MTG Salvation

With the understanding that no card other than "silver-bordered" cards has the same effect as that found in Julius's triggered ability or Ordinary Pony's ability, and that "host" is listed neither as a card type nor as a supertype in the comprehensive rules (C.R. 205.2a, 205.4a):

See this thread, where I say: "The comprehensive rules don't include any rules on 'combined' permanents or what happens when a permanent enters the battlefield 'combined'. The answer ultimately depends on what rules the players in the game adopt for 'combined' permanents (perhaps with inspiration from the reminder text on Grusilda[, Monster Masher])." For example, the comprehensive rules don't cover cases when a nontoken permanent "combined" with another nontoken permanent (resulting in a permanent made up of two different cards if rules suggested by the reminder text for augment are followed) is exiled with Ordinary Pony. If rules suggested by the behavior for melded permanents are followed, then that permanent is exiled in the form of the cards that permanent makes up (see also C.R. 712.4), then those cards return to the battlefield (see also C.R. 712.4c); if a permanent that returns this way is a "host ... under your control", Julius's ability will trigger (see also C.R. 400.7).

In general, in a game allowing "silver-bordered" cards such as those in Unglued, Unhinged, and Unstable, the players in the game can agree on modifications to the comprehensive rules ("house rules") to accommodate situations, such as this one, that the comprehensive rules neither regulate nor answer and that are unique to such cards (see also C.R. 100.7). Although Mark Rosewater issues "rulings" on how certain game situations unique to such cards play out, such advice is no more or less valid than the "house rules" agreed to by the players (that is, such players can agree whether to adopt such "rulings" or not).

EDIT: Edited after comment 3 was posted.
EDIT (May 21; Mar. 25): Edited further.

Quote from BasqueRootwalla »

Great, thanks so much. Am I correct, then, that when the Estrid's Invocation is exiled and comes back, it's no longer an Elephant Grass? For instance, if you were unable or unwilling to pay the original Elephant Grass's cumulative upkeep cost and sacrifice it, the following upkeep your Estrid's Invocation wouldn't be able to come back as an Elephant Grass.

The new Estrid's Invocation won't necessarily enter as a copy of whatever the old Estrid's Invocation was a copy of, if any. This is because the new permanent has "no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence" as the old permanent (C.R. 400.7).

Is there some favorable interaction with Solitary Confinement? There's no real benefit of stacking them, so I'm unclear on what the favorable interaction is if my understanding of the Estrid's Invocation/Elephant Grass-style upkeep trigger interaction is correct.

In the case of Solitary Confinement, the scenario is largely similar to the case of Elephant Grass, as given in comment 2. In the analogue to step 5, you can choose not to discard a card when the upkeep ability of the old Estrid's-Invocation-turned-Solitary-Confinement resolves, and you won't sacrifice that permanent because it has already left the battlefield.

If you're referring to the interation between Estrid's Invocation and Elephant Grass, here's how this scenario works:

1. Assume you control and own Estrid's Invocation that's a copy of Elephant Grass. It thus has "cumulative upkeep 1" and "At the beginning of your upkeep, you may exile this enchantment. If you do, return it to the battlefield under your control", among other abilities. Assume you also control the original Elephant Grass.
2. Your upkeep begins. Both abilities just mentioned trigger at the same time, as well as the original Elephant Grass's cumulative upkeep ability.
3. Then those abilities go on the stack at the same time, in the order of your choice. You put the cumulative upkeep abilities below the "At the beginning of your upkeep, you may exile..." ability.
4. All players pass, then the "At the beginning of your upkeep, you may exile..." ability resolves. You choose to exile Estrid's Invocation and return it to the battlefield under your control. Because the new Estrid's Invocation is different from the one that left as far as the game is concerned (C.R. 400.7), you may choose to have it enter as a copy of any enchantment you control, not just the original Elephant Grass. Assume in what follows that you choose to have it enter as a copy of the original Elephant Grass.
5. All players pass, then the old Estrid's-Invocation-turned-Elephant-Grass's cumulative upkeep ability resolves. You can't put an age counter on that permanent because it has already left the battlefield. You choose not to pay 1 for each age counter on the permanent, so you would sacrifice the permanent, which you also can't do.
6. All players pass, then the original Elephant Grass's cumulative upkeep ability resolves. You put an age counter on Elephant Grass. Then you must sacrifice Elephant Grass unless you pay 1 for each age counter on it.

EDIT: Numbered the steps after comment 3 was posted.

A player can activate an activated ability (such as Wildheart Invoker's) even if isn't their turn (C.R. 117.1b, 117.1, 117.3), unless the ability states otherwise (for example, if it says "Activate only during your turn", "Activate only during your upkeep", or "Activate only as a sorcery" [C.R. 307.5]; examples include Fleshformer, Llanowar Augur, and Defiant Salvager) (C.R. 602.1b). See also this thread and this thread.

EDIT (Apr. 20, 2021): Edited, including to conform to rule changes with Strixhaven.

