Pointed Discussion

This is a neat card to splash any color in a deck without breaking the bank.

Rupture Spire?
You look a little less...
Ruptured.

What a lovely art. Would look great on your board next to Pillar of the Paruns and Ancient Ziggurat.

I'd still prefer Evolving Wilds / Terramorphic Expanse.

There aren't many situations where I'd trade the -1 mana with the post-play colour-flexibility.

A "win more" card.

Because somebody in R&D really wanted 2 Rupture Spires in their EDH deck.

Pros like me love color-fixing lands and this one does just that, at common I might add.

The flavor bodes well for me in my Group-hug "Diplomacy" EDH deck, as a welcoming embassy to my "opponents". A cool and flavorful spin on Rupture Spire.

What do you mean it's not all colors at all times?

When I first saw this spoiled I remember groaning as I realized it was merely a reprinting of Rupture Spire, a land that I've tried numerous times to make work in Pauper but ultimately inevitably failing with. I understand that there need to be common mana-fixers, but a land that sets you back two turns will never be the way to go about it. Very thankfully, WotC added the new Gate duals for Pauper in this set as well, and this card, and its twin, the Spire, will never have to be used again.

this is similar to Bird of Paradise. Both are good at fixing mana. The only difference is the bird is creature and Transguild Promenade is land. Therefore, Bird of Paradise is sightly better than this one.

Ironically, Rupture Spire's name fits Ravnica as well as Alara. They would only have to depict a gothic spire in the art.

I really do not understand how or why, but this is better than Rupture Spire.

It's a land of any colour that costs just one mana, great common to splash any colour. So you're a little slow for that turn, the flexibility afterwards is excellent. I'm wondering if I could finally make a five colour standard deck towards the end of this cycle, cards like this will make that closer to being possible.

i play pauper and you have not a lot of common lands that produce any color of mana. shimmering grotto is better than this in most of decks and hands.

Great for casual play. I run it in my Rakdos deck so I can splash blue and play Nicol Bolas or Blood Tyrant or other Grixis stuff. Also helps get the most out of Unburial Rites.

I like this card for the flavor. It can support any of the guilds as befitting its neutral status. Granted, a tapland version of Pillar of the Paruns would probably have been better, but this at least provides more flexible color fixing.

Incredible in Limited and EDH, which, being that those are two of the only formats I play, gets a 4/5 from me.

@The_Murderauder: Don't like it? Don't play.

Sure it enters battlefield tapped, must be sacrificed unless you pay , still, it s for a mana of *any* color, as opposed to ing to filter into another color, which makes it worth running in certain EDH decks at least.

This is a perfect example of why I never trust anything that Wizards of the Coast says.

They've stated that they want to cut down on functional reprints unless they need to to fit the flavor of the set (Kodama's Reach makes no sense outside of Kamigawa, hence Cultivate), or players really want to play 8 in a deck, and it wouldn't be overpowered (and frankly, I can't imagine that anyone was begging to play 8 Rupture Spires), and they try to use preexisting cards if they fit. Good example of this in action: Blazing Torch in Innistrad.

And yet, we get this. Rupture Spire would have fit perfectly in RTR. It's a spire. In a city. Sounds good to me!
What gives? Why? Not many people were asking for more copies of Rupture Spire, and even if they were, there's not much reason to give it to them. WotC just went against something they've told their fans seemingly on a whim.

And this is true of many other areas of the game.

They assured us that the Mythic rarity wasn't going to turn into a tier of super-powerful cards just for power and rarity's sake, but that it was to be filled with things that felt mythic, like planeswalkers, certain legends, and other very special-feeling cards. Things that really resonated. And sure, we got some pretty fancy, interesting cards. But we also got shit like Vengevine, Consecrated Sphinx, and Massacre Wurm that were clearly just designed to be mechanically powerful, and have no flavor whatsoever.

We were told that we had to let go of long-time fan favorite Grizzly Bears, because the idea of plain old, non-magical, real-life creatures in a fantasy setting was silly and boring (you know, like a Brindle Boar or Horned Turtle), and creatures with plural names were confusing and unflavorful (hey, sorta like Tireless Missionaries or Goblin Bangchuckers!). I guess I have to admit though, Grizzly Bears was particularly bad, since it was both; nothing like those beautiful and newly-designed Guardian Lions!

Then there was the REALLY egregious one, where they broke probably the most important promise WotC has ever made: they said they'd never change the back of a Magic card, ever. We see how that turned out.
Let this be a lesson: WotC does whatever the hell it wants, regardless of the promises they've made to their long-time fans and customers.

Okay, rant done. What, this card? Sure, I guess it's fine or whatever.

@Continue: That's idiotic. Just because there are certain things I don't like about the game (namely the practices of the the company producing it), doesn't mean I dislike the game in its entirety. That's like saying "Don't like carrots? Stop eating food!"