What do you think about this change?
I don't like it at all and I think it will be seen as a huge mistake, specially since this set is so important (for those who don't know, this is the equivalent of the Avengers movies for Marvel. The place where many important characters and a big story come together)
what change?
Are you retarded anon?
>>44523045
What are you on about? There's a distinct difference between the original tapping for 1 generic, and the reprint tapping for <>.
I'm with OP. They've complicated something that didn't need to be. Plus mass erratas for sooooo many cards is not a good look.
>>44523081
>There's a distinct difference
what difference?
>Plus mass erratas for sooooo many cards is not a good look.
You mean like when they made the creature type overhaul and every creature got new creature types? You remember how that wasn't a big deal at all?
>>44523045
dude did you even click on the image
it looks so much simpler and intuitive the old way. think of a new player picking up a land and looking at this weird symbol. If it was "add 1" he would understand it immediately.
And there are many lands that tap for generic in addition to other effects so this is going to come up a lot. is not like snow mana which came up once in one set and then you can forget about it.
>>44523013
I just like the art on the first one better
>>44523244
>simpler and intuitive the old way.
How? Is it also not intuitive that Forests tap for green mana?
>And there are many lands that tap for generic in addition to other effects so this is going to come up a lot.
there were a lot of more creatures that had their creature type changed than lands that tap for colorless mana.
>>44523013
I don't care about the change because it adds nothing and I'm not a whiny fatbeard, so when change happens I don't shriek about it for weeks posting the same topic about anus mana.
>>44523081
>>44523244
the fact that you think those lands tap to produce generic mana is part of the reason why this change was done. in two years no one will even care about this change.
>>44523013
It's not that hard a concept to grasp anon. It's not like they're going back and changing requirements, they're just changing how colorless mana looks. Some cards in the new set require colorless mana, so they gave a way to separate generic from colorless.
how can anyone complain when it means they're adding a basic land that taps for colorless???
>>44523081
We're people this retarded back when they changed it from "one colorless mana to your mana pool" to "add [1] to your mana pool" Around Odessy?
>>44523408
also bismuth wastes are going to look beautiful in foil soooo~
Bismuth look is neat tho
>>44523013
I personally like the new anus mana, even if I do understand >>44523244 's concerns.
Artificially colorless colored Eldrazi was definitely not the way to go. Reducing those in favor of true colorless mana is a wise design choice, plus it does increment the design space by a whole fuckin' lot.
Think about it, its like a brand new color, one that probably won't interact with the others, but new nonetheless.
This means new themes, abilities, interactions, mechanics, creatures, spells and artifacts different to anything we've seen in any color before, to a degree at least.
Ultimately this is a coin flip. It'll either l be remembered as one of the worst fuck ups in magic history or a brilliant success. It all depends on how its handled.
For now I remain carefully optimist. I have see nothing so far that would lead me to think Anus is going to bomb conceptually, even though I'm not too content on wizards and their long history of screwing up.
>>44523407
because aesthetics matter in this kind of things. and this looks worse for sure
>>44523081 There is no way, and never was a way, to add generic mana to your mana pool.
Generic mana has always existed solely in costs, and colorless mana had previously existed only in mana sources.
>They've complicated something that didn't need to be.
They're simplifying it, not complicating it.
Two symbols for two things is more intuitive than one context dependent symbol for two things.
>Plus mass erratas for sooooo many cards is not a good look.
As long as erratas don't have mechanical changes they won't give them a second thought. Pic related.
>>44523525
but Sol Ring is shit now you need a Wastes to play it
>>44523329
>intuitive that Forests tap for green mana?
Never underestimate the pure stupidity of new players.
>calling mana lands
>callings lands mana
>thinks you have to sacrifice a land just to get mana out of it
>thinks 3G means you have to pay GGG for the casting cost, says "It costs three forests to cast!"
>thinks sorceries and instant spells are permanents
>thinks creatures do combat damage when they enter the battlefield to target creatures
>any time I play a spell: "is that good?"
>ragequits the very first time I counter something
>holds onto counters the entire game even after bitching about me playing good spells
>tries to play all lands in hand every turn
>never attacks or blocks with creatures
>gets extremely upset anytime I do anything on his turn
>can't remember which land taps for which color
>thinks can't cast creature because none of her lands tap for colorless mana (self imposed eldrazi kek)
The list goes on.
>>44523013
>specially since this set is so important (for those who don't know, this is the equivalent of the Avengers movies for Marvel.
No it's not.
Emrakul's two chump lieutenants are dead (will be dead), but the big man is still out there.
They may save Zendikar but the universe is still doomed with the flying-spaghetti-monster still out there.
That said I think the eldrazi really should have just said "Can only be paid with colourless mana" instead of confusing people, with a slight of hand that really makes minimal difference oh the game overall.
>>44523508
Aside from the symbol design being shit, anus mana is the only interesting thing this block has going for it.
Through all the spoilers and the previous set its just garbage as far as the eye can see with a few interesting things sprinkled in, but ultimately over costed and thus useless.
>>44523615
he means the planeswalkers with attitude
>>44523547
>sol ring is shit now that you need wastes to play it
That's not how it works. They're not going back and changing things like Sol Ring to cost <> or Wurmcoil engine to cost <><><><><><>. They still cost generic mana to cast.
Things in Oath will require colorless (<>) to activate abilities or to cast.
>>44523628
90% of cards have always been for limited
>>44523639
that was in fact a joke
>>44523508
>This means new themes, abilities, interactions, mechanics, creatures, spells and artifacts different to anything we've seen in any color before
Except not. Is the same mechanics/abilities but with a new cost/symbol. If they made a new land that made orange mana and then took some cards and changed the color symbol to an orange symbol, it wouldn't really be new thing
Wizards seems to be going in the direction of adding radically new thing just for the shake of it, and thats a dangerous thing to do since magic is already complicated enough. There is still a lot of design space within the existing elements of the game.
