I am surprised though I haven't looked through all the pages...that no one has suggested...
Dual land
T:Add white to your mana pool only if you control a plains
T:Add green to your mana pool only if you control a forest
significant draw back...and like reflecting pool can only produce what you control, but is restricted to 2 colors, and can't produce anything on turn one, can only produce one color on turn 2 and beyond until you get the second basic land type...makes a lot of sense to me.
For the most part, you're going to tap it for mana to play a spell, therefore you'll reveal the spell you're about to play to tap it for mana. There are other circumstances where you would tap the land for mana and not be able to reveal a card, but for the most part it's almost always going to tap for mana to play the spell you're wanting to.
Well, there's artifacts and activations of permanents, which you can't use without the tap for colorless clause (unless you have a blue or black card in your hand, of course).
If all you have is artifacts and land in your hand, my proposed land doesn't make mana.
I am surprised though I haven't looked through all the pages...that no one has suggested...
Dual land
T:Add white to your mana pool only if you control a plains
T:Add green to your mana pool only if you control a forest
significant draw back...and like reflecting pool can only produce what you control, but is restricted to 2 colors, and can't produce anything on turn one, can only produce one color on turn 2 and beyond until you get the second basic land type...makes a lot of sense to me.
People have suggested it, and it's a terrible idea. It doesn't produce both colors until turn 3. That is the opposite of "awesome".
I am surprised though I haven't looked through all the pages...that no one has suggested...
Dual land
T:Add white to your mana pool only if you control a plains
T:Add green to your mana pool only if you control a forest
significant draw back...and like reflecting pool can only produce what you control, but is restricted to 2 colors, and can't produce anything on turn one, can only produce one color on turn 2 and beyond until you get the second basic land type...makes a lot of sense to me.
I'd rather see:
Dual land
T: Add white to your mana pool only if you don't control a plains
T: Add green to your mana pool only if you don't control a forest
T: Add 1 to your mana pool
I am surprised though I haven't looked through all the pages...that no one has suggested...
Dual land
T:Add white to your mana pool only if you control a plains
T:Add green to your mana pool only if you control a forest
significant draw back...and like reflecting pool can only produce what you control, but is restricted to 2 colors, and can't produce anything on turn one, can only produce one color on turn 2 and beyond until you get the second basic land type...makes a lot of sense to me.
This is really weak. Like you said, it's weaker than Reflecting Pool, but without the interaction with vivids the pool really isn't quite that strong, as evidenced by the time it was first printed.
This cycle should sell the set. Your suggestion would make this a crap-rare cycle.
yes but its supposed to NOT be great or strictly better... and yes if you control neither it produces colorless...they said they aren't supposed to be better than basics persay. So...I can see it. Or something similar like
T: add W to your mana pool if other land you control could produce W
the if you DON't control wouldn't really be plausible because once a plains and a forest are on the board it only makes colorless which is terrible on turn 3, 4, 5
yes but its supposed to NOT be great or strictly better... and yes if you control neither it produces colorless...they said they aren't supposed to be better than basics persay. So...I can see it.
There are plenty of existing dual designs already out there that have been printed and the only ones that have been strictly better than basics are the original Alpha duals. This is worse than almost all of them.
Someone suggested something like this in the last thread. The problem is that if you have multiples in play once you play your fifth land they all turn off.
This is NOT chase rare quality. Not even close.
I'm sorry, I really don't think the new duals WILL be chase rares. With the recent trend of very playable uncommon lands, I'm of the opinion that the M10 lands will be playable, but not chase.
The less than 5 land clause is actually a subtle way of discouraging more than 2 colors. As you increase the number of colors you play beyond 2 or 3, these lands get significantly worse and less functional. That is part of what makes them elegant. You are expecting some powerhouse awesome dual land...I think you expect too much.
Dual land
T: Add white to your mana pool only if you don't control a plains
T: Add green to your mana pool only if you don't control a forest
T: Add 1 to your mana pool
So a land that could be useless eventually? You have to build around it as well.
Assuming the 'catering to new players' line wasn't a lie, and the fact that they might be pushing us back to using basics both discourage this card from seeing print in M10.
T -Add R or G to your mana pool. Play this ability only during your turn.
or
Land
T - Add 1 to your mana pool.
T -Add R or G to your mana pool. Play this ability only during your turn.
I think the first one would be too bad and the second one is almost a dual and maybe too good, but I definitely could see both printed.
Those are both terrible.
