Welcome back to Vorthos Wednesday, where we keep the flavor flowing faster than a body through a corpsefloat valve. I put off the typical set review last week in favor of Selesnya’s theme week. I hope you all enjoyed a Vorthos’s take on building a Standard deck, but now, it’s time to get to unfinished business. So sit back, relax, and enjoy the smashing of our new set’s flavor against that of old Ravnica.

Azorius

Overall Flavor

We start with a bit of a difficult guild to compare with its older iteration. Not only has the guild’s values changed thanks to plot developments, but only twelve of the original Ravnica’s thirty-five cards have flavor text. I suppose that’s fitting for a guild that believes more writing will solve problems.

I have to declare a bit of a tie on this one. The original flavor concentrates on stalling and preventing players from doing anything. It’s centered around Grand Arbiter Augustin IV and his philosophy of avoiding change. The new set has lost Augustin and his stifling presence and seeks only to enforce the law and prevent transgressions. Beyond actual mechanics—we’ll get to those in a second—Azorius is very similar in how it plays out in each set.

Mechanics

Here’s the most lopsided comparison you will see in this review. Forecast, while having a cool name and creating interesting play decisions, gives off little flavor for Azorius. They can see into the future? That’s neat! Uhh . . . but I can’t. Tip: Future-related words like forecast work well only when related to gaining previously unknown information.

Detain, on the other hand, is in close running with scavenge as the most flavorful of Return to Ravnica’s mechanics. The fact that it fits so well with Azorius’s current ideals and goals makes detain the clear winner.

Card-by-Card

Isperia, Supreme Judge and Grand Arbiter Augustin IV – While her ability shows off the guild’s fervor to use any aggression to its advantage, I can’t help wishing (solely from a flavor perspective) Isperia had Archon of the Triumvirate’s ability. It is direct and straightforward. Giving the guild masters an identity is important, but let the subtlety fall to other cards. The Grand Arbiter wins here. His ability to slow down the opponent feels very Azorius, in either set, and still manages to create a bit of identity. His pumping abilities are a bit strange, but we’ll pretend they don’t exist.

New Prahv Guildmage and Azorius Guildmage – While I’m incredibly happy to see Wizards was able to put detain on one of the guild’s most iconic cards, I’m disappointed in New Prahv Guildmage. What does flying have to do with Azorius? Both pieces of art feel Azorius and work with their abilities, but Azorius Guildmage feels much less threatening thanks to the choice of a scantily-clad female. With that said, victory goes to the original, as the ability mishap on New Prahv Guildmage is much more egregious than the art issue.

Golgari

Overall Flavor

I’m not sure how much of it is a refined understanding of the guilds by players due to additional information and exposure and how much of it is a better message from Wizards, but all of the guilds come across with a clearer and deeper theme this time around. Does that mean the original set didn’t have Golgari right? No, but it did seem to concentrate on the rot and death aspects of the guild more so than the replenishing.

Mechanics

This is a tough one, and I imagine there will be varying opinions among you. I find dredge incredibly flavorful but slightly askew for Golgari. The ability uses future potential (your library) to regain the past (your graveyard). Golgari’s theme has been explained as a circle of life, with death and rot feeding a new generation. What is a circle of life where the dead just keep coming back? Scavenge, while perhaps a bit less interesting for gameplay, is just as flavorful and fits with the above-stated theme much better.

Scavenge 1, Dredge 0

Card-by-Card

Grisly Salvage and Golgari Brownscale – Grisly Salvage is practically dredge in concept. The key difference is in execution. While both use future potential for gain, Dredge’s gain involves returning cards to “life.” Grisly Salvage’s does not. There is definitely a portion of necromancy to Golgari (see Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord), but to have it be the biggest and most visual aspect is wrong.

Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord and Drooling Groodion – Both of these are great examples of using the sacrifice ability in a very Golgari way. Jarad gets an extra push for creating a tension that all Golgari mages must feel. “Does this creature eat it now for strength? Or do we save it for someone else to feed on?”

Korozda Guildmage and Golgari Guildmage – Korozda’s first ability and the original’s second ability are quite close. They feed off something and become stronger—got it. Their remaining abilities aren’t that far apart either, now that I look closer. The simplicity of the original sums up the guild’s philosophy well, but Korozda’s fits better. A creature dies and gives birth to new life—not a returning one.

Izzet

Overall Flavor

The instant-and-sorcery theme comes across loud and clear in both sets. There is also an element of randomness and lack of control in both that is essential to Izzet. While I don’t mind the minor toning down of that in the newer set, I do wish there was at least one card involving a random target or coin flip. (Odds // Ends would be a great example, though unprintable due to being a split card.) In addition, the new set completely lacks a card with the ability to redirect spells. It’s not a big deal, but it’s noticeable.

As the guild with the closest ratio of cards in the new set to the old—thirty to thirty-six, respectively—I find the streamlining a bit odd. Are the Izzet even capable of streamlining?

Mechanics

I like replicate; I do. I think it has embedded flavor that could give a great jolt to a set. It just doesn’t belong with the Izzet. Sure, it shows their fire for research and discovery, but copying the same thing over and over doesn’t exemplify other aspects of the guild. Besides, can you imagine an Izzet interested in doing the same thing twice? Neither can I.

Overload on the other hand . . . Overload is very similar to replicate—you can choose to use a small ability or a very large effect—and has Izzet flavor because of that. What makes it better lays somewhere Vorthos doesn’t usually find flavor: in the rules text. When you overload a spell, you cannot direct it to only the targets you want. It hits every creature your opponent controls or every one of yours (depending on the spell). If you don’t think that’s Izzet, you might want to get your inner Vorthos checked.

Card-by-Card

Nivix Guildmage and Izzet Guildmage – There is nothing wrong with Izzet Guildmage, but Nivix Guildmage’s consolidation of the original’s abilities into one makes a very strong case for supremacy. (Can you think of a flavor reason explaining why this is not better? I would love to hear!) Add to that his generic research ability, and I close the case.

Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius and Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind – The guild master of Izzet became a little fatter and switched things up to keep his enemies guessing. The comparison wouldn’t be worth the words I’m writing if it weren’t for the flavor text. The original is genius; it appeals on both a Vorthos and Melvin level. Sadly, the newer flavor text is pure garbage. It tries too hard and doesn’t succeed. That erroneous “by” could be the reason.

Thoughtflare and Development – Did you know the original set doesn’t have a single looter with an Izzet affiliation? Instead, cards such as Research // Development were printed. While it’s a card I would enjoy in any other set, it doesn’t feel very Izzet. Why would an Izzet punish an opponent with such a choice? Do they even have the control required to do so?

I know it’s a bit abrupt, but that’s all the time we have for today. Come back tomorrow for the second course!