Hello, if my opponent plays 1st turn Gond's Gate (no other permanents) and i play Vesuva as my first land copying that Gate. Is it correct that Vesuva will enter the battlefield tapped since we will apply the copy-replacement-effect of Vesuva, which wants to enter the Vesuva (copy of Gond's Gate) tapped and the replacement effect of the copying Gond's Gate won't apply because that copy affects all Gates and not only the specific permanent that's entering the battlefield?
The Bramblewood Paragon thing is much easier to consider if you think about if you cast a shapeshifter with changeling. The effect would definitely apply to the shapeshifter, so it would also apply to the Adaptive Automaton if Warrior was chosen. It's a niche case that works similarly to a common one.
"Does Coastal Tower enter the battlefield tapped or untapped?" Regardless of whatever else is happening in the game, the answer most likely is "Yes". Unless lands go somewhere else instead of the battlefield, then it is "No".
26:23 my primary issue here is with the verb “put” The way I see it, the counters are never “put” on an existing creature. He simply enters with the counters automatically. As per ETB logic, there is never a moment where he exists without the counters So while I do agree that his static ability/replacement effect should generally be considered during ETB procedures (per CR 614.12), I simply do not find any “events” that it actually applies to 🤷
Is this understanding correct? To determine which replacement effects exist, use the hypothetical game state after the permanent enters the battlefield. To determine which of those effects apply and what they do, use the game state before it enters the battlefield.
A more accurate way of putting it is that the game *only* looks into the future for the specific information spelled out in CR 614.12 In all other cases, the required information shall be determined by the present state of the game, before the permanent enters the battlefield (When in doubt, use present information. Future info only applies if you can cite a specific reason that is explicitly spelled out in the rules)
Hello, and first of all I'd like to congratulate you for another amazing work and video. Incredible didactic and well explained. It is so incrediable that I'd like to ask your permission to use this as an reference and create a version of this theme in portuguese (Id give all credits to you and your channel)
Obrigado pelas palavras amáveis! Of course you can use this as the basis for your work! Email me at dave@judgingftw.com if you need any help with the explanations or would like to see some more examples that didn't make it into this presentation.
That is my first time seeing Yixlid Jailer. That is a cool card. I wonder why it doesn't see play. It would shut down a lot of graveyard strategies. Escape wouldn't work, flashback, Vengevine, Bloodghast. Would it work on Narcamoeba or Emrakul, Aeons Torn though? From what this is saying about the battlefield, their state would be checked as they would exist in the graveyard and then they would go to the graveyard without their abilities triggering. Is that correct?
I can't answer your ruling question, but I can answer the question of why it doesn't see play. One, it's a creature, meaning it's one of the easiest types of permanents to deal with, and two, and I think this is the bigger issue, there are just far better graveyard hate cards from surgical extraction, to rest in peace, to endurance, heck even tormods crypt has combo potential in that weird displacer kitten legacy list, and all of the graveyard hate options I just mentioned are either the same amount of mana and better or cost less mana. Like for example jailer doesn't shut off reanimation spells. Even if you make all the cards in my graveyard lose their abilities I can still goryo's vengeance my griselbrand or whatever back into play. It's just way too narrow of a hate piece to dedicate a slot to it.
Question- All scenarios 3 players left all at 10 hp. Scene 1: Player A casts Sower of Discord targeting player A and B. Player A does 10 damage to player B. and Player C is still alive. Does player A KO themself? Scene 2: Player A casts Sower of Discord targeting Player A and Player B Player A does 10 damage to player B and Player C. Does player A win? Scene 3: It is player B turn. Player A casts Fireball for 10 damage on Player C. in response during Player B Turn. Player C casts fireball for 10 damage against Player B. since Player B is knocked out does the turn end and thus the Fireball from Player A fizzle?
Yes to all. More specifically: Scene 1: B dies, and Sower's triggered ability goes on the stack. A has until it resolves to do whatever he can. (Note that Sower's ability is not damage, but life loss). Scene 2: If the damage to C was dealt before Sower's ability resolved, it works. If not, it just becomes a repeat of Scene 1. Scene 3: Specifically, A's Fireball fizzles regardless of whose turn it is, because all of its targets are now invalid. Though B's turn ending due to his losing the game will happen as a state-based action before A's Fireball can fizzle normally.
In relation to the exemple sitated in 30:01 about isolated chapel and urborg, if I have a card that have the continius effect of "swamps come to play untapped" on the battlefild, them isolated chapel is comming tô paly untaped, hight?
Thanks for the information! Clarification question: "Enters the battlefield with.." effects means they enter, then add effects such as a shield counter for example, go onto the stack? Which could allow a player to cast murder before the counter goes on? Or they just enter with said effects? Blocking the murder's "destroy" effect. I appreciate any guidance with this.
To answer directly, rule 614.c directly states that "enters the battlefield with" is a replacement effect, not a triggered ability. Furthermore, it can't be a triggered ability, because all triggered abilities contain one of "when, whenever, or at". But to give some intuition as to why it is a replacement effect, let me answer your question with another question: Does Endless One, when X is 5, enter the battlefield as a 5/5, or does it enter the battlefield as a 0/0 with a trigger to put counters on it? I think you would agree that it *has* to enter as a 5/5, otherwise it would die to state based actions.
Something that enters the battlefield *with* counters on it never has any time where it is on the board without counters on it. It's just that things that etb with counters are special-cased in the rules to count as "having counters placed on them" as they enter, for effects that care about when things have counters placed on them.
Question: Altar of the Pantheon has the ability "Your devotion to each color and each combination of colors is increased by one." Does/could 'combination of colors' include e.g. 'no colors' and 'all colors'?
18:35 Did you mean to say “whenever a creature enters the battlefield”? “If a creature would enter the battlefield” (e.g. Containment priest) shouldn’t apply, right?
25:23 The current version of rules (at least on yawgatog) in CR 614.12, says “Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c-d.)” Movu doesn’t fit the rules in the parentheses, so Movu doesn’t fall under this rule, right?
In general, the parenthetical citations within the CR of the form "see rule NNN.NN" are references. The rules referred to are applicable to the rule that references them, but there is no guarantee that they are the only ones that so apply.
Looking at 614.1c-d, these examples primarily seem to cover ETB effects that are printed on the card itself But clearly 614.12 covers far more than that, since it also applies to continuous effects from other sources, among other things
Wow really good video!! The neoform/Mowu vs neoform/winding constrictor difference is quite fun and interesting!
Hello,
if my opponent plays 1st turn Gond's Gate (no other permanents) and i play Vesuva as my first land copying that Gate. Is it correct that Vesuva will enter the battlefield tapped since we will apply the copy-replacement-effect of Vesuva, which wants to enter the Vesuva (copy of Gond's Gate) tapped and the replacement effect of the copying Gond's Gate won't apply because that copy affects all Gates and not only the specific permanent that's entering the battlefield?
This looks familiar for the viewers that have already watched the backlog of your judge presentations. 😌
The Bramblewood Paragon thing is much easier to consider if you think about if you cast a shapeshifter with changeling. The effect would definitely apply to the shapeshifter, so it would also apply to the Adaptive Automaton if Warrior was chosen. It's a niche case that works similarly to a common one.
"Does Coastal Tower enter the battlefield tapped or untapped?"
Regardless of whatever else is happening in the game, the answer most likely is "Yes". Unless lands go somewhere else instead of the battlefield, then it is "No".
Ha.
26:23 my primary issue here is with the verb “put”
The way I see it, the counters are never “put” on an existing creature. He simply enters with the counters automatically. As per ETB logic, there is never a moment where he exists without the counters
So while I do agree that his static ability/replacement effect should generally be considered during ETB procedures (per CR 614.12), I simply do not find any “events” that it actually applies to 🤷
Is this understanding correct?
To determine which replacement effects exist, use the hypothetical game state after the permanent enters the battlefield. To determine which of those effects apply and what they do, use the game state before it enters the battlefield.
I like this distilling, but can anyone confirm is this indeed the case?
A more accurate way of putting it is that the game *only* looks into the future for the specific information spelled out in CR 614.12
In all other cases, the required information shall be determined by the present state of the game, before the permanent enters the battlefield
(When in doubt, use present information. Future info only applies if you can cite a specific reason that is explicitly spelled out in the rules)
Hello, and first of all I'd like to congratulate you for another amazing work and video. Incredible didactic and well explained. It is so incrediable that I'd like to ask your permission to use this as an reference and create a version of this theme in portuguese (Id give all credits to you and your channel)
Obrigado pelas palavras amáveis! Of course you can use this as the basis for your work! Email me at dave@judgingftw.com if you need any help with the explanations or would like to see some more examples that didn't make it into this presentation.
