If you want 602.5c more or less handles the interaction
If an object acquires an activated ability with a restriction on its use from another object, that restriction applies only to that ability as acquired from that object. It doesn’t apply to other, identically worded abilities.
The copied abilities would have the 'can only be used once per turn' clause but because they haven't been used...Or are you asking why the 'once per turn' clause is copied at all, when it doesn't seem to be a modification of the abilities granted but a separate ability that is part of the ability granting.
If you want 602.5c more or less handles the interaction
If an object acquires an activated ability with a restriction on its use from another object, that restriction applies only to that ability as acquired from that object. It doesn’t apply to other, identically worded abilities.
The copied abilities would have the 'can only be used once per turn' clause but because they haven't been used...Or are you asking why the 'once per turn' clause is copied at all, when it doesn't seem to be a modification of the abilities granted but a separate ability that is part of the ability granting.
Eli doesn't seem to be right on this. While it is true that a canonical activated ability with a restriction - let's say, Basking Rootwalla - has a syntax covered by rule 112.3b...
112.3b Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]” A player may activate such an ability whenever he or she has priority. Doing so puts it on the stack, where it remains until it’s countered, it resolves, or it otherwise leaves the stack. See rule 602, “Activating Activated Abilities.”
... Mairsil doesn't award that 'activation instruction' as part of the activated ability, but instead, as an additional effect of the (static) ability which gives those activated abilities to Mairsil.
As for 602.5c, I honestly can't tell what that rule is even doing. It looks to me like one of those overzealous rules that is indicating B is not equal to A. There is almost an argument of "rules-as-written" here. That is, Mairsil's static ability has an effect which gives the activated ability "a restriction on its use", so if we are considering the whole universe in that crucial word "with", then the abilities in this interaction count for this rule.
But, if you were going to get technical in that way, 602.5c doesn't actually say anything applies to anything. What that rule says is that something doesn't apply (and which, as I noted, is already a given with the understanding that abilities have distinct identities).
So, my answer to the posted question is "Well I certainly can't."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
"Discard a card: Wild Mongrel gets +1/+1 and becomes the color of your choice until end of turn."
"{1}{G}: Basking Rootwalla gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Activate this ability only once each turn."
and
"{U}: Quicksilver Elemental gains all activated abilities of target creature until end of turn."
Because of Marisils ability, you can every ability use just once per turn. So you could discard a card to buff Marisil, then pay 1 and a green to buff it again and then you pay blue, targetting Marisil, so it gets all abilities again. Then it has the follwong abilities:
"Discard a card: Wild Mongrel gets +1/+1 and becomes the color of your choice until end of turn."
"Discard a card: Wild Mongrel gets +1/+1 and becomes the color of your choice until end of turn."
"{1}{G}: Basking Rootwalla gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Activate this ability only once each turn."
"{1}{G}: Basking Rootwalla gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Activate this ability only once each turn."
"{U}: Quicksilver Elemental gains all activated abilities of target creature until end of turn."
"{U}: Quicksilver Elemental gains all activated abilities of target creature until end of turn."
Each of those abilities, you can only use once. So you can only choose the new ones. But now you can activate each new ability. So you can buff Marisil for +1/+1 by discarding a card, for +2/+2 by paying {1}{G} and you can pay {U} to get all the abilites again. Repeat often with enough mana.
What rule 602.5c does, is exactly that: If you have an ability, like that one of Basking Rootwalla, and you copy that ability in the way, like my example above, the rule states, that I can activate the ability with the same wording, as long it is another ability.
But that still doesn't actually explain Eli's ruling, as we have nothing so far that clearly appends Mairsil's restriction to the text of the abilities it acquires. It doesn't make any sense for Mairsil's static rule to affect the abilities it copied through an effect other than the Caging block of text, not from the information we're looking at so far.
