BTW, where will the [O]fficial thread being posted? I think it will be on Magic Rulings, but I'm not sure, since I never met such situation before.
I posted the question to a listserv run by WotC, and Gavin will post the [O]fficial response there. I'm sure that either Woapalanne or myself will repost that response to this thread, since this seems to be where the most people are reading this discussion.
also... if there were to be some disagreement in wizards (similar to here)... how would it be settled?... a vote of some kind?... is there someone with a final word?... or can the "final word" be overturned by congress (or some such shenanigans)?
also... if there were to be some disagreement in wizards (similar to here)... how would it be settled?... a vote of some kind?... is there someone with a final word?... or can the "final word" be overturned by congress (or some such shenanigans)?
Not being on the Rules Team, I really can't speak to it being more than the decision of the Magic Rules Manager as to how it works. Whatever the outcome is, my personal wish would be to see a section in the CR on "variable costs" as a concept, or just expanding the existing "costs" section to include more on variable costs. I'm not a fan of looking through the Glossary for that.
And we've received a final post-M10 answer on the Cascade-Bonds question. Note that this is not an [O] answer on how to rule it now, unfortunately; the NetReps are seeking further clarification, but the current rules are ambiguous and there aren't even any meaningful Extended events until M10's prerelease anyway, so my unofficial suggestion is to just stick to the post-M10 answer quoted below. I'll post an update if the NetReps get word that there is sufficient drive to continue the previous ruling for one month.
Quote from NateDogg, WotC Forums NetRep »
Sorry about the lateness. It's been under discussion and I finally have an [o] ruling from MaGo:
Quote:
This interaction will not work post-M10 rules. If a player is casting a
spell that has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of X isn't defined by
the text of that spell (as on Spoils of War), and an effect lets that
player cast that spell without paying any mana cost or alternative cost
that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. The rule will
not take additional costs (as on Bond of Agony) into account.
This update will be included in Monday's CI for those who don't check the forums regularly.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
Note that this is not an [O] answer on how to rule it now
The [O] answer on how to rule it now has arrived on MTGRULES-L. Emphasis mine:
After consideration, the rules manager has informed me that as part of
the 2010 magic update, that sentence will be clarified to bring it in
line with the desired interpretation: non-zero values for X are not
allowed when the X-mana cost of a spell is not being paid. In the
meantime, it has been ruled to work the same way... Bonds of Agony +
Cascade does NOT work.
--
Gavin Duggan, L3 Calgary: MTGRULES-L Netrep
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 2 Magic Judge
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
I wouldn't say it's that they hate combo players, the ruling was never meant to work that way. It was just ambiguous that it made it sound like either way could work even though it was only meant to work one way.
Goddamnit. Why does WotC hate us combo-players? Augh, this was definitely going to be the most fun combo deck ever
Chances are that the already played combo with Hypergenesis is better than the combo with Bonds of Agony would've been. With Hypergenesis, you only need some strong and hard-to-deal-with fatties in hand, while with Bonds, you need your life total to be higher than your opponent's when you go off, which is harder to do than it may sound especially if you're facing some kind of aggro.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I posted the question to a listserv run by WotC, and Gavin will post the [O]fficial response there. I'm sure that either Woapalanne or myself will repost that response to this thread, since this seems to be where the most people are reading this discussion.
also... if there were to be some disagreement in wizards (similar to here)... how would it be settled?... a vote of some kind?... is there someone with a final word?... or can the "final word" be overturned by congress (or some such shenanigans)?
figure of destiny = charmander
mulldrifter = counsel-man
profane command = pro manuver
No. When something is published on MTG-Rules, it will be reposted here. I expect that it will be another week, based on Gavin's email.
Not being on the Rules Team, I really can't speak to it being more than the decision of the Magic Rules Manager as to how it works. Whatever the outcome is, my personal wish would be to see a section in the CR on "variable costs" as a concept, or just expanding the existing "costs" section to include more on variable costs. I'm not a fan of looking through the Glossary for that.
This update will be included in Monday's CI for those who don't check the forums regularly.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
The [O] answer on how to rule it now has arrived on MTGRULES-L. Emphasis mine:
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
Chances are that the already played combo with Hypergenesis is better than the combo with Bonds of Agony would've been. With Hypergenesis, you only need some strong and hard-to-deal-with fatties in hand, while with Bonds, you need your life total to be higher than your opponent's when you go off, which is harder to do than it may sound especially if you're facing some kind of aggro.