Topic: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

Hi, I'm doing some casual magic with some friends and I'm not in the mood (yet) to buy any chocklands so for now I'm using gates in my multicolored decks.

But something hit me, since the gates come in tapped anyway, isn't it better to run Terramorphic Expanse instead of a gate, since both effectively enters the play tapped. (Due to price I'm not talking about the fetchlands in which you have to pay 1 life, since they are really expensive)

The upside of the gate is that it can generate 2 different colors, but I'm not that sure that that is a problem since you'll always be able to fetch the land you need the most with the fetchland. And the fetchland has the additional benefit of also thinning your deck

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

in a multi-color deck i feel that gates are more benificial. where as in a mono colored deck the "fetch" is better. however the "fetch" can be used in multi color very effectivly. i only caution to be wary of useing to many nonbasic lands that come into play tapped as it will greatly slow your play down

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

I wouldn't pay tapping fetchlands like Terramorphic Expanse in a mono-colored because, just as you say, they slow you down and I don't think it outweighs the thinning

I think that if you run more than 2 colors, gates might increase in value, but for dual-colored I'm not sure. the fetchlands will hopefully help you gain an even spread of lands.

I'll have to swap out my gates for fetchlands and try and see smile

Last edited by RichoDemus (2013-07-17 07:47:40)

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

why not add one playset of a fetch
then that gives you both acceleration (thinning) as well as a color balance with gates

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

tav2smart4u wrote:

why not add one playset of a fetch

Sorry I don't understand hmm

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

These are actual fetch lands and used with the shocks in modern. http://www.ebay.com/bhp/zendikar-fetch-lands

I agree that i would probably play Terramorphic expanse over gates if I didn't have access to the other.  I do prefer the farseek with shocks though.  If money is an issue then this is probably the best option. Alternatively you can "fetch" gates with Maze's end.

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

elpablo wrote:

These are actual fetch lands and used with the shocks in modern. http://www.ebay.com/bhp/zendikar-fetch-lands

I agree that i would probably play Terramorphic expanse over gates if I didn't have access to the other.  I do prefer the farseek with shocks though.  If money is an issue then this is probably the best option. Alternatively you can "fetch" gates with Maze's end.

Yeah, I know of the "better" fetchlands but they are a little to costly smile

You mean farseek as a replacement for fetchlands?

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

yeah, I think it's a valid strategy.  The standard midrange decks have been running farseak for the last year.  It has the benefit of ramping and thinning, so you get  a little bit of both worlds.  I'd still want the shocks though. smile

  • ZebN
  • Member
  • Offline

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

I would say that both have their advantages and disadvantages.

For example if you are playing a Landfall heavy deck then the fetch lands are going to give you more bang for your buck (allowing 2 Landfall triggers per turn).  However barring this I would give a slight advantage to the Gates over the fetch lands, and here's why.

Typically with the fetch lands you need them to supplement your mana base instead of replace mana slots.  So for example if you are running a 3 color deck with 22 lands you will need fetch lands on top of that base to fix your mana, thereby taking up spots in your deck that could be filled by spells.  So if you are running 22 lands and 4 fetch lands essentially your mana base becomes 26, which is a drag.

Gates don't have this problem, since they are replacing mana in your deck.  In the 22 lands example above you would just replace the basic lands with gates of your choice, and still only have a base of 22 mana.

Also, gates provide more flexible mana fixing throughout the whole game.  When you use a fetch land and grab a Plains, that's a Plains until the end of the game.  But if you had an Azorius Guildgate, you could tap it for White or for Blue as the situation arises as the game continues.  When running more than 2 colors this flexibility gets more and more important.

Just my feelings on the two options. smile

Re: Aren't fetchlands better than gates?

I'm coming to this discussion late, but here are my two cents.

First off, the modern "fetchlands," i.e. Arid Mesa, are easily much better than gates and the less sought after "fetches" like Evolving Wilds and Terramorphic Expanse.  They let you get shocks, they get dual colors, lots of stuff.  They're staples in modern and legacy decks too - hence their hefty pricetags.

So if we exclude them for a moment, the focus seems to be on the comparison between playing gates and the lesser fetches (Wilds/Expanse).  To this end, they're both not bad options especially in a standard format that's about to lose all the M13 and Innistrad duals.

Why go Gate?
Gates offer the benefit of a dual color land.  If you're running something with a LOT of color specific casting costs, well, this wins hands down.  Yes, it comes in tapped just like the basic from the baby fetches, but which would you rather have?  A tapped basic or a tapped dual?  The key here is the flexibility - which comes at the cost of some speed.  (Nevermind the shenanigans if you start playing Maze's End or some of the gatekeepers).

Why go Baby Fetches?
These are often best suited if you're running a deck that really just has to worry about splashes of other colors.  Much like the group has pointed out, Farseek has been huge over the past year as it would let people go grab the shocks they need for all their color fixing.  Admittedly the baby fetches cannot go grab a shock for you, but if you only need ONE white symbol in a deck, you can easily drop in a single plains, some shocks that have white, and perhaps 2-3 baby fetches with the knowledge that you will be able to get that white symbol rather reliably.  BUT, perhaps more importantly, the baby shocks come with the added advantage of helping to thin out the remaining cards in your deck.  It might not seem like much, but if you have 50 some odd cards remaining in your library, removing that one more land will increase your odds of drawing that one card you're looking for, improving deck flow and consistency.

So which is better?  Well, to be honest, it's entirely situational.  If you're running two colors (or more) you should run the gates as they're essentially duals, just a bit slower than we've admittedly been spoiled having.  If you're just splashing a color, the baby fetches will work in your favor in a few ways.

Then again, Theros might give us reprints of the original fetches for all we know...