As far as I know WotC evades 3-mana land destruction even if it's multicolored. Gameplay wise I don't feel the LD option brings much, but removing does makes it just a Banishing Light so becomes questionable.

Still it could be made into a "half-gold multicolor" as SecretInfiltrator puts it:

> Cycle of what I'll call "half-gold multicolor" like Dreadbore or Glimpse the Unthinkable.

I mean, the original Journey to Nowhere was black after all (Oubliette) - so kinda the here would be just "condensing" the cost.

That card was made in Aenyr as Lifelike Canvas.

I don't really think this is problematic as a 3 mana land destruction, because it has the downside of being removable. I consider this generally worse than Vindicate, and while Wizards probably wouldn't print Vindicate again (in Standard at least). Also, I kinda disagree with the philosophy of "we should only make custom MTG cards that Wizards would print." They've done all sorts of things that they people "wouldn't do" and while they are very good at what they do, their way of doing it, isn't the only way of doing it.

I'll agree, I mean I've been playing with a concepts such as extra colors for years now.

Just in general WotC is the only "standard" to which we can compare ourselves so certain people are very adamant about staying within the boundaries they have revealed. It's ironic really how many times they print stuff that would get panned if shown by a custom designer. The recent blocks seem to have also crossed the redflagged quota and are high in complexity.

The comparison to Vindicate is actually really scary. It's not on the level of "I consider this generally worse than Ancestral Recall" but still, how many times have played a game in standard or such that Oblivion Ring or Banishing Light was removed after it was played? Heck, and are pretty much denied the possibility to do so.

It's definitely something risky. Getting lands removed early on in the game is really painful.

How about a compromise?

> "... exile target nonbasic permanent until..."

Personally I find the overabundance of nonbasic land use regretful, so slowly but surely printing cards that hose them is something I could get behind.

With regard to "we should only make custom MTG cards that Wizards would print": That's an oversimplification. Most of us in our custom sets are deliberately relaxing certain restrictions that WotC follow, such as "no other IPs" (Doctor Who, Harry Potter, Code Geass), "no references to Earth / modern technology", complexity level/target audience, or whatever.

But in each case the general assumption is that we're trying to design "like WotC except where noted"; if we don't state "I'm deliberately breaking the colour pie in areas A B and C in this set", we'll get a lot of commenters pointing out colour-pie violations. Which is fair enough.

So I completely agree "their way of doing it isn't the only way of doing it". This whole site exists pretty much on that basis. But it's still helpful to state your assumptions and approaches that differ from "like WotC", otherwise people will assume it's in a "like WotC unless noted" area and point things out.