Guildmasters Guide to Ravnica...wow.

[MinimanMidget]

Has anyone else checked out the table of contents for the new book? It looks like it's going to be worthless as a splatbook AND as a campaign setting. Anyone who complained about SCAG is going to just loooove this one.

[HolyDraconus]

Saw it. What did you expect when they aren't bothering to public test anymore? Thank you Amazon for saving me money. Not worth the 50 bucks.

[Unoriginal]

Has anyone else checked out the table of contents for the new book? It looks like it's going to be worthless as a splatbook AND as a campaign setting. Anyone who complained about SCAG is going to just loooove this one.

-Descriptions of the Guilds

-Description of the 10th district

-Advice on how to build adventures in this setting

-New races

-New magic items

-70 pages of monsters and NPCs.


What are you complaining about, exactly?

[MinimanMidget]

4 new races, 2 new subclasses, 3 pages on the setting. In a 250 page book.

[The Aboleth]

4 new races, 2 new subclasses, 3 pages on the setting. In a 250 page book.

Then don't buy it? I mean, it's fine you don't like it and even ok to complain about it, but nobody is forcing you to buy the book.

Honestly, I didn't realize until this thread that the book had new races. I might just buy it on the cheap somewhere for that reason alone! To each their own, in other words.

[Unoriginal]

4 new races, 2 new subclasses, 3 pages on the setting. In a 250 page book.

... I'm sorry, what?

There are 93 pages of setting and 37 on adventuring in the setting.


I mean, it's fine you don't like it and even ok to complain about it, but nobody is forcing you to buy the book.

Complaining is ok, making a thread to literally lie about the book is not.

[MinimanMidget]

... I'm sorry, what?

There are 93 pages of setting and 37 on adventuring in the setting.

The guilds != the setting. They're part of the setting, but there's more to it than just the guilds.

[Unoriginal]

The guilds != the setting. They're part of the setting, but there's more to it than just the guilds.

So? Describing a part of the setting is still describing the setting. And given it's the Guildmasters' Guide, it's hard to argue the importance of the Guilds.

Even if you somehow decide that the Guilds don't count as setting content, that still leave 70 pages about the environment and the adventures you could have in it. More than 1/4 of the book.

[Lord Vukodlak]

The setting is called “Ravnica: City of Guilds” that says to me covering the guilds covers most of the setting. And looking up the setting tells me I’m right. The guilds, their history and interactions is the entire setting.

[Cybren]

The guilds are so much “the setting” that Mark Rosewater has to convince his superiors to let him do the original Ravnica MTG expansion by explaining how he’d split up the guilds per pack

[LaserFace]

The guilds are literally the setting. It's a big city with everything you'd expect in fantasy, except with the context of ten powerful guilds that basically decide everything. Do you want a detailed history of each Orzhovian basilica? Do you want 100 pages describing the Azorius archives of small business contracts? Do you want a top 10 billboard for the most entertaining Rakdos Murder-Clowns? Some details are just simply better left for the DM to figure out. Just think of each guild as playing the same role as a different fantasy kingdom. Their jobs, collaborations and conflicts are substitutes for agreements, treaties and wars.

And full disclosure, this is coming from someone who loves D&D and Magic but thinks the idea of a Ravnica D&D book is a bad, boring idea because MTG lore has never been good enough for D&D

[Envyus]

The guilds != the setting. They're part of the setting, but there's more to it than just the guilds.
No the guilds are the setting.


Saw it. What did you expect when they aren't bothering to public test anymore? Thank you Amazon for saving me money. Not worth the 50 bucks.
What does this mean. The public playtest ended 4 years ago.

[KOLE]

All of this arguing is irrelevant.

We're getting an official Circle of Spores.

I'm a happy man on that alone.

[the_brazenburn]

4 new races, 2 new subclasses, 3 pages on the setting. In a 250 page book.

So you're all about crunch?

Why are you even looking at a setting-based book, then?

The point of this book isn't to give a bunch of new player options, it's to give a lot of lore and DM info about the setting.

I'm pumped for the NPC tables too, anybody see if we get Shambleshark stats?

[Sception]

Im personally disappointed by thr lack of crunch, myself. Maybe I was spoiled by core campaign books in previous editions, but I usually look for such books to have a bit more mechanical options than this alongside their setting lore. There was supposed to be expanded background (as in the game mechanic) stuff for the guilds too, so if that's still thete, and does more than normal backgrounds do elsewhere in the game, then i could still be ok with it. Room mate will get this regardless, so I guess Ill get to see either way.

[MinimanMidget]

So you're all about crunch?

Why are you even looking at a setting-based book, then?

Setting books are awesome, and I was looking forward to a setting that's new to D&D. I'm no longer looking forward to it, because it's apparently a book almost entirely about factions, rather than one that actually tells us stuff about the world.

[Kite474]

Setting books are awesome, and I was looking forward to a setting that's new to D&D. I'm no longer looking forward to it, because it's apparently a book almost entirely about factions, rather than one that actually tells us stuff about the world.
Again your missing the point telling about the Guilds IS actually telling you about the world. They have existed thousands upon thousands of years. The things they do are the events of the worlds history including its very geography (the last vestiges or untamed green are responsible from thr actions of one guild.)

And things like commerce amd art all owe their history to various guilds as well. Itd not like Planescape where thr guikds are just funny philosophical clubs. Its more like Shadowrun mega crops where the crops have existed as long as we have recorded history

[Whit]

Usually don’t buy til I gather more intel. So far I see a lack of it

[Prince Vine]

I might be biased so I will disclose my background on both sides of this setting.

I play D&D, dabbled in basic AD&D as a kid, but not enough to say anything about it. Much more serious from 3rd Edition to now.

I played Magic, Ice Age to Mercadia, but stopped playing years ago. I do own the MtG novels from Odyssey to partway through Kamigawa with one really old short story collection. That range includes the first Ravnica cycle book series.

I am also confused as to what pieces of setting someone would look for beyond the guilds. Their interactions and influence in their claimed territory is everything. Outside of the capital (and much of within it) geography is whatever the current controlling interest required. Izzet districts are steam plants, research labs and blast craters, Golgari understreets and dark, humid and full of fungus, bugs, monsters (teratogens) and zombies.
You don't need a lot of general discription beyond "giant buildings and towers with various walkways and landing platforms for sky tracel in various states of repair" before the important part of how the specific owners tend to influence their domains.

I will be happy to try to fill in more detail, I am just unsure what people want.

[Mana Opal]

Here's a fun way to look at it: Ravnica has 7 named sets revolving around it, with an eighth coming in a few months. Those are:

1) Ravnica: City of Guilds
2) Dissension
3) Guildpact
4) Return to Ravnica
5) Gatecrash
6) Dragon's Maze
7) Guilds of Ravnica
8) TBA (as far as I'm aware, anyway)

That's three sets that have the word 'Guild' in their names- and that's not even going into the fact that Gatecrash refers to the Izzet League's tampering with the Guildgates in order to activate the Dragon's Maze in the first place! That oughta say something about the state of the world on its own.

Each one has a role in everyday life, as well. The Izzet are in charge of creating and maintaining the city's infrastructure, the Golgari make sure there's enough food to go around (ew!), the Azorius make the walls (which the Boros then uphold), the Orzhov are the center of both business and religion, the Selsnya are the big group trying to make sure there are still vestiges of nature left in the city at all, etc. etc.

These aren't just some random factions like Harpers or the Zhentarim, these are the very foundation of the world everyone lives in. Which, in turn, is why the 'basic premise' only gets so few pages in comparison. That said, if the Gateless only get a passing mention, I'm gonna be mildly annoyed...

[Kite474]

I might be biased so I will disclose my background on both sides of this setting.

I play D&D, dabbled in basic AD&D as a kid, but not enough to say anything about it. Much more serious from 3rd Edition to now.

I played Magic, Ice Age to Mercadia, but stopped playing years ago. I do own the MtG novels from Odyssey to partway through Kamigawa with one really old short story collection. That range includes the first Ravnica cycle book series.

I am also confused as to what pieces of setting someone would look for beyond the guilds. Their interactions and influence in their claimed territory is everything. Outside of the capital (and much of within it) geography is whatever the current controlling interest required. Izzet districts are steam plants, research labs and blast craters, Golgari understreets and dark, humid and full of fungus, bugs, monsters (teratogens) and zombies.
You don't need a lot of general discription beyond "giant buildings and towers with various walkways and landing platforms for sky tracel in various states of repair" before the important part of how the specific owners tend to influence their domains.

I will be happy to try to fill in more detail, I am just unsure what people want.

I think the issue is a sort of dissonance in how Ravnica operates compared to every other D&D setting except Planescape, and even then its borrowing from an incredibly different set of genres than Planescape (that being Punk and Spy Fiction of the Martini and Beer ends. With a bit of pulp for your crazier adventures)

Theres also the book itself. Its not super crunch heavy and it bucks the trend of books being super general (every book has to have something for everyone) wherein this is specialized (its main purposes is providing thiggs for setting an adventure in Ravnica and by George its gonna do it wether you like ot or not)

[Waterdeep Merch]

It feels like the disappointment is more from people that don't know what Ravnica is. This is exactly what I assumed the book was going to be. It's the only thing it could be.

The only thing I find disappointing off of the table of contents is the limited new subclasses (they can't think of any other cool things from Magic? Seriously?) and what appears, from here, to be zero attempts to modify the D&D magic system to act like the color wheel. Both in general, actually- colors are pretty diverse in their representation, from energy and settings to philosophy and viewpoints. That has amazing roleplay potential, yet it seems to be completely nonexistent here. And that's a shame. It's what I wanted most out of the setting.

[Kite474]

It feels like the disappointment is more from people that don't know what Ravnica is. This is exactly what I assumed the book was going to be. It's the only thing it could be.

The only thing I find disappointing off of the table of contents is the limited new subclasses (they can't think of any other cool things from Magic? Seriously?) and what appears, from here, to be zero attempts to modify the D&D magic system to act like the color wheel. Both in general, actually- colors are pretty diverse in their representation, from energy and settings to philosophy and viewpoints. That has amazing roleplay potential, yet it seems to be completely nonexistent here. And that's a shame. It's what I wanted most out of the setting.
Apparently there were going to be more subclasses. At the very least two more, the invention wizzard and the brute fighter.

Both apparently proved unpopular in the play test UA so they were scrapped.... instead of you know just fixing them.

Im also a little disappointed in no attempt to explain the colors. Especially since as a version of alignment it not only eats D&Ds lunch it beats it in the student council race... and steals their prom date, and....

[Mana Opal]

Hmm, are there no new spells or something? I feel like there really isn't a whole lot in the way of magic of distinctly Simic flavor outside of the Polymorph line and maaaybe Primal Beast!Guardian of Nature, and even then the former relies on there being mixed-species creatures like Rapid Hybridization's Frog Lizards to truly get the point across. The Hybrid race is neat, yes, but I don't it's quite enough for them to work with quite yet...

Meanwhile, the Orzhov were cackling with maniacal glee when Xanathar's Guide dropped, so there's no need to worry about them. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edit: The School of Invention get scrapped? Dangit, that was my favorite one! That's a shame, considering that most of the people I've seen complaining about it were the ones who had no idea that it was supposed to be an Izzat League mage when it dropped. Oh well...

[Unoriginal]

It feels like the disappointment is more from people that don't know what Ravnica is. This is exactly what I assumed the book was going to be. It's the only thing it could be.

The only thing I find disappointing off of the table of contents is the limited new subclasses (they can't think of any other cool things from Magic? Seriously?) and what appears, from here, to be zero attempts to modify the D&D magic system to act like the color wheel. Both in general, actually- colors are pretty diverse in their representation, from energy and settings to philosophy and viewpoints. That has amazing roleplay potential, yet it seems to be completely nonexistent here. And that's a shame. It's what I wanted most out of the setting.

Magic: the Gathering's magic was modified to be D&D magic.

It's one of the reasons why I was not in favor of M:tG being integrated to the D&D universe. I feel bad for those who like M:tG, but at the same time it's kinda funny to have people like Jace realize that they were just big fish in a tiny pond now that they learned the existence of the Material Plane. And that Planewalkers aren't actually planewalkers, they just teleport to one of the worlds which were in a cluster separated from the other Crystal Spheres.



Im also a little disappointed in no attempt to explain the colors. Especially since as a version of alignment it not only eats D&Ds lunch it beats it in the student council race... and steals their prom date, and....

D&D alignments won, though. So in your analogy the colors are the ****ty bully who peaked at high school while D&D alignments became CEO.

[Kite474]

Apparently there were going to be more subclasses. At the very least two more, the invention wizzard and the brute fighter.

Both apparently proved unpopular in the play test UA so they were scrapped.... instead of you know just fixing them.

Im also a little disappointed in no attempt to explain the colors. Especially since as a version of alignment it not only eats D&Ds lunch it beats it in the student council race... and steals their prom date, and....

There is one new spell: “Encode Thoughts” which I imagine is for Dimir mind probing shenanigans.

Yeah its a shame Invention Wizzard was cut while it did have some problems the idea of a dice roll version of the wizzard was an awesome idea.

Who knows maybe after this they will put Ravnica on the DMs guild and we can make our own subclasses, with Blackjack and Rakdos street preformers

[Waterdeep Merch]

Im also a little disappointed in no attempt to explain the colors. Especially since as a version of alignment it not only eats D&Ds lunch it beats it in the student council race... and steals their prom date, and....

The idea of defining your character by the color wheel is such a great idea. Imagine a party with a green/red, a blue/black/red, a white/black, and a mono red. Anyone that understands Magic knows how interesting and quirky that party is at a glance, yet there is a pretty wide swath for how those philosophies could pan out. Is the blue/black/red just obsessed with arcane power or are we identifying a very cognizant relation to the corruption of power, for example? Is the green/red completely uncontrollable or simple accepting of their primal urges? What sort of mania does the red suffer from, or do they have their destructive impulses completely under control? Black/white's just innately fascinating.

It's such a good idea that I'm absolutely doing it if I ever end up running Ravnica whether the book wants to help me or not.

[Boci]

I sort of figured this would happen. I know certain the book isn't for me, but is it a bad book? I feel it is, because theres no new mechanics. Its a setting yes, but the setting needed new mechanics. The Guilds have unique abilities, that's the whole point of the settings. Making Guilds where members are good at X-theme relating to guild but don't have any special abilities for it seems to miss the point. I think one new subclass per guild that exemplafied what they were about, the Golgari getting circle of spores being a really good example, would have been fair.

Basically I don't think there's much point in a D&D setting for Ravnica if a non-Izzit blaster mage is just as good as an Izzit blaster mage.

[Prince Vine]

You don't need an explicit color wheel. The colors are a game mechanic for philosophical underpinnings. You can have concepts of invention and knowledge or nature and growth without needing to call it blue or green. It does require players and DMs to agree to some uncomfortable limits if you want to impose that feel on spellcasters though. I can see someone being very upset when their DM says they can't have fireball, haste or fly because they said they wanted to play an Azorious Lawmage.

[Boci]

You don't need an explicit color wheel. The colors are a game mechanic for philosophical underpinnings. You can have concepts of invention and knowledge or nature and growth without needing to call it blue or green. It does require players and DMs to agree to some uncomfortable limits if you want to impose that feel on spellcasters though. I can see someone being very upset when their DM says they can't have fireball, haste or fly because they said they wanted to play an Azorious Lawmage.

Which is another reason why the book really needed to have to have new stuff to properly realize the setting IMO. "You can't cast the fireball spell, you're an Azorious Lawmage" sucks, but "You can't cast Mizzium Mortars, that's an Izzit only spell, but at level 15 you'll have Supreme Eviction" for example would be cool, or at least I think so.

[Millstone85]

It's one of the reasons why I was not in favor of M:tG being integrated to the D&D universe. I feel bad for those who like M:tG, but at the same time it's kinda funny to have people like Jace realize that they were just big fish in a tiny pond now that they learned the existence of the Material Plane. And that Planewalkers aren't actually planewalkers, they just teleport to one of the worlds which were in a cluster separated from the other Crystal Spheres.Crawford and Mearls gave contradictory answers on the subject, here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JHyJj8C21c&t=33m46s) and here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gznSEmZ5HVY&t=46m10s).

[Chaosmancer]

All of this arguing is irrelevant.

We're getting an official Circle of Spores.

I'm a happy man on that alone.

Seriously?

Happy dance!

[the_brazenburn]

Has anyone else checked out the table of contents for the new book? It looks like it's going to be worthless as a splatbook AND as a campaign setting. Anyone who complained about SCAG is going to just loooove this one.

Do you have a link, or a screenshot?

I was considering whether to buy this or Dragon Heist, and I'd like to get a little more info first.

[Prince Vine]

Which is another reason why the book really needed to have to have new stuff to properly realize the setting IMO. "You can't cast the fireball spell, you're an Azorious Lawmage" sucks, but "You can't cast Mizzium Mortars, that's an Izzit only spell, but at level 15 you'll have Supreme Eviction" for example would be cool, or at least I think so.

I totally get what you are saying but I am also a strong advocate for flavorful self-handicapping. However, that was never particularly viable when my main avenue for playing was AL.
Parties did not like a spellcaster without many of the staples...no matter how on theme or background it was.

[Millstone85]

Do you have a link, or a screenshot?

I was considering whether to buy this or Dragon Heist, and I'd like to get a little more info first.https://i2.wp.com/www.sageadvice.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/rav2-1.jpg

[tieren]

What are "guild spells"?

[Kite474]

https://i2.wp.com/www.sageadvice.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/rav2-1.jpg

Huh. We get Keyrunes and Signets. Sweet.

Also Mizium Mortars... well at least its not in my sealed pool lol


What are "guild spells"?
We arent quite sure. Possibly spell lists that are thematic to the guilds or refulffs for certain spells

[Tectorman]

https://i2.wp.com/www.sageadvice.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/rav2-1.jpg

Centaurs? Heck, I'm buying this for that alone (please still be Medium, please still be Medium...).

[the_brazenburn]

https://i2.wp.com/www.sageadvice.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/rav2-1.jpg

That looks absolutely fantastic!

I'm definitely getting it now.

[Whit]

I’m lost in this. Is it suppose to be a brand new game world like ebberon greyhawk FR etc or an expansion to be added to those worlds? I was at the beginning of Magic up to Dark? One or two past legends I finished.
I would have loved to see a new world with their gods heroes etc. and having new spells with mana color in play.

[Beechgnome]

I get why some are disappointed: for players who are primarily players, and not DMs, having only two new subclasses and four new races is slight. It's a shame they couldn't make something akin to School of Invention work, or that other playtest notions (Giant Soul Sorcerer, a reworked Brute) or surprise subclass options couldn't have been added.

But maybe the problem is players don't think about the guild stuff as being for them because there's no equivalent in the player's handbook. It seems like it must give more benefits or have more crunch than, say, belonging to the Harpers in FR. I guess we'll see.

[Prince Vine]

I’m lost in this. Is it suppose to be a brand new game world like ebberon greyhawk FR etc or an expansion to be added to those worlds? I was at the beginning of Magic up to Dark? One or two past legends I finished.
I would have loved to see a new world with their gods heroes etc. and having new spells with mana color in play.

The weird thing about Ravnica is how it broke the color pie a bit. It was built with an idea of where do these two color philosophies overlap, then built that up farther. Izzet blue and Azorious blue do not overlap much at all, despite both being blue.

In D&D terms Azorious and Orzhov have a lot more in common than say Azorious and Izzet or Simic. Or Orzhov and Golgari for that matter. The philosophy matters for D&D not MTG color.

[Whit]

Lol. U lost me on everything u said.

I only know the cards I have and some history from Alpha beta Arabian knights urza mishra legends

[Boci]

Lol. U lost me on everything u said.

I only know the cards I have and some history from Alpha beta Arabian knights urza mishra legends

Ravnica is famous for having 10 duel coloured guilds. My understanding is this was rare for a amgic block, as it was the first time enemy colours (black and white, red and blue) were given equal footing to the more regular colour pairs (white and green, red and black).

[Whit]

I’d rather see league of legends runeterra d&d addition

[Finback]

Setting books are awesome, and I was looking forward to a setting that's new to D&D. I'm no longer looking forward to it, because it's apparently a book almost entirely about factions, rather than one that actually tells us stuff about the world.

*spoilers* we know almost nothing about Ravnica BEYOND it is a giant sprawling cityscape that is run by ten guilds in an ancient pact with each other. There aren't any maps. We know a scant handful of locations as names, and little else (eg the Rubble Belt).. if I was to give a comparison - this is a book about the history of the Rebellion and the Galactic Empire and their battles, NOT a field guide to every planet and species.

[Finback]

but at the same time it's kinda funny to have people like Jace realize that they were just big fish in a tiny pond now that they learned the existence of the Material Plane. And that Planewalkers aren't actually planewalkers, they just teleport to one of the worlds which were in a cluster separated from the other Crystal Spheres.

But.. is it? I mean, I've seen *nothing* that connects ANY of this to any of the established D&D multiverse. This is just applying the 5e ruleset onto a new setting, not an integration of that setting into the existing worlds. I mean, if I run 5e Modern, does that mean my players can just walk through a door into a world with dragons? It can if I *want* it to, but there's nothing to say it IS. Likewise if you applied 5e rules onto the Lovecraftian universe - it doesn't mean you have to mix orcs in with your dimensional shamblers.

The planeswalkers already know there's a multiverse out there because of the planes and the Blind Eternities, but I've seen nothing to connect the MtG multiverse to the D&D multiverse stated in any texts for this book.

[Finback]

Izzet blue and Azorious blue do not overlap much at all, despite both being blue.

Well, they're both SCIENCE! Just one is "RIGOROUS EXPERIMENTATION AND STUDY OF SPECIMENS", the other is cackling wildly with Van der Graff machines and goggles. ;)

[Mana Opal]

Well, they're both SCIENCE! Just one is "RIGOROUS EXPERIMENTATION AND STUDY OF SPECIMENS", the other is cackling wildly with Van der Graff machines and goggles. ;)

Er, not quite: the Azorious are the strict personage to mandate and uphold the laws of the land, while the Izzet are the cacklers. The former's Blue is about the restriction and control of people, while the latter's about flinging and (loosely) controlling magic.

The crazy bioengeneers are the Simic, though they are closer to the Izzet's Blue despite sharing the Azorious' basic targets (people) due to the science and experimentation bent.

And just because I'm on a roll or something, the Dimir's Blue is all about the mind- and never in a manner that you want to be used around you. Secrets? You mean these valuable pieces of information I just pulled out of your cranium in order to meet my own nefarious goals? Yeah, they're mine now- and you're not gonna remember any of this~! These are the guys you'll probably be dealing with the most in an urban intrigue type campaign.

[Finback]

Er, not quite: the Azorious are the strict personage to mandate and uphold the laws of the land, while the Izzet are the cacklers. The former's Blue is about the restriction and control of people, while the latter's about flinging and (loosely) controlling magic.

The crazy bioengeneers are the Simic, though they are closer to the Izzet's Blue despite sharing the Azorious' basic targets (people) due to the science and experimentation bent.


Yeah, looks like my quoting went wrong.

[Mikaleus]

I’m excited for Golgari spore Druid and Simic Hybrid race options.

Was hoping for a Wizard Simic biomancer thougg :/

[Drascin]

But.. is it? I mean, I've seen *nothing* that connects ANY of this to any of the established D&D multiverse. This is just applying the 5e ruleset onto a new setting, not an integration of that setting into the existing worlds. I mean, if I run 5e Modern, does that mean my players can just walk through a door into a world with dragons? It can if I *want* it to, but there's nothing to say it IS. Likewise if you applied 5e rules onto the Lovecraftian universe - it doesn't mean you have to mix orcs in with your dimensional shamblers.

The planeswalkers already know there's a multiverse out there because of the planes and the Blind Eternities, but I've seen nothing to connect the MtG multiverse to the D&D multiverse stated in any texts for this book.

I haven't heard anything either, and to be honest they shouldn't. Like, D&D is already a bad fit for the genres more common in Ravnica from a purely mechanical perspective, if you ALSO insist on adding all the trappings and full cosmology that's just gonna be a disaster.

[Prince Vine]

I haven't heard anything either, and to be honest they shouldn't. Like, D&D is already a bad fit for the genres more common in Ravnica from a purely mechanical perspective, if you ALSO insist on adding all the trappings and full cosmology that's just gonna be a disaster.

I'm perfectly happy with it stay seperate, lore-wise for most of it's existence Ravnica existed in a bubble cut-off from any Multiverse anyway.

I disagree that Ravnica plots aren't suitable for D&D. Thwarting demon-cult kidnappings, corrupt officials manipulating people into giving them a throne or stopping insane wizards from creating and controlling ultrapowerful dragons to overthrow their ruler seem fairly fitting plots. Though the second one does sound a little Palpatine-esque.

[Millstone85]

To show how little I know about M:tG, I am surprised that a card game would have defined settings. Now I am intrigued, which will be my first reason for buying GGtR.

The spore druid has my interest too. And as someone mentioned, GGtR could be an alternative to W:DH for urban material.

[Unoriginal]

And as someone mentioned, GGtR could be an alternative to W:DH for urban material.

I doubt the release dates for those products are that close by coincidence.

In the end, do we know if the Wayfarer's Guide to Eberron will have the School of Invention when published as an hardcover?

[Whit]

What is a Planeswalker if tossed into a D&D world?
God or lvl 20 mage ?

[Knaight]

To show how little I know about M:tG, I am surprised that a card game would have defined settings. Now I am intrigued, which will be my first reason for buying GGtR.

I don't know if you're at all familiar with MOBAs, but if so - you know how each character comes with some setting information, both in explicit flavor text and in terms of just names, artwork, etc.?

Magic is the same way, where this instead applies to every card, and there are upwards of 20,000 of them. There's really no way around a setting.

[Boci]

What is a Planeswalker if tossed into a D&D world?
God or lvl 20 mage ?

Difficult to say. A planeswalker is just someone who can cross plains. However powerful that makes them, they typically aren't weak, it doesn't mean they are more powerful than say a god. Didn't Elspeth need Godsend to kill a god? I don't think she would have been able to on her own.

In D&D terms that's hard to represent. People aren't plane bound by default, and doing it through magic means you are a powerful mage, plenty of low challenge creatures can laready do it.

[Prince Vine]

What is a Planeswalker if tossed into a D&D world?
God or lvl 20 mage ?
Old style? Super high level mage.
New style? A guy that can cast a self-only planeshift.

I may be bitter about the huge lore shift on them...

[UrielAwakened]

If there isn't even a new subclass for each guild then I'm not sure what the point of the book is.

Also not integrating the color wheel at all just seems like the biggest missed opportunity. I get not wanting to revamp all of spellcasting but it should at least supplant alignment, which is terrible in D&D and actually really interesting in MtG.

Probably won't buy it. Probably will homebrew something better instead.


What is a Planeswalker if tossed into a D&D world?
God or lvl 20 mage ?

Depends on the Planeswalker.

Someone like Tibalt is probably a low-level sorcerer equivalent, while someone like Nicol Bolas is going to shame every other dragon in existence. Like, take an ancient red dragon and then tack on 20 levels of Wizard. Whatever CR that is might get you close.

Karn is a silver golem that can travel through time. I don't know what CR that is but it's definitely high.

[Vogie]

What is a Planeswalker if tossed into a D&D world?
God or lvl 20 mage ?

Neither. It's more of a background. They only have the ability to move between planes... just not particularly accurately. Just because one is a planeswalker doesn't exclusively mean they're any good at magic, although it certainly helps - you can pick up ideas, concepts, training and spells from all over the multiverse, instead of just your own. Gideon, specifically, isn't really that powerful of a magic user - He's most like a paladin, but with the ability to ignore damage.

Honestly, the best comparison is the divinities from the Godsfall worldbook, something that levels alongside the player.

[JackPhoenix]

I doubt the release dates for those products are that close by coincidence.

In the end, do we know if the Wayfarer's Guide to Eberron will have the School of Invention when published as an hardcover?

