The red one isn't extremely horrible. It's a land, can't be countered and gets around protection. Obviously you shouldn't replace lightning bolt with it.
Freaking explosivo vegetation? Thats crazy.
Red and white are kinda boring.i guess ahock in a colorless land is still profit. Life for each creature might be good if allies deck isNt afraid of going wide and aggro
Red land is a dash of extra reach for a red deck, but ultimately not a high-impact card, and probably highly unlikely to impact the format in a meaningful way. Even a RDW deck that might be interested in the "free" nature of the ability will probably be hurt more often by color screw than helped by the ability.
White land is deceptively strong. Being able to cash in a land for 6-8 life when getting beaten down is huge. It obviously only works in certain decks, of course.
Black and Blue lands are absolutely great, assuming they don't hurt their mana bases too much.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
Blck and Green one are the best ( I think )
The Black one ( mostly of the time ) will hold back your oponnt after an Wrath
Playing the green on a UG leaves you openend to counter spell or aET fetch 2 more lands.
The white one is disgustingly good in EDH in a Crucible/Life from the Loam setup. The red land is actually not that bad IMO: it can take out Kor Firewalker and other pro-red creatures that typically give Burn problems. Unfortunately, tapping for colorless instead of R makes it unsuitable for play in Modern Burn, which has demanding color requirements, especially with stuff like Atarka's Command.
Blighted Woodland looks good in a Valakut setup but I'm not sure it's Constructed-playable.
These days, some wizards are finding they have a little too much deck left at the end of their $$$.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
Sneaking damage into your decks with lands is insane. Do people even know how red decks work? You will play four of those in your RDW decks for as long as they are in standard simply for the reason as there is no reason not to do so. Anything your lands do that is not tapping for mana is worth playing. There really is no downside for mono red decks in playing a play set.
Sneaking damage into your decks with lands is insane. Do people even know how red decks work? You will play four of those in your RDW decks for as long as they are in standard simply for the reason as there is no reason not to do so. Anything your lands do that is not tapping for mana is worth playing. There really is no downside for mono red decks in playing a play set.
True, except that these tap for colorless. Running four copies means we risk having two in our opening hand, increasing our chances of mulligans. Is the potential for a) getting to six lands, b) having nothing better to do with our six mana, and c) being in a position where an expensive Shock matters worth that downside?
I can see running one or two at most in RDW, unless colored requirements are especially low.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
If there was a triple red card then maybe but still play 20 mountains plus four of these and then you should be OK. It still comes into play untapped with is a much bigger deal breaker than the colourless mana.
If there was a triple red card then maybe but still play 20 mountains plus four of these and then you should be OK. It still comes into play untapped with is a much bigger deal breaker than the colourless mana.
Maybe. But RDW plays closer to 21 lands right now, so really we're looking at 17 mountains and four of these. If your opening hand consists of two Blighted lands, one Mountain, and any number of double-red spells, you're in trouble. Your second red source is only sixteen of the remaining fifty-three cards in your deck. That's a mulligan.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
Wow, all these land are amazing. I'm glad I pre-ordered a playset of BfZ uncommons; uncommons are turning great for the set in general. All of these (except maybe the white one which is pretty meh in comparison) are eminently playable. Only the most color-intensive decks will not play at least a 2-of of one of them.
Wow...unless I'm mistaken the green one is a strictly better Explosive Vegetation? EDH staple for years...
Edit: I suppose the downside is you're using up your land drop for the turn, but that's a small price to pay for having a ramp spell that can tap for mana when you don't want to invest in any more ramp.
Not quite. The green one is 5 mana (4 + sac land) for +1 land, while Explosive is 4 mana (and 1 card in hand) for +2 lands. It's more along the lines of a Rampant Growth in terms of mana acceleration.
Sneaking damage into your decks with lands is insane. Do people even know how red decks work? You will play four of those in your RDW decks for as long as they are in standard simply for the reason as there is no reason not to do so. Anything your lands do that is not tapping for mana is worth playing. There really is no downside for mono red decks in playing a play set.
Depends on how many cards you play that cost RR. Barbarian ring was so much better since it still tapped for R.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to SpiderBoy4 @ High-Light Studio's for the awesome banner
“I once had an entire race killed just to listen to the rattling of their dried bones as I waded through them.” —Volrath
Sneaking damage into your decks with lands is insane. Do people even know how red decks work? You will play four of those in your RDW decks for as long as they are in standard simply for the reason as there is no reason not to do so. Anything your lands do that is not tapping for mana is worth playing. There really is no downside for mono red decks in playing a play set.
Depends on how many cards you play that cost RR. Barbarian ring was so much better since it still tapped for R.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to SpiderBoy4 @ High-Light Studio's for the awesome banner
“I once had an entire race killed just to listen to the rattling of their dried bones as I waded through them.” —Volrath
Not quite. The green one is 5 mana (4 + sac land) for +1 land, while Explosive is 4 mana (and 1 card in hand) for +2 lands. It's more along the lines of a Rampant Growth in terms of mana acceleration.
More like an harrow that costs 2 more. (Because you must tap this land to activate it.)
Not quite either of these either though. You run it instead of ramp (or on top of it) not instead of land. That way it's more like an explosive Vegetation that's a bit worse early game but much much better late game.
I wouldn't go all the with to 4 with the Red one in Mono Red Aggro. A lot of the stuff you play might be very cheap and cost one Red buy that is still a Red mana for every card. You probably want to run at least two of them anyway.
Still, though, it might not even work. Two of this land provides SOME amount of increased mulligan chance for a RDW deck, and the payoff, as I've described earlier in this thread, is very narrow. The game needs to go long (even though, playing RDW, you want to keep it short), a shock needs to be relevant, and you need to reach six lands. That's a lot of asks.
I'm honestly thinking that one copy may be the correct balance of risk and reward.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Red and white are kinda boring.i guess ahock in a colorless land is still profit. Life for each creature might be good if allies deck isNt afraid of going wide and aggro
Red land is a dash of extra reach for a red deck, but ultimately not a high-impact card, and probably highly unlikely to impact the format in a meaningful way. Even a RDW deck that might be interested in the "free" nature of the ability will probably be hurt more often by color screw than helped by the ability.
White land is deceptively strong. Being able to cash in a land for 6-8 life when getting beaten down is huge. It obviously only works in certain decks, of course.
Black and Blue lands are absolutely great, assuming they don't hurt their mana bases too much.
The Black one ( mostly of the time ) will hold back your oponnt after an Wrath
Playing the green on a UG leaves you openend to counter spell or aET fetch 2 more lands.
Very nice.
Good Lord
Kinda want to brew a crucible deck now.
Blighted Woodland looks good in a Valakut setup but I'm not sure it's Constructed-playable.
MTG finance guy- follow me on Twitter@RichArschmann or RichardArschmann on Reddit
True, except that these tap for colorless. Running four copies means we risk having two in our opening hand, increasing our chances of mulligans. Is the potential for a) getting to six lands, b) having nothing better to do with our six mana, and c) being in a position where an expensive Shock matters worth that downside?
I can see running one or two at most in RDW, unless colored requirements are especially low.
Maybe. But RDW plays closer to 21 lands right now, so really we're looking at 17 mountains and four of these. If your opening hand consists of two Blighted lands, one Mountain, and any number of double-red spells, you're in trouble. Your second red source is only sixteen of the remaining fifty-three cards in your deck. That's a mulligan.
Edit: I suppose the downside is you're using up your land drop for the turn, but that's a small price to pay for having a ramp spell that can tap for mana when you don't want to invest in any more ramp.
You are mistaken. It costs a land to do it, so it doesn't ramp you as quickly.
My Custom Cards
My Twitch - Languishing in neglect under the vain hope of starting again
My Livestream Archive
Depends on how many cards you play that cost RR. Barbarian ring was so much better since it still tapped for R.
“I once had an entire race killed just to listen to the rattling of their dried bones as I waded through them.”
—Volrath
Depends on how many cards you play that cost RR. Barbarian ring was so much better since it still tapped for R.
“I once had an entire race killed just to listen to the rattling of their dried bones as I waded through them.”
—Volrath
Not quite either of these either though. You run it instead of ramp (or on top of it) not instead of land. That way it's more like an explosive Vegetation that's a bit worse early game but much much better late game.
Still, though, it might not even work. Two of this land provides SOME amount of increased mulligan chance for a RDW deck, and the payoff, as I've described earlier in this thread, is very narrow. The game needs to go long (even though, playing RDW, you want to keep it short), a shock needs to be relevant, and you need to reach six lands. That's a lot of asks.
I'm honestly thinking that one copy may be the correct balance of risk and reward.