Support NeoGAF

[Yeef]

The only thing that really makes me doubt it is the lack of reminder text for the <> on the Mythics. In the past they've still always put reminder text for set mechanics on Mythics. Not having Kozilek say how you cast it feels real weird.

There are plenty of mythics that don't use reminder text for mechanics. At higher rarities they basically only use reminder text if it fits.

If Mirrorpool just taps to add (1), why would it come into play tapped?

The obvious answer is "so that Mirrorpool is not strictly better than Wastes." But then, if <> is (1) then there would be a hundred existing lands strictly better than Wastes. Buried Ruin would be strictly better than wastes.

So <> is not replacing (1).

Or it could be because both of its effects are really powerful, so they wanted to weaken it a bit for balance reasons.

 

[ultron87]

Ah yeah, I guess there's recent example of mythics with no reminders, like some of the Theros gods don't have Devotion reminder text. I stand corrected.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

I really want it to be more than Eldrazi thingy but I fear it's not going to be.

It might not even be an Eldrazi thing it's too specific to Kozilek, since Ulamog doesn't require it and the Waste artstyle only ever appears on cards in relation to Kozilek.

 

[OnPoint]

I really want it to be more than Eldrazi thingy but I fear it's not going to be.

It might not even be an Eldrazi thing it's too specific to Kozilek, since Ulamog doesn't require it and the Waste artstyle only ever appears on cards in relation to Kozilek.

It makes me kind of excited to see what they'll do with Emrakul. Ulamog and his spawn are actually kind of boring. Kozilek and his are proving to be (if this is real) mechanically more interesting. But what's the next step for the eldrazi concerning Emrakul? It excites me.

 

[divisionbyzorro]

Ah yeah, I guess there's recent example of mythics with no reminders, like some of the Theros gods don't have Devotion reminder text. I stand corrected.

This is personal opinion of course, but I feel like mana symbols are so important that if they don't behave exactly as they look, you'd need reminder text. The closest thing we have recently is Phyrexian Mana, and there wasn't a single card with Phyrexian Mana that didn't have reminder text.

 

[charlequin]

It's amusing to go back and read the Great Designer Search entry where Ken Nagle and Rosewater gently pooh-pooh the idea of a colorless-mana symbol, before and after saying that a spell that just puts a card from your hand into play face down couldn't work in the rules. &#128514; http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/125b

 

[red13th]

This is personal opinion of course, but I feel like mana symbols are so important that if they don't behave exactly as they look, you'd need reminder text. The closest thing we have recently is Phyrexian Mana, and there wasn't a single card with Phyrexian Mana that didn't have reminder text.

And Kozi has flavour text too, so "room" isn't an issue. I'm intrigued! heh

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

It makes me kind of excited to see what they'll do with Emrakul. Ulamog and his spawn are actually kind of boring. Kozilek and his are proving to be (if this is real) mechanically more interesting. But what's the next step for the eldrazi concerning Emrakul? It excites me.

Ulamog himself is amazing, much better than the original imo. Can't really argue about Eldrazi since I was never such a big fan of them.

I just don't want to see a nice new Basic Land be used once and then never again.

This is personal opinion of course, but I feel like mana symbols are so important that if they don't behave exactly as they look, you'd need reminder text. The closest thing we have recently is Phyrexian Mana, and there wasn't a single card with Phyrexian Mana that didn't have reminder text.

Well Phyrexian Mana was more like an alternate cost not an alternate colour.

And Kozi has flavour text too, so "room" isn't an issue. I'm intrigued! heh

I doubt a reminder text would have fit into that space.

 

[divisionbyzorro]

Well Phyrexian Mana was more like an alternate cost not an alternate colour.

My point exactly! That's why I think <> behaves like another color, not as a synonym for (1). You don't need reminder text if <> behaves the same way W, U, B, R, and G do.

 

[OnPoint]

Ulamog himself is amazing, much better than the original imo. Can't really argue about Eldrazi since I was never such a big fan of them.

I just don't want to see a nice new Basic Land be used once and then never again

I prefer the first one, but it's arguable. As for them never using Waste again, they'll dust it off and bring it out every time the Eldrazi show up. Plus, depending on what it's called, it can slot into other stories and/or mechanical places.

 

[divisionbyzorro]

Here's a weird quirk. If it works the way that kirlbar/charlequin say it does, you could use City of Brass to pay for <> costs in Commander, but only if you're not playing a 5-color general. :lol

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

I prefer the first one, but it's arguable. As for them never using Waste again, they'll dust it off and bring it out every time the Eldrazi show up. Plus, depending on what it's called, it can slot into other stories and/or mechanical places.

I think the first Ulamog is a bit bland. What's infinite gyre even supposed to mean, is he a Dreidel? The art is infinitely better though.

