Lion's Eye Den

[Nefarias]

This idea's been in my head for a while now, but I've never submitted it because I think it's probably too good. It's really cool (at least IMO), so I'll throw it out there to see what everyone else thinks. Worst case scenario, it'll at least be out of my thoughts.

Lion's Eye Den
Land
Discard your hand, T: Add two mana of any color to your mana pool. Play this ability only any time you could play an instant.

So yeah, probably too good, but I'll leave that up to you all to decide. Would making this Legendary make it okay? What if it only produced one mana? Would that be playable?

///CURRENT WORDING///
Lion's Eye Den
Land
Discard your hand, T: Add two colorless mana to your mana pool. Play this ability only any time you could play an instant.

[MrZuccinniHead]

becasue this is a land and becasue it can't pay for it's own madness discard, I think this might be safe.

[ELD]

I'm confused, why can't it pay for cards that it madnessed-ed.

[Norm4eva]

Like its 'parent' card, this would be a huge boost to the Madness deck.  It would also probably find a home in Dragon and other various combo.  The strange thing about this kind of discard is that, it can totally become a boon instead of a hinderance.  Making this Legendary is not really a drawback anyway; you'll probably just discard the other copy while you play a big hasty Roar token.  I don't think this kind of card can be a land.

[Jacob Orlove]

This is way too good.

[Alfred]

I think that discarding your hand is a way bigger drawback than say, getting shocked (ancient den). This isn't THAT good, even when combined with madness, because, unlike LED, it doesn't produce the colored mana that a lot of the madness cards require. I don't even know if I would play this in an extended madness deck.

[Nefarias]

Well actually, the way it is now it does produce colored mana. Do you think making it colorless only would make this card not so broken? What if it only added one colored mana?

[Alfred]

Holy crap, I thought it made colorless mana! Well, then this IS too good. I would make it colorless mana, then this would be fine.

[MrZuccinniHead]

I'm confused, why can't it pay for cards that it madnessed-ed.

what i meant was that you must discard before you get the mana...so it can't pay for madness cards.

[Jacob Orlove]

This is a mana ability. You would get the mana without having to pass priority--so you could play madness cards off it.

[Nefarias]

EDIT: JOrlove beat me to this.

Actually, when you discard a card with madness, you have until the next time a player would receive priority to pay for its madness. This works the exact same way as LED. That's why, if you have two forests in play, you can discard Arrogant Wurm to Wild Mogrel, play a forest, and then madness him. You cannot, however, play a fetch, break it, and play him, because the fetch requires priority.

I may not have the exacts down perfectly, but the point is, in its current state, this can indeed pay for madness, as well as be used in the Long.dec sense of in response to a tutor/Draw 7.

Does colorless mana prevent this from being nutty, even though it can still pay for Arrogant Wurm and Roar of the Wurm?