A few people have been bouncing around the idea of new basic lands which control night and day. The thing is, would this make sense flavour-wise? There isn't any evidence that certain areas of Innistrad are "suspended" in eternal night or day. And it wouldn't make sense for the creatures, either -- the mayor stays in a day place, never turns into a wolf, until he takes a trip to a night place.
What happens when they are equal numbered? What happens when there are no day/night lands in play (lots of non-basics, or people just don't have/use the day/night lands)? Seems pretty unlikely.
This forum should have a "no semantic quibbling" sticky
I'd like to quibble with you about whether or not "no semantic quibbling" is the right name to call this rule. I prefer "no quibbling of a semantic nature". Perhaps we should discuss this in depth.
A few people have been bouncing around the idea of new basic lands which control night and day. The thing is, would this make sense flavour-wise? There isn't any evidence that certain areas of Innistrad are "suspended" in eternal night or day. And it wouldn't make sense for the creatures, either -- the mayor stays in a day place, never turns into a wolf, until he takes a trip to a night place.
at one point around the time of the commander spoilers (maybe a little after) someone posted an R&D playtester card that was labelled snowland. now we know that RD will place random but related place holder words on there testers, so maybe that was a reference to a "Nighttime Land" or such and not a fake?
EDIT: I love how your mockups look, they look great!
EDIT EDIT: NVM, I just looked at that thread and found out it was an abandoned card for commander.
A few people have been bouncing around the idea of new basic lands which control night and day. The thing is, would this make sense flavour-wise? There isn't any evidence that certain areas of Innistrad are "suspended" in eternal night or day. And it wouldn't make sense for the creatures, either -- the mayor stays in a day place, never turns into a wolf, until he takes a trip to a night place.
This is incorrect, for the purposes of a card such as Ratchet Bomb, Myr Propagator tokens have a CMC of 3. They copy all printed characteristics, which includes CMC. This is identical to how Clone works.
You sir are right, I stand corrected:
216.1 ...
The spell or ability may define any
number of characteristics for the token. A token doesn't have any
characteristics not defined by the
spell or ability that created it. ...
So unless the effect creating the token
states that the token has a mana cost (or unless the token is a copy of
something else that has a mana cost), it will have a CMC = 0
I agree with the occasional sentiment I've seen expressed that the lands are the key. I think each land in the block, including basics, will have either a day or a night symbol. Like poison counters, one of the cards in the token slot will be a double-sided Day/Night card, which starts in the "Day" position at the beginning of the day. Then, whenever a land is played with either the Day or Night symbol, flip the Day/Night card to the appropriate side. They might even have only Night symbols on lands, and state that any land without a Night symbol changes it back to Day.
Any non-land card with a Day/Night symbol has a matching card or (preferably) token card (that comes with the main card?). Those cards are placed atop/below one another, with the two switching as the game changes from Day to Night to Day.
Something like that seems the most implementable, to me.
I think most people who argue that there won't be a two-sided cards or that the wolf card won't be packaged in the same booster forget Occam's Razor. If the wolf card is a simple token and if the mayor card is meant to be usually played all by itself without the wolf card, then why would Wizards have bothered to print such an elaborate wolf card? If Wizards designed and printed an elaborate wolf card with a new border, a new moon marker and rule text on the card, I think we should assume that it was done because it was the simplest solution to whatever they aimed to do. Thus it is lofgcal that it will be bundled with the mayor card.
While it may seem that a similar argument could be said for tokens, the situation is actually different. For tokens, the token exists *in addition* to the token-generating card. In this new case, the wolf is obviously meant to replace the mayor, thus if they printed a separate card, it almost certain that they are meant to always be use together.
Otherwise, if the card really are bundled separatedly and randomly, it seems to me they would be spending a lot of design, creative and printing effort for only a small return. Unless they're doing it to boost sale due to people wanting to collect them. That seems a shallow act and too much of an obvious money grab, even for them.
@pierre Lets toss out the "what about sleeves" problem. Lets set aside the "everyone will know what I'm drafting" problem. Despite those and all of the many other perfectly valid arguments against the "double sided" card theory that have already been posted in this thread AD NAUSEUM, here's the one I think most makes it unlikely using the images that we have: If the two images are the same card, why do they have collector numbers XXXa and XXXb? If it's the exact same physical card, they wouldn't need distinguishing collector numbers, would they? Split cards didn't have seperate collector numbers.
