The game is just a collection of cards, of which some have depicted male angels. We might not see more of those in the future, given the current art policies, or it might change. I was disputing whether the fact that Gabriel Angelfire was originally a D&D character designated anything about his status as a card and as a character.
It doesn't count because it was done specifically to contrast that these are things which do not happen. It's doing something to make it obvious that it is not done.
That was sort of the entire point of the alternate framed cards.
That's fine if you wished to say something like "WOTC's policy indicates that they will not print depictions of male angels on Magic cards any time soon."
But insofar as the storyline interpretation is concerned, its supertextual, and there's the problem of hermeneutic circularity, etc etc. To say "there are no male angels in Magic" is actually an induction even if we had a planeswalker as a source, and not necessarily a very strong one in terms of making storyline distinctions.
The fact is, when Time Spiral introduced the element of alternative timelines, the previously closed system of the storyline continuity expanded to include all other timelines. We can say things about how this gimmick influenced how the timeshifted cards were designed, developed and depicted. But that's all outside the realm of the storyline proper.
Because the other example brought up is an alternate reality interpretation.
If Malach of the Dawn does not count because he was specifically created to show an alternate creation, then a predated creation does not count in the same fashion.
Otherwise, the "text" in question is a male angel which counts no matter the provenance of its conceptualization.
It's not clear to me that you can disqualify the Malach, either. Bringing up the alternate reality interpretation is ad hoc.
And this post explains why, regardless of provenance or attachment, he doesn't qualify in the argument in question since his gender predated his establishment, or indeed, the edict that the company would focus solely upon female angels.
He doesn't count towards the diversity of male angels because he was introduced whole as a character into the lore from an outside source.
Yeah, no. I don't know why you would point to the "word of god" type of evidence when I'm clearly stating that only textual evidence has any bearing on what text counts as text.
I don't even like postmodernism, generally, but this is one area where it does apply.
And the Lady of the Mountain was the goddess of the dwarves and Fiers and Gaea's "Daughter" who came into existence when the goblins appeared on Dominaria.
Just because they have a story attached to Magic doesn't mean jack about their origins.
Gabriel had a story attached to him after the fact.
Best not to argue this sort of thing with me.
This is really a non-argument in terms of literary criticism. It's almost completely irrelevant to any narrative within its own context where the elements of that narrative originated, except as a note in passing, and certainly the genetic fallacy to disqualify narrative elements as narrative elements because of their origin. It would be like saying Gabriel Angelfire doesn't count as a character because "Gabriel" is obviously influenced by the Biblical angel of the same name. Whether or not the people who originally included him intended any sort of significance to the character (intentions which we can't actually verify in our interpretation), he is nevertheless the character who does have a story and this is the only valid basis of distinguishing him from anything that is "not part of the storyline," with respect to the storyline.
There are a lot of media forms that Magic could use to narrate a storyline that would be more marketable and accessible to a broader audience than novels. Comics being one of them, as well as animated series, and the like, which would probably expand interest in the game, and thereby revenue. Of course, it would be a significant investment to get the kind of production value needed to really draw in a new audience, but I think something like a TV show would do more to market the game than just about anything. And once you are implementing popular media forms, then it makes more sense to commission novels.
Of course, a TV show (and especially a movie) could easily be awful. But if they did at least expand the Magic community, it would justify resuming the novel line with a focus on quality, as a supplement to the rest of the media narratives.
The hall continues for a time before abruptly crumbling into black nothingness. At the precipice of this point of disintegration, a worn, old rusty chest hangs midair, slightly to its side and slowly rotating as though still in the motion of having been tossed there by some mage or force of nature.
It's not weapon damage, so reduction doesn't apply. Some effects can make you immune to it, though. Knowledge (arcana/planes), and/or Spellcraft for more.
That's fine if you wished to say something like "WOTC's policy indicates that they will not print depictions of male angels on Magic cards any time soon."
But insofar as the storyline interpretation is concerned, its supertextual, and there's the problem of hermeneutic circularity, etc etc. To say "there are no male angels in Magic" is actually an induction even if we had a planeswalker as a source, and not necessarily a very strong one in terms of making storyline distinctions.
The fact is, when Time Spiral introduced the element of alternative timelines, the previously closed system of the storyline continuity expanded to include all other timelines. We can say things about how this gimmick influenced how the timeshifted cards were designed, developed and depicted. But that's all outside the realm of the storyline proper.
It's not clear to me that you can disqualify the Malach, either. Bringing up the alternate reality interpretation is ad hoc.
Yeah, no. I don't know why you would point to the "word of god" type of evidence when I'm clearly stating that only textual evidence has any bearing on what text counts as text.
I don't even like postmodernism, generally, but this is one area where it does apply.
This is really a non-argument in terms of literary criticism. It's almost completely irrelevant to any narrative within its own context where the elements of that narrative originated, except as a note in passing, and certainly the genetic fallacy to disqualify narrative elements as narrative elements because of their origin. It would be like saying Gabriel Angelfire doesn't count as a character because "Gabriel" is obviously influenced by the Biblical angel of the same name. Whether or not the people who originally included him intended any sort of significance to the character (intentions which we can't actually verify in our interpretation), he is nevertheless the character who does have a story and this is the only valid basis of distinguishing him from anything that is "not part of the storyline," with respect to the storyline.
Of course, a TV show (and especially a movie) could easily be awful. But if they did at least expand the Magic community, it would justify resuming the novel line with a focus on quality, as a supplement to the rest of the media narratives.
Whew, okay that took a little longer than I was expecting. Sorry guys. Please continue.
Darkvision sees through the darkness. Orell already destroyed the undead creature in round 2, however, so keep that in mind for your round 3 action.
Immediate action, but a suicidal one.
It's not weapon damage, so reduction doesn't apply. Some effects can make you immune to it, though. Knowledge (arcana/planes), and/or Spellcraft for more.
Tal'Mek succeeds; Rish fails.
The one you're engaged with is still hanging around just barely as of the end of round 2. I posted its action for round 3.