I'm not sure these are going to screw three color decks as much as everyone's saying. I haven't playtested them, sure so I could be wrong. However, the scry is going to smooth things out somewhat and a well constructed three color deck should be able to figure it out.
Most likely what this means is your three color deck is going to be more of two and a splash or most of the important cards in one color on the top end that you won't need to hit right away. Also, expect more basics in everyones decks.
Are the potential land bases here as good as current standard? No. But then, we're missing five lands from what's obviously a ten land cycle. It's also interesting that we got some allies and some enemies.
but why do that want to make monocolored decks right after a dual colored block... that's like following a graveyard set by making a set that wants you too never have cards at grave
Does the printing of dual colored lands signal that they want people to stop playing dual color decks to you?
Something is wrong with the pairings. Every color were paired with their ally colors except for W. And I'm already gearing towards a GW deck because of the lion but now I have to rethink again, lands are big deal. A UW land would have also been nice.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Going back to Europe Tonight. will say goodbye to you all.
Something is wrong with the pairings. Every color were paired with their ally colors except for W. And I'm already gearing towards a GW deck because of the lion but now I have to rethink again, lands are big deal. A UW land would have also been nice.
You'll notice the five pairings match up to the guilds that were in Gatecrash. Perhaps they were chosen because Wizards thought that the first 4 months of Ravnica would be dominated by the five guilds from that set, then the next months would be about equal because all 10 guilds had their lands, so giving the Gatecrash guilds their new duals first would balance things out?
It might have worked, too, if it wasn't for crazy cards like Thragtusk forcing more and more players into that 3rd colour.
I don't know, I think we're really underestimating how much "come into play tapped" suuuuucks on a land. They're just slightly better than guildgates and they take up 5 rare slots.
I'm definitely not looking forward to this upcoming standard rotation. Especially after getting a look at these.
Does everyone forget that the Scars dual lands would not always come into play untapped? People complained to high heaven about those, and yet they ended up seeing play in Standard and have seen some Modern play. Entering the battlefield tapped can be a hit to tempo, no doubt, but it's up to a good deck designer and good player to mitigate those potential set backs while harnessing the upsides.
There is a big difference between "could come into play untapped" and "will never come into play untapped".
EDIT: Nath'ed
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
- H. L. Mencken
At least the Scars lands (I don't remember anyone complaining about them personally) had a good chance to not come into play tapped on the turns when they were most needed.
That these ALWAYS come into play tapped AND take up 5 rare slots really makes me not wanna touch a pack of Theros. With my luck, I'm just gonna end up cracking 6 of these as my rare at the pre-release.
@Valanarch: So, Bolt lands that scry? That's a horrible design.
Why? It would have been better than what we have right now but still worse than the shocklands. You might as well say that the shocklands are horribly designed because they are just Alpha dual lands that shock you or enter the battlefield tapped.
I'm sure some people will choose the consistency of extra fixing over having a strong curve. Having the lands you need to cast high powered early to mid game drops like Boros Reckoner is very important.
Ultimately, lum is right. It's not necessary that the dual lands see play in every deck, even decks of their colour. Personally, I think these will be played across the board in decks of their colours, even aggressive ones, because curving out isn't always what a deck wants to do (or needs to do, given a specific match) and the added consistency and card quality can make up for the potential to have less explosiveness.
@JollytheOctopuss: Believe me, I remember the amount of word vomit spewed in the thread when Scars' lands were previewed. Just like these ones, they were called the worst duals ever and people predicted that they wouldn't see any play. Those people were wrong.
@Valanarch: It's horrible design because it's adding a rider to an already good design at the expense of making the penalty arbitrarily different. The Shcoklands are a good design because it's obvious a) that the original dual lands are too good in modern terms to be printed and b) the comparison they were being drawn against at the time was the Painlands. The reason they are a better design than the Painlands is that Painlands always cost you life for coloured mana, making them unfriendly to new players who don't understand the value of mana fixing. The Shocklands bypass that 'feel bad' play by allowing players to play them as taplands, and eventually learn the value of being able to make them come into played. While your land does a similar thing, it adds unnecessary text for the sake of trying to feel "Spikier", or less boring, which is not really elegant design.
When I looked at these in the spoiler, I was also like ''Okay, but are these really rare?"
However, when I read the DailyMTG article, the value of the scry 1 on a land became a bit more clear to me. It is especially relevant because it allows you to keep hitting your land drops as a control deck, but it does not allow aggro decks to curve out, even if it prevents them from flooding.
Also, they'd ruin limited if at uncommon, making it, as said in the article, a ''dig for your bomb'' format.
I knew the whole of MTGS would start hating on these though :/ so predictable.
Isn't it amazing that once you read about the methodology of their creation, and consider contexts that you otherwise might not, like Limited, you get a clearer picture of why certain choices regarding cards like this are made? If more people who immediately decried these lands as bad, boring, or not needing to be Rare had read the article, that might have gained a bit more insight.