The drawback is unplayable for control decks, and any deck that likes to play instants.
I think we need to focus more on a 'comes into play' drawback than a limitation/cost to tap it...
People glossed over my card ideas...
Enlightening Isle
Land - Island Plains
When Enlightening Isle comes into play, you may reveal a card from your hand at random to your opponent. If you don't, Enlightening Isle comes into play tapped.
I could see this being with or without land types. I feel that most duals don't have land types because they tap for colorless or have some stipulation to tapping for mana. The tribal lands didn't have land types (bosk not withstanding) because it distracted from Tribal cards, and didn't help the cards in the block any.
Got another:
Isle of Knowledge
Land - Plains Island
When Isle of Knowledge comes into play, you may put a card in your hand on top of your library. If you don't, Isle of Knowledge comes into play tapped.
WoTC likes to give people a choice with their duals, while keeping them simple. (Shocklands, Painlands...)
Seriously guys, most of the ideas being posted today have been posted already.
I'm sorry, I really don't think the new duals WILL be chase rares. With the recent trend of very playable uncommon lands, I'm of the opinion that these will be playable, but not a must.
They are replacing painlands.
They are replacing painlands.
I had to repeat it for effect.
These will also be reprinted in M11, assuming they go over as well as WoTC thinks they will.
WoTC has called them 'awesome' and opted out of reprinting Shocklands for these. Players will pitch a fit if they aren't good lands.
Making them chase rares gives players an incredible incentive to buy M10. WoTC is taking a chance with M10, and they need every ace in the hole they can get. Making unexciting, just barely playable duals is not going to sell the set.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
They are replacing painlands.
They are replacing painlands.
Painlands have been losing popularity ever since Invasion. The fact they are being replaced is no big deal.
I had to repeat it for effect.
I'm sure I'll get a flame warning here, but that's kind of childish.
These will also be reprinted in M11, assuming they go over as well as WoTC thinks they will.
WoTC has called them 'awesome' and opted out of reprinting Shocklands for these. Players will pitch a fit if they aren't good lands.
Making them chase rares gives players an incredible incentive to buy M10. WoTC is taking a chance with M10, and they need every ace in the hole they can get. Making unexciting, just barely playable duals is not going to sell the set.
Wizards has thought lots of things were awesome that the community hasn't. The fact is, their playtesters aren't always as in tune with the playerbase as they'd like to be. Any dual land they put into these will unfortunately cause it to be sold...and do you know why? Because we will have no other option. The simple fact that all the painlands and shocklands we have now will not be legal in standard is what will make the set sell.
You guys who think that these new lands will be the best thing since real duals are deluding yourselves with false hope. They will likely be worse than shocklands and slightly better than painlands.
They will likely be worse than shocklands and slightly better than painlands.
I don't think anyone is suggesting cards that are any different.
That is certainly what I expect.
If painlands can sell a core set, these would be able to.
And painlands are still used. They are the only option for turn one dual mana in standard, assuming you aren't playing a tribal deck.
How do you figure they are losing popularity when they are in every tier one deck that isn't 5cc? (In WR kithkin builds) And run in most tier 2 decks to boot. (Also, how have they been losing popularity before the enemy pains were even made?...people loved those)
And it isn't childish, because people don't seem to realize how often painlands are actually used until they lose them. Including you, apparently, as you seem to think they are not used.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
I read through the thread and it appears this hasn't been mentioned if it has my apologies.
Building twords destruction:
T: Add X or Y to your mana pool add a counter to land
If there are three counters on the land target opponent may draw a card and all counters are removed.
Newer players don't see the signifagence of their opponent drawing cards frequently and it would make older players seriously consider wether the card they were going to throw down was worth adding the counter. It is however quite wordy for a core set and somewhat confusing and probably incorrectly templated. What's more it could be seen as a tempo loss if you have to wait an additional turn to play a spell to prevent your opponent from drawing though I think that is kind of what makes the card challenging.
Were the Shocklands this? Were the Painlands? Where did you get this from?
Losing life is relatively equal across the colors, yes. Gaining life, discarding, and milling are all drawbacks that are disliked as much or more by new players as taking damage.
I read through the thread and it appears this hasn't been mentioned if it has my apologies.
Building twords destruction:
T: Add X or Y to your mana pool add a counter to land
If there are three counters on the land target opponent may draw a card and all counters are removed.
