|
2 years ago ::
May 01, 2011 - 6:32AM
#1
|
|
|
If I cast Etched Monstrosity with Melira, Sylvok Outcast already on the battlefield, will Etched Monstrosity still enter the battlefield with 5 -1/-1 counters on it?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 01, 2011 - 6:49AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2006
|
No, it won't. 10/10 right off the bat! The definition of "a counter being placed on a permanent" includes that permanent entering the battlefield with counters.
 Magic The Gathering DCI Rules Advisor Don't hesitate to post rules question in the Rules Q&A forum for me and other competent advisors to answer : http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75842/134778/Rules_Q38A
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 01, 2011 - 9:05AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Mar 15, 2010
|
This same rules point has come up so many times recently, it's really weird.
Entering with counters = placing counters, so no, it's a 10/10.
Official Rules Advisor
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 01, 2011 - 11:42AM
#4
|
- Mogic Puzzle Master
- Plays Well With Others
|
This question has come up a lot. And it's been answered wrong almost every single time: 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). They may also come from other sources. To determine which replacement effects apply and how they apply, check the characteristics of the permanent as it would exist on the battlefield, taking into account replacement effects that have already modified how it enters the battlefield, continuous effects generated by the resolution of spells or abilities that changed the permanent’s characteristics on the stack (see rule 400.7a), and continuous effects from the permanent’s own static abilities, but ignoring continuous effects from any other source that would affect it. Bolding mine. So it will get the counters, because it ignores the ability of Melira. And yes, I know about the ruling for Tatterkite, but that's his own ability, so that's different. And of course, we might be getting new rules that change this, but this is how it's standing now. I really hope this is in the FAQ (one way or the other).
DCI Level 2 Judge
"That's what's so stupid about the whole magic thing, you know," Rincewind said. "You spend twenty years learning the spell that makes nude virgins appear in your bedroom, and then you're so poisoned by quicksilver fumes and half-blind from reading old grimoires that you can't remember what happens next."
- Terry Pratchett, The Colour Of Magic
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 01, 2011 - 12:06PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 20, 2004
|
This question has come up a lot. And it's been answered wrong almost every single time:
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). They may also come from other sources. To determine which replacement effects apply and how they apply, check the characteristics of the permanent as it would exist on the battlefield, taking into account replacement effects that have already modified how it enters the battlefield, continuous effects generated by the resolution of spells or abilities that changed the permanent’s characteristics on the stack (see rule 400.7a), and continuous effects from the permanent’s own static abilities, but ignoring continuous effects from any other source that would affect it.
Bolding mine. So it will get the counters, because it ignores the ability of Melira. And yes, I know about the ruling for Tatterkite, but that's his own ability, so that's different. And of course, we might be getting new rules that change this, but this is how it's standing now. I really hope this is in the FAQ (one way or the other).
Except that rule covers replacement effects and Melira, Sylvok Outcast  doesn't have one of those; she has a static ability that changes the rules of the game. Specifically:
Creatures you control can't have -1/-1 counters placed on them. Also, that appears to conflict with the ruling on Doubling Season  which would suggest that the counters can be affected by replacement effects anyway.
ΦΦΦΦΦ
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 01, 2011 - 12:17PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jan 19, 2003
|
This question has come up a lot. And it's been answered wrong almost every single time:
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). They may also come from other sources. To determine which replacement effects apply and how they apply, check the characteristics of the permanent as it would exist on the battlefield, taking into account replacement effects that have already modified how it enters the battlefield, continuous effects generated by the resolution of spells or abilities that changed the permanent’s characteristics on the stack (see rule 400.7a), and continuous effects from the permanent’s own static abilities, but ignoring continuous effects from any other source that would affect it.
Bolding mine. So it will get the counters, because it ignores the ability of Melira. And yes, I know about the ruling for Tatterkite, but that's his own ability, so that's different. And of course, we might be getting new rules that change this, but this is how it's standing now. I really hope this is in the FAQ (one way or the other).
614.12 is used to determine whether or not the replacement effect applies. And, as you point out, the 614.12 states that the replacement effect does apply.
But just because a replacement effect is applicable doesn't mean it is effective.
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.
The modified event (entering with counters instead of without counters) is impossible, so you ignore the impossible part..
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 02, 2011 - 11:31AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 16, 2008
|
But just because a replacement effect is applicable doesn't mean it is effective.
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.
The modified event (entering with counters instead of without counters) is impossible, so you ignore the impossible part..
Placing counters on it is only impossible if you do not ignore continuous effects from other sources which 614.12 instructs you to ignore.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 02, 2011 - 11:35AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jan 19, 2003
|
Placing counters on it is only impossible if you do not ignore continuous effects from other sources as 614.12 instructs you to do.
614.12 is only concerned with figuring out which replacement effects apply. 614.12's instruction to ignore continuous effects has no jurisdiction outside of that narrow situation.
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). They may also come from other sources. To determine which replacement effects apply and how they apply, check the characteristics of the permanent as it would exist on the battlefield, taking into account replacement effects that have already modified how it enters the battlefield, continuous effects generated by the resolution of spells or abilities that changed the permanent’s characteristics on the stack (see rule 400.7a), and continuous effects from the permanent’s own static abilities, but ignoring continuous effects from any other source that would affect it.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 02, 2011 - 11:39AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2009
|
...and now I'm confused. So what's the consensus? Wait and see how Melira is explained in the FAQ?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 02, 2011 - 11:39AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Sep 16, 2008
|
Yes. We are determining whether or not the replacement effect of EingTB with -1/-1 counters applies and how it is applied.
That pretty specifically applies to this situation.
|
|
|
