Llanowar Burned: Recent Activity
| Llanowar Burned: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Llanowar Burned: (Generated at 2026-10-04 03:30:59)
| Llanowar Burned: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Llanowar Burned: (Generated at 2026-10-04 03:30:59)
It's a land-only O-ring. I agree the wording was, um, bad. Fixing. (Was: While ~ is in play, target land is not.)
Umm, you mean
> As long as ~ is on the battlefield, target land is treated as though it didn't exist.
or
> Target land is treated as though it didn't exist until ~ leaves play.
?
Also, 2 mana land destruction in white? The card is kinda confusing and I would wager it isn't NWO-friendly.
(art)
This is a good point. I'd hoped to make it a playing field you'd contest; but maybe I just need to focus on your own land-death with only minor ways to take advantage of an opponent who focusses on it.
> "Lots of stuff that wants dead lands, that rewards you for having dead lands; that punishes opponents for having dead lands."
Not a pair of mechanics that you usually would put in the same set since the two deck types meeting would create undue tension and hose each other.
The issue is timing it right when you cast cards from your library. As written, it doesn't use the stack, and if you need to rewind the spell (e.g. you tried casting a sorcery at instant speed), you need to "undraw" the card. Alternatively, you accidentally draw the card you meant to cast from your library
Actually we have new template technology that takes care of this issue. Just swap jmgariepy's suggestion around:
> "Sacrifice ~: Add
. When you do, draw a card."
That said... there is a lot else going on on this card that's questionable e. g. how is this at basic rarity? A how many card cycle is this?
There are multiple aspects to this card that skew its perception. Cards like Dwarven Ruins and Geothermal Crevice have less wacky options and still don't replace themselves when they sacrifice for mana.
Comparing this to Horizon Canopy you also boardcycle this far cheaper at +3 mana, so it looks clearly less balanced. Which seems a side effect of the haphazard construction of the cycle.
I would suggest keeping it simpler and more straight-forward. Is there a reason these cannot be basic land types outside the graveyard? You could go with a Forest with boardcycling and relax the ETBT a bit like the recent Eldraine lands e. g. Gingerbread Cabin.
A really interesting variant would replace the ability to sac for mana + cantrip with an ability to sacrifice for a Treasure token + cantrip.
...stoopid rules getting in the way.
Is it a reaosnable thing to TRY and do though? Or will it get used often enough if it's just the mana?
"Sacrifice Gwand: Draw a card. When you do, add
to your mana pool"? Does that work? Unsure...
I'm sure Vitenka will hand will just hand wave this as "It works as written" though.
Drawing a card as a mana ability does terrible things to the rules
(art) Maybe make it pseudo-cycle?
(art) (pretend it's an infiltrator - though really the fennec is named "scout") Given this is sacc a land to use, can its activation be slightly cheaper? I guess it doesn't tap, so the last-gasp would be dangerous if too cheap
(art)
omit the "you may" no longer needed in modern templates. Other than that, this seems to fill its niche.
(art)
Fair enough; as I said, I liked them. And yes, it was "Slip a couple in a deck" not "Run 4 of every one possible to make use of" so that might have been the problem. Also, of course, the proper dual-lands were around at the time, so these looked very weak in comparison.
And this version is slightly more viable since you can choose to split the emergency mana gain up to a later point if you need.
So... keeping as it is.
That would make the card more tournament viable. But the extra conditions to keep track of might make the casual crowd like it less.
I think it's fine as is. Not every dual land needs to be 5-stars.
I always liked them - and these can at least be used the turn you drop them (though only as a sacrifice for a single mana).
But without etbt they're in the "strictly better than" category; so do need some downside. Enter tapped unless you control a... maybe?
Entering tapped is such a huge drawback
It's also relatively close to Irrigation Ditch, though it's not quite that either.
I have this strange need to point out that both the Fallen Empire and the Invasion sac lands weren't very popular. I don't know why, though. I always thought the boost they provided was worth it, presuming I didn't overdo it and only slipped a couple in my deck.
No, the only conditional dual I can think of is River of Tears
Surely this cycle (modulo the graveyard rider) already exists somewhere in mtg?
(typo)
See wuland.
See wuland.
See wuland.
See wuland.
So. Putting together the sac-lands in Risen Empires ( Dwarven Ruins etc.) gave me this wonderful wonderful variant. Adding 'counts as blah in the graveyard' should help enable burned-land abilities.
So yeah. Serendipity cycle! ... Now I just need to come up with some names.