I wish the "double sided" theory would die, it seems far and away the least likely possiblity. I say that fully ready to eat crow if I'm wrong.
I think most people who argue that there won't be a two-sided cards or that the wolf card won't be packaged in the same booster forget Occam's Razor. If the wolf card is a simple token and if the mayor card is meant to be usually played all by itself without the wolf card, then why would Wizards have bothered to print such an elaborate wolf card? If Wizards designed and printed an elaborate wolf card with a new border, a new moon marker and rule text on the card, I think we should assume that it was done because it was the simplest solution to whatever they aimed to do. Thus it is lofgcal that it will be bundled with the mayor card.
While it may seem that a similar argument could be said for tokens, the situation is actually different. For tokens, the token exists *in addition* to the token-generating card. In this new case, the wolf is obviously meant to replace the mayor, thus if they printed a separate card, it almost certain that they are meant to always be use together.
Otherwise, if the card really are bundled separatedly and randomly, it seems to me they would be spending a lot of design, creative and printing effort for only a small return. Unless they're doing it to boost sale due to people wanting to collect them. That seems a shallow act and too much of an obvious money grab, even for them.
Agree with this. As I said before, I consider this the "next gen tokens" Ones that won't be counted as such, but as actual on-battlefield creature placeholders. They won't be counted as tokens per se, but they should be distributed as such, thus one token and one land will come in every booster. You can either get a common token, or get a new-gen token (whatver they name them)
@ FalconGK81: Seems to me you just put the nail in the coffin to the double-sided theory with that! (hopefuly)
Double-sided gameplay card is a truly silly notion and I can't believe people are even remotely entertaining that idea.
A separate physical card is the most logical answer, pre-packaged with it's associate primary card - and as just mentioned above treated as an actual card vs. token for gameplay purposes.
Really curious to see the full dynamics of Werewolves and how this set as a whole pans out.
People seem to be getting some facts confused about mana cost and converted mana cost.
Some cards have no mana cost (Evermind, Ancestral Vision, etc.). These cards cannot be cast as spells by paying their mana cost, because they do not have one.
However, every card has a CMC; according to rule 202.3a, the CMC of a card with no mana cost is defined to be 0. Yes, this is hugely misleading (in that they are uncastable rather than free). They still have a CMC of 0 despite lacking a mana cost.
I still fail to see why a dual sided token is a silly idea... everyone seems to think there will be another packaged card that makes this work. Why can;t that other card just be a dual sided token?
All this talk about double sided cards needs to end. The main reason Wizards can't print double sided cards is because it would be illegal. Let me explain.
In the 1990s Microsoft was accused of a monopolistic practice called "tying". Tying is an illegal business practice in which a company creates a product that must be "tied to" another product in order to be usable.
Creating double sided cards would now require the consumers to purchase sleeves in addition to their cards if they want to play magic, which up until this point has been a voluntary decision. This would be an illegal business practice. I'm fairly confident Wizards would not engage in this type of activity as I'm sure they are aware of basic business law.
@ Merlin. Double sided token is likely the correct answer to this conundrum. Or perhaps a single sided token that is always packaged with a given card.
@SecretInfiltrator: Hypegenesis has no CMC. It's actually written down in EVERMIND's textbox for christ's sake
CMC = converted mana cost Evermind's converted mana cost is 0. It has no mana cost. It has a converted mana cost.
Quote from Comprehensive Rules »
202.3a The converted mana cost of an object with no mana cost is 0.
@Silex: Token creatures, no matter where or what or when they came from... have a CMC of 0
Now you're not just mixing things up, but are flat out wrong.
Quote from Comprehensive Rules (excerpt from 706.2.) »
The "copiable values" are the values derived from the text printed on the object (that text being name, mana cost, card type, subtype, supertype, expansion symbol, rules text, power, toughness, and/or loyalty)
Stop. Reread what you have written. Continue living. (Half the people replying to you actually were wrong themselves, so I can get why you insisted on refuting them. Didn't make you right though. :D)
Oh, and one more example for nontoken creatures without mana cost to drive you insane (;)): Face-down creatures.
I'm out.
@FalconGK81: Thought the same thing, but then again we never got two cards with a different set of names at the same number in a set (right?) - art, flavor text, but not names.
Creating double sided cards would now require the consumers to purchase sleeves in addition to their cards if they want to play magic, which up until this point has been a voluntary decision. This would be an illegal business practice. I'm fairly confident Wizards would not engage in this type of activity as I'm sure they are aware of basic business law.
Well, this would only be true if the cards were meant to be put into your deck. I don't put it beyond them to develop a mechanic that prods you to put cards into your sideboard. Though I see no likely satisfying solution to combine it with all other puzzle pieces. Doesn't mean that R&D working from the other side of the process hasn't had the necessary idea.
CMC = converted mana cost Evermind's converted mana cost is 0. It has no mana cost. It has a converted mana cost.
Now you're not just mixing things up, but are flat out wrong.
Stop. Reread what you have written. Continue living. (Half the people replying to you actually were wrong themselves, so I can get why you insisted on refuting them. Didn't make you right though. :D)
Oh, and one more example for nontoken creatures without mana cost to drive you insane (;)): Face-down creatures.
I'm out.
@FalconGK81: Thought the same thing, but then again we never got two cards with a different set of names at the same number in a set (right?) - art, flavor text, but not names.
------
Well, this would only be true if the cards were meant to be put into your deck. I don't put it beyond them to develop a mechanic that prods you to put cards into your sideboard. Though I see no likely satisfying solution to combine it with all other puzzle pieces. Doesn't mean that R&D working from the other side of the process hasn't had the necessary idea.
At first i said tokens didn't have mana cost. And this is true, however, as per rules posted above, an object with no mana cost, has a CMC0. I stand corrected, i confused some words in the posting frenzy. And yeah, got me there with Morphs hahaha True that.
I still fail to see why a dual sided token is a silly idea... everyone seems to think there will be another packaged card that makes this work. Why can;t that other card just be a dual sided token?
No one said anything about "double sided Tokens" It's Double sided cards that actually go into a deck. Reread the whole thread and you'll see. WotC can do whatever they want with tokens, on either side since they don't count for deckbuilding purposes, not even SB.
Well, this would only be true if the cards were meant to be put into your deck. I don't put it beyond them to develop a mechanic that prods you to put cards into your sideboard. Though I see no likely satisfying solution to combine it with all other puzzle pieces. Doesn't mean that R&D working from the other side of the process hasn't had the necessary idea.
True... WOTC knows what they are doing in the world of game design, and would not put our a mechanic "just cause it's neato." Remember R&D is made up of former magic players, and some of them pros. I would think they would catch something as simple as "You can't play that card in that deck without someone seeing you draft it."
Seriously people, I think this needs to get all taken over to speculation. i mean we're only going to have to wait till Monday at worse case till we see what this all means.
Otherwise this thead is going to end up being 100 more pages of back and forth and repeating theories.
Important things to note about card numbering: Previous cards numbered with a or b include the Media Inserts. Also, Mayor of Avabruck is 193a while Howlpack Alpha is 193b. These are not alphabetically listed, but they're listed next to each other in the set why? Probably for purposes of printing and packing. Also note that split cards do not have this distinct numbering pattern.
As for the day/night mechanic, who's to say that the "3/3 >" on Mayor of Alabruck doesn't have text that says, "When night occurs put a 3/3 werewolf from outside the game into play" much like Phasing? The formatting of the frame on that point of Mayor of Alabruck similarly "breaks" the border like Planeswalkers do. The translated text for the Howlpack Alpha makes no mention of the Night/Day mechanic other than playing "at least two spells on the previous turn". And the green dot on the Howlpack Alpha could mean that you can only get the werewolf from a green "Day" card.
Clearly the rules for the Command Zone and Wishes have been added, so why not a "Night Zone" which allows you to have a stack of cards. Essentially, you "flip" (Kamigawa style) a "day human" into a werewolf from the "Night Zone."
Lastly, anyone else notice that the window behind the Mayor is the same window the Howlpack Alpha is breaking out of?
Well, this would only be true if the cards were meant to be put into your deck. I don't put it beyond them to develop a mechanic that prods you to put cards into your sideboard. Though I see no likely satisfying solution to combine it with all other puzzle pieces. Doesn't mean that R&D working from the other side of the process hasn't had the necessary idea.
