So, I noticed this section of the Color Pie article that talks about how it applies to the individual person. I didn't have a problem with anything I was reading until I got to this point:
An individual cannot be three or more colors. This is a controversial viewpoint and should be approached with an open mind as well as a skeptical one, as many will likely dispute this. It is important to note that Wizards of the Coast does print three color legends, but it is also notable that this is done out of balance reasons, block theme, or mechanical reasons. However one must acknowledge that it does seem suspect that a character like Oros, the Avenger is somehow an advocate of everything White stands for while simultaneously representing everything that White does not. However, it is Oros' "breath" ability that seems to represent White (given the White activation cost), so one can make the argument that he is a Black/Red character with little more than an inherently White weapon. This is perfectly respectable and often likely. In one's analysis of a character, one color should be ruled out as either non-existent or mistaken, a balance-related or mechanic addition, a block theme-related decision. For another example, Zur the Enchanter is a three-color creature, but without knowing more about the character, it is likely that he would rightfully belong in Black/White or solely Blue. Perhaps with knowledge of the character, one can deduce that he is very Blue/Black, but simply prefers to meddle in White magic. This is also quite possible, since almost no one always plays the color they philosophically connect with most.
On the one hand, this author insists that one person cannot be three-colored. On the other hand, Wizards prints three-colored legends. It strikes me as more likely that the author's understanding of how the color pie relates to individuals is incorrect. I'd like to propose a way that this is actually possible:
Just as a bicolor perspective can be represented as a goal affiliated with one color being pursued through a method derived from the other (RW can either a particularly passionate approach to enforcing order, or a democratic and organizational celebration of the haphazard and instinctual—consider alternately a masked vigilante and the leader of a terrorist cell), a tricolor perspective can be achieved by either substituting a two-color perspective for one of the colors in this relationship, OR by adding a third layer of intent.
So, WBR encapsulates an individual who is one of the following:
1. a passionate and evangelical capitalist (WB motivation and R methods)
2. an ethical boxer (BR motivation and W methods)
3. a sadistic inquisitor (RW motivation and B methods)
4. an honorable and traditional slave-owning and using sculptor (W behavior, B methods, R objectives)
5. a ruthless and uncaring arsonist trying to drive out a tyrannical ruler (B behavior, R methods, W objectives)
6. a jovial (albeit easily distracted) lobbyist using the political system to position his company for maximum personal profit (R behavior, W methods, B objectives)
(et cetera)
With this in mind, I propose that the fourth section of the "Individualism and the Color Pie" heading either be removed or updated to correspond with the reality of the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If your signature takes up more lines than your actual post does, you should fix one or both of them.
Whole swaths of the wiki are just disgraceful. It's a combination of neglect and attention, and no discussion. And no guidelines for how it ought to have been.
Without intending to make it so, I'd say three fifths of the words about just single colors in theme and mechanics are solely mine. I wrote it, and it didn't get edited.
If I were you, I'd start a larger movement to get the Color Pie category in the wiki revamped.
And I don't think this is the forum. This is technical support.
In place of that, I'd support removing all discussion of three-color because it has received no official treatment from Wizards' people. All of it is speculation, from the perspective of an encyclopedia. But thing is, that was written by someone I know and miss on this website. Mainly, I gave up the wiki for just the reason of this personal conflict.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
If I were you, I'd start a larger movement to get the Color Pie category in the wiki revamped.
For sure.
And I don't think this is the forum. This is technical support.
Nope. All things wiki.
Anything that can't be verified, in particular by Wizards of the Coast, can be on discussion/talk pages but cannot be on the article page.
I recall not having purged this (in 2007-2009, there was a user or two with their several gimmicks in particular who created a great many pages on "strategy"; that was pickle to clean up) because, unlike other ultimately pieces of opinion or personal interpretation, it was well-written, a credit to Horseshoe_Hermit.
Thanks, H_H, for writing it and for your other contributions. They've not gone unnoticed (and, if they have, well, there's always the user contribs. log).
Whole swaths of the wiki are just disgraceful. It's a combination of neglect and attention, and no discussion. And no guidelines for how it ought to have been.
I'm a huge fan of the Color Pie series by Mark Rosewater, and recently I was trying to examine which colors I would fit (in terms of personality) if I were to make a Tricolor Deck. Now, here's the thing: I settled on a wedge, and I agree with the OP that a person CAN be a conduit of three mana colors depending on the layers of how these colors interact.
Thing is, humans are complex creatures. I'd like to think that everyone has a bit of each of the five colors in them, and a person simply exhibits traits which are drawn from the most prevalent ones. While each color is distinct, they do overlap with each other in most cases. In the case of a wedge like WBR, why wouldn't it make sense that a person made of these mana colors be a mix of the tensions between the philosophies of these colors?
Consider the Shard articles by MaRo. In each one, he focused on the common ally color, and the common ally was "interviewed". In each article, it was pretty much decided that this color was the "balancer" between the two philosophies. If he writes a wedge cycle (which I am hoping will happen eventually) then he could realistically write them up from the perspective of the "unbalancer", the common enemy. If he wrote the Bant article from White balancing Blue and Green, he can write it from the perspective of White balancing Red and Black.
Consider WBR. What do Black and Red have in common aside from a hatred for White? Together, they make hedonism at it's finest. Their conflict? Black sides with Blue when it comes to long term planning, while Red sides with Green when it comes to "here and now" matters. Now, White understands both Green and Blue, since it's the common ally. White is flexible enough to play in both the long term and the short term aspects of these philosophies (reflected mechanically by Blue's love for control and Green's love for aggro, White being able to mix and match between them with ease).
In this case, the wedge could be focused on how White acts as the ambassador between the two, and balances Black and Red by being the combination of what they would usually look for in their other allies, but can't find within themselves. Can a single human being be conflicted by this sense of order and chaos at the same time? Of course they can. That's the whole point of philosophy. Thus, I believe an individual may be more than one or two colors.
I participate yearly in a survival challenge in which I am dropped off in the wilderness with 1 days rations, a knife, and no other supplies, and have to find my way home. This is typically several weeks hiking from civilization.
I have personally killed several bears in the course of this challenge, with the use of snares and other traps.
But there's nothing concrete and it has zero reference in the game or metagame; wedge legends appear in special product and have no writing. So there's nothing encyclopedic to be done.
It's not the right outlet for that inquiry.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Wickeddarkman, Troll, Faceless Wanderer, Birdmaiden, and Flavortext was probably one individual whose accounts were banned by myself and sneakyhomunculus.
SenakeRow, if I may ask, who are you?
The articles on colours are ugly and original. If anyone can read through years of articles on Wizards and summarize that, without plagiarizing, with references, and in keeping with the style guide, that person deserves an award.
On the one hand, this author insists that one person cannot be three-colored. On the other hand, Wizards prints three-colored legends. It strikes me as more likely that the author's understanding of how the color pie relates to individuals is incorrect. I'd like to propose a way that this is actually possible:
Just as a bicolor perspective can be represented as a goal affiliated with one color being pursued through a method derived from the other (RW can either a particularly passionate approach to enforcing order, or a democratic and organizational celebration of the haphazard and instinctual—consider alternately a masked vigilante and the leader of a terrorist cell), a tricolor perspective can be achieved by either substituting a two-color perspective for one of the colors in this relationship, OR by adding a third layer of intent.
So, WBR encapsulates an individual who is one of the following:
1. a passionate and evangelical capitalist (WB motivation and R methods)
2. an ethical boxer (BR motivation and W methods)
3. a sadistic inquisitor (RW motivation and B methods)
4. an honorable and traditional slave-owning and using sculptor (W behavior, B methods, R objectives)
5. a ruthless and uncaring arsonist trying to drive out a tyrannical ruler (B behavior, R methods, W objectives)
6. a jovial (albeit easily distracted) lobbyist using the political system to position his company for maximum personal profit (R behavior, W methods, B objectives)
(et cetera)
With this in mind, I propose that the fourth section of the "Individualism and the Color Pie" heading either be removed or updated to correspond with the reality of the game.
Without intending to make it so, I'd say three fifths of the words about just single colors in theme and mechanics are solely mine. I wrote it, and it didn't get edited.
If I were you, I'd start a larger movement to get the Color Pie category in the wiki revamped.
And I don't think this is the forum. This is technical support.
In place of that, I'd support removing all discussion of three-color because it has received no official treatment from Wizards' people. All of it is speculation, from the perspective of an encyclopedia. But thing is, that was written by someone I know and miss on this website. Mainly, I gave up the wiki for just the reason of this personal conflict.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Nope. All things wiki.
Anything that can't be verified, in particular by Wizards of the Coast, can be on discussion/talk pages but cannot be on the article page.
I recall not having purged this (in 2007-2009, there was a user or two with their several gimmicks in particular who created a great many pages on "strategy"; that was pickle to clean up) because, unlike other ultimately pieces of opinion or personal interpretation, it was well-written, a credit to Horseshoe_Hermit.
Thanks, H_H, for writing it and for your other contributions. They've not gone unnoticed (and, if they have, well, there's always the user contribs. log).
Mmm...
Feel free to edit articles if you feel it is so disgraceful.
I did largely mean my stuff.
I have a love-hate relationship with the subjects right now.
More hate.
My answer to ITDW perhaps explains myself.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Thing is, humans are complex creatures. I'd like to think that everyone has a bit of each of the five colors in them, and a person simply exhibits traits which are drawn from the most prevalent ones. While each color is distinct, they do overlap with each other in most cases. In the case of a wedge like WBR, why wouldn't it make sense that a person made of these mana colors be a mix of the tensions between the philosophies of these colors?
Consider the Shard articles by MaRo. In each one, he focused on the common ally color, and the common ally was "interviewed". In each article, it was pretty much decided that this color was the "balancer" between the two philosophies. If he writes a wedge cycle (which I am hoping will happen eventually) then he could realistically write them up from the perspective of the "unbalancer", the common enemy. If he wrote the Bant article from White balancing Blue and Green, he can write it from the perspective of White balancing Red and Black.
Consider WBR. What do Black and Red have in common aside from a hatred for White? Together, they make hedonism at it's finest. Their conflict? Black sides with Blue when it comes to long term planning, while Red sides with Green when it comes to "here and now" matters. Now, White understands both Green and Blue, since it's the common ally. White is flexible enough to play in both the long term and the short term aspects of these philosophies (reflected mechanically by Blue's love for control and Green's love for aggro, White being able to mix and match between them with ease).
In this case, the wedge could be focused on how White acts as the ambassador between the two, and balances Black and Red by being the combination of what they would usually look for in their other allies, but can't find within themselves. Can a single human being be conflicted by this sense of order and chaos at the same time? Of course they can. That's the whole point of philosophy. Thus, I believe an individual may be more than one or two colors.
How well do you do against one?
But there's nothing concrete and it has zero reference in the game or metagame; wedge legends appear in special product and have no writing. So there's nothing encyclopedic to be done.
It's not the right outlet for that inquiry.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
SenakeRow, if I may ask, who are you?
The articles on colours are ugly and original. If anyone can read through years of articles on Wizards and summarize that, without plagiarizing, with references, and in keeping with the style guide, that person deserves an award.
— jean-baptiste alphonse karr, les guêpes (1849)
wiki subforum @ mtgs forums * mtgs wiki * site rules