Last week's vote is so close, that WotC is going to have a run off vote between the two top contenders, Enchantments and Lands.

Robby Rothe over at MTG Color Pie offered some well needed commentary on the voting. In his article, he encouraged everyone to vote for Enchantments. I happen to agree with his assessments.

"Enchantments can be almost any mechanic you want. You can make them beneficial for you, or just hurt your opponents. It may be an aura, it may not. They can be Johnny/Spike and Timmy enchantments, or any combination of the above. Enchantments can be the pinnacle of a game instead of just the stepping stone. That’s so nice about the card type: it can fit into any role you want it to."

In contrast, any Land that the community designs is more than likely going to do one of five things.

- A Strip Mine or a Dust Bowl effect.
- A fetchland (ala Polluted Delta).
- A “Man-Land” (ala Mishra’s Factory).
- Something that taps for more than one mana.
- Something that taps for every color of mana.

"Some might ask why I’m so anti-lands (I’ve seen it in some of the forums around). It’s not that I don’t like lands, but this contest isn’t about trying to prove a point. We actually have a chance to make a real Magic card and people want to suggest a land to fix their mana? That’s like getting a Major League baseball at bat and trying to draw a walk rather than trying to hit a home run. Sure, the walk is safer and you have a better change of getting on base, but you’re not really swinging for the fences, are you? Walks aren’t remembered, home runs are. I believe that both Forgotten Ancient and Crucible of Worlds were home runs; why not try again? Who knows if or when we’ll ever get this shot again, and with enchantments, I feel like we’re taking that swing. WotC isn’t going to give us Search the City as much as they aren’t going to give us Wasteland.

I’m endorsing Enchantments this time around. Not only is there more room for design but there’s just more fun to be had with enchantments. You play your lands to cast your enchantments; it’s like eating your vegetables to get to your desert. Before you vote land, look up at the five bullets points at the beginning of this post. If your design that you have in mind matches one of those points, please rethink your vote. This is the card of the people: do we really want it to be a land to search for another land?"

If you haven't already, click here to vote! Everyone counts!

Once again, I voted for Enchantment. As has been noted, there are simply a much wider range of options available.

Hmm... I wonder if they'll accept enchantment creatures when the time comes to submit designs. Lucent Liminid needs friends.

I voted lands the first time, but went for enchantment in the runoff. I can see the point that you have a lot more flexibility to make something amazing on an enchantment than on a land.

As evidence of this, take a look at what happened to Gemstone Caverns, which was originally a submission from the invitational. We the players voted on which of the non-winners submissions we'd like to see as a Magic card, and we chose the land. It's a powerful effect, so it got nerfed in development, and no one played it.

I dispute that Lands cannot offer as much creative space as Enchantments (Dark Depths, Tomb of Urami, and Maze's End are all pretty interesting cards), but I agree that the likelihood of a truly creative and interesting Land is much smaller.