And only 4 of each, snow lands are nonbasic lands.
Depends on the specific land. Snow-Covered Island is a basic land, since it has the Basic supertype and the presence/absence of other supertypes (like Snow) is moot, and you are allowed to have more than four in your deck. But you would be limited to four Arctic Flats, since that doesn't have the Basic supertype.
And only 4 of each, snow lands are nonbasic lands.
If you're referring to Snow basic lands, this is incorrect. However, if you're referring to non-basic Snow lands, this is correct.
@OP: because the set they were printed in is not currently legal, they are not currently legal. It's a bit confusing because they are basic lands, but the Snow lands are different in that way.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Amazing Avy & Sig by mchief111 @ Rising Studios [4/22/11]
10/1/2008 Since this is a basic land, you may have any number of it in a Constructed deck in any format in which the _Masters Edition II_ set, the _Coldsnap_ set, or the _Ice Age_ set is legal.
10/1/2008 In Limited events, you can't add basic snow lands to your deck from outside your card pool. You may add only lands named Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest, as normal.
However if you really want to use them because of the way they look i would ask you LGS if they are fine with it. If the don't have a problem then go for it.
However if you really want to use them because of the way they look i would ask you LGS if they are fine with it. If the don't have a problem then go for it.
This isn't up to an individual store or TO to decide. If snow lands are not legal in the format for the event, they can't be used at all. No exception is provided to "waive" this. (And it is especially vital that stores don't make this kind of exception, because if a player goes to a more Competitive event using snow lands, then it can mean the player receives a Game Loss for Tournament Error--Deck/Decklist Problem.)
You many also not in competitive events write island and play with snow-covered islands. If you are deckchecked, you will receive a game loss for Deck/Decklist Problem. There are plenty of pretty lands, just pick one of the 200+ others available...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All foil Invasion Draft Set (1 Rare, 3 Uncommon, 6 Common) California DCI Level 2 Judge
What is the harm in playing basic snow covered lands instead of normal basic lands in an enviorment where the snow supertype has no effect at all?
Is there any card in standard (the only constructed format where these lands are not legal) that effects or is affected by supertypes not present in the format?
Sometimes it matters for either the supertype, sometimes it matters for the name. For example, Invader Parasite cares about the name, which is different for Snow-Covered Island. Running half Snow-Covered Island/half Island would affect the functionality there. Strata Scythe is another example of a card that cares about names.
While I would agree that this may be rare, the fact is, it can sometimes be relevant. Either way, set legality for a format determines what cards are allowed or not allowed. Certainly if you want to petition WotC to "waive" this for Snow-Covered Island et al, you can do that. But, until then, the policy is pretty straight forward as it applies to sanctioned events.
It's a stupid rule anyway and Wizards should get rid of it.
What is the harm in playing basic snow covered lands instead of normal basic lands in an enviorment where the snow supertype has no effect at all?
Is there any card in standard (the only constructed format where these lands are not legal) that effects or is affected by supertypes not present in the format?
Because it sets precedent that your LGS owner or TO is a rules arbiter on another level from the rules, which is untrue. If your totally casual games don't care, then whatever, but when there's a specific structure to be followed, then... follow the structure. There are plenty of formats to use your Snow permanents - Standard isn't one of them right now. You're right that there might not be any interactions in Standard right now, but the rule is fine as a safeguard against future problems. I'm sorry you don't get to use your non-functional pimp lands for every format, but like you say, it makes no difference, so let's just stick with the rules instead of making pointless exceptions that increase complexity for no reason.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
UUU Talrand, Sky Summoner // (W/U)(W/U)(W/U) Grand Arbiter Augustin IV // RRR Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker // (R/G)(R/G)(R/G) Wort, the Raidmother // URG Riku of Two Reflections // RWU Ruhan of the Fomori
Quote from Mark Rosewater »
In response to your Lightning Blast, I'll eat this burrito.
Quote from slipknot72102 »
This is why I started playing magic in the first place. It wasn't PT aspirations just making noobs cry by doing things that are perfectly fair.
Why not just run Ice Age basic lands in your standard deck? Personally I'm a big fan of the art (particularly the Mountains). Snow-Covered lands are awesome, but save them for your Legacy decks or other things (just watch out for Avalanche!)
Snow covered lands are not legal in standard, but in modern/legacy a large number of people will run them as their basics in order to use Scrying Sheets or Mouth of Ronom
If you are playing standard casually and your lands are snow then I really should hope no one will care, but in a competitive environment little things matter a lot, so you have to start getting used to paying attention to detail.
We have a landbox that people use lands from in drafts. Every now and then someone finds a snow land, but I don't think they would get a game loss for that.
In a set with snow themes, it would be a problem, but otherwise...
