[OGW] Oath of the Gatewatch spoilers thread

I see that Wastes doesn't have a land type despite being Basic. This means that it can't be fetched with most fetch lands (since they search for e.g. a Swamp or Island), and nor do Wastes interact with stuff like Domain.

My guess as to their functionality: in addition to tapping for colorless mana, they also provide mana that can function as the colored mana required on colorless spells. So for example, a spell with Devoid that costs 2R could be cast by tapping a Wastes (for the R) and an Ancient Tomb (for the remaining 2 colorless mana).

This would be a method of making an Eldrazideck much more playable in Standard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barook

Maybe all instances of :1: producers gets errated to <>. Ancient Tomb would produce <><> in that case.

---

That seems ridiculously unnecessary - especially since they made colorless lands in this very block :tongue:

---

Edit: I like the poster above's comment. . . . maybe <> is "may only be paid by colorless sources AND if produced counts as any color for the purposed of casting colorless spells" BUT that seems super complicated. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barook

@Ace/Homebrew: This leaves up the question why Kozilek's brood shits out Bismuth:

Edit:

Maybe all instances of :1: producers gets errated to <>. Ancient Tomb would produce <><> in that case.

---

That seems kind of silly to me. So what about about non-land effects that produce colorless mana would they be errated as well?

Point is, if all <> means is that it must be paid with colorless mana, there is no reason to have lands specifically produce <>.

I actually think it makes more sense to go the other way, that <> can be used as :1:, but that :1: can't be used as <>.

So it would work much like Snow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cire

I like the interpretation that <> means "must be paid in colorless mana" - however, the problem with that interpretation is why would the land produce <>, wouldn't producing (1) be just as good?

---

Yes, if all this waste mana is true, all sources of generic mana will now have an errata, and give the new colorless mana instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guillemnicolau

Yes, if all this waste mana is true, all sources of generic mana will now have an errata, and give the new colorless mana instead.

---

Unless it actually works like Snow mana...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GundamGuy

I actually think it makes more sense to go the other way, that <> can be used as :1:, but that :1: can't be used as <>.

So it would work much like Snow.

---

That would probably the most parasitic mechanic ever, even worse than Snow.

I don't think they can fuck up that bad, despite BFZ already being terrible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wcm8

My guess as to their functionality: in addition to tapping for colorless mana, they also provide mana that can function as the colored mana required on colorless spells. So for example, a spell with Devoid that costs 2R could be cast by tapping a Wastes (for the R) and an Ancient Tomb (for the remaining 2 colorless mana).

---

I don't think it will be like this. Colorless mana can't pay color costs, but it must be payed without color mana (they are the opposite, while generic mana can be payed with both).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barook

That would probably the most parasitic mechanic ever, even worse than Snow.

I don't think they can fuck up that bad, despite BFZ already being terrible.

---

How is it worse then snow? It's just colorless snow.

Man I can't wait for this card:

(2/B)(P/B)(<>)(S)
Artifact Snow Creature - Eldrazi Horror (R)
Devoid, Infect
This card is not a "card," and you are not a "player."
6/6

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GundamGuy

How is it worse then snow? It's just colorless snow.

---

it's worse because snow mana can have color and be used to pay non-snow costs. Colorless mana can only pay generic costs and colorless costs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wcm8

My guess as to their functionality: in addition to tapping for colorless mana, they also provide mana that can function as the colored mana required on colorless spells. So for example, a spell with Devoid that costs 2R could be cast by tapping a Wastes (for the R) and an Ancient Tomb (for the remaining 2 colorless mana).

---

Isn't that overly complicated and unintuitive?
Obviously all this is speculation so nobody is right or wrong yet...

I suspect <> in a mana cost means "must be paid in colorless mana" similar to how the snowflake symbol means "must be paid using snow-mana".
<> on the card Wastes is just a colorless mana, the significance of the card being that it will be classified as the 6th basic land type.

This will play well with Converge and Domain and cards like Draco.
It also gives colorless EDH pilots basic lands so they do not get blown out by Wave of Vitriol.

Wastes won't be relevant in Standard because of the pain lands.
It was made mostly to fix limited where all of the lands that tap for colorless are at Uncommon or Rare.

Ace - the waste was a basic land - but it didn't have a basic land type - so I think it does nothing for domain type cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guillemnicolau

it's worse because snow mana can have color and be used to pay non-snow costs. Colorless mana can only pay generic costs and colorless costs

---

<> can be used to pay non-<> cards too.

It's not any worse then snow. Now admitedly Snow is terrible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GundamGuy

<> can be used to pay non-<> cards too.

It's not any worse then snow. Now admitedly Snow is terrible.

---

You can't cast an ancestral recall with waste mana, but you can with a snow-covered island.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guillemnicolau

You can't cast an ancestral recall with waste mana, but you can with a snow-covered island.

---

Well yeah, you can't cast Ancestral recall with colorless mana.

I'm not suggesting that colorless snow would be better then color snow, but I am saying mechanically they would work the same way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace/Homebrew

I suspect <> in a mana cost means "must be paid in colorless mana" similar to how the snowflake symbol means "must be paid using snow-mana".
<> on the card Wastes is just a colorless mana.

---

I agree with "must be paid with <> mana" I however don't think <> is actually just the same thing as :1:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cire

Ace - the waste was a basic land - but it didn't have a basic land type - so I think it does nothing for domain type cards.

---

Good point.

http://i.imgur.com/CO1Ue17.png

This artwork pretty clearly shows a Mountain that was corrupted. I'm guessing we'll get 5 artworks for Wastes, each showing a different corrupted basic land type.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace/Homebrew

This artwork pretty clearly shows a Mountain that was corrupted. I'm guessing we'll get 5 artworks for Wastes, each showing a different corrupted basic land type.

---

Seems likely. I wonder if they are all going to have the Bismuth look to them, or if the Wastes look wasted but different depending on the land type that was wasted...

Also seems like a great time to re-print Wasteland (:tongue:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace/Homebrew

...

This artwork pretty clearly shows a Mountain that was corrupted. I'm guessing we'll get 5 artworks for Wastes, each showing a different corrupted basic land type.

---

And then a cycle of waste-duals that can also produce mana of a particular color ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Echelon

Tin Fins would like to have a word with you, good sir. The onions they burst are quite often spaghetti monster shaped.

---

I'm well aware of onions, good sir, it's one of my sleeved decks currently :cool: My LGS don't get enough onions or spaghetti in their diet.

But you wouldn't want to be Shallow Graving/Vengeancing this guy, he wants to stay in play and counter everything they play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dissection

I'm well aware of onions, good sir, it's one of my sleeved decks currently :cool: My LGS don't get enough onions or spaghetti in their diet.

But you wouldn't want to be Shallow Graving/Vengeancing this guy, he wants to stay in play and counter everything they play.

---

I approve of your discussion regarding our favorite folic acid and magnesium producing vegetable. Carry on!