Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Dec-06 9:24 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 350 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 24  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-17 10:55 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Mar-31 8:25 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: New Zealand
lumination wrote:
Snow mana is a property acquired through the supertype.

Quote:
107.4h The snow mana symbol {S} represents one generic mana in a cost. This generic mana can be paid with one mana of any type produced by a snow permanent (see rule 205.4f). Effects that reduce the amount of generic mana you pay don’t affect {S} costs. (There is no such thing as “snow mana”; “snow” is not a type of mana.)


What I think is that the new mana symbol works kind of the same with the Basic supertype. It may be the symbol for Basic mana; and the Wastes cards would produce one colorless Basic mana.

Then I suppose mana produced by existing Basic lands (such as Forest) could also be used to pay for Basic mana in costs.


Ya, I think that explanation makes sense.

You wouldn't expect to be forced to play Wastes in a 3 colour Commander list to play these new cards, but if you didn't run any basics at all, you couldn't cast the new Kozilek.

So basically the new symbol means you can't use Cinder Glade to pay for it, only a basic land.

Makes sense to me.

_________________
Xenagos, God of Revels
Kalemne, Disciple of Iroas


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-17 11:55 pm 

Joined: 2015-Mar-04 12:43 am
Age: Drake
The only thing that bothers me with the "basic mana" assumption is the fact that they made Mirrorpool also produce that mana while (obviously) not being a Basic land. It doesn't invalidate the concept, but breaking its base principle right away feels weird.

Yet, I feel this is much more probable than them simply deciding to change the symbol for colorless mana (in the middle of a block, no less). While it would make sense to force colorless in costs, I don't buy its use in producers. How could they obsolete the template of the existing cards printed for years, like moraff and zimagic have wondered?
Thus, I believe it will have something else attached to it besides "colorless".


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 12:14 am 

Joined: 2008-Aug-08 6:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Rouen, France
GoodbyeWorld wrote:
Quote:
What I think is that the new mana symbol works kind of the same with the Basic supertype. It may be the symbol for Basic mana; and the Wastes cards would produce one colorless Basic mana.
Then I suppose mana produced by existing Basic lands (such as Forest) could also be used to pay for Basic mana in costs.

Ya, I think that explanation makes sense.

You wouldn't expect to be forced to play Wastes in a 3 colour Commander list to play these new cards, but if you didn't run any basics at all, you couldn't cast the new Kozilek.
So basically the new symbol means you can't use Cinder Glade to pay for it, only a basic land.


I'd have to disagree with you for reasons of tracking. It's highly unlikely that you'll be required to track not only the number and colour of mana in your pool but also what volume of each colour came from basics and what didn't. That's a much bigger rules change than saying: Generic costs can be paid by any mana and courless can now be required in a cost just as color is required.

That's pretty much how I expect it to turn out. I'd be unsurprised if they don't wash retro-fitting this to the last 22 years of cards by sayng it's a design templating change to allow you to distinguish colourless mana from generic mana for the purposes of highlighting costs with colorless requirements.

Anyone know of cards with a "Spend only colorless mana" cost?

Another question: Imagine this is a home run change. Everyone loves it. It's the hybrid mana / split cards of the current magic scene. Is "Wastes" a generic enough name to allow them to print the 6th basic as an evergreen card?

_________________
Current decks:
Sydri's random pile of cards with "Artifact" on them
Scarab God Zombie Horde
Sissay 5c Superfriends
Morophon Eldrazi (5C Devoid)
Grenzo's Goblins


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 12:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2009-Aug-20 7:49 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: New Hampshire
lumination wrote:
Thus, I believe it will have something else attached to it besides "colorless".

This. Assuming these are real cards, I'm guessing it will be something like "void" instead of "snow" and just be a special kind of colorless.
zimagic wrote:
Imagine this is a home run change. Everyone loves it. It's the hybrid mana / split cards of the current magic scene. Is "Wastes" a generic enough name to allow them to print the 6th basic as an evergreen card?

