If you've played Magic for any length of time, then you can relate to the how I am feeling about the game right now. I'm in one of those negative phases when luck - the bad kind - tends to dominate my games. Any boosters I open seem to include the worst rare in the set - unless I need that rare, in which case it includes the second-worst rare in the set with packaging crimps across the top. Things are so bad that I have been thinking how selling my entire collection would pretty much finance the swimming pool my kids keep pleading for.

Yet when I read the Star City article about some problems with Magic Online, I felt compelled to come to the defense of the very people I've been silently cursing. All groups responsible for my addiction-gone-sour have been the subject of most my whining lately, so I am torn in my decision to come to their aid in defending any of their products. Perhaps if I had never experienced such"Magic doldrums" before, I would respond differently... But knowing that better days will return is enough to convince me to rebut portions of the article about Magic Online.

I just smiled at the realization that some people out there will assume I am being compensated by Wizards or related parties (as people thought in response to Gary Wise's passionate article at the Sideboard). Nothing I can type here will convince such people otherwise, but let me say this:"I wish they would compensate me!"

That pool my kids want would be perfect, but I'd settle for a Magic T-Shirt.

(Extra large. No Pokemon, please. I was thinking a Dragon or fancy Wizards logo so I can go on advertising for you.)

(That's not going to work, is it?)

Mr. Roney and Kernaghan were deserved winners of the Star City $50 submission contest. I'm certainly no English professor, but the article seemed well-written to me, and it included many good points followed by some suggestions on how to improve Magic Online. I believe a few of the arguments were somewhat incomplete, though - incomplete in the way that makes me imagine that the authors were suffering a downswing in their Magic careers much as I have been. While reading the article again, I began to feel it was a rant. A rant by someone who had just been pummeled by someone with a 1870 rating. Perhaps the authors have 1870+ ratings themselves, I don't know, but"rant" is what popped into my mind.

A dictionary reveals to me that"rant" really doesn't hold the meaning I thought it did, so let me suggest that the article seemed like a complaint made out of frustration... Not unlike the whining I do when I don't draw enough land, or when I open a booster with the second worst rare in the set, crimped.

Or like my kids will whine later today when the sun is high and I say"No" about a pool.

The authors start of the meat of their article with a strong message about Magic Online. First they praise the merits of Magic Online, and then they suggest, " What you probably haven't heard yet is the unfairness of it all."

They go on to describe what they mean by the unfairness:

Yes, beginners will usually have to suffer as road kill for awhile. How is this any different from real Magic, though? (Keep in mind that the authors keep comparing Magic Online to real Magic.)

The next several paragraphs of the article provide what I believe to be an accurate description of a typical cycle of someone starting on Magic Online. Some of the features of Magic Online designed with the beginner in mind are referred to. The way in which new players will be compelled to buy more cards to be able to compete with other players is mentioned. It all sounds reasonable to me, and very similar to real Magic.

So where's the unfairness?

What's the problem?

I agree.

Now show me what the 1870+ rated player used to learn basic deckbuilding skills. Where did they learn about synergy tactics?

My chess set doesn't reveal how to arrange the pieces to start a game. That is just so unfair to beginners.

Perhaps I should put my perspective into perspective.

My Magic Online Limited rating has bounced between 1590ish and 1690ish over the dozens of matches I have played. That mirrors my real Magic Limited rating, which has been riding that roller coaster since Ice Age, as my first sanctioned tournament was an Ice Age sealed deck. Oh, that was a PTQ. I didn't know what Ice Age was and I had never played Sealed deck. In fact, my Constructed deck still consisted of every card I owned, minus the ones I didn't understand, like Revised dual lands. Where was my Training Room? Where was I supposed to learn about synergy?

I have two points mixed: One being that I am not exactly one of the"sharks" eating up road kill in the draft room, and the other point being that the cycle of a typical beginner on Magic Online is not much different than in real Magic.

