Oracle and Gatherer Ruling Changes - Dark Ascension

155 posts / 0 new
Last post

Do you think a card's Oracle wording needs review? Is there an old ruling in Gatherer that is no longer correct? This thread is the best way to let me know about it so it can be reviewed for the Dark Ascension update. A few notes:

* M12, Innistrad, and a lot of error fixes are in the pipeline, as it were. Wait until that update gets published before mentioning anything that is likely to be fixed or added there (for example, anything involving color indicators).
* This thread is for Oracle or ruling content only. Technical errors should continue to be reported using the "Providing Feedback" entry under the Help section of Gatherer.

Thanks again everyone for their help!

Still waiting for Volcanic Island and kin to get

(Tap: Add Blue or Red to your mana pool.)

… and then, the squirrels came.
Does this mean Avedomni is no longer handling Gatherer ruling updates?
Does this mean Avedomni is no longer handling Gatherer ruling updates?

No, it means I'm trying to limit the number of places we have to look.
Why did Shelkin Brownie lose its Faerieness? If Brine Shaman is a Human Cleric Shaman, then Shelkin Brownie should be a Faerie Ouphe.

Also with creature tyes, since the card is named Nameless Race, shouldn't it have a class like Warrior or Monk?
Still waiting for Lotus Vale and Lake of the Dead to go back to their original wordings much like Winter Orb, Phyrexian Dreadnought and Master of Arms have

What is this, a forum for ants? Seriously, set it to autofit the screen guys, I shouldn't have over a third of the width of my browser as blank space.

"One" on Gate to Phyrexia should get correct oracle text of "a" not "only one". See Ashnod's Altar from the same set: Exact same wording but one is restricted, th eother unbound.
"One" on Gate to Phyrexia should get correct oracle text of "a" not "only one". See Ashnod's Altar from the same set: Exact same wording but one is restricted, th eother unbound.


I don't quite follow. Taken literally, you're proposing to change the second sentence to "Activate this ability only during your upkeep and a each turn.", which doesn't make sense.

Though this isn't even close to what you said, my best guess is that you mean the restriction should be removed entirely. But I don't understand why you think this should be done.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
Well, assuming that the various errors I pointed out in the original errors thread were given due consideration, the only other things I am aware of that need a look at are in this thread:

community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...

As well as the primary Heat Wave issue, there is a mention of some problems with Heroism and similar on the 2nd page.
"One" on Gate to Phyrexia should get correct oracle text of "a" not "only one". See Ashnod's Altar from the same set: Exact same wording but one is restricted, th eother unbound.


I don't quite follow. Taken literally, you're proposing to change the second sentence to "Activate this ability only during your upkeep and a each turn.", which doesn't make sense.

Though this isn't even close to what you said, my best guess is that you mean the restriction should be removed entirely. But I don't understand why you think this should be done.



I think it should get removed entirely.

The cards with the exact same "sacrifice one of your creatures" text from that expansion have the oracle text "Sacrifice a creature" but with no restriction as to how many times you can do this.

Nothing in the original Gate text says that it's restricted to only one activation, just that it's one creature sacced = one artifact destroyed.

The timing restriction should be enough without levvying an additional restriction on this card that has no relation either to the original functional text nor to the oracle text all other cards with similiar original wording were given.
I think it should get removed entirely.

The cards with the exact same "sacrifice one of your creatures" text from that expansion have the oracle text "Sacrifice a creature" but with no restriction as to how many times you can do this.

Nothing in the original Gate text says that it's restricted to only one activation, just that it's one creature sacced = one artifact destroyed.

The timing restriction should be enough without levvying an additional restriction on this card that has no relation either to the original functional text nor to the oracle text all other cards with similiar original wording were given.

It seems clear to me that the original intent of Ashnod's Altar was that you could do it multiple times (see the "{0}:" and the "Poly Artifact"), but that the original intent of Gate to Phyrexia was that you could only do it once per upkeep. It reads to me like a triggered ability, actually, not an activated ability with a timing restriction; but I'll defer to the Rules Team here.
I... Didn't read what the Gate actually does. Yeah idk why it's that way.

