I am working on a custom card and ran into a dilemma. I want my card to make a copy of a card the caster owns that can be cast at that moment (and only in that moment), but I want the original card to end up in the caster’s hand.
One thought was “Reveal a card in your hand and copy it. You may cast the copy.”, but rule 706.12 says “the copy is created in the same zone the object is in”. Rule 706.10a says “If a copy of a card is in any zone other than the stack or the battlefield, it ceases to exist.” So would the copy be created in their hand and then cease to exist, or does the “cease to exist” action wait to see if they will cast it? It seems to work that way with Demilich.
What if the customer card did this:
Reveal an instant or sorcery in your hand: Until end of turn, it gains buyback
I don't know how much the buyback cost would be or how it would fit in the rules though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
pucatrade
big receipts
alpha mox emerald
beta time walk
4 goyfs received
3 liliana of the veil
4 karn liberated
3 force of will
4 grove of the burnwillows
snapcaster mage
3 horizon canopy
2 full art damnation
The trouble with this kind of card would be that you would be making it possible to cast a card (even if its just a copy of it) for an extremely low cost. Most copy spells cost 2-4 Mana, but with how (iam guessing here) your thinking of producing this spell could be busted.
Though i think the wording you want may be this:
HAND SPELL 2UU
Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast HAND SPELL, reveal an instant or sorcary card of cost 4 or less from your hand.
HAND SPELL becomes a copy of the revealed Card.
It could be something along these lines, though look at the wording for Village Rites for ideas.
704.5e If a copy of a spell is in a zone other than the stack, it ceases to exist. If a copy of a card is in
any zone other than the stack or the battlefield, it ceases to exist.
It's a state based action, and so happens right before a player gets priority. Not during the resolution of a spell or ability. This wording
Reveal a card in your hand and copy it. You may cast the copy.
is fine as it gives permission to cast the copy during the resolution of your spell/ability. The player has to choose and do so then and there, and he can do so without having priority.
Thanks! This would be great at simplifying it, but it would not be able to do all I want it to do. I will reply to my original post with further explanation.
EDIT: Whoops, I have to get use to how replying works. I was replying to Pokerkingdave
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.
Thanks, Rezzahan! Yes, I must have found another, more obscure occurrence of that concept in 706. Either way, your answer settles my concern.
Thanks also to Funk Pirate. I have definitely been thinking about the cost cheating that can happen, but I do not think it is as big of a concern in my case. I had simplified the card for the purpose of the question, but this is the entirety of what I was thinking: (yes, more atypical things are going on)
On a creature:
"2UR, t: Reveal the top card of your
library and put it into your hand. If it has X in its mana cost, copy it. You may
cast the copy without paying its mana cost, except
X is 1."
So Buyback (per Pokerkingdave's suggestion) would not work entirely because I want this to hit creatures like Hydras as well as instants and sorceries. Cheating in high-costing cards would not be common since most X spells have mana value 3 or less. Still, yes, it might be good to say "if it has X in its mana cost and mana value 3 or less.
...Reveal the top card of your library and put it into your hand...
This part is troublesome, I think. Because the card is revealed in the library and then leaves the library. Which means it becomes a new object, and stops being revealed. It also means, that the copy is created in the library. Simply reversing the order should work, though.
You could also do something like 'exile the top card of your library. If it has X in its casting cost copy it and you may cast the copy. Then place the exiled card into your hand'
You could also do something like 'exile the top card of your library. If it has X in its casting cost copy it and you may cast the copy. Then place the exiled card into your hand'
Yeah, true, that would sound more like what we usually see, too. It sort of bounces around between talking about the copy and talking about the original, though, which might be confusing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
One thought was “Reveal a card in your hand and copy it. You may cast the copy.”, but rule 706.12 says “the copy is created in the same zone the object is in”. Rule 706.10a says “If a copy of a card is in any zone other than the stack or the battlefield, it ceases to exist.” So would the copy be created in their hand and then cease to exist, or does the “cease to exist” action wait to see if they will cast it? It seems to work that way with Demilich.
Reveal an instant or sorcery in your hand: Until end of turn, it gains buyback
I don't know how much the buyback cost would be or how it would fit in the rules though.
pucatrade
big receipts
alpha mox emerald
beta time walk
4 goyfs received
3 liliana of the veil
4 karn liberated
3 force of will
4 grove of the burnwillows
snapcaster mage
3 horizon canopy
2 full art damnation
Though i think the wording you want may be this:
HAND SPELL 2UU
Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast HAND SPELL, reveal an instant or sorcary card of cost 4 or less from your hand.
HAND SPELL becomes a copy of the revealed Card.
It could be something along these lines, though look at the wording for Village Rites for ideas.
~Funk Pirate
It's a state based action, and so happens right before a player gets priority. Not during the resolution of a spell or ability. This wording
is fine as it gives permission to cast the copy during the resolution of your spell/ability. The player has to choose and do so then and there, and he can do so without having priority.
Former Rules Advisor
"Everything's better with pirates." - Lodge
(The Gamers: Dorkness Rising)
"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."
(Girl Genius - Fairy Tale Theater Break - Cinderella, end of volume 8)
EDIT: Whoops, I have to get use to how replying works. I was replying to Pokerkingdave
Thanks also to Funk Pirate. I have definitely been thinking about the cost cheating that can happen, but I do not think it is as big of a concern in my case. I had simplified the card for the purpose of the question, but this is the entirety of what I was thinking: (yes, more atypical things are going on)
On a creature:
"2UR, t: Reveal the top card of your
library and put it into your hand. If it has
X in its mana cost, copy it. You may
cast the copy without paying its mana cost, except
X is 1."
So Buyback (per Pokerkingdave's suggestion) would not work entirely because I want this to hit creatures like Hydras as well as instants and sorceries. Cheating in high-costing cards would not be common since most X spells have mana value 3 or less. Still, yes, it might be good to say "if it has X in its mana cost and mana value 3 or less.
This part is troublesome, I think. Because the card is revealed in the library and then leaves the library. Which means it becomes a new object, and stops being revealed. It also means, that the copy is created in the library. Simply reversing the order should work, though.
"... Draw a card and reveal it ..."
is shorter and circumvents the issue.
Former Rules Advisor
"Everything's better with pirates." - Lodge
(The Gamers: Dorkness Rising)
"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."
(Girl Genius - Fairy Tale Theater Break - Cinderella, end of volume 8)
Oh perfect! I didn’t know you could do that. I guess if I had known about Fa'adiyah Seer…
Yeah, true, that would sound more like what we usually see, too. It sort of bounces around between talking about the copy and talking about the original, though, which might be confusing.