>They're simplifying it, not complicating it.
I would bet real money that if you ask a new player, he is most likely going to say that the old way was simpler
>Two symbols for two things is more intuitive than one context dependent symbol for two things.
Yeah and it 20+ years of magic, it never really made a difference.
If they really wanted to push this Eldrazi colorless thing, they should have made something like snow mana and not change the entire system so that a few eldrazi cards could get made
>>44523547
gr8 b8 m8 i r8 8/8
>>44523574
I've ran into a few of these, but for the post part the players I've taught tend to pick it up pretty quick,
>>44523656
>that was in fact a joke
This place can be so dumb I can never tell.
>>44523013
It is good. Why? People like >>44523547 will learn how to play the game better.
What are they going to do when the source adds 3 or more colorless mana? Sincerely asking
>>44523816
Just like they do with colors.
>>44523816
>>44523831
yeah, this
and there are barely any regardless
>>44523831
Makes sense, stupid question. The number inside the circle made the text shorter though
>>44523897
eh, no one complains about "two mana of any color" and that takes up a shit load more
>>44523897
Shorter flavour texts, not that they're any good lately.
Old format:
> okay, I tap and get one colorless
New format:
> I tap and get one anus? What color is this?
It'll confuse new players, I guarantee it.
>>44523948
That's a better ability
>>44523975
Memester pls
why isn't it just a grey circle, anyway
I guess they were worried people would think it was a misprint of (1)?
>>44523081
>yfw you realize that Maro is right, and that the majority of magic players are actually too retarded to understand basic concepts.
OP here
>>44523975
Yeah exactly
Finally someone gets it. People are all looking at this from the perspective of the 20 year old guy who has been playing for years. The thing is that when it comes to games, you really want to make sure that people understand what things do the first time they see it. Specially the 11-15 year old kids that want to try the game.
>>44524088
It's actually much clearer that way. See>>44523081
>>44524088
>Old format
Oh, Sol Ring taps for two generic mana (WRONG)
>New format
Oh, Sol Ring taps for [looks at infographic] two colourless mana (CORRECT)
The new way will produce less confusion. The fact that people thought that generic mana was a thing that could be produced rather than a thing exclusively in costs was proof enough that this change was necessary.
>>44524157
confusion about what? when would that even come up? If it didn't came up in 20 years of magic I doubt it would ever do.
>>44524294
It doesn't come up for the 20 year old guy who has been playing for years as you say it. But for the beginners? Yeah, it happens.
>>44524026
C'mon now. It understandable that people are confused. This is a problem created solely by Wizards by being lazy designers and it's a confusion that's continually perpetuated through every level of Wizards by calling the generic cost colorless for the decades since it's inception. It's only exacerbated by the NWO because Wizards' coddling leads to this whole generation of players were constantly assured by the gamemakers that they never had to know what generic mana is.
NWO isn't the solution. NWO is the problem.
>>44523574
>can't remember which land taps for which color
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>44523013
shut up you dumbass
>>44524157
Nobody even says generic or colorless when playing. The vast majority of people look at sol ring and say "ok I tap it for 2 mana" and thats it. It has absoluely zero effect on gameplay
Now someone who is new to the game looks at anus mana and it has to look up what it means, because it is not obvious at first sight. thats my entire point
No wonder there will never be another Time Spiral. The reaction to colorless mana proves how fucking stupid the playerbase is. Maro has REPEATEDLY needed to answer questions on his blog with "colorless is not a color." Fucking "can Birds of Paradise tap for <> now?" Fucking "If a card costs <>W is it colorless and white?" How goddamn retarded can people be? No wonder NWO exists. If it didn't people would be having fucking aneurysms trying to use an intro deck.
>>44524680
>Now someone who is new to the game looks at LITERALLY ANY GAME CONCEPT and it has to look up what it means, because it is not obvious at first sight. thats my entire point
Wow new players don't know what flying means, they can't understand the difference between combat damage and noncombat damage, and they have never heard of exile. NEW PLAYERS HAVE TO LEARN THINGS OH GOD WHAT WILL WE DO?
>>44524767
>NEW PLAYERS HAVE TO LEARN THINGS OH GOD WHAT WILL WE DO?
Yeah but the more things a player has to learn to start playing the game the higher the risk that said player will just say "screw it, this is too complicated" before getting hooked up on the game.
Even maro himself said that complexity creep is the one thing that could kill magic. And they just added complexity to a very fundamental aspect of the game.
>>44524891
>And they just added complexity to a very fundamental aspect of the game.
they didn't they made it less complex you idiot.
>>44524891
Seriously the game became easier to get into since its inception.
>Keywords followed by explain text.
>Damage doesn't go on the stack anymore.
>No snow mana, banding or untap symbol.
Even if it becomes a bit more complicated as you claim. New kids will be able to handle it. The game is not very complicated in its current state.
>>44524983
Everything new adds complexity
New symbol = more complexity
Yeah, they were using the same symbol for "generic" and "colourless" but before eldrazi there was never a situation were this was relevant at all. The fact that magic made it 20+ years without this ever being an issue proves it.
>>44524983
>less complex
>a whole new mana symbol that has to be explained to every magic player new and old at least once
>a whole new framework that's identical to all the other colors but is not a color for arbitrary reasons
>a complete errata on every card in existence that produces colorless mana
>less complex
When you have to change the little rules insert that comes with the starter decks to add more text, it's definitely a change to more complexity.
>>44524983
>decides to pronounce a meaningless distinction between colorless and generic
>less complex
It's pretty much the perfect example of taking something really intuitive and simple and adding a big caveat to it. Anus mana is additional complexity.
>>44525114
This exactly.
Something I find teaching new players is that they at some point always ask "why is it worded in such a confusing way?" And I have to do my best to explain why it's important to think of every possible way a simpler wording could have been misconstrued and misused, and that wording it this way makes it more precise so as to squeeze more gameplay out of it while still not leaving any holes to be broken. Butthole mana is just going to be another one of these moments, yet another speed bump to cross before playing is instinctual. And for it to only matter in just ONE set, not even an entire block.
>>44524157
>Let's make the game insultingly intuitive to the point where no intelligence or learning is required to play it at any form of level n_n
>>44523656
>90% of cards have always been for limited
Pretty sure this is not true at all. And I am certain it's not true if you are referring to draft.
>>44525345
>Pretty sure this is not true at all
Ever opened a Magic booster? How many cards on average do you care about for constructed? Now take that as a percentage and subtract it from 100%. Oh look, it's around 90%!
>>44525345
I think he means that 90% new cards in each set wont end up being played in standard or modern decks, and wizards knows this. The bulk of the commons/uncommons are probably made to make an interesting limited/draft gameplay.
>>44525396
>>44525453
Always is a long time. In the context of MTG, it must mean when it was first around. Which was around 20 years ago. I can pretty much guarantee you, they didn't have draft in mind when they designed alpha.
>>44523547
Almost got me. Pretteh gud
>>44524767
>Fucking "can Birds of Paradise tap for <> now?" Fucking "If a card costs <>W is it colorless and white?"
The fact that these questions are even coming up proves how bad a decision this was.
>>44525589
It's a short term problem, but it's good long term. WotC is under the impression that it makes the game easier to learn for new players, and that isn't a conclusion they would make blindly. They have focus groups.
>>44525572
Thinking about it, they could make functional reprint of Sol Ring that costs <>.
>>44523547
Did you mother drink while pregnant?
>>44523574
Do you play in the Special Olympics circuit?
>If a card costs <>W is it colorless and white?
I actually had to think about it, and I have been playing for years.
I guess it would be white? But they probably wouldn't make such a thing anyway.
>>44526032
I'm quite certain it would be white.
It's not complex.
>>44526032
Colorless implies the absence of a color. Why the fuck would something by half colorless?
Get the fuck out, you are too stupid for my hobby.
>>44525589
BOP can only tap for mana of any color
Colorless is devoid of color and thus cannot be picked
Something costing <>W would still be white unless otherwise stated since it requires white mana it is a white card unless otherwise stated. Needing a colorless mana as well does not unmake its color or split it. You can't be half a negative.
The fact that people can't figure out these basic things and then bitch and moan that the obvious is complicated is concerning.
>>44526226
>Why the fuck would something by half colorless?
Why indeed?
>>44526643
are you dumb?
That card is not half colorless.
>>44526643
Seems like a colorless card to me. Says so right there in the text box, "This card has no color." If you had a card that referred to red or black creatures, it would not apply to this.
I think it is an unnecessary change, not stupid, but unnecessary. Old players won't even care about it since it makes sense, but here's what I'm picturing:
>new or casual player
>sol ring example
>has to look it up on gatherer and try to make sense of the change
>hence all the questions jew roseshekel gets
Not all of the MTG players are as invested in the game as we are, iirc most of the playerbase are causal players, so I assume they only know the basic concepts of the game and don't look up on internet for better decks, cards, lore, tournaments, etc. This change will force them to do that, find out how anus mana works and eventually get confused.
Imagine that the MTG playerbase is divided in 4 groups: Old players, people who are just starting to learn, people who eventually will learn to play and stupid players;
>Old players won't care, make sense of it or whine on /tg/, but they understand how it works
>Future players will know from the get-go about the difference between generic and colorless and just roll with it
>Stupid players and people who are just learning how to play will be the most affected by this change, the laters will be confused because of the sudden change and stupid players are stupid
Remember that before this new colorless matter theme the colorless concept was only used to artifacts and that made sense mechanically and lorewise.
>"these robots/swords/objects can be casted with any land type, also see that sol ring can be tapped to add {2}? tap it to cast Omega Myr, makes sense, right?"
It's not a GAME CHANGER modification so it doesn't bother me that much, Maro also said it was a Kozilek only thing so I guess when we see Emrakul we'll not have anus mana, then again we all know Maro's word is worth shit and they probably will keep pushing it.
The real question is was this change worth all the trouble? In the end only time will tell.
>>44526902
Except that I use red and black lands to cast it and it's clearly doesn't have the absence of color that tells you it's colorless. Now colorlessness is a nebulous concept that involves two types of mana symbols and a keyword to try and figure it out.
Wizards tried to cheat in a 6th color with colorless and it just causes more problems than if they had just made a new purple mana.
>>44526643
Congrats, anon. You are the reason we can't have mechanics like shroud or flanking.
>>44527193
I'll give you a hint anon. What does the reminder text following "Devoid" say.
>>44523220
>wasn't a big deal at all
Fuck you, that update killed some of the best creature types like "Uncle Istvan" or "Ali From Cairo"
>>44523423
Probably, but the internet wasn't as big a deal back then.
>>44527293
Uncle istvan tribal was too strong.
>>44525494
Are you always a faggot or is today special? Most cards are pauper trash that won't see constructed play outside the limited environment of Standard or Sealed. It's the reason why I have two fat pack boxes full of red cards that will NEVER get used again unless someone is picking through my collection and likes the art.
>>44526643
I'd expect each <> card will be DEVOID, which will make it colourless regardless of the casting cost.
>>44527131
It wasn't but it justified someone's job to do it.
>>44527193
If it's got Devoid, it's colorless. It doesn't matter what the casting cost is and players won't get confused cause they write THIS CARD IS COLORLESS on every devoid card for people like you and timmy turner down at the lgs.
