What I find disturbing is that it seems less likely they'd reprint Zen (+ Onslaught) fetches in an expert set before Return to Zendikar. So while they COULD do so in a fall expert set AND then Return the Zendikar later, I'm now thinking it's more likely they'll print them in M15.
The Wizards Reprinting Fetchlands thread in Speculation is basically having an endless loop on discussing this very topic. I honestly have no idea where it's going.
When MaRo says "unique block structure" I suspect he is not referring as much to size as he is to the actual framework a la Lorwyn/Shadowmoor. Sure, they could do Medium-Medium-Medium and call it "unique structure" but I think with a teaser like this it will actually be a change in the number of sets and potentially the draft arrangement.
Something as radical as releasing two sets at once in boxes of 24 packs each as opposed to 36. The release could be two sets that were designed to draft alone or mixed. I see them doing this with the Winter set as opposed to the fall set, as the draft environment would be extremely interesting if it had fall-winter1-winter2 as the format in winter. They could then release a third set in the spring that could be added to the draft format with players/TO's deciding on which winter set to include in the full block draft. WotC could even push the number of packs in a draft to 4 while reducing the number of cards present per pack to 11 or 12.
I am just theorycrafting here but MaRo's comments lead me to believe that something radical is going to occur and not something as mundane as big-big-big.
Big-big-big seems like the logical cop-out (it is unique, after all), but I'm hoping it has to do with the draft structure.
Here's something interesting:
Set 1 - big block, introduces plane setting, blah blah blah. Nothing unusual.
Set 2 - medium/small block, expands on ONE of the key factions in the block. Let's take the Mirran vs. Phyrexian example from SOM. So this would be more Mirran than Phyrexian.
Set 3 - medium small block, expands on the other. So more Phyrexian than Mirran.
Then have the draft structure be (once the full set is out):
2/3 - 2/3 - 1
EACH player chooses what the first two packs opened are. So I could choose to open two packs of the second set OR 2 packs of the third set OR 1 pack each (and determine the order of opening). So there would be a variable number of packs of Set 2 & 3 being drafted, depending on how the players choose.
Would put a twist to draft in a new way, and I very much would like to see something that messes with the traditional draft structure of 3-2-1.
Everyone keeps talking about the "unique block structure" in regards to the number & size of the sets, but I think we're looking at the wrong direction.
Wasn't the original Ravnica's "guild model" a "block structure"? I'm thinking it's more along those lines.
I could have sworn MaRo confirmed this a very long time ago, but looking back on it, it would appear he didn't. I suppose I just took it for granted after we found the Warlords of Khanar/Khans of Tarkir info.
Could someone give an example of a previous set that had a bottom-up design?
Most blocks did.
If the main idea behind a set is something mechanical like multicoloured (Ravnica, RTR, Alara,) tribal (Lorwyn, Onslaught,) or focused around a card type (Zendikar with lands) then it is a bottom-up design.
I'd like to see two parallel small sets being released simultaneously. For draft, players could pick either pack in that slot.
I don't think it'd work out very well, though. It doesn't seem to have a whole lot going for it compared to a single large set. If you're going after a specific rare/mythic, you'll end up with lots of the same uncommons/commons, though I guess it'd increase your chances of getting said mythic. Seems to have all the same drawbacks of regular small sets, but at least it gets around the 'first set must be large for card pool reasons' issue. I think it'd be neat to see as a gimmick, and see if they can make anything cool happen with it. Not holding my breath though.
We should have the official announcement of the fall set by the end of this month. If tradition holds true a few weeks after that we'll have the announcement for the fall Duel Decks product which may indicate the theme of the next block. Can't wait to see what they have planned.
Is it too much to hope that this is the wedge block?
no
it is unlikely but not imposible
they could focus only on wedges ( no 2 color only 3) and monocolored cards , soo they could call this unique block struture...
But i m not sure who people would accept this
All three will be large blocks with the only thing in common between them is that they occur on the same plane. They would tell the whole story of the plane (Tarkir)from the extinction of the dragons (Warlords of Khanar), the story of Sarkhan Vol up to the point he got his spark and departed the plane (Khans of Tarkir), and then his return to the plane the re-introduction of dragons to the plane (Dragons of Tarkir). Other than the large-large-large format, the uniqueness would be that each set is complete in itself.
Could also be return to Alara. The merged shards form a new plane after all... MaRo love to filter his spoilers and give them some kind of twisted truth perspective ( a la "next set is not Ravnica 2.0").
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"De potentia juvenis somniabat, nunc de Mundo somniat..."
A set with weak cards and boring flavour that isn't so much being inspired by real-world mythology as it is just copying it wholesale and changing the names.
Ok, so that's Kamigawa, but what do you think about Theros?
Really, I don't see how any of that applies to Theros. I mean, Brimaz alone contradicts every single point you made.
zendikar isn't just a prison for the eldrazi, but IS an eldrazi itself thus an entirely new plane! return to zendikar confirmed!!! fetchlands confirmed!!!!!
Anybody who thought that there was a meaningful chance of Huey not being a new plane hasn't been paying very much attention. All of Maro's comments on returns made since RtR was announced several years ago suggest that it would be followed by at least two non-returns. Even with the block-order shuffling that apparently went on, Fall 2015 being a return has always been an extreme longshot. Maro has indicated that so strongly for so long that I doubt he even thought he was giving any new information in the response quoted in the first post.
I'm guessing big/big/big, with radically different themes between them set on the same plane as well. Whether or not they're across different time periods or focus on different areas of the plane where each doesn't know the other, who knows.
Remember Ramaz from DotP 2014? He sure looks like he'd fit in with a warlords, snow covered, savage theme.
Ok, so that's Kamigawa, but what do you think about Theros?
Really, I don't see how any of that applies to Theros. I mean, Brimaz alone contradicts every single point you made.
How, exactly? Having a good card in a weak block doesn't make the overall block any less weak. You mentioned Kamigawa block yourself, which just so happened to have the most powerful equipment card ever... And is still considered one of the worst blocks ever in terms of power.
As for the rest of my points, I don't think he has anything to do with them. Were you just making an attempt at being pithy or is there actual substantiation behind your claims? I'd love to see how Brimaz is proof that Monstrous is a good mechanic, or that Heliod contains the tiniest shred of originality.
I was referring to the points that I quoted, Brimaz is a strong card without boring flavour (admittedly subjective, but so is your claim) who is the king of a race that's definitely not just a renamed group from the original source. Brimaz is basically the antithesis of the passage I quoted and while I accept that he doesn't own his own disprove anything I'm just kind of stunned that you think any of those things are true. Particularly your claim that the entire setting is "just stealing every little element and renaming it" which I understood to be your main point. That's just clearly not true, Theros is very much a Magic setting inspired by Greek mythology by which I mean it is a Magic setting first and foremost. Most monsters in Greek mythology were one of a kind, Theros expands stuff like The Minotaur or Pegasus into entire tribes. Even the pantheon is modelled strictly on the colour pie, some parallels can obviously be drawn but it's clear that the colour wheel comes first in their design. There's a handful of one-shot designs based on a particular myth, but Innistrad had its Jekyll and Hyde and the like. Heliod is not Zeus, he's the monowhite god; Zeus is a lot of things but monowhite he is not. Heliod has many qualities of Zeus because they're both leaders of their respective pantheons and there's some obvious inspiration going on. But he's not just a renamed Zeus and if that's your basis for this blanket claim of all of Theros I suggest you read up on the source material more.
Ok, so that's Kamigawa, but what do you think about Theros?
Really, I don't see how any of that applies to Theros. I mean, Brimaz alone contradicts every single point you made.
How, exactly? Having a good card in a weak block doesn't make the overall block any less weak. You mentioned Kamigawa block yourself, which just so happened to have the most powerful equipment card ever... And is still considered one of the worst blocks ever in terms of power.
As for the rest of my points, I don't think he has anything to do with them. Were you just making an attempt at being pithy or is there actual substantiation behind your claims? I'd love to see how Brimaz is proof that Monstrous is a good mechanic, or that Heliod contains the tiniest shred of originality.
Greek mythology doesn't have cats. Inspired doesn't need to be a keyword because it isn't, it's an ability word. None of the characters(that i aware of) are products of incest and/or rape. Strictly better Murder and Cancel are by definition not weak. Theros isn't "An enchantment block" like how Mirrodin is a "An Artifact block". I'm pretty sure maros words were "It isn't a block with a lot of enchantments, it is a block that uses enchantments." A mechanic(Bestow) with a unique rules interaction had to have tons of thought behind it since it required a slight rewrite of the rules for it to work. Bestow gives the same stats as a memory issue, and a flavor one. Tons of unique creatures are entire clans. I find bestow to be more relevant in limited than monstrous.
It sounds to me like you have more of a problem with greek mythology than you do the development and design of Theros.
Greek mythology doesn't have cats. Inspired doesn't need to be a keyword because it isn't, it's an ability word. None of the characters(that i aware of) are products of incest and/or rape. Strictly better Murder and Cancel are by definition not weak. Theros isn't "An enchantment block" like how Mirrodin is a "An Artifact block". I'm pretty sure maros words were "It isn't a block with a lot of enchantments, it is a block that uses enchantments." A mechanic(Bestow) with a unique rules interaction had to have tons of thought behind it since it required a slight rewrite of the rules for it to work. Bestow gives the same stats as a memory issue, and a flavor one. Tons of unique creatures are entire clans. I find bestow to be more relevant in limited than monstrous.
It sounds to me like you have more of a problem with greek mythology than you do the development and design of Theros.
Greek mythology doesn't have cats. Inspired doesn't need to be a keyword because it isn't, it's an ability word. None of the characters(that i aware of) are products of incest and/or rape. Strictly better Murder and Cancel are by definition not weak. Theros isn't "An enchantment block" like how Mirrodin is a "An Artifact block". I'm pretty sure maros words were "It isn't a block with a lot of enchantments, it is a block that uses enchantments." A mechanic(Bestow) with a unique rules interaction had to have tons of thought behind it since it required a slight rewrite of the rules for it to work. Bestow gives the same stats as a memory issue, and a flavor one. Tons of unique creatures are entire clans. I find bestow to be more relevant in limited than monstrous.
It sounds to me like you have more of a problem with greek mythology than you do the development and design of Theros.
I think one should read up/research more before stating a "fact".
I have read every post on maros tumblr. Over 30,000 of them. Lets find some quotes shall we?
All below are direct quotes from maros tumblr. All bolding is done by me for emphasis.
"Every time I’ve talked about Theros here and in my columns and in interviews and at the panel and basically everywhere I have stressed that Theros is not “enchantment matters”. I’m not sure if it was possible for me to convey it more."
"I’ve said that my goal was to do something different with an enchantment block than “enchantment matters” where you just play a deck full of enchantments. That’s not to say there aren’t any goodies for you in the block but that is not the focus of the enchantment theme."
"It’s not an enchantment block. It’s a Greek mythology block with a strong enchantment component allowing us to properly capture the feel of Greek mythology.
Please remember, this design isn’t bottom-up but top-down. The enchantments play an important role in defining the feel of the gods. They are not in the block to be the mechanical focus."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The Wizards Reprinting Fetchlands thread in Speculation is basically having an endless loop on discussing this very topic. I honestly have no idea where it's going.
Credit to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the Avatar & Miraculous Recovery for the Banner.
My 540 Card Cube (WIP)
Something as radical as releasing two sets at once in boxes of 24 packs each as opposed to 36. The release could be two sets that were designed to draft alone or mixed. I see them doing this with the Winter set as opposed to the fall set, as the draft environment would be extremely interesting if it had fall-winter1-winter2 as the format in winter. They could then release a third set in the spring that could be added to the draft format with players/TO's deciding on which winter set to include in the full block draft. WotC could even push the number of packs in a draft to 4 while reducing the number of cards present per pack to 11 or 12.
I am just theorycrafting here but MaRo's comments lead me to believe that something radical is going to occur and not something as mundane as big-big-big.
Here's something interesting:
Set 1 - big block, introduces plane setting, blah blah blah. Nothing unusual.
Set 2 - medium/small block, expands on ONE of the key factions in the block. Let's take the Mirran vs. Phyrexian example from SOM. So this would be more Mirran than Phyrexian.
Set 3 - medium small block, expands on the other. So more Phyrexian than Mirran.
Then have the draft structure be (once the full set is out):
2/3 - 2/3 - 1
EACH player chooses what the first two packs opened are. So I could choose to open two packs of the second set OR 2 packs of the third set OR 1 pack each (and determine the order of opening). So there would be a variable number of packs of Set 2 & 3 being drafted, depending on how the players choose.
Would put a twist to draft in a new way, and I very much would like to see something that messes with the traditional draft structure of 3-2-1.
its a block with 2 sets ( one big sn one small)
Wasn't the original Ravnica's "guild model" a "block structure"? I'm thinking it's more along those lines.
My free stuff so far: 2 Rise of the Eldrazi boosters & 1600 XBOX points
Most blocks did.
If the main idea behind a set is something mechanical like multicoloured (Ravnica, RTR, Alara,) tribal (Lorwyn, Onslaught,) or focused around a card type (Zendikar with lands) then it is a bottom-up design.
I don't think it'd work out very well, though. It doesn't seem to have a whole lot going for it compared to a single large set. If you're going after a specific rare/mythic, you'll end up with lots of the same uncommons/commons, though I guess it'd increase your chances of getting said mythic. Seems to have all the same drawbacks of regular small sets, but at least it gets around the 'first set must be large for card pool reasons' issue. I think it'd be neat to see as a gimmick, and see if they can make anything cool happen with it. Not holding my breath though.
Karador EDH
Comments on decks welcome: http://tappedout.net/users/AradonTemplar/
Currently developing Set 1 of 3, 'Shadow': http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=436885
This is absurd. They've made two blocks set on pre-Mending planes.
Commander:
R Daretti, Scrap Savant
BR Olivia Voldaren
BRG Shattergang Brothers
GUR Riku of Two Reflections
WBG Karador, Ghost Chieftain
Death and Taxes
Pauper
UB Teachings
Tortured Existence
Murasa Tron
Modern
Pod (RIP)
Bloom(RIP)
Merfolk
no
it is unlikely but not imposible
they could focus only on wedges ( no 2 color only 3) and monocolored cards , soo they could call this unique block struture...
But i m not sure who people would accept this
Karador EDH
Comments on decks welcome: http://tappedout.net/users/AradonTemplar/
Currently developing Set 1 of 3, 'Shadow': http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=436885
All three will be large blocks with the only thing in common between them is that they occur on the same plane. They would tell the whole story of the plane (Tarkir)from the extinction of the dragons (Warlords of Khanar), the story of Sarkhan Vol up to the point he got his spark and departed the plane (Khans of Tarkir), and then his return to the plane the re-introduction of dragons to the plane (Dragons of Tarkir). Other than the large-large-large format, the uniqueness would be that each set is complete in itself.
Ok, so that's Kamigawa, but what do you think about Theros?
Really, I don't see how any of that applies to Theros. I mean, Brimaz alone contradicts every single point you made.
Remember Ramaz from DotP 2014? He sure looks like he'd fit in with a warlords, snow covered, savage theme.
Want to be a better Magic player? Read the rulings forum and check out the comprehensive rules!
I was referring to the points that I quoted, Brimaz is a strong card without boring flavour (admittedly subjective, but so is your claim) who is the king of a race that's definitely not just a renamed group from the original source. Brimaz is basically the antithesis of the passage I quoted and while I accept that he doesn't own his own disprove anything I'm just kind of stunned that you think any of those things are true. Particularly your claim that the entire setting is "just stealing every little element and renaming it" which I understood to be your main point. That's just clearly not true, Theros is very much a Magic setting inspired by Greek mythology by which I mean it is a Magic setting first and foremost. Most monsters in Greek mythology were one of a kind, Theros expands stuff like The Minotaur or Pegasus into entire tribes. Even the pantheon is modelled strictly on the colour pie, some parallels can obviously be drawn but it's clear that the colour wheel comes first in their design. There's a handful of one-shot designs based on a particular myth, but Innistrad had its Jekyll and Hyde and the like. Heliod is not Zeus, he's the monowhite god; Zeus is a lot of things but monowhite he is not. Heliod has many qualities of Zeus because they're both leaders of their respective pantheons and there's some obvious inspiration going on. But he's not just a renamed Zeus and if that's your basis for this blanket claim of all of Theros I suggest you read up on the source material more.
Greek mythology doesn't have cats. Inspired doesn't need to be a keyword because it isn't, it's an ability word. None of the characters(that i aware of) are products of incest and/or rape. Strictly better Murder and Cancel are by definition not weak. Theros isn't "An enchantment block" like how Mirrodin is a "An Artifact block". I'm pretty sure maros words were "It isn't a block with a lot of enchantments, it is a block that uses enchantments." A mechanic(Bestow) with a unique rules interaction had to have tons of thought behind it since it required a slight rewrite of the rules for it to work. Bestow gives the same stats as a memory issue, and a flavor one. Tons of unique creatures are entire clans. I find bestow to be more relevant in limited than monstrous.
It sounds to me like you have more of a problem with greek mythology than you do the development and design of Theros.
Hmmmm...
Theros is an enchantment block.
http://wiki.mtgsalvation.com/article/Theros
MaRo lists it as one of his goals of Theros as an enchantment block.
http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/262
I think one should read up/research more before stating a "fact".
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
I have read every post on maros tumblr. Over 30,000 of them. Lets find some quotes shall we?
All below are direct quotes from maros tumblr. All bolding is done by me for emphasis.
"Every time I’ve talked about Theros here and in my columns and in interviews and at the panel and basically everywhere I have stressed that Theros is not “enchantment matters”. I’m not sure if it was possible for me to convey it more."
"I’ve said that my goal was to do something different with an enchantment block than “enchantment matters” where you just play a deck full of enchantments. That’s not to say there aren’t any goodies for you in the block but that is not the focus of the enchantment theme."
"It’s not an enchantment block. It’s a Greek mythology block with a strong enchantment component allowing us to properly capture the feel of Greek mythology.
Please remember, this design isn’t bottom-up but top-down. The enchantments play an important role in defining the feel of the gods. They are not in the block to be the mechanical focus."