Presumably the retcons were performed in this case to better flesh out Kaladesh as a setting and Chandra's parents as characters, although I cannot dismiss the possibility that someone realized that the original version's story element of Chandra being upset over an arranged marriage might be problematic given that Kaladesh is clearly an India-themed plane.
As an aside, I do like that Chandra is from a steampunk plane - it explains her fashion choices and why she stole an Izzit gauntlet (i.e. she may have been broadly familiar with the technology).
OK SUPER excited for the next five weeks now! Yay! Hopefully this will be good.
I have to say, and I never imagined saying this, but one thing that has been sorely lacking in Magic fiction over the last several years is romance. I mean, it's been done a few times (Jace & Liliana, Gideon & Chandra [sorta], and Jace and Emmara) but not all that well. And nothing ever comes from these romantic potentials. Jace and Lili left things really awkwardly and we haven't seen them interact in years. Same with Gideon and Chandra. Jace and Emmara felt like the most forced couple ever, because, ya know, guys and girls can't just be friends in fiction without trying to make them something more. I feel like the closest we got to a good romantic storyline was with Elspeth and Daxos (probably because of Jenna's excellent writing) but it was very brief, but it did have a beautifully tragic ending.
The reason that I am bringing this up is because Jenna, Doug and others have been promoting their new approach to story as being "relatable" and there will be "something for everyone." I think the best way to do this is to have all sorts of narrative elements and stories, from action to mystery to political issues to romantic entanglements. Anyway, since Origins features 4 Planeswalkers who have been somewhat mixed up with each other romantically in the past, hopefully we will get something in the way of relationships in the future, thus helping our characters feel more human and relatable. Am I alone in this? What do you all think?
John Betty over at StarCityGames touched on this (http://www.starcitygames.com/article/29166_Family-Affairs.html) last year, and I generally agree - with the caveat I worry about how well the resulting story would be executed. Would WotC allow any of their major characters to ever become permanently involved in a relationship or even become a parent some day, or would things eventually return to some sort of status quo, a la most comic book characters? (This is a genuine question on my part, and I'm curious what everyone thinks - WotC has shown they are willing to make changes to major planewalkers' status quo - e.g. Garruk, Jace, Elspeth - but how far are they willing to go? Before anyone says "death", I don't consider Venser part of the main stable of planeswalkers, and does anyone expect Elspeth to stay dead when we finally return to Theros?)
Put me down for also wanting to see WotC using planeswalkers to tell a variety of diverse stories, including political intrigue, mystery, western, and so on. About half the time, it feels like the planeswalker stories on a given plane are entirely divorced from the tone of the plane. Next time we see Innistrad, let's have the planewalkers in the set involved in a true Gothic Horror story instead of just passing through the plane involved in their own (tonally-distinct) stories. Or swept up in a true detective story on Ravnica (or maybe even that Victorian plane teased in Futuresight). (As silly as it sounds, I'd love to see a group of planeswalkers in a Clue-like scenario, for instance.) So on, and so forth - one of coolest things about planeswalkers as characters is that a single planeswalker can be used in multiple, very different, types of stories, and see how they adjust to a dramatically different genre - let's actually see that happen in the future.
As for Affinity, as a few others on this site have suggested over the years, what I expect to see is Affinity for Creature Type, e.g. Affinity for Elves or Affinity for Goblins. It seems like it could be a solid mechanic in a Tribal set as long as you restrict it to large creatures. Imagine a Hydra with Affinity for Elves, for example, or a Dragon with Affinity for Goblins.
I think I can see what happened here - I believe WotC intended for each of the Dragon Lords to embody one specific archetypical aspect of dragons as they are depicted in different (Earth) cultures, although interestingly those aren't exactly the same as the ideals the Clans worshiped (and WotC put forth for the Dragons as well):
Simulgar - The greedy dragon, hording treasure, ever-paranoid about his hoard(Think Smaug)
Atarka - The dragon as a devourer, ever-hungry and all-consuming (And really, does the Atarka Clan even embody "Savagery" anymore?)
Kolaghan - The dragon as the bringer of death, a savage monster embodying raging storms and primal chaos (think Tiamat and her brood from Sumerian legend, for example)
Ojutai - The dragon as a teacher and keeper of wisdom (A common trait in many East Asian dragons)
Dromoka - The dragon as a protector and/or distant ancestor of a family or tribe - with Dromoka, the later is strictly symbolic. (Another common trait in East Asian dragons)
The danger with using raw archetypes is that it is very easy to get lazy and slide into straight cliche, and I think that's what happened to some extent with the design of the five Dragon clans.
Could be, but it could also be a reference to Ixion's Wheel.
I'm thrilled at all the references included in Theros. I did NOT expect to get references to Diomedes' flesh-eating mares, to Socrates' forced suicide by hemlock, or to messenger from Marathon.
