Cool going back to Kamigawa, but 2022 seems a biillion years away. I don't even want to know what my life is like in two weeks let alone two years. fml
Cool going back to Kamigawa, but 2022 seems a biillion years away. I don't even want to know what my life is like in two weeks let alone two years. fml
i know it’s 2022 because they already showed all the standard sets (and possibly suplament sets) For 2021
I would be curious to know if those who would like this are former and/or current Yugioh/Pokemon players and how many are into Anime.
Personally I have ZERO interest in this genre but I understand I am not the target market for a set like this. Maybe I will be surprised. I will try to keep an open mind about it, We are talking what, early 2022 at the earliest? I wonder what else is out there in the Trademark application world that is yet to be discovered from WotC?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
I have the distinct feeling that this is going to end up in MaRo's "State of Design" with the negative "We should have referred to it as a different plane, not Kamigawa." The connective tissue between the two at a glance is incredibly tenuous. Maybe that'll change with more information, but it's a lot to take in.
It's a little too drastic a change for me, personally.
That doesn't mean it's going to be bad, mind. It's just edging closer to that "Magic/Tech" divide than I'm comfortable with.
penguinhorowitz asked: Could you explain what a lot of players didn't like about Kamigawa block? I know it came on the tail-end of an incredibly powerful, well-received set, but other than that I can't quite figure out the hate. I'm a huge fan, but I also wasn't playing back then, so I wasn't there for that standard and draft environment. I am also partial to the set because I'm a huge EDH fan.
The set mechanically was very parasitic (it required too much playing with itself) and the setting, while authentic, was not recognizable enough by most players. It rated very low in market research on mechanics and world.
per-mariam-ad-jesum asked: Do you believe the admittedly bad mechanics of Kamigawa cannot be divorced from the awesome flavor and setting of Kamigawa? Is it possible to go back to Kamigawa without any of its last mechanical execution?
We test both the mechanics and creative elements for sets. Kamigawa did poorly on it’s mechanics. It did even worse on its world (I believe it holds the record for the worst results for any world since we did market research on them - Ulgrotha predates the market research). The idea that it was successful creative married to bad mechanics is false. At the time, both were strongly disliked.
mrtitanic asked: Kamigawa may have been a legitimate design flaw, but I can tell you that as a setting, it was brilliant, and it's one of the most popular blocks in EDH (not just because of having many Legendaries, but in general). The only issue was the mechanics were weak and slow, and the Kami were weird. But Minamo Academy, Oboro and the Moonfolk etc. were all successes. Everyone loves Tamiyo.
I believe players love elements of Kamigawa block although I believe the huge numbers of legendary creatures is the primary cause for the Commander love. We tested the creative as well as the cards and the world (once again, not just the cards) didn’t test well. It didn’t quite jell with a majority of the players.
The reason I think there are people who are huge fans of Kamigawa is that there are elements that are very cool. The source material has tons of fans so it seems to reason that players would like those elements they see reflected in the game.
Tamiyo, by the way, has a very split reaction. She tends to be polarizing. Those that like her really like her but those that don’t really don’t. Now I think Magic should have polarizing things so I’m a huge fan of Tamiyo. Worlds, though, are not the things that are supposed to be polarizing. We want as many players as possible to love our worlds.
As you saw in Planechase 2, we understand their are fans of parts of Kamigawa and we will try where appropriate to do some fan service for those players. I’m just trying to be honest with all of you and say that I don’t see a Return to Kamigawa being the best way for us to capture many of those things that players loved from the original block.
@Ritokure grabing a portion is a bit mislead it's being a Japanese them it's clearly the mechanics that made it unpopular
Takenuma | Art by: Cliff Childs
Previously seen in: Champions of Kamigawa, Betrayers of Kamigawa, and Saviors of Kamigawa
Popularity: Unpopular
Of all our polling, this is the world that had the lowest ratings. Even in modern times when we ask about older worlds, Kamigawa ranks at or near the bottom. That said, there's a small but loud enfranchised minority that's very passionate about Kamigawa, so it's a topic that comes up a lot on my blog and on social media.
Mechanical Identity: Weak
Kamigawa block didn't do a great job of creating a strong mechanical identity. The set was designed top-down, but it doesn't have the mechanical cohesiveness of a set like Innistrad. The loudest component surrounded the Kami (aka the Spirits), but that was trying to play up the war that was the key conflict of the block and probably wouldn't play as big a role in a return.
Creative Identity: Average
Kamigawa was very faithful to its source material, but played around in a lot of spaces that weren't very resonant for the majority of the audience, making the set feel more "weird" than focused. It definitely has a distinctive look, but not one that scored well in the market research. Again, through the lens of time and the Commander format, it has built up some new fans.
Room for Expansion: Some Room for Expansion
The Kamigawa block took places over a thousand years ago from a story perspective, so a lot could change with a return. The biggest issue isn't what new could be there, but what old things would be expected. I've spent a lot of time on social media asking what players would expect upon a return, and the expectations are pretty broad. The biggest desire is a return of many of the creature types which each come with their own baggage.
Story Continuation: Minor Plot Line
The Kamigawa story mostly ended, but there are a few threads one could pick up, none which tie all that much into the modern story. The best potential for a storyline surrounds Tamiyo, a Planeswalker from Kamigawa. Most of the glimpses of Kamigawa through the modern story are seen through Tamiyo, so any return would probably have to focus on her.
Rabiah Scale Rating: 8
As I've explained numerous times on social media, this return is a tough sell for me to make internally based on how disastrous the first visit went. The biggest factor that a return hinges on is how much are we allowed to change and still call it Kamigawa. The set has minimal mechanical space we want to return to and many creative choices we would do differently if we started over with the source material. I wouldn't count out the chance of a return, but it's not a big one.
It's the design that made it terrible like the mechanics and etc not that it was a japanese myth theme.
It was clearly mentioned that the mechanics is the problem and it mentioned most of the time.
SO I AM RIGHT
Kamigawa was a set close to the likes of Onslaught, Mirrodin and Ravnica so it would be seen really slow. It's not because it being a Japanese Myth it's the mechanic that failed it. Obviously and mentioned clearly. Later on MTG would go more on other eastern theme and it's not a problem as long the mechanics works.
It's impossible that being a Japanese Myth makes it automatically worse in the aspect of game design
There is also a successful Japanese Theme TCG before Kamigawa
This era of modern that MTG is doing another thing like they did in portal and Arabian nights if people feel alienated it's not the huge case compare to the mechanics they did. It's not a big deal as something would make the set terrible.
If Mtg did something like a strong tribal set on Kamigawa like Onslaught I don't think it would fail the set is slow and force on revolving to itself.
Mirrodin was a powerful set and Ravnica was a diverse set and Kamigawa was in the middle with a force eco system of gameplay and poor mechanics.
For example mechanics named like Bushido can have been a different way of buffing
Epic could had been a different mechanic
Ninjutsu was a really likable mechanic
Soulshift and Arcane could had been better if it's more flexible in other condition of triggers
Dominaria has a improve Legendary theme compare to the restrictive Kamigawa set
It's the design that made it terrible like the mechanics and etc not that it was a japanese myth theme.
It was clearly mentioned that the mechanics is the problem and it mentioned most of the time.
SO I AM RIGHT
You are "right" when analyzing an argument that was never made. Once again, you seem to be misinterpreting every reply in either an attempt of grasping at straws or an assumption based entirely on very poor understanding of the language.
Literally nobody here said that "Kamigawa was bad because it's japanese myths". The argument is that "Kamigawa was also bad because it's japanese myths done poorly". Your first reply is pretty clear stated that:
It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa.
when every given source proves that yes, the aesthetics, atmosphere and overall themings DID contributed to the failing of Kamigawa.
Also, "misleading quoting" is a terrible argument when the original source is also provided. Every quote of any written source is shortened for brevity, be it in news or scientific/academic texts, otherwise you'd have to copy the whole thing and then you'd be doing plagiarism.
But speaking of misleading, how about that quote up there where you use bold to accentuate the "mechanics" argument while ignoring the very next sentence that mentions the failings of Kamigawa from a worldbuilding perspective were even worse? Or the one where you use bold text to accentuate something that was not said by MaRo? Or you accentuating three words of a 300ish word segment and ignoring the things that you don't like? Because THAT is misleading.
Either way, I don't think Maro was the person who needed convincing. As I understand the situation, it was the business suits who didn't want to go back to a world that sold poorly last time.
It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa. It was most of the printed cards being played was underwhelming and boring after mirrodin and before ravnica.
Imagine those cards swap creature type and mechanic turned into another usual generic plane or something close to Dominaria plane it would still fail.
This was the complete post which makes it right and backup by the sources
It's the design that failed it.
It's kinda terrible to judge Kamigawa as failure because the settings was based on Japanese Mythology. Nowadays we had other set that weren't to similar to dominaria and other strong artifact set.
Also, "misleading quoting" is a terrible argument when the original source is also provided. Every quote of any written source is shortened for brevity, be it in news or scientific/academic texts, otherwise you'd have to copy the whole thing and then you'd be doing plagiarism.
Because the details are important which clearly mentioned that it was the mechanics that failed it.
This was the complete post which makes it right and backup by the sources
It's the design that failed it.
OK, so this is going nowhere and I'm just wasting my time. Your English is poor and a headache to understand, your reading comprehension is even worse and you're so deep into your false dilemma fallacy that it's pointless to continue further. If we continue this i'll be posting multiple complete analysis by MaRo himself on all the angles Kamigawa failed, you'll see the words "Design: Weak" and disregard every other point while proclaiming yourself the all-knowing game designer, I'll rebuke your stupid claims providing more sources and we'll be repeating this all week while further derailing this thread.
So, here you go: Give me ONE quote from Mark Rosewater stating that Kamigawa's flavor was NOT a contributing factor to its failings. DO NOT quote him saying that Card Design was a factor, quote him saying that Card Design was the ONLY factor.
So, here you go: Give me ONE quote from Mark Rosewater stating that Kamigawa's flavor was NOT a contributing factor to its failings. DO NOT quote him saying that Card Design was a factor, quote him saying that Card Design was the ONLY factor.
LOL your demands are entire ridiculous. That's kinda "Ad Ignorantiam"
WHY?
It's like asking me to give you ONE evidence that the art or either the flavor text of Omnath, Locus of Creation was NOT a contributing factor to cause it to be banned in some format.
He doesn't even need to say it's NOT and all I need was his claims to align with me.
MaRo himself on all the angles Kamigawa failed, you'll see the words "Design: Weak" and disregard every other point while proclaiming yourself the all-knowing game designer, I'll rebuke your stupid claims providing more sources and we'll be repeating this all week while further derailing this thread.
I never proclaimed being all-knowing where did you get that
I posted the whole article that you even linked and it's clearly still point the mechanics it's not your interpretation that is "Design: Weak".
The complete multiple detail from the article and multiple tumblr that proves my argument is true and it is a consistent true which, I posted it here which backed me all even your posted link.
The whole thing is basically talking about terrible mechanics that even includes the link you provide
Which entirely supports my claims in a clear in details. Clarity proves it's true rather thank you just posting links and your own words not the article
It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa. It was most of the printed cards being played was underwhelming and boring after mirrodin and before ravnica.
So, here you go: Give me ONE quote from Mark Rosewater stating that Kamigawa's flavor was NOT a contributing factor to its failings. DO NOT quote him saying that Card Design was a factor, quote him saying that Card Design was the ONLY factor.
LOL your demands are entire ridiculous. That's kinda "Ad Ignorantiam"
WHY?
Because YOU asked me to give any source to my claims that Kamigawa's worldbuilding and flavor was considered a failure by MaRo, and I did. Your argument is that Design failed it while also disregarding the failings of the setting's flavor. Therefore, either acknowledge the failings of the "plane's aesthetic or atmosphere" according to the provided MaRo quotes or give me proof of the contrary. Not that hard to understand, and it's literally the only demand I made while complying with yours.
And as I said ONE quote, not multiple, because your reading comprehension is too awful for me to debunk multiple arguments in one post and your scattershot, unfocused arguments of citing other games that have nothing to do with MtG or literally making stuff up about me regarding Japanese themes as a failure is getting boring. Either way, I'll accept your failure to comply to my demands as admittance you're wrong.
WHY? Because YOU asked me to give any source to my claims that Kamigawa's worldbuilding and flavor was considered a failure by MaRo, and I did. Your argument is that Design failed it while also disregarding the failings of the setting's flavor. Therefore, either acknowledge the failings of the "plane's aesthetic or atmosphere" according to the provided MaRo quotes or give me proof of the contrary. Not that hard to understand, and it's literally the only demand I made while complying with yours.
See your misleading me with Ad Ignorantiam because everything supported my claims even your source favor mine when looked clearly in the details of the page
And which proves my point because here is what your sources said:
Takenuma | Art by: Cliff Childs
Previously seen in: Champions of Kamigawa, Betrayers of Kamigawa, and Saviors of Kamigawa
Popularity: Unpopular
Of all our polling, this is the world that had the lowest ratings. Even in modern times when we ask about older worlds, Kamigawa ranks at or near the bottom. That said, there's a small but loud enfranchised minority that's very passionate about Kamigawa, so it's a topic that comes up a lot on my blog and on social media.
Mechanical Identity: Weak
Kamigawa block didn't do a great job of creating a strong mechanical identity. The set was designed top-down, but it doesn't have the mechanical cohesiveness of a set like Innistrad. The loudest component surrounded the Kami (aka the Spirits), but that was trying to play up the war that was the key conflict of the block and probably wouldn't play as big a role in a return.
Creative Identity: Average
Kamigawa was very faithful to its source material, but played around in a lot of spaces that weren't very resonant for the majority of the audience, making the set feel more "weird" than focused. It definitely has a distinctive look, but not one that scored well in the market research. Again, through the lens of time and the Commander format, it has built up some new fans.
Room for Expansion: Some Room for Expansion
The Kamigawa block took places over a thousand years ago from a story perspective, so a lot could change with a return. The biggest issue isn't what new could be there, but what old things would be expected. I've spent a lot of time on social media asking what players would expect upon a return, and the expectations are pretty broad. The biggest desire is a return of many of the creature types which each come with their own baggage.
Story Continuation: Minor Plot Line
The Kamigawa story mostly ended, but there are a few threads one could pick up, none which tie all that much into the modern story. The best potential for a storyline surrounds Tamiyo, a Planeswalker from Kamigawa. Most of the glimpses of Kamigawa through the modern story are seen through Tamiyo, so any return would probably have to focus on her.
Rabiah Scale Rating: 8
As I've explained numerous times on social media, this return is a tough sell for me to make internally based on how disastrous the first visit went. The biggest factor that a return hinges on is how much are we allowed to change and still call it Kamigawa. The set has minimal mechanical space we want to return to and many creative choices we would do differently if we started over with the source material. I wouldn't count out the chance of a return, but it's not a big one.
Another thing is if you read how Maro rate other expansion/sets in the link you posted... it's mostly along average or strong and solely the only one that got the weak rate is kamigawa and being specific it's on the mechanical part which is downfall and the tumblr claims supported it all.
And it's not just that article because every thing that Maro would say on Tumblr about Kamigawa supported me not just a single article like yours lol
Kamigawa was very faithful to its source material, but played around in a lot of spaces that weren't very resonant for the majority of the audience, making the set feel more "weird" than focused. It definitely has a distinctive look, but not one that scored well in the market research. Again, through the lens of time and the Commander format, it has built up some new fans.
As I've explained numerous times on social media, this return is a tough sell for me to make internally based on how disastrous the first visit went. The biggest factor that a return hinges on is how much are we allowed to change and still call it Kamigawa. The set has minimal mechanical space we want to return to and many creative choices we would do differently if we started over with the source material. I wouldn't count out the chance of a return, but it's not a big one.
Source specifically cites in the bolded parts that the creative and flavorful aspects were NOT well received. Therefore, while "your" source does proves that MaRo thought Design was A issue in the full quote, it wasn't the ONLY issue in the quotes mentioned above. Therefore, WRONG.
The set mechanically was very parasitic (it required too much playing with itself) and the setting, while authentic, was not recognizable enough by most players. It rated very low in market research on mechanics and world.
Setting and world cited specifically as failings that didn't resonate with players in market research. Therefore, WRONG.
We test both the mechanics and creative elements for sets. Kamigawa did poorly on it’s mechanics. It did even worse on its world (I believe it holds the record for the worst results for any world since we did market research on them - Ulgrotha predates the market research). The idea that it was successful creative married to bad mechanics is false. At the time, both were strongly disliked.
Not only MaRo flat-out states that the creative and flavor aspects of Kamigawa were poorly received, but he specifically does so citing not only as one of the WORST worlds but also debunking a statement not unlike yours from Tumblr user "per-mariam-ad-jesum". Therefore, WRONG.
We tested the creative as well as the cards and the world (once again, not just the cards) didn’t test well. It didn’t quite jell with a majority of the players.
The reason I think there are people who are huge fans of Kamigawa is that there are elements that are very cool. The source material has tons of fans so it seems to reason that players would like those elements they see reflected in the game.
Tamiyo, by the way, has a very split reaction. She tends to be polarizing. Those that like her really like her but those that don’t really don’t. Now I think Magic should have polarizing things so I’m a huge fan of Tamiyo. Worlds, though, are not the things that are supposed to be polarizing. We want as many players as possible to love our worlds.
Once again, MaRo states that both card design and world design were failures according to market research done by WotC, and specifically states that while the source of Japanese myths and culture are solid and well-loved, the execution in Kamigawa was poor and divisive, which is the exact argument being made by me. This post barely even mentions the failings of card design either, so you don't get even that going for you and therefore WRONG.
Four citations, not one proving your point about Card Design being the only failing of Kamigawa. Try again.
Four citations, not one proving your point about Card Design being the only failing of Kamigawa. Try again.
Look thats still another "Ad Ignorantiam"
It's terrible, basically those were just taken out of context and misquoting a single article
That FACT that those out of context snippets claims of yours came from the an article that clearly supported my claims in complete detail which also supported by other related discussion in tumblr which was linked earlier with the same topic that is Kamigawa. So you lose.
Give up and move on your only shaming yourself even we continue from here obviously the early comments of mine answered yours. We could continue this but if people read this and how you take it. it's basically yourself as the shameful because your clearly wrong and your being desperate while trying hard.
Complete Details in an article + other topics > out of the context snippets in a single article .... that's how things works especially truths that are unbias and NOT misleading.
I could even leave this thread and let you continue like but your claims stays and mine and mostly you got no choice but reuse the links posted earlier which complete and most proves mine in complete details.
It's terrible basically those were just taken out of context and misquoting a single article because in complete detail it prove my claims to be true which is also supported by other discussion in the same topic in tumblr. So you lose.
Wrong. Because we aren't playing your game. I already did, I provided a source which confirmed what I said. The rest of the context is irrelevant because it's neither relevant to what you asked in the first reply to me nor relevant to my own argument.
Now it's your turn to play my game, and I laid the simple game rules and you can't follow them. I asked ONE singular source, saying in black and white that a flavor wasn't a factor. You didn't provided any, therefore you lose.
It's terrible basically those were just taken out of context and misquoting a single article because in complete detail it prove my claims to be true which is also supported by other discussion in the same topic in tumblr. So you lose.
Wrong. Because we aren't playing your game. I already did, I provided a source which confirmed what I said. The rest of the context is irrelevant because it's neither relevant to what you asked in the first reply to me nor relevant to my own argument.
Now it's your turn to play my game, and I laid the simple game rules and you can't follow them. I asked ONE singular source, saying in black and white that a flavor wasn't a factor. You didn't provided any, therefore you lose.
I don't care about your childish non-sense game or whatsoever. because it's logical fallacy an "Ad Ignorantiam"
My point is it was the mechanics that failed Kamigawa not the it being based on an interpretation of a Japanese myth.
Plain and simple and your so called "sources" you post even supported my claims in complete details. which was also back up by multiple Kamigawa discussion and all you got is out of context and misquoting a single article that supported my claim also. lol
Complete Details in an article + other topics out of the context snippets in a single article ...
...that article even supported also my claims lol
that's how things works especially truths that are unbias and NOT misleading.
I don't care about your childish non-sense game or whatsoever. because it's logical fallay an "Ad Ignorantiam"
My point is it was the mechanics that failed Kamigawa not the it being Japanese myth. plain and simple and every "sources you post supported my claims. which was also back up by multiple Kamigawa discussion and all you got is out of context and misquoting a single article that supported my claim also. lol
First off, fallacy fallacy. Ad ignorantiam is not used to disprove a claim under ignorance but create one, it's made to make a unverifiable claim under the pretense we don't know X therefore Y must be true. YOU made the bold statement "FALSE!" as a counterargument, and therefore burden of proof falls under you now and said argument can be disproven by lack of proof at any time.
Second, moving the goalposts. Your initial argument was NOT "failed Kamigawa not the it being Japanese myth", whatever that poor imitation of English even means. The goalpost was pretty clear from the first post - "It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa.", disproven by my source as MaRo did mention that the aesthetic and atmosphere DID fail Kamigawa and backed up by another user with several more claims.
Third, once again, no misquotes happened, unless you can prove otherwise, in which case we're back into my game. Your crying over my "out of context" claims are pathetic as you analyze YOUR claims that bold three words to make an "argument" or use bold text to completely misrepresent the person saying the quote, and that kind of shady trash is why I made the simple argument: prove it, with your own words, using ONE quote and nothing else. Once again, a counterargument is still an argument, and if you can't substantiate it with the proof estabilished by my rules you lose.
I don't care about your childish non-sense game or whatsoever. because it's logical fallay an "Ad Ignorantiam"
My point is it was the mechanics that failed Kamigawa not the it being Japanese myth. plain and simple and every "sources you post supported my claims. which was also back up by multiple Kamigawa discussion and all you got is out of context and misquoting a single article that supported my claim also. lol
First off, fallacy fallacy. Ad ignorantiam is not used to disprove a claim under ignorance but create one, it's made to make a unverifiable claim under the pretense we don't know X therefore Y must be true. YOU made the bold statement "FALSE!" as a counterargument, and therefore burden of proof falls under you now and said argument can be disproven by lack of proof at any time.
Second, moving the goalposts. Your initial argument was NOT "failed Kamigawa not the it being Japanese myth", whatever that poor imitation of English even means. The goalpost was pretty clear from the first post - "It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa.", disproven by my source as MaRo did mention that the aesthetic and atmosphere DID fail Kamigawa and backed up by another user with several more claims.
Third, once again, no misquotes happened, unless you can prove otherwise, in which case we're back into my game. Once again, a counterargument is still an argument, and if you can't substantiate it with the proof estabilished by my rules you lose.
I don't need to continue this because all the sources and the one that came yours supported mine.
Based on how conversation progress from the beginning.. all the issues were cleared and sources presentated i have gave everything in unbiased and complete form... along with other multiple tumblr of Maro which supported it.
..while all you do was throw in logical fallacy and just used out of the context text from the article that also supported my claims.
It's not about who talks the most and talks the last. It's who is supported by multiple sources in a clear and not misinterpreted.
Shards of Alara already had the transhumanistic replacement of body parts with Etherium. Esper is pretty cyberpunk in it's own right.
And that was a better take on it for sure. I really don't want to criticize this "neon plane" idea of their's without knowing much, but when you place it with all of the other decisions they have made lately I'm already not liking it.
How i feel about competitive players and casual players in EDH: The competitive are german tourists, the casual are italian tourists, both in a italian beach. The italians asking themselves "why are the germans here?" make a legitimate question, the answer is because the beach is beautiful, no matter the country you came from. The italians wanting to ban the germans are dumb, because if the germans pay for their stay and follow the rules like everyone else, they have the right to be in the beach. Hovewer, if the germans started to ask themselves "why are the italians here?"... they would be dumb as hell.
I'm also on the fence about the cyberpunk setting on Kamigawa, but given just how much the genre draws from contemporary Japanese culture, it shouldn't be that hard of a blend. Maybe they do a Dresden Files-type thing where the mystical elements are merged into modern tech. For example, imagine a ninja infiltrating a building, going all, "The kami of my metal arm senses the souls of two moonfolk and a nezumi in the room. Better tread carefully."
The Nine Titans already had mechas/power armor. I have a certain trust in MtG Creative to give us an interesting twist and take on cyberpunk the same way they repurposed steam punk into "aetherpunk" on Kaladesh.
As far as I'm concerned their transformation with their own IPs has been consistently less of an issue than their product bloat, power creep, "set design" (probably restrains put on this one to have chase cards for all kinds of Constructed formats) etc.
Marketing and business decisions are far more problematic than the artistic realization, and I'm certain I'll be quite pleased at the concept of the plane, but they'll pair it with a new wallet-targeting product that would have soured the taste of the release independent of which plane they choose and how they developed it.
So I welcome this, oping they don't repeat what the just did in ZNR and underplay their chance at nostalgia by sheer flavor name-drops.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Conuly »
Heck, every day I wake up, I don't go out and kill people - and I'm rewarded by not having legions of enemies! Amazing how that works.
Although ninjas are experts of camouflage and concealment, they are actually horrible liars. This means that no matter where you are, you can shout out, “Are there any ninjas here?” and if there’s a ninja within earshot, he’ll be compelled to respond.
For the record, AD IGNORANTIUM refers to insisting that something is true because it hasn’t been proven false or false because it hasn’t been proven true.
Example: Bigfoot hasn’t been disproven so it must be real
Example 2: Until science can 100% document how gravity interacts with every other force and can verify the existence of dark matter without reference to “gravity”, I don’t see any reason to believe that gravity is real. After all, it is only a theory.
With that in mind “I heard that flavor on Kamigawa was considered a failure because it was not resonant enough, go find one source that mentions mechanics being bad and not the flavor and I’ll believe you” might be capable of being described as ad ignorantium... if you squint at it.
The moment that any of those articles were found and presented as proof and mentioned flavor having problems (even in a tiny excerpt... even if it is following a grade of “average” or a statement about how the mechanics were a MUCH bigger problem), however, Ad Ignorantium has officially left the building.
The logical fallacy we are now dealing with is a false dichotomy. This isn’t a matter where only one of them can be the problem. Flavor may have smaller problems than mechanics even if they both have problems.
Arguing that fluff was a problem does not mean that the crunch was not. Arguing that crunch was the problem does not mean that flavor wasn’t. Anyone arguing that either flavor or mechanics were problematic correct. Anyone who is saying that either flavor OR mechanics were NOT a problem, however, is blatantly incorrect (at least as far as Maro’s quotes are concerned).
So for all those of you talking about a time-spiral like time warp -
Time spiral essentially retconned the MTG story to make all the "old walkers" (including us players) jive with the New World Order in storyland. The whole mending and such was used to basically negate all the old stories (like "Arena) and allow them to coexist in the MTG story.
I doubt they'll F$%^ with time like they did there again.
Khans kind of comes to mind, but that was a block about an inflection point in time and didn't span as large of a time period, so I don't see them doing anything besides maybe bringing Kamigawa to the contemporary timeline in the "planarverse."
Holy mother of unneccesary arguments. If you actually read the Maro quotes without being bent on "winning" an argument, it's stupidly clear that while the aesthetic/flavor wasn't the ONE problem that caused Kamigawa to perform badly, it was one of several factors that lead to the set's bad overall performance.
i know it’s 2022 because they already showed all the standard sets (and possibly suplament sets) For 2021
Personally I have ZERO interest in this genre but I understand I am not the target market for a set like this. Maybe I will be surprised. I will try to keep an open mind about it, We are talking what, early 2022 at the earliest? I wonder what else is out there in the Trademark application world that is yet to be discovered from WotC?
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
It's a little too drastic a change for me, personally.
That doesn't mean it's going to be bad, mind. It's just edging closer to that "Magic/Tech" divide than I'm comfortable with.
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/171535849908/do-you-believe-the-admittedly-bad-mechanics-of
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/77834619992/kamigawa-may-have-been-a-legitimate-design-flaw
@Ritokure grabing a portion is a bit mislead it's being a Japanese them it's clearly the mechanics that made it unpopular
MaRo's "Rabiah Scale" article:
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/rabiah-scale-part-1-2018-11-12
It's the design that made it terrible like the mechanics and etc not that it was a japanese myth theme.
It was clearly mentioned that the mechanics is the problem and it mentioned most of the time.
SO I AM RIGHT
Kamigawa was a set close to the likes of Onslaught, Mirrodin and Ravnica so it would be seen really slow. It's not because it being a Japanese Myth it's the mechanic that failed it. Obviously and mentioned clearly. Later on MTG would go more on other eastern theme and it's not a problem as long the mechanics works.
It's impossible that being a Japanese Myth makes it automatically worse in the aspect of game design
There is also a successful Japanese Theme TCG before Kamigawa
This era of modern that MTG is doing another thing like they did in portal and Arabian nights if people feel alienated it's not the huge case compare to the mechanics they did. It's not a big deal as something would make the set terrible.
If Mtg did something like a strong tribal set on Kamigawa like Onslaught I don't think it would fail the set is slow and force on revolving to itself.
Mirrodin was a powerful set and Ravnica was a diverse set and Kamigawa was in the middle with a force eco system of gameplay and poor mechanics.
For example mechanics named like Bushido can have been a different way of buffing
Epic could had been a different mechanic
Ninjutsu was a really likable mechanic
Soulshift and Arcane could had been better if it's more flexible in other condition of triggers
Dominaria has a improve Legendary theme compare to the restrictive Kamigawa set
Literally nobody here said that "Kamigawa was bad because it's japanese myths". The argument is that "Kamigawa was also bad because it's japanese myths done poorly". Your first reply is pretty clear stated that: when every given source proves that yes, the aesthetics, atmosphere and overall themings DID contributed to the failing of Kamigawa.
Also, "misleading quoting" is a terrible argument when the original source is also provided. Every quote of any written source is shortened for brevity, be it in news or scientific/academic texts, otherwise you'd have to copy the whole thing and then you'd be doing plagiarism.
But speaking of misleading, how about that quote up there where you use bold to accentuate the "mechanics" argument while ignoring the very next sentence that mentions the failings of Kamigawa from a worldbuilding perspective were even worse? Or the one where you use bold text to accentuate something that was not said by MaRo? Or you accentuating three words of a 300ish word segment and ignoring the things that you don't like? Because THAT is misleading.
This was the complete post which makes it right and backup by the sources
It's the design that failed it.
It's kinda terrible to judge Kamigawa as failure because the settings was based on Japanese Mythology. Nowadays we had other set that weren't to similar to dominaria and other strong artifact set.
Because the details are important which clearly mentioned that it was the mechanics that failed it.
So, here you go: Give me ONE quote from Mark Rosewater stating that Kamigawa's flavor was NOT a contributing factor to its failings. DO NOT quote him saying that Card Design was a factor, quote him saying that Card Design was the ONLY factor.
LOL your demands are entire ridiculous. That's kinda "Ad Ignorantiam"
WHY?
It's like asking me to give you ONE evidence that the art or either the flavor text of Omnath, Locus of Creation was NOT a contributing factor to cause it to be banned in some format.
He doesn't even need to say it's NOT and all I need was his claims to align with me.
I never proclaimed being all-knowing where did you get that
I posted the whole article that you even linked and it's clearly still point the mechanics it's not your interpretation that is "Design: Weak".
The complete multiple detail from the article and multiple tumblr that proves my argument is true and it is a consistent true which, I posted it here which backed me all even your posted link.
https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/819230-potential-upcoming-set-leaked-for-2022?page=2#c30
The whole thing is basically talking about terrible mechanics that even includes the link you provide
Which entirely supports my claims in a clear in details. Clarity proves it's true rather thank you just posting links and your own words not the article
Legends of the Five Rings have you heard it kid?
And as I said ONE quote, not multiple, because your reading comprehension is too awful for me to debunk multiple arguments in one post and your scattershot, unfocused arguments of citing other games that have nothing to do with MtG or literally making stuff up about me regarding Japanese themes as a failure is getting boring. Either way, I'll accept your failure to comply to my demands as admittance you're wrong.
And which proves my point because here is what your sources said:
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/rabiah-scale-part-1-2018-11-12
Another thing is if you read how Maro rate other expansion/sets in the link you posted... it's mostly along average or strong and solely the only one that got the weak rate is kamigawa and being specific it's on the mechanical part which is downfall and the tumblr claims supported it all.
And it's not just that article because every thing that Maro would say on Tumblr about Kamigawa supported me not just a single article like yours lol
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/175499625718/could-you-explain-what-a-lot-of-players-didnt
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/171535849908/do-you-believe-the-admittedly-bad-mechanics-of
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/77834619992/kamigawa-may-have-been-a-legitimate-design-flaw
That ultimately ends and favors my claims for it being consistently mentioned not just in one article but most of the time the topic resurface.
Source specifically cites in the bolded parts that the creative and flavorful aspects were NOT well received. Therefore, while "your" source does proves that MaRo thought Design was A issue in the full quote, it wasn't the ONLY issue in the quotes mentioned above. Therefore, WRONG.
Setting and world cited specifically as failings that didn't resonate with players in market research. Therefore, WRONG.
Because I was right and it was a logical fallacy like I said in another comment that was an "Ad Ignorantiam" a logical fallacy
Stop cherry picking a single article and the links back it up and it's clear.
Man it doesn't mater how many thing you post or try because I already won because the article clear said so along with
Look thats still another "Ad Ignorantiam"
It's terrible, basically those were just taken out of context and misquoting a single article
That FACT that those out of context snippets claims of yours came from the an article that clearly supported my claims in complete detail which also supported by other related discussion in tumblr which was linked earlier with the same topic that is Kamigawa. So you lose.
Give up and move on your only shaming yourself even we continue from here obviously the early comments of mine answered yours. We could continue this but if people read this and how you take it. it's basically yourself as the shameful because your clearly wrong and your being desperate while trying hard.
Complete Details in an article + other topics > out of the context snippets in a single article .... that's how things works especially truths that are unbias and NOT misleading.
I could even leave this thread and let you continue like but your claims stays and mine and mostly you got no choice but reuse the links posted earlier which complete and most proves mine in complete details.
Now it's your turn to play my game, and I laid the simple game rules and you can't follow them. I asked ONE singular source, saying in black and white that a flavor wasn't a factor. You didn't provided any, therefore you lose.
I don't care about your childish non-sense game or whatsoever. because it's logical fallacy an "Ad Ignorantiam"
My point is it was the mechanics that failed Kamigawa not the it being based on an interpretation of a Japanese myth.
Plain and simple and your so called "sources" you post even supported my claims in complete details. which was also back up by multiple Kamigawa discussion and all you got is out of context and misquoting a single article that supported my claim also. lol
...that article even supported also my claims lol
that's how things works especially truths that are unbias and NOT misleading.
Second, moving the goalposts. Your initial argument was NOT "failed Kamigawa not the it being Japanese myth", whatever that poor imitation of English even means. The goalpost was pretty clear from the first post - "It's not the plane aesthetic and atmosphere that failed Kamigawa.", disproven by my source as MaRo did mention that the aesthetic and atmosphere DID fail Kamigawa and backed up by another user with several more claims.
Third, once again, no misquotes happened, unless you can prove otherwise, in which case we're back into my game. Your crying over my "out of context" claims are pathetic as you analyze YOUR claims that bold three words to make an "argument" or use bold text to completely misrepresent the person saying the quote, and that kind of shady trash is why I made the simple argument: prove it, with your own words, using ONE quote and nothing else. Once again, a counterargument is still an argument, and if you can't substantiate it with the proof estabilished by my rules you lose.
I don't need to continue this because all the sources and the one that came yours supported mine.
Based on how conversation progress from the beginning.. all the issues were cleared and sources presentated i have gave everything in unbiased and complete form... along with other multiple tumblr of Maro which supported it.
..while all you do was throw in logical fallacy and just used out of the context text from the article that also supported my claims.
It's not about who talks the most and talks the last. It's who is supported by multiple sources in a clear and not misinterpreted.
But if your persist okay you win. lol
And that was a better take on it for sure. I really don't want to criticize this "neon plane" idea of their's without knowing much, but when you place it with all of the other decisions they have made lately I'm already not liking it.
As far as I'm concerned their transformation with their own IPs has been consistently less of an issue than their product bloat, power creep, "set design" (probably restrains put on this one to have chase cards for all kinds of Constructed formats) etc.
Marketing and business decisions are far more problematic than the artistic realization, and I'm certain I'll be quite pleased at the concept of the plane, but they'll pair it with a new wallet-targeting product that would have soured the taste of the release independent of which plane they choose and how they developed it.
So I welcome this, oping they don't repeat what the just did in ZNR and underplay their chance at nostalgia by sheer flavor name-drops.
Although ninjas are experts of camouflage and concealment, they are actually horrible liars. This means that no matter where you are, you can shout out, “Are there any ninjas here?” and if there’s a ninja within earshot, he’ll be compelled to respond.
For the record, AD IGNORANTIUM refers to insisting that something is true because it hasn’t been proven false or false because it hasn’t been proven true.
Example: Bigfoot hasn’t been disproven so it must be real
Example 2: Until science can 100% document how gravity interacts with every other force and can verify the existence of dark matter without reference to “gravity”, I don’t see any reason to believe that gravity is real. After all, it is only a theory.
With that in mind “I heard that flavor on Kamigawa was considered a failure because it was not resonant enough, go find one source that mentions mechanics being bad and not the flavor and I’ll believe you” might be capable of being described as ad ignorantium... if you squint at it.
The moment that any of those articles were found and presented as proof and mentioned flavor having problems (even in a tiny excerpt... even if it is following a grade of “average” or a statement about how the mechanics were a MUCH bigger problem), however, Ad Ignorantium has officially left the building.
The logical fallacy we are now dealing with is a false dichotomy. This isn’t a matter where only one of them can be the problem. Flavor may have smaller problems than mechanics even if they both have problems.
Arguing that fluff was a problem does not mean that the crunch was not. Arguing that crunch was the problem does not mean that flavor wasn’t. Anyone arguing that either flavor or mechanics were problematic correct. Anyone who is saying that either flavor OR mechanics were NOT a problem, however, is blatantly incorrect (at least as far as Maro’s quotes are concerned).
Time spiral essentially retconned the MTG story to make all the "old walkers" (including us players) jive with the New World Order in storyland. The whole mending and such was used to basically negate all the old stories (like "Arena) and allow them to coexist in the MTG story.
I doubt they'll F$%^ with time like they did there again.
Khans kind of comes to mind, but that was a block about an inflection point in time and didn't span as large of a time period, so I don't see them doing anything besides maybe bringing Kamigawa to the contemporary timeline in the "planarverse."
Fun fact: Just because you specifically don't bold the parts that contradict your argument doesn't mean those parts of the quote don't exist.