Mox Diamond-like Replacements

37 posts / 0 new
Last post
Suppose I have a Mox Diamond on the battlefield. I play a Glorious Anthem, and then a March of the Machines, turning my Mox Diamond into a 1/1 creature.

Then I play a Parallel Lives. Then, I Cackling Counterpart my Mox Diamond.


Mox Diamond has a replacement effect modifying how it enters the battlefield, as does Parallel Lives. Replacement effects go in the order of "Self-Replacement" --> "Control" --> "Copy" --> "Everything else in any order you want", so am I right in saying that I could do either of these two things:

A) (Apply Parallel Lives 1st) Double my incoming Mox Diamond, discard two lands, and then have two Mox Diamond tokens enter the battlefield,

OR

B) (Apply Mox Diamond 1st) Discard a land, and then have two of the resulting Mox Diamond tokens enter the battlefield? (Only having discarded a single land?)
I think Parallel lives' replacement effect is modifying Cackling Counterpart, not the entrance of the token.

So you discard two lands BUT maybe you end up with 4 tokens?
Each Mox Diamond token replaces itself entering the battlefield. You'll have to discard a land for each one.

If you don't discard a land, I believe the tokens get created in the graveyard (and then cease to exist shortly after). Can anyone else confirm?
Rules Advisor
Mox Diamond has no self-replacement effects. It's a regular replacement effect.

I don't think you can do B. The second Mox has a replacement effect that hasn't been applied but is applicable to the event (Cackling Counterpart making a token) after the first land discard has already happened.

Rules Advisor

Please autocard: [c]Shard Phoenix[/c] = Shard Phoenix.

Does Parallel Lives modify the "If you do, put Mox Diamond onto the battlefield." on each token? Can we end up with a token for each land in hand?
Mox Diamond has no self-replacement effects. It's a regular replacement effect.

I don't think you can do B. The second Mox has a replacement effect that hasn't been applied but is applicable to the event (Cackling Counterpart making a token) after the first land discard has already happened.



Wouldn't that violate 614.5?

614.5. A replacement effect doesn't invoke itself repeatedly; it gets only one opportunity to affect an event or any modified events that may replace it.



In this single event, I have a Mox Diamond replacement effect and a Parallel Lives replacement effect. According to 614.5, once I've applied the Mox Diamond replacement effect, I cannot apply it again, even if I would end up with more than one Mox Diamond due to some other effect during the same event. I would either have to have two or more events, or, two or more Mox Diamond replacement effects to begin with.
The key thing here is that the cost is on the Mox diamond itself.
Parallel Lives is modifying Cackling Counterpart, not the Mox Diamond.
Each of them is entering as its own creature and producing its own effect.

If the discarding of the card was part of the cost of Cackling Counterpart, then Parallel Lives would make it so you only had to do it once for the two, but since it is an effect on the tokens each token triggers and must be paid separately. Each effect is only being triggered once.
Cackling Counterpart resolves: one effect event is created, and that effect event is A token enters the battlefield.

Rule 616.1c tells us to apply the copy effect first: the token will be a copy of Mox Diamond.
Then rule 616.1d lets us choose one applicable replacement effect.
Then rule 616.1e tells us to look for any other replacement effect to apply.

I belive KyCygni was right in the first place: he may choose which effect to apply first.
(and get two Diamond for one discard)

616.1a If any of the replacement and/or prevention effects are self-replacement effects (see rule 614.15), one of them must be chosen. If not, proceed to rule 616.1b.

616.1b If any of the replacement and/or prevention effects would modify under whose control an object would enter the battlefield, one of them must be chosen. If not, proceed to rule 616.1c.

616.1c If any of the replacement and/or prevention effects would cause an object to become a copy of another object as it enters the battlefield, one of them must be chosen. If not, proceed to rule 616.1d.

616.1d Any of the applicable replacement and/or prevention effects may be chosen.

616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.



I don't think Mox Diamond has a self-replacement effect.
614.15. Some replacement effects are not continuous effects. Rather, they are an effect of a resolving spell or ability that replace part or all of that spell or ability’s own effect(s). Such effects are called self-replacement effects. When applying replacement effects to an event, self-replacement effects are applied before other replacement effects.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

Crackling counterpart resolves, one effect is created, that effect is TWO tokens enter the battlefield.


Parallel lives does not say "If an effect would put one or more tokens onto the battlefield under your control, put twice that many of those tokens onto the battlefield instead."

It says "If an effect would put one or more tokens onto the battlefield under your control, it puts twice that many of those tokens onto the battlefield instead."

This is the same reason Mimic Vat tokens will both be exiled.

I still suspect you may get two tokens per land discard because PL will modify the Diamond's 2nd scentance. Weather you would have to discard another land to keep that 2nd diamond around is another question.

The key thing here is that the cost is on the Mox diamond itself.



Mox Diamond does not have a cost (well, it does, and that cost is simply ), it has a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield. Oops, you're right. "If you do" is right there.

Parallel Lives is modifying Cackling Counterpart, not the Mox Diamond.



Parallel Lives is modifying the event, which Mox Diamond is also modifying.

Each of them is entering as its own creature and producing its own effect.



That is true if you, arbitrarily, decide to apply the replacement effect of Parallel Lives first. What is stopping me from applying Mox Diamond's first?

If the discarding of the card was part of the cost of Cackling Counterpart, then Parallel Lives would make it so you only had to do it once for the two, but since it is an effect on the tokens each token triggers and must be paid separately. Each effect is only being triggered once.



These are not triggers, they are replacement effects.



Parallel lives does not say "If an effect would put one or more tokens onto the battlefield under your control, put twice that many of those tokens onto the battlefield instead."

It says "If an effect would put one or more tokens onto the battlefield under your control, it puts twice that many of those tokens onto the battlefield instead."



Are you implying that these two wordings are functionally different? I'd agree that the made-up one would be more ambiguous.
The key thing here is that the cost is on the Mox diamond itself.



Mox Diamond does not have a cost (well, it does, and that cost is simply ), it has a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield.



It is a cost.  
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
 
The key thing here is that the cost is on the Mox diamond itself.



Mox Diamond does not have a cost (well, it does, and that cost is simply ), it has a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield.



It is a cost.  
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
 



Ooo, that "If you do" is so sneaky. You are right.

...does that change anything?


Edit: Wait, 117.12 says "Spells, activated abilities, and triggered abilities". In this situation, during the resolution of Cackling Counterpart, I am not casting a spell, nor am I activating an ability, nor is an ability getting triggered. A token is simply entering the battlefield. Does that matter?
Here's how I'm seeing it:

  1. Cackling Counterpart begins resolving. Applicable replacement effects: Mox ETB, Double tokens.

  2. Pick and apply Mox ETB first, discarding a land. Applicable replacement effects: Double tokens.

  3. Apply double tokens, making another Mox. Applicable replacement effects: Mox ETB #2 (only one of the two that exist have been applied)

  4. Apply Mox ETB #2, discarding a land.

  5. Two Mox Diamond tokens enter the battlefield.

Rules Advisor

Please autocard: [c]Shard Phoenix[/c] = Shard Phoenix.

But why would you add an additional Mox Diamond replacement effect if you didn't have it in the first place? If you're allowed to do that (or required, I guess), then what is 614.5 even referring to?
Mox Diamond has a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield. Changing the number of them that are entering the battlefield doesn't change that. If you cast Cackling Counterpart on a Diregraf Ghoul, you couldn't have only one enter tapped.
Rules Advisor
But why would you add an additional Mox Diamond replacement effect if you didn't have it in the first place?


You don't need to have it in the first place. The "second" mox contains a replacement effect that is applicable to the event and hasn't been applied to the event yet. It doesn't matter that a completely separate object has applied a different (but identically worded) replacement effect to itself.

Rules Advisor

Please autocard: [c]Shard Phoenix[/c] = Shard Phoenix.

Mox Diamond has a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield. Changing the number of them that are entering the battlefield doesn't change that. If you cast Cackling Counterpart on a Diregraf Ghoul, you couldn't have only one enter tapped.



