Web hosting Custom Email SiteBuilder

I have been playing Magic the Gathering since the release of Alliances. While I've had success in tournament play (qualified for PT-Chicago '99), I have never made a dedicated attempt to qualify for the Pro Tour. Regardless of my tournament experience or success, I wish to share my thoughts on a somewhat stagnate discussion of principle theories behind Magic the Gathering, and, at the same time, I hope to unify all the theories of Magic up to this point-a lofty goal, but I hope to accomplish this.

Since the time I began playing competitive Magic, I've read the strategy of card advantage by Brian Weissman, The Schools of Magic by Robert Hahn, and many, many strategy articles by some of the greats to ever play the game. These articles focused either on Magic in general or specific deck concepts.

Many consider the theories of Weissman to be the first and most basic principles of Magic the Gathering. Card advantage has been the underlying principle in many decks ever since the creation of "The Deck". However, this whole time, other factors of the game of Magic didn't seem to apply to "card advantage" per se.

Other questions began popping up in my mind. Forgotten Orb (Black weenies, Winter Orb, and blue spells such as Memory Lapse) was one of the first decks that seemed to emphasize a different theory other than card advantage. This deck tried to use "Time Advantage" to win games. By using Winter Orbs to limit the mana supply of both players, and using cards such as Memory Lapse (which are powerful under Worb), it created, in a sense, a virtual Time Walk. This is where my team and I created the concept of comparing any play in Magic to a Time Walk rather than the general consensus of applying Magic plays to an Ancestral Recall (card advantage).

For example, under a Winter Orb, if you Memory Lapse your opponent's Wildfire Emissary, let's take a look at what happens: first, the opponent paid 4 for the spell, and you paid 2 for the Memory Lapse. You lost the Memory Lapse and your opponent lost the Wildfire Emissary (his hand size decreased by one, it just so happens that the top card of his deck is now known to be a Wildfire Emissary). But, because of the Winter Orb, your opponent lost "4 turns" of untapping his land to your two. Assuming no other attacking or playing of spells occurs (for the sake of argument), you gained 2 turns with all concerns to this game.

We kept joking about how "this" card was a Time Walk in a certain instance or "that" card was. Soon, we realized that our joke had a lot more merit behind it than just a stupid magic joke that just won't go away. Before you knew it, we were equating many situations of Magic with Time Walks. Then, when we looked at it even closer, we realized "Everything is a Time Walk." In fact, we went as far as proving our theory as stating "name any Magic card and we will be able to come up with some instance where that card CAN be a Time Walk." We still have not been able to come up with an example to disprove us.

I've seen articles on Card Synergy, Card Advantage, Time Advantage, Virtual Card Advantage, Tempo Advantage, and I believe the concept "Everything is a Time Walk" can possibly unify all of these Magic theories.

The rules of Magic the Gathering are set so that you start with 20 life, you can only play one land per turn, you untap your lands at the beginning of your turn, you must discard down to 7 cards at the end of each turn, you are allowed one attack per turn, and each turn you draw one card. Simply put, the rules of Magic are based around how much you can do in one turn, so it would make sense that if you can break through the limits of these basic rules that you will gain an advantage over your opponent (it would be like being able to move twice in a row during a game of chess).

For example, Ancestral Recall. Input: 1 blue mana, 1 card, Output: 3 cards. While you spent one blue mana and 1 card, you gained 3 cards. Assuming the loss of the one blue mana is negligible (again, assume this for argument's sake), you gained 2 cards. But 2 cards equals 2 turns of Magic, without attacking or untapping your land. So, if you didn't attack or use any of your mana over those 2 turns, this Ancestral Recall really did give you a Time Walk for 2 (which is why many consider Ancestral Recall to be better than the card Time Walk), OR it allowed you to draw 2 extra cards in that one turn. Either way, you still went beyond the limits of the rules of the game.

Remember how I said assume, for argument's sake, that the loss of the blue mana was negligible? Well, bring that back into play. Now, you cannot base your comparison of advantage directly on cards, because you're using a different resource other than cards-mana. Mana, as I've stated before, replenishes every turn by untapping. Card advantage simply cannot explain that situation. "Time Walk" can.

Let's identify the various resources in the game of magic:

--Cards in hand
--Cards in library
--Cards in graveyard
--Cards out of the game
--Cards in play-Mana, Non-mana (or being cast for instants and sorceries)
--Life total

It's common knowledge that in Magic, life total doesn't matter unless you need it for a casting cost (using Necropotence, for instance) or you have 0 in which case you lose.

In general, cards out of the game, and, for the most part, cards in the graveyard don't really count as resources (again, there are exceptions such as Recurring Nightmare, Replenish, Living Death or Regrowth and more cards are being made that turn cards in the graveyard into resources-but even these cards just make it seem as if the cards in your graveyard were actually in your hand or library and were accessible).

Cards in your library really don't offer any advantage. It only determines the probability of drawing a specific card (which can help you with other resources). Also, there is the condition that if you are forced to draw a card but cannot, you lose the game. Very seldom does it occur that you lose due to "being decked."

So, we can pretty much assume that the most important resources are "accessible" cards (cards in play and cards in hand--cards which are playable or already played). Cards in hand are pretty much "potential resources." They are resources which can be played, but have not been played yet. Cards in play have already been played ("actual resources")-being played comes through the casting cost (usually paying mana, sometimes paying other resources like Force of Will's alternate casting cost).

Gaining advantages in these various categories allows you to win the game. But all of these have a delicate balance. Because of the way Magic is set-up, you really have effects that are mana ("fuel") and non-mana ("threats"). As many have explained it, think of Warcraft, the Peasants cut wood and mine gold (mana), and you produce knights and archers (threats). Mana cards, on their own cannot do anything, but Non-mana cards on their own cannot do anything as you need mana to use them.

A great example of this balance is the challenging question asked by every deck builder: how much mana do you wish to gain while still being able to effectively play your non-mana resources?

--How much artifact mana do you use in a Tinker deck compared to how many "business" cards do you use?

--How much land do you play in your Sligh deck?

--How many multi-lands should I use to get color consistency without be susceptible to their drawbacks?

Mana will not directly win you the game, but it can allow you to win the game. For this reason, it's hard to say there is a mana advantage per se. Advantage is usually compared to your opponent, but "mana advantage" as defined in the game of Magic is also relative to your deck. A Draw-Go deck requires much more mana than a Sligh deck.

Also, having a more favorable position with your mana compared to your opponent's position does not mean that you actually have an advantage. Obviously the more mana cards you have, the less non-mana cards you will have, and vice versa is true as well.

Another way to maximize mana is to use all of your mana every turn (leaving mana untapped is like not using your turn to the fullest, thus creating a "negative" Time Walk effect). Also, you could use low casting cost cards so that you wouldn't need as much mana.

Mana "advantage" is really a relative concept that is based on how many resources you need to gain an advantage with YOUR non-mana cards. This delicate balance is shown in every tournament competitive deck created, it's just a very abstract concept that has not been explained very thoroughly in the history of Magic theory.

You can see that this aspect of the Time Walk was finally realized by the Magic community after people started using the "Sligh Mana Curve" in more decks than just Sligh. No longer was card advantage the only principle, but using your mana efficiently came into play (creating Time Walks). Force Spike became a popular counterspell around this time because of this reason. I believe many players can remember when Force Spike was considered to be a worthless card. The same principle of Time Walk/Time Advantage can be seen in this recent Masques Block Qualifier season. Many people remarked how cards like Seal of Removal and Waterfront Bouncer would've been considered poor cards a few years back, but now they are cards used quite frequently. The reason for this is that people have "unconsciously" realized some of aspects of the Time Walk Theory and have thus adjusted their strategies.

In the forthcoming examples, I will not take into consideration the mana requirements because I'm assuming that enough is available to cover the costs of the cards. I know that you cannot do this under most circumstances, and I know that I have proven that mana is an extremely important resource, but I want to reduce the number of "advantage"
variables, so I can prove that card advantage is directly based on time advantage.

Again, at the same time, realize how even if you were equating these situations ONLY through card advantage, you've eliminated the mana requirements, and therefore you cannot explain the entire situation-and you cannot leave this very important part of Magic out of your explanation.

Non-mana resources are your Sorceries and Instants (Spells) and Artifacts, Enchantments, and Creatures (Permanents-reusable spells). Lands can be considered non-mana permanent resources if they overlap into a creature or an artifact/enchantment effect. (Maze of Ith could be considered to have an effect like an Artifact, again Mishra's Factory like a Creature). To win the game, you must get your opponent down from 20 life to 0 life. To do this you either use effects which directly effect life totals (Lightning Bolt, Cursed Scroll, Drain Life) or through creature battles. Here is where traditional Magic theory highlights its principles.

