It is currently Fri May 14, 2021 5:41 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 7:08 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Posts: 2296
Location: Roaming Dominaria
So, Maro confirmed there will be errata for the Phyrexian creature type:

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... 2021-02-15

Quote:
So, yes, we are planning to errata old cards. Everything that's a Phyrexian will be gaining the Phyrexian creature type (although there's some fuzziness on some creatures). I don't think anything will be losing a creature type, though. The change should just be additive.


That's awesome, and because this really matters to me, I thought I'd try to be a helpful little Vorthos and did some work on the side. I'm sure there are folks at WotC who are looking into this, but some additional sets of eyes from the community probably won't hurt. "Everything that's a Phyrexian", you say? Well, I have some Phyrexians for you!

Consider:

This is the section for cards that I wasn't immediately sure about and that might require some thought/discussion/hitting the books to figure out whether or not they should count as "Phyrexian". I haven't really had the time for that, but I'll just drop them here for now:

Spoiler


Tokens created by:

Spoiler


Core Sets:

Soul of New Phyrexia

Antiquities:

Spoiler


Ice Age Block:

Spoiler


Mirage Block:

Spoiler


Tempest Block:

Phyrexian Hulk

Urza Block:

Spoiler


Masques Block:

Spoiler


Invasion Block:

Spoiler


Time Spiral Block:

Phyrexian Totem

Commander Products:

Spoiler


Scars Block:

[all creatures with the Phyrexian watermark]
Inkmoth Nexus

Modern Horizons:

Plague Engineer
First-Sphere Gargantua


Have you got any objections to my picks? Anything I've missed? What about the unclear ones? Feel free to discuss! I'm going to bed now... :sleep:

_________________
"Enchant me with your tale-telling. Tell about Tree, Grass, River, and Wind.
Tell why Truth must fight with Falsehood, and why Truth will always win."
—Love Song of Night and Day


Last edited by Pavor Nocturnus on Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2021 6:59 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 3308
Yeah, realistically only 20 of those things will be phyrexians.

_________________
Matahouroa
Planeswalker's Guide
The Story

My Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/Carliro
Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 12:15 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Posts: 2296
Location: Roaming Dominaria
Yeah, realistically only 20 of those things will be phyrexians.
Why? Wizards normally tries to make sure that people can somewhat reliably guess a creature's type by looking at the card when they errata something, so why would they arbitrarily errata some Phyrexians to count as "Phyrexian" but not others? There are already a lot more creatures with "Phyrexia(n)" in their names than 20, and a LOT more than that with the Phyrexian watermark, and those two things seem like the most obvious markers of Phyrexian-ness that you could give to a creature. The Grand Creature Type Update affected a lot more creatures than my suggestions for Phyrexians would, especially when it comes to Humans.

I agree with Maro that some cards are in a bit of a grey area, which is why I made a large section for those, and maybe I could get over it if they left the creature tokens alone (although they really shouldn't, they even made two different pieces of artwork for Phyrexian and Mirran Myr and Golems, and all Germ tokens are obviously Phyrexian etc.), but if what they end up doing isn't at least somewhere in the ball park of my compilation, I might just lose interest in New Phyrexia altogether. I can't stand illogical creature types, and Phyrexia is one of a small handful of things that at least keep me in the orbit of Magic. If they make an effort to get it right, though, Phyrexian might become one of my favourite tribes going forward.

_________________
"Enchant me with your tale-telling. Tell about Tree, Grass, River, and Wind.
Tell why Truth must fight with Falsehood, and why Truth will always win."
—Love Song of Night and Day


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:14 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 3308
Took WOTC three to five times to errata all the dinosaurs.

_________________
Matahouroa
Planeswalker's Guide
The Story

My Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/Carliro
Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:26 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Posts: 2296
Location: Roaming Dominaria
Took WOTC three to five times to errata all the dinosaurs.
Eh, maybe? But at least they put some serious thought into it and got there eventually. I don't really care if it takes them multiple waves to errata all Phyrexians as long as they, you know, errata all Phyrexians. They couldn't really justify leaving some of them out on purpose.

