0:09

Hello and welcome

0:11

to the EDH Wreckcast, where we're all about

0:13

commander, data, and dad jokes.

0:15

My name is Joey Schultz and I'm joined as always by my

0:18

fantastic co-hosts. Up first, he

0:20

can't get over how in the new Ixalan set,

0:22

the U-descended mechanic is different than

0:25

the Descend mechanic, which is also different than

0:27

the Fathomless Descent mechanic. It's

0:29

Matt Morgan.

0:30

So I know that a shark can swim faster

0:32

than me, but I'm pretty sure I can run faster than a

0:34

shark. So in a triathlon, I think it comes

0:37

down to who's a better cyclist.

0:39

Okay. Do you think you

0:41

stand a good chance against that? I

0:44

mean, if you gave me a little bit to practice, probably, because

0:47

I don't think his fins can reach the pedals

0:49

on a bike. So I might actually win.

0:52

That's fair. But Matt, the card shark

0:54

typhoon has cycling. So

0:57

I want to say according to magic rules. Wow.

1:01

Well, now I'm just beat. I am in danger now. Well

1:04

played.

1:06

All right. Up next,

1:08

you know, this one's not even a silly joke. He'd actually

1:11

genuinely, just like Wizards to Stop Giving

1:13

Everything Ward to, please, please, we're

1:15

begging you. It's Dana Roach. Hi, Dana.

1:19

I had a rough day today. I wound up getting

1:21

into a fight with a turkey of all

1:23

things.

1:24

He got in a few shots, but I

1:26

knocked the stuffing out of him at the end. That

1:30

is the best part of Thanksgiving dinner. Yeah.

1:32

And I got out of there right afterwards. I didn't want to get accused

1:35

of foul play or anything. So I just

1:36

jumped on the gravy

1:38

train and boogied out of town. You're

1:41

on a roll, a dinner roll,

1:43

even. Our listeners are going to gobble

1:45

that joke up, Dana. They're absolutely going to love

1:47

it. All right. Hey,

1:50

Matt, what are we talking about in this week's

1:52

episode? Well,

1:53

this week we are going to give the definitive,

1:56

undeniably concrete and

1:59

unassailable.

1:59

tier list I guess

2:02

of what the best dual lands are for commander.

2:06

Yeah definitely definitive definitely

2:09

yeah yeah the end all be all for

2:11

sure. There will be absolutely zero

2:13

discussion had on this list. No doubt it's

2:15

gonna be so complete. I

2:18

would hate for our listeners to go to

2:21

the comment section of YouTube and

2:23

tell us exactly what lands

2:26

they think we got wrong in this list. Oh

2:28

goodness. We would derail

2:31

us if they went to the comment section. I

2:34

see what you're all about man this is hilarious yeah

2:36

we are going to do a dual land

2:39

tier list basically any color fixing stuff we

2:41

want to talk about our favorites the ones that we do and

2:43

don't play I'm excited to get into

2:45

this but we've got some shout outs to do before we get

2:47

to it.

2:48

First I'd like to thank Chase also known as

2:50

Manicurve for helping editing the show you

2:52

can find them online at Manicurve.

2:54

And if you would like to support the show you can do so by liking

2:57

and subscribing on YouTube you can

2:59

subscribe to local podcast app or you can go to

3:01

patreon.com slash edh retcast

3:03

where you have patron tiers of all sorts levels where they want to join the

3:06

discord community for as little as two dollars

3:08

a month there's all that and more over

3:10

at patreon.com slash edh retcast

3:13

including the weekly patron shout out so

3:15

this week we are going to give a very special shout

3:17

out very very special actually because it is just a

3:19

powerful name but Matt Etheridge thank

3:21

you so much for your support Matt I mean

3:24

I just have to respect somebody with a just dominant

3:27

assertive first name and so Matt you

3:30

did it and shout out to your cousin

3:32

Melissa she's great artist. Matt

3:35

I cannot help but think that you might be a little

3:37

bit biased here. I've never

3:40

said anything biased I don't appreciate that accusation

3:42

Joey just Matt Etheridge just solid

3:45

human being. No bias

3:47

also the tier list that we're gonna do for this episode

3:50

definitely purely 100% the definitive

3:53

one I love the confidence

3:55

you're bringing to the show today buddy I

3:58

mean I need it today because I mean

4:00

just all this post-con crud just bringing me

4:03

down, but no it's not bringing us down We are

4:05

here to be penultimate professionals.

4:08

We're here to be the second to last professionals No,

4:10

the super ultimate the mega the mega

4:13

ultimate kind of like this tier list that we're gonna get to

4:15

talking about right now Okay,

4:18

let's get on track here We are indeed

4:21

doing a little tier list of

4:23

the dual lands and for folks who are watching on the

4:25

youtubes We will have that on screen that we can like sort

4:27

around We'll talk about the different dual lands that exist

4:30

in commander and whether we rank them as s tier

4:32

a tier BCD all the way to

4:35

F tier, you know Which are the ones that we would or

4:37

would not play like above a basic land

4:39

and things like that and I guess I

4:42

mean, yeah, I guess we're just gonna get right started into it

4:44

There are plenty of other folks who have done tier

4:47

lists out there for things like this But as Matt

4:49

said we are penultimate professionals and this is

4:51

apparently the definitive one. So

4:53

guys let's get right to it We've got

4:55

our tier list here And the first thing that we're talking about

4:57

is of course the original dual lands

5:00

the AB you are dual lands the underground seas And

5:02

all of them I assume

5:04

we just slam these right into s tier. Yeah Yeah, I

5:06

mean I would even argue that they're

5:08

in the OP tier as an overpriced tier

5:12

What they bring to your deck nice. I like

5:14

that Yeah, unless you're playing a four

5:16

or five color deck do these make that much

5:18

of a difference? I mean, they are considerably

5:21

better than everything else out there It's

5:24

one card in a deck like the amount

5:26

of situations where it changes the outcome

5:28

of the game and that's true of all these lands Are

5:31

pretty minimal? That

5:33

said, you know, they're fetchable by

5:35

a whole bunch of different means They

5:37

never come into play taps and maybe most importantly

5:40

they make other lands better Which is not

5:42

necessarily a thing you could say about many lands They let

5:45

you hit thresholds for various things that

5:47

allow other lands to come into play untapped So

5:50

as someone who has ran these in the past in the

5:52

last couple years taking them out of decks I

5:55

can't say that I've missed them at all. It hasn't really

5:57

changed how my decks perform, but

5:59

I'm down

5:59

really, there's just nothing better. Yeah. Yeah.

6:03

I think that it's safe to put those into S tier but also like they're

6:05

kind of a who cares about them

6:08

as well. It's just like, yeah, they're the best lands but they're

6:10

also like ridiculously overpriced as you said, Matt and

6:12

like, whatever. The price

6:14

to win ratio is a little bit off here but like

6:16

you can't not put them in S tier, boring

6:19

as it is is kind of where I'm at with it. Yeah.

6:22

Like instead of buying an underground sea, you can just build a whole

6:24

new powerful deck and that seems

6:26

like a better use of money to me. And anything

6:28

else, I mean, we're just kind of beating around the bush. Yeah. So

6:30

that moves us on to such lands

6:33

like the Misty rainforests and all of them.

6:36

Dana, where are you feeling? You know, they're

6:38

a little bit

6:39

time consuming and frustrating and

6:42

like, I don't subscribe

6:44

to the notion that you can run a whole bunch of these

6:46

to thin out your deck mathematically. It's

6:48

been proven that doesn't really work in commander. It

6:51

barely works in 60 card formats, at

6:53

least in terms of like the price you pay for actually

6:56

losing life and things of that nature to

6:59

pin your deck out. That's just not a mathematical thing.

7:01

But they're

7:02

very useful and maybe

7:05

in a weird unique way because they can go faster

7:07

than the basic land type, they fix whatever

7:09

particular problem you're having in a way that

7:11

very few other lands do. Whatever

7:14

mana you're short of, you can grab that

7:17

and the cover you're second most short

7:19

of. They're pretty fantastic. You

7:21

know, I happen to have a bunch of them from back

7:23

in cons of Tarkir era. I

7:26

put them in every two color deck even though I don't know how much of

7:28

a difference it makes.

7:29

It's just nice being able

7:31

to have a land that will solve whatever problems you

7:33

have. Setches are expensive. I

7:36

mean, most of them are at least $20, if not more. Even

7:39

with all the reprints that we've gotten, you can

7:41

get other fetchable dual lands. But

7:43

in a lot of cases, those are expensive. The

7:46

shock lands that we're going to talk about and the triomes,

7:49

those aren't cheap dual lands or tri

7:51

lands in some instances. The

7:53

cost is beyond just the actual

7:55

price tag on the fetch land itself. Yes, fetches

7:58

are very, very powerful. But there's

8:00

also a lot you have to take into account beyond just like, okay,

8:02

I bought a fetchland, now what? See,

8:05

I'm feeling that these also belong in the S

8:07

tier. Like this is where I'm leaning because of the

8:09

extra stuff that they lead. Like there can

8:11

be sacrifice synergies in your deck. You can get these

8:14

back with like Crucible to World. Savin's Reclamation

8:16

can affect those. If you ever need to shuffle

8:18

your library, if you are indeed, you know,

8:20

plain brainstormy type of effects in your deck. If

8:23

you need landfall triggers, like the color

8:25

flexibility that these offer you is one thing and

8:28

they also enhance so many other types of lands.

8:30

But like the other doors that they open, I'm

8:33

just like, in terms of what lands can do, this

8:35

one has a utility beyond color

8:37

fixing that I feel is kind of unmatched by many

8:40

other dual lands we'll talk about. So these belong in

8:42

the S for me as well. I

8:44

would agree with that as well. Yeah, landfall utility,

8:46

I mean, that's also something that you kind of get

8:49

to play around with. So yeah, I do

8:51

agree they're probably S tier just on power alone.

8:54

But there's just, there's other factors I think a lot of players

8:56

need to make sure they keep in mind when putting fetches

8:58

in their decks. Very very fair.

8:59

So that brings us to Shocklands now. I

9:02

mean, we all know and love these. Where

9:04

do Shocklands go? The only thing I would say

9:06

about Shockland is because technically they are

9:09

a worse version of AVR duels. I

9:11

would have a tough time also putting them on S tier

9:13

because that's what they are. They're just an AVR

9:16

duel. They have the same basic subtypes.

9:19

They work in the same way except for they

9:21

only come into play on tap if you pay two lives. They're

9:24

amazing and probably the next best

9:27

land cycle out there after AVR duels

9:29

and fetches. For

9:32

myself, I think that just disqualifies

9:34

them and they would be the start

9:37

of the A tier here for me. So

9:40

I

9:41

basically, Dana, what you're saying is, you

9:43

know, pepperoni pizza is just a worse version

9:46

of meat lovers pizza. So because

9:48

of that, because meat lovers is S tier,

9:50

pepperoni isn't as good. So that

9:53

doesn't make any sense. Pepperoni can

9:55

still be S tier. I'm with Matt here. A

9:57

slightly less good version of S tier.

10:00

something doesn't automatically need it, it's not good. It's

10:03

not meat lovers, but it's still pizza. Here's

10:05

the thing for me, like, am I going to put these

10:08

in a deck more than just a

10:10

two-color deck? Like, this is where I start to think of, like,

10:12

would this go in a three-color deck? Would this go in a four-color deck?

10:14

Would I even put these in a five-color deck? And the answer

10:17

is yes. Like, I consider the fact that, oh sure, the

10:19

ABUR dual lands exist at STR, sure. But

10:21

they also don't exist at STR because who

10:23

has these? Who's bothering to go and pay the money

10:25

for these? So like, S stands for shock

10:28

lands, as far as I'm concerned.

10:29

I'm not going to argue against how

10:32

good they are, absolutely. If you guys absolutely

10:34

want them at STR, I

10:37

made my semantical argument about why

10:39

I wouldn't put them there, but that's entirely what it is, it's semantic.

10:42

So I'm absolutely not

10:45

going to doubt that they're powerful. S

10:47

for supreme, as in the pizza that Dana also

10:49

hates. 100%, do not like

10:51

supreme pizza. How about the dual

10:53

lands are S plus, and these are just

10:56

S, or these are S minus. Now it's getting

10:58

too complicated. Yeah, that's too

11:00

much. Okay, okay, I'm just, they're

11:02

still going there, is all I'm saying. All

11:05

right, that'll take us on to, I think these are called like the crowd

11:07

lands, but they're like the battle-bound style of lands,

11:09

where they enter tapped as long as you have multiple opponents.

11:13

Okay, I'll fire off here. For

11:15

me, these are also fully S

11:17

tier. I can't think of a reason that I would put these

11:19

below, but I'm not sure where you guys stand. I

11:21

also think these are S tier. These are just great.

11:24

Okay. They're, to me, how good

11:26

a card is at pretty much any stage of the game is kind

11:28

of a big deal, and these are always just,

11:31

if you're entering these tapped, the

11:33

game's probably over already, and it's not depending on

11:36

one extra land drop coming in untapped. Or

11:38

the game's gone really well so far for you, because you've

11:40

killed off two other opponents, yeah. Yeah,

11:42

so I love these. Whenever

11:44

they get reprinted, and you can get them for $3 a pop, absolutely

11:47

worth just stocking up. I do that every time they get reprinted,

11:50

and they're just great, because they go in pretty

11:52

much every deck. These are probably

11:54

one of my most played land cycles

11:56

right here. All right, I

11:58

have to push back here. Okay. What

12:00

you guys are trying to do is include

12:02

a really nice souped up Subaru

12:05

in the same category as a Ferrari.

12:07

And while that Subaru may be real

12:10

nice, a Ferrari it is not.

12:13

I absolutely like these Battlebond lands

12:15

a lot. They are fantastic. They

12:17

are not fetchable. They don't make your other

12:19

lands better. They are excellent.

12:21

They are S-tier not.

12:24

So these would absolutely be the first land

12:26

in A-tier. They just aren't that almost

12:30

perfect creation like you see with those first

12:32

three. I think including these

12:34

alongside ABR duels, fetches and even

12:37

shocks devalues how good those lands

12:39

are by comparison. No, no. I

12:41

don't know about that last part. And

12:44

I also at some point then you start looking at do I include

12:46

these in a three or four or five color deck?

12:48

Yeah. Maybe in a three but I start

12:51

including them in a five color deck where I have ten shocks. I

12:55

probably have a handful of fetches. I'm running

12:57

the City of Brass, Manicomflow, Exotic Orchard,

12:59

stuff like that. I'm absolutely not running

13:01

a full cycle of these. I might run a couple

13:04

but I think that's where we're getting

13:06

knocked down to A-tier. They are not that

13:09

elite top line land. And if

13:12

you guys want to include them in the top then you're welcome

13:14

to be wrong but they should not be in the S-tier. Nothing

13:17

else should belong there. I will support this

13:19

argument because of points you brought up. They

13:22

don't have any basic land types so you can't really

13:24

fetch them very well. That's a huge, huge factor.

13:26

They don't make other lands around you better. I

13:29

support this significantly

13:30

more than saying that Pepperoni

13:32

Pizza is not also S-tier. The

13:36

argument for these being an A-tier I think is a

13:38

little bit better because eventually you do have

13:40

to separate them. I still personally would put them into

13:43

my S-tier but I understand the

13:45

arguments against them and I do see

13:47

where you're coming from with these. My

13:49

vote is also for S-tier so that's 2 out

13:52

of 3 unless Matt you're kind of the swing vote here.

13:54

Where are we putting this one? I mean it is fun

13:57

upsetting Dana so I'm going to vote for S-tier.

14:00

I just think that these are so because they're so

14:02

reliably untapped and we can

14:04

make caveats about everything like okay Well in a five color

14:06

they get less good or whatever you want to say

14:09

Man, they're so powerful

14:12

in the decks They are powerful in yeah that I think

14:14

that they still do carry the weight of an S tier All

14:16

right, cool, then that is where we shall place

14:18

them Dana I understand the arguments and

14:20

if it makes you feel better this next one that

14:23

we're getting you guys are just lumping everything

14:25

in the S tier So like we're not putting over there's

14:27

all S tiers from here. I know what I get. No No,

14:29

it's really not because the next one we're talking about our check lands

14:32

But you know like Dragon's Soul Summit enters untapped

14:34

only if you control a mountain or a swamp I

14:36

can definitely say I'm not putting these at S tier

14:38

right might not even be putting them at A tier I think that

14:40

these maybe fall at the B range for me Oh these

14:43

for me is exactly where A tier should start

14:45

these are absolutely great if you're all

14:48

you need is one Basic land

14:50

type of whatever you need. So that's so

14:53

incredible unless you're Dana. It's incredibly easy to do

14:55

I should say That's just it

14:57

right it counts off your duels it counts off your

14:59

triomes anything They just has a basic

15:01

land type in pretty much any color

15:03

deck. These are fantastic whether it's two

15:05

color or five color I think these are very

15:08

very good Especially the price

15:10

for like the dollar amount that you have to pay on these

15:12

I think check lands is that perfect

15:15

balance of? They're a few bucks But

15:17

you're getting a lot of value out of that those

15:19

couple bucks that you're spending on these check lands Be

15:22

here at best. Whoo. Okay.

15:24

Okay, so you and I are more aligned on this one. They

15:27

are not fetchable it's

15:29

Really easy to get burned by them particularly

15:31

in the early game if you don't

15:34

like they get better if you have a VR

15:36

duels But

15:37

it's really easy to miss out on these unless

15:40

you are running basics more basics than

15:42

I run Exactly. I

15:44

think I think this is Dana's deck building Knocking

15:47

these down like if you're running if you're running like me

15:49

if you're running eight to ten basics And you

15:51

know a shock land and maybe

15:53

something else It's really easy to have these

15:55

coming to play tapped and I don't want to have to think

15:58

about my lands

15:59

I want them

15:59

to work every single time. For

16:02

me, that's what most matters and these

16:04

don't work every single time for me. So

16:07

that knocks them down to at

16:09

least B tier for me. I also follow

16:12

on that because like these are the kind of things that

16:14

like if you are having a lot of utility lands in your deck, these

16:16

are the considerations that you have to start making. The

16:18

fact that they can upset your tempo even if

16:20

it is a little bit unusual, like I guess

16:22

actually here's where I'd put like an A tier is something

16:25

that I would still consider in like a four or a five

16:27

color deck and I wouldn't play these in a four or five

16:29

color deck. I've even taken these out of some three

16:31

color decks before because I have had

16:33

some issues with color fixing along that line in

16:36

a way that I haven't with like the Battle Bond lands for example.

16:38

Thanks. I have pulled them from three color

16:40

decks as well, Joey. So that's what shaped my

16:43

opinion as well. Still like them. Yeah,

16:45

absolutely. I'm still like, oh, better than a basic most of the time

16:47

for sure. So like I think B is still very respectful,

16:49

but sorry, Matt. I think this time you're the one who's getting out loaded.

16:52

That's, you're allowed to be wrong. Like Dana said,

16:55

if we're allowed to be wrong, then both of you are.

16:57

Alright, into the B range, it goes

17:00

just by virtue

17:02

of the vote. Moves us to pain

17:04

lands now like Brushland and the

17:06

Darkar Wastes and stuff like that. You

17:09

know, it's just untapped, can be a colorless or

17:11

you can tap for one of two colors and it, you know, hurts

17:13

you just a tiny, tiny little bit.

17:15

Solid A tier for me, but

17:17

where are you guys at? Definite A tier here. I think

17:19

these are maybe one of the more underappreciated

17:22

land cycles in the game. I think people get

17:24

way too scared off by losing a single life. You

17:27

only, you really lose that life the first couple

17:29

of turns of the game by turn four or five,

17:31

even if you drop it on turn one, you

17:34

can play around that damage really easily by tapping

17:36

them for a colorless mana. Being able to tap

17:38

them for a colorless mana is relevant sometimes.

17:41

There are situations where you need to produce that for

17:43

various Eldrazi things. You can get additional

17:45

colorless mana if you have a Forsaken Monument out.

17:48

They're cropped up for me on more than one occasion

17:50

and decks will run that. I just don't have to think

17:52

about them. They always come into play untapped.

17:54

They always make me the mana I want and

17:56

in situations where I'm low on life, it's almost always one

17:58

where I can work around the damage.

17:59

damage it gets dealt. So for me, exactly

18:02

what I'm looking for in a land, no must, no fuss,

18:05

solve the problem, get it done, A tier. I love

18:07

how you're saying all these things about

18:09

the Pain Lands, but then you are so low

18:12

on the Battle Lands. It's

18:14

just bewildering to me that you're so high

18:17

on them. I wasn't low on the Battle Lands. I wanted

18:19

them to be in A tier as well. I think I would have

18:21

included it side by side. Oh, that does line

18:23

up, I feel you. Matt, where are you with these? I

18:26

am not huge on these. With

18:29

a shock lane at least, you know you're only losing two life.

18:32

With these it might be more because, say,

18:34

maybe things don't go right. These and

18:37

another land cycle that also causes you to lose life,

18:39

they're in B tier for me. I don't love...

18:43

Yes, they do come into play untapped. And

18:45

in certain decks, when you corner case it

18:47

a little bit, yeah, the colorless mana does definitely

18:49

have some upside. But

18:52

you could lose a significant amount of life over the course

18:54

of a game to some of these types of lands, and that puts them in B

18:56

tier for me. But I understand

18:58

why, but I'm not very high

19:01

on these. I feel like I've never paid more

19:03

than three for these, and three life is the range

19:05

that I would get. If I'm willing to shock into

19:07

a shock land, if I'm willing to fetch

19:09

into a shock land, that's already going to be three life

19:12

right there. If I'm willing to do that, then I'm willing to pay

19:14

potentially three life for these as well. And I

19:16

feel like I almost never actually do. And I definitely

19:18

like the fact that these will never disrupt tempo.

19:21

And Dana, I love what you said about how the colorless cost can sometimes

19:23

be relevant. So yeah,

19:26

I think that A is a place that I'm

19:28

inclined to put these as well, is what it sounded

19:30

like. Yeah, I'm with there. But that life

19:32

loss does move us to the next one that you just hinted

19:34

at, Matt, and that's Horizon Canopy, or

19:36

just the Horizon lands in general. They

19:39

cost the life to use every time,

19:41

but you can pay a mana tap, sacrifice

19:43

them and draw a card later on. You

19:46

said B tier for these? For me personally, these

19:48

are B tier. Again, you don't

19:50

have the option to tap for colorless and

19:52

not lose life on these. So whenever you're tapping them for

19:54

mana, you are losing a life. Being

19:57

able to cantrip out is nice and all. format

20:00

like commander I think some of the power that makes them

20:03

prestigious almost in modern

20:05

in those 60 card formats I don't think it

20:07

really carries over as much as

20:09

it would in commander yeah being

20:11

able to get rid of lands to draw and can't

20:14

rip out is nice but there are other lands that do that

20:16

a little more expensive for sure but

20:18

I'm not very high on those so I these

20:20

are these are B tier they're fine I'm not gonna

20:22

blame anybody for playing these but I

20:25

just especially for the monetary investment

20:27

to get some of these lands I don't think

20:29

it's worth it

20:29

I am with Matt here on calling these beats

20:32

here as well okay reasons he mentioned

20:34

I think the the myth

20:37

that horizon canopy brought with it from from

20:39

how much of a powerhouse that it was in modern impacts

20:43

how people perceive them in EDH to this day rising

20:46

canopy was the only one in the cycle for a long time

20:48

and like I think that kind of built up how powerful

20:51

was people's brains and that power

20:53

level in commander isn't necessarily commiserate

20:55

to what it was in modern

20:57

because because one card in a format where you're

21:00

you know casting relatively low cost spells

21:02

is a whole different deal than one card in a

21:04

multiplayer format where you're casting larger spells

21:06

and at least personally I found the amount

21:08

of situations where I'm willing to get rid of

21:10

that one land to draw a card is

21:13

different than it is in like a competitive format

21:16

may the only time I'll ever wind

21:18

up using these really is when it's like oh this

21:21

thing just happened I wasn't ready for well maybe

21:24

I'll top deck of sorts of fall shares not die to the

21:26

blight steel but it's not like that's the only time

21:28

I wind up cracking these sure so I

21:30

feel like the utility on them is something

21:33

I you're paying a cost in terms of trading

21:35

a life every turn and I cash

21:38

in on that utility way less frequently than

21:40

I and I pay the light so okay I think these

21:42

are perfectly fine but I don't like them as much as people

21:44

do in in say modern gotcha

21:47

okay I had these at a but I'm being

21:49

out voted here and I'm perfectly fine with that I

21:51

you guys have made some really good arguments before these

21:53

especially the timing of when you do cash them out that

21:55

does make sense I do still play them in three colored

21:58

X before and above them like I probably would

21:59

For those I was really happy to see these

22:02

reprinted in the Doctor Who decks for

22:04

example like I was just like thank goodness Yeah, so I

22:06

love seeing them in like pre-con manabases,

22:08

but be it seems like a solid

22:10

place for them to go I'm happy to be out voted

22:12

here that brings us to a fun

22:14

little thing here We've got the fast lands and the

22:16

slow lands the ones that enter

22:19

untapped if you have two or fewer lands versus

22:21

more lands So you know concealed courtyard

22:24

versus deserted beach and things like

22:26

that Matt I know you have some

22:28

strong opinions about the fast. Let's

22:30

talk about fast lane. Yeah, little answer guys So

22:33

the fast lands we want to talk about how

22:36

much power you get for the monetary investment

22:39

Maybe the only thing worse at one point in time

22:41

then the duels was when black leave kiffs

22:44

was like $50 People were clamoring to

22:46

put those into their commander decks is like well, it's $50

22:48

must be good. No, it's not It's not

22:50

great at all because unless you draw

22:52

it in your opening hand It's gonna come into play tap to you just

22:54

play a gate at that point Well, I

22:57

don't love these these are In

22:59

my tier these are C tier for commander at least the

23:01

fast lands are oh, I've got them at D Okay

23:03

that that you you convinced me. That's all you had

23:05

to say. Yeah, I'd rather

23:08

play a basic than the the fast

23:10

lands almost every time I don't like them So

23:12

these ones probably have the most flex based

23:14

on what the power level of your meta

23:17

is or part of your deck I should

23:19

say I

23:20

Understand the logic if you are

23:22

playing at the absolute cutting edge if

23:24

you are playing a c88 style game where you

23:26

need to be making plays every single

23:28

turn and You have

23:30

to do something on turn one or two or you like You

23:33

are not in the same game the way everyone else is

23:36

They are a much different beast to there than they are

23:38

outside of there So I'm doing this evaluation

23:40

based on how I play and the people that I know tend

23:42

to play and yeah I'm gonna put them like down

23:45

at C or D tier. I Would

23:47

not run these and I have none of them in a deck

23:50

right now and I can't imagine a situation Aside

23:52

from like me trying to play competitively where

23:54

I would run them sure Yeah, now now on

23:57

the other hand the slow lands are

23:59

fantastic. They are a solid A tier for

24:01

me. Oh, happily, yeah. For

24:03

the same reason, basically, the fast

24:05

lands come into play for me, who tends to

24:07

play games that go 10 turns, that means the fast

24:10

lands come into play tapped 80% of the time,

24:12

and the slow lands come into play and tap 80%

24:14

of the time. Like, it's just a very

24:16

clear-cut difference in how they perform for

24:19

me based on the length of games I tend

24:21

to play at. Absolute same. I'm totally

24:24

co-signing on A tier. I love

24:26

these. I've even played these in four color decks and I've never

24:28

had an issue with

24:29

them disrupting my tempo or getting

24:32

the colors that I need even in those situations. I

24:34

absolutely love those and would love to see them reprinted

24:37

all the ding-dang time. I just I love

24:39

this slow lands. My check lands never come into

24:41

play tapped, but I'm just doing things better, kind of like

24:43

how I segue better. What if we both say it at the

24:46

same time? Can I get a half point on seguing?

24:49

No, because you can't interrupt me and

24:51

it's like, oh, I stole this from you.

24:53

I invented this. That's what you were doing. That's

24:55

what you did to me when you first started

24:58

taking my segue in to challenge the stats

25:00

though, Matt. I'm just trying to get it back by any

25:02

means necessary. Show me the receipts

25:04

on that one. The

25:06

listeners will know. They're gonna be in the comment section already

25:08

in this episode. True. So we'll see

25:10

what they say. Alright, yeah. We'll take a quick pause

25:13

from all of the ranking of the lands.

25:15

We've got plenty more to go, but yeah, there's

25:17

a bit of data on EDIATREC that we've got

25:19

to challenge, so let's take a quick break and come

25:21

back with that. This

25:24

episode is sponsored by BetterHelp.

25:26

This time of year can be a lot.

25:29

The holidays are approaching, the weather is

25:32

weathering, and it's very natural to

25:34

feel anxiety or even sadness about

25:36

those things. It's natural too to want

25:38

to talk about those feelings with someone,

25:41

and adding something new and positive to your

25:43

routine can counteract some of those feelings.

25:46

And therapy can be a bright spot amidst

25:48

all the stress and change, something

25:50

to look forward to, something to make you feel grounded,

25:52

and to give you the tools to help manage

25:55

everything that's going on. Which is why I'm

25:57

glad to tell you this episode is sponsored

25:59

by... BetterHelp. BetterHelp is

26:02

entirely online so even if it's

26:04

cold and icy out, you can still get talking

26:06

to a licensed professional therapist to

26:08

help you feel more in tune with yourself.

26:11

Just fill out a quick questionnaire and they'll

26:13

match you with a licensed therapist and

26:15

you can switch anytime, no additional

26:18

charge. Find your bright spot this season

26:20

with BetterHelp. Visit betterhelp.com slash

26:23

EDH today to get 10% off

26:25

your first month. That's betterhelp.com

26:29

slash

26:29

EDH. The

26:32

first two letters of Webster Bank, we, as

26:35

in us and you, working together. That's

26:37

the we we're all about.

26:39

The we that means you can think bigger and

26:41

do more with our financial solutions

26:44

tailored to your goals and expert

26:46

guidance at every step. So take your

26:48

next step with total confidence because

26:50

you've got the power of we on your

26:52

side and together we can

26:55

do anything. Webster Bank. It

26:57

starts with we. WebsterBank.com.

26:59

Webster Bank, NA, member FDIC, Equal

27:01

Housing Lender.

27:03

Hi everyone, I'm Nolan Sykes and I'm one of the hosts

27:05

of Past Gas. Past Gas brings you

27:07

a weekly episode about the most amazing, scariest,

27:10

craziest, and weirdest moments in automotive

27:13

history. From Formula One to flying

27:15

cars to races through the jungle, we

27:17

cover it all on Past Gas. You don't

27:19

have to like cars to like our show, you just

27:21

have to like great stories and larger-than-life

27:24

characters. I'll tell you what, Past

27:26

Gas has a bunch of them. Past Gas by Dunnit

27:28

Media. Check it out.

27:33

All right, I'm gonna start us off for Challenger stats this

27:36

week and I've got an overplayed card in

27:38

the deck, Fal'dorn Dreadwolf Herald,

27:40

which folks may remember from the Baldur's Gate pre-cons.

27:42

This pre-con, right out of the box, just

27:45

absolutely slaps. So many wolves this thing

27:47

can make. It is the three mana, three three human druid

27:49

in Gruul that says whenever you cast a spell from exile

27:51

or a land enters the battlefield under your control

27:54

from exile, you create a 2-2 green wolf creature

27:56

token and you can pay one mana, tap Fal'dorn,

27:58

and discard a card to exile a creature from exile. the top card of your

28:00

library and you may play that card this turn. Again,

28:03

this deck absolutely, seriously

28:05

is so good. I know a lot of folks are enamored of Prosper

28:07

because of all the treasure tokens that it makes, that

28:09

that one can make, but if you want to also

28:11

play more stuff from Exile in slightly different colors, Faldorn

28:14

will get a lot of stuff going. I

28:16

do want to be a bit critical, however, of the

28:18

card Terramorph on Faldorn's page.

28:21

It shows up in 39% of the 4800 Faldorn decks

28:24

out there, and it's a pretty interesting

28:26

land-searching spell. I actually do like the design

28:28

of this card a lot. It's a 4 mana green

28:30

sorcery that searches your library for a basic land card,

28:33

puts it right onto the battlefield, and then you shuffle

28:35

and it has rebound. So rebound says

28:37

if you cast the spell from your hand, you exile

28:39

it as it resolves, and at the beginning of your next upkeep,

28:42

you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.

28:44

So that's pretty cool. You will get the, you know, played

28:46

from exile trigger off of Faldorn right with that

28:48

rebound, so you'd make a wolf token. And that seems

28:51

pretty neat. The issue that I have with

28:53

it is that decks like Faldorn tend to play

28:55

so many of those impulse draw effects that

28:57

often your spells will wind up in exile,

28:59

you know, inspired tinkering type of spells or

29:02

the reckless impulse and things like that, that

29:04

you could very well be playing this card from exile

29:07

in the first place, which won't get the rebound

29:09

effect, because rebound only happens when you cast

29:11

the spell from your hand. Even if you want to

29:13

discard this card with Faldorn's own tap ability,

29:16

you will miss out on rebound stuff. So I'm

29:18

a little critical of this particular land-searcher

29:20

in Faldorn decks. I think you can play potentially

29:22

some other stuff that you'll actually get a bit more

29:24

direct benefit off of. Yeah, a little bit more

29:26

bang for your buck, as it were, given the form and

29:28

the nature of this ramp spell. So be a little

29:30

bit critical of rebound spells when you're playing stuff

29:33

from exile as your main strategy. So

29:35

that is my challenge. How about you guys? Well,

29:37

my challenge is a quick and easy hitter. So

29:40

looking at the stats, we've talked about how divination

29:42

is kind of a, it's a fine like budget

29:44

filler card, whatever. It's still being played in 10,000

29:47

decks. And so whether you like it or not, it's still

29:49

a relatively popular card. But we

29:52

now have a better version. And we don't

29:54

get to say strictly better very often, but

29:56

we actually do in this case, because quick

29:58

study was just printed. Two in a

30:00

blue for an instant that just says draw two cards.

30:02

Compare that to divination which was two in a blue for a sorcery

30:05

which also said draw two cards. It's

30:07

a pretty quick swap. I like, unless

30:09

you specifically have to be casting sorceries, there's

30:12

not really any reason other than you want multiple

30:14

copies of this effect to not be playing quick

30:16

study. I got to cast it a whole bunch at

30:18

all the wild level drain events that I've gone to

30:21

so far. It's just great. Being able to speed

30:23

things up, holding your man up, staying flexible

30:25

with when you want to cast spells is incredibly

30:28

powerful. So if you need a quick and easy

30:30

upgrade, if you're still playing divination or

30:32

you just want to finally play this effect, quick

30:34

study, absolutely great. It's 20 cents.

30:37

Perfect time to upgrade. I can't believe divination is

30:39

still in 10,000 decks. And

30:42

it was in pre-constructed decks for a while too

30:44

so that's probably why it kind of got some numbers

30:46

fluffed. But people are still putting in a deck.

30:49

But quick study is absolutely great. It's absolutely worth considering

30:52

if you need a draw a spell just quick

30:54

and efficient, quick study is a great way to do it. Well,

30:56

last but not least here, we have a challenge from a listener

30:59

Gordon

30:59

Finlay. And Gordon's challenge

31:02

is for Fincalli Hunter in

31:05

Grollnok decks. Fincalli

31:08

Hunter is a adventure card.

31:10

The sorcery portion of it is retrieve, prey

31:13

costing one of the green. Exhale target creature

31:15

card from your graveyard until the end of your next turn.

31:17

You may cast that card. But most

31:20

relevant here is the

31:21

Fincalli Hunter portion, 5 and 2

31:24

green for a Scorpion Skelly 7-7 with

31:26

trample.

31:27

Once each turn you may pay zero

31:30

rather than paying the mana cost for a creature

31:32

spell you cast from exile.

31:35

Why this is particularly relevant in

31:37

Grollnok decks is whenever a permanent card

31:39

is put into your graveyard from your library, you exile

31:41

it with a crow counter on it

31:43

and you can play lands and cast spells

31:45

from among cards you own in exile with crow

31:47

counters on them. So you have a command that is putting

31:50

creatures specifically into exile

31:52

and this lets you basically cast once

31:54

a turn one of those creatures for free.

31:57

Right now it is only showing up in...

32:00

about a hundred decks of the over 4,000

32:03

Gornak lists on our database. Being able

32:05

to drop just about any giant

32:07

creature from Exile onto the battlefield on your turn

32:09

for free is really, really good.

32:12

And because of how it's been called work, you

32:14

can free cast slash creatures like, say,

32:16

Mystic Snake on other players' turns

32:19

if they're in Exile, giving you a Zero Man of Counterspell

32:21

as well. It's just a really good card

32:23

and that kind of deck especially should see more

32:26

play than just 103 lists that are running it. Yeah,

32:28

I dig it. Thank you so much for the challenge, Gordon.

32:30

That one's awesome.

32:31

Alright guys, we are getting back into our

32:33

topic here. We've got a lot more dual

32:35

land stuff to start

32:38

ranking and maybe a couple of other fun

32:40

additional Manifixers to talk about later on

32:43

as well. Just, you know, stuff helping to fix the colors.

32:45

We are going to move on now to

32:48

the Sunken Hollowcycle. I think that people

32:50

call these like Tangle Lands. They have both

32:52

basic land types, but they enter

32:54

Untapped only if you control two or more basic

32:57

lands.

32:58

I'm conflicted about these. So

33:00

let's just get out of the way. Dana

33:02

put these in D tier because they never come into play

33:04

on text. Thumbs

33:07

down. No, these are decent.

33:10

I'm trying to ignore my own personal playstyle

33:12

and how they work. But even if I ran more

33:14

basics, let's say I was running like

33:17

seven of each color in a two color deck, that

33:19

still doesn't feel consistent enough

33:22

for me,

33:23

particularly today when there's so many

33:25

land cycles out there that I feel like just do the thing

33:27

I want them to do.

33:28

So I don't have anything against these, but like I think

33:30

they're just a little too hit or miss for

33:33

me personally. I

33:34

would probably put them in B tier. Nothing

33:36

against them and they're useful, but I just tend to not

33:38

run them because they don't work for the way I brew.

33:41

I love them in two color decks. Dana, I was really worried that you

33:43

were going to say, we got to put them in C tier

33:45

below. And I was just like, oh, because you were talking a little bit down on

33:47

them, but B is a perfectly respectable grade for these

33:49

and B is where I had them as well. I'm trying not to grade

33:52

too much based on like my own weird brewing

33:54

and you think it's these. See, I like these of all

33:56

the budget fetchable dual cycles.

33:58

These are probably one of the best. Yeah, all you need

34:01

especially if you're playing green These are absolutely great

34:03

because a simple cultivate or kadama's reach means

34:05

you have all the basics you need to do this There's only

34:07

two and so if even if your games go

34:10

ten turns and you draw these on turn five If

34:12

you're playing green more than likely these are coming into play untapped.

34:15

I think these are absolutely fantastic I would personally

34:17

put them in a tier again These are

34:20

like babies first vegetable duel kind

34:22

of showing you the power of these. I think they're

34:24

great I understand beat here is is probably

34:26

where they're again putting my bite bias

34:29

aside Dana has to put his aside to keep them out of D

34:31

tier I probably put them put

34:33

my bias aside to keep them out of a I think

34:35

B is a perfectly respectable slot

34:38

Even though personally I'll put them a little bit higher No I

34:40

think the only reason that I wouldn't put them at a tier

34:42

is because they do get worse with more

34:44

colors in your deck Sure, and

34:46

that is what keeps them out of the a range for me But

34:49

be only if you're playing fewer basics Well,

34:51

but like once you get to four or five colors Matt, it's kind of like

34:54

not really for it But you're absolutely right, especially them

34:56

being the best budget fetchable Like I absolutely

34:58

adore these in a way that I don't necessarily

35:01

always adore the next ones which are these cycling lands

35:03

I think some people call them bicycle lands because

35:05

they are two colored lands They also have both land

35:07

types like Canyon slough is one that we'll use

35:09

an example here So it's a swamp and a mountain but it

35:12

always enters tapped But it does have cycling

35:14

too so you can discard it from your hand to draw a card

35:17

I got to put cycling at sea just because

35:19

of the Just like see

35:21

for cycling and the fact that these are

35:24

always tapped. They're they're budget fetchables I

35:26

respect their crap out of these but there are occasions

35:28

where I would prefer to have drawn a basic land over

35:30

these and That's sort of what C tier

35:33

means to me So compared

35:35

to the ones we just talked about these these feel

35:37

like a step below to me Yeah, they are a step

35:39

below for sure. And if I'm putting them a step below

35:42

The the tango lands for example, they

35:45

would be a B tier for me Yeah, the fact

35:47

that they are always coming to play tapped It

35:49

is a definite drawback But the

35:52

fact that you don't ever have to play them tapped is

35:54

also a benefit You can get rid of them. I I

35:57

think there's a lot of flex, but I think these are probably a little bit

35:59

more flexible than the Horizon Lands where you're

36:01

gonna lose a bunch of life, you're gonna have to sack

36:04

it and get rid of it. You don't ever have to play these. I

36:06

think that's the nice part and if you do want to fetch, that's fine. I

36:08

think they're B tier but also looking at the tiers

36:10

that we've already set up, probably C tier is

36:13

fine. I do think they're better than a basic

36:15

but I can't put them any lower than C

36:17

just because it's a cheap fetchable duel. I

36:19

mean there's a handful at this point now of cheap

36:22

fetchable duels. There's a couple other budget

36:24

ones

36:25

and having played those, there

36:27

isn't really functionally a difference between

36:29

the ones that fill a slot

36:31

at uncommon in a draft

36:34

archetype and these based on how they

36:36

perform. I don't

36:37

think against them they're fine I guess but

36:40

I'm not running them in almost any of my decks at this

36:42

point and as new cycles

36:44

come out, these are the decks

36:46

that still run them, the one or two that still have one of these, these

36:49

are probably the first ones to go. So that feels

36:51

like a C tier land to me. Okay, yeah.

36:53

I'm happy to put Kenyon Slough, the

36:56

cycling land at C tier. It just feels like

36:58

there's just a nice harmony there to all

37:00

of the alliteration of C. C is for cycling

37:03

and that is good enough for me so I

37:05

can live with that. This next one

37:07

I want to slam directly into D tier. I do

37:09

not like these. The snarls,

37:12

the reveal lands or port town is another thing.

37:14

D tier is being complimentary to them but that

37:17

is probably where they belong. The reveal lands you

37:19

have to reveal either a plains

37:21

or a swamp from your hand for shine and

37:24

shnarl to enter untapped.

37:28

I hate seeing these in pre-cons so

37:30

much. I do not like these. If they're fine

37:32

on a budget, it's like sure, it's whatever but even

37:34

then, honestly, even on a budget sometimes

37:37

I'm just like why? I actually would

37:39

prefer to play some of those things that have dual

37:41

types even if they always enter tapped.

37:44

Like the radiant groves of the world and stuff like that.

37:46

I just really don't care for these. I

37:48

think they are a very elegantly designed

37:51

land cycle that works really

37:53

well in a limited environment and

37:55

we're not playing that. like

38:00

conceptually, but there's just too

38:02

many good options in EDH to run these.

38:05

All the things I said about the check lands and why

38:07

I don't love those are true about the snarls

38:10

twice over. Because you're

38:13

even that much less likely to

38:15

have the land in your hand to meet the

38:18

threshold to have them come into play on tap than you are to have one in play.

38:20

So yeah, just no reason for me to run these

38:23

ever. So we like to point out that

38:25

the way that Dana builds his decks influences

38:27

his tiers.

38:28

The way that literally anybody plays in

38:31

their decks should influence how bad these

38:33

are. These are absolute

38:35

dookie butter. Get these out. I

38:39

hate seeing these in pre-tons because

38:42

it alludes to newer players that

38:45

these are powerful lands. They

38:47

are not. Yeah, no. All right. Right

38:50

into these here. Like I can't give them a failing

38:52

grade because every so often they do sometimes work, but

38:54

like deeply unexcited to

38:56

play these. And in most cases I would prefer to

38:58

have a basic. I will note that the

39:00

redeeming quality of these is if you are playing on

39:03

a really tight budget in a two-color deck

39:05

and you're running like 15 of each

39:07

basic,

39:08

these are a pretty good inclusion compared

39:11

to like a guild gate because of that kind of environment

39:13

where you're running so many basics just to save

39:15

money. Well, they're almost always going to come into play on

39:17

tap than because of the sheer amount

39:20

of basics you have. But outside of that weird environment

39:22

where you're running 30 basics in a deck,

39:24

there's just no reason to play these. So

39:26

that's the one redeeming quality they have. And

39:28

that's just it. I'd rather use a nature's lure to go and find

39:31

a radiant grove. You know, like

39:33

that's where I'm at with these things that like if they're always going to

39:35

enter tap, they might as well have some ability to fetch them out

39:37

with some of that. Anyway, anyway, we got to

39:39

move on. We got to move

39:41

on. Temples are next. The ETP

39:43

tapped all of the time, but when they enter, you scry

39:46

one. I'm very curious to see where you

39:48

guys would place these. So I like

39:50

temples of all of the non-fetchable

39:52

dual cycles that are

39:54

always going to come into play tapped. This is

39:56

the only cycle I will routinely play

39:58

in decks. I think the Scry

40:01

one, especially attached to a land, it's

40:03

low key actually like pretty good. It helps smooth out your draws.

40:06

I like it a lot. Personally, I can't put

40:08

it below B tier. My gut, just

40:10

be a personal bias in there, is

40:12

maybe A tier, but B tier is

40:14

the lowest I would accept. Okay. These

40:17

going in there. I think it gets these

40:19

and everything Matt has said is

40:21

true of them, but I've also

40:24

found that like, there's enough lands that despite

40:27

those positives you just noted that

40:29

I think are better.

40:29

It's like, I just don't play these anymore. I don't

40:32

have these in any depth at this point. And that's not because

40:34

they're not useful. It's just because there's

40:36

enough lands that are better and these have gotten

40:39

just pushed out of my decks over the

40:41

course of the last, you know, five-ish years or so. As

40:44

a result, it's not like I kind of got to put them in a C

40:46

tier if I'm not running them. And it's

40:48

also one of those things where I feel like they

40:51

get worse every time they make a new good

40:53

cycle too. These are the first kind of lands

40:55

you're looking to remove because they just always come into play tapped.

40:57

Interesting. I think once upon a time these

40:59

might have been A for me. I think

41:01

I'm going to end up splitting the difference between you guys

41:04

and B feels like,

41:06

yeah, I agree with you. I'd like, I

41:09

do still play. I think I have a couple of three-colored

41:11

decks that do still run these, but

41:14

like, I don't know. Actually, no, yeah. The deck that

41:16

I play these in is my Yannette deck where like manipulating

41:18

top of my deck is actually pretty darn important. And like

41:20

when you play these and it saves you like, oh, thank goodness, I'm not

41:22

going to draw this forest and like

41:24

saves you a card. That is a really good feeling.

41:27

Yeah, and so I do appreciate that little bit of

41:29

utility. In terms of something that enters tapped, this

41:31

is the one that I am always most excited to see. And

41:34

I think that does have to budget into B

41:36

tier for me because there are cases even in like

41:38

my two-colored decks or whatever where I'm more excited

41:41

to see these than I am to see

41:43

a basic. And that would definitely

41:45

put it above C tier for me because C is where I'm debating whether

41:47

it's a basic, but like I do feel excited about these.

41:49

I do especially like them on turn one. Yeah, B

41:51

tier it is then. B tier. Now

41:54

we've got a pair of filter lands to talk about,

41:56

both the Shadowmoor filters and

41:58

the Odyssey filters. known as the Signet

42:00

Lands. So these are kind of

42:02

interesting because the Shadowmore filters you

42:05

have to pay one of the color

42:07

into it to activate them so that you can get, for

42:09

example, either two blue or a red

42:11

and a blue or two red. Whereas

42:14

the Signet Lands you can pay any type of mana

42:16

into it and it will produce just both

42:18

of the colors that you need. Like Darkwater Catagums you pay a generic

42:20

into it and you get a blue and a black. So we've

42:22

got a pair of Filter Lands here. Do they

42:24

land in similar places for you guys? Yeah,

42:27

I think so. I'm a big fan of these, probably more

42:29

so than most

42:29

people. I'd be very tempted to put both

42:32

of these in A tier. I definitely need the

42:34

filters in A tier and I'm strongly

42:36

considering the Odyssey filters in there

42:38

as well. I've just never had any problem with these

42:40

at all. They always

42:43

get the job done and they never come into play tapped.

42:45

I've just never had an issue with them and I consider

42:48

the Odyssey filters, one of the cycles I wish

42:50

they would really finish because I feel like every

42:52

two cover deck I would run these and we're

42:55

a ways away from getting enough lands to bump

42:57

them out for me. They

42:58

do what I need lands to do

43:00

every time. We need to get you to

43:02

bed, Dana. This is wild to me. Especially the

43:05

Signet Lands, they're fine.

43:11

The Lorwin cycle, being able to tap for mana

43:13

on their own is a benefit. I'd put

43:15

them a little bit above but I would put

43:17

maybe B tier at the top for either

43:20

of these. This is interesting. I

43:23

don't love these. The color restriction

43:26

on the Shadowmoor Filter Lands is that

43:28

I have had that sometimes burn me but

43:30

I also really do like them. I don't

43:32

think I have these in three color decks but

43:35

the interesting thing about the Signet Lands is that I actually

43:37

do feel comfortable. They've reprinted those in some of

43:39

the four color precon and it felt good to do

43:41

that. There is a flexibility

43:44

with both of these so I don't dislike any of them

43:46

but A tier feels really strong because

43:48

I can think of moments where I have been

43:50

a little bit like, dang it, these are messing with

43:52

my colors in the way that I don't need them to do right

43:55

now. I do tend to be a little bit

43:57

more restrictive to where I play them. the

44:00

Shadowmore filters. I think I kind of only have in two

44:03

colored decks right now, but they are bangers

44:05

in those two colored decks. So I'm a little conflicted

44:07

here. I would put the Lorewyn

44:10

filters in B tier. I personally,

44:13

I would put the Signet Lands in C

44:15

tier because like you said, Joey, having

44:18

to need men of a certain color

44:20

to activate them kind of burns you. Only

44:22

ever being able to produce exactly a blue

44:25

and a black, for example, that has burned

44:27

me before. And so I've had enough situations

44:29

come up where I needed to be in either

44:31

or, not definitely this and this. So

44:35

I've been burnt by the Signet Lands enough.

44:38

Let me C tier for me. But Dana said both

44:40

at A tier. So are we splitting the difference on here

44:42

again? I would definitely say, I would say Lorewyn's

44:44

in A and the filters in

44:46

B. The Odyssey filter is happy to put

44:49

them into B, but I'm not sure

44:51

where to put them in A. I

44:54

think B is fine. Oh no,

44:57

am I splitting the vote? Matt

44:59

did steal my challenge to stat segway. So maybe

45:01

I side with Dana on this one. Yeah. Are you

45:04

putting the, are you seriously putting them in A? I

45:06

think they're that good. I

45:10

mean, do what you want. The listeners are definitely

45:12

not going to let us know that you messed this one up real bad

45:14

in the comment section. All right. Just for

45:16

your impudence. Now I have to. Yeah, yeah.

45:18

I'm happy to put it in B. That's fine.

45:20

I need a shower after that one. Ah

45:23

no, come on. It's again with a

45:25

thing about tempo. Like, yeah.

45:27

But then again, I did actually say earlier that like A

45:29

tier would be something I wouldn't, like I'm not going to play

45:31

these in a four or five color deck basically ever.

45:34

I did kind of hint that that was a qualification

45:36

for me for A tier, but I will abandon

45:38

my morals just to stick it to Matt this

45:41

one time. I'm okay with that. I mean, the

45:43

problem with that qualification Joey is with four different land

45:45

cycles in the S tier, of

45:47

course you're not going to run anything else. There's not enough slots

45:50

in a deck really to run a bunch

45:52

of these in five color decks. Very

45:54

fair. Also very true. All right, Matt,

45:57

these next ones you've got strong opinions

45:59

about. I do. So the

46:02

pathway lands that we saw, the dual-faced

46:04

land cycle, I do not like

46:06

these. D tier for do not like.

46:09

Wow. I think

46:11

they're fine for constructed formats

46:14

in standard where you really

46:16

just need to be able to pick one or the other. The fact that these

46:18

do not tap for either mana, like once

46:20

you play it, that is there. That to me as

46:22

an instant, well, how is it really

46:25

all that much better than a basic

46:27

at that point? Because it effectively does become a basic,

46:29

except it doesn't have a basic type. There's

46:31

so much going on with these. I

46:35

want my duels to give me both

46:37

options at any given point in the game. These

46:40

only do it once and that's where I

46:42

really just fall short on these. It fixes

46:45

well enough for me and they don't come into play tapped. I

46:47

think these are a strong B tier. Yeah, they're

46:50

not fetchable. Yeah, you have to make a decision.

46:53

But I think if you

46:55

are a player paying attention to your

46:57

base, that's fine. You can make an determination

47:00

of what's already out or what you have in your hand that I'm

47:02

going to need this color more than that color. Good

47:04

enough for me. I think these are a solid B tier. Again,

47:07

this is one of those situations where when I'm looking

47:09

to replace a land in a deck, my eyes

47:12

don't linger very long on these. I'm

47:14

looking for something else because I feel like they always get the job done. The

47:17

argument you use for these, well, if you just pay attention

47:19

to your mana base, they're fine. You can

47:21

make that argument for all the other ones that I was talking

47:23

about that are good that you didn't like. No,

47:26

in the moment I'm saying, I

47:28

have to brew around check lands. These aren't to brew

47:31

around, I don't think. Here, I actually

47:33

do feel like I have to

47:34

brew around them a little bit because I take these

47:36

out of three colored decks. Oh, yeah, for sure. Because my mana

47:38

needs will definitely change and often drastically

47:40

as the game goes on in a three colored deck. And

47:43

that's another strike against them. I do like them, but I

47:45

had them written down as C. I will just make

47:47

this note about that argument. I'm not going to disagree

47:49

with you necessarily. But

47:51

given the amount of lands that we have available,

47:54

not qualifying for a three colored deck is

47:56

a super high bar to clear. If

47:58

you're running a three colored deck, and you're putting in three fetches

48:01

and ignoring the ABUR duels,

48:03

three shocks, three of the Battlebond lands,

48:06

a couple of the multicolor sixers, a few utility lands, you're

48:08

already out of flots. I think

48:11

fitting in a three-color deck isn't really

48:13

necessarily something that should disqualify

48:15

something from like the B-ish tier because

48:18

nothing makes that cut or very few lands make

48:20

that cut. I just want to make that note. I don't necessarily disagree

48:22

with your point on these because they are limited but

48:25

I think there's a lot of things that aren't going to measure up to that.

48:27

Yeah, you know what? Okay, yeah. Dana,

48:30

upon reflection, you have persuaded me. I said

48:32

I don't play the MDFC duels in three-colored

48:35

decks or more but I can't

48:37

put them at C because C

48:39

is my tier of there's a debate whether this

48:41

card is better than a basic land and I

48:43

don't have that debate with these. With the

48:45

exception of random cards counting like however many swamps

48:48

I have, which I already don't play a whole lot of those in two-colored

48:50

decks anyways, these are better than a

48:52

basic. There isn't really much debate there for me because they

48:55

enter untapped and they give me an option. So

48:57

I do side with Dana here. We will slam these into B tier

49:00

and we'll move on to the next one. Yeah,

49:02

let's keep scooting. Sure. All

49:04

right. Creature lands are up next. A bunch of

49:06

dual lands that can turn into creatures, celestial, colonnade,

49:08

hiss and quagmire, things like that. I'm

49:11

also inclined to say C for creature lands just

49:13

again because of some of the alliteration like wahoo but

49:15

where are you all at? Same. C tier

49:17

for creature that's also right where I think

49:19

they go. I don't remember the last time that I had a

49:22

creature land in a deck and actually activated

49:24

it. And that's just again, exactly. We're

49:26

talking about personal playstyle but if you're doing

49:29

something like that unless you have specific synergies

49:31

built into some of these, I

49:34

have one in my raga draga deck but even then, I don't

49:36

remember the last time I activated raging ravine because

49:39

I just had other creature lands that

49:42

I was going to activate like a mistress factory. So these,

49:45

the fact that they're just so expensive

49:47

to activate, I just think a different

49:49

multicolor utility land is

49:51

probably going to get more bang for your buck when you put them in there.

49:54

They're fine if you have specific synergies, that's fine

49:56

but like that's again, we're corner casing

49:58

to advocate for them. For me, that just they're

50:00

C tier, they're fine. D tier for me.

50:03

I think if a modular card has

50:05

modes that never get used, it's not

50:08

actually a modular card. I think if a

50:10

land has abilities that you're

50:13

never actually using, it's just a guild gate.

50:16

And I think even the potential to do

50:18

a thing with these in the average

50:21

deck doesn't make it worth running

50:23

what is a guild gate the other 98% of the

50:25

time. I

50:27

have a deck with multiple creature lands in it. My

50:30

equipment deck, because there are situations

50:32

where I'm

50:33

able to after a board wipe, play Arden

50:36

and then turn that blink moth nuksus for

50:38

one man into a creature and have

50:40

Arden magically throw six swords onto it. That's

50:43

a really good deck to have creature lands,

50:45

but outside of like

50:47

those real niche corner cases,

50:49

you are just playing a tapped land with

50:52

a mode that you're almost never going to use

50:54

and I don't want to be paying that price

50:57

for pay extra cost for

50:59

something that I'm never going to benefit from.

51:01

I resonate with that argument pretty strong. I

51:04

think

51:05

I still have some that I would occasionally

51:07

lean to like creeping tar pit for example.

51:10

So as a cycle, I'm like, there's some

51:12

that I kind of forgive a little bit. So

51:14

that's what makes me feel like I want to be a little bit more generous

51:16

and put these at sea. Like I have the depth

51:18

touch land in my depth touch deck thematically.

51:21

It's not good there. Like

51:23

there's absolutely like it whereas I'm

51:25

not going to like be somatically running a guild gate.

51:28

I guess so. I mean, yeah, that makes them slightly

51:30

better but not by a lot. Yeah.

51:33

All right. So we wouldn't see for those just, you know, two out

51:35

of three votes went there. But I do hear your

51:37

argument saying, are you right? Like the illusion of flexibility

51:40

when you're not actually using that stuff, that's a good thing to

51:42

pay attention to for sure. The

51:44

next ones though, oh my God, balance lands. Balance

51:47

lands are up next and I really

51:49

strongly suspect that you guys will disagree with me. I have

51:51

these at A. I can see why they would

51:53

be A. There's a lot of landfall synergy that

51:55

you can build around being able to do

51:58

some fun play around with that. It's

52:00

fine. I understand why I might put

52:02

them closer to B tier, but I'm

52:04

not opposed to them being in A tier. You

52:07

get landfall, you can recover

52:09

a modal double-faced card like a Bologuette recovery

52:11

if you played it as a land earlier. I use these on

52:14

turn two to get too many cards in my hand and I discard

52:16

a huge creature that can revive later. Like,

52:18

I feel so safe holding a two land

52:20

opening hand when one of them is a bounced land. I

52:23

even play Gildes Commons in a whole bunch of my two colored decks

52:25

because that's the colorless one. I don't know about that. But

52:27

like, this is a really long round chance.

52:30

And it also helps out with little stuff like Night of the White Orchid

52:32

effects and things like that if you are paying attention to your

52:34

land count. Like, effectively, balanced lands are lands

52:37

that draw you a land. Lands that draw

52:39

you a card. Like, they're two land drops on a land. I love

52:41

these. But I'm also probably more

52:43

excited about them than a lot of other players out there. So,

52:45

Dana, where are you at with them? I

52:47

definitely wouldn't call them an A tier. I

52:50

like them more than I did

52:52

once upon a time. This is one of those kind of things.

52:55

I think these cards tend to be something you

52:57

like when you first start playing and then you get better. You're like, I

52:59

don't like these at all. And then you

53:01

come back to them a little bit for

53:04

the reasons Joey mentioned. There is a

53:06

lot of tricks you can do.

53:08

On the other hand, I've seen a lot

53:11

of players do that land on turn

53:13

one, bounce land on turn two. And then someone else was like,

53:15

you have to discard a card, by the way. Yeah. Oh,

53:17

like... But to benefit. I've seen that happen a lot.

53:20

Well, it's a benefit... No, you discard something to reanimate. It's great.

53:22

It's a benefit in like 5% of decks though.

53:24

It's not a benefit for a whole lot of people a lot of

53:26

the time. Yeah, you can say that there's upside

53:29

with having to discard a card, but that's in maybe 5% of

53:31

decks and 5% of games. Whereas

53:33

the other 95%, it's like, oh, we actually

53:36

have to play around this. And it restricts when you

53:38

can play them. So, if we're going to go with

53:40

the numbers like we have with a couple other cards,

53:43

then definitely these get knocked down a little bit because

53:45

of the reasons Dana just said. Okay, yeah. You guys have upvoted

53:47

me. Be for bounce land. Is that... We're

53:50

good with that? Yeah, I don't necessarily

53:52

love them there. I think they're... Yeah,

53:55

that makes... I'm fine with that. Be at best. Yeah.

53:58

Be at best. Yeah.

53:59

I absolutely love the lands, but I could

54:02

talk about them for the whole rest of the show But we'll move

54:04

on because now we're getting we're stretching the definition

54:06

of dual lands here But like you know we're talking about color fixing

54:08

stuff, and we've moved on now to some trilands

54:12

and Triomes they always enter

54:14

tapped they tap for three different colors of things the

54:16

triomes also have a cycling ability and three different

54:18

land types But let's talk about them together

54:21

lands with three different colors of access

54:24

where they land in for you guys I think they're

54:26

pretty good in the decks where you want

54:28

to run them three color decks

54:29

I think you're you're and you don't

54:32

want to run too many of them in like a four or five because

54:34

then you're looking at A whole lot of lands

54:36

coming into play tapped the fact that they're fetchable

54:39

is really really useful particularly the the

54:41

triumph cycle They have make

54:43

believe cycling on them It

54:46

doesn't get used They're cycling on

54:48

there, but like that's not that's such a

54:50

ridiculous thing to have in those cards. They're

54:52

really good though This

54:54

would definitely be a B tier for me the

54:56

fact that they always come into play tapped

54:58

is I think disqualifies

55:00

anything from going to a tier, but they're

55:03

Fantastic be tear lead. I think

55:05

the triumphs on the basis

55:07

of getting three different colors It

55:10

doesn't cost you any life to do yes They

55:12

come into play tapped, but the fact they're fetchable

55:14

with three different fetchable types I would

55:16

put the the triumphs at a

55:18

tier and the the basically

55:20

that the bivouac and that like from cons

55:23

I would put those in beats here just because when

55:25

you're playing three colors when you're playing four and five colors

55:28

Manifesting and getting getting your colors down is

55:31

very very important So the decks that you want them in you

55:33

are absolutely going to want them in there Yeah,

55:35

I'm fully co-signing with Matt on that one. I

55:38

think that I'm vote you Dana. Sorry, but

55:40

I think the bivouacs are D tier at best.

55:42

Oh my god. I think I don't need them I think again, you're

55:44

looking at I'm gonna run a couple of the triumphs.

55:47

I'm running some touches I got I've got some shocks

55:50

You're running a city of brass and that a conflict exotic

55:52

Archer. Maybe I don't think

55:53

I think they are on it's an unnecessary Bit

55:56

of fixing it's on you're running a land that comes

55:58

into play tap. It's fixing

55:59

problem that you don't need to have solved. In

56:02

a three color deck, I 100% would rather

56:04

run a bivouac than the second

56:06

mana confluence or city of brass because that's

56:08

going to get all of your colors. It only

56:10

comes to play tapped one time but then you don't lose any

56:13

more life. I think that's going to come down

56:15

to philosophy with you versus me, Dana, where

56:17

you do like to play fast and lose with your life total. I

56:20

try to preserve that as much as possible. I

56:22

would rather have one land come into play tapped and

56:24

not cost me anything the rest of the game than a mana

56:27

confluence. That's going to cost me maybe six, seven life

56:29

over the course

56:29

of a game. I have one more complaint about

56:32

the triome cycle though. I think taken

56:34

by themselves, they're really, really useful. Yes, you're

56:36

paying the prices coming into play tapped but you're fixing three

56:39

colors. It's super easy to fetch because it has

56:41

three land types.

56:42

That's the first one. The second one and the third

56:44

one that you're running in your deck,

56:46

you probably need a six thing at that point. You've already

56:48

got this land out that makes everything so now

56:50

you're fixing things that don't necessarily need to get a six and you're

56:52

still paying the cost. That's my problem

56:54

with the cycle as I think it's

56:57

a thing where the more you run in the deck, the worse they

56:59

get. I think that's another reason I

57:01

wouldn't call them an A tier. They've

57:04

been so incredibly valuable in my Tom Bombadil

57:06

deck because I do have the original

57:09

duels in that deck just because I have them. I didn't

57:11

buy them for it but I have them just from my playing legacy

57:13

days. I will more often than not fetch them

57:16

over

57:16

the ABU duels just because getting

57:18

my colors down as soon as possible is just

57:20

that important in that deck. Yeah, I

57:22

like both of these a whole lot. I think A

57:24

and B just feels right to me particularly because like Dana

57:26

in your examples there, you named a whole lot but a lot of those

57:28

lands that you mentioned were expensive. The fact that these

57:31

particularly the Bivouacs and the Trilans can

57:33

be so helpful for budget players is especially

57:36

a thing that I feel like I have to put them an extra wreck up

57:38

for that and I have to put the Trilums above

57:40

the rank there. That's why I think these end

57:43

up budging up for me. During

57:45

that discussion,

57:46

Mana Confluence and City of Brass came up. They're a little bit

57:48

further down the list but heck, let's place those right now. Paying

57:51

life to get any color of mana that you want, where are

57:53

they going? City of Brass were both A tier lands.

57:55

They always make the mana I want every time I

57:57

do not have to care about anything else.

58:00

That's an A tier land for me. See, I can't

58:02

put them any higher than the Horizon lands

58:04

because there's at least also added utility to them. But

58:07

again, you're guaranteed to be losing life every

58:09

time that you use it. Unless you're building

58:11

some specific synergies around that, yes,

58:13

having it come into play untapped, but there's a real

58:15

cost to using them every turn.

58:18

And if you're playing in a more aggressive

58:20

kind of pod, stuff like that, that's

58:23

gonna add up really quickly. So I understand

58:25

the power behind them. But again, I

58:27

think they're more powerful in the 60 card formats

58:30

where coming into play untapped, just

58:32

getting your mana every single turn, I

58:35

get it, but I can't put these above

58:37

the Horizon lands that we just put in B tier.

58:39

Well, so here's the thing, Matt. I wanted to put the Horizon lands

58:42

in A tier, if I recall correctly. So I'm signing

58:44

with Dana on this one. That's fine.

