5 Cards That Have Never Been the Same After they Changed the Rules

[@CardmarketMagic]

Want to relive some of the nostalgia and see other examples, read Tobi Henke's wonderful article here: www.cardmarket.com/Magic/Insight/Articles/Famous-Rules-and-Card-Changes-in-Magic-History

[@ghoulofmetal]

i thought the werewolf one was gonna be that they changed double sided cards into having 2 front sides so you couldn't manifest the flipped side onto the board anymore, giving flip cards effectively 3 sides since they have 2 fronts and one imaginary backside.

[@Karonar]

@@ghoulofmetal that rule never existed...

[@davidbenitoduran3324]

@@ghoulofmetal me

[@drworldify]

Tunnel vision was changed slightly another way. After the Borborygmos vs. Borborygmos Enraged incident in 2017 with pithing needle, communication rule requirements around naming cards was altered slightly, which also changed that card. Not an important change, but an interesting one.

[@The_Murder_Party]

Borb was also my guess

[@MH-wz1rb]

I had not heard of this incident, but as soon as I read this I now understand the "Borborygmos" reference in the Rhystic Studies video about One with Nothing. So thanks for that

[@IaCthulhuFthagn]

Wasn't whether or not you can name Magic cards that are not legal in the format changed at some point? Also, until recently (Neon Dynasty recently) you could famously name some tokens when naming a card. Applies more to pithing needle, and to be honest really doesn't apply much at all to anything, but there has been some finagling with card naming over the years.

[@Psyman2]

@@IaCthulhuFthagn Technically you could not name tokens. Rather certain tokens existed as a card, so by naming the card you also named the token.

[@Hapsasa]

That was my guess as well

[@sirsquiggles1584]

One of my earliest Magic memories is hearing people discussing the rules change for Indestructible. Completely brand new player, didn't know how priority worked, barely knew "untap, upkeep, draw," but gosh darn it, I knew Indestructible was now a keyword!

[@josephmathes]

Dark Ritual changed twice. Originally, "mana source" wasn't a card type, and Dark Ritual was an interrupt. This meant that you couldn't respond to it with an instant, but you could counter it with an interrupt.

[@Blizz3112]

Secretly, I miss Interrupts, as silly as they were rule-wise...

[@xerty5502]

I still do not see them as silly removing them created the nonsense that was the stack they worked if you wanted to react or counter something with out it going off you had to use an interrupt not any and every instant or ability on a inplay card. One of the worst rule changes in magic imo yes I know many people thought it was a great idea at time of creation but just no.

[@anorouch]

@@xerty5502 If they remade magic for the digital age, this would have been a good change.

[@xerty5502]

@@anorouch I personally still prefer the old wd system of instant, interup, mana source, I personally saw 0 benefits to the change besides possibly streamlining deck construction I personal felt removing them actually complicated play by alwing for huge stacks losing the play options of alwing instants to react did increase play options for many instants and ablites but was not worth the complication imo so not an advantage. Though I did not play competitive in the old formated maby there were problems I am unaware of

[@daftwulli6145]

@@xerty5502 this would make goyf even more broken, 2 more cardtypes

[@e.t.6424]

My thought for Boros Charm was similar to what happened with Esper Charm. Somebody said “Esper Charm, targeting myself” meaning they wanted to draw the cards. However, the only mode on Esper Charm that targets is the discard mode. Judge got called, the player had to discard instead of draw. I thought somebody said “Boros Charm, target myself” meaning they wanted to give their creatures indestructible but instead dealt 4 to themselves.

[@tonysmith9905]

Yeah but this incident didn't create any rules changes soooo....

[@e.t.6424]

@@tonysmith9905 Yeah I know, but in the moment I couldn’t remember if it sparked a change or not.

[@bouboulroz]

@@tonysmith9905 it didn't create any rules change because the rules already covered this case and the judge call was bad. The casting procedure wasn't respected, as the player is supposed to declare the mod before declaring a target. The correct fix was to roll-back the game up to the point the spell was about to be cast, then do the correct procedure.

[@ReyosBlackwood]

@@bouboulroz Not sure I agree, magic does allow shortcuts, and because of that naming a target on a charm that only has one mode where the named target is legal is a valid way to shortcut both naming mode and selecting targets.

[@TuberTugger]

It's the same change to boros charm, but there was a second relevant thing that change did. When they made indestructible a keyword, it also stopped boros charm's effect from affecting new permanents that entered AFTER the casting of boros charm. It used to just be a general statement about all your permanents for the turn. But now it applies things to the currently in-play permanents and later played stuff aren't affected. Making the card instantly worse.

[@Stayner]

I was comming for this comment!!! you beat me to it!!

[@briancaro196]

This is exactlly why I remembered the rule change instantly

[@danielcrowley162]

Ohhhhhhh. I thought I just misunderstood the Polyraptor + Forerunner of the Empire + Boros charm combo, I didn't realize there was a rules change.