An "activated ability with a restriction on its use" within the meaning of C.R. 602.5c means an activated ability with an activation instruction (within the meaning of C.R. 602.1a-b and C.R. 113.10a) containing such a restriction. Such instructions areThe text setting forth such instructions is "not part of the ability's effect" (C.R. 602.1b). The effect of Mairsil's second ability restricting when certain activated abilities can be activated doesn't change those abilities' textadds an activation instruction to those abilities, however (C.R. 113.10a) (see also The Chain Veil, whose activated ability also affects when certain abilities can be activated). But that doesn't mean that effect doesn't apply to such an activated ability (see also C.R. 101.2); notably, that effect applies to "each" of the abilities Mairsil gains due to its last ability.
The crux of the matter is the fact that two or more instances of an ability are involved. And C.R. 113.2c says: "If an object has multiple instances of the same ability, each instance functions independently", and that includes instances with identical wording.
EDIT (Sep. 28): Edited to conform to rule change for Ixalan, which takes effect tomorrow.
EDIT (Oct. 6; Mar. 18, 2018; Feb. 24, 2019): Further correctness edit.
EDIT (Jan. 26, 2020): Some rules were renumbered with Core Set 2020.
Meaning, peter? Perhaps some blame with the unwieldiness of this subject lies in the embedding of the original question within a link to an off-site body of text.
The question is, if Mairsil activates its "quicksilver" ability on itself, it gains some abilities it already has. BUT, Eli claims those abilities are also restricted in their use. If those abilities don't have an activation instruction written into them, then by all the foregoing logic, Mairsil restricts the first order of abilities from being used, but not the instances it gains from itself.
I believe this is what you have just now affirmed, but it's not crystal clear.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Meaning, peter? Perhaps some blame with the unwieldiness of this subject lies in the embedding of the original question within a link to an off-site body of text.
The question is, if Mairsil activates its "quicksilver" ability on itself, it gains some abilities it already has. BUT, Eli claims those abilities are also restricted in their use. If those abilities don't have an activation instruction written into them, then by all the foregoing logic, Mairsil restricts the first order of abilities from being used, but not the instances it gains from itself.
I believe this is what you have just now affirmed, but it's not crystal clear.
Mairsil's second ability applies only to "all activated abilities of all cards [Mairsil's controller] own(s) in exile with cage counters on them" (C.R. 109.5), not to any instances of abilities (within the meaning, that is, scope, of C.R. 112.2c) that Mairsil gains by any other means (including when the ability Mairsil gains from Quicksilver Elemental resolves), even if they have the same text or do the same thing.
EDIT (Sep. 28): Due to the rule change for Ixalan, which takes effect tomorrow, the effect of Mairsil's second ability adds an activation instruction to the abilities it gains due to that effect such that it "become(s) part of" the abilities gained this way (C.R. 113.10a). Thus, those instructions will carry over if any object (including Mairsil itself) gains any of those abilities from Mairsil.
EDIT (Jan. 26, 2020): Add citation to a rule, which was moved in the meantime, to the note from Sep. 28.
I'll start by saying that I am no judge, but I am generally well-versed with the rules.
To put peteroupc's citations more simply, if I understand correctly...
-An effect can add an ability to a card with the wording "gains" or "has" (112.10)
-Text which limits when you can activate an ability is not part of that ability's effect (602.1b)
It then follows that the limitation on when you can activate the abilities Mairsil "has" is not part of the effect which grants those abilities. Instead the abilities Mairsil "has" are limited by another separate ability (which so happens to be the one that granted them). Also worth noting is that Mairsil's "has" ability specifically refers to "those abilities".
If you look again at rule 602.5c...
602.5c If an object acquires an activated ability with a restriction on its use from another object, that
restriction applies only to that ability as acquired from that object. It doesn’
t apply to other,
identically worded abilities.
(emphasis mine)
peteroupc is saying that the underlined phrase refers specifically to the definition given by rule 602.1b, rather than generally to any ability with a restriction. This makes sense to me, as there is no other attempt to define "an activated ability with a restriction on its use" in the comprehensive rules and the underlined phrase alone without further definition is quite vague.
