If a permanent is phased out when a turn ends, do "end of turn" effects ignore its existence? For example, if I cast an Insurrection, take control of all creatures, then cast a Guardian of Faith, do the creatures phase back in under my control on my next untap step and remain under my control indefinitely?
If a permanent is phased out when a turn ends, do "end of turn" effects ignore its existence?
All "until end of turn" effects end in the cleanup step.
514. Cleanup Step
514.1. First, if the active player’s hand contains more cards than their maximum hand size (normally
seven), they discard enough cards to reduce their hand size to that number. This turn-based action
doesn’t use the stack.
514.2. Second, the following actions happen simultaneously: all damage marked on permanents
(including phased-out permanents) is removed and all “until end of turn” and “this turn” effects end.
This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack.
For example, if I cast an Insurrection, take control of all creatures, then cast a Guardian of Faith, do the creatures phase back in under my control on my next untap step
They phase in at that time, because you controlled them when they phased out. But there is no longer any reason for you to control them.
702.26a Phasing is a static ability that modifies the rules of the untap step. During each player’s
untap step, before the active player untaps permanents, all phased-in permanents with phasing
that player controls “phase out.” Simultaneously, all phased-out permanents that had phased out
under that player’s control “phase in.”
No, because that control effect has already ended.
702.26f 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.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Why bother with mere rulings when so many answers can be found in the Rules?
The effect of Insurrection can expire even while the permanent it affects is phased out (C.R. 702.26f). Even so, the permanent will phase in during the next untap step of whoever controlled it when it phased out (C.R. 502.1).
702.26f 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.
I'd like to understand how phasing compares to exiling. Suppose that I have a Prowling Geistcatcher in play. I then cast Insurrection. I sacrifice all the creatures with Prowling Geistcatcher. What happens when Geistcatcher leaves play? Alternatively, suppose that I cast Insurrection, take control of all creatures, then cast Lumbering Battlement. Do I maintain control of the creatures indefinitely after Lumbering Battlement leaves play?
The effect of Insurrection is created and that effect concerns the set of creatures that is determined when it is created. While a creature is phased out, it doesn't exist, so nothing applies to a thing that doesn't exist, and no one controls a thing that doesn't exist. When the object phases back in, in the example, Insurrection's turn has passed, so that effect does not exist any more, which means it does not bear on who controls the phased-in creature now that it does exist.
If you actually move creatures out of the battlefield, then Insurrection stops applying to them because those creatures are gone, and the objects are considered expired - their lifetimes end at the zone change. Prowling Geistcatcher puts a set of cards onto the battlefield under a player's control. These are completely distinct from the creatures that were sacrificed and became those cards in exile. Long, long before any of that though, Insurrection stopped mattering to them when they were sacrificed, because they were gone. Insurrection only applies to the creatures, it doesn't know or care about objects in exile.
Similarly, Lumbering Battlement ends the lifetimes of the creatures that would be affected by Insurrection. Insurrection expiring doesn't change much because the things it applied to stopped existing first. Lumbering Battlement returns the cards to the battlefield under their owner's control, because that's how effects written like Lumbering Battlement default to working when you "exile [something] until" an event.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Prowling Geistcatcher puts a set of cards onto the battlefield under a player's control. These are completely distinct from the creatures that were sacrificed and became those cards in exile. Long, long before any of that though, Insurrection stopped mattering to them when they were sacrificed, because they were gone. Insurrection only applies to the creatures, it doesn't know or care about objects in exile.
Similarly, Lumbering Battlement ends the lifetimes of the creatures that would be affected by Insurrection. Insurrection expiring doesn't change much because the things it applied to stopped existing first. Lumbering Battlement returns the cards to the battlefield under their owner's control, because that's how effects written like Lumbering Battlement default to working when you "exile [something] until" an event.
In the context of what you said (above), when Prowling Geistcatcher leaves play, it puts a set of new cards onto the battlefield whose nature and number match the no-longer-existing cards that used to be permanents but were sacrificed. When it does this, Insurrection does not exist so, by default, one would expect those new cards to come into play under their owner's control-- since, as you point out, that's how exiled and returned cards typically default to working.
Similarly, Lumbering Battlement exiles the creatures until it leaves the battlefield. When it leaves play, it puts a new set of cards onto the battlefield whose nature and number match the no-longer-existing cards that it exiled earlier. When it does this, Insurrection does not exist so, by default, one would expect those new cards to come into play under their owner's control (not mine)-- since, as you point out, that's how effects written like Lumbering Battlement default to working when you 'exile [something] until' an event.
However, Prowling Geistcatcher and Lumbering Battlement aren't typical 'exile-and-return' cards. They are unusual. The text on Prowling Geistcatcher explicitly says, "When Prowling Geistcatcher leaves the battlefield, return each card exiled with it to the battlefield under your control." The text on Lumbering Battlement doesn't explicitly say that they come in under your control but-- unlike the vast majority of exile-and-return cards, it says nothing about the creatures returning under their owners' control. What it says is, "When Lumbering Battlement enters the battlefield, exile any number of other nontoken creatures you control until it leaves the battlefield." It says nothing about control changing. Almost every other exile-and-return card explicitly says that the cards enter under their owner's control, but this one doesn't.
I have two questions:
Since the text on Prowling Geistcatcher says, "return each card exiled with it to the battlefield under your control," doesn't that mean that the creatures return from exile under my control since the text on a card overrules everything else?
Since I was controling the creatures when Lumbering Battlement exiled them, doesn't it seem reasonable that I continue to control them after they return to play-- given that there is nothing on the card that explicitly says that control should change? Or is there an explicit Magic the Gathering rule that requires exiled cards to always return to the battlefield under their owner's control, unless a card explicitly states otherwise?
Since the text on Prowling Geistcatcher says, "return each card exiled with it to the battlefield under your control," doesn't that mean that the creatures return from exile under my control since the text on a card overrules everything else?
Yes. The post acknowledges the way Geistcatcher is actually written, I didn't claim it works like Lumbering Battlement.
Since I was controling the creatures when Lumbering Battlement exiled them, doesn't it seem reasonable that I continue to control them after they return to play-- given that there is nothing on the card that explicitly says that control should change? Or is there an explicit Magic the Gathering rule that requires exiled cards to always return to the battlefield under their owner's control, unless a card explicitly states otherwise?
There is an explicit rule, created for exactly the kind of effect on Lumbering Battlement when that mechanic was invented. The zone change "until" effect:
610.3. Some one-shot effects cause an object to change zones “until” a specified event occurs. A second one-shot effect is created immediately after the specified event. This second one-shot effect returns the object to its previous zone.
610.3c An object returned to the battlefield this way returns under its owner’s control unless otherwise specified.
Back to Geistcatcher, the point perhaps that I need to make is that Insurrection isn't relevant any more. The Geistcatcher says the player that it means under whose control to put the cards back. That's unlike phasing because the phasing in restores the creature to existing, it didn't actually change zones; but the control of an object has no reason to be sticky or 'cached'. Control is determined statically.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
All "until end of turn" effects end in the cleanup step.
They phase in at that time, because you controlled them when they phased out. But there is no longer any reason for you to control them.
No, because that control effect has already ended.
If you actually move creatures out of the battlefield, then Insurrection stops applying to them because those creatures are gone, and the objects are considered expired - their lifetimes end at the zone change. Prowling Geistcatcher puts a set of cards onto the battlefield under a player's control. These are completely distinct from the creatures that were sacrificed and became those cards in exile. Long, long before any of that though, Insurrection stopped mattering to them when they were sacrificed, because they were gone. Insurrection only applies to the creatures, it doesn't know or care about objects in exile.
Similarly, Lumbering Battlement ends the lifetimes of the creatures that would be affected by Insurrection. Insurrection expiring doesn't change much because the things it applied to stopped existing first. Lumbering Battlement returns the cards to the battlefield under their owner's control, because that's how effects written like Lumbering Battlement default to working when you "exile [something] until" an event.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Similarly, Lumbering Battlement exiles the creatures until it leaves the battlefield. When it leaves play, it puts a new set of cards onto the battlefield whose nature and number match the no-longer-existing cards that it exiled earlier. When it does this, Insurrection does not exist so, by default, one would expect those new cards to come into play under their owner's control (not mine)-- since, as you point out, that's how effects written like Lumbering Battlement default to working when you 'exile [something] until' an event.
However, Prowling Geistcatcher and Lumbering Battlement aren't typical 'exile-and-return' cards. They are unusual. The text on Prowling Geistcatcher explicitly says, "When Prowling Geistcatcher leaves the battlefield, return each card exiled with it to the battlefield under your control." The text on Lumbering Battlement doesn't explicitly say that they come in under your control but-- unlike the vast majority of exile-and-return cards, it says nothing about the creatures returning under their owners' control. What it says is, "When Lumbering Battlement enters the battlefield, exile any number of other nontoken creatures you control until it leaves the battlefield." It says nothing about control changing. Almost every other exile-and-return card explicitly says that the cards enter under their owner's control, but this one doesn't.
I have two questions:
Since the text on Prowling Geistcatcher says, "return each card exiled with it to the battlefield under your control," doesn't that mean that the creatures return from exile under my control since the text on a card overrules everything else?
Since I was controling the creatures when Lumbering Battlement exiled them, doesn't it seem reasonable that I continue to control them after they return to play-- given that there is nothing on the card that explicitly says that control should change? Or is there an explicit Magic the Gathering rule that requires exiled cards to always return to the battlefield under their owner's control, unless a card explicitly states otherwise?
.
Yes. The post acknowledges the way Geistcatcher is actually written, I didn't claim it works like Lumbering Battlement.
There is an explicit rule, created for exactly the kind of effect on Lumbering Battlement when that mechanic was invented. The zone change "until" effect:
610.3. Some one-shot effects cause an object to change zones “until” a specified event occurs. A second one-shot effect is created immediately after the specified event. This second one-shot effect returns the object to its previous zone.
610.3c An object returned to the battlefield this way returns under its owner’s control unless otherwise specified.
Back to Geistcatcher, the point perhaps that I need to make is that Insurrection isn't relevant any more. The Geistcatcher says the player that it means under whose control to put the cards back. That's unlike phasing because the phasing in restores the creature to existing, it didn't actually change zones; but the control of an object has no reason to be sticky or 'cached'. Control is determined statically.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].