Angels are technically constructs, but they're not robots.
Anyway; given the mechanics, it's unlikely to be evil angels so much as crazy ones. If BFZ was the Eldritch Abomination side of Lovecraft, Innstrad 2.0 is pretty clearly the "Everyone descends into madness" side.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cyme we inne frið, fram the grip of deaþ to lif inne ðis smylte land.
I think Avacyn finds out who made her and what her actual purpose is through Nahiri. Thus Avacyn reasons that the only way to stop all the other evils of Innistrad from being is to kill all the humans, since without humans more vampire can't be made. Same goes for werewolves since the primal savagery needs humans to be able to change them werewolves. Skaabs and Ghouls can't kill humans if no more humans are left. Demons lose supplicants and can't gain more power. And most Geist's just want the blessed sleep which the angels can give, and even the vengeful angry geist's are no where near as powerful as regular angels and are powerless against Avacyn and her powerpuff angels. Ironically Avacyn starts losing power without humans and are destroyed by the only thing the plane has left Demons, Zombies and Ghosts. Sorin surely would weep if that happened.
I'm pretty sure Avacyn and possibly a few high members of the church already know that Sorin created her to bring balance to the plane. So I don't see this being the case unless Nahiri is able to convince Avacyn that Sorin isn't all that good of a person and that she was really created to essentially be Sorin's gamekeeper. Created to make sure that the vampires always have something to hunt.
We know that some high members of the Church (The Lunarch, whoever that may be now, and some trusted people/the person that read his diary) know that Avacyn was created as a shepherd, but we don't know if Avacyn knows. Doug Beyer specifically said that not even Creative is sure whether she knows or not(this was after the last set, so things have probably changed since then, but nothing public.)
More likely the fact that domestic abuse of women in a greater number than domestic abuse of men is a continued problem and reinforcing that, even in a fantasy card game has some negative implications. It's the Triumph of Ferocity problem all over again.
And even that problem shouldn't have been a problem, that whole thing was rather hilarious. People just looked at the picture rather than understanding the reasoning behind it, but I guess in this world men can't get revenge on women.
Man, spot the SJW is becoming even easier than spot the vegan. Likes for all the people that rebuked their hugbox.
Anyway, neat card. I didn't really find the first Innistrad all that interesting, but this is shaping up to be a little more my speed. Some of these cards are pretty cool.
More likely the fact that domestic abuse of women in a greater number than domestic abuse of men is a continued problem and reinforcing that, even in a fantasy card game has some negative implications. It's the Triumph of Ferocity problem all over again.
And even that problem shouldn't have been a problem, that whole thing was rather hilarious. People just looked at the picture rather than understanding the reasoning behind it, but I guess in this world men can't get revenge on women.
I agree, this should be a non controversy. Though domestic abuse towards women is higher it's only because they only count physical abuse and not emotional, which would balance the equation a lot more. The other funny thing the PC police don't understand is that when you pretend a violent picture towards a woman promotes more of the same, you inadvertently show you are the sexist one by truly believing women need "extra" protection like not having these pictures. Or we could go with the alternative and make the angel a male and completely break the mtg lore continuity so that self righteous people can pretend they are protecting women, which again, IS SEXIST
More likely the fact that domestic abuse of women in a greater number than domestic abuse of men is a continued problem and reinforcing that, even in a fantasy card game has some negative implications. It's the Triumph of Ferocity problem all over again.
How is the card Triumph of Ferocity an issue when there's a counterpart card for it - Triumph of Cruelty ? Also, the number of males killed in war is waaaaay higher than the number of females killed in battle. So let's try and reverse this trend.
Additionally, demons and devils as males is a long tradition, generally unburdened by the weight of perception because of that long tradition, and also the fact that it continues the idea of males in power, regardless of spiritual position. Meanwhile, angels have usually been depicted as male, especially those of high power, or in earlier cases non-human entities of indiscriminate gender, so Magic deciding to make what is generally considered one of the highest powers for good an all female race is a good step in the direction of inclusiveness, and empowerment of women.
So you're arguing that since men seem to have more "power", it's okay to portray them as evil and also for them to be killed en masse? Solely because they have "power"? Also, since men are also usually depicted as angels, they should also be "unburdened by the weight of perception of that long tradition", ergo it shouldn't matter to have male angels. Funny that you call it inclusiveness and empowerment when it benefits women and allows women to kill men with impunity.
