Try coming up with a dozen white enchantment designs and a dozen land designs that would all fit the criteria of YMTC and then let me know which of those two is more limiting.
In your example, lands have far more open design space. The biggest difference between land and enchantment is that an enchantment will have a global effect. On the other hand, land will probably have a tap ability, but could also have a global ability. Land has more open design space in this regard.
I think it will be more difficult to design a good enchantment because they are so limited as to being useful past the first copy that comes into play. Lands are almost always useful, even in multiples. I really want this card to be playable - not format breaking - but playable.
Mark Rosewater had this to say on his tumblr about the requirements that will probably be placed on any land designs should land win the card type poll:
"All lands must produce mana (or have the ability to get access to mana/lands. Lands cannot be strictly better than basic lands which means if it produces colored mana (including producing more than one color of mana), it will have to have some kind of drawback.
I also doubt the public is going to have the ability to make legendary land as we do them very infrequently and only for very specific story purposes. I also believe land tokens are not going to be on the table for the same reason we haven’t done them yet - they’re very confusing and hard to track whether or not they’re tapped."
None of the other YMTC have ended up with a Legendary permanent, so that isn't an restriction at all.
Token lands? Also not a restriction. Any thing that would make token lands could just search the library instead.
And adding, ":symtap:: Add to you mana pool." is hardly a problem.
I think they're going to be aggressive with costing the card this time. I think they'd rather have something a bit overpowered than something like Vanish into Memory.
It would be nice to have a playable card again. Crucible of Worlds was great because it fit into any color, is very balanced, and is a favorite among many different kinds of players. Vanish into Memory has vanished into memory for the majority of players, and Forgotten Ancient is a great name for a creature that was largely forgotten.
ok, so Land wins, but they decide to do a run-off. this is just lame. now we have to wait another FULL week for this?
a really bad start for this whole process.
In your example, lands have far more open design space. The biggest difference between land and enchantment is that an enchantment will have a global effect. On the other hand, land will probably have a tap ability, but could also have a global ability. Land has more open design space in this regard.
I think it will be more difficult to design a good enchantment because they are so limited as to being useful past the first copy that comes into play. Lands are almost always useful, even in multiples. I really want this card to be playable - not format breaking - but playable.
None of the other YMTC have ended up with a Legendary permanent, so that isn't an restriction at all.
Token lands? Also not a restriction. Any thing that would make token lands could just search the library instead.
And adding, ":symtap:: Add to you mana pool." is hardly a problem.
It would be nice to have a playable card again. Crucible of Worlds was great because it fit into any color, is very balanced, and is a favorite among many different kinds of players. Vanish into Memory has vanished into memory for the majority of players, and Forgotten Ancient is a great name for a creature that was largely forgotten.
Land all the way!
I couldn't have said it better myself, THANK YOU!!!!
Also, I am quite mad that land WON, and they're making us REvote... LAME!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
In your example, lands have far more open design space. The biggest difference between land and enchantment is that an enchantment will have a global effect. On the other hand, land will probably have a tap ability, but could also have a global ability. Land has more open design space in this regard.
The design space on lands is extremely limited because of the requirement that they be free and hard to remove. Take an extremely broken land and stick the same text on a CMC-2 creature and the result is a crappy card.
The Possibilites are a lot more vast than there are for enchantments...
Wrong.
Enchantments have the most design space of the two card types left. Almost anything that you can put on a creature you can put on an enchantment, and just the opposite as well. Lands don't always have that function.
Oh, and that's just one possibility.
Lands have to tap for mana, and maybe do one other thing as well. Enchantments, well, they can do so much more than lands. It's not just acting as auras enchanting lands, or other permanents. They can take over games, preventing the other player from casting spells or giving you benefits to help destroy your enemies. In fact, Enchantments can totally benefit lands, cause them to double their mana source or even change the color of the mana they produce. The number of enchantments that you see each set vastly outweigh the number of nonbasic lands. Why?
Because there's that much design space for enchantments.
You might think that a bunch of enchantments are "bad" and "unplayable" and think that because there are so many "passable" lands, then there's that much more space to use. You're wrong. There are so many restrictions placed on lands it's not even funny. Lands have to be "better" because there are fewer of them printed; look at Planeswalkers. If there was so much space for lands, they'd be printing them left and right. They could afford to "make mistakes" with "bad lands". But they don't.
There's more design space in lands then there is in enchantments? Please, don't patronize me.
I feel that land is the feature of magic that I dislike the most. The ebb and flow of land can predetermine games before they are played out. It's that sweet spot where both players get the right mana and clash in an epic dual, that's when I love magic. That said, I feel that wizards can make the land aspect of the game more fun. I'm voting land because I want to choose a land design that I want to topdeck even when I'm flooded, and can use early game without it ruining my opening.
The design space on lands is extremely limited because of the requirement that they be free and hard to remove. Take an extremely broken land and stick the same text on a CMC-2 creature and the result is a crappy card.
If I recall correctly, Magus DID see play in standard competitively...
Just because it's crappy NOW doesn't mean it was back then.
I'm done for the night, peace!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
The design space on lands is extremely limited because of the requirement that they be free and hard to remove. Take an extremely broken land and stick the same text on a CMC-2 creature and the result is a crappy card.
You could also very easily add a mana cost to activate the ability. Say, ":4mana:, :symtap:" or you could reduce the power level.
Ahahahahaha. Sorry, but no. Lands have gotten decidedly weaker since the NWO design philosphy. With that said, so have enchantments, largely because planeswalkers actively eat a lot of design space for enchantments.
Detention Sphere, Intangible Virtue, and Ethereal Armor would say that enchantments are better than you think.
You say that you've never seen a land as bad as Search The City? I say I have never seen any card as bad as Sorrow's Path.
You say we're more likely to get a Guild's Feud than a Rancor? I say we're more likely to get a Rogue's Passage, a Thespian's Stage, a Hellion Crater, a Grove of the Guardian, or a Haunted Fengraf than a Cavern of Souls.
Honestly, the arguments cut both ways, or the vote wouldn't be as close as they are. What it tells me is that there are just as many Timmys who could give a flying hippo about a land as there are Spikes interested in improving the Modern environment.
I think the people arguing for land haven't even played their best argument though. If I were to argue for land (and though I voted for enchantment, honestly I think the correct answer was creature all along, so I don't really have a horse in the race), I would simply point out that Zendikar was a hugely popular block based around that colorless card type that so many people claim to find so boring, so popular that it has all but guaranteed a return, one that most likely will happen in the next five years. Enchantments on the other hand had Urza's Saga back in 1998-1999, which nearly killed the game, got the entirety of R&D chewed out, left such a bad taste in the mouth that even graveyard as a block theme has repeated in the last 15 years, and at least half of the current players don't even realize there was an Enchantment block because it got overshadowed by the overpowered artifacts and (ironically) lands in the set.
Detention Sphere, Intangible Virtue, and Ethereal Armor would say that enchantments are better than you think.
You say that you've never seen a land as bad as Search The City? I say I have never seen any card as bad as Sorrow's Path.
Again, you're cherry picking enchantments... Those are the RARE exceptions.
Intangible Virtue is so narrow, tokens only. So it really only affects one type of deck... a deck that uses tokens... and is white.
Detention Sphere, White and Blue... Has a multiplied effect based on Oblivion Ring... Again, it's good, but more could've been done with it.
Ethreal Armor - Wow, gives a creature +1/+0 and first strike for each enchantment you control, in a block with only a couple playable enchantments in its' sole color... Needs a splash of another color to be useful, along with Rancor... In a vacuum, this card is sub-optimal at best. Again, it's white... noticing a pattern here...
Your argument also lends credence that only White-Enchantments are actually playable beyond Rancor being in green. Red, Black, and Blue all get the shaft 9/10 times...
Also, at least Sorrow's Path was playable in limited, whereas Search the City is complete garbage in every format, limited included... I've never seen ANY card as bad as Search the City... Not even Sorrow's Path...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
I voted land. The odds are too good that an enchantment would be outside colors I care about, while it's fairly likely that the land will probably be completely colorless.
Honestly, I think that whole article saying "OMG DONT VOTE FOR LAND!!1!1" is silly. First, because this isn't some sort of min-maxing exercise, you just go with your gut feeling.
Second, does the limited design space of lands even matter in the discussion? If land winds, they will pick ~ten land mechanics for us to vote for. If enchantment wins, they will pick ~ten mechanics for us to vote for.
Pretty sure people will come up with at least 10 interesting land designs. Does it mean it's less likely someone will come up with a super breakthrough design for lands? Maybe. Does it matter? Probably not.
I went for enchantment because there's more design space. People seem excited for land because a land must cost zero, but that means...you have to have effects that are reasonable on a card that costs :zero:. We could do something cool, nutty, and weird with lands but I like enchantments more :).
I also think people voting based on the possible power of the card are just insane. We have no idea how we'll be doing mechanics this time, and if we go off our past crowd-sourcing we can see we're currently at 1 casual star, 1 constructed star, and one unplayable jank card from past YMTC. So #4 could literally go any way in terms of power and playability, regardless of what card type we pick. Being a land doesn't mean it will inherently be more powerful.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sufferer of EDHD
Commander - Currently Playing: RCRDaretti: Superfriends Forever RCR WGBDoran: Ent-mootWBG GGGMultani: Group Bear HugGGG GB(B/G)The Gitrog Monster: Dredgefall DurdleGB(B/G) RGWGahiji, the Honored Group Hug MonsterRGW UB(U/B)Yuriko, Ninja Trinket AggroUB(U/B) WUBRGAtogatog: Assembling a OHKOWUBRG
I say they make a Enchantment Land (think Ancient den but enchantment).
Hell, an Enchantment flip-card could be awesome.
1GW - Lands you control do something cool.
If you control 5 enchantments you may flip *
-flipped
Enchanted Super Land
Taps for...
Tap: Enchanted creatures you control gain...
Again, you're cherry picking enchantments... Those are the RARE exceptions.
Intangible Virtue is so narrow, tokens only. So it really only affects one type of deck... a deck that uses tokens... and is white.
Detention Sphere, White and Blue... Has a multiplied effect based on Oblivion Ring... Again, it's good, but more could've been done with it.
Ethreal Armor - Wow, gives a creature +1/+0 and first strike for each enchantment you control, in a block with only a couple playable enchantments in its' sole color... Needs a splash of another color to be useful, along with Rancor... In a vacuum, this card is sub-optimal at best. Again, it's white... noticing a pattern here...
Your argument also lends credence that only White-Enchantments are actually playable beyond Rancor being in green. Red, Black, and Blue all get the shaft 9/10 times...
Also, at least Sorrow's Path was playable in limited, whereas Search the City is complete garbage in every format, limited included... I've never seen ANY card as bad as Search the City... Not even Sorrow's Path...
You argument was there are no must play enchantments in the past 4 years outside of reprints and my argument was to present 3 enchantments that have been in Standard (and in the case of Ethereal Armor, Modern) tournament winning decks. I could also point to lists that have Curiosity, Spectral Flight, and Abundant Growth. I could also point out Blind Obedience, but that's a white enchantment, which is apparently the same as no enchantment. Yes I cannot point out any that are black or red (at least only black or only red even black and red), but the strategies employed by black and red do not generally want enchantments...nor do they want the specialized lands that have been suggested here, bar maybe Cavern of Souls.
You also ignore the entire last half of my statement which was an argument for land not enchantments. Would you say that my suggesting that a set that financially and critically was a success for the very card type you are arguing for and which demonstrates that land has a wider appeal and possibilities for Timmies and Johnnies, the two demographics more likely to vote against Team Land than for it, was me calling Team Land in general or you specifically out? There is a very strong argument for Land, clearly, or again there would not be such a close vote. I'm just saying there is more to enchantments than you are saying that there is, even if it tends to be in white (incidentally, the color that interacts with enchantments the most in modern color pie). I still think both sides should have gone with creature instead and I fear the kind of card we're going to get on the other end no matter which wins between land and enchantment.
As mentioned before me, lands may be universally playable, but the likely hood of a boring card is much greater if you vote land. We have and will continue to have a TON of utility lands. We have seen less and less exciting enchantments as time has gone on. Lets see what a cool enchantment can do.
We should make an enchantment aura that enchants target enchantment.
