The old thread was long and was going in circles. Lets try to steer it back.
Here are some guidelines and summaries from the previous thread.
The following is based on the hints WoTC has given us so far, and prededent.
-New players don't like taking damage to get mana, these will not involve life loss.
-Due to the rumored removal of lifetotal mechanics and removal of mana burn, life GAIN cards are out too. (not to mention they HEAVILY favor certain deck types)
-They are exciting. (they will sell the set, as they are a new rare cycle of duals)
-They are new design. (they are new cards, not a retread/slight tweak of an older cycle)
-They are elegantly created. (most duals follow this. All duals are symmetrical unless the design of the set skews towards a color...Torment)
-They are simplistic. (Alpha duals >>> Nothing >>> Painlands >>> Taplands >>> Painlands >>> These lands...will not have a paragraph of text.)
-They have a drawback that is (relatively) equal across the colors. (Gaining life is immediately out, as is discard/draw/milling.)
-They are not strictly better than a basic land. (They will have some form of drawback, and nonbasic and no land types is not a drawback...)
-These lands are replacing the Painlands. These lands allow the option of one of two colors on turn one. The new lands have to be able to do this to be a success.
-These lands are not going to have a restrictive or narrow drawback. Whatever the drawback, it will fit.
-Occam's Razor is going to apply here. This is a core set, and these are the new gold standard for dual lands, as they will be reprinted next year too, assuming all goes well with them.
-The last duals that WoTC hyped to a large extent were shocklands. There hasn't been a hyped, powerful dual cycle since. (Pains in 10th, Hybrid lands were nice, but none of those rose to the prices shocklands saw)
ShuckCreations posted a summary of every already printed dual idea, all off limits:
Again...these are all the ideas that have been used before for Dual Lands in the past. Please do not refer to, duplicate, or imply that they will be used again. Thanks
Dual Land - Basic X & Y
T: Add X or Y
Tri-Land
CIPT
T: Add X, Y, or Z
Bouncy Land
CIPT
Bounce land you control to hand
T: AD XY
Dual Fetch Land
CIPT
T, Sac: search library for X or Y
Double Fetch Land
CIPT
T: add 1
2, T, Sac: search library for X and Y & put in play tapped
Tri-Fetch Land
T: add 1
1, T, Sac: search library for X, Y, or Z & put in play tapped
Sac Land
CIPT
T: add X
T, Sac: add ANY
Double Sac Land
CIPT
T: add X
T, Sac: add XY
Dual Filter Land
1, T: add XY
Tri-Filter Land
T: add 1
1, T: add X
2, T: add Y or Z
Hybrid Land
T: add 1
X/Y, T: add XX, XY, or YY
Grave Land
T: add 1
T: as long as ~ is in the graveyard lands you control have "add X or Y"
Lair Land
Bounce non-lair land ir CIPT
T: add X, Y, or Z
Legendary Land
Every land is X
Life Land
T: add 1
T: add X or Y, each opponent gains 1 life
Pain Land
T: add 1
T: add X or Y, ~ deals 1 damage to you
Pain Fetch Land
T, Pay 1 life, Sac: search library for X or Y
Needy Land
T: add 1
T: add X if you control a Y
T: add Y if you control a X
Tri-Needy Land
T: add 1
T: add X or Y if you control a Z
Land Play ... uh Land
T: add X unless played a land this turn then add Y
Reveal Land
Reveal so-and-so from your hand or CIPT
T: add X or Y
Shock Land - Basic X & Y
Pay 2 life or CIPT
T: Add X or Y
Storage Land
T: add 1
1, T: add counter
1, remove # counters: add combination of # of X and/or Y
Vivid Land
CIPT w/ 2 counters
T: add X
T: remove counter add ANY
Tap Land
T: add 1
T: add X or Y ~ doesn't untap during next untap step
And a summary of the many ideas had on the thread by Masked Legend:
Lavaland "Cycle"
Land - Mountain Swamp
As ~ comes into play, an opponent may put a card from his or her hand on the bottom of his or her library then draw a card.
Lavaland "Landcycle"
Land - Mountain Swamp
As ~ comes into play, an opponent may shuffle a card from his or her hand into his or her library, then search his or her library for a basic land card, reveal it and put it into his or her hand.
Lavaland "Counter"
Land
Comes into play with two mine counters.
T: Add 1 to your mana pool. (Put a mine counter on it?)
T, Remove a mine counter: Add B or R to your mana pool.
Lavaland "Legendary"
Legendary Land
T: Add B or R to your mana pool.
When Lavaland is put into a graveyard from play, search your library for a Mountain or Swamp card and put it into play tapped. Then shuffle your library.
Lavaland "Mana on first turn, but not second"
Land
Comes into play tapped.
As ~this~ comes into play, you may add B or R to your mana pool.
T, Sacrifice ~this~: Search for a mountain or swamp and put it into play tapped.
Lavaland "Scry"
Land
As Lavaland comes into play, target opponent may look at the top one/two card(s) of his or her library and put them back on top or bottom of his or her library in any order.
T: Add R or B to your mana pool.
Lavaland "Reveal"
Land (Mountain, Swamp)
Comes into play tapped, unless you reveal a mountain or swamp card from your hand.
T: Add R or B to your mana pool.
Lavaland "Antishock"
Land - M, S
(T: Add B or R)
Comes into play tapped, unles you have an opponent gains 2 life.
Lavaland "Fetch"
Land
T, Sac/shuffle into lib: Search your library for basic Swamp or basic mountain card and put it into play. Then shuffle your library
Lavaland "Action trigger"
Land
T: Add B or R. Use this ability only if you played a land or cast a spell this turn.
Lavaland "Ziggurat/Pillar"
Land
T: Add 1.
T: Add B or R. Use this mana only to cast spells.
Lavaland "Reverse Temple of False God"
Land
T: Add 1 to your mana pool.
T: Add B or R to your mana pool. Use this ability only if you control four or fewer lands.
Lavaland "Reveal color"
Land - M. S
Comes into play tapped, unless you reveal a card that is black and red or a black card and a red card.
I put the land lists in spoilers for cleanliness' sake.
Please read them before posting.
I think something like
Misery Mire
Land
T: Add U to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play blue spells.
T: Add B to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play black spells.
I think something like
Misery Mire
Land
T: Add U to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play blue spells.
T: Add B to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play black spells.
Would be excellent design.
Umm, what else would you use the U for? I mean, sure, it won't let you cast the colorless costs and non-colored artifacts, but most one-drops that will be around, methinks, require colored, and this is would be QUITE a bit better than a basic land. Now, if it were this:
T: Add U to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play black spells.
T: Add B to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play blue spells.
then I would agree: excellent design, especially right after a very gold-heavy set. But I doubt this would see print, since this is supposed to be reprinted in the core sets for awhile, which would include mono-heavy blocks.
Still, my small, inner goldspike would like to see that printed... a lot...
Umm, what else would you use the U for? I mean, sure, it won't let you cast the colorless costs and non-colored artifacts, but most one-drops that will be around, methinks, require colored, and this is would be QUITE a bit better than a basic land. Now, if it were this:
T: Add U to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play black spells.
T: Add B to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play blue spells.
then I would agree: excellent design, especially right after a very gold-heavy set. But I doubt this would see print, since this is supposed to be reprinted in the core sets for awhile, which would include mono-heavy blocks.
Still, my small, inner goldspike would like to see that printed... a lot...
Have you ever played with Ancient Ziggurat?
Restrictive mana doesn't pull through when you need it to unless you build around it.
The second card doesn't fix your mana at all...what is the point? To cast gold cards? Try the never used Pillar of the Paruns.
As for the 'each player adds' lands, those fall under the 'drawbacks that are better against certain decks/colors'.
Giving control versus giving aggro :symg:, hrm...seems incredibly inbalanced.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
Umm, what else would you use the U for? I mean, sure, it won't let you cast the colorless costs and non-colored artifacts, but most one-drops that will be around, methinks, require colored, and this is would be QUITE a bit better than a basic land. Now, if it were this:
I'm putting them out there because they're great for two color play, meh for three color play, and garbage for anything more. I'd like to get back to good old fashioned two color, I've been sick of Spike and his Amazing technicolor manabase for a while now.
Have you ever played with Ancient Ziggurat?
Restrictive mana doesn't pull through when you need it to unless you build around it.
The second card doesn't fix your mana at all...what is the point? To cast gold cards? Try the never used Pillar of the Paruns.
Ya, you're right, as I realize after stepping back and looking at it again.
Still, the one I commented on just seems too good (and probably redundant) as-is, but I can't decide on how to fix it.
EDIT: How about this, for 2-color decks:
t: Add U to your mana pool. Use this ability only to cast mono-blue or blue and black spells. (or some other way to specify a 2-color spell) t: Add B to your mana pool. Use this ability only to cast mono-black or blue and black spells.
Ya, you're right, as I realize after stepping back and looking at it again.
Still, the one I commented on just seems too good (and probably redundant) as-is, but I can't decide on how to fix it.
EDIT: How about this, for 2-color decks:
t: Add U to your mana pool. Use this ability only to cast mono-blue or blue and black spells. (or some other way to specify a 2-color spell) t: Add B to your mana pool. Use this ability only to cast mono-black or blue and black spells.
Far, far too wordy to be a core set 'golden standard' dual.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
There are definitely a few ideas from the previous thread missing; but, considering how long that thread is and how long it must have taken to go through all those posts looking for new ideas, I must commend the primer on the top of the page.
My most recent idea:
Dual dropper T: Add 1 to your mana pool. T: Put a basic Swamp or Mountain from your hand into play. Use this ability only during your turn and only once per turn.
