Ugh I like you Kuma but that is way too argumentative for such a little commentary.
1) I am well aware of the Rahkshasa of D&D but even there if you read their entry (in the various monster manual equivalents for each edition) you will find out that in the game they are primarily considered Shapeshifters and master illusionists. Not Cats. Were-tiger happens to be the most common form.
2) The connection I made to Lamia from Naga was a physiomorphic one, though the paragraph where I made that clearer was deleted when I rewrote the post. Lamia (Ala D&D, or Feist) are essentially people with lower trunks/feet replaced with snake parts. The idea of "The Lamia" is about as useful to a card game as "The Gorgon" or "The Medusa" etc. IE: Not very. Naga (ala D&D, numerous literary sources and myth) have a similar form. The logic is not at all unreasonable if you don't get too narrow in your criteria.
As for their respective cultural gap, I suspect the Lamia directly relates to the Naga myth via cultural appropriation. The leap is not extraordinary. And in this day and age, a fantasy game can make it without blinking an eye.
@Leviathan: Yeah, going by logic, they should have had at least the Snake type attached as well. I'm more annoyed by the fact that Theros established all Dryads are Nymphs (and it's correct), so Shanodin Dryads got the Nymph type (back), but all the other Dryads didn't, so now we have a few Dryads with the Nymph type and a few of them without it (and it's not even plane-based at this point, since Shanodin is from Dominaria).
Considering Lampads, Naiads and all the others subtypes of Nymphs didn't get their own type, the most sensible course of action would have been to eliminate the Dryad type entirely and make all of them just Nymphs.
By the way (answering to Paul's mention of it, too), Coiling Oracle couldn't be a Naga, because Coiling Oracle is a scientific experiment of the Simic. They literally blended an elf and a snake together. It's the work of mad science, not a race of beings.
I like Monks, too. The wuxia flavor of the Jeskai clan is really great.
As I said in the article, they just used the D&D Rakshasas. It's sort of an internal corporate synergy. (I don't like it much, but it's what it is. It's true of other flavor choices as well. When in doubt, they go with the D&D route).
And mythological Nagas have nothing to do with Lamias. The original Lamia of the myth was a single creature (just like for Hydra, Medusa, Pegasus, and many other Greek myths where one unique creature was later turned into one of a kind in pop culture, including "pop culture" from before the 20th century). And her defining trait was the fact that she would eat her children after seducing men. She was akin to a succubus, or a vampire, and a metaphor for ancestral fears about mothers harming their children. My point being that fantasy settings use Lamias as lonely monsters, so you can't make them into a whole society of beings with males, females, social structures and so, if you want to be at least partially true to the mythological roots and not use Lamia just as a random name (which was most definitely not Theros's M.O.).
Whereas the mythological Nagas are depicted as a people, not just one monster. They're largely benevolent (if dangerous) and protect specific places, especially the bodies of water. They're like natural spirits, and often deities, which fits the Eastern philosophies within which they've been imagined, as a way to personify nature through the figure of the big snakes, that were both feared and admired for their majesty, considered sacred. The best comparison here is to faeries of the Celtic tradition, intended as a whole, elves, leprechaun, sprites, and such, creatures that represent the mysteries and whims and beauty and dangers of nature, and that humans can sometimes befriend or worship but always at their own risk. In some traditions the Nagas, or some specific subset of them, have a darker interpretation, but you can opine the same is true of the Celtic faeries, too.
End of little mythological divagation!
I do agree that a second Grand Creature Types Update is sorely needed. Some inconsistencies can't be solved, though, because they have too much mechanical impact at this point. For instance, I always find odd that there are Zombies with associated types, like Dwarf, Elf, Giant, Dragon, Plant, Crocodile and so, that tie to what the creatures were before their corpses were raised from the dead. Which is cool, but then all the other Zombies that haven't another specific type should have the Human type attached (Vampires have this issue too). Except that would make the Human type even larger, and there are too many cards that care about it now, not to mention what would mean for Tribal Wars (not that they really think about it, ever). And yet Zombie is de facto treated as an attribute in those cases, the same as Soldier or Wizard, but not in the cases where they are meant to be reanimated Humans, which makes it inconsistent, if necessarily so.
