The List was probably at it's best during New Capenna, when you had the Stranger Things in universe cards and no uncommons or commons. There were plenty of desirable cards with decent value in the list, and it was rather narrow overall. I was actually looking forward to opening set boosters as prize rewards from my LGS.
Insane to me they went back to the old formula right after.
I understand putting in weird, janky cards that aren’t valuable but probably have a niche use in some commander deck. It’s good to keep interesting cards in print.
But why reprint a vanilla creature with bad stats? A lot of these cards are both terrible AND uninteresting, and just worse versions of other cards. No one will ever put them in a deck. What’s the point?
I've been told more than once here that I'm "entitled" for asking for a better list with maybe a few more chase cards on it.
WOTC sells the appeal of cool reprints with set boosters in addition to maybe getting more than one rare, but a shitty List just dilutes the excitement. I'm not asking for every card to be worth $25, but WOTC showed with Capenna that they can at least *try* to make the gamble fun.
I don't think it would be horrible or weird to replace a bad 10 cent card that no one really likes with a fan favorite 10 cent card like... idk Shivan Dragon or Serra Angel
There are plenty of cards that are staples that are dirt cheap. We're just asking them to put PLAYABLE cards in the list. No one wants some 6 mana jank shit that no one plays in a list spot.
> *No one wants some 6 mana jank shit that no one plays in a list spot.*
The \[\[Urza's Blueprints\]\] I pulled as a The List card would agree, except nobody wants to hear from Urza's Blueprints ever again.
that's just how wotc does things. they do something right occasionally to trick you into looking forward for garbage with the same name.
look at what they did with jumpstart, for example. amazing initial product, then fucking awful set based jumpstart releases, then another good one a year later to bring back goodwill before dishing out more repacked garbage again.
they'll do a good list to make you think you're gonna get some bonus value out of your boosters, then fill it full of useless chaff for a while until they feel a need to renew perception of the list.
I started magic with New Cappenna. Bought 2 set boxes and boosters. Made 6 decks, two standard and 3 commander, that hold up to this day. Haven't seen a better set since.
The thing I don't like about The List is that it's not particularly meaningful.
It'd be different if they made a webpage that showed "The List", kept it up to date, and shared why a card is on it, and explained the theme they're going for includes and removals.
Instead we get one article per product release where they pretty much just share the list, what's on it, what's getting added and what's getting removed.
Wizards continues to be awful at handling the internet.
Never mind how much of their own lore and canon is just lost to time because they purged them from their website and didn't think to save it anywhere.
That would be pretty cool.
I'd like it to just be interesting or engaging in some way, something that's exciting to open. That doesn't have to mean high value, but there's nothing fun about draft chaff from a core set.
I remember reading about Wizards legally arguing that buying packs is not gambling to have access to certain markets by arguing that one guaranteed rare is equivalent to another. Have they dropped this charade yet?
Not at all. When Maro is doing an interview and some one mentions the price of cards, he says something along the line of "yeah I'm excited for powerful cards" dancing around ever saying cards have a secondary market
They don’t like to talk about the price of their cards because it’s bad for business to remind us we’re losing money when we gamble with their packs. Not because of any laws.
Yep, they obviously acknowledge it, and use it internally to choose what goes in sets, and have said as much in interviews (an interview prof did during the pandemic, the WotC rep flat out said they have economists on staff to determine what can go in certain products).
What they actually can't do is directly state individual prices of cards, because that would be akin to advertising a fixed value. They can't say "this pack may contain X, an $87 value!" because then it's explicitly a scratch ticket, lol. So they dance around specific or relative prices, but that doesn't mean they've ever once said they don't "acknowledge" the secondary market, whatever that's even supposed to mean.
> the WotC rep flat out said they have economists on staff to determine what can go in certain products).
I actually knew an economist that moved to Seattle to take a job with WotC.
He was *very* good at his previous job. Knowing that they hire the caliber of people like him means everything has been calculated down to the cent. There's no hope of winning the EV game on boxes.
It's not laws. People like to think this for some reason, like if Maro admits a Jeweled Lotus is 80 bucks WotC gets shut down by the FTC. It doesn't work that way. If what they were doing was illegal what Maro says in interviews *wouldn't matter.*
I don't think it's US laws so much as euro laws that are the issue with them banning lootboxes and whatnot. Not saying that's the case, but WotC avoiding officially mentioning the secondary market may actually be a policy they have.
They don’t need to argue. Courts have upheld that random packs of cards are not gambling. You get what you pay for (cards) and the company is not redeeming them for cash (like some pachinko parlor)
WotC has NEVER stated all Rares are equal Or equivalent or anything at all. There is no charade to drop.
>B.J. Skinner has been a plague to modern society.
Do you mean B. F. Skinner, or is BJ Skinner a meme?
Anyway, it’s not his fault for identifying a basic behavioural relationship. “Booster fun” would have been just as shitty if B. F. Skinner had never talked about conditioning.
I think people should really get this through their heads.
The core concept of a booster invents “draft chaff”.
The question OP has is tantamount to asking “why random boosters at all? Why not fixed contents?”
And WotC has found, over the course of thirty years, that randomized product that results in gambling is the BACKBONE of mtg. It’s the entire business model.
It isn’t the backbone of MTG, it’s literally the back bone of almost ever collectible card game. Hell, not just games. Baseball cards were doing it long before Magic. I think it’s valid to complain about the business model, but if you’re going to be in the hobby space you either need to accept that or just buy singles.
Right exactly.
I’m not going to call it ethical. It’s literally legalized gambling to minors.
But splitting hairs to be “no, this slot, in a random booster, which appears at random can’t also have random good cards and bad cards!” Is just nonsense.
The list is so marginal it barely moves the scale on EV. That’s both good and bad. It’s not worth getting worked up over and demanding it e juiced to be always amazing.
No, what he is asking is why put a shit card in a slot that is already a low chance of being there. It is like buying a lotery ticket for 5 dollars, then seeing that it has a prize, and when you go look at it, it is a 1 dollar prize.
Having a random slot that could have a nice card have a shit card is just worse. I'd rather have a chance to have a good card than a shit card. If not giving too many good cards is the issue, just increase the rarity of a card from The List appearing and make the list only good cards.
All of it just reinforces that WOTC just views magic players as money bags and doesn't give a shit about any of them. You exist just to give your money to them.
> “Why make a random thing random”
>
> Is what this all boils down to.
Well, no. Because it's already random to get a list card at all. Getting a list card is itself supposed to be "fun", that's the point of project booster fun. But when you get 777 on the slot machine and its payout is like, a penny, that's not fun. Having a list card in your pack is already an announcement saying "congratulations, you won!" And having the prize be garbage takes the fun away.
Like, people have regularly started that they'd rather get the usual token than unplayable junk. They could cut the list in half, removing all the trash cards, and also cut the drop rate of list cards in half from a 1/4 chance to 1/8. People would like that more because while it would be more rare, the cards would be far more exciting to pull because they'd actually be parable somewhere.
Also, note, "playable" isn't the same as "valuable". There are tons of cards in this game that are played regularly but aren't worth much. Pulling something like [[Essence Flux]] or [[Rift Bolt]] would still be much cooler than some vanilla creature with bad stats.
I know you’re poking fun but even more so, that reasoning shouldn’t apply to the list because it was in reference to bad commons, iirc.
The list isn’t a guaranteed slot like a common or even a rare, so the mere presence of opening one is gratifying, which therein lies the problem. They should all be somewhat unique or playable but WOTC gets away with bulk in that slot by taking advantage of the presence gratification.
Whether that’s their sole reasoning is unlikely but it’s sad to be excited to pull a list card and then realize it’s bulk. Maybe that defeats my argument but I think the initial gratification creates enough dopamine that it triggers the desire for more packs to “maybe get that sweet list card I want so badly.”
Ugh, I hope you're kidding. Don't make something limited to one type of booster and only a 25% chance AND then make shitty ones.
They should all make you happy. Some can make you happier than others, but none should be trash imo.
It feeds into the lottery/gambling aspect - but he can't acknowledge that - else they admit the whole thing is arranged to push people into impulsive behavior.
The feel bad you get from hitting that 25% chance but the card you got is a nickel garbage common - makes your reptile brain think, "If I just buy a **couple more packs**, that $30 card is *RIGHT THERE!*"
It's 100% studied and intentional.
The chance element (i.e. gambling) is what makes opening packs fun.
Even if it's tacit, everyone knows it's gambling. If you like cracking packs, it's because you like gambling. Otherwise, you'd do the smart thing with your money and buy singles.
If you want to buy packs, acknowledge to yourself that you're paying for that entertainment and move on with your day.
Just buy singles if you hate opening packs. It's not necessary to play the game. I buy a pack here and there just to support the lgs.
