Sam (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
l33tminion) wrote2024-11-23 10:08 pm
l33tminion) wrote2024-11-23 10:08 pm
Foundations
Back in the "I don't know what to write", but I said maybe I'd write more about Magic: the Gathering, so that's a thing I can write about.
I play Magic these days mostly on MTG Arena, almost entirely Standard (with cards from a rotating cast of the most-recent sets). Fairly recently, Standard rotation was extended to a three-year cycle from two. This year, two new things are happening to Standard.
First, there's a new core set out, released last week. Core sets in Magic are meant as an introduction and retrospective, they tend to feature a lot of reprints and have a greater breadth of theme and setting instead of focusing on one particular setting and story. The latest set, Foundations, will get special treatment in the rotation, with a current plan that it will stay in Standard for at least five years. Foundations seems like a great core set, but I wonder if it will start to overstay its welcome before the time is up. I haven't been the biggest fan of the extended Standard rotation, the changes don't seem to shake things up as much as I like. (Speaking of core sets, the superb Magic video essay channel Rhystic Studies took the occasion to do a retrospective on 7th Edition, the 2001 Magic core set that was also a turning point for the role that sort of set plays in the game.)
Second, the other-IP-as-Magic sets "Universes Beyond", are coming to Standard. Wizards has been doing a lot more of that recently. Alternative card art aside, unique cards based around existing media franchises have been coming into various Magic formats. They did a Lord of the Rings set that went straight into Modern (a non-rotating format of cards from mainline sets starting in 2003, plus some newer sets added directly to Modern and older non-rotating formats), and a Warhammer 40,000 set for Commander (a popular non-rotating format with a multiplayer focus and a few twists to the rules). But this year, Standard will include sets based on Final Fantasy (which fits well enough, I guess), Marvel: Spider Man (??!), and something TBA (who knows).
It's interesting because Magic is a game that invests pretty heavily in its aesthetic elements. Obviously, those elements function in a mnemonic role as well: "Deal three damage to any target" is easier as "Lightning Bolt" than "spell 261". But I do get the impression that Magic-but-bland would be a much less memorable and enjoyable game. So how about Magic-but-whatever-the-heck-this-is? Magic has always drawn all sorts of influences from all sorts of media franchises and tropes, but "pop-culture mashup" is still not its primary aesthetic. But at some point, it might be. The Universes Beyond stuff has been a commercial success for Wizards so far, and these "what ifs" have an appeal, so it's natural for them to give the goose a squeeze. I still get the sense it's different when that becomes the thing the game is. Unsurprisingly, in addition to excitement, this trend in the development of the game has also caused a lot of at least apprehension in the player-base. I don't know how it will play out.
I play Magic these days mostly on MTG Arena, almost entirely Standard (with cards from a rotating cast of the most-recent sets). Fairly recently, Standard rotation was extended to a three-year cycle from two. This year, two new things are happening to Standard.
First, there's a new core set out, released last week. Core sets in Magic are meant as an introduction and retrospective, they tend to feature a lot of reprints and have a greater breadth of theme and setting instead of focusing on one particular setting and story. The latest set, Foundations, will get special treatment in the rotation, with a current plan that it will stay in Standard for at least five years. Foundations seems like a great core set, but I wonder if it will start to overstay its welcome before the time is up. I haven't been the biggest fan of the extended Standard rotation, the changes don't seem to shake things up as much as I like. (Speaking of core sets, the superb Magic video essay channel Rhystic Studies took the occasion to do a retrospective on 7th Edition, the 2001 Magic core set that was also a turning point for the role that sort of set plays in the game.)
Second, the other-IP-as-Magic sets "Universes Beyond", are coming to Standard. Wizards has been doing a lot more of that recently. Alternative card art aside, unique cards based around existing media franchises have been coming into various Magic formats. They did a Lord of the Rings set that went straight into Modern (a non-rotating format of cards from mainline sets starting in 2003, plus some newer sets added directly to Modern and older non-rotating formats), and a Warhammer 40,000 set for Commander (a popular non-rotating format with a multiplayer focus and a few twists to the rules). But this year, Standard will include sets based on Final Fantasy (which fits well enough, I guess), Marvel: Spider Man (??!), and something TBA (who knows).
It's interesting because Magic is a game that invests pretty heavily in its aesthetic elements. Obviously, those elements function in a mnemonic role as well: "Deal three damage to any target" is easier as "Lightning Bolt" than "spell 261". But I do get the impression that Magic-but-bland would be a much less memorable and enjoyable game. So how about Magic-but-whatever-the-heck-this-is? Magic has always drawn all sorts of influences from all sorts of media franchises and tropes, but "pop-culture mashup" is still not its primary aesthetic. But at some point, it might be. The Universes Beyond stuff has been a commercial success for Wizards so far, and these "what ifs" have an appeal, so it's natural for them to give the goose a squeeze. I still get the sense it's different when that becomes the thing the game is. Unsurprisingly, in addition to excitement, this trend in the development of the game has also caused a lot of at least apprehension in the player-base. I don't know how it will play out.