I'm pretty sure you can't tap Sol Ring and eight Plains to pay the two colorless and eight generic for Kozilek.
I strongly believe you can do exactly that. Colorless needs its own symbol outside the generic symbol. New players are confused about things that produce {}
Parasitic? That's not an argument against its validity, given the Ingest debacle of the last set. (Granted, the Eldrazi Processor mechanic that depended on it was really cool.)
Also, to what extent do people think this may/may not violate New World Order? Honestly, this is a nightmare of a mechanic to explain to new players, as other have pointed out above.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes... Three generations of imbeciles are enough."
--Buck v Bell, 1927. This case, regarding the compulsory sterilization of inmates at mental institutions, has -- somehow -- never been overturned. Just a wee PSA for ya.
I like the idea that <> is the new generic symbol for colorless mana. However, I also fear that because of this, we'll be seeing a lot of "why did Wizards make this card require <>" in the future. If this is a thing now, I hope Wizards doesn't start slapping <> on artifact mana costs or replacing our generic artifacts with colorless cards that require <> to make full use of this new thing.
<> does NOT mean colourless and only colourless. Otherwise, we would not see land specifically tapping for <> rather than just 1. The lands tapping for that would serve literally no purpose and cause extra confusion with no benefit.
<> is not replacing normal colourless symbols, otherwise we would not see costs like 8<><>.
Like many others in these threads, you have just proven the point of introducing <> as a new symbol for colorless mana. You seem to think that if <> stood for colorless mana, then 8<><> and 10 would be identical. However, the 8 in Kozileks cost doesn't stand for colorless, it stands for generic mana. The generic mana symbols stay the same (numbers in a grey circle), while colorless mana finally gets its own symbol.
First of all, "generic mana" hasn't existed in years because it was a stupid term.
Actually, you are wrong.
107.4b Numeral symbols (such as {1}) and variable symbols (such as {X}) represent generic mana in costs. Generic mana in costs can be paid with any type of mana. For more information about {X}, see rule 107.3.
Taken from the most recent comprehensive rules. The comp rules go on to use the term "generic mana" another 16 times.
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.)
WOTC hates when one thing can mean two (or more) different things. That's why "play" has been changed to "play a land", "cast a spell", and "activate an ability" (as well as changing "in play" to "on the battlefield"). <> meaning "colourless" and {1} meaning "generic" makes it much easier to differentiate between the two.
It clearly doesn't just mean colorless: Kozilek wouldn't cost 8DD instead of 10. This is some kind of special Eldrazi mana. I suspect that it is colorless, but unique beyond that. I'm pretty sure you can't tap Sol Ring and eight Plains to pay the two colorless and eight generic for Kozilek.
I'm hoping D can serve as any color of mana for devoid cards. That would be really neat.
Also, the symbol should be abbreviated as "D" and not "<>", the former is shorter and D stands for "devoid".
If anything, we should call it "C", for colorless. Which will most likely be the way Wizards will abbreviate it, considering that they recently freed up "C" (see here, under 107.12).
I understand that difference, but still, if this is WotC's attempt to make that difference visible I don't like that move at all. All it does is make things more complicated that did not need to be complicated. It made no difference to Magic gameplay if mana was generic or colorless, and the way it was displayed on cards was perfectly understandable for even the beginners.
All this would do is (presumably) start a huge Errata-campaign, make card effects look more awkward than before (Monoloth tapping for <><><> instead of 3). And introducing a new basic land and a new mana symbol would just create more confusion to newer players.
tl;dr. Yes, there's a difference between Generic and Colorless mana, but making that difference visible on cards creates more confusion than it solves, especially given that it doesn't change how the game is played.
I don't know what sort of Basalt monolith you're playing but specifically says to "tap to add 3 colourless mana to your mana pool" it doesn't tell me to add 3
I understand that difference, but still, if this is WotC's attempt to make that difference visible I don't like that move at all. All it does is make things more complicated that did not need to be complicated. It made no difference to Magic gameplay if mana was generic or colorless, and the way it was displayed on cards was perfectly understandable for even the beginners.
All this would do is (presumably) start a huge Errata-campaign, make card effects look more awkward than before (Monoloth tapping for <><><> instead of 3). And introducing a new basic land and a new mana symbol would just create more confusion to newer players.
tl;dr. Yes, there's a difference between Generic and Colorless mana, but making that difference visible on cards creates more confusion than it solves, especially given that it doesn't change how the game is played.
But that's kind of inevitable the game already is more than 20 years old and we get 4+ blocks a year, we've also had a variable amount of mana signs changes like hybrid, snow, and phyrexian.
If the numbers on the two spoiled lands are to be believed, we would have 9 slots maximum for basic land are on the normal 5 basic lands. Unless basics aren't included in the set (not impossible..) but in that case, between Mirrorpool and Wastes there are 9 more lands? That is a lot of non-basic land.
Worldwake had 14, and that set was 40 cards smaller than this one. And we've known for a while that the (other) five basics are the BfZ versions.
I'll believe it when I see WOTC post it. Considering the misspelling of the artists name on Kozilek, and the new Basic Land being labeled as "C" instead of "L" in the bottom left corner, I'm still thinking fake.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: GR Pummeler
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
If the numbers on the two spoiled lands are to be believed, we would have 9 slots maximum for basic land are on the normal 5 basic lands. Unless basics aren't included in the set (not impossible..) but in that case, between Mirrorpool and Wastes there are 9 more lands? That is a lot of non-basic land.
The usual 5 basics won't be in the set. The 5 usual basic lands you get in the land slot will just be more BFZ basics. Small sets rarely have their own basic lands. As someone mentioned a few pages back, 3 enemy manlands + 5 enemy battlelands is 8 more nonbasics right there.
I understand that difference, but still, if this is WotC's attempt to make that difference visible I don't like that move at all. All it does is make things more complicated that did not need to be complicated. It made no difference to Magic gameplay if mana was generic or colorless, and the way it was displayed on cards was perfectly understandable for even the beginners.
It is not more complicated, it makes things clearer. The generic symbol pulling double-duty to represent colorless mana confuses new players.
Also, it is useful for developing artifacts. Artifacts are in a sad, sorry state right now. Unless they get pushed, they have to always either be too weak, or overcosted to be playable. With this change, they can now make more powerful artifacts that you can access only by diluting the colors in your mana base.
eg I can imagine a draft where you pick up a couple sweet artifacts and decide to go with "GW splash c"
I'll believe it when I see WOTC post it. Considering the misspelling of the artists name on Kozilek, and the new Basic Land being labeled as "C" instead of "L" in the bottom left corner, I'm still thinking fake.
How is his named misspelled? It appears to match every other artist credit he's received.
I'll believe it when I see WOTC post it. Considering the misspelling of the artists name on Kozilek, and the new Basic Land being labeled as "C" instead of "L" in the bottom left corner, I'm still thinking fake.
How is the artist's named misspelled? Looks right to me.
Also, being labeled as "C" means Wastes could replace a common slot.
Finally, the first page has been updated that it's apparently been confirmed real (although this is the site that confirmed flip-Chandra was fake).
I'll believe it when I see WOTC post it. Considering the misspelling of the artists name on Kozilek, and the new Basic Land being labeled as "C" instead of "L" in the bottom left corner, I'm still thinking fake.
1) A couple google searches reveal no mispelling of that artist's name.
2) They may have decided that the card should take a common slot rather than a land slot.
I'm hoping D can serve as any color of mana for devoid cards. That would be really neat.
Also, the symbol should be abbreviated as "D" and not "<>", the former is shorter and D stands for "devoid".
If anything, we should call it "C", for colorless. Which will most likely be the way Wizards will abbreviate it, considering that they recently freed up "C" (see here, under 107.12).
My arguments for D:
"C" stands for "color," so the letter after C should stand for "colorless."
D also stands for "devoid" and "diamond."
The shape of the capital D is topologically equivalent to the new diamond symbol.
D is the fourth letter of the alphabet, and the new mana symbol already has four sides.
2) They may have decided that the card should take a common slot rather than a land slot.
Then it wouldn't be labeled as a Basic Land, it would just be a Land, like Blighted Fen or Shivan Reef. Basic Lands have always had the designation "L". Other lands have their designation correlate with their rarity level.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: GR Pummeler
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
2) They may have decided that the card should take a common slot rather than a land slot.
Then it wouldn't be labeled as a Basic Land, it would just be a Land, like Blighted Fen or Shivan Reef. Basic Lands have always had the designation "L". Other lands have their designation correlate with their rarity level.
Applying pre-existing logic to something extremely extraordinary like this seems pretty silly, to me.
Anyway, I think they'll just put a copy in every pack like they did for DFC cards for Innistrad block. If it's a key mechanic, it'd become rather difficult to draft or build around with any consistency in limited. There will also probably be other lands that produce <> to accompany it.
2) They may have decided that the card should take a common slot rather than a land slot.
Then it wouldn't be labeled as a Basic Land, it would just be a Land, like Blighted Fen or Shivan Reef. Basic Lands have always had the designation "L". Other lands have their designation correlate with their rarity level.
There is no rule saying basic lands must be in the land slot of a booster pack. Making it a basic land only means you can play more than 4 wastes if you want, and you may want to do so if <> is a big thing in OGW.
There is no rule saying basic lands must be in the land slot of a booster pack. Making it a basic land only means you can play more than 4 wastes if you want, and you may want to do so if <> is a big thing in OGW.
No rules but it takes away a common card from limited.
In limited you can add as many basic lands you want to you pool, so opening a common land takes away a card from your pool directly.
No go.
It also doesn't have a land type. It's just a basic land. Like I said, I'll believe it when WOTC posts it, until then as far as I'm concerned it's fake. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I really hope I'm right, because I really don't like these.
But honestly, if they were going to do a new land type like that I think they would have done it in BFZ, instead of doing Eldrazi with color identities and Devoid. Otherwise there would have been no reason to give the eldrazi stuff a color identity, except maybe screwing with commander players who can't use some of the stuff they want due to the identity.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Standard: GR Pummeler
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
ok, so I'm not a newb, I have been playing for a while, and I have a more or less solid grip on the rules, so please don't talk down to me, but I am also not a judge. I know the basic difference between generic and colorless, but just to be sure, no matter what Wizards has as the final word there, a stack of Urza lands would be able to cast the new Kozilek? I see no home in my Tron deck, but I have a few cute ideas in a colorless EDH with those new basics. and they could be used to cast say,Mindslaver, right?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
I skimmed the thread but was the "new" mana explained at all anywhere or are people assuming that it'll be only paid with colorless?
I'm just curious on what the implications in, let's say EDH for example, will be. Is it going to be restricted or will it be usable in any deck? Aside from the weird mana symbol, the first effect is really nice on top of giving him Menance. The counter ability is also interesting but I don't think it will see play in current standard just like Newlamog. I'm not going to judge Oath yet until more stuff is spoiled. If Kozilek made an appearance, let's see if Emrakul does as well (or if Emrakul somehow ties in with SOI).
If the numbers on the two spoiled lands are to be believed, we would have 9 slots maximum for basic land are on the normal 5 basic lands. Unless basics aren't included in the set (not impossible..) but in that case, between Mirrorpool and Wastes there are 9 more lands? That is a lot of non-basic land.
The usual 5 basics won't be in the set. The 5 usual basic lands you get in the land slot will just be more BFZ basics. Small sets rarely have their own basic lands. As someone mentioned a few pages back, 3 enemy manlands + 5 enemy battlelands is 8 more nonbasics right there.
And ALL of them with names between M and W? Plus another land in there? I'm not saying it's impossible, but.. worldwake had what, 14 non-basic lands? Just seems an odd distribution that there's so many in the latter half of the alphabet.
Although I guess it's also fair to assume we will get more than one type of artwork for Wastes?
Sure, it's entirely possible a large number of lands could come after M. Maybe there's another 5-card cycle like the Blighted lands that starts with N-Z. That right there could bring the count to 13, one off Worldwake's number. There's no rule that dictates how many cards must start with a certain letter or range of letters.
I also agree that multiple Wastes with different arts is a possibility (helps raise the as-fan of Wastes so that players who need them in a draft can find them).
I'll believe it when I see WOTC post it. Considering the misspelling of the artists name on Kozilek, and the new Basic Land being labeled as "C" instead of "L" in the bottom left corner, I'm still thinking fake.
The artist's name is not misspelled and the "C" on Wastes is because it is being sorted as Common and not Basic Land in the set (which just means it won't be in the basic land slot in booster packs). See cards like Mortuary Mire.
I strongly believe you can do exactly that. Colorless needs its own symbol outside the generic symbol. New players are confused about things that produce {}
Also, to what extent do people think this may/may not violate New World Order? Honestly, this is a nightmare of a mechanic to explain to new players, as other have pointed out above.
--Buck v Bell, 1927. This case, regarding the compulsory sterilization of inmates at mental institutions, has -- somehow -- never been overturned. Just a wee PSA for ya.
Trades
Pucatrade with me!
(Signature courtesy of Argetlam of Hakai Studios
Actually, you are wrong.
Taken from the most recent comprehensive rules. The comp rules go on to use the term "generic mana" another 16 times.
WOTC hates when one thing can mean two (or more) different things. That's why "play" has been changed to "play a land", "cast a spell", and "activate an ability" (as well as changing "in play" to "on the battlefield"). <> meaning "colourless" and {1} meaning "generic" makes it much easier to differentiate between the two.
Uril, the Miststalker RGW -- Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre C -- Vhati il-Dal BG -- Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer RW -- Animar, Soul of Elements URG
Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker R -- Maga, Traitor to Mortals B -- Ghave, Guru of Spores BGW -- Sliver Hivelord WUBRG
Yes it does. Basalt Monolith
But that's kind of inevitable the game already is more than 20 years old and we get 4+ blocks a year, we've also had a variable amount of mana signs changes like hybrid, snow, and phyrexian.
Worldwake had 14, and that set was 40 cards smaller than this one. And we've known for a while that the (other) five basics are the BfZ versions.
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
The usual 5 basics won't be in the set. The 5 usual basic lands you get in the land slot will just be more BFZ basics. Small sets rarely have their own basic lands. As someone mentioned a few pages back, 3 enemy manlands + 5 enemy battlelands is 8 more nonbasics right there.
It is not more complicated, it makes things clearer. The generic symbol pulling double-duty to represent colorless mana confuses new players.
Also, it is useful for developing artifacts. Artifacts are in a sad, sorry state right now. Unless they get pushed, they have to always either be too weak, or overcosted to be playable. With this change, they can now make more powerful artifacts that you can access only by diluting the colors in your mana base.
eg I can imagine a draft where you pick up a couple sweet artifacts and decide to go with "GW splash c"
Pumpkin Spiced Land confirmed.
How is his named misspelled? It appears to match every other artist credit he's received.
How is the artist's named misspelled? Looks right to me.
Also, being labeled as "C" means Wastes could replace a common slot.
Finally, the first page has been updated that it's apparently been confirmed real (although this is the site that confirmed flip-Chandra was fake).
1) A couple google searches reveal no mispelling of that artist's name.
2) They may have decided that the card should take a common slot rather than a land slot.
My arguments for D:
Then it wouldn't be labeled as a Basic Land, it would just be a Land, like Blighted Fen or Shivan Reef. Basic Lands have always had the designation "L". Other lands have their designation correlate with their rarity level.
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
Applying pre-existing logic to something extremely extraordinary like this seems pretty silly, to me.
Anyway, I think they'll just put a copy in every pack like they did for DFC cards for Innistrad block. If it's a key mechanic, it'd become rather difficult to draft or build around with any consistency in limited. There will also probably be other lands that produce <> to accompany it.
(Also known as Xenphire)
There is no rule saying basic lands must be in the land slot of a booster pack. Making it a basic land only means you can play more than 4 wastes if you want, and you may want to do so if <> is a big thing in OGW.
No rules but it takes away a common card from limited.
In limited you can add as many basic lands you want to you pool, so opening a common land takes away a card from your pool directly.
No go.
But honestly, if they were going to do a new land type like that I think they would have done it in BFZ, instead of doing Eldrazi with color identities and Devoid. Otherwise there would have been no reason to give the eldrazi stuff a color identity, except maybe screwing with commander players who can't use some of the stuff they want due to the identity.
Modern: Mono-Red Control, Lantern Control, Eldrazi Taxes, Skred Infect
Pauper: Affinity
EDH: Gaddock Teeg Kithkin Tribal, Meren
Legacy: 8 Rack, Omnitell (Both in progress)
I'm just curious on what the implications in, let's say EDH for example, will be. Is it going to be restricted or will it be usable in any deck? Aside from the weird mana symbol, the first effect is really nice on top of giving him Menance. The counter ability is also interesting but I don't think it will see play in current standard just like Newlamog. I'm not going to judge Oath yet until more stuff is spoiled. If Kozilek made an appearance, let's see if Emrakul does as well (or if Emrakul somehow ties in with SOI).
Lymphoma Cancer Survivor!
Sure, it's entirely possible a large number of lands could come after M. Maybe there's another 5-card cycle like the Blighted lands that starts with N-Z. That right there could bring the count to 13, one off Worldwake's number. There's no rule that dictates how many cards must start with a certain letter or range of letters.
I also agree that multiple Wastes with different arts is a possibility (helps raise the as-fan of Wastes so that players who need them in a draft can find them).
The artist's name is not misspelled and the "C" on Wastes is because it is being sorted as Common and not Basic Land in the set (which just means it won't be in the basic land slot in booster packs). See cards like Mortuary Mire.