Sean Stackhouse Level Two Judge (Yay!) Maine

It seems clear to me that the original intent of Ashnod's Altar was that you could do it multiple times (see the "{0}:" and the "Poly Artifact"), but that the original intent of Gate to Phyrexia was that you could only do it once per upkeep. It reads to me like a triggered ability, actually, not an activated ability with a timing restriction; but I'll defer to the Rules Team here.



I concur. "During your upkeep" means phase ability, which almost universally was updated to phase triggers.
 
It seems clear to me that the original intent of Ashnod's Altar was that you could do it multiple times (see the "{0}:" and the "Poly Artifact"), but that the original intent of Gate to Phyrexia was that you could only do it once per upkeep. It reads to me like a triggered ability, actually, not an activated ability with a timing restriction; but I'll defer to the Rules Team here.



I concur. "During your upkeep" means phase ability, which almost universally was updated to phase triggers.
 



Except here.

Either way the oracle text needs changing.
It seems clear to me that the original intent of Ashnod's Altar was that you could do it multiple times (see the "{0}:" and the "Poly Artifact"), but that the original intent of Gate to Phyrexia was that you could only do it once per upkeep. It reads to me like a triggered ability, actually, not an activated ability with a timing restriction; but I'll defer to the Rules Team here.


I concur. "During your upkeep" means phase ability, which almost universally was updated to phase triggers.
 


Except here.

Either way the oracle text needs changing.


I don't know the Antiquities-era rules well enough to say how the card worked back then, but the big difference between a restricted activated ability and a phase-triggered ability is that the former lets you save the targeted artifact after the creature is sacrificed, while the latter lets you choose whether to sacrifice the creature or not, knowing whether the artifact will actually be destroyed.

Since, by modern standards, the printed wording falls into the "gibberish" category, original functionality takes a higher priority in determining the ideal Oracle wording - when new players have to look up the Oracle wording to know what the card does, printed wording loses much of its weight.


On the other hand, there do seem to be typos in both versions of the flavor text:

Masters Edition IV Flavor:


"The warm rain of grease on my face immediately made it clear I had entered Phyrexia."

—Jarsyl, Diary

Antiquities Flavor:


"The warm rain of grease on my face immediately made it clear I had entered Phyrexia."Jarsyl, Diary

The quote's attribution is not in italics in the MEIV version, and lacks the dash in the Antiquities version.



M:tG Rules Advisor
Ability words--landfall, imprint, threshold, morbid, and all the rest--aren't italicized in the card's Oracle text like they should be.


Also, insert here my obligatory blah blah fizzling rule says "counter", forcing additional text, Gilded Drake ugliness blah blah--you've heard that argument before.

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

Multani's Presence is currently the only card that can trigger on a spell fizzling, and yet for the few months that the card was played with 5E, it didn't trigger in such a case (as "fizzle" and "counter" were separate ideas)! So there's even a return to original function going on there.
I think General Jarkeld still needs to be fixed, doesn't he?

Zammm = Batman.

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.

The Pony Co. 

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.
It's the card of the day!

Frankenstein's Monster's Oracle text is:

As Frankenstein's Monster enters the battlefield, exile X creature cards from your graveyard. If you can't, put Frankenstein's Monster into its owner's graveyard instead of onto the battlefield. For each creature card exiled this way, Frankenstein's Monster enters the battlefield with a +2/+0, +1/+1, or +0/+2 counter on it.


I believe modern templating avoids "can't", and this should instead say "If you don't"?
I believe modern templating avoids "can't", and this should instead say "If you don't"?

There are quite a few cards that say "if you can't". It tends to be that if an action is mandatory, it will say "if you can't", while if it's optional it will say "if you don't".

I believe modern templating avoids "can't", and this should instead say "If you don't"?

There are quite a few cards that say "if you can't". It tends to be that if an action is mandatory, it will say "if you can't", while if it's optional it will say "if you don't".


Perhaps. But then pacts and controversial lands should say can't, as the instruction isn't optional.

Perhaps. But then pacts and controversial lands should say can't, as the instruction isn't optional.

For the pacts, paying is technically mandatory, but since you have full control over mana production (usually), they end up being effectively optional. Maybe they should say "can't", but I think it reads ok either way.

For the lotus vale cycle, the reason it uses "if you don't" is probably because it preceded by an "if you do". Both sentences should use the same word (do/do not, rather than do/can not), but they don't print "if you can" on cards, making can/can not out of the question.
I believe modern templating avoids "can't", and this should instead say "If you don't"?

There are quite a few cards that say "if you can't". It tends to be that if an action is mandatory, it will say "if you can't", while if it's optional it will say "if you don't".



Speaking of, Chains of Mephistopheles should say " If the player can't discard a card this way," instead of " If the player doesn't discard a card this way,"?

Zammm = Batman.

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.

The Pony Co. 

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.
I believe modern templating avoids "can't", and this should instead say "If you don't"?

There are quite a few cards that say "if you can't". It tends to be that if an action is mandatory, it will say "if you can't", while if it's optional it will say "if you don't".



Speaking of, Chains of Mephistopheles should say " If the player can't discard a card this way," instead of " If the player doesn't discard a card this way,"?


They're very inconsistent about this. I greatly prefer "can't" whenever that's the intended meaning - cards should say what they mean, in general. (See also Gilded Drake.)
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011

On the other hand, there do seem to be typos in both versions of the flavor text:

Masters Edition IV Flavor:


"The warm rain of grease on my face immediately made it clear I had entered Phyrexia."

—Jarsyl, Diary

Antiquities Flavor:


"The warm rain of grease on my face immediately made it clear I had entered Phyrexia."Jarsyl, Diary

The quote's attribution is not in italics in the MEIV version, and lacks the dash in the Antiquities version.






If we're talking flavor text, and other Gatherer-but-not-Oracle problems, Plow Under has italicization problems in Gatherer.  Also, Kill Destroy is called "Kill Destroy" instead of "Kill! Destroy!" (in the text as well as the card name).  (And it's not like Magic lacks precedent for exclamation marks (or other punctuation) in names, in Un-sets or otherwise.)
Also, Kill Destroy is called "Kill Destroy" instead of "Kill! Destroy!" (in the text as well as the card name).  (And it's not like Magic lacks precedent for exclamation marks (or other punctuation) in names, in Un-sets or otherwise.)



Silver bordered cards are invisible to Rules team members.

It's true, if you paint a silver border around the only door in a room, if you let rules members into that room they'll be unable to find the exit. What do you think happened to Mago? The room got him.

* Or he went off to be a developer... if you beleive what the "man" says.
… and then, the squirrels came.
Void Maw now has two rulings that say the same thing. The second ruling and the third ruling are the same.
Strongarm Thug and Sylvan Hierophant shouldn't target. (This one I know you're already aware of, but I figured I'd bring it up again now that we have a central thread.)

Ivory Tower should use a numeral 4 to be consistent with other cards that subtract a number from something.
blah blah metal lyrics
"Cast Blaze of Glory only during combat before blockers are declared."
Printed text said "before defense is chosen" and the card works fine during the beginning of combat step.

"Cast Rapid Fire only during combat before blockers are declared."
Every other card that says "before blockers are declared" also says "during combat" including Acidic Dagger which was changed to say "during combat".

Diligent Farmhand should say "As long as Diligent Farmhand is in your graveyard". Compare to Anger and Dearly Departed.

Argothian Treefolk mentions sources in its printed text, so it should be "Prevent all damage that would be dealt to Argothian Treefolk by artifact sources." just like Artifact Ward.

Chromatic Armor's ability should say "by sources of the last chosen color." It should be plural like Light of Sanction.
Still waiting for Lotus Vale and Lake of the Dead to go back to their original wordings much like Winter Orb, Phyrexian Dreadnought and Master of Arms have

Yeah, I'm going to second this one.

"Cast Blaze of Glory only during combat before blockers are declared."
Printed text said "before defense is chosen" and the card works fine during the beginning of combat step.


I believe that as currently templated it only effects the current set of attacking creatures and thus is useless before attacks.
blah blah metal lyrics
Eater of the Dead should have the if clause removed. If I just looked at the printed text, I would think the abiity was "Exile target creature card from a graveyard and untap Eater of the Dead."
Eater of the Dead should have the if clause removed. If I just looked at the printed text, I would think the abiity was "Exile target creature card from a graveyard and untap Eater of the Dead."

This is just the Timevault errata dance again, but with no meaningful purpose. 


  • "Untap for free" is only meaningful in formats Eater is legal in anyway, which is still grossly outclassed by all the other broken stuff flying around in those formats.

