I just checked it against a BFZ full art Forest and yeah, they haven't followed the same templating.
Well, I apologize for my previous post. Now I'm just bewildered
So much for future-proofing/evergreening prospects. It's likely this mechanic is going to be a lot more insular than many people with my same assumption had thought.
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
The whole Waste concept is interesting and I feel it will be experienced in the same vein as "Snow" mana.
Brings existence to the term, "splash for colorless".
People will not be able to just "easily" throw these cards in decks that have no way of producing colorless mana.
It forces you to respect the idea of Eldrazi and their "colorless" identity.
Either way, whatever WOTC decides I hope this whole "colorless/deviod" stuff doesn't divert them from creating some more Modern-playable artifacts.
Because I want to re-emphasize--there's not actually that many different things they can do without REALLY doing some extensive re-working of the comp rules. There's already, like I've mentioned before, exactly one option for making that land even produce mana if they only print it in full art mode: revising rule 305.6 or some equivalent change to give lands a new "default" mana production ability. OK, actually, there are two, they could make an oracle errata with a text box giving it a mana ability without ever actually printing a card with the rules text on it. But hey, that's even messier if you consider the way the rules manager Matt has been handling oracle fixes anyway.
They've made a grand change to these rules at least twice before. First, when they removed the text from the lands with Portal and permanently with Masques (a point at which the lands still had no basic super or subtypes to reference), then again in 8th Edition when they introduced the basic super and subtypes. I would think they could simply add another line of text that reads, "If a land has the Basic supertype and no basic land subtype, it has the intrinsic ability '{t}: add <> to your mana pool.'" That would allow them to make other basic lands without subtypes which produce colorless but more flavorful in relation to their setting, like a "City" for Ravnica, or a "Cave" for somewhere else, without any additional updates to the rules.
I'm curious how these particular rules were worded around Masques. I remember when Portal first came out and a friend used the textless lands, I told him his land didn't produce any mana unless he could show me the rule that allowed it. He laughed at the concept and thought I was stupid for suggesting such a rule even need exist. I found it eventually, and laughed right back at him for not understanding the need for a rule, but I don't surely recall what it was.
I guess I'm confused as to why Mirrorpool would say Tap: Add <> instead of Tap: Add (1), when you say it produces colorless. If I'm not mistaken, the other portion of what you're saying is that Kozilek costing 8<><> simply means that <><> MUST be 2 colorless sources (can't be a color) and that the 8 colorless can be paid with anything. I'm just not understanding "producing colorless mana in abilities" portion.
My argument is that it may be/is likely to be just an aesthetic change. It's there to clarify that the card can pay for <> mana in costs. IE:
"Kozilek requires <><> to cast. <> denotes mana that is specifically colorless, IE, it can be payed with the mana from the first ability on Caves of Koilos, because that mana is not colored. It can also be payed with mana from Wastes or Mirror Pool, because <> means the same thing as 1 when either of those symbols is displayed in mana-producing abilities."
"In abilities" in that sentence is mean to distinguish mana production from mana costs, where <> means a different thing.
There are two possibilities on this, assuming myself and others are correct in our belief that <> represents costs that required colorless mana. One is that <> will be used in mana-producing abilities as the symbol that represents a single colorless mana in perpetuity, the other is that it will only be used in sets that include cards with <> costs. I argue for the latter possibility, because I see little reason to change all cards that produce colorless mana in perpetuity for the sake of a faction-specific mechanic that we may never see again after this set.
In short, I think that <> is an aesthetic choice used on cards that produce colorless mana to indicate that they can pay <> costs on cards that require colorless mana, and will not be used in sets that do not involve cards with <> in their costs.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
*Insert giant block of annoying garbage that no one cares about but you have to scroll past anyway here*
they have made "sweeping" changes in the past, sure, but they don't need to make sweeping changes--they just need to change 305.6 to give any land with the "basic" supertype a mana ability, and then replace it based on subtype.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Yes, I am a local area mod. WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE
Primary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
I find it less likely that <> simply means must be paid for with colorless mana, since that would make Wastes a whole lot less interesting and basically unplayable in both Standard and Modern since we have a lot of ways to generate colorless mana in both formats. I find it hard to believe that they would spoil a card first and go through all the trouble of making it a basic land type, if it's gonna serve a marginal role at best and be unplayable at worst.
I do however think there's a lot of ways they can reward you for putting <> spells and lands in your deck. A <> sol-land perhaps? That would be a start. But all in all I think we're looking at a mechanic that most likely won't be strong enough for Modern, unless they return to it later on. Or unless it enables some crazy colorless Tron brew. You never know.
I also find it unlikely that a basic land type only produces colorless mana, instead of "<> or 1" like Forest produces: "G or 1" and also from a flavor perspective it seems more likely that some Eldrazi need specifically Wastes (lands sucked dry). It makes no sense that they can't draw power from Mounains or Plains (or Scrublands) but can from a Gavony Township.
What (I think) will happen:
<> mana has a type and a quality: colorless and Eldrazi-Snow. If <> occurs in a mana cost or an activation cost, <> is required. If you have <> in your mana pool, you can use it to pay for mana costs and activation costs requiring <> or (one generic mana). The card Wastes, though full art, has the ability " : Add <> to your mana pool". <> will not occur outside of Oath of the Gatewatch (until maybe we return to Zendikar again, if we do).
What (I think) will not happen:
1. <> will not be the new symbol for colorless mana. Painlands, Sol Ring, Tron lands, Boreal Druid, etc. will not produce <>.
2. <> will not only be able to be used to cast colorless spells or activate abilities of colorless permanents. You will be able to cast Jace, Vryn's Prodigy by tapping one Island and one Wastes (or one Mirrorpool).
What (I think) will happen:
<> mana has a type and a quality: colorless and Eldrazi-Snow. If <> occurs in a mana cost or an activation cost, <> is required. If you have <> in your mana pool, you can use it to pay for mana costs and activation costs requiring <> or (one generic mana). The card Wastes, though full art, has the ability " : Add <> to your mana pool". <> will not occur outside of Oath of the Gatewatch (until maybe we return to Zendikar again, if we do).
What (I think) will not happen:
1. <> will not be the new symbol for colorless mana. Painlands, Sol Ring, Tron lands, Boreal Druid, etc. will not produce <>.
2. <> will not only be able to be used to cast colorless spells or activate abilities of colorless permanents. You will be able to cast Jace, Vryn's Prodigy by tapping one Island and one Wastes (or one Mirrorpool).
I think so, except it wont' be snow. We probably will never see it in modern, as tron will always be better and doesn't need anything they are likely to print with a <> cost.
Also... OTG is going to need a whole lot of <> and otherwise colorless cards for any of them to be playable even in standard, to say nothing of limited. Wouldn't it be interesting if it was a 100% colorless set, and wastes was the only basic land? I don't actually think that will happen, but it would be kind of cool. Realistically it probably really will have to be close to half colorless just to have enough of them to bother, since it's only 1 set out of 6 in standard.
I find it less likely that <> simply means must be paid for with colorless mana, since that would make Wastes a whole lot less interesting and basically unplayable in both Standard and Modern since we have a lot of ways to generate colorless mana in both formats. I find it hard to believe that they would spoil a card first and go through all the trouble of making it a basic land type, if it's gonna serve a marginal role at best and be unplayable at worst.
I do however think there's a lot of ways they can reward you for putting <> spells and lands in your deck. A <> sol-land perhaps? That would be a start. But all in all I think we're looking at a mechanic that most likely won't be strong enough for Modern, unless they return to it later on. Or unless it enables some crazy colorless Tron brew. You never know.
I also find it unlikely that a basic land type only produces colorless mana, instead of "<> or 1" like Forest produces: "G or 1" and also from a flavor perspective it seems more likely that some Eldrazi need specifically Wastes (lands sucked dry). It makes no sense that they can't draw power from Mounains or Plains (or Scrublands) but can from a Gavony Township.
But a forest DOES NOT and CAN NOT produce 1, you can produce G with a forest and use that to pay for a generic cost (1).
For example:
If this card existed:
Broken Dreams, 1
Do 1 damage to target player, if G was spent to cast this you lose the game.
There is no way to pay for that card with a forest and not lose.
RW Blaze Commando Soldier Swarm BW Edgewalker Clerics i.e. All the prevention R Ogre Menial (Fallen Feromancer) Tunnelin' Infectors GB Shaman of the Pack Elves URReclusive Artificer Artifact Control GBCatacomb Sifter Sac-Attack
Tiny Leader Decks
WU Geist of Saint Traft WKembha's Cats WRG Marath Slide Control
Just to clarify, I do not believe it will be Snow, just that it will be like Snow. In what way? In the way that Snow is about mana quality, not mana type. An example of a card that has a mana quality restriction in its mana cost: Myr Superion.
I forgot to say that I don't think any of these three cards will have any impact in Modern. If Mirrorpool didn't enter the battlefield tapped it might have seen some play, but it won't in its current form.
Am I the only one not real crazy about Oath of the Gatewatch? I'm not sure how adding a new land type and mana cost is going to improve the non-limited play of the set outside of standard.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Am I the only one not real crazy about Oath of the Gatewatch? I'm not sure how adding a new land type and mana cost is going to improve the non-limited play of the set outside of standard.
It could open up some design space where if <> means 'colorless only' that colorless wouldn't necessarily need the "colorless tax"
Some examples:
a <><> 3/4 is harder to cast than a 2 3/4.
<>G is harder to cast than 1G.
Etc.
It would allow them to play with the costs of some cards. That and I think the big one: being a basic allows for EDH deck with colorless generals to run a basic land, something that the casual community has been clamoring for.
RW Blaze Commando Soldier Swarm BW Edgewalker Clerics i.e. All the prevention R Ogre Menial (Fallen Feromancer) Tunnelin' Infectors GB Shaman of the Pack Elves URReclusive Artificer Artifact Control GBCatacomb Sifter Sac-Attack
Tiny Leader Decks
WU Geist of Saint Traft WKembha's Cats WRG Marath Slide Control
Just to clarify, I do not believe it will be Snow, just that it will be like Snow. In what way? In the way that Snow is about mana quality, not mana type. An example of a card that has a mana quality restriction in its mana cost: Myr Superion.
I forgot to say that I don't think any of these three cards will have any impact in Modern. If Mirrorpool didn't enter the battlefield tapped it might have seen some play, but it won't in its current form.
I got ya. I don't think it'll be like snow either. It will work the way you say, but be it's own thing. <> mana will be a 6th type with no color and no other qualities. If it were like snow, it would probably have to say so on wastes, and it doesn't.
AFAIK, this is a gimmick mechanic analogous to most mechanics seen in specific sets we've encountered so far that will never be seen again and will have a fringe class of decks that play around it.
Just like arcane and splicing, unless you build around it, it's useless.
Just like snow lands, unless you use other cards that interact with snow, it's useless.
IMHO, unless you actually design your deck around this new mana, you won't use it and since the power level of new cards seems to go down all the time, it will probably not be built around since it will be too weak for modern.
AFAIK, this is a gimmick mechanic analogous to most mechanics seen in specific sets we've encountered so far that will never be seen again and will have a fringe class of decks that play around it.
Just like arcane and splicing, unless you build around it, it's useless.
Just like snow lands, unless you use other cards that interact with snow, it's useless.
IMHO, unless you actually design your deck around this new mana, you won't use it and since the power level of new cards seems to go down all the time, it will probably not be built around since it will be too weak for modern.
0/10, would not play or sideboard against.
Hey Skred Red is a modern deck that uses Snow to decent effect! If we can just one tier 2.5 deck out of this I'd be happy.
Hey Skred Red is a modern deck that uses Snow to decent effect! If we can just one tier 2.5 deck out of this I'd be happy.
Yes, as I mentioned you can build around it but here are some key differences between skred red and this abomination:
- it uses snow basic lands that can produce both snow and red. This allows the deck to efficiently splash snow mechanics while mainly focusing on being red.
- skred works passively off the lands and can be a powerful spell
- scrying sheets works passively off the lands when needed
Note that Skred red is mainly red with a splash mechanic.
This new mechanic, forces colorlessness (TRON) and is printed in a set that will probably be very weak as it was seen in Theros and in BFZ. Almost no cards from BFZ sees play outside of standard/limited.
Tron will probably not use this as it already has a solid base to build around. The core of the deck is Urzalands, not strict lands.
So unless you build around wastes, you won't use wastes.
If the set's cards are powerful on their own, they will see play in modern.
If the set's cards are powerful with wastes, they may see play in modern depending on what can be played.
If the set's cards are weak, regardless of wastes, they will not see play in modern.
So the mechanic doesn't matter, it's whether or not the set is strong.
I imagine it will not be.
Edit: New Kozilek is also probably strictly worse than the old Kozilek as well in any Tron variant.
I'd love to think thats part of the point. We dont need more power in tron...
That's true to the extent of RG Tron, but Blue Tron is factually a bad deck, given it has absolutely zero results to speak of.
Now that we know the rules for the waste symbols, I don't see how UW tron wouldn't want Mirrorpool since it can copy gifts, copy a Wurmcoil Engine, copy removal, etc. Seems good to me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On mtgsalvation people don't want to discuss ideas, so I give people something else to discuss: my controversial opinions.
Edit: New Kozilek is also probably strictly worse than the old Kozilek as well in any Tron variant.
I'd love to think thats part of the point. We dont need more power in tron...
That's true to the extent of RG Tron, but Blue Tron is factually a bad deck, given it has absolutely zero results to speak of.
Now that we know the rules for the waste symbols, I don't see how UW tron wouldn't want Mirrorpool since it can copy gifts, copy a Wurmcoil Engine, copy removal, etc. Seems good to me.
He ? What did I miss ? Where did I miss it ? What ARE the rules for the symbol ?
Snow lands are my favorite part of Magic, so you could say I am geeking out about this new set. Hopefully we will get more than three good cards to go with it though >_>
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Pauper: UB Wight Phantasm RB Burn UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Edit: New Kozilek is also probably strictly worse than the old Kozilek as well in any Tron variant.
I'd love to think thats part of the point. We dont need more power in tron...
That's true to the extent of RG Tron, but Blue Tron is factually a bad deck, given it has absolutely zero results to speak of.
Now that we know the rules for the waste symbols, I don't see how UW tron wouldn't want Mirrorpool since it can copy gifts, copy a Wurmcoil Engine, copy removal, etc. Seems good to me.
He ? What did I miss ? Where did I miss it ? What ARE the rules for the symbol ?
Look at the judge who posted the rules on the second page
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On mtgsalvation people don't want to discuss ideas, so I give people something else to discuss: my controversial opinions.
Maybe Mirrorpool will see play in UW or even Mono U Tron but I don't think it will make high numbers in those decks. It doesn't seem particularly good to me or better than anyting those Tron decks are already playing.
I agree it would want mirrorpool as a 1 of. It's just a nice utility land.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On mtgsalvation people don't want to discuss ideas, so I give people something else to discuss: my controversial opinions.
Look at the judge who posted the rules on the second page
Ahh, ok, now I understand what you mean, but i still think it looks hilarious for my Sol Ring to produce Waste-Mana.
And I hope that he is not right. :/
(I get the whole Basic-Thing, but what it means for the symbol to appear on that other land, that's what concerns me ... )
Maybe I'm the weirdo for not freaking out about this but I don't honestly think its that big of a deal. I also don't think how this thing is going to work is all that much of a mystery. I realize how the rules stand now and I can't imagine how it would be that difficult to give this land the ability to tap for "<>" which can be used to pay "<>" costs as well as 1 costs just like very other basic land in the game.
Plains taps for W and can be used to pay for W and 1. Island taps for U and can be used to pay for U and 1. Swamp taps for B and can be used to pay for B and 1. Mountain taps for R and can be used to pay for R and 1. Forest taps for G and can be used to pay for G and 1. Wastes taps for <> and can be used to pay for <> and 1.
All of the above can be tutored for using Evolving Wilds, Terramorphic Expanse, and similar effects.
At the very least it will be like Snow in that the only cards ever printed that actually care about <> will be left in this block but now we will have access to a colorless Basic Land.
Phyrexians had Phyrexian Mana and now Eldrazi have Eldrazi Mana. Unlike Phyrexians which were colored artifacts, Eldrazi are colorless non-Artifacts. I think as far as eternal formats are concerned, this will have no more impact than Snow and cards like Scrying Sheets or Skred.
The following link is an invitation to join Pucatrade (card trading service though similar to TCGPLayer). If you follow the link then it awards me with tokens to exchange for actual cards. Thanks! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
I just checked it against a BFZ full art Forest and yeah, they haven't followed the same templating.
Well, I apologize for my previous post. Now I'm just bewildered
So much for future-proofing/evergreening prospects. It's likely this mechanic is going to be a lot more insular than many people with my same assumption had thought.
"OH GOD MY BRAIN IS EXPLOADING AT HOW BAD THE ART IS ON MY OWN CARD"
-A friend's first impression of Ancestral Recall
10/10, I tapped.
Brings existence to the term, "splash for colorless".
People will not be able to just "easily" throw these cards in decks that have no way of producing colorless mana.
It forces you to respect the idea of Eldrazi and their "colorless" identity.
Either way, whatever WOTC decides I hope this whole "colorless/deviod" stuff doesn't divert them from creating some more Modern-playable artifacts.
Twitch: gamerchamp
Modern: UGrand Architect, UBTezzeret Control, UBWRG Bridge From Below (Dredge)
Legacy: UWGTrue-Name Bant
They've made a grand change to these rules at least twice before. First, when they removed the text from the lands with Portal and permanently with Masques (a point at which the lands still had no basic super or subtypes to reference), then again in 8th Edition when they introduced the basic super and subtypes. I would think they could simply add another line of text that reads, "If a land has the Basic supertype and no basic land subtype, it has the intrinsic ability '{t}: add <> to your mana pool.'" That would allow them to make other basic lands without subtypes which produce colorless but more flavorful in relation to their setting, like a "City" for Ravnica, or a "Cave" for somewhere else, without any additional updates to the rules.
I'm curious how these particular rules were worded around Masques. I remember when Portal first came out and a friend used the textless lands, I told him his land didn't produce any mana unless he could show me the rule that allowed it. He laughed at the concept and thought I was stupid for suggesting such a rule even need exist. I found it eventually, and laughed right back at him for not understanding the need for a rule, but I don't surely recall what it was.
My argument is that it may be/is likely to be just an aesthetic change. It's there to clarify that the card can pay for <> mana in costs. IE:
"Kozilek requires <><> to cast. <> denotes mana that is specifically colorless, IE, it can be payed with the mana from the first ability on Caves of Koilos, because that mana is not colored. It can also be payed with mana from Wastes or Mirror Pool, because <> means the same thing as 1 when either of those symbols is displayed in mana-producing abilities."
"In abilities" in that sentence is mean to distinguish mana production from mana costs, where <> means a different thing.
There are two possibilities on this, assuming myself and others are correct in our belief that <> represents costs that required colorless mana. One is that <> will be used in mana-producing abilities as the symbol that represents a single colorless mana in perpetuity, the other is that it will only be used in sets that include cards with <> costs. I argue for the latter possibility, because I see little reason to change all cards that produce colorless mana in perpetuity for the sake of a faction-specific mechanic that we may never see again after this set.
In short, I think that <> is an aesthetic choice used on cards that produce colorless mana to indicate that they can pay <> costs on cards that require colorless mana, and will not be used in sets that do not involve cards with <> in their costs.
Yes, I am a local area mod.WELP. GOOD LIFE CHANGES ALL HAPPEN AT ONCE AND SOME ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVEPrimary Decks:
Modern: Esper Draw-Go
Legacy: RUG Lands
EDH: Sidisi turn-3 storm
I do however think there's a lot of ways they can reward you for putting <> spells and lands in your deck. A <> sol-land perhaps? That would be a start. But all in all I think we're looking at a mechanic that most likely won't be strong enough for Modern, unless they return to it later on. Or unless it enables some crazy colorless Tron brew. You never know.
I also find it unlikely that a basic land type only produces colorless mana, instead of "<> or 1" like Forest produces: "G or 1" and also from a flavor perspective it seems more likely that some Eldrazi need specifically Wastes (lands sucked dry). It makes no sense that they can't draw power from Mounains or Plains (or Scrublands) but can from a Gavony Township.
What (I think) will happen:
<> mana has a type and a quality: colorless and Eldrazi-Snow. If <> occurs in a mana cost or an activation cost, <> is required. If you have <> in your mana pool, you can use it to pay for mana costs and activation costs requiring <> or (one generic mana). The card Wastes, though full art, has the ability " : Add <> to your mana pool". <> will not occur outside of Oath of the Gatewatch (until maybe we return to Zendikar again, if we do).
What (I think) will not happen:
1. <> will not be the new symbol for colorless mana. Painlands, Sol Ring, Tron lands, Boreal Druid, etc. will not produce <>.
2. <> will not only be able to be used to cast colorless spells or activate abilities of colorless permanents. You will be able to cast Jace, Vryn's Prodigy by tapping one Island and one Wastes (or one Mirrorpool).
I think so, except it wont' be snow. We probably will never see it in modern, as tron will always be better and doesn't need anything they are likely to print with a <> cost.
Also... OTG is going to need a whole lot of <> and otherwise colorless cards for any of them to be playable even in standard, to say nothing of limited. Wouldn't it be interesting if it was a 100% colorless set, and wastes was the only basic land? I don't actually think that will happen, but it would be kind of cool. Realistically it probably really will have to be close to half colorless just to have enough of them to bother, since it's only 1 set out of 6 in standard.
But a forest DOES NOT and CAN NOT produce 1, you can produce G with a forest and use that to pay for a generic cost (1).
For example:
If this card existed:
Broken Dreams, 1
Do 1 damage to target player, if G was spent to cast this you lose the game.
There is no way to pay for that card with a forest and not lose.
EDH DECKS:
GBCatacomb Sifter Sac-Attack
I forgot to say that I don't think any of these three cards will have any impact in Modern. If Mirrorpool didn't enter the battlefield tapped it might have seen some play, but it won't in its current form.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
It could open up some design space where if <> means 'colorless only' that colorless wouldn't necessarily need the "colorless tax"
Some examples:
a <><> 3/4 is harder to cast than a 2 3/4.
<>G is harder to cast than 1G.
Etc.
It would allow them to play with the costs of some cards. That and I think the big one: being a basic allows for EDH deck with colorless generals to run a basic land, something that the casual community has been clamoring for.
EDH DECKS:
GBCatacomb Sifter Sac-Attack
I got ya. I don't think it'll be like snow either. It will work the way you say, but be it's own thing. <> mana will be a 6th type with no color and no other qualities. If it were like snow, it would probably have to say so on wastes, and it doesn't.
Just like arcane and splicing, unless you build around it, it's useless.
Just like snow lands, unless you use other cards that interact with snow, it's useless.
IMHO, unless you actually design your deck around this new mana, you won't use it and since the power level of new cards seems to go down all the time, it will probably not be built around since it will be too weak for modern.
0/10, would not play or sideboard against.
RETIRED - GAME SUCKS
Modern:
UUUMerfolksUUU
RGoblinsR
Ad Nauseam
BR 8 Racks RB
WUB Mill BUW
Legacy:
XOps! All splels! X
What I think of MaRo
Hey Skred Red is a modern deck that uses Snow to decent effect! If we can just one tier 2.5 deck out of this I'd be happy.
- it uses snow basic lands that can produce both snow and red. This allows the deck to efficiently splash snow mechanics while mainly focusing on being red.
- skred works passively off the lands and can be a powerful spell
- scrying sheets works passively off the lands when needed
Note that Skred red is mainly red with a splash mechanic.
This new mechanic, forces colorlessness (TRON) and is printed in a set that will probably be very weak as it was seen in Theros and in BFZ. Almost no cards from BFZ sees play outside of standard/limited.
Tron will probably not use this as it already has a solid base to build around. The core of the deck is Urzalands, not strict lands.
So unless you build around wastes, you won't use wastes.
If the set's cards are powerful on their own, they will see play in modern.
If the set's cards are powerful with wastes, they may see play in modern depending on what can be played.
If the set's cards are weak, regardless of wastes, they will not see play in modern.
So the mechanic doesn't matter, it's whether or not the set is strong.
I imagine it will not be.
RETIRED - GAME SUCKS
Modern:
UUUMerfolksUUU
RGoblinsR
Ad Nauseam
BR 8 Racks RB
WUB Mill BUW
Legacy:
XOps! All splels! X
What I think of MaRo
Now that we know the rules for the waste symbols, I don't see how UW tron wouldn't want Mirrorpool since it can copy gifts, copy a Wurmcoil Engine, copy removal, etc. Seems good to me.
Decks I'm playing in Modern right now:
URB Grixis Reveler (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-grixis-reveler/)
UB Faeries (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/ub-fae-2/)
UW Azorious Control (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-ojutai-control-2/)
He ? What did I miss ? Where did I miss it ? What ARE the rules for the symbol ?
I mean I get the mechanics they're aiming for, or at least I assume I do, but still wtf.
I'm genuinely nonplussed right now.
UB Wight Phantasm
RB Burn
UR Faerie Rites of Initiation
Legacy:
R Burn
CG-Post
Look at the judge who posted the rules on the second page
Decks I'm playing in Modern right now:
URB Grixis Reveler (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-grixis-reveler/)
UB Faeries (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/ub-fae-2/)
UW Azorious Control (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-ojutai-control-2/)
I agree it would want mirrorpool as a 1 of. It's just a nice utility land.
Decks I'm playing in Modern right now:
URB Grixis Reveler (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-grixis-reveler/)
UB Faeries (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/ub-fae-2/)
UW Azorious Control (http://www.mtgvault.com/supast4r7/decks/modern-ojutai-control-2/)
Ahh, ok, now I understand what you mean, but i still think it looks hilarious for my Sol Ring to produce Waste-Mana.
And I hope that he is not right. :/
(I get the whole Basic-Thing, but what it means for the symbol to appear on that other land, that's what concerns me ... )
Plains taps for W and can be used to pay for W and 1.
Island taps for U and can be used to pay for U and 1.
Swamp taps for B and can be used to pay for B and 1.
Mountain taps for R and can be used to pay for R and 1.
Forest taps for G and can be used to pay for G and 1.
Wastes taps for <> and can be used to pay for <> and 1.
All of the above can be tutored for using Evolving Wilds, Terramorphic Expanse, and similar effects.
At the very least it will be like Snow in that the only cards ever printed that actually care about <> will be left in this block but now we will have access to a colorless Basic Land.
Phyrexians had Phyrexian Mana and now Eldrazi have Eldrazi Mana. Unlike Phyrexians which were colored artifacts, Eldrazi are colorless non-Artifacts. I think as far as eternal formats are concerned, this will have no more impact than Snow and cards like Scrying Sheets or Skred.
https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/86097