I have just one thing to add to the VMA format. It was indeed a good format to draft (not one of the best like rise of eldrazi but still good) but the sealed format was not good. Most of the time sealed felt weak and sometimes something broken would happen and win the game.
Can't believe lsv came back that 2nd game, I was just watching going there is zero ways he wins this but then draws the clutch will to completely turn it around. Sweet game.
One might argue that the Naga and the Snakes would view Elves, Apes and Humans to be the same, same with Imp's and Devils, Catholics and Protestants. You get the idea.
I'd agree with RexDart on both points. As much as I love the potential that Kscope has, giving it a few months off and a haircut might help freshen things up.
I suspect the choice of Naga was a flavor choice because while the mythos isn't really Indian/Hindic it has Rakshasa (though they really goofed on the creature type there too, Cat Demon?? those guys in creative really didn't do their due diligence there.), Djinni, Efreeti, and other eastern creatures. Naga is a south eastern Asian mythological creature similar to the Lamia of the Greek legends. Unfortuately there, they could have made Coiling Oracle a Naga instead of Elf Snake and we would have good precedent.
It could also be that R&D pushed the Naga cards out of Theros block and they were reused after reflavoring. So what was initially Lamia type became Naga type. Personally I think it is about time for a new round of Universal Generic Type changes. Just to make everything a little more sensible and organized instead of the mess types have become. Especially in regards to the Humans, Elves and Goblins super types.
I'm a little annoyed at the inclusion of Naga, when there is an already supported tribe out there that could have been used, ie. snake. You pointed out the differences between the Kamigawa snakes and these nagas, but really they look the same as Coiling Oracle to me. I don't think it would have been any sort of stretch to call the nagas here snakes, and you could have gotten use out of your old Kamigawa cards as well. Seems like a misfire to me.
On the other hand, I really like the inclusion of monks. These guys were really underdeveloped in Kamigawa and I appreciate seeing more of them. I just hope we get a few more and continue to grow this tribe. I really want them to stick around, but maybe that's just me.
Standard staples: Standard prices are, overall, up again this week? Most of your entries have red changes, dropping in price. probably a typo? Always love the State of the P!
FWIW, I think you should give K-Scope tribal another shot with Khans in the format, and just ban knights/Humans. There are a ton of potential decks in this format with a wide variety of tribes, I've brewed up several myself, but almost nobody is playing anything other than the easiest builds of the most obvious decks.
These specialty formats are all prone to this kind of problem. Singleton has been won this year by: Elf, Goblin, Knight, Goblin, Knight. And the last Knight deck was playing a ton of anti-Goblin tech and three Goblin decks in that event went x-1 right behind it. Singleton has a Goblin problem the way K-Scope has a Knights problem.
I would suggest giving both K-Scope and Singleton a short break and trying again in the summer, just running extra regular tribal events in the meantime.
Certainly a good control deck is possible in the format. Pernicious Deed and Supreme Command together make for a powerful control shell. The problem I see with the control strategy is that it doesn't have any synergy with the available tribes. Also Pernicious Deed is so expensive that no one will bother purchasing them for the events.
The lack of disruption (how much does Rishadan Port cost?), synergies, combos, and powerful one-mana spells turn the format into a slog. It's not going to be anything other than mid-range creatures versus other mid-range creatures.
That and the distorting effect of the hybrid mana cards make for an uninteresting format.
Personally, I hate kaleidoscope and hope we never do it again. Maybe if they come out with another three or four multicolor sets, and do some reprints of the more expensive cards, that would open it up enough to make it a viable format, but as things stand I don't think it's something I would ever want to play again.
I'm almost always opposed to bans. I would prefer to see a stable metagame. If people know what they're up against, they can adapt to it. That's true in normal formats, but in Kaleidoscope there are so playable cards that everyone is going to converge on the same things regardless. It's almost like a block constructed event. There are so few cards to choose from that everyone chooses the same ones.
I agree with Romellos that the most powerful knight is Stillmoon Cavalier. Still, I wouldn't ban it, because there are enough ways to kill it (UR, RG, UG (you can play Snakeform in any blue or green deck)), not to mention mass removal of course.
