2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • 1

    posted a message on Tameron and Gorael, Esper Sphinxes
    Two Sphinxes from Esper, each of whom offered a gift to the humans and vedalken. Tameron offered the Marble Chalice in hopes those who drank from it would live long enough to decrypt the sphinxes' wisdom, while Gorael offered the Onyx Goblet in hopes the humans and vedalken would eventually destroy each other to acquire it, leaving Esper to her own kind.

    Tameron, Marble Sphinx 3WU
    Legendary Artifact Creature - Sphinx
    Flying
    When ~ enters the battlefield, you may search your library for an artifact card with converted mana cost 3 or less, reveal it, put it into your hand, then shuffle your library.
    Whenever you gain life, you may pay 2. If you do, draw a card.
    4/4

    Gorael, Onyx Sphinx 3UB
    Legendary Artifact Creature - Sphinx
    Flying
    When ~ enters the battlefield, you may search your library for an artifact card with converted mana cost 3 or greater, reveal it, put it into your hand, then shuffle your library.
    Whenever an opponent loses life, you may pay 2. If you do, draw a card.
    4/4

    Obviously, these two designs want to parallel each other in a couple ways. First off, each one can tutor for an artifact card of a particular cmc range, and since their respective artifacts each have a cmc of 3, it makes sense to include 3 in those ranges. Since white favors small, cheap creatures, Tameron tutors 3 or less, while Gorael tutors for an artifact with cmc 3 or greater since most Esper Sphinxes have a cmc higher than 3. Second are their life gain/loss triggers, obviously designed to work with their respective gifts. Tameron lets you pay 2 to draw a card whenever you gain life, while Gorael rewards you in a similar way for hurting your opponents. Thus the two Sphinxes each synergize with their gifts in a couple ways while being flexible enough that you can build around them with other cards as well.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 2

    posted a message on Commander 2019 Theme Speculation
    Quote from Faruel »
    I love angels but I don't see them as a 5 color tribe. Sure there is the 5 colored Maelstrom Angel but nothing else. I wouldn't enjoy a Dragon v2 deck with just Angels instead of Dragons. I prefer to get some missing known Angels. I'm not talking about the 4th sister, because she is relative new. I'm speaking about Feather, Asha, Trine, Rahel and character strongly aligned to angels like Serra, Eskil. I could see Serra as playable Commander Planeswalker in mono white or bant with 'partner with Radiant' a new Radiant in the Boros colors.

    I remember that Maro was confident that the 4th sister will get a card most likely some day. But if she is in any way similar to the first printing of the other sisters, than she should be strong enough by her own (not supportive to some tribe). She could fit in other decks supporting a different strategy like revive/sacrifice theme or something like that.



    Between all the Bant, Boros, and Orzhov Angels, it looks like a pretty WUBRG tribe to me. There are enough Angels in every color to justify a WUBRG deck. Not to mention Angels are the second most popular iconic after Dragons. If any creature type is going to get a WUBRG deck next, it's going to be Angels. And if you want Feather and Asha in the same deck, you're already looking at RGWU. Might as well add black so we can get the Fourth Sister or a new Selenia while we're at it. And why shouldn't the Fourth Sister debut alongside her sisters in an Angel-tribal deck?

    Quote from AtraxianShade »
    could even be a combined creature, like a council of the 4 sisters before Avacyn was created. It would have less impact on the lore of the plane and possibly less risk of plotholes/retcons.

    Quote from Faruel »
    I like AtraxianShade suggestion better, because I never heard something about a Mother Angel. Angels are manifestation of mana. The Innistrad Angel Sisters comes from the same source of mana. Some angels are created to answer prayers/wishes from mortals at least in Dominaria. I don't know if we have any information about angel creation on Innistrad. Maybe the system is similar to the of Demons that angels can be 'reborn' as different Angel-beings when killed.