Most Magic theories say that if you can eliminate your opponent's ways of killing you (defense) or your opponent's ways of preventing your resources to kill him (offense), you will win.

The first part says that if you can get rid of all your opponents "threats" you will be able to win because you can't be killed. To get rid of all of your opponents threats AND be able to kill him, it makes sense that you will need to A) be able to match all of his threats, and B) be able to provide at least one additional threat to kill him. In other words, you want what we've termed card advantage: match all threats.

A Nevinyrral's Disk destroying 3 of his creatures and nothing else means that 1 of your cards "matched" 3 of his. Now, equate that back to "turns." He spent three turns drawing those cards, and you spent one turn drawing the disk. Assuming that paying for the cards was not a problem and the delay of activating the Disk for one turn was not a problem, you got to take an additional two turns just by gaining a card advantage of 2.

Another popularly discussed topic of Magic theory was the theory of Virtual Card Advantage. For example, if I have a Masticore in play, I'm virtually preventing my opponent from playing the 3 Llanowar Elves in his hand (because I only have to pay 6 mana to destroy all 3 cards-really one turn, using most of my mana). Again, he spent 3 turns drawing those Llanowar Elves and my one Masticore that took me one turn to draw is preventing them from being played. Granted, I have to discard a card every turn to prevent my Masticore from dying (losing a card each turn = losing a turn), but the virtual card advantage and the creation of a 4/4, hard-to-kill threat could be worth me spending a "turn" each turn to keep the Masticore on the board.

Another example: you're playing Necro and he's playing Draw-Go. You spend 7 turns each dropping and land, and you play a spell and he counters it every time. By turn 8, you each have 0 cards in hand, 7 lands in play, and nothing else. Now, you draw a Necropotence. You play the Necro, you Necro for 7. You get to draw 7 cards. Card advantage, right?

What if you wouldn't have gotten a Necro in the top 8 cards? You would've spent 8 turns drawing the same amount of cards you drew in one turn with Necropotence. It seems like it's card advantage, but since cards = time, it's REALLY time advantage.

You could argue, "Yeah, Scott, well, duh, this IS card advantage." True, but the reason I chose to equate this instance of card advantage with time advantage (as I've defined it) is not every instance can be equated with cards-and this, I feel, is the main mistake with Magic theories.

Our "base unit" should be time, not cards. As I've said, cards are really a unit of time anyway. Attack phases and untapping mana cannot be directly explained by cards, but they can be explained by time. Because of Weissman's ingenious, groundbreaking articles on card advantage, we seemed to have stopped there, believing that card advantage is the ONLY thing. I know many authors have tried to stray away from this thinking, but in the end a concrete definition of another "type" of advantage always seems to be based on card advantage. In my opinion, as expressed in this theory, card advantage is really BASED ON time advantage.

What if your opponent never got to take any more turns? Do you see how the concept of the Time Walk is starting to take over and control the game?

For one, final practical purpose on time advantage, let's change one rule in Magic. Instead of having life points, let's assume that Crumbling Sanctuary's effect was always in play (this example was used by one of my teammates). Now, you don't have A) life, which is really not based on any other aspect of the game, and B) you can really see the consequences of time advantage. The CCG Star Wars operates under a similar premise, and it even goes as far as equating your resources (mana in Magic) with your life and with the resources you have access to (cards you're able to draw).

I'm not trying to say that Star Wars is a superior CCG or anything (I only played the game for about a week, so please don't address this topic when responding), but, like the Crumbling Sanctuary example, this stresses the importance of time and not only cards.

The concept of "Everything is a Time Walk" is very abstract. I have not gone into extreme detail, and I'm not sure if I or anyone else ever will be able to cover every topic it presents. Interestingly enough, try applying this Time Walk Theory to life-me is money, getting money is a Time Walk, etc-then you will realize that everything IS a Time Walk.

I hope that this article can create some discussion in the Magic community about the Fundamental Theories of Magic, as I feel this is somewhat of a lost art. While I have not attempted to use this theory to describe and improve many things in Magic, I have tried to define, what I consider to be, a superior underlying theory of Magic the Gathering.


Scott Keller
scottkeller@hotmail.com

Return to the Magical Article Page.