Modal DFCs in Commander

[Dunharrow]

Other than the Pathway lands, how do you perceive Modal DFCs for Commander?

My impression is that the mythics that can come into play untapped for 3 life are totally reasonable to replace basics in 1 or 2 color decks.

Glasspool Mimic // Glasspool Shore I could see being played in a deck that wants a lot of clones.. as a clone and secondarily as a land.

I just don't see the others being played in commander to much success.

[illakunsaa]

I think they pretty good. While their effects arent super strong the fact that you can play them as a land makes them super easy to include in your decks.

I think most of them are almost auto includes.

[JWK]

I would never replace a land with a spell/land MDFC. I would run them as a spell slot, with the option of playing them as a land if you are mana-screwed.

Personally, I am not a fan of any of the mythic ones. These were designed very cautiously and I think the spell parts are over-costed for what you get. I wouldn't say they are not playable, but I would say I don't think they are generally the best choice for those effects, and that you are giving up quite a bit of function for the sake of flexibility.

Some of the lesser rarity ones I can see being good. Glasspool Mimic // Glasspool Shore is definitely playable. Khalni Ambush // Khalni Territory is playable in some decks that want fight effects, with it being an instant making it good. Bala Ged Recovery // Bala Ged Sanctuary is playable if you want another Regrowth or as a replacement for Eternal Witness if you aren't interested in having the effect on a body for some reason. I will be running Valakut Awakening // Valakut Stoneforge in Grenzo, and maybe in some other decks to do some hand filtering, and Kazuul's Fury // Kazuul's Cliffs will probably go in Animar hydra tribal as another Fling effect. Malakir Rebirth // Malakir Mire is playable. A lot of these are still over costed (even decks with lots of red theft effects can do better than Song-Mad Treachery // Song-Mad Ruins).

I think the Pathway DFC lands are pretty bad in our format, though I expect them to be very powerful in standard and some of the other competitive formats.

[Sinis]

Other than the Pathway lands, how do you perceive Modal DFCs for Commander?

I'll be honest, these cards strike me as 'great taste but awful execution'.

Almost universally, I don't want to play either side of them, and that's usually a bad sign. I think the ones I'm most favourably inclined towards are Sea Gate Restoration // Sea Gate, Reborn, Valakut Awakening // Valakut Stoneforge and Glasspool Mimic // Glasspool Shore. The former two are relatively unique effects, and the latter one is only because it's strictly better than Mirror Image, which I have considered playing before, but never actually sleeved up. I just don't see myself wanting to play these awful watered down effects so I can have the option of playing some awful watered down land on the other side.

Additionally, the logistics of DFCs in general bother the hell out of me. I'm pretty tired of checklists (which are aesthetically jarring to say the least), unsleeving/resleeving cards midgame for cards with a non-trivial dollar value. The best solution I've had so far is to play a real copy in a sleeve and have another sleeved copy nearby for the other side, but, unless it's bulk, I don't generally want to acquire multiple copies of cards just so I can avoid the crappy execution of these cards. I wish they just made them like the Kamigawa flip cards (like Erayo, Soratami Ascendant // Erayo's Essence), but I doubt they're going to do that again given that they didn't for the DFC lands that have the most trivial text.

[Outcryqq]

In goldfishing, these are fantastic. I have replaced a number of basics for the mythic versions, and some of the rare/uncommon ones are very playable too.

I would NEVER replace a spell for it (@JWK), as these are generally coming in as lands for me about 75% of the time. But the other times, I'm drawing them late game and have the chance to have gas in my hand as opposed to what would have been a basic with no options. The opportunity cost of running these in place of a land is very low. And if you have any ways to bounce lands, these become much much stronger (think Kefnet the Mindful, Trade Routes, and bounce lands).

I think the mythics are auto includes in most one and two color decks, and many 3 color non-green decks. If your deck uses a lot of basic search, you might have a better argument to not include them. I like all the rare ones, but they are more limited and dependent on deck synergy. The green uncommon Regrowth one is fantastic.

[Guardman]

I can only speak about my experience of playing with MDFC in limited so far, but after two sealed pools and four drafts I've sort of categorized MDFC into four categories.

First is the group that you want to play as a land usually. These are cards that I straight up count as taplands. The idea being I will play them as lands most of the time, but I can "cycle" them later if I don't need a land. Also most of the Mythic Bolt Lands are included here since early they come into play untapped lands, and late they are powerful spells. The one exception to the above is Tangled Florahedron // Tangled Vale as it is either land or a ramp, so it's basically the same on either side.

Full Land Count:

Emeria's Call // Emeria, Shattered Skyclave
Ondu Inversion // Ondu Skyruins
Beyeen Veil // Beyeen Coast
Sea Gate Restoration // Sea Gate, Reborn
Zof Consumption // Zof Bloodbog
Shatterskull Smashing // Shatterskull, the Hammer Pass
Valakut Awakening // Valakut Stoneforge
Tangled Florahedron // Tangled Vale
Turntimber Symbiosis // Turntimber, Serpentine Wood
Vastwood Fortification // Vastwood Thicket


The second group is the group where I count them as fifty/fifty as the spell effect is good enough that I want to play it, but not strong enough that I don't mind playing it as a land when I have to. As such I count them as half lands, and by that I mean I will remove one land for each two of these cards I have in my deck.

50% Land Count:

Makindi Stampede // Makindi Mesas
Sejiri Shelter // Sejiri Glacier
Skyclave Cleric // Skyclave Basilica
Umara Wizard // Umara Skyfalls
Malakir Rebirth // Malakir Mire
Pelakka Predation // Pelakka Caverns
Akoum Warrior // Akoum Teeth
Kazuul's Fury // Kazuul's Cliffs
Song-Mad Treachery // Song-Mad Ruins
Spikefield Hazard // Spikefield Cave
Bala Ged Recovery // Bala Ged Sanctuary


The third group are the cards I straight up count as spells as most of the time I do not want to play them as lands unless I have to.

Count as Spells:

Kabira Takedown // Kabira Plateau
Glasspool Mimic // Glasspool Shore
Silundi Vision // Silundi Isle
Blackbloom Rogue // Blackbloom Bog
Hagra Mauling // Hagra Broodpit
Kazandu Mammoth // Kazandu Valley
Khalni Ambush // Khalni Territory


The final group is for the "other" as there are two MDFC I haven't really figured out where they go.

Jwari Disruption // Jwari Ruins is a weird card as I haven't figured out whether to value it as a spell or a land or both as both sides get progressively worse the longer the game goes on, but the counterspell on a land makes it extremely strong and versatile in the early game.

Agadeem's Awakening // Agadeem, the Undercrypt has a similar, but different problem as Jwari's Disruption. After playing with Agadeem's Awakening (in constructed), it is just an extremely power spell, often bringing back 3+ creatures. In addition the opportunity cost is so low being able to come into play untapped that counting it as a straight up land is attractive as well. My current view is to count it as a 75% land, i.e. if you are playing four you want to add an extra land to the deck, but with anything less just count them as lands.

These rankings are just my initial impressions from playing with and against them, and probably will change once I get more experience with them. In addition, for the most part these experiences are limited to limited and will probably change depending on the format.

[ISBPathfinder]

I think we are going to need to get some testing in with them to really tell but I think that at some point you can cut a land every few that you play assuming you are willing to play the land side of it.

In my opinion, its like looking at Cyclonic Rift. If in your mind there is only one way to play that card then don't cut lands for the DFC land spells.

I plan to do some testing and playing with some of the mythics in place of lands in 1-2 color decks. Most of the other ones I would not cut lands for because I think I would primarily be playing them for what they do on the front with the back side of them being like an emergency out but probably playing that mode less than 1/4th the time. Its possible if they do more of this type of card I would maybe cut a land like.... every 3 of the rare ETB tapped versions you run. The problem is like, who is running a bunch of these DFC cards in their decks? Most decks would only consider 1-2 of them at the most.

[Dunharrow]

Opinions are definitely more varied than I assumed.

I will say that for limited I count all of these as lands. I see them as lands with upside.

In constructed formats, I see the mythics as lands that have late game functionality. I would replace basics with them because 3 life is pretty negligible in our format.

The other options I do not see playing in commander because I find both sides to be sub-par. However, if your playgroup is slow enough I could definitely see playing them.

There are also some decks where you can make an engine - think Crucible of Worlds an something that returns lands from play to your hand. Hagra Mauling // Hagra Broodpit is not a great murder, but if you play it 3 times in a game you may win.

[ISBPathfinder]

There are also some decks where you can make an engine - think Crucible of Worlds an something that returns lands from play to your hand. Hagra Mauling // Hagra Broodpit is not a great murder, but if you play it 3 times in a game you may win.

They are only the front side of the card when not in play unfortunately so no Crucible plays.

[Mookie]

There are also some decks where you can make an engine - think Crucible of Worlds an something that returns lands from play to your hand. Hagra Mauling // Hagra Broodpit is not a great murder, but if you play it 3 times in a game you may win.

They are only the front side of the card when not in play unfortunately so no Crucible plays.

I'm going to have to wait for the official comprehensive rules update on this, but I believe that you would be able to play the land half of the card using Crucible of Worlds. However, you can't target it with Life from the Loam. On the flip side, you can Animate Dead a MDFC creature, but you couldn't have it enter as a land (nor could you ramp out the land half with Sakura-Tribe Scout).

Anyway, I think a lot of these cards are at least worth consideration, assuming you care about the spell half. Would definitely need a lot of testing to know how often I play each side though - I suspect the spicier ones (like Agadeem's Awakening // Agadeem, the Undercrypt) I would usually want to play for the spell half, while something like Tangled Florahedron // Tangled Vale I would be totally fine playing as a land.

My own personal plan for testing (whenever I get around to it) is to add the MDFCs in pairs, replacing both a spell and a land. Won't work for every deck (since some will want an odd number of them), but it feels like a good starting point. In practice, I suspect I'll usually want to replace spells with them, since my decks tend to be pretty mana-hungry.

[ISBPathfinder]

I'm going to have to wait for the official comprehensive rules update on this, but I believe that you would be able to play the land half of the card using Crucible of Worlds. However, you can't target it with Life from the Loam. On the flip side, you can Animate Dead a MDFC creature, but you couldn't have it enter as a land (nor could you ramp out the land half with Sakura-Tribe Scout).

711.4a While a double-faced card is outside the game, in a zone other than the battlefield, or on the battlefield with its front face up, it has only the characteristics of its front face.

https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/cr711/

Double faced cards are not a new mechanic. We have seen them in three sets now and that is always how they have functioned. It is unique that we can choose which face of the card to play in this set but it isn't as if we can recover Dowsing Dagger // Lost Vale to hand using Life from the Loam. I am not sure if there is any newer rules to pull from for BFZ but I am quite positive that the front side of the cards is the only one considered when not in play.

[Mookie]

I'm going to have to wait for the official comprehensive rules update on this, but I believe that you would be able to play the land half of the card using Crucible of Worlds. However, you can't target it with Life from the Loam. On the flip side, you can Animate Dead a MDFC creature, but you couldn't have it enter as a land (nor could you ramp out the land half with Sakura-Tribe Scout).

711.4a While a double-faced card is outside the game, in a zone other than the battlefield, or on the battlefield with its front face up, it has only the characteristics of its front face.

https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/cr711/

Double faced cards are not a new mechanic. We have seen them in three sets now and that is always how they have functioned. It is unique that we can choose which face of the card to play in this set but it isn't as if we can recover Dowsing Dagger // Lost Vale to hand using Life from the Loam. I am not sure if there is any newer rules to pull from for BFZ but I am quite positive that the front side of the cards is the only one considered when not in play.

From the release notes:

If an effect allows you to play a specific modal double-faced card, you may cast it as a spell or play it as a land, as determined by which face you choose to play. If an effect allows you to cast (rather than "play") a specific modal double-faced card, you can't play it as a land.

If an effect allows you to play a land or cast a spell from among a group of cards, you may play or cast a modal double-faced card with any face that fits the criteria of that effect. For example, if Sejiri Shelter / Sejiri Glacier is in your graveyard and an effect allows you to play lands from your graveyard, you could play Sejiri Glacier. That effect doesn't allow you to cast Sejiri Shelter.

[5colorsrainbow]

Just my thoughts on what I'd run;

Kabila Takedown - I think this a a new space for white removal and there are a few decks of mine this will work well in and doesn't need too many creatures to be pretty powerful.

I wanna like Ondu Inversion but its just a tad much. I run Wakening Sun's Avatar for my Gishath deck, which ramps like crazy and Wakening Sun's Avatar can be hard to play and it offers nearly one-sided board wipe and 7/7 body for all the mana.

Sejiri Shelter slots really well in Feather.

Jwari Disruption is really nice counter (since you'd really only play it when you know they can't pay for it).

Academe's Awakening seems really nice thought not sure if I have a deck that can proper use it.

I'd like my 4 mana kill spells to do a bit more Hagra Mauling versatility makes me wanna run in all black decks.

Malakir Rebirth plays well in if you need another Kaya's Ghostform.

Shatterskull Smashing will be used in a few decks where I ramp and it can deal a lot of damage.

Valakut Awakening is a red draw spell, like there cantrips but it lets you draw even if you don't discard.

Bala Ged Recovery will basically replace a lot of regrow spell.

Kazandu Mammoth would play well in my Windgrace deck but I don't think I'll actively look for and will likely be a decent card for most land based decks.

Khalni Ambush same as Kabila Takedown though not new, it great removal in a color that would like it.

Tangled Florahedron is very cute and really a nifty mana dork.

I would never replace a land with a spell/land MDFC. I would run them as a spell slot, with the option of playing them as a land if you are mana-screwed.

I feel the same, except for Tangled Florahedron since it has the same function either way. They feel best as the non-slot utility cards you can ditch for land if your needing it.

I think the Pathway DFC lands are pretty bad in our format, though I expect them to be very powerful in standard and some of the other competitive formats.

Yeah even if the land ebt tapped one reason to run dual lands is for mana fixing and once on the battlefield they are locked into one mode. I think they will be a lot more powerful in other faster formats where you don't have a turn or two to wait for the fixing.

I'm going to have to wait for the official comprehensive rules update on this, but I believe that you would be able to play the land half of the card using Crucible of Worlds. However, you can't target it with Life from the Loam. On the flip side, you can Animate Dead a MDFC creature, but you couldn't have it enter as a land (nor could you ramp out the land half with Sakura-Tribe Scout).

711.4a While a double-faced card is outside the game, in a zone other than the battlefield, or on the battlefield with its front face up, it has only the characteristics of its front face.

https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/cr711/

Double faced cards are not a new mechanic. We have seen them in three sets now and that is always how they have functioned. It is unique that we can choose which face of the card to play in this set but it isn't as if we can recover Dowsing Dagger // Lost Vale to hand using Life from the Loam. I am not sure if there is any newer rules to pull from for BFZ but I am quite positive that the front side of the cards is the only one considered when not in play.

On the announcement stream they said as much, 711.4a applies to MDFC and each one does have have default "front".