This is basically what Shard_Fenix is saying. No matter what you do with Cackling Counterpart, Doubling Season, and Diregraf Ghoul, both ghouls enter the battlefield tapped. Similarly, you can't get around Mox Diamond's ETB cost. You can think of it in the way that Shard described it, or you can say that creating extra tokens can't work around abilities that modify how a permanent enters the battlefield.

If it helps, the text "If Mox Diamond would enter the battlefield..." exists on both copies. There are two instances of this ability (or three if you count the original Mox). The original copy's ability doesn't apply to the DS copy, but DS copy's own ability certainly does.
Here's how I'm seeing it:

  1. Cackling Counterpart begins resolving. Applicable replacement effects: Mox ETB, Double tokens.

  2. Pick and apply Mox ETB first, discarding a land. Applicable replacement effects: Double tokens.

  3. Apply double tokens, making another Mox. Applicable replacement effects: Mox ETB #2 (only one of the two that exist have been applied)

  4. Apply Mox ETB #2, discarding a land.

  5. Two Mox Diamond tokens enter the battlefield.


I'm very uncomfortable with this reasoning.
614.4. Replacement effects must exist before the appropriate event occurs...


Let's say we admit that doubling the token ressuscitates the Mox effect, but only one instance of it.
You are telling us that one token has had its discard paid, and the other one hasn't. Then I ask WHICH ONE?

Since it is impossible to establish a difference between the tokens, it must be impossible to pretend that one is paid and the other isn't.
Once the Mox discard effect has been applied, it cannot be brought back for a second application.
614.5. A replacement effect doesn’t invoke itself repeatedly; it gets only one opportunity to affect an event or any modified events that may replace it.

Remember, all of this still is ONE event: a token enters the Battlefield.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

Suppose I have a Mox Diamond on the battlefield. I play a Glorious Anthem, and then a March of the Machines, turning my Mox Diamond into a 1/1 creature.

Then I play a Parallel Lives. Then, I Cackling Counterpart my Mox Diamond.

Congratulations, KyCygni. A very puzzling question!
(for I am not even sure about my own answer!) 

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

How about these:

614.6. If an event is replaced, it never happens. A modified event occurs instead, which may in turn trigger abilities. Note that the modified event may contain instructions that can't be carried out, in which case the impossible instruction is simply ignored.

614.7. If a replacement effect would replace an event, but that event never happens, the replacement effect simply doesn't do anything.

So if you apply the mox token discard event replacement effect 1st, the Cackling Counterpart "put a token into play" event never happens and the DS replacement that is trying to double it simply doesn't do anything.


STILL not sure about doubling the "If you do, put MOX Dimond into play" token.


Edited for corectness, thanks Chaikov

After applying Mox Diamond's replacement effect, we find that we are still putting it onto the battlefield. In this case, we're putting two of them on the battlefield. There are three effects at play here: Doubling Season's and each Mox Diamond's.

Doubling Season sees one event. A token is entering the battlefield, so it wants two to enter instead. There is no confusion on this point.

From the Mox's point of view, there are two events. Or, at least, each Mox only sees itself. It is clear to me that 614.5 does not prevent both effects from applying, since we are dealing with two different effects that come from different permanents.

Chaikov raises an interesting question, however. If one were to pay only a single discard, it would be impossible to determine which Mox Diamond to put on the battlefield. I cannot resolve this on any theoretical level, only a practical one: One Mox ends up in the graveyard and one on the battlefield. Since they are indistinguishable from each other, it doesn't matter which one goes where.
How about these:
So if you apply the mox token discard event 1st, the Cackling Counterpart "put a token into play" event never happens and the DS replacement that is trying to double it simply doesn't do anything.

Try not to mix up events and effects; there is ONE event and there are THREE effects.

The event is the resolution of Cackling Counterpart: put a token on the Field.

The effects are:
-the token will copy something
-the token will be doubled
-the token will end up in the Grave unless you discard a land.

All of them exist before the event happens.
Applying the copy effect make Diamond discard effect applicable.

Applying the doubling effect first would double the discard effect, so each tokens will claim its "tax".
Applying the discard first would make a token for which the "tax" has been paid. Then doubling would make two 'paid for' tokens.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

Here's how I'm seeing it:

  1. Cackling Counterpart begins resolving. Applicable replacement effects: Mox ETB, Double tokens.

  2. Pick and apply Mox ETB first, discarding a land. Applicable replacement effects: Double tokens.

  3. Apply double tokens, making another Mox. Applicable replacement effects: Mox ETB #2 (only one of the two that exist have been applied)

  4. Apply Mox ETB #2, discarding a land.

  5. Two Mox Diamond tokens enter the battlefield.


I'm very uncomfortable with this reasoning.
614.4. Replacement effects must exist before the appropriate event occurs...


The key to grasp is that one does not perform the event until after all replacement effects are applied.

Thus, if applying one replacement effect causes another replacement effect to come into being, that new effect exists before "the appropriate event occurs." You are not limited to considering only effects that could have applied to the original event.

Let's say we admit that doubling the token ressuscitates the Mox effect, but only one instance of it.
You are telling us that one token has had its discard paid, and the other one hasn't. Then I ask WHICH ONE?

No, we do not say that the doubing "resuscitates" or in any other way revives the effect that has already been applied. What has happened is that a new effect has been created before the event has happened, and therefore can be applied to the event.

The game knows which one, because the tokens on the battlefield will be separate and distinct objects. It is impossible for the replacement effect generated by one token to apply to the other token.

614.12. Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c–d.) Such effects may come from the permanent itself if they affect only that permanent (as opposed to a general subset of permanents that includes it).

Thus, the effect generated by one token cannot possibly affect how the other enters the battlefield.

Remember, all of this still is ONE event: a token enters the Battlefield.

No, that is not the event. That was the first description of the event, but it has been modified twice by replacement effects. The new description is this.

Discard a land card. Put one of the two tokens created by Cackling Counterpart onto the battlefield and the other into your graveyard.
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.
We'll need an official ruling on this one. I can see this both Chaikov's way and mine, but I see nothing in the rules telling me to favor either.
There was a Rules T&T thread about similar problems here.

You guys have fascinating timing. Already fixed in the next update, although perhaps not in the way you expect. #cryptic #waitandsee

Level 1 Judge

We'll need an official ruling on this one. I can see this both Chaikov's way and mine, but I see nothing in the rules telling me to favor either.

Agreed.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

Let's say we admit that doubling the token ressuscitates the Mox effect, but only one instance of it.
You are telling us that one token has had its discard paid, and the other one hasn't. Then I ask WHICH ONE?

No, we do not say that the doubing "resuscitates" or in any other way revives the effect that has already been applied. What has happened is that a new effect has been created before the event has happened, and therefore can be applied to the event.

The game knows which one, because the tokens on the battlefield will be separate and distinct objects. It is impossible for the replacement effect generated by one token to apply to the other token.


The problem I have with this interpretation is that it that we're not discussion whether the discard for one token applies to the other, we're discussing whether the discard for the original applies to the replacement tokens.  Remember doubling seasons effect isn't 'If an effect would put one or more tokens onto the battlefield under your control, it puts that many of additional tokens onto the battlefield instead.'; the effect is If an effect would put one or more tokens onto the battlefield under your control, it puts twice that many of those tokens onto the battlefield instead.'.  As both tokens are replacing the original token there is no reason to treat them differently.  Either both costs count as being paid and the tokens enter the battlefield or neither do and you have two more discards to make.
The key to grasp is that one does not perform the event until after all replacement effects are applied.

Thus, if applying one replacement effect causes another replacement effect to come into being, that new effect exists before "the appropriate event occurs." You are not limited to considering only effects that could have applied to the original event.



I would never have come to this conclusion from the comp. rules alone (especially 614.4); if this is correct, I would vote for a more explicit statement like this within the appropriate subsection.
The fact that you can apply replacement effects in this way is a consequence of 614.1 (replacement effects watch for events to replace) and 614.6 (when an event is replaced, a modified event occurs), and there's a heavy implication in 614.5.

I see no harm in adding an additional rule to §614 for clarification along the following lines:

After a replacement is applied, check to see if any other replacement effects will further modify the event. It is possible for a replacement effect to apply to the modified event even if it did not apply originally.
Example: A player has a creature in his graveyard with Dredge 6, and his opponent controls a Leyline of the Void. If that player would draw a card, he may instead exile 6 cards to return the creature to his hand.
Yes, a new event is created by replacing it, and this may change which replacement effects apply, but nothing says that newly created replacement effects should be considered.

Definitely a case for rules update. 

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

Yes, a new event is created by replacing it, and this may change which replacement effects apply, but nothing says that newly created replacement effects should be considered.
Definitely a case for rules update. 

No need of rule update IMO. Check this rule.
616.2. A replacement or prevention effect can become applicable to an event as the result of another replacement or prevention effect that modifies the event.
Example: One effect reads “If you would gain life, draw that many cards instead,” and another reads “If you would draw a card, return a card from your graveyard to your hand instead.” Both effects combine (regardless of the order they came into existence): Instead of gaining 1 life, the player puts a card from his or her graveyard into his or her hand.


A doubling effect always create identical and undifferentiable objects. That's what the word 'double' means.

It is NOT POSSIBLE for a doubling effect to create "one token for which the discard cost has been paid" and "one token for which it hasn't". Doubling is doubling, and the result HAS TO BE two identical things. Of course, once created, those objects will go on their merry way and may live different lives, but that CANNOT be the result of the doubling effect.

So, the game will either create two 'unpaid tokens in the Grave', or two 'paid tokens on the Field', or perhaps two 'you still may pay tokens', or even two 'I have engaged myself to pay tokens**'; otherwise, it couldn't be called doubling.



So, NO, rule 616.2 cannot make it so that the doubling effect creates one token has been paid while the other hasn't.
So, YES, we need a rules update. (and an OR meanwhile)


**If this fourth option is the correct one, then the player will discard two lands and cannot choose to discard just one.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

The more I think about it, that fourth option must be correct.
So, I have now joined the other camp: I now believe it is not possible to obtain two tokens from one discard.
(but not for any of the reasons any of you exposed) 

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

Whilst I'm not any form of rules expert, I believe the player would have the option of discard (a) 1 land for 1 mox diamond, or (b) 2 or (c) 3 (?!) lands for 2 mox diamonds, and even (d) 1 land for 0 (?!!) mox diamonds.

This is because the original token never enters the battlefield, but 2 copies of the original token enter the battlefield instead.

"10/1/2005 The tokens and counters that Doubling Season creates are exact copies of the kind of tokens and counters that were being created in the first place."

(a) Player chooses not to pay the option for the first token that will never exist on the battlefield, then doubling season makes 2 new copies, of which only 1 is paid (1 land discarded). (Or chooses to apply the doubling season replacement first, and only pay for 1)

(b) Player chooses not to pay the option for the first token that will never exist on the battlefield, then doubling season makes 2 new copies, both are paid (2 lands discarded). (Or chooses to apply the doubling season replacement first)

(c) Player chooses to pay the option for the first token that will never exist on the battlefield (1 land discarded), then doubling seasons makes 2 new copies, both of which are paid (2 more lands discarded).

(d) Player chooses to pay the option for the first token (1 land discarded), then doesn't choose to discard any more lands.

But I could be way off with this. 

Robvalue: Copy target bug or glitch. You may choose a new card for the copy...

Will never buy games made by Arena Net again.

Will not buy Duel 2015 until 2HG reinstated.

 

Grei wrote:

Orc_Welfin wrote:
 I've removed content from this thread. 


Nice to know removing content is a company wide policy.
Doubling effects do not make two new copies of anything, only one, so any three-token-scenario of yours cannot happen.
Even believing that it actually makes a copy is an incorrect approach: no token is ever created and then copied. Rather, two tokens are created where there should have been one.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!

If i cast a Wild Guess with Epic Experiment, I still have to discard a card. All additional costs must be paid even with alternate casting costs.
If I cast 2 of them with my Epic Experiment, then I have to discard 2 cards, because it is an additional cost that each of them have.

The same way that each of those Mox Diamonds would have its own additional cost to enter the battlefield.

