Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Magic: The Gathering

Can a competitive card game also be a form of personal expression? Magic: The Gathering, celebrating its 25th anniversary in 2018, has pioneered a successful gaming concept on the idea.

Magic, for the uninitiated, challenges rivals to defeat each other in a round of eldritch fantasy combat represented by competing decks of cards. What made Magic unusual so many years ago was that players did not all have the same decks and the same cards. They purchased or otherwise obtained packs of randomized cards and built personalized decks.

Do you prefer to beat your opponents with an army of goblins and dragons? Strike them down with fire and lightning magic? Manipulate them with powerful enchanted artifacts? Your carefully curated deck determined the path to victory.

Magic was an instant hit, and new sets of cards have been released every year. There's a robust secondary market for individual cards for collectors, just like with baseball trading cards. Some early ones are worth thousands of dollars.

Magic's success launched an entire card game genre, and it persists as the godfather of that game style. To celebrate its anniversary, the latest collection, titled "Dominaria," returns to the fantasy locations of the game's roots, bringing back several popular characters that haven't been seen in years.

Virtual versions of collectible card games, such as Hearthstone (based on the popular video game World of Warcraft), have taken off in recent years. Magic has one well-used workmanlike version of an online system and has frequently made other attempts to penetrate this market, usually unsuccessfully. But the publisher is now pushing further into the free-to-play market by beta testing a new digital platform called Magic: The Gathering Arena. Gamers can earn new cards through daily play. But the magic of the original physical cards persists even in the virtual age.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Richard Stallman||

    Once you buy a chess set, or a go set, you can play for years without
    paying for the privilege. Winning depends only on your ability. A
    deck of cards allows you to pay hundreds of games, as many times as
    you wish. Winning depends only on your ability, and chance.

    The tremendous "advance" in Magic is that it continues to extract
    money from the players, year after year. Winning depends not only on
    ability and chance, but also on how much you continue to pay.

    Is this something we should admire? Should people yield to it and
    grant it success? To do that increases the pressure on others to
    yield.

    I think the right thing to do is to reject it.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online