58:46

I wouldn't put these in a two-color deck. No, I

58:49

wouldn't do that. But in a three-plus-color deck, absolutely.

58:51

Like, these definitely feel really good. But

58:54

I'm totally sympathetic to the argument that you're making there,

58:56

but preserving life total, these are some dangerous lands

58:58

to play with. But you're talking with Dana

59:00

and I, and we both play a lot of blacks and we're used to paying life for

59:02

stuff. So that's just fine. Matt, you said this was

59:04

the definitive list that no one could argue with, so you

59:07

can't argue with it either, okay? I'm

59:09

gonna let the audience argue in the comment section for this

59:11

one. All right, yeah. That

59:14

moves us to a really big section here. We'll go

59:16

rapid through a bunch of these. The Terra

59:18

Mothic expansion, Evolving Wilds, just sort of as a

59:20

pair. That can, you know, they'll

59:23

fetch you a basic, it's gonna be tapped. Ash Barons

59:25

has basic land cycling, but it can't enter untapped to

59:27

give you a color list. There's also Fabled Passage,

59:29

which can give you any basic, and later

59:31

on in the game, it won't be tapped. Prismatic

59:33

Vista, another type of fetch. It costs you a life to do it, but

59:35

it gets you any basic. And then there's some stuff from Kapena

59:38

that enters and immediately cracks, or the Panoramas,

59:40

the Slow Fetches, like Rocky Tarpets and all of

59:42

those. We've got a bunch of different other

59:45

types of fetchable things.

59:47

Where are we putting a bunch of these, you guys? So

59:50

you guys mentioned budget before, and that definitely

59:52

changes how a lot of these things work.

59:54

We are people who've been fortunate enough

59:57

to be playing this game for a whole lot of years.

59:59

not only lucky enough to have A, B, or DUAL

1:00:02

sometimes, but shocks are not cheap, fetches are

1:00:04

not cheap.

1:00:05

The filter lands have been very expensive at various

1:00:07

points in the past. And that's just expensive,

1:00:09

talking about really truly expensive, but when you're putting

1:00:12

a bunch of $5 lands in decks, that

1:00:14

adds up in a hurry too. So even the lands that are

1:00:17

less expensive can get pretty expensive

1:00:19

when you're putting three or four or five in the deck. So

1:00:22

I think those all have a place

1:00:25

in decks where you are concerned about how

1:00:27

much money you are going to spend. I absolutely

1:00:29

get that. But I don't think we're really talking

1:00:31

about that here. We're looking at this in a world

1:00:34

where like, aside from maybe A, B, or DUALs,

1:00:36

you probably conceivably are looking

1:00:38

at all these lands as an option for your deck. And

1:00:40

if I'm doing that, they're just not playable.

1:00:43

Unless there's some weird super synergy where

1:00:45

like, I want as many fetches

1:00:48

as possible because I'm doing landfall shenanigans,

1:00:50

or I have a commander that cares about sacrificing

1:00:52

things. But if I'm just

1:00:54

like brewing a generic commander, these

1:00:57

aren't making the cut in any of my decks. Okay,

1:01:00

I'm sorry, big pause. Fabled Passage

1:01:02

isn't making a cut in any of your decks? Like,

1:01:04

what? No,

1:01:07

I just don't need it. Because there's enough other lands that do

1:01:09

the job. I just doesn't, there's just not

1:01:11

room for it. I'm not going to bump on Odyssey Filter.

1:01:14

I'm not going to bump out any of

1:01:16

the other lands that we talked about and be enough

1:01:18

tier. At that point, there's just no room

1:01:20

in the list. It's not about whether or not they're good. It's

1:01:22

about whether or not they're good enough. And they're not good enough

1:01:24

when you have access to all those other lands. See,

1:01:27

I was just going to go a hard C

1:01:29

tier for all of them. They're fine when you need them, and

1:01:31

they're good budget manifesting. And

1:01:34

so I think, Dana, you kind of alluded to

1:01:36

your way of evaluating all of these, where you're

1:01:38

just taking budget out of the picture and just what is the

1:01:40

best. Sure, absolutely. I can't

1:01:43

take the budget factor out of it because

1:01:46

sometimes you just need something that's going to be quality

1:01:48

for a starter deck, a

1:01:51

new person getting into the format, where they aren't

1:01:53

as lucky as we are to have been playing for a while and

1:01:55

it happened to get duels when

1:01:57

they were cheap, relatively cheap, I guess.

1:02:00

And so the the evolving wilds, terraforma,

1:02:02

or frickin' expanse, they're fine. They're there I

1:02:05

don't love them But I think C

1:02:07

for all of these especially like Prismatic Vista where

1:02:10

that is just way too expensive for what

1:02:12

it does When I mean fabled passage

1:02:14

more often than not Prismatic Vista is it's

1:02:17

a card that is very very powerful in 60 card formats,

1:02:19

but that power doesn't carry over into

1:02:21

commander I honestly

1:02:24

they're probably just as good as

1:02:26

the evolving wilds and all that stuff in commander C

1:02:28

tier for all of these for me.

1:02:31

Okay, I gotta jump in but there are some absolute

1:02:33

thinkers here like the slow fetches For example this

1:02:35

okay the slow fetches I have in D tier Yes I

1:02:38

have them at F like the slow fetches enter

1:02:40

tapped and most often the thing that

1:02:42

they fetch for will also enter tapped or Will

1:02:45

struggle to enter untapped these

1:02:47

look good on a budget But they're actually

1:02:49

like double the slowness and F tier

1:02:52

for me means that even on a budget I

1:02:54

would not play these and in fact for

1:02:56

these especially on a budget. I wouldn't play these

1:02:58

there are so many other options if you need sacrifice

1:03:01

energy or landfall synergies that don't

1:03:03

mess up your tempo the way that these do and That

1:03:06

on the opposite side of the coin is why I like fabled

1:03:08

passage in Prismatic Vista Passage is

1:03:10

only five bucks I'm sensitive to the price

1:03:13

of prismatic Vista being too high

1:03:15

for the effect that you know that that makes sense to me But

1:03:17

for much of the time these ones don't affect your

1:03:20

tempo Which is what I like about the MDFC

1:03:22

dual lands that we mentioned earlier I also

1:03:24

like Ash Barrens more than evolving wilds or

1:03:26

the others just personally like I play Ash

1:03:28

Barrens in a two color deck even Though I wouldn't play wilds in

1:03:30

a two color deck unless it's a specifically landfall

1:03:33

or grave or sac synergy kind of deck because

1:03:35

I Mean if I want to tap land I prefer it to give

1:03:37

me two colors rather than just after one

1:03:39

color So for me with the budget fetches

1:03:41

if it can enter untapped if

1:03:43

it has an untapped option at some point That

1:03:46

is what I like to see from those fetches I'm

1:03:48

cool with C for the classics, but I am

1:03:50

just overall with this discussion I'm surprised that Dana is

1:03:52

so down on them just the ability to get them back

1:03:54

from the yard or with like Sabine's

1:03:56

reclamation Effects or using landfall

1:03:59

all of these little extra things

1:03:59

that they can do means that for me, I can't

1:04:02

push the traditional evolving wilds below

1:04:04

C tier in any way. But I

1:04:06

think that's, it's tough to judge though. I

1:04:08

kind of want to rate them based on this specific niche deck

1:04:10

where you care about landfall stuff because outside that,

1:04:13

who cares? So I'm

1:04:15

trying to be a generalist about

1:04:17

this and whenever I've built

1:04:19

super budget decks with a hard cap

1:04:21

of $20 or $50 or whatever it is, what

1:04:24

I've found is I was almost

1:04:26

always better off in a two color deck running

1:04:28

just 17 of each basic than

1:04:30

I was trying to run evolving wild. Evolving

1:04:33

wilds hurt my gameplay

1:04:36

and just running all basics didn't. So

1:04:39

I have a tough time rating these lands very highly,

1:04:41

again outside of a super niche case or

1:04:43

like a budget four color deck where you just want to have access

1:04:45

to stuff because

1:04:46

they're worse than basics most of the time. In

1:04:49

budget like multi-color decks,

1:04:51

I really struggle to fault somebody

1:04:54

for playing some of these just to get their colors down.

1:04:57

There's a couple other cycles that I know I'm higher on

1:04:59

than you guys are just because they

1:05:02

offer so much utility for the 10,

1:05:05

20 cents that they are. So I get why

1:05:07

people are playing the evolving wilds. I don't think

1:05:09

Ash Barons is honestly, in my

1:05:11

opinion, and I might be wrong about this YouTube comments,

1:05:14

I don't think Ash Barons is all that much better than evolving wilds.

1:05:16

Interesting. That's just me though. You

1:05:19

have to pay mana to do that. Whereas like the

1:05:21

panoramas, the fact they tap for mana on

1:05:23

their own accord, I think there is value

1:05:25

in that. Ash Barons also taps for mana of its own

1:05:27

accord. But you have to play, then you lose your

1:05:29

fetch ability. But your tempo

1:05:31

is fine. I don't know. I think

1:05:33

that it's fine to put a whole bunch of these at

1:05:36

sea. I think that the fact that we

1:05:38

are having a debate about whether or not they work better

1:05:40

than a basic is what sea tier means

1:05:42

to me. So I'm fine with that.

1:05:45

Sure. I think none of these are, I think maybe Prismatic

1:05:47

Vicious is a sea, everything else is a deer lower.

1:05:50

I can't. I can't. Maybe

1:05:52

the Capena stuff. I don't particularly like those. The

1:05:54

Capena ones that pop instantly, yeah.

1:05:57

I've never considered it for a deck. That

1:06:01

was a great big section of stuff, but we've honestly

1:06:03

I think we'll kind of like talk about these next ones in

1:06:06

a section as well There are some creature

1:06:08

type matters lands like guilt leaf palace They'll enter

1:06:10

untapped if you reveal a specific creature type from your

1:06:12

hand in that case like an elf There's a couple of

1:06:14

those floating around out there There are some

1:06:16

future site lands a cycle of those

1:06:18

that are very unusual and have a bunch of different effects

1:06:22

The tainted lands as well that give

1:06:24

you multiple colors But only if you control a swamp and then also

1:06:26

some storage lands Which actually might qualify more as

1:06:28

utility lands than as an actual like dual lands or

1:06:30

color fixtures But these are also very

1:06:33

awkward to place don't you think I can't

1:06:35

put? The future site cycle

1:06:37

in one because some of those lands are like if

1:06:39

they finish those cycles Some of them would

1:06:41

be very very different from the others the palace

1:06:44

of clouds I believe is the blue-white one where If

1:06:46

you have an island you get to tap for

1:06:49

blue if you have a plane to get to tap it for white That

1:06:51

one if they finish cycle, I think that's perfectly respectable

1:06:53

as a land But the rest cycle like I

1:06:55

don't love the blue-black one grove the burn willows

1:06:58

is fine I would rather give my opponent's life because

1:07:00

I know I could I'm not gonna kill them by like

1:07:02

one or two points of life I'm gonna kill it by 30 and

1:07:04

so grove the burn willows I think it's totally

1:07:06

fine. And so it's it's all over the

1:07:08

place the creature type lands They're

1:07:11

a D because they're only good in very very

1:07:14

specific decks that that's probably where I would put the

1:07:16

guild gates Like if if the guild gates

1:07:18

are good, they're amazing because gate decks are

1:07:20

very real But if you're not playing a gate stick

1:07:22

you have like Dana's point out you have so

1:07:24

many more options even at the budget level

1:07:27

And Dana, how about you? Where are you out with these? I just

1:07:29

don't know what I would the problem with all of these

1:07:31

is like what do you cut for them? And

1:07:33

why are you mate? Why are you running these instead of something

1:07:36

else that's more consistent? Even

1:07:39

the the typo lands. I feel like have that same

1:07:41

problem where

1:07:42

sure sometimes it does this thing But this land always

1:07:45

is gonna work for me I don't have

1:07:47

to worry about like maybe just not having a creature in my

1:07:49

hand or something So these to me I see

1:07:51

where I are much weaker that future site lands

1:07:53

or crapshoot Like Matt mentioned the

1:07:55

Azorius one if there was if

1:07:57

we had access to that in green where

1:08:00

you're much more likely to have multiple land

1:08:02

types because you're going to fetch

1:08:04

with green land fetch and oftentimes getting something

1:08:07

with multiple land types. That would be a

1:08:09

really strong cycle if you had access to it

1:08:11

in something with green. So like that

1:08:13

would change where I would evaluate those. But given

1:08:15

what we have, I

1:08:17

don't run any of these, I don't think in decks

1:08:19

anymore, any of the four that don't have inner

1:08:22

cycles,

1:08:22

or three, I guess it is. They're

1:08:25

fine, but there's been enough things that are more consistently

1:08:28

productive for me. So

1:08:31

most of these are playable, but I don't

1:08:33

think any of them are particularly noteworthy

1:08:35

necessarily. I think the only one that I'm kind

1:08:37

of like, maybe are the

1:08:39

tainted lands. Yeah, like I

1:08:42

struggle with those sometimes and I play a lot of black,

1:08:44

but even then like I'm not playing these in three color and

1:08:46

I've had some, they've sometimes not

1:08:49

worked for me, even in two color, I'm just like, oh, dang,

1:08:51

they feel like a more advanced version of check land. And

1:08:54

I definitely prefer to have a check land. So

1:08:57

yeah, how are we feeling about, where should they go then?

