I think counters and static X/X are both inelegant ways to do it. I work as a game developer too, and I've been studying Maro's articles for years- were I to be making this card, I'd do it in both the most elegant and grokkable way possible if I could. And I'm guessing that this means that for the player, were it a manland, it would be a continuous X/X instead of static- an ability like the "Land Creature" that has X/X where X = number of locus. Its complicated for the player to remember the power/toughness of static X/X creatures that are set each time they activate when things can change like killing another one, and can lead to headaches.
Personally I figure either the Land Creature or the 'Becomes an X/X until EOT", not the +1/+1 counters or 0/0. Anyway, theres an unaccounted for X/X left, isn't there?
I think counters and static X/X are both inelegant ways to do it. I work as a game developer too, and I've been studying Maro's articles for years- were I to be making this card, I'd do it in both the most elegant and grokkable way possible if I could. And I'm guessing that this means that for the player, were it a manland, it would be a continuous X/X instead of static- an ability like the "Land Creature" that has X/X where X = number of locus. Its complicated for the player to remember the power/toughness of static X/X creatures that are set each time they activate when things can change like killing another one, and can lead to headaches.
Personally I figure either the Land Creature or the 'Becomes an X/X until EOT", not the +1/+1 counters or 0/0. Anyway, theres an unaccounted for X/X left, isn't there?
A lone Land Creature would be out of place, even in the Land block. A twist/development as big as that would come in a large expansion, not the small Winter expansion. A Locus-influenced manland I could buy, but it would, at the same time, distract from the allied-dual-manland cycle. I think, in Speculation, sometimes we undervalue the ... I'll call it busyness of a set ... the amount going on at a time. While MaRo might prize innovation, there's also a limit on the amount of healthy innovation, that, should it be pushed too far, can be detrimental to a set's health. The set becomes too busy, and cards start to distract from one another. If there's a cycle of allied-color manlands, having other manlands makes that keystone cycle feel less special, so (admittedly being very very very verrrrrrry far from a professional game designer), even though the Locus you suggest sounds well designed, I'd want to keep either one of them from distracting from the other, lest the LocusManLand overshadow the AlliedManLand or vice-versa.
It all comes back to building an identity for the set. Either "The set with the AlliedManLands" or "The set with the LocusManLand" is a stronger brand than "The set with all those ManLands," and, experience (with Magic, as well as in retail) tells me that the Brand argument will win out. If not, I'll eat my ... something. Not a hat. I've made that mistake one time too many in the past.
"The set with the new Locus" sells itself quite nicely. Cloudpost is longtime favorite in casual and older formats. "Land Creature" is by itself a very rarely done mechanic. Putting it on the same card as a new Locus is overkill, in my opinion. A new Locus is exciting all by itself with being a Land Creature as well.
It would be different if Land Creatures were used more often, but it's only ever been done once. Doing it for the second time on the second Locus ever printed is too much.
We know there is a manland subtheme in the set; we know there is a cycle of dual-color manlands, plus the Zendikons, plus the Statuary. Two cycles and a one-off do not a subtheme make. There's plenty of room for a new Locus manland. Heck, it might not even be a manland! A new Locus is exciting enough that it doesn't even need to tie into the subtheme.
Also, we have to account for the fact that the word "Locus" shows up twice. Once on the typeline, and presumably one other time in the textbox. A variable power and toughness that are equal to the number of Loci you control can't possibly use the word "Locus" in its singular form. It would have to use the term "for each Locus".
I for one am glad they are utilizing semi-forgotten subtypes like Locus.
On the one hand, totally understandable why they wouldn't want to produce these very often, but to not utilize the subtype is criminal.
"The set with the new Locus" sells itself quite nicely. Cloudpost is longtime favorite in casual and older formats. "Land Creature" is by itself a very rarely done mechanic. Putting it on the same card as a new Locus is overkill, in my opinion. A new Locus is exciting all by itself with being a Land Creature as well.
It would be different if Land Creatures were used more often, but it's only ever been done once. Doing it for the second time on the second Locus ever printed is too much.
My point exactly. If "Locus" appears on a Land—Locus, it won't be a Land Creature. When we see a Land Creature, we'll see them in droves. Or maybe groves, if they're heavy in green.
Oh well, it was worth hoping for. This guy is fun too, so I'll probably try it out. In a Locus deck that a friend has, this thing could be a bit of fun, albeit the colorless mana doesn't carry over. I'm sure there's a way to easily convert colorless into green, if I bothered to look hard enough.
Personally I figure either the Land Creature or the 'Becomes an X/X until EOT", not the +1/+1 counters or 0/0. Anyway, theres an unaccounted for X/X left, isn't there?
A lone Land Creature would be out of place, even in the Land block. A twist/development as big as that would come in a large expansion, not the small Winter expansion. A Locus-influenced manland I could buy, but it would, at the same time, distract from the allied-dual-manland cycle. I think, in Speculation, sometimes we undervalue the ... I'll call it busyness of a set ... the amount going on at a time. While MaRo might prize innovation, there's also a limit on the amount of healthy innovation, that, should it be pushed too far, can be detrimental to a set's health. The set becomes too busy, and cards start to distract from one another. If there's a cycle of allied-color manlands, having other manlands makes that keystone cycle feel less special, so (admittedly being very very very verrrrrrry far from a professional game designer), even though the Locus you suggest sounds well designed, I'd want to keep either one of them from distracting from the other, lest the LocusManLand overshadow the AlliedManLand or vice-versa.
It all comes back to building an identity for the set. Either "The set with the AlliedManLands" or "The set with the LocusManLand" is a stronger brand than "The set with all those ManLands," and, experience (with Magic, as well as in retail) tells me that the Brand argument will win out. If not, I'll eat my ... something. Not a hat. I've made that mistake one time too many in the past.
It would be different if Land Creatures were used more often, but it's only ever been done once. Doing it for the second time on the second Locus ever printed is too much.
We know there is a manland subtheme in the set; we know there is a cycle of dual-color manlands, plus the Zendikons, plus the Statuary. Two cycles and a one-off do not a subtheme make. There's plenty of room for a new Locus manland. Heck, it might not even be a manland! A new Locus is exciting enough that it doesn't even need to tie into the subtheme.
Also, we have to account for the fact that the word "Locus" shows up twice. Once on the typeline, and presumably one other time in the textbox. A variable power and toughness that are equal to the number of Loci you control can't possibly use the word "Locus" in its singular form. It would have to use the term "for each Locus".
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
On the one hand, totally understandable why they wouldn't want to produce these very often, but to not utilize the subtype is criminal.
So I welcome our new land-y overlord.
My point exactly. If "Locus" appears on a Land—Locus, it won't be a Land Creature. When we see a Land Creature, we'll see them in droves. Or maybe groves, if they're heavy in green.
I vote for:
Big Locus
Legendary land - Locus
T: Add 1 colorless
X: Becomes a X/X creature. It's still a land.
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
My Altered Art Gallery
WRBoros
RKuldotha Red
R Citizen Cane (Feldon of the Third Path)
This guy isn't bad at all. In mono green, he can get really really beasty. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see him played rather heavily.
My art blog
Claims:
The kicker variant in WWK will be "Kicker without a kicked effect." - proven wrong Jan 2010 : 2 wrongs
Decks:
:symu::symb: Bloodchief Ascension - Modern
:symb::symr: Rakdos, the Defiler - EDH
:symu::symb::symw: Sharuum the Hegemon - EDH
:symw::symu::symb: Zur the Enchanter - EDH