Considering the readability of Reach and Flying, do you think if magic started from the beginning it would try and tie mechanics and abilities to Symbols to help with readability accross the table?

Or do you think there would be to much a risk of consuming text space and the text box becoming poluted.

Symbols quickly get overwhelming to beginners.

Hey Mark! I’ve noticed a lot of content creators have mentioned getting into Magic around RTR and/or Innistrad. I also hopped in around that point, which is part of why hearing this a lot has stuck out. Was there something unique in that period that might have had that result? Is it just that we’re in a certain point in a cycle of players? Or is it maybe all just confirmation bias on my part?

There’s no correlative data showing that time period had any spikes beyond the normal slope at the time. Confirmation bias seems likely.

Why people want new keywords so much? When I was a new player the thing I got more trouble understanding was which keywords did what. I printed a cheat sheet with the evergreen ones but it took me months to memorize them. A card with a full paragraph was usually easier to understand than keyword soup cards that had only one line with 3 keywords.

I think many enfranchised players don’t realize the true barrier of a lot of vocabulary words to newer players, as there was just a lot less evergreen vocabulary words when they entered the game.

hi a friend walked me through a commander game and I liked it and so I got a couple premade decks. I then went to a couple commander nights and I kinda liked it except for the part where I felt like I was a little kid with floaties in the middle of the ocean trying to sing a little song to myself so I wouldn't think about the things that might be lurking just below the surface that I can't see.

Magic is vast and deep and I don't know how I can enjoy playing when there's just too much. I get that the hugeness is part of its staying power, but it feels too big and too much to even approach beyond playing my premade deck and hoping the people at the table won't look down on me for it (which they often do). Even looking up tutorials and guides is overwhelming because each one of them is sharing a *different* tiny slice of material! I haven't felt this baby-beginner starting something new in a very long time (and I say that as someone that is otherwise well-versed in being a terrible beginner at new things).

Is there a way to play magic without getting absolutely lost in the depths? or is that the nature of the beast and I just gotta "git gud"?

The two formats I would suggest are draft or Cube. Both use a much smaller card pool, one you can more easily learn about.

Have you ever thought of formatting card draw as a keyword action like scary and surveil? ("Draw 1" as an analogy to "Scry 1?") Why or why not? Thanks for answering our questions sir.

It’s not necessary and would make it harder for new players to understand.

I'd like to express my gratitude for the change to "this " going forward. That was something that confused me as a beginner when it comes to things like copying, and it lines up with the way you have always done tokens with abilities, such as the 0/0 Constructs. It's a small change, but I appreciate it

Happy to hear that.

Following up on my "magic for beginners" question. I think jumpstart is great, but I'm envisioning a set that exists in a way that can add complexity for each level. Like you break out the set and it starts ok here are two 30 card decks with just creatures (and those creatures just have say, haste and flying), once you're good with that, you add in 10 sorcery cards that are easy to understand, then 10 enchantments, then 10 instants. I just feel like magic throws people in the deep end.

The interesting thing we’ve learned having explored this topic for over thirty years is players are more likely to continue playing if it’s a little above them, if they feel like there’s more things to learn. When we strip a lot of things out to simplify it, many players go, “That’s it?” and leave never to explore any deeper.

I'm really struggling to understand this:Assassin's Creed didn't get Commander precons and instead got two 60-card starter decks to introduce them to 60-card formats.While Modern Horizons 3, a set that is dedicated to possibly the most popular 60-card format, got Commander precons?

Universes Beyond can function as a good entry for new players, so we made starter decks for them. Modern Horizons sets are for players who like high complexity and nostalgia. Many Commander players fall squarely into that audience.

Why do a starter deck for assassins creed? The starter decks are intended for players just starting out but the assasins creed cards are modern legal so the complexity and power level should be for more advanced players. You didn't do commander decks for this product when they made way more sense than mh3

Beginners can play cards that are Modern legal. : )

Happy birthday Mark! Here's some Magic trivia for you - I just moved to Sweden and they play a unique style of constructed here called Gentry. It's standard 60/15 deck and sideboard, but it can only include 4 unique rares or mythics and 15 uncommons and then the rest of the cards have to common. It's pretty fun and it's very easy to afford several decks. People often bring extras to tournaments to loan to new players

Cool format. Thanks.