Meddling Mage, Isochron Scepter, and Split cards

[Guest]

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

Ok, here's the simplified setup:

Player A has an Isochron Scepter in play imprinted with Fire/Ice.

Player B plays Meddling Mage naming "Fire/Ice".

Does this prevent Player A from using the Scepter's ability? The
scepter allows you to play a copy of the named imprinted card without
paying its mana cost. Is their any distinction between playing the
card and playing a "copy" of the card that would allow you to still use
the scepter?

Thank-you,
Leon

 

[Guest]

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

leonworkman_2000@yahoo.com writes:
> Player A has an Isochron Scepter in play imprinted with Fire/Ice.
>
> Player B plays Meddling Mage naming "Fire/Ice".
>
> Does this prevent Player A from using the Scepter's ability?

No. (Technicality: Even if the Mage prevented the copy from being
played, the Scepter's ability could still be played, even if it
wouldn't do anything useful.)

> The scepter allows you to play a copy of the named imprinted card
> without paying its mana cost. Is their any distinction between
> playing the card and playing a "copy" of the card that would allow
> you to still use the scepter?

,----[ Oracle ]
| Meddling Mage
| {W}{U}
| Creature -- Wizard
| 2/2
| As Meddling Mage comes into play, name a nonland card.
| The named card can't be played.
`----

The Meddling Mage explicitly refers to cards. A copy-of-a-card made by
the Scepter isn't a card, and thus the Mage doesn't stop it.

If it were worded "The named spell can't be played" or something, then
the Mage would stop it. (Although then again, as a spell it would just
be named Fire or be named Ice, and not Fire/Ice. So it might depend on
if a "can't be played" restriction gets checked before the selection
of which half to use. So I'm less sure about this now.) But it's not
worded that way, possibly for this reason, so it's a rather
theoretical discussion.

> Thank-you,

You're very welcome. Please post again if you have any more questions.

--
Peter C.
A chicken is an egg's way of producing more eggs

 

[Guest]

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

leonworkman_2000@yahoo.com <leonworkman_2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Ok, here's the simplified setup:
>
>Player A has an Isochron Scepter in play imprinted with Fire/Ice.

Okay, He can play either half after making the copy.

>Player B plays Meddling Mage naming "Fire/Ice".

Now he can still play either half after making the copy... because Meddling
Mage prevents the named -card- from being played. The copy is not a card. (The
card sits in the RFG zone, and the copy is also made in that zone and played
from there onto the stack, but the copy's not itself a card.)

>Does this prevent Player A from using the Scepter's ability?

No. To stop A from using the Scepter's _ability_, something on the order of
"The chosen player can't play activated abilities of artifacts" would be
needed - Abeyance, City of Solitude, Damping Matrix, Hand to Hand, Null Rod,
or Stasis Cocoon could all cause this (some only during certain time periods).

A can use the Scepter's ability regardless of what _spells_ or _cards_ A is
able to play. When the ability resolves, A may make a copy; if A does, A must
then attempt to play the copy without paying its mana cost. Effects that stop
a -card- with that name from being played will not stop this; effects that
stop a -spell- with that name from being played ... well, this gets to the
next complication: once the split card is a spell, its name is either Fire or
Ice. Not both. So saying the spell "Fire/Ice" could not be played doesn't
exactly stop you from choosing to play the Fire side and putting that side of
the copy on the stack. (Which is a good reason why Meddling Mage doesn't say
"spells", it says "cards".)

> The scepter allows you to play a copy of the named imprinted card without
>paying its mana cost. Is their any distinction between playing the
>card and playing a "copy" of the card that would allow you to still use
>the scepter?

Why, yes; no actual -card- is involved with the copy. (Because of this, if
you CAN'T play the copy for some reason after making it - no legal target is
the most common problem - it Evaporates Completely once the Scepter ability
is done resolving.) A copy of a card is not itself a card. (And a card that
becomes a copy of something else will still be a card, even if it's a Clone
copying a Wasp token, for example.)

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.