Sets [KHM] Kaldheim Official Previews

[Chris Taylor]

Anyone running Rx equipment?

It saddens me a little when I realize that I'm more excited to see commons than I am to see the mythic rares.

You know I don't love short sword++, but that art is sick as hell.
Like I want that helm in WoW

 

[Brad]

No one was interested in my Yu-Gi-Oh history series, and that's ok.

Would anyone want an article/post detailing the process of making a cube inspired by the newest set every set? I liked these cards, here's why, here's the scryfall searches I did and why, here's a list. Would go through the whole process.

Like this post if that's content you would check out. Don't know a better way to gauge interest.

 

[Zoss]

The ol' GW Legends deck is getting a boost, which is cool. I really do like that idea.

Honestly, if Abzan didn't have better things to be doing, I think it could be a good home for Legends thanks to the following cards. It might work as a subtheme for Abzan? It's cool that WotC seems to be going in this direction in the last few years, as it would go a ways towards giving Legends a mechanical identity.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

No one was interested in my Yu-Gi-Oh history series, and that's ok.

Would anyone want an article/post detailing the process of making a cube inspired by the newest set every set? I liked these cards, here's why, here's the scryfall searches I did and why, here's a list. Would go through the whole process.

Like this post if that's content you would check out. Don't know a better way to gauge interest.

I feel like that's something you'd want to find a larger outlet with which to share. I'm not sure anyone here (who isn't lurking) would really have an issue with making a set cube.

Perhaps apply to become a CubeCobra content creator and post it there?

 

[Brad]

I feel like that's something you'd want to find a larger outlet with which to share. I'm not sure anyone here (who isn't lurking) would really have an issue with making a set cube.

Perhaps apply to become a CubeCobra content creator and post it there?

Inspired by the new set, not a set cube. Like a Theros-inspired cube would likely end up focusing on the gods/devotion and/or enchantments. The M21-inspired cube might make an environment to accommodate the Shrines. Ikoria-inspired might use the Eldrazi as the true behemoths or attempt to utilize the new Ultimatums. Things like that.

I didn't know I could apply for that. I'll look into it.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

Inspired by the new set, not a set cube.

That's also what I was referring to, I should have been clearer with my verbiage. Sorry for the confusion!

 

[Brad]

That's also what I was referring to, I should have been clearer with my verbiage. Sorry for the confusion!

Then I think you're severely discrediting the work required to make a cube that isn't filled with generic, overused themes and random good stuff.

 

[Velrun]

I think you already asked this question when the lands in the Castle Vantress cycle were spoiled?

/me searches

Oh. Oh this is too funny not too quote, sorry Velrun



Anyway, this Tumblr post by MaRo still applies: https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/187783989713/mark-can-we-please-please-please-have-more

And again, I want to stress that I absolutely agree with you from a Vorthos point of view, but I definitely also agree with MaRo that legendary lands play really poorly. This causes a real conflict between wanting to show off the cool and unique places in the world with the desire to foster fun gameplay. In the end, gameplay concerns usually outweigh flavor concerns, which is why you are seeing so many nonlegendary legendary lands.

Looks like I broke my promise not to complain again

About MARO's answer: It's not an answer. We've heard it before and it's been debunked many, many times. Because running a legendary land doesn't play poorly. They're just giving the player a deck building constraint when they are constructing their deck. Only run 1 in your deck = Problem solved. That's how they do it in Commander. You're not suppose to have two on the battlefield anyways. We just saw pro player Autumn Burchett run two legendary black lands in their mono red Goblin deck on the last big tournament live on Twitch. Autumn would have prefered to run 4 copies but chose 2 because it is legendary. This is an interesting decision to make. Obviously if you make sure the lands are never legendary, then you can sell more packs and make more money because consumers need several in their decks. So if we want a more expensive game, let the lands stay non-legendary. If we want a more interesting gameplay and cheaper game, let them be legendary. Also it makes better sense.

Wizards will have this uproar from the consumers whenever they print a land that should have been legendary but isn't. It's all everyone talks about with that card in case you missed it. It's not a problem that will go away all by itself. If Wizards keep doing it to sell more packs, then the consumers will keep complaining because they prefer the card to be legendary. Imagine how right you have to be in order to actually say "I wish my card was worse/low-powered".

 

[Velrun]

Eldraine >= Kaldheim = Ikoria >> Theros Beyond Death > Zendikar Rising.

Thank you for elaborating <3 I 100 % agree with your ranking. I also like that they're giving us new frames to play with each set but also feel like they sometimes find a better suit than others

A thing I've noticed: Up until this set they have also made that extended art frame that looks more simple and less wordy. So far they've been doing (in my opinion) a really poor job with them because the extended art is not more art but less art, which is an odd thing to conclude but that's how they scaled the art. They had to zoom in on the middle of the art in order for it to fit the extended frame. It seems like with Kaldheim that little mischief so to speak is behind them Now it looks like they comission the artwork to suit the extended art.

If we take a look at Archon of Emeria from Zendikar Rising



This card follows the same extended art patterns as the other cards from Eldraine, Theros, Ikoria & Zendikar

If you look at the flying creature's claws, they've almost left the picture frame on the extended art but are 100 % visible on the normal card. If you look at the tail, it is gone on the extended art. Same goes for 1/5 of the sword in the hand at the top.

Now if we take a look at Kaldheim



Notice the trees on the left, the clouds on the right and the branch at the bottom. The extended art just has more art.

I truly hope this trend will continue and that this is not just one lucky Troll

 

[Onderzeeboot]

Oh Wow Velrun, I never noticed that (because I prefer just playing the plain (nonfoil) regular border versions of as many cards as possible in my cube), but that Archon of Emeria is a cropped and zoomed-in art frame rather than an extended art. Crazy!

Looks like I broke my promise not to complain again

About MARO's answer: It's not an answer. We've heard it before and it's been debunked many, many times. Because running a legendary land doesn't play poorly. They're just giving the player a deck building constraint when they are constructing their deck. Only run 1 in your deck = Problem solved. That's how they do it in Commander. You're not suppose to have two on the battlefield anyways. We just saw pro player Autumn Burchett run two legendary black lands in their mono red Goblin deck on the last big tournament live on Twitch. Autumn would have prefered to run 4 copies but chose 2 because it is legendary. This is an interesting decision to make. Obviously if you make sure the lands are never legendary, then you can sell more packs and make more money because consumers need several in their decks. So if we want a more expensive game, let the lands stay non-legendary. If we want a more interesting gameplay and cheaper game, let them be legendary. Also it makes better sense.

Wizards will have this uproar from the consumers whenever they print a land that should have been legendary but isn't. It's all everyone talks about with that card in case you missed it. It's not a problem that will go away all by itself. If Wizards keep doing it to sell more packs, then the consumers will keep complaining because they prefer the card to be legendary. Imagine how right you have to be in order to actually say "I wish my card was worse/low-powered".

I think this is a matter of perspective. I suppose booster sales could be a small factor, but I honestly don't think R&D is invested on that aspect that much. MaRo's argument holds up just fine as far as I'm concerned, and your example of Autumn Burchett illustrates it very well actually. My guess is R&D really wants you to be able to play those four of those special lands from a game design point of view, so they crop up in games reliably and have an impact, not because that makes WotC more money.

Also, to put things into perspective, people may be wondering why / be disappointed that this isn't a legendary, but it's hardly an uproar. Nobody is quitting magic just because lands like this aren't legendary.

 

[Velrun]

I might have used the wrong word when I said "uproar" but it has been 75 % of everyone's first reaction to the spoiler when it comes to THE World Tree. And the next time they will make the centerpiece of the entire plane a non-legendary, Wizards will have disappointed most of their playerbase yet again.

You don't think it's interested to have to think about how many cards you want of a copy instead of simply jamming 4 in there?

From a powermax perspective Autumn Burchett would have wanted 4 Phyrexian Towers in his deck list. But from a game perspective it is much more interesting to have a decision to make that will impact their upcoming tournament. If we look besides the money aspect, Wizards went with the mindless, powermax, 4 of everything variant instead of the flavorful correct, popular by the playerbase and interestingly skilltesting variant.

 

[Velrun]

This is kind of cute. It can create a copy of any token and not just creature tokens like Selesnya's Populate mechanic from Return to Ravnica.



This is terrifying. It creates 3/3s on each upkeep and not your own upkeep.

 

[Onderzeeboot]

From a powermax perspective Autumn Burchett would have wanted 4 Phyrexian Towers in his deck list.

"her decklist" or "their decklist" please, his is pretty insensitive in Autumn's case (I'm not saying you did that on purpose though)

I might have used the wrong word when I said "uproar" but it has been 75 % of everyone's first reaction to the spoiler when it comes to THE World Tree. And the next time they will make the centerpiece of the entire plane a non-legendary, Wizards will have disappointed most of their playerbase yet again.

You don't think it's interested to have to think about how many cards you want of a copy instead of simply jamming 4 in there?

From a powermax perspective Autumn Burchett would have wanted 4 Phyrexian Towers in her deck list. But from a game perspective it is much more interesting to have a decision to make that will impact their upcoming tournament. If we look besides the money aspect, Wizards went with the mindless, powermax, 4 of everything variant instead of the flavorful correct, popular by the playerbase and interestingly skilltesting variant.

I argued about this with you before, and like I said then (and in an earlier post here), it's not that I don't agree with you from a flavor point of view, but I honestly can understand WotC's stance just as much and I don't care enough to go complain about it. Phyrexian Tower, if printed today, would absolutely be a nonlegendary land. Not counting flip lands, the last legendary land in a standard legal set was Inventor's Fair, which was printed four years ago. The pendulum might swing back again if enough people complain, so I don't begrudge you your opinion, I was just explaining WotC's stance on the matter, that is all.

 

[sigh]

That serpent is a pretty cool UG finisher. No intrinsic evasion, so it doesn't just swing through willy nilly, builds it's own army, but also uses that same army to power it's own abilities.

Sometimes games need to end!

 

[LadyMapi]

I twitch whenever I see Koma.

Why do we have three different Snake tribes, when we have a singular Cat tribe? Wizards plz.

 

[Velrun]

"her decklist" or "their decklist" please, his is pretty insensitive in Autumn's case (I'm not saying you did that on purpose though)

Let me quote myself

We just saw pro player Autumn Burchett run two legendary black lands in their mono red Goblin deck on the last big tournament live on Twitch. Autumn would have prefered to run 4 copies but chose 2 because it is legendary. This is an interesting decision to make.

I argued about this with you before

Yes you did.



Anyone running adventure support? Maybe a mix of adventure, foretell, suspend, flashback?



Iron Verdict 2W
Instant
Iron Verdict deals 5 damage to target tapped creature.
Foretell

I want to use foretell as a combat trick mechanic. Everything with flash and foretell is cool!

 

[LadyMapi]

Awakening of the Trolls - 4RG
Enchantment - Saga (R)
I: Destroy target land.
II: Put a land card in a graveyard onto the battlefield under your control.
III: Choose an opponent. If they control fewer lands than you do, create a number of 4/4 Green Troll Warrior tokens with Trample equal to the difference.

...

I love it.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

This is terrifying. It creates 3/3s on each upkeep and not your own upkeep.

I upset some guy on instagram because I said this probably wasn't good in vintage cube. He didn't listen, which is fine, but then he called me close minded and my cube (which he has never even seen) boring. Because I said a 7 mana 6/6 that doesn't immediately do anything was not going to be good in Powered cubes.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

Then I think you're severely discrediting the work required to make a cube that isn't filled with generic, overused themes and random good stuff.

How? I just said anyone here would probably already know how to do that. Heck, that's arguably what I'm trying to do with my cube right now! Granted, I'm simply trying to evoke the feeling of a specific standard format and not any one set, but I think the same basic principle applies.

There are other parts of the community who absolutely could use a resource like what you're suggesting. It's a good idea! I just think you should find an outlet where more people could read what you create.

 

[TrainmasterGT]

3R
Sorcery
Create X 2/1 red Dwarf Berserker creature tokens, where X is the number of Vehicles you control plus the number of Equipment you control.

For each of those tokens, You may attach an Equipment you control to it.

I wonder how many equipments one would need in their deck before this card becomes viable. The art on this is too fun to pass up!

 

[Rasmus Källqvist]

Considering we have Sram, Senior Edificer as a 'buff card matters' card, seems like this is a pretty good support card in that deck? 2/1 tokens can add quite a lot of power! I guess the drawback is the quite significant drawback of _requiring_ an equipment/vehicle before this card even does anything.

 

[Brad]

Snow Sorcery
Choose target creature you control and target creature you don’t control. The creature you control gets +1/+0 and gains indestructible until end of turn if you control three or more snow permanents. Then those creatures fight each other. (Each deals damage equal to its power to the other.)

WotC really trying to make me run a (likely temporary?) Snow theme...

Awakening of the Trolls - 4RG
Enchantment - Saga (R)
I: Destroy target land.
II: Put a land card in a graveyard onto the battlefield under your control.
III: Choose an opponent. If they control fewer lands than you do, create a number of 4/4 Green Troll Warrior tokens with Trample equal to the difference.

...

I love it.

You know, there's more cards that do this kind of thing than I thought, so I didn't list nearly all of them.

I used to have a Jund 1v1 EDH deck that would ramp into a combination of super flexible removal and +1 removal, often targeting lands as part of the +1. It's a little unfun, as it's LD, but it happens a bit later and had Karrthus to close it up consistently. Something like that could be applicable in cube. A lot of the cards are a bulky removal spell at worst.

Rampant Growth. Mwonvuli Acid-Moss. Wake those trolls.

 

[LadyMapi]

Awakening the Trolls is just a really sweet incentive to run land-based ramp in your Green section. Especially if you cast Wildfire the turn before you get your trolls.

 

[Onderzeeboot]

Awakening the Trolls is just a really sweet incentive to run land-based ramp in your Green section. Especially if you cast Wildfire the turn before you get your trolls.

Omg, I was already contemplating Awakening the Trolls, but that is just another reason for me to run this saga!

 

[Humpty_Dumpty]

Inspired by the new set, not a set cube. Like a Theros-inspired cube would likely end up focusing on the gods/devotion and/or enchantments. The M21-inspired cube might make an environment to accommodate the Shrines. Ikoria-inspired might use the Eldrazi as the true behemoths or attempt to utilize the new Ultimatums. Things like that.

I didn't know I could apply for that. I'll look into it.

Such an article would certainly be of theoretical interest, but few people will go on to build a cube as you describe.

Where it could really be of practical use is to take lessons learned from a set design. For example, if I want to include massive creatures in my cube, what does Ikoria teach me about how to achieve that? I understood the Ultimatums to be viable in Ikoria draft, but that requires a certain amount of fixing to be present and sufficient time to reach the required mana.

it would also be an opportunity to look at why draft archetypes are unsuccessful. I don’t think that the Shrine deck was ever a serious deck in M21 limited, but again we could analyse the set to learn about why that is.

I imagine the articles in three parts: first an analysis of the set, laying out what did or did not work and why; next an outline of how a set-inspired cube would look with access to every magic card; and lastly how this could inform design of cubes more generally.