If you want to dive deep into the weeds (unnecessarily since I'm talking about bad templating, not rules), then the interpretation of 106.6.1 which you probably don't have is that both mana have a restriction. That restriction is they both must be used to cast the same creature card.
If you want to dive deep into the weeds (unnecessarily since I'm talking about bad templating, not rules), then the interpretation of 106.6.1 which you probably don't have is that both mana have a restriction. That restriction is they both must be used to cast the same creature card.
Man i like it when i made a rule and take this on it:
Exemple : if a effect generates 2 mana with a restriction or additional effect then once in the mana pool you may split that mana into 1 and 1 and both that mana will have the same effect or restriction that the original 2 had.
Just to it do what i want with the interaction with one card but then someone says i m wrong and says that the thing i put as a exemple is wrong i like to watch this it looks like a film that i saw recently .... wait¹!....
Also are you saying that 2 is diferent than 1 + 1 while on the mana pool ? if soo go be judge on legacy tournaments where people play Sensei's Divining Top with the 2 generatted by Ancient Tomb and other lands...
If you are saying two mana (2) with a restriction or additional effect can't be split to play or pay two diferent abilities or spells then tell me why Grand Architect couldn't break this casting a artfact with CMC 1 and then using the other 1 ( that by your logic is free of the additional effect or restricton ) to cast a non artfact spell or to play a non artfact abilit?
If you are saying that it can only spent that 2 mana (together) to do artfact stuff then why it can combo with Pili-Pala while Training Grounds is on the batlefield or why you can tap 2 blue creatures to equip sword of feast and farmine into a creature ?
...
if you can read you would see that:
5/1/2008: Mana Reflection doesn't produce any mana itself. Rather, it causes permanents you tap for mana to produce more mana. (This is different than seemingly similar cards like Heartbeat of Spring and Gauntlet of Power.) If the permanent puts any restrictions or riders on the mana it produces, as Pillar of the Paruns and Hall of the Bandit Lord do, that will apply to all the mana it produces this way.
Hall of the bandit lord produces 2 mana while Mana Reflection in on the batlefield ... soo why hall mana can be split and generator's can't ...
this is why 106.6 is important:
106.6. Some spells or abilities that produce mana restrict how that mana can be spent, or have an additional effect that affects the spell or ability that mana is spent on. This doesnt affect the manas type. #
Example: A players mana pool contains {1}{U} which can be spent only to pay cumulative upkeep costs. That player activates Doubling Cubes ability, which reads "{3}, {T}: Double the amount of each type of mana in your mana pool." The players mana pool now has {2}{U}{U} in it, {1}{U} of which can be spent on anything.
( Sorry mods again ) ( this is not spam)
if you keep saying other wise than or you didn't readed propely over this thread or you just want to believe what you think is corect ( and in fact isn't ) ...
In the generator's case the "if you cast that mana to cast a creature spell, ..." is a propriety of that mana soo every 1 of the 2 the Generator Servant generated (1 and 1 == 2 ) has that propriety...
its not that dificult to get... is it?
about the haste templete...: Hall of the Bandit Lord (new templete)
magiccards.info/chk/en/277.html
You are referring to what they probably meant, but thats not what they actually wrote. "That" mana is 2, and it can be spent on "a" creature "spell".
edit: Just finished reading the next two pages. This is not an argument that you can "win" by quoting rules of magic at us or cards that did not run into the same issue.
This is basic English grammar and tense. You can't tell us that Wizards didn't screw up if they meant it to clearly read as up to 2 creature cards. We know what they probably meant to write, but they failed to write it the way they meant.
The template is the same of older cards that gives additional effects to mana.
you missed that "that mana" is all the mana generated by the generator ( that gains the additional effect).
with Mana Reflection...
And that was covered and linked on a post on the page before of the post you quoted .
I did not miss those cards or that interaction. Those two cards are completely and utterly irrelevant to the discussion at hand because they read 1. You have to come up with a creative way to change that to two, but that doesn't somehow make your point, it is still unclear, and Wizards still templated this poorly. The fact that "mana" is both the singular and the plural form of "mana" is also irrelevant. The operative words are "that", "a", and "creature"
{T}, Pay 2 life: Add {1} to your mana pool. If that mana is spent on an instant or sorcery spell, that spell can't be countered by spells or abilities.
but i know you will say those are wrong and we will continue with this...
I did not miss those cards or that interaction. Those two cards are completely and utterly irrelevant to the discussion at hand because they read 1. You have to come up with a creative way to change that to two, but that doesn't somehow make your point, it is still unclear, and Wizards still templated this poorly. The fact that "mana" is both the singular and the plural form of "mana" is also irrelevant. The operative words are "that", "a", and "creature"
Its not that the template is poor, it doesn't need clarification because mana does not exist out side of units of 1 in your mana pool. If it was that both mana were required to give the cast creature haste it would say so, because that is a restriction.
eg if it worked how you think it does it would read as
T, Sacrifice Generator Servant: Add 2 to your mana pool. If that mana is spent on a single creature spell, it gains haste until end of turn.
Even then we can apply Mana Reflection here as it doubles the amount made by a permanent that taps as part of the cost to make mana as this guy does, so you'd have 4 mana generated by the effect so your saying that all 4 of that would have to be used on a single creature spell to give it haste, which just isn't how Mana works nor the rules of the game. In almost all cases the cards leave little up to interpretation and almost always unless the rules or the card state you must do something in a specific way, it works in the simplest way.
As much as I understand their reasoning, the inconsistency between this and the other legendary Slivers really bugs me...
That artwork is beautiful though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I collect Legendary cards, Planeswalkers, and Sagas.
Current count of different Legends: 1314
Current count of different Planeswalkers: 213
Current count of different Sagas: 44
The only thing my Sliver Queen deck has been missing has been Wrath protection. Hivelord brings it in spades. How many permanent answers are there to Hivelord + Crystalline Sliver? If only it wasn't destined to be as stupid-expensive as Sliver Legion is. Also kind of strange that the two best cards for 5C Slivers come out a year after all the other new Slivers, thus ensuring the sliver deck can't exist for more than 2-3 months.
Wow, just wow. After reading the comments here I am fully convinced that people don't know how to construct a great deck and that magic players cry over spilled milk. Really you complain that this sliver is 5/5 and only makes indestructable? Slivers are ridiculous as is and this is really all they needed to save you from most board wipes. I say bravo because that alone is crazy and there are so much more to fix everything commented here.
So, is this the sliver king of the M14 slivers too? Or are they separate hives?
I don't think there's place for a king in a hive. It's probably at royal guard level, hence lord.
Also, don't think it's from Shandalar. It's very likely from Dominaria base on its artwork.
Its from Shandalar... see flavor text.
My theory is : the M14 slivers are mutation of this hive ( that is also a mutation of another hive...) and this guy works like the queen or the overlord and in some extention like the legion. It is the mind of the swarm...
what i hate in the m14 slivers is that they have individual names class and culture. ( that for me kill the original flavor of the hive mind.)
Wow... Hivelord has... er... Commander bannage potential...
So I can now build a 5-colour Sliver deck, and have them all indestructible from Turn 4 if I build my deck well enough? Thumbs up!
I guess you could nitpick, but the fact that the new lord actually looks like a sliver makes me happy. Now I'm glad they didn't make one in M14, they would have made a giant predator if they did. This is the only Shandalar sliver I don't hate.
In the world where it actually says that, it would be clearer.
The card does not say that, and you can't make it say that no matter how much you may want it to.
Man i like it when i made a rule and take this on it:
Exemple : if a effect generates 2 mana with a restriction or additional effect then once in the mana pool you may split that mana into 1 and 1 and both that mana will have the same effect or restriction that the original 2 had.
Just to it do what i want with the interaction with one card but then someone says i m wrong and says that the thing i put as a exemple is wrong i like to watch this it looks like a film that i saw recently .... wait¹!....
Also are you saying that 2 is diferent than 1 + 1 while on the mana pool ? if soo go be judge on legacy tournaments where people play Sensei's Divining Top with the 2 generatted by Ancient Tomb and other lands...
If you are saying two mana (2) with a restriction or additional effect can't be split to play or pay two diferent abilities or spells then tell me why Grand Architect couldn't break this casting a artfact with CMC 1 and then using the other 1 ( that by your logic is free of the additional effect or restricton ) to cast a non artfact spell or to play a non artfact abilit?
If you are saying that it can only spent that 2 mana (together) to do artfact stuff then why it can combo with Pili-Pala while Training Grounds is on the batlefield or why you can tap 2 blue creatures to equip sword of feast and farmine into a creature ?
...
if you can read you would see that:
5/1/2008: Mana Reflection doesn't produce any mana itself. Rather, it causes permanents you tap for mana to produce more mana. (This is different than seemingly similar cards like Heartbeat of Spring and Gauntlet of Power.) If the permanent puts any restrictions or riders on the mana it produces, as Pillar of the Paruns and Hall of the Bandit Lord do, that will apply to all the mana it produces this way.
Hall of the bandit lord produces 2 mana while Mana Reflection in on the batlefield ... soo why hall mana can be split and generator's can't ...
this is why 106.6 is important:
Example: A players mana pool contains {1}{U} which can be spent only to pay cumulative upkeep costs. That player activates Doubling Cubes ability, which reads "{3}, {T}: Double the amount of each type of mana in your mana pool." The players mana pool now has {2}{U}{U} in it, {1}{U} of which can be spent on anything.
if you keep saying other wise than or you didn't readed propely over this thread or you just want to believe what you think is corect ( and in fact isn't ) ...
Anyway see ya
And i present you with the updated oracle text for Hall of the Bandit Lord:
Hall of the Bandit Lord enters the battlefield tapped.
{T}, Pay 3 life: Add {1} to your mana pool. If that mana is spent on a creature spell, it gains haste.
http://magiccards.info/chk/en/277.html
....
http://magiccards.info/v12/en/2.html
Boseiju, Who Shelters All enters the battlefield tapped.
{T}, Pay 2 life: Add {1} to your mana pool. If that mana is spent on an instant or sorcery spell, that spell can't be countered by spells or abilities.
but i know you will say those are wrong and we will continue with this...
Its not that the template is poor, it doesn't need clarification because mana does not exist out side of units of 1 in your mana pool. If it was that both mana were required to give the cast creature haste it would say so, because that is a restriction.
eg if it worked how you think it does it would read as
T, Sacrifice Generator Servant: Add 2 to your mana pool. If that mana is spent on a single creature spell, it gains haste until end of turn.
Even then we can apply Mana Reflection here as it doubles the amount made by a permanent that taps as part of the cost to make mana as this guy does, so you'd have 4 mana generated by the effect so your saying that all 4 of that would have to be used on a single creature spell to give it haste, which just isn't how Mana works nor the rules of the game. In almost all cases the cards leave little up to interpretation and almost always unless the rules or the card state you must do something in a specific way, it works in the simplest way.
That artwork is beautiful though.
Current count of different Legends: 1314
Current count of different Planeswalkers: 213
Current count of different Sagas: 44
Above all else, I'm a Vorthos.
UBDragonlord Silumgar WGKarametra, God of Harvests
BRUNekusar, the Mindrazer BGMazirek, Kraul Death Priest
URMelek, Izzet Paragon UGPrime Speaker Zegana
WUHanna, Ship's Navigator BWUSydri, Galvanic Genius
WUBRGSliver Queen RBBladewing the Risen
WBKarlov of the Ghost Council RGXenagos, God of Revels
GFreyalise, Llanowar's Fury RWAurelia, the Warleader
RIb Halfheart, Goblin Tactician BDrana, Liberator of Malakir
UAzami, Lady of Scrolls WNahiri, the Lithomancer
WBGDoran, the Siege Tower CEmrakul, the Promised End
I don't think there's place for a king in a hive. It's probably at royal guard level, hence lord.
Also, don't think it's from Shandalar. It's very likely from Dominaria base on its artwork.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
Its from Shandalar... see flavor text.
My theory is : the M14 slivers are mutation of this hive ( that is also a mutation of another hive...) and this guy works like the queen or the overlord and in some extention like the legion. It is the mind of the swarm...
what i hate in the m14 slivers is that they have individual names class and culture. ( that for me kill the original flavor of the hive mind.)
So I can now build a 5-colour Sliver deck, and have them all indestructible from Turn 4 if I build my deck well enough? Thumbs up!
My Stupidly Large Number of Current Decks
PucaTrade with me!
The Multiplayer Power Rankings
Cube: the Gittening (My Multiplayer Cube) - MTGS Cube List | @ CubeTutor
The N00b Cube (Peasant cube for new players) - MTGS Cube List | @ CubeTutor
Again, it's not clear whether they originate from Shandalar. At least not for this hivelord. What's this calamity they speak of?
You're half right I suppose. But the calamity could have been a planeswalker bringing them by accident.
UR Melek, Izzet ParagonUR, B Shirei, Shizo's CaretakerB, R Jaya Ballard, Task MageR,RW Tajic, Blade of the LegionRW, UB Lazav, Dimir MastermindUB, UB Circu, Dimir LobotomistUB, RWU Zedruu the GreatheartedRWU, GUBThe MimeoplasmGUB, UGExperiment Kraj UG, WDarien, King of KjeldorW, BMarrow-GnawerB, WBGKarador, Ghost ChieftainWBG, UTeferi, Temporal ArchmageU, GWUDerevi, Empyrial TacticianGWU, RDaretti, Scrap SavantR, UTalrand, Sky SummonerU, GEzuri, Renegade LeaderG, WUBRGReaper KingWUBRG, RGXenagos, God of RevelsRG, CKozilek, Butcher of TruthC, WUBRGGeneral TazriWUBRG, GTitania, Protector of ArgothG
run it and get new friends.....
Sign me in!