|
fsecco
|
 |
« Reply #180 on: December 11, 2015, 10:04:42 pm » |
|
Let's see if they are bold enough to make a <> costing artifact.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Protoaddict
|
|
« Reply #181 on: December 11, 2015, 11:36:18 pm » |
|
It does not functionally change anything about those cards. It is just new templating. I wish they didn't decide to "wow" us with this announcement though and just added that symbol to cards in the last set. It is strange to have cards in the same block have different templating.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TheWhiteDragon
|
|
« Reply #182 on: December 12, 2015, 03:10:12 am » |
|
It may get a bit hairy when they try to print things with a large colorless cost. For example, Emrakul is easily costed as (15). I'm not sure how it would look to say it costs <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>. Maybe they'll add the number inside? <15>? I get that colored mana can be used to cast Emrakul and <> is colorless only, but I'm thinking that they limit themselves creating high cost spells that require all colorless unless you put the number inside the brackets, <X>, which they probably wont since they already printed a card that is 8<><>. Otherwise you end up with a stream of <>s across the top.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I know to whom I owe the most loyalty, and I see him in the mirror every day." - Starke of Rath |
|
|
|
ajfirecracker
|
|
« Reply #183 on: December 12, 2015, 03:30:49 am » |
|
It may get a bit hairy when they try to print things with a large colorless cost. For example, Emrakul is easily costed as (15). I'm not sure how it would look to say it costs <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>. Maybe they'll add the number inside? <15>? I get that colored mana can be used to cast Emrakul and <> is colorless only, but I'm thinking that they limit themselves creating high cost spells that require all colorless unless you put the number inside the brackets, <X>, which they probably wont since they already printed a card that is 8<><>. Otherwise you end up with a stream of <>s across the top.
Isn't this already a problem with the regular mana symbols? For example Khalni Hydra |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
kingneckbeard on MTGO
"I fully believe that if Dredge could play a transformational sideboard it would just win all the tournaments yet it just doesn’t have one because there is just nothing that it can play. It’d be awesome to completely ignore all those very specific hate cards people bring against you but how are you going to do that?" - Paulo Vitor Damo da Rosa
|
|
|
|
fendog
|
|
« Reply #184 on: December 12, 2015, 05:43:41 am » |
|
Perhaps they could put an extra space between each set of 5 <><><><><> <><><><><> <><><><><>
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vartemis
|
|
« Reply #185 on: December 12, 2015, 10:54:24 am » |
|
It may get a bit hairy when they try to print things with a large colorless cost. For example, Emrakul is easily costed as (15). I'm not sure how it would look to say it costs <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>. Maybe they'll add the number inside? <15>? I get that colored mana can be used to cast Emrakul and <> is colorless only, but I'm thinking that they limit themselves creating high cost spells that require all colorless unless you put the number inside the brackets, <X>, which they probably wont since they already printed a card that is 8<><>. Otherwise you end up with a stream of <>s across the top.
AFAIK, thats not how <> works. It is specifically colorless mana. <>!=  , but it can count as . A forest can produce  and , but not <>. Therefore Emrakul would still cost {15}, which can be paid for with colored mana. Mana costs from the past will not change; only mana production will. Sol ring will produce <><> and Mishra's Workshop will produce <><><> that can only be spent on casting artifacts. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dice_Box
|
|
« Reply #186 on: December 12, 2015, 11:20:48 am » |
|
Alt+4=♦
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
serracollector
|
 |
« Reply #187 on: December 12, 2015, 01:15:17 pm » |
|
So can lands like City of Brass or Mana Confluence tap for this? What if I name Eldrazi on Cavern of Souls and its cost is <> can I use the uncounterable mana to cast it or can I only use the colorless part?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
B/R discussions are not allowed outside of Vintage Issues, and that includes signatures.
|
|
|
|
ajfirecracker
|
|
« Reply #188 on: December 12, 2015, 02:04:22 pm » |
|
Colorless is not a color, so 5-color lands should not be able to tap for ♦ outside of Commander (where you can pick an off-color and the special Commander rules make it colorless for you)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
kingneckbeard on MTGO
"I fully believe that if Dredge could play a transformational sideboard it would just win all the tournaments yet it just doesn’t have one because there is just nothing that it can play. It’d be awesome to completely ignore all those very specific hate cards people bring against you but how are you going to do that?" - Paulo Vitor Damo da Rosa
|
|
|
gkraigher
Full Members
Basic User
Posts: 705
|
|
« Reply #189 on: December 12, 2015, 05:22:26 pm » |
|
So can lands like City of Brass or Mana Confluence tap for this? What if I name Eldrazi on Cavern of Souls and its cost is <> can I use the uncounterable mana to cast it or can I only use the colorless part?
1) No, city of brass and mana confluence have to tap for a color of mana. 2) Cavern of Souls on Eldrazi. You could tap it for a colorless mana and pay for a <>, or you could tap it for a mana of any color to use in a generic mana cost and then it would be uncounterable. If you tap Cavern for <>, it will not make the spell uncountereable. The card has two seperate and unique abilities. Colorless is not a color, so 5-color lands should not be able to tap for ♦ outside of Commander (where you can pick an off-color and the special Commander rules make it colorless for you) This is pretty cool. I have a Vaevictis Asmadi multiple player EDH deck that has all the good ramp spells and all the good mana flare effects and it plays all the Eldrazi. I am going to fit the new Kozilek in there, and this angle makes it even easier to do so without needing wastes. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 12, 2015, 05:24:57 pm by gkraigher »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fsecco
|
|
« Reply #190 on: December 12, 2015, 08:21:34 pm » |
|
Actually no, you can't use Cavern that way since if you add C to your pool with it, you're doing that with Cavern first ability. You can't add C with the second ability since it's not a color.
Oh and, officially, C is the right short for <>. It's a shame since now it will be confusing to distinguish actual C mana from CC (abv for casting cost) in forum discussions...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TheWhiteDragon
|
|
« Reply #191 on: December 12, 2015, 09:42:37 pm » |
|
Actually no, you can't use Cavern that way since if you add C to your pool with it, you're doing that with Cavern first ability. You can't add C with the second ability since it's not a color.
Oh and, officially, C is the right short for <>. It's a shame since now it will be confusing to distinguish actual C mana from CC (abv for casting cost) in forum discussions...
You can use Cavern to make Eldrazi or whatever uncounterable. Example Kozilek...8<><>. You just pay the part 8 with the mana made by cavern. If you couldn't, then you also couldn't use cavern to cast uncounterable golem (LSG), which people do all the time. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 13, 2015, 12:43:47 am by TheWhiteDragon »
|
Logged
|
"I know to whom I owe the most loyalty, and I see him in the mirror every day." - Starke of Rath |
|
|
|
serracollector
|
|
« Reply #192 on: December 13, 2015, 05:03:09 am » |
|
The way I meant it he was correct you could not use it. I was saying if there was a creature with ONLY <> symbols in its casting cost like CCC for example. You could not use the second mana ability to cast it and make it uncounterable due to that mana having to be of a specific color of your choice. Looks like I might get to play more with my Urzatron set tho  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
B/R discussions are not allowed outside of Vintage Issues, and that includes signatures.
|
|
|
gkraigher
Full Members
Basic User
Posts: 705
|
|
« Reply #193 on: December 13, 2015, 01:47:14 pm » |
|
BOOM!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dice_Box
|
|
« Reply #194 on: December 13, 2015, 06:24:34 pm » |
|
It's a limited reprint, I doubt they are going to make it Standard legal.
Wasteland, Stripmine, Dust Bowl, Canopy... Fuck.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 13, 2015, 09:43:53 pm by Dice_Box »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ajfirecracker
|
|
« Reply #195 on: December 14, 2015, 04:05:16 am » |
|
It's a limited reprint, I doubt they are going to make it Standard legal.
Wasteland, Stripmine, Dust Bowl, Canopy... Fuck.
The set is EXP rather than OGW so definitely not Standard legal They've revealed a new Forbidden Orchard as well |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
kingneckbeard on MTGO
"I fully believe that if Dredge could play a transformational sideboard it would just win all the tournaments yet it just doesn’t have one because there is just nothing that it can play. It’d be awesome to completely ignore all those very specific hate cards people bring against you but how are you going to do that?" - Paulo Vitor Damo da Rosa
|
|
|
|
jcb193
|
|
« Reply #196 on: December 14, 2015, 04:36:35 pm » |
|
Any chance of seeing this someday? Does it get around reprint policy?  T: Add <> to your mana pool. T: Search your library for a forest or mountain |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
vaughnbros
|
|
« Reply #197 on: December 14, 2015, 05:30:37 pm » |
|
Any chance of seeing this someday? Does it get around reprint policy? T: Add <> to your mana pool. T: Sac, Search your library for a forest or mountain and put it into play tapped.This seems possible, yeah. Its a slight improvement from Panoramas. They certainly are not going to print a fetch that is strictly better than current fetches that would completely defeat the purpose. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MaximumCDawg
Full Members
Basic User
Posts: 2172
|
|
« Reply #198 on: December 14, 2015, 05:44:28 pm » |
|
Well, they ain't doin' neither in Oath of the Gatewatch. Instead, we get reprints with new names of such all-stars as COSTAL TOWER! And SALT MARSH! And SHIMMERING GROTTO!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jcb193
|
|
« Reply #199 on: December 14, 2015, 10:16:11 pm » |
|
Any chance of seeing this someday? Does it get around reprint policy? T: Add <> to your mana pool. T: Sac, Search your library for a forest or mountain and put it into play tapped.This seems possible, yeah. Its a slight improvement from Panoramas. They certainly are not going to print a fetch that is strictly better than current fetches that would completely defeat the purpose. I was thinking more along the lines of reprinting dual lands, but using <> mana as a differentiator. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Protoaddict
|
|
« Reply #200 on: December 14, 2015, 10:30:55 pm » |
|
They will never print something on par with the duals, I think best we can hope for is something parallel that fits niche strategies, much how Orchard is crap in most decks and required in Oath. That being said I don't think slapping <> on a card is going to be enough, there are already plenty of lands that make colorless that don't hold up.
That being said this set does have some good potential non reprint lands so far, at least for other formats. Holding out hope we see some more.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