Knight of New Alara is strong, but it's main problem is that it competes for a 4-drop spot with much superior Wilt-Leaf Liege. That's why I only played 3, and probably that's one too many - you definitely don't want 2 of them early on. It's also bad on it's own and more vulnerable to removal, as compared to the liege. So I strongly disagree that Knight of New Alara is the most problematic knight (if that was your point, Kuma) or that it is in general too powerful for the format.
I believe Knight decks have been so successful because players didn't play many good control decks (which are definitely possible in this format). With Oversoul of Dusk now being gone there is even less reason to not make a deck filled with spot removal and mass removal and wreck the knights (URG/UBR/URW/BRG combinations are all fine). If players fail to do so, that doesn't make the knights too strong in general, but it makes them too strong in an environment where players don't adapt (which might still be a legitimate reason for banning, depending on one's philosophy).
Electrolyze kills Stillmoon Cavalier and Knight of New Alara (and bunch of 2 drops) and nets you a card. Prophetic Bolt kills any knight and nets you a card. Terminate kills any knight except for Stillmoon Cavalier for 2 mana, giving you tempo advantage. Snakeform ambushes every knight and nets you a card. Supreme Verdict clears the table. Teferi's Moat prevents most knights from attacking you. Etc.
I find myself arguing against bans in practically all of these discussions, so it might be just my "anti-ban, let the players figure out the solutions" bias at work, but I truly believe that most "problematic" cards are evaluated wrongly by the "pro-ban people" (I have to include AJ_Impy as my complete opposite in this group, since I don't remember you ever disagreeing with proposed bans, haha).
Anyway, while I disagree that the knights are powerful enough to be banned, and am in this sense against their ban, I don't *really* care if they're banned or not (the same as with other cards that were banned before). It won't make the format any less fun for me (not to say that Kaleidoscope is particularly fun) if there is a small additional restriction.
Game Two vs Goblins was only one I didn't sideboard. (He didn't either) I didn't document it on the 4th Round, 'cuz it was so quick, but did do the BSZ & O-ring.
Nonetheless, good point. I need to get into those habits.
Also detailing my matches better, writing down ops hand, etc, instead of relying on my fading memory.
I'd say it isn't any one knight lord: It's all of them. There's a critical mass of knight lords (Plus the Cavalier, and KotR, which is powerful enough to see play outside of kaleidoscope and even outside its tribe) which make the deck as a whole a step above the rest of the format. That isn't healthy.
I'm gonna say it, but only cause I luvs ya: If you are going to set up a fund to go to "the bigger stage", you've got to play like you mean it.
Every time I read "Didn't Sideboard" I cringed. Black Sun's Zenith and Oblivion Ring should have come in Rounds 2 and 3. I could see if you didn't have anything at all to bring in, but you did. I know it was just the local FNM, I know those matches seemed like they were in the bag, but there is no reason not to maximize your deck. Playing your best game is better for you AND your opponent to improve.
Even in sealed, shifting cards between games is really important. I'll always take a few moments to browse through and see if their are ways to swing my curve up/down to meet the situation at hand.
You don't have to condemn yourself to nothing but playtesting every waking second from now to whenever, but those small things you can strengthen in your gameplay will mean a lot when you are still hoping to make Day 2 with a 5-2 record sitting across from a GP Grinder.
Ascendancy Combo
A Standard Magic deck, by Andrew Baeckstrom
11th place at a tournament in Indianapolis, Indiana, United States on 2014-09-27
Maindeck:
Artifacts
1 Astral Cornucopia
1 Briber's Purse
Creatures
4 Kiora's Follower
4 Rattleclaw Mystic
4 Sylvan Caryatid
Enchantments
4 Dragon Mantle
4 Jeskai Ascendancy
1 Nylea's Presence
Instants
3 Dig Through Time
4 Retraction Helix
Sorceries
4 Commune with the Gods
2 Taigam's Scheming
3 Twinflame
Lands
3 Battlefield Forge
4 Mana Confluence
2 Shivan Reef
2 Temple of Abandon
1 Temple of Epiphany
3 Temple of Mystery
2 Temple of Plenty
4 Yavimaya Coast
Sideboard:
4 Circle of Flame
3 Aetherspouts
3 Magma Spray
4 Swan Song
1 Restock
Well, that's exactly what we'll do. :)
Your inner vorthos and graphic arts background show so clearly here. Seems like you had a good deal of fun coming up with this. :D
Thanks Levi :) I need to pull out the art supplies and do more drawing at some point. My urge to do so waxes and wanes quite a bit.
