equipment changes control

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

If my opponent equips Bonesplitter to one of his creatures, and I take
Bonesplitter in response with Memnarch, should the creature be equipped?
I feel it should not, but I guess that comes down to what "you" means.
MTGO says it is equipped, the Adepts I asked say it is not.

On looking this up, I now feel I was wrong. Glossary for You:
"For activated abilities, this is the player who played that ability".

I'll just make sure of that and post this anyway, hope nobody minds.

Thanks,

Rahul Chandra

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Rahul Chandra <mathie_uw@yahoo.ca> wrote:

> If my opponent equips Bonesplitter to one of his creatures, and I take
> Bonesplitter in response with Memnarch, should the creature be equipped?

Memnarch
{7}
Artifact Creature -- Wizard Legend
4/5
{1}{U}{U}: Target permanent becomes an artifact in addition to its other
types. (This effect doesn't end at end of turn.)
{3}{U}: Gain control of target artifact. (This effect doesn't end at end
of turn.)

502.33. Equip

502.33a Equip is an activated ability of artifact Equipment cards. The
phrase "Equip [cost]" means "[cost]: Move this Equipment onto target
creature you control. Play this ability only any time you could play a
sorcery."

502.33b For more information about Equipment, see rule 212.2,
"Artifacts."

502.33c If an artifact has multiple instances of equip, any of its equip
abilities may be used.

> I feel it should not, but I guess that comes down to what "you" means.
> MTGO says it is equipped, the Adepts I asked say it is not.
>
> On looking this up, I now feel I was wrong. Glossary for You:
> "For activated abilities, this is the player who played that ability".

The Equip ability checks on resolution whether the target is still
controlled by you. It does not check the control of the ability's
source. Of course, on your turn, you can spend {1} to move the
Bonesplitter to one of your creatures.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Rahul Chandra sez:

<<
>If my opponent equips Bonesplitter to one of his creatures, and I take
>Bonesplitter in response with Memnarch, should the creature be >equipped?
>
>>

This'n's a cold answer (so I wouldn't take my own word on it), but I'd say no.
Why? Because on resolution of the Bonesplitter's Equip ability, it sees its
target is no longer legal (it's targeting a creature its controller does not
control). So the 'splitter's Equip is countered, and it stays where it is.


----
"If President Bush is going to take credit for 'the invisble hand' [of
economics], then he's going to take the blame when 'the hand' gives him the
finger."
--From Fark.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Andy Jakcsy <djaxmann@aol.computer> wrote:

> (it's targeting a creature its controller does not
> control)

The original message said nothing about the creature changing
controller.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Andy Jakcsy, worshipped by llamas the world over, wrote...
> Rahul Chandra sez:
>
> <<
> >If my opponent equips Bonesplitter to one of his creatures, and I take
> >Bonesplitter in response with Memnarch, should the creature be >equipped?
> >
> >>
>
> This'n's a cold answer (so I wouldn't take my own word on it), but I'd say no.
> Why? Because on resolution of the Bonesplitter's Equip ability, it sees its
> target is no longer legal (it's targeting a creature its controller does not
> control). So the 'splitter's Equip is countered, and it stays where it is.

I read the question as asking about a Bonesplitter that's *already*
equipped on one of the opponent's creatures.

If my reading is correct, then nothing special happens when Rahul takes
control of the 'splitter, except that Rahul can later move it around,
not his opponent.

If what I take to be your reading is correct, and Rahul is using
Memnarch's ability in response to the opponent playing the Equip
ability, then I belive you are correct - on resolution, the target will
be illegal and the ability will "fizzle" (be countered on resolution).
The target specification for the Equip ability is "Target creature you
control".

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Daniel W. Johnson, worshipped by llamas the world over, wrote...
> Andy Jakcsy <djaxmann@aol.computer> wrote:
>
> > (it's targeting a creature its controller does not
> > control)
>
> The original message said nothing about the creature changing
> controller.

Neither did Andy's answer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Rahul Chandra <mathie_uw@yahoo.ca> writes:
> If my opponent equips Bonesplitter to one of his creatures, and I take
> Bonesplitter in response with Memnarch, should the creature be
> equipped? I feel it should not, but I guess that comes down to what
> "you" means. MTGO says it is equipped, the Adepts I asked say it is
> not.

Despite MTGO's occasional bugs, I suspect that it does know the rules
better than the adepts.

> On looking this up, I now feel I was wrong. Glossary for You:
> "For activated abilities, this is the player who played that ability".
>
> I'll just make sure of that and post this anyway, hope nobody minds.

As you suspected, your initial idea was wrong. The more complete rule:

,----[ Comp. Rules (http://www.wizards.com/magic/comprules) ]
| 217.6c Each spell has all the characteristics of the card associated
| with it. Each activated or triggered ability that's on the stack has
| the text of the ability that created it and no other
| characteristics. The controller of a spell is the person who played
| the spell. The controller of an activated ability is the player who
| played the ability. The controller of a triggered ability is the
| player who controlled the ability's source when it triggered.
`----

So, in Equip's "target creature you control", the "you" is the
controller of the ability--the person who played it. Therefore, the
creature gets equipped.

--
Peter C.
"Because IP only guarantees best effort delivery, loss of a carrier
can be tolerated." -- RFC 1149, "A Standard for the Transmission of IP
Datagrams on Avian Carriers"

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Daniel W. Johnson sez:

<<
>Andy Jakcsy <djaxmann@aol.computer> wrote:
>
>> (it's targeting a creature its controller does not
>> control)
>
>The original message said nothing about the creature changing
>controller.
>
>>

No, but it did say something about THE EQUIPMENT changing controller...

But, like I said, this isn't a great area of the rules for me. It could also
very well be that once the Equip ability goes on the stack, it's tied to the
player who played it...


----
"If President Bush is going to take credit for 'the invisble hand' [of
economics], then he's going to take the blame when 'the hand' gives him the
finger."
--From Fark.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Jeff Heikkinen <oh@s.if> wrote:

> Neither did Andy's answer.

Yes, it did.

Here is the full sentence:

"Because on resolution of the Bonesplitter's Equip ability, it sees its
target is no longer legal (it's targeting a creature its controller does
not control)."

The ability's controller controlled the target creature when the ability
was played. For that to no longer be true would require that the
control of the creature change, since an activated ability on the stack
remains controlled by whoever played it.

Control, Controller
A permanent's controller is whoever put it into play unless the spell or
ability that put the permanent into play states otherwise. Other effects
can later change a permanent's controller.
A spell or activated ability on the stack is controlled by whoever
played it. A triggered ability on the stack is controlled by the player
who controlled its source at the time it triggered.
Objects in zones other than in play or the stack have no
controller. If anything asks for the controller of an object that
doesn't have a controller, use its owner instead.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On Tue, 25 May 2004 21:02:04 GMT, Rahul Chandra <mathie_uw@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>If my opponent equips Bonesplitter to one of his creatures, and I take
>Bonesplitter in response with Memnarch, should the creature be equipped?

Sure; nothing -changes- that the Bonesplitter is attached to the creature,
here. Memnarch doesn't say "Unattach it from whatever permanent it is
attached to".

.....Oh, you're asking about stealing it -in response-. No, in that case...
because the Equip ability -targets- a creature you control. Since opponent
no longer controls that creature on resolution, the Equip ability gets
countered. (I originally thought you were stealing it afterwards and asking
if the Equipment stayed attached.)

> I feel it should not, but I guess that comes down to what "you" means.
> MTGO says it is equipped, the Adepts I asked say it is not.

Nothing _stops_ the Bonesplitter from being attached to
someone else's creature; you just can't get it there through use of its
own Equip ability. Magnetic Theft could get your Bonesplitter onto
opponent's creature, for example. But in this case, where the creature
changes control in response, that makes the target illegal of the Equip
ability, so it does get countered and the Bonesplitter remains where it was.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On 26 May 2004 17:14:31 -0400, David DeLaney <dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 May 2004 21:02:04 GMT, Rahul Chandra <mathie_uw@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>If my opponent equips Bonesplitter to one of his creatures, and I take
>>Bonesplitter in response with Memnarch, should the creature be equipped?
>
>Sure; nothing -changes- that the Bonesplitter is attached to the creature,
>here. Memnarch doesn't say "Unattach it from whatever permanent it is
>attached to".
>
>....Oh, you're asking about stealing it -in response-. No, in that case...
>because the Equip ability -targets- a creature you control. Since opponent
>no longer controls that creature on resolution, the Equip ability gets
>countered. (I originally thought you were stealing it afterwards and asking
>if the Equipment stayed attached.)

