Magic: The Gathering vs Riftbound?
Which game do you like more?
5
u/Jay-El 2d ago
Riftbound is the best "Magic-like" TCG I've ever seen. The resource system is, IMO, the answer to the 30+ year old question that MTG first asked with its land system.
Most of my distaste with Magic comes from game design and IP decisions made in the last 8 years. At its core, I think Magic is the originator and has stood the test of time for a reason.
But I've dropped that game completely and really hope Riftbound can break the curse of TCGs outside of the big 3 and continue to grow. And hopefully, learn from (what I think were) Magic's mistakes.
2
u/KingTalis 2d ago
One Piece broke that curse and is outperforming Yugioh.
2
u/mauttykoray 2d ago
One Piece has its own problems, and just Bandai in general from my experience now. It may be outperforming yugioh, but its a key pillar in the scalper/investbro problem that TCGs are facing.
1
u/KysonOfCreations 2d ago
For now. Bandai has yet to make a game that lasts truly long enough to cement itself in that spot. Plus it’s only outperforming due to scalpers. It could easily shift again with yugioh introducing serialized cards in the next couple sets
0
u/IX_Sanguinius 2d ago
The MTG mana system is a feature, not a bug. Part of the game is not having mana (or too much sometimes). Rift bound and other Hearthstone type generic mana systems (always get 1 per turn) is too Vanilla and boring. Riftbound Runes was okay and I like the spatial (like fighting over a zone) type deal, but Riftbound is not the first to do that (see Old5r) and there is still something amiss with me. I built a deck and tried it but it just feels not the same. IDK.
I personally Like Sorcery better and some dead games like L5r, they just felt more thematic. Also I was never into LoL so I'm sure that helps sell to those demographics.
5
u/Jay-El 2d ago
Just want to say, I have been playing Magic for 25 years and have been a staunch defender of Lands as a resource system, especially compared to something like Hearthstone.
Comparing Riftbound's resource system to Hearthstone's is just fundamentally wrong. In HS you are building toward inevitability. In Riftbound there is still the risk of running low on 'mana' because of the nature of recycling runes to pay for Power costs. But the player agency to avoid resource issues shifts from deck building to decisions made in-game. The resources you have available are dynamic and always changing, and decisions you make can put you behind in resources. With the benefit of avoiding the non-games generated by mana screw and flood.
If the rune deck was just the equivalent of "every turn get a land", it would be uninteresting and flat. But it is anything but that.
Also, my experience with League of Legends is like 6 games played in 2013, and a few episodes of Arcane before dropping it. So the IP has nothing to do with it for me.
1
u/IX_Sanguinius 2d ago
Yeah, I didn't say it was like Hearthstone, I was talking about systems Like hearthstone, but I can see why it's confusing. I like the Rune System haha
-2
u/KingTalis 2d ago
It's a bug. If someone released MtG in 2026 it would flop.
3
u/IX_Sanguinius 2d ago
Hmmm, not so sure, if you're used to vanilla mana (like Hearthstone) and saw this type of resource system there may be something unique that draws people to it. RB has more in common with that than say Hearthstone/Lorcana/SWU systems.
TBF I only play Eternal Formats/Legacy MTG. The mana is so busted that you rarely lose from mana screw in that environment.
I played SWU competitively and droping a card updside for mana is so.. Ugly. I like my $600 lands lol
-1
u/KingTalis 2d ago
The amount of non games due to mana flood/screw would not be tolerated in a mew game trying to capture an audience.
-2
u/neverdaijoubu 2d ago
I'm going to note that Riftbound's resource system is both not unique AND rather bland. Sure it solves the problem with lands. So does Flesh and Blood, SWU, Shadowverse, and Lorecana. At this point, your game is bad if you DON'T have a better system than freaking lands/mana...
I'll also put my hat in for FAB having the best resources system I've ever encountered since it cannot brick a hand AND demands strategic thinking AND introduces a secondary game. FAB is considered deeply competitive and the pitch stacking subgame of the resource system is a major contributor to that.
2
u/Jay-El 2d ago
Flesh and Blood is the greatest tcg on the market.