_________________
"Enchant me with your tale-telling. Tell about Tree, Grass, River, and Wind.
Tell why Truth must fight with Falsehood, and why Truth will always win."
—Love Song of Night and Day


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 3:19 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 4711
Preferred Pronoun Set: He/him
Some of these could be problematic simply because of space. In thinking specifically about Atraxa. I doubt they could fit phyrexian in her type line in print, and they will almost certainly reprint her again some day. I guess they could have her lose the horror type, but I'm not sure.

_________________
Come and play 3 Card Magic! The Most Minimalistic Magic Format! (TM)

my ego sig


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 10:07 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 13610
Identity: Chaoslight
Preferred Pronoun Set: She
Actually replacing the horror on phyrexians with the phyrexian type and giving horror more of its own identity might be their play here

_________________
altimis wrote:
I never take anytihng Lily says seriously, except for when I take it personally. Then it's personal.
WotC_Ethan wrote:
People, buy more stuff.
#WotCstaff
Spoiler

Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 10:18 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 3308
Would be smart; horror is basically the "default" phyrexian creature.

Same with germ. Germ doesn't exist outside of phyrexia, so it has to go.

_________________
Matahouroa
Planeswalker's Guide
The Story

My Patreon:
https://www.patreon.com/Carliro
Image


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:01 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 13, 2015
Posts: 5766
I get why people want a Phyrexian type but I personally like that cards like Blinding Souleater and the Exarch cycle are just race-less Clerics. To me, that shows compleation removing all biological definition from the creature and they are only the role they have in Phyrexia.

But, beyond those few cards, this is not a consistent pattern for Phyrexian creatures so losing that doesn't matter really.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2021 2:35 pm 
Online
Member

Joined: Sep 22, 2013
Posts: 11524
I don't think everything with a phyrexian watermark really deserves the phyrexian type.
While they may be aligned and loyal to Phyrexia, unless they're actually compleated, it's not really their creature type, it's just their loyalty. (Blind zealot, for example)

I think another factor might be in how flexible the name is and potentially how much the mechanic on the card is tired to Phyrexia. Theoretically, if it's sufficiently flavor neutral, it probably shouldn't get its type changed for purely pragmatic reprint reasons.

_________________
At twilight's end, the shadow's crossed / a new world birthed, the elder lost.
Yet on the morn we wake to find / that mem'ry left so far behind.
To deafened ears we ask, unseen / "Which is life and which the dream?"


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 08, 2021 8:43 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Posts: 2296
Location: Roaming Dominaria
Aaarrrgh wrote:
Some of these could be problematic simply because of space. In thinking specifically about Atraxa. I doubt they could fit phyrexian in her type line in print, and they will almost certainly reprint her again some day. I guess they could have her lose the horror type, but I'm not sure.
My default reaction when people argue something wouldn't fit on a typeline is to point them in the direction of the German printing of Jedit Ojanen of Efrava from Planar Chaos when he still had the Lord type. If they can fit "Legendäre Kreatur - Katze, Krieger, Herrscher" on a typeline (note the additional colons that German cards have between creature types), I think Atraxa could work as a Phyrexian Angel Horror. I couldn't find an image of the German Jedit, but there are some other non-English printings with a pretty long type line out there, like this one:

Spoiler


I guess they could always just errata Atraxa now and worry about the type line when/if they actually reprint her. But they simply can't introduce a Phyrexian type and leave out cards that are as obviously Phyrexian as Atraxa.


Barinellos wrote:
I don't think everything with a phyrexian watermark really deserves the phyrexian type.
While they may be aligned and loyal to Phyrexia, unless they're actually compleated, it's not really their creature type, it's just their loyalty. (Blind zealot, for example)

I think another factor might be in how flexible the name is and potentially how much the mechanic on the card is tired to Phyrexia. Theoretically, if it's sufficiently flavor neutral, it probably shouldn't get its type changed for purely pragmatic reprint reasons.
Sure, there's a tiny handful of Human cards that have the Phyrexian watermark but no obvious mechanical ties to Phyrexia and that don't look obviously compleated (like Blind Zealot), but I guess those may or may not be compleated and go either way. Another argument in favour of making them Phyrexians would be the way the "new" Glistening Oil on Mirrodin worked. Because everyone and everything that is loyal to the Phyrexian side probably got that way by being exposed to the oil. Some of those individuals are more corrupted by the oil than others, with cards like Tel-Jilad Fallen or Fallen Ferromancer having Infect and showing visible signs of corruption without being compleated in the taditional sense. So I would argue the creatures with the Phyrexian watermark from Scars block could all be justified as having the Phyrexian type by saying they must have been "infected" by the oil, if not outright compleated. That sort of corruption was the whole point of the Infect and Proliferate mechanics after all.