Newer players don't see the signifagence of their opponent drawing cards frequently and it would make older players seriously consider wether the card they were going to throw down was worth adding the counter. It is however quite wordy for a core set and somewhat confusing and probably incorrectly templated. What's more it could be seen as a tempo loss if you have to wait an additional turn to play a spell to prevent your opponent from drawing though I think that is kind of what makes the card challenging.
or, since they want these to be really strong:
T: Add 1 to your mana pool.
T: Add X or Y to your mana pool. Put a cipher counter on ~.
Whenever there are three or more cipher counters on ~, remove them and choose an opponent, that opponent may draw a card.
I don't know if this hasn't been posted before, but all I can think that matches everything posted is one of the following:
Discard-Land
Land
When ~ comes into play discard a card from your hand or ~ goes to the graveyard.
Tap: add X or Y to your mana pool.
RFG-Land
Land
When ~ comes into play RFG a card from your hand or ~ goes to the graveyard.
Tap: Add X or Y to your mana pool
The primary issue I see with this type of card is the fact that it's a really bad disadvantage, except for a narrow suitation (discard land with madness) and they are dead draws off the top of your deck when you have no cards in hand.
I don't expect anyone to want either type of card... Hmm, this is tough.
Nonetheless, it's true. People looking at the matter through new eyes tend to see giving life to their opponents as equivalently bad to damaging themselves (putting themselves further from winning rather than closer to losing), and everyone hates discarding.
Whatever the drawback is, the new duals will have one, and new players are going to figure out anyway that the benefit of providing mana of two different colors outweighs the negatives of the land
Well, that's part of why the really convincing entries in this thread take the form of "drawback or CIPT." CIPT seems like an incredibly painless drawback because it doesn't actually take away your resources or put you closer to losing -- it's only when you understand tempo really well that you see why it's not very strong. A land that has that CIPT option is always going to be more appealing to a newbie than one that always "enforces" its drawback like the painlands.
Also, the argument that having an opponent gaining life isn't equal across the colors is a red herring.
Not really. It's true that not every conceivable deck in any given color combination will have an exactly equal response to a give-opponent-life drawback, but the general effect would still be more than enough to make the value of the lands in such a cycle drastically uneven. Like -- someone might make a blue-black aggro deck that doesn't want to run "Pool of the Lifewaters" or whatever (and obviously that Kavu life-aggro deck did run Grove) but in general a ton of control decks will snap up UB and UW lifelands in a way that far outstrips the utility of the rest of the cycle.
Here is a list of possible mechanics that have not been used previously on dual lands. Of course, for all we know, Wizards has created an entirely NEW mechanic which will be on these new "awesome" lands, but here are a few things that haven't been suggested. I realize that not all of them could be considered "awesome" as I have typed them, but perhaps someone else out there might have an idea for a good edit. I'm just hunting for new design space.
Imprint - remove a basic land from the game, "awesome" land gains that land type.
Untap - land taps for one color, untaps for a different color. Some type of errata on it to ensure that it is not played more than once per turn without some type of drawback.
Phasing
Suspend
Echo (suggested by another poster, but it's never been done before.)
Token - when land comes into play a token that is a {swamp / mountain / etc} comes into play. Token may or may not need to be sac'd. Token may or may not be a basic land. Token may or may not produce colored mana. Lots of unexplored design space here, but I'm not sure any of it would qualify as "awesome".
Tap another permanent - when "awesome land" becomes tapped, tap another permanent you control. Not likely because it would be too easy to break.
When "awesome" comes into play, end your turn. Sort of halfway to CIPT, but you can play an instant on your opponent's turn. Again, not likely, just never been suggested.
When "awesome" comes into play, target opponent may untap one basic land.
When "awesome" comes into play, target oppenent may put a basic land into play tapped.
Quirion Elves effect - when "awesome" comes into play, choose a color. "Awesome" taps for either the chosen color or the color of whatever predetermined color is printed on the card. May or may not have a basic land type. May or may not gain a basic land type. Some type of drawback would need to be built into this card if basic land types were added, or possibly if an enemy color was chosen. Example:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Quirion Mountain: When Quirion Mountain comes into play, choose a color. If that color is blue or white, Quirion Mountain comes into play tapped.
t: add R to your mana pool t: add one mana of the chosen color to your mana pool.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-prsgrrl
"Nothing is carved in stone. Even if it were, stone can be broken." -Melanie Rawn
I made this banner myself from copyrighted magic card graphics
Badlands 3.0
Land - Mountain Swamp
When ~this~ comes into play you may reveal a black or red card from your hand and remove it from the game until the end of your turn, otherwise ~this~ comes into play tapped.
Just seems easier and doesn't allow you to get around the previous restriction through cycling or something.
Edit: Not that I'm saying this is a good or necessary idea, just trying to fix the formatting.
That actually doesn't do what I intended for it, what I intended with the "You can not play that card this turn" was for it to require you to reveal a card other than the card you intend to play.
It doesn't cause card disadvantage, but it does give away extra information.
Card disadvantage for fixing your mana is an absolutely awful idea.
The best ideas I've seen are the category of "CIPT unless X", where X is probably revealing a card in hand. The best thing about a drawback of revealing a spell is that it's easiest to avoid when you need it: when you have cards in your hand you can't cast yet, either because the game just started or you're short on a color. For that reason, it might be a bit too powerful to require only a reveal of one of the two colors - and perhaps a bit too weak to require a land reveal. The latter might teach people that holding back a land you don't actually need to play is a good decision, but the revealing of a spell might be a big enough drawback due to the information it generates.
I was also leaning towards Nimbus Maze, but there's problems of being not able to cast spells with two of the same mana; the drawback seems ok when the environment has very few cards that have that sort of cost, but that's just what happens in multi-color blocks. It won't happen in normal blocks, and the core set in particular should be full of such cards.
Also, is there 100% confirmation that these lands will be able to produce either color of mana on a player's first turn?
Also, is there 100% confirmation that these lands will be able to produce either color of mana on a player's first turn?
No, but it is the main niche Painlands fill, and if they can't do this, people won't have much incentive to use these duals.
I agree on the reveal a card in your hand thing, I have posted my ideas twice and they have gone ignored...yet people repost the same ideas and get replies.
My suggested drawbacks were:
When X comes into play, you may reveal a card in your hand at random to target opponent. If you don't this comes into play tapped.
Or:
When X comes into play, you may put a card in your hand on the top of your library. If you don't this comes into play tapped.
The jury is out if they should or shouldn't have land types, but I feel that they should, as if they aren't tapping for colorless, we don't have much reason not to.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
Dual land
T:Add white to your mana pool only if you control a plains
T:Add green to your mana pool only if you control a forest
significant draw back...and like reflecting pool can only produce what you control, but is restricted to 2 colors, and can't produce anything on turn one, can only produce one color on turn 2 and beyond until you get the second basic land type...makes a lot of sense to me.
Well, there's artifacts and activations of permanents, which you can't use without the tap for colorless clause (unless you have a blue or black card in your hand, of course).
If all you have is artifacts and land in your hand, my proposed land doesn't make mana.
Right, because this land is so overly powerful the way it is.
This land is not a chase rare, this is a very mediocre dual design.
People have suggested it, and it's a terrible idea. It doesn't produce both colors until turn 3. That is the opposite of "awesome".
Standard:
UBR Grixis Control
WUB Time Sieve
WUB Esper Artifacts
I'd rather see:
Dual land
T: Add white to your mana pool only if you don't control a plains
T: Add green to your mana pool only if you don't control a forest
T: Add 1 to your mana pool
This is really weak. Like you said, it's weaker than Reflecting Pool, but without the interaction with vivids the pool really isn't quite that strong, as evidenced by the time it was first printed.
This cycle should sell the set. Your suggestion would make this a crap-rare cycle.
T: add W to your mana pool if other land you control could produce W
the if you DON't control wouldn't really be plausible because once a plains and a forest are on the board it only makes colorless which is terrible on turn 3, 4, 5
There are plenty of existing dual designs already out there that have been printed and the only ones that have been strictly better than basics are the original Alpha duals. This is worse than almost all of them.
Land-Forest Mountain
Tap: Add 1 to your mana pool.
Tap: Add R or G to your mana pool. Play this ability only if you control less than 5 lands.
It smooths your mana until you have enough on the board that colors should no longer be a problem. At which point, it becomes simply another land.
I'm sorry, I really don't think the new duals WILL be chase rares. With the recent trend of very playable uncommon lands, I'm of the opinion that the M10 lands will be playable, but not chase.
The less than 5 land clause is actually a subtle way of discouraging more than 2 colors. As you increase the number of colors you play beyond 2 or 3, these lands get significantly worse and less functional. That is part of what makes them elegant. You are expecting some powerhouse awesome dual land...I think you expect too much.
So a land that could be useless eventually? You have to build around it as well.
Assuming the 'catering to new players' line wasn't a lie, and the fact that they might be pushing us back to using basics both discourage this card from seeing print in M10.