[@MainTopmastStaysail]

This is true, and it's definitely worse, but only by like 0.01%. The indestructible mode on Boros Charm was never the most relevant. It's played for doing 4 to the face and the other modes are just add-ons. I also don't think there's ever been a tournament match where a Boros Charm was cast, then a creature, then that creature was killed. It could happen, but it's really unlikely with how Burn decks play things out.

[@TuberTugger]

@@MainTopmastStaysail Only low intelligent individuals need to make up percentages to explain themselves.

[@tomthemime4318]

In addition to the stuff with cascade, split cards with isochron scepter could be imprinted using the low mana value side and the copy could be either side.

[@ericjonsson]

Man, I miss the days when you could imprint Fire//Ice on the Isochron Scepter.

[@jamestanguay7365]

Also worked with cards like sunforger in searching as long one side was an instant and 1 side was 4 or less red or white spell.

[@al_z_homie]

@Cardmarket - Magic: The rules change that should have never happpened, IMO is the type change for Daru Stinger. When the Change to Creature Types was made and a seperation was made between a tribe and a job or career (e.g. human or elf is a tribe and soldier or druid is a career/job) a lot of older cards were changed according to this. The Daru-Creatures from Legion where changed to be humans at that point, which obviously enabled new synergies (e.g. you can play Grim Lavamancer in a Human Tribal deck now). One mechanic, where this was actually kind of interesting was Amplify, because some of the creatures with this ability got a new type, which made Amplify a lot more potent. This meant, that for a realtively short Time you could play Daru Stinger in pauper and reveal Humans to pump it, which was actually kind of cool, IMO, because there are obviously a lot of humans you happen to play accidentily and this card ist actually complete garbage if you can make it like a 3/3 or bigger (compare this to Heavy Ballista, aka a very strong common back in weatherlight). WOTC didn't like that though, because it was obviously designed to only work in a soldier tribal deck and not a human tribal deck, so to my knowledge Daru Stinger is the only creature, that got retro actively changed twice and lost it's primary tribal and only has a career now and thus will probably never show up as a niche Sideboard card in pauper, which it otherwise could have. Sorry for the long post, here is a potato 🥔

[@CardmarketMagic]

This was a great piece of information! And thank you for the potato 🥔

[@siryeetalot]

U lernd from 9gag

[@RabblesTheBinx]

... Y'know, has anyone stopped to think about how _weird_ it is that potato is meme? Like, potato has been used as punchline for joke since before I was born, but _why?_ Is potato!

[@sallomon2357]

it's made even weirder by the fact that in the art, Daru Stinger looks probably THE MOST human out of all the Daru cards xD

[@Sekraiii]

Tunnel Vision technically had another change related to Naming Cards: At a certain tournamnet where someone named a card (Borborygmos) which was not the card name they intended when naming (that was Borborygmos Enraged) and everyone knew it was not the card they intended to name but at the time the card you named was the one you meant. After this tournament I believe the rules were changed so that an ample description of the card is all you need when naming a card, which would also affect cards like Tunnel Vision where you no longer have to perfectly name the card you mean. But I'll take my 6 points and thank you for another great video!

[@ThePigKnight]

I thought the same thing and even guessed Borgy was the hint card.

[@Mirro18]

That was piffing Needle right? ... Or however you spell that. The Needle that you put into your brain!

[@CardmarketMagic]

That's another fantastic example we did not bring up but could be good for next episode :)

[@raisins7777]

Slight quibble, the "unique oracle description = name" thing was not the Borborygmos change, that was just about ambiguous names still being ambiguous even if they are the full name of an actual card that exists. Naming "the cyclops that throws land at you" would have worked even back then, that part is a much older rule.

[@ReyosBlackwood]

True, but at that event it wasn't tunnel vision, it was Bradley Carpenter's pitihing needle, trying to shut off Bob Huang's Borborygmos Enraged win con. RAW at the time, since he named a card that actually existed and was legal in format, he was assumed to be naming that card and not short forming the card he meant to name.

[@tentacle_love]

That was a really cool change with regards to tunnel vision. I was thinking it had something to do with choosing not to find a card or something.

[@randomguy6680]

Not finding only applies when searching in a hidden zone. You cannot not find a revealed card. And while I am not sure it was a rule right from the start, it has been in the game for longer than tunnel vision. I thought it had to do witth how you no longer need to correctly name a card when naming a card.

[@Gloryofthereef]

So is that last rule change effectively saying that you can’t name a card that you know about? So you can’t London mul thassas oracle to the bottom then name it with consultation? I’m not sure what rule actually changed on that last one, they more or less just said that the mulligan rules changed. At least that’s all I gathered

[@randomguy6680]

@@Gloryofthereef For a long time, Mulligan was shuffling your hand then drawing one less (6, then 5, 4 ...). Now, you can put cards at the bottom of your library. Now, you CAN tunnel vision/consultation a card you put at the bottom of your library through mullifan (or sry, but that was always the case).

