If they present the set symbol with no extraneous information, then yes, it's not terribly interesting. Quaint at best.
If they reveal it with some accompanying trailer or story or card that shows, as people have mentioned, the heron being stripped from the moon, or some other great event associated with the moon, then the set symbol becomes associated with that hype, and will bring back reminders to that particular moment of excitement.
It's like ThyLordQ said. It matters how they present it for the first time (or how they would have, if it weren't for us discovering it).
I'm thinking that, because this would be so far away from the norm, they'd want to reveal it in the best light possible, like on a flashy preview card. I think that would provoke more positive reactions and first impressions than just showing it to us when they announced EMN.
It's like ThyLordQ said. It matters how they present it for the first time (or how they would have, if it weren't for us discovering it).
I'm thinking that, because this would be so far away from the norm, they'd want to reveal it in the best light possible, like on a flashy preview card. I think that would provoke more positive reactions and first impressions than just showing it to us when they announced EMN.
At this point it's going to have the opposite effect. No matter how cool WotC conceitedly thinks it is, the players will be sorely disappointed for having to wait that long just for a set symbol. Because let's get real, the symbol won't look that great. It's just a ploy to keep up this charade. Another gimmick where they always underestimate the fans.
We're talking about a 20 year old company who still don't have a competent digital team. Obfuscating files on a publicly accessible server to a fanbase that consists of computer-savvy nerds with so much free time. Really? Guess they keep forgetting how many things have been leaked this way. Even the "clever" clues game was decoded days before the entire mystery was disseminated as planned.
No chance this image is changing slowly over time?
I compared the image with a program on 5/16/2016 to 05/24/2016 but didn't see any difference. But I don't know if there are even older copies of this image from some other time.
Would be interesting if they were slowly corrupting an image of innistrad's moon into whatever the set symbol will eventually become.
No chance this image is changing slowly over time?
I compared the image with a program on 5/16/2016 to 05/24/2016 but didn't see any difference. But I don't know if there are even older copies of this image from some other time.
Would be interesting if they were slowly corrupting an image of innistrad's moon into whatever the set symbol will eventually become.
That being said, Mark Rosewater has stated he had made a ridiculously huge vanilla creature, that had a power and toughness larger than any ever before it, and it's in an upcoming set. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the moon houses that creature and it comes out. This would be a great reason to hide information from us so that we believe it's emrakul rather than this huge vanilla creature.
That being said, Mark Rosewater has stated he had made a ridiculously huge vanilla creature, that had a power and toughness larger than any ever before it, and it's in an upcoming set. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the moon houses that creature and it comes out. This would be a great reason to hide information from us so that we believe it's emrakul rather than this huge vanilla creature.
That being said, Mark Rosewater has stated he had made a ridiculously huge vanilla creature, that had a power and toughness larger than any ever before it, and it's in an upcoming set. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the moon houses that creature and it comes out. This would be a great reason to hide information from us so that we believe it's emrakul rather than this huge vanilla creature.
larger than Marit Lage? Blasphemy!
To be fair Marit Lage isn't vanilla, and being a token may also exclude it.
That being said, Mark Rosewater has stated he had made a ridiculously huge vanilla creature, that had a power and toughness larger than any ever before it, and it's in an upcoming set. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the moon houses that creature and it comes out. This would be a great reason to hide information from us so that we believe it's emrakul rather than this huge vanilla creature.
Is this the "Mythic Vanilla Creature"? I had not heard that he had said anything about its size; only that he had made a mythic rare vanilla creature. Do you hav a source, or is i conjecture?
If there truly is a mythic rare vanilla creature, that would, in my opinion, support the double-dual-face Emmy theory. One side of one of his cards is a vanilla creature; The other card has the flip conditions, and flips them both together; The backside of the two cards combine to become uberakul (or just the big bad of the set, Emrakul or otherwise).
I can't imagine any other way "vanilla" could ever meet the complexity requirements to be mythic rare. Either, it must have a backside and since it can't flip itself (it has no text on its front), it must be something truly special; or it must be like Hearthstone's C'thun, that is referenced so often on other cards in the set that it can become something truly special despite being a boring loser on its own.
It's from Mark Rosewater, and he is pretty strict with his definition of what he terms vanilla. Phyrexian Dreadnought without trample would be a "virtual vanilla". Phyrexian Dreadnought itself is a "virtual French vanilla". I am not sure how he would define the phyrexian-mana example, but it could work. I am pretty sure a double faced card doesn't count unless both sides are vanilla. Perhaps Eldricht Moon introduces ways to flip cards (like Moonmist), and the mythic he is talking about is something like a vanilla 1/1 on one side and a vanilla 8/8 on the other side, but with no way to flip it without the aid of other cards?
What he said was that (not a direct quote) "a future set had a vanilla creature at mythic rare at the end of design", but I don't think he has said anything more on its fate during development. There was a dedicated thread somewhere about speculation about the nature of the vanilla mythic.
