Didn't they start adding one land per booster now? How friggin expensive can they possibly be?
This. That's 24 lands per 8 man draft, 36 lands per box opened, let alone any that come with Fat Packs or such. Charging 45 cents a land is ridiculous, decent uncommons go for that price.
This. That's 24 lands per 8 man draft, 36 lands per box opened, let alone any that come with Fat Packs or such. Charging 45 cents a land is ridiculous, decent uncommons go for that price.
Apparently the reason is, and I quote "Players want matching lands that way the opponent can't tell one land from another"
Apparently the reason is, and I quote "Players want matching lands that way the opponent can't tell one land from another"
That is the dumbest f(editting this now so I don't get in trouble)ing answer on earth, because as far as correct play etiquette goes, you are supposed to separate enchanted lands/modified lands from their unenchanted counterparts. There is literally no tactical advantage to having 4 of the same fullart forest.
That is the dumbest f(editting this now so I don't get in trouble)ing answer on earth, because as far as correct play etiquette goes, you are supposed to separate enchanted lands/modified lands from their unenchanted counterparts. There is literally no tactical advantage to having 4 of the same fullart forest.
That is the dumbest f(editting this now so I don't get in trouble)ing answer on earth, because as far as correct play etiquette goes, you are supposed to separate enchanted lands/modified lands from their unenchanted counterparts. There is literally no tactical advantage to having 4 of the same fullart forest.
It's not etiquette, it's a rule. If you're purposely obfuscating the game state it's a game loss.
Xavius2010-03-31 02:12:19
To Kial's credit, Zendikar lands are actually going for more than their commons.
$.45/ea. is still disproportionately high.
Shiri2010-03-31 03:09:45
I don't think you guys are understanding the actual implications of having the lands the same. The idea is that if you reveal one from the top of your deck, and then play a different land, they'll know you still have a land in hand. So it's a legit concern albeit an incredibly minor one.
I don't think you guys are understanding the actual implications of having the lands the same. The idea is that if you reveal one from the top of your deck, and then play a different land, they'll know you still have a land in hand. So it's a legit concern albeit an incredibly minor one.
That would drive up the price of ANY land, though, so long as they all match. People are just charging a premium for full-art because they know people like them.
Shiri2010-03-31 04:14:44
Yeah, but it's not about obfuscating the board state.
Rodngar2010-04-05 20:03:54
A lot of my impressions of these last few days of spoilers, besides Gideon, are honestly really negative. Eldrazi is looking kinda lackluster. :/
Xavius2010-04-05 22:06:34
That's crazy talk. Eldrazi has the most beautiful mana curve I've ever seen. You need to stop looking at the expensive beaters. Expensive hands lose games.
That's crazy talk. Eldrazi has the most beautiful mana curve I've ever seen. You need to stop looking at the expensive beaters. Expensive hands lose games.
I won't lie, some of the stuff is neat.. but I think I'm just not feeling it as a set.
I DO really like Student of War though - AND it can brought up with Ranger of Eos.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
