I can see doing 5 now, 5 later, but 6 now, 4 later? Am I missing something? No Azorius, Rakdos, Golgari, Simic? I have not been following spoiler season closely so apologies if this is just known already.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On MTGO as Protoman.
On 7/14/10, broke 1900 mark! <3 ROE.
Let's see... in past set, when people claimed a set was good, it turned out to be busted. See: trone of Oko and Ravnica, city of planeswalkers. When people a set was mediocre, it turned out to be merely good.
My impression is that Zendikar has many mechanics that are incorrectly estimated: spell-lands and kicker. I think the land-spells will become widely played in multiple format for being lands. Sure, there are real duds, but there are real good ones. land / card draw, land / counter, ... kicker is easy to undervalue because they help the mana curve and add flexibility.
Party, I agree, will probably turn out not to be good in constructed... but very good in limited. The cards turn from mediocre to okay to good at 2 party members. They turn to great to amazing at 3 and 4 members. With full party, many of the card are at the busted level:
a single mana to tutor any card and then cast a 4 CMC spell for free? For goodness sake! That's just bonker crazy over-powered.
a single mana to destroy any creature or PW? Even alpha had nothing that good.
This does not make them good in constructed. But in limited they will shine.
I can see doing 5 now, 5 later, but 6 now, 4 later? Am I missing something? No Azorius, Rakdos, Golgari, Simic? I have not been following spoiler season closely so apologies if this is just known already.
The awkward distribution was to support the set strategies: WB Clerics, UB Rogues, RW Warriors, UR Wizards, and RG and GW Landfall. The other four will be in Kaldheim.
The awkward distribution was to support the set strategies: WB Clerics, UB Rogues, RW Warriors, UR Wizards, and RG and GW Landfall. The other four will be in Kaldheim.
Okay thanks man.
Boy this random split was not an elegant solution.
Besides, don't the other pairs also have strategies? GU kicker, BG counters-matter?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On MTGO as Protoman.
On 7/14/10, broke 1900 mark! <3 ROE.
I like the MDFCs in principle, because they fix mana screw/flood. But DFCs are a pain in the ass in paper, and I still don't know how to feel about Wizards apparently wanting to flood the game with them throughout the next year.
The landfall cards are fine.
I really don't like the party mechanic. It feels really weak outside of Limited, and the creative behind it is uninspired (Allies weren't much better though). It's kind of disheartening that we're going to get even more boring, milquetoast DnD stuff next year…
To be honest, this is about what I expected a return to zendikar to be like, since we're back to villain of the week mode -- if the eldrazi were back, I'm sure something more would be explored here.
At least they're trying something new with the DFC modals. There's probably a sleeper or two among them.
But as is, I'm here for 3 of this set's mythics, some of these ten cent uncommons and fifty cent rares, and I'll be happy to save the money for Commander Legends.
I like the MDFCs in principle, because they fix mana screw/flood. But DFCs are a pain in the ass in paper, and I still don't know how to feel about Wizards apparently wanting to flood the game with them throughout the next year.
The landfall cards are fine.
I really don't like the party mechanic. It feels really weak outside of Limited, and the creative behind it is uninspired (Allies weren't much better though). It's kind of disheartening that we're going to get even more boring, milquetoast DnD stuff next year…
I'm all about the MDFCs, but I mainly play Arena so that helps. If it's any consolation, I think the tedium of swapping out card faces in sleeves will probably fade as it becomes muscle memory.
Does anyone actually like party? I mean, to actually play with versus the general flavor concept. I feel like there's fairly broad consensus that it's the mechanic that sunk the set, which does not bode well for the D&D set if we have even more of this.
Again, quest, level up, and traps were all distinctively tied to Zendikar 1.0.
Traps are the one thing I wanted to touch on. If the Party mechanic is a thing where in you take a group of people and go out adventuring it would go without saying that while they explore long lost areas looking for treasure and adventure you would expect them to run into traps, right? Part of the point of this return was to go back to the adventuring roots of Zendikar, which at least I would assume would include them. I'm not upset they aren't here, but when you think it about it it seems like they should be.
