>implying colorless will not be treated like a 6th color.
what's wrong with this? i'm sure it will just be like this for this block so it's not like they're changing the whole game or anything
>>44254525
Anus symbol looks so stupid.
>>44254700
>>44254801
Its not called new world order for shits and giggles
>>44254525
Can you kill that with pic related? No? Then it's not a 6th color. The only thing new is a symbol.
>>44254866
Heh, I'm sure it'll stick as well as the phyrexian mana did. Or Allies, Land Fall, Heroic, Bloodrush, Cascade, Infect, etc. Each set has it's one or two unique mechanics that come and go with it not to be seen unless the setting gets revisited. Occasionally they stick, but 9 times out of 10 they don't.
>>44254525
No that I'm seeing that art in glorious large size i want to post in on /co so they can complain about noodle arms
>>44254525
Look, something artifacts already could do!
>>44254525
>Implying those aren't colorless mechanics
>>44255617
That's a colorless card with colorless abilities that can all be payed with generic mana.
>>44254525
Does tapping a land for red mana in EDH produce anus or "colorless" mana if my commander is UB?
>>44255932
Yes.
>>44254525
>>44254700
Boo fucking hoo. Magic is slightly different now. Quit your bitching. The new notation is interesting and solves communication issues.
>>44256144
>Solves communication issues
Are you high, or just retarded?
>>44256193
How about, there's always been a difference between generic and colourless, only now we've got the symbols to make it a lot damn clearer?
>>44256144
Your asking MtG nerds to not whine. It's like Wizards trying to fight the meta.
Hilarious to watch but ultimately pointless.
>>44256297
That's true. The only thing the Magic community does better than sharpening its pitchforks is bitch.
>>44254879
Underrated post
>>44256334
It seems to be symptomatic of Wizards fans in general. The popcorn goodness the edition wars causes amongst the DnDers is artery clogging.
Though I have to admit I'm just as bad as the rest when I get going. But I'm liking the new wastes. Means being able to have fully colourless decks without using shittons of special lands. My all Myr deck approves.
Do you think the Wastes version of this will come into play untapped?
>>44256530
>implying there will be
>>44255617
There are no "colorless mechanics". Colorless cards get to do anything they want, but are supposed to not be as good as cards of appropriate color.
>>44256144
>solves communication issues.
There never were any.
It's just a shitty gimmick, that is hopefully forgotten once this shitty block ends, and never revisited.
Anyone know what could have been a better "exclusively colorless mana" symbol? I don't really like the one we have but I can't think of ANYTHING that could be better.
>>44256706
Before they added the new symbol they would have had to add an extra line on every card to explain the cost requirements.
Which would be awful in many ways.
The new symbol will be rocky while people are still adjusting, but once it's been around for a while it will be fine.
Plus, new players will have an easier time learning the difference between colorless and generic mana. (which *apparently* a lot of old players never bothered to learn about)
the magic community's meltdown over this has convinced me that the new world order is not just a reasonable precautionary measure, but, in fact, genuinely completely necessary.
>>44257538
>>44257538
>Kiora should've been mythic premium foil rarity because almost no one was able to read her ultimate right
>>44256620
>There are no "colorless mechanics"
Annihilator.
I was at my lgs today playing some commander. and the tables behind me were drafting. I heard the store manager say there was a special going on "if you open an expedition you can buy it back for just 4 dollars" I have very limited experience with that format but I always thought you keep the cards you get in a draft since you paid for the packs.
>>44258332
Why didn't you ask the players who drafted?
>>44254525
I choose "Protection from Colorless"
>>44258332
Sounds like your store does rare redrafting.
>>44258383
Progenitus technically has protection from colorless
So does star mana just have to be paid with colorless mana, like what you'd get from a sol ring, and can't be paid with colored mana like regular colorless?
>>44258508
>"Protection from everything" means the following: Progenitus can't be blocked, Progenitus can't be enchanted or equipped, Progenitus can't be the target of spells or abilities, and all damage that would be dealt to Progenitus is prevented.