We're all probably dumb enough to do it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A scrupulous writer, in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at least four questions, thus: 1. What am I trying to say? 2. What words will express it? 3. What image or idiom will make it clearer? 4. Is this image fresh enough to have an effect? And he will probably ask himself two more: 1. Could I put it more shortly? 2. Have I said anything that is avoidably ugly?"
I voted land. The odds are too good that an enchantment would be outside colors I care about, while it's fairly likely that the land will probably be completely colorless.
The only comment I wanted to reply to.
How do you figure this? We have a say in the matter, that's what this is about. And as for "completely colorless" land, that makes no sense. Sure, we might end up with a glorified Blasted Landscape but might just as well get something like Volrath's Stronghold!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[I was permabanned and all I got to show for it was .... well, nothing.]
Enchantments have the most design space of the two card types left. Almost anything that you can put on a creature you can put on an enchantment, and just the opposite as well. Lands don't always have that function.
Almost anything, that is except the ability to have a tap activation, or combat interaction, both of which have overlap in artifacts and lands. You're not giving other card types enough credit with such a statement.
As for all the talk about Crucible of Worlds, it might as well be an enchantment. I'm not sure what kind of distinction you can make between it and a Leyline of Anticipation apart from colour identity and what spells remove it. They let you do something that is otherwise against the rules. So one is a magical trinket or machine of some kind, and the other is a lingering spell that affects the whole world, where exactly is the difference in the design space they occupy? Really then, didn't we already get a pretty damned good "enchantment"?
Perhaps you should just send WOTC a resume and tell them why you're better at Magic than one of their employees instead of complaining here, where nobody really has any authority on the matter.
The only comment I wanted to reply to.
How do you figure this? We have a say in the matter, that's what this is about. And as for "completely colorless" land, that makes no sense. Sure, we might end up with a glorified Blasted Landscape but might just as well get something like Volrath's Stronghold!
This is You Make The Card, which is not the same as You Make The Cycle or You Make The Carte Blanche. Because this is a single, solitary card, it is likely that the option to do something other than tapping for colorless or tapping for one mana of any color (and possibly not even the latter) will not be present. In addition, though there may be an outside possibility of this becoming a Hellion Crater or a Grove of the Guardians (two cards that require colored activation costs that are not part of a larger cycle), this again is probably highly unlikely (and if the main appeal in designing a land is to pick something which fits into a variety of a deck rather than a deck that contains one or more particular colors, even if such an option were presented, by the people most vested in voting for land, it would not be chosen anyway). Volrath's Stronghold is also part of a larger cycle of five lands, so it is not a particularly good example. What those of Team Land fail to realize is that, right or wrong, the main strike against land is the fact that there are fewer opportunities to provide input into the making of the card. There will not be a color, there will not be a subtype vote, there will not be a supertype vote, there is no mana cost. Once land is chosen, it is whatever mechanic it has on it besides "T: Add 1 to your mana pool," the art, and the name. Maybe flavor text if the mechanic isn't too wordy. This is not to say that making a land wouldn't be interesting, or that any of that truly constitutes a drawback. This is to say that there is going to be a certain population for which this holds true, and unfortunately, there is not much Team Land can do to argue this fact away.
I picked enchament again. I still think people are being blinded by their passion for a land while the enchament people are thinking clearly.
Land for me still feels far to close to crucible of worlds and given the balancing around 0 land it just doesnt seem fun/interesting and will most likely get nerfed to the point where its a rival to DRM legendary maze land.
Red I belive really needs a decent enchantment however I still want my version to be made.
Prismatic Void2U
Enchantment-
When ever a player casts a spell, Spells and non land permenants become the color of that spell until end of turn.
Want to see other duel decks I made ? Check out my Blog ! Feel free to post advice or give topics for me to make duel decks out of. Check out the Theros Block Planeswalker Theme Duel Decks Elspeth, Xenagos, Ashok, Kiora, Ajani
We should make an enchantment aura that enchants target enchantment.
We're all probably dumb enough to do it.
What, enchant enchantment? Thing is it's been done several times before. Steal Enchantment, Power Taint, etc. There's really no way to make a card like that much good.
