MTG Salvation

I just gave you a direct quote. Every deck that wants shock would want lightning bolt instead. Every deck that wants a basic swamp would need to want my black land instead for it to be considered "better than a basic". If you don't believe the definition of "card" applies to land then that's on you.

You can be a child or you can answer the question. You jumped in here being antagonistic for no real reason and now you're trying to worm your way out of a corner. I have answered your question multiple times but I'll spell it out real slow and I'll even throw in a quote from that same article!

I guess I should start by explaining what I mean by “strictly better.” This is a phrase R&D tosses around a lot. “Strictly better” means that one card is in all occurrences (within reason) better than another. An example of a “strictly better” would be Lightning Bolt versus Shock. Barring a really convoluted set-up (you know your opponent has Eye for an Eye and you're at 3 life while he's at 2), you would always want Lightning Bolt over Shock. For an identical cost, it just does exactly the same thing, but better.

That bolded part there means that every deck that uses a basic Swamp would want to use my black land instead for it to be considered strictly better. Not a couple decks. Not even just one deck. Every single deck. That would also be the part of the same article I alluded to from 2003 as agreeing with me after you first chimed in.

"Show me where "legendary" is an acceptable drawback."

You've already admitted that Legendary is a drawback. I've showed you that in Kamigawa they accepted it and then again in Time Spiral. I'm going to assume you haven't read the rest of the thread because the contention was that RnD no longer considers Legendary a drawback, which I said there was no proof of. You don't want to consider it a drawback on land? Check out the Lantern control forums and see all of the discussions on whether or not to run two Inventors Fair or three.

@Mondu: That would be the exact article I mentioned in my post, which came out a year before they printed a ton of cards where Legendary was the drawback, and then they did exactly the same thing a few years later in Time Spiral. I'm still waiting...

First, a fixed Bloodmoon?

Terramorph 2U
Enchantment
When Terramorph enters the battlefield, starting with you, each player chooses a basic land type.
Nonbasic lands are the chosen types.

Wasted Space 3
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant land
Enchanted land is a Wastes.

I had one of these cards in another thread but the discussion took direction towards a different set of cards. This effect has been tertiary in Green throughout Magic's history with cards like Lush Growth, Gaea's Liege and as recently as Song of the Dryads. Do people think this is something green could do more often?

Overgrow 1G
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant land
When Overgrow enters the battlefield, draw a card.
Enchanted land is a Forest.

Spreading Vines 1GG
Creature - Plant
When Spreading Vines enters the battlefield, target land becomes a Forest until Spreading Vines leaves the battlefield.
2/2

Seed Sower G
Creature - Elf Druid
T: Target land becomes a Forest until end of turn.

Wild Reclamation G
Enchantment
When Wild Reclamation enters the battlefield, draw a card.
Lands you control are Forests in addition to their other land types.

Here's the thing: There are no direct quotes to support any of what you are all saying. In fact, the only things I can find are from 2014 and earlier and they all support my stance. Heck, even the MTGSalvation Wiki calls out this exact situation by saying that Legendary on Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth is exactly why it isn't better than a Swamp. Even more, there is no "better than basic" meaning, Mondu. If you'd like to show me the lexicon where you're spewing baseless rhetoric from, I'd like to read it. Lastly, the only article I can find specifically calling out being better than a basic is from 2003, a year before Kamigawa mass-produces Lands with the drawback of being Legendary and way before Time Spiral where they did it again. People keep talking about how currently Legendary lands are a big no-no and that some time between an ancient article and now that has changed but there's no proof I can find of that.

http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Drawback

@willows: The black land does nothing for Legacy Storm and a basic land is better for fetching. The white land does nothing for Modern Restore Balance and a basic is better for borderposts. I can very easily give examples for days for how, by your own definition, these are not better than basics.

I don't have a problem making these ETBT and non-legendary but "better than a basic" is not present here. I'm most likely not going to reply to this thread anymore because it's to the point where I can't answer everyone and you're even contradicting each other. I appreciate the input you've given me and I think it's time we moved on.

My very first response was saying they weren't about power. I don't see why you would be telling me that. Oboro, Palace in the Sky is not better than a basic because not every deck wants that effect. Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth is not better than a basic because not every deck wants that effect. I can go on with literally any Legendary land that produces colored mana. Not every deck wants what these lands have to offer. They are not better than a basic.

The Valakut link was to the poster before you asking which lands WotC said they wished were reworked as Legendary.

Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle and friends.

Fetch-Dual Land mana bases are the mana bases of Magic. So you're talking about just Standard, then? So out of the 5 or 6 Standard decks that are good at any given time, each of them replaces a basic with a Legendary land IF they can use that land? I don't see how that's a problem. Not every deck can use these. We're both in agreement that you wouldn't run more than one in a given deck. That IS a significant drawback.

If you replace Legendary with ETBT, more decks run these and with more copies. That alone should say there is a drawback present.

I believe Legendary on a land is a significant drawback when the goal of the land is to have 8 lands in play. WotC has admitted that they would have reworked the original Zendikar lands to be Legendary if they could, so it's not a question of power. What matters is when the land becomes strictly better than a basic, which I don't believe any of these are. Oboro, Palace in the Sky, Pendlehaven and Flagstones of Trokair are perfect examples of this. These are effects that some decks want but they wont replace a land in every deck running that color. The combination of being nonbasic, Legendary and not having a basic land type creates a very relevant set of downsides. A Legendary land is also a very different beast than a Planeswalker or a creature. Most of the time those things get destroyed and another copy is important. Drawing a second copy of a Legendary land is almost always a dead draw.

Trust me when I say I understand that there is a line where Legendary is no longer a downside.

1
Legendary Land - Swamp
1B, T: Target player loses 1 life.

That card is too good. Being nonbasic and Legendary is not enough of a drawback. This card would replace a basic swamp in most decks that run them.

Anyways, rant over. I would like to change the red land but damage is so boring. Any ideas?

Overgrow was based on Song of the Dryads, which was printed just last year. I don't know how taboo a scaled down version of that effect is, honestly.

1
Legendary Land
T: Add W to your mana pool.
3W, T: Put a 1/1 white Human Ally creature token onto the battlefield.
5WW, T: Put three 1/1 white Human Ally creature tokens onto the battlefield.

2
Legendary Land
T: Add U to your mana pool
2U, T: Return target creature you control to its owner’s hand.
5UU, T: Return target creature to its owner’s hand.

3
Legendary Land
T: Add B to your mana pool.
3B, T: Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand.
5BB, T: Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield.

4
Legendary Land
T: Add R to your mana pool.
2R, T: Each player sacrifices a land.
5RR, T: Target player sacrifices a land.

5
Legendary Land
T: Add G to your mana pool.
2G, T: Search your library for a land card, reveal it and put it into your hand. Then shuffle your library.
5GG, T: Search your library for a creature card, reveal it and put it into your hand. Then shuffle your library.

Is a green Spreading Seas doable?

Overgrow 1G
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant land
When Overgrow enters the battlefield, draw a card.
Enchanted land is a Forest.

1
WW
Creature - Human Knight (R)
Vigilance
Landfall — Whenever a land enters the battlefield under your control, ~ gains indestructible until end of turn.
2/2

2
1U
Creature - Merfolk Wizard (U)
Landfall — Whenever a land enters the battlefield under your control, Scry 1.
1/3

3
B
Creature - Vampire Shaman (U)
Landfall — Whenever a land enters the battlefield under your control, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain 1 life.
1/1

4
1BB
Enchantment (R)
Landfall — Whenever a land enters the battlefield under your control, you draw a card and you lose 1 life.

5
2RRR
Sorcery (R)
~ deals 5 damage to target creature or player.
Landfall — If a land entered the battlefield under your control this turn, you may have ~ deal 5 damage to each creature and each player instead.

6
1R
Instant (U)
~ deals 2 damage to target creature or player.
Landfall — If you had a land enter the battlefield under your control this turn, ~ deals 4 damage to that creature or player instead.

7
2GGG
Creature - Insect (M)
Landfall — Whenever a land enters the battlefield under your control, put a token onto the battlefield that’s a copy of ~.
1/1

At that point it would just be:

"Counter target spell. You lose life equal to it's converted mana cost."

The mana leak wording could be more or less life, depending on how much open mana they have.

Both versions definitely have merit.

It's in a very strange spot. It's worse than counterspell and usually worse than mana leak. It's better than mana leak when you're paying 4 or more life, which is hefty. It's weak to aggressive decks and has a restrictive cost. On the other hand, countering anything on-curve only costs you 1 life. I think in a Standard where red is pushed it's printable. Perhaps some sort of Modern-legal special product.

Spell Curse UB
Instant
As an additional cost to cast Spell Curse, pay X life.
Counter target spell unless it's controller pays X.

What was that argument made about Wizards of the Coast having credibility? Something about not being able to go back on the Reserved List because of something they said way back when? This company is the best Soap Opera on television.