I really do enjoy the new "required colorless" symbol. At pre-release, it really did add a change of pace while deckbuilding and playing. It felt, at times, like a sixth color (though I imagine outside of sealed it will feel less like that.)
Will they continue to not only print wastes, but have cards that *require* colorless? It seems they could go either way. Wastes as a basic land helps out a lot for EDH if you're on a budget, but outside of that, it can be easily replaced with basically any land that produces colorless. It's only real purpose seems to be for a colorless based deck, but even then, that doesn't seem very viable.
I also heard that when they draft this set, you are NOT allowed to add wastes into your deck, you actually have to draft them. Is this correct? If so, I feel that it could be hard to balance the amount of cards they actually print that *require* colorless.
Finally, is there a term for the new required colorless mana? I assume when I read a card that requires 4C I should read it as "four and colorless"? My playgroup has always referred to colorless mana as "neutral mana", so maybe that will be the thing.
MaRo suggested it would be a thing that was Eldrazi specific and may show up in the future if its appropriate but wouldn't be a mainstay in every set.
Yes, you gotta play only Wastes that you draft or open in your sealed pool.
The symbol itself is called "Asteroid" which is kinda neat, so I've just been calling it that. 4R is "four, red" and 4C is "four, asteroid." Probably makes more sense to just say "four, colorless" though, as asteroid hasn't really caught on.
Every time someone called the colorless mana "waste mana" I was getting quite mad, but then a friend of mine named it a "rubble mana". Since then I never call it otherwise.
I personally believe we ought to just start calling 1 "neutral mana" and C "colorless mana." My reasoning is simple.
5 does not mean five colorless. In reality, it means 5 mana of any or no color. This means it is essentially "neutral." In terms of spellcasting, it makes sense. A neutral spell can come from any source. C does not mean a mana of any color. It means it must specifically be colorless. This makes sense in terms of spellcasting as well. A colorless spell must come from the source of colorless mana.
So, essentially, my point is that 5 implies the spell can be used by the heart of any planeswalker, despite their color/mana usage, while C can only be used by pure, colorless sources.
Anyone with me on calling it neutral and colorless?
I personally believe we ought to just start calling 1 "neutral mana" and C "colorless mana." My reasoning is simple.
Call it generic mana. The comprehensive rules have done exactly that since 5th Edition. (And the distinction between generic and colorless has existed since Alpha, even if the word "generic" wasn't introduced until 5th.)
Since this is still considered on topic, what kind of cards do you think the new innistrad set will have that require colorless?
Currently, C is intended to be for cards associated with Kozilek only. So, even if the shadow in Shadow Over Innistrad is Emrakul as some people have speculated, we're unlikely to see much if any instances of C in SOI.
Since this is still considered on topic, what kind of cards do you think the new innistrad set will have that require colorless?
I don't expect it to come in Innistrad, but if you asked me to make a card that required that was not associated with the Eldrazi, it would be a mana prism of some sort, like an artifact that converts into .
MaRo suggested it would be a thing that was Eldrazi specific and may show up in the future if its appropriate but wouldn't be a mainstay in every set.
Not exactly. He said for now it's specific to Kozilek but he could imagine other uses for it. He also said that we should expect it to show up a little less often than hybrid mana does now. So it won't be coming up often but it is a tool that they have now and not just for eldrazi. However I would imagine that, because of the ties to Kozilek in OGW, we won't be seeing anything new with colorless costs until after BFZ/OGW rotate out of Standard. Probably not until the block after they rotate, really.
Honestly can't believe how many people call it diamond mana or some crap, it's stupid and I have no idea why they started doing so? Do you say skull mana, sun mana, broccoli mana?
Honestly can't believe how many people call it diamond mana or some crap, it's stupid and I have no idea why they started doing so? Do you say skull mana, sun mana, broccoli mana?
Honestly can't believe how many people call it diamond mana or some crap, it's stupid and I have no idea why they started doing so? Do you say skull mana, sun mana, broccoli mana?
I've seen plenty of people (mostly newbies or people who just don't play much) saying "fire mana", "water deck". But never for white, black and green, only for red and blue for some reason.
