https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA-eWvDPZX8
>>44107171
Only morons didn't think it was real after the first five minutes of "WHAT".
>>44107171
confirmed, i'm off to Salvation to watch them melt over this shit.
Now we officially get to fight over the superior artwork.
HintOH SHIT IT'S MOTHERFUCKING BISMUTH
>>44107405
Okay there,Edgelord
No if you'll excuse me, Bone-wastes has inspired me to make colorless Jund a thing.
>People complaining Diamond mana will be a parasitic mechanic
>Colorless mana works exactly like everyone with a brain expects
Tapping Sol Ring for Kozy confirmed.
>>44107171
FINA-FUCKING-LLY! WASTELANDS AND NEW COLORLESS SYMBOL CONFIRMED!!! ALL YOU STUPID SHITTERS GET FUCKED! NO NEW COLOR OR SNOWLANDS HERE!
Does anyone else think that [the newest thing that they added] is the worst thing that has ever happened to magic?
>>44108142
Nah. That'd be the reserved list, for sure.
WORLD MAGIC CUP DAY ONE LIVE STREAM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-43ddDMbG8
https://twitter.com/TrickMTG/status/675303346681593856
>Colorless sources of mana confirmed for producing anus mana
>>44108106
Replacing all instances of "Colorless" with "Purple" changes nothing. It's literally the same thing as a new color. It always existed, but it was incredibly fringe without supporting cards.
>>44107171
I just really hope we get a card depicting Kozilek karate-chopping Lorthos in half. Because that moment was brutal as fuck.
>>44107171
I still can't believe people were denying this even up to YESTERDAY
>>44107171
I am not surprised at all...
>taping a sol ring for two gaping anuses
rip magic I guess
>>44107171
The best thing about this is the inevitable Tron ban in modern.
>>44108489
Most of us had higher expectations of wizards.
But nope, anus mana is real.
>>44108348
Abilities that check for color would disagree with you... aka what is sunburst?
>>44108106
Just because they decided to do it your way doesn't make it any less retarded
This makes me glad I play in Legacy and will never have to deal with this ugly-ass symbol.
And once Legacy dies, I will finally be free of MtG.
>>44107171
Why are people so butthurt about a fricking diamond? The symbol is not pretty nor ugly. Man, magic players can be so fucking retarded sometimes
>people actually upset that this isn't snow mana 2.0: even more parasitic edition
maybe you guys should play Yu-Gi-Oh?
>>44108600
look closer, Legacy is already dead.
All you're seeing is the dead cat bounce
>>44108724
Legacy has been dead for 10 years now.
>>44108742
That said, it's still the best format.
>>44108812
That's not how you spell turbocasual chaos draft.
Nice wastes, would be amazing in foil.
>>44108348
except that you can't get the new diamond mana symbol from a mana confluence or get protection from colorless from a (insert bullshit protection from colors card)
>making colorless a color
Good job Maro
good job wizards
what a shitshow
>>44109013
>it has a unique symbol now so it's a color
Out.
>>44109013
it's not a color nitwit
Wastes is just a basic land that essentially reads "T: Add {C} to your mana pool."
The actual {C} is just an errata to things like Sol Ring's "T: Add (2) to your mana pool" to read "T: Add {C}{C} to your mana pool."
How is that hard to understand.
>>44109045
They are explicitly saying it's a color by including its symbol in casting costs. Why even bother making the distinction if it's not?
>>44109062
It's not difficult to understand, it's just denial at this point because of how unbelievably retarded the whole idea of it is
>>44109067
>Being this clueless
Alright bro. Enjoy getting BTFO by judges when you try to Utlimate Price kozilek.
>>44109094
>Being this obtuse
Yeah no shit it's not actually a color, it just acts that way in every sense of how colors act without being a color.
>>44109062
Then why is Kozilek's new CMC {C}{C}8. By your logic, shouldn't it be {C}{C}{C}{C}{C}{C}{C}{C}{C}{C}?
>>44109085
I'm just curious as to what this actually changes that is causing people to become so upset
Its just a small colorlessness matters set. Why are people freaking out about this so much?
>>44109129
Because you're confusing Colorless mana, which can be added to a mana pool, with Generic mana, which can't. Until now, they had the same symbol.
>>44109067
Because it's literally not a colour. You can't name it when naming a colour. It doesn't have a place in the colour pie. It's compatible with everything dealing with colourless going back to the start of Magic.
>>44109129
I feel like I'm being baited
The actual colorless cost of creatures isn't being changed, it's just changing cards that produce colorless mana
Newkozi basically requires 8 of any color and two colorless mana specifically
>>44109144
Because it's fucking lazy design. This way MaRo gets to brag about how they solved the sixth color problem without actually doing anything. The distinction between "colorless" and "generic" mana didn't need to be made and now nonbasic lands will have this ugly ass symbol all over them for the rest of eternity
>>44109129
<> is not generic mana, nothing has ever produced generic mana, generic mana has always been a cost.
