Subject: Is MTG Dead? Date: Mon, 05 Oct 98 19:18:04 Pacific Daylight Time From: James Peterson To: fkusumot This is my first post to the Dojo, hope it helps. I have only been playing since last Christmas, but have been playing seriously. That is, competing regularly in tournaments, especially constructed, and spending a fair amount of money for a hobby. I was introduced to the game by my sons. One son just won his first pro tour qualifier (PTQ Rome) at Costa Mesa, CA. Another son is 8, and is the typical "kid with a green deck". I played chess for years on the chess tour, so have some experience with competitive gaming. Here is my reaction to some of the comments in the "Is MTG dead" thread. 1. MTG is not dead. It is an amazingly flexible game which attracts the interest of a wide variety of players. WotC is to be thanked for creating a game that can be played with interest by everyone, from me to my pro tour son to my "kid with a green deck", and all in the same tournament! 2. However, the fact we are all playing in the same tournament creates problems. How can you reward the truly skilled player by having him/her win most duels, and still provide enough luck factor for the less skilled player to have a chance to win sometimes? (In chess, the problem is solved by having players play only other players of the same skill level). Those who feel the more skilled player should always win, or the "kid with the green deck" should have no chance, are just plain wrong. If that were true, no one would ever stay in the game long enough to become skilled. No one wants to lose all the time. Actually, to follow this argument to its logical conclusion, there would be no need to have competitive tournaments. Players would just have to sign up, and the "best" players would be awarded the prizes. There would be no need to play. However, luck is a major factor in magic, and that is a good thing. (most other games also have a large luck factor: poker, backgammon. and others). In the long run, skilled players will win more often than unskilled players. But in the short run, anyone can win, which is good for the game. 3. The Dojo Effect is probably good, on the whole. I know having access to strategy articles and winning deck lists has drastically accelerated my own success in tournaments. I do not begrudge it of those following me. However, if I ever create an original deck which is effective, I do not intend to post it. Others can consider doing something similar. Here in Southern California our local tournaments (especially the weekly T2 at Costa Mesa) are very strong. I regularly get to play and observe master deck builders like Alan Comer and others of his local circle. I know he is generous with his ideas with his friends, but keeps new ideas in house until he can spring them in major tournaments. Anyone can do this. I am a little suspicious that some of the writers to this topic would really like to get a really good Dojo deck for themselves, and then turn the Dojo off for others. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. 4. Regular rotation of sets seems to keep interest up. Yesterday (Sunday) I attended an all day magic fest at the local Artifex store, capped with a midnight distribution of Ursa's Saga. It was great fun, and everyone looked forward with anticipation to the new cards. 5. A fair number of tournament players are manners challenged. On the other hand, there are a lot of great guys and gals playing here. Not too much of the unshowered and unshaven. Also, because the game is rather complicated, you have to be pretty smart to play the game, especially well. That's it for now. Thanks for reading this far.