Kaldheim Spoilers

[Morganator 2.0]

I had some time to think about Mark Rosewater's hints.

• A card with a {W}{W}{U}{U}{B}{B}{R}{R}{G}{G},{T} activation

Pretty sure this is just Door to Nothingness.

• a card that lets you use a creature’s toughness to perform an action normally using a creature’s power

This is either fighting with toughness, or just a Doran the Siege Tower effect.

• the introduction of a creature type that players have been wanting for years

I have no idea what this could be. What new creature type have people wanted? Vikings? Platypus?

[Schau]

• the introduction of a creature type that players have been wanting for years

I have no idea what this could be. What new creature type have people wanted? Vikings? Platypus?

It's obviously Hobbits

[ApothecaryGeist]

• the introduction of a creature type that players have been wanting for years

I have no idea what this could be. What new creature type have people wanted? Vikings? Platypus?

It's obviously Hobbits

"Apothecary" 

[Spinsane]

• a card that lets you use a creature’s toughness to perform an action normally using a creature’s power

This is either fighting with toughness, or just a Doran the Siege Tower effect.

I have to assume this is actually a way to use Toughness to crew vehicles (or a specific vehicle) rather than Power...

[Elan Morin Tedronai]

Kithkins should be the Hobbits, I think imho. I expect future revealings of possible Angels or Dwarven lords.

[Morganator 2.0]

A friend of mine sent me this. If it's a fake, it's one of the most convincing ones I've seen.

So I guess "Phyrexian" is the creature type players have been waiting for.

[WizardSpartan]

A friend of mine sent me this. If it's a fake, it's one of the most convincing ones I've seen.

So I guess "Phyrexian" is the creature type players have been waiting for.

I saw this on Reddit, but there didn't seem to be a consensus as to whether it was legitimate or not. Did WotC confirm it was a fake or something?

EDIT: Nvm I misread Morg. Disregard.

[Slyvester12]

A friend of mine sent me this. If it's a fake, it's one of the most convincing ones I've seen.

So I guess "Phyrexian" is the creature type players have been waiting for.

HOLY SHIT, WE'RE BACK BOYS.
Kaldheim was already looking like my favorite set in a long time, but this seals it.

[ApothecaryGeist]

I hope this doesn't mean that dozens upon dozens of cards are going to get errata to add the "phyrexian" creature type.

[Soren841]

People think it's fake but I'm convinced it's real. Everything fits.

[Judaspriester]

I hope this doesn't mean that dozens upon dozens of cards are going to get errata to add the "phyrexian" creature type.

Mhh... that could happen...

[ApothecaryGeist]

I hope this doesn't mean that dozens upon dozens of cards are going to get errata to add the "phyrexian" creature type.

Mhh... that could happen...

Yes. It very well could.  And I hate it when they do that.


Mainly because WotC makes the claim that they don't do functional errata.


*Me looking at all my burn spells trying to figure what they can target*

[Judaspriester]

I hope this doesn't mean that dozens upon dozens of cards are going to get errata to add the "phyrexian" creature type.

Mhh... that could happen...

Yes. It very well could.  And I hate it when they do that.


Mainly because WotC makes the claim that they don't do functional errata.


*Me looking at all my burn spells trying to figure what they can target*

I don't really get the point here.. If they do Errdata, I doubt that they will remove already given subtypes. They will just add "phyrexian" to a few more. I don't see how this should really affect your burn spells.

[Slyvester12]

I hope this doesn't mean that dozens upon dozens of cards are going to get errata to add the "phyrexian" creature type.

Mhh... that could happen...

Yes. It very well could.  And I hate it when they do that.


Mainly because WotC makes the claim that they don't do functional errata.


*Me looking at all my burn spells trying to figure what they can target*

I don't really get the point here.. If they do Errdata, I doubt that they will remove already given subtypes. They will just add "phyrexian" to a few more. I don't see how this should really affect your burn spells.

They're saying that adding Phyrexian will make creatures functionally different and comparing it to when WotC errata'd the way dealing damage to planeswalkers worked, effectively making players guess whether any given burn spell printed before the change can hit a planeswalker or not.

[WizardSpartan]

I hope this doesn't mean that dozens upon dozens of cards are going to get errata to add the "phyrexian" creature type.

Mhh... that could happen...

Yes. It very well could.  And I hate it when they do that.


Mainly because WotC makes the claim that they don't do functional errata.


*Me looking at all my burn spells trying to figure what they can target*

I forgot how annoying that is until you mentioned it. Thanks, I hate it.

In a similar vein, trying to explain that the original lords like Elvish Champion, Lord of Atlantis, etc. have the creature type they buff but actually still don't buff themselves is kinda annoying.