So how should they execute this set's story, then?
That's a good question. Arthurian romance as a genre is a well-established hero's journey with a particular focus on courtly love, courage, loyalty, and adventure so that could be a good place to start. I've seen speculation that the set's story could be Rowan going on a quest to save Will, which is an angle with some promise. An area of overlap between Grimm's tales and Arthurian stories is that of a setting with light, love, and chivalry/innocence getting peeled back to expose real darkness. Arthurian legend has courtly intrigues, tragedy, and betrayals and most Grimm's fairy tales have dark and gruesome elements; much of the art we've seen echos those themes so it's a sure thing that we'll see those themes.
I'd probably lean into the storybook theme, maybe make Eldraine a plane where stories literally come to life based on people's belief in those stories, like a NeverEnding Story/tulpa situation. That would make the setting quite distinct from Lorwyn and Innistrad (honestly, what we've seen of Eldraine is a mixing of those two, so the comparisons are natural) and would enable a good rationalization of the on the nose fairy tale references in-world and tell a story in a way we haven't seen in MtG with the 'real' and the fantastic overlapping and denizens of the 'real' having a level of awareness of the stories given form. There's something meta about it because WotC still gets the Disney references for resonance but the characters in-world can undercut and lampshade the silliness. It even provides a built-in MacGuffin for the Kenriths to chase if the stories given form used to be more whimsical and innocent but have turned dark and dangerous for a mysterious reason.
This may sound rude and misguided but from what you're saying here and others have said before it really sounds like your saying "The more stuff I recognize the less I like it." Which due to years of scientific studies we know is the opposite of what people actually feel meaning this is probably more accurately "The less I understand the cooler I think it makes me to like it."
Well, at least you were aware you sounded rude and misguided.
Mere-exposure/familiarity theory does show that familiarity/exposure to something does increase positive feelings and loyalty towards that something and tropes are tropes because they establish familiar patterns that audiences recognize, but there are diminishing returns and familiarity can only take you so far. A popular song can get overplayed, a genre or style of film can wear on audiences over time, and nostalgia can be overdone to the point of feeling derivative. The trouble with adapting a setting/genre/mythology is that while it will resonate easier with audiences and its familiarity to them will make it more likely they'll respond positively, one can also overplay their hand. And the more familiar the work you're adapting is, the more work is needed to make it feel fresh.
I like familiar things, and I think MtG can and has adapted real world concepts with a degree of success (I'd argue that their more original settings tend to work for me better than their settings that rely heavily on real world inspiration, but that's more a matter of taste), but I also think they can be lazy and derivative. And the more familiar we are with a set of tropes, the more we're able to see when they're adapted well and when they're adapted lazily. And Eldraine is playing in a sandbox a wide swath of the audience is highly familiar with, which means some aspects can feel too familiar, or lazily executed, or like a gimme. I think a setting like that is workable, but if some parts are a little too on the nose or if the adaptation isn't as seamless as it should be, it will be noticed. So for me, it's more "The greater amount of stuff I recognize as lazily-adapted, the less sold I am on the setting".
That's a valid point, thank you for it. What we've seen of Eldraine still reads as lazy to me (and in fairness, I'm "meh" on the setting on a conceptual level because I see it as played out and I don't think MtG has the capacity to make it feel fresh), but your post gives me more reason to hope they'll pull off what they're going for.
I think what you're experiencing is another acute case of Lorwynitis. It's one thing for a setting to be derivative if the content that's derived is rich or has some kind of artistic merit that warrants revisiting and re-exploring in a new medium. Old horror tropes fit the bill here because horror never stops being relevant to the human condition regardless of time or place. Fairy tales also have timeless themes in them but they mostly resonate with children, especially if they are interpreted heavily in the Disneyesque context. If they had tipped the scales of the balance towards more Arthurian themes with a smattering of little fairy tale stuff added, instead of the other way around, most likely it would have felt more substantive. But you're right that WotC can still execute the hell out of this concept.
