Unreleased and New Card Discussion

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 2283
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 10 months ago

Ghen, Arcanum Weaver kind of low-key annoys me. What exactly about him is red? The only defense I've seen is that it's a similar effect to Goblin Welder...but plenty of black cards have similar effects (i.e. Champion of Stray Souls, Doomed Necromancer, Hell's Caretaker), and also red doesn't mess with enchantments. Black doesn't generally mess with them either although I guess it does now. Enchantment synergy has historically been primarily white, then green, and then it's pretty thin tbh. I could accept abzan or naya, but mardu? And besides, the logic that "this color does this sort of mechanic, and this color cares about this type, therefore a card that's both colors can do this mechanic with this type" doesn't seem accurate. Green can do destroy target (artifact/enchantment), and green cares about creatures, but green can't do "destroy target creature".

Eh, I guess maybe I'm being overly critical. But I think he would have made more sense as either abzan, naya, or even RW or BW...maybe even RG or BG? Idk. It just seems like the link to enchantments - which is probably the most important part of the card, since you can build him without intentional recursion synergy, but you can't really build him without enchantments - is only one of the three colors.

I think part of it is that wotc seems to be forcing extra colors into legendaries to make them more playable. Personally I find 3C annoying open-ended with too many options.

It also just annoys me because seriously, how many "synergizes with X permanent type" commanders do we really need? Although I'll admit it's at least a lot more interesting of a synergy than Tuvasa the Sunlit.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

ilovesaprolings
Posts: 507
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by ilovesaprolings » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
I think part of it is that wotc seems to be forcing extra colors into legendaries to make them more playable. Personally I find 3C annoying open-ended with too many options.
That's like your opinion man. I personally adore tricolor and think it's the perfect amount of colors. I'm happy they are printing tricolor legends here (wished for more) and i'm happy they are exploring themes they would have never explored in normal sets.

User avatar
JWK
Elder Thing
Posts: 465
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Post by JWK » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
Ghen, Arcanum Weaver kind of low-key annoys me. What exactly about him is red? The only defense I've seen is that it's a similar effect to Goblin Welder...but plenty of black cards have similar effects (i.e. Champion of Stray Souls, Doomed Necromancer, Hell's Caretaker), and also red doesn't mess with enchantments. Black doesn't generally mess with them either although I guess it does now. Enchantment synergy has historically been primarily white, then green, and then it's pretty thin tbh. I could accept abzan or naya, but mardu? And besides, the logic that "this color does this sort of mechanic, and this color cares about this type, therefore a card that's both colors can do this mechanic with this type" doesn't seem accurate. Green can do destroy target (artifact/enchantment), and green cares about creatures, but green can't do "destroy target creature".

Eh, I guess maybe I'm being overly critical. But I think he would have made more sense as either abzan, naya, or even RW or BW...maybe even RG or BG? Idk. It just seems like the link to enchantments - which is probably the most important part of the card, since you can build him without intentional recursion synergy, but you can't really build him without enchantments - is only one of the three colors.

I think part of it is that wotc seems to be forcing extra colors into legendaries to make them more playable. Personally I find 3C annoying open-ended with too many options.

It also just annoys me because seriously, how many "synergizes with X permanent type" commanders do we really need? Although I'll admit it's at least a lot more interesting of a synergy than Tuvasa the Sunlit.
One of the designers, the guy who came up with the Sultai turtle, on Twitter pretty much said without exactly saying it that they ignored the color pie on some of these legends in order to have them do cool stuff. When it was pointed out that the turtle's tappy stuff is pretty firmly part of white's color pie, the justification offered is that a lot of cards put zombies and reanimated creatures into play tapped, and they thought it would be cool for them to not have to be untapped. How that relates at all to the character depicted on the card, I have no idea, and honestly, it doesn't sound like flavor was really considered much when it came to cards depicting new characters. Which is really odd, given how in-flavor most of the cards depicting old characters are (with the notable flavor fail of making the Baron a partner commander, but whatever).

