Yeah, I read about that and Vanishing. But I'm an OpalWave combo user in EDH and I need to have all my bases covered on rules interaction due to the sheer insanity that is the stack interaction with the cards.
If they would errata PWave to have Vanishing, oh how happy I'd be.
A discussion arose at the EDH table tonight concerning Parallax Wave and the Fading mechanic.
Basically, can Parallax Wave "live" on the board without any Fading counters? I've been under the impression that if I remove the last one (let's say, on my opponents turn) the card goes into exile, right then and there, before my next upkeep.
My opponent counters that it should stay on the board until my upkeep (even with zero Fading counters on it), as it only removes itself once it checks for whether or not I can remove a counter at the beginning of my upkeep.
Thanks for any help you can give to help me clear up the discussion.
Your first paragraph isn't telling me anything I didn't already understand about the card, mechanically. It's the wording I was having an issue with as when prompted to choose multiple "things" in a card for it to resolve, I get wary of it and meeting it's requirements for a legal cast.
The second statement helps to clarify, but I'm still wary that even though it doesn't have an an "only if" qualifier it also doesn't have a "choose up to x" out-clause. Because of cards like Decimate existing where without legal targets for each permanent listed it can't be cast, I need total clarity in case I have to argue the card's abilities.
Still, with that said, I guess because MoS lacks the word "target" with regards to the listed permanents I get to choose, it gets around all qualifiers, and does what I hoped it did.
We all know that wording is a killer in Magic. So, I just wanted to be sure.
I've cast it using the colors needed to be able to choose my opponents permanents for them...
However, I'm getting hung up on the wording as, usually, I'd want to see "up to one" in front of each permanent type listed, as without it, and unless I'm mistaken, I couldn't cast this unless every player (assuming it's an EDH game) had one of each permanent listed for it to be a legal cast.
I'd love to be sure in the fact that I'm wrong and that for WWBR I can sculpt my opponents boards... but Decimate is my basis of my fears wherein you have to be able to target each type for it to be legal. I know MoS doesn't need to target, but I just need to be assured that the lack of targetting gets around being able to choose 1 of each listed permanent.
Unblocked Wasitora, Nekoru Queen has been given doublestrike. So, it's effect triggers twice, if I have my rules down, correct?
I site Warren Instigator's Oracle ruling as proof. (But accept that the wording is a bit different as it can deal ANY damage, not just combat, and get the effect)
I have members arguing that combat damage is only being assigned twice, but resolving at the end of combat once.
I accept I could be wrong, but I'm 99% sure I'm right.
Does my opponent get control of the Duplicant? There was a discussion as to whether or not the fact that the Duplicant wasn't cast meant it wasn't a spell (in fact that was my arguing point, but even I was not wholly convinced I was right).
As always, I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong, so, please, educate me.
Should be... but there are a great many awesome enchantment combos that are outside his restriction. Parallax Wave & Opalescence for example. I use him as my G/W Enchantress General and I rarely play him. However, if I know there's an issue with high CMC, non-creature, spells on the horizon, he comes out. I can get rid of him if I need to.
Reverberate... I have such a soft spot in my heart for that card... I will fiercely defend its usefulness, while wholeheartedly understanding it's limitations. I love the possibilities the card represented. Great card, and my favorite, whatever you might thing about it.
If they would errata PWave to have Vanishing, oh how happy I'd be.
Seems off-flavor for something to not fade away when the last of its fading counters is removed...
Either way, thanks for the clarification.
Basically, can Parallax Wave "live" on the board without any Fading counters? I've been under the impression that if I remove the last one (let's say, on my opponents turn) the card goes into exile, right then and there, before my next upkeep.
My opponent counters that it should stay on the board until my upkeep (even with zero Fading counters on it), as it only removes itself once it checks for whether or not I can remove a counter at the beginning of my upkeep.
Thanks for any help you can give to help me clear up the discussion.
The second statement helps to clarify, but I'm still wary that even though it doesn't have an an "only if" qualifier it also doesn't have a "choose up to x" out-clause. Because of cards like Decimate existing where without legal targets for each permanent listed it can't be cast, I need total clarity in case I have to argue the card's abilities.
Still, with that said, I guess because MoS lacks the word "target" with regards to the listed permanents I get to choose, it gets around all qualifiers, and does what I hoped it did.
We all know that wording is a killer in Magic. So, I just wanted to be sure.
Thanks!
I've cast it using the colors needed to be able to choose my opponents permanents for them...
However, I'm getting hung up on the wording as, usually, I'd want to see "up to one" in front of each permanent type listed, as without it, and unless I'm mistaken, I couldn't cast this unless every player (assuming it's an EDH game) had one of each permanent listed for it to be a legal cast.
I'd love to be sure in the fact that I'm wrong and that for WWBR I can sculpt my opponents boards... but Decimate is my basis of my fears wherein you have to be able to target each type for it to be legal. I know MoS doesn't need to target, but I just need to be assured that the lack of targetting gets around being able to choose 1 of each listed permanent.
Also, "Lands" not "Mands"
Unblocked Wasitora, Nekoru Queen has been given doublestrike. So, it's effect triggers twice, if I have my rules down, correct?
I site Warren Instigator's Oracle ruling as proof. (But accept that the wording is a bit different as it can deal ANY damage, not just combat, and get the effect)
I have members arguing that combat damage is only being assigned twice, but resolving at the end of combat once.
I accept I could be wrong, but I'm 99% sure I'm right.
What say you, rules forum?
Does my opponent get control of the Duplicant? There was a discussion as to whether or not the fact that the Duplicant wasn't cast meant it wasn't a spell (in fact that was my arguing point, but even I was not wholly convinced I was right).
As always, I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong, so, please, educate me.
G and U backing massive mana reserves? I'm already piloting an Eldrazi heavy U/G Deck with Kruphix and it's solid.
He's super cheap and a great hate bear.
Mogis, God of Slaughter is probably a year old.
Krenko, Mob Boss since 2014.
Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind has been around, retired and resurrected a couple times, since 2013.
Arcum Dagsson has been built, retired, then rebuilt. It's only about a year old in its current iteration.
Gaddock Teeg is only 6 months old.
In retirement: Norin, Skullbriar, Mishra, Chainer, a bunch of short lived other builds.