As I said before even if the or is working the way you intended it to work by rules they are 2 different effects as a when denotes the conditional for a triggered ability. And as cast denotes a replacement effect. And As has been said before replacement effects cant do the thing you want it to do. And if it could and the when didnt denote a different type of ability (both of which aren't the case) It would be one Giant replacement effect and that would mean with the wording you can only draw the cards on entering the stack as thats whats being replaced and if you dont replace that there would be no way to get to the second part. And that is under the pretext that you are correct in that it is One Ability, Replacement effects being able to do that and the or working as you think it is and all of that is already false. So even if your assumptions are correct it is still wrong there.
Both your card and pillar hit isochron scepters casted cards.
Sure when an opponent plays an Omniscience or a Fires of Invention your cards becomes stronger in that Moment then pillar and yes your card hits the copy and cast for free cards (of which there are 13) but pillar still hits those if their MV is 3 or below. And on Average Pillar hits more than your card thats why pillar/eidolon is maindeckable and your card would be more of a sideboard card at best for me, and since you made it blue I'd rather play Void Mirror to not hurt myself with my cantrips.
The difference between copying and copying and casting is you can't copy something that isn't there so you need to go though the casting process before to see if casting it would be a legal move.
You can copy future spells since they will be on the stack then and the legality of the move will be checked then.Teach by Example but you can't copy spells that aren't on the stack, that's why there are copy and copy and cast.
Effects that read “[This permanent] enters the battlefield with . . . ,” “As [this permanent] enters the battlefield . . . ,” or “[This permanent] enters the battlefield as . . . “ are replacement effects.
and 603.1 both being rules DXM as currently worded has 2 abilities a replacement one which can't do what you want it to do due to the fact how casting works and how replacement effects work
To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f–h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. A player must be legally allowed to cast the spell to begin this process (see rule 601.3). If a player is unable to comply with the requirements of a step listed below while performing that step, the casting of the spell is illegal ; the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 726, “Handling Illegal Actions”).
and
Replacement effects must exist before the appropriate event occurs—they can’t “go back in time” and change something that’s already happened. Spells or abilities that generate these effects are often cast or activated in response to whatever would produce the event and thus resolve before that event would occur.
This is the reason that all as you cast cards only replace stuff on the effect of the spell itself see [card]Aether Burst
[/card], Akroma's Will, Draconic Roar and stuff like kicker.
And declaration of nought literally does not have an "on-off stack" effect it is a replacement effect as it enters the battlefield if it was cast related you couldn't reanimate it and name something but you can do that so a bad example for your argument as it has nothing to to with it.
And again the "on-off stack time-frame" is not a singular time frame as you can interact with stuff on the stack and add to it.
Textbox i'd give a 6/10 as a weaker pillar but still interesting enough to be its own.
(hits around 30 cards that pillar doesn't hit but pillar hits ~10k cards that this doesn't hit)
Color and typeline lowers it to a 2/10. It's much weaker in most cases than both Pyrostatic Pillar and Eidolon of the Great Revel both of which aren't legendary so unless you want to play more than 8 of that effect I wouldn't run it. And if I wanted to run more than 9 of that effect Legendary hurts so its basically just copy 9 for those who really want it.
I guess thats your intent since you didn't want the effect to stack easily, I just personally wouldn't run even 8 of that effect and id run both eidolon and pyro over that effect.
Similar gripe with color as others have mentioned it isn't really a blue effect its not in blues wheelhouse anymore but as a custom card I dont mind the color break that much the problem is as blue is usually the color that isn't aggressive you cant really capitalize on that damage and it is also the color that uses a lot of one mana cards across formats and also the 2 most used pitch spells it seems counterproductive to run this in a blue deck.
With cycling added the textbox becomes a 8/10 and as a whole a 4/10
Why did you put Darksteel colossus here ? As an example?
But As currently worded it is/has a triggered ability in it so it can't just be a state based action without ruling changes and state based actions as per rule
Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect]. [Instructions (if any).]”
Furthermore
Abilities that watch for a specified game state are triggered abilities, not state-based actions. (See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”)
basically says you cant do what you want to do with state based actions. And there is still the or problem with the two different time frames as you've put it and for state based actions this effect is also in 2 different time frames. See
Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 117, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based actions have been performed as the result of a check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, the appropriate player gets priority. This process also occurs during the cleanup step (see rule 514), except that if no state-based actions are performed as the result of the step’s first check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, then no player gets priority and the step ends.
Planes use the established ability categories and don't introduce new ones see:
310.4. A plane card may have any number of static, triggered, and/or activated abilities. As long as a plane card is face up in the command zone, its static abilities affect the game, its triggered abilities may trigger, and its activated abilities may be activated.
Same with Schemes:
313.4. A scheme card may have any number of static, triggered, and/or activated abilities. As long as a scheme card is face up in the command zone, its static abilities affect the game, its triggered abilities may trigger, and its activated abilities may be activated.
Saga Comp Rules are Posted They have Triggered Abilities:
715.2. A chapter symbol is a keyword ability that represents a triggered ability referred to as a chapter ability.
Turn Based Action:
715.3b As a player’s precombat main phase begins, that player puts a lore counter on each Saga they control. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack.
And State Based Action:
715.4. If the number of lore counters on a Saga permanent is greater than or equal to its final chapter number, and it isn’t the source of a chapter ability that has triggered but not yet left the stack, that Saga’s controller sacrifices it. This
state-based action
doesn’t use the stack.
And Finally Dungeons:
Venture into the Dungeon is An Keyword Action so a replacement of the text "Enter the first room or advance to the next room" which is an effect so the same thing as "draw a card" or "deal 1 damage".
And effects:
609.1. An effect is something that happens in the game as a result of a spell or ability. When a spell, activated ability, or triggered ability resolves, it may create one or more one-shot or continuous effects. Static abilities may create one or more continuous effects. Text itself is never an effect.
Furthermore
Several traditional Magic cards (the ones that do go in your deck) will instruct you to venture into the dungeon. This could be the effect of a spell, an activated ability, or a triggered ability, as seen here on Shortcut Seeker.
As for the Dungeons themselves they use triggered abilities:
309.4c Each room has a triggered ability called a room ability whose effect is printed on the card. They all have the same trigger condition not printed on the card. The full text of each room ability is “When you move your venture marker into this room, [effect.]” As long as a dungeon card is in the command zone, its abilities may trigger. Each room ability is controlled by the player who owns the dungeon card that is that ability’s source.
And sorry I was Wrong I 2007 wasnt the last time a new category of abilities were introduced as Loyalty abilities are Activated abilities so it was even way before that.
So even new types of cards use the same categories of abilities actions and effects and yet you want to add a new one and that for a thig you yourself stated shouldn't be overused.
Maybe you should use the established categories to make your DXM work and use the established rules for them.
As magic designers have done for well over 15 years and they all could make it work even with whole new card types because they are good designers.
You can do improvisation and ingenuity while adhereing to the rules thats what mtg designers do all the time. Like I said the last time we needed a new category of Ability / Effect was in 2007 for planeswalker every other ability is part of the established categories. And If one can't Improvise or show ingenuity within a given set of criteria (Aka following the rules) that shows you can't adapt which is a bad trait for a designer.
No one of us is shutting down your Idea in general and sone of us even offered a wording that does what you want it to do. You are the one shutting down our help.
You defined a new ability category that isn't even in the rules at all. And it uses Wording which is exclusive to triggered abilities yet it doesn't work like them. So how can it work fine within them? If they are neither part nor consistent with the existing rules?
As mentioned though, this is not something for the masses, or just for anyone to implement. This is something only for the most talented person on the team to implement. Otherwise, it would get totally out of control, would be overly produced, cuts would have to be made, and certainly people begin giving themselves slack so they can get in extra designs that are sentimental to them. It would be spammed irresponsibly, and the effects would take crude, vulgar, spammy forms.
So a failed design then if you can't even trust the right usage of a design to other people that to me is an inherent fail of a design, similar to overuse if overuse is a problem it shouldn't even be keyworded.
"successful argument" lol the only successful argument youve made is that english is subjective which isn't even relevant to the discussion.
I don't need to Rules Lawyer. I know how this works. You are the ones trying to Rules Lawyer suggesting it doesn't for reasons unsupported, unreasonable, unjust deprivation, unjust quartering, etc.