>>44258509
It can only be paid for by colorless mana. Sol Ring, Painland colorless, etc.
You cannot use colored mana of any type to pay for it
>>44258531
The debate I suppose is whether Protection from Colorless is a thing or not
>>44254879
Excellent post with best Ultimate Price art
>>44258549
It can't be chosen as a color because no matter how hard you guys want it to be a color, it isn't. It's barely effectively a new color, let alone an actual new color.
>>44258549
So far there's no card that can give protection from colorless but the rules don't seem to be against it. Since protection is going away though, there will most probable be no protection from colorless in OGW.
>>44258610
>protection is going away though
What??
My precious knights!
PAIN LANDS ARE NOW THE BEST TRI-COLOR LANDS
>>44258742
That is not actually true.
>>44258658
Going away in that they aren't really printing anything with it from now on, though unlike Intimidate or Landwalk it's not entirely discontinued, just Mostly Discontinued. They left it open for a 'sometimes if appropriate' type deal, which will probably mostly involve reprints to be honest.
>>44258778
So the same state as Hexproof, huh.
>>44258883
I personally call hexproof troll shroud still, just to 1) piss off people and 2) defy nwo
>>44258883
They're fine with hexproof. They're just using it more sparingly - as it should be.
>>44258549
If the print one, then sure.
You cannot choose colorless out of something that say colors though.
You're not allowed to choose colorless when casting Brave the Elements, metalcrafted Etched Champion does not have protection from colorless, Emrakul does not have protection from colorless spells etc etc etc
>>44258883
Technically the same state as Hybrid, just more willing to use it on a single card in a set.
>>44259018
No, hexproof is still evergreen while hybrid is "deciduous". Hexproof will be in almost every set whereas hybrid will be in a set from time to time.
>>44258509
>paid with colored mana like regular colorless?
This is why we have a colorless mana symbol now.
>>44259131
>colorless mana in costs appears only on uncommons to not confuse players
>>44258762
It's true. You now get two colors and colorless, which now functions as a color, out of them, untapped. Not even the original dual lands, shock lands, or any other type of mana-fixing lands offer that kind of versatility. It's time to buy up all the Pain lands and watch their price skyrocket.
>>44259097
I was talking about Protection being deciduous like Hybrid (unlike the evergreen Hexproof)
Imagine OP card is coloured.
Green for untapping
Red for direct damage
White for no attacking/blocking
Blue for card draw
It would be a 3 or 4 colored gold card.
If it was an artifact creature, its casting cost and all the activated abilities would cost 2 more mana.
So much for a color pie to define mechanics. This card just muddied it to brown.
What do you think. /mtg/ers? Magic the Gathering may not die but these spoilers show that I don't like it anymore.
>>44259252
Colorless is not part of the color pie so of course looking it at the filter of the color pie is idiotic.
>>44259097
>>44259191
How is hexproof evergreen? I checked gatherer and it's almost an even split between cards that are green and cards of a different colour (33 other colour 34 green) I didn't count colourless and lands just because.
>>44259252
Instead, it requires you to dilute your manabase with worse manafixers to run it.
You wouldn't be able to play it in the current top decks - they're all dependent on fetches/battlelands, with not nearly enough painlands to be able to cast this fucker in a reasonable number of games, nevermind activate its last ability.
That's the trade off for running C - a shittier mana base to play these things (unless you're in Modern/Legacy/Vintage in which case this is overcosted garbage and only usable in tron where you don't want it anyways or in decks that sneak it out that...also don't want it)
>>44259369
>>44259369
I legitimately can't tell if you're for real.
>>44259252
How are the mechanics of ARTIFACTs defined?
>>44259252
Artifacts have always had those abilities. What's the problem?
>>44258278
>>44256620
Devoid is the most colorless mechanic there is.
>>44259536
>Devoid
>mechanic
>>44259391
>>44259417
Teach a noob. Why call an ability evergreen if it shows up on other colours as often as green?
>>44256671
here here!
