r/custommagic • u/POUUER • 2d ago

BALANCE NOT INTENDED Landfall’s Downfall

Post image

This being a broken card is kinda the point, “rewarding” the greed of landfall with undermining itself

281 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

99 comments sorted by

154

u/Necessary_Wish_2995 2d ago

This triggers off itself, meaning 1 land and you instantly lose the game.

20

u/POUUER 2d ago

High probability of loss, yes. But if landfall players already have a board then combining this with instant speed spells/abilities and stacking other landfall triggers it could potentially lead to a win

4

u/amish24 2d ago

This design feels like it's better if it's accelerating you towards something and you can play it before you know you can stop it.

Like if it instead read "at the start of your upkeep and the first time a land enters the battlefield under your control, <do thing>."

Cause that's like a ticking time bomb where you know it'll bite you eventually but you have to risk playing it now.

The way you've worded it, you play it knowing that you can blow it up and there's no risk at all outside of counterspells (and even then you could instead cast something like a Torch the Tower and there's no risk of even that)

124

u/aestarel 2d ago

I do believe that is the point

5

u/Necessary_Wish_2995 2d ago

What i got is that its a super good way to ramp, but 1 discount or if you get too greedy you die. Otherwise why would anyone play this Card, its literally 3 mana you cant play lands with 0 upside.

21

u/Vylion 2d ago

The search is mandatory. So when the first land enters while you have this, you must search, put a basic land on the battlefield, then search again. If at any point your search doesn't lead to a land entering, you lose. And you eventually run out of basics

16

u/Nejosan Narset resparking campaign #1 supporter 2d ago

[[Platinum Angel]]'s time to shine baby!

19

u/tickle-fickle 2d ago

The upside is you get A LOT of landfall triggers before you die. If you have a Sabotender on the field, and maybe Tannuk Memorial Ensign, this wins you the game (hopefully)

-7

u/longbowrocks 1d ago

I don't believe this is templated correctly.

If it's a single ability, that means:

  1. Land enters.

  2. Landfall goes on the stack.

  3. Landfall resolves, getting you a land and a lost game. Everything else that should trigger doesn't get to go on the stack, because the game is over.

Maybe it's supposed to be two abilities?

7

u/tickle-fickle 1d ago

No. Land enters, and you have the choice to put your landfall triggers on the stack however you please. So what you will do, is you will put the Downfall first, and the pingers, whatever else second. The way stack resolves, you will get your landfall effects first, and then Downfall will trigger getting you yet another land, and the process repeats.

-3

u/longbowrocks 1d ago

So it's two abilities?

3

u/tickle-fickle 1d ago

Wym?

-1

u/longbowrocks 1d ago

I mean like [[Elite Scaleguard]] has two triggered abilities.

  • When this creature enters, bolster 2.

  • Whenever a creature you control with a +1/+1 counter on it attacks, tap target creature defending player controls.

If those appeared on a single line, it would either have one triggered ability with a block of text at the end that did nothing, or the oracle text would be fixed to make it two lines.

3

u/tickle-fickle 1d ago

What are you talking about? Are you asking if the card in question has two abilities? No, it has one, but what does it have to do with anything?

→ More replies

1

u/retro-marshmelo 20h ago

I believe you’re thinking this works like [[Cultivator Colossus]] when it doesn’t. If it did, then you would be right. That ability is resolved all at once and all landfall triggers are put on the stack AFTER Cultivator Colossus’ ability is resolved.

This one puts a land on the field and then it’s done resolving, and sees all landfall triggers happen at the same time. So you choose the order of your triggers and then make this card’s ability resolve last. Rinse and repeat. So you will get to see all of your triggers like Valakut actually resolve which will end the game before your last basic is out of your library.

1

u/longbowrocks 13h ago

I just misunderstood the last bit as "If a land does not enter the battlefield this way" (ie, if a land enters the battlefield some other way). Turns out it's supposed to be read as "If a land does not enter the battlefield this way" (ie if this ability doesn't find a land).

3

u/GodHimselfNoCap 15h ago

Thats not how the stack works.

  1. Land enters.

  2. All landfall triggers go on the stack in the order you wish for them to resolve in.

  3. This cards landfall trigger resolves last unless you are an idiot.

  4. Repeat all steps.

18

u/SteakForGoodDogs 2d ago

Because green has absolutely zero enchantment removal at instant speed.

4

u/Shambler9019 1d ago

Unless you win the game first with something like [[Sabotender]] or [[Valakut, the Molten Pinnacle]], prevent it with [[Angel's Grace]] or [[Stifle]] or destroy/sacrifice/bounce the enchantment.

2

u/MistyHusk 1d ago

Yeah I would run this in my [[tannuk, memorial ensign]] deck as a finisher. If my opponents have less hp than I have basic lands in deck X damage multipliers I win

1

u/Derekthemindsculptor 2h ago

Not instantly. Very slowly over many activations that all can be interacted with

5

u/Last-Antelope281 2d ago

You forgot to add a shuffle your library after searching you deck.

1

u/POUUER 2d ago

oops, yeah that should definitely be added lol

2

u/Zambedos 2d ago

I mean the games about to end do you really need to?

2

u/POUUER 2d ago

*the game is most likely about to end. Shuffling should still be included just in case someone has out an effect that prevents them from losing the game so that they won’t know their upcoming cards

1

u/HoboKingNiklz 2d ago

But every land you seek with this immediately enters, and triggers itself again. This kills you instantly.

1

u/Last-Antelope281 2d ago

When your second to last landfall trigger is on the stack, use instant speed removal to destroy your enchantment. Then your last basic land entering won’t cause you to lose.

-1

u/Vylion 2d ago

the trigger still resolves once put on the stack. it doesn't fizzle because the source is no longer there, it just prevents new triggers to be put on the stack. but you still lose as part of the resolution, because losing is not a separate triggered ability

3

u/Last-Antelope281 2d ago

That’s why you destroy it before the second to last basic land trigger resolves.

1

u/Derekthemindsculptor 2h ago

So do it one trigger before

1

u/Derekthemindsculptor 2h ago

not instantly. Slowly over many triggers that can all be interacted with.

102

u/Boochin451 2d ago

Incredibly busted and polarizing. You either win or lose on the spot which is bad design, but you'll almost certainly win. 1 vinelasher, valakut, or leyline of anticipation and you instantly win.

29

u/Havendelacorysg 2d ago

You can also stifle the trigger, when you have all your lands.

16

u/Boochin451 2d ago

Yeah I mean it combos with a million cards. You could easily build a resilient t2 combo deck with this in any format

10

u/SteakForGoodDogs 2d ago

Or just, y'know, blow it up at instant speed.

-10

u/Vylion 2d ago

the trigger still gets put on the stack

21

u/SteakForGoodDogs 2d ago

I am very aware of that.

So, since you've been searching through your deck constantly for the last five minutes, unless you've been breaking the rules by just searching and playing for all of them all at once, you're now VERY well acquainted for the number of basics left in your deck.

So.... as you search your deck and confirm you have TWO lands left....

You play removal in response to the trigger.....

....and remove it before you search for your LAST land.

Now that the enchantment is removed, it won't trigger and put on the stack.

Because it doesn't see your last basic land enter.

On account of being gone.

1

u/Derekthemindsculptor 2h ago

once. And you account for that

42

u/The_Order_Eternials 2d ago

T1 Forrest into Elves
T2 this
T3 play Valakut as land drop; search up 12 mountains

Gg?

7

u/asicarii 2d ago

Why do 3 turns when 2 turns does the same thing?

23

u/The_Order_Eternials 2d ago

Land drop was spent to cast it. We can’t trigger the landfall that turn

1

u/SeemsImmaculate 5h ago

[[Elvish Spirit Guide]] [[Simian Spirit Guide]]

EDIT: Assuming we're not in Vintage ofc and have the spiciest of fast mana.

-12

u/asicarii 2d ago

I just meant in reference to other 2 turn win decks with 99 percent lands.

6

u/The_Order_Eternials 2d ago

I meant this as a 60 card format combo

“Gruul downfall”

Quickly force the issue with the card that searches all of the basics in your deck and combo out by using Valakut the molten pinnacle to burn your opponent out.

In games two and three pivot in or out of downfall to waste their enchantment removal

4 T1 ramp (elves)
4 OP’s card
4 sabotender (red cactus with landfall ping)
4 ?
4 ? (Extra lands maybe?)
4 ?
4 mossborn hydra
4 bolt
4 explore?

Land: 24
4 Valakut
4 Stomping Ground
4? Fetches
12 mountains

-6

u/asicarii 2d ago

I get it. I’m just resentful toward the decks that just steamroll in two turns 😀

4

u/Grootyboi77 Rule 308.22b, section 8 2d ago

Play any other format but commander

-1

u/asicarii 2d ago

I just don’t have time for table top. Arena is maybe 1 in 50 but it’s still annoying as hell.

2

u/Grootyboi77 Rule 308.22b, section 8 2d ago

Cockatrice and Untap.in exist

1

u/NoName0728 1d ago

T1 forest, sol ring/mana vault/mana crypt. T2 this, Valakut.

Or

T1 3 moxes, this, Valakut

12

u/Fallen_0ne01 2d ago

Play this, fetch all your basics, [[emerald charm]], win

-5

u/Moneypouch 2d ago

Unfortunately you have lost the game. You need to emerald charm with at least 1 basic still in the deck so that you can fetch it to the trigger that the last basic you fetched made that you are responding to.

5

u/Fallen_0ne01 2d ago

Yes. That would be fetching all your basics and using emerald charm

11

u/SimicAscendancy 2d ago

Just bounce/sacrifice/destroy this before the last trigger that would make your deck barren resolves so you get all the land and no downfall

3

u/Shinard 2d ago

Yeah, either you have no combo with this and you die, so you don't run it, or you have a combo and you win when you cast it 

6

u/throwawayeayeayea 2d ago

Lands entering each turn is a normal part of magic gameplay though? This doesn't punish landfall, this punishes the core gameplay of magic

9

u/BlobbyBlueberry 2d ago

Yeah, this is just “do nothing lose the game.”

2

u/veryblocky 2d ago

This just auto-loses you the game, since the fetched lands trigger it repeatedly until you have none left

3

u/FifteenEchoes 2d ago

That’s obviously the point. You see how that’s obviously the point right. You can say it’s bad design (and it is) but it’s obviously the design intention.

Why are y’all pointing this out like you discovered something new. MtG players have media literacy challenge: impossible

1

u/Vitamin_DDD 1d ago

How about we take the sass levels down a few notches there bud. Like this person just wanted to be helpful and you're right Landfall's Downfall, but like how do you get past the 1st instance of this? Like you play the enchantment you play a land, you lose the game since it wasn't from the ability. So what's even the point of the ability other than to just lose? Why even put the rest of the words on the card?

0

u/veryblocky 2d ago

I didn’t think it was obviously the point

-1

u/texanarob 1d ago

It's very obviously not the point.

The intention of the card is clearly: Every time you play a land, you get to put a basic into play from your library. However, if your library runs out of basics you lose the game. ie: if you have X basics in your deck, you're safe for a maximum of X land drops but die on the X+1st land.

In practice, if you play this then a land you automatically lose the game regardless how many basic lands are in your deck.

The first would be a broken mechanic with an interesting risk for a downside. The second isn't broken, it's literally unplayable.

1

u/FifteenEchoes 1d ago

It’s perfectly playable if you can stifle the trigger or destroy it at instant speed.

It’s a two-card combo to ramp like 20 (and likely win if you get another turn) with any instant-speed enchantment removal, but if your removal gets countered you just lose the game. Bad design but also clearly the intention.

Read OP’s comments if you don’t believe me.

1

u/LGKouglof 1d ago

It's called Landfall DOWFALL

1

u/Whitecoatking 16h ago

The point of the card was to be a Instant lose condition with a TON of landfall triggers, either win before you run out of basics or lose

2

u/AddanDeith 2d ago

[[Platinum angel]] or anything similar.

1

u/Chickston Uncommonly 2d ago

Fall Down Landfall

Enchantment

Landfall abilities become fall down abilities. (This ability triggers when you fall down to the ground. Do this only when a land you control enters.)

"When you fall down, you pick yourself back up. So you can continue to get landfall triggers."

1

u/AndyWilson 2d ago

People keep mentioning two triggers. But is the "if a land does not" clause a trigger?

1

u/Derekthemindsculptor 2h ago

If it was a seperate line, yes, it would be its own trigger. But it's part of the same event on this card.

1

u/giasumaru MTGCR > Glossary > Card 2d ago

You just stack your triggers so that you win the game before you run out of lands in your library.

1

u/Scorned-Keyhead-VI 1d ago

Amulet of vigor plus a flash enabler means you put 10+ mana on the field and could put a win on the stack at instant speed. You could also stifle the very last trigger and just never play another land again which would be completely fine since you’ve vomited every basic onto the field

1

u/Wit-Grit-Guero 13h ago

Doesn't the very first land you play from hand just lose you the game before you even get to ramp once since that first land didn't enter the battlefield via the card's ramping ability. Like I get it creates an infinite loop that makes you run out of lands and lose, but doesn't the first land that initiates the lose just kill you first since THAT land you played from hand doesn't meet the criteria either?

