The word "another" doesn't refer to any particular set of game elements by default. The effect that contains it has to identify some set of game elements that the word can then base its meaning from.
The closest comparison would be creatures' abilities that reference "other creatures" or "another creature". This works, though, since the ability's source is "this creature", and "other creatures" and "another creature" mean "creatures that are not this creature".
Using "another color" as written implies that Diplomacy is a color, which it's obviously not. The statement is pretty much nonsensical -- there can't be "another color", since Diplomacy itself isn't a color in the first place. "Whenever you cast a spell, if it doesn't share a color with ~, you gain 1 life" would be the wording that's used. It's not even that much longer, either.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How to use card tags (please use them for everybody's sanity)
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format Minimum deck size: 60 Maximum number of identical cards: 4 Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
The word "another" doesn't refer to any particular set of game elements by default. The effect that contains it has to identify some set of game elements that the word can then base its meaning from.
That's what I thought, but I was hoping I'd found some kind of technical loophole that basically forces the effect to default to the most sensible interpretation - namely referring to its own color. With that in mind, is the wording intuitive in that sense? And if it is, could the rules handle it?
That's what I thought, but I was hoping I'd found some kind of technical loophole that basically forces the effect to default to the most sensible interpretation - namely referring to its own color. With that in mind, is the wording intuitive in that sense? And if it is, could the rules handle it?
It's absolutely intuitive. I can't think of any other reasonable interpretation that a person could come up with, new or experienced.
109.3. An object’s characteristics are name, mana cost, color, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, abilities, power, toughness, loyalty, hand modifier, and life modifier. Objects can have some or all of these characteristics. Any other information about an object isn’t a characteristic. For example, characteristics don’t include whether a permanent is tapped, a spell’s target, an object’s owner or controller, what an Aura enchants, and so on. If an object specifies "another [characteristic]" without referring to any previously-chosen objects that match the characteristic, it refers to any objects that match the stated characteristic, excluding the object itself.
The text in blue would be the addition.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How to use card tags (please use them for everybody's sanity)
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format Minimum deck size: 60 Maximum number of identical cards: 4 Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
Diplomacy (Common)
W
Enchantment
Whenever you cast a spell of another color, you gain 1 life.
The closest comparison would be creatures' abilities that reference "other creatures" or "another creature". This works, though, since the ability's source is "this creature", and "other creatures" and "another creature" mean "creatures that are not this creature".
Using "another color" as written implies that Diplomacy is a color, which it's obviously not. The statement is pretty much nonsensical -- there can't be "another color", since Diplomacy itself isn't a color in the first place. "Whenever you cast a spell, if it doesn't share a color with ~, you gain 1 life" would be the wording that's used. It's not even that much longer, either.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format
Minimum deck size: 60
Maximum number of identical cards: 4
Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
That's what I thought, but I was hoping I'd found some kind of technical loophole that basically forces the effect to default to the most sensible interpretation - namely referring to its own color. With that in mind, is the wording intuitive in that sense? And if it is, could the rules handle it?
It's absolutely intuitive. I can't think of any other reasonable interpretation that a person could come up with, new or experienced.
109.3. An object’s characteristics are name, mana cost, color, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, abilities, power, toughness, loyalty, hand modifier, and life modifier. Objects can have some or all of these characteristics. Any other information about an object isn’t a characteristic. For example, characteristics don’t include whether a permanent is tapped, a spell’s target, an object’s owner or controller, what an Aura enchants, and so on. If an object specifies "another [characteristic]" without referring to any previously-chosen objects that match the characteristic, it refers to any objects that match the stated characteristic, excluding the object itself.
The text in blue would be the addition.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format
Minimum deck size: 60
Maximum number of identical cards: 4
Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
Whenever you cast a spell that is another color than CARDNAME, [effect].
Compare crudely with Adaptive Snapjaw.
Wonder if color identity will go mainstream.
Whenever you cast a spell of a different color identity than ~, gain 1 life.
........................