Exploration

[Guest]

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

Hi,

About Exploration gatherer says:

Oct 4, 2004 - You have to say when you put the land out that it is the
one you get because of Exploration. If you put out a Forest while
Exploration is in play, then Exploration leaves play (by being
destroyed or something), you can't put out another Forest claiming
that the first one was due to Exploration unless you said so when you
played that Forest.


I don't understand how you can play an additional land without having
played a land in the first place. And could you ever want the first
land not to be played becasue of Exploration? To me it sounds stupid
that you have to say the first land is because of Exploration.

And if you played 2 lands and then bounce and replay the Exploration,
can you play a third land? Because of this ruling I'd say yes although
I feel it should be no.


Exploration
{G}
Enchantment
You may play an additional land each of your turns.

--
David

 

[Guest]

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

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:37:18 +0200, David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl> wrote:
>About Exploration gatherer says:
>
>Oct 4, 2004 - You have to say when you put the land out that it is the
>one you get because of Exploration. If you put out a Forest while
>Exploration is in play, then Exploration leaves play (by being
>destroyed or something), you can't put out another Forest claiming
>that the first one was due to Exploration unless you said so when you
>played that Forest.
>
>I don't understand how you can play an additional land without having
>played a land in the first place.

Exploration doesn't say "If you have already played a land this turn, you
may play an additional land". Doing it this way eliminates the confusion
that arises in the situation above if you did NOT say whether the Forest
you played was due to Exploration or not. Either you're using your special
one-per-turn your-main-phase action to lay the land, or you're using
Exploration... and nothing on Exploration says you have to have used the
"normal" special action _first_ to Turn On the power of Exploration, or
anything like that.

>And could you ever want the first
>land not to be played becasue of Exploration?

Sure. I've learned long since never to ask "Is there some REASON you might
want to do it this way?" because in Magic the answer is just about always
"Yes, due to (odd combination of cards)".

>To me it sounds stupid
>that you have to say the first land is because of Exploration.
>
>And if you played 2 lands and then bounce and replay the Exploration,
>can you play a third land? Because of this ruling I'd say yes although
>I feel it should be no.

Yes, you can. The Exploration that comes into play the second time is NOT
THE SAME ENCHANTMENT. It's the same -card-, but the permanent it becomes
has no memory of ever being in play before (or in your hand, even), and
has no idea that a previous incarnation of it, represented by the same card,
allowed its "once per turn" power to be used.

In other words, Magic tries as hard as it can to NOT have you have to keep
track of where a given card has been, previously, or what it did while it
was there. This is an example of that; putting the card into play again
gives you a "new" Exploration, one whose ability hasn't been used yet.

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?)

David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl> writes:
> I don't understand how you can play an additional land without having
> played a land in the first place.

Well, I agree that the wording could be a bit clearer, since
"additional" does somewhat imply that in order for it to be
additional, there had to be a normal one that turn. That's not what
the rules, say, though:

,----[ Magic Comp. Rules <http://www.wizards.com/magic/comprules> ]
| 212.6b A player may play only one land card during each of his or
| her own turns. Effects may allow the playing of additional lands;
| playing an additional land in this way doesn't prevent a player from
| taking the normal action of playing a land. Players can't begin to
| play a land that an effect prohibits from being played. As a player
| plays a land, he or she announces whether he or she is using the
| once-per-turn action of playing a land. If not, he or she specifies
| which effect is allowing the additional land play. Effects may also
| allow you to "put" lands into play. This isn't the same as "playing
| a land" and doesn't count as the player's one land played during his
| or her turn.
`----

Perhaps it'd be clearer if cards like Exploration just said that "You
may play a land on each of your turns.", but that might be even more
confusing, since then it just seems like it's stating a rule that's
already true. So the "additional" is just to make it clear that it
doesn't interfere with the normal land-playing ability.

> And could you ever want the first land not to be played becasue of
> Exploration? To me it sounds stupid that you have to say the first
> land is because of Exploration.

I really can't think offhand of a scenario. But if you have more than
one extra-land-playing ability (such as say, Azusa, Lost but Seeking
in addition to Exploration), then it makes sense that you'd need to
declare when playing a land which effect is letting you do so. And
then, if you don't make such a declaration, it seems like a reasonable
assumption that it must have been your "normal" land drop. So when
there's any chance of confusion at all, it's really the best idea to
be as clear as possible about what you're doing.

> And if you played 2 lands and then bounce and replay the Exploration,
> can you play a third land? Because of this ruling I'd say yes although
> I feel it should be no.

Well, unlike "maximum hand size", there isn't a concept of "maximum
lands-per-turn" that's initially 1 and gets changed via effects. Maybe
the effects would be clearer if they did it that way, but maybe
not. So, just like any other static ability, each one on each
permanent applies separately.

--
Peter C.

 

[Guest]

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

Peter Cooper Jr. <pete@cooperjr.name> wrote:
>David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl> writes:
>> And could you ever want the first land not to be played becasue of
>> Exploration? To me it sounds stupid that you have to say the first
>> land is because of Exploration.
>
>I really can't think offhand of a scenario. But if you have more than
>one extra-land-playing ability (such as say, Azusa, Lost but Seeking
>in addition to Exploration), then it makes sense that you'd need to
>declare when playing a land which effect is letting you do so.

Oh, I remember - I knew there was one. When you also have a Gaea's Touch out,
and you want to play your Forest _first_, play the Wild Growth on one of
your existing lands to get it out of your hand, let the Aspect of Wolf on
your Old Man get bigger, steal opponent's Nightmare with it and let it die,
attack with your Maro, paying for your Cowed By Wisdom that got moved onto
it, while it's still big enough that blocking it would kill the blocker, THEN
play the Swamp through the Exploration and the Island through your normal land
drop or vice-versa.

(I didn't say it wouldn't be CONFUSING...)

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 Sun, 28 Aug 2005, David DeLaney wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:37:18 +0200, David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl> wrote:
>> About Exploration gatherer says:
>>
>> And if you played 2 lands and then bounce and replay the Exploration,
>> can you play a third land? Because of this ruling I'd say yes although
>> I feel it should be no.
>
> Yes, you can. The Exploration that comes into play the second time is NOT
> THE SAME ENCHANTMENT. It's the same -card-, but the permanent it becomes
> has no memory of ever being in play before (or in your hand, even), and
> has no idea that a previous incarnation of it, represented by the same card,
> allowed its "once per turn" power to be used.

I know, I should have said "destroy Exploration and play another one"
to make that clear but that's not my point.

> In other words, Magic tries as hard as it can to NOT have you have to keep
> track of where a given card has been, previously, or what it did while it
> was there. This is an example of that; putting the card into play again
> gives you a "new" Exploration, one whose ability hasn't been used yet.

You make it sound as if it has an activated ability with "play only
once each turn" but it doesn't. It has a static ability.

--
David

 

[Guest]

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

David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl> wrote:
>On Sun, 28 Aug 2005, David DeLaney wrote:
>> In other words, Magic tries as hard as it can to NOT have you have to keep
>> track of where a given card has been, previously, or what it did while it
>> was there. This is an example of that; putting the card into play again
>> gives you a "new" Exploration, one whose ability hasn't been used yet.
>
>You make it sound as if it has an activated ability with "play only
>once each turn" but it doesn't. It has a static ability.

Yes, it does. Which has a very similar restriction: it allows you to do
something you could not normally do. But only once each turn. Much like
Arcane Laboratory but turned around; Arcane Laboratory allows a spell to
be played, but only if it's the first spell you've played that turn, otherwise
it says "You can't play spells". And it is doing this with a static ability.

To allow more than one additional land to be played in a turn, Exploration
would have to say so, either with a number (Azusa,_Lost but Seeking) or
by saying you had no limit (Fastbond). Since it only says you may play
one additional one, that's as far as its static ability's effect stretches;
if you've already played a land through its static ability, the effect doesn't
allow you to do it again that turn.

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 Sun, 28 Aug 2005, Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:

> David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl> writes:
>
>> And if you played 2 lands and then bounce and replay the Exploration,
>> can you play a third land? Because of this ruling I'd say yes although
>> I feel it should be no.
>
> Well, unlike "maximum hand size", there isn't a concept of "maximum
> lands-per-turn" that's initially 1 and gets changed via effects. Maybe
> the effects would be clearer if they did it that way, but maybe
> not. So, just like any other static ability, each one on each
> permanent applies separately.

Yes, that's the way the card's text comes to me. I know the rules say
otherwise but "you may play an additional land" sounds to me as "you
were allowed to play one so now you can play two". When you destroy
it you aren't allow to play an additional land anymore so it's one
again. Then when you play another Exploration you can play an
additional (a second) land again. But if you already played a second
land that doesn't help you.

I know the rule say something else but that's a pity.

--
David

 

[Guest]

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

Indeed. Consider this weirdish scenario.

I play a land announcing it's from Exploration. I haven't played a
land yet but I am somehow playing an "additional" land.

Later, my Exploration is Disenchanted/Scoured/bounced/destroyed by
Katrina. Now the static continuous effect is gone, goner, gonest.
It's off the twig, kicked the bucket, shuffled off this mortal coil,
run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile. It's an
ex-effect! And I've already played a land this turn, yet some
mysterious how I get to play another.....

James, L2, with apologies to Monty Python....

 

[Guest]

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

David DeLaney wrote:
> Peter Cooper Jr. <pete@cooperjr.name> wrote:
> >David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl> writes:
> >> And could you ever want the first land not to be played becasue of
> >> Exploration? To me it sounds stupid that you have to say the first
> >> land is because of Exploration.
> >
> >I really can't think offhand of a scenario. But if you have more than
> >one extra-land-playing ability (such as say, Azusa, Lost but Seeking
> >in addition to Exploration), then it makes sense that you'd need to
> >declare when playing a land which effect is letting you do so.
>
> Oh, I remember - I knew there was one. When you also have a Gaea's Touch out,
> and you want to play your Forest _first_, play the Wild Growth on one of
> your existing lands to get it out of your hand, let the Aspect of Wolf on
> your Old Man get bigger, steal opponent's Nightmare with it and let it die,
> attack with your Maro, paying for your Cowed By Wisdom that got moved onto
> it, while it's still big enough that blocking it would kill the blocker, THEN
> play the Swamp through the Exploration and the Island through your normal
> land drop or vice-versa.
>
> (I didn't say it wouldn't be CONFUSING...)

?? Confusing indeed.

First: in the Gaea's Touch case, there are much simpler reasons than
yours.
E.g. you might want to play your Forest first because the other land
you
want to play is Jungle Basin.

Second: I think the question was "Is there ever an advantage to using
your **normal land drop** rather than your Exploration land drop?"
And the answer is yes - when Word of Command is around!

It's the start of your turn.
You have 2 life with two Propagandas, Dark Heart of the Wood,
Exploration
and a Crazed Goblin enchanted with Contaminated Bond. (And no lands).
In hand you have two Forests and a Simplify.
Your opponent has 5 life with a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher, Birds of
Paradise (tapped) and Reveille Squad in play, and you just saw him
return
Word of Command to his hand.

You can't stop your Crazed Goblin attacking. When it does, you will
lose 3
life, then it will trigger his Reveille Squad and give him the extra
mana he
needs to play Word of Command.
Then he'll force you to play a land and you'll die.

How do you stay alive?

--
Laurie Cheers

 

[Guest]

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

Laurie Cheers wrote:
> It's the start of your turn.
> You have 2 life with 2 Propagandas, Dark Heart of the Wood, Exploration
> and a Crazed Goblin enchanted with Contaminated Bond. (And no lands).
> In hand you have two Forests and a Simplify.
>
> Your opponent has 5 life with a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher, Birds of
> Paradise (tapped) and Reveille Squad in play, and you just saw him
> return Word of Command to his hand.

Drat, it doesn't work.
Ok, the Crazed Goblin is enchanted with Insolence.

======

Actually, a more elegant version:

You have 2 life. In play you have a Dark Heart of the Wood, Exploration
and a Scryb Sprites enchanted with Insolence. (and no lands.)
In hand, you have two Forests and a Simplify.

Your opponent has 1 life. In play he has a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher,
Utopia Tree (tapped) and a Reveille Squad. You just saw him return Word
of Command to his hand.

It's the beginning of your turn. Win the game this turn.

--
Laurie Cheers

 

[Guest]

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

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Laurie Cheers wrote:

> It's the start of your turn.
> You have 2 life with two Propagandas, Dark Heart of the Wood,
> Exploration
> and a Crazed Goblin enchanted with Contaminated Bond. (And no lands).
> In hand you have two Forests and a Simplify.
> Your opponent has 5 life with a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher, Birds of
> Paradise (tapped) and Reveille Squad in play, and you just saw him
> return
> Word of Command to his hand.
>
> You can't stop your Crazed Goblin attacking. When it does, you will
> lose 3
> life, then it will trigger his Reveille Squad and give him the extra
> mana he
> needs to play Word of Command.
> Then he'll force you to play a land and you'll die.
>
> How do you stay alive?

You let the Zo-Zu trigger go on the stack and sacrifice the Forest to
your Heart of the Wood in response. I must be missing something.
But I believe you're right there is a scenario containing Word of
Command.

--
David

 

[Guest]

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

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Laurie Cheers wrote:

> Actually, a more elegant version:
>
> You have 2 life. In play you have a Dark Heart of the Wood, Exploration
> and a Scryb Sprites enchanted with Insolence. (and no lands.)
> In hand, you have two Forests and a Simplify.
>
> Your opponent has 1 life. In play he has a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher,
> Utopia Tree (tapped) and a Reveille Squad. You just saw him return Word
> of Command to his hand.
>
> It's the beginning of your turn. Win the game this turn.

Play a Forest, tap it for mana and sacrifice it for 3 life in response
to the Zo-Zu trigger. Play the Simplify and sacrifice the Insolence.
Then attack with the Scryb Sprites. I missing something again.

--
David

 

[Guest]

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

Oh, rats, the Insolence is an enchantment... ok:

You have 2 life. In play you have a Dark Heart of the Wood, Exploration
and a Scryb Sprites enchanted with (your) Treacherous Link. (and no
lands.)
In hand, you have a Forest, an Island and a Simplify.

Your opponent has 1 life. In play he has a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher,
two Caltrops,
Utopia Tree (tapped) and a Reveille Squad.
You just saw him return Word of Command to his hand.

Your turn has just started. Kill your opponent this turn.

 

[Guest]

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

Jeff Heikkinen wrote:
> From Word of Command's rulings (emphasis mine):
>
> Oct 4, 2004 - You can make them play anything that they could legally
> play if the spell stack was empty. So a Sorcery spell can be played IF
> IT IS THEIR MAIN PHASE, and so on. Since they do get to play the spell
> as if the spell stack were empty, it is possible to make them play a
> Sorcery when the spell stack is not actually empty.
>
> So your opponent can't make you drop a land during combat, which is the
> only way this example works as written.

Oh, yeah - the Scryb Sprites will kill him immediately. Bah.
I was aware of that ruling, though; the original intent was that he'd
make
you drop a land during your postcombat main phase.


All right, the simplified final situation is...

You have 4 life. In play you have Mox Ruby, Exploration and Exalted
Dragon.
In hand you have Forest, Mountain, Simplify and Reckess Abandon.

Your opponent has 9 life. In play he has a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher,
Utopia
Tree (tapped) and a Reveille Squad.
The only card in his hand is Word of Command.

> For the example to work, you actually want to simplify it a bit; untap
> the Utopia Tree (or just replace it with any untapped land that can give
> your opponent black mana without damaging him), and you can get rid of
> the Reville Squad and the Simplify too. THEN the order matters.

Well, no, in that case you're just dead.

i.e: Your Main phase begins, and you get priority.
If you pass now, your opponent plays Word of Command; you can't do
anything in response, so he forces you to play your Island. You can't
do anything in
response to Zo-Zu's trigger, either, so you die.

If you play your Forest, Zo-Zu triggers and you get priority again.
You have to use Dark Heart of the Wood now (otherwise Zo-Zu kills you),
and
then you get priority again.
Now you have to pass, so your opponent plays Word of Command, and you
die as
above.

--
Laurie Cheers

 

[Guest]

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

One of the voices in my head - or was it Laurie Cheers? - just said...
> Oh, rats, the Insolence is an enchantment... ok:
>
> You have 2 life. In play you have a Dark Heart of the Wood, Exploration
> and a Scryb Sprites enchanted with (your) Treacherous Link. (and no
> lands.)
> In hand, you have a Forest, an Island and a Simplify.
>
> Your opponent has 1 life. In play he has a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher,
> two Caltrops,
> Utopia Tree (tapped) and a Reveille Squad.
> You just saw him return Word of Command to his hand.
>
> Your turn has just started. Kill your opponent this turn.

