Sets [DMU] Dominaria United Spoilers

sproutinggoblin.jpg


Behold, the handsome lad. For the record, Velrun, I'm adding this little guy to the list of "cards I'd happily draft without being able to kick it" (except that's a lie, because I am drawn to Green.)

Oh, he brought a friend? How lovely.

elvishhydromancer.jpg
 
Do cards often use the not complete name in their rules text? Is there another card that is the original King Darien???
We have often (for about 5-8 years now) seen cards that refer to themself using only part of the name. But the examples I can think of all had their own full name in the rules text as well. So it was only when the name was repeated in the rules text. Maybe the first would be the full length and the second mention would only be part of the name.

I personally cannot think of a card that only mentions itself once on the card and only uses part of the name.

Does this mean they can never make another King Darien?
 
We have often (for about 5-8 years now) seen cards that refer to themself using only part of the name. But the examples I can think of all had their own full name in the rules text as well. So it was only when the name was repeated in the rules text. Maybe the first would be the full length and the second mention would only be part of the name.

I personally cannot think of a card that only mentions itself once on the card and only uses part of the name.

Does this mean they can never make another King Darien?



I think this is a relatively recent development, not too many older cards that do that shortened reference to themselves. How else would they fit all that extra text for (mostly) mediocre cards with (mostly) mediocre mechanics and counters? I think King Darien is fine as a design, but there are so many supplemental cards that I can recall reading once and thinking but why with so much unnecessary complexity. And then never ever revisiting again because most were just garbage.

I will say that this is definitely a bit jarring. I'm so used to the "proper" formatting for self reference that it just feels weird to see. Almost feels like a fake card on first glance.
 
Does this mean they can never make another King Darien?
The first 47 King Dariens (Kings Darien?) weren’t worthy of a card, and the Phyrexian invasion is putting the bloodline in jeopardy.

I’m considering the card as a go- wide, counters and tokens signpost: he hits all my three colour archetypes containing {W}{G}.
 
A few more:

Tear-Asunder-DMU-265.jpg
Phyrexian-Missionary-DMU-265.jpg
Tribute-to-Urborg-DMU-265.jpg


Are they gonna print an off-color kicker card I DON'T want to run?

Meria-Scholar-of-Antiquity-DMU-265.jpg


What a weird card in Gruul. I'm sure someone here will be into this, though.

Garna-Bloodfist-of-Keld-showcase-DMU-265.jpg


This feels REALLY strong in an Aristocrats shell. Hell, any aggressive shell really.
 
Is the Goyf better or more interesting than

?

Hybrid mana is great and random pod like ability for redundancy.
I don't think it's better or more interesting, no.
I think they're different enough that a 1:1 comparison isn't really fair. Fiend Artisan can't grow itself without tapping and squandering other resources already on the board. The Goyf, by contrast, can fuel itself and other graveyard synergy cards for a small one-time mana payment. I think having a way to put 1/7th of your starting library into your graveyard on one card can enable some shenanigans in a way fiend artisan never could.

Basically, if you want a card doing an expensive birthing pod impression, you'd play Fiend Artisan. If you want a card that allows you to insert your library into your graveyard, you'd play Anagoyf. If you want both, play both.
 
Man, this set is *stacked*. I went through the spoiler and I'm up to 40 cards that I'm interested in.
Totally agree. I don't think I'm going to be *playing* a substantial percentage of the cards I think are cool in my Cube, but I am very excited to go to prerelease and draft this set on Arena.

Also, a contender for best art in the set:
tailswipe.jpg
 
Top