We are faced with 3 possibilities
1) <> is now the new colorless and colorless producing lands like painlands will be errated to reflect this fact.
2) <> is like half a new color and different than (1) and can only be produced by wastes/lands that specifically state they make <> which limits the lifetime of this type of mana to the Oath set.
3) <> reads as "<> can be payed with either (1) or <>", which would be a bridge between that two above possibilities but once again limits future use since you can't use <> as a symbol in a set that doesn't have a <> producing land which doesn't fit in every plane given that you need eldrazi to create Wastes.
Also, as pic shows, Wastes are a new basic land, not a new basic land type. There is no type.
>>43708180
It's not without precedence, as Snow lands are Basics. Bismuth has also been used in BfZ artwork involving Eldrazi, so it would fit the artistic direction. There's also been some evidence fluffwise that the Eldrazi aren't just destroying land, but rather re-purposing it to their own ends.
In terms of what <> represents, assuming that the spoilers are real (debatable), a cost of "8<><>" seems to imply that the new symbol does not denote a single colorless mana, but rather will be treated as a sixth "color" or type of mana. Similarly, the lack of reminder text in the card spoiled alongside "Wastes" suggests that this is not a case like Phyrexian mana that denotes an alternate cost.
>>43708180
>given that you need eldrazi to create Wastes.
What?
>>43708480
From a story perspective.
>>43708345
>a cost of "8<><>" seems to imply that the new symbol does not denote a single colorless mana, but rather will be treated as a sixth "color" or type of mana.
8<><> means 8 mana of any color (or 8 colorless) plus 2 colorless mana.
>>43708508
Explain. Wastes can exist for a number of reasons. They exist on Earth for fucks sake.
>>43708180
2 is most likely. 1 is definitely not happening
>>43708180
more bismuth on cards
>>43708508
I'm sure they can come up with another reason for a land to produce this mana. I mean, if it's suppose to be colorless mana from the Blind Eternities or something, I don't see why they couldn't have lands on other planes that are capable of producing it (or rather, drawing from it from the Blind Eternities). Not that that's the direction they'd have to take, but I just mean there are ways they could try to justify it or make it work.
>>43708345
>8<><>" seems to imply that the new symbol does not denote a single colorless mana, but rather will be treated as a sixth "color" or type of mana
Not necessarily, <> probably means it can ONLY be paid with colorless mana, so "8<><>" means 8 of any type and 2 colorless.
This turns colorless into the defacto sixth color without actually creating a new sixth color.
>>43708582
>>43708609
Read the next sentence.
>>43708629
Did, doesn't matter. There is no alternate cost. It's strictly colorless.
>>43708582
>Explain. Wastes can exist for a number of reasons.
These Wastes are what is left after the eldrazi (Ulamog's Brood) are done eating the colored mana out of a patch of land or living being, they are not wastes by the normal definition of the word.
>>43708603
At this point this ruination and white chalk eating thing is a hallmark of the eldrazi and I think it unlikely for them to canibalize on this identity by making another sort of creature from the Eternities that turns life into Waste. Unless we get a block that's on that Blind Eternities, that would be interesting but stupid.
>>43708629
Don't forget that Mythic Rares (and some normal rares) don't have to follow New World Order. I'm sure there are common and uncommon creatures/spells with <> that have reminder text.
>>43708683
>Unless we get a block that's on that Blind Eternities, that would be interesting but stupid.
To be honest, I'm surprised we haven't already. You'd think it's an idea they would have hit up a long time ago.
>>43708683
>these mountains are what is left after Purphoros crafted the landscape in his passion
>these swamps are the result of Grixis hordes tore up Alara
Wastes is general enough to show up anywhere. There was colorless mana before Eldrazi.
>>43708345
>Similarly, the lack of reminder text in the card spoiled alongside "Wastes" suggests that this is not a case like Phyrexian mana that denotes an alternate cost.
Both of the cards we've seen that use it are mythics. Mythics, and to some extent, rares, typically do not have reminder text.
>>43708754
well given that the blind eternities as they have been described to date are less a place and more an inconceivable space between spaces, it would be at least difficult to use as a setting. not to mention that, at best it is populated with bizarre beings that are even less applicable to reality than the eldrazi, any asthetic it has would be akin to deep cuts from Lovecrafts most deranged nightmares.
I think they're getting more and more willing to make insular, throwaway mechanics.
These lands are probably only ever going to matter for eldrazi.
>>43708683
The chalk lands are those devoured by Ulamog and his brood.
The bismuth lands are those devoured by Kozilek and his brood.
Each titan leaves their own unique stain on the land.
>>43708834
I thought that Ulamog turned shit to chalk and then Kozikek comes and changes the chalk to these crystals.
>>43708754
Maro doesn't like the idea and neither does creative. The only way you'd get a Blind Eternities block would be as a top-down decision and the team just isn't keen.
>>43708847
It might be that. We don't know.
All I have to go on is the two Kozilek brood cards in BFZ having bismuth around them.
Does Kozilek's casting effect resolve if he's countered?
>>43708933
Did you cast him?
>I can finally make my Kozilek deck
Woohoo. A shame it'll be shit on by Jeskai and Abzan until Spring but still, woohoo!
>>43708940
Yes?
>>43708588
It would solve the issue that (1) in a cost is 1 mana of any color but producing (1) is 1 mana of no color. If the latter is being Oracled to <> instead that would actually make sense.
>>43708952
Then why wouldn't it?