<> is just a new symbol for colorless rather then sharing a symbol with generic mana (1).
So for Kozilek you are required to spend two colorless <><> and 8 generic mana (any color or colorless mana can be used)
/tg/, I've had an idea for a new mechanic!
It's a new kind of mana that can only be spent to pay generic mana costs, not any colour OR colourless <>!
Because this generic-costs-only mana is worse than mana of any of the five colors and colorless mana, it can be produced more cheaply. For example, a version of a painland that tapped for this new mana, or either color if you pay one life, would be inferior to an actual painland, so it could have an upside, such as cycling.
>>44109161
See >>44109119
Colorless is now the"sixth color" in every sense except for actually having pigment
I don't mind at all but >>44108314 has a link that says all colorless producing cards will have their (X) replaced by (<>). Sounds kind off stupid, but whatevever. Won't prevent me from having fun.
>Team USA got kicked out by Team Indonesia
REKT!
>>44109067
>wtf why is Wizards making basic lands a colour?
>>44109179
>nothing has ever produced generic mana, generic mana has always been a cost.
That's not true
>>44109177
well, for the foreseeable future. Old lands aren't going to see reprints.
is that people's concern? they don't like the look of the new symbol?
>>44109187
>not any colour OR colourless
That doesn't make any sense. Anything without color is by definition colorless.
>>44109217
No, that's true. Until now, generic mana was always in costs and colourless mana was always added to your mana pool, and they just happened to have the symbol.
>>44109211
I want a Muraganda block.
>>44109223
better go get your goat back, it has been got.
>>44109153
The only reason Im pissed is that there are cards from the same block that need erreta. Like now that blocks are two sets you really think they wouldve given this mechanic more space and continuity
>>44109223
>T: Add {Z} to your mana pool. ({Z} can be spent on costs of {1}, but not {W}, {U}, {B}, {R}, {G} or {<>})
Get it now?
>>44109217
Sol ring has always produced colorless.
I am not aware of anything that has ever produced generic
>>44109243
I guess the jokes on me. You were only pretending to be retarded.
>>44109267
mechanically it is fine if you want it but conceptually it doesn't hold water.
I also am wholly aware that you are arguing this point facetiously.
>>44109045
>requiring colorless mana for certain spells
It's a color, idiot. It functions exactly like a color now.
>>44109292
>but conceptually it doesn't hold water.
wut
>>44109187
>Not any colour
>Not colourless
Nigga what are you doing
>>44109193
Things that adding a sixth colour would do:
-require brand-new lands to produce them
-completely change mechanics like domain, converge, sunburst, etc
-require design space to be allocated to it in the colour pie
-requires either constant support from hereon out or quickly becomes the most parasitic mechanic of all time
-basically amounts to the biggest change in magic since the start of the game
Things that this does:
-allows cards to specify needing colourless mana in costs
WOW EXACTLY THE SAME
>>44109311
Is it mechanically flawed?
>>44109267
>T: Add {Z} to your mana pool. ({Z} can be spent on costs of {1}, but not {W}, {U}, {B}, {R}, {G} or {<>})
Mechanically, you have just created a new colour, Z. Compare it to replacing Z with Green in the above line.
>>44109314
Except this does two of the things you mentioned a 6th color would need, good job retard
>>44109346
No, mechanically I just created generic, aka colorless, mana.
It's obviously not green, because it can't be spent on green mana costs.
It can only be spent on generic mana costs that any mana can be spent on.
i.e. generic mana.
It can't be spent on any mana symbol, not a colour and not <>
>>44109351
Which ones?
They didn't actually have to make Wastes to support this, they only did for limited and EDH. And there's nothing indicating that they're reallocating any design space for this.
>>44109304
It doesn't count for anything where color matters. Like say, Sunburst.
It may not be a huge difference in practice, but it is a mechanical difference.
>>44109334
>Is it mechanically flawed?
Yes, because the behavior-space is already filled.
Any atributes you can give to this new mana symbol/way of paying costs would make it either a new colour, and existing colour, or colourless.
Hey guys just a quick reminder that magic is a card game and this change has no bearing on anything meaningful.
>>44109377
>Yes, because the behavior-space is already filled.
By what? Not colourless, because that can be spent on <>.
/tg/, what do you think of this mechanic?
>T: Add {1} to your mana pool. Spend this mana only to pay generic costs. (You can't spend this mana on costs of {<>}.)
>>44109373
It doesn't matter what they "needed" to do, this is what they're doing.
>Nothing indicating they're reallocating design space
>Reallocating
That's not what you said, but they are allocating design space for colorless matters things, or did you not see the entirety of BFZ?
