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.
EDIT #2: Didgeridooda showed me a recently released video portraying the very first set Wastes was meant to be in way back before Legends!
Darkmagi1131 says... #2
Well if you check Femme_Fatale's post above you'll see that someone did lose their job. Heard it from my shop owner as well.
November 30, 2015 9:15 p.m.
Named_Tawyny says... #3
Heard it from a guy who heard it from a guy that some nameless person lost their job doesn't really count as a reliable source.
November 30, 2015 10 p.m.
Darkmagi1131 says... #4
The premier class stores hearing it from WOTC doesn't count as reliable eh? I guess none of the spoilers we ever get are reliable because they come frome third parties. Geezz
November 30, 2015 10:06 p.m.
Do you have a source on the Two-Headed Giant draft? That sounds interesting.
December 1, 2015 3:20 p.m.
Harashiohorn says... #7
Likely the biggest effect of a 2HG theme will be creatures and effects that reference something to the effect of "friendly" creatures and permanents rather than just ones you control, that would at least seem like an easy logical step.
December 1, 2015 3:24 p.m.
Harashiohorn says... #8
Two-Headed Giant is Central to the ExperienceOath of the Gatewatch is all about teamwork. Its designed to support Two-Headed Giant better than most any set in Magic history
Pretty sure it was Mark, but not 100% on that. It is legit though since we are seeing 5 limited 2HG GP's which is quite a few more than we have previously seen.
December 1, 2015 3:37 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #9
It's just a word of mouth hearing. There is no mention of any credible source nor game store.
I think everyone has pretty much forgotten about the 2HG thing (myself included) Gepetto. I honestly don't see how Wastes strengths 2HG anymore than it would strengthen a regular draft.
December 1, 2015 4:10 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #10
Its more like with teams its a lot easier to play Wastes, which is justification for putting it in.
December 1, 2015 4:24 p.m.
Cyberpunk_Eevee says... #11
Damn, here my friend and I got people to agree to a 2HG event at our store during the BFZ pre-release... May have just given our foes an unexpected edge...
December 1, 2015 7:32 p.m.
I played 2HG at a BFZ pre-release.
The guy from that shop runs them each time.
It would be interesting to play that style with cards more tailored for it.
If that happens.
December 2, 2015 8:27 a.m.
TheFoilAjani says... #14
Well, the new UR lends some credibility to the new cards. Kozilek just joined the fight.
December 2, 2015 2:40 p.m.
Harashiohorn says... #16
that's what the player base seems to hope, though "Oath of the Gatewatch" doesn't sound like what you would call a set in which the Eldrazi destroy Zendikar, more of a "Fall of Zendikar" or "New Eldrazia"
December 2, 2015 4:37 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #18
Well, maybe the Eldrazi get retrapped on Zendikar, Planeswalkers form the "Gatewatch" to keep them there, but they are free to roam and eat Zendikar anyway, they just cannot manifest on other planes..
December 2, 2015 8:15 p.m.
Seriously, who the fuck keeps deleting the images I post?
new card spoiler: clicky
December 3, 2015 11:08 a.m.
That second ability is interesting, although I'm not a fan of accruing life just to activate something.
I know it could all work with Felidar Sovereign, but I'm not sold.
December 3, 2015 11:14 a.m.
I've been forced to build an edh deck around her, and I hate Orzhov.
December 3, 2015 11:25 a.m.
ThisIsBullshit says... #23
You've been forced to build a deck around her?
How do you force someone to build a deck?
December 3, 2015 11:27 a.m.
I may or may not have fallen in love with a card. It's very similar to Romeo and Juliet. Love that transcends hate.
She's really cool and allowed for easy building. Tribal is always enjoyable for me, so wooo clerics.
December 3, 2015 11:30 a.m.
TheFoilAjani says... #25
I retract my earlier statement as official Kozilek Art was released. I think it's on one of the threads. It's REALLY similar to how the Ulamog art is. So that's something to consider.
December 3, 2015 11:50 a.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #26
Epochalyptik/ChiefBell, it looks like this is becoming the prime place to discuss OGW spoilers, shall I rename this to "Official Oath of the Gatewatch Spoiler Thread", and sticky it?
December 3, 2015 2:43 p.m.
I think this is quite a charged thread because the OP is critical of some developments. I'd rather have a completely neutral start.
December 3, 2015 2:50 p.m.
So, is this the official OGW spoiler thread now?
That other card looks pretty good. The abilities are nice, but the thing that will probably redeem the card the most is the fact that it is a 2/3 deathtouch for two mana. Also, Vindicate ability is Vindicate.
December 3, 2015 4:09 p.m.
Oh yeah, its pretty much strictly better than Disciple of Griselbrand. Did I mention that?
December 3, 2015 4:14 p.m.
Lastdaysgunslinger says... #32
2-3 weeks we should start seeing legit spoilers. So hopefully everyone gets what there wishing for.
December 4, 2015 1:18 a.m.
After reading the spoiler thread here on Tapped.out I think these new "land" could potentially be overlay cards ala Morphs.
The Eldrazi "eat" one of your other lands, turning it into a Waste, which can now only be tapped for a certain non-colour type of mana.
December 7, 2015 8:47 a.m.
Gidgetimer says... #34
I am inclined to agree. Except that the morph/manifest overlays have token collector's numbers and there is no reason for the Supertype "Basic" if it is an overlay.
December 7, 2015 9:03 a.m.
What if it's "basic" so there's no confusion if you end up with more than four of your lands turning into Wastes?
Also they won't actually be tokens.
It's not an exact theory. Just a general idea.
December 7, 2015 12:44 p.m. Edited.
Gidgetimer says... #36
The morph overlays weren't actually tokens either, but they had token collector's numbers instead of collector's numbers from the set. I don't see them giving it the supertype basic to prevent confusion. The only reason for the supertype basic is for deck building.
December 7, 2015 1:01 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #37
They are already shown to be the distinction between colourless and generic mana. Look to the Mystic Gate expedition spoiler.
December 7, 2015 4:19 p.m.
So it looks like <> is colorless and 
is generic. We now know from the Mystic Gate expedition.
December 7, 2015 5:31 p.m.
So... if <> is the new symbol for producing/requiring colorless mana, how quick do you think they'll be pushing reprints for some old classics?
Perhaps, C16 = 2 or 3 different Colorless decks... (all foil, like the Sliver Deck and Fire and Lightning Deck?), featuring Wastes, Sol Ring, Mutavault, Dreamstone Hedron, Stalking Stones, etc...
December 8, 2015 4:01 p.m. Edited.
canterlotguardian says... #41
Rayenous so wait, if they did that with Mutavault, would it be both "T: Add <> to your mana pool." and "<>: Text"?
December 8, 2015 4:07 p.m.
Nope, it would be:
"
: Add <> to your mana pool."
": Mutavault becomes a 2/2 creature with all creature types until end of turn. It's still a land."
- This is because it would produce colorless ( <> ), but it would require 1 generic... i.e.: mana of any color, or colorless... ().
December 8, 2015 4:12 p.m.
Schuesseled says... #44
Well here we go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA-eWvDPZX8
Now confirmed.
December 11, 2015 3:11 p.m.
Lastdaysgunslinger says... #45
Yeah they finally did it. The discussion earlier about colorless and generic being the same was also confirmed on twitter.
December 11, 2015 5:48 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #46
Colorless and generic NOT being the same. But yes.
December 11, 2015 9:58 p.m.
theemptyquiver says... #47
I like where Caligula is going with his post. It seems sensible to me.
December 11, 2015 10:13 p.m.
Lastdaysgunslinger says... #48
Well it is on there thread stating ."colorless (aka) generic. "Thats all i was getting at in our earlier discussions.
December 12, 2015 3:46 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #49
Link? Because WotC has always made the distinction. They made it in the video, MaRo made it on his tumblr. I have seen no where that any official source has said "colorless (aka generic)"
TheNextRedDude says... #1
The leaks could still be intentional. Maybe WOTC has a guy they need to fire, and this is how they would do it.
November 30, 2015 8:58 p.m.