Dumb Rules Question

[Fonzy]

My buddies always play gay cards like Clone and Vesuvan Shapeshifter that have oodles of rules baggage attached to them.

I just want to make sure I have this scenario right.

If I have a Mogg Fanatic in play, and someone plays a Clone, I can sac the Mogg Fanatic in response so that they can't chose it as a creature to copy, but that will allow them to chose another creature as the Clone comes into play, right? Basically, you can't make Clone "fizzle" unless there is only one creature in play and you remove it from play in response to them playing Clone, because Clone doesn't target. You can limit their ability to choose targets as they play the spell by removing creatures from play, but ultimately, if there's any creatures in play as the Clone resolves, they'll have to pick one of them for Clone to copy.

Right?

[Jenius]

I'm pretty sure that's right. You can respond to clone being placed on the stack, but the clone ability itself doesn't use the stack, so unless you had a way of removing all creatures from the board before clone hit, he could just pick from whatever was left.

My personal favorite was copy enchantment on dreamleash/confiscate, not only does the stealing part not use the stack, but because you just attach the enchantment, it doesn't count as targeting and you can ignore the rules on the card. I remember hitting an untapped kodama of the north tree (it might have been south, the 6/4 trampler that can't be targeted) in a multiplayer game before on modo and the guy thought I was hacking.

[RC]

Correct. Anything that uses "as" or "if" is a replacement effect and simply replaces or modifies one action with another. They don't use the stack; rather, they change things already on the stack.

You'd have to sac Mogg Fanatic before the Clone spell resolves.

[jok3r]

Correct. Anything that uses "as" or "if" is a replacement effect and simply replaces or modifies one action with another. They don't use the stack; rather, they change things already on the stack.

You'd have to sac Mogg Fanatic before the Clone spell resolves.

this.

also, using this to own the forum.

[notallama]

if they're playing the card, and you sac in response, it hits play as usual and they pick another creature.

the shapeshifter is trickier, though.
if they flip it up, you can't respond to it. they just pay 1u and it becomes whatever right away.

[Naga]

1. Card says "at end of turn, sac ~".
2. I lose control of it
3. ???

[mrs_bun]

That means "during your next end phase," so they would not sac it until the end of their turn.

[Jenius]

I'm pretty sure it means during the next endphase, regardless of who's it is. So they gain control of it during your turn and I'm pretty sure it dies at end of your turn, unless it came unto play after the end phase (which is possible, it's fun to abuse kiki jiki that way).

[mrs_bun]

Whoops, Jenius is right lmao. I was thinking of something and now I can't remember what it is tho... :(

[Jenius]

Well cards that die eot are generally worded like "At end of turn, sac this", I think if said at the end of your turn, it'd be different.

[Naga]

I'm pretty sure it means during the next endphase, regardless of who's it is. So they gain control of it during your turn and I'm pretty sure it dies at end of your turn, unless it came unto play after the end phase (which is possible, it's fun to abuse kiki jiki that way).

I just built a deck around it working like this.

Thanks.

:)

[Fonzy]

Well cards that die eot are generally worded like "At end of turn, sac this", I think if said at the end of your turn, it'd be different.

I would tend to agree, because phrases like that are generally directed at the controller. So if you had a card that said, "at the end of your turn" and an opponent took control of it, "your turn" would actually be their turn.

[Avedomni]

You people and your noncommittal answers.

Definitive Answer:
A triggered ability of the form "At end of turn, <do stuff>" will trigger at beginning of every End of Turn step. If <do stuff> is "sacrifice this", then the permanent will end up being sacrificed at the end of whatever turn it is, regardless of whose turn it is. If it somehow isn't (ie, the ability is Stifled), then the ability will trigger again at the beginning of the next End of Turn step.

A triggered ability of the form "At the end of your turn, <do stuff>" will trigger only during its controller's End of Turn step. There are no abilities of this form where <do stuff> is "sacrifice this" actually printed on a creature, but one is granted by Nettlevine Blight and by Instill Furor.

