Chris Taylor
Contributor
I mean, like if you're happy with the art, make sure they're good and edited etc
Its more of a commitment right?
Its more of a commitment right?
True. I'm open to any critiques. Art, card quality, names, whatever.I mean, like if you're happy with the art, make sure they're good and edited etc
Its more of a commitment right?
Perfect. Definitely going for strong but not crazy. No raw duals, at least. It also seems like you can push lands a bit in draft because they cost a pick and no one is going to run 20 of them in their Modern deck.I think they all seem reasonably balanced compared to each other. They are super powerful but that’s fine.
No raw duals is a goal of my own. Back when I had ABUR duals, people would splash them off a fetch because there was no drawback. They were actually detrimental to the format's goals sometimes.I didn’t say no raw duals at least. I said they were super powerful but that it was fine.
Meaningful choices are indeed tasty, but I personally lean towards having the player decide between life and colorless mana instead of life or losing access to the land completely. Probably depends on how colored-mana intensive the cards are in the environment to determine how much of a drawback only having access to colorless mana on select lands would be. It's definitely less punishing, and my preference it probably skewed towards reducing feel-bads regardless of its risk-reward level.I love pain lands, so B for me. Meaningful choices are tasty, and getting an untapped triland seems pretty dang good. I'm a bit fan of the cycling trilands too.
This is why I ever considered B. I can't tell how good it is.\getting an untapped triland seems pretty dang good
It's either 1.5 painlands or .6 Confluences.Functionally, would go with A since B is strictly worse than Mana Confluence
This is very true.and the other lands you've presented are potentially a higher level of fixing.
I feel like making up flavor text has a high potential to be cringe. I'm not opposed to adding some, but it seems risky.Aesthetically, I like the clean, single-line of text with B. Addition of flavor text would improve A if aesthetics matter.
This is going to make me go with A. Being stuck on B and 1-2 other lands could be game-ending damage and that's really unfun.reducing feel-bads
Yeah. It's definitely not the strongest thing ever printed, but I still think it's pretty good, ya? The basic land types help and I don't want it to be free to toss into a deck, so I don't think I can remove the world "basic."This cycle is pretty low power
~ ENTERS TAPPED UNLESS YOU CONTROL A BASIC SWAMP.
Compare it to the new cycle from Midnight Hunt.
The window for which it could be better is on turn 2, only.
I think it's cleaner to just go with A. A is already quite strong.If you go with B, just add a sac outlet to provide use later in the game. MTG already has a 2 color variant of this that proves itself to be quite good: