Quote from"Saproling" seems to be a generic term for small plant/fungus creatures rather than a specific species.
Indeed what a Saproling is varies from plane to plane - sometimes even within a plane; on Ravnica in the old days Saprolings differed from guild to guild; Selesnya Saprolings are small creatures consisting of vines wrapped around crystals (as can be seen in the artwork) - the vines are based on plants which is why the Selesnyan Saprolings use seeds and pollen; Golgari Saprolings with the guilds focus on lightless subterranean rotfarms are classical fungal beings; Simic Saprolings are open to interpretation, though they are cyan/green-blue globules and seem to consist entirely of their trademark Cytoplast.
Guildless Saprolings could follow either style guide or none at all.
Remember: A Saproling doesn't need to be fungal. If anything its root tells us more about the fact that it likes death and decay. It can be (and sometimes is) a plant and apparently sometimes part gem.
--
Now you don't only seem to have a problem with Saprolings being not depicted fungal enough, but with Saprolings depicted too much like a Fungus. For example the "earthstars" are not there for there own sake. Those are the Saprolings that Vitaspore Thallid tosses around. Look at the mechanic and art and tell me that "every now and then it throws a new creature onto the field" isn't what the Thallid mechanic is actually reads like.
You can see similar depictions of Saprolings on Thallid cards again and again e. g. a big "white" Thallid in front of a few smaller "green" Saprolings on Pallid Mycoderm; maybe now you also understand the boring palette of colors: When an artist gets told to paint a "green" Fungus it will end up being green more often than not.
less to play for each Dragon or Demon permanent you control." would be preferable.
I'll second Melkor. While sometimes their Collector's premium frames and treatments are neat and all by themselves sometimes even great, you have to wonder how much thought is put into variety over time. This concentration of black-and-white treatments is a little unimpressive foresight/planning.
I read this point a lot, but is the issue really the 60 cards or the non-Singleton nature? Because one often ignored way EDH is prohibitive is by deck-size. I like playing 60 card Singleton variants. It's perfect for casual junk decks, especially considerig I often play with beginners with slim collections that are not redundant enough for 4-ofs and not extensive enough for 100-card decks.
And beside that, there is value to consisency. If you are a Tammy/Johnny that wants the chance to see their combo go off more regularly, you'll have better chances with a smaller deck with built-in redundancy.
I second thepoint that deck diversity is a larger issue, which is a problem with any format that gets "solved" by pros. Even adapting metagames can turn into rotating Rock-Paper-Scissors.
I also like the way the candles on the arm remind me of Providence. It's hard to count, but there might be thirteen.
You act as if drafting blocks hasn't had any issues either. Drafting 3rd/2nd/1st e. g. let to less packs opened of the 3rd set even as it solved some of the issues of 1st/2nd/3rd. I assume, drafting both large sets together is more of a novelty with individual drafts being the norm anyway.
Now that one was more of a pointless money grab - at least from the perspective of offering gameplay. It's more akin to today's collector's boosters.
Because the RC governs the rules for EDH/Commander. Brawl is a WotC-governed format. Consistency is not guaranteed.
Really, designing dungeons seems a lot about fine tuning and figuring out what the appropriate pay-off for choosing one dungeon/room over another is. And since they dn't take up spots in the deck power creep is a real issue here. Your suggested dungeon could easily become the default for any deck that doesn't care about completing dungeons and that would take away from the depth of decision making.
I also fail to really see how different going from one section of the Dungeon That Never Ends to another section when comparing it to going from one completed dungeon to another - except of course for restricted options.
I thinkit could be cool to have a "campaign" e. g. dungeons that can only be used after you have completed another dungeon or task.
It doesn't have to. I really don't get why a person talking about their personal preference gets a response like that about how things "must" be. I totally get the preference though:
I liked the pivotal story moment shown for WAR and would have liked a reason to care as much about the Eldraine story. It's an actual fairy tale world, so getting it told like a fairy tale would have been cool etc.
The reason is probably that the software stops passing on the output once the initial Quote is balanced.
I can see how this isn't simply fixed by passing on the whole post, but a possible solution is to identify the imbalanced tags and passing them on with Noparse tags.
I hadn't though about it before, but the sasquatch token is another really humanoid Beast.
I live for all the different interpretations of Clue tokens on different planes. I want to see Clue tokens, Food tokens and Treasure tokens from every plane!
What else? That guy is really happy about their contribution to the pumpkin carving contest.
Lynde is not a Werewolf though.
So if you make a guess, how about the first thing you do is check the actual artwork we have for the character for the prominent facial scar. Lynde doesn't have one.
Werewolves in human form are routinely depicted with the scar of their infection visible - it's also commonly a feature shown to be consistent across transformation and hence a strong visual identifier of a character. Which is why Arlinn, the most prominent Werewolf character, has a facial scar. That is also why the most prominent werewolf character from the video has the scar; we are supposed to be able to tell that the black werewolf and the doctor are the same character.
Knowing this, any depiction of a character without scar or with a scar that is obviously different is a different character.
Red hair is fairly common in Innistrad (not surprising considering the germanic roots it has, which are also apparent in terms and names). So there is really little of a point to guess every red-headed character while the more strongly distinguishing feature is missing.
---
There is a stronger case for Jerren/Jerren identity with the same name (though... it happens to distnct characters as well), but I have to wonder... wouldn't Ormendahl's cleric have a better way to dispose oftheir orphans than throwing them to the (were))wolves? This seems more like behavior driven by greed and disregard for human life than actual (profane) religious fervor. Plus, while their respective deaths are only implied in both media, card and video, they seem to meet a different ultimate fate from each other.
---
Looking forward to the Tim, Hungry Orphan//Tim, Feasting Werewolf legendary creature card we get in Modern Horizons 7: More Modern, More Horizons.
But then again why would Merfolk bother with coven? Is it on-color in-tribe?
That said Sunflower MTG doesn't mention cEDH. But with how different the format is, it should have its own banlist easily.
I mean "for the people who do not Rule 0, they just lost their favorite or most fun commander" is also basically an admission that the people who now "just suffered a wrongful, tasteless ban" are suffering due to their own choice to pick and choose which rules they follow. They choose tofollow the banlist, but choose to ignore Rule 0. If they were consistent between following either both or neither, there would beno issue, correct?
How much power on the battlefield though can come from 0 power in the graveyard?
I feel the point of Brawl was to make a deck that can be entirely Standard-legal, but also be turned into a Commander deck by adding another 40 cards. But the compromise didn't turn out successful enough. I liked Brawl in some regards. Just give me a Commander format with smaller decks.