Torpor Orb & Flourishing Defences

117 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hello,


I controll Torpor Orb and Flourishing Defenses. An Etched Monstrosity enters the battlefield. Does it cause the ability of the Defenses to trigger ?
Yes, I think.

From the Orb itself:
"Abilities that create replacement effects, such as a permanent entering the battlefield tapped or with counters on it, are unaffected."


I controll Torpor Orb and Flourishing Defenses. An Etched Monstrosity enters the battlefield. Does it cause the ability of the Defenses to trigger ?


Oooh.... interesting. I think the answer is "no", but i'm not actually sure.

Flourishing defense's trigger condition includes both a counter being placed on a permanent while its on the battlefield, and a permanent entering the battlefield with a counter. But torpor orb says that creatures entering the battlefield can't trigger abilities, and i would think this includes creatures entering the battlefield with counters. 
121.6. If a spell or ability refers to a counter being "placed" on a permanent, it means putting a counter on that permanent while it's on the battlefield, or that permanent entering the battlefield with a counter on it as the result of a replacement effect (see rule 614.1c).

EDIT: to be clear, etched monstrosity definitely enters the battlefield with counters. The only part i'm unsure of is whether flourishing defenses triggers as a result.
None of those abilities trigger based on a creature entering the battlefield.  The Monstrosity has no triggered abilities, so the Orb has no effect there.  The Defenses triggers on the counters being put on the creature, not the creature entering the battlefield (even though placing the counters happens to be a side effect of that and happens at the same time).
None of those abilities trigger based on a creature entering the battlefield.  The Monstrosity has no triggered abilities, so the Orb has no effect there.  The Defenses triggers on the counters being put on the creature, not the creature entering the battlefield (even though placing the counters happens to be a side effect of that and happens at the same time).


This would be my assumption too. The counters are being placed on him as he enters the battlefield, but the act of entering itself isn't actually triggering anything.

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.
None of those abilities trigger based on a creature entering the battlefield.  The Monstrosity has no triggered abilities, so the Orb has no effect there.  The Defenses triggers on the counters being put on the creature, not the creature entering the battlefield (even though placing the counters happens to be a side effect of that and happens at the same time).


This would be my assumption too. The counters are being placed on him as he enters the battlefield, but the act of entering itself isn't actually triggering anything.


In the absence of torpor orb, etched monstrosity will trigger flourishing defenses.
The rulings on the gatherer page for Flourishing Defenses also state that creatures entering the battlefied with counters will trigger it.
None of those abilities trigger based on a creature entering the battlefield.  The Monstrosity has no triggered abilities, so the Orb has no effect there.  The Defenses triggers on the counters being put on the creature, not the creature entering the battlefield (even though placing the counters happens to be a side effect of that and happens at the same time).


This would be my assumption too. The counters are being placed on him as he enters the battlefield, but the act of entering itself isn't actually triggering anything.


In the absence of torpor orb, etched monstrosity will trigger flourishing defenses.


Well yeah, but not because he's entering the battlefield. That just happens to be when the counters are being placed on him.

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.
None of those abilities trigger based on a creature entering the battlefield.  The Monstrosity has no triggered abilities, so the Orb has no effect there.  The Defenses triggers on the counters being put on the creature, not the creature entering the battlefield (even though placing the counters happens to be a side effect of that and happens at the same time).


This would be my assumption too. The counters are being placed on him as he enters the battlefield, but the act of entering itself isn't actually triggering anything.


In the absence of torpor orb, etched monstrosity will trigger flourishing defenses.


Well yeah, but not because he's entering the battlefield. That just happens to be when the counters are being placed on him.

The ability "Whenever a -1/-1 counter is placed on a creature" has a special exception in the rules: rule 121.6, which cyphern quoted. This is the only reason the ability triggers when Etched Monstrosity enters the battlefield. For example, Diregraf Ghoul entering the battlefield would not trigger the ability "Whenever a creature becomes tapped".


I think because of this exception, the ability should be considered "Whenever a -1/-1 counter is placed on a creature or a creature enters the battlefield with a -1/-1 counter on it" for the purposes of Torpor Orb. It will not trigger for the same reason Amulet of Vigor will not trigger when Torpor Orb is active.


I think because of this exception, the ability should be considered "Whenever a -1/-1 counter is placed on a creature or a creature enters the battlefield with a counter on it" for the purposes of Torpor Orb. It will not trigger for the same reason Amulet of Vigor will not trigger when Torpor Orb is active.



Amulet of Vigor won't trigger because it specifically refers to permanents entering the battlefield, which by definition includes creatures.  Flourishing Defenses  triggers with Etched Monstrosity not because a creature is entering the battlefield, but because those counters are being placed on it.  I think it's more accurate to think of the creature and counters entering the battlefield simultaneously, but being two distinct events  that can set off two distinct types of triggers.  The fact that they happened to enter the battlefield at the same time is irrelevant.
I think it's more accurate to think of the creature and counters entering the battlefield simultaneously, but being two distinct events  that can set off two distinct types of triggers.


You don't get to decide what constitutes an "event" or not, nor is it open to (your or my) interpretation.  Imagine an attacking Karplusan Wolverine, equipped with Infiltration Lens.  When I block with two 1/1 creature tokens, how many "events" transpire?

The answer is, it depends on what the relevant triggers are looking for!  The Wolverine's ability (whenever {this creature} becomes blocked) sees it as a single event -- it only became blocked once, so the ability triggers a single time.  The equipment's ability, on the other hand (whenever equipped creature becomes blocked by a creature,) sees the exact same thing happen, but sees it as two events, instead of one -- it became blocked by two creatures, so the ability triggers twice.  Now you tell me, how many "events" were there?

As for the topic at hand, Flourishing Defenses doesn't trigger off a creature, or anything else for that matter, entering the battlefield.  It triggers off of counters being placed.  Torpor Orb has no opinion on counters being placed whatsoever, and so it doesn't interfere with the firing of this particular trigger.  "A creature entering the battlefield" isn't what would set off the trigger in the first place, "a counter being placed" is what does it.
MTG Rules Advisor since 2007-06-27. Amateur MTG rules nerd since forever. Download the official rules and more at wizards.com/magic/rules -[ IronMagus' New Marketplace Trade Thread ]- 100+ completed trades!
I believe, IronMagus, that JTBM said exactly the same thing you do, with different words.

Etched Monstrosity's ability creates a replacement effect;
its entering the Battlefield event is replaced by TWO simultaneous events:
-enter the Field, and
-put counters on it

Flourishing Defenses triggers on the second one only, but that doesn't mean there's only one event happening.


700.1. Anything that happens in a game is an event. Multiple events may take place during the resolution of a spell or ability. The text of triggered abilities and replacement effects defines the event they’re looking for. One “happening” may be treated as a single event by one ability and as multiple events by another.

I believe, IronMagus, that JTBM said exactly the same thing you do, with different words.


Could be.  I quoted him more as a jumping-off point for my own comments, rather than to single him out specifically for his.

I still think the Defenses would trigger.  The event that it's watching for is completely disconnected from any events that involve things entering the battlefield, and so this would not be suppressed by the Torpor Orb.
MTG Rules Advisor since 2007-06-27. Amateur MTG rules nerd since forever. Download the official rules and more at wizards.com/magic/rules -[ IronMagus' New Marketplace Trade Thread ]- 100+ completed trades!
  ...Flourishing Defenses  triggers with Etched Monstrosity (...) because those counters are being placed on it...



So does JTBM. And me!

Well, I didn't think my question will cause such a debate !

I think the rule quoted by cyphern is the relevant one :

121.6. If a spell or ability refers to a counter being "placed" on a permanent, it means putting a counter on that permanent while it‘s on the battlefield, or that permanent entering the battlefield with a counter on it as the result of a replacement effect (see rule 614.1c).

I am not an expert (english is not ma native language), but it seems I agree with cyphern in post #3 : the Defenses trigger either on a -1/-1 counter beeing placed on a creature while it's on the battlefield or on a creature entering the battlefield with a -1/-1 counter on it. I think the Torpor Orb will shut down the second one.

Looking for an official clarification, though.    
Between that rule and the oracle rulings for Torpor Orb and Flourishing Defenses that were mentioned by chase and Chaikov, it looks like FD is good to go on Etched Monstrosity







5/1/2008This ability triggers both when a -1/-1 counter is put on a creature on the battlefield and when a creature enters the battlefield with a -1/-1 counter on it. This includes when a creature returns to the battlefield as a result of persist.


From Flourishing Defenses rulings in Gatherer^

To me, that indicates that Torpor Orb can stop it triggering when a creature ETB with -1/-1 counters on it.

Am I missing something?

~ Tim
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
I think we'll probably need an [O] to be sure, but I'm inclined to think it will trigger. The things may happen at the same time, but the creature entering the battlefield is not what triggers the Defenses, so Torpor Orb shouldn't affect it. It reads "Creatures entering the battlefield don't cause abilities to trigger", not "Events happening simultaneously to creatures entering the battlefield don't cause abilities to trigger."
Rules Nut Advisor
I think we'll probably need an [O] to be sure, but I'm inclined to think it will trigger. The things may happen at the same time, but the creature entering the battlefield is not what triggers the Defenses, so Torpor Orb shouldn't affect it. It reads "Creatures entering the battlefield don't cause abilities to trigger", not "Events happening simultaneously to creatures entering the battlefield don't cause abilities to trigger."


I'm inclined to agree with this for the reasons already stated.  Though I could easily see it being ruled the other way as well.
DCI Level 1 Judge Please autocard: [c]Skithiryx, the Blight Dragon[/c] = Skithiryx, the Blight Dragon [c=Skithiryx, the Blight Dragon]Skittles[/c] = Skittles Cards do what they say they do. No more. No less.
I suspect it wouldn't trigger.

Torpor Orb shuts downs triggers resulting from events where a creature enters the field.

If something wants to trigger and it happens as a result of a creature entering the field, it doesn't happen. The ability on Torpor Orb is written in a way such that it it is not limited to the subset of EtB triggers on creatures or EtB triggers watching for creatures to EtB.

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

I suspect it wouldn't trigger.

Torpor Orb shuts downs triggers resulting from events where a creature enters the field.

If something wants to trigger and it happens as a result of a creature entering the field, it doesn't happen. The ability on Torpor Orb is written in a way such that it it is not limited to the subset of EtB triggers on creatures or EtB triggers watching for creatures to EtB.


I would suspect the opposite (altough both POV seem valid to me):

Flourishing Defenses triggers on counters being placed. While Etched Monstrosity enters the battlefield with the counters, it isn't the fact it entered the battlefield that'll trigger FD, but the counters being placed as part of the replacement effect.

I doubt rules clearly explain what should happen here, so let's hope for an update on the Torpor Orb's rulings... :P

Rules Advisor

The Basic rulebook, read it! A lot of basic questions are answered there!

How to autocard :
Type [c]Black Lotus[/c] to get Black Lotus.
Type [c=Black Lotus]The Overpowered One[/c] to get The Overpowered One.

Assume flourishing defenses had the following wording (which i know does not represent the full range of its true functionality):


  • Whenever a creature enters the battlefield with -1/-1 counters on it, you may put a 1/1 green elf warrior creature token onto the battlefield.


I think it's pretty clear that torpor orb would shut down this wording, just as it can shut down things that trigger on a creature "entering the battlefield tapped" or "entering the battlefield under your control".

The important thing to figure out then, is what does flourishing defenses actual ability actually mean (2 times the actual!). The only rule to work from for discovering it's true meaning is this one:
121.6. If a spell or ability refers to a counter being "placed" on a permanent, it means putting a counter on that permanent while it's on the battlefield, or that permanent entering the battlefield with a counter on it as the result of a replacement effect (see rule 614.1c).


Making substitutions based on that rule, I believe Flourishing Defenses means:


  • Whenever a -1/-1 counter is put on a creature while it's on the battlefield, or a creature enters the battlefield with a -1/-1 counter on it, [...]


And the blue trigger condition happens to match the very first ability i mentioned above. As a result, i believe it can be shut down by torpor orb, just as the hypothetical case could be shut down.

If you believe differently, then presumably your expansion of flourishing defenses' ability is different from mine, and i'm curious what that would be.
Assume flourishing defenses had the following wording (which i know does not represent the full range of its true functionality):


  • Whenever a creature enters the battlefield with -1/-1 counters on it, you may put a 1/1 green elf warrior creature token onto the battlefield.


I think it's pretty clear that torpor orb would shut down this wording, just as it can shut down things that trigger on a creature "entering the battlefield tapped" or "entering the battlefield under your control".

The important thing to figure out then, is what does flourishing defenses actual ability actually mean (2 times the actual!). The only rule to work from for discovering it's true meaning is this one:
121.6. If a spell or ability refers to a counter being "placed" on a permanent, it means putting a counter on that permanent while it's on the battlefield, or that permanent entering the battlefield with a counter on it as the result of a replacement effect (see rule 614.1c).


Making substitutions based on that rule, I believe Flourishing Defenses means:


  • Whenever a -1/-1 counter is put on a creature while it's on the battlefield, or a creature enters the battlefield with a -1/-1 counter on it, [...]


And the blue trigger condition happens to match the very first ability i mentioned above. As a result, i believe it can be shut down by torpor orb, just as the hypothetical case could be shut down.

If you believe differently, then presumably your expansion of flourishing defenses' ability is different from mine, and i'm curious what that would be.


As Spock would say...

"Fascinating..."

Rules Advisor

The Basic rulebook, read it! A lot of basic questions are answered there!

How to autocard :
Type [c]Black Lotus[/c] to get Black Lotus.
Type [c=Black Lotus]The Overpowered One[/c] to get The Overpowered One.



If you believe differently, then presumably your expansion of flourishing defenses' ability is different from mine, and i'm curious what that would be.


From my point of view, it wasn't Flourishing Defenses that I was focusing on.  I hadn't even considered that part, and that's a very interesting side of it.
I was more expanding the "enters the battlefield with counters" aspect into two separate things, as Chaikov mentioned above: entering the battlefield, and simultaneously placing counters.  The one of those that the Orb would prevent is not the same one that makes the Defenses trigger, which made me believe that it would happen.  Although I freely admit that I was never 100% sure about it.
Torpor Orb shuts downs triggers resulting from events where a creature enters the field.
If something wants to trigger and it happens as a result of a creature entering the field, it doesn't happen.



I can't see how you may come to such a conclusion.
Cards only do what they say they do: Torpor Orb stops enter-the-battlefied triggers, and nothing else.
Nowhere does it say it'll stop resulting events. 





If you believe differently, then presumably your expansion of flourishing defenses' ability is different from mine, and i'm curious what that would be.



I will not expand Flourishing Defenses's ability: cards only do what they say they do.
Replacement effects do «expand» the effects of other cards, by replacing one event with something else;
no card is trying to replace FD's effect. (much less replace its ability)



It's obvious we need [O] ruling!

(let's just hope we don't get opposite O-rulings if we ask different O-rulers...)



If you believe differently, then presumably your expansion of flourishing defenses' ability is different from mine, and i'm curious what that would be.

I'd be inclined to agree with that, if it weren't for the ruling on Gatherer.

I would think the Flourishing Defenses would trigger, as it cares about the counters, not the creature coming into play as the Torpor Orb does, and the Orb's ruling on Gatherer is "Abilities that create replacement effects, such as a permanent entering the battlefield tapped or with counters on it, are unaffected.

So, the Etched Monstrosity enters the Battlefield, unaffected by the Orb, gets it's 5 counters, and Flourishing Defenses creates 5 elves.

This was all stated above in one form or another... just my 2 cents.

"Belief matters more than truth. Every moment, belief in imaginary things alters lives while truth sits unnoticed and waits."
I'm not sure if this counts as official, but Lee Sharpe (A judge who works for wizards on magic online) brought this issue up on twitter a month ago:

@Lee_Sharpe
Torpor Orb and Flourishing Defenses are on the battlefield. Grief Tyrant enters the battlefield. Do you think Flourishing Defenses triggers?

@Lee_Sharpe
(To be clear, Flourishing Defenses does trigger if Torpor Orb is *not* on the battlefield. I'm asking if you think Torpor Orb stops it.)


@samstod
@Lee_Sharpe what was the answer on Flourishing Defenses/Torpor Orb/Grief Tyrant? Or is it a corner-case in progress?


@Lee_Sharpe
.@samstod Since Flourising Defenses doesn't actually care about entering the battlefield, it will trigger despite the Torpor Orb.


 
All Generalizations are Bad
"Abilities that create replacement effects, such as a permanent entering the battlefield tapped or with counters on it, are unaffected."  .



Yeah, I brought that one, but then realized it was not enough. This ruling actually means:
«Those replacement abilities still happen»

Thus, Monstrosity WILL get its counters.

But this ruling, by itself, does not inform us whether or not Flourishing Defenses would trigger.

@Eldarelf: I think you're overapplying that Gatherer Ruling. The point is that it doesn't apply to abilities creating replacement effects. ie. Clone still copies something, Graft still places +1/+1 counters on the creature with Graft, etc.

It's not saying anything about triggers triggering off of placing counters.

The wording on Torpor Orb does not appear to be limited only to EtB triggers, rather triggers that occur as a result of "creatures entering the battlefield" which in my opinion would include the resulting trigger for FD

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

As an aside: who thinks Torpor Orb would stop Pandemonium from triggering when a Living Weapon artifact enters the field?

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

@Eldarelf: I think you're overapplying that Gatherer Ruling. The point is that it doesn't apply to abilities creating replacement effects. ie. Clone still copies something, Graft still places +1/+1 counters on the creature with Graft, etc.



Isn't that the very same thing I said seven minutes ago? (post #28)

 




The wording on Torpor Orb does not appear to be limited only to EtB triggers, rather triggers that occur as a result of "creatures entering the battlefield" which in my opinion would include the resulting trigger for FD



Isn't that the very same argument I've proven false fifteen minutes ago? (post #25)

As an aside: who thinks Torpor Orb would stop Pandemonium from triggering when a Living Weapon artifact enters the field?



I do.

(But then, Pandemonium never triggers from an Equipment entering the Field...)

Of course, you were talking about the Germ creature: Pandemonium can't trigger even, because of Orb. 

@Eldarelf: I think you're overapplying that Gatherer Ruling. The point is that it doesn't apply to abilities creating replacement effects. ie. Clone still copies something, Graft still places +1/+1 counters on the creature with Graft, etc.

It's not saying anything about triggers triggering off of placing counters.

The wording on Torpor Orb does not appear to be limited only to EtB triggers, rather triggers that occur as a result of "creatures entering the battlefield" which in my opinion would include the resulting trigger for FD

Yeah, well I do usually end up on the wrong side of these things!  ;)  However, I am just reading it as it is worded... the Orb has zero affect on the Flourishing Defenses; are you going off of this, (from the Orb's ruling): "Torpor Orb stops a creature's own enters-the-battlefield triggered abilities as well as other triggered abilities that would trigger when a creature enters the battlefield." I don't see Flourishing Defenses caring about ETB, only that the counter(s) is placed or not, and in this case it is, rather 5 are.

"Belief matters more than truth. Every moment, belief in imaginary things alters lives while truth sits unnoticed and waits."
Isn't that the very same argument I've proven false fifteen minutes ago? (post #25)

I don't find your proof conclusive.

Oracle Text on Torpor Orb
Creatures entering the battlefield don't cause abilities to trigger.

Not Oracle text on Torpor Orb
Enter the battlefield triggers don't trigger from creatures entering the battlefield.

It's a subtle distinction, but there is a distinction: The latter applies only to EtB triggers whereas the former applies to all triggers that result from a creature entering the field.

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

Isn't that the very same argument I've proven false fifteen minutes ago? (post #25)

I don't find your proof conclusive.

Oracle Text on Torpor Orb
Creatures entering the battlefield don't cause abilities to trigger.

Not Oracle text on Torpor Orb
Enter the battlefield triggers don't trigger from creatures entering the battlefield.

It's a subtle distinction, but there is a distinction: The latter applies only to EtB triggers whereas the former applies to all triggers that result from a creature entering the field.


OK, but even if that's true, Flourishing Defenses still isn't looking at when/how/if a creature entered the 'Field, it's only looking for -1/-1 counters, and the Orb still allows those counters to be placed.  Am I oversimplifying it? 

I reread it all; I still think the Orb only shuts off "triggered abilities that would trigger when a creature enters the battlefield..." (as worded) and Flourishing Defenses only triggers when the counter is placed, thus no affect from the Orb.

"Belief matters more than truth. Every moment, belief in imaginary things alters lives while truth sits unnoticed and waits."
Once again, it is not entering the Field that causes the trigger, it is the placing of counters

Cards only do what they say they do:
Torpor Orb does not care about counters being placed on creatures. It cares only about creatures entering the Field.
2got4U is overextending the power of the Orb by pretending it ALSO applies to OTHER RESULTS from a critter entering the field.

700.1. Anything that happens in a game is an event. Multiple events may take place during the resolution of a spell or ability. The text of triggered abilities and replacement effects defines the event they’re looking for. One “happening” may be treated as a single event by one ability and as multiple events by another.

Isn't that the very same argument I've proven false fifteen minutes ago? (post #25)

I don't find your proof conclusive.

Oracle Text on Torpor Orb
Creatures entering the battlefield don't cause abilities to trigger.

Not Oracle text on Torpor Orb
Enter the battlefield triggers don't trigger from creatures entering the battlefield.

It's a subtle distinction, but there is a distinction: The latter applies only to EtB triggers whereas the former applies to all triggers that result from a creature entering the field.


It we accept the logic that FD's trigger is a "result" of a creature entering the battlefield as you say, then wouldn't that also apply to triggers such as Endangered Armodon or Goblins of the Flarg? Those abilities would not have triggered if that 1/1 or Dwarf hadn't entered the battlefield, so by that logic they would also be a "result" of said creature entering the battlefield, would they not?

Those two are state-based triggers that certainly result from a creature entering the field, but even if Torpor Orb stopped it the first time, they'd just trigger again so they aren't really triggering as a result of the event.

@Chaikov: right, the placing of counters happens as a consequence of the event that puts the creature on the field and normally, that trigger wouldn't even see that event except for the exception in the CompRules that Cyphern cited earlier which specifically allows that trigger to see counters placed as part of the event of the creature entering the field, but Torpor Orb specifically says that abilities don't trigger from creatures entering the field so the placement of the counter trigger would be likewise stopped.

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

Those two are state-based triggers that certainly result from a creature entering the field, but even if Torpor Orb stopped it the first time, they'd just trigger again so they aren't really triggering as a result of the event.


So you're saying it would prevent the ability from triggering the first time, but not any subsequent time?

At what point does the game state go from being a result of a creature entering the battlefield to not being a result of that event?

Those two are state-based triggers that certainly result from a creature entering the field, but even if Torpor Orb stopped it the first time, they'd just trigger again so they aren't really triggering as a result of the event.


I don't find your proof conclusive.

603.8. Some triggered abilities trigger when a game state (such as a player controlling no permanents of a particular card type) is true, rather than triggering when an event occurs. These abilities trigger as soon as the game state matches the condition. They’ll go onto the stack at the next available opportunity. These are called state triggers. (Note that state triggers aren’t the same as state-based actions.) A state-triggered ability doesn’t trigger again until the ability has resolved, has been countered, or has otherwise left the stack. Then, if the object with the ability is still in the same zone and the game state still matches its trigger condition, the ability will trigger again.


[...]but Torpor Orb specifically says that abilities don't trigger from creatures entering the field so the placement of the counter trigger would be likewise stopped.


But the Orb ALSO says "Abilities that create replacement effects, such as a permanent entering the battlefield tapped or with counters on it, are unaffected."

"Belief matters more than truth. Every moment, belief in imaginary things alters lives while truth sits unnoticed and waits."