>>44109369
But it can obviously also be spent on {Z} costs.
You just haven't bothered to give it a symbol and WHOOPS we're back in the orginal mess, except you've displaced Colourless from it's proper position because {Z} can't pay for {<>}. You've made {<>} into a colour, and {Z} is the new colourless. Well done, you've achieved nothing but bloat.
>>44109408
Really stupid and pointless because we'll probably only see {C} as often as we see hybrid mana costs.
>>44109408
Why are you so butthurt about this?
>>44109334
It is mechanically flawed only in so far as it would require a complete top-down redesign of the game structure
the bigger issue is that it makes no goddamn sense.
Fundamentally magic the card game is trying to model the concepts of Magic the universe.
How do you explain Z mana neither having nor lacking color? what does that even mean?
>>44109431
We'll see C being produced all the time.
We'll see C as costs even less often than we see hybrid at all, likely only when the Eldrazi show up.
>>44109376
>Wastes don't interact with Domain
>Colorless symbol doesn't interact with Sunburst
>Still have cards that require colorless
>Put this halfway into a set rather than starting the set with it
I reiterate, what a fucking shit-show this is. I can't believe these people are paid to work on this game.
>>44109351
>Require brand-new lands to produce them
Nope! Thanks to the fact that colorless mana is colorless mana, new symbol or not, many lands are fully capable of tapping for this.
See painlands, Ancient Tomb, and dozens of others scattered throughout. That's not even including the many sources of colorless mana from non-lands, such as Eldrazi Spawn/Scions, Mind Stone/Sol Ring effects, and Kruphix-style transformation.
>Completely change mechanics
Nope! Not a color, doesn't matter.
>Require design space to be allocated to it in the colour pie
Arguably true, but it's already been done! Artifacts (and to some extent, colorless) already have boundaries of what they can and cannot do. This is as close to a true color as colorless can get.
>Requires constant support
No more than snow mana did. No more than anything else does. And they WILL be supporting it, and using this in the future. It's why they're making this much cosmetic errata.
>Biggest change in Magic
Not even close. The Creature Type update blows this out of the water.
>Allows cards to specify needing colorless mana
The real intent. It's just a way for Wizards to refine a card game, and something that's been missing for a while. It also helps distinguish between GENERIC and COLORLESS mana, which many anons are having trouble with today.
>>44109422
There are no {Z} costs. I explained this very clearly. {Z} is mana that can only be spent on generic costs.
>except you've displaced Colourless from it's proper position
Colorless' proper position is blank, because its proper position, being able to pay for only generic costs, is unocupied.
>You've made {<>} into a colour
{<>} became a colour the day it became a cost that needed its own kind of mana to be paid.
{Z} is never required to be paid. It's generic mana that can only be spent on generic mana costs. It's not a colour.
You've just explained why colourless is now a colour, though.
>>44109413
The design space of "Colourless matters" is completely different from the design space of "Requires purple mana to play".
The colour pie is all about tying the abilities a player has access to with how they build their mana base. Adding a new colour would be a gigantic fundamental change to this allocation. {C} doesn't necessarily do that, as it can simply function in the space already allocated to artifacts etc, and simply be a harder to access than existing things in that space. (In the same way that things costing {G}{G} aren't in a different design space than things costing {1}{G}).
>>44109470
>I'm just going to be a massive pedant and hope that ends the argument.
>>44109447
>It is mechanically flawed only in so far as it would require a complete top-down redesign of the game structure
How? You could print a single card with it and it would work perfectly well with all existing cards, requiring no support or design consideration.
<> requires design consideration, because suddenly what was a drawback becomes a pro.
>the bigger issue is that it makes no goddamn sense.
How do you claim that?
>How do you explain Z mana neither having nor lacking color? what does that even mean?
What do colorless mana and <> mean again?
GUYS! THE SIXTH COLOUR HAS EXISTED SINCE ANTIQUITIES!!! HOW COULD WE HAVE BEEN SO BLIND???
>>44109520
Well, it worked, because you can't dispute any point they made.
>>44109493
>There are no {Z} costs. I explained this very clearly. {Z} is mana that can only be spent on generic costs.
Ah, but you've made a {Z} symbol. What happens when Maro goes and puts it in the top righthand corner?
{Z} mathematically MUST be a 6th colour or colourless. There is no design space unfilled here, and none can be made without massively rearranging the game structure.
>>44108348
>It's literally the same thing as a new color. It always existed
>new
>always existed
>>44109461
So at least the next three sets?
>>44109540
>suddenly what was a drawback becomes a pro
Probably not until the next set with Eldrazi in it.
>>44109211
The second I saw the Wastes and then Kozilek, Imperiosaur was the first thing I thought of. It just places restriction or conditions on what you pay for it, like other spells in the past have done.
>>44109573
HOLY SHIT I FOUND A GAME BREAKING COMBO!
THESE 3 CARDS MAKE 7 OF THE BRAND NEW COLORED MANA!
>>44109614
>Ah, but you've made a {Z} symbol. What happens when Maro goes and puts it in the top righthand corner?
He can't. It's not a cost.
Or to put it another way, the same thing as when he puts a tap symbol in the top-right corner. Since you seem to think the fact it's a symbol means it can go there.
It doesn't need a symbol anyway:
>T: Ad one zed mana to your mana pool. (Zed mana can be spent only on generic mana costs, not on colored or colorless costs.)
>{Z} mathematically MUST be a 6th colour or colourless.
Show me your working here.
>There is no design space unfilled here,
Yes there is, and it's been repeatedly explained to you. Mana that can only be spent on generic costs. What's there to get?
>>44109493
Why are there no Z costs? What's the purpose of introducing a symbol that can only be used for generic costs? Why should Z exist?
>>44109466
This and devoid are both incredibly needless and weak conceptually and mechanically. It makes me consider quitting.
I understand that they're trying to conserve design space, but churning out things like this is too high a cost to pay.
They're creating things that are mechanically possible just because they can, even though they're gimmicks that contradict the design intention of earlier cards.
>>44109193
It has no unique mechanical space. It has no philosophy behind it. It will not receive an equal number of cards as the five colors do. It cannot be named as a color, nor is it counted as one by counting effects. Emrakul is not protected against it.
I can't think of a single thing that makes it a color other than the fact that it has a symbol.
>>44109625
What? You mean Oath. Oath is turning a drawback into a pro. This is knows. It's a fact they have already revealed.
>>44109693
>Why are there no Z costs?
That defeats the point of Z, which is to be a weaker form of mana.
>What's the purpose of introducing a symbol that can only be used for generic costs? Why should Z exist?
It's a drawback. Go back to the first post where there was an example of how it could be used in a dual land cycle.
>>44109470
>It also helps distinguish between GENERIC and COLORLESS mana, a distinction that didn't need to be made but they're out of ideas so now they're dissecting the game trying to find the next thing to ruin
>>44109740
Just like how Odyssey block turned cards that milled you or made discarding your own stuff a pro!
Or how Theros block suddenly made the drawback of having a fuckton of manasymbols in your cost a pro!
Oh look, this is something Magic does.
>>44109717
>It makes me consider quitting.
>>44109717
>It makes me consider quitting.
I'm sure that would be quite the loss for all of us.
>>44109717
>even though they're gimmicks that contradict the design intention of earlier cards
What cards?
>>44109790
If WOTC would rather have you as a player than me, that's their choice.
>>44109765
So in other words, there is no point for this Z, other than because you want there to be Z, because there's going to be no real difference between Z and C in a dual land, power-wise, other than 'can or cannot cast certain Eldrazi', which is...a fucking pointless distinction?
>>44109817
Everything that ever added colorless mana. Duh. How could you not see that?
>>44109447
Flavor terms: Eldrazi predate colored mana. This is that form of mana in a harnessed fashion.
>>44109772
Its a children's card game. Why are you so buttblasted about this?
>>44109836
>other than 'can or cannot cast certain Eldrazi', which is...a fucking pointless distinction?
You are aware that that is the distinction between colors?
>>44109843
All those cards still do the same thing they did before. Nothing about them is contradicted.
>>44109857
>Its a children's card game.
Oops, really? Then I'm too old for it anyway.
>>44109177
>The distinction between "colorless" and "generic" mana didn't need to be made
its ok if core game concepts that appear in every set are confusing and indistinct from each other?
sorry guy, this isn't a game you made up with friends and drew cards on bits of paper with crayon for. it's a multi-million dollar enterprise with world wide reach. Quality control is going to happen.
>>44109857
Because he was wrong when he was SO sure that the symbol was something else.
Because he was wrong, he is now angry and feels a need to belittle the people who were right by implying that there's something fundamentally wrong with this being the case. Because his ego is too fragile to deal with the fact that he was wrong, he needs to find a way to argue that he's still in the right.
>>44109843
Their design intent for those was "these will never ever be used to cast certain Eldrazi"??
If you mean generally "generating only colorless was supposed to be a downside 100% of the time, and now it's a downside 99% of the time, oh no", then look at >>44109774 and realize that this is basically the backbone of Magic design.
>>44107171
"Menace is a variation on the theme of annihilator." - Wizards of the Coast
>>44109876
The distinction between colors is "can or cannot generate this type of mechanical effect," not "can or cannot have creatures with this subtype." Every color has humans, and every color except for white can already cast Eldrazi.
>>44109901
I'm gonna bet this is 100% accurate.
Is there anyone here who hates this change and also didn't retardedly assume it was snow mana 2.0 when it was spoiled?
>>44107171
>"Hands it off to my team and I"
>>44109890
Wrong. They now provide a function basic lands do not.
>>44109876
And colorless isn't a color. Congratulations.
There is still no point to this Z.
Not being able to cast a specific kind of card that only comes in a very few sets is not a drawback worth making a new kind of mana over, or making new dual lands out of. It would change Fucking Nothing.
>>44109876
No, it seems to be a distinction of a certain type of card that cares what you pay for it. It's been done before. Just not with colorless, which is the Eldrazi gimmick.
>>44108348
>It's literally the same thing as a new color.
It's literally not. For Protection for example.
>>44109917
>every color except for white can already cast Eldrazi.
Nice mechanical distinction you got there :^)
>>44109950
What's the point in adding colorless mana to mana pools?
>>44109945
So what? Thousands and thousands of cards became improved in the context of later cards. It's one of the most acclaimed aspects of the game.
>>44108580
It is a sound, simple and actually much needed design issue that both got resolved and that opened up design space. Why do you think it's a bad clarification?
>>44109970
Flavorful distinction. Or are cards on Tarkir somehow different colors from cards on Ravnica because Tarkir red cards have efreet?
>>44109970
Are you an idiot? That's like saying that white can't cast zombies is a mechanical distinction. It only makes sense if there's a mechanic shared among all Eldrazi or zombies that no creature that white can cast has access to. Which is far from true. Plus white can cost Eldrazi, there's just no devoid Eldrazi that require white.
Seriously /tg/, there's much bigger things to quit MTG over. Girls getting invited to tournaments for being female, tumblr censoring card art and shoehorning LGBT themes into sets, players getting their MTGO accounts taken off them because of historical crimes, players and fans getting sent fraudulent C&D letters, etc etc
>>44109177
Oh, it really, really needed to be made.
>>44109945
See
>>44109774
This is what Magic does. New cards are designed to interact with old cards in new ways that weren't available before. If that's not what you want, then play a card game that doesn't print hundreds of new, different cards every year.
>>44109987
Apparently, they are giving such a thing a point in the next set. Essentially pushing the Eldrazi identity to "Other" or outright "Alien".
>>44110029
meant to reply to >>44109917
>>44109987
it's easy to get.
>>44109801
I started writing a long answer telling you to chill out but in the end I don't really give a shit. I'm not even a MtG player.
Go ahead, stop playing. If you condider stopping it means you're not having fun anymore. Thus you'd better do something else.
It's a good thing we already started calling it anus mana, because it's causing unreal levels of anal devastation in people who were wrong about it.
Shit. >>44110062 was meant for >>44109823
>>44110036
Wait, when did they start letting girls into our treehouse?!
>>44110083
You're >>44110053, aren't you?
>snow confirmed
oh boy, more parasite crap that will disappear forever after rotation. who could have guessed?
Looks like SOI is going to need to introduce 5 new mana symbols on account of the fact that /tg/ is full of idiots who don't know what the differences between "color" and "colorless" are.
>>44109823
See you next week at FNM, then.
>>44110106
No, but me and this guy have at least one thing in common.
>>44110135
This is nowhere near as parasitic as snow as there's already ~300 cards that produce {C}.
>>44110135
Did Maro ever actually say they'd do Snow Mana again?
>>44110063
It's the same damn thing anything new goes though with Magic on the internet. So much assumption and expectation and then it all crashes to the ground when it isn't meeting or exceeding the mental image they had.
>>44109823
God, I'd hate to imagine how much of a whining piece of shit you would've been if you had played when they changed the card frames or did the creature type update or introduced planeswalkers.
>>44110093
You misunderstand, we're talking a tournament male players have to qualify for.
Or a deliberate strawman?
>>44110036
>caring about the lore
>not the mechanical backbone of the game
If you had a vagina, there would be no difference, except you probably wouldn't be a virgin.
A N U S M A N A
N
U
S
>>44110182
>when it isn't meeting or exceeding the mental image they had.
Should probably also acknowledge the fact that these idiots didn't just have the wrong idea, but viciously argued against the many of non-terrible-at-Magic, rational people who essentially figured out what the new symbol must mean right away.
>>44110200
People seem to lose their shit about any change the game makes. Hell, we've still got people who are anal devastated that Planeswalkers are still around. I'm surprised that I don't hear more about the whiners who want artifacts to go back to being OFF when you tap them, that there's no more Fear or mana burn, or that the Legendary rule changed.
Let 'em bitch. There's more space at the table for others who can roll with it.
>>44110215
If I had a vagina, I'd a) get to skip qualifiers while playing in magic tournies and b) be too busy getting fucked to wan to play anyway.
>>44110036
>I DON'T WANT GIRLS AROUND AND I WANT TO HAVE A BONER WHEN I LOOK AT MY CARD SLEEVES
literally cancer
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/134995414593/i-have-a-question-about-the-oath-of-the-gatewatch
>It’s a Kozilek thing. Ingest and Processors were an Ulsmog thing. Different Eldrazi work a bit differently.
Oh would you look at that, it's the sound of me being goddamn motherfucking right as always.
>>44110062
>If you condider stopping it means you're not having fun anymore.
This... is really quite profound.
Thank you. I have been playing lately out of a sense commitment. That I've always played so I always will.
But if I don't actively want to, then you're probably right that I shouldn't be. Passive "because it's what I've done before" shouldn't be good enough.
>>44110200
I played during 2.5/3 of those and support a different 2.5/3 of them.
>>44109673
Now if only we had powerful, colorless cards to take advantage of this mana we can produce! But all of the cards we want to run require generic mana, whatever shall we do!
>>44110302
Where did you read that?
Oh right, you support all that. It sickens me that Wizards caters to you, sexist.
>>44110326
This was evident. All Kolikez cards on BFZ care about colorless in some way or another
And another thing to remember is that we won't be seeing <> costs outside of Kozilek cards. <> as a cost is rather parasitic, and thus requires a colorless matters set to work.
<> as produced works identically to say Sol Ring.
This is mainly a formatting change that ekes out a tiny mechanical space for Kozilek and possibly other Eldrazi shenanigans. Nothing else.
>>44110345
Do what you need to do. If that means finding new interests, then go for it. We have too little time in this world to spend it doing things that do not contribute to our more positive aspects.
>>44110302
Don't be a smartass, he's not butthurt about the presence of girls, but rather by Wiz allowing people into tournaments when they clearly didn't do anything to deserve it.
The problem isn't "girls in my treehouse!" but rather the way it's happening.
>>44110326
>It’s a Kozilek thing. Ingest and Processors were an Ulsmog thing. Different Eldrazi work a bit differently.
Cop out. They were obviously not ready to put them in BFZ due to design reasons, and this is the stupid flavour reason.
>>44110326
Cool, that means we'll get a lot of overpriced vanillas with new useless abilities again!
>>44110402
As opposed to catering to the prepubescent tastes of man-children?
>>44110448
She knows what the post meant, but would rather pretend it means something else >>44110483
>>44110448
Oh, yes he is angry because women. Doesn't really care about how, angry they're there at all. See >>44110300
>>44110326
Calling it for Emrakul being in SOI and for Emrakul's "thing" being mutating in some way (DFCs).
Sad that without <> costs we won't see an Emrakul Wastes.
>>44110501
Given that they also use the term "SJW", I think the odds are pretty high that they're a misogynist /pol/tard.
>>44110477
>>44110468
>jokey665 asked: Why was the colorless mana symbol added in OGW and not BFZ?
>That was a subject of huge debate. I was on the BFZ side but my side did not win out. The winning argument said that introducing before it was mechanically relevant would confuse even more players than having them mix in limited. It also made the splash when it was supposed to be the focus.
He even admits it!
>>44110439
>We have too little time in this world to spend it doing things that do not contribute to our more positive aspects.
Tell that to my boss.
>>44110522
>Emrakul's "thing" being mutating in some way (DFCs)
Oh shit, that's an awesome idea.
>>44110530
Yours is the first instance of "SJW" in this thread, but nice try, femiazi.
>>44110522
>Eldrazi Mutants using Dual-Face Cards.
YES
>>44110561
Oops, it was actually "LGBT". The sentiment remains the same.
>>44110534
Yes, and?
>>44110584
You know LGBT is just a collective term for gay, trans, etc?
>>44110036
>Girls getting invited to tournaments for being female
Point me where I can get my GP Promo for free.
>>44110530
>>44110561
>>44110584
Freudian Slip much
>>44110542
I remember a thread a few months ago where people discussed the works of Lovecraft and Howard.
One of the interpretations of it an anon gave is that the shoggoth/elder god can be seen as a representation of all that hold us back and being Conan means you managed to gather enough courage to punch the shoggoth in the face and realize it isn't that dangerous. He concluded saying "the boss is your shoggoth, smacking your keyboard on his head makes you Conan."
Do whatever you want with this information. Though I guess you don't absolutely NEED to punch your boss.
>>44110647
>female player doesn't know the difference between qualification and entry fee
Stop being such a self-parody.
You obviously believe that's a lie, but tell me, would you condemn WotC if they had invited someone because they were female?
>>44110684
>would you condemn WotC if they had invited someone because they were female?
No. Nor do I condemn them because they invited a SC2 commentator because he was a SC2 commentator.
And I don't believe it's a lie. I really want the Stoneforge Mystic promo.
>arguments in this thread
Considering how crazy people are going over this, it may be a case of ARG with Kozilek himself warping the minds of these players.
>>44110810
hah
>>44110711
>>would you condemn WotC if they had invited someone because they were female?
>No.
Everything that's wrong with today's society.
>Nor do I condemn them because they invited a SC2 commentator because he was a SC2 commentator.
Do explain how this is analogous.
>>44110678
Meant to say "your boss is the shoggoth", but that works too.
>>44110841
How is it not? They just want to bring in new people into Magic. You know. For money.
>>44110862
When they invite a woman because she's a stripper and player in her underwear, that will work as an excuse for sexism.
Until then, they can eat shit, and so can you.
>>44110882
What the hell are you even talking about?
>>44110904
You want new people in Magic? Sex sells. Hire a stripper.
>>44110920
Well, don't quit your job and go into marketing.
>>44110941Eat shit, sexist.
>>44110920
You misunderstand, they want new KINDS of people to play magic. Dudebros and Neckbeards already play.
>>44110920
A stripper would only bring in people who were already coming in. You need to appeal to groups that otherwise wouldn't be interested, which is what they're doing. Not all marketing is meant for you.
>>44110862
Everyone in this arguement is working at cross purposes.
This:
>Girls getting invited to tournaments for being female
has happened in the past. Just go search for it. There has been unfair admittance, without qualification, over established others who worked for it.
>>44110967
>Dudebros
>>44111006
>Just go search for it.
Why don't you provide source for your claims? I mean, it's not like I don't believe you, I just don't care enough to do the legwork.
>>44111006
You're missing the point. They know that. They don't care. Look >>44110711
It could not be more explicit. They're perfectly happy with that. They're misogynists who think women are incapable of ever managing anything without men stepping aside to help them.
scorched ruins for legacy
>>44111048
Keep going on. The strawman you're building in your head seems pretty fun to watch.
>>44111020
>>44111048
So /tg/ is dead, if anyone failed to notice that until now. It's literally reddit.
How has it come to this?
>>44111048
And now I have to argue for the other side.
They are saying that women should get invites along with everyone else. Equal treatment is fine. You're both wrong in what you think the other believes.
The first guy doesn't think women should be banned. The second guy doesn't think they should be given preferential treatment.
>>44111078
>It's literally reddit.
Which subreddit is the most /tg/? I'd love to have a replacement for this board.
>>44111103
No they're not you retard. They're calling for sexual discrimination in invites.
>>44111048
>says women should get special invites
>it's a strawman to say you think women should get special invites
>>44111119
If you wanted something new, why would you ask which shithole is the most similar to this shithole?
>>44111075
>>44111262
>says women should get special invites
>it's a strawman to say you think women should get special invites
>>44111248
>Having to actually qualify for tournaments like everyone else is somehow discrimination
>>44111289
Wizards' tumblrlogic to a T.
They reflect the kind of people they want in their game.
>>44108635
voice of reason
>>44111042
Just search for Melissa DeTora.
Melissa DeTora is a fairly good magic player. Not great, but better than most scrubs. She got an invite to a Pro Tour not due to her own achievements however, but because she was a Judge and wrote articles for TCG Player. Some say, it was also to get a woman into the Pro Tour for diversity reasons.
Then she managed to Top Eight. Some said this showed she should have been invited naturally. Some say you should imagine what that must feel like for the guy who came 9th, being displaced by a luck sack who shouldn't even be there.
This was not the first time this kind of discrimination has been called. There was the case of the woman who was out-right cheating in a prize tournament, and was given a free pass because she claimed she didn't know it was cheating. Any guy in that situation would have been banned from all tournys forever.
>>44111436
how about the time day9 got invited because he is good at starcraft
Why did the leftist stop defending <>?
>>44111533
>A mana symbol is somehow a left/right thing
I want tumblr and /pol/ to leave.
>>44111549
The important thing is that you've found a way to feel superior to both.
>>44109177
It didn't need to be made in the same way that I don't need a banana split right now. Okay, sure, but it would be nice.
>>44110437
>This is mainly a formatting change that ekes out a tiny mechanical space for Kozilek and possibly other Eldrazi shenanigans. Nothing else.
Why wouldn't they make non-Eldrazi things that cost {ANUS}, especially Artifact-ish cards? MaRo says that {ANUS} is "a Kozilek thing" but that's like saying red is "a Chandra thing" when talking about Planeswalker; it doesn't imply exclusivity.
>>44109896
The distinction was already there, in the rules.
And, in all honesty, it was there in the cards BEFORE, too, up til about Odyssey block, when they decided 'let's use the generic mana symbols for colorless instead of spelling it out'. Thus, in part, the current confusion between generic and colorless.
>>44111587
It's not hard to be superior to them, anon. They're the lowest form of internet dialogue, approached from opposite ends.
Most people are superior to the screaming manchildren on /pol/ and the screaming womenchildren on tumblr.
>>44111549
Didn't you follow the posters? The tumblrtard was the biggest of the <> shitposters.
>>44111620
Most, but not those whose politics are "I'm better than both sides!"
>>44111665
People who bring their politics to games suck, anon. I don't give a fuck about what they think.
>>44111665
are you retarded? This is a card game not your next President election.
>>44111713
WotC brought politics into their game the day they decided to appeasing the progressive crybullies.
>>44111731
What do you mean "my" next presidential election?
>>44111751
WotC is a business.
Their interaction with the community suggests an interest in diversity in magic to them.
Thus, it's good business sense to include some. Broad demographic appeal is something a company whose job is to SELL CARDS wants.
People that whine about card games because there aren't enough black main characters or because there are too many black people in not-greece, however, are morons.
>>44111665
And now you're trying to feel superior to both the participants and non-participants!And now you invoke some obscure rule of debate indicating my observation isn't valid, right?
>>44111797
Nobody said "diversity".
The problem is that there is one demographic that rewards companies for appeasing it and another that accepts always being on the back foot and never boycotts from the other side.
The squeaky wheels gets the grease, and there's no-one squeakier than the left.
>>44110379
I played through three of those and support three of those (though I admit the frame update took a while to bring me around, and I still wish they'd used the Planar Chaos frames instead...)
>>44110841
>Do explain how this is analogous.
Being a commentator for SC2 has exactly as much to do with Magic as being a woman does.
>>44111842
I don't know anon, you're pretty squeaky it seems.
>>44111842
have you tried boycotting magic?
>>44111863
The planar chaos frames were nice. It was a shame they were a one-time thing.
I feel like this addition/change is completely fucking pointless
Imagine all the time and effort that went into coming up with this concept and then all the time and effort it will take to errata any reprints of cards that will now point out that they do <> instead of colorless
What a fucking waste
>>44112005
How fitting that a "Waste" produces (<>)
>>44111842
>no one's squeakier than the left
>literally no one giving a shit about this stuff until some /pol/tard waltzes in with BUT WHAT ABOUT MUH MISANDRY
>>44112005
The errata might take a little bit, but I don't think it's as long as you'd think.
It does have a point, though. Rather than the Eldrazi being like artifacts in that they go into any fucking deck it emphasizes they're colorless rather than generic, and so some of the mana you pay for them can't have a color.
>>44110439
>If that means finding new interests, then go for it.
I think it probably does.
>We have too little time in this world to spend it doing things that do not contribute to our more positive aspects.
I must remember this.
>>44112005
That's kind of the way I feel about it. It's a template change for people who couldn't understand that (X) could be used to satisfy (<>) or (X) in a casting cost, but not (W). Those people will still struggle to figure out that (<>) can satisfy (X) or (<>) but not (W) even with this new template, so why go to the trouble of adding errata?
>>44112246
>why go to the trouble of adding errata
They want to remove those intimidating numbers from cards to prepare for the common core generation becoming old enough for Magic. In SOI, power/toughness is going to be read by counting how many little swords and shields are on the card (symbols similar to the ones on Portal cards).
>>44112042
>ctrl+f misandry
>(1)
Don't you have a quota to go fill?
>>44112328
If you honestly think >>44110036 is a completely neutral unbiased post that doesn't reflect /pol/ sensibilities, you are being ridiculously obtuse.
>>44112346
So you're saying that unqualified people getting invited to tournaments for PR, agendas being driven into a game that said agenda's adherents don't finance, Wizards arbitrarily deleting accounts, and lawyers being flung at people who don't profit from a Wizards product are all good things?
>>44112246
>(<>) is a templating change for people who didn't understand (<>)
>>44112346
None of those things are objectionable to anyone but /pol/tards? What the fuck? Well you're obviously the furthest thing from impartial.
Can Anus mana (aka Colorless mana, aka Wastes) be tapped to generate a generic mana? In other words, can I tap 10 anus to cast new Kozilek?
>>44112446
Given that they specify "female", "tumblr", and "SJW", and that they're pretty obviously referring to the Zach Jesse incident, their argument is obviously based in gender politics.
>>44112595
yes
>>44112595
All mana is generic mana, <> requires it to be a colorless mana.
>>44112448
It's the same principle as determining what can pay (X) costs and (W) costs. If (<>) is in the cost, you should be able to tell which cards may satisfy that (<>) without any errata if you can already understand how (X) and (W) may be paid.
So in a way, yes. The templates surrounding (<>) are for people who would otherwise struggle to understand how to pay (<>) even once (<>)'s value is known.
