to think about combat not stacking, we find that in rarely matters outside of limited (a situation where you could gain an advantage off of playing something dmg on stack as opposed to after blockers may come up about once in a 9 round constructed tournament unless you're playing a card that got hosed). In limited formats from M10 and forward, wizards will obviously design cards and formats with the new game rules in mind as opposed the old ones. cards like unsummon probably wont see print, and pump spells may be fewer.

the mulligan rule is easily the biggest change, in that it gives a much greater advantage to the person who is playing first and places a much bigger burden on the die roll....

edit: also, for every card that got worse there's another than got better (and the ones that get better get WAY better! dont believe me?: umezawa's jitte wake thrasher and mana drain are a couple that come to mind)

maybe these two actually balance each other out in that you are more likely to be the aggressor, and thus probably profit more from combat damage shenanigans. (i dont actually think this is the case, but i figured i'd trow it out there)

Vedrfolner · Joined: 04 Apr 2006 Posts: 2325

golddmaster · Joined: 25 Jul 2008 Posts: 8

I personally think the changes are great! Very Happy

They will definately improve the future of magic although seeing cards with the older wording on it will annoy me.

nico · Joined: 28 Oct 2003 Posts: 1001

Vedrfolner: imagine the following situation:

You attack with a 4/4 vanilla. Your opponent blocks with a 3/4 and a 1/4 vanilla. In the current situation you can assign 2 damage to both creatures, your attacking creature dies, and after combat you can play a post-combat pyroclasm to kill both creatures, because they both have 2 damage already.
In thje new situation, you have to assign lethal damage to a creature, and you are not free to choose, so this limits your choices. This means that after combat you will end up with the attacking creature, and one blocking creature dead, and one creature alive with no damage, instead of in the current situation, 2 creatures with 2 damage.
I assume, that it still is possible to play a volcanic fallout after blockers are declared, and when combat damage is assigned, you only need to assign 2 damage to each blocking creature, thus you still get to take out both creatures.
Thing is, by changing the damage assignment step to not using the stack, they make things simpler DURING THAT STEP. This may feel like dumbing things down, but it also opens up things for different strategies. As another poster already mentioned: be sure that wizards are designing cards with the new ruleset in mind already, and it won't surprise me if we see something in M10 already, and more in Zendikar.
In short: yes, things are changing, yes some things will be less complex, but no, I don't think it will kill the game, or even dumb it down completely. Every change will also give opportunity for new strategy and decktypes.

LordLink · Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Posts: 79

I find it amusing that after 6 hours of bitching people still haven't come up with a relevent example other than Mogg Fanatic.

Wizards: Mogg Fanatic is now banned in all constructed formats.

Magic Community: What! Mogg Fanatic is the reason I play magic! I'm going to throw a toaster in my bath now...

Honestly it didn't even see standard play anymore, and wasn't going to get reprinted anyway. =/

Ordering Blockers seems like its adding unnecessary complexities to the game though...

MikeL123 · Joined: 27 May 2007 Posts: 78

I actually agree with all of their rule changes except the combat damage ones. The fact that you cannot split non-lethal combat damage (for example, the Pyroclasm example above) is just stupid. As is the removal of putting damage on the stack.

The whole fun of "damage on the stack" is you can have your opponent commit to something, and then if you have tricks you can use them after the opponent has committed to something. Now, I have to freaking use Healing Salve BEFORE COMBAT DAMAGE IS ASSIGNED. Congrats, dumbasses, you've actually managed to make Healing Salve WORSE.