|
5 months ago ::
Dec 27, 2012 - 2:38AM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2011
|
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.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 27, 2012 - 5:37AM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2006
|
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.
«Dystocracy : A system of government in which corrupt leadership colludes with dishonest bankers and greedy elites in order to ensure that productive members of society –people who actually do useful work- bear the greatest share of taxes while gaining the least benefit possible.»
Sounds familiar?
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 27, 2012 - 5:46AM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2006
|
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)
«Dystocracy : A system of government in which corrupt leadership colludes with dishonest bankers and greedy elites in order to ensure that productive members of society –people who actually do useful work- bear the greatest share of taxes while gaining the least benefit possible.»
Sounds familiar?
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 27, 2012 - 1:52PM
#34
|
|
|
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...
---
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29193605/Promotional_Unlock_Cards_List
---
Will never buy games made by Arena Net again.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 27, 2012 - 2:00PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2006
|
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.
«Dystocracy : A system of government in which corrupt leadership colludes with dishonest bankers and greedy elites in order to ensure that productive members of society –people who actually do useful work- bear the greatest share of taxes while gaining the least benefit possible.»
Sounds familiar?
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 28, 2012 - 10:51PM
#36
|
|
|
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 Diamond  s 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.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Dec 29, 2012 - 10:40AM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2006
|
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.
«Dystocracy : A system of government in which corrupt leadership colludes with dishonest bankers and greedy elites in order to ensure that productive members of society –people who actually do useful work- bear the greatest share of taxes while gaining the least benefit possible.»
Sounds familiar?
|
|
|