Party wasn't executed well, but mechanically and flavorfully it's better than ally. Expect it to get even mo' better after D&D: The Gathering drops later next year.
"It might get better" isn't the selling point you think it is. If Party returns for D&D Core, and I'm sure it will, that isn't a great thing that we need to wait for a mechanic to get better when the other half of it comes out. If Party were to return I don't think it will get much better, if any.
Should Magic grow as a brand, or just do the same old things every time we revisit a plane?
Yes, it should indeed grow, but with this set I'm not seeing a whole lot of growth. Kicker and Landfall are being used much in the same way they always have with nothing really sticking out. In the case of Kicker there wasn't even any strange costs to it, yes we now have more cards that care about the mechanic, but there's nothing new happening here.
As for Zendikar itself story wise there isn't much, if any, growth here. Seems like the focus on the sky was strictly to avoid even discussing the Eldrazi in any way and there's really only a few nods to it in the whole set. The only continuing story is Nissa going back to her older ways. Yes, we have the new ones with vampires becoming endangered, Nahiri trying to do some various evil for *queue Hot Fuzz* "The greater good", but after that there's really no growth or continuation for the plane as a whole. Compared to the most recent return of Theros where we had the continuation of Elspeth's story and how that affected the gods, and therefore the plane (even if it meant retconning the rules so a spark could come out of nowhere), what we are seeing here is lacking.
While BFZ and Oath were not so great overall, honestly pretty bad, I am going to remember the weird things it did (from their own Avengers and the start of the Bolas arc) and the crap it caused at the time (from their own Avengers constantly being around, Gideon running amok, and the bad CG art) this Zendikar on the other hand feels mediocre and something I don't think I'm going to remember all that much.
Is this set terrible? No. Is it amazing? No. It's in the middle. A bland middle.
Why come we didn’t get the purple orb/ocohedron thing nahiri used in the trailer as a card
Depends on the story really. Lack of a card either means WotC hasn't decided what it does yet or they don't want to spoil what it does. My personal theory is it either kills anything not Kor or turns things to stone so those like Nahiri and bend them to their will or what have you.
Wouldn't surprise me though if this ends up as another Mirari level mcguffin that can just do a lot of stuff and is powerful.
Does anyone actually like party? I mean, to actually play with versus the general flavor concept. I feel like there's fairly broad consensus that it's the mechanic that sunk the set, which does not bode well for the D&D set if we have even more of this.
Maybe? I think there's some potential in a WUB build as that trio has some of the better party payoff cards and have a really flush history in the four tribes with really good potential candidates to expand the party with creatures that you both want to play, contribute to a bigger gameplan, and/or protect the party. I think it'd still be pretty casual, and I don't see it making a big splash outside of Limited and constructed formats more focused on fun than fine-tuned competition.
Am I overly invested in building around party? No, not really, but if I were, I'd probably run Tazri as a commander focusing only on WUB. I think the biggest hurdles party decks face are consistently getting a full party and keeping that party on the board. WUB likely has the best tools to assemble a party and keep it around, and they have a few party payoffs that are worth it. The red and green party payoffs just aren't worth it.
The problem with defining this format by what is "fun" is that everyone seems to define fun as what they don't lose to. If you keep losing to easily answered cards, that means you should improve your deck. If you don't want to improve your deck, then you should come to peace with the idea that you are going to lose because you chose to not interact with better strategies.
Why come we didn’t get the purple orb/ocohedron thing nahiri used in the trailer as a card
Depends on the story really. Lack of a card either means WotC hasn't decided what it does yet or they don't want to spoil what it does. My personal theory is it either kills anything not Kor or turns things to stone so those like Nahiri and bend them to their will or what have you.
Wouldn't surprise me though if this ends up as another Mirari level mcguffin that can just do a lot of stuff and is powerful.
It's called a lithoform, so I'm guessing it and all others like it are stuffed inside the Lithoform Engine.
Wait, you're supposed to be the expedition's healer, but you can't use healing magic unless there's another cleric in the party??
------
The set's fine. I think the party mechanic takes up too much space overall, and a few stray traps would have been nice. Mostly people complain because that's their job.
As far as fetches go, we knew full well we weren't getting them. I just wish they'd given us enemy Bad River fetches. They aren't overly powerful, but can allow sweet double landfall triggers in a turn.
The awkward distribution was to support the set strategies: WB Clerics, UB Rogues, RW Warriors, UR Wizards, and RG and GW Landfall. The other four will be in Kaldheim.
Okay thanks man.
Boy this random split was not an elegant solution.
Besides, don't the other pairs also have strategies? GU kicker, BG counters-matter?
Agreed. It makes no sense.
Wizards seems to have a serious, fundamental refusal to ever just give us a complete 10-card cycle of good duals in a single set. At least we only have to wait 1 set for the remaining 4 of these. We may never get enemy color battle lands or enemy color cycling lands (or the other 4 Horizon Canopy lands, for that matter).
Seems like they have the same problem revisiting Zendikar as they did with Ravnica.
First Ravnica block was the best, partially because of all the innovative card designs, but also because it had an organic creative feel to it. There were lots of individual features like the nephilim that weren't popular in and of themselves but added character to the setting. These were stripped out during the revisits and replaced with more of the features that marketed well, resulting in a blander, more generic plane. By the third visit I dread ever going back.
I personally feel that getting a full 10-land cycle of lands is kind of odd. On the one hand, having 15% of the rares in your set being desirable lands that are likely worth the price of the pack seems really, really good, to the point where some people would genuinely crack draft boosters... But wizards seems to believe that it's the splashy bombs that make limited environments excited, so...
Honestly, I wish that wizards would use their new set booster to fit in rares that wouldn't be exciting in a draft but that would be desirable. From niche anti-meta rares to dual lands and innocuous plants for old formats, there are quite a few cards that wizards could pointedly leave out of draft boosters to give a more refined and targeted limited environment while packing potentially good cards that don't draft well in set boosters (giving players a real reason to buy set boosters other than playing the lottery)... Unless that would just kill all interest in limited.
Zendikar 2.0 failed to be the 'Eldrazi matters block' we thought it should be, and yet the very next block was (to my mind) the best possible iteration of that theme. Zendikar 2.0 also failed to be the 'plane of adventures' that, again, everyone expected and hope for - just 3 blocks later we got Ixalan, a spectacular adventure plane. This tells me three things: one that yes, we should absolutely be optimistic about having our expectations met further down the road; two, that we should judge a set based on its own merits; and three, the name of a plane / set is ultimately meaningless as long as we realize that our expectations are actually being met.
Zendikar 2.0 failed to be the 'Eldrazi matters block' we thought it should be, and yet the very next block was (to my mind) the best possible iteration of that theme. Zendikar 2.0 also failed to be the 'plane of adventures' that, again, everyone expected and hope for - just 3 blocks later we got Ixalan, a spectacular adventure plane. This tells me three things: one that yes, we should absolutely be optimistic about having our expectations met further down the road; two, that we should judge a set based on its own merits; and three, the name of a plane / set is ultimately meaningless as long as we realize that our expectations are actually being met.
Were people expecting a return to adventuring in a world being attacked by space abominations? Where did they think that would fit in exactly? "Oh that spaghetti monster just ate that mountain. Oh well, I'm off to go see if there's a goblet in that cave over there." It was pretty obvious BFZ was not going to be the Zendikar we knew. You had mentioned growth before and seems like people just wanted more of the same.
In Zen 3 we were promised the feel of adventuring to return and while we got part of it, with Party, you didn't really experience the other parts of adventuring. Feels like they only got about a third of the adventuring.
1.Make a party.
2.Go out and adventure while facing various trials and tribulations.
