Dependency

49 posts / 0 new
Last post
I'm not 100% clear on how do determine when dependency applies.

The rules say this.
613.7a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect (see rules 613.1 and 613.3); (b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to; and (c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability. Otherwise, the effect is considered to be independent of the other effect.

Some cases are clear.
Blood Moon + Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth for example.
Urborg is dependent on Blood Moon
Blood Moon would change the existence of the effect on Urborg.

Opalescence + Conspiracy as another example.
Conspiracy is dependent on Opalescence
Opalescence could modify what Conspiracy applies to.

yet there are other times where I'm uncertain.

If there was an enchantment that said All creatures are lands in addition to their other types. and Opalescence and Blood Moon are also on the field. Does this enchantment depend on Blood Moon?
The application of Blood Moon would remove the existance of the ability on this enchantment if Opalescence was applied, but it would not if Opalescence was not applied.

613.7a says dependency applies if both effects are applied in the same layer and one effect removes the other or changes what the other applies to or what it does to any of the things it applies to.
Does Blood Moon apply in the same layer? yes
Does it remove the other enchantment's effect? sometimes, depending on whether other effects in the same layer have been applied or not.

Does anything in the comp rules indicate whether that is dependency or not?

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

Blood Moon can only possibly apply to your hypothetical card if it's a land, and it's only a land if its own effect has already applied. And if its own effect has already applied, removing the ability that generates it does nothing.

In the situation you describe, your hypothetical card depends on Opalescence, and Blood Moon depends on your hypothetical card--straightforward dependency chain. Opalescence, Hypothetical, then Blood Moon.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

Blood Moon can only possibly apply to your hypothetical card if it's a land, and it's only a land if its own effect has already applied. And if its own effect has already applied, removing the ability that generates it does nothing.

except that we haven't yet determined the order of application, the 3 effects in my example can be applied 6 ways. We look at the application of the effects on each other in the absence of the other effects to determine if there is a dependency between them. Nothing in the rules makes it clear that the determination of dependency is done in a vacuum. We are attempting to find the order and by the definition given Blood Moon could remove the existence of the ability on the theoretical enchantment if it is a land. You point out that it's a straight forward chain and I agree, but when we look at that order of application Blood Moon suddenly appears to make the other dependent on it which on the surface calls into question whether that is the correct order of application because it fits the rule. Are the effects applied in the same layer? yes. Does Blood Moon remove that ability? if we determine that that is the order, then yes it does ergo dependency by definition. I think it is intended and I get that we have to look at each individual effect in isolation which each other individual effect, but the rules aren't clear on that.
In the situation you describe, your hypothetical card depends on Opalescence, and Blood Moon depends on your hypothetical card--straightforward dependency chain. Opalescence, Hypothetical, then Blood Moon.

I'm kind of getting the feeling that the dependency check is assumed to be done with no effects applied in that layer, but nothing in the rule seems to indicate that. It seems the intent is that we look at the pseudo-state of the objects prior to application of any effects in that layer and there must be a concrete object to cause dependency, not just a theoretical possibility.

Conspiracy with saproling chosen + Life and Limb

Conspiracy depends on Life and Limb because forests become creatures.
Life and Limb depends on Conspiracy because creatures become saprolings.

but it seems there has to be a concrete existence of an actual forest to create the first dependency
and an actual creature to create the second dependency. The absence of either seems to remove the dependency for that direction. The rules say "what it applies to" but they don't seem to indicate that it has to be a concrete object to exist. What it applies to can be taken theoretically and if they mean a concrete existence of an object that it applies to they should make that clearer.

Do you see what I mean?

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

I second that. Dependencies suck. Casual player have 0% chance of understanding them. However, I'm sure they could easily get on board with the 'timestamp' thing. In reasonably simple examples, that can even be basic rulebook stuff. But dependencies?

Does anyone have a good reason why depencies exist? It doesn't seem to make logical sense... you say things apply in the order of timestamps, why would this order change just because one effect does something different if done in a different order? It's like the effects have "minds of their own" and come to some kind of agreement with each other. I feel there must be a reason I'm missing, but right now it seems just an overcomplication without enough payoff, and it's neither logical nor flavourful.

I agree the whole "doing as much as possible" thing doesn't really pan out, as it's kind of a matter of opinion what is "doing the most", it's hardly quantifiable. And would be severaly biased by what you actually want to happen.
I am a Rules advisor. Feel free to send me any questions as a private message! Check if you have found a bug in Duels 2013 Report a bug Report a technical issue I have written several guides to help new DoTP players here, move to the first post to start reading. They are also in Wordpress format here. The principles involved should still be useful for Duels 2013!
Useful links:
Find other DoTP players - a database of friendly players, find a match or post your name here to be added to the list! I'll add a D13 section if anyone would like. Ask a rules question - ask anything about DoTP, Magic in general, or to check out if you've found a bug by asking if the rules are being followed. Community thread for general chatter in the DoTP part of the forum! Guide to Yugioh on Xbox live: A beginner's guide focusing on the similarities and differences to Magic.

The rules say this.
613.7a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect (see rules 613.1 and 613.3); (b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to; and (c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability. Otherwise, the effect is considered to be independent of the other effect.



If there was an enchantment that said All creatures are lands in addition to their other types. and Opalescence and Blood Moon are also on the field. Does this enchantment depend on Blood Moon?
The application of Blood Moon would remove the existance of the ability on this enchantment if Opalescence was applied, but it would not if Opalescence was not applied.




The rules says that 'if A changes to what B applies,' then A is applied first. There is no question here. Opalescence and Hypothetical would be applied in the same layer, as far as types go--one is adding creature, the other adding land. As such, Hypo is dependent on Opal. You know this to be true. Now, since Hypo is dependent on Opal, then you know from extension that Blood Moon is dependent on Hypo, because once again it changes the set of things to which Blood Moon does anything by adding more lands to the field. It's rather clear-cut. There's no bias of 'Would it affect more things or not depending on how you apply things.' Since the set of objects affected by one is changed by the other, the other is always applied first.

Even without Opalescence, Blood Moon would depend on Hypothetical because it potentially changes the subset of 'lands' to which Blood Moon applies. I say 'potentially' because the rules are not written with 'if it actually does something, one thing; if it does another, another thing.' Since Hypo could potentially create additional nonbasic Lands as long as there are creatures out, Blood Moon will always depend on Hypo, so even if Hypo becomes a creature, its ability will apply first (because it has to turn itself into a land for Blood Moon to even affect it, at which point its too late).
MTG Rules Advisor Mirrodin_Loyalty.png

(b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to;

we see that Hypo depends on Opalescence and Blood Moon depends on Hypo because each of them change what it would apply to.

However, if we follow that order Hypo becomes dependent on Blood Moon because of the highlighted part above. It isn't in isolation, but we arrive at a dependency if we were to apply them in that order which calls into question that that is the correct order.

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

(b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to;

we see that Hypo depends on Opalescence and Blood Moon depends on Hypo because each of them change what it would apply to.

However, if we follow that order Hypo becomes dependent on Blood Moon because of the highlighted part above. It isn't in isolation, but we arrive at a dependency if we were to apply them in that order which calls into question that that is the correct order.



The flaw with your argument is that you're ignoring the other parts of (b) to look at the first. As long as any part of (b) is true, then it is true. Since it changes to what it applies, it's dependent.
MTG Rules Advisor Mirrodin_Loyalty.png

I second that. Dependencies suck.
Does anyone have a good reason why depencies exist? It doesn't seem to make logical sense...



Yes, Dependency is sometimes difficult to establish.

But there HAS to be some form of Dependency rule; Timestamp is not SATISFYING by itself. See:


1) «All creatures are black»


2) «Black creatures can't attack or block»


The instinctive conclusion requires that ALL creatures be black and «pacified», but if you played (2) BEFORE (1), Timstamp would say that some creatures are «pacified», some are not. This would feel awkward, flavorwise.

Darkest Hour HAS TO be dependent on Light of Day, whatever Timestamp they get.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!



Light of Day HAS TO be dependent on Darkest Hour, whatever Timestamp they get.




Fixed. ;) Light is dependent on Hour because Hour affects the set of objects to which Light applies.
MTG Rules Advisor Mirrodin_Loyalty.png

Those two effects are have no dependency. Not only are they not in the same layer, but one affects an object, and one affects the rules of the game.
613.7a An effect is said to "depend on" another if (a) it's applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect (see rules 613.1 and 613.3); (b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to; and (c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability. Otherwise, the effect is considered to be independent of the other effect.

613.10. Some continuous effects affect game rules rather than objects. For example, effects may modify a player's maximum hand size, or say that a creature is indestructible. These effects are applied after all other continuous effects have been applied. Continuous effects that affect the costs of spells or abilities are applied according to the order specified in rule 601.2e. All other such effects are applied in timestamp order. See also the rules for timestamp order and dependency (rules 613.6 and 613.7).

For a case in which dependency has to matter, how about the interaction between Dralnu's Crusade and Conspiracy (set to either Goblin or something else)?
No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.

I personally don't see why any dependency has to be in place, sure in some examples you may say it produces a slightly unintuitive result, but the layers are so damn complicated and once the number of things competing and depending on each other get above even 2, things get so whacky that intuition pays no part anymore. I think a general time-stamp only system would be so much easier, you just think "well I apply that, then that, to each thing". And the result would make sense, since that's the order things are done. Very easy to explain, very easy to understand. It really is a matter of opinion whether a whole bunch of messy effects produce the result you "expect" or not. It may do for simple cases, but is it worth it so that not even advanced players can figure out what happens when the numbers get moderately high?


I think everyone would agree that the whole layer system is a mess anyway, and it would be far better to have an overall much simpler system. I don't know what that is though just yet. But I do know that this is making it worse and I don't think it's worth it.


Edit: Yeah, from the above example, who's to say what "should" happen? The player may well want to have different things happening depending on the order they play those cards, yet the rules so "no we know what should happen and you don't, we know what you expect" and change the order how they see fit anyway. Sometimes you get a dependency loop which to my mind shows how ridiculous the whole thing is, and you abandon the system and go back to timestamp anyway. Thus defeating the point of it, you waste 30 minutes drawing out complicated diagrams and trees and then just do the simplest thing anyway.


 


 

I am a Rules advisor. Feel free to send me any questions as a private message! Check if you have found a bug in Duels 2013 Report a bug Report a technical issue I have written several guides to help new DoTP players here, move to the first post to start reading. They are also in Wordpress format here. The principles involved should still be useful for Duels 2013!
Useful links:
Find other DoTP players - a database of friendly players, find a match or post your name here to be added to the list! I'll add a D13 section if anyone would like. Ask a rules question - ask anything about DoTP, Magic in general, or to check out if you've found a bug by asking if the rules are being followed. Community thread for general chatter in the DoTP part of the forum! Guide to Yugioh on Xbox live: A beginner's guide focusing on the similarities and differences to Magic.
Robvalue: Using no knowledge of the rules, just your intuition and common sense, what do you expect to be the result if both Mycosynth Lattice and March of the machines are on the battlefield?
  1. Everything is an artifact, and thus everything is also a creature

  2. Everything is an artifact, but most of them are unaffected by March of the Machines

And how about this situation: I have a Dralnu's crusade which says that all goblins are also zombies. I then use Mistform Dreamer's ability to turn it into a goblin. What is the dreamer?
  1. A goblin, and thus it gets +1/+1, is black, and is a zombie

  2. A blue goblin that is unaffected by dralnu's crusade

If you answered #1 to those questions, then you agree that dependencies are important, because that is the only way the rule achieve those results. If you answered #2, then your intuition and common sense is quite different from most people's. The layer system exists so that the outcome of these situations matches with what the majority of people would naturally expect, and the dependencies are necessary for situations like these to turn out as expected.

 

Honestly? I'd just say it depends on what order you apply them in. I'd say it's a complicated situation and I'd have to check how the rules told me to handle it, I think it's already beyond intuition. And I'd rather have a sensible, easy to apply one-fits-all rule. The fact is, you have to pick up the rule book at some point, even if it's the basic rule book. You can't expect anyone to figure the entire game out on their own from just looking at cards. "Interaction of continuous effects" is certainly one of those things.


You may get it so beginners can figure out some stuff on their own, but they will never, ever be able to apply that "intuition" to even a remotely complicated interaction of multiple cards together. With just timestamps, there is more chance that they will.


I think if some cards really "want" to be considered last to act, then they should say so on the card. But I'd rather it was just kept as simple as possible and apply stuff in order.


Of course, you try to do as much as you can with each card to make the rules as clear as possible, but with the layer system as it is, nothing you write on the cards is going to help anyone figure it out. You have to look it up.


EDIT: Heh lots of edits here. My mind is like a rotating lump of swiss cheese. Yeah, as I was saying you can cover stuff like 2 or even 3 card interactions of similar effects in a basic rulebook.


"3 cards are all trying to change a creature's type, or do things depending on what creature type they are. To work out what happens, just apply the effects, in the order they appeared (either when the card they are on entered play or the spell resolved that created them)."


I know that's a simplification, but I think that could be put into a basic rulebook and give beginners a fair chance at having a stab at the layer system. No way are you going to describe what would happen if you consider dependencies. The beginner would rip up the rulebook in disgust and go play some other game. And then when they move on to learn the layer system for real, what they have learned will still apply, just they learn the intricacies of it. If you shove dependencies into the works, all they think they've worked out suddenly goes down the john.

I am a Rules advisor. Feel free to send me any questions as a private message! Check if you have found a bug in Duels 2013 Report a bug Report a technical issue I have written several guides to help new DoTP players here, move to the first post to start reading. They are also in Wordpress format here. The principles involved should still be useful for Duels 2013!
Useful links:
Find other DoTP players - a database of friendly players, find a match or post your name here to be added to the list! I'll add a D13 section if anyone would like. Ask a rules question - ask anything about DoTP, Magic in general, or to check out if you've found a bug by asking if the rules are being followed. Community thread for general chatter in the DoTP part of the forum! Guide to Yugioh on Xbox live: A beginner's guide focusing on the similarities and differences to Magic.
The layers system is a "mess" (quotation marks because I don't agree) because it needs to be that way to make the rules actually come out to the most intuitive answer for people who don't know the game at all. Those saying, "I would apply it in timestamp order," are speaking from an 'intuition' derived from knowing how timestamps work in MtG. For someone who just started the game, they will not understand something like that; instead, they will see two effects, one of which affect a set of objects [A] and one which makes more objects become part of the set [A], and they will intuitively assume that anything that is part of [A], including those added by the other effect, will be affected by the first effect. So, the dependency "mess" is there to make the rules match the intuition of the majority of players.

Unlike other issues in which I feel doing this is unnecessary because it's still grokkable with just a smidge of explanation, the issue of the layers system and dependency is something with which I'm fine being made to match the intuition of players, because then they otherwise have to learn a lot of stuff that they would not otherwise need. The layers are not a mess; they are not perfect, but they're probably the closest thing the rules have to the rule matching the intuition of a new player.
MTG Rules Advisor Mirrodin_Loyalty.png

I don't know if this will help or hinder or simplify or complicate or what, but I thought I would make for another metaphorical cook in the kitchen.

What I always have done with two effects that affect the same thing or have overlapping effects or whatever else the situation may be that is causing confusion is this:

Effect A and Effect B are affecting all the things they affect continuously.  So, I just create a little loop of both effects so that after a cycle or two of both effects happening you can see what the final effect will be.