[@Gloryofthereef]

@@randomguy6680 thanks for explaining, the last rule change actually made the thing they talked about possible, didn’t rule something out. I guess I was looking for what you “couldn’t” do any more, not what was now possible. I get how the mulligan system works, and having info on a card(or more) on the bottom of your deck seemed powerful as a side effect when London mulligan was implemented.

[@ReyosBlackwood]

@@Gloryofthereef The london mull is what made you know about it. Technically the Vancouver mulligan could also let you know what was on the bottom, but it was alot less likely to be the card you needed since it was the result of scry 1.

[@marcbonnet5555]

With Tunnel Vision, can you name yourself if you have Form of the Approach of the Second Sun ? Do you reveal yourself or cease to be a card ?

[@PhazonOmega]

That's hilarious.

[@Kalenz1234]

You reveal yourself and put yourself on top of your library (meaning you have no other cards on top of your head). You yourself are treated as the top card of your library at this point. Should you name another card and either mill yourself or fail to find and shuffle your library you cease to be a card.

[@therealax6]

@@Kalenz1234 If you mill yourself, please place yourself into the graveyard. It's not required by the card, but by the rule of funny!

[@mattd.5254]

Important context for Oracle + Pact is that you have to be playing a singleton deck for it to work. Otherwise you'll hit two of the same named cards with your Pact and you won't get to the oracle on the bottom. People also apparently did it with Lutri, because that way you could cast your pack twice, finding your oracle with the first one and exiling the rest of your library with the second.

[@yumyum366]

If you want pact in your opening hand, it's alright to run 2 of them though? (since if you play one from your hand, it doesn't matter the other is in your deck?)

[@opo33333]

That part doesn't really make sense, it looks like they wanted to talk about demonic consultation but the card got switched out for some reason

[@Hardivh]

You don't need to play singleton to have just 1 copy of a card in your deck

[@mattd.5254]

@@Hardivh With Tainted Pact you do. Pact doesn't have you name a card, you just keep going until you hit two cards with the same name. So if your deck when you cast pact is not singleton, you will not be able to guarantee that you exile your library. The deck can play two copies of Pact though, because if one of them is on the stack, you know there aren't two in your library to stop you from exiling the whole thing.

[@Lightning_Lance]

I'm really digging all the content you guys have been making lately, it scratches the itch I've had ever since LSV stopped doing Magic TV

[@CardmarketMagic]

Oh wow I used to binge watch that show! It was just two guys sitting with plants and lists of cards but it was still phenomenal!

[@markchaney4469]

Just watch lsv cube drafting

[@AndrewDotExe]

i thought the tunnel vision one was going to be a reference to the commander rules changes where you can't fateseal or otherwise tuck someones commander to the bottom of their deck anymore. I remember a lot of people playing tunnel vision with those kinds of effects to mill someone out since you know the deck is singleton

[@angelotricase3619]

Technically, Tunnel Visions received another "nerf", but just for edh. Actually, when a commander is moved in any area different from the battlefield, such as in the bottom of the library, the owner can put it in the commander zone. In the past this action could be done only when the commander was put in the graveyard/exile, so it was possible to put opponent commander at the bottom of its library and tunnel vision him to mill all its deck

[@rhc128]

I am so so so glad hinder + tunnel vision isn't a thing anymore, that's what I assumed they were talking about when I first saw the card

[@goonerbear8659]

I remember when that rules change rendered Chaos Warp unusable against commanders. I was bummed the first time and had to look it up.

[@lequinow]

Condemn is probably the most straightforward card that got impacted by that change.

[@zabumbaman1828]

+ Vendilion Clique as a commander.

[@Lowkey-NoPressure]

Biggest rule change that messed up my favorite casual deck: The token ownership rule change. Used to run Hunted Horror and Forbidden Orchard, and get rid of the tokens with despotic scepter and tel-jilad stylus. the rest of the deck was 'swap' stuff, like gilded drak, vedalken plotter, etc (and then put 'my' stuff on the bottom). But losing the ability to sink the tokens really hurt.

[@lxkas123]

I thought tunnel vision ruling change was the old commander rule where if your commander was put in your deck stays in your deck, so if your opponent put your commander in the bottom of your deck and cast tunnel vision, he mill you out of the game.

[@ChouRaiyuki]

It's still funny (but moreso sad) to me that Spell Crumple was specifically printed for commander only to be nerfed by that exact rule change (IDK if people even used Spell Crumple, I just thought the idea of that counter was cool and I loved how tailored it was tot he format).

[@necroinsanity2639]

Back when I was just starting to get into formats beyond standard, I found this deck using breaking/entering and isocron scepter to cast both sides at once. It seemed great, and a perfect example of the intricacies of the rules of magic... and then they changed it before I could scrap enough together to play the deck 😂

[@insertphrasehere15]

My guess for Tunnel Vision was the change to Commander with the 'tuck' rule. You used to be able to Hinder someone's commander, which was just a great play in general, then later in the game hit them with Tunnel Vision and mill them out. I think I stpped seeing this combo played back when the Eldrazi were released, since a lot of mill strats went out the window. While you can still do this by tucking some other card, it's not nearly as effective as being able to deny a commander, then use that later in the game as a wincon against that player (That you know their bottom card).