- Nostalgia cards which have nothing to do with Ravnica - hello, Morphling, Pernicious Deeds, etc
Just to set the record straight, Dissension (the 3rd set in the original RAV block, just as Dragon's Maze is the 3rd set in the RTR block) also contained homages to Morphling (Windreaver) and Pernicious Deed (The "Punishment" half of Crime // Punishment.) In other words, these are callbacks to the original RAV block. Kinda.
I do have my share of disappointments (Emmara), but overall I actually like how this set is shaping up, and cards like those in this thread are part of the reason why - some fill holes in my casual decks, some have obvious Limited applications, and one might even be Constructed playable, depending in part on what the next rotation brings. But that's just my opinion.
It might be a long shot, but according to MaRo's latest article, we'll be seeing the "Guild Champion" cycle in "Sinker." I'd give Feather at least a decent chance (based on her popularity) of making the cut as the Boros member of that cycle.
And before anyone objects that Feather is a rival Guildmaster, not a 'Champion' - do not forget that in Ravnica, the Golgari member of the cycle was Savra, Queen of the Golgari - also a rival Guildmaster.
I guess what I am trying to do is actually find out if the claims that "Chronicles almost ruined magic" are really true.
Chronicles usually gets the blame but it was really just the straw that broke the camel's back for a lot of people.
First of all, you have to realize that there was a larger 'collector bubble' of sorts in the early '90s, which included both collectible cards and comics. Thanks to the very small print runs of the early sets, as the games' player base increased dramatically, player demand caused card prices to skyrocket, and non-player collectors (primarily store owners) took notice and began stocking up on valuable cards, further driving prices up.
However, The Dark and Fallen Empires hurt player interest a lot...
and then Fourth Edition came along. Not only did Fourth Edition remove a lot of popular cards from Revised (Clone, Fork, the Dual Lands, etc.), it reprinted a lot of cards like Killer Bees and Carrion Ants that had been $10 to $20 cards up until that point. Players were pissed about the loss of popular cards from the core set (and the fact that Dual Lands went from about $5 to $20 practically overnight), and collectors were pissed that a large number of cards were suddenly devalued.
Then Ice Age comes along, and not only was generally perceived as another weak set (which it was, but this was also before people understood card advantage and the value of Necropotence), but reprinted Icy Manipulator, another card that had been selling northward of $20 until then. By this point, some of the first generation of MtG players had quit playing, but were retaining their cards essentially as investments.
Two months later, Chronicles was released, and as I said, it was the straw that broke the camel's back. Many high-value cards - the Elder Dragons, Recall, Ernham Djinn, City of Brass, and plenty of others - lost nearly all their value. These early players, as well as the non-player collectors, were extremely pissed about the one-two punch of Fourth Edition and Chronicles, and the resulting outcry led the Reserve List.
As for the near-death of MtG, two months later (Oct. 05), Homelands was released, and then there were NO Magic releases until Alliances in June 2006. A series of weak sets, several loss of value of many cards, a long drought of releases, and the rise of other CCGs such as Star Wars during that drought, caused a lot of players to leave Magic, and arguably did almost kill the game. But it wasn't Chronicles by itself.
I'm sure I've oversimplified things a bit, and/or mixed up a few details, but that's the gist of it. Chronicles gets plenty of blame, but it was just one of several factors at that time that devalued prices and drove players away.
1
As an aside, I do like that Chandra is from a steampunk plane - it explains her fashion choices and why she stole an Izzit gauntlet (i.e. she may have been broadly familiar with the technology).
1
John Betty over at StarCityGames touched on this (http://www.starcitygames.com/article/29166_Family-Affairs.html) last year, and I generally agree - with the caveat I worry about how well the resulting story would be executed. Would WotC allow any of their major characters to ever become permanently involved in a relationship or even become a parent some day, or would things eventually return to some sort of status quo, a la most comic book characters? (This is a genuine question on my part, and I'm curious what everyone thinks - WotC has shown they are willing to make changes to major planewalkers' status quo - e.g. Garruk, Jace, Elspeth - but how far are they willing to go? Before anyone says "death", I don't consider Venser part of the main stable of planeswalkers, and does anyone expect Elspeth to stay dead when we finally return to Theros?)
Put me down for also wanting to see WotC using planeswalkers to tell a variety of diverse stories, including political intrigue, mystery, western, and so on. About half the time, it feels like the planeswalker stories on a given plane are entirely divorced from the tone of the plane. Next time we see Innistrad, let's have the planewalkers in the set involved in a true Gothic Horror story instead of just passing through the plane involved in their own (tonally-distinct) stories. Or swept up in a true detective story on Ravnica (or maybe even that Victorian plane teased in Futuresight). (As silly as it sounds, I'd love to see a group of planeswalkers in a Clue-like scenario, for instance.) So on, and so forth - one of coolest things about planeswalkers as characters is that a single planeswalker can be used in multiple, very different, types of stories, and see how they adjust to a dramatically different genre - let's actually see that happen in the future.
2
I seem to recall there were hints dropped long ago that Mirrodin's "E" Mechanic were cards that specifically required colorless mana to cast. Also, the dropped "Forbidden" mechanic from Avacyn Restored is probably this: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/speculation/246421-forbidden-mechanic-cursing-attacks-from-dominion
As for Affinity, as a few others on this site have suggested over the years, what I expect to see is Affinity for Creature Type, e.g. Affinity for Elves or Affinity for Goblins. It seems like it could be a solid mechanic in a Tribal set as long as you restrict it to large creatures. Imagine a Hydra with Affinity for Elves, for example, or a Dragon with Affinity for Goblins.
1
Simulgar - The greedy dragon, hording treasure, ever-paranoid about his hoard(Think Smaug)
Atarka - The dragon as a devourer, ever-hungry and all-consuming (And really, does the Atarka Clan even embody "Savagery" anymore?)
Kolaghan - The dragon as the bringer of death, a savage monster embodying raging storms and primal chaos (think Tiamat and her brood from Sumerian legend, for example)
Ojutai - The dragon as a teacher and keeper of wisdom (A common trait in many East Asian dragons)
Dromoka - The dragon as a protector and/or distant ancestor of a family or tribe - with Dromoka, the later is strictly symbolic. (Another common trait in East Asian dragons)
The danger with using raw archetypes is that it is very easy to get lazy and slide into straight cliche, and I think that's what happened to some extent with the design of the five Dragon clans.
1
Could be, but it could also be a reference to Ixion's Wheel.
I'm thrilled at all the references included in Theros. I did NOT expect to get references to Diomedes' flesh-eating mares, to Socrates' forced suicide by hemlock, or to messenger from Marathon.
2
Just to set the record straight, Dissension (the 3rd set in the original RAV block, just as Dragon's Maze is the 3rd set in the RTR block) also contained homages to Morphling (Windreaver) and Pernicious Deed (The "Punishment" half of Crime // Punishment.) In other words, these are callbacks to the original RAV block. Kinda.
I do have my share of disappointments (Emmara), but overall I actually like how this set is shaping up, and cards like those in this thread are part of the reason why - some fill holes in my casual decks, some have obvious Limited applications, and one might even be Constructed playable, depending in part on what the next rotation brings. But that's just my opinion.
1
And before anyone objects that Feather is a rival Guildmaster, not a 'Champion' - do not forget that in Ravnica, the Golgari member of the cycle was Savra, Queen of the Golgari - also a rival Guildmaster.
Article here: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/213
1
Chronicles usually gets the blame but it was really just the straw that broke the camel's back for a lot of people.
First of all, you have to realize that there was a larger 'collector bubble' of sorts in the early '90s, which included both collectible cards and comics. Thanks to the very small print runs of the early sets, as the games' player base increased dramatically, player demand caused card prices to skyrocket, and non-player collectors (primarily store owners) took notice and began stocking up on valuable cards, further driving prices up.
However, The Dark and Fallen Empires hurt player interest a lot...
and then Fourth Edition came along. Not only did Fourth Edition remove a lot of popular cards from Revised (Clone, Fork, the Dual Lands, etc.), it reprinted a lot of cards like Killer Bees and Carrion Ants that had been $10 to $20 cards up until that point. Players were pissed about the loss of popular cards from the core set (and the fact that Dual Lands went from about $5 to $20 practically overnight), and collectors were pissed that a large number of cards were suddenly devalued.
Then Ice Age comes along, and not only was generally perceived as another weak set (which it was, but this was also before people understood card advantage and the value of Necropotence), but reprinted Icy Manipulator, another card that had been selling northward of $20 until then. By this point, some of the first generation of MtG players had quit playing, but were retaining their cards essentially as investments.
Two months later, Chronicles was released, and as I said, it was the straw that broke the camel's back. Many high-value cards - the Elder Dragons, Recall, Ernham Djinn, City of Brass, and plenty of others - lost nearly all their value. These early players, as well as the non-player collectors, were extremely pissed about the one-two punch of Fourth Edition and Chronicles, and the resulting outcry led the Reserve List.
As for the near-death of MtG, two months later (Oct. 05), Homelands was released, and then there were NO Magic releases until Alliances in June 2006. A series of weak sets, several loss of value of many cards, a long drought of releases, and the rise of other CCGs such as Star Wars during that drought, caused a lot of players to leave Magic, and arguably did almost kill the game. But it wasn't Chronicles by itself.
I'm sure I've oversimplified things a bit, and/or mixed up a few details, but that's the gist of it. Chronicles gets plenty of blame, but it was just one of several factors at that time that devalued prices and drove players away.