(Lands put into play in this way do not count towards your one land per turn limit.)
There are definitely a few ideas from the previous thread missing; but, considering how long that thread is and how long it must have taken to go through all those posts looking for new ideas, I must commend the primer on the top of the page.
My most recent idea:
Dual dropper T: Add 1 to your mana pool. T: Put a basic Swamp or Mountain from your hand into play. Use this ability only during your turn and only once per turn.
(Lands put into play in this way do not count towards your one land per turn limit.)
That doesn't fix your mana, it accelerates your mana.
Duals exist to fix mana.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
There are definitely a few ideas from the previous thread missing; but, considering how long that thread is and how long it must have taken to go through all those posts looking for new ideas, I must commend the primer on the top of the page.
My most recent idea:
Dual dropper T: Add 1 to your mana pool. T: Put a basic Swamp or Mountain from your hand into play. Use this ability only during your turn and only once per turn.
(Lands put into play in this way do not count towards your one land per turn limit.)
This cycle is supposed to fix your mana, not accelerate it! This would be unplayable in most decks except those that might find a way to abuse the hell out of it.
Strictly better than a basic land.
Please read the first post before posting...
it's not strictly better because it doesn't have an interaction type(something you can build around) and are more vulnerable (non-basic hosers) This is extremely elegant and really good, with the trilands at uncommon now I could see these being printed. Actually I think this is a contender for being the actual cards to be printed. (not that that makes me happy, I like duals with the land types on them but it's ok they'd be very good and hopefully drop the price of rav lands and onslaught fetches a bit helping me trade for them on mtgo) sometimes it's the simplist things that end up getting printed, so far this is the most likely thing I've seen on the forums.
Land - Swamp Island (:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.)
Whenever ~this~ is tapped (for mana?), remove the top 4? (5? 6?) cards of your library from the game.
Dual G/W
Land
~ comes into play tapped.
When ~ comes into play, you may add 1 to your mana pool. T: Add G or W to your mana pool.
Fetch G/W
Land T: Search your library for basic Forest or Plains card and put it into play. Shuffle ~ into your library.
Reveal G/W
Land
When ~ comes into play reveal a green or white card from you hand or else it comes into play tapped. T: Add G or W to your mana pool.
I know the Reveal is G/W similar to the current Reveal lands but still might be possible because they are color instead of creature type. I think it could be pushing it though being a similar mechanic. Anywayz here's my addition to the thread:
Conditional G/W
Land
~ comes into play tapped only if you control a Forest and a Plains. T: Add G or W to your mana pool.
Or it could be more restrictive like this:
Conditional G/W
Land
~ comes into play tapped only if you could produce G and W from all mana sources you control. T: Add G or W to your mana pool.
Almost all of these land ideas, and your list of every dual printed so far are in the first post.
@ Debujerk: Wizards and the community (for the most part) agree that those lands are strictly better. When we say "strictly better" we mean that in a vacuum the lands are always better. Nonbasic hosing and basic landtype relevence is not enough of an argument to deem those lands fair.
Here is a thought... what if its a land that can't be searched? Something like
Shroudland
Land - Forest/Plains
Shroudland can not be Fetched (By any lands, spells, or abilities)
Or
Handland
Land - Plains/Island
Handland may only be played from your hand.
They are powerful but the draw back means that they aren't broken for their land types. You can't use a fetch land to grab one of them and you can't cheat the other into play like you can with some lands or spells. Its fairly even across the colors I think.
Almost all of these land ideas, and your list of every dual printed so far are in the first post.
@ Debujerk: Wizards and the community (for the most part) agree that those lands are strictly better. When we say "strictly better" we mean that in a vacuum the lands are always better. Nonbasic hosing and basic landtype relevence is not enough of an argument to deem those lands fair.
wizards is not a monolith, what they say is their transient conclusion, as for your closing assertion, well sometimes magic isn't fair, and I don't particularly agree given past precedents. These days basically "not as good as an alpha dual land" = printable.
Here is a thought... what if its a land that can't be searched? Something like
Shroudland
Land - Forest/Plains
Shroudland can not be Fetched (By any lands, spells, or abilities)
Or
Handland
Land - Plains/Island
Handland may only be played from your hand.
They are powerful but the draw back means that they aren't broken for their land types. You can't use a fetch land to grab one of them and you can't cheat the other into play like you can with some lands or spells. Its fairly even across the colors I think.
these are fairly inelegant, perhaps in an expansion cycle where tutoring becomes highly valued this could be used on alot of cards, but I doubt it. It should be "this can't come into play from anywhere but you hand" btw.
it's not strictly better because it doesn't have an interaction type(something you can build around) and are more vulnerable (non-basic hosers) This is extremely elegant and really good, with the trilands at uncommon now I could see these being printed. Actually I think this is a contender for being the actual cards to be printed. (not that that makes me happy, I like duals with the land types on them but it's ok they'd be very good and hopefully drop the price of rav lands and onslaught fetches a bit helping me trade for them on mtgo) sometimes it's the simplist things that end up getting printed, so far this is the most likely thing I've seen on the forums.
Did you read the old thread at all??
MaRo just wrote an article specifically saying that a land like that breaks the design rule to not make a dual better than a basic land. A land that comes into play untapped with no drawback and lets you tap for two types of mana with no drawback is better than a basic land. Trilands are balanced as CIPT lands. Comparing a CIPT land to that is incredibly offbase.
Dabujerk, MaRo and another designer posted last week that lands can't be better than a basic, they need a legitimate drawback. He also specifically said 'nonbasic' and 'lack of land types' is not a drawback. Every dual cycle except for two has no land types. That is not a drawback of each dual cycle. It is a bonus of those two dual cycles that they have types.
Addendum, you are banned for suspension evasion, have a nice day.
Here is a thought... what if its a land that can't be searched? Something like
Shroudland
Land - Forest/Plains
Shroudland can not be Fetched (By any lands, spells, or abilities)
Or
Handland
Land - Plains/Island
Handland may only be played from your hand.
They are powerful but the draw back means that they aren't broken for their land types. You can't use a fetch land to grab one of them and you can't cheat the other into play like you can with some lands or spells. Its fairly even across the colors I think.
I think we are all thinking too hard here, considering Fetches are rotating out of extended this fall...why bother making lands that are designed in a tiny box to try to not 'break them'.
Not to mention those two lands are still better than a basic.
Seriously, we are not starting this again.
Go read the MaRo article on land design from last week.
No disrespect meant Urzassedatives... but what do you think they will be?
I don't think I have seen your ideas in either thread and you continue to just shoot down other ideas saying that they are either better than basic, which some of the ones you have said that about are debatable, or that they break the design rules for lands. I really mean no disrespect but what do you think they will be?
Also my design wasn't just for fetches... but to not be targeted by ANY spell that or ability that fetches. Granted that is strong... but Its hard to come up with much else considering so much has already been done and many of the ideas aren't clean enough for a base set.
No disrespect meant Urzassedatives... but what do you think they will be?
I don't think I have seen your ideas in either thread and you continue to just shoot down other ideas saying that they are either better than basic, which some of the ones you have said that about are debatable, or that they break the design rules for lands. I really mean no disrespect but what do you think they will be?
Also my design wasn't just for fetches... but to not be targeted by ANY spell that or ability that fetches. Granted that is strong... but Its hard to come up with much else considering so much has already been done and many of the ideas aren't clean enough for a base set.
Better than basic is this:
A land that, when you play it from your hand, functions the same as an original dual for your mana purposes.
It doesn't matter if it has land types.
It doesn't matter if it has a narrow drawback.
I like the reveal X cards, myself. Revealing basics or cards of one or both of the color of the land...not sure what seems most reasonable.
I think the line is walked by the 'no pain find a basic' fetches...I can see the argument as those being better than a basic...
This is hard, I just think we are all getting too elaborate on our drawbacks.
As to the above card, milling or rfging is going to be better for certain colors/decks than others, and that drawback is a little extreme...not to mention I would think any new player would rather take a pain than lose cards off their deck.
Also, Debujerk was suspended on another account for trolling the rumor mill...and he made a new account to do it on...so both are now banned.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
News and spoiler contributor for GatheringMagic.com
Almost all of these land ideas, and your list of every dual printed so far are in the first post.
@ Debujerk: Wizards and the community (for the most part) agree that those lands are strictly better. When we say "strictly better" we mean that in a vacuum the lands are always better. Nonbasic hosing and basic landtype relevence is not enough of an argument to deem those lands fair.
Oh snap! Completely missed the spoiler thanx! HAHA!
Not sure if one turn is enough draw back but I feel with this type of land you shouldn't be able to play a one drop from either color but should be fixed color wise as soon as you would need both colors, which at earliest would be turn two.
Lava Land
Land Imprint: When ~ comes into play search your library for a mono colored card and remove it from the game. ~ Can tap for one mana of the removed card's color.
T: add R to your mana pool.
Not really a super simple land, but realistically not that complex. This would reduce the number of "duals" that would need to be printed (only one for each color) thus leaving more room open for other card and not creating a ungodly set of 10 - 20 lands for people to get ahold of. The draw back is very balanced as it effectively makes you risk consistency for fixing which is a concept ignored by newer players but would be better understood by more advanced ones.
Better than basic is this:
A land that, when you play it from your hand, functions the same as an original dual for your mana purposes.
It doesn't matter if it has land types.
It doesn't matter if it has a narrow drawback.
I like the reveal X cards, myself. Revealing basics or cards of one or both of the color of the land...not sure what seems most reasonable.
I think the line is walked by the 'no pain find a basic' fetches...I can see the argument as those being better than a basic...