After Seize the Soul is exiled haunting a creature, Seize the Soul isn't moved elsewhere merely because the creature it haunts dies or otherwise leaves the battlefield, since nothing in Seize the Soul or haunt says to move Seize the Soul elsewhere this way (review C.R. 702.54b; see also this thread).

Where Ajani's Pridemate says "Whenever you gain life", it means "Whenever a source causes you to gain life" (C.R. 118.9). Here, there are two creatures causing you to gain life as they deal damage (thanks to lifelink) (C.R. 119.3f), so Ajani's Pridemate's ability will trigger twice (C.R. 608.2, especially C.R. 608.2c). The fact that the two creatures deal damage to the same creature is irrelevant. Compare Ajani's Pridemate with Sun-Crowned Hunters, whose ability triggers only once each time Sun-Crowned Hunters is dealt damage, no matter how many sources deal that damage at one time (C.R. 608.2, especially C.R. 608.2c; C.R. 700.1). See also this thread.

Quote from PerniciousWolf »

My question about this is which happens first? does the mana empty, or does Omnath, Locus of Mana return preventing the mana from emptying? Because mana empties at the end of each phase, but he also returns at the end of the said phase.

When Omnath is exiled with Identity Thief this way, it will happen during the declare attackers step and, since Omnath is no longer on the battlefield, the player who last controlled Omnath will generally lose any mana they have that goes unspent as the declare attackers step ends (C.R. 500.4). An effect that ends the turn during that step will also end that step in the process (C.R. 716.1d), so that that player will lose any unspent mana they have in that process (C.R. 500.4).

Would this mean Omnath will remain in exile for the rest of the game? Or can he be returned to the command zone?

If you end the turn with Sundial of the Infinite while delayed triggered abilities (such as from Identity Thief) are on the stack, each of those abilities will be exiled and will not trigger again unless it specifies a duration (such as "for the rest of the game", which is not the case for Identity Thief, though) (C.R. 603.7b, 716.1b). In this case, therefore, if you end the turn this way while Identity Thief's delayed triggered ability is on the stack, Omnath will remain exiled indefinitely. See also this thread, this thread, and this thread. (Note that a permanent can't be moved to the command zone instead of to exile without more; for example, in the traditional Commander variant in general, a commander that would be exiled from anywhere may be moved to the command zone instead was just exiled may be moved to the command zone as a state-based action if its owner so chooses [C.R. 903.9 C.R. 903.9a].)

EDIT (Jun. 19; Jun. 23): Correctness edit.
EDIT (Jul. 2, 2020): Edited to conform to rule update with Core Set 2021.

If you control more than one Stalking Vengeance and a creature you control dies, each such Stalking Vengeance's triggered ability will trigger (except that if that creature is a Stalking Vengeance, its own triggered ability won't trigger this way), and those abilities will go on the stack the next time a player would get priority (C.R. 603.2, 603.3). As those abilities go on the stack, you choose separately, for each one, which player or planeswalker it targets (C.R. 108.1, 603.3d, 601.2c, 114.1d).

Note that Primalcrux's converted mana cost is 6, so you can't put Primalcrux onto the battlefield with Genesis Wave if X is only 2. Thus, assume you've cast Genesis Wave for an X of 6 rather than 2 in what follows.

In the answers below, assume you choose to put Primalcrux and Rancor onto the battlefield; in this case, they will try to enter at the same time (the relevant part of the effect, "you may put [certain cards] onto the battlefield", contains only one action verb) (C.R. 608.2c).

Also assume that Nylea is the only permanent you control with a mana cost at the beginning of the scenario.

1. Under C.R. 303.4f, in this case, you must "choos[e] what [Rancor] will enchant as it enters the battlefield". However, this choice is not exactly a replacement effect, which is clearly dealt with before Primalcrux enters the battlefield; if this were a replacement effect, you clearly could not choose Primalcrux this way (C.R. 614.12a; see also C.R. 400.6). However, in this scenario, there would be no "time", as far as the game is concerned, that—

• Rancor isn't on the battlefield attached to a creature without Primalcrux also being on the battlefield, or
• Primalcrux is on the battlefield without Rancor also being on the battlefield attached to a creature,

so Primalcrux can't be chosen as the creature Rancor will enchant this way, since Primalcrux isn't yet on the battlefield at the moment you would have to choose what Rancor will enchant this way.
2. Because the choice made under C.R. 303.4f is not exactly a replacement effect, the special rules under C.R. 614.12 that govern what effects are taken into account as a permanent enters the battlefield are inapplicable (and indeed, there are no replacement effects involved in this scenario [review C.R. 614.1]). Thus, Nylea's devotion to green is only one at the moment you start to put Rancor and Primalcrux onto the battlefield, since there is only one green mana symbol in the mana costs of permanents you control at that moment (namely the one found in Nylea's mana cost) (C.R. 700.5). Thus, because that devotion isn't less than five, Nylea isn't a creature for the purposes of C.R. 303.4f, so you can't have Rancor enchant Nylea this way as Rancor enters the battlefield (C.R. 702.5a).
3. Rancor and Primalcrux will enter at the same time here, so the order in which they appeared in your library is irrelevant.

EDIT: Edited after comment 4 was posted.
EDIT (Mar. 2, 2021): Correct rule citation.

Quote from CavalierKid80 »

So basically, the general rule is that a spell/ability that only targets a creature can't be cast/activated unless the target is a creature as the spell/ability is cast/activated?

Yes. In general, a spell that requires targets can't be cast, and an activated ability that requires targets can't be activated, unless—

• the required number of targets are chosen for that spell or ability, and
• those targets meet the criteria of that spell or ability (e.g., "[t]arget creature" for Defiant Strike or Giant Growth)

(C.R. 601.2, 601.2c, 602.2, 602.2b, 114.1a-c).

You can't target Mizzium Tank with Defiant Strike unless Mizzium Tank is already a creature by the time you start casting that spell (C.R. 114.1a, 601.2c). However, if an effect lets you change Defiant Strike's target (which neither Defiant Strike nor Mizzium Tank lets you do), that target could thereby be changed to another creature even if it became a creature after Defiant Strike is cast and before it resolves (C.R. 114.7, 114.4). See also this thread. (Note that Mizzium Tank's second ability triggers only when you finish casting a noncreature spell [C.R. 601.2i].)

In general, if a Clone enters the battlefield as a copy of Gigantoplasm, it will acquire Gigantoplasm's copiable values (which in this case will include "X: This creature has base power and toughness X/X" if Gigantoplasm itself entered the battlefield as a creature due to its own ability) (C.R. 706.9a, 706.2). However, besides copy effects, most other effects, including effects that set a creature's base power and toughness, are not copied this way (C.R. 706.2).

Take the following scenario:

• You control Grizzly Bears on the battlefield.
• You cast Gigantoplasm, all players pass, then Gigantoplasm resolves. You choose to have Gigantoplasm enter the battlefield as a copy of Grizzly Bears. Gigantoplasm will thus be 2/2 (and include that power and toughness in its copiable values) and have the ability "X: This creature has base power and toughness X/X" (again part of Gigantoplasm's copiable values).
• You activate the newly acquired ability, choosing 5 for X.
• All players pass, then that ability resolves. Gigantoplasm now has base power and toughness 5/5.
• You cast Clone, all players pass, then Clone resolves. You choose to have Clone enter the battlefield as a copy of Gigantoplasm. Clone will thus be 2/2 (not 5/5) and have the ability "X: This creature has base power and toughness X/X", which is part of Gigantoplasm's copiable values.

EDIT (Oct. 23): Correctness edit.

When Jace's Archivist's ability resolves, the card discards, if any, happen (making Archfiend of Ifnir's ability trigger as often as called for), then the card draws, if any, happen (making Nekusar's ability trigger as often as called for) (C.R. 608.2c, 603.3). However, even though not all of the abilities just mentioned necessarily trigger at the same time, those abilities will go on the stack at the same time, the next time a player would get priority (here, after Jace's Archivist's ability finishes resolving) (C.R. 117.3b, 117.5, 603.3b). Since in this case you controlled Nekusar and Archfiend of Ifnir when their corresponding abilities triggered, you choose the order those abilities go on the stack (C.R. 603.3b, 113.8).

EDIT (Oct. 25): Edited, including because some rules were renumbered with Core Set 2020.

The tokens created with Worldspine Wurm will be named "Wurm Token" (C.R. 111.4). However, "Wurm Token" isn't the name of a card in the Oracle card reference at the time of this writing, so that name can't be chosen for Runed Halo (C.R. 201.3). (See also this thread and this thread.)

EDIT (Sep. 29): Edited, including because one rule was renumbered in the meantime.
EDIT (Nov. 11, 2021): Edited to conform to announced rule update with Innistrad: Crimson Vow.

Quote from void_nothing »

An emblem isn't really an object in any zone (although they're physically placed in the command zone for convenience's sake); it's just a marker.

Under C.R. 109.1, objects include emblems. And, in fact, there are emblems that deal damage (an example is found in Ral, Izzet Viceroy) as well as emblems with abilities that target permanents (such as found in Venser), so that a creature with protection from a given player (as granted by True-Name Nemesis)—

• would have damage an emblem controlled by that player would deal to it be prevented (C.R. 702.16j, 109.4b; under C.R. 120.1, an "object that deals damage is the source of that damage"), and
• could not be the target of an ability of an emblem controlled by that player (C.R. 702.16j, 109.4b, 113.8; for the meaning of "source of an ability", see C.R. 113.7).

EDIT: Correctness edit after comment 5 was posted.
EDIT (Apr. 8, 2021): Some rules were renumbered in the meantime.
EDIT (May 17, 2021): Edit certain rule citations.