1:09:00

I mean, it's so hard because in the decks they're good, they're very

1:09:02

good in, but like in a majority decks, they're just

1:09:05

filler. And so C

1:09:07

or D tier, I don't think that they're F because,

1:09:10

like we said, they're fine in the right

1:09:12

circumstances. They're playable, a lot

1:09:14

of them are budget friendly, but I mean,

1:09:16

you can do better. The tainted lands

1:09:18

have the advantage of in a budget environment

1:09:20

where you're probably running a whole ton of

1:09:23

basics because you're on a budget, they

1:09:25

get way, way better. If I was playing a very

1:09:27

tight budget, then the tainted are excellent

1:09:29

because odds are I'm running, you

1:09:31

know, 14 swamps in that deck in a way that I wouldn't

1:09:33

normally be doing. Gotcha. So I

1:09:36

would rate those above the rest,

1:09:38

but not by a lot. So like

1:09:40

C tier and then D tier for a lot of

1:09:42

these other ones? Yeah, I think so. The storage lands, I don't remember

1:09:45

the last time I even put those in a deck. At least

1:09:47

those, I would have, there's a note where like,

1:09:49

if you were playing a deck with a ton of proliferate synergy, they

1:09:51

can be pretty decent. Yeah, but if you're playing a gates

1:09:54

deck, then gates, yeah. Yeah, there's only so many

1:09:56

gates decks too. I just wanted to make that note.

1:09:58

I don't think that makes them any better.

1:09:59

like they do have a use in a way that some

1:10:02

of these lands I don't think do.

1:10:03

The Vivid's for example. Yeah, that

1:10:06

makes a lot of sense to me. So it sounds like D but there's some

1:10:08

asterisks on a lot of these is what

1:10:10

it sounds like. Yeah, very asterisk

1:10:12

heavy on like this little section here. Totally

1:10:14

makes sense. You know what doesn't have asterisks?

1:10:17

Just stuff that is tapped. Ervork Volcano, just enter

1:10:19

tapped. F tier. Yeah, hate these. Dislike,

1:10:22

dislike button, zero to ten unsubscribe. I don't

1:10:24

like these. There's some great art on some

1:10:26

of these lands too which is unfortunate but yeah,

1:10:28

there's just no reason to play them. It

1:10:30

thinks that they're still finding their way into pre-constructed

1:10:33

deck environments too. That's where it really stinks

1:10:35

is because again, it gives the illusion to

1:10:38

newer players that like these are a good

1:10:40

type of card to be putting into your decks when

1:10:42

really they're not even. There's 50 set

1:10:45

options that are higher up on this list that are going

1:10:47

to get you more bang for your buck than it's always

1:10:49

going to end in a battlefield tap. There's no real specific

1:10:51

synergies. It's just a land. Yes,

1:10:54

it's a duel but enters tapped. Again, I would

1:10:56

just run basics over these every time. For sure.

1:10:58

There's a little bit of a complication for the ones

1:11:00

that enter taps but have actual land

1:11:03

types though. We've mentioned a couple of them before.

1:11:05

They're really great for budget. There are also some

1:11:07

snow versions of them too. I think some from Dominaria,

1:11:10

some from Kaldheim, Woodland Chasm,

1:11:12

Radiant Grove, these types of things. I

1:11:14

assume since we put the previous tapped

1:11:16

thing into F tier, these maybe go in

1:11:18

D tier? I'm going to advocate

1:11:21

for there's a lot of value to

1:11:23

newer players for having basic land

1:11:25

types. I personally have these in B tier because

1:11:27

not everybody has the money for Shocklands.

1:11:30

I know like Dana, you

1:11:32

pointed out, there's so many options but for

1:11:35

newer players trying to figure out what the

1:11:37

next step is, these are so, so

1:11:39

valuable. They're so good for the new player

1:11:42

to see like, okay, now I understand why

1:11:44

this is so good. Oh, that's what makes

1:11:47

a sacred foundry so good. Yeah,

1:11:49

I would pay the two life so that doesn't make sense. I

1:11:52

personally have them in B tier but I think C where

1:11:55

most decks are going to have some sort of basic land

1:11:57

synergy, putting them around the same

1:11:59

tier as what I... prefer this over basic, I

1:12:01

think this is kind of definitively that

1:12:04

conversation. So

1:12:05

I would like to see them in sea tier, especially

1:12:07

the snow lands. I'm going to put the snows in

1:12:09

sea and we didn't mention them but the

1:12:11

artifact lands, the bridge cycle, I

1:12:14

would put in sea as well and for the same exact

1:12:16

reason, for both of them I would say, you

1:12:19

talk about something like Evolving Wilds that I was very down

1:12:21

on, yes it has some landfall synergy

1:12:23

and that's useful but there's a lot

1:12:25

of things that will get you there. There's a ton of lands

1:12:27

that will crack and do a fetch and let you get

1:12:29

that double landfall every single turn.

1:12:32

There's not a lot of things that are

1:12:34

snow land. In a deck that needs that, the

1:12:37

things that will meet that goal

1:12:39

are way narrower for snow. The decks

1:12:41

that care about artifact count. There's not

1:12:43

many lands that do what that does that are

1:12:46

fetchable. So while it's the decks

1:12:48

that want them are maybe relatively

1:12:51

narrow,

1:12:52

very few things can replicate what it does whereas

1:12:54

a lot of things replicate in Evolving Wilds. So that's

1:12:56

why these I think, despite being relatively

1:12:59

narrow in what decks want them, I would

1:13:01

make them a C because it's just not

1:13:03

something that a lot of things do whereas like I said,

1:13:05

Wilds has a lot of things that do that. Yeah, the

1:13:08

uniqueness of the effect, I think there is a lot of

1:13:10

value. I do agree Dana. Okay, so a lot

1:13:12

of those and since we're talking about a bunch of these tapped

1:13:14

things, I mean budget decks also tend to favor

1:13:16

those gain lands as well like the Scourd Barrens,

1:13:19

ETB taps but you gain a life. Would those

1:13:21

land in the same spots?

1:13:22

I don't hate it in C tier, maybe

1:13:24

D tier. I mean, I

1:13:26

still have these in a couple of decks because like I don't want to go out

1:13:29

and buy a $5 upgrade when like this is

1:13:31

getting me by just fine. So like

1:13:33

I still play the gain lands. I don't think if you're

1:13:36

building optimally you would

1:13:38

but I mean they're fine. I

1:13:40

think it's funny on turn one when someone plays

1:13:42

one and they gain a life and everyone's like, oh, you're

1:13:44

already winning. That

1:13:46

never doesn't make me chuckle and that's the

1:13:49

only thing I can say about them. Okay,

1:13:51

so C for the whole lot of them. I'm not even

1:13:53

sure I'd call them a C. I probably would have called them a D because I just

1:13:55

don't think the life gain is enough of an advantage to

1:13:59

make them worth considering. Even in life gain

1:14:01

decks, one life doesn't really

1:14:03

trigger very much or doesn't tend to make a big difference

1:14:05

in a way that gaining 8 or 10

1:14:07

life does

1:14:08

to offset it coming into play tapped.

1:14:12

I've seen them trigger some cool stuff in life

1:14:14

gain decks before. I prefer them to be in

1:14:16

C, but I would get why they would be in

1:14:18

D too. I think just

1:14:22

like, it's easy to just throw the whole lot of them in there. Dana's

1:14:24

getting out voted, that's fine. The Vividlands,

1:14:26

can we agree though? I see these are next

1:14:29

up on our list. Vividlands can just

1:14:31

be like D or F. I don't like them either. I

1:14:33

don't. They're super useful and limited, but

1:14:35

like that's it. Yeah, they're fine bridge cards,

1:14:38

they're bridge lands I should say because they help you get from the

1:14:40

early game to the late game, but the

1:14:42

limited uses versus always being

1:14:45

able to tap for two different colors. I

1:14:47

don't love the Vividlands. Ten years ago, Vivid's were

1:14:49

great, but these especially have been paced.

1:14:52

Those blue auras that give a creature minus four minus

1:14:54

O are also awesome and limited and you don't play the

1:14:56

main game. Yeah, okay,

1:14:58

so I mean I think that there are a lot of folks

1:15:00

who have used these in proliferate decks and that might be kind

1:15:02

of interesting for them, but also just like the labor

1:15:05

of actually putting this stuff on your lands. I'm just like, oh

1:15:07

my god, I can't be bothered. But Matt,

1:15:09

I am curious, Vivid Grove compared to Thriving

1:15:11

Lands and there's also a series, a cycle

1:15:14

from the Baldur's Gate as well, they enter

1:15:16

tapped and they definitely tap for one color like Thriving Isle,

1:15:18

definitely taps for blue, but you can

1:15:20

also choose a color and it can tap for an additional thing there. I

1:15:22

mean I kind of feel similarly to those as I

1:15:24

would about the Vividlands,

1:15:27

but it seems like you feel differently and I'm

1:15:29

curious why. So these

1:15:31

probably are some of my favorite budget lands

1:15:34

just full stop. I think these are absolutely

1:15:36

fantastic, especially if you're trying to build a

1:15:38

cheap three plus color deck. The

1:15:40

fact that you can select what land

1:15:43

or what color I should say that you're missing and

1:15:45

hit that, yes, it comes into play tapped,

1:15:47

but the same kind of arguments go towards the

1:15:50

Thrive Lands entered a battlefield tap. I

1:15:52

love these. These are personally in my beach here.

1:15:55

I know that not everybody thinks that way. So

1:15:57

again, so the value for the new. player

1:16:00

being able to create a very effective

1:16:03

budget mana base, these are kind of the

1:16:05

backbone of that. I like these more than

1:16:07

just a regular, you know, Selesnya guildgate because

1:16:10

you get to pick the color that you're missing. If you

1:16:12

want to dog on them, remember Hall of Famer Brian Kibler

1:16:14

plays the Thriving Lands in his decks and he

1:16:17

effectively has unlimited budget too. So

1:16:19

here's the thing though, like every single time if I'm

1:16:21

playing something that definitely is tapped, I'd rather have

1:16:23

the Radiant Grove effect. I'd rather have something that I could actually

1:16:25

fetch out with a Nature's Lore or something like that. Like

1:16:28

that strikes me as more potentially valuable.

1:16:30

I just think that the flexibility behind

1:16:33

these, especially when, and this is kind of my

1:16:35

point of emphasis, you know, Dana's is the lens

1:16:37

of unlimited budget, you know, we're just talking the

1:16:39

best no matter what. Again, I can't

1:16:41

take the budget out of there. I think these just

1:16:44

bang for your buck, the 10, 15 cents

1:16:46

that these cards are just getting somebody into

1:16:48

the game. These are so good. I

1:16:50

love these cycles. I was very excited for limited,

1:16:53

but then also I'm like, oh, they're actually just fine

1:16:55

in a three, four color deck. Yeah,

1:16:57

I mean, I don't disagree with Matt that these are

1:16:59

like, if you

1:16:59

are playing a four color deck

1:17:02

on a $30 budget and you've been playing for

1:17:04

six weeks and it's, you know,

1:17:06

a full moon on the Ides of March,

1:17:09

then these are probably really, really good. I don't disagree with

1:17:11

that, but I think the amount of times that that's relevant

1:17:13

is pretty narrow. And

1:17:16

the fact that like that person's situation is going

1:17:18

to change, they will probably have a little

1:17:20

more budget, get a little bit more familiar with the game and

1:17:22

then they'll swap these out for something else. Whereas

1:17:25

I think if a land is good, it should just be good.

1:17:28

It shouldn't be good contingent on

1:17:30

what you know and how you play. And I don't

1:17:32

know. I see what you're saying, but

1:17:34

like I have a tough time. I have a tough time using

1:17:36

that as a way to evaluate them. You're

1:17:39

not wrong, but I don't think that necessarily

1:17:41

makes them better in my opinion based

1:17:43

on how I'm evaluating land. At least these

1:17:45

always

1:17:45

do the thing. Yeah. Okay. Them

1:17:47

always doing the thing is a really good point, Dana.

1:17:49

So like, I think that makes a distinction

1:17:52

for the Vivid to be D, but then the others can go

1:17:54

up to C. Well, we, well, we've got some lands to

1:17:56

go below it here soon. So that's definitely

1:17:58

true. Um, the whole. of the next ones

1:18:00

that we're going to talk about all inter tapped. We've talked about

1:18:02

the guild gates before, we've also got some campus

1:18:04

cards from Strixhaven and there are some new kapenno

1:18:07

ones. They have different effects that you can

1:18:09

like pay for mana tap them and you get the like sacrifice

1:18:11

them to draw a card or something like that. I don't

1:18:13

like them. I think they're bad. I think

1:18:15

the gates get a D just because gates decks are

1:18:17

cool. I like that. But the campuses

1:18:20

and the new kapenno lands, I would also put those in F

1:18:22

tier because I think if you're using them, it's bad.

1:18:24

I think you're not winning that game anyway and these cards

1:18:26

trick you into thinking they're good. Yeah,

1:18:29

like Dana said, if the modal cards

1:18:31

have a mode that isn't used, they're not actually modal.

1:18:33

Yeah. I don't think a lot of these are actually

1:18:35

modal. Paying effectively five mana

1:18:38

draw card, that's a steep. I would 1000%

1:18:41

rather run the cheap ish

1:18:43

now, horizon lands than

1:18:45

these campus cards. I'm

1:18:48

just not playing them. And the same goes for these series

1:18:50

of kamigawa lands that can

1:18:52

tap for colorless or they can give you a color but then

1:18:54

they stay tapped on the next turn. Absolutely.

