2 ms·
For me, damage not going on the stack was a big change. That's probably better for the game, but eliminates a lot of tricks. Also, the cards printed these days
by akud 10y ago
For me, damage not going on the stack was a big change. That's probably better for the game, but eliminates a lot of tricks.
Also, the cards printed these days tend to not allow you to hose yourself. Take things like detention sphere, that say "exile a non land permanent you don't control." It used to be that those types of cards would exile any non land permanent, do a skilled opponent could, in certain situations, exile something you controlled by bouncing their only non land permanent in response.
- mrob 10y agoSee also the replacement of Shroud (can't be targeted) with Hexproof (can't be targeted by opponents). There's no longer an interesting trade-off where you're sacrificing flexibility by being unable to target your own creatures.
- UncleMeat 10y agoRemoving damage from the stack actually makes the game more complex. Previously, it was always correct to stack damage first. There was zero penalty. If you knew the rules then you got to make the optimal choice. Now you actually have to choose. Do I want this creature to deal damage or do I want to get the benefit of some effect due to sacrificing it or whatever. Sakura-Tribe Elder got worse but it got much more strategically interesting.
- Fargren 10y agoI stoped playing right around the time this change was implemented. What I felt back then was that while you are right in principle, in theory what happened was that the power level of a lot of interesting cards dropped so much they weren't playable anymore. So while my Mogg Fanatics got more complex, it didn't really matter because at that point I had to drop them from my deck, usually replacing them with something more dumb and mana efficient.