So apply Effect A.  See what happens.  Apply Effect B.  See what happens.  Apply Effect A again.  See if anything changes.  Apply Effect B again, etc.

In the case of Blood Moon and Urborg, you will always end up with Urborg becoming a Mountain because Urborg is affected by Blood Moon, but Blood Moon is not affected by Urborg.

Effect A: Urborg adds the Swamp type to all lands.  Effect B: Blood Moon makes all non-basic lands Mountains; Urborg turns into a Mountain.  Effect A: Oops, I can't apply Effect A anymore because now Urborg is just a Mountain, end of loop.
"I have created many decks...but someone else has usually created it first...and better"
Layers work, and that's a big deal. Are they perfect? No, they aren't. But i have yet to see another system that could replace them that's simpler.

If you can find one that works, i'm sure Rules will be all over it.
… and then, the squirrels came.

Sure you can look at dependencies easily enough with just 2 cards, but once you have 3, and especially more than that, things get obnoxious in a hurry. The permutations involved grow extremely fast and it becomes more of a complex maths problem than a rule. Even people on here who answer complicated questions every day admit they can't even sort out what the dependency tree would be in some cases. That means it's just unworkable, and virtually impossible for a casual player. You have to admit that is true.


I'm happy for the layer system to stay (not that it's up to me haha) but I think the dependencies being removed would make it oh, oh so much simpler for beginners and rule-guys alike. I feel they are not needed. Casual players wouldn't need to learn the whole layer system most of the time, just to know that "things apply in the order they appeared". That's a pretty easy rule to remember right? I know it doesn't cover everything, but it would give you a decent chance of sorting out even 4 card situations with effects competing to do similar things.


It's basically a case of trying to make things work "as expected" (although that's really a matter of opinion) in 2 card situations, but causing exponential and hideously unworkable rules scenarios when the situations get any more complicated than that. The question is, is that worth it? If everyone just learnt "apply everything in timestamp order" then they would quickly stop expecting things to work any other way, would be able to solve most situations on their own, and these frigging dependency loops, permutation nightmares, and other things that keep me awake at night would disappear in a puff of sensibleness.

I am a Rules advisor. Feel free to send me any questions as a private message! Check if you have found a bug in Duels 2013 Report a bug Report a technical issue I have written several guides to help new DoTP players here, move to the first post to start reading. They are also in Wordpress format here. The principles involved should still be useful for Duels 2013!
Useful links:
Find other DoTP players - a database of friendly players, find a match or post your name here to be added to the list! I'll add a D13 section if anyone would like. Ask a rules question - ask anything about DoTP, Magic in general, or to check out if you've found a bug by asking if the rules are being followed. Community thread for general chatter in the DoTP part of the forum! Guide to Yugioh on Xbox live: A beginner's guide focusing on the similarities and differences to Magic.

Sure you can look at dependencies easily enough with just 2 cards, but once you have 3, and especially more than that, things get obnoxious in a hurry. The permutations involved grow extremely fast and it becomes more of a complex maths problem than a rule. Even people on here who answer complicated questions every day admit they can't even sort out what the dependency tree would be in some cases. That means it's just unworkable, and virtually impossible for a casual player. You have to admit that is true.




And you will simply have to admit that the cases where the system becomes close to unworkable are completely irrelevant corner cases. The system is not perfect, but it works in 99.99999% of all cases. Call the remaining 0.00001% residual risk, if you will, but I see no need at all to change anything about the system as it is.

Also, there is never a dependency tree. It can either be a chain or a loop. A tree branches. Dependency doesn't.
DCI L2 Judge "When nothing remains, everything is equally possible." - One With Nothing

Sometimes I make them into daisy chains.


I find it strange that everything I say is always dismissed as a "corner case", especially as I didn't even mention one specific card this time. The rules seem to have so many corners that it is approaching a circle now. It's like the Axiom of the Magic world. If you can't prove something in Maths, you make it an axiom. If the rules don't adequately cover something in Magic, you call it a corner case. I think it has become the "get out of jail free" term of late. It's a corner case to have 4 cards in play that may interact?


I'll leave it at that and the discussion can carry on in T&T without me.


Bitter man out.

I am a Rules advisor. Feel free to send me any questions as a private message! Check if you have found a bug in Duels 2013 Report a bug Report a technical issue I have written several guides to help new DoTP players here, move to the first post to start reading. They are also in Wordpress format here. The principles involved should still be useful for Duels 2013!
Useful links:
Find other DoTP players - a database of friendly players, find a match or post your name here to be added to the list! I'll add a D13 section if anyone would like. Ask a rules question - ask anything about DoTP, Magic in general, or to check out if you've found a bug by asking if the rules are being followed. Community thread for general chatter in the DoTP part of the forum! Guide to Yugioh on Xbox live: A beginner's guide focusing on the similarities and differences to Magic.
Admittedly, «Timestamp only, no dependency system, no layer system» would simplify things for everyone.
 
I still feel it could make strange results when Wild Mongrel meets Bad Moon...

Try this, under «Timestamp only» ruling:

A)
Cast Mongrel
Discard and turn it black
Cast Bad Moon
-Mongrel gets pumped

B)
Cast Mongrel
Cast Bad Moon
Discard and turn Mongrel black
-Mongrel does not get pumped

C)
Cast Mongrel
Discard and turn it black
Cast Bad Moon
-Mongrel gets pumped
End of turn
Next turn: discard and turn Mongrel black
-Does Mongrel get pumped this time? (Heck! who knows?)