I have been correcting people all week. They call it Wastes Mana, I explain that it is colorless mana. They call colorless the sixth color, I explain that colorless is literally the lack of color.
My favorite moment was when I told someone who argued about colorless being a sixth color by telling the Birds of Paradise couldn't make colorless mana and it left him speechless.
It's just going to take some getting used to. We just have a lot more people at once that have to get used to using correct terms at the same time.
Not sure if anyone watches "magic: the amateuring" here (Tolarian podcast, great one too.) but they brought in Judge Robb who mad a good point.
They should've added the colorless change in magic origins, but done nothing with it. By adding the colorless symbol to cards that would produce it, but NOT to cards cost, it would've familiarized people with the concept a bit more. Then, they could've swooped in with Battle for Zendikar and added it in the cost and most people would've understood it perfectly fine.
So, taking a step back from game mechanics for a moment, I want to take a bit about the lore function now...
Since eldrazi are the physical embodiment of colorless, the new ones require colorless. This makes sense. They are soulless creatures. Colorless mana, in my mind, is the embodiment of a "lack" of Magical properties. Generic mana costs and colorless costs are the only thing asteroid colorless (just colorless) mana can pay for. Artifacts typically either possess magical power from a previous creator, or have no magical properties at all (it cannot have colored mana in any of the costs.) There are no colorless enchantments that I can think of (outside of eldrazi), but there are a few colorless spells (that usually still somewhat stay intact with the "lack of magic" concept.) Eldrazi on the otherhand come from the Blind Eternities, the AEther, and in that sense are the "purest" life forms (if the AEther/Blind Eternities pieces all the planes together, then it is the basis for all life) since they are incapable of being influenced by the infinite planes of the world. This is why I believe there is plenty of "eldrazi magic". They are simply able to shape planes using the AEther/BE. In my eyes, it's like this. Imagine if you stepped into a pond. To the fish, your two legs and a hand are three gigantic beasts coming from someplace out of their concept of existence, and you can influence the underwater with anything outside of the water. This isn't the equivalent of "magic", which would be somehow getting these objects without actually access the AEther, but instead simple movement/placement in our eyes. The Eldrazi are the same way.
This still leaves two questions...
1. Colored Eldrazi that are colorless. Where does this fit in with the lore? I don't see why one would need "colored" mana for a "colorless" creature. The only thing I can think of is maybe the Eldrazi brood, upon their constant death and return, are somewhat influenced or scarred by colored mana/influence of the planes, but at the heart of them they are still able to be manipulated easily by the AEther, which is colorless.
2. Where does generic mana fit in here? I can understand why artifacts would be generic at the heart of them, since they are machines and embody nothing, not even colorless, and the same for any magical property that comes from the AEther and is not influenced by any of the mana of the planes (planar portal is a good example), but what about other cards? I feel that, if they reprinted Grimoire of the dead, they would keep it generic and not add colorless, but from a lore perspective this makes little sense. It seems like something that wasn't created from the AEther at all, nor is it a machine of sorts that would be uninfluenced by the magic of the planes.
They should've added the colorless change in magic origins, but done nothing with it.
Really adding at any time that isn't the middle of a block would have been good. The way they did it guaranteed confusion. Cards printed in the same block should not be displaying the exact same thing in two different ways.
Every time someone called the colorless mana "waste mana" I was getting quite mad, but then a friend of mine named it a "rubble mana". Since then I never call it otherwise.
I have been correcting people all week. They call it Wastes Mana, I explain that it is colorless mana. They call colorless the sixth color, I explain that colorless is literally the lack of color.
My favorite moment was when I told someone who argued about colorless being a sixth color by telling the Birds of Paradise couldn't make colorless mana and it left him speechless.
It's just going to take some getting used to. We just have a lot more people at once that have to get used to using correct terms at the same time.
For the purposes of deck building, it makes sense to view cards that require diamond mana as a 6th color. Just like if you were splashing one or two swamp colored cards, you'd need to make sure you have a few skull mana lands in your deck, if you're splashing one or two waste colored cards in your deck, you'd need to make sure you have a few diamond mana lands in your deck.
