Tabak (rules manager) regarding Chain Veil - "From the upcoming M15 Release Notes: Each additional time The Chain Veil’s last ability resolves will allow you to activate a loyalty ability of each planeswalker you control an additional time. For example, if you activate The Chain Veil’s last ability, untap it, then activate it again, you can activate a loyalty ability of a planeswalker you control three times that turn."
Tabak (rules manager) regarding Chain Veil - "From the upcoming M15 Release Notes: Each additional time The Chain Veil’s last ability resolves will allow you to activate a loyalty ability of each planeswalker you control an additional time. For example, if you activate The Chain Veil’s last ability, untap it, then activate it again, you can activate a loyalty ability of a planeswalker you control three times that turn."
So, it works how most of us thought. Looks like Tezzeret has a new bff!
Tabak (rules manager) regarding Chain Veil - "From the upcoming M15 Release Notes: Each additional time The Chain Veil’s last ability resolves will allow you to activate a loyalty ability of each planeswalker you control an additional time. For example, if you activate The Chain Veil’s last ability, untap it, then activate it again, you can activate a loyalty ability of a planeswalker you control three times that turn."
So, it works how most of us thought. Looks like Tezzeret has a new bff!
Lots of stuff goes well with it. I feel it would have been unplayable without the multi-use.
Tabak (rules manager) regarding Chain Veil - "From the upcoming M15 Release Notes: Each additional time The Chain Veil’s last ability resolves will allow you to activate a loyalty ability of each planeswalker you control an additional time. For example, if you activate The Chain Veil’s last ability, untap it, then activate it again, you can activate a loyalty ability of a planeswalker you control three times that turn."
So, it works how most of us thought. Looks like Tezzeret has a new bff!
Thank you for linking this. I was on my phone when I read the last few pages of this thread and couldn't share it. I really don't understand how so many people have such low reading comprehension.
[EDH] It's built to be a casual format and to a specific vision, and if you don't like the vision, there's nothing wrong with that, but it's not going to change to accommodate everyone. Big tent is not a goal.
It really makes no sense to me that you can put the ability on the stack, copy it, let both resolve, then activate your abilities three times. It just seems that the wording they chose is horrible to convey that this is the way it works. If it's supposed to work in the same way as extra land drops from something like Oracle of Mul Daya, why isn't it worded that way? Something like "For each planeswalker you control, you may activate a loyalty ability of that planeswalker an additional time this turn" would have made far more sense in my opinion.
So now we have another Thorncaster Sliver, but much cheaper and black.
Slivers are looking awesome.
The effect is a lot worse than Thorncaster Sliver's though since it doesn't let you kill opposing creatures. The card may be as strong or stronger overall, but the ability is far weaker.
Meh, potato potahto. Yeah, it doesn't kill creatures, but it doesnt get stopped by Urza's Armor, either.
Except that most people play creatures in their decks, while they don't often play Urza's Armor. The important factor is that it has a much lower converted mana cost.
It really makes no sense to me that you can put the ability on the stack, copy it, let both resolve, then activate your abilities three times. It just seems that the wording they chose is horrible to convey that this is the way it works. If it's supposed to work in the same way as extra land drops from something like Oracle of Mul Daya, why isn't it worded that way? Something like "For each planeswalker you control, you may activate a loyalty ability of that planeswalker an additional time this turn" would have made far more sense in my opinion.
People put too much thought in the word "once"
If you read it fully, as it is meant to be read, it reads "you may activate one of its loyalty abilities once this turn as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn."
It's so you can distinguish it from a normal use. It points towards the ability, not that you can "use it once this turn".
EDIT: to clarify, if the "once" wasn't there, it would mean you could use that specific ability, infinite times.
EDIT2: To clarify further.. it would say "you may activate one of its loyalty abilities this turn as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn.".
In this case you could activate that "one" ability for as many times as you choose (infinitely) because it's "as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn.".
I hope this explains things.
It really makes no sense to me that you can put the ability on the stack, copy it, let both resolve, then activate your abilities three times. It just seems that the wording they chose is horrible to convey that this is the way it works. If it's supposed to work in the same way as extra land drops from something like Oracle of Mul Daya, why isn't it worded that way? Something like "For each planeswalker you control, you may activate a loyalty ability of that planeswalker an additional time this turn" would have made far more sense in my opinion.
People put too much thought in the word "once"
If you read it fully, as it is meant to be read, it reads "you may activate one of its loyalty abilities once this turn as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn."
It's so you can distinguish it from a normal use. It points towards the ability, not that you can "use it once this turn".
EDIT: to clarify, if the "once" wasn't there, it would mean you could use that specific ability, infinite times.
EDIT2: To clarify further.. it would say "you may activate one of its loyalty abilities this turn as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn.".
In this case you could activate that "one" ability for as many times as you choose (infinitely) because it's "as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn.".
I hope this explains things.
The part that makes the least sense to me is how you can stack them up. It seems like a subsequent activation should overwrite a previous one based on the wording, meaning that if you had resolved the Chain Veil's ability previously and the proceeded to activate it again without activating any loyalty abilities in between, you wouldn't get to stack up multiple extra uses, but apparently you can. It would be the same as saying "You may play a land as though you haven't played one this turn" in a situation where you in fact hadn't played a land this turn. It wouldn't make sense that you suddenly get to play two lands, would it?
Think of Explore. What's an additional land play if not the ability to play a land as though you haven't played one this turn? The difference is that playing an additional land is already encoded into magicspeak, but the ability to use an additional planeswalker ability isn't yet.
Think of Explore. What's an additional land play if not the ability to play a land as though you haven't played one this turn? The difference is that playing an additional land is already encoded into magicspeak, but the ability to use an additional planeswalker ability isn't yet.
Not exactly though. Otherwise you would run into issues if you tried to cast multiple copies of Explore without playing any lands. Maybe I am just not understanding the intent behind the ruling, but I don't think I'm going to be convinced by this wording.
It would be the same as saying "You may play a land as though you haven't played one this turn" in a situation where you in fact hadn't played a land this turn. It wouldn't make sense that you suddenly get to play two lands, would it?
Yeah, I don't see how this doesn't make sense. "You may a land as though you haven't" is now "active" until EOT, when you play a land you choose if it's the one with "as though you haven't" ruled on it, or the normal 1 land drop.
This isn't that hard..
It would be the same as saying "You may play a land as though you haven't played one this turn" in a situation where you in fact hadn't played a land this turn. It wouldn't make sense that you suddenly get to play two lands, would it?
Yeah, I don't see how this doesn't make sense. "You may a land as though you haven't" is now "active" until EOT, when you play a land you choose if it's the one with "as though you haven't" ruled on it, or the normal 1 land drop.
This isn't that hard..
Actually this sort of makes sense to me now. So it's essentially creating a condition where you can activate the ability as though you haven't, completely independently of you normal one per turn, and then every subsequent activation creates another instance of this condition? I guess that makes sense, but it's really weird and certainly not the way I thought of it at first, so it seems like this card will still cause a lot of confusion.
It would be the same as saying "You may play a land as though you haven't played one this turn" in a situation where you in fact hadn't played a land this turn. It wouldn't make sense that you suddenly get to play two lands, would it?
Yeah, I don't see how this doesn't make sense. "You may a land as though you haven't" is now "active" until EOT, when you play a land you choose if it's the one with "as though you haven't" ruled on it, or the normal 1 land drop.
This isn't that hard..
Actually this sort of makes sense to me now. So it's essentially creating a condition where you can activate the ability as though you haven't, completely independently of you normal one per turn, and then every subsequent activation creates another instance of this condition? I guess that makes sense, but it's really weird and certainly not the way I thought of it at first, so it seems like this card will still cause a lot of confusion.
Well, if you think of it, it isn't "that" weird. People just tend to freak out once they see the word "once" on an ability and can't fully place it in context as to why it was written there in the first place. (which is to prevent infinite usage)
From my understanding, having multiple copies of Chain Veil's ability on the stack via Rings or Kurk or what have you doesn't do anything. However, if you use the veil, then use the loyalty abilities it grants, then have it be untapped and use it again, THEN it has the potential to go infinite. Or, at least, that seems to be a logical reading of the text. I'm sure it will be answered later anyway, though, and it's still a pretty cool card to support a Planeswalkers deck either way.
Well, if you think of it, it isn't "that" weird. People just tend to freak out once they see the word "once" on an ability and can't fully place it in context as to why it was written there in the first place. (which is to prevent infinite usage)
It isn't so much the use of the word "once" that was throwing me off as it was the fact that I didn't understand that it was creating separate conditions which each allowed you to activate the loyalty abilities, rather than one condition that kept overwriting itself.
From my understanding, having multiple copies of Chain Veil's ability on the stack via Rings or Kurk or what have you doesn't do anything. However, if you use the veil, then use the loyalty abilities it grants, then have it be untapped and use it again, THEN it has the potential to go infinite. Or, at least, that seems to be a logical reading of the text. I'm sure it will be answered later anyway, though, and it's still a pretty cool card to support a Planeswalkers deck either way.
That's what I thought, but it's actually incorrect. It doesn't matter whether you use the loyalty abilties in between each resolution. You could activate the Veil 10 times in a row (if you had the means) and then activate your loyalty abilities 11 times in a row (original + additional 10). This is what I thought didn't make sense based on the wording of the card, but based on the way Juwdah explained it (and on what Matt Tabak said on Twitter), I guess it does still work.
From my understanding, having multiple copies of Chain Veil's ability on the stack via Rings or Kurk or what have you doesn't do anything. However, if you use the veil, then use the loyalty abilities it grants, then have it be untapped and use it again, THEN it has the potential to go infinite. Or, at least, that seems to be a logical reading of the text. I'm sure it will be answered later anyway, though, and it's still a pretty cool card to support a Planeswalkers deck either way.
It has been answered already.
You can go infinite either way.
Quoting Jivan who is quoting Tabak:
Tabak (rules manager) regarding Chain Veil - "From the upcoming M15 Release Notes: Each additional time The Chain Veil’s last ability resolves will allow you to activate a loyalty ability of each planeswalker you control an additional time. For example, if you activate The Chain Veil’s last ability, untap it, then activate it again, you can activate a loyalty ability of a planeswalker you control three times that turn."
Driving Stick with Isochron Scepter.
Trinkets and Treasure: An Artificer's Toolbox.
Proc Drops: Playing with One Drops.
Deck Primer: Toshiro Umezawa
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
StaffSo, it works how most of us thought. Looks like Tezzeret has a new bff!
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
StaffLots of stuff goes well with it. I feel it would have been unplayable without the multi-use.
I really like Hornet's Nest as well. All sorts of fun shenanigan possibilities there.
Thank you for linking this. I was on my phone when I read the last few pages of this thread and couldn't share it. I really don't understand how so many people have such low reading comprehension.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
Slivers are looking awesome.
The effect is a lot worse than Thorncaster Sliver's though since it doesn't let you kill opposing creatures. The card may be as strong or stronger overall, but the ability is far weaker.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
Except that most people play creatures in their decks, while they don't often play Urza's Armor. The important factor is that it has a much lower converted mana cost.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
People put too much thought in the word "once"
If you read it fully, as it is meant to be read, it reads "you may activate one of its loyalty abilities once this turn as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn."
It's so you can distinguish it from a normal use. It points towards the ability, not that you can "use it once this turn".
EDIT: to clarify, if the "once" wasn't there, it would mean you could use that specific ability, infinite times.
EDIT2: To clarify further.. it would say "you may activate one of its loyalty abilities this turn as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn.".
In this case you could activate that "one" ability for as many times as you choose (infinitely) because it's "as though none of its loyalty abilities have been activated this turn.".
I hope this explains things.
[Primer] Kozilek, Butcher with Juice.
The part that makes the least sense to me is how you can stack them up. It seems like a subsequent activation should overwrite a previous one based on the wording, meaning that if you had resolved the Chain Veil's ability previously and the proceeded to activate it again without activating any loyalty abilities in between, you wouldn't get to stack up multiple extra uses, but apparently you can. It would be the same as saying "You may play a land as though you haven't played one this turn" in a situation where you in fact hadn't played a land this turn. It wouldn't make sense that you suddenly get to play two lands, would it?
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
Not exactly though. Otherwise you would run into issues if you tried to cast multiple copies of Explore without playing any lands. Maybe I am just not understanding the intent behind the ruling, but I don't think I'm going to be convinced by this wording.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
Yeah, I don't see how this doesn't make sense.
"You may a land as though you haven't" is now "active" until EOT, when you play a land you choose if it's the one with "as though you haven't" ruled on it, or the normal 1 land drop.
This isn't that hard..
[Primer] Kozilek, Butcher with Juice.
Actually this sort of makes sense to me now. So it's essentially creating a condition where you can activate the ability as though you haven't, completely independently of you normal one per turn, and then every subsequent activation creates another instance of this condition? I guess that makes sense, but it's really weird and certainly not the way I thought of it at first, so it seems like this card will still cause a lot of confusion.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
Well, if you think of it, it isn't "that" weird. People just tend to freak out once they see the word "once" on an ability and can't fully place it in context as to why it was written there in the first place. (which is to prevent infinite usage)
[Primer] Kozilek, Butcher with Juice.
It isn't so much the use of the word "once" that was throwing me off as it was the fact that I didn't understand that it was creating separate conditions which each allowed you to activate the loyalty abilities, rather than one condition that kept overwriting itself.
That's what I thought, but it's actually incorrect. It doesn't matter whether you use the loyalty abilties in between each resolution. You could activate the Veil 10 times in a row (if you had the means) and then activate your loyalty abilities 11 times in a row (original + additional 10). This is what I thought didn't make sense based on the wording of the card, but based on the way Juwdah explained it (and on what Matt Tabak said on Twitter), I guess it does still work.
GUB [Retired Primer] The Mimeoplasm BUG
Modern: UR Storm RU
Cube: WUBRG Pauper Cube GRBUW
Credit for the banner goes to DarkNightCavalier at Heroes of the Plane Studios
It has been answered already.
You can go infinite either way.
Quoting Jivan who is quoting Tabak:
[Primer] Kozilek, Butcher with Juice.
Turnabout + Reiterate (create infinite mana) + Filigree Sages + Chain Veil + Chandra, Pyromaster (infinite damage with her +1).
So that's a 5 card combo...to many pieces so not broken but still powerful.
EDH Decks:
WUBOloro, Combo ControlWUB
UBOona Reanimator ComboUB
BRGProssh, Eater of the Blue MageBRG
UBRGrixis StormUBR
Rebuilding Jenara (stealyourstuff.dec)
Pauper Deck:
UBInspired SirenUB
You're telling me 4 forests, new nissa, ral zareck, chain veil isn't easier?
Sig and Avatar Credit: Heroes of the Plane Studios
ral zarek however kills them with hi s-2 infinitely
Sig and Avatar Credit: Heroes of the Plane Studios