Yeah...I thought about them. Specifically, the Myojin. More specifically, Night's Reach. If any non-walker being that has been detailed in magic has been close to true deity status before...
But again, they weren't referred to as gods. This is me acknowledging it's an irrational line in the sand, but it is still where I put it.
Eh, the problem with that is that the very name Kami is equivalent to god. Why would they call them gods when they were already NAMED as Gods.
On that subject, do you believe that there shall be demons in Theros, or not, since most of the demons in this game seem to be inspired (if only vaguely) by the beings from Judeo-Christian tradition rather than those of Greek mythology (except for the oni of Kamigawa, which were clearly inspired by the oni of Japanese mythology)?
I think there probably will be. It wouldn't be hard to make the demons fit, unlike the angels, who are such a deeply Abrahamaic symbol.
But I'm hoping for quite the common askings.
Green: Dryads, Humans, Centaurs, Satyrs, Birds, Winged-Horses,
Red: Humans, Minotaurs, Satyrs, Griffins, Heroes, Cyclops,
Black: Humans, Furies, Gorgons,
Blue: Merfolk, Sirens, Sphinx, Humans, Muse-esque, Birds, Heroes,
White: Dragon, Humans, Birds, Heroes, Winged-Horses,
Pegasi are in White, not green. Unicorns are in both white and green, but not Pegasi.
Fun fact, the plural of Cyclops is Cyclopes.
... Why the heck did you put Dragons into white?! Those are overwhelmingly red.
In particular, it's both overdone to the point of becoming an actual cliché and fundamentally both insulting and cowardly. So what, pagan gods are not gods, but Jesus is still Jesus?
The moment Magic makes a Muhammed that is not a prophet, is the moment where them taking the false gods route becomes decent.
Pegasi are in White, not green. Unicorns are in both white and green, but not Pegasi.
Fun fact, the plural of Cyclops is Cyclopes.
... Why the heck did you put Dragons into white?! Those are overwhelmingly red.
In Greek Mythology, they were wild horses, so it's likely to see them in green. As well as from the only story I actually know of with a dragon in Greek Mythology, it was one part of the protectors of a Goddess's sacred apple tree. The other part were the three daughters of Atlas.
Also, not all dragons are the Western idea of fire-breathing dracos. Plus it would be nice to have a return of white dragons. The most recent white dragon from a block was back in Kamigawa.
And I can't believe I left out Cerberus and phoenix!!
In Greek Mythology, they were wild horses, so it's likely to see them in green. As well as from the only story I actually know of with a dragon in Greek Mythology, it was one part of the protectors of a Goddess's sacred apple tree. The other part were the three daughters of Atlas.
Also, not all dragons are the Western idea of fire-breathing dracos. Plus it would be nice to have a return of white dragons. The most recent white dragon from a block was back in Kamigawa.
And I can't believe I left out Cerberus and phoenix!!
The problem is this isn't a card game based on Greek myth. This is a MAGIC set based on Greek myth. That means that priorities will ALWAYS go to what Magic has established before. Which means Pegasi in white and Dragons in red. That's what they are defined as. Any deviation is a special case basis, as such as the cycle of Spirit Dragons in Kamigawa.
Also, you forgot Hydra.
Which is a good thing, or else we would see only 1 minotaur, only 1 medusa and only 1 pegasus, as it was clearly mentioned in Greek mythology that these were singular monsters. These were the result of some quite unusual pairings (pegasus for example was he son of poseidon and, I believe, Medusa).
That's my bet as well for the story. It will be like Wrath of the Titans but hopefully in better taste. The Titans resurface from their imprisonment in the Underworld and the Olympians need their children's help (Born of the Gods) to defeat them once more, or something along those lines.
They. Aren't. Going. To. Make. Specific. Characters. From. MYTHS.
I have a feeling I'm going to have to start tossing around cards if this keeps up.
I'd agree, but I'd put big money on a slew of cards based on Myths.
So who are our returning planeswalkers? We've had at least two recurring characters in planeswalker form every block since Alara. I'd say Ajani is due for a storyline reappearance
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Why do I like posting in lists:
1. It allows me to express multiple thoughts without a need to write an essay or make multiple posts. 2. I tend to have multiple thoughts at the same time. 3. Having the right first opinion is sometimes more glorious than having a grammatically correct second opinion. 4. It allows you as a reader to pick out the most erroneous point and counter-comment, allowing you the chance to express an opinion and look like a sensible person when I sound like a dummy.
Based on the current precedent of there being two blocks between appearances for returning planeswalkers, excluding the SOM block 'walkers since they should be too busy fighting the Phyexians, the returning planeswalkers could be Ajani, Chandra, Nissa, Sarkhan, or Nicol Bolas. Chandra is less likely since she's the focus of M14, but core sets don't usually count.
I want to see quests return, a reprint of Centaur's Glade, some Spartan expys would be nice. Satyrs and harpies and cerberus//orthros and gladiator battles and equipment matters and griffin tribal support and a black alligned protagonist.
Couldn't "Born of the Gods" possibly refer to a specific planeswalker (likely a new one) that figures into the block's flavor/plot? I'm sure in a world based on Greco-Roman mythology, the people inhabiting it would consider a planeswalker to be descended from divinity given the abilities a planeswalker has (even post-Mending).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Lapsed DCI Rules Advisor - Retired from playing but still hanging around
It's kind of interesting that people have mentioned Kiora, and I was all gung-ho for this as well until a friend pointed out to me that Krakens are not Greek in origin, but rather Norse.
Huh.
Still, when they were making Innistrad, various folks from WotC stressed how important it was to them to remain mostly faithful to people's expectations of Gothic horror, and I don't think this set will be any different in that regard.
That is to say, even though Krakens aren't Greek in origin, they have come to be associated with Greek lore through more contemporary IPs like Clash of the Titans and God of War, and because of that expectation, I don't think it's unlikely for krakens to show up.
It still bothers me that they got their own creature type and then the freaking gryffs from AVR weren't typed as such. Of course, I would have preferred them to be horse griffins on the type line.
How could they? There wasn't a single gryff creature in the whole set. ):
I played Age of Mythology A LOT as a kid, so I am really excited for this block. I hope to see references to greek mythology, but we can't really have the minotaurs maze now, because of Dragon's Maze And no Medusa planeswalker because of Vraska..
It would be cool to see a new card type, maybe lands representing buildings that can give a more civilization feel to the game. Maybe the gods would be walkers from before the spark was changed, but people still think of them as gods. It'd be cool to see some new planeswalkers!
It's kind of interesting that people have mentioned Kiora, and I was all gung-ho for this as well until a friend pointed out to me that Krakens are not Greek in origin, but rather Norse.
The name is, but giant sea monsters that could easily pass as krakens in magic do exist in greek lore. Charybdis being the most prominent example.
What other creature type would you give it? Leviathan is jewish in origin and serpents are very defined in their physiology, and creating a new creature type just because is kind of pointless.
True. Three gorgons, one called Medusa and she was the only one able to turn people into stone, I believe (it has been a while, maybe I should refresh my Greek mythology for Theros, or just for fun).
Anyway, it at least points to that Wizards will change Greek mythology to fit their set. Or else you can only have 1 (legendary) minotaur and pegasus, only 3 gorgons and (I think) sirens, only wild barbaric centaurs and satyrs, etc. The original Greek mythology is quite different from what we actualy expect and is not directly suitable for magic, which is no problem as they can (and will) adapt it, so it is suitable.
3 Gorgons all of them able to turn people to stone and actually quite a bit more humanoid in appearance with actual legs and a pair of golden wings if you follow the most prominent translations to Perseus's tale. The one exception to Medusa was she was Posiedon's actual lover and was the only one who could be killed by mortal means. (Hermes enchanted blade that he gifted to Perseus.)
As for the whole Kraken debate, greek mythology did have sparse interactions with giant sea monsters. The only two stories you might have heard off the top of my head that include them are the fable Illiad and the myth regarding Cassiopeia. As for creature type WOTC will probably just go with whatever they use now for big stupid islandwalking mythics.
