Talk:Magic: The Gathering formats

Standard Update

The list of standard deck still in rotation is almost a year old now, someone should update it (I don't know enough to do that properly, but I'm hoping one of you does). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.205.249.237 (talk) 13:04, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Frozen Purple Cube

Ok, I put together this article, culled most of the stuff from the magic the gathering main article, but I figure this separate page has more room for expansion. FrozenPurpleCube 22:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Momir Basic

Is a separate page for Momir Basic really necessary at this point? It could easily fit into a section here if more information on the subject is desired. FrozenPurpleCube 17:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it is. But I do think we can scratch off the basic part, and revise the article to include all Momir formats, perhaps? Gardevior 21:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't oppose including any other momir formats that can be properly sourced. FrozenPurpleCube 22:01, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Improving this page

Ok, A Man in Black has expressed some concerns with this page. I disagree that game guide or notability is a problem, since there's nothing strategic here, just information on the variants that describe their fundamental nature, nor a real question of notability since these are spin-offs of Magic: Gathering. But that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. More sources would be nice, and so would more real world context. I'm sure there's more, but my real concern is understanding what specifically seems to be bothering A Man in Black. Can you specify your concerns? FrozenPurpleCube 19:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Basically that. All how-to-do-this and no real-world impact or non-primary sources. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing whatsoever that I would consider how-to-do this in the article. So, I don't understand your objection there. Could you quote some sentences and compare them to other articles that you think do it right? I'll look for more information on the variant tournaments though, to satisfy your other concerns. I do think that's important to include. And like I said, I don't agree with the original research tag, but I will say the references aren't adequate. So I'll change that. FrozenPurpleCube 04:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Pretty much all of "alternate deck construction," for example.

This kind of content isn't a problem when it's here as context for a game's place in history or other real-world impact (sourced to reliable sources independent of the subject), but right now this is completely lacking in references or even any claims of importance. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, I'm not seeing it as a how-to though. You are saying things it is missing. Fine, I can agree with that. You are right, those aren't there. It would be nice if they were. That doesn't make it a how-to. Really, I think the problem here is, you have objections, which have some merit, but you're just not describing them accurately.

I certainly agree with you that finding sources that describe who created the variants would be appropriate, and expand the article nicely though. For example, I just found that Rob Baranowski apparently created Peasant magic (found on both Pojo and Wizards.com). I'll add that in now. I don't know about the others, but I think descriptions would still be appropriate even if their sources are lacking. FrozenPurpleCube 05:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Improving this page

Based on the comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Magic: The Gathering#Variant Magic: The Gathering formats, I've made some changes to this page. Still need to add tribal to it. FrozenPurpleCube 22:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I took a look at this page and I found it useful - I learned about some variants I haven't heard about before - but I thought it could use some reorganizing and I added a few variants we have here that are quite popular. References coming soon. Darkelfpoet 17:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I reverted your edits, not because I thought they were vandalism or anything, but because I'm concerned that you were a bit overbold in doing so. Not saying they were bad, but I'd rather talk about the changes before implementing them. This is particularly so because you added a number of variants without sources or references. Maybe if you shared some of your ideas for this page first? FrozenPurpleCube 20:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

My apologies - still getting used to making edits on here. Most of the changes I'd like to see are structural - I'm thinking we could structure the content a bit better - subdivide into "Deck Construction" (for the alternate deck construction), "Official Variants" (for those provided by WotC) and "Unofficial Variants" for the more common house-rules games perhaps (since the majority of variants are multiplayer). And instead of having the variants in one paragraph, perhaps give each its own minisection and provide some useful information (min/max number of players, average time length, etc). The only variants I'd really like to see added are Assassin and Hi-Life - Assassin has a wikibook on it, as well as a slight variation on the Assassin I play located here [1]. Hi-Life has one definition here [2]. If I can find a better site, I'll let you know (but the content on this one isn't bad). A few other things that perhaps should be added: 2HG is actually a specific version of Multi-Headed Giant (WotC may call it something else?) which can be played with any number of heads - I'm fairly certain that one is in the comprehensive rules but I don't have access to them at the moment. While I lack references, I have seen Vanguard used in a number of multiplayer variants, as well as a single player variant on Vanguard which uses random distribution of Vanguard cards. I have also seen Reject Rare Drafts use 46 or 47 cards and create prizes and Reject Uncommon drafts. Finally, there is also a Grand Melee variant described in the comprehensive rules. [3] (UPDATE: My apologies, there is no Multi-Headed Giant in the comprehensive rules, but the variant does exist. My apologies once again Darkelfpoet 15:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, there's nothing inherently wrong with your edits, and I agree, this page could use a structural rewrite. It just might be better to work with the page in a separate location for the editing so we can decide what we're going to do first. I do think that "Alternate Deck Construction" is a valid section, but I think that given that "Official" and "Unofficial" variants can apply to both alternate deck construction, multiplayer, and so-forth, it might be better to have those as the "main sections" with "ADC", "Multiplayer" and anything else as subsections in both. Or maybe have those as the sections with the official and unofficial in both? I dunno. 2HG could reasonably state something like "This variant can also be applied to more players, on MTGO it's limited to three on each team, but in real life, the numbers can be higher" .

In terms of sources, I'm not sure just using Beebleboy's page is sufficient to establish a variant as notable. As a page on a free web host, it probably isn't a reliable source. Same with having a wikibook. A better source would be coverage on Wizards.com or a magazine or even a magic website that has regular content like Starcity or salvation. Or if there was a tournament held for the variant at a major convention. FrozenPurpleCube 16:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Are there official (WotC) alternate deck constructions? I can't think of one off the top of my head - unless Vanguard qualifies. So we have ADC, Multiplayer and Two-Player (Vanguard is officially a two-player variant) as well as Official versus Unofficial. I like the idea of using subsections for each, but it seems kindof... cluttered in my mind. Maybe we could drop the unofficial/official headings and just mention it in the paragraph whether or not it is sanctioned/official/unofficial. I was thinking about a brief outline of each variant at the start of each subsection, something like....

Legality: [Official | Sanctioned | Unofficial]

Players: 4-7

Minimum Deck Size: 60 (for ADC)

Maximum Deck Size: 90 (for ADC)

The closest thing I can find to Assassin is Vendetta (which adds a bit to the rules) [4]. I'll look on MTGSalvation tonight. Darkelfpoet 18:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, "official" in the sense that they're supported in the online game, or in the comprehensive rules for tournament play. Vanguard is probably the easiest variant to say that it's "official" since it was supported by official products. It might work to include a description in those cases where a variant exists in both official and unofficial forms. FrozenPurpleCube 19:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

So, would you like me to gin up a demo page of the structure (on one of my user pages say?) and we can tweak it to be perfect? Darkelfpoet 19:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Works for me, let me know when you get something together. FrozenPurpleCube 03:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Darkelfpoet/Variant_MTG_Formats_Demo - doesn't have all the content on it (or the references which I'll get around to ASAP) but shows how I'm thinking of setting it up. In case I haven't added them by the time you get around to reading it, under Legality, I was going to include DCI/WotC; Magic:Online; (other major organizations such as GenCon? and the 5CRC) Darkelfpoet 19:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

K, I'll give you some thoughts on the talk page there. FrozenPurpleCube 20:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Tribal Wars

I feel that Tribal Wars should be mentioned on this as well. There's a decent following for this format online. DbishopNWF 17:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

(we're working on a new version of the page, it'll have Tribal Wars on it) Darkelfpoet 19:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Elder Dragon Highlander (EDH)

I added a small note for EDH, since it appears to be quite popular. If you replace this page (see Darkelfpoet's post above), please include this variant as well. Smileylich (talk) 17:41, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

All endorsed formats not listed

I play MTG Online which is the official product from Wizards of the Coast and I don't see all the officially sanctioned formats listed in this article. Are they listed somewhere else? Is there a reason to exclude Wizards endorsed formats? There are quite a few, each with specific build rules, that aren't listed here. I didn't want to add to the article without asking if there was a reason why they weren't listed first. The only problem I foresee is that Wizards hasn't put a lot of these formats on the interweb on any of their pages. They are all formats that are available inside the MTG Online client so I don't know how I would source that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.199.20.125 (talk) 16:13, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Block Constructed

Block Constructed is said to be the three sets in a block or as it says "two sets," like from Llorwyn. I believe this is false. It is stated that The two sets from Llorwyn and the two sets from Shadowmoor together make up a block constructed deck. bhegeta (talk) 21:20, 11 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.70.243.140 (talk)

Uncited casual formats removed from article

Most of these haven't had citations in 5 years. You can see the removed formats in this edit; they can always be added back if a proper citation is found. SnowFire (talk) 23:21, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Oathbreaker inconsistency

Oathbreaker appears twice, once in the "Commander" section and once in the "Casual Formats" section. I assume the latter should be removed, since Oathbreaker is officially supported now, and it's not accurate in deck count anyway (it says 59 cards in the main deck, the correct number is 58). 75.135.125.78 (talk) 17:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done Removed the sentence under "Casual Formats". Sariel Xilo (talk) 17:46, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

"Paupers deck challenge" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Paupers deck challenge has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 5 § Paupers deck challenge until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 08:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Poorly sourced formats

Casual Constructed

• Gentry: a budget-friendly variation on the standard format. Cards can be used from the same set rotation as Standard, but a deck can only contain 4 unique rare or mythic rare cards and up to 15 uncommon cards. The banlist is generally the same as the one used for regular standard play, although some specific uncommon cards can sometimes be treated as rares for deckbuilding limitations based on local rules. Gentry is popular among some smaller Magic communities because it is less expensive compared to the Standard format and is easily accessible for new players.
• Frontier: a format developed by Japanese stores Hareruya and BigMagic in 2016. It is similar to Modern in its deck construction rules, but with a later start date; card sets are legal from Magic 2015 onwards.
• Premodern: a constructed format which only allows for typically "old-bordered" cards printed from 4th Edition up to Scourge (prior to the 1st modern-legal set, 8th Edition - hence the "Premodern" name). Certain powerful combo-enabling cards are banned, such as Entomb or Necropotence, but a number of decks and strategies from past Standard/Type 2 and Extended formats can be seen in tournaments, such as Goblins, the Rock, Landstill, etc. However, up-to-date Magic: The Gathering rules are enforced as opposed to past implementations : among other things, for example, extra mana left in the pool does not cause mana burns and combat damage does not go on the stack.

Casual Multiplayer

• Free-For-All: the simplest format where players sit in a circle and vie with those around them to be the final surviving player. Sometimes restrictions are added on who can be attacked in large free-for-alls - e.g. a player can only attack players sitting next to them.

Vanguard

• One recent addition to the regular Vanguard format is Momir Basic, which involves the Momir Avatar, which allows a player to discard a land card to get a random creature into play. All Momir Basic Decks are constructed entirely of basic land.

Other casual formats

• All-Play is an unofficial format using a 100 card deck. All 5 basic land cards are available at the side. On your turn you can play a land from one of the piles. During draw phase you draw 2 cards and discard 1 to the scrap pile. Hand limit is 3 cards and other players play off the same deck. Each player has their own discard pile and the scrap pile is not counted. If you trigger a scry you do it next turn before your draw step.
• Desolation is an unofficial format where all cards are banned besides cards that were once banned and/or restricted in sanctioned formats. The format is played in two different versions, one that allows cards printed in unglued, unhinged, and unstable, and another one that does not titled "Candy Desolation" and "Classic Desolation" respectively.
• Game of Thrones is an unofficial format based on "Kings" of a six-person to eight-person free for all where you have 6-8 cards that represent the following characters 2 Kings (King of the North and King of the South), 1-2 Knights (who are secretly assigned to a king), and 1-2 Usurpers. You give out the cards secretly to each of the six-eight players. Their role is decided by the card they have. When the game starts the two kings reveal his or her role and she or he rolls against the other king to see who goes first. The goal of the game for each class is different. As the king, if you are the last one alive you win the game so your goal is to kill the other king, the knight or knights can or can not be alive for this win condition. The Knight's role is to keep their king alive and kill the other king. The Usurpers role is to kill any king in order to become the king. Should this happen, the Usurper becomes the king, adds 10 life to their life total, and the "killed" king becomes the new Usurper with a total of fifteen life. The knight or knights who were assigned to the previous king are now reassigned to the new king. There are a number of special rules for this format. 1) anyone can block for the king but no one can block for anyone else. 2) Everyone is allowed a free mulligan and free scry. 3)The king who rolls the highest amount always goes first. 5) The King's life starts 10 life higher than the knights and the usurpers. The point of the game is to play as the roles and figure out each others roles while trying to protect your king and kill the other king. Milling and commander damage still apply.
• King is an unofficial format of a five-person free for all where you have 5 cards that represent the following characters King, Assassin, Guard, and Rogue. The assassin has two cards in the 5 pile. You give out the cards secretly to each of the five players. Their role is decided by the card they have. When the game starts the king reveals his or her role and she or he goes first. The goal of the game for each class is different. As the king, if you are the last one alive you win the game, the guard can be alive for this condition. The guards only role is to keep the king alive and kill the assassins and rogue. The assassins jobs are to kill the king, if at any time in the game the king loses and an assassin is alive they win. The rogue's job is to kill everyone without the assassins winning the game. When a person loses during this format they reveal their card and their character. Another role is possible for this format for more players: the jester. The jester wants to be killed by anyone, and is pretending to be an assassin. If the jester is killed he/she reveals their card. They then take the card of the person who killed him and their life total. Their board state remains the same. There are a number of special rules for this format. 1) anyone can block for the king but no one can block for anyone else. 2) Everyone is allowed a free mulligan and free scry. 3)The king always goes first. 4) no alternate win conditions. This is because the point of the game is to play as the roles and find each other this is defeated by any alternate win conditions. This rule does not apply to milling or commander damage.
• Pack War is a format in which two players each open two booster packs (without looking at the contents), set aside the token or advertisement cards, and add 3 of each type of basic land. The players then play a best 2-of-3 games. Several game stores supporting this unofficial format then award a booster pack from one of the sets in Standard to the winner (assuming the four other booster packs were purchased at the store that day).
• Penny Dreadful is an unofficial Magic Online budget format where the legality rules include only cards that cost 0.02 ticket - roughly one penny.
• Old Frame is a format where only cards that were originally printed between Alpha and Onslaught are allowed. This format intends to recreate 2003 Vintage. The main differences are that Portal sets and Starter 1999 are allowed, the format is played with contemporary rules and erratas and the banned and restricted list is regularly modified as needed.
• Old School is a format where only cards that were printed in 1993 and 1994 (the first 2 years of Magic) are allowed. There are many different variations, often with different rules set regionally by a playgroup or a local tournament organizer.
• QL Magic is a variant where players can only play with cards with the old Magic card frames, in contrast with the Modern format. As such the format allows players to play with cards from Alpha through Onslaught block. The format also uses an older version of the rules based on the Sixth Edition rules.
• Roploplo is a format where only cards that were printed in 1993 and 1994 (the first 2 years of Magic) are allowed. Singleton 80 Multiplayer with commander Legendary or mono Color Paladin Ruleset (Mind Twist, Library of Alexandria and City in a bottle banned).

The above formats have been poorly sourced for a while (many were tagged with "citation needed" in 2021). If you find sources and restore a format to the article, please strike out the entry above. Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 01:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

References