You guys are aware that we use the Generic Mana Symbol because of a mistake in Odyssey Block? It was shorthanded in R&D, and never fixed when it went into printing. Ever since Odyssey block ended, they just started using the Generic Mana Symbol. So, I actually approve of this, because it was a mistake that took them 10 years or so to correct.
>>44527619
the {1} in adding generic mana was in odyssey. Sol ring was in alpha and that added {2} generic mana. Generic mana was in mana pools before odyssey.
>>44528138
are you dumb? like really dumb?
>>44523081
It is literally impossible for a land to tap for generic mana. Generic mana is only used in casting costs and such, lands tap for colorless mana. There is no difference between those cards except for the notation.
>>44528138
They spelt out 'Add two colourless mana to your mana pool', up until it became add (2) to your mana pool.
The mechanic hasn't changed, and it won't change.
>>44525245
>implying even people that have been playing for a decade properly understand the stack, filters and priority.
>implying the people complaining about anus mana haven't been playing the game for years
>>44526370
Anon, I am perfectly aware of how those cards work. The problem is, a new player most likely will not, and adding in this pseudo-sixth color is not helping matters.
I mean, prior new mana symbols were intuitive. Hybrid was clear and easy to grasp, and the color implications were simple. Phyrexian mana was easily explained on the card, and the use of color made things pretty clear that you could use colored mana to pay the cost.
This new symbol has nothing to ground it like those two. It's brand new, inelegant (see that Sol Ring), and needlessly complicates things for one set's gimmick. They could have added in a simple rules text on the cards that require colorless mana to cast, instead of reformating everything.
>>44528602
Part of the problem is that they did this in the middle of a block for some insane reason.
>>44528602
This is actually something they've been wanting to do for a while now, they just haven't gotten around to doing it.
>>44528678
And yes, doing it mid-block IS retarded, and for once you can't blame MaRo for that one - he wanted it to be changed in BfZ because it makes more sense to start off in the beginning of the block instead of suddenly switching halfway through, but got shut down because it'd ruin the surprise of colorless costs or something.
>>44528602
They reformatted things a few. Interupts, Mana Source, hoe Regeneration works. Change is the name of the game.
>>44528678
This is the really baffling part.
>>44528678
That is indeed really fucking dumb.
>>44528678
Dailry reminder that Mark "Hated by Angry Neckbeards" Rosewater wanted the change for BFZ and not in OGW but was overruled by Brand or something.
>>44528254
I have a bad attention span and attention to detail.
>>44523574
>>44524395
The problem is that Mtg wants the new players AND the longterm players are the same time. So you get simplified mechanics while basic lands don't even have "Tap: add one C mana to your mana pool".
You have total newbies tapping a Llanowar Elf to bring a forest into play. Then you have Ulamog that need colorless mana to cast & is indestructible and Planeswalkers.
Then Wotc kills counterspells, discard and land destruction for NWO.
Why doesn't WotC have a permanent core set that is always standard legal? Make it full of vanilla & french vanilla creatures. Sure it'll be underpowered but it's a learning tool that's always standard legal.
Sigh.
>>44530225
>[ ] understands NWO
>[x] complained about NWO
Nice.
>>44530225
Sample decks are always standard legal already, and they're full of the cards you talk about. Nobody notices because none of the cards are constructed playable, but first-timers don't get kicked out of fnm for bringing an illegal deck, at least. Also, NWO only affects commons. The only thing NWO does is make sure we don't get shit like phasing or banding at common and puts reminder text on most other stuff, like the new colourless symbol, which is clearly required based on bountiful evidence in this thread.
>>44528843
>They reformatted things a few. Interupts, Mana Source, hoe Regeneration works. Change is the name of the game.
They only added the Flash keyword because the rules manager was opposed to "Instant Creature" as a type combination.
>>44530555
That would have been quite different, considering the number of cards that care about instants.
>>44530406
sample decks?
>>44530278
>[x] understands NWO
>[x] complained about NWO
FTFY
>>44530921
>Then Wotc kills counterspells, discard and land destruction for NWO.
That's not NWO, you retard.
>>44530921
Do you even know what NWO is?
>>44530839
The one they gave for free in LGS to learn how to play, I believe they're made of 40 cards.
i fail to see why people are so butthurt
>>44530989
It's quite simple. MTG is a shitty game but spergs want to justify the amount of money they've put in so they keep trying to rationalize the disparity between their expectations and reality.
>>44530989
Well my personal reaction was:
> 'kay, that's cool.
But I didn't felt the need to post such a powerful opinion until now.
>>44530989
People get emotionally attached to their hobbies and humans resist changes by nature.
I never had a beef with the change to <> and I can't understand who would be so autistic as to get their panties in a knot over it.
>>44531241
"They changed it, now it sucks."
This applies even to cosmetic changes - I'm surprised I didn't see people whining about them switching to bullet points for modal spells when Khans hit.
>>44531321
I'm still wondering whether MtG was the first card game to use bullet points or not. Pokémon seems to have adapted it right after Magic did it.
So funny you guys are thinking this is confusing for new players.
Its counterintuitive for you because you played the game for years. Literally every person I teached this game in the last years thought if something generated (1) you could pay anything with it. I mean, its logical if you look at it with the eyes of a new player. (1) can be paid by any mana, so why can't I pay any mana with my generated (1)?
But then again, this is supposed to be a small little change to make the game more clear, yet /tg/, reddit and maros blog are filled with "is C a color now" questions or extreme misunderstandings of such a small thing which requires literally no brainpower to grasp.
I have a theory that we're returning to two popular sets back to back in the new 2set block structure right out of the gate because WotC is tuning down the power level and simplifying things to a stupid degree and as a result are pumping out somewhat interesting things, but mostly trash and need to rely on the power of popular planes to help smooth out sales while they force this transition.
Much like comics, they're hoping new players will gobble up moldy table scraps because it's all they know and will just up and get bored or it pretty quick anyway, but are baited in for a taste regardless while seasoned veterans will just sit through the shitblast because they've been here so long.
And just like comics they'll come to realize this doesn't really work, but will keep doing it anyway because they've offended their established player and fan base that they have to keep things going this way to survive.
The fact they're forcing a justice league type thing just helps solidify this analogy.
>>44531321
the bullet points were a great idea aesthetically
>>44523547
(You)
I just started playing Magic again, I got a couple cards back on Kamigaya and played with some newbie friends. I'm having some fun with Magic Duels and the new Zendikar expansion.
Is there any chance that Allies get viable with the next expansions? I just wanted a one drop Flash Ally to work with Hero of Goma Fada.
>>44533470
That's a very weak theory.
Magic is always in a constant flux of power level/complexity, sometimes referred to as a "pendulum." If anything, we're in the highest bar of complexity that the game has reached for a while now. Nothing is being turned to a "stupid degree" of simplicity.
Returning to two popular planes in a row literally based on chance because every new set can only be a new plane or old (50/50).
The "forcing" of the Justice League does not solidify anything. in fact, you gave no reasons on why it does. The banding of planeswalkers is just one facet of their new way of storytelling, nothing more.
>>44533470
This is kinda silly - we've had a pretty steady stream of eternal playables in the recent sets.
>>44534220
I'm glad you're having fun.
Yeah, I can see a deck propping up. I don't see us getting a Flash Ally, though. Try to build build a deck with better protection for your creatures than Hero of Goma Fada. For example, the Nissa coming up in OFW + Inspiring Call from DTK. Get creative.
>>44533470
I have a theory that we return to popular sets because they're now finally resolving some of the cliffhangers and are weaving together some of the threads of disbanded story elements.
>>44534220
You could use an Aether Vial or stuff like Scout's Warning to add on Flash. It won't be super powerful in competitive, but it should be fun in casual settings.
this thread and its like have made it clear
the world does not deserve magic
>>44534438
>>44534603
It could work with Collected Company if I'm running green.
I wish something like Missionary of Kabira could get a reprint. Thanks for the tips, I think that Green and White will work well.
Anything else in standart that can save my ass from wipes in Standard?
>>44534857
NWO confirmed for not being a mistake.
>>44533883
but MUH IMMURSHUN
>>44533470
Or maybe they chose to go to two returning blocks in a row so as to not put as great a strain on the creative team, who now has to do stuff for two blocks a year instead of one, and while yes they still have to make new stuff and whatnot they CAN rely partially on old styleguides for returns - while not zero workload, it's a lessened one.
>>44534915
It's a bit different because in Standard Lanquish is not the general wipe. Valorous Stance and Hero of Goma Fada is about as good as it gets for general "Destroy all", and Dromoka's Command and Feat of Resistance are about as good as it gets for damage-based stuff.
>>44531414
I think yugioh did it first
>>44536098
did they get better as the game aged because those are ridiculously tiny
>>44536611
Not that I'm aware of, no.
What's a better four drop for a UW Standard control deck, Nivix Barrier, Bone to Ash, or Jace's Sanctum?
Obviously it should be on any cards that require it as a cost, but putting it on lands is fucking stupid. Looks dumb as fuck. I'm also really fucking tired of Eldrazi cards in general
>>44537257
Not terribly familiar with standard, but I'm guessing Jace's Sanctum > Nivix Barrier > Bone to Ash
Nivix barrier looks beter than Jace's Sanctum when you have medium to big creatures.
Bone to Ash seems too situational for it's cost, and doesn't come close to Jace's Sanctum in terms of digging power.
>>44537257
All of those cards are fucking garbage. Roll a die to see which you put in your deck because you won't win a match at FNM with it regardless.
>>44536611
Yugioh text is always ridiculously tiny. Not only do they shove more text on a card than MTG, but their standard card size is smaller than the card art takes up more space.
>>44537284
"Obviously" you don't know what you're talking about.
Putting the new symbol strictly on mana costs and not on cards that produce colorless mana is bad design. The change is supposed to make it apparent to the players the difference between colorless mana and generic.What you're suggesting is R&D to half-ass a needed change in the game. Note, it's not a mechanical change because nothing is being errat'd, it's purely visual.
>Looks dumb as fuck
I like the way it looks. I can't blame you if you simply hate it aesthetically.
>I'm also really fucking tired of Eldrazi cards in general
Yeah, I think I can do without them for a while. I don't necessarily hate the Eldrazi because mechanically they're interesting, though.
I don't know how many of you are lorefags, but some times ago they pretty heavily hinted at the fact that colored mana is a consequence of some big mess and that the Eldrazi are just cleaning it up and making it all colorless again. I'm not enthusiastic for this change but I think that it might pay off in the grande scheme of things, maybe when the inevitable showdown with Emrakul finally arrives or when we will confront Nick Bolas (or maybe Ugin, who knows) and understand what the fuck he's doing. They could make realli cool mechanics with this.
>>44537576
Ahh standard players
>the cards only good because it was in top 8!
Most top 8 decks suck outside the tournaments or against casual standard deck because they were made to defeat specific decks and a casual deck has more surprises. Sorry to go all whiny faggot but you know it to be true
>>44523013
This is equivalent to them introducing the tap symbol. I honestly don't get why some people are up in arms about it.
>>44523523
It doesn't look worse. You're just used to seeing it the other way. If it were the other way around, and they had the <> symbol before, and were now introducing (1), I guarantee you would be arguing saying that looks ugly instead.
Its a little silly to me that this change is getting so much asshurt. The only problem I have is when I play with stupid players will they differentiate the difference between (1) and (<>) and will this some cards look plaim retarded for example
Big Ass Eldrazi <><><><><><><><><>
>>44525077
>>44525089
For the rules themselves the complexity has not changed, but become more precise in presentation.
