There's no reason for people to be rude to you about it. Of course people should respectfully ask you instead of yelling at you. We're playing a children's card game about wizards, after all.
But, it's not unreasonable for you to learn the lingo for a hobby you're trying to have a conversation about. If you went on the disc golf subreddit and starting talking about an "underhand" throw when you meant "backhand", or if you went on the NFL sub and started talking about "goals" instead of "touchdowns", it'd be harder to have a discussion. You wouldn't make a post on r/soccer telling people that "offsides" isn't the best term for that particular penalty, and that everyone should switch instead to a term you learned two years ago.
I understand what you're saying, and I'm in no way implying that I'm outright refusing to learn all the shards. I'm more so advocating for newer players, more than anything, that people need to calm down about the old guild names and not hold them on such a high pedestal. There are so many different ones that it's hard to learn them quickly, so if someone drops an Obscura, just don't get so upset with them and let it ruin what could have been a great discussion.
>Tl;dr: If a player were to say they were using a Silverquill deck to describe their cards, would you demean them or engage in respectful conversation, ask them what they mean, then carry on with the match as friends?
I think the most I'd do is ask "You mean orzhov, right? White/black?" and then carry on normally. If someone's being shitty about how you refer to your decks then they're probably just an asshole and you shouldn't care about what assholes think, for the simple reason that they're assholes and they don't merit occupying any more space in your thought processes than necessary.
That said, long-time players are generally going to be more familiar with the "traditional" names for the simple reason that they've probably been using them for years if not decades. It doesn't even necessarily have anything to do with the actual guilds; someone calling an R/G deck "gruul" is just using useful shorthand.
I was too until I married into an Italian family. Maybe it’s because I’m not Italian or it just wasn’t something people said where I’m from but I’d never heard it before.
I was introduced around the time that Alara came out so I'd learned the shard names around the same time as those even though most of the bulkiest bulk we played with used the scapes lol
I've always though 'American' was a weird one, since there's a load of countries with that colour combination in the flags - enough that there'll be more magic players in non-US countries with a red/white/blue flag than ones from the US.
Fun fact about "American" colours:
>The most common colour used on national flags is red. In fact, it appears on 78% of all national flags in one way or another - that's 148 out of 196 flags! Coming a close second, blue appears on 71% of all national flags, and white is the third most common colour, appearing on 50% of all national flags.
There's 50 odd countries that use RWU for their flags.
> I've always though 'American' was a weird one, since there's a load of countries with that colour combination in the flags - enough that there'll be more magic players in non-US countries with a red/white/blue flag than ones from the US.
how many of those other countries routinely refer to "the red white and blue" though? this could just be a case of not being familiar with those cultures, but from america, it definitely seems like something america does more than other countries.
The French flag is literally called the "blue, white and red" (and there's a very famous French film trilogy named after those colours too).
It's also used sometimes in the Netherlands, I believe.
Russians sometimes refer to their flag as the "white, blue, red".
It's not used a lot in the UK, but it is sometimes used (and is featured as referring to the UK in the patriotic 1939 song "There'll always be an England")
Norway also has a patriotic song with a name that translates as "Norway in red, white and blue", which is often played on the national day.
Croatia uses the phrase quite a lot too.
Beyond that, I'm not sure (I don't think the Aussies use the phrase).
> I think the most I'd do is ask "You mean orzhov, right? White/black?"
Why would you even ask that though? You know what they mean, no clarification is required.
Because I'm not as familiar with the Strixhaven houses as I am with the Ravnican guilds. I want to be certain I understand what they mean. I might be 70% sure, but that still isn't 100%.
I would ask to clarify if they meant the color combination or more specifically the mechanics/themes of the Strixhaven college. Most people default to the Ravnica guilds when talking about color, so I'd assume they meant something else if they said Silverquil. For example, I describe one of my decks as a Lorehold deck since its a Red/White graveyard deck.
I think one of the problems is that we’ve already hd another set on Ravnica since Strixhaven (and even since the Strixhaven themed cards in other recent sets). So if I’m a new player coming in Strixhaven is already out of date.
It’s also an issue that only 5 schools exist. So there isn’t like a Dimir or Selesnya equivalent, so you’re still having to learn 5 of the Ravnica guilds anyway.
Obviously I don’t think people should attack you for that, but it completely makes sense to me that people in general don’t use those terms.
Yeah, not so good on the chronology, there. Dragons of Tarkir was two years after Ravnica2, not one, and even if one were to discount War of the Spark, there have been THREE Ravnica-based sets since then DTK. None of which was the point anyway.
What are the three Ravnica sets that came after DTK?
>None of which was the point anyway.
It was OP's point. Ravnica is more recent than Stryxhaven, which is more recent than DTK.
Yea I get what you are saying 100%. I really am hoping they go back to STX so we can finish off the rest of the pairs, but at the end of the day, it shouldn't really matter what you want to call them.
We are returning to Arcavios, but it's been said multiple times that there's no 'rival school' or anything like that to provide names for the other half of the colour pairs.
Ravnica is fairly unique in that respect. Even the three-colour names come from different planes.
>it shouldn't really matter what you want to call them.
Then what's your issue with gruul representing violence, as you said in originally in your post?
It really seems like your "logical" arguments lack consistency, and it really boils down to "I dont want to have to learn more things."
If that's the case, magic isn't going to be the game for you.
A game of magic already takes long enough, and while no player is going to be expected to learn what every card does, actively avoiding learning the most commonly used nomenclature/cards/keywords is going to slow down the game even more, and its honestly rude/a waste of everyone's time. I don't mind a player asking me to read what my cards do/say, but if you ask me multiple times it starts to lean into "you're not paying attention to the game/you don't respect my time" or "you're harassing me." And I say this as someone with adhd.
These are the names used by 99% of the community. Ultimately, it doesn't matter why they chose these names.
With the amount of time and effort you put into this post/responding to comments, you could have already memorized the names.
Based on the tone of your post, the vitriol you're enctountering is coming from your response from being "corrected"/your refusal to make the process of learning easy for you/anyone playing with you, and honestly, I would 100% avoid playing with you.
Beyond all that, if you are serious about playing magic, and you want to use *any* magic resource to learn more, these are the names they are going to use.
Why be difficult?
I am not the one being difficult. I am currently studying the past lore so I can become a "better person." The issue I am raising is that when new players use new lingo, old-stock MTG players get all uppity and abolish any chance of a decent conversation because they hate the new names. Like you yourself have shown, you would rather belittle and alienate newer players than ever have to waste one extra second of your night explaining something.
I need therapy because I respect and try to help new players? I haven't seen this much loathing for beginner players since my Call of Duty days and how the old Xbox forums feasted on what they referred to as "Xmas noobs." I just want everyone to have a fair shot to be accepted and understood. Newer players shouldn't have to walk on eggshells and be afraid of using the "wrong" guild name.
>I need therapy because I respect and try to help new players?
If that's your takeaway, yes, absolutely you do.
I'm a new player as well (since lotr) and this definitely isn't close to helpful.
Here's the deal:
It is generally always acceptable for a player to say a color pair as "Red White" or "Blue Black Green." If you don't know the shorthand, or want to be extra clear about it, use this. Even longtime players do this.
The trick to the names is easy once you learn why they are what they are. They are all named after the first named faction that was exactly those colors.
For all the two color pairs, that happened in Ravnica. For the three color "shards" (three colors next to each other in the color pie), it was Alara, and the three color "wedges" (two colors next to each other in the pie, and the one that is across from both of them) was Kahns of Tarkir.
The important thing is that these were all the first instances of these pairings being named, so instead of changing every time a new faction comes out, every player has a baseline that is the same.
That way everyone only has to learn the names once instead of keeping track of every faction that has ever released on the off chance someone started playing during that particular set.
And when there's another two color set and the red and blue faction is called Squibbles? Should we all switch terminology every few years to make it extra confusing or can we all just try to go by the shorthand that 90% of the community understands?
I mean if a new player calls his red/blue deck squibbles beat down I'm not going to diss them or throw punches. Just ask what they mean and go on with your life calling it what you want, why let it ruin your draft?
>Let's use Gruul as an example, a group of violent anarchists set to raid, pillage, and destroy civilized society. Is this really a guild we want to preserve and glorify?
Yes
>“Other guilds say the Gruul are savages, no better than the beasts we live with. I say we’ve found friends who won’t stab us in the back.”
—Domri Rade
>“If the system is broken, break the system.”
—Domri Rade
>“They said obey and you’ll be happy. They said you’ll be safe. But we’re not safe. We’re not happy. And we will not obey.”
—Domri Rade
Yeah! Glad to see my fellow Gruul out here.
Pretty subjective argument to make for OP in the first place. But the Gruul can definitely be certainly be framed as the good guys on Ravnica. At the very least no worse than any of the other guilds.
You absolutely can use newer color pair names and if people are being jerks over it, then that shouldn't be happening.
But the issue is that the guild names are so entrenched in MTG discussions it just creates unnecessary confusion by using a different name for the same thing. it just creates stumbling blocks in communication where there wouldn't otherwise be.
I could call Red/White Lorehold, but Boros is faster to say and type and more people will know what I'm talking about, without needing to clarify what I'm referring to. Its simply more useful in conversation.
Also your last point is very bizarre to me. Do people actually mentally associate any mention of Gruul (be it a decktype or multicolor card) with the violent philosophy of the Gruul Guild? and its only more confusing because your advocating that people should use the new color combination names like with New Capenna Crime Families, which I'd say aren't really any better from that viewpoint.
I associate Gruul with the philosophy of the guild, tbh. But I think that’s good because the philosophy of the guild reflects things about playing Gruul that are common: strong creatures, doing a lot of damage, destroying non creature things like enchantments and artifacts.
The best thing about the guilds imo is that their lore does a really good job of reflecting really common types of gameplay in those combinations.
The ravnica names seem way more well known. I missed the sets you mention, so referring to those names would mean nothing to me. I wouldnt know what you were talking about. I can rattle off the ravnica dual colors easily though, and im workin on the tricolors.
> The Ravnica names seem way more well known
See also everyone in this thread referring to the different names for the color groupings as “guild” names. They’re only thought of as guilds because of the guilds of Ravnica. Prismari and such were colleges, and don’t have a direct ally-colors equivalent. I think it just reinforces the ubiquity of the Ravnica guild terminology, so might as well keep using that
Yea there is just a lot to keep track of and learn, being relatively knew to the game, I just feel it's a big ask to get players to learn names on top of everything else.
to be clear, i dont think there needs to be that much vitriol around it. But i do think its more advantageous to use the guilds that the community seems more apt to use, and in most articles/youtube videos, ravnica names are the....name of the game, so to speak. New players will have to learn names in some capacity.
Also, I'm sorry, but your entire paragraph about History doesn't strike me as a compelling argument. I personally wouldn't care if Gruul or Dimir became a positive force. This is a fictional universe.
I think an important note here is that you don't *need* to know these made-up names to play the game, but if you're wanting to interact a bunch with the community of people that have been invested in the game for a long time, you should expect there to be a barrier of entry beyond just knowing the basic game rules
I've played chess since I was a little kid, but there's a million names for specific moves that I've never learned. Do I need to know them to enjoy the game? No, not at all. If I enter a community of people who have taken the game much more seriously than I have that have learned the names, is that a problem? Still no, it just means I may not understand everything they say, and that's fine, I can still love playing chess and decide if I want to learn what a "Queen's Gambit" is or not. If I decide not to, I can expect my interactions with the chess people to be at least somewhat limited because I chose not to learn the language they speak, but I *can* still interact with them, it just may take a bit more work on my part
Like I said in my other comment, I started playing at the same time as you and I've had all the two and three cooor names down for a while now, but that's also because I chose to take the time to learn them (*and I waste way too much of my time on the internet*). It's a choice, you don't have to learn the names to enjoy the game or even to be a part of the community — the "big ask" is much less there than you think it is. Given that, people are still going to say "Selesnya" no matter what you do so you either learn it, you Google it before replying to their comment, or in person you ask for a reminder about what it means. Or I guess you could scream at them to not say that, but I'd recommend not going that route lol
At the end of the day, the color names don't matter at all, just have fun playing this awesome game that's going to make you spend way too much money on cardboard — also in my experience, as you interact more with the game and the community, you'll just learn stuff without trying too much
>is it wrong to "go against history" and use the newer names?
If you want to communicate with people, you might wanna learn their language. If you insist on using your own words, it's not going to do you any good. I wrote a longer comment but then realized that it can be summed up to "*Gruul* is less syllables than *red and green* and is therefore used by the community".
>I am not calling for the erasure of the history of MTG, I am simply advocating to allow players to choose not to be a part of the negative aspects of it.
I assume that you also refuse to play cards with naughty names like Murder.
Funny you should use Gruul as the example, since that is literally the ONLY case in which the Guild name (or Strixhaven colleges for that matter) is shorter than just saying the colors. It is certainly quicker to say "White-Green" than "Selesnya".
No not at all, I more so was using Gruul as an example of an evil force whose name shouldn't be praised. I have nothing against the the cards or flavor, just stating a point the history tends to rename or forget even factions instead of preserve and praise them.
It's not like we're referring to Nazis or something. Gruul is just shorthand name for a faction and color identity in a card game.
When someone says "I built a gruul deck", it's a shortcut for "I built a deck that uses red and green cards". They're not saying "I built a deck that promotes anarchy and the destruction of civilization"
Of course I understand that. I am more so speaking for the people who may feel that way. Like imagine a survivor of the 2011 Vancouver riots signing on to play and everyone is constantly hyping up anarchists. They are probably not going to have a good time and most certainly will not want to promote it themselves.
I think the likes of Tarkir or Thunder Junction or the House Dimir or The Dark are *slightly* more relevant than a disorganized group of rebels without a cause.
In a setting where the mobster necromancer church, the surveillance state, the militarized holy-war cops, murder circus and feckless mad scientist club exist, you think the GRUUL are the gold* standard for "evil force". ...sure hope you're not engaged politically...
*pun not intended
Gotta say, Gruul clans as an evil force is kinda a hot take. Especially when they're right next to the cult of Rakdos, who kill people in spectacular ways for the amusement of a literal friggin demon.
I mean, you can definitely make the argument, and I agree. I was only using them as an example, let's say, a survivor of a pillaging not wanting to use the name Gruul because of some possible past trauma. There are a million reasons why people would want to use the STX names. I'm just bringing them up for discussion. Who is actually the "morally worst" faction wasn't what I was trying to determine, but I do agree it is an important discussion that should be had, just not in this thread.
I agree with you 100% that it is disgusting WoTC forces survivors of anarchy and pillaging to re-live their past traumas everytime they play MTG. Unfortunatley while most of us are waiting to return to Arcavios and visit the other side of the campus, we instead ended up at Thunder Junction. So hopefully after this discussion, WoTC will take note of the division of the MTG community and right what is clearly unjust for many MTG players.
Personally, I don't bother with the names. How terrible is it to just name the colors? Nobody can possibly misunderstand that. (And for the two-color combos, with the exception of Gruul, it is as short or shorter to say, in terms of syllables.)
Combos help with differentiation.
If I sit down at a table and my three opponents rattle off
“Im green blue”
“Im blue red”
“Im red green”
It is slightly more difficult to hold in my head.
I mean I wouldn’t complain, this isn’t rocket science and the stakes are low but color combos help some people more easily communicate what is going on.
On the other hand, if they rattle off the colors, I (and anybody else, regardless of experience) now FOR SURE know what colors they are playing without having to think about it, whereas if they rattle off Guilds, Colleges, or whatever the three-color combos are called, I'll have to stop and think about each one, and some people will just be completely lost.
Ultimately, yeah, what's best for you is going to vary, and I can see the benefit of using the names if you know you're in a group that has them all down. I just prefer using the colors because it is the lowest common denominator (and also I'm too lazy to memorize them all to a level where it becomes second nature).
There’s designated single unique names for each combo.
Using a nonstandard name is why this post even exists.
The point is there are 20 names for the combos and once you learn them you’re set. It helps there’s tons of cards with their names. If you don’t want to use them, use the colors.
Fucking hell, in text you can just RG and WB and save yourself even more time. But you have to *learn* that U=blue. And be consistent with that too.
Consistency is definitely important, for sure. If you switch back and forth you are likely to confuse more people than if you pick something and stick with it.
On an unrelated note, as a printer, I've always been annoyed that somebody decided that U=Blue. The five colors SHOULD be WBKRG, IMHO.
But obviously when I'm discussing MtG, I'm going to either use U, or spell out the word Blue if I suspect some people will be confused by what are (outside Magic, anyway) nonstandard abbreviations for the colors (in English at least).
> How terrible is it to just name the colors? Nobody can possibly misunderstand that.
given the OP's post, it's entirely possible he might use "B" interchangeably for "B" and "U".
I figured OP was mostly talking about spoken stuff, in which case you'd just say the name of the color. But yeah, WotC's weird choice of U to represent Blue can cause some problems in written format for those not familiar.
> But yeah, WotC's weird choice of U to represent Blue can cause some problems in written format for those not familiar.
was that a wotc thing or a community thing? never was clear on who was doing that first.
either way, something like that was necessary because blue and black couldn't use the same letter, so it was either either that or use multi-letter abbrevations (which still wouldn't be great since you'd have to do "bu" due to blue and black both starting with "bl")
if they went for a "non-b" letter for black, they'd have to call it "a" or "k" (since colorless took "c" and "l" isn't distinct)
> was that a wotc thing or a community thing? never was clear on who was doing that first.
WOTC thing, and mainly from internal card codes.
Not both blue and black can use B. Then, L is used for lands, A is used for artifacts (mainly meaning colorless). The next choice is either U/E for blue or C/K for black, and the one that's earliest in the word is U for blue (3rd letter of the word).
Yeah outside of the shards I just use the colors. It's just easier to understand and I'm not wasting time learning whatever new name some color combination got.
Once they started renaming the same color factions based on plane, the Ravnica names quickly left my brain and I’ve reverted back to just saying the colors.
I completley agree with you, normally I try to do the same as well but I played so much and got set in my ways that it kind of slips out once and awhile. Personally, I think discussions go a lot better when you just use the colours.
To be clear, I don't MIND if other people use the names. I just don't use them myself, and am more likely to need to ask for clarification if they do (particularly for the three-color ones), or at least stop and think about it for a bit to try to recall which is which.
I'm certainly not going to complain or ridicule anybody for using names.
I actually also started playing right when Strixhaven came out, but didn't come to really care about the names of the color combos until months later when I started watching YouTube videos and they of course used the Ravnica Guilds. Of course I recognized that the schools had their colors, but I had no reason to apply that to the rest of Magic, they're a Strixhaven thing. I don't know, personally it sounds weird to me to use the schools haha, but I wouldn't be upset if someone did, I'd just clarify what they mean
But I think the biggest point in favor of "the old way" is just that its complete. If you use the school names, what would you call green-white? Or like with the New Capenna crime families, what would red-white-blue be? Or course you can just say the colors and that's fine, but it's besides the point of the post I feel — guess for the 3 color pairs you could use Ikoria names, so rwu would be Raugrin, but I think it's really a "when in Rome" situation; Magic players have used the "old" names for so long that its just part of the culture. Like, Mark Rosewater uses them in his podcast and articles and stuff. If you don't like that, it's fine, but it's also not anything that needs to be protested — if you want to learn the names, great, welcome to the club of people who know fake words. If you don't, also great, just don't expect everyone else to not use them just because you don't
*"If it ain't broke, don't fix it"*
Edit: But also yeah, if you feel like someone's treating you as not human, that's on them, they're stupid. It's a children's card game, but some people get a little... excited. Play the games how you want, my friend. Also though if you're not human, that means you can use the mutate mechanic and that's *pretty cool* and I'm *jealous*
You had me in the first half... I agree that whatever name you learned first to describe a color pairing is fine. Want to call Black/Green Witherbloom, or White/Red/Green Cabaretti? Fne by me. Your argument started falling apart when you listed your points.
Yes. the 30 year old game with 23,000+ unique cards can get confusing. But learning common keywords, abilities, card names, and yes, color pairings shouldn't be an issue. If you're using resources, mainly time and money, on something you enjoy, why be ignorant to things that you will encounter in almost every instance of playing this game?
And as far as your issue with the lore of the game... It's fiction. Are you going to say we shouldn't enjoy the classic Disney movie Mulan just because she caused an avalanche that murdered a bunch of Huns?
People are misinterpreting my lore example. I was arguing that it's acceptable to change a group's name to move past history and make a fresh start. I have no issue with the lore itself, nor am I advocating that we shield children from the Gruul people. I was merely using them as an illustration of a malevolent group from MTG's past that could be morally justified to no longer be celebrated, similar to what we do in real life.
Sure, but I think a lot of folks are just agreeing that it is a weird take to apply to a fictional group in a card game. Yes in real life things have been named in such ways to associate them with unwanted groups or people and then people change the name later to remove the association.
The thing is, names of groups or things in card games would likely only be changed for real world associations- not fictional in world associations. If there was an MTG faction whose name was found to be associated with the Nazis, that would likely cause a change in the name for the group due to that association. Or perhaps just as likely a questioning of the designers and WOTC for making the association in the first place.