Good thing that you know how it works a designer needs to make it so everyone knows how it works, and a good designer either needs to listen to the rules lawyers or be one. Either you are an Architect with backgound in Engineering or you are an architect who listens to an engineer, if neither of it is true your house may be cool to look at but might not stand for long or be functional.
And with the current ruleset it doesnt work (at least not in the Intended way.
And the supported reasons is that there are no working comp rules on your Act-Based ability since that is not a thing (yet) and we haven't seen a working way from you that integrate it in the already exiting rules without breaking them.
Yet there is no effort on your side to do that, neither on the adapt the wording to fit the current ruleset nor the adapt the ruling to fit with your wording. Always just a "it's readable / people will know what it means / its obvious" , when One multiple people have already misinterpreted the effect and not with bad intentions and two people who are actually Judges pointed out that it doesn't (at least currently) work the way you intend it to do.
There is no context to give insight towards priority. It needs to be explained in the comp rules of the Act Based Ability.
Then you need to do that and present it otherwise it is and always will be an unfinished Design thats why having a thread just about the ability to make it fit the rules, especially if you want to introduce a whole new category of ability not defined in the rules. (The last time this happened was in 2007 by the way implying that unless you really need it to work you don't do it. In your case you just wanna do it although there are plenty of workarounds that could work without the need to do that)
Furthermore this new category of Ability should not break already existing cateories of Abilities and Effects and If they nontheless do you need to rewrite those as well so the whole system is back in working order.
As a one man designer you have 2 options either be a "rules lawyer" as well to be able to integrate your card into the already existing rule system, or listen to the feedback rules lawyers give you on how to make the design do what you want to do given the rules.
(Technically you could have them rewrite the rules so that your cards work as well but given that workarounds exist the chance of anyone doing this is probably slim)
If you can't show us a card where it doesn't use the system you can proof it isn't systematic otherwise it is, there is no need for documenting this if it is implied as others explained not everything has to be documented to be true.
If you can't do a simple proof by contradiction for your argument which would be simple if it were true this greatly implies that the system is indeed in place. Hence my plea for you to show us a card where the system isn't true.
And I showed you the documentation that you CANNOT use AS as a Trigger for an triggered ability.
From the glossary of the Comprehensive Rules (November 19, 2021—Innistrad: Crimson Vow)
Triggered Ability
A kind of ability. Triggered abilities begin with the word “when,” “whenever,” or “at.” They’re written as “[Trigger condition], [effect].” See rule 113, “Abilities,” and rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”
That is also the reason the or is inclusive on cards like sun titan by the way since it is one effect with 2 different trigger conditions and all the trigger does is put the effect on the stack. and by rule.
603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability’s trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. The ability doesn’t do anything at this point.
And Sun titan Basically says [Condition 1] or [Condition 2] -> [effect] and by rule 603.2 The Or doesn't really matter since as soon as a condition is met it will put [effect] on the stack.
Quote from "ReapThaWhirlwind »
In that, also for the Titan, these are two different time frames where there cannot be a choice between the two.
Same for your Deus Ex machina effect There are two different time frames
[As] When you cast it and When it is [leaving the Stack] resolved. I provided you with evidence that you cant use As here in general.
As for Proof that it is 2 different time frames
Comp Rules Casting
601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f–h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. A player must be legally allowed to cast the spell to begin this process (see rule 601.3). If a player is unable to comply with the requirements of a step listed below while performing that step, the casting of the spell is illegal ; the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 726, “Handling Illegal Actions”).
Comp rules Resolving
608.1. Each time all players pass in succession, the spell or ability on top of the stack resolves. (See rule 609, “Effects.”)
With the highlights it is saying that when you cast sth each player has time to interact before it resolves hence it being 2 different time frames as each player can do stuff in between the first part or your deus ex ability and the second part making it Literally the same as sun Titan.
So even If you don't think the system we presented you with is in place. Your wording is wrong by MTG definition. And your Interpretation of different same timeframes is wromg by MTG definition. And when you use the correct definitions / wordings by MTG standards guess where we arrive the same wording as cards like suntitan.
When you cast ~ or when it leaves the stack do X. And with the actual rulings that IS as you said 2 time frames making it trigger twice.
This is not to say you can't word it in such a way that it only triggers once as people have showed you various ways of doing that but you chose to keep your incorrect wording nonetheless.
Its not subjective in the magic sense its objective Show me one card that doesn't follow the system and I will grant you that it is subjective. All existing cards with official ruling follow the systematic objective wording. They do so because the english language is subjective but to have rules that work irregardles of who reads them they need to be objective hence the systemisation of the wordings.
Show us an example where magic cards don't follow the or system rowan presented to you.
Again it is entirely because english is subjective Magic Wording systemizes their wording with the same context clues for the same definition of or. To get rid of the subjectiveness.
Target Choices:
Target x or y. Is ALWAYS an exclusive or. Examples: Disenchant,Pillage
if you want a Target Choice to use the Inclusive or you ALWAYS use and/or
Target X and/or Y Examples: Angel of the Ruins,Baral's Expertise
Triggered abilities (which by the way always use When/Whenever/At see comp rules 603 they never use As and since your deus ex mechanic clearly is a triggered ability you cant use as there)
Whenever/At/When x or y ALWAYS use an Inclusive or.
Examples:Sun TitanCeremonial GuardPelt CollectorSundering Titan
And/Or always denotes the inclusive or. Or always the exclusive except on Triggers for triggered abilities there it is always inclusive.
Show me a card with its oracle text defying those rules.
It's not systematic. If it was systematic, then there wouldn't be the need for additional context (such as [and/or]) to describe the context usage and its intended functionality as singular or multifaceted.
They would all simply read [OR] and everyone would know what it means, and that you can choose one or both, but we know you can't always do that in MTG—and not because choice targeting—but because of choice context and wording composure.
Except that it is systematic. The way the context works is always used the same aka it uses a system. That system was even described to you in this very thread by rowanalpha. And it works like that every single time. That's what a system is hence it being systematic.
Certainly, there are some systematic (standard wording composure) standards.
However, it's also subjective exactly as I've explained it.
Except that it is never subjective it is always systematic, even when context is involved, there is a systematic way to include it.
You can word your deus ex Ability so that it works as intended as other people have pointed out.
Then why don't you use the systematic approach that is more organized than your wording as it doesn't turn the whole design of magic wordings into a guessing game. If you have a system use the system if it doesn't work in the system dont change the system change the card so it works in the system.
Your approach is the polar opposite of organized. Judging from the comments of the other posters and you constantly having to defend your wording it seems neither easy to read nor easy on the eyes to look at for anyone besides yourself.
This is apart of the package. I believe still in coherence, and the principal that for the sake of, some things should be spelled out entirely. It's professional. I don't find this is the case for that, as I've explained. Here it's professional to use context adaptation and wording composure to create something that's neat and easy to read—easy on the eyes—while still being totally coherent to anyone except the most oblivious or belligerent person.
Yet you don't use the games coherence aka the games internal consistency to affect your wording choice so by your own standards you are not professional.
You don't even use coherency in the general sense as there are no context clues that you can't use it twice. English as you said is "open source" so by definition not inherently coherent sometimes you need context clues to get the coherency which this lacks. And due to the systematic nature of magic wording as the only context clue you can use this twice.
Sure when an opponent plays an Omniscience or a Fires of Invention your cards becomes stronger in that Moment then pillar and yes your card hits the copy and cast for free cards (of which there are 13) but pillar still hits those if their MV is 3 or below. And on Average Pillar hits more than your card thats why pillar/eidolon is maindeckable and your card would be more of a sideboard card at best for me, and since you made it blue I'd rather play Void Mirror to not hurt myself with my cantrips.
The difference between copying and copying and casting is you can't copy something that isn't there so you need to go though the casting process before to see if casting it would be a legal move.
You can copy future spells since they will be on the stack then and the legality of the move will be checked then.Teach by Example but you can't copy spells that aren't on the stack, that's why there are copy and copy and cast.
and 603.1 both being rules DXM as currently worded has 2 abilities a replacement one which can't do what you want it to do due to the fact how casting works and how replacement effects work
[/card], Akroma's Will, Draconic Roar and stuff like kicker.
And declaration of nought literally does not have an "on-off stack" effect it is a replacement effect as it enters the battlefield if it was cast related you couldn't reanimate it and name something but you can do that so a bad example for your argument as it has nothing to to with it.
And again the "on-off stack time-frame" is not a singular time frame as you can interact with stuff on the stack and add to it.
(hits around 30 cards that pillar doesn't hit but pillar hits ~10k cards that this doesn't hit)
Color and typeline lowers it to a 2/10. It's much weaker in most cases than both Pyrostatic Pillar and Eidolon of the Great Revel both of which aren't legendary so unless you want to play more than 8 of that effect I wouldn't run it. And if I wanted to run more than 9 of that effect Legendary hurts so its basically just copy 9 for those who really want it.
I guess thats your intent since you didn't want the effect to stack easily, I just personally wouldn't run even 8 of that effect and id run both eidolon and pyro over that effect.
Similar gripe with color as others have mentioned it isn't really a blue effect its not in blues wheelhouse anymore but as a custom card I dont mind the color break that much the problem is as blue is usually the color that isn't aggressive you cant really capitalize on that damage and it is also the color that uses a lot of one mana cards across formats and also the 2 most used pitch spells it seems counterproductive to run this in a blue deck.
With cycling added the textbox becomes a 8/10 and as a whole a 4/10
But As currently worded it is/has a triggered ability in it so it can't just be a state based action without ruling changes and state based actions as per rule
Same with Schemes:
Saga Comp Rules are Posted They have Triggered Abilities:
715.2. A chapter symbol is a keyword ability that represents a triggered ability referred to as a chapter ability.
Turn Based Action:
715.3b As a player’s precombat main phase begins, that player puts a lore counter on each Saga they control. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack.
And State Based Action:
715.4. If the number of lore counters on a Saga permanent is greater than or equal to its final chapter number, and it isn’t the source of a chapter ability that has triggered but not yet left the stack, that Saga’s controller sacrifices it. This doesn’t use the stack.
And Finally Dungeons:
Venture into the Dungeon is An Keyword Action so a replacement of the text "Enter the first room or advance to the next room" which is an effect so the same thing as "draw a card" or "deal 1 damage".
And effects:
Furthermore
See:here
As for the Dungeons themselves they use triggered abilities:
309.4c Each room has a triggered ability called a room ability whose effect is printed on the card. They all have the same trigger condition not printed on the card. The full text of each room ability is “When you move your venture marker into this room, [effect.]” As long as a dungeon card is in the command zone, its abilities may trigger. Each room ability is controlled by the player who owns the dungeon card that is that ability’s source.
And sorry I was Wrong I 2007 wasnt the last time a new category of abilities were introduced as Loyalty abilities are Activated abilities so it was even way before that.
So even new types of cards use the same categories of abilities actions and effects and yet you want to add a new one and that for a thig you yourself stated shouldn't be overused.
Maybe you should use the established categories to make your DXM work and use the established rules for them.
As magic designers have done for well over 15 years and they all could make it work even with whole new card types because they are good designers.
No one of us is shutting down your Idea in general and sone of us even offered a wording that does what you want it to do. You are the one shutting down our help.
So a failed design then if you can't even trust the right usage of a design to other people that to me is an inherent fail of a design, similar to overuse if overuse is a problem it shouldn't even be keyworded.
"successful argument" lol the only successful argument youve made is that english is subjective which isn't even relevant to the discussion.
Good thing that you know how it works a designer needs to make it so everyone knows how it works, and a good designer either needs to listen to the rules lawyers or be one. Either you are an Architect with backgound in Engineering or you are an architect who listens to an engineer, if neither of it is true your house may be cool to look at but might not stand for long or be functional.
And with the current ruleset it doesnt work (at least not in the Intended way.
And the supported reasons is that there are no working comp rules on your Act-Based ability since that is not a thing (yet) and we haven't seen a working way from you that integrate it in the already exiting rules without breaking them.
Yet there is no effort on your side to do that, neither on the adapt the wording to fit the current ruleset nor the adapt the ruling to fit with your wording. Always just a "it's readable / people will know what it means / its obvious" , when One multiple people have already misinterpreted the effect and not with bad intentions and two people who are actually Judges pointed out that it doesn't (at least currently) work the way you intend it to do.
Just becuase people do an action at the same time does not mean priority is equal APNAP is still in effect.
thats why
Then you need to do that and present it otherwise it is and always will be an unfinished Design thats why having a thread just about the ability to make it fit the rules, especially if you want to introduce a whole new category of ability not defined in the rules. (The last time this happened was in 2007 by the way implying that unless you really need it to work you don't do it. In your case you just wanna do it although there are plenty of workarounds that could work without the need to do that)
Furthermore this new category of Ability should not break already existing cateories of Abilities and Effects and If they nontheless do you need to rewrite those as well so the whole system is back in working order.
As a one man designer you have 2 options either be a "rules lawyer" as well to be able to integrate your card into the already existing rule system, or listen to the feedback rules lawyers give you on how to make the design do what you want to do given the rules.
(Technically you could have them rewrite the rules so that your cards work as well but given that workarounds exist the chance of anyone doing this is probably slim)
If you can't do a simple proof by contradiction for your argument which would be simple if it were true this greatly implies that the system is indeed in place. Hence my plea for you to show us a card where the system isn't true.
And I showed you the documentation that you CANNOT use AS as a Trigger for an triggered ability.
That is also the reason the or is inclusive on cards like sun titan by the way since it is one effect with 2 different trigger conditions and all the trigger does is put the effect on the stack. and by rule.
And Sun titan Basically says [Condition 1] or [Condition 2] -> [effect] and by rule 603.2 The Or doesn't really matter since as soon as a condition is met it will put [effect] on the stack.
Same for your Deus Ex machina effect There are two different time frames
[As] When you cast it and When it is [leaving the Stack] resolved. I provided you with evidence that you cant use As here in general.
As for Proof that it is 2 different time frames
With the highlights it is saying that when you cast sth each player has time to interact before it resolves hence it being 2 different time frames as each player can do stuff in between the first part or your deus ex ability and the second part making it Literally the same as sun Titan.
So even If you don't think the system we presented you with is in place. Your wording is wrong by MTG definition. And your Interpretation of different same timeframes is wromg by MTG definition. And when you use the correct definitions / wordings by MTG standards guess where we arrive the same wording as cards like suntitan.
When you cast ~ or when it leaves the stack do X. And with the actual rulings that IS as you said 2 time frames making it trigger twice.
This is not to say you can't word it in such a way that it only triggers once as people have showed you various ways of doing that but you chose to keep your incorrect wording nonetheless.
Show us an example where magic cards don't follow the or system rowan presented to you.
Again it is entirely because english is subjective Magic Wording systemizes their wording with the same context clues for the same definition of or. To get rid of the subjectiveness.
Target Choices:
Target x or y. Is ALWAYS an exclusive or. Examples: Disenchant,Pillage
if you want a Target Choice to use the Inclusive or you ALWAYS use and/or
Target X and/or Y Examples: Angel of the Ruins,Baral's Expertise
Triggered abilities (which by the way always use When/Whenever/At see comp rules 603 they never use As and since your deus ex mechanic clearly is a triggered ability you cant use as there)
Whenever/At/When x or y ALWAYS use an Inclusive or.
Examples:Sun TitanCeremonial GuardPelt CollectorSundering Titan
And/Or always denotes the inclusive or. Or always the exclusive except on Triggers for triggered abilities there it is always inclusive.
Show me a card with its oracle text defying those rules.
Except that it is systematic. The way the context works is always used the same aka it uses a system. That system was even described to you in this very thread by rowanalpha. And it works like that every single time. That's what a system is hence it being systematic.
Except that it is never subjective it is always systematic, even when context is involved, there is a systematic way to include it.
You can word your deus ex Ability so that it works as intended as other people have pointed out.
Then why don't you use the systematic approach that is more organized than your wording as it doesn't turn the whole design of magic wordings into a guessing game. If you have a system use the system if it doesn't work in the system dont change the system change the card so it works in the system.
Your approach is the polar opposite of organized. Judging from the comments of the other posters and you constantly having to defend your wording it seems neither easy to read nor easy on the eyes to look at for anyone besides yourself.
Yet you don't use the games coherence aka the games internal consistency to affect your wording choice so by your own standards you are not professional.
You don't even use coherency in the general sense as there are no context clues that you can't use it twice. English as you said is "open source" so by definition not inherently coherent sometimes you need context clues to get the coherency which this lacks. And due to the systematic nature of magic wording as the only context clue you can use this twice.