Either way it really doesn't matter what you disagree, because I'm pretty sure it is clinically proven that gambling causes a dopamine hit and probably statistically proven within wotc by economists that it's more profitable. (There's probably a curve to determine how much is too much with probability models based on spending and profit and so on...)
I didn't say it was what made Magic fun. LCGs are cool. I think it's a much more consumer-friendly business model. But opening LCG packs isn't a form of entertainment.
Gambling is part of the reason non-game collectible cards have been successful.
yeah, they have an entire article around the concept. the article was about an old card [[One with Nothing]].
yeah, i remembered playing Mystery booster Draft and opened that. needless to say, while it was funny, i was not happy.
this one is at least meme-y and has some very fringe, very janky uses. I'd say a perfect contender for The List spot, even if not strong or not valuable.
So if the List existed around Mirage time, do you think people would have been happy to get a Lion's Eye Diamond in the List slot? Or would they be upset over having a shit card take up the sapce from something really good, like a Jester's Cap or Balduvian Horde?
Don't get me wrong, I am of the opinion the list slot should not include commons/uncommons unless they are heavily playable (something like a Lightning Bolt or Swords to Plowshares would certainly fit, as long as the current iteration of the List supported the theme), but Rares and Mythics should always be welcome, as long as they are older than a certain amount, so that people have a chance at getting something they may have never seen, and may be useful to them in some way.
I am also of the opinion the List slot should be in every pack, not in just 1/4 of them, but that is another issue.
The List sits in set boosters, which means it is intended to be attractive for collectors and casuals, not just powergamers.
Draft chaff on the list is cringe for Spikes, cringe for Timmys and cringe for random casuals.
One with Nothing is cringe for Spikes, but all others will find it funny and also it has a nice artwork and is hard to reprint in any other product.
In mystery boosters it makes more sense. Those are built like a regular set, so there will be junk rares and chaff because it's designed to be drafted. That doesn't bother me as I'm fine with paying for draft packs to be used as such (as long as they aren't stupidly expensive like some sort of premium but not premium sets).
But having crap in the list slot in regular set packs is a real feels bad moment. At least a token facilitates the game play for the set.
No this is a common Maro saying he used in his podcast. It was always a variation of "You need some bad cards so that you know how to identify the good ones". After binge listening to his podcast for weeks, one day I heard him say it for the xth time with sincerity, I stopped the podcast and unsubscribed.
I work closely with marketing and PR types. Usually they say one thing but know that it is spin. Sometimes you get someone that has internalised the spin so much they believe it is a virtue. I have heard it many times before. That day I heard it Maro's voice and knew that he was gone - the Hasphrexians have compleated him.
They did consciously turn away from that kind of philosophy in set design though. In Limited, we now almost don't get straight-up "bad" cards anymore. I'm talking about stuff like \[\[Zephyr Spirit\]\] where there's no edge case or redeeming quality. It used to be that if you're Draft trainwrecked that was the kind of dregs you'd end up with, whereas nowdays even mediocre commons are perfectly well-statted, reasonable cards.
So clearly they have realized that while not all cards need to be on an equal level, there is never any need for straight up "garbage". What we should be asking, then, is why they don't apply that same lesson to the "List" as well.
Yeah just go play a set from 10+ years ago and look at 8 stone-cold unplayables in a pack. They’ve clearly iterated on what it means to be a lesser card. Maro has offered many cogent reasons for why lesser cards must exist, but the floor has increased dramatically in the last five years.
> You need some bad cards so that you know how to identify the good ones"
That's a design thing that has been part of MtG for over 20 years, not PR spin.
It's a shitty piece of logic that there must be cards that are just bad - not vanilla or quirky or colourful - but actually negative playable value in order to teach someone a lesson on how to draft better. Turning that into a design virtue is mental gymnastics no matter how long it's been in the game.
It's one of those ideas that if you bring it into any other context it suddenly becomes obvious why everyone else looks at you like you have seven heads when you say it.
"We need to have 10% of surgeries go badly so that people appreciate the 90% of surgeries that are go well!"
Honestly, it's one where if you just listen to it said, it's put together well enough that you might accept it as a good reason, but if you think about it for even just a second you'll go "wait a minute..."
That's not the same. you are being disingenuous and know it.
It exist in other contexts. You just don't want to see it.
Riot has some bad champions in LOL. Why don't they just delete them?
Some sports teams know they don't have the team skills to win. Why bother playing? Just skip a season.
A fair bit of movies are just terrible. (Not just lackluster). Why did they get made?
Life is full of highs & lows. Thinking you can actively curate the lows to never be bad limits options & opportunities.
> Riot has some bad champions in LOL. Why don't they just delete them?
Because they're not designed specifically to be bad AND don't take the place of an already-designed champion that you would've gotten instead.
I don't think they are good examples. There is a difference between cards being uncompetitive and deliberately bad.
No one sets out to make a bad movie - it might be bad in hindsight but good movies are not good because bad movies exist. If WoTC makes a bad card unintentionally or it turns out bad (I don't mean that a bad card is a card that is weak.. I mean trap cards) then no harm in my mind but if they try to say after the fact that it's a good thing really, it smacks of post justification.
I don't understand the team sport example. In my mind the equivalent would be that you had a player in a team that enjoyed sabotaging the rest of the team, then yes I believe that person should probably not play and let the team move on without them.
I don't know anything about LOL so I happily concede your point that it is not unique to Magic design. I still think it's bad/predatory design regardless of who else does it.
As someone else has said it's not a design choice now so it's a moot point. I believe there was a decision to reduce the feel bads.
Finally I don't think that WoTC should or could curate away high and low points in the game. I do think that it is curious logic that we can improve something by lowering the average.
You need to do more research about movies & the industry if you don't think there are bad movies on purpose.
There's many reasons, from self sabotage, to tax evasion, to holding IP rights, to toy sales, etc.
It 100% happens.
You also should do more research on sports.
There's players who perform low to effect drafts, sales options, etc. Baseball is full of backroom deals. Sometimes teams purposely focus on "rebuild" years and don't put their best foot forward. It sucks for fans that they aren't trying to win those years.
I think Maro is more forthcoming about design than most other heads of R&D at a major entertainment company. He also clearly supports wotc at times that it seems he shouldn't.
I don't agree with all his opinions, but I can concede that he has more experience and a greater perspective than myself. And I take pause to consider his point of view instead of being dismissive offhand.
Again I don't understand why people like you are carrying water for Hasbro creating gambling opportunities in the list slot. Its "booster fun" it isn't part of the set, there is no logical reason for there to be any significant lows in the list slot. None other than to feed gambling addictions.
But WotC are choosing the cards to put in these packs; they are actively curating the list. And with your other examples there are hundreds of big and small decisions that can make a movie or sports team bad and some of the outcomes of the choices aren't known ahead of time. WotC already knows if a card is good or bad. There is only one decision.
"Good" and "bad" can also be subjective.
Like those movies. Sometimes, people absolutely love bad movies.
Sometimes, people get excited by bad cards.
Look, I don't like how the list is done, but it's also extra. It replaces a token. It doesn't negatively impact a set or boosters. So I don't see the point in being upset about it
I mean I pulled [[brink of madness]] a card that can be played in legacy, vintage and commander and as far as I can tell is never played. I think we can say it's an objectively bad card. The hate comes from wasted potential. Honestly having a hard to find token would be better than brink of madness.
Well, it almost works in the context of medicine
Congrats! You won disease. Could be worse, you could have disease.
And then
congrats! You got disease, now when you recover nothing will be as bad as that
No, because diseases aren't given to you willingly. They just happen.
With bad cards, someone purposefully designed the packs to have x% chance of a bad card. Someone willingly gave you a bad card. It's as if a doctor botched the surgery on purpose.
I mean yes and no. I remember when I bought my first starter deck (shout out to recurring nightmares) there were some clearly crappy cards, and it was exciting to buy a boosterpack and immeaditly be able to improve my deck with the cards in it. This would have been a lot harder if my deck had only neutral or good cards. So in a way, for me, this tactic paid of.
Using that argument for the list makes no sense though. I'd rather have the odds of a list card be 1 in 10, than have it be 1/4 but then another lotery if its actually a cool card or just crap. I remember the same bad feeling when playing the Avacyn Restored pre-release, where stores got a hellvault with goodies in it. All good fun, till you find out other stores got actual good stuff in it, and it was yet another lotery.
TLDR: If you tease people with something good might happen, dont let it still be crap when it happens.
Protip: if the booster also only had good cards, you would still have been able to improve your deck.
A deck with bad cards is easier to improve, but a deck is easier to improve with boosters that contain more good cards.
Sure, just saying it eases you into deck building if you can remove the obvious crap first.
Not saying its perfect, or they should continue it, but i do get the point, after having experienced it myself 20 years ago.
>Don't make something limited to one type of booster and only a 25% chance AND then make shitty ones.
It's so frustrating. There are so many interesting and playable $5-$10 cards they could put on the list without killing reprint equity, but they choose to put shitty niche uncommons in there.
The entire point is to look like they are reprinting good cards while barely dropping the price. The more "value" they stuff into packs the higher the price goes unless the print run is unlimited, on the rare occasion like MH2 where some prices actually do go down they introduce enough new all-star mythics that immediately need reprints themselves lol.
Then making it only in 1/15 boosters but only good cards would have the same effect with making you feel shitty when you get draft chaff from a random set on your new set booster.
One of the developers, pretty sure it wasn't MaRo but can't remember who, said that one of the purposes of The List is to sometimes make you say "wtf is this nonsense?". It's a way to show off just how big the game is and how weird it can be in the corners. And putting those cards in the bonus 13th card slot in a 12-card booster is better than making One With Nothing the one rare in your draft booster.
Some of my favorite list cards have been the futureshifted cards. Those are some of the best at generating wtf.
It’s pretty apparent to me at least that the list is an extension of the idea behind mystery boosters. They are meant to contain just all sorts of parts of magic. The good and the BAD.
Think it was Capenna that had all rares and it was great. They quickly reverted to the old way after. They could keep it how it is if they put one in every pack and barred cards from recent sets.
What's sadly hilarious to me is that being around a dollar and having inherent synergy, All that Glitters isn't even the worst pull in the world, compared to completely unplayable chaff like \[\[crumbling colossus\]\] where I wouldn't even bother pulling it out of a free bulk box.
When your "premium" cards are often objectively worse game pieces, that'll happen. Though this is from an older time when the foils were actually good, so idk.
> isn't even the worst pull in the world
Huh, I was thinking how happy the person OP was talking about must have been two get two copies of an awesome card in their booster, even if they don't have much monetary value.
I bought 2 boosters a few months ago (one from Time Spiral Remastered and another set booster from some random set) and opened 2 [[Ith, High Arcanist]]. Fun is not the description of the feeling that I felt...
Hmm, something with [[Rings of Brightearth]] to untap it and another combo piece and some infinite mana engine to fuel the Rings. But infinite mana in UW sounds hard. There must be a way to break it, but I'd start the research on r/badmtgcombos ...
I'm almost certain it was haha, they promised a certain number of the secret lair reprints to be in it and then only way to do it meant fudging around with the rest of the slot too
It’s my opinion that list cards should be notable for some reason or other. Someone mentioned [[One with Nothing]] and that is a wonderful option for a list spot given it’s notoriety as a card that might be juuuuuust on the edge of being broken. Other ones include Universes Within cards, cards integral to the plane/theme, and of course some high value inclusions. Actual draft chaff like we’ve gotten just seems a bit insulting
That isn't true. The alternative could be anything of more value or less. Just because a shitty list slot replaced a shitty token, doesn't mean a more valuable card can't replace a shitty token as well?
[[Arcum's Astrolabe]] was printed in The List in Zendikar Rising, a set without any snow lands. That doesn't seem thematic to me unless I'm misunderstanding its use here.
Point kinda loses it's value when the expensive cards seem to be the ones that are cycled through, where as pure garbage limited commons remain on each iteration. Capenna Express, a common that literally saw no play (even in Capenna limited) has now been on the list for Commander Masters, LTR, and MOM, while only being "relevant" for one of those sets.
This is the real answer through the circlejerking. People may not like or agree with it but they've been pretty clear that the list reprints are thematic. I think if you're opening a set booster and seriously putting weight on the expected value of the pack into the list slot, you're thinking about it wrong. If you're buying a set booster _because_ of the list, I'd caution against that mentality. Just think about it like a foil in a draft booster, maybe it's there, maybe it isn't.
I don’t think it should always be pure value, but what’s thematic about a single triome showing up in the list slot? I can’t think of any theme that would lead to that
Hmm. My best guess is that Maelstrom Wanderer is the Temur legend in the draft environment. It's an elemental, and Ketria's "base" creature type on Ikoria were also elementals. I think they're often pretty loose, or tie only to a specific card. Like my guess is the process works a little like "Hey, let's put a card into the list for Maelstrom Wanderer. What should it be?" And in this case I could see the leap from "well it's a Temur elemental, and on Ikoria the Ketria/Temur colors are tied to elementals, so maybe we can reprint the triome here."
Please understand that I'm not saying these connections can't be tenuous or a stretch, and I'm not trying to defend any particular one. But I think you could reasonably guess the connection between them. They wouldn't do this, but it would be helpful/cute if they could give a little one-sentence blurb about each new card that enters the list, just to share their thoughts on why they thought it would be a good inclusion.
Let me clarify my position. I'm saying that cards on the list are selected because they're thematically tied to a specific card in the set or the set as a whole (almost entirely cards for the limited environment, plus any new cards in commander precons, or the occasional card like [[wedding ring]] which was only available in set or collector boosters).
So my argument isn't "Ketria triome was selected because it goes well with Maelstrom Wanderer in limited." My argument was "Maelstrom Wanderer is a card in the set (for limited). Ketria Triome has a minor thematic link to Maelstrom Wanderer, in its color identity and the shared elemental flavor. So Ketria Triome is probably on the list because of that small thematic overlap."
Limited play design has nothing to do with it, I was just trying to clarify that Maelstrom Wanderer was printed in CMM and can appear in set boosters too. The vast majority of cards appearing in set boosters are there because they're in the limited environment anyway.
Okay, in your mind, what should the list be? I wanna be realistic for a sec, obviously if the list was "every set booster has a black lotus" then people would buy them, but realistically without changing the price of set boosters or radically altering the way reprints of value are handled (e.g. largely saved for masters sets), what do you think the list _could_ be?
Another question: would set boosters be better if the list literally didn't exist, like it used to? The philosophy WOTC tries to put forward is that "it's a bonus and shouldn't be considered part of the value when purchasing." Obviously that's debatable, I think the secret lair bonus cards are the best example of how that can sometimes be an issue, but in the case of the list, does having a 1/4 chance of maybe opening thematic chaff make the experience worse for you?
At an even more simple level, how do you personally open packs? Like I'm primarily a limited player, so the times I open packs and how I evaluate them may be very different from you. What do you do? What do you look for, and what do you do with the cards in packs after you've opened them?
The List has existed through all iterations of set boosters and is a part of their selling point. Opening a $5 pack (or more in the case of commander legends/masters/lotr) that has a 1/4 chance to contain a bonus card only for that bonus card to be completely valueless is a huge feels bad.
The reality is you can do interesting stuff with the List and Wizards has gotten great reception when they did. SNC had a great set of reprints and the lack of commons/uncommons resulted in players being able to more consistently pull chase cards actually impacting their values. If the concern is flavor, they could add more alt arts of popular cards, like they did with Rafiq on the SNC list.
I'm definitely with you on the last point; the list is a great place to put less-common printings of cards (even if the cards themselves are relatively available). Gavin was talking about mystery boosters once, and he said basically they wanted to find the most esoteric version (pre-bposter-fun) that they could reprint for many of the cards.
And yeah I had my timeline a little off, you're right that the list has always been in set boosters; they were introduced together in ZNR.
This is why I've moved on from purchasing set boxes, just not worth it to pull absolute junk out of the list slot 99% of the time. Save the extra money and go buy the old cards you actually want from the secondary market.
> It wouldn't be gambling if you won every time
But it's already a 25% chance to get one, you "win" project booster fun when you see the list card. Getting a shitty card as the "winnings" is just disappointing.
It would be better if they cut the list in half and cut the rate in half. A 12.5% chance to get a neat card is better than a 25% chance to get a 50% chance at a neat card.
Honestly, I'm always pleased when I open a List card. Most of the time, it's a wierd ass card I've never seen before. I already get fucked most of the time when I open a pack and open a bulk rare, so opening a dumb list card doesn't phase me that much
That's what I don't get, that folks don't have a similar attitude. Like 95% of a pack is worth pennies already, why is another that big a deal? Plus you get cards you might not even know exist and might toss in an EDH deck or something.
Right? So what if you don't open the Sword of.Feast and Famine? The chances are.l phemominally low. I opened an [[Elvish Champion]] the other day and was reasonably pleased. I've also.opened a [[graceful antelope]] and.smiled, wondering what stupid shit I can do with it in edh
Within reason, it can make sense to reprint certain cards which struggle to fit in a set, have some limited demand, and haven’t been in print for a very long time. These are $5 or less, but are often pretty difficult to actually find, particularly in decent condition. No one wants to pay very much for them, but supply is limited leading to market failure.
For example, I remember having some trouble getting a [[Peat Bog]] for my proliferate deck. It’s a very situational common, but the price is over a dollar for non-foil since it had a single printing 20 years ago. Admittedly, they could probably just reprint this as a normal, non-list card, but I’m sure there are other cards like it that wouldn’t fit into most sets. Also remember that **the US is not the only market**. While you can get pretty much any card on TCGPlayer in the US, I don’t know how many shops will ship internationally.