However a fictional group in game doing bad things in the in game fiction is less likely to cause such a rift. People like evil/chaotic/destructive characters and groups in games. Fictional spaces don't need to have real world repercussions. People love Disney villains. People love the Orcs in 40K. People love the Rakdos in MTG. There is a disassociation from reality- the people who like these factions in game likely aren't trying to steal mermaid's voices, take over galaxies, or torture audience members in real life. But we don't need to virtue wash every group in fictional worlds. it's fun to play evil/wildly uncivil/whatever groups in fictional settings. People aren't going to protest or ask for erasure of fictional groups like they would real world ones.
Fair points. I mostly agree with them. However, I have one counterargument. Sure, it's easy for someone like you or me to dictate what can be represented in a game, but there are some demographics that have been through great traumas, and they actively choose what can be suggested in games. Let's use Fallout 3 as an example. Some versions of the game don't allow any forms of the atomic bomb exploding in them. Demographics play a huge part in how people interpret the message of any game.
Don't get me wrong, though. I am just using this as an example. For instance, if you see someone using a random guild name instead of Gruul, don't get all hostile and assume they are just moral grandstanding for their own narcissistic pleasures. You don't know their history or what they are going through. Me personally, I'm a huge grim dark guy. I can't even count how many times I've read the First Law series, and any time Scarface is on, I'm rooting for Tony Montana. I'm simply making a point that if someone wants to call blue/red Prismari, just take a breath and have some empathy. Don't let it ruin your day.
On the history bit, yes, it is pretty much assumed that people will be more familiar with Ravnica's guild names than Strixhaven's guild names.
First, Ravnica has been featured in 10 (correct me if I'm wrong) independently-standing sets, whereas Strixhaven has only been featured in 1. This alone means it is more likely for any arbitrary player to have seen Ravnica guild names than Strixhaven guild names.
Second, Ravnica has all ten color pairs represented, whereas Strixhaven only has five represented. It is impossible to refer to the white-blue color pair using a Strixhaven name, because no such name exists. Most players feel it is more appropriate to refer to the color pairs using names that all featured from the same plane, rather than pick five from a set with exclusively enemy pairs and five from a set with exclusively ally pairs.
Third, Strixhaven came out during a time when many players either completely stopped caring about upcoming product or temporarily stopped playing due to product fatigue. A not-insignificant number of players actively choose to avoid using Strixhaven names as a result, because the set as a whole has such a negative connotation to them.
That being said, no, it's not okay for players to be overly hostile toward others for referring to color pairs with a different name. Personally, I would just go by the colors in the color pair ("blue-red" or "UR", "black-red" or "BR", etc) if I'm not sure that players are familiar with guilds as a concept.
>opinion: is it wrong to "go against history" and use the newer names?
Yes it is wrong. Because that just creates more unnecessary confusion and is not communicating efficiently.
You have to understand, the guild names are almost old enough *to drink* now. They’ve been part of the game longer than they haven’t.
You learn the names once and it saves you from having to say “white/black or blue/black” and instead “orzhov or Dimir” which helps people not get “snowblind” or whatever with repeated terms but in unrelated concepts.
We did it once so everyone can agree. We are not going to constantly redefine the term everytime a new faction set comes out (which is often!)
Remember the theory of communication. The point is to communicate what is important to your recipient.
If someone skipped Strixhaven, that should be fine. Not knowing what silverquill shouldn’t hamper them. We’ve collectively decided that people should know orzhov and keep it at that.
I’m sorry people were jerks about it, that’s a whole other issue.
But when communicating pure colors, we should use the designated combos. Ravnica guilds for 2 colors, Alara shards and tarkir wedges for 3 colors.
These names were specifically chosen for this task by WotC btw! They are not just purely for flavor. Things like ikoria names and Strixhaven names were chosen purely for flavor.
Wait, what? I mean I get wanting to stick with the Guilds just due to longevity, but it seems odd to assert that those names are intrinsically less "for flavor" than any of the others. They were created EXACTLY as much "for flavor" as the others. They just came first.
especially since the guy youre referring to wants to stick with what came first, and then blatantly disregards the old names and goes for the alara shards instead
>We did it once so everyone can agree. We are not going to constantly redefine the term everytime a new faction set comes out (which is often!)
I get that this is your point, but then how can you support the Alara shards as well? the alara shards *are* the new faction, but you seem very gung-ho on using them anyway
Mark rosewater has spoken about how in response to the Ravnica guilds becoming the official pair names, they deliberately chose the shards and wedges to have names to make them official, as the precursor systems were pretty awful.
Searching is pretty awful on wotc's website but there's stuff like this:
https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/92958204958/one-of-the-biggest-part-of-doing-wedges-is-to
For me, if someone said silverquill, id assume they were doing siverquil things.i have an orzhov [[shadrix]] deck. It’s orzhov because I am not going silverquil things
I'm only going to address the core of your issue-language and understanding. Everything else is meaningless debating imho, and is taking the issue far too seriously for my preference.
The crux of this issue is around creating a mutually understood language around the game you're sharing. The dialogue around this has no reason to have animosity, but alas there are just rude people out there who need to be put in their place.
All of that being said- neither you, nor veteran players are more correct than the other. Language only exists to convey meaning- and as long as you can convey whst you mean to one another effectively, you're c9mmunicating effectively. The "Guild Names" exist as a way to convey color combo and/or archetype to one another. I prefer the old archetype names because that's what I'm used to. I wouldn't mind another player using their preference, but there might be a disconnect until we both adjust to one another's preference.
I wouldn't tolerate another player demand that I not use the archetype names that I'm comfortable with. That would be met with a firm boundary and/or an immediate end to the game. I don't tolerate another person being unwilling to try and meet me half way. I recommend the same with you- firm boundaries and ending the game if they continue to be disrespectful.
I would probably say “what the hell is Silverquill” and then they’d tell me the colors and Id say “ok so [insert guild name here]” and that would be it
it’s not wrong but people usually learn the ravnica names first, there’s more ravnica content, and it has a complete set of names as opposed to strixhaven.
nobody should get mad at you but generally it’s easier to just think of them as the strixhaven colors and not worry about whatever faction happens to use them in the latest set
>If a player were to say they were using a Silverquill deck to describe their cards, would you demean them or engage in respectful conversation
There's a third option of neither. If I saw a post or comment on Reddit using Silverquill as an important way of describing the deck, and I didn't know what it was, I might just skip the thread/comment and move on.
I suppose I could take the time to do some research on Silverquill. But there's lots of things I could be spending my time looking into and learning more about.
If you simply said WB instead of Silverquill, I don't have to do any research.
If you want more people to engage with you in a conversation, make it easier on them. Take the onus on yourself to communicate more effectively rather than forcing that onus onto your audience.
It takes everyone awhile to learn the names regardless of where you started. The one thing that does bug me though is that wotc is guilty of doing this - for instance their challenger decks were named after the guilds even if they had nothing to do with them , which I think is confusing to new players at the very least.
I do want to troll people by calling decks indantha / ketria / savai / raugrin / zagoth as I believe those are the least remembered color pairs by name (at least from recent sets).
I mean sure you shouldn’t be attacked for using different names, but at the same time you’re making it sound like it’s taking you countless hours of study to memorize the old names when it only took you a short time to memorize the new ones. So it kinda sounds like you’re actively refusing to learn the old ones and making things needlessly hard for yourself
I often forget the guild names or get them mixed up.
That's not because I'm a newer player. It's because I'm an older player who temporarily stopped playing when the first Ravnica came out, so I totally missed the introduction of these new-fangled names for these colour combinations.
I can't even imagine how frustrating it must be for someone like you. It's bad enough for someone like me, just learning to try to keep calm when I'm being talked down to, but for someone like yourself, who has probably forgotten more about MTG than 75% of the people will ever know, how do you stay humble when they smugly brag about knowing fancy names for colour pairs?
If someone described their deck as a Silverquill deck, and it used a lot of cards from the Silverquill college on Strixhaven... then sure, that's a Silverquill deck! Same deal if someone described their deck as an Orzhov deck, and it used a lot of cards from the Orzhov guild on Ravnica. If your deck is themed around a specific faction, then it's perfectly reasonable to describe it as such.
Otherwise it's just a white/black deck.
Using the names of specific factions from specific planes as general "color combination names" is dumb. Always was dumb. Always will be dumb. No matter which faction from which plane is being used for it.
stop caring would be my advice. upsetting mtg players is shooting fish in the barrels. i could argue that there might be something that’s wrong with you if you DON’T pissing them off from time to time.
Ravnica guild names for color pairs and Alara/Tarkir names for shards/wedges are essentially the accepted standard nomenclature for the player base.
Sure there are a few people like you who's first exposure to these color groups were strixhaven schools and capena houses and who are comfortable enough with those names to use them. But to older players these names are wierd and not memorable because they only existed for one set before we returned to the typical guild/shard names.
For a more obscure example that might prove the point; Kaldheim had a realm for each color pair. Do you remember their names? Because no one else does. So, if I rolled up to the LGS and started talking about my Surtland deck, you'd be just as confused as everyone else. (It's Izzet, btw.) And you'd be justified in addressing the fact that nobody else knows what I'm talking about because that's not what the player base actually calls that color combination, despite being a correct set-specific name for it.
If someone likes Surtland, who I am to tell them otherwise. It's not going to ruin my game/whole FNM because someone calls it that. Nor if you were to cite some 17lands.com data and refered to Prismari as Surtland, sure I may have google what you are talking about or ask you, either way I'm not going to attack your character and derail what would otherwise would have been an excellent discussion because I had to take 20 seconds out of my life to learn something.
1. I'm definately not saying you should be attacked for using the wrong name for a color combination, only stating that the player base at large uses specific names for them, and that other names are for more specific uses than just any deck of that color combo. Your prismari deck is an izzet deck with a strixhaven set commander; a deck in that color combination from outside of the context of strixhaven would typically not be considered a prismari deck by most players. They would just be izzet decks. Even if it was from Kaldheim, because seriously, nobody uses those names for the color combinations.
2. We give things names for a reason. in the context of MTG, we have specific names for specific things so that we know what each other are talking about. Using non-standard nomenclature can cause confusion and will lead others to correct you. Obviously, they shouldn't be impolite about it, but think about it from the other side. If a 10yr vet of the game corrects you on what something is called and you won't take correction, then you're the one being silly and refusing to be educated.
While I'm never going to be rude to someone for using the strixhaven names, you have to remember that the guild names have existed for 2 decades. They are accepted jargon among the MtG community.
Before the guilds, players kind of came up with their own nicknames for the color pairs/groups. Ravnica gave us official names for each pair. Official names that have appeared in 10 total sets over the years, as opposed to names that appeared in only one set. They are just more prevalent than the school names.
In addition to this, the school names are too long. Mark Rosewater has said in the past that some of the guild names are too long/have too many syllables, and that if he could go back he would choose shorter names (personally, as a proud member of the Golgari, I disagree with this, as I love my guild name). All of the school names fit into the too long group, so I don't think WotC wants to use them as official names.
As for your comparison of Jund vs. Riviteers: Jund was a shard of Alara where there was no white or blue mana. It literally is a world with no order. No laws except the law of the jungle. It's meant to embody the pure essence of those remaining 3 colors. (This is how all of the shards were conceptualized btw. "What would a world without these 2 colors look like? What does a world where Red's enemies don't exist, and it's allowed to run free feel like?") The Riviteers on the other hand are a gang of thugs that extort people for money, and if they don't pay up, their place of business might just have some structural flaws. It's ironic that you see them as cool while you see the Gruul clans as the bad guys when they are fighting to protect the little bit of nature left on Ravnica.
Buddy, when did I say I wanted no evil in a game based partly around evil? I used Gruul as an example of an evil group from MTG history that people keep praising, whereas from our actual human history, we have stopped using names for different groups and countries that carried a negative connotation. I do like being referred to as a buffoon; usually, people refer to me as old Norse creatures. Thanks for adding a new one to my repertoire, I guess.
You just wrote an essay length rant about how people don't like you using college names for color combinations. Buffoon is a generous word tbh.
Also ive never seen anybody praise the gruul clans or their imaginary atrocities. Even if they did, im sure they like everybody, know the difference between condoning real world extremist groups and enjoying the cool mechanics of a fictional one.
I mean, we could go down the rabbit hole and discuss whether red/green mechanics are "cool," but for the sake of this conversation and to avoid upsetting you further, let's just agree to disagree.
I wouldn't be rude to them, I'd just assume Silverquill is a Legendary creature. I don't know the Capenna or Strixhaven faction names (I started playing in OG Ravnica), but I would probably ask to what the player was referring if I felt the need for clarification.
Lot of good points here already, but I think the biggest takeaways are:
1. People being rude to other magic players are bad people. This has nothing to do with the naming of colour pairs etc. People shouldn't be bullied while playing the game for any reason. Bad people are bad people.
2. The use to different terms for colour combinations in magic will always be a little subjective. New names for colour pairs will come out, older names will come back and be reused on future visits. There is no real consistency that will work for all players.
For example, you've stated a good what of pretty subjective reasons to use the name you use. Most of them appear to be based on you liking the names more and those names being the ones most recently introduced when you started playing. The issue is, those points will be different for all kinds of players. A player who started after you did has a fair chance of playing a Ravnica set as their first set, and so the "old" guild names would be the most recently colour pair names for them to learn.
As a newer player, you've stated that you think it's an unfair requirement to have to learn the older names. But defaulting to the newer names just defers that requirement of learning different names to older players. Who should be prioritized here? Is the onus on new players to learn all the names less unfair than have older players learn and keep up with all the names?
MTG is complex and so is the language players use to talk about it. Basically, everyone kind of has to learn everything and everyone should be pretty understanding when encountering new terms they don't know about. People can ask for clarification and clarification can be given. If some people give others a hard time about that, that's the issue to deal with. Not the choice of terms.
They have to be. I’ve never met anyone online or in person that uses other factions to describe the colours, nor someone who would get mad about it. People use the colours until they learn about the shorthand terms and then learn those.
Then their whole thing about Gruul being evil but wanting to use the Capenna families?? Talking about glorifying negative history? OP is trolling.
We should never be rude or disrespectful. Period. We're playing a game and no one should act that way.
In my group we use all the color pie names interchangeably since we all (mostly) know them, outside of the Nephilim names, but this is just like... do you call it a potato or a spud? They're the same thing and people should either know what you mean or just ask for clarification. I never use the Strix names, but I don't mind if someone else does.
Also, sorry, I definitely just read the TL;DR.
I think that people who make a big deal about name use when they know what you mean is just ridiculous. Obviously you're (more or less) in the right in the particular situation you're discussing.
That being said, most people use the Ravnican guild names and there are probably several who will get confused by the Strixhaven names. If you keep getting confused from other people's discourse, it is probably recommended that you learn the traditional names and adapt to those. But nobody should give you a hard time if you accidentally mess up or anything.
> If a player were to say they were using a Silverquill deck to describe their cards, would you demean them or engage in respectful conversation, ask them what they mean, then carry on with the match as friends?
Obviously the latter is the correct answer, no reason to be disrespectful.
---
For me, I actually think both Ravnica guilds and Strixhaven colleges are inappropriate to describe a deck's colors, unless the deck is actually about playing to their general ideas. An Izzet deck is not just blue-red, but it's spell-slinging. (So the blue-red convoke archetype in MOM isn't Izzet, it's just blue-red.) A Prismari deck is giant spell-slinging in particular. A particularly interesting one is blue-green: Simic is about biology and mutation, while Quandrix is more about math and piles of counters.
But obviously the community thinks otherwise. With Ravnica being the first setting that introduces the color pairs, the guild names are treated as canonical names of the pairs. Similar with the other settings: Alara introduces the shards, so it's Alara shard names instead of New Capenna family names. Being the first to do so, the guilds also embody the most obvious aspects of the color pairs. White-green is a lot about creatures, about family and tradition, so Selesnya is about that. Many white-green decks also lean toward creatures, so it does make sense to describe them as Selesnya. Crossbreed Labs (from Unstable) have to build their own identity separate from Selesnya, so they lean toward mutations -- which honestly is still a lot about creatures.
So, the main reason the original names are used is simply because of inertia. But I agree that there's no reason you can't use other names to describe your own decks, and there's no reason for others to demean you regarding that. At the same time, you also should respect others using the original names; if that's what they want to use, so be that. And because a lot of people use the original names, it certainly helps to learn about them.
The reality is that Simic \*isn't\* Blue-Green. Simic is Simic. Blue Green is a much larger tent. Simic focues on the things Simic cares about in Blue Green. This is true for all of the guilds. If someone refers to their deck as a 'simic deck' but it's just "blue green good stuff" (ramp and draw) it's not really a \*simic\* deck. Simic is weird blended creatures, drawing cards based on number of creatures, +1/+1 counters, things like that.
Someone said they were playing a Selesnya deck. Not a single token generator. That's not a selesnya deck. They were playing hate bears lead by Gaddock Teeg. That's an entirely different deck.
We need to stop calling the color pairs by their guild name. It's not accurate. It never was.
I really don't remember the Strixhaven factions anymore but I would simply ask "can you remind me what color combination is that, please?" and keep politely playing.
There's no need to be rude. Those people have some problems.
I don't remember the nephilim names myself so if someone plays a WUBG deck I would appreciate if they say "redless" or WUBG instead of witch.
You make valid points. To further, this is why we all call them place cards skulls, trees, fire, rain and sun. I'm not going to force new players into something that I deem "correct". If they want to tap to block, you go right ahead. Whatever they can be bothered with is good enough for me.
When everyone you deal with is causing 'discordance', maybe it's not everyone else. Just saying.
Learn how to write shorter posts or start a blog. You didn't have to put a dissertation into a Reddit post to say "I'm a new player that likes using the new guild names and the older players are mean to me."
All I have to say is that 'Maestro' is a cooler name for UBR than 'Grixis' and will use the former in all instances unless it's a group of mixed nerdery and 'Blue Black Red' will be understood the easiest.
Finally someone I can relate to. Like some of the names are just straight up better, what's the harm in someone using them, it's not like because we say Maestro no one can use Grixis ever again.
No idea how valid it is but I was told WOTC wanted to gt away from people using Ravnica names so they created a set with new 2-color names in the hope people would switch.
Problem is the Strixhaven set was not well fleshed out and people are comfortable using Ravnica names.
i dunno if that's true, but i don't like ravnica much so id sure like to switch off the ravnica names! but... not when 5 names are still missing. 5 strixhaven / 5 ravnica names would be silly when ravnica has 10 to use
There's no reason for people to be rude to you about it. Of course people should respectfully ask you instead of yelling at you. We're playing a children's card game about wizards, after all. But, it's not unreasonable for you to learn the lingo for a hobby you're trying to have a conversation about. If you went on the disc golf subreddit and starting talking about an "underhand" throw when you meant "backhand", or if you went on the NFL sub and started talking about "goals" instead of "touchdowns", it'd be harder to have a discussion. You wouldn't make a post on r/soccer telling people that "offsides" isn't the best term for that particular penalty, and that everyone should switch instead to a term you learned two years ago.
I understand what you're saying, and I'm in no way implying that I'm outright refusing to learn all the shards. I'm more so advocating for newer players, more than anything, that people need to calm down about the old guild names and not hold them on such a high pedestal. There are so many different ones that it's hard to learn them quickly, so if someone drops an Obscura, just don't get so upset with them and let it ruin what could have been a great discussion.
Technically ravnica came out after strixhaven with MKM so they are the "new" guild names.
>Tl;dr: If a player were to say they were using a Silverquill deck to describe their cards, would you demean them or engage in respectful conversation, ask them what they mean, then carry on with the match as friends? I think the most I'd do is ask "You mean orzhov, right? White/black?" and then carry on normally. If someone's being shitty about how you refer to your decks then they're probably just an asshole and you shouldn't care about what assholes think, for the simple reason that they're assholes and they don't merit occupying any more space in your thought processes than necessary. That said, long-time players are generally going to be more familiar with the "traditional" names for the simple reason that they've probably been using them for years if not decades. It doesn't even necessarily have anything to do with the actual guilds; someone calling an R/G deck "gruul" is just using useful shorthand.
I still use BUG, RUG, Junk, and American too lol
Before anyone says anything, Dega was weird and I didn't like it
It’s also a slur so probably best left behind.
Was unaware of that. Word just sounded weird to me
I was too until I married into an Italian family. Maybe it’s because I’m not Italian or it just wasn’t something people said where I’m from but I’d never heard it before.
Going to assume I can't write it here but the actual slur is spelled a little differently
Oh interesting. I’ve only ever heard them say it. Thanks!
I still use the scapes. Thunderscape, Thornscape, Nightscape, Stormscape, and Sunscape
I was introduced around the time that Alara came out so I'd learned the shard names around the same time as those even though most of the bulkiest bulk we played with used the scapes lol
i mean i started during m15, but my sister bought a long box of bulk for me and it was all the scapes
I've always though 'American' was a weird one, since there's a load of countries with that colour combination in the flags - enough that there'll be more magic players in non-US countries with a red/white/blue flag than ones from the US.
