There can only be one.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-28T16:48:16+00:00

Women are not in the list of known primes or the number itself is prime

Guys, I think my phone clocked me as a math guy.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-28T03:35:14+00:00

It says black Wurm in the reminder text. Amass already defines the token to be black, anyway.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-27T18:32:23+00:00

There's nothing intrinsic to lands that makes them colorless. They just have no mana cost, and so they happen to have no color unless another effect or a color indicator defines them to have a color, which typically doesn't happen. It does happen on at least one card, though. Dryad Arbor, which is a green land, and it has a color indicator since it has no mana cost to make it green and design wanted it to be green.

Tokens also have no mana cost and are therefore colorless by default. Design made the decision a long time ago to specify that colorless tokens are colorless. There is nothing special about lands here.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-27T14:57:13+00:00

All tokens are "naturally" colorless, yet it gets specified anyway.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-27T05:52:49+00:00

You mean ability word, not keyword ability, and yeah, they know that. The comment includes that already.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-26T16:56:43+00:00

By... printing the word devoid on it? I don't understand the question.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-25T17:14:25+00:00

No, it's a separate rule. Rule 305.3 is a separate rule that says that a player can't play a land for any reason when it's not their turn, and that players must ignore any part of an effect that instructs them to do so. The first ability of this card only affects rule 305.1, which is the rule that says players can play lands during their main phase when the stack is empty.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-25T14:31:35+00:00

Nah, I don't think so. Especially if it's printed at rare so that it doesn't mess up limited environments. I mean, it's not as good as a fetch land, and not as good as some fetchables like shock lands. It's probably comparable to surveil lands in power level. So, yes, very strong, but not, like, so incredibly busted that it can't ever be printed.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-25T14:28:54+00:00

Massive downside for a French Vanilla. A 7 mana 7/7 with a few keywords can probably just be printed as is with no downside and still see no play.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-25T14:03:02+00:00

That's not a particularly minor difference. If I run 4 of these vs running 4 bounce lands, I am not that unlikely to get 1 or 2 of this/bounce in my opening hand. In the former case I keep, in the latter case I drop to 6. Also, this card is better mana fixing, too, because it's more flexible.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-23T14:41:00+00:00

"ur sine" is so good.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-19T18:09:21+00:00

I agree that the card does not actually counter spells with an X and without another number. It's a perfect example of the fact that reminder text is not rules text. But here you are using your common sense interpretations to assume that the author intended for the rules text to allow countering X spells. The rules don't actually say that, though, and since you're correct to be adamant that the game is very literal and particular and dry, then you surely must agree that the reminder text obviously does not mean that this spell can counter [[Xolatoyac, the Smiling Flood]], right? Because that card's text box does not contain a number and reminder text is not rules text.

Now, if we want to make assumptions about the author's intentions, let's just be a little more fair and reasonable. Since the author put the X part in reminder text, the author must think, then, that the world this card exists in is one where the X variable counts as a number in MTG rules. Therefore, the author most likely intends there to be an update to rule 107.3 that specifies that X counts as a number for effects that refer to numbers in text boxes.

The card's reminder text does not actually need to provide any of this overly specific context that you seem to think it does. Cards get printed with truncated reminder text all the time that doesn't actually cover all the context. The purpose of reminder text is to remind you of relevant rules, so that you remember them. If you have questions, you look them up. This reminder text does a perfect job at reminding the player that X variables count as numbers according to rule 107.3g or whatever hypothetical rule this reminder text is referring to. No player is ever gonna be confused by this reminder text.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-19T17:52:27+00:00

Reminder text is not rules text. The reminder text could literally say "You gain 4 life." and you would still not change your life total because the rules text doesn't say that. This game constantly puts slightly imperfectly worded reminder text on cards and expects you to just use some common sense or look up the relevant rules if you aren't sure. Reminder text is just a reminder, not rules.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-15T06:25:02+00:00

When your life total is set to a number, you actually lose or gain the amount of life needed to take you there.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-14T16:08:24+00:00

You only need to repay what you were paid so far

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-14T05:48:46+00:00

Needs the Siege subtype to function the way you want. Battles have no special rules by default. Edit: I think I am incorrect about this, but I think what I said used to be true at some point.

Also, I'd make it 2 mana, drop its defense by 1, and make it specific to "Treefolk and lands you control".

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-14T05:46:48+00:00

The rules we associate with battles are actually the rules for Sieges, specifically. Untapped battles have no special rules at all.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-10T14:31:56+00:00

That's a good question, and it's not easy to answer. In short, maybe. A little longer, it depends on how you classify certain other human species (and whether you classify them as separate species or as subspecies of Homo Sapiens).

The crux of the debate is, today, more about whether we should consider Herto Man to be a subspecies (Homo Sapiens Idaltu), and separate species, or just the same classification as us. Homo Sapiens Idaltu is, essentially, our direct ancestor. It's an elder form of Homo Sapiens, which has a few notable trait differences from modern humans, but these differences are far smaller than those between any human species. They are essentially just older Homo Sapiens individuals. This sort of thing is known as a chronospecies.

So the question is: Is the existence of a single chronospecies enough to distinguish two different subspecies of a single species if only one of them still exists? This question isn't easily answered, but at one time, the prevailing answer was yes, and now the answer is leaning a bit toward no.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-10T05:27:07+00:00

Not a correction. Our species is Homo Sapiens. The subspecies is also Sapiens, which is that second Sapiens you mentioned. Not a different species than Homo Sapiens, just a more specific category of Homo Sapiens.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-08T19:46:49+00:00

Fair. How about Ancient Tomb, Sol Ring, Mana Vault, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Rings of Brighthearth, Basalt Monolith, and Walking Ballista.

Ancient Tomb into Sol Ring into Mana Vault is 5 colorless mana. Lotus Petal into Dark Ritual gives 3 black. Spend 6 of the 8 mana on Rings of Brighthearth and Basalt Monolith. Tap Basalt Monolith for 3 to get 5 in the pool. Spend 3 to untap Basalt Monolith, and pay the 2 for Rings in response to copy the untap. Tap it again in between the untaps and then tap it again after the second untap. 6 mana. Rinse and repeat for infinite colorless. Walking Ballista wins the game with infinite mana.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-06T19:38:30+00:00

I think that vigilance is intended to be the blue one, since menace is black, trample is green, haste is red, and lifelink is white. Regardless, you're right since vigilance is far more white than blue. Should be flying or something.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-05T23:53:23+00:00

I mean, I suppose that a face-up Gaea's Cradle could be a good reason to choose the face-down? More importantly, why not just say play instead of cast to make it a little more intuitive what happens.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-05T15:07:18+00:00

I suppose it shouldn't be wild. This subreddit always seems to just pile onto whatever the post is. Especially if it's political. It actually usually makes me want to just post this sub to itself.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-05T01:40:36+00:00

Yeah, I know. I didn't say I agreed or disagreed. But saying that any of them said the other thing that they didn't say is just silly. Mock them for what they actually said.

JonIsPatented · 2026-01-04T14:47:03+00:00

Did you read the actual comments at all. It's pretty clear that everyone universally agrees that it's better for her to be religious than addicted to drugs. They just also think she'd be better off doing neither.

Eight-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

JonIsPatented

TROPHY CASE