I think the gatewatch angle has reduced (or some may argue streamlined) mtg's main storyline to a superheroes saving the day kind of plot, at least at its core. And just like a lot of people's sentiments, I wouldn't mind it if it were done right. And if we follow the superhero storyline logic, I believe that superhero narratives are only as good as its villains.. so as far as improving the storyline, that would to me be the best start.
Personal preference at this point: I want an anti-thesis of the gatewatch. Frustrated planeswalkers who came together simply because they're sick of the power rangers spoiling their fun all the time. If the Gatewatch came together to "protect the peace across the multiverse", these guys came together because "fck you, that's why lol deal with it". They don't even have to be under Bolas, just a bunch of rogues who value personal freedom over everything else. Then they come together and give the gatewatch a run for their money. They can even call themselves the Gatecrashers, Hatewatch or even Baywatch for all I care. I mean imagine a story arc wherein this team gets to coax liliana into joining them for a while.. if I remember correctly, liliana's ulterior motive to joining jace and co. in the first place was to somehow manipulate them into helping her kill the 2 remaining demons.. Then this new all star team composed of nahiri (wishful thinking lol I really want a mardu walker), vraska, ashiok, etc (hell, throw in tibalt for good measure who cares) just show up and say "hey lili, you don't have to manipulate us, just join us and we'll help you willingly so you can drop the good girl act lol".. I think stirring and mixing things up in the "villains" side of things will by association make the Gatewatch more interesting. That kind of adversity can induce character development on all fronts without having to force backstories just to make characters seem more deep. But I admit this particular paragraph has a lot of bias. I just want an evil walker team, preferably without Bolas.
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
So, heroic would be the Strawhat Crew from One Piece?
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
So, heroic would be the Strawhat Crew from One Piece?
lol!! I'm not too sure about that, but yeah that might be as close an analogy as I can think of assuming you weren't being sarcastic
I would say the gatewatch are great. I would like more small moments with them like we had with Nissa and Chandra as it was quite heartwarming. Chandra being RG makes sense.
The following is spoiler-tagged in order to not heavily derail the discussion and keep it politely and neatly small for other forum-goers experience.
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I think you are mixing RG philosophy with RB. The least villainous of the dragonlords is Atarka. Atarka's brood cares about one thing: Food. As long as that condition is satisfied, they are by and large the least harmful to the humans. The dragons spend most of the their time, aside from eating, fighting amongst themselves in order to make themselves stronger. Dissent has only started amongst this clan because of visions. Not exactly by the doing of the dragons within this tribe.
"The dragonlord became a fearsome leader, using violence, cruelty, and her trademark unpredictability to keep the clan in line... Unlike the Mardu, the Kolaghan follow no code of honor. Their ambitions are to raze the other Clans down and bring ruin wherever they go. The Kolaghan pine for freedom, from civilization, from limits, from any form of honor or law."
RB is selfish and cares about itself.
Even Dromoka's brood is not necessarily the nicest in town. As remember Anafenza? She had the gall to take part in her families old traditions and what was her sentence? Execution. Because she died the way she did as a martyr, their is now a quiet growing amount of dissent going amongst the people as they now partake in the old traditions like Anafenza did and she watches over them as a kin-tree spirit.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
Oh? The majority of RB cards are filled with some of the most evil stuff out there. The only character who even matches close to Phantom King's description is Olivia Voldaren BUT even she enjoys and partakes in bloodsports.
RB is the the most villainous color. You want more? The only two cards in the entire game that aren't even about such things are Ghostflame and Ghostflame Slivir. As far as I am concerned Qaanglaagix is actually correct on this matter. RB is not something misunderstood like B tends to be, it is in fact perfectly understood. Its about: Hedonism, pain, mayhem, violence, arson, torture, blood, cruelty, revenge, suffering, desecration, demons, bombing, fearmongering, ritualistic sacrifices, spitefulness, destruction of public property. If MTG was a game marketed to an older demographic, it would include a lot more unsavory things in there that would make people squirm.
, WB, BU or GB are more likely to get heroes(/anti-heroes) than RB and some of those have already had heroes(/anti-heroes). RB is and always has been the villain's color for the past 20+ years of MTG.
Also to nip this in the bud: Luffy's Gang as BR? Yeah I will agree with you here. I would argue that with the crew's combined traits they are WUBRG.
Also to nip in the bud ahead of time: characters doesn't necessarily get along with characters and their can be differences on how things are handled. Such as with Heliod and Elspeth who are both mono-white but held different views and the Leonin of Theros who also held different views from both of those two who are also mono-white. Lets also not forget Ajani who at that time is GW and went all iconoclast on the gods after what they did to his friend Elspeth and hated them, particularly Heliod, for what happened to his beloved friend. Yes that is right. A character can break laws and traditions if they believe that those very things put in place by another character is unhealthy and hinders society as a whole and that society would be better off.
BR breaks laws and traditions because it hindered THEM, not those AROUND them.
I would say the gatewatch are great. I would like more small moments with them like we had with Nissa and Chandra as it was quite heartwarming. Chandra being RG makes sense.
The following is spoiler-tagged in order to not heavily derail the discussion and keep it politely and neatly small for other forum-goers experience.
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I think you are mixing RG philosophy with RB. The least villainous of the dragonlords is Atarka. Atarka's brood cares about one thing: Food. As long as that condition is satisfied, they are by and large the least harmful to the humans. The dragons spend most of the their time, aside from eating, fighting amongst themselves in order to make themselves stronger. Dissent has only started amongst this clan because of visions. Not exactly by the doing of the dragons within this tribe.
"The dragonlord became a fearsome leader, using violence, cruelty, and her trademark unpredictability to keep the clan in line... Unlike the Mardu, the Kolaghan follow no code of honor. Their ambitions are to raze the other Clans down and bring ruin wherever they go. The Kolaghan pine for freedom, from civilization, from limits, from any form of honor or law."
RB is selfish and cares about itself.
Even Dromoka's brood is not necessarily the nicest in town. As remember Anafenza? She had the gall to take part in her families old traditions and what was her sentence? Execution. Because she died the way she did as a martyr, their is now a quiet growing amount of dissent going amongst the people as they now partake in the old traditions like Anafenza did and she watches over them as a kin-tree spirit.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
Oh? The majority of RB cards are filled with some of the most evil stuff out there. The only character who even matches close to Phantom King's description is Olivia Voldaren BUT even she enjoys and partakes in bloodsports.
RB is the the most villainous color. You want more? The only two cards in the entire game that aren't even about such things are Ghostflame and Ghostflame Slivir. As far as I am concerned Qaanglaagix is actually correct on this matter. RB is not something misunderstood like B tends to be, it is in fact perfectly understood. Its about: Hedonism, pain, mayhem, violence, arson, torture, blood, cruelty, revenge, suffering, desecration, demons, bombing, fearmongering, ritualistic sacrifices, spitefulness, destruction of public property. If MTG was a game marketed to an older demographic, it would include a lot more unsavory things in there that would make people squirm.
, WB, BU or GB are more likely to get heroes(/anti-heroes) than RB and some of those have already had heroes(/anti-heroes). RB is and always has been the villain's color for the past 20+ years of MTG.
Also to nip this in the bud: Luffy's Gang as BR? Yeah I will agree with you here. I would argue that with the crew's combined traits they are WUBRG.
Also to nip in the bud ahead of time: characters doesn't necessarily get along with characters and their can be differences on how things are handled. Such as with Heliod and Elspeth who are both mono-white but held different views and the Leonin of Theros who also held different views from both of those two who are also mono-white. Lets also not forget Ajani who at that time is GW and went all iconoclast on the gods after what they did to his friend Elspeth and hated them, particularly Heliod, for what happened to his beloved friend. Yes that is right. A character can break laws and traditions if they believe that those very things put in place by another character is unhealthy and hinders society as a whole and that society would be better off.
BR breaks laws and traditions because it hindered THEM, not those AROUND them.
I don't disagree with any of your points. B/R is the most villainous color by nature. But all B/R CHARACTERS being villains is not a generalization I want to make as of now. If you can help me prove kolaghan is a straight up villain in the khan's arc, then I'm with you all the way lol!
I would say the gatewatch are great. I would like more small moments with them like we had with Nissa and Chandra as it was quite heartwarming. Chandra being RG makes sense.
The following is spoiler-tagged in order to not heavily derail the discussion and keep it politely and neatly small for other forum-goers experience.
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I think you are mixing RG philosophy with RB. The least villainous of the dragonlords is Atarka. Atarka's brood cares about one thing: Food. As long as that condition is satisfied, they are by and large the least harmful to the humans. The dragons spend most of the their time, aside from eating, fighting amongst themselves in order to make themselves stronger. Dissent has only started amongst this clan because of visions. Not exactly by the doing of the dragons within this tribe.
"The dragonlord became a fearsome leader, using violence, cruelty, and her trademark unpredictability to keep the clan in line... Unlike the Mardu, the Kolaghan follow no code of honor. Their ambitions are to raze the other Clans down and bring ruin wherever they go. The Kolaghan pine for freedom, from civilization, from limits, from any form of honor or law."
RB is selfish and cares about itself.
Even Dromoka's brood is not necessarily the nicest in town. As remember Anafenza? She had the gall to take part in her families old traditions and what was her sentence? Execution. Because she died the way she did as a martyr, their is now a quiet growing amount of dissent going amongst the people as they now partake in the old traditions like Anafenza did and she watches over them as a kin-tree spirit.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
Oh? The majority of RB cards are filled with some of the most evil stuff out there. The only character who even matches close to Phantom King's description is Olivia Voldaren BUT even she enjoys and partakes in bloodsports.
RB is the the most villainous color. You want more? The only two cards in the entire game that aren't even about such things are Ghostflame and Ghostflame Slivir. As far as I am concerned Qaanglaagix is actually correct on this matter. RB is not something misunderstood like B tends to be, it is in fact perfectly understood. Its about: Hedonism, pain, mayhem, violence, arson, torture, blood, cruelty, revenge, suffering, desecration, demons, bombing, fearmongering, ritualistic sacrifices, spitefulness, destruction of public property. If MTG was a game marketed to an older demographic, it would include a lot more unsavory things in there that would make people squirm.
, WB, BU or GB are more likely to get heroes(/anti-heroes) than RB and some of those have already had heroes(/anti-heroes). RB is and always has been the villain's color for the past 20+ years of MTG.
Also to nip this in the bud: Luffy's Gang as BR? Yeah I will agree with you here. I would argue that with the crew's combined traits they are WUBRG.
Also to nip in the bud ahead of time: characters doesn't necessarily get along with characters and their can be differences on how things are handled. Such as with Heliod and Elspeth who are both mono-white but held different views and the Leonin of Theros who also held different views from both of those two who are also mono-white. Lets also not forget Ajani who at that time is GW and went all iconoclast on the gods after what they did to his friend Elspeth and hated them, particularly Heliod, for what happened to his beloved friend. Yes that is right. A character can break laws and traditions if they believe that those very things put in place by another character is unhealthy and hinders society as a whole and that society would be better off.
BR breaks laws and traditions because it hindered THEM, not those AROUND them.
I don't disagree with any of your points. B/R is the most villainous color by nature. But all B/R CHARACTERS being villains is not a generalization I want to make as of now. If you can help me prove kolaghan is a straight up villain in the khan's arc, then I'm with you all the way lol!
Given Maro has said something along the lines of color combinations not being good or evil I would say it's at least something Wizards doesn't agree with. Doesn't mean we will get a B/R Chandra (I'd think R/G personally, though not the same as Gruul) anytime soon though, but it's not something that is completely outside of Chandra's nature.
I would say the gatewatch are great. I would like more small moments with them like we had with Nissa and Chandra as it was quite heartwarming. Chandra being RG makes sense.
The following is spoiler-tagged in order to not heavily derail the discussion and keep it politely and neatly small for other forum-goers experience.
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I think you are mixing RG philosophy with RB. The least villainous of the dragonlords is Atarka. Atarka's brood cares about one thing: Food. As long as that condition is satisfied, they are by and large the least harmful to the humans. The dragons spend most of the their time, aside from eating, fighting amongst themselves in order to make themselves stronger. Dissent has only started amongst this clan because of visions. Not exactly by the doing of the dragons within this tribe.