As for what I want: Cephalids (It will never happen and doesn't make sense for the set but it would make for such a fun meta with the combination of threshold and Dimir's mill antics.)
I wanna see more of Vraska, especially as Gorgons are a creature already cemented in Greek mythology. Would also love to see some sort of "epic journey" theme, as stories like the Illiad and The Golden Fleece are packed with flavour.
I'd love to see some greek mythology inspired cards. Demigods like Herakles or Perseus would be nice, but I'm not sure if they should really touch this...
Cards inspired by Herakles and Perseus (and etc) is good, but why stop there, whats keeping them from actually also using those names on cards/texts ?
Lots and lots of tv-documentaries/commercials and etc depicts these figures in all the ways possible (Im especially thinking of humor here). So why couldnt WotC too ?
Jace, Lilliana and etc is extremely uninteresting to put it politely.
Donald Duck has taught kids history for decades with comedy. Trip to the Andes and those square-box eggs randomly comes to mind.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
- This is, honestly, a grotesque advantage.
Noah Weil on scouting, an attorney from Seattle with 20 Pro Tour appearances.
Of course they could use the names Heracles and Perseus in Theros, just like they could have used the names Dracula and Frankenstein in Innistrad. But they are creating a Magic the Gathering setting, not a Greek Mythology card game, so they won't.
Agree, this is the reason as I see it too. Those books about planes/worlds, Jaces and etc and what they sell for is the reason.
Now Ill take the discussion to next lvl;
I think the mtg-cards would sell even more if they got rid of this mtg-lore and started using history as their lore source, pluss including unicorns and such (non real creatures from real tales). There is an exceptional number of strange and fascinating creatures that are hardly known by the common man in the real world too. Throw in creativity/completely made up creatures/stuff and WotC has plenty to work with.
Must admit I am not sure of numbers/market here though =).
But, gee, I have seen people speak badly of those mtg-books in (these) forums. The people that read them would probably get a much better litterature experience if reading other fantasy books out there (not that Ive read them either, except from The Hobbit).
I think the mtg-cards would sell even more if they got rid of this mtg-lore and started using history as their lore source, pluss including unicorns and such (non real creatures from real tales).
I highly disagree. The mtg lore, for what it's worth is unique and something that I personally appreciate. Incorporating real world folklore and more or less copying existent myths as opposed to creating their own lore with inspirations from existent myths, would greatly diminish Magic's sense of uniqueness. That is to say, I'm far more interested in the spin WotC takes on weaving their own mythologies than cut-and-paste from ancient greek/roman/celtic/etc.
In any case, while I can't say that sales will tank if WotC takes your suggested route, I can see that at the very least a few players would be miffed at the sudden loss of creativity.
I think the mtg-cards would sell even more if they got rid of this mtg-lore and started using history as their lore source, pluss including unicorns and such (non real creatures from real tales). There is an exceptional number of strange and fascinating creatures that are hardly known by the common man in the real world too. Throw in creativity/completely made up creatures/stuff and WotC has plenty to work with.
Must admit I am not sure of numbers/market here though =).
Then perhaps you shouldn't make sweeping statements without being familiar with whom you are speaking.
For the record, you would be phenomenally wrong. Magic has been running for 20 years now. If they had tied their hands and gone only with existent lore, they would have exhausted all the present marketable and popular mythology already. By creating their own lore, they have the limitless potential to use however they see fit.
But, gee, I have seen people speak badly of those mtg-books in (these) forums. The people that read them would probably get a much better litterature experience if reading other fantasy books out there (not that Ive read them either, except from The Hobbit).
No... they wouldn't. Because Wizards would still be the ones producing the books, not adapting other properties. Because, you know, those other properties are protected by copyright.
And for the record, this was the last straw. I will be carding any further instances of "they should put in X character."
I hope we see kiora atua, she would fit in this block greek myth has a lot of giant creatures in their oceans. Besides that yeah legendary demigod/ heroes, god/ avatar deals with creatures that help cheat them out either convoke or a more specific thing like the behemoth's herald.
