What do I need to play Magic the Gathering with my kid?

[Frylock]

I go to Target and I see these "starter packs" (or words to that effect) with sixty cards. Is this enough for one person to play, or is it enough for two to play?

[Frylock]

I think this was one of the ones I saw. There were like four or five different ones called "intro packs."

[Frylock]

BTW we tried playing once last year. They gave out free thirty card packs at Gen Con. (Which suggest sixty is enough for two but I just want to be sure here...) but one of the decks we ended up with seemed completely unquestionably by far to be more powerful than the other. So we gave up.

[Swords to Plowshares]

You may want to look in to the "Duel Decks" products. Each one comes with two decks balanced to play against each other and they have some fun themes (water vs. fire, angels vs. demons). The cards are a bit more advanced than what comes in the intro packs, but I don't think it would be too difficult.

[Quimby]

Originally Posted by Swords to Plowshares

You may want to look in to the "Duel Decks" products. Each one comes with two decks balanced to play against each other and they have some fun themes (water vs. fire, angels vs. demons). The cards are a bit more advanced than what comes in the intro packs, but I don't think it would be too difficult.

I agree with this but they can be harder to find. If so the starter decks you linked to are okay too.

[markdash]

There's something called the "Deck Builder's Toolkit" that I saw at Target, which contains 125 cards, four booster packs, and 100 basic lands.

http://www.wizards.com/magic/tcg/pro...bt/productinfo

I have also heard from people that playing the computer game "Duels of the Planeswalkers" is a good way to get children interested in playing Magic.

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by Frylock

I think this was one of the ones I saw. There were like four or five different ones called "intro packs."

That is a single deck...looks like it comes with a booster pack of 15 semi-random extra cards that may or may not be useful with the deck. Each of you would need one of those decks to play a game.

[Lynn Bodoni]

It's been a long, long time since I've played Magic.

I don't remember the minimum number of cards required. I want to say forty. You say, no problem, then I pick up two decks, right? Wrong. The problem is that most players (back when I was in the game) will tell you that you should have just two colors in your hand, three at most. The reason for this is because you need to have lands in order to do anything meaningful. Certain types of lands will give you access to green magic, other lands to white magic, etc. The colors are balanced so that while White magic will give you a lot of healing and defense, it's weak on offensive magic, but Black magic can give you a lot of offensive magic, but it's weak on healing and defense. And so forth. So a lot of the game is actually not what happens when you're facing an opponent, it's building your deck. This involves trading cards (in the case of you and your kid, you'd probably take turns picking the cards, face up, from the common deck) with others, buying booster packs, and even buying individual cards. Some people find building decks to be more enjoyable than playing the game with others. And actually, building the deck is more a matter of weeding out what doesn't work in your collection, rather than adding cards. Magic works better with three or more players, up to a certain point.

Might I suggest another card game? Get Munchkin. Kill the monsters. Steal the treasure. Stab your buddies. It's better with three or more players, but it's doable with two players. You can buy expansion packs, and the flavor text on the cards is hilarious. You don't get a random assortment of cards, each deck or booster pack will contain the same number and same kind of cards. One guy illustrates most of the cards, but on at least one occasion, there have been guest artists.

I think that Munchkin is easier to learn, easier to play, and a lot more fun. YMMV. Magic can be quite an involving hobby, and if you get into it, I suggest locating a gaming/comic book shop in your area, because even though you can buy individual cards on eBay and other places online, it's more interesting to browse through a collection. A gaming shop might also offer space to play games, as well.

[FinnAgain]

Magic: The Spendening... is expensive.
Duels of the Planeswalkers is a fairly decent XBox Live game. Hell, you could probably buy two consoles, and put a copy of the game on each, and get a year's Live subscription for less than the price of building two top flight decks.

