It was my understanding that the ability of basic lands to produce mana was completely due to their subtypes. A mountain can produce red mana because it is a mountain. Other lands which produce red mana have the ability explicitly written on them, where as mountains (Mountains, Sacred Foundry, Volcanic Island, etc.) have no line that reads "Add R to your mana pool." (outside of errata). Older lands once had that, but it was removed from them for the large image of the mana they produce. It is even unrepresented on Oracle.
Wizards has said that they do not wish to have inherent properties on subtypes. I refer you to Walls. They decided instead of having a creature type which inherently cannot attack, create an ability that restricts creatures from attacking (ie defender). I assumed that, despite this desire from Wizards, basic land types would retain this self-contained ability of tapping for their respective mana type. Look to cards like Contaminated Ground or Song of the Dryads. You cannot argue that these permanents can now produce B and G respectively. Blood Moon makes each nonbasic land produce R with no doubt. They did not gain a text line, they gained a type.
My question now comes to the new Wastes basic lands. They do not have a subtype--they are just basic lands. Not having a subtype suggests they do not produce any mana inherently. But then they are lands with no abilities, though we have come to expect them to produce this diamond mana. Is it fair to expect that? They do not have a line of text that says they produce mana, they do not have a subtype that suggests it.
Wizards has also gone on record saying that each land should produce at least 1 mana. Each land should produce some form of mana. But there are lands which don't:
Is the new ruling suggesting that there is an inherent property with something being a land or not? Lands will always produce mana, subtypes work as a filter to color the mana? If so, will these older and classic lands be able to tap for mana now?
If not, does the "tap for mana" ability come from the land being basic? Then there are problems with cards like Song of the Dryads because the enchanted thing is presumably nonbasic.
I feel this would have all been avoided if Wizards simply made a new land type, Wastes. Maybe just not call it a basic land type.
I also have a problem with the ruling of Blood Moon as it never says the line "lose all abilities". These nonbasics should retain their abilities and simply have the added ability of tapping for R. I feel Wizards is just catering to players who have invested in these HEAVILY valued cards and the backlash of the rule change (and price dip) would be huge. I speak this as a person who owns a foil Blood Moon, so I am not speaking as an unaffected member of the community.
I pose all this not as an aggravated player, but as a logistician. I always believe that the rules of Magic work in a very well-defined manner, similar to that of computer programming, so when I see issues like the ones I'm mentioning here, it is really an act of troubleshooting and cleaning code.
I understand this was a long post and I greatly appreciate your reading it through to the end. Any thoughts on this are welcomed. Thanks.
The rule that lands should tap for mana is more of a guideline. Its intent that lands should help you get cast spells, and fetchlands, Terramorphic Expanse, etc. do that. You have to "cash them", but the end result is that you will get another mana-producing land thanks to them. Similarly for Eye of Ugin: while it doesn't produce mana on its own, it reduces costs of spells, and so it helps you to cast them. Arena and Maze of Ith are very old lands, from before the rule was formalized. AFAIK, the last land that had NOTHING to do with mana production was Dark Depths, and that card was a deliberate throwback to earlier design philosophies.
Now, for land types, it should be noted that most of land types actually don't have any rules baggage. There's 13 land types and only the 5 basic land types have special rules. These rules are as follows:
305.6. The basic land types are Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest. If an object uses the words “basic land type,” it’s referring to one of these subtypes. A land with a basic land type has the intrinsic ability “{T}: Add [mana symbol] to your mana pool,” even if the text box doesn’t actually contain that text or the object has no text box. For Plains, [mana symbol] is {W}; for Islands, {U}; for Swamps, {B}; for Mountains, {R}; and for Forests, {G}. See rule 107.4a. Also see rule 605, “Mana Abilities.”
305.7. If an effect sets a land’s subtype to one or more of the basic land types, the land no longer has its old land type. It loses all abilities generated from its rules text, its old land types, and any copy effects affecting that land, and it gains the appropriate mana ability for each new basic land type. Note that this doesn’t remove any abilities that were granted to the land by other effects. Setting a land’s subtype doesn’t add or remove any card types (such as creature) or supertypes (such as basic, legendary, and snow) the land may have. If a land gains one or more land types in addition to its own, it keeps its land types and rules text, and it gains the new land types and mana abilities.
These rules ARE a bit complicated, but there doesn't seem to be a good way to simplify them.
As for Wastes, I believe you are simply wrong when you say "But then they are lands with no abilities, though we have come to expect them to produce this diamond mana. Is it fair to expect that? They do not have a line of text that says they produce mana, they do not have a subtype that suggests it." The Wastes we saw were full-art lands, and like other full-art cards that appeared in Magic before (as promos), this says absolutely nothing about whether they actually have text or not. There might very well be non-full-art Wastes cards with printed text "{T}: Add {C} to your mana pool."
The reason they changed legend and wall was because it messed with tribal by causing problems with type changing or having all creature types. As for wastes, we don't know how it works yet, technically. We'll probably have to wait until at least the mechanics article.
Please refer to Oracle for basic lands, they have no line of text. Yes, the Wastes are full art, thus have no text box. That doesn't change what we should expect from Oracle. Old lands from sets such as Mirage have the line "Add R to your mana pool." But now lands simply have large mana symbols to express this. That is an illustration and not ruling.
Rule 305.6 actually confirms what I'm saying about lands having specific abilities depending on their subtypes.
305.7 clarifies my argument toward Blood Moon though it still feels like a bogus rule. Compare it to changing a creature's type. Why would Imagecrafter be able to take away a creature's ability?
As for nonfull art Wastes, that's a fair point that we may have them with a line of text. But suppose we don't. Suppose they follow the pattern we've had so far in Zendikar. Full art, no text line, no text line on Oracle. Where does the mana production ability come from? Yes, there are full art promos, like Cryptic Command, but although they don't have text, Oracle does.
I'm not arguing against Legend or Wall adjustments. I'm in agreement with how they handled it and I think it streamlined portions of the game. Still, a Wall without defender can attack. Each old Wall from before the change has been updated on Oracle giving them defender. To discuss this however takes away from the point I intended to address.
I believe we DO have sufficient data to presume what Magic will do with Waste mana. It will be used to create restrictions on colorless things like Eldrazi and Artifacts. Lands that produce colorless mana will now show the diamond symbols instead of numbers in gray circles. The card Scorched Ruins will now contain the text "Add <><><><> to your mana pool." My question involves determining where the mana producing ability comes from. What I did was outline where it might come from and showed why there will be a contradiction unless they update the rules. Now the concern is how will they update the rules.
And all printed Wastes, even non-full-art, will simply have the {C} symbol just like the other basic lands. (A bit confusing, yes, but obvious what it means.)
And they also confirmed that there's no rule that says a basic land without a basic land type automatically taps for C. On one of their Twitter articles, they said that if Urborg is on the field, a Wastes can tap for C or B.
If Oracle does have that line of text, then my concern is essentially discarded. I don't like the assumption that "it has this illustration of mana, so we know what to do" sort of thing. Whatever is on a card (in a playable regard) should be represented and supported in the rules. Aside from Unhinged, there's not any reference to art in cards.
@Minoke
Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth is not a questioned card. It actually supports my argument suggesting that the Wastes should have this line of text or something that suggests they can tap for this mana. Anything that is a Swamp (regardless of its other types) will be able to produce B. 305.6 affirms that. But Wastes, being no basic land type with inherent abilities and no line of text (unless Oracle provides it), shouldn't have any ability.
I want to stress that this is not my misunderstanding of the playability of this card. I understand the way Wizards wants it to go, how judges will rule it, and how players will use it. I'm saying, on a technical side, it doesn't make sense. There are a number of people stating that this is a bit confusing. It's not. It really is not. It seems really blatant and straight forward how the GAME will work and how players will use this. They will be correct in doing so (from the intents of Wizards). I'm just saying there IS an inconsistency in the rules.
Before this announcement/ruling, Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth was a highly questioned card, because a lot of people were supposing that the new rule wording would be "Basic lands with no subtype inherently have a Tap-for-Colorless ability". Which, if true, would make a Wastes-that-is-also-a-Swamp-because-Urborg able to produce ONLY black and no longer able to produce colorless.
This Tabak announcement removed that question.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wizards has said that they do not wish to have inherent properties on subtypes. I refer you to Walls. They decided instead of having a creature type which inherently cannot attack, create an ability that restricts creatures from attacking (ie defender). I assumed that, despite this desire from Wizards, basic land types would retain this self-contained ability of tapping for their respective mana type. Look to cards like Contaminated Ground or Song of the Dryads. You cannot argue that these permanents can now produce B and G respectively. Blood Moon makes each nonbasic land produce R with no doubt. They did not gain a text line, they gained a type.
My question now comes to the new Wastes basic lands. They do not have a subtype--they are just basic lands. Not having a subtype suggests they do not produce any mana inherently. But then they are lands with no abilities, though we have come to expect them to produce this diamond mana. Is it fair to expect that? They do not have a line of text that says they produce mana, they do not have a subtype that suggests it.
Wizards has also gone on record saying that each land should produce at least 1 mana. Each land should produce some form of mana. But there are lands which don't:
...and many more.
Is the new ruling suggesting that there is an inherent property with something being a land or not? Lands will always produce mana, subtypes work as a filter to color the mana? If so, will these older and classic lands be able to tap for mana now?
If not, does the "tap for mana" ability come from the land being basic? Then there are problems with cards like Song of the Dryads because the enchanted thing is presumably nonbasic.
I feel this would have all been avoided if Wizards simply made a new land type, Wastes. Maybe just not call it a basic land type.