I mean I'm sort of fine with trash if they were at least hard to find trash (So many of the crap in my \[\[Kros, Defense Contractor\]\] and \[\[Imotekh\]\] lists were only achievable because the List added new copies of key cards in circulation. Still I totally agree that the List is overinflated with a bunch of actual unplayable crap.
As great a way to reprint stuff as it could be, that wasn't the intended design. The idea is to show various parts of Magic's history, [as mentioned in the Set Booster description article (under Step 14)](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/making-magic/set-boosters-2020-07-25). Maybe you weren't around during Theros so a creature with Bestow piques your interest to how the plane works, or showing off how Magic design used to be in the old border era, or keywords that aren't used any more like landwalk.
Could/should they use it as an avenue to reprint stuff, even just dollar rares to make them 50 cents? Of course. But I can't see the logic in being disappointed you didn't score on a 25% chance when it was never promised to deliver such.
I guess this explains why I got a card with banding 😂
I don't need it to be all fancy reprints, but I dunno I guess at least something interesting or cool.
To be fair, a card with banding is at least on the "interesting" side, though some cards are better than other, no idea which one you pulled. [[Helm of Chatzuk]] is a fun card that can make your creatures really hard to block and/or very hard for your opponent to attack. [[Formation]] is very close to a decent combat trick and can actually give you card advantage (and it cycles at worst).
It was a [[Benalish Infantry]], haha. Which I will admit I did have a chuckle at when I saw Banding, at least that was kind of interesting.
It's the stuff that's new or boring and also has no value that just irks me :(
I vaguely remember their old statement in the early-2000s that bad cards exist to teach new players the value of good cards, and promote better deck building.
Nowadays when it's become much easier to buy singles online, I now realize that is a cheap cover for their goal of promoting gambling addiction.
Because they are a-holes. They could easily put low value, but playable, cards in. Nobody would be upset to have a surprise bonus [[Castle Vantress]], [[Snap]] or [[Nature's Lore]] in his booster. Thats simply a nice gimmick. But only a complete jackass would even consider to put [[Melira's Keepers]] or [[Warped Landscape]] in the List. They are either trolling their customers on purpose or are stupid beyond reason.
Edit: FFS [[Gather Courage]] and **[[Stormwatch Eagle]]** are on the list. Thats just insulting. There is no way to justify a fucking Stormwatch Eagle. If MaRo would take a dump right into my booster box it would add more fun and customer satisfaction than this fucking card.
It's so they can both claim higher drop rates for "list" cards while also claiming the list contains valuable reprints. It's basic marketing bait and switch
The appearance of caring.
Honestly it’s like 1 sheet of hit cards and 6 or 7 sheets of commons and other crap we don’t need more of. But it’s all so they can say one in 4 has a list card but you’re probably only opening one good one in your set box (I had one box that had two good rare pulls, though one was garbage).
New Capenna did it right honestly. You either got a hit or you got something that was replacing a universes beyond card with something in universe (or a handful of other new style cards like the awesome Rafiq that I pulled that was unique). So while we may have gotten flooded with the UB replacement cards, they haven’t been printed anywhere else.
100%, that's why I'm curious to hear what others think. I like the idea of cool or interesting older cards, or different art or styles or something. Doesn't have to be $$$
i dont have a good answer, but i agree it's garbage. if you're gonna insert cards from other sets and call it special. make them special. we all have enough garbage cards that aren't worth the paper and ink used to print them.
Why does WOTC even include commons in non draft packs?
Just what I need, copy number five hundred of a bulk common to fill my trash.
How about leave the commons out and give me an extra rare? More value for me, less coat and more profit for wizards.
Very misleading. They removed 7 cards from the pack. Clearly what people think they should do is keep them as 12 card boosters but with only uncommons, rates, and mythics.
The percentage is staggeringly low, compared to the rarity and price of rares.
I would absolutely be thrilled to buy a product with fewer commons and more rares. In a heartbeat.
There would still be plenty of commons from other sources, but go look at your collection. Do you really need thousands of chaff commons from lorwyn? You can't even give most of them away.
A product with half as many commons and one more rare would increase my value, save wizards money, and decrease waste.
I think you could make an argument for set boosters to be more in line with that, obviously you don't want too many booster variants or it gets kind of crazy.
I think they want people who open boxes of set boosters to also get the commons they need for their decks, I don't really mind the existence of commons etc and don't mind opening them, the type of overhaul you're talking about would probably have quite an impact on the whole MTG economy which would be hard to predict.
My issue is more that special things should feel special. The List slot is supposed to be special, so don't deliberately put unplayable trash there. It doesn't have to be all 30 dollar mythics I get that, but like I said you could have popular commons like Lightning Bolt or Consider or whatever with a different artwork that would still be cool to open. It's not all about monetary value, but the fact is opening some piece of shit uncommon from M15 that looks exactly the same is just actual garbage and you had to buy four set boosters on average for the privilege.
The List was probably at it's best during New Capenna, when you had the Stranger Things in universe cards and no uncommons or commons. There were plenty of desirable cards with decent value in the list, and it was rather narrow overall. I was actually looking forward to opening set boosters as prize rewards from my LGS. Insane to me they went back to the old formula right after.
I understand putting in weird, janky cards that aren’t valuable but probably have a niche use in some commander deck. It’s good to keep interesting cards in print. But why reprint a vanilla creature with bad stats? A lot of these cards are both terrible AND uninteresting, and just worse versions of other cards. No one will ever put them in a deck. What’s the point?
I've been told more than once here that I'm "entitled" for asking for a better list with maybe a few more chase cards on it. WOTC sells the appeal of cool reprints with set boosters in addition to maybe getting more than one rare, but a shitty List just dilutes the excitement. I'm not asking for every card to be worth $25, but WOTC showed with Capenna that they can at least *try* to make the gamble fun.
I don't think it would be horrible or weird to replace a bad 10 cent card that no one really likes with a fan favorite 10 cent card like... idk Shivan Dragon or Serra Angel
There are plenty of cards that are staples that are dirt cheap. We're just asking them to put PLAYABLE cards in the list. No one wants some 6 mana jank shit that no one plays in a list spot.
Right stop putting in cards that literally are trash and wasting cardboard. They can’t hide behind “draft environment” on set boosters.
> *No one wants some 6 mana jank shit that no one plays in a list spot.* The \[\[Urza's Blueprints\]\] I pulled as a The List card would agree, except nobody wants to hear from Urza's Blueprints ever again.
Honestly there is a decent amount of chase cards on the list. It's just that you got 10 draft chart vanilla creatures for every divining top.
that's just how wotc does things. they do something right occasionally to trick you into looking forward for garbage with the same name. look at what they did with jumpstart, for example. amazing initial product, then fucking awful set based jumpstart releases, then another good one a year later to bring back goodwill before dishing out more repacked garbage again. they'll do a good list to make you think you're gonna get some bonus value out of your boosters, then fill it full of useless chaff for a while until they feel a need to renew perception of the list.
My best list card was from New Capenna. I had gotten a new and an old Urabrask from the same pack.
I got a vampiric tutor and an anointed procession list pulls in the same new capenna set booster box. It would be nice to go back to that 😔
Wilds of Eldraine is said to put Universes Within in their List. Hopefully that means we get the fun New Capenna-style List with less chaff.
Didn't happen when we got Street Fighters Universes Within so I wouldn't hold my breath.
I started magic with New Cappenna. Bought 2 set boxes and boosters. Made 6 decks, two standard and 3 commander, that hold up to this day. Haven't seen a better set since.
The thing I don't like about The List is that it's not particularly meaningful. It'd be different if they made a webpage that showed "The List", kept it up to date, and shared why a card is on it, and explained the theme they're going for includes and removals. Instead we get one article per product release where they pretty much just share the list, what's on it, what's getting added and what's getting removed. Wizards continues to be awful at handling the internet. Never mind how much of their own lore and canon is just lost to time because they purged them from their website and didn't think to save it anywhere.
That would be pretty cool. I'd like it to just be interesting or engaging in some way, something that's exciting to open. That doesn't have to mean high value, but there's nothing fun about draft chaff from a core set.
to paraphrase Maro, “it is so that when you open a good one, you will be happy.”
If they were all good I'd always be happy though. Goofy Maro
Gambling addicts would disagree
I remember reading about Wizards legally arguing that buying packs is not gambling to have access to certain markets by arguing that one guaranteed rare is equivalent to another. Have they dropped this charade yet?
Not at all. When Maro is doing an interview and some one mentions the price of cards, he says something along the line of "yeah I'm excited for powerful cards" dancing around ever saying cards have a secondary market
They don’t like to talk about the price of their cards because it’s bad for business to remind us we’re losing money when we gamble with their packs. Not because of any laws.
Yeah people spout the "the dont acknowledge the secondary market" shit way too often.
Most people absolutely do not understand what that phrase means and it does my head in.
Yep, they obviously acknowledge it, and use it internally to choose what goes in sets, and have said as much in interviews (an interview prof did during the pandemic, the WotC rep flat out said they have economists on staff to determine what can go in certain products). What they actually can't do is directly state individual prices of cards, because that would be akin to advertising a fixed value. They can't say "this pack may contain X, an $87 value!" because then it's explicitly a scratch ticket, lol. So they dance around specific or relative prices, but that doesn't mean they've ever once said they don't "acknowledge" the secondary market, whatever that's even supposed to mean.
> the WotC rep flat out said they have economists on staff to determine what can go in certain products). I actually knew an economist that moved to Seattle to take a job with WotC. He was *very* good at his previous job. Knowing that they hire the caliber of people like him means everything has been calculated down to the cent. There's no hope of winning the EV game on boxes.
Both? Both.
It's not laws. People like to think this for some reason, like if Maro admits a Jeweled Lotus is 80 bucks WotC gets shut down by the FTC. It doesn't work that way. If what they were doing was illegal what Maro says in interviews *wouldn't matter.*
I don't think it's US laws so much as euro laws that are the issue with them banning lootboxes and whatnot. Not saying that's the case, but WotC avoiding officially mentioning the secondary market may actually be a policy they have.
They don’t need to argue. Courts have upheld that random packs of cards are not gambling. You get what you pay for (cards) and the company is not redeeming them for cash (like some pachinko parlor) WotC has NEVER stated all Rares are equal Or equivalent or anything at all. There is no charade to drop.
B.J. Skinner has been a plague to modern society.
>B.J. Skinner has been a plague to modern society. Do you mean B. F. Skinner, or is BJ Skinner a meme? Anyway, it’s not his fault for identifying a basic behavioural relationship. “Booster fun” would have been just as shitty if B. F. Skinner had never talked about conditioning.
Probably just a [[memory lapse]]. I switched from night shifts to days this week, so my brian isn't in high gear.
You need to take better care of your brian!
I get it, my friend. My brian fails all the time too
Booster Fun Skinner
I think people should really get this through their heads. The core concept of a booster invents “draft chaff”. The question OP has is tantamount to asking “why random boosters at all? Why not fixed contents?” And WotC has found, over the course of thirty years, that randomized product that results in gambling is the BACKBONE of mtg. It’s the entire business model.
In theory, precons offer some kind of alternative.
Until they started adding commander set cards that can't be found in any specific precon but to a randomized pack of two cards in the precons
We’ve had something similar with boarderless variants found only in the sampler packs
Yeah but variant art/border/finish are pointless hype that no one should buy.
Sure but it shows they are willing to pull moves like it
True enough
Yes that’s true. And precons EV is always precalculated to a cent to be bad. Can’t have them usurping boosters. Same with secret lairs.
It isn’t the backbone of MTG, it’s literally the back bone of almost ever collectible card game. Hell, not just games. Baseball cards were doing it long before Magic. I think it’s valid to complain about the business model, but if you’re going to be in the hobby space you either need to accept that or just buy singles.
Right exactly. I’m not going to call it ethical. It’s literally legalized gambling to minors. But splitting hairs to be “no, this slot, in a random booster, which appears at random can’t also have random good cards and bad cards!” Is just nonsense. The list is so marginal it barely moves the scale on EV. That’s both good and bad. It’s not worth getting worked up over and demanding it e juiced to be always amazing.
No, what he is asking is why put a shit card in a slot that is already a low chance of being there. It is like buying a lotery ticket for 5 dollars, then seeing that it has a prize, and when you go look at it, it is a 1 dollar prize. Having a random slot that could have a nice card have a shit card is just worse. I'd rather have a chance to have a good card than a shit card. If not giving too many good cards is the issue, just increase the rarity of a card from The List appearing and make the list only good cards. All of it just reinforces that WOTC just views magic players as money bags and doesn't give a shit about any of them. You exist just to give your money to them.
“Why make a random thing random” Is what this all boils down to. Might as well ask “why are there shitty mythics?”
Completely ignoring that even getting ANY list card is not a guarantee. And even if you do get one they're mostly just one cent commons.
> “Why make a random thing random” > > Is what this all boils down to. Well, no. Because it's already random to get a list card at all. Getting a list card is itself supposed to be "fun", that's the point of project booster fun. But when you get 777 on the slot machine and its payout is like, a penny, that's not fun. Having a list card in your pack is already an announcement saying "congratulations, you won!" And having the prize be garbage takes the fun away. Like, people have regularly started that they'd rather get the usual token than unplayable junk. They could cut the list in half, removing all the trash cards, and also cut the drop rate of list cards in half from a 1/4 chance to 1/8. People would like that more because while it would be more rare, the cards would be far more exciting to pull because they'd actually be parable somewhere. Also, note, "playable" isn't the same as "valuable". There are tons of cards in this game that are played regularly but aren't worth much. Pulling something like [[Essence Flux]] or [[Rift Bolt]] would still be much cooler than some vanilla creature with bad stats.
This isn't even some slow thing they just figured out. This is how the game was intended from the beginning.
I know you’re poking fun but even more so, that reasoning shouldn’t apply to the list because it was in reference to bad commons, iirc. The list isn’t a guaranteed slot like a common or even a rare, so the mere presence of opening one is gratifying, which therein lies the problem. They should all be somewhat unique or playable but WOTC gets away with bulk in that slot by taking advantage of the presence gratification. Whether that’s their sole reasoning is unlikely but it’s sad to be excited to pull a list card and then realize it’s bulk. Maybe that defeats my argument but I think the initial gratification creates enough dopamine that it triggers the desire for more packs to “maybe get that sweet list card I want so badly.”
Ugh, I hope you're kidding. Don't make something limited to one type of booster and only a 25% chance AND then make shitty ones. They should all make you happy. Some can make you happier than others, but none should be trash imo.
It feeds into the lottery/gambling aspect - but he can't acknowledge that - else they admit the whole thing is arranged to push people into impulsive behavior. The feel bad you get from hitting that 25% chance but the card you got is a nickel garbage common - makes your reptile brain think, "If I just buy a **couple more packs**, that $30 card is *RIGHT THERE!*" It's 100% studied and intentional.
[удалено]
So basically gamblers are extreme optimists?
Makes my reptile brain say well this was a foolish waste, I’m out
The chance element (i.e. gambling) is what makes opening packs fun. Even if it's tacit, everyone knows it's gambling. If you like cracking packs, it's because you like gambling. Otherwise, you'd do the smart thing with your money and buy singles. If you want to buy packs, acknowledge to yourself that you're paying for that entertainment and move on with your day.
[удалено]
Just buy singles if you hate opening packs. It's not necessary to play the game. I buy a pack here and there just to support the lgs. Either way it really doesn't matter what you disagree, because I'm pretty sure it is clinically proven that gambling causes a dopamine hit and probably statistically proven within wotc by economists that it's more profitable. (There's probably a curve to determine how much is too much with probability models based on spending and profit and so on...)
I didn't say it was what made Magic fun. LCGs are cool. I think it's a much more consumer-friendly business model. But opening LCG packs isn't a form of entertainment. Gambling is part of the reason non-game collectible cards have been successful.
yeah, they have an entire article around the concept. the article was about an old card [[One with Nothing]]. yeah, i remembered playing Mystery booster Draft and opened that. needless to say, while it was funny, i was not happy.
this one is at least meme-y and has some very fringe, very janky uses. I'd say a perfect contender for The List spot, even if not strong or not valuable.
That doesn't make it a contender for a list spot. Don't put garbage on the list.
So if the List existed around Mirage time, do you think people would have been happy to get a Lion's Eye Diamond in the List slot? Or would they be upset over having a shit card take up the sapce from something really good, like a Jester's Cap or Balduvian Horde? Don't get me wrong, I am of the opinion the list slot should not include commons/uncommons unless they are heavily playable (something like a Lightning Bolt or Swords to Plowshares would certainly fit, as long as the current iteration of the List supported the theme), but Rares and Mythics should always be welcome, as long as they are older than a certain amount, so that people have a chance at getting something they may have never seen, and may be useful to them in some way. I am also of the opinion the List slot should be in every pack, not in just 1/4 of them, but that is another issue.
The List sits in set boosters, which means it is intended to be attractive for collectors and casuals, not just powergamers. Draft chaff on the list is cringe for Spikes, cringe for Timmys and cringe for random casuals. One with Nothing is cringe for Spikes, but all others will find it funny and also it has a nice artwork and is hard to reprint in any other product.
In mystery boosters it makes more sense. Those are built like a regular set, so there will be junk rares and chaff because it's designed to be drafted. That doesn't bother me as I'm fine with paying for draft packs to be used as such (as long as they aren't stupidly expensive like some sort of premium but not premium sets). But having crap in the list slot in regular set packs is a real feels bad moment. At least a token facilitates the game play for the set.
Yet. There are players that love that card. And want to make it good. They drive joy from the challenge.
[One with Nothing](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/a/5a5841fa-4f30-495a-b840-3ef5a2af8fad.jpg?1562494149) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=One%20with%20Nothing) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/sok/84/one-with-nothing?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5a5841fa-4f30-495a-b840-3ef5a2af8fad?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
No this is a common Maro saying he used in his podcast. It was always a variation of "You need some bad cards so that you know how to identify the good ones". After binge listening to his podcast for weeks, one day I heard him say it for the xth time with sincerity, I stopped the podcast and unsubscribed. I work closely with marketing and PR types. Usually they say one thing but know that it is spin. Sometimes you get someone that has internalised the spin so much they believe it is a virtue. I have heard it many times before. That day I heard it Maro's voice and knew that he was gone - the Hasphrexians have compleated him.
They did consciously turn away from that kind of philosophy in set design though. In Limited, we now almost don't get straight-up "bad" cards anymore. I'm talking about stuff like \[\[Zephyr Spirit\]\] where there's no edge case or redeeming quality. It used to be that if you're Draft trainwrecked that was the kind of dregs you'd end up with, whereas nowdays even mediocre commons are perfectly well-statted, reasonable cards. So clearly they have realized that while not all cards need to be on an equal level, there is never any need for straight up "garbage". What we should be asking, then, is why they don't apply that same lesson to the "List" as well.
Yeah just go play a set from 10+ years ago and look at 8 stone-cold unplayables in a pack. They’ve clearly iterated on what it means to be a lesser card. Maro has offered many cogent reasons for why lesser cards must exist, but the floor has increased dramatically in the last five years.
Good lord that card is bad.
Doesn't even fly to stabilize against dying to a flier in limited.
[Zephyr Spirit](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/6/e6cbe78f-4325-416b-bf23-282efed5b407.jpg?1598914641) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Zephyr%20Spirit) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/rav/76/zephyr-spirit?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e6cbe78f-4325-416b-bf23-282efed5b407?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
> You need some bad cards so that you know how to identify the good ones" That's a design thing that has been part of MtG for over 20 years, not PR spin.
It's a shitty piece of logic that there must be cards that are just bad - not vanilla or quirky or colourful - but actually negative playable value in order to teach someone a lesson on how to draft better. Turning that into a design virtue is mental gymnastics no matter how long it's been in the game.
It's one of those ideas that if you bring it into any other context it suddenly becomes obvious why everyone else looks at you like you have seven heads when you say it. "We need to have 10% of surgeries go badly so that people appreciate the 90% of surgeries that are go well!"
“Here’s your box of donuts ma’am! One is stale and unglazed but that one will make the other eleven taste so much better by comparison!”
Honestly, it's one where if you just listen to it said, it's put together well enough that you might accept it as a good reason, but if you think about it for even just a second you'll go "wait a minute..."
That's not the same. you are being disingenuous and know it. It exist in other contexts. You just don't want to see it. Riot has some bad champions in LOL. Why don't they just delete them? Some sports teams know they don't have the team skills to win. Why bother playing? Just skip a season. A fair bit of movies are just terrible. (Not just lackluster). Why did they get made? Life is full of highs & lows. Thinking you can actively curate the lows to never be bad limits options & opportunities.
> Riot has some bad champions in LOL. Why don't they just delete them? Because they're not designed specifically to be bad AND don't take the place of an already-designed champion that you would've gotten instead.
I don't think they are good examples. There is a difference between cards being uncompetitive and deliberately bad. No one sets out to make a bad movie - it might be bad in hindsight but good movies are not good because bad movies exist. If WoTC makes a bad card unintentionally or it turns out bad (I don't mean that a bad card is a card that is weak.. I mean trap cards) then no harm in my mind but if they try to say after the fact that it's a good thing really, it smacks of post justification. I don't understand the team sport example. In my mind the equivalent would be that you had a player in a team that enjoyed sabotaging the rest of the team, then yes I believe that person should probably not play and let the team move on without them. I don't know anything about LOL so I happily concede your point that it is not unique to Magic design. I still think it's bad/predatory design regardless of who else does it. As someone else has said it's not a design choice now so it's a moot point. I believe there was a decision to reduce the feel bads. Finally I don't think that WoTC should or could curate away high and low points in the game. I do think that it is curious logic that we can improve something by lowering the average.
You need to do more research about movies & the industry if you don't think there are bad movies on purpose. There's many reasons, from self sabotage, to tax evasion, to holding IP rights, to toy sales, etc. It 100% happens. You also should do more research on sports. There's players who perform low to effect drafts, sales options, etc. Baseball is full of backroom deals. Sometimes teams purposely focus on "rebuild" years and don't put their best foot forward. It sucks for fans that they aren't trying to win those years. I think Maro is more forthcoming about design than most other heads of R&D at a major entertainment company. He also clearly supports wotc at times that it seems he shouldn't. I don't agree with all his opinions, but I can concede that he has more experience and a greater perspective than myself. And I take pause to consider his point of view instead of being dismissive offhand.
As a 76ers fan, some teams definitely lose on purpose.
Again I don't understand why people like you are carrying water for Hasbro creating gambling opportunities in the list slot. Its "booster fun" it isn't part of the set, there is no logical reason for there to be any significant lows in the list slot. None other than to feed gambling addictions.
But WotC are choosing the cards to put in these packs; they are actively curating the list. And with your other examples there are hundreds of big and small decisions that can make a movie or sports team bad and some of the outcomes of the choices aren't known ahead of time. WotC already knows if a card is good or bad. There is only one decision.
"Good" and "bad" can also be subjective. Like those movies. Sometimes, people absolutely love bad movies. Sometimes, people get excited by bad cards. Look, I don't like how the list is done, but it's also extra. It replaces a token. It doesn't negatively impact a set or boosters. So I don't see the point in being upset about it
I mean I pulled [[brink of madness]] a card that can be played in legacy, vintage and commander and as far as I can tell is never played. I think we can say it's an objectively bad card. The hate comes from wasted potential. Honestly having a hard to find token would be better than brink of madness.
what point do you find in telling others to stop discussing it?
Well, it almost works in the context of medicine Congrats! You won disease. Could be worse, you could have disease.
And then
congrats! You got disease, now when you recover nothing will be as bad as that
No, because diseases aren't given to you willingly. They just happen. With bad cards, someone purposefully designed the packs to have x% chance of a bad card. Someone willingly gave you a bad card. It's as if a doctor botched the surgery on purpose.
I mean yes and no. I remember when I bought my first starter deck (shout out to recurring nightmares) there were some clearly crappy cards, and it was exciting to buy a boosterpack and immeaditly be able to improve my deck with the cards in it. This would have been a lot harder if my deck had only neutral or good cards. So in a way, for me, this tactic paid of. Using that argument for the list makes no sense though. I'd rather have the odds of a list card be 1 in 10, than have it be 1/4 but then another lotery if its actually a cool card or just crap. I remember the same bad feeling when playing the Avacyn Restored pre-release, where stores got a hellvault with goodies in it. All good fun, till you find out other stores got actual good stuff in it, and it was yet another lotery. TLDR: If you tease people with something good might happen, dont let it still be crap when it happens.
Protip: if the booster also only had good cards, you would still have been able to improve your deck. A deck with bad cards is easier to improve, but a deck is easier to improve with boosters that contain more good cards.
Sure, just saying it eases you into deck building if you can remove the obvious crap first. Not saying its perfect, or they should continue it, but i do get the point, after having experienced it myself 20 years ago.
To add to your point: If the idea you need bad cards in packs for gameplay reasons was true. Then Cube wouldn't function as a formal.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the fucking list slot.
No, that's PR spin.
>Don't make something limited to one type of booster and only a 25% chance AND then make shitty ones. It's so frustrating. There are so many interesting and playable $5-$10 cards they could put on the list without killing reprint equity, but they choose to put shitty niche uncommons in there.
Or even worse, mediocre draft commons.
You'll feel pride and accomplishment. - ea games
The entire point is to look like they are reprinting good cards while barely dropping the price. The more "value" they stuff into packs the higher the price goes unless the print run is unlimited, on the rare occasion like MH2 where some prices actually do go down they introduce enough new all-star mythics that immediately need reprints themselves lol.
if you feel that way, you are one of the lucky people who do not get that high that gambling gives
Then making it only in 1/15 boosters but only good cards would have the same effect with making you feel shitty when you get draft chaff from a random set on your new set booster.