Wastes is a generic enough name. I'm not convinced, however, that they'd be reprinting this thing because of the special symbol. It pretty much HAS to have special rules baggage attached to it, given the way the costs on Kozilek and the abilities on the Mirrorpool are written. * can't mean "spend only colorless on this" because you don't add "spend only colorless" to your mana pool. It can't be colorless or mana produced by basics, because Mirrorpool isn't a basic. It's something else.

_________________
"The President's job - and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realize this - is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it." -- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide tot he Galaxy Radio Transcripts predicting the future.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 12:58 am 

Joined: 2008-Nov-30 12:36 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Buthrakaur wrote:
The whole thing is too fishy for me to buy into it just yet. Instead of trying to figure out how it would work, I think the community should focus more on if it is a real leak.

I'm with you on that. I am certainly skeptical that these cards are real, but more than anything I am HOPING they are not real. The idea of a colorless basic is cool and all, but no other aspect of this potential leak is even remotely exciting to me. In fact, I dread that Kozilek being real.

_________________
The Command Zone (my MTG Blog).
Commander 2015 Set Review


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 1:08 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
If we're right about this (colorless mana production/requirement) what are the necessary rules implications?

The rule about basic land types and mana production would require an update along the lines of "A Basic Land without a subtype has "{T}: Add * to your mana pool" (probably splitting 305.6 into 305.6a for the current mana production rules and 305.6b for typeless basics). The colorless symbol in costs would have to be defined (someplace in 107.4), probably including something about it not being reduced by cost reducers that reduce generic mana costs. These are all pretty reasonable.

They would have two options for existing cards that produce colorless mana. They could just add the symbol to what is currently 107.4c and call it a day (which probably gives us Boreal Centaur or Knacksaw Clique type reminder text on every common and uncommon, most rares, and possibly some mythics with a * cost), or they could do a massive Oracle update and affect every colorless nonbasic going forward. I'd bet on the reminder text one.

zimagic wrote:
Another question: Imagine this is a home run change. Everyone loves it. It's the hybrid mana / split cards of the current magic scene. Is "Wastes" a generic enough name to allow them to print the 6th basic as an evergreen card?

It only makes sense for things that are so divorced from regular mana that they require colorless. I imagine it is generic enough to fit in any of setting where such a thing would exist (where ever Emrakul shows up, some sort of world being depleted to power its crazy artifacts, etc.).

Sid the Chicken wrote:
* can't mean "spend only colorless on this" because you don't add "spend only colorless" to your mana pool

Currently {3} (or whatever numberal) in a mana cost doesn't represent colorless mana; it represents generic mana. In a mana ability it represents colorless mana. The symbols can mean different things in different places.

You can illustrate it with a little substitution, too.

{R} can't mean "spend only red on this" because you don't add "spend only red" to your mana pool.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 1:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Dec-10 12:16 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
zimagic wrote:
Anyone know of cards with a "Spend only colorless mana" cost?


No, but we do have Imperiosaur. the only other templates I can think of along these lines are the old Drain Life and Soul Burn style templates.

_________________
V/R

HK

Hazezon Tamar - Manland theme
Seshiro the Anointed - Snake Tribal
Jedit Ojanen of Efrava - Cat and Warrior Dual Tribal
Doran, the Seige Tower - Wall Tribal
Progenitus - Hydra themed Proliferate Deck
Karona, the False God - Backstabbing Hug


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 1:47 am 

Joined: 2009-Oct-08 1:00 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Buthrakaur wrote:
The whole thing is too fishy for me to buy into it just yet. Instead of trying to figure out how it would work, I think the community should focus more on if it is a real leak.

It has new art of Kozilek and new art of a Zendikar-style landscape with floating islands transformed into bismuth (which is what Kozilek-brood Eldrazi do.) I don't think the legitimacy of the leaks is actually in any real doubt.

Sid the Chicken wrote:
* can't mean "spend only colorless on this" because you don't add "spend only colorless" to your mana pool.

Not true. All kinds of mana symbols have different special meanings when paid vs. when added. I mean, {1} already means either "one mana of any color" or "one colorless mana" in those two situations, so it's not a crazy idea. Similarly, if a card would add a hybrid mana to your pool it's equivalent to adding one of either color to your pool instead.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 1:50 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Sep-19 1:30 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
I don't think any of the proposed ideas on this are right so far, and here's why:

◊ is colorless mana only
As stated in several posts so far, while that would work in mana costs, it becomes nonsensical as a type of mana generated. {1} is already mana that can only be used for colorless costs, so Wastes and Mirrorpool would generate {1} not ◊.

◊ is Basic mana
Problematic for the bookkeeping requirements (especially in conjunction with Upwelling and the like). This also runs into the problem of Mirrorpool being a non-Basic that produces Basic mana. (Which is fine, since cards can trump rules, but it does seem like the sort of thing that would rankle the rules manager if it shows up on a bunch of cards...)
However, one thing going for this theory is that it would make cards with ◊ costs not be 100% parasitic (which has always been a problem with the Snow mana-requiring cards). I just can't imagine they'd ever make a flagship card like Kozilek be completely unplayable outside its own block.

◊ will be a new "color" of mana
Problematic for all the reasons "purple mana" was. While the concept of "void mana" would tie in nicely to Eldrazi, the addition of a sixth "color" has always had a lot of rules baggage and complications that go with it. (Here's a link to pore information on purple mana: http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/feature/386.)
And, once again, unless they put ◊ mana into every set from now on, Kozilek becomes unplayable outside its block - which I don't see them ever doing for a flagship-level card.

_________________
Useful threads: Colorless CI landsGraveyard HateRoR's Greatest Hits
My Decks: Zombiepocalypse (Thraximundar) ♦ Thrun stands alone (voltron) ♦ Ashling the Burninator ♦ Doran beatdown (treefolk/plant tribal) ♦ Mine! (UB theft/clone) ♦ Vampire Beatdown (Edgar Markov) ♦ BW Enchantments (Daxos the Returned)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 2:06 am 

Joined: 2009-Oct-08 1:00 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Willbender wrote:
As stated in several posts so far, while that would work in mana costs, it becomes nonsensical as a type of mana generated.

Any type of mana symbol that can exist in a card's mana cost needs to have rules defined for what happens when you add it to a mana pool because of cards like Elemental Resonance, so even if it's just a placeholder the way hybrid or Phyrexian mana is it'd still work in that context.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 2:28 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Sep-19 1:30 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
OK, I feel a little silly for immediately contradicting myself, but thinking about it a bit more I'm starting to think that ◊ really will just mean "colorless mana", as it is the simplest change that makes any sense, and is the only way that it makes ◊ not a completely parasitic mechanic (and, as I've said, I can't see them making Kozilek unplayable outside this set).

Here's how I see this working: ◊ becomes the new symbol for colorless mana.
  • All old cards are changed to use ◊s instead of {number} in mana generation in future printings. (For example, Sol Ring's text box becomes "{T}: Add ◊◊ to your mana pool.")
  • In casting/activation costs, ◊ is the colorless equivalent of {W} and similar.

Pros/Cons/Questions:
  • This means errata to thousands of old cards. No, it actually means no errata at all. Just like old cards changing from reading "Tap to xxxx" to reading "{T}: xxxx", it's just a formatting change - there is no change in how the cards work.
  • The mechanic would not be parasitic. This is one of the biggest reasons I think this is how its going to work.
  • They wouldn't introduce a major mechanic like new mana in a small set. Since this isn't really a completely new mana mechanic, but rather a simple casting-cost requirement, I think it's perfectly reasonable to debut in a small set. (With the caveat that it would have made more sense to introduce it last set so it existed for the whole block, and used it on Ulamog.)

There is some question as to how Wastes will work mechanically. Either it actually has the rules text "{T}: Add ◊ to your mana pool" and they're just shortcutting it to the mana symbol on the full art version of the card (which I find perfectly reasonable when they've printed textless Cryptic Command), or they're going to add rules baggage to the Basic supertype (two possibilities being all Basics can produce ◊, or the more likely all Basics with no basic subtype can produce ◊). Personally I hope they're just shortcutting the rules text into a symbol on the full art cards.