Or wait - I get it - men dying in battle and being disposable is a "long tradition" so we shouldn't care.
So taking that power away naturally comes across as a bad thing, mmkay.
Yes, it would be quite unfortunate if WotC stopped producing art like Ash Zealot killing a man because that would remove the agency of women.
In actual thread related remarks: Interesting design for a card. Suggests a potentially slower format, with an archetype involving haymaker Angels in play. If it was just about removing any flier whatsoever, they'd just reprint Plummet like they did in BFZ. And the implications for plot are interesting indeed.
If they are printing "haymaker" Angels with the exception of original Avacyn, I'd rather play Plummet 99% of the time because at least I can target.
an all female race is a good step in the direction of inclusiveness
This is what brainwash looks like.
Goblins, humans and angels are the most likely victims of violence in Magic. Goblins for the sake of comedy, humans for the sake of exemplification, and angels because they are the most powerful "good" creatures.
Maybe demons should be female and angels should be male so that the Worf Effect won't trigger your petty postmodern ideologue feelings, or maybe it's time we accept depictions of violence have absolutely zero correlation to violence in the real world.
MaRo has stated that in the Magic multiverse, Demons are male and Angels female. It's structured that way. If you want anything else you should maybe find an artist to alter it for you, or find another game that suits your obsession.
Guys, from this point on any discussion about SJW, misoginy, misandry and anything else pertaining to that subject is going to be auto-carded. Please keep discussion about such subjects to the debate forum.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Commander decks:
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
If they are printing "haymaker" Angels with the exception of original Avacyn, I'd rather play Plummet 99% of the time because at least I can target.
Which is precisely the reason they'd print something like this instead. Remember Theros Limited, and the restriction on straight removal so that it wasn't such a feel bad moment when you tried to make your voltron? That's what I was getting at. It's not targeted so that people can play their haymaker Angels with slightly more impunity.
What's wrong about female angels being killed? How is it worse than male angel being killed?
It's worse because I like female angels, and this might be the second time we've had a set about female Angels that has little to offer someone who likes female Angels. Avacyn Restored sucked because there were only five Angels below Rare in the entire set, making it impractical to actually build an Angel deck, and now this.
If you like Goblins, imagine how you'd feel if there was a Goblin-centric set coming up where they're all brooding emos instead of catastrophically carefree. That's how I feel about this.
In what universe? If you build a deck like that, and ever draw that hand, I will personally come to wherever you live, perform complicated acts of awestruck ********, then disembowel myself to escape the world that allowed something like this to occur and validate you.
What's wrong about female angels being killed? How is it worse than male angel being killed?
It's worse because I like female angels, and this might be the second time we've had a set about female Angels that has little to offer someone who likes female Angels. Avacyn Restored sucked because there were only five Angels below Rare in the entire set, making it impractical to actually build an Angel deck, and now this.
If you like Goblins, imagine how you'd feel if there was a Goblin-centric set coming up where they're all brooding emos instead of catastrophically carefree. That's how I feel about this.
Come on, it's not that bad. They've been making angel cards in nearly every set, so there's no shortage. A lot of them are quite cheap as well, and there are other tribal cards you can include (for example, Urza's Incubator)
Based on a wording, I wonder if there's a multiplayer/THG subtheme going on... Like, "each opponent sacrifices a creature with flying". God, I hope not. We've had that stupid surge already...
More likely the fact that domestic abuse of women in a greater number than domestic abuse of men is a continued problem and reinforcing that, even in a fantasy card game has some negative implications. It's the Triumph of Ferocity problem all over again.
More likely the fact that domestic abuse of women in a greater number than domestic abuse of men is a continued problem and reinforcing that, even in a fantasy card game has some negative implications. It's the Triumph of Ferocity problem all over again.
Based on a wording, I wonder if there's a multiplayer/THG subtheme going on... Like, "each opponent sacrifices a creature with flying". God, I hope not. We've had that stupid surge already...
