• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ashodin

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,596
Durham, NC
Nah. Golgari/Orzhov (B), Rakdos/Gruul (R), Izzet/Dimir (U).
Orzhov is already used.

Boros and Gruul will be weird.

Listening to Drive to Work (War of the Spark):

Drive to Work: War of the Spark Novel

Notes: (Spoiler bits from the novel)


-----

Teyo sparks early on and goes to Ravnica, we get a preview of Gobakhan (his home plane) here.

Kaya steps up, really becomes one of the main characters of the novel and mentors Teyo. Hates what Bolas has put her up to.

Jace grows as a person and continues being better since Ixalan. In love with Vraska obviously.

Liliana's toughest trials come in this book. Not a very good book for Liliana. Growing self-awareness of how she got into her position and the cost of it. It's starting to matter to her the collateral damage she's causing. It's a dark book for her.

Chandra is a lot of fun here. She gets to Ravnica and Dovin Baan is there which makes her very mad. She realizes she has to fight smarter. Jaya is there mentoring her still. Other Gatewatch members step up to keep her feeling good.

Gideon is eager to take a direct approach here, strategy just seems to always fail because he has three counters to it. Gideon has the Blackblade and it's time to get up and close with Bolas. Gideon inspires the Boros and others there from his last visit.

Ral has been playing catchup all the time, and every step he's taken has backfired, and plans with Niv-Mizzet have backfired often. Ral activates his beacon. He's worried this will backfire too. He's struggling to keep up with being guildmaster.

-----

LEADS: Bolas, Teyo, Kaya, Chandra, Jace, Gideon, Liliana, Ral Zarek, Vraska, Ugin, Dack

(Dack couldn't be in the set because they had no room for him, sadly.)

SUPPORTING ROLES: Ajani, Karn, Teferi, Ob Nixilis

-----

Guilds were hard for Greg to interpret at first, once he understood the two-color philosophy for each guild it became really easy to write each one as represented in the book. All ten guilds are featured. Orzhov is big here, Izzet is big here. Golgari is big here.

Loved the setting of Ravnica, created Rat as a gateway to the story as a Gateless citizen. Teyo is the POV character: Stranger in a strange land thing.

There's guilds on Gobakhan: Carpenter and Mason's guilds. Nothing big, just professions.

Rat is considering joining a guild: she's attracted to Selesnya and Rakdos, her parents are Gruul.

Character juggling was difficult, but Greg feels he did enough of them justice.

Tibalt does not have a moment in the book. He was told to be off-limits at first.

-----

Interpreting how magic works (mana, pulling from the land, spells) was the most difficult part of the book. Figuring out what each character could do and keep it straight was difficult.
 
Last edited:

Serule

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,766
Don't know if it means anything, but both "Bond of x" cards have two guilds that form a shard, but are oddly in a color that's not the center of the shard. So others would be
Blue : Dimir / Izzet
Black: Rakdos / Golgari
Red: Gruul / Boros
 

Actinium

Teyvat Traveler
Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,791
California
Can't finale just go into the miracle red deck to get back skewer and lightning for 5 mana, as well as get 3 cast triggers for steam kins or guttersnipes or whatever?
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
They're giving themselves the option select to do Shards of Ravnica (but in a way different to Alara) if they want to for Rav4.
 
OP
OP
SigmasonicX

SigmasonicX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,474
Drive to Work podcast where Mark Rosewater interviews Greg Weisman

People testing out the London Mulligan seem to universally be praising it.


Autumn Burchett
‏ @AutumnLilyMTG

My assumption at this point is that if the London Mulligan causes a deck to be oppressive in a format that is more an indication of what should be allowed to be legal within the format rather than what the mulligan rule should be
11:45 AM - 12 Apr 2019



Ben Stark
‏ @BenS_MTG

Ben Stark Retweeted Autumn Burchett

Perfect take as usual Autumn. The London Mulligan is soooooooooooooooo much better for magic overall. Instead of Mulliganing feeling like a nightmare and the worst part of magic, it now feels like a healthy strategic part of the game. Ban problem cards, keep the great rule!!!!!

11:49 AM - 12 Apr 2019

General impressions are that it doesn't boost dredge and such as much as you'd think, and it actually helps out Tier 2 decks much more. And like Autumn said, if anything breaks, that's more reason to ban those cards than to go back to the old mulligan rule.
 

Izzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
683
Orzhov and Azorius are my favorite guilds but that team up card seems weak. Maybe you can use it to push for lethal in limited but I don't see myself picking it over removal or a cheaper combat trick.
 
