In Magic: The Gathering (MTG), the Commander format has experienced significant changes, with new bans removing valuable cards like Jeweled Lotus and reducing mana value. A spell’s mana value is always defined by what’s in the top right corner, regardless of discounts like Hinata, extra costs, or alternative costs. Costs are always paid before the thing you are paying for resolves.
When in doubt, go cheaper. Thalia and Goblin Electromancer can decrease the additional cost of a spell. Colorless spells with mana value 7 or greater cost 1 less to cast, while other colorless creatures receive +1/+1. Modern Horizons 3 (Uncommon) offers Flusterstorm, one of the most economical counterspells in Magic, costing a single blue mana.
Killing a creature is great at a discount, and Spellshift allows players to play an instant or sorcery without paying its mana cost. Some of the best one-mana removal spells in MTG include Spellshift, Epic, and the +1/+1 effect on Epic.
In conclusion, lowering your mana curve is one of the best ways to improve efficiency and save mana in the game. By using cheaper cards to trade against more expensive, powerful cards, players can gain an advantage and lower their mana cost.
📹 Fix these MISTAKES with your mana rocks & ramp in Commander
EDH #Commander #mtg Too many players make these SIMPLE mistakes when deck building for Commander – learn why you …
Why did they get rid of mana burn?
R and D deemed the rule “mana burn” too complex and unnecessary. It was a concept where players lost life for excess unspent mana when a phase ended. This rule no longer exists, as it was a complex and unnecessary concept. For example, if a player cast Dark Ritual, Erg Raiders, and let the phase end without spending the remaining mana, they would lose 1 life from mana burn. This rule was removed from the Comprehensive Rules in 2009.
What is the rule 118 in Magic The Gathering?
A player cannot pay a cost without having the necessary resources to pay it fully. For example, a player with only one life cannot pay a cost of 2 life, and a permanent that’s already tapped cannot be tapped to pay a cost. A spell with a mana cost of must be cast the same way as one with a cost greater than zero, and the same is true for an activated ability with a cost of.
If an unpayable cost is increased by an effect or an additional cost is imposed, the cost is still unpayable. If an alternative cost is applied to an unpayable cost, including an effect that allows a player to cast a spell without paying its mana cost, the alternative cost may be paid.
Effects that reduce a cost by an amount of generic mana affect only the generic mana component of that cost. If a cost is reduced by an amount of colored or colorless mana, but the cost doesn’t require mana of that type, the cost is reduced by that amount of generic mana. If a cost is reduced by an amount of mana represented by a hybrid mana symbol, the player paying that cost chooses one half of that symbol at the time the cost reduction is applied.
What MTG card has the highest converted mana cost?
Magic’s biggest creature, Draco, is technically the most expensive card with a converted mana cost of 16. Despite being easier to cast in a rainbow-color deck, Draco still holds the record for the highest converted mana cost among all creatures. To learn more about Magic’s biggest creatures, follow Gabys Partz on Twitter or stream at twitch. tv/gabyspartz. Share your excitement for Emrakul, the Promised End and other Magic’s biggest creatures.
Can you overload MTG without paying mana cost?
The overload cost is a mechanic that allows a spell to target hexproof, shroud, or protection abilities without having a target. If the cost is paid, the spell has no targets and can affect things with these abilities. Overload is an alternative cost that doesn’t change the total mana value of the spell. Taxing and discount effects affect the alternate cost of a spell. Effects that allow casting without paying mana cost cannot be used to cast an overloaded spell. Overload was a popular mechanic with powerful spells, but its return is challenging due to its difficulty in design and spell-heavy environment.
What is the difference between mana cost and converted mana cost?
Magic cards, except for visual reminder cards, have a converted mana cost (CMC) that is derived from their mana cost. Players must add up all mana symbols found on the card’s mana cost, such as the five colors of mana, to convert it into its CMC. If the mana cost has generic mana with a gray circle and number, the number is added to the card’s CMC. Snow mana symbols and Phyrexian mana symbols count as one each for CMC purposes.
Hybrid mana symbols, such as Rafiq of the Many, have two different mana symbols in them, adding one point toward its CMC. Sphinx’s Revelation has a CMC of 3, counting the three colored mana symbols in its mana cost. However, once cast and X is one or more, the card’s CMC goes up for that instance. If X is four, Sphinx’s Revelation will have a CMC of 7 when cast that way.
Cost-reduction effects never change a card’s CMC, even if the spell becomes cheaper to play.
What is the rule for without paying mana cost?
The casting of a card “without paying its mana cost” does not permit the application of alternative costs; however, optional costs, such as kicker costs, may be paid. Any mandatory additional costs must be paid. In the event that a card bears the value of X in its mana cost, it is required that the value be zero. “Without paying its mana cost” represents an alternate cost, and only a single type can be paid.
Do cost reducers change mana value?
Mana value is determined by the cost of an object, regardless of casting cost or alternate casting cost. For instance, Strixhaven’s “Mastery” spells can be cast for alternate costs, such as 2WW or 3WW. Devastating Mastery has a mana value of 6, while Ingenious Mastery has a mana value of 3. When cast for alternate cost, the value of X remains at 3.
The mana value of a split card is calculated by adding the mana values of each half. Split cards have evolved over time, and their interaction with mana values has evolved.
Does reducing mana cost change CMC?
Mana value is determined by the cost of an object, regardless of casting cost or alternate casting cost. For instance, Strixhaven’s “Mastery” spells can be cast for alternate costs, such as 2WW or 3WW. Devastating Mastery has a mana value of 6, while Ingenious Mastery has a mana value of 3. When cast for alternate cost, the value of X remains at 3.
The mana value of a split card is calculated by adding the mana values of each half. Split cards have evolved over time, and their interaction with mana values has evolved.
Can alternate costs be reduced at MTG?
Alterate costs, which can lead to similar effects as additional costs and miscellaneous cost increases and reductions, differ in their rules. These costs replace the original mana cost component of the total cost, and additional costs or other increases or decreases are applied to them just like they would to a typical mana cost. However, abilities that put permanents or copies of spells into play may seem like alternative costs, but they were not cast at all, so no alternative cost was paid.
What is the rule for mana cost reduction?
The text outlines the rules and regulations for cost reduction, including the use of generic mana, colored or colorless mana, hybrid mana symbols, Phyrexian mana symbols, and snow mana symbols. It also discusses the application of additional costs to spells and abilities, with some costs being optional and others mandatory.
Additional costs do not change a spell’s mana cost, but what its controller must pay to cast it. Spells and abilities that ask for a spell’s mana cost still see the original value. However, only one alternative cost can be applied to any one spell as it is being cast. The controller of the spell must announce their intentions to pay that cost, and it is generally optional.
An alternative cost does not change a spell’s mana cost, but what its controller has to pay to cast it. If an alternative cost is being paid to cast a spell, any additional costs, cost increases, and cost reductions that affect that spell are applied to that alternative cost.
In summary, the text provides a comprehensive guide on cost reduction, additional costs, and alternative costs in spells and abilities. It emphasizes the importance of considering the specifics of each cost and its impact on the overall cost reduction process.
What is the 75% rule in MTG?
The 75 rule in MTG represents a foundational concept that informs both the construction of decks and the decision-making process during gameplay. The 75 rule suggests that a deck should be powerful enough to win against 75 opponents, thereby ensuring a balanced and effective deck.
📹 Players Don’t Understand This $1 Tutor. Let Me Explain It. | MTG Commander
Moonsilver Key is a brilliant tutor in MTG Commander, the only problem is not everyone knows what a ‘Mana Ability’ is. In this …
Card draw replacing lands is a much better argument than replacing lands with mana rocks, for the reasons stated in the article. I run a few decks with so many cantrips or enough large amount of card draw that I naturally flood out even with 30-32 lands in said decks. They still have the normal amount of ramp. It helps even more with a low, low top end.
