Support NeoGAF

[OnPoint]

I don't think that's a big enough drawback for a card as powerful as Timetwister. Especially with hand emptying in certain formats.

All this discussion is moot though. This is a huge issue for a collector such as me. If Wizards is going to make one change to all the cards on the do not print list and then reprint them, I'm out.

1. They've been doing it for years. The Power 9 still grows in value due to age, scarcity and notoriety, not just power. Some examples that probably should have made you quit a long time ago if this is how you feel.

• Treasure Cruise
• Temporal Mastery
• Lion's Eye Diamond
• Lotus Petal
• Lotus Bloom
• etc

2. They're going to reuse design space occasionally, especially powerful effects that make people excited. Again, this isn't going to crash, or even impact your collection's value. They aren't going to lock away the effects of powerful cards, just likely the most broken and/or powerful applications of them.

3. I think you're wrong about this one. Refilling your opponent's hand and then giving them the turn right away is likely a huge disadvantage.

 

[GregLombardi]

Yes, I play Vintage all the time on MTGO and its very clear to me that you don't. Timetwister is literally good in one deck, and that deck isn't even necessarily good anymore. You don't know what you're talking about. Timetwister barely sees play even in Vintage.

Really. Is that why its restricted?

 

[aidan]

I don't think that's a big enough drawback for a card as powerful as Timetwister. Especially with hand emptying in certain formats.

All this discussion is moot though. This is a huge issue for a collector such as me. If Wizards is going to make one change to all the cards on the do not print list and then reprint them, I'm out.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. The reserved list is incredibly problematic.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Really. Is that why its restricted?

Honestly, it doesn't seem like you even understand the game. Day's Undoing is dramatically less powerful than Timetwister by any sane metric.

You're not likely to find a sympathetic ear to your whining about your cardboard 401(k).

 

[GregLombardi]

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. The reserved list is incredibly problematic.

Be careful what you wish for. Without collectors, this game would be a shadow of what it is today.

Honestly, it doesn't seem like you even understand the game. Day's Undoing is dramatically less powerful than Timetwister by any sane metric.

You're not likely to find a sympathetic ear to your whining about your cardboard 401(k) in this thread, sorry.

I've been playing magic since 93. I understand it quite well thanks. And I don't even own a Timetwister in paper. I'm just extremely concerned for the precedent this card printing sets. Wizards cannot renege on that list or show that they intend to. It would affect the entire game and not just those that have collections. You would see a permanent exodus of players.

 

[aidan]

Be careful what you wish for. Without collectors, this game would be a shadow of what it is today.

I've been playing magic since 93. I understand it quite well thanks. And I don't even own a Timetwister in paper. I'm just extremely concerned for the precedent this card printing sets. Wizards cannot renege on that list or show that they intend to. It would affect the entire game and not just those that have collections. You would see a permanent exodus of players.

The game is so popular nowadays that WotC is no longer beholden to the collectors who've been playing for years. Removing the reserved list would upset people, sure, but, at this point, it would be a small portion of players overall, and a very small portion of those who spend appreciable money on Magic products. Casual players outnumber hardcore collectors by orders of magnitude.

That said, I respect that WotC has stuck by their word. That's rare in business. It's a problem for the game, however.

And, since apparently it matters, I've been playing since '94. So I've seen how the game has changed in the past 20 years.

 

[The Technomancer]

Be careful what you wish for. Without collectors, this game would be a shadow of what it is today.




I've been playing magic since 93. I understand it quite well thanks. And I don't even own a Timetwister in paper. I'm just extremely concerned for the precedent this card printing sets. Wizards cannot renege on that list or show that they intend to. It would affect the entire game and not just those that have collections. You would see a permanent exodus of players.

How do you feel about

 

[Etrian Oddity]

A 1-drop that taps for 2 mana would certainly be a good tool.

Turn 1, Sultai Hatcher
Turn 2, Satyr Wayfinder, Tasigur

Seems fair.

Hmmmm

 

[WanderingWind]

Be careful what you wish for. Without collectors, this game would be a shadow of what it is today.

I've been playing magic since 93. I understand it quite well thanks. And I don't even own a Timetwister in paper. I'm just extremely concerned for the precedent this card printing sets. Wizards cannot renege on that list or show that they intend to. It would affect the entire game and not just those that have collections. You would see a permanent exodus of players.

No, you wouldn't. It would see people like you, who care more about their fake 401k, then the design space and enjoyability of the game, leave. Those people are so vastly in the minority in this century, and so utterly irrelevant to WotCs business model that literally nobody would be affected if the fraction of a fraction of a percent that consider themselves collectors all left en mass.

You are "concerned" over a "precedent" that is neither a legitimate concern or a legitimate precedent. Lesser versions of the power 9 have been printed before and nothing happened. No exodus of "collectors" and no ruination of the game that is more popular than it has ever been. The fact that you are seemingly wholly unaware of things like Treasure Cruise and Temporal Mastery show that while you may have "played" since 93, you're woefully out of the loop.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Be careful what you wish for. Without collectors, this game would be a shadow of what it is today.




I've been playing magic since 93. I understand it quite well thanks. And I don't even own a Timetwister in paper. I'm just extremely concerned for the precedent this card printing sets. Wizards cannot renege on that list or show that they intend to. It would affect the entire game and not just those that have collections. You would see a permanent exodus of players.

You are extremely confused about how the game works and what the demographics currently look like.

 

[G.ZZZ]

Be careful what you wish for. Without collectors, this game would be a shadow of what it is today.




I've been playing magic since 93. I understand it quite well thanks. And I don't even own a Timetwister in paper. I'm just extremely concerned for the precedent this card printing sets. Wizards cannot renege on that list or show that they intend to. It would affect the entire game and not just those that have collections. You would see a permanent exodus of players.

What are you saying, this card is nowhere in the same ballpark with timetwister and twister ain't even that good. Also, a big part of Timetwister value is collector value because it's played in what, 2 decks in vintage?

Treasure cruise was much closer to Ancestral than this is to Twister and didn't change the cost of ancestral one bit. If anything, all vintage (and most legacy) cards value nowadays is 90% driven by speculators because vintage players has only been decreasing but lotus is more than 10 times the cost it was 10 years ago when vintage was still a real format.

 

[OnPoint]

How do you feel about

Tried making this point and was totally ignored.

No, you wouldn't. It would see people like you, who care more about their fake 401k, then the design space and enjoyability of the game, leave. Those people are so vastly in the minority in this century, and so utterly irrelevant to WotCs business model that literally nobody would be affected if the fraction of a fraction of a percent that consider themselves collectors all left en mass.

You are "concerned" over a "precedent" that is neither a legitimate concern or a legitimate precedent. Lesser versions of the power 9 have been printed before and nothing happened. No exodus of "collectors" and no ruination of the game that is more popular than it has ever been. The fact that you are seemingly wholly unaware of things like Treasure Cruise and Temporal Mastery show that while you may have "played" since 93, you're woefully out of the loop.

Funny how it comes up again...

You are extremely confused about how the game works and what the demographics currently look like.

And there it is. Greg obviously stepped out of a time machine from 10 years ago. Let's cut him some slack.

 

[GregLombardi]

The game is so popular nowadays that WotC is no longer beholden to the collectors who've been playing for years. Removing the reserved list would upset people, sure, but, at this point, it would be a small portion of players overall, and a very small portion of those who spend appreciable money on Magic products. Casual players outnumber hardcore collectors by orders of magnitude.

That said, I respect that WotC has stuck by their word. That's rare in business. It's a problem for the game, however.

And, since apparently it matters, I've been playing since '94. So I've seen how the game has changed in the past 20 years.

What about the legal ramifications of saying they will not reprint something and then reprinting it?

Also ask the other poster why amount of time played matters, they were the one telling me I knew nothing of the game.

How do you feel about

I feel that 90+% of the time that is a worse card than Time Walk.

 

[aidan]

What about the legal ramifications of saying they will not reprint something and then reprinting it?

There are no legal ramifications to a non-legally binding promise. No contract was ever signed between WotC and their customers.

I feel that 90+% of the time that is a worse card than Time Walk.

100% of the time that card is worse than Time Walk. Just like how Day's End is worse than Timetwister 100% of the time.

 

[GregLombardi]

There are no legal ramifications to a non-legally binding promise. No contract was ever signed between WotC and their customers.

Wanna bet?

 

[aidan]

Wanna bet?

No.

 

[Angry Grimace]

What about the legal ramifications of saying they will not reprint something and then reprinting it?

Also ask the other poster why amount of time played matters, they were the one telling me I knew nothing of the game.

The amount of time you've played isn't what is important. You are the one who is giving yourself credit for the amount of time you've allegedly played. Understanding what makes cards good and bad is what is important, and you don't.

Timetwister is good for literally one thing now: in storm decks it lets you refill your hand to increase your storm count, which has to take place on the same turn. Day's Undoing by its text can't do that. It is a vastly inferior card. You cannot simply force yourself to have 1 cards in hand which is Timetwister (or Day's Undoing) while your opponent has 6. That is what we call "Magic Christmasland" in card evaluation.

There are no legal ramifications to a non-legally binding promise. No contract was ever signed between WotC and their customers.



100% of the time that card is worse than Time Walk. Just like how Day's End is worse than Timetwister 100% of the time.

There's an argument to be made in promissory estoppel (e.g. detrimental reliance by collectors akin to a contractual arrangement) That said, we've already been told by people at WOTC that their legal team advised them that they can break it if they want. They just don't because they said they wouldn't. At some point they are going to break it to reprint the 10 dual lands.

 

[GregLombardi]

The amount of time you've played isn't what is important. You are the one who is giving yourself credit for the amount of time you've allegedly played. Understanding what makes cards good and bad is what is important, and you don't.

If I'm forced to give myself credit in response to your posts, that means you need to stop insulting posters. You are the one who needs to control his/her language, not me.

Timetwister is good for literally one thing now: in storm decks it lets you refill your hand to increase your storm count, which has to take place on the same turn. Day's Undoing by its text can't do that. It is a vastly inferior card. You cannot simply force yourself to have 1 cards in hand which is Timetwister (or Day's Undoing) while your opponent has 6. That is what we call "Magic Christmasland" in card evaluation.

There are plenty of times when timetwister is great that aren't manifested in a super competitive vacuum. And times when it completely changes a game in ones favor just by sheer volume of chance.

That said, that's not what this is about. This is about the fact that Wizards just came perilously close to violating their public statements on a reprint list. And if it isn't a violation of those statements, the difference is negligible. The card has the same converted mana cost, same card type, and same effects save one minor addition. Yes, that addition changes the card but not so much so that it assuages my concern.

 

[WanderingWind]

Nobody cares.

 

[SigmasonicX]

That said, that's not what this is about. This is about the fact that Wizards just came perilously close to violating their public statements on a reprint list. And if it isn't a violation of those statements, the difference is negligible. The card has the same converted mana cost, same card type, and same effects save one minor addition. Yes, that addition changes the card but not so much so that it assuages my concern.

What do you think of

which is almost exactly

which is on the Reserved List? And note that Reverberate was printed in Magic 2011, which was printed in 2010.

 

[Newt]

Yeah, I'm perfectly fine with wizards screwing over the collectors. Reserved list shouldn't have come into existence in the first place. This is a card game first, over a financial investment.

 

[ultron87]

There's an argument to be made in promissory estoppel (e.g. detrimental reliance by collectors akin to a contractual arrangement) That said, we've already been told by people at WOTC that their legal team advised them that they can break it if they want. They just don't because they said they wouldn't. At some point they are going to break it to reprint the 10 dual lands.

I'm totally anti reserve list, but where did they say that the legal team said that? I thought all we've gotten from them over the last few years was "we can't talk about it".

 

[WanderingWind]

I'm totally anti reserve list, but where did they say that the legal team said that? I thought all we've gotten from them over the last few years was "we can't talk about it".

Curious on that one as well. I hadn't heard anything different than "we ain't gonna talk about it" since I've been back in the game.

 

[ultron87]

Maro on that 38% number.

As part of the most recent “deep dive” survey, the question was asked “Do you play Magic?” defined as playing with physical paper cards, in any place or format, or digitally through Magic Online or Magic Duels. Of all the people who answered “yes” to that question, 38% were female.

 

[SigmasonicX]

MaRo cleared up the "38% of Magic players are female" thing

Some people are questioning the statistic I’ve used about how many Magic players are female. I believe this is pulling focus from the actual issue – we all want to make more players, including women, feel more comfortable and welcome at Magic events no matter what – but I sense it won’t go away until addressed.

It’s important for our business to understand who our audience is, so from time to time, we do what is called a “deep dive”where we seek out an outside expert to gather global data about who exactly our audience is. As part of the most recent “deep dive” survey, the question was asked “Do you play Magic?” defined as playing with physical paper cards, in any place or format, or digitally through Magic Online or Magic Duels. Of all the people who answered “yes” to that question, 38% were female.

With that out of the way, let’s please turn our attention back to the actual topic of discussion: the number of female players is up (and I believe everyone in this debate acknowledges this), yet is not represented at equal numbers in organized play. Why is this? Please share your experiences.

Thank you.

 

[GregLombardi]

What do you think of

which is almost exactly

which is on the Reserved List? And note that Reverberate was printed in Magic 2011, which was printed in 2010.

I think that is also a violation of the reserved list, one that I didn't even realize. Its ramifications are less both inside the game and in collections. But it is still a violation.

 

[Angry Grimace]

If I'm forced to give myself credit in response to your posts, that means you need to stop insulting posters. You are the one who needs to control his/her language, not me.

There are plenty of times when timetwister is great that aren't manifested in a super competitive vacuum. And times when it completely changes a game in ones favor just by sheer volume of chance.

That said, that's not what this is about. This is about the fact that Wizards just came perilously close to violating their public statements on a reprint list. And if it isn't a violation of those statements, the difference is negligible. The card has the same converted mana cost, same card type, and same effects save one minor addition. Yes, that addition changes the card but not so much so that it assuages my concern.

You are again wrong. In a vacuum, Timetwister gives your opponent the same advantage it gives you, except you are missing 2U.

You just wandered into a thread of people who love and have been regularly playing competitive Magic and started complaining about your mistaken evaluation of a card. Then you just ignored everyone who explained why you're incorrect and kept complaining about the same thing. I don't know what kind of reception you are expecting.

I'm totally anti reserve list, but where did they say that the legal team said that? I thought all we've gotten from them over the last few years was "we can't talk about it".

It was on Blogatog at some point.

 

[Firemind]

Man all I open from MM2015 packs is straight up garbage. I checked how much Splinter Twin is worth online and it's worth three whole tix. :lol

Mulldrifter might as well be a rare.

 

[SigmasonicX]

I think that is also a violation of the reserved list, one that I didn't even realize. Its ramifications are less both inside the game and in collections. But it is still a violation.

You can go yell at Mark Rosewater, the lead developer, if you want

 

[WanderingWind]

Because organized play is a goddamn chore and most women I know have more sense than to subject themselves to 2 days of sitting in shitty conference halls, standing in line for 30 minutes to piss and having to spend literally hours doing absolutely nothing waiting for Mr Durdle Turtle and Friends to finish their match.

It's an actual grind to get into organized play now and unless that shit is your job, it's a waste of time and money. If it is your job, enjoy being in the same pool with sponsored players who get free access to cards, limitless test time with other "pros" and often get travel costs paid for by fans.

Add in it's been the nerdiest of nerdy hobby for about 20 years, which draws in dudes who lack in personal hygiene and haven't interacted with many people outside of their immediate circle and you have a recipe for woman repellant.

 

[GregLombardi]

You are again wrong. In a vacuum, Timetwister gives your opponent the same advantage it gives you, except you are missing 2U.

You just wandered into a thread of people who love and have been regularly playing competitive Magic and started complaining about your mistaken evaluation of a card. Then you just ignored everyone who explained why you're incorrect and kept complaining about the same thing. I don't know what kind of reception you are expecting.

Why do you keep re-framing the argument to bring it back towards a discussion of the merits of Timetwister? This is about the reserved list. Not how good of a card Timetwister is. I've responded to discussions surrounding the goodness/badness of timetwister, but that's not the point of my posts.

Stop re-framing.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Why do you keep re-framing the argument to bring it back towards a discussion of the merits of Timetwister? This is about the reserved list. Not how good of a card Timetwister is. I've responded to discussions surrounding the goodness/badness of timetwister, but that's not the point of my posts.

Stop re-framing.

You're the one who brought up the argument that the card was functionally Timetwister (and therefore a violation of the Reserved List). Whether the card is functionally equivalent to Timetwister is completely relevant even if you want to back away from that now. The Reserved List is unhealthy for the game in any case. The entire Legacy format is dying because WOTC cannot print Underground Sea, Tropical Island, Bayou or Volcanic Island. People who hold onto those cards would in fact gain value because they would have people to play those cards with.

Summary:

1. That card is not Timetwister.
2. The Reserved List is dumb and should be abolished.
3. Nobody cares about the value of your collection.

 

[Etrian Oddity]

This thread used to be fun.

...

So.

What are gonna be the biggest losses from Theros and M15 rotating out, I wonder?

Hero's Downfall, Thoughtseize, Bile Blight, Voyaging Satyr, Rabblemaster, Stormbreath Dragon, Xenagod, the Hydra family -- all gone.

I think token-based decks will still be in check with Virulant Plague in existence. Devotion decks will entirely be phased out and replaced by whatever themes Zendikar will introduce. I'm excited.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Its hard to say without knowing what is in BFZ.

 

[red13th]

I hate the reserved list, but even if they abolished it the way they would reprint stuff like duals would probably be dreadful, considering that they reprint Modern stuff (the format that would in theory be accessible) in such a shitty way with Modern Masters, reserve-listless Legacy Masters would certainly be even shittier.

 

[Angry Grimace]

I hate the reserved list, but even if they abolished it the way they would reprint stuff like duals would probably be dreadful, considering that they reprint Modern stuff (the format that would in theory be accessible) in such a shitty way with Modern Masters, reserve-listless Legacy Masters would certainly be even shittier.

The chance that they would reprint Black Lotus or any of the Power Nine even if the list were abolished is like zero. They don't reprint Force of Will right now.

But they could actually print Thunder Spirit.

 

[kirblar]

Because organized play is a goddamn chore and most women I know have more sense than to subject themselves to 2 days of sitting in shitty conference halls, standing in line for 30 minutes to piss and having to spend literally hours doing absolutely nothing waiting for Mr Durdle Turtle and Friends to finish their match.

It's an actual grind to get into organized play now and unless that shit is your job, it's a waste of time and money. If it is your job, enjoy being in the same pool with sponsored players who get free access to cards, limitless test time with other "pros" and often get travel costs paid for by fans.

Add in it's been the nerdiest of nerdy hobby for about 20 years, which draws in dudes who lack in personal hygiene and haven't interacted with many people outside of their immediate circle and you have a recipe for woman repellant.

It's deeper/simpler than that. Organized play IS competitive play. Organized play is not EDH. Organized play is not casual play at home. Organized play is not Duels of the Planeswalkers. Posted it a few times previously, but there appears to be a reward mechanism in male players that's missing from female ones. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100318

We found higher positive emotional responses (as indexed by both physiological measures and self-reports) during competitive than cooperative play for males, but no differences for females. In addition, we found no differences in negative emotions, and heart rate, skin conductance, and self-reports yielded contradictory evidence for arousal. These results support the hypothesis that males not only prefer competitive over cooperative play, but they also exhibit more positive emotional responses during them. In contrast, the results suggest that the emotional experiences of females do not differ between cooperation and competition, which implies that less competitiveness does not mean more cooperativeness.

That single difference explains virtually everything here, and it means that metric (girls in competitive play) is fundamentally never going to change. You can see this pattern - look at all the rundown, beaten up places you see guys cluster in order to game. The old dilapidated boxing gym. The local arcade. A smoky dark LAN center with no sunlight. Game stores packed to the brimg with players sitting elbow to elbow with poor ventilation. MTGO. These places are our gaming crackhouses. The emotional reward/high the guy are getting is getting them to override the smells, the time investment, the game-ending bugs and frequent requests for compensation.

And as long as that high is there- those things are molehills. Some are bigger for some than others - some of us are wiiling to put up with whatever MTGO throws at us in order to get that fix. For others that's a bridge too far. But when one gender doesn't have that reward mechanism in place- those molehills are going to become mountains. The time investment, the bugs, the cramped spaces- there's no longer an emotional override in place to leave you "ahead" in net happiness. With no difference between cooperative and competitive play- why put in all that extra work when you get the same emotional reward as doing something which doesn't require it?

The game stores and competitive play environements- they aren't what's really causing the impetus of the issue. Instead, they're a symptom of the difference here that causes competitive gaming to bring in male players like a bugzapper lures in insects. Because of that difference, the stores, norms, and competitive play environment then warp around the almost-fully male makeup, which then reflects many of the gender issues we have today that tend to be specific to the guys. And so, seeing these societal issues on the local level, the easy conclusion is to think that those things are simply keeping women out, because we know that in terms of capability- both genders should be pretty much the same. But it's not capability that's the issue here- it's desire.

(I'm rough drafting my long form response in writing this.)

 

[Firemind]

Every time I draft MM2015, I get handed R/W doublestrike or B/R bloodthirst. Boring.

 

[y2dvd]

Screw the reserved list because it's preventing cards that I want to add to my EDH deck from ever being reprinted.

What's Power 9?

 

[Angry Grimace]

It's deeper/simpler than that. Organized play IS competitive play. Organized play is not EDH. Organized play is not casual play at home. Organized play is not Duels of the Planeswalkers. Posted it a few times previously, but there appears to be a reward mechanism in male players that's missing from female ones. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0100318



That single difference explains virtually everything here, and it means that metric (girls in competitive play) is fundamentally never going to change. You can see this pattern - look at all the rundown, beaten up places you see guys cluster in order to game. The old dilapidated boxing gym. The local arcade. A smoky dark LAN center with no sunlight. Game stores packed to the brimg with players sitting elbow to elbow with poor ventilation. MTGO. These places are our gaming crackhouses. The emotional reward/high the guy are getting is getting them to override the smells, the time investment, the game-ending bugs and frequent requests for compensation.

And as long as that high is there- those things are molehills. Some are bigger for some than others - some of us are wiiling to put up with whatever MTGO throws at us in order to get that fix. For others that's a bridge too far. But when one gender doesn't have that reward mechanism in place- those molehills are going to become mountains. The time investment, the bugs, the cramped spaces- there's no longer an emotional override in place to leave you "ahead" in net happiness. With no difference between cooperative and competitive play- why put in all that extra work when you get the same emotional reward as doing something which doesn't require it?

(I'm rough drafting my long form response in writing this.)

I just don't think a participation number is relevant or even useful. There are many legitimate reasons why the participation number for any given hobby doesn't equal that of the population. Seriously, the gender breakdown in coin collecting (really) is like 6:1 men to women. It just appeals to men for whatever reason that is. I don't know, but I don't know that its necessarily relevant.

NeoGAF itself is overwhelmingly male from what I gather when we do threads where you can tell.

 

[Jhriad]

This is a huge issue for a collector such as me. If Wizards is going to make one change to all the cards on the do not print list and then reprint them, I'm out.

I think that is also a violation of the reserved list, one that I didn't even realize. Its ramifications are less both inside the game and in collections. But it is still a violation.

Here, we'll play you out in style. *waves*

 

[OnPoint]

This thread used to be fun.

...

So.

What are gonna be the biggest losses from Theros and M15 rotating out, I wonder?

Hero's Downfall, Thoughtseize, Bile Blight, Voyaging Satyr, Rabblemaster, Stormbreath Dragon, Xenagod, the Hydra family -- all gone.

I think token-based decks will still be in check with Virulant Plague in existence. Devotion decks will entirely be phased out and replaced by whatever themes Zendikar will introduce. I'm excited.

It's still fun, don't let the drive-by postings by the uneducated ruin it for you.

I'll be sad to see Chromanticore go. But I won't miss Devotion or Rabblemaster.

 

[Firemind]

But Rabblemaster is life.

 

[Jhriad]

That single difference explains virtually everything here, and it means that metric (girls in competitive play) is fundamentally never going to change.

You might be making a bit of an assumption saying that it'll never change given that we don't understand exactly why this difference exists and it could very well be as simple as a learned behavior that we'll have to stop teaching and/or reinforcing in girls as they grow up. For example, when you look at pay inequality one of the problems is that women are considerably less likely to negotiate for their compensation. Here's a short blurb on it and at least one reason why they don't negotiate like men do. There's some additional research out there about it but I'm lazy and it's pretty off topic anyway.

 

[kirblar]

You might be making a bit of an assumption saying that it'll never change given that we don't understand exactly why this difference exists and it could very well be as simple as a learned behavior that we'll have to stop teaching and/or reinforcing in girls as they grow up. For example, when you look at pay inequality one of the problems is that women are considerably less likely to negotiate for their compensation. Here's a short blurb on it and at least one reason why they don't negotiate like men do.

How do you teach someone to have an intrinsic emotional reaction to something? This isn't a learned behavior- this is a behavior in response to internal stimuli that provides a reward mechanism for the behavior.

 

[Jhriad]

How do you teach someone to have an intrinsic emotional reaction to something?

If they associate it with enough positive or negative feedback it's not exactly hard to elicit practically any response from either sex.

 

[kirblar]

If they associate it with enough positive or negative feedback it's not exactly hard to elicit practically any response from either sex.

While making the kids deeply unhappy in the process, sure.

 

[Jhriad]

While making the kids deeply unhappy in the process, sure.

If you're told, "this isn't for you, you won't like it" enough at a young age you probably just find other ways to entertain yourself. That's literally the experience of some female Magic players I know in that they weren't able to play for years because their male friends told them it wasn't for them and wouldn't play with them. I don't really think this is exclusive to Magic either.

 

[kirblar]

If you're told, "this isn't for you, you won't like it" enough at a young age you probably just find other ways to entertain yourself. That's literally the experience of some female Magic players I know in that they weren't able to play for years because their male friends told them it wasn't for them and wouldn't play with them. I don't really think this is exclusive to Magic either.

Sure, but that isn't the argument here- it's not about playing in general or gatekeeing that game in general. There are obviously a lot of women playing and enjoying magic and breaking down those shitty barriers that keep them from doing so is a great thing.

The issue is that WotC wants these women in stores spending money and supporting local businesses. This is where you run into a huge issue- the types of play that are offered at a local store that make it money are primarily competitive offerings. Constructed tournaments: Competitive. Drafts: Competitive. The entire organized play system is based around battling each other for prizes. The tournaments that bring players in to buy cards and directly spend money? Competitive. This is where that fundamental emotional difference comes into play. The men have a vastly more positive reaction to this specific style of play than the women. Something in them is being triggered- it isn't happening for the women. Because of this, they come out in droves and you get a very imbalanced gender ratio in those events that doesn't reflect the greater one. Thus, if you want to bring women in, you need to offer casual events/open play.

But here's the problem- those events don't directly earn money. And space/time is limited. That casual day could be Modern, or Legacy, or YGO, or any number of other competitive offerings that might lure in that swarm of male players instead. Each free event you put up has opportunity cost in the form of lost potential revenue elsewhere. The economic incentives don't align right here and it makes it really difficult to push back against the warped cultural inertia you have from a total sausugefest. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be pushing back against it- it just means that we should not be expecting more women at PTQs as a result of it.

 

[blindrocket]

I hate the reserved list, but even if they abolished it the way they would reprint stuff like duals would probably be dreadful, considering that they reprint Modern stuff (the format that would in theory be accessible) in such a shitty way with Modern Masters, reserve-listless Legacy Masters would certainly be even shittier.

Hah, that's the truth. Mythic Mythic Rare in Limited sets