I think the each player or each opponent things will just be a theme going forward to broaden how you can play the game in the future. Since EDH and other casual formats are so common, having each opponent on a card increases their usability. There are multiple times I've played 8 person games where it is one free for all. Cards like the one spoiled get increasingly better in those types of formats. Things no longer need to affect only one opponent. Lastly, since wizards wants to support draft as much as possible, making draft games as easily varied in style as possible is a good thing. I'm sure they feel if they can make all sets draftable in 2HG or free for all styles then will sell more packs due to the variety of games that can be played.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All your base are belong to us!
RIP Batman guy. I hope somebody picks up the slack now that you are gone. Sick children need their Batman.
Based on a wording, I wonder if there's a multiplayer/THG subtheme going on... Like, "each opponent sacrifices a creature with flying". God, I hope not. We've had that stupid surge already...
Oh, another one that thinks "whatever smells other than classic 1v1, god forbid even CASUAL, must inevitably stink" ?
Newsflash: You can trigger surge by your own spells...
The Stromkirk are busy worsipping Dagon.
It'll be either Mr. Golden Boy (because it's been sooooooooooooo long since Jace last saved the world), Grandpa Markov or Liliana by "accident" again.
But Runo has always worshiped Dagon and that didn't stop him from helping humans thrive in Nephalia.
What you said about Liliana does seem likely, although Edgar would definitely be a better choice if it's not Runo.
Tempest: Quite possibly, though there may be something behind the Angels going mad.
Could be Nahiri, could be Emrakul/something else in the moon, or something totally else. (Currently, I believe it's Nahiri that is the woman-behind-the-madness.)
BTW, does this shed any more light on Nahiri's flavor text? She may be just trying to ruin Innistrad the way Sorin 'ruined' Zendikar? Or is she implying that the Eldrazi actually have a function in the multiverse similar to the angels' function on Innistrad? Kinda out there, but it's possible, if highly unlikely, that the Eldrazi are something like cosmic janitors.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Anyway; given the mechanics, it's unlikely to be evil angels so much as crazy ones. If BFZ was the Eldritch Abomination side of Lovecraft, Innstrad 2.0 is pretty clearly the "Everyone descends into madness" side.
We know that some high members of the Church (The Lunarch, whoever that may be now, and some trusted people/the person that read his diary) know that Avacyn was created as a shepherd, but we don't know if Avacyn knows. Doug Beyer specifically said that not even Creative is sure whether she knows or not(this was after the last set, so things have probably changed since then, but nothing public.)
And even that problem shouldn't have been a problem, that whole thing was rather hilarious. People just looked at the picture rather than understanding the reasoning behind it, but I guess in this world men can't get revenge on women.
Anyway, neat card. I didn't really find the first Innistrad all that interesting, but this is shaping up to be a little more my speed. Some of these cards are pretty cool.
I agree, this should be a non controversy. Though domestic abuse towards women is higher it's only because they only count physical abuse and not emotional, which would balance the equation a lot more. The other funny thing the PC police don't understand is that when you pretend a violent picture towards a woman promotes more of the same, you inadvertently show you are the sexist one by truly believing women need "extra" protection like not having these pictures. Or we could go with the alternative and make the angel a male and completely break the mtg lore continuity so that self righteous people can pretend they are protecting women, which again, IS SEXIST
How is the card Triumph of Ferocity an issue when there's a counterpart card for it - Triumph of Cruelty ? Also, the number of males killed in war is waaaaay higher than the number of females killed in battle. So let's try and reverse this trend.
So you're arguing that since men seem to have more "power", it's okay to portray them as evil and also for them to be killed en masse? Solely because they have "power"? Also, since men are also usually depicted as angels, they should also be "unburdened by the weight of perception of that long tradition", ergo it shouldn't matter to have male angels. Funny that you call it inclusiveness and empowerment when it benefits women and allows women to kill men with impunity.
Or wait - I get it - men dying in battle and being disposable is a "long tradition" so we shouldn't care.
Yes, it would be quite unfortunate if WotC stopped producing art like Ash Zealot killing a man because that would remove the agency of women.
If they are printing "haymaker" Angels with the exception of original Avacyn, I'd rather play Plummet 99% of the time because at least I can target.
This is what brainwash looks like.