I don't want it tied to Eldrazi is my biggest issue again not the biggest fan, and would like to see more colouridentyless Artifact commanders instead. The colourless colour would give them more of an identity.

 

[SigmasonicX]

I still say it makes the most sense from the cards we've seen if void mana is like the mana produced by this card:

That is to say, it's (1) in most cases, but it can be used to pay snow costs, and you can't pay snow costs with a regular (1). It's just like any color of mana in that it can pay (1) and <> costs, but it does not actually have a color associated with it.

For those who are stuck on how difficult it would be to draft Waste cards, remember that Two-Headed Giant is being encouraged, and it's easier to get into a specific archetype that way. I also expect for there to only be a few cards that have <> in the casting cost, and for most cards that use it to need it for an activated ability. There will also probably be Scion variants that add <> to your mana pool.

I'm also expecting a card like this:
Kozilek's Distorter - 3R
Creature - Eldrazi Drone
Devoid
Nonbasic lands are Wastes (or however that would be worded).
3/3

Anyway, Uncharted Realms is back to the Battle for Zendikar story with Hedron Alignment, and--oh god dammit, it's written by Kreines. That said, it wasn't terrible.
* Gideon plans out how to attack Ulamog when Jace returns.
* Jace explains his plan, but Kiora becomes angry, because she feels that she can defeat Ulamog on her own right now and they don't need to delay to set up a trap. Nissa also becomes angry that they intend to just trap Ulamog again, before Jace can explain that he has a plan to destroy it.
* Kiora leaves, but the others decide to go with Jace's plan.
* Nissa gets upset that Jace is using a scale model of the hedron ring made from magic to explain things instead of the actual thing. This is a very minor point, but seriously, Nissa? You really want him to drag people over to the actual hedrons every time he explains something?
* They lure Ulamog into the trap, but one of the hedrons gets out of alignment. Nissa allows Jace into her mind so that they can work together to figure out which one, and they fix it.
* The trap activates, and everyone celebrates, but then Ob Nixilis arrives in secret and kills a sentry.

 

[OnPoint]

I am hoping -- nay -- praying for an All Is Dust reprint.

Edit:

LOL

 

[SigmasonicX]

I am hoping -- nay -- praying for an All Is Dust reprint.

Not going to happen in Standard because it's a Tribal card. In any case, it was recently reprinted in Modern Masters 2015.

 

[WanderingWind]

I mean, they don't like tribal, but tribal mana is cool. Maybe the tribal hate is what they were talking about revisiting. It'd make sense leading back into a tribe heavy set like Innistrad.

 

[Angry Grimace]

I think the first Ulamog is a bit bland. What's infinite gyre even supposed to mean, is he a Dreidel? The art is infinitely better though.

I don't want it tied to Eldrazi is my biggest issue again not the biggest fan, and would like to see more colouridentyless Artifact commanders instead. The colourless colour would give them more of an identity.

It's a typo. He's got a Ceaseless Hunger so he normally has an Infinite Gyro.

I'll show myself out.

 

[charlequin]

For those who are stuck on how difficult it would be to draft Waste cards, remember that Two-Headed Giant is being encouraged, and it's easier to get into a specific archetype that way.

1% of all the limited this set ever sees will be 2HG at the Prerelease; the other 99% is going to be the bog-standard OOB draft at FNMs, GPs, and the Pro Tour.

 

[Joe Molotov]

Void Mana.

I'm going with Antimana.

 

[WanderingWind]

Eldrazi Mana. Y'all overthinking this.

 

[OnPoint]

Eldrazi Mana. Y'all overthinking this.

If they ever intend to use Wastes and the mana they produce in non-eldrazi sets, they'll call it something else.

 

[Bandini]

Wastes, huh. Well the limited can't be worse than BFZ x3, can it?

Gonna take a "wait and see" approach here I guess.

 

[raiot]

Just call it "nana" "Not - mANA"

 

[WanderingWind]

If they ever intend to use Wastes and the mana they produce in non-eldrazi sets, they'll call it something else.

Pretty big "if" there. Guess we'll see what the mana actual means, but considering Phyrexian mana, that's what I'm going with. If it's an enormous paradigm shift in how colorless works and not like snow/Phyrexian mana worked, you may have a point.

 

[kirblar]

Eldrazi Mana. Y'all overthinking this.

Kozilek's Channeler says hi.

It isn't an accident.

 

[OnPoint]

Pretty big "if" there. Guess we'll see what the mana actual means, but considering Phyrexian mana, that's what I'm going with. If it's an enormous paradigm shift in how colorless works and not like snow/Phyrexian mana worked, you may have a point.

No lands produced Phyrexian mana though.

This being a new basic with a generic name says to me that they plan to use it elsewhere.

 

[WanderingWind]

Kozilek's Channeler says hi.

It isn't an accident.

I don't get it.

No lands produced Phyrexian mana though.

This being a new basic with a generic name says to me that they plan to use it elsewhere.

Yeah, maybe. But to be fair, no lands produced Phyrexian mana because that diametrically opposed the design of that mana. It could have been done, sure, but it went against what they were trying to do with it. And it totally broke so many things, so maybe this is their "fix" for alternative mana costs?

 

[Jhriad]

For those who are stuck on how difficult it would be to draft Waste cards, remember that Two-Headed Giant is being encouraged, and it's easier to get into a specific archetype that way.

It certainly would have helped BFZ prerelease if 2HG was more encouraged. What a shit sealed set.

 

[Angry Grimace]

All they have to do is update the comp rules to say a basic land without a type produces colorless mana and &#9830; is the colorless symbol. Wastes is a very generic name to begin with, but a rule like that would let you call it anything you want on any given plane.

I don't get it.



Yeah, maybe. But to be fair, no lands produced Phyrexian mana because that diametrically opposed the design of that mana. It could have been done, sure, but it went against what they were trying to do with it. And it totally broke so many things, so maybe this is their "fix" for alternative mana costs?

Kozilek's Channeler will be in the format with Kozilek and produces 2 colorless.

 

[WanderingWind]

It certainly would have helped BFZ prerelease if 2HG was more encouraged. What a shit sealed set.

Basically the motto of BFZ. "Battle for Zendikar: What a shit."

 

[OnPoint]

All they have to do is update the comp rules to say a basic land without a type produces colorless mana and &#9830; is the colorless symbol. Wastes is a very generic name to begin with, but a rule like that would let you call it anything you want on any given plane.



Kozilek's Channeler will be in the format with Kozilek and produces 2 colorless.

Two colorless. Not (<>)(<>). Are you of the school of thought that (<>) in casting costs can be paid with any color? Or just (<>).

I like how much thought everyone is putting into this. I'll be so sad if these aren't real.

 

[WanderingWind]

Kozilek's Channeler will be in the format with Kozilek and produces 2 colorless.

Sure, I get what the card does, just not sure what connection is trying to be made here.

 

[charlequin]

I don't get it.

Kozilek's Channeler makes two colorless mana, so if you have one in play you can cast Kozilek.

 

[Jhriad]

Kozilek's Channeler makes two colorless mana, so if you have one in play you can cast Kozilek.

Huh? Kozilek's Channeler costs 5 colorless. Even if you drop a land the turn afterward you're still only at 6 + 2. Kozilek costs 8 + &#9830;&#9830;. I'm also not seeing the connection here other than the more tenuous, Kozilek = colorless mana matters. Maybe &#9830; = 2 colorless mana, that could be another connection, I guess.

 

[divisionbyzorro]

Kozilek's Channeler makes two colorless mana, so if you have one in play you can cast Kozilek.

I still don't buy it. If you can pay (2) for <><>, then why do you print a land that taps for <>? What is the point of tapping for <> if you can just tap for (1)? It makes zero sense.

Spoiler

What infuriates me more than anything in the fact that you might actually be right, which would just be one more bafflingly dumb design/development decision in this turd of a block.

 

[Hackworth]

Okay so I made a Nekusar EDH deck and I want to know how badly it'll explode on me. I'm likely to be playing it against two to three people.
I might dismantle it to get parts for a creature-based Riku deck I'm building.
Also: How viable is Ezuri-Infect?

EDIT: So as not to eat like half a page, I've linked the deck [here]

 

[WanderingWind]

Kozilek's Channeler makes two colorless mana, so if you have one in play you can cast Kozilek.

I see. Or it just makes him easier to cast. I do see what he was getting at now though.

 

[kirblar]

I still don't buy it. If you can pay (2) for <><>, then why do you print a land that taps for <>? What is the point of tapping for <> if you can just tap for (1)? It makes zero sense.

Spoiler

What infuriates me more than anything in the fact that you might actually be right, which would just be one more bafflingly dumb design/development decision in this turd of a block.

It's a better design than BFZ proper, which Erik Lauer's team had to salvage.

Odds are, the Colorless Mana Matters stuff was the original third block twist.

 

[WanderingWind]

I still don't buy it. If you can pay (2) for <><>, then why do you print a land that taps for <>? What is the point of tapping for <> if you can just tap for (1)? It makes zero sense.

Spoiler

What infuriates me more than anything in the fact that you might actually be right, which would just be one more bafflingly dumb design/development decision in this turd of a block.

Basically. I'm trying to give WotC the benefit of the doubt that the big new mechanic isn't just a new symbol on their colorless mana spot. What would be the point of Wastes then, besides flavor? No, I think I'll just draft cards that do stuff with the mana that already taps for R and (1).

They wouldn't.

 

[Angry Grimace]

I still don't buy it. If you can pay (2) for <><>, then why do you print a land that taps for <>? What is the point of tapping for <> if you can just tap for (1)? It makes zero sense.

Spoiler

What infuriates me more than anything in the fact that you might actually be right, which would just be one more bafflingly dumb design/development decision in this turd of a block.

Generic mana and Colorless Mana have always had the same symbol despite being, within the rules different things.

This is because there isn't any way to make colorless mana itself matter without its own differentiating symbol. It just doesn't matter until they actually need colorless mana to actually matter, which it never has previously.

Basically. I'm trying to give WotC the benefit of the doubt that the big new mechanic isn't just a new symbol on their colorless mana spot. What would be the point of Wastes then, besides flavor? No, I think I'll just draft cards that do stuff with the mana that already taps for R and (1).

They wouldn't.

EDH, limited, the ability to have basics matter. Colorless mana is still worse in general than every other type of mana. In constructed you would probably run 0 Wastes, correct, because Painlands, Blighted Lands, etc. are all better by default. It's definitely weird, but not everything needs to have a purpose in every format, I guess.

 

[kirblar]

BTW, this makes it backwards compatible with the eldrazi drones/scions. That's hugely important.

The Wastes are at common because they're needed for limited, like Snow lands. It's highly likely that 2-4 common slots are taken by them.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Two colorless. Not (<>)(<>). Are you of the school of thought that (<>) in casting costs can be paid with any color? Or just (<>).

I like how much thought everyone is putting into this. I'll be so sad if these aren't real.

Two colorless is &#9830;&#9830; if "&#9830;" is the colorless symbol.

 

[OnPoint]

Two colorless is &#9830;&#9830; if "&#9830;" is the colorless symbol.

So you believe that Sol Ring now reads: Add (<>)(<>) to your mana pool?

 

[WanderingWind]

Alright, so it's later here and maybe I'm not making a necessary connection, but if the mana works that way, why would you ever draft a land that is strictly worse than a basic? A mountain can tap for R or <> in this scenario. A waste can only tap for <> and takes up a draft selection, albeit a late one. The limited format would have to have massive support for wastes in particular for it to be even roughly considered a decent pickup in draft.

Constructed, obviously is right out. EDH...well, it's EDH.

 

[divisionbyzorro]

But again, you don't have to make a land that taps for &#9830;! You just say "(&#9830; can only be paid for with colorless mana.)" Boom - you've accomplished the same thing!

Why do you make a land tap for &#9830; if &#9830; is a synonym for (1)? Why introduce a synonym for (1) halfway through the block? Why print Kozilek's Channeler that taps for (2) when it would be bad ass if it tapped for &#9830;&#9830;? This whole situation is a gigantic piece of crap!

Spoiler

Maybe we'll get lucky and just the mythic land will be a fake, and there aren't any lands that tap for &#9830;, and it all works out nice and clean.

 

[kirblar]

Because <> is necessary to make a clean full art land. Also, for costs. Having both side by side eases the transition.

 

[Santiako]

Alright, so it's later here and maybe I'm not making a necessary connection, but if the mana works that way, why would you ever draft a land that is strictly worse than a basic? A mountain can tap for R or <> in this scenario. A waste can only tap for <> and takes up a draft selection, albeit a late one. The limited format would have to have massive support for wastes in particular for it to be even roughly considered a decent pickup in draft.

Constructed, obviously is right out. EDH...well, it's EDH.

Mountains, Forests, Swapms, Islands and Plains can't produce colorless mana, so you can't use them to pay <>

 

[WanderingWind]

Mountains, Forests, Swapms, Islands and Plains can't produce colorless mana, so you can't use them to pay <>

Ah, so we're saying <> can only be paid with a colorless source. That clears things up substantially. Cheers.

 

[Yeef]

A mountain can tap for R or <> in this scenario. A waste can only tap for <> and takes up a draft selection, albeit a late one.

I think you're confused about the rules. The current basic lands (mountain and the rest) can't tap for colorless. They only tap for their associated color.

There's a difference between generic mana and colorless mana.

Generic Mana can only appear in costs. It just means "use whatever type of mana you want for this part of the cost."

Colorless Mana, until now, only appeared in abilities that generated it. If <> is the colorless mana symbol what it means is you can only used colorless mana for it; it's not generic mana, you can't use colored mana to pay for it.

 

[kirblar]

Ah, so we're saying <> can only be paid with a colorless source. That clears things up substantially. Cheers.

Yeah, Kozilek's casting cost is the key to the whole thing.