First off I appreciate the willingness to branch out and go all out on weirder art. I understand the idea behind the artwork and mixing shaded figures with flat elements and colors. Something like Klimt or Art Noveau-ish. That's cool. But holy carp this looks bad not gonna lie. Composition is fine but by God those flat elements loo like automatic MS Paint shapes and overall this picture reminds me of like bad Youtube thumbnails on meme videos or those old Tripod and Angelfire sites which were basically a collection of dissonant nonsense.
@ilovesaprolings Probably the same reason they would change the art on any female character in current MTG: too spicified/damsel in distress-y. Can't show females running away from anything, now can we? Females can only be strong and not show any weakness whatsoever, just like in real life. Also butt.
I guess the centuries of women being depicted as the weaker-thans only able to be saved by a male aren't enough for you eh? You feeling insecure about women being depicted in a strong, commanding fashion bruh? Not cool with an identified male being seen as the one running away?
Nothing of what you wrote here is even remotely in my post, explicitly or otherwise. In fact, if anything what you implied from it proves exactly my point. Whenever this issue comes up people like to complain about women being being depicted as weaker/sexualized, etc in art for centuries upon centuries. Sure, but this is MTG we're talking about, not Prhyne Before the Aeropagus or the Abduction of the Sabines. Get on with the times for God's sake. Please show me the years and years of "negative female depiction" in MTG that people still feel we need vindication for. Sure, there was Elvish Ranger way back in like the first 5 years of Magic. It's been like, what, 25+ years and people still complain of "constant females in chainmail bikinis", etc. What media are you even watching anyway, that you see this everywhere? Apart from the aforementioned card, in my 27 years of life I've never seen a chainmail bikini or enough damsels in distress to really feel this is a stereotype that's still being pushed. Quite the opposite in fact. Please be aware that now there are people young enough to never have seen Red Sonja (and from what I know, she's not a weak character anyway). As for the flavor reasons behind the depiction of Saffi, I agree, but it will always be nerd talk before anything else. To give a random example, you can give whatever in-world lore explanation of why, say, Gandalf came back from the dead in LOTR, but it will always come down to Tolkien wanting to give a Christian message of God's providence, lore reasons and explanations will always be subordinated to ideology and politics.
And I do like the illustration, it's good, I was just responding to another post with my theory of why it was changed.
@ilovesaprolings Probably the same reason they would change the art on any female character in current MTG: too spicified/damsel in distress-y. Can't show females running away from anything, now can we? Females can only be strong and not show any weakness whatsoever, just like in real life. Also butt.
Fun fact: the actual Harry Potter TCG that Wizards made back in 2001 experienced a huge boom in the pandemic, the prices have doubled if not tripled for some of the rarer cards. They even made their first fan created set with original comissioned art and it's actually pretty well designed and it's doing good. I suspect this statement is purely because of JK Rowling and politics.
WotC's gonna WotC I guess. Gotta respect that it's for charity at least.
I see this and all I can think of is that white dude Wizards employee a couple years ago who tweeted about how much there's too many white males in the company and how there should be more diversity and urged black people to apply so they could get hired because they're black (while doing nothing, of course, that would risk his own position at Wizards- it's OTHER white people who should be replaced right?)
WotC's gonna WotC.
I can't take any of the pearl clutching seriously when I haven't seen any one of you pearl clutching about scantily clad females. In fact it's hypocritical to be calling for more semi-naked ladies while complaining about a man without a shirt on which is much more common irl than women running around in war bikinis
How is it hypocritical? What if I want more scantily clad people on both sides? Peronally I'm not "pearl-clutching" for less scantily clad males, I want more of both!
If you're looking for soft core porn and near nude models there are other websites for that. We don't need to sexually gratify anyone with a 13+ card game. That's not what this game is for. If seeing a male character with a shirt off means you feel entitled to near nude women in a card game meant to be acceptable for children then idk what to tell you.
And so the hypocrisy tables are turned, so to speak. If you find near nude people in art, male or female, like Harald (or Jorn, or countless others) to be "sofct core porn" and detestable, why didn't you complain about him too?
And if you think displaying the human body necessarily implies a sexual, pornographic connotation, then I don't feel any shame in calling you and people who think like you puritans. That's literally what puritans thought. The OG pearl-clutchers.
I can't take any of the pearl clutching seriously when I haven't seen any one of you pearl clutching about scantily clad females. In fact it's hypocritical to be calling for more semi-naked ladies while complaining about a man without a shirt on which is much more common irl than women running around in war bikinis
How is it hypocritical? What if I want more scantily clad people on both sides? Peronally I'm not "pearl-clutching" for less scantily clad males, I want more of both!
Aaand he has one of the lamest names anyone in Germany would give their child in 2021. Pretty much as modern a name here as Jebediah would be in the States. Great card nonetheless, and of course the gravy train for people who are into shredded shirtless guys is still running at top speed.
'^^
I like the name Harald but it should heve been used for a human character, not a elf. Harald is a typical name for a gruff viking warrior-king, not a faeric Alfar.
The gods in this set feel more like goofy humans rather than gods. Not sure how I feel about them.
I mean, half the point of the Norse gods is that, first of all, as with certain other pantheons of gods (like the Greek gods), Norse gods are very close to the temperament and behavior of the humans.
Unlike most other pantheons, however, Norse gods aren't immortal. At all. On the contrary, when they die they go to Hel or Valhalla just like everyone else. And, unlike virtually every other pantheon of gods, the Norse gods are not inherently born immortal. They are ONLY able to stay youthful in body and long-lived enough to see Ragnarok because of magical apples grown by their fellow Norse goddess, Iðunn. If they did not eat these apples, Norse gods grow old and die of natural causes, just like everyone else.
Norse gods being fundamentally mortal but powerful beings is kind of one of the whole things that make them unique amongst pantheons.
While I agree with this description, this isn't unique to Norse myth.
Nothing of what you wrote here is even remotely in my post, explicitly or otherwise. In fact, if anything what you implied from it proves exactly my point. Whenever this issue comes up people like to complain about women being being depicted as weaker/sexualized, etc in art for centuries upon centuries. Sure, but this is MTG we're talking about, not Prhyne Before the Aeropagus or the Abduction of the Sabines. Get on with the times for God's sake. Please show me the years and years of "negative female depiction" in MTG that people still feel we need vindication for. Sure, there was Elvish Ranger way back in like the first 5 years of Magic. It's been like, what, 25+ years and people still complain of "constant females in chainmail bikinis", etc. What media are you even watching anyway, that you see this everywhere? Apart from the aforementioned card, in my 27 years of life I've never seen a chainmail bikini or enough damsels in distress to really feel this is a stereotype that's still being pushed. Quite the opposite in fact. Please be aware that now there are people young enough to never have seen Red Sonja (and from what I know, she's not a weak character anyway). As for the flavor reasons behind the depiction of Saffi, I agree, but it will always be nerd talk before anything else. To give a random example, you can give whatever in-world lore explanation of why, say, Gandalf came back from the dead in LOTR, but it will always come down to Tolkien wanting to give a Christian message of God's providence, lore reasons and explanations will always be subordinated to ideology and politics.
And I do like the illustration, it's good, I was just responding to another post with my theory of why it was changed.
I see this and all I can think of is that white dude Wizards employee a couple years ago who tweeted about how much there's too many white males in the company and how there should be more diversity and urged black people to apply so they could get hired because they're black (while doing nothing, of course, that would risk his own position at Wizards- it's OTHER white people who should be replaced right?)
WotC's gonna WotC.
And so the hypocrisy tables are turned, so to speak. If you find near nude people in art, male or female, like Harald (or Jorn, or countless others) to be "sofct core porn" and detestable, why didn't you complain about him too?
And if you think displaying the human body necessarily implies a sexual, pornographic connotation, then I don't feel any shame in calling you and people who think like you puritans. That's literally what puritans thought. The OG pearl-clutchers.
How is it hypocritical? What if I want more scantily clad people on both sides? Peronally I'm not "pearl-clutching" for less scantily clad males, I want more of both!
I like the name Harald but it should heve been used for a human character, not a elf. Harald is a typical name for a gruff viking warrior-king, not a faeric Alfar.
Except for the females, where we can only imagine them because apparently to WOTC the female body is somewhat of a taboo?
My bad. Good thing I'm not on Twitter!
While I agree with this description, this isn't unique to Norse myth.