I have to wonder about the rulings text here. Did someone seriously give this thing Island of Wak-Wak Walk? If so, I'd love to hear the circumstances of why there. Ten thousand points if there was a sound strategic motive in mind.
scumbling1
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
"I have to wonder about the rulings text here. Did someone seriously give this thing Island of Wak-Wak Walk? If so, I'd love to hear the cir***stances of why there. Ten thousand points if there was a sound strategic motive in mind."
No Sorrow's Path-walk? Way to go, you ruined the game, Wizards.
tavaritz
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Island of Wak-Wak is not a land type, it's a name of a land. Desert on the other hand is both, lair (like in Crosis's Catacombs) is just a type. So you could give lairwalk to this.
longwinded
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
@Gradius: yes. Before the notion of subtypes and supertypes were added to the game -- that is, back when all you had was creature types, before that was generalized into subtypes for lands, artifact creatures, and other spells -- all that mattered was a land's name. "Landwalk ability of your choice" could be "Urza's Towerwalk" just as easily as "forestwalk" or "swampwalk". IIRC, "Island of Wak-Wak-walk" actually came up in a tournament, because the opponent was on the defensive with non-flying blockers and Island of Wak-Wak. I vaguely remember another component -- did he have Island Sanctuary and desperately need the card draw? Did he sacrifice all of his basic lands? -- but it's oddly difficult to find the specifics online these days.
When subtypes were introduced and land types were created, they added subtypes for Urza's Tower, Urza's Mine, and Urza's Factory, so that the old style of play would still be legal for older lands. Still, they had to draw the line somewhere, and it was at Island of Wak-Wak.
It should also be noted that, since all that mattered was name, the dual lands needed special "counts as both a swamp/plains/etc. and a forest/island/etc." rules text. Also, Island of Wak-Wak was the first card where they could officially rule that a land with island (or any basic land name) in its name is not necessarily an island (or other land type) under the rules. All three of these issues, as well as clarifying what the text of transformative spells like Conversion meant, are why subtypes were eventually added for the land type.
The_Stray
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
He might have given it Island of Wak-Wak Walk just for the lulz...
Kryptnyt
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Wak-wak walk is too broken to exist.
Lord_of_Tresserhorn
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
No more Island of Wak-Wak Walk? *sadface*
Also, this is pretty much even worse than Flow of Maggots... More color-intensive, especially the CU.
Comments (10)
Someone's opponent controlled an Island of Wak-Wak, maybe?
When subtypes were introduced and land types were created, they added subtypes for Urza's Tower, Urza's Mine, and Urza's Factory, so that the old style of play would still be legal for older lands. Still, they had to draw the line somewhere, and it was at Island of Wak-Wak.
It should also be noted that, since all that mattered was name, the dual lands needed special "counts as both a swamp/plains/etc. and a forest/island/etc." rules text. Also, Island of Wak-Wak was the first card where they could officially rule that a land with island (or any basic land name) in its name is not necessarily an island (or other land type) under the rules. All three of these issues, as well as clarifying what the text of transformative spells like Conversion meant, are why subtypes were eventually added for the land type.
Also, this is pretty much even worse than Flow of Maggots... More color-intensive, especially the CU.