UB: LOTR
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on March 14, 2023, 8:06 p.m. by Coward_Token
Spoiler season starts at May 30
So this is one of the few UB:s I'll reluctantly admit that I kinda like, since Tolkien's work doesn't clash too much with MTG's more generic fantasy flavor. From what I'm seen, I'm actually kind of dissapointed that that they're not doing more to differentiate their character designs from the Jacksson movies?
My card thoughts Show
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor At least for me I feel like, while food makes some sense to be a part of hobbits, they've overdone it in a ham-handed way.
As for other mechanics, I really don't get how the whole '2nd card drawn' thing works with Saruman or really any thing in LotR. Saruman's greatest power was in his voice and ability to influence and deceive people. His cards do not do that at all.
In general I am not a fan of the color identities (note that I don't care at all about character skin coloring) of several characters. It just seems incongruent with what they are. Gandalf the Grey being Izzet just makes no sense whatsoever. I get that Wizards needs to balance the set for color, but a consequence of that is that it forces compromises with color identities. That's less a game issue as it is a flavor one, but as a huge LotR fan it is annoying.
Also, while having more than one card in a set representing a character is fine, they've gone overboard. Honestly I think they should have looked more at mechanics like in Frodo, Sauron's Bane to represent growth and change in characters as opposed to spamming mediocre legends.
June 3, 2023 1:27 a.m.
Gleeock So there aren't many Balrogs at all. Tolkien in some of his notes indicated that there were only like 7 of them, ever, though that was never officially established. Durin's Bane, like all Balrogs, is one of the Maiar, just like Gandalf, Saruman and Sauron, so in one sense they are basically all legendary. Now there is some contradictions for this because in some of Tolkien's earlier writing there are hundreds of Balrog's and they are much less powerful than Durin's Bane.
One character I'm interested in seeing represented will be Glorfindel. He really doesn't have a role in the movies at all, but in the books he is sent from Rivendell to find Aragorn and the Hobbits. He attacks and drives off some Nazgul on his own. He's also arguably one of the most powerful beings on Middle-Earth. In the First Age, millennia before the events of Lord of the Rings, he fought and killed the second most powerful Balrog in order to save the elves retreating through mountain passes during the Fall of Gondolin, giving his life in the process. His bravery and sacrifice impressed the Valar so much that they re-embodied his spirit from the Halls of Mandos almost immediately after his death, a process that normally takes many years for fallen elves. Later they sent him back to Middle-Earth from Valinor to provide guidance to the free people's of Middle Earth, just like they did with the Maiar Istari (Gandalf, Sarumand, ect.). Later in the Third Age he led the forces of Rivendell in coming to the aide of the Kingdom of Arnor in their war against Angmar. When Glorfindel joined the field the Witch-King fled and Glorfindel was the one said that no man would kill him. He's basically an epic bad-ass. I fully expect his card to be an uncommon that gets a +1/+1 counter for a land coming into play or something...
June 3, 2023 2:02 a.m.
Haha, he is a total badass, I forgot about that. My single favorite thing about Glorfindel is that he was too badass to be part of the Fellowship! Basically, having Glorfindel in the Fellowship was akin to using a sledgehammer to squash a flee. Or basically, it was supposed to be a low-profile mission & Glorfindel was not low-profile :)
I fully expect to see MtG-style dildo-ears on my beloved LoTR elves... Which, I guess Tolkien didn't specifically say elves don't have dildo-ears... But I thought he sortof wrote them to be a little more nuanced, maybe slightly leaf-shaped.
June 3, 2023 4:13 a.m.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor - Personally, I would have liked to see less lazy design. A lot of these feel like they were ripped right from this site’s Card Creation Thread, made by someone who had a decent understanding of the character, but a really good challenge they wanted to post, so they slapdashed together a card so they could rush to post the thing they actually wanted.
Take Tom Bombadil’s card. He isn’t really a Saga focused character - he knows a lot, to be sure, but he has decidedly separated himself from the world and its stories, beyond the small plot of land he patrols.
More importantly, we do not know what he is - Tolkien intentionally did not want to ruin the sense of wonder and mystery. But we do know one thing - the only time Tolkien really chimed in on that demands was when someone implied he might be a God, and Tolkien said that interpretation was incorrect. Wizards, of course, went with the only wrong answer on the card’s subtype.
It’s things like that which make me think this set was designed by some really ardent fans, but mostly a lot of casual fantasy nerds who have read the books once or twice and enjoyed them, but mostly just wanted to get their jobs done.
Abaques - You are slightly incorrect on your Balrog facts - the writings which indicate entire hosts of Balrog exist also post-date the margin note which says the number probably fell between three and seven. That note was found in one of Tolkien’s drafts which never became part of his published canon, while descriptions of balrog armies can be found in the later-written Silmarillion.
The reality is that there is no great answer on how many there might have been. The Silmarillion might have been both part of the published canon and the last word on their number, but it is an intentionally inaccurate book. Tolkien purposefully set out to make a full mythology - and as anyone who has studied Greek mythology knows, every single work contains their own interpretations on myth. Trying to count the Balrog’s number is like asking “How many Greek gods were there?” You just cannot really know, as different sources will give you different answers.
It also is irrelevant to the Legendary question. Durin’s Bane is legendary because he is a figure of Legend. Gothmog (the Balrog) would be as well (if a card could be made for him - we will not see one). Any of the others, be it five or five hundred, likely would not - their names were lost to history and, much as every Angel is not Legendary, every Maiar would not be either (Maiar operate in a space akin to angels in Tolkien’s lore, with the Valar acting in a space of archangels).
June 3, 2023 10:07 a.m.
Well yeah, that would be good & all, except the way the card is texted my musing of number is relevant.
The way the card read out is: THE Balrog then they throw the suffix on there clarifying "Flame of Udun"; it is just a bit odd... It just reads to me like: THE ONE & ONLY BALROG in Middle Earth Just unusual to put the creature type as a prefix, then have the unique clarifier coming in as the suffix.
That would have really been something to see to watch Shelob going up against Morgoth, especially when he called his Balrog (multiple) in for backup. Do you think some of the Valar just pulled up lawn chairs & busted out the popcorn?
June 3, 2023 12:48 p.m.
It reminds me of how they say: A balrog of Morgoth, not THE balrog of Morgoth.
June 3, 2023 12:50 p.m.
Gleeock Oh, I agree about the name. Honestly I have no idea why they just didn't use Durin's Bane as the card name. It's just better than what they came up with. Of course not every card is spoiled yet, so maybe they will have another card for the Balrog, even though it only featured in one part of the story.
I also think as a card it really needed a dies trigger. Of the three Balrogs where their deaths were written about (Gothmog killed by Ecthelion, the Balrog [in some writings known as Lungorthin] killed by Glorfindel, and Durin's Bane killed by Gandalf), all of them took their killers with them.
June 3, 2023 1:28 p.m.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor says... #10
Abaques and Caerwyn - thank you for expanding on your critiques. I agree with a lot of what you have said though some of your critiques of the set don't bother me that much personally. Still, you both make good points.
Palantir of Orthanc might be the card I am most excited for right now. That is a snap add to my Balthor the Defiled/Sheoldred Flip commander deck. It's either Mesmeric Orb #2 without the downside of annoying the entire table or straight card draw.
June 4, 2023 12:09 p.m.
I am also a fan of the Palantir. "Rise of the Witch King" is a really solid reanimator card as well.
June 4, 2023 1 p.m.
I forgot... That was Ungoliant squaring up against Morgoth when he had to call in his Balrog right?
June 5, 2023 11:10 p.m.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor says... #13
Gleeock - Yes. If I remember correctly, she only was able to overpower him after absorbing the two Trees of Valinor and the well. Speaking of Ungoliant, "Shelob, Child of Ungoliant" seems like an interesting cross section of spider tribal and clones.
