this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
11 points (100.0% liked)

MTG

1921 readers
1 users here now

Magic: the Gathering discussion

General discussion, questions, and media related to Magic: the Gathering that doesn't fit within a more specific community. Our equivalent of /r/magicTCG!

Type [[Card name]] in your posts and comments and CardBot will reply with a link to the card! More info here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
andrew@mtgzone.com
mike@mtgzone.com
11
Choosing the right format for my friend group – EDH, Cube, Pauper or something else? (mtgzone.com)
submitted 1 year ago by Brage@mtgzone.com to c/mtg@mtgzone.com
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hi folks. I have recently introduced a couple of friends to MTG. I've played the game for quite a while on and off (started in 2013) and have also played a bit competitively at times (Modern and limited). I've been out of the game for a couple of years and recently got back into it.

I would love to hear from your experiences with introducing new players to the game these days (the product lineup is quite different nowadays) and which formats you have tried in a group with a wide skill and experience gap.

I took one of them to the LTR prerelease and we had a good time. Afterwards we played pack wars with our prize packs and played our sealed decks against each other. We ended upgrading our sealed decks with cards from the packs and also make some extra 40-card decks with our extra LTR cards from the seald pool + prize packs.

We have since played some more with these LTR 40-card decks and it's been a lot of fun. These are the decks we used to introduce another friend to the game yesterday. We have discussed keeping this 40-card LTR format alive and I am consider buying some LTR jumpstart packs as a housewarming gift to the second friend who doesn't have any cards of their own (yet).

I am very cautious about imposing financial pressure on my friends and I try to not spend too much money on cardboard myself. Therefore, no matter what format we end up with, it should obviously be a budget friendly one. I like that the 40-card LTR format is very accessible (at least right now), but I know that it is ultimately a short-lived phenomenon that will become stale and inaccessible once the products leave the shelves. Another downside to going heavily in on LTR as a set is that it doesn't naturally transition to a financially viable 60-card format since most of the cards are only legal in Modern. Opting for current standard sets instead could be a gateway towards Pioneer.

Is then commander the natural next step? I suspect we will get there eventually no matter what, but I also think it's a bit of a big initial hurdle to get a full 100-card deck if you don't really want to spend much money on the game.

I am definitely pro-proxying and have been working on some proxy printing techniques and toying with the idea of handing out "booster packs" of commander staple proxies during our game nights to give everyone access to good cards.

I have also been toying with the idea of making an LTR cube/collection of cards to use for wizard's tower, fat stack, cube draft, premade decks or homemade jumpstart packs which would save everyone else money, but I am wary that my friends will miss out on the glorious experience of acquiring new cards and putting them in your deck which admittedly is quite fun.

I've also considered pauper as it has some event support at my LGS and I've wanted to play it for some time, but I think the main thing holding me back is the fact that it depends a lot on online research and buying old singles from the internet. New players will feel bummed that they don't get to play the new shiny cards from their booster packs and might be daunted by the vast card pool in Pauper.

Perhaps 60-card kitchen table magic could work fine, as well? In that case I would have to figure out some deck retrictions for myself, since my Modern decks would obviously be too strong.

The proxy angle is also something that boggles my mind. I haven't really done much proxying before but I kinda feel that it's not super fun to just grab top tier decks online and proxying them outright. I'm a big believed in the adage "limitation breeds creativity" and the creativity of deck building is such a huge part of the game, I think.

Obviously I'm not going to make a unilateral decision about formats, but I have the most experience and existing card resources so I have a big say in things by choosing which things I want to introduce or suggest to the others.

Just for reference, my LGS also sometimes does French duel Commander, Premodern, Oathbreaker or Highlander casual tournaments. Oathbreaker does seem kinda fun, I guess?

all 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Evu@mtgzone.com 3 points 1 year ago

I'm normally a big Pauper proponent, but you make some good points about it in this context, plus there's the fact that Pauper decklists you get off the internet will be tuned for two-player games, while it sounds like you'll be playing three-player.

Commander is the most popular format for a reason (even if I don't personally know what that reason is), and if your friends have Commander decks that they're comfortable with, then they'll be ready if they want to join a pod at the LGS on their own sometime. If you're worried about the cost to your friends to get involved, what if you start by building a few Commander decks yourself and passing them around the table when you get together?

[–] pancakes@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would say commander for a few reasons.

The first is that 100 card highlander means decks are quite inconsistent and you could play the same deck 5 times and have fairly different experiences each time.

The second is I find the metagame of commander more fun. The headgames, making deals, assessment of the board and analysing how to win in any scenario. For example, knowing when to appear weak can be the difference from dying first to winning the game. At the same time, people who play above the power level of the table often don't win because they are identified as archenemy and ganged up on.

The last reason is the vast array of deckbuilding options and potential. It's not just the idea that you can build a dragon deck or life gain check because you think they're neat. Variety in power levels across budgets is key too. You can have a $30 deck beat a $500 deck because cards aren't always priced based on their power in commander and unpopular tribes can wield massive power at a low budgetary cost. There's really no competition to commander in the sheer number of viable decks that can be built.

[–] Brage@mtgzone.com 2 points 1 year ago

True, commander is very popular for a reason. It does most of the cool and fun things in magic and can be played on a budget. I think Commander will become our main format and I'll provide loaner decks so that people don't feel pressured to buy one outright.

[–] ScreaminOctopus@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm a big fan of playing cube and other limited formats. Basically all I play these days. I think the un-optimized decks are great for new players, and limited avoids any annoying rule 0 conversation. You could always build a cube big enough for commander draft, that way if you want to play 1v1, the pool of cards is big enough you won't see the same stuff all the time. I feel like commander gets kind of stale once everyone starts really learning the game and people start running value engine decks with 10 minute turns, but it was definitely fun for a while. I have a hard time getting into modern because it's so sweaty.

[–] Brage@mtgzone.com 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I definitely agree with your reasoning about commander. It can become so tedious. The problem with Cube is that the draft portion can take ages, as well, and players who don't know all the cards can feel exhausted after the draft and have low motivation for building a deck and playing.

I guess I really appreciate 60-card magic for its simplicity, in a way. Your deck has a game plan that you can fairly consistently pull off, the number of different cards is lower and it's all in all a tighter gameplay loop that still offers plenty of complexity. The huge disadvantage is that it is extremely hard to have a balanced and fair metagame on a budget in nearly any 60-card format. The second someone starts buying singles or netdecking the arms race begins and many casual players will be left in the dust.

[–] ScreaminOctopus@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

If you build the cube you could start one with fewer, more basic cards, then add more mechanics as they get more familiar with the game. I definitely understand worrying about how long deck drafting takes, but it's definitely a big part of the fun for me personally. My girlfriend plays much more casually than I do and she likes draft a lot more since she doesn't have to spend time outside of playing with friends doing deck construction + the power level is lower.

[–] Sandra@idiomdrottning.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Cube is great since it puts everyone on the same playing field and since they liked the sealed pre-release. You can make an "EDH-like" cube akin to commander legends. And, people don't need to redraft every single session, you can keepmthe decks around for a few nights at a time if that's what people want.

Constructed → pay-to-win money pit
Non-cube limited → waste of cardboard
Cube → the perfect life

[–] Brage@mtgzone.com 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And, people don’t need to redraft every single session, you can keepmthe decks around for a few nights at a time if that’s what people want.

That's actually a neat idea, I hadn't thought of that. Thanks for the tip!

I think I want to make a cube and ideally support draft, fat stack and sealed. That way we can change it up as we see fit.

Do you think cubes work best when they replicate a realistic draft experience (e.g. just sleeve up a bunch of packs or maintain a certain card rarity ratio), or when they contain a broad mix of hand picked unique one-of cards? I find myself drawn to the notion of making a more "true to real life" card pool where you can get multiples of the same card and you mostly get commons and uncommons.

I have tried to build a one-of-each-card cube with powerful and interesting cards in the past but I think it came across as quite overwhelming. Every single card in every single pack you draft is unique and all the cards your opponent plays are unique. Kinda exhausting to read and understand to many different cards and mechanics for people who don't have a lot of card knowledge. I think those types of cubes are mostly good to keep veteran players intrigued and engaged.

I think Cube + Constructed commander is all we really need as a playgroup, maybe. Cube for fairness and variety, Commander for fun deck building and using your cards in pet decks (I suspect that some will enjoy that). I can lend out EDH decks to those that don't have their own and help them with proxies to build their own if they wish.

[–] Sandra@idiomdrottning.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As far as stacks go, I love playing the "Battle Box" a.k.a. "Danger Room" format. We have a copy of the list Channel Fireball posted but I wanna put together a D&D-themed one, too.

However, it lacks the fun of deckbuilding that you can get with draft or sealed from a cube 🤷🏻‍♀️

[–] Brage@mtgzone.com 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks for the recommend! That sounds like a very nice way to play a fat stack type format since you don't have the tedium of finding lands.

I couldn't find the original article about it, but this page explains the basics well enough.