2 tokens will be created.
Each of them is its own permanent, it has the words written on itself, the cost for each must be paid the same way that each of the cards must be discarded for the 2 wild guesses. It doesn't matter that each of these separate permanents was generated by one effect.
The additional cost of discarding a land card was never part of the cost of the effect that generated them, it is inidividual to each of them which makes the order of replacement effects irrelevant.

It doesn't even seem right to me that you could apply them out of order like this but if you were to somehow apply mox's effect first, it would end up looking like this:
Cackling counterpart goes to make a token
Apply Mox's replacement effect a mox is paid for
Apply parallel lives effect another mox will now enter
Apply the new Mox's replacement effect 

You can't use one payment for multiple costs. If I have Saproling Burst out, I can't remove a fade counter in my upkeep as a cost, and put a token out with the same counter. Each cost must be paid separately. You can't pay once for two additional costs for 2 separate permanents. Just because this happens before it enters the battlefield doesn't change anything. If I made a Thragtusk clone with Parallel Lives out I couldn't choose to only gain 5 life when they entered the battlefield because it is on the card/token. It is an effect on the card, each instance of it must be resolved separately.

The reason I think that the parallel lives would have to be applied first is because it modifies Cackling Counterpart's effect while the Mox Diamond token modifies itself. Cackling Counterpart has to resolve before the Mox Diamond token even exists to use its replacement effect.

We all seem to agree on the (only) relevant question here: it is not possible to obtain two tokens from one discard. We do, however, disagree on the logical process required to produce this conclusion. So, for those rulelawyers among us who like to split hairs, here's my take on it, new & improved.

-First off, the easy ones:
Rule 614.1a confirms that Parallel Lives’ ability is a replacement effect.
Rule 614.1c confirms that Diamond’s first ability is a replacement effect.
Rule 616.1 confirms that the player may order those replacement effects as he/she wishes.

-Second, the medium difficulty one:
If Parallel Lives’ effect is applied before Diamond’s, two tokens are first created, and then each of those tokens asks for discard: the player may choose and discard zero, one or two land cards to obtain zero, one or two tokens on the Field. Nobody here challenged that conclusion, so I’ll move on.

-Third, the tough one:
What if the player applies Diamond’s effect before Parallel Lives’?

Say I cast Clone copying Voice of All.

I must choose to copy Voice first, and then am allowed to choose a color. I cannot simply play Clone and choose a color: I must first voice my intention to copy Voice of All, and then voice the color I’ve chosen. (rule 616.2) Look closely: the whole enter the Battlefield process has been entirely modified by my DECISION to copy Voice of All; and yet, nothing has been DONE, no card has been moved, nothing actually happened. Still, merely voicing my decision affected the whole situation.

The same is true with Mox Diamond: any decision I make and voice will affect the rest of the process. If I say «I will discard a land», then voicing that choice affects what happens later.

But what if I SAY it and then don’t DO it?

Well, if I say «I cast Lightning Bolt» and then place a Prodigal Sorcerer card on the table, something is definitively wrong. I am bound to decisions I utter. If I say «I will discard a land card for Mox Diamond», then I must do it. If I don’t, an illegal action has been committed and the game must be rewound.

If you disagree with this opinion, stop reading here. Otherwise...
When Diamond’s effect is applied, I must voice my decision: either «I will discard» or «I won’t discard». And I must abide by this choice. Voicing this decision change Diamond’s entering the Battlefield process; from «If Mox Diamond token would enter the battlefield, you may...», it became «Discard a land card and put Mox Diamond token onto the battlefield».

And then, Parallel Lives’ effect is applied: the process is doubled. It becomes...
«Discard a land card and put Mox Diamond token onto the battlefield»
+
«Discard a land card and put Mox Diamond token onto the battlefield»

So I discard two land cards and put two Mox Diamond tokens on the Field. 
If I don’t discard as promised, then I have committed an illegal move and must rewind the process.
Observe an interesting fact: according to my choices, I am not allowed, in this specific situation, to discard only one land. I must discard two, or rewind the game and make other choices.

It's not Logic, it's Magic!