I guess "Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact" would be too long.
OK, I actually don't care, I'm just amazed that after all the time I spent learning this stuff in GCSEs I remember any of it -- I remember at the time trying to remember the names of the ambassadors and not being able to at all :)
PS. Sorry, I didn't see your comment before submitting mine. FWIW:
"I would prefer removing the manaability completly over bringing them tapped"
Tapping for generic mana is also a usual drawback for ability lands and would be completely fine. The usual drawback is that people prefer coloured mana on a land that fits in a cycle, but if you're ok without that, it would be fine.
"I just don't like tappedlands"
I definitely agree. Even wizards have said they don't like relying on that ability per se. But also, it almost always is the only sensible drawback for a coloured ability land or dual land that anyone can think of.
Wizards have printed untapped mono ability lands whose only drawback is legendary before, so it's possible, eg. Flagstones of Trokair (it depends on the ability).
Advantages of Legendary:
It's splashier, which very much fits the cycle of famous places -- I like it for this reason.
Normally the legendary drawback feels a bit arbitrary -- big splashy cards usually feel unique even if they don't have a proper name. But for cards based on actual specific unique places, it's more obviously appropriate to only have one.
Disadvantages of Legendary:
Wizards say they try to avoid putting legendary on lands because it goes against how people expect it to work (I think?)
It probably is too good, even if wizards have done it before. Playing one is basically a strict upgrade on a basic land, which is what wizards say they're trying to avoid.
Wizards haven't done it since Kamigawa and Time Spiral, and I think their default advice now would be to stick with come into play tapped and other drawbacks not legendary (I'm not positive).
So normally I'd just say "make them come into play tapped", but this feels like a case that could go either way.
That said, that depends on the abilities being balanced for nearly-basic-lands. I find expensive abilities on lands really, really hard to judge: they're almost always too good (even a very, very overcosted ability is very very useful when it can take a land slot in your deck instead of a spell slot), but occasionally they're too weak and I can't tell the difference very easily.
These lands feel like they should have powerful abilities, but a repeatable ability (even one difficult to use) may well be too good. And if so, changing the drawback to tapping probably doesn't make much difference.
For instance, this ability could almost be a hard lock once you have the mana to use it (which could be very early in a mono white deck). That makes me think it's too good. But I may be wrong. And I don't know if the current cost and ability are important: it could well be balanced with a much larger mana cost, or an additional cost to stop you simply playing it every turn, or a slightly different effect, or a larger one-off effect.
The comes into play tapped would just delay the mana but not the mainability, I would prefer removing the manaability completly over bringing them tapped (I just don't like tappedlands). Legendary again comes rather from flavor reasons than powerlevel...
I like the landmark cycle, but due to their power they should all enter tapped (for example, Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle and friends from Zendikar). Legendary isn't a big enough drawback on its own.
it's white for flavour reasons, and the name's just for now (although I should change it asap to make it free for a land with sacrifice costs, I like that idea).
Don't want to make it ETB tapped because it's part of a cycle with other "Landmarklands"
THX for the input!
Flavour adjustment
The lenght (probably) wouldn't be a problem, but more people know Hitler and Stalin than Molotov (exept for his cocktailparties^^) and Rippentrop.
Some people think that if your opponent plays a legendary land with the same name as yours, you can quickly tap it for mana before it dies; you can't.
If you made the second ability on all of them cost an additional
, that would greatly reduce the power, which is probably a good thing.
I guess "Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact" would be too long.
OK, I actually don't care, I'm just amazed that after all the time I spent learning this stuff in GCSEs I remember any of it -- I remember at the time trying to remember the names of the ambassadors and not being able to at all :)
THX for the feedback!
fixed drawback
Changed remove from game to destroy
PS. Sorry, I didn't see your comment before submitting mine. FWIW:
"I would prefer removing the manaability completly over bringing them tapped"
Tapping for generic mana is also a usual drawback for ability lands and would be completely fine. The usual drawback is that people prefer coloured mana on a land that fits in a cycle, but if you're ok without that, it would be fine.
"I just don't like tappedlands"
I definitely agree. Even wizards have said they don't like relying on that ability per se. But also, it almost always is the only sensible drawback for a coloured ability land or dual land that anyone can think of.
Wizards have printed untapped mono ability lands whose only drawback is legendary before, so it's possible, eg. Flagstones of Trokair (it depends on the ability).
Advantages of Legendary:
Disadvantages of Legendary:
So normally I'd just say "make them come into play tapped", but this feels like a case that could go either way.
That said, that depends on the abilities being balanced for nearly-basic-lands. I find expensive abilities on lands really, really hard to judge: they're almost always too good (even a very, very overcosted ability is very very useful when it can take a land slot in your deck instead of a spell slot), but occasionally they're too weak and I can't tell the difference very easily.
These lands feel like they should have powerful abilities, but a repeatable ability (even one difficult to use) may well be too good. And if so, changing the drawback to tapping probably doesn't make much difference.
For instance, this ability could almost be a hard lock once you have the mana to use it (which could be very early in a mono white deck). That makes me think it's too good. But I may be wrong. And I don't know if the current cost and ability are important: it could well be balanced with a much larger mana cost, or an additional cost to stop you simply playing it every turn, or a slightly different effect, or a larger one-off effect.
The comes into play tapped would just delay the mana but not the mainability, I would prefer removing the manaability completly over bringing them tapped (I just don't like tappedlands). Legendary again comes rather from flavor reasons than powerlevel...
I like the landmark cycle, but due to their power they should all enter tapped (for example, Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle and friends from Zendikar). Legendary isn't a big enough drawback on its own.
it's white for flavour reasons, and the name's just for now (although I should change it asap to make it free for a land with sacrifice costs, I like that idea). Don't want to make it ETB tapped because it's part of a cycle with other "Landmarklands" THX for the input!