I have been correcting people all week. They call it Wastes Mana, I explain that it is colorless mana. They call colorless the sixth color, I explain that colorless is literally the lack of color.
My favorite moment was when I told someone who argued about colorless being a sixth color by telling the Birds of Paradise couldn't make colorless mana and it left him speechless.
It's just going to take some getting used to. We just have a lot more people at once that have to get used to using correct terms at the same time.
For the purposes of deck building, it makes sense to view cards that require diamond mana as a 6th color. Just like if you were splashing one or two swamp colored cards, you'd need to make sure you have a few skull mana lands in your deck, if you're splashing one or two waste colored cards in your deck, you'd need to make sure you have a few diamond mana lands in your deck.
It makes sense to balance the mana costs in your deck like it is a 6th color, but the whole point is that colorless mana is not an actual color and cannot be generated by "produce one of any color" mana sources. This is one of a few rule cases that will come up where colorless cannot be confused as a 6th color.
Every time someone called the colorless mana "waste mana" I was getting quite mad, but then a friend of mine named it a "rubble mana". Since then I never call it otherwise.
I have been correcting people all week. They call it Wastes Mana, I explain that it is colorless mana. They call colorless the sixth color, I explain that colorless is literally the lack of color.
My favorite moment was when I told someone who argued about colorless being a sixth color by telling the Birds of Paradise couldn't make colorless mana and it left him speechless.
It's just going to take some getting used to. We just have a lot more people at once that have to get used to using correct terms at the same time.
For the purposes of deck building, it makes sense to view cards that require diamond mana as a 6th color. Just like if you were splashing one or two swamp colored cards, you'd need to make sure you have a few skull mana lands in your deck, if you're splashing one or two waste colored cards in your deck, you'd need to make sure you have a few diamond mana lands in your deck.
It makes sense to balance the mana costs in your deck like it is a 6th color, but the whole point is that colorless mana is not an actual color and cannot be generated by "produce one of any color" mana sources. This is one of a few rule cases that will come up where colorless cannot be confused as a 6th color.
When there are people like Sam Stoddard and Paolo Vitor Damo Da Rosa talking about how colorless is effectively now 6th color, it seems silly to me that so many people are taking a "that's not the literal truth according to the rules, noob!" stance on this. Maybe, just maybe, the point people like Sam and PV are making is a bit more nuanced than that. It makes me wonder if people like Mistermind also feel the need to correct people when they summon a Bob or "swing" with all their creatures. Maybe the person Mistermind was speaking to was "speechless" not because he didn't have an answer but because it's pretty hard to completely explain the concept of figurative language and how it relates to Magic and its culture.
I have been correcting people all week. They call it Wastes Mana, I explain that it is colorless mana. They call colorless the sixth color, I explain that colorless is literally the lack of color.
My favorite moment was when I told someone who argued about colorless being a sixth color by telling the Birds of Paradise couldn't make colorless mana and it left him speechless.
It's just going to take some getting used to. We just have a lot more people at once that have to get used to using correct terms at the same time.
For the purposes of deck building, it makes sense to view cards that require diamond mana as a 6th color. Just like if you were splashing one or two swamp colored cards, you'd need to make sure you have a few skull mana lands in your deck, if you're splashing one or two waste colored cards in your deck, you'd need to make sure you have a few diamond mana lands in your deck.
It makes sense to balance the mana costs in your deck like it is a 6th color, but the whole point is that colorless mana is not an actual color and cannot be generated by "produce one of any color" mana sources. This is one of a few rule cases that will come up where colorless cannot be confused as a 6th color.
When there are people like Sam Stoddard and Paolo Vitor Damo Da Rosa talking about how colorless is effectively now 6th color, it seems silly to me that so many people are taking a "that's not the literal truth according to the rules, noob!" stance on this. Maybe, just maybe, the point people like Sam and PV are making is a bit more nuanced than that. It makes me wonder if people like Mistermind also feel the need to correct people when they summon a Bob or "swing" with all their creatures. Maybe the person Mistermind was speaking to was "speechless" not because he didn't have an answer but because it's pretty hard to completely explain the concept of figurative language and how it relates to Magic and its culture.
