Hybrid mana

User avatar
cryogen
GΘΔ†
Posts: 1056
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Westminster, MD
Contact:

Post by cryogen » 4 years ago

ISBPathfinder wrote:
4 years ago
Sheldon wrote:
4 years ago
REB's color and color identity are the same. What's the source of the confusion? The fact that the word blue is on it?

The simple thing that I remember is only mana symbols (that aren't in reminder text) matter.
I was more mentioning the fact that Red Elemental Blast can't counter or kill Memnarch. I know it and many do but I think it could be a confusing point for newer players. Its a very corner case and I don't think a lot of new players would end up in that situation but it highlights some of the confusion between color and color identity.
I see probably once a week in Facebook groups where a new(ish) player will ask a seemingly simple rules question about Commander. So while I agree with Sheldon that the rule is 99% clear (I'M STILL LOOKING AT YOU, EXTORT), I can appreciate where players see the initial confusion. Especially since Commander/Brawl/Tiny Leaders are the only formats to my knowledge that use the concept of color identity.
Sheldon wrote:You're the reason we can't have nice things.

Tags:

User avatar
Dunharrow
Posts: 1821
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Montreal

Post by Dunharrow » 4 years ago

I used to be in favour of loosening the rules about hybrid. I remember looking at Shaman of the Great Hunt and wanting to play it in Marchesa, the black rose.

I also looked at Ramos, Dragon Engine vs Birds of Paradise, noting that their mana production abilities were templated so differently that BoP could be in any green deck and Ramos could only be in 5 color decks. I really wish Ramos could have been templated as "Add two mana of each color".

But then, reading Sheldon's comments on Hybrid mana in Commander, I changed my mind. As is, the rules are much more clear cut than any alternative I have seen suggested. The simplest, most straightforward option is going to the best here.

I agree that Extort is weird though. I think the triggered ability should have been Black. Not an either/or, just Black. Monowhite getting life drain is weird. But Monoblack should have it.
But, no real point in debating it - as it stands, I think it should be considered hybrid. It is a triggered ability with a cost. It is similar to Alesha, Who Smiles at Death's triggered ability. Just because they made a keyword for it, doesn't mean it isn't the same situation.

I say this knowing that I have multiple decks that would be hurt to have Extort made officially W+B.
The New World fell not to a sword but to a meme

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

To be fair it makes no damn sense that "add 1 mana of any color" has a different color identity than "add W, U, G, R, or B"

Pretty serious flaw with the color identity rules from a mana production standpoint :)

User avatar
ISBPathfinder
Bebopin
Posts: 2154
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: SD, USA

Post by ISBPathfinder » 4 years ago

Dunharrow wrote:
4 years ago
I used to be in favour of loosening the rules about hybrid. I remember looking at Shaman of the Great Hunt and wanting to play it in Marchesa, the black rose.

I also looked at Ramos, Dragon Engine vs Birds of Paradise, noting that their mana production abilities were templated so differently that BoP could be in any green deck and Ramos could only be in 5 color decks. I really wish Ramos could have been templated as "Add two mana of each color".

But then, reading Sheldon's comments on Hybrid mana in Commander, I changed my mind. As is, the rules are much more clear cut than any alternative I have seen suggested. The simplest, most straightforward option is going to the best here.

I agree that Extort is weird though. I think the triggered ability should have been Black. Not an either/or, just Black. Monowhite getting life drain is weird. But Monoblack should have it.
But, no real point in debating it - as it stands, I think it should be considered hybrid. It is a triggered ability with a cost. It is similar to Alesha, Who Smiles at Death's triggered ability. Just because they made a keyword for it, doesn't mean it isn't the same situation.