Correct. A double-sided token or card that is not meant to be in your deck is perfectly fine and would not require you to purchase sleeves. It would also be a new mechanic for Magic, which makes it quite possible.
@FalconGK81: Thought the same thing, but then again we never got two cards with a different set of names at the same number in a set (right?) - art, flavor text, but not names.
Fire//Ice. Two cards with different set of names at the same number in a set. This is an even more awesome precedent because they also share the same physical card. So Fire//Ice could have had XXXa and XXXb as their collector numbers, but THEY DO NOT. So why would the double sided cards?
What if, and this is a BIG what if, but what if there were a way for the 2 cards to be attached together in the booster, so when you draft, you get them both, and then separate them when you build? If they've found a way to attach them so they could be separated later without either A: Damaging them or B: Making the pack feel or look larger.
I know this is very unlikely, but still a possibility.
What if, and this is a BIG what if, but what if there were a way for the 2 cards to be attached together in the booster, so when you draft, you get them both, and then separate them when you build? If they've found a way to attach them so they could be separated later without either A: Damaging them or B: Making the pack feel or look larger.
I know this is very unlikely, but still a possibility.
This is not an impossibility. Would also explain MaRo's "we cracked a bunch of product to make sure everything was as it was supposed to be" tweet mentioned earlier in the thread.
EDIT: Seems much easier logistically to just replace the token in the pack with the necessary token/card and then put a rule in the tournament rules covering how these cards are drafted.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What happens when they are equal numbered? What happens when there are no day/night lands in play (lots of non-basics, or people just don't have/use the day/night lands)? Seems pretty unlikely.
I like your mockups though.
I'd like to quibble with you about whether or not "no semantic quibbling" is the right name to call this rule. I prefer "no quibbling of a semantic nature". Perhaps we should discuss this in depth.
at one point around the time of the commander spoilers (maybe a little after) someone posted an R&D playtester card that was labelled snowland. now we know that RD will place random but related place holder words on there testers, so maybe that was a reference to a "Nighttime Land" or such and not a fake?
EDIT: I love how your mockups look, they look great!
EDIT EDIT: NVM, I just looked at that thread and found out it was an abandoned card for commander.
I really like those. really nice design/art. I think it will be much similar to this.
You sir are right, I stand corrected:
216.1 ...
The spell or ability may define any
number of characteristics for the token. A token doesn't have any
characteristics not defined by the
spell or ability that created it. ...
So unless the effect creating the token
states that the token has a mana cost (or unless the token is a copy of
something else that has a mana cost), it will have a CMC = 0
NeoFinnity... A Control Affinity Primer
Any non-land card with a Day/Night symbol has a matching card or (preferably) token card (that comes with the main card?). Those cards are placed atop/below one another, with the two switching as the game changes from Day to Night to Day.
Something like that seems the most implementable, to me.
While it may seem that a similar argument could be said for tokens, the situation is actually different. For tokens, the token exists *in addition* to the token-generating card. In this new case, the wolf is obviously meant to replace the mayor, thus if they printed a separate card, it almost certain that they are meant to always be use together.
Otherwise, if the card really are bundled separatedly and randomly, it seems to me they would be spending a lot of design, creative and printing effort for only a small return. Unless they're doing it to boost sale due to people wanting to collect them. That seems a shallow act and too much of an obvious money grab, even for them.
I wish the "double sided" theory would die, it seems far and away the least likely possiblity. I say that fully ready to eat crow if I'm wrong.
Agree with this. As I said before, I consider this the "next gen tokens" Ones that won't be counted as such, but as actual on-battlefield creature placeholders. They won't be counted as tokens per se, but they should be distributed as such, thus one token and one land will come in every booster. You can either get a common token, or get a new-gen token (whatver they name them)
@ FalconGK81: Seems to me you just put the nail in the coffin to the double-sided theory with that! (hopefuly)
NeoFinnity... A Control Affinity Primer
A separate physical card is the most logical answer, pre-packaged with it's associate primary card - and as just mentioned above treated as an actual card vs. token for gameplay purposes.
Really curious to see the full dynamics of Werewolves and how this set as a whole pans out.
Some cards have no mana cost (Evermind, Ancestral Vision, etc.). These cards cannot be cast as spells by paying their mana cost, because they do not have one.
However, every card has a CMC; according to rule 202.3a, the CMC of a card with no mana cost is defined to be 0. Yes, this is hugely misleading (in that they are uncastable rather than free). They still have a CMC of 0 despite lacking a mana cost.
In the 1990s Microsoft was accused of a monopolistic practice called "tying". Tying is an illegal business practice in which a company creates a product that must be "tied to" another product in order to be usable.
Creating double sided cards would now require the consumers to purchase sleeves in addition to their cards if they want to play magic, which up until this point has been a voluntary decision. This would be an illegal business practice. I'm fairly confident Wizards would not engage in this type of activity as I'm sure they are aware of basic business law.
@ Merlin. Double sided token is likely the correct answer to this conundrum. Or perhaps a single sided token that is always packaged with a given card.
CMC = converted mana cost
Evermind's converted mana cost is 0. It has no mana cost. It has a converted mana cost.
Now you're not just mixing things up, but are flat out wrong.
Stop. Reread what you have written. Continue living. (Half the people replying to you actually were wrong themselves, so I can get why you insisted on refuting them. Didn't make you right though. :D)
Oh, and one more example for nontoken creatures without mana cost to drive you insane (;)): Face-down creatures.
I'm out.
@FalconGK81: Thought the same thing, but then again we never got two cards with a different set of names at the same number in a set (right?) - art, flavor text, but not names.
------
Well, this would only be true if the cards were meant to be put into your deck. I don't put it beyond them to develop a mechanic that prods you to put cards into your sideboard. Though I see no likely satisfying solution to combine it with all other puzzle pieces. Doesn't mean that R&D working from the other side of the process hasn't had the necessary idea.
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO
At first i said tokens didn't have mana cost. And this is true, however, as per rules posted above, an object with no mana cost, has a CMC0. I stand corrected, i confused some words in the posting frenzy. And yeah, got me there with Morphs hahaha True that.
No one said anything about "double sided Tokens" It's Double sided cards that actually go into a deck. Reread the whole thread and you'll see. WotC can do whatever they want with tokens, on either side since they don't count for deckbuilding purposes, not even SB.
NeoFinnity... A Control Affinity Primer
True... WOTC knows what they are doing in the world of game design, and would not put our a mechanic "just cause it's neato." Remember R&D is made up of former magic players, and some of them pros. I would think they would catch something as simple as "You can't play that card in that deck without someone seeing you draft it."
Seriously people, I think this needs to get all taken over to speculation. i mean we're only going to have to wait till Monday at worse case till we see what this all means.
Otherwise this thead is going to end up being 100 more pages of back and forth and repeating theories.
As for the day/night mechanic, who's to say that the "3/3 >" on Mayor of Alabruck doesn't have text that says, "When night occurs put a 3/3 werewolf from outside the game into play" much like Phasing? The formatting of the frame on that point of Mayor of Alabruck similarly "breaks" the border like Planeswalkers do. The translated text for the Howlpack Alpha makes no mention of the Night/Day mechanic other than playing "at least two spells on the previous turn". And the green dot on the Howlpack Alpha could mean that you can only get the werewolf from a green "Day" card.
Clearly the rules for the Command Zone and Wishes have been added, so why not a "Night Zone" which allows you to have a stack of cards. Essentially, you "flip" (Kamigawa style) a "day human" into a werewolf from the "Night Zone."
Lastly, anyone else notice that the window behind the Mayor is the same window the Howlpack Alpha is breaking out of?
Correct. A double-sided token or card that is not meant to be in your deck is perfectly fine and would not require you to purchase sleeves. It would also be a new mechanic for Magic, which makes it quite possible.
Fire//Ice. Two cards with different set of names at the same number in a set. This is an even more awesome precedent because they also share the same physical card. So Fire//Ice could have had XXXa and XXXb as their collector numbers, but THEY DO NOT. So why would the double sided cards?
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that I'm 99% sure you made that statistic up.
But hey, I could be wrong, your math is in your favor.
Thanks to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the amazing sig.
NO RUG: Primer
Tempo Thresh: Primer
I know this is very unlikely, but still a possibility.
This is not an impossibility. Would also explain MaRo's "we cracked a bunch of product to make sure everything was as it was supposed to be" tweet mentioned earlier in the thread.
EDIT: Seems much easier logistically to just replace the token in the pack with the necessary token/card and then put a rule in the tournament rules covering how these cards are drafted.