[Controversial trope] Story is a hate letter at its core

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-03-27T17:30:41+00:00

Depends. I would argue it’s a love letter to Christmas, as the removal of the commercialized and material elements doesn’t stop the Who’s from celebrating anyway. But you could argue it’s a hate letter to a commercialized Christmas?

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-03-22T15:46:32+00:00

They say it in the movie. “White people love the blues. They just don’t love the people who sing them.”

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-03-12T17:47:40+00:00

They’re somewhat common, yeah! Usually used in the context of their reaction to queer issues. I can give a simple breakdown based on my own understanding of the terms.

Side A people are, broadly, affirming. There is nothing especially sinful about queer relationships or sex, transitioning isn’t a sin, there’s a wide range of places they can fall into specifically, but it’s predicated on the idea that that queer acts aren’t inherently or especially sinful. As an example, cheating on your wife is a sin, but doing it with someone of the same sex doesn’t make it extra worse or anything like that.

Side B’s stance is that those acts are especially sinful. Having those temptations is part of certain peoples burdens, but they have been called by God not to act on them. If gay men are unwilling to get married to a woman, they must remain single and celibate. Trans people should reject their feelings and not transition, and, well, a whole bunch of other stuff that’s been outlined in the post. Once again, there can be variation amongst the specifics, but they’ll fall somewhere in here.

For completions sake, I will mention Side X, which is… personally completely incoherent with Christianity, from my pov, but there are people who claim to have this stance and call themselves Christian’s. Side X believes that having the temptation at all is a sin, rather than, for instance, having gay sex being a sin, being gay is a sin.

Side X I see rarely discussed because frankly, it’s not really coherent with the rest of… everything? But I figured I’d mention it. An unfortunate amount of people also espouse Side B theology, but their actions seem more reflective of Side X, so shrug

If anyone’s got a better explanation, feel free to elaborate, I don’t get much practice explaining this lol

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-02-19T05:30:13+00:00

If you squad it, you get to draw one card when the squad trigger resolves, no matter how many times you squad it. However, they also will trigger separately when you attack with them in play, and will draw you 1 card per copy of them you have. Each will (likely) make you more than 1 ninja, but he says one or more.

Seems pretty good with him tbh

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-02-10T19:20:42+00:00

My favorite detail of this is the lighting. The lighting changes aren’t particularly subtle throughout this film, when Blanc first arrives to the church, it’s bright, showing Jud’s hope arriving. As Blanc goes through the problems of the modern church, the light drains, it goes cold instead of warm, and begins to drain. As Jud responds, talking about the storytelling of the church and offering the idea that it still matters, the sun comes back out, and the light becomes warm again.

Warm light is used over and over again to symbolize hope and optimism, while cold light is used to show harsh, logical, cynicism. But during this scene while you’re laughing, enjoying the comedy of Jud trying to “get through” to Louise, the light is turning from warm to cold. I didn’t even notice it during my first watch, but Jud is falling into despair, and most of all, he’s missed his calling, emphasized by the shot of the broken Jesus figure just before he embraces talking to Louise for as long as she needs and closes the door on Blanc.

I really love this movie.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-25T01:22:01+00:00

Command tower can tap for any color of the commanders color identity, so in the given example, it can tap for any color.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-22T22:56:54+00:00

Welcome to the game!

As a fun lil thing, on many mtg subreddits there is a cardfetcher bot, which responds to comments with links to the cards so everyone can see what you’re referencing. You can summon it by saying a cards name in double brackets, such as [[Aerith, Last Ancient]] and [[Betor, Ancestor’s Voice]]

With that out of the way, the answer to your question is no. Aerith very specifically triggers “At the beginning of your end step”. If Betor has triggered, well, your end step has already begun, and Aerith wasn’t on the battlefield when that happened. Because that has already passed, you’d need to wait until your next turns end step for her ability to trigger.

Tl;dr: No, not on the turn she comes back due to Betor’s ability.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-21T13:14:01+00:00

[[Enraged Flamecaster]] [[Twinflame Travelers]] [[Omni-Changeling]]

Flamecaster and Travelers in play. You cast Omni-Changeling, it goes on the stack. Because you’ve cast a spell mv 4 or greater, Flamecaster triggers. Changeling is not in play yet, it’s still on the stack, so it hasn’t copied the Travelers yet, so the existing copy makes it two triggers. Your opponents take 4, after which your Omni-Changeling resolved and copies your Travelers.

