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.
to your mana pool.EDIT #2: Didgeridooda showed me a recently released video portraying the very first set Wastes was meant to be in way back before Legends!
This is, in fact, a bad-guy (bad-dragon?) who has, for over a millennia, disguised himself as a good-guy (good-dragon).
November 20, 2015 2:42 p.m.
Regardless, I think some sound advice is to never trust a dragon, especially ones that have been alive for a millenia, use magic beyond your comprehension, and view living things as cogs.
November 20, 2015 3:21 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #4
Wait, are the Eldrazi really destroying? Ulamog consumes and poops out, Kozilek distorts, not destroys. Emrakul... fears squirrels? I dunno what she does.
November 20, 2015 3:28 p.m.
Depends on your perspective. They could be tools to turn colored land into waste.
But when Drana drank from a giant eldrazi, didnt she hear a voice implying the eldrazi titans where searching for their home? Though it seems that their only purpose is to consume or distort in Kozi's case, they also seem to think something is broken. By consuming perhaps they "fix" what is broken, whatever that is.
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/uncharted-realms/memories-blood-2015-09-16
Btw, im not familiar with the outcome of Kozilek distorting something. What happens when he does this? If you have a link thatd be better.
November 20, 2015 7:42 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #6
I think it means that since the Eldrazi predate colored mana, they see these new-fangled "colors" as a "break"in the Multiverse's natural order. And if you can't fix it, eat it.
November 20, 2015 8:21 p.m.
Cyberpunk_Eevee says... #7
Looking at it from a Lore-only perspective:
What's to say the Eldrazi weren't attempting to infuse their own mana into Zendikar last time? Lore wise, it would make sense that after breaking out and renewing the fight, the Eldrazi would find a way to channel their own, unique, twisted magics. In this case, they had to corrupt and drain the land before converting it to their use to support their magics.
Just thoughts from a story/writer wannabe perspective.
November 21, 2015 10:25 p.m.
Cyberpunk_Eevee says... #8
Another thing, compare the image for "Wastes" to the image for a particular mountain in BFZ. the one here: http://mythicspoiler.com/bfz/cards/mountain1.html (I forgot the number and am rushing out in a minute).
Is it just me, or do the lands look similar? Like the land itself was "Wasted" and distorted?
November 21, 2015 10:54 p.m.
The border of the cards with Devoid seem to have that Bismuth pattern around the top of the cards.
November 21, 2015 11:12 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #10
that is actually the normal card border, which fades away to the Devoid border. All the devoid cards have it.
November 22, 2015 7:56 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #11
That is exactly what he was pointing out TheNextRedDude. Only the Devoid cards have the Bismuth pattern on the top of the cards, which is connected to the Waste looking like Bismuth.
November 22, 2015 1:59 p.m.
Lastdaysgunslinger says... #12
I agree epoc. Theres no guarantee these are real. I personally cant understand why wotc would decide nows the time for a new basic. And the kozilek is much weaker than ulamog imho. Menace doesnt fit and dicarding x cmc to counter an x cmc would not be very good at all, way to diverse to be competitive. I cant wait until the actual spoilers come out.
November 23, 2015 9:39 a.m.
Darkmagi1131 says... #13
Auctually these have been confirmed. Was talking to my shop owner and he said wotc confirmed it to retail and that someone was fired...
November 23, 2015 9:51 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #14
While I'd like to believe that, and while I think it's getting likelier and likelier that these cards are legitimate, hearsay is not proof.
November 23, 2015 10:27 a.m.
Darkmagi1131 says... #15
Mtg salvation is also saying confirmed so I think it's more likely then not
November 23, 2015 10:34 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #16
Once again, I would like to believe that, and to some extent it may be likely, but hearsay is not proof.
That's not to say that we can't speculate on the reasonable assumption that these are real cards, but saying "it's true because I heard someone talking about it" or "it's true because [unofficial source] says so" is not the same as proving that these are real.
November 23, 2015 10:38 a.m.
Would be better if you just have to show a card with same cmc and not discard it
November 23, 2015 10:46 a.m.
Prediction: Amendment to rule 305.6
Currently:
305.6. The basic land types are Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest. If an object uses the words basic land type, its referring to one of these subtypes. A land with a basic land type has the intrinsic ability T: Add [mana symbol] to your mana pool, even if the text box doesnt actually contain that text or the object has no text box. For Plains, [mana symbol] is ; for Islands, 
; for Swamps, 
; for Mountains, ; and for forests, 
. See rule 107.4a. Also see rule 605, Mana Abilities.
If 'Wastes' is not a Fake:
Add to this rule: - "for Basic Lands with no basic land type, <>"
(Perhaps it could be a separate rule, #305.6a.)
Reasoning:
Without this intrinsic ability, 'Wastes' would have to have the actual text "
: Add <> to your mana pool", rather than just the <> symbol.
Possible future implication:
Cards (spells/abilities) that 'remove' basic land types. i.e.: "Until end of turn, all land lose all basic land types." - This would make Island, Mountain, etc able to be tapped for <>... but something like Steam Vents (because they aren't basic) unable to be tapped for mana.
November 23, 2015 11:16 a.m. Edited.
Lastdaysgunslinger says... #19
Agreed, also someone did mention that the waste may be a token type card , as to say a new ability might change lands into wastes but idk. Its all whatif's for the moment. Well if you like the leaks then by all means be excited, this is supposed to be fun anyway . I personally dont like these possible new cards and probably wont use any of those 3 in standard anyway.
November 23, 2015 1:26 p.m.
'Wastes' has a card number 184/184. As such, it is not a token... assuming it is not fake.
November 23, 2015 2:15 p.m.
...Which is also making me think about the 'C' instead of 'L' in the rarity.
Fate Reforged had the same number of cards... 184.
It also had 70 commons.
This means that, with 10 commons per pack (ignoring foils), there is about a 1-in-7 chance at getting a particular common in a pack.
With there being 6 Basic Land in this set, there's a 1-in-6 chance of getting a particular Basic in a pack instead of the usual 1-in-5. - To me, this seems like a ratio more fitting a 'C' than a 'L'. - Perhaps Wizards recognized this as well.
November 23, 2015 2:31 p.m.
Named_Tawyny says... #22
Jirayamo is by 'better' you mean 'completely broken' then yes.
Even as is, it's a 1-for-1 manaless counter. I'm not sure how that's even remotely anything less than amazing. To be asking to be able to 0-for-1 your oppenents and not have to spend mana... wow. Just wow.
November 23, 2015 8:10 p.m.
atomic_moose says... #23
The great thing about standard is you don't need to wait too long to out the old in and in the new. I for one am excited for colorless edh players if this turns out to be a real thing.
November 24, 2015 1:51 a.m.
Lastdaysgunslinger says... #24
If you use his ability to counter counterspells then you need to be packing cards with 1-2-3-4 cmc and thats just to use against control, how is that amazing. This is why im not liking it.
November 24, 2015 11:16 a.m.
Free Counterspells... how is that not amazing?
I would assume you are already playing with some 1-2-3 CMC spells...
Did you ramp into him? - Then your Birds of Paradise, Sylvan Scrying, Natural Connection... whatever, are now all free counter spells.
Did you use Tron Lands to bring him out? - Then your Solemn Simulacrum, Talisman of Progress, Expedition Map, Thirst for Knowledge and so on, are all free counter spells.
Did you 'cheat' him out? - Then your Gifts Ungiven, Unburial Rites, Goryo's Vengeance, Lingering Souls etc, are now all free counter spells.
The general concept is the cards supporting you getting him into play can now support you keeping him in play. - And even if they aren't removing him, you can still counter ANYHING. - Preventing them from getting a board state or using an alternate win-con.
November 24, 2015 11:35 a.m. Edited.
Lastdaysgunslinger says... #26
This is true. But im bullheaded an still dont like him lol.
November 24, 2015 12:07 p.m.
Heck... even if he can't find a good deck to be played in, I like the fact that Wizards is still 'thinking outside the box' when it comes to powerful creature abilities.
November 24, 2015 12:46 p.m.
Named_Tawyny says... #29
Oh, and of course that says nothing about the whole '10 mana: draw 7' part of him.
November 24, 2015 11:01 p.m.
Schuesseled says... #30
Besides the only spells you are likely to want to counter are high mana cost spells.
November 25, 2015 7:30 a.m.
Well... it's not exactly '
: Draw 7"
If you have 4 other cards in hand when you cast him, it's ": Draw 3", and could even be ": Draw 0"
November 25, 2015 7:30 a.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #32
Its more like: 10: Fill up your hand and get a giant creature with evasion and many many Disrupting Shoals
November 25, 2015 1:57 p.m.
Jimmy_Chinchila says... #33
It is clearly different from colorless mana. Colorless mana is represented numerically, not symbolically. The 5 basic lands each have a symbol representing the mana they produce. Wastes also have a symbol, the diamond, which means they produce a mana that has a specific "color" identity. It will surely make things more confusing at first, and I totally agree it was retarded not to have it in the first set. Ulamog can use colorless but Kozilek requires wastes? No logic.
As far as future sets, keep in mind that Emrakul is likely gone from Zendikar and thus is on a different plane. So there's a chance we'll see the Eldrazi lands again. But then the question is: how would Emrakul utilize waste lands if Ulamog is the one who consumes the mana and and converts the land to desolate husks? Ulamog consumes material things, Kozilek feeds on mental energies and Emrakul alters space/time.
November 25, 2015 4:56 p.m.
Jimmy_Chinchila says... #34
It's not guys, that's the whole thing. It's 
and 2 <>. You have to play with new lands in order to play him.
November 25, 2015 4:58 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #35
Jimmy_Chinchila Still, it is 10 total mana, and if you are playing a deck that can play him, by the time you have 10 mana, you should have at least 2 of all your colors unless one is a tiny splash.
November 25, 2015 7:18 p.m.
Jimmy_Chinchila says... #36
And Richard Garfield is fuming. How dare you screw with a 20+ year old model of 5 colors in a linked pentagram? Lol
November 25, 2015 8:22 p.m.
Jimmy_Chinchila says... #37
TheNextRedDude I understand the cmc but my point was that the new mana "color" symbol would be an issue. If I Crumble to Dust your only Wastes, you're screwed. You have to admit it will make mana bases tricky.
And how bout that flavor fail of Shrine of the Forsaken Gods? That land should've made Waste rather than colorless.
It also shits on the mythos of creatures that have transcended colored mana. Now some are requiring a specific type of mana? Seems like they're getting weaker. Before Kozilek could be cast by drawing mana from any type of land, now two of the lands have to have been already devoured by Ulamog? Colorless, non-artifact creatures was unique and fit the lore. Them requiring a new form of land, one that has had its mana and essence stripped dry, just doesn't make sense. Old Kozilek: you can use any color of mana to summon me, same with the rest of the Eldrazi and Eldrazi Titans (no scions or spawn or processors). New Kozilek: yeah after eons of consuming all forms of mana now I'm gonna need some of it to be specifically derived from land that has already been skeletonized. Was the guy in charge of lore sick that day?
November 25, 2015 8:34 p.m.
Jimmy_Chinchila says... #38
Hate to see all the new mana-type symbols Emrakul will require...
<><>~~***
November 25, 2015 8:39 p.m.
I wouldn't consider Shrine of the Forsaken Gods a flavor fail: I think it is likely that, even if these new cards require a Waste mana to cast, their color identity will still be colorless. The Shrine was also built by the Zendikari, who don't have access to Waste mana.
November 25, 2015 8:45 p.m.
Named_Tawyny says... #40
Jimmy_Chinchila, Crumble to Dust doesn't hit wastes.
November 25, 2015 8:56 p.m.
MindAblaze says... #41
From that "if/when" line of questioning from MaRos tumblr.
What's the difference between colorless and generic?
"Colorless mana is mana that has no color. It is a type of mana.Generic mana is a cost which can be paid for using any mana including both colorless mana and colored mana. It is a type of cost.The two get confused because we use a number in a mana circle to represent both. Take the Sol Ring thats been printed in Commander decks. The 1 in the mana circle in the upper right corner is the mana cost of the card and it is a generic mana cost in that you can spend any color or colorless to pay for it.The 2 in the mana circle in the rules text is a type of mana it produces which happens to be two colorless mana."
Something tells me they're just finding a solution to the confusion this inconsistency creates. Colorless has always been a kind of mana, now it has a symbol (assuming these are real) Generic is a cost, like snow, and we're all very familiar with that.
November 25, 2015 10:20 p.m.
Jimmy_Chinchila says... #42
Ruffigan oh yeah good call, that makes me feel better. I like the mythos to "make sense".
Named_Tawyny yeah you're right my bad, the concept I guess was that it can't be all 10 of any sort but that 2 were of a certain sort, and so ways to eliminate that "sort" would make him difficult to cast, which I felt went against the theme of Eldrazi evolving beyond a point of recognizing any particular "sort" of mana. Granted none use white mana, we have Blighted Steppe that shows they will still eat white mana.
MindAblaze thank you for that, it makes much more sense now. I think you're right about what they're trying to do, I just think it's something that the whole block should've used for a sense of uniformity. It's odd such a "big" change would be made in such a small set. I'm still not thrilled that some Eldrazi will require colorless mana rather than generic, as I feel like the ability to use any/every form of mana was what made the Eldrazi unique. But again, I don't have Twitter or tumblr or whatnot so I appreciate your sharing that.
November 26, 2015 12:40 a.m.
Named_Tawyny says... #43
I actually found that the ability to use any/every form of mana went against the Eldrazi mythos, and took away from their uniqueness. There's already a type of spell that can use any/every form of mana - 95% of all artifacts.
Actually REQUIRING colourless mana (if that's what they're doing) is strongly making the Eldrazi nearer to uniqueness, not further.
November 26, 2015 5 a.m.
Lastdaysgunslinger says... #44
Except the fact that they never took this mana previously in sets or even ulamog last set yet now all of a sudden they need specific colorless.Just seems strange.
November 26, 2015 6:25 a.m.
Darkmagi1131 says... #45
But I think the idea was for Ulamog and his processors to "process" the land and it's mana into a more usable source therefore the colorless only requirement showing up in the 2nd set is a logical continuation of the theme. My guess is Ulamog processes raw material, Kozilek refines and absorbs it then Emrakul destroys/finishes absorbing the plane returning it to the Blind Eternities
November 26, 2015 6:38 a.m.
I'll wait and see, but I am curious about the new set. This (new mana) could work, especially if there would be some sort of 'transformer' Eldrazi who transform one type of mana into something else; in the vein of Initiates of the Ebon Hand (only for Eldrazi mana, not black of course)
November 26, 2015 7 a.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #47
Anyway, people, don't judge the mechanic as a whole because of a few cards. Being sort of a new mana, it will probably get a slice of the color pie, and being colorless means it will get things from all the colors. This could be a worthwhile "color" to play, and it is likely that it will get better cards than Cardzilek, Wastescard, and Mirrorcard.
November 26, 2015 9:10 a.m.
philktoken8998 says... #49
I think one thing that would be cool and possibly make sense in the set rather than have all 10 battlelands in the block is doing dual lands that fetchable for this colorless wastes and a normal basic land. IE a card that is "Swamp Waste" or "Forest Waste" would make a lot of sense right now, as my own hunches say they will not do the other 5 battlelands in OTG. Having rare dual lands like this could make creatures and noncreature spells with the colorless mana cost more viable to play in constructed with cards like that. It makes sense then because you would have the 5 dual battlelands and then the 5 dual wastelands for each of the 5 colors, respectively, all fetchable.
November 26, 2015 10:26 a.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #50
Kozilek's spawn in the last set were aggressive and "colorless matters" so that is probably what many will be in OGW. The deck I am hoping to make is Mono _ Aggro.
CuteSnail says... #1
Accurate. I forgot to mention that. Heel face turn is somewhat subjective. but yes.
November 20, 2015 2:39 p.m. Edited.