Ugh I like you Kuma but that is way too argumentative for such a little commentary.
1) I am well aware of the Rahkshasa of D&D but even there if you read their entry (in the various monster manual equivalents for each edition) you will find out that in the game they are primarily considered Shapeshifters and master illusionists. Not Cats. Were-tiger happens to be the most common form.
2) The connection I made to Lamia from Naga was a physiomorphic one, though the paragraph where I made that clearer was deleted when I rewrote the post. Lamia (Ala D&D, or Feist) are essentially people with lower trunks/feet replaced with snake parts. The idea of "The Lamia" is about as useful to a card game as "The Gorgon" or "The Medusa" etc. IE: Not very. Naga (ala D&D, numerous literary sources and myth) have a similar form. The logic is not at all unreasonable if you don't get too narrow in your criteria.
As for their respective cultural gap, I suspect the Lamia directly relates to the Naga myth via cultural appropriation. The leap is not extraordinary. And in this day and age, a fantasy game can make it without blinking an eye.
But I am glad we agree on SOME things.
@Leviathan: Yeah, going by logic, they should have had at least the Snake type attached as well. I'm more annoyed by the fact that Theros established all Dryads are Nymphs (and it's correct), so Shanodin Dryads got the Nymph type (back), but all the other Dryads didn't, so now we have a few Dryads with the Nymph type and a few of them without it (and it's not even plane-based at this point, since Shanodin is from Dominaria).
Considering Lampads, Naiads and all the others subtypes of Nymphs didn't get their own type, the most sensible course of action would have been to eliminate the Dryad type entirely and make all of them just Nymphs.
By the way (answering to Paul's mention of it, too), Coiling Oracle couldn't be a Naga, because Coiling Oracle is a scientific experiment of the Simic. They literally blended an elf and a snake together. It's the work of mad science, not a race of beings.
I like Monks, too. The wuxia flavor of the Jeskai clan is really great.
As I said in the article, they just used the D&D Rakshasas. It's sort of an internal corporate synergy. (I don't like it much, but it's what it is. It's true of other flavor choices as well. When in doubt, they go with the D&D route).
And mythological Nagas have nothing to do with Lamias. The original Lamia of the myth was a single creature (just like for Hydra, Medusa, Pegasus, and many other Greek myths where one unique creature was later turned into one of a kind in pop culture, including "pop culture" from before the 20th century). And her defining trait was the fact that she would eat her children after seducing men. She was akin to a succubus, or a vampire, and a metaphor for ancestral fears about mothers harming their children. My point being that fantasy settings use Lamias as lonely monsters, so you can't make them into a whole society of beings with males, females, social structures and so, if you want to be at least partially true to the mythological roots and not use Lamia just as a random name (which was most definitely not Theros's M.O.).
Whereas the mythological Nagas are depicted as a people, not just one monster. They're largely benevolent (if dangerous) and protect specific places, especially the bodies of water. They're like natural spirits, and often deities, which fits the Eastern philosophies within which they've been imagined, as a way to personify nature through the figure of the big snakes, that were both feared and admired for their majesty, considered sacred. The best comparison here is to faeries of the Celtic tradition, intended as a whole, elves, leprechaun, sprites, and such, creatures that represent the mysteries and whims and beauty and dangers of nature, and that humans can sometimes befriend or worship but always at their own risk. In some traditions the Nagas, or some specific subset of them, have a darker interpretation, but you can opine the same is true of the Celtic faeries, too.
End of little mythological divagation!
I do agree that a second Grand Creature Types Update is sorely needed. Some inconsistencies can't be solved, though, because they have too much mechanical impact at this point. For instance, I always find odd that there are Zombies with associated types, like Dwarf, Elf, Giant, Dragon, Plant, Crocodile and so, that tie to what the creatures were before their corpses were raised from the dead. Which is cool, but then all the other Zombies that haven't another specific type should have the Human type attached (Vampires have this issue too). Except that would make the Human type even larger, and there are too many cards that care about it now, not to mention what would mean for Tribal Wars (not that they really think about it, ever). And yet Zombie is de facto treated as an attribute in those cases, the same as Soldier or Wizard, but not in the cases where they are meant to be reanimated Humans, which makes it inconsistent, if necessarily so.
