Please hold while we load your cart...
People of the message boards, I have returned. I thought the end of school for the summer would mean I would be writing more. Boy was I wrong. A lower level of free time than anticipated combined with an increased level of laziness has left me staring down the last few weeks of summer, realizing that I have not done anything for my beloved StarCityGames.com in a long, long time.
It's been so long, in fact, that many of you have forgotten all about me and my quest to finish all of Mark Rosewater's hundred questions. For those of you who need reminding, or have some catching up to do, here's what got us to this point.
Rosewater's Article
Rosewater's Follow-up
No, No Talk TO Me: Answering Maro's Call - Part 1
No, No, Talk TO Me Part 2: Mmmm...pie
No, No, Talk TO Me Part 2.5: Jumping on the Banned-wagon
Now that we've got that out of the way, let's dive in, eh?
Art
50.) How important is the art to Magic?
Art is important, but not nearly as important as R&D's work in the set's mechanics. Bad art won't ruin a card, but bad gameplay will.
51.) Is the quality of the current Magic art better than the past, equal to the past or worse than the past?
Overall, its probably better. Colors seem to be richer, and fewer cards seem to look like they're from a 1950's comic book. I know some people think its worse, that it's been made too warm and fuzzy, and that may be the case...but I'd say your average card looks better; the older ones seemed to be hit-or-miss.
52.) Is it good to have artists that polarize the players (some hate it, some love it)?
A little debate over art is always a good time. I could live with seeing art I personally didn't like if I knew some people liked it. I'd also enjoy telling them why they have about as much taste in art as Richard Simmons has in fashion.
53.) Is it better to have the same consistent pool of artists or a constant churn of new artists?
A consistent pool. If an artist is good, we should keep them around as long as possible. Wizards need a core of established artists and a small group that is frequently rotated, so that when it came time to replace a retiree, there will be some names readily available with some work on Magic with which to judge them.
54.) Is there too little, just enough, or not enough non-representational art (defined as art that doesn't simply show a straight-forward scene)?
Not enough. Some cards are hard to represent, like Mana Short, and so lend themselves to non-representational art. The rose on Mana Short was great. If they keep printing mechanic helpers, which have no flavor of their own, Wizards would do well to at least make the art interesting. Astral Slide, for instance, was okay, but it could have been much cooler.
55.) Is the current variety of Magic artists too small, just right or too great?
I have no complaints. I'd like to see more of my favorites, but I realize that this would require crowding out someone else's favorites.
56.) Does similarity of art ever cause you confusion in game play?
Yes, and I'm not alone. You'd think that this sort of thing could be easily avoided. There ought to be a central art database, where the artists can see what each other are doing. It would help them to create a consistent"look" for the set (something Wizards has said it wants) and would avoid blunders such as these:
Hundroog, Titanic Bulvox, and Krosan Groundshaker
Whipgrass Entangler and Daru Sanctifier
The Kai himself made a well-publicized blunder involving the latter pair, mistaking the Entangler for the morph creature. If a player famous for his tight play can make mistakes like this, you had better believe us non-pros can do the same. Many players identify cards with a glance at the art, not by title. Similar art, and similar mana costs in the abilities of the latter pair, can cause people to make mistakes - the kind of mistakes that people aren't happy to be the beneficiaries of, the kind that make you curse your luck and threaten to quit Magic. You'd think this kind of thing would be easy to avoid.
57.) Should there be more variety in how each color is represented in the art?
White in Onslaught is a great example of how a unified look can get out of hand, and so is Green. As creatures"mutated," instead of growing more and more diverse, they grew more and more the same. The key is to find a balance between making each piece fresh, and yet in tune with the color's overall image.
58.) Should magic of a certain color be of that color's palette when represented in the art (i.e. should red magic actually have to appear as some shade of red)?
I wouldn't say this is essential. The only time this has caused me trouble is with basic lands. As most of you know, all basic lands have the same borders. Normally, the color of a card is easily discerned with a glance at the border, but with land this is not the case, because lands aren't colored - they are, however, closely tied to color. For this reason, I really depend on the art. Normally, this is fine - a Swamp looks like a swamp, and a Forest looks like a forest. Unless that Swamp is made of metal and has huge masses of green gas floating over it - in that case a Swamp looks like a forest. Before you all scold me for making such a silly error, consider how little time you usually have to grab lands when you're building a draft deck, and how hectic the pawing can get. Cards! Pawing through cards!
Bunch of freaks.
59.) Which artists do you love?
First of all, there's Christopher Rush. There are few other artists I identify more with Magic than Chris - heck, he was one of the designers of the Magic logo itself. He's been around forever and just keeps turning in the goods. Credits include Ice Age's Brainstorm, every Lightning Bolt, and Homelands' Ihsan's Shade and Eron the Relentless, and many other great pieces that I fear I'm neglecting. His website has a gallery of his work.
Alan Pollack has been around for a little while, but the card that really brought my attention to him was Blinkmoth Infusion. His website has a gallery of all the art he's done for Magic.
Kaja Foglio is a first pick, I hear. She did the simply awesome Ice Age Swords to Plowshares, and the original Bottle Gnomes (to which SCG has the original artwork), just to name a few.
Kev Walker is quickly becoming the Christopher Rush of Magic's new era. He painted the latest Wrath of God, and did an awesome job on Legions's Clickslither. Unfortunately for him, kevwalker.com belongs to a guitar teacher.
Drew Tucker is a blast from the past. His style has a twist of impressionism to it, a surreal quality that offers a nice change of pace. His credits include Icatian Moneychanger, Plateau, Hurr Jackal, Angry Mob, and Dandân.
Rob Alexander has made a name for himself recently as the artist behind most of the fetchlands, but he has many other credits. His gallery is here.
John Avon is Mr. Land. I don't know of any other Magic artist whose landscapes are better, year in and year out. Some of my favorites are the Swamps from Urza's Saga, at least one of which won the 8th Edition art vote. Seriously, the man's done almost every good land ever. His website obnoxiously uses frames, but all the Magic art is just one click from his homepage.
Rebecca Guay is back for Ninth and Kamigawa block. Many consider her the best of all time, and I can understand why. She'll be doing the art for at least Elvish Piper in 9th, and is on board for Kamigawa as well. I for one can't wait. She recently illustrated The Barefoot Book of Ballet Stories, and I for one can wait. Her gallery is here.
[Personally, I think Scott M. Fischer is amazing (for more than just Time Stop) and I'm a big fan of Mark Zug, Chippy, Carl Critchlow, Puddnhead, and Matt Cavotta (mmm, Etched Oracle). - Knut]
60.) Which artists do you hate?
The truly bad artists don't to stick around long. Glen Angus has been, in my view, inconsistent. Sandskin and Gustcloak Runner are not especially pleasing to the eye (although I admit they're growing on me a bit), and his Dragon and Bear Player Rewards tokens (image not available) are simply awful.
On the other hand Mindslaver and All Sun's Dawn are great, and some of his lands aren't bad and the Kamigawa stuff I've seen so far looks promising. The angles and almost splotchy colorings that seem awkward on his creatures work much better on landscapes. It will be interesting to see how he develops and what kind of assignments he gets.
61.) Do you like"Easter eggs" (visual references to older Magic cards) in art?
Sure, why not? Am I the only one who thought that"Easter eggs" were little jokes hidden in cards? Oh well, on to the next group.
Card Concepts
62.) How do you feel about the Mirrodin creative environment?
I'm not sure I like the concept of a metal plane any better than I like any other plane, but I do feel that Mirrodin was more well developed than its predecessors. The emphasis on exploring the world through the cards, rather than making cards that emphasized a specific character or told a story, was change very much welcome.
63.) Is the current world development (meaning the look and feel of the world) better, the same or worse than previous world development?
This is tough, as I have no fair point of comparison. Dominaria (whatever it's called - the main plane) has been developed so much they decided to leave it for a long time. I wasn't around for Masques, or Visions, or any of the other"side trips" before the new block structure. Many of the flavor text"contradictions" could be explained away, but the fact that they needed explanation isn't a plus. Art was pretty good, although I imagine Kamigawa will be better in every imaginable way. Overall, though, I appreciated the move towards using the cards to describe the whole world. Going from the"Akroma and Kamahl in various poses" block to the"Glissa and Memnarch in various poses" block would have been a pain.
64.) What qualities do you look for in Magic world environments?
Cohesiveness and immersiveness are tops on my list. I really couldn't care less if we were in Medieval France or in Pericles's Athens or flying around between Saturn and Jupiter or at Epcot Center. Magic is Magic, and as long as there's some recognizable vestiges of fantasy, I'm good.
65.) Are you happier visiting different planes every year or would you rather stay on the same plane for multiple years in a row?
Variety is good.
66.) Should planes be revisited, and if so, how often?
If a plane is especially popular (i.e. if Wizards sells a lot of packs), I could see revisiting it. Part of the fun now is anticipating not only the new cards, but the new realm. Revisiting an old plane would take that away, so I guess the deciding factor would be whether announcing a return to that plane would be better received than announcing a brand sprankering new one.
You get to make up words whenever you want when you're an internet writer.
The title"internet writer" is sweet because it sounds important, and yet requires practically no credentials whatsoever.
When you're an internet writer, you get to make random digressions about the liberties you get to take as an internet writer and feel the need to for no reason other than that you can get away with it and people who write for school or business can't.
67.) How much of a fantasy look should Magic have?
I already answered this question, which forces me to make a decision: I can cut and paste the answer that I already made, and re-write the section to cover the gap, or I can just write something random like"Hi, I'm Dream's Grip," and move on.
Don't believe people who say you can't learn anything by reading articles on the internet. I learned how to write those last few paragraphs by reading Tim Aten.
That last remark was intended to be both funny and complimentary, but in retrospect I can see that it might not have been either. Oh well.
68.) Should Magic ever visit real world inspired settings (a la Arabian Nights)?
Yes. So long as Wizards doesn't get sued into bankruptcy, I'm cool. Go Kamigawa! w00t!
69.) Do you prefer having the same creature types every year or do you prefer having them ebb and flow (meaning each type sits certain blocks out)?
I like variety, but I realize that some people are inseparably tied to a certain creature type. So I'll compromise - each block should have its own distinct creature types, but the old favorites should appear fairly consistently. I'm going to enjoy seeing something other than elves on Green cards when Kamigawa comes out, for instance. Snakefolk! Hisssssss!
70.) Is there a creature type that shouldn't exist?
The only one that comes to mind at the moment is"Lord." Goblin King isn't a Goblin why? I'm not too worried about the authenticity or practicality of a creature type. So many things in Magic don't make sense that a few problematic creature types don't make much difference overall.
71.) Is there a creature type we've stopped using or simply don't use enough that should get more use?
Notice how I avoided answering this question early? See, I learned my lesson. Merfolk should be back. Period. They're just to awesome to leave out for the piddling reason that they can't do anything on land. Oh yeah?! What about Ariel? She was a merfolk, and she could kick some major...um, merfolk yeah! I always liked townsfolk as well, if we're talking about folk. Some cards that should be made as townsfolk seem to get made as wizards or clerics nowadays. Playing with townsfolk is like,"I don't need Dragons or Elementals or Vampires to beat you, I just need peasants! What now!" I'd also like to see more Ferrets, because then we could have the ferret deck play the rat deck (which might actually be a good deck pretty soon - go figure) and although the Zombies and Rats have gotten most of the attention recently, the Thrull tribe is very good at demonstrating what Black's about.
Homer Simpson: I want you scientists to make me stupid again!
Scientist: We don't play God, sir.
Homer: Oh yeah? I think your Octoparrot would say differently!
Octoparrot: Squak, I shouldn't be!
72.) Which is more important, having the art match the mechanic or having the art unto itself be as cool as possible?
Cool art!
73.) Is any element currently being overdone in the current Magic card concepts?
Yes. The concept of the sucky White card has been done to death.
Speaking of revisiting things I've talked about before, apparently Red isn't unintelligent, or so says the Maro.
"If there's anything red hates as much as rules it would be thinking...(this characteristic) leads to some false assumptions. Let's talk about some of these:
Red is stupid - Yes, red is not the thinking color. But this doesn't mean red is unintelligent. Red is emotional. Red is short-sighted. Red is impulsive. But none of these are mutually exclusive of intelligence. Red can (and does) have some very bright people. Both Tanhgarth and Starke from the Weatherlight Saga, for example, were intelligent red characters."
I don't like this, but I'm willing to accept it. I would, however, like to point out that for every Tanhgarth there have been a hundred Mogg Fanatics.
I, do however, stand by my claim that Shunt is in the wrong color. Misdirection is not Red; Shunt is not Red. Red is direct:"Red wants quick, physical answers...blunt implement(s) of action," as Maro informs us. Shunt is not impulsive, it is not direct, it is not emotional, it is not quick or simple or frank. It is not the trick of the trickster, which is embraced by Kamigawa's Akki, it is the premeditated cunning of the master archmage.
Misdirection is, gasp, the exact opposite of directness.
"Red is a bully - Because Magic is a game about dueling, the cards tend to show off the aspect of the colors that lend themselves towards combat. For red, that means playing up the more aggressive emotions such as anger. This makes red seem like a big bully. And to be fair, it often is, but red does have many other less aggressive components. Red, for instance, is the color of passion and drive. Red is the home to most styles of art and poetry. Red has a very gentle side. It's just not the kind of things you build a Magic card around."
And why not? If Red is all about following its emotion, and harnessing it, why can't Blossoming Wreath be Red. Not the mechanic, or course, but the flavor. Drawing strength from the emotions caused by the death of comrades?
For example:
The Highwayman (2)(R)
Legendary Creature--Human Rogue
Haste
If The Highwayman attacks, sacrifice it at end of combat.
The Highwayman gets +1/+0 for each creature in your graveyard.
"Back, he spurred like a madman. Shrieking a curse to the sky, / With the white road smoking behind him, and his rapier brandished high!" --The Highwayman
1/1
That was some awesome top-down design right there, I must say. But I'm tired now, so I'll wrap up in my usual way.
Turns out its really hard to type a cappella freestyling.
ROCK!
Aah, Aah, Ah-oh-oh-ah-ah-ah,
Oh... whoa..
Oh yo..
This is not
The greatest Magic issues article in the world;
This is just a tribute.
Couldn't remember the greatest magic issues article in the world, oh
No--this is a tribute.
Thanks for sticking with me on this edition of"No, No, Talk TO Me." See you next time.
Grant Babcock
Bobvader314 on the forums
