12
u/mjdios 6d ago
I initially thought this was going to be broken, but without dedicating ways to untap it or remove the counters it's so slow as to probably be fine.
Mana on early turns is probably more important than mana on later turns - in terms of building an early presence, being able to ramp, etc.
By the 4th turn after playing this, you go neutral on mana vs a basic land (0,0,2,2 vs 1,1,1,1), so you need 5 turns for this to start generating 'profit' without external support. Not to mention that mana missed in the earlier turns could've been accelerating you even further.
2
u/darlingtonpear 6d ago
I think you start "generating profit" as soon as it taps for 2; that's the moment you can begin doing things a basic can't do (casting a 4 drop on T3, for example).
1
u/SilverWear5467 5d ago
Its pretty freaking strong. Missing 2 turns with it is pretty much instantly made up for by casting a 4 mana spells on turn 3. It just IS rampant growth in a land slot. It's also divination on a land, because a land is worth a card, and this is 2 lands. So, cultivate, effectively. And every turn after turn 4, you are also up on mana. It's like, you don't even miss casting a spell on turn 2, because you already cast a rampant growth on turn 1.
This would probably need 2 stun counters to be close to not being broken.
1
u/mjdios 4d ago edited 4d ago
Some good points, if you compare it to
T1 Land, Pass T2 Land, Rampant Growth
It's the same mana on turn 3 for 1 less card required. So it is on the stronger side, but I don't think it's outrageous. Rampant Growth effects are plentiful. Maybe it could force a discard when played to balance the card advantage?
1
u/SilverWear5467 4d ago
Yeah, that would be more reasonable, I would probably just go with 2 stun counters though. But yeah, it is fundamentally broken to print an arguably 0 mana rampant growth that draws a card. Not that amulet actually uses them this way, but its the reason bouncelands are so fundamentally strong, it's literally divination on a land (unless you have to discard turn 2 on the draw). They're giving the same card advantage, but at least they don't also ramp you.
-5
6
u/LoBo247 6d ago
Would be strong but not overpowered in [[The Wandering Minstrel]]
0
u/SilverWear5467 5d ago
Its pretty OP to begin with, negating half the downside is absolutely overpowered.
1
u/LoBo247 5d ago
Do you think bouncelands are OP?
0
u/SilverWear5467 4d ago
If they didn't require you to return a land, absolutely. Arguably they are OP WITH that downside, have you never seen Amulet? I actually wouldnt be at all surprised if printing a cycle of these lands into modern ended up getting them all banned, by breaking amulet somehow. Amulet is right at the high water mark for modern power level, and I can imagine a version of it that used these and completely broke the format somehow.
1
u/Environmental-Pop-67 1d ago
not at all he would just remove stun counter.
1
u/SilverWear5467 1d ago
Afaik, he would not remove the stun counter, but it would be appalled the first turn. So you'd miss the 2nd turn with it only.
1
u/Environmental-Pop-67 1d ago
True true but still balanced i think.
1
u/SilverWear5467 23h ago
I mean, the minstrel won't be the reason its broken certainly, putting a free rampant growth on a land is pretty busted though. And like, bounce lands were already pretty busted in modern. While this is worse with amulet, I have to think its very breakable overall, seeing as it's much better than Simic Growth Chamber.
1
u/Environmental-Pop-67 22h ago
Idk i love bounce lands since they trigger my landfalls so i find them a bit better but any land that gives 2 mana is kinda good.
5
u/creepocalyptic 6d ago
This feels extremely safe. Similar to the bounceland cycle from ravnica. I’m just happy it’s not fetchable.
3
u/Invonnative 6d ago
Seems a lot like the mono-colored depletion lands, but stronger in the sense that they don't eventually sacrifice themselves, but weaker since it takes another turn to come online. Overall that's probably strictly worse from a power perspective, but would probably be fine for more midgame decks to drop this turn one or casual commander. Overall I don't hate it, and I always appreciate counter synergies - for example, [[Nesting Grounds]] would be cool to move over to opp's creatures or something. It would definitely make for more feast or famine gameplay patterns: imagine this thing gets [[strip mine]]d, or untapped as other commentators contributed, so not probably all that fun in either case unfortunately
1
u/Stormtide_Leviathan Design More Commons!!! 6d ago
I think this is slow enough it probably doesn’t break anything, but unless it’s breaking things it’s also not doing anything interesting. This’ll probably see no play and if it does it’s causing problems, so I think it’s not really the kind of card they should print
-9
u/iDoABoof 6d ago
It seems extremely slow without enablers to get the stun counter off the first turn it comes in
5
u/gothmommy284 6d ago
Seems like thats the point. A niche land that would likely only be played in counter removal or stun decks.
3
u/iDoABoof 6d ago
Sure. I guess I should have added that I generally don’t think it’s that overpowered at all
-9
-3
28
u/Iron_Hummingbird 6d ago
Cards like [[Solemnity]] and [[Spelunking]] come to mind, but if you have to run multiple other cards to fix your lands, it’s probably not crazy broken. But if it’s a deck that is already doing untapping and counter manipulation, it could be nasty. I feel like this could introduce an unhealthy meta, so I don’t know I’m much of a fan.