2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Equipment Control Question
    No, the Equipment does not become unattached if your opponent gains control of the creature it's attached to. The equip ability can cause confusion sometimes because it states "attach to target creature you control", but it is possible for Equipment you control to be attached to a creature you don't control if this situation happens.

    You can activate the Equipment's equip ability when you normally could in order to attach it to something else, though, as you still control that Equipment. You have to control another creature to target with the equip ability, though.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Guile and Commander
    Your opponent will have the option to move his commander to the command zone when Guile's ability exiles it. If a commander would be exiled for any reason, its owner can choose to put it in the command zone instead. If s/he does, you won't be able to cast it.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Happy 102nd birthday Hannes!
    Happy birthday, Hannes! And besides, he's still young...Yoda lived to 900, after all. Wink
    Posted in: Special Occasions
  • posted a message on Deck state - upside down cards
    Quote from Exsam
    Is one card completely indistinguishable from another? If the answer is 'no' then your cards are marked.

    Cards facing opposite directions are distinguishable from one another.

    While there may not be a pattern to the markings it is still something that is not allowed because it would be all too easy for someone to have their lands in one direction and spells in another.


    I've been playing for nearly 15 years and never knew that. I will have to keep that in mind for future Competitive or higher REL events. Thanks.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Deck state - upside down cards
    Quote from Exsam
    No, it is not legal.

    It is fairly easy to tell which direction a card is facing even when in a sleeve and having them in different directions differentiates them from one another leaving you with marked cards.


    Wait, so if a deck is shuffled with some cards ending up pointing in one direction (the top of the card pointing away from you) and others pointing in the other, the cards have become marked? That's how I initially interpreted the question (not whether, say, a card was sleeved upside down).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Deck state - upside down cards
    Green Sun's Zenith

    There is no rule that states that all cards must be oriented exactly the same way in a deck, so long as the deck is random and all cards are face-down.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Top-card-flipped interaction with scry-like abilities
    Quote from Segoth
    No thats not correct. The rule you quoted is during the casting of a spell or the activation of an ability. In this case it's not being cast or activated, it's resolving. In fact both cards you draw would also be revealed as you draw them, as well as the third card.


    I thought I was right the first time... I noticed the ruling when applied to spells and activated abilities and for some reason thought that was the case for triggered abilities. A lot of things would not work properly if that weren't the case.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Top-card-flipped interaction with scry-like abilities
    Quote from SicksEyeUrn
    I agree on revealing the draw 2 part but my understanding is you wouldn't reveal the top card of the library again until the process of completing the activated ability was done (ie if they choose 2 cards to put back on top of library). If they pay the 8 life then i do agree the next card is revealed.


    Yeah, you're right. From Oracle of Mul Daya's rulings:

    5/1/2007 If the top card of your library changes while you're casting a spell or activating an ability, the new top card won't be revealed until you finish casting that spell or activating that ability.


    So actually, yes, if the player pays 8 life to keep the two cards drawn with Sylvan Library, then the third card in line gets revealed. Otherwise, it doesn't.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Top-card-flipped interaction with scry-like abilities
    Oops, didn't see Sylvan Library there. In that case, yes, you're drawing the cards, so each card you draw gets revealed as you draw it (since an instruction to draw multiple cards is treated as if the effect said "draw a card" that many times). After you've drawn the two cards, whichever card is next on top of your library will be revealed.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Top-card-flipped interaction with scry-like abilities
    No. The only time you'll reveal the top card of your library is if the previous top card of your library gets moved to another zone (for example, if you draw it). If you're just looking at the top X cards of your library, they're still in your library. The top card should still be known to all players, and if the effect causes you to put some number of cards on the top or bottom of your library when you're done looking at them, the card that becomes the top card of your library is revealed then.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Gideon Jura & Geist of Saint Traft
    Quote from Archmage Eternal
    Why would it if it has hex? Its an ability thats causing creatures to attack Gideon. Whats the whole purpose of hex then?


    It doesn't matter if it has hexproof or not. The ability doesn't target any creatures, only an opponent. Its effect is something true about all creatures the targeted player controls at the beginning of his or her declare attackers step and only at that point.

    If Player A controls Gideon Jura and uses his +2 ability on Player B, any creature Player B controls at the beginning of his declare attackers step must attack Gideon if able, even if it's a creature that wasn't on the battlefield when Player A activated the ability. For example, if Player B puts a creature with haste onto the battlefield while under the effect of Gideon's +2 ability, that creature must attack Gideon.

    Hexproof only stops creatures from being the target of spells or abilities your opponents control. Geist of Saint Traft was never targeted, so it is subject to Gideon's +2 ability just like any other creature. However, the Angel token it creates was not on the battlefield when attackers were declared, and the ability that creates it does not specify what it's attacking, so it can attack a player or planeswalker other than Gideon if you want.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Gideon Jura & Geist of Saint Traft
    Quote from Archmage Eternal
    The Geist does not have to attack Gideon though, correct?


    The Geist of Saint Traft does have to attack Gideon. The Angel token it creates does not.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Uncharted Realms Discussions
    Quote from raventime22
    Taz could be Tezzeret and he's still working for Nicol Bolas in some capacity. Maybe they're trying to sow chaos in Ravnica as part of some master plan to unseat the Infinite Consortium.

    It's not implausible Nicol Bolas united the remaining Dmir under Tezzeret's leadership to undermine the work Jace is trying to do on Ravnica. After all wasn't Tezzeret U/B last we saw him?


    Probably not, seeing as the last time we saw him, Tezzeret was still in New Phyrexia.
    Posted in: Magic Storyline
  • posted a message on Uncharted Realms Discussions
    New story is up, the backstory behind Krenko, Mob Boss.

    http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/ur/204

    Among other things, it answers a question a lot of people have had lately since we found out about the guild structure in Return to Ravnica block.
    Posted in: Magic Storyline
  • posted a message on Penn State Tragedy
    It has everything to do with college sports. The problem is that the football program was the only reason Penn State opted to cover up Sandusky's activities. They weren't concerned about Sandusky's victims - they were only concerned about how news of his crimes would impact the football program, and nothing more. The school's officials and the athletic program, along with Coach Paterno, put their own reputation and the football program's legacy above the livelihoods of Sandusky's victims. The football program is directly linked to all of this, and the attitude of Penn State toward its football program caused this to become what it has. This isn't the same as an athletic booster buying cars for players.
    Posted in: Talk and Entertainment
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.