Magic the Gathering Appreciation Station

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Magic the Gathering Appreciation Station

Kabanaw: Jan 27, 2012; The real Pokemon begins here

Allstone posted:

The same mechanic by which Bestowed Auras can't fizzle, I guess. Just a thing in the rules that says it does. I know people that were really annoyed about Bestow just having a weird clause that doesn't appear on any card.

Not even that, it's the same reason that Darksteel Tower says "T:Add {1} to your mana pool". They would just print a card called Waste with the typeline "Basic Land" and rules text that says "T:Add {1} to your mana pool", or I guess add ♦, and then shorthand that the way they do with all the other basics - the big green mana symbol they put on forests just means "T:Add {G} to your mana pool".

Anyway, these are fake. In a set where the new mechanic is turning colorless mana into a sixth color, why would they print so few colorless cards that Kozilek shows up in the 4 spot? Assuming their name distribution doesn't skew way lower in the alphabet than normal, that's only like 10 colorless cards. Wouldn't they treat colorless as a sixth color and print way more than like 10? Would they make some "multicolor" devoid cards that require colored and uncolored mana? Speaking of devoid, why would they use a colorless mana mechanic here when it interacts terribly with it?

VVVV nah, assuming they're printing two new of each basic like they have most the previous small sets that seems correct, at least.

Kabanaw fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Nov 18, 2015

# ? Nov 18, 2015 02:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 19, 2024 19:39

Balon: May 23, 2010; ...my greatest work yet.

If the numbering on Mirrorpool is any indicator there's at least 11 lands in the set? Does that seem like too many to be real?

# ? Nov 18, 2015 02:57

whydirt: Apr 18, 2001; Gaz Posting Brigade

Not for a Zendikar block set, no.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 02:59

Serperoth: Feb 21, 2013

Balon posted:

If the numbering on Mirrorpool is any indicator there's at least 11 lands in the set? Does that seem like too many to be real?

Don't small sets have two of each basic land? That's 10 right there already.

VV: Magiccards.info has basics for Mirrodin Besieged and New Phyrexia, as well as Fate Reforged so I kinda went off of that.

Serperoth fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Nov 18, 2015

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:00

Balon: May 23, 2010; ...my greatest work yet.

Serperoth posted:

Don't small sets have two of each basic land? That's 10 right there already.

I thought only large sets have basic lands.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:01

Twiddy: May 17, 2008; To the man who loves art for its own sake, it is frequently in its least important and lowliest manifestations that the keenest pleasure is to be derived.

Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:

That, though, is based on Bestow.

Wastes producing ♦ is based on nothing. There isn't a mechanic providing it with the ability to make mana, and to make it able to produce ♦ means changing what happens when rules aren't there.

Which is weird as heck.

It'd be based around {D} symbol existing, same reason they had to add rules into the game making the Devoid mechanic work after they made the Devoid mechanic exist.

This really isn't the problem with the cards spoiled. They can change and add rules however they want, they do it just about every set to make their new mechanics work. The problem with Barry's Land archetypes in the past have been the other cards and mechanics they break by adding the new rules, and at least some of the suggestions for this mechanic break none, so this is a relatively easy addition (if possibly stupidly parasitic, who knows).

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:04

Voyager I: Jun 29, 2012; This is how your posting feels.
🐥🐥🐥🐥🐥

I'm excited for Oath just because BFZ has a bunch of mechanics that only key off other cards in the set and right now there's just not enough of them to make anything really worthwhile. Need more than 37 total allies in Standard if you want anyone to play with them.

Twiddy posted:

(if possibly stupidly parasitic, who knows).

It's the set partner to BFZ, so that's probably a design goal.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:05

Cernunnos: Sep 2, 2011; ppbbbbttttthhhhh~

Balon posted:

I thought only large sets have basic lands.

From what I can see small sets having Basics is an on-again-off-again thing.

Some small sets get new basics others just use the same Basics as the large set before them.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:07

Sigma-X: Jun 17, 2005

All rules get added when the set is launched, there not being rules for Wastes already in the game does not mean that they can't exist. There was no notion of two sides of a card before flip cards and that didn't stop them from making it a mechanic.

I still don't actually believe that these are real yet but all of the reasons they aren't real aren't great reasons yet.

Also the most important indicator towards these being fake - they don't seem playable outside of limited / standard / EDH and fakes typically excite me because they are powerful enough to warrant play outside those formats (like the fake R/W land)

e: they have specifically added new basics the sets to indicate the changes to the environment before - having new "wasting" arts of existing full art lands would be both sick and awesome. Scars / MBS did this with their land art.

Also worldwake had like 12-13 different lands that weren't basics.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:08

Serperoth: Feb 21, 2013

Voyager I posted:

It's the set partner to BFZ, so that's probably a design goal.

BFZ had design goals? :v:

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:09

suicidesteve: Jan 4, 2006; "Life is a maze. This is one of its dead ends.

Serperoth posted:

BFZ had design goals?

1. Ruin Magic.
2. See 1.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:10

Snacksmaniac: Jan 12, 2008

Angry Grimace posted:

Now we're getting weird

Milpool

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:10

cheetah7071: Oct 20, 2010; honk honk; College Slice

To answer the logistical concerns, I'm assuming they'll function like snow basics do in coldsnap--you only get the ones you draft. In constructed, you can play however many you want.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:10

Twiddy: May 17, 2008; To the man who loves art for its own sake, it is frequently in its least important and lowliest manifestations that the keenest pleasure is to be derived.

God if these actually exist I'm gonna have to buy a 100 of these aren't I.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:12

Olothreutes: Mar 31, 2007

E: whoops.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:13

Sigma-X: Jun 17, 2005

Twiddy posted:

God if these actually exist I'm gonna have to buy a 100 of these aren't I.

You only need like 20 for a commander deck maximum and fewer for any constructed deck.

This is WotC's way to ensure that everyone buys 20 packs

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:14

Orange Fluffy Sheep: Jul 26, 2008; Bad EXP received

the biggest reason it's fake is that ♦ is a pretty drat big mechanic to be introducing in the small set. The third set problem's gonna be the second set problem.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:14

Myriad Truths: Oct 13, 2012

As for the rules issue with how this thing could tap for mana, I would speculate that the rule they would go with is just 'If a basic land loses all basic land types, it taps for colorless instead'. As far as I'm aware, there isn't any existing way to cause a basic land to not have a basic land type, so that doesn't break anything.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:15

Some Numbers: Sep 28, 2006; "LET'S GET DOWN TO WORK!!"

I'm rereading Kozilek and I'm wondering if that first line of text actually works within the rules of the game.

Shouldn't it be worded "draw until you have seven" or something?

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:16

whydirt: Apr 18, 2001; Gaz Posting Brigade

Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:

the biggest reason it's fake is that ♦ is a pretty drat big mechanic to be introducing in the small set. The third set problem's gonna be the second set problem.

whydirt posted:

Remember that small sets are now basically medium sized and provide two packs instead of just one for drafting. It should be much easier for them to introduce new mechanics than before.

That doesn't mean these cards are real, but Oathwatch being a "small" set isn't great evidence against their authenticity.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:16

Ramos: Jul 3, 2012

Some Numbers posted:

I'm rereading Kozilek and I'm wondering if that first line of text actually works within the rules of the game.

Shouldn't it be worded "draw until you have seven" or something?

Nah, the wording works.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:18

Olothreutes: Mar 31, 2007

Some Numbers posted:

I'm rereading Kozilek and I'm wondering if that first line of text actually works within the rules of the game.

Shouldn't it be worded "draw until you have seven" or something?

That's the exact wording on Damia, so it works.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:18

Orange Fluffy Sheep: Jul 26, 2008; Bad EXP received

whydirt posted:

Christ, fine then, ♦ is a pretty drat big mechanic to be introducing in one set. The third set problem's gonna be the second set problem.

Some Numbers posted:

I'm rereading Kozilek and I'm wondering if that first line of text actually works within the rules of the game.

Shouldn't it be worded "draw until you have seven" or something?

These fakers know their templating, at least.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:18

Twiddy: May 17, 2008; To the man who loves art for its own sake, it is frequently in its least important and lowliest manifestations that the keenest pleasure is to be derived.

Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:

the biggest reason it's fake is that ♦ is a pretty drat big mechanic to be introducing in the small set. The third set problem's gonna be the second set problem.

Yeah seriously. I can think of reasons why this could be real life but everything I know about marketing tells me that you would probably want to lead with this.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:18

MiddleEastBeast: Jan 19, 2003; Forum Bully

The cards are real.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:18

Terrible Horse: Apr 27, 2004; :I

MiddleEastBeast posted:

The cards are real.

Agreed.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:19

whydirt: Apr 18, 2001; Gaz Posting Brigade

Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:

Christ, fine then, ♦ is a pretty drat big mechanic to be introducing in one set. The third set problem's gonna be the second set problem.

Nah. If anything BFZ was already stretched thin between callbacks to original ZEN and adding a few new things. There definitely wasn't room for a new basic land. Adding something big splashy and cool in Oathwatch is actually how you avoid the old third set problem.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:23

bhsman: Feb 10, 2008; by exmarx

Unless that art can be found elsewhere on a non-Wizards site, those are likely real.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:25

Orange Fluffy Sheep: Jul 26, 2008; Bad EXP received

whydirt posted:

Nah. If anything BFZ was already stretched thin between callbacks to original ZEN and adding a few new things. Adding something big splashy and cool is actually how you avoid the old third set problem.

But a parasitic mechanic that by virtue of being in the 2nd set can't have much support isn't how you add something big splashy and cool. :psyduck:

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:25

Myriad Truths: Oct 13, 2012

Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:

But a parasitic mechanic that by virtue of being in the 2nd set can't have much support isn't how you add something big splashy and cool.

It's not parasitic, because any number of lands exist that produce colorless mana.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:26

Irony Be My Shield: Jul 29, 2012

There are currently at least 20 in standard.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:29

Niton: Oct 21, 2010; Your Lord and Savior has finally arrived!

..got any kibble?

bhsman posted:

Unless that art can be found elsewhere on a non-Wizards site, those are likely real.

This is the conclusion that i've come to, as well. If that art isn't Aleksi Briclot's, it's a very good style parody, and that doesn't match any known art.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:31

bhsman: Feb 10, 2008; by exmarx

Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:

But a parasitic mechanic that by virtue of being in the 2nd set can't have much support isn't how you add something big splashy and cool.

It's not a huge mechanic, it's just "Hey, when you pay for this spell or ability, at least X mana must be paid with colorless only."

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:33

Twiddy: May 17, 2008; To the man who loves art for its own sake, it is frequently in its least important and lowliest manifestations that the keenest pleasure is to be derived.

Irony Be My Shield posted:

There are currently at least 20 in standard.

I want this mechanic to exist and for {D} to work with absolutely any colorless mana, so we get standard devoid aggro decks hedging on whether to have Ugin's Sanctum or Allied Encampment as their 21st land or something.

# ? Nov 18, 2015 03:36