[Toshi]

I totally agree that they wanted to play it safe with the mythics being bombs rather than format wrecking early plays.
While i like the overall idea, i hope they stay cautious, if we ever get to see them again.
Pathways are obviously strong in Standard, but not too shabby in EDH either. Outside of basic/landtype interaction heavy decks i see virtually no downside in playing them over basics.
I don't see the problem with resleeving. Just shuffle them back in the way they are, chances are you'll use the same side next time anyway.

Aside from niché interactions some of the DFCs are pretty good:

- Bala Ged Recovery // Bala Ged Sanctuary: Nothing stellar, but rarely a dead card.
- Kazuul's Fury // Kazuul's Cliffs: I know way too many Fling type decks to underrate this one.
- Khalni Ambush // Khalni Territory: Especially for mono- decks this is solid.
- Malakir Rebirth // Malakir Mire: The Gala Bed one and this are likely the most plug and play ones. With the amount of ETBs in the format and its low CMC, this is pretty damn good. Undying Evil & Supernatural Stamina have been outperforming their face value in my Gonti, Lord of Luxury deck for years now.
- Silundi Vision // Silundi Isle: Solid include for pesky (±focused) spellslinger decks.
- Valakut Awakening // Valakut Stoneforge: Obvious Grenzo, Dungeon Warden interaction is obvious. The hand filtering is great and there are plenty "draw matters" decks that can profit from it.

I'll likely pick up a set of Pathways, a Valakut Awakening // Valakut Stoneforge and 2-5 Malakir Rebirth // Malakir Mire for my decks.

[Dunharrow]

There are also some decks where you can make an engine - think Crucible of Worlds an something that returns lands from play to your hand. Hagra Mauling // Hagra Broodpit is not a great murder, but if you play it 3 times in a game you may win.

They are only the front side of the card when not in play unfortunately so no Crucible plays.

Ancient Greenwarden lets you play them from the graveyard on Arena. I have done this many times now. But if you need to search your library for a land you can't search up something that is a spell on the front side. Pretty sure you can't Life from the Loam them either.

[Kelzam]

There are also some decks where you can make an engine - think Crucible of Worlds an something that returns lands from play to your hand. Hagra Mauling // Hagra Broodpit is not a great murder, but if you play it 3 times in a game you may win.

They are only the front side of the card when not in play unfortunately so no Crucible plays.

Ancient Greenwarden lets you play them from the graveyard on Arena. I have done this many times now. But if you need to search your library for a land you can't search up something that is a spell on the front side. Pretty sure you can't Life from the Loam them either.

Rules-wise, this is correct (although that's probably obvious since Arena's automation is allowing it).

To elaborate: If a MDFC (modal double-faced card) where Side B is a Land is in a zone and an effect modifies how you can play lands which allows you to play a Land from that zone, you can play Side B as a Land. If Hagra Mauling // Hagra Broodpit is on top of your library and you control Courser of Kruphix, then you can play Hagra Broodpit from the top of your library because Courser modifies how you can play lands to allow you to do so since playing a MDFC with a Land on Side B is just the same as playing a Land. It doesn't go on the stack or anything and in the rules just functions the same as a Land where possible. Same with Ancient Greenwarden or Crucible of Worlds if a MDFC Spell // Land is in your graveyard. Outside of effects that modify how you can play Lands, the MDFC follow the usual DFC rules. You can't search for a MDFC Spell // Land with Sylvan Scrying because only the characteristics of the front face of the card are seen in any zone other than on the battlefield and transformed, just like you couldn't search for Westvale Abbey // Ormendahl, Profane Prince with Worldly Tutor, or if you were to cast Mulch and reveal a MDFC Spell // Land you wouldn't be able to put it into your hand as it's not considered a Land when Mulch resolves.

[Hawk]

My mental heuristic when considering if I can straight-up replace a land with these cards is to ask the following two questions:

1. Is the "A" side to this better than "1 mana: Draw a card" (which is what running, say, a Lonely Sandbar would give me)? Or to put another way - if I always drew this, is that good?

2. Would this deck run Cycling lands? Does it currently?

Note that the mythic cycle doesn't have this apply, because Emeria's Call // Emeria, Shattered Skyclave, Sea Gate Restoration // Sea Gate, Reborn, Turntimber Symbiosis // Turntimber, Serpentine Wood, Shatterskull Smashing // Shatterskull, the Hammer Pass, and Agadeem's Awakening // Agadeem, the Undercrypt technically have three modes - a tapped land, a powerful finisher, or an untapped land that bolts you. Those aren't necessarily auto-includes, to me, but it makes it much easier to replace a land with these and feel totally fine with it. I suspect these are all auto-adds to any mono-colored deck and strong inclusions to any two-colored deck with Restoration being especially good.

For my money, I think that Silundi Vision // Silundi Isle and Bala Ged Recovery // Bala Ged Sanctuary are the two glaringly obvious, slam-dunk, "this is better than cycling". Both easily slot into Pheldagriff, and I anticipate adding Recovery to The Gitrog Monster and Vision into Sevinne. Those decks are also already running cycling lands, so these easily replace either that or a spell to help drive up the land count higher (all three decks are insanely mana-hungry). Ondu Inversion // Ondu Skyruins is also very intriguing and probably "better than a random card" in most white decks. Ditto Hagra Mauling // Hagra Broodpit - this is a worse Murder and I don't run Murder but I can see how some more casual or land-hungry decks (like, again, Gitrog) might consider replacing a spell with this just to drive up the land-count, and generally I'd never be mad to cycle into a Murder.

Now, some of these are a spell so often that they count as a spell instead, like Guardman outlined - ostensibly I am running Glasspool Mimic // Glasspool Shore as a strictly-better Mirror Image with the added upshot that in an absolute emergency it is a land. Kabira Takedown // Kabira Plateau is worth a look because it is sort of unprecedented - this is the first spell since Sunlance to be able to burn non-combatants in mono-white, and any deck that thinks it will reliably have this shooting for 4+ should consider it. Like Glasspool, this is a card where the spell half is what matters most of the time. Same deal with Valakut Awakening // Valakut Stoneforge and Malakir Rebirth // Malakir Mire - these are somewhat unique effects, and worth fiddling with purely for the spell sides. Being an emergency land-drop is pure gravy.

I think the rest will fade into obscurity - even in a dedicated heroic deck I am not convinced that something like Sejiri Shelter // Sejiri Glacier is worth it, especially since a tapland is significantly worse in those decks.

[Card Slinger J]

I guess my biggest concern about the Modal DFCs in Zendikar Rising for the Commander format is that it might promote cheating more since there's no coherent cost to flip the cards like there was with Transform in Innistrad, Ixalan, and Magic Origins especially in competitive environments where you could easily get away with that sort of thing without a Judge calling you out on it even on Arena.

Part of the reason why Wizards of the Coast stopped live streaming Paper Magic events was so that players could get away with cheating on Arena without any consequences. Apparently they thought streaming matches the old way was too tedious for what it was worth considering how much money they used to invest in it for Pro Tours, Grand Prix, and MagicFest which is unfortunately now a thing of the past thanks to COVID.

[Dragoon]

I guess my biggest concern about the Modal DFCs in Zendikar Rising for the Commander format is that it might promote cheating more since there's no coherent cost to flip the cards like there was with Transform in Innistrad, Ixalan, and Magic Origins especially in competitive environments where you could easily get away with that sort of thing without a Judge calling you out on it even on Arena.

How do you cheat with them exactly?

Part of the reason why Wizards of the Coast stopped live streaming Paper Magic events was so that players could get away with cheating on Arena without any consequences. Apparently they thought streaming matches the old way was too tedious for what it was worth considering how much money they used to invest in it for Pro Tours, Grand Prix, and MagicFest which is unfortunately now a thing of the past thanks to COVID.

How do you cheat on Arena?

[Card Slinger J]

I'm starting to now realize that it's got less to do with cheating and more to do with Wizards of the Coast purposefully designing new rules / cards that are easy to program on Arena but are almost impossible to play on Paper. Their most recent efforts seem to be geared toward Arena, streaming, and the eSports scene. They're so infatuated with competing against Hearthstone and Twitch streaming numbers that it's having a negative effect on their design philosophy for MTG.

It's strange because DFCs weren't really a problem at all when it came to the Transform mechanic and now it's like If you're mana screwed early game you can automatically flip these new DFC lands over for no cost whatsoever. Most of the recent confusion in Zendikar Rising stems from putting copies of a permanent on the stack with Lithoform Engine being the case study in this example. However it's just one example of how complicated the rules are getting.

[Kelzam]

I'm starting to now realize that it's got less to do with cheating and more to do with Wizards of the Coast purposefully designing new rules / cards that are easy to program on Arena but are almost impossible to play on Paper. Their most recent efforts seem to be geared toward Arena, streaming, and the eSports scene. They're so infatuated with competing against Hearthstone and Twitch streaming numbers that it's having a negative effect on their design philosophy for MTG.

This is a big ol pile of hyperbole. DFCs were supposedly going to be the end of the game when Innistrad came out, and so many other things before them. A sign of being out of touch, or Hasbro's influence or the illuminati or whatever insidious force people conjure up every set for why the new fangled thing is supposedly going to be the end of Magic, or a sign of it failing someway, somehow. Far be it to believe that they like iterating and doing twists on designs that ended up being lauded as fun, and maybe it's not investors and Arena leading them to make interesting, complicated mechanics but the need to keep driving the game forward mechanically so that it doesn't get stale while wielding a willingness to take more chances following an age where players regularly bemoaned Wizards "dumbing the game down." Go figure, the most consistently vocal detractors are never happy.

Also, entering the battlefield tapped is a cost on the ones that do. For the ones you can pay 3 life to have enter untapped, losing a spell that you presumably put in the deck because it could be useful at some point and you no longer have access to that spell without jumping through hoops like bouncing that land back to your hand with karoo lands or other methods is, in fact, a cost. A cost wherein in you're down a land and a card to get it back.

[Card Slinger J]

I'm starting to now realize that it's got less to do with cheating and more to do with Wizards of the Coast purposefully designing new rules / cards that are easy to program on Arena but are almost impossible to play on Paper. Their most recent efforts seem to be geared toward Arena, streaming, and the eSports scene. They're so infatuated with competing against Hearthstone and Twitch streaming numbers that it's having a negative effect on their design philosophy for MTG.

This is a big ol pile of hyperbole. DFCs were supposedly going to be the end of the game when Innistrad came out, and so many other things before them. A sign of being out of touch, or Hasbro's influence or the illuminati or whatever insidious force people conjure up every set for why the new fangled thing is supposedly going to be the end of Magic, or a sign of it failing someway, somehow. Far be it to believe that they like iterating and doing twists on designs that ended up being lauded as fun, and maybe it's not investors and Arena leading them to make interesting, complicated mechanics but the need to keep driving the game forward mechanically so that it doesn't get stale while wielding a willingness to take more chances following an age where players regularly bemoaned Wizards "dumbing the game down." Go figure, the most consistently vocal detractors are never happy.

Also, entering the battlefield tapped is a cost on the ones that do. For the ones you can pay 3 life to have enter untapped, losing a spell that you presumably put in the deck because it could be useful at some point and you no longer have access to that spell without jumping through hoops like bouncing that land back to your hand with karoo lands or other methods is, in fact, a cost. A cost wherein in you're down a land and a card to get it back.