Now consider this: Wouldn't a beginner armed with a 7^th Edition Preconstructed deck playing in the Magic Online training room be in a better position to learn something constructive about this game than the beginner in real Magic playing with a hundred-card pile of crap that they created? Do you really think that Starter does anything more than walk beginners through the mechanics of the game, such as mana costs and turn structure? Surely you agree that Magic Online is an excellent learning tool when it comes to turn structure, and even timing mechanics. Heck, it even queues you when triggered upkeep effects trigger. How many beginners get that kind of help in real Magic?

What facts are that statement based on? It's 9:52 am Eastern Time as I type this: There are 585 players in casual rooms, 197 in the Sanctioned Tournaments room, 27 in the Training Room, 115 in Leagues, 6 in Clans and 4 in Premier Events. I'd make an argument that Leagues is a casual room - but even without that, casual play outweighs tournament play almost three to one. The time of day is certainly a factor, but it's not uncommon to see 1000+ plus in casual rooms during the evening when there are less than 500 in Sanctioned Tournaments.

If any comparisons can be drawn from real Magic, I refer to a quote from Randy Buehler's recent article on MagicTheGathering.com titled,"What I hope to learn from Worlds". Randy said, "Tournament players are significantly outnumbered by"casual" Magic players..."

I think Randy and I wear the same sized T-shirts.

The article I am rebutting suggests, "The first fundamental change that must be made is more sheltering for the beginners." I like that the authors chose to include the word"more" in that suggestion. There is sheltering for beginners already. To suggest more is needed is fair - but I believe the sheltering is sufficient, but maybe not as apparent as it should be.

I don't see any reference to Magic Online Leagues in the article. Leagues are a form of sheltering for casual players, and are a good idea for newer players as well. The opening quote from the League help screen sums it up nicely:

There seems to be plenty of leagues devoid of pros. There's also the option of starting your own league amongst friends and other beginners. You could even create an exclusive league, using a service such as"myleague.com" for keeping statistics.

Then there's my favourite sheltering of them all: In the casual rooms, where one might expect newer players to progress to after the training rooms, click on"New Game" to open up the"New Game Options." Notice the check boxes at the right? Read the one that says,"Buddy list only". You can bet that Kai Budde wouldn't be on my buddy list if I were filtering out players while I learned the game. Not that Kai isn't a great guy to be buddies with, I guess, but until I knew what was so good about a zero-power bird or some card that let my opponent chose which extra card I get to draw, he'd be way over my head.

(Incidentally, it was an article by Mr. Budde that propelled me to my first ever PTQ top 8.)

I think that's what I just suggested with the buddy list feature, but let's take a different point of few on that. My wife went with me to that fateful Ice age PTQ so many years ago; she knew less about Magic than I did, which meant she knew almost nothing. We were both beginners. If I had been paired up against her in the first round, would I have learned more about the game? I was lucky enough to sit across from my wife during deck construction. I built some green based deck and chose to leave Shambling Strider out because I wasn't using any red, which was needed for the Strider's activated ability. (I didn't know those phrases back then and probably referred to the ability as his"pump thingy.")

My wife agreed with my reasoning - of course, we were wrong, but as beginners we didn't realize it.

My wife hasn't played since.

She never recovered from the Magic doldrums.

She'd probably vote for the pool.

(Don't tell her how much my Mox is worth!)

After a thorough pummelling from Mr. Donais, I allowed him to look at my card pool. He saw the Shambling monster in my sideboard, picked his jaw up from the table and inquired, as to why I didn't use him in my green deck. I explained my thoughts about the red cost of the activated ability (pump thingy). He nodded and politely suggested that the Strider's size was pretty good and that it might have worked in my main deck regardless of the wasted ability. I'm sure he enjoyed a good laugh about it amongst friends later, but he was polite with me, and I learned something that no Starter CD has ever taught.

I would not be able to reveal my deck to someone on Magic Online, but a similar conversation could take place. More importantly, I can learn from my losses even without conversation. I can learn how that zero-power bird allowed someone to get their 5/5 monster out faster than I got my out.

