|
odiv posted:Does that have to be five distinct decks? Or just five top 8s? the latter.
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:25 |
|
|
bhsman posted:There's also that mythic rare land that can copy spells/creatures, which brings me to my point: There haven't been official spoilers yet, and the cards with this new mechanic have been mythic rares, which tend to not have reminder text IIRC. I bet you we'll see a Eldrazi bear that costs 1♦ or ♦♦ and says (♦ may only be paid for with colorless mana.) Except now colorless mana is ♦, so it'd say (♦ can only be paid for with ♦) which is basically not saying anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:14
|
|
)
|
bhsman posted:If and when you acquire a copy of Mirrorpool, take a picture of you holding it up and apologizing to your poor cats. Nah, if they're real (they're not (I have to believe)) I'll just pester my cats with them since I play Animar and Kessig alone is too many colorless-producing lands, so gently caress anything ♦-themed. And post pics obv.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
I hope they're real, cause it looks like an interesting mechanic that could be cool for the game. Presumably since it's a basic land and far-reaching, it wouldn't be a one-off thing. 'Wastes' is a generic enough name that it could be anywhere, afterall. Just posting some optimism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:Tron is GIANT FUCKIN MANA themed, not colorless themed - frequently you're using that colorless themed mana to GSZ for 6G. What are the green creatures that you frequently see Tron players tutoring up with Green Sun's Zenith?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
e:^^ my bad, I saw Tron and my head turned that into 12-post because I haven't played modern in like 6 months.Allstone posted:No as in literally: modular, equip, mana rocks, indestructible, living weapon, artifacts/colourless matters, affinity (Incidentally a great way to put a minimum cost on colourless affinity cards), charge counters, etc. The mechanics that artifacts are currently using. They can already do this with the 5 previous colors, adding a 6th magic bullshit color does not open this design space up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
lol at people complaining about this when it's only even been a consistent thing since 8th edition - a little more than half of the game's existence http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=11140
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:39
|
|
|
I can't see how ♦ could be good for limited. The only way a ♦/x archetype works in draft is if it has massive support in Oath - and consequently, fewer colored cards - because BFZ has only six cards that produce colorless mana and only 23 cards that do not require colored mana to cast. Your choices in limited end up being to either go ♦/x in the first two packs knowing that the third pack is going to have almost nothing for half your deck or being forced to ignore a hefty amount of cards in the first two packs in order to have a better chance at getting playable cards in pack three. The alternative would be that there isn't a huge amount of support for ♦ in Oath and the (presumably) marquee mechanic is only usable as a splash, which just sounds like a stupid idea.
ElectricRelaxation fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:Except now colorless mana is ♦, so it'd say (♦ can only be paid for with ♦) which is basically not saying anything. it's flavor text written by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Deceptive Thinker posted:lol at people complaining about this when it's only even been a consistent thing since 8th edition - a little more than half of the game's existence That's more than mythic rares, auras, equipment, vampire tribal, colored artifacts, nonartifact colorless spells, and sheep.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
yourdadsbestfriend posted:I can't see how ♦ could be good for limited. The only way a ♦/x archetype works in draft is if it has massive support in Oath - and consequently, fewer colored cards - because BFZ has only six cards that produce colorless mana and only 23 cards that do not require colorless mana to cast. Your choices in limited end up being to either go ♦/x in the first two packs knowing that the third pack is going to have almost nothing for half your deck or being forced to ignore a hefty amount of cards in the first two packs in order to have a better chance at getting playable cards in pack three. The alternative would be that there isn't a huge amount of support for ♦ in Oath and the (presumably) marquee mechanic is only usable as a splash, which just sounds like a stupid idea. How did you come with that 6 number? There's 18 cards that make scions alone. Also, no cards in BFZ require colorless mana to be cast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
yourdadsbestfriend posted:I can't see how ♦ could be good for limited. The only way a ♦/x archetype works in draft is if it has massive support in Oath - and consequently, fewer colored cards - because BFZ has only six cards that produce colorless mana and only 23 cards that do not require colorless mana to cast. Your choices in limited end up being to either go ♦/x in the first two packs knowing that the third pack is going to have almost nothing for half your deck or being forced to ignore a hefty amount of cards in the first two packs in order to have a better chance at getting playable cards in pack three. The alternative would be that there isn't a huge amount of support for ♦ in Oath and the (presumably) marquee mechanic is only usable as a splash, which just sounds like a stupid idea. Either you or I are really confused here. BFZ has exactly zero cards that require colourless. Also the number of cards that require colourless in their costs is no issue since wastes is a basic and you can add as many as you want during deckbuilding.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Sorry we ripped off your cards. We changed them now (per our contractual obligations in the settlement):    Among the other funny changes: quote:In HEX previously, all Champions had 20 health. Now you’ll see a variety of Champion health totals. You’ll see totals range from 14 to 19 and 21 to 26 in this update. We’ve thoroughly tested this change and are happy with the results. In other words, you can have any amount of life as long as it isn't 20. And booster packs can't be 15 cards, they must be SEVENTEEN! Wow! More cards! Also, it's not "graveyard," it's Crypt. Get it right!  
Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:They can already do this with the 5 previous colors, adding a 6th magic bullshit color does not open this design space up. E: A really easy example is to look for red or blue cards that do life gain. A bunch of colourless cards do life gain for cheap, so why can't red or blue cards? Because colourless has its own set of mechanics that other colours can't necessarily access. is that good fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
Deceptive Thinker posted:lol at people complaining about this when it's only even been a consistent thing since 8th edition - a little more than half of the game's existence Strictly speaking, you can find it a lot earlier than that, but early examples like this are pretty much down to inconsistent templating. They standardized on writing out "colorless mana" for a while, then started changing it back to generic mana symbols with Odyssey (the Odyssey nonbasic lands didn't have them, but Nantuko Elder did, and it appears that starting with Onslaught the nonbasics did too).
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:How did you come with that 6 number? There's 18 cards that make scions alone. Also, no cards in BFZ require colorless mana to be cast. The one thing was a typo, only 23 cards in BFZ don't required COLORED mana to cast. And you're right, I forgot about Scions, but a quick Gatherer search shows that only 14 additional cards in BFZ produce Scions, and they're all in Blue, Black, or Green, so I think the point still stands that there would need to be a relatively huge proportion of colorless cards in Oath in order to make a ♦/x deck a viable archetype, and I think that would hurt the Limited environment overall. Fuzzy Mammal posted:Either you or I are really confused here. BFZ has exactly zero cards that require colourless. Also the number of cards that require colourless in their costs is no issue since wastes is a basic and you can add as many as you want during deckbuilding. It's an issue in the same sense that any splash hurts your manabase, except that in this case, ♦ seems like it would be a marquee mechanic for Oath and I'd imagine they wouldn't want it to simply be a splash mechanic. ElectricRelaxation fucked around with this message at 02:19 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:Strictly speaking, you can find it a lot earlier than that, but early examples like this are pretty much down to inconsistent templating. They standardized on writing out "colorless mana" for a while, then started changing it back to generic mana symbols with Odyssey (the Odyssey nonbasic lands didn't have them, but Nantuko Elder did, and it appears that starting with Onslaught the nonbasics did too). That's what I meant by the word "consistent" - even in the link I posted the Ice Age version has it
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:Except now colorless mana is ♦, so it'd say (♦ can only be paid for with ♦) which is basically not saying anything. It's more likely to just say "{D} is the symbol for colourless mana." Or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Deceptive Thinker posted:That's what I meant by the word "consistent" - even in the link I posted the Ice Age version has it Touche. I started with the point in my head that it was happening consistently before 8th (Onslaught, like I said) but then I rambled. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
yourdadsbestfriend posted:The one thing was a typo, only 23 cards in BFZ don't required COLORED mana to cast. And you're right, I forgot about Scions, but a quick Gatherer search shows that only 14 additional cards in BFZ produce Scions, and they're all in Blue, Black, or Green, so I think the point still stands that there would need to be a relatively huge proportion of colorless cards in Oath in order to make a ♦/x deck a viable archetype, and I think that would hurt the Limited environment overall. I really don't think it needs to be a full on "draft ♦ cards and nothing else" archetype for it to work. It's more like a theme for some set of color pairs. I can see a green deck working out very well. You play ramp cards and the payoff is getting these D cards to work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
I would be really, really surprised if Wastes shows up in any sets after this one that aren't another Return to Zen set. Colorless mana costs are likely to show up about as much as hybrid mana; very occasionally and with specific reasons for doing so. Jesus I remember almost this exact same argument happening for weeks when Ravnica came out. It's not about opening up design space, although it does do that to a degree. The fundamental point of this change is obviously to separate colorless mana production from generic mana costs, which is a smart and good change. It looks better and makes more sense. It's not in any way a "pseudo sixth color" unless you consider artifacts to be the sixth color. If anything it helps RESTRICT color bleed by allowing WOTC to print disincentives for dummy 4c and 5c goodstuffs decks I mean if you wanna say that printing a run of cards in one set that require colorless mana to be cast is a bad dumb mechanic then fine but that's just, like, your opinion, man. There's nothing objectively bad about it. Edit: to put it a different way, the answer to the question "what can a creature that costs 1GB do differently than a creature that costs ♦GB?" the answer isn't just nothing, but emphatically nothing. A ♦GB creature INSISTS on being only green and black, it steadfastly refuses to be red, white or blue. Again, ♦ costs are reinforcing the five color paradigm, not distorting it. sit on my Facebook fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
Allstone posted:Black, red, and blue explicitly don't get indestructible as often as colourless does. Apart from green, there are exceedingly few nonland nonartifact permanents that unconditionally tap for mana. I don't think there are any coloured cards with modular? There are 7 coloured equipment cards to about 200 colourless ones. So no, they can't just use colourless mechanics on coloured cards. Why do you need to make these colorless lifegain artifacts into colorless-matters cards to make them harder to splash? Why not just run a white card at that point if you want a difficult to cast lifegain card? Making a colorless-required card is no more restrictive than adding a different color splash. stinkles1112 posted:It looks better and makes more sense. It's not in any way a "pseudo sixth color" unless you consider artifacts to be the sixth color. If anything it helps RESTRICT color bleed by allowing WOTC to print disincentives for dummy 4c and 5c goodstuffs decks What is a disincentive to running 5 colors that adding colorless mana as a requirement skirts around? It is literally as restrictive as colored mana. The deck build costs are pretty much identical between WUB♦ and WUBR, either way you have 4 restrictions. Artifacts aren't a 6th color because they're intended to be shared among colors and be used by any color deck, that's their entire original design goal. Adding a colorless restriction is not functionally different than a 6th color, and is fundamentally different than artifacts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
You can't put snow basics into your deck for free in Coldsnap draft so you might have to draft Wastes if you want to play them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:What is a disincentive to running 5 colors that adding colorless mana as a requirement skirts around? It is literally as restrictive as colored mana. The deck build costs are pretty much identical between WUB♦ and WUBR, either way you have 4 restrictions. See my edit above you If Siege Rhino cost ♦WGB, it would be much harder to play him in a deck with four colors, where your mana base has to be devoted and super greedy. it incentivizes you to stick with the colors printed on the card because the fewer colors your deck is trying to support, the more likely you are to have incidental colorless lands like the Blighted cycle, painlands, things like Rogue's Passage, and on and on and on. The important difference isn't between WUBR and ♦UBR, but between 2RU and ♦♦RU
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:I mean if you wanna say that printing a run of cards in one set that require colorless mana to be cast is a bad dumb mechanic then fine but that's just, like, your opinion, man. There's nothing objectively bad about it. No. You're wrong. Anything that doesn't appeal to me is trash and will kill the game completely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:See my edit above you If Siege Rhino cost ♦WGB it would be as hard to play him in a 3+colorless deck as it would be to play him in a 4 color deck if he cost WGBR. This is why it's effectively a 6th color. It is not incentivizing anything in any way that the existing 5 mana symbols don't operate. It is exactly the same. The only "new" thing it does is incentivize people to play colorless lands to cast these ♦ spells, much in the same way that you are incentivized to play white lands to cast white cards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:If Siege Rhino cost ♦WGB it would be as hard to play him in a 3+colorless deck as it would be to play him in a 4 color deck if he cost WGBR. This is why it's effectively a 6th color. It is not incentivizing anything in any way that the existing 5 mana symbols don't operate. It is exactly the same. This brings up an interesting thought, if they do run with the idea of diamond mana, how long until they print [diamond / one of the colors] "dual lands" because the thought of any tension existing in manabases causes them to poop themselves?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:Except now colorless mana is ♦, so it'd say (♦ can only be paid for with ♦) which is basically not saying anything. Well, personally I think the ♦ is going to be unique to this block as a mechanic and not evergreen going forward; even the land may just have "Add ♦ to your mana pool" as a block-unique thing or even only expedition-unique.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:This brings up an interesting thought, if they do run with the idea of diamond mana, how long until they print [diamond / one of the colors] "dual lands" because the thought of any tension existing in manabases causes them to poop themselves? like the painlands, the original karoos, and a bunch of others?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:This brings up an interesting thought, if they do run with the idea of diamond mana, how long until they print [diamond / one of the colors] "dual lands" because the thought of any tension existing in manabases causes them to poop themselves? Will they have the basic land type of the associated color?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 03:12
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:The only "new" thing it does is incentivize people to play colorless lands to cast these ♦ spells, much in the same way that you are incentivized to play white lands to cast white cards. I'm actually kinda okay with them pushing utility lands, though. But then I love durdling so anything that encourages competitive durdles I'm down with.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:Why do you need to make these colorless lifegain artifacts into colorless-matters cards to make them harder to splash? Why not just run a white card at that point if you want a difficult to cast lifegain card?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
Does anyone have the Magic version of loss.jpg handy? asking for a friend.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:I would be really, really surprised if Wastes shows up in any sets after this one that aren't another Return to Zen set. Colorless mana costs are likely to show up about as much as hybrid mana; very occasionally and with specific reasons for doing so. I generally agree with you that the people flipping out over this are largely being huge babies, but your edit is misleading -- as others have pointed out. While a ♦GB creature steadfastly refuses to be red, white, or blue, it is more than being "only" green and black. It is green, black, and colorless now. It will be as hard to cast as a WGB creature would be in an Abzan deck (and harder than a 1GB creature would be in a GB deck). That is still a meaningful difference -- and could conceivably lead to ♦GB creatures being designed slightly differently than 1GB creatures in ways we haven't considered yet. At the very least, the restrictions on your ability to cast ♦BG cards absolutely liken it to being a pseudo 6th color. edit: a cool thing is now the painlands are untapped trilands. MiddleEastBeast fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
Kalli posted:I kinda want to go back to when Bestow was first spoiled because I'm pretty sure we had the same multi-page discussion of people sure nobody would ever understand it ever, which is a problem that will last the pre-release and maybe a draft or two. There's a reason "____ will kill Magic" is a meme. In other news, Vintage Super League Play-In Finals! It's Workshops vs. Workshops. Nick Detwiler is a massive player in the Northeast Vintage Magic community. This is already great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
The confusion about colorless mana is arising entirely because people have internalized the current inconsistent system without actually understanding it. It perfectly demonstrates the problems with using the same symbol to represent two separate things, which new players are completely justified in being confused by. Once we all get used to ♦ this conversation will stop happening because we'll basically just have 6 varieties of mana that all behave in exactly the same way, it's just that one of them doesn't normally appear in costs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:like the painlands, the original karoos, and a bunch of others? And of course the filter lands. Like, you know, the Mystic Gate we saw.  Sorry, you can tell that I don't have my head fully around all the implications of the change yet, myself. On the one level I realize that now most nonbasics will tap for D, but on the other hand the implications of that for certain duals in decks with D spells is something that completely blows by me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
Gensuki posted:Does anyone have the Magic version of loss.jpg handy? asking for a friend. This one?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
To more fully explain why this is kindof cool - there are already decks that are built to generating large amounts of colorless mana, to the extent that some of their threats have to be colorless (eg 12post, Tron, to a lesser extent the green ramp deck in standard). As it is, though, all of those threats can go in any deck. That means they have to be pretty generic - they can't do anything that you want any individual colour to be unable to do. This new mechanic is a way around it - by explicitly giving colorless an identity you can give the big mana colorless decks interesting cards without giving them to every other deck as well. Of course we have no idea whether the implementation will be good or not yet, which is part of why it's super stupid to be complaining at this stage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:25 |
|
|
It's really odd, then, that the flagship big colorless dude (newzilek) feels very blue. Draw some cards, and here have a way to counter some spells. Also the wastes, at least as I see them, are pretty well tied to the eldrazi flavor right now. Sure you can have them elsewhere with little to no problem, but they seem to be leaning towards "these lands produce colorless because of eldrazi taint" in both the theme and in the art with the bismuth looking eldrazi effect. So if the eldrazi have really hosed off into the wild and they start to taint other planes, wastes continue to make sense in this manner. If not, or if we move to a plane that they haven't been to yet, do we just ignore this mechanic for a set/block or do we have other wastes that produce the same thing but aren't from the same source? Olothreutes fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Dec 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2015 05:30
|
|
