I have to agree that it definitely made me think fallen angel at first impression. There typically aren't too many knights running around with that much cleavage, but angels.....
I'm just saying that I don't think she looks very knightly. Then again, with wotc you never can tell tuntil you have it in front of you.
anyway, is it possible that the website got it wrong somehow? i mean, perhaps it IS "knight of dusk," and maybe this is somehow a segway into the next block (or two!?)... but maybe it's not. just considering the possibilities...
oh yeah, look at my banner - many knights existed without horsies under them. even if it's just a "new rule," certainly there was none such for a LONG time in magic. i think the horses = flanking...
No, it is certainly Knight of Dusk.
Ultra-Pro was right with Future Sight, and people argued about the Venser pic being 'wrong' then too.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
No, it is certainly Knight of Dusk.
Ultra-Pro was right with Future Sight, and people argued about the Venser pic being 'wrong' then too.
so, they were right once, which makes them infallible in perpetuity?
i want to stress that i am not being a nay-sayer... though i'd suspect that if it hasn't been "fixed" by this point, then it is probably correctly labeled.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Now playing Transformers: Legends. 27-time top tier finisher and admin of the TFL Wikia site.
I can't see it being Dakmor Sorceress unless they drop Nightmare from the set. I doubt they would do that as Nightmare gains flying and variable (ie: mostlikely higher) thoughness for the same cost. I know that Nightmare dies to Bust and the Sorceress doesn't, but Nightmare just strikes me as more iconic. I think that the resemblance to Dakmore Sorceress isn't accidental, though. If Nightmare stays then we won't see the Sorceress so it is safe to make homage art for her. At least that is my guess as to the similar art. We may even see it in an arcana if it is true. With TS and all the homages and nostalgia running around they will be more inclined to do nostalgiac art for core sets and then say, "Look at what we are doing!"
More on topic, I realy like the art for the Knight, and would love to see the full art for the Tutor as it looks interesting, but could still go either way for me. I like the concept to it, though.
Looks a lot like an update on Dakmor Sorceress. Notice the coat.
God, dude, if they felt the compulsion to change THAT art I'd have to punch them in the neck, or something. Dakmor Sorceress is like, the best art ever, or close to it.
I can't see it being Dakmor Sorceress unless they drop Nightmare from the set. I doubt they would do that as Nightmare gains flying and variable (ie: mostlikely higher) thoughness for the same cost. I know that Nightmare dies to Bust and the Sorceress doesn't, but Nightmare just strikes me as more iconic. I think that the resemblance to Dakmore Sorceress isn't accidental, though. If Nightmare stays then we won't see the Sorceress so it is safe to make homage art for her. At least that is my guess as to the similar art. We may even see it in an arcana if it is true. With TS and all the homages and nostalgia running around they will be more inclined to do nostalgiac art for core sets and then say, "Look at what we are doing!".
It really looks so similiar to Dakmor Sorceress that I can't see it being Knight of Dusk. When I first saw it I thought "WOW
Dakmor Sorceress". Probably am wrong but it doesn't look like a knight at all to me
It really looks so similiar to Dakmor Sorceress that I can't see it being Knight of Dusk. When I first saw it I thought "WOW
Dakmor Sorceress". Probably am wrong but it doesn't look like a knight at all to me
My previous post is under the assumption that, as Seds points out, the website these are from is probably correct in their labaling. The one that isn't the Tutor is labeled as Knight of Dusk, so I guess we can all work under the assumption that it is, in fact, Knight of Dusk. I thought it was the Sorceress when I saw it too, but Seds makes a good point in that the Ultra Pro site is probably correct when it comes to which card each art piece is for.
I know what you're trying to express here, but you phrased it really badly. This logic is pretty much terrible; you could say the same thing about Stone Rain and Avalanche Riders: "They printed a card with a similar effect, anything is possible."
Due to the printing of Korlash,I am pretty sure the sorceress wouldn't be in X. It would be cool, but Korlash being able to regen makes him pretty good in that spot. Nightmare has been in a while, but I imagine he has at least one more in him before taking a break. I cant wait to see what other new art is coming, I like that we get to have so much new art, with black borders no less. I can't recall actually being all that excited about a core set before, so I guess wizards is doing something right.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not pee my pants excited, but I do look forward to it more than the other core sets I have been around for.
I agree with some others saying that it really seems Dakmor Sorceress, but I hope not, since it's worse than nightmare itself (and nightmare isn't a great card, btw)..
I agree that it looks like Dakmor, but it isn't.
It is Knight of Dusk.
WoTC is working WITH Ultra-Pro to make these products. WoTC is providing ultra-pro with these card arts, and telling them what cards they are for. WoTC would not let such a big mistake fall through the cracks.
They were right before, and they are right now
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
I agree with some others saying that it really seems Dakmor Sorceress, but I hope not, since it's worse than nightmare itself (and nightmare isn't a great card, btw)..
For the other card.... i dunno... The first thing I thought about that art was Night's whisper... or Diabolic tutor. Yes, that eyes are really DIABOLIC. however, original art of Diabolic Tutor sucks, imo, so if will be changed in that i'll be happy.
I dont care what the art is for, i think it all looks great! I'm big fan of new art, and MTG art just keeps getting better and better!
chtck the left column with comming soon products - theres the box on the bottom ... i believe thats Seething Song!
