Ever since I've seen this card, the only thing I could think is "What the hell?" I just don't get what's going on here. The best way I could describe the art is as such: A fat satyr or (a hoofed ogre) and a shrimpy minotaur child are running away from some dinosaur that looks like a cross between a triceratops and an ankylosaurus. This presents some gaping problems:
1. Satyrs don't live in Ravnica, nor do hoofed ogres.
2. Dinosaurs also don't live in Ravnica. Some would argue that the behemoth in the art is a beast, not a dinosaur. However, beasts in MTG history have always looked like made up animals, yet this thing just looks straight up "dinosaur".
3. No other minotaurs are portrayed as wimpy on Ravnica. They're all buff and tall. This guy looks like a 9-yr-old with a calf head.
So is there something I'm missing? Is this really just a mish-mash of not-of-Ravnica stuff in one mess of a card art, or am I looking at it all wrong?
Ever since I've seen this card, the only thing I could think is "What the hell?" I just don't get what's going on here. The best way I could describe the art is as such: A fat satyr or (a hoofed ogre) and a shrimpy minotaur child are running away from some dinosaur that looks like a cross between a triceratops and an ankylosaurus. This presents some gaping problems:
1. Satyrs don't live in Ravnica, nor do hoofed ogres.
2. Dinosaurs also don't live in Ravnica. Some would argue that the behemoth in the art is a beast, not a dinosaur. However, beasts in MTG history have always looked like made up animals, yet this thing just looks straight up "dinosaur".
3. No other minotaurs are portrayed as wimpy on Ravnica. They're all buff and tall. This guy looks like a 9-yr-old with a calf head.
So is there something I'm missing? Is this really just a mish-mash of not-of-Ravnica stuff in one mess of a card art, or am I looking at it all wrong?