(3*) Can you still return a card with the Free the Fae? Can you still cast Picklock Prankster? Support Judging FtW on Patreon at / judgingftw Suggest a question: forms.gle/YTK2... A: Yes
I spend a lot (A LOT) of time looking for cards that do exactly what I need to illustrate the points that I want to make. When I found Another Chance, I stopped looking because it was absolutely perfect, including lending itself to a great transition.
I actually got this one right. I had learned this ruling when Queen Kayla bin Kroog came out because I wanted to know how she interacted with Rest in Peace.
701.13c was unexpected. It seems unintuitive to me initially. But I could see how it makes it work how other people might think it works. As a side effect, it makes "a card milled this way" effects more powerful and resilient to graveyard hate.
Small clarification: The adventure exiling itself is a replacement effect, so you could have the leyline of the void exile it and not be able to cast it as a creature. Of course it's never going to happen in a normal game because, as the controller of the spell, you're never going to choose to apply the effect of the leyline first.
@@YoshiFawful64 Apparently, the adventure exiling itself is not a self-replacement effect. I'm not a judge, and actually kinda confused myself when looking into it, so I would ask an actual judge about it as well lmao.
The RU-vidr/streamer AspiringSpike had a question about a new card, which I thought you might be able to answer (assuming you're willing to do episodes on MH3 cards). The question (again, with MH3 spoilers) is below: The new card is a saga called called The Creation of Avacyn, and it face-down exiles a tutored card from your deck on Chapter 1, turns that card face up on Chapter 2 and has you lose life equal to its mana value if it's a creature card, and then puts it into the battlefield *if it's a creature card* on Chapter 3. The question is as follows: If you let the saga's Chapter 2 trigger go on the stack, and then proliferate the lore counters with the chapter 2 trigger still on the stack, Chapter 3 will trigger and will then resolve before Chapter 2. When Chapter 3 resolves, will the game know that the face-down exiled card is a creature card and thus be able to put it onto the battlefield?
I don't believe so since it uses "put it onto the battlefield". 406.3a would let you cast it, but since I couldn't find an equivalent for putting it onto the battlefield, the first part of that rule would apply and say it has no characteristics. 406.3a: 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 708.4), the card is turned face up just before the player announces that they are playing the card (see rule 601.2).
More interesting question regarding The Creation of Avacyn would be... What happens if you remove counters from it to repeat the chapter 1 and chapter 2 abilities? The way I understand it, it'd be - Chapter 1 has no additional weirdness from resolving mutliple times. - Every time chapter 2 resolves, it attempts to turn all cards exiled with chapter 1 face up. You then lose life equal to the total mana value of all those cards (including ones that were already face up, and including ones for which you've already lost life from previous chapter 2 triggers) - Chapter 3 similarly works on all the cards In which case you could do the following: - Repeat the chapter 1 ability a bunch of times by repeatedly removing the lore counter on it - Either put chapter 2 and 3 on the stack at the same time (Doubling Season-esque effect) or proliferate in response to chapter 2, so you can resolve chapter 3 before chapter 2 - The cards are still face down, meaning they aren't creature cards, so you put all of them into your hand - Chapter 2 resolves, but there are no exiled cards, so you lose no life
I actually knew this one because I was around for when Gyruda got a ban on MTGO due to it not interacting with Rest in Peace (and similar effects) as intended.
I honestly would have gotten this one wrong if not for a just yesterday watching a video running into this interaction with Rest in Peace instead of Leyline.
Is there a particular reason that "mill" has this extra rules entry to track cards ? If its not mill, but put from the library into the graveyard, it wont track the cards (unless the card is oracled to be mill), so behaving different is a big strange, unintuitive and a bit bothersome that its not more standardized among effects which can and cannot track cards.
The reason is because they wanted it to work for effects like this. They probably also want it to work for effects like Another Chance too, but that's much more difficult to do unless you use a really clunky template.
In simple english it makes sense - “the milled cards” are just “cards that were milled”, so it shouldn’t care about where they go, unless they went somewhere that can’t be grabbed from. The cards were milled, doesnt matter if they ended up in a gy or exile, we’re looking for the cards that were milled.
This could still work with "put from library into the graveyard" effects if the wording of the return effect is something like "return [card] from those cards" as oppose to "from the graveyard."
I can't remember what you've covered and what you havent, but I have a few questions: * Normally a counterspell cannot target itself. But let's say I control Hive Mind and cast some cheap creature spell, hold priority, and cast Pact of Negation targeting my own spell. Now, each opponent gets a copy of Pact on the stack, and can choose new targets for it. Is each opponent allowed to have their Pact target itself in this case? * Any effect that lets you "copy a card and cast the copy." What zone is that copy in? Or rather, where is it being cast from? * Also, this isn't a rules question but something that annoys me and I don't know what WotC was thinking. Aragorn the Uniter deals damage to "target opponent" whenever you cast a red spell. To my knowledge this was the first card that deals damage to target opponent that can't also target planeswalkers (prior to Dominaria any noncombat source to an opponent could be redirected to an opponent's planeswalker.) This now makes the game more confusing to new players who started playing after the redirection rule was deleted and are reading cards printed when the redirection rule still existed. It's the same problem as "play" vs "cast" where everything before 2011 that said "play" meant "cast"
1. No. A spell it ability can never target itself. 115.5: A spell or ability on the stack is an illegal target for itself. 2. The same zone the original is in, which is usually going to be exile like in the case of Isochron Scepter, but Kefnet creates it in your hand (K's ruling: The copy is created in and cast from your hand.). If you don't cast it, it will cease to exist next time SBAs are checked. 3. There's been several others including the Carnage half of Carnival//Carnage and demanding dragon, though most of those have some other effect that also applies to the opponent. I think with Aragorn they felt it would be weird to mention Planeswalkers since there aren't any in the LOTR set or commander decks.
Not terribly relevant to this question, but I did have something that I wanted to ask because it's caused a bit of an argument. When you copy a spell with a cast trigger (i.e., "when you cast this spell..."), does the copy also get the cast trigger? Everything I've found says it doesn't, but there are apparently people who think it does.
@@seandun7083 That's not what's happening in the hypothetical that led to the argument. It's casting Emrakul, the Promised End with Ulalek, Fused Atrocity's triggered ability. As I understand it, you would get the actual paper card for Emrakul and a token copy of Emrakul (one of which would die to legend rule), plus two instances of controlling an opponent's next turn and giving them another turn afterwards. I also pointed out that storm would be (even more) broken if copies triggered cast triggers, but they weren't budging. Guess that's what I get for arguing on the internet. :P
@@seanheath4492 yeah, you are correct. This rule clarifies what casting a spell is. Copying a spell means that it doesn't come from anywhere and you don't pay it's costs (even alternate ones like "without paying it's mana cost). If you copy a spell, it gets around Trinisphere and Chalice of the void. Also, it should be pretty clear from Ulalek's ability since they designed it specifically so that you would also get a second trigger through copying the trigger whereas normally it wouldn't. 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 730, "Handling Illegal Actions").
What if I copy with a card,what says,"Copy target creature,in a mode like you already played it's mana cost. Or copy target...,but you still need to pay it's mana cost. Would these count as casting the copy?
@@stevefurrier9932 if you need to pay it's mana cost (or cast it without paying it's mana cost) then that generally means you are casting it. If you copy the spell on the stack or create a token copy/clone of it after it resolves, you aren't casting it so you won't get cast triggers.
Hey, I have a weird ruling question from a game of commander I just played. So my opponent controls roil elemental and a llanowar scout. I cast solitude and target roil elemental with the ability, after which my opponent taps llanowar scout to put a forest into play from there hand. With the roil elemental trigger, they decide to take solitude with the roil trigger and cast tamiyo’s safekeeping on the roil elemental using the forest from llanowar scout ability. My questions is if the solitude changed control to my opponent would solitudes ability fizzle since they gave it hexproof or not?
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I think this is how everything would resolve: You cast Solitude (uncertain if it was evoked or not; not relevant to this particular discussion) Opponent activates Llanowar scout in response, assuming it is untapped and not summoning sick Scout's ability presumably resolves, putting a forest into play and triggering landfall Roil Elemental triggers, targeting Solitude Elemental's trigger presumably resolves, taking your Solitude Still in response to the Solitude trigger, Opponent casts Tamiyo's safekeeping, targeting Roil Elemental Safekeeping presumably resolves, giving Elemental hexproof and indestructible Solitude's trigger attempts to resolve but no longer sees Roil Elemental as a legal target due to hexproof and so fizzles. The relevant rule is 112.7a, which says in short that once an ability (activated or triggered) goes onto the stack, it is considered separate from its original source. Because Solitude's trigger went onto the stack, it is now considered independent of its source the creature, and now control of the creature is irrelevant. In summary, Solitude's ability would fizzle due to hexproof because you still retain control of Solitude's triggered ability.
Regarding the part about Another Chance and Planar Void, what about the other side of that interaction? It's pretty obvious that Planar Void should be unable to exile a card that was milled and then put into hand by Another Chance (so obvious that it wasn't even mentioned), but is that due to the card no longer being in a public zone or due to the card changing zone at all? For example, what if one of the milled card is not put into the hand, but is then put into play by some other effect before Planar Void's trigger resolves? Would Planar Void then still be able to exile it or fail to do so? What if it was exiled by some other effect? Would Planar Void ...put it from exile into exile? Would that cause any effects that trigger on exile to trigger twice?
When a card changes zones, it becomes a new object with no connection to its previous self. After Planar Void triggers for a card, if that card leaves the graveyard for any reason, that trigger won't be able to find it to exile it.
Can you explain the ruling for hexproof in a situation where the card says "choose" instead of "target". For example: Duress vs Leyline of Sanctity/ Aegis of the gods
In regards to the leyline of the void. Let's say i am playing Muldrotha deck, so I use cards like "cankerbloom" or "seal of primordium". If I were to sac my card to destroy Letline of the Void, does my card get exiled or would it instead go to the graveyard?
Sacrificing those cards is part of the process of activating their abilities. Thus, they would be exiled because Leyline of the Void is not destroyed until the ability resolves. This is different from what would happen if you just played a spell that destroys Leyline of the Void, which I talk about in DDR#66: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3v4fvDJTwqE.html
@@isaz2425 I think the opposite. I think not having this rule would make it more complicated, because it would be hitting a case where the spells wording does not do what it implies to be doing - mentioning specific cards but then not working on those cards leaves us in linguistic ambiguity as to what's going to happen and requires the application of a more complex ruleset about how exactly static abilities interfere with effects.
@@Luxalpa I honestly wouldn't be surprised if part of the reason they made mill a keyword was so they could make rules specific to it that don't apply to other cases of stuff going to the graveyard.
