Played some EDH with a bunch of guys at my LGS. It was great fun. My Azorius Angel-Wizard tribal control deck was really janky but fun to play. Looking forward to more EDH.
Q:Re: the new Funko figures - Gideon's a little dark, isn't he? I mean, he's always had lighter skin than that in artwork before. Are they not the final designs, or what?
alienlovemessiah
We were trying to get Gideon closer to his original intended ethnicity, which includes a bit more melanin than hes had in past illustrations (he was never intended to be a straight-up white guy). He was supposed to have some Mediterranean influence blended with hints of other influences, and that feedback led to the skin color of the vinyl. Gideons ethnicity includes more details than just skin color, but Funko vinyls are pretty stylized, so thats kind of all that came across.
#gideon #gideon jura #again though #totes adorbs
marpj said: What are the chances to change the rotation policy to be by set instead of by block (at each new set the oldest rotates out, being always 7 or 8 set standard legal)?
A fine question. If you controlled the rotation policy for Standard, how would you have it work? Keep it the same is an acceptable answer.
I didn't realize they got that small in the States. Yesterday in the UK I played in a 280+ player one and they've all been that size this season.
"The Kenny Mayer Special" is what we call em. Anything south of DC ends up getting not-that-many players.American privilege, son.
Explanation of Gideon's dark skin color in his Funko figure
So Gideon is supposed to have darker skin, but his previous illustrations didn't really show that. They intend for future art to reflect this better. Also, Kiora still having the last name Atua on the figure is a mistake.
Also, Maro responded to a question about Standard rotation.
djh119 said: It's kind of annoying you guys gave Triumph of Ferocity an alternate art. There is nothing wrong with the original art; it portrays the struggle equally, in which Liliana wins with Triumph of Cruelty. I think doing so admits that WOTC thinks the first portrayal is indecent, when it is not.
You have to remember that intent is not enough. Yes, our motives behind the illustration were pure, but the way it was perceived upset a portion of our audience.
We have to be sensitive to the fact that, out of context, the art portrayed some things that we work very hard to avoid in our game. The portrayal of women in Magic is something that we strive to be a leader on in our industry.
Part of living up to that goal is being aware not just of what we mean when we make our cards but what the audience perceives when they look at them. We changed the art because it was creating messages, intended or not, that we did not mean to send.
I realize that some people, such as yourself, did not perceive the art that way, but you need to understand that others did and we have to be respectful of that.
Isn't Tezz a robo-zombie now? They're usually pretty pale, right?Way to leave out Tezz being white now guys haha geeze.
Explanation of Gideon's dark skin color in his Funko figure
So Gideon is supposed to have darker skin, but his previous illustrations didn't really show that. They intend for future art to reflect this better. Also, Kiora still having the last name Atua on the figure is a mistake.
Also, Maro responded to a question about Standard rotation.
It turns out Triumph of Ferocity got new art on Duels of the Planeswalkers 2015.
![]()
MaRo explains it here
Good on Wizards for that.
So EVERY previous depiction of Gideon, and there have been plenty, were wrong? This is going to be a bit of an awkward transition to say the least. How did they botch it for long if what he looked like before was a mistake?
Isn't Tezz a robo-zombie now? They're usually pretty pale, right?
I mean its kind of annoying because to take offense to the image requires you to not be aware of the context (and making a comment on anything sans context is dangerous) of the image and that it is the mirrored image depicting a battle between two planeswalkers of about equal power who are trying to kill each other. This is not some overpowering brute trying to lay his dominance over a weak and defenseless woman. ALL THAT BEING SAID, I understand how the image can be problematic if someone didn't/can't/wasn't able to acquire context and if changing it results in a net increase in happiness in the world then its a good thing. The image isn't worth falling on a sword for.
I think the context of the card even without Triumph of Cruelty is pretty clear though. He's holding her down and saying "remove this curse or I'll kill you", so there's a practical reason for him holding her down the way he is (that doesn't involve sexual abuse, and it isn't just random violence). I'm not even that opposed to the idea that they've updated the art, but the fact that Liliana isn't even on the new version annoys me. Something tells me it's going to be a long time before we see a two people of different genders fighting on a card again, which doesn't feel very progressive,
Why jump to that conclusion? The problem with the original art is the posing, not that it portrays both a woman and a man. All this requires Wizards do is be more sensitive and aware with their art direction.
I don't agree that there was anything particularly wrong with the original art, but I'm all for them taking under advisement whether people think cards come off as discriminatory and making a point to not repeat past mistakes.
I just wish they'd found a middle ground that involved putting Vess on the card (the flavour text made a lot more sense in the first card). It just reads like they're sacrificing art direction to appease.
Sure, but I think that's a different matter. I just think it's silly to suddenly worry that they're never going to show a man and woman fighting again.
We Messed Up on Born of the Gods
One of the banes of Magicdesign is third sets. They're just tricky to do. We have to innovate enough to make them fresh after eight months of players being exposed to the block, but we can't deviate too much or else it doesn't feel connected. Obviously, one only needs to look at sets like Rise of the Eldrazi and Avacyn Restored to see that we've gone to great lengths to try and make third sets work.
But wait, wasn't Born of the Gods the second set? Yes, it was. See, I was so concerned with making sure the third set worked that I made the second set give up too much. We finally made a worthy third set only to realize it came at the cost of the second one.
Let me quickly jump in and say that this problem was not because of Ken Nagle, the lead designer of Born of the Gods, but because of me as the head designer. I'm the one who called the shots and decided what went were and, if the second set was lacking, it's because I was saving stuff for the third set. Which leads us to the next lesson:
No new artwork. Disappointing.
So when will preview season start?
Prowess lol. What a shitty keyword.
Basically, limited fodder.Looks like Jeskai's mechanic will revolve around combat tricks and buffs. This could be fun, if you enjoy stuff like Kiln Fiend or Nivix Cyclops.
Theros block was anything but complex. Control was basically dead unless you had a Hedonia or the serpent that bounced everything your opponent has.
Morph is pretty wacky and adds a LOT of hidden information/onboard combat tricks to the gameplay. You don't need to make what's surrounding it all that complicated.Misread Prowess at first, and now that I realize a single spell ticks all your prowess creatures it'll probably be alright, especially for Limited.
Was morph really that complicated a mechanic? Never had any trouble with it back in Onslaught block. Really starting to dislike NWO if it means they feel they have to water sets down below belief to compensate.
Basically, limited fodder.
There'll be a 1/1 Prowess for one and it'll be terrible.
Does morph use the stack? That doesn't have an obvious answer unless you already know it.Was morph really that complicated a mechanic? Never had any trouble with it back in Onslaught block. Really starting to dislike NWO if it means they feel they have to water sets down below belief to compensate.
Bestow was fine, as was Devotion.
I think Tribute was one the least inspired mechanics ever. Well other than Inspired.
You don't choose whether the spell is going to be an Aura spell or not until the spell is already on the stack. Abilities that affect when you can cast a spell, such as flash, will apply to the creature card in whatever zone you're casting it from. For example, an effect that said you can cast creature spells as though they have flash will allow you to cast a creature card with bestow as an Aura spell anytime you could cast an instant.
On the stack, a spell with bestow is either a creature spell or an Aura spell. It's never both.
Unlike other Aura spells, an Aura spell with bestow isn't countered if its target is illegal as it begins to resolve. Rather, the effect making it an Aura spell ends, it loses enchant creature, it returns to being an enchantment creature spell, and it resolves and enters the battlefield as an enchantment creature.
Unlike other Auras, an Aura with bestow isn't put into its owner's graveyard if it becomes unattached. Rather, the effect making it an Aura ends, it loses enchant creature, and it remains on the battlefield as an enchantment creature. It can attack (and its Tap abilities can be activated, if it has any) on the turn it becomes unattached if it's been under your control continuously, even as an Aura, since your most recent turn began.
If a permanent with bestow enters the battlefield by any method other than being cast, it will be an enchantment creature. You can't choose to pay the bestow cost and have it become an Aura.
Auras attached to a creature don't become tapped when the creature becomes tapped. Except in some rare cases, an Aura with bestow remains untapped when it becomes unattached and becomes a creature.
Basically, limited fodder.
There'll be a 1/1 Prowess for one and it'll be terrible.
physics-pony said: who made raid and prowess? they are both so simple and yet, so full of potential!
Raid was made by the exploratory design team for Khans (Ethan Fleischer, Shawn Main and myself). I thought I came up with prowess but it turns out it came from Jon Loucks in the second Great Designer Search and I didn’t realize where the idea got lodged in my head.