|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 1:04PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2004
|
In a multiplayer game, a Pyromancer's Swath  is donated to another player with Zedruu, the Greathearted  's second ability. If the new controller of Pyromancer's Swath is eliminated from the game would Pyromancer's Swath be exlied from play or returned to the original owner? Also, along the same lines, a Taniwha  donated to another player (also with Zedruu) is phased out when that player is eliminated, would the Taniwha phase back in under it's owner's control at their next untap step?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 1:10PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Oct 13, 2002
|
The swath is returned to its owner.
800.4a. When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game, all spells and abilities controlled by that player on the stack cease to exist, and any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end. Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that player, those objects are exiled. This is not a state-based action. It happens as soon as the player leaves the game. If the player who left the game had priority at the time he or she left, priority passes to the next player in turn order who’s still in the game.
I'm not sure about Taniwha. Things only phase in during your untap step if they phased out under your control. I'm thinking it will stay phased out forever.
702.24a Phasing is a static ability that modifies the rules of the untap step. During each player’s untap step, before the active player untaps his or her permanents, all phased-in permanents with phasing that player controls “phase out.” Simultaneously, all phased-out permanents that had phased out under that player’s control “phase in.”
All Generalizations are Bad
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 1:16PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Mar 12, 2011
|
I'd say the control changing effect ends. The Taniwha is still phased out and will phase in when its new(old) controler begins his/her turn. Phased in/out is a status like tapped/untapped, flipped/unflipped and face up/down. The permanent is still on the battlefield, it is just treated as though it wasn't.
I'm a Rules Advisor now  "Simple questions" usually need rather complex answers, while complex questions often come down to no more than a simple "yes" or "no". Some of my favorite Flavor texts:
Show
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 1:18PM
#4
|
|
|
RootBreaker has it right; Taniwha never phases in.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real.
--Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 1:26PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Sep 30, 2004
|
What is the difference between Zedruu's "donate" effect that returns a donated permanent to it's owner after the controller loses the game (For example, Zedruu leaving play doesn't end it's effect and return a donated permanent) Would a a permanent "stolen" with Bribery  or Acquire  return to it's owner as well?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 1:34PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Oct 29, 2007
|
MtG Rules Advisor &
Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJDJ VortexDCI Certified Rules Advisor from July 14, 2009 to July 14, 2012 DCI #5209514320 Wit found in Rules Q&ARPJesus: "Man, screw the rules, I'll play a game of 2HG Archenemy Planechase Emperor EDH draft yet. Once I figure out the rules for it..." Chaikov: "Of course, casual Magic may be played any way your Pokemon group agrees on..." and "It's not logic. It's Magic!" GainsBanding: "I only play online. The Magic Online shuffler is AWESOME!" Ikegami: "one might think [adult cats] would make excellent tokens. The issue, though, is that they are very hard to exile. They return to the battlefield more often than an undying creature." Astarael7: "Does 121.1 imply that players are supposed to wear their poison counters?" Bimmerbot: "If you move the wrong way and [the poison counters] fall, it's a game rule violation" Helluminatus: "Just remember, if it looks like a duck, smells like a duck, and quacks like a duck, but the oracle text says creature - Bunny , then by god, it's a bunny." MadCow21: "Who are you and what have you done with the real Chaikov?" My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 1:36PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Oct 13, 2002
|
What is the difference between Zedruu's "donate" effect that returns a donated permanent to it's owner after the controller loses the game (For example, Zedruu leaving play doesn't end it's effect and return a donated permanent)
What's the difference between a duck? One of its legs are both the same.
You need to contrast Zedruu's ability with something for us to tell you the what the difference is between them.
Would a a permanent "stolen" with Bribery or Acquire return to it's owner as well?
No. Those permanents were never controlled by anyone else. Without the control-changing effect created by putting them onto the battlefield, they wouldn't exist, so they're exiled.
All Generalizations are Bad
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 2:28PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Oct 13, 2002
|
RootBreaker has it right; Taniwha never phases in.
Okay, there was a similar thread over on salvation about this.
Does it change controllers? If so, how? I don't see a rule that specifically mentions phasing that covers this, and it seems like 702.24b prevents the player-losing-the-game rules from covering it.
702.24b If a permanent phases out, its status changes to “phased out.” Except for rules and effects that specifically mention phased-out permanents, a phased-out permanent is treated as though it does not exist. It can’t affect or be affected by anything else in the game. If it doesn't change controllers, it's controlled by someone not in the game, or controlled by "undefined." If that's the case, what happens if someone plays Time and Tide  ?
All Generalizations are Bad
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 2:48PM
#9
|
|
|
If it doesn't change controllers, it's controlled by someone not in the game, or controlled by "undefined." If that's the case, what happens if someone plays Time and Tide ?
We complain to Matt Tabak until he fixes it.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real.
--Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 11, 2011 - 3:03PM
#10
|
|
|
Actually, on a second reading, this might be covered. 702.24b says that things treat it as though it doesn't exist, but in this case 800.4a isn't trying to affect Taniwha itself--it's simply ending the continuous effect that refers to Taniwha. It doesn't matter that the rule treats Taniwha as if it doesn't exist, because the effect exists no matter whether Taniwha does or not. So Taniwha is phased out, the control-effect on it ends thanks to 800.4a, and then if someone casts Time and Tide after that it phases in under the control of whoever would otherwise control it. (Probably its owner.) What isn't covered is Taniwha's owner leaving the game. 700.24b specifically stops 800.4a from causing it to leave the game, because 800.4a doesn't specifically mention phased-out objects.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real.
--Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
|
|
|
~ 
~ 
~ 
~ 