<> could be "Can be paid with two colorless mana or <>" based on Kozilek's channeler.
<> is always considered colorless mana unless otherwise mentioned.
is it possible to draw into a dispel if your opponent counter your Kozilek and use that dispel on counter?
>>43709055
If he responds to your draw trigger with his counterspell, which he will unless he wants to pointlessly let you have Kozilek down, then no it's not possible.
>>43709055
No because the counterspell would resolve before the draw trigger.
>>43709055
Google "The Stack 101", you poor kitchentable newfriend.
I'm curious to see if <> will be associated with any specific mechanical effects other than the sorts of stuff we've already seen with Eldrazi. If its the same stuff, I don't know why this couldn't have been introduced in the last set.
>>43709091
Disregard this. The poster above me is correct.
>>43709081
>>43709091
>>43709096
thanks guys. Sorry for being a retard
>>43709103
Maybe this was going to be the 3rd set's big splash before the 2set paradigm?
>>43709103
Honestly if I had to wager it was just too late to do that.
They saw the difficulty people had in realizing that cards were colourless while still needing coloured mana, so for BFZ their solution was Devoid.
In this set their solution is to change how the mana works entirely.
>>43709103
With BFZ's position in the set cycle, I wouldn't be surprised if it had been rushed or dumbed down due to lots of shifts in the design paradigm.
>>43709159
Why would they save something as huge and pivotal as "eldrazi mana" for the 3rd set of the block? That would be like having the big "enchantments matter" mechanic at the end of the enchantments blo..... Oh wait.
>>43709380
Fucking Starfield of Nyx. it comes out when the fucking enchantments are dying out.
>>43708180
I still wandering how the rules will update, so that Wastes is not simply a blank card.
>>43708590
Ash grey bismuth is what happens to matter after it gets sucked of its mana by eldrazi.
>>43709555
Most likely option is that "T: add (1) yo your mana pool" gets replaced with "T: add â—‡ to your mana pool" and â—‡ in a cost means specifically colorless mana.
107.4c is rewritten or removed and/or a new letter for the new symbol is added to 107.4. that is literally all they need to change in the rules.
the errata for cards though, will be a very long list
Why does anything have to change?
Why can't they just make spells or abilities that has "can only be payed with colorless mana"?
Nothing changes, but colorless basic lands becomes relevant.
>>43708873
There's more than two Kozilek-brood cards.
Herald of Kozilek, Kozilek's Channeler, Kozilek's Sentinel, and Skitterskin all have BISMUTH, as does Omnath, Locus of Rage.
I hope this set lets my play Grixis Eldrazi. I have all the lands I need for it, just show me the cards.
Based on what we know about the new Wastes (and omitting what we don't know about the cards which require <> mana), is there any conceivable way that Wastes benefits existing decks and archetypes? We usually try to avoid basic lands where we can, and this one seems strictly worse than basics which produce colored mana.
The only reason to run it seems to be those cards which have <> in the cost, and colorless EDH decks.
>>43709684
Yes but I am not aware that lands have the ability to tap for mana unless they have a land type or a sentence printed on them that allows them to do so.
Wastes currently has neither.
>>43709380
you mean second set of the block, we are now in two block sets not three.
>>43709856
Remember back before the change to black borders, when basic lands had a sentence saying what they did rather than a symbol?
It might be that the normal Wastes card is like that, saying "T: Add <> to your mana pool" and it's just the full art one that omits text.
>>43709869
Read the reply chain you mouthbreather.
>>43709777
Because by doing that you can quantify shit. If Kozi was 10 cmc and had "can only be payed with colorless mana" that means all of it would have to colorless which would make it pretty much impossible to cast and writting "Out of the 10 mana needed to cast Kozi, the Butt Pirate 2 must be colorless" is retarded.
>>43709893
Fuck off retard
>{T}: Add [1] to your mana pool.
>{R/U}, {T}: Add [3] to your mana pool.
>>43708603
>I'm sure they can come up with another reason for a land to produce this mana.
Whatever powerful planeswalker learn to over-consume things to produce more mana. Maybe to fight eldrazi for maximum tragedy and hubris. He must be stopped to preserve [plane]!
We're probably going to have a few eldrazi set anyway.
http://strawpoll.me/6041454
Come one come all, lets vote on what we think the new mana symbol means.
>>43709856
Until, y'know, the set comes out and it's errata'd into the rules just like double-faced cards were.
I forget, is this new Zendikar block going to just be two sets, or is it the last three set block?
>>43709953
Really? That's how you respond when someone points out your mistake?
>>43710147
The last 3-set block was Tarkir.
This is the first of the 2-set blocks. Although I think effectively the story is going to cover 4 sets because Shadows Over Innistrad is the immediate follow-up and that's pretty obviously still going to involve Eldrazi.
>>43709967
Have you considered not being a knuckle dragging retard? We get 2 sets per block, not 3
>>43710172
>This is the first of the 2-set blocks
LORWYN
AND
SHADOWMOOR
>>43709883
It is better then I though they only need to update rule 305.6 to make this work.
>>43710168
Fuck off retard
>>43710203
No you dumbass pedant, I'm obviously talking about the new 2-set block paradigm in which every block from now on is going to be 2.
>>43708180
As a note:
If A is true, and 'T: Add â—Š to your mana pool' is how they're doing 'T: Add 1 to your mana pool' from now on, then this is not the first time they've done a massive errata. Nor the second, or the third.
Mono artifacts, poly artifacts, and continuous artifacts all became just plain artifacts.
Summons became creatures.
Creature - Legends became Legendary Creatures.
Walls lost their rules text in the creature type and gained Defender
Enchant Creatures became Enchantment - Auras with Enchant Creature.
'comes into play' became 'enters the battlefield'
'is put into the graveyard from play' became 'is put into the graveyard from the battlefield' became 'dies'
'choose one - x, y, or z' became
'choose one -
•x
•y
•z'
>>43710172
>Shadows Over Innistrad is the immediate follow-up and that's pretty obviously still going to involve Eldrazi.
It is? Sorry if I seem out of the loop, but without having any money to be able to afford Magic cards I've kinda fallen out of touch with things. I knew the next block was returning to Innistrad but I didn't know it was going to feature the Eldrazi.
So, do we know why BFZ was focused on Ulamog, and this next set seems like it's focusing on Kozilek? Presumably Shadows Over Innistrad will focus on Emrakul and then set #2 of New Innistrad will be... Either all three titans, or perhaps whatever unfathomable beast that spawned all three of them?
>>43710230
Oh, so those 2 set blocks that sold like shit don't count anymore, because they're not NEW 2 set blocks, therefore because they're not new 2 set blocks, they're not 2 set blocks at all.
Isn't Shadowmoor like the worst performing block/set of all time?
>>43710245
Set #2 might be about how Innistrad has the perfect hero to combat the Eldrazi.
>>43710236
The recent keywording of menace was a fairly big errata, that also very slightly changed the functionality of a few cards.
>>43710252
>Isn't Shadowmoor like the worst performing block/set of all time?
Nothing compares to pit of warm garbage that was Homelands.
>>43710267
Yeah she stops Ulamog exiling your library. Nice find.
>>43710172
>that's pretty obviously still going to involve Eldrazi
Is it? I don't think that's a given at all.
>>43710312
What is theros for 200
>>43710335
Admittedly I was thinking about Annihilator. I forgot they got rid of it for the nu eldrazi
>>43710354
I'm pretty sure Theros sold better than Homelands.
>>43710354
Theros is garbage but was a relative success. Enough for Maro to consider it as an exemple for future mythology-inspired blocs (hi kamigawa).
>>43710354
Theros sold decently because Thoughtseize and it followed Return to Everyone's Favourite Plane.
>>43710252
It wasn't Shadowmoor so much as Lorwyn, Morningtide, and Eventide. Shadowmoor itself was the good one in the block, apparently, and the model itself wasn't bad - just the sets themselves.
So if I have this right, <> can be used as <> as well as (X)?
>>43710451
Probably. But no one knows for sure yet.
>>43710252
What the fuck are you talking about? Where does product sold even figure into this? An anon asked if BFZ was the last 3-set block or the first of the new 2-set blocks. That's what I responded to. You're being a pedantic little bitch and creating some kind of argument where there is none. Take a chill pill faggot.
>>43710175
Initial design for BFZ started well before the new block paradigm was announced. There is a possibility that BFZ was originally laid out as a 3-set block before being switched. That's what they're talking about in the reply chain. The diamond mana symbol may have been planned for the third set before the third set was dropped.
>>43710546
>Where does product sold even figure into this?
Well the last time 2 set blocks were around, Magic took a nosedive in sales.
>>43710451
Or â—Š is just the new way of 'add 1 to your mana pool'
>>43710347
>Shadow Over Innsmouth
>Cashing in on pop culture crossover from Bloodborne
>Immediate follow-up to a block in which we saw only 2 of the 3 Eldrazi titans
>Shadow Over Innsmouth
Dude. If there are no Eldrazi in that block I will tear up my Lili's and Snapcasters into tiny little pieces of paper.
>>43708180
>the only people who think this is the new face of "colorless" mana are the people desperate for their painlands to go up in value
Let it go, pain lands will never be good.
>>43710572
Correlation does not equal causation.
Lorwyn did bad because it was fucking Lorwyn, not because it was a 2-set block. Players care ten thousand times more about the setting and the mechanics than they do about block structure.
>>43710592
I doubt it has anything to do with Bloodborne - they work two years in advance, after all.
>>43710572
Lorwyn's failure was due to its setting and complexity, not its block structure. The block structure was one of the things that went RIGHT with it.
>>43710619
I don't think painlands are necessarily going to go up in value very much just because of a few Eldrazi cards that require explicitly colorless mana, but it does make sense that Wizards would make them no longer strictly worse than dual-lands by giving them a fringe deck to be playable in.
That's not the main reason we think this is the new colorless mana, though.
Does anyone else think it's weird that the eldrazi are considered this big multi-planar menace to be stopped? If they come from the blind eternities, shouldn't they be a natural part of the multiverse and also be too numerous to do anything about?
>All this theorizing over the mana type
Why is it so hard to believe it's just a new mana type that has no color?
>>43710635
>Correlation does not equal causation.
Pattern recognition is a sign of intelligence. And standard rotating faster than ever due to the new structure just means investing in a deck is even more of a risk than before. And I mean come the fuck on, standard decks are cracking $1000.
>>43710592
>>43710666
>I doubt it has anything to do with Bloodborne - they work two years in advance, after all.
They make the card effects two years in advance, they request the art and make the flavor of such cards only a few months before release.
They pretty much are trying to cash on the Bloodborne audience, and probably soon on the Jurassic Park audience.
>>43710592
You don't even have any Lils or Snaps, I'd wager.
At any rate, the "evidence" you posted is based completely on speculation and is laughable at best. Cash in on the "bloodborne" money? You do know that game floppedl commercially, right? 1.5 mil is all, which isn't even in the top 25 games on the PS4. You might as well assume they're going to introduce call of duty soldiers playing soccer using that logic.
>>43710674
The probably are, and what we see in Zendikar might just be the metaphorical tip of the iceberg. But them being natural doesn't mean people are chill with them- earthquakes are natural too but if we could stop them from happening by stabbing something in the face you know we would.
>>43710635
Fuck you I loved Lorwyn. I only hope we never go back becauase it will be shit like DTK and BFZ.
Have we considered that WotC leaked this intentionally, to see if we could figure out what <> means without the rules for it?
So that WotC could see how much product space they need to spend explaining it, and how much people will just figure it out correctly.
>>43710764
WotC wouldn't be that forward-thinking or in-touch with the magic community.
>>43710706
Return to Theros is just an obvious attempt to cash in on Rocket League's popularity.
>>43710764
They plan out sets like 2 years in advance. theres no way
>>43710764
HAAAAAAAAAAAH
No
>>43710764
They're too close to the roll out date for the next expansion for any data from a leak to be useful. Modern WotC's production is so massive, everything they do has to be years in advance.
>>43710693
>standard decks are cracking $1000.
I don't think this will be the norm, though. Decks play 10+ fetches that are 25 USD apiece- when was the last time in-standard lands were so expensive? Jace being >50 is a pretty extreme case as well- when was his last competitor? Liliana of the Veil at 40?
>>43708180
Wizzerds won't errata old cards for the sake of new mechanics.
I'm not sure why they would do Option 3 because that's not how Snow worked and I don't trust Wizzerds to have learned from their biggest mistakes.
Option 2 is almost definitely what Wizzerds would do. It's a terrible idea, but Wizzerds isn't new to terrible ideas.
There's also Option 4, which is that "â—Š" indicates that there's some alternate cost one can pay, like "sacrifice a permanent" or "discard a card."
Then there's Option 5, which is that the spoilers aren't real.
>>43710828
Thundermaw Hellkite hit $60.
>>43710725
My completely out-there guess is that eldrazi are suppose to be scavengers that eat dying/dead planes, but the titans (with their lineage) are mutants with the ability to "bleach" mana.
So typically, a plane starts decaying and the land loses its color, which would attract eldrazi to feed on it. But the titans can induce the bleaching themselves, thus making them feed out of control.
>>43710764
No, that is retarded.
When the set is released new mechanics will also be explained. There is nothing more to it and I can't see why there would be.
>oh looks like some guy on 4chan figured out what <> meant, let's not explain any new keywords lol
Is this how you imagine WotC works?
>>43710572
>Well the last time 2 set blocks were around, Magic took a nosedive in sales.
That's because Lorwyn was the hideous face of what Standard (and modern) would be.
Stupidly powerful creatures, little inter-block synergy, planeswalkers, mostly awful sorcs and instants.
![Channelfireball_Siege-Rhino_9-8-2014-copy[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/RziDKH6.jpg "Channelfireball_Siege-Rhino_9-8-2014-copy[1].jpg")
>>43710909
>Stupidly powerful creatures
>little inter-block synergy
>planeswalkers
>awful sorcs and instants
Truly, Lorwyn was ahead of its time.
>>43710673
Painlands (and any other non-dual-type or nonbasic lands) will always be worse than duals.
That doesn't mean they're bad, but it definitely means that retconning the rules like that won't mean anything for eternal players. Or even for Modern players. Or Standard players.
And again, Wizzerds doesn't use errata to make old cards newly useful. Otherwise any number of instants and sorceries like Goblin Grenade would be Tribal now.
>>43710852
For what, two, maybe three weeks? I'm counting cards that are staples their entire time in-format.
>>43710764
I doubt that's the reason but I could see them leaking this just to build hype. The cards leaked are just inscrutable enough to foster a lot of discussion and raise awareness for the next set. Basically free advertising.
>>43710590
We're thinking that <> is 'spend only colorless mana to pay for <>'
>>43710883
Also, if natural eldrazi are only attracted to colorless mana, then Kozilek's mutation must be less severe than Ulamog's since he's attracted to (summoned with) colorless mana.
Maybe taking out just Ulamog would be enough to make the others fuck off since he seems to be the one tasked with sucking the color out of stuff.
>>43710883
The lineages ARE the titans, though. We've only seen three Eldrazi (and Ulamog apparently had Eldrazi Cancer)
That said, them eating dead/dying planes has been suggested before - even with it just being the three and with their abilities as-is. Don't forget that they didn't come to Zendikar by their own choice. They were lured there intentionally in order to seal them.
>>43710909
>Cryptic Command
>>43711094
None of those impacts how the cards work.
If that poster had said, "tapping lands and combat damage don't use the stack," I'd have found the argument marginally convincing, but even in those instances, Wizzerds didn't make the changes in ways that would boost the effectiveness of old cards.
>>43711128
They're gonna get rid of ulamog and leave the plane or otherwise leave kozile because colorless. Kozilek is going to absorb colorless mana and end up being corrupt by phyrexia for a return.
I just want mirrodin pure .
>>43711149
Nearly unplayable in the eternal formats.
>>43710236
Not to mention when they decided to go back and add creature types to old retarded shit like most of the Legends set.
>>43710267
God I fucking hate that bitch
>>43711149
Wow, you named one but he said >mostly
Ill give you another one, thoughtsieze.
Wow two cards out of four sets.
>>43710280
It's not an errata, they literally just turned the phrase into a keyword you fucking idiot
>>43710592
>Wanting more eldrazi
Why? They ruined the first zendikar block, they're ruining this block and now you want them to ruin Innistrad?
>>43711214
Yeah, that, Ponder, and Manamorphose are the only really good ones. Rest of the set's inst/sorc load was pretty abysmal, and not a lot has changed.
>>43711128
Mutation?
>>43708180
You left out the 4th, most likely option:
Shit's fake brah.
>>43710909
>>43710954
>Ponder
>Thoughsieze
>Scapeshift (A Modern Deck)
>Cryptic Command
>Tarfire (Tarmogoyf Shock before bolt reprint)
Lorwyn/Shadowmoor can boast 4 Modern decks that are centered around their cards. The creatures are reliant on synergies and are not as oppressive individually as Siege Rhino.
>>43711358
Only one of those cards is the centerpiece of a deck in Modern, and none of those cards is the centerpiece of a deck in the eternal formats.
Also, Gaddock Teeg's pretty oppressive.
>>43710706
>You don't even have any Lils or Snaps, I'd wager.
3 and 3 son, I was one of the pioneers of neo Solar Flare as soon as the full first Innistrad spoiler dropped.
>At any rate, the "evidence" you posted is based completely on speculation and is laughable at best. Cash in on the "bloodborne" money? You do know that game floppedl commercially, right? 1.5 mil is all, which isn't even in the top 25 games on the PS4. You might as well assume they're going to introduce call of duty soldiers playing soccer using that logic.
Yeah alright that one's a stretch, but the Lovecraft wordplay is not, and the timing is not. Anyone who thinks there won't be Eldrazi in SOI is an idiot. Probably the same idiots who actually thought Scars block was somehow going to end with Mirrodin Pure when we had overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
>>43711418
Elves, Faeries, Merfolk and Scapeshift are heavily reliant and only exist because of cards from Lorwyn and Shadowmoor.
I like to think each Block has a 'flair' set. You know, the stuff that stands out from previous magic sets, based on power, mechanics, flavor, you name it.
Oath of the gate watch is the 'flair' set. Khans of Tarkir was the flashiest of its block. Theros had... thoughtsieze.
>>43708933
Casting is the process of putting the card from your hand, to the stack and assigning mana. You, oddly, successfully cast it.
>>43710840
>Wizzerds won't errata old cards for the sake of new mechanics.
It's not a new mechanic. Colorless mana and generic mana are already separate in the rules, they just didn't have separate symbols because colorless mana has never been required in a mana cost before.
>Then there's Option 5, which is that the spoilers aren't real.
Why is the internet so bad at telling apart real leaks from fake? These are so obviously real, the chances of them being faked at this point are like infinitesimally small.
>>43711418
Modern is an eternal format.
It doesn't rotate, thus it's an eternal format.
>>43711239
I never meant that I necessarily wanted them or not, just that the likelihood of them being in the block is so fucking absolute that if I'm wrong I'll tear up my expensive cards.
>>43711311
Literally retarded.
>>43711560
I can't tell if this is bait or if you really don't known what eternal means.
>>43708767
In this case, wastes have no colour identity anymore, unlike your mountains and swamps.
What exactly this means for a land that produces colourless is anyone's guess until we get rules/set confirmation.
>>43711610
I've read the art argument, and it's bullshit. Frankly I think it's more likely that the art was leaked, and they made up these bullshit cards around them.
Not even WotC is retarded enough to release this <shit>
>>43711631
Lands don't have color identities.
>>43711493
If you're referring to Modern and Modern alone, that's fair. Not really what I was saying, but that's still correct. My point was that, of Ponder, Thoughtseize, Scapeshift, Cryptic Command, and Tarfire, only one of those cards was the centerpiece of a deck, and only two of them are close to essential in any other decks in any other formats. The decks you mentioned (except for Scapeshift) all rely on the ridiculous creatures I mentioned in my earlier post (>>43710909).
>>43711685
It's already been confirmed as real. Stop being retarded and go die now
>>43711685
>Not even WotC is retarded enough to release this <shit>
>>43711613
>Eternal
>As in "forever"
>As in "the cards in the format will be there forever"
Do YOU know what eternal means?
>>43711695
But that's wrong.
>>43711731
Yeap you are baiting. Here's a hint, eternal does not mean non-rotating.
>>43711695
Lands don't have colors.
They do have color identities.
Color identities only matter for Commander.
>>43711718
I haven't seen it on wizards, so all we have is mtgsalvation moderating staff's word that the source is reliable.
>>43711764
What's it like down there with your head stuck in the sand?
>>43711731
The definition of "eternal" and the definition of "an eternal format" are different. The name never made sense; I know that.
There's a distinction made between "eternal" and "non-rotating." There are three eternal formats, four non-rotating formats, and two non-rotating non-eternal formats.
>>43711764
And their sources have repeatedly been fantastic since time spiral.
>>43710954
I'll grant you 1, 3 and 4 but Standard is so expensive right now because the lands at least have too much inter-block synergy, not too little.
>>43709779
My bad. I forgot.
>>43711750
Shit my bad.
>>43710909
Hrmm or perhaps it was because it came out during a fucking recession?
>>43711869
The biggest problem with Standard is that it's always going to be too expensive. It may be more expensive now than it has been in some time, but the problem remains that the entire community goes bananas over Voice of Resurgence, drives the price up to almost a hundred dollars, and then the card becomes useless and loses 70% of its value.
Synergy isn't the problem with Standard; the problem with Standard is that the economics of the format make no sense once you've played for three blocks and thus can afford to play any other format.
>>43711851
>>43711791
It's all a conspiracy I say. WotC leaked accurate shit since timespiral to convince us of a sixth color now.
Wake up sheeple.
>>43711908
Nah, I think it was just that the sets were terrible.
>Kithkin, Treefolk, Elementals, and Giants as tribes
>Introduce two new card types because reasons
>Bad instants and sorceries
>Pushed creatures
>Awful flavor
>>43711941
You're never going to build a tournament-quality deck for less than $100, but the fact that every deck runs 10-12 fetches and at least 4 duals is the difference between a $400-500 Standard and a $800-$1000 Standard.
>>43711685
Yeah you're right, totally fake, just like all those New Phyrexian cards that leaked early were total fakes.
Oh wait.
The odds of <> being only colorless mana are low judging by the fact that lands produce <>. If it were just colorless, those lands would just tap for 1.
>>43711994
>Kithkin, Treefolk, Elementals, and Giants as tribes
Maybe they didn't just want to have Humans, Merfolk, Zombies, Goblins and Elves?
>Introduce two new card types because reasons
I've heard Planeswalkers were meant to appear in the block prior, but didn't get sorted out until Lorwyn.
As for Tribal spells, it was a decent way to have the Tribal interactions extend further than just creatures. Doesn't everyone always complain that Magic is too focused on creatures?
>Bad instants and sorceries
There were some good ones as well. Part of that might be because they were using Evoke and Elementals to make creatures that could double as spells.
>Pushed creatures
There were quite a few standouts in that area, though people will complain about power level either way. The biggest problem was Faeries, really.
>Awful flavor
Yeah, I much prefer generic fantasy plane #11.
>>43712220
I don't think that's the case, but it's possible I guess.
Changing {1} to {D} has the the consequence of making this card work strangely.
This is one of the cases where generic has to = colorless for it to work intuitively.
I am gonna go with the
> spend only colorless mana to pay for <>
theory
>>43712436
How? Let's say Elemental Resonance enchants a bear which costs 1G. Then you will add one green and one generic (not colorless!) mana to your mana pool. Because the {1} in mana costs is generic mana, not colorless mana. You will only be able to pay generic mana costs with the generic mana, not colorless mana costs.
>>43712544
Seconded.
It's just like Snow Mana. Nothing new.
>>43711220
Look at every single other card that has the words "can't be blocked except by two or more creatures". It's oracle has been changed to menace. Its the same deal with {1} --> <>, just a change in symbol
>>43712584
It already adds 1 colorless and 1 green, read the fucking oracle rulings.
>>43712587
Except it's nothing like snow mana
With the new mana symbol, colorless devotion?
>>43712678
Other than in every single way? Yeah, I guess you're on to something.
>>43712587
It's literally nothing like snow mana. If it's just "<> can only be paid with colourless mana" then that means not just mana produced from a Wastes. Any other colourless producing land such as Stensia Bloodhall or Urza's Tower would work too.
>>43712678
>{S} can only be paid with (mana from snow sources)
>{D} can only be paid with (colorless mana)
>>43712788
It was pointed out on mtgsalvation that the code for the chaos symbol was recently changed from {C} to {CHAOS}.
>>43712712
Right, I forgot the part where Coldsnap errata'd hundreds of previously printed lands to be Snow lands and came closer than ever to making a 6th color. Yeah it's exactly the same.
>>43712788
>>{S} can only be paid with (mana from snow sources)
>>{D} can only be paid with (colorless mana)
Not, {D} can only be paid with (mana from colorless sources)
>>43712177
>Fear
>Vigilance
>Removing "T: add X to your mana pool" from basics
>Updating the legend rule
>Updating it again
>Changing damage stacking
>changing it back
>Updating creature types with shitloads of errata
>Double faced cards
>colored artifacts
>neo slivers
>Planeswalkers
Yeah man, Wizards always sticks to their historical canon and never retcons the way mechanics work.
>>43712819
See >>43712788 and then try to stop being retarded when you get a chance.
>>43712805
{C}, {D}, same difference. It gets the point across.
This definitely isn't worse than snow mana. I'll give it that.
>>43712870
No one here is arguing for that. All lands are colorless.
>>43712773
so literally like snow mana? snow mana wasn't limited to snow lands, it was all mana produced by snow permanents, see Rime Dryad
>>43712901
He thinks the people saying Snow Mana are actually saying >>43712822
He's also clinically retarded.
>>43712854
>doesn't address any of the points I made
>does call me a retard
Damn, you sure showed me.
>>43712864
It's much, MUCH worse than Snow Mana.
>>43708180
It's entirely possible they only used the "8<><>" format because Kozilek's new name is too long to fit ten diamond mana in the title bar. I mean, Khalni Hydra has eight green mana in its cost, but only because the name of the creature is short enough to fit it all in there.
<> mana is probably just going to be the new colorless mana symbol and it was only shortened for Kozilek due to space restrictions. Giving colorless a new basic land is a heavy indicator that it will see print in future sets.
It feels like it's just going to be the new colorless
>>43709779
And that one common merfolk is holding a chunk.
>>43712936
>make no points
>they don't get address
>cry online
Okay.
The problem is you have no idea what's being discussed. I don't know if it's because you can't grasp basic concepts or if you just can't follow a conversation. Nothing even needs to be errated, so no clue why you're throwing a bitchfit over that.
The only reasonable outcome is that they are very close to Snow Lands. Again, read >>43712788. Maybe it'll click this time.
>>43712850
There is LITERALLY 0% chance that Wizards will errata all (1) mana costs and producers to the <> symbol. The amount of backtracking between that and anything you just listed is preposterous.
>>43708754
Every time a Planeswalker traverses the Blind Eternities it's described as a hellish, awful experience. I'm not convinced that it's a setting you can just go to, especially considering it's the entire space between planes.
>>43712972
Yet more proof that people just don't currently understand the difference between colorless mana and generic mana.
Here's a hint, (10), (8)<><>, and <><><><><><><><><><> are all very different casting costs.
>>43712972
Congratulations anon, this is easily the most retarded theory I've seen. I had a chuckle.
>>43712619
The oracle rulings say "If the enchanted permanent's mana cost is {2}{W}{U}, this Aura's controller adds {2}{W}{U} ..." so it adds {1}. I can't find the word "colorless" there, only the { }. Until now it was not neccessary to differentiate between colorless and generic mana in such a case, this will probably change.
>>43711731
>As in "forever"
>As in "the cards in the format will be there forever"
ever heard of TREASURE CRUISE and DTT? Forever =/= 1 year
>>43713019
except it's not backtracking because <> wouldn't be functionally different than (1), it's literally just a different way to write
>what is Fear
>What is Vigilance
>What is Defender
>What is Intimidate
>What is Menace
>>43713019
It's not even really an errata, just a rules text update that would be reflected on any reprints. producing (1) would just be read as producing <>, rules wise they're literally the same. It's about as impactful to old cards as changing the old tap symbol into the new tap symbol, but the distinction would allow them to print new cards like this Kozilek.
>>43712822
>lands are colorless anyway
ayylmao
>>43713019
Costs not, that's true, because the costs are generic mana.
Producers maybe or maybe not, depending on how lazy they are; I believe they will errate it.
>>43713071
The set is still in the (eternal) formats, banning of individual cards doesn't change that. But his post was faulty, yes.
>>43712936
well he called it right
>>43712615
Thran dynamo now produces <><><>
How ugly.
>>43713172
>mfw the true eternal format is casual
>>43713015
There's nothing to click. {D} and {S} act entirely differently.
{S} checks the source for snow type
{D} does not check the source for colorless
Snow mana can have color.
Colorless cannot.
Functionally, they're not even close. Just because a new basic land type is introduced doesn't mean it's the same shit.
>>43713169
>lands are the only mana source
ayy
It's just gonna be blighted mana, guys. It's gonna be Snow Mana 2, electric boogaloo.
>>43713238
yup that sounds pretty retarded
I'm pretty sure <> is fake OR means "spend only colorless mana (AS A COST) and (AS A SOURCE) can only be used for colorless spells/costs with <>" which means it could be printed on an dork or something.
Super unlikely to get out of this block unless eldrazi shenanigans are involved, if it was ever real in the first place.
>>43713271
Now I can't tell if you're being intentionally retarded or not.
>>43713071
Then no format is eternal because cards get banned in legacy and vintage too
>>43713271
I'll take what are dorks and mana rocks for 500 please.
>>43713271
>still hasn't read >>43712788 after being linked it twice
Are you just pretending?
>>43713334
>I have no argument
Daily reminder that Kozilek himself leaked the cards to watch us turn against each other.
>>43713348
Wizards never really knew how to get their shit together senpai
>>43713048
Nobody but wizards understands the difference between colorless mana and generic mana anon. There have been no official rulings on how it works. This is all just speculation.
The huge problem with the "you may only spend generic mana to pay this cost theory" is that cards have been spoiled that can produce these symbols. If the <> symbol was just a cost modifier (like phyrexian mana), then there wouldn't be cards that can actually produce <>. There wouldn't need to be.
Sure, they could just errata hundreds of cards and use a really ugly template (seriously, <><><> repeated over and over again? the current generic mana template is better looking because it saves space) Or they could just be printing a set unique mechanic.
Also, does nobody find it odd that they printed kozilek's channeler in the last set and it can't produce <>?
If they knew they were just gonna errata it a set later, why bother?
>>43713374
>still better than being literally retarded
>>43713391
It's more or less one retard at this point. Everyone else has it figured out.
>>43713421
Stop replying. He just wants more (You)s.
>>43713371
Yes, I have. By that logic it's no different than any colored mana. Still not even close to snow.
>>>43712788
>>{S} can only be paid with (mana from snow sources)
>>{D} can only be paid with (colorless mana)
>{W} can only be paid with (white mana)
>{U} can only be paid with (blue mana)
>{B} can only be paid with (black mana)
>{R} can only be paid with (red mana)
>{G} can only be paid with (green mana)
>inb4 you just don't get it
learn to elaborate, stop relinking the same retarded post.
I cant really articulate how I feel about this.
>BfZ
>no idea where to go, lets revisit eldrazi
>no Annihilator, hurts new players feelings
>parasitic, underpowered mechanics
>horrible standard season
>Moneygrab expeditions
>now "Exciting new mana, guess what its true colorless!"