[mrs_bun]

You people and your noncommittal answers.

Definitive Answer:
A triggered ability of the form "At end of turn, <do stuff>" will trigger at beginning of every End of Turn step. If <do stuff> is "sacrifice this", then the permanent will end up being sacrificed at the end of whatever turn it is, regardless of whose turn it is. If it somehow isn't (ie, the ability is Stifled), then the ability will trigger again at the beginning of the next End of Turn step.

A triggered ability of the form "At the end of your turn, <do stuff>" will trigger only during its controller's End of Turn step. There are no abilities of this form where <do stuff> is "sacrifice this" actually printed on a creature, but one is granted by Nettlevine Blight and by Instill Furor.

Oh yeah like you're so definitive! :stare:

Oh, wait, right. :o

[Jenius]

You people and your noncommittal answers.

Definitive Answer:
A triggered ability of the form "At end of turn, <do stuff>" will trigger at beginning of every End of Turn step. If <do stuff> is "sacrifice this", then the permanent will end up being sacrificed at the end of whatever turn it is, regardless of whose turn it is. If it somehow isn't (ie, the ability is Stifled), then the ability will trigger again at the beginning of the next End of Turn step.

A triggered ability of the form "At the end of your turn, <do stuff>" will trigger only during its controller's End of Turn step. There are no abilities of this form where <do stuff> is "sacrifice this" actually printed on a creature, but one is granted by Nettlevine Blight and by Instill Furor.
Thank you for restating exactly what I said. It's quite helpful you see.

[mrs_bun]

It wasn't definitive, tho! :V

[Avedomni]

Thank you for restating exactly what I said. It's quite helpful you see.
What makes it potentially helpful is the lack of "I would tend to", "I think", "I'm pretty sure", and other such qualifiers that leave the other answers in this thread sounding like there's a distinct possibility that it doesn't work that way, and that you people are just making educated guesses.

[Fonzy]

What makes it potentially helpful is the lack of "I would tend to", "I think", "I'm pretty sure", and other such qualifiers that leave the other answers in this thread sounding like there's a distinct possibility that it doesn't work that way, and that you people are just making educated guesses.

That's because we don't consider ourselves to be definitive authorities on the subject, so we leave ourselves open to the possibility of being proven wrong by someone who is a definitive authority on the subject.

[Avedomni]

That's because we don't consider ourselves to be definitive authorities on the subject, so we leave ourselves open to the possibility of being proven wrong by someone who is a definitive authority on the subject.Hence our post authoritatively confirming that you aren't? Or are you only interested in authoritative proof when you are wrong?

[Fonzy]

Hence our post authoritatively confirming that you aren't? Or are you only interested in authoritative proof when you are wrong?

What does that have to do with anything?

I'm just explaining the "noncommittal answers" you mentioned.

[Jenius]

What makes it potentially helpful is the lack of "I would tend to", "I think", "I'm pretty sure", and other such qualifiers that leave the other answers in this thread sounding like there's a distinct possibility that it doesn't work that way, and that you people are just making educated guesses.

Well yes, but you could have merely quoted one of us and said we were right, rather than copy/pasting what we said while being haughty with people who haven't played magic for years labeling their posts with "IIRC".

[Avedomni]

Well yes, but you could have merely quoted one of us and said we were right, rather than copy/pasting what we said while being haughty with people who haven't played magic for years labeling their posts with "IIRC".First, we weren't being haughty in the slightest. The responses given were of ambiguous uncertainty, and we felt that a more certain response was warranted. If that offended you, we're sorry.

Second, we hardly copy/pasted. We answered the question, clarified the answer to the extra question regarding "end of your turn", and pointed out that no creature's actually have that second ability.

[Jenius]

First, we weren't being haughty in the slightest. The responses given were of ambiguous uncertainty, and we felt that a more certain response was warranted. If that offended you, we're sorry.

Second, we hardly copy/pasted. We answered the question, clarified the answer to the extra question regarding "end of your turn", and pointed out that no creature's actually have that second ability.