Those are both terrible.
The drawback is unplayable for control decks, and any deck that likes to play instants.
I think we need to focus more on a 'comes into play' drawback than a limitation/cost to tap it...
People glossed over my card ideas...
I could see this being with or without land types. I feel that most duals don't have land types because they tap for colorless or have some stipulation to tapping for mana. The tribal lands didn't have land types (bosk not withstanding) because it distracted from Tribal cards, and didn't help the cards in the block any.
Got another:
WoTC likes to give people a choice with their duals, while keeping them simple. (Shocklands, Painlands...)
Seriously guys, most of the ideas being posted today have been posted already.
They are replacing painlands.
They are replacing painlands.
I had to repeat it for effect.
These will also be reprinted in M11, assuming they go over as well as WoTC thinks they will.
WoTC has called them 'awesome' and opted out of reprinting Shocklands for these. Players will pitch a fit if they aren't good lands.
Making them chase rares gives players an incredible incentive to buy M10. WoTC is taking a chance with M10, and they need every ace in the hole they can get. Making unexciting, just barely playable duals is not going to sell the set.
Twitter
(Cheap) aggro goes: "Drawback? What drawback?"
Also seems to punish 3-color play a bit too harshly. 2-Color could work around the drawback in most cases.
Painlands have been losing popularity ever since Invasion. The fact they are being replaced is no big deal.
I'm sure I'll get a flame warning here, but that's kind of childish.
Wizards has thought lots of things were awesome that the community hasn't. The fact is, their playtesters aren't always as in tune with the playerbase as they'd like to be. Any dual land they put into these will unfortunately cause it to be sold...and do you know why? Because we will have no other option. The simple fact that all the painlands and shocklands we have now will not be legal in standard is what will make the set sell.
You guys who think that these new lands will be the best thing since real duals are deluding yourselves with false hope. They will likely be worse than shocklands and slightly better than painlands.
I don't think anyone is suggesting cards that are any different.
That is certainly what I expect.
If painlands can sell a core set, these would be able to.
And painlands are still used. They are the only option for turn one dual mana in standard, assuming you aren't playing a tribal deck.
How do you figure they are losing popularity when they are in every tier one deck that isn't 5cc? (In WR kithkin builds) And run in most tier 2 decks to boot. (Also, how have they been losing popularity before the enemy pains were even made?...people loved those)
And it isn't childish, because people don't seem to realize how often painlands are actually used until they lose them. Including you, apparently, as you seem to think they are not used.
Twitter
Building twords destruction:
T: Add X or Y to your mana pool add a counter to land
If there are three counters on the land target opponent may draw a card and all counters are removed.
Newer players don't see the signifagence of their opponent drawing cards frequently and it would make older players seriously consider wether the card they were going to throw down was worth adding the counter. It is however quite wordy for a core set and somewhat confusing and probably incorrectly templated. What's more it could be seen as a tempo loss if you have to wait an additional turn to play a spell to prevent your opponent from drawing though I think that is kind of what makes the card challenging.
Losing life is relatively equal across the colors, yes. Gaining life, discarding, and milling are all drawbacks that are disliked as much or more by new players as taking damage.
or, since they want these to be really strong:
T: Add 1 to your mana pool.
T: Add X or Y to your mana pool. Put a cipher counter on ~.
Whenever there are three or more cipher counters on ~, remove them and choose an opponent, that opponent may draw a card.
Gathering Magic
Goblin Artisans
Channel Fireball
Daily MTG Making Magic
Daily MTG Latest Developments
MTG Color Pie
Discard-Land
Land
When ~ comes into play discard a card from your hand or ~ goes to the graveyard.
Tap: add X or Y to your mana pool.
RFG-Land
Land
When ~ comes into play RFG a card from your hand or ~ goes to the graveyard.
Tap: Add X or Y to your mana pool
The primary issue I see with this type of card is the fact that it's a really bad disadvantage, except for a narrow suitation (discard land with madness) and they are dead draws off the top of your deck when you have no cards in hand.
I don't expect anyone to want either type of card... Hmm, this is tough.
Nonetheless, it's true. People looking at the matter through new eyes tend to see giving life to their opponents as equivalently bad to damaging themselves (putting themselves further from winning rather than closer to losing), and everyone hates discarding.