We're getting off-topic everybody, the mythic vanilla discussion belongs in Speculation. I'll leave this thread open for another couple of days, but if we don't get any new info this week I'm going to lock thread until the symbol is spoiled
"The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again"
So now we finally see it and all the secrecy makes sense. (We literally got this set symbol at the last possible minute. We saw friggin Kaladesh's symbol before Moon's!)
Btw, I'm totally down to have this thread go from a "what's the symbol" spec thread to a "yea or nay" review thread, btw. Personally, I don't think it looks particularly better or worse than the average set symbol. It's vaguely reminiscent of Born's symbol (Xenagos horns) actually. But it seems much more polarizing than average, just based on what I've read from the community so far.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm officially proposing we retire the word "insane" from the MtG vocabulary.
"The best way to be different is to be better" - Gene Muir
If they present the set symbol with no extraneous information, then yes, it's not terribly interesting. Quaint at best.
If they reveal it with some accompanying trailer or story or card that shows, as people have mentioned, the heron being stripped from the moon, or some other great event associated with the moon, then the set symbol becomes associated with that hype, and will bring back reminders to that particular moment of excitement.
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/magic-story/i-am-avacyn-2016-05-18
Because the last part came out and still no reveal on what's causing the madness.
I'm thinking that, because this would be so far away from the norm, they'd want to reveal it in the best light possible, like on a flashy preview card. I think that would provoke more positive reactions and first impressions than just showing it to us when they announced EMN.
At this point it's going to have the opposite effect. No matter how cool WotC conceitedly thinks it is, the players will be sorely disappointed for having to wait that long just for a set symbol. Because let's get real, the symbol won't look that great. It's just a ploy to keep up this charade. Another gimmick where they always underestimate the fans.
We're talking about a 20 year old company who still don't have a competent digital team. Obfuscating files on a publicly accessible server to a fanbase that consists of computer-savvy nerds with so much free time. Really? Guess they keep forgetting how many things have been leaked this way. Even the "clever" clues game was decoded days before the entire mystery was disseminated as planned.
........................
I compared the image with a program on 5/16/2016 to 05/24/2016 but didn't see any difference. But I don't know if there are even older copies of this image from some other time.
Would be interesting if they were slowly corrupting an image of innistrad's moon into whatever the set symbol will eventually become.
Interesting theory.
I will keep an eye on the symbol.
WPN page
That being said, Mark Rosewater has stated he had made a ridiculously huge vanilla creature, that had a power and toughness larger than any ever before it, and it's in an upcoming set. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the moon houses that creature and it comes out. This would be a great reason to hide information from us so that we believe it's emrakul rather than this huge vanilla creature.
Standard: lol no
Modern: BG/x, UR/x, Burn, Merfolk, Zoo, Storm
Legacy: Shardless BUG, Delver (BUG, RUG, Grixis), Landstill, Depths Combo, Merfolk
Vintage: Dark Times, BUG Fish, Merfolk
EDH: Teysa, Orzhov Scion / Krenko, Mob Boss / Stonebrow, Krosan Hero
To be fair Marit Lage isn't vanilla, and being a token may also exclude it.
Sorry I had to make this joke.
Hands to the sky
Give a round of applause
For the great Miss Y!
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
I can't imagine any other way "vanilla" could ever meet the complexity requirements to be mythic rare. Either, it must have a backside and since it can't flip itself (it has no text on its front), it must be something truly special; or it must be like Hearthstone's C'thun, that is referenced so often on other cards in the set that it can become something truly special despite being a boring loser on its own.
What he said was that (not a direct quote) "a future set had a vanilla creature at mythic rare at the end of design", but I don't think he has said anything more on its fate during development. There was a dedicated thread somewhere about speculation about the nature of the vanilla mythic.
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
The symbol is emrakul herself
I mean, it honestly doesn't look at that much like Emrakul, though.
It's more like an adorable lil baby squid. Squee!
11-3-1 @ GP Copenhagen: Top Stories of Grand Prix Copenhagen
http://magic.wizards.com/sites/mtg/files/images/featured/EMN_SET_SYMBOL.png
Live streaming Casual Magic: the Gathering
Sundays at 7:00 PM Eastern Time / 4:00 PM Pacific Time
Follow along on Instagram (@kokoshomebrews) as I create casual tribal decks
and try to build around crazy combos, then play em on stream!
|| WBG || GW || GB || GWU ||
Btw, I'm totally down to have this thread go from a "what's the symbol" spec thread to a "yea or nay" review thread, btw. Personally, I don't think it looks particularly better or worse than the average set symbol. It's vaguely reminiscent of Born's symbol (Xenagos horns) actually. But it seems much more polarizing than average, just based on what I've read from the community so far.
I'm officially proposing we retire the word "insane" from the MtG vocabulary.
"The best way to be different is to be better" - Gene Muir
Cubes:
Modern Banlist Cube
Monocolor Budget Cube