abilities/spells refering to how their costs were paid?

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
(note: this question more or less taken from a cranialinsertion question)

Jhoira of the Ghitu has an activated ability where part of the cost is exiling a card from your hand. part of the ability's text refers to this exiled card.

my questions:
- do the comp rules give extra clarification on what is happening in situations like this (ie where the text of an ability or spell refers to the cost used to pay for that ability or spell?)
- if i copy that ability (say, with illusionist's bracers), the copy of the ability remembers what was used to pay for the original, and pretends it has a cost paid by the same payments. is this explained in the comp rules?

----

sorry, i partially found out the answer to my second question above.

===
706.10  To copy a spell or activated ability means to put a copy of it onto the stack [....] If an effect of the copy refers to objects used to pay its costs, it uses the objects used to pay the costs of the original spell or ability. [....]
===

but the rule doesn't say anything about the /mana/ used to pay for its costs, which is important for things like Batwing Brume
- do the comp rules give extra clarification on what is happening in situations like this (ie where the text of an ability or spell refers to the cost used to pay for that ability or spell?)

What do you mean? Abilities and spells remember how you chose to pay their costs.

if i copy that ability (say, with illusionist's bracers), the copy of the ability remembers what was used to pay for the original, and pretends it has a cost paid by the same payments. is this explained in the comp rules?

Yes, lemme go get it for you. . .
706.10. To copy a spell or activated ability means to put a copy of it onto the stack; a copy of a spell isn't cast and a copy of an activated ability isn't activated. A copy of a spell or ability copies both the characteristics of the spell or ability and all decisions made for it, including modes, targets, the value of X, and additional or alternative costs. (See rule 601, "Casting Spells.") Choices that are normally made on resolution are not copied. If an effect of the copy refers to objects used to pay its costs, it uses the objects used to pay the costs of the original spell or ability. A copy of a spell is owned by the player under whose control it was put on the stack. A copy of a spell or ability is controlled by the player under whose control it was put on the stack. A copy of a spell is itself a spell, even though it has no spell card associated with it. A copy of an ability is itself an ability.

Rules Advisor

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

- do the comp rules give extra clarification on what is happening in situations like this (ie where the text of an ability or spell refers to the cost used to pay for that ability or spell?)

Do you mean this?
400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. There are seven exceptions to this rule:

400.7g A resolving spell or activated ability can perform actions on an object that moved from one zone to another while that spell was being cast or that ability was being activated, if that object moved to a public zone.

- if i copy that ability (say, with illusionist's bracers), the copy of the ability remembers what was used to pay for the original, and pretends it has a cost paid by the same payments. is this explained in the comp rules?


706.10. To copy a spell or activated ability means to put a copy of it onto the stack; a copy of a spell isn’t cast and a copy of an activated ability isn’t activated. A copy of a spell or ability copies both the characteristics of the spell or ability and all decisions made for it, including modes, targets, the value of X, and additional or alternative costs. (See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”) Choices that are normally made on resolution are not copied. If an effect of the copy refers to objects used to pay its costs, it uses the objects used to pay the costs of the original spell or ability. A copy of a spell is owned by the player under who se control it was put on the stack. A copy of a spell or ability is controlled by the player under whose control it was put on the stack. A copy of a spell is itself a spell, even though it has no spell card associated with it. A copy of an ability is itself an ability.



lol, perhaps i should double-check the comp rules before posting, rather than posting, checking, making an edit, then having you helpful folks tell me what i found out for myself

cyphern, that isn't what i was asking (ie 407.g), but i'm glad you brought it up because i didn't know about that :-)



so, what about the question about batwing brume? will a copy of that remember the mana used to pay for it?
so, what about the question about batwing brume? will a copy of that remember the mana used to pay for it?

No, it will not. A copy can remember objects used to pay for the original (eg, the creature sacrificed to Fling), but it does not remember mana spent. A copy of batwing grume will have no effect.
cyphern, the rules don't explicitly say that, right? ie, we understand this to be the case just because the rules, when talking about what copying a spell means, /don't/ say that this involves remembering mana payments?
so, what about the question about batwing brume? will a copy of that remember the mana used to pay for it?



Cast
To take a spell from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will
eventually resolve and have its effect. See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”



Copies of spells are created on the stack so they don't meet the requirments of being cast.  If the spell wasn't cast, it couldn't have used or to cast it.
w..ell, glimmereyes, you could say the same thing about (say) sacrificing or exiling objects (or returning one to your hand, silly master transmuter!) to pay for casting a spell or activating an ability, right?
but i suppose for some reason, doing things to objects to pay for costs are treated specially, vs paying mana or life (or anything else not related to objects) to pay for costs.
The difference is precisely the use of the name of the object in the text of the spell's abilities.

A copy of Batwing Brume that wasn't cast might remember what mana was spent to cast the original Batwing Brume...but its text isn't asking about that: its asking about what mana was spent to cast this Batwing Brume. The answer to that question is none at all: this Batwing Brume was never cast.

Contrast this with a copy of Fling that wasn't cast. There the text very specifically isn't asking about "the creature sacrificed to cast this Fling". Its asking about some sacrificed creature. So this Fling is perfectly able to think "Hmmm. I don't recall sacrificing a creature. Lemme check my original." To which inquiry the original can promptly respond "Ah! You mean this guy! Technically, it's gone but fortunately, I have its characteristics saved right here. Enjoy." So both Flings happily deal their damage.

Level 1 Judge as of 09/26/2013

Zammm = Batman

"Ability words are flavor text for Melvins." -- Fallingman