Anyway, I tossed in a vote for land. Because I think it'll be interesting to see what develops with a slightly more restricted design space, and odds are it'll wind up playable. An enchantment would probably just be gimmicky for the sake of being gimmicky since the design space is a bit too open there.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
No make it permanent
In your example, lands have far more open design space. The biggest difference between land and enchantment is that an enchantment will have a global effect. On the other hand, land will probably have a tap ability, but could also have a global ability. Land has more open design space in this regard.
I think it will be more difficult to design a good enchantment because they are so limited as to being useful past the first copy that comes into play. Lands are almost always useful, even in multiples. I really want this card to be playable - not format breaking - but playable.
None of the other YMTC have ended up with a Legendary permanent, so that isn't an restriction at all.
Token lands? Also not a restriction. Any thing that would make token lands could just search the library instead.
And adding, ":symtap:: Add
It would be nice to have a playable card again. Crucible of Worlds was great because it fit into any color, is very balanced, and is a favorite among many different kinds of players. Vanish into Memory has vanished into memory for the majority of players, and Forgotten Ancient is a great name for a creature that was largely forgotten.
Land all the way!
a really bad start for this whole process.
I couldn't have said it better myself, THANK YOU!!!!
Also, I am quite mad that land WON, and they're making us REvote... LAME!
Please Visit my Alterations Page!
My Alters Sales Thread
Want a FREE Playset of Foil Baneslayer Angels?!?:
The design space on lands is extremely limited because of the requirement that they be free and hard to remove. Take an extremely broken land and stick the same text on a CMC-2 creature and the result is a crappy card.
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Wrong.
Enchantments have the most design space of the two card types left. Almost anything that you can put on a creature you can put on an enchantment, and just the opposite as well. Lands don't always have that function.
Oh, and that's just one possibility.
Lands have to tap for mana, and maybe do one other thing as well. Enchantments, well, they can do so much more than lands. It's not just acting as auras enchanting lands, or other permanents. They can take over games, preventing the other player from casting spells or giving you benefits to help destroy your enemies. In fact, Enchantments can totally benefit lands, cause them to double their mana source or even change the color of the mana they produce. The number of enchantments that you see each set vastly outweigh the number of nonbasic lands. Why?
Because there's that much design space for enchantments.
You might think that a bunch of enchantments are "bad" and "unplayable" and think that because there are so many "passable" lands, then there's that much more space to use. You're wrong. There are so many restrictions placed on lands it's not even funny. Lands have to be "better" because there are fewer of them printed; look at Planeswalkers. If there was so much space for lands, they'd be printing them left and right. They could afford to "make mistakes" with "bad lands". But they don't.
There's more design space in lands then there is in enchantments? Please, don't patronize me.
GatheringMagic.com Commander Writer
Twitter: @mtgcolorpie
One of the GDS2 Final 101
Recently Written Posts:
1-31 MTGCP The Complete Commander - Designing Commander
12-18 MTGCP The Day Kibler Shut Down the World
If I recall correctly, Magus DID see play in standard competitively...
Just because it's crappy NOW doesn't mean it was back then.
I'm done for the night, peace!
Please Visit my Alterations Page!
My Alters Sales Thread
Want a FREE Playset of Foil Baneslayer Angels?!?:
You could also very easily add a mana cost to activate the ability. Say, ":4mana:, :symtap:" or you could reduce the power level.
It would be kind of like Diamond Valley and High Market or even Miren, the Moaning Well (which probably wouldn't be Legendary now anyway.)
Ahahahahaha. Sorry, but no. Lands have gotten decidedly weaker since the NWO design philosphy. With that said, so have enchantments, largely because planeswalkers actively eat a lot of design space for enchantments.
You say that you've never seen a land as bad as Search The City? I say I have never seen any card as bad as Sorrow's Path.
You say we're more likely to get a Guild's Feud than a Rancor? I say we're more likely to get a Rogue's Passage, a Thespian's Stage, a Hellion Crater, a Grove of the Guardian, or a Haunted Fengraf than a Cavern of Souls.
Honestly, the arguments cut both ways, or the vote wouldn't be as close as they are. What it tells me is that there are just as many Timmys who could give a flying hippo about a land as there are Spikes interested in improving the Modern environment.
