Black and red should not be able to get access to this ability.

the only way they're getting it is if they turn lands face down

Even sacrificing a land (which it would be, outside of this set) is going to be worth having in the sideboard.

Sacrificing a land? I think I missed something

I think what Vitenka is saying is that the card would be well worth it for black and red even if they had to sacrifice a land. The cheapest they're allowed (right now) is Scour From Existence. And to be honest, I was surprised that Wizards allowed black and red to have that...

So they'd add a wastes to their deck to run it? That seems weird, and at that point why not add a forest?

Why use a wastes when you could use Sulfurous Springs? All you need is colorless mana... that's easy enough to come by.

but sulfurous springs isn't in my set

[Shrug]. Well, I certainly can't argue that your set doesn't conform to the laws of Magic, if it's your intention to make a set that doesn't conform to the laws of Magic.

But consider this from my perspective. If you came across a set in which all the counterspells were green, but there was no real explanation for why that was happening, what would your response be? I would assume you would want to know why that is. If the designer then responded with "Oh, because all the blue cards are green in this set," you would probably be flummoxed. You would likely want to know why that's the case. It's a fair enough question, but it would never be resolved.

So Null Exposure can't be cast by a red/black deck (unless you put... let's say a Deadfield Wisp into your deck.) At least it can't be cast by red/black considering the way you perceive your own set. Yet, I would suppose that the vast majority of people looking at the card would see this card as unfair because they would presume it belonged in the greater game of Magic, and not just this set. They would be 'wrong'. Though, personally speaking, and speaking only in the realm of perception and what is fun, I'm of the opinion that when the majority of players are wrong, they are actually right.

i don't think your assumption that sets on multiverse are designed to interact with the wider magic universe is a reasonable one to make

I didn't say that, so if that's what you inferred, that was my error. I'm just trying to express a viewpoint that I assume (and I could be wrong about this) would be common, and I'm doing it because I think it's worth considering.

I love to see new and different ideas. I personally think that too many designers get constrained by the limits of what Magic does now, or are too focused on where Magic could be in the future, that they forget to ask what Magic can do. For what it's worth, keflexxx, I think there's a lot of original design space in this set, and you'll have to excuse me if I don't chime in more often to say I like what's going on.

That said, and speaking now as an artist instead of a card designer, I create for an audience. And while I don't all the time agree with what this imaginary audience wants, I find that I must make choices as to whether I will satisfy my audiences desires, or do something more personal which opposes my audience. And the decision to choose one path and committing to that choice makes my art better.

So you will have to excuse me for acting like a devil's advocate. For what it's worth, I'm five times as harsh on myself. I think sets that don't belong in the greater realm of Magic belong on Multiverse. I just think it's crucial to think about the decision critically, since it is against the norm, for the purpose of making the set that much stronger.

"I didn't say that, so if that's what you inferred, that was my error."

fair enough, might have misread you; sorry about that. i think my own point needs clarifying too, actually: this card isn't technically breaking the colour pie here because within the self-contained universe that is this set, it can't be exploited by other colours. there's a handful of lands that produce colourless mana in this set, and the set doesn't need to be designed to interact with cards beyond the set itself. so i don't think it's fair to conflate cards like this with a green counterspell; that doesn't fit green's identity, but this card can easily be seen to fit colourless' identity. the ability for it to interact with existing mtg cards poorly is true, but best-case scenario is this sets gets used for some drafts & a bit of block constructed; i'm not hugely concerned by the issue

"For what it's worth, keflexxx, I think there's a lot of original design space in this set, and you'll have to excuse me if I don't chime in more often to say I like what's going on."

thanks for that, appreciate it. like with lots of things in life, i think on multiverse people are more inclined to comment when they see a problem that needs solving as opposed to when they see a card they like (i know i'm guilty of this). it means that no news ultimately means good news, but still it's nice to hear compliments. i should try and dole out more myself

"I create for an audience"

you and me both, but in this case the audience is really just my immediate circle of friends. maybe you're aiming a bit broader than that? wouldn't blame you; i'm placing a hard limit on the significance of what i'm doing

i think we're more or less on the same page here in that we agree this card as-is would be a big headache for eternal formats, if not standard. but i haven't been able to figure out a more elegant solution, and the idea of Nothing as this lifeless barren void is a really compelling one to me; i really want the colourless spells to evoke this idea and i think this is a good manifestation of that. because i can create an environment where the main drawback can be avoided, i'm not too worried about it. if i was practicing to be the next wotc superstar, i'd probably reconsider. but i'd probably be reconsidering a lot of my cards if that were the case

thanks for expounding a bit more, sorry if i came across as too caustic before. i find it a bit too easy to do when there's just disembodied words on the other end, but i'm working on it

I said "sacrifice a land" since; if you're not using this set heavily; a face-down land is basically useless to you.

But ok. Set is to be played in isolation only. You're still going to have to be a bit careful about what this does to the colour pie. You might end up with blob decks (everyone can run colourless; so why would you not?) which was a problem mirrodin had. Or you might just end up making black and red unusually more powerful than other colours (since this nicely covers one of their weaknesses) and you may need to do something similarly nice for, say, green; to make up for it.

I don't think everyone can run colourless, at least in reference to spells like this. Well see what happens in playtesting, but I'm not worried about that at this stage

Black & red need to jump through hoops to run this, they can't just jam it mindlessly. Again, not particularly worried but I'll know more after playtesting

Of course, a black or red deck can already splash green for Naturalize. Without having really paid attention to the rest of this set, that seems equivalent.

Hmm.. just playing two colors in this set might prove problematic. The closest thing to a dual-land in the set is a Tendo Ice Bridge variant.

there's going to be five of them, and there's the sphere of the suns variant as well. but in my experience playing two colours in any set is always easy enough because you've got enough lands