It is currently Mon Jun 18, 2018 4:40 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 336 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 17  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 11:12 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 801
Location: Indy
Was Jaya Ballard in the Time Spiral books?

I was under the impression she had an off screen death.

_________________
Yuri is best girl!


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 11:32 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27, 2015
Posts: 1560
I believe she was said to have died offscreen. I remember there being a big stink when one of the Time Spiral novels mentioning Jaya came out.

Make Meathooks Great Again is what I want out of the Dominaria set.

These are meathooks.

_________________
The Man in Black fled across Manhattan, and the Gunslinger jumped off rooftops.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:00 am 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 10010
Was Jaya Ballard in the Time Spiral books?

I was under the impression she had an off screen death.

Freyalise and Jodah discussed it, but in fairness, there's not much evidence to suggest it wasn't an alternate reality Jodah.

_________________
At twilight's end, the shadow's crossed / a new world birthed, the elder lost.
Yet on the morn we wake to find / that mem'ry left so far behind.
To deafened ears we ask, unseen / "Which is life and which the dream?"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:02 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 801
Location: Indy
There is nothing to say it was either.

However, the current story team has ignored Dummermouth era continuity before, they can do it again.

_________________
Yuri is best girl!


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:19 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 10010
There is nothing to say it was either.

However, the current story team has ignored Dummermouth era continuity before, they can do it again.

There were a few lines that could be interpreted as such though.
Towards the end of future sight, Jhoira confronted him about who he was. It could be read as he was an alternate Jodah. Though it could also read that he just didn't feel like he lived up to the legend.

_________________
At twilight's end, the shadow's crossed / a new world birthed, the elder lost.
Yet on the morn we wake to find / that mem'ry left so far behind.
To deafened ears we ask, unseen / "Which is life and which the dream?"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:47 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jan 05, 2016
Posts: 1349
Location: noe valley
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/they
Make Meathooks Great Again is what I want out of the Dominaria set.

These are meathooks.
if they rebooted dominaria after all this time and made it centered around those disgusting nu-slivers i'd have a conniption

_________________
i disappointed myself when you asked for a secret and i could
only produce that my father would have preferred that
i had gone into politics, instead


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:58 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27, 2015
Posts: 1560
Slivers vs Kavu

_________________
The Man in Black fled across Manhattan, and the Gunslinger jumped off rooftops.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:05 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Posts: 1931
Location: Roaming Dominaria
Make Meathooks Great Again is what I want out of the Dominaria set.

These are meathooks.
if they rebooted dominaria after all this time and made it centered around those disgusting nu-slivers i'd have a conniption
This. So much. And I'm not even a sliver player.

Slivers are kind of in a weird place. Wizards seems to have got the message that people absolutely hated the Nu-Slivers, but as far as I know, the part that they acknowledged as a mistake was only their look, not the mechanical change, which to me at least was 50% of the problem. Maro said that if Slivers are going to return, it'll be with the new one-sided wording ("Slivers you control"), not with the classical one. To me personally, that means I never ever want to see another Sliver in Magic again. They've ruined their mechanical identity just as they did with trolls and skeletons when they retired regeneration. I'm pretty sure sharing their abilities with all Slivers around them is something that Slivers had no control over originally, so at the very least they'd have to provide a very good in-universe explanation that actually matters in the story for why they suddenly split up into several incompatible hives to make the "you control" clause work. There could be different evil overlords who have taken control of a bunch of Slivers (e.g. through a Hivestone) and somehow managed to separate them from the other hives to have them fight each other. Even then I'd find it extremely hard to accept them. I want this to feel like Dominaria after all, and nuances like these matter a lot.

That said, I think there are a few other obstacles to putting Slivers into Dominaria. Since it's going to be only one measly set and Slivers would need a certain number of cards to make them work, there might not be enough space for them becausse of all the other, much cooler stuff that hopefully will be in this set. What's more, people at Wizards have admitted that they're running out of design space for Slivers. In fact, they introduced a few new keywords in Future Sight that only served to give more keywords to the Slivers. They've printed pretty much every conceivable ability on a Sliver at this point, the only thing they could do would be to just take stuff that they already did and print it with the new one-sided wording, but that would be super lame and not really open up new design space. Heck, even the five colour Sliver lord thing has been done to death at this point.

Sign me up for those Kavu, though. :hand:

_________________
"Enchant me with your tale-telling. Tell about Tree, Grass, River, and Wind.
Tell why Truth must fight with Falsehood, and why Truth will always win."
—Love Song of Night and Day


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:14 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 6939
Honestly, the "all slivers" clause of the originals was a pretty glaring fault in the first place. If slivers gain abilities on a proximity basis, then why do my slivers, that start maybe hundreds of yards across the battlefield from you, give your slivers any powers outside of any time they happen to be near each other during combat? Like, in the story the Weatherlight crew only had to separate the slivers a little bit to keep them from sharing abilities during their fight. The fact the WotC moved to make their ability fall more in line with how they wanted other "lord" abilities to work isn't really worth stressing over. Their flavor and characterization changes were far more egregious and it seems they learned their lesson in that regard.

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:37 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 8796
AzureShade wrote:
Honestly, the "all slivers" clause of the originals was a pretty glaring fault in the first place. If slivers gain abilities on a proximity basis, then why do my slivers, that start maybe hundreds of yards across the battlefield from you, give your slivers any powers outside of any time they happen to be near each other during combat? Like, in the story the Weatherlight crew only had to separate the slivers a little bit to keep them from sharing abilities during their fight. The fact the WotC moved to make their ability fall more in line with how they wanted other "lord" abilities to work isn't really worth stressing over. Their flavor and characterization changes were far more egregious and it seems they learned their lesson in that regard.

To me, it was just another symptom of the over-all dumbing down of the game. Wizards clearly feels, and in fairness probably rightly so, that players (especially new players) don't like things they do to be potentially harmful to themselves. Mana burn was the first casualty that I noticed. Players didn't like that they had to be careful with their mana, and they didn't like that miscounting or using a powerful multi-mana producing artifact or land or whatever could potentially hurt them. Players didn't like that they could play a sliver and it might buff an opponent's sliver. They didn't like that playing their legend might mean that the opponent could kill it by playing their own. I get it. I don't like it, but I get it.

Frankly, I'm sort of amazed that Wizards still has "pay life" mechanics, as I would expect that to be an eventual victim of this "only positive plays" philosophy.

Personally, I really liked the potential negative of the slivers, as well as the really fun multiplayer shenanigans that could come into play with two or more teammates all playing slivers. But I do agree that the thoroughly illogical physical changes they made to the slivers are a worse problem, and the bigger slap in the face of long-time players and fans. I also personally find their justification (that things need to look basically "human" in order to be identified with) to be both ridiculous and insulting.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:42 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Posts: 1931
Location: Roaming Dominaria
The proximity thing is true, but it's neither here nor there. From a flavour perspective, maybe my Slivers shouldn't get abilities from your Slivers while they aren't attacking (though maybe an argument could be made if the frontlines aren't too far apart), but then they certainly should during combat (as the classical Slivers do by default). So it's not like the new wording is inherently more flavourful. And I'd argue that Slivers and other "lord" abilities are two different things. Slivers are Slivers, it's just how they're supposed to work. I really don't like it when they change the mechanical identity of well-liked and iconic things (especially things that might show up in a history focused and nostalgia driven set on Dominaria), and I think the benefits of leaving Slivers alone would have outweighed whatever minimal benefit Wizards believes they gain from changing it. If anything, it makes gameplay more confusing if multiple players have Slivers in play, because let's be honest, most people who play Sliver decks probably started with the original Slivers and are totally going to mix them with the new ones (if they play the new ones at all), and then the battlefield is going to be a mess of one- and two-sided Slivers. In other words, the change only affects scenarios where both players have Slivers, but that ideal world in which it will always be new Slivers vs. new Slivers simply doesn't exist. Finally, what about cards like Plague Sliver (Raven kind of ninja'd me there)? If they insist that every Sliver should be one-sided, they lose the ability to print Sliver hosers like that and to potentially make the gameplay more balanced by providing answers.

Sure, at the end of the day, the visual makeover was worse, but Slivers that say "Slivers you control" will never be Slivers to me.

_________________
"Enchant me with your tale-telling. Tell about Tree, Grass, River, and Wind.
Tell why Truth must fight with Falsehood, and why Truth will always win."
—Love Song of Night and Day


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 10:16 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 3571
Identity: Goblin Piker
Mana Burn was a mechanic that really didn't need to be around. It came up so rarely players didn't really teach it until it actually came up. Legendary permanents not being able to be played on the other side of the field makes little sense to me, since you aren't summoning the actual creature but a representation of it. Like, we never had a good explanation for why Khamal red and Khamal green could be in play at the same time other than that, and if that is the explanation for how legends work, then why would we limit them to one side of the field or the other?

But the new Slivers were just another mistake that WotC has made. I was always under the impression that Slivers granted abilities to each other due to the hive mind. I get they did it to cut down on complexity (you generally don't want to have to focus on too many things beyond your own board that effect your creatures without providing a direct physical reminder) but the thing about Slivers to me was they all provided abilities to all of them. That was a distinct sliver only thing to me. Also the visual change was stupid. You can argue that being bipedal is better for movement and energy conservation than slithering and that an "ultimate predatory species" should evolve into the best form possible, but they just look like the Predator and if they want them to not be snake-like, they should have multiple different forms. Like quadruped or just wings and heads (winged sliver without a tail) because we shouldn't be trying to relate or identify with a hive mind species. They SHOULD be completely alien.

_________________
Twitter: (at)MrEnglish22 if you want to reach me
My cube: http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/mrenglish22


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:22 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 12841
Identity: Chaoslight
Preferred Pronoun Set: She
I used to be against the way new slivers only buff your own, but after playing the eternal card game, which has a tribe with the same mechanic as slivers, its actuslly kind of miserable especially in draft. Getting a bunch of them in a draft can be oppresively strong, but if you opponent happened to draft just a few of them your entire deck becomes nerfed. Constructed on the other hand is fine, slivers was never super op, and in the mirror the effects basically cancel out in the long run

_________________
altimis wrote:
I never take anytihng Lily says seriously, except for when I take it personally. Then it's personal.
WotC_Ethan wrote:
People, buy more stuff.
#WotCstaff
Spoiler

Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:31 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 6939
Yes but you all also forget that story slivers and game-play slivers aren't really the same anyway. I don't think we've ever had a story written about competing hives of slivers. There was always just "slivers are a hive" vs. everyone else. It made sense ins the story for slivers to share effects with all of their kind because they were always all part of the same hive under a queen, overlord, or sovereign. We never got to see a story where two queens of different hives had their sliver babies duke it out. Why would competing hives share abilities with each-other? They would have a vested interest not to share abilities with their rivals until the competing hive was subjugated in some way or destroyed.

In game-play terms, players have control of competing hives. Unless you are suggesting that two opposing sets of slivers meet on the battlefield, decide to all be friendly and share abilities....while fighting each-other, and then....I don't know...maybe decide to team up as a mega hive and kill off their controllers?

Basically, game-play is just modeling something that the story never addressed. Cards like Plague Sliver are just relics of ideas that didn't pan out with the way Magic is currently aligned. Creature-type hosers are really easy to make though, so it's not like the change shut off a whole line of design. It just tamped down on one small path to that eventual end goal.

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:59 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 8796
AzureShade wrote:
Yes but you all also forget that story slivers and game-play slivers aren't really the same anyway. I don't think we've ever had a story written about competing hives of slivers. There was always just "slivers are a hive" vs. everyone else. It made sense ins the story for slivers to share effects with all of their kind because they were always all part of the same hive under a queen, overlord, or sovereign. We never got to see a story where two queens of different hives had their sliver babies duke it out. Why would competing hives share abilities with each-other? They would have a vested interest not to share abilities with their rivals until the competing hive was subjugated in some way or destroyed.

In game-play terms, players have control of competing hives. Unless you are suggesting that two opposing sets of slivers meet on the battlefield, decide to all be friendly and share abilities....while fighting each-other, and then....I don't know...maybe decide to team up as a mega hive and kill off their controllers?

Basically, game-play is just modeling something that the story never addressed. Cards like Plague Sliver are just relics of ideas that didn't pan out with the way Magic is currently aligned. Creature-type hosers are really easy to make though, so it's not like the change shut off a whole line of design. It just tamped down on one small path to that eventual end goal.

To be fair, you're the one who used the story as a justification of the change.