Dec 4, 2017
3,097
Don't know if it means anything, but both "Bond of x" cards have two guilds that form a shard, but are oddly in a color that's not the center of the shard. So others would be
Blue : Dimir / Izzet
Black: Rakdos / Golgari
Red: Gruul / Boros
The Legion would never work with the people who are willing pawns of Bolas. Domri Rade is the only one who doesn't resent what Bolas helped him do. Neither Aurelia nor Pierakor/Feather would accept joining with the destroyers.
 

Chronos

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,204
Drive to Work podcast where Mark Rosewater interviews Greg Weisman

People testing out the London Mulligan seem to universally be praising it.








General impressions are that it doesn't boost dredge and such as much as you'd think, and it actually helps out Tier 2 decks much more. And like Autumn said, if anything breaks, that's more reason to ban those cards than to go back to the old mulligan rule.



If anything, Serum Powder will get banned. That Goryo-Griselbrand deck is absurd with it.
 

Arkanim94

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,113
Drive to Work podcast where Mark Rosewater interviews Greg Weisman

People testing out the London Mulligan seem to universally be praising it.








General impressions are that it doesn't boost dredge and such as much as you'd think, and it actually helps out Tier 2 decks much more. And like Autumn said, if anything breaks, that's more reason to ban those cards than to go back to the old mulligan rule.

magic aids basically said similar things, it's super skill intensive but overall better for the game.

but serum powder will probably get banned :v
 
Oct 28, 2017
6,119
The Legion would never work with the people who are willing pawns of Bolas. Domri Rade is the only one who doesn't resent what Bolas helped him do. Neither Aurelia nor Pierakor/Feather would accept joining with the destroyers.

Well, they did. The first color combinations are shards. For color balance, that means the other three are shards also. The card will be a red Boros/Gruul combination.
 
OP
OP
SigmasonicX

SigmasonicX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,474
Note that even if the guild leader is allied with Bolas, not everyone is; the two different flavor texts on the guildgates were meant to show that every guild has two factions.
 

Clay

Member
Oct 29, 2017
8,109
Do I understand Standard rotation correctly? This summer another core set will come, and it and M19 will be Standard-legal at the same time. Then another set will come out in the fall. At that point the two Ixalan sets, Dominaria, and M19 all rotate out.

This seems a little crazy, that will dramatically reduce the number of playable cards and seems like it would really limit the diversity of competitive decks.

Why do they rotate so many sets out all at once? Replacing four sets with a single new one and then slowly building the number of playable cards back up seems so unnecessary, why not just rotate the oldest set out every time a new comes out? Or do it by blocks, like when Allegiance came out Ixalan and Rivals could have both rotated out (I think technically it would have been Amonkhet block by this method, but you get what I mean).
 

Metallix87

User Requested Self-Ban
Banned
Nov 1, 2017
10,533
Do I understand Standard rotation correctly? This summer another core set will come, and it and M19 will be Standard-legal at the same time. Then another set will come out in the fall. At that point the two Ixalan sets, Dominaria, and M19 all rotate out.

This seems a little crazy, that will dramatically reduce the number of playable cards and seems like it would really limit the diversity of competitive decks.

Why do they rotate so many sets out all at once? Replacing four sets with a single new one and then slowly building the number of playable cards back up seems so unnecessary, why not just rotate the oldest set out every time a new comes out? Or do it by blocks, like when Allegiance came out Ixalan and Rivals could have both rotated out (I think technically it would have been Amonkhet block by this method, but you get what I mean).
It's for cleaner rotations, and longevity of deck design.
 

The Adder

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,091
They're giving themselves the option select to do Shards of Ravnica (but in a way different to Alara) if they want to for Rav4.
You can do Shards and Wedges simultaneously.

Senate Diplomat
WU
Creature - Angel
B: Orzhov ends by Azorius means
R: Boros ends by Azorius means
2/2

House Diplomat
UB
R: Rakdos ends by Dimir means
G: Golgari ends by Dimir means
2/2

Etc
 
OP
OP
SigmasonicX

SigmasonicX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,474
Do I understand Standard rotation correctly? This summer another core set will come, and it and M19 will be Standard-legal at the same time. Then another set will come out in the fall. At that point the two Ixalan sets, Dominaria, and M19 all rotate out.

This seems a little crazy, that will dramatically reduce the number of playable cards and seems like it would really limit the diversity of competitive decks.

Why do they rotate so many sets out all at once? Replacing four sets with a single new one and then slowly building the number of playable cards back up seems so unnecessary, why not just rotate the oldest set out every time a new comes out? Or do it by blocks, like when Allegiance came out Ixalan and Rivals could have both rotated out (I think technically it would have been Amonkhet block by this method, but you get what I mean).
People dislike having to remove cards from their decks four times a year much more than they dislike having to remove a bunch of cards once a year. They experimented with bumping it up to twice a year a few years ago, and it led to a sharp drop in Standard play after the first mid-year rotation happened, so they quickly backtracked.
 

Chronos

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,204
Do I understand Standard rotation correctly? This summer another core set will come, and it and M19 will be Standard-legal at the same time. Then another set will come out in the fall. At that point the two Ixalan sets, Dominaria, and M19 all rotate out.

This seems a little crazy, that will dramatically reduce the number of playable cards and seems like it would really limit the diversity of competitive decks.

Why do they rotate so many sets out all at once? Replacing four sets with a single new one and then slowly building the number of playable cards back up seems so unnecessary, why not just rotate the oldest set out every time a new comes out? Or do it by blocks, like when Allegiance came out Ixalan and Rivals could have both rotated out (I think technically it would have been Amonkhet block by this method, but you get what I mean).

Most decks will be gutted, but you will be surprised at how a bunch of new archetypes jump up To fill the vacuum. There will also be a lot of cards that have no chance of seeing play in the current meta all of a sudden become very playable and important to new decks.

If anything, I would argue that we are currently at the point where we now have too many cards legal in Standard and it really limits deck building potential because of so many oppressive archetypes now.
 

Serule

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,766
Why do they rotate so many sets out all at once? Replacing four sets with a single new one and then slowly building the number of playable cards back up seems so unnecessary, why not just rotate the oldest set out every time a new comes out? Or do it by blocks, like when Allegiance came out Ixalan and Rivals could have both rotated out (I think technically it would have been Amonkhet block by this method, but you get what I mean).

They tried having two rotations per year and it was very unpopular.
 

Clay

Member
Oct 29, 2017
8,109
It's for cleaner rotations, and longevity of deck design.

One of the things that seems really weird about the current method of rotation is that no everything has the same longevity. Cards from Ixalan are legal in Standard for seven months longer than cards from Dominaria, which seems significant. Only decks that are reliant on cards from the first set in a given rotation have more longevity.

Any maybe I haven't been playing long enough to get what you mean but cutting the game's playable cards by almost a half in one fell swoop does not seem very clean.

They tried having two rotations per year and it was very unpopular.

Ah, I see. Are there any good resources that talk about why the community reacted that way? Maybe I'll see if there's any YT videos that talk about it, or a Channel Fireball article or whatever. I'm interested in this now, not having played for long and just having thought about it for a little while the twice-per-year seems better in a lot of ways. Every card is Standard legal for more or less the same amount of time, there's always roughly the same number of cards to brew with, etc.
 

Yeef

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,439
New York
One of the things that seems really weird about the current method of rotation is that no everything has the same longevity. Cards from Ixalan are legal in Standard for seven months longer than cards from Dominaria, which seems significant. Only decks that are reliant on cards from the first set in a given rotation have more longevity.

Any maybe I haven't been playing long enough to get what you mean but cutting the game's playable cards by almost a half in one fell swoop does not seem very clean.
Only having to worry about rotation once per year instead of every 3 months is a lot cleaner from the players' perspective. If I build a deck, then can't play for 4 weeks for whatever reason, not having to worry about my deck being legal when I can play again is important.

There's also the issue of pre-constructed decks. The more often you rotate the shorter their shelf life.
 

The Adder

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,091
Rotation every three months would be awful for folks like me. You've seen me in and out of this thread and the other one with a new brew and a refined iteration on a previous one every weak or so since Allegiance came out. My Mardu Tokens deck has, over the course of time, warped into an Abzan tokens deck. I wouldn't have the time to test and retest and refine then also be able to just sit back and finally enjoy just playing with it.
 
OP
OP
SigmasonicX

SigmasonicX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,474
Only having to worry about rotation once per year instead of every 3 months is a lot cleaner from the players' perspective. If I build a deck, then can't play for 4 weeks for whatever reason, not having to worry about my deck being legal when I can play again is important.

There's also the issue of pre-constructed decks. The more often you rotate the shorter their shelf life.
That reminds me, back when Wizards moved to two rotations a year, there were a ton of hot takes about how Wizards was exploiting players by forcing them to spend more to keep their decks up to date.
 

ZealousD

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,303
Hearthstone has basically the exact same way of handling rotation, only difference is that they do 3 sets per year instead of 4, with no Core Sets.
 

Izzy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
683
Yeah it's an imperfect system but I'm definitely on the side of once a year. Having to get rid of cards sucks, so it's better to minimize the amount of times that happens.
 

Firemind

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,530
The Legion would never work with the people who are willing pawns of Bolas. Domri Rade is the only one who doesn't resent what Bolas helped him do. Neither Aurelia nor Pierakor/Feather would accept joining with the destroyers.
I mean it's weird for the Selesnya to go along with the Simic, since the latter is into bio engineering. And the Azorius with the Orzhov, since the former is law creation and enforcement and the latter is literally a syndicate.

I'm still curious how they're going to spin Boros to be BFFs with Gruul though lol
 
Last edited:

The Adder

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,091
I mean it's weird for the Selesnya to go along with the Simic, since the latter is into bio engineering. And the Azorius with the Orzhov, since the former is law creation and enforcement and the latter is literally a syndicate.

I'm still curious how they're going to spin Boros to be BFFs with Gruul though lol
See my above post.
 

aidan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,769
Bolas
I mean it's weird for the Selesnya to go along with the Simic, since the latter is into bio engineering. And the Azorius with the Orzhov, since the former is law creation and enforcement and the latter is literally a syndicate.

I'm still curious how they're going to spin Boros to be BFFs with Gruul though lol

I mean... we're currently living in a socio-political climate that's requiring a lot of different groups with similar goals (not getting killed by dictatorial leaders) having to set aside philosophical differences to ensure mutual survival.
 

Chronos

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,204
I'm slowly transitioning away from Standard as I build some Modern decks now anyway to avoid all this rotation stuff. I feel like I will spend less money overall after investing in a few staples.
 

Firemind

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,530
I mean... we're currently living in a socio-political climate that's requiring a lot of different groups with similar goals (not getting killed by dictatorial leaders) having to set aside philosophical differences to ensure mutual survival.
What? The socio-political climate today is splintered and go more and more extreme on either side.
 
Oct 26, 2017
12,125
As someone who has been out of magic for years.


3 questions.
1. Are barbarian types back yet?
2. What happened to kamahl
3. Is Garrick still around?
 
OP
OP
SigmasonicX

SigmasonicX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,474
As someone who has been out of magic for years.


3 questions.
1. Are barbarian types back yet?
2. What happened to kamahl
3. Is Garrick still around?
Barbarians haven't been around in a while. Last one was back in Coldsnap, I think, and even she was errata'd to just be a Human in reprints.
34.jpg


Kamahl is long dead.

Garruk is still around; he isn't in this set, but we're told there are plans for him soon.
 
Oct 28, 2017
6,119
As someone who has been out of magic for years.


3 questions.
1. Are barbarian types back yet?
2. What happened to kamahl
3. Is Garrick still around?

1. Nope, but maybe very soon. We might be going to a Viking plane.
2. He died to save the world.
3. Garruk turned into a cursed Planeswalker hunter and now he kills for sport. He's not around but he should reappear by the end of the year.
 
OP
OP
SigmasonicX

SigmasonicX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,474
* Greg liked working with the characters, though I can't imagine he'd say otherwise when in the car with MaRo.
* Teyo is from a plane called Gobakhan, which has two massive unending storms on either side of civilization. He's a shield mage that helps protect people from the storms, but he's the worst around and sparks when he gets caught in a storm, arriving in Ravnica.
* Kaya is one of the main leads, and becomes Teyo's mentor.
* The color pie was a huge help not particularly for character motivations, but for keeping track of what each guild's deal is.
* Every character that's featured gets at least one big moment.
* Tibalt is not in the book. Greg was told he was off limit, but then by the time Wizards changed their mind, it was too late to include him. I suspect that like Garruk, there were future plans with him.
* The hardest part was keeping track of how characters use magic, what's easy and what's difficult for them.
* The Guilds of Ravnica / Ravnica Allegiance web stories have no impact on this first WAR book, but they do on the epilogue book coming later. It's unclear if this means characters from those will show up, or if the influence is just in how Ravnica is depicted.
 

Firemind

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,530
It's a widening gulf between two sides, but people on each side of that gulf are allying with people on the same side that they would otherwise despise.
My point is there are guild combinations that seem they would fit more logically given their ideologies to form shards in case they want to do Alara Redux.

Jund: Gruul + Golgari
Bant: Azorius + Simic
Esper: Dimir + Orzhov
Naya: Selesnya + Boros
Grixis: Rakdos + Izzet

Okay maybe some of these don't allign either lol. I kind of like the idea of the Izzet using Rakdos as cannon fodder for their experiments though.
 

Zocano

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,023
Nah most of those make sense in my mind.

Azorious and Simic are like "biological order". Dimir and Orzhov are "political subterfuge". Selesnya and Boros are akin to invigoration and life. Rakdos and Izzet are madness and mania? Gruul and Golgari are The weakest link but even those would be like the perfect form of biology/life (be it undead or beastly).
 

The Adder

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,091
Azorius + Orzhov are the lawmakers and the lawyers

Selesnya + Simic are the life preservationists and the life creators

Boros + Gruul are the martial forces, ordered and regimented + wild and passionate

Izzet + Dimir are the knowledge seekers

Golgari + Rakdos are the death worshippers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.