Talk:Eldritch Moon: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "==Set Symbol== According to the article, the set symbol is "Stylized silhouette of Emrakul". While I won't deny that Emrakul's influence is clearly there, doesn't it also...") |
>Fenhl (→Set Symbol: reply) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
According to the article, the set symbol is "Stylized silhouette of [[Emrakul]]". While I won't deny that Emrakul's influence is clearly there, doesn't it also resemble Liliana's headdress? Given that Liliana Vess plays an important role in the storyline of Eldritch Moon, I doubt that it's a coincidence, and so isn't it possible that the symbol is actually a combined Emrakul/Liliana symbol? Or am I just completely wrong about that? --[[Special:Contributions/172.112.59.55|172.112.59.55]] 01:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC) | According to the article, the set symbol is "Stylized silhouette of [[Emrakul]]". While I won't deny that Emrakul's influence is clearly there, doesn't it also resemble Liliana's headdress? Given that Liliana Vess plays an important role in the storyline of Eldritch Moon, I doubt that it's a coincidence, and so isn't it possible that the symbol is actually a combined Emrakul/Liliana symbol? Or am I just completely wrong about that? --[[Special:Contributions/172.112.59.55|172.112.59.55]] 01:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC) | ||
: I didn't catch this when I added it to the infobox, but it's definitely there. The article also menitons it in prose. —[[User:Fenhl|Fenhl]] 02:19, 2 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:19, 2 July 2016
Set Symbol
According to the article, the set symbol is "Stylized silhouette of Emrakul". While I won't deny that Emrakul's influence is clearly there, doesn't it also resemble Liliana's headdress? Given that Liliana Vess plays an important role in the storyline of Eldritch Moon, I doubt that it's a coincidence, and so isn't it possible that the symbol is actually a combined Emrakul/Liliana symbol? Or am I just completely wrong about that? --172.112.59.55 01:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
- I didn't catch this when I added it to the infobox, but it's definitely there. The article also menitons it in prose. —Fenhl 02:19, 2 July 2016 (UTC)