[@soxwon04]

This is where I thought it was going to go as well. There were so many cards that got worse with the change to the commander tuck rule: HInder, Bant Charm, Condemn. Terminus. Heck, Spell Crumple was created in a commander deck as a second copy of Hinder because of this interaction.

[@ReyosBlackwood]

17:30 For this to work with tainted pact, you'd also have to be running all different lands. A normal mana base (depending on format) would have multiple of the same fetches, shocks or basic lands.

[@RollTheBonez]

Also for Boom//Bust, I think there use to be a rule where multi target spells would fizzle even if only one target became invalid. Though that was before it's printing, I believe.

[@andrewtaylor3167]

That change happened with Champions of Kamigawa due to splice.

[@wizardlizard3641]

This was my assumption for that card as well, so like target an Evolving Wilds and in response to the target declaration you crack the land to only shoot theirs.

[@maze._]

Tunnel Vision: It used to not affect nonbinary players.

[@drakegrandx5914]

That's a good one. XD

[@behemoth9543]

Well that's a really arbitrary exception. You can simply decide you're nonbinary now to blank the card

[@CromwellMTG]

Youre right but 😬

[@RedPandaStan]

​@@behemoth9543no

[@arthurpotter9092]

​@@behemoth9543 that's not how being non binary works...

[@RegimentJoker]

Phyrexian Metamorph used to be a kill spell and a reanimate target for Sharuum under the old legendary rule

[@chaosredefined3834]

There was another change related to Tunnel Vision that was my guess. I don't know if it counts as a "rules" change though. A player played Pithing Needle naming "Borborygmos" when he meant to name "Borborygmos Enraged". Because Borborygmos is an actual card, the opposing player called a judge, asked if he could still use the abilities of "Borborygmos Enraged", and proceeded to win. The rules were changed so that the "Name a card" didn't need to be so specific, if it was clear to both players what you meant, that was good enough. This was game 3, he had seen a "Borborygmos Enraged" in game 1 and/or game 2, it was obvious to all the judges and the opposing player what he meant.

[@sephirothrr]

that wasn't actually the change - you never had to actually give the name of the card, just unambiguously describe it. the change was that now a name alone isn't enough to be unambiguous, both players still need to confirm that they're thinking of the same card

[@Strike-w6k]

you no longer have to name the exact name for tunnel vision. you can just say "yeah, that legendary you run that deals 2 damage on draw".

[@motorboot2822]

Carl, your collection of cool jackets and vests is insane.

[@CityState_of_Valletta]

I haven't been watching for too long but I swear I've yet to see a duplicate. I thought he like thrifted one every recording session then never wore it again. We need a closet tour.

[@CardmarketMagic]

I tried wearing à different shirt for every video and made it throught almost a year that way 😅 but I ran out of shirts so now I'm ok with doing duplicates

[@spectralunicorn]

The Tunnel Vision tules change I thought of was the commander tuck change where Hinder into Tunnel Vision was the wincon of choice.

[@neminem233]

So proud of myself for seeing the correct indestructible one from Boros Charm

[@zuiprax]

If you count cards that were printed one way, then due to rules change became overpowered, then through subsequent rules change went back to the way they were, you should totally include Mogg Fanatic and Thawing Glaciers.

[@T-Mobull]

The best part about this channel is that this dude is like 95% Ted Mosby from how I met your mother.

[@christopherpie8559]

Title has a typo, should be "...After They Changed..." Typo fixed, thanks!

[@CardmarketMagic]

Thank you! We'll fix it now :)

[@DCFatCat]

Surprised to not see a breakdown of the legend rule change. Nothing changed the collectivity of Gaeas cradle when BOTH players could play a copy

[@CardmarketMagic]

We did it in the last video :) kzbin.info/www/bejne/m57dd416hayDnc0

[@Campernicus]

You two have great energy. I'm a Magic newbie but enjoyed this video anyway.

[@antmansenpai]

Serum Powder seems like it may have been a better card/hint for #5

[@Banana-senpai]

Tunnel vision doesn't say "until the named card is revealed IN THIS WAY". So could you name, say, "lightning bolt" then wait until their library has no cards and literally REVEAL a lightning bolt from YOUR OWN HAND to make your opponent deck their entire library?

[@colgatelampinen2501]

I was Tunnel visioned into tucking how that changed in EDH. Back when tucking was good and everyone did it, Tunnel Vision was okay player removal. Do companion rules change in some episode, I am sure Carl would get that.

[@AshenHawk96]

Idea for the next ones: Cards that needed day 1 errata for rules or combo reasons. Invert//Invent and Marath, Will of the Wild come to mind. Or had mistakes on the printings like the Corpse Knights from the Brawl deck.