Goblins, humans and angels are the most likely victims of violence in Magic. Goblins for the sake of comedy, humans for the sake of exemplification, and angels because they are the most powerful "good" creatures.
Maybe demons should be female and angels should be male so that the Worf Effect won't trigger your petty postmodern ideologue feelings, or maybe it's time we accept depictions of violence have absolutely zero correlation to violence in the real world.
MaRo has stated that in the Magic multiverse, Demons are male and Angels female. It's structured that way. If you want anything else you should maybe find an artist to alter it for you, or find another game that suits your obsession.
Otherwise, get over it.
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
Chandra, Torch of Defiance - Oops! All Chandras.
Prime Speaker Zegana - Draw for Power.
Pir & Toothy - Counterpalooza.
Arcades, the Strategist - Another Brick in the Wall.
Zacama, Primal Calamity - Calamity of Double Mana.
Edgar Markov - Vampires Don't Die.
Child of Alara - Dreamcrusher.
Which is precisely the reason they'd print something like this instead. Remember Theros Limited, and the restriction on straight removal so that it wasn't such a feel bad moment when you tried to make your voltron? That's what I was getting at. It's not targeted so that people can play their haymaker Angels with slightly more impunity.
It's worse because I like female angels, and this might be the second time we've had a set about female Angels that has little to offer someone who likes female Angels. Avacyn Restored sucked because there were only five Angels below Rare in the entire set, making it impractical to actually build an Angel deck, and now this.
If you like Goblins, imagine how you'd feel if there was a Goblin-centric set coming up where they're all brooding emos instead of catastrophically carefree. That's how I feel about this.
Come on, it's not that bad. They've been making angel cards in nearly every set, so there's no shortage. A lot of them are quite cheap as well, and there are other tribal cards you can include (for example, Urza's Incubator)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men#Gender_symmetry
Nope.
Had the same thought tho i hope not. Would hate to see the major angels of Innistrad die
I think the each player or each opponent things will just be a theme going forward to broaden how you can play the game in the future. Since EDH and other casual formats are so common, having each opponent on a card increases their usability. There are multiple times I've played 8 person games where it is one free for all. Cards like the one spoiled get increasingly better in those types of formats. Things no longer need to affect only one opponent. Lastly, since wizards wants to support draft as much as possible, making draft games as easily varied in style as possible is a good thing. I'm sure they feel if they can make all sets draftable in 2HG or free for all styles then will sell more packs due to the variety of games that can be played.
RIP Batman guy. I hope somebody picks up the slack now that you are gone. Sick children need their Batman.
Oh, another one that thinks "whatever smells other than classic 1v1, god forbid even CASUAL, must inevitably stink" ?
Newsflash: You can trigger surge by your own spells...
And now seriously: "each opponent" cards are here since the infancy of Magic (Visions, and are scattered here and there through all modern sets (Agent of Masks, Breath of Malfegor, Crackling Doom, Dominator Drone)...shall I continue?
Let this great clan rest in peace (2001-2011)
But Runo has always worshiped Dagon and that didn't stop him from helping humans thrive in Nephalia.
What you said about Liliana does seem likely, although Edgar would definitely be a better choice if it's not Runo.
So, yeah, always good.
WU TBD | UB Wrexial | BR The Scorpion God | RG Xenagos | GW Katilda
WB TBD | UR TBD | BG Virtus & Gorm | RW Feather | GU Koma
GWU TBD | WUB Sefris | UBR TBD | BRG Lord Windgrace | RGW TBD
WBG TBD | URW Brallin & Shabraz | BGU Kadena | RWB Edgar | GUR Maelstrom Wanderer
WUBR TBD | UBRG Thrasios & Vial Smasher | BRGW Saskia | RGWU TBD | GWUB TBD
WUBRG The Ur-Dragon | C Kozilek
Could be Nahiri, could be Emrakul/something else in the moon, or something totally else. (Currently, I believe it's Nahiri that is the woman-behind-the-madness.)
BTW, does this shed any more light on Nahiri's flavor text? She may be just trying to ruin Innistrad the way Sorin 'ruined' Zendikar? Or is she implying that the Eldrazi actually have a function in the multiverse similar to the angels' function on Innistrad? Kinda out there, but it's possible, if highly unlikely, that the Eldrazi are something like cosmic janitors.