- Emperor Norton
- Registered User
-
Member for 16 years and 24 days
Last active Fri, May, 18 2018 11:27:53
- 0 Followers
- 732 Total Posts
- 67 Thanks
-
Mar 16, 2018Emperor Norton posted a message on All Sets Are Good: Saviors of KamigawaI can see why Saviors gets such a bad reputation, but I think that it's ultimately a pretty fun little set. It would have been better with more Ninjas instead of the "hand size matters" theme, of course, but I remember getting a fair amount of casual use from stuff that hasn't aged well like Ghost-Lit Redeemer. For the most part, though, the set just suffers from an acute case of almost everything costing - too much.Posted in: Articles
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
*Throws Up*
I understand trying to save space on the card, but Magic is rapidly losing one of its best features for the past 20 years: card texts that were (mostly) clear, specific, and unambiguous.
Ignoring the fact that it misrepresents what the ability actually does by leaving out the Commander functionality, I loathe the first time I have a Partner/Aven Mindcensor interaction come up - the reminder text implies by omission that you aren't searching your library (just putting something into your hand from it), and I know I'm going to see someone try to lawyer it that way.
Or even worse, that could possibly be the official ruling depending on what the specific text is in the comprehensive rules.
This is different from things like Pestilence activated 4 times, as Pestilence will have Kazarov's ability trigger (and resolve) between each damage event (unless the Pestilence activations are specifically timed to go on top of Kazarov's triggers, so an opponent can still kill him with this sort of effect).
The card itself is kinda meh. I always appreciate a good vigilance + tap ability combo and a good token producer, but this one isn't inspiring me personally. I do like that she's riding a panther, though (excellent throwback), and that's a nice armor design that should look good in foil.
Cards that involve one person looking at hidden information aren't fun for the rest of the table, so I try to limit playing them to cases where there's a strong synergy and the occasional tutor (where I'll try to have a general idea of what I'd tutor for before hand).
And it's not just women who are having their appearance commented on - there was a fair bit of mockery in the Naban thread as well as praise for Jodah's good looks in his thread. The only reason I didn't comment in the Naban thread is that I couldn't quite decide what Disney villain he most looked like.
Here's the thing: every time a character is drawn, the artist's intentions can be boiled down to "this character is supposed to be attractive", "this character is supposed to be ugly", or "this character is supposed to be average". If the artist failed to actually make something attractive when it was supposed to be, it's all the more noticeable compared to, say, Dauntless Bodyguard, which is perfectly content with its mediocrity.
If an artist is clearly attempting to draw an attractive character, then yes, that character was "put on this earth" to be looked at. I'll stop objectifying fictional characters when they actually start having thoughts of their own and aren't an artistic representation of a game mechanic. So long they don't have feelings to hurt, commenting on their looks is fair game.
If you're going to complain, it makes more sense to complain about the artists that keep trying to make their female characters look like supermodels while being more than content to have mediocre male characters. We're far more likely to start commenting on male appearances if they weren't mostly bland by design.
Oh, and if a beautiful woman confessed her love for me (regardless of hair) I'd take a step back, analyze my escape options, and question who the crap she is.