Highly unlikely, as the present form doesn't really fit Eberron. However, I'm surprised, and pleased at the lack of an Artificer in GGtR. It gives me hope we'll get a proper one instead of the izzetficer from the last playtest.


What is a Planeswalker if tossed into a D&D world?
God or lvl 20 mage ?

Not the first. Possibly, but not likely, the second. Post-Mending 'walkers are just spellcasters with the ability to travel between planes, with no limitation how weak or powerful they are. You have Bolas, who can do amazing stuff, you have Tibalt, who's... well, Tibalt. And everything in between.

[Hears You]

To show how little I know about M:tG, I am surprised that a card game would have defined settings. Now I am intrigued, which will be my first reason for buying GGtR.

The spore druid has my interest too. And as someone mentioned, GGtR could be an alternative to W:DH for urban material.

MtG's creative sthitck is that they go to a new world every 6 months or so. Due to the weird worldbuilding limits put onto them by trying to reflect the card games mechanics it winds up usually being a fairly fresh take on a classic trope land.

A lot of the Les Grogonard wind up being down on the little setting PDF's they push out for each one because the MTG worlds are pretty broad strokes "here's some key places, these are the types of monsters unique to this world, here's some key NPCs" sort of thing, and not a really ornate and overdevloped world like FR. Which for my Dming style I kinda like a lot more. It gives players just enough fun things to latch characters onto while having enough blank space to basically be a home-brew.

[jaappleton]

Disappointed regarding the Subclasses. The races are.... OK.

I’m excited for some new magic items.

[solidork]

In case you were wondering, (I think) all of the magic items are artifact cards from the card game. I'm excited for the Sunforger, which in the card game lets you search your deck for an inexpensive white or red spell and cast it for free.

[Kane0]

If it comes out in hardcover i'll get it because of my collector's itch. I'll probably only use the Circle of Spores, but maybe a race or two too. Interested to see how centaurs turned out.

[Asensur]

I will use the book to include "similar" factions to my homebrew (with also my AL faction versions), and maybe a mega-city capital as the imperial city of TES for them to "play game of thrones".

Gruul Resistance, Boros P.D., Rakdos Fight Club... There are many options to use the setting within an existent or homebrew one.

[Luccan]

Could simeone explain why they think the color wheel is better than alignment? I mean, it sounds like you can do 1 or 2 colors in any combo, which is a bit more advanced than D&Ds 2 axes, but it still sounds pretty restrictive if not more so from the actual descriptions I've heard. Just not really focused around morality/ethics.

[Asensur]

Could simeone explain why they think the color wheel is better than alignment? I mean, it sounds like you can do 1 or 2 colors in any combo, which is a bit more advanced than D&Ds 2 axes, but it still sounds pretty restrictive if not more so from the actual descriptions I've heard. Just not really focused around morality/ethics.

Well, the color wheel is more about personal values rather than choosing sides in a conflict (the way PCs treat alignments in D&D).

A white character values morals.
A blue character values knowledge.
A black character values presence/position.
A red character values freedom.
A green character values survival.

Dual color characters are a combination of them. For example, boros values justice, while izzet values discovery, and dimir value control.

Also, every character can be a hero or villain. An example is in Theros, where the white god kills a hero (after him/her saving the day) because the knowledge of his/her nature menaces the social construct.

[Millstone85]

Well, the color wheel is more about personal values rather than choosing sides in a conflict (the way PCs treat alignments in D&D).

A white character values morals.
A blue character values knowledge.
A black character values presence/position.
A red character values freedom.
A green character values survival.

Dual color characters are a combination of them. For example, boros values justice, while izzet values discovery, and dimir value control.

Also, every character can be a hero or villain. An example is in Theros, where the white god kills a hero (after him/her saving the day) because the knowledge of his/her nature menaces the social construct.But if there is no conflict, why choose only two?

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81kzx0F7E7L.pngAre you sure a black character can be heroic? :smallconfused:
(Please don't quote me out of context. :smalleek:)

[Prince Vine]

But if there is no conflict, why choose only two?

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81kzx0F7E7L.pngAre you sure a black character can be heroic? :smallconfused:
(Please don't quote me out of context. :smalleek:)

Yes but it takes fairly specific circumstances. Usually a black hero is being oppressed fairly heavily (along with others) by a white or blue hard-line utilitarian perspective. So his rebellion, for his own livlihood and advancement ends up happening to help everyone else too. You can also set up a perspective vs. a crazy red force of chaos and destruction as well.

As an aside, colors don't only represent ideals and philosophies, they also represent fundamental forces and elements. Or as we call them, spell lists and domains.

[Asensur]

But if there is no conflict, why choose only two?

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81kzx0F7E7L.pngAre you sure a black character can be heroic? :smallconfused:
(Please don't quote me out of context. :smalleek:)

Kratos (black/red), Tony Stark (blue/black), Punisher, Jack Sparrow are some examples.

Black tend to be edgy, "I do best", anti-heroes. They are the "end justify the means", as opposed to white's "means justify the end". The see the weakness of dependence in green characters, and the restraint white characters have.

[Millstone85]

So his rebellion, for his own livlihood and advancement ends up happening to help everyone else too.If it is so incidental, it hardly seems heroic.


Kratos (black/red), Tony Stark (blue/black), Jack Sparrow are some examples.I only know the MCU version, but I wouldn't say Tony Stark values selfishness at the expense of others.

And I would be wary about calling Kratos, or Jack Sparrow, a hero.

[Prince Vine]

If it is so incidental, it hardly seems heroic.

Weirdly just among the 4 MTG book series I own, it happens twice. Kamigawa and Ravnica trilogies.

[Unoriginal]

I think Innistrad had a heroic Black-mana Planeswalker. Created an angel to protect the people of the plane against the whole Hammer Horror monster gallery that is infesting it, back when the Planeswalker where god-like, and is now trying to solve the current issues despite the massive depower he went through.

[Asensur]

I think Innistrad had a heroic Black-mana Planeswalker. Created an angel to protect the people of the plane against the whole Hammer Horror monster gallery that is infesting it, back when the Planeswalker where god-like, and is now trying to solve the current issues despite the massive depower he went through.

Sorin is the one you call, although he is white/black. He is a vampire from Innistrad

He creates Avacyn (a Solar) to put a balance between good and evil in the plane, as wiping out humanity will cause starvation and civil war between the vampires.

Also, he is one of the PW who imprisoned ancient beings that were eating the planes (as his home is also one of the planes).

[Millstone85]

Weirdly just among the 4 MTG book series I own, it happens twice. Kamigawa and Ravnica trilogies.I wasn't calling it a rare occurence.

[Prince Vine]

I wasn't calling it a rare occurence.
Heroic isn't the word. Not always awful maybe. Many thieves are black.

[JackPhoenix]

Sorin is the one you call, although he is white/black. He is a vampire from Innistrad

He creates Avacyn (a Solar) to put a balance between good and evil in the plane, as wiping out humanity will cause starvation and civil war between the vampires.

Also, he is one of the PW who imprisoned ancient beings that were eating the planes (as his home is also one of the planes).

Sorin is pure black. And his reasons for creating Avacyn and imprisoning Eldrazzi are selfish... note that he doesn't care that the Eldrazzi got loose once he was sure Innistrad is protected from their incursion.

[UrielAwakened]

The reason the color wheel is better than an alignment perspective are multifaceted, and not limited to:

* They more accurately capture aspects of a character than alignment does. Each color represents a hell of a lot more than just "lawful" or "evil" does.
* The ability to be two or more colors allows for greater depth and customization in a character's ideals and morals.
* They are way less subjective.

[Prince Vine]

I find the color wheel a useful conceptual tool but not really needed in D&D as we already have all the tools within the existing system to represent the same concepts. It just is a matter of specific choice limiting.

[UrielAwakened]

I find the color wheel a useful conceptual tool but not really needed in D&D as we already have all the tools within the existing system to represent the same concepts. It just is a matter of specific choice limiting.

Do we though because I don't think we do. And more importantly we're discussing this in the context of an official MtG supplement for D&D, making it all the more ludicrous not to include it in some capacity.

[Asensur]

Sorin is pure black. And his reasons for creating Avacyn and imprisoning Eldrazzi are selfish... note that he doesn't care that the Eldrazzi got loose once he was sure Innistrad is protected from their incursion.

Yes, of course.

He created Avacyn to protect his race (even if it didn't seem so). He imprisoned the Eldrazi to protect his plane.

Yes, he cares about the Eldrazi got loose, you can see it in the events of Zendikar when he goes with Nissa (although he is pissed about her true intentions and leaves the plane for its demise and for her stupidity), and you can see it in the events of Tarkir when he awakes Ugin cause of the Eldrazi. However, he had problems with the other partner who helped him do it at first.

Sorin wants balance in the multiverse, however his flaw is that he wants things done his way.

[UrielAwakened]

TIL Sorin is Thanos.

[Prince Vine]

Do we though because I don't think we do. And more importantly we're discussing this in the context of an official MtG supplement for D&D, making it all the more ludicrous not to include it in some capacity.

We have alignments, bonds, ideals, bonds, flaws and spell lists. That generally covers it.

Though my adventuring bladesinger when I audited his spell list on a whim was red/white/blue and maybe some black.

[Waterdeep Merch]

We have alignments, bonds, ideals, bonds, flaws and spell lists. That generally covers it.

Though my adventuring bladesinger when I audited his spell list on a whim was red/white/blue and maybe some black.
It's not really about whether it's already covered or not, but that the color wheel has always been a core part of Magic's identity and either replacing or supplementing parts of 5e's alignment/background/etc to welcome it could have helped distinguish it as a Magic/D&D fusion. It could have fit here so easily and would have been a real treat to see for the hybrid fans.

It's disappointing that it's not even being given a sidebar.

[Finback]

you have Tibalt, who's... well, Tibalt. And everything in between.

We don't talk about the Scrappy Doo of planeswalkers.

[Prince Vine]

I think that it may not be intended as a fusion. Instead of thinking of it as Magic in D&D it is more here is this setting for D&D that happened to be in a different game. They didn't need to bring that game's mechanics in with the setting. You don't need to describe as character as logical, distant and always has 7 divination spells prepared and then mention oh yeah, that means blue. D&D actually has all the elements already present that Magic had to use colors as shorthand (and design ease and balance) for.

Of course if thinking about color helps you with your design by all means use it (I often do at some point of brainstorming as well as using other types of personality scales). Some people still think of the Simpsons based on their magic color.

[Finback]

Sorin is pure black. And his reasons for creating Avacyn and imprisoning Eldrazzi are selfish... note that he doesn't care that the Eldrazzi got loose once he was sure Innistrad is protected from their incursion.

Yes, it might be best to note that the colours a PW *card* aligns to do not necessarily accurately reflect that PW's overall worldview.

Cases in point: Ajani. He's been mono white, red/white, green/white. Sarkhov - mono red, red/green, red/black, red/green/blue. Nissa has stepped out of mono-green once, into green. These all might have narrative components/be designed to fit into a mechanical structure within the game's current meta-environment, rather than necessarily being integral. It's also not simply a case of "card comes first, storyline second", as these do develop these things in tandem.

By contrast, Nicol Bolas has ALWAYS been in Grixis colours, and Chandra has always been mono-red, and Elspeth and Gideon are both mono-white. Generally, it's more common for a PW to stay within their original colour boundaries, but they do step out sometimes, but we shouldn't read too much into it.

[Azreal]

It's not really about whether it's already covered or not, but that the color wheel has always been a core part of Magic's identity and either replacing or supplementing parts of 5e's alignment/background/etc to welcome it could have helped distinguish it as a Magic/D&D fusion. It could have fit here so easily and would have been a real treat to see for the hybrid fans.

It's disappointing that it's not even being given a sidebar.

I completely agree as one of the hybrid fans. I was really looking forward to seeing how they would integrate the Color Wheel into DnD and it's a fairly bitter disappointment that it doesn't appear to be a thing that's actually even addressed. It's really strong flavor and they are just kinda tossing it to the wayside.

[raygun goth]

Honestly, the designers keep saying that Black is selfish, but I don't see it. You suffer for power under Black. You give up things, mostly your things. You sacrifice things - often at great personal cost - for power. Black's main tribe is zombies - a blank-faced horde that is in full agreement about its goals. Black is, if anything, portrayed as being selfless on its cards. Sure, there's nasty, icky things in there, but that's what I like about Magic's color alignments: none of them are explicitly good or evil.

White is about honor, duty, tradition - and zealotry, hatred of the other, and "purification" without asking if anyone is ok with this.
Black is about death, disease, power - and giving of yourself to attain that power, reclaiming what others have discarded, and overcoming mortal limitations.
Green is about growth, nature, cunning - and murdering people with bears, brutal destruction of art and science, and a fallacious view of nature and parasitism as purity.
Red is about freedom, personal strength, and speed - and burning everything because that seems like the thing to do.
Blue is about "logic," discovery, and understanding - and mind control, deception, and drowning.

They all have their problems, which is why mixing them can lead to interesting character traits. Every deck I make is already a character, this is just the next logical step.

[Azreal]

Honestly, the designers keep saying that Black is selfish, but I don't see it. You suffer for power under Black. You give up things, mostly your things. You sacrifice things - often at great personal cost - for power. Black's main tribe is zombies - a blank-faced horde that is in full agreement about its goals. Black is, if anything, portrayed as being selfless on its cards. Sure, there's nasty, icky things in there, but that's what I like about Magic's color alignments: none of them are explicitly good or evil.

Black is considered Selfish because you look out for number one. No one else matters as much as yourself and your needs/wants.

[Spriteless]

Yeah, that color pie infogram should have replaced one instance of 'selfish' with 'ambitious,' or 'mercenary' or 'callous.'

I think the color pie has its own problems though. Whereas alignment can be confining, the color pie can be too flexible. Many tropes fit under multiple colors. A card where the little guy sacrifices themself for the greater good is white, a card where the big guy sacrifices minions for their own greater good is black, a card where the minion is sacrificed just to hurt some third party is red, or possibly colorless (which means anyone can use it).

Also, I want a D&D spell that lets me blow up my own mountains to hurt a far away enemy.

[Luccan]

I think the color pie has its own problems though. Whereas alignment can be confining, the color pie can be too flexible. Many tropes fit under multiple colors. A card where the little guy sacrifices themself for the greater good is white, a card where the big guy sacrifices minions for their own greater good is black, a card where the minion is sacrificed just to hurt some third party is red, or possibly colorless (which means anyone can use it).

It seems to me, after seeing everyone talking about it... yeah in a tabletop RPG like 5e the colors are either too restrictive (If you're logical, you're blue and must therefore also be X) or not really relevant (If you're logical, you're blue and that means you're blue). Now, I'm assuming the guilds have some ties to specific colors and obviously you could do the same with spells and maybe even some classes/subclasses, but D&D pretty much stopped restricting things based on alignment an edition ago, so bringing it back for Ravnica would be weird for 5e's general design (though it probably should have been brought back, since it's important to MTG).

[Prince Vine]

Ravnica guilds have a weird relationship to color. They started with an idea of "let's make every two color combination and see how to reconcile their perspectives" which led to a place where the new two color philosophy became the defining aspect of each set of cards and allowed the actual cards to go beyond the usual color roles if it fit the theme (which didn't happen often but can occur).

[raygun goth]

Black is considered Selfish because you look out for number one. No one else matters as much as yourself and your needs/wants.

If by "number one" you mean "you, the player, the person playing the deck," then maybe, but you should look more at the person playing the deck as the goal. Under that lens, black is self-sacrificing. Again, even its main tribe is about being a faceless member of the crowd with a single goal.

[Prince Vine]

If by "number one" you mean "you, the player, the person playing the deck," then maybe, but you should look more at the person playing the deck as the goal. Under that lens, black is self-sacrificing. Again, even its main tribe is about being a faceless member of the crowd with a single goal.

I don't know. I sacrifice my minion to kill someone, or to gain it's strength or for knowledge or to hurt someone doesn't seem selfless.

In the lore of the game you are a mighty power calling forth and commanding lesser beings. Black is very likely to call them forth and eat them, or sacrifice them to a dark ritual.

[Kite474]

Generally Black doesn't work in grander stories that rely on a classical good vs evil.

Black as a protagonist color works alot better when selfishness is considered a part of human nature instead of flaw. For example a metric crap ton of fantasy protagonist (Including the likes of Conan and Grey Mouser) they generally can be heroic characters in that they kill threats to the world and or city... But they arent capital H heroic.

Another good example for heroic black is Han Solo and his smuggling ways.

[Azreal]

If by "number one" you mean "you, the player, the person playing the deck," then maybe, but you should look more at the person playing the deck as the goal. Under that lens, black is self-sacrificing. Again, even its main tribe is about being a faceless member of the crowd with a single goal.

Black isn't self-sacrificing. Look at every single black Planeswalker we know of. One of the major themes between them all is they only care about furthering their own goals regardless of what they have to do to get there.

[Aelyn]

If by "number one" you mean "you, the player, the person playing the deck," then maybe, but you should look more at the person playing the deck as the goal. Under that lens, black is self-sacrificing. Again, even its main tribe is about being a faceless member of the crowd with a single goal.
The thing is that the philosophies of MTG colours are very much about the people using the magic - namely, the player, the planeswalkers, and some of the more independent and powerful summonable creatures.

If you think of Zombies as faceless crowds with a single goal, you're missing the point. They're corpses, animated with dark magic for the sole purpose of doing whatever the summoner needs them to do. Black mages like using zombies because they don't question anything, don't have pesky instincts or emotions, and don't have the capacity to resist being sacrificed. It's not the zombies themselves which are selfish, it's the mages who animate, bind, and summon them.

A lot of the more powerful creatures in black, the ones who do have independent thought and agency, are "selfish" as cards - they require the summoner to pay a tithe, such as life or cards in hand, before they will deign to work for them. This does happen across colours, but is far more common in black than anywhere else, simply because those creatures are aligned with the black philosophy.

[iTreeby]

If by "number one" you mean "you, the player, the person playing the deck," then maybe, but you should look more at the person playing the deck as the goal. Under that lens, black is self-sacrificing. Again, even its main tribe is about being a faceless member of the crowd with a single goal.
In Mtg, "you" are a planeswalker. Planeswalker cards represent your relationship to another Planeswalker. Creature cards are beings you can summon. There are many ways to gain power a black aligned planeswalker does so for themselves. The amount of control you have over a summon has little to do with the "tribe" of creature.

[skaddix]

The problem is Magic is shaped by the Colors...and DnD uses a different Magic System entirely but they didn't really even try to integrate the colors of magic into this...honestly though I say Magic The Gathering would work better in a Spheres of Power type system.

[The Aboleth]

A quick question for someone who is just getting into MtG (the card game): Are you guys getting all this lore purely from the cards' text, or are there actual MtG books one could read? If the latter, what books would you recommend (and which would you not, for whatever reason)?

[Asensur]

A quick question for someone who is just getting into MtG (the card game): Are you guys getting all this lore purely from the cards' text, or are there actual MtG books one could read? If the latter, what books would you recommend (and which would you not, for whatever reason)?

The first Ravnica trilogy.

And also, you have the art (and fluff) books for Zendikar, Innistrad, Kaladesh, Amonkhet, Dominaria, and (in spring) Ravnica.

[JackPhoenix]

There are also stories on MtG part of WotC's website (https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/columns/magic-story) for the newer blocks (Battle for Zendikar onward) and bits and pieces for even older stuff.

[The Aboleth]

The first Ravnica trilogy.

And also, you have the art (and fluff) books for Zendikar, Innistrad, Kaladesh, Amonkhet, Dominaria, and (in spring) Ravnica.

Thanks! Among those options, which would you most highly recommend? Or are they all good?


There are also stories on MtG part of WotC's website (https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/columns/magic-story) for the newer blocks (Battle for Zendikar onward) and bits and pieces for even older stuff.

Thanks! And same question: Are there any stories you particularly recommend I read (or avoid)? MtG lore seems a little intimidating given all the years of buildup I've missed, so I'm really looking to start out with the "good" stuff so I'm not turned off by accidentally starting with the "not-so-great" stuff.

[Prince Vine]

I have a handful of the 'block' trilogies, and one of the old (early to mid 90s) short story compilations. I also read several of one of the main designer's lore-mechanics design articles. There are several 'lore reset' points. The old stuff was just vignettes, then they had stuff mostly limited to plots within a block (with the Urza storyline going long and covering several years), then they did a major Multiverse-changing event and seem to have an over-arching metaplot, but that part is after my time (I stopped following it halfway through the block set in the world of Kamigaws).

[Asensur]

Thanks! Among those options, which would you most highly recommend? Or are they all good?



Thanks! And same question: Are there any stories you particularly recommend I read (or avoid)? MtG lore seems a little intimidating given all the years of buildup I've missed, so I'm really looking to start out with the "good" stuff so I'm not turned off by accidentally starting with the "not-so-great" stuff.

I recommend starting with the free short stories in their web, and expanding forward/backwards from there with the books for those worlds/characters you like.

Here you have a list of the short stories:

https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Magic_Story

[JackPhoenix]

Thanks! And same question: Are there any stories you particularly recommend I read (or avoid)? MtG lore seems a little intimidating given all the years of buildup I've missed, so I'm really looking to start out with the "good" stuff so I'm not turned off by accidentally starting with the "not-so-great" stuff.

I recommend reading everything from Zendikar forward, as it forms one coherent storyline dealing with the current cast of main characters, Gatewatch. While it refers to previous events, it generally explains the details you need to know. M19 storline is secondary, IMO, it uses different characters, and while it goes into Nicol Bolas and Ugin's backstory, I don't like the portrayal of Bolas there... without spoilers, when he eventually appears, he's out of character compared to how he behaves everywhere else. And Vivien Reid's story seems irrelevant to the main storyline.

Kaladesh and Ixalan are my personal favorite, I don't like certain inconsistencies in Zendikar and Innistrad, mostly ones related to distances and travel length, but otherwise, the stories are fine... YMMV.

[R.Shackleford]

Has anyone else checked out the table of contents for the new book? It looks like it's going to be worthless as a splatbook AND as a campaign setting. Anyone who complained about SCAG is going to just loooove this one.

Gotta watch out. If you have negative opinions about WotC stuff people here will try to invalidate your opinion or make you feel like you shouldn't post how you think (as I can already see in this thread)

I really want to support 5e D&D but WotC is making it really hard to do that.

[Unoriginal]

Gotta watch out. If you have negative opinions about WotC stuff people here will try to invalidate your opinion or make you feel like you shouldn't post how you think (as I can already see in this thread)

I really want to support 5e D&D but WotC is making it really hard to do that.

Dude, come on.

It's legitimate to not like a setting or a supplement. I couldn't care less for Plane****: Innistrad, myself, for example, but there is a difference between "man, I don't like this setting" and "man, WotC ****ed up, according to the table of content it's going to be useless as a splatbook and a campaign setting" when the table shows it IS exploring the setting AND there will be a decent chunk of the book giving options for mechanical /character stuff.

Trying to frame that as the forum users trying to bully someone for their opinions rather than telling someone that the claim they made and insisted on is factually incorrect doesn't work when we can see what happened.

[Prince Vine]

I can put this book off until after Christmas. I was going to get it right away but we already have a straight 5E game and are going to try the Monarchies of Mau for our alternate game.

I do intend to use it for my work game still if I need one.

[HolyDraconus]

Dude, come on.

It's legitimate to not like a setting or a supplement. I couldn't care less for Plane****: Innistrad, myself, for example, but there is a difference between "man, I don't like this setting" and "man, WotC ****ed up, according to the table of content it's going to be useless as a splatbook and a campaign setting" when the table shows it IS exploring the setting AND there will be a decent chunk of the book giving options for mechanical /character stuff.

Trying to frame that as the forum users trying to bully someone for their opinions rather than telling someone that the claim they made and insisted on is factually incorrect doesn't work when we can see what happened.

.... you did exactly what he said you would when he posted an opinion.

[Chaosvii7]

What is a Planeswalker if tossed into a D&D world?
God or lvl 20 mage ?

They're people who, for whatever reason, have plane shift as an innate spell. Sometimes, when in danger, they plane shift uncontrollably.

There used to be a clear distinction between planeswalkers and ordinary people, in that anyone who became a planeswalker became an immortal shapeshifting demigod, but there was an event in the game's story that took all of that power away from every current and future planeswalkers (also known as the Great Mending). Now they're as vulnerable as you or I, they just have the ability to travel through space with magic. There's a few that are just more powerful than others, but the ability to planeswalk itself is just the ability to move between planes.

I know the game is all about the planeswalkers these days, but by comparison; Creatures kill planeswalkers, and most planeswalkers need to rely on abilities that only stop things from attacking them. A 20/20 creature is a lot more threatening in the short term than a planeswalker whose only form of defense is to tap a creature so it can't attack. Really, planeswalkers are basically just glass cannons in the realm of the actual card game.

[Drascin]

A quick question for someone who is just getting into MtG (the card game): Are you guys getting all this lore purely from the cards' text, or are there actual MtG books one could read? If the latter, what books would you recommend (and which would you not, for whatever reason)?

Bit of both. You really can get a feel for each setting from the cards themselves, and then there's novels and stuff. But even without the novels I always could catch the basics of the plotline just by reading the cards themselves.

[Unoriginal]

.... you did exactly what he said you would when he posted an opinion.

No. Making a claim isn't the same thing as posting an opinion.

"I don't like this forum" is an opinion. "People will try to silence you for your opinion here" is claim that is meant to be taken factually. Except when you look at the facts, it's obvious it's not true.

Again, if anyone want to tell their Ravnica-related opinions, be my guest. I've expressed mine, and I've had no issue with others'. But an opinion isn't a factual claim. If I said something like "those new races are unplayable", then people would be more than justified to call me out for it.

[Prince Vine]

Has anything been leaked on if goblins have subraces?

[Asensur]

They're people who, for whatever reason, have plane shift as an innate spell. Sometimes, when in danger, they plane shift uncontrollably

I want to remark this. In D&D terms, they do not have "plane" shift, but "world" shift.

For example, they can travel from Eberron to Faerûn, but not from the material plane to the elemental plane.

Planes in MTG are worlds in D&D.

[Unoriginal]

I want to remark this. In D&D terms, they do not have "plane" shift, but "world" shift.

For example, they can travel from Eberron to Faerûn, but not from the material plane to the elemental plane.

Planes in MTG are worlds in D&D.

Note you can do that with a Teleport spell, in 5e.

[Drascin]

Note you can do that with a Teleport spell, in 5e.

...is that for real? Wow, that's silly as heck.

[Envyus]

.... you did exactly what he said you would when he posted an opinion.

That was not an opinion. That was lying.

[Envyus]

...is that for real? Wow, that's silly as heck.

You have to know were you are going. Remember Teleports rules. The only effective way to teleport to a different material plane world is to know the sequence for a teleportation circle there, unless you have somehow been able to visit it before.

[Azreal]

You have to know were you are going. Remember Teleports rules. The only effective way to teleport to a different material plane world is to know the sequence for a teleportation circle there, unless you have somehow been able to visit it before.

Which is what makes Planeswalkers interesting. Not only do they innately cast Teleport (to another "plane") they are able to use it far more often and they don't have to have been there before. They can show up on other worlds by total accident, or just from exploring the Blind Eternities.

[Finback]

Thanks! Among those options, which would you most highly recommend? Or are they all good?

Just want to add, the Kaladesh/Revolt storyline really works well, I think. Some amazingly fleshed out "NPCs", and a great action storyline with some fun "cinematic" moments.

I'm tempted to make a gremlin familiar for a mage-slayer type PC :)

[Finback]

Has anything been leaked on if goblins have subraces?

iirc, at this point the only goblin subraces are those for Zendikar goblins; the ones for other planes like Ixalan and Mirrodin aren't really "subraces", as one could argue they're functionally different lifeforms, just with the term "goblin" applied to them. (They're more like monkeys, really, while Zendikari goblins have "subraces" based on their tribal allegiances.)