1:18:57

These are in here just so we can dunk on them. These

1:18:59

cards are bad. They're in F tier. They're so

1:19:02

awful. I will note the

1:19:04

ratio to how bad they are to how good the

1:19:07

art is is probably greater than it is on any particular

1:19:09

any other cycle of magic. There's a bunch of

1:19:12

gorgeous pieces of art on these and they're all terrible. Man,

1:19:15

Joey said that he wants to dunk on these. I wanted

1:19:17

to Kenbemu Tumbo these and like smack them out of

1:19:19

your hands just go. No, no, no. Give them the

1:19:21

finger wagon. Yeah, I had it off into the stands. Heck

1:19:23

yeah. Oh, that's terrific. Not in my house. Okay,

1:19:26

we've got at long last a final

1:19:28

cycle of cards that can be five

1:19:31

colors. Command tower, any

1:19:33

color in your commander's color identity. That's amazing. Exotic

1:19:36

orchard can produce any color that your

1:19:39

opponent's lands can produce. Reflecting

1:19:41

pool giving you any color that you can already produce.

1:19:44

Forbidden orchard which can give you any color but it gives

1:19:46

an opponent a one-one and path of ancestry.

1:19:48

Always inter tapped but it gives you any color and you

1:19:51

can scry when you cast your commander or something that

1:19:53

shares a type with it. Whole bunch of potentially

1:19:56

five color lands and they're really

1:19:58

good in like...

1:19:59

decks that have more colors, I've got

1:20:02

some big thoughts here but I'm gonna let Dana

1:20:04

start us off on this final foray. So,

1:20:06

I was actually writing an article that I need to submit

1:20:08

in the next couple days that might beat the

1:20:10

show out, we'll find out. When I talk about

1:20:12

cards that have too many words

1:20:14

and because of the words in the card, people think

1:20:16

they're worse than they are. Path of Ancestry

1:20:19

is better than the like,

1:20:21

bivouac style trilands but

1:20:24

people don't realize it is because they think they need to run it in

1:20:26

a tapered deck. Even if you have zero

1:20:29

creatures of the appropriate type in your deck that

1:20:31

match your commander, it's still strictly

1:20:33

better than a bivouac style land because

1:20:35

it taps for the same colors and it will

1:20:37

give you a scry on occasion when you cast your commander. Path

1:20:40

of Ancestry is

1:20:41

not something I'm gonna hard jam into a ton

1:20:43

of decks but if you're gonna run one of those trilands, it's

1:20:46

better than the trilands. I mean, I would even argue

1:20:48

that it's better than City Brass and

1:20:51

Mana Confluence because you're not losing life to do this either. You

1:20:53

have an interest tapped but so like... Yeah.

1:20:57

Since we're having that discussion, like those we had put at A tier,

1:20:59

I was also solidly gonna say Path of Ancestry

1:21:01

A tier. Does that sound like what we're all landing? It still

1:21:04

feels like a B tier to me for Path. I

1:21:06

like it a lot but it doesn't feel like what I would look

1:21:08

at it and I don't see that card and think that

1:21:10

is an A tier card and this doesn't feel cool,

1:21:13

whatever that means, it doesn't feel like that to me but

1:21:15

I like it a lot. I mean, I think Command Tower

1:21:17

is strongly S tier but

1:21:20

the other ones, again, I think

1:21:22

Path of Ancestry is better than Mana Confluence. It

1:21:25

comes into play tapped, who cares? It

1:21:27

doesn't cost you any life over the course of the game so it's

1:21:30

gotta be A tier, I guess, if you're asking

1:21:32

me because we put Mana Confluence and City Brass

1:21:34

there. I don't love Forbidden Orchard

1:21:37

giving my opponents spirits every time I use

1:21:39

it. Yeah. There's no flexibility, you just need

1:21:41

your mana and so I would put Forbidden

1:21:43

Orchard maybe in C tier but the others,

1:21:45

I mean, B or A tier, I guess. Dana

1:21:48

said he'd rate Path of Ancestry above the trilands and we had

1:21:50

the trilands at B tier so I think Path of Ancestry,

1:21:52

it just like, you know, has to go above there just given

1:21:54

where we've already placed stuff. And

1:21:57

Dana, I also think you're totally right, like people do sometimes

1:21:59

overlook what the utility is on these. I really,

1:22:01

really enjoy Path of Ancestry and I have it in any deck

1:22:03

that has multiple colors. Just full stop because I'm going

1:22:06

to Scarmen, I guess my commander. Why not? And it gets even better

1:22:08

with more colors. It's terrific. Forbidden Orchard though,

1:22:11

I can't, I don't think I can put that a C. Like the number of

1:22:13

Skull Clamps running around out there, giving my opponent a

1:22:15

1-1, I really have to be committed to Group Hug to be playing

1:22:17

this one. So that one ranks

1:22:20

like the yet best for me. I don't

1:22:22

know how y'all feel though. Yeah, unless

1:22:24

you have some super synergy going on outside, I also

1:22:27

would not want to run it these days. Like

1:22:29

you said, stupid Skull Clamps, who are the things that

1:22:31

care about sacrificing? You're just asking to get

1:22:33

burned. Yeah, it feels like this

1:22:35

could absolutely be a thing that contributes to

1:22:37

you losing the game. There

1:22:40

are decks that can make use of it like, oh, I'm going to give you a thing and I

1:22:42

goad it. And that's really cool. So there is a situational

1:22:45

thing that makes me feel like, that's why it could be indeed.

1:22:47

But I think in plenty of times it could actually mess

1:22:49

up your ability to do stuff. I mean, yeah, giving your

1:22:51

opponent's blockers is never a good idea. That

1:22:54

leaves us with Exotic Orchard and Reflecting

1:22:57

Pool, giving you colors based on who's got what.

1:22:59

And these definitely rank high for me. I

1:23:01

mean, I don't love needing your

1:23:04

opponents to give you the colors. I would just rather play

1:23:06

Command Tower or a Triland and

1:23:08

then I have all my colors that I need. So I

1:23:11

would put one a little bit above the other, but I mean,

1:23:13

they're both good. I just, again, Watsy

1:23:16

has started giving us a few more reasons

1:23:18

and a few more interesting 1 and 2 color commanders.

1:23:21

So it sometimes isn't very reliable

1:23:23

to counter your opponents to have all the colors,

1:23:26

especially if you're playing that in a 5 color deck.

1:23:28

Yeah, Reflecting Pool is

1:23:29

really easy to wind up in a situation where you have

1:23:31

it in hand and you have nothing

1:23:34

else that makes colored mana. So it doesn't do you any

1:23:36

good. Whereas Exotic Orchard is always

1:23:38

going to, almost always going to make you

1:23:40

something with a color. And if,

1:23:42

particularly if you're playing in a 4 pod, one

1:23:45

of those colors is going to be one of your colors, if not both,

1:23:47

if not three of them. Just like statistically

1:23:50

speaking, Exotic Orchard is almost always

1:23:52

a battle bottom land, if not better.

1:23:54

Reflecting Pool, I dig less

1:23:56

just because there's those couple early turns

1:23:59

where

1:23:59

You don't have the ideal hand that's not going to bail

1:24:02

you out and I've had exotic orchard with

1:24:04

a not ideal hand to bail me out. So I think

1:24:06

orchard is better. It's definitely a tier higher. I

1:24:09

would probably put orchard as a B and maybe

1:24:11

a reflecting pool as a C. Oh wow, I was going

1:24:13

to go with orchard as an A and reflecting pool

1:24:15

as a B. I like both of them in anything

1:24:18

three color above. I don't think I play either of them in two

1:24:20

color decks. But I do really like

1:24:22

them. If I'm playing multiple colors, I want them both.

1:24:25

The more colors you're playing, the better orchard gets

1:24:27

and I think the more colors you're playing, the

1:24:30

less likely reflecting pool is to help you particularly

1:24:32

the first couple turns. So I think pool gets worse, the

1:24:35

more colors you're playing and orchard gets better. Interesting,

1:24:37

yeah. Again, orchard doesn't feel like an A tier card.

1:24:40

It's an exotic orchard. Maybe that's because that's been reprinted 190

1:24:42

times. I have a tough

1:24:44

time calling an A tier card for that reason, I guess, which

1:24:46

is maybe arbitrary. But I

1:24:48

think it's a better card than a reflecting pool at

1:24:50

the very least and it should be a tier higher. I mean, in order

1:24:53

to keep this bell curve that we have so perfectly

1:24:55

going, I think putting them in B or

1:24:57

C is what's going

1:24:59

to aesthetically keep the audience

1:25:02

going to the comment section letting us know how wrong this list

1:25:04

is. So guys,

1:25:06

we've finalized our little list

1:25:08

here. Are you happy with where things have

1:25:10

placed? Like does this look right

1:25:13

to you? What do you think? I mean, aesthetically, yes.

1:25:15

I mean, everybody loves a good bell curve.

1:25:18

But I mean, there's a few that we

1:25:21

have disagreed with, but I think overall,

1:25:23

I think it's a good list too. If

1:25:25

you're getting somebody in the game or just talking with

1:25:27

people kind of like, okay, how do I upgrade my decks? How do I

1:25:30

take that next step? It's a good list

1:25:32

to have as far as, you know, there's arguments for this,

1:25:34

that and the other. And yeah,

1:25:37

there's some nitpicks. But again, we're

1:25:39

magic players. We like to nitpick. I mean,

1:25:41

I would downgrade a

1:25:43

third of these

1:25:46

cards. I would not make a third

1:25:48

of them down one tier. I knew you were going to say that. But

1:25:51

that's fine. And again, I think

1:25:54

a lot of that is like personal brewing and

1:25:56

play style preferences. And for

1:25:58

mine, a lot of these cards are pretty good. cards like they

1:26:00

prefer, they don't perform at the

1:26:03

level that you guys think they perform at. I'm not saying

1:26:05

you're wrong, I'm just saying like based on how I build

1:26:07

decks, they don't feel that powerful.

1:26:10

That might be different for somebody else who builds in a different way

1:26:13

and plays in a different meta, that kind of thing.

1:26:15

So like there's a lot of, a lot of subjectivity

1:26:17

here,

1:26:18

subjectively for me, I

1:26:21

would down, I would bump

1:26:23

a lot of the C's down to D's and a few of

1:26:25

the B's maybe even down to C's.

1:26:27

I don't have any massive objections. I mean,

1:26:29

well, I want to put bounce lands up in other tiers. Yeah,

1:26:33

but again, like there's so many, like all three

1:26:35

of us are coming at it from very different points of

1:26:37

view where like, sure, if you have an unlimited budget,

1:26:40

you're never going to play anything below the A tier, but that's, that's

1:26:42

not the case for 98% of the player base.

1:26:44

And so, yeah, so I think

1:26:47

you have to give some of these more consideration than you

1:26:49

might want to in this perfect world. And

1:26:53

I, so wait, like Dana, I'm thinking

1:26:55

back over your comments. Are you saying that maybe

1:26:57

this isn't the objective,

1:26:59

definitive, absolutely 100% true

1:27:03

type of thing that we always said it was?

1:27:05

No, it is. It still is. I

1:27:08

think this was a good combination

1:27:11

of our ideas about what's right

1:27:13

and if people really want the like

1:27:15

true objective tier

1:27:17

list, they can DM me and I'll give them

1:27:20

the accurate one that isn't the

1:27:22

combination. I mean, my personal one also

1:27:24

looks a little bit different and like as you all said, listeners

1:27:27

are going to feel very differently about this too. But in terms

1:27:29

of our evaluations and our deck building and a little

1:27:31

bit of averaging out between us. It's a good representation

1:27:33

of a combination of our three opinions. Yeah,

1:27:36

yeah, there you go. And this is also like really

1:27:38

fun to do. I hope that folks really enjoyed

1:27:40

watching and listening to it. But listeners,

1:27:43

we already know that you're going to let us know where you think these different

1:27:45

lands should have fallen. Which ones do you rate higher

1:27:47

and which ones do you rate lower? And honestly, like

1:27:50

we'd love to see your versions of this tier list

1:27:52

too. Let's see if we can like link it in the description of this video

1:27:55

so that you can make one and screenshot it for yourself

1:27:57

as well. Because this is also just a really fun exercise

1:27:59

to do. So I've had a blast doing

1:28:01

this thing. I'm just looking at all these lanes

1:28:03

and they're so pretty. I'm gonna go mess around with

1:28:05

the lanes in my deck now. And while I'm doing

1:28:07

that, I think maybe you guys should let folks know where they

1:28:10

can find you online if they'd like to tell you about their

1:28:12

tier lists. Let's start with you, Matt. Well, you can

1:28:14

find my undisputable, amazing tier

1:28:16

lists over on pretty much any social media platform

1:28:19

at Mathemis55. That's Instagram,

1:28:21

Blue Sky, whatever you want to go to. It's

1:28:23

all there. Mathemis55 on all of them. But

1:28:26

yeah, you can see our finger paintings too at ETH Red

1:28:28

Cast also on pretty

1:28:29

much any social media platform as well. And

1:28:32

Dana, how about you? You can find me online

1:28:34

at Dana Roach. You can find

1:28:36

my articles on EDH Rec and Commander's Herald. And

1:28:39

you can find all of us together at patreon.com.

1:28:42

slash EDH Red Cast. And I'm Joey Schultz. You

1:28:44

can find me at josephmschultz online.

1:28:46

Most likely I'm being a fool on Instagram

1:28:49

or something like that. And you can find the cast at

1:28:51

EDH Red Cast everywhere online. Plus, if you got

1:28:53

a question for us, you can contact us at EDHRedCast

1:28:55

at gmail.com. Our thanks once again

1:28:57

to Chase for their fantastic work in the post-production

1:29:00

of the show. You can find them online

1:29:02

at ManaCurves. And listeners, we'll be back

1:29:04

at you next week with more data and insights.

1:29:07

But until then, remember, EDH, wreck

1:29:09

your deck before you wreck your deck.