Tokens do not have summoning sickness, right?

29 posts / 0 new
Last post
So I just read the Token section here on the forums and if I am reading everything right, Tokens do not have summoning sickness. They are not summoned. This is correct, right?

In effect, Tokens have haste? (Essentially)

Just looking for some clarification and conformation on this.

Thanks a million!


Jut
All creatures have summoning sickness. If they are tokens, artifact creatures, animated lands or whatever is irrelevant. It's a creature? Then it can't attack or use abilities with the tap symbol as cost unless you controlled them since the beginning of your turn.
You need more lands! You need more card draw! You need more removal!
I understand what both of you are saying but this:

"Q: Does putting a creature token onto the battlefield count as casting a creature spell?
A: No. The act of "casting a spell" has a special meaning in magic, involving taking a card (usually from your hand), putting it onto the stack, choosing required targets, modes, and making other required decisions, and paying the required costs to do so. Putting a token onto the battlefield doesn't involve any of that--you aren't casting anything, much less a creature spell, when you put a token onto the battlefield.

Thus, putting a creature token onto the battlefield won't trigger abilities like EquilibriumImage.ashx?type=card&name=Equilibrium's, which trigger on casting a creature spell. They will, however, trigger abilities like PandemoniumImage.ashx?type=card&name=Pandemonium's, which trigger on a creature entering the battlefield and don't care how it got there."



Would seem to say otherwise. OR am I just missing something, I even read up on Summoning Sickness and it does not seem to address this.

OR . . .

Q: Do tokens have names?
A: Yes. A creature token's name is usually the same as its creature type(s); however, if the token is a copy of something, its name is the same as whatever it's a copy of, and if the effect that created it specified a name for it, that is its name.

Example: A "1/1 red Goblin Scout creature token" (Goblin ScoutsImage.ashx?type=card&name=Goblin Scouts) is named "Goblin Scout", but a "legendary 2/2 green and white Wolf creature token named Voja" (Tolsimir WolfbloodImage.ashx?type=card&name=Tolsimir Wolfblood) is named "Voja".

PLus this:

Q: What does 'summoning sickness' do?
A: Creatures with summoning sickness can't attack and can't use abilities with costs that include the mana_tap.gif or mana_untap.gif symbols. Creatures have summoning sickness if they have not been under their current controller's control since the beginning of that player's most recent turn.


Mean that the Token are in fact creatures, and while not traditionally "summoned" they are still a creature that has not been under my control since the beggining of my turn. (Is this the case?)

If so, the 1st qoute from the Token section is a bit misleading IMHO or is it just me? (it can be me, I can be dense at times!)


Thanks for helping me try to figure this out. (or did I just figure it out?)

Jut
I understand what both of you are saying but this:

"Q: Does putting a creature token onto the battlefield count as casting a creature spell?
A: No. The act of "casting a spell" has a special meaning in magic, involving taking a card (usually from your hand), putting it onto the stack, choosing required targets, modes, and making other required decisions, and paying the required costs to do so. Putting a token onto the battlefield doesn't involve any of that--you aren't casting anything, much less a creature spell, when you put a token onto the battlefield.

Thus, putting a creature token onto the battlefield won't trigger abilities like Equilibrium's, which trigger on casting a creature spell. They will, however, trigger abilities like Pandemonium's, which trigger on a creature entering the battlefield and don't care how it got there."



Would seem to say otherwise. OR am I just missing something, I even read up on Summoning Sickness and it does not seem to address this.


Thanks for helping me try to figure this out.


Jut



What you quoted has nothing to do with tokens and summoning sickness. What you quoted is just stating that abilities that say "cast" will not be triggered when you put tokens onto the battlefield since you are not "casting" it from your hand.

EVERYTHING has summoning sickness...but as said above, creatures are the ones affected by it.

DCI Level 1 Judge Katy, Texas
Whether something is affected by summoning sickness is unrelated to the act of casting a spell. Something is affected by summoning sickness if both of the following are true:
  1. It is a creature

  2. It has not been under your control since the start of your most recent turn 

302.6. A creature's activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can't be activated unless the creature has been under its controller's control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can't attack unless it has been under its controller's control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the "summoning sickness" rule.