[@chaosredefined3834]

Walking Atlas and Oboro Envoy are the only ones I can recall...

[@seandun7083]

Hostage taker doesn't say "another" as printed. Bloodvial purveyor is missing "until end of turn". Apparently parts of Serra Paragon don't technically work within the rules and I'm not sure what the eventually solution was/will be and if the card or the rules need to be changed. On another note, Riding the Dilu Horse doesn't say until end of turn and it hasn't ever received errata.

[@cadlyn]

@@seandun7083 if i'm remembering correctly, they changed the rules for Serra Paragon so that it works as they intended it to.

[@vctrsigma]

Now we can add "Wheel of Potential" to the list.

[@petrie911]

There's another change for Tunnel Vision, though I don't think it could ever be useful. It used to be you could name any card, including cards not legal in the format.

[@LivingPeople12]

11:55 Wait, I have questions. 1. A Clone would come in as a 0/0 after a Dress Down was played, right? 2. So what layer does "can't be blocked" reside in? Layer 1? And wich layers do cards like Dress Down actually touch? On a similar matter: 3. A Magus of the Moon has an ability regarding e.g. Petroglyphs' effect, but it retains the ability after a, let's say, Darksteel Mutation? Even though that enchantment takes away all other abilities, right?

[@Elyasserg]

I love stuff like this, its those odd fringe pieces of info about magic that is just cool

[@jaycejoy4023]

The one who suffered the most is Fanatic Mogg. Poor goblin was never the same after you couldnt assign damage anymore!

[@Nalianna]

#freethemogg

[@nickhughes8179]

Mogg Fanatic is quite good for Pauper.

[@unknownkw]

I actually hated the removal of interrupt speed back in the days as "interdict" was one of my favorite blue card. It used to stop every other annoying card like morphling or killer bees, but becoming vastly weaker after the change. It would still stop a disk or even something that has hexproof but that was only a fraction of its glory before the rule change.

[@iwantyourfood4083]

Honestly I didnt play during the time. But I long for a similar spell speed system to yugioh but not the super fast gameplay. Maybe ill try some old rule games sometime

[@SpiderWaffle]

2:30 Before there was mana source, which was invented in 1998 I believe with the stack and stack damage (soon later was removed as a special non-stacking card type as well as stack damage), cards like dark ritual couldn't be played as "interrupts", so you could never used dark ritual to help pay for a power sink.

[@ngaged]

Sakura-Tribe Elder had a significant nerf on standard when damage stopped being put unto the stack. Arcbound Ravager got hit too, but it really wasn't affected as much and continued to dominate the format.

[@rodrigod.p.serrano6046]

With the redirection to planeswalkers rule change, a bunch of cards got worse, namely Volcanic Fallout and Slagstorm. Slagstorm would sometimes be kept in vs control decks because it would kill planeswalkers, namely JTMS that just brainstormed

[@1986Om3ga]

Here I thought this was goin to be like "Ghost Council of Orzhova used to be way stronger when damage went on the stack" but these are some deep cuts. Good content!

[@biggswigg2613]

The only place I've ever seen Tunnel Vision was in a combo edh deck with Vendillion Clique. Which just made them toss a card to the bottom then Tunnel Vision to mill them out. So I guess I mostly got it right? Not specifically the mulligan but the idea of putting something on bottom to throw away the library, this case just your opponents instead of yours.

[@themobiustripper]

When your buddy Carl shows up in a mtg video after you haven’t seen him for over a decade. You’re looking great, dude!

[@tulius123]

Yeah, i got 2....only the dark ritual one...but it was really nice! Liked the video a lot!

[@DaGraveCrowder]

Reconnaissance became very strong after the changes to combat damage

[@acetraker1988]

Not an MTG player. I used to play YGO I guessed the reasons why, so I got full marks. Last one was pretty hard, however, I have seen That Oracle card in various commander games, and I knew Mulligan is a thing in mtg, so I realised it, it took me a while though.

[@yaluckyboy]

watching this really shows me how out of touch I am with Magic now, I had no idea about half of these rule changes

[@canadianguy1578]

I've only ever seen tunnel vision used in jank combos to mill opponents.

[@TheWoelrat]

Not jank combo, but junk combo. In Ravnica sealed/draft with Junktroller you could put a card they hopefully had only one of in their deck on the bottom to then call it and mill them.

[@nickhughes8179]

​@@TheWoelrat Reito Lantern and Hinder are also cards that combo with Tunnel Vision. I think the Fateseal mechanic does too.

[@POPHISTORIAN]

As soon as I saw Tunnel Vision I thought it was going to be about the command zone. You used to be able to mill your opponents entire library by putting their commander on the bottom of library

[@veryblocky]

I only got 4 points, knew the first one, and got the next two with hints. The last two I had no idea. Once you explained that final rule interaction, I thought it was very clever.

[@zackestin1368]

As somebody who plays tainted pact in historic with Jace still, proud to say I got the tunnel vision one. First two mulligans are always free if you know you are in a matchup that they won’t interact with you

[@SpongeJ]

Can someone explain to me the bonus points on huntmaster of the fells, I didn't understand What Tofel said.

[@sarahbohn743]

Toralf describing the mulligan made me feel like he was casting doomsday as a pregame action XD

[@zvonk2480]

I used to tunnel vision myself for Living death all the time in 5 color ante. One of my favorite 1 card combos.

[@raynenimbus]

A relevant story about the change to indestructible being a keyword. Back during Return to Ravnica standard, one of the big beatstick win conditions was avacyn, because only exile would remove her. Before the rules change, Turn and Burn, one of the premier U/R removal spells at the time, wouldn't kill her because she stayed indestructible. after the rules change she became a lot worse.

[@Dreznin]

Oh man... that Dark Ritual one took me back. I started playing back when the Rath cycle was first coming out and had the little pocket rulebook to remember all the little timings. The changing of Mana Source and Interrupt to Instant, as well as the removal of batches in favor of the brand new stack, was a major streamlining of the rules when 6th Edition came out. I do have to admit, I'm one of the old-timers that misses mana burn and combat damage on the stack since I felt they added extra layers of strategy, though I do understand why they were removed. Still, I'll always remember the time I played in a massive group game at my LGS and dropped out Upwelling with another player having out Mana Flare... everyone decided to keep us alive since they loved all the mana, but I loved the look on all their faces when I disenchanted my own Upwelling and killed most of the table with mana burn.

[@CardmarketMagic]

Oh that Upwelling play is so delightfully cruel!

[@HomeCookinMTG]

Damage using the stack never really made sense from a flavor perspective, I get why people miss it though, I miss the days of killing Jace TMS w/ Jace Beleran.

[@lisaparker271]

I didnt know about the mana source rule. I didn't know about the infinite flip for huntmaster and i completely forgot about indestructibility being a keyword. This was a lot of fun though haha.

[@leefisher6366]

13:07 - It's because some people don't associate with either of the adjectives 'His' or 'Her' any more.

[@CardmarketMagic]

Yes that's why I pointed it out, it felt like some outdated ancient literature 😅

[@andrewhoward6946]

I could have sworn Tunnel Vision was the card naming rule change prompted by Borbor. But I actually remember specifically mentioning the potential function of Tunnel Vision after I first heard about the London Mulligan. So I should have still been able to figure that one. Alas. Cool way to cover some rules updates though, and how they can affect the game in weird ways.

[@chebi97]

Can you explain the transform change to huntmaster (the second change you talked about)? I'm not sure I followed what you meant. What is the situation where huntmaster used to transform back and forth that no longer applies?

[@noahcalvo15]

"If a spell or ability attempts to transform a permanent, but that permanent has transformed since the spell or ability was put on the stack, the permanent doesn't transform." I think this is the relevant change, from Shadows over Innistrad. Sounds like previously, you could stack flips, like by copying a moonmist on the stack? and each would cause the huntmaster to flip when it resolved.

[@MK-13337]

I think Grenzo, Dungeon Warden is a better example of the mulligan rule changing cards. You can guarantee a hit by stacking the bottom of your deck.

[@chuckwagon3718]

I like the new format changes for this video.

[@KleineKassiopeia]

I have two other interesting cards that got worse after rules changes: warp world and Flame Fusillade. Both were only indirectly affected but it made them a lot worse up to even unplayable

[@williamdrum9899]

How so?

[@KleineKassiopeia]

@@williamdrum9899 Warp world cares about the owner, not the controller of the cards. And in standard there were the Hunted Creatures. For Example Hunted Troll creates 4 1/1 tokens and initially they were controlled by the opponent, but the game counted you as the owner since you created them. So if you then played warpworld you would count 5 permanents and your opponent 0, instead of 1 and 4 for your opponent how it is now. And flame fussilade was in a time where Time Vault had one of its many rules changes. And at that time you could skip your next turn to untap time vault. So you could skip next turn, tap it to deal 1dmg with flame fussilade, skip your turn after the one you skipped and untap it, then tap to deal 1dmg and then do that infinite times.

[@Hedgemonkey5]

Tunnel vision is actually great. In commander (or any singleton format) you can put a card on the bottom of an opponent's library, and then name that card with tunnel vision, effectively milling every card in their deck apart from that one.

[@OhGodAnotherUsername]

They use Tainted Pact in the last example but they mean Demonic Consultation, right (or that other one from Mirrodin or something that's just like Consultation but does damage to you whose name I forget)? Tainted Pact does not have you name a card, nor does it really care what card is on the bottom of your deck. I don't see how the new mulligan rule has much impact on how this card plays. Makes sense for Tunnel Vision, though.

[@damien4197]

Yeah, tainted pact is just a way to pull off a Thassa's Oracle win in commander (w/ no basic land doubles), as long as you have them both in hand already.

[@stevenglowacki8576]

The one that does damage (or rather, makes you lose life) is Spoils of the Vault. It's a one black tutor, but you lose life for the cards you had to reveal from your library in order to find it.

[@happyslapsgiving5421]

My boy *Kokusho, the Evening Star.* I had two copies of him in a *Reanimator* deck that also featured *Bladewing, the Risen,* as well as *Footsteps of the Goryo* and *Bogardan Hellkite.* But then they changed the Legendary rule... 😒

[@stuvius]

Thought the last one had to do with when naming a card, if the chosen name is incomplete in some way but "should be" clear to both players which card is referred, then it counts as using the correct name. I remember an instance where a player named "Borborygmos" instead of the full name "Borborygmos Enraged" and got in trouble

[@steve_jackson9933]

I never heard of 'mana source' before. I remember back in the day, it was Interrupt, Instant and Sorcery speed. So, Dark Ritual, could only be interfered with by another Interrupt.

[@RaginKavu]

Tunnel Vision has a synergy with things that put stuff from the grave to the bottom of libraries... Specially if you can put something from an opponent's graveyard back into the bottom of their library. In a commander game, it's a very nice way to "tutor" them a card... And leave them with nothing but one card in their decks.

[@wizardlizard3641]

My score was a 6, not as good as I hoped, but not awful. Results were: Dark Ritual: correct Boom//Bust: I thought it had to do with targeting a land, then sacrificing the land before resolution Huntsman of the Fells: Correct Boros Charm: I got the indestructible part, but not the plainswalker targeting Tunnel Vision: had no real clue, so I thought maybe it had to do with the revealed cards not having a designated zone to exist in as the spells effect was taking place. Very fun video!

[@CardmarketMagic]

Thank you for playing along! 😃

[@dakkenblah1450]

Tunnel vision and junk troller is such a mean combo in commander. Can deck yourself and then win with multiple cards like oracle or jace. Can also deck an opponent

[@Mogget01]

I remember when Radha went from one of the greatest 2 drops to almost completely useless right after the block it was released in concluded and they changed the rules for how mana is conserved over steps and phases.

[@omnivision616]

What I like about these videos is it's like hanging out with your group talking MTG. Just shooting the shit about your favorite game. Damage should still use the stack. I will die on this hill.

[@wyldefyr4116]

I used to use Junktroller with Tunnel Vision to put a card on the bottom of the opponents library from their graveyard, then tell them to dig for it...mills the whole library except that card in commander.

[@noahedmonds-estes9204]

For huntmaster of the fells, didn’t the change about redirecting damage to planes walkers also nerf it? That was my first thought.

[@Sunshiner129]

It still hits planeswalkers, the oracle text is updated, but very wordy.

[@sagacious03]

Neat analysis video! Thanks for uploading!

[@JervisGermane]

18:37 Which rules change do I think shouldn't have happened? How much time ya got...

[@CardmarketMagic]

🤣

[@kabobawsome]

Tunnel Vision is still a very situationally powerful card for blue self-mill decks in commander. Scry 1 and this can become a "Mill your entire library" card. I run it with Kwain, where one of my win-cons is having no library. Just being able to suddenly go down to one card in library when I have a Laboratory Maniac out and with Swiftfoot Boot or Lightning Greaves is *incredibly* powerful. Especially if you already have a card-draw doubler out and can immediately tap Kwain to win the game. It does suck when you drop Opt or whatever and it's a basic land, though. One reason why I always wait for a higher scry value in practice. Augury Owl is the typical one I use, but there are several good ones. My favorite is Condescend for 0 as the X. It's a very funny one that makes your opponents go "huh?" right before you pull a "My entire library is gone" stunt.

[@williamdrum9899]

Better yet, Chromatic Sphere. You win the game at mana ability speed

[@peruru84]

Great video as usual! :)

[@Parmenter1983]

On the topic of Indestructible / Dress Down. Last I knew you could put instance of regeneration on something and it stayed there until end of turn (or phase) or until the creature was destroyed. If you used regeneration in response to Dress Down, would a Day of Judgement still kill the creature?

[@jordangroblewsky2087]

13:10 Commander 'tuck rule?' That's the first thing I think of.

[@kylegonewild]

Instantly knew the Boros Charm change specifically because of the wording. Wizards is a lot more picky with their words now than they used to be. Something as simple as "are" instead of "gain" or "has/have" mattered a lot.

[@NewLifeDante]

"damage on the stack" used to make certain cards way better-- my favorite that I remember from Type II circa 2007 was Ghost Council of Orzhova. Ghost Dad was a threat to be reckoned with back then

[@shawnreichard5497]

There was also a rule change in regards to naming cards. Before you had to be super specific with the name you stated for the card. Now you don't even need to know the specific name, but it needs to be understood and agreed upon which specific card by both players.

[@kartzzy6101]

hearing them disrespect tunnel vision pushes my buttons. I remember using that card a decade ago to put peoples commanders at the bottom of their library and then milling them out with tunnel vision.

[@NOMEEL-cq2dn]

I remember back in the day you could Dark Ritual though a Nether void without having to play the extra 3 because it was a mana source.

[@Krunschy]

Really thought Mana Drain was going to make the list, but I guess that would've been a tad too easy.

[@organous8870]

The major rules change to affect a card that *I* remember has to do with a Coldsnap card that had a cumulative upkeep of *gaining* mana, because mana burn was a thing. Once that was removed, the card just gave you an endless fountain of mana.

[@Ahayzo]

Braid of Fire! My favorite jank Modern card I ever threw into a deck.

[@apanapane]

Eight points for me. The Huntmaster one got me and I was not even close on the last one.

[@RickNeverGiveYouUp]

I thought there would be the question for battle damage on stack and mana burn, but still a nice video. Thanks for sharing something so interesting.

[@CardmarketMagic]

I have some bad news for you 😅

[@RickNeverGiveYouUp]

@@CardmarketMagic KZbin just sugget me the video four months ago after your comment, and I got all I asked in there 😂😂

[@BunteKartonsMTG]

Great video again, really like your content! One thing though... It would be great if you could put the same effort into your website's UX/UI! Any chance there will be changes in the near future?

[@CardmarketMagic]

The department that works on the videos is not the same that works on the website, but all the programmers are currently working hard on a huge refurbishing of the website :)

[@Tree3D]

Okay, I paused on Tunnel Vision. My guess is that you can now in EDH (or any deck with 1-of's) mill your entire deck except the last card with it because London Mulligan lets you bottom a card from your hand? This could also work when they did the Scry mulligan rule if your deck, including lands, is 1-of's Time to see if I'm right.

[@Tree3D]

Ahhhhh I read the card wrong. You just need the card you named to be a 1-of, then you mill your whole deck to it. Cool that I was right though!

[@CardmarketMagic]

Yes! It's not the rules change we were thinking of, but it was absolutely another correct answer! :)

[@SmilingFish415]

Im confused, how did the player/PW change how boros charm worked, because they changed it at the same time to target walkers, feels like an awk example because it was functionally the same before and after. Chandra or vial smasher actually changed because of that rule but id say boros charm didn't really. also 9 points

[@Dylan-vs6sf]

You actually have to target the planeswalker. Back when redirection existed your target was always the opponent. It is only when it resolved that you redirected damage. So your opponent couldn't know if you were going to hit the planeswalker or them. Now you have to target the planeswalker on cast

[@SmilingFish415]

@@Dylan-vs6sf ah fair

[@spinakker14]

@@Dylan-vs6sf thanks, but they also said that boros charm was good because you could kill Jaces with it. But you still can, so what's the difference?

[@SmilingFish415]

@@spinakker14 that was exactly what confused me, i think they just misspoke

[@jeremywigington6176]

I feel like the last one should have been about the Borborgymos change for naming cards. Makes a lot more sense for the first card.

[@valt3rnative]

I didn't quite get how the transform once per turn rules change was before the change. Could someone give me another example on how one could abuse it?

[@ChrToft3]

I assume its a change from cards posing a generic transformation to a specific one for each side. Hear me out: Your human werewolf has a transformation on the stack, you then play "Moonmist" (Transform all humans), and let it resolve. Since your human werewolf is a human it transforms into its backside with the original transform still in the stack. After the rules changes I would guess this transformation fizzles, and the old rules had you transform it back into its frontside. Hence you would be able to cast "Moonmist" twice one the same turn transforming your werewolf 3 times in total. (I have absolutely no clue is I'm right or wrong btw. Edit: Not quite right in my initial description of generic or specific transformation, but more that you just can't stack transformations in general 701.28f )

[@valt3rnative]

@@ChrToft3 Thanks for the response, let me see if I understood this correctly. Huntmaster's effect to transform goes on the stack since no spells were cast last turn, then I cast Moonmist and turn it into Ravager. Then Huntemaster's effect happens and turns it back into Huntmaster to have its effect trigger again and go on the stack to transform into Ravager. And with the rules change this can't happen anymore. But what was the exact rules change? As I understand it, beginning of upkeep effects all go on the stack at the same time, so if it flips in the middle of the stack then it shouldn't be able to trigger anymore. Was this not the case in the past and is this what they changed?

[@ChrToft3]

The additional transform you are talking about aren't going on the stack, that was not the rule change, the change was: 701.28f If an activated or triggered ability of a permanent that isn’t a delayed triggered ability of that permanent tries to transform it, the permanent transforms only if it hasn’t transformed since the ability was put onto the stack. If a delayed triggered ability of a permanent tries to transform that permanent, the permanent transforms only if it hasn’t transformed since that delayed triggered ability was created. In either case, if the permanent has already transformed, the instruction to transform is ignored. Aka he would never transform back into Huntsmaster in the first place, but it would prior.

[@valt3rnative]

Ok, gotcha, thanks!