2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Stonehorn Dignitary Question
    Yes, multiple combat phases will be skipped.
    9/22/2011 If more than one Stonehorn Dignitary enters the battlefield during the same turn, and you target the same opponent with each ability, that opponent will skip that many combat phases (over multiple turns if necessary).

    614.10. An effect that causes a player to skip an event, step, phase, or turn is a replacement effect. “Skip [something]” is the same as “Instead of doing [something], do nothing.” Once a step, phase, or turn has started, it can no longer be skipped—any skip effects will wait until the next occurrence.

    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Question about old card Agent of Stromgald
    Agent of Stromgald has an activated mana ability (it produces mana and doesn't target; and it's not a loyalty ability), not a static ability. It can be used any time you could normally use a mana ability: when you have priority or are asked for a mana payment (including during your opponent's turn).

    Also, there's no such thing as an interrupt now. Check a card's Oracle text to determine if an activated ability has any timing restriction other than the usual (any time you have priority for non-mana abilities).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Question about Teferi's Veil and Intet triggers
    Teferi's Veil triggers when you declare the attack; at that time (during the declare attackers step) it creates a delayed trigger for the end of combat step, which is when the phasing out actually occurs. Intet triggers during the combat damage step, which is before the end of combat step, so it won't yet be phased out when you resolve its trigger.

    However, once Intet phases out, you can no longer play cards you exiled with it, since the "for as long as Intet remains on the battlefield" duration can no longer track Intet. Notably that means you won't be able to play non-instant cards exiled with Intet's trigger unless they have flash.


    702.25e Continuous effects that affect a phased-out permanent may expire while that permanent is phased out. If so, they will no longer affect that permanent once it’s phased in. In particular, effects with “for as long as” durations that track that permanent (see rule 611.2b) end when that permanent phases out because they can no longer see it.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Ophiomancer and carrion feeder question
    Yes, you can get and sacrifice 4 tokens each turn. The "intervening 'if' clause" in Ophiomancer's trigger checks if you control any Snakes when it triggers and when it resolves, not in between. So as long as you don't control a Snake at the beginning of each upkeep, all 4 Ophiomancers would trigger and as long as you sacrifice each before the next trigger goes to resolve you can get a token and sacrifice it from each of the 4 triggers.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on ETB trigger questions
    1. Your description is off. You get 3 triggers, one for each Ally that enters the battlefield. Each trigger makes you gain 3 life at once, triggering the Vampire only once per trigger. So you gain 3*3=9 life and your opponent loses 3*1=3 life.

    2. Nothing about soulbond or the ability Deadeye Navigator grants targets, so shroud doesn't matter. Even if the soulbond trigger that created the pairing targeted, gaining shroud after the fact wouldn't break the pairing. So yes, it works.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Woodlurker Mimic + Garruk Relentless
    As you suspect, it doesn't. Garruk Relentless is only green, regardless of the color of its back face; color identity doesn't come into it.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Failing to find with Gifts Ungiven.
    Your opponent does as much as possible, choosing it, and you put it into the graveyard. It's the same principle that causes you to discard your only card if hit by Mind Rot, for example.

    609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.
    Example: If a player is holding only one card, an effect that reads “Discard two cards” causes him or her to discard only that card. If an effect moves cards out of the library (as opposed to drawing), it moves as many as possible.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Arlinn Kord + number of times you can use her in a turn

    606.3. A player may activate a loyalty ability of a permanent he or she controls any time he or she has priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of his or her turn, but only if no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.

    This is the rule. As you can see, the restriction (bolded) won't allow you to activate a loyalty ability of a permanent that has already had one of its loyalty abilities activated that turn. A permanent that transforms is still the same permanent; transforming doesn't "reset" this.
    Posted in: Rumored Card Rulings
  • posted a message on Thing in the ice and Vampire Hexmage
    Quote from protoaddict »
    If I have a Thing in the Ice in play and use Vampire Hexmage on it to remove all its counters, and then after resolution of that play an instant, do I get to flip TITI?

    Yes.
    My assumption is no becuase the wording on TITI is conditionally written, in that you have to remove a counter and THEN flip if it has no more counters, so removing the counter is part of the action that flips it.

    Your argument is poorly conceived. In terms of actions, transforming the card is a separate action from removing a counter from it. You don't do both at the same time. Or if you simply mean they are part of the same trigger and no one has priority to act in between, of course that's the case; but it doesn't follow that one is dependent on the other.

    The argument that I have seen against this is that the conditional is separated by a period and not a comma,

    The punctuation choice has no bearing on the meaning; of course, a period is grammatically correct, since they are two independent clauses.
    which means that they are not linked abilities and one is not contingent on the other.

    Linked abilities have no bearing on this. There is one ability here, not two abilities, and it is not an ability that references thing other instances of itself have done.
    Unsure if there is precedent for this so not sure which is correct.

    Neither is, as I explained. You follow the instructions in a spell or ability in the order written. So a card that tells you, "Do something. Then do something else," will have you do, or attempt to do, both things in order regardless of whether one, both, or neither can successfully be completed.

    Quote from Comp. rules »

    101.3. Any part of an instruction that’s impossible to perform is ignored. (In many cases the card will specify consequences for this; if it doesn’t, there’s no effect.)

    608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. However, replacement effects may modify these actions. In some cases, later text on the card may modify the meaning of earlier text (for example, “Destroy target creature. It can’t be regenerated” or “Counter target spell. If that spell is countered this way, put it on top of its owner’s library instead of into its owner’s graveyard.”) Don’t just apply effects step by step without thinking in these cases—read the whole text and apply the rules of English to the text.

    Quote from th3shinigami »
    Actually, the difference is the intervening if clause in SBW

    An "intervening 'if' clause" is a condition in a triggered ability that's checked to determine if the ability gets put on the stack or resolves, used in the form "[trigger event], if [condition], [effect]." The if clause in Thing in the Ice is just a regular if clause.
    Posted in: Rumored Card Rulings
  • posted a message on Vedalken Shackles permanent ownership.
    Yes, you'll control the creature indefinitely. An object that changes zones becomes a new object, so no longer connected to the Shackles, and since the creature enters the battlefield under your control as part of the Smuggler's ability, you're its default controller.

    PS: Re: the title, you won't be the owner, but the controller.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on FlickerForm and Meren of Clan Nel Toth (end step effects)
    The main thing is that all "at the beginning of the end step" triggers are put on the stack only when the end step begins, and so need to exist at that point and not show up later.

    So Meren has to be on the battlefield at the beginning of the end step to trigger; it (or any creature) would also need to be on the battlefield to be targeted by the Conjurer's Closet trigger.

    Flickerform's delayed trigger works the same way: it gets put on the stack at the beginning of the end step. Therefore it doesn't resolve until after that point; by which time the returned Meren won't have been on the battlefield in time to trigger.

    So if your opponent uses Flickerform, and your Meren returns to the battlefield during your end step, Meren won't trigger, and the Closet can't flicker Meren. In the same way the Closet can't flicker a creature that would be brought back by Meren's trigger either.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Noyan + man lands
    Noyan Dar's animation effect is indefinite; something animated by Noyan Dar's trigger won't stop being animated simply because another temporary animation effect expires.

    Note that the Nexus's power and toughness will depend on timestamps; the animation effect with the later timestamp will win with regard to the Nexus's base power and toughness (1/1 from the temporary Nexus effect or 0/0 from Noyan Dar). So if both effects are active, the later one wins, meaning Noyan Dar's trigger applying after animating via the Nexus ability would result in a 3/3 (0/0 with three +1/+1 counters) rather than a 4/4 (1/1 with three +1/+1 counters); if you activate the ability after applying the trigger it's 4/4; and when only Noyan Dar's effect is active the Nexus will of course be 3/3.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on monkey cage
    In both cases you get 3 tokens from Monkey Cage. Monkey Cage's effect doesn't say that getting the tokens is dependent on the Cage being sacrificed, so it isn't; you get tokens for each creature that triggers it, even though you'll only sacrifice the Cage to the first such trigger to resolve.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Rubinia Soulsinger
    Quote from Magiqmaster »
    Ok that's what I thought.

    I suppose that in the case of control magic, the God would then go back to it's owner, right?

    Control Magic is an Aura with enchant creature. An Aura attached to an illegal object falls off, so if the enchanted object stops being a creature, Control Magic falls off and no longer gives you control of the object; thus it would revert to control of the player with the control effect with the latest timestamp, or otherwise to its default controller (the player under whose control it entered the battlefield, which may not be its owner).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Rubinia Soulsinger
    Nothing special happens. The duration of the control change effect doesn't end simply because the object stops being a creature; whether it's a creature only matters at the points where target legality is checked (i.e. when activating and resolving the ability).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.