That is my first time seeing Yixlid Jailer. That is a cool card. I wonder why it doesn't see play. It would shut down a lot of graveyard strategies. Escape wouldn't work, flashback, Vengevine, Bloodghast. Would it work on Narcamoeba or Emrakul, Aeons Torn though? From what this is saying about the battlefield, their state would be checked as they would exist in the graveyard and then they would go to the graveyard without their abilities triggering. Is that correct?
I can't answer your ruling question, but I can answer the question of why it doesn't see play. One, it's a creature, meaning it's one of the easiest types of permanents to deal with, and two, and I think this is the bigger issue, there are just far better graveyard hate cards from surgical extraction, to rest in peace, to endurance, heck even tormods crypt has combo potential in that weird displacer kitten legacy list, and all of the graveyard hate options I just mentioned are either the same amount of mana and better or cost less mana. Like for example jailer doesn't shut off reanimation spells. Even if you make all the cards in my graveyard lose their abilities I can still goryo's vengeance my griselbrand or whatever back into play. It's just way too narrow of a hate piece to dedicate a slot to it.
Question- All scenarios 3 players left all at 10 hp.
Scene 1:
Player A casts Sower of Discord targeting player A and B. Player A does 10 damage to player B. and Player C is still alive. Does player A KO themself?
Scene 2:
Player A casts Sower of Discord targeting Player A and Player B
Player A does 10 damage to player B and Player C.
Does player A win?
Scene 3:
It is player B turn.
Player A casts Fireball for 10 damage on Player C. in response during Player B Turn. Player C casts fireball for 10 damage against Player B. since Player B is knocked out does the turn end and thus the Fireball from Player A fizzle?
Yes to all. More specifically:
Scene 1: B dies, and Sower's triggered ability goes on the stack. A has until it resolves to do whatever he can. (Note that Sower's ability is not damage, but life loss).
Scene 2: If the damage to C was dealt before Sower's ability resolved, it works. If not, it just becomes a repeat of Scene 1.
Scene 3: Specifically, A's Fireball fizzles regardless of whose turn it is, because all of its targets are now invalid. Though B's turn ending due to his losing the game will happen as a state-based action before A's Fireball can fizzle normally.
In relation to the exemple sitated in 30:01 about isolated chapel and urborg, if I have a card that have the continius effect of "swamps come to play untapped" on the battlefild, them isolated chapel is comming tô paly untaped, hight?
Thanks for the information! Clarification question:
"Enters the battlefield with.." effects means they enter, then add effects such as a shield counter for example, go onto the stack? Which could allow a player to cast murder before the counter goes on?
Or they just enter with said effects? Blocking the murder's "destroy" effect.
I appreciate any guidance with this.
To answer directly, rule 614.c directly states that "enters the battlefield with" is a replacement effect, not a triggered ability. Furthermore, it can't be a triggered ability, because all triggered abilities contain one of "when, whenever, or at". But to give some intuition as to why it is a replacement effect, let me answer your question with another question: Does Endless One, when X is 5, enter the battlefield as a 5/5, or does it enter the battlefield as a 0/0 with a trigger to put counters on it? I think you would agree that it *has* to enter as a 5/5, otherwise it would die to state based actions.
Something that enters the battlefield *with* counters on it never has any time where it is on the board without counters on it.
It's just that things that etb with counters are special-cased in the rules to count as "having counters placed on them" as they enter, for effects that care about when things have counters placed on them.
I honestly thought that automaton's ability when you name a type is an etb
Question: Altar of the Pantheon has the ability "Your devotion to each color and each combination of colors is increased by one." Does/could 'combination of colors' include e.g. 'no colors' and 'all colors'?
The best way i'd explain it is "you have 1 rainbow-colored hybrid mana pip", it doesn't count for colorless because colorless is not a color
18:35 Did you mean to say “whenever a creature enters the battlefield”?
“If a creature would enter the battlefield” (e.g. Containment priest) shouldn’t apply, right?
25:23 The current version of rules (at least on yawgatog) in CR 614.12, says “Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c-d.)”
Movu doesn’t fit the rules in the parentheses, so Movu doesn’t fall under this rule, right?
In general, the parenthetical citations within the CR of the form "see rule NNN.NN" are references. The rules referred to are applicable to the rule that references them, but there is no guarantee that they are the only ones that so apply.
Looking at 614.1c-d, these examples primarily seem to cover ETB effects that are printed on the card itself
But clearly 614.12 covers far more than that, since it also applies to continuous effects from other sources, among other things