If we were to take in MaRo's comments in this video at face value (Namely, the fact that they have had Barry's Land thought-out and ready to go), OGW sounds like the perfect place to "deploy it" (as Wastes).
If that is the case, it leaves the question of Kozilek requiring that same <> mana. My conjecture (read: educated guess, not fact -- I see you trolls. o_O) is they decided to shoehorn Wastes in at the last minute, but they didn't want to leave it at that, so they added the mechanic of "Colorless required" to a handful of cards that were probably a full-generic cost beforehand. Kozilek likely changed from 10 to 8<><> as Wastes was added.
It would make sense with the leak too. The spoilers we have contains every possible size of the new mana icon, which reeks of a test-print that got leaked. They probably wanted to see how the mana symbol would look on a few cards, so these three were an obvious go-to.
Does this guess make sense to anyone? I'm obviously just speculating here, but every time I edit this it feels more like a really good guess.
That's not MaRo and I have no idea how you can infer that they shoehorned a colourless basic last minute in a block that cares about colourless...
And these leaks were very likely planned, MaRo (the real one) even addressed spoilers that occur outside of spoiler season and through non-WotC channels. Clearly this is going to be a big deal and having this kind of info be revealed this way means it will likely find it's way to the enfranchised players' ears which is exactly the plan.
They found the place for the COLORLESS basic land. It wasn't shoehorned in, they had the idea back in 2013 and waited for the right time and set to put it. <> is the symbol for colorless mana, no link to eldrazi because making a BASIC land for only a set would be waste.
Rules-wise, is there a practical difference between colorless mana and generic mana, or is "generic mana" just a slang for "mana of any kind"?
Colorless mana is mana that has no color. It is a type of mana.
Generic mana is a cost which can be paid for using any mana including both colorless mana and colored mana. It is a type of cost.
The two get confused because we use a number in a mana circle to represent both.
Take the Sol Ring that’s been printed in Commander decks. The 1 in the mana circle in the upper right corner is the mana cost of the card and it is a generic mana cost in that you can spend any color or colorless to pay for it.
The 2 in the mana circle in the rules text is a type of mana it produces which happens to be two colorless mana.
Basically the distinction has always been there, but using the same symbols makes the distinction between the two difficult to grok. Grok-ability is very key to what we can expect as it needs to be understood easily.
I could see MaRo expanding on that answer saying (<>) is a way we could show colorless in casting costs as opposed to generic mana.
They found the place for the COLORLESS basic land. It wasn't shoehorned in, they had the idea back in 2013 and waited for the right time and set to put it. <> is the symbol for colorless mana, no link to eldrazi because making a BASIC land for only a set would be waste.
It's basic, so you can have any number in your deck.
But nothing about Wastes says "print me in every large set from now on".
Sorry if someone else said it before but...in my opinion, the only logic answer is that <> represents a new type of mana (let's say eldrazi colorless mana or blind mana or whatever). The main reason for this is, simply put, why would you EVER use that wastes land if you could pay for <> with colorless? Let's say I play a GR ramp with Kozilek...why would I use Wates and not Kessig wolf run for casting Kozilek? Of course, <> could just mean "pay this only with colorless" and Wates will see play in exactly 0 deck, but who knows? :)) We'll have to wait and see.
You cannot get a Waste with a Sakura Tribe Elder. Kessig Wolf Run and such gets hit by non-basic hate pretty hard as well. Waste plays pretty well in heavy colorless decks using the Battle for Zendikar duals. It is really only as useless as any basic.
You CAN get a Wastes with Sakura-Tribe Elder.
Sacrifice Sakura-Tribe Elder: Search your library for a basic land card, put that card onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle your library.
Wastes is a basic land, it can be fetched. I think there are only two generic fetch cards that can fetch basics that can't fetch Wastes because they look for a basic land type.
Wastes were also partially designed to solve a hole in Commander decks, which they clearly already stated.
I meant Kessig Wolf Run The context of the post I quoted should put my comment into better perspective.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTGSalvation; Where the whining is a time honored tradition, and enjoying the game is trolling.
77 pages makes it hard to check if a specific point has been made, but...