That's a Boris Vallejo painting titled "Mistress of Fire." One of the guys where I play Magic has a set of sleeves with it. In spite of the pun, "she's hot" -- as are the vast majority of Boris' subjects.
The statement that WotC made about Knights needing to be depicted in the art on horses was limited only to the Knights in Time Spiral. In Time Spiral, a creature having the creature type Knight was mechanically connected with having flanking. And flanking is an ability that is shown in the art by having the creature on a horse. That statement was not related to anything other than Knights in Time Spiral. And they didn't say that Knights had to have a horse. They said that since Tivadar of Thorn was not illustrated on a horse, he could not have flanking. Since he was (1) in Time Spiral and (2) did not have flanking, he could not be a Knight.
Any comparison with the statement that the Knights of Time Spiral needed to be illustrated on horses because they had flanking and that the 10ED art for Knight of Dusk is not Knight of Dusk because she isn't on a horse is taking that statement completely out of context.
..keep your mind open enough and someone is going to throw some crap in..
..cause i'm sick of being treated like i have before
like it's stupid standing for what i'm standing for..
..it's not faith if you're using your eyes..
Portfolio · Evolution = Wrong
I'm just saying that I don't think she looks very knightly. Then again, with wotc you never can tell tuntil you have it in front of you.
No, it is certainly Knight of Dusk.
Ultra-Pro was right with Future Sight, and people argued about the Venser pic being 'wrong' then too.
Twitter
so, they were right once, which makes them infallible in perpetuity?
i want to stress that i am not being a nay-sayer... though i'd suspect that if it hasn't been "fixed" by this point, then it is probably correctly labeled.
The MirroCube - 420 card Mirrodin themed cube
And if I've offended you, I'm sorry, but maybe you need to be offended. But here's my apology and one more thing...
More on topic, I realy like the art for the Knight, and would love to see the full art for the Tutor as it looks interesting, but could still go either way for me. I like the concept to it, though.
GENERATION 11: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig and add 1 to the generation. social experiment.
My Have/Want list (MTGO)
God, dude, if they felt the compulsion to change THAT art I'd have to punch them in the neck, or something. Dakmor Sorceress is like, the best art ever, or close to it.
I don't really mind the excess cleavage, because for every Healing Leaves there's a Yavimaya Barbarian.
It really looks so similiar to Dakmor Sorceress that I can't see it being Knight of Dusk. When I first saw it I thought "WOW
Dakmor Sorceress". Probably am wrong but it doesn't look like a knight at all to me
I could see them dropping Nightmare for Dakmor Sorceress. Nightmare could use a rest IMO. They just printed Korlash, Heir to Blackblade so anything is possible.
My previous post is under the assumption that, as Seds points out, the website these are from is probably correct in their labaling. The one that isn't the Tutor is labeled as Knight of Dusk, so I guess we can all work under the assumption that it is, in fact, Knight of Dusk. I thought it was the Sorceress when I saw it too, but Seds makes a good point in that the Ultra Pro site is probably correct when it comes to which card each art piece is for.
GENERATION 11: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig and add 1 to the generation. social experiment.
My Have/Want list (MTGO)
I know what you're trying to express here, but you phrased it really badly. This logic is pretty much terrible; you could say the same thing about Stone Rain and Avalanche Riders: "They printed a card with a similar effect, anything is possible."
Don't get me wrong, I'm not pee my pants excited, but I do look forward to it more than the other core sets I have been around for.
I agree that it looks like Dakmor, but it isn't.
It is Knight of Dusk.
WoTC is working WITH Ultra-Pro to make these products. WoTC is providing ultra-pro with these card arts, and telling them what cards they are for. WoTC would not let such a big mistake fall through the cracks.
They were right before, and they are right now
Twitter
I dont care what the art is for, i think it all looks great! I'm big fan of new art, and MTG art just keeps getting better and better!
p.s. Nightmare is an awsome card, its a classic!!
That is great art! I don't really mind if it's indulgent (ya know, hot babe is good for mostly-male game, har har). I do not mind one bit.
Augustin, Rasputin, Bruna, Brago, Ojutai
wat u thinko?
thus DS will live on ...
http://www.ultrapro.com/page.php?pname=gaming/deck_boxes
chtck the left column with comming soon products - theres the box on the bottom ... i believe thats Seething Song!
No, that is neither a Magic product nor seething song art. That's one of ultra pro's usual gallery artists.
Clan MTGSalivation :: Trade Thread
"In another life, in another dream,
By a different name,
Gave it all away for a memory and a quiet lie.
But I felt the face of a cold tonight,
Still don't know the score,
But I know the pain of leaving everything very far behind.
And if I could cry,
And if I could live,
What truth I did then take me there,
Heaven Goodbye."
-Heaven's Not Enough, by Steve Conte
That's a Boris Vallejo painting titled "Mistress of Fire." One of the guys where I play Magic has a set of sleeves with it. In spite of the pun, "she's hot" -- as are the vast majority of Boris' subjects.
Any comparison with the statement that the Knights of Time Spiral needed to be illustrated on horses because they had flanking and that the 10ED art for Knight of Dusk is not Knight of Dusk because she isn't on a horse is taking that statement completely out of context.