Community

I knew green was next. After this will be blue, then red.

It's a bit of a shame since red, as the most misunderstood colour, really has the most to say.

Mistform_Mage wrote:

He always saves the most important for last. Wasn't white last when there were tons of arguments about whites future?

That's true. It's still a little sad that we're going to have to wait a month to read how Wizards (or Maro, at least) currently views red, and whether they're going to do anything to help shore up the disconnect. I'll admit Lorwyn's boggarts were a big step in the right direction (and even more so for black), even if they weren't to everyone's taste.

Of course, it'd be great to read an article about green philosophy that isn't mostly "Nature! Animals! TREEEEEEES!!! ".

Why is this so?

Nature is essential a system that has to constantly adapt. No matter what you throw at nature, it has to find a way to accept it and move on. This is a system that thrives on solving problems. Thus if you need a place to look for answers, why not look at the ultimate problem solver?

I know this article series is focused on flavour rather than mechanics but I do wish that someone, at some point, would address how R&D reconciles stuff like this with the mechanical fact that green is less focused on answers than any other colour in the game. Nature may solve problems, but green as a colour in the game doesn't, outside of certain narrow contexts (artifacts, flying creatures); instead green just hopes that its threats can get there before its problems give the win to the other guy. This article makes it sound like green should oppose artificial change, deception, and manipulation, but it doesn't oppose those things; it just abstains from them.

Remember when block-inspired themes were spread out more so you weren't hit over the head by their repetitiveness? I checked the links to the 10 Ravnica articles and they came every 3 or 4 columns, not every 2 like we've rigidly gotten. I'm sure there's a reason to it, but I think it's overloaded.

Nature is unrelenting. To fight it is ultimately to lose to it.

Remove a necessary predator, and the prey grow out of control. Remove the prey, and the predators starve. If left alone, nature will create a self-sustaining ecosystem, but when outside forces step in they threaten to undermine everything.

Seems like green is contradicting itself. Of course that's in it's nature, especially when Logic is a hated enemy.

Hi, Mark. I'm (color). I like (value #1) and (value #2).

Speaking of (value #1) and (value #2), I really, really hate (color two spaces clockwise), because it embodies (opposite of value #1). I also hate (color two spaces counterclockwise), because it embodies (opposite of value #2).

The world would be a much better place without (color two spaces clockwise) and (color two spaces counterclockwise). Just take a look at (shard centered on original color). In (shard centered on original color), (value #1) and (value #2) are allowed to flourish, because (color two spaces clockwise) and (color two spaces counterclockwise) aren't around to screw things up. There is no (opposite of value #1) or (opposite of value #2).

I live on (shard centered on original color) with my friends, (color one space counterclockwise) and (color one space clockwise). I like (color one space counterclockwise) because it understands the importance of (value #1). My only gripes with (color one space counterclockwise) are that it doesn't pay enough attention to (value #2) and that it spends a little too much time around (color two spaces counterclockwise). I also like (color one space clockwise) because it understands the importance of (value #2). I just wish it would pay more attention to (value #1) and stay away from (color two spaces clockwise). Come to think of it, I'm the perfect balance between (color one space counterclockwise) and (color one space clockwise).

Thanks for interviewing me, Mark.