_________________
"Enchant me with your tale-telling. Tell about Tree, Grass, River, and Wind.
Tell why Truth must fight with Falsehood, and why Truth will always win."
—Love Song of Night and Day


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 09, 2021 11:40 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Posts: 2296
Location: Roaming Dominaria
So, looking at some of the cards in the "consider" category, I'd say we can probably rule out Traxos and possibly Rona.

Spoiler


Spoiler


Traxos doesn't make a whole lot of sense to begin with. What even is that thing? Clearly not a dragon engine, but whatever the case, it says "based on Phyrexian designs", which I take to mean it must be one of the machines Mishra built himself rather than one of Phyrexian origin. Traxos feels like another Ramos situation in that the description makes it sound like they should have appeared in The Brothers' War but clearly didn't. The less gets said about Traxos, the better.

I guess you could argue for either side when it comes to Rona, but personally I'm leaning more on the side of not giving her the Phyrexian type, unless they really want to foreshadow her turning into a Phyrexian-style monstrosity down the road. But as it stands now, she only has some artificial modifications she made to her own body, no real connection to Phyrexia proper beyond an admiration for Gix.

The biggest elephant in the room is the Father of Machines himself. Should they give Yawgmoth - in his human form - the Phyrexian type? I guess it would be kinda sad if you wanted to build a Phyrexian tribal deck and it didn't care about Yawgmoth, but then again, it shows him at a time when "Phyrexians" weren't really a thing. Our best guess might be to look at The Thran to figure out whether the incarnation of Yawgmoth that's shown in the artwork can be put on a particular point of the timeline and whether that means he has already established his connection to Phyrexia at that point. I guess the powerstone on his workbench is supposed to be the one that will be split into the Might- and Weakstone, but I can't tell from the top of my head whether that makes sense within the context of the story or where that might put him on the timeline. Then again, his mechanics are very Phyrexian, and that armour he's wearing looks special enough to be some kind of power armour like the ones that were used in the Thran-Phyrexian war later in the novel. I could probably buy Wizards handwaving the art as mostly symbolic and just giving (or not giving) him the Phyrexian type either way (it might just be 'a' powerstone, not 'the' powerstone). It could be justified if he already established his metaphysical connection to Phyrexia, which would arguably make him the first Phyrexian.

_________________
"Enchant me with your tale-telling. Tell about Tree, Grass, River, and Wind.
Tell why Truth must fight with Falsehood, and why Truth will always win."
—Love Song of Night and Day


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2021 3:34 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Posts: 2296
Location: Roaming Dominaria
Looking at a few more cards from the "consider" category, I'd say I probably wouldn't give errata to Skittering Horror, Skittering Monstrosity, Bone Shredder, Abyssal Horror, Looming Shade and Selenia, Dark Angel. I guess most of those just stuck out to me when I went through the sets in question because they were creepy black monsters from Urza block. Abyssal Horror and Looming Shade have been reprinted with different flavour text and more generic artwork, and none of those creatures really look Phyrexian. Selenia was probably just cursed or tainted with black mana, and her body shattered into millions of shards when she died, so I'd say she was very much still a pure mana construct.

Edit: Oh, and Wall of Junk is just a rusty pile of, well, junk and probably too generic to get the Phyrexian type anyway, so I'd consider that a 'no' as well.

_________________
"Enchant me with your tale-telling. Tell about Tree, Grass, River, and Wind.
Tell why Truth must fight with Falsehood, and why Truth will always win."
—Love Song of Night and Day


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group