Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Dec-06 9:33 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 350 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 24  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 3:35 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
zimagic wrote:
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.

Painlands might be playable before the fetches rotate after all.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 3:54 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2013-Oct-26 9:21 am
Age: Dragon
Location: Xenia, OH, USA
Willbender wrote:
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.



I really think that this is exactly what it is. "◊" is the new colorless symbol, and if it shows up in a casting/activation cost, it means you must spend at least that many mana that is colorless to cast/activate. So the new Kozilek needs 10 mana to cast, with 2 having to be colorless. Mirrorpool's activation costs require at least one colorless mana each to activate.

There is also the printing of a new basic land in a set. If this set is the only one that is going to use it, why is it a basic land? Basic implies it's going to be around. Also that it will be usable in any set, past, present, or future. I really don't see the new symbol being a sixth "color" just the new symbol for 1 colorless mana. Your example of Sol Ring getting errata to say it is "T: Add ◊◊ to your mana pool." is correct.

_________________
You know you've said something right when Sheldon hits you with a QFT...

http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?p=233412#p233412


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 4:29 am 

Joined: 2011-Aug-18 3:35 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
tgambitg wrote:
Willbender wrote:
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.



I really think that this is exactly what it is. "◊" is the new colorless symbol, and if it shows up in a casting/activation cost, it means you must spend at least that many mana that is colorless to cast/activate. So the new Kozilek needs 10 mana to cast, with 2 having to be colorless. Mirrorpool's activation costs require at least one colorless mana each to activate.

There is also the printing of a new basic land in a set. If this set is the only one that is going to use it, why is it a basic land? Basic implies it's going to be around. Also that it will be usable in any set, past, present, or future. I really don't see the new symbol being a sixth "color" just the new symbol for 1 colorless mana. Your example of Sol Ring getting errata to say it is "T: Add ◊◊ to your mana pool." is correct.


Colorless mana symbols aren't changing. That is crazy to even suggest. They aren't going to change 10k+ cards for one small set. There's also 0 reason to have to use these lands or symbols moving forward, the proof of that is that it's a common, not a land draw. Like all set mechanics they exist in a single set or block. They have the possibility to be used moving forward but there is no expectation of such. Phyrexian mana was used in one small set. Snow "mana" (not snow basics) was used in one small set. Those cards with snow activations are not "unplayable" because they haven't printed snow permanents elsewhere.

It's a basic land because they've been trying to do a colorless basic for years. It's a colorless basic because it fits thematically in that all the color was sapped from them but they're still lands... a barren waste.

They can easily function within the rules just like snow with a rider attached to the mana produced by the lands. They do that all the time. It's not a new color, it's not a new basic land type. It's colorless mana with a rider. We don't know what that rider is but speculating that it's going to change everything is foolish. That is exactly the outcome they want to avoid. We all know they want to avoid it. Why even think that they're going to change everything to make it work when all they have to do is add a line of text to the rules to make it work without changing anything else?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 4:36 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2013-Oct-26 9:21 am
Age: Dragon
Location: Xenia, OH, USA
Epsilon wrote:

Colorless mana symbols aren't changing. That is crazy to even suggest. They aren't going to change 10k+ cards for one small set. There's also 0 reason to have to use these lands or symbols moving forward, the proof of that is that it's a common, not a land draw. Like all set mechanics they exist in a single set or block. They have the possibility to be used moving forward but there is no expectation of such. Phyrexian mana was used in one small set. Snow "mana" (not snow basics) was used in one small set. Those cards with snow activations are not "unplayable" because they haven't printed snow permanents elsewhere.

It's a basic land because they've been trying to do a colorless basic for years. It's a colorless basic because it fits thematically in that all the color was sapped from them but they're still lands... a barren waste.

They can easily function within the rules just like snow with a rider attached to the mana produced by the lands. They do that all the time. It's not a new color, it's not a new basic land type. It's colorless mana with a rider. We don't know what that rider is but speculating that it's going to change everything is foolish. That is exactly the outcome they want to avoid. We all know they want to avoid it. Why even think that they're going to change everything to make it work when all they have to do is add a line of text to the rules to make it work without changing anything else?


But here's the thing, colorless mana never had a symbol before. You're thinking generic mana. That's not changing. It's distinguishing colorless from generic. Which is actually already a distinction. All I see this is like changing "Tap" to "{T}"(the tap symbol).

_________________
You know you've said something right when Sheldon hits you with a QFT...

http://mtgcommander.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?p=233412#p233412


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 4:40 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Sep-19 1:30 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
tgambitg wrote:
There is also the printing of a new basic land in a set. If this set is the only one that is going to use it, why is it a basic land? Basic implies it's going to be around.
Not really. The Snow-Covered lands were just a one-off Basic cycle in Ice Age (a two-off once Coldsnap was printed) - they're not going to be around all the time. Likewise, Wastes is probably only going to see print in sets where it makes sense mechanically (like if Eldrazi show up on another plane, etc.).

Epsilon wrote:
Colorless mana symbols aren't changing. That is crazy to even suggest. They aren't going to change 10k+ cards for one small set.
This is no more of a change than having reprints use the {T} symbol instead of the "Tap to" wording. This is not an errata, just a change in their style.

Epsilon wrote:
There's also 0 reason to have to use these lands or symbols moving forward, the proof of that is that it's a common, not a land draw.
There is no proof that this is a common - where are you getting that? It's a full-art basic, so it would make sense that this is going to be in the land slot.

Epsilon wrote:
Like all set mechanics they exist in a single set or block. They have the possibility to be used moving forward but there is no expectation of such.
But at the same time, plenty of mechanics, style changes, etc. were introduced in a new block and used ever since then, in all new sets.

Epsilon wrote:
Phyrexian mana was used in one small set. Snow "mana" (not snow basics) was used in one small set. Those cards with snow activations are not "unplayable" because they haven't printed snow permanents elsewhere.
Anything with a casting cost requiring Snow sorta is unplayable outside the set, not counting "trick into play" shenanigans.

Epsilon wrote:
They can easily function within the rules just like snow with a rider attached to the mana produced by the lands. They do that all the time. It's not a new color, it's not a new basic land type. It's colorless mana with a rider. We don't know what that rider is but speculating that it's going to change everything is foolish. That is exactly the outcome they want to avoid. We all know they want to avoid it.
Which is exactly why evidence is pointing to it being a new colorless mana symbol instead of being some wacky new mana type with a rider. This lets them introduce "new" mana without making it parasitic in any way, and will not make any sweeping changes at all.

_________________
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 4:46 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
Willbender wrote:
Epsilon wrote:
There's also 0 reason to have to use these lands or symbols moving forward, the proof of that is that it's a common, not a land draw.
There is no proof that this is a common - where are you getting that? It's a full-art basic, so it would make sense that this is going to be in the land slot.

The rarity is now on the cards by letter code with the new border. This one is "C" where the Zendikar full-art basics were "L"

I'd guess that it is going in the common slot so that you have to draft them if you want them for your deck; similar to snow basics in Coldsnap.


tgambitg wrote:
There is also the printing of a new basic land in a set. If this set is the only one that is going to use it, why is it a basic land?

By being a basic, you can run more than 4 copies of it in your standard deck to support your colorless-required spells. It also solves what many perceive to be a problem with running a colorless CI commander deck.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 5:08 am 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
It's either going to be a smash hit or a total flop. I can't see a way to make it work that doesn't create a type of mana that's mechanically identical to the five colors *except* it has no color. How that will be received I don't know. Mono-brown just got cheaper though.

_________________
Deepglow Skate
Antis wrote:
I'm seriously suspicious of any card that makes Doubling Season look fair and reasonable.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 5:13 am 

Joined: 2008-Aug-08 6:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Rouen, France
Spectrar Ghost wrote:
It's either going to be a smash hit or a total flop. I can't see a way to make it work that doesn't create a type of mana that's mechanically identical to the five colors *except* it has no color. How that will be received I don't know. Mono-brown just got cheaper though.


I like it because it opens the door to them saying it was gimmick should everyone hate it or defining the way they do colourless for the future.

_________________
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 5:15 am 

Joined: 2015-Jan-14 2:58 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
There's truth in that.

_________________
Deepglow Skate
Antis wrote:
I'm seriously suspicious of any card that makes Doubling Season look fair and reasonable.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 5:43 am 

Joined: 2011-Aug-18 3:35 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
There is 0 downside to running snow lands outside of coldsnap block constructed. There is 0 downside to running these lands outside of Zendikar block constructed. Suggesting these are "unplayable" because the lands aren't printed elsewhere is just patently false. Mirrorpool is nuts. We'll see what other nonbasics they make that also provide this rider'ed mana. The power level of Kozilek alone is enough to have these at least tested in other formats.

Being "colorless plus" doesn't make it worse than colorless. The rider doesn't have to be useful outside of the block to have these as basic lands be useful outside of the block.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 6:39 am 

Joined: 2014-Sep-13 7:28 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Wilkinsbane wrote:
I am not looking forward to opening Wastes instead of any other full-art basic land though, assuming Oath will have them.

It was mentioned two posts prior to yours that this spoiler puts Wastes in the common slot, not in the land slot.

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

I thought there was one, and could not find it, however...

zimagic wrote:
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.

Not necessarily, if this is just a one-set mechanic. Imperiosaur tracks super type. It's also required by many individuals cards that state 'use this mana only for _____' that you keep track of it. Besides Willbender's Upwelling example, you usually get rid of mana rather quickly anyway.
And that said, as i say below, i think it's clearly not 'basic mana' anyway.

Sid the Chicken wrote:
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.

I'm not sure what you mean. I don't think the way Mirrorpool's requirements are written REQUIRE that it has additional baggage, if it is explained on release that diamond means colorless mana. Why can't a card require you spend colorless mana? All it has to do is say so. Imperiosaur states you have to use basic lands. Myr Superion says it must be from creatures. If they make this an evergreen type of thing (if diamond does indeed just mean colorless) then they wouldn't need to state it, since it would be a new symbol we are supposed to understand (the way we already understand 'green tree symbol' is 'this must be paid with green mana'.

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

This, specifically, i don't understand. You can add colorless mana to your mana pool, and it can only pay generic costs (and possibly now, pay costs with symbols that mean 'this must be paid with colorless, not just any color).

charlequin wrote:
Buthrakaur wrote:
The whole thing is too fishy for me to buy into it just yet.

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.

Placing my bets here as well. No reason to suspect trickery this time around.

Willbender wrote:
◊ 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.

They do this on Imperiosaur and Myr Superion (for creature mana ofc). It's a pain in the ass maybe, but you more or less can keep track of just a few mana if you are the one playing the card in the first place. By playing Upwelling and the like, that's your choice to count. OTOH, if i had Upwelling, idk what kind of deck i'm playing that requires remembering more than ~4 'basic mana' from Wastes anyway. Maybe if kept building up Somberwald Sage mana it could get rough, but it's not unprecedented.
Although, i really can't imagine how they would create a symbol for 'this mana must be paid with basic land'. That would be ridiculous.

Wilkinsbane wrote:
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.

Except to pay for colored mana costs. But mostly colorless Eldrazi can do anything, and there's nothing wrong with that. They're weird. A lot of other colorless things are also very boring and have basic evergreen abilities.

Epsilon wrote:
Colorless mana symbols aren't changing. That is crazy to even suggest. They aren't going to change 10k+ cards for one small set. There's also 0 reason to have to use these lands or symbols moving forward, the proof of that is that it's a common, not a land draw.

Some of the things you said make some sense, but these lines don't to me.
They don't have to change 10k cards. The cards don't function any differently with (1) or with <>.
Yes, there is likely 0 reason to have these basics moving forward. Perhaps that's why they are draftable commons, instead of land slot. Maybe there will be rules about basic lands to your deck that states it may only be the WUBRG lands and not Wastes.
Changing the colorless symbol on mana producers to <> doesn't ruin MTG. Even if the next set for Innistrad if they reprint Radiant Fountain to say 'add <> to your mana pool' nothing has changed about how colorless mana functions.
It's not crazy that people think these things, they are fair ideas just like your 'snow mana' idea is fair... Even though i think it's wrong and that you're crazy ;)

-----------------------

If diamond means 'must be paid by colorless not WUBRG mana' then some of these eldrazi will be a neat boon for budget players who may be using Pain lands instead of ABUR duals. Could only imagine in this case cards with a single diamond symbol being effective, though. Temple of the False God and Ancient Tomb are also solid cards anyway.

Requiring colorless mana and colorless being (so far) difficult to fetch out makes Mirrorpool make sense for it's costs.

Kozilek is AWESOME and I can't wait to play it in EDH! Maybe i'm crazy, but he looks so damn fun as a finisher in maybe WUG/BUG control or some reanimator type, like maybe a Mimeoplasm or Zur target. The design is spot on to me.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 7:19 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
Sovarius wrote:
Kozilek is AWESOME and I can't wait to play it in EDH!

I can't decide if I want to use him or Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger, to lead a colorless commander deck. I guess both really play to a plan of heavy ramp and control, so maybe I'll just rotate who's the boss.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 7:29 am 

Joined: 2014-Sep-13 7:28 am
Age: Elder Dragon
I'm not sure i'll ever make a colorless deck, but Kozilek is in the very rare 2-shot club if you want a finisher. Ulamog has a better cast effect, but his staying power may mean you only get to do it once or twice.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 7:42 am 

Joined: 2013-Aug-20 4:37 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Boston
I know! People will be forced to start chumping him super fast, so menace acts as pseudo-annihilate on him. Self-protection through his countering ability seems pretty awesome, too.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Oath of the Gatewatch -- The Colorless Basic Land is Here!
AgePosted: 2015-Nov-18 7:51 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Sep-19 1:30 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
JJackson wrote:
Willbender wrote:
It's a full-art basic, so it would make sense that this is going to be in the land slot.
The rarity is now on the cards by letter code with the new border. This one is "C" where the Zendikar full-art basics were "L"

I'd guess that it is going in the common slot so that you have to draft them if you want them for your deck; similar to snow basics in Coldsnap.
Ah, true, that does make it more likely it's in the common slot, but not a guarantee. We've had non-L rarities in the land slots before. Fate Reforged had all non-L in there, and Dragon's Maze had a mix of L and R rarities there. I could see these being mixed into the land slot since they're full art.

_________________
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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 350 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 24  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 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: