Magic: The Gathering is set to announce new crossovers with other popular fantasy properties, including Lord of the Rings and Warhammer 40,000. Hasbro will announce the crossovers later today at an investor event, along with a re-organization that will spin out Wizards of the Coast into its own division. The Wall Street Journal was the first to report the news that Warhammer 40,000 and Lord of the Rings will both be coming to Magic: The Gathering, with Lord of the Rings getting a full expansion. ComicBook.com was able to independently confirm the reports. It is currently unclear whether Warhammer 40,000 will get a full expansion as well, or if this will be a Secret Lair drop similar to a crossover with The Walking Dead.
Secret Lair thing seems the obvious direction - you can see what they did for the Walking Dead here.
They look to be a small set of cards (3-10) rather than full sets.
Well apparently the Lord of the Rings one is a full expansion. As a magic fan, I’m not happy about this. I don’t like this recent trend of shoehorning other IP into magic.
Complete lack of interest, personally, but I can see the wisdom in this. Indie stores do a lot more traffic with card games than minis, and this is way to get kids hooked at the front of the store (CCGs are typically sold at the register), get their money and get some of them to later move to the back of the store where the miniatures games are.
---
I also look forward to the fuel this adds to the 'hasbro is going to buy GW' conspiracy theories.
The MTG community is absolutely on fire right now over this announcement.
But there's still so much we don't know as to exactly how this will be done. My personal suspicion is that the Warhammer version will be it's own box set like Game Night or Unsanctioned.
Tannhauser42 wrote: The MTG community is absolutely on fire right now over this announcement.
But there's still so much we don't know as to exactly how this will be done. My personal suspicion is that the Warhammer version will be it's own box set like Game Night or Unsanctioned.
'The Warhammer 40,000 Commander decks, for example, will be available everywhere we currently sell Commander decks, as will The Lord of the Rings product.'
lord_blackfang wrote: Oh will you look at the time, it's ruin a bunch of good properties by mashing them together in a sensless cash grab o'clock
Warhammer has what makes Magic have appeal to me - great art. Not everyone is into the latest art, but I'd totally buy some of the cards as a collector - especially any Thousand Sons.
This is at least one that might last a bit longer than the others. GW has had several combat card games over the years; though many don't seem to last. AoS Champions was the last and died a death (the company went super silent for a half year or more and then quietly just axed the physical game and the digital never took off because it was always made to support the physical side).
There was one or two before that as well, some which had unique art (far as I could tell AoS champions was all GW art cropped and cut for card display).
MTG at least has potential to finish the project
As for cross-overs eh I'm out of MTG so it doesn't hurt me and having it as a side thing is ok in my view. That said I do agree sometimes yo udon't need mash-ups just for the cross marketing potential.
That said I now have to somehow blank my mind of this ever happening so I don't get sucked back into MTG
I'm gonna make a video of myself burning Rowboat Girlyman planeswalker cards
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yarium wrote: I feel like Magic is circling a design drain right now. They obviously are running out of ideas to stay relevant.
How dare you say that, the Harry Potter ripoff set is just about to drop and then we have the Return to the Return to Innistrad and then the D&D crossover set!
Tannhauser42 wrote: The MTG community is absolutely on fire right now over this announcement.
But there's still so much we don't know as to exactly how this will be done. My personal suspicion is that the Warhammer version will be it's own box set like Game Night or Unsanctioned.
They’ve already mentioned 40k Commander decks.
I stand corrected. The original news regarding all of this was extraordinarily short on details. We'll see what the Commander RC has to say on their legality, but given they allowed the TWD cards... I'm not bothered by it, though.
Earlier today, we revealed an exciting expansion of Magic: The Gathering into the realms of Universes Beyond—a series that combines the gameplay of Magic: The Gathering with worlds, characters, and stories that are cherished by millions of fans around the world.
Among those worlds are the expansive universes of Warhammer 40,000 and The Lord of the Rings, with others set to join as our Universes Beyond expands.
This expansion of the Magic game system to other universes is exciting and new, and certainly raises questions for many of our longstanding fans, so today we're going to answer many of those questions as we look toward the Universes Beyond release in 2022 and further.
Universes Beyond will act as a brand within Magic: The Gathering—existing in addition to and alongside our existing line of products.
Universes Beyond came about thanks to a simple thought—if we can expand our story beyond the game system to things like comics, novels, and other games, then surely we can expand the game system to let players explore worlds outside of the worlds of Magic.
We are all fans of these other universes. Many of us imagined what it might be like to play a game of Magic with Gandalf the Grey, sketched out how we might translate the One Ring to Magic, or wanted to build a deck around the mighty Space Marines. In many ways, Universes Beyond is us living out those dreams of our own.
But we also hope that Universes Beyond will bring the game we love to more people who might not have otherwise found us. We hope fans of these worlds and characters will find our game through Universes Beyond—and we hope they'll stay a while and become part of our amazing community.
We know you're curious about Universes Beyond. We can't answer everything you may be asking, but we are thrilled to set the table on a number of topics today.
First, Universes Beyond will be branded slightly differently and will have a specific look as a result. These are still Magic cards, through and through, but the frame will be distinct and cards will have a holofoil stamp that denotes them as being from Universes Beyond. It will look like this:
If that stamp looks familiar, it's because it already exists on Secret Lair X The Walking Dead cards, which will be grandfathered into Universes Beyond.
On that note, Universes Beyond products will generally be sold in all Magic channels—these will not be strictly Secret Lair products. The Warhammer 40,000 Commander decks, for example, will be available everywhere we currently sell Commander decks, as will The Lord of the Rings product. We may occasionally do associated Secret Lair products related to the main release, like the Secret Lair Godzilla lands when Ikoria: Lair of Behemoths came out. There will also be the occasional standalone product like The Walking Dead, but the intention is to typically make Universes Beyond as available as any other Magic product.
That said, Universes Beyond cards will not be Standard legal. We strive to make Magic cards that are widely useful, but Universes Beyond will be above and, well, beyond our normal Standard releases. So nothing much is changing with our normal cadence of releases for Standard. This is purely a cool thing we're doing in addition to all the other cool things we're already doing.
To that end, it's worth noting that the upcoming Magic set Adventures in the Forgotten Realms is not part of Universes Beyond. For now, we're reserving the Universes Beyond branding for worlds outside those built by Wizards of the Coast. As to whether the Forgotten Realms are now canonically part of Magic's Multiverse, for now, the answer is no. But we may change our minds in the future if it makes sense and is a fun net positive for Magic and D&D.
Finally, fans who have seen us try out a variety of treatments for cards featuring characters from other universes might wonder if we're utilizing the treatment from the Ikoria Godzilla cards—existing Magic cards skinned with the alternate universe—or the treatment used for The Walking Dead—alternate universe cards that stand on their own. The answer is "both," but often we'll default to letting these cards stand on their own. We may find charming opportunities to do the reskinned versions of existing cards and will continue to balance between the two as we move forward.
Universes Beyond represents an exciting, new, and, yes, different take on Magic. We're ecstatic to geek out over some of our favorite stories, characters, and fandoms alongside all of you, and we look forward to sharing more on Universes Beyond as we get closer.
Whole lotta words there, so I apologize but it does seem that they're meant to be "standalones" for the time being.
Speaking as someone who's gotten into MTG over lockdown...I'm fairly disinterested in a 40k set, but I enjoy Commander a lot. Maybe there'll be something that catches my eye. I'm a bit more focused on organizing my mess of Kaldheim+Selesnya decks for the time being.
Yarium wrote: I feel like Magic is circling a design drain right now. They obviously are running out of ideas to stay relevant.
I feel like they have been for a super long time. They used to tell some pretty interesting stories with the Ice Age Block, The Weatherlight Saga, Mirrodin block (even though the game itself was awful at that point). Lately it’s just been “Pick a culture, add fantastical element.” Steampunk India? Conquest of Central Americans by Conquistadors- with dinosaurs and vampires. Norse mythology - with demons?
Aside from more Return to Return to sets, it looks like crossovers are their thing now. I mean I can’t blame them for making money, but they certainly lost my interest a looooong time ago.
I'd go with justifiable butt hurt, the problem is that the design monkeys are taking the GW approach in pushing power to shift product, then banning and / or errataing cards once sufficient units have shifted, I have up about 5-6 years ago when a 2 card Infinte combo snuck past "testing" along with cockwomble in chief Rosewater yet again stamped his feet and forced another terrible pet rule on the set
Hmm, release at least says not standard legal, hopefully that stretches out to a few other metas. While I think it may be cool to play a game of commander where everyone has a 40k deck. I really don't want to see 40k cards mixed in a normal game of commander.
Absolutionis wrote: I'm hoping it's more like Warhammer Fantasy and not 40k. Walking Dead was already an absurd break.
The initial announcement might just be flawed.
I really hope that EDH/Commander doesn't become nothing but various colors of marines like 40k currently is.
40K doesn't make as much sense story/theme wise, but as a marketing move it makes more sense. As much as GW might love AoS (and its clear right now that AoS is getting the creative team love in buckets) 40K is the bigger name.
This is also likely part of their huge outreach program to lure in new gamers. Ties into things like the animated TV series that they are steadily having produced and for which I suspect AoS versions aren't ready for.
That said AoS is still somewhat teething in some respects. There's still a few armies with a lot of old materials flying around and some with very small model ranges. AoS is growing and doing really well and I hope in a few years it gets its own big cross overs like 40K and its own TV series.*heck I'd love with with Brian Blessed voicing Gotrek*
Am I the only person that has wanted this for years?
I used to try and make sets based on 40k.
Drop Pod: 2 white 3 colorless, 0/5. When Drop Pod enters the battlefield put 5 1/1 Colorless Astartes tokens onto the battlefield under your control.
Jerram wrote: Hmm, release at least says not standard legal, hopefully that stretches out to a few other metas. While I think it may be cool to play a game of commander where everyone has a 40k deck. I really don't want to see 40k cards mixed in a normal game of commander.
exactly. I would prefer to see a new unique card game focused on the lore and universe of 40K with mechanics similar to MTG.
I play commander regularly, and no one ever runs cards from just one set unless it is a pre-con deck.
I don't want to see smatterings of sci-fi in MTG either.
Going to be interesting to discover where they are going with this.
MTG has always had at least a few smatterings of sci-fi in it though. The Phyrexians for example make a strong a case, as does everything involving the Thran and Urza.
Jerram wrote: Hmm, release at least says not standard legal, hopefully that stretches out to a few other metas. While I think it may be cool to play a game of commander where everyone has a 40k deck. I really don't want to see 40k cards mixed in a normal game of commander.
exactly. I would prefer to see a new unique card game focused on the lore and universe of 40K with mechanics similar to MTG.
I play commander regularly, and no one ever runs cards from just one set unless it is a pre-con deck.
I don't want to see smatterings of sci-fi in MTG either.
Going to be interesting to discover where they are going with this.
As it’s own thing, totally cool. I often thought it would be a good match for a once a year or so set for other IP.
But I really don’t want any 40k in magic games, the original reason I play magic was being sick of 40k at the time. It will probably all be space marines as well if commander decks with all themed cards.
I agree on some points but I think that is oversimplifying a bit. (Standard disclaimer; obviously this all is very IMO.)
Imperium is solidly white/black in theme, with some portions deviating from that. Marines would lean white/red for example.
Orks are green/red all the way. They fit that archetype perfectly.
Chaos you are probably looking at a red/black base, but different gods would deviate. Nurgle, in particular, is extremely green/black. Tzeentch rocking the red/blue, Slaanesh blue/black, Khorne heavy red some black. Chaos as a whole is basically anti-white.
Eldar are very blue, but they should be splashing in other colors based on the type of eldar. Craftworld feel more blue/white to me, DEldar blue/black.
Tau are extremely white in theme, and Necrons are extremely black. The only two armies I could see being appropriately mono-color.
Tyranids are definitely green, probably tri-color for green/red/back. GSC are more of a green/black/blue.
I was actually thinking similar, just wanted to get the purple mana joke in! Imperial guard actually feel like a goblin deck; hordes of expendable 1/1s backed up with some ridiculous artillery.
Necrons and Tau I can both see as having heavy colourless artefact aspects to them.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh and Commissars obviously require you to sacrifice a creature in order to use their abilities!
His Master's Voice wrote: There's just no way 40k and LotR can co-exist in the same overarching setting, be it with each other or things like Urza's Saga or Mirrodin.
I guess we're back to Garfield's original idea - that every MtG set be it's own, separate thing, and visual and narrative continuity be damned.
Could simply be a straight port of the MTG rules, with the intention that whilst one could have Guilliman vs Nazgul, each set is intended to be its own thing - simple and cost effective way to cross pollinate between properties.
I do wonder if GW and Tolkien's estate are fine with that though. Historically, both have been fiercely protective of their respective IPs and I'm not sure if "tap Witch King to deal three damage to that Daemonette over there" is how they want them to be presented. Cross overs are rare for a reason.
And the MTGing of 40K is complete lol, i mean the resource mechanic/strat combo damage boosts moved the miniature game in that direction so this crossover really isn't a surprise.
I could see the nid/grot decks mirror the squirrel deck, after a few turns there would be no stopping the explosion in numbers.
Jidmah wrote: Well, damn me. I might actually be buying the first MtG cards in years.
Where’s that LotR “and so it begins” gif...
Eh, the main reason I stopped was because I had to cull some hobbies when my daughter was born. Leaving your wive alone at home with a newborn five times a week would have been a huge a Erebus move from my side.
I have always loved the game, though I wasn't a huge fan of some of the newer blocks. MtG solely bit the bucket because something had to go and I still had overlapping hobbies with everyone playing MtG. Dropping another hobby would also have meant dropping friends.
That said, I also quit WH40k at roughly the same time
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lord Damocles wrote: 40K card games haven't been good since the original Combat Cards.
Change my mind.
Jidmah wrote: The best part about this is all the people claiming stratagems are "MtG" can finally see first hand how wrong they are.
Actually just the opposite it proves the point-
strats linked to resource management to boost damage IS what magic does it just uses mana+spells to boost creatures
You just spend X CP to use Y stratagem to boost damage for Z weapon instead of spending X lands to use Y spell to boost Z creatures damage potential.
Jidmah wrote: The best part about this is all the people claiming stratagems are "MtG" can finally see first hand how wrong they are.
Actually just the opposite it proves the point-
strats linked to resource management to boost damage IS what magic does it just uses mana+spells to boost creatures
You just spend X CP to use Y stratagem to boost damage for Z weapon instead of spending X lands to use Y spell to boost Z creatures damage potential.
Different words, same game effects.
Nope. Not going into detail (again), but the whole argument only exists because you are abstracting both games to a point where neither is recognizable anymore.
If 40k and MtG are the same, 40k and backgammon are the same, because you are using dice to determine how far circular game pieces move and whether they take out other circular game pieces.
There are many valid points to be made about why the CP/stratagem system is bad, none of them have anything to do with MtG.
Comparing stratagems to MtG is nothing but a logical fallacy (appeal to emotion fallacy/genetic fallacy) - many people in the 40k community hate MtG and so you are trying to justify your hate for stratagems by connecting the two.
Whenever anyone claims "9tH EditIOn haS BEComE MTg!!!11" it can safely be read as "I have no idea what I'm talking about".
Whenever anyone claims "9tH EditIOn haS BEComE MTg!!!11" it can safely be read as "I have no idea what I'm talking about".
And i can safely assume you have no idea about my experience with it, since i have played with the (cp/stratagem) system myself and i also play with people who are big MTG and 40K players who can be honest enough to admit that while not exactly the same they can see similarities and influence that moved 40K away from a TT WARgame and into a resource management warGAME.
My original point was-40K/MTG crossover? not a surprise since they appeared to be inching closer together now for the past few years.
Whenever anyone claims "9tH EditIOn haS BEComE MTg!!!11" it can safely be read as "I have no idea what I'm talking about".
And i can safely assume you have no idea about my experience with it, since i have played with the (cp/stratagem) system myself and i also play with people who are big MTG and 40K players who can be honest enough to admit that while not exactly the same they can see similarities and influence that moved 40K away from a TT WARgame and into a resource management warGAME.
You admitting that you don't actually know anything about MtG yourself proves my hypothesis right, doesn't it?
IMO40k is just moving towards being a modern board game rather than the wargame or miniature based RPG that it was in the past. Almost all of the better ones released in the last years uses cards and resource management, mostly because it's a great mechanism to increase depth without increasing complexity by too much if done right.
Some people boil things down to very simple components and then compare them at that simplistic end. The problem is that they often don't realise that the simplistic angle they view things at are also biased based on how they've simplified it. It's similar to the whole "there's only 5 stories in the world" or "any computer game with experience is an RPG"
Well maybe if you started a game of Magic with 10-12 mana, which is the frontload issue of strats in that it's not really managing a resource just unloading ASAP to leafblow enough that the other player can't do it back, although maybe the latest oppsie spell printed (and promptly banned) could simulate CP blowouts
I suspect that this was in the pipeline before the Walking Dead salt but it'll sell and undoubtedly will have the odd "must have" for EDH, jokes on them mind I've got a printer
Jidmah wrote: The best part about this is all the people claiming stratagems are "MtG" can finally see first hand how wrong they are.
Actually just the opposite it proves the point-
strats linked to resource management to boost damage IS what magic does it just uses mana+spells to boost creatures
You just spend X CP to use Y stratagem to boost damage for Z weapon instead of spending X lands to use Y spell to boost Z creatures damage potential.
Different words, same game effects.
Nope. Not going into detail (again), but the whole argument only exists because you are abstracting both games to a point where neither is recognizable anymore.
If 40k and MtG are the same, 40k and backgammon are the same, because you are using dice to determine how far circular game pieces move and whether they take out other circular game pieces.
There are many valid points to be made about why the CP/stratagem system is bad, none of them have anything to do with MtG.
Comparing stratagems to MtG is nothing but a logical fallacy (appeal to emotion fallacy/genetic fallacy) - many people in the 40k community hate MtG and so you are trying to justify your hate for stratagems by connecting the two.
Whenever anyone claims "9tH EditIOn haS BEComE MTg!!!11" it can safely be read as "I have no idea what I'm talking about".
God damn. You finally put to words what my brain could not. Thank you.
His Master's Voice wrote: There's just no way 40k and LotR can co-exist in the same overarching setting, be it with each other or things like Urza's Saga or Mirrodin.
I guess we're back to Garfield's original idea - that every MtG set be it's own, separate thing, and visual and narrative continuity be damned.
The 'crossover sets' aren't part of the normal MTG cannon--that still exists and the majority of sets will still be set in the MTG multiverse.
Jidmah wrote: The best part about this is all the people claiming stratagems are "MtG" can finally see first hand how wrong they are.
Actually just the opposite it proves the point-
strats linked to resource management to boost damage IS what magic does it just uses mana+spells to boost creatures
You just spend X CP to use Y stratagem to boost damage for Z weapon instead of spending X lands to use Y spell to boost Z creatures damage potential.
Different words, same game effects.
Nope. Not going into detail (again), but the whole argument only exists because you are abstracting both games to a point where neither is recognizable anymore.
If 40k and MtG are the same, 40k and backgammon are the same, because you are using dice to determine how far circular game pieces move and whether they take out other circular game pieces.
There are many valid points to be made about why the CP/stratagem system is bad, none of them have anything to do with MtG.
Comparing stratagems to MtG is nothing but a logical fallacy (appeal to emotion fallacy/genetic fallacy) - many people in the 40k community hate MtG and so you are trying to justify your hate for stratagems by connecting the two.
Whenever anyone claims "9tH EditIOn haS BEComE MTg!!!11" it can safely be read as "I have no idea what I'm talking about".
TBD wrote: As a MtG player this makes me want to vomit.
If it was a stand-alone product... cool. But 40K mixed into MtG... off
Sources indicate it's a single one off "What If" universe Commander Deck containing cards stamped with a symbol already ruled as ineligible for Standard, Modern, etc.. It won't affect the majority of MTG players in the slightest.
TBD wrote: As a MtG player this makes me want to vomit.
If it was a stand-alone product... cool. But 40K mixed into MtG... off
Sources indicate it's a single one off "What If" universe Commander Deck containing cards stamped with a symbol already ruled as ineligible for Standard, Modern, etc.. It won't affect the majority of MTG players in the slightest.
The majority of MtG players right now are Commander players, so yes, it will affect the majority of MtG players in a huge way.
Tannhauser42 wrote: The MTG community is absolutely on fire right now over this announcement.
But there's still so much we don't know as to exactly how this will be done. My personal suspicion is that the Warhammer version will be it's own box set like Game Night or Unsanctioned.
My suspicion is that it will be similar to Ponys the Galloping as a boxed set game... Mostly because I imagine I'm the target demographic and that's really the format I'd buy this product in. A sort of Cube or premade Commander style product meant for 40k fans but using Magic as a game engine is a rock solid product concept. Sign me up.
I do not want to play regular MTG with a thousand crossover cards shoved into every deck like the game is just one giant add for all of pop culture. That would be so disgusting and unfun. As cycnical as the community is, I find it hard to believe Wizards and Hasbro are really so ready to throw the entire IP into the sink. That makes no sense.
But the entire deal is wrapped up in chaos about the refusal to get a clear answer about format legalities for these products so no one knows what the game is supposed to look like now. Is magic going to keep being magic, or are they Heroes of the Storming this gak whether we like it or not? The worst part is that everyone is acting like Wizards can just shovel this off into commander so none of the other Constructed formats have to deal with it and Commander players won't care anyway. feth no, I care. Modern EDH isn't what it was 10 years ago when it was a pure bastion of janky nonsense and goofy plays. There are a lot of us who play the format thematically and don't want to be the donkey-caves at the table not wanting to play with Timmy's Master Chief deck or see someone randomly play Drop Pod Assault to pull five creatures from their deck, two of whom are Frodo and Homer Simpson.
And it's a shame, cause the idea of 40k Commander decks really writes itself. If it were it's own deal as a true spin-off not meant to be inserted into everyday Magic I'd probably be excited for it. Instead I'm annoyed by the inability of Wizards to actually relate to the community. Again.
The initial announcement might just be flawed.
I've been trying to point out in a few places that this announcement was never made to players. It was made at an investor meeting. The post they put on the website and are directing players to is just a copy paste of the original announcement.
We really don't know anything about these things other than that they exist and consumers weren't the target of the initial announcement, so some of the things said in it I'm skeptical of because I'm not sure they mean in that meeting what they mean to magic. A lot of MTG players don't realize how magic can often sound like a foreign language.
I see no reason to be salty about this. If there is money to be made let them make it.
If someone turns up at a MTG tourney with a Chaos Space Marine deck it will be no different from myriad other themed decks, it might even be fun to play and I would certainly be interested in seeing the cards if only for curiosities sake.
MTG doesnt really have a story, its a collage of all sorts of stuff, and I wish they would stop trying to shoehorn it into D&D. However MTG elements do not intrude on Forgotten Realms to my knowledge and there are no honest attempts to integrate it into the larger D&D canon universe so it can be seperated.
The thing is I would have zero problems have Pony decks, or Dalek decks, or 40K decks or D&D decks or Middle Earh decks in MTG as the port is one way only. MTG has or at least should have zero influence on 40K canon. So if Marneus Calgar suddenly channels white and blue and is tapped for some effect it happens in MTG and stays in MTG. It has zero bearing on 40K canon even as an apocrypha. Marneus Calgar himself doesn't know anything about it because as far as he is concerned its at the very most an in canon toy, and we aren't sure in which canon.
This is the way it should be as it puts MTG in its place as an anything goers of fantasy culture that has many port-ins but hopefully no port outs as it occupies a null space in fantasy culture.
Def interested to see what happens and what comes out - I still occassionally pick up MTG cards for the art (yeah I am odd) but a 40k expansion with a wide range of characters and factions would be very cool.
If its just Marines Red (Blood Angels), Blue (Ultramarines), Black (Dark Angels), Green (Salamanders) and White (White Scars) I won't bother.
Age of Sigmar would seem to fit better - in thats its another fantasy/steampunk world like many of the MTG ones. Love to have a Neferata MTG card
Is it lore infringement though. So long as licences are paid and nobody's IP is being damaged, or there is a comic fair use as parody then let them get on with it.
I think there is a lack of understanding about one way crossovers. They mean zip to established canon and can be used for comic relief or cooperation. Examples being Batman vs Judge Dredd. Daleks invading Children in Need, the White Dwarf scenario of the Fellowship travels through Moria using 1st edition AD&D, numerous diss tracks on ERB etc etc.
Yes nerds like a contained canon with as few holes as possible. But being upset because the Ultramarines have invaded Ravnica by drop pod and are being faced off by the legions of Sauron, a splicer deck and a rat deck is just.... wrong. I might as well ask in which universe the Lego crossover occurred where Harry Potter and Luke Skywalker had a sing off. And does it upset your canon?
Let's take the case where MTG is in the best position to cause 'damage', which is the D&D universe canon as there is co-ownership. Ravnica may be ported into the D&D system, but has no place in D&D sourcebooks outside that set aside for Ravnica. So while the D&D cosmos has a unified whole you cant demand a portal in Sigil to Ravnica because Ravnica exists outside main D&D canon, and this is not like Athas which is separated from the D&D cosmos because its strange magics would damage the fabric of the cosmos in general. Ravnica is separated because from a D&D view it doesn't exist, just like Middle Earth doesn't exist, or the Imperium of Man, or us.
End users, a.k.a. DMs, can place their settings wherever they want including any of the fore-mentioned or elsewhere. Many DMs do this but it means nothing to the written canon.
Mr Morden wrote: If its just Marines Red (Blood Angels), Blue (Ultramarines), Black (Dark Angels), Green (Salamanders) and White (White Scars) I won't bother.
Leaving aside my annoyance to nerd a bit, there's been lots of speculation about this. Factors that embody certain factions don't match the play style that element has in game, and there's a heavy tilt toward white/red/black to me across all of 40k. That said;
-The Imperium seem like a shoe in for White. It's the color of order, civilization, and faith most of the time. Also angels. 40k Angels = Space Marines A card called Exterminatus that wipes the board is right at home in white. IG match the play style of White/Green decks very neatly (lots of flooding the board in cheap creatures) while Space Marines would slot right at home both in terms of gameplay and theme with White/Red, which tends to be artifact (wargear) focused and militant in style. Sisters of Battle also fit the White/Red paradigm, but could also work as White/Blue. White/Black could also fit the Imperium though, with White/Black tending to draw out Black's better nature and White's worst as oppressive and controlling which would fit the Imperium.
-Chaos is Black/Red. 1k Sons would be Black/Red/Blue, Death Guard Black/Red/Green. Red is chaos in Magic, but in terms of what Chaos is in 40k, Black is the better fit, but Black/Red is really just right there for representing Chaos Marines and Demons straight up. They're probably the easiest faction to place thematically and gameplay wise.
-Eldar seem like they'd be most at home in some variation of Blue, maybe Blue/Red or Blue/White. Blue/White often has a spirits and high wisdom focus to its theme and that seems very Eldar. Blue/Red is my preference. This is weird because Blue the control color and likes to play the long game, but in Magic that means it plays slow. Eldar are normally more of a glass cannon faction. Blue/Red really best encapsulates them. Maybe Blue/Red/White?
-Tau feel don't fit very cleanly into the color pie honestly. Not sure where I'd put them. They could be White, but they also have elements of Blue, Red, and Green depending on how the product would try to present them.
-Tyranids are Green/Blue, maybe Green/Blue/Black. A lot of people have also pointed out that Slivers are basically Tyrnids, so colorless can also work.
-Necrons feel Blue/Black to me but like the Tau they're not quite a clean fit. Zombies are black though, and the Necron's high tech is def blue. Black/Blue as a pairing tends to have lots of graveyard stuff, zombies included, and hand/deck disruption. Feels fitting but something about it also feels off. Can't put a finger on it.
-Orks are Red. They're probably the only 40k faction that actually feels right at home in Magic since 40k Orks and Magic Goblins are thematically very similar for the wacky things they can do, aggressive play, and tongue-in-cheek comic relief.
Orlanth wrote: I see no reason to be salty about this. If there is money to be made let them make it.
If someone turns up at a MTG tourney with a Chaos Space Marine deck it will be no different from myriad other themed decks, it might even be fun to play and I would certainly be interested in seeing the cards if only for curiosities sake.
MTG doesnt really have a story, its a collage of all sorts of stuff, and I wish they would stop trying to shoehorn it into D&D. However MTG elements do not intrude on Forgotten Realms to my knowledge and there are no honest attempts to integrate it into the larger D&D canon universe so it can be seperated.
The thing is I would have zero problems have Pony decks, or Dalek decks, or 40K decks or D&D decks or Middle Earh decks in MTG as the port is one way only. MTG has or at least should have zero influence on 40K canon. So if Marneus Calgar suddenly channels white and blue and is tapped for some effect it happens in MTG and stays in MTG. It has zero bearing on 40K canon even as an apocrypha. Marneus Calgar himself doesn't know anything about it because as far as he is concerned its at the very most an in canon toy, and we aren't sure in which canon.
This is the way it should be as it puts MTG in its place as an anything goers of fantasy culture that has many port-ins but hopefully no port outs as it occupies a null space in fantasy culture.
MtG certainly has a background story. Not a very well written one but there is an ongoing story for sure and it has very well defined characters and worlds (planes) a lot of which go back all the way to the '90s . Involving these other IPs in it and especially a grimdark sci-fi setting completely pollutes MtG's flavor.
From a GW/40K player's point of view, imagine this happens:
"Hello people, GW here! Since our crossover into Magic the Gathering was so succesfull we have good news! GW is proud to announce some brand new collaborations with Hasbro and Nintendo to produce more crossover products in the future. This time Hasbro and Nintendo's IPs will be introduced into 40K! Starting late 2022 GW will be producing plastic kits of the entire range of Pokemon characters as well as an entire range of Transformers kits, and all of them will have rules to be used in games of Warhammer 40.000. Feel free to mix and combine all these new awesome kits and rules into your excisting Warhammer 40K armies!"
^ This is EXACTLY what MtG Commander & Legacy players are looking at right now.
Imagine how you (40K players) would feel about showing up to the store with your Eldar army and you have Marneus Calgar looking at you from across the table flanked by freaking Pikachu, Squirtle and Optimus Prime. The lads at the next table have Tyranids & Sponge Bob squaring off against an all GI. Joe army led by The Great Unclean One.
But that's also the absurdity of it. Surely that can't be what Wizards/Hasbro views as the future of their most profitable product. They've been frustrating vague and evasive about answering the basic question but when you sit and think about what the game becomes in the doomsday people fear, it becomes absurd to think that's the intent.
It just doesn't make sense.
Why would they take the best selling part of the entire business (Magic outsells all of Hasbro's toy lines combined, and has better margins) and turn it into an advertising platform and literally nothing else? Why would they devalue the base IP like that by completely selling it off as an engine for crossover promotions? Companies want money, and that would make money, but this is basically a proposal to destroy their most secure and stable product line and throw it into chaos. Company's are risk averse, and this image of the game is so insanely risky it boggles the mind. We're talking about a company that's too scared to reprint core cards everyone wants because if everyone gets them easily they might not buy booster packs anymore.
There's also the other direction, of why would GW want to permanently commit to their product being represented by a player tapping 3 mountains and playing an Orc Nob into summoning a free Swarmlord because some card effect lets them do it?
I really don't think that's what we're looking at, it's just that it's really hard to feel secure in that thought when we can't get straight answers especially because TWD cards are legal in some formats despite completely clashing with the Magic aesthetic.
Yes nerds like a contained canon with as few holes as possible. But being upset because the Ultramarines have invaded Ravnica by drop pod and are being faced off by the legions of Sauron, a splicer deck and a rat deck is just.... wrong.
Excuse me but who are you exactly to decide this?
MtG has been a well defined setting since 1994 and it has never legitimately been polluted by outside intellectual properties.God forbid if it's players want to keep it that way, right?
What we'll get now is that some herpaderp will show up with his Atraxa/Bilbo/Ghazghkull Thraka/Rick Grimes commander deck looking for a game and he will get told to GTFO. I know my playgroup will tell him exactly that. Don't underestimate how pissed off Magic players are at this nonsense.
Mostly I find it hilarious that someone's opinion is basically MTG fans are wrong for not wanting 40k to encroach into their fun times, but definitely no porting of any MTG into mah 40k. That would just be wrong.
LordofHats wrote: Mostly I find it hilarious that someone's opinion is basically MTG fans are wrong for not wanting 40k to encroach into their fun times, but definitely no porting of any MTG into mah 40k. That would just be wrong.
The level of cognitive dissonance.
Exactly.
Seeing things being said like "Magic doesn't have a story" makes it clear people don't have a clue about MtG and what is going on with it.
It's notable that the proposed product is called Magic Universes Unbound, not Magic the Gathering Universes Beyond.
I wonder if the question we should be asking is really; Is The Gathering going to be it's own product line distinct from Universes Beyond, but both are supposed to be Magic? Some of the things I've seen come from devs seem suggestive that there's some kind of shake up planned not for the game people are playing now but the language and approach of the business itself.
Necrosis wrote: Is this the first time that Magic the gathering has had a cross-over like this?
Like this, yes I think. LOTR is getting a 'full expansion,' no explanation on what that specifically means. 40k is slated to have a release of pre-constructed Commander decks. To my knowledge, neither of those things have happened before in the game's history.
There have been other crossovers;
-There was a release of limited edition cards for The Walking Dead. This got a lot of backlash because the cards were limited, had unique mechanics, and one of them is quite powerful. A lot of fans disliked suddenly playing against Rick Grimes in the middle of a Magic game and further disliked that the cards were unique mechanically and of limited availability.
-When Ikoria released, they also released a series of Godzilla cards. Most of these were reskins of cards in the Ikoria set. They had the same mechanics (Mothra was the same as Luminous Broodmoth) save for Godzilla, who has a 'canon Magic' card that is equivalent to him but that card has never been printed so he is effectively a mechanically unique card. People were more receptive to this because the cards looked different but didn't have different mechanics. I actually have a couple of these for collector purposes. I'm in the camp who still things seeing these cards in play is immersion breaking.
-There have been cards in the past that were promotional (there are older LOTR cards for example) but these are very few and far between. There's never been a release where a crossover was the release's express purpose.
-EDIT: Some people have also pointed out the very old Arabian Nights and 3 Kingdoms releases, but I see that differently because those are open source IPs, free to be reinterpreted, and those sets are ancient, I've never seen any of those cards in play ever save for the reprinted Imperial Recruiter card that I didn't even know was originally from 3K because it doesn't remotely stand out aesthetically. These sets are mostly a non-issue outside of of supremely optimized legacy decks that are rarely played.
Pony's the Galloping were silver border products. By default they aren't legal for constructed play with regular Magic cards (they also used several unique mechanics that wouldn't fit in a regular magic game, EDIT: One of them even references cards that don't exist, and another requires you to have a MLP toy on hand to use it). No one ever really complained that they existed because those cards will never appear in a regular game of Magic unless we're using Rule 0 and house ruling it. They're basically the same thing as you and me sitting down for a 40k game and agreeing to let me play my off-brand Goonies IG models.
The current fuss is that it's confirmed these new products will have black border cards, which are usually taken as a signer of legality for constructed play.
Rosebuddy wrote: they're probably black-bordered because a lot of people are basically scared of "unofficial" content, which silver-bordered cards pretty much are
Mark Rosewater made a tweet that was roughly on these lines.
They don't want to make the new products silver border because silver border aren't 'real cards.' My contention however is that answer doesn't answer the question people are really asking. It rather sidesteps it to talk about how products are valued and regarded, not the relationship between the future MUB content and the current MTG content. The argument people are making that they must be intended to be the in the same play space (like it or gtfo?) seems to be in complete ignorance that most companies when launching new products launch new products. They don't suddenly inject them into a current product.
GW didn't launch Lord of the Rings by saying "Warhammer Fantasy Battles will now feature a crossover with Lord of the Rings" with LotR models intended to be played on the same tables in the same games.
Mr Morden wrote: If its just Marines Red (Blood Angels), Blue (Ultramarines), Black (Dark Angels), Green (Salamanders) and White (White Scars) I won't bother.
Leaving aside my annoyance to nerd a bit, there's been lots of speculation about this. Factors that embody certain factions don't match the play style that element has in game, and there's a heavy tilt toward white/red/black to me across all of 40k. That said;
-The Imperium seem like a shoe in for White. It's the color of order, civilization, and faith most of the time. Also angels. 40k Angels = Space Marines A card called Exterminatus that wipes the board is right at home in white. IG match the play style of White/Green decks very neatly (lots of flooding the board in cheap creatures) while Space Marines would slot right at home both in terms of gameplay and theme with White/Red, which tends to be artifact (wargear) focused and militant in style. Sisters of Battle also fit the White/Red paradigm, but could also work as White/Blue. White/Black could also fit the Imperium though, with White/Black tending to draw out Black's better nature and White's worst as oppressive and controlling which would fit the Imperium.
-Chaos is Black/Red. 1k Sons would be Black/Red/Blue, Death Guard Black/Red/Green. Red is chaos in Magic, but in terms of what Chaos is in 40k, Black is the better fit, but Black/Red is really just right there for representing Chaos Marines and Demons straight up. They're probably the easiest faction to place thematically and gameplay wise.
-Eldar seem like they'd be most at home in some variation of Blue, maybe Blue/Red or Blue/White. Blue/White often has a spirits and high wisdom focus to its theme and that seems very Eldar. Blue/Red is my preference. This is weird because Blue the control color and likes to play the long game, but in Magic that means it plays slow. Eldar are normally more of a glass cannon faction. Blue/Red really best encapsulates them. Maybe Blue/Red/White?
-Tau feel don't fit very cleanly into the color pie honestly. Not sure where I'd put them. They could be White, but they also have elements of Blue, Red, and Green depending on how the product would try to present them.
-Tyranids are Green/Blue, maybe Green/Blue/Black. A lot of people have also pointed out that Slivers are basically Tyrnids, so colorless can also work.
-Necrons feel Blue/Black to me but like the Tau they're not quite a clean fit. Zombies are black though, and the Necron's high tech is def blue. Black/Blue as a pairing tends to have lots of graveyard stuff, zombies included, and hand/deck disruption. Feels fitting but something about it also feels off. Can't put a finger on it.
-Orks are Red. They're probably the only 40k faction that actually feels right at home in Magic since 40k Orks and Magic Goblins are thematically very similar for the wacky things they can do, aggressive play, and tongue-in-cheek comic relief.
Astartes and Sororitas as White Red. Organized but lethal.
Guard as White Green. All about massive units and hordes.
Titans as large Artifact Creatures
Craft world Eldar as White Blue. Organized Manipulators.
Harlequins as Blue, tricksters and manipulators.
Dark Eldar as Blue Red. Scheming but also thrillseekers
Ynnari as Blue Black.
Orks as Green Red. Chaotic hordes and massive machines and beasts.
Tau as Blue Green. Play the political game but also swarms of drones and massive aircraft and battlesuits
Tyranids as Green Black. All consuming Hordes.
Necrons as Black White. Ancient undead robotic society
Nurgle as Black Green. Death and decay, but also disease and life
Tzeentch. Black Blue. Chaotic Manipulator
Khorne as Black White. Murder but also martial.
Slaanesh as Black Red. Impulse and sensation.
Well, I can fully understand why you wouldn't want those cards in you every day magic, considering how I don't mix in my Munchkin 40k cards with the fantasy sets because it feels stupid, and not the good kind of stupid.
Yeah, I don't think there'd be so much toxicity about this if there were a clear answer about how people will be spending their playtime.
If these are products that are using Magic like a game engine, but are supposed to be their own deal, people could effecitively mix and match them when they feel like it (because they'd all be using the same rule set, it would be easy) and have those wacky and hilarious moments where you cast a Land Raider and crew it with Donald Duck, Percy Jackson, and buff it with Grabthar's Hammer. People can and will play these cards that way regardless because it'll be goofy fun.
I think the vitriol is spilling over because people don't want that to be the entire game and don't want to be made the donkey-caves declining to play hodgepodge IP decks at their tables.
Yes nerds like a contained canon with as few holes as possible. But being upset because the Ultramarines have invaded Ravnica by drop pod and are being faced off by the legions of Sauron, a splicer deck and a rat deck is just.... wrong.
Excuse me but who are you exactly to decide this?
Orlanth, I can voice opinions same as you.
So please get over it.
MtG has been a well defined setting since 1994 and it has never legitimately been polluted by outside intellectual properties.God forbid if it's players want to keep it that way, right?
What we'll get now is that some herpaderp will show up with his Atraxa/Bilbo/Ghazghkull Thraka/Rick Grimes commander deck looking for a game and he will get told to GTFO. I know my playgroup will tell him exactly that. Don't underestimate how pissed off Magic players are at this nonsense.
It takes a ,lot of salt to get offended by the flavour text on another players cards. If you are offended by having the above cards in a deck I hear rattles flying out of prams. MTG 'canon' is extra thin and has no bearing on the game. You can mix any card and any faction, the only exception being commander and then that exception is extremely loose. You already have the equivalent of multiple genre characters in a magic deck and it has been that way since alpha. I know, I was there.
Unlike 40K years, decades even went by before there was even the thinnest attempt at a narrative and it still means zip to the game.
Where is the 'herpaderp' when you can have any creature with any moral outlook, biome or origin in any army.
Even so when the canon was introduced it did include factions, some semblance of cultural continuity etc etc, yet many many cards (probably most but I havent bothered to check) exist totally outside of that and were never integrated and were never part of the narrative. The tie ins add to a feature that is already there.
LordofHats wrote: Mostly I find it hilarious that someone's opinion is basically MTG fans are wrong for not wanting 40k to encroach into their fun times, but definitely no porting of any MTG into mah 40k. That would just be wrong.
The level of cognitive dissonance.
The cognitive dissonance is comparing a free for all card game where anything goes that has been structureless since its origins in the early 90's with a game system which had faction narrative built into it from the ground up from its origin a half decade earlier. You can add a big gribbly monster to a deck of humans, it happens all the time, it is so not unusual nobody will notice it happening. But you still can't have a carnifex in a space marine army, you never have and likely never will and it would almost always be questioned at some level.
LordofHats wrote: That just tells me you don't know much about Magic.
Evidently far more than you think.
Lets take it to the root. If you take a look at Rogue Trader and every edition since there have been faction based unit rosters since the outset and with a lot of continuance. Yes in the earliest editions there was a lot of crossover in weapon types and you can have individuals fighting in different factions, but there were restrictions and there was explanation as to what was what. 40K is a narrative driven game has always been so.
Meanwhile to play MTG you got a deck which contained a set number of cards you had a fixed number of random lands in that deck and a mix of other cards delimited only by rarity not content. This was how MTG launched and it has been the core of how it has been played. Even if you now have themed starters there theme is extremely loose and you can at any time swap your cards around and customise your deck, and the flavour text on the card you swap in has never been relevant. It is the opposite to 40K in terms of narrative. So it only includes the narrative you choose to add if you choose to even pay attention which the vast majority of MTG players do not do.
I haven't played MTG for a long time but have a deck still and came back to the game after two decades of not playing. I have a Commander deck and so long as it has cards with the same colour as the Commander and the cards are not in the list of withdrawn cards then its legal, and fluff makes up 0% of the ruling. Themes are possible but entirely optional and even themes are normally only themes for effect with very little in the way of linking narrative.
Meanwhile my Death Guard codex not only tells me which units I can have but why, inherently to the system.
Adding say Pikachu to the Death Guard army would be a problem, a genuine one deserving genuine backlash. Adding Pikachu to a Commander deck would not. Simple really. Even so if someone brought a counts as Pokemon army of Death Guard to a non-GW event I am sure it would be given a fair look. People would be looking to see if you have put the modelling effort to make it look like your Pokemon were plague ridden and had sworn allegiance the ruinous powers. The effort or lack thereof in model theme would matter more than the models actually used. I have seen 'worse'. In fact these crossover armies are normally popular anywhere except where there is a restrictor on GW miniatures only, which is understandable. There was a 'heretical engine' Thomas the Tank Engine meme going around, and this in turn spawned several attempts to make the model. Just google image search 'thomas the tank engine 40k' and see for yourself. Maybe these are just modelling projects, but maybe they see tabletop time in friendly games. You just suspend hardcore 40K for the duration of a non-canon battle, enjoy it and move on. It doesn't cause ruptures in the fabric of the canon.
I am warming to the idea actually of having Princes Luna, some Pokemon, a character from Tolkien and some 40K in a deck. Do I call it the 'salt mine deck' or the 'troll activator deck'? I don't normally name decks except for classification by theme when the theme is a keyword card effect that had some synergy, or a function of the deck as a whole. This seems the norm for most players. I have seen myriad 'green timmy ramp decks' but not a single one is so classified by exactly which green large monsters it contains. They are themeless and work by the effects on the card not the flavour text, with sole exception to keywords which could be just about anything so long as it qualifies for activation.
Why so serious?
It's MTG, it has had themeless factionless decks facing themeless factionless decks for 30 years. Mine had five Moxes in it back then, and even that wasn't a theme, I just happened to have them from random box sets. If someone wants to add ponies, calm down, channel your inner adult and LET THEM.
Orlanth wrote: This was how MTG launched and it has been the core of how it has been played.
Maybe for you back then.
Just because you don't care about Magic's lore or themes doesn't mean no one else does. Fun is a two way street. The idea that one person should suck it up and have less fun because someone else can have some is the polar opposite of how most people approach tabletop games but it's the position Magic players seem to be getting forced into whether they like it or not. Somehow it seems to me you'd be having the same reaction if the shoe was on the other foot, so maybe you're the one who could afford to be more an adult?
Just because you don't care about Magic's lore or themes doesn't mean no one else does. Fun is a two way street.
Fun is a two way street. which means you don't get to dictate incoming traffic. I really do hope that when people turn up at game clubs with pony decks and other licenced crossover material they wont be put upon as some recently implied would happen. It's a petty and ignorant thing to do.
Somehow it seems to me you'd be having the same reaction if the shoe was on the other foot, so maybe you're the one who could afford to be more an adult?
I just proved I wasn't suffering the same reaction, with examples and reasoning given.
To reiterate, MTG is inherently themeless, this is a fact. You can retroactively add a theme to it, and you can even have a thin theme shoehorned in with the dueling decks, though the vast majority of players use them as deck fuel or a base to build rather than for the duelling theme itself.
You can choose at any time to restrict yourself to the thin spread of official narrative of MTG and strictly tailor your decks to very specific subset of cards.
However most players will only look at the effect on the cards and its mana costs and will ignore the flavour text entirely. If the card is legal and its effects fit the deck it will get used. Get used to this.
As for crossovers into 40K, they have long been part of the game, mostly as what we would now call 'easter eggs'. Sly Marbo is a clear example that shouldn't need much explanation.
As for crossover armies here is a primer on how to handle them. T L : D R If someone turns up with a crossover army, don't be a petulant child.
Fun is a two way street. which means you don't get to dictate incoming traffic.
Neither do you, and your facts are about as factual as the boy who cried wolf.
It's amazing how I'm ignorant for wanting to have fun in a hobby, but you're not for telling me to get used to it? You realize that someone being told to shut up and play a game they won't enjoy is still a net gain of 1 person not having fun, right? It's actually worse than what I normally see. Most Magic players have conversations about power levels and deck styles. Healthy Magic is played by group consent and that's when it's at it's best. Bringing a comp deck out against someone's goofy all chairs deck isn't fun either way. I'm sure those conversations will continue going forward regardless of any new product. Mutual consent and group fun are big parts of the community. People who tell anyone to 'get used to it' aren't people worth playing with regardless of the game being played.
Cognitive dissonances was too generous. You haven't proved anything other than your own callous hypocrisy
Orlanth wrote: This is what I get for forwarding logical arguments that you can't handle or articulate a counter for.
Listing a long line of subjective opinions about 40k and how you value it, and another long line of subjective opinions about Magic and how you value it isn't a logical argument. It's a valid opinion I could respect, but all you've done with it is proclaim it fact and dismiss the entire concept that others might have different opinions and values for their hobby. You've called me ignorant and petulant, but you've been rude and dismissive this entire time, basically acting like the kind of player you'd accuse me of being.
You haven't forwarded anything but your usual brand of condescending smugness. No point continuing? Why did I bother trying is a better question. You're always like this. I should have known better.
Alright this definitely needs to cool down a bit between you two. And I'd much rather that be by your choice than my action. It's clear you disagree with each other and can't find common ground, fine. Let that be the end of it.
It's amazing how I'm ignorant for wanting to have fun in a hobby, but you're not for telling me to get used to it? .
LordofHats wrote: You've called me ignorant and petulant, but you've been rude and dismissive this entire time, basically acting like the kind of player you'd accuse me of being.
Lets take a look at this. When did I mention 'ignorance'. Here:
Fun is a two way street. which means you don't get to dictate incoming traffic. I really do hope that when people turn up at game clubs with pony decks and other licenced crossover material they wont be put upon as some recently implied would happen. It's a petty and ignorant thing to do.
So what does this mean if you actually read the post properly. First I did not call you ignorant or petty, instead here it means that if someone turns up with a deck one doesn't like the theme of and one makes that person or their deck unwelcome then that is being petty and ignorant. I stand by those words. If you choose instead that your own fun doesn't extend to vetting what other people are allowed to collect and play then you avoid that label.
As for 'petulance' that was a T L : D R of the attached thread, basically don't behave in the manner described above.
Now as for 'getting over it', so long as the crossovers exist and those who dislike the crossovers don't want to be obnoxious to other people who collect playing cards they don't like the theme of, then some amount of 'getting over it' is required.
This is a clear cut issue of right and wrong. If some claim they are going to go as far as to discriminate against people for the simple matter of having this in a gaming deck:
...or cards of similar ilk, then they need to grow up, and I may vocalise a protest against their behaviour.
I can't be clearer than that.
Hopefully that is all just venting and nobody here will actually stoop anywhere near that low.
Like that's not me saying I don't like the card. You literally can't (and it's not just because of the silver border). The card isn't playable not just by the rules but by it's own wording.
Spoiler:
Of the five keywords mentioned on the card, only 3 actually exist... Well, ponies might exist somewhere idk, but I can't think of any. The only Alicorn cards are the ones in Ponies the Galloping and it's only five cards. The cards mentioned on that card naming the other main characters from MLP don't exist. Everypony has no meaning in the rules, though contextually I assume it means every player.
You can't actually play it because the card literally isn't usable. It's not even about whether I like it or not.
The only card in The Galloping set that could be potentially playabe is Nightmare Moon/Luna and is so powerful it wouldn't be any fun to use it. It says to play cards from outside the game with moon art, there are at least ten "I play this I win" cards that depict a moon in the art. In constructed play it would be on a banlist if not for the silver border already disqualifying it from regular play. Far weaker cards are already banned.
I addressed it in an earlier post;
Pony's the Galloping were silver border products. By default they aren't legal for constructed play with regular Magic cards (they also used several unique mechanics that wouldn't fit in a regular magic game, EDIT: One of them even references cards that don't exist, and another requires you to have a MLP toy on hand to use it). No one ever really complained that they existed because those cards will never appear in a regular game of Magic unless we're using Rule 0 and house ruling it. They're basically the same thing as you and me sitting down for a 40k game and agreeing to let me play my off-brand Goonies IG models.
The current fuss is that it's confirmed these new products will have black border cards, which are usually taken as a signer of legality for constructed play.
Right now, the only crossover cards that are in the game are the Godzilla reskin cards only a few people really mind, and the TWD promotional cards, only one of which ever sees play. And even then hardly anyone plays it because there are so few Rick cards, and only a subset of people who have one who actually use it (mostly in Human tribal theme decks since Rick is a monstrous buffer).
No one is complaining about Ponies the Galloping. No one really cared that it released. They weren't real cards intended to be played and 4/5 of them actually can't be used because they don't work. Someone could Rule 0 the card, but they'd have to house rule the ambiguous parts or invent the cards it calls for the player to use. Either way, no one is really complaining that people might do wacky things in their own time on their own initiative.
Despite that, Wizards has said the new products will have a distinct holo stamp, which leaves everyone confused about what the relationship is supposed to be. There might not be any official explanation for a long time cause Wizards tends not to talk about things much until we're maybe 3-4 months from release.
All you're confirming is that you really don't play Magic, which makes this vehemence your directing at people who do and care about it really hard to deal with. Very 'logical' on your part, but I guess I'm just expected to let it go so w/e.
1 Scifi game, 1 Fantasy game.
The scifi game is being inserted into the fantasy game and the fantasy fans are upset.
Fantasy fans say 'how would you like it if the fantasy went into your scifi game'?
Scifi fans say 'but thats not the same thing'.
I guess it shows the narrowmindedness of the scifi fans.
Well, a magic set rumored for next year is supposedly going to be Cyberpunk themed, but that's it's own barrel of monkeys that's kind of fallen by the wayside because of the crossover announcement. Even that wasn't so bitter though because most people I've seen have no issue with Magic taking Magic in a scifi direction per se (it's already very science fantasy in some settings) and Kamigawa is a setting people have been asking to see more of for a long time. Previous sets featuring the setting have been explicitly stated to be stories from its past, so we've never seen it's present and that has some people excited.
Most of the complaints on the crossover products are that people don't want the game to become an empty platform for crossover products.
I noticed that there are two extremes of MTG players (among many others). One kind sees only mechanics of the card the other sees only the artistry of the card.
One side doesn't really care as much what picture is on the card when they play, nor the name of the card or anything fluff/lore/creative about it. What they care is the stats and abilities, the pure mechanics of the card.
The other extreme cares more about the art, name, lore and overall creative artistic side of the card.
Both groups consider the other side important, they just don't weight it as heavily nor as importantly.
So yep when the creative side of magic is at risk one side is up in arms (potentially) whilst another side is not as worried because they can appreciate the art, but for them the core is the mechanics.
In the end I do also appreciate that many don't want to see MTG go the same path as, say, Lego has with tie-in products all over the place. There can be enjoyment in that, but at the same time it can also dilute the original and creative fun. Also from what I can gather MTG doesn't actually "Need" crossovers. It's already a growing giant in the market and doesn't seem at risk of being overlooked. Granted crossovers might help them secure a fresh wave of new younger gamers into their ranks.
1 Scifi game, 1 Fantasy game.
The scifi game is being inserted into the fantasy game and the fantasy fans are upset.
Minus the ad hominem attack, I think you are right. I doubt most MtG fans would have an issue if the AoS/WHFB universe was made into a set.
I don’t think that’s true because one of the sets is Lord of the Rings and people have issue with that too (myself included). It’s more the idea of watering down Magics own IP with external universe stuff in general, not whether it’s a thematic fit or not.
Lord of the Rings would inevitably be about all the characters from the books, because essentially that's what most of the IP is about. These would then have to be slotted into a universe they don't belong and would be in direct competition to MtGs own world building. A LotR set with a huge number of legendary creatures is pretty much impossible. The warhammer fantasy universe on the other hand is more of a canvas for stories, you could easily create a set which would neither need to create a bunch of new types and mechanics nor would it have to be in contradiction to MtGs color wheel.
Honestly, planes like Kamigawa or Lorwyn feel more alien to the MtG setting than the warhammer fantasy would.
If the argument is just "I don't want any other IP ever for no particular reason but I would totally accept a sci-fi setting made by WotC"... well, no rational argument is going to shift a person's believes.
Mirrodin/New Phyrexia were already fairly Sci-Fi, so yes, I would be more accepting of a sci-fi setting made by WotC than external IP and I don’t see that as particularly irrational, but whatever. It’s the 4th wall breaking that makes Warhammer or LotR or whatever feel incongruous to the setting, not the thematics of the universes being included.
Jidmah wrote: Mirrodin isn't even anywhere near sci-fi, and neither is new phyrexia. Have you even read the books?
I'm talking about tanks, space ships, bombs, guns and explosives in MtG. And not some magic steam-punk things like Kaladesh had.
Whatever, my point is that people are upset about the LotR stuff too, so your initial point about the fact that it’s 40k that’s the problem and if it were fantasy it would be fine, is wrong. I’m sure it would for some people, but not everyone. Would you be okay if when The Old World came back it had Planeswalkers and New Phyrexians and Ravnican Guilds and stuff included? Or Lord of the Rings characters or Space Marines or Walking Dead characters or anything? I don’t understand why people can’t see where people are coming from here. It’s one thing to not personally mind it but I think the objection to the idea is pretty understandable whether you agree or not.
I don’t even know how I’d feel about Wizards doing a sci-fi magic set, I wouldn’t be that keen probably, but that isn’t what’s happening so it doesn’t matter.
Edit: sorry, this isn’t even really aimed at you. Just a bit frustrated.
Jidmah wrote: Lord of the Rings would inevitably be about all the characters from the books, because essentially that's what most of the IP is about. These would then have to be slotted into a universe they don't belong and would be in direct competition to MtGs own world building. A LotR set with a huge number of legendary creatures is pretty much impossible.
The warhammer fantasy universe on the other hand is more of a canvas for stories, you could easily create a set which would neither need to create a bunch of new types and mechanics nor would it have to be in contradiction to MtGs color wheel.
Honestly, planes like Kamigawa or Lorwyn feel more alien to the MtG setting than the warhammer fantasy would.
If the argument is just "I don't want any other IP ever for no particular reason but I would totally accept a sci-fi setting made by WotC"... well, no rational argument is going to shift a person's believes.
Depends if they're using lotr specifically for the war of the ring or if it's a catch all term for the first and second ages as well. If it includes the previous ages, then there a hell of a lot of "legendary creatures" they could draw from. Not that I particularly care as I don't play magic. I'm just interested in any nice new art that may be produced.
I sold my MTG cards a couple of years ago and haven't played 40k since I demo'd Star Wars Legion.... yet I'm interested in this.
Commander was the only format of MTG I liked, and I think 40k can fit it pretty well.
I hope they are just stand alone premade decks and can't be used outside 40k games. I know that's all I intend to use them as. I think my MTG friends would be willing to stay with premade decks for 40k, and it makes it much more attractive to my non-MTG friends
$30ish dollars to have a decent lunch game with some coworkers or a group game with my pals when we don't feel like getting our minis out... sounds good.
ImAGeek wrote: Whatever, my point is that people are upset about the LotR stuff too, so your initial point about the fact that it’s 40k that’s the problem and if it were fantasy it would be fine, is wrong. I’m sure it would for some people, but not everyone. Would you be okay if when The Old World came back it had Planeswalkers and New Phyrexians and Ravnican Guilds and stuff included?
I would totally be ok with that and, I'd absolutely drop all my money on a boros army if they ever did one. New Phyrexia kind of a special case, but let's not pick apart the argument because of that.
Or Lord of the Rings characters or Space Marines or Walking Dead characters or anything?
See, this a different thing. Lord of the Rings as a general setting I would be ok with, but the other things don't fit into the setting at all.
I don’t understand why people can’t see where people are coming from here. It’s one thing to not personally mind it but I think the objection to the idea is pretty understandable whether you agree or not.
I don’t even know how I’d feel about Wizards doing a sci-fi magic set, I wouldn’t be that keen probably, but that isn’t what’s happening so it doesn’t matter.
Edit: sorry, this isn’t even really aimed at you. Just a bit frustrated.
No harm done
See, this is the reason why I said there is no point in rationally arguing believes. This is your opinion and there is no being wrong or right here. It's same as arguing music, your favorite food or which 40k army you like best. Your opinion doesn't cause any damage to anyone, so you are free to have it. The thing is, you also can't convince someone of your opinion because it wasn't a rational thing to begin with. You are feeling frustrated because you are trying to anyways.
Not liking your magic with other IPs is essentially the same as not liking pineapple on pizza. You can decide for yourself to not like it, but you won't convince the person eating such a pizza that it tastes terrible.
Personally, I don't have a strong opinions on cross-overs, I even like them when they are done well. Having a total disconnect between setting types bugs me, because it usually causes huge flaws in logic and/or handwaves essential parts of one or the other universe.
On the other end, there's people like me who don't really care if the aesthetics of the setting fit because the lore doesn't. What does a Planeswalker mean in LotR or 40k? It doesn't mean anything. Neither setting has such a thing and the concepts of lands and mana don't mean anything either. I'm a lore obsessive kind of person. I like picking into obscure details and pulling out stuff that isn't immediately obvious.
It's "I don't want that" because the very concept that these are meant to be normal cards dilutes the actual game lore and renders it meaningless. The game doesn't become about itself it becomes about the next crossover product.
I tap three mountains and play Mekboy Teleporta is on it's face weird contextually. Orks don't care about mountains. The 40k setting has no use for mana or land. That concept isn't a product that actually reflects 40k in any meaningful way. It's just a random thrown in of a 40k reference into Magic that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
I would be interested in these products if they were well done, but it doesn't seem to me that just ramming them into the game and telling people to get used to it is a strong sign that they'll be well done. Which makes it doubling sad to me because I'd be interested in a boxed or precon WH40k card game using Magic as a game engine. That sounds fun.
The idea that all my Magic play will now have to start with a discussion about what IPs to use sounds like work that'll just end in someone telling me to STFU and deal with it somewhere along the road. At that point the game isn't fun anymore. For anyone really.
Otoh if they decide to keep them separate imaging tapping an agriculture world, a manufacturing world and a death world to put a catachan regiment in play, now we're talking.
H'mm considering that formats = allowed expansions you may just see additional commander formats added. I think at this point all we can do is provide feedback to Hasbro/WOTC and idly speculate..
Jerram wrote: Otoh if they decide to keep them separate imaging tapping an agriculture world, a manufacturing world and a death world to put a catachan regiment in play, now we're talking.
Yeah, this is what kind of gets me.
Plains, Islands, Mountains, Swamps, and Forests don't mean anything in 40k.
Manufactorums or supplies or something totally fit. The mechanics would be funcationally the same, the use lands as a resource card is mechanically independent of thematic context. If I were interested in this product, I'd want to reflect that. And how can you not use the Planeswarker card type for Psykers? Could also work as a representation of a legendary character or commander. Totally fits Like, a space marine deck literally writes itself in a lot of ways;
-Primaris Captain, Soldier (Astartes), all Space Marines you control gain +1/+1.
-Apothecary, Soldier (Astartes), When Apothecary enters the field, put 3 counters on it. If a solider you control would be destroyed, remove 1 counter from Apothecary. That creature is Indestructible till end of turn.
-Devastator Squad, Soldier (Astartes), tap, Deal 3 damage to target creature or character.
-Drop Pod Assault, Instant, Search your deck for 3 Space Marine cards and put them into play tapped and attacking. Use this card only in your combat phase before declaring attackers.
-Iron Halo, Wargear, Equipped Soldier has Protection from non-combat damage.
Really. It really writes itself. I was skeptical about the singleton Commander format and making 65-67 singleton cards, but it's actually not that hard. If I can think up a dozen without trying, the devs could think of plenty.
H'mm considering that formats = allowed expansions you may just see additional commander formats added. I think at this point all we can do is provide feedback to Hasbro/WOTC and idly speculate..
Yeah. Part of me thinks that, either by Wizard's hand or by players, we'll see a splitting of the current play formats into TG Magic and UB Magic, so there'd be TG EDH, which only uses original Magic IP, and then UB EDH that opens the gate to any black border card that isn't banned.
Jerram wrote: Otoh if they decide to keep them separate imaging tapping an agriculture world, a manufacturing world and a death world to put a catachan regiment in play, now we're talking.
H'mm considering that formats = allowed expansions you may just see additional commander formats added. I think at this point all we can do is provide feedback to Hasbro/WOTC and idly speculate..
I can see why GW would do this, but I wonder why Wizards is so keen. I was under the impression that MTG had never been more profitable than today, so a brand deal like this sounds a bit desperate, or bizarre at least.
Granted, the MTG writing hasn't been super tight in pretty much forever. There are recurring characters like Jace, Bolas and Chandra, but the settings swing fairly widely in terms of theme, between extremes like Mirrodin, Theros, and Innistrad. But they've always steered clear of licensed settings, even Wizards' own D&D stuff where that would have been relatively simple and uncontroversial.
I'm now wondering if this means all bets are off. Could MTG turn into Smash Brothers? Maybe we'll get a Nintendo set in 2022, and a Dark Souls one soon after. Let's face it, both would sell.
It's probably the same reason that GW is doing animations and school programs. Both firms realise that their strength is not in customer retention, but in recruitment of new young fresh customers
Retaining old customers is very good for both firms, nay essential as the older generations are often running clubs, drawing in people, introducing them and being front-line interactions.
However both are also very clearly aware that if they sit back and rely on those older customers then their customerbase will keep getting older. That might be fine for a few years, heck they might even enjoy a sales boom when those retained older customers hit retirement and have more free time. However its a ticking time bomb for suddenly waking up with an aging customer base and a huge generation gap within the player base. It's very hard to recruit new members in their teens when your youngest members are in their 50s. No matter how welcoming you are the generation gap is there.
One of the biggest strengths GW, Lego and other firms that have lasted long term is recruitment of new generations. LEGO did this by branching into film tie-ins. Meanwhile hobbies like Mecanno and Hornby are running on older generations. From what I know Hornby isn't doing badly, but its not the big toy for kids these days.
MTG I think as a strength could use its brand to create considerable numbers of side products not connected with the core game. There are a lot of no-name small card games that pop up that attach to an existing IP (GW has had a few over the years); and most tend to die off. MTG has the infrastructure to survive and if they branched out they could easily do side games that don't impact their core game. Heck because the side games are side they could easily use the balanced core game data and stats to create separate games. Sure their core market might not want htem; but they'd be making more off side markets and drawing in those customers into their ecosystem.
I'm willing to be some who get into the 40K cards will end up picking up some core MTG stuff too
MtG has done nods to other IPs in the past - the D&D and MLP sets were silver-bordered and con-exclusive in their nature. No one minded this because they were specifically marked as illegal in normal play (the silver border) and iirc there was also a 'charity' element to these sets as well.
The Godzilla 'crossover' cards were fine as well - they were 'alt art' versions of existing cards in the related set and didn't replace them. If you wanted a perfectly normal set you could have it. If you wanted to theme stuff around the Godzilla alt-arts you could. There was no major mechanic changes, they were optional.
MtG's big hoo ha over external IPs came in first with the recent Walking Dead set - which not only produced black bordered cards but also REALLY strong cards in a limited availability set. For real, Rick Grimes and Negan are incredibly strong cards in that set for what they do.
And people got upset because not only did it seem like they were introducing even more of a pay to win element (and MtG is a known MESS for netdecking and pay to win deckbuilding where if you basically can't afford the expensive shiny super cards for your deck, hahaha, have fun with that) but also crossing IPs and making it limited.
My concern is that 40k will end up like this. Black bordered, a limited 'set' priced as a premium above normal MtG rivalling their Masters sets.
Now the solution here is very, very simple - make it a silver-bordered set like the Un-sets.
Admittedly the Un-sets were designed as comedy sets - with joke rules and card mechanics (I still remember an Unhinged draft and raiding the drama soc's costumes for spare shoes for a Shoe Tree) ... but silver border is probably the most straightforward solution and prevents these external IP cards bleeding into Modern, Legacy or Normal play.
For the record- Silver bordered cards ARE legal in Commander. That rule changed last year iirc. However, Commander is intended as a more casual style of play so really, it's subject to agreement with your group with opponents - you're meant to have fun with Commander rather than play hyper-competitively.
The specific mention of 40k Commander being a thing could be an indicator that the cards will possibly be silver bordered as a set.
And to be fair, I have no problem with that.
Alt-arts? Fine.
Silver border sets? Fine.
MtG lost it at TWD because those were black bordered, incredibly potent cards in a very limited release (Secret Lairs) - so were legal in a number of formats and bled an external IP in.
Overread wrote: MTG I think as a strength could use its brand to create considerable numbers of side products not connected with the core game. There are a lot of no-name small card games that pop up that attach to an existing IP (GW has had a few over the years); and most tend to die off. MTG has the infrastructure to survive and if they branched out they could easily do side games that don't impact their core game. Heck because the side games are side they could easily use the balanced core game data and stats to create separate games. Sure their core market might not want htem; but they'd be making more off side markets and drawing in those customers into their ecosystem.
I'm willing to be some who get into the 40K cards will end up picking up some core MTG stuff too
The hubub is mostly centered on the concern that the side products aren't side at all but are explicitly intended to be part of the core game. I don't think there's any real opposition to the idea of spin offs themselves. Players are worried, and Wizards is being cagey, that the spin offs aren't really spin offs. I'm not convinced that's what's going to happen, but the inability to get an answer from Wizards on the question is so persistent I think there's some kind of gag in place. Most questions relating to MUB get spun off into some peripherally* related issue that doesn't directly address the question being asked.
The company has a constant year long release cycle. Time Spiral Remastered is about to hit the market on the 19th, and then Strixhaven in April, the D&D set (an internal crossover players were already divided on), then some weird not sure how it works dual set release for Innistrad. By the time those sets launch, they'll be previewing the 2021 release schedule which has already had some leaks but nothing official. Wizards has typically tended to focus exclusively on it's main lines of communication on the next set release with tidbits for the one after it. So these products might not be seeing much info beyond the vaguest details till late 2021 or early 2022.
I feel like Wizards almost has to say something though, cause peeps are freaking out all over. I'm not really seeing the benefit to being cagey for two years about what the future state of the game is supposed to be.
Overread wrote: MTG I think as a strength could use its brand to create considerable numbers of side products not connected with the core game. There are a lot of no-name small card games that pop up that attach to an existing IP (GW has had a few over the years); and most tend to die off. MTG has the infrastructure to survive and if they branched out they could easily do side games that don't impact their core game. Heck because the side games are side they could easily use the balanced core game data and stats to create separate games. Sure their core market might not want htem; but they'd be making more off side markets and drawing in those customers into their ecosystem.
I'm willing to be some who get into the 40K cards will end up picking up some core MTG stuff too
The hubub is mostly centered on the concern that the side products aren't side at all but are explicitly intended to be part of the core game. I don't think there's any real opposition to the idea of spin offs themselves. Players are worried, and Wizards is being cagey, that the spin offs aren't really spin offs. I'm not convinced that's what's going to happen, but the inability to get an answer from Wizards on the question is so persistent I think there's some kind of gag in place. Most questions relating to MUB get spun off into some peripherally* related issue that doesn't directly address the question being asked.
That said, Universes Beyond cards will not be Standard legal. We strive to make Magic cards that are widely useful, but Universes Beyond will be above and, well, beyond our normal Standard releases. So nothing much is changing with our normal cadence of releases for Standard. This is purely a cool thing we're doing in addition to all the other cool things we're already doing.
The same article mentions they receive a specific Universes Beyond holostamp to mark them apart. In addition, they stated that TWD set would be retroactively part of UB. They aren't being cagey at all, this stuff was answered the day they announced them.
Tannhauser42 wrote: Standard is only one format, and not even the most popular one.
Sanctioned Tournaments, FNM, Prerelease events, Draft Weekends, Online, and Arena all use Standard rules. It's the basis for most of the currently most played outside of Commander.
Like tons of people I played magic a long time ago, but havent played or been in the culture for ages and ages. (I did buy into Theros because #greekstuff, but before that I hadnt played since... Coldsnap! (which was criminally underrated artwise, IMO)
My impression was Standard was indeed the most generally popular, followed by the rise of Commander and then whatever that one is that lets you use almost any card in the game ever made (which tends to be popular either in super casual groups or super competitive ones).
Overread wrote: My impression was Standard was indeed the most generally popular, followed by the rise of Commander and then whatever that one is that lets you use almost any card in the game ever made (which tends to be popular either in super casual groups or super competitive ones).
Legacy. Commander has really grown in popularity because the Highlander style helps curb a lot of the combos and abuses in Standard, Modern, and Legacy.
I have to say I think my most fun with MTG was boosterdrafts; mostly because you always got a reward for your time (ok you had to buy the cards...); but also because it curbed some of the power-combos going on. Not perfect, but it at least levelled the playing field a little between the more and less skilled.
Regular magic sessions can be brutal if you're not that skilled/not buying lots of cards/not buying specific prebuilt decks. If anything I'd say the internet, easy trading and such has spoilt "some" of the card collecting and gaming aspects for me. It's not just that you can find power-decks online, but that you can buy the specific cards to build them - its not so much limited by the local player card pool.
There's ups and downs of course and I freely admit some of my lack of liking the current system is just that I wasn't able/prepared to invest enough time to learn the power-play and to keep up with the constant change.
I still dabble in the idea of collecting casually via boosterdrafts; but I think I'd only get back in if I found the right group to engage with.
The Selesnya Commander deck I just finished putting together after getting into the game makes me feel specifically called out by your comments, Overread.
Standard is the most popular format if you include all of Magic.
But when Magic Arena launched, and while lots of people still play Standard it's kind of died in a lot of places where people play face to face. Commander and Modern are the most popular forms of paper Magic (Wizards is the one who told us this). There's a mix of reasons there but the most obvious is that longtime Magic players have big collections and those gametypes aren't really present on Magic Arena. As Arena has become the focus of standard Magic, Veterans have increasingly played different formats IRL which has in turn made those formats more popular by word of mouth. Commander has exploded in the past few years.
And I also mentioned this before. I'm not sure 'standard play' means in that announcement what it means to Magic players. Do they mean standard play, as in how the game is normally played, or do they mean Standard Play as in the format? That announcement is a copy paste from the investor meeting that preceded it and is word for word the same thing they told a bunch of stake holders, many of whom probably don't play the game or understand it. Is Wizards talking to its investors the same way it talks to its players?
Calling out Standard specifically is weird given the current state of the game and how people are playing it.
Modern uses the same essential banlist as Standard + extra. If it's not legal in Standard, it's not legal in Modern generally speaking. Given how hard they've been pushing Commander though and how popular the format is today both with players and set releases, it's weird to exclude Standard of all things. Commander's a more difficult format to get into because of the buy in. I'm actually surprised in some ways the proposed 40k products are Commander decks rather than Brawl decks (a format that is basically Standard + a commander).
I have to say I think my most fun with MTG was boosterdrafts; mostly because you always got a reward for your time (ok you had to buy the cards...)
Yeah, booster play can be kind of a great equalizer when it comes to people with different levels of collection or investment. It's also still a very popular way to play and makes lots of money. I suspect this factors into why LotR is getting a 'full expansion.'
They'll probably be able to sell that for booster play.
off
Like, a space marine deck literally writes itself in a lot of ways;
