2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Repeating Saga's Final Ability
    Quote from davidb32 »
    Why can't a player respond to the final chapter ability while it's still on the stack and remove lore counters?
    The sacrifice state based action only occurs once the chapter ability leaves the stack.
    I was mistaken and I have deleted my comment.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Eye Of The Storm and Mind's Desire
    Can I opt to put that instant into the stack then and there?

    If you exile a card with Mind's Desire, you choose whether to play that card only right after you exile it (C.R. 608.2f), and not later; playing that card is a one-shot effect (C.R. 610.1; compare the second ability of Chandra, Pyromaster with her third ability). The card is played this way at a moment that cards normally can't be played (for spells, the rule is C.R. 608.2f; for lands, you follow the "play" keyword action under C.R. 608.2c and 701.13, but see C.R. 305.2b, 305.3) — players don't have priority while a spell or ability is resolving (C.R. 117.2e), so not even instant spells could normally be cast at that moment (review C.R. 117.1a). See also this thread and this thread.

    EDIT: Struck out this text after comment 5 was posted.

    Is the instant cast or just exists?

    To play a nonland card means to cast it as a spell (C.R. 701.13b; compare with C.R. 701.13a). Thus, playing such a card follows all the rules for casting spells, notably C.R. 601.2 (C.R. 701.4), and for the purposes of Eye of the Storm, an instant or sorcery card "play[ed]" with Mind's Desire has been cast. See also this thread.

    What I'm after is, Is the word play, from Desire, exchangeable with the word cast?

    Not exactly. Mind's Desire still says "play" and not "cast" in its Oracle text [C.R. 108.1], notably because it allows a land card exiled with it to be played under certain circumstances (C.R. 116.2a, 305.2b, 305.3; review C.R. 701.13a; see also this thread). On the other hand, Eye of the Storm's text now says "...casts an instant or sorcery card" and "may cast the copy" rather than "...plays an instant or sorcery card" and "may play the copy" because cards no longer speak of "playing" a spell or an instant or sorcery card (C.R. 701.13d, 108.1). See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Attacking with Stonebrow and Ferocity of the Wilds
    Stonebrow's triggered ability will trigger. In this scenario, as soon as a non-Human creature you control attacks, it will immediately "get +1/+0 and have trample" thanks to Ferocity of the Wilds (C.R. 613.1f-g, 613.3b, 613.4, 611.3b, 113.6), so that Stonebrow's triggered ability will trigger for that creature since it's now a "creature you control with trample" (C.R. 508.1k, 508.1m; see also C.R. 603.10, 603.2). See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Indestructible inquiry
    Quote from ashrog »
    "-x/-x" or "-1/-1 counters" will [destroy an indestructible creature].
    No, that's not true. The only things that can destroy a permanent are—
    • effects that say "destroy", and
    • the state-based actions that destroy a creature because of deathtouch or lethal damage
    (C.R. 701.7a-b, 704.5g-h), and they are the only things the indestructible ability works against (C.R. 702.12). Nothing else counts as destroying a permanent, including dealing damage to it, putting counters on it, or applying a "gets -N/-M" effect to it. See also this thread and this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Cards "Flash" + "Arixmethes, Slumbering Isle"
    If you put Arixmethes onto the battlefield with Flash, you then sacrifice Arixmethes if you don't "pay its mana cost reduced by up to 2", regardless of whether Arixmethes entered the battlefield as a creature (the words "it" and "its" on Flash refer to the permanent put onto the battlefield with Flash, regardless of its nature [C.R. 400.7h, 400.2]) (C.R. 118.11a). See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Magic Questions
    Quote from BlueEqualsWin »
    Do you know of any cards that do the same affect as Surestrike Trident? I’m running a mono green deck, and have been looking for cards that do the same effect? peteroupc
    That question is out of scope for this forum. Try asking your question in the Magic General forum instead.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Magic Questions
    In general, you can't activate the ability Surestrike Trident grants to Blightsteel Colossus the turn it enters the battlefield.

    That ability has T in its cost (C.R. 602.1). For that reason, and also because Blightsteel Colossus is a creature, that ability generally can't be activated if Blightsteel Colossus entered the battlefield this turn or came under your control this turn, unless the creature has haste (which Surestrike Trident doesn't grant and Blightsteel Colossus normally doesn't have) (C.R. 302.6, 702.10c).

    Compare Surestrike Trident with Blinding Powder — unlike with Surestrike Trident, the ability Blinding Powder grants to the equipped creature can be activated the turn that creature enters the battlefield, since the ability doesn't have the tap or untap symbol in its cost (C.R. 302.6);

    EDIT: Edited slightly after comment 5 was posted.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Magic Mirror and counters
    A copy effect such as Mirage Mirror's doesn't copy counters of any kind (whether +1/+1 or otherwise) (C.R. 706.2).

    A copy effect also doesn't copy whether a permanent is monstrous (C.R. 701.30b, 706.2). If Mirage Mirror isn't already monstrous, it doesn't become monstrous merely by becoming a copy of a monstrous permanent.

