Interesting. I don’t think artifact (outside of maybe a proxy for Excalibur) would represent transcendence very well. A spirit/avatar in planeswalker form would be cool for that tho I think; and you could do something like Tevish suggested and have its starting loyalty be based on Domain, or its +/- abilities be based on Domain

I mean, we didn't start with "transcendence" as the starting point for everything, only if it were a creature.
Obviously, it would otherwise have been a proxy for either something akin to Caledfwich or maybe even like the Holy Grail or something equally associated with the Arthurian culture.

As to the king himself, a legendary creature is what makes the most sense. There's really no need to make him a planeswalker, as the key to his identity is inherently that he's bound to the land and has no impetus to leave.

I feel like colorless is a poorly-explored identity-space. In the old days it was pure neutral, standing in for artifacts and machines that anybody could use. But since the introduction of the Eldrazi and the occasional bit of colorless weirdness after, I've wanted more takes. The tradition of colorless artifacts (sadly broken though it is) sets colorless as "This doesn't need any sort of special care to operate". Eldrazi are "This is colorless because it's outside normal existence.

Two other interpretations however could be "This is colorless because it rejects color as impurity" and "This is colorless because it is a blank canvass meant for color". The former has made me want to design Touhou-themed cards and place the Lunarians as obligate colorless (similar to the couple of cards they have in the Slay the Spire style deckbuilder, The Lost Branch of Legend). The latter... might be what we're looking at here. Colorless itself rather than 5c because it is the container, the whole on which color plays its pantomime.

There's also moment I enjoy in one of my card game animes where the origin of the supernatural BS is aligned with colorless because of that same implication of unbounded possibility (Or colorless as the precursor to all colors, or what have you), which carries over to the character's game pieces and is something I truly enjoy, so I'm biased.

Long story short, I think Colorless has enough blank space (pun intended) that we shouldn't feel bound to its current interpretations in order to play with its space. As long as it's properly cool, I think that's fair.


I want to think about this. Camelot is not a setting with a great and well-defined "Inside" and "Outside" or "Us" and "Them". In arthurian fiction, knights can mostly just sort of go places and it doesn't particularly matter how they correlate to any sense of geopolitics or familiar world. There is strife, but the lines between Arthur's realm and "other kingdoms" are not so sharp as to mark their residents as different peoples, not is the authority of one strong and noble ever particularly questioned.

Some modern interpretations use the tribes of Britain, like the Scots or the Picts, who were certainly fighting foes in the background, as major enemies, but if we're looking at a mythic Camelot with a long-lived fisher king, I don't know how much having a mortal threat makes sense. There's no room for a usurper like Vortigern here, if there is a human enmity it has a different vibe. You get the Fae, which is sort of the direction Eldraine went with having them as a recognizable "Other", but the grant of the Lady of the Lake and the support of at least the orthodox house of Faerie implies they're not enemies per say.

Mythically, Camelot's decline was internal, but how good a dynamic does that make?

Well, it depends on the dynamic. I think we COULD work internal strife into this Camelot. The king has reigned a long time. Too long, perhaps, beyond his appointed time. We can see some of the cracks, where the beautiful dream of Camelot, which would have been a tragedy to lose in only a single mortal span, may not have aged well. Peace becomes tyranny, at least to some. Idleness provokes rot. The glory days refused to die beautifully or "go into the west" and the debts are coming due



But while I think the human "enemy" of a society in decline is on valid antagonistic force, I do want a mythic enemy as well, and while just sort of going stream of consciousness here, something came to mind.

A force wild and terrible, something that even a king who has become one with his kingdom might not defeat.
Something old, enough to have been a scourge from the beginning until the end.
Something magical, but grounded enough that it seems like it would exist in the Arthur myth
And something with a deep, abiding presence in Magic: the Gathering.

I want a dragon.





I also like the idea of extending this to Western European medieval feel. I don't want to water it down TOO much (lest we get into some of Eldraine's issues), but I'm open to... let's call it a "General Bretonnia Vibe" to reference the Warhammer version of the setting. Perhaps a bit more skewing Celtic in look and feel.

I've been turning the thoughts over in hand for about a day or so to see how best to approach it, because very much I feel like we're on the same wavelength, of perhaps not the same crest or trough.

The kingdom showing wear is not at all a thing I'm opposed to, but I don't think I like any formalized resistance or rabble rousing. The strain showing might be generational, but only spoken in whispers, an indolence and lethargy setting into a kingdom still in motion, but labored in pain to keep going, the fear of a collapse and the unknown of what comes next mostly keeping the inertia going. In that, we would really have 3 factions to split between in the kingdom proper and the knights in microcosm: the realists, the idealists, and the optimists.

The realists would see the state of the kingdom and more the king and are basically doomsday preppers, convinced there's nothing that can save them.
The idealists are willfully blind to the problems, and in that, they're likely the most aggressive when confronted with the state of things. They still believe in the beautiful dream and don't want to wake up.
The optimists acknowledge the problems and try to fix them, convinced they can still salvage things, this is a rough spot they can push through if they can just hold everything together.

From outside, the event on the borders being non human is totally the direction I want, savages and barbarians chipping away year after year.
A dragon as the central figure to that I'm in total support of, but I have two thoughts regarding that.
I had been trying to come up with something to stand in for the enemy at the gate and I had briefly considered the Fomori Giants, dreadfully in the midst of being soured in actual Canon by turning them into an interplanar threat as the "coin empire", but I did think of the good old stand by of goblins, lackluster as they may be. However, with a dragon or dragons as central figures, that opened up the idea of potentially using Kobolds as the foot soldiers.
I also toyed briefly with ouphes, but they seem more solitary.
The second accommodation is I think I would choose to not make the dragon in red, but rather in black. I don't like the idea of demons in this setting, but dragons filling that slot scratches an itch for me.

Lastly, while I'm good avoiding an Excalibur stand in for obvious reasons, I feel strongly we need magic swords. So, maybe a cycle of mono color swords that rest in the Treasury, to be used in times of strife.

I like Kobolds, and Dragons in Black. I'd keep dragons in Red as well, but for medieval sensibilities having dragons be the iconic makes a lot of sense (I recall one analysis that Dragons were such an enduring foe in the corpus of western european literature because their common depictions and habits could be seen as embodying every mortal sin. The distilled narrative of a long-slumbering dragon offended at being robbed of some insignificant trinket and demanding a maiden sacrifice to devour highlights the dragon's sloth, pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, and gluttony in a very quick manner)

Orcs could also make sense, but we don't want to feel *too* LotR. Which is going to make my next comment seem a little odd

Wizards as a race.

That is not using "Wizard" itself as a racial type, but locking use of the "Wizard" type to beings that are not mortal humans. Fae can be wizards, and possibly one of the Knights could be a Wizard, but a normal citizen would not. Like Kaladesh, active magic use isn't really known here, not in that manner. And Merlin is a thing but in every era of the lore but the most modern, Merlin is more of a being -- a changeling, the son of an incubus, something else that's not quite human and not entirely mortal

But this is Magic: the Gathering. It would make sense if the Kingdom had wizards in it.

Which gave me an idea to work with: changing the optics of the Lady of the Lake figure to make her more distinct from nature fey, associating the Lady as supermatural patron with the moon and then including Moonfolk as royal (or at least kingdom) aligned wizards.

~~~

I feel like each of the Knights should have a legendary artifact associated with them, probably a weapon but in some cases a trinket might be possible. I also want to speak in favor of the fact that spears can be cool. You and I both know a couple, including Rhongomyniad. Plus if we want to up our knight optics, lances are horseback weapons.

Dragons in black have always felt pretty natural to me. I think I'd prefer to avoid them in red for the setting, though the replacement there might be something like Giants.
I really want a cunning and malevolence for the black dragon, something carrying with it an ancient grudge and red's nature as impulsive and primal doesn't mesh as much with that image.


So, I'm a bit on the fence, not with the concept of having an inherently magical type of creature (that isn't fae) but rather figuring out which is a choice that fits most naturally. Wizards as a race isn't a bad thing, but the question there is what physical distinction will they have to set them aside from humans? It doesn't have to be much, as we've seen with elves being not all that different physically. Moonfolk isn't a bad option, though it carries virtually no baggage for the good or the bad as far as identity goes, which means we'd have to do a lot more heavy lifting in crafting an identity.

Additionally, I think I like Wizard as a race because it gives us an excuse to create a separation between Wizard and what I would like to do for the class to reintroduce Mystic as a type. That creates a hard distinction between the two.


As I pondered, weak and weary, (couldn't help myself) I did kind of come to a conclusion that might stand a bit controversial when we've been trying to vibe a general Albion kind of feel. Kobolds are a bit teutonic, but their pop culture identity flows into dragons without much fuss. However, my next suggestion I feel could feel pretty natural, but casts its origins kind of afar from that central conceit too. I said I wanted elves, but I've changed my mind to a degree. I think, instead of elves, I want Dryad filling that slot. Specifically, with a kind of evocation of the Green Man and the verdant forests of ancient Britannia. Honestly, I'm vibing them as the constituent parts of the courts that represents the Irish parts of the isles especially.
I'm seeing them as perfectly civilized, but rather than an elf just being nebulously old because elf, they can derive their lengthy lives to the age of their trees, and it plays into spaces about the dark of the woods and the wilderness without clashing too terribly with the Camelot aesthetic.
(Yes, I know, Dryads aren't very British, but I feel like there's enough inertia in the concept that making them fit isn't hard.)


I would rather avoid a lance as a lance, though halberds and other polearms are certainly not out of the question (though I still feel strongly about a cycle of swords specifically)
We could have a mono color cycle of swords and then another five in colorless that fill out the various other armaments, be it polearm, shield, or bow, there are a lot of options.

For the record, my reluctance to lances are specifically because lances are really single use items. Jousting tended to make them, y'know, explode.
As battlefield weapons, that isn't true, but they're not exactly best known for more than duels.

https://youtu.be/4X0jUg1B1vQ?si=_XFgJQhTqQwrF37c
A song that seems fitting for the general discussion, if a bit far removed. All the same, I ran across it a long while back and it's popped back into my head as late.

Checking back on the roles


: the Advisor, a voice of reason, Second in Court
: the Spider, the master of spies
: the Mad Dog, a double-edged sword
: the Reveler, fond of brawl and drink
: The Hero, Knight errant for whom the quest never ended
: the Keeper, a revenant who holds the histories of the honoured fallen
: the General, an inspiration to others, hard bitten but paternal
: the Magician, a capricious force of who only the King knows all, none know how much is true magic or parlor tricks
: the Mystic, one wise in the ways of the fae and primal
:

That's about what I've been operating on as a kind of reference list. The majority still aligns with Tevish's previous list, but I've added a note here or there or changed for dynamic sake.

I feel like there should be one among them all that's actually blood related to the king.

Rather than Dryads, perhaps we could use treefolk? Dryad's whole thing has been a mess since the introduction of Nymph, and I can see more human scale tree people still having the Treefolk type (over generic Plant) to lump the Groot-esque green men with the full scale ents. Treefolk also speak to me as something more civilized and capable of roaming than dryads, as well as not being heavily tied to another mythology.

As for the black/green slot, it's a tough one. The optics are a bit rough to reconcile with the knightly court: either component color has issues, and the combo is unforgiving.

I do think back, though, to my talk about Mordred (for which I myself remembered Lullaby. Great minds run in the same gutter, as they say) and how BG was a valid color identity, combined with comments of wanting at least one blood relative of the King.



: The Scion/The Outlander: Child of the King from His mortal days, weary and nostalgic, in whom dark thoughts are finding fertile soil.

This kicks serious ass.

I know the problem I'd have with treefolk is that the treants are very much too inhuman, and anything that would ultimately resemble groot might also edge too far into that.
What I'm mostly thinking is something similar to the Sylvari from Guild Wars, as being near indistinguishable from human on the surface level (though I would probably opt for some less human characteristic, so it might be better to say something more elven)
I'm not against it, but it creates a harder layer of expectation to it when you see the creature type. We'd definitely have to come up with a specific name to use to avoid overlapping with the treants, even if they could go into the same tribal deck.


I like this a lot.
I wonder if a son/daughter may be a little on the nose, but it isn't anything I feel critical.
If a child might be a bit too heavily inspired, it might be interesting to sort of combine Mordred and Morgan into a singular character as the king's sibling as well as the outsider at the table.
Even if we did that, I don't see where we'd need to change but like, two words in your above passage.
Also, I saw that cheeky little reference to Durin's Song.

A sibling would also have been closer to a peer, maybe a beloved ally and a true confidant before the King's faults and humanity were excised off him - though the child angle could play into personal (filial) admiration/hero worship contrast easier. A matter of undertones tho, I agree.

There's still potential in terms of admiration that a younger sibling might hold for their elder sibling.
Of course it's all still dependent on what Tevish thinks.

I don't think a child who at least was known and acknowledged and in the past had a good relationship is cutting too close to the Mordred archetype, especially if said sibling is not a rebel instigator, but this is a group project; if others do, a younger sibling would make the next most sense to me.

Nah, nothing wrong with choosing the progeny. I just wanted to open the dialogue about it.
I did say right off the bat that I liked it as is

The only hitch now is that it invites speculation about the marriage.

I've been turning over more the ideas we've tossed back and forth, and as far as archetypes go, I think we're settled okay, but we aren't making much concrete progress past that.
So, I was considering that matter, and I think the next step would be unconventional to approach this way:
Let's decide what the Knight crests are!

I already tossed out the idea of a silver Leotau with leopard spots for the king, but what else shall we do?

Thinking a hippogriff seems reasonable for one. Probably a griffin for another.

Griffin r/w maybe?
Hippogriff u/w?

So, assuming the king's heraldry would be described as such: On a field azure, a spotted silver leotau Proper, Rampant.

The scion would likely have a related arms such as: On a field vert, a Leotau Argent, Rampant Regardant.

Hippogriff Sergeant, Or on a Vert field, would seem to make sense for the Quester to me.

A suggestion for the Magician that would be solely to mess with expectations: On a field azure, an ourobous laid upon a vertical sword in Or.

For the Spider, I think the charge could be something along the lines of a Kraken Hauriant, perhaps Sable on Argent?

For either the Mystic or a non-annoying Magician arms: a field sable, base vert, charged with a crescent in argent, horns to dexter, above a wolpertinger volant recursant descendant Proper.

Pretty much agreed, I think, with perhaps one alteration
On a chief field azur, a proper Leotau rampant


I think I would prefer passant regardant, with sable bend on the vert field


I think, overall that works.
I consider maybe a Pale to emphasize the height

Of first consideration is the issue that Kraken have little defined anatomy.
I propose Displayed guardant to cover all possible configurations.
Whether Hauriant or Urinant, we'd first have to figure out where the head is, after all.


Yeah, I think you got those two mixed up for which would be "annoying'

For the mystic, I think I rather like a sable Cockatrice vigilant on a Vert and Azur field with argent Chevron

And for the General, an Or Felidar couchant guardant with tail nowed on gules ermine field

For a bit, I've juggled a few ideas about how some of our knights became immortal, and there's been one sticking point that I've been turning over and over.

The issue of what to do with the Fae.

There's one Japanese myth regarding immortality that I used as part of the world Saigo hails from, but didn't feel it entirely fair to use, especially after the discussion regarding dryads (actually feel like I could defend that, vis a vis Roman occupation and Greek influence, but also don't feel like upsetting the tea kettle, as it were) and I think I've... Somewhat landed in a solution for what I think would work.

We've soundly established the central pillar that is the hominid rule, with a few natural exceptions, but while watching In/Specter and listening to them rattle off the myriad permutations of names they had for folk monsters, it struck me what to do with the Fae, and possibly use the mermaid myth as well.

The fae could, effectively, be a catch all applied to anything almost human, but magical. This could also form a kind of hierarchy for how close a magical being is to human. Wizards are practically human except magical, fae make the not human, and then we slide into things more monstrous. (Demon would seem the natural step, but I still think I'd rather avoid that)

Anyway, looping back around, I considered the Spider, particularly with a kraken heraldry, to have, at one point, taken in love with a fae merfolk, but she cursed him with immortality when he chose another love. A spiteful gift to outlive all he loves.

... I should come back to this.