I would also love to see evoke on gods, imagine angel of serenity plus a cheap evoke cost, bounce or return up to three creatures to hands, it'd be pretty sweet.
I can nothing but mention that stuff like phyrexians vs mirrans give me no added flavour at all.
I acknowledge they make misses on occasion. Heck, I didn't like the Scars block story myself. But this sort of stuff happens when something is so long lived and successful.
Agree, this is the reason as I see it too. Those books about planes/worlds, Jaces and etc and what they sell for is the reason.
Now Ill take the discussion to next lvl;
I think the mtg-cards would sell even more if they got rid of this mtg-lore and started using history as their lore source, pluss including unicorns and such (non real creatures from real tales). There is an exceptional number of strange and fascinating creatures that are hardly known by the common man in the real world too. Throw in creativity/completely made up creatures/stuff and WotC has plenty to work with.
Must admit I am not sure of numbers/market here though =).
But, gee, I have seen people speak badly of those mtg-books in (these) forums. The people that read them would probably get a much better litterature experience if reading other fantasy books out there (not that Ive read them either, except from The Hobbit).
This is so completely and utterly wrong, i love myth, i have spent most of my life reading myths and know greek mythology intimately, WotC has always taken flavor from existing myth just as Tolkien did, but just adapting myth directly is like clash of the titans or something bad like that, utter bastardizations where all the artistic license translates badly.
I acknowledge they make misses on occasion. Heck, I didn't like the Scars block story myself. But this sort of stuff happens when something is so long lived and successful.
Magic walks a fine line between scifi, and fantasy, so blocks come of more of one or the other, mirrodin block is very scifi, whereas a block like lorwyn is very fantasy, ravnica walks the line better than most, giving players of either lore preference love.
Magic walks a fine line between scifi, and fantasy, so blocks come of more of one or the other, mirrodin block is very scifi, whereas a block like lorwyn is very fantasy, ravnica walks the line better than most, giving players of either lore preference love.
I'd say that Scars and original Mirrodon walk a lot closer to the Scifi than other blocks, it's possible to have an artifact heavy set and still have it rooted in fantasy. The entire Brother's War, Thran, and the Phyrexian war was definitely in the fantasy section.
I get what you're saying though, there's definitely moments that do feel like MtG's trying to have a bit of both. Most of what Venser did in Spiral is really close to Scifi. I'd say Ravnica's a lot closer to fantasy though, albeit with a urbanisation twist. Old Rav's closer (slightly) to Scifi with the Old-Simic and their grafting though.
I'd say that Scars and original Mirrodon walk a lot closer to the Scifi than other blocks, it's possible to have an artifact heavy set and still have it rooted in fantasy. The entire Brother's War, Thran, and the Phyrexian war was definitely in the fantasy section.
I get what you're saying though, there's definitely moments that do feel like MtG's trying to have a bit of both. Most of what Venser did in Spiral is really close to Scifi. I'd say Ravnica's a lot closer to fantasy though, albeit with a urbanisation twist. Old Rav's closer (slightly) to Scifi with the Old-Simic and their grafting though.
Ravnica is dungeon punk which is kinda in demand as far as you go for settings considering it can be gritty and stick true to many fantasy settings. As for MTG they tend to just rotate out of subsets of fantasy with just certain persistent themes that keep the whole story together. I personally am a fan of the game's lore everything post Weatherlight (Its not I thought that it was bad I just wasn't there for it.) and that they are able to deliver cohesive story arcs while consistently rotating the themes of the cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Eh, the problem with that is that the very name Kami is equivalent to god. Why would they call them gods when they were already NAMED as Gods.
I think there probably will be. It wouldn't be hard to make the demons fit, unlike the angels, who are such a deeply Abrahamaic symbol.
Pegasi are in White, not green. Unicorns are in both white and green, but not Pegasi.
Fun fact, the plural of Cyclops is Cyclopes.
... Why the heck did you put Dragons into white?! Those are overwhelmingly red.