....And looking a third time - this was a fairly difficult-to-read-properly
question, for some reason - you stole the _Bonesplitter_, not the creature.

This doesn't change the controller of the _ability_, no; the ability is
still controlled by opponent, and the creature is still controlled by opponent,
so Equip _does_ move the Bonesplitter (which you currently control) onto the
creature opponent controls, here. Sorry for the confusion, don't know WHY that
question kept throwing me off into other similar questions.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On 26 May 2004 02:02:17 GMT, Andy Jakcsy <djaxmann@aol.computer> wrote:
>Rahul Chandra sez:
>>If my opponent equips Bonesplitter to one of his creatures, and I take
>>Bonesplitter in response with Memnarch, should the creature be >equipped?
>
>This'n's a cold answer (so I wouldn't take my own word on it), but I'd say no.
>Why? Because on resolution of the Bonesplitter's Equip ability, it sees its
>target is no longer legal (it's targeting a creature its controller does not
>control). So the 'splitter's Equip is countered, and it stays where it is.

Read again - I made the same mistake. He's stealing the Equipment, not
the creature. The Equip works fine in that case, since he doesn't manage
to change the controller of the Equip ability, already on the stack, this way.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Daniel W. Johnson, worshipped by llamas the world over, wrote...
> Jeff Heikkinen <oh@s.if> wrote:
>
> > Neither did Andy's answer.
>
> Yes, it did.
>
> Here is the full sentence:
>
> "Because on resolution of the Bonesplitter's Equip ability, it sees its
> target is no longer legal (it's targeting a creature its controller does
> not control)."

Yes, because the BONESPLITTER has changed controller.

(Snip stuff that I already know.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Jeff Heikkinen <oh@s.if> wrote:

> Yes, because the BONESPLITTER has changed controller.

Which is irrelevant.

402.6. Once activated or triggered, an ability exists independently of
its source as an ability on the stack. Destruction or removal of the
source after that time won't affect the ability. Note that some
abilities cause a source to do something (for example, "Prodigal
Sorcerer deals 1 damage to target creature or player") rather than the
ability doing anything directly. In these cases, any activated or
triggered ability that references information about the source will
check that information when the ability resolves, or will use the
source's last known information if it's no longer in play.

You, Your
The words "you" and "your" on an object refer to the object's controller
(or its owner if it has no controller). For static abilities, this is
the current controller of the object it's on. For activated abilities,
this is the player who played the ability. For triggered abilities, this
is the controller of the object when the ability triggered. See also
Controller, Owner.
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Daniel W. Johnson, worshipped by llamas the world over, wrote...
> Jeff Heikkinen <oh@s.if> wrote:
>
> > Yes, because the BONESPLITTER has changed controller.
>
> Which is irrelevant.
>

No, it really isn't. Please see David's reply.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Jeff Heikkinen <oh@s.if> wrote:

> No, it really isn't. Please see David's reply.

You mean this?

"This doesn't change the controller of the _ability_, no; the ability is
still controlled by opponent, and the creature is still controlled by
opponent, so Equip _does_ move the Bonesplitter (which you currently
control) onto the creature opponent controls, here."
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

David DeLaney sez:

<<
>>This'n's a cold answer (so I wouldn't take my own word on it), but I'd say
no.
>>Why? Because on resolution of the Bonesplitter's Equip ability, it sees its
>>target is no longer legal (it's targeting a creature its controller does not
>>control). So the 'splitter's Equip is countered, and it stays where it is.
>Read again - I made the same mistake. He's stealing the Equipment, not
>the creature.
>
>>

Everyone's thinking that parenthesized part is referring to the creature. The
it in both cases was referring to the 'splitter...


<<
> The Equip works fine in that case, since he doesn't manage
>to change the controller of the Equip ability, already on the stack, this
>way.
>>

....which I think I said was a possibility after reading more into it...so, I
was wrong in this case, but like I said, I wouldn't trust my own answer was
correct, so...


----
"If President Bush is going to take credit for 'the invisble hand' [of
economics], then he's going to take the blame when 'the hand' gives him the
finger."
--From Fark.com