If <> is a new kind of mana, that makes it considerably more awkward to put the mechanic in a set (OGW or any future set WotC might want to bring it back in). Colorless mana producers are everywhere; they're a natural part of every set, so if <> just means colorless, then there's already enough support to cast them in any format you might want to. But if <> is something different, then WotC would have to go out of their way to add enough <> produces to the set to support the cards, so that people can actually play them in limited and standard.
Sorry if someone else said it before but...in my opinion, the only logic answer is that <> represents a new type of mana (let's say eldrazi colorless mana or blind mana or whatever). The main reason for this is, simply put, why would you EVER use that wastes land if you could pay for <> with colorless? Let's say I play a GR ramp with Kozilek...why would I use Wates and not Kessig wolf run for casting Kozilek? Of course, <> could just mean "pay this only with colorless" and Wates will see play in exactly 0 deck, but who knows? :)) We'll have to wait and see.
You cannot get a Waste with a Sakura Tribe Elder. Kessig Wolf Run and such gets hit by non-basic hate pretty hard as well. Waste plays pretty well in heavy colorless decks using the Battle for Zendikar duals. It is really only as useless as any basic.
You CAN get a Wastes with Sakura-Tribe Elder.
Sacrifice Sakura-Tribe Elder: Search your library for a basic land card, put that card onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle your library.
Wastes is a basic land, it can be fetched. I think there are only two generic fetch cards that can fetch basics that can't fetch Wastes because they look for a basic land type.
Wastes were also partially designed to solve a hole in Commander decks, which they clearly already stated.
I meant Kessig Wolf Run The context of the post I quoted should put my comment into better perspective.
I was agreeing with you, and only correcting some info that was mistakenly phrased in your post as well as giving more information.
My thoughts are with the friends and family of the Orlando Shooting victims and with the rest of the LGBTQA+ community.
Check out my Newborder Peasant Cube here! http://www.cubetutor.com/draft/37467
Necarg, please don't acknowledge this in any way whatsoever.
True Name Mafia (Win),Clan Contest IX Mafia (Win), Bravely Default Mafia (Loss), BOTAS (loss), BfV (Loss), Ace Attourney (loss)
Rules Advisor before they were eradicated
Looks like the rules changes I said were likely to happen are going to happen then. Otherwise Wastes won't tap for anything. Simple changes though.
To recap:
Current:
107.4. The mana symbols are W, U, B, R, G, and X; the numerals 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and so on; the hybrid symbols (W/U), (W/B), (U/B), (U/R), (B/R), (B/G), (R/G), (R/W), (G/W), and (G/U); the monocolored hybrid symbols (2/W), (2/U), (2/B), (2/R), and (2/G); the Phyrexian mana symbols (W/P), (U/P), (B/P), (R/P), and (G/P); and the snow symbol S.
New: (bolded change)
107.4. The mana symbols are W, U, B, R, G, <>, and X; the numerals 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and so on; the hybrid symbols (W/U), (W/B), (U/B), (U/R), (B/R), (B/G), (R/G), (R/W), (G/W), and (G/U); the monocolored hybrid symbols (2/W), (2/U), (2/B), (2/R), and (2/G); the Phyrexian mana symbols (W/P), (U/P), (B/P), (R/P), and (G/P); and the snow symbol S.
Current:
107.4c Numeral symbols (such as {1}) and variable symbols (such as {X}) can also represent colorless mana if they appear in the effect of a spell or ability that reads “add [mana symbol] to your mana pool” or something similar. (See rule 107.3e.)
New: (bolded change)
107.4c The <> symbol is used to represent colorless mana, and also to represent colorless mana in costs. Colorless mana in costs can be paid only with colorless mana. See rule 202, “Mana Cost and Color.”
Current:
202.1a The mana cost of an object represents what a player must spend from his or her mana pool to cast that card. Unless an object’s mana cost includes Phyrexian mana symbols (see rule 107.4f), paying that mana cost requires matching the color of any colored mana symbols as well as paying the generic mana indicated in the cost.
New: (bolded change)
202.1a The mana cost of an object represents what a player must spend from his or her mana pool to cast that card. Unless an object’s mana cost includes Phyrexian mana symbols (see rule 107.4f), paying that mana cost requires matching the colored or colorless mana symbols as well as paying the generic mana indicated in the cost.
New:
305.6a A basic land without a basic land type has the intrinsic ability “T: Add <> to your mana pool,” even if the text box doesn’t actually contain that text or the object has no text box. See rule 107.4c. Also see rule 605, “Mana Abilities.”
if the <> are any big endeavor, I'd think to make room for enough representation, just 2 cards from each color would be 10 freed up of the 184 coming. the artifacts that would be normally represented can be fewer also. so there's enough room to have good representation for <>. this is a small set too, which makes you wonder why not would they been introduced in a larger set?
it does weigh in favor of this being OGW only. not so much resources committed to <> cards as would be to push an ongoing new element.
I think a lot of us will be eating storm crow in a few days!
The fact that they're changing all colorless-mana generators to <>... they wouldn't change all those cards just for a few cards in GOW. Since Ayli's 151, that means we have 150 cards between colorless and each color. Probably something like 15 colorless and 27 of each color. Maybe some of the Devoid cards will have <> in their mana costs to make things really interesting.
Who was it that promised to burn a foil Mox Opal if <> turned out to replace the (1) for colorless mana generation?
That might have been me
I expect a video of that within 2 weeks.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My thoughts are with the friends and family of the Orlando Shooting victims and with the rest of the LGBTQA+ community.
Check out my Newborder Peasant Cube here! http://www.cubetutor.com/draft/37467
Necarg, please don't acknowledge this in any way whatsoever.
True Name Mafia (Win),Clan Contest IX Mafia (Win), Bravely Default Mafia (Loss), BOTAS (loss), BfV (Loss), Ace Attourney (loss)
Rules Advisor before they were eradicated
Unless it's a multicolored-focused set, all multicolor cards are lumped together. It goes true colorless, W, U, B, R, G, gold, hybrid, artifact, land.
So out of 184 cards, 150 are either colored or colorless. Assuming there's a 10-card cycle of gold cards (the Russian RG legend is 156), that leaves 24 cards between artifacts and lands. Probably a lot of lands and a handful of artifacts.
Alright, color me surprised. I see no reason to disbelieve this. I owe 256k ten bucks if he's still around.
I do think it's overall better for the game in the long run, but didn't think they'd do something like this so suddenly. Looking forward to more details on the set~
Ok so it taps for <> and is specific to spells with <>in the mana cost. And they have basics and filters.... It's not going to be the universal symbol for colorless, that's absurd!!! It's for <>!!!!! Seems more like a snow land than anything I've ever seen before lol
Ok so it taps for <> and is specific to spells with <>in the mana cost. And they have basics and filters.... It's not going to be the universal symbol for colorless, that's absurd!!! It's for <>!!!!! Seems more like a snow land than anything I've ever seen before lol
Mystic Gate, which taps for 1 in the first ability of its previous printing, taps for <> in the first ability of the Expedition card. That means that <> is the new symbol for colorless mana.
EDIT: Looking at it now, this post might be sarcasm. If it is, my bad.
lol, this <guy> at this post will destroy a valuable card because they were too stupid to admit that maybe Wizards might want to create a generic mana symbol.
Sorry Team_Overthink, but you made mtg Salvation an enjoyable read, while it lasted.
There were so much garbage theories on <>, the people who thought <> was some alien concept fail to understand that the people in Magic have already pledged themselves to make the game as simple to understand as possible, because Magic itself is already very complex. There was no need to overturn or make worse a very good mana system already.
My advice is to think how WotC would think of Magic first, then react to it. But 5/5 for effort.
If we were to take in MaRo's comments in this video at face value (Namely, the fact that they have had Barry's Land thought-out and ready to go), OGW sounds like the perfect place to "deploy it" (as Wastes).
If that is the case, it leaves the question of Kozilek requiring that same <> mana. My conjecture (read: educated guess, not fact -- I see you trolls. o_O) is they decided to shoehorn Wastes in at the last minute, but they didn't want to leave it at that, so they added the mechanic of "Colorless required" to a handful of cards that were probably a full-generic cost beforehand. Kozilek likely changed from 10 to 8<><> as Wastes was added.
It would make sense with the leak too. The spoilers we have contains every possible size of the new mana icon, which reeks of a test-print that got leaked. They probably wanted to see how the mana symbol would look on a few cards, so these three were an obvious go-to.
Does this guess make sense to anyone? I'm obviously just speculating here, but every time I edit this it feels more like a really good guess.
And these leaks were very likely planned, MaRo (the real one) even addressed spoilers that occur outside of spoiler season and through non-WotC channels. Clearly this is going to be a big deal and having this kind of info be revealed this way means it will likely find it's way to the enfranchised players' ears which is exactly the plan.
/Thread
They found the place for the COLORLESS basic land. It wasn't shoehorned in, they had the idea back in 2013 and waited for the right time and set to put it. <> is the symbol for colorless mana, no link to eldrazi because making a BASIC land for only a set would be waste.
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/133764358703/rules-wise-is-there-a-practical-difference
Basically the distinction has always been there, but using the same symbols makes the distinction between the two difficult to grok. Grok-ability is very key to what we can expect as it needs to be understood easily.
I could see MaRo expanding on that answer saying (<>) is a way we could show colorless in casting costs as opposed to generic mana.
It's basic, so you can have any number in your deck.
But nothing about Wastes says "print me in every large set from now on".
( 0.0 )
=O ((U/R)) O=
(")(")
I'm an AI making Magic cards.
http://www.staalmedia.nl/nexus/#generate
I see what you did there
I meant Kessig Wolf Run The context of the post I quoted should put my comment into better perspective.
If <> is a new kind of mana, that makes it considerably more awkward to put the mechanic in a set (OGW or any future set WotC might want to bring it back in). Colorless mana producers are everywhere; they're a natural part of every set, so if <> just means colorless, then there's already enough support to cast them in any format you might want to. But if <> is something different, then WotC would have to go out of their way to add enough <> produces to the set to support the cards, so that people can actually play them in limited and standard.
I tried to resist. I really did. I'm sorry.
I was agreeing with you, and only correcting some info that was mistakenly phrased in your post as well as giving more information.
Seems like a lot of us were right!
Check out my Newborder Peasant Cube here! http://www.cubetutor.com/draft/37467
True Name Mafia (Win),Clan Contest IX Mafia (Win), Bravely Default Mafia (Loss), BOTAS (loss), BfV (Loss), Ace Attourney (loss)
Rules Advisor before they were eradicated
Sorry, Team Snow.
To recap:
it does weigh in favor of this being OGW only. not so much resources committed to <> cards as would be to push an ongoing new element.
I think a lot of us will be eating storm crow in a few days!
I expect a video of that within 2 weeks.
Check out my Newborder Peasant Cube here! http://www.cubetutor.com/draft/37467
True Name Mafia (Win),Clan Contest IX Mafia (Win), Bravely Default Mafia (Loss), BOTAS (loss), BfV (Loss), Ace Attourney (loss)
Rules Advisor before they were eradicated
glarblglarblglarb.
So out of 184 cards, 150 are either colored or colorless. Assuming there's a 10-card cycle of gold cards (the Russian RG legend is 156), that leaves 24 cards between artifacts and lands. Probably a lot of lands and a handful of artifacts.
I do think it's overall better for the game in the long run, but didn't think they'd do something like this so suddenly. Looking forward to more details on the set~
Mystic Gate, which taps for 1 in the first ability of its previous printing, taps for <> in the first ability of the Expedition card. That means that <> is the new symbol for colorless mana.
EDIT: Looking at it now, this post might be sarcasm. If it is, my bad.
RGWMayael the AnimaRGW
UBRMarchesa, the Black RoseUBR
Modern Decks
RGWNaya BurnRGW
There were so much garbage theories on <>, the people who thought <> was some alien concept fail to understand that the people in Magic have already pledged themselves to make the game as simple to understand as possible, because Magic itself is already very complex. There was no need to overturn or make worse a very good mana system already.
My advice is to think how WotC would think of Magic first, then react to it. But 5/5 for effort.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG