Whether you're looking at Baneslayer Angel over Serra Angel or Elvish Archdruid over Elvish Champion it has become clear that modern creatures in Magic the Gathering are more powerful then ever.  With the advent of "comes onto the battlefield" abilities coupled with unprecedented tribal bonuses and creature pumping enchantments, summoned beings dominate the plane.   But what does this mean for the game as a whole?  Perhaps we can glean more from the "onto the battlefield" verbiage change than we might have at first glance. And how far does wizards plan on taking this trend?

Thumbing through a pack of Magic 2010 I couldn't help but chuckle a bit at a quote on one of the "Learn to Play" inserts.  "A deck normally consists of 20-25 creatures, 25-30 lands and 5-10 other spells." (this is repeated in the official rulebook)

[caption id="attachment_3874" align="aligncenter" width="440" caption="Another "Tips and Tricks" insert:  Granted this is referring to a sealed deck but really? No mention of cards other than creatures and lands?"][/caption]

Not only are we now encouraging new players to play with potentially five non-creatures spells, but those spells are apparently only around to support your creatures.  Another insert failed to even mention non-permanent spells at all!  As a veteran blue wizard I couldn't help but scoff at the idea of limiting my decks to summon spells only.   If I were teaching someone how to play magic, I might actually have them make a simple creature deck as well.  My point here is that the entire game of Magic is basically summed up as a creature-fest with maybe a few creature support spells.

[caption id="attachment_3858" align="alignright" width="234" caption="Would you rather play 2 Negates and a 2/2 Persist/Flying creature... or this?  The choice is clear."][/caption]

This isn't to say that creatures aren't fun, interesting and a gigantic part of Magic the Gathering.  I'm simply pointing out a trend that deeply effects the game we know and love.  In a way, creatures have become spells.  Which would you say is better?  A spell that does something for X amount of mana.. or a creature that does the same thing for less?  In a world without effective sweeps and tournament creature removal all but non-existent (though that might change with Doom Blade and Path to Exile seeing more action as of late), creatures are the clear choice.  From Glen Elendra Archmage to Dauntless Escort, we rely more and more on our creature's abilities to do what were formerly "non-creature" things.  Couple this with planeswalkers who offer even more opportunity to use abilities without casting additional spells and you're beginning to see the plight of the impotent non-permanent. This must be taken into account if one wishes to seriously analyze the game's balance.

With this knowledge in hand, let's take a look at the classic paper,rock, scissors paradigm.  Control, Combo and Aggro.  Almost any deck can be classified as belonging to one or more of these three groups. So in a world where creatures reign supreme and modern "spells" are replaced by said creatures, which of these three would you expect to dominate the landscape?  The answer, of course, is Aggro.  Or more specifically the all-out creature rush.  Think token generation, inexpensive creatures and elves.  But don't take my word for it.  Take a look at what people are playing.  Post M10- green elves led by Elvish Archdruid are swarming the pro tour, while white token decks are a dime a dozen.  The overrepresented fae deck is still viable.  People generally consider this deck to be more of a control style deck, which is certainly fair considering the heavy counter element mixed with a bit of discard.   But even this blue/black control deck is 100% dependent upon it's creatures and is certainly no stranger to the aggro token creature rush.  The real exception to the aggro/token creature influx in tournament play has been 5-color-control which, granted, isn't entirely creature based but should give any color wheel aficionado pause nevertheless.

[caption id="attachment_3863" align="alignleft" width="250" caption="Magic the Gathering... in a nutshell."][/caption]

Moreover, the paper, rock, scissors model is extremely lopsided in today's metagame.   Pro level magic has always been decided within the first 5 or 6 turns of a game, but this shift towards speed creature combat as well as the power of inexpensive creatures themselves is without precedent.  With no sign of a creature-sweeper in M10, the only counter to an aggro creature deck is-- an aggro creature deck.  Volcanic Fallout and Infest aren't going to cut the mustard with the latest lords and Honor of the Pure quickly getting their tribe's toughness above 2.  Even so, players are building their rushes in anticipation of mirror matches.  So what's a control or combo lover to do?

This isn't a rant about how Magic needs a cheaper sweep in standard.  Nor is it a blind bash on aggro decks.  It's simply an earnest analysis of the field as it currently lies.  Looking forward towards Zendikar, wizards needn't "crush the rush" as it were.  Their decision to forgo the inclusion of Wrath of God makes more and more sense to me as time goes on.  Does white really need something to fight the rush?  White is the rush at the moment.  And does white really need another premium, universally useful, chase-rare up it's sleeve?  Probably not.  But what about blue or black?  Is it possible for a black, green, or blue deck (or any combination of the three) to combat even one Spectral Procession + Honor of the Pure + Ajani Goldmane swarm?  I can understand the reluctance to print cards that easily and totally obliterate what has become the heart of the game - creatures.  But isn't there a middle ground somewhere?

[caption id="attachment_3855" align="alignright" width="243" caption="Wizards needn't "go Gandalf" on the rush. Some creatures must be allowed to pass.. but give non-permanent spells a chance to shine as well."][/caption]

If wizards truly does not want to include a sweep then let me offer an alternative.  Forget Evacuation or even Mutilate for a moment.  Consider a card such as Echoing Truth.  It isn't universally "anti-creature" and it certainly doesn't sweep the board in most circumstances.  It's also a chance to give blue it's bounce back (pun intended).  Consider Pestilence- a four drop enchantment that needs black mana to be effective and fades away after one wipe.  To destroy all creatures it will take at least 6 or 7 black mana (and most likely more).  We're looking at Plague Wind prices for board wipes here!  Hardly a broken card at that price and with those limitations.  Heck, you can even make Echoing Truth cost one more or Pestilence cost one less, that is not really the point here.  Either of these cards could offer some resistance to the aggro massacre going on in pro and casual metas without breaking the creature centric focus Wizards obviously intends for the game.

My personal feelings and suggestions aside, there is no arguing that MTG is more of a creature game now than ever before.  For better or worse, your neighborhood standard deck (casual or otherwise) most likely consists of 25+ creatures and yes, 5-10 "creature support" cards.  And who could blame you?  You're looking at Great Sable Stag, Stigma Lasher, Figure of Destiny, Mulldrifter, Boggart Ram-Gang, Bloodbraid Elf...  who wants to play dusty old non-permanent spells when you can drop a creature that does exactly what that spell did anyway!  You end up using less cards and often spending less than it would cost to achieve each of those abilities separately.  Its a two for one deal!  Or in the case of planeswalkers- an infinite for one deal!  For the average player, there really is no alternative at this point.  Combat is a wonderful, flavorful, classic element of the game.    I would never want to diminish that.  I simply contend that there are other elements of the game that are just as important.  Having the most creatures on the board the quickest and with the best pump-ups shouldn't be the only avenue to victory.  Surprise, alternate win conditions and raw cunning also have important roles to play.  Those are all still possible but come in the form of creatures and planeswalkers.

At this juncture it is difficult to picture a scenario where sorcery and enchantment can contend with the onslaught of powerful, relatively inexpensive creatures.  Look, I get just as excited about great creatures as the next duelist.  But I worry about the fate of all non-permanent spells as they approach the brink of irrelevancy.  There has to be a balance here somewhere.  Permanents and non-permanents can both be effective even in a world where cards like Reveillark are at once a wonderful creature and one of the best sorceries in the game.  Here's hoping that Zendikar brings with it some much needed balance to that end.

The flavor of Magic the Gathering is moving away from being a "Wizard's Duel" and more of a "battlefield" strategy game in tune with Warcraft or Age of Empires.  The wizard himself is largely removed from the battlefield while his minions do the fighting.  A field general if you will.  I am not passing judgment on this transition, I am merely observing the evolution of a game that was once dominated by sorceries and spells but has ever so slowly creeped towards a more combat driven game of chess.  It may surprise you to hear that this does not bother me so much.  In fact, it is something I'm excited to adapt to.  I only hope that wizards takes great care in preserving at least a semblance of that wizard vs wizard spell duel the game once was.  If nothing else this revolution is simply something that each and every wizard needs to understand when buying, trading, and playing this ever changing game.

Wow, Reinhart- do you ever stop whining?  I mean really,  a great new expansion comes out and you're crying like a 14 year old girl!

Granted, these past couple of articles would have to be classified as having a more negative tone.  I am really excited about M10 thus far and am considering it in the running for "my personal favorite set".   I'm simply having a tough time trying to figure out how the 200 cards in Zendikar are going to make up for the 1000+ cards we're losing when Lorwyn rotates out.  And I have come to the obvious conclusion that they wont.  I wouldn't want to be in a designer's shoes right now (okay, yes I would).  Couple that with my more conservative perspective on the game in general (the color wheel, mono-colored decks, balance etc..)  and you've got the perfect recipe for negativity!  I promise to grace you with a more positive article next week.  There are so many things to be excited about this year and so many positive things to say about M10 I'm sure I can come up with something a bit less... black and blue.

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

Worldwake, the second expansion to Zendikar has been announced.  The set will contain 145 cards to be released on February 5th, 2010.  Stay locked to GatheringMagic's spoiler page for all the latest news and previews.