>discontinuation of Core set
>release of Magic Duels: Origins
>changing to 2 set cycles
>EDH monetization and pandering
>NWO
I just feel like... I dont know. Are they losing their touch? Am I being left behind while they target a new demographic? Why do I feel like I'm losing interest in the new direction Wizards is going? Why do I wish it was 2009 again? Am I a faggot or is my stomach trying to tell me something? Its all just so... underwhelming.
>>43713449
Holy shit, he's starting to get it now! There's hope left.
>>43712948
Snow mana makes snow lands strictly better than non-snow lands. That's a huge no-no.
>>43713454
>doesn't see why the new design age shines
I laugh at you while I bathe in the connection between story and gameplay mechanics. BFZ is absolutely amazing when it comes to emulating story just with the mechanics in the set.
>>43713454
I feel you buddy, gone are the days of RTR-INN
>mfw drownyard/mill was a viable deck
>mfw restoration angel/thragtusk best thing ever
>mfw hellrider came out and it became the best thing ever
>mfw i have no face
>>43713449
There's nothing to elaborate. You got it correct there.
Why are you arguing what you're agreeing to?
>>43713498
>BFZ
>Flavor
Uh, you spelled kamigawa wrong faggot. Hell even mirrodin has better flavor/mechanics interation than this pile of shit you call a set.
>>43713514
>gone are the days of RTR-INN
RTR was fucking terrible and INN had exactly one good set.
Say TSP/RAV next time.
>>43713454
Son, you are getting older, too. Do you still remember that one time when you told your old dad (shouting, no less) that you would never become like him and that he should shut up and that he didn't understand you and that old people are stupid? I'm still waiting for an apology for that, by the way. Please visit me in the retirement home. Bring something to eat, the food here is horrible.
>>43713542
I drafted Kamigawa block two weeks ago with paper cards and while it got me very nostalgic, the gameplay mechanics do not come very close to the flavor of the set. The conflict between the two factions isn't as good reflected in the cards as it is in BFZ.
I still want to go back to Kamigawa, though. I feel that this time they wouldn't fuck it up that much.Also, I don't want Tamiyo to be homeless.
>>43713454
Magic has been dead for me for years.
I can only get my kicks modding DotP 2014.
>>43713545
Kek.
[Spoiler] I didn't know magic existed until 2009 [/Spoiler]
>>43713542
>>43713498
Kamigawa
Lorwyn
Mirrodin
Ravinca
GOAT flavor wise, this is not debatable.
And before one of you faggots says I started in mirrodinyou're fairly close actually, I started in Apocalypse
>>43713454
How many "made for EDH" cards has wotc printed now that were subsequently banned in EDH?
>>43713498
I laugh at you for actually caring about that retarded shit
>>43713608
I didn't know this was a thing. What kind of mods can you do?
>>43713623
>no Time Spiral
So close to perfect taste.
>>43713391
I just noticed the fucking rock halo on that guy.
Guys....
Guysss....
Kosi is using the land itself to fuck with people. He's going to literally turn Zendikar against itself.
>>43713454
This is the Two-Block Paradigm, anon. Large sets are essentially the new Core that introduce a theme and the mechanics to go with it, small set expands on the theme of the first set with a new concept. BFZ is the shittiest because it was halfway through development before being split in half.
>>43713663
It's up there. I unfortunately didn't get to experience the lore as much because I had taken a break, and I hadn't experienced as much dominaria as I should have (starting at the tail end of it). As a love letter to dominaria, I can see it's appeal.
>>43713623
I started with Invasion. The sets you mentioned are great for flavor but my point was that the flavor itself wasn't reflected much in gameplay. For years WotC has created new sets with new cards with settings on new worlds. Only very rarely will the sets actually PLAY as if there was a real connection between what is going on in the world. Most of the time it's just two sides: One is mechanics on cards, the other one is the world and the story. There was barely any connection between them. They are now changing that.
>>43713653
Any card that the game can handle. A group of modders are working on the entire card catalog.
You could also make up your own cards and add them in, if you know how they should be worded.
There's an external program to make your own decks. I like it more than Cockatice since there's a rules engine to back it up (just be sure the cards are properly coded)
>>43713519
I'm arguing that it's nothing like snow mana, like >>43712587 purported
>>43713734
But you just proved it's very similar. So, good job I guess.
>>43713600
All you have to do is look at Rend Spirit/Rend Flesh. I really don't think BFZ is still better in that respect than Kamigawa. BFZ just feels so half-assed. All you have are these generic shit rares that are just made to be bombs in draft and are extremely narrow. (That plated piece of shit that cost something like 3GGG) At least they set up the environment in Kamigawa.
I really don't want to take my nostalgia goggles off.
>>43713727
Is it just against AIs though?
>>43710267
There's also Tajuru Preserver.
>>43713763
Cute, but no, it's entirely dissimilar.
>>43713770
Then you had soulshift, which was a great way of encapsulating the eternal nature of the spirits.
The only real flavor failure in Kamigawa was Splice. And it was also a mechanical failure. Seriously, why no "Splice onto X" instead of a parasitic keyword?
>>43713776
If you and a friend have the SAME EXACT MOD FILES (caps because if even one file is slightly different, it doesn't work), you can play multiplayer.
There is a Community WAD and Community Decks to go with it to ease people syncing, but I enjoy deckbuilding too much to use someone else's decks.
Check out http://www.slightlymagic.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=109
>>43713819
As much as I want splice to be better, I feel like "splice onto x" has the potential to be really really broken.