I also have a problem with the ruling of Blood Moon as it never says the line "lose all abilities". These nonbasics should retain their abilities and simply have the added ability of tapping for R. I feel Wizards is just catering to players who have invested in these HEAVILY valued cards and the backlash of the rule change (and price dip) would be huge. I speak this as a person who owns a foil Blood Moon, so I am not speaking as an unaffected member of the community.
I pose all this not as an aggravated player, but as a logistician. I always believe that the rules of Magic work in a very well-defined manner, similar to that of computer programming, so when I see issues like the ones I'm mentioning here, it is really an act of troubleshooting and cleaning code.
I understand this was a long post and I greatly appreciate your reading it through to the end. Any thoughts on this are welcomed. Thanks.
RKrenko, Mob BossR
WBAthreos, God of Passage~Non-ApostleWB
URWNarset, Enlightened MasterURW
Join me on PucaTrade! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/51352
Now, for land types, it should be noted that most of land types actually don't have any rules baggage. There's 13 land types and only the 5 basic land types have special rules. These rules are as follows:
These rules ARE a bit complicated, but there doesn't seem to be a good way to simplify them.
As for Wastes, I believe you are simply wrong when you say "But then they are lands with no abilities, though we have come to expect them to produce this diamond mana. Is it fair to expect that? They do not have a line of text that says they produce mana, they do not have a subtype that suggests it." The Wastes we saw were full-art lands, and like other full-art cards that appeared in Magic before (as promos), this says absolutely nothing about whether they actually have text or not. There might very well be non-full-art Wastes cards with printed text "{T}: Add {C} to your mana pool."
Rule 305.6 actually confirms what I'm saying about lands having specific abilities depending on their subtypes.
305.7 clarifies my argument toward Blood Moon though it still feels like a bogus rule. Compare it to changing a creature's type. Why would Imagecrafter be able to take away a creature's ability?
As for nonfull art Wastes, that's a fair point that we may have them with a line of text. But suppose we don't. Suppose they follow the pattern we've had so far in Zendikar. Full art, no text line, no text line on Oracle. Where does the mana production ability come from? Yes, there are full art promos, like Cryptic Command, but although they don't have text, Oracle does.
RKrenko, Mob BossR
WBAthreos, God of Passage~Non-ApostleWB
URWNarset, Enlightened MasterURW
Join me on PucaTrade! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/51352
I believe we DO have sufficient data to presume what Magic will do with Waste mana. It will be used to create restrictions on colorless things like Eldrazi and Artifacts. Lands that produce colorless mana will now show the diamond symbols instead of numbers in gray circles. The card Scorched Ruins will now contain the text "Add <><><><> to your mana pool." My question involves determining where the mana producing ability comes from. What I did was outline where it might come from and showed why there will be a contradiction unless they update the rules. Now the concern is how will they update the rules.
RKrenko, Mob BossR
WBAthreos, God of Passage~Non-ApostleWB
URWNarset, Enlightened MasterURW
Join me on PucaTrade! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/51352
For the curious, Wastes has Oracle text of "{T}: Add {C} to your mana pool." Wastes is not a land type nor a type of mana. Just a card name.
So there's no new rule for all lands producing colorless mana or anything like that. Wastes will simply have the ability on its Oracle text.
And they also confirmed that there's no rule that says a basic land without a basic land type automatically taps for C. On one of their Twitter articles, they said that if Urborg is on the field, a Wastes can tap for C or B.
If Oracle does have that line of text, then my concern is essentially discarded. I don't like the assumption that "it has this illustration of mana, so we know what to do" sort of thing. Whatever is on a card (in a playable regard) should be represented and supported in the rules. Aside from Unhinged, there's not any reference to art in cards.
@Minoke
Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth is not a questioned card. It actually supports my argument suggesting that the Wastes should have this line of text or something that suggests they can tap for this mana. Anything that is a Swamp (regardless of its other types) will be able to produce B. 305.6 affirms that. But Wastes, being no basic land type with inherent abilities and no line of text (unless Oracle provides it), shouldn't have any ability.
I want to stress that this is not my misunderstanding of the playability of this card. I understand the way Wizards wants it to go, how judges will rule it, and how players will use it. I'm saying, on a technical side, it doesn't make sense. There are a number of people stating that this is a bit confusing. It's not. It really is not. It seems really blatant and straight forward how the GAME will work and how players will use this. They will be correct in doing so (from the intents of Wizards). I'm just saying there IS an inconsistency in the rules.
RKrenko, Mob BossR
WBAthreos, God of Passage~Non-ApostleWB
URWNarset, Enlightened MasterURW
Join me on PucaTrade! https://pucatrade.com/invite/gift/51352
Before this announcement/ruling, Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth was a highly questioned card, because a lot of people were supposing that the new rule wording would be "Basic lands with no subtype inherently have a Tap-for-Colorless ability". Which, if true, would make a Wastes-that-is-also-a-Swamp-because-Urborg able to produce ONLY black and no longer able to produce colorless.
This Tabak announcement removed that question.