I don't have a problem with Wizards of the Coast needing to keep driving MTG forward mechanically so that it doesn't become stale when all I'm saying is don't allow Arena to be ahead of Paper Magic to where it's unable to keep up. A lot of game companies behind Digital Exclusive Trading Card Games / Collectible Card Games refuse to release Paper versions of these games simply because they're designed in a way that's impossible to be replicated in Paper. They're able to get away with things that they normally wouldn't be able to get away with which can invite it's own set of problems.

[Dunharrow]

I'm starting to now realize that it's got less to do with cheating and more to do with Wizards of the Coast purposefully designing new rules / cards that are easy to program on Arena but are almost impossible to play on Paper. Their most recent efforts seem to be geared toward Arena, streaming, and the eSports scene. They're so infatuated with competing against Hearthstone and Twitch streaming numbers that it's having a negative effect on their design philosophy for MTG.

This is a big ol pile of hyperbole. DFCs were supposedly going to be the end of the game when Innistrad came out, and so many other things before them. A sign of being out of touch, or Hasbro's influence or the illuminati or whatever insidious force people conjure up every set for why the new fangled thing is supposedly going to be the end of Magic, or a sign of it failing someway, somehow. Far be it to believe that they like iterating and doing twists on designs that ended up being lauded as fun, and maybe it's not investors and Arena leading them to make interesting, complicated mechanics but the need to keep driving the game forward mechanically so that it doesn't get stale while wielding a willingness to take more chances following an age where players regularly bemoaned Wizards "dumbing the game down." Go figure, the most consistently vocal detractors are never happy.

Also, entering the battlefield tapped is a cost on the ones that do. For the ones you can pay 3 life to have enter untapped, losing a spell that you presumably put in the deck because it could be useful at some point and you no longer have access to that spell without jumping through hoops like bouncing that land back to your hand with karoo lands or other methods is, in fact, a cost. A cost wherein in you're down a land and a card to get it back.

I don't have a problem with Wizards of the Coast needing to keep driving MTG forward mechanically so that it doesn't become stale when all I'm saying is don't allow Arena to be ahead of Paper Magic to where it's unable to keep up. A lot of game companies behind Digital Exclusive Trading Card Games / Collectible Card Games refuse to release Paper versions of these games simply because they're designed in a way that's impossible to be replicated in Paper. They're able to get away with things that they normally wouldn't be able to get away with which can invite it's own set of problems.

DFCs are not an end to paper magic. There is nothing they have done online which was not also done in paper, except for Reserved List reprints.
They even test the game on paper....

[Card Slinger J]

DFCs are not an end to paper magic. There is nothing they have done online which was not also done in paper, except for Reserved List reprints.
They even test the game on paper....

DFCs in Zendikar Rising could've been fixed to say, "Choose a side once this card enters the battlefield, If it's an Instant or Sorcery spell put into its owners' graveyard after it resolves or is countered". The difference between these and the DFCs from past sets was that they required you to meet a certain condition in order to flip them where in this case you pick a side as the spell is resolving. Okay that wasn't as confusing as I thought it was.

[Dunharrow]

DFCs are not an end to paper magic. There is nothing they have done online which was not also done in paper, except for Reserved List reprints.
They even test the game on paper....

DFCs in Zendikar Rising could've been fixed to say, "Choose a side once this card enters the battlefield, If it's an Instant or Sorcery spell put into its owners' graveyard after it resolves or is countered". The difference between these and the DFCs from past sets was that they required you to meet a certain condition in order to flip them where in this case you pick a side as the spell is resolving. Okay that wasn't as confusing as I thought it was.

What issue do you see? Your extra verbiage seems unnecessary. You pick a side an play it. It isn't 'as the spell is resolving'. Why does this need fixing?
TDFCs had an A side and a B side. In most cases, the B side was more powerful and you wanted to jump through the hoop to transform the card.
MDFCs are more like split cards than TFDCs. You pick the side you want. Both sides are weaker than if it had been a single card.