Each card is assigned a rarity (common, uncommon, rare, mythic rare) based on its power This is not really true. Rarity is a combination of power level, comple

Each card is assigned a rarity (common, uncommon, rare, mythic rare) based on its power This is not really true. Rarity is a combination of power level, complexity and some other design principles. For example, cards which appear at common rarity can have powerful effects, but they must be simple and straightforward effects, easy for a newer player to understand (since commons will be the majority of the cards a new player sees). Uncommons are permitted to be slightly more complex, and rares and mythics more complex yet. Several cards which even in recent years appeared at common in their respective sets are considered too powerful to reprint in the Standard format at any rarity. And of the seven cards currently banned in Standard (which is a massive failure on the part of the set design/development teams, and almost unprecedented in the game's history), one (Attune with Aether) is a common, and three (Felidar Guardian, Ramunap Ruins, Rogue Refiner) are uncommons. All cards of a given rarity have the exact same probability of showing up in a given booster pack. This is also not always true due to the logistics of the printing process. A while back I posted a comment on reddit about how it can happen, sometimes, that not all cards of a given rarity are equally likely to appear in a booster pack: https://www.reddit.com/r/mtgfinance/comments/2fblta/odds_of_pulling_certain_cards_not_rarity/ck7u1on/ https://www.reddit.com/r/mtgfinance/comments/2fblta/odds_of_... The tl;dr is that the math of setting up the printing sheets doesn't always work out perfectly with the number of cards the set needs at a given rarity (commons are printed on one set of sheets, uncommons on another, and rares/mythics on a third set of sheets). Which sometimes -- though not always -- can lead to a card being slightly underprinted relative to other cards of the same rarity.