Enlightened City - Land With No Mana Ability!

[netherspirit]

First of all let me begin by telling you that I know lands nowadays always have mana abilities, however, this one doesn't so as to make it more fair.

Here's the card:

Enlightened City
Land
At the beginning of each player's draw step, that player draws a card.

It's basically a 0 cost Howling Mine, however, it takes up a land drop; so essentially you give your opponent a very big tempo boost in return for the additional card. I decided on making it a land because of the art (which I can't show you because I don't know how) and my obssession with nonmana lands, plus I felt this was the easiest and cleanest way to go about the card. Well there it is, thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?

Current Wording:

Enlightened City
Land
At the beginning of each player's draw step, that player draws a card.

[Shock Wave]

I like the idea of lands that do cool things and don't produce mana (Tabernacle, Maze, etc) but isn't this .... really bad?

[parallax]

I like the idea of lands that do cool things and don't produce mana (Tabernacle, Maze, etc) but isn't this .... really bad?

I hate the idea of lands that do cool things and don't produce mana -- it defeats the entire purpose of being a land. I don't think "It costs a land drop instead of mana." is interesting enough to justify breaking the "Lands produce mana." rule.

[Shock Wave]

I like the idea of lands that do cool things and don't produce mana (Tabernacle, Maze, etc) but isn't this .... really bad?

I hate the idea of lands that do cool things and don't produce mana -- it defeats the entire purpose of being a land. I don't think "It costs a land drop instead of mana." is interesting enough to justify breaking the "Lands produce mana." rule.

This is just a matter of opinion though. Is there actually some new card development rule that states that lands must now produce mana?

[Norm4eva]

Pretty much.  There's been several statements @ mtg.com about how they really, really want to stay away from lands that don't actually produce mana of some sort.  The most recent example I can think of that betrays this notion is fetchlands, but they don't exactly count because their sole function is to seek out land that taps for manas.
I guess what it comes down to is, land is to mana what power/toughness is to creatures.

[Matt]

You could make it:

: Add to your mana pool. Play this ability only when you could play a sorcery.
At the beginning of each player's draw step, if CARDNAME is untapped, that player draws a card.

If you want the mana, you still have to forego the card. But you need a funky mana ability so there's no "I'll tap it in your upkeep" nonsense.

[andrewpate]

Good idea, Matt, but this wording means that you always draw the card, because it untaps before your own draw step.  This wording is basically a Howling Mine that Icy-Manipulates itself automatically every turn, and for a free mana instead of costing one.  It needs to have the depletion land clause, or possibly ":  Add to your mana pool.  CARDNAME loses all abilities until the end of your next draw step."

[Anusien]

Why not
If this would come into play, you may sacrifice an untapped land.  If you do, put this into play, otherwise put it into its owner's graveyard.
At the beginning of each player's draw step, that player draws a card.
: Add to your mana pool.

That way it actually eats up a land drop (would this be a fair multicolored land?) and still gets to be a land.

[parallax]

Actually, there is a design rule that says lands must produce mana. Read the Dark Depths preview where they explain how Dark Depths lost its mana ability because of space, but they justified it becuase it's "Ice Age era".

You could also give this a really bad mana ability like ", : Add to your mana pool." Why even make this land, though, when it doesn't really differ much from Mikokoro, Center of the Sea?