I mean, we'll see if they can. One of the bigger criticisms of the Gatewatch (aside from the "shoved down our throats" argument) was that it felt like an obvious ripoff of The Avengers with a clunky execution so I think the standard for a smooth execution is higher when adapting things audiences have a lot of exposure to. I doubt I'm the only one out there tired of Disney adaptations (which I now this technically isn't, but given the ubiquity of the Disney versions of fairy tales, it's where much of the audience's familiarity will come from), so I think WotC has their work cut out for them.
I could argue we already have a number of that in the art already. I see True loves kiss, Evil step mother enslaving a stepdaughter, witch cooking kids in pies and living in the woods, magical swords and twins/brother/sister lost in the woods are all found on many stories. The hag offering an apple referring Snow white which in term is often thought of linked with other stories of temptation of women with fruit such as Eve and Persephone who are then curse after eating the offered treat.
I think its simply Inninstrad just lesser know with the source material as a story and the themes where more known as it being a genre instead of a mythology. And a number of thing you talking about horror tropes being broad and not having a single source are also true for many fairy tales tropes I listed above. As I said above a number of stuff we have seen has gone with way with Eldraine.
That's a valid point, thank you for it. What we've seen of Eldraine still reads as lazy to me (and in fairness, I'm "meh" on the setting on a conceptual level because I see it as played out and I don't think MtG has the capacity to make it feel fresh), but your post gives me more reason to hope they'll pull off what they're going for.
Also how is Innistrad any better when it literally made cards based on the fly, invisible man, dracula, ect?
The tropes referred to were inherently broad to begin with and not just direct expies (such as the references to the number 13, references to broad horror tropes like fear of the dark, claustrophobia, alchemy, cannibalism, angry townsfolk with pitchforks and torches etc). Or the tropes referenced have themselves been replicated multiple times in different works over the past few centuries so the references are to a thread of referential works (Delver of Secrets, for example, is not a reference only to The Fly but also the earlier The Metamorphosis). That means when there is a direct one-to-one reference, such as the references to Frankenstein, it feels earned more than derivative because it's supported by a suite of references that aren't as specific.
This feels balanced and not lazy because there are many layers of reference so even the occasional Captain Ersatz doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. Innistrad was a setting made up almost entirely of references, but because so many of them have no single, specific reference point (and instead refer to very general concepts) the overall setting doesn't at all feel derivative. It's that balance I was referring to earlier. I hope Eldraine has that balance (or has some other way to make the Captain Ersatz conga line we've been shown so far make sense).
Eugh... Being unwilling to make obscure references because they are obscure is not a good sign. Sure, you have to make sure to resonate with your larger audience, but part of the point of delving into something like European fairytales is just that: delving. You get into some weird interesting stuff pretty fast, and that's what's cool about it.
No, it isn't - or at least it shouldn't be. They always used recognizability as a metric to choose which tropes they include in their final product and yet we got an Argus-reference on Theros which they didn't consider all that recognizable. Why? Because cool concepts are going to make it into the final product on their own merit as well. And if it happens to be a reference to an obscure piece of lore, they aren't obliged to remove the reference. And they will always throw some bones to those who like to delve deeper into the material just because that's actually a part of player engagement and good design doesn't ignore it. All they tell us here, is that they focus on the well-known tropes.
If anything the Green Knight might still be in there, both because MaRo got to name drop it of the top of his head, and Maro literally is a Green Knight (i. e. the illustration - MaRo's favorite piece of art in the game - is a pretty obvious reference to depictions of the Green Knight seen in architecture).
I think we're getting into the subjective area of taste here, but I do not like when they lean heavily on easily recognized tropes executed at a very shallow level. It feels lazy and base to me and even if I can understand where their motivations come from (recognizable tropes create resonance which in turn can help build player interest in a setting and therefore a set), it concerns me when they put the focus on expies with little depth. I don't mind expies when used sparingly (I think they help sell a setting without requiring a lot of exposition or explanation) and when they're utilized to help establish the tone/rules/story/etc of the setting and provide a lens, particularly if the major focus of the flavor is on the less recognizable elements of the inspiration and/or the unique elements created without direct reference.
Basically, I find the settings where they directly lift elements from the source material without much twist or depth to be derivative. My favorite settings have been the ones with largely unrecognizable inspirations or really great balance between recognizable and unrecognizable elements. Innistrad, I think, got that balance bang on. Ravnica is another example. Eldraine, though clearly still mostly unknown to us, does not seem to be heading in that direction based on our limited information. Introducing the setting with "Come see our versions of classic fairy tales presented with about as much as variation from the source text as Shrek managed in 1999 meshed with elements of Arthurian legend (but only the famous parts because research showed most people didn't recognize secondary aspects of those tales so we stuck with shallow depictions)!" is not inspiring confidence in me. It feels like a lazy grab at dark Disney nostalgia if I'm being frank and I'm viewing the setting through that lens.
That said, I'd like to be proven wrong. They do almost always lead previews with the most recognizable elements of a setting (be it favorites from a past set if revisiting a setting, or recognizable elements from the source material for new settings) and maybe this will be more like Innistrad to me when we see the finished product.
So keeping with the Arthurian theme, I'm wondering how deep they will go with the mythology and stories. It would be great to have a Green Knight equivalent in the game. I bet we will see an extension of Knight tribal as a as a return of Faeries!
I have some disappointing news for you. First Maro has said that the dive into Arthurian is fairly shallow because the populace doesn't actually know that much. He specifically calls out the Green Knight as something probably not done because no one would recognize it.
Well, that's certainly concerning. It sounds like they're only making references to real world mythology for Eldraine if they're making direct references to the most well-known aspects rather than trying to weave many elements in even if the references are to more obscure elements. Again, the real proof is in the final product but that feels really lazy to me.
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.
That's a good question. Arthurian romance as a genre is a well-established hero's journey with a particular focus on courtly love, courage, loyalty, and adventure so that could be a good place to start. I've seen speculation that the set's story could be Rowan going on a quest to save Will, which is an angle with some promise. An area of overlap between Grimm's tales and Arthurian stories is that of a setting with light, love, and chivalry/innocence getting peeled back to expose real darkness. Arthurian legend has courtly intrigues, tragedy, and betrayals and most Grimm's fairy tales have dark and gruesome elements; much of the art we've seen echos those themes so it's a sure thing that we'll see those themes.
I'd probably lean into the storybook theme, maybe make Eldraine a plane where stories literally come to life based on people's belief in those stories, like a NeverEnding Story/tulpa situation. That would make the setting quite distinct from Lorwyn and Innistrad (honestly, what we've seen of Eldraine is a mixing of those two, so the comparisons are natural) and would enable a good rationalization of the on the nose fairy tale references in-world and tell a story in a way we haven't seen in MtG with the 'real' and the fantastic overlapping and denizens of the 'real' having a level of awareness of the stories given form. There's something meta about it because WotC still gets the Disney references for resonance but the characters in-world can undercut and lampshade the silliness. It even provides a built-in MacGuffin for the Kenriths to chase if the stories given form used to be more whimsical and innocent but have turned dark and dangerous for a mysterious reason.
Regardless, I wouldn't play the setting straight.
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
Well, at least you were aware you sounded rude and misguided.
Mere-exposure/familiarity theory does show that familiarity/exposure to something does increase positive feelings and loyalty towards that something and tropes are tropes because they establish familiar patterns that audiences recognize, but there are diminishing returns and familiarity can only take you so far. A popular song can get overplayed, a genre or style of film can wear on audiences over time, and nostalgia can be overdone to the point of feeling derivative. The trouble with adapting a setting/genre/mythology is that while it will resonate easier with audiences and its familiarity to them will make it more likely they'll respond positively, one can also overplay their hand. And the more familiar the work you're adapting is, the more work is needed to make it feel fresh.