  • Cleaning out a graveyard's creatures for five mana seems quite innocent when Tormod's Crypt and Bujoka Bog strip out entire graveyards for essentially free.

  • All the errata does is say, "Find a way to tap your five-mana dude.  Then you can rip all the creatures out of the other guy's graveyard".


"Exile target creature card from a graveyard and untap Eater of the Dead."

As per above (essentially the original wording in modern Magicese), the card is just a scoped graveyard hoser, or an overcosted black creature with pseudo-vigilance, or at best a safety-valved combo.  None of those are particularly dangerous, nor is any of those worth a "just because" errata.
Glancing over the thread I didn't see this yet, so:

In Redirect's reminder text the "—Jace Beleren, to Garruk Wildspeaker" quote attribution is not italicized.

DCI Lvl 2 Judge

Many of the rulings in Clone aren't 100% accurate.

Also, Aurochs' Oracle wording isn't functionally identical to either of its printed wordings.
(community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...)

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

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013  - If you have any concerns with my conduct as a judge, feel free to submit feedback here.
DCI #5209514320


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

Two of the rulings on Aurochs are almost identical.  
 
Endless Whispers refers to "that graveyard", but a graveyard was never mentioned. It should also say "put" instead of "return", because the owner and the new controller are different. Compare It That Betrays.
Each creature has "When this creature dies, choose target opponent. That player puts this card onto the battlefield under his or her control at the beginning of the next end step."

Endless Whispers refers to "that graveyard", but a grave yard was never mentioned. It should also say "put" instead of "return", because the owner and the new controller are different. Compare It That Betrays



Return and put mean the same thing. It just comes down to how it sounds.

Return works just as well given that the creature is returning to the battlefeild. It just happens to be under a different player's control than before.

I don't know why It That Betrays uses "put" when "return" would sound much better. and given the choice, It that betrays should be changed, not endless whispers.
… and then, the squirrels came.
Orcish Mine should have two triggered abilities. The printed text for the second trigger is exactly what the modern wording of the condition would be. The first trigger should also use "or" instead of "and". Compare Shrine of Burning Rage.
At the beginning of your upkeep or whenever enchanted land becomes tapped, remove an ore counter from Orcish Mine.

When the last ore counter is removed from Orcish Mine, destroy enchanted land and Orcish Mine deals 2 damage to that land's controller.

Farrel's Mantle's printed text said "other target creature". Oracle text should say "another target creature".
its controller may have it deal damage equal to its power plus 2 to another target creature.

Cloak of Confusion should have its effect reordered to match the other cards with a similar effect.
Whenever enchanted creature attacks and isn't blocked, you may have defending player discard a card at random. If you do, it assigns no combat damage this turn.

Phyrexian Portal should have an if clause rather than an activation restriction. It needs to check on resolution to make sure you do not have zero cards or one card in your library by the time the ability resolves.
If your library has ten or more cards in it, target opponent looks at the top ten cards of it and separates them into two face-down piles.

Leashling should say "from your hand" instead of "in your hand". Compare Hidden Retreat.
Put a card from your hand on top of your library: Return Leashling to its owner's hand.

All Hallow's Eve should have two triggered abilities. Its printed text said "when you remove the last counter". It also should not use scream counters, since Endless Scream uses that kind. I suggest night counters.
When the last night counter is removed from All Hallow's Eve, if it's exiled, put it into your graveyard and each player returns all creature cards from his or her graveyard to the battlefield.

Gaze of Adamaro, Storm Seeker, and Sudden Impact should be reordered to read more clearly. They should match Runeflare Trap and Vicious Shadows.
~ deals damage to target player equal to the number of cards in that player's hand.

Malignant Growth should have you choose an opponent. Its printed text targeted a single opponent. This is similar to The Rack's Fourth Edition text and its Oracle wording.
As Malignant Growth enters the battlefield, choose an opponent.

At the beginning of the chosen player's draw step,

Shaman en-Kor's creature types are in the wrong order. It should be a Kor Cleric Shaman. Every other Cleric Shaman has Cleric come first. It was also printed as a Cleric so it should come first.
All Hallow's Eve should have two triggered abilities. Its printed text said "when you remove the last counter". It also should not use scream counters, since Endless Scream uses that kind. I suggest night counters.


How about Pumpkin counters?
M:tG Rules Advisor
Sign In to post comments