So, since we have established that the restriction is not included in the newly-acquired ability as part of Mairsil's second printed ability, is not referred to by rule 602.5c, and is not one of "those abilities" that Mairsil "has" as per his second printed ability, there is no reason to believe that the abilities granted by a caged Quicksilver Elemental's ability would be any more limited than those granted by a caged Havengul Lich's ability.
It then follows that the limitation on when you can activate the abilities Mairsil "has" is not part of the effect which grants those abilities. Instead the abilities Mairsil "has" are limited by another separate ability (which so happens to be the one that granted them). Also worth noting is that Mairsil's "has" ability specifically refers to "those abilities".
C.R. 602.1b, rather, refers to the "text" of the activation instructions setting forth those limitations, not to the limitations themselves. Notably, the sentence "This text is not part of the ability's effect" on C.R. 602.1b doesn't apply to the "You may activate each of those abilities only once each turn" on Mairsil's second ability (a static ability [C.R. 604.1]), which sets forth a continuous effect like any other (C.R. 611.1, 611.3).
EDIT (Dec. 20): Part of the text stricken for correctness.
I'll start by saying that I am no judge, but I am generally well-versed with the rules.
To put peteroupc's citations more simply, if I understand correctly...
-An effect can add an ability to a card with the wording "gains" or "has" (112.10)
-Text which limits when you can activate an ability is not part of that ability's effect (602.1b)
It then follows that the limitation on when you can activate the abilities Mairsil "has" is not part of the effect which grants those abilities. Instead the abilities Mairsil "has" are limited by another separate ability (which so happens to be the one that granted them). Also worth noting is that Mairsil's "has" ability specifically refers to "those abilities".
If you look again at rule 602.5c...
602.5c If an object acquires an activated ability with a restriction on its use from another object, that
restriction applies only to that ability as acquired from that object. It doesn’
t apply to other,
identically worded abilities.
(emphasis mine)
peteroupc is saying that the underlined phrase refers specifically to the definition given by rule 602.1b, rather than generally to any ability with a restriction. This makes sense to me, as there is no other attempt to define "an activated ability with a restriction on its use" in the comprehensive rules and the underlined phrase alone without further definition is quite vague.
So, since we have established that the restriction is not included in the newly-acquired ability as part of Mairsil's second printed ability, is not referred to by rule 602.5c, and is not one of "those abilities" that Mairsil "has" as per his second printed ability, there is no reason to believe that the abilities granted by a caged Quicksilver Elemental's ability would be any more limited than those granted by a caged Havengul Lich's ability.
602.5c actually says everything with regard to this interaction. Mairsil, the Pretender acquires abilities, and those abilities have a restriction as a result of the static effect that also grants the abilities. So even though the text of the ability copied doesn't have a restriction, the ability was acquired from an object (Mairsil) that imposed a restriction on the ability. So whether Quicksilver Elemental is acquiring abilities from Mairsil, Mairsil has caged Quicksilver Elemental and is using that ability on himself, or some other variant where Mairsil's abilities are being copied to himself or some other object, they will be restricted to once a turn use per 602.5c.
The last sentence of 602.5c clarifies that if you have the same ability twice, and one of them has a restriction while the other doesn't, even if identically worded, the restriction only applies to the one with the restriction. An example would be as such:
Mairsil has caged Llanowar Elves
Quicksilver Elemental copies Mairsil's abilities
Quicksilver Elemental copies Elvish Mystic's ability.
Quicksilver Elemental has two identically worded abilities (T: Add G to your mana pool) but one of them has an invisible restriction that allows you to activate it only once per turn since it came from Mairsil.
Mairsil has caged Llanowar Elves
Quicksilver Elemental copies Mairsil's abilities
Quicksilver Elemental copies Elvish Mystic's ability.