I can appreciate people not wanting to spend money to lose to someone with a 1860+ rating. That's why casual play is essentially free. Yes, there is the cost of whatever amount of cards you want to buy. That's not exclusive to Magic Online. This brings us to the argument about the fixed price of Magic Online boosters.

Hogwash!

Right now in the trading rooms, there are countless messages advertising Judgement boosters for sale at less than retail. Three tickets is very common, and there's the occasional bulk deal that puts boosters at less than three tickets each. You can buy hordes of tickets at less than retail on eBay, and then trade them for boosters at less than retail, effectively paying less than $3 per booster.

We're talking about the secondary market here. No, Wizards is not selling boxes at discounted rates - but lots of other people are. Some of those user names are the same people who own retail stores where you buy your real boosters. Some of those user names are pros who have won more boosters than they can play with and they need to unload them for tickets; they win so much they can let boosters go for less than retail, and you can reap the benefits.

Besides, discounts on retail prices for bulk purchases does nothing for the beginning player! Why should a"core market" player with reasonably deep pockets, like myself, be entitled to cheaper boosters than a new player who wants to try the game a bit? I'd like the benefit for sure - but doesn't that go against the whole philosophy of making MTGO better for the beginner?

How can we save the beginners from the pros?

Did an amateur ever learn anything from watching a pro sports game? Sure.

Should the same amateur jump into a pro sports game? Not if they want to win... But as a learning experience it can be a good thing. Spending money to do it in a tournament is not something everyone can afford, but a thrashing in the occasional casual game can be a valuable experience.

The beginners don't need to be saved from the pros. They need to recognize their current level of play ability (skill or card pool) and chose their matches accordingly: Magic Online has the tools available to do so.

When I entered that Ice Age PTQ, it would have been silly of me to have expectations of winning.

I was a beginner.

The pros rode over me like a Canadian Olympic Hockey Team.

Did I need saving? Not at all.

Was I in over my head? Yes!

Did it cost me money? You betcha.

Was it worth it? Well...

I still don't have a pool.

Should I have been segregated from the pros?

Beginners on Magic Online do not need saving from the pros. If they get their...umm....toes handed to them on a platter by some pro, they need to learn from the experience - and not just learn from how the pro played, but learn from being in over their heads. Learn that the high-profile tournaments with big prizes will be tough competitions. Learn that the stranger with the 1890+ limited rating might be pretty good at casual constructed, too.

When you fall out of the saddle, get up and try again, but maybe with a different horse.

The rest of the Roney/Kernaghan article includes a lot more points; I'm not rebutting most of them, either because I agree with them or have no arguments to support my opinion about them. Tournaments with different K levels would be great (not that beginners understand or care about K levels). A more casual level of tournament would be great. The authors made comparisons to Friday Night Magic. Great idea! Leagues touch on that idea some, and overcome the problem of international time zones, but there is room for more"casually competitive" support. I'd like to take things a step further and bring in more casual formats. Where's Highlander? At least we have multiplayer.

Oh, come on! Just like all the nay-sayers during beta testing who said Magic Online would flop with the pricing structure. How many players were online at 9:52 a.m. just two months after the came went live? I wish I had a penny for everyone who was wrong about this. Better yet, I wish I had a penny for each $3.29 virtual booster Wizards has sold.

What the...?

I've heard that argument about real Magic for years, yet the game goes on and many, many people continue to play.

It really isn't that bad, folks. Improvements can be made to Magic Online... But this non-pro, for one, doesn't feel like things are corrupted. I have a couple beginners on my buddy list already. A lot of Magic enthusiasts enjoy helping out. Why spend time whining to the company when you could be doing something constructive like helping out a beginner. We're not saving them from the pros - we're helping them look both ways before crossing so that they don't become road kill.

Hey, you know what else?

The pro I managed to beat in a Magic Online draft the other day wasn't feeling very catered to.

Bob Pitcher
MTGO nick: rpitcher