You clarified nothing that wasn't already said.

Also: http://magiccards.info/query/cards/3631321.html

And lastly, is there a mouse in your pocket or do you just have a mpd?

[mrs_bun]

Mouse? o_O

[Avedomni]

You clarified nothing that wasn't already said.It would be kind of hard to clarify something that wasn't said previously.Also: http://magiccards.info/query/cards/3631321.htmlErm...what?And lastly, is there a mouse in your pocket or do you just have a mpd?Neither?

[mrs_bun]

You clarified nothing that wasn't already said.

Also: http://magiccards.info/query/cards/3631321.html

And lastly, is there a mouse in your pocket or do you just have a mpd?

He said no CREATURES have the ability. :P

[Jenius]

It would be kind of hard to clarify something that wasn't said previously.
What I meant was that your post contained no new information, you didn't need to say anything at all, if you merely quoted one of several posts in this thread and said "this is correct" it would have given the same message. Instead you come in and act like it was some sort of sin to admit we could have been wrong on subjects we were hazy with.

Erm...what?
There's several creatures on that page that have oracle text "At the end of your turn" something happens. Though in context with your previous post, I suppose you could have been referring solely to abilities relating to sacrificing. Even still, there is at least one creatures that you must sacrifice at end of your turn if you didn't attack with them on said page, so the point is moot as you're wrong either way.

Neither?
Then why do you keep saying we?

Mouse? o_O
Haven't you ever heard that before? My mom used to say that to me all the time when I used "we" in a situation wherein there was no we.

[mrs_bun]

What I meant was that your post contained no new information

J, source; source, j. :P

[Jenius]

To be honest, his original post just came across as so condescending that I don't even know who this guy is and I don't like him :V.

[Avedomni]

What I meant was that your post contained no new information, you didn't need to say anything at all, if you merely quoted one of several posts in this thread and said "this is correct" it would have given the same message. Instead you come in and act like it was some sort of sin to admit we could have been wrong on subjects we were hazy with.We acted like "it was some sort of sin?" We're fairly certain that all we did was make a facetious comment about there not being any answers that weren't qualified, and then provided one. Could we have quoted a post and said "This is correct"? Sure. Was there any reason to do so, when we could just type up the answer ourself? Not really.

The fact that you're so insecure that you get offended over something as simple as that isn't really our problem.There's several creatures on that page that have oracle text "At the end of your turn" something happens. Though in context with your previous post, I suppose you could have been referring solely to abilities relating to sacrificing. Even still, there is at least one creatures that you must sacrifice at end of your turn if you didn't attack with them on said page, so the point is moot as you're wrong either way.Our claim was that there are no creatures with "At the end of your turn, sacrifice <this>". That's a true statement. We did miss that there is a creature that conditionally has you sacrifice it.

[Jenius]

Because you keep referring to yourself with plural pronouns, I will too.

It totally has at the end of your turn, sac this on it. It may be conditional, but the concept of only sacrificing at the end of your own turn has appeared on a creature. So basically, y'all were wrong.

Y'all's writing style is also retarded.

[mrs_bun]

I find that if you don't try to take what ppl say as condescending, you don't really ever seem to find anyone being condescending. I spose it helps that I've known ave for a while outside of ts's super arguey and condescending atmosphere, maybe, but what he posted still doesn't seem condescending. Maybe just playful.

Also, sheesh, relax, Jenius, you're super condescending to me all the time anyway. :P

[Avedomni]

Because you keep referring to yourself with plural pronouns, I will too.Most people do.
It totally has at the end of your turn, sac this on it. It may be conditional, but the concept of only sacrificing at the end of your own turn has appeared on a creature. So basically, y'all were wrong.We just reported the result of a search. Also, we admitted to being wrong about that, so why are you continuing to mention it?Y'all's writing style is also retarded.Your face is retarded.

[Zerg]

Yo mommas are so fat that they are plural!

[mrs_bun]

Yo mommas are so fat that they are plural!

Hahahaha omg yes.

Alsol lmao @ your face is retarded. XP