Sometimes, I feel magic has become a parody of itself. Loan shark is a card that would fit in an unset, but in an official set? A land grubbing shark? How does that makes any sense? It's not even a simic mutant or hybrid, which at least made some sense in the past.
If I remember right from one of the Planechase sets, there was a Plane that was thematically focused around humanoid animals. Belenon I think it was? We know that barring Humans, the other races on that plane are Rhox, Loxodon and Aven. Thematically he'd fit in there.
It'd sort of be like putting creature type Goat Demon on a depiction of Satan.
I don't see anything inherently wrong with that. Just like how "Cerberus" was an entire group of multi-headed dogs on Theros, I could theoretically see a "race" of demons called Satans that have the creature type Goat Demon in some magic plane. Sure, it'd sound a bit silly to us but it's not problematic.
The Rakshasa of Tarkir are just based on the mythological ones, just like literally every single other creature in Magic. I absolutely don't understand how this change is necessary. And whether DnD does it or not doesn't matter. If it was done for real world cultural reasons then DnD faces the same issue. And if it doesn't, then why does Magic.
Also, the tribal thing continues to baffle me. When has "tribal" ever had a negative connotation? Savage I can understand but tribal???
There's kind of a big history of white western fantasy taking whatever the hell concepts it likes from nonwestern, nonwhite cultures and religions and just doing whatever the hell they want with it, basically just using the fact that it is a real religious/mythological thing to give it some kind of 'exotic' flair. But this can all get rather uncomfortable if you are from that background and don't get to see much representation of it, and then when you do it's just madeup fantasy creatures in a half remembered costume of it. Not to mention the problematic associations of nonwhite, nonwestern cultures happening to be portrayed as more mystical (and therefore it must be great to throw in their words), literally demonising spirits and deities (Baal is Canaanite deity, Astaroth is a Phoenician deity etc), lumping in all sorts of thing under the umbrella of western concepts, and the broader long history of using other culture's concepts as toys and props, misrepresenting and sometimes going out of their way to disrespect them.
Rakshasa as the DnD tiger demons stinks very much to me of a disrespectful attitude. Leaning on some version pulled out of thin air, with this very obvious Rakshasa=Indian India=Tigers element, plopped into western dominated fantasy lacking much of any real Hindu context that shapes their real meaning, showing a weird loyalty to continue to reinforce an existing popular inaccurate depiction. Just feels unmistakably orientalist tbh.
There's always subjectivity to this of course, but it's pretty easy I think to make a case for why it's not great and just not much of a reason to keep it this way.
I mean, the same thing happens in return with Western religious beliefs and mythology. I don't think its strictly just a Western thing. I'd argue that the presence of Angels in Ixalan recently was equally offensive if we take a similar approach. Aztecs don't have claim to Judeo-Christian mythology.
What people often mean when they say 'Fantasy' is DnD-style sword-and-sorcery. Eberron got flack in DnD for dabbing a bit more in Science-Fiction. I think people tend to prefer the two distinctly kept different. So long as the Universes Beyond stuff is kept distinct lore-wise from MTG lore and no-one is forced to play against Universes Beyond cards, then bring on more I say.
Its just too weird going up against Optimus Prime when playing a proper game of Magic using a canon character.
The most important thing is he wanted a Mythos for Great Britain, a culture and history for us.
So he stole a bunch of German culture and Nordic myths. Typical Anglo-saxon thievery.
Saxons were Germans and settled in Great Britain. Significant number of Vikings did so too. Both contributed to Great British culture and mythology.
What "Great british culture and mythology?" Did you not just say that there was none? Typical Anglo-Saxon two-faced lies. Buncha rejects run off and colonize the celtic isles and they think they're a brand new people native to albion.
You have no idea what either Anglo or Saxon means right?
If anglo-saxons still viewed themselves as anglo-saxons we wouldn't be having this conversation. Now they're the "english" and they think they comprise the whole of britain just because of a handful of bloody, incomplete conquests.
I'm Scottish. There was Scottish culture, Welsh culture, Irish culture but England (and Great Britain as a whole) lacked a unifying mythology. That's what Tolkien sought to try and do.
Great Britain has been invaded, colonised and re-colonised so many times that there isn't any point in singling out any one group for doing that. It was simply a way of the world and it happened to many other countries too.
I mean, if you think Human creature type is more important, that's kind of boring in this setting, but by all means valid.
Personally, I love how balanced it is, Humans Elves Hobbits Dwarves and Wizards are all very important and cool to me, both in the game and in this setting. I'm enjoying seeing the diversity.
I think its cause the only big draw character out of them really is Frodo. Sam's not really a big deal compared as an example.
It's always crazy to see people act like ONE interpretation of any oh so sacred SoUrCe MaTeRiAl undoes anything that came before it... At their limit yelling at a black person on a piece of cardboard, while their arms are full of all prior representations that still are there for them to cherish.
I for one have been thrilled to see this set make so many people, myself included, feel represented and delighted to see fantasy figures that look like us. Jfc it's a card game... imagine that being the breaking point! Very steaming hot takes in here. When the real issue should be how funny that the sigil of rohan has taken smoky form in the art! Lol
I don't mind the black representation but I find it weird that the only white humans are villains, characters who die or abhumans like elves or hobbits.
If I remember right from one of the Planechase sets, there was a Plane that was thematically focused around humanoid animals. Belenon I think it was? We know that barring Humans, the other races on that plane are Rhox, Loxodon and Aven. Thematically he'd fit in there.
Wouldn't be the first time we get an attack on Western and Celtic beliefs and mythology, so it doesn't surprise me.
Kindred just doesn't have the same ring to it.
I mean, the same thing happens in return with Western religious beliefs and mythology. I don't think its strictly just a Western thing. I'd argue that the presence of Angels in Ixalan recently was equally offensive if we take a similar approach. Aztecs don't have claim to Judeo-Christian mythology.
Its just too weird going up against Optimus Prime when playing a proper game of Magic using a canon character.
I'm Scottish. There was Scottish culture, Welsh culture, Irish culture but England (and Great Britain as a whole) lacked a unifying mythology. That's what Tolkien sought to try and do.
Great Britain has been invaded, colonised and re-colonised so many times that there isn't any point in singling out any one group for doing that. It was simply a way of the world and it happened to many other countries too.
Saxons were Germans and settled in Great Britain. Significant number of Vikings did so too. Both contributed to Great British culture and mythology.
I think its cause the only big draw character out of them really is Frodo. Sam's not really a big deal compared as an example.
I dunno, I just think a more balanced approach would have been better.
I don't mind the black representation but I find it weird that the only white humans are villains, characters who die or abhumans like elves or hobbits.