Filth casser-what?

I’ve been following the emergence of the unfortunately-named Magic format “Filth Casserole.” Primarily, it’s of interest as another singleton format, something which seems to be relatively out of favor among the current player base. I guess not everyone agrees with Abe Sargent that making anything singleton makes it more fun (I do, personally). It’s also interesting to me that it goes in essentially the opposite direction from EDH/Commander: smaller and easier-to-handle deck sizes. I’m an average-sized person with slightly larger-than-average hands, but I have a lot of trouble handling a pile of 99 Magic cards in sleeves – it tends to result in muscle strain, and I don’t consider shuffling without sleeves an option for a serious collector.

If you like Filth Casserole, or even a modified version of it (I personally have trouble keeping strictly to the Modern card pool – how do you say no to cards like Armadillo Cloak or Wonder?), the best thing to hope for may be that it never truly goes mainstream. Whenever something’s done that in the past, it attracts the parts of the online “community” that want to solve everything, optimize everything, and mechanize everything, and it’s hard to argue that the game doesn’t suffer when that happens. Witness the rise of netdecking in Commander.

And yes, I’m aware of the irony of posting about something on my blog and then suggesting that it shouldn’t go internet-mainstream. I guess I’m hanging on to the essence of something Paarthurnax says in Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim – “Those who try to hasten the end may delay it. Those who work to delay the end may bring it closer.”

Hard questions

Yes, how many times must a man look up before he can see the sky?
And how many ears must one man have before he can hear people cry?
— Bob Dylan, “Blowin’ in the Wind”

Mark Rosewater once wrote an article called “The Troubled One,” on the perception (and the truth) that blue was, at that time, far and away the most powerful color in Magic, and how its cards’ being designed with a marked lack of discipline and caution was a contributing factor in that disproportionate power. When I say “once,” I mean almost ten years ago. How is the effort to bring blue into balance with the other colors going?

Image

Yeah.

If anything, blue is stronger proportional to recent cards than it was in the era of Psychatog and Circular Logic. There was a period in the middle where things seemed to be getting better, especially the Alara block, but other than that, we see the same patterns being repeated over and over and over again: giving blue abilities that supposedly belong to other colors, giving blue near-exclusive access to card-drawing spells and card selection spells, printing overpowered counterspells, printing very few ways for other colors to circumvent or avoid those counterspells, and making blue the only color that can effectively play during an opponent’s turn.

There are a few possibilities, which I’m going to list in their most crudely-expressed form for the sake of simplicity.

It’s an innocent mistake. MagicTheGathering.com and the various R&D people’s Twitter accounts are full of development stories that basically come down to shrugging their shoulders and saying “Oops.” This makes for great PR, as it makes for a very powerful portrayal of an indie-style game being made by ordinary gamers and not a corporate venture, which it has been for many years now. It’s because it is a corporate venture that we can only entertain the “just an innocent mistake” explanation for so long, even when said explanation is couched in a Rosewaterism about “blue is the tricky color even towards Research and Development.” Seriously. We’ve been accepting it for more than ten years at this point. How long are we – by which I mean people who are interested in having a better-balanced game – going to bang our heads against a stone wall? At some point, you’d think that more people would start wondering, and possibly moving on to other explanations like

This actually is what the audience wants. There is, superficially, some support for this. The online “community” is full of people who argue in favor of even the most overpowered blue cards. Part of the problem with blue is that it’s concepted as the color of intellectualism, and many Magic players want to see themselves as intellectuals. Further, professional and wannabe-pro players definitely see themselves as smarter than other kinds of players. It’s also the case that if one color is more powerful than all the others, it’ll probably be played more because people like to win. However, this is probably not sufficient by itself to explain the problem. After all, there are fans of other colors represented, and R&D people sometimes talk about market research that says that the majority of players don’t like counterspells and attrition-based control decks.

R&D is not capable of fixing the problem as things stand now. In my opinion, this statement is the closest to the truth. There are two dimensions to it: first, the issue that most members of R&D have been on the inside for years and are out of touch with how the game is actually played in the real world. None of them show a significant understanding of just how competitive the online “community” really is and how fast it drives to solve new formats and sets. Mark Rosewater has stated that he mostly plays limited, not constructed, and is prone to making inaccurate and outright tone-deaf statements about how creatures that are generally good stand a chance in competitive Magic against synergy creatures like Snapcaster Mage and Delver of Secrets. The second issue is that R&D is figuratively married to many color pie interpretations that may be outdated. It took them until this year to give red and green card-drawing spells that could be considered among a set’s most noteworthy cards. It took them until Planar Chaos to explore the possibility of letting white into the counterspell club even when it made sense for it to be there, and since then they’ve done it precisely twice.

It’s easier to work within the status quo. Humans love security, and there’s no guarantee that what follows major change will be better than what came before. And Magic is probably not the most pressing example of something in society that needs to be changed. But how long can you actually play an unbalanced or, dare I say, broken game? It’s fine to feel powerful, but how long does this satisfy compared to something you enjoy on a deeper level? And how long will it take before we demand the same values – fairness, inclusiveness, transparency – from our games that we say we cherish in our lives?

Primary research

If you haven’t visited MagicTheGathering.com recently, this might be a good time to do so, as they were doing an online survey about player spending habits. Unfortunately, it was the kind of thing that appears semi-randomly in the space on the side of the Daily MTG page, so it may not appear every time. Still, it’s worth doing if you can – especially if you’re not a regular tournament player, because Wizards of the Coast has not always shown as much awareness as it could be of the non-tournament scene’s habits and viewpoints. (I’m aware that tournament players are generally louder and more active than casual players on the internet, and that this post may have not only gone right past its intended audience, but alienated some of you who arrived here via Google or something. Well, we’ll see how things go.)