I'm asking about Batterskull with Sapphire Charm targeting the Germ token, choosing the "phasing mode".
I'm quite aware of the "conventional wisdom" view that the Batterskull stays phased out forever, and would like only actual judges or former judges to respond, please
Quote from Comprehensive Rules »
702.25f When a permanent phases out, any Auras, Equipment, or Fortifications attached to that
permanent phase out at the same time. This alternate way of phasing out is known as phasing
out “indirectly.” An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won’t phase in
by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it’s attached to.
There are at least two ways to interpret this:
1) The aura/equipment/fortification only phases in if the attached permanent is there to phase in with it
2) The aura/equipment/fortification phases in attached to the same permanent if possible, and unattached otherwise.
The reason I think the second interpretation is viable is the following (and/or the normal replacement effect rules):
Quote from Comprehensive Rules »
702.25a Phasing is a static ability that modifies the rules of the untap step. During each player’s
untap step, before the active player untaps his or her permanents, all phased-in permanents with
phasing that player controls “phase out.” Simultaneously, all phased-out permanents that had
phased out under that player’s control “phase in.”
So when you phase out a Batterskull token, the Batterskull clearly gets phased out. The token disappears. The Batterskull is considered to have been phased out "indirectly". Now you have a choice... you can violate 702.25a "all phased-out permanents that had phased out under that players control 'phase in.'" Alternately, you can violate 702.25f that the Batterskull phases in "along with the permanent it's attached to."
Note that under either rule your Batterskull still phases back in (or tries to do so). If you simply apply both rules as normal replacement effects, your Batterskull still phases back in. Only by selectively reading 702.25f to apply only the restriction that it "won't phase in by itself" can you argue that the Batterskull stays "phased out". The "won't phase in by itself" is only part of the rule, though. It has a replacement effect for phasing in "by itself" - instead it (still) phases in, but "along with" the permanent to which it is attached.
Are there any high-level judges on MTGS who could shed light on this?
You are not violating either rule. 702.5a only applies to cards that are directly phased out so does not apply to this situation.
702.5f states that if something is indirectly phased out it will only returned when the thing it returns to phases comes back in. As the token immeadiatly ceases to exist it will never return to the battlefield. So the batterskull that was attached to the germ token is looked out of the game until the current game ends.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
There are no replacement effects involved here. Where do you see one? The kinds of replacement effects are defined in rule 614.1; nothing here fits those definitions.
702.25f is really all you need to know what happens here, and the clause "won't phase in by itself" is quite clear. Even if you argue that 702.25a should make any phased out permanent phase in regardless if it was phased out directly or indirectly, 702.25f forbids it. "Can't" beats "can". Magic Golden Rule 101.2.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm a former judge (lapsed), who keeps up to date on rules and policy. Keep in mind that judges' answers aren't necessarily more valid than those of people who aren't judges; what matters is we can quote the rules to back up our answers. When in doubt, ask for such quotes.
You are not violating either rule. 702.5a only applies to cards that are directly phased out so does not apply to this situation.
702.5f states that if something is indirectly phased out it will only returned when the thing it returns to phases comes back in. As the token immeadiatly ceases to exist it will never return to the battlefield. So the batterskull that was attached to the germ token is looked out of the game until the current game ends.
That is certainly a reasonable interpretation of the rules, and if I got that interpretation from a judge at a tournament I would feel compelled (however reluctantly) to accept it and continue with my game.
Fortunately, we are not at a tournament and I will press the issue a little bit here.
702.5f does not exist. 702.5 is a section dealing with the keyword "Enchant" and only goes up to 702.5d. I think you mean 702.25f.
702.5a has nothing to do with phasing (it's Enchant). I think you mean 702.25a
Nowhere in the rules does it state that 702.25a only applies to cards that are directly phased out. I'm not sure what your justification is for that claim. Instead, the rule claims to apply to "all phased-out permanents that had phased out under that player's control" (no time frame or other restrictions mentioned).
702.25f does not "state" that if something is indirectly phased out it will only return when the thing it returns to phases comes back in (also not a proper sentence - perhaps an editing error in your post?). I posted the exact text above, and will re-post here:
Quote from Comprehensive Rules »
702.25f When a permanent phases out, any Auras, Equipment, or Fortifications attached to that
permanent phase out at the same time. This alternate way of phasing out is known as phasing
out “indirectly.” An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won’t phase in
by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it’s attached to.
"instead" clearly establishes a replacement effect
These items clearly "phase out" and are clearly permanents, so it would certainly appear that 702.25a applies to them.
I would contend that "by itself" and "along with" are not defined anywhere in the rules, and that the judge at an event must decide what they mean on the spot. I think judge could quite reasonably decide that "along with" modified how it phased in (i.e. still attached) or some sort of timing restriction (i.e. only when the attached-to permanent phases in).
Is there anything to disprove the idea that it is a judgement call, and that a judge at your local tournament could reasonably call it either way?
There are no replacement effects involved here. Where do you see one? The kinds of replacement effects are defined in rule 614.1; nothing here fits those definitions.
702.25f is really all you need to know what happens here, and the clause "won't phase in by itself" is quite clear. Even if you argue that 702.25a should make any phased out permanent phase in regardless if it was phased out directly or indirectly, 702.25f forbids it. "Can't" beats "can". Magic Golden Rule 101.2.
Like I said above, I think that interpretation is quite reasonable and I would be forced to accept it at a tournament. As we are not in a tournament, I will press the issue just a little bit.
614.1a - "instead" establishes a replacement effect
702.25f - "instead" of phasing in by itself, it phases in "along with" the attached-to permanent
The replacement-effect nature of what goes on does not seem controversial to me.
I have a strong feeling that this whole thread is for trolling purposes.
What makes you think that the rules would be any different during a tournament vs outside of one? The same rules apply regardless of where you are.
Your question has been answered pretty clearly in my opinion. 614.1a is talking about writing on cards. It does not mean that anytime you can find the word "instead" somewhere in the CR, that it is talking about a replacement effect.
702.25f clearly states that an equipment will not phase back in by itself. It will continue to sit there, phased out, waiting for the germ token to phase back in, so that it can come with it. Since the germ will never phase back in, the batterskull will sit there waiting for it for the rest of the game.
I have a strong feeling that this whole thread is for trolling purposes.
What makes you think that the rules would be any different during a tournament vs outside of one? The same rules apply regardless of where you are.
Your question has been answered pretty clearly in my opinion. 614.1a is talking about writing on cards. It does not mean that anytime you can find the word "instead" somewhere in the CR, that it is talking about a replacement effect.
702.25f clearly states that an equipment will not phase back in by itself. It will continue to sit there, phased out, waiting for the germ token to phase back in, so that it can come with it. Since the germ will never phase back in, the batterskull will sit there waiting for it for the rest of the game.
I am not trolling, and I do not welcome the accusation. I am aware of the "conventional wisdom" of the interaction, and your comment makes me hesitant to come to the rules subforum and try to see what underlies that conventional wisdom.
I think the rules would be the same, but inside of a tournament I wouldn't press the issue. Judges have finite time and finite attention and other duties. A forum is different in that you're not obligated to stand there and deal with me if I prove troublesome or thick (unintentionally, I assure you, but I am aware that I take that risk by furthering the discussion).
No, it states that it does not phase in "by itself". Instead it phases in "along with" the attached-to permanent. Does "along with" modify the property of being still attached, or the timing?
For example, if I run Sapphire Charm and attempt to use it to permanently "phase out" my opponent's Batterskull, would I have any grounds to expect that the Batterskull stays phased out indefinitely, or just the hope that the judge at the tournament has a majority opinion that happens to align with yours?
Is there a ruling? Is there any sort of clarification anywhere as to what "along with" actually means? This is what I am trying to get at.
About replacement effects, you're missing this word here: 614.1a. Effects that use the word "instead" are replacement effects...
Effects are defined by 609.1 as "something that happens in the game as a result of a spell or ability. When a spell, activated ability, or triggered ability resolves, it may create one or more one-shot or continuous effects. Static abilities may create one or more continuous effects. Text itself is never an effect."
Indirect Phasing in 702.25f is not a "continuous effect from a static ability", much less a "one-shot effect from resolving spell or ability"
"Instead" in an effect indicates that effect is a replacement effect. "Instead" in a rule has just its regular English meaning. The rule can't be a replacement effect because it's not an effect in the first place.
Is there a ruling? Is there any sort of clarification anywhere as to what "along with" actually means? This is what I am trying to get at.
If you can't find any special definition for a expression in the rules, it will simply have the regular English meaning.
Batterskull being phased out indirectly with its Germ token won't phase in "by itself" ( = "alone", "unaided"). Period.
It would phase in "along with" ( = "in company with" or "at the same time as") the Germ token, if the token hadn't ceased to exist.
It won't phase in by itself, and it can't phase in along with the token. So it'll stay phased out for the rest of the game.
I don't believe there is a problem or ambiguity with the wording of those rules, but even if there is, this is not the best place to productively discuss it; these forums are for explaining how the rules actually apply. And how these rules actually apply at the moment, officially and by consensus, is that Batterskull doesn't phase in. While they may be imperfect, and you might have found a loophole in them, I don't think you can argue the intent of the rules, i.e. that a indirectly phased out permanent should not phase in if the permanent it was attached to doesn't. We can fetch an official answer by a Wizards netrep if you want, which would settle the "judgement call" problem.
In the meantime, a last argument from me : if that wasn't the intent, why would the sentence "An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won’t phase in by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it’s attached to" need to be in the rule? If that sentence didn't exist, those permanents would just phase in as per 702.25a.
There exists forums on rules theory and templating and for suggesting changes to the CR to Wizards, on their official website : http://community.wizards.com/forums/107121. I suggest you take your claim there if you hope for it to result in something, but honestly, I think people will just argue against you and dismiss it. It's your call.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm a former judge (lapsed), who keeps up to date on rules and policy. Keep in mind that judges' answers aren't necessarily more valid than those of people who aren't judges; what matters is we can quote the rules to back up our answers. When in doubt, ask for such quotes.
Glad to hear you're not trolling, I'm more than happy to answer actual questions anytime.
In answer to your question, "along with", means that it will only phase back in when the permanent it was attached to phases back in. So if a non-token creature with an equipment attached phases out, the equipment will only come back along with the creature. So in the case of a token creature, the equipment will sit there phased out forever, waiting for the token that it was attached to to phase back in. (Which will never happen.)
For example, if I run Sapphire Charm and attempt to use it to permanently "phase out" my opponent's Batterskull, would I have any grounds to expect that the Batterskull stays phased out indefinitely, or just the hope that the judge at the tournament has a majority opinion that happens to align with yours?
Batterskull is not usually a legal target for Sapphire Charm. However if you mean using it to phase out the germ token, then yes, the batterskull is going to stay phased out, unless your opponent has some way to prevent this, for example if they return the batterskull to hand in response to your charm.
Any judge at a tournament is going to tell you same thing. If one were to tell you something else, I would recommend appealing to the head judge.
About replacement effects, you're missing this word here: 614.1a. Effects that use the word "instead" are replacement effects...
MadMageQc has a point because rules are not effects.
Effects are defined by 609.1 as "something that happens in the game as a result of a spell or ability. When a spell, activated ability, or triggered ability resolves, it may create one or more one-shot or continuous effects. Static abilities may create one or more continuous effects. Text itself is never an effect."
Indirect Phasing in 702.25f is not a "continuous effect from a static ability". So the "instead" in that rule just has its regular English meaning, without indicating a replacement effect.
Is there a ruling? Is there any sort of clarification anywhere as to what "along with" actually means? This is what I am trying to get at.
Those words have the regular English meaning.
Batterskull being phased out indirectly with its Germ token won't phase in by itself. Period.
It would phase in "along with" ( = "in company with" or "at the same time as") the Germ token, if the token hadn't ceased to exist.
It won't phase in by itself, and the token itself will never phase in because it ceased to exist. So the Batterskull can't phase in at all.
You're quite right about the replacement effect bit. I was simply wrong to use the term "effect". It has a well-defined rules meaning that simply does not apply.
My problem is that I don't feel "along with" is at all clear or well-defined here. You are assuming that the attached-to permanent "drags" the indirectly phased out permanent onto the battlefield (or perhaps they proceed hand-in-hand). An interpretation equally consistent with both the MTG rules and normal English is that the Equipment/Aura/Fortification "drags" the attached-to permanent onto the battlefield. To wit: instead of phasing in "by itself" the equipment phases in "along with" (i.e. 'bringing along') the attached-to permanent.
I think this is very much a matter of interpretation and the patterns of a person's speech (how do they use "by itself" and "along with"?)
That said, it is clear that the majority has settled on a particular interpretation, at least in this subforum.
I will leave it at that.
Thank you all for your patience and careful understanding of the rules.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am the author of the "Resource Advantage in Magic" series over on EternalCentral.com
First, since the question involves the way a mechanic works and is not about a tournament setting, there shouldn't be any exclusion of people who aren't judges to answer the question. Just because a person is rules-savvy doesn't mean they're automatically a judge.
The word "instead" on the effect of a permanent denotes a replacement effect. The word "instead" in a CR rule does not automatically denote a replacement effect. A rule isn't an effect; it's not "something that happens as a result of a spell or ability" (609.1).
The phrase "along with" denotes "at the same time as". That's what the phrase means in plain English. Other than words that are specifically defined to mean something within the game, all other terms are assumed to use their regular English definition.
EDIT: I guess I'm slow at typing today.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How to use card tags (please use them for everybody's sanity)
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format Minimum deck size: 60 Maximum number of identical cards: 4 Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
First, since the question involves the way a mechanic works and is not about a tournament setting, there shouldn't be any exclusion of people who aren't judges to answer the question. Just because a person is rules-savvy doesn't mean they're automatically a judge.
The word "instead" on the effect of a permanent denotes a replacement effect. The word "instead" in a CR rule does not automatically denote a replacement effect. A rule isn't an effect; it's not "something that happens as a result of a spell or ability" (609.1).
The phrase "along with" denotes "at the same time as". That's what the phrase means in plain English. Other than words that are specifically defined to mean something within the game, all other terms are assumed to use their regular English definition.
EDIT: I guess I'm slow at typing today.
Yeah, I was warned over the judge issue. I didn't realize that was a rule, but it is, and I quite clearly broke it.
I said I would refrain from arguing the point (due to apparent consensus over which of the many English meanings of the phrase "along with" is to be used) and with great effort I am doing so.
Edit: Some food for thought: There used to be a rule that when a token phased out the attached items remained phased out indefinitely. Perhaps this is what drives the consensus interpretation. That rule (previously 217.8d) no longer exists.
Edit: Some food for thought: There used to be a rule that when a token phased out the attached items remained phased out indefinitely. Perhaps this is what drives the consensus interpretation. That rule (previously 217.8d) no longer exists.
I'm not sure why you keep saying "consensus interpretation". You've been given rulings from multiple judges just in this thread, but seem unwilling to accept them because you're determined that the rules are unclear.
If you have further questions, or if there is really something you don't understand, feel free to PM me (or probably anyone else in this thread). Otherwise, accept that what you thought wasn't clear is pretty clear to others, and be happy that you now understand it!
Edit: Some food for thought: There used to be a rule that when a token phased out the attached items remained phased out indefinitely. Perhaps this is what drives the consensus interpretation. That rule (previously 217.8d) no longer exists.
Since at least 2012 the 200 rules section has been concerned with the various parts of a card, so it would never have included anything to do with phasing.
Either way that rule still exists in 702.25k and 702.25f which you quoted earlier.
Quote from comp rules »
702.25k Phased-out tokens cease to exist as a state-based action. See rule 704.5d.
Other than changes in numbering this rule has also been in existence with in the same form since that time.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
Edit: Some food for thought: There used to be a rule that when a token phased out the attached items remained phased out indefinitely. Perhaps this is what drives the consensus interpretation. That rule (previously 217.8d) no longer exists.
Since at least 2012 the 200 rules section has been concerned with the various parts of a card, so it would never have included anything to do with phasing.
Either way that rule still exists in 702.25k and 702.25f which you quoted earlier.
Quote from comp rules »
702.25k Phased-out tokens cease to exist as a state-based action. See rule 704.5d.
Other than changes in numbering this rule has also been in existence with in the same form since that time.
There was a rule that said very specifically that the indirectly phased out permanents would remain phased out forever if they had been on a token.
Now you can potentially reach that as a conclusion of other rules, not a rule in itself.
I saw this prior rule quoted in the official Wizards forum recommended by MadMageQc
to wit:
Quote from Comprehensive Rules, October 2008 »
217.8d Tokens in the phased-out zone cease to exist. This is a state-based effect (see rule 420, "State-Based Effects"). Any phased-out Auras, Equipment, or Fortifications that were attached to those tokens remain phased out for the rest of the game.
This rule no longer exists. It may be well be the logical conclusion of the current 702.25 rules, but this particular case is no longer addressed directly in the Comprehensive Rules.
I'm not sure why you keep saying "consensus interpretation". You've been given rulings from multiple judges just in this thread, but seem unwilling to accept them because you're determined that the rules are unclear.
If you have further questions, or if there is really something you don't understand, feel free to PM me (or probably anyone else in this thread). Otherwise, accept that what you thought wasn't clear is pretty clear to others, and be happy that you now understand it!
I shouldn't use the phrase "consensus interpretation" to refer to the case where everyone agrees on how to interpret a rule? Pardon? Could you explain that?
I shouldn't use the phrase "consensus interpretation" to refer to the case where everyone agrees on how to interpret a rule? Pardon? Could you explain that?
It's not an interpretation. It's what the rules actually mean. The former Rule 217.8d was removed because it was no longer necessary, as together the current Rules 702.25f and 704.5d (referenced by 702.25k) produce the same result.
Rhadamanthus, I can't effectively reply to that comment without risking quite a lengthy discussion. Perhaps you'd care to continue the discussion via PM?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am the author of the "Resource Advantage in Magic" series over on EternalCentral.com
Edit: Some food for thought: There used to be a rule that when a token phased out the attached items remained phased out indefinitely. Perhaps this is what drives the consensus interpretation. That rule (previously 217.8d) no longer exists.
The magic rulebook has little room for interpretation, and this is not one of the cases where it does. The rulebook is permissive, it doesn't list everything that can and can't possibly happen, because it would be a million pages long. Instead, it says "nobody can do anything and nothing can happen unless a rule or card says otherwise" then it lists the exceptions.
The rulebook is not a fill-in-the-dots book where you can wedge common sense between each rule. If the rulebook doesn't allow Batterskull to come back, then it doesn't come back. There is no rule that says indirectly phased out permanents phase in by themselves, so they don't.
The magic rulebook has little room for interpretation, and this is not one of the cases where it does. The rulebook is permissive, it doesn't list everything that can and can't possibly happen, because it would be a million pages long. Instead, it says "nobody can do anything and nothing can happen unless a rule or card says otherwise" then it lists the exceptions.
The rulebook is not a fill-in-the-dots book where you can wedge common sense between each rule. If the rulebook doesn't allow Batterskull to come back, then it doesn't come back. There is no rule that says indirectly phased out permanents phase in by themselves, so they don't.
702.25a says all phased out permanents phase in. It does not distinguish between direct and indirect phasing.
702.25f lays out "how" the indirectly phased permanents phase out and in.
The difference between permissive and restrictive rules is simply not relevant.
If the rule is unambiguous, then it can only be because a permanent phasing in "along with" another permanent is totally unambiguous.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am the author of the "Resource Advantage in Magic" series over on EternalCentral.com
I'd like to take a whack at hitting the nail on the head, by using what was stated in the original post.
702.25f When a permanent phases out, any Auras, Equipment, or Fortifications attached to that
permanent phase out at the same time. This alternate way of phasing out is known as phasing
out “indirectly.” An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won’t phase in
by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it’s attached to.
If you read carefully, this rule actively states that
An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won’t phase in
by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it’s attached to.
Now, it seems like the problem is that you didn't know how to interpret "along with" but the rules tell you.
An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won’t phase in by itself
Since we know that the token ceases to exist, those equipments and what not can not phase in on their own, they need the permanent they were attached to in order for them to phase back in. That rule covers it all. So, it isn't a widely held belief, it is in the rules, and works with any token that has anything attached to it. Not just batterskull.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Whats the big deal about black lotus you ask? Well you see, there is no big deal about it. It IS the big deal.
If your point is that the rules could be written more precisely then you might be right, though there's not much point to arguing it here. If your point is that Batterskull should phase in, then you are mistaken. Your reading of 702.25f is tortured. "'Can't' beats 'Can'" is one of Magic's golden rules (101.2).
I've decided, against the temptation, not to argue the point. There seems to be a pretty well-defined consensus on the issue. I would be happy to discuss more via PM if you're interested.
To put it differently: I asked a question and got an answer. I'm not particularly convinced by the answer, but this doesn't quite seem the place to dig deeper.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am the author of the "Resource Advantage in Magic" series over on EternalCentral.com
I'm quite aware of the "conventional wisdom" view that the Batterskull stays phased out forever, and would like only actual judges or former judges to respond, please
There are at least two ways to interpret this:
1) The aura/equipment/fortification only phases in if the attached permanent is there to phase in with it
2) The aura/equipment/fortification phases in attached to the same permanent if possible, and unattached otherwise.
The reason I think the second interpretation is viable is the following (and/or the normal replacement effect rules):
So when you phase out a Batterskull token, the Batterskull clearly gets phased out. The token disappears. The Batterskull is considered to have been phased out "indirectly". Now you have a choice... you can violate 702.25a "all phased-out permanents that had phased out under that players control 'phase in.'" Alternately, you can violate 702.25f that the Batterskull phases in "along with the permanent it's attached to."
Note that under either rule your Batterskull still phases back in (or tries to do so). If you simply apply both rules as normal replacement effects, your Batterskull still phases back in. Only by selectively reading 702.25f to apply only the restriction that it "won't phase in by itself" can you argue that the Batterskull stays "phased out". The "won't phase in by itself" is only part of the rule, though. It has a replacement effect for phasing in "by itself" - instead it (still) phases in, but "along with" the permanent to which it is attached.
Are there any high-level judges on MTGS who could shed light on this?
Trolling Warning
Kahedron
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
702.5f states that if something is indirectly phased out it will only returned when the thing it returns to phases comes back in. As the token immeadiatly ceases to exist it will never return to the battlefield. So the batterskull that was attached to the germ token is looked out of the game until the current game ends.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
702.25f is really all you need to know what happens here, and the clause "won't phase in by itself" is quite clear. Even if you argue that 702.25a should make any phased out permanent phase in regardless if it was phased out directly or indirectly, 702.25f forbids it. "Can't" beats "can". Magic Golden Rule 101.2.
That is certainly a reasonable interpretation of the rules, and if I got that interpretation from a judge at a tournament I would feel compelled (however reluctantly) to accept it and continue with my game.
Fortunately, we are not at a tournament and I will press the issue a little bit here.
702.5f does not exist. 702.5 is a section dealing with the keyword "Enchant" and only goes up to 702.5d. I think you mean 702.25f.
702.5a has nothing to do with phasing (it's Enchant). I think you mean 702.25a
Nowhere in the rules does it state that 702.25a only applies to cards that are directly phased out. I'm not sure what your justification is for that claim. Instead, the rule claims to apply to "all phased-out permanents that had phased out under that player's control" (no time frame or other restrictions mentioned).
702.25f does not "state" that if something is indirectly phased out it will only return when the thing it returns to phases comes back in (also not a proper sentence - perhaps an editing error in your post?). I posted the exact text above, and will re-post here:
"instead" clearly establishes a replacement effect
These items clearly "phase out" and are clearly permanents, so it would certainly appear that 702.25a applies to them.
I would contend that "by itself" and "along with" are not defined anywhere in the rules, and that the judge at an event must decide what they mean on the spot. I think judge could quite reasonably decide that "along with" modified how it phased in (i.e. still attached) or some sort of timing restriction (i.e. only when the attached-to permanent phases in).
Is there anything to disprove the idea that it is a judgement call, and that a judge at your local tournament could reasonably call it either way?
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
Like I said above, I think that interpretation is quite reasonable and I would be forced to accept it at a tournament. As we are not in a tournament, I will press the issue just a little bit.
614.1a - "instead" establishes a replacement effect
702.25f - "instead" of phasing in by itself, it phases in "along with" the attached-to permanent
The replacement-effect nature of what goes on does not seem controversial to me.
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
What makes you think that the rules would be any different during a tournament vs outside of one? The same rules apply regardless of where you are.
Your question has been answered pretty clearly in my opinion. 614.1a is talking about writing on cards. It does not mean that anytime you can find the word "instead" somewhere in the CR, that it is talking about a replacement effect.
702.25f clearly states that an equipment will not phase back in by itself. It will continue to sit there, phased out, waiting for the germ token to phase back in, so that it can come with it. Since the germ will never phase back in, the batterskull will sit there waiting for it for the rest of the game.
I am not trolling, and I do not welcome the accusation. I am aware of the "conventional wisdom" of the interaction, and your comment makes me hesitant to come to the rules subforum and try to see what underlies that conventional wisdom.
I think the rules would be the same, but inside of a tournament I wouldn't press the issue. Judges have finite time and finite attention and other duties. A forum is different in that you're not obligated to stand there and deal with me if I prove troublesome or thick (unintentionally, I assure you, but I am aware that I take that risk by furthering the discussion).
No, it states that it does not phase in "by itself". Instead it phases in "along with" the attached-to permanent. Does "along with" modify the property of being still attached, or the timing?
For example, if I run Sapphire Charm and attempt to use it to permanently "phase out" my opponent's Batterskull, would I have any grounds to expect that the Batterskull stays phased out indefinitely, or just the hope that the judge at the tournament has a majority opinion that happens to align with yours?
Is there a ruling? Is there any sort of clarification anywhere as to what "along with" actually means? This is what I am trying to get at.
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
614.1a. Effects that use the word "instead" are replacement effects...
Effects are defined by 609.1 as "something that happens in the game as a result of a spell or ability. When a spell, activated ability, or triggered ability resolves, it may create one or more one-shot or continuous effects. Static abilities may create one or more continuous effects. Text itself is never an effect."
Indirect Phasing in 702.25f is not a "continuous effect from a static ability", much less a "one-shot effect from resolving spell or ability"
"Instead" in an effect indicates that effect is a replacement effect. "Instead" in a rule has just its regular English meaning. The rule can't be a replacement effect because it's not an effect in the first place.
If you can't find any special definition for a expression in the rules, it will simply have the regular English meaning.
Batterskull being phased out indirectly with its Germ token won't phase in "by itself" ( = "alone", "unaided"). Period.
It would phase in "along with" ( = "in company with" or "at the same time as") the Germ token, if the token hadn't ceased to exist.
It won't phase in by itself, and it can't phase in along with the token. So it'll stay phased out for the rest of the game.
In the meantime, a last argument from me : if that wasn't the intent, why would the sentence "An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification that phased out indirectly won’t phase in by itself, but instead phases in along with the permanent it’s attached to" need to be in the rule? If that sentence didn't exist, those permanents would just phase in as per 702.25a.
There exists forums on rules theory and templating and for suggesting changes to the CR to Wizards, on their official website : http://community.wizards.com/forums/107121. I suggest you take your claim there if you hope for it to result in something, but honestly, I think people will just argue against you and dismiss it. It's your call.
In answer to your question, "along with", means that it will only phase back in when the permanent it was attached to phases back in. So if a non-token creature with an equipment attached phases out, the equipment will only come back along with the creature. So in the case of a token creature, the equipment will sit there phased out forever, waiting for the token that it was attached to to phase back in. (Which will never happen.)
Batterskull is not usually a legal target for Sapphire Charm. However if you mean using it to phase out the germ token, then yes, the batterskull is going to stay phased out, unless your opponent has some way to prevent this, for example if they return the batterskull to hand in response to your charm.
Any judge at a tournament is going to tell you same thing. If one were to tell you something else, I would recommend appealing to the head judge.
You're quite right about the replacement effect bit. I was simply wrong to use the term "effect". It has a well-defined rules meaning that simply does not apply.
My problem is that I don't feel "along with" is at all clear or well-defined here. You are assuming that the attached-to permanent "drags" the indirectly phased out permanent onto the battlefield (or perhaps they proceed hand-in-hand). An interpretation equally consistent with both the MTG rules and normal English is that the Equipment/Aura/Fortification "drags" the attached-to permanent onto the battlefield. To wit: instead of phasing in "by itself" the equipment phases in "along with" (i.e. 'bringing along') the attached-to permanent.
I think this is very much a matter of interpretation and the patterns of a person's speech (how do they use "by itself" and "along with"?)
That said, it is clear that the majority has settled on a particular interpretation, at least in this subforum.
I will leave it at that.
Thank you all for your patience and careful understanding of the rules.
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
The word "instead" on the effect of a permanent denotes a replacement effect. The word "instead" in a CR rule does not automatically denote a replacement effect. A rule isn't an effect; it's not "something that happens as a result of a spell or ability" (609.1).
The phrase "along with" denotes "at the same time as". That's what the phrase means in plain English. Other than words that are specifically defined to mean something within the game, all other terms are assumed to use their regular English definition.
EDIT: I guess I'm slow at typing today.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format
Minimum deck size: 60
Maximum number of identical cards: 4
Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
Yeah, I was warned over the judge issue. I didn't realize that was a rule, but it is, and I quite clearly broke it.
I said I would refrain from arguing the point (due to apparent consensus over which of the many English meanings of the phrase "along with" is to be used) and with great effort I am doing so.
Edit: Some food for thought: There used to be a rule that when a token phased out the attached items remained phased out indefinitely. Perhaps this is what drives the consensus interpretation. That rule (previously 217.8d) no longer exists.
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
I'm not sure why you keep saying "consensus interpretation". You've been given rulings from multiple judges just in this thread, but seem unwilling to accept them because you're determined that the rules are unclear.
If you have further questions, or if there is really something you don't understand, feel free to PM me (or probably anyone else in this thread). Otherwise, accept that what you thought wasn't clear is pretty clear to others, and be happy that you now understand it!
Since at least 2012 the 200 rules section has been concerned with the various parts of a card, so it would never have included anything to do with phasing.
Either way that rule still exists in 702.25k and 702.25f which you quoted earlier.
Other than changes in numbering this rule has also been in existence with in the same form since that time.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
There was a rule that said very specifically that the indirectly phased out permanents would remain phased out forever if they had been on a token.
Now you can potentially reach that as a conclusion of other rules, not a rule in itself.
I saw this prior rule quoted in the official Wizards forum recommended by MadMageQc
to wit:
This rule no longer exists. It may be well be the logical conclusion of the current 702.25 rules, but this particular case is no longer addressed directly in the Comprehensive Rules.
I shouldn't use the phrase "consensus interpretation" to refer to the case where everyone agrees on how to interpret a rule? Pardon? Could you explain that?
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
I'm Mike, from The Mana Pool.
Check out my Tapped Out profile and comment on my decks!
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
Spam warning issued. -Carsten
The magic rulebook has little room for interpretation, and this is not one of the cases where it does. The rulebook is permissive, it doesn't list everything that can and can't possibly happen, because it would be a million pages long. Instead, it says "nobody can do anything and nothing can happen unless a rule or card says otherwise" then it lists the exceptions.
The rulebook is not a fill-in-the-dots book where you can wedge common sense between each rule. If the rulebook doesn't allow Batterskull to come back, then it doesn't come back. There is no rule that says indirectly phased out permanents phase in by themselves, so they don't.
702.25a says all phased out permanents phase in. It does not distinguish between direct and indirect phasing.
702.25f lays out "how" the indirectly phased permanents phase out and in.
The difference between permissive and restrictive rules is simply not relevant.
If the rule is unambiguous, then it can only be because a permanent phasing in "along with" another permanent is totally unambiguous.
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/
If you read carefully, this rule actively states that
Now, it seems like the problem is that you didn't know how to interpret "along with" but the rules tell you.
Since we know that the token ceases to exist, those equipments and what not can not phase in on their own, they need the permanent they were attached to in order for them to phase back in. That rule covers it all. So, it isn't a widely held belief, it is in the rules, and works with any token that has anything attached to it. Not just batterskull.
To put it differently: I asked a question and got an answer. I'm not particularly convinced by the answer, but this doesn't quite seem the place to dig deeper.
Check it out!
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part-1-one-shot-resources/
http://www.eternalcentral.com/resource-advantage-in-magic-part2-tempo/
I've also written a short primer on Manaless Dredge in Vintage:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/the-dredge-of-glory-an-introduction-to-manaless-dredge-in-vintage/