The next time you have some unshaved ape write a book featuring characters you fully intend to make the 'face of Magic', please have the werewithal to tell the author to PUT THEM IN THE FIRST CHAPTER. I must admit, that while I'm sure it's the pinnacle of hilarity for snickering teenagers to read about public drunkeness, urination, bros crying over girls, and castration threats, a fantasy story meant to involve the greatest wizards of the age should have precious little space for such things. Especially in THE FIRST CHAPTER.
I'm not saying that I mind these terrible new characters your latest escapee from the monkey house has crayoned out, but starting the book with them is beyond stupid. It exceeds my grasp of the English language to state how addlepated it is for a book about wizards to not start with an intense battle, but end with it as mere padding for a guy to get wasted and sob over his girlfriend who has secret powers and just randomly threatens people before decimating a bar because monsters with weapons show up and who else could they be after?
I'm glad you've decided to start releasing hardcover books. I'm overjoyed that the cover is so pretty. Once you manage to fill those attractive bindings with writing more substansial than Liliana Vess and all her Rowdy Friends I will be the first to purchase one. Until then, please tell your next caged animal you give the story reins to, that books where magical battles take place SHOULD START WITH THE MAGICAL BATTLES. I realize this is a hard formula to digest, that it would occur to nearly no one that pitched etheral battles of wizardry should be included in a novel that promises such things in the first place. It is my sincere hope that your next novel of undisputed magery will be better than this shiny doorstop, because honestly, you have nowhere to go but up after Agents of Artifice (Which had a total of zero artifice in the first chapter either, in case you didn't catch that).
Yours eternally,
H. Powdered Pius Mildrid Fibblefarns Blackblade VII, Esq, PhD, XYX.
As I read through this thread (and others), I feel compelled to comment. Many present have become rather . . . hostile toward Magic authors. Now, we all have our own style and plot and character preferences, and are, to some extent or other, invested in the shared world and game. You can see my reflections on J.K. Rowling on another thread. However, I do not believe such vehemency is necessary. I know that Will McDermott, Pete Venters, and Scott McGough used to post on these boards. I think having such authors and Magic faces around is a positive attribute for this site to get behind-the-scenes explanations and further clarifications. Yet, with such attitudes, I would not blame these men (as they have all been male authors thus far, as, to my knowledge, Lynn Abbey is the only female author at all, and she has not visited here as far as I know) for not returning.
In spirit of positive community, I think such harsh attacks should be contained in relevant critiques and personal views. Author and company-bashing seems counterproductive.
Of course, I am no moderator, and I've been away from these boards from quite some time, so my suggestions/opinions may not carry much weight. I just thought I'd comment as I saw necessary in the hope for goodwill.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dominian Scholar of the Old Guard, specializing in pre-revisionist (Armada comics) and revisionist (Brothers' War through Apocalypse)history
They aren't attacks, they are opinions. You can not say that the current quality of the novels hold a candle to Brother War. Sorry but this is a series of books, when coming into it you have to be as good or not better then the previous books or else people will lose interest. It is just how story telling works. No one wants to learn about the apocalyptic battle for Dominaria and then have a book about the rest of Sisay's life. They want something bigger, better.
Okay, enough. There was a time when I got the modship here and tried to decrease the negativity here. It was extremely strong when the first spoiler of AoA appeared and everybody started tossing crap on it despite the fact that there wasn't a single line known from the book.
And when looking at Zazdor's post, I see my own words from four months ago repeated.
It kind of worked for some time, although I unintentionally managed to chase one of the best local posters from here for some time (btw, I'm glad you're back).
So once again: for Powdered Blackblade and the others: CUT THE NEGATIVITY and reserve your opinions until you READ THE WHOLE BOOK.
You're entitled to have your opinion, but I won't tolerate posts of the kind that their whole value consists of the author's trying to be as much "smart-ass" and ironic as possible. Continue, and I will start hand around warnings.
I am all for sharing personal views. I just get uneasy when they are worded in certain ways. In no way do I suggest we must like the story or novels--it's just in the phrasing of our reactions that I suggest we address. Sharing frustration is okay, but remember, we are also a storyline board--here to serve as references, clarifications, theorists, historians, speculators, and so forth. Only posting discontent so frequently does not serve these purposes.
I think Eid at one point noted that there used to be theories and such, and now we have only four threads on Nicol Bolas and his return. I am a more theoretical person--the days of discussing the nature of the spark, the concept of a center of consciousness, whether Urza was the Oracle en-Vec, and similar speculation is fun. Griping just gets old.
With such a variety of people here on these boards, I think such speculation and compilation of continuity has amazing potential based on all our "specialties" and interests in the Magic storyline. Once we have a planeswalker novel, despite perhaps our anger or sadness or confusion over the Mending, we can work out the rules and limitations governing the new 'walkers. A revised CenCon theory, perhaps. Working together to elucidate continuity would be much more productive for our own wellbeing than working together to bemoan it.
Let's use each other to renew interest, or at least enjoy the aspects of continuity that we may each deem "best" (such as Armada comics or The Brothers' War).
Thanks, guys--I look forward to our discussions!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dominian Scholar of the Old Guard, specializing in pre-revisionist (Armada comics) and revisionist (Brothers' War through Apocalypse)history
My opinion: Criticism is fine. Negative criticism is also fine. But flaming the author is bad. Everyone does it to some extent, I'm certainly no exception. But there's a difference between expressing your belief that a book doesn't have merit and simple name-calling.
If someone feels so strongly that they need to use name-calling to express their opinion, that's absolutely fine. But it needs to be in the form of a letter to WotC or the writer himself. It doesn't need to happen on this message board. This place exists to discuss the aspects of this storyline--positive and negative. But let's not turn it into a flame war.
But, I don't agree with the logic that the negativity should be reserved only for those who've read the book. People can form negative opinions about certain aspects of the book based on the synopsis or (more especially) on the first chapter. Reading the first chapter makes it obvious to me that it's not going to be that great of a book. That's negative criticism I guess, but it's my opinion. And if something changes my opinion to be positive, that's wonderful. I think how you express your opinion is indicative of whether or not your opinion is constructive or not. If someone has a negative opinion on the book after reading the first chapter, I don't see how that's indicative that that person's opinion shouldn't be displayed here. But if that opinion goes beyond being negative into the realms of being offensive, then I'd rather not have to read it.
Eid--I agree completely. Criticism is criticsm--positive or negative. Word choice is just something to always keep in mind, which would include, as you noted, name-calling.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dominian Scholar of the Old Guard, specializing in pre-revisionist (Armada comics) and revisionist (Brothers' War through Apocalypse)history
Thanks. In addition, I'd like to point out BEST STORYLINE POSTER OF 2008, biz-natches! Eat that, Tezzeret AND Mort! You're cleverly arranged, detailed arguments are nothing compared to my sophomoric wit and apathy.
... Sorry. Had to get that out of my system. I'll go lie down now.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
AIM - EidTelNVil
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
My opinion: Criticism is fine. Negative criticism is also fine. But flaming the author is bad. Everyone does it to some extent, I'm certainly no exception. But there's a difference between expressing your belief that a book doesn't have merit and simple name-calling.
If someone feels so strongly that they need to use name-calling to express their opinion, that's absolutely fine. But it needs to be in the form of a letter to WotC or the writer himself. It doesn't need to happen on this message board. This place exists to discuss the aspects of this storyline--positive and negative. But let's not turn it into a flame war.
But, I don't agree with the logic that the negativity should be reserved only for those who've read the book. People can form negative opinions about certain aspects of the book based on the synopsis or (more especially) on the first chapter. Reading the first chapter makes it obvious to me that it's not going to be that great of a book. That's negative criticism I guess, but it's my opinion. And if something changes my opinion to be positive, that's wonderful. I think how you express your opinion is indicative of whether or not your opinion is constructive or not. If someone has a negative opinion on the book after reading the first chapter, I don't see how that's indicative that that person's opinion shouldn't be displayed here. But if that opinion goes beyond being negative into the realms of being offensive, then I'd rather not have to read it.
For what it's worth, that's my opinion anyway.
Thanks for your opinion, Eid.
It's the same thing over and over....I do not like to see people here being unnecesarily harsh, pessimistic, or offensive to the authors/Wizards. It's not about the criticism itself (honestly, did anybody here really think that he would be persecuted solely for having a different opinion? This is not a totalitarian state..), but about the form.
Yes, the times of Brothers' War , Phyrexians and Weatherlight are long past, and we have different stories, styles, authors now. AoA is written by somebody who (AFAIK) never wrote for Magic before. I am looking forward to reading the whole book and discussing it here. We'll see how it turns out in the end.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
100% Vorthos Spike and Storyline Expert
Former Fact Prospector of the Greek Alliance.
Let this great clan rest in peace (2001-2011)
It's the same thing over and over....I do not like to see people here being unnecesarily harsh, pessimistic, or offensive to the authors/Wizards. It's not about the criticism itself (honestly, did anybody here really think that he would be persecuted solely for having a different opinion? This is not a totalitarian state..), but about the form.
Yes, the times of Brothers' War , Phyrexians and Weatherlight are long past, and we have different stories, styles, authors now. AoA is written by somebody who (AFAIK) never wrote for Magic before. I am looking forward to reading the whole book and discussing it here. We'll see how it turns out in the end.
To a point I did believe being negative would not be tolerated on this board because you posted in a topic I was mianly negative in and then stickied a new topic asking us not to be negative @_@
I judge a book by its cover and first chapter. I am one of those weirdos who grabs a book, goes and buys some water and sits and reads the first chapter. i did it for Brothers War and just bought the rest online to finish up the story. To me I don't believe I would pick up Agents of Artifice beacuse, though the story could seem interesting, nothing took hold of me in the first chapter.
Couple what I would judge as a boring book along with the quality of every book after Apocalypse(which I think we can agree, besides Ravnica and Kamigawa has been a downward spiral) leads me to believer that overall this book will not be as good as I was hoping for it to be.
I will buy AoA and try it because I am loyal to the overall storyline. I will also buy Alara because I do believe it will (hopfully) be an interesting story. If neither hold my interest I will, sadly, be dropping the books all together because Mirrodin and Time Spiral have killed my faith in WotC :-(
To a point I did believe being negative would not be tolerated on this board because you posted in a topic I was mianly negative in and then stickied a new topic asking us not to be negative @_@
Yes, I agree completely. I was (and still am for that matter) a little fuzzy on what exactly you mean, Caranthir, when you say "cut out the negativity"? Do you want us to cut out negativity that isn't constructive, or just cut out negativity altogether? I mean, message boards exist to talk about good and bad aspects of whatever the board's topic is. If we can be negative about the books (how can one be positive, I wonder?) as long as we don't step beyond the bounds of decency, maybe you should change the sticky you just created from "cut the negativity" to "cut the flaming" or "cut the disrespectful negativity" or something.
Sorry to interrupt the topic, but I'm just a little confused about what we can and can't say here. "Don't be negative" sounds like it's totalitarian, but I think that's because it's not really what Caranthir is trying to indicate. It comes across as "don't say anything bad about the books"--which I think isn't what's being asked of us.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
AIM - EidTelNVil
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
Yes, I agree completely. I was (and still am for that matter) a little fuzzy on what exactly you mean, Caranthir, when you say "cut out the negativity"? Do you want us to cut out negativity that isn't constructive, or just cut out negativity altogether? I mean, message boards exist to talk about good and bad aspects of whatever the board's topic is. If we can be negative about the books (how can one be positive, I wonder?) as long as we don't step beyond the bounds of decency, maybe you should change the sticky you just created from "cut the negativity" to "cut the flaming" or "cut the disrespectful negativity" or something.
Sorry to interrupt the topic, but I'm just a little confused about what we can and can't say here. "Don't be negative" sounds like it's totalitarian, but I think that's because it's not really what Caranthir is trying to indicate. It comes across as "don't say anything bad about the books"--which I think isn't what's being asked of us.
*sigh*
You are giving me a hard time....but then, what less should I expect among such high-level and smart audience like you guys here.
I apparently sounded harsher than I intended.
Quote from Eid »
If we can be negative about the books (how can one be positive, I wonder?) as long as we don't step beyond the bounds of decency, maybe you should change the sticky you just created from "cut the negativity" to "cut the flaming" or "cut the disrespectful negativity" or something.
Yes. That is actually a good idea to get the message through clearly and undeformed. It was done.
Nobody will be punished for having a negative opinion. Just know the limits between polite, constructive criticism and useless bashing of everything that comes from the writers.
Is it clear now? I hope so.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
100% Vorthos Spike and Storyline Expert
Former Fact Prospector of the Greek Alliance.
Let this great clan rest in peace (2001-2011)
Whoever he was, he definitely doesn't interview people for a living. He just nods his head without paying attention, and spends time reading the next pre-arranged question from a board on the floor.
Perhaps they went over future recurring characters? I will say I am looking forward to the novel. As for one day of going over the storyline . . . there were those bookshelves behind him. Couldn't that be made into an author lending library? "Here, new author. Read these."
However, he was prepped--that's good. Brady mentioned on here a few weeks ago the freedom given to the writers. As I consider it more, I appreciate that. We'll see how it works.
As for author interviews, here's a typed response by Clayton Emery regarding his work on Greensleeves and Jedit. I'm sure many of us long-standing continuity buffs have read it, but if not, or for those who are newer here, here's Clayton's . . . uh . . . explanation of his experience: http://www.claytonemery.com/FantasyMTG.html
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dominian Scholar of the Old Guard, specializing in pre-revisionist (Armada comics) and revisionist (Brothers' War through Apocalypse)history
I liked the first chapter :o. I know, yeah the author used to many commas but still. As someone who has been turned down by a girl who I liked while very drunk in a less then savoury neighbourhood it worked as an introduction to Kallist at least. We get some insight into the workings of Lilliana's powers (and how powerful she really is, would Urza or any of the "true" planeswalkers give anything about three Joes with crossbows?) and it does give some character development to Lilliana through Kallist's exposition. She's self centered, stubborn, decisive and is just trying to enjoy herself (I'd say almost RB if anything). Yeah its not Stephen Erikson or R. Scott Bakker but still if you know who the characters are supposed to be and a bit about the setting you can really dig into it.
Other than that to go back to the Bolas aspect, weren't the Elders supposed to planeswalk without sparks? Something that very few beings are in theory capable of doing. Meaning without a postmeandering spark he should be at walker powerlevels if not already past them. Add in the spark and the 25000 years of experience... I really doubt the four walkers could slow him down much(that being said, Bolas vs. Anomander Rake for those in the know, how dope would that be? :D)
Asking out a girl is like trying to cast a first turn Necropotence. Sometimes the other player will have the Force of Will to say no. You shouldn't let that stop you from trying it.
Oooh, you're treading on thin ice there, Tessie. "God exists because you can't prove otherwise". Let's not go there. Really, let's not.
I think that we will just have to agree that the Elder Dragons were incredibly powerful. It's probably best to forget about their cards, because that can't possibly do them any justice. If there were that many and only a few survived, imagine what kind of powers they had to do that to one another. And making every single dragon lose flying (that is, every loser) is no mean feat.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[I was permabanned and all I got to show for it was .... well, nothing.]
Zaz, thanks, I've been wanting to read that article again for a while now. Clayton Emery is now my favorite Magic writer after reading that article. Man, I feel sorry for the guy. He honestly did the best he could (and he's a good writer, make no mistake) after WotC basically handed him a train wreck and told him to make a trilogy out of it. Poor guy. I'd like to see him get to write another trilogy in the Magic books, but I'd say the chances of him wanting to do that are pretty slim.
Edit: OMFG, this is a grumpy disgruntled fan's (me) wet dream -
Emery - "How do I graduate from the B list to the A list?"
WotC - "You don't."
Emery - "Will you guys promote my work?"
WotC - "No. If you catch fire with the fans, then we'll promote you."
Emery - "How do I catch fire with the fans if you don't promote my work?"
WotC - "Who knows? We don't promote Magic books as a rule anyway, because they don't sell well."
Eid--I did appreciate rereading Clayton's thoughts. And yes, he sure should win the internet with that one. It seems now, though, as Brady has been discussing on the other thread, that they are working on the promotional aspect. Let's take what we can, step by step.
Tez--The reference of "they were said to be" in regards to the Elders most probably came from Jeff Lee's old Legends of Magic site. I don't know how familiar you are with it (I don't think it exists any more), and it was suggested that sometimes Jeff added information not canon, but many of us have looked to his work as reliable. Tez, I know you refer to the revisionist novels most often, but there are the previsionist stories (novels and comics), which many of us take for canon until they are replaced by revisionist knowledge.
Note on Agents: I've started reading it (slowly), and it's alright. Liliana and Kallist have to get somewhere in the early chapters, and I haven't yet figured out why they just don't 'walk there . . .
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dominian Scholar of the Old Guard, specializing in pre-revisionist (Armada comics) and revisionist (Brothers' War through Apocalypse)history
Tez, I am confused as to why you suggest that the idea that the elders were immortal or ageless is "apparently wrong." Have we been given information that states the Elders are not immortal? As I noted, taking prerevision as fact until otherwise noted is a good route. I don't think revisionist contradicts this.
Rhuell lived until right before the World-spell. That was a long time. And he was healthy and such. And he was not a planeswalker (and whether he could or could not planeswalk may be questionable from the comics, as others have stated, we do know the Dragon Wars were across Dominia, not only Dominaria).
And, when Rhuell was killed, Ravidel used his carcass as an interplanar war barge (but that could have just been Ravidel's own spellwork).
You just seem so determined to scratch prerevision. I'm trying to understand the argument better, but see no reason why Elders cannot be immortal (but susceptible to murder).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dominian Scholar of the Old Guard, specializing in pre-revisionist (Armada comics) and revisionist (Brothers' War through Apocalypse)history
Since this is apparently the right thread for it, I can say I honestly really enjoyed the book. It's the best one in a long time. It's not Brothers' War good, but I think it'd be definitely in the top 5 if not #2.
I'm slowly working on it. I don't dislike the writing--it tends to get a bit verbose, but so do I, so I appreciate that. I'm still focused on the workings of the new 'walkers, so until I get a better grasp, I'll reserve a more complete response.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dominian Scholar of the Old Guard, specializing in pre-revisionist (Armada comics) and revisionist (Brothers' War through Apocalypse)history
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The next time you have some unshaved ape write a book featuring characters you fully intend to make the 'face of Magic', please have the werewithal to tell the author to PUT THEM IN THE FIRST CHAPTER. I must admit, that while I'm sure it's the pinnacle of hilarity for snickering teenagers to read about public drunkeness, urination, bros crying over girls, and castration threats, a fantasy story meant to involve the greatest wizards of the age should have precious little space for such things. Especially in THE FIRST CHAPTER.
I'm not saying that I mind these terrible new characters your latest escapee from the monkey house has crayoned out, but starting the book with them is beyond stupid. It exceeds my grasp of the English language to state how addlepated it is for a book about wizards to not start with an intense battle, but end with it as mere padding for a guy to get wasted and sob over his girlfriend who has secret powers and just randomly threatens people before decimating a bar because monsters with weapons show up and who else could they be after?
I'm glad you've decided to start releasing hardcover books. I'm overjoyed that the cover is so pretty. Once you manage to fill those attractive bindings with writing more substansial than Liliana Vess and all her Rowdy Friends I will be the first to purchase one. Until then, please tell your next caged animal you give the story reins to, that books where magical battles take place SHOULD START WITH THE MAGICAL BATTLES. I realize this is a hard formula to digest, that it would occur to nearly no one that pitched etheral battles of wizardry should be included in a novel that promises such things in the first place. It is my sincere hope that your next novel of undisputed magery will be better than this shiny doorstop, because honestly, you have nowhere to go but up after Agents of Artifice (Which had a total of zero artifice in the first chapter either, in case you didn't catch that).
Yours eternally,
H. Powdered Pius Mildrid Fibblefarns Blackblade VII, Esq, PhD, XYX.
In spirit of positive community, I think such harsh attacks should be contained in relevant critiques and personal views. Author and company-bashing seems counterproductive.
Of course, I am no moderator, and I've been away from these boards from quite some time, so my suggestions/opinions may not carry much weight. I just thought I'd comment as I saw necessary in the hope for goodwill.
MtG is just not delivering want the fans want.
And when looking at Zazdor's post, I see my own words from four months ago repeated.
It kind of worked for some time, although I unintentionally managed to chase one of the best local posters from here for some time (btw, I'm glad you're back).
So once again: for Powdered Blackblade and the others: CUT THE NEGATIVITY and reserve your opinions until you READ THE WHOLE BOOK.
You're entitled to have your opinion, but I won't tolerate posts of the kind that their whole value consists of the author's trying to be as much "smart-ass" and ironic as possible. Continue, and I will start hand around warnings.
Let this great clan rest in peace (2001-2011)
I think Eid at one point noted that there used to be theories and such, and now we have only four threads on Nicol Bolas and his return. I am a more theoretical person--the days of discussing the nature of the spark, the concept of a center of consciousness, whether Urza was the Oracle en-Vec, and similar speculation is fun. Griping just gets old.
With such a variety of people here on these boards, I think such speculation and compilation of continuity has amazing potential based on all our "specialties" and interests in the Magic storyline. Once we have a planeswalker novel, despite perhaps our anger or sadness or confusion over the Mending, we can work out the rules and limitations governing the new 'walkers. A revised CenCon theory, perhaps. Working together to elucidate continuity would be much more productive for our own wellbeing than working together to bemoan it.
Let's use each other to renew interest, or at least enjoy the aspects of continuity that we may each deem "best" (such as Armada comics or The Brothers' War).
Thanks, guys--I look forward to our discussions!
If someone feels so strongly that they need to use name-calling to express their opinion, that's absolutely fine. But it needs to be in the form of a letter to WotC or the writer himself. It doesn't need to happen on this message board. This place exists to discuss the aspects of this storyline--positive and negative. But let's not turn it into a flame war.
But, I don't agree with the logic that the negativity should be reserved only for those who've read the book. People can form negative opinions about certain aspects of the book based on the synopsis or (more especially) on the first chapter. Reading the first chapter makes it obvious to me that it's not going to be that great of a book. That's negative criticism I guess, but it's my opinion. And if something changes my opinion to be positive, that's wonderful. I think how you express your opinion is indicative of whether or not your opinion is constructive or not. If someone has a negative opinion on the book after reading the first chapter, I don't see how that's indicative that that person's opinion shouldn't be displayed here. But if that opinion goes beyond being negative into the realms of being offensive, then I'd rather not have to read it.
For what it's worth, that's my opinion anyway.
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
... Sorry. Had to get that out of my system. I'll go lie down now.
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
Thanks for your opinion, Eid.
It's the same thing over and over....I do not like to see people here being unnecesarily harsh, pessimistic, or offensive to the authors/Wizards. It's not about the criticism itself (honestly, did anybody here really think that he would be persecuted solely for having a different opinion? This is not a totalitarian state..), but about the form.
Yes, the times of Brothers' War , Phyrexians and Weatherlight are long past, and we have different stories, styles, authors now. AoA is written by somebody who (AFAIK) never wrote for Magic before. I am looking forward to reading the whole book and discussing it here. We'll see how it turns out in the end.
Let this great clan rest in peace (2001-2011)
To a point I did believe being negative would not be tolerated on this board because you posted in a topic I was mianly negative in and then stickied a new topic asking us not to be negative @_@
I judge a book by its cover and first chapter. I am one of those weirdos who grabs a book, goes and buys some water and sits and reads the first chapter. i did it for Brothers War and just bought the rest online to finish up the story. To me I don't believe I would pick up Agents of Artifice beacuse, though the story could seem interesting, nothing took hold of me in the first chapter.
Couple what I would judge as a boring book along with the quality of every book after Apocalypse(which I think we can agree, besides Ravnica and Kamigawa has been a downward spiral) leads me to believer that overall this book will not be as good as I was hoping for it to be.
I will buy AoA and try it because I am loyal to the overall storyline. I will also buy Alara because I do believe it will (hopfully) be an interesting story. If neither hold my interest I will, sadly, be dropping the books all together because Mirrodin and Time Spiral have killed my faith in WotC :-(
Yes, I agree completely. I was (and still am for that matter) a little fuzzy on what exactly you mean, Caranthir, when you say "cut out the negativity"? Do you want us to cut out negativity that isn't constructive, or just cut out negativity altogether? I mean, message boards exist to talk about good and bad aspects of whatever the board's topic is. If we can be negative about the books (how can one be positive, I wonder?) as long as we don't step beyond the bounds of decency, maybe you should change the sticky you just created from "cut the negativity" to "cut the flaming" or "cut the disrespectful negativity" or something.
Sorry to interrupt the topic, but I'm just a little confused about what we can and can't say here. "Don't be negative" sounds like it's totalitarian, but I think that's because it's not really what Caranthir is trying to indicate. It comes across as "don't say anything bad about the books"--which I think isn't what's being asked of us.
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
*sigh*
You are giving me a hard time....but then, what less should I expect among such high-level and smart audience like you guys here.
I apparently sounded harsher than I intended.
Yes. That is actually a good idea to get the message through clearly and undeformed. It was done.
Nobody will be punished for having a negative opinion. Just know the limits between polite, constructive criticism and useless bashing of everything that comes from the writers.
Is it clear now? I hope so.
Let this great clan rest in peace (2001-2011)
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
Mi blog: http://japoniano.blogspot.com/
"We went over recurring characters?"
What recurring characters? The only recurring character was Bolas.
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
Mi blog: http://japoniano.blogspot.com/
Man, I am too negative!
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
However, he was prepped--that's good. Brady mentioned on here a few weeks ago the freedom given to the writers. As I consider it more, I appreciate that. We'll see how it works.
As for author interviews, here's a typed response by Clayton Emery regarding his work on Greensleeves and Jedit. I'm sure many of us long-standing continuity buffs have read it, but if not, or for those who are newer here, here's Clayton's . . . uh . . . explanation of his experience:
http://www.claytonemery.com/FantasyMTG.html
Other than that to go back to the Bolas aspect, weren't the Elders supposed to planeswalk without sparks? Something that very few beings are in theory capable of doing. Meaning without a postmeandering spark he should be at walker powerlevels if not already past them. Add in the spark and the 25000 years of experience... I really doubt the four walkers could slow him down much(that being said, Bolas vs. Anomander Rake for those in the know, how dope would that be? :D)
I think that we will just have to agree that the Elder Dragons were incredibly powerful. It's probably best to forget about their cards, because that can't possibly do them any justice. If there were that many and only a few survived, imagine what kind of powers they had to do that to one another. And making every single dragon lose flying (that is, every loser) is no mean feat.
Edit: OMFG, this is a grumpy disgruntled fan's (me) wet dream -
Clayton Emery - You, sir, have won the Internet.
Xbox Live - eidtelnvil
PlayStation Network - eidtelnvil
Currently reading It by Stephen King
Currently playing Persona 4
Tez--The reference of "they were said to be" in regards to the Elders most probably came from Jeff Lee's old Legends of Magic site. I don't know how familiar you are with it (I don't think it exists any more), and it was suggested that sometimes Jeff added information not canon, but many of us have looked to his work as reliable. Tez, I know you refer to the revisionist novels most often, but there are the previsionist stories (novels and comics), which many of us take for canon until they are replaced by revisionist knowledge.
Note on Agents: I've started reading it (slowly), and it's alright. Liliana and Kallist have to get somewhere in the early chapters, and I haven't yet figured out why they just don't 'walk there . . .
Rhuell lived until right before the World-spell. That was a long time. And he was healthy and such. And he was not a planeswalker (and whether he could or could not planeswalk may be questionable from the comics, as others have stated, we do know the Dragon Wars were across Dominia, not only Dominaria).
And, when Rhuell was killed, Ravidel used his carcass as an interplanar war barge (but that could have just been Ravidel's own spellwork).
You just seem so determined to scratch prerevision. I'm trying to understand the argument better, but see no reason why Elders cannot be immortal (but susceptible to murder).
I'm slowly working on it. I don't dislike the writing--it tends to get a bit verbose, but so do I, so I appreciate that. I'm still focused on the workings of the new 'walkers, so until I get a better grasp, I'll reserve a more complete response.