It makes sense that they would want to change it since the crowds involved in WoW and MtG are similar. And as many have said thus far, Khan is a much cooler word than Warlord, especially since it's been relatively underused in the Multiverse. Plenty of room for some Khans.
if its mongolian themed ( world building) then shamanism may be a big roler in the block...
And soo Sarkhan Vol backstory could fit the block ( A world with warlords that hunted dragons as prizes leading them to "extinction" , and soo cults of shamans that had dragons as nearly godlike forms of life (perfection) , witch Sarkhan becomes a menbers before ascending).
Having the first submeted name be "Warlords of khanar" and then "Khans of Tarkir" and then "Dragons of Tarkir" ( and why the last one ? maybe because Dragons are thought to be extincts by this time on the plane? )( And Maro has said that they could print a Set without dragons if mechanics or even flavor asks) ( Read: Khans of Tarkir has no Dragons or very few of them)
Also just like
the plane card Lethe Lake ( Plane: Arkhos) was described like the greek plane (before Theros) Theros was supossed to be that plane but they re worded it and changed the flavor.
Kharasha Foothills ( plane : Mongseng)(Mong:=Hope ; Sèng:=survival ( rogue translate from Vietnamese) is described like a world ruled by warlords in a constant war . This could indeed be the origin of Tarkir..
those are know information and speculation in these foruns... but i think its nice to make people remember those things ....
So when do we get confirmation on the next block? Given the usual block announcement patterns, we’re running quite late.
Announcing Shards of Alara: March 18, 2008
Announcing Zendikar: March 25, 2009
Announcing Scars of Mirrodin: March 18, 2010
Announcing Innistrad: March 14, 2011
Announcing Return to Ravnica: April 9, 2012
Announcing Theros: March 25, 2013
We're nearing the end of April, and nothing yet.
It has to be my fault, I jinxed it or something — this is the only block whose announcement I’ve been checking for every day. A watched pot never boils, I suppose.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'd rather die speaking the truth than live a lie." --Gix, to Yawgmoth (pre-Phyrexia)
They were going to announce it at PAX but decided not to step on the Journey into Nyx Spoilers and excitement for its release. I remember reading somewhere that they will announce it in a few weeks.
It will be announced May 18th at the pro tour for Journey into Nix. They backed it off for some reason. My guess is that it would have been more exciting than the JOU spoilers at PAX east.
It will be announced May 18th at the pro tour for Journey into Nix. They backed it off for some reason. My guess is that it would have been more exciting than the JOU spoilers at PAX east.
To be fair most things would have been more exciting than the JOU spoilers at PAX east.
MaRo confirmed they've pushed the announcement date back until the Spring Pro Tour (presumably from now on) so they don't draw attention away from the set they're spoiling around the time of PAX.
I wonder if they'd rewrite the banding rules, considering that they've already rewritten the Legend rule twice. A simplified version of banding would make limited combat really fun.
I wonder if they'd rewrite the banding rules, considering that they've already rewritten the Legend rule twice. A simplified version of banding would make limited combat really fun.
I'd assume that if they wanted something like banding-lite, they'd probably just come up with a new keyword for it. They dislike doing functional errata if they don't have to, and unlike the Legendary rule, which is external to the cards themselves, banding has a specific rules meaning for the card itself.
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
What about Soulbond? I thought that was a pretty cool mechanic. That's pretty 'banding lite'
As cool as Soulbond is, it is nothing like banding at all. For example, I can't redirect some of the damage dealt to a soulbond creature to the creature it is bonded with. The ability to redistribute damage between the various banded creatures was a big part of the appeal of banding.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's about time for the reserved list to die, for the sake of Vintage and Legacy (And Commander).
I actually think banding is basically two separate abilities now -- one on offense and one on defense. Banding when blocking is pretty simple, actually.
I actually think banding is basically two separate abilities now -- one on offense and one on defense. Banding when blocking is pretty simple, actually.
Yeah, as someone who actually liked Errand of Duty on my Kitchen Table, I'd welcome a defensive banding. I presume it could read very similar to:
New banding - (Whenever this creature blocks, defending player distributes damage from any creature blocked by it).
Mark Rosewater doesn't seem too keen on abilities that discourage attacking and complicate combat math though, and this does both.
If it's a Mongol block, maybe we'll see a land destruction theme.
It would cause almost as much suffering as the real Mongols did. I can already hear the wails and lamentations of millions of players all over the world.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'd rather die speaking the truth than live a lie." --Gix, to Yawgmoth (pre-Phyrexia)
Mark Rosewater doesn't seem too keen on abilities that discourage attacking and complicate combat math though, and this does both.
With good cause, non-interactive game-play is unfun, especially if it draws the game on long. Plus, I'm sure the developers hate the idea of banding more.
I would like something like banding though. That's what I thought Iroas was going to do (give you control over combat damage assignment to represent banding tactics).
I wonder if they'd rewrite the banding rules, considering that they've already rewritten the Legend rule twice. A simplified version of banding would make limited combat really fun.
You know what? I think modern day players might be able to handle banding a lot better than we all did back when the game first came out.
