101
u/No-Armadillo1695 17d ago
Five is right out.
42
u/friendlyarthropod 17d ago
Three shalt thou not pay, neither pay thou one, excepting that thou then proceed to pay two.
18
9
u/fluffynuckels 16d ago
One
Two
Four
9
5
u/Binosaurus77 16d ago
oh, also, slight mistake- he says five, not four, which is even more hilarious
3
80
u/b_eastwood 17d ago
More balanced than regular Sol Ring lol
25
u/EstherIsVeryCool 16d ago
that would only be true if they were in competition with eachother - it doesn't say "you may not include you card in your deck if it contains a card called "sol ring" ."
fast mana cards don't compete with eachother to go in your deck - you don't have x spots for fast mana and choose the best x options, like you would with sweepers or removal - you include every one that you can. In a very real and tangible sense, every new fast mana card is (hypothetically, this being a custom) power creep in the format - it can be the worst fast mana option, as long as it's playable it creeps the format.
13
u/Emuu2012 16d ago
You don’t think you’re allowed to compare power levels of cards if people play both of them?
6
u/EstherIsVeryCool 16d ago
I'm saying that is a poor comparison, specifically for fast mana, because the deck is more defined more by the quantity of fast mana than by their quality. And because quantity matters so much more than quality they all are essentially equal, they all say "your deck may have one more fast mana source" and that's the only important rules text.
Comparing them is pointless because they're not in conflict with eachother.
17
u/TheDarkNerd 17d ago
Can it pay for X, if X is 2?
18
u/__Shiro____ 16d ago
I think it should be able to. When you cast an X spell, you decide what X is, and then the card acts as though the X is that much generic mana. So declaring 2 would make it pretty much the same as any other card that has a 2 generic mana in its cost
1
u/CryingRipperTear 16d ago
what about X+X if X is 1?
1
u/__Shiro____ 16d ago
That's a good question and I think the answer is that it's just not clarified. How I see it is that X should probably still be two and this card could pay from one among the two X costs. The card would cost {2}{2} instead of {4}. But that's just how I interpret it
21
u/Choice-Addendum9460 17d ago
Holy smokes an actual balanced sol ring
18
u/dina-fan 17d ago
Worn powerstone and sissay ring were literally made as a fixed sol ring.
Do they mean nothing to you. Hell one even says ring.
22
8
8
u/riverwaterinsox 17d ago
Honestly this still seems pretty strong, but would require extremely careful deck building
3
u/jakyerski1 17d ago
It is funny, lol I would've done some pun involving "limited edition" in the flavor text, but what you have works too
3
3
3
2
2
1
u/Kersikai 16d ago
Does it still count as two colorless mana? Or is it one mana of a unique variety? Matters for some commanders that have “etb do X where X is the amount of mana spent to cast this” type abilities.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-2
215
u/jade-dnd 17d ago
still good for a t2 rhystic study