Just edited my post and I think I have it figured out.

Thanks!


Jut
Wasnt there a big argment recently over the fact that "summoning sickness" isnt limited to things that summoned, with a suggestion being made that the name of the term should change to avoid confusion?

"summoning sickness" can be induced by:
- changing controllers
- exiling and then bringing back
- casting, or simply putting onto the battefield
(and probably other things too - these are just examples)

It even affects creatures that werent creatures at the time they were put onto the battlefield (etc), like manlands (things that happened to the land before it became a creature can limit its abilities to do things after it becomes a creature).

~ Tim
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
Wasnt there a big argment recently over the fact that "summoning sickness" isnt limited to things that summoned, with a suggestion being made that the name of the term should change to avoid confusion?

"Summoning sickness" is an informal term. How would they go about changing something that is unofficial? They'd have about as much success with that as trying to redefine the meaining of "mise" or "cantrip".
Summoning Sickness Rule
Informal term for a player's inability to attack with a creature or to activate its abilities that include the tap symbol or the untap symbol unless the creature has been under that player's control since the beginning of that player's most recent turn. See rule 302.6. See also Haste.
They'd have about as much success with that as trying to redefine the meaining of "mise" or "cantrip".



.. or, indeed, "instant speed".


Well they could stop using it themselves, mark it as outdated in the comp rules, and promote a better term. They could even make the new term the official name of the rule itself.

~ Tim
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
Well they could stop using it themselves, mark it as outdated in the comp rules, and promote a better term. They could even make the new term the official name of the rule itself.

~ Tim

"Creature Disorientation"?
One thing that I like and which has been suggested on these boards before is that your creature is "Dizzy" unless you've controlled it since the beginning of your turn.
All Generalizations are Bad
One thing that I like and which has been suggested on these boards before is that your creature is "Dizzy" unless you've controlled it since the beginning of your turn.



Player A casts Baneslayer Angel!
Baneslayer Angel enters the battlefield confused!
Baneslayer Angel hurt itself in its confusion!

DCI Level 1 Judge Katy, Texas
"Dizzy" sounds like something from Pokemon. "Creature Disorientation" is accurate, but sounds like a blue spell. Anyone know their way around a thesaurus?

~ Tim
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
"Dizzy" sounds like something from Pokemon.



That is because it is from Pokemon lol. It was also the reason why I gave an example in my previous post about the state of "confusion" as Dizzy can inflict "confusion" on a pokemon.

Oh....3rd grade memories.

DCI Level 1 Judge Katy, Texas
"Control Sickness" would be the term I like to use, since it works for both "entering the battlefield" as well as "on the battlefield, but changes controller."
Pick any one from here which sounds as if the creature is adapting to it's arrival on your side of the battlefield:
Accomodating, Acclimatising, Attuning..

.. or these here which sounds as if the creatures simply aren't responsive due to it's 'new' status: 
Muzzy, Fuzzy, Jetlagged..

Just sharing~ ; )
 
Pick any one from here which sounds as if the creature is adapting to it's arrival on your side of the battlefield:
Accomodating, Acclimatising, Attuning..

.. or these here which sounds as if the creatures simply aren't responsive due to it's 'new' status: 
Muzzy, Fuzzy, Jetlagged..

Just sharing~ ; )
 



Please don't bump old threads.

"summoning sickness" is not an official term and it has no rules meaning.  You can call it whatever you want.
the one thing no one mentioned is for example hero of bladehold the tokens come in tapped and attacking, so that and a couple other cards do put tokens into play and they are attacking.
that doesn't change the fact that they are summoning sick
proud member of the 2011 community team
"summoning sickness" is not an official term and it has no rules meaning.  You can call it whatever you want.


Technically, yes. However, Dryad Arbor uses the term in its rules text. Also, it's in the comprehensive rules glossary (not that it means anything).


the one thing no one mentioned is for example hero of bladehold the tokens come in tapped and attacking, so that and a couple other cards do put tokens into play and they are attacking.