_________________
Useful threads: Colorless CI landsGraveyard HateRoR's Greatest Hits
My Decks: Zombiepocalypse (Thraximundar) ♦ Thrun stands alone (voltron) ♦ Ashling the Burninator ♦ Doran beatdown (treefolk/plant tribal) ♦ Mine! (UB theft/clone) ♦ Vampire Beatdown (Edgar Markov) ♦ BW Enchantments (Daxos the Returned)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 2:46 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
Willbender wrote:
There is some question as to how Wastes will work mechanically. Either it actually has the rules text "{T}: Add ◊ to your mana pool" and they're just shortcutting it to the mana symbol on the full art version of the card (which I find perfectly reasonable when they've printed textless Cryptic Command), or they're going to add rules baggage to the Basic supertype (two possibilities being all Basics can produce ◊, or the more likely all Basics with no basic subtype can produce ◊). Personally I hope they're just shortcutting the rules text into a symbol on the full art cards.

Skipped my post, didn't you? :P


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 2:50 am 

Joined: 2011-Aug-18 3:35 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
It will be "add ♦ to your mana pool." They already have it on Mirrorpool and the symbol is on wastes.

I would say it's just colorless mana with a rider like snow mana rather than a hybrid like Phrexian mana. Whether they define that rider as "only colorless" or whatnot remains to be seen but it's clearly going to be mana with a rider based on Kozilek's casting cost.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 2:54 am 

Joined: 2008-Aug-08 6:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Rouen, France
Willbender wrote:
And, once again, unless they put ◊ mana into every set from now on, Kozilek becomes unplayable outside its block - which I don't see them ever doing for a flagship-level card.


I see this as the biggest reason for ◊ mana being the "color-defined" colorless mana produced by things, differentiating it from generic mana which is the cost of things and not some Snow variant.

Snow got Ice Age & Coldsnap and is a curiosity. Making this Eldrazi-Snow (for want of a better term) in a small set with absolutely no support from the associated big set would be a terrible sales move. Sure you'd have some cool cards that will sell the initial product and there's always the remaining treasures, but who's buying a small-set Coldsnap that's stuck to a relatively underwhelming large set?

Hey kids, did you enjoy that set that you can't play with anything else? Yay, let's go back to Innistrad now!

I don't buy it, it makes no sense to sell a product to kids they can't play with the rest of their cards.

Willbender wrote:
◊ is colorless mana only
As stated in several posts so far, while that would work in mana costs, it becomes nonsensical as a type of mana generated. {1} is already mana that can only be used for colorless costs, so Wastes and Mirrorpool would generate {1} not ◊.


I don't think it's as nonsensical as all that. Look at standard mana-bases right now: You can fetch anything, there's even duals (with a drawback) & trilands in the format. People are playing Enemy wedge decks and adding a 4th color, it's so easy. That's crazy! Now add in something that says "You can have this big monster but you can't pay RRGGUUBB off your fancy duals for it, you have to add in ◊◊ and 6 other generic mana. And, to spice things up, you can't fetch that mana off Khan fetches."

That's a huge shift in deck construction: Mana bases that suppot ◊ and cards that find ◊ in the current format? Dude, spider-senses are tingling! Making a Siege Rhino that costs ◊WBG instead of 1WBG is a massive change.

It's colorless but it's still an entire new color because you have to pay it with a non WUBRG source. For that, you have to run one and be able to find it.

All that's left is to give us cards that say "Ok, it's worth building this manabase because that is cool/OP/rad/groovy/*insert generational superlativeof choice*!"

◊*◊*◊*◊ Scooby-segueway into Commander ◊*◊*◊*◊

Who doesn't run Temple of the False God, eh? So, you want to give us cool stuff our existing manabases support anyway?

Eh, Ok!!

_________________
Current decks:
Sydri's random pile of cards with "Artifact" on them
Scarab God Zombie Horde
Sissay 5c Superfriends
Morophon Eldrazi (5C Devoid)
Grenzo's Goblins


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 3:28 am 

Joined: 2013-Sep-05 6:26 am
Age: Drake
If they keep this going past Oath, they're going to have to seriously start defining what colourless can do, because right now it can do anything and everything.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 350 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 24  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: