|
Post by Lady Mapi on Feb 27, 2020 7:26:48 GMT
As far as I know, there are no formats where your lands all start on the battlefield. Honestly, it'd probably be a pain to balance. But thinking about that made me thing about this: 1) Each player builds a 63 card deck. Decks must consist of three basic land cards of any type, some number of nonland cards, and any number of Wastes. 2) Players may have a maximum of four copies of any nonland card. 3) At the start of the game, each player removes the basic land cards from their library and puts them into the command zone. 4) At any time, a player may exile a Wastes card from their hand to put a land card in their command zone into their hand. 5) If a non-Waste basic land card would be put into a graveyard or into exile from anywhere, its owner may put it into their command zone instead. The idea here is that you have incredible control over the order of your land drops... but the majority of your mana is going to be colorless. I think the banlist would include stuff like: • Mana dorks. • Mana rocks. • Those Green auras that make lands tap for more than one mana. • Realmwright, Joiner Adept, Overlaid Terrain, Dryad of the Ilysian Grove, and Prismatic Omen• Quicksilver Fountain, because it'd wreck everything.Because those cards would defeat the whole point of having a constrained mana base.
|
|
|
Post by ZephyrPhantom on Feb 29, 2020 16:46:20 GMT
As far as I know, there are no formats where your lands all start on the battlefield. Honestly, it'd probably be a pain to balance. But thinking about that made me thing about this: 1) Each player builds a 63 card deck. Decks must consist of three basic land cards of any type, some number of nonland cards, and any number of Wastes. 4) At any time, a player may exile a Wastes card from their hand to put a land card in their command zone into their hand. The idea here is that you have incredible control over the order of your land drops... but the majority of your mana is going to be colorless. (Assuming Wastes, while being basic lands, are staying in the deck) So if I understand right, this is halfway in between actual MTG where you have to draw the land and Force of Will where you have a separate deck of them to draw from - you still have to draw the land, but don' have to worry about the color. I think the big question here is - does this do anything besides eliminate color screw? The reason people don't enjoy landscrew as a concept is because it makes them unable to play the game - but this also means playing more colors is balanced out by raising the difficulty of having all the appropriate ratios of lands (or paying life with fetches/shocks). From the looks of it this would mostly just make it easier to play multicolor decks while land screw still exists.
|
|
|
Post by Lady Mapi on Feb 29, 2020 17:47:15 GMT
I'm not entirely sure what I was thinking - it was 2AM a few days ago, after all.
I'm guessing the idea was to eliminate color screw - I vaguely remember an idea where you started with some number of basic lands on the battlefield, and then gradually sacrificed/replaced them over the course of the game.
It's all getting mixed up with the part of my brain that insists that landwalk and landhome could have been interesting and flavorful mechanics had Magic evolved differently¹. Heck, if you set Landwalk up to be more like Flying (so creatures with Islandwalk can always block creatures with Islandwalk, for example), I think that Landwalk would be a more interesting and interactive mechanic than flying is.
EDIT: Oh, wait, I think I remember why I used Wastes - I wanted to make a strong distinction between a Blue deck that splashes Red and a Red deck that splashes Blue.
Oops, you do keep the Wastes in your library - I was mostly using them as a generic "this is a land" card.
|
|