Very nice VMA opinion section. I was starting to miss a non-state-of-the-client opinion section.
I have just one thing to add to the VMA format. It was indeed a good format to draft (not one of the best like rise of eldrazi but still good) but the sealed format was not good. Most of the time sealed felt weak and sometimes something broken would happen and win the game.
Heh, well, they *were* uncommon before Vintage Masters.
"We lose Aquamoeba and Circular Logic, both uncommons."
This made my head hurt.
That vintage league game was incredible.
(Spoilers)
Can't believe lsv came back that 2nd game, I was just watching going there is zero ways he wins this but then draws the clutch will to completely turn it around. Sweet game.
One might argue that the Naga and the Snakes would view Elves, Apes and Humans to be the same, same with Imp's and Devils, Catholics and Protestants. You get the idea.
I'd agree with RexDart on both points. As much as I love the potential that Kscope has, giving it a few months off and a haircut might help freshen things up.
I suspect the choice of Naga was a flavor choice because while the mythos isn't really Indian/Hindic it has Rakshasa (though they really goofed on the creature type there too, Cat Demon?? those guys in creative really didn't do their due diligence there.), Djinni, Efreeti, and other eastern creatures. Naga is a south eastern Asian mythological creature similar to the Lamia of the Greek legends. Unfortuately there, they could have made Coiling Oracle a Naga instead of Elf Snake and we would have good precedent.
It could also be that R&D pushed the Naga cards out of Theros block and they were reused after reflavoring. So what was initially Lamia type became Naga type. Personally I think it is about time for a new round of Universal Generic Type changes. Just to make everything a little more sensible and organized instead of the mess types have become. Especially in regards to the Humans, Elves and Goblins super types.
Good stuff as always, nice life lessons as usual. And you know I love the drawings!
I'm a little annoyed at the inclusion of Naga, when there is an already supported tribe out there that could have been used, ie. snake. You pointed out the differences between the Kamigawa snakes and these nagas, but really they look the same as Coiling Oracle to me. I don't think it would have been any sort of stretch to call the nagas here snakes, and you could have gotten use out of your old Kamigawa cards as well. Seems like a misfire to me.
On the other hand, I really like the inclusion of monks. These guys were really underdeveloped in Kamigawa and I appreciate seeing more of them. I just hope we get a few more and continue to grow this tribe. I really want them to stick around, but maybe that's just me.
Good stuff.
Standard staples: Standard prices are, overall, up again this week? Most of your entries have red changes, dropping in price. probably a typo? Always love the State of the P!
FWIW, I think you should give K-Scope tribal another shot with Khans in the format, and just ban knights/Humans. There are a ton of potential decks in this format with a wide variety of tribes, I've brewed up several myself, but almost nobody is playing anything other than the easiest builds of the most obvious decks.
These specialty formats are all prone to this kind of problem. Singleton has been won this year by: Elf, Goblin, Knight, Goblin, Knight. And the last Knight deck was playing a ton of anti-Goblin tech and three Goblin decks in that event went x-1 right behind it. Singleton has a Goblin problem the way K-Scope has a Knights problem.
I would suggest giving both K-Scope and Singleton a short break and trying again in the summer, just running extra regular tribal events in the meantime.
Certainly a good control deck is possible in the format. Pernicious Deed and Supreme Command together make for a powerful control shell. The problem I see with the control strategy is that it doesn't have any synergy with the available tribes. Also Pernicious Deed is so expensive that no one will bother purchasing them for the events.
The lack of disruption (how much does Rishadan Port cost?), synergies, combos, and powerful one-mana spells turn the format into a slog. It's not going to be anything other than mid-range creatures versus other mid-range creatures.
That and the distorting effect of the hybrid mana cards make for an uninteresting format.
Personally, I hate kaleidoscope and hope we never do it again. Maybe if they come out with another three or four multicolor sets, and do some reprints of the more expensive cards, that would open it up enough to make it a viable format, but as things stand I don't think it's something I would ever want to play again.