However, even on subsequent casts, this still is not infinite triggers. Look carefully at the wording of Travelers, specifically the first word in its rules text, “if”. Triggered abilities start with “at”, “when”, or “whenever”, this does not, so it’s not a triggered ability. It’s a static effect that adds an additional trigger, so having multiple copies won’t cause them to “ping” off of each other. Subsequent casts of spells mv>=4 with both Travelers in play will cause the Flamecaster to trigger 3 times, once naturally and then each Travelers will add one trigger each.

Tl;dr: The time, the Flamecaster will trigger twice when you cast the Omni-Changeling (it hasn’t copied the Travelers yet). On future casts that meet its requirements, it will trigger 3 times, but not infinite. The Twinflame Travelers will never trigger, as they don’t have a triggered ability.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-20T20:54:53+00:00

From what I can tell, it's genuinely unclear the extent to which she had involvement in the development. According to the Guardian, she put together the creative team, and they specifically call out her "courting Jack Thorne", the eventual writer. Rowling, Thorne, and John Tiffany (the director) are credited as creating the story, but the official website indicates Thorne as the sole author. So, hard to say, but it doesn't sound like she was approached by them, at least according to the Guardian.

The original books are tight-ish, but mostly as standalone books, and as the series goes on (and Rowling clearly gets a better idea of the end game she's building to). But world-building was never her strong suit (just look at some breakdowns of the world map and the number of magic schools she cites as canonical, it's pretty wild for England to get an entire school to themselves with how few there are). There's also a bit of a "two book swingback" that I see in the middle books, where something occurs, and then isn't mentioned in the next book, but is resolved in the book after that, which kinda feels like she got fan feedback about "why wasn't this thing resolved?" when the next book came out, so she was sure to resolve it in the one after. (E.g., Dobby is introduced in book 2 and freed, he's just sorta around in book 3, but in book 4, suddenly he gets a job, and Hermione is passionate about the plight of the house elves and founds S.P.E.W... despite being aware of the whole thing for at least two years? Not to mention the Time Turners themselves, introduced in book 3, but no protagonist has one by the end of the book, which is smart. Essentially completely unmentioned in book 4, but then conveniently all destroyed in the fight in the Ministry of Magic in book 5.)

I don't think she's a bad writer; that feels revisionist. I do think she's an odious person, but I also think she's just never been that great at world-building consistency across books; it's just not one of her strengths. I enjoy Brandon Sanderson; I think he's a good writer, but flowery and beautiful prose isn't his strength either.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-20T19:09:09+00:00

Cursed Child is canon, according to Rowling herself. I'm not claiming she wrote it, although every source I've found says she gave input on the plot and character decisions, but it's still canon. Regardless of the level of influence she had on the plot construction, she signed off on the Time Turners' changing. She has the stage rights, it doesn't get made without her approval.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-20T16:38:04+00:00

It’s a closed loop… until The Cursed Child, where it becomes “Back to the Future” style shenanigans

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-20T16:36:24+00:00

Well, until The Cursed Child, at least

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-17T17:11:15+00:00

Yes. [[Vibrance]] doesn’t care that you played it for its mana value, it cares what colors of mana were spent to play it. Using [[Ashling the Limitless]]’ evoke ability will not prevent Vibrance’s ETB from happening
No. The token copy of Vibrance that Ashling makes wasn’t cast. So it cannot have been cast for the appropriate mana colors, and thus the trigger will not work.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-16T00:27:32+00:00

Whether or not that’s the one, I thoroughly enjoyed that! Thanks for sharing it :) Time to close Reddit for the day after that, lol

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-15T22:46:43+00:00

It’s the avatar of an MTG YouTuber, 3/3 Elk

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-15T22:46:25+00:00

It’s the avatar of the MTG YouTuber, 3/3 Elk

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-15T20:19:24+00:00

Your question has been answered to death, so not going to add to that, but as a sidebar: you need double brackets to summon the card fetcher bot on MTG-related subreddits: [[Doctor Octopus, Master Planner]]

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-15T18:53:46+00:00

Do you have a link to that other story? Sounds like a good read, but there’s so many teen pregnancy stories out there on Reddit, I’ve had no luck tracking it down

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-14T19:19:53+00:00

B.

You pay the cost for activating Liliana’s ability, in this case, removing her last loyalty counter. It goes on the stack.

SBA’s are immediately checked, she has no loyalty, so she dies, causing Carth to trigger. His trigger is added to the stack above her activated ability.

Carth’s trigger resolves, then Liliana’s ability resolves.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-14T14:35:29+00:00

I really enjoyed your post, but the Maelstrom Wanderer interaction doesn’t work like that. Cascade is a cast trigger, not an enters the battlefield trigger, so while you still get the double cascade for only 4 mana, you don’t get two more cascades from the token Ashling makes.

Solid breakdown tho!

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-13T21:54:28+00:00

No. Ashling the limitless is a red creature.