>>44525715
Good idea, but I don't think they'll be doing that for a card banned in Legacy.
>>44534257
>Planes visited: 12 or so?
>Planes not yet visited: ????
Yeah that's not how chance works.
>>44538763
It generally doesn't look too stupid
>>44523574
These are all mistakes that can be easily explained in specific unambiguous terms / symbols. The point with colorless v. generic is that it was ambiguous.
>>44538763
>I play with stupid players will they differentiate the difference between (1) and (<>)
judging form here evidently not
>>44539025
I think I wasn't being clear enough. I'll try again:
The fact that we are returning to already visited planes twice in a row (BFZ block, followed by SOI block) is simply chance. Every new block features one plane as the setting, that setting can only either a) a never before seen plane or b) a previously visited plane, hence 50/50. We have only recently been returning to planes since Scars of Mirrodon. Every block other has been a return as well (SOM to INN to RTR) up until THR-KTK, which featured to never before visited planes in a row. Since there is a half chance that each plane would be new or a return, there is a one-in-fourths chance that two blocks back-to-back will both be returns. We are simply living in that coincidence.
>>44523244
>lands that tap for generic
Think about what you just said, and the argument that you're trying to make, and hopefully you'll realize why this change is necessary.
>>44523668
>I would bet real money that if you ask a new player, he is most likely going to say that the old way was simpler
well new players are garbage concerning rules questions, why should their opinion matter?
like some other anon said. 2 symbols for 2 things is better than 1 contextual symbol for 2 things. people just have to get used to "generic mana" and "colorless mana" not being the same thing, which they have never been. this change just clarifies existing rules. wtf is wrong with people that cant grasp this
>>44539498
Still not how chance works. The plane being written about is not based in randomness so none of what you're saying makes any sense
>>44539498
Do you fucking understand how retarded you sound? What you're saying is comparable to "The chance of winning the lottery is 50/50, you either do or you don't".
Shit like this is why people need to stop trying to include statistics in their arguments.
>>44530964
>The one they gave for free in LGS to learn how to play, I believe they're made of 40 cards.
30 cards, actually, with no card having more than 2 copies. The idea being you could take two sample decks and mash them together to make a valid Constructed deck.
>>44541517
His argument came off weird sounding but i think wizards is going to end up doing more or less what he said. Two blocks a year, one world totally new the other one returning to a previous one. Sometimes to new worlds in a row or two old planes in a row just to add some variety, but gnerally 50/50 seems like a good way to put it.
>>44537776
From what I read, YuGiOh art is actually slightly smaller than MTG art. The difference is that it's portrait-oriented instead of landscape-oriented, and the header takes up much more space than MTG's. That's why the text box is so fucking small.
>>44528602
>Phyrexian mana was easily explained on the card, and the use of color made things pretty clear that you could use colored mana to pay the cost.
As someone who's partly colorblind, I fucking hated phyrexian mana. The mechanic was solid but their choice of symbols for it was poor. The fact that they're all a light, sorta pastel shade of red/blue/whatever color with the same phyrexian symbol on them made them really hard to tell apart, especially if the lighting isn't so great. Black and Green phyrexian mana just look like gray to me and the other colors look pretty close to each other too. It doesn't help that these symbols were frequently used on artifact cards, with no colored border to give you a hint what color the phyrexian mana probably is.
>>44530225
>Then Wotc kills counterspells, discard and land destruction for NWO.
What? Wizards replaced hard counter with conditional counters because "I need the right tool for the right job" is more interesting gameplay than "my opponent doesn't get to play anything." Land destruction is still a thing. Discard is still a thing.
>>44530225
Why doesn't WotC have a permanent core set that is always standard legal?
That's what the Core Sets were. They changed a little every year to make them more interesting. We still don't really know why they killed it in favor of Origins or whatever.
Holy fuck what if Origins just becomes permanently in print and it's the new forever core set? That would be kind of awesome.
>>44523013
It only feels backwards now because we've had it backwards for twenty years.
Letting it twist your knickers also means you're in the running for the Golden Autist awards.
>>44540933
>why should their opinion matter?
Because that's what Wizards is generally targeting with changes like this.
>>44542647
>we've had it backwards for twenty years
I don't see how it was backwards before.
Also, the Maro defense force in this thread is getting retarded.
>>44534857
Every MTG thread just demonstrates how bad at magic /tg/ is and how whiny the players here are. At this point the lore thread is probably the best place to talk about the game.
>>44542526
Land destruction isn't a thing anymore either because it was one of the most unfun things to play against, at least control decks let you try and cast spells.
>>44543785
LD as a strategy is unfun in the same way stax is unfun, but they're both legitimate strategies. That being said if you make them too good people will complain more vocally than say if shit like Swagtusk or Memerhino are pushed because playing againt LD/Stax is painful
Wiping LD in general is bullshit because now we have even less checks against the glut of fetches and shocks. I dream of the day we get Price of Progress in modern. I'd even settle for it doing 1 damage per nonbasic at this point
>>44543785
Yeah but guess what? Now we have Delve so they can destroy all your lands and you'll still be able to cast a Tasigur.
>>44543849
>I'd even settle for it doing 1 damage per nonbasic at this point
Sounds like you want a card from HOMELANDS. Primal Order.
>>44523668
Late reply but please, bear with me.
No no, you don't understand. Sure, the same mechanics under a new color certainly isn't a new thing and so far that's what we've got out of Colorless. Not that that's a disaster. Its a very novel thing after all, there hasn't been any time.
But wether Colorless has brought anything to the table is besides the point. The real question is, can it?
That's what I meant when I said Colorless could be a great addition, that it has potential to be its own thing, a lot of it too.