We have a landbox that people use lands from in drafts. Every now and then someone finds a snow land, but I don't think they would get a game loss for that.
At any Regular REL event, no one should be issued a Game Loss for this kind of situation. Yes, the card is illegal for the format, but the typical procedure is "Fix by replacing with a normal basic land, educate, and let them keep playing."
However, this becomes a more significant issue at Competitive REL events. Which is why the "educate" portion at Regular REL events like FNM, and where you don't want to make carve-outs that aren't actually allowed by policy. When you do that, you create different expectations than is the reality, and that can be especially jarring when someone finds out the hard way that what they've done at FNM every week is that much more serious.
It's a stupid rule anyway and Wizards should get rid of it.
What is the harm in playing basic snow covered lands instead of normal basic lands in an enviorment where the snow supertype has no effect at all?
Is there any card in standard (the only constructed format where these lands are not legal) that effects or is affected by supertypes not present in the format?
By this same argument, you could play Grizzly Bears in Standard. Are you saying we should allow that as well?
We have a landbox that people use lands from in drafts. Every now and then someone finds a snow land, but I don't think they would get a game loss for that.
In a set with snow themes, it would be a problem, but otherwise...
That's a different situation. If someone grabs a snow land out of a lands box provided by the LGS they should be permitted to replace it with a regular land. Especially considering that many new players are drafters, the last thing you would want to do is start issuing game losses for something that is really the LGS' fault. (you could say "you should have checked" but if you're a new player and you grab a snow-covered mountain out of the lands box you don't necessarily even know that it's illegal.)
I was kinda under the impression that the rule used to be if you are playing Snow-Covered basics in format in which Snow-Covered lands aren't legal your Snow-Covered Islands function as Islands. Meaning what Epeeguy brought up with cards like Strata Scythe don't matter because Strata Scythe would read Snow-covered Plains as plain old Plains.
"I have no idea what it's like not to be a straight white male, and the experiences of others are irrelevant." -Conservative Motto
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
I was kinda under the impression that the rule used to be...
No such rule currently exists. The name of "Snow-Covered Island" is just that, and it is a different type line than an Island. These are two different cards.
No such rule currently exists. The name of "Snow-Covered Island" is just that, and it is a different type line than an Island. These are two different cards.
I didn't say it currently did and yes they are 2 different cards. However what i'm suggesting is that it's reasonable to allow Snow-Covered basics as Proxy basics. It would be easy for the DCI to add a technicality to the rules on proxies.
I've seen Chinese Snow-covered basics be used in sanctioned events before and never seen anything happen because of it. So to the OP if you really wanna use Snow-covered basics for the art, if you don't mind using Chinese. I suggest you shove them into your deck and play dumb if you ever get caught, which won't happen.
"I have no idea what it's like not to be a straight white male, and the experiences of others are irrelevant." -Conservative Motto
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
I didn't say it currently did and yes they are 2 different cards. However what i'm suggesting is that it's reasonable to allow Snow-Covered basics as Proxy basics. It would be easy for the DCI to add a technicality to the rules on proxies.
That is also not allowed. Players cannot make or otherwise use their own proxies, which is explicitly stated in policy. Proxies may only issued by the Head Judge in very specific situations, and certainly providing "proxy" Snow-Covered lands in place of normal Basics would likely not pass muster on that account.
I've seen Chinese Snow-covered basics be used in sanctioned events before and never seen anything happen because of it. So to the OP if you really wanna use Snow-covered basics for the art, if you don't mind using Chinese. I suggest you shove them into your deck and play dumb if you ever get caught, which won't happen.
Whether you've "seen people use X and nothing has ever been none" only means that either (a) no judge was involved or (b) it was handled incorrectly if a judge was called. Or, in those circumstances, it was actually legal. In the OP's situation, it isn't, and telling the OP (or anyone else) that it's okay is misleading and does a disservice to the OP and anyone else reading this thread. (Edit: Especially as judges/TOs unfamiliar with how this kind of situation might be handled might believe that a Game Loss/Match Loss/Disqualification is the way to handle someone who shows up with illegal cards in their deck, even when at Regular REL. And that is not as uncommon a belief as some may think.)
That is also not allowed. Players cannot make or otherwise use their own proxies, which is explicitly stated in policy. Proxies may only issued by the Head Judge in very specific situations, and certainly providing "proxy" Snow-Covered lands in place of normal Basics would likely not pass muster on that account.
Not what i said. I said you could add a rule that allows SCB to used as Proxy basics of the same type. Also your talking about DCI sanctioned events. Legitimate 10 proxy type Vintage events take place all the time.
Whether you've "seen people use X and nothing has ever been none" only means that either (a) no judge was involved or (b) it was handled incorrectly if a judge was called. Or, in those circumstances, it was actually legal.