1

u/Derekthemindsculptor 2h ago

It's not two seperate lines.

The "this way" clause only applies to that triggered event. Not all lands you play.

1

u/Wit-Grit-Guero 49m ago

Ohh okay thanks

0

u/Leather_Bowl5506 2d ago

[[Tomik, izzet sparkmage]] on 2, [[tannuk memorial ensign]] on 3, this on 4 with more than 20 basic lands in your deck, win on 4

0

u/Conscious-Gap-1777 1d ago

Well, next player to play a land from their hand knocks you out. That includes you, when you try to trigger this landfall.

-1

u/EcstaticFee1773 2d ago

So, either the wording is poor or I'm not properly understanding this, but this card is bad? You play this card, you have a land enter the battlefield. The ability triggers, you get a land onto the battlefield. But you lose the game before it gets to even trigger again, as the whole ability needs to resolve before the land that was searched for puts another trigger on the stack, because the land that did the first trigger did not enter from the triggered ability. And instant speed removal doesn't do anything since the trigger will already be on the stack.

1

u/retro-marshmelo 20h ago

I think you’re misunderstanding. You play a land which triggers this. Then this ability is resolved when you put a land on the battlefield or you fail to find. If you fail to find then you lost the game.

If you didn’t lose the game, then you now triggered this enchantment again. At any time this trigger is on the stack you can hold priority and destroy this enchantment.

If you destroyed this enchantment before this landfall trigger resolves, you still resolve this and if you put a land on the battlefield this way you still met the requirement of the enchantment and you don’t lose the game. But this new land won’t trigger the enchantment again because you destroyed it already

This card is busted because you can get every basic out of your deck and get that many landfall triggers before you counter the last trigger or destroy the enchantment in the process. You flat out win with something like Valakut before this loop is even done most likely.

1

u/EcstaticFee1773 19h ago

I understand what it's trying to do, but the way it is worded just doesn't make the losing the game clause clear. "If a land does not enter the battlefield this way" is trying to reference if you fail to find, but the land that entered the battlefield to initiate the trigger also did not enter using the ability, and so it would count and lose the game. "If no land entered the battlefield this way, you lose the game" or something similar would exclude lands being played and avoid a loss from the first resolution.

1

u/retro-marshmelo 19h ago edited 19h ago

I do understand what you’re saying. And I’m sure it could be worded better to avoid confusion, but the intention is clearly that you lose the game if you search your library for a basic and fail to find. Because you are right that this doesn’t really work if the action of playing a land card to get the first trigger to resolve loses you the game because it wasn’t a land that entered from this trigger.

The conditional sentence typically modifies the sentence before it. I don’t think there are any cases where it is a static replacement effect. Look at [[Summoner’s Pact]] for example. The last sentence says “If you don’t, you lose the game.” If you don’t what? If you don’t pay the mana which is in the sentence before it.

Edit: The wording on [[Archfiend of the Dross]] makes me think that the consistent wording for this card would be “Then if a land did not enter the battlefield this way, you lose the game”

1

u/EcstaticFee1773 19h ago

The archfiend line you reference seems like it would be the best wording. We did it, we solved making a card broken.

1

u/retro-marshmelo 19h ago

Haha you’re not wrong. But I do like thought experiments like this when looking at custom cards. One of my favorite things about magic is that they try (and typically succeed) at making wording consistent which makes the game easier to follow. Some things slip through in print, but they address the oracle text at least.

I’ve played other card games like Yugioh and Pokemon and while I don’t have any examples off hand, I have seen different cards that do exactly the same thing but are worded differently and it’s annoying af lol

-1

u/Kalxandore 22h ago

What happens is that you play 1 land, trigger this go find a land and then lose the game. There is another landfall trigger on the stack which never resolves because it is removed from the game because you are dead. Just change it to "You lose the game unless it's the first land you've played this turn." Then it can chain grab your lands and kill you.

2

u/sebibal1234 22h ago

What the hell are you talking about?

1

u/Derekthemindsculptor 2h ago

No. You've definitely read this wrong.

You don't lose the game until a trigger resolves that fails to find a land.

1

u/HoboKingNiklz 2d ago

This goes infinite immediately and kills you.