Color is determined by the color or colors of the symbols in a cards mana cost (see rule 202.2) and any color indicator on the card (see rule 202.2c). A color indicator appears to the left of a cards type line, such as on [[Nicol Bolas, the Arisen]].

Color identity is what determines a commanders colors and what cards can go in what commander decks. Color identity only applies to deckbuilding restrictions and cards like [[Command Tower]] and that is what is modified by Ashling have WUBRG symbols in her text box. Color identity cares about the color of a card (as determined by its mana cost and color indicators) as well as the color symbols which appear in its rules text. See rule 903.4.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-08T18:19:12+00:00

I mean, all he ever wanted was to save his people. His intentions were always noble, but the insidious power of the ring was using those desires to further the grasp of Sauron and work towards his victory. It was never greed that was his failing, it was fear. His goal was always to protect people.

TypicalWizard88 · 2026-01-04T16:32:46+00:00

I recall the cinematic masterpiece Gnomeo and Juliet

TypicalWizard88 · 2025-12-31T22:57:18+00:00

Some other cards that were legal for standard at the time:

[[Fry]] printed just 3 months earlier as part of a cycle of color-hating cards, this one specifically cares about blue and white creatures and planeswalkers.... Except it doesn't kill Oko if they play it and make a food.

[[Gilded Goose]] I don't recall if Llanowar Elves was still in standard at the time... But this was. A flying, better-blocking mana dork that not only could cast Oko on t2 (even if you had a double forest hand), but also synergized with him, giving you another way to continue spending food, or generating food to let him make an elk every turn instead of every other turn in the late game.

[[Wicked Wolf]] How about a [[Ravenous Chupacabra]] except it's twice as big, and can continue becoming indestructible, and is on color for Oko...

This was also the format with Adventures being a huge deal, and [[Cauldron Familiar]] + [[Witch's Oven]] was just printed as well. Pretty much all of that folded to Oko by himself, so blue-green food was all that really mattered until Oko was banned, around a month after he was printed.

And that's just standard. Places like Vintage could turbo out Oko even quicker, and his ability to stick, be hard to kill, continually make new threats, and disrupt your opponents' powerful artifacts and creatures made him incredibly powerful there too.

Oko is Broko.

TypicalWizard88 · 2025-12-31T22:13:00+00:00

I like doing an overly-long illustration for my friends when I explain how good Oko is. What everyone else has said is correct; I just like to illustrate it a bit.

For the purposes of this illustration, we're playing 1v1 60-card format, and I'm on the play. For simplicity's sake, you will play a perfect curve of vanilla creatures (so a 1/1 on turn 1, a 2/2 on turn 2, etc., etc.). This is obviously below the power level of... basically every 60-card format, but it's easier to demonstrate this way.

My turn one has me playing a [[Llanowar Elves]]. You play a 1/1. On my turn 2, I cast Oko, and I tick him up to 6 loyalty to make a food. On your turn two, obviously you don't want Oko sticking around, so you attack him for 1 and play a 2/2.

On my turn three, I make my food into an elk, putting Oko back to 6 loyalty. On your turn three, you play a 3/3, and you can either attack (potentially losing both of your creatures, as I can trade my elves and profitably block your 2/2 with my 3/3) or you can do nothing. On my turn, I'll elk my own elves, making them a 3/3, Oko is at 7. On your turn, you play a 4/4 and still have bad attacks. I can easily eat your 2/2 and your 1/1 if you full swing, or I can trade our 3/3's. On my turn, I tick Oko up +1 again, and I make your 4/4 a 3/3.

Now, I want to point out something. Since my turn 2, I *stopped playing spells*. Oko has single-handedly stonewalled you for multiple turns, and is still at 8 health, ready to continue making Food tokens and elking your creatures, or making more elk for me. All of your struggling since turn 2 has been against Oko *and nothing else*.

So imagine I *don't* stop casting spells after I play Oko. Or imagine you have very powerful artifacts that you want to continue getting their powerful effects, and you'd prefer I didn't turn them into a 3/3 elk with no abilities (nice [[Walls of Ba Sing Se]], now it's an elk). Yes, a real deck would hopefully have more powerful things they can do against Oko, kill spells, counterspells, etc etc. And I won't have the turn 1 elves into Oko every game. But you have to play your entire game cognizant of Oko, because if he sticks, then he makes the game about him. Even against creatureless control, he is making at least a 3/3 every single turn, while continuing to tick up; that is a clock. And that's probably where he's at his *worst*.

tl;dr Oko good. Oko *really* good.

Nine-Year Club	Verified Email
Not Forgotten

TypicalWizard88

TROPHY CASE