|
Niton posted:Keith Adams that guy shows up at my LGS sometimes. I've seen him film flip it or rip it.
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 13:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
Bread Set Jettison posted:Here we go Devotion to ♦ If it were a ▲ we could make illuminati jokes but nooo
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
I'd be pretty unhappy if this ends up being a mechanic and they don't use it as a chance to errata colorless mana to ♦ mana. It's pretty weird how adding 2 colorless mana says add {2} while for every other type of mana it says add {G}{G}, so I'd hope they use this as a chance to change that instead of only introducing ♦ for one set and making it somehow different from colorless mana.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
If they were going to errata colorless mana to produce this ♦, why would they print a card like Kozilek's Channeler in the set preceding OGW? Anyway, I doubt this leak is real, most probably someone just got a hold of the art and slapped together some cards. New players would absolutely not get this new mana symbol (it's a color like the other ones but colorless? what?), and it would introduce a lot of new complexity for very little gains.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Oh neat, some rules technology being added to the back of a 20yo game and the grognards don't like it. It's clunky as-is and I'd rather a fresh start for magic where this could be better implemented but oh well. Works well enough.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
Interestingly, if this does mean can only be cast with colorless mana, it's one of the mechanics from The Great Designer Search 2:quote:1) Common Card #1 –
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
FWIW I like these potential changes... mostly. Adding a symbol for "must be payed with colorless mana" is good and could open up some new/cool things. Changing colorless mana production to that same symbol is weird though. It's a really sweeping change to make in a small set. It makes it look like another color when it isn't and I can't wait to have to explain yet more rules weirdness to people. Not that I don't already have to explain poo poo to even our really good players (probably the best guy at our store plays Eternal Command in Modern and I keep having to tell him that if Cryptic only has 1 target and that target is removed, or otherwise becomes illegal, Cryptic gets countered and he doesn't get to tap all my dudes or draw).
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
NivMizzet posted:Interestingly, if this does mean can only be cast with colorless mana, it's one of the mechanics from The Great Designer Search 2: "Your ideas are bad and you should feel bad." -Maro, after crumpling up test cards and stuffing them in his pocket.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
Probably mentioned before, but another strong piece of evidence that this is a big evergreen change to the game is that "waste" would be a waste of a good name for a land. If this was just some stupid eldrazi snow mana they would have picked a different name for the land.
Northjayhawk fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Nov 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
NivMizzet posted:Interestingly, if this does mean can only be cast with colorless mana, it's one of the mechanics from The Great Designer Search 2: "Thanks for the free designs, loser!" -Rosewater, if Wastes et. al. were real, which they are not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
I think its a really clean way to impliment a psuedo 6th color.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
Is Menace an evergreen word? Why would they print a standard playable card with no reminder text. (And how ugly would Koz be with the text shoved in there?)
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
Bread Set Jettison posted:I think its a really clean way to impliment a psuedo 6th color. It's going to be an actual 6th color in limited... Thor-Stryker posted:Is Menace an evergreen word? Why would they print a standard playable card with no reminder text. (And how ugly would Koz be with the text shoved in there?) Yeah Menace is evergreen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
Thor-Stryker posted:Is Menace an evergreen word? Why would they print a standard playable card with no reminder text. (And how ugly would Koz be with the text shoved in there?) Yes. It's a mythic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
Thor-Stryker posted:Is Menace an evergreen word? Why would they print a standard playable card with no reminder text. (And how ugly would Koz be with the text shoved in there?) Menace is evergreen. Regardless, they tend not to put reminder text on mythics since they show up so rarely there's no real point to reminder text. Plus it has more punch without it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
2R, sorcery, target land becomes a Waste
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
dragon enthusiast posted:2R, sorcery, target land becomes a Waste Go big or go home. ◇◇◇, Enchantment, all nonbasics become Wastes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
They're real and they're spectacular.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
dragon enthusiast posted:2R, sorcery, target land becomes a Waste Naw, think more spreading seas-style. ◇R Enchant Land Enchanted Land loses all abilities and is a Waste. ?Draw a card? (this is too strong in the current environment)
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Balon posted:Naw, think more spreading seas-style. Wouldn't it actually just say what Spreading Seas does, then? "Enchanted land is a Waste. Draw a card." See not only does it match Spreading Seas' text, it also sounds cooler.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
Abolish the color pie. Make a whole new game with 7 basics. It'll be the New Coke of Magic
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Reminder text on mythics? It varies.  Sometimes, there's just straight up no need. Nothing Anafenza does is actually that complicated. There's nothing reminder text could clarify on Archangel ofTithes.   More to the point, mechanics do tend to have reminder text.   Yes I know Emrakul and Blightsteel don't have reminder text, but that's because they have a lot of words.   Ulamog and other infect mythic Skittles do have reminder text. Ulamog isn't much wordier than that fake Kozilek up there. Hell, Kozilek probably has menace and flavor text entirely so the fakers could decline to put reminder text for ♦. The flavor text is especially rotten. Elbrus, the Binding Blade is the one time a card has declined reminder text for flavor text, and it was the reminder text for the evergreen keyword Equip. Which is an entirely different league from declining flavor text for new paradigm-changing mechanic ♦ just so you can make some lovely comment about voids? They've never had a set's brand-new marquee mechanic not have reminder text in favor of flavor text. And I don't see why they'd start here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
Kozi underground, with diamonds
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
The lowercase "a" in Emrakul's annihilator ability always pissed me off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
If this is real, I don't think Kozilek is that good. At least for Standard/Modern.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
Newlamog skips reminder text for flavour. e: if this is actually a larger shift (ie colorless lands will always produce diamonds now to make them distinct from generic mana) then there may be no need for reminder text at all. Irony Be My Shield fucked around with this message at 16:29 on Nov 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Newlamog skips reminder text for flavour. He has Indestructible, an evergreen keyword. Everything else is instruction. This is, hm, how we say, different from costing 8♦♦ and not having reminder text for ♦.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
NivMizzet posted:Interestingly, if this does mean can only be cast with colorless mana, it's one of the mechanics from The Great Designer Search 2: Heh good catch. That was Jonathon Loucks who worked as a designer till 2014. Considering how far in advance sets are designed/planned I wouldn't be surprised if MaRo took the idea and re-purposed it; though Jonathon isn't actually on the list of designers for the set.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
If colourless lands now produce ♦ what would the reminder text even say? "(♦ can only be paid with ♦)"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
There's no need for a reminder text if it's a new type of mana. It's not like phyrexian mana which was either a color or 2 life.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Wouldn't it actually just say what Spreading Seas does, then? That doesn't work because Wastes (as spoiled/faked) don't have subtypes. It would read: Enchanted land loses all abilities. (Lands with no other abilities have T: Add ♦ to your mana pool.) Or possibly the land has to be basic with no types to get this ability? Obviously we don't know what the rules support for Wastes will be. Lancelot fucked around with this message at 16:52 on Nov 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Lancelot posted:That doesn't work because Wastes (as spoiled/faked) don't have subtypes. "Enchanted land loses all abilities and gains "T:♦" e: Better yet new action word, "waste", which means "loses all abilities and agains "T:♦"". 1♦R, Waste target land. ♦U, enchanted land becomes wasted. Kabanaw fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Nov 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Frozen_flame posted:Go big or go home. I would be all about wastemoon
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:If colourless lands now produce ♦ what would the reminder text even say? "(♦ can only be paid with ♦)"? Why would they revolutionize the entire game, forever changing how every colorless mana generator works, to make a few cards in a small set more confusing? Is my name Cassandra?
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
Lancelot posted:That doesn't work because Wastes (as spoiled/faked) don't have subtypes. It would be more: Enchanted land loses all abilities and types, and gains T: Add ♦ to your mana pool. Rules support will probs be along the lines of: ♦ is a mana cost that can only be paid by ♦ mana. For example 2♦ would need to be paid for by 2 mana of any type and one ♦; not 3 of any type. ♦ is colourless; spells, effects and abilities that refer to a colour do not include ♦. This means spells and permanents that cost ♦ are also colourless, unless they have other mana costs printed (1♦U would be Blue despite having a cost of ♦). Spells and effects that add colourless mana do not add ♦ unless specified. This means Sol Ring still taps for 2 not for ♦♦. Gridlocked fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Nov 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
Kabanaw posted:♦U, enchanted land becomes wasted.  Moon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:Magic: The Gathering: Look Again, The Mana Is Now Diamonds Matgic: The Gathering: Shine on you crazy diamonds
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:It would be more: I think the idea is that (2) could pay ♦♦ in a cost
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
My assumption is that the diamond symbol literally refers to colorless mana. It's not a new, sixth color, and you actually can pay for the new Kozilek by tapping five Sol Rings. However, you could not do it by tapping nine mountains and one mind stone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
Cactrot posted:Matgic: The Gathering: Shine on you crazy diamonds Magic the gathering: Diamond is Unfathomable
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2015 16:59
|
|