cle-guy

[cle-guy]

Ahem. Just like Trump’s conspiracy to steal the 2020 election. We all saw it and then we voted him back into office 4 years later

It occurs to me that for all the Republicans pandering to conspiracy theorists, they seem unwilling to convene a congressional hearing or hearings investigating these supposed conspiracies. Despite having the votes to do so in both houses. Almost like they know that it’s a load of crap.

Conspiracy theories are standard populist fare. The idea that there is a shadowy conspiracy perpetrated by those in power is quite appetizing to those who believe that the "elites" are suppressing the common people and need a champion. It fits in with their conception of how the world works. Given how empty populist rhetoric is on substance, this shouldn't surprise anyone.

Thanks for the remarks, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

Thoughts on the recent partial ceasefire?

A deal that requires Russia to sacrifice almost nothing (since they can still 'accidentally' hit the targets) and has no mechanism for enforcement? Sounds a lot like what I expected.

Sarcasm aside, I expect very little from this. As I've mentioned before, Trump is likely to believe what ever supports his pre-determined conclusions and so when Russia tells him that Ukraine breaches a ceasefire, he'll believe it even if all other evidence is to the contrary.

-SLAL

[cle-guy]

Had Italy not entered WWII, would this have made a great impact on the outcome and could Mussolini have survived like Franco?

Honestly, I think Italy staying out of the war and pulling a Franco *helps* Hitler a lot. Italy can extract (or purchase) oil and then resell it to Hitler which actually helps alleviate (but does not eliminate) one of the Third Reich's critical supply bottlenecks.

I think the only thing that might make a significant difference is if Hitler is able to actually hit the oil fields in Baku by having enough resources to do it. If they can do that and take Moscow, possibly killing Stalin, it's possible the USSR fractures. But once the United States enters the war and the sheer weight of industrial manufacture is aginst his side, Hitler would largely have a manpower shortage trying to occupy Russia west of the Urals and fend off a Western invasion.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

Do you believe the United States, and the future Soviet Union, would still have collided in a 'Cold War' had the Triple Alliance beaten the Entente during World War 1?

That’s a difficult question because how WWI ends shapes Europe to include the Russian Revolution and the formation of the Soviet Union. But I get to worldbuild our actual world now, which I enjoy as much as worldbuilding pure fantasy worlds.

If, for example, the Schlieffen-von Moltke plan worked, and Germany crushed Belgium and France in the timetable that the German High Command was expecting, it’s entirely possible that Germany forces a ceasefire in 1914-1915, and depending on the terms, Russia might not be weakened enough to permit the Revolution, and Lenin might still be sitting in Zurich or Bern instead of ever going to Russia (and his radical politics would quickly run him into hot water in a victorious Kaiserreich). Autocracy would be heralded as the triumphant European answer, having beaten the French Republic not once but twice in this mechanized age, and you might see a movement in Europe toward more authoritarian styles of regimes, Tsarist Russia already being one of the most autocratic regimes of the 20th century. von Moltke would be heralded as a military genius for his flawless execution of winning a two-front war, Central Europe would be a far more dominant player on the world stage, and France, Great Britain, and the United States might be seen as antiquated traditionalists who refused to adapt their governments in the face of growing mechanization mandating a one-party dictatorship to ensure mobilization is at its most rapid.

Conversely, if the United States stays out and Ludendorff wins WWI with his Kaiserschlact, then while much of that stays the same, you would see growing antagonism between the victorious German Empire and the Soviet Union (Ludendorff despised socialism) and you would have had the Western powers picking which of the two they wanted to support for the next great conflict. Ireland would have probably become a full socialist state rather than the Irish Republic, and other new countries that were birthed in the breakup of WWI might adopt socialism as well. Would the United States continue to support Great Britain and France or would they look to sell to the winning team? I’m not even going to touch the Middle East since it would look completely, well, alien to our modern understanding. Maybe the United Arab nation actually materializes, maybe it collapses under the strain of factionalism and arguments over who is in charge. We’re in completely new territory.

If the United States enters and the Germans win anyway, then the US would probably be extraordinarily isolationist (at least until technology forces globalization), since interventionism hurt them so significantly.

Then, you have to wonder whether the Soviet Union in this new world sticks with Stalin as the successor to Lenin, or if Trotsky manages to become the leader and he follows his “Revolution in All Countries” mantra and export dissidents and communists to other nations, in which case you would certainly still have conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States, but the shape of it would be very different.

After all, the Cold War was very much a competition of models of government (as Nixon’s Kitchen Debates shows), and the loss of the autocratic powers (to include Russia) in World War I and World War II went a long way to discrediting fascism and dictatorship in the early 20th century in the West. So instead you might see a Cold War between democracies on one side, socialism on another side, and autocracy on the third for a sort of feeling that honestly resembles Europe pre-World War I to a frightening degree.

Either way, that world would be very different.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy. It’s always fun to build new 20th centuries.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

Had Italy not entered WWII, would this have made a great impact on the outcome and could Mussolini have survived like Franco?

Honestly, I think Italy staying out of the war and pulling a Franco *helps* Hitler a lot. Italy can extract (or purchase) oil and then resell it to Hitler which actually helps alleviate (but does not eliminate) one of the Third Reich's critical supply bottlenecks.

I think the only thing that might make a significant difference is if Hitler is able to actually hit the oil fields in Baku by having enough resources to do it. If they can do that and take Moscow, possibly killing Stalin, it's possible the USSR fractures. But once the United States enters the war and the sheer weight of industrial manufacture is aginst his side, Hitler would largely have a manpower shortage trying to occupy Russia west of the Urals and fend off a Western invasion.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

Is the French and British nuclear program enough to deter Russia without the US?

Given the Russian population density in West Russia and the ethnicentrism in Russia that overly favors Moscow and St. Petersburg elites over all else? The Pakistani nuclear program is enough to deter Russia, let alone the British or French nuclear stockpiles.

-SLAL

[cle-guy]

What would have happened had China not been included as a permanent member of the UNSC?

That wouldn't have happened. The formation of the UNSC was founded on the idea that the Four Policemen - the USA, the USSR, the UK, and China (represented at this point by Chiang Kai-Shek).

What would be more likely is if recognition of China's seat was not shifted to the PRC from the ROC following US-Chinese rapproachment under Nixon. In that case, you probably would have seen the PRC act much more aggressively in the region. US investment and trade helped uplift much of the Chinese people from poverty; a China that continued to experience economic stagnation would see adventurism as a means to secure domestic support and acquire valuable resources. If the PRC did experience large scale revolt, it may have collapsed. It would have been hard for the ROC to secure a foothold unless they were able to find a whole lot of loyal PRC collaborators to form a cadre. The Soviets would probably have intervened in any Chinese collapse. So it could mean that the 1970's or 1980's get pretty spicy.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

Just upping this because every now and again I like to re-read it, and it's getting harder to find

Do you believe the United States, and the future Soviet Union, would still have collided in a 'Cold War' had the Triple Alliance beaten the Entente during World War 1?

That’s a difficult question because how WWI ends shapes Europe to include the Russian Revolution and the formation of the Soviet Union. But I get to worldbuild our actual world now, which I enjoy as much as worldbuilding pure fantasy worlds.

If, for example, the Schlieffen-von Moltke plan worked, and Germany crushed Belgium and France in the timetable that the German High Command was expecting, it’s entirely possible that Germany forces a ceasefire in 1914-1915, and depending on the terms, Russia might not be weakened enough to permit the Revolution, and Lenin might still be sitting in Zurich or Bern instead of ever going to Russia (and his radical politics would quickly run him into hot water in a victorious Kaiserreich). Autocracy would be heralded as the triumphant European answer, having beaten the French Republic not once but twice in this mechanized age, and you might see a movement in Europe toward more authoritarian styles of regimes, Tsarist Russia already being one of the most autocratic regimes of the 20th century. von Moltke would be heralded as a military genius for his flawless execution of winning a two-front war, Central Europe would be a far more dominant player on the world stage, and France, Great Britain, and the United States might be seen as antiquated traditionalists who refused to adapt their governments in the face of growing mechanization mandating a one-party dictatorship to ensure mobilization is at its most rapid.

Conversely, if the United States stays out and Ludendorff wins WWI with his Kaiserschlact, then while much of that stays the same, you would see growing antagonism between the victorious German Empire and the Soviet Union (Ludendorff despised socialism) and you would have had the Western powers picking which of the two they wanted to support for the next great conflict. Ireland would have probably become a full socialist state rather than the Irish Republic, and other new countries that were birthed in the breakup of WWI might adopt socialism as well. Would the United States continue to support Great Britain and France or would they look to sell to the winning team? I’m not even going to touch the Middle East since it would look completely, well, alien to our modern understanding. Maybe the United Arab nation actually materializes, maybe it collapses under the strain of factionalism and arguments over who is in charge. We’re in completely new territory.

If the United States enters and the Germans win anyway, then the US would probably be extraordinarily isolationist (at least until technology forces globalization), since interventionism hurt them so significantly.

Then, you have to wonder whether the Soviet Union in this new world sticks with Stalin as the successor to Lenin, or if Trotsky manages to become the leader and he follows his “Revolution in All Countries” mantra and export dissidents and communists to other nations, in which case you would certainly still have conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States, but the shape of it would be very different.

After all, the Cold War was very much a competition of models of government (as Nixon’s Kitchen Debates shows), and the loss of the autocratic powers (to include Russia) in World War I and World War II went a long way to discrediting fascism and dictatorship in the early 20th century in the West. So instead you might see a Cold War between democracies on one side, socialism on another side, and autocracy on the third for a sort of feeling that honestly resembles Europe pre-World War I to a frightening degree.

Either way, that world would be very different.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy. It’s always fun to build new 20th centuries.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

@lotrweek 2024 — day 7: free day ↳ happy hobbit day!

[cle-guy]

• A new mechanic which is a tweak on a mechanic from 2013:

This could be Evolve, Cipher, Battalion, Bloodrush, Extort, Fuse, Scry, Monstrosity, Heroic, Bestow, or Devotion

Monstrosity (Adapt), Battalion (Coven) & Scry (Surveil) have both been done before. Bloodrush feels too much like Channel to me, and I think it's not the option. Cipher's design space is too small, and Evolve doesn't feel like the right fit (nor does Extort). Fuse is not enough to get excited about, and I think Bestow is too complex and is an enchantment mechanic making it a better fit for Duskmorn. That leaves Heroic and Devotion, I'll guess Heroic.

• “Destroy target creature” (a spell with only this rules text) gets a new mana cost

Hmm, one mana cost with an additional cost?

• A cycle of uncommon lands that each reference four creature types

We've already seen these

• Counters in the set: +1/+1, blight, coin, finality, flood, flying, indestructible, loyalty, stash, stun, and supply

We've seen almost all of these before, not too much to see. Stash counters are interesting

• A noncreature subtype makes its first return

Hmmm, this could be: Cartouche, Case, Class, Lair, Rune, Siege (UNLESS it's a PLANESWALKER subtype but I will assume Mark isn't playing tricks). Cartouche does not fit, Case I suppose could but I'm skeptical. I'll guess Lair

• A ten-card cycle that acts as typal glue

Changelings IMO

• Two mechanics that came out in the same set return each part of a different two-color archetype

This one is tough, will have to think on it too many options

Not too much to say on the others

Maro’s Bloomburrow Teaser

Before previews for Bloomburrow officially begin, I thought it would be fun to do another of my Duelist-style teasers where I give tiny hints of things to come. Note that I’m only giving you partial information.  

First up, here are some things you can expect:  

• A new mechanic which is a tweak on a mechanic from 2013

• “Destroy target creature” (a spell with only this rules text) gets a new mana cost

• A cycle of uncommon lands that each reference four creature types

• Counters in the set: +1/+1, blight, coin, finality, flood, flying, indestructible, loyalty, stash, stun, and supply

• A noncreature subtype makes its first return

• A ten-card cycle that acts as typal glue

• Two mechanics that came out in the same set return each part of a different two-color archetype

• The word “Squirrels” shows up four times in rules text

• A mythic cycle with a new symbol

• One of the cutest mechanics we’ve ever made

Next, here are some rules text that will be showing up on cards:  

• “Create X tokens that are copies of target token you control.”

• “If you control a Raccoon, you may discard a card.”

• “Creatures your opponents control have base toughness 1.”

• “Whenever one or more other creatures you control leave the battlefield without dying,”

• “if it’s the first instant spell, the first sorcery spell, or the first Otter spell”

• “put a flood counter on target land.”

• “where X is the number of creatures you opponents controlled that were exiled this turn.”

• “for each other Squirrel and/or Food you control.”

• “As long as there are four or more card types among cards exiled with CARDNAME,”

• “up to one target artifact, creature, or planeswalker an opponent controls loses all abilities until your next turn.”

Here are some creature type lines from the set: 

• Creature – Hamster Citizen

• Creature – Frog Advisor

• Creature – Skunk Assassin

• Creature – Raccoon Berserker

• Creature – Squirrel Warlock Bard

• Creature – Rabbit Mouse

• Legendary Creature – Badger Warrior

• Legendary Creature – Weasel Mercenary

• Legendary Creature – Elemental Elk

• Legendary Creature – Bird Dragon

Finally, here are some names in the set: 

• Crumb and Get It

• Festivals of Embers

• Hop to It

• Kitnap

• Playful Shove

• Polliwallop

• Rabid Gnaw

• Shrike Force

• War Squeak

• Wishing Well

Tune-in to our official YouTube and Twitch channels (youtube.com/@mtg antwitch.tv/Magic and) at 9:00 am PT on Tuesday, July 9 as Bloomburrow previews begin.

[cle-guy]

[cle-guy]

Shocked

I feel awful, rest in peace Steven

I don’t have a lot of words right now but Steven Attewell, who you all reading this probably know as @racefortheironthrone , just passed away. He was a very great writer, friend, and person, and it’s a horrible loss.

[cle-guy]

First off: how many Ravnicans are going to actually know that "War of the Spark" was about planeswalkers?

Second off: planeswalkers were ALSO on the side of SAVING the city during "War of the Spark" including the two crucial ones who won the dang thing (and one of them died in the attempt), so this is not as clear cut in my mind at all.

Third off: I do not buy for one second that "all of those planeswalkers owe their lives to the citizens of Ravnica!" since those planeswalkers were pretty crucial to their victory. War of the Spark is a Bolas win without Jace, Teferi, Ajani, Kaya...the list is long, all fighting their tails off to save the city. They are equally responsible.

With all of this being said: I could buy Ravnicans hating planeswalkers post War. But this is after March of the Machine.

For me the better case for Ravnicans to hate anyone or anything its the Guilds. It was the guilds who all clammed up during War of the Spark and chose not to fight (well, besides the Boros). It's the guilds who collapsed and generally failed in MOM to lead the defense of the city (especially the Izzet and Simic who were enamored with glistening oil).

This whole thing feels contrived

Hi Jay,

The recent story seems to heavily imply that the Ravnican population as a whole are pissed off with *all* planeswalkers for not coming to their aid during the Phyrexian Invasion. Are they all being entitled ass-hats (what with the number of planeswalkers << numberof planes being invaded), or am I missing something here?

Imagine you are an average Ravnican.

Imagine if the most important position in your government was taken by a being from outside of your world, and they disappeared for long stretches off-world. You've never heard of a planeswalker before.

Imagine if within the span of a few months, half your other heads of state were replaced by planeswalkers just like him, most of which because of assassinations... carried out by these same planeswalkers. Most at the behest of ANOTHER planeswalker, a massive evil dragon who launches an invasion with off-world murder zombies and wreaks havoc on your world. You finally know the name planeswalker, and associate it with the worst tragedy to happen on your plane in millennia.

All to get at these planeswalkers. And at the cost of thousands of lives - YOUR lives, YOUR people, the ones that the dragon AREN'T after, they win. Every single one of those planeswalkers owes their lives to the citizens of Ravnica. Every. Single. One. Dozens of planeswalkers, deep in Ravnica's debt.

Two years later, one of those planeswalkers, a supposed local, launches yet another invasion. Worse than the last. And where were these planeswalkers YOU saved in THEIR hour of need, now that YOU need them?

Not a single one of the dozens whose lives were bought with the blood, sweat, and tears of average Ravnicans could be bothered to show up. Even the Orzhov Guildmaster couldn't even be bothered to show up. The only one that did was the Izzet Guildmaster.

Azor's beard. These ungrateful assholes. Planeswalkers suck. We hate them.

[cle-guy]

-My guess is that White can cast a sub-type off the top of the deck, maybe detectives? That would fit the theme of the set OR it allows them to cast Cases

-Case is intriguing, my guess is its a subtype which sacrifices itself when it's 'solved' for an effect

-The four different hybrids will be their new take on four color creatures, maybe a cycle like the nephilim

-My guess on the popular returning mechanic, tweaked, is Detain. It fits the theme of the set and has a fair amount of design space. My guess is it incorporates stun counters in some way

-Green sorcery will be like Muscle Burst from Odyssey

-My guess is Conspire on the returning card as it fits the set flavorfully

-Ooooh, maybe a creature that lets you sacrifice other creatures to cast spells?

On the creature types:

The two that intrigue me are Lammasu and Mole God. I do not recall a 'Mole God' being anywhere in Ravnica, so that's intriguing

Looking forward to this

Maro’s Teaser for Murders at Karlov Manor

Before previews for Murders at Karlov Manor officially begin, I thought it would be fun to do another of my Duelist-style teasers where I give tiny hints of things to come. Note that I’m only giving you partial information.  

First up, here are some things you can expect:  

• white gets a card that lets you play a subset off the top of the deck

• a new enchantment subtype Case

• a card with four different hybrid symbols in its mana cost

• a popular mechanic returns tweaked with a new name

• a green sorcery that you can have any number of in your deck

• a keyword mechanic not printed in a premier set since 2008 returns on a single card

• a creature that allows you an alternate nonmana cost for all your spells

• some creature tokens in the set: (note that some have abilities) 0/0 green Ooze, 0/0 colorless Thopter (also artifact), 0/1 green Plant, 1/1 black Bat, 1/1 white Dog, 1/1 red Goblin, 1/1 white Human, 1/1 blue Merfolk, 1/1 white and black Spirit, 1/1 colorless Thopter (also artifact), 2/1 black Skeleton, 2/1 black and green Spider, 2/2 white and blue Detective, 2/2 red Imp, and 5/5 green and white Wolf

• And yes, Murder is in the set

Next, here are some rules text that will be showing up on cards:  

• “Whenever a creature an opponent controls dies, if its toughness was less than 1, draw a card.”

• “Choose any number of target players.”

• “Creature cards in your graveyard gain ‘You may cast this card from your graveyard’ until end of turn.”

• “Then sacrifice it if it has five or more bloodstain counters on it.”

• “you may search your graveyard, hand, and/or library for a card named Magnifying Glass and/or a card named Thinking Cap and put them onto the battlefield.”

• “target opponent gains control of any number of target permanents you control.”

• “If an ability of a creature you control with power 2 or less triggers, that ability triggers an additional time.”

• “As long as there are no cards in your library,”

• “If one or more tokens would be created under your control, those tokens plus a Clue token are created instead.”

• “Whenever you sacrifice a Clue, target opponent gets two poison counters.”

Here are some creature type lines from the set: 

• Creature – Vedalken Artificer Detective

• Creature – Ogre Cleric

• Artifact Creature – Insect Thopter

• Creature – Lammasu

• Creature – Weird Detective

• Creature – Goblin Bard

• Creature – Viashino Assassin

• Artifact Creature – Clue Fish

• Creature – Elf Crocodile Detective

• Legendary Creature – Mole God

Finally, here are some names in the set: 

• Airtight Alibi

• Caught Red-Handed

• Deadly Cover-Up

• Eliminate the Impossible

• Homicide Investigator

• Innocent Bystander

• It Doesn’t Add Up

• Person of Interest

• Private Eye

• Scene of the Crime

Follow the story each day this week and tune into the debut at 9:00 am PT on Jan 16 on twitch.tv/magic or youtube.com/@mtg to learn whodunit! Can you solve the mystery before detective extraordinaire Alquist Proft?

[cle-guy]

Dack was a mistake which in hindsight was totally avoidable

There just haven’t been that many deaths though. The survivors stand out more

Do you think any of the deaths in the story were a mistake?

Dack Fayden.

I will never forgive.

“Mistake” is the wrong word here though, because planeswalker deaths happen for more reasons than just narrative choices by an author, right? Design space, popularity, etc etc all affect it.

I think my only regrets (not that I make any of the calls, to be clear) is killing off characters before they’ve had a good amount of narrative, but that itself was a challenge in a multiverse with 40+ Planeswalkers where we can only feature a handful at a time.

[cle-guy]

My guesses:

Beijing (China)

Cairo (Egypt)

Dublin (Ireland)

Edinburgh (Scotland)

Frankfurt (Germany)

Geneva (Switzerland)

Hanoi (Vietnam)

Istanbul (Turkey)

Jakarta (Indonesia)

Kyiv (Ukraine)

London (England)

Mumbai (India)

New York (America)

Oslo (Norway)

Paris (France)

Rome (Italy)

Sydney (Australia)

Tokyo (Japan)

Ulaanbaatar (Mongolia, and it’s the capital)

Vancouver (Canada)

Warsaw (Poland)

Zurich (Switzerland)

Couldn’t think of any city that started with Q, X, or Y that fit

When will we know the other cities of the world code names?

When the enter exploratory design.

[cle-guy]

Had they done this they could have avoided the silliness of omen paths

Do you think it would ever be an issue to print a still-sparked Planeswalker as a legendary creature? They are still, fundamentally, just people, and thus could just as easily be represented by creatures.

We thus far have chosen not to do that, but it has been discussed.