2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Companion question
    It is whatever you want; you are sideboarding after all. So, you can put it into your deck if you want. If you do that, it is no longer a Companion (or, more specifically, can't be declared as one). If you want to use it as your companion, you need to leave it in the sideboard and still ensure your main deck matches the condition after you are done sideboarding.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Questions about Vorinclex, Monstrous Raider interaction
    1) Yes. Same as Doubling Season

    2) No. They paid the cost; Vorinclex just modified the cost to be "add 0 counters". It is similar to how Vizier of Remedies and Devoted Druid still works, But Melira + Druid doesn't. Also, you need to re-read Solemnity; it doesn't do anything to planeswalkers.

    3) Yes. See answer to Q2. Since counters are never added, the last trigger never triggers to make them sac it.

    4) If a Saga enters with more than one counter, or "skips" a chapter ability by adding more than one counter, you get both effects. The one it has the counters for and the one it skipped since the rules just care about it not having enough to start with and then having the right number or more to get the effect.
    Posted in: Rumored Card Rulings
  • posted a message on Legendary MDFCs, Rules Text, and Color Identity
    It is already covered in the rules because of things like Archangel Avacyb:

    903.4d. The back face of a double-faced card (see rule 711) is included when determining a card's color identity. This is an exception to rule 711.4a.

    So, no, the symbols on the front face don't change anything. Or, if they do, they don't matter because the rule says to just look at the back face and the back face has those symbols too.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Plague enchantment
    Your Enchant ability doesn't work. As soon as it is put onto the creature, the Enchant ability is now being violated and the Aura falls off. You should be able to say "another card named..." and be fine. Also, I am not sure if it is intentional, but the tokens can all gang up on one creature if you wanted them too since none are cards (though none can attach to the creature with the original Kiss). And, if so, it seems like the restriction isn't doing much anyway.

    In fact, I might even lean into the idea that in order to be playable you shouldn't care about it stacking on a single creature. If the opponent has one creature, it doesn't work at all since you can't attach any copies to it. If they only have two, if you want each to have 1 copy, it isn't going to kill either one and then the other copies you create don't do anything.

    It is interesting and it is sort of hard to cost. If you put it on something too small, they just target what it is on and you don't get the tokens. If not, then it sticks around and you might get more copies but the more creatures they have, the less chance you have of doing anything productive with them (if they can't stack anyway).
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on [KHM] Cosima, God of the Voyage/The Omenkeel - Kotaku.AU
    Quote from SkyFe24 »
    If I exile Cosima in my upkeep she permanently gains that ability right?
    So if I bring her back to battlefield and my opponent uses Path to Exile on her... She still has the ability to return to battefield with a land drop, right???
    Quote from CatParty »
    Quote from SkyFe24 »
    If I exile Cosima in my upkeep she permanently gains that ability right?
    So if I bring her back to battlefield and my opponent uses Path to Exile on her... She still has the ability to retine to battefield with a land drop, right???


    Yes? The "she gains" wording makes it seem like the ability sticks around. But there might be a rules interaction where she enters the battlefield as a new creature and loses the ability. Definitely worth knowing.
    Quote from m_pathogen »
    Quote from SkyFe24 »
    If I exile Cosima in my upkeep she permanently gains that ability right?
    So if I bring her back to battlefield and my opponent uses Path to Exile on her... She still has the ability to return to battefield with a land drop, right???


    On a similar note, doesn’t that mean you can exile Cosima repeatedly to get multiple instances of that ability?

    Also— The Omenkeel is awesome, my favorite vehicle, no question.
    No to all of this. She gains the ability in exile, but changing zones, as it always does, makes it a new object with no relation, or memory, of its previous existence.

    Moving to the battlefield is enough for it to lose the ability she gained.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Can't remember card name ><;
    Quote from yewminyst81 »
    If you consider sacrificing the artifact into the cost, sounds like Kaleidostone
    Considering Kaleidostone wasn't printed until 9 months *after* OP's post (their post is nearly 12 years old at this point), I am going to go out on a limb and say no, that is not what they were thinking of.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Ertai's Trickery and a copied kicked spell
    706.2 reads, in part:

    706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object's characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked,...

    Since Trickery only cares about it being "kicked" (rather than, say, a kicker cost being paid), and being kicked is copiable, it appears that it can counter a copy of a kicked spell since the copy is also kicked. I don't really see a distinction here between "was kicked" or "is kicked".
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on So when is Commander gonna get fixed?
    Perhaps that is a difference in deckbuilding philosophy then? In terms of the subpar cards argument anyway. I looked at 3 of my decks and could not find a single subpar card within them. And anything that could be argued as subpar is likely there as a testing slot. Or perhaps some of the foundation making the deck work. Almost every set I have to go through my decks and cut cards I like just to make room for new ones. For example, within my last three rounds of changes for Karador I cut Erebos, Mikaeus, Protean Hulk, Birthing Pod, Greater Good, Kozilek, and Oracle of Mul Daya. Among other cards of course. These can hardly be considered subpar cards and yet they still made it to the chopping block because they simply weren't what the deck needed anymore.

    The impetus for doing so of course was to play with new toys: Luminous Broodmoth, Mythos of Nethroi, Eerie Ultimatum, Fiend Artisan, Elder Gargaroth, Tevesh Szat, and Magus of the Order. Again, among others. While the changes may not stick, it is hard to argue that the deck contains subpar cards simply because the deck size is 100 cards. In fact, I have often seen the opposite argument: the deck restriction should be a minimum like it is in other formats so people can play with 101 or 102 cards as ways to test out new additions.

    As I said, still disagree with the cost aspect. In Karador alone, I have 21 cards (not counting lands) under $1. These represent some pretty good cards in the deck but even if I simply said these were the worst, based on cost, they only come out to be $9.41. If I just take out the 15 lowest cost cards, since the other 5 would be lands, the cost is $4.23. So even accepting that the deck has "filler", the cost savings is relatively minimal. Do note, these 15 include things like Sun Titan, Crop Rotation, Gray Merchant of Asphodel, Command Tower, Magus of the Order (I will concede this could end up being subpar, but it is being tested), Wall of Blossoms, and Unexpectedly Absent.

    So, while our quick and dirty math shows an obvious difference in cost between 100 and 80 cards, I still maintain that if you are running subpar cards, your cost in doing so in negligible. Subpar cards are not $1. *Good* cards can be had for under $1. And even if you are not running subpar cards, the costs are still reasonable.

    I do understand your point: fewer cards means less cost. Easy. Simple. And I realize your "$1 for bad; $2 for good" is just illustrative. But the cost isn't where it is because you are filling the deck with subpar cards because you shouldn't be using subpar cards to begin with. The cost is there simply by virtue of needing more cards. Those additional cards can easily be good and, somewhat easily, be done on a budget.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Color of Effect
    Based on precedent, it could be either red or blue as the second color. I do think red makes more sense as red seems more into the temporary stuff (card "draw" being another big one). In reality, I don't think you can go wrong with either color combo though I personally lean towards red-white.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Kediss +Malcolm?
    Quote from Rezzahan »
    Since the trigger condition is "damage to your opponentS", it doesn't change anything if one opponent or all or any number in between get damaged at the same time. It's one trigger, so one Treasure. So in your scenario ,you have that twice, thus two trigger events, two triggers, two Treasures.
    Its one trigger, but the trigger can produce more than one token. "damage to your opponents" is followed by "create a Treasure token for each opponent dealt damage". The first trigger from Malcolm gets them one treasure since one opponent is dealt damage; the second trigger gets them two treasures since the other 2 opponents are dealt damage.

    They will get 3 treasures total.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on So when is Commander gonna get fixed?
    Quote from Magic2020 »

    b) Shuffling 100 cards isn't fun. And that is why most play the game, for fun. Do you really enjoy shuffling 100 cards? While its possible to build a fetching/tutoring deck, is it really fun to shuffle 100 cards every turn?
    I might be in the minority here, but I *do* prefer shuffling 100 cards (and I double sleeve mine and I have "normal" sized hands). Whenever I shuffle a 60 card deck, it just feels like I have nothing in hand. I have no problems with the shuffling after every search and I have no problems shuffling the deck in general.


    c) It costs more. I love to spend money, heck who doesn't. But who really likes to find and then spend hundreds (or even thousands) to test a new possible mechanic or to build a top competitive 100 card commander deck?

    d) It can force you to add subpar or weak cards. Having 100 cards can sometimes force you to add weak cards for that mechanic simply to fulfill the 100 card requirement. Do you really like to add and then draw weak cards?


    These two things are at odds with one another. It can't cost more *and* force subpar cards. At least, they can't both be used as generalities. In any case, I disagree with point 'd' (I don't really agree with point 'c' either but I have a feeling that is more subjective). There are 20,000+ cards in Magic. If you are running subpar cards either you didn't look hard enough or you think anything worse than Cyclonic Rift or Sol Ring is subpar. They may be "worse" but there are plenty of good cards you can include in decks.
    Posted in: Commander (EDH)
  • posted a message on Can Tale's end counter the discard trigger from ideas unbound?
    There is a rulings forum for questions like this and card tags are required:

    Ideas Unbound
    Tale's End

    Yes, Ideas Unbound sets up a delayed trigger and since Tale's End can counter triggers, it can counter it so you don't have to discard any cards.
    Posted in: Community Discussion
  • posted a message on Creeping Blight
    Is this: "Lands you control are X/X green creatures with haste, where X is the number of lands you control with creeping counters." supposed to be part of the EOT trigger or its own paragraph/ability?

    Current convention is to give the lands indestructible which might be right here. It would feel pretty bad to do this, and then have the one land with a counter on it blown up, and you lose all your lands. At least indestructible sort of helps with that.

    You could also just add a counter to a land as a replacement effect so you have a land right away though, that does mean you get an additional in the end step right away. Maybe that is fine though.

    4 mana seems fine to me. It scales pretty well but it is also an enchantment that is easy to blow up. I guess if it ends up being too powerful as an exponential ability, you could add a counter when it enters and then just add another each upkeep to sort of keep it in check.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • posted a message on Primeval Titan fetching "triggered abilitiy" lands, rulings step by step
    A little more detail, because I initially wasn't certain of the sequence you intended and I misread Lotus Vale. Lotus Vale does not have a triggered ability.
    108.1. Use the Oracle card reference when determining a card’s wording. A card’s Oracle text can be found using the Gatherer card database at Gatherer.Wizards.com .

    "If Lotus Vale would enter the battlefield, sacrifice two untapped lands instead. If you do, put Lotus Vale onto the battlefield. If you don't, put it into its owner's graveyard."
    1. I'm not going to specify the sequence that led to Primeval Titan's ability triggering.
    2. The "Whenever Primeval Titan enters the battlefield or attacks, you may search your library for up to two land cards, put them onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle your library." ability resolves. When you search your library, you choose Boros Garrison and Lotus Vale. You put them onto the battlefield tapped, right after sacrificing two untapped Forests for Lotus Vale's replacement effect. You shuffle your library.
    3. You would get priority, but there is a triggered ability to put on the stack. (If there were multiples at this point, you would get to choose the order regardless of whether they actually triggered simultaneously.) You put "When Boros Garrison enters the battlefield, return a land you control to its owner's hand." on the stack. (You might have some idea what land you'll be returning, but the game does not accept a decision at this time.)
    4. You get priority and pass.
    5. Opponent gets priority and passes.
    6. The top object on the stack (the ability put there in step 3) resolves. You return a land you control to its owner's hand. This might be Boros Garrison, this might be Lotus Vale, this might be one you tapped when putting Primeval Titan onto the battlefield (whenever that happened). This can not be a card that is currently in the graveyard after being sacrificed in step 2.
    7. You get priority and ....
    Perhaps this will help OP if they ever want to Play Lotus Vale. But as the question pertains to Lotus FIELD it isn't quite as accurate as that *does* have a trigger. So your initial answer seems correct.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Ezran, Warleader
    First, the easy part: you need to change "whenever" to "if". "Whenever" denotes a trigger which it seems you don't want to do.

    I am not sure the rules really support replacing combat damage for "other" combat damage this way, but I guess it can be assumed to work with whatever rules changes are needed.

    Also, the "exactly one opponent" thing isn't needed. Not really anyway. If you had two of these in play and a third 2/2 was dealing damage, one applies to make itself deal combat damage and then the other applies to make the other deal combat damage instead. Since Replacement effects will never invoke themselves repeatedly (unless a new event is also created in their text somewhere which is rare) the wording is superfluous and doesn't really change functionality. Just note that in that case you are not going to deal commander damage since only one Ezran gets to deal damage and your opponent chooses which one. So it doesn't do well with things like Helm anyway.

    My main concern is that this turns into a one-shot kill for the whole table if you can get an army out. Granted, White is the weakest color but "end of your turn, White Sun's Zenith for 20, cast Ezran on my turn, win" doesn't sound appealing. I am not a fan of commander damage as it is but losing to it because someone *else* couldn't block seems pretty terrible to have to deal with. This card means either everyone dies or no one does when you attack with your army.

    And even without an army it just allows for incremental damage until you get to the point where a single 2/2 going in unblocked on someone ends the game.

    I think this would be better off being a Saskia or Hydra Omnivore ability where Ezran just triggers on damage and makes the creature deal damage to all other opponents or a chosen opponent or something. It doesn't scale as well as your current version because it isn't combat damage (and definitely isn't commander damage) but I think it ends up being a bit more fair with more interesting play lines. The main issue is whether that is truly in white's slice of the pie. It is used so seldom I suppose it could be argued to be.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.