A subscription model that entitles me to pay for the thing I probably don't want twice, while having no option to pass on one you don't want without forfeiting the entire subscription without refund for remaining time? Yea.... sod that idea.
The movement of this into 'live services' mindsets of subscription models and loot boxes, that offer nothing tangible except the 'ability' to spend money buying the same thing as everyone else, are nothing more than means to financially exploit insecure people and I strongly suggest against endorsing it, funding it or promoting it, less Hasbro pushes ever more anti-consumer nonsense at people...
Upon looking through the cards Jason Felix has illustrated, I noticed that his style is strangely all over the place though. Maybe it's bias because of this case, but I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that he "fudged" his stuff in one way or the other before.
That is usually a sign of either/or two things being true; that the artist is eccentric and likes to consistently push into new styles + work on projects of dissimilar types, or, that the artist relies on 'borrowing' work from others and tracing over it leaving a scattershot art effect.
Since those early sets, Magic has appeared in: Multiple tactics, strategy and hack n slash video games. A magazine only cross-promotion with Yu-Gi-Oh (A gold card Dark Magician, a 'dragon' 6 star Shivan Dragon monster). Official crossover material for D&D. A series of game books (published by company who produces Queens Blade books). A staff only UFS (now AniVersus) character card. Referenced/parodied in at least two anime. A proposed & developed, ultimately unreleased board game that crossed over with the Monster In My Pocket brand. A crossbrand drinks promotion with World of Warcraft. A white dwarf only army list for Slivers...
These are a handful of examples from around the world, across MTG's history. The only difference is this time those franchies appear in MTG card form.
I can't say that I'm particularly moved by the argument "MtG concepts/likenesses/settings have been used in promos of other IPs, so this is fine" because I don't play those games and never heard of the promos you're talking about. They aren't a part of my MtG experience and they have nothing to do with how I view the game. I have been involved with MtG in some form or another since 1998 and my perspective on what the game is was shaped by almost a quarter century of MtG cards, not cynical promotional stuff that exists outside the game.
And that's fine, I can appreciate that view. But it's a string that works both ways. For many other players, Magic is ancillary, it's a part of their world but doesn't define it. They will likely be cross-hobbyists, or people who fell out of love with the game.
This is where that 'this product isn't for you' comes in.
It is like FF7. I don't particularly love that game, but it's fine enough and it's a good example of what I'm trying to express so let's just pretend I love that game. Cloud has appeared in a lot of other IPs, none of which I play, to me that is just tacky marketing from Square that I can and do safely ignore because they exist outside and apart from the game of FF7 that I enjoy. But if the Kingdom Hearts gang showed up in FF7 Remake Part Two, it would surely compromise my perception of the game.
This is a thing that's already been discussed and put to bed.
These cards are not Magic canon cards, hence their dissimilar holo stamps. Also, two Kingdom Hearts characters are the most requested DLC characters for FF7 Remake PT2.
If these other franchises were being included into the canonised stories of MTG, then that would be a functionally different problem. Compatible playing pieces isn't such a big deal, when there's rumours on the other IP's side that this is actually a two way street, with some Gatewatch members supposedly getting mini's through Games Workshop, who now share the LOTR licence with Hasbro.
Which is why I find it so amusing that a tiny subset of players who've proudly pushed their IP into the frames of others are now having a major backlash that those same IPs are appearing in theirs.[/quote]
We did what now? What makes you think I'm proud that WotC pushed their IP elsewhere to market MtG and/or make a quick buck? At best, I accept that it's a thing WotC will do in their strategy to keep the market for the game healthy.
I wouldn't include you in that subset of players Mikey - you've actually got reasons for your disagreements with this.
As well, since we're expressing what we're amused by, I'm amused by how posters here are characterizing the attitudes and behaviors of those who aren't liking the Universe Beyond concept. It's all getting the clickbait title treatment, overstating responses and emotionality to frame arguments and posters in a way that's easier to argue against or paint as dismissible. I'm not experiencing a major backlash, UB is a thing that doesn't vibe with my experience of the game, I'm unlikely to engage with it and I doubt I'll ever experience much if any of it so this isn't really a big deal to me. I just find the debate here fascinating and truth be told, I've got pandemic boredom amid chronic work stress and every cat benefits from a scratching post.
And I honestly Mikey wish that both sides would take a more reasoned and responsible attitude to the whole thing because you are right, people are losing their minds over something they could just as easily choose not to buy or not to personally play with. But if they're allowed to be bombastic, surely the most enigmatic villain of MTGS should get to play, si?
Your last sentence is a sentiment that I can share. My claws need sharpening once in a while too.
To say that MTG wasn't designed to facilitate crossover's is to literally ignore the patenting documents that force everyone else to pay Hasbro royalties (because most of it's mechanical fundamentals (like tapping a card to show it's used) are properiety).
What player constructs their perception of the game on patent documents?
Perception doesn't matter in regards to facts. I can perceive the sky as red and green, but that matters little if one has damaged eyes or is looking through a filter. Perception is relative, essentially, as you know.
As for what is original and divergent about lifting a picture of Christoper Lambert from the movie Merlin, making a set about a Magic School with a cross promotion for that other IP (promotion abandoned eleventh hour after other IP frontperson damaged said IP), or, Magic's most iconic villian being copied from an 80's sci-fi show villian. The whole thing was always designed to be a crossover of multiple IP's, it just wasn't considered big enough by the other IPs brand managers to make it a worthwhile investment for them to grant a license to use most of the time (as opposed to Games Workshop's recent scattershot approach of licenses for everyone).
Homage/Influence/Parody =/= Crossover
This is why the events of The Avengers XXX: A Porn Parody are not canon in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. A little more seriously, though, there's a reason aspects of MtG being influenced by or homages to other works does not feel out of place where UB does. It's adaptation versus transplantation, and honestly it's been surreal for me to see so many posters not get that. To give credit to Tiro, he analogized the point well by saying the Theros gods might as well have been the actual Greek gods by the logic that homage/influence and crossovers are interchangeable.
Perhaps you're right, though, that MtG was always intended not to be a game of its own with its own independent identity but instead a multi-IP platform of crossovers only delayed by MtG not being big enough. But at the end of the day, that hasn't been my experience with the game for almost a quarter century and I don't intend for it to be part of my experience going forward.[/quote]
I am aware of the difference, but I was not asked 'what is the difference between homage, parody and plagerism', I was dictated at in essence that 'everything in Magic is completely original or divergent', which is what I challenged.
Also, I will note, it's not out of place because of adaption. That's a slight misunderstanding. It's not out of place because their copying the main elements of work they've already copied everything else from. Hence why WOTC used to pay royalties to Tolkien's group for things contained within the reserved list, and why Kithkin aren't hobbits or gnomes (the latter they'd have to pay Games Workshop for ironically, who then have to pay... Tolkien's group).
Throwing LOTR in with Magic fare isn't going to cause a big stir: they're both fantasy rooted with a lot of overlap due to the above. What does feel out of place is 40K, and that's something others have mentioned - if they'd used any of the fantasy stuff, nobody would of really batted an eye. And thus the problem isn't really an argument over UB, it's an argument over 'dissonance of theme'. Those who like anachronistic works and grand crossovers are going to love it, and thematic purists will hate it, and that's going to be the real divide.
But Magic itself was always designed for this, it was always the end goal - it always is with media of any type. I'll always love Magic's lore (most of it), and I'm glad it grew to be as grand as it is. But it's time for the purists to let go for the sake of the game, as there's nowhere left for it to go, because when we're reskinning Harry Potter and The Worst Witch, or reskinning Merlin, it's just better for all sides if we use the originals. Because as much as people don't want to admit it, WOTC isn't pulling in new players with core Magic releases anymore and Magic's fanbase is to blame for that. If this people want this game to survive, especially during a period of reduced in person interaction, it has to be allowed to reach new audiences and has to do so in a way those audiences are open to.
Without new players, this game will die, like all those before it who focused too hard on their self-contained bubble of purists.
[quote]Since those early sets, Magic has appeared in: Multiple tactics, strategy and hack n slash video games. A magazine only cross-promotion with Yu-Gi-Oh (A gold card Dark Magician, a 'dragon' 6 star Shivan Dragon monster). Official crossover material for D&D. A series of game books (published by company who produces Queens Blade books). A staff only UFS (now AniVersus) character card. Referenced/parodied in at least two anime. A proposed & developed, ultimately unreleased board game that crossed over with the Monster In My Pocket brand. A crossbrand drinks promotion with World of Warcraft. A white dwarf only army list for Slivers...
These are a handful of examples from around the world, across MTG's history. The only difference is this time those franchies appear in MTG card form. Which is why I find it so amusing that a tiny subset of players who've proudly pushed their IP into the frames of others are now having a major backlash that those same IPs are appearing in theirs. To say that MTG wasn't designed to facilitate crossover's is to literally ignore the patenting documents that force everyone else to pay Hasbro royalties (because most of it's mechanical fundamentals (like tapping a card to show it's used) are properiety).
The thing is that direction is important you wouldn't call Persona or Metroid or Minecraft Games that were designed to facilitate crossovers just because they appear in Smash bros which is however a game which is desinged to do that. Furthermore most if not all of those crossovers happened not from the hasbro side asking but the crossover side asking to basically do the thing many in here accuse wizards of doing with this, a quick cash grab. Also the size of the crossovers were in most cases hold to a minimum to you know have the other IP keep it's Identity.
That's why I personally wouldn't mind a silver bordered crossover set for example that way you can use the game system but keeping the crossover distinct but still playable for those that like these, albeit as an opt-in rather than an opt-out.
Direction changes with time. In fact, in this case, this would be Magic returning somewhat to it's original direction - a game system for representing multiple franchises. There's also likely the business case: Hasbro could lose the patency that grants them royalties from everyone else if they don't act on the original filing soon, being able to show that the system is being used for it's original purpose. Ya see, that patency of game mechanics is tied to the reason 'for' the mechanic. If they can't prove their using it for intent, they'll have a far harder time trying to justify why those who are have to pay them royalties. Hence why it's a win-win for Hasbro: expanding their market into other IP's to grab those consumers, while also taking care of some backroom business.
I do agree intent wise on these being silver-bordered, that I agree with. Though, if they were trying to prevent confusion with the UN sets, redesigning the holo thing at the bottom of the card seems as wise a choice as any.
Also, they can, as with TWD cards, make 'functional reprints' any time they want. Using this card as an example, Wizards could reprint this card when the licence deal ends... but they must change the card name, the art, and may not use 'Walker' as a creature token because 'walkers' are a 'terminological' identifier of TWD, and I'm reasonbly sure nobody is stupid enough to go to court and try to make the case that TWD's fans are unfamiliar with that term.
One issue with the functional reprints is when you get to the scale of the 40kommander decks and LotR set is that we could be seeing the potential of 300+ cards strictly with those IPs on them. That's a lot of functional reprints. They may also never be able to Godzilla skin those cards as they would still need Gandalf below the "other name" of the card and that then would accrue some sort of cost. I also have to wonder if this would be an issue on streamed tournaments when WotC shows someone playing Gandalf in a Legacy game or on Arena if any of these cards go to Historic. will we see those cards banned so WotC doesn't have to keep shelling out money to show those licenses?
I don't particularly look forward to seeing a "Functional reprint set" with the tag line of "Now with proper Magic art and text."
TWD had the issue where we couldn't see the proper name of the cards beneath the TWD names, currently there is no promise of a "real" version of those cards because WotC didn't think that far ahead.
This is accurate and why I made an argument internally against using functional reprint ideals for these products. I view that the skins methodology used for the Godzilla cards or the current, compatible but separate implementation being better. I obviously rooted for the latter as it allows the franchise to grow. If UB does well that increases chances of player uptake of core Magic because of UB acting as a gateway, more likely to be acceptable for teens due to IP fandom and for relatives to throw a deck in a christmas stocking or birthday bag.
But that makes your argument simply: It's ok to deny people product that they want to play with, as long as it's not the product 'I' want to play with.
Or I was arguing the point that "this doesn't take anything away", which the development time of this could have meant other normal Magic products didn't get developed, making what that poster said false. This isn't a "only product I like", there are a lot I don't like being made (planeswalker decks, theme boosters, collector's boosters, secret lairs), but they are Magic products. I know that I'd much rather have Magic product that focuses on Magic than focusing on other products. I play Magic to play Magic, not to play LotR or 40k, if I wanted to do that there are other avenues for those to other card games to video games to miniatures.