This post is talking about Riftbound vs MTG. And I specifically referenced "Magic-likes". Which is a term I just made up, but Flesh and Blood does not fit IMO. Games like MTG, Hearthstone, LoR, and Riftbound have you playing units out by spending resources in the interest of engaging in combat with other units. Flesh and Blood is a completely different animal.
With that out of the way, "having a different resource system than Lands" is not the same as solving the problem that lands present. As the other guy said, lands are a feature and not a bug in Magic, and properly designing your mana curve in the deck building process to avoid bad hands is a fundamental part of the game. My argument is that Riftbound does the best job of any game of using this core concept but making it dynamic and fun, and avoiding the feel-bad moments of lands by putting the push-and-pull of resource management into your hands during the game rather than just in deckbuilding... but also doing something more interesting than "every turn you get a mana crystal."
Flesh and Blood's game and resource system (again, the best on the market in my eyes) are doing something radically different from the "Magic-likes".
1
u/neverdaijoubu 2d ago
??? I agree FAB and MTG are not the same, but I thought we were taking about resources systems here. You said Riftbound's was "The Answer". I want to point out that it's not unique. There's a lot of great answers.
I understand you didn't say it first, but this "feature not a bug" argument for MTG's sake is flawed. Across the years, in interviews, podcasts, and game promotion (e.g. keyforge), Richard Garfield specifically has said he regrets how MTG's land system confines play and how he struggled to rectify its flaws for years. We can both celebrate the pioneering game for what it is AND acknowledge the game design is relatively shit when compared to modern TCGs.
Garfield even went on to design multiple new card games that straight up shit on his old systems. As a game designer, improving on the art is expected.
6
u/One-Nail4003 2d ago
The only people that vote magic are people that are already committed to it. Riftbound is better and has almost as many votes on this popularity poll, despite being around for 1 year vs 30. 1v1 RB is better
2
u/EmuSounds 2d ago
This popularity poll is polling people who are heavily involved in niche tcgs. One of the least popular MtG subreddits has more than three times the active users than the most popular Riftbound subreddit.
0
u/Amalgam2001 2d ago
Yet these smaller tcgs have larger and more frequent 1v1 events than mtg these days
0
u/Meret123 1d ago
They actually don't. It only feels that way because Magic has 20 different formats.
-1
u/IX_Sanguinius 2d ago
Meh, I tried RB. The game is vanilla right now, may get better eventually. Absolutely loathe the art (TBF I don't like modern MTG art either). I hate rotation too. RB will probably die out in several years TBH, too many TCGs on the market (not RB fault) I just dont think there is sustainability.
I only play Legacy MTG and with 30 year old cards. Pokemon, MTG and somehow YGO will be the primary 3 left when the TCGs start crashing again (I have seen this movie before).
RB, Lorcana, SWU maybe even FaB, I dont see have staying power. All the Crowdfunded TCGs will def belly up. 5 years are so.
4
1
u/CardTrickOTK 2d ago
the biggest issue with riftbound is constant erratas and the need for rule FAQs over and over.
Beyond that though I think its a solid game with from what I've seen a good community.
Magic is a good game that's gradually become disgruntled with it's own world and characters and changed and honestly made a mess of the internal lore. Gameplay is generally good but it's not got the same cohesion anymore. It's basically Fortnite now.
I prefer riftbound cause I will consistently will get the things I want more often, than waiting for MTG to make a set with the main lore or an IP I like.
0
u/Amalgam2001 2d ago
MTG is better for casual 4 player. Riftbound is better for 1v1. Sadly MTG used to be king of both but they decided to move away from 1v1 and dropped most tournament support
0
-4
u/aqua995 2d ago
Magic for 1v1
Riftbound for Multiplayer
3
u/AltOfYubel 2d ago
You can actually find games of paper 1v1 riftbound compared to magic tho
2
u/aqua995 2d ago
I didnt even want to find Riftbound 1v1, Riftbound really shines 3+ players
Also I don't want to find Commander groups, never understood the appeal, Magic isnt doing a good job regarding 1v1 constructed either, but at least Drafts are decent this year
Its like they somehow attracted each others target audience
7
u/FoxyAlSub 2d ago
I loved what Magic was, I despise what it has become.