What do people think of hypothetical new types of fetchlands (not reprints)?
Modern forum
Posted on July 6, 2015, 5:31 p.m. by Wizard_of_the_Broke
I would love to see sets of land like this:
and/or this:
Reason being, I see a big gap between the power (and price) of fetchlands and all other land-based mana-fixing options in Modern, and I think these would fill it. As added benefits, I think they would help stabilize original dual fetchland prices long-term, provide slightly less powerful, but cheaper options for new/budget players, and not be overpowered in Standard or create a new series of price issues. I think WotC has done an okay job of mitigating major price hurdles for players, and that this is a good way to continue that project. Thoughts?
GlistenerAgent says... #3
You have fastlands (a la Copperline Gorge), filter lands (a la Flooded Grove), checklands (a la Hinterland Harbor), painlands (a la Yavimaya Coast), storage lands (a la Calciform Pools), etc.
By the way, whatever's best will probably be the most expensive. If something comes out that's better than fetch-shock, then that will shoot up in price and the fetch-shock manabase won't be playable anymore.
July 6, 2015 5:42 p.m.
Well they just printed shocks and fetches so they will never be cheaper. Battle for zendikar or after will have the other fetches no doubt too. The other modern lands i think are awesome are the shadowmoor block filter lands. But they are expensive right now and unlikely to see a reprint anytime soon :-(
July 6, 2015 5:44 p.m.
Honestly, complaining about the cost of landbases won't get you a ton of sympathy. Many longer term Modern players remember the days of $30 shock lands and $60 fetches. Comparatively, you're getting into Modern extremely cheap. It's been a well-established fact of Magic for at least the dozen or so years that I've been playing that if you really want to increase your competitiveness, you have to invest in lands. That's just the way it is.
July 6, 2015 5:47 p.m.
a playset of any of the khan's fetches runs between $40-$50. That is fairly cheap, considering they used to be 4x that price. Modern is a turn 4 format, and it will likely stay. WOTC has never stated that it wanted to slow down any format except for standard, which it has done a great job of doing.
if anything, I think they need to introduce bolt lands. example:
July 6, 2015 5:55 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #7
There are plenty of options for fixing your mana base in Modern. It just so happens that Fetches and Shocks are the best and any attempt to make a better card would likely just be too good.
July 6, 2015 6:12 p.m.
I really want them to print mono colored fetches at uncommon. That would be amazing.
July 6, 2015 6:23 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #9
Thanks for the responses, but: I know there are other dual lands, and that fetchlands are unlikely to become any cheaper than they are in the near term. I am not simply complaining or seeking sympathy, nor am I looking for an explanation of WotC's choices. And I know there are plenty of options, I would just like to see some options that are much closer in power and versatility to fetchlands, perhaps without surpassing them.
I'm also saying that I think the format could be better, and that printing new lands that would be nearly equal in power to fetchlands might be the answer (i think the land I proposed might be better in some decks, but clearly worse in many others - so they would perhaps drop fetch prices but hopefully stabilize themselves, or at least offer a reasonably priced, competitive, alternative land base, like Tron).
I'd like to hear what people think about what such a set of new lands might look like aside from my idea (thanks, Khanye and Chubbub). I also imagine that while the comments so far seem to think there isn't an issue with lands, the commenters might agree that the format could be cheaper and more interactive, and may have other ideas about that. Maybe I'm an idiot and everyone thinks the format is perfect as is, but I doubt that is the case, and "everything should be exactly as it is" doesn't make for very interesting discussion. I don't mean to be disrespectful toward previous commenters, I'd just like to urge some more creativity in the discussion.
July 6, 2015 6:25 p.m.
I definitely can see your points and respect your opinion but I personally think the land base in modern is great! First off the cooling lava card you made is pretty much a worse checkland. Also, if you are wanting to play at a competitive level you can't expect to do well with a budget deck. Now if you're just taking about FNM level competitiveness then budget decks should be fine but to be honest none of the khans fetchlands or the shocklands costs very much and the fetches are fairly easily to come by as of right now. I see no reason at all to be upset by the modern land base as It has a wide variety and the prices are nowhere near as high as they used to be.
July 6, 2015 6:49 p.m.
fluffybunnypants says... #11
I honestly don't even know how to respond to this.
July 6, 2015 7:20 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #12
Yeah, I hear you guys. I've been playing on and off since Unlimited, so I know prices fluctuate, and could be a lot worse. And part of the reason I wanted to get into Modern now is that it wasn't absolutely prohibitively expensive to the degree it was at other points. But I'm still ultimately disappointed in WotC. Lowering the barrier for newer players means more people to sell packs to, more people in tournaments and on MTGO, etc.. I just think that's a better business model than letting the card market inflate and then bilking people with hopes of pulling a Tarmogoyf reprint, which is basically just like holding a lottery. I like the game. I just think a card game where decks are worth about as much as a used car, and the barrier to entry is about the price of a major household appliance is a bit insane. Hence I see room for improvement, and don't think it would be that hard to implement (even if my particular idea about how to do it doesn't work). I also get that people that have been involved in a format for a long time don't want their card prices to drop, and don't want the format they've invested in to change that much, but I'm really now seeing it from a noob-ish view presently, and I'm really not terribly impressed with the difference between WotC's rhetoric about affordability, approachability, and interactivity, and what the game actually looks like on the ground. And rather than just complain, I proposed some thoughts on how things might be improved, and would like to hear likewise from others.
July 6, 2015 7:40 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #13
To clarify (again for the TL:DR types), I respect the opinion that the format is just swell as-is, and don't discourage anyone from voicing that opinion. But I'm sure everyone has some ideas about how they might do things differently, and I'm far more interested in that, especially with respect to new land ideas.
July 6, 2015 7:53 p.m.
What the hell lmao Frustrated? Modern has nearly PERFECT land bases, which is why you see so many 3 color and sometimes, 4 color decks. What else do you want? Original Dual reprints? Modern land bases have NEVER been cheaper. Just, wow.
July 6, 2015 8:01 p.m.
fluffybunnypants says... #15
Here are two of the issue with what you're presenting.
First: Cost isn't driven by WotC, cost is driven by consumers. If new lands get printed that are really good, they'll eventually become as expensive if not more expensive that the landbase currently is because the demand for them will be high.
Second: WotC wants Modern to be what they consider playable while keeping its potential power in check. Want to have a stable landbase that can support a three color deck? Okay, in order to allow room for mono and dual colored decks in the format, your land base is going to have to punish you somehow to balance out the power level disparity. If you want to play a three color plus deck while only being mildly punished for it, that format exists, it's called Legacy.
While trying to remain respectful, I must say this reads exactly like you say it's not supposed to. You don't like the price of fetches and you don't like the price of shocks or taking damage from either of them for that matter.
July 6, 2015 8:11 p.m.
Why are you mad at wotc? They JUST reprinted shocks and fetches lowering their prices drastically!!! In a competitive game there needs to be a price for decks,if you just want to play casually you can do that for very very cheap. Also,you have to realize that the economy in magic is there for a reason,it is the big reasons LGS's can even stay open.
July 6, 2015 8:11 p.m.
CanadianShinobi says... #17
formayor I'm going to address the following:
"I like the game. I just think a card game where decks are worth about as much as a used car, and the barrier to entry is about the price of a major household appliance is a bit insane. Hence I see room for improvement, and don't think it would be that hard to implement (even if my particular idea about how to do it doesn't work). I also get that people that have been involved in a format for a long time don't want their card prices to drop, and don't want the format they've invested in to change that much, but I'm really now seeing it from a noob-ish view presently, and I'm really not terribly impressed with the difference between WotC's rhetoric about affordability, approachability, and interactivity, and what the game actually looks like on the ground. And rather than just complain, I proposed some thoughts on how things might be improved, and would like to hear likewise from others. "
The first point that I wish to address is your notion of "Barrier to Entry" You seem to have completely disregarded the typical FNM player here, where most decks are brews that can range drastically in price. If I wanted t I could go make a Merfolk deck for roughly $100. Or a mono red Burn deck for less if I wanted to. Of course to do so I would be ignoring the most expensive and best cards, but sitting down at FNM or with a group of friends, well it would do just nicely. However, you have taken "barrier to entry" to mean the barrier to enter competitive play where the average deck costs six to seven hundred dollars. As such, you have completely misrepresented the format as a whole, because Modern, as a format, does not simply revolve around competitive play. I would argue that it has far greater reach as a social format, much like Commander, because most players like playing with non-Standard legal cards.
Now, I will agree that Wizards is rather detached from Modern. They actively promote it, but aside from that they give it little consideration. That being said, credit where credit is due. Modern has lately become much more accessible than it has been in the past. There is, of course, room for improvement (Exhibit A: Serum Visions), but to simply say that players don't want change because they want their cards to stay expensive is incredibly disingenuous.
You stated that you offered ideas, but you offered your ideas largely from a place of ignorance about the format. Now, don't mistake me, I am not accusing you of being stupid, I am simply stating that you lacked certain insight that comes from having a knowledgeable understanding of the format. And unfortunately I do have to respectfully agree with fluffybunnypants on this. Despite not wanting to sound a certain way, you sound precisely the way to do not want to sound.
July 6, 2015 9:58 p.m.
FAMOUSWATERMELON says... #18
(Just a little parentheses here for the fact that Visions is nearing 15 bucks and that it's a bloody common. Damn son. Carry on.)
July 6, 2015 10:02 p.m.
I agree with Fluffy as well. It sucks man, and I was in the same boat. But depending on how competitive you want to be, you have to buy in a bit. I still try my best to keep a deck as cheap as suitable, but I still play Liliana of the Veil, so it sucks a lot. Lol. New lands would also be awesome, I had also liked the three color land in Esper. That seems the most stable for what it does because in modern you go Fetch and Shock, thus Bolting yourself. So why not! Someone should send that in to them. :)
July 7, 2015 1:45 a.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #20
Fair enough points about competitive magic vs FNM, etc., CanadianShinobi. My fault for lack of clarity there, as I do realize there are decks that be built for $100 that are perfectly good for casual play. I'll also add that I live in NYC and FNM is perhaps a good deal more competitive than other places, but I really don't know. I also thought the point by seuvius about LGS's is fair, but there I also still think more players is better than high card prices for all involved. And while I realize WotC doesn't control prices, fluffybunnypants, they absolutely can influence them, greatly.
It's not like I hate WotC, I'm a fan. But I do think they could think more about affecting the Modern format and long term card prices, and deal with things like absurd Serum Visions price/demand. So I agree with WotC that having Modern be more affordable would be good for the game, and I just wished they would do more to address what I see as a major affordability issue, despite the reprinting of shocks and fetches (if it was so successful, why not do it again?). As an example, Modern UR Storm was my first serious build, and it's a great deck, but more than half the cost is the land base (a quarter of the cards), and a good chunk of the rest is Serum Visions. Sure, it's playable without the fancy lands, but it's a lot weaker. I'm hoping for a future option that's a lot cheaper, and only a bit weaker, so the super-competitive can keep the expensive stuff and a slight edge, but the rest of us can still compete reasonably without a huge investment.
Again, I'm not expecting the original dual lands to be reprinted. I would like to see a more diverse land base in Modern, with more methods of mana-fixing that are closer to the fetch/shock method in power, but that aren't necessarily superior. I think there's a gap there and it wouldn't be difficult to generate ideas for filling it. I hope to hear such ideas.
July 7, 2015 2:18 a.m.
After getting reprints of shocks that cut more than 3/4 of their cost, getting new fetches for a fraction of the cost of other Modern-legal ones, Modern players are still complaining about prices. That is to say, Modern players who do not have those cards are complaining. Perspectives on that matter change a lot when you have a playset of each fetch and shock + extra copies.
The obvious answer is to play legacy and complain about the fact that a playset of a single dual land can cost the same as the entire collection of modern shocks and fetches.
July 7, 2015 5:50 a.m. Edited.
CanadianShinobi says... #22
formayor because doing it again would crash the market. Wizards can't simply print lands willy nilly just to make Modern worth pennies. It takes away the monetary value from the game. And yes, they would anger collectors. On paper having competitive decks cost a fraction of their price seems great, but this is a collectable card game and it simply isn't economically feasible for everyone to have all the good cards. This is coming from someone who doesn't play competitively.
