MTG Speculation: The Happening Edition

File: Untitled.jpg (27KB, 671x320px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 671x320px

MIRROR

HE SPOILED HIS OWN FAVORITE CARD AFTER HE SAW THAT DONTHEMAGE FULFILLED HIS PART OF THE SPOILERS - E.G. LEAKING IT TO THE MTGPODCAST

File: 1447808603460.jpg (78KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 720x1280px

>>43717223
>http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/126480135723/since-you-were-in-charge-of-the-un-sets-and-each

>>43717223
These are shoped
I can tell from the pixels and by having seen quite a few shops in my time

>>43717270
Nice damage control, Mark.

Was any of this even mentioned on MTG Salvation or anywhere else? Are we the first to crack this case?

◇

>>43717223
>Raymand Swanland art that isn't destinctive Raymond Swanland art
Fuken dropped

>>43717300
Dunno, I'm too lazy to lurk forums and I don't undestand reddit.

File: Sliver Hivelord.jpg (203KB, 1800x1312px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1800x1312px

>>43717327
Aleksi and Raymand styles checks out.

>>43717327
They probably told him to boil his edgy shit down for a basic land that will be played in a fucking lot of decks. Still looks cool, though. I wonder what the other three or four Wastes will look like since they will probably come with more than just one for a basic land.

>>43717327
>Swanland covers all his art in flames and spikes
>draws some bismuth
He can only draw edgy.

>>43717223
My pet theory is that the art is real, but the cards are fake mockups deliberately leaked by Wizards to fuck with us, because Kozi is a trickster god.

>>43717396
To be fair, the only Kozilek from BfZ that DOESN'T have bismuth in it is Turn Against

File: MM20150209_icon.jpg (82KB, 768x432px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 768x432px

>>43717396
To be fair, the art director is responsible for choosing who gets to paint what. Clearly Swanland is the go-to guy for scales, explosions and shit with spikes and edges.

>>43717223
Guys, keep the tinfoil hats on.
Yes, donthemage is probably the one who leaked the pictures and he probably had the cards for a while now. So somebody leaked cards, what of it? And yes, he might be an insider and he might know MaRo, that doesn't change anything.

>>43717461
It's good to know this leak was planned. They are watching us freak out and turn against each other for coming up with how the new colorless mana works. This is all part of Kozilek's plan. He IS the trickster titan after all.

>>43717461
But we can't post epic memes if it isn't Le Happening

File: Turn-Against-Battle-for-Zendikar-MtG-Art[1].jpg (141KB, 735x1000px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 735x1000px

>>43717486
>They are watching us freak out and turn against each other for coming up with how the new colorless mana works.
> freak out and turn against each other
>turn against

>@Mtgfocus deleted the leak tweet
>https://twitter.com/Mtgfocus/status/666764141072257027

SHIT IS GETTING DEEP!

File: 1442374137833.gif (499KB, 350x198px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 350x198px

>>43717520

File: CUDbJA7U8AED7Td.jpg large.jpg (111KB, 1024x512px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1024x512px

>>43717544
They left this retweet up, though: https://twitter.com/MishrasFotoshop/status/666773693469691905

File: disappoint_cowbell_boise.jpg (24KB, 226x259px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 226x259px

>getting excited about trash cards

File: CUIypWGUAAALOJz.png (480KB, 795x370px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 795x370px

>>43717270
The image from the original tweet were in HQ.

>>43717619
>"I only play Eternal formats because they have good cards. It's the only true way to play and enjoy Magic."

>>43717619
mirrorpool is EDH gold

>>43717619
Assblasted Legacy Player detected.

>>43717723
>copy spell you control
>copy creature you control

it's trash, Jim. Even EDH can't save that shit.

File: hmmm.png (169KB, 375x523px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 375x523px

>>43717268
>Wastes is bismuth
>Mirrorpool is Ferrofluid

Is mtg art direction now just the google image results for "Cool sciency stuff"?

File: 1434588695722.jpg (54KB, 625x262px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 625x262px

>>43717805

>>43717796

>L-Legacy is dead! Ha ha ha! That shows you!

Bitch I don't even play legacy I'm just tired of you idiots acting like these are good cards.

>>43717805
>copying Dig through time and Treasure cruise

>bad

jesus christ.

also the fact that instead you can just create another Rhino or whatever instead is great.

>>43717849
This thread isn't about whether the cards are good or not.

>>43717849
>I don't always post on /tg/, but when I do, I'm a complete faggot
>Stay Salty, my friends

>>43717849
>being this butthurt

I'm here for the possible leak and conspiracy, calm your soggy tits please.

>>43717852

>Tap four lands and I can copy my treasure cruise!
>Tap SIX lands and I can copy my Seige Rhino!

zmg Timmy I can't handle the powerrrrr

>>43717901
People seem to always underestimate the impact of lands.

Even the blue and green blighted lands are seeing play, since they are basically free spells that you can put into your deck.

I agree, we will have to see how free the ◇ mana ist, but it is most likely going to see play.

>>43717901
and? that is great when your in top deck mode, bam you now draw 6 cards.

you have now won the game almost assurdly.

>>43717901
>>43718018
Sounds like a great land for control decks.

>>43717901
what you just said is actually quite powerful, are you on drugs? this is an uncounterable affect, even if they counter Treasure cruise, you still get the copy.

>>43717901
>5 mana to draw 6 cards

>not incredible

someone doesn't understand magic, it seems.

>>43717901
>even gives you more cards to delve for stuff

I'm sensing a great value deck here!

File: 63.jpg (59KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 312x445px

>>43717901
reminder, people played this quite alot.

with this land you pay 5 mana, only one of it is blue, and draw 6.

>>43717901
The only players who are worse at Magic than new-to-the-game timmies are spikes who are bad at card evaluation. Good Job, anon.

>>43717901
>/tg/ being horribly bad at Magic

Everytime.

>>43718127
That's what you become when you're playing nothing but netdecks.

>>43718095
>late game, guy plays Dig

>I attempt to counter spell with Dispell or something

>he copies Dig with this land, digs into a counterspell to counter my DIspell, then his original Dig resolves.

this is going to be a real thing that will happen, and idiots who aren't ready will suffer heavily, like this faggot>>43717901

Hey /tg/ if Mirrorpool actually makes it into an mtgtop8 deck in standard I'll rip all of my Lillis in half

>>43717901
>Bradnelson.dek

>>43718178
Post your Lilis so we can see you're serious.

>>43718178
Yeah me too

>>43718178
why wouldn't it? every esper player in existence wants at least 3 of this fucking land.

Speaking of lands, which (non zendy) swamps have the best artwork in your honest opinion /tg/? Im looking to pimp out this new monoblack modern deck im making

>>43718206

How can I be serious when /tg/ is such a joke

File: AnonDoesntKnowWhatHitHim.jpg (19KB, 686x79px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 686x79px

>>43718178
Screencapped for posterity. See you in 4 months bro.

>>43718233
Wrong thread.

>>43718235
Post them, you fucking coward.

>>43718239
Saving this for secondary confirmation

>>43718178
are people still playing Dig, Murderous Cut, Treasure Cruise, and Seige Rhinos?

>>43718242
Hey i figured its worth a shot. I need some new ideas.

>>43718235
>lol I didn't even have a Liliana so I won't have to rip them in half lol XD

>>43718127
Let's clarify this a bit.

Either you're good at card evaluation or you're not.

The people who are good at card evaluation take a card, build a deck with it, and it see whether it works or not. You don't necessarily need to be good at card evaluation, you just need to be able to build a deck and play a shit ton of games - these are the people who know what cards are good or not, they only know after tons of hours wasted figuring out what works or doesn't. Needless to say, there are not a lot of these people - namely nobody at your store or you are good at card evaluation.

Everyone else: pros, casuals, people working at Wizards, store owners, me and you, and all the people who don't do the above are SHIT at card evaluation.

>>43718178
k

File: My Lillis bring all the boys to the yard.png (132KB, 600x559px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 600x559px

>>43718242

Sure, here you go bro

>>43718304
>>43718278

>>43718286
>netdecking scrub projecting because he's bad at card evaluation and doesn't play outside of fnm grinding

>>43718333
Trips confirm.

>>43718233
Time Spiral has all the absolute best swamps.

>>43718286

>1U Good Card
>Creature
>Split second, flash
>end of turn you win the game
>0/1

This card is shit because it's a 01 for 2 mana and it does to removal and gets countered by counterbalance so it's a shitty card.

I bet you guys are the ones who thought Smothering Abomination was going to be the next big thing.

>>43718286
>The people who are good at card evaluation take a card, build a deck with it, and it see whether it works or not. You don't necessarily need to be good at card evaluation, you just need to be able to build a deck and play a shit ton of games - these are the people who know what cards are good or not, they only know after tons of hours wasted figuring out what works or doesn't.

This, whenever a new card is spoiled I never say that it's bad or good anymore. I just test out them out and see how it does.

>there are people in this thread that haven't already experimented with the cards
they're alright

>>43718398
it is, in Mardu aristocrats/rally.

it was always going to be a niche' card for niche' decks.

File: 18806.jpg (24KB, 200x285px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 200x285px

>>43718233
The Shadowmoor swamps are my favorite.

>>43718333
Nobody here. Me or you, have played with these cards in a deck or tested these cards in a deck. Or tried these decks in the environment they will be played in with other new cards. Nobody knows if these cards are good because nobody has done any testing. The only metric that determines EFFECTIVE card evaluation is testing. Raw testing.

So you're right. I netdeck all the time and play at FNM. But I know I'm shit at card evaluation and everyone else needs to admit this to themselves.

There are maybe only 20 people in the world good at card evaluation. 20 people who take the time to brew something out of nothing and find out what is good or not. Many more people can tweak, polish, or build off that foundation, but the people who actually figure it out what is good number no more than 20 and from them stem every competitive deck that makes cash. And those same ~20 people will show when the set is fully revealed what is good or not.

>>43718452
more like about 200 people.

the game isn't chess anon, it isn't hard to slot in a siege rhino, or figure out drawing 3 cards for 1 mana ala cruise is good.

>>43718452
You're confusing Card Evaluation as a skill with Deck Brewing as a skill.

>>43718233
Foil Mirrodin Swamp by Mark Tedin

>no one talking about the leak conspiracy

Guys...

>>43718541
It's either viral advertising or it's not. Who cares.

File: confirmed.png (376KB, 446x627px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 446x627px

>>43718406

>>43718541
That's because there is no conspiracy. It was an intentional leak, just like all of those "we found this card from the next set in a booster pack of the current set, or in the parking lot of our fnm"

>new basic land
>its not purple

dropped

>>43718659
>wanting an actual new color

File: f649ce05fd[1].png (338KB, 751x584px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 751x584px

Hedron-flavored mind stone reprint in Oath of the Gatewatch showing off ◇ confirmed

Someone explain to me what all this shit is. Is this a new kind of mana?

>>43717340
>>43717300

it's been on mtgsalvation since yesterday

>>43718678
>it makes a difference

>>43718739
I'm talking about the conspiracy surrounding it. Click the links in the OP post.

>>43718732
The only answer is "nobody knows"
A guess is that the diamond symbol means "can only be paid for with colorless"
Another is that it's something similar to snow mana. Eldrazi mana, its own type, but still colorless
It's a leak so no actual information is out
Not guaranteed to be real either

>>43718659
There aren't enough mechanics and design space to fill five colors. How the hell can you expect a 6th color to be anything else than a flop?

Every set there's blue cards that tap, red cards that Threaten, black cards that discard, and so forth. Keywords must overlap between colors and their combinations are limited. They're hitting the limits of design space and have to ration whatever creative space is left. A 6th color would be the worst thing they could implement.

I'm glad that they're using phrases like "colorless spell" and "colorless creature" now. That's as close as you're going to get to 6th color. But that's not going to be around beyond this set.

>>43718705
I will love this, although rampant growth would be nicer to have

>>43718732
True colorless mana. If you see it in a cost, it can ONLY be paid for with colorless mana. Cards will likely no longer tap for (x) but instead ta for <>.

>>43718771
>>43718678
You both are really, really new arnt you.

>>43718775
so unless they errata every single mana rock, this shit is unusable in EDH unless people buy NEW cards?

Wizards might be going full jew.

>>43718791
WE DON'T KNOW

>>43718766

that I don't know, since I haven't been up with the threads.

>>43718791
They've done errata of that level before.

>>43718791
First of all, Wizards already is full jew, they have been for years now. Second of all, they likely will do the colorless mana errata. And third, this is all still just speculation because we don't have confirmation on ANY of this by Wizards.

>>43718766
My guess is no, it was only a few hours ago right?

>>43718791
It wouldn't be errata since it's clear that everything that produces [number of colorless mana] is now n[colorless mana symbol].

>>43718791

>this new card isn't useable in EDH unless you buy NEW CARDS?

just sayin

>>43718766
I read the posts.

One. Never trust anything MaRo says. It's all marketing, hype, and one day any promises he makes will be broken.

Two. donthemage is the guy posting some of these posts. This guy is the loudest supporter of the Reserve List. He fucking loves it and everything MaRo says. Based on everything I've read from this guy in the past he sounds like he'll kowtow to anything Wizards says without question and argue supporting it. He's either a mouthpiece for Wizards or a blind follower, either way, he, like MaRo, should not be trusted as they're essentially the same person.

>>43718791
I don't see why they'd need to, just let everything keep producing (1),(2), etc, that mana is still colorless. All that changes is that there will be a handful of cards that care about colorless mana.

>>43718791
>going full jew
>going
what race is Maro anon.

>>43718791

Holy christ. YOU DON'T HAVE TO ERRATA ANYTHING.

Things that tap to add 1 or 2 or whatever to your pool already add colorless mana of that amount, which is functionally different in the rules from generic mana. The new symbol would only visually denote this rule that already exists, so that they can combine colorless and generic in casting costs.

This continued nonsense about errata is basically the equivalent of having a fit when they introduced the new tap symbol because "NOW THEY HAVE TO ERRATA ALL THE OLD TAP SYMBOLS TO THE NEW TAP SYMBOLS, OTHERWISE I CAN'T TAP MY PERMANENTS!"

>>43718849
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/23169388122/2-does-the-word-sorry-even-exist-in-the-wotc-or

See >>43716705

>>43718791
>Wizards might be going full jew

"Just watch as I shift into MAXIMUM OVERJEW"

>>43718850
This makes sense but the problem with that is that Mirrorpool >>43717659 actually specifies the symbol instead of just 1
Ugly formatting at the very least

>>43718452
>There are maybe only 20 people in the world good at card evaluation.
You're fucking retarded and don't even understand what the word "card evaluation" means.

It's not hard to see that both of these new cards are pretty fucking amazing.

One is a fucking land that becomes siege rhino 5-8 later on.

The other is a lategame uncounterable draw 7 that can then stick you a massive, evasive body which turns all your 2-drops into Force of Will against common removal and counterspells.

>>43718791
Errata only matter for Gatherer and reprints. And since most mana rocks will never see print again, it's not hard to change a few fucking symbols on Gatherer.

>>43718705
>we are going to have to design a card that literally already exists

One of the guys from the Great Designer Search made the colorless mechanic. You can find it in the archives.

Here's how this is going to work: any colorless X, or 1, 2, or whatever can be paid for with mana of any color.
Diamonds can only be paid for by purely colorless mana; mana that has no color at all. So to cast Kozi here, you could have 8 green mana and two colorless, or 10 colorless, but NOT 10 green.

Mana rocks will continue to produce wholly colorless mana-the diamond symbol. It will be marked with {C}.
Costs will still require large "anything goes" costs, with probably only a handful needing actual colorless mana in any given set. Expect it to be evergreen, but rare. Think protection. It's a very large drawback, which leads to splashy effects. This is an interesting twist on a sixth color while still allowing for future use outside of the set, and not cocking up the rest of Magic. I look forward to the reveal.

See you in a few months.

>>43718869
Literally this. Thank you.

It's like people saying "well I guess all these come into play abilities on old cards no longer mean anything because there's only 'The Battlefield' now".

>>43718922
Thank you, Mr. Nagle.

>>43718791
They already errata'd it from "Add one colorless mana to your mana pool" to "Add {1} to your mana pool", and it's a pretty convincing argument that once again changing it to "Add {D} to your mana pool" makes the game easier to explain while opening up design space.

File: Image.ashx.png (137KB, 223x311px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 223x311px

>>43718885
Good point. Well there are already cards like (pic related) so Wizards at least isn't against printing a ton of mana symbols on a card.

>>43718791
>>43718951
Compare the original printing of Blasted Landscape to its most recent printing.

It's just gonna be Eldrazi mana. Snow mana 2.0.

See you in a few months.

>>43718871
Well fuck, I'm glad someone else sees it.

Nobody cares though. We're on fucking 4chan the so-called buttplug of the Internet. Post this shit anywhere else and it will get nuked for slander or downvoted to hell.

It's elementary information control. Have some pundits on your side, buy off your critics.

Look at the Limited Resources podcast. God bless you Marshall for such a quality show but you obviously aren't allowed to talk shit about MTGO being broken now that you're on Wizards' payroll AND ChannelFireball's payroll, which is also in some ways on Wizards' payroll as a marketing outlet.

>>43718949
You're welcome.

Interestingly, Nagle was on the panel for the designer search.

>>43718968
Hey, we can meet up.

>>43718968
it's what i figured
which sucks cause that sucks

>>43718969
>aren't allowed to talk shit about MTGO being broken now

This is probably just self-censorship on his side.

>>43718871

Maro really has a lot of patience. I can kinda respect the guy for being able to deal with fans.

>>43718806
>They still won't make the nephilim legendary

>>43718968
I can't wait until colorless mana gets finally spoiled only to tell idiots like you "told you so" while you will be in denial you ever thought it was going to work that way. Thank god, we're all anonymous here, right? :^)

>>43719003
2016 will have four-color Commander decks with new Nephilim as legendaries.

>>43718922
so painlands would be good in standard if just for this

File: elusive_faggot.jpg (49KB, 401x600px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 401x600px

>>43719021

>I can't wait until eldrazi mana gets finally spoiled only to tell idiots like you "told you so" while you will be in denial you ever thought it was going to work that way. Thank god, we're all anonymous here, right? :^)

>>43718922
I'm not betting on it being evergreen. Right now, it seems to be Eldrazi-flavored and it possibly will be in the future. Only when a new set comes around that cares about colorless the <> will be used in costs. But first let's see what OGW brings.

>>43717520
>Ulamog destroys the physical
>Emrakul destroys reality
>Kozilek destroys Magic

He's really doing his best.

>>43719082
>Emrakul will warp the inhabitants on Innistrad

Innsmouth fish people confirmed!

>>43719003
This is non-functional errata; see >>43718967

>>43719030
I'll believe it when I see it, anon.

File: Untitled.jpg (158KB, 1367x612px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1367x612px

This is how you do a bet.

>>43718993
The reality is that he can't talk shit about the program. Whether or not it is because he is professional enough to self-censor or his managers have outright instructed him to not talk shit about it the reality remains the same, he remains completely mum on the topic.

Here's the deal, former co-hosts Jon Loucks and Brian Wong haven't played on MTGO since Khans because it's a broken piece of shit. They've been playing Hearthstone. I'm not going to begrudge Wong for quitting because the show was just too consuming but a tin-foil-hat part of me wants to think the man can't continue to be on the show and be muzzled when he wants to express that MTGO is a dogshit program. He still plays Limited on paper, but he's abandoned the MTGO.

Absolutely none of the pros that Wizards regularly uses as the faces of the game have ever shit-talked the program. They may be associated with those who have but the premier players don't say anything negative. They say nothing negative about card prices, they say nothing negative about the game - it's all upbeat excitement. Their continued spotlight is dependent on whether Wizards features them in articles or in their coverage. It's not necessarily negative but something critical that I want them to say but they don't.

Magic does better when players are just moronically flopping in and out of the game. People are constantly encouraging players to just rip open booster packs so as to brag about their lottery addiction. Being critical outside of gameplay is hardly something that is encouraged.

>>43719082
Ulamog, the Infinite Gyre and Ceaseless Hunger, consumes the world around him

Kozilek, Butcher of Truth, The Great Distortion, warps the reality he touches.

Emrakul, The Aeons Torn, sunders time itself.

>>43719171
>putting your money were your mouth is
Good on you. So what are you gonna do with that $10?

>>43719171
>The lack of reminder text
>On Mythics

They don't need to put reminder text for effects that will also be occurring at the common and uncommon levels. They expect that you'll have seen a few ◇ spells with reminder text in them by the time you see a Kozilek.

Obviously, it's different for something like Void Winnower who has a unique effect. This is basic, even under NWO.

>>43719184
What will Emrakul's name will be the next time she gets printed as a new card?

Emrakul, the Deafening Madness

Now it's your turn, /tg/!

>>43718705
>Next time we go to Zendikar
>We're already on Zendikar
>There will be a next time
Superfriends confirmed for saving the plane. Ob Nixilis a shit

File: understood_that_reference_avengers.gif (866KB, 500x269px) Image search: [Google]

866KB, 500x269px

>>43719082

>>43719003
Errata of the Nephilim would be functional errata - they prefer not to do functional errata when they can avoid it, unless it's a shift of the baseline rules, though 'functional errata' is something like 'strictly better' - it's considered only on a card by card basis, with maybe some Generic Always Around Stuff considered, not considered with every card past future or present that could possibly effect it.
Adding a supertype to make something die if there's more than one of them is beyond what they'd be willing to do with errata. Changing a symbol is not.

File: d2Q0E.jpg (15KB, 447x444px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 447x444px

>>43719002
How does his dick taste like?

>>43718963
Man I love that card

>>43719245
I can almost see them going all out and just calling her "Emrakul, the Shadow over Innistrad".

>>43719245
Emrakul, the Eternal Rift

>>43719313

I can dig it.

File: 14872631.webm (129KB, 360x214px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 360x214px

COLORLESS MANA ≠ GENERIC MANA

COLORLESS MANA ≠ GENERIC MANA

COLORLESS MANA ≠ GENERIC MANA

COLORLESS MANA ≠ GENERIC MANA

COLORLESS MANA ≠ GENERIC MANA

>>43719354
Thank you.

>>43719313
I wouldn't mind Emrakul showing her presence in the dreams of the Innistrad people, slowly turning everything weird and darker just by being in the vicinity of the plane. It would probably even be better if she wasn't shown at all.

>>43719003
The only reason to do it is EDH.
EDH is usually casual enough that you should be able to get your friends to allow you to play a Nephilim as your commander if your heart is really set on it.

>>43719354
I feel sad for anyone who hasn't realized this already.

>>43718909
A ten mana creature has a huge effect on the game? Gadzooks! A land that doesn't tap for colored mana could be used for effect in a three color deck on turn 6? Stop the presses!

>>43719361
You know they'll show her though.

>>43718919
I'll take it was a joke for 200 Alex

>>43719274
He's a mouthpiece for wizards. I wonder if his justification for lying is 'if I didn't someone would replace me' which to be fair is almost definitely correct, although he could still promote the truth for a small time before they offed him.
I understand hating him because he lies (and he definitely lies) but I think that some of the anger is misguided and should be directed towards wizards in general. One of his main purposes is to be a scapegoat and it shouldn't work as well as it does.
That said, not the anon you replied to.

>>43719419
If she's in Innistrad, probably. I still hope they're going for slow, creeping Lovecraft horror with the big reveal only at the end. It would work with the two-block paradigm.

>>43719441
See >>43719274

>>43717852
If you want to evaluate cards from a kitchen table perspective that's fine, but none of this is good enough for standard even

>>43719245
>Emrakul, the Genderfluid

Aternately,

>Emrakul, Excuse to Draw Avacyn Tentacle Porn

>>43719469
>I understand hating him because he lies
>although he could still promote the truth for a small time before they offed him
>I'm sucking his dick
What? I wouldn't care if you blew up his house I just don't hate the guy much myself.
Emphasis on much.

>>43718095
That card was only good because it was an instant. You basically are setting yourself up to play a pile of suboptimal cards for the chance of a nut draw

>>43719565
>Ruise Cruise
>Land that doubles your cruise
>Sub-optimal

>>43719498
I get your point, what I hate is this sort of cult following he has around him on tumblr, his awful comics and the fact he can't see why jace is being overused.

I don't dislike his work because mainly I don't know what cards he designs, I dislike him as a person. He's a true money vampire, he's an asshole irl and people see him as the saviour of mtg. The fucker is not your friend, he doing marketing while he designs.

>>43719631
>his awful comics
What? I tried looking it up I still don't know what you're talking about.

>>43719082
>>43719184
Close. Ulamog consumes worlds. Kozilek consumes minds. Emrakul consumes time.

>>43719498
One of his job description is probably 'rile up enough neckbeards so we can get free publicity from all the abloo bloos posted in online forums.'

>>43719361
This. The next block is all about something twisting people, like the a church of Avacyn, into monsters and everyone is in a panic (us the readers, and the Planeswalker protagonists) because they fear that it is clearly the Eldrazi. There are plenty of signs, but as they dig deeper, the signs twist and distort like they were never there and the protagonists think it's all in their head, but Jace confirms that the memories are real. He become paranoid that there is a mind mage afoot, like a vampire, that is causing all these problems for his own benefit by manipulating people's memories. Sorin has found out many safeguards he had laid are twisted and/or gone without a trace, and he's pissed because someone has been messing with his shit. Liliana shows up and confronts Jace who lashes out at her thinking she is responsible for everything as a game. Meanwhile, a mysterious yet unassuming figure is seen in the background of many of these scenes. The block ends with this figure rowing a small boat out to a foggy ocean as a wicked grin crosses his face.

At the end of the first block we have:
Trail of corruption from the cult of Avacyn
Clues and mysteries leading to twisted horrors
Paranoid as fuck Jace who can't trust anyone
Pissed off Sorin wonder who has been sabotaging his shit
Liliana struggling with the Veil


The reality is that Emrakul is doing what Emrakul does and pieces of time are being erased, but the memories of what happened are still in people's minds. Likewise, we as the readers expect to see Elzradi, but they aren't actually there. The next set involves a horde of twisted monsters rolling in with the fog, and the heroes venture out to find the source, which turns out to be Nahiri sleeping in a hedron with the cult leader twisting her dreams, making her use the hedrons power ton affect the dead. Emrakul is revealed in the return to return, and we move away from the Eldrazi plot for now.

>>43719704
>time
Teferi Pls.

>>43719733
>Emrakul has been following Sorin to get revenge or whatever the equivalent emotion an Eldrazi can feel, is

It all wouldn't be too far off. I'd be game for a psychological horror set.

>>43719774

I think not would more accurately be that Sorin had lured the Eldrazi to Zendikar, and Emrakul was still following the Lure or it followed Nahiri.

>>43718826
>they likely will do the colorless mana errata.
Anyone who actually thinks this is fucking retarded.

File: 'errata'.jpg (66KB, 446x310px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 446x310px

>>43719897
They would never "errata" cards, right guys?

>>43719914
Before now there was no functional difference. Now there is.

>>43719922
That functional difference being?

>>43719940
That (1) can't be used to pay for (<>)

But Kozilek isn't indestructible and his abilities are shit

I don't buy it

File: 1447918713466.jpg (70KB, 446x310px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 446x310px

>>43719922
I don't see any functional difference.

>>43719953
(1) is generic mana you can find in mana costs that can be paid with any mana. <> is colorless mana.

>>43719953

You don't know that. Literally nobody knows that.

File: X17puIB.gif (534KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

534KB, 500x281px

>>43719940
>New color mana xDDD :^)

/tg/ is bad at magic. Just let it go. Screen shot for later so you can post and laugh, but for now just let them flop around. Pic related.

>>43719966
Certainly not the people who leaked it, right? ;^)

>>43719631

jace is being overused and counterspells are the most op form of removal are my two favorite mtg memes

>>43719953
Yes, actually, it can. That's the point.

(1) is now (C) when it's mana that is generated. (1) in a cost is something different.

>>43719953
Holy shit, I thought /tg/ is bad at magic was an exaggeration.

>>43719958
>abilities are shit
>uncounterable fill your hand
>turns all your one-drops into uncounterable mental misstep for 0, all your two-drops into uncounterable spell snare for 0, all your three drops into etc. etc.
He's a fucking beast.

File: 635823146225462416.jpg (84KB, 486x370px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 486x370px

Daily reminder that generic mana is NOT colorless mana.

A is not the same as B. <> is what the colorless mana will look like with OGW to differentiate it from the generic mana.

File: kek.png (43KB, 1350x262px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 1350x262px

Case solved, everyone go home!

If (<>) is the same as (1) then why do the abilities on Mirror Pool not cost (<>)(<>)(<>) and (<>)(<>)(<>)(<>)(<>) respectively?

>>43720093
because >>43720032

generic mana =/= colorless mana

>>43719958

Ulamog is the only Indestructible Eldrazi, he was the only Indestructible Eldrazi in the original Rise set.

>>43720093
because you can't put titties on cards (.)(.) much less double pair of titties (.)(.)(.)(.).

>>43720032
>Daily reminder that generic mana is NOT colorless mana.
and the cost {u} is not the same thing as adding {u} to the mana pool. The only difference between that distinction and the colorless generic distinction is that generic can be payed with any color of mana. The essence of 'colorless' mana is that it is generic and can only be used on generic mana, adding a colorless color is retarded and the only reason why distinguishing would be necessary is if they were doing exactly that.
Not to say that they aren't doing it, it seems like they are, but hopefully it'll just be snow 2.0 instead.

>>43720093
Because (<>) has to be paid with colorless mana specifically. The (2) and (4) can be paid with any color, the same as always. That's the popular theory anyway.

>>43720133
That's a stupid ass theory. Why the fuck even make the distinction?

>>43720122
>retarded

>>43720151
>stupid ass

>>43720091
>making a shitty mechanic like that for one set in a 2 set block and likely barely ever use it again
>making it complicated
>straining land bases harder if you wanna run this shit
>all of this for one singular set

Wizard's simply wouldn't do that

Diamond land will probably just be an additional kind of land for this block as a gimmick

>>43720133

I really hope that's the case, otherwise this is going to be worse than BFZ. It would be unplayable until next rotation....much like BFZ

>>43720154
>quote

>>43720151
Why is it stupid? We get a functional sixth color without having to actually print out a bunch of shit to support it, because there's a ton of stuff that produces colorless mana already. It's a clever and simple way to implement a new color without actually making a new color.

>>43720178
I see it more as a "devotion to colorless mana sources" as a sixth color.

>>43720191
Well yah, that's what I'm saying, if the theory is true all they're actually doing is making colorless mana actually matter. I can't think of any cards that need/want colorless mana specifically, so this would be new design space they're exploring.

>>43717223
So Kozilek is... still colorless, but in such a way that you need to use colorless mana to cast him? (i.e. the requirement can't be fulfilled via Birds of Paradise/Black Lotus/Moxen/tap for any color lands like City of Brass)

Welp, Eldrazi confirmed too weird for me to fully grasp, my brain is broke

Sure, it's probably just a new mechanic for 'colorless mana', but arguing about that is boring. I don't want to live in that world.

OBVIOUSLY this is a new, sixth color. A paradigm shift to end the game of Magic: The Gathering as we know it. Obviously the Eldrazi have won, and destroyed the universe. Obviously this is the end of Modern, and all subsequent sets are to be played only in the Future format. And obviously, the theme of its first set - will be Contraptions.

>>43720252
Well if you think about it, colorless mana has sort of been a color all along, there has just never been cards that needed it to be cast. You can't use colorless mana to pay for (G), the same way you can't use (G) to pay for (U). The only difference now is that there will be a handful of cards that treat colorless as a necessary color that they need to be cast.

>>43720278
I like it that you can't effortlessly splash Kozilek into a 3 or more colored deck. You have to actually think about how to plan your mana for your game.

>>43718871
what went with the helvault prerelease?

>>43719313
Too long, unfortunately. Wouldn't fit on a card.

>>43720310
I agree, and I'm really hoping that's how it's going to work. Making colorless function like an actually color would be a really elegant way to introduce a sixth color as it already has a lot of cards to make it functional right out of the gate.

>>43719247
This is Maro we're talking about.
He absolutely LOVES to drop carefully worded hints - he can't outright TELL us due to NDAs and whatnot, but he can hint and whatnot.
And the next time we're going to be going to Zendikar is this January, with Oath of the Gatewatch. We'll be returning to Zendikar...after the Commander decks.

>>43720178
>Why is it stupid?
Game designer makes 5 colors of mana, each can be spent for its own color or generic mana. Then GD decides that there should also be mana that can only be spent on generic costs, he calls this 'generic mana'. Making colorless mana rather is strictly worse than making colored mana when costing cards, it is a downside in comparison.
Making generic mana its own color makes it fundamentally non-generic and turns that downside into an upside, this means that cards which were previously balanced on making mana that can only be spent on generic cards get a buff. Either the cards which use the 'colorless color' are unplayable or they fuck up balance for no fucking reason. They don't even encourage mono colored or 0 colored decks because they themselves count as a color for manabase concerns.
This mirrodin style solution of making tribes gain support out of thin air is becoming tiring and hurting the game as a whole. This is just the last and most egregious offense that wizards has done.

File: YavimayaCoast.jpg (33KB, 223x310px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 223x310px

>>43720366

>>43720386
That definitely is a generic mana symbol, yes.

<> can only be paid with specifically colorless mana.
Wastes generatate {1} or <1> AKA Specifically colorless mana.

Waste (The land, do NOT confuse with wasteland, the land) is basic, hence you can have any amount of them in a deck. Waste generates <1> or {1}. Waste does NOT have a type, and as such doesn't influence Domain.


<> is a parasitic mechanic, much like snowcosts and soul shift.

Kozi2 is good in legacy.

>>43720421
><> is a parasitic mechanic

Except that there always have been sources of colorless mana in the past.

>>43720366
>Making generic mana its own color makes it fundamentally non-generic and turns that downside into an upside, this means that cards which were previously balanced on making mana that can only be spent on generic cards get a buff. Either the cards which use the 'colorless color' are unplayable or they fuck up balance for no fucking reason.
I think there's a middle ground there, but we'll have to see.
>They don't even encourage mono colored or 0 colored decks because they themselves count as a color for manabase concerns
I don't think it discourages such decks either. Colorless is still colorless, it may just function as a color with some cards, there may not even be many.

>>43720434
<> the symbol will probably either never appear again, or appear once in a blue moon.

That's parasitic mechanics.

>>43720421
><> can only be paid with specifically colorless mana.
>Wastes generate {1} or <1> AKA Specifically colorless mana.
Makes sense. this would mean that as one of mirror pools abilities costs 2<> respectively, you can pay for it with 3 mana, but one of them MUST be colorless. same for its 4<> ability.

>>43720450
No, it's not. A parasitic mechanic in Magic only works within it's own set. You can still use Mirrorpool without any other OGW card in your deck and it works.

>>43720366
a) Generic mana is not its own color and it will never be one. Generic mana only appears in costs, never as a product of a card.
b) A mana source that does not produce a colored mana produces colorless mana, not generic mana. AFAIK there are no cards so far that explicitely need colorless mana (there might be a card with "you may only spend colorless mana on this" but I found none).
c) Colorless mana can be spend as generic mana, just like colored mana can.
d) There is only one symbol for both colorless mana (if it is produced) and for generic mana (as a cost).
e) IF <> is the new symbol for colorless mana, d) will change and there will be cards that specifically need colorless mana to be cast from now on. You will be able to spend <> as colorless mana or as generic mana. Everything else is speculation.


>>43720386
That is the symbol for both generic and colorless mana, but in this case it is colorless mana.

>>43720421
Soulshift isn't parasitic, it plays perfectly well with spirits from all across magic. It's Splice/Arcane that was parasitic. Also Samurai Tribal, Ninja Tribal, and Moonfolk Tribal.

>>43720468
Except that before Kamigawa there were almost no spirits at all in Magic. Soulshift was highly parasitic when Kamigawa came out.

>>43720468
Everything is parasitic.

>>43720440
>Colorless is still colorless, it may just function as a color with some cards, there may not even be many.
That's the hope I guess, I hate what it will do to non-rotating formats but it could be good for standard potentially.
>>43720467
>Generic mana is not its own color and it will never be one
When did I imply otherwise? Everyone gets this, stop acting like it's confusing.
>Generic mana only appears in costs
I use the term 'generic mana' for both because it was called generic mana before it was called 'colorless'.
>A mana source that does not produce a colored mana produces colorless mana, not generic mana
Why are you pretending like there is confusion here when there clearly fucking isn't any?
>Colorless mana can be spend as generic mana
You mean colorless mana can only be spent on generic mana just like no other color can, right?
Why did you even respond? Just because I understand that 'colorless' mana is fundamentally linked with generic mana unlike you fucking morons?

File: Sol Ring Alpha.jpg (30KB, 226x311px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 226x311px

>>43720517
>it was called generic mana before it was called 'colorless'.

CAN WE AGREE
<> IS ESSENTIALLY A NEW TYPE OF MANA
WHILE YES IT IS COLORLESS, IT CAN ONLY PAY FOR <> (WHICH IS CLASSIFIED AS COLORLESS )
THIS IS A SEPARATE ENTITY TO (X) WHICH CAN BE PAYED WITH ANY COLOR (INCLUDING <>)

CHEERS,
W

>>43720553
no

>>43720517
>When did I imply otherwise? Everyone gets this, stop acting like it's confusing.
Not everything was directed at you, I was also recapitulating for everyone.
>I use the term 'generic mana' for both because it was called generic mana before it was called 'colorless'.
Depending on OGW, you might have to change your use of the term.
>Why are you pretending like there is confusion here when there clearly fucking isn't any?
There is clearly lots of confusion. You seem not to be confused as you indicated in the sentence before, but other anons are.
>>Colorless mana can be spend as generic mana
>You mean colorless mana can only be spent on generic mana just like no other color can, right?
No, I mean what I wrote. The long form would be: Colorless mana can be spent on generic mana costs, and white mana can be spent on generic mana costs, and blue mana ...
>Why did you even respond? Just because I understand that 'colorless' mana is fundamentally linked with generic mana unlike you fucking morons?
See above, lots of anons don't understand it.

>>43720553
It's devotion to colorless mana sources. It's in between new mana / snow mana / colored mana. It does make you reconsider your manabase like a real color. But in reality it inverts the value of lands capable of producing colored mana and substitutes it with colorless. Now you might want to play your painland instead of a BFZ kekland.

>>43719699
Tales From The Pit. Maro's... thing.

File: tumblr_nx1adcYvx81qjqvxao1_1280.jpg (671KB, 1280x900px) Image search: [Google]

671KB, 1280x900px

>>43720568
>you will never be as strong as a person as Maro is

;_;

>>43720312
People got all pissy that some random stores got "special" Hellvaults containing foil versions of the promo cards.

Keep in mind these promo cards were tokens and oversized Legendary creatures - cards that aren't even used to play the fucking game. So people felt like they were getting ripped off because some random people got surprise unplayable foil paper.

>>43720517
>>43720398
I correct myself in so far that that symbol is indeed called "generic mana symbol". As I said, so far there has been no need to differentiate between colorless mana symbols and generic mana symbols, since nothing specifically needed colorless mana.

For the other anons:
107.4b Numeral symbols (such as {1}) and variable symbols (such as {X}) represent generic mana in costs. Generic mana in costs can be paid with any type of mana. For more information about {X}, see rule 107.3.
107.4c Numeral symbols (such as {1}) and variable symbols (such as {X}) can also represent colorless mana if they appear in the effect of a spell or ability that reads “add [mana symbol] to your mana pool” or something similar.
They will probably adjust this if <> is the new symbol for colorless mana.

>>43720468
Splice wouldn't be parasitic if they printed more fucking arcane spells.
Or maybe just printed "splice into instant/sorcery" cards.

>>43720588
Some Helvaults contained Judge promos, though.

>>43720557
>There is clearly lots of confusion
Please show me.
>No, I mean what I wrote. The long form would be
This is purposefully obtuse, the difference between colorless and colored mana is that colorless isn't asked for. It isn't 'technically' in the rules but that is the effective state of things.
>>43720527
Holy shit are there seriously no cards which state they generate 'generic mana'? I could've sworn I saw some.

>>43720614
if there are cards that say "generic mana" they would be saying it in a payment context, such as "you may pay two generic mana to counter this effect"

>>43720614
>I could've sworn I saw some.

Are you sure you aren't confused yourself, anon? I'm pretty sure you're more confused than you know about mana.

>>43720605
But they didn't. Which is why it IS so damn parasitic.

>>43720622
OK, that would make sense.

>>43720588
>ignoring the judge promo Demonic Tutors

>>43720606
Alright, I didn't know that.

But that being the case. They were getting pissy about not receiving unplayable shiny cards AND cards they weren't entitled to in the first place (by the fact that the people bitching almost certainly weren't judges).

Even if some contained Worldwake Jace the Mind Sculptors I don't even see a problem with that either. Here's the deal, we were told the Helvaults contained promo tokens and oversized cards. That is all that should be expected. Anything extra is just that, a bonus. Getting angry that some people got a happy surprise is fucking childish and petty to the extreme.

>>43720626
But Wizards/Maro like to trot it out as proof of parasitic mechanics, when the thing could be anything but if they ever bothered to try doing something with it.

>>43720624
>Are you sure you aren't confused yourself, anon?
Please tell me how my mistake in semantics caused or showed any misunderstanding of the rules in any relevant or practical sense.

>>43720632
It's the same as complaining about expeditions in booster packs: "If I'm not guaranteed and someone else still got these, I hate them!"

>>43720639
You were dead sure about the generic mana thing and it wasn't true.

>>43720614
In this thread there is almost none (>>43720151), but the other threads were bad and it wore me out. Sorry for that.

>>43720624
That wasn't me, btw.

>>43720642
>You were dead sure about the generic mana thing and it wasn't true.
We've been over this (although I'm not sure if I'd call myself 'dead sure' but whatever.)
Anything actually relevant?

>>43720632
The judge promos weren't randomly distributed like the Expedition Lands. They were specifically sent to a handful of high profile stores like Twenty Sided store in New York.


It wasn't like some lottery where there was a small chance your store could be lucky. You literally had zero chance if you were at a run of the mill hometown FLGS.

>>43719631
He's a juden

>>43720091
>You can't pay for <>
I guess we don't have to worry about anyone hard casting the new Kozilek then

>>43720687
"He's a jews"

>>43720663
God forbid we reward our high profile stores for making us more money.

Once again, the expectation was tokens and oversized Legendaries. Just because somebody else got something better, doesn't mean you got fucking ripped off.

>>43720632
Did you see the reaction here when they know wizards is inserting Expeditions into BfZ boosters?
It's something like : GIVING US FREE EXPENSIVE STUFFS? FUCK YOU WIZARDS FUCK YOOOOUUUU.
It's honestly not that different from that neckbeard.

>>43719958
Kozi never had evasion, that was kind of the point of Kozi honestly, was that he was the most powerful, as long as he didn't get killed.

File: abide snek.png (8KB, 1025x556px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 1025x556px

>>43719245
Emrakul 2: Electric Boogaloo

So is this shit real or fake??

File: 238.jpg (47KB, 312x445px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 312x445px

>>43718233
Esper a best shard. Best lands. Best stuff. I LIKE ESPER.

>>43721275
mtg salvation claims they are real...

https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/3tc4v0/kozilek_mana_leaks_confirmed_real_mtgs/

So like a 90% chance they're real.

>>43721369
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/648035-ogw-kozilek-the-great-distortion-and-new-basic?comment=771

MTG Salvation is full of smart people!

They still haven't figured out that those leaks were planted by Maro as indicated by the links in the OP post.

>>43721388
Regardless, MTGS doesn't claim leaks are real lightly.

Of the top of my head I cannot remember a time where they have posted leaks on their spoiler for it to later be disproved.

>>43721388
I don't know if it's fair to imply that they're stupid for not discussing the possibility of planted leaks as very few places are doing so right now.

It's not exactly an obvious conclusion.

So how are these lands gonna work for sealed?

>>43721468
they appear to take the common slot in a pack, lands that appear at the back of a pack tend to have a little L at the bottom of the card. the waste has a C, denoting common.

>>43721388
>They still haven't figured out that those leaks were planted by Maro as indicated by the links in the OP post
As others have pointed out, what does it even matter?

So what if MaRo leaked them? How does that change anything?

>>43720632
>Getting angry that some people got a happy surprise is fucking childish and petty to the extreme.

WELCOME TO THE MAGIC COMMUNITY NEW FRIEND

I mean, these are quite clearly fake. Cool, sure, but fake.

>>43719590
>Im going to add a bunch of cards that weaken my mana base because I might be able to get an effect out of them

>>43721752
>Im going to cut wastelands from my delver deck because I have trouble casting delver turn 2

>>43721840
Wasteland is a free spell that happens to tap for mana. This land requires you to add lands to you deck that tap for the new mana, essentially adding a color for one spell. A color which can't be fetched.

>>43721880
>This land requires you to add lands to you deck that tap for the new mana
We wont know that until it's explained how <> functions.

>>43720261
I'm okay with setting the game on fire to get Contraptions out of the ashes.

>>43721894
Mirrorpool taps for that color of mana, so we can assume that lands need to specifically tap for that color of mana to produce it

>>43721468
>>43721492
But if it's a Basic, won't you be allowed to add as many as you want to your Sealed/Draft deck? So why would it be Common instead of Land, that's the one thing that doesn't make sense to me. I don't get why they'd force you to specifically pick Wastes over actual cards in a draft and if they aren't doing that why is it Common?

>>43721921
Unless, as most of us are assuming, Wasteland now taps for <> as do all other lands that previously tapped for {1}.

>>43721921
>we can assume
You can, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you're correct. Most people, myself included, believe that <> functions as (1), and costs that require <> can be paid by any colorless source, such as Wasteland.

>>43721940
how did snow lands work in a draft during coldssnap? i assume in a similar way, they took a common slot and were basic lands.

>>43721958
That I couldn't tell you, I've drifted in and out of Magic and was out for that (which is a shame in hindsight, I loved Ice Age/Alliances).

>>43721965
according to a quick google, you couldnt use snowlands from outside the draft in a draft deck, so i assume you'll just get what you draft.

assuming everything we have been assuming is correct, about <> being the new colourless symbol, i would assume the only reason they are basic lands is for constructed, not for draft.

>>43721954
So rather than giving the eldrazi mana reminder text>>43721944
they go back and give every single colorless land an erratra? Snow mana 2 seems way more likely, wizards rehashing old territory in a new way.

>>43721944
Only a few delusional people are assuming that. Why would they print cards that tap for 2 in the last set (Mindstone*2 and Kozilek's channeller). If they knew they were going to errata them in this set. That's just retarded.

>>43721981
They've done errata that big a dozen times before, this wouldn't be some impossibly herculean undertaking compared to, say, the creature type revamp.

>>43721986
It's pretty ugly though.

Do you really want to see a Thran Dynamo tap for <><><>?

if they were planning on changing this, they would have chosen a symbol that works with the numbers. So instead of (2) for sol ring, it would be <2>. but they didn't.

>>43721984
Because they hadn't finalized it yet? (can block creatures with flying showed up in Time Spiral, Reach was introduced as a keyword in Future Sight)

>>43721991
They've done shit like >>43718963 or Cabal Ritual before, they're not exactly afraid to put multiple mana symbols next to each other.

>>43721981
A sixth color is an idea Wizards has been kicking around for a long time, and making colorless mana actually matter to a few cards would be the simplest way to implement it. They've done big erratas before, and this one wouldn't be difficult. Not only that, it holds with the Eldrazi's colorless theme. They're still colorless, it just that now one of them requires colorless mana.

>>43721991
>So instead of (2) for sol ring, it would be <2>. but they didn't.
That could be confusing next to generic mana costs given that they're both the same color grey. Better to treat the new symbol exactly as they would any other colored mana symbol and have it repeat like the rest.

>>43721992
I suppose that's possible, but with how big a rules change this is (effectively a sixth color) it makes me think there would have been finalized plans way before. This isn't the difference between keywording an ability or not, this is adding a sixth color, something R&D has been discussing for ages, something the eldrazi are perfect for, etc, etc. Every thing about this, if it was a sixth color, has been slow and deliberate, and you're telling me they'd just toss in some stuff to errata later the set before?

nah, not buying that at all.

What we're most likely seeing is a new type of mana, that can't be satisfied by generic mana, just like all colored mana can't be satisfied by generic mana.

File: 1295441356853.png (36KB, 162x301px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 162x301px

>>43720565
Someone please sticky this post to the top of /tg/ so we don't have to keep explaining it to retards over and over again.

>>43722027
If it's the colorless mana symbol, the only rules change here is the addition of cards like newKozi that require colorless mana. The {1}->◊ change is just a clarification of the difference between colorless and generic mana. That could be done whenever, and it makes some sense to have it be in a set flavored around Kozilek.

How are people this thick

You can only pay <> with colorless mana, and it will only ever be a cost. Nothing will generate <> because it would just generate {1}.
You can pay a cost of {X} with any color but you can only pay <> with colorless.

>>43722027
>and you're telling me they'd just toss in some stuff to errata later the set before?
Like you said, it's a big deal, they probably just didn't want people to see it coming. It's straight forward enough that any time a player sees that a card produces (2) or more that that can be interpreted to (<>)(<>) for cards that actually call for colorless mana.

>>43722048
Except cards have been spoiled that do generate <>

>>43722060
that's the sort of thing that actually does lead to confusion, and that they tend to avoid though.

I think all you errata theory guys are just in denial: wotc is doing snow mana all over again.

>>43722069
"Spoiled"

>>43722069
One basic land, which is full art already and only coming out in the same set it is introduced, so it makes sense it would look special and show off the new symbol.

It doesn't "generate <>"
If its rules text were written out it would be "{T}, Add {1} to your mana pool."

>>43722069
It's also confusing that you can tap a mountain to pay {1} but you can't tap for {1} to pay R because the cost is generic mana and the production is colorless. They currently have 2 different types of mana that use the exact same symbols and this would clarify that.

>>43722069
>that's the sort of thing that actually does lead to confusion, and that they tend to avoid though
I really don't see what's confusing about it, you would just need colorless mana to pay for <>, that's all. All they'd be doing is making colorless mana matter to some cards.

File: mirrorpool[1].jpg (34KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 265x370px

>>43722078
>>43722083
see pic related.

>>43722104
Again, "spoiled"
These aren't confirmed.

>>43722117
There's a lot of evidence this is an intentional leak.

>>43722117
denial. They were confirmed by the guy who has had legit spoilers in the past. I hate it too, but face reality.

>>43722137
>>43722133
The whole thing seems completely inelegant. I don't mind being wrong, but until we get something official I won't believe it.

>>43722104
Well I'm in the errata camp, but we're all going to have to just wait and see. Wizards was smart to spoil these, all the speculation over <> is definitely generating some buzz.

What is so hard to understand in this?

W,U,B,R G and <> can pay for 1
W,U,B,R and G cannot pay for <>
<> cannot pay for W,U,B,R or G
Card that says ''add (Number) to your mana pool actually add <>

it's not exactly rocket science.

>>43722154
all this clunk is probably going to lead the way for a lot of smooth sailing in the future though, assuming the leading speculation is correct.

>>43722194
You messed up. I fixed it for you.

>W,U,B,R,G and 1 cannot pay for <>

>>43722202
I dunno, I'm just quite skeptical about it. Things don't seem to be making any goddamn sense, at least to me.

>>43722194
The only issue I have with the concept is adding <>. Having a new mana symbol that can only be paid with colorless is fine, but adding <> would be ridiculous if it functions just like adding 1.

>>43722228
He didn't mess up though, and neither did you, because we don't know which of those, if either, is how <> will function yet.

>>43722228
That would be parasitic as FUCK.

>>43722228
No, actually, YOU fucked it up.

1 CAN pay for <>. that's the fucking point. 1 is colorless mana.

>>43722246
Of course I know, this is /tg/ so obviously my speculation is correct and everyone who speculates different things is a fag/retard/autist/etc.

>>43722233
>Having a new mana symbol that can only be paid with colorless is fine, but adding <> would be ridiculous if it functions just like adding 1.
If colorless is going to function as a color then it's best to treat it like any other and use mana symbols for it the same way as they'd appear on other cards, like (B)(B)(B) on Dark Ritual.

>>43721981
Mythic Rares don't need reminder text.
You can keep complaining if a common gets spoiled with the mana and no reminder text.

>>43722251
<> isn't colorless anon. It's Grey or Silver, or Bismuth.

>>43722264
The issue with that is errata; Wizards doesn't do errata like this any more. Even if nothing functionally changes it would still lead to massive confusion outside of enfranchised players, which is something they try to avoid.

>>43722271
Archangel of Thune, Army of the Damned, Ashcloud Pheonix. All of these cards with mechanics that appear at common. Mythic or not, it should have reminder text.

>>43722233
if they are changing the symbol for (1) it's because of a perceived problem that wizards has with the symbol (1) in a cost and the symbol (1) as colourless mana being the same thing. MaRo has been pretty vocal about colourless needing it's own symbol for this reason.

the <> costs are probably only going to be limited to the eldrazi, so they can have their own speshul snowflake creatures, and the two colourless 'walkers we currently have, so they don't always need to be so hideously expensive every time a new one is printed.

it also means that if we ever get another artifact-centric block they can balance the bigger, scarier creatures to require <>, so not every colour can cast them, and they are still able to be cast in normal play at lower/ish costs.

we probably wont know for sure if the speculation is correct until late december though.

>>43722295
>which is something they try to avoid
True, but it's still the most painless way to implement a sixth color, so I think they'd make an exception in this case.

>>43722295
If the reminder text would add too much text, than no, it doesn't.
Especially not at mythic.

It doesn't matter if the mechanic also pops up at common, when it's on a mythic and it's too jarring or takes up too much space, then it can easily be left out.

File: SALT.jpg (117KB, 750x450px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 750x450px

>>43722285
It's salt you dullard, salt!

>>43722320
A symbol for just {1} and not all colorless would still be incredibly confusing, and would require errata for every card costing {1} or having {1} anywhere on it to have <> which, again while not functionally different would still be confusing.

>>43722326
It would be an extremely elegant way to treat colorless like a sixth color, but that doesn't mean they're going to risk confusing new players. They've made massive leaps to avoid doing that.

>>43722330
Fair enough.

>>43722375
the other symbol isnt colourless though, it's referred to as "generic mana" in the rules text. changing colourless mana means that generic mana and colourless mana no longer get confused as they do at the moment

to recap, (1) is a cost that you can spend any colour of mana to pay for. AKA, Generic mana.

<> is colourless mana.

>>43719313
And that was the end on Innistrad. Next time on "What's up Eldrazi?" our little friend Kozilek finds a "kozy" home in Lorwyn!

>>43722411
That doesn't make any sense at all. {1} and the like is already referred to as colorless mana.

>>43722423
Look, you can only spend <> on cards that that have <> in any of the Mana costs.

>>43722439
Then we have a new mana type and a parasitic mechanic.

>>43722411
out of curiosity, how do you explain cards that uses {1} and is considered colourless even in other blocks?

File: 1426358086419.gif (121KB, 200x141px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 200x141px

>>43722416
>finds a "kozy" home in Lorwyn!
>Lorwyn is revisited in the lore only to say Kozilek went there
>he completely decimated it so we'll never get the chance to return to it

>>43722449
Not him, but I can totally see it happening. Just like Snow, it is a parasitic symbol that only work for a very restricted amount of cards.

>>43722449
Not if that's how all colorless mana is treated going forward.

>>43722457
>everything is warped and distorted
>Kithkins are even shorter now

Magic Noob here
Played Magic2014 on steam and really liked it

Really want to get into the tc game, bought a 2015 deck builders tool kit a while back and played with a mate. Want to go to a Friday night magic event i know i need new cards, what is the best thing to do, get an intro deck or the new deck builders toolkit ? I don't care if i get destroyed, what should a new player really start buying?

>>43722538
Event Decks/Clash Packs are the fastest way to go bro. Then buy singles for upgrades. Anything else is a waste of money.

>>43722451
depends, if you are talking about artifacts, then they are colourless by nature except under special circumstances IE, phyrexian corruption or esper cyborgs.

other than that the "colourless" cost is just a generic mana cost, not an actual colourless cost.

otherwise, "they never had a good enough reason to bother implementing it until now"

>>43722538
Event decks are multiple times better without costing much more. It may be overwhelming to buy singles at first, so just play and buy at your own pace.

File: Crucible-of-the-Spirit-Dragon-Fate-Reforged-Spoiler.png (173KB, 265x370px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 265x370px

>>43722678
which will then bring up the confusion regarding lands presumably providing colourless mana to tap like pic related as most people would assume {1} would mean colourless up until this point

>>43722669
>>43722710
Cheers guys! Out of what is in Standard right now, are there any stand out event decks? Or is it just pick a color im interested in

Guys, guys, what if it means it counts as any mana but only for colourless spells? Wouldn't that be interesting?

>>43722871
What does that even mean for <> as a cost?

File: blessing-of-leeches.jpg (75KB, 480x680px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 480x680px

>>43722800

it'll be confusing for all of a week. until the news settles in that there is a new symbol for colourless mana. it's confusing in the same way that enchantments with the type "enchant creature" became "enchantment - aura" cards with handy 'enchant creature' text in their boxes. it's just an obsolete way of representing something that the new rules overwrite.

now, this is a pretty big change. it's pretty smart of wizards to reveal a few cards a month or two before the set is released so the players could get a vague understanding of what they were doing before hand, so a lot of the confusion is mitigated by speculation and rumor.

>>43722880
Specifically that mana? I dunno.

>kozilek, the trickster god, disappears for a while
>comes back with new mana symbols.
>yfw he was tricking the universe into creating a new color of mana for eldrazi to exist on and get along with everyone else.
>yfw 6th color and ruined lore all in one set.

>>43723240
That's eldrazi for you. They ruined the first zendikar block, they're ruining this block and now they're off to ruin Innistrad

>>43722194
>Card that says ''add (Number) to your mana pool actually add <>
Except this is wrong

>>43717849
Theyre fun cards though, which is far more important you fucking sperg. Go buy some more baby jaces and let us get hyped.

>>43722837
There's the Armed and Dangerous Clash Pack from Magic Origins and the most recent Ultimate Sacrifice Battle for Zendikar deck.

>>43723307
Thank you, will pop into my local store and see if I get get one

>>43723290
>More big Timmy eldrazi cards
>"fun"