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by Lynn Bodoni

I don't remember the minimum number of cards required. I want to say forty. You say, no problem, then I pick up two decks, right? Wrong. The problem is that most players (back when I was in the game) will tell you that you should have just two colors in your hand, three at most. The reason for this is because you need to have lands in order to do anything meaningful. Certain types of lands will give you access to green magic, other lands to white magic, etc. The colors are balanced so that while White magic will give you a lot of healing and defense, it's weak on offensive magic, but Black magic can give you a lot of offensive magic, but it's weak on healing and defense. And so forth. So a lot of the game is actually not what happens when you're facing an opponent, it's building your deck. This involves trading cards (in the case of you and your kid, you'd probably take turns picking the cards, face up, from the common deck) with others, buying booster packs, and even buying individual cards. Some people find building decks to be more enjoyable than playing the game with others. And actually, building the deck is more a matter of weeding out what doesn't work in your collection, rather than adding cards. Magic works better with three or more players, up to a certain point.

You're talking several levels of complexity over what the OP is trying to do. He just wants to play the game with his kid. For that purpose, a store-bought "premade" deck, like the one he linked to and I commented on, is fine. Those decks are already balanced with an appropriate number of lands in the needed colors to support the offensive and defensive capabilities of the deck. They typically contain 60 cards in two colors. Some may contain a single color. They are ready to play right out of the box (after shuffling, of course). For $10-$15 or so, he can be playing the game with his kid at a very basic level. If they like it they can move on to more advanced decks.

I think you may be confusing premade decks like the one he linked with other things....like "tournament packs", which are just a selection of cards from a particular series and used in deck building by more advanced players.

[Grumman]

A sixty card preconstructed deck is sufficient for a single player. For two players you need two preconstructed decks, a duel decks pack or enough booster packs/individual cards to build your own decks from scratch.

If you can find the sort of game store that sells pen&paper RPGs, models and things like that, you should be able to find some of the out of print preconstructed decks, if there's a particular theme you're looking for. This and this might help you find something you like.

Originally Posted by Lynn Bodoni

Might I suggest another card game? Get Munchkin. Kill the monsters. Steal the treasure. Stab your buddies. It's better with three or more players, but it's doable with two players. You can buy expansion packs, and the flavor text on the cards is hilarious. You don't get a random assortment of cards, each deck or booster pack will contain the same number and same kind of cards. One guy illustrates most of the cards, but on at least one occasion, there have been guest artists.

I'd suggest against Munchkin, especially for two players. The game basically comes down to whoever has the next turn once everyone's run out of ways to stop the Level 9 players hitting Level 10. Two player games lack even that, since there's no room for diplomacy when you've only got one opponent.

[Lynn Bodoni]

Premade decks? Back in MY day, we didn't have such things! We built our own decks out of DIRT, and we LIKED it!

Or we didn't like it, and gave up playing the game years ago, as I have. I still have quite a few binders full of uncommon and rare cards, but when I realized how much I was spending on the game, and how little I played it, well, I quit playing it. I'm sure that the rules are vastly different now.

However, I still think that Munchkin is a better choice.

[Frylock]

I have munchkin already. We couldn't find a way to make it fun as a two player game. (And my wife does not like to play this kind of game. She's a scrabble/trivial-pursuit type of gal.)

[Kinthalis]

Just walk into any small magic the gathering D&D retailer around you. The nerds there will help you.

But yeah, the dual pack sets are probably the best to get started, or two of the basic starter sets will work as well.

It CAN be expensive.

If you both have a laptop/PC I would suggest you give the video game a chance first. You don't need gaming PC's to run it, it's usually cheap on Steam and it's a lot of fun playing by yourself, against eahc other and co-op against others/the AI.

I believe the new release later this year will also be out on the iPad, so you can use those if you've got 'em as well.

[Athena]

If you're looking for alternative two-player card games, I can heartily recommend Lost Cities. Really fun, and definitely playable with 2 people.

[FinnAgain]

Oh oh oh!
Octagon 2.0 should still be a freeware program that lets you simulate all sorts of collectible card games once you download the skins. I'm pretty sure that Octagon is legal, but you'll have to ask on other forums where you can best find a set of virtual Magic cards.

[Trepa Mayfield]

Originally Posted by Kinthalis

But yeah, the dual pack sets are probably the best to get started, or two of the basic starter sets will work as well.

Two intro precon decks (like the OP linked to) are probably better than a Duel Decks Pack for a new player. The game is complicated enough on its own; Duel Decks have a dozen different obscure mechanics from various points in Magic's history.