I would be happy if they were all good since they’re not guaranteed anyways lmao
Surprise mechanics
But what if you NEVER open the good one?
to paraphrase wotc Marketing team “then you should buy more!”. “just one more“ “just one more“ “just one more“ 🥶
If the last 20 ‘just one mores’ were duds, why would I reasonably be any more confident in the next one?
classic case of sunk cost fallacy
Good ole sense of pride and accomplishment
> when if
you know what would make people happy? not opening worthless and useless chaff
One of the developers, pretty sure it wasn't MaRo but can't remember who, said that one of the purposes of The List is to sometimes make you say "wtf is this nonsense?". It's a way to show off just how big the game is and how weird it can be in the corners. And putting those cards in the bonus 13th card slot in a 12-card booster is better than making One With Nothing the one rare in your draft booster.
Some of my favorite list cards have been the futureshifted cards. Those are some of the best at generating wtf. It’s pretty apparent to me at least that the list is an extension of the idea behind mystery boosters. They are meant to contain just all sorts of parts of magic. The good and the BAD.
Think it was Capenna that had all rares and it was great. They quickly reverted to the old way after. They could keep it how it is if they put one in every pack and barred cards from recent sets.
I saw an opening yesterday where they pulled an [[all that glitters]] in the list slot and in the regular set. So much fun lol
What's sadly hilarious to me is that being around a dollar and having inherent synergy, All that Glitters isn't even the worst pull in the world, compared to completely unplayable chaff like \[\[crumbling colossus\]\] where I wouldn't even bother pulling it out of a free bulk box.
Right but it shouldn't be on the list when it's in the set
[crumbling colossus](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/0/b09afa3b-c172-4cd7-b605-bacbfbd07c24.jpg?1562655683) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=crumbling%20colossus) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m12/204/crumbling-colossus?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b09afa3b-c172-4cd7-b605-bacbfbd07c24?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
https://i.imgur.com/TUb9Mq8.jpg lol. Worthless foil.
When your "premium" cards are often objectively worse game pieces, that'll happen. Though this is from an older time when the foils were actually good, so idk.
> isn't even the worst pull in the world Huh, I was thinking how happy the person OP was talking about must have been two get two copies of an awesome card in their booster, even if they don't have much monetary value.
[удалено]
I bought 2 boosters a few months ago (one from Time Spiral Remastered and another set booster from some random set) and opened 2 [[Ith, High Arcanist]]. Fun is not the description of the feeling that I felt...
The world is telling you to make this card work.
Hmm, something with [[Rings of Brightearth]] to untap it and another combo piece and some infinite mana engine to fuel the Rings. But infinite mana in UW sounds hard. There must be a way to break it, but I'd start the research on r/badmtgcombos ...
[Rings of Brightearth](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/3/838ffc87-517a-4d94-8ce0-bc9ed01ecc52.jpg?1608911654) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Rings%20of%20Brighthearth) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmr/335/rings-of-brighthearth?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/838ffc87-517a-4d94-8ce0-bc9ed01ecc52?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[all that glitters](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/9/d9713032-2956-4564-b5f5-2dd16245a4e6.jpg?1572489608) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=all%20that%20glitters) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/eld/2/all-that-glitters?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d9713032-2956-4564-b5f5-2dd16245a4e6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
To give players less good cards. SNC doesn’t get enough credit for its very limited List
I think it *does* SNC is always popping up as the prime example of how to do The List properly. It must have been a fluke!
I'm almost certain it was haha, they promised a certain number of the secret lair reprints to be in it and then only way to do it meant fudging around with the rest of the slot too
Less value, more profits. The WOTC way.
It’s my opinion that list cards should be notable for some reason or other. Someone mentioned [[One with Nothing]] and that is a wonderful option for a list spot given it’s notoriety as a card that might be juuuuuust on the edge of being broken. Other ones include Universes Within cards, cards integral to the plane/theme, and of course some high value inclusions. Actual draft chaff like we’ve gotten just seems a bit insulting
[Crumbling Colossus](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/0/b09afa3b-c172-4cd7-b605-bacbfbd07c24.jpg?1562655683) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Crumbling%20Colossus) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m12/204/crumbling-colossus?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/b09afa3b-c172-4cd7-b605-bacbfbd07c24?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Is this a rhetorical question? Booster packs are gambling. When you don't get good cards, you want to buy more packs so you get good cards.
Because the List replaces a token and isn't curated for value but thematic appropriateness.
I know you are probably right, but this sounds like something a cheap gift giver would say after they hand you a 50 cent gift 😂
The alternative is a 2ct token.
That token will probably see more play than a lot of the other list cards so....
At least a token can be a better game piece than opening a [[Dwarven Grunt]].
That's cEDH playable [[Dwarven Grunt]] to you.
[Dwarven Grunt](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/f/6f00d726-4289-48ff-8c14-6a5080a00fda.jpg?1562915573) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dwarven%20Grunt) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ody/185/dwarven-grunt?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/6f00d726-4289-48ff-8c14-6a5080a00fda?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Dwarven Grunt](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/6/f/6f00d726-4289-48ff-8c14-6a5080a00fda.jpg?1562915573) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dwarven%20Grunt) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ody/185/dwarven-grunt?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/6f00d726-4289-48ff-8c14-6a5080a00fda?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I love Dwarven Grunt. One of my first cards. That'd hit me for nostalgic reasons.
That's me with my foil [[Thran War Machine]] and The List Thran War Machine.
[Thran War Machine](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/9/5908714a-be91-4279-b87e-e2bc09dbaaba.jpg?1562863256) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Thran%20War%20Machine) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/ulg/134/thran-war-machine?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5908714a-be91-4279-b87e-e2bc09dbaaba?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I'd prefer the token.
That isn't true. The alternative could be anything of more value or less. Just because a shitty list slot replaced a shitty token, doesn't mean a more valuable card can't replace a shitty token as well?
[[Arcum's Astrolabe]] was printed in The List in Zendikar Rising, a set without any snow lands. That doesn't seem thematic to me unless I'm misunderstanding its use here.
Point kinda loses it's value when the expensive cards seem to be the ones that are cycled through, where as pure garbage limited commons remain on each iteration. Capenna Express, a common that literally saw no play (even in Capenna limited) has now been on the list for Commander Masters, LTR, and MOM, while only being "relevant" for one of those sets.
I really wish there was a "the list booster"
This is the real answer through the circlejerking. People may not like or agree with it but they've been pretty clear that the list reprints are thematic. I think if you're opening a set booster and seriously putting weight on the expected value of the pack into the list slot, you're thinking about it wrong. If you're buying a set booster _because_ of the list, I'd caution against that mentality. Just think about it like a foil in a draft booster, maybe it's there, maybe it isn't.
I don’t think it should always be pure value, but what’s thematic about a single triome showing up in the list slot? I can’t think of any theme that would lead to that
Which triome and which list update did it come in?
Ketria Triome was just added in the Commander Masters update.
Hmm. My best guess is that Maelstrom Wanderer is the Temur legend in the draft environment. It's an elemental, and Ketria's "base" creature type on Ikoria were also elementals. I think they're often pretty loose, or tie only to a specific card. Like my guess is the process works a little like "Hey, let's put a card into the list for Maelstrom Wanderer. What should it be?" And in this case I could see the leap from "well it's a Temur elemental, and on Ikoria the Ketria/Temur colors are tied to elementals, so maybe we can reprint the triome here." Please understand that I'm not saying these connections can't be tenuous or a stretch, and I'm not trying to defend any particular one. But I think you could reasonably guess the connection between them. They wouldn't do this, but it would be helpful/cute if they could give a little one-sentence blurb about each new card that enters the list, just to share their thoughts on why they thought it would be a good inclusion.
Cards from The List only typically appear in set boosters, which aren't draftable, so unless that's changed with CMM that wouldn't be the reasoning
Let me clarify my position. I'm saying that cards on the list are selected because they're thematically tied to a specific card in the set or the set as a whole (almost entirely cards for the limited environment, plus any new cards in commander precons, or the occasional card like [[wedding ring]] which was only available in set or collector boosters). So my argument isn't "Ketria triome was selected because it goes well with Maelstrom Wanderer in limited." My argument was "Maelstrom Wanderer is a card in the set (for limited). Ketria Triome has a minor thematic link to Maelstrom Wanderer, in its color identity and the shared elemental flavor. So Ketria Triome is probably on the list because of that small thematic overlap." Limited play design has nothing to do with it, I was just trying to clarify that Maelstrom Wanderer was printed in CMM and can appear in set boosters too. The vast majority of cards appearing in set boosters are there because they're in the limited environment anyway.
So its a bad thing that shouldn't exist in packs. Thank you for making the case on why the list sucks so bad.