"The dragonlord became a fearsome leader, using violence, cruelty, and her trademark unpredictability to keep the clan in line... Unlike the Mardu, the Kolaghan follow no code of honor. Their ambitions are to raze the other Clans down and bring ruin wherever they go. The Kolaghan pine for freedom, from civilization, from limits, from any form of honor or law."
RB is selfish and cares about itself.
Even Dromoka's brood is not necessarily the nicest in town. As remember Anafenza? She had the gall to take part in her families old traditions and what was her sentence? Execution. Because she died the way she did as a martyr, their is now a quiet growing amount of dissent going amongst the people as they now partake in the old traditions like Anafenza did and she watches over them as a kin-tree spirit.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
Oh? The majority of RB cards are filled with some of the most evil stuff out there. The only character who even matches close to Phantom King's description is Olivia Voldaren BUT even she enjoys and partakes in bloodsports.
RB is the the most villainous color. You want more? The only two cards in the entire game that aren't even about such things are Ghostflame and Ghostflame Slivir. As far as I am concerned Qaanglaagix is actually correct on this matter. RB is not something misunderstood like B tends to be, it is in fact perfectly understood. Its about: Hedonism, pain, mayhem, violence, arson, torture, blood, cruelty, revenge, suffering, desecration, demons, bombing, fearmongering, ritualistic sacrifices, spitefulness, destruction of public property. If MTG was a game marketed to an older demographic, it would include a lot more unsavory things in there that would make people squirm.
, WB, BU or GB are more likely to get heroes(/anti-heroes) than RB and some of those have already had heroes(/anti-heroes). RB is and always has been the villain's color for the past 20+ years of MTG.
Also to nip this in the bud: Luffy's Gang as BR? Yeah I will agree with you here. I would argue that with the crew's combined traits they are WUBRG.
Also to nip in the bud ahead of time: characters doesn't necessarily get along with characters and their can be differences on how things are handled. Such as with Heliod and Elspeth who are both mono-white but held different views and the Leonin of Theros who also held different views from both of those two who are also mono-white. Lets also not forget Ajani who at that time is GW and went all iconoclast on the gods after what they did to his friend Elspeth and hated them, particularly Heliod, for what happened to his beloved friend. Yes that is right. A character can break laws and traditions if they believe that those very things put in place by another character is unhealthy and hinders society as a whole and that society would be better off.
BR breaks laws and traditions because it hindered THEM, not those AROUND them.
I don't disagree with any of your points. B/R is the most villainous color by nature. But all B/R CHARACTERS being villains is not a generalization I want to make as of now. If you can help me prove kolaghan is a straight up villain in the khan's arc, then I'm with you all the way lol!
Aside from using cruelty and unpredictability to turn the Mardu people into a roving band of honorless bloodthirsty cannibals who seek to ruin civilization? Where they must abandon their sick, crippled and old aet Kolaghan's request? Where they are browbeated by Kolaghan and her brood with getting electrified by their breaths if they fail to keep up with the dragons or try to become a deserter?
None of the Dragon Broods are good. They are all a kind of evil in one the various forms. Oujtai's evil for instance is a strict and regimented learning through philosophy and education that prohibits creative thinking. (aka brain washing youths through education and teaching them not to expand their minds to the possibilities.)
I would say that Yahenni is about as close as we've got to a "good" (B/R) character. Though their card is mono B, their character reads pretty well as (B/R), and could easily have been (B/R) if they had been printing a multicolored cycle in AER instead of a monocolored one.
I would say the gatewatch are great. I would like more small moments with them like we had with Nissa and Chandra as it was quite heartwarming. Chandra being RG makes sense.
The following is spoiler-tagged in order to not heavily derail the discussion and keep it politely and neatly small for other forum-goers experience.
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I think you are mixing RG philosophy with RB. The least villainous of the dragonlords is Atarka. Atarka's brood cares about one thing: Food. As long as that condition is satisfied, they are by and large the least harmful to the humans. The dragons spend most of the their time, aside from eating, fighting amongst themselves in order to make themselves stronger. Dissent has only started amongst this clan because of visions. Not exactly by the doing of the dragons within this tribe.
"The dragonlord became a fearsome leader, using violence, cruelty, and her trademark unpredictability to keep the clan in line... Unlike the Mardu, the Kolaghan follow no code of honor. Their ambitions are to raze the other Clans down and bring ruin wherever they go. The Kolaghan pine for freedom, from civilization, from limits, from any form of honor or law."
RB is selfish and cares about itself.
Even Dromoka's brood is not necessarily the nicest in town. As remember Anafenza? She had the gall to take part in her families old traditions and what was her sentence? Execution. Because she died the way she did as a martyr, their is now a quiet growing amount of dissent going amongst the people as they now partake in the old traditions like Anafenza did and she watches over them as a kin-tree spirit.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
Oh? The majority of RB cards are filled with some of the most evil stuff out there. The only character who even matches close to Phantom King's description is Olivia Voldaren BUT even she enjoys and partakes in bloodsports.
RB is the the most villainous color. You want more? The only two cards in the entire game that aren't even about such things are Ghostflame and Ghostflame Slivir. As far as I am concerned Qaanglaagix is actually correct on this matter. RB is not something misunderstood like B tends to be, it is in fact perfectly understood. Its about: Hedonism, pain, mayhem, violence, arson, torture, blood, cruelty, revenge, suffering, desecration, demons, bombing, fearmongering, ritualistic sacrifices, spitefulness, destruction of public property. If MTG was a game marketed to an older demographic, it would include a lot more unsavory things in there that would make people squirm.
, WB, BU or GB are more likely to get heroes(/anti-heroes) than RB and some of those have already had heroes(/anti-heroes). RB is and always has been the villain's color for the past 20+ years of MTG.
Also to nip this in the bud: Luffy's Gang as BR? Yeah I will agree with you here. I would argue that with the crew's combined traits they are WUBRG.
Also to nip in the bud ahead of time: characters doesn't necessarily get along with characters and their can be differences on how things are handled. Such as with Heliod and Elspeth who are both mono-white but held different views and the Leonin of Theros who also held different views from both of those two who are also mono-white. Lets also not forget Ajani who at that time is GW and went all iconoclast on the gods after what they did to his friend Elspeth and hated them, particularly Heliod, for what happened to his beloved friend. Yes that is right. A character can break laws and traditions if they believe that those very things put in place by another character is unhealthy and hinders society as a whole and that society would be better off.
BR breaks laws and traditions because it hindered THEM, not those AROUND them.
I don't disagree with any of your points. B/R is the most villainous color by nature. But all B/R CHARACTERS being villains is not a generalization I want to make as of now. If you can help me prove kolaghan is a straight up villain in the khan's arc, then I'm with you all the way lol!
Aside from using cruelty and unpredictability to turn the Mardu people into a roving band of honorless bloodthirsty cannibals who seek to ruin civilization? Where they must abandon their sick, crippled and old aet Kolaghan's request? Where they are browbeated by Kolaghan and her brood with getting electrified by their breaths if they fail to keep up with the dragons or try to become a deserter?
None of the Dragon Broods are good. They are all a kind of evil in one the various forms. Oujtai's evil for instance is a strict and regimented learning through philosophy and education that prohibits creative thinking. (aka brain washing youths through education and teaching them not to expand their minds to the possibilities.)
Oh wow I didn't know Kolaghan did those things. Where was that explicitly stated? I'd love to read up that lore.
I would say the gatewatch are great. I would like more small moments with them like we had with Nissa and Chandra as it was quite heartwarming. Chandra being RG makes sense.
The following is spoiler-tagged in order to not heavily derail the discussion and keep it politely and neatly small for other forum-goers experience.
RB will not always be villains. Kolaghan was arguably the least villainous of the Dragonlords, and was rather decent overall.
They care about the law when breaking it means they dont get what they want. They care about what they want, but part of that is the ones they love.
I think you are mixing RG philosophy with RB. The least villainous of the dragonlords is Atarka. Atarka's brood cares about one thing: Food. As long as that condition is satisfied, they are by and large the least harmful to the humans. The dragons spend most of the their time, aside from eating, fighting amongst themselves in order to make themselves stronger. Dissent has only started amongst this clan because of visions. Not exactly by the doing of the dragons within this tribe.
"The dragonlord became a fearsome leader, using violence, cruelty, and her trademark unpredictability to keep the clan in line... Unlike the Mardu, the Kolaghan follow no code of honor. Their ambitions are to raze the other Clans down and bring ruin wherever they go. The Kolaghan pine for freedom, from civilization, from limits, from any form of honor or law."
RB is selfish and cares about itself.
Even Dromoka's brood is not necessarily the nicest in town. As remember Anafenza? She had the gall to take part in her families old traditions and what was her sentence? Execution. Because she died the way she did as a martyr, their is now a quiet growing amount of dissent going amongst the people as they now partake in the old traditions like Anafenza did and she watches over them as a kin-tree spirit.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
Oh? The majority of RB cards are filled with some of the most evil stuff out there. The only character who even matches close to Phantom King's description is Olivia Voldaren BUT even she enjoys and partakes in bloodsports.
RB is the the most villainous color. You want more? The only two cards in the entire game that aren't even about such things are Ghostflame and Ghostflame Slivir. As far as I am concerned Qaanglaagix is actually correct on this matter. RB is not something misunderstood like B tends to be, it is in fact perfectly understood. Its about: Hedonism, pain, mayhem, violence, arson, torture, blood, cruelty, revenge, suffering, desecration, demons, bombing, fearmongering, ritualistic sacrifices, spitefulness, destruction of public property. If MTG was a game marketed to an older demographic, it would include a lot more unsavory things in there that would make people squirm.
, WB, BU or GB are more likely to get heroes(/anti-heroes) than RB and some of those have already had heroes(/anti-heroes). RB is and always has been the villain's color for the past 20+ years of MTG.
Also to nip this in the bud: Luffy's Gang as BR? Yeah I will agree with you here. I would argue that with the crew's combined traits they are WUBRG.
Also to nip in the bud ahead of time: characters doesn't necessarily get along with characters and their can be differences on how things are handled. Such as with Heliod and Elspeth who are both mono-white but held different views and the Leonin of Theros who also held different views from both of those two who are also mono-white. Lets also not forget Ajani who at that time is GW and went all iconoclast on the gods after what they did to his friend Elspeth and hated them, particularly Heliod, for what happened to his beloved friend. Yes that is right. A character can break laws and traditions if they believe that those very things put in place by another character is unhealthy and hinders society as a whole and that society would be better off.
BR breaks laws and traditions because it hindered THEM, not those AROUND them.
I don't disagree with any of your points. B/R is the most villainous color by nature. But all B/R CHARACTERS being villains is not a generalization I want to make as of now. If you can help me prove kolaghan is a straight up villain in the khan's arc, then I'm with you all the way lol!
Aside from using cruelty and unpredictability to turn the Mardu people into a roving band of honorless bloodthirsty cannibals who seek to ruin civilization? Where they must abandon their sick, crippled and old aet Kolaghan's request? Where they are browbeated by Kolaghan and her brood with getting electrified by their breaths if they fail to keep up with the dragons or try to become a deserter?
None of the Dragon Broods are good. They are all a kind of evil in one the various forms. Oujtai's evil for instance is a strict and regimented learning through philosophy and education that prohibits creative thinking. (aka brain washing youths through education and teaching them not to expand their minds to the possibilities.)
Oh wow I didn't know Kolaghan did those things. Where was that explicitly stated? I'd love to read up that lore.
I should note - with regards to the Rakdos/ - that MaRo's said in the past that viewing the Guilds of Ravnica as being the only way a Color Pair can be interpreted is wrong, and that, since Magic is a combat-oriented game, you'll usually see the more violent elements of the Guilds displayed in the cards. The Rakdos have been stated to run quite a few legitimate businesses around Ravnica (restaurants and the like), and in the original Ravnica books, one of Agrus Kos' allies is a Rakdos Imp/Goblin, if memory serves.