[Frylock]

Regarding the Steam game, I got it (the 2012 version) a while back when it was six dollars or so. As far as I could tell, the UI required me to right click and select something in order to be able to read a card--and then did not allow me to play the card until I had right clicked and selected something to de-magnify the thing. This seemed ludicrously clunky to me so I put it away. It's possible I just didn't figure out the right way to use the UI, but it wasn't particularly important to me that I learn how to play that particular game as I had other ways to entertain myself available.

But anyway, now I'll ask--does it sound to you like I just was missing something UI-wise?

[FinnAgain]

Yeah. The UI doesn't work that way on the console. You probably just need to fuck with your pause settings.

[Frylock]

Originally Posted by FinnAgain

Yeah. The UI doesn't work that way on the console. You probably just need to fuck with your pause settings.

...pause settings?

What does that have to do with it?

[FinnAgain]

IIRC, for instance, it'll drop a new card and auto-pause forever until you click through it. Other phases will pause too, and clicking on a card will pause it until you re-click to indicate that you're done reading. I don't think you can get away from the latter estting. And I think that there's a slight difference between the two Planeswalkers games, but I can't certify that 100%.

[Kinthalis]

Originally Posted by Frylock

Regarding the Steam game, I got it (the 2012 version) a while back when it was six dollars or so. As far as I could tell, the UI required me to right click and select something in order to be able to read a card--and then did not allow me to play the card until I had right clicked and selected something to de-magnify the thing. This seemed ludicrously clunky to me so I put it away. It's possible I just didn't figure out the right way to use the UI, but it wasn't particularly important to me that I learn how to play that particular game as I had other ways to entertain myself available.

But anyway, now I'll ask--does it sound to you like I just was missing something UI-wise?

Hmmm, yeah, this isn't the way it should work.

You can use the mouse scroll wheel to magnify/zoom out of any card at any time. This pauses the game while you read the card details. Just using the scroll wheel or right clicking will take you back to the game.

There are instances where the game will require you to "allow" a card. In this cases you'll have to click on the card to allow it (or you can click down below on your deck for possible counters).

It's a card game, so it's hella easier to use the mouse over the controller, which feels lacking, as it necessarily locks down what you can do at particular times during gameplay. With the mouse you can, for example, check out ANY other card in play at pretty much any time. This isn't always possible with the controller.

Alternatively you COULD use the controller on the PC if you wanted to.

I switch between the two depending on whether I'm playing on the TV or the PC monitor, but again, vastly prefer the mouse interface (except on the main menu where the developers apparently forgot that this game was supposed to work with a mouse).

[Chronos]

It is possible (in most cases) for two players to play off of the same deck-- I've done it a few times when a friend and I were hanging out and only one of us had brought a deck. The games tend to be a bit boring, though, since both players will have exactly the same capabilities at their disposal, and you're entirely missing out on the deck construction aspect, which is in many ways bigger than the play itself. And there are a few mechanics which would work out really weird that way.

A large part of play is effects which theoretically affect both players equally, but which in practice are unequal. For instance, you might have a card which says "Destroy all creatures", which would affect both your creatures and your opponent's creatures. If you're both playing the same (or very similar) decks, such a card would probably not be worth bothering with at all. But if your opponent is playing a deck with a lot of creatures, and you're playing a deck with few or none, suddenly it becomes a lot more effective.

[Grumman]

Originally Posted by Frylock

Regarding the Steam game, I got it (the 2012 version) a while back when it was six dollars or so. As far as I could tell, the UI required me to right click and select something in order to be able to read a card--and then did not allow me to play the card until I had right clicked and selected something to de-magnify the thing. This seemed ludicrously clunky to me so I put it away. It's possible I just didn't figure out the right way to use the UI, but it wasn't particularly important to me that I learn how to play that particular game as I had other ways to entertain myself available.

But anyway, now I'll ask--does it sound to you like I just was missing something UI-wise?

IIRC, you can use the scroll wheel to look at a card. I didn't like Duel of the Planeswalkers, but my complaints are primarily as an existing M:tG player. Someone new to the game isn't going to be as annoyed by some of their design decisions.

[Cliffy]

There's a lot of accurate information on the thread that's making it much more complicated than it needs to be.

