Haha, ironic that your avatar and name references Karona (although wasn't referenced from day 1). But really, there's no good reason to make her open to even more kill spells.
I liked Karona for the lore, but her card should have been much better.
I dunno, I think all legendaries should be pretty impressive and unique. I'm fine with legendaries having simple abilities, but I'd perfer they were a little more unique than a white terror. Linvala is a good example of a simple, powerful, and unique ability on a legendary.
If your oppoenent doesn't want to kill the legendary the moment you play it, then something is seriously wrong.
Me, I'm predicting that Avacyn will be a card in AVR, be BW, be 4-6 cmc, have Flying (of course), and have, "When Avacyn ~ enters the battlefield, destroy target nonwhite creature." (This has appropriate flavour, as Avacyn has probably whacked a lot of vampires, zombies, werewolves, and even spirits.) That's just me, though.
So, she'll be a slightly worse version of Angel of Despair?
I would expect more from a legendary angel that's been referenced since day 1 of this set.
Why does everyone say that she's an Angel and therefore can't be a 'walker? Does no one remember Serra?
Granted, Serra was pre-mending... But still... It's a precedent that it CAN happen.
However, as much as I'd love to see a new white 'walker, I don't think Avacyn will be one. Sorry folks.
Serra wasn't an angel, though she created many of them.
Serra was just another human(oid) who had ascended to Planeswalkerdom, and much like Elspeth, believed in that super idealized world of perfect white-mana-ness. Serra Angel is not Serra.
Typically people argue that Angels can't be walkers because traditionally Angels are essentially constructs, either elevated humans or beings conjured from pure mana. That's not saying that some angels can't be living beings, but I don't think any have been represented yet.
Overall, I agree that Avacyn will not be a walker, as it sounds like she was created by Sorin and her art doesn't particularly strike me as walker art.
Mind you I would absolutely DIE to have an angel planeswalker....
IT could literally be a guy choking his wife and it wouldn't be as provocative as a Earthbind.
Also, consider magic's willingness to depict violent, graphic murder, especially prevelant in the most recent block, and now they're afraid of something because it sexualizes somebody?
Mixed values and utter bull****.
Seriously. Maybe someone should put those full-scale on a playmat and see if Wizards bans their own imagery.
Not really. The cries of racism would likely be too much.
Do we portray them realistically? As the "noble savage"? As violent uncultured savages? And then which tribes are we representing? There were estimated to be over 200 in the territory of the USA alone, some of those tribes moves in and out of Canada and Mexico. So we only represent the big names, what about ones like the Mayans or the Aztecs?
What do we do if Wizards makes a R Indian? What about a B one? Is the whole setting going to be Indians? Or is it going to be another excuse to play out the "white man" vs "native" conflict?
Honestly, I think it would just be far too troublesome and Wizards would spend more time trying to make the set "culturally sensitive".
Hey, Star Trek does it all the time. In fact, there was a Star Trek episode where the entire planet was populated by Indians. And another with "Americans" and "Comerades". *shrug*
Ah yes, one of those infamous Wesley-sodes. At least in Original Trek handled real-world political issues through the guide of extra-terrestrial relations, when they did that episode in TNG I just facepalmed all over the place.
I'm really asking for you to show otherwise. I do love playing the game and would be very happy to see that I could be more of a part of it than just a customer. Or, you could just call someone names. On the internet.
Argumentative fallacy. The burden isn't on us to disprove your argument.
It's nice that you'd like to be move involved. Send Wizards an application.
Well that explains why they called it "Hel"vault instead of "Hellvault". I kept going: "why not use "hell"? You've used it before on cards..." And there's the answer: because they're using "Helvault" as their big-ticket keyword on their advertizing and they don't want to make magic look any more satanic than it's already perceived.
Still, sounds cool, bummed about the launch thing though.
As is already said, Venser took that "Honor" for himself... And I hope they don't kill her off, we need more female walkers... And nonhuman ones...
Elves only barely count as "non-human". I'd honestly consider Garruk to be the least "human" of the bunch. On the whole I agree, I want to see more non-human walkers. Significantly non-human, not just sexy women with fish gills.
As a parent, I am firmly on the side of WotC on this one because it is logical. If I have to screen a game for sexual content, my children aren't going to play it. Argyle showed extremely bad judgment by using M:tG branding characters in this way.
I am also concerned about how people are thinking this gets a pass BECAUSE it is a homosexual depiction; ignoring the question about whether or not it is OK, but are there seriously people that believe that it is MORE OK than heterosexual sensual depictions, especially on a product marketed to minors?
If you aren't screening MTG for sexual content, then you must be missing all the T&A hanging out all over the place.
Secondly: this is simply not the case. If your concern is homosexual depictions, be honest about it. You may not have the most popular opinion, but you are still entitled to it, and personally I'd rather you express yourself truthfully, then make an attempt to appear "FOR THE CHILDREN!"