    If Mirage Mirror becomes monstrous (e.g., because the ability it acquires from Colossus of Akros resolves [C.R. 701.30a]) while a copy effect is active on it, it doesn't stop being monstrous when that copy effect ends, when it becomes a copy of a permanent that isn't monstrous, or when it otherwise stops being a creature; rather, Mirage Mirror will "sta[y] monstrous until it leaves the battlefield" (C.R. 701.30b).

    For the purposes of monstrosity, whether a permanent is monstrous does not depend on whether or not it has +1/+1 counters on it (C.R. 701.30a). See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Phyrexian Altar and Omnath, Locus of Rage
    Quote from BigSasha »
    Could this be done multiple times per turn?
    You can activate Phyrexian Altar's ability as often as you can pay its cost (which is "Sacrifice a creature" here), not just once each turn (C.R. 118.3, 602.1). Compare Phyrexian Altar with Akki Avalanchers or Fault Riders, whose abilities have restrictions on how often they can be activated (C.R. 602.1b). And each time "Omnath ... or an Elemental creature you control dies" (whether by being sacrificed or otherwise), Omnath's last ability will trigger (C.R. 603.2, 700.4, 701.16a). See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Phyrexian Altar and Omnath, Locus of Rage
    If you control Omnath and Phyrexian Altar and sacrifice an Elemental you control (including an Elemental token created with Omnath) with Phyrexian Altar, Omnath's last ability will trigger. (Note that you add one mana of any color before you put that ability on the stack and choose its target [C.R. 605.3b, 603.3, 603.3d, 601.2c, 605.1a].)
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Facedown exile and exiled abilities
    Quote from davidb32 »

    That last sentence would appear to reference the second to last. That sentence is concerned with the hideaway ability and it's linked cast from exile ability.

    A card exiled face down has no characteristics, but the spell or ability that exiled it may
    allow it to be played from exile. Unless that card is being cast face down (see rule 707.4), the card
    is turned face up just before the player announces that they are playing the card (see rule 601.2).

    It is hard to see how the rule authorizes the announcement of casting due to an ability the face-down card would have if face-up but currently doesn't have.
    With that interpretation, then the last sentence of C.R. 406.3 doesn't apply, strictly speaking, to Shelldock Isle's last ability or hideaway, since the former didn't exile the card it refers to and the latter doesn't allow a player to play any cards (C.R. 702.74a).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Misthollow griffin + Watcher of tomorrow
    After rereading the rules, I was wrong in part. Even on June 6, 2019, when the War of the Spark version of the rules were in effect, C.R. 406.3 read in part: "Unless [a face-down card in exile] is being cast face down ..., the card is turned face up just before the player announces that they are playing the card", and this is still the case as of Theros Beyond Death. Thus, if you own Misthollow Griffin face down in exile, and at least if you're otherwise allowed to look at that card, you may still begin to cast that card face up. As part of doing so, you turn the card face up before announcing you will cast that card from exile. This conclusion is reinforced by C.R. 601.3e, a rule added in Throne of Eldraine.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Facedown exile and exiled abilities
    After rereading the rules, I was wrong in part. Even on December 1, 2017, when the Ixalan version of the rules were in effect, C.R. 406.3 read in part: "Unless [a face-down card in exile] is being cast face down ..., the card is turned face up just before the player announces that [they are] playing the card", and this is still the case as of Theros Beyond Death. Thus, if you own Misthollow Griffin or Eternal Scourge face down in exile, and at least if you're otherwise allowed to look at either card, you may still begin to cast that card face up. As part of doing so, you turn the card face up before announcing you will cast that card from exile. This conclusion is reinforced by C.R. 601.3e, a rule added in Throne of Eldraine.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Wishing for a facedown card in exile (CEDH)
    Even if the spell or ability allowed you to choose a card "you own ... in exile", as Coax from the Blind Eternities does, for example, the card would still have to meet the criteria of that spell or ability. Note, however, that in general, a face-down card in exile has no characteristics, even if—
    • the card would meet the spell's or ability's criteria if it were face up, or
    • something allows one or more players to look at that card in exile
    (C.R. 406.3).

    Thus, for example, in general, a face-down card in exile isn't an "Eldrazi card" for the purposes of Coax from the Blind Eternities, since the face-down card has no subtypes, including Eldrazi (C.R. 203.5m, 109.3).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Double Damage
    If you control both Dictate of the Twin Gods and Furnace of Rath, and a source would deal damage to a creature or player, both their effects combine: Instead of dealing 3 damage, Lightning Bolt deals 12 damage (3 damage doubled and doubled again) (C.R. 616.2; see also C.R. 616.1).

    This is similar to the case of you controlling two Doubling Seasons; in this case, if an effect would create a token under your control or would put a counter on a permanent you control, it creates four of those tokens or puts four of those counters instead, respectively, since the effects of both Doubling Seasons combine (C.R. 616.2).

    Even if a replacement effect, such as from Doubling Season, Dictate of the Twin Gods, or Furnace of Rath, modifies an event, another replacement effect can in turn modify that modified event (C.R. 616.2; but see C.R. 614.5). This has nothing to do with the question of whether counters, tokens, damage, or spells are objects as far as the game is concerned.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.