Just want to ditto what plopfil just said. My FAQ originally also said that the Flying Men would be tapped because the stack is a zone, but he talked me out of it with the argument he just re-posted.
Moggs call is of course the one that matters. My brewing waits with baited breath.
614.12. Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c-d.) Such effects may come from the permanent itself if they affect only that permanent (as opposed to a general subset of permanents that includes it). They may also come from other sources. To determine which replacement effects apply and how they apply, check the characteristics of the permanent as it would exist on the battlefield, taking into account replacement effects that have already modified how it enters the battlefield (see rule 616.1), continuous effects generated by the resolution of spells or abilities that changed the permanent's characteristics on the stack (see rule 400.7a), and continuous effects from the permanent's own static abilities, but ignoring continuous effects from any other source that would affect it.
The continuous effect of the round's special rule is not in any of the included categories. It is ignored.
The round rule doesn't create a replacement effect at all. Rather, it causes each card to gain some abilities.
With Diregraf Ghoul on the battlefield, Flying Men enters the battlefield tapped, because Flying Men has the ability "Flying Men enters the battlefield tapped". Flying Men enters the battlefield tapped because of a continuous effect from one of its own static abilities.
Mogg's call is of course the one that matters. My brewing waits with baited breath.
Sometimes, I really wish it weren't. Breaking formats is more fun than fixing them, and if a couple of days hadn't already passed and I hadn't already received submissions, I'd be sorely tempted to replace this format with something simpler until all confusion could be removed. As it is, I hope the brewing is still fun, and that we can consider that this round is one of the costs of running ambitious formats.
I really might be mistaken here, but my understanding of that rule is that you're not only ignoring replacement effects - you are ignoring certain classes of continuous effects *for the purpose of determining which (unrelated) replacement effects apply*.
In this case, we'd be ignoring the round rule (since it wasn't generated by the resolution of a spell or ability and isn't on Flying Men) when examining how Flying Men will exist on the battlefield. In the absence of the round rule, it would enter untapped, so it does so, despite having the ability on the stack.
(This is a counterintuitive result, but that is somewhat understandable, because the Magic rules do not expect continuous effects not generated by the resolutions of spells or abilities to affect what ETB replacement abilities an object has on the stack. There are no real static abilities in Magic that do this.)
I really might be mistaken here, but my understanding of that rule is that you're not only ignoring replacement effects - you are ignoring certain classes of continuous effects *for the purpose of determining which (unrelated) replacement effects apply*.
In this case, we'd be ignoring the round rule (since it wasn't generated by the resolution of a spell or ability and isn't on Flying Men) when examining how Flying Men will exist on the battlefield. In the absence of the round rule, it would enter untapped, so it does so, despite having the ability on the stack.
This is also what I was thinking. Weirdly, magic doesn't care how it looked on the stack because it didn't gain the ability from "the resolution of a spell or ability that changed the permanent's characteristics on the stack", but instead it got the ability from a continuous effect that changed the permanent's characteristics on the stack.
I'll be honest, if I were the Rules Manager and I were rewriting Magic to have this week's format as a game rule, I would rewrite
Quote from Comprehensive Rules 400.7a »
Effects from spells, activated abilities, and triggered abilities that change the characteristics
of a permanent spell on the stack continue to apply to the permanent that spell becomes.
to mention static abilities as well, because I think Flying Men coming in tapped is the intuitive result.
This is a delightful mess, but I'm having a great time just trying to sort it out. I certainly didn't intend to stress Mogg out with my comments about his ruling being the one that matters, so I apologize if that was the case.
There's something else we need to be careful of here. In seeking to apply 614.12 correctly (or rather, avoid applying it incorrectly) we're - obviously - looking at the wording as it appears in the current Comp Rules. But there's a problem with that: WotC update the Comp Rules frequently to take newly printed cards into account and do not attempt to future proof the rules against things which don't exist yet. Consequently, the chances are that the reason 614.12 doesn't cover the round rule is simply because nothing like that exists in Magic.
Now leaving aside the question of this round specifically (which others seem to be happily engaged in addressing) I think we want to avoid setting a precedent that seemingly exhaustive lists of cases which appear in the Comp Rules can exclude the round rules and thereby switch them off. For this reason, I think that XCB could do with a new version of Magic's Golden Rule.
101.1. Whenever a card's text directly contradicts these rules, the card takes precedence. The card overrides only the rule that applies to that specific situation
What we want is something which says: If the Comp Rules appear to contradict or otherwise invalidate the round rule, the round rule wins. (But worded in a more technical way.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
This is a delightful mess, but I'm having a great time just trying to sort it out. I certainly didn't intend to stress Mogg out with my comments about his ruling being the one that matters, so I apologize if that was the case.
I'm glad you're having a good time! Any stress is self-inflicted. Having the rules change at all yesterday was less than ideal, which is why I extended the submission deadline, and I'm not going to change them again today. The rules and rulings we're using this round are those in the opening post. If a specific interaction hasn't been addressed and its resolution is unclear, please feel free to ask about it in the thread or via pm and I'll address it.
There's something else we need to be careful of here. In seeking to apply 614.12 correctly (or rather, avoid applying it incorrectly) we're - obviously - looking at the wording as it appears in the current Comp Rules. But there's a problem with that: WotC update the Comp Rules frequently to take newly printed cards into account and do not attempt to future proof the rules against things which don't exist yet. Consequently, the chances are that the reason 614.12 doesn't cover the round rule is simply because nothing like that exists in Magic.
Now leaving aside the question of this round specifically (which others seem to be happily engaged in addressing) I think we want to avoid setting a precedent that seemingly exhaustive lists of cases which appear in the Comp Rules can exclude the round rules and thereby switch them off. For this reason, I think that XCB could do with a new version of Magic's Golden Rule.
101.1. Whenever a card's text directly contradicts these rules, the card takes precedence. The card overrides only the rule that applies to that specific situation
What we want is something which says: If the Comp Rules appear to contradict or otherwise invalidate the round rule, the round rule wins. (But worded in a more technical way.)
This is also what I was thinking. Weirdly, magic doesn't care how it looked on the stack because it didn't gain the ability from "the resolution of a spell or ability that changed the permanent's characteristics on the stack", but instead it got the ability from a continuous effect that changed the permanent's characteristics on the stack.
I'll be honest, if I were the Rules Manager and I were rewriting Magic to have this week's format as a game rule, I would rewrite to mention static abilities as well, because I think Flying Men coming in tapped is the intuitive result.
This rule exists basically entirely to explicitly exclude static abilities. I'm at work right now and the specific situation isn't coming to mind, but I once spent a long time grappling with this rule - there are situations where nasty stuff happens when you try to fully flesh out "how it would exist on the battlefield" when affected by all static abilities. I think it has to do with things like those effects reading properties of the permanent that are not yet known - think about Mul Daya Channelers for instance.
That said, an easy fix for this week is to just add "round rules" rather than all static abilities to the list of exceptions. I think this is what Mogg's ruling effectively is, and I propose that it be made explicit in the rules - I think this circumvents Mogg's moratorium on further rules changes by virtue of merely formalizing how the rules have already been decreed to work
This is a delightful mess, but I'm having a great time just trying to sort it out. I certainly didn't intend to stress Mogg out with my comments about his ruling being the one that matters, so I apologize if that was the case.
I am having a lot of fun too! And I am also sorry that it is stressing out Mogg
Thanks! I'm glad to know if these problems haven't been too much of a frustration for others.
EDIT:
Including a bunch of extra text was messing with the formatting of the opening post for some reason, so I've included the summary of rulings here:
Q: Do abilities get shared between players? A: Yes (from Mogg)
Q: What happens if Erebos, God of the Dead is on the battlefield along with a Flying Men and no other permanents? A: (from Mogg, expanded slightly by me): Very little. Layers Kick in. In layer 4 (type-changing effects) Erebos becomes not a creature. The ability sharing rule applies in layer 6, but Erebos and Flying Men do not share a type, so they don't share any abilities.
Q: What happens if Erebos, God of the Dead is on the battlefield along with a Phyrexian Obliterator, and each player controls a Flying Men? A: (from me) Layers kick in. In layer 4, Erebos remains a creature.
In layer 6, each Flying Men gets the following added to his abilities box exactly once, in an unclear order:
"Flying" (from the other Flying Men),
"Trample" (from Obliterator)
"Whenever a source deals damage to CARDNAME, that source's controller sacrifices that many permanents." (from Obliterator)
"Indestructible" (From Erebos)
"Your Opponents can't gain life" (from Erebos)
"1B, Pay 2 life: Draw a card" (from Erebos)
Technically, the 'x is not a creature' ability is also shared, but it never does anything because we've already gone past layer 4 at this point.
Erebos gets the following added to his abilities exactly once, also in an unclear order:
"Flying" (from one Flying Men),
"Flying" (yes a second flying, from the other Flying Men),
"Trample" (from Obliterator)
"Whenever a source deals damage to CARDNAME, that source's controller sacrifices that many permanents." (from Obliterator)
Obliterater gets the following added to its abilities exactly once, also in an unclear order:
"Flying (from flying Men #1)
"Flying" (from the other Flying Men)
"Indestructible" (From Erebos)
"Your Opponents can't gain life" (from Erebos)
"1B, Pay 2 life: Draw a card" (from Erebos)
Technically, the 'x is not a creature' ability is also shared, but it never does anything because we've already gone past layer 4 at this point.
Q: What happens if Erebos, God of the Dead is in my graveyard, and a Flying Men is on the battlefield? A: (from me) Layers, naturally, kick in. In layer 4, Erebos's type changing effect does not do anything because Erebos is not on the battlefield, so Erebos is a creature enchantment card in the graveyard.
Two things happen in layer 6. The first is that Flying Men gets some new abilities:
"Indestructible" (From Erebos)
"Your Opponents can't gain life" (from Erebos)
"1B, Pay 2 life: Draw a card" (from Erebos)
Technically, the 'x is not a creature' ability is also shared, but it never does anything because we've already gone past layer 4 at this point.
The second is that the Erebos Card gets a new ability
"Flying" (from Flying Men)Of course, Flying only does anything when it is on the battlefield, so this matters very little.
Q: So what other kinds of effects don't get shared because sharing does not occur until Layer 6? A: (from me) Layers 1-5 are, in order: Copy Effects, Control-Changing Effects, Text-Changing Effects, Type-Changing Effects, and Color Changing Effects. This also means that Celestial Dawn and Darkest Hour do not present a rules problem for us this round, as their color-change effects arent really shared, they apply in layer 5.
Q: If I have a creature, an artifact creature, and a noncreature artifact, does the ability of the creature end up on the noncreature artifact, and vice versa? A: (from me and some others) No. The game rule applies exactly once to each permanent at all times. It looks at your Artifact and adds to it all the abilities from all Artifacts in non-hand zones. It looks at your Creature and adds to it all the abilities from all Creatures in non-hand zones. It looks at your Artifact Creatures and adds to it all the abilities from Artifacts and all the abilities from Creatures in non-hand zones. But it does all that simultaneously, so it never 'sees' any of the abilities it is going to create. Then it is done, but it will start again (from scratch) every time priority is passed.
It may help to think of this rule as first looking at all the cards in play and making a sticky-note for each card with what needs to be added to that card. Then when it is completely finished making sticky notes, it simultaneously attaches all the sticky notes to the cards.
Q:Man-o'-War is on the battlefield. What happens when I cast Flying Men? A: (from Mogg) When the Flying Men enter the battlefield, they have Man-o'-War's ability and you must bounce something.
Q:Diregraf Ghoul is on the battlefield. What happens when I cast Flying Men? A: (from me and plopfil) Flying Men enters the battlefield untapped. This is a slightly different case from the one above because Diregraf Ghoul's ability is a replacement effect that applies before it is on the battlefield. Rule 614.12 tells us how to figure out what replacement effects apply in cases like this, and that includes "ignoring continuous effects from any other source that would affect it", which is the category our format rule falls into. See plopfill's post just below this one.
Q:Boreal Shelf is on the battlefield. What happens when I play a Swamp? A: (from me and plopfil) Swamp enters the battlefield untapped. It turns out this is very much like the case above, even though I thought it was different at first.
EDIT1: Fixed ETB tapped questions based on plopfil's input.
EDIT2: Fixed Phyrexian Obliterator examples to use the word CARDNAME instead of Phyrexian Obliterator in the abilities that Flying Men and Erebos gain.
This is totally true and I'm dumb, but I'm pretty sure the same principle can still result in some bad things happening.
For instance, the continuous effect generated by this rule presumably has an earlier timestamp than everything else, and thus applies before other ability-granting effects. That means that, for instance, an enchantment could have both Humility's ability and another ability-granting ability, and they would again have the same timestamp and it would be ambiguous what state they leave things in.
I actually did mean what I said about my last post having final rulings. That said, you're right that the time stamp issue isn't fully addressed - your presumption, though, is actually an XCB rule (1.8b), because I did have some foresight) - so here's an additional ruling (not in technical writing, but in a way that I believe will have clear intent): Each card gains or loses abilities by the round rule in order of the time stamp of the permanent that has the ability that's being gained by other cards. For this purpose, treat cards in zones other than the battlefield as gaining a time stamp when they enter that zone.
For example, if card A enters the battlefield before card B, then the round rules gives card A's abilities to card B, and then give card B's abilities to card A. After the abilities given by the round rules have been applied, layer abilities as normal. If card B is subsequently put in a graveyard, then the order is reversed, because card B has the most recent time stamp. If both cards are put into a zone other than the battlefield simultaneously, choose an order for their timestamps as though they had entered the battlefield simultaneously.
At some point, I'd like to write a cleaner version of the round rules, but for now I'd rather keep the rules as is and add references in the opening post to these rulings. I don't want to rewrite the rule in a way that inadvertently causes more problems. Thankfully, I don't expect the facet of the round rules that has received discussion at-length will actually be relevant very often.
To be clear, I meant to say that enters-the-battlefield triggers are shared. Effects that read "enters the battlefield with" or "enters the battlefield as" are not shared. Here's the relevant rule:
"603.6b Continuous effects that modify characteristics of a permanent do so the moment the permanent is on the battlefield (and not before then). The permanent is never on the battlefield with its unmodified characteristics. Continuous effects don’t apply before the permanent is on the battlefield, however (see rule 603.6e).
Example: If an effect reads “All lands are creatures” and a land card is played, the effect makes the land card into a creature the moment it enters the battlefield, so it would trigger abilities that trigger when a creature enters the battlefield. Conversely, if an effect reads “All creatures lose all abilities” and a creature card with an enters-the-battlefield triggered ability enters the battlefield, that effect will cause it to lose its abilities the moment it enters the battlefield, so the enters-the-battlefield ability won’t trigger."
Q:Diregraf Ghoul is on the battlefield. What happens when I cast Flying Men? A: (from me and plopfil) Flying Men enters the battlefield untapped. This is a slightly different case from the one above because Diregraf Ghoul's ability is a replacement effect that applies before it is on the battlefield. Rule 614.12 tells us how to figure out what replacement effects apply in cases like this, and that includes "ignoring continuous effects from any other source that would affect it", which is the category our format rule falls into. See plopfill's post just below this one.
Q:Boreal Shelf is on the battlefield. What happens when I play a Swamp? A: (from me and plopfil) Swamp enters the battlefield untapped. It turns out this is very much like the case above, even though I thought it was different at first.
One last thing: My answer quoted above is incorrect, because I didn't realize that the stack is a zone. I don't want to mess up anything else, because of an incorrect answer that I gave based on a fairly basic misunderstanding. As a result, in the above two scenarios, Swamp still enters the battlefield untapped, but Flying Men enters the battlefield tapped.
Thanks! I'm glad to know if these problems haven't been too much of a frustration for others.
The two are not mutually incompatible. I'm enjoying the week of crazy rules questions. But building a deck was hard enough already without the rules (or explanation/understanding of the rules) changing every day. In the future, I'd suggest posting proposals like this round a week ahead. Then we could have a relaxed, fun discussion while not affecting the current week's deckbuilding, and the round announcement could have a final wording.
Moggs call is of course the one that matters. My brewing waits with baited breath.
The round rule doesn't create a replacement effect at all. Rather, it causes each card to gain some abilities.
With Diregraf Ghoul on the battlefield, Flying Men enters the battlefield tapped, because Flying Men has the ability "Flying Men enters the battlefield tapped". Flying Men enters the battlefield tapped because of a continuous effect from one of its own static abilities.
Sometimes, I really wish it weren't. Breaking formats is more fun than fixing them, and if a couple of days hadn't already passed and I hadn't already received submissions, I'd be sorely tempted to replace this format with something simpler until all confusion could be removed. As it is, I hope the brewing is still fun, and that we can consider that this round is one of the costs of running ambitious formats.
BWTeysa, Orzhov Scion
GWRhys the Redeemed
GUKruphix, God of Horizons
GRXenagos, God of Revels
GThrun, the Last Troll
GStompy
In this case, we'd be ignoring the round rule (since it wasn't generated by the resolution of a spell or ability and isn't on Flying Men) when examining how Flying Men will exist on the battlefield. In the absence of the round rule, it would enter untapped, so it does so, despite having the ability on the stack.
(This is a counterintuitive result, but that is somewhat understandable, because the Magic rules do not expect continuous effects not generated by the resolutions of spells or abilities to affect what ETB replacement abilities an object has on the stack. There are no real static abilities in Magic that do this.)
This is also what I was thinking. Weirdly, magic doesn't care how it looked on the stack because it didn't gain the ability from "the resolution of a spell or ability that changed the permanent's characteristics on the stack", but instead it got the ability from a continuous effect that changed the permanent's characteristics on the stack.
I'll be honest, if I were the Rules Manager and I were rewriting Magic to have this week's format as a game rule, I would rewrite to mention static abilities as well, because I think Flying Men coming in tapped is the intuitive result.
This is a delightful mess, but I'm having a great time just trying to sort it out. I certainly didn't intend to stress Mogg out with my comments about his ruling being the one that matters, so I apologize if that was the case.
Now leaving aside the question of this round specifically (which others seem to be happily engaged in addressing) I think we want to avoid setting a precedent that seemingly exhaustive lists of cases which appear in the Comp Rules can exclude the round rules and thereby switch them off. For this reason, I think that XCB could do with a new version of Magic's Golden Rule.
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
I'm glad you're having a good time! Any stress is self-inflicted. Having the rules change at all yesterday was less than ideal, which is why I extended the submission deadline, and I'm not going to change them again today. The rules and rulings we're using this round are those in the opening post. If a specific interaction hasn't been addressed and its resolution is unclear, please feel free to ask about it in the thread or via pm and I'll address it.
I like that idea.
BWTeysa, Orzhov Scion
GWRhys the Redeemed
GUKruphix, God of Horizons
GRXenagos, God of Revels
GThrun, the Last Troll
GStompy
This rule exists basically entirely to explicitly exclude static abilities. I'm at work right now and the specific situation isn't coming to mind, but I once spent a long time grappling with this rule - there are situations where nasty stuff happens when you try to fully flesh out "how it would exist on the battlefield" when affected by all static abilities. I think it has to do with things like those effects reading properties of the permanent that are not yet known - think about Mul Daya Channelers for instance.
That said, an easy fix for this week is to just add "round rules" rather than all static abilities to the list of exceptions. I think this is what Mogg's ruling effectively is, and I propose that it be made explicit in the rules - I think this circumvents Mogg's moratorium on further rules changes by virtue of merely formalizing how the rules have already been decreed to work
I am having a lot of fun too! And I am also sorry that it is stressing out Mogg
Thanks! I'm glad to know if these problems haven't been too much of a frustration for others.
EDIT:
Including a bunch of extra text was messing with the formatting of the opening post for some reason, so I've included the summary of rulings here:
I actually did mean what I said about my last post having final rulings. That said, you're right that the time stamp issue isn't fully addressed - your presumption, though, is actually an XCB rule (1.8b), because I did have some foresight) - so here's an additional ruling (not in technical writing, but in a way that I believe will have clear intent): Each card gains or loses abilities by the round rule in order of the time stamp of the permanent that has the ability that's being gained by other cards. For this purpose, treat cards in zones other than the battlefield as gaining a time stamp when they enter that zone.
For example, if card A enters the battlefield before card B, then the round rules gives card A's abilities to card B, and then give card B's abilities to card A. After the abilities given by the round rules have been applied, layer abilities as normal. If card B is subsequently put in a graveyard, then the order is reversed, because card B has the most recent time stamp. If both cards are put into a zone other than the battlefield simultaneously, choose an order for their timestamps as though they had entered the battlefield simultaneously.
At some point, I'd like to write a cleaner version of the round rules, but for now I'd rather keep the rules as is and add references in the opening post to these rulings. I don't want to rewrite the rule in a way that inadvertently causes more problems. Thankfully, I don't expect the facet of the round rules that has received discussion at-length will actually be relevant very often.
It is. One round of infinite Nest Invader mana was enough.
BWTeysa, Orzhov Scion
GWRhys the Redeemed
GUKruphix, God of Horizons
GRXenagos, God of Revels
GThrun, the Last Troll
GStompy
The two are not mutually incompatible. I'm enjoying the week of crazy rules questions. But building a deck was hard enough already without the rules (or explanation/understanding of the rules) changing every day. In the future, I'd suggest posting proposals like this round a week ahead. Then we could have a relaxed, fun discussion while not affecting the current week's deckbuilding, and the round announcement could have a final wording.