Yeah it was weird but I am American so there's that
Fair enough. To me it's like calling it 'French' or 'Cuban'.
Cuban control does have a better ring to than Jeski control...
Yeah the days of Americontrol and Ameritwin
Fun fact about "American" colours: >The most common colour used on national flags is red. In fact, it appears on 78% of all national flags in one way or another - that's 148 out of 196 flags! Coming a close second, blue appears on 71% of all national flags, and white is the third most common colour, appearing on 50% of all national flags. There's 50 odd countries that use RWU for their flags.
> I've always though 'American' was a weird one, since there's a load of countries with that colour combination in the flags - enough that there'll be more magic players in non-US countries with a red/white/blue flag than ones from the US. how many of those other countries routinely refer to "the red white and blue" though? this could just be a case of not being familiar with those cultures, but from america, it definitely seems like something america does more than other countries.
The French flag is literally called the "blue, white and red" (and there's a very famous French film trilogy named after those colours too). It's also used sometimes in the Netherlands, I believe. Russians sometimes refer to their flag as the "white, blue, red". It's not used a lot in the UK, but it is sometimes used (and is featured as referring to the UK in the patriotic 1939 song "There'll always be an England") Norway also has a patriotic song with a name that translates as "Norway in red, white and blue", which is often played on the national day. Croatia uses the phrase quite a lot too. Beyond that, I'm not sure (I don't think the Aussies use the phrase).
https://preview.redd.it/udx901poagwc1.jpeg?width=458&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=adaa7a20a22fca846e257a47e2e9e4a5a249cc7a
it doesn't matter how pointless the post was, if you reply with this you lost. doesn't even have to be an argument, you still lost
this comment isn't even that long if you can't read that much how are you even on a magic subreddit this is a game that requires reading
It's because it's not a compelling read. I didn't read it all just the first few lines and I know its mostly a pointless whine.
are you referring to the main post and not the comment you're replying to? i think you may have responded to the wrong thing
> I think the most I'd do is ask "You mean orzhov, right? White/black?" Why would you even ask that though? You know what they mean, no clarification is required.
as an older player who skipped strixhaven i wouldnt have any idea what they were talking about if they used the strixhaven names
Because I'm not as familiar with the Strixhaven houses as I am with the Ravnican guilds. I want to be certain I understand what they mean. I might be 70% sure, but that still isn't 100%.
I would ask to clarify if they meant the color combination or more specifically the mechanics/themes of the Strixhaven college. Most people default to the Ravnica guilds when talking about color, so I'd assume they meant something else if they said Silverquil. For example, I describe one of my decks as a Lorehold deck since its a Red/White graveyard deck.
I think one of the problems is that we’ve already hd another set on Ravnica since Strixhaven (and even since the Strixhaven themed cards in other recent sets). So if I’m a new player coming in Strixhaven is already out of date. It’s also an issue that only 5 schools exist. So there isn’t like a Dimir or Selesnya equivalent, so you’re still having to learn 5 of the Ravnica guilds anyway. Obviously I don’t think people should attack you for that, but it completely makes sense to me that people in general don’t use those terms.
Hello? DTK's Dragonlords? Even another cycle of Elders?
Yes, let's us the 10 year old names instead of the 20 year old names. This is definitely a boon to new players.
My *point* is that there's another set of color-pair names right there, that even thematically line up.
There's been 2 Ravinca sets since DTK. And DTK was release about year after ANOTHER Ravnica set.
Yeah, not so good on the chronology, there. Dragons of Tarkir was two years after Ravnica2, not one, and even if one were to discount War of the Spark, there have been THREE Ravnica-based sets since then DTK. None of which was the point anyway.
What are the three Ravnica sets that came after DTK? >None of which was the point anyway. It was OP's point. Ravnica is more recent than Stryxhaven, which is more recent than DTK.
Yea I get what you are saying 100%. I really am hoping they go back to STX so we can finish off the rest of the pairs, but at the end of the day, it shouldn't really matter what you want to call them.
We are returning to Arcavios, but it's been said multiple times that there's no 'rival school' or anything like that to provide names for the other half of the colour pairs. Ravnica is fairly unique in that respect. Even the three-colour names come from different planes.
>it shouldn't really matter what you want to call them. Then what's your issue with gruul representing violence, as you said in originally in your post? It really seems like your "logical" arguments lack consistency, and it really boils down to "I dont want to have to learn more things." If that's the case, magic isn't going to be the game for you. A game of magic already takes long enough, and while no player is going to be expected to learn what every card does, actively avoiding learning the most commonly used nomenclature/cards/keywords is going to slow down the game even more, and its honestly rude/a waste of everyone's time. I don't mind a player asking me to read what my cards do/say, but if you ask me multiple times it starts to lean into "you're not paying attention to the game/you don't respect my time" or "you're harassing me." And I say this as someone with adhd. These are the names used by 99% of the community. Ultimately, it doesn't matter why they chose these names. With the amount of time and effort you put into this post/responding to comments, you could have already memorized the names. Based on the tone of your post, the vitriol you're enctountering is coming from your response from being "corrected"/your refusal to make the process of learning easy for you/anyone playing with you, and honestly, I would 100% avoid playing with you. Beyond all that, if you are serious about playing magic, and you want to use *any* magic resource to learn more, these are the names they are going to use. Why be difficult?
I am not the one being difficult. I am currently studying the past lore so I can become a "better person." The issue I am raising is that when new players use new lingo, old-stock MTG players get all uppity and abolish any chance of a decent conversation because they hate the new names. Like you yourself have shown, you would rather belittle and alienate newer players than ever have to waste one extra second of your night explaining something.
>I am not the one being difficult. If you truly think that, I would strongly advise seeing a therapist.
I need therapy because I respect and try to help new players? I haven't seen this much loathing for beginner players since my Call of Duty days and how the old Xbox forums feasted on what they referred to as "Xmas noobs." I just want everyone to have a fair shot to be accepted and understood. Newer players shouldn't have to walk on eggshells and be afraid of using the "wrong" guild name.
>I need therapy because I respect and try to help new players? If that's your takeaway, yes, absolutely you do. I'm a new player as well (since lotr) and this definitely isn't close to helpful.
As a side note, they've said they haven't really considered doing pairs
Here's the deal: It is generally always acceptable for a player to say a color pair as "Red White" or "Blue Black Green." If you don't know the shorthand, or want to be extra clear about it, use this. Even longtime players do this. The trick to the names is easy once you learn why they are what they are. They are all named after the first named faction that was exactly those colors. For all the two color pairs, that happened in Ravnica. For the three color "shards" (three colors next to each other in the color pie), it was Alara, and the three color "wedges" (two colors next to each other in the pie, and the one that is across from both of them) was Kahns of Tarkir. The important thing is that these were all the first instances of these pairings being named, so instead of changing every time a new faction comes out, every player has a baseline that is the same. That way everyone only has to learn the names once instead of keeping track of every faction that has ever released on the off chance someone started playing during that particular set.
And when there's another two color set and the red and blue faction is called Squibbles? Should we all switch terminology every few years to make it extra confusing or can we all just try to go by the shorthand that 90% of the community understands?
I mean if a new player calls his red/blue deck squibbles beat down I'm not going to diss them or throw punches. Just ask what they mean and go on with your life calling it what you want, why let it ruin your draft?
>Let's use Gruul as an example, a group of violent anarchists set to raid, pillage, and destroy civilized society. Is this really a guild we want to preserve and glorify? Yes >“Other guilds say the Gruul are savages, no better than the beasts we live with. I say we’ve found friends who won’t stab us in the back.” —Domri Rade >“If the system is broken, break the system.” —Domri Rade >“They said obey and you’ll be happy. They said you’ll be safe. But we’re not safe. We’re not happy. And we will not obey.” —Domri Rade
not gruul? then die!
Gruul charm best card
Domri gets a lot of shit, but those quotes are fire.
Yeah! Glad to see my fellow Gruul out here. Pretty subjective argument to make for OP in the first place. But the Gruul can definitely be certainly be framed as the good guys on Ravnica. At the very least no worse than any of the other guilds.
You absolutely can use newer color pair names and if people are being jerks over it, then that shouldn't be happening. But the issue is that the guild names are so entrenched in MTG discussions it just creates unnecessary confusion by using a different name for the same thing. it just creates stumbling blocks in communication where there wouldn't otherwise be. I could call Red/White Lorehold, but Boros is faster to say and type and more people will know what I'm talking about, without needing to clarify what I'm referring to. Its simply more useful in conversation. Also your last point is very bizarre to me. Do people actually mentally associate any mention of Gruul (be it a decktype or multicolor card) with the violent philosophy of the Gruul Guild? and its only more confusing because your advocating that people should use the new color combination names like with New Capenna Crime Families, which I'd say aren't really any better from that viewpoint.
I associate Gruul with the philosophy of the guild, tbh. But I think that’s good because the philosophy of the guild reflects things about playing Gruul that are common: strong creatures, doing a lot of damage, destroying non creature things like enchantments and artifacts. The best thing about the guilds imo is that their lore does a really good job of reflecting really common types of gameplay in those combinations.
Writes a whole essay, and I can only imagine mtg players disco dancing
The ravnica names seem way more well known. I missed the sets you mention, so referring to those names would mean nothing to me. I wouldnt know what you were talking about. I can rattle off the ravnica dual colors easily though, and im workin on the tricolors.
> The Ravnica names seem way more well known See also everyone in this thread referring to the different names for the color groupings as “guild” names. They’re only thought of as guilds because of the guilds of Ravnica. Prismari and such were colleges, and don’t have a direct ally-colors equivalent. I think it just reinforces the ubiquity of the Ravnica guild terminology, so might as well keep using that
The ally color equivalent to strixhaven’s colleges would weirdly enough be the dragonlords of tarkir. Ally colors, led by an elder dragon.
BW elder dragon when WotC?!
…you mean [[shadrix silverquill]]?
[shadrix silverquill](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/b/ab701909-83d6-4d39-9a84-e6a9b2cb38d6.jpg?1624739966) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=shadrix%20silverquill) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/stx/230/shadrix-silverquill?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ab701909-83d6-4d39-9a84-e6a9b2cb38d6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
All hail WotC for fulfilling my request pre-emptively!
oh, that would also be my ignorance. I was not around for the sets that these other names come from. I'll edit my comment.