Not funny.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

613.6b A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability receives a timestamp at the time it’s created.


 


So in example C no it doesn't get pumped second time round since the pump ability has a later timestamp than Bad Moon. The previous pump ability has worn off, so it's effectively now the same as example B.


Reading that example just reassures me that it does make more sense, and it easier to figure out. It's the dependency that throw up the question marks of applying things in the order they should be put into. All you need to say is "what order did the effects start" and apply them in that order. Either within the current layer system, or regardless of it. Either way dependency is like drug dependency, it's bad.


Things just happen in the order they happen throughout the rest of the game. The stack doesn't suddenly get rearranged to make it look more intuitive or pleasing to the eye, or so spells get "maximum effect" and I don't see why these should. Just my opinion of course.


Bottom line is it makes a difference what order things happen in Magic, that's the general rule. Why should this be different? Why would you expect the same result from ordering things two different ways? Why this is the amazing exception I don't know. You don't try to make every damn thing switch around to how someone "might" expect it to happen.


 


EDITS: Excuse me making a fool of myself. Think I corrected it now.


EDIT AGAIN: I agree, results like could be viewed as strange. But the more I think about, the more I think it's not strange at all, for the above reasons. It's logical. And I think it only appears strange because people are so used to the twisted way things work like this, and I'm not wholly convinced someone new to the game would jump to all the same conclusions we are used to. Even if they do, you only have to teach them the "timestamp rule" and they are covered for life in one easy payment. Unlike the LAYERS OF DEPENDENCY DEATH.


EDIT 3: I predict dependency will disappear, in the reasonably short future. And it will have much less impact than anyone thinks it will. It's clearly step 1 of trying to untangle the layer mess.


OK I really am done now. I'll not say another word on the subject.

I am a Rules advisor. Feel free to send me any questions as a private message! Check if you have found a bug in Duels 2013 Report a bug Report a technical issue I have written several guides to help new DoTP players here, move to the first post to start reading. They are also in Wordpress format here. The principles involved should still be useful for Duels 2013!
Useful links:
Find other DoTP players - a database of friendly players, find a match or post your name here to be added to the list! I'll add a D13 section if anyone would like. Ask a rules question - ask anything about DoTP, Magic in general, or to check out if you've found a bug by asking if the rules are being followed. Community thread for general chatter in the DoTP part of the forum! Guide to Yugioh on Xbox live: A beginner's guide focusing on the similarities and differences to Magic.
Dependcy will not disappear in the near future because Wizards did not ever say they wanted to make the rules more simple; they said they wanted to make the rules match the intuition of the players. In most cases, this does mean a simplification of the rules, sometimes with which I disagree because there's more than one intuitive way among new players to see something.

In the case of dependency and the layers as they are now, however, there is, by far, a large majority of players who see it intuitively being the way it works because of the layers system and dependencies. This is a case in which the rules must seem extremely complicated so as to match the simple intuition of new players, and since 99% of new players' intuition matches with what the rules say, the rules are not going to change.

To reiterate: Wizards never said they wanted to dumb all the rules down; they said they wanted to have the rules match the intuition of new players.
MTG Rules Advisor Mirrodin_Loyalty.png

I find it strange that everything I say is always dismissed as a "corner case", especially as I didn't even mention one specific card this time. The rules seem to have so many corners that it is approaching a circle now. It's like the Axiom of the Magic world. If you can't prove something in Maths, you make it an axiom. If the rules don't adequately cover something in Magic, you call it a corner case. I think it has become the "get out of jail free" term of late. It's a corner case to have 4 cards in play that may interact?


No, but the main reason it gets called a corner case is that in real-life experience, it just doesn't happen all that often.  What was the last situation you had in an actual game, where you couldn't figure out what a permanent "was" thanks to layer and dependency rules?

Personally, I can't recall mine, though I'm not sure whether that's because I understand the dependency rules better than most, because my opponents and I don't play complicated decks, or just because I have a bad memory.  (Probably the latter. ;) )

By the way, I concur that the dependency rules are horribly complex.  (Little-known fact: If two or more permanents enter play simultaneously, the active player is supposed to set their relative timestamps [613.6g], regardless of who controls the permanents.  That means that if I blow up a bunch of stuff during my turn and you get it back during that same turn, I get to set all the relative timestamps of the incoming permanents, even though you cast the spell that brought the permanents back to the battlefield and even though you control some or all of the incoming permanents.  If that's not counter-intuititve, I don't know what is.)
I find it strange that everything I say is always dismissed as a "corner case", especially as I didn't even mention one specific card this time. The rules seem to have so many corners that it is approaching a circle now. It's like the Axiom of the Magic world. If you can't prove something in Maths, you make it an axiom. If the rules don't adequately cover something in Magic, you call it a corner case. I think it has become the "get out of jail free" term of late. It's a corner case to have 4 cards in play that may interact?


No, but the main reason it gets called a corner case is that in real-life experience, it just doesn't happen all that often.  What was the last situation you had in an actual game, where you couldn't figure out what a permanent "was" thanks to layer and dependency rules?