3.Reward
We really didn't get #2 one bit or #3, unless maybe WotC thinks the "Reward" is the Masterpieces in boxes this time. "You young adventurers have grouped together, risking life and limb against the plague, and now your reward is this shiny trinket (for $100)."
Seems like if people were upset about the lack of adventure in BFZ then I can't see how they'd be all that accepting of only getting part of it now.
No totem armor cards or cards that grant/replicate totem armor even though protective spells make sense (apparently Nissa got the memo tho)
Only a singular card that cares about allies (which awkwardly isn't an ally itself) even though the ally type would make sense for a D&D party.
A single colorless card that while not directly Eldrazi support, is about the best of the bunch for representing what came before.
Apparently the world just healed turbo fast and there is not a single Wastes card.
Two cards with 'trap' in their name which do nothing with the actual trap cards.
Zendikar 2.0 failed to be the 'Eldrazi matters block' we thought it should be, and yet the very next block was (to my mind) the best possible iteration of that theme. Zendikar 2.0 also failed to be the 'plane of adventures' that, again, everyone expected and hope for - just 3 blocks later we got Ixalan, a spectacular adventure plane. This tells me three things: one that yes, we should absolutely be optimistic about having our expectations met further down the road; two, that we should judge a set based on its own merits; and three, the name of a plane / set is ultimately meaningless as long as we realize that our expectations are actually being met.
Were people expecting a return to adventuring in a world being attacked by space abominations? Where did they think that would fit in exactly? "Oh that spaghetti monster just ate that mountain. Oh well, I'm off to go see if there's a goblet in that cave over there." It was pretty obvious BFZ was not going to be the Zendikar we knew. You had mentioned growth before and seems like people just wanted more of the same.
In Zen 3 we were promised the feel of adventuring to return and while we got part of it, with Party, you didn't really experience the other parts of adventuring. Feels like they only got about a third of the adventuring.
1.Make a party.
2.Go out and adventure while facing various trials and tribulations.
3.Reward
We really didn't get #2 one bit or #3, unless maybe WotC thinks the "Reward" is the Masterpieces in boxes this time. "You young adventurers have grouped together, risking life and limb against the plague, and now your reward is this shiny trinket (for $100)."
Seems like if people were upset about the lack of adventure in BFZ then I can't see how they'd be all that accepting of only getting part of it now.
I guess I would need a more robust definition of what you (or anyone else) thinks adventuring should be fully comprised of in order to respond with efficacy here. Looking at the spoilers again, I see represented: class roles (party), phat loots (equipment), wild beasties of every imaginable size (from jerboas to a giant crab), and exotic locales (MDFC lands). That's a lot more dynamic than people are giving it credit for, and really the only thing getting in the way of recognizing it as such is our preconception about what Zendikar should be - something that will always be personal and, ultimately, subjective.
An aside: I had to learn how to either come to terms of what being a Star Wars fan meant to me, or give it up entirely. The franchise has grown wildly since I was first exposed to it in the '80s: there's the prequel trilogy, the liminal one-offs (Rogue One, Solo), the 'kiddie stuff' (Clone Wars, Rebels), and then mostly recently The Mandalorian and sequel trilogy. Not even accounting for all of the Legends material I grew up with, that's a lot of material dragging the franchise in separate directions, with varying degrees of palatability. To be perfectly honest, I hate most of it; the original trilogy represents the definitive Star Wars experience, and anything which doesn't jibe with that is generally too far afield to be enjoyable for me. When the brand first started to grow in the mid-late '90s, it was easy to be dismissive - this old part was good, this new part part was bad, and despite some contrary opinions my perspective seemed to align with the general consensus. Fast forward a couple of decades and now there's simply too much material for a consensus to even be possible. The prequels haven't aged well, but for a particular generation they're highly nostalgic; the Disney acquisition invalidated a huge body of former canon that some people adored; Rogue One was well received by more traditional Star Wars fans, but I hated it; I enjoyed Solo, a movie that was critically panned by the greater fandom; the 'kiddie stuff' absolutely grates on my nerves, and while it ultimately drove me out of almost every licensed board, card, or miniatures game, I recognize that it's generally well received by the larger audience; The Mandalorian is objectively great, let's not kid ourselves; and while the sequel trilogy is hit or miss (Rian Johnson deserves his own ring special ring in the Inferno), it generally resonates with what I appreciate about the franchise as a whole.