Not the place for this guys.
In Greek Mythology, they were wild horses, so it's likely to see them in green. As well as from the only story I actually know of with a dragon in Greek Mythology, it was one part of the protectors of a Goddess's sacred apple tree. The other part were the three daughters of Atlas.
Also, not all dragons are the Western idea of fire-breathing dracos. Plus it would be nice to have a return of white dragons. The most recent white dragon from a block was back in Kamigawa.
And I can't believe I left out Cerberus and phoenix!!
The problem is this isn't a card game based on Greek myth. This is a MAGIC set based on Greek myth. That means that priorities will ALWAYS go to what Magic has established before. Which means Pegasi in white and Dragons in red. That's what they are defined as. Any deviation is a special case basis, as such as the cycle of Spirit Dragons in Kamigawa.
Also, you forgot Hydra.
And some Gorgons, I like them too. Someone mentioned Medusa, she would make a sweet legendary card.
Only 1 Medusa, but she had two sisters.
They. Aren't. Going. To. Make. Specific. Characters. From. MYTHS.
I have a feeling I'm going to have to start tossing around cards if this keeps up.
I'd agree, but I'd put big money on a slew of cards based on Myths.
So who are our returning planeswalkers? We've had at least two recurring characters in planeswalker form every block since Alara. I'd say Ajani is due for a storyline reappearance
1. It allows me to express multiple thoughts without a need to write an essay or make multiple posts.
2. I tend to have multiple thoughts at the same time.
3. Having the right first opinion is sometimes more glorious than having a grammatically correct second opinion.
4. It allows you as a reader to pick out the most erroneous point and counter-comment, allowing you the chance to express an opinion and look like a sensible person when I sound like a dummy.
I want to see quests return, a reprint of Centaur's Glade, some Spartan expys would be nice. Satyrs and harpies and cerberus//orthros and gladiator battles and equipment matters and griffin tribal support and a black alligned protagonist.
Huh.
Still, when they were making Innistrad, various folks from WotC stressed how important it was to them to remain mostly faithful to people's expectations of Gothic horror, and I don't think this set will be any different in that regard.
That is to say, even though Krakens aren't Greek in origin, they have come to be associated with Greek lore through more contemporary IPs like Clash of the Titans and God of War, and because of that expectation, I don't think it's unlikely for krakens to show up.
How could they? There wasn't a single gryff creature in the whole set. ):
Level 1 Judge
I write flavor articles for RoxieCards.
I play and judge at Giga Bites Cafein Marietta, Georgia.
It would be cool to see a new card type, maybe lands representing buildings that can give a more civilization feel to the game. Maybe the gods would be walkers from before the spark was changed, but people still think of them as gods. It'd be cool to see some new planeswalkers!
The name is, but giant sea monsters that could easily pass as krakens in magic do exist in greek lore. Charybdis being the most prominent example.
What other creature type would you give it? Leviathan is jewish in origin and serpents are very defined in their physiology, and creating a new creature type just because is kind of pointless.
3 Gorgons all of them able to turn people to stone and actually quite a bit more humanoid in appearance with actual legs and a pair of golden wings if you follow the most prominent translations to Perseus's tale. The one exception to Medusa was she was Posiedon's actual lover and was the only one who could be killed by mortal means. (Hermes enchanted blade that he gifted to Perseus.)
As for the whole Kraken debate, greek mythology did have sparse interactions with giant sea monsters. The only two stories you might have heard off the top of my head that include them are the fable Illiad and the myth regarding Cassiopeia. As for creature type WOTC will probably just go with whatever they use now for big stupid islandwalking mythics.
As for what I want: Cephalids (It will never happen and doesn't make sense for the set but it would make for such a fun meta with the combination of threshold and Dimir's mill antics.)
But my deepest yearning....
is Javelin counters.
Cards inspired by Herakles and Perseus (and etc) is good, but why stop there, whats keeping them from actually also using those names on cards/texts ?
Lots and lots of tv-documentaries/commercials and etc depicts these figures in all the ways possible (Im especially thinking of humor here). So why couldnt WotC too ?
Jace, Lilliana and etc is extremely uninteresting to put it politely.
Donald Duck has taught kids history for decades with comedy. Trip to the Andes and those square-box eggs randomly comes to mind.
Noah Weil on scouting, an attorney from Seattle with 20 Pro Tour appearances.
Now Ill take the discussion to next lvl;
I think the mtg-cards would sell even more if they got rid of this mtg-lore and started using history as their lore source, pluss including unicorns and such (non real creatures from real tales). There is an exceptional number of strange and fascinating creatures that are hardly known by the common man in the real world too. Throw in creativity/completely made up creatures/stuff and WotC has plenty to work with.
Must admit I am not sure of numbers/market here though =).
But, gee, I have seen people speak badly of those mtg-books in (these) forums. The people that read them would probably get a much better litterature experience if reading other fantasy books out there (not that Ive read them either, except from The Hobbit).
Noah Weil on scouting, an attorney from Seattle with 20 Pro Tour appearances.
I highly disagree. The mtg lore, for what it's worth is unique and something that I personally appreciate. Incorporating real world folklore and more or less copying existent myths as opposed to creating their own lore with inspirations from existent myths, would greatly diminish Magic's sense of uniqueness. That is to say, I'm far more interested in the spin WotC takes on weaving their own mythologies than cut-and-paste from ancient greek/roman/celtic/etc.
In any case, while I can't say that sales will tank if WotC takes your suggested route, I can see that at the very least a few players would be miffed at the sudden loss of creativity.
I can nothing but mention that stuff like phyrexians vs mirrans give me no added flavour at all.
Noah Weil on scouting, an attorney from Seattle with 20 Pro Tour appearances.
Then perhaps you shouldn't make sweeping statements without being familiar with whom you are speaking.
For the record, you would be phenomenally wrong. Magic has been running for 20 years now. If they had tied their hands and gone only with existent lore, they would have exhausted all the present marketable and popular mythology already. By creating their own lore, they have the limitless potential to use however they see fit.
No... they wouldn't. Because Wizards would still be the ones producing the books, not adapting other properties. Because, you know, those other properties are protected by copyright.
And for the record, this was the last straw. I will be carding any further instances of "they should put in X character."
I would also love to see evoke on gods, imagine angel of serenity plus a cheap evoke cost, bounce or return up to three creatures to hands, it'd be pretty sweet.
I acknowledge they make misses on occasion. Heck, I didn't like the Scars block story myself. But this sort of stuff happens when something is so long lived and successful.
This is so completely and utterly wrong, i love myth, i have spent most of my life reading myths and know greek mythology intimately, WotC has always taken flavor from existing myth just as Tolkien did, but just adapting myth directly is like clash of the titans or something bad like that, utter bastardizations where all the artistic license translates badly.
Magic walks a fine line between scifi, and fantasy, so blocks come of more of one or the other, mirrodin block is very scifi, whereas a block like lorwyn is very fantasy, ravnica walks the line better than most, giving players of either lore preference love.
I'd say that Scars and original Mirrodon walk a lot closer to the Scifi than other blocks, it's possible to have an artifact heavy set and still have it rooted in fantasy. The entire Brother's War, Thran, and the Phyrexian war was definitely in the fantasy section.
I get what you're saying though, there's definitely moments that do feel like MtG's trying to have a bit of both. Most of what Venser did in Spiral is really close to Scifi. I'd say Ravnica's a lot closer to fantasy though, albeit with a urbanisation twist. Old Rav's closer (slightly) to Scifi with the Old-Simic and their grafting though.
Ravnica is dungeon punk which is kinda in demand as far as you go for settings considering it can be gritty and stick true to many fantasy settings. As for MTG they tend to just rotate out of subsets of fantasy with just certain persistent themes that keep the whole story together. I personally am a fan of the game's lore everything post Weatherlight (Its not I thought that it was bad I just wasn't there for it.) and that they are able to deliver cohesive story arcs while consistently rotating the themes of the cards.