I don’t see how the fact that it’s rotating effects the point at all. The thing in contention was that they hadn’t printed any “straight tutors” when Acqusition is a straight tutor plus. Never mind that there’s still two months of the current standard before that rotation.
Is there some way that I can specify which set I want the card I'm displaying the card art of to be from?
Like, if I want to show the card art of "Cave People" from, say, 4th Edition or The Dark, for example, but if I just do the bracket card bracket cardname bracket slash card bracket thing, it'll show the most recent (5th edition) version of it. How can I (if it's possible) type it in a way where it'll show the 4th edition version?
Yes. [card]CARD NAME|SET NAME[/card] is what you are looking for. For example:
[card]Cave People|4th Edition[/card] yields Cave People.
[card]Cave People|The Dark[/card] yields Cave People.
The image showing for your 4th edition example is showing 5th. 4th version shows the same artwork as that from The Dark. Try Fourth Edition instead and see what happens.
'buster
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
'buster
HR Analyst. Gamer. Activist | Fearless, and forthright | Aggro-control is a mindset. Elspeth and Jhoira rock my world.
I'm gonna admit, if they make this set's equivalent of King Arthur female, I'm going to be disappointed.
*waits for everyone to get done booing and throwing rotten fruit at me*
I'm not against women with swords or other weapons, mind you. I like Elspeth, and I might end up liking Rowan as well. But for me, part of the King Arthur trope's resonance is that he's a king. If you make the royal with a sword a female, you're subverting the trope instead of playing it up like is supposed to be the point of a topdown set, as much as if it were a male king with a legendary axe or a black king instead of a white one. It would be like turning the Wicked Stepmother into a Wicked Stepfather, or turning Goldilocks into a boy.
The same thing happened to me during Ixalan. When I heard that we were getting UBR Pirates, I was so stoked to see Magic's version of Blackbeard. And then we got not one but two legendary Pirate women who had a distinct lack of beard, black or otherwise, after Kaladesh already gave us Kari Zev, Teenage Pirate Girl. I was a little disappointed. Not as much since it wasn't supposed to be a topdown Pirate world, but after all this time, for Pirates to finally come back as a proper tribe only to be denied the Pirate Captain with a glorious black beard, deflated my enthusiasm. When I looked at Beckett Brass, I didn't see Blackbeard, I saw "older pirate woman who isn't Blackbeard and never will be". By all means keep Brass and Storm around, but please, give me a proper Captain Blackbeard at some point. And maybe a Captain Jack Sparrow while you're at it.
Again, I got no problem with women wielding weapons, I just want resonant tropes to actually feel resonant, and if you change a major feature of an established character - be it race, gender, weapon, etc. - then it won't feel resonant, it'll feel like boxchecking on some arbitrary inclusion list. You'll only be reminding us of what the trope is actually supposed to be, and your derivative character will languish in their shadow. Olivia Voldaren doesn't feel like the Dracula of Innistrad, she feels like the Carmilla. Edgar Markov is the Dracula of Innistrad.
If we want women with weapons, let's adapt some actual WWWs, like Joan of Arc or Boudica. Saskia the Unyielding could be interpreted as a homage to the latter, what with the celtic warrior vibe (which was ruined by making her a Soldier). You could also make a homage to Meridia from Disney and Pixar's Brave, or a homage to Mulan. I'm all for inclusion, just please, please don't sacrifice trope resonance in the process, not in a topdown set. And if you want to subvert a trope, please subvert it in a set that isn't built around trope resonance. We have plenty of opportunities for queens with legendary swords in Magic, but only so many opportunities to have King Arthur and Excalibur.
I think we just disagree here. Personally I despise this whole "trope resonance" thing. Feels like magic creative is unable to create it's own worlds and it has to keep creating derivatives. I think some indirect references here and there are cool but carbon copies like King Macar, the Gold-Cursed are terrible and lazy.
In that sense I appreciate WotC trying to establish it's own characters and set then apart. Some trope resonance is enriching but too much feels like a cheap trick, a way for then to make legendary creatures that will makes sense for players without having the trouble to flash then out.
So imo the problem with Captain Lannery Storm and Admiral Becket Brass is not that they fail to mimic characters from other sources, it's that they are completely underdeveloped and lack any context.
Not trying to antagonize you here, just pointing out that a portion of the fan base rejects this "Theros" approach and there are more reasons to subvert expectations then representation alone. I think how much they feed on trope resonance will vary from block to block and this one feels like it's closer to Theros. But don't be surprised if King Arthur is Queen Rowan Kenrith as they will have to tune down the troping at some point.
This set will have more in common with frozen from Disney than with shadowmoor, knowing wizards' modus operandi.
From the art it doesn't look like that. Honestly they are doing a pretty good job and while it feelbland and too obvious, Theros surely did it more.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
How many sets will be for this new plane? Just one like for Dominaria (still can't belive we only got one) or two?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern: Elves(GB), Merfolk(U), Grixis Death Shadow Standard: Dinosaurs(GR) Commander: The Ur-Dragon, Arahbo-Roar of the World, Zacama-Primal Calamity, Nath of the Gilt-Leaf
I imagine it will be just one.
For how they described the new way they are doing sets (when they removed blocks) cases like Ravnica will be the exception and not the rule.
Would sound a little strange having them saying "Now we are doing 1-set = 1-plane unless narrative decisions require more sets" then have it apply only for 1 story-driven set (core sets do not really count) in the 2 years after the announcement.
I hope were getting proper tribal theme here again
I think we'll have wolf tribal and knight tribal as subthemes
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
I hadn't realized this until this thread. How many people here are familiar with the Series Fate? As in Fate Stay Night, Fate Zero, Fate Apocrypha, or Fate Go? Because of this franchise, I have exclusively thought of King Arthur as Female for over a decade and would be sorely disappointed if MTG's King Arthur is male. I realize this is a minority thought pattern but this thread has lowered my hopes of getting a good King Arthur.
How many sets will be for this new plane? Just one like for Dominaria (still can't belive we only got one) or two?
From what MaRo said we are only getting one Eldraine set then the next set is also a new plane. But if they have done eldraine like lorwyn, i mean, if eldraine is a transformative plane then the other part of the plane could be considered a new plane as well.
I think it would be better to at least have 2 sets with Rowan and Will, to develop another set of characters and see the acceptance of them. If the speculation that the story is about rowan looking for will (which may work on Eldraine but if their spark are connected and the same, then rowan looking for will in another plane would probably not work unless the planes are conected or if they omited something on this "shared spark" of the twins).
Rowan shouldn't be "King Arthur" for one reason: planeswalkers should NOT have political power on one specific plane unless they are going to stay there as a permanent fixture. Jace being the living guildpact always really annoyed me. If she is going to be King Arthur, she's gotta stay in Camelot.
Honestly, I don't really like the exact parallels thing. If they are going to make King Macar, the Gold-Cursed, I'd rather they just do like Arabian Nights and make actual King Midas as with Sindbad and Aladdin. Obviously they won't do that. I'm fine with referencing the source material, but I don't really want to see King Melthur who pulls the sword Spallibur from a magic stump, and has a wizard named Korlin, and cavaliers of the round countertop. It's all a bit generic brand.
Rowan shouldn't be "King Arthur" for one reason: planeswalkers should NOT have political power on one specific plane unless they are going to stay there as a permanent fixture. Jace being the living guildpact always really annoyed me. If she is going to be King Arthur, she's gotta stay in Camelot.
I see what you meant, but there is plenty of precedent (Sorin in Innistrad, Ral and Vraska in Ravnica). I guess it's not too hard to keep certain walkers in their own plane for a while and only make then leave when plot demands it. But I agree, this won't work for the very recurrent walkers like Jace, Liliana and Chandra.
Honestly, I don't really like the exact parallels thing. If they are going to make King Macar, the Gold-Cursed, I'd rather they just do like Arabian Nights and make actual King Midas as with Sindbad and Aladdin. Obviously they won't do that. I'm fine with referencing the source material, but I don't really want to see King Melthur who pulls the sword Spallibur from a magic stump, and has a wizard named Korlin, and cavaliers of the round countertop. It's all a bit generic brand.
How many sets will be for this new plane? Just one like for Dominaria (still can't belive we only got one) or two?
I'm sure the only plane that will get more than one set under this new system will be Ravnica because they can't do their usual guild thing and fit everything in one set.
The only mythic from the set who is female is Serra, who fans have been asking for, and is a female angel, long established in lore.
Why do so many people think that she was an angel? She wasn't an angel. Serra was a human planeswalker. She was known to create angels. The main feature for angels are wings. She has no wings in her art. In some planes she was/is seen as a goddess and she was able to create her own artificial plane, Serra's Realm.
The only mythic from the set who is female is Serra, who fans have been asking for, and is a female angel, long established in lore.
Why do so many people think that she was an angel? She wasn't an angel. Serra was a human planeswalker. She was known to create angels. The main feature for angels are wings. She has no wings in her art. In some planes she was/is seen as a goddess and she was able to create her own artificial plane, Serra's Realm.
The only mythic from the set who is female is Serra, who fans have been asking for, and is a female angel, long established in lore.
Why do so many people think that she was an angel? She wasn't an angel. Serra was a human planeswalker. She was known to create angels. The main feature for angels are wings. She has no wings in her art. In some planes she was/is seen as a goddess and she was able to create her own artificial plane, Serra's Realm.
Wait, Serra's a human? News to me.
Yes she is. The majority of pre-mending walkers decided to mostly use the form they had before ascending. They could change their form if they wanted, but most didn’t. Tevesh Sazts being one of the few who used a different form than their original one.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOut of the ground,I rise to grace...W BAfter the lights go out on you, after your worthless life is through. I will remember how you scream...B
Not sure about that. It could be a prominent tribe, but not have real tribal support, like Angels in the Innistrad block.
On the other hand, it would be nice to have knights in colors different from black and white.
Why are we still talking about this? It's not important. The cards will work exactly the same if they have a white man or an Indian woman or a dragon or a cat person or whatever the hell else is on them. Would you people kindly stop talking in circles and either get back to the topic of Eldraine or GTFO?
This is really what it boils down to.
So far from what we've seen I'm excited for the set. The art seems top notch and I'm a sucker for high fantasy and fairy tales. I'm really curious to see what the new 'book' mechanic on the card textboxes will be.
In this thread: posters expose some questionable attitudes towards people unlike themselves.
A conversation I am really interested in is the one around settings being too derivative versus being too far a departure from the inspiration to really resonate. I think the important element is how established the inspiration is for the general public in the first place. When a setting is already commonly understood, following it very closely feels too derivative to me. I think the King Macar example is good because it's a little too on the nose, though I think Theros as a whole varied wildly in that regard. Some aspects worked subtly and others didn't. I think WotC can get away with direct references when the source inspiration isn't as foundational in the cultural zeitgeist (I think they've always been heavy handed to a degree when adapting real world inspiration, but the Lorwyn/Shadowmoor and Tarkir settings did a good job of depicting a setting based on real mythology without resorting to xeroxing aspects - or that could just be my unfamiliarity with their inspirations to notice issues).
Eldraine is honestly getting too close to derivative for me. The art is gorgeous, but what we've seen looks a bit too on the nose to me. The proof will be in the final product and a fraction of the art does not a derivative failure make, but given that they purposely selected these pieces to sell the setting and direction is a concerning sign that they'll be relying heavily on direct references with the barest hint of twists, I have reservations about the aesthetic they're going with. Obviously we'll see the impacts on the cards themselves later and I'm hopeful the aesthetic is heavy handed but the set itself will be fun to play with.
So what do we think of the storybook card design? Will the Goldilocks card be legendary? I’m thinking that the 7 mana cost will turn the creature into a legend, as well as having a one time spell attached to it. Like “7cmc: destroy three creatures, Little Girl becomes a 4/4 legendary creature named Goldilocks, Bear Slayer.”
The image showing for your 4th edition example is showing 5th. 4th version shows the same artwork as that from The Dark. Try Fourth Edition instead and see what happens.
'buster
HR Analyst. Gamer. Activist | Fearless, and forthright | Aggro-control is a mindset.
Elspeth and Jhoira rock my world.
I think we just disagree here. Personally I despise this whole "trope resonance" thing. Feels like magic creative is unable to create it's own worlds and it has to keep creating derivatives. I think some indirect references here and there are cool but carbon copies like King Macar, the Gold-Cursed are terrible and lazy.
In that sense I appreciate WotC trying to establish it's own characters and set then apart. Some trope resonance is enriching but too much feels like a cheap trick, a way for then to make legendary creatures that will makes sense for players without having the trouble to flash then out.
So imo the problem with Captain Lannery Storm and Admiral Becket Brass is not that they fail to mimic characters from other sources, it's that they are completely underdeveloped and lack any context.
Not trying to antagonize you here, just pointing out that a portion of the fan base rejects this "Theros" approach and there are more reasons to subvert expectations then representation alone. I think how much they feed on trope resonance will vary from block to block and this one feels like it's closer to Theros. But don't be surprised if King Arthur is Queen Rowan Kenrith as they will have to tune down the troping at some point.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
From the art it doesn't look like that. Honestly they are doing a pretty good job and while it feelbland and too obvious, Theros surely did it more.
Standard: Dinosaurs(GR)
Commander: The Ur-Dragon, Arahbo-Roar of the World, Zacama-Primal Calamity, Nath of the Gilt-Leaf
For how they described the new way they are doing sets (when they removed blocks) cases like Ravnica will be the exception and not the rule.
Would sound a little strange having them saying "Now we are doing 1-set = 1-plane unless narrative decisions require more sets" then have it apply only for 1 story-driven set (core sets do not really count) in the 2 years after the announcement.
I think we'll have wolf tribal and knight tribal as subthemes
From what MaRo said we are only getting one Eldraine set then the next set is also a new plane. But if they have done eldraine like lorwyn, i mean, if eldraine is a transformative plane then the other part of the plane could be considered a new plane as well.
I think it would be better to at least have 2 sets with Rowan and Will, to develop another set of characters and see the acceptance of them. If the speculation that the story is about rowan looking for will (which may work on Eldraine but if their spark are connected and the same, then rowan looking for will in another plane would probably not work unless the planes are conected or if they omited something on this "shared spark" of the twins).
Honestly, I don't really like the exact parallels thing. If they are going to make King Macar, the Gold-Cursed, I'd rather they just do like Arabian Nights and make actual King Midas as with Sindbad and Aladdin. Obviously they won't do that. I'm fine with referencing the source material, but I don't really want to see King Melthur who pulls the sword Spallibur from a magic stump, and has a wizard named Korlin, and cavaliers of the round countertop. It's all a bit generic brand.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
I see what you meant, but there is plenty of precedent (Sorin in Innistrad, Ral and Vraska in Ravnica). I guess it's not too hard to keep certain walkers in their own plane for a while and only make then leave when plot demands it. But I agree, this won't work for the very recurrent walkers like Jace, Liliana and Chandra.
Yeah, I feel the same.
BGU Control
R Aggro
Standard - For Fun
BG Auras
RUAffinityUR
GMono Green StompyG
CEldrazi TronC
URWJeskai GeistWRU
WRBoros BurnRW
BRWMardu PyromancerWRB
I'm sure the only plane that will get more than one set under this new system will be Ravnica because they can't do their usual guild thing and fit everything in one set.
We got Gate of Babylon...
Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest WUR Voltron Control
Temmet, Vizier of Naktamun WU Unblockable Mirror Trickery
Ra's al Ghul (Sidar Kondo) and Face-Down Ninjas
Brudiclad, Token Engineer
Vaevictis (VV2) the Dire Lantern
Rona, Disciple of Gix
Tiana the Auror
Hallar
Ulrich the Politician
Zur the Rebel
Scorpion, Locust, Scarab, Egyptian Gods
O-Kagachi, Mathas, Mairsil
"Non-Tribal" Tribal Generals, Eggs
Why do so many people think that she was an angel? She wasn't an angel. Serra was a human planeswalker. She was known to create angels. The main feature for angels are wings. She has no wings in her art. In some planes she was/is seen as a goddess and she was able to create her own artificial plane, Serra's Realm.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
Yes she is. The majority of pre-mending walkers decided to mostly use the form they had before ascending. They could change their form if they wanted, but most didn’t. Tevesh Sazts being one of the few who used a different form than their original one.
BAfter the lights go out on you, after your worthless life is through. I will remember how you scream...B
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO
On the other hand, it would be nice to have knights in colors different from black and white.
This is really what it boils down to.
So far from what we've seen I'm excited for the set. The art seems top notch and I'm a sucker for high fantasy and fairy tales. I'm really curious to see what the new 'book' mechanic on the card textboxes will be.
A conversation I am really interested in is the one around settings being too derivative versus being too far a departure from the inspiration to really resonate. I think the important element is how established the inspiration is for the general public in the first place. When a setting is already commonly understood, following it very closely feels too derivative to me. I think the King Macar example is good because it's a little too on the nose, though I think Theros as a whole varied wildly in that regard. Some aspects worked subtly and others didn't. I think WotC can get away with direct references when the source inspiration isn't as foundational in the cultural zeitgeist (I think they've always been heavy handed to a degree when adapting real world inspiration, but the Lorwyn/Shadowmoor and Tarkir settings did a good job of depicting a setting based on real mythology without resorting to xeroxing aspects - or that could just be my unfamiliarity with their inspirations to notice issues).
Eldraine is honestly getting too close to derivative for me. The art is gorgeous, but what we've seen looks a bit too on the nose to me. The proof will be in the final product and a fraction of the art does not a derivative failure make, but given that they purposely selected these pieces to sell the setting and direction is a concerning sign that they'll be relying heavily on direct references with the barest hint of twists, I have reservations about the aesthetic they're going with. Obviously we'll see the impacts on the cards themselves later and I'm hopeful the aesthetic is heavy handed but the set itself will be fun to play with.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
GWUBRDraft my Old Border Nostalgia Cube! and/or The Little Pauper Cube That Could!RBUWG
Modern:WDeath & TaxesW | RUGRUG DelverRUG