I say this knowing that I have multiple decks that would be hurt to have Extort made officially W+B.
For what its worth, there is some precedent of life syphon like effects outside of extort for white:

Pious Evangel
Inquisitor Exarch
Suture Priest

The effect is a bit of a stretch for white but I just thought I would mention there are a few other similarish cases of basis for this. Its definately a stretch for the color but its probably also worth pointing out that a lot more of the extort cards are black or black / white than just being white.
[EDH] Vadrok List (Suicide Chads) | Evelyn List (Vamp Mill) | Sanwell List | Danitha List | Indominus List | Ratadrabik List

Carthain
Posts: 5
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Carthain » 4 years ago

Dunharrow wrote:
4 years ago
I really wish Ramos could have been templated as "Add two mana of each color".
The problem with this is then you couldn't use it as your commander and include any cards with colour in them. With the mana symbols in the text box, then he can actually be used as a 5c commander. And I think WotC is conscious enough about Commander that they know if they templated it as "add two mana of each colour" then they'd get flack for creating a legendary creature that wants to be used in a 5c deck, but can't be the commander of a 5c deck.

User avatar
Dunharrow
Posts: 1821
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Montreal

Post by Dunharrow » 4 years ago

Carthain wrote:
4 years ago
Dunharrow wrote:
4 years ago
I really wish Ramos could have been templated as "Add two mana of each color".
The problem with this is then you couldn't use it as your commander and include any cards with colour in them. With the mana symbols in the text box, then he can actually be used as a 5c commander. And I think WotC is conscious enough about Commander that they know if they templated it as "add two mana of each colour" then they'd get flack for creating a legendary creature that wants to be used in a 5c deck, but can't be the commander of a 5c deck.
You are 100% correct. So then it becomes people who want this as a 5 color general vs people who want to play it in any deck. No matter what, one group will not be happy.

I am seriously waiting on any Jeskai legend with Partner so that I can have 5 color Reyhan and play this in the deck.
The New World fell not to a sword but to a meme

onering
Posts: 1227
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 4 years ago

ISBPathfinder wrote:
4 years ago
Dunharrow wrote:
4 years ago
I used to be in favour of loosening the rules about hybrid. I remember looking at Shaman of the Great Hunt and wanting to play it in Marchesa, the black rose.

I also looked at Ramos, Dragon Engine vs Birds of Paradise, noting that their mana production abilities were templated so differently that BoP could be in any green deck and Ramos could only be in 5 color decks. I really wish Ramos could have been templated as "Add two mana of each color".

But then, reading Sheldon's comments on Hybrid mana in Commander, I changed my mind. As is, the rules are much more clear cut than any alternative I have seen suggested. The simplest, most straightforward option is going to the best here.

I agree that Extort is weird though. I think the triggered ability should have been Black. Not an either/or, just Black. Monowhite getting life drain is weird. But Monoblack should have it.
But, no real point in debating it - as it stands, I think it should be considered hybrid. It is a triggered ability with a cost. It is similar to Alesha, Who Smiles at Death's triggered ability. Just because they made a keyword for it, doesn't mean it isn't the same situation.

I say this knowing that I have multiple decks that would be hurt to have Extort made officially W+B.
For what its worth, there is some precedent of life syphon like effects outside of extort for white:

Pious Evangel
Inquisitor Exarch
Suture Priest

The effect is a bit of a stretch for white but I just thought I would mention there are a few other similarish cases of basis for this. Its definately a stretch for the color but its probably also worth pointing out that a lot more of the extort cards are black or black / white than just being white.
Two of those are from New Phyrexia, which counts every bit as much as planar chaos when it comes to setting color pie precedents, and the other is from the black side of the transform card (which seems like a cop out way to say it's black)

illakunsaa
Posts: 251
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by illakunsaa » 4 years ago

This may be offtopic but not just remove the color identity rules entirely? I think the rule creates a lot of bad gameplay interactions and adds extra layer rules complexity. I don't see any upside for having color identity in the first place.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

illakunsaa wrote:
4 years ago
This may be offtopic but not just remove the color identity rules entirely? I think the rule creates a lot of bad gameplay interactions and adds extra layer rules complexity. I don't see any upside for having color identity in the first place.
Despite what the RC says I suspect that is the natural logical conclusion of EDH if they keep printing overpowered 5c legends and potentially revisit partners.