Conversely, by prohibiting the production of this product you would be taking away the potential enjoyment of someone else. When two parties find enjoyment in contrary things it is often the case that one party will lose out if they can't find a compromise.
It also stands true that just because you prefer 'Magic' products to these newer ones, you would still prefer if those 'Magic' products were not produced in favour of the ones you do enjoy. The sliding scale is just that, a sliding scale - it doesn't invalidate my point that it's core, you're measuring only your own enjoyment, and not considering that every other person will have the exact same view.
Hence compromise is everyone getting a product for their tastes, rather than only one group gets a product for their tastes: a fast way to wither and die, hence WOTC abandoning their prior 'standard support only' ideology to support other popular formats with releases.
Also, relatively sure neither of those IP's had a card game that functioned using MTG's system... until now.
....And? That's not a reason to put them in the game. Smoking commercials haven't been in the MTG system either, guess based on your logic they should be in the game too.
It's also not a reason to prohibit it. As the design team of Wizards would tell you, they've anticipated and facilitated you're disagreement with the design choice of using the holo-stamp to differentiate these cards from Magic canon cards.
We don't need all the different card game systems, when there is one that clearly works and all others have to pay royalties to. You're argument is tantamount to saying that because a King paved a road in stones, the peasents may only pave roads with coins. It's illogical, unnecessary and from a design standpoint; dysfunctional.
A better argument to make would be to create a separated sub-team that focuses on UB releases and Magic canon releases separately, with priority on the latter. It's actually what the current design shift of most card based games is moving to, especially with how parent companies are restructuring their portfolios. And again, you're dislike for something doesn't mean it shouldn't exist, when you can just as easily choose to not purchase it if you don't wish to.
If that was the case, people wouldn't be arguing since childhood about which hero/villain/characters are better across franchises, and in my experience across a breadth of media, the biggest causes of failure for established IP's are antagonizing their consumer base and/or purist consumers who bully out those newly interested for not liking 'the right part' of said media (in thie case of this thread, it seems to be obsessive with Dominaria lore, conveniently ignoring the cross-IP references in all the non-Dominaria lore). Cross IP promotion is very rarely stated as a reason for total IP failure.
So your argument is "people like to debate about superheroes" is a reason to do this?
Also, you may want to look at the DCEU for a failure to crossover.
While a crossover may not be why something fails it's usually a sign that an IP is dying and they are trying to do anything to bring in an audience of any kind to survive. Television does this plenty, from crossovers to time travel, there are a myriad of examples that show when an IP is starting to fail. To me a crossover, if it is done too often, is an admittance that the IP you are bringing in so many others into cannot stand on its own. Magic has been on pretty shaky ground the last couple of years, constant products, gameplay becoming weaker due to cards being too strong and gameplay not balanced, and more that this is just another problem to add to that list.
The reason people debate and compare and create fiction of those IP's crossing over is because they're not being facilitated by current offerings. It's why crossovers are one of the highest selling trends in all mediums, are performed in all mediums, marketed in all mediums, and are the inevitability of all mediums.
Visual Novels are crossover of books and video games. Any 'feat' in a song is a crossover of two artists brands. Every Pizza Hut with Mars ice cream desert is a crossover promotion. Even the computer you type on, will have advertised itself using this same mechanism.
And to counterpoint your narrative over crossovers = failure, I'd just like to point out that the highest grossing product in every medium is a form of crossover...
Also, because you only seem to understand the cultural expectations of your own immediacy, I'd like to point out that from the perspective of those who work in these industries, people seeking to enter your domain of influence is considered a sign of success: the weaker property features in the stronger. So using your own words somewhat, it would be the featuring franchises that are admitting they can't stand alone (which, in case you hadn't realised, Games Workshop's holdings are in decline, hence their massive PR push and rush licensing offers at the moment)
You're now at the point of literally sitting telling us how great Magic lore is, and then telling is that the lore of Magic is 100% wrong as compared to your personal headcanon.
I have not said how great Magic lore is, but why read when you can ignore things! I questioned whether that person knew all of it as they said "it's terrible" multiple times in a row with no evidence for their opinion as to why, but hey if you want to jump to conclusions I can get that mat from Office Space.
As for a copyright, I don't care. Magic was not intended for this for well over two decades, there's a reason they stopped doing it. What makes them so sure they can pull it off now and make the game better? I'm sure crickets will sound soon.
No, you tried to impose that for them to dislike the lore, that they clearly didn't know all of it. You made an assumption about that persons capabilities and knowledge. You are now attempting to justify that miscast assumption of yours by attacking me for your mistake.
I'm fairly sure what allows them to think that way is because they already did it, thrice, and nobody batted an eye except to give them money. And to be honest, I can understand their patience with the small section of elitists that constantly scream that they have a higher knowledge while consistently getting the very fundamental basics wrong. So I'm fairly sure they can pull it off, because they're attempting to launch secondary system that maintains compatability with Magic, while being able to expand into it's own giant crossover-nonsense thing (see, AniVersus, who WOTC feels threatened by).
I'm getting the feeling you were one of those VS or Overpower players that got angry when they saw kids playing Spiderman and Batman on the same team...
Then by your own established logic, they must of either 1) Gone to the places of residence of those other entities to meet them (within that IP), or 2) Those things came to the spellcasters residence for them to know of these other entities (within Magic IP). That means, on the weight of your own argument, the game's fundamental core is literally steeped in there being a multiverse of endless possibility.
All Magic worlds are in the Magic UNIVERSE, it cannot be a multiverse if there's only one. That's literally what multi- means, multiple. An extra world is not another universe, it's another world in THE universe. Just like how Jupiter isn't another universe to Earth. How do you not know that? Dragonball has a multiverse. Power Rangers has a multiverse. Marvel & DC have a multiverse. Magic does not have a multiverse.
They are not traveling to Angel Grove to summon Goldar, they are traveling to Innistrad and summoning a zombie. One is within Magic's own universe, the other had a average at best movie in 2017.
Mate I can literally go get copies of the original books, copies of books from Magic's midlife, copies of more recent books - all of them state there's a multiverse. Saheli's storyline and the current Phyrexian storyline is over there being a multiverse. We have just remastered a set about that literal concept. The Word of God has spoken, your distaste and head canon doesn't overwrite authorial intent or direction.
I mean your first paragraph doesn't just fly in the face of the established canon of decades of MTG lore and the faces of the games makers, but also shows you don't understand the core basics of real world quantum physics or the suppositions of how spacetime works
I mean if you don't know about a subject, cool, but don't stand preaching as an authority while making it up on the spot: it doesn't end well. There's a whole kids story about it.
Thanks for reminding me, I totally forgot about the Neopets/Kellogs/Hasbro cereal crossover in the UK from when I was a wee one.
That's a promotion, not a crossover. Pizza Hut didn't "crossover" with Sony in the 90s to give out PS1 demo discs when you ordered a pizza.
Actualllllyyyy (imagine it in 'her' voice), that is legally called a cross-promotional offer, and is legally also defined as a form of crossover (where two brands, IP's or features thereof are manifest in the same works as per agreed by their respective owners). This was formalised in law in both the UK and US during the argument between Disney and Warner Bros over the representations of Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny in the film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
If you like, I'm even prepared to literally cite the dictionary definition of the word if you want to try to test my knowledge further on this field.
Wow, you sent me to the main page of a company. That tells me......nothing. So the "word of god" is nothing?
Sorry, did you not recognise the Magic The Gathering homepage? I mean, I thought you were the know-all of magic lore: how sad you must be to click a link that takes you to the main page of the actual people who make the game and decide what is and isn't. Or maybe you're just choosing to be ignorant, something you were complaining others did before.
and the aether fluxx itself is a name for the space between dimensions of existence. The 'planes' and 'aether flux' are themselves copyrighted as a multiverse, with those names being the IP's 'terminological names' for those phenomena.
Looking that up on google and MTG wiki gives me nothing for what this is outside of Aetherflux Reservoir, what is this?
That is the legal definitions that Wizards uses in its patency for their works. The term Aetherflux has been around since the first sets and books. It's WOTC legally held right to sue anyone using that term in their creative works, because it's their name for their multiverse, as listed in the legal filing with the various trademark and copyright offices I have to deal with.
The fact you didn't know this, one of the most fundamental pieces of magic lore, means you do not have the breadth of knowledge us dinosaurs have. It means you're just another wet that hasn't learned how the world works (either fictional or real). Canon of a product changes to suit the business decisions of those at the top. Be grateful that the consistency of Magic canon to retain it's multiversal standings, from it's literal inception, has circled round to pay dividends while it's undoubtably the most popular form of medium expression
In essence, planeswalking is exactly like Rick and Morty, which is why the shows creators have even taken jabs at properties such as MTG and narrative devices like The Storyteller's Convention (both in the same episode).
Yeah, you're right, cause they're the same thing. Garruk is able to walk through time and different universes, yep, happens every block. No, they go to different worlds and that's the only thing in common. One thing in common does not make it exactly. Magic doesn't cause people to rush McDonald's screaming for BBQ sauce and cause them to flop on the floor screaming "REEEEEEE I'M PICKLE RICK" (in this case the REEE is actually correct for what happened in that famous video.)
That episode in no way was a jab at MTG, it was an episode where they came up with random jokes that they couldn't fit into an episode and then created the multiverse tv as a framing device to allow them to do so. It wasn't making fun of anything in particular, just a bunch of random jokes.
Also, world walking has been a thing in literature/media long before Magic and Rick & Morty, it's nothing new.
OK so you made a mistake right there. They don't go to different 'worlds', they go to different 'planes'. Planes contain 'worlds', and can have multiple of them. Planes, is short for 'Planes of Existence', which is also a part of the D&D canon (which MTG semi-officially crosses over with). This was held by WOTC for about 10 years before it really became notable in their Planescape franchise, which set down the fundamental rules of 'Gates/Portals' (now part of the MTG lore), and the ability for some entities to move through Planes without needing such. Including the Planeswalkers of MTG, the Lady of Pain from Planescape, and certain 'Gods' from D&D (rules which then feature in Theros and it's sequel).
So when a company literally uses the same storytelling rule sets, copyrights and trademarks them as such, says themselves in both statements and within the written material that makes the canon that this a multiverse, you're 'but I don't like it' attitude and complete non-understanding of the subject matter doesn't change the facts.
However, obsession does cause people to freak out whenever their narcissism isn't being indulged, from attention-seeking 'sezuachan sauce' antics to screaming because a card game released a product that 'wasn't' for them, or someone enjoyed an experience they didn't, or god-forbid, someone combined two things to enhance their enjoyment, those filthy hedonists.
Also, multiversal cable wasn't even the episode I was talking about, which proves you don't understand the subject matter to refer to it when the episodes point is to make fun of narcisstic behaviour and self-obsessive, on the spot prattling. Also, you are again trying to undermine the word of god by claiming that the Rick and Morty writers are wrong about their own writing while relying on their words to justify your misunderstanding. Honestly, I'm glad you're not one of my students, I'd have to have serious words with admin.
And yes, it has. But that's the difference between world walking and planeswalking. Planeswalking is a copyrighted term by WOTC, which is why everyone jumps through ridiculous hoops to try to avoid saying that word when dealing with multiversal concepts in their own works.
You just spent an entire section going off at someone for using words incorrectly (despite them being entirely accurate). That sounds a lot like a case of 'pot, kettle, black' to me...
Because telling someone you can't use the word hate (definition - feel intense or passionate dislike) is wrong as it is being used correctly by those who hate this announcement. It's not my fault when people use words incorrectly. Would you like to try again, but this time do it better?
So you're argument is they're wrong for using the word hate in regards to your attitude, because only your allowed to use it? What?
I mean, also it's fanciful that you've just chosen to half-quote the dictionary after literally spending nearly a thousand words claiming the dictionary is wrong, but you do you - different strokes for different folks.
Your argument is becoming more detached from observable fact and straying into trying to impose your feelings (which are clearly strong) in pace of those facts.
What's your argument here again? The poster I replied to stated that because a magazine did a thing and made a fake card that means that it's okay for other fake cards to be used. You're right, we should let the 1 cmc "You win the game" card in play. It only makes sense.
So you ask my argument, then make a strawman in its place, attack it, and then parade around like a toddler with a soiled nappy demanding a medal..
My point is you not liking something doesn't prohibit others enjoying it in their own space or people making products for them. I think you know that, but I think you've run out of road and have realised bad insults aren't working on me, so you're not just being ignorant and obtuse, but also dismissive of those who're your seniors presenting you with evidenced, black and white facts.
If you go around screaming in peoples faces in public, insulting them and belittling them, screaming "I was just communicating" when they retaliate will get you zero sympathy for your situation because your actions have repercussions that weasel wording will not always save you from.
No one is screaming in people's faces here, insulting and belittling are being done by multiple people from both sides of the like/dislike aisle, you for example are doing the same thing. Not sure where you are going with this, people get passionate and conversations happen. That poster wanted people to communicate, but then hated it when people were....communicating. That's literally hypocrisy on their part.
They asked for civil conversation, you launched a barrage of insults at them, people retaliated to that, and then your victim playing and trying to blame everyone else for your actions. That sums it up nicely.
So not only are you a prolific liar, who's ignorant, I'm fairly sure you're just trying to antagonise people and stir the pot by asking non-questions of people on both sides and then insult-barraging anyone who calls out the contradiction. Or has the temerity to stand by their convictions.
See above, as when the word of god officially lists it in it's copyrights and trademarks as a mechanical system to facilitate gameplay across multiple IP's (the same filing that has existed from origin to now), that it consistently crosses over with other IP's (self confessing you're ignoring those because you like those IP's doesn't make them less of a crossover), and directly plans crossovers with other IP's (which it's done since it's inception).
Wow....that literally had nothing to do with my argument or the argument the poster I replied to was making which was what is a crossover or not, in their example they believe being inspired by something automatically makes the thing brought about by inspiration a crossover, which it is not, but I'm glad you could post a bunch of nonsense that had zero to do with any of the points being made in that quote block. Good job.
Wow you somehow took what I said, misquoted it and then wrote out an answer to something completely different, and then somehow that's my fault that you've the reading comprehension of a frog and the slight-of-hand skills of a badger? Did your favourite character from WITW live in a big house?
My point stands, you deliberately misquoting me because you don't have an answer doesn't invalidate my point.
It seems like a tantrum really, you drop your enjoyment because one addition to the game, maybe you didn't enjoy the game that much in the first place. Anyway, seems like something deeper going on, I would talk with my therapist for sure.
So you believe someone not liking their hobby anymore because said hobby no longer matches their interests is a mental disorder that needs therapy? *deep sigh*.......What?
Sorry, remember that part I brought up earlier I wanted to save for later...
... You don't get to go around using mental illness as a weapon to beat people over the head with, asserting that disagreeing with you is akin to mental illness, and then jump in to accuse those who view with disdain the anger and hatred that people are spewing out as misusing the application of mental illness.[/quote]
[/quote]Ummm....what?! When was I using mental illness as a weapon? What in the blue ever loving echi double hockey sticks is this?[/quote]
I noticed the one thing you didn't quote of mine was earlier. You snipped one of yours (as well as rewriting parts of my quotes, don't think I didn't notice) where you attacked that users mental capacity for the fact they enjoy cross-IP works. They retaliated in kind and you immediately went to victim playing. I established that earlier.
Hence my standpoint above which hasn't changed, and my lack of respect towards you (which has intensified with each of the arrogant things you've done, from lying, to misquoting me, to being wilfully ignorant, to outright cognitive dissonance).
I guess you're maybe just not used to someone who doesn't need attention and applause and will just say what they think consequences be damned, because I'm not concerned with getting onlookers on my side or egging the fight on, I'm just fed up with the outright lying, animosity and narcisstic self-entitlement of young purists who define their entire identity through a card game to the point of trying to exclude anyone they see as undesireable (anyone who shows happiness, joy, or has fun). Screaming about the longevity of the game while demanding products aren't made or formats not played unless it's for 'them'. Screaming that people are sheep for being self-expressive, because the only true self-expression is to mindlessly follow those demanding conformity around themselves.`People who get angry because, shock horror, the majority of other players don't define their real life identities solely by their involvement with a card game.
[quote from="Dontrike »" url="/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/820636-read-this-announcement-at-your-own-risk-it?comment=231"]I know it's consistent with your side of the arguments 'one rule for us, another rule for everyone else' mentality that drives your sides collective consciousness, but as someone who literally lives with the feeling of reality trying to crush them from existence everyday, seeing anyone bandying around mental illness as a weapon (or ill conceived defense) is appaulling, and that behaviour will drive away new players and destroy the games enduring fandom far quicker than any disagreement over IP crossovers, favourite deck colours or favourite formats ever could.
Argument is fine, tearing someone else apart is fine. Using the mental health of third parties is not.
No, seriously, WHAT?! What rules am I imposing for others but not following? I'm having some real trouble trying to not get banned for spitting out obscenities, how was I doing any of that? The poster I replied to said it was a mental condition and I was questioning it.
What is happening here? What is this nonsense?
The fact you're talking to an autistic person, feeling that you've the right to condescend to me because of that and then claim my complaint of your behaviour is 'nonsense' is called 'ableism', and unlike the fictious disabled person in your head that you can bully, I'm standing up to you front and center, and you're clearly in a panic not knowing what to do because I didn't just take it and then run away.
Though despite your attitude, I don't think anything is gained for any of us by banning you. A warning and a timeout should be enough. Though be thankful to the admins, because they're not sparing me of you, they're sparing you of my onslaught.
One question I certainly have is what reprintability these will have, at least in original form. Will they get the licenses for that? I don't think they have in other non-Hasbro owned IP, so is it therefore possible that this is their "new way" of printing another slate of Reserves? Even if later cards are allowed to duplicate functionality, if they aren't specifically worded as reskins of these previous products ala Godzilla, do we know how that will work? It's a nuanced worry, but one that I have as these come online. And this doesn't just include issues with the paper product or even Arena, but the larger milieu. If, for example, Gandalf the White or Sauron are planeswalkers as they might be expected to be, then what does that mean in an age of planeswalker focused Magic, i.e. are these now to be part of the continuing pantheon? This could become an issue if they go for a second War of the Spark kind of thing. If you don't have the rights to those planeswalkers, you either have a "hard division" going on between IP worlds or you don't. These are the issues with a shared universe.
To answer your question re: third party IP's and reprints I'll be deffering to the contracts that the various UFS publishers made over time (including the unreleased staff cards).
When using a third party IP the set itself can only be manufactured and distributed for a set amount of time established within the IP licensing contract. That means, once the contract ends, Wizards can't use the art, names or any references to that IP. For instance, if they had a W40k version of Naturalize with Orcish art, they could reprint Naturalize ad-infinitum, but could not use the Orcish art as it depicts a GW held property. If they made a card that was called, say, The Great Clean One with a new ability Soap Suds and a 40K style frame, they could reuse the soap suds mechanic, and any stats on the card itself, but it's art, name, and anything else 40Kish would be disallowed.
Also, they can, as with TWD cards, make 'functional reprints' any time they want. Using this card as an example, Wizards could reprint this card when the licence deal ends... but they must change the card name, the art, and may not use 'Walker' as a creature token because 'walkers' are a 'terminological' identifier of TWD, and I'm reasonbly sure nobody is stupid enough to go to court and try to make the case that TWD's fans are unfamiliar with that term.
This revives the argument of why doing these as seperate cards has caused debate: a reskinned version of this doesn't replace the original card, it would be playable alongside it, which obviously breaks the spirit of the game in some way (functional 8 copies/2 copies, format depending). Though, nobody seems to care that you could essentially wack 20 copies of Elvish Mystic in a deck using variants. They only seem to care when it's characters, IP's or deck types they don't personally enjoy...
Super Smash Bros. was literally made from the start to be a crossover though.
MTG was literally designed off of D&D campaigns and has heavy D&D influence especially in early sets, particularly Legends. Do you not think that perhaps MTG was meant to be a crossover-enabler for fantasy-esque settings?
'buster
No, and this is still a disingenuous take. The fumbling for a cohesive identity of a game in its infancy is not indicative of its identity as it coalesced over decades, which is why a lot of those early sets have direct references that feel out of place in hindsight (though how much that bothers a player is subjective). And this take also conflates influence and homage with expanding the game to include external IPs.
Universe Beyond represents a change for the game, if the TWD Secret Lair was dipping the toe in this is a belly flop. We can all have different responses to it, but let's not pretend this is an organic change in the game or that the game was always meant for it. People can embrace the UB concept without all that.
Your points don't make sense. First you're saying it's bad for the game to expand and evolve, particularly with IPs, yet say it's not right to assume the identity of a game from its infancy. Isn't that what you're doing? "The game shouldn't expand because that's not what it's about yet its original intent shouldn't be the basis for which the game develops and evolves."
Make up your mind man.
'buster
That's not at all what I said. What I said was that the game took a few sets to really find its footing/identity but that for decades after it had established its identity and set expectations for players. And that identity was independent from IP crossovers (though MtG obviously has pulled considerable inspiration from other IPs/mythologies/pop culture/etc over the years), until recently.
The reason I made that point was to disagree with the assertion that those early days of trial and error when it came to how the game interacts with other IPs/real world concepts can be used to justify Universe Beyond because I feel that is a weak argument. UB isn't less of a big shift for the game because Frankenstein's Monster was a card in 1995. Despite the growing pains of the early days, MtG developed an identity over decades distinctly independent of direct crossover, to the point where the obvious lifts from other IPs don't really feel like they fit in hindsight. That's the basis of my disagreement that early sets like Legends show that MtG was meant for IP crossover like UB, it's a weak and disingenuous line of reasoning. If that's not feeling clear for you, by all means let me know which aspects you need more clarity on.
I'm not against the game expanding, far from it, I just tend to dislike expansions that feel dissonant with the core of the game. And I don't feel IP crossovers fit with that core, certainly others may.
Since those early sets, Magic has appeared in: Multiple tactics, strategy and hack n slash video games. A magazine only cross-promotion with Yu-Gi-Oh (A gold card Dark Magician, a 'dragon' 6 star Shivan Dragon monster). Official crossover material for D&D. A series of game books (published by company who produces Queens Blade books). A staff only UFS (now AniVersus) character card. Referenced/parodied in at least two anime. A proposed & developed, ultimately unreleased board game that crossed over with the Monster In My Pocket brand. A crossbrand drinks promotion with World of Warcraft. A white dwarf only army list for Slivers...
These are a handful of examples from around the world, across MTG's history. The only difference is this time those franchies appear in MTG card form. Which is why I find it so amusing that a tiny subset of players who've proudly pushed their IP into the frames of others are now having a major backlash that those same IPs are appearing in theirs. To say that MTG wasn't designed to facilitate crossover's is to literally ignore the patenting documents that force everyone else to pay Hasbro royalties (because most of it's mechanical fundamentals (like tapping a card to show it's used) are properiety).
As for what is original and divergent about lifting a picture of Christoper Lambert from the movie Merlin, making a set about a Magic School with a cross promotion for that other IP (promotion abandoned eleventh hour after other IP frontperson damaged said IP), or, Magic's most iconic villian being copied from an 80's sci-fi show villian. The whole thing was always designed to be a crossover of multiple IP's, it just wasn't considered big enough by the other IPs brand managers to make it a worthwhile investment for them to grant a license to use most of the time (as opposed to Games Workshop's recent scattershot approach of licenses for everyone).
I don't understand this position. These new toys take ABSOLUTELY NOTHING away from existing players. Fun and enjoyment is not a zero-sum game.
This likely did take away products they would otherwise enjoy though, like Planechase or other products, so that may not be necessarily true. I would much rather see parts of the game that haven't been explored, not other franchises I can explore as much as I want outside of the game, from all of it or none at all. If I wanted to play a LotR card game I would have played either of them or go off and play the MMO (Lord of the Rings Online) and there is plenty to digest about 40k, but I choose not to.
But that makes your argument simply: It's ok to deny people product that they want to play with, as long as it's not the product 'I' want to play with.
Also, relatively sure neither of those IP's had a card game that functioned using MTG's system... until now.
This adds something new and nice for crossover fans and fans of the other IPs, attracting new blood to the game (which is an objectively good thing).
Are there fans of strictly crossovers? Like they don't like the two IPs separately but putting together? They enjoy crossovers in general? Also, I don't think this will bring in that much new blood, likely new cash, but not new players when looking at this that would buy less of this product.