The only thing you should ever replace lands with is card draw, specifically draw that will draw you at least three cards. This works because you can reasonably expect that card to net you at least one land when played. However, this needs to be balanced as it’s only effective if you can guarantee to play that card draw with the mana you expect to have when you first miss a land drop. Another point: You state that the player who spends the most mana usually wins. However it’s worth highlighting that this should exclude mana spent on further mana generation. For instance, if I cast a Sol Ring, a Cluestone and a Thran Dynamo then I need to have cards in hand to cast and sufficient turns to cast them. I’ve spent 8 mana so far allowing me to generate 10 on turn 4 (6 from rocks, three from lands). However my opponent has feasibly spent 6 mana already on board and is ready to spend another 4 on their fourth turn – bringing them to a total of 10 (matching mine). Meanwhile I’m three cards down. If I don’t use all of my 10 mana on turn 4, they’re still ahead on board and on card advantage. Of course, my increased mana production should help me in the long game. However it’s important to recognise the detrimental effects of taking turns out to ramp and thereby make informed decisions when deck building.
I’ve found that, with the way I build my decks, I usually only need get to a certain amount of Mana and can generally work from there, rather than needing to hit my land drops every single turn. For instance, I have a Marisi, Breaker of the Coil deck filled with a bunch of cheap, evasive creatures to make my opponents whittle each other down through Goading. Since those creatures usually only clock in at around 2-3 mana, and the fact that it doesn’t need to commit super hard to board (needing only 1 nigh-unblockable creatures per opponent, plus Commander), it can actually operate really well at around 4-5 Mana for a while until I draw one of my finishers, like Gisela, Blade of Goldnight. I also have a Xenagos Deck focused on stacking Damage Multipliers on large Trample creatures to do massive lethal damage that really only needs to hit 5-6 Mana to be able to cast most of what it needs. Most the Trample creatures and Multipliers fall on either 5 or 6, with some of those being instant one-shots on a player, like a Bloodthirster in a 4-player pod, or Godo searching out Embercleave. All that being said, I still like upping my consistency to avoid having to mulligan constantly, and still run around 35-36 lands and 12-14 Ramp, so I think your advice here is sound. Heck, my aforementioned Xenagos Deck does indeed run 20 Ramp spells (10 1-mana ramp, 10 3-mana), which felt… extremely validating when you got to that part! So yeah, great work you’re doing here, and I love how clearly and concisely you lay out these things in these articles.
I think you have to be careful here. There are different kinds of rocks. Fast mana is a whole other category.) 0 and 1 mana rocks break some of the precepts talked about here. This is why you see cEDH decks with lower land counts – they have the moxes and mana crypts that allow them to be playing all out turn 1 or 2. The other key variables are card draw – if you are drawing a lot of cards, your percentage of hitting changes – and commander. If you have a commander that can ramp or draw and have low cmc, it totally changes the probabilities.
My thought process is as the game continues you get more card draw, and with it higher chances of land. So I tend to run low on land with 34-36 in the deck. However I’ll run 3 search for land cards like Kodama’s reach and a last March Of The Ents. Not for the lands drops as much as it is to remove the lands from what I’ll be drawing. My group usually pops between turn 6 and 8 so drawing more lands than you can play are pseudo dead draws. Lands are a crucial mechanic of the game obviously but getting flooded when all you need is 1 or 2 pieces to win is maddening.
i think its fine to take out lands for certain rocks. if the rock is free like chrome mox or mana crypt then you can use them interchangeably. often its better to draw chrome mox or mana crypt than it is to draw a land because it means you can use them in tandem with dropping your land so you’ve effectively played two lands that turn
Love the maths, personally I want to customize my ramp to the deck itself also my sons use the inter webs I’m old school pen and paper and maths to make my mana base. But let’s compare K’rik to Chulane for instance totally different ideas for ramp here. I use dorks in chulane and rituals and K’rik himself in K’rik.
I disagree. You CAN cut lands for rocks IF your deck has enough draw to still ensure to hit your landdrop each turn. In general you want to draw a single land per turn, not zero, not two. This is why people reduce their land count in favor for ramp – because you can play multiple rocks per turn but normally you can only make a single land drop. Some people however make the mistake to forget that their deck doesn’t draw enough cards for such a low land count.