But regardless, I've never felt it was about slivers deciding to "be friend and share abilities." To me, that's the whole point of the sliver ability; it just happens. Slivers in close proximity (yes, including a battlefield) naturally attuned to the abilities of one another. It's not a conscious decision, but rather a biological reaction, like responding to pheromones or other species-specific behavior. The fact that the slivers are fighting against each other is irrelevant (and also likely has to do with the geas the summoning wizard places on summoned creatures). Any sliver is affected. It's just their biology, and part of what makes them one of the most unique and, in my opinion, interesting races in Magic. Before the change, anyway.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:37 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 801
Location: Indy
Make Meathooks Great Again is what I want out of the Dominaria set.

These are meathooks.
if they rebooted dominaria after all this time and made it centered around those disgusting nu-slivers i'd have a conniption
This. So much. And I'm not even a sliver player.

Slivers are kind of in a weird place. Wizards seems to have got the message that people absolutely hated the Nu-Slivers, but as far as I know, the part that they acknowledged as a mistake was only their look, not the mechanical change, which to me at least was 50% of the problem. Maro said that if Slivers are going to return, it'll be with the new one-sided wording ("Slivers you control"), not with the classical one. To me personally, that means I never ever want to see another Sliver in Magic again. They've ruined their mechanical identity just as they did with trolls and skeletons when they retired regeneration. I'm pretty sure sharing their abilities with all Slivers around them is something that Slivers had no control over originally, so at the very least they'd have to provide a very good in-universe explanation that actually matters in the story for why they suddenly split up into several incompatible hives to make the "you control" clause work. There could be different evil overlords who have taken control of a bunch of Slivers (e.g. through a Hivestone) and somehow managed to separate them from the other hives to have them fight each other. Even then I'd find it extremely hard to accept them. I want this to feel like Dominaria after all, and nuances like these matter a lot.

That said, I think there are a few other obstacles to putting Slivers into Dominaria. Since it's going to be only one measly set and Slivers would need a certain number of cards to make them work, there might not be enough space for them becausse of all the other, much cooler stuff that hopefully will be in this set. What's more, people at Wizards have admitted that they're running out of design space for Slivers. In fact, they introduced a few new keywords in Future Sight that only served to give more keywords to the Slivers. They've printed pretty much every conceivable ability on a Sliver at this point, the only thing they could do would be to just take stuff that they already did and print it with the new one-sided wording, but that would be super lame and not really open up new design space. Heck, even the five colour Sliver lord thing has been done to death at this point.

Sign me up for those Kavu, though. :hand:



I'm glad I'm not alone in this opinion. Hell I LOVED Licid's, and we haven't had once since Tempest block, so I can live without Slivers.

_________________
Yuri is best girl!


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:54 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 801
Location: Indy
Actually I was working on an Un-set with that politically incorrect board Travis Woo owned, and it had two slivers in it, one to address that problem.

_________________
Yuri is best girl!


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 12:09 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct 12, 2015
Posts: 674
This is definitely one mechanical criticism I do not understand at all. I kind of get missing mana burn. The wording change does not matter at all unless the other person is playing Slivers. Which they never are.

So I guess I feel sorry for the one playgroup out there where everybody only plays Slivers. They can house-rule the new ones to work like the old ones.

Oh boy is that art hot garbage though. I sort of tried to like it when Doug Beyer tried to (very reasonably) point out that after 3 whole blocks of Slivers, it was starting to get really hard to make hook-limbed snake worms with literally zero facial features visually distinct, but errrrrrrrggh.

_________________


"Ability words are flavor text for Melvins."

"Remember, dear friends: when we announce something and you imagine it, the odds that we made exactly that thing are zero."---Kelly Digges


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 2:03 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mar 27, 2015
Posts: 1560
What were licids? I mean in terms of a species and all, I know what the cards are.

edit: Maybe make Slivers a Masterpiece/Invocation/X exclusive, reprinting those Tempest block Slivers that saw a lot of play in Legacy.

_________________
The Man in Black fled across Manhattan, and the Gunslinger jumped off rooftops.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 2:06 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 6939
They were effectively symbiotic creatures that latched onto a host and gave them magical powers as compensation.

_________________
magicpablo666 wrote:
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in an thread with GM_Champion" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go in against AzureShade when card design is on the line!"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 336 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 17  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group