Coming back to my original thought: at a certain point I had to either accept that there was simply too much content to categorize Star Wars as being either good or bad - based on my prescribed criteria - or adhere to what has eventually come to be a very narrow definition and, since Star Wars would accordingly be 'bad,' walk away from something I've loved from adolescence through most of my adulthood. It took some serious introspection, but I eventually decided that it was okay to recognize that what I loved about Star Wars need not define it as a whole - I can take what I like, discard the rest, and not pass judgment on others for the mere existence of disagreeable content, let alone their enjoyment of it. Applying this to Magic, I think it would be wise to find ways to grow as both individuals and as a playerbase. When a given set or block doesn't meet our expectations, sometimes that blame can be placed on Wizards, but for better or worse the onus is on us to determine our own enjoyment of the game as a whole. Take things as they are, not for what you think they should be, and you'll be a lot happier with the things you're passionate about.
Does anyone actually like party? I mean, to actually play with versus the general flavor concept. I feel like there's fairly broad consensus that it's the mechanic that sunk the set, which does not bode well for the D&D set if we have even more of this.
Maybe? I think there's some potential in a WUB build as that trio has some of the better party payoff cards and have a really flush history in the four tribes with really good potential candidates to expand the party with creatures that you both want to play, contribute to a bigger gameplan, and/or protect the party. I think it'd still be pretty casual, and I don't see it making a big splash outside of Limited and constructed formats more focused on fun than fine-tuned competition.
Am I overly invested in building around party? No, not really, but if I were, I'd probably run Tazri as a commander focusing only on WUB. I think the biggest hurdles party decks face are consistently getting a full party and keeping that party on the board. WUB likely has the best tools to assemble a party and keep it around, and they have a few party payoffs that are worth it. The red and green party payoffs just aren't worth it.
I think Linvala really made a strong impression for me that the mechanic wasn't understood to need potent payoffs. There are some good full party payoff effects but I can't help but wonder what could have been with different mechanics.
Part of the issue could be addressed if they just adjusted the level of complexity they'd allow. Like the aforementioned Expedition Healer. If it were something like:
~ has lifelink as long as you control another Cleric, first strike as long as you control a Rogue, vigilance as long as you control a Warrior, protection from non creature spells as long as you control a Wizard. Then you'd get a little bit for Cleric redundancy but also jives with full party.
Like come on.
|| UW Jace, Vyn's Prodigy UW || UG Kenessos, Priest of Thassa (feat. Arixmethes) UG ||
Cards I still want to see created:
|| Olantin, Lost City || Pavios and Thanasis || Choryu ||
I can see doing 5 now, 5 later, but 6 now, 4 later? Am I missing something? No Azorius, Rakdos, Golgari, Simic? I have not been following spoiler season closely so apologies if this is just known already.
On 7/14/10, broke 1900 mark! <3 ROE.
My impression is that Zendikar has many mechanics that are incorrectly estimated: spell-lands and kicker. I think the land-spells will become widely played in multiple format for being lands. Sure, there are real duds, but there are real good ones. land / card draw, land / counter, ... kicker is easy to undervalue because they help the mana curve and add flexibility.
Party, I agree, will probably turn out not to be good in constructed... but very good in limited. The cards turn from mediocre to okay to good at 2 party members. They turn to great to amazing at 3 and 4 members. With full party, many of the card are at the busted level:
This does not make them good in constructed. But in limited they will shine.
Why come we didn’t get the purple orb/ocohedron thing nahiri used in the trailer as a card
Okay thanks man.
Boy this random split was not an elegant solution.
Besides, don't the other pairs also have strategies? GU kicker, BG counters-matter?
On 7/14/10, broke 1900 mark! <3 ROE.
I like the MDFCs in principle, because they fix mana screw/flood. But DFCs are a pain in the ass in paper, and I still don't know how to feel about Wizards apparently wanting to flood the game with them throughout the next year.
The landfall cards are fine.
I really don't like the party mechanic. It feels really weak outside of Limited, and the creative behind it is uninspired (Allies weren't much better though). It's kind of disheartening that we're going to get even more boring, milquetoast DnD stuff next year…
At least they're trying something new with the DFC modals. There's probably a sleeper or two among them.
But as is, I'm here for 3 of this set's mythics, some of these ten cent uncommons and fifty cent rares, and I'll be happy to save the money for Commander Legends.
I'm all about the MDFCs, but I mainly play Arena so that helps. If it's any consolation, I think the tedium of swapping out card faces in sleeves will probably fade as it becomes muscle memory.
Does anyone actually like party? I mean, to actually play with versus the general flavor concept. I feel like there's fairly broad consensus that it's the mechanic that sunk the set, which does not bode well for the D&D set if we have even more of this.
Traps are the one thing I wanted to touch on. If the Party mechanic is a thing where in you take a group of people and go out adventuring it would go without saying that while they explore long lost areas looking for treasure and adventure you would expect them to run into traps, right? Part of the point of this return was to go back to the adventuring roots of Zendikar, which at least I would assume would include them. I'm not upset they aren't here, but when you think it about it it seems like they should be.
"It might get better" isn't the selling point you think it is. If Party returns for D&D Core, and I'm sure it will, that isn't a great thing that we need to wait for a mechanic to get better when the other half of it comes out. If Party were to return I don't think it will get much better, if any.
Yes, it should indeed grow, but with this set I'm not seeing a whole lot of growth. Kicker and Landfall are being used much in the same way they always have with nothing really sticking out. In the case of Kicker there wasn't even any strange costs to it, yes we now have more cards that care about the mechanic, but there's nothing new happening here.
As for Zendikar itself story wise there isn't much, if any, growth here. Seems like the focus on the sky was strictly to avoid even discussing the Eldrazi in any way and there's really only a few nods to it in the whole set. The only continuing story is Nissa going back to her older ways. Yes, we have the new ones with vampires becoming endangered, Nahiri trying to do some various evil for *queue Hot Fuzz* "The greater good", but after that there's really no growth or continuation for the plane as a whole. Compared to the most recent return of Theros where we had the continuation of Elspeth's story and how that affected the gods, and therefore the plane (even if it meant retconning the rules so a spark could come out of nowhere), what we are seeing here is lacking.
While BFZ and Oath were not so great overall, honestly pretty bad, I am going to remember the weird things it did (from their own Avengers and the start of the Bolas arc) and the crap it caused at the time (from their own Avengers constantly being around, Gideon running amok, and the bad CG art) this Zendikar on the other hand feels mediocre and something I don't think I'm going to remember all that much.
Is this set terrible? No. Is it amazing? No. It's in the middle. A bland middle.
Depends on the story really. Lack of a card either means WotC hasn't decided what it does yet or they don't want to spoil what it does. My personal theory is it either kills anything not Kor or turns things to stone so those like Nahiri and bend them to their will or what have you.
Wouldn't surprise me though if this ends up as another Mirari level mcguffin that can just do a lot of stuff and is powerful.
Maybe? I think there's some potential in a WUB build as that trio has some of the better party payoff cards and have a really flush history in the four tribes with really good potential candidates to expand the party with creatures that you both want to play, contribute to a bigger gameplan, and/or protect the party. I think it'd still be pretty casual, and I don't see it making a big splash outside of Limited and constructed formats more focused on fun than fine-tuned competition.
The colors struggle a bit for Warriors that measure up, but a handful may have potential.
Mindblade Render
Mardu Strike Leader
Species Specialist
God-Eternal Oketra
Butcher of Malakir
Solemn Recruit
Once you get into the other tribes, though, things get wonderful. Wizards has Commander stalwarts like Sen Triplets, Azami, Teferi, Venser, Snapcaster. Not to mention more workhorse cards like Exclusion Mage, Vedalken AEthermage, Glen Elendra Archmage, Wizard's Retort, Archaeomancer, Deadeye Navigator. Clerics has Ravos, Ayli, new Mangara, Bishop of Rebirth, Selfless Spirit, Containment Priest. Rogues get Sygg, Oona, Invisible Stalker, Rankle, True-Name Nemesis, Zulaport Cutthroat, Notorious Throng, Gwafa Hazid, Brazen Borrower. These three tribes are deep in these colors, so there's a lot to pick from depending on your playstyle, deck concept, and meta.
Am I overly invested in building around party? No, not really, but if I were, I'd probably run Tazri as a commander focusing only on WUB. I think the biggest hurdles party decks face are consistently getting a full party and keeping that party on the board. WUB likely has the best tools to assemble a party and keep it around, and they have a few party payoffs that are worth it. The red and green party payoffs just aren't worth it.
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
I scrolled down to say exactly this.
Wait, you're supposed to be the expedition's healer, but you can't use healing magic unless there's another cleric in the party??
------
The set's fine. I think the party mechanic takes up too much space overall, and a few stray traps would have been nice. Mostly people complain because that's their job.
As far as fetches go, we knew full well we weren't getting them. I just wish they'd given us enemy Bad River fetches. They aren't overly powerful, but can allow sweet double landfall triggers in a turn.
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.
Agreed. It makes no sense.
Wizards seems to have a serious, fundamental refusal to ever just give us a complete 10-card cycle of good duals in a single set. At least we only have to wait 1 set for the remaining 4 of these. We may never get enemy color battle lands or enemy color cycling lands (or the other 4 Horizon Canopy lands, for that matter).
Thank you for stating the actual problem.
Fully-powered 600-Card "Dream Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/dreamcube
450-Card "Artificer's Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/artificer
Cubing in Indianapolis...send me a PM!!
Honestly, I wish that wizards would use their new set booster to fit in rares that wouldn't be exciting in a draft but that would be desirable. From niche anti-meta rares to dual lands and innocuous plants for old formats, there are quite a few cards that wizards could pointedly leave out of draft boosters to give a more refined and targeted limited environment while packing potentially good cards that don't draft well in set boosters (giving players a real reason to buy set boosters other than playing the lottery)... Unless that would just kill all interest in limited.
Zendikar 2.0 failed to be the 'Eldrazi matters block' we thought it should be, and yet the very next block was (to my mind) the best possible iteration of that theme. Zendikar 2.0 also failed to be the 'plane of adventures' that, again, everyone expected and hope for - just 3 blocks later we got Ixalan, a spectacular adventure plane. This tells me three things: one that yes, we should absolutely be optimistic about having our expectations met further down the road; two, that we should judge a set based on its own merits; and three, the name of a plane / set is ultimately meaningless as long as we realize that our expectations are actually being met.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Were people expecting a return to adventuring in a world being attacked by space abominations? Where did they think that would fit in exactly? "Oh that spaghetti monster just ate that mountain. Oh well, I'm off to go see if there's a goblet in that cave over there." It was pretty obvious BFZ was not going to be the Zendikar we knew. You had mentioned growth before and seems like people just wanted more of the same.
In Zen 3 we were promised the feel of adventuring to return and while we got part of it, with Party, you didn't really experience the other parts of adventuring. Feels like they only got about a third of the adventuring.
1.Make a party.
2.Go out and adventure while facing various trials and tribulations.
3.Reward
We really didn't get #2 one bit or #3, unless maybe WotC thinks the "Reward" is the Masterpieces in boxes this time. "You young adventurers have grouped together, risking life and limb against the plague, and now your reward is this shiny trinket (for $100)."
Seems like if people were upset about the lack of adventure in BFZ then I can't see how they'd be all that accepting of only getting part of it now.
Only a singular card that cares about allies (which awkwardly isn't an ally itself) even though the ally type would make sense for a D&D party.
A single colorless card that while not directly Eldrazi support, is about the best of the bunch for representing what came before.
Apparently the world just healed turbo fast and there is not a single Wastes card.
Two cards with 'trap' in their name which do nothing with the actual trap cards.
I guess I would need a more robust definition of what you (or anyone else) thinks adventuring should be fully comprised of in order to respond with efficacy here. Looking at the spoilers again, I see represented: class roles (party), phat loots (equipment), wild beasties of every imaginable size (from jerboas to a giant crab), and exotic locales (MDFC lands). That's a lot more dynamic than people are giving it credit for, and really the only thing getting in the way of recognizing it as such is our preconception about what Zendikar should be - something that will always be personal and, ultimately, subjective.
An aside: I had to learn how to either come to terms of what being a Star Wars fan meant to me, or give it up entirely. The franchise has grown wildly since I was first exposed to it in the '80s: there's the prequel trilogy, the liminal one-offs (Rogue One, Solo), the 'kiddie stuff' (Clone Wars, Rebels), and then mostly recently The Mandalorian and sequel trilogy. Not even accounting for all of the Legends material I grew up with, that's a lot of material dragging the franchise in separate directions, with varying degrees of palatability. To be perfectly honest, I hate most of it; the original trilogy represents the definitive Star Wars experience, and anything which doesn't jibe with that is generally too far afield to be enjoyable for me. When the brand first started to grow in the mid-late '90s, it was easy to be dismissive - this old part was good, this new part part was bad, and despite some contrary opinions my perspective seemed to align with the general consensus. Fast forward a couple of decades and now there's simply too much material for a consensus to even be possible. The prequels haven't aged well, but for a particular generation they're highly nostalgic; the Disney acquisition invalidated a huge body of former canon that some people adored; Rogue One was well received by more traditional Star Wars fans, but I hated it; I enjoyed Solo, a movie that was critically panned by the greater fandom; the 'kiddie stuff' absolutely grates on my nerves, and while it ultimately drove me out of almost every licensed board, card, or miniatures game, I recognize that it's generally well received by the larger audience; The Mandalorian is objectively great, let's not kid ourselves; and while the sequel trilogy is hit or miss (Rian Johnson deserves his own ring special ring in the Inferno), it generally resonates with what I appreciate about the franchise as a whole.
Coming back to my original thought: at a certain point I had to either accept that there was simply too much content to categorize Star Wars as being either good or bad - based on my prescribed criteria - or adhere to what has eventually come to be a very narrow definition and, since Star Wars would accordingly be 'bad,' walk away from something I've loved from adolescence through most of my adulthood. It took some serious introspection, but I eventually decided that it was okay to recognize that what I loved about Star Wars need not define it as a whole - I can take what I like, discard the rest, and not pass judgment on others for the mere existence of disagreeable content, let alone their enjoyment of it. Applying this to Magic, I think it would be wise to find ways to grow as both individuals and as a playerbase. When a given set or block doesn't meet our expectations, sometimes that blame can be placed on Wizards, but for better or worse the onus is on us to determine our own enjoyment of the game as a whole. Take things as they are, not for what you think they should be, and you'll be a lot happier with the things you're passionate about.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
We should revisit this subject a year from now.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
I think Linvala really made a strong impression for me that the mechanic wasn't understood to need potent payoffs. There are some good full party payoff effects but I can't help but wonder what could have been with different mechanics.
Part of the issue could be addressed if they just adjusted the level of complexity they'd allow. Like the aforementioned Expedition Healer. If it were something like:
~ has lifelink as long as you control another Cleric, first strike as long as you control a Rogue, vigilance as long as you control a Warrior, protection from non creature spells as long as you control a Wizard. Then you'd get a little bit for Cleric redundancy but also jives with full party.