I'm almost always opposed to bans. I would prefer to see a stable metagame. If people know what they're up against, they can adapt to it. That's true in normal formats, but in Kaleidoscope there are so playable cards that everyone is going to converge on the same things regardless. It's almost like a block constructed event. There are so few cards to choose from that everyone chooses the same ones.
I agree with Romellos that the most powerful knight is Stillmoon Cavalier. Still, I wouldn't ban it, because there are enough ways to kill it (UR, RG, UG (you can play Snakeform in any blue or green deck)), not to mention mass removal of course.
Knight of New Alara is strong, but it's main problem is that it competes for a 4-drop spot with much superior Wilt-Leaf Liege. That's why I only played 3, and probably that's one too many - you definitely don't want 2 of them early on. It's also bad on it's own and more vulnerable to removal, as compared to the liege. So I strongly disagree that Knight of New Alara is the most problematic knight (if that was your point, Kuma) or that it is in general too powerful for the format.
I believe Knight decks have been so successful because players didn't play many good control decks (which are definitely possible in this format). With Oversoul of Dusk now being gone there is even less reason to not make a deck filled with spot removal and mass removal and wreck the knights (URG/UBR/URW/BRG combinations are all fine). If players fail to do so, that doesn't make the knights too strong in general, but it makes them too strong in an environment where players don't adapt (which might still be a legitimate reason for banning, depending on one's philosophy).
Electrolyze kills Stillmoon Cavalier and Knight of New Alara (and bunch of 2 drops) and nets you a card. Prophetic Bolt kills any knight and nets you a card. Terminate kills any knight except for Stillmoon Cavalier for 2 mana, giving you tempo advantage. Snakeform ambushes every knight and nets you a card. Supreme Verdict clears the table. Teferi's Moat prevents most knights from attacking you. Etc.
I find myself arguing against bans in practically all of these discussions, so it might be just my "anti-ban, let the players figure out the solutions" bias at work, but I truly believe that most "problematic" cards are evaluated wrongly by the "pro-ban people" (I have to include AJ_Impy as my complete opposite in this group, since I don't remember you ever disagreeing with proposed bans, haha).
Anyway, while I disagree that the knights are powerful enough to be banned, and am in this sense against their ban, I don't *really* care if they're banned or not (the same as with other cards that were banned before). It won't make the format any less fun for me (not to say that Kaleidoscope is particularly fun) if there is a small additional restriction.
Game Two vs Goblins was only one I didn't sideboard. (He didn't either) I didn't document it on the 4th Round, 'cuz it was so quick, but did do the BSZ & O-ring.
Nonetheless, good point. I need to get into those habits.
Also detailing my matches better, writing down ops hand, etc, instead of relying on my fading memory.
@matthew, thankfully we now definitely know that block (dailies, queues etc.) are returning:
http://magic.wizards.com/en/MTGO/articles/archive/magic-online-announcem...
The format wasn't losing its support, it's just that interest drops off so much in the period after the core set is released.
I'd say it isn't any one knight lord: It's all of them. There's a critical mass of knight lords (Plus the Cavalier, and KotR, which is powerful enough to see play outside of kaleidoscope and even outside its tribe) which make the deck as a whole a step above the rest of the format. That isn't healthy.
I'm gonna say it, but only cause I luvs ya: If you are going to set up a fund to go to "the bigger stage", you've got to play like you mean it.
Every time I read "Didn't Sideboard" I cringed. Black Sun's Zenith and Oblivion Ring should have come in Rounds 2 and 3. I could see if you didn't have anything at all to bring in, but you did. I know it was just the local FNM, I know those matches seemed like they were in the bag, but there is no reason not to maximize your deck. Playing your best game is better for you AND your opponent to improve.
Even in sealed, shifting cards between games is really important. I'll always take a few moments to browse through and see if their are ways to swing my curve up/down to meet the situation at hand.
You don't have to condemn yourself to nothing but playtesting every waking second from now to whenever, but those small things you can strengthen in your gameplay will mean a lot when you are still hoping to make Day 2 with a 5-2 record sitting across from a GP Grinder.
- Gio