Why were the rules for Proliferate changed?Why Does Magic Use The “Paris Mulligan” Rule?How can I tell what has changed in a Comprehensive Rules update?Wording on Volrath's ShapeshifterCards entering the battlefield simultaneously and “Enter the Battlefield” effectsWhy does rule 608.2b counter Last Word, when Last Word can't be countered?How does Sundial of the Infinite help you avoid losing turns to Eater of Days?Will countering a spell that left the stack still trigger abilities?In a multiplayer game, if a player is controlling another player's turn, may they reveal that player's hand?Can you give an example why the active player wants to have priority in Beginning of Combat first?Change in “can't be countered” wording
Extracting the parent, leaf, and extension from a valid path
Why is there a cap on 401k contributions?
Picking a theme as a discovery writer
How to increase speed on my hybrid bike with flat handlebars and 700X35C tyres?
Scaling rounded rectangles in Illustrator
The unknown and unexplained in science fiction
Gift for mentor after his thesis defense?
Which "exotic salt" can lower water's freezing point by 70 °C?
How to make a kid's bike easier to pedal
When does WordPress.org notify sites of new version?
Is throwing dice a stochastic or a deterministic process?
Can a player choose to add detail and flavor to their character's spells and abilities?
Can you just subtract the challenge rating of friendly NPCs?
What does “two-bit (jerk)” mean?
My parents are Afghan
In a series of books, what happens after the coming of age?
What is the meaning of "matter" in physics?
Why did Gendry call himself Gendry Rivers?
Why did Dr. Strange keep looking into the future after the snap?
HTML folder located within IOS Image file?
All of my Firefox add-ons have been disabled suddenly, how can I re-enable them?
Is there a reason why Turkey took the Balkan territories of the Ottoman Empire, instead of Greece or another of the Balkan states?
I want to write a blog post building upon someone else's paper, how can I properly cite/credit them?
Why is the blank symbol not considered part of the input alphabet of a Turing machine?
Why were the rules for Proliferate changed?
Why Does Magic Use The “Paris Mulligan” Rule?How can I tell what has changed in a Comprehensive Rules update?Wording on Volrath's ShapeshifterCards entering the battlefield simultaneously and “Enter the Battlefield” effectsWhy does rule 608.2b counter Last Word, when Last Word can't be countered?How does Sundial of the Infinite help you avoid losing turns to Eater of Days?Will countering a spell that left the stack still trigger abilities?In a multiplayer game, if a player is controlling another player's turn, may they reveal that player's hand?Can you give an example why the active player wants to have priority in Beginning of Combat first?Change in “can't be countered” wording
With the release of War of the Spark, the rules for Proliferate changed. Previously, they allowed you to add 1 counter to the chosen permanents and players, of a type it already had. Now, it adds an additional counter for every type of counter already present.
This seems like a big change that suddenly changes the way a bunch of existing cards work; in most cases making all of those cards stronger. Why alter the power level of all those existing cards?
It almost seems like if they one day said that from now on, "Lifelink" means that you get 2 life for every damage instead of 1.
In this article about War of the Spark rules changes, it mentions that the rules were changed:
The rules for proliferate got a makeover! The rule reminding you who chooses counters is dropped, since there are no more choices on the counters, and the other two rules are updated to match the new reality.
But this seems to be a change just to deal with the fact that "Proliferate" changed; it's not an explanation of the fact that Proliferate changed or why.
Is there an article or source that announces and explains this change?
magic-the-gathering
asked 1 hour ago
GendoIkariGendoIkari
45.5k397177
add a comment |
With the release of War of the Spark, the rules for Proliferate changed. Previously, they allowed you to add 1 counter to the chosen permanents and players, of a type it already had. Now, it adds an additional counter for every type of counter already present.
This seems like a big change that suddenly changes the way a bunch of existing cards work; in most cases making all of those cards stronger. Why alter the power level of all those existing cards?
It almost seems like if they one day said that from now on, "Lifelink" means that you get 2 life for every damage instead of 1.
In this article about War of the Spark rules changes, it mentions that the rules were changed:
The rules for proliferate got a makeover! The rule reminding you who chooses counters is dropped, since there are no more choices on the counters, and the other two rules are updated to match the new reality.
But this seems to be a change just to deal with the fact that "Proliferate" changed; it's not an explanation of the fact that Proliferate changed or why.
Is there an article or source that announces and explains this change?
magic-the-gathering
asked 1 hour ago
GendoIkariGendoIkari
45.5k397177
I think you're certainly correct in theory, especially considering past changes in the game that were causing issues with minor changes by comparison. However in practice, I don't think the situation of wanting to add more than one counter is going to come up all that often - and when there is a deck that benefits from it, Proliferate was very likely already a game changer for it before. For some situations, it can even be a nerf, such as your Infect Commander deck now having to make a choice playing against an experience counter commander.
– TheThirdMan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
With the release of War of the Spark, the rules for Proliferate changed. Previously, they allowed you to add 1 counter to the chosen permanents and players, of a type it already had. Now, it adds an additional counter for every type of counter already present.
This seems like a big change that suddenly changes the way a bunch of existing cards work; in most cases making all of those cards stronger. Why alter the power level of all those existing cards?
It almost seems like if they one day said that from now on, "Lifelink" means that you get 2 life for every damage instead of 1.
In this article about War of the Spark rules changes, it mentions that the rules were changed:
The rules for proliferate got a makeover! The rule reminding you who chooses counters is dropped, since there are no more choices on the counters, and the other two rules are updated to match the new reality.
But this seems to be a change just to deal with the fact that "Proliferate" changed; it's not an explanation of the fact that Proliferate changed or why.
Is there an article or source that announces and explains this change?
magic-the-gathering
asked 1 hour ago
GendoIkariGendoIkari
45.5k397177
With the release of War of the Spark, the rules for Proliferate changed. Previously, they allowed you to add 1 counter to the chosen permanents and players, of a type it already had. Now, it adds an additional counter for every type of counter already present.
This seems like a big change that suddenly changes the way a bunch of existing cards work; in most cases making all of those cards stronger. Why alter the power level of all those existing cards?
It almost seems like if they one day said that from now on, "Lifelink" means that you get 2 life for every damage instead of 1.
In this article about War of the Spark rules changes, it mentions that the rules were changed:
The rules for proliferate got a makeover! The rule reminding you who chooses counters is dropped, since there are no more choices on the counters, and the other two rules are updated to match the new reality.
But this seems to be a change just to deal with the fact that "Proliferate" changed; it's not an explanation of the fact that Proliferate changed or why.
Is there an article or source that announces and explains this change?
magic-the-gathering
magic-the-gathering
asked 1 hour ago
GendoIkariGendoIkari
45.5k397177
asked 1 hour ago
GendoIkariGendoIkari
45.5k397177
edited 58 mins ago
GendoIkari
asked 1 hour ago
GendoIkariGendoIkari
45.5k397177
asked 1 hour ago
GendoIkariGendoIkari
45.5k397177
asked 1 hour ago
GendoIkariGendoIkari
45.5k397177
45.5k397177
I think you're certainly correct in theory, especially considering past changes in the game that were causing issues with minor changes by comparison. However in practice, I don't think the situation of wanting to add more than one counter is going to come up all that often - and when there is a deck that benefits from it, Proliferate was very likely already a game changer for it before. For some situations, it can even be a nerf, such as your Infect Commander deck now having to make a choice playing against an experience counter commander.
– TheThirdMan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I think you're certainly correct in theory, especially considering past changes in the game that were causing issues with minor changes by comparison. However in practice, I don't think the situation of wanting to add more than one counter is going to come up all that often - and when there is a deck that benefits from it, Proliferate was very likely already a game changer for it before. For some situations, it can even be a nerf, such as your Infect Commander deck now having to make a choice playing against an experience counter commander.
– TheThirdMan
1 hour ago
I think you're certainly correct in theory, especially considering past changes in the game that were causing issues with minor changes by comparison. However in practice, I don't think the situation of wanting to add more than one counter is going to come up all that often - and when there is a deck that benefits from it, Proliferate was very likely already a game changer for it before. For some situations, it can even be a nerf, such as your Infect Commander deck now having to make a choice playing against an experience counter commander.
– TheThirdMan
1 hour ago
I think you're certainly correct in theory, especially considering past changes in the game that were causing issues with minor changes by comparison. However in practice, I don't think the situation of wanting to add more than one counter is going to come up all that often - and when there is a deck that benefits from it, Proliferate was very likely already a game changer for it before. For some situations, it can even be a nerf, such as your Infect Commander deck now having to make a choice playing against an experience counter commander.
– TheThirdMan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
According to a post from Mark Rosewater (Lead Designer for Magic: The Gathering), the reasons were to make the mechanic as a whole more easily understandable, along with seemingly wanting to streamline the experience in digital MtG games.
Quoting the post in its entirety both for reference and relevance:
R&D is always on the lookout for ways to make cleaner, more straight-forward mechanics. This makes mechanics easier to process in tabletop and lessens the amounts of clicks on digital.
When we decided to bring back proliferate, we realized we could make a simple change that would both, on average, make the mechanic more powerful and clean it up for digital.
Previously if a player or creature had more than one counter, you the owner of the proliferating source chose which one of the different counters to duplicate. This new version doesn’t make you chose, but instead duplicates all of them. Remember, you still choose which players and/or permanents to proliferate.
Yes, there’s a tiny scenario where you have to chose between duplicating both a positive and a negative counter, but that’s far less likely than the scenario where you have two different types of counters you want to duplicate (especially on creatures as +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters negate one another).
answered 1 hour ago
TheThirdManTheThirdMan
6,75811343
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "147"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47148%2fwhy-were-the-rules-for-proliferate-changed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
According to a post from Mark Rosewater (Lead Designer for Magic: The Gathering), the reasons were to make the mechanic as a whole more easily understandable, along with seemingly wanting to streamline the experience in digital MtG games.