The Comprehensive rule say this

508.1a The active player chooses which creatures that he or she controls, if any, will attack. The chosen creatures must be untapped, and each one must either have haste or have been controlled by the active player continuously since the turn began.


508.1j Each chosen creature still controlled by the active player becomes an attacking creature. It remains an attacking creature until it’s removed from combat or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. See rule 506.4.


So being an attacking creature is completely separate from attacking. Being an attacking creature has nothing to do with haste.

56761258 wrote:
Oh, there's a rule for that.
There are 3 kinds of MTG players:
Show
1. The newbies who accept your correct knowledge of the rules. 2. The stubborn intermediate players who challenge your knowledge of the rules, and it takes exact rules to convince them. They refuse to accept your knowledge even when you've proved them wrong time and time again. 3. The experts who is nearly always right, but refuse to believe you when they're wrong.
To Autocard: [c]Island[/c] = Island [c=Island]Blue FTW[/c] = Blue FTW
"summoning sickness" is not an official term and it has no rules meaning.  You can call it whatever you want.


Technically, yes. However, Dryad Arbor uses the term in its rules text. Also, it's in the comprehensive rules glossary (not that it means anything).



Reminder text is not rules text.

The rules say that the term "summoning sickness" is informal.

302.6. A creature‘s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can‘t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller‘s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can‘t attack unless it has been under its controller‘s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the summoning sickness rule. 



 
"summoning sickness" is not an official term and it has no rules meaning.  You can call it whatever you want.


Technically, yes. However, Dryad Arbor uses the term in its rules text. Also, it's in the comprehensive rules glossary (not that it means anything).



Reminder text is not rules text.

The rules say that the term "summoning sickness" is informal.

302.6. A creature‘s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can‘t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller‘s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can‘t attack unless it has been under its controller‘s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the summoning sickness rule. 



 


That's why I said "technically yes"
And yeah, you're right about the reminder text, that's what I meant.
56761258 wrote:
Oh, there's a rule for that.
There are 3 kinds of MTG players:
Show
1. The newbies who accept your correct knowledge of the rules. 2. The stubborn intermediate players who challenge your knowledge of the rules, and it takes exact rules to convince them. They refuse to accept your knowledge even when you've proved them wrong time and time again. 3. The experts who is nearly always right, but refuse to believe you when they're wrong.
To Autocard: [c]Island[/c] = Island [c=Island]Blue FTW[/c] = Blue FTW


Please don't bump old threads.



.. Killjoys. ; P...



 
"summoning sickness" is not an official term and it has no rules meaning..



 
.. true, not an official term, but it's an official effect, that's in need of a simpler one or two syllabus update.

When I teach new players how to play, it takes a while for them to digest 'summoning sickness'. Somehow, it's easier when the term 'dizzy' is used for these new players instead.  


 
Please don't bump old threads.



I am offended by your judgement in mentioning my action as 'bumping an old thread', when I actually added value, even if it's tiny by introducing new possible suggestions to  a debate that's once forgotten, which can certainly be useful when inducting new players into the scene.

But I'm cool, so I forgive you. Cool
Incorrect.
Everything that enters the battlefield "has" summoning sickness - but only creatures are affected by it.


Really? I did not know this.

Orzhova Witness

Restarting Quotes Block
58086748 wrote:
58335208 wrote:
Disregard women acquire chase rares.
There are a lot of dudes for whom this is not optional.
97820278 wrote:
144532521 wrote:
How;s a 2 drop 1/2, Flying broken? What am I missing?
You're missing it because *turns Storm Crows sideways* all your base are belong to Chuck Norris and every other overused meme ever.
Incorrect.
Everything that enters the battlefield "has" summoning sickness - but only creatures are affected by it.


Really? I did not know this.


Well, that's the easiest way of putting it that works in all cases. The restriction is not because of the printed card type, it's because of whatever it happens to be at that time.

Sig
Disclaimers
My initial responses to rules questions are usually just answers. If you want an explanation as to why, say so. Just because it says I'm there, I'm not necessarily there. I leave my browser open so I don't have to reload ~30 tabs. Anyone who wants to text duel me through either PM or chat can just PM me with a format (and a time if playing through chat). I don't play standard.
# Card Blind Hall of Fame
3CB
3CB #1 (1/30/11): Won by silasw, with Mishra's Factory, Orzhov Basilica, Vindicate. 3CB #2 (2/13/11): Won by Vektor480, with Mishra's Workshop, Ensnaring Bridge, Scalding Tongs 3CB #3(2/20/11): Joint win between defuse, with Saprazzan Skerry, Scalding Tongs, Energy Field; and Mown, with The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Inkmoth Nexus, Sheltered Valley 3CB #4(3/13/11): Won by Mown, with Keldon Megaliths, The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Boros Garrison 3CB #5(3/20/11): Won by silasw, with Black Lotus, Channel, Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
5CB
5CB 1 (3/6/11): Won by Maraxus-of-Keld, with Tropical Island, Thallid, Nether Spirit, Daze, Foil
quotes
56819178 wrote:
So, how would I use a card that has a large in the top half and "sui?l? -- pu?? ?is?q" across the middle?
57031358 wrote:
99113151 wrote:
Winning is not important if: 1. You win by a blowout. 2. You pay billions of dollars in cards to win. If you like wasting money just to win one game, while you could have saved it to lose a few and end up winning more in the future, then it is fine by me.
what? do you ceremonially light your deck on fire after a win?
57169958 wrote:
Or did no one notice Transmogrifying Licid before. (And by not notice, I mean covered their ears and shouted LA LA LA LA )
57193048 wrote:
57169958 wrote:
Hmmm... I think the most awkward situation at the moment is simply the Myr Welder / Equipment / Licid / Aura craziness, but I'm pretty sure he's aware of it.
If the most awkward thing going on right now involves Licids, I declare victory.
56287226 wrote:
We regret to inform you of Trevor Kidd's untimely demise in an unfortunate accident involving a mysteriously blown breaker box and a photophobic creature of unknown origin at his home near Renton, Washington. We at the Wizards Community apologize for any inconvenience or delay, and assure you we'll be preparing a replacement to assume his duties as soon as we finish warming up the cloning vats.
[02:47:46] It doesn't merely "come out of suspend" - you take the last time counter off, and then suspend triggers and say "now cast that! CAST IT NOOOOOW!" [02:47:49] Because suspend has no indoors voice
[10:11:33] !opalescence [10:11:33] Opalescence {2WW} |Enchantment| Each other non-Aura enchantment is a creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost. It's still an enchantment. · Reserved,UD-R,Vin,Leg,Cla,USBC [10:11:51] *sigh* [10:12:10] Otecko: Do you have a question about Opalescence? [10:12:17] sure [10:12:23] $10 on humility interaction [10:12:25] :P [10:12:29] :D [10:12:47] humility + opalescence put into play by replenish
Ego
58325628 wrote:
Mage is awesome, BTW.
56967858 wrote:
Dear Mage24365, You are totally awesome. Thank you so much. I hope you are able to dine in Paradise without kicking the bucket to actually get there, and that every dollar you ever make magically becomes two more.
58158398 wrote:
56761258 wrote:
I don't think there are any cards like that. There are things that prevent you from activating activated abilities, things that increase their cost, and things that counter them, but I don't think anything triggers from them specifically. There are things that trigger from targeting, so that might be relevant, but I can't think of anything that triggers from targeting a player. I'm almost positive there's nothing that triggers from damage being prevented.
Rings of Brighthearth; Dormant Gomazoa; Samite Ministration.
56761258 wrote:
Well played.

 

Incorrect.
Everything that enters the battlefield "has" summoning sickness - but only creatures are affected by it.


Really? I did not know this.


I think there's some contention with no clear answer from the rules. There are basically two camps.
a) Everything has summoning sickness, but only creatures care about it.
b) Only creatures have summoning sickness.

The former has the obvious advantage of explaining manlands and such much more intuitively, the latter has the advantage of... I dunno, being fewer words?
Zammm = Batman. Bronies unite. "I'd call you a genius, but I'm in the room."
It's my sig in a box
58280208 wrote:
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
192334281 wrote:
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
57092228 wrote:
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
56995928 wrote:
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul: Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay." I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board. Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
144543765 wrote:
195392035 wrote:
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
117639611 wrote:
198869283 wrote:
Oh I have a standing rule. If someone plays a Planeswalker I concede the game. I refuse to play with or against people who play Planeswalkers. They really did ruin the game.
A turn two Tibalt win?! Wicked... Betcha don't see that everyday.
Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
57461258 wrote:
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
57461258 wrote:
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
57461258 wrote:
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
92481331 wrote:
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now. O' Jesus Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle. Amen.
92481331 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic, giving you time to set up your silly combo. Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
[quote=ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.[/quote]
56756068 wrote:
56786788 wrote:
.....would it be a bit blasphemous if I said, "PRAYSE RPJAYSUS!" like an Evangelical preacher?
Perhaps, but who doesn't like to blaspheme every now and again? Especially when Mr. RPJesus is completely right.
56756068 wrote:
I don't say this often, but ... LOL
57526128 wrote:
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster... Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil. And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
57042968 wrote:
111809331 wrote:
I'm trying to work out if you're being sarcastic here. ...
Am going to stop you right there... it's RPJesus... he's always sarcastic
58335208 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
112114441 wrote:
we can only hope it gets the jace treatment...it could have at least been legendary
So that even the decks that don't run it run it to deal with it? Isn't that like the definition of format warping?
I lol'd.
56287226 wrote:
98088088 wrote:
Uktabi Orangutan What the heck's going on with those monkeys?
The most common answer is that they are what RPJesus would call "[Debutantes avert your eyes]ing."
56965458 wrote:
Show
57461258 wrote:
116498949 wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right? Right.
57545908 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
58397368 wrote:
58222628 wrote:
This just won the argument, AFAIC.
That's just awesome.
57471038 wrote:
57718868 wrote:
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players. And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it. He/It got me with Light of Sanction, which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
71235715 wrote:
+10
100176878 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
57078538 wrote:
heaven or hell.
Round 1. Lets rock.
GG quotes! RPJesus just made this thread win!
56906968 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
143359585 wrote:
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad, things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed.
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
On what flavor text fits me:
57307308 wrote:
Surely RPJesus gets Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius?
56874518 wrote:
First: I STILL can't take you seriously with that avatar. And I can take RPJesus seriously, so that's saying something.
121689989 wrote:
I'd offer you a cookie for making me laugh but it has an Upkeep Cost that has been known to cause people to quit eating.
56267956 wrote:
I <3 you loads
57400888 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
"AINT NO LAWS IN THE SKY MOTHER****." - Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran
10/10. Amazing.
The supposed advantage is that a) isn't actually what the rulebook says.

Of course, neither is b, which gives rise to a third camp - the people, including (maybe even restricted to) some of the most knowledgable posters here, who keep saying that nothing "has" summoning sickness, it's just an informal name for the rule.

To which I say:


  • Any kind of "sickness" is something that can be "had". It doesn't matter whether the rulebook explicitly words it that way or not.

  • a and b are equally reasonable answers to the question that becomes obvious once you have made that observation - "what has SS, exactly?".

  • As noted, a has the clear advantage that it explains things like manlands in an intuitive way.

  • Oh and by the way, a was the actual rule at one point, though you have to go back to the 5th edition days.


So the nitpicking that a is often met with here has always struck me as a hypercorrection, analagous to habitually rewording split infinitives or "me and X" sentences even though they aren't errors.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
So the nitpicking that a is often met with here has always struck me as a hypercorrection, analagous to habitually rewording split infinitives or "me and X" sentences even though they aren't errors.


I don't generally correct anyone when they talk about creatures "having" summoning sickness, but I'm careful to avoid the terminology simply on account of it possibly being misleading to people who are trying to learn some of the more technical aspects of the rules, much like how many people dislike the term "sorcery/instant speed" because it may confuse some people. There have been times when it has appeared to me that the terminology is confusing someone, and in that case, I've found it nesessary to itterate the exact nature of the summoning sickness rule.
Ever feel like people on these forums can't possibly understand how wrong they are? Feeling trolled? Don't get mad. Report Post.