I am guessing they thought "Mardu enchantments, that would be different" and went about building it, without consideration that a) that is already sort of a thing with Queen Marchesa decks, and they kind of encroached on her established territory a bit with this new card, and b) maybe there's a reason there'd never been an explicitly enchantress Mardu commander up to now.

I now await the Selesnya artifact commander. Maybe it will have a Mirrorworks effect stapled to it to make token copies of all your artifacts, since both W and G care about tokens. That sounds real Selesnya!!

Me, I'm going to slot the Mardu legend it into Queen Marchessa so when someone blows up part of my pillowfort, I can sac it and rebuild a different part of the fort.
I have 68 active EDH decks, with more in progress. I don't consider this a problem. Do you?
I am also one of those barbarians who enjoys winning by turning creatures sideways.

User avatar
Rumpy5897
Tuner of Jank
Posts: 1555
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rumpy5897 » 10 months ago

The beauty of weird coloured legends is that you don't have as much support for whatever archetype they're trying to push. Would you rather Ghen was Bant and had access to the three best enchantment colours? Nope, instead you've got the white primary and let's see what you cook up with the fourth and fifth best colours at your disposal. Personally, I find this sort of stuff a lot more enticing than being in the "correct" colours. I'm a huge enchantment fiend, yet my enchantress of choice is Daxos the Returned. I also built an Eutropia the Twice-Favored, which skips the primary colour altogether and takes enchantments in a garbagestormy direction.

But yeah, Ghen speaks to me. Not enough to kill off my established Daxos, but I might try to cook something up and see how it goes. The flavour text is also oddly on point with regards to self-constrained jank.
 
EDH Primers (click me!)
Deck is Kill Club
Show

User avatar
Ginuqu
Posts: 327
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: they / them

Post by Ginuqu » 10 months ago

they have to reprint Tainted Pact now or never, right? I can't think of a more opportune time and that card's price is a mess.

I'm buying several copies of Ardenn and Numa just for casual performance/experiment decking. I feel like Ardenn is probably broken.

I'm a two-colour person but I don't particularly believe in the colour pie when cited as a reason a card shouldn't be the way it is. It's a creative system that only seems to be applied to reinforce saminess and stricture. I'm glad that weird Mardu enchantment commander exists, and its costs make it look like a cute extension to the Ragnar, Xira Arien, Adun Oakenshield pseudocycle.
sorta mad at magic right now

User avatar
5colorsrainbow
Posts: 284
Joined: 2 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: he / him

Post by 5colorsrainbow » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
Ghen, Arcanum Weaver kind of low-key annoys me. What exactly about him is red? The only defense I've seen is that it's a similar effect to Goblin Welder...but plenty of black cards have similar effects (i.e. Champion of Stray Souls, Doomed Necromancer, Hell's Caretaker), and also red doesn't mess with enchantments. Black doesn't generally mess with them either although I guess it does now. Enchantment synergy has historically been primarily white, then green, and then it's pretty thin tbh. I could accept abzan or naya, but mardu? And besides, the logic that "this color does this sort of mechanic, and this color cares about this type, therefore a card that's both colors can do this mechanic with this type" doesn't seem accurate. Green can do destroy target (artifact/enchantment), and green cares about creatures, but green can't do "destroy target creature".
For Theros 2 they had black and red can sacrifice their own enchantments similar style in how the two colors like to sacrifice creatures. The idea (along with Blim) was to use those self harming enchantments and then sac them for a benefit.

And i somewhat agree with ilovesaprolings, I like three colors and welcome any legends that open up different deck types, more so in a set like this where they are a bit more flexible with design.
“There are no weak Jews. I am descended from those who wrestle angels and kill giants. We were chosen by God. You were chosen by a pathetic little man who can't seem to grow a full mustache"

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 2283
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 10 months ago

The color pie is a constraint, and one that forces creativity by creating a tradeoff - more colors means more options, but more difficult mana. If every color can do everything, what's even the point of having color at all?

Granted, adding additional colors to a card doesn't really have the same dynamic since you still need to be playing the other colors to play it. Mostly the proliferation of 3c legendaries annoys me because...well, this may be a confusing metaphor but maybe it will make sense. Have you ever been enjoying a movie/book/tv show, and then something happens that pulls you out of it, because you are suddenly made aware of the writer? Like when a character does something wildly out of character because the plot needs them to, for example. Well, to me a lot of 3c legendaries are like that. They're not 3c because it logically follows that they should be, they're 3c because they'll sell better. Obviously shows have writers, and card games are just trying to sell me cards, but they're supposed to trick me into forgetting those things by immersing me, which they're supposed to do by staying consistent.

That's another thing I miss about the early days of EDH - every legendary felt like an actual character. Is there going to be some detailed backstory for Ghen? I dunno, maybe there is one somewhere, but from what I can see it's obvious that they're churning out a million new legendaries per set because it'll sell packs, not because they actually need those characters to tell a compelling story.

These are just ramblings tbh. I mean I still like building around new legendaries all the time, I've certainly made a lot of decks. But the feel of the game is very different than it used to be, and there are a million little ways the game feels more commercial every set.

Ardenn does look really strong, it's too bad I just slaked my recurring voltron thirst with Akiri. Although he can't use Zirda, the Dawnwaker so...
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

Wallycaine
Posts: 633
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Wallycaine » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
Ghen, Arcanum Weaver kind of low-key annoys me. What exactly about him is red? The only defense I've seen is that it's a similar effect to Goblin Welder...but plenty of black cards have similar effects (i.e. Champion of Stray Souls, Doomed Necromancer, Hell's Caretaker), and also red doesn't mess with enchantments. Black doesn't generally mess with them either although I guess it does now. Enchantment synergy has historically been primarily white, then green, and then it's pretty thin tbh. I could accept abzan or naya, but mardu? And besides, the logic that "this color does this sort of mechanic, and this color cares about this type, therefore a card that's both colors can do this mechanic with this type" doesn't seem accurate. Green can do destroy target (artifact/enchantment), and green cares about creatures, but green can't do "destroy target creature".
Your example is really off, because you're talking about a multicolored card. A green/Black card could have "destroy target creature" easily.

As far as why Mardu, it makes sense when you break it down past a superficial "enchantment colors" understanding. Mechanically, it's a card that sacrifices and recurs enchantments. Red is primary in sacrificing it's own stuff, including enchantments in recent years. Black is a recursion color. White cares about enchantments. So a card that sacrifices enchantments to recur enchantments is pretty solidly Mardu. You could certainly get away with less colors, but they were building a 3 color legend, so that seems like an extraneous complaint.
JWK wrote:
10 months ago
One of the designers, the guy who came up with the Sultai turtle, on Twitter pretty much said without exactly saying it that they ignored the color pie on some of these legends in order to have them do cool stuff. When it was pointed out that the turtle's tappy stuff is pretty firmly part of white's color pie, the justification offered is that a lot of cards put zombies and reanimated creatures into play tapped, and they thought it would be cool for them to not have to be untapped. How that relates at all to the character depicted on the card, I have no idea, and honestly, it doesn't sound like flavor was really considered much when it came to cards depicting new characters. Which is really odd, given how in-flavor most of the cards depicting old characters are (with the notable flavor fail of making the Baron a partner commander, but whatever).
That's... not at all what was said, and stretching it to mean that seems pretty disingenuous to me. They were talking about why they went with black as the third color, at no point were they talking about the effects being in pie for black, because *they don't have to be on a multicolored card*. Blue is primary in untapping things, including having them come in untapped, with green theoretically secondary. The kismet effect is white and blue. It's not "primarily" white, and in fact the card as a whole would be out of pie as a mono white card. So at its base, this card is blue or green/blue. So it's a matter of what color to add to the color identity, since whatever color they add doesn't have any bearing on the abilities themselves, because those are already justified in pie by the other colors. So they picked a color that would have more benefit from the ability, which is what they talked about.

ilovesaprolings
Posts: 507
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by ilovesaprolings » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
Granted, adding additional colors to a card doesn't really have the same dynamic since you still need to be playing the other colors to play it. Mostly the proliferation of 3c legendaries annoys me because...well, this may be a confusing metaphor but maybe it will make sense.
The proliferation? This is the commanderest commander set and we have 10 tricolors, 20 bicolors and 40 monocolors. You can call it proliferation?
I find it weird complaning about the blandness of tricolors when Golos, Kenrith, Najeela and others exist. But whatever. Maybe you think that commander was better when you had to play Teneb if you wanted to play an abzan deck. But the majority of player will disagree.

Ghen is a different take on enchantress. It works with self-harming enchantments and curses. What's the problem with that?
JWK wrote:
10 months ago
I now await the Selesnya artifact commander. Maybe it will have a Mirrorworks effect stapled to it to make token copies of all your artifacts, since both W and G care about tokens. That sounds real Selesnya!!
... isn't this what partner is about? Just assemble everything in every color? Just take your Rebbec and wait until they spoil a artifact-themed partner from Kaladesh

User avatar
5colorsrainbow
Posts: 284
Joined: 2 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: he / him

Post by 5colorsrainbow » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
The color pie is a constraint, and one that forces creativity by creating a tradeoff - more colors means more options, but more difficult mana. If every color can do everything, what's even the point of having color at all?
While I fundamentally agree with this, as Wallycaine points out this card is pretty in color.
Granted, adding additional colors to a card doesn't really have the same dynamic since you still need to be playing the other colors to play it. Mostly the proliferation of 3c legendaries annoys me because...well, this may be a confusing metaphor but maybe it will make sense. Have you ever been enjoying a movie/book/tv show, and then something happens that pulls you out of it, because you are suddenly made aware of the writer? Like when a character does something wildly out of character because the plot needs them to, for example. Well, to me a lot of 3c legendaries are like that. They're not 3c because it logically follows that they should be, they're 3c because they'll sell better. Obviously shows have writers, and card games are just trying to sell me cards, but they're supposed to trick me into forgetting those things by immersing me, which they're supposed to do by staying consistent.

That's another thing I miss about the early days of EDH - every legendary felt like an actual character. Is there going to be some detailed backstory for Ghen? I dunno, maybe there is one somewhere, but from what I can see it's obvious that they're churning out a million new legendaries per set because it'll sell packs, not because they actually need those characters to tell a compelling story.
I mean, most legendary creatures until recently had no lore and many where made legendary by development to limit the number of effects at one time. And if your wanting to go by flavor him beings a passionate artist seems pretty red.

And if you want lore here you go, apparently a member of creative has a mission to make sure each legend has a backstory, typically on his own;
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... 2020-10-30
“There are no weak Jews. I am descended from those who wrestle angels and kill giants. We were chosen by God. You were chosen by a pathetic little man who can't seem to grow a full mustache"

User avatar
DirkGently
My wins are unconditional
Posts: 2283
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by DirkGently » 10 months ago

ilovesaprolings wrote:
10 months ago
The proliferation? This is the commanderest commander set and we have 10 tricolors, 20 bicolors and 40 monocolors. You can call it proliferation?
I find it weird complaning about the blandness of tricolors when Golos, Kenrith, Najeela and others exist. But whatever. Maybe you think that commander was better when you had to play Teneb if you wanted to play an abzan deck. But the majority of player will disagree.

Ghen is a different take on enchantress. It works with self-harming enchantments and curses. What's the problem with that?
Not in this set specifically, more just in general. Zendikar rising has 17 legendaries, which is actually a little low compared to our recent averages. You know how many the original Zendikar had (which is around when I started playing the format and before wotc started trying to market towards it)? A whopping 4. And they're all mono-colored. The design has changed very dramatically to cater to commander players and I find it's kind of cheapened the experience for me, personally. There's something more satisfying about having to work for what you want, instead of having unlimited options, imo. And yeah, I did kind of prefer it when playing 3c, with all the advantages that has, came with the not-insignificant downside of having restricted commander choice, while mono-color gave you tons of options, relatively speaking. These days there's very little tradeoff - from an effectiveness point of view, picking a mono or even a dual color commander is usually handicapping yourself right out of the gate.