Oh, for sure. But the thing is no one ever pays enough attention to notice so it doesn't matter. 99.9% of the playerbase wouldn't even be tell the difference if the did pay enough attention to notice.
In the OP's situation, it isn't, and telling the OP (or anyone else) that it's okay is misleading and does a disservice to the OP and anyone else reading this thread. (Edit: Especially as judges/TOs unfamiliar with how this kind of situation might be handled might believe that a Game Loss/Match Loss/Disqualification is the way to handle someone who shows up with illegal cards in their deck, even when at Regular REL. And that is not as uncommon a belief as some may think.)
Any venue that would DQ/GL/ML you for "mistakenly" playing SCB in your deck when you "think" they are normal basics isn't a venue i would ever want to be at. If lying straight faced to the TO/Judge is what i need to do to allow me to play an aesthetically pleasing card, when the only problem it causes is that offends the TO dogmatic beliefs about the rules. Then ill go ahead and do that and i would suggest others do the same.
Fun facts: Signed cards used to be considered marked, Portal *** used to be banned by the MTR in formats where *** was legal. same goes for cards from the Garfield vs Finkel Precon even though about 98% of the people playing at the time couldn't tell the cards apart form the real thing. It's funny how these rules change over time.
"I have no idea what it's like not to be a straight white male, and the experiences of others are irrelevant." -Conservative Motto
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
All the same, you shouldn't be suggesting to people that they knowlingly do something that's against the rules and then to play dumb if they get caught. You can see how that's a bad path to begin down, surely.
All the same, you shouldn't be suggesting to people that they knowlingly do something that's against the rules and then to play dumb if they get caught. You can see how that's a bad path to begin down, surely.
Nah, bro. You think i shouldn't be doing that. I think i should and will continue to do so, when it comes to silly pointless things like this. Deceit isn't always a bad thing. Enjoy letting other people boss you around though.
"I have no idea what it's like not to be a straight white male, and the experiences of others are irrelevant." -Conservative Motto
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
Knowingly using illegal cards is cheating. You are telling people to cheat, and lie about it to avoid repercussions. Maybe you don't like "the man" bringing you down, but you are giving people terrible advice, please stop telling them to do things that will get them DQ'd in the real world.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Rules Advisor as of 9/25/11
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sales Thread
And only 4 of each, snow lands are nonbasic lands.
Depends on the specific land. Snow-Covered Island is a basic land, since it has the Basic supertype and the presence/absence of other supertypes (like Snow) is moot, and you are allowed to have more than four in your deck. But you would be limited to four Arctic Flats, since that doesn't have the Basic supertype.
If you're referring to Snow basic lands, this is incorrect. However, if you're referring to non-basic Snow lands, this is correct.
@OP: because the set they were printed in is not currently legal, they are not currently legal. It's a bit confusing because they are basic lands, but the Snow lands are different in that way.
10/1/2008 Since this is a basic land, you may have any number of it in a Constructed deck in any format in which the _Masters Edition II_ set, the _Coldsnap_ set, or the _Ice Age_ set is legal.
10/1/2008 In Limited events, you can't add basic snow lands to your deck from outside your card pool. You may add only lands named Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest, as normal.
However if you really want to use them because of the way they look i would ask you LGS if they are fine with it. If the don't have a problem then go for it.
This isn't up to an individual store or TO to decide. If snow lands are not legal in the format for the event, they can't be used at all. No exception is provided to "waive" this. (And it is especially vital that stores don't make this kind of exception, because if a player goes to a more Competitive event using snow lands, then it can mean the player receives a Game Loss for Tournament Error--Deck/Decklist Problem.)
California DCI Level 2 Judge
Sometimes it matters for either the supertype, sometimes it matters for the name. For example, Invader Parasite cares about the name, which is different for Snow-Covered Island. Running half Snow-Covered Island/half Island would affect the functionality there. Strata Scythe is another example of a card that cares about names.
While I would agree that this may be rare, the fact is, it can sometimes be relevant. Either way, set legality for a format determines what cards are allowed or not allowed. Certainly if you want to petition WotC to "waive" this for Snow-Covered Island et al, you can do that. But, until then, the policy is pretty straight forward as it applies to sanctioned events.
Because it sets precedent that your LGS owner or TO is a rules arbiter on another level from the rules, which is untrue. If your totally casual games don't care, then whatever, but when there's a specific structure to be followed, then... follow the structure. There are plenty of formats to use your Snow permanents - Standard isn't one of them right now. You're right that there might not be any interactions in Standard right now, but the rule is fine as a safeguard against future problems. I'm sorry you don't get to use your non-functional pimp lands for every format, but like you say, it makes no difference, so let's just stick with the rules instead of making pointless exceptions that increase complexity for no reason.