    You mean like how they revealed there was a Fourth Sister when before all signs pointed to there only being three? :p Not every piece of a world's lore is going to be revealed in one visit. If the Mother Angel disappeared a long time ago, possibly because her essence split and formed into the Four Sisters, then it's understandable that most everyone on Innistrad has forgotten she even existed.
    Posted in: Speculation
  • 2

    posted a message on [ELD] Charming prince
    Prince Charming: Once upon a time, in a kingdom far, far away, the king and queen were blessed with a beautiful baby girl, and throughout the land everyone was happy, until the sun went down, and they saw that their daughter was cursed with a frightful enchantment that took hold each and every night. Desperate, they sought the help of a fairy godmother, who had them lock the young princess away in a tower, there to await the kiss of the handsome Prince Charming. It was he who would chance the perilous journey through blistering cold and scorching desert, traveling for many days and nights, risking life and limb to reach the dragon's keep, for he was the bravest, and most handsome in all the land, and it was destiny that his kiss would break the dreaded curse. He alone would climb to the highest room of the tallest tower to enter the princess's chambers, cross the room to her sleeping silhouette, pull back the gossamer curtains to find her- gasp!

    Wolf: What?

    Charming: Princess...Fiona?

    Wolf: NO!

    Charming: Oh, thank heavens! Where is she?

    Wolf: She's on her honeymoon.

    Charming: Honeymoon? With whom?

    ---

    Fiona: What kind of Knight are you?

    Shrek: One of a kind.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 2

    posted a message on [ELD] Mystical Dispute
    Right, this argument has gone on long enough. It's clear that you people are among those who think an eye for an eye is an acceptable way of balancing past injustices. You won't be satisfied unless we spend a good few centuries with men suffering the way women did in centuries past, even though men today didn't cause the suffering back then and do not deserve to suffer for it. Well I'm done talking about it. I'm not budging on my stance. A fair society comes from people of all sexes, races, orientations, etc. getting actual equal treatment, not reverse privileges for certain groups. I started the argument by bringing up a controversial opinion, and now I'm finishing it. It's over. Anyone else who brings it up will be reported and blocked. Now get back to talking about the card.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [ELD] Mystical Dispute
    Quote from Wraithe »
    -snip-


    Well, my choices are 1) just accept the trend I find troubling and not say anything, or 2) bring it up in a place where people who need to see it will actually see it. My indignation is at someone else's assertation that it's progressive to favor one sex, but not the other. I think it's oppressive either way, and I'm trying to make it clear that that mentality does not sit well with me. And yes, I would say the exact same thing if we were talking about races as opposed to sexes, because being part of one race doesn't give you a right to oppress another race either.

    I brought the subject up because I want people to think rather than just nod, accept, and try to assert that oppressing this group is okay now because some people of this group oppressed people of another group in the past. It doesn't matter whether the groups are men and women, whites and blacks, cats and dogs, or apples and oranges. Oppression is wrong, no matter who it's aimed at, no matter who it's coming from, I don't care what excuse is being used to rationalize it.

    I find it perplexing that when I say "I'd like men and women both to be represented as dominant some of the time", I'm met with "no, women should be dominant all of the time". We are supposed to be moving past demographic biases like racism and sexism, yet so-called "progressives" are themselves trying to establish and enforce demographic biases. Again, I point to my statement that equality needs to be allowed, not forced.

    I have a right to be indignant when I'm told "you should be submissive because you're male", just as much as women have a right to be indignant when they're told they should be submissive because they're female. A "person of color" has a right to be indignant if they were told they should be submissive because of their race. Every person has a right to be indignant at being told what they should or shouldn't be, especially when that decision is based on some physical attribute that, until recent history, they had no control over. I can't change the fact I was born a straight white cis male. And why would I want to? I am what I am. I don't want to change my race, my sex, or my sexuality. But what I am does not determine who I am.

    I'm gonna give you a thought experiment. Let's say I'm a black woman. I come into this topic and see a card depicting a black woman being dominated by a white man. That bothers me, because I've seen it a lot since I started playing the game, yet I never see a black woman dominating a white man. I bring this up, I receive a response that says black people being dominated by white people is "progressive" and the other way around is "regressive", I respond with indignancy. Then you come along and tell me I shouldn't interject "subversive" thoughts into a forum about a game in a discussion about a card game. I'm a black woman who feels black women are not being given fair representation in the game's art, and you're saying I'm wrong for bringing that up? You're saying I'm wrong for becoming indignant when someone says I should be submissive because I'm black? Does any of that sound at all okay to you?

    By the way, I'm only using the word "subversive" because the responder used it first. Since being "subversive" is apparently okay, I'm being "subversive" towards a "subversive" mindset. You gonna use fire, I'm gonna use it too.

    People want me to choose one "side" or the other, the sides in this case being the sexes, and choosing either is sexist to me, so I'm choosing a third path here, one that sits in the middle and sees a problem with both extremes. You're only seeing the part of me that opposes the female extreme, because that's the extreme at work here; if I saw a male extreme here, I'd be arguing in favor of more representation of women and female dominance in the game, because my focus is on being fair. My focus is on making it so everybody can embrace the roles they want, and right now that's not the case. I ask for more instances of male dominance in a game that predominantly leans towards female domination and has for years, and I'm told "no, men shouldn't be dominant". That is not a fair, just, or equal mentality, that is a sexist mentality, just as sexist as if it was the other way around. How about instead we say "Both men and women can be dominant or submissive"? That's fair and equal. Same goes for race, orientation, whatever.

    And I find it funny that nobody addresses the complications that trans people add to the equation. In my system, trans people are simply people, and they have a right to be dominant or submissive as much as anyone else. But if the issue is one hinging on fundamental differences in gender, then what's your ruling on these people? Does a trans man lose his "right" to be dominant because he stopped being a woman? Funny how almost nobody ever thinks of how the feminist and LGBT "causes" might occasionally grind against each other.

    Frankly, I don't care if I get responses that make me indignant. I care about being able to speak my mind freely, indignant or not. If you're gonna say something that makes me indignant, then go ahead and say it. Speak your mind, and I'll speak mine. That's what Freedom of Speech is all about.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [ELD] Thunderous snapper
    Hydras are massive creatures that can grow in size, armed with multiple maws. They're like hungry dinosaurs crossed with trees. They're everything green wants in an iconic. Plus the public at large identified Hydras with green more than any other iconic candidate. They've tried other types; Elementals, Treefolk, Wurms. Hydras won out.

    As you said, Manticores are poisonous, thus why they'd probably be a better fit for black even than red, much like wyverns. Part of it is the fact black gets flying far more often than green. If Manticores had to have a third color, then it would probably be green, but they are nowhere near iconic status for green.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on Mythic Legendary Artifact Cycle
    Quote from user_938036 »
    I'm fairly certain that the holy grail of their world is connected to the black court for some reason. So we should expect that; it healed garruk of his corruption. I don't recall a mention of what the green court had but it could be their Stonehenge teleportation circle.


    Crazy thought, but what if the chalice is the green artifact? Would be rather fitting for a green artifact to cleanse a green planeswalker of a black curse.

    Cool to hear the curse on Garruk is truly broken, now. Hopefully he can be the iconic green nature hero he was meant to be? Maybe even join the Gatewatch? I mean, Ajani, Jace, Liliana, and Chandra are all part of Gatewatch. It would only be fitting for the remaining member of the Lorwyn 5 to join at this point. Hey, if they ever do go back to Lorwyn, what if Ajani, Jace, Liliana, Chandra, and Garruk all play a role and get new cards?

    Back on topic, it's kinda surprising the Magic Mirror wasn't the black part of the cycle, what with the theme of vanity and all. Of course it's also surprising the Excalibur stand-in is red rather than white.
    Posted in: Speculation
  • 2

    posted a message on [ELD] Thunderous snapper
    How about a Shark Hydra? Or even better, a Dragon Hydra?
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [ELD] Fervent champion
    I think red just found its new best 1 cmc creature.

    White: Stoneforge Mystic allows me to tutor an Equipment, and cheat Equipment onto the battlefield.
    Blue: Snapcaster Mage grants flashback to any instant or sorcery card in my graveyard.
    Black: Dark Confidant draws me extra cards at a reasonable price.
    Green: Tarmogoyf gets bigger with every card type in all graveyards.
    Red: Hold my beer.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.