Quicksilver Elemental has two identically worded abilities (T: Add G to your mana pool) but one of them has an invisible restriction that allows you to activate it only once per turn since it came from Mairsil.
I'm afraid I must disagree, in part, with your scenario. Here, the ability Quicksilver Elemental gained from Mairsil doesn't have a restriction on when it can be activated. Again, Mairsil's second ability applies only tomakes Mairsil gain only "all activated abilities of all cards [Mairsil's controller] own(s) in exile with cage counters on them" (C.R. 109.5). The effect Mairsil has restricting when certain abilities can be activated applies only to certain abilities Mairsil itself has, and doesn't apply if another object acquires those abilities from Mairsil ("each of those abilities" means only "each of the abilities Mairsil has this way"). Moreover, an activated ability another object gains from Mairsil is a separate instance (within the meaning of C.R. 113.2c), and nothing in C.R. 602.5c implies that a "restriction on [an activated ability's] use" necessarily carries over when one object gains an activated ability from another (even when that restriction is not inherent to that ability as is the case with activation instructions [C.R. 602.1b] or loyalty abilities [C.R. 606.3]).
In any case, no other card imposes a restriction on when particular abilities can be activated besides an activation instruction (under C.R. 602.1a-b) onset forth in the text of, or otherwise inherent in, the activated ability itself (for example, loyalty abilities have an inherent restriction to them as they have loyalty symbols in their costs [C.R. 606.2, 606.3]), so that the text "a restriction on its use" on C.R. 602.5c was not very ambiguous, as it is now. It remains to be seen whether a future version of the rules will replace the text "a restriction on its use" on C.R. 602.5c with—
"an activation instruction imposing a restriction on its use",
"a restriction on its use, whether it appears as an activation instruction or otherwise", or
some other clarifying text.
EDIT (Sep. 28): Edited to conform to rule change for Ixalan, which takes effect tomorrow.
EDIT (Oct. 6): Further correctness edits.
EDIT (Jul. 29, 2019): Correctness edit.
EDIT (Jan. 26, 2020): One rule was renumbered with Core Set 2020.
EDIT (Mar. 6, 2021): Correctness edit.
Ultimately, wouldn't activating the Quicksilver ability give another copy of that very same ability that can effectively be activated again?
The only difference I can see between what people are debating about is whether I only have to activate the Quicksilver ability once for abilities without Mairsil's restrictions, or I have to activate the Quicksilver ability once each time beyond the first for each ability I want to activate more than once.
tldr: The difference is I can see is paying a U once vs. paying a U multiple times.
Ultimately, wouldn't activating the Quicksilver ability give another copy of that very same ability that can effectively be activated again?
The only difference I can see between what people are debating about is whether I only have to activate the Quicksilver ability once for abilities without Mairsil's restrictions, or I have to activate the Quicksilver ability once each time beyond the first for each ability I want to activate more than once.
tldr: The difference is I can see is paying a U once vs. paying a U multiple times.
Ya, you got the gist of it. At the worst, if the Rules Manager's ruling doesn't change, it's established that activating the ability from Quicksilver again gives Mairsil new instances of the abilities that can be activated (including Quicksilver's ability, which allows you to rinse and repeat).
To sum it up, Rules Manager Eli Shiffrin states that the restrictions are part of the abilities, and people are arguing that nothing in the rules implies that clearly. We'll have to wait and see what happens (maybe the rules get amended to support Eli's vision), but until then, the Rules Managers are the strongest authority on the rules, and their rulings stand.
I believe everything that could be said on the subject for now has been said, this thread has run its course and is going in circles, so I'm locking it. If we get new info on this from the Rules Managers, we may re-open it, notice me via PM.
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.
The Ixalan rules update added a rule (at what is now C.R. 113.10a) that clarifies that the effect of Mairsil's second ability adds activation instructions to the abilities Mairsil gains due to that effect such that they "become part of" the abilities gained this way. Thus, when those rules go into effect tomorrow, those instructions will carry over if any object (including Mairsil itself) gains any of those abilities from Mairsil.