If you are playing standard casually and your lands are snow then I really should hope no one will care, but in a competitive environment little things matter a lot, so you have to start getting used to paying attention to detail.
In a set with snow themes, it would be a problem, but otherwise...
At any Regular REL event, no one should be issued a Game Loss for this kind of situation. Yes, the card is illegal for the format, but the typical procedure is "Fix by replacing with a normal basic land, educate, and let them keep playing."
However, this becomes a more significant issue at Competitive REL events. Which is why the "educate" portion at Regular REL events like FNM, and where you don't want to make carve-outs that aren't actually allowed by policy. When you do that, you create different expectations than is the reality, and that can be especially jarring when someone finds out the hard way that what they've done at FNM every week is that much more serious.
By this same argument, you could play Grizzly Bears in Standard. Are you saying we should allow that as well?
No way this should be allowed, it would be broken beyond belief.
That's a different situation. If someone grabs a snow land out of a lands box provided by the LGS they should be permitted to replace it with a regular land. Especially considering that many new players are drafters, the last thing you would want to do is start issuing game losses for something that is really the LGS' fault. (you could say "you should have checked" but if you're a new player and you grab a snow-covered mountain out of the lands box you don't necessarily even know that it's illegal.)
In constructed there is no excuse.
Flame infraction. - Blinking Spirit
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
No such rule currently exists. The name of "Snow-Covered Island" is just that, and it is a different type line than an Island. These are two different cards.
I didn't say it currently did and yes they are 2 different cards. However what i'm suggesting is that it's reasonable to allow Snow-Covered basics as Proxy basics. It would be easy for the DCI to add a technicality to the rules on proxies.
I've seen Chinese Snow-covered basics be used in sanctioned events before and never seen anything happen because of it. So to the OP if you really wanna use Snow-covered basics for the art, if you don't mind using Chinese. I suggest you shove them into your deck and play dumb if you ever get caught, which won't happen.
Flame infraction. - Blinking Spirit
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
That is also not allowed. Players cannot make or otherwise use their own proxies, which is explicitly stated in policy. Proxies may only issued by the Head Judge in very specific situations, and certainly providing "proxy" Snow-Covered lands in place of normal Basics would likely not pass muster on that account.
Whether you've "seen people use X and nothing has ever been none" only means that either (a) no judge was involved or (b) it was handled incorrectly if a judge was called. Or, in those circumstances, it was actually legal. In the OP's situation, it isn't, and telling the OP (or anyone else) that it's okay is misleading and does a disservice to the OP and anyone else reading this thread. (Edit: Especially as judges/TOs unfamiliar with how this kind of situation might be handled might believe that a Game Loss/Match Loss/Disqualification is the way to handle someone who shows up with illegal cards in their deck, even when at Regular REL. And that is not as uncommon a belief as some may think.)
Not what i said. I said you could add a rule that allows SCB to used as Proxy basics of the same type. Also your talking about DCI sanctioned events. Legitimate 10 proxy type Vintage events take place all the time.
Oh, for sure. But the thing is no one ever pays enough attention to notice so it doesn't matter. 99.9% of the playerbase wouldn't even be tell the difference if the did pay enough attention to notice.
Any venue that would DQ/GL/ML you for "mistakenly" playing SCB in your deck when you "think" they are normal basics isn't a venue i would ever want to be at. If lying straight faced to the TO/Judge is what i need to do to allow me to play an aesthetically pleasing card, when the only problem it causes is that offends the TO dogmatic beliefs about the rules. Then ill go ahead and do that and i would suggest others do the same.
Fun facts: Signed cards used to be considered marked, Portal *** used to be banned by the MTR in formats where *** was legal. same goes for cards from the Garfield vs Finkel Precon even though about 98% of the people playing at the time couldn't tell the cards apart form the real thing. It's funny how these rules change over time.
Flame infraction. - Blinking Spirit
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.
Erebos B | Ghost Council WB | Grimgrin UB | Jhoira UR
Jor Kadeen RW | Melek UR | Mimeoplasm GUB | Rasputin WU
Savra BG | Sisay GW | Teneb BGW | Thada Adel U | Wort BR
I draft and play EDH. If a Standard player can't understand who a card is for, it's probably for me.
I also write things about good films.
Nah, bro. You think i shouldn't be doing that. I think i should and will continue to do so, when it comes to silly pointless things like this. Deceit isn't always a bad thing. Enjoy letting other people boss you around though.
Flame infraction. - Blinking Spirit
Calling someone a Commie is flaming and must be stopped, but turning the word Conservative into a loaded pejorative and using it over and over again is perfectly acceptable.