Or it may not be necessary at all. Basic land types were included in color identity rules before commander was in Wizards comprehensive rules. The color identity of Badlands has been black and red since the idea of color identity was invented. The Rules Committee didn't have rule 903.5d when that determination was made. They still don't, basic land type restrictions aren't mentioned in the rules maintained by the rules committee. Why? Because they don't have to. Because the color identity restriction covers it.bobthefunny wrote: ↑1 year agoIf that were true, there would be no reason for 903.5d, Yes, the lands have that intrinsic ability, but that's still in the rules, and not on the card - and CI looks at what's on the card. While the lands are granted that ability, that ability is not actually on the card, it's in the rules. Exactly like extort. On the card, it is only there as reminder text. This is why 903.5d is there and necessary.
If that rule is necessary, and the color identity of Blood Crypt isn't black and red in the comprehensive rules, the comprehensive rules were written incorrectly. That's not their rule to change.
Basic lands do have oracle text. It's stupid oracle text, Forest just says "G", and so forth for the rest, but it's there. It's so dumb that 3rd party card databases cite the reminder text instead, but oracle text is official, even when super dumb. And technically, it's enough to officially establish color identity in the official rules text of all the basics, without having any rules meaning whatsoever. Point is, Wizards can do some dumb things and make mistakes like anyone else, and unless a RC member wants to pop in and tell me that Blood Crypt has a colorless color identity, I'm going to believe Wizards either did a dumb here or added the extra clarification to be as unambiguous as possible. And if that does happen, I'll have to ask them "since when" and "why are your deck construction rules glaringly incomplete?"Basic lands do not have rules text.