Far / Away Noob Question

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
Can Far be used on a token?

Far
Return target creature to its owner's hand.


Sure. Assuming the token is a creature, it can be bounced with Far. After Far is done resolving, the token will ceist to exist since it's no longer on the battlefield.

Wizards.Com Boards Net Rep

DCI Level 2 Judge

Questions don't have to make sense, but answers do.


Can Far be used on a token?

Far
Return target creature to its owner's hand.





Assuming it is used on a token creature, yes. The creature will be returned to its owner's hand (the owner of a token is the controller of the effect that created it) where it will cease to exist.

awesome, thanks guys
Far needs a target, and the target has to be a creature.  "Token" doesn't mean "not a creature," it means "not a card."  As long as the token has the type Creature, then it's a legal target for anything that can target a creature.

Rules Advisor

(the owner of a token is the controller of the effect that created it)




This used to be true, but unless I'm going crazy and remembering things that didn't happen, it was changed (at least a couple years back) to be that the owner of the token is the player under whose control the token entered the battlefield.

(Could someone confirm/deny that for me? Now I'm wondering if I'm remember right and I can't get at the rulebook where I'm at right now.)

MTG Rules Advisor
 

This used to be true, but unless I'm going crazy and remembering things that didn't happen, it was changed (at least a couple years back) to be that the owner of the token is the player under whose control the token entered the battlefield.

(Could someone confirm/deny that for me? Now I'm wondering if I'm remember right and I can't get at the rulebook where I'm at right now.)

Confirm. That was part of the Magic 2010 rule changes.

Here's the current entry in the rulebook:
110.5a A token is both owned and controlled by the player under whose control it entered the battlefield.

(the owner of a token is the controller of the effect that created it)




This used to be true, but unless I'm going crazy and remembering things that didn't happen, it was changed (at least a couple years back) to be that the owner of the token is the player under whose control the token entered the battlefield.

(Could someone confirm/deny that for me? Now I'm wondering if I'm remember right and I can't get at the rulebook where I'm at right now.)




Yep. I am wrong. Actual rule:


110.5a. A token is both owned and controlled by the player under whose control it entered the battlefield.


 
This used to be true, but unless I'm going crazy and remembering things that didn't happen, it was changed (at least a couple years back) to be that the owner of the token is the player under whose control the token entered the battlefield.

(Could someone confirm/deny that for me? Now I'm wondering if I'm remember right and I can't get at the rulebook where I'm at right now.)

Confirm. That was part of the Magic 2010 rule changes.

Here's the current entry in the rulebook:
110.5a A token is both owned and controlled by the player under whose control it entered the battlefield.




You know, I should feel bad for not remembering it was part of the M10 update, since I was the one who wrote up that thread that got stickied for a while that highlighted all the big changes such as that.

MTG Rules Advisor
 

(And not only did I include the token ownership thing, but I worded it the exact same way I did up there. Hah. >.>;; )

MTG Rules Advisor
 

Sign In to post comments