This is hard, I just think we are all getting too elaborate on our drawbacks.
The reveal X ones to me... seem like too small of a drawback. If I have a White/Green land that requires me to reveal a Green and White card to play it than I would just reveal a card that is both green and white. I think forcing a player to reveal a card that is BOTH colors isn't reasonable for the base set as the base set has never contained multicolor cards before and if these are going to be a new staple than they need to be able to stay in the base set for a good while and through several blocks. Something that forces the reveal of a two colored card doesn't work well for that.
Revealing a Basic land maybe fine though. However isn't that a bit too much like the Reveal lands from Lorwyn block? These are supposed to be of a new design so I don't think they will rehash that using basic lands instead of creature types.
The problem with the entire situation is that there aren't many clean drawbacks that have not been done yet... so more elaborate drawbacks keep popping up.
I'm starting to think that something like "You may play this land only if you control a basic land" seem to make sense. or even "You may play this land only if you control another land.". Thats probably one that has already been suggested though lol.
Not sure if one turn is enough draw back but I feel with this type of land you shouldn't be able to play a one drop from either color but should be fixed color wise as soon as you would need both colors, which at earliest would be turn two.
Lava Land
Land Imprint: When ~ comes into play search your library for a mono colored card and remove it from the game. ~ Can tap for one mana of the removed card's color.
T: add R to your mana pool.
Not really a super simple land, but realistically not that complex. This would reduce the number of "duals" that would need to be printed (only one for each color) thus leaving more room open for other card and not creating a ungodly set of 10 - 20 lands for people to get ahold of. The draw back is very balanced as it effectively makes you risk consistency for fixing which is a concept ignored by newer players but would be better understood by more advanced ones.
Let me know what you think.
I don't know if the first would see any play, since decks need to hit their colors first turn, and if they can't, then they're behind at least a turn with that, which could cost them the game (not to mention, these will be rare; thus, the power level must be at the rare level).
The second one is just too good. Fix your mana on your first turn AND thin out your deck? I'll take 20 of each, please.
Honestly, though, I'm totally stumped. I still like my latest idea (but it's too inelgant) and Urza's, but I don't know if those would be at the proper power level that Wizards is looking for...
Here are some guidelines and summaries from the previous thread.
The following is based on the hints WoTC has given us so far, and prededent.
-New players don't like taking damage to get mana, these will not involve life loss.
-Due to the rumored removal of lifetotal mechanics and removal of mana burn, life GAIN cards are out too. (not to mention they HEAVILY favor certain deck types)
-They are exciting. (they will sell the set, as they are a new rare cycle of duals)
-They are new design. (they are new cards, not a retread/slight tweak of an older cycle)
-They are elegantly created. (most duals follow this. All duals are symmetrical unless the design of the set skews towards a color...Torment)
-They are simplistic. (Alpha duals >>> Nothing >>> Painlands >>> Taplands >>> Painlands >>> These lands...will not have a paragraph of text.)
-They have a drawback that is (relatively) equal across the colors. (Gaining life is immediately out, as is discard/draw/milling.)
-They are not strictly better than a basic land. (They will have some form of drawback, and nonbasic and no land types is not a drawback...)
-These lands are replacing the Painlands. These lands allow the option of one of two colors on turn one. The new lands have to be able to do this to be a success.
-These lands are not going to have a restrictive or narrow drawback. Whatever the drawback, it will fit.
-Occam's Razor is going to apply here. This is a core set, and these are the new gold standard for dual lands, as they will be reprinted next year too, assuming all goes well with them.
-The last duals that WoTC hyped to a large extent were shocklands. There hasn't been a hyped, powerful dual cycle since. (Pains in 10th, Hybrid lands were nice, but none of those rose to the prices shocklands saw)
ShuckCreations posted a summary of every already printed dual idea, all off limits:
Dual Land - Basic X & Y
T: Add X or Y
Tri-Land
CIPT
T: Add X, Y, or Z
Bouncy Land
CIPT
Bounce land you control to hand
T: AD XY
Dual Fetch Land
CIPT
T, Sac: search library for X or Y
Double Fetch Land
CIPT
T: add 1
2, T, Sac: search library for X and Y & put in play tapped
Tri-Fetch Land
T: add 1
1, T, Sac: search library for X, Y, or Z & put in play tapped
Sac Land
CIPT
T: add X
T, Sac: add ANY
Double Sac Land
CIPT
T: add X
T, Sac: add XY
Dual Filter Land
1, T: add XY
Tri-Filter Land
T: add 1
1, T: add X
2, T: add Y or Z
Hybrid Land
T: add 1
X/Y, T: add XX, XY, or YY
Grave Land
T: add 1
T: as long as ~ is in the graveyard lands you control have "add X or Y"
Lair Land
Bounce non-lair land ir CIPT
T: add X, Y, or Z
Legendary Land
Every land is X
Life Land
T: add 1
T: add X or Y, each opponent gains 1 life
Pain Land
T: add 1
T: add X or Y, ~ deals 1 damage to you
Pain Fetch Land
T, Pay 1 life, Sac: search library for X or Y
Needy Land
T: add 1
T: add X if you control a Y
T: add Y if you control a X
Tri-Needy Land
T: add 1
T: add X or Y if you control a Z
Land Play ... uh Land
T: add X unless played a land this turn then add Y
Reveal Land
Reveal so-and-so from your hand or CIPT
T: add X or Y
Shock Land - Basic X & Y
Pay 2 life or CIPT
T: Add X or Y
Storage Land
T: add 1
1, T: add counter
1, remove # counters: add combination of # of X and/or Y
Vivid Land
CIPT w/ 2 counters
T: add X
T: remove counter add ANY
Tap Land
T: add 1
T: add X or Y ~ doesn't untap during next untap step
And a summary of the many ideas had on the thread by Masked Legend:
Land - Mountain Swamp
As ~ comes into play, an opponent may put a card from his or her hand on the bottom of his or her library then draw a card.
Lavaland "Landcycle"
Land - Mountain Swamp
As ~ comes into play, an opponent may shuffle a card from his or her hand into his or her library, then search his or her library for a basic land card, reveal it and put it into his or her hand.
Lavaland "Counter"
Land
Comes into play with two mine counters.
T: Add 1 to your mana pool. (Put a mine counter on it?)
T, Remove a mine counter: Add B or R to your mana pool.
Lavaland "Legendary"
Legendary Land
T: Add B or R to your mana pool.
When Lavaland is put into a graveyard from play, search your library for a Mountain or Swamp card and put it into play tapped. Then shuffle your library.
Lavaland "Mana on first turn, but not second"
Land
Comes into play tapped.
As ~this~ comes into play, you may add B or R to your mana pool.
T, Sacrifice ~this~: Search for a mountain or swamp and put it into play tapped.
Lavaland "Scry"
Land
As Lavaland comes into play, target opponent may look at the top one/two card(s) of his or her library and put them back on top or bottom of his or her library in any order.
T: Add R or B to your mana pool.
Lavaland "Reveal"
Land (Mountain, Swamp)
Comes into play tapped, unless you reveal a mountain or swamp card from your hand.
T: Add R or B to your mana pool.
Lavaland "Antishock"
Land - M, S
(T: Add B or R)
Comes into play tapped, unles you have an opponent gains 2 life.
Lavaland "Fetch"
Land
T, Sac/shuffle into lib: Search your library for basic Swamp or basic mountain card and put it into play. Then shuffle your library
Lavaland "Action trigger"
Land
T: Add B or R. Use this ability only if you played a land or cast a spell this turn.
Lavaland "Ziggurat/Pillar"
Land
T: Add 1.
T: Add B or R. Use this mana only to cast spells.
Lavaland "Reverse Temple of False God"
Land
T: Add 1 to your mana pool.
T: Add B or R to your mana pool. Use this ability only if you control four or fewer lands.
Lavaland "Reveal color"
Land - M. S
Comes into play tapped, unless you reveal a card that is black and red or a black card and a red card.
I put the land lists in spoilers for cleanliness' sake.
Please read them before posting.
Twitter
Lavaland "Echo"
Land - Swamp Mountain
Echo B/
Sharecropped Field
Land
t: Each player adds W to his or her mana pool.
t: Each player adds G to his or her mana pool.
If mana burn stays then it still works as:
Sharecropped Field
Land
t: Each player may add W to his or her mana pool.
t: Each player may add G to his or her mana pool.
Misery Mire
Land
T: Add U to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play blue spells.
T: Add B to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play black spells.
Would be excellent design.
Umm, what else would you use the U for? I mean, sure, it won't let you cast the colorless costs and non-colored artifacts, but most one-drops that will be around, methinks, require colored, and this is would be QUITE a bit better than a basic land. Now, if it were this:
T: Add U to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play black spells.
T: Add B to your mana pool. Use this mana only to play blue spells.
then I would agree: excellent design, especially right after a very gold-heavy set. But I doubt this would see print, since this is supposed to be reprinted in the core sets for awhile, which would include mono-heavy blocks.
Still, my small, inner goldspike would like to see that printed... a lot...
T2
TokEnS!
Thanks to DarkNightCavalier of Heroes of the Planes Studios!
Avatar from: http://www.recoculous.com/2008/09/18/slivers/
Have you ever played with Ancient Ziggurat?
Restrictive mana doesn't pull through when you need it to unless you build around it.
The second card doesn't fix your mana at all...what is the point? To cast gold cards? Try the never used Pillar of the Paruns.
As for the 'each player adds' lands, those fall under the 'drawbacks that are better against certain decks/colors'.
Giving control versus giving aggro :symg:, hrm...seems incredibly inbalanced.
Twitter
I'm putting them out there because they're great for two color play, meh for three color play, and garbage for anything more. I'd like to get back to good old fashioned two color, I've been sick of Spike and his Amazing technicolor manabase for a while now.
Ya, you're right, as I realize after stepping back and looking at it again.
Still, the one I commented on just seems too good (and probably redundant) as-is, but I can't decide on how to fix it.
EDIT: How about this, for 2-color decks:
t: Add U to your mana pool. Use this ability only to cast mono-blue or blue and black spells. (or some other way to specify a 2-color spell)
t: Add B to your mana pool. Use this ability only to cast mono-black or blue and black spells.
T2
TokEnS!
Thanks to DarkNightCavalier of Heroes of the Planes Studios!
Avatar from: http://www.recoculous.com/2008/09/18/slivers/
Far, far too wordy to be a core set 'golden standard' dual.
Twitter
My most recent idea:
Dual dropper
T: Add 1 to your mana pool.
T: Put a basic Swamp or Mountain from your hand into play. Use this ability only during your turn and only once per turn.
(Lands put into play in this way do not count towards your one land per turn limit.)
That doesn't fix your mana, it accelerates your mana.
Duals exist to fix mana.
Twitter
This cycle is supposed to fix your mana, not accelerate it! This would be unplayable in most decks except those that might find a way to abuse the hell out of it.
it's not strictly better because it doesn't have an interaction type(something you can build around) and are more vulnerable (non-basic hosers) This is extremely elegant and really good, with the trilands at uncommon now I could see these being printed. Actually I think this is a contender for being the actual cards to be printed. (not that that makes me happy, I like duals with the land types on them but it's ok they'd be very good and hopefully drop the price of rav lands and onslaught fetches a bit helping me trade for them on mtgo) sometimes it's the simplist things that end up getting printed, so far this is the most likely thing I've seen on the forums.
Land - Swamp Island
(:symtap:: Add or to your mana pool.)
Whenever ~this~ is tapped (for mana?), remove the top 4? (5? 6?) cards of your library from the game.
Dual G/W
Land
~ comes into play tapped.
When ~ comes into play, you may add 1 to your mana pool.
T: Add G or W to your mana pool.
Fetch G/W
Land
T: Search your library for basic Forest or Plains card and put it into play. Shuffle ~ into your library.
Reveal G/W
Land
When ~ comes into play reveal a green or white card from you hand or else it comes into play tapped.
T: Add G or W to your mana pool.
I know the Reveal is G/W similar to the current Reveal lands but still might be possible because they are color instead of creature type. I think it could be pushing it though being a similar mechanic. Anywayz here's my addition to the thread:
Conditional G/W
Land
~ comes into play tapped only if you control a Forest and a Plains.
T: Add G or W to your mana pool.
Or it could be more restrictive like this:
Conditional G/W
Land
~ comes into play tapped only if you could produce G and W from all mana sources you control.
T: Add G or W to your mana pool.
@ Debujerk: Wizards and the community (for the most part) agree that those lands are strictly better. When we say "strictly better" we mean that in a vacuum the lands are always better. Nonbasic hosing and basic landtype relevence is not enough of an argument to deem those lands fair.
Shroudland
Land - Forest/Plains
Shroudland can not be Fetched (By any lands, spells, or abilities)
Or
Handland
Land - Plains/Island
Handland may only be played from your hand.
They are powerful but the draw back means that they aren't broken for their land types. You can't use a fetch land to grab one of them and you can't cheat the other into play like you can with some lands or spells. Its fairly even across the colors I think.
RB Olivia Voldaren RB
GB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons GB
BWR Queen Marchesa BWR
RW Anya, Merciless Angel RW
UW Bruna, Light of Alabaster UW
UB Wydwen, The Biting Gale UB
GU Momir Vig, simic visionary GU
WG Karametra, God of Harvests WG
WUBSydri, Galvanic GeniusWUB
wizards is not a monolith, what they say is their transient conclusion, as for your closing assertion, well sometimes magic isn't fair, and I don't particularly agree given past precedents. These days basically "not as good as an alpha dual land" = printable.
these are fairly inelegant, perhaps in an expansion cycle where tutoring becomes highly valued this could be used on alot of cards, but I doubt it. It should be "this can't come into play from anywhere but you hand" btw.
Did you read the old thread at all??
MaRo just wrote an article specifically saying that a land like that breaks the design rule to not make a dual better than a basic land. A land that comes into play untapped with no drawback and lets you tap for two types of mana with no drawback is better than a basic land. Trilands are balanced as CIPT lands. Comparing a CIPT land to that is incredibly offbase.
Dabujerk, MaRo and another designer posted last week that lands can't be better than a basic, they need a legitimate drawback. He also specifically said 'nonbasic' and 'lack of land types' is not a drawback. Every dual cycle except for two has no land types. That is not a drawback of each dual cycle. It is a bonus of those two dual cycles that they have types.
Addendum, you are banned for suspension evasion, have a nice day.
I think we are all thinking too hard here, considering Fetches are rotating out of extended this fall...why bother making lands that are designed in a tiny box to try to not 'break them'.
Not to mention those two lands are still better than a basic.
Seriously, we are not starting this again.
Go read the MaRo article on land design from last week.
Twitter
I don't think I have seen your ideas in either thread and you continue to just shoot down other ideas saying that they are either better than basic, which some of the ones you have said that about are debatable, or that they break the design rules for lands. I really mean no disrespect but what do you think they will be?
Also my design wasn't just for fetches... but to not be targeted by ANY spell that or ability that fetches. Granted that is strong... but Its hard to come up with much else considering so much has already been done and many of the ideas aren't clean enough for a base set.
RB Olivia Voldaren RB
GB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons GB
BWR Queen Marchesa BWR
RW Anya, Merciless Angel RW
UW Bruna, Light of Alabaster UW
UB Wydwen, The Biting Gale UB
GU Momir Vig, simic visionary GU
WG Karametra, God of Harvests WG
WUBSydri, Galvanic GeniusWUB
Better than basic is this:
A land that, when you play it from your hand, functions the same as an original dual for your mana purposes.
It doesn't matter if it has land types.
It doesn't matter if it has a narrow drawback.
I like the reveal X cards, myself. Revealing basics or cards of one or both of the color of the land...not sure what seems most reasonable.
I think the line is walked by the 'no pain find a basic' fetches...I can see the argument as those being better than a basic...
This is hard, I just think we are all getting too elaborate on our drawbacks.
As to the above card, milling or rfging is going to be better for certain colors/decks than others, and that drawback is a little extreme...not to mention I would think any new player would rather take a pain than lose cards off their deck.
Also, Debujerk was suspended on another account for trolling the rumor mill...and he made a new account to do it on...so both are now banned.
Twitter
Oh snap! Completely missed the spoiler thanx! HAHA!
Alright lets give this a try:
Lava Land
Lava Land can't be played during your first turn.
T: add R or B to your mana pool.
Not sure if one turn is enough draw back but I feel with this type of land you shouldn't be able to play a one drop from either color but should be fixed color wise as soon as you would need both colors, which at earliest would be turn two.
Lava Land
Land Imprint: When ~ comes into play search your library for a mono colored card and remove it from the game. ~ Can tap for one mana of the removed card's color.
T: add R to your mana pool.
Not really a super simple land, but realistically not that complex. This would reduce the number of "duals" that would need to be printed (only one for each color) thus leaving more room open for other card and not creating a ungodly set of 10 - 20 lands for people to get ahold of. The draw back is very balanced as it effectively makes you risk consistency for fixing which is a concept ignored by newer players but would be better understood by more advanced ones.
Let me know what you think.
The reveal X ones to me... seem like too small of a drawback. If I have a White/Green land that requires me to reveal a Green and White card to play it than I would just reveal a card that is both green and white. I think forcing a player to reveal a card that is BOTH colors isn't reasonable for the base set as the base set has never contained multicolor cards before and if these are going to be a new staple than they need to be able to stay in the base set for a good while and through several blocks. Something that forces the reveal of a two colored card doesn't work well for that.
Revealing a Basic land maybe fine though. However isn't that a bit too much like the Reveal lands from Lorwyn block? These are supposed to be of a new design so I don't think they will rehash that using basic lands instead of creature types.
The problem with the entire situation is that there aren't many clean drawbacks that have not been done yet... so more elaborate drawbacks keep popping up.
I'm starting to think that something like "You may play this land only if you control a basic land" seem to make sense. or even "You may play this land only if you control another land.". Thats probably one that has already been suggested though lol.
Edit: I also like Vandreads first lava land Idea.
RB Olivia Voldaren RB
GB Hapatra, Vizier of Poisons GB
BWR Queen Marchesa BWR
RW Anya, Merciless Angel RW
UW Bruna, Light of Alabaster UW
UB Wydwen, The Biting Gale UB
GU Momir Vig, simic visionary GU
WG Karametra, God of Harvests WG
WUBSydri, Galvanic GeniusWUB
I don't know if the first would see any play, since decks need to hit their colors first turn, and if they can't, then they're behind at least a turn with that, which could cost them the game (not to mention, these will be rare; thus, the power level must be at the rare level).
The second one is just too good. Fix your mana on your first turn AND thin out your deck? I'll take 20 of each, please.
Honestly, though, I'm totally stumped. I still like my latest idea (but it's too inelgant) and Urza's, but I don't know if those would be at the proper power level that Wizards is looking for...
T2
TokEnS!
Thanks to DarkNightCavalier of Heroes of the Planes Studios!
Avatar from: http://www.recoculous.com/2008/09/18/slivers/