I usually do now days 35-33 lands and 15 ramp cards only like 8 or less Mana rocks/dorks with 2 or 3 Mana cost the rest are cheap ramp spells that are 3 or less to cast. Alot better then what I use to do like 40 lands with almost 3 or 5 ramps 🤣🤣🤣 I never could get anything done bc everyone is ahead of me but glad I seen my bad errors of my ways a year ago
Due to how consistency works with lands, then you can probably cut a little bit of lands if you add a significant amount of ramp, assuming you are still moving around in the decent territory of lands. For a normal deck this might mean running 24 lands and 8-12 ramp cards instead of running 26-28 lands. This in a way has to do with consistency of getting enough mana, and while it does not bring you ahead, it does help with consistency around your normal targeted areas.
I agree, I run a 5 color deck in commander. I run a 35 lands an 10 mana rock, with 3 ramp spells, I got mana screw but ended up winning still because I had an equipment that made treasure tokens to help cover any unfortunate card draws. At the end, I only played 6 lands at the end with no mana rocks or ramp.
This article is indeed good info for the normal commder deck but since commander is very diverse format this won’t work with every deck. Like my deck is more than fine with 30 lands (I often actually end up flooding) and the critical turn things doesn’t really work since my deck has a lot of cards on the more expensive side but I’m not planning to hard cast them
I still disagree in most circumstances. If I play a ramp spell on turn 2 and 3, but then I miss my 6th land drop and those ramp spells are not ‘just lands I had to pay mana for’ because I got to use them and be ahead of the curve for a period of time, too. When the ‘lose case’ for running less lands and more rocks is ‘6 mana on turn 4, 5 and 6’ and the ‘lose case’ for running too many lands is 4,5,6 mana but 3 dead cards in my hand… I’d rather have the chance for explosiveness and higher card quality, but miss a land drop sometimes in the mid-late game than hit all my land drops, but be slower or flood more frequently. I am interested to see your take including card draw, but i think it’s key here. I also often find low cost card draw to be controversial, surprisingly
Some players perusal this might be sighing because they’re wprking on a deck with a companion like Keruga and know that ramping sooner than turn 3 is not feasible…except that it is. Just run a bunch of lands that net more than 1 mana each time they tap and you’ll be shocked how fast the deck runs. There’s a ton of options in mono green and keruga is a Simic creature. Choosing a commander for him that also ramps and/or fixes mana is also a huge help.
I can’t really argue here lol. Like the narrator in Darkest Dungeon says— “Overconfidence is a slow and insidious killer.” I don’t usually play many, but I tend to run specific rocks, some of which are sacrificed for deck-thinning, be it for draw or land tutoring, and Sol Ring is one of those more-bang-for-your-buck rocks, so I can supplement my addiction to jank strategies. I think of it like I’m a reckless motorcycle stunt driver. I’m here for a good time, not a long time, but I do supplement my brews with about 6 to 8 big mana value bombs, which can include some boardwipes and ways to capitalize on them. I have definitely played for goober-town levels of greed and fun interactions, like when (in my Lulu//Veteran Soldier vehicles brew) I run The Weatherlight, Board the Weatherlight, Bennie Bracks, Sram, Ellyn Harbreeze, Skullclamp, and other fun bits of repeatable draw, ramp, and synergy. I like playing mind-games with my opponents, and I’ll build to let my cards do the bamboozling for me. I enjoy being the class clown at the table.
So if I’m running 40 lands, 20 ramp spells/rocks, 10 sources of draw, 10 removal spells, and a few tutors, that leaves about 15 cards to synergize with my commander. Obviously this is an exaggeration, but it doesn’t seem too far off from what you’re suggesting here. Am I missing something? This way of deck building seems like a good way to spend the entire game durdling and not actually doing anything fun.
lol those people who say 30 lands because they have lots of mana rocks is not a misinformation. i been playing 30-32 lands and i dont get mana screwed often, actually i ramp more and cast more spells. but this always depends on ur mana curve. dont expect to run 30 land and some ramp with a 5 mana curve decks.
0 mana rocks are mostly equal to land, in a low cmc deck rocks do allow you to play 30 or less lands but it is really about cmc and top end. However is this super important for a casual deck? I tend to worry about hitting my land drops (35-37ish land) along side a handful of rocks (8-12) to accellerate my gameplan in casual, if my ave cmc is 3-4 this is normally fine.