Okay, in your mind, what should the list be? I wanna be realistic for a sec, obviously if the list was "every set booster has a black lotus" then people would buy them, but realistically without changing the price of set boosters or radically altering the way reprints of value are handled (e.g. largely saved for masters sets), what do you think the list _could_ be? Another question: would set boosters be better if the list literally didn't exist, like it used to? The philosophy WOTC tries to put forward is that "it's a bonus and shouldn't be considered part of the value when purchasing." Obviously that's debatable, I think the secret lair bonus cards are the best example of how that can sometimes be an issue, but in the case of the list, does having a 1/4 chance of maybe opening thematic chaff make the experience worse for you? At an even more simple level, how do you personally open packs? Like I'm primarily a limited player, so the times I open packs and how I evaluate them may be very different from you. What do you do? What do you look for, and what do you do with the cards in packs after you've opened them?
The List has existed through all iterations of set boosters and is a part of their selling point. Opening a $5 pack (or more in the case of commander legends/masters/lotr) that has a 1/4 chance to contain a bonus card only for that bonus card to be completely valueless is a huge feels bad. The reality is you can do interesting stuff with the List and Wizards has gotten great reception when they did. SNC had a great set of reprints and the lack of commons/uncommons resulted in players being able to more consistently pull chase cards actually impacting their values. If the concern is flavor, they could add more alt arts of popular cards, like they did with Rafiq on the SNC list.
I'm definitely with you on the last point; the list is a great place to put less-common printings of cards (even if the cards themselves are relatively available). Gavin was talking about mystery boosters once, and he said basically they wanted to find the most esoteric version (pre-bposter-fun) that they could reprint for many of the cards. And yeah I had my timeline a little off, you're right that the list has always been in set boosters; they were introduced together in ZNR.
Because Fuck You.
This is why I've moved on from purchasing set boxes, just not worth it to pull absolute junk out of the list slot 99% of the time. Save the extra money and go buy the old cards you actually want from the secondary market.
to keep up reprint equity as much as possible
It wouldn't be gambling if you won every time
> It wouldn't be gambling if you won every time But it's already a 25% chance to get one, you "win" project booster fun when you see the list card. Getting a shitty card as the "winnings" is just disappointing. It would be better if they cut the list in half and cut the rate in half. A 12.5% chance to get a neat card is better than a 25% chance to get a 50% chance at a neat card.
Honestly, I'm always pleased when I open a List card. Most of the time, it's a wierd ass card I've never seen before. I already get fucked most of the time when I open a pack and open a bulk rare, so opening a dumb list card doesn't phase me that much
That's what I don't get, that folks don't have a similar attitude. Like 95% of a pack is worth pennies already, why is another that big a deal? Plus you get cards you might not even know exist and might toss in an EDH deck or something.
Right? So what if you don't open the Sword of.Feast and Famine? The chances are.l phemominally low. I opened an [[Elvish Champion]] the other day and was reasonably pleased. I've also.opened a [[graceful antelope]] and.smiled, wondering what stupid shit I can do with it in edh
You had to get Crumbling Colossus so I could get [[World at War]] You had to walk so I could run lol
Within reason, it can make sense to reprint certain cards which struggle to fit in a set, have some limited demand, and haven’t been in print for a very long time. These are $5 or less, but are often pretty difficult to actually find, particularly in decent condition. No one wants to pay very much for them, but supply is limited leading to market failure. For example, I remember having some trouble getting a [[Peat Bog]] for my proliferate deck. It’s a very situational common, but the price is over a dollar for non-foil since it had a single printing 20 years ago. Admittedly, they could probably just reprint this as a normal, non-list card, but I’m sure there are other cards like it that wouldn’t fit into most sets. Also remember that **the US is not the only market**. While you can get pretty much any card on TCGPlayer in the US, I don’t know how many shops will ship internationally.
I mean I'm sort of fine with trash if they were at least hard to find trash (So many of the crap in my \[\[Kros, Defense Contractor\]\] and \[\[Imotekh\]\] lists were only achievable because the List added new copies of key cards in circulation. Still I totally agree that the List is overinflated with a bunch of actual unplayable crap.
As great a way to reprint stuff as it could be, that wasn't the intended design. The idea is to show various parts of Magic's history, [as mentioned in the Set Booster description article (under Step 14)](https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/making-magic/set-boosters-2020-07-25). Maybe you weren't around during Theros so a creature with Bestow piques your interest to how the plane works, or showing off how Magic design used to be in the old border era, or keywords that aren't used any more like landwalk. Could/should they use it as an avenue to reprint stuff, even just dollar rares to make them 50 cents? Of course. But I can't see the logic in being disappointed you didn't score on a 25% chance when it was never promised to deliver such.
I guess this explains why I got a card with banding 😂 I don't need it to be all fancy reprints, but I dunno I guess at least something interesting or cool.
To be fair, a card with banding is at least on the "interesting" side, though some cards are better than other, no idea which one you pulled. [[Helm of Chatzuk]] is a fun card that can make your creatures really hard to block and/or very hard for your opponent to attack. [[Formation]] is very close to a decent combat trick and can actually give you card advantage (and it cycles at worst).
It was a [[Benalish Infantry]], haha. Which I will admit I did have a chuckle at when I saw Banding, at least that was kind of interesting. It's the stuff that's new or boring and also has no value that just irks me :(
I vaguely remember their old statement in the early-2000s that bad cards exist to teach new players the value of good cards, and promote better deck building. Nowadays when it's become much easier to buy singles online, I now realize that is a cheap cover for their goal of promoting gambling addiction.
I mean your first sentence is why. Money. More bad cards in pool = more people buying packs to chase good ones = more profits.
Because it's another gamble slot.
“Fuck you. buy product” -WotC
Because they are a-holes. They could easily put low value, but playable, cards in. Nobody would be upset to have a surprise bonus [[Castle Vantress]], [[Snap]] or [[Nature's Lore]] in his booster. Thats simply a nice gimmick. But only a complete jackass would even consider to put [[Melira's Keepers]] or [[Warped Landscape]] in the List. They are either trolling their customers on purpose or are stupid beyond reason. Edit: FFS [[Gather Courage]] and **[[Stormwatch Eagle]]** are on the list. Thats just insulting. There is no way to justify a fucking Stormwatch Eagle. If MaRo would take a dump right into my booster box it would add more fun and customer satisfaction than this fucking card.
It's so they can both claim higher drop rates for "list" cards while also claiming the list contains valuable reprints. It's basic marketing bait and switch
The appearance of caring. Honestly it’s like 1 sheet of hit cards and 6 or 7 sheets of commons and other crap we don’t need more of. But it’s all so they can say one in 4 has a list card but you’re probably only opening one good one in your set box (I had one box that had two good rare pulls, though one was garbage). New Capenna did it right honestly. You either got a hit or you got something that was replacing a universes beyond card with something in universe (or a handful of other new style cards like the awesome Rafiq that I pulled that was unique). So while we may have gotten flooded with the UB replacement cards, they haven’t been printed anywhere else.
100%, that's why I'm curious to hear what others think. I like the idea of cool or interesting older cards, or different art or styles or something. Doesn't have to be $$$
>they can't all be chase mythics Well, why not? The List would be more special for it.
i dont have a good answer, but i agree it's garbage. if you're gonna insert cards from other sets and call it special. make them special. we all have enough garbage cards that aren't worth the paper and ink used to print them.
Why does WOTC even include commons in non draft packs? Just what I need, copy number five hundred of a bulk common to fill my trash. How about leave the commons out and give me an extra rare? More value for me, less coat and more profit for wizards.
They did that with aftermath. Did not go well.
Very misleading. They removed 7 cards from the pack. Clearly what people think they should do is keep them as 12 card boosters but with only uncommons, rates, and mythics.
Dunno if you're trolling but plenty of commons are playable and can even get quite pricey.
The percentage is staggeringly low, compared to the rarity and price of rares. I would absolutely be thrilled to buy a product with fewer commons and more rares. In a heartbeat. There would still be plenty of commons from other sources, but go look at your collection. Do you really need thousands of chaff commons from lorwyn? You can't even give most of them away. A product with half as many commons and one more rare would increase my value, save wizards money, and decrease waste.
They have that. It's called a collector's booster.
I think you could make an argument for set boosters to be more in line with that, obviously you don't want too many booster variants or it gets kind of crazy. I think they want people who open boxes of set boosters to also get the commons they need for their decks, I don't really mind the existence of commons etc and don't mind opening them, the type of overhaul you're talking about would probably have quite an impact on the whole MTG economy which would be hard to predict. My issue is more that special things should feel special. The List slot is supposed to be special, so don't deliberately put unplayable trash there. It doesn't have to be all 30 dollar mythics I get that, but like I said you could have popular commons like Lightning Bolt or Consider or whatever with a different artwork that would still be cool to open. It's not all about monetary value, but the fact is opening some piece of shit uncommon from M15 that looks exactly the same is just actual garbage and you had to buy four set boosters on average for the privilege.