BR is often the villain colour due to its opposition to norms and society, but it has repeatedly also been associated with individuality and self-assertion. Even the Rakdos have had relatively benevolent characters in their ranks
Well the whole point of the origins 5 characters is that they ARE mono-colored. That said, IF any of them were to expand into multiple colors, I think it would break down like this:
Gideon: W -> WR
Jace: U -> UW
Liliana: B -> BU
Chandra: R -> RW
Nissa: G -> GB
Note that I'm basing this purely on their characterizations, both past and present, as their power sets are all firmly mono-colors.
Eh...
- Gideon was kind of pigeonholed into RW for a while, yes. It's kind of ironic when the character was originally depicted as WU, someone taught to divorce his magic from emotions and focus primarily on discipline.
- Chandra is emphatically not RW, however. She is dictated by being chaotic and impulsive, not really concerned with ideals beyond freedom for everyone.
- Nissa as arguably BG, but she's now much closer to being GW
BR is often the villain colour due to its opposition to norms and society, but it has repeatedly also been associated with individuality and self-assertion. Even the Rakdos have had relatively benevolent characters in their ranks
I said it once and I will say it again: If Rakdos, if MTG were written for a different audience, it would cover more unsavory details. Such as poverty, being an addict, drugs, ghettos, slavery, brothels, etc. Sure a few nice characters can be found their, but how do they go about their lives? How do they wield mana in the face of adversity and how do they seek to end conflict? Well by BR methods, plain and simple as that. Rarely do BR characters who aren't evil be more than window dressing that serves as a means to move the plot along.
The fact that the boggarts are an exception does not mean they are also the norm by which you look at things. Also mentioning of Lorwyn Boggarts: That is their lorwyn side. Their Shadowmoor side of them is far different as they split into five different categories. You have Hobgoblins for instance that act like Kithkin as they wear clothes and actually groom themselves and form militias. Another one of the six is the Redcaps that gleefuly kill in a homicidial rage and drench their heads in their victim's blood. This is also accounting for the fact that two different personalities can be shared by the same individual on Lorwyn/Shadowmoor. So what may have been a lovable prankster at one point is now a protector or murderer or they are simply motivated by their hunger like the Spriggans is and can increase their size. One of the remaining ones are Shadowmoor Boggarts which are roving marauders that seek to quench their ever unsatisfied hunger (Atarka brood anyone?). The final one being Stream Hoppers who are bizarre purple goblins that simply hop great distances with one leg, one arm and one eye.
Well the whole point of the origins 5 characters is that they ARE mono-colored. That said, IF any of them were to expand into multiple colors, I think it would break down like this:
Gideon: W -> WR
Jace: U -> UW
Liliana: B -> BU
Chandra: R -> RW
Nissa: G -> GB
Note that I'm basing this purely on their characterizations, both past and present, as their power sets are all firmly mono-colors.
Eh...
- Gideon was kind of pigeonholed into RW for a while, yes. It's kind of ironic when the character was originally depicted as WU, someone taught to divorce his magic from emotions and focus primarily on discipline.
- Chandra is emphatically not RW, however. She is dictated by being chaotic and impulsive, not really concerned with ideals beyond freedom for everyone.
- Nissa as arguably BG, but she's now much closer to being GW
Nissa going GW makes sense. She has shown a great deal of love, patience and kindness for other people. She doesn't exactly act selfishly from what I have read and reread.
BR is often the villain colour due to its opposition to norms and society, but it has repeatedly also been associated with individuality and self-assertion. Even the Rakdos have had relatively benevolent characters in their ranks
I said it once and I will say it again: If Rakdos, if MTG were written for a different audience, it would cover more unsavory details. Such as poverty, being an addict, drugs, ghettos, slavery, brothels, etc. Sure a few nice characters can be found their, but how do they go about their lives? How do they wield mana in the face of adversity and how do they seek to end conflict? Well by BR methods, plain and simple as that. Rarely do BR characters who aren't evil be more than window dressing that serves as a means to move the plot along.
The fact that the boggarts are an exception does not mean they are also the norm by which you look at things. Also mentioning of Lorwyn Boggarts: That is their lorwyn side. Their Shadowmoor side of them is far different as they split into five different categories. You have Hobgoblins for instance that act like Kithkin as they wear clothes and actually groom themselves and form militias. Another one of the six is the Redcaps that gleefuly kill in a homicidial rage and drench their heads in their victim's blood. This is also accounting for the fact that two different personalities can be shared by the same individual on Lorwyn/Shadowmoor. So what may have been a lovable prankster at one point is now a protector or murderer or they are simply motivated by their hunger like the Spriggans is and can increase their size. One of the remaining ones are Shadowmoor Boggarts which are roving marauders that seek to quench their ever unsatisfied hunger (Atarka brood anyone?). The final one being Stream Hoppers who are bizarre purple goblins that simply hop great distances with one leg, one arm and one eye.
The point isn't about which is more likely, but about the possibility, at least that's how I viewed it. You can be Black/Red and still be a good person. You might be more likely to not be, but that isn't really relevant to the discussion on if they could do that. Given it's for one of the Gatewatch I could see it happening, and it's decently likely we will get a Rakdos representative of some sort.
BR is often the villain colour due to its opposition to norms and society, but it has repeatedly also been associated with individuality and self-assertion. Even the Rakdos have had relatively benevolent characters in their ranks
I said it once and I will say it again: If Rakdos, if MTG were written for a different audience, it would cover more unsavory details. Such as poverty, being an addict, drugs, ghettos, slavery, brothels, etc. Sure a few nice characters can be found their, but how do they go about their lives? How do they wield mana in the face of adversity and how do they seek to end conflict? Well by BR methods, plain and simple as that. Rarely do BR characters who aren't evil be more than window dressing that serves as a means to move the plot along.
The fact that the boggarts are an exception does not mean they are also the norm by which you look at things. Also mentioning of Lorwyn Boggarts: That is their lorwyn side. Their Shadowmoor side of them is far different as they split into five different categories. You have Hobgoblins for instance that act like Kithkin as they wear clothes and actually groom themselves and form militias. Another one of the six is the Redcaps that gleefuly kill in a homicidial rage and drench their heads in their victim's blood. This is also accounting for the fact that two different personalities can be shared by the same individual on Lorwyn/Shadowmoor. So what may have been a lovable prankster at one point is now a protector or murderer or they are simply motivated by their hunger like the Spriggans is and can increase their size. One of the remaining ones are Shadowmoor Boggarts which are roving marauders that seek to quench their ever unsatisfied hunger (Atarka brood anyone?). The final one being Stream Hoppers who are bizarre purple goblins that simply hop great distances with one leg, one arm and one eye.
Only boggarts turn into boggarts. The rest of Shadowmoor's goblins have hibernated during Lorwyn-time. The dynamic between Lorwyn and Shadowmoor goblins is pretty much a welcome example of where BR can be more benevolent than RG sometimes: hedonism versus mindless hunger.
In either case, it doesn't erase the fact that benevolent characters can be BR. Creative has this option, even if they use it sparsely.
BR is often the villain colour due to its opposition to norms and society, but it has repeatedly also been associated with individuality and self-assertion. Even the Rakdos have had relatively benevolent characters in their ranks
I said it once and I will say it again: If Rakdos, if MTG were written for a different audience, it would cover more unsavory details. Such as poverty, being an addict, drugs, ghettos, slavery, brothels, etc. Sure a few nice characters can be found their, but how do they go about their lives? How do they wield mana in the face of adversity and how do they seek to end conflict? Well by BR methods, plain and simple as that. Rarely do BR characters who aren't evil be more than window dressing that serves as a means to move the plot along.
The fact that the boggarts are an exception does not mean they are also the norm by which you look at things. Also mentioning of Lorwyn Boggarts: That is their lorwyn side. Their Shadowmoor side of them is far different as they split into five different categories. You have Hobgoblins for instance that act like Kithkin as they wear clothes and actually groom themselves and form militias. Another one of the six is the Redcaps that gleefuly kill in a homicidial rage and drench their heads in their victim's blood. This is also accounting for the fact that two different personalities can be shared by the same individual on Lorwyn/Shadowmoor. So what may have been a lovable prankster at one point is now a protector or murderer or they are simply motivated by their hunger like the Spriggans is and can increase their size. One of the remaining ones are Shadowmoor Boggarts which are roving marauders that seek to quench their ever unsatisfied hunger (Atarka brood anyone?). The final one being Stream Hoppers who are bizarre purple goblins that simply hop great distances with one leg, one arm and one eye.
Only boggarts turn into boggarts. The rest of Shadowmoor's goblins have hibernated during Lorwyn-time. The dynamic between Lorwyn and Shadowmoor goblins is pretty much a welcome example of where BR can be more benevolent than RG sometimes: hedonism versus mindless hunger.
In either case, it doesn't erase the fact that benevolent characters can be BR. Creative has this option, even if they use it sparsely.
I wouldn't go so far as benevolent, but benign fits. You would be hard pressed to fit an actual benevolent character into BR.
BR is often the villain colour due to its opposition to norms and society, but it has repeatedly also been associated with individuality and self-assertion. Even the Rakdos have had relatively benevolent characters in their ranks
I said it once and I will say it again: If Rakdos, if MTG were written for a different audience, it would cover more unsavory details. Such as poverty, being an addict, drugs, ghettos, slavery, brothels, etc. Sure a few nice characters can be found their, but how do they go about their lives? How do they wield mana in the face of adversity and how do they seek to end conflict? Well by BR methods, plain and simple as that. Rarely do BR characters who aren't evil be more than window dressing that serves as a means to move the plot along.
The fact that the boggarts are an exception does not mean they are also the norm by which you look at things. Also mentioning of Lorwyn Boggarts: That is their lorwyn side. Their Shadowmoor side of them is far different as they split into five different categories. You have Hobgoblins for instance that act like Kithkin as they wear clothes and actually groom themselves and form militias. Another one of the six is the Redcaps that gleefuly kill in a homicidial rage and drench their heads in their victim's blood. This is also accounting for the fact that two different personalities can be shared by the same individual on Lorwyn/Shadowmoor. So what may have been a lovable prankster at one point is now a protector or murderer or they are simply motivated by their hunger like the Spriggans is and can increase their size. One of the remaining ones are Shadowmoor Boggarts which are roving marauders that seek to quench their ever unsatisfied hunger (Atarka brood anyone?). The final one being Stream Hoppers who are bizarre purple goblins that simply hop great distances with one leg, one arm and one eye.
Only boggarts turn into boggarts. The rest of Shadowmoor's goblins have hibernated during Lorwyn-time. The dynamic between Lorwyn and Shadowmoor goblins is pretty much a welcome example of where BR can be more benevolent than RG sometimes: hedonism versus mindless hunger.
In either case, it doesn't erase the fact that benevolent characters can be BR. Creative has this option, even if they use it sparsely.
I wouldn't go so far as benevolent, but benign fits. You would be hard pressed to fit an actual benevolent character into BR.
I could see it happening. Benevolent isn't the same as being altruistic. Just a matter of being nice to someone really.
I wouldn't go so far as benevolent, but benign fits. You would be hard pressed to fit an actual benevolent character into BR.
I could see it happening. Benevolent isn't the same as being altruistic. Just a matter of being nice to someone really.
No, benign is being nice. Benevolent is being well meaning. A BR character can be nice, but it is incredibly difficult for them to be well meaning.
Why? Well meaning isn't the same as them taking a loss or anything. I can mean well but still do something that advances me too, especially with Red in the mix. If it was Blue/Black I'd see it being harder to justify.
So far I like the gatewatch, specifically for the Nissa and Chandra interactions. Honestly I would say the two are good for each other whether in a platonic or romantic manner. As the words they use to describe the other very much hints at a budding friendship or relationship. They are written very much like they are made for each other, like they were Soul Mates. Maybe its just that I read quite a bit of fiction, but what I really noticed that seemed quite apparent is how they describe the other. Such as with their eyes, their scents, how the other moves. That kind of stuff that hints at something more. They seem right for each other at least from a writing and character growth standpoints as they help balance each other out and also give the other a trait the other lacks. If the writing wedged them apart, that would be very bad as it would almost feel like a character assassination for them both. As the two can talk to each other on a level that is natural and allows them to open up to each other and be understand by the other.
A physically affectionate person would an example of a "nice" BR character, since that's usually R's way of being nice, not W's. The B would add in a lack of concern for personal space, though.
BR is often the villain colour due to its opposition to norms and society, but it has repeatedly also been associated with individuality and self-assertion. Even the Rakdos have had relatively benevolent characters in their ranks
I said it once and I will say it again: If Rakdos, if MTG were written for a different audience, it would cover more unsavory details. Such as poverty, being an addict, drugs, ghettos, slavery, brothels, etc. Sure a few nice characters can be found their, but how do they go about their lives? How do they wield mana in the face of adversity and how do they seek to end conflict? Well by BR methods, plain and simple as that. Rarely do BR characters who aren't evil be more than window dressing that serves as a means to move the plot along.
The fact that the boggarts are an exception does not mean they are also the norm by which you look at things. Also mentioning of Lorwyn Boggarts: That is their lorwyn side. Their Shadowmoor side of them is far different as they split into five different categories. You have Hobgoblins for instance that act like Kithkin as they wear clothes and actually groom themselves and form militias. Another one of the six is the Redcaps that gleefuly kill in a homicidial rage and drench their heads in their victim's blood. This is also accounting for the fact that two different personalities can be shared by the same individual on Lorwyn/Shadowmoor. So what may have been a lovable prankster at one point is now a protector or murderer or they are simply motivated by their hunger like the Spriggans is and can increase their size. One of the remaining ones are Shadowmoor Boggarts which are roving marauders that seek to quench their ever unsatisfied hunger (Atarka brood anyone?). The final one being Stream Hoppers who are bizarre purple goblins that simply hop great distances with one leg, one arm and one eye.
The point isn't about which is more likely, but about the possibility, at least that's how I viewed it. You can be Black/Red and still be a good person. You might be more likely to not be, but that isn't really relevant to the discussion on if they could do that. Given it's for one of the Gatewatch I could see it happening, and it's decently likely we will get a Rakdos representative of some sort.
Pretty much this. No one is arguing that evil in rakdos is not the norm, myself included. The inclination is there, yes. Aggression in red, self-indulgence and "power at all costs" mentality in black. Combining those will always predispose those characters to hedonistic, anarchic behavior. But a predisposition does not 100% of the time translate to reality. Exceptions may be unlikely, but not impossible. I'm lorwyn illiterate though since I quit during that time, so I didn't know boggarts were not evil. Then again, an "auntie" already sounds like they deviated from normal B/R characters.
I mean, Lorwyn-wise they aren't evil though. Or I wouldn't argue they are at least. The only one is the Black/Green Elves in Lorwyn proper as far as what I recall. Which is meant to be ironic when Shadowmoor hits and everything but them is evil, but it's still the same concept just through a distorted lens. I really liked Lorwyn/Shadowmoor, in general I'm a fan of things warping like that, usually a good chance to see the color pie in action. Tarkir didn't do that very well though sadly.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Personal preference at this point: I want an anti-thesis of the gatewatch. Frustrated planeswalkers who came together simply because they're sick of the power rangers spoiling their fun all the time. If the Gatewatch came together to "protect the peace across the multiverse", these guys came together because "fck you, that's why lol deal with it". They don't even have to be under Bolas, just a bunch of rogues who value personal freedom over everything else. Then they come together and give the gatewatch a run for their money. They can even call themselves the Gatecrashers, Hatewatch or even Baywatch for all I care. I mean imagine a story arc wherein this team gets to coax liliana into joining them for a while.. if I remember correctly, liliana's ulterior motive to joining jace and co. in the first place was to somehow manipulate them into helping her kill the 2 remaining demons.. Then this new all star team composed of nahiri (wishful thinking lol I really want a mardu walker), vraska, ashiok, etc (hell, throw in tibalt for good measure who cares) just show up and say "hey lili, you don't have to manipulate us, just join us and we'll help you willingly so you can drop the good girl act lol".. I think stirring and mixing things up in the "villains" side of things will by association make the Gatewatch more interesting. That kind of adversity can induce character development on all fronts without having to force backstories just to make characters seem more deep. But I admit this particular paragraph has a lot of bias. I just want an evil walker team, preferably without Bolas.
I do get the "not all as*holes are bad people argument", and yeah it will be a stretch to say that ALL r/b characters will always be villains. But given the nature of rakdos colors, there may be situations wherein they may not necessarily be villains, but they will always be villainized by those who do not share their ideals.
So, heroic would be the Strawhat Crew from One Piece?
lol!! I'm not too sure about that, but yeah that might be as close an analogy as I can think of assuming you weren't being sarcastic
The following is spoiler-tagged in order to not heavily derail the discussion and keep it politely and neatly small for other forum-goers experience.
I think you are mixing RG philosophy with RB. The least villainous of the dragonlords is Atarka. Atarka's brood cares about one thing: Food. As long as that condition is satisfied, they are by and large the least harmful to the humans. The dragons spend most of the their time, aside from eating, fighting amongst themselves in order to make themselves stronger. Dissent has only started amongst this clan because of visions. Not exactly by the doing of the dragons within this tribe.
"The dragonlord became a fearsome leader, using violence, cruelty, and her trademark unpredictability to keep the clan in line... Unlike the Mardu, the Kolaghan follow no code of honor. Their ambitions are to raze the other Clans down and bring ruin wherever they go. The Kolaghan pine for freedom, from civilization, from limits, from any form of honor or law."
RB is selfish and cares about itself.
Even Dromoka's brood is not necessarily the nicest in town. As remember Anafenza? She had the gall to take part in her families old traditions and what was her sentence? Execution. Because she died the way she did as a martyr, their is now a quiet growing amount of dissent going amongst the people as they now partake in the old traditions like Anafenza did and she watches over them as a kin-tree spirit.