Admittedly, the color spectrum is fairly wide in normal sets between mono, duo, and tri colors, though we've certainly seen a lot more 5c legendaries recently, especially of the flexible CI-from-activated-abilities variety. In the precons, though, it's a ton of 3c legendaries.
5colorsrainbow wrote:
10 months ago
And if you want lore here you go, apparently a member of creative has a mission to make sure each legend has a backstory, typically on his own;
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... 2020-10-30
Having a paragraph of story created to justify the card isn't the same as them being an actual character though. When your commander was Ertai, Wizard Adept, that was an actual character in the story. Also it meant nobody wanted to play with you, probably.
Wallycaine wrote:
10 months ago
Your example is really off, because you're talking about a multicolored card. A green/Black card could have "destroy target creature" easily.

As far as why Mardu, it makes sense when you break it down past a superficial "enchantment colors" understanding. Mechanically, it's a card that sacrifices and recurs enchantments. Red is primary in sacrificing it's own stuff, including enchantments in recent years. Black is a recursion color. White cares about enchantments. So a card that sacrifices enchantments to recur enchantments is pretty solidly Mardu. You could certainly get away with less colors, but they were building a 3 color legend, so that seems like an extraneous complaint.
Uh...but you could just do that on a mono-black card? I feel like you're proving my point.

Black sacrifices stuff all the time and probably more than red - searching for "sacrifice" netted me 500-some results for black and 340 for red, so idk where you're getting "red is primary" from. But also it's not like "sacrificing your own stuff" is really a thing that's terribly color restricted. There's plenty of cards in all colors that sacrifice things as a cost, there's no reason to add extra colors to justify it.

"they were building a 3 color legend"

Yeah see that's what I don't like. They had the starting place of building a 3c legend and then tried to justify it, when they should have just made it the colors that made the most sense.
Last edited by DirkGently 10 months ago, edited 1 time in total.
Perm Decks
Phelddagrif - Kaervek - Golos - Zirilan

Flux Decks
Lukka - Sefris - Ebondeath - Rokiric - Garth - Nixilis - Grist - Mavinda - Kumano - Nezahal - Mavinda - Plargg - Plargg - Extus - Plargg - Oracle - Kardur - Halvar - Tergrid - Egon - Cosima - Halana+Livio - Jeska+Falthis+Obosh - Yeva - Akiri+Zirda - Lady Sun - Nahiri - Korlash - Overlord+Zirda - Chisei - Athreos2 - Akim - Cazur+Ukkima - Otrimi - Otrimi - Kalamax - Ayli+Lurrus - Clamilton - Gonti - Heliod2 - Ayula - Thassa2 - Gallia - Purphoros2 - Rankle - Uro - Rayami - Gargos - Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa - Ashling1 - Angus - Arcum - Talrand - Chainer - Higure - Kumano - Scion - Teferi1 - Uyo - Sisters
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote
Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena
Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6

User avatar
Serenade
UnderKing
Posts: 873
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Serenade » 10 months ago

Kodama/Rebbec is your GW artifact general. =P

I figured red loving to sacrifice and loot were good enough reasons/synergy for Ghen. I didn't think three+-color legends need to rigidly hit every color restriction unless they use hybrid mana.

They are belching out too many legends per set now, and while I do wish these characters had more/some background, it's not like we always got it. Did Uril, the Miststalker, Wydwen, the Biting Gale, or Wrexial, the Risen Deep have a story? This set would have been a nice chance to only use characters we know from the stories (like Time Spiral did), but I figured it was unlikely.
Mirri, Cat Warrior counts as a Cat Warrior.

User avatar
JWK
Elder Thing
Posts: 465
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Post by JWK » 10 months ago

Serenade wrote:
10 months ago
Kodama/Rebbec is your GW artifact general. =P
🤢🤢🤮🤮
I have 68 active EDH decks, with more in progress. I don't consider this a problem. Do you?
I am also one of those barbarians who enjoys winning by turning creatures sideways.

Wallycaine
Posts: 633
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Wallycaine » 10 months ago

Serenade wrote:
10 months ago
They are belching out too many legends per set now, and while I do wish these characters had more/some background, it's not like we always got it. Did Uril, the Miststalker, Wydwen, the Biting Gale, or Wrexial, the Risen Deep have a story? This set would have been a nice chance to only use characters we know from the stories (like Time Spiral did), but I figured it was unlikely.
If we want to go back even further, we can look at the flavorful legends from Legends, which had the deep backstory of being *checks notes* the designers D&D characters. Legends have pretty much always been cards first, occasionally characters with a deep backstory later. And that's okay?

They're pretty clearly looking to fit many older characters onto cards, but I think it's smart of them to intersperse it with new characters. Mechanically, there's going to be certain cards that don't really fit a particular older character, and so I'd rather they add a new character to the lineup at that point than try and shoehorn someone else onto it. Shoehorning is how we end up with Ludevic, Necro-Alchemist, after all.

User avatar
Serenade
UnderKing
Posts: 873
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Serenade » 10 months ago

The plus side of no-background characters is we can be less disappointed if they suck. (example being Radiant, Serra Archangel).
Mirri, Cat Warrior counts as a Cat Warrior.

User avatar
JWK
Elder Thing
Posts: 465
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Post by JWK » 10 months ago

Speaking of new characters, Armix, Filigree Thrasher and Gnostro, Voice of the Crags strike me as interesting. I suppose Gnostro could be an odd sort of spellslinger general, but think he's more likely to end up in the 99. I may slot him into Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest.

Armix, I am excited about slotting into Glissa, the Traitor, but I find it intriguing enough to also consider partner options, even though I am, generally speaking, pretty meh regarding partners. I guess it's a testament to most of this set's partners not being too obviously broken that I am for the first time ever considering running partners as actual paired commanders instead of just finding places to slot them into the 99, which has been 100% my approach in the past.
Last edited by JWK 10 months ago, edited 2 times in total.
I have 68 active EDH decks, with more in progress. I don't consider this a problem. Do you?
I am also one of those barbarians who enjoys winning by turning creatures sideways.

User avatar
JWK
Elder Thing
Posts: 465
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Post by JWK » 10 months ago

Serenade wrote:
10 months ago
The plus side of no-background characters is we can be less disappointed if they suck. (example being Radiant, Serra Archangel).
Sad, but true. One of my friends was really excited to hear Baron Sengir was getting a new card. Then he read the card.

On the other hand, some of the legends in this set are 100% on cue with their backgrounds. Belbe would be strong regardless, but her abilities seem a great fit for the character, and knowing who Krark is makes him that much more fun in play.
I have 68 active EDH decks, with more in progress. I don't consider this a problem. Do you?
I am also one of those barbarians who enjoys winning by turning creatures sideways.

Wallycaine
Posts: 633
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Wallycaine » 10 months ago

One of the weird ideas I've got floating around in my head is "Black/White Tokenswarm partner tribal", where I just run all the black/white partner pairs that work well with tokens (interested to see if the Mythic white partner fits into that, but already have Tevesh Szat, Doom of Fools, Sengir, the Dark Baron, Prava of the Steel Legion, Tymna the Weaver, Ravos, Soultender, and then a special pair of Krav, the Unredeemed and Regna, the Redeemer), and just spin the wheel to find out what pair is actually running the deck that week.

User avatar
5colorsrainbow
Posts: 284
Joined: 2 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: he / him

Post by 5colorsrainbow » 10 months ago

Wallycaine wrote:
10 months ago
One of the weird ideas I've got floating around in my head is "Black/White Tokenswarm partner tribal", where I just run all the black/white partner pairs that work well with tokens (interested to see if the Mythic white partner fits into that, but already have Tevesh Szat, Doom of Fools, Sengir, the Dark Baron, Prava of the Steel Legion, Tymna the Weaver, Ravos, Soultender, and then a special pair of Krav, the Unredeemed and Regna, the Redeemer), and just spin the wheel to find out what pair is actually running the deck that week.
I try to find a one or two "alternate" commanders for each deck to shake things up. Typically one commander is the better one to lead but sometimes its fun just to shake thing around.