Personally, I can't recall mine, though I'm not sure whether that's because I understand the dependency rules better than most, because my opponents and I don't play complicated decks, or just because I have a bad memory.  (Probably the latter. ;) )

By the way, I concur that the dependency rules are horribly complex.  (Little-known fact: If two or more permanents enter play simultaneously, the active player is supposed to set their relative timestamps [613.6g], regardless of who controls the permanents.  That means that if I blow up a bunch of stuff during my turn and you get it back during that same turn, I get to set all the relative timestamps of the incoming permanents, even though you cast the spell that brought the permanents back to the battlefield and even though you control some or all of the incoming permanents.  If that's not counter-intuititve, I don't know what is.)


Makes me wonder why the controller of the effect that's putting those permanents onto the battlefield doesn't get the choice.
Note that the ruels have lots of counter-intuitive stuff, however most of it only matters in rare instances. For instance triggers with may in their effects with targets still go on the stack and still target something if possible, this can matter if Crystallization is enchanting the only legal target.

Makes me wonder why the controller of the effect that's putting those permanents onto the battlefield doesn't get the choice.





Yeah! let ME choose which creatures get pumped by my Bad Moon! hey hey hey...


OK, try this one, under Timestamp only ruling:

Cast Bad Moon
Cast Scathe Zombies
The zombie does not get pumped since it came AFTER Bad Moon; can it get any crazyer?

We DO NEED some form of dependency system; agreed, the one we have now can be complex.
Any serious idea?

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

OK, try this one, under Timestamp only ruling:

Cast Bad Moon
Cast Scathe Zombies

Trivially easy. There is only one effect trying to modify scathe zombies, so you apply it, making the zombies 3/3. No timestamps, no dependencies, no need to step through the layers at all.

The layer system becomes relevant when there are multiple effects trying to modify objects, and it is the timestamp of the effects that matter, not the timestamps of the affected objects.
Back to my original question.

Opalescence + Hypothetical + Blood Moon

is there dependancy of Hypothetical on Blood Moon?
Opalescence makes it a creature, Hypothetical makes itself and Blood Moon a nonbasic land and Blood Moon removes Hypos and its own abilities.

If we had three effects A, B, and C with A depending on B, B depending on C and C depending on A, we couldn't determine a dependency loop was in effect until after we had started applying the effects. Does my example above fit the profile of 613.7b? or is it somehow different?

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

Back to my original question.

Opalescence + Hypothetical + Blood Moon

is there dependancy of Hypothetical on Blood Moon?
Opalescence makes it a creature, Hypothetical makes itself and Blood Moon a nonbasic land and Blood Moon removes Hypos and its own abilities.


No; it fails clause (b) of 613.7a.  Applying Blood Moon first won't change the existence of Hypothetical's ability (since, at the time you're trying to decide if the dependency exists, Blood Moon doesn't affect Hypothetical); nor will it change the set of objects that Hypothetical applies to (all creatures - Blood Moon doesn't change which objects are creatures) or what Hypothetical does to them (land-ifies them - obviously Blood Moon doesn't change how the effect applies).  Blood Moon can't depend on Hypothetical unless Hypothetical has already been applied, at which point it doesn't matter any more.

... I think.  Don't go quoting me on that.  (By the way, can we just ban Life and Limb forever?)
Back to my original question.

Opalescence + Hypothetical + Blood Moon

is there dependancy of Hypothetical on Blood Moon?
Opalescence makes it a creature, Hypothetical makes itself and Blood Moon a nonbasic land and Blood Moon removes Hypos and its own abilities.


No; it fails clause (b) of 613.7a.  Applying Blood Moon first won't change the existence of Hypothetical's ability (since, at the time you're trying to decide if the dependency exists, Blood Moon doesn't affect Hypothetical); nor will it change the set of objects that Hypothetical applies to (all creatures - Blood Moon doesn't change which objects are creatures) or what Hypothetical does to them (land-ifies them - obviously Blood Moon doesn't change how the effect applies).  Blood Moon can't depend on Hypothetical unless Hypothetical has already been applied, at which point it doesn't matter any more.

... I think.  Don't go quoting me on that.  (By the way, can we just ban Life and Limb forever?)



Hypothetical doesn't depend on Blood Moon, but Blood Moon does depend on Hypothetical, because it applies to all nonbasic Lands, and Hypothetical changes that set of objects by making all creatures into [nonbasic] lands. I think that's what 2goth was meaning.

Even without Opalescence to turn Hypo into a creature (though Hypo does depend on Opal because Opal makes more creatures, meaning the set of objects affected is changed by Opal, so Hypo depends on that), Moon is dependent on Hypo because Hypo changes the set of [nonbasic lands] for the Moon to affect. So, the dependency order here would be [Opal] -> [Hypo, which depends on Opal] -> [Moon, which depends on Hypo].
MTG Rules Advisor Mirrodin_Loyalty.png

Hypothetical doesn't depend on Blood Moon, but Blood Moon does depend on Hypothetical, because it applies to all nonbasic Lands, and Hypothetical changes that set of objects by making all creatures into [nonbasic] lands. I think that's what 2goth was meaning.


Well, that's what I was trying to say (at least I was trying to say that Hypothetical doesn't depend on Blood Moon).  I was operating under the assumption that everyone already agreed that Blood Moon depends on Hypothetical.

So at least we agree, although I may not have gotten my point across well enough.
yes, with none of the three effects applied we see that Hypo depends on Opalescence because Opalescence makes more creatures for Hypo to affect. We also see that Blood Moon depends on Hypo because Hypo makes more non-basic lands for Blood Moon to affect.

What concerns me is this: If we apply them in that order, Blood Moon will remove its own and Hypo's abilities which appears to meet the definition of dependency: are the effects applied in the same layer? yes. Does Blood Moon change the existance of another effect or change what another effect applies to or change what another effect does to the objects it applies to? if any of the three is yes we have our answer. does Blood Moon change what Hypo applies to? no. Does Blood Moon change what Hypo does to the objects it applies to? no. Does Blood Moon change the existance of the ability on Hypo? if we apply them in that order, yes it does.

613.7b says three things.
1) we start to apply the effects all at once, those with dependency wait until after the effects that they are dependent on are applied.
2) if two or more effects would depend on the same effect, they are applied based on relative timestamps to each other.
3) if a dependency loop occurs from several (3 or more) effects, ignore dependency for effects in the loop and use time stamp instead.

so Opalescence is applied first, then Hypo, then Blood Moon. A dependency loop occurs after Blood Moon is applied, though it's not a loop of several effects, it's of two which doesn't meet the exception.

I think I just had the light switch go on. There is dependency, but it doesn't matter because the loop only includes two effects and in this case Blood Moon doesn't create the dependency until after it is applied.
I think the rules could be more explicit, but I think I get it.

Of course, if we actually had three effects A, B, and C with the following dependencies:
A depends on B
B depends on C
C depends on A
none of them would be applied by 613.7b because each of them would wait for the one before it to be applied though I think this is the type of dependency loop of 3+ effects that ignores that process and uses time stamp instead.

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

2 things
Opalescence doesn't animate itself.
the other enchantments become creatures and then saprolings but not forests because Conspiracy is applied after Life and Limb, therefore Blood Moon does not remove Humility's abilities and Humility will still remove creature abilities in layer 6.

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

Life and Limb does two things in layer 4.
1) adds type creature - saproling to land - forests
2) adds type land - forest to creature - saprolings

if you apply L&L first, it will not affect the enchantment creatures because they aren't yet saprolings from Conspiracy.
if you apply Conspiracy first, it will not affect the land forests and they will remain creature - saprolings (pretend Life and Limb added creature - plant to land - forest instead to see what would happen - the forests would become land creature - forest plant and Conspiracy would not change them to saproling)

There is a two-way dependency between Life and Limb and Conspiracy
Conspiracy needs to know which forests will become creatures so that it can override their creature type. Life and Limb needs to know which creatures are saprolings so that it can make them forests.
Given that A: there is a forest on the field and that B: Opalescence's effect will make creatures  it follows that both dependencies are active when they are about to be applied. That's a dependency loop so we revert back to time stamp which has L&L before Conspiracy. L&L adds creature - saproling to forests and adds land - forest to creature - saprolings, then Conspiracy changes all creature types to saproling thus the enchantments are now creature - saprolings but they are not land - forests. Technically, the rules say to use time stamp when there are "several" effects that form a dependency loop. Several means more than two, but in the absence of any other way to figure it out, the principle seems to default back to time stamp.

The intent of the rules seems to be this.

1) look at all effects to determine if there are any dependencies
2) apply all effects that have no dependencies
3) if no effects were applied and there are effects remaining, then there is a dependency loop, therefore apply the effects in the loop (and only those effects) in time stamp order
4) apply all remaining dependent effects whose dependencies have been completely fulfilled, if two or more effects are applied at the same time and both depend on the same effect, apply them in time stamp order relative to each other, also if an effect removes the existance of the text of another effect that has yet to be applied, then the removed effect is not applied.
5) if no effects were applied and there are effects remaining to be applied, then there is a dependency loop, therefore only apply the effects that are in the loop in time stamp order
6) repeat steps 4 and 5 until no effects remain to be applied.

I'm uncertain whether dependencies are re-evaluated after each pass of effect application or only at the beginning.

eg1. three effects A, B, C
step 1 - determine dependencies
A -> B (A depends on B)
B -> C
C -> A
step 2 - apply all effects with no dependencies
no effects applied
step 3 - apply effects in loop in time stamp order
A, B, C are applied in time stamp order
step 4 - apply all remaining dependent effects whose dependency has been fulfilled
no effects to apply
step 5 - end loop

eg2. three effects A, B, C
step 1 - determine dependencies
A -> B
B -> C
step 2 - apply all effects with no dependencies
apply effect C
step 3 - skip
step 4 - apply all remaining effects whose dependencies have been fulfilled
apply effect B
step 5 - skip
step 6 (repeat 4) - apply all remaining effects whose dependencies have been fulfilled
apply effect A
step 7 (repeat 5) - end loop

eg3. three effects Opalescence, Hypo, Blood Moon
step 1 - determine dependencies
Hypo -> Opalecence
Blood Moon -> Hypo
step 2 - apply all effects with no dependencies
apply Opalescence
step 3 - skip
step 4 - apply all effects whose dependencies have been fulfilled
apply Hypo
step 5 - skip
step 6 (repeat 4) - apply all remaining effects whose dependencies have been fulfilled
apply Blood Moon
step 7 (repeat 5) - end loop



DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

What you seem to be missing is this.

