This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, Cranial Insertion: Rise and Shine!. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 2 Magic Judge
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
In the question with Student of Warfare and Aura Gnarlid, Aura Gnarlid can't be blocked by student because his power is higher than Student's. However, the question works fine if you switch the attacker and the blocker (so Student is attacked and being blocked by Gnarlid).
I disagree with the Lighthouse Chronologist an Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. I think that Lighthouse Chornologist should trigger again at the end step of the opponent's extra turn from Emrakul the Aeons Torn resulting in an additonal turn before the Lighthouse's controller's regular turn.
Just to clarify Befuddlemant. Your reply is Ok, but could be more clear by making the regular turn order part plural ("Your regular turns.").
Just to write the scenario out:
OP: Play Emrakul, Extra turn a is created.
End of opponent turn, Chronologist gives out Extra turn b
After extra turn b, opponent takes his extra turn a.
End of extra turn a, Chronologist gives it's contoroller extra turn c.
After extra turn c, you get your regular turn. (And the rest of the table gangs up and kills you...)
Actually, we had the Emrakul/Chronologist situation play out at the pre-release, as they went to time in the match. Default User's description is exactly how we ruled it (although the we skipped the killing part).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Magic Level 1 Judge / Advanced WPN Coordinator / D&D Encounters DM / Store Trader / Price Gun Guy / Very Tired
In the question with Student of Warfare and Aura Gnarlid, Aura Gnarlid can't be blocked by student because his power is higher than Student's. However, the question works fine if you switch the attacker and the blocker (so Student is attacked and being blocked by Gnarlid).
And so it was originally - it got changed somewhere along the line of rewriting it for clarity. I've fixed the article.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
I disagree with the Lighthouse Chronologist an Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. I think that Lighthouse Chornologist should trigger again at the end step of the opponent's extra turn from Emrakul the Aeons Torn resulting in an additonal turn before the Lighthouse's controller's regular turn.
This situation came up for me in the Magic Online beta. My opponent had a lighthouse Chronologist fully leveled up and I cast an Emrakul (with a Djinn of Wishes). My opponent took his extra turn first, then I took my extra turn (and then I won as I swung away with Emrakul).
Based on the way Chronologist reads, this seems like the correct order. If it's not, then Magic Online has it wrong right now. =)
This situation came up for me in the Magic Online beta. My opponent had a lighthouse Chronologist fully leveled up and I cast an Emrakul (with a Djinn of Wishes). My opponent took his extra turn first, then I took my extra turn (and then I won as I swung away with Emrakul).
Based on the way Chronologist reads, this seems like the correct order. If it's not, then Magic Online has it wrong right now. =)
That's correct - Chronologist, then Emrakul - but the Chronologist should get another turn after the Emrakul extra turn before he receives his normal turn.
So it should go Emrakul Casting - Lighthouse - Emrakul Swinging - Lighthouse - Lighthouse Controller
Q: If I kill my opponent's Soul's Attendant with Spawning Breath, does he still gain 1 life from the Eldrazi Spawn token entering the battlefield?
A: He sure does. Soul's Attendant won't be destroyed until the state-based action check that happens after Spawning Breath has finished resolving, so Soul's Attendant sees the mana baby entering the battlefield and its life gain ability triggers. Once an ability has triggered, it's independent from its source, so the life gain still happens even though Soul's Attendant has been destroyed by the time the ability is put on the stack.
Note that if you are not playing MTGO, since Soul's Attendant's ability is a "may" trigger, if your opponent doesn't know he can get life from your Eldrazi Spawn, you don't have to tell him. Doing so would be sportsmanlike of course, but you're in no obligation here, so you can get a small 1 life edge if you wish it so. However, you can't lie if he asks, and if it's Soul Warden he's playing instead, you do have to tell him to gain life, because there is no "may".
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.
Was anyone else besides me surprised by the Convoke ruling?
Q: If I cast Chord of Calling, can I tap my mana babies for convoke before sacrificing them for mana?
A: No, you can't. While you can pay the total cost in any order, you have to produce mana before you begin paying the total cost. This means that the Eldrazi Spawn you sacrifice for mana aren't around to be tapped for the convoke cost when you attempt to pay the total cost, so you can't get the Eldrazi Spawn tokens to do double duty for you.
This seems unintuitive to me. Since convoke is a "cost-reduction" mechanic i would think you would do use it before you paid the total cost.:-/
It is buried in the order of steps you have to perform whilst casting a spell. If you want to activate any mana abilities to cast the spell it must be done before any other ability. So by the time you could have tapped the eldrazi spawn to reduce the cost you will already have sacrificed it and sent it to the graveyard.
Quote from comp rules »
601.2e The player determines the total cost of the spell. Usually this is just the mana cost. Some spells have additional or alternative costs. Some effects may increase or reduce the cost to pay, or may provide other alternative costs. Costs may include paying mana, tapping permanents, sacrificing permanents, discarding cards, and so on. The total cost is the mana cost or alternative cost (as determined in rule 601.2b), plus all additional costs and cost increases, and minus all cost reductions. If the mana component of the total cost is reduced to nothing by cost reduction effects, it is considered to be {0}. It can’t be reduced to less than {0}. Once the total cost is determined, any effects that directly affect the total cost are applied. Then the resulting total cost becomes “locked in.” If effects would change the total cost after this time, they have no effect.
601.2f If the total cost includes a mana payment, the player then has a chance to activate mana abilities (see rule 605, “Mana Abilities”). Mana abilities must be activated before costs are paid.
601.2g The player pays the total cost in any order. Partial payments are not allowed. Unpayable costs can’t be paid.
Example: You cast Death Bomb, which costs {3}{B} and has an additional cost of sacrificing a creature. You sacrifice Thunderscape Familiar, whose effect makes your black spells cost {1} less to cast. Because a spell’s total cost is “locked in” before payments are actually made, you pay {2}{B}, not {3}{B}, even though you’re sacrificing the Familiar.
Convoke
702.48a Convoke is a static ability that functions while the spell with convoke is on the stack. “Convoke” means “As an additional cost to cast this spell, you may tap any number of untapped creatures you control. Each creature tapped this way reduces the cost to cast this spell by {1} or by one mana of any of that creature’s colors.” Using the convoke ability follows the rules for paying additional costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2e–g.
Example: You cast Guardian of Vitu-Ghazi, a spell with convoke that costs {6}{G}{W}. You announce that you’re going to tap a colorless creature, a red creature, and a green-and-white creature to help pay for it. The colorless creature and the red creature each reduce the spell’s cost by {1}. You choose whether the green-white creature reduces the spell’s cost by {1}, {G}, or {W}. Then the creatures become tapped as you pay Guardian of Vitu-Ghazi’s cost.
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
I knew about the convoke thing, but the rulings on Vendetta and Cradle of Vitality did surprise me. So, just to make this perfectly clear - If I have a 2/2 with Hyena Umbra on it, and you Vendetta it, the Umbra goes away and you lose 2 life, not 3? That makes sense when you really think about it, I suppose, but I'm surprised that they would make an interaction between two commons in the same set so unintuitive.
Just a question back to the convoke. Last week it was mentioned in the Omnath, Locus of Mana being sacrificed to Momentous Fall that depending on your choice (pay mana cost then sacrifice or sacrifice then pay mana cost) that the outcome would be different.
Sounds stupid but how does the convoke (since from what I understood its still considered an additional cost) ability differ from the other sacrifice cost. Unless does it come later in the question only because it reduces the mana cost? (as per 601.2e)
All costs for casting a spell are paid in any order.
Sacrificing Omnath IS a cost for casting a Momentous Fall
Sacrificing Eldrazi Spawn tokens IS NOT a cost for casting Chord of Calling.
The costs for casting Chord of Calling are [some amount of mana] and [some number of creatures tapped]. Sacrificing Eldrazi Spawn will produce some amount of mana, but the cost of Chord of Calling does not actually require you to sacrifice them. It requires you to pay mana, which you can get by sacrificing them, but the cost is "mana" and not "sacrifice Spawn". Because of that, you don't sacrifice them during the "pay all costs in any order" step of casting a spell. Instead, you sacrifice them during the "activate mana abilities" step, and then when it comes time to pay costs, they won't be around to be tapped.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 3 Magic Judge
Do you know any judges who always impress you with their work ethic, knowledge, or attitude? Nominate them to be the next Judge of the Week!
Just a question back to the convoke. Last week it was mentioned in the Omnath, Locus of Mana being sacrificed to Momentous Fall that depending on your choice (pay mana cost then sacrifice or sacrifice then pay mana cost) that the outcome would be different.
Sounds stupid but how does the convoke (since from what I understood its still considered an additional cost) ability differ from the other sacrifice cost. Unless does it come later in the question only because it reduces the mana cost? (as per 601.2e)
Convoke is an additional cost that buys a cost reduction. If you choose X=6 for Chord of Calling, the spell's total cost is 6GGG. If you announce that you convoke for 3, the spell's total cost becomes "3GGG and tap 3 untapped creatures you control." Before you can begin to pay that cost, you need to activate mana abilities to produce the necessary mana. Once you have the mana, you can pay the cost in any order, but you must produce the mana before beginning to pay the cost. If you sacrifice a mana baby to obtain mana, you can't tap it for the convoke cost, because it's not around when you pay the convoke cost.
That's really no different in Omnath/Fall's case: You must produce the mana before you begin paying the cost of "2GG and sacrifice Omnath" in any order.
The actual difference is that you're not trying to get mana out of Omnath by sacrificing it, but you are trying to get mana from the mana babies by sacrificing them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 2 Magic Judge
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
Perfect. Now here's an arbitrary scenario. If it was part of the cost to sacrifice AND to tap. Could I tap then sacrifice the same creature as long as it doesn't specify a different creature since I can choose to pay the costs in any order?
Obviously this scenario shouldn't occur, its just to get a better grasp on the situation.
Perfect. Now here's an arbitrary scenario. If it was part of the cost to sacrifice AND to tap. Could I tap then sacrifice the same creature as long as it doesn't specify a different creature since I can choose to pay the costs in any order?
Yes, that would work.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 2 Magic Judge
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
Thanks, Kahedron. The actual rules for Convoke was what i was missing. It is specifcally an optional, additional [bold]cost[/bold], so must be used after mana abilities. I should probably have looked this up before posting.:embarrass:
Regarding the question where a 1/1 has two Snake Umbras on it, wouldn't the first instance of the creature being destroyed trigger BOTH auras to destroy themselves to their totem armor triggers? It seems like a creature with multiple totem armors would have all the auras wipe at the same time at the first instance of destruction. Why is this different?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Magic the Gathering is like an RPG where your character is your deck and your XP is equal to how much money you're willing to spend." - Brian S.
Regarding the question where a 1/1 has two Snake Umbras on it, wouldn't the first instance of the creature being destroyed trigger BOTH auras to destroy themselves to their totem armor triggers? It seems like a creature with multiple totem armors would have all the auras wipe at the same time at the first instance of destruction. Why is this different?
Totem armor is not a triggered ability. It generates a replacement effect that replaces destruction of the enchanted creature with destruction of the Aura. Once this replacement effect has been applied, the creature is not being destroyed, so the other Aura has no event to replace and no reason to be destroyed.
As the controller of the enchanted creature, you choose which Aura gets destroyed.
* If a permanent you control is enchanted with multiple Auras that have totem armor, and the enchanted permanent would be destroyed, one of those Auras is destroyed instead -- but only one of them. You choose which one because you control the enchanted permanent.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 2 Magic Judge
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
About the convoke thing: does the situation change at all if you replace the Eldrazi spawns with a Wall of Roots with 4 counters already on it? Say I have a 0/1 wall and I want to use its mana ability and tap it for convoke. Is this not possible?
*snip minor judge center leakage* -Woap
If this isn't possible, then I made an incorrect ruling at GP Oakland when this exact scenario came up :P. (I also remember discussing it with a number of judges there, who agreed with me).
SBA are checked every time a player would get priority which is why a corrupt you cast will never kill you with out help. Whilst if you put the 5 0/-1 counter on the wall of roots the wall will be 0/0 the game would not move it to the graveyard until you have completed the actions of casting your chord of calling so you can still tap the wall to reduce the costs.
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
That depends on whether SBEs are checked between the steps of casting a spell. The Wall of Roots has toughness 0 after activating the mana ability but it won't die before SBEs are checked.
Right, I forgot about that part, thanks!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't click here!
(\__/)
(='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")signature to help him gain world domination!
I have a question about totem armors and Planar Cleansing. Since all non-land permanents are destroyed simultaneously, the totem armor is still attached to the creature when it is destroyed right? If the aura is destroyed at the exact same time, is it still able to use the replacement effect to save the creature? I'm pretty sure the number of totem armors attached to a creature doesn't matter since the auras are all destroyed, but I'm just curious about whether the totem armor is still able to protect the creature.
With planar cleansing and akroma's vengeance the game attempts to destroy creatures and enchantments at the same time so the totem armours will protect the creatures they are enchanting.
with Austere command with the correct modes chosen the creature would be destroyed as well as the enchantments are destroyed first leaving the creatures vulnerable.
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
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
"Can you apply the penal code to demons?"
Just to write the scenario out:
OP: Play Emrakul, Extra turn a is created.
End of opponent turn, Chronologist gives out Extra turn b
After extra turn b, opponent takes his extra turn a.
End of extra turn a, Chronologist gives it's contoroller extra turn c.
After extra turn c, you get your regular turn. (And the rest of the table gangs up and kills you...)
Set to default
And so it was originally - it got changed somewhere along the line of rewriting it for clarity. I've fixed the article.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
This situation came up for me in the Magic Online beta. My opponent had a lighthouse Chronologist fully leveled up and I cast an Emrakul (with a Djinn of Wishes). My opponent took his extra turn first, then I took my extra turn (and then I won as I swung away with Emrakul).
Based on the way Chronologist reads, this seems like the correct order. If it's not, then Magic Online has it wrong right now. =)
That's correct - Chronologist, then Emrakul - but the Chronologist should get another turn after the Emrakul extra turn before he receives his normal turn.
So it should go Emrakul Casting - Lighthouse - Emrakul Swinging - Lighthouse - Lighthouse Controller
This seems unintuitive to me. Since convoke is a "cost-reduction" mechanic i would think you would do use it before you paid the total cost.:-/
- 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
Sounds stupid but how does the convoke (since from what I understood its still considered an additional cost) ability differ from the other sacrifice cost. Unless does it come later in the question only because it reduces the mana cost? (as per 601.2e)
Sacrificing Omnath IS a cost for casting a Momentous Fall
Sacrificing Eldrazi Spawn tokens IS NOT a cost for casting Chord of Calling.
The costs for casting Chord of Calling are [some amount of mana] and [some number of creatures tapped]. Sacrificing Eldrazi Spawn will produce some amount of mana, but the cost of Chord of Calling does not actually require you to sacrifice them. It requires you to pay mana, which you can get by sacrificing them, but the cost is "mana" and not "sacrifice Spawn". Because of that, you don't sacrifice them during the "pay all costs in any order" step of casting a spell. Instead, you sacrifice them during the "activate mana abilities" step, and then when it comes time to pay costs, they won't be around to be tapped.
Do you know any judges who always impress you with their work ethic, knowledge, or attitude? Nominate them to be the next Judge of the Week!
Convoke is an additional cost that buys a cost reduction. If you choose X=6 for Chord of Calling, the spell's total cost is 6GGG. If you announce that you convoke for 3, the spell's total cost becomes "3GGG and tap 3 untapped creatures you control." Before you can begin to pay that cost, you need to activate mana abilities to produce the necessary mana. Once you have the mana, you can pay the cost in any order, but you must produce the mana before beginning to pay the cost. If you sacrifice a mana baby to obtain mana, you can't tap it for the convoke cost, because it's not around when you pay the convoke cost.
That's really no different in Omnath/Fall's case: You must produce the mana before you begin paying the cost of "2GG and sacrifice Omnath" in any order.
The actual difference is that you're not trying to get mana out of Omnath by sacrificing it, but you are trying to get mana from the mana babies by sacrificing them.
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
Obviously this scenario shouldn't occur, its just to get a better grasp on the situation.
Yes, that would work.
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
Totem armor is not a triggered ability. It generates a replacement effect that replaces destruction of the enchanted creature with destruction of the Aura. Once this replacement effect has been applied, the creature is not being destroyed, so the other Aura has no event to replace and no reason to be destroyed.
As the controller of the enchanted creature, you choose which Aura gets destroyed.
This is also addressed in the FAQ, by the way:
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
*snip minor judge center leakage* -Woap
If this isn't possible, then I made an incorrect ruling at GP Oakland when this exact scenario came up :P. (I also remember discussing it with a number of judges there, who agreed with me).
-Alexei Gousev
Level 1
(\__/)
(='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")signature to help him gain world domination!
- 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
Right, I forgot about that part, thanks!
(\__/)
(='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")signature to help him gain world domination!
with Austere command with the correct modes chosen the creature would be destroyed as well as the enchantments are destroyed first leaving the creatures vulnerable.
- 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