From Word of Command's rulings (emphasis mine):

Oct 4, 2004 - You can make them play anything that they could legally
play if the spell stack was empty. So a Sorcery spell can be played IF
IT IS THEIR MAIN PHASE, and so on. Since they do get to play the spell
as if the spell stack were empty, it is possible to make them play a
Sorcery when the spell stack is not actually empty.

So your opponent can't make you drop a land during combat, which is the
only way this example works as written.

For the example to work, you actually want to simplify it a bit; untap
the Utopia Tree (or just replace it with any untapped land that can give
your opponent black mana without damaging him), and you can get rid of
the Reville Squad and the Simplify too. THEN the order matters.

 

[RisseR]

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

It seems to me that the ruling muddies the waters. For example, you
could treat the number of lands you can play per turn as a value that
is increased or decreased by these static effects, much like Spellbook
or the Misers affect hand size.

Then, if you have Exploration in play, you can play 2 lands per turn.
If you play one land, then move on to Combat and someone zaps your
Exploration, the static effect disappears and you can only play one
land per turn. So, you missed your opportunity, which seems natural to
me.

Currently though, if I say the first land is from Exploration, and it
gets zapped, I can still lay my normal land, which I suppose makes
sense, but is kinda weird.

I think the problem with my solution lies in something like Gaea's
Touch where only one type of land can be played additionally, but I
think it could be worked out.

In any case, that's not what the rules say, so the discussion is mostly
moot.

However, I did see that Summer Bloom:
***
Summer Bloom {1G}
Sorcery
Visions Uncommon
- You may play up to three additional lands this turn.
***

is back in 9th, and has a different ruling (albeit from the exact same
date): Oct 4, 2004 - This spell increases the number of lands you can
play in a turn. The land cards are played as you would normally play
lands.

There's no mention of having to say which land is from which effect.

So... I don't really know where I'm going, except to try and further
dig up scenarios where it makes a difference.

Anyway,
Peter

 

[Guest]

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

One of the voices in my head - or was it Laurie Cheers? - just said...
> Jeff Heikkinen wrote:
> > From Word of Command's rulings (emphasis mine):
> >
> > Oct 4, 2004 - You can make them play anything that they could legally
> > play if the spell stack was empty. So a Sorcery spell can be played IF
> > IT IS THEIR MAIN PHASE, and so on. Since they do get to play the spell
> > as if the spell stack were empty, it is possible to make them play a
> > Sorcery when the spell stack is not actually empty.
> >
> > So your opponent can't make you drop a land during combat, which is the
> > only way this example works as written.
>
> Oh, yeah - the Scryb Sprites will kill him immediately. Bah.
> I was aware of that ruling, though; the original intent was that he'd
> make
> you drop a land during your postcombat main phase.
>
>
> All right, the simplified final situation is...
>
> You have 4 life. In play you have Mox Ruby, Exploration and Exalted
> Dragon.
> In hand you have Forest, Mountain, Simplify and Reckess Abandon.
>
> Your opponent has 9 life. In play he has a Swamp, Zo-Zu the Punisher,
> Utopia
> Tree (tapped) and a Reveille Squad.
> The only card in his hand is Word of Command.
>
> > For the example to work, you actually want to simplify it a bit; untap
> > the Utopia Tree (or just replace it with any untapped land that can give
> > your opponent black mana without damaging him), and you can get rid of
> > the Reville Squad and the Simplify too. THEN the order matters.
>
> Well, no, in that case you're just dead.
>
> i.e: Your Main phase begins, and you get priority.
> If you pass now, your opponent plays Word of Command; you can't do
> anything in response, so he forces you to play your Island. You can't
> do anything in
> response to Zo-Zu's trigger, either, so you die.
>
> If you play your Forest, Zo-Zu triggers and you get priority again.
> You have to use Dark Heart of the Wood now (otherwise Zo-Zu kills you),
> and
> then you get priority again.
> Now you have to pass, so your opponent plays Word of Command, and you
> die as
> above.

Yes, you do need the Simplify.