Well, that's part of why the really convincing entries in this thread take the form of "drawback or CIPT." CIPT seems like an incredibly painless drawback because it doesn't actually take away your resources or put you closer to losing -- it's only when you understand tempo really well that you see why it's not very strong. A land that has that CIPT option is always going to be more appealing to a newbie than one that always "enforces" its drawback like the painlands.
Not really. It's true that not every conceivable deck in any given color combination will have an exactly equal response to a give-opponent-life drawback, but the general effect would still be more than enough to make the value of the lands in such a cycle drastically uneven. Like -- someone might make a blue-black aggro deck that doesn't want to run "Pool of the Lifewaters" or whatever (and obviously that Kavu life-aggro deck did run Grove) but in general a ton of control decks will snap up UB and UW lifelands in a way that far outstrips the utility of the rest of the cycle.
Imprint - remove a basic land from the game, "awesome" land gains that land type.
Untap - land taps for one color, untaps for a different color. Some type of errata on it to ensure that it is not played more than once per turn without some type of drawback.
Phasing
Suspend
Echo (suggested by another poster, but it's never been done before.)
Token - when land comes into play a token that is a {swamp / mountain / etc} comes into play. Token may or may not need to be sac'd. Token may or may not be a basic land. Token may or may not produce colored mana. Lots of unexplored design space here, but I'm not sure any of it would qualify as "awesome".
Tap another permanent - when "awesome land" becomes tapped, tap another permanent you control. Not likely because it would be too easy to break.
When "awesome" comes into play, end your turn. Sort of halfway to CIPT, but you can play an instant on your opponent's turn. Again, not likely, just never been suggested.
When "awesome" comes into play, target opponent may untap one basic land.
When "awesome" comes into play, target oppenent may put a basic land into play tapped.
Quirion Elves effect - when "awesome" comes into play, choose a color. "Awesome" taps for either the chosen color or the color of whatever predetermined color is printed on the card. May or may not have a basic land type. May or may not gain a basic land type. Some type of drawback would need to be built into this card if basic land types were added, or possibly if an enemy color was chosen. Example:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Quirion Mountain: When Quirion Mountain comes into play, choose a color. If that color is blue or white, Quirion Mountain comes into play tapped.
t: add R to your mana pool
t: add one mana of the chosen color to your mana pool.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"Nothing is carved in stone. Even if it were, stone can be broken." -Melanie Rawn
I made this banner myself from copyrighted magic card graphics
That actually doesn't do what I intended for it, what I intended with the "You can not play that card this turn" was for it to require you to reveal a card other than the card you intend to play.
It doesn't cause card disadvantage, but it does give away extra information.
The best ideas I've seen are the category of "CIPT unless X", where X is probably revealing a card in hand. The best thing about a drawback of revealing a spell is that it's easiest to avoid when you need it: when you have cards in your hand you can't cast yet, either because the game just started or you're short on a color. For that reason, it might be a bit too powerful to require only a reveal of one of the two colors - and perhaps a bit too weak to require a land reveal. The latter might teach people that holding back a land you don't actually need to play is a good decision, but the revealing of a spell might be a big enough drawback due to the information it generates.
I was also leaning towards Nimbus Maze, but there's problems of being not able to cast spells with two of the same mana; the drawback seems ok when the environment has very few cards that have that sort of cost, but that's just what happens in multi-color blocks. It won't happen in normal blocks, and the core set in particular should be full of such cards.
Also, is there 100% confirmation that these lands will be able to produce either color of mana on a player's first turn?
No, but it is the main niche Painlands fill, and if they can't do this, people won't have much incentive to use these duals.
I agree on the reveal a card in your hand thing, I have posted my ideas twice and they have gone ignored...yet people repost the same ideas and get replies.
My suggested drawbacks were:
When X comes into play, you may reveal a card in your hand at random to target opponent. If you don't this comes into play tapped.
Or:
When X comes into play, you may put a card in your hand on the top of your library. If you don't this comes into play tapped.
The jury is out if they should or shouldn't have land types, but I feel that they should, as if they aren't tapping for colorless, we don't have much reason not to.
Twitter
Land
I thought about adding only one color but that has already been done.
Spam warning for a waste of a post.
When ~ comes into play, you may make target opponent draw a card. If you don't, X comes into play tapped.
T: Add A or B
Howling Mines
When ~ taps for mana, all players draw a card at end of turn.
T: Add A or B
Solitary Lands
When ~ comes into play, if you control another (non-basic?) land it comes into play tapped.
T: Add A or B
Hyper Lands
When ~ comes into play, your opponent may untap a permanent.
T: Add A or B