Quote from nitzNo floating buildings, but Rooftop Storm sure seems similar. Of course, that could be me reading way too into it.
Quote from PorcelainGodI will give you that there is lightning in both pics but that's about where it ends.
Rooftop Storm is another Trope card, or more specifically an obvious reference to the "awakening" scene in most Frankenstein movies. If you see more then that in the card then you might want to read up on this guy.
Quote from SpeedGrapherthat's really cool that you looked through the image files and found that, I like the art, and he could be in Innistrad sure, but remember, that is still alot of really limited information, Ral could be nothing more then some important character in game only
Quote from KajillionConfirmation that he is Ravnican. This Pic from the Steam Product Page says so.
Quote from MundusThe rules don't need to be revisioned for a card like this, thanks to this little Golden Rule.
"101.1. Whenever a card’s text directly contradicts these rules, the card takes precedence. The card
overrides only the rule that applies to that specific situation. The only exception is that a player can
concede the game at any time (see rule 104.3a)."
The part of that rule there that says "The card overrides only the rule that applies to that specific situation" I think limits Ral Zarek to ONLY override the "Only activate these abilities anytime you can play a sorcery" rule for Planeswalkers, but not necessarily the "once per turn" rule.
Though, they seem to have mashed those two "rules" into one single rule..
But, if I were to see this Planeswalker card, and saw that -1 ability, I wouldn't automatically think "Oh, I can play it as an instant, so that means I can also play it however many times I want!", I'd just think "Ok, I can play it as an instant, so if my opponent throws multiple things at me or a planeswalker I control, I need to choose wisely what it is I want to counter." After all, I'd still be thinking I could activate an ability of a planeswalker only once. Nothing's really given me reason NOT to.
I really just want to avoid making the text so freakin small. It's bad enough as it is.
@The Captivating Vampire comment: Wow, didn't notice that.. It does look similar, though not exactly the same. But still, an outlined colorless Dragon tattoo on the left arm..
@Niv-Mizzet possibility comment: Well, maybe him being known as Niv-Mizzet isn't necessary for what they have in store? And besides, if you were to go into hiding and changed your appearance, would you keep the same name?
Quote from DaneJ8I just wanted to add a little something to the comments about Ral possibly being Niv-Mizzet (I know it's all just speculation)
If wizards decides to keep up this double sided card deal (perhaps at least just for the block), and either the next set does in fact revisit Ravnica, or simply Ral Zarek becomes a real card in the next set regardless of the plane, and he IS Niv, then perhaps we'll see Ral Zarek, Planeswalker, who flips over, revealing his true form to become Niv-Mizzet, Planeswalker
Quote from luminum can...he made it? The Izzet do not have a monopoly on mad-scientist gear. "Mad alchemists/necromancers" are a major part of Innistrad's setting.
Contrast Ral, who has much shinier, sleeker, Izzet-worthy gear dealing in lightning, rather than geistflame.
Quote from MorphlingWith the enemy-colored Flashback costs we're seeing, I think that is a pretty strong hint we'll see him in this block. Ditto Kiora, actually.
Quote from MaRo »As the lead designer of the set, I handed over the set without the lands but identified what could be taken out to put them in. I knew development was going to swap them in, but I felt I should make the statement that design-wise the cards didn't belong.
Quote from PorcelainGodJust like how the enemy M10 lands are a hint of a larger enemy colored theme to come in INN?
Quote from TheArchitectThat is the stupidest thing I've ever read on this forum.Quote from RMC13135 »He has a Vampire Nighthawk equip with a Basilisk Collar
Quote from RMC13135 »He has a Vampire Nighthawk equip with a Basilisk Collar
Quote from Teia RabishuBecause conservative bias is a far, far worse thing. Liberal bias doesn't, statistically speaking, make people stupid. Conservative bias (or at least Fox's version of it) does.