That your argument seemed to now imply that if you like two IP's you shouldn't want them to crossover because you can enjoy them apart is folly. If that was the case, people wouldn't be arguing since childhood about which hero/villain/characters are better across franchises, and in my experience across a breadth of media, the biggest causes of failure for established IP's are antagonizing their consumer base and/or purist consumers who bully out those newly interested for not liking 'the right part' of said media (in thie case of this thread, it seems to be obsessive with Dominaria lore, conveniently ignoring the cross-IP references in all the non-Dominaria lore). Cross IP promotion is very rarely stated as a reason for total IP failure.
Additionally, the mythos that Magic -does- have is that multiple universes exist and the player/planeswalkers pull creatures and spells through time and space to use them to do battle. Dipping into other IPs is 100% unequivocally exactly what Magic is already about, and arguments to the contrary are disingenuous and misinformed at best.
Well that's incredibly wrong.
No, it's not. As that's literally how WotC/Hasbro has their copyright filed. That is their literal canonical mechanics, as reiterated as recently as 2020 by marketing materials. You're now at the point of literally sitting telling us how great Magic lore is, and then telling is that the lore of Magic is 100% wrong as compared to your personal headcanon.
Mages are not summoning Steven Universe or the Red Ranger from ever Power Rangers season they are summoning beasts/spells from what they know, usually from things they met.
Then by your own established logic, they must of either 1) Gone to the places of residence of those other entities to meet them (within that IP), or 2) Those things came to the spellcasters residence for them to know of these other entities (within Magic IP). That means, on the weight of your own argument, the game's fundamental core is literally steeped in there being a multiverse of endless possibility.
Kamahl summoning fire cats during Odyssey block is because he's seen them in some capacity or knows the spell to do so, but he's not calling forth Herby the car or a Shoyru Neopet.
Thanks for reminding me, I totally forgot about the Neopets/Kellogs/Hasbro cereal crossover in the UK from when I was a wee one.
They summon within the Magic universe or just their world, this isn't Rick & Morty or every other franchise that just has to have a multiverse right now.
Um, except the word of God says you're wrong, as it's been established since the time of Yawgmoth and Urza that Planeswalkers are indeed summoning across time and space, and the aether fluxx itself is a name for the space between dimensions of existence. The 'planes' and 'aether flux' are themselves copyrighted as a multiverse, with those names being the IP's 'terminological names' for those phenomena. Ironically, they weren't able to establish rights to the concept of 'planeswalkers', as there was multiple IP's that already did that thing for it to become a narrative mainstay.
In essence, planeswalking is exactly like Rick and Morty, which is why the shows creators have even taken jabs at properties such as MTG and narrative devices like The Storyteller's Convention (both in the same episode).
Some of you need to analyze your thoughts about 'HATE' 'Hate' is a strong feeling and word. MLK said 'Let no man pull you low enough to hate him' Hate is what brings evil and breeds *****ty people.
Well this is just a poor argument. "You can't use the word hate because technically...." is nothing that adds to the discussion in any way. Aw man, I can't say I hate stubbing my toe, because it's not the right use of the word. Are you kidding?
You just spent an entire section going off at someone for using words incorrectly (despite them being entirely accurate). That sounds a lot like a case of 'pot, kettle, black' to me...
Its a freaking card game. People been making 'Fake Cards' of like Superman and Wolverine and Batman for like ..years..HELL , INQUEST MAGAZINE did it themselves back in the day ..they had fake cards printed up in the back of the Magazine for years!! You can search them up and everything.
People have also been making incredibly overpowered fake cards too, so what's your point? You admit they were fake and therefore couldn't be played with in a tournament setting (which these will be) isn't really a point in "WotC should do it" argument.
Above bolded by me. That bolded text also indicates you've got no idea how product management and development works, because these products were part commissioned (as was the Commander products, Planechase, Battlebond, Archenemy, Secret Lair, From The Vault and every other ancillary revenue stream) based on observations of what the players were doing. The same logic that Wizards is literally explaining in their articles on the recent TSR set (the timeshifted sheet). At this point, you're literally telling the people who did the work that their wrong about their reasons for doing the work, when they're the only people who can define those reasons. Your argument is becoming more detached from observable fact and straying into trying to impose your feelings (which are clearly strong) in pace of those facts.
Some people here are gonna start tweeting Maro and all the people in Magic they can ...and then they'll get blocked and think that because they got blocked or some ***** that its a 'Win'
Yes, there are crazy people in the world no matter what fandom or corner, what's your point again?
I'm going to put this here because I want to circle back to this later, because as someone who lives with and works with those with mental illness, I find it pretty antagonizing (and disrespectful) the attitudes that are being taken here...
Sometimes ...when I was younger I always wondered why us nerds got picked on and beaten up ...the freaking way that some of you have been acting? I can see why there's a bit of that still today.
Didn't you just say people should communicate, but now it should get you beaten? What?
If you go around screaming in peoples faces in public, insulting them and belittling them, screaming "I was just communicating" when they retaliate will get you zero sympathy for your situation because your actions have repercussions that weasel wording will not always save you from.
MTG was literally designed off of D&D campaigns and has heavy D&D influence especially in early sets, particularly Legends.Do you not think that perhaps MTG was meant to be a crossover-enabler for fantasy-esque settings?
Being inspired by something does not make a product a crossover. Hot Fuzz isn't a crossover because it was inspired by action movie cliches. D&D isn't a crossover because it was inspired by Lord of the Rings. Magic being inspired by people that played D&D makes it about as much of a crossover as I am a shoe.
See above, as when the word of god officially lists it in it's copyrights and trademarks as a mechanical system to facilitate gameplay across multiple IP's (the same filing that has existed from origin to now), that it consistently crosses over with other IP's (self confessing you're ignoring those because you like those IP's doesn't make them less of a crossover), and directly plans crossovers with other IP's (which it's done since it's inception). The ONLY thing Wizards ever made clear wasn't part of the crossover was it's own story canon, which admittely would be terrible if they tried to canonise other IP's into their own. But they've never, not in the history of the games publication, ever said that the mechanical focus can't be crossed over into other games, other IP's or other media.
It seems like a tantrum really, you drop your enjoyment because one addition to the game, maybe you didn't enjoy the game that much in the first place. Anyway, seems like something deeper going on, I would talk with my therapist for sure.
So you believe someone not liking their hobby anymore because said hobby no longer matches their interests is a mental disorder that needs therapy? *deep sigh*.......What?
Sorry, remember that part I brought up earlier I wanted to save for later...
... You don't get to go around using mental illness as a weapon to beat people over the head with, asserting that disagreeing with you is akin to mental illness, and then jump in to accuse those who view with disdain the anger and hatred that people are spewing out as misusing the application of mental illness. I know it's consistent with your side of the arguments 'one rule for us, another rule for everyone else' mentality that drives your sides collective consciousness, but as someone who literally lives with the feeling of reality trying to crush them from existence everyday, seeing anyone bandying around mental illness as a weapon (or ill conceived defense) is appaulling, and that behaviour will drive away new players and destroy the games enduring fandom far quicker than any disagreement over IP crossovers, favourite deck colours or favourite formats ever could.
Argument is fine, tearing someone else apart is fine. Using the mental health of third parties is not.
Exactly. The new guy, or any guy for that matter, needs to understand there is a line to be drawn as far as what we will accept Wizards of the Coast does with our game. If they decide to sell out on what the game has always been and make a flat out mockery out of it then it needs to be clear there are people who will not allow that as opposed to your sheepish conformist mentality of blindly accepting whatever WotC tells you to like. I’m free to think that is having no standard and being weak to the bone.
As opposed to you telling us all what to like and blindly conforming to your vision... That just sounds like trading one master for another.
I'm fine with these crossover cards. More players and diversity of interests is better for everyone. If they have their own little side-format that's fine, as that's no different to UNCommander, cEDH or Commander Draft - it's just format variance.
Don't like the cards, don't buy them. Simple. Not scream at those, in person or online, that might be wanting to learn the mechanics of MTG through something they're already familiar with, or those who get one gifted to them by a loved one because of that other IP, or just Mr Casual, who might actually like giant IP crossovers.
I get the purist mentality, there's nobody stopping you playing a WOTC-Only card list if you want, but nobody is entitled to give out orders on either side of the fence, and expressing someones individuality through their interests - even if that's contrary to yours - isn't 'sheepishness', it's good self-esteem.
Now, where's my Morrigan Aensland with Vampire creature typing - I neeeeedddd thisssss....
It is clear you don’t have a clue about what is going to happen once these cards are released.
First off, don't talk down to me, as it's not only clear I'm your senior in terms of age, but also in terms of the game itself and its associated design.
We are not talking about “just format variance” or little side formats or UNCommander. If that is what it was nobody would mind it. The way WotC is doing this they are forcing EVERYBODY playing Commander games to deal with this garbage because everything is thrown on the same pile. You’ll never again be able to sit down with strangers joining your game without addressing this issue.
Which, as I correctly pointed out, is also true of cEDH, UNCommander and any other 'not to everyones taste' elements of the game. These cards are no different to any other argument, wether it be silver borders, gold borders, proxies, alternate arts or mechanical concepts like land destruction.
That I can speak to that pattern is because I know 'exactly' how this plays out, and I'm all for more diversity and an increased player base, because hopefully it means more players celebrating their collective interests rather than self-entitled, spoilt brats trying to bully others out of enjoying a hobby.
If people wants these other IP’s games then make games for the other IP’s. Not **** up a game that has been there for 25+ years.
Just like the stack, removing mana burn, the introduction of Planeswalkers and ending of Extended was going to kill Magic, I find your rantings less doomsday, and more pompousgrandstanding...
Exactly. The new guy, or any guy for that matter, needs to understand there is a line to be drawn as far as what we will accept Wizards of the Coast does with our game. If they decide to sell out on what the game has always been and make a flat out mockery out of it then it needs to be clear there are people who will not allow that as opposed to your sheepish conformist mentality of blindly accepting whatever WotC tells you to like. I’m free to think that is having no standard and being weak to the bone.
As opposed to you telling us all what to like and blindly conforming to your vision... That just sounds like trading one master for another.
I'm fine with these crossover cards. More players and diversity of interests is better for everyone. If they have their own little side-format that's fine, as that's no different to UNCommander, cEDH or Commander Draft - it's just format variance.
Don't like the cards, don't buy them. Simple. Not scream at those, in person or online, that might be wanting to learn the mechanics of MTG through something they're already familiar with, or those who get one gifted to them by a loved one because of that other IP, or just Mr Casual, who might actually like giant IP crossovers.
I get the purist mentality, there's nobody stopping you playing a WOTC-Only card list if you want, but nobody is entitled to give out orders on either side of the fence, and expressing someones individuality through their interests - even if that's contrary to yours - isn't 'sheepishness', it's good self-esteem.
Now, where's my Morrigan Aensland with Vampire creature typing - I neeeeedddd thisssss....
I don't think it is toxic to point out whining. I don't think it is toxic to point out entitled behaviors. Being whiny, and behaving as though you are owed things that you haven't earned? That is toxic.
And I don't think it's toxic to call out hypocrisy or narcissism. I don't think it's toxic to raise criticisms of a design, or air distrust in the direction a product is taking. I think it's far more toxic to call people 'whiners' or 'entitled' because they aired a criticism and you took it personally (like a narcissist), with the dubious argument that someone else's criticism somehow devalued the purchase you made... which is kinda sad, if you're enjoyment of a product is based in taunting others that they don't have it.
Don't think anybody has whined in here that they're owed anything. Most criticism is either 1) they're mechanically unique cards released on a limited timeframe, and 2) some people are skeptical about the precedent it creates regarding future IP crossovers. That you try to dismiss those criticism as 'whining' - while hypocritically sitting there whining yourself that not enough people are treating you like a celebrity because you endorse the product - is a self-defeating argument that will not earn you respect here.
And as presented across platforms the number one reason for people being annoyed by limited time releases isn't cost, or 'not earning it', it's just being punished because your payday/rent day/whatever falls just before/after when this week-sale begins, making it a forced missed oppourtunity. Unless people are willing to make poor life/financial decisions, which tends to be a narcisisstic behaviour that leads to whining in public spaces (such as shops or forums) that not enough people are celebrating their purchase... oh, wait...
We don't support this archetype in the giant cube, but we do have this card. I can feedback that our experience with it as follows:
Giant cube has it listed as a 1R Instant for slots. Functionally, the group treats it as 1R: Draw a card. If third time activating this, gain a 8/8 Trample + Haste. As a self-recurring draw spell has been the primary function of the card, which works well in almost any deck built with red. The times three trigger happens rarely, but is exceedingly fun when it does.
It's also been hard cast as a value beater, been Sneak Attacked in, is popular in the GR Ramp decks.
It's a nice card, regardless of if you put it in your 2 CMC or 7 CMC slots. I strongly applaud it.
I was hoping to get this up before WTL's article, but hey ho, late as always
The list of includes on a larger basis I've put in spoiler tags, as this set was really good for the extra large (1440) cube. A lot of cards helped support the tribes-that-bind that make the cube operable, and the party mechanic adds value to decks that don't pursue a particular tribe. Some cards also were essentially swapped just to freshen up the cube by rotating out cards that don't see enough play (for whatever reason).
There is a number of cards I've singled out for comment though, as these are cards that in testing were a tad more impactful than the other bread & butter cards.
WHITE
Angel of Destiny - Being an angel it works with Lyra Dawnbringer, being a cleric is also interesting. Being a life gain machine that's also a double-striking flyer is also interesting. I imagine this card would be good for smaller cubes with a BWG life gain package or just for those with a life drain archetype. For us, it's an interesting value card that can be built around.
Maul of the Skyclaves - For those with RW equipment support, or who just want some value equipment, this is pretty good. I've seen it played on turn three after a turn 2 creature was removed, allowing it to attach to a 2/1. Suddenly that 2/1 is a 4/3 flyer, which is difficult for a tapped down control player. I've also seen it stolen with Vulshok Battlemaster, which like any good play with that card, was utterly backbreaking. As far as equipment goes, this attach-on-enter variant of Living Weapon is great for those aggressive decks.
Luminarch Aspirant - At first this didn't really stand out to us. Then someone remembered we have cards like Isamaru, Hound of Konda, Mirran Crusader and High Sentinels of Arashin, all of which work well with +1/+1 counters. And then there's Kitchen Finks, which this got frustrating to deal with really, really quickly. If you've a persist package or +1/+1 theme, this card is great, without it's a good option for value creatures.
Squad Commander - RW tokens wants to say hello, because this card rocks in that deck. Maybe not a consideration for smaller cubes, but for larger cubes this can easily knock out 2/3 tokens on entry, and when that second clause gets going (especially with something like Najeela, the Blade-Blossom or Legion Warboss on the board, it can be a really annoying 'everyone's a Gideon' effect.
BLUE
Confounding Conundrum - This is anti-sacland tech. It's anti ramp tech. It gives blue an option for fighting ramp and aggro decks that's not just counters, and forces my opponents to think. The usefulness of this card does seem proportional to the density of Cultivate/Rampant Growth and sacland effects in the cube, but with a high enough density, this card does create some interesting tension.
Glasspool Mimic - I am aware of many people's feelings on this card. I'm aware of why they feel that way. However, this card has been VERY interesting for us and hard to evaluate when it's come up. As a creature, it's incidentally been good for rogues, been handy for randomly cloning True-Name Nemesis off a top deck, even making a second Etherium Sculptor in the artifact deck has been useful. But what's really been interesting is that it's covered blue from land screw a few times: players have dropped this turn 3 after keeping a 2 land hand, where they've been able to pass priority through turn 3 because they've a 2CMC counter in hand. Because of that alone, this card has made for far more interesting games.
Thieving Skydiver - Whatever I say will likely just reiterate the thoughts of WTL, so just click here to go to his article. Aside from that, stealing Moxen, stealing Talismans, stealing Swords of This and That; in the end, it all leads to stealing the game (and possibly your opponent's sanity).
BLACK
Nullpriest of Oblivion - An early game aggressive creature that outpaces Child of Night in every way. Great for Vampire players, Cleric Players, but best of all, those who enjoy value. Being an early game card that gains life and evades is great, turning into a reanimation spell late game is great, and that reanimation spell doesn't break the bank either. Definitely a card I expect to be seeing in cubes of all sizes.
Nighthawk Scavenger - Vampire support, Rogue support, and a direct upgrade for those with Vampire Nighthawk who don't want to play them side by side. This grows quickly though, like a Tarmogoyf that flies and gains life. An absolute nightmare when equipped with Lightning Greaves.
Bloodchief's Thirst - This has been a nice little value card. It's handy for MBC, shutting down some irritating early aggro pushes and utility creatures. Later in the game, it's a fair removal spell. The reason I've mentioned it is because in larger cubes the cards that have two modes of play are increasingly valuable as they can functionally fill a gap the draft may have created: this card helps alleviate that in spades.
RED
Cleansing Wildfire - There is a lot of utility lands that can be shot down with this. From Maze of Ith to City of Brass, this can slow your opponent's mana down, buying you time. If that player got greedy and didn't put basics in their deck? Well... you just got a cantripped Stone Rain at 1R. And that's what makes this better than most of its cousins, the cantrip: drawing a card to replace this means it rarely feels bad, and regardless of what you snipe, it's likely to at least disrupt the opponent the majority of the time.
Valakut Awakening - At worse, this card is 2R: Draw a card. At best, you can pitch a dead hand to the bottom of your deck to try for better (which also triggers any 'when you draw a card' effects). You can also play it turn 1 as a land when you're playing RU Spells decks, and alike most of the MDFC, this is where it's strength has lay, enabling hands that otherwise wouldn't be kept, increasing gameplay tension and the meaningful decisions players must make.
Shatterskull Charger - This card has been ridiculous. 4/3 Trample + haste for 1RR is big for aggro. It also plays well with Purphoros, God of the Forge and Terror of the Peaks. Even getting a 5/4 Trample + Haste for 3RR isn't bad. Strap on Giant and Warrior for those were it's relevant, and you've got a really tasty red beater, especially when combined with...
Kargan Intimidator - The other great red beater this set brought along. The top line might be a throwaway much of the time, but for anyone with a higher density of changelings, this messes with them so hard. Even on it's own, it's modality on turn 3 is brutal: trample over walls, walk past things that can kill it, or pump itself vs an empty board. This isn't going anywhere for a while I don't think, and I'd be surprised if this doesn't barge it's way into smaller, more powered cubes as well.
Fireblade Charger - Is it Goblin Guide? No. It's a goblin card that supports warrior and equipment decks. What is also is, is hilarious: Dropping this turn 5 off a top deck, auto equipping Obsidian Battle-Axe to it, then paying for the Loxodon Warhammer as well, is nasty (6/2 Trample, Lifelink, Haste), and then if it dies... it deals 6 damage to whatever you want. The trick with this card is timing: play it early for Footlight Fiend style shenanigans, or play it late to grab a weapon and swing/self detonate. Not sure if it'll make it into the most tight of cubes, but those with Goblins, Equipment or who like shenanigans should consider it.
Moraug, Fury of Akoum - Ok, here it comes.... this card, is weird. I know most people don't like it. I know the problem with it not creating an additional main phase. I also know I've seen it kill on turn 4. How? Player A got Sneak Attack on the board turn 3 when Player B tapped out. On Turn 4 Player A used Sneak Attack to throw down this and Combat Celebrant. So what happened? Well, they attack, with Moraug and the Celebrant that exerts, mowing down the blockers and getting some damage in, with a second combat phase for Moraug from the Celebrant. Then they play a land during their second main phase. Then they attack with both this and the just untapped Celebrant (it can't exert). Then they kill their opponent. Witnessing that, says to me to that while the card is unlikely to be amazing on it's own, it's interactions with exert creatures, saclands and Sneak Attack alone are so ridiculous, that when it does work, it's literally game-breaking.
GREEN
Tajuru Paragon - It's a 3/2 elf for 1G. That makes it good for aggro decks who wanna keep swinging. It also boosts multiple tribes (six of them, all relevant). It also has a kicker effect that while not fundamentally busted, can be useful if this is a late game top-deck (dig for the big thing). A very good value card, like a personal gift for tribal or large cubes, and should definitely be considered for those looking for more green aggro options.
Turntimber Symbiosis - As before, WTL likely has already explained this card better than me (I've not read their article yet). Lest to say, when pulling out Troll Ascetic or Drana, Liberator of Malakir is as good as spawning Wurmcoil Engine or King Kong the card is great. But the ability to keep an opening hand that's got only 2 lands because you can drop this as a land turn 1 if necessary is nuts. Get this in your cube because I can't envision it coming back out again.
@LeyShade: very insightful, thanks. I think this is a good way of looking at these ETBT MDFCs when considering whether to include them or not.
Edit: holy *****, 56 posts in 14 years? You should definitely open your mouth more often!
My account got lost in the great Twitchgeddon. My prior post count was much higher. Though I generally keep stump outside this forum section because I seem to upset people a lot and would prefer to avoid confrontation.
I'm glad I could contribute positively in this discussion though. Thank you for the positive words
To add to the discussion on MDFC cards as the resident idiot in this forum, I would like to propose an alternate way of evaluating these cards.
Much alike how my group treats Hybrid cards within our larger cube as either A or B when finding slots rather than gold cards, perhaps it would be useful for people to think of MDFC cards as lands first, spells second. As in, the question should be, "Is the possibility to play XY spell worth this land entering tapped". For instance, cubes that are heavily reliant on basic lands matter cards (Spitting Earth, Aven Trailblazer) would find lower value in these cards. Heavily multicolour cubes would find higher value (incidental mana fixing).
For the average cube designer, I would suspect that evaluating these cards as lands first would simplify the 'cubeable' checklist too, 1) Does my cube have this effect? and 2) Does entering the battlefield tapped effect the tempo of the decks playing it?
If one is no (I don't have this effect), then the MDFC card is almost a shoe in: As WTF mentioned, it improves the viability of opening hands, while not changing or impacting upon cards already in the cube. If one is yes (I have this effect), then it becomes a matter of taste (wether your group/cube interact better with cycling or mana fixing).
If two is no (This doesn't slow down the decks playing it), then the MDFC card is almost a shoe in for the same reason as 1. If two is yes, and the ETBT clause would slow down a deck (Aggro mostly, I presume), then maybe the MDFC isn't right for your cube/group.
I think by evaluating things this way, as lands first and spells second, it would improve the understanding of what these cards are aiming to do design wise so we can make more nuanced decisions, as the cards themselves are largely good (lands that are spells are innately good), so I believe decisions come down to interaction with individual cubes and play scenarios than it does the raw power of the cards themselves. Something we should be happy for, that we have enough good cards to be deciding on preference.
Or disregard this, because I'm an idiot and should be awarded a literal Jester's Cap everytime I speak
The movement of this into 'live services' mindsets of subscription models and loot boxes, that offer nothing tangible except the 'ability' to spend money buying the same thing as everyone else, are nothing more than means to financially exploit insecure people and I strongly suggest against endorsing it, funding it or promoting it, less Hasbro pushes ever more anti-consumer nonsense at people...
Because not even having Tiro blocked allows me to escape his awful views or his promotion of those advocating them.
That is usually a sign of either/or two things being true; that the artist is eccentric and likes to consistently push into new styles + work on projects of dissimilar types, or, that the artist relies on 'borrowing' work from others and tracing over it leaving a scattershot art effect.
I wouldn't include you in that subset of players Mikey - you've actually got reasons for your disagreements with this.
And I honestly Mikey wish that both sides would take a more reasoned and responsible attitude to the whole thing because you are right, people are losing their minds over something they could just as easily choose not to buy or not to personally play with. But if they're allowed to be bombastic, surely the most enigmatic villain of MTGS should get to play, si?
Your last sentence is a sentiment that I can share. My claws need sharpening once in a while too.
Perception doesn't matter in regards to facts. I can perceive the sky as red and green, but that matters little if one has damaged eyes or is looking through a filter. Perception is relative, essentially, as you know.
Homage/Influence/Parody =/= Crossover
This is why the events of The Avengers XXX: A Porn Parody are not canon in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. A little more seriously, though, there's a reason aspects of MtG being influenced by or homages to other works does not feel out of place where UB does. It's adaptation versus transplantation, and honestly it's been surreal for me to see so many posters not get that. To give credit to Tiro, he analogized the point well by saying the Theros gods might as well have been the actual Greek gods by the logic that homage/influence and crossovers are interchangeable.
Perhaps you're right, though, that MtG was always intended not to be a game of its own with its own independent identity but instead a multi-IP platform of crossovers only delayed by MtG not being big enough. But at the end of the day, that hasn't been my experience with the game for almost a quarter century and I don't intend for it to be part of my experience going forward.[/quote]
I am aware of the difference, but I was not asked 'what is the difference between homage, parody and plagerism', I was dictated at in essence that 'everything in Magic is completely original or divergent', which is what I challenged.
Also, I will note, it's not out of place because of adaption. That's a slight misunderstanding. It's not out of place because their copying the main elements of work they've already copied everything else from. Hence why WOTC used to pay royalties to Tolkien's group for things contained within the reserved list, and why Kithkin aren't hobbits or gnomes (the latter they'd have to pay Games Workshop for ironically, who then have to pay... Tolkien's group).
Throwing LOTR in with Magic fare isn't going to cause a big stir: they're both fantasy rooted with a lot of overlap due to the above. What does feel out of place is 40K, and that's something others have mentioned - if they'd used any of the fantasy stuff, nobody would of really batted an eye. And thus the problem isn't really an argument over UB, it's an argument over 'dissonance of theme'. Those who like anachronistic works and grand crossovers are going to love it, and thematic purists will hate it, and that's going to be the real divide.
But Magic itself was always designed for this, it was always the end goal - it always is with media of any type. I'll always love Magic's lore (most of it), and I'm glad it grew to be as grand as it is. But it's time for the purists to let go for the sake of the game, as there's nowhere left for it to go, because when we're reskinning Harry Potter and The Worst Witch, or reskinning Merlin, it's just better for all sides if we use the originals. Because as much as people don't want to admit it, WOTC isn't pulling in new players with core Magic releases anymore and Magic's fanbase is to blame for that. If this people want this game to survive, especially during a period of reduced in person interaction, it has to be allowed to reach new audiences and has to do so in a way those audiences are open to.
Without new players, this game will die, like all those before it who focused too hard on their self-contained bubble of purists.
Direction changes with time. In fact, in this case, this would be Magic returning somewhat to it's original direction - a game system for representing multiple franchises. There's also likely the business case: Hasbro could lose the patency that grants them royalties from everyone else if they don't act on the original filing soon, being able to show that the system is being used for it's original purpose. Ya see, that patency of game mechanics is tied to the reason 'for' the mechanic. If they can't prove their using it for intent, they'll have a far harder time trying to justify why those who are have to pay them royalties. Hence why it's a win-win for Hasbro: expanding their market into other IP's to grab those consumers, while also taking care of some backroom business.
I do agree intent wise on these being silver-bordered, that I agree with. Though, if they were trying to prevent confusion with the UN sets, redesigning the holo thing at the bottom of the card seems as wise a choice as any.
This is accurate and why I made an argument internally against using functional reprint ideals for these products. I view that the skins methodology used for the Godzilla cards or the current, compatible but separate implementation being better. I obviously rooted for the latter as it allows the franchise to grow. If UB does well that increases chances of player uptake of core Magic because of UB acting as a gateway, more likely to be acceptable for teens due to IP fandom and for relatives to throw a deck in a christmas stocking or birthday bag.
Conversely, by prohibiting the production of this product you would be taking away the potential enjoyment of someone else. When two parties find enjoyment in contrary things it is often the case that one party will lose out if they can't find a compromise.
It also stands true that just because you prefer 'Magic' products to these newer ones, you would still prefer if those 'Magic' products were not produced in favour of the ones you do enjoy. The sliding scale is just that, a sliding scale - it doesn't invalidate my point that it's core, you're measuring only your own enjoyment, and not considering that every other person will have the exact same view.
Hence compromise is everyone getting a product for their tastes, rather than only one group gets a product for their tastes: a fast way to wither and die, hence WOTC abandoning their prior 'standard support only' ideology to support other popular formats with releases.
It's also not a reason to prohibit it. As the design team of Wizards would tell you, they've anticipated and facilitated you're disagreement with the design choice of using the holo-stamp to differentiate these cards from Magic canon cards.
We don't need all the different card game systems, when there is one that clearly works and all others have to pay royalties to. You're argument is tantamount to saying that because a King paved a road in stones, the peasents may only pave roads with coins. It's illogical, unnecessary and from a design standpoint; dysfunctional.
A better argument to make would be to create a separated sub-team that focuses on UB releases and Magic canon releases separately, with priority on the latter. It's actually what the current design shift of most card based games is moving to, especially with how parent companies are restructuring their portfolios. And again, you're dislike for something doesn't mean it shouldn't exist, when you can just as easily choose to not purchase it if you don't wish to.
Again, why wouldn't I enjoy two things I enjoy crossing over? It's a convention that's existed for millennium. You can even go back to the foundation works Kaldheim was based on to see it crossing over with another popular mythos of its time. Jam is nice, so is bread, and peanut butter - put them together, it's a whole different sensation.
The reason people debate and compare and create fiction of those IP's crossing over is because they're not being facilitated by current offerings. It's why crossovers are one of the highest selling trends in all mediums, are performed in all mediums, marketed in all mediums, and are the inevitability of all mediums.
Visual Novels are crossover of books and video games. Any 'feat' in a song is a crossover of two artists brands. Every Pizza Hut with Mars ice cream desert is a crossover promotion. Even the computer you type on, will have advertised itself using this same mechanism.
And to counterpoint your narrative over crossovers = failure, I'd just like to point out that the highest grossing product in every medium is a form of crossover...
Also, because you only seem to understand the cultural expectations of your own immediacy, I'd like to point out that from the perspective of those who work in these industries, people seeking to enter your domain of influence is considered a sign of success: the weaker property features in the stronger. So using your own words somewhat, it would be the featuring franchises that are admitting they can't stand alone (which, in case you hadn't realised, Games Workshop's holdings are in decline, hence their massive PR push and rush licensing offers at the moment)
No, you tried to impose that for them to dislike the lore, that they clearly didn't know all of it. You made an assumption about that persons capabilities and knowledge. You are now attempting to justify that miscast assumption of yours by attacking me for your mistake.
I'm fairly sure what allows them to think that way is because they already did it, thrice, and nobody batted an eye except to give them money. And to be honest, I can understand their patience with the small section of elitists that constantly scream that they have a higher knowledge while consistently getting the very fundamental basics wrong. So I'm fairly sure they can pull it off, because they're attempting to launch secondary system that maintains compatability with Magic, while being able to expand into it's own giant crossover-nonsense thing (see, AniVersus, who WOTC feels threatened by).
I'm getting the feeling you were one of those VS or Overpower players that got angry when they saw kids playing Spiderman and Batman on the same team...
Mate I can literally go get copies of the original books, copies of books from Magic's midlife, copies of more recent books - all of them state there's a multiverse. Saheli's storyline and the current Phyrexian storyline is over there being a multiverse. We have just remastered a set about that literal concept. The Word of God has spoken, your distaste and head canon doesn't overwrite authorial intent or direction.
I mean your first paragraph doesn't just fly in the face of the established canon of decades of MTG lore and the faces of the games makers, but also shows you don't understand the core basics of real world quantum physics or the suppositions of how spacetime works
I mean if you don't know about a subject, cool, but don't stand preaching as an authority while making it up on the spot: it doesn't end well. There's a whole kids story about it.
Actualllllyyyy (imagine it in 'her' voice), that is legally called a cross-promotional offer, and is legally also defined as a form of crossover (where two brands, IP's or features thereof are manifest in the same works as per agreed by their respective owners). This was formalised in law in both the UK and US during the argument between Disney and Warner Bros over the representations of Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny in the film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
If you like, I'm even prepared to literally cite the dictionary definition of the word if you want to try to test my knowledge further on this field.
Sorry, did you not recognise the Magic The Gathering homepage? I mean, I thought you were the know-all of magic lore: how sad you must be to click a link that takes you to the main page of the actual people who make the game and decide what is and isn't. Or maybe you're just choosing to be ignorant, something you were complaining others did before.
I got two entire sets of proof, plus a notable moment of Magic canon and the place it occurs.
So are you being deliberately ignorant or do you just literally not have any idea what you're talking about?
That is the legal definitions that Wizards uses in its patency for their works. The term Aetherflux has been around since the first sets and books. It's WOTC legally held right to sue anyone using that term in their creative works, because it's their name for their multiverse, as listed in the legal filing with the various trademark and copyright offices I have to deal with.
The fact you didn't know this, one of the most fundamental pieces of magic lore, means you do not have the breadth of knowledge us dinosaurs have. It means you're just another wet that hasn't learned how the world works (either fictional or real). Canon of a product changes to suit the business decisions of those at the top. Be grateful that the consistency of Magic canon to retain it's multiversal standings, from it's literal inception, has circled round to pay dividends while it's undoubtably the most popular form of medium expression
OK so you made a mistake right there. They don't go to different 'worlds', they go to different 'planes'. Planes contain 'worlds', and can have multiple of them. Planes, is short for 'Planes of Existence', which is also a part of the D&D canon (which MTG semi-officially crosses over with). This was held by WOTC for about 10 years before it really became notable in their Planescape franchise, which set down the fundamental rules of 'Gates/Portals' (now part of the MTG lore), and the ability for some entities to move through Planes without needing such. Including the Planeswalkers of MTG, the Lady of Pain from Planescape, and certain 'Gods' from D&D (rules which then feature in Theros and it's sequel).
So when a company literally uses the same storytelling rule sets, copyrights and trademarks them as such, says themselves in both statements and within the written material that makes the canon that this a multiverse, you're 'but I don't like it' attitude and complete non-understanding of the subject matter doesn't change the facts.
However, obsession does cause people to freak out whenever their narcissism isn't being indulged, from attention-seeking 'sezuachan sauce' antics to screaming because a card game released a product that 'wasn't' for them, or someone enjoyed an experience they didn't, or god-forbid, someone combined two things to enhance their enjoyment, those filthy hedonists.
Also, multiversal cable wasn't even the episode I was talking about, which proves you don't understand the subject matter to refer to it when the episodes point is to make fun of narcisstic behaviour and self-obsessive, on the spot prattling. Also, you are again trying to undermine the word of god by claiming that the Rick and Morty writers are wrong about their own writing while relying on their words to justify your misunderstanding. Honestly, I'm glad you're not one of my students, I'd have to have serious words with admin.
And yes, it has. But that's the difference between world walking and planeswalking. Planeswalking is a copyrighted term by WOTC, which is why everyone jumps through ridiculous hoops to try to avoid saying that word when dealing with multiversal concepts in their own works.
So you're argument is they're wrong for using the word hate in regards to your attitude, because only your allowed to use it? What?
I mean, also it's fanciful that you've just chosen to half-quote the dictionary after literally spending nearly a thousand words claiming the dictionary is wrong, but you do you - different strokes for different folks.
So you ask my argument, then make a strawman in its place, attack it, and then parade around like a toddler with a soiled nappy demanding a medal..
My point is you not liking something doesn't prohibit others enjoying it in their own space or people making products for them. I think you know that, but I think you've run out of road and have realised bad insults aren't working on me, so you're not just being ignorant and obtuse, but also dismissive of those who're your seniors presenting you with evidenced, black and white facts.
They asked for civil conversation, you launched a barrage of insults at them, people retaliated to that, and then your victim playing and trying to blame everyone else for your actions. That sums it up nicely.
So not only are you a prolific liar, who's ignorant, I'm fairly sure you're just trying to antagonise people and stir the pot by asking non-questions of people on both sides and then insult-barraging anyone who calls out the contradiction. Or has the temerity to stand by their convictions.
Wow you somehow took what I said, misquoted it and then wrote out an answer to something completely different, and then somehow that's my fault that you've the reading comprehension of a frog and the slight-of-hand skills of a badger? Did your favourite character from WITW live in a big house?
My point stands, you deliberately misquoting me because you don't have an answer doesn't invalidate my point.
... You don't get to go around using mental illness as a weapon to beat people over the head with, asserting that disagreeing with you is akin to mental illness, and then jump in to accuse those who view with disdain the anger and hatred that people are spewing out as misusing the application of mental illness.[/quote]
[/quote]Ummm....what?! When was I using mental illness as a weapon? What in the blue ever loving echi double hockey sticks is this?[/quote]
I noticed the one thing you didn't quote of mine was earlier. You snipped one of yours (as well as rewriting parts of my quotes, don't think I didn't notice) where you attacked that users mental capacity for the fact they enjoy cross-IP works. They retaliated in kind and you immediately went to victim playing. I established that earlier.
Hence my standpoint above which hasn't changed, and my lack of respect towards you (which has intensified with each of the arrogant things you've done, from lying, to misquoting me, to being wilfully ignorant, to outright cognitive dissonance).
I guess you're maybe just not used to someone who doesn't need attention and applause and will just say what they think consequences be damned, because I'm not concerned with getting onlookers on my side or egging the fight on, I'm just fed up with the outright lying, animosity and narcisstic self-entitlement of young purists who define their entire identity through a card game to the point of trying to exclude anyone they see as undesireable (anyone who shows happiness, joy, or has fun). Screaming about the longevity of the game while demanding products aren't made or formats not played unless it's for 'them'. Screaming that people are sheep for being self-expressive, because the only true self-expression is to mindlessly follow those demanding conformity around themselves.`People who get angry because, shock horror, the majority of other players don't define their real life identities solely by their involvement with a card game.
The fact you're talking to an autistic person, feeling that you've the right to condescend to me because of that and then claim my complaint of your behaviour is 'nonsense' is called 'ableism', and unlike the fictious disabled person in your head that you can bully, I'm standing up to you front and center, and you're clearly in a panic not knowing what to do because I didn't just take it and then run away.
Though despite your attitude, I don't think anything is gained for any of us by banning you. A warning and a timeout should be enough. Though be thankful to the admins, because they're not sparing me of you, they're sparing you of my onslaught.
To answer your question re: third party IP's and reprints I'll be deffering to the contracts that the various UFS publishers made over time (including the unreleased staff cards).
When using a third party IP the set itself can only be manufactured and distributed for a set amount of time established within the IP licensing contract. That means, once the contract ends, Wizards can't use the art, names or any references to that IP. For instance, if they had a W40k version of Naturalize with Orcish art, they could reprint Naturalize ad-infinitum, but could not use the Orcish art as it depicts a GW held property. If they made a card that was called, say, The Great Clean One with a new ability Soap Suds and a 40K style frame, they could reuse the soap suds mechanic, and any stats on the card itself, but it's art, name, and anything else 40Kish would be disallowed.
Also, they can, as with TWD cards, make 'functional reprints' any time they want. Using this card as an example, Wizards could reprint this card when the licence deal ends... but they must change the card name, the art, and may not use 'Walker' as a creature token because 'walkers' are a 'terminological' identifier of TWD, and I'm reasonbly sure nobody is stupid enough to go to court and try to make the case that TWD's fans are unfamiliar with that term.
This revives the argument of why doing these as seperate cards has caused debate: a reskinned version of this doesn't replace the original card, it would be playable alongside it, which obviously breaks the spirit of the game in some way (functional 8 copies/2 copies, format depending). Though, nobody seems to care that you could essentially wack 20 copies of Elvish Mystic in a deck using variants. They only seem to care when it's characters, IP's or deck types they don't personally enjoy...
Since those early sets, Magic has appeared in: Multiple tactics, strategy and hack n slash video games. A magazine only cross-promotion with Yu-Gi-Oh (A gold card Dark Magician, a 'dragon' 6 star Shivan Dragon monster). Official crossover material for D&D. A series of game books (published by company who produces Queens Blade books). A staff only UFS (now AniVersus) character card. Referenced/parodied in at least two anime. A proposed & developed, ultimately unreleased board game that crossed over with the Monster In My Pocket brand. A crossbrand drinks promotion with World of Warcraft. A white dwarf only army list for Slivers...
These are a handful of examples from around the world, across MTG's history. The only difference is this time those franchies appear in MTG card form. Which is why I find it so amusing that a tiny subset of players who've proudly pushed their IP into the frames of others are now having a major backlash that those same IPs are appearing in theirs. To say that MTG wasn't designed to facilitate crossover's is to literally ignore the patenting documents that force everyone else to pay Hasbro royalties (because most of it's mechanical fundamentals (like tapping a card to show it's used) are properiety).
As for what is original and divergent about lifting a picture of Christoper Lambert from the movie Merlin, making a set about a Magic School with a cross promotion for that other IP (promotion abandoned eleventh hour after other IP frontperson damaged said IP), or, Magic's most iconic villian being copied from an 80's sci-fi show villian. The whole thing was always designed to be a crossover of multiple IP's, it just wasn't considered big enough by the other IPs brand managers to make it a worthwhile investment for them to grant a license to use most of the time (as opposed to Games Workshop's recent scattershot approach of licenses for everyone).
But that makes your argument simply: It's ok to deny people product that they want to play with, as long as it's not the product 'I' want to play with.
Also, relatively sure neither of those IP's had a card game that functioned using MTG's system... until now.
That your argument seemed to now imply that if you like two IP's you shouldn't want them to crossover because you can enjoy them apart is folly. If that was the case, people wouldn't be arguing since childhood about which hero/villain/characters are better across franchises, and in my experience across a breadth of media, the biggest causes of failure for established IP's are antagonizing their consumer base and/or purist consumers who bully out those newly interested for not liking 'the right part' of said media (in thie case of this thread, it seems to be obsessive with Dominaria lore, conveniently ignoring the cross-IP references in all the non-Dominaria lore). Cross IP promotion is very rarely stated as a reason for total IP failure.
No, it's not. As that's literally how WotC/Hasbro has their copyright filed. That is their literal canonical mechanics, as reiterated as recently as 2020 by marketing materials. You're now at the point of literally sitting telling us how great Magic lore is, and then telling is that the lore of Magic is 100% wrong as compared to your personal headcanon.
Then by your own established logic, they must of either 1) Gone to the places of residence of those other entities to meet them (within that IP), or 2) Those things came to the spellcasters residence for them to know of these other entities (within Magic IP). That means, on the weight of your own argument, the game's fundamental core is literally steeped in there being a multiverse of endless possibility.
Thanks for reminding me, I totally forgot about the Neopets/Kellogs/Hasbro cereal crossover in the UK from when I was a wee one.
Um, except the word of God says you're wrong, as it's been established since the time of Yawgmoth and Urza that Planeswalkers are indeed summoning across time and space, and the aether fluxx itself is a name for the space between dimensions of existence. The 'planes' and 'aether flux' are themselves copyrighted as a multiverse, with those names being the IP's 'terminological names' for those phenomena. Ironically, they weren't able to establish rights to the concept of 'planeswalkers', as there was multiple IP's that already did that thing for it to become a narrative mainstay.
In essence, planeswalking is exactly like Rick and Morty, which is why the shows creators have even taken jabs at properties such as MTG and narrative devices like The Storyteller's Convention (both in the same episode).
You just spent an entire section going off at someone for using words incorrectly (despite them being entirely accurate). That sounds a lot like a case of 'pot, kettle, black' to me...
Above bolded by me. That bolded text also indicates you've got no idea how product management and development works, because these products were part commissioned (as was the Commander products, Planechase, Battlebond, Archenemy, Secret Lair, From The Vault and every other ancillary revenue stream) based on observations of what the players were doing. The same logic that Wizards is literally explaining in their articles on the recent TSR set (the timeshifted sheet). At this point, you're literally telling the people who did the work that their wrong about their reasons for doing the work, when they're the only people who can define those reasons. Your argument is becoming more detached from observable fact and straying into trying to impose your feelings (which are clearly strong) in pace of those facts.
I'm going to put this here because I want to circle back to this later, because as someone who lives with and works with those with mental illness, I find it pretty antagonizing (and disrespectful) the attitudes that are being taken here...
If you go around screaming in peoples faces in public, insulting them and belittling them, screaming "I was just communicating" when they retaliate will get you zero sympathy for your situation because your actions have repercussions that weasel wording will not always save you from.
See above, as when the word of god officially lists it in it's copyrights and trademarks as a mechanical system to facilitate gameplay across multiple IP's (the same filing that has existed from origin to now), that it consistently crosses over with other IP's (self confessing you're ignoring those because you like those IP's doesn't make them less of a crossover), and directly plans crossovers with other IP's (which it's done since it's inception). The ONLY thing Wizards ever made clear wasn't part of the crossover was it's own story canon, which admittely would be terrible if they tried to canonise other IP's into their own. But they've never, not in the history of the games publication, ever said that the mechanical focus can't be crossed over into other games, other IP's or other media.
Sorry, remember that part I brought up earlier I wanted to save for later...
... You don't get to go around using mental illness as a weapon to beat people over the head with, asserting that disagreeing with you is akin to mental illness, and then jump in to accuse those who view with disdain the anger and hatred that people are spewing out as misusing the application of mental illness. I know it's consistent with your side of the arguments 'one rule for us, another rule for everyone else' mentality that drives your sides collective consciousness, but as someone who literally lives with the feeling of reality trying to crush them from existence everyday, seeing anyone bandying around mental illness as a weapon (or ill conceived defense) is appaulling, and that behaviour will drive away new players and destroy the games enduring fandom far quicker than any disagreement over IP crossovers, favourite deck colours or favourite formats ever could.
Argument is fine, tearing someone else apart is fine. Using the mental health of third parties is not.
First off, don't talk down to me, as it's not only clear I'm your senior in terms of age, but also in terms of the game itself and its associated design.
Which, as I correctly pointed out, is also true of cEDH, UNCommander and any other 'not to everyones taste' elements of the game. These cards are no different to any other argument, wether it be silver borders, gold borders, proxies, alternate arts or mechanical concepts like land destruction.
That I can speak to that pattern is because I know 'exactly' how this plays out, and I'm all for more diversity and an increased player base, because hopefully it means more players celebrating their collective interests rather than self-entitled, spoilt brats trying to bully others out of enjoying a hobby.
Just like the stack, removing mana burn, the introduction of Planeswalkers and ending of Extended was going to kill Magic, I find your rantings less doomsday, and more pompous grandstanding...
As opposed to you telling us all what to like and blindly conforming to your vision... That just sounds like trading one master for another.
I'm fine with these crossover cards. More players and diversity of interests is better for everyone. If they have their own little side-format that's fine, as that's no different to UNCommander, cEDH or Commander Draft - it's just format variance.
Don't like the cards, don't buy them. Simple. Not scream at those, in person or online, that might be wanting to learn the mechanics of MTG through something they're already familiar with, or those who get one gifted to them by a loved one because of that other IP, or just Mr Casual, who might actually like giant IP crossovers.
I get the purist mentality, there's nobody stopping you playing a WOTC-Only card list if you want, but nobody is entitled to give out orders on either side of the fence, and expressing someones individuality through their interests - even if that's contrary to yours - isn't 'sheepishness', it's good self-esteem.
Now, where's my Morrigan Aensland with Vampire creature typing - I neeeeedddd thisssss....
And I don't think it's toxic to call out hypocrisy or narcissism. I don't think it's toxic to raise criticisms of a design, or air distrust in the direction a product is taking. I think it's far more toxic to call people 'whiners' or 'entitled' because they aired a criticism and you took it personally (like a narcissist), with the dubious argument that someone else's criticism somehow devalued the purchase you made... which is kinda sad, if you're enjoyment of a product is based in taunting others that they don't have it.
Don't think anybody has whined in here that they're owed anything. Most criticism is either 1) they're mechanically unique cards released on a limited timeframe, and 2) some people are skeptical about the precedent it creates regarding future IP crossovers. That you try to dismiss those criticism as 'whining' - while hypocritically sitting there whining yourself that not enough people are treating you like a celebrity because you endorse the product - is a self-defeating argument that will not earn you respect here.
And as presented across platforms the number one reason for people being annoyed by limited time releases isn't cost, or 'not earning it', it's just being punished because your payday/rent day/whatever falls just before/after when this week-sale begins, making it a forced missed oppourtunity. Unless people are willing to make poor life/financial decisions, which tends to be a narcisisstic behaviour that leads to whining in public spaces (such as shops or forums) that not enough people are celebrating their purchase... oh, wait...
We don't support this archetype in the giant cube, but we do have this card. I can feedback that our experience with it as follows:
Giant cube has it listed as a 1R Instant for slots. Functionally, the group treats it as 1R: Draw a card. If third time activating this, gain a 8/8 Trample + Haste. As a self-recurring draw spell has been the primary function of the card, which works well in almost any deck built with red. The times three trigger happens rarely, but is exceedingly fun when it does.
It's also been hard cast as a value beater, been Sneak Attacked in, is popular in the GR Ramp decks.
It's a nice card, regardless of if you put it in your 2 CMC or 7 CMC slots. I strongly applaud it.
The list of includes on a larger basis I've put in spoiler tags, as this set was really good for the extra large (1440) cube. A lot of cards helped support the tribes-that-bind that make the cube operable, and the party mechanic adds value to decks that don't pursue a particular tribe. Some cards also were essentially swapped just to freshen up the cube by rotating out cards that don't see enough play (for whatever reason).
There is a number of cards I've singled out for comment though, as these are cards that in testing were a tad more impactful than the other bread & butter cards.
WHITE
Angel of Destiny - Being an angel it works with Lyra Dawnbringer, being a cleric is also interesting. Being a life gain machine that's also a double-striking flyer is also interesting. I imagine this card would be good for smaller cubes with a BWG life gain package or just for those with a life drain archetype. For us, it's an interesting value card that can be built around.
Maul of the Skyclaves - For those with RW equipment support, or who just want some value equipment, this is pretty good. I've seen it played on turn three after a turn 2 creature was removed, allowing it to attach to a 2/1. Suddenly that 2/1 is a 4/3 flyer, which is difficult for a tapped down control player. I've also seen it stolen with Vulshok Battlemaster, which like any good play with that card, was utterly backbreaking. As far as equipment goes, this attach-on-enter variant of Living Weapon is great for those aggressive decks.
Luminarch Aspirant - At first this didn't really stand out to us. Then someone remembered we have cards like Isamaru, Hound of Konda, Mirran Crusader and High Sentinels of Arashin, all of which work well with +1/+1 counters. And then there's Kitchen Finks, which this got frustrating to deal with really, really quickly. If you've a persist package or +1/+1 theme, this card is great, without it's a good option for value creatures.
Squad Commander - RW tokens wants to say hello, because this card rocks in that deck. Maybe not a consideration for smaller cubes, but for larger cubes this can easily knock out 2/3 tokens on entry, and when that second clause gets going (especially with something like Najeela, the Blade-Blossom or Legion Warboss on the board, it can be a really annoying 'everyone's a Gideon' effect.
BLUE
Confounding Conundrum - This is anti-sacland tech. It's anti ramp tech. It gives blue an option for fighting ramp and aggro decks that's not just counters, and forces my opponents to think. The usefulness of this card does seem proportional to the density of Cultivate/Rampant Growth and sacland effects in the cube, but with a high enough density, this card does create some interesting tension.
Glasspool Mimic - I am aware of many people's feelings on this card. I'm aware of why they feel that way. However, this card has been VERY interesting for us and hard to evaluate when it's come up. As a creature, it's incidentally been good for rogues, been handy for randomly cloning True-Name Nemesis off a top deck, even making a second Etherium Sculptor in the artifact deck has been useful. But what's really been interesting is that it's covered blue from land screw a few times: players have dropped this turn 3 after keeping a 2 land hand, where they've been able to pass priority through turn 3 because they've a 2CMC counter in hand. Because of that alone, this card has made for far more interesting games.
Thieving Skydiver - Whatever I say will likely just reiterate the thoughts of WTL, so just click here to go to his article. Aside from that, stealing Moxen, stealing Talismans, stealing Swords of This and That; in the end, it all leads to stealing the game (and possibly your opponent's sanity).
BLACK
Nullpriest of Oblivion - An early game aggressive creature that outpaces Child of Night in every way. Great for Vampire players, Cleric Players, but best of all, those who enjoy value. Being an early game card that gains life and evades is great, turning into a reanimation spell late game is great, and that reanimation spell doesn't break the bank either. Definitely a card I expect to be seeing in cubes of all sizes.
Nighthawk Scavenger - Vampire support, Rogue support, and a direct upgrade for those with Vampire Nighthawk who don't want to play them side by side. This grows quickly though, like a Tarmogoyf that flies and gains life. An absolute nightmare when equipped with Lightning Greaves.
Bloodchief's Thirst - This has been a nice little value card. It's handy for MBC, shutting down some irritating early aggro pushes and utility creatures. Later in the game, it's a fair removal spell. The reason I've mentioned it is because in larger cubes the cards that have two modes of play are increasingly valuable as they can functionally fill a gap the draft may have created: this card helps alleviate that in spades.
RED
Cleansing Wildfire - There is a lot of utility lands that can be shot down with this. From Maze of Ith to City of Brass, this can slow your opponent's mana down, buying you time. If that player got greedy and didn't put basics in their deck? Well... you just got a cantripped Stone Rain at 1R. And that's what makes this better than most of its cousins, the cantrip: drawing a card to replace this means it rarely feels bad, and regardless of what you snipe, it's likely to at least disrupt the opponent the majority of the time.
Valakut Awakening - At worse, this card is 2R: Draw a card. At best, you can pitch a dead hand to the bottom of your deck to try for better (which also triggers any 'when you draw a card' effects). You can also play it turn 1 as a land when you're playing RU Spells decks, and alike most of the MDFC, this is where it's strength has lay, enabling hands that otherwise wouldn't be kept, increasing gameplay tension and the meaningful decisions players must make.
Shatterskull Charger - This card has been ridiculous. 4/3 Trample + haste for 1RR is big for aggro. It also plays well with Purphoros, God of the Forge and Terror of the Peaks. Even getting a 5/4 Trample + Haste for 3RR isn't bad. Strap on Giant and Warrior for those were it's relevant, and you've got a really tasty red beater, especially when combined with...
Kargan Intimidator - The other great red beater this set brought along. The top line might be a throwaway much of the time, but for anyone with a higher density of changelings, this messes with them so hard. Even on it's own, it's modality on turn 3 is brutal: trample over walls, walk past things that can kill it, or pump itself vs an empty board. This isn't going anywhere for a while I don't think, and I'd be surprised if this doesn't barge it's way into smaller, more powered cubes as well.
Fireblade Charger - Is it Goblin Guide? No. It's a goblin card that supports warrior and equipment decks. What is also is, is hilarious: Dropping this turn 5 off a top deck, auto equipping Obsidian Battle-Axe to it, then paying for the Loxodon Warhammer as well, is nasty (6/2 Trample, Lifelink, Haste), and then if it dies... it deals 6 damage to whatever you want. The trick with this card is timing: play it early for Footlight Fiend style shenanigans, or play it late to grab a weapon and swing/self detonate. Not sure if it'll make it into the most tight of cubes, but those with Goblins, Equipment or who like shenanigans should consider it.
Moraug, Fury of Akoum - Ok, here it comes.... this card, is weird. I know most people don't like it. I know the problem with it not creating an additional main phase. I also know I've seen it kill on turn 4. How? Player A got Sneak Attack on the board turn 3 when Player B tapped out. On Turn 4 Player A used Sneak Attack to throw down this and Combat Celebrant. So what happened? Well, they attack, with Moraug and the Celebrant that exerts, mowing down the blockers and getting some damage in, with a second combat phase for Moraug from the Celebrant. Then they play a land during their second main phase. Then they attack with both this and the just untapped Celebrant (it can't exert). Then they kill their opponent. Witnessing that, says to me to that while the card is unlikely to be amazing on it's own, it's interactions with exert creatures, saclands and Sneak Attack alone are so ridiculous, that when it does work, it's literally game-breaking.
GREEN
Tajuru Paragon - It's a 3/2 elf for 1G. That makes it good for aggro decks who wanna keep swinging. It also boosts multiple tribes (six of them, all relevant). It also has a kicker effect that while not fundamentally busted, can be useful if this is a late game top-deck (dig for the big thing). A very good value card, like a personal gift for tribal or large cubes, and should definitely be considered for those looking for more green aggro options.
Turntimber Symbiosis - As before, WTL likely has already explained this card better than me (I've not read their article yet). Lest to say, when pulling out Troll Ascetic or Drana, Liberator of Malakir is as good as spawning Wurmcoil Engine or King Kong the card is great. But the ability to keep an opening hand that's got only 2 lands because you can drop this as a land turn 1 if necessary is nuts. Get this in your cube because I can't envision it coming back out again.
ARTIFACT
Myriad Construct - This breaks when in play with Urza, Lord High Artificer and Tolarian Academy. I don't feel the need to expound on that fact any further.
The list below is the bread & butter cards for those interested:
BLUE:
Sure-Footed Infiltrator > Academy Elite
Expedition Diviner > God-Eternal Kefnet
Cascade Seer > Spark Double
Tazeem Roilmage > Kadena's Silencer
Anticognition > Spell Rupture
Merfolk Windrobber > Distortion Strike
Zulaport Duelist > Controlled Instincts
Umara Wizard > Dreamtail Heron
Windrider Wizard > Teferi's Protege
Nimble Trapfinder > Mass Diminish
Enigma Thief > Frozen Aether
BLACK:
Malakir Blood-Priest > Fallen Askari
Expedition Skulker > Extremely Slow Zombie
Nimana Skitter-Sneak > Undercity Scavenger
Feed the Swarm > Mire In Misery
Taborax, Hope's Demise > Slate Street Ruffian
Demon's Disciple > Kheru Mind-Eater
Shadow Stinger > Silversmote Ghoul
Drana, the Last Bloodchief > Doom Blade
Thwart the Grave > Torment of Hailfire
Scourge of the Skyclaves > Nether Traitor
RED:
Goma Fada Vanguard > Blood Aspirant
Grotag Bug-Catcher > Bloodrage Brawler
Rockslide Sorceror > Tectonic Giant
Scavenged Blade > Temur Battle Rage
GREEN:
Scale the Heights > Harrow
Inscription of Abundance > Track Down
Tajuru Blightblade > Scute Mob
Veteran Adventurer > Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger
Strength in Solidarity > Sprout
WHITE:
Rockslide Sorceror > Burrenton Bombardier
Angelheart Protector > Zhalfirin Crusader
Kor Blademaster > Knight of the Holy Nimbus
Kor Outfitter > Old Guard
Warrior en-Kor > Tithe Taker
Tazri, Beacon of Unity > God-Eternal Oketra
Shepherd of Heroes > Knight-Captain of Eos
Emeria Captain > Sanctifier of Souls
Archpriest of Iona > Nyxborn Shieldmate
ORZHOV:
Cleric of Life's Bond > Arvad the Cursed
RAKDOS:
Zagras, Thief of Heartbeats > The Scorpion God
BOROS:
Kargan Warleader > Outlaws' Merriment
DIMIR:
Zareth San, the Trickster > Extract from Darkness
Anowon, the Ruin Thief > Etrata, the Silencer
ARTIFACT:
Sea Gate Colossus > Pathrazer of Ulamog
Stonework Packbeast > Pili-Pala
Relic Vial > Heraldic Banner
Relic Axe > Heart Piercer Bow
LAND:
Base Camp > Unknown Shores
My account got lost in the great Twitchgeddon. My prior post count was much higher. Though I generally keep stump outside this forum section because I seem to upset people a lot and would prefer to avoid confrontation.
I'm glad I could contribute positively in this discussion though. Thank you for the positive words
Much alike how my group treats Hybrid cards within our larger cube as either A or B when finding slots rather than gold cards, perhaps it would be useful for people to think of MDFC cards as lands first, spells second. As in, the question should be, "Is the possibility to play XY spell worth this land entering tapped". For instance, cubes that are heavily reliant on basic lands matter cards (Spitting Earth, Aven Trailblazer) would find lower value in these cards. Heavily multicolour cubes would find higher value (incidental mana fixing).
For the average cube designer, I would suspect that evaluating these cards as lands first would simplify the 'cubeable' checklist too, 1) Does my cube have this effect? and 2) Does entering the battlefield tapped effect the tempo of the decks playing it?
If one is no (I don't have this effect), then the MDFC card is almost a shoe in: As WTF mentioned, it improves the viability of opening hands, while not changing or impacting upon cards already in the cube. If one is yes (I have this effect), then it becomes a matter of taste (wether your group/cube interact better with cycling or mana fixing).
If two is no (This doesn't slow down the decks playing it), then the MDFC card is almost a shoe in for the same reason as 1. If two is yes, and the ETBT clause would slow down a deck (Aggro mostly, I presume), then maybe the MDFC isn't right for your cube/group.
I think by evaluating things this way, as lands first and spells second, it would improve the understanding of what these cards are aiming to do design wise so we can make more nuanced decisions, as the cards themselves are largely good (lands that are spells are innately good), so I believe decisions come down to interaction with individual cubes and play scenarios than it does the raw power of the cards themselves. Something we should be happy for, that we have enough good cards to be deciding on preference.
Or disregard this, because I'm an idiot and should be awarded a literal Jester's Cap everytime I speak