Yes. The creature will come into play and die immediately, but it will come into play briefly.
It doesn't "Come into play briefly". You can't "come into play briefly".
That would be like saying "I shot the man briefly", or "I drove into the wall briefly".
It is an event describing an instantaneous occurrence, a change from one state to the next. It does not persist over time.
@question-asking-person:
The key is that the creature *did* come into play. Though it died soon after, this is irrelevant, because we only care if it came into play.
Do not so easily extend this idea to other permanents though. There are some rules which limit when Auras would change zones. Read them if it fancies you, or if you want to be prepared. Whichever works.
Are all activated abilities affected by summoning sickness, or just tap abilities? I played a wild mongrel, and for its ability, discarded an anger. MY friend seems to think that all activated abilities are useless until the second turn unless the creature has haste. . but this didn't seem to make much sense to me. . I thought summoning sickness specifically involved tapping. . .
thanks in advance for any clarification. .
I suggest for Humanity's benefit you forget about this "summoning sickness" thing. It doesn't work.
There is a rule which limits when creatures can pay :tap: costs, using the symbol.
Each creature that has not been continuously in play under its owner's control since the start of that player's most recent turn cannot pay :tap: costs.
That is the only limitation to paying :tap: costs aside from its definition of how the permanent must be untapped to begin with.
There are basically two connected rules for questions like this:
If an effect wants a player to do something *quantitative* which is impossible because that player cannot do enough of the requested action, then the player does as much as possible instead.
If such a request is made in similar circumstances for a non-quantitative request (such as, "Choose a Red creature", when there are no Red creatures), then the player ignores that request. The game can handle undefined choices and knows that you didn't actually *do* the action.
Also remember that something that happened in the amount of 0 doesn't happen at all - discarding 0 cards, taking 0 damage, it's all the same.
I wonder why they didn't make it modal... it would've been far easier to understand as "Sacrifice Dwarven Scorcher: Choose target creature. Its controller chooses one -- Dwarven Scorcher deals 1 damage to target creature; or Dwarven Scorcher deals 2 damage to target creature's controller." I guess requiring people to actually understand their own **** language would be too much...
That would functionally change the effect.
The original keeps all players in the dark until it actually resolves and the creature's contoller makes a choice.
That wording would have the choice made as you play the spell, at the time you would have made such a choice if it were a normal modal spell.
Q: If there is a Magnivore in play and there are four sorceries in all graveyards and a Wildfire is played, does the Magnivore die? Vulturous Zombie? --Robert A: Magnivore lives; Vulturous Zombie dies. The key is in how each creature's toughness changes. Magnivore's toughness is constantly looking at sorceries. Once damage is dealt and lands are destroyed, Wildfire is put into the graveyard. This makes the Magnivore 5/5 immediately because of that continuous checking. On the other hand, Vulturous Zombie grows with counters, and those counters use a trigger. The Zombie Plant (how does undead foliage learn to fly?) will trigger to grow bigger from the lands and Wildfire put into an opponent's graveyard, but if it's not already big enough to live through the four damage, that damage will kill the Plant before the trigger resolves and counters can make it grow.
It answer ur question and gives further details
He probably asked because of this edition, and was dissatisfied with Carter's explanation (as most people are).
But good catch though.
I think epeeguy has completely and satisfactorily and succinctly explained this interaction. I'm sure the thread can close once the thread-starter returns to read his answer.
How does spawnbroker interact with ray of command or threaten?
In a 3+ players game, If I use ray of command on player two's creature, then transfer that creature after playing spawnbroker to player three, who keeps the creature?
You use Ray of Command. You gain control of it until end of turn.
You then play Spawnbroker. You legally (Spawnbroker himself is quite a doozy for rules) exchange control of the creature you Commanded with another player's creature. (Ray of Command's effect taps it, but meh)
Now, let's have a look at the Commanded creature currently. Its within the duration of the effect Ray of Command applied to it, though its effect may no be seen (you don't control it). Spawnbroker was a one-shot effect, which gave control of it to that other player.
The creature is under the control of your opponent because the timestamp of the effect has overridden your Ray of Command. To illustrate, had you used Spawnbroker somehow, *then* Ray of Command, you would be in control of the creature due to Ray of Command.
So, back to the question, your opponent controls the creature because Spawnbroker overrides Ray of Command.
On the cleanup step, when "until end of turn" durations end, the Ray of Command ends. No longer is that creature under your control.
Looking at the creature however, it is well under your opponent's control. That effect disappearing changes nothing.
So your Spawnbroker trick permanently disrupted the board. Good job.
A more worthy question would be whether using an addition Spawnbroker to regain control of the commanded creature would make a difference. I'm not prepared to answer that question at this time.
I feel the need to point out that Exhaustion isn't.. well it isn't entirely accurate to say that it modifies what untaps on the untap step.
What it does is it tells certain permanents that they won't untap on a certain untap step.
The difference is that Exhaustion looks at the permanents, not the untap step.
Exhaustion says "Creatures and lands target opponent controls [Don't do something]"
When it resolves, the permanents it is referring to will become affected by the effect.
That effect is "don't untap during [that player's] next untap step"
Felt the need to say that. This means that other permanents which enter play after an Exhaustion will remain unaffected.
Since this was 'confirmed' by Aaron.... is this really a rumour?
Just a funny semantic nitpick.
Anywho, yes, I am a firm supporter of Spiders losing their current connotation. They should be an insect creature like any other.
It doesn't make any sense to me how Green doesn't have Flying in the colour pie for balance, but then they give it Flying-hate abilities that even Red would envy (case in point: Arashi, the Sky Asunder. For the average man, stuff like Crash Landing or what is it... umm... Needle Storm I think it is... 4 damage to each creature with flying for 3 mana????)
How can Green have such blatant creature removal? Combine it with Flying Carpet or Magic Carpet (one of those is real), and you can build a Burn deck with efficient creatures. Run mana acceleration, and the additional cost is NO PROBLEM!
Heck, it's not even like skipping your turn is the end. You still got instants and abilities for use on your opponent's.
So broken. To fix it, they'd have to make it give a life penalty to ake you want to do it quickly, and have a seriously crippled hand size (maybe -3 to mirror it, though probably -2 so you only have to activate once)
Why is everyone so sure there're split cards?
Did that rumour start for any grounded reason?
How could they introduce Split cards into a set that wouldn't allow them to make the complete 10-part cycle?
It doesn't "Come into play briefly". You can't "come into play briefly".
That would be like saying "I shot the man briefly", or "I drove into the wall briefly".
It is an event describing an instantaneous occurrence, a change from one state to the next. It does not persist over time.
@question-asking-person:
The key is that the creature *did* come into play. Though it died soon after, this is irrelevant, because we only care if it came into play.
Do not so easily extend this idea to other permanents though. There are some rules which limit when Auras would change zones. Read them if it fancies you, or if you want to be prepared. Whichever works.
I suggest for Humanity's benefit you forget about this "summoning sickness" thing. It doesn't work.
There is a rule which limits when creatures can pay :tap: costs, using the symbol.
Each creature that has not been continuously in play under its owner's control since the start of that player's most recent turn cannot pay :tap: costs.
That is the only limitation to paying :tap: costs aside from its definition of how the permanent must be untapped to begin with.
If an effect wants a player to do something *quantitative* which is impossible because that player cannot do enough of the requested action, then the player does as much as possible instead.
If such a request is made in similar circumstances for a non-quantitative request (such as, "Choose a Red creature", when there are no Red creatures), then the player ignores that request. The game can handle undefined choices and knows that you didn't actually *do* the action.
Also remember that something that happened in the amount of 0 doesn't happen at all - discarding 0 cards, taking 0 damage, it's all the same.
That would functionally change the effect.
The original keeps all players in the dark until it actually resolves and the creature's contoller makes a choice.
That wording would have the choice made as you play the spell, at the time you would have made such a choice if it were a normal modal spell.
Perhaps a Human Skeleton Wizard?
He probably asked because of this edition, and was dissatisfied with Carter's explanation (as most people are).
But good catch though.
I think epeeguy has completely and satisfactorily and succinctly explained this interaction. I'm sure the thread can close once the thread-starter returns to read his answer.
Okay...
You use Ray of Command. You gain control of it until end of turn.
You then play Spawnbroker. You legally (Spawnbroker himself is quite a doozy for rules) exchange control of the creature you Commanded with another player's creature. (Ray of Command's effect taps it, but meh)
Now, let's have a look at the Commanded creature currently. Its within the duration of the effect Ray of Command applied to it, though its effect may no be seen (you don't control it). Spawnbroker was a one-shot effect, which gave control of it to that other player.
The creature is under the control of your opponent because the timestamp of the effect has overridden your Ray of Command. To illustrate, had you used Spawnbroker somehow, *then* Ray of Command, you would be in control of the creature due to Ray of Command.
So, back to the question, your opponent controls the creature because Spawnbroker overrides Ray of Command.
On the cleanup step, when "until end of turn" durations end, the Ray of Command ends. No longer is that creature under your control.
Looking at the creature however, it is well under your opponent's control. That effect disappearing changes nothing.
So your Spawnbroker trick permanently disrupted the board. Good job.
A more worthy question would be whether using an addition Spawnbroker to regain control of the commanded creature would make a difference. I'm not prepared to answer that question at this time.
He didn't "know that he knew not" so to speak.
At what RELs would the 'honest mistake' thing be serious and at which is it a warning?
EDIT: Oh, and, if you are asked a rules question, what are your options? If you know the answer, do you say it? Can you always say "I don't know" ?
What it does is it tells certain permanents that they won't untap on a certain untap step.
The difference is that Exhaustion looks at the permanents, not the untap step.
Exhaustion says "Creatures and lands target opponent controls [Don't do something]"
When it resolves, the permanents it is referring to will become affected by the effect.
That effect is "don't untap during [that player's] next untap step"
Felt the need to say that. This means that other permanents which enter play after an Exhaustion will remain unaffected.
If it's not that, then it is that the controller of each attacking creature chooses which head that creature deals damage to.
So either way, it is the attacking team.
For a more specific answer, wait for someone else to answer this question!
And now, a word from our sponsors....
If it's not that, then it is that the controller of each attacking creature chooses which head that creature deals damage to.
So either way, it is the attacking team.
For a more specific answer, wait for someone else to answer this question!
And now, a word from our sponsors....
Modal abilities like the one on Power Conduit and Orzhov Pontiff also have their mode chosen at that time.
The key is the phrase "Choose one - " followed by a semicolon (';') and the word "or" like "Choose one - [Choice 1]; or [Choice 2]"
I was thinking...
Since this was 'confirmed' by Aaron.... is this really a rumour?
Just a funny semantic nitpick.
Anywho, yes, I am a firm supporter of Spiders losing their current connotation. They should be an insect creature like any other.
It doesn't make any sense to me how Green doesn't have Flying in the colour pie for balance, but then they give it Flying-hate abilities that even Red would envy (case in point: Arashi, the Sky Asunder. For the average man, stuff like Crash Landing or what is it... umm... Needle Storm I think it is... 4 damage to each creature with flying for 3 mana????)
How can Green have such blatant creature removal? Combine it with Flying Carpet or Magic Carpet (one of those is real), and you can build a Burn deck with efficient creatures. Run mana acceleration, and the additional cost is NO PROBLEM!
Or at least decks with some kinda critical turn.
Heck, it's not even like skipping your turn is the end. You still got instants and abilities for use on your opponent's.
So broken. To fix it, they'd have to make it give a life penalty to ake you want to do it quickly, and have a seriously crippled hand size (maybe -3 to mirror it, though probably -2 so you only have to activate once)