EDIT (Jan. 26, 2020): One rule was renumbered with Core Set 2020.
EDIT (Aug. 18, 2021): Edited to conform to updates in the meantime.
EDIT (May 9, 2022): Correctness edit.
Quicksilver Elemental
Can someone please explain this ruling to me please, in terms of the Comp Rules?
Thanks in advance!
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
Maybe?
If you want 602.5c more or less handles the interaction
The copied abilities would have the 'can only be used once per turn' clause but because they haven't been used...Or are you asking why the 'once per turn' clause is copied at all, when it doesn't seem to be a modification of the abilities granted but a separate ability that is part of the ability granting.
The second one.
You can activate both abilities even though it's the same text (T: Add G to your mana pool.)
(Errrr.... if you can manage to untap Marisil; didn't think of the tap thing but anyway)
... Mairsil doesn't award that 'activation instruction' as part of the activated ability, but instead, as an additional effect of the (static) ability which gives those activated abilities to Mairsil.
As for 602.5c, I honestly can't tell what that rule is even doing. It looks to me like one of those overzealous rules that is indicating B is not equal to A. There is almost an argument of "rules-as-written" here. That is, Mairsil's static ability has an effect which gives the activated ability "a restriction on its use", so if we are considering the whole universe in that crucial word "with", then the abilities in this interaction count for this rule.
But, if you were going to get technical in that way, 602.5c doesn't actually say anything applies to anything. What that rule says is that something doesn't apply (and which, as I noted, is already a given with the understanding that abilities have distinct identities).
So, my answer to the posted question is "Well I certainly can't."
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Let's assume Marisil has caged three creatures: Wild Mongrel, Basking Rootwalla and Quicksilver Elemental. It therefore has three abilities:
"Discard a card: Wild Mongrel gets +1/+1 and becomes the color of your choice until end of turn."
"{1}{G}: Basking Rootwalla gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Activate this ability only once each turn."
and
"{U}: Quicksilver Elemental gains all activated abilities of target creature until end of turn."
Because of Marisils ability, you can every ability use just once per turn. So you could discard a card to buff Marisil, then pay 1 and a green to buff it again and then you pay blue, targetting Marisil, so it gets all abilities again. Then it has the follwong abilities:
"Discard a card: Wild Mongrel gets +1/+1 and becomes the color of your choice until end of turn."
"Discard a card: Wild Mongrel gets +1/+1 and becomes the color of your choice until end of turn."
"{1}{G}: Basking Rootwalla gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Activate this ability only once each turn."
"{1}{G}: Basking Rootwalla gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Activate this ability only once each turn."
"{U}: Quicksilver Elemental gains all activated abilities of target creature until end of turn."
"{U}: Quicksilver Elemental gains all activated abilities of target creature until end of turn."
Each of those abilities, you can only use once. So you can only choose the new ones. But now you can activate each new ability. So you can buff Marisil for +1/+1 by discarding a card, for +2/+2 by paying {1}{G} and you can pay {U} to get all the abilites again. Repeat often with enough mana.
What rule 602.5c does, is exactly that: If you have an ability, like that one of Basking Rootwalla, and you copy that ability in the way, like my example above, the rule states, that I can activate the ability with the same wording, as long it is another ability.
Or are you interested in a Fiora flavor cube? Conspire and win!
Level 2 Judge
Most Used (of many dozens) EDH Decks:
Brago, King Eternal - Stax
Grenzo, Dungeon Warden - Aggro Combo
Wort, the Raidmother - Spellslinger Swarm Control
Animar, Soul of Elements - Tempo Combo
Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder - Spellslinger
Exodia the Forbidden One:
Oona, Queen of the Fae - Combowins.dec
Such instructions areThe text setting forth such instructions is "not part of the ability's effect" (C.R. 602.1b). The effect of Mairsil's second ability restricting when certain activated abilities can be activateddoesn't change those abilities' textadds an activation instruction to those abilities, however (C.R. 113.10a) (see also The Chain Veil, whose activated ability also affects when certain abilities can be activated).But that doesn't mean that effect doesn't apply to such an activated ability (see also C.R. 101.2); notably,that effect applies to "each" of the abilities Mairsil gains due to its last ability.The crux of the matter is the fact that two or more instances of an ability are involved. And C.R. 113.2c says: "If an object has multiple instances of the same ability, each instance functions independently", and that includes instances with identical wording.
EDIT (Sep. 28): Edited to conform to rule change for Ixalan, which takes effect tomorrow.
EDIT (Oct. 6; Mar. 18, 2018; Feb. 24, 2019): Further correctness edit.
EDIT (Jan. 26, 2020): Some rules were renumbered with Core Set 2020.
The question is, if Mairsil activates its "quicksilver" ability on itself, it gains some abilities it already has. BUT, Eli claims those abilities are also restricted in their use. If those abilities don't have an activation instruction written into them, then by all the foregoing logic, Mairsil restricts the first order of abilities from being used, but not the instances it gains from itself.
I believe this is what you have just now affirmed, but it's not crystal clear.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Mairsil's second ability applies only to "all activated abilities of all cards [Mairsil's controller] own(s) in exile with cage counters on them" (C.R. 109.5), not to any instances of abilities (within the meaning, that is, scope, of C.R. 112.2c) that Mairsil gains by any other means (including when the ability Mairsil gains from Quicksilver Elemental resolves), even if they have the same text or do the same thing.EDIT (Sep. 28): Due to the rule change for Ixalan, which takes effect tomorrow, the effect of Mairsil's second ability adds an activation instruction to the abilities it gains due to that effect such that it "become(s) part of" the abilities gained this way (C.R. 113.10a). Thus, those instructions will carry over if any object (including Mairsil itself) gains any of those abilities from Mairsil.
EDIT (Jan. 26, 2020): Add citation to a rule, which was moved in the meantime, to the note from Sep. 28.
To put peteroupc's citations more simply, if I understand correctly...
-An effect can add an ability to a card with the wording "gains" or "has" (112.10)
-Text which limits when you can activate an ability is not part of that ability's effect (602.1b)
It then follows that the limitation on when you can activate the abilities Mairsil "has" is not part of the effect which grants those abilities. Instead the abilities Mairsil "has" are limited by another separate ability (which so happens to be the one that granted them). Also worth noting is that Mairsil's "has" ability specifically refers to "those abilities".
If you look again at rule 602.5c... (emphasis mine)
peteroupc is saying that the underlined phrase refers specifically to the definition given by rule 602.1b, rather than generally to any ability with a restriction. This makes sense to me, as there is no other attempt to define "an activated ability with a restriction on its use" in the comprehensive rules and the underlined phrase alone without further definition is quite vague.
So, since we have established that the restriction is not included in the newly-acquired ability as part of Mairsil's second printed ability, is not referred to by rule 602.5c, and is not one of "those abilities" that Mairsil "has" as per his second printed ability, there is no reason to believe that the abilities granted by a caged Quicksilver Elemental's ability would be any more limited than those granted by a caged Havengul Lich's ability.
- Rabid Wombat
C.R. 602.1b, rather, refers to the "text" of the activation instructions setting forth those limitations, not to the limitations themselves. Notably, the sentence "This text is not part of the ability's effect" on C.R. 602.1b doesn't apply to the "You may activate each of those abilities only once each turn" on Mairsil's second ability (a static ability [C.R. 604.1])
, which sets forth a continuous effect like any other (C.R. 611.1, 611.3).EDIT (Dec. 20): Part of the text stricken for correctness.
