Meddling Mage, Isochron Scepter, and Split cards

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
2 answers Last reply
More about meddling mage isochron scepter split cards
  1. 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
  2. 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.
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games