>>44259564
Google "evergreen", anon.
>>44258986
progenitus
>>44259590
>>44259624
>images
No fucking shit.
>>44254801
>i'm sure it will just be like this for this block
Colorless mana has always existed and this set merely introduced a way to separate colorless from generic mana. You could be saying that they won't be using colorless specific costs after this set, but it seems very silly to think that Wizards would come up with a way to differentiate it from generic mana and then not do anything with it after the first set where it's itroduced, almost as silly as it would have been if Planeswalkers showed up in Lorwyn and then never again.
>>44259564
"Evergreen" is a type of tree. It's a tree that doesn't grow leaves that fall off in winter. It is the same year round.
It is contrasted with deciduous trees. Deciduous trees have leaves that fall off in winter.
As keywords, Evergreen and Deciduous means "always an option" and "variably an option" for card developers. You won't see phyrexian mana in a block that has nothing to do with phyrexia. Phyrexian mana is a deciduous mechanic. Its "leaves are not there" if it's not the right season (block).
>>44259757
Being helpful is nice and all, but if he is literally incapable of googling "Evergreen MtG" then he doesn't deserve it. It's a waste of effort, his pea-brain probably already forgot what you said.
>>44259252
>Blue for untapping
>Red for direct damage, but blue had it a while ago, so that's OK
>Blue for no attacking/blocking
>Blue for card draw
>>44259606
You mongoloid, "protection from everything" is short hand for Proggy can't be damaged, enchanted, blocked, or targeted. It does not specify protection from colorless. Or are you being intentionally dense? Currently nothing gives pro colorless, though there's no reason why it couldn't happen.
>>44259778
Not the guy that asked, but I googled your "evergreen mtg" to see if it would be as simple to understand as the helpful guy you linked, and the page on evergreen that comes up first still leaves a little confusion on the term if you don't know anything about it.
There is no explanation of why you would use the term evergreen.
That guy explained the meaning behind why those terms are used the way they are so it made sense.
Also just telling people to google valid questions about obscure information rather than give them a simple answer is kind of a dick way to act. Is the MtG crowd nowdays so elitist that everyone who doesn't know all the different terminology is just ignored and left out?
>>44258008
wut
>>44259850
Im gonna go ahead and say youre wrong because progenitus is pro EVERYTHING
Therefore, if colorless is a thing aka keyword on a card, he has protection from it
>>44259902
The fuck are you talking about, "a thing"? Do you even know what a keyword is?
I'll say it nice and slow, so you can follow.
Protection from X means the following: Can't be damaged by X, can't be enchanted/equipped by X, can't be targeted by X, can't be blocked by X.
Progenitus has protection from everything.
Therefore,
Progenitus can't be damaged, enchanted, blocked, or targeted.
Nowhere on the card is "colorless" used, because it's unnecessary. The word protection already covers it. I feel like you're being dense on purpose and I just fell for the bait, in which case congratulations, but seriously this is not a hard concept.
>>44259850
Give enough explanation, then drop it. There's a reason i don't respond to the bait.
>>44259624
Well played.
>>44259890
>Also just telling people to google valid questions about obscure information rather than give them a simple answer is kind of a dick way to act.
Answering your obscure questions is exactly why Google exists. Please start walking in the footsteps of your neanderthal ancestors and learn to use tools. It's the current year.
>>44259890
>mtg crowd
No, this has been common etiquette on 4chan for ages, it has nothing to do with MtG.
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for the rest of his life.
Don't spoonfeed people with information that is easily acquirable on your own.
This is reason for having your thread deleted on other boards.
>>44259757
In what's possibly a needless splitting of hairs I'd clarify that phyrexian mana is a set mechanic (not sure if there's an official term for this) rather than a deciduous mechanic. Set mechanics are a theme of the entire set, like Converge or Phyrexian mana, whereas deciduous mechanics can just appear in any set, but won't always, like Hybrid Mana and Protection from X (as of it being recategorised after ORI).
>>44259811
Blue can't Make things not attack
I also don't think they can make things not block either
Also blue direct damage was a mistake
>>44254866
You don't even know what you're talking about.
>>44259182
That's the dumbest thing I've heard all week. And I've been hanging out with the heads in bags.
>>44259182
Oh no, they can help cast SIX MANA SPELLS that's so broken what are we going to do surely their price will surpass every Jace ever printed.
The horror.
The horror.
>>44254525
I am so happy I picked up a bunch of eldrazi shit and lands. Standard Eldrazi gonna be fun.
>>44256245
That difference never mattered until this set
>>44262525
except, you know, colorless mana can only pay generic costs and colored mana can pay for generic and colored costs?
>>44254801
MtG players are autistic, let them whine, that's all they're capable of anyways with their overinflated egos.
>>44256454
Colorless EDH is finally possible without dying to fucking Ruination and friends.
>>44262907
>edh
>ruination
I'm so sorry you can't enjoy edh anon.
>>44256620
Curiously, the most colorless mechanics existing is generating colored mana
>>44258549
It would probably be worded like "protection from non-colored"
>>44263774
Because they would never use the word "colorless" on a card, right?
>>44263825
errata : you may reveal a non-colored card. :^)
>>44263835
;^(
>>44254525
Free shrugs Eldrazi.
So /tg/, I have a few BfZ Fat Packs
What should I do with them?
>>44265301
draft with some friends and keep the exploration lands
>>44259893
People kept thinking kiora's ultimate went finite when they couldn't read that the fight trigger and getting octopus triggers were separate things
>>44265549
>People kept thinking kiora's ultimate went finite when they couldn't read that the fight trigger and getting octopus triggers were separate things
How ? They never saw quotation marks before ?
>>44266172
The average Magic player has a reading comprehension and a temper of a 10-year-old.
Source: Mark Rosewater
>>44254879
>>44258383
Let's see what the designers of magic have to say about the issue.
>http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/125b
>"It manages to add a pseudo-sixth color in a way that is backward compatible" -Maro
>Wow. This is a straightforward and backwards compatible implementation of a sixth color.
>I'm intrigued, but nervous about adding a sixth color to Magic
I don't know who the other 2 guys are.
>>44259350
>colorless isn't part of the color pie
True, but misleading.
http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr165
>"While artifacts are not officially part of the color pie, they have carved out a few mechanic niches for themselves"
>>44265549
I still prefer the first Kiora. Thedowbside was the low loyalty, but she could defend herself from many creatures and her emblem was awesome. Pooping 9/9 Krakens in standard andcommander most of the time was game ender.
>>44254525
I almost want to be excited for the set, but BFZ taught me better.
>>44259372
>Battlelands
I found the SCG shill guys.
>>44266196
Sad fact that is he completly right
>>44258549
Yes, something could theoretically have "Protection from colorless" in the game.
No, no such card exists and no card exists that grants it to other cards.
No, such a card is still unlikely to ever see print.
>>44266172
Weren't you on /tg/ at the time? Any site where MtG is discussed even the smallest tiniest bit. Because that was a thing exactly everywhere.
>>44267610
I was on /tg/ during this time but never saw anyone saying this
Maybe I didn't pay attention
>>44267610
>>44267693
There were a couple of guys that read it as infinite but it was corrected immediately.
It's not as hyperbolic as what that anon stated.
>>44267492
I hate the other names for that cycle due to them being fucking retarded, and they've used the term 'battlelands' on the WotC site.
>>44268566
"memelands"
>>44268566
What's wrong with "Slowlands"? They can't come in untapped in the first turns of the game: slow.
>>44268687
I've honestly never seen anyone call them that before.
>>44268687
They're cucklands.
Only get turned on if two others are already there.
>>44268566
"Battlelands" is horrible though since it doesn't fit what the cards do only the set they were printed in. What about when we have enemy color versions, do we still call them battlelands?
>>44268930
"battlestrad lands"
>>44268930
I honestly prefer double checks myself, but nobody else calls them that
>>44268687
We already have slowlands though
http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Slow_lands
>>44268970
>double checks
Bateman-lands?