ALSO: Good to hear from Steve on this one, and I totally see where Wizards is coming from, though I find the idea highly intriguing.
fair use bro! you don't know what you are talking about
Fair use only goes so far. And keep in mind the key word here is "fair" use. If they(WOTC) don't consider shipping ChandraXLiliana to be "fair use" of their copyright, then it isn't protected.
Personally I ship JaceXGarruk
Couples in Magic would be an interesting idea actually.
Well, they've already initially set them up to some degree, ChandraXGideon, JaceXLilana(in a very weird sort of way), I'm sure if Wizards actually bothers to develop their characters, we'll see more of it.
Not trying to come off as being smug but how exactly does someone posting fan art on their Deviantart page violate any copyright law? If he was trying to sell it as a product I could see the justification.
All fan-art is a violation of copyright protection. You are using the copyrighted character designs of another for your own uses without authorization.
Most companies simply turn a blind eye to it because they realize that doing something about it will hurt them more than it will help.
Really? After the whole Jace the Mindsculptor debauchle they decide that a 3-turn PW nuke+reanimator is a good idea? Yeah....I'm sure this'll hit the ban lists real quick.
And it wouldn't make much sense as she's supposed to be the protector of the place.
I liked Karona for the lore, but her card should have been much better.
I dunno, I think all legendaries should be pretty impressive and unique. I'm fine with legendaries having simple abilities, but I'd perfer they were a little more unique than a white terror. Linvala is a good example of a simple, powerful, and unique ability on a legendary.
If your oppoenent doesn't want to kill the legendary the moment you play it, then something is seriously wrong.
So, she'll be a slightly worse version of Angel of Despair?
I would expect more from a legendary angel that's been referenced since day 1 of this set.
Noone should be able to pay 4 and win.
Serra wasn't an angel, though she created many of them.
Serra was just another human(oid) who had ascended to Planeswalkerdom, and much like Elspeth, believed in that super idealized world of perfect white-mana-ness. Serra Angel is not Serra.
Typically people argue that Angels can't be walkers because traditionally Angels are essentially constructs, either elevated humans or beings conjured from pure mana. That's not saying that some angels can't be living beings, but I don't think any have been represented yet.
Overall, I agree that Avacyn will not be a walker, as it sounds like she was created by Sorin and her art doesn't particularly strike me as walker art.
Mind you I would absolutely DIE to have an angel planeswalker....
Seriously. Maybe someone should put those full-scale on a playmat and see if Wizards bans their own imagery.
Man I want one of those. Do they make one?
Do we portray them realistically? As the "noble savage"? As violent uncultured savages? And then which tribes are we representing? There were estimated to be over 200 in the territory of the USA alone, some of those tribes moves in and out of Canada and Mexico. So we only represent the big names, what about ones like the Mayans or the Aztecs?
What do we do if Wizards makes a R Indian? What about a B one? Is the whole setting going to be Indians? Or is it going to be another excuse to play out the "white man" vs "native" conflict?
Honestly, I think it would just be far too troublesome and Wizards would spend more time trying to make the set "culturally sensitive".
Ah yes, one of those infamous Wesley-sodes. At least in Original Trek handled real-world political issues through the guide of extra-terrestrial relations, when they did that episode in TNG I just facepalmed all over the place.
Argumentative fallacy. The burden isn't on us to disprove your argument.
It's nice that you'd like to be move involved. Send Wizards an application.
Still, sounds cool, bummed about the launch thing though.
Elves only barely count as "non-human". I'd honestly consider Garruk to be the least "human" of the bunch. On the whole I agree, I want to see more non-human walkers. Significantly non-human, not just sexy women with fish gills.
It's not unstoppable. counterspell, auriok replica or anything similar would be able to overcome it.
If you aren't screening MTG for sexual content, then you must be missing all the T&A hanging out all over the place.
Secondly: this is simply not the case. If your concern is homosexual depictions, be honest about it. You may not have the most popular opinion, but you are still entitled to it, and personally I'd rather you express yourself truthfully, then make an attempt to appear "FOR THE CHILDREN!"
ALSO: Good to hear from Steve on this one, and I totally see where Wizards is coming from, though I find the idea highly intriguing.
To the fan-fiction mobile!
Fair use only goes so far. And keep in mind the key word here is "fair" use. If they(WOTC) don't consider shipping ChandraXLiliana to be "fair use" of their copyright, then it isn't protected.
Well, they've already initially set them up to some degree, ChandraXGideon, JaceXLilana(in a very weird sort of way), I'm sure if Wizards actually bothers to develop their characters, we'll see more of it.
All fan-art is a violation of copyright protection. You are using the copyrighted character designs of another for your own uses without authorization.
Most companies simply turn a blind eye to it because they realize that doing something about it will hurt them more than it will help.
Now.
Really? After the whole Jace the Mindsculptor debauchle they decide that a 3-turn PW nuke+reanimator is a good idea? Yeah....I'm sure this'll hit the ban lists real quick.