Oath of the Gatewatch: WotC's Failure
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on Nov. 18, 2015, 6:09 a.m. by Femme_Fatale
For those of you who don't know, these were just recently spoiled.
If you doubt the legitimacy of this, I would direct you to these to artworks from BFZ, and links number one and number two.
BFZ artworks Show
I'm not here to talk about these as spoilers or as cards themselves, no, there is something I want to say. Something that has been common knowledge among the community set builders of Magic Set Editor. I will however forewarn that there is A LOT of text and A LOT of reading to do, so make sure you got yourself an hour so before reading it all.
There are two types of mechanics on mana/colours that eventually turned out to be pointless creations that don't add anything to the game and pointlessly complicates things. They are frequently used or created by players looking to make brand new sets, but those of us from MSE strongly advise against them.
I am referring to two types of mana symbols.
- One is the colourless mana symbol. You can only use colourless mana to pay for these symbols. Since in OGW this represents the Eldrazi, I'm going to call this "Eldrazi Mana" to prevent confusions.
- The other is the multicoloured mana symbol. You can only use coloured mana to pay for these symbols.
The biggest problem with these is that balancing and applying them to the card pool is so fringe that it makes hybrid mana costs easy to balance in comparison.
As a sort of example, when building a set, balancing comes as an issue for us custom set makers as we don't have the experience that WotC does. In this, hybrid mana frequently makes appearances as just another symbol, even if it isn't a theme of the set. It may be on as little as 10 cards in a 300 card set, but they are there to help balance.
Why does hybrid mana help balance a card? Well, consider the types of cost for a card as a sort of decimal rating determining how much it alters the cost requirements. Colourless costs are at the bottom at around 0.1. Coloured mana is at the top at around 0.8. Depending on the focus of your theme, cards with two colours (
) or cards with double of one colour () can cost 1.4 or so, but in general two separate colours is lower on average than double of one colour. Hybrid mana functions as single colour, double, and multiple colours all at once. They are easier to cast than just a simple coloured mana, but are harder than colourless. In this, the colourless cost of a card being an inherent reverse exponential graph of the power level of that card (ie, a card is more likely to have a higher colourless cost than a coloured cost, and it is easier to change the numbers of a 8 to an 6 rather than a 3 to a 1.), can be partially applied to hybrid mana. And if you look at the history of hybrid mana, you can certainly see this being applied in the Shadowmoor block. Wrapping this up, Hybrid Mana can help balance a card by lowering the card cost from having to put too much colourless mana in, or increasing a card cost from not having enough coloured mana in. And I'm not saying difficulting in casting but their position on the converted mana cost chart.
So essentially, hybrid mana being easier to cast than a solid colour makes it lower on the scale, at about 0.6. Now if we were to look at this and realize that this is only 2 colours, (the 
symbols are right inbetween hybrid and solid colour, at 0.7), a mana symbol that can only be paid in coloured mana would be even easier to cast, but just barely harder to cast than a colourless mana. This puts it at 0.2. Note that in comparison with cards that generate coloured mana, there is a scarcity in cards that generate colourless mana, so you really shouldn't have any problems with them.
However ... I finally get to the issue I brought this point up for, colourless mana symbols. Remember when I said that there was a scarcity in cards that generate colourless mana when compared with coloured mana? Well, this basically means that it is harder to cast this symbol. While constructed formats with large card pools may not have difficulties, Limited and perhaps Standard will definitely have problems. In this, it makes the colourless mana symbol much higher than the regular mana symbol, at around 1.2.
Now let's chart these off and compare them. While yes, these symbols are arbitrarily designated by me, I do believe that their essential feel of "difficulty in paying" for them is captured by the point values.
- Colourless X: 0.1
- Multicoloured X: 0.2
- Phyrexian Mana: 0.5
- Hybrid Mana: 0.6
- Colourless Hybrid Mana: 0.7
- Coloured Mana: 0.8
- Eldrazi Mana: 1.0
- Muliple Coloured Mana: 1.3
- Double Coloured Mana: 1.4
What does these findings tell us? First, it tells us that it is easy to add more colourless X cost to a card than it is to add more coloured symbols. Next, it tells us that on a fundamental level, the Multicoloured X cost holds no real mechanical potential value above colourless cost and would then just needlessly complicate a set. New World Order was specifically set in to prevent needless complications.
It also tells us that Eldrazi Mana are fundamentally more costly than regular coloured mana symbols, which makes them really hard to balance and forces them into a block only mechanic. Except that WotC failed in that regard and made it a SMALL SET ONLY MECHANIC.
In the past, articles hosted by WotC design team touched on the concept of a 6th colour, purple, for Dominaria, and how the biggest difficulty for them was giving it a spot in the colour pie. They ended up constantly taking slices of the pie from existing colours to flesh this out, and it didn't have it's own inherent identity. Does this apply to Eldrazi Mana? ... Not really. The Eldrazi have been around long enough and explored enough that what they do the best has really been solidified into their own portion of the pie. A problem with Eldrazi Mana is that no current land scheme beyond utility lands actually supports Eldrazi Mana. And even utility lands usually have a coloured mana cost to them.
It is not that Eldrazi Mana doesn't have its own portion of the pie, or thematically doesn't have any complications, it's that everything it holds for or does is mechanically already done and solved for by regular colourless mana. Therein lies the biggest problem, a problem similar to the Multicoloured Only Mana. By the principles of New World Order, a mechanic that does the same thing as an already widely accepted and fully fleshed out existing mechanic, but makes it more complicated, is not a mechanic you want to be using. What Eldrazi Mana does is it takes the colourless mana we all know and enjoy in its simplicity, and it complicates it beyond our ability to even play it as all of what made it simple is now gone.
Let's look at the consequences of making it a feature that is only available in ONE SMALL SET. Something as impactful, ambitious and large as Eldrazi Mana is a block defining mechanic, something that makes the entire block be what it is. And for some god knows reason why, WotC decided that it wasn't the main mechanic of the block. In fact, WotC has a recent history with this in the past two blocks. In Theros, they gave the Enchantment matters mechanic the middle finger by making it only appear in the last set, in a block that was supposed to have been an Enchantment matters block. In Tarkir, the Dragons theme was supposed to be the main theme of DTK, but it didn't even show up at common. Instead, WotC decided that they should put common dragons in FRF, a set that wasn't entirely about the dragons but the conflict between the Khans and the Dragons. Both times WotC lamented on their failures. And yet we see that they haven't learned from their failures at all.
Making it the small set of the block means that there is going to be a limited card pool to support that mechanic. Something as large and defining as adding another colour that also uses an existing colour needs a very hefty amount of support in order to be fully fleshed out, appreciated and incorporated into the Limited and Standard environments. But it wasn't. In fact, a previous WotC article clearly stated that they didn't want the Eldrazi to be colourless in a card design standpoint because they needed them to fit into Limited and Standard properly. That's what Devoid was for, to give the Eldrazi a colourless flavour that didn't mess with Limited or Standard by having a plethora of colourless only cards. But now we all of the sudden are getting a football to the face with this Eldrazi Mana which basically says "yeah, you know devoid? Yeah, it completely contradicts this set." In short, the Limited environment was practically screwed over by devoid being in the larger set and Eldrazi Mana being in the smaller set. I feel that the only reason that this got through the design team was because they knew that they had already failed on BFZ because they foolishly brought back old mechanics (which they didn't do for Scars of Mirrodin or RTR, and they were absolutely wonderful blocks) that don't fit with the existing Standard, nor how the plane is at that current time.
In closing, BFZ block looks like to be like the biggest screw up since Kamigawa. I really fear for what will come of SOI. I really do.
TL;DR
Eldrazi Mana fails the principles of New World Order, should have been implemented in BFZ instead of devoid, and because it wasn't, it will never be used in Standard and destroys BFZ Limited.
Add EDIT #2: Didgeridooda showed me a recently released video portraying the very first set Wastes was meant to be in way back before Legends!
Skilgannon says... #3
Interesting read and I can see you point. I also would like to point out that custom designers as possibly a very small (if not the smallest) audience for WotC to design for. Do you feel that they take you into account when designing cards and mechanics usually? I have absolutely no idea as I have only ever flirtly lightly with designing my own cards.
I am curious though where your source is that this would only appear in Oath? You make this point several times. Nothing has been said about it has it? Even the spoiler source for these cards has vanished? Have I missed something?
November 18, 2015 6:33 a.m.
beakedbard says... #4
Does this make the new Eldrazi mana a temporary 6th color in a sense then? That's kind of odd i thought they basically said at some point they wouldn't ever do this at the point they were half planning to make purple mana a thing. Granted i don't actually know that much about that but this seems like a very odd move for wizards. Also i really don't like the new Kozilek design.
November 18, 2015 6:39 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #5
Saying that these only appear in OGW is me saying that they should have appeared in BFZ, but didn't. I know not of anything beyond OGW, but I do know that they won't appear anytime soon as WotC doesn't like to visit the same villains over and over again, it makes the lore of a set weak and reduces sales. These most likely are a mechanic restrictive to only the Eldrazi, as I hardly see it being used elsewhere.
November 18, 2015 6:39 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #6
Also, it's not that I'm saying WotC should be designing for custom set creators Skilgannon, I'm saying that WotC made a decision that most experienced custom set creators in the Magic Set Editor community declares a bad decision that doesn't bring enough to the table. In short, WotC made a decision that we know from experience to turn out as a failure.
Yes it does beakedbard. Sort of. It's more like a 5.5 colour as it is half 6 sixth colour half colourless. WotC did say that they weren't doing a sixth colour, but the 4th last paragraph does state why this has a better chance versus Purple do to the Eldrazi already having a solidified take of the colour pie, something that Purple didn't.
November 18, 2015 6:43 a.m.
Skilgannon says... #7
It wasn't meant as a negative comment, more a genuine question as I have no idea.
So you believe that this is 'eldrazi mana' purely and will only be seen with eldrazi? Again I'd love to see a source as I haven't found anything about it. Again not negative, just inquisitive.
November 18, 2015 6:47 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #8
Just speculation, as the Eldrazi are the only colourless being that WotC has truly been able to tie down how they work in the colour pie. They don't have to do all the work for Purple that is find a completely knew tribe and completely knew mechanics that don't fit in with other colours. Instead, it was already made and well thought out for them. They just made a 5.5th colour for something that already existed. This is much easier to do than create something out of thin air.
See, had WotC made Eldrazi Mana as the main mechanic instead of devoid, BFZ would have sold a lot more and people, like me, wouldn't have been so critical about the mechanic. It would have made perfect sense as the mechanic that fuses the block together, but now I don't see how this will ever work.
November 18, 2015 6:58 a.m.
Skilgannon says... #9
I can see your reasoning, and to a point I agree. After all the Phyrexian's had their 'own mana' so why not the Eldrazi. I would like to counter though that if WotC made something so potentially new and different and ground breaking (colourless basics), and assuming this spoiler is real, than I believe they will do more with it surely?
November 18, 2015 7:02 a.m.
I don't know if I doubt the legitimacy
And I've seen a claim somewhere that they are up at mtgsalvation.com as well but could only find a thread discussing the new mana
Either way, a very interesting design twist
November 18, 2015 7:17 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #12
Phyrexian Mana is different from Eldrazi Mana, if you look at the charts. It is hard to balance Phyrexian Mana at 1 or 2 cmc because you have "10 life mana" at the start of the game to pay for them. Double Phyrexian Mana in things like Dismember seemed to be the way to go as paying 4 life or "2 life mana" was a definite set back that could lose you the game.
Eldrazi Mana, conversely, is much harder to pay for because colourless lands are not very prevalent in MtG history as opposed to coloured lands, and most colourless lands even have coloured activation costs OR add any coloured (multicoloured) mana in things like Mana Confluence.
Phyrexian Mana as the advantage of completely ignoring the Life Mana side of things, and thus it doesn't stray from the principles of New World Order too much. It is simple in design, but allows the player to be given a choice in how they want to play it, a choice that at the competitive level certainly matters. Eldrazi Mana has no choice, you must use colourless mana. Its a restriction on something that was meant to give you freedom. Colourless mana was supposed to be something that everyone could use and apply it everywhere. Removing that is a downgrade, and a restriction that doesn't feel right to the players.
November 18, 2015 7:21 a.m.
Skilgannon says... #13
Now this leads to a questions I have about the new mana. Does the <> symbol mean the land used to cast the spell has to produce <> or does it mean it has to be paid with a colourless source (as opposed to W,U,B,R or G)? Kozilek's Channeler makes '2'. It would seem strange that this cannot be used to 'channel' Kozilek. So maybe some lands will produce <> but lands that produce '1' can be used to pay the <> cost in the spell?
November 18, 2015 7:39 a.m.
The thing is, unlike other kinds of "6th mana color" that WotC made in the past, like phyrexian mana which was basically just 2 lifepoints, this one says "basic land" on it.
What does that mean?
That means you can fetch it with ramp, that means you can have more of 4 copies of those land in your deck.
Kinda like snow mana, with the difference that the new mana is independent of other colors.
I would be interested in seeing this mana symbol in other sets too, as I agree that making a new specific manasource for the small, last set of a block is kind of retarded, so I hope that it is more of an universal thing now.
That said, I still doubt this spoilers unless they are officially confirmed.
Might be a WotC-prank after all.
November 18, 2015 7:47 a.m.
greenkingwashere says... #15
From the mailbag article three days ago:
@maro254 What design concept/idea are you afraid to try (or believe is too dangerous)?
Evan Erwin (@misterorange) October 23, 2015I'd say adding a sixth color. That idea is fraught with so many perils.
November 18, 2015 7:47 a.m.
This comes off as a little alarmist. We've only seen 1 card. Does it make things complicated? At first, yes. For all we know though they might yet knock it out of the park with great design. I'm not sure I would be so early to proclaim disaster.
November 18, 2015 7:49 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #17
We can definitely say that it won't help Standard nor Limited at all by being only in the small set. It just hinders such a mechanic in every way, trust someone who works with custom sets.
November 18, 2015 7:58 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #18
I'll preface this with a "I only skimmed the comments," so forgive my laziness if this has been raised already.
We've seen one possibly real card using this new mechanic. One. Out of the entire set. To cry foul now and say that WOTC has completely dropped the ball or "failed" with Oath of the Gatewatch is, frankly, asinine. Anything at this point is just speculation.
Secondly, I'd like to know where you're getting these numbers from. If they're genuinely arbitrary, then we shouldn't be using them as any sort of evidence for any argument. If they aren't, I'd like to see the math.
Now, if the diamond symbol does indeed mean colorless mana only (as opposed to some Wastes-specific kind of mana), then I think there's significantly less to worry about. Colorless is easier to support in other Standard sets (ramp rocks, several permutations of creature mana abilities, etc.) and already has the same kind of support in other formats.
Limited, I do agree, would be in a bad position here because of the relationship between devoid and colorless-only, and that does seem like a design misstep based only on what we "know" for right now. But we have yet to see what other support may emerge.
November 18, 2015 8:01 a.m.
pookypuppy6 says... #19
Why would Kozilek have this mana restriction and yet Ulamog doesn't? Seems off to me in terms of card design across the two sets of the block.
Why introduce a new basic land that is generally pointless bar for this one small-set mechanic? I would be more off-beat and have a bunch of maybe some new, maybe some reprinted colourless nonbasics come up in the land slot, like with Dragon's Maze packs containing a guildgate at the back.
And yes, why would the block NEED Eldrazi mana when we have Devoid? The whole crux of the block is Ghostfire, why do we need to itnroduce a sixth mana symbol when you have a mechanic already specifically designed to make stuff colourless and functioning in the color pie? Eldrazi already have mechanical distinction with and without coloured mana costs. I don't see what an Eldrazi colourless symbol would add.
@Femme_Fatale: Well-written observations and I'm glad to hear someone other than me enjoys the story of PURPLE MAGIC! I would nitpick that Scars block did have a returning mechanic, but then I'd have to take that nitpick straight back as Imprint was not only minor, but not that good and WotC admitted that they struggled to expand its design space more than they expected. It was probably the forgettable fail mechanic of that block, like Tribute was in Theros block.
November 18, 2015 8:05 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #20
And further (posting this separately because I fear an edit will be overlooked in a thread this active), experience with custom sets is not really anything that makes you a credible authority on the subject. Yes, it does give you experience, but it doesn't make you an expert anything close.
As I said, it's far too early to assume that this mechanic won't have any viability or that it doesn't help Standard or Limited. Please try to differentiate between baseless speculation and educated speculation.
And, as ------ pointed out, the fact that this new symbol (again assuming that it's legitimate) has basic land support means that there are certainly possibilities when it comes to fixing and support. More possibilities, in any case, than there would be if we were forced to rely on nonbasics and artifacts.
November 18, 2015 8:05 a.m.
Named_Tawyny says... #21
This article works on a lot of assumptions, and a lot of assumptions that I think might be jumping the gun.
From looking at it, it seems that <> might function more as Snow-mana than anything else (because otherwise, there would be no point in having land that produce <> if it only means 'must be paid with colourless').
I am very surprised that(if true) it's being introduced in a small set, but WOTC has also said that the current story-arc is going to be multi-block, so void-mana might be making a comeback sooner than you expect (if not throughout all of SOI; as the switch to a two block paradigm happened after devign stage for SOI, IIRC).
TL;DR too early to say anything for certain, and I'm excited to see how it develops. I'll save my outrage for when I know more.
November 18, 2015 8:06 a.m.
canterlotguardian says... #22
My hype meter is officially off the charts. I am absolutely in love with both my main man Kozilek and this new Basic Land (FULL ART BTW). So hyped for OGW.
November 18, 2015 8:09 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #23
I want to ask this as the person who handles our card database ...
What is the short hand form for Eldrazi Mana? Like, we have WUBRG, P/W for phyrexian, S for snow ... this can either be C for colourless or E for Eldrazi. Choices?
November 18, 2015 8:26 a.m.
I'm thinking Z would be good. Can't imagine they'll come up with something more appropriate for Z.
November 18, 2015 8:30 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #25
Why not just wait for confirmation from WOTC first about this new mechanic?
November 18, 2015 9 a.m.
canterlotguardian says... #26
Jay you'll be sorry when they do their epic MTG/Pokemon crossover and introduce Zygarde mana.
November 18, 2015 9:16 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #27
I don't think it's possible yet to have a meaningful analytical conversation about Wastes and the <> mana symbol. There isn't enough information available. It could be the "6th color", it could be some kind of fancy Eldrazi mana, or it could basically be Snow mana.
Of course, because it's so early and because these cards are so far out there, I'm not 100% on board with the idea that the cards are actually real. I will admit, however, that everything about them is very believable. The art, the frames, the rules text, etc. I think Menace is a very creative replacement for Annihilator on the Kozilek card.
November 18, 2015 9:23 a.m.
canterlotguardian says... #28
Kozilek for Supreme Ruler of Zendikar 2016
November 18, 2015 9:25 a.m.
Without knowing how this Mechanic/Mana type works, we can't say what it's implications will be.
For instance, if the 'imploding diamond' symbol simply means that you must use colorless mana to pay the cost, then the pain lands become even better... take pain for color, or no pain to pay for Kozilek's requirement, which Tango's can't pay.
If, however, it acts like any other color and you have to use mana produced from "Wastes" to cast things with the Kozilek symbol, then both Kozilek and Wastes become very limited in scope, and there will be little impact. (Which is why I don't think this is likely)
In reality, we have to wait to hear the official word from Wizards on how this works...
November 18, 2015 9:42 a.m.
Note Also: Fetches cannot fetch this new land... but Evolving Wilds can.
(A little contradictory, in my opinion, that lands can 'evolve' into 'Wastes'... but there's lots of little contradictions like that in Magic)
November 18, 2015 9:47 a.m.
Hahaha, you just literally stole the image I created in the thread I made. That's ok though, you at least took time to create a meaningful post.
November 18, 2015 9:57 a.m.
If the symbol really means "colorless only", I think I'm okay, because as far as my understanding of the rules goes I should still be allowed to freecast this with Animar on enough counters.
November 18, 2015 10:15 a.m.
"As his name implies, he is distortion. Wastes are basic lands, however lack a basic land type. This is because they are the basic lands after other Eldrazi have distorted them from consumption. They now no longer produce the mana they once did, however can still produce this eerie, distorted new form of mana. This mana draws Kozilek near. It is not a new basic land TYPE, simply they are basic lands after being ravaged by the Eldrazi. I hope that this clears it up for everyone."
This thread post makes sense to me. On the mythic spoiler thread.
November 18, 2015 10:16 a.m.
I'm starting to think this will work like any other color... except it has no color...
Example:
- 
is Blue, it can be used to pay the cost requirements of or 
.
- Similarly, <> is colorless, it can be used to pay the cost requirements of <> or .
Because <> is colorless, it does not increase 'Converge' values, and because 'Wastes' have no basic land type, they will not increase 'Domain' values.
Because 'Wastes' are Basic, a deck can have any number of them... allowing for much easier colorless EDH decks to be built.
This is just speculation, but I think it's quite likely.
November 18, 2015 10:28 a.m.
Kravian i think that's the whole point: they don't want you to cast newkozilek for free. with the introduction of Ancestral Statue i've been able to cast the eldrazi titans for free as early as turn 4 in my Animar, Soul of Elements deck.
i'm hoping that cards like Shivan Reef and Cascade Bluffs will be able to fill the needs for the two required colorlesss mana in newkozilek's mana cost (and who knows about Command Tower and Ancient Ziggurat) otherwise i probably won't run him
November 18, 2015 10:44 a.m. Edited.
OmegaAura113 says... #36
Does anyone know if this is purely Colorless (meaning it can be the commander of an EDH deck that's purely colorless) or if, because of the new mana, you' be unable to use it in a normal EDH deck, like Animar?
I really like the new Kozilek, but this whole new mana thing is pretty messed up and somewhat confusing.
November 18, 2015 10:55 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #37
I've found some interesting tidbits which I'll put into this later. If you wish to know more before I type it out, look into "Barry's Land".
November 18, 2015 10:55 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #38
Rayenous, Wastes will actually increase Domain, as that was what it was intended to do for the set that was supposed to come before Legends :D
November 18, 2015 10:56 a.m.
Wastes will not increase Domain... it does not have a basic land type. It simply has "Basic Land", and not "Basic Land - Type". No additional Type, means no addition to Domain.
November 18, 2015 11:03 a.m.
Femme_Fatale I agree that this could potentially be legit, because Converge is now back, and this new basic would increase the domain costs, without taxing mana bases. It'll be very interesting to see how this unfolds.
November 18, 2015 11:04 a.m.
I agree with Rayenous' theory, that makes the most sense to me.
November 18, 2015 11:09 a.m. Edited.
Epochalyptik says... #42
Still assuming this is real, the only way Wastes would increase converge values is if it were treated as a color. I think that's unlikely.
Wastes also does not increase domain because it does not have a basic land type. It has the supertype "basic" and the type "land," but no subtypes.
November 18, 2015 11:10 a.m.
Ah ok, I guess I didn't read that enough. Well, that's unfortunate. I guess we will see if WotC wants this to become something outside of Standard or Limited. I'm not seeing a lot of reason to play it in eternal formats or Modern yet.
November 18, 2015 11:22 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #44
Epochalyptik, Barry's Land had no type either, yet during its testing during Invasion, it still counted towards Domain.
I've got to finish this little new section to answer these things x.x
November 18, 2015 11:24 a.m.
It's interesting... I once posed a question to Mark Rosewater regarding Barry's Land.
Basically suggested this land, except it had instead of <>, and I called it 'Clay Pit'. Same concept of being basic, colorless, and having no subtype. - I suggested it as a way to allow for a new 'Basic' land, that didn't cause changes with Domain or other such effects. - He basically said there was 'no issue with domain', and never really commented on the land design. - Now I see why... it was to similar to this design for him to comment.
November 18, 2015 11:29 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #46
And don't forget that the templating was much worse in Invasion. Note that even the real basic lands in Invasion just said "Land" with no basic supertype or basic land type as the subtype.
If the card has no basic land type, then it cannot contribute to effects that care about basic land types. It's fully possible that Barry's Land was a primitive version of a sixth basic land type, which would explain how it might work with domain.
Similarly, if a card does not produce colored mana, it cannot be used to increase converge values.
November 18, 2015 11:47 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #47
We cannot assume that this is colourless mana though. For all we know it could be a different colour that can pay and be paid by colourless mana but not coloured mana.
Anyways, NEW EDIT IS UP! READ AND REJOICE IN MORE INFORMATION!
November 18, 2015 11:55 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #48
Which is why I explicitly stated in post #41 that this would only work if it were treated as a color.
Similarly, we cannot say that this new, unverified land is proof that Limited is screwed and WOTC is messing up, but that didn't exactly stop you.
November 18, 2015 11:58 a.m.
RussischerZar says... #49
As someone previously said: the current story is confirmed to be a multi-block story, which in my eyes pretty much means that we'll follow the Eldrazi around. This could mean that the void mana will be continueing in the next few sets down the road.
November 18, 2015 12:26 p.m.
Blackshadow415 says... #50
I have one question for wizards,why why do this to the mana base they just basically pulled the finger at devoid with the new land mana bases are going to be so weird now I don't want to play standard anymore
Femme_Fatale says... #2
I apologize if the quality of writing isn't up to snuff, I've been up for a long time as I have to completely redo my sleeping schedule to start working late at night instead of early in the morning.
November 18, 2015 6:31 a.m.