Calling Colorless a 6th color adds to the confusion that makes learning the game harder. Plenty of people out there hear that this new mana symbol is a 6th color and don't understand the difference. There will be several people trying to cast colorless spells off of an assortment of sources that can't produce colorless because one or more can produce a "mana of any color". Calling Dark Confidant "Bob" because of the designer of the card or using a term like "swing" to refer to tapping all of your creatures is a far cry from saying something is the exact opposite of what it is. The Comp Rules are as long and detailed as they are because people spend a lot of time making Magic as concise as possible. Adding a Colorless mana symbol just serves to clear up the terminology and writing even more. If you want to argue with me trying to teach people the rules and terminology have at it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
L1 Judge
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Will they continue to not only print wastes, but have cards that *require* colorless? It seems they could go either way. Wastes as a basic land helps out a lot for EDH if you're on a budget, but outside of that, it can be easily replaced with basically any land that produces colorless. It's only real purpose seems to be for a colorless based deck, but even then, that doesn't seem very viable.
I also heard that when they draft this set, you are NOT allowed to add wastes into your deck, you actually have to draft them. Is this correct? If so, I feel that it could be hard to balance the amount of cards they actually print that *require* colorless.
Finally, is there a term for the new required colorless mana? I assume when I read a card that requires 4C I should read it as "four and colorless"? My playgroup has always referred to colorless mana as "neutral mana", so maybe that will be the thing.
Yes, you gotta play only Wastes that you draft or open in your sealed pool.
The symbol itself is called "Asteroid" which is kinda neat, so I've just been calling it that. 4R is "four, red" and 4C is "four, asteroid." Probably makes more sense to just say "four, colorless" though, as asteroid hasn't really caught on.
Where is it called that? I've only ever heard people call it "diamond" when saying it aloud.
Standard - RIP Cat
Modern - Death & Taxes
Commander - Mazirek, Trostani, Angry Omnath
Asteroids are these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroid
Different from a diamond.
Commander: Hazezon Tamar (GRW), Arjun, the Shifting Flame (UR), [Waiting on Amonkhet]
Tiny Leader: [Waiting on Amonkhet]
Peasant Dragon: [Waiting on Amonkhet]
Modern: Orzhova Spirits (WB)
Legacy: Burn (R)
Vintage: Bazaar Dredge (B)
Every time someone called the colorless mana "waste mana" I was getting quite mad, but then a friend of mine named it a "rubble mana". Since then I never call it otherwise.
MTGO: UberMower
5 does not mean five colorless. In reality, it means 5 mana of any or no color. This means it is essentially "neutral." In terms of spellcasting, it makes sense. A neutral spell can come from any source.
C does not mean a mana of any color. It means it must specifically be colorless. This makes sense in terms of spellcasting as well. A colorless spell must come from the source of colorless mana.
So, essentially, my point is that 5 implies the spell can be used by the heart of any planeswalker, despite their color/mana usage, while C can only be used by pure, colorless sources.
Anyone with me on calling it neutral and colorless?
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Since this is still considered on topic, what kind of cards do you think the new innistrad set will have that require colorless?
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
I don't expect it to come in Innistrad, but if you asked me to make a card that required that was not associated with the Eldrazi, it would be a mana prism of some sort, like an artifact that converts into .
Not exactly. He said for now it's specific to Kozilek but he could imagine other uses for it. He also said that we should expect it to show up a little less often than hybrid mana does now. So it won't be coming up often but it is a tool that they have now and not just for eldrazi. However I would imagine that, because of the ties to Kozilek in OGW, we won't be seeing anything new with colorless costs until after BFZ/OGW rotate out of Standard. Probably not until the block after they rotate, really.
UBBreya's Toybox (Competitive, Combo)WR
RGodzilla, King of the MonstersG
-Retired Decks-
UBLazav, Dimir Mastermind (Competitive, UB Voltron/Control)UB
"Knowledge is such a burden. Release it. Release all your fears to me."
—Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver
No, but I do now.
I've seen plenty of people (mostly newbies or people who just don't play much) saying "fire mana", "water deck". But never for white, black and green, only for red and blue for some reason.
My favorite moment was when I told someone who argued about colorless being a sixth color by telling the Birds of Paradise couldn't make colorless mana and it left him speechless.
It's just going to take some getting used to. We just have a lot more people at once that have to get used to using correct terms at the same time.
They should've added the colorless change in magic origins, but done nothing with it. By adding the colorless symbol to cards that would produce it, but NOT to cards cost, it would've familiarized people with the concept a bit more. Then, they could've swooped in with Battle for Zendikar and added it in the cost and most people would've understood it perfectly fine.
So, taking a step back from game mechanics for a moment, I want to take a bit about the lore function now...
Since eldrazi are the physical embodiment of colorless, the new ones require colorless. This makes sense. They are soulless creatures. Colorless mana, in my mind, is the embodiment of a "lack" of Magical properties. Generic mana costs and colorless costs are the only thing asteroid colorless (just colorless) mana can pay for. Artifacts typically either possess magical power from a previous creator, or have no magical properties at all (it cannot have colored mana in any of the costs.) There are no colorless enchantments that I can think of (outside of eldrazi), but there are a few colorless spells (that usually still somewhat stay intact with the "lack of magic" concept.) Eldrazi on the otherhand come from the Blind Eternities, the AEther, and in that sense are the "purest" life forms (if the AEther/Blind Eternities pieces all the planes together, then it is the basis for all life) since they are incapable of being influenced by the infinite planes of the world. This is why I believe there is plenty of "eldrazi magic". They are simply able to shape planes using the AEther/BE. In my eyes, it's like this. Imagine if you stepped into a pond. To the fish, your two legs and a hand are three gigantic beasts coming from someplace out of their concept of existence, and you can influence the underwater with anything outside of the water. This isn't the equivalent of "magic", which would be somehow getting these objects without actually access the AEther, but instead simple movement/placement in our eyes. The Eldrazi are the same way.
This still leaves two questions...
1. Colored Eldrazi that are colorless. Where does this fit in with the lore? I don't see why one would need "colored" mana for a "colorless" creature. The only thing I can think of is maybe the Eldrazi brood, upon their constant death and return, are somewhat influenced or scarred by colored mana/influence of the planes, but at the heart of them they are still able to be manipulated easily by the AEther, which is colorless.
2. Where does generic mana fit in here? I can understand why artifacts would be generic at the heart of them, since they are machines and embody nothing, not even colorless, and the same for any magical property that comes from the AEther and is not influenced by any of the mana of the planes (planar portal is a good example), but what about other cards? I feel that, if they reprinted Grimoire of the dead, they would keep it generic and not add colorless, but from a lore perspective this makes little sense. It seems like something that wasn't created from the AEther at all, nor is it a machine of sorts that would be uninfluenced by the magic of the planes.
Really adding at any time that isn't the middle of a block would have been good. The way they did it guaranteed confusion. Cards printed in the same block should not be displaying the exact same thing in two different ways.
Fitting with the lore? Yeah, good one.
Evidently some things just require a certain amount of energy without the exact kind being important.
do you call R fire mana, and U water mana?
It makes sense to balance the mana costs in your deck like it is a 6th color, but the whole point is that colorless mana is not an actual color and cannot be generated by "produce one of any color" mana sources. This is one of a few rule cases that will come up where colorless cannot be confused as a 6th color.
Only when summoning captain planet!
My current trade binder.
"People most likely to cry "troll" are those who can't fathom holding a position for reasons unrelated to how they want to be perceived"
Calling Colorless a 6th color adds to the confusion that makes learning the game harder. Plenty of people out there hear that this new mana symbol is a 6th color and don't understand the difference. There will be several people trying to cast colorless spells off of an assortment of sources that can't produce colorless because one or more can produce a "mana of any color". Calling Dark Confidant "Bob" because of the designer of the card or using a term like "swing" to refer to tapping all of your creatures is a far cry from saying something is the exact opposite of what it is. The Comp Rules are as long and detailed as they are because people spend a lot of time making Magic as concise as possible. Adding a Colorless mana symbol just serves to clear up the terminology and writing even more. If you want to argue with me trying to teach people the rules and terminology have at it.