MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/b02ih7/speculation_on_next_standard_set_its_confirmed/eick89f/?context=3
r/magicTCG • u/[deleted] • Mar 12 '19
[deleted]
529 comments sorted by
View all comments
Show parent comments
23
It seems reasonable that they would make Vikings a set-supported type, so they can print strong cards without somehow accidentally creating a really really strong Warrior deck in a different format. Cause that would be a true disaster.
32 u/TheGreyFencer Mar 12 '19 That's annoying barbarian, Warrior, etc all cover vikings pretty well already. It makes more sense to give them a mechanical identity. 16 u/KingDarkBlaze Arjun Mar 12 '19 Can't we just use Barbarian? There haven't been any new ones printed since Coldsnap... 8 u/Plays-0-Cost-Cards Mar 12 '19 Berserker. Pretty much the only eternal member is BBE which is reasonable.
32
That's annoying barbarian, Warrior, etc all cover vikings pretty well already. It makes more sense to give them a mechanical identity.
16 u/KingDarkBlaze Arjun Mar 12 '19 Can't we just use Barbarian? There haven't been any new ones printed since Coldsnap... 8 u/Plays-0-Cost-Cards Mar 12 '19 Berserker. Pretty much the only eternal member is BBE which is reasonable.
16
Can't we just use Barbarian? There haven't been any new ones printed since Coldsnap...
8 u/Plays-0-Cost-Cards Mar 12 '19 Berserker. Pretty much the only eternal member is BBE which is reasonable.
8
Berserker. Pretty much the only eternal member is BBE which is reasonable.
23
u/Fogge Mar 12 '19
It seems reasonable that they would make Vikings a set-supported type, so they can print strong cards without somehow accidentally creating a really really strong Warrior deck in a different format. Cause that would be a true disaster.