In fairness, it depends on who the nightmare bender's going after. A heroic use of the bender's talents would be in putting down...say...Ramsay Bolton (to throw out the first truly monstrous character that came to mind), or old Walder Frey.

Worst flavor? Goblin Chieftain with the smash song.

Oh, lord, yes! I loved the original flavor text, showing that goblins, despite sometimes being portrayed as dimwitted and suicidally-eager little buggers, can be a force to be reckoned with. Then came M12 "Derp! Me like smashy!" goblin flavor text.

AAAAHAHAHA I NEVER NOTICED THAT OH MY GOD

Also, what is it with reprints getting dumbed down flavor text? Specifically red reprints?

...I still love Icatian Moneychanger, though. You can't take that away from me. I actually really love all the old cards like that because while they were often incredibly clumsy, they were really trying to express, in mechanical terms, something conceptual. I will absolutely always support something that strove for innovation and evocation and failed over something that strove for mediocrity and succeeded.

There's a mountain (har har) of "dumb goblin joke" cards for instance that aren't eggregiously bad, but they're just so rote...

Whipporwill not having flying is pretty stupid though.

Who is not important. Who is just a byproduct, it is WHY that makes something like that heroic.
Putting down Ramsay would only be heroic if it were in an act meant to enrich the lives of others. Not something Ashiok is wont to do, no, the nightmare weaver would put down a monstrous being because it's FUN. It is just as equally monstrous an act as one committed by Ramsay himself.
Paying evil unto evil is not an act of good.

Sorry for taking our discussion out of the realms of the multiverse. Replace Ramsay with Mogis and his minotaurs. By removing a threat, the disciple's actions can be interpreted as heroic by the people who were initially threatned by Mogis and co. The methods may be a bit messier than those used by someone like Elspeth, but they get the job done. The interesting thing about heroics is that they're really up to the individual's interpretation.

The major problem still arises that once Mogis is dealt with, what happens next?
Their attention is drawn to the people they supposedly just saved. They do not do what they do out of some sense of a higher ideal for their fellow man, but in pursuit of their own sadistic art. The who never matters, the motivation shall always be the same, regardless if the individual under their skills deserved it or not.

Don't sass my Brown Ouphe! I love that little guy! He's admittedly a terrible card, but that's not his fault. His flavor's just fine.

For modern flavor, how about Syncopate? What on earth does countering a spell have to do with changing up the accents in a musical piece or shortening words? The modern flavor text doesn't help, either--the original's fairly generic blue mage flavor with a vague reference to the exile effect, but the modern's just pure unintelligible snark--she's telling the person throwing fire at her to be patient? What?

@Barinellos: That unpredictability and somewhat hedonistic bent is what I find appealing about those sort of heroes. Even if they do have a loftier idealism, it's often grounded in some basic need or desire.

That isn't heroism though. It's visiting evil upon evil, which you shouldn't confuse with being a hero.
It's being EVIL to someone that is just as evil as you. It's VILLAINY for the gods' sakes!

Hero's a subjective term, though (see the quote in my signature). I'd look at Toshi, Hidetsugu and Kiku, for example, as heroes. Toshi and Hidetsugu a tad more since they were given more exposure in the novels. But if "visiting evil upon evil" is villainy, does that make the Hyozan Reckoners villains?

Not the worst flavor, but the Shadowmoor/Eventide elementals and spirit avatars are out of place. I love them aesthetically, but they don't feel as if they belong to Shadowmoor.

By and large, yeah, it really does.
Actions are not inherently good nor evil, what matters is not the consequences in that respect, but instead the intent.
There can be a heroic action with terrible consequences, and there can be villains acts with fortuitous ones, but in the end it is about the why.
Toshi, ultimately, chose to be a hero even if he was acting selfishly virtually the entire time.
Hidetsugu though? Yeah, he was a villain. His intent was never for the greater good and he slaughtered a **** of innocent people in his mayhem. While that somewhat upset the bigger villain's plans, he wasn't doing it with noble intentions... well, not quite. He certainly had honorable intentions, but those aren't the same as being noble. Of course, then you get into a debate of cultural mores and perspective, but given that we have a third person omniscient view, we CAN actually dictate that sort of thing.

I would define heroism, mostly, by the simple question of if it is selfless and if it improves the lives of those you wish to help.
Visiting evil upon evil, with no concern for those affected because of your own selfish cause is incapable, ultimately, of being a heroic act, even if the consequences improve other's lives.

As I've been saying all along, it is the WHY you do something that matters.

It makes perfect sense to me. You are more in tune with nature (by having bigger creatures in your deck), so nature reveals things to you others can't see (by letting you draw cards). Also, the art is perfect. You have figured out the clever thing about the art, haven't you?



Here's the thing, though: The people who would call him a Hero do not have a third person omniscient view. All they see is a stranger sweeping in, killing the Minotaurs, and then moving on. If he never reveals his motivation, they have no reason not to consider him a hero. Thus, the ability can make sense in-universe, even though we know it isn't true. There have been many villains who the public called heroes.

DS: thanks, that actually makes sense now.

Barinellos, the white wolf: It sounds like you guys are arguing because you have different definitions of heroism, one of them being "an act that is perceived as good by outsiders", and the other being "an act of selflessness intended to improve the lives of others". I don't think either of you will be able to convince the other to change their opinion, nor do I think either opinion is more valid than the other.

I know, right? Then the "arrogant pride" part kind of piles on as well.

Spell check, Bolas! Spell check!

I also think it's important to consider what 'heroes' are on Theros. If we look at Greek myth, heroes were not the most virtuous people around. They were often deeply flawed, if not almost evil or depraved by our standards. As I understand it, in Homeric tradition, anyone who was fighting during the Trojan War was a 'hero'.

Being a hero is like being a super athlete. You defeat those who challenge you, you receive patronage, you are not necessarily a good person.

@Syncopate - I guess maybe you're ruining the other mage's spell by messing up their incantation? I works, if not well. The flavour text I think is about the blue mage being a dick and drawing out the battle with counterspells to make it more "fun" for them. Kind of meta when you see it that way.

@Heroic - Yeah a lot of "heroic" cards might be perceived by others as being heroic but aren't very heroic at all really. Since we have kind of an omniscient view point we could definitively declare the creatures in game as unheroic. The whole thing is rescued by the Greek flavour though. These are ancient Grecian style heroes and in an ancient Grecian style world they get to count as heroes just because the gods favour them.

According to dictionary.com, the definition of hero is: a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.

Along with that, the webster definition is: a person who is admired for great or brave acts or fine qualities.

Neither of these mention any exact morale code that a person must go by. It is just that popular culture dictates that a hero must be good. An anti-hero is still just a hero.

Most any card with 72 point font like Balduvian Shaman.
The tragic thing is, I'm pretty sure old wordy cards like that were made so wordy because the designers were trying waaaaay too hard to make the flavor work, and we just end up with giant ugly messes that no one in their right mind well ever want to play with.

When's the last time you actually accomplished something playing Ice Cauldron.

Admittedly the second one's an "or", but I think it's fair to say that you must be both good and strong to be a hero.

What does a hero truly need? That is for YOU to decide...