Hopefully WotC will provide some clarification soon.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
602.5c actually says everything with regard to this interaction. Mairsil, the Pretender acquires abilities, and those abilities have a restriction as a result of the static effect that also grants the abilities. So even though the text of the ability copied doesn't have a restriction, the ability was acquired from an object (Mairsil) that imposed a restriction on the ability. So whether Quicksilver Elemental is acquiring abilities from Mairsil, Mairsil has caged Quicksilver Elemental and is using that ability on himself, or some other variant where Mairsil's abilities are being copied to himself or some other object, they will be restricted to once a turn use per 602.5c.
The last sentence of 602.5c clarifies that if you have the same ability twice, and one of them has a restriction while the other doesn't, even if identically worded, the restriction only applies to the one with the restriction. An example would be as such:
Mairsil has caged Llanowar Elves
Quicksilver Elemental copies Mairsil's abilities
Quicksilver Elemental copies Elvish Mystic's ability.
Quicksilver Elemental has two identically worded abilities (T: Add G to your mana pool) but one of them has an invisible restriction that allows you to activate it only once per turn since it came from Mairsil.
I'm afraid I must disagree, in part, with your scenario. Here, the ability Quicksilver Elemental gained from Mairsil doesn't have a restriction on when it can be activated. Again,Mairsil's second abilityapplies only tomakes Mairsil gain only "all activated abilities of all cards [Mairsil's controller] own(s) in exile with cage counters on them" (C.R. 109.5). The effect Mairsil has restricting when certain abilities can be activated appliesonlyto certain abilities Mairsil itself has, and doesn't apply if another object acquires those abilities from Mairsil ("each of those abilities" means only "each of the abilities Mairsil has this way"). Moreover, an activated ability another object gains from Mairsil is a separate instance (within the meaning of C.R. 113.2c), and nothing in C.R. 602.5c implies that a "restriction on [an activated ability's] use" necessarily carries over when one object gains an activated ability from another (even when that restriction is not inherent to that ability as is the case with activation instructions [C.R. 602.1b] or loyalty abilities [C.R. 606.3]).In any case, no other card imposes a restriction on when particular abilities can be activated besides an activation instruction (under C.R. 602.1a-b)
onset forth in the text of, or otherwise inherent in, the activated ability itself (for example, loyalty abilities have an inherent restriction to them as they have loyalty symbols in their costs [C.R. 606.2, 606.3]), so that the text "a restriction on its use" on C.R. 602.5c was not very ambiguous, as it is now. It remains to be seen whether a future version of the rules will replace the text "a restriction on its use" on C.R. 602.5c with—- "an activation instruction imposing a restriction on its use",
- "a restriction on its use, whether it appears as an activation instruction or otherwise", or
- some other clarifying text.
EDIT (Sep. 28): Edited to conform to rule change for Ixalan, which takes effect tomorrow.
EDIT (Oct. 6): Further correctness edits.
EDIT (Jul. 29, 2019): Correctness edit.
EDIT (Jan. 26, 2020): One rule was renumbered with Core Set 2020.
EDIT (Mar. 6, 2021): Correctness edit.
The only difference I can see between what people are debating about is whether I only have to activate the Quicksilver ability once for abilities without Mairsil's restrictions, or I have to activate the Quicksilver ability once each time beyond the first for each ability I want to activate more than once.
tldr: The difference is I can see is paying a U once vs. paying a U multiple times.
To sum it up, Rules Manager Eli Shiffrin states that the restrictions are part of the abilities, and people are arguing that nothing in the rules implies that clearly. We'll have to wait and see what happens (maybe the rules get amended to support Eli's vision), but until then, the Rules Managers are the strongest authority on the rules, and their rulings stand.
I believe everything that could be said on the subject for now has been said, this thread has run its course and is going in circles, so I'm locking it. If we get new info on this from the Rules Managers, we may re-open it, notice me via PM.
EDIT: Thread re-opened on 2017/09/28.
EDIT (Jan. 26, 2020): One rule was renumbered with Core Set 2020.
EDIT (Aug. 18, 2021): Edited to conform to updates in the meantime.
EDIT (May 9, 2022): Correctness edit.