Kozilek, Ulamog and in the future Emrakul's broods will probably constitute the pillars of Colorless. There are already quite a few of conceptually interesting, original Eldrazi cards, such as Oblivion Sower, It That Betrays, Oblivion Winnower, Dread Defiler and Deceiver of Form that demonstrate that colorless won't simply be a mesh of bits from everywhere of the color pie + Devoid, which is exactly the reason why Colorless to exists. To be an umbrella for all these new mechanics to gather under. They could have kept it as generic mana, but then the Eldrazi brood mechanics wouldn't have any further relation other than creature type. Now they'll forever be associated with Colorless.
>>44544072
but that's a 4-mana green enchantment, not a 2 mana instant
i think "2R - Instant - ~ deals damage to target player equal to the number of nonbasic lands they control" would be pretty fair for modern
hit greedy mana bases hard without being too cheap
(Cont.)
Dat dun meen you wrong tho.
>Wizards seems to be going in the direction of adding radically new thing, and thats a dangerous thing to do since magic is already complicated enough. There is still a lot of design space within the existing elements of the game.
Thats absolutely correct no matter how you look at it. Still, I'd dispute that there was no need for colorless. Sure, there's plenty of design space within what is already stablished, but should they have conformed to them?
Think Devoid. The reason Devoid exists is pretty obvious, if it didn't, about half of all BfZ cards would have been colorless and that is not a wise design choice. Due to Devoid though, all colors were given exile interaction in the form of ingest + others that weren't meant to have I suspect that's why Ingest was made to be so shit, to keep it from having too much of an impact on the colors and how they played. In the same manner, colors 'tainted' Eldrazi cards, giving them traits of their section of the pie true colorless Eldrazi weren't meant to have.
That's why Colorless is being treated as a color this time around. Its fine if a color is predominant in a set, settings work like that, sometimes they are more conductive to cards of a certain color. Having a predominance of generic cards wouldn't have been okay though, since the colors are the heart and soul of the game. To keep true to that, Colorless as a color was a necessity and this was as good of a time to introduce a new color as any other, before they squander interesting concepts that could be the pillar of said new color spreading it through the pie due to Devoid or just keeping it generic.
>>44544613
Anus casting requirements are confirmed to be a Kozilek brood only thing.
But if were going to talk about Anus's design space, there's only one card with anus in the casting cost and the cost of activated abilities. Most cards only do one or the other.
>>44544756
>Anus casting requirements are confirmed to be a Kozilek brood only thing.
Hadn't heard about this before, source?
Also I'm fine with the other thing. Even with a new color we can't make it too predominant, can we?
Plus, I'd understand such cases as colored/colorless hybrids. After all, its unlikely we ever get actual colorless / colored creatures, since it wouldn't make an ounce of sense for something to have Anus and any other color in their casting cost.
>>44544617
But it's playable on Turn 2 or 3! And doesn't die to Abrupt Decay!
>>44542464
All the permanents with Phyrexian mana in their casting cost were colored artifacts (like the Esper stuff), so there WAS color in their border, but yeah it wasn't the best way to do it. They probably should've done something sorta like the devoid Eldrazi where it goes from regular border to colored artifact border or something, because the only thing denoting what color it is for colorblind people is the reminder text
>>44542647
It's only been backwards since Odyssey, they had it right before that.
>>44542464
>Partly colourblind
So what do you prefer? The old brown coloured artifacts or the newer silver coloured ones?
>>44545707
as someone who isn't colorblind, I prefer the old borders because the new ones are too close to white
>>44545707
As someone who isn't colorblind, I prefer the new ones because the old colours weren't in any manner aesthetically pleasing to me.
No Standard General so I'll ask here.
I used to play quite a lot of casual MtG with friends 5 years ago. Now that I just finished college and am in a new town I want to start playing again but competitively this time and in standard.
I spotted 3 deck that I like that are fairly cheap to build (I don't have much money), but I don't know which one to pick.
I'm hesitant between GR Eldrazi Ramp, BW Lifegain Allies and Artifacts (pic related).
What would be the best option to have fun but still win some games at FNMs ? I really like the artifact deck but I don't know if it's really good in the format meta.
>>44548846
Anyone ?
>>44548846
Go with the ramp deck and watch out for RG Landfall and Atarka Red.
>>44548846
>GR Eldrazi Ramp
probably eldrazi ramp is the best deck of the ones you mentioned. I tried to play allies but they suck against anything really competitive.
What's so fucking hard to understand about colorless mana?
EVERYONE JUST REPLACE "COLORLESS" WITH "YELLOW" IN YOUR HEAD.
IT FUNCTIONS JUST LIKE A NEW COLOR EXCEPT YOU CAN'T CHOOSE IT IN "OF ANY COLOR" OPTIONS.
Forget colorless mana guys. Seems wizard will take the heartstone path.
> Mana Blade
> Artifact - 6cmc generic mana - Mythic Rare
> (X)(X), Tap: Controller of Mana Blade can attack or block as a creature where his or her power is X and his or her toughness is his or her life total (Damage received while using the ability of Mana Blade will reduce your life total).
Seems to be comming in Shadows of Innistrad
>>44553570
Yes, someone's shitty custom card that is Totally Real has anything to do with what they're actually doing.
Definitely.
For MTGO it makes how mana is displayed nicer.
Better to have a colourless symbol than just an empty circle which isnt used on any cards at all.
Also makes the color filter a bit clearer.
Also, as noted in the article where OP got that picture from, in the old version (1) has too completely different meanings on the same card. That aint great.
"Colorless" is literally just another color, except it's treated as colorless concerning interactions.
>sorry senpai, you can't pay R with <>
>but, you CAN pay <> and only <> for <>
>and, of course <> pays for generic costs... just like any other color
I seriously hope this shit lasts only for this block.
>>44543688
And yet it's still better than the discussion in reddit.
>>44557563
>>44553151
This is probably the worst advice, and is why people are asking Maro if a card that costs <>W is colourless AND white.
I really hate the term "generic mana" because it implies that it can exist in your mana pool, it's a noun, it sounds like a kind of mana
There doesn't need to be a term for what "generic mana" refers to, in actual practice, you can simply say that a spell or ability costs X mana of any kind and X of a specific color, or whatever
Saying it costs, for instance, one red and two generic mana just reinforces that awkwardness I mentioned abive, generic mana doesn't exist so why would you say that you need it?
>>44542526
Origins permanently in print would be nice but will it happen?
>>44558332
>>44558332
You know that "generic" is an adjective with a meaning, right?
>>44542526
>>44558360
No. No it won't.
>>44542526
>That's what the Core Sets were. They changed a little every year to make them more interesting. We still don't really know why they killed it in favor of Origins or whatever.
That's what they had been prior to a few years ago when they started designing many more cards for core sets, rather than just reprinting staples from previous sets.
In the past, reprints in "Expert Level" sets were rarer, as were newly designed cards in core sets. Then over the course of a few years, that divide got more muddled, and core sets became less necessary to keep staples in print.
>>44523013
The only real shame with BFZ is that Wizards seem to have played it too safe because they didn't know how the new Standard rotation would affect what they can and cannot print, and hoped that setting the block on Zendikar and including expeditions would be enough to carry it. So we ended up with a block full of very generic cards with interchangeable keywords. They obviously didn't play it overly safe to build to up to the change in how colorless is templated, because if they had known about that beforehand they would surely have included the new symbol already in the first set.
And the real shame is that this would have been the perfect time to really experiment and push the limits, because no matter how much they fucked it up the block would still sell based on the Zendikar name alone, but now even that might be squandered. I seriously doubt the next block set on Zendikar will garner even an ounce of the hype that this block got.
>>44523013
Ever since I got into magic, I have always liked artifact creatures as well as the concept of focusing on colorless as a gimmick. The first deck I built was a white Myr deck with the highly impractical double Galvanizer + Palladium Myr trick. I've entertained the thought of a true colorless deck with the Urza lands and whatnot, but I never got around to it.
Even if its largely unnecessary, and presumably done so that colorless can now work with various color-based card mechanics (devotion, etc), I can't help but feel happy that my silly niche is being directly catered to.
I haven't actually played magic in months, however. Maybe I'll get back into it and start repping monogray. Pic related, it's my favorite card.
>>44559276
Mono Brown is certainly a thing.
>>44559276
>>44559296
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL04lbfeNAaS9GvvMzigOyy9ZRmRl2LRV4&v=Wie2Jf4N9vg
>>44523013
I don't understand the hate for this new change. Aside from the 30 seconds it takes to understand it, it's not that much of a complication, and it allows for the creation of new mechanics without wrenching existing systems.
>>44559276
>double Galvanizer + Palladium Myr
Ahh, the good old Ikea Gun.
>>44523574
>stupidity of new players
It's... It's almost as if they aren't familiar with how to play the game!
>>44558245
as stated earlier in the thread I am shocked that these kinds of retards exist
and it's not just new players, it's supposed "veterans" too.
This is why we got fucking trollshroud and why everything has just been +1/+1 counters and half baked mechanics worthless outside of limited for the most part since RTR
>>44559276
as a fellow artifact player, this block, and its nonsense, are doing everything in its power to promote colorless, but especially NOT artifacts
I completely understand anus mana
Anus mana is just as confusing to all players, as the concepts they intend to replace/update
>>44523013
can we stop having these threads holy shit, who fucking cares that they changed a symbol. i swear all these fucking threads are just bait at this point.
When anyone of these retards asks "Is colorless a color", just tell them "No, anus is not a color"
>>44559210
They DID know about it already.
Some parts of R&D wanted to have the new symbol start in BfZ (including Maro), but the majority wanted to hold off until Oath for the surprise factor, because that was apparently more important for some goddamn reason
>>44560013
No, it was immediately obvious what it was at first glance. I have no idea how it's become a point of confusion at all.
>>44561549
>including Maro
I don't always agree with Maro on design decisions, even if I usually can see where he's coming from, but it seems I always find myself in agreement with him on aesthetic decisions concerning the game. Perhaps he should lead the team that manages those instead so that retarded things like this can stop.
>>44523547
I have not seen bait this funny for a long time
HOW DO PEOPLE STILL DONT UNDERSTAND THAT <> is the symbol for required colorless (grey mana) and X is generic or Any color
I haven't played magic in years but even I get that
I might buy a phat pack of Shadow Over Innistrad with a friend when it comes out
So why they need new mana type instead of writing something like "to play this spell, at least two mana you pay to cast it must have no colour"?
>>44524088
>The thing is that when it comes to games, you really want to make sure that people understand what things do the first time they see it
...therefore it was better when generic and colorless mana shared the same symbol in a confusing way?
>>44524294
>If it didn't came up in 20 years of magic
Except for the fact that it comes up all the goddamn time, you're exactly right.
Shit, wait, uh...
>>44565409
You're literally retarded. This is not how it works.
>>44562357
>...therefore it was better when generic and colorless mana shared the same symbol in a confusing way?
>confusing way
There was literally no difference between the two until this very set; who was confused?
>>44565922
I was making a funny anon.
>>44558395
I do, i just don't think it's appropriate here
There are two slightly different ways the term is used
When a thing has varieties, but one variety is the normal or common one, it can be referred to as the generic one
This is the most common usage of the term, but it conflicts with magic mana rules, so it's awkward
using it to mean any variety is why it's called generic mana but I just think it's less intuitive with that wording, I rarely hear the term generic used that way
>>44566037
Not really, considering there are dumbshits that actually believe it.
