What's up, this weekend is fastidious in favor of me, as this occasion i am reading this wonderful informative post here at my home.

FIRE and NWO are not mutually exclusive. Both co-exist today.

Modern design sensibility is based around FIRE: https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/card-preview/fire-it-2019-06-21

I acknowledge that there are benefits of NWO. Being said, I have generally found (large) sets from this decade to be more engaging than ones from the 2010s. I haven't followed how much core design philosophy has changed over the past decade and what factor NWO played in that design philosophy.

From my perspective dual land cycles that exist purely for mana generation don't belong at rare. I'm a big fan of the dedicated land slot that may be not just a basic land but also a common dual land.

With that logic theses cards also don't eat into common slots.

Taplands/Gainlands are my default. I could see SNC taplands with boardcycling easily.

There is value in some completed cycles we're getting recently e. g. Viridescent Bog. There's also value in just taplands with nonbasic land types.

I don't know if WotC have read this thread, or someone passed it along. Certainly some suggestions here have been accepted into official cards.

• Use of 'this' instead of card names.
• Shorten 'enters the battlefield' to merely 'enters'.
• 'During your turn' instead of 'as long as it's your turn'

More and more lands, even duals, now printed with land types, including basic types and new land types.

Traditionally large sets reserved 10 rare slots just for dual lands for every color pair. Some sets also reserve as much at common or uncommon lands. That's a huge waste of space, and unexciting.

I like the new "choose a color" lands, such as Citadel Gate. Players still get sufficient -- arguably even better -- mana fixing from 5 choose-lands as from 10 traditional lands. This saves 5 slots in a set. Which could be used for another cycle of 5 lands, or spells, etc.

From personal experience, my set Raiders of Tsinbork originally slated a cycle of 10 morph-lands. After I discovered the choose-lands, I converted my lands likewise; now they are 5 morph-choose-lands. Subsequently wisely used 5 free slots for more interesting spells pertaining to the set's themes and mechanics, or filled with spells to flesh out the colors.

A major way to make Magic more accessible to new players (and to retain old players) is to restructure the template of rules text. Simplify the language, as suggested in the other topic. Cards and effects will be easier to grok when the language used is likewise easy to grasp.

• Easy to read, natural-sounding sentences using simpler, shorter words.
• Use impactful, easy to remember keywords for frequently used and seen effects.
• Use active voices. Cards, zones, and effects perform the actions.
• Avoid long-winded text that sounds like reminder text.

I don't often play draft. But that could be due to two reasons.

1. NWO cards are boring.

2. NWO makes one feel powerless.

I occasionally check out new official sets and mechanics by drafting. But official sets exert the two issues aforementioned, and never draft them again.

My set Raiders of Tsinbork is the first true set I (nearly) completed to be drafted (on MTG Forge). It is definitely more complex at the commons, but (personally) feel more fun, exciting, empowering. Obviously I need to draft it many times to playtest any major issues; yet never found it boring. It's more fun to draft commons that are worth higher potential all around.