When you consider whether Hypothetcal Enchantment is affected by Blood Moon, you ask "At the point Blood Moon applies, is Hypothetical Enchantment already a land?"

If you apply Blood Moon before Hypothetical Enchantment, the answer is "no, Hypothetical Enchantment is not a land," and therefore Blood Moon does not and can not affect Hyptothetical Enchantment in any way whatsoever.

Since Blood Moon does not remove the ability of Hypothetical Enchantment (and it clearly doesn't change the set of objects HE applies to, or what HE does to those objects) Hypothetical Enchantment is not in any way dependant on Blood Moon.
Still blessed by Julia of Hillsdown. M:tG Rules Adviser You are Red/Blue!
You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
To be honest, the rulebook is vague about dependency because nobody has been able to agree how it should work. If you construct pathologically complex cases or invent hypothetical cards, different gurus will give different answers about which effects "really" depend on each other.

Constructing a properly comprehensive algorithm for resolving this would be really fiddly, would add another layer of complication to an already complicated question, and to be honest, it simply never matters in actual games. So it hasn't been worthwhile to make these rules precise.
To be honest, the rulebook is vague about dependency because nobody has been able to agree how it should work. If you construct pathologically complex cases or invent hypothetical cards, different gurus will give different answers about which effects "really" depend on each other.

Constructing a properly comprehensive algorithm for resolving this would be really fiddly, would add another layer of complication to an already complicated question, and to be honest, it simply never matters in actual games. So it hasn't been worthwhile to make these rules precise.

I see what you're saying, odd corner cases shouldn't warrant a large investiture of time, but these are the Comprehensive Rules. I find myself arguing MissingCalculus's case (referencing his neverending lifebid loop thread) for a completely comprehensive rulebook.
Ironically, I didn't see the case made for his example and I didn't support his call for a change.

It just feels wrong to shine a light in the corner of the rules and the thread starts to unravel and you're left holding various strands of string and wondering if you're a madman in a lunatic asylum.

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

Within all this discussion about Dependency no one has actually stated what the end result of 
having these in play:

   Opalescence
   Life and Limb
   Conspiracy(Saporlings)
   Humility
   Blood Moon
   Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
   Forest


 What exactly is the final result for real???????/
STEP 1: Find your cousin STEP 2: Get your cousin in the cannon STEP: 3 Find another cousin
It depends on timestamps and what else is on the board.  If anyone's really curious I'll try to work through it some time and post.

Laurie spoke truth, though.

I know it hurts to have it be this vague mess rather than cool, clean, precise and always correct, but it really is the best option.  You just have to believe in the spirit of the rules


Gerdef
Magic Judge Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Rules Theory and Templating: "They may be crazy, but they're good." --Matt Tabak, Rules Manager*
Within all this discussion about Dependency no one has actually stated what the end result of 
having these in play:

   Opalescence = O
   Life and Limb = L&L
   Conspiracy(Saprolings) = C
   Humility = H
   Blood Moon = BM
   Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth = U
   Forest


 What exactly is the final result for real???????/

this is my take on it.
assumptions:
1) there is at least one creature on the field for Conspiracy to affect before effects are applied
2) the effects' time stamps are the order you listed above

U -> BM (urborg depends on blood moon) because BM changes the existance of Urborg's text
C -> O because O makes creatures that C affects
L&L -> C because C makes creatures saprolings and L&L would add land - forest to them
C -> L&L because L&L makes creatures whose type C would overwrite
BM -> L&L because L&L makes non-basic lands that BM would apply to

in layer 4 only O, L&L, C, BM, and U have a potential effect
we apply O first as it is not dependent on anything
then L&L and C in time stamp order (they form a dependency loop)
then BM
U never gets applied because it's gone when BM is applied.
in layer 5 L&L makes land - forests and creature - saprolings green
in layer 6 H removes all abilities on creatures
in layer 7
O sets enchantment creatures' P/T to CMC
L&L sets creature - saprolings' P/T to 1/1
H sets creatures' P/T to 1/1

so here are the results
Opalecence is a white enchantment
Life and Limb is a green 1/1 creature enchantment - saproling with no abilities
Conspiracy is a green 1/1 creature enchantment - saproling with no abilities
Humility is a green 1/1 creature enchantment - saproling with no abilities
Blood Moon is a green 1/1 creature enchantment - saproling with no abilities
Urborg is a colourless land - mountain that can tap for
non-basic forests are green 1/1 land creature - mountain saprolings with no abilities
basic forests are green 1/1 land creature - forest saprolings with no abilities
non-basic non-forest lands are colourless land - mountains that can tap for
non-saproling creatures are unchanged colour 1/1 creature - saprolings with no abilities
saproling creatures are green 1/1 land creature - mountain saprolings with no abilities
basic non-forest lands are unaffected



DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

 

Taking offers on my set of unopened limited edition full art judge foil basic lands, message me if interested.
 

Thanks 2goth4U, that seems like the most likely outcome, I think!!!!!!!!!! 
STEP 1: Find your cousin STEP 2: Get your cousin in the cannon STEP: 3 Find another cousin