No Goblins Allowed
http://862838.jrbdt8wd.asia/

Duels v Paper - which land is better
http://862838.jrbdt8wd.asia/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=18162		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  SquiderDragon [ Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:08 am ]
Post subject:  Duels v Paper - which land is better
I build paper versions of certain Magic Duels decks. It can sometimes be expensive ;). As a lot of paper players know sometimes the cost of the mana base can be a significant cost.

I have a paper deck I am putting together than in Duels requires 2 Hinterland Harbor. I do however have 2 Yavimaya Coast. Given I do need access to colourless mana as well for Eldrazi Displacer.

This is not about being 'strict' legal but more about running vintage. For me the pain land seems better than the standard Duels land which would come in untapped and give me access to both colours.

Thoughts?
Author:  divinevert [ Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Pain lands are typically better because they are a turn 1 dual.
Author:  marnel.estrada [ Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Produces 3 colors and comes into play untapped. Yes, it's way better.
Author:  WrightJustice [ Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Excuse me, that's 2 colours and colourless.
Author:  Magister-Ludorum [ Thu Mar 23, 2017 1:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Colorless counts as an extra color since BfZ, though.
Author:  Sl33pHumper [ Thu Mar 23, 2017 1:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
I get so jelly when I see all the pain and multi color lands standard has access to when I am brewing a multicolor deck.
Author:  SquiderDragon [ Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Yeah they are sweet, we really need the tri-color lands. Would be a great enabler for decks without breaking anything fundamental. Have a good selection in paper, a full set of seaside citadel for example.
Author:  WrightJustice [ Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Magister-Ludorum wrote:
Colorless counts as an extra color since BfZ, though.

Colourless is very clearly colourless and therefore not a colour. MaRo even says so himself.
It's an extra cost like colours but isn't a colour because it's colourless.
Author:  Eonblueapocalypse [ Thu Mar 23, 2017 1:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
WrightJustice wrote:
Magister-Ludorum wrote:
Colorless counts as an extra color since BfZ, though.

Colourless is very clearly colourless and therefore not a colour. MaRo even says so himself.
It's an extra cost like colours but isn't a colour because it's colourless.


Even though I know this is the official stance, I still don't agree.

You can create an entire deck that uses nothing but colorless cards, using lands that generate nothing but colorless mana. While it doesn't get an official piece of the color pie, and is officially "not" a color, for all intents and purposes, it may as well be.
Author:  WrightJustice [ Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Yeah but it's called colourless which is the lack of colour. Not saying it's not essentially the same as colours but it's not a colour, it's colourless.
That's why I said extra cost but it's more of "specific mana source" if you want to refer to all 6.
They're all specific mana sources but they're not all colours.
Author:  babassoonist [ Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Eonblueapocalypse wrote:
WrightJustice wrote:
Magister-Ludorum wrote:
Colorless counts as an extra color since BfZ, though.

Colourless is very clearly colourless and therefore not a colour. MaRo even says so himself.
It's an extra cost like colours but isn't a colour because it's colourless.


Even though I know this is the official stance, I still don't agree.

You can create an entire deck that uses nothing but colorless cards, using lands that generate nothing but colorless mana. While it doesn't get an official piece of the color pie, and is officially "not" a color, for all intents and purposes, it may as well be.

except the only cards that will ever require :c: is Kozilek's Brood. calling :c: a color is the same as trying to call :s: a color

back on topic though, Pain Lands are generally better then Check Lands. UNLESS your deck already has fetch and shock lands (see Misty Rainforest and Breeding Pool)
Author:  divinevert [ Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
I prefer to call shock lands as "Ravnica duals".
Author:  babassoonist [ Fri Mar 24, 2017 2:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
divinevert wrote:
I prefer to call shock lands as "Ravnica duals".

cool story bro

must be fun trying to explain which duel lands from both Ravnica blocks you're talking about
Author:  BounceBurnBuff [ Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
That "30 year old man" Freudian slip.
Author:  Black Barney [ Fri Mar 24, 2017 7:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
More fun than saying cool story brah
Author:  zzmorg82 [ Fri Mar 24, 2017 7:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Black Barney wrote:
More fun than saying cool story brah


Okay, this old. Image
Author:  Eonblueapocalypse [ Fri Mar 24, 2017 7:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
babassoonist wrote:
Eonblueapocalypse wrote:
WrightJustice wrote:
Colourless is very clearly colourless and therefore not a colour. MaRo even says so himself.
It's an extra cost like colours but isn't a colour because it's colourless.


Even though I know this is the official stance, I still don't agree.

You can create an entire deck that uses nothing but colorless cards, using lands that generate nothing but colorless mana. While it doesn't get an official piece of the color pie, and is officially "not" a color, for all intents and purposes, it may as well be.

except the only cards that will ever require :c: is Kozilek's Brood. calling :c: a color is the same as trying to call :s: a color

back on topic though, Pain Lands are generally better then Check Lands. UNLESS your deck already has fetch and shock lands (see Misty Rainforest and Breeding Pool)


I should point out that this discussion has been going on since well before :c: was a thing, when "colorless" wasn't defined the way it is now and was synonymous with generic colorless mana ( :1: ).

Again, it is possible to create a deck running nothing but "generic colorless" cards, running lands that produce nothing but "generic colorless" mana.

As I said, it doesn't get an official piece of the color pie, and I understand that, because it isn't a color (which is why things with generic colorless costs can be payed with any color, and generic colorless itself isn't specifically needed to cast cards with generic colorless costs).

The fact that there are such a large amount of "generic colorless" cards out there (enough so that you could create multiple entire decks, including land bases) means that we have to at least be willing to consider their existence sort of like a pseudo-color, even if they don't entirely function as such.
Author:  babassoonist [ Fri Mar 24, 2017 8:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
brown decks have always been a thing
Author:  WrightJustice [ Fri Mar 24, 2017 9:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
Plus brown mana costs (generic) could be paid by any kind of mana sources so it never counted back then and still not even now, now that colourless has become more defined.
Author:  divinevert [ Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Duels v Paper - which land is better
babassoonist wrote:
divinevert wrote:
I prefer to call shock lands as "Ravnica duals".

cool story bro

must be fun trying to explain which duel lands from both Ravnica blocks you're talking about

Pretty positive the Return to Ravnica duals were just reprints of the original Ravnica duals. I don't think anyone would confuse them with the Guildgates, unless your friends are idiots.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/