I also like the design of the King of the Oathbreakers.
June 6, 2023 12:28 a.m.
And Glorfindel was spoiled.... and he is a mediocre 3/2 uncommon who gets +1/+1 when you scry. Sigh...
June 6, 2023 12:35 p.m.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor says... #15
Yo these commander precons are legit. Not only does each one have decent reprints, but the new cards in the Jeskai monarch/humans deck and Grixis spellslinger/theft deck look awesome. Heck even the Elf deck with all of the voting mechanics looks pretty fun. I had no intention of picking up the commander decks from this set, but now I feel the urge to grab multiple.
June 8, 2023 8:33 p.m.
Crow_Umbra says... #16
I was pleasantly surprised by quite a few of the reprints Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor. Makes me wonder if we won't see some of those in the upcoming Commander Masters set, hopefully opening up slots for other much-needed reprints.
I'm most likely going to end up building either Jeskai Aragorn or Grixis Saruman. I have a Hinata deck I don't play much that could be re-purposed, & pieces leftover from Anhelo. Saruman seems like a more resilient avenue for some of the spell-slinger shenanigans I was hoping to pull off with Anhelo, or at least allows a pivot of using bigger bodies from Amass for more resilient offense & defense.
June 8, 2023 9:17 p.m.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor says... #17
Crow-Umbra - Jeskai Aragorn is the one I am most interested in as well. I love the monarch mechanic and Jeskai is also a good set of colors for initiative. I do really like the Grixis Saruman but the one from that deck that has peaked my interest most is the Lord of the Nazgul. There aren't many "wraiths" in magic (20 in total if you include the 9 Nazgul and exclude changelings), but that second ability seems like it could be fun.
June 8, 2023 11:39 p.m.
Coward_Token says... #18
I'm disproportionally disapointed that there's no legendary Farmer Maggot card with Protection from Wraiths.
June 11, 2023 7:31 a.m.
Coward_Token says... #19
Templating confusion:
- Why doesn't Fealty to the Realm doesn't just goad?
- Why doesn't Gollum, Obsessed Stalker just say "...dealt combat damage by it..."?
I get that there's some nuance to not having the above (e.g. Helm of the Host on Gollum), but it seems minute.
Thankfully no Horsemanship on Rohan cards, AFAIK.
Boromir, Gondor's Hope: feels weird flavor-wise. The sea power thing again?
The faces in Lorien Revealed look more horrified than amazed
Call of the Ring is basically a more wrath-resistant Dark Confidant in decks with a black inclusive mana value <= 1, namely: Rograkh, Son of Rohgahh (with the proper partner), Ashnod, Flesh Mechanist (skulk + 1 base power means she can often attack safely for her trigger), Frodo, Sauron's Bane (obviously). Also Valentin, Dean of the Vein Flip, I guess.
Fall of Cair Andros: Man, Blasphemous Act was already overpowered. Gogo Rem Karolus, Stalwart Slayer (+ a haste source), the Army will probably be able to finish someone off on its own while you attack someone else with the rest of your creatures.
Rising of the Day: Randomly strictly Fervor, I actually don't like this.
Long List of Ents: Cute, but the amount of hoops you need to hop trough for one extra counter per turn feels pretty anti-climatic. But hey, if your proliferate an extra chapter counter onto this (or something) and you then cast a changeling (or something), it'll get two counters! Woho...
Quickbeam: Kinda feel like he should have haste?
Horn of Gondor: Even if it's non-free to activte, Human Krenko is pretty good.
Palantir of Orthanac: I feel people are overestimating this for the purpose of self-milling. After 2-3 counters in a graveyard deck, people are just going to let you have that free Preordain
June 11, 2023 6:55 p.m.
Hi_diddly_ho_neighbor says... #20
Coward_Token: I think your own comment about Palantir answers your concern. A free ponder every turn is great. Either you mill a bunch of cards or your opponent lets set up the top of your library for future self-mill and draw a card. It's slow, but there is zero downside to this card for self mill decks.
The "can't attack you clause" on Fealty to the Realm makes it different from goad. Goaded creatures must attack. If you goad a creature in a 1v1 scenario, then it will still attack you. The language used here prevents the creature from attacking if your opponent has the monarch and it's 1v1.
June 12, 2023 10:54 p.m.
Coward_Token says... #22
Orcish Bowmasters: Yeah this card is pretty incredible, even if I personally don't fell it's an automatic inclusion in every black-inclusive deck (someone compared it to Hullbreacher, which I feel is a bit much). EDHrec has a pretty comprehensive take on it here (scroll down). My two cents, aside from that:
- It's easy to zoom in on the "whenever" templating, missing "Flash" and "enters the battlefield". On top of everything else (and that's a lot), half a Shock on a random dork (or Esper Sentinel) is nothing to scoof at.
- Like the damage part, you get a separate instance of Amass for each trigger. In an aristocrats deck, you can sacrifice the Army after each trigger, forcing the ability to make a new token, which can potentially net nice value. (Wheel of Fortune + Phyrexian Altar sounds pretty absurd.) I honestly don't know why they made it Amass, the flavor's barely there and the card is already so versatile.
June 14, 2023 5:43 p.m.
I don't think Orcish Bowmasters is as powerful as Hullbreacher, but I still think it is bad design. Its a really powerful card that is just generically good in any deck (speaking about commander here) that can play it. I also think that it can and likely will lead towards game states that aren't terribly fun. If you have a one-toughness commander and someone else has a Rhystic Study out, well, I hope your deck functions without your commander, because you aren't keeping it in play. And that late-game wheel that now suddenly kills a player or two out of nowhere. And all for only two mana.
I think it would be a much better card at four mana and maybe even then without flash. It's just way too much of a card for two mana.
June 14, 2023 11:05 p.m.
Coward_Token says... #24
Yeah it feels like they added the templating that avoids making it a Chandra, Awakened Inferno emblem on legs and patted themselves on the back for their restraint. And this is coming from someone who usually complains about conservative card design.
Really, it could have just have been an Underworld Dreams on legs for two mana and it would have been fine.
June 15, 2023 1:17 a.m.
Hadn't you heard of the legendary: Orcish Bowmasters who fought for supremacy of Middle Earth? :) ;)
June 15, 2023 12:04 p.m.
Coward_Token says... #26
Just two dudes were responsible for 40% of Gondorian/Rohirric losses in the Battle of the Pelennor Fields
June 15, 2023 3:45 p.m.
Coward_Token says... #27
I wonder if the card is actually a reference to this ancient meme, but that might be giving WotC too much credit.
June 15, 2023 3:56 p.m.
Coward_Token says... #28
Non-Bowmaster musing: Delighted Halfling is the only hobbit-related card with that epiteth in its name, I'm guessing it's because they want to be able to reprint it with DnD-favlor, or possibly introduce Halflings as a thing in Magic proper (although IMO they're pretty redundant to Kithkin)
June 16, 2023 4:56 p.m.
Is it just me or is Orcish Bowmasters kinda wonky from a flavor perspective. I'd think that a flash orc would be a warg rider of some kind, or that orcs would amass off of magic used on your side of the field, red mana (burning the woods to fuel the furnaces), or amass off tapping a goblin or something. Admittedly it's been a while since I read the books other than The Hobbit, but I can't think of a single reason for orcs benefit from your opponent drawing cards.
I get that it is a splashy in game effect, but couldn't it have been on something else? Maybe on the Nazgul that has some kind of massive payoff if you hit amass 9, as they are chasing magic around the table.
I don't know, maybe I'm missing something : )
June 16, 2023 8:32 p.m.
- I've noticed for some reason, someone over at -Wizards of the Coast felt like imparting their political ideology into our pastime and outright changing the lore of one of my favorite fictional stories while they were at it. I can't understand their reason for making Aragorn's Avatar, (in MTG Arena), a black man. Other than for some political statement. Lets have a quick thought experiment. If someone asked you personally to create an avatar for.. Lets say, "John Wick" I'm sure a few things would cross your mind. What is he going to wear? Should I make him look like he just got through with the fight, bloody and dishevelled. Or should he be in a clean all black suit. Should he be holding a weapon or not. All good ideas in regards to creating an avatar for a known character. What wouldn't cross your mind, would be. Should John Wick be a black man. Or to put it better? Should I make John wick look completely different than how everyone knows him. Tolkien wrote Aragorn as the King of "The Men of the West". Let's be honest here. If we're not gonna stay true to the history of Tolkien's Middle Earth. Then why are we even bothering. There's only 1 middle earth. If there not gonna take the description of the characters seriously. Then they shouldn't bother calling it Middle Earth or Lord of the Rings. If there not happy with Tolkins Middle earth and they believe certain things need to be changed. Then all they did was introduce another standard medieval fantasy world into Magic The Gathering. If we're gonna make Aragorn a black man. Why not make Galadriel a male hobbit. Or for the sake of inclusivity and diversity. How about we make Frodo a female elf, Samwise a black lesbian, Pippin a trans dwarf, and Merry a schizophrenic paraplegic bigender bisexual that struggles with multiple personality disorder. And, whos pronouns are (they-them). Because Meriadoc would never assume the gender of his other personalities, that they didn't identify with. Oh and while we're at it, we might as well make Sauron a 3 inch pixie with body desmorphia. Apparently it has something to do with his eyes. And how about flying cars. We're gonna start changing shit and continue to call it middle earth then where's where's the lame ever going to be drawn. emphasized text
June 23, 2023 4:39 a.m.
KillTeam6 I don't want to feed the trolls and TappedOut isn't really a place for politics, but I feel that not confronting racism when you see it is wrong.
For context I'm a middle-aged white dude who is one of the bigger fans of Lord of the Rings and Tolkien that you'll meet. I've read the LotR over a dozen times in my life, the Hobbit and the Silmarillion about half as many times. As a massive fan of Tolkien's works I have some serious problems with some of the things Wizards has done with the set. I think there are some massive flavor fails in places and in particular the 'ring tempts you' mechanic is really bad.
But to be blunt: Aragorn's skin color doesn't matter to the story at all. Middle Earth is a fantasy world. Yes Tolkien wrote it from the perspective of a British dude in the early to mid-20th century and probably envisioned Aragorn as white doesn't mean anything in regards to the actual story. You bring up slippery-slope arguments about other changes you see as equivalent, but those are strawmen that have not happened. That is a classic line of argument used to attempt to justify all sorts of evil, from racism, classism, sexism and other forms of oppression. Strangely you also bring up 'John Wick' and his skin color, but seriously, how on earth does skin color matter at all to the story in 'John Wick'?
June 23, 2023 10:57 a.m.
Abaques- You bring up the fact that I mentioned the skin color as if I was the one who created an avatar and went out of my way to change the skin color of a character. And I don't understand how the slippery slop argument applies to my criticisms. You mention racism. I, in no way disparaged anyone of color, nor perpetuated any stereotypes in my criticism. Please explain to me the "strawman" argument you say I used?? And I have to believe you didnt you even read my criticism. I, in no way, shape or form mentioned the skin color of John Wick. It was a thought experiment. I'm simply trying to understand, how the people who created the art came to the decision that what needed to be changed was the skin color of the original characters. Because it wasn't just Aragorn. Théoden, Éomer and Éowyn we're all redesigned as people of color. I have no issue with fictional characters of color. The problem I have is why the people in charge have an issue with these characters being white. It wasn't I who made the skin color of these characters an issue. And if you Subscribe to the idea that the skin color of the original characters is what needs to be changed. That's racism. No matter how to defend it. And I don't appreciate being gaslit for mentioning that race was being made an issue, when it didn't need to be. So if you would like to reread my criticism and actually make an intelligent argument about what I said and how it was either wrong or unfair. I'm all ears. And if you choose to do that go point by point. No more of these broad sweeping accusations. Like "but I feel that not confronting racism when you see it is wrong"....