There're already very few approaches to the game that would not be better off as 4c partners, one of the 4c generals, or one of the busted 5c commanders.

User avatar
cryogen
GΘΔ†
Posts: 1056
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Westminster, MD
Contact:

Post by cryogen » 4 years ago

I dunno. Most 5c decks I see have been either thematic (tribal) or combo goodstuff. I don't think either of those two archetypes are a risk to the format.
Sheldon wrote:You're the reason we can't have nice things.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

cryogen wrote:
4 years ago
I dunno. Most 5c decks I see have been either thematic (tribal) or combo goodstuff. I don't think either of those two archetypes are a risk to the format.
I also see a lot of 5c superfriends and have seen a bit of 4c hatebears of various types (tymna+tana, tymna+thrasios).

Generally speaking "mana dorks and hatebears" used to be a fairly diverse set of generals (teeg, karador, ephara, anafenza, etc.) and they're all much worse than partners for the most part.

Golos has largely replaced all the previous 3c Lands commanders as well; really nothing you can do stronger in that archetype. Not to say no one plays other themes he's just better. His design alleviates a lot of the mana pressure too, allowing you to really focus on a small color spectrum but still be able to use his ability.

Spellslinger is another archetype I could see getting replaced by an overpowered 5c legend very easily.

Tymna+Thrasios, Atraxa, Jodah, Kenrith, Golos and Breya make up a pretty huge swath of the most popular generals and cover quite an array of archetypes.

onering
Posts: 1227
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 4 years ago

3 color lands was already replaced by the gates win for any land deck that wanted to do anything but durdle. Golos tutors for any land, and if you take away the gates win then the etb tutor is more important than 5 color.

Color identity is one of the key restrictions in the format. It is one of the biggest factors driving deck diversity. Removing it would do massive harm to the format by making it even more uniform than it is now. All hate bears decks would be exactly the same except for the commander. Combos would be even easier. It would be disgusting.

I personally don't see 2 color universal partners happening again. I see mono color universal partners and various restricted partners happening. Partner with cardname is just the beginning. Partner with shared color is another, and for a 2 color commander that makes color identity max out at 3. Partner with monocolor is another ( once monocolor Universal's exist).

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

onering wrote:
4 years ago
Color identity is one of the key restrictions in the format. It is one of the biggest factors driving deck diversity. Removing it would do massive harm to the format by making it even more uniform than it is now. All hate bears decks would be exactly the same except for the commander. Combos would be even easier. It would be disgusting.
So I think that it's true that color identity provides some deck diversity, but I think it's quite a bit less so with all the options for 5c and partners these days. It's already true that most hatebears decks should be Tymna+Tana or Tymna+Thrasios and are worse by not being them, and any infinite mana combo deck should be thrasios.

I think the main thing restraining people from playing 4c and 5c decks is not the rule so much as:
1) budget because manabases get really expensive really fast at 4c
2) desire to play something different

In the end I think removing color identity would probably create a bit of diversity as well since a lot of generals that are hot garbage because of color identity would be pretty good with another color or two.

I'm not really sure if I am in favor of removing the color identity rule, but I think it's probably an exaggeration to say it would be "Disgusting" because fundamentally nothing is stopping you from doing something more powerful with your theme -- there're probably not more than a handful of themes that do not have stronger alternatives in a partner pair or a 4c or 5c commander.

And it certainly neglects the added diversity of GW, GB, BUG and RUGW Thrun, the Last Troll decks.

Distinguishing between card diversity and commander diversity is probably important I guess, because while you would see tons of commander diversity there'd probably be a lot less card diversity -- that is, if you can splash green in ephara, god of the polis why wouldn't you, and the cards you play are fairly obvious (mana dorks, rec sage, birthing pod, green tutors).

onering
Posts: 1227
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 1
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by onering » 4 years ago

That's my point. It doesn't really matter if there's now 10 viable hate bear commanders if the only difference between the decks is the commanders themselves. Getting rid of color identity would open up 2 and 3 color Thrun decks, and promptly render them irrelevant as 4 and 5 color would be better options (or Thrun gets ignored altogether for a different hexproof commander). Thrasios dominates infinite Mana decks only partly because of partner, as he's a fantastic Mana sink on his own in colors that are great at doing infinite mana, so if color identity didn't exist he'd still dominate. Even if he didn't, I don't see 20 different infinite Mana commanders as diversity if they all generally play the same 99.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

onering wrote:
4 years ago
That's my point. It doesn't really matter if there's now 10 viable hate bear commanders if the only difference between the decks is the commanders themselves. Getting rid of color identity would open up 2 and 3 color Thrun decks, and promptly render them irrelevant as 4 and 5 color would be better options (or Thrun gets ignored altogether for a different hexproof commander). Thrasios dominates infinite Mana decks only partly because of partner, as he's a fantastic Mana sink on his own in colors that are great at doing infinite mana, so if color identity didn't exist he'd still dominate. Even if he didn't, I don't see 20 different infinite Mana commanders as diversity if they all generally play the same 99.
I think that philosophically this is where we differ; in general I think that people choose to play weaker commanders with weaker color identities would still choose to play weaker decks to keep the power level right, vs. all playing the same 5c piles.

Right now there are very few archetypes that would not be better as 4c or 5c. But Better is not what people are concerned with, otherwise they would build 4c/5c decks. Commander is largely a solved format at the upper power levels. Not to sidetrack into that but I think removing color identity would vastly improve diversity at the CEDH level -- the power level of many commanders is limited by not having access to blue/black or green. 4c Yisan would be very competitive with 4c tymna/Thrasios.

That said, the point is that people are already constraining themselves for the sake of diversity by not porting their deck designs to 4c/5c builds. And those who like to play higher powered versions of their existing generals (E.g. Rug kiki-Jiki) are free to do so.

I think you would see a *lot* of 2 and 3 color decks with mono-color generals and a metric ton of 3 color decks with 2 color generals.

Almost nobody casual likes the 4c and 5c manabases. They're atrocious, expensive, boring and extremely tedious.

Just to continue that example -- I suspect thrun, the last troll has a spot as one of the coolest voltron commanders ever if he has more colors. He's uncounterable, brings his own protection from many sweepers, and has a respectable rate.

Again, I'm not sure I am for removing color identity but I think it's a mistake to just say it would kill diversity without analyzing it.

Might be its own thread though :)

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

Maro talks about this for like 20 minutes solid here:
https://media.wizards.com/2020/podcasts ... wUd243.mp3

And no surprise I agree with him :)

User avatar
cryogen
GΘΔ†
Posts: 1056
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Westminster, MD
Contact:

Post by cryogen » 4 years ago

He is still rehashing the same old arguments though, which basically boil down to "as a designer this makes my mechanic not work to its full potential and that upsets me" while dismissing the entire purpose of the color identity rule.
Sheldon wrote:You're the reason we can't have nice things.

MRHblue
Posts: 102
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by MRHblue » 4 years ago

pokken wrote: So I think that it's true that color identity provides some deck diversity, but I think it's quite a bit less so with all the options for 5c and partners these days. It's already true that most hatebears decks should be Tymna+Tana or Tymna+Thrasios and are worse by not being them, and any infinite mana combo deck should be thrasios.
The whole point of the format is it can be broken, so why try? Saying some decks are 'better' or 'should be X partners' just flys in the face of the whole point. Letting people play 5c Glissa makes no sense, the decks would degenerate into goodstuff. But for now if you want to run her, and have access 100% of the time, you have to be Golgari. And thats just better than allowing 5c goodstuff all the time.

MaRo just doesnt get EDH, and seems to actively not try.

illakunsaa
Posts: 251
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by illakunsaa » 4 years ago

MRHblue wrote:
4 years ago
pokken wrote: So I think that it's true that color identity provides some deck diversity, but I think it's quite a bit less so with all the options for 5c and partners these days. It's already true that most hatebears decks should be Tymna+Tana or Tymna+Thrasios and are worse by not being them, and any infinite mana combo deck should be thrasios.
The whole point of the format is it can be broken, so why try? Saying some decks are 'better' or 'should be X partners' just flys in the face of the whole point. Letting people play 5c Glissa makes no sense, the decks would degenerate into goodstuff. But for now if you want to run her, and have access 100% of the time, you have to be Golgari. And thats just better than allowing 5c goodstuff all the time.

MaRo just doesnt get EDH, and seems to actively not try.
I highly doubt removing color id would make people play nothing but 5c goodstuff. Other formats aren't dominated by 5c goodstuff decks and even formats like highlander you still have mono color decks.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

illakunsaa wrote:
4 years ago
I highly doubt removing color id would make people play nothing but 5c goodstuff. Other formats aren't dominated by 5c goodstuff decks and even formats like highlander you still have mono color decks.
Yeah, part of my point is that you can play almost any deck style you want with partners, kenrith, golos, ramos, the first sliver, jodah, etc, already and they are better than almost anything else. So the format not devolving into 4-5c goodstuff is not because of the color identity rule its' because people like limitations.

I personally would not advocate for getting rid of color identity yet but I think there are reasons to think it wouldn't be as bad as people think. The most common thing you'd see is mono colored generals played as 2 or 3 colors.

But again, hybrid mana is *nowhere near* the size of change that color identity removal would be.

User avatar
cryogen
GΘΔ†
Posts: 1056
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Westminster, MD
Contact:

Post by cryogen » 4 years ago

My opinion is that allowing off color hybrids is the first step to removing the CI. All arguments for or against hybrids aside, I'm firmly against it simply because they are literally off-color cards and the format has always been one that uses restricted colors as a deck building restriction.
Sheldon wrote:You're the reason we can't have nice things.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

cryogen wrote:
4 years ago
My opinion is that allowing off color hybrids is the first step to removing the CI.
What makes you think that?

User avatar
Mookie
Posts: 3461
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 47
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: the æthereal plane

Post by Mookie » 4 years ago

pokken wrote:
4 years ago
cryogen wrote:
4 years ago
My opinion is that allowing off color hybrids is the first step to removing the CI.
What makes you think that?
Chipping in because I share this opinion. Don't let me put words in your mouth, but my own view is that there isn't a difference between the either-or logic that would be required to allow hybrid mana and the either-or logic required to allow twobrid mana, phyrexian mana, and alternate casting costs. And at that point, we might as well get rid of color identity entirely.

I do recognize that this is a bit of a slippery-slope argument - you could make a rule that explicitly allows hybrid mana while disallowing other things. But I also think that such a rule would be just as arbitrary as the color identity rules we already have in place, while also being unnecessarily complicated. I'm also of the opinion that a line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere, and that the line allowing hybrid mana is too close to the line that gets rid of color identity altogether.

User avatar
pokken
Posts: 6283
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: he / him

Post by pokken » 4 years ago

While I don't share the opinion that getting rid of color identity would necessarily be such a bad thing (for reasons previously discussed it has good and bad, whether you agree or not) I don't think that is something that would likely ever be under consideration. I don't see why the RC would suddenly start wanting to change that when they're so reluctant to even consider hybrid.

I am the first person to admit that slippery slopes can be slippery but in this case when there is such serious reluctance and it doesn't require any real philosophy change or anything I think it's a pretty low risk.

User avatar
cryogen
GΘΔ†
Posts: 1056
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Westminster, MD
Contact:

Post by cryogen » 4 years ago

Mookie wrote:
4 years ago
pokken wrote:
4 years ago
cryogen wrote:
4 years ago
My opinion is that allowing off color hybrids is the first step to removing the CI.
What makes you think that?
Chipping in because I share this opinion. Don't let me put words in your mouth, but my own view is that there isn't a difference between the either-or logic that would be required to allow hybrid mana and the either-or logic required to allow twobrid mana, phyrexian mana, and alternate casting costs. And at that point, we might as well get rid of color identity entirely.

I do recognize that this is a bit of a slippery-slope argument - you could make a rule that explicitly allows hybrid mana while disallowing other things. But I also think that such a rule would be just as arbitrary as the color identity rules we already have in place, while also being unnecessarily complicated. I'm also of the opinion that a line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere, and that the line allowing hybrid mana is too close to the line that gets rid of color identity altogether.
Mookie pretty much summed up my thoughts. Basically, my approach to Commander is that there are certain core aspects/features to the format which make it unique and add to its appeal. One of those is the concept of the color identity. Now, the way color identity has evolved over the years, starting at strictly the symbols in the mana cost, then adding mana symbols in the rules text, and finally removing the off-color mana generation rule ("Rule #4"). It is also worth noting that on several occasions members of the Rules Committee have made comments indicating that they wished this rule would encompass cards like off-color fetches, which I bring up only to show the strength of their desire to keep the deck identity "on-color".

So with that in mind, my approach to hybrid cards is very simple. They ARE multi colored cards. If I have a Slippery Boggle in my binder it is a blue card and a green card. If I cast it using all green mana my opponent can counter it with a Red Elemental Blast. If I cast Green Sun's Zenith I can find this card. These are all defined by the rules of the game. Similarly, the color identity rule and deck building restriction is defined by the rules of Commander. In this regard, hybrid cards work exactly as they were designed to work (even if they don't work as they were intended to). For this reason alone I feel that allowing off-color hybrid cards is the first step to removing the color identity rule altogether. Because you're literally saying "yes, you can play this green card in your mono-blue deck". But let's go further and talk about this notion of "intent".

MaRo has said on numerous occasions that as a designer hybrid doesn't work how it's supposed to. I sympathize with him on this, I really do. But at the same time, that's not a concern I share. And the reason is that it is a slippery slope argument, some parts having actual merit, and others having complete hyperbole. "Intent" of the design is that the card has flexibility. You don't need to have blue mana to cast that Boggle. Even though it's a blue and green card, you can cast it with blue or green mana, or any combination of the two (see Reaper King for the pinnacle of flexibility). But is this the only place in Magic design where we see this design intent of cards doing something which seemingly contradicts the rules? Of course not. We have:

- Twobrid mana,, where the intent is that you can spend colored mana OR colorless mana
- Phyrexian mana, where the intent is that you can spend colored mana OR pay life
- the Bringers cycle, where the intent is that you can cast them for their own color OR for WUBRG
- cards like Reanimate Dead where the intent is that you don't even need to cast them at all
- the Devoid mechanic, where the intent is that cards required colored mana but the cards themselves are colorless

And probably some other things I'm forgetting about when delving into the hyperbole (although it's worth noting that the first two examples are direct comparisons, and the third one is something that has been legitimately argued for many years). Now of course I'm not suggesting that we should allow all of these exceptions. But I am attempting to illustrate that when you move away from something concrete like rules and towards a more nebulas direction of desire and intent then it becomes very easy to make justifications and arguments supporting something which contradicts the norm.

The other argument that I hear frequently is that it is confusing and counter-intuitive. But I would posit that this is something which a) is exasperated by MaRo's continued discussions (and people repeating them), and b) something which is easily cleared up by explaining the color identity rule and why hybrid still falls under it. Because again, the heart of this argument can be summed up as "I want this card to work this way and not that way".

I think that pretty much covers my entire thought process on this matter.
Sheldon wrote:You're the reason we can't have nice things.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Rules and Philosophy”