Im building a reanimator deck and im having issues determining the correct amount of lands and ramp. I believe reaniamtor is a very unique deck in the sense that 1) the average mana cost is not “real” cause it considers the cost of several fatties you dont wanna ever cast 2) it loots significantly so it sees more cards than the average deck….anyone can help?
How do you determine how much mana you NEED to be ahead by on which turn? For example, the latest deck I built has an average mana cost of 3.3. By your formula my critical turn is the turn I can generate 6 plus mana, which theoretically is turn 6. Do I need to scale ramp/lands to be at the critical turn on turn 5? Turn 4? That’s the determination I don’t understand (to simplify, I have 39 lands 37 excluding MDFCs and 7 ramp/rock spells)
I got my own lil formula 1 color deck: 33-35 lands 2 color deck: 34-36 lands 3 color: 35-37 4 color: 36-38 5 color: 37-39 Ramp ranges anywhere from 6-18, it’s highly dependent on the decks CMC, commanders CMC, and what the purpose of the deck is. (My yuriko deck has 34 land and 6 ramp, cause the CMC is super low and operates fine at 4 mana) I’ll go outside my land count depending on the purpose of the deck aswell, but that’s rare. Landfall is a good example or if my CMC is super low.
The 2 rules my group like to break in Commander are having more than 100 card decks and not playing with lands that aren’t for utility. Manabases are among the most expensive parts of deck building. If you eliminate that it allows you to put all the cards you actually want in your deck that do something. Lands don’t do anything really. In Landless you draw 2 less cards and discard at 9 instead of eight since you aren’t making land drops every turn. This provides every Deck with more gas, no flooding, no mana screws, and you simply use a die for the mana color of your choice when you would make a land drop. You can still ramp and track everything normally. We’ve been doing this for a few years now and that is exclusively how we build decks at this point. It’s so much more fun 🙂
I like to start with 14 ramp pieces or 14 of any effect I want to see in my opening hand because that’s a 1/7 chance. I like to start with 40 lands in any deck but have gone a little higher in green. People tell me that’s high, but I don’t think so, a lot of really good lands enter tapped and you can’t count on them, some of them have effects you’d rather use instead of its land side, and fetch lands don’t add mana so they are also not really lands, and colorless lands often bring problems. So 40 isn’t all that high if you properly assume these cards aren’t helping you get your gameplan online. Also, realistically I want to play a land for every turn of the 10/12 turns of the game. I do think ramp is over rated though and not every deck needs to go a turn or two faster. The card slots you use for ramp are often better used for more threats rather than better threats in a proactive aggro deck, more card draw and interaction in control decks, or more tutors and higher variance tools in combo decks. I like ramping out for decks where most of my cards land on a certain spot on the curve or in decks with powerful commanders that are going to be targeted down. Other than that, more basics and redundant game pieces are the way I like to go. Related to the point in this article, I see players treat draw spells the way they treat ramp, thinking they can cut lands to play a 2mana draw spell, but the argument against that is even dodgier that a mana rock; instead of playing a 0 mana add 1 mana using 1 card slot, you’re paying 2 mana to ‘maybe’ play a land across 2 or 3 card slots, and the ‘maybe’ caveat makes it strictly worse than a mana rock.
OK bro. Play your 40 lands 20 rocks deck. Mana generation is mana generation. Card advantage is card advantage. Lands and rocks don’t win on their own spells abilities and creatures do. The player who spends the most mana generally wins not the player who plays the most lands. The question then is how to spend the most on relevant spells. Assuming card draw is equal in your scenario you average 4 land hand with at least 1 rock, So 2 spells or creatures in hand. You may be less mana screwed overall but this is the recipe to run out of gas in more games than not. You may have optimized the mana but I bet you’d win less games overall using this kinda strategy
i’m sorry i lost interest halfway through the article. you don’t mention fetch lands and why people don’t run Evolving Wilds/Terramorphic Expanse and would maybe run Fabled Passage but would run Prismatic Vista or any of the well known “fetch lands” they get you “ramp” and one less potential “dead draw”.