I think you can do better than that. Please explain the racism that you were attempting to confront in my argument.
June 23, 2023 2:21 p.m.
Tolkien specifically wanted other creators to put their own spin on his works, and he outright advocated for literature to be blind as to skin colour. He was a man who abhorred racism - and his every writing and speech on both his works and his views on segregation in literature clearly demonstrate he would have been both fascinated and delighted by Wizards’ new interpretation of his creation.
Please read post No. 16 on on the first page of the thread for more details.
June 23, 2023 2:31 p.m.
At the risk of stepping into this...
Why is it important that Aragorn is white? His skin color is never described. There's nothing in the source material saying he's white.
What does John Wick have to do with anything?
The "slippery slope" is asking why WotC didn't distort all characters beyond recognition in the name of inclusivity and diversity. First, the tone taken by the post implied that you see diversity and inclusivity as a negative, or at least not worth considering. Second, how does "We gave this minimally-described character darker skin" lead directly into "We're making all the characters into weird stereotypes of tokenism"? There's the slippery slope. A detail, that isn't even a change from the source material, is not a catalyst for throwing everything out.
And, per Caerwyn's layout in posts #16 and 18 of this thread, racial identity in LotR is, was, and always will be a complete non-issue.
June 23, 2023 2:37 p.m.
KillTeam6 I accused you of racism because you espoused arguments that racists use in an attempt to justify why you perceived changing the characters skin colors was a bad thing. You said that you couldn't understand why someone would make Aragorn's MtG Arena Avatar black other than for political reasons. Now, with the fact that Aragorn's skin color is completely irrelevant to the story, that pretty much leaves one logical reason why you would have this complaint: you're racist.
And just like Goebbels suggested you're now accusing those people who imagined an Aragorn and an Eowyn as not white people of racism. This is a common technique of hate speech called accusation in a mirror and it's used to incite and divide.
You are an obvious troll. Your account was created 12 hours ago and you have no decks. You created this account to be a racist troll. I'm not going to go into a detailed analysis of your largely nonsensical arguments but if you want to understand what a straw man argument is I've now given you the link. I wouldn't normally respond to trolling of this type, but not confronting racism when you encounter it is wrong in my book.
June 23, 2023 4:39 p.m.
I have no issue with diversity or being open and inclusive. I just believe that people hide there true intentions behind these words. It's as if they believe that changing these characters will somehow make MTG more palatable to people of color. And it's about as racist and patronizing as one can get to think that minorities and other groups of people will find MTG more inclusive because of the diversity of skin color in the characters they release. Not to mention it all stems from the demonstrably bad idea that there's something inherently wrong with white skin. And if that wasn't true, Then they wouldn't have felt the need to change it to begin with. And I I have to say none of these changes are being done by people of color. I'm willing to bet anything that these changes are being done by white people who believe they know what's the best for people of color. And Aragorn was described as "a shaggy head of dark hair flecked with grey, and in a pale stern face a pair of keen grey eyes".... If you're gonna make a statement like "There's nothing in the source material that says he was white"... at least know what you're talking about. What type of person would be described as having a pale stern face.... And Tolkien described easterlings as having a sworthy complexion. The fact that I'm having to go to these lengths in order to call out your blatan falsehoods is sad. And yes Tolkien was absolutely fine with adaptations. But I think it's a giant leap to say He would be fine with people outright changing his his life's work in order to satisfy their social and political beliefs. And at no point did I ever say people who imagine Aragorn as a person of color is racist. And I find it truly laughable how you immediately went to calling me a Nazi. Because let's be honest equating something Goebbels suggested, with me, is tantamount to calling me a nazi. That's the true problem. You're saying I'm trying to divide. But I don't doubt your intentions. Or the people making these changes. I truly believe they come from a place of good intentions. Although, We know how the road to hell was paved.
But you truly believe I am a bad person at heart. You can't even offer me the same benefit of the doubt that I offer you. I don't believe you're intentionally trying to subvert our culture. But you must truly believe that my intent is to divide. And cause harm. Well, I'll tell you how that ends up. When people irrationally fear another group that much. And believe they're out to do you harm. It will be people like you who will send millions of people like me to die. You can think I'm being hyperbolic. But history has shown what people will do when they irrationally fear something.
And you have the gull to relate anything I said with an evil nazi.
Well. Apparently certain things are just off limits to speak about.
June 23, 2023 5:38 p.m.
I'll grant you the single word "pale" and retract my statement that there is no description of his skin color. There is still the question of relevance, the tone of your post, the relevance of the John Wick comparison, the slippery slope, and Tolkien's own views.
"it all stems from the demonstrably bad idea that there's something inherently wrong with white skin." Nobody here has expressed that belief. I reject that idea, and put no faith in it. What is your source for this statement?
Speaking for myself, I will not call you a bad person at heart. However, I believe that your position is highly speculative at best and completely unfounded at worst, of marginal relevance, and that you are echoing arguments used to support racist beliefs. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest that the last point is unintentional, but it's still not the best position to take.
June 23, 2023 6:30 p.m.
KillTeam6 - Simce you are brand new to this site, let me make a few things clear. TappedOut is not a place for you to stir up trouble by falsely claiming others called you a “Nazi” (you’ll find you are the only person on this page who used the word Nazi - no one accused you of being such).
While generally I would prefer to educate about Tolkien’s clear statements and open acceptance of race swapping rather than toss on the moderator hat, your mischaracterisation of others’ points in an inflammatory way crosses a line.
Consider yourself on notice - if you wish to continue to post on this site, you will do so in an honest and polite manner, and not throw out baseless allegations about the nature of others’ statements.
June 23, 2023 7:03 p.m. Edited.
legendofa You are absolutely right, and really, Tolkien's writing just didn't have a lot of overt descriptions of characters. Things were a lot of the time framed through one character's perspective, how they saw their friends and companions, and it's part of the really great organic feel to groups in his books. I think it's a fantastic world to reimagine characters in because, when it came down to it, Tolkien's characters were always known for who they, what they did, and the story he told was one where good can only be accomplished when there is heroism from lots of different people in lots of different ways.
Ha, sorry, that was a way round about way of saying, yep, agree with you : )
June 24, 2023 9:57 p.m.
It's interesting, so much fantasy writing is character-heavy now. We forget sometimes how location oriented writers could be... Sometimes describing a section of the world that basically burnt down & was rebuilt several times... It's part of how regions could actually seem so vast, & travel could truly seem to have the weight of time to it. Locations & events were often more important in these writings
June 25, 2023 midnight
Coward_Token says... #42
Whew, extra-imaginary white genocide huh? emphasized text
Abaques Caerwyn legendofa: thanks for speaking out and defying the bullshit asymmetry principle, even when it means going up against a word count of nearly 1300.
June 25, 2023 8:24 a.m.
Coward_Token says... #43
My extremly niche grievance with this product is that King of the Oathbreakers makes it unlikely we'll ever have white Teferi's Veil, even though that would help tokens and go-wide creatures in general in EDH a lot.
June 30, 2023 12:24 p.m.
There are some good cards in there for commander. Honestly I would have been way happier if this is what we got instead of the set.
Gleeock says... #1
I'm trying to remember. Is this Balrog basically legendary because it is specifically the "Flame of Udun/Durin's Bane"? Morgoth had multiple "Balrog" at his disposal previously right?
...Or maybe all Balrog are legendary? -- that seems possible too, since they are all a class of Maiar I think. Been a long time since I read the Silmarillion & I don't take my time to search up the source material. Seems like all the remaining Balrog could be unique, & thus legendary, I guess.
June 2, 2023 4:41 p.m.