I think the people arguing for land haven't even played their best argument though. If I were to argue for land (and though I voted for enchantment, honestly I think the correct answer was creature all along, so I don't really have a horse in the race), I would simply point out that Zendikar was a hugely popular block based around that colorless card type that so many people claim to find so boring, so popular that it has all but guaranteed a return, one that most likely will happen in the next five years. Enchantments on the other hand had Urza's Saga back in 1998-1999, which nearly killed the game, got the entirety of R&D chewed out, left such a bad taste in the mouth that even graveyard as a block theme has repeated in the last 15 years, and at least half of the current players don't even realize there was an Enchantment block because it got overshadowed by the overpowered artifacts and (ironically) lands in the set.
You know, if I was going to argue for land.
Again, you're cherry picking enchantments... Those are the RARE exceptions.
Intangible Virtue is so narrow, tokens only. So it really only affects one type of deck... a deck that uses tokens... and is white.
Detention Sphere, White and Blue... Has a multiplied effect based on Oblivion Ring... Again, it's good, but more could've been done with it.
Ethreal Armor - Wow, gives a creature +1/+0 and first strike for each enchantment you control, in a block with only a couple playable enchantments in its' sole color... Needs a splash of another color to be useful, along with Rancor... In a vacuum, this card is sub-optimal at best. Again, it's white... noticing a pattern here...
Your argument also lends credence that only White-Enchantments are actually playable beyond Rancor being in green. Red, Black, and Blue all get the shaft 9/10 times...
Also, at least Sorrow's Path was playable in limited, whereas Search the City is complete garbage in every format, limited included... I've never seen ANY card as bad as Search the City... Not even Sorrow's Path...
Please Visit my Alterations Page!
My Alters Sales Thread
Want a FREE Playset of Foil Baneslayer Angels?!?:
Honestly, I think that whole article saying "OMG DONT VOTE FOR LAND!!1!1" is silly. First, because this isn't some sort of min-maxing exercise, you just go with your gut feeling.
Second, does the limited design space of lands even matter in the discussion? If land winds, they will pick ~ten land mechanics for us to vote for. If enchantment wins, they will pick ~ten mechanics for us to vote for.
Pretty sure people will come up with at least 10 interesting land designs. Does it mean it's less likely someone will come up with a super breakthrough design for lands? Maybe. Does it matter? Probably not.
I also think people voting based on the possible power of the card are just insane. We have no idea how we'll be doing mechanics this time, and if we go off our past crowd-sourcing we can see we're currently at 1 casual star, 1 constructed star, and one unplayable jank card from past YMTC. So #4 could literally go any way in terms of power and playability, regardless of what card type we pick. Being a land doesn't mean it will inherently be more powerful.
RCRDaretti: Superfriends Forever RCR
WGBDoran: Ent-mootWBG
GGGMultani: Group Bear HugGGG
GB(B/G)The Gitrog Monster: Dredgefall DurdleGB(B/G)
RGWGahiji, the Honored Group Hug MonsterRGW
UB(U/B)Yuriko, Ninja Trinket AggroUB(U/B)
WUBRGAtogatog: Assembling a OHKOWUBRG
I say they make a Enchantment Land (think Ancient den but enchantment).
Hell, an Enchantment flip-card could be awesome.
1GW - Lands you control do something cool.
If you control 5 enchantments you may flip *
-flipped
Enchanted Super Land
Taps for...
Tap: Enchanted creatures you control gain...
#teamland
You argument was there are no must play enchantments in the past 4 years outside of reprints and my argument was to present 3 enchantments that have been in Standard (and in the case of Ethereal Armor, Modern) tournament winning decks. I could also point to lists that have Curiosity, Spectral Flight, and Abundant Growth. I could also point out Blind Obedience, but that's a white enchantment, which is apparently the same as no enchantment. Yes I cannot point out any that are black or red (at least only black or only red even black and red), but the strategies employed by black and red do not generally want enchantments...nor do they want the specialized lands that have been suggested here, bar maybe Cavern of Souls.
You also ignore the entire last half of my statement which was an argument for land not enchantments. Would you say that my suggesting that a set that financially and critically was a success for the very card type you are arguing for and which demonstrates that land has a wider appeal and possibilities for Timmies and Johnnies, the two demographics more likely to vote against Team Land than for it, was me calling Team Land in general or you specifically out? There is a very strong argument for Land, clearly, or again there would not be such a close vote. I'm just saying there is more to enchantments than you are saying that there is, even if it tends to be in white (incidentally, the color that interacts with enchantments the most in modern color pie). I still think both sides should have gone with creature instead and I fear the kind of card we're going to get on the other end no matter which wins between land and enchantment.
Aaron
As mentioned before me, lands may be universally playable, but the likely hood of a boring card is much greater if you vote land. We have and will continue to have a TON of utility lands. We have seen less and less exciting enchantments as time has gone on. Lets see what a cool enchantment can do.
I just hope we don't make an Aura.
We're all probably dumb enough to do it.
The only comment I wanted to reply to.
How do you figure this? We have a say in the matter, that's what this is about. And as for "completely colorless" land, that makes no sense. Sure, we might end up with a glorified Blasted Landscape but might just as well get something like Volrath's Stronghold!
Almost anything, that is except the ability to have a tap activation, or combat interaction, both of which have overlap in artifacts and lands. You're not giving other card types enough credit with such a statement.
As for all the talk about Crucible of Worlds, it might as well be an enchantment. I'm not sure what kind of distinction you can make between it and a Leyline of Anticipation apart from colour identity and what spells remove it. They let you do something that is otherwise against the rules. So one is a magical trinket or machine of some kind, and the other is a lingering spell that affects the whole world, where exactly is the difference in the design space they occupy? Really then, didn't we already get a pretty damned good "enchantment"?
This is You Make The Card, which is not the same as You Make The Cycle or You Make The Carte Blanche. Because this is a single, solitary card, it is likely that the option to do something other than tapping for colorless or tapping for one mana of any color (and possibly not even the latter) will not be present. In addition, though there may be an outside possibility of this becoming a Hellion Crater or a Grove of the Guardians (two cards that require colored activation costs that are not part of a larger cycle), this again is probably highly unlikely (and if the main appeal in designing a land is to pick something which fits into a variety of a deck rather than a deck that contains one or more particular colors, even if such an option were presented, by the people most vested in voting for land, it would not be chosen anyway). Volrath's Stronghold is also part of a larger cycle of five lands, so it is not a particularly good example. What those of Team Land fail to realize is that, right or wrong, the main strike against land is the fact that there are fewer opportunities to provide input into the making of the card. There will not be a color, there will not be a subtype vote, there will not be a supertype vote, there is no mana cost. Once land is chosen, it is whatever mechanic it has on it besides "T: Add 1 to your mana pool," the art, and the name. Maybe flavor text if the mechanic isn't too wordy. This is not to say that making a land wouldn't be interesting, or that any of that truly constitutes a drawback. This is to say that there is going to be a certain population for which this holds true, and unfortunately, there is not much Team Land can do to argue this fact away.
Land for me still feels far to close to crucible of worlds and given the balancing around 0 land it just doesnt seem fun/interesting and will most likely get nerfed to the point where its a rival to DRM legendary maze land.
Red I belive really needs a decent enchantment however I still want my version to be made.
Prismatic Void2U
Enchantment-
When ever a player casts a spell, Spells and non land permenants become the color of that spell until end of turn.
Decks used- GGarruk vs LilianaB, WElsepth vs TezzeretU, WGKnights vs DragonsR
WGRAjani vs BolasRUB, WUVenser vs KothR, RUIzzet vs GolgariGB.
WBSorin vs TibaltBR, WRHeros vs Monsters RG
Want to see other duel decks I made ? Check out my Blog ! Feel free to post advice or give topics for me to make duel decks out of. Check out the Theros Block Planeswalker Theme Duel Decks Elspeth, Xenagos, Ashok, Kiora, Ajani
What, enchant enchantment? Thing is it's been done several times before. Steal Enchantment, Power Taint, etc. There's really no way to make a card like that much good.
Anyway, I tossed in a vote for land. Because I think it'll be interesting to see what develops with a slightly more restricted design space, and odds are it'll wind up playable. An enchantment would probably just be gimmicky for the sake of being gimmicky since the design space is a bit too open there.