Though you brought up a fun idea of running several different partners you can switch out in and out.
“There are no weak Jews. I am descended from those who wrestle angels and kill giants. We were chosen by God. You were chosen by a pathetic little man who can't seem to grow a full mustache"

User avatar
JWK
Elder Thing
Posts: 465
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Post by JWK » 10 months ago



This looks potentially like a lot of fun. In addition to the obvious benefits of having a Sundial in your CZ, the political implications are pretty cool.
I have 68 active EDH decks, with more in progress. I don't consider this a problem. Do you?
I am also one of those barbarians who enjoys winning by turning creatures sideways.

User avatar
Ginuqu
Posts: 327
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: they / them

Post by Ginuqu » 10 months ago

having to weigh Kaja Foglio Cuombajj Witches vs Seb McKinnon Cuombajj Witches seems like the toughest question this set will ask!
sorta mad at magic right now

User avatar
JWK
Elder Thing
Posts: 465
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Post by JWK » 10 months ago

Ginuqu wrote:
10 months ago
having to weigh Kaja Foglio Cuombajj Witches vs Seb McKinnon Cuombajj Witches seems like the toughest question this set will ask!
In this case Seb wins out easily. That art is stunning.
I have 68 active EDH decks, with more in progress. I don't consider this a problem. Do you?
I am also one of those barbarians who enjoys winning by turning creatures sideways.

User avatar
Guardman
A Dog's Dream of Man
Posts: 672
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: In a Turn-Based World

Post by Guardman » 10 months ago

DirkGently wrote:
10 months ago
Ghen, Arcanum Weaver kind of low-key annoys me. What exactly about him is red? The only defense I've seen is that it's a similar effect to Goblin Welder...but plenty of black cards have similar effects (i.e. Champion of Stray Souls, Doomed Necromancer, Hell's Caretaker), and also red doesn't mess with enchantments. Black doesn't generally mess with them either although I guess it does now. Enchantment synergy has historically been primarily white, then green, and then it's pretty thin tbh. I could accept abzan or naya, but mardu? And besides, the logic that "this color does this sort of mechanic, and this color cares about this type, therefore a card that's both colors can do this mechanic with this type" doesn't seem accurate. Green can do destroy target (artifact/enchantment), and green cares about creatures, but green can't do "destroy target creature".

Eh, I guess maybe I'm being overly critical. But I think he would have made more sense as either abzan, naya, or even RW or BW...maybe even RG or BG? Idk. It just seems like the link to enchantments - which is probably the most important part of the card, since you can build him without intentional recursion synergy, but you can't really build him without enchantments - is only one of the three colors.

I think part of it is that wotc seems to be forcing extra colors into legendaries to make them more playable. Personally I find 3C annoying open-ended with too many options.

It also just annoys me because seriously, how many "synergizes with X permanent type" commanders do we really need? Although I'll admit it's at least a lot more interesting of a synergy than Tuvasa the Sunlit.
Technically red does interact with enchantments. Red can put lore counters on sagas and more importantly red is the best color at sacrificing enchantments they control, which was actually a theme in Theros Beyon Death.

More importantly, black cannot sacrifice/destroy enchantments they control.

White is more laze-fair about sacrificing enchantments.

So the long answer is that technically Ghen, Arcanum Weaver could've been BW, but he makes more sense from a mechanical standpoint as RBW. Given that, he is technically the right colors, even though it looks weird. Still waiting for the Azban Enchantress Commander though.

Edit: Just saw the End the Turn commander. I really feel I have to build her now just because she is amazing and right up my alley.

BeneTleilax
Posts: 885
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by BeneTleilax » 10 months ago

They actually printed Ach, Hans! Hans Erikson.
Decks: Flicker Feather, Krenko, Varina, Zabaz

User avatar
Dunharrow
Posts: 950
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Montreal

Post by Dunharrow » 10 months ago

I am not so worried about whether these cards are the right colors. What I appreciate is that they are narrow and not goodstuffy. I haven't seen a single Golos.
The New World fell not to a sword but to a meme

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Commander”