Your best bets, as noted: 1) two Intro Packs, which each contain a 60 card, typically two-colored, deck (plus a booster pack of 15 random cards). Wizards of the Coast, the company that publishes MtG, puts out four or five of these every time they release a new set (four times a year), and they're specifically designed for newer players -- cool cards and interactions, but nothing too complex and a balanced power level. If you go this route, get two packs from the same expansion (e.g., Innistrad or Dark Ascension). Each set features different mechanics and advantages different types of strategies, so it's possible (although not likely) that if you mix and match the cards from one set will just be hella better than the others.

If you can find them, you might want to get the packs for the Magic 2012 Core Set, which is mechanically simpler, but in the Intro Packs it's prob not a big deal.

2) Duel Decks. This is a box containing two pre-made decks built around opposing concepts. Drawbacks are that the decks are somewhat more complex and are usually monocolored. While that can strengthen them, it's probably less fun for the casual player. Also, there's no booster pack in the box. OTOH, if you care, you're more likely to be able to recoup your investment on the Duel Decks if you want to sell them in a few years. Wizards releases two Duel Decks a year, one set has decks constructed around a theme, (e.g. Knigts vs. Dragons, Divine vs. Demonic) or around two "planeswalkers" -- wizards who appear on a special card type (e.g. Venser vs. Koth, Ajani vs. Nicol Bolas). Shouldn't matter which you choose -- planeswalker cards are sorta complex, but they're fun, so it's a trade-off.

The reason these are your best options is because they're pre-contructed. One of the coolest parts of Magic is being able to come up with your own decks of cards that all work with each other in powerful ways. But it's really complicated to do, and there's no need to go down that advanced route until you already understand the game.

Finally, you'll need to figure out how to play. There's an insert in these boxes which can help, although it's probably better as a reminder. You could try Duels of the Planeswalkers again (as Grumann says, use the scroll wheel to magnify and demagnify) -- it isn't exactly the same as paper Magic, but it's close enough to let you understand the game. Otherwise, Wizards made several How to Play videos a year or two ago. I'll see if I can dig up the links.

There's a ton of other Magic product out there which will offer you a lot of ways to expand your game once you get tired of your first 120 cards, but you can get a **lot** of mileage out of this stuff first.

--Cliffy

[Cliffy]

One addendum: I didn't notice if you mentioned the kid's age. The current sets (Innistrad and Dark Ascension) are set on a horror-themed world. No gore, but a few of the card designs could be scary to a younger child. If that's something you're worried about, either get one of the Duel Decks, the intro packs from the M12 set I mentioned, or wait a month for the packs from the new set, Avacyn Restored. That takes place on the same world, but it's all about the good guys saddling up and kicking the monsters' ass, so it has a different vibe (at least from the few cards already revealed).

This page has links to the instructional videos I mentioned, as well as a brief demo program for PC.

--Cliffy

[Grumman]

Originally Posted by Cliffy

One addendum: I didn't notice if you mentioned the kid's age. The current sets (Innistrad and Dark Ascension) are set on a horror-themed world. No gore, but a few of the card designs could be scary to a younger child. If that's something you're worried about, either get one of the Duel Decks, the intro packs from the M12 set I mentioned, or wait a month for the packs from the new set, Avacyn Restored. That takes place on the same world, but it's all about the good guys saddling up and kicking the monsters' ass, so it has a different vibe (at least from the few cards already revealed).

If that's a concern, I'd suggest avoiding black decks (self explanatory) and Phyrexian decks from the Shards of Mirrodin block (the ones with an upper case Phi - Φ - on them).

[Cliffy]

I wouldn't say avoiding black is necessary as a rule; there's always lots of demons and stuff, but to my eye they made them scary in Innistrad block as opposed to just tough and mean looking. You're probably right about the Phyrexian stuff.

--Cliffy

[Trepa Mayfield]

Yeah, I think Abattoir Ghoul is pushing the line on CREEPY a little bit, compared to other black cards from other sets.

Side discussion: what is the creepiest Magic card ever? That's gotta be somewhere on the list.

[Grumman]

Originally Posted by Cliffy

I wouldn't say avoiding black is necessary as a rule; there's always lots of demons and stuff, but to my eye they made them scary in Innistrad block as opposed to just tough and mean looking. You're probably right about the Phyrexian stuff.

It's not completely necessary, but it's an easy guideline for a newcomer to remember without looking at decks on a card by card basis.

But yeah, Phyrexia is more open and shut. The Scars of Mirrodin block is basically one big retcon so they could do horrible things to one of their old sets.

[markdash]

Originally Posted by Grumman

It's not completely necessary, but it's an easy guideline for a newcomer to remember without looking at decks on a card by card basis.

But yeah, Phyrexia is more open and shut. The Scars of Mirrodin block is basically one big retcon so they could do horrible things to one of their old sets.

How is it a "retcon"? AFAIK the Scars block is basically at the end of the Magic timeline.

[Cliffy]

Originally Posted by Grumman

It's not completely necessary, but it's an easy guideline for a newcomer to remember without looking at decks on a card by card basis.

I woudn't want to steer the OP away from black altogether -- if he's getting two intro packs, especially, it might be hard to avoid, and because of black's copious removal it's usually easy for a newcomer to pilot it.

--Cliffy

[Chronos]

Just to sum up the five colors:

White: Goodness, protection, law, healing. Typical creatures are soldiers, knights, and angels.
Blue: Water, air, knowledge, subtlety. Typical creatures are wizards, merfolk, and sea monsters.
Black: Death, evil, ruthlessness, power at all costs. Typical creatures are various undead and demons.
Red: Fire, earth, savagery, chaos. Typical creatures are goblins, fiery elementals, and dragons.
Green: Life, nature, ecology, physical might. Typical creatures are elves, wild animals, and forces of nature.

These are arranged around a circle (sometimes called the "color pie"), so (for instance) white is adjacent to (allied with) green and blue, and opposed to red and black.

[Kinthalis]

This thread inspired me to play the (video) game again.

Then Nicol Bolas spanked my party in like 4 rounds.

I'm going to need to do co-op to beat him I guess.

[Smapti]

According to the TV commercials I remember from the '90s, all you need is a deck and a friend.

Depending on whether you consider your son a friend or an enemy, this could pose a problem.

[Grumman]

Originally Posted by markdash

How is it a "retcon"? AFAIK the Scars block is basically at the end of the Magic timeline.

Because at the end of Fifth Dawn...

SPOILER:

...there wasn't anybody left on Mirrodin to be horribly butchered by the Phyrexians. Once Slobad and Glissa got tired of being the only living things on Mirrodin they would have broken their soul traps, returned to their original planes with their friends and families, and lived happily ever after.

[batsto]

I have an 8 year old boy, and we bought the deck builder kit with the 125 cards and have had no problems playing with that. We've since bought a few booster packs, but we had plenty of games with just the original 125.

[Cliffy]

Originally Posted by Grumman

there wasn't anybody left on Mirrodin to be horribly butchered by the Phyrexians.

I wasn't playing then, but the setting material from Scars said that all the non-native Mirrodinians got sent home, but there were lots of natives descended from those early colonists, and they stayed. Was that explicitly ruled out at the end of the original block? (What about Thrun?)

--Cliffy

[Grumman]

Originally Posted by Cliffy

I wasn't playing then, but the setting material from Scars said that all the non-native Mirrodinians got sent home, but there were lots of natives descended from those early colonists, and they stayed. Was that explicitly ruled out at the end of the original block? (What about Thrun?)

Yes, explicitly.

SPOILER:

After Memnarch's Ascension Web activated, Karn stated that his plane was empty again.

[Gedd]

Originally Posted by Trepa Mayfield

Side discussion: what is the creepiest Magic card ever? That's gotta be somewhere on the list.

I always found Takklemaggot to be a bit creepy. That could partly be because of all the text though . . .

I haven't really played Magic since about '05. When I started I think Ice Age had just come out. I played with some friends for a few years but stopped until I found a bunch of people in college that played. My best moment was beating my roomate's deck that was probably worth $300 with a goblin/burn deck. (Horray for Goblin Grenade!)

A few years ago I talked with a friend who had just begun playing it and I didn't know half the rules he was talking about. The game seems to have changed a bit.

[Quimby]

Originally Posted by Trepa Mayfield

Side discussion: what is the creepiest Magic card ever? That's gotta be somewhere on the list.

For me, Card with creepiest art is this one.

[Cliffy]

Originally Posted by Quimby

For me, Card with creepiest art is this one.

Dear god!

No wonder they gave that one new art when they reprinted it in a Duel Deck.

Originally Posted by Gedd

A few years ago I talked with a friend who had just begun playing it and I didn't know half the rules he was talking about. The game seems to have changed a bit.

I'm an extremely casual player now, and I first learned the game in '94 before getting away from it for 15 years or so. The play experience isn't ultimately that different, I think. The biggest rule change, AFAIK, was they went to the stack and Interrupts became obsolete, which would have been when you were still playing. I wonder if it's more terminology that's changed -- for instance, each block has its own mechanics, but in older sets they were less often given official names.

--Cliffy

[dngnb8]

I started at Ice Age and in the Limited Tournament format, I was ranked 96th in the State of AZ. I still have my collection of over 15,000 cards.

Its a great game of strategy.

[MHaye]

I started in 1994, played with a couple of breaks until tailing off last year. Most of my enjoyment of the game is looking at weird, comical and bizarre card interactions, and I'm a Rules Adviser (which means I've passed a test on the rules on the Wizards website within the last twelve months.)

The game is still the same game of resource management and reacting to opponents moves. Implementation is different, and in most cases better.

This page has some useful resources, the best (for beginners) being the Basic Rulebook (the top link). If you want to pick brains about rules or card wordings, you can always PM me.

I'd suggest an intro pack each, because basic lands can be hard to come by at first.

Innistrad contains many horror themes (there's a card inspired by Jekyll and Hyde, for example, and another by The Fly, but the main innovation is a decent treatment of werewolves). The third set in the block will be out in less than a month, and this time the good guys win (for a change).

SPOILER:

Macabre Waltz.

That is all.

[markdash]

It's not as much that interrupts became "obsolete" as they just function with the same timing rules as other instants now. There isn't a special subset of the stack which allows only interrupts to be played. This might seem like it matters but in 95+% of the instances you play a counterspell, there's no functional difference between an instant and an interrupt.

[Grumman]

Originally Posted by MHaye

...the main innovation is a decent treatment of werewolves...

I don't agree with that. The two spells/zero spells mechanic for changing form is fine, but the use of double faced cards is awful. It necessitates too many kludges for what it's worth.

[Chronos]

It seems like every block introduces some new mechanic that makes players go "What the heck is that?". The Onslaught block had Morph, the Mirrodin set introduced Equipment, the Kamigawa block had the flip-cards, the Ravnica block had hybrid mana, the Time Spiral block didn't have anything but weird mechanics, the Lorwyn block introduced Planeswalkers, the Shadowmoor block had the untap symbol, Alara had colored artifacts, the Zendikar block introduced colorless non-artifacts and level-up, Scars of Mirrodin had Phyrexian mana, and now Innistrad has the two-faced cards.

[Grumman]

I've got no objection to "What the heck is that?" mechanics as you define them, just double faced cards. For all of the other mechanics you mentioned, any weirdness is intentional. Shadowmoor's untap symbol is unusual, but it works exactly like you'd expect it to work: like the tap symbol, but you untap a tapped permanent instead of tapping an untapped permanent.
Coloured artifacts and colourless non-artifacts are even simpler: the rules already supported these things in theory, there just weren't any examples in the game without outside help.

With DFC, the intent is a permanent that can change between two distinct forms (like Morph or Flip cards), but the removal of the standard back creates unintended consequences. It means you cannot play them without either opaque card sleeves or sanctioned proxies, and it also means that they interact strangely with Morph-type effects. These are bugs in the mechanic that I feel should have axed their use.

[Chronos]

Oh, yeah, I wasn't actually disagreeing with that: They are a nuisance. You can also add to the list, by the way, that they don't really work right in any of the tabletop-simulator computer games: I was considering adding the new Garruk to a deck in one of those, but decided against it partly due to the inconvenience of the two card faces.

[Quimby]

If you play Magic using OCTGN 3, it handles the double faced cards just fine. Now the upcoming Miracle cards will be another story. Seems made for online cheating.