Quoting the post in its entirety both for reference and relevance:
R&D is always on the lookout for ways to make cleaner, more straight-forward mechanics. This makes mechanics easier to process in tabletop and lessens the amounts of clicks on digital.
When we decided to bring back proliferate, we realized we could make a simple change that would both, on average, make the mechanic more powerful and clean it up for digital.
Previously if a player or creature had more than one counter, you the owner of the proliferating source chose which one of the different counters to duplicate. This new version doesn’t make you chose, but instead duplicates all of them. Remember, you still choose which players and/or permanents to proliferate.
Yes, there’s a tiny scenario where you have to chose between duplicating both a positive and a negative counter, but that’s far less likely than the scenario where you have two different types of counters you want to duplicate (especially on creatures as +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters negate one another).
answered 1 hour ago
TheThirdManTheThirdMan
6,75811343
add a comment |
According to a post from Mark Rosewater (Lead Designer for Magic: The Gathering), the reasons were to make the mechanic as a whole more easily understandable, along with seemingly wanting to streamline the experience in digital MtG games.
Quoting the post in its entirety both for reference and relevance:
R&D is always on the lookout for ways to make cleaner, more straight-forward mechanics. This makes mechanics easier to process in tabletop and lessens the amounts of clicks on digital.
When we decided to bring back proliferate, we realized we could make a simple change that would both, on average, make the mechanic more powerful and clean it up for digital.
Previously if a player or creature had more than one counter, you the owner of the proliferating source chose which one of the different counters to duplicate. This new version doesn’t make you chose, but instead duplicates all of them. Remember, you still choose which players and/or permanents to proliferate.
Yes, there’s a tiny scenario where you have to chose between duplicating both a positive and a negative counter, but that’s far less likely than the scenario where you have two different types of counters you want to duplicate (especially on creatures as +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters negate one another).
answered 1 hour ago
TheThirdManTheThirdMan
6,75811343
add a comment |
According to a post from Mark Rosewater (Lead Designer for Magic: The Gathering), the reasons were to make the mechanic as a whole more easily understandable, along with seemingly wanting to streamline the experience in digital MtG games.
Quoting the post in its entirety both for reference and relevance:
R&D is always on the lookout for ways to make cleaner, more straight-forward mechanics. This makes mechanics easier to process in tabletop and lessens the amounts of clicks on digital.
When we decided to bring back proliferate, we realized we could make a simple change that would both, on average, make the mechanic more powerful and clean it up for digital.
Previously if a player or creature had more than one counter, you the owner of the proliferating source chose which one of the different counters to duplicate. This new version doesn’t make you chose, but instead duplicates all of them. Remember, you still choose which players and/or permanents to proliferate.
Yes, there’s a tiny scenario where you have to chose between duplicating both a positive and a negative counter, but that’s far less likely than the scenario where you have two different types of counters you want to duplicate (especially on creatures as +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters negate one another).
answered 1 hour ago
TheThirdManTheThirdMan
6,75811343
According to a post from Mark Rosewater (Lead Designer for Magic: The Gathering), the reasons were to make the mechanic as a whole more easily understandable, along with seemingly wanting to streamline the experience in digital MtG games.
Quoting the post in its entirety both for reference and relevance:
R&D is always on the lookout for ways to make cleaner, more straight-forward mechanics. This makes mechanics easier to process in tabletop and lessens the amounts of clicks on digital.
When we decided to bring back proliferate, we realized we could make a simple change that would both, on average, make the mechanic more powerful and clean it up for digital.
Previously if a player or creature had more than one counter, you the owner of the proliferating source chose which one of the different counters to duplicate. This new version doesn’t make you chose, but instead duplicates all of them. Remember, you still choose which players and/or permanents to proliferate.
Yes, there’s a tiny scenario where you have to chose between duplicating both a positive and a negative counter, but that’s far less likely than the scenario where you have two different types of counters you want to duplicate (especially on creatures as +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters negate one another).
answered 1 hour ago
TheThirdManTheThirdMan
6,75811343
answered 1 hour ago
TheThirdManTheThirdMan
6,75811343
answered 1 hour ago
TheThirdManTheThirdMan
6,75811343
answered 1 hour ago
TheThirdManTheThirdMan
6,75811343
6,75811343
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Board & Card Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47148%2fwhy-were-the-rules-for-proliferate-changed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
I think you're certainly correct in theory, especially considering past changes in the game that were causing issues with minor changes by comparison. However in practice, I don't think the situation of wanting to add more than one counter is going to come up all that often - and when there is a deck that benefits from it, Proliferate was very likely already a game changer for it before. For some situations, it can even be a nerf, such as your Infect Commander deck now having to make a choice playing against an experience counter commander.
– TheThirdMan
1 hour ago