Oh? The majority of RB cards are filled with some of the most evil stuff out there. The only character who even matches close to Phantom King's description is Olivia Voldaren BUT even she enjoys and partakes in bloodsports.
RB is the the most villainous color. You want more? The only two cards in the entire game that aren't even about such things are Ghostflame and Ghostflame Slivir. As far as I am concerned Qaanglaagix is actually correct on this matter. RB is not something misunderstood like B tends to be, it is in fact perfectly understood. Its about: Hedonism, pain, mayhem, violence, arson, torture, blood, cruelty, revenge, suffering, desecration, demons, bombing, fearmongering, ritualistic sacrifices, spitefulness, destruction of public property. If MTG was a game marketed to an older demographic, it would include a lot more unsavory things in there that would make people squirm.
, WB, BU or GB are more likely to get heroes(/anti-heroes) than RB and some of those have already had heroes(/anti-heroes). RB is and always has been the villain's color for the past 20+ years of MTG.
Also to nip this in the bud: Luffy's Gang as BR? Yeah I will agree with you here. I would argue that with the crew's combined traits they are WUBRG.
Also to nip in the bud ahead of time: characters doesn't necessarily get along with characters and their can be differences on how things are handled. Such as with Heliod and Elspeth who are both mono-white but held different views and the Leonin of Theros who also held different views from both of those two who are also mono-white. Lets also not forget Ajani who at that time is GW and went all iconoclast on the gods after what they did to his friend Elspeth and hated them, particularly Heliod, for what happened to his beloved friend. Yes that is right. A character can break laws and traditions if they believe that those very things put in place by another character is unhealthy and hinders society as a whole and that society would be better off.
BR breaks laws and traditions because it hindered THEM, not those AROUND them.
I don't disagree with any of your points. B/R is the most villainous color by nature. But all B/R CHARACTERS being villains is not a generalization I want to make as of now. If you can help me prove kolaghan is a straight up villain in the khan's arc, then I'm with you all the way lol!
Given Maro has said something along the lines of color combinations not being good or evil I would say it's at least something Wizards doesn't agree with. Doesn't mean we will get a B/R Chandra (I'd think R/G personally, though not the same as Gruul) anytime soon though, but it's not something that is completely outside of Chandra's nature.
None of the Dragon Broods are good. They are all a kind of evil in one the various forms. Oujtai's evil for instance is a strict and regimented learning through philosophy and education that prohibits creative thinking. (aka brain washing youths through education and teaching them not to expand their minds to the possibilities.)
Oh wow I didn't know Kolaghan did those things. Where was that explicitly stated? I'd love to read up that lore.
The Planeswalkers guide to Dragons of Tarkir might be a good start.
I should note - with regards to the Rakdos/ - that MaRo's said in the past that viewing the Guilds of Ravnica as being the only way a Color Pair can be interpreted is wrong, and that, since Magic is a combat-oriented game, you'll usually see the more violent elements of the Guilds displayed in the cards. The Rakdos have been stated to run quite a few legitimate businesses around Ravnica (restaurants and the like), and in the original Ravnica books, one of Agrus Kos' allies is a Rakdos Imp/Goblin, if memory serves.
BR is often the villain colour due to its opposition to norms and society, but it has repeatedly also been associated with individuality and self-assertion. Even the Rakdos have had relatively benevolent characters in their ranks
Eh...
- Gideon was kind of pigeonholed into RW for a while, yes. It's kind of ironic when the character was originally depicted as WU, someone taught to divorce his magic from emotions and focus primarily on discipline.
- Chandra is emphatically not RW, however. She is dictated by being chaotic and impulsive, not really concerned with ideals beyond freedom for everyone.
- Nissa as arguably BG, but she's now much closer to being GW
The fact that the boggarts are an exception does not mean they are also the norm by which you look at things. Also mentioning of Lorwyn Boggarts: That is their lorwyn side. Their Shadowmoor side of them is far different as they split into five different categories. You have Hobgoblins for instance that act like Kithkin as they wear clothes and actually groom themselves and form militias. Another one of the six is the Redcaps that gleefuly kill in a homicidial rage and drench their heads in their victim's blood. This is also accounting for the fact that two different personalities can be shared by the same individual on Lorwyn/Shadowmoor. So what may have been a lovable prankster at one point is now a protector or murderer or they are simply motivated by their hunger like the Spriggans is and can increase their size. One of the remaining ones are Shadowmoor Boggarts which are roving marauders that seek to quench their ever unsatisfied hunger (Atarka brood anyone?). The final one being Stream Hoppers who are bizarre purple goblins that simply hop great distances with one leg, one arm and one eye.
Nissa going GW makes sense. She has shown a great deal of love, patience and kindness for other people. She doesn't exactly act selfishly from what I have read and reread.
The point isn't about which is more likely, but about the possibility, at least that's how I viewed it. You can be Black/Red and still be a good person. You might be more likely to not be, but that isn't really relevant to the discussion on if they could do that. Given it's for one of the Gatewatch I could see it happening, and it's decently likely we will get a Rakdos representative of some sort.
Only boggarts turn into boggarts. The rest of Shadowmoor's goblins have hibernated during Lorwyn-time. The dynamic between Lorwyn and Shadowmoor goblins is pretty much a welcome example of where BR can be more benevolent than RG sometimes: hedonism versus mindless hunger.
In either case, it doesn't erase the fact that benevolent characters can be BR. Creative has this option, even if they use it sparsely.
I could see it happening. Benevolent isn't the same as being altruistic. Just a matter of being nice to someone really.
Why? Well meaning isn't the same as them taking a loss or anything. I can mean well but still do something that advances me too, especially with Red in the mix. If it was Blue/Black I'd see it being harder to justify.
Pretty much this. No one is arguing that evil in rakdos is not the norm, myself included. The inclination is there, yes. Aggression in red, self-indulgence and "power at all costs" mentality in black. Combining those will always predispose those characters to hedonistic, anarchic behavior. But a predisposition does not 100% of the time translate to reality. Exceptions may be unlikely, but not impossible. I'm lorwyn illiterate though since I quit during that time, so I didn't know boggarts were not evil. Then again, an "auntie" already sounds like they deviated from normal B/R characters.