I mean, let's be honest, it isn't THAT complex compared to a lot of the rules and interactions we all deal with now. The problem back then was: a) most of us were 13-15, b) the internet was not really around to help, and c) everything else was so straightforward and simple.
I think we might find it isn't as scary in reality as it is in our collective memories.
Most, if not all mechanics nowadays encourage attacking so we've less stalled boards. Stalled boards can be frustrating, because there's a lot of math, permutation and complexity.
"Attacking" mechanic means you as the player take the initiative; which makes it more intuitive than a blocking mechanic, which lets your opponent do the thinking.
Magic combat system itself is not interactive and doesn't provide enough strategic and tactical control to the players (esp. attacking player.) that's why stalls are bad for this game.
http://magictheflavoring.com/?comic=color-me-awesome
http://magictheflavoring.tumblr.com/
And soo Sarkhan Vol backstory could fit the block ( A world with warlords that hunted dragons as prizes leading them to "extinction" , and soo cults of shamans that had dragons as nearly godlike forms of life (perfection) , witch Sarkhan becomes a menbers before ascending).
Having the first submeted name be "Warlords of khanar" and then "Khans of Tarkir" and then "Dragons of Tarkir" ( and why the last one ? maybe because Dragons are thought to be extincts by this time on the plane? )( And Maro has said that they could print a Set without dragons if mechanics or even flavor asks) ( Read: Khans of Tarkir has no Dragons or very few of them)
Also just like
the plane card Lethe Lake ( Plane: Arkhos) was described like the greek plane (before Theros) Theros was supossed to be that plane but they re worded it and changed the flavor.
Kharasha Foothills ( plane : Mongseng)(Mong:=Hope ; Sèng:=survival ( rogue translate from Vietnamese) is described like a world ruled by warlords in a constant war . This could indeed be the origin of Tarkir..
those are know information and speculation in these foruns... but i think its nice to make people remember those things ....
Seeing as he's RUG, Wedge plane now plz
would love a return of snow, and full art snow lands would be an obvious idea if/when that happens.
assorted combat mechanics would be nice too, I loves me some aggro.
Vintage: Dredge | Legacy: Burn, Goblins, Soldier | Standard: Mono-Red Aggro
Commander: Nicol Bolas, Sliver Overlord, Rafiq
Casual: Selesnya Saproling Smackdown, Izzet Labs, Rebel
Played since June 2004, mostly inactive June 2011 to March 2018
Other usernames include AlanFromRochester, homerthebeerbaron
MTG checklists from Alpha to Ravnica Allegiance - https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/other-magic-products/third-party-products/805324-checklists-for-everything-from-alpha-to-ravnica
Announcing Shards of Alara: March 18, 2008
Announcing Zendikar: March 25, 2009
Announcing Scars of Mirrodin: March 18, 2010
Announcing Innistrad: March 14, 2011
Announcing Return to Ravnica: April 9, 2012
Announcing Theros: March 25, 2013
We're nearing the end of April, and nothing yet.
It has to be my fault, I jinxed it or something — this is the only block whose announcement I’ve been checking for every day. A watched pot never boils, I suppose.
To be fair most things would have been more exciting than the JOU spoilers at PAX east.
I'd assume that if they wanted something like banding-lite, they'd probably just come up with a new keyword for it. They dislike doing functional errata if they don't have to, and unlike the Legendary rule, which is external to the cards themselves, banding has a specific rules meaning for the card itself.
"OH GOD MY BRAIN IS EXPLOADING AT HOW BAD THE ART IS ON MY OWN CARD"
-A friend's first impression of Ancestral Recall
10/10, I tapped.
As cool as Soulbond is, it is nothing like banding at all. For example, I can't redirect some of the damage dealt to a soulbond creature to the creature it is bonded with. The ability to redistribute damage between the various banded creatures was a big part of the appeal of banding.
---
Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.
Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.
Yeah, as someone who actually liked Errand of Duty on my Kitchen Table, I'd welcome a defensive banding. I presume it could read very similar to:
New banding - (Whenever this creature blocks, defending player distributes damage from any creature blocked by it).
Mark Rosewater doesn't seem too keen on abilities that discourage attacking and complicate combat math though, and this does both.
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
It would cause almost as much suffering as the real Mongols did. I can already hear the wails and lamentations of millions of players all over the world.
With good cause, non-interactive game-play is unfun, especially if it draws the game on long. Plus, I'm sure the developers hate the idea of banding more.
I would like something like banding though. That's what I thought Iroas was going to do (give you control over combat damage assignment to represent banding tactics).
You know what? I think modern day players might be able to handle banding a lot better than we all did back when the game first came out.
I mean, let's be honest, it isn't THAT complex compared to a lot of the rules and interactions we all deal with now. The problem back then was: a) most of us were 13-15, b) the internet was not really around to help, and c) everything else was so straightforward and simple.
I think we might find it isn't as scary in reality as it is in our collective memories.
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
They could also do something with ordering blockers that could be similar to defensive banding. Something like:
Example Wall 2W
Example Wall must always be ordered as the first blocker.
0/6
It has always seemed weird to me that they would change the blocking rules but not use any of the new design space.
"Attacking" mechanic means you as the player take the initiative; which makes it more intuitive than a blocking mechanic, which lets your opponent do the thinking.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
........................