I am certain Wizards' months of development and testing in the FFL, however, is of great consequence to someone whose made a snap judgement after reading the cards. /sarcasm
These are great; they increase decision making both during the game and in deck-building, as well as slowing down the format. These all favour strong players and are a welcome change.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I write for Channel Fireball now! Read my CFB articles here. Read my Dies to Removal articles here. Read the definitive Red Deck Wins Primer here.
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
No one is saying they are bad. We are saying they are bad at rare.
At uncommon they would be perfectly servicable. At rare, the do nothing but drive pack value into the toilet.
However, they do encourage 2 color decks, since mana bases are going to be just shocks and basics now. They accomplished their goal by being unplayable.
These are pretty terrrible, but at least I don't get stuck playing Guildgates in Standard. And my guild actually got its land in Theros. Feel sorry for GW and RB players, since those aggressive guilds not only have to wait 4-7 months, but are really going to hate playing a tapland. I know some people ran Rakdos Gate in RB Zombies... and those people were wrong. Taplands are definitely going to favor control overall, while being q mixed bag for midrange and ramp that really can use the scry but needs to play on curve to be effective.
They are just plain meh. They are guildgates with a small upside at best. The only lands I run in my deck that always CiPT are ones with significantly bigger impact than scry 1, something that Thassa is going to let me do every single one of my upkeeps for free anyways.
Bojuka Bog exiles a graveyard.
Creeping Tar Pit swings in and is almost guaranteed to connect, I've won games off of it.
Tolaria West can fetch me any land in my deck.
It takes more than scry 1 one time to justify yourself. I'd rather run a basic.
yeah, what about those games that you couldn't find your thasa.
Maybe if you would have played these turn one or two you would be able to dig that extra card to find it?
Do people really not understand how powerful a free scry is for playing a land that also fixes your mana?
This card helps you mulligan less frequently, hit early land drops, dig for needed cards in the mid game, and throw useless lands away late game, and taps for two different colors of mana
Sure, getting your turn three Loxodon Smiter will be more difficult, but aggro decks have had enough time to shine
If you read the article, you'd understand that they weren't made Uncommon because a threshold of Scry cards would lead to more and more Limited games being decided by who could scry their way to their bomb first, whereas scry was originally added to the set because it helped a player balance their creatures to auras count, and made it more likely you'd have creatures and auras to enchant them with, not have creatures and no auras, or auras and no creatures.
And dual lands are typically some of the more valuable cards in the set, so if these are played, they'll likely hold a higher price than any 5 random rares.
These are great; they increase decision making both during the game and in deck-building, as well as slowing down the format. These all favour strong players and are a welcome change.
Biased opinion from a mono-red player
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
- H. L. Mencken
These are pretty terrrible, but at least I don't get stuck playing Guildgates in Standard. And my guild actually got its land in Theros. Feel sorry for GW and RB players, since those aggressive guilds not only have to wait 4-7 months, but are really going to hate playing a tapland. I know some people ran Rakdos Gate in RB Zombies... and those people were wrong. Taplands are definitely going to favor control overall, while being q mixed bag for midrange and ramp that really can use the scry but needs to play on curve to be effective.
I think actually it is for the best. If you want full on aggro from GW or RB, then using scrylands in your deck won't probably be the best decision.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
- H. L. Mencken
I don't know, I think we're really underestimating how much "come into play tapped" suuuuucks on a land. They're just slightly better than guildgates and they take up 5 rare slots.
I'm definitely not looking forward to this upcoming standard rotation. Especially after getting a look at these.
because 5 in your oppinion bad cards, make the whole set bad...^^ people are so freaking funny.
but i now know why people still think that that m14 is bad. even after proved wrong.
it didnt even have any dual. seems like people fix the quality of a set on the quality of its duals allone funny ****^^
FWIW these are fine in aggro decks built with them in mind. Sure, they don't support blitz decks that only want to vomit their hand and play 'either I win turn , or I lose' but who really likes playing that? These lands promote more deliverate, considered and well-built aggro decks, which is to the benefit of actually good aggro players.
Me? Very excited to play Boros or Rakdos aggro.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I write for Channel Fireball now! Read my CFB articles here. Read my Dies to Removal articles here. Read the definitive Red Deck Wins Primer here.
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
to all people who say that control benefits more from this, and this is unplayable in aggro.. remember that the supreme verdict may come 1 turn later too and so on... so.. both sides have that "problem"
u should really listen to zemanjaski. he knows what he is talking about
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Most likely what this means is your three color deck is going to be more of two and a splash or most of the important cards in one color on the top end that you won't need to hit right away. Also, expect more basics in everyones decks.
Are the potential land bases here as good as current standard? No. But then, we're missing five lands from what's obviously a ten land cycle. It's also interesting that we got some allies and some enemies.
Does the printing of dual colored lands signal that they want people to stop playing dual color decks to you?
U Superman?
UW Control (:symu: :symw:)
You'll notice the five pairings match up to the guilds that were in Gatecrash. Perhaps they were chosen because Wizards thought that the first 4 months of Ravnica would be dominated by the five guilds from that set, then the next months would be about equal because all 10 guilds had their lands, so giving the Gatecrash guilds their new duals first would balance things out?
It might have worked, too, if it wasn't for crazy cards like Thragtusk forcing more and more players into that 3rd colour.
I'm definitely not looking forward to this upcoming standard rotation. Especially after getting a look at these.
they want your curve to be worse after a set requiring a strong curve
and no I am Ironman
BUG Dredge BUG]
WUBRG Storm WUBRG
UBR FaerieStalker UBR
EDH
Sygg, River Cutthroat (1vs1)
Maga, Traitor to Mortals (multiplayer)
There is a big difference between "could come into play untapped" and "will never come into play untapped".
EDIT: Nath'ed
- H. L. Mencken
French Duel Commander
WBR Kaalia of the Vast WBR
RUG Maelstrom Wanderer RUG
That these ALWAYS come into play tapped AND take up 5 rare slots really makes me not wanna touch a pack of Theros. With my luck, I'm just gonna end up cracking 6 of these as my rare at the pre-release.
Why? It would have been better than what we have right now but still worse than the shocklands. You might as well say that the shocklands are horribly designed because they are just Alpha dual lands that shock you or enter the battlefield tapped.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Ultimately, lum is right. It's not necessary that the dual lands see play in every deck, even decks of their colour. Personally, I think these will be played across the board in decks of their colours, even aggressive ones, because curving out isn't always what a deck wants to do (or needs to do, given a specific match) and the added consistency and card quality can make up for the potential to have less explosiveness.
@JollytheOctopuss: Believe me, I remember the amount of word vomit spewed in the thread when Scars' lands were previewed. Just like these ones, they were called the worst duals ever and people predicted that they wouldn't see any play. Those people were wrong.
@Valanarch: It's horrible design because it's adding a rider to an already good design at the expense of making the penalty arbitrarily different. The Shcoklands are a good design because it's obvious a) that the original dual lands are too good in modern terms to be printed and b) the comparison they were being drawn against at the time was the Painlands. The reason they are a better design than the Painlands is that Painlands always cost you life for coloured mana, making them unfriendly to new players who don't understand the value of mana fixing. The Shocklands bypass that 'feel bad' play by allowing players to play them as taplands, and eventually learn the value of being able to make them come into played. While your land does a similar thing, it adds unnecessary text for the sake of trying to feel "Spikier", or less boring, which is not really elegant design.
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
Isn't it amazing that once you read about the methodology of their creation, and consider contexts that you otherwise might not, like Limited, you get a clearer picture of why certain choices regarding cards like this are made? If more people who immediately decried these lands as bad, boring, or not needing to be Rare had read the article, that might have gained a bit more insight.
I am certain Wizards' months of development and testing in the FFL, however, is of great consequence to someone whose made a snap judgement after reading the cards. /sarcasm
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
At uncommon they would be perfectly servicable. At rare, the do nothing but drive pack value into the toilet.
However, they do encourage 2 color decks, since mana bases are going to be just shocks and basics now. They accomplished their goal by being unplayable.
yeah, what about those games that you couldn't find your thasa.
Maybe if you would have played these turn one or two you would be able to dig that extra card to find it?
Do people really not understand how powerful a free scry is for playing a land that also fixes your mana?
This card helps you mulligan less frequently, hit early land drops, dig for needed cards in the mid game, and throw useless lands away late game, and taps for two different colors of mana
Sure, getting your turn three Loxodon Smiter will be more difficult, but aggro decks have had enough time to shine
Message me if your interested in sharing mtgo cards
Currently Playing:
In Limbo
And dual lands are typically some of the more valuable cards in the set, so if these are played, they'll likely hold a higher price than any 5 random rares.
Biased opinion from a mono-red player
- H. L. Mencken
French Duel Commander
WBR Kaalia of the Vast WBR
RUG Maelstrom Wanderer RUG
I think actually it is for the best. If you want full on aggro from GW or RB, then using scrylands in your deck won't probably be the best decision.
- H. L. Mencken
French Duel Commander
WBR Kaalia of the Vast WBR
RUG Maelstrom Wanderer RUG
because 5 in your oppinion bad cards, make the whole set bad...^^ people are so freaking funny.
but i now know why people still think that that m14 is bad. even after proved wrong.
it didnt even have any dual. seems like people fix the quality of a set on the quality of its duals allone funny ****^^
FWIW these are fine in aggro decks built with them in mind. Sure, they don't support blitz decks that only want to vomit their hand and play 'either I win turn , or I lose' but who really likes playing that? These lands promote more deliverate, considered and well-built aggro decks, which is to the benefit of actually good aggro players.
Me? Very excited to play Boros or Rakdos aggro.
Want to see me in action? Check out my stream! Currently broadcasting Boros Burn in Standard. Full archive available.
Want to play better magic? Come join us at diestoremoval.com
u should really listen to zemanjaski. he knows what he is talking about