>>44257538
I'm tempted to screenshot every Reddit thread asking how an element of the game they were already supposed to know works and ever single ANUS thread on here, then put it into a PDF alongside people misunderstanding the stack and all that other shit. That way, whenever I see someone saying nerds are more intelligent I can just present them with that.
>>44268979
>Waterveil Cavern
>Tap for {1}
>or Tap for {U} or {B}, doesn't untap next turn.
My god those are terrible. I wouldn't even play those in limited if I had no other fixing.
>>44257538
Agreed with this anon, it's also convinced me that autists have the ability to overthink even the most simple concepts and ultimately be able to misunderstand them
>>44269006
I'm down for Batelands
>>44269231
They are fine for limited.
>>44257813
>magic player attempts to figure out a new mechanic.gif
>>44267574
The closest we have is Apostle's Blessing, which grants protection from artifacts.
>>44254879
By far the most important aspect of a spell's color is how it impacts your deck's manabase. The non-generic portion of a spell's casting cost will always be influential in every game because it is fundamental to your decisions both prior to the game when designing your mana base, and during the game when you are choosing how you play your mana sources.
Every other aspect of what defines a "color" is a trivial technicality in comparison. Targeting restrictions such as those depicted in Ultimate Price or Terror, protection: colored, abilities such as sunburst, etc are comparatively tiny niches that don't even come into play in the vast majority of matches.
Anus mana is a sixth "color" in the most important aspect of what defines colors.
>>44273743
Cards that care about color were a huge mistake, one that Magic can never recover from.
>>44273817
Why?
When cards reference colour directly, it creates a tangible connection between the mechanical and fluff parts of the game. It shows directly that the 5 Colours of Mana in the MtG multiverse are REAL, not some game-based abstraction like Power or Toughness, as there are things that interact differently with each one.
I think spells that reference colour make Magic stronger, by binding fluff and game together.
>>44273817
I wouldn't call it a mistake. The only parts of a spell that matter 100% of the time are its cost and its effect. The other attributes such as color, creature subtype, etc, don't come into play as often. But just because every facet of a spell isn't always significant doesn't make spells that interact and care those attributes a mistake.
Even anus mana isn't necessarily a mistake. When you build decks with anus cards and cast anus spells, anus mana will essentially be a sixth color. It just technically isn't.
>>44269231
To be fair the original slow lands were around at time when cheap mana rocks were abundant in Standard then(Fellwar Stone, Sol Grail, Lotus Petal)
>>44259252
good magic players don't care what an animeposting turbocasual thinks
excited to see where they go with this, but BFZ teaches me that it's nowhere interesting or playable.
>>44259252
you are looking at an eldritch abomination and you are wondering why it doesnt act like an elf, a goblin, a human, or a merfolk,
i hope you understand.
>>44278420
No, he's wondering why it is acting like elves, goblins, humans, and merfolk. It isn't some new strange thing. It is the same shit the other colors have done for years, the only difference is that now they have taken all of this diversity and stuffed it inside an anus card.
>>44268814
I hope you realize you're just as annoying and unfunny as redditors calling them tangolands
>>44281312
Let's just be CFB shills and call them banjolands ok?
So, question: if anything that produces (1) actually produces one Star mana, then what's the point on Wastes? Aren't there already lots of land cards that do the same thing, but have extra effects too?
>>44281960
Wastes is a basic land.
>>44281960
the star/square/anus/diamond/bismuth mana on casting costs and ability costs cannot be paid with colored mana. It have to be paid with colorless.
>lots
actually there's not, at least not in standard. Take a deck nearest to you and count how many colorless mana source it have.
>>44263393
Ruination is fun as fuck
>>44281960
there are lots of various lands that produce colorless, but since ALL of them are non basic you're restricted to a max of 4 each, and have very limited fetch options
>>44281960
1) They're spread out through the history of Magic.
2) Wastes are basics, and thus dodge nonbasic hate and can be grabbed by Evolving Wilds and anything else that says 'basic land'
3) You can run as many Wastes as you want
4) Wastes are commons, most of the others are rare.
5) They're not as comon as you'd thing honestly. Landwise, in standard, pre-Oath, we've got...the painlands, the blighted lands, Foundery of the Consuls, Crucible of the Spirit Dragon, Haven of the Spirit Dragon, Ally Encampment, Mage-RIng Network, Rogue's Passage, Sanctum of Ugin, Shrine of the Forsaken Gods, Spawning Bed, Tomb of the Spirit Dragon. Which sounds like a lot, but...how many of those would you actually run in your deck, considering it's highly doubtful you'd be running mono-colorless? The only ones that DO tap for colored mana are the painlands, Ally Encampment (allies only), and Sanctum/Haven (dragon only)
>>44273817
I think it's more "Cards that care about color are almost always printed in the worst possible sets".
Ultimate Price was first made in RTR when hybrid and multicolor cards were rampant, and then reprinted in DTK when multicolor cards are again the focus of the set.
>>44282128
the proper mathematical name for this shape is astroid.
Anyone who would have liked to see an Emrakul Wastes?
>>44266225
Eldrazi don't abide by the rules given to artifacts.
>>44259536
>Devoid is the most colorless mechanic there is.
Nonsense. The devoid keyword exclusively appears on colored cards. It's the least colorless thing in the world.
>>44281960
>So, question: if anything that produces (1) actually produces one Star mana,
>Star mana
Please use the proper, official term: anus mana.
>>44285096
How does it even look like an anus anyways?
If that is what your anus looks like then there is something wrong with your anus.
>>44258935
>I personally call hexproof shroud
The correct terminology is "untargetable" for shroud and "untargetable by opponents" for hexproof.
>>44260690
They can force things to attack though.
>the most important aspect of a color is the limit it puts on your mana base
>not the unique mechanics and cards you gain by limiting your mana base to that color(s)
im just not seeing how the new colorless cards are "treated like a color"
you're not getting anything special that you cant get from other colors by going colorless, youre just getting versatility and the benefits of what colorless-matters effects exist in the block
the difference is just that for this set in particular, there is less synergy between the colorless cards and the colored cards, motivating you to go all in in one or the other because your mana base wont be efficient when youre doing both
colorless cards are normally, (and still to an extent in this block, no question) there to be an option any color can pick up to fill out their deck with mechanics their colors dont have
in this hyper multicolored meta, thats unnecessary, and i actually like how this colorless-matters block was designed given the state of mana-bases in standard
the only issue is powerlevel, so far, it hasnt been high enough to compete with the multicolored tarkir decks, but the principle is nice. instead of making a bunch of colorless cards that could be abused by the multicolor decks, making them even stronger (hangarback walker), they made stuff like OP's pic related, that might be harder to put into your 3 color deck (not to say that the card in OP's pic is as good as hangarback)
>>44285203
"Troll Shroud" is hexproof.
Before hexproof was granted its own keyword, it was an ability that was written out in full. It was found most commonly on creatures of the "Troll" subtype. That's why people called it "Troll shroud."
>>44254879
Look at this pedantic literal retard
>HURR THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS ULTIMATE PRICE
>>44286091
It's to be expected given the number of autists that play MtG.
WotC reveals anus mana, and most people remark how WotC has essentially added a sixth color to the game. Then the autists come out of the woodwork and can't shut up about how it "technically" isn't a new color.
>>44286018
It wasn't 'most commonly on creatures of the troll subtype', actually.
It was only on one. In fact, only two trolls in the history of Magic have ever had Hexproof, and one is a reference to the other.
It was called Trollshroud because Troll Ascetic because it was one of the first two tournament-legal cards with the ability, debuting alongside Plated Slagwurm, and of the two it was by far the more high profile.
Nobody remembers the Slagwurm. And the two cards from Portal Three Kingdoms aren't counted because at the time they weren't legal in anything ever