I like familiar things, and I think MtG can and has adapted real world concepts with a degree of success (I'd argue that their more original settings tend to work for me better than their settings that rely heavily on real world inspiration, but that's more a matter of taste), but I also think they can be lazy and derivative. And the more familiar we are with a set of tropes, the more we're able to see when they're adapted well and when they're adapted lazily. And Eldraine is playing in a sandbox a wide swath of the audience is highly familiar with, which means some aspects can feel too familiar, or lazily executed, or like a gimme. I think a setting like that is workable, but if some parts are a little too on the nose or if the adaptation isn't as seamless as it should be, it will be noticed. So for me, it's more "The greater amount of stuff I recognize as lazily-adapted, the less sold I am on the setting".
I mean, we'll see if they can. One of the bigger criticisms of the Gatewatch (aside from the "shoved down our throats" argument) was that it felt like an obvious ripoff of The Avengers with a clunky execution so I think the standard for a smooth execution is higher when adapting things audiences have a lot of exposure to. I doubt I'm the only one out there tired of Disney adaptations (which I now this technically isn't, but given the ubiquity of the Disney versions of fairy tales, it's where much of the audience's familiarity will come from), so I think WotC has their work cut out for them.
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
That's a valid point, thank you for it. What we've seen of Eldraine still reads as lazy to me (and in fairness, I'm "meh" on the setting on a conceptual level because I see it as played out and I don't think MtG has the capacity to make it feel fresh), but your post gives me more reason to hope they'll pull off what they're going for.
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
The tropes referred to were inherently broad to begin with and not just direct expies (such as the references to the number 13, references to broad horror tropes like fear of the dark, claustrophobia, alchemy, cannibalism, angry townsfolk with pitchforks and torches etc). Or the tropes referenced have themselves been replicated multiple times in different works over the past few centuries so the references are to a thread of referential works (Delver of Secrets, for example, is not a reference only to The Fly but also the earlier The Metamorphosis). That means when there is a direct one-to-one reference, such as the references to Frankenstein, it feels earned more than derivative because it's supported by a suite of references that aren't as specific.
This feels balanced and not lazy because there are many layers of reference so even the occasional Captain Ersatz doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. Innistrad was a setting made up almost entirely of references, but because so many of them have no single, specific reference point (and instead refer to very general concepts) the overall setting doesn't at all feel derivative. It's that balance I was referring to earlier. I hope Eldraine has that balance (or has some other way to make the Captain Ersatz conga line we've been shown so far make sense).
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 think we're getting into the subjective area of taste here, but I do not like when they lean heavily on easily recognized tropes executed at a very shallow level. It feels lazy and base to me and even if I can understand where their motivations come from (recognizable tropes create resonance which in turn can help build player interest in a setting and therefore a set), it concerns me when they put the focus on expies with little depth. I don't mind expies when used sparingly (I think they help sell a setting without requiring a lot of exposition or explanation) and when they're utilized to help establish the tone/rules/story/etc of the setting and provide a lens, particularly if the major focus of the flavor is on the less recognizable elements of the inspiration and/or the unique elements created without direct reference.
Basically, I find the settings where they directly lift elements from the source material without much twist or depth to be derivative. My favorite settings have been the ones with largely unrecognizable inspirations or really great balance between recognizable and unrecognizable elements. Innistrad, I think, got that balance bang on. Ravnica is another example. Eldraine, though clearly still mostly unknown to us, does not seem to be heading in that direction based on our limited information. Introducing the setting with "Come see our versions of classic fairy tales presented with about as much as variation from the source text as Shrek managed in 1999 meshed with elements of Arthurian legend (but only the famous parts because research showed most people didn't recognize secondary aspects of those tales so we stuck with shallow depictions)!" is not inspiring confidence in me. It feels like a lazy grab at dark Disney nostalgia if I'm being frank and I'm viewing the setting through that lens.
That said, I'd like to be proven wrong. They do almost always lead previews with the most recognizable elements of a setting (be it favorites from a past set if revisiting a setting, or recognizable elements from the source material for new settings) and maybe this will be more like Innistrad to me when we see the finished product.
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
Well, that's certainly concerning. It sounds like they're only making references to real world mythology for Eldraine if they're making direct references to the most well-known aspects rather than trying to weave many elements in even if the references are to more obscure elements. Again, the real proof is in the final product but that feels really lazy to me.
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
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