Now, that being said I'm going to bring up something that you seem to have overlooked, but have touched on, notably Wizards reprint policy and how they handle reprints.
I fully, wholeheartedly agree that Wizards could make Modern more accessible than it currently is. And I am slightly concerned that Wizards reprint policy will have a long term negative impact on the format as a whole. Notably because they fail to reprint key uncommons and commons. Again, I will remind everyone that Serum Visions is desperately in need of a reprint.
But aside from that, let us consider perhaps the most important thing about Modern. Modern relies on cards from Standard to reinvigorate the format. And Wizards has stated that they do not print cards with Modern in mind. As such, Wizards promotes a format that it does not actively support. Reprints can only help a format so much. While Modern Masters are nice for the reprints, I would like to remind you that in the long run these sets have driven up the price of the reprinted cards that were mythic and rare. Without thought being put into Modern we have bans like Dig Through Time. A ban based purely on speculation. This is dangerous. I suspect someone will point out that the Tarkir block has been very generous to Modern has a format. I would agree. I would also like to point out that Theros was a laughable disaster all things considered.
Regardless of where one stands on the issue of: is Wizards doing enough? I believe we can all agree that they are making certain attempts to address economic accessibility. But even then we cannot expect them to make Modern into a format where a competitive Jund deck is $20.
July 7, 2015 11:54 a.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #23
CanadianShinobi - Thanks for your thoughtful responses. I'm totally okay with having some decks out there that are inaccessible. If I want to play competitively with a cheaper deck, I have no problem being forced to use some ingenuity and brew something rogue-ish rather than buy Jund - that's fair enough given the collector aspect of the game. The reason I have the issue with land in particular is that not every deck needs Goyfs, but every deck needs land. This is why I think land prices are the major barrier, as bad as other prices may be. And again, I'm not sure that reprints are actually the only answer (though I hope they run the Zendikar fetches, obviously).
The more I've thought about it, the more I like Chubbub's suggestion. Mono-colored fetches would be great in 2-color decks, and perfectly good in 3-color decks with a dominant color (Burn/RDW - a sensible introductory deck- might be $200 cheaper). They would be less powerful than dual fetches, but probably good enough to decrease demand and price for the duals in the long term. Also, seeing as how they aren't reprints, and not overly powerful, you could certainly print them at uncommon, and I don't think they'd disrupt Standard (but I'm no Standard player, so I don't really know). I think it would go a long way to offering a solid option for new players to build around.
Anyone else have thoughts on mono-colored fetches?
Sidenote CanadianShinobi- I know WotC claims to not consider Modern a major factor in new set creation, but Modern Masters demonstrates that do give some thought (and action) to the format. I hope they continue to do so, and consider some better new lands in Standard that won't blow up that format.
I'm not sure what you mean by Modern Masters causing Mythics and Rares to rise in price long term. I could see why this might happen short-term, as the metagame floods with certain high-powered cards, but that should eventually be mitigated and shouldn't apply to lands (I might feel like I need Goyfs all of a sudden, if everyone has Gofys all of a sudden, but I always need good lands, regardless of goings on in the metagame).
July 7, 2015 2:41 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #24
Khanye- I like the idea of boltlands, and would love to see a new, fetchable, multicolored land set alongside mono-colored fetches, but I think boltlands would cause the problem mentioned by FAMOUSWATERMELON and GlistenerAgent, as they would be better than dual shocks. I imagine they would also be way too powerful and fast in Standard. I think what I'd rather see is something like this:
Frozen Tundra
Land - Plains
tap: Add 
to your mana pool.
tap, Pay 1 life: Add 
or 
to your mana pool. Activate this ability only if you control another land.
I think that's close to balanced. Thoughts?
July 7, 2015 2:54 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #26
GlistenerAgent - C'mon, man. Much respect to your contributions to this community, but i think i raised an interesting point, whether or not you agree with it. And rather than people bothering to think about it, with a few exceptions, I got a bunch of glib responses and told to shut up and stop whining in so many words, by people who didn't seem to have read much of what I said (Yes, I know this is the internet where everyone is shitty and nobody reads anything, but that's all the more reason to respond to the more thoughtful posts). In any case, you're welcome to not participate. Mono-colored fetches are a great idea.
July 7, 2015 4:02 p.m.
While I do like the idea behind mono colored fetches I feel like they couldn't be printed at uncommon because of the fact that they are fetch lands they can still fetch a good majority of shocks. For example,a mono blue fetch land could still fetch a breeding pool,watery grave,steam vents,hallowed fountain.
July 7, 2015 4:18 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #28
seuvius - They're good because they can fetch shocks. They wouldn't be all that useful if they could only grab 1 type of basic land. Though I do think that fetches that could grab 2 types of basics, but not shocks, would also be a good idea. In the case of either idea, the new fetches would clearly be less powerful than the current dual fetches, but way better than most of the other mana-fixing in Modern. I think it's a really good solution that would somewhat mitigate price inflation on the original dual fetches, provide a good, cheaper option than those duals, and not create a new price/scarcity problem.
Why not print them at uncommon? I think to not create a price issue in Standard, and avoid the same problem in Modern, they're would have to be a lot of them - and I don't think they'd be overpowered in any format.
July 7, 2015 4:36 p.m.
What I'm saying is that I don't think they could be printed at uncommon because of the fact that even though they aren't as good as actual fetches they would still be way to powerful at uncommon.
July 7, 2015 4:42 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #30
Right, I get what you're saying. But I don't think rarity has much to do with the intrinsic power of the card. In terms of the card's impact/power in the format, I think printing them at Uncommon would be great for Modern, and am curious if you disagree with that and why (as in, what would you predict the impact would look like). I can't say I know that much about how they'd impact Standard.
July 7, 2015 4:49 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #31
July 7, 2015 4:56 p.m.
ItchiUchiha117 says... #32
How would they be all that powerful at uncommon? That only affects how often they pop up in draft (technically) and a land that makes you tap, pay 1 life, and sac it to get a land of one specific basic land type seems like something that is completely fair, especially in a set that might not even have non basic lands with basic land type.
If there were any non basic lands with basic land types in the set, they'd either be along the lines of the utility lands from Shadowmoor (Madblind Mountain and co.) or they would be Shocklands or the such. If they were the former, they would be at common, but not all that powerful. If they were the latter, they'd be at rare and very unlikely to pop up in draft. Even if one did, how are you guaranteed to get a relevant fetch?
A land that can only fetch a land that has a specific land type is not fixing in a limited deck. It's only fixing in constructed, which is where we need it anyways. It isn't all that complicated, so it doesn't break New World Order and it isn't so powerful that you absolutely need them, so it doesn't break limited. So, I must ask, because I am curious: How, at uncommon, would they be too powerful?
July 7, 2015 5:07 p.m.
ItchiUchiha117 says... #33
Also, I really wish they would do lands along the lines of Murmuring Bosk, though without the tribal aspect. Have them enter the battlefield tapped (maybe unless you paid two life), only have one basic land type, and then tap for two other colors of mana if you pay a life.
July 7, 2015 5:10 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #34
ItchiUchiha117 Thanks for the better perspective on other formats. I think your analysis is right. What do you think of the land I sketched out above (the alternative Frozen Tundra), which would be mono-colored for the purposes of fetching, but also act as a 3-color painland after turn 1? I've heard boltlands mentioned before, and thought the idea needed balancing with respect to dual shocks.
July 7, 2015 5:24 p.m.
ItchiUchiha117 says... #35
Hm, it seems decent, all things considered. You aren't completely fixed turn one, but you basically are. The issue I see is that the restriction become completely irrelevant late game. It needs and ETB tapped unless clause on it or it becomes incredibly powerful.
July 7, 2015 5:34 p.m.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #36
Yeah, they're overpowered - thanks for feedback. I was thinking about something that would be analagous in Modern to Invasion Sac lands as budget options in Legacy, but my idea is probably overboard.
Wizard_of_the_Broke says... #2
For TL:DR types - I think there should be more solid mana-fixing options in Modern than just fetches and shocks. Curious about other peoples opinions and new land ideas.
July 6, 2015 5:36 p.m.