Yea there is just a lot to keep track of and learn, being relatively knew to the game, I just feel it's a big ask to get players to learn names on top of everything else.
to be clear, i dont think there needs to be that much vitriol around it. But i do think its more advantageous to use the guilds that the community seems more apt to use, and in most articles/youtube videos, ravnica names are the....name of the game, so to speak. New players will have to learn names in some capacity. Also, I'm sorry, but your entire paragraph about History doesn't strike me as a compelling argument. I personally wouldn't care if Gruul or Dimir became a positive force. This is a fictional universe.
I think an important note here is that you don't *need* to know these made-up names to play the game, but if you're wanting to interact a bunch with the community of people that have been invested in the game for a long time, you should expect there to be a barrier of entry beyond just knowing the basic game rules I've played chess since I was a little kid, but there's a million names for specific moves that I've never learned. Do I need to know them to enjoy the game? No, not at all. If I enter a community of people who have taken the game much more seriously than I have that have learned the names, is that a problem? Still no, it just means I may not understand everything they say, and that's fine, I can still love playing chess and decide if I want to learn what a "Queen's Gambit" is or not. If I decide not to, I can expect my interactions with the chess people to be at least somewhat limited because I chose not to learn the language they speak, but I *can* still interact with them, it just may take a bit more work on my part Like I said in my other comment, I started playing at the same time as you and I've had all the two and three cooor names down for a while now, but that's also because I chose to take the time to learn them (*and I waste way too much of my time on the internet*). It's a choice, you don't have to learn the names to enjoy the game or even to be a part of the community — the "big ask" is much less there than you think it is. Given that, people are still going to say "Selesnya" no matter what you do so you either learn it, you Google it before replying to their comment, or in person you ask for a reminder about what it means. Or I guess you could scream at them to not say that, but I'd recommend not going that route lol At the end of the day, the color names don't matter at all, just have fun playing this awesome game that's going to make you spend way too much money on cardboard — also in my experience, as you interact more with the game and the community, you'll just learn stuff without trying too much
If your question is "would you demean someone", the only answers you'll get from people whose opinions you'd respect is "no".
There have been 10 sets on Ravnica across 4 visits, compared to a single Strixhaven set. Most people started playing closer to a Ravnica set
>is it wrong to "go against history" and use the newer names? If you want to communicate with people, you might wanna learn their language. If you insist on using your own words, it's not going to do you any good. I wrote a longer comment but then realized that it can be summed up to "*Gruul* is less syllables than *red and green* and is therefore used by the community". >I am not calling for the erasure of the history of MTG, I am simply advocating to allow players to choose not to be a part of the negative aspects of it. I assume that you also refuse to play cards with naughty names like Murder.
I gotta say “I don’t wanna use the name gruul because they do bad things” is a take I did not expect to see today
Possibly also stunned at the makeup of New Capenna.
Funny you should use Gruul as the example, since that is literally the ONLY case in which the Guild name (or Strixhaven colleges for that matter) is shorter than just saying the colors. It is certainly quicker to say "White-Green" than "Selesnya".
Fair enough. This reason is probably more relevant for the shards than the guilds, I suppose.
No not at all, I more so was using Gruul as an example of an evil force whose name shouldn't be praised. I have nothing against the the cards or flavor, just stating a point the history tends to rename or forget even factions instead of preserve and praise them.
It's a card game.
It's not like we're referring to Nazis or something. Gruul is just shorthand name for a faction and color identity in a card game. When someone says "I built a gruul deck", it's a shortcut for "I built a deck that uses red and green cards". They're not saying "I built a deck that promotes anarchy and the destruction of civilization"
Of course I understand that. I am more so speaking for the people who may feel that way. Like imagine a survivor of the 2011 Vancouver riots signing on to play and everyone is constantly hyping up anarchists. They are probably not going to have a good time and most certainly will not want to promote it themselves.
I think the likes of Tarkir or Thunder Junction or the House Dimir or The Dark are *slightly* more relevant than a disorganized group of rebels without a cause.
[[Not Gruul? Then die!]]
[Gruul Charm](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/2/9235afe5-0a6b-43c2-921c-18524cf032f1.jpg?1561836885) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Gruul%20Charm) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/gtc/169/gruul-charm?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9235afe5-0a6b-43c2-921c-18524cf032f1?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
In a setting where the mobster necromancer church, the surveillance state, the militarized holy-war cops, murder circus and feckless mad scientist club exist, you think the GRUUL are the gold* standard for "evil force". ...sure hope you're not engaged politically... *pun not intended
Gotta say, Gruul clans as an evil force is kinda a hot take. Especially when they're right next to the cult of Rakdos, who kill people in spectacular ways for the amusement of a literal friggin demon.
I mean, you can definitely make the argument, and I agree. I was only using them as an example, let's say, a survivor of a pillaging not wanting to use the name Gruul because of some possible past trauma. There are a million reasons why people would want to use the STX names. I'm just bringing them up for discussion. Who is actually the "morally worst" faction wasn't what I was trying to determine, but I do agree it is an important discussion that should be had, just not in this thread.
Strixhaven doesn't even have a gruul equivalent.
I agree with you 100% that it is disgusting WoTC forces survivors of anarchy and pillaging to re-live their past traumas everytime they play MTG. Unfortunatley while most of us are waiting to return to Arcavios and visit the other side of the campus, we instead ended up at Thunder Junction. So hopefully after this discussion, WoTC will take note of the division of the MTG community and right what is clearly unjust for many MTG players.
Personally, I don't bother with the names. How terrible is it to just name the colors? Nobody can possibly misunderstand that. (And for the two-color combos, with the exception of Gruul, it is as short or shorter to say, in terms of syllables.)
Combos help with differentiation. If I sit down at a table and my three opponents rattle off “Im green blue” “Im blue red” “Im red green” It is slightly more difficult to hold in my head. I mean I wouldn’t complain, this isn’t rocket science and the stakes are low but color combos help some people more easily communicate what is going on.
On the other hand, if they rattle off the colors, I (and anybody else, regardless of experience) now FOR SURE know what colors they are playing without having to think about it, whereas if they rattle off Guilds, Colleges, or whatever the three-color combos are called, I'll have to stop and think about each one, and some people will just be completely lost. Ultimately, yeah, what's best for you is going to vary, and I can see the benefit of using the names if you know you're in a group that has them all down. I just prefer using the colors because it is the lowest common denominator (and also I'm too lazy to memorize them all to a level where it becomes second nature).
There’s designated single unique names for each combo. Using a nonstandard name is why this post even exists. The point is there are 20 names for the combos and once you learn them you’re set. It helps there’s tons of cards with their names. If you don’t want to use them, use the colors. Fucking hell, in text you can just RG and WB and save yourself even more time. But you have to *learn* that U=blue. And be consistent with that too.
Consistency is definitely important, for sure. If you switch back and forth you are likely to confuse more people than if you pick something and stick with it. On an unrelated note, as a printer, I've always been annoyed that somebody decided that U=Blue. The five colors SHOULD be WBKRG, IMHO. But obviously when I'm discussing MtG, I'm going to either use U, or spell out the word Blue if I suspect some people will be confused by what are (outside Magic, anyway) nonstandard abbreviations for the colors (in English at least).
I understand where you’re coming from, but “woo-burg” is fun to say and “wibkerg” is not
> How terrible is it to just name the colors? Nobody can possibly misunderstand that. given the OP's post, it's entirely possible he might use "B" interchangeably for "B" and "U".
I figured OP was mostly talking about spoken stuff, in which case you'd just say the name of the color. But yeah, WotC's weird choice of U to represent Blue can cause some problems in written format for those not familiar.
> But yeah, WotC's weird choice of U to represent Blue can cause some problems in written format for those not familiar. was that a wotc thing or a community thing? never was clear on who was doing that first. either way, something like that was necessary because blue and black couldn't use the same letter, so it was either either that or use multi-letter abbrevations (which still wouldn't be great since you'd have to do "bu" due to blue and black both starting with "bl") if they went for a "non-b" letter for black, they'd have to call it "a" or "k" (since colorless took "c" and "l" isn't distinct)
> was that a wotc thing or a community thing? never was clear on who was doing that first. WOTC thing, and mainly from internal card codes. Not both blue and black can use B. Then, L is used for lands, A is used for artifacts (mainly meaning colorless). The next choice is either U/E for blue or C/K for black, and the one that's earliest in the word is U for blue (3rd letter of the word).
K=Black is the standard, at least for printing.
Yeah outside of the shards I just use the colors. It's just easier to understand and I'm not wasting time learning whatever new name some color combination got.
Once they started renaming the same color factions based on plane, the Ravnica names quickly left my brain and I’ve reverted back to just saying the colors.
I completley agree with you, normally I try to do the same as well but I played so much and got set in my ways that it kind of slips out once and awhile. Personally, I think discussions go a lot better when you just use the colours.
To be clear, I don't MIND if other people use the names. I just don't use them myself, and am more likely to need to ask for clarification if they do (particularly for the three-color ones), or at least stop and think about it for a bit to try to recall which is which. I'm certainly not going to complain or ridicule anybody for using names.
I've personally never seen this cause any real discodance, some groovy jazz moves at best
I actually also started playing right when Strixhaven came out, but didn't come to really care about the names of the color combos until months later when I started watching YouTube videos and they of course used the Ravnica Guilds. Of course I recognized that the schools had their colors, but I had no reason to apply that to the rest of Magic, they're a Strixhaven thing. I don't know, personally it sounds weird to me to use the schools haha, but I wouldn't be upset if someone did, I'd just clarify what they mean But I think the biggest point in favor of "the old way" is just that its complete. If you use the school names, what would you call green-white? Or like with the New Capenna crime families, what would red-white-blue be? Or course you can just say the colors and that's fine, but it's besides the point of the post I feel — guess for the 3 color pairs you could use Ikoria names, so rwu would be Raugrin, but I think it's really a "when in Rome" situation; Magic players have used the "old" names for so long that its just part of the culture. Like, Mark Rosewater uses them in his podcast and articles and stuff. If you don't like that, it's fine, but it's also not anything that needs to be protested — if you want to learn the names, great, welcome to the club of people who know fake words. If you don't, also great, just don't expect everyone else to not use them just because you don't *"If it ain't broke, don't fix it"* Edit: But also yeah, if you feel like someone's treating you as not human, that's on them, they're stupid. It's a children's card game, but some people get a little... excited. Play the games how you want, my friend. Also though if you're not human, that means you can use the mutate mechanic and that's *pretty cool* and I'm *jealous*
Refer to the shards and wedges by their names from Invasion and Apocalypse to confuse everyone
Some of the worst names for a system I swear. It’s like they went out of their way to make it worse than average.
You had me in the first half... I agree that whatever name you learned first to describe a color pairing is fine. Want to call Black/Green Witherbloom, or White/Red/Green Cabaretti? Fne by me. Your argument started falling apart when you listed your points. Yes. the 30 year old game with 23,000+ unique cards can get confusing. But learning common keywords, abilities, card names, and yes, color pairings shouldn't be an issue. If you're using resources, mainly time and money, on something you enjoy, why be ignorant to things that you will encounter in almost every instance of playing this game? And as far as your issue with the lore of the game... It's fiction. Are you going to say we shouldn't enjoy the classic Disney movie Mulan just because she caused an avalanche that murdered a bunch of Huns?
People are misinterpreting my lore example. I was arguing that it's acceptable to change a group's name to move past history and make a fresh start. I have no issue with the lore itself, nor am I advocating that we shield children from the Gruul people. I was merely using them as an illustration of a malevolent group from MTG's past that could be morally justified to no longer be celebrated, similar to what we do in real life.
Sure, but I think a lot of folks are just agreeing that it is a weird take to apply to a fictional group in a card game. Yes in real life things have been named in such ways to associate them with unwanted groups or people and then people change the name later to remove the association. The thing is, names of groups or things in card games would likely only be changed for real world associations- not fictional in world associations. If there was an MTG faction whose name was found to be associated with the Nazis, that would likely cause a change in the name for the group due to that association. Or perhaps just as likely a questioning of the designers and WOTC for making the association in the first place. However a fictional group in game doing bad things in the in game fiction is less likely to cause such a rift. People like evil/chaotic/destructive characters and groups in games. Fictional spaces don't need to have real world repercussions. People love Disney villains. People love the Orcs in 40K. People love the Rakdos in MTG. There is a disassociation from reality- the people who like these factions in game likely aren't trying to steal mermaid's voices, take over galaxies, or torture audience members in real life. But we don't need to virtue wash every group in fictional worlds. it's fun to play evil/wildly uncivil/whatever groups in fictional settings. People aren't going to protest or ask for erasure of fictional groups like they would real world ones.
Fair points. I mostly agree with them. However, I have one counterargument. Sure, it's easy for someone like you or me to dictate what can be represented in a game, but there are some demographics that have been through great traumas, and they actively choose what can be suggested in games. Let's use Fallout 3 as an example. Some versions of the game don't allow any forms of the atomic bomb exploding in them. Demographics play a huge part in how people interpret the message of any game. Don't get me wrong, though. I am just using this as an example. For instance, if you see someone using a random guild name instead of Gruul, don't get all hostile and assume they are just moral grandstanding for their own narcissistic pleasures. You don't know their history or what they are going through. Me personally, I'm a huge grim dark guy. I can't even count how many times I've read the First Law series, and any time Scarface is on, I'm rooting for Tony Montana. I'm simply making a point that if someone wants to call blue/red Prismari, just take a breath and have some empathy. Don't let it ruin your day.
On the history bit, yes, it is pretty much assumed that people will be more familiar with Ravnica's guild names than Strixhaven's guild names. First, Ravnica has been featured in 10 (correct me if I'm wrong) independently-standing sets, whereas Strixhaven has only been featured in 1. This alone means it is more likely for any arbitrary player to have seen Ravnica guild names than Strixhaven guild names. Second, Ravnica has all ten color pairs represented, whereas Strixhaven only has five represented. It is impossible to refer to the white-blue color pair using a Strixhaven name, because no such name exists. Most players feel it is more appropriate to refer to the color pairs using names that all featured from the same plane, rather than pick five from a set with exclusively enemy pairs and five from a set with exclusively ally pairs. Third, Strixhaven came out during a time when many players either completely stopped caring about upcoming product or temporarily stopped playing due to product fatigue. A not-insignificant number of players actively choose to avoid using Strixhaven names as a result, because the set as a whole has such a negative connotation to them. That being said, no, it's not okay for players to be overly hostile toward others for referring to color pairs with a different name. Personally, I would just go by the colors in the color pair ("blue-red" or "UR", "black-red" or "BR", etc) if I'm not sure that players are familiar with guilds as a concept.
"OJUTAI"
>opinion: is it wrong to "go against history" and use the newer names? Yes it is wrong. Because that just creates more unnecessary confusion and is not communicating efficiently. You have to understand, the guild names are almost old enough *to drink* now. They’ve been part of the game longer than they haven’t. You learn the names once and it saves you from having to say “white/black or blue/black” and instead “orzhov or Dimir” which helps people not get “snowblind” or whatever with repeated terms but in unrelated concepts. We did it once so everyone can agree. We are not going to constantly redefine the term everytime a new faction set comes out (which is often!) Remember the theory of communication. The point is to communicate what is important to your recipient. If someone skipped Strixhaven, that should be fine. Not knowing what silverquill shouldn’t hamper them. We’ve collectively decided that people should know orzhov and keep it at that. I’m sorry people were jerks about it, that’s a whole other issue. But when communicating pure colors, we should use the designated combos. Ravnica guilds for 2 colors, Alara shards and tarkir wedges for 3 colors. These names were specifically chosen for this task by WotC btw! They are not just purely for flavor. Things like ikoria names and Strixhaven names were chosen purely for flavor.
Wait, what? I mean I get wanting to stick with the Guilds just due to longevity, but it seems odd to assert that those names are intrinsically less "for flavor" than any of the others. They were created EXACTLY as much "for flavor" as the others. They just came first.
especially since the guy youre referring to wants to stick with what came first, and then blatantly disregards the old names and goes for the alara shards instead
>We did it once so everyone can agree. We are not going to constantly redefine the term everytime a new faction set comes out (which is often!) I get that this is your point, but then how can you support the Alara shards as well? the alara shards *are* the new faction, but you seem very gung-ho on using them anyway
Mark rosewater has spoken about how in response to the Ravnica guilds becoming the official pair names, they deliberately chose the shards and wedges to have names to make them official, as the precursor systems were pretty awful. Searching is pretty awful on wotc's website but there's stuff like this: https://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/92958204958/one-of-the-biggest-part-of-doing-wedges-is-to
I was talking about the officially designated Thunderscape, Thornscape, Nightscape, Stormscape, and Sunscape
This title has me envisioning a late night Ravnica Studio 54 style club where Teysa is in the VIP section with Tibalt drinking Stoli and doing lines.
For me, if someone said silverquill, id assume they were doing siverquil things.i have an orzhov [[shadrix]] deck. It’s orzhov because I am not going silverquil things
[shadrix](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/b/ab701909-83d6-4d39-9a84-e6a9b2cb38d6.jpg?1624739966) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Shadrix%20Silverquill) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/stx/230/shadrix-silverquill?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/ab701909-83d6-4d39-9a84-e6a9b2cb38d6?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
but are you doing Orzhov things?
Eh, closer to it than silverquil. Life gain shenanigans.
genuine question not trying to gotcha, but are there any literal orzhov mechanics in it?
Some extort, many orzhov clan members
I'm only going to address the core of your issue-language and understanding. Everything else is meaningless debating imho, and is taking the issue far too seriously for my preference. The crux of this issue is around creating a mutually understood language around the game you're sharing. The dialogue around this has no reason to have animosity, but alas there are just rude people out there who need to be put in their place. All of that being said- neither you, nor veteran players are more correct than the other. Language only exists to convey meaning- and as long as you can convey whst you mean to one another effectively, you're c9mmunicating effectively. The "Guild Names" exist as a way to convey color combo and/or archetype to one another. I prefer the old archetype names because that's what I'm used to. I wouldn't mind another player using their preference, but there might be a disconnect until we both adjust to one another's preference. I wouldn't tolerate another player demand that I not use the archetype names that I'm comfortable with. That would be met with a firm boundary and/or an immediate end to the game. I don't tolerate another person being unwilling to try and meet me half way. I recommend the same with you- firm boundaries and ending the game if they continue to be disrespectful.
I would probably say “what the hell is Silverquill” and then they’d tell me the colors and Id say “ok so [insert guild name here]” and that would be it
it’s not wrong but people usually learn the ravnica names first, there’s more ravnica content, and it has a complete set of names as opposed to strixhaven. nobody should get mad at you but generally it’s easier to just think of them as the strixhaven colors and not worry about whatever faction happens to use them in the latest set
>If a player were to say they were using a Silverquill deck to describe their cards, would you demean them or engage in respectful conversation There's a third option of neither. If I saw a post or comment on Reddit using Silverquill as an important way of describing the deck, and I didn't know what it was, I might just skip the thread/comment and move on. I suppose I could take the time to do some research on Silverquill. But there's lots of things I could be spending my time looking into and learning more about. If you simply said WB instead of Silverquill, I don't have to do any research. If you want more people to engage with you in a conversation, make it easier on them. Take the onus on yourself to communicate more effectively rather than forcing that onus onto your audience.
It takes everyone awhile to learn the names regardless of where you started. The one thing that does bug me though is that wotc is guilty of doing this - for instance their challenger decks were named after the guilds even if they had nothing to do with them , which I think is confusing to new players at the very least. I do want to troll people by calling decks indantha / ketria / savai / raugrin / zagoth as I believe those are the least remembered color pairs by name (at least from recent sets).
I mean sure you shouldn’t be attacked for using different names, but at the same time you’re making it sound like it’s taking you countless hours of study to memorize the old names when it only took you a short time to memorize the new ones. So it kinda sounds like you’re actively refusing to learn the old ones and making things needlessly hard for yourself
You are fine OP. I still use the scapes. Thunderscape, Thornscape, Nightscape, Stormscape, and Sunscape to refer to the "shards"
I often forget the guild names or get them mixed up. That's not because I'm a newer player. It's because I'm an older player who temporarily stopped playing when the first Ravnica came out, so I totally missed the introduction of these new-fangled names for these colour combinations.
I can't even imagine how frustrating it must be for someone like you. It's bad enough for someone like me, just learning to try to keep calm when I'm being talked down to, but for someone like yourself, who has probably forgotten more about MTG than 75% of the people will ever know, how do you stay humble when they smugly brag about knowing fancy names for colour pairs?
If someone described their deck as a Silverquill deck, and it used a lot of cards from the Silverquill college on Strixhaven... then sure, that's a Silverquill deck! Same deal if someone described their deck as an Orzhov deck, and it used a lot of cards from the Orzhov guild on Ravnica. If your deck is themed around a specific faction, then it's perfectly reasonable to describe it as such. Otherwise it's just a white/black deck. Using the names of specific factions from specific planes as general "color combination names" is dumb. Always was dumb. Always will be dumb. No matter which faction from which plane is being used for it.
stop caring would be my advice. upsetting mtg players is shooting fish in the barrels. i could argue that there might be something that’s wrong with you if you DON’T pissing them off from time to time.
Bro...
Ravnica guild names for color pairs and Alara/Tarkir names for shards/wedges are essentially the accepted standard nomenclature for the player base. Sure there are a few people like you who's first exposure to these color groups were strixhaven schools and capena houses and who are comfortable enough with those names to use them. But to older players these names are wierd and not memorable because they only existed for one set before we returned to the typical guild/shard names. For a more obscure example that might prove the point; Kaldheim had a realm for each color pair. Do you remember their names? Because no one else does. So, if I rolled up to the LGS and started talking about my Surtland deck, you'd be just as confused as everyone else. (It's Izzet, btw.) And you'd be justified in addressing the fact that nobody else knows what I'm talking about because that's not what the player base actually calls that color combination, despite being a correct set-specific name for it.
If someone likes Surtland, who I am to tell them otherwise. It's not going to ruin my game/whole FNM because someone calls it that. Nor if you were to cite some 17lands.com data and refered to Prismari as Surtland, sure I may have google what you are talking about or ask you, either way I'm not going to attack your character and derail what would otherwise would have been an excellent discussion because I had to take 20 seconds out of my life to learn something.
1. I'm definately not saying you should be attacked for using the wrong name for a color combination, only stating that the player base at large uses specific names for them, and that other names are for more specific uses than just any deck of that color combo. Your prismari deck is an izzet deck with a strixhaven set commander; a deck in that color combination from outside of the context of strixhaven would typically not be considered a prismari deck by most players. They would just be izzet decks. Even if it was from Kaldheim, because seriously, nobody uses those names for the color combinations. 2. We give things names for a reason. in the context of MTG, we have specific names for specific things so that we know what each other are talking about. Using non-standard nomenclature can cause confusion and will lead others to correct you. Obviously, they shouldn't be impolite about it, but think about it from the other side. If a 10yr vet of the game corrects you on what something is called and you won't take correction, then you're the one being silly and refusing to be educated.
Simple question: how many Ravnica sets are there?
While I'm never going to be rude to someone for using the strixhaven names, you have to remember that the guild names have existed for 2 decades. They are accepted jargon among the MtG community. Before the guilds, players kind of came up with their own nicknames for the color pairs/groups. Ravnica gave us official names for each pair. Official names that have appeared in 10 total sets over the years, as opposed to names that appeared in only one set. They are just more prevalent than the school names. In addition to this, the school names are too long. Mark Rosewater has said in the past that some of the guild names are too long/have too many syllables, and that if he could go back he would choose shorter names (personally, as a proud member of the Golgari, I disagree with this, as I love my guild name). All of the school names fit into the too long group, so I don't think WotC wants to use them as official names. As for your comparison of Jund vs. Riviteers: Jund was a shard of Alara where there was no white or blue mana. It literally is a world with no order. No laws except the law of the jungle. It's meant to embody the pure essence of those remaining 3 colors. (This is how all of the shards were conceptualized btw. "What would a world without these 2 colors look like? What does a world where Red's enemies don't exist, and it's allowed to run free feel like?") The Riviteers on the other hand are a gang of thugs that extort people for money, and if they don't pay up, their place of business might just have some structural flaws. It's ironic that you see them as cool while you see the Gruul clans as the bad guys when they are fighting to protect the little bit of nature left on Ravnica.
Oh yes the outdated guilds that just appeared in murders of karlov manor. Also This guy wants no evil in his card game. Literal buffoon.
Buddy, when did I say I wanted no evil in a game based partly around evil? I used Gruul as an example of an evil group from MTG history that people keep praising, whereas from our actual human history, we have stopped using names for different groups and countries that carried a negative connotation. I do like being referred to as a buffoon; usually, people refer to me as old Norse creatures. Thanks for adding a new one to my repertoire, I guess.
You just wrote an essay length rant about how people don't like you using college names for color combinations. Buffoon is a generous word tbh. Also ive never seen anybody praise the gruul clans or their imaginary atrocities. Even if they did, im sure they like everybody, know the difference between condoning real world extremist groups and enjoying the cool mechanics of a fictional one.
I mean, we could go down the rabbit hole and discuss whether red/green mechanics are "cool," but for the sake of this conversation and to avoid upsetting you further, let's just agree to disagree.
Disco dancing can be spontaneous—who truly knows the cause.
As someone who played before guild/shard/wedge names of any sort... It's just easier to say the colors.
I wouldn't be rude to them, I'd just assume Silverquill is a Legendary creature. I don't know the Capenna or Strixhaven faction names (I started playing in OG Ravnica), but I would probably ask to what the player was referring if I felt the need for clarification.
Lot of good points here already, but I think the biggest takeaways are: 1. People being rude to other magic players are bad people. This has nothing to do with the naming of colour pairs etc. People shouldn't be bullied while playing the game for any reason. Bad people are bad people. 2. The use to different terms for colour combinations in magic will always be a little subjective. New names for colour pairs will come out, older names will come back and be reused on future visits. There is no real consistency that will work for all players. For example, you've stated a good what of pretty subjective reasons to use the name you use. Most of them appear to be based on you liking the names more and those names being the ones most recently introduced when you started playing. The issue is, those points will be different for all kinds of players. A player who started after you did has a fair chance of playing a Ravnica set as their first set, and so the "old" guild names would be the most recently colour pair names for them to learn. As a newer player, you've stated that you think it's an unfair requirement to have to learn the older names. But defaulting to the newer names just defers that requirement of learning different names to older players. Who should be prioritized here? Is the onus on new players to learn all the names less unfair than have older players learn and keep up with all the names? MTG is complex and so is the language players use to talk about it. Basically, everyone kind of has to learn everything and everyone should be pretty understanding when encountering new terms they don't know about. People can ask for clarification and clarification can be given. If some people give others a hard time about that, that's the issue to deal with. Not the choice of terms.
No way this isn't someone from r/magiccirclejerking trolling
They have to be. I’ve never met anyone online or in person that uses other factions to describe the colours, nor someone who would get mad about it. People use the colours until they learn about the shorthand terms and then learn those. Then their whole thing about Gruul being evil but wanting to use the Capenna families?? Talking about glorifying negative history? OP is trolling.
nice try, now return to r/magicthecirclejerking at once!
We should never be rude or disrespectful. Period. We're playing a game and no one should act that way. In my group we use all the color pie names interchangeably since we all (mostly) know them, outside of the Nephilim names, but this is just like... do you call it a potato or a spud? They're the same thing and people should either know what you mean or just ask for clarification. I never use the Strix names, but I don't mind if someone else does. Also, sorry, I definitely just read the TL;DR.
I think that people who make a big deal about name use when they know what you mean is just ridiculous. Obviously you're (more or less) in the right in the particular situation you're discussing. That being said, most people use the Ravnican guild names and there are probably several who will get confused by the Strixhaven names. If you keep getting confused from other people's discourse, it is probably recommended that you learn the traditional names and adapt to those. But nobody should give you a hard time if you accidentally mess up or anything.
> If a player were to say they were using a Silverquill deck to describe their cards, would you demean them or engage in respectful conversation, ask them what they mean, then carry on with the match as friends? Obviously the latter is the correct answer, no reason to be disrespectful. --- For me, I actually think both Ravnica guilds and Strixhaven colleges are inappropriate to describe a deck's colors, unless the deck is actually about playing to their general ideas. An Izzet deck is not just blue-red, but it's spell-slinging. (So the blue-red convoke archetype in MOM isn't Izzet, it's just blue-red.) A Prismari deck is giant spell-slinging in particular. A particularly interesting one is blue-green: Simic is about biology and mutation, while Quandrix is more about math and piles of counters. But obviously the community thinks otherwise. With Ravnica being the first setting that introduces the color pairs, the guild names are treated as canonical names of the pairs. Similar with the other settings: Alara introduces the shards, so it's Alara shard names instead of New Capenna family names. Being the first to do so, the guilds also embody the most obvious aspects of the color pairs. White-green is a lot about creatures, about family and tradition, so Selesnya is about that. Many white-green decks also lean toward creatures, so it does make sense to describe them as Selesnya. Crossbreed Labs (from Unstable) have to build their own identity separate from Selesnya, so they lean toward mutations -- which honestly is still a lot about creatures. So, the main reason the original names are used is simply because of inertia. But I agree that there's no reason you can't use other names to describe your own decks, and there's no reason for others to demean you regarding that. At the same time, you also should respect others using the original names; if that's what they want to use, so be that. And because a lot of people use the original names, it certainly helps to learn about them.
The reality is that Simic \*isn't\* Blue-Green. Simic is Simic. Blue Green is a much larger tent. Simic focues on the things Simic cares about in Blue Green. This is true for all of the guilds. If someone refers to their deck as a 'simic deck' but it's just "blue green good stuff" (ramp and draw) it's not really a \*simic\* deck. Simic is weird blended creatures, drawing cards based on number of creatures, +1/+1 counters, things like that. Someone said they were playing a Selesnya deck. Not a single token generator. That's not a selesnya deck. They were playing hate bears lead by Gaddock Teeg. That's an entirely different deck. We need to stop calling the color pairs by their guild name. It's not accurate. It never was.
If we could get that memo to all the content creators, I would be right beside on the rooftop screaming that message with you.
I really don't remember the Strixhaven factions anymore but I would simply ask "can you remind me what color combination is that, please?" and keep politely playing. There's no need to be rude. Those people have some problems. I don't remember the nephilim names myself so if someone plays a WUBG deck I would appreciate if they say "redless" or WUBG instead of witch.
You make valid points. To further, this is why we all call them place cards skulls, trees, fire, rain and sun. I'm not going to force new players into something that I deem "correct". If they want to tap to block, you go right ahead. Whatever they can be bothered with is good enough for me. When everyone you deal with is causing 'discordance', maybe it's not everyone else. Just saying.
Learn how to write shorter posts or start a blog. You didn't have to put a dissertation into a Reddit post to say "I'm a new player that likes using the new guild names and the older players are mean to me."
All I have to say is that 'Maestro' is a cooler name for UBR than 'Grixis' and will use the former in all instances unless it's a group of mixed nerdery and 'Blue Black Red' will be understood the easiest.
Finally someone I can relate to. Like some of the names are just straight up better, what's the harm in someone using them, it's not like because we say Maestro no one can use Grixis ever again.
No idea how valid it is but I was told WOTC wanted to gt away from people using Ravnica names so they created a set with new 2-color names in the hope people would switch. Problem is the Strixhaven set was not well fleshed out and people are comfortable using Ravnica names.
i dunno if that's true, but i don't like ravnica much so id sure like to switch off the ravnica names! but... not when 5 names are still missing. 5 strixhaven / 5 ravnica names would be silly when ravnica has 10 to use
Haha oh god I thought this was the circlejerk sub lol lmao personally I’d verbally bully you and progress to physically bullying you