I'm trying to understand when Ranar the Ever-Watchful's last ability will and won't trigger.
1) Ranar's last ability triggers off of Foretelling cards like Doomskar or Suspending cards like Mox Tantalite, as those abilities have you exile the card from your hand. But unless I'm mistaken (which I'd love to be) cards like Ephemerate with Rebound would not trigger Ranar's last ability because the card is exiled as the spell resolves, ie exiled from the stack, not from hand. Is this correct? In a similar vein, spells with Madness that are discarded are discarded into exile, so they do go to exile from the hand...but is this considered a discard from hand that happens to end up in exile, or would it be treated as an exile from hand?
(side note: what would be the correct forum in which to ask what other mechanics exist where you exile cards from hand, as I'm not familiar with some of the older mechanics?)
2) I've heard that mixing Renar with Rest in Peace and Blasting Station creates an infinite damage combo, where the player who controls all three sacrifices a Spirit token (or something else to start this off, either of which is exiled thanks to Rest in Peace's replacement effect) to pay for the Station's activated ability, since a permanent was exiled from the field Renar creates a token, the Station untaps since a creature ETB, the Station deals 1 damage, repeat). This, along with cards such as Swords to Plowshares, Play of the Game, or Ephemerate intuitively make sense to me, as Ranar's controller controls the spell/ability causing the exile. But I'm unclear of if it's specifically the Blasting Station or the Rest in Peace that's exiling the token. In this combo it doesn't really matter, as every permanent and ability involved is controlled by Renar's controller... but what what if they're not? Which of the following situations would trigger Ranar's last ability, and in general what is the origin of the exile?:
a) Player A controls Renar the Ever-Watchful and Rest in Peace, then a source Player A controls destroys/deals lethal damage to/forces a sacrifice of Player B's creature or permanent (that doesn't have indestructible). (If the exile is done by Player B (as an SBA?), Ranar's ability doesn't trigger)
b) Player A controls Renar the Ever-Watchful and Rest in Peace, then a source controlled by Player B destroys/deals lethal damage to/sacrifices Player B's creature or permanent (that doesn't have indestructible). (If the exile is done by the source controlled by Player B or by Player B, Renar's ability doesn't trigger)
c) Player A controls Renar the Ever-Watchful and Rest in Peace, then a source controlled by Player B destroys/deals lethal damage to/forces a sacrifice of Player A's creature or permanent (that doesn't have indestructible). (If the exile is done by the source controlled by Player B, Renar's ability doesn't trigger)
d) Player A controls Renar the Ever-Watchful, while Player B controls Rest in Peace. A source controlled by Player A destroys/deals lethal damage to Player B's creature or permanent (that doesn't have indestructible). (If the exile is done by Rest in Peace (which is controlled by Player B) Ranar's ability doesn't trigger)
So, when it comes to replacement effects, what is the source of the exile?
1. Ranar's last ability won't trigger when Ephemerate is exiled as it resolves (the same is true for Time Spiral or Burning Wish), since the spell is neither a card in hand nor a permanent (C.R. 110.1, 112.1). But if you discard a card due to madness, you discard it into exile, so Ranar's last ability will trigger since the card was exiled from your hand (recall that madness means, in part, "that player discards it, but exiles it instead of putting it into their graveyard" [C.R. 702.35a]).
2. It's the player controlling Rest in Peace who exiles the creature, no matter who sacrifices that creature with Blasting Station (see also C.R. 109.5). (Recall that "exile" is a keyword action; see C.R. 701.11a.) Ranar's last ability will trigger in this case, however, only if "a spell or ability you control exiles" that creature; this generally means the creature is exiled while the spell or ability is resolving (even if it's exiled instead of going to another zone), but (in accordance with a statement by the rules manager) not while you're paying the cost of a spell or ability such as Blasting Station's first ability. See comment 13 below.
If you control Rest in Peace (as in scenarios (a) through (c)) and any card or token (controlled or owned by any player) would go to any graveyard by any means (whether by destruction, sacrifice, or otherwise), you exile that card or token instead. (Thus, for example, if multiple creatures, whether controlled by one player or several, are destroyed due to combat damage at the same time, then instead of them going to the graveyard, you exile all those creatures instead.) However Ranar's last ability doesn't care who exiles any permanents or cards.
Note also that it's not damage, by itself, that destroys a creature, but rather a state-based action could do so (C.R. 120.5, 704.5g-h).
EDIT: Edited to add note about damage, after comment 9 was posted.
EDIT (Mar. 15): Edited.
EDIT (Apr. 22): See comment 10.
EDIT (May 1): One rule was renumbered with Strixhaven.
EDIT (Aug. 14): Edited, including to conform to updated text in Modern Horizons 2.
EDIT (Aug. 15): Edited slightly.
EDIT (Aug. 4, 2023): Correctness edit.
EDIT (Aug. 5, 2023): Clarification.
Got it. So Rest in Peace prompts it's controller to exile the cards/permanents. It never explicitly uses the word "you", but it implies it in the phrasing. I wasn't sure if that was the case or if it basically just changed the behavior of whatever was sending the card/permanent to the graveyard, but sounds like everything else behaves as I expected. Thanks!
Also, if an opponent were to copy my Rest in Peace with say a Mirrormade or play their own Rest in Peace, they would function in timestamp order, so I would still be exiling everything because by the time the newer Rest in Peace tried to exile anything those things would already be heading to exile from my RIP. Correct?
Also, if an opponent were to copy my Rest in Peace with say a Mirrormade or play their own Rest in Peace, they would function in timestamp order, so I would still be exiling everything because by the time the newer Rest in Peace tried to exile anything those things would already be heading to exile from my RIP. Correct?
Replacement effects don't use timestamps. The affected person or controller of the affected object chooses the order in which to apply replacement effects. You choose to apply your own rest in peace which means your cards aren't going to the graveyard so you can't apply your opponent's rest in peace.
Also, if an opponent were to copy my Rest in Peace with say a Mirrormade or play their own Rest in Peace, they would function in timestamp order, so I would still be exiling everything because by the time the newer Rest in Peace tried to exile anything those things would already be heading to exile from my RIP. Correct?
That would be your decision for your stuff and your opponent's decision for their stuff; timestamp order is irrelevant.
616. Interaction of Replacement and/or Prevention Effects
616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object’s controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Why bother with mere rulings when so many answers can be found in the Rules?
Got it. So Rest in Peace prompts it's controller to exile the cards/permanents. It never explicitly uses the word "you", but it implies it in the phrasing. I wasn't sure if that was the case or if it basically just changed the behavior of whatever was sending the card/permanent to the graveyard, but sounds like everything else behaves as I expected. Thanks!
Also, if an opponent were to copy my Rest in Peace with say a Mirrormade or play their own Rest in Peace, they would function in timestamp order, so I would still be exiling everything because by the time the newer Rest in Peace tried to exile anything those things would already be heading to exile from my RIP. Correct?
Not necessarily, in fact. If multiple players each control Rest in Peace, the effects of those Rest in Peace permanents would each change whether the same card or token goes to a graveyard. In that case, the controller of the object that would go to the graveyard (or its owner if it has no controller) chooses which Rest in Peace effect to apply (C.R. 616.1).
For example, say you and your opponent each control Rest in Peace. When your opponent then sacrifices a creature, it would go to the graveyard, but since your opponent controls that creature, your opponent can choose to apply the Rest in Peace they control so that they would exile that creature instead, rather than you.
Edit: So, I found the Twitter statement from the Rules Manager, so I'm clear that this is in fact how Rest in Peace works, but...
Edit 2: Oops...typo fix on 119.3f
I'm still trying to understand how replacement effects work in general. I think my confusion boils down to how I'm supposed to understand the word "replace" in [CR 614.1] "Such effects watch for a particular event that would happen and completely or partially replace that event with a different event."? Specifically, does this mean the replacement effect is akin to a text change where the original effect is still active only with its concluding event having been swapped out (bad analogy time: like putting a new engine in an old car), or does it mean that a new effect/event is introduced that is itself a driving force (like trading in one car for another...oh god the puns...)? Similarly, in [CR 614.6] "If an event is replaced, it never happens. A modified event occurs instead[...]", and calling it a modified event makes it sound like the original effect/event is still running, just with a different end result...
Additionally, what are the rules that indicate this? A lot of people seem to think the former (I stumbled across a thread on [REDACTED] asking my same original question, but which led to VERY different conclusions by the respondents), but from what has been discussed in this thread so far it would seem to be the latter.
I did stumble across this thread re:Rain of Gore that asserts that the card whose ability generates a replacement effect is the "cause" of the events that come of that effect, but I'm still unclear on where the actual justification for that assertion is found from the CR...
Side note, I've not been able to find [CR 119.3f] ANYWHERE. What is this? Is it from an old numbering or version of the rules?
I did stumble across this thread re:Rain of Gore that asserts that the card whose ability generates a replacement effect is the "cause" of the events that come of that effect, but I'm still unclear on where the actual justification for that assertion is found from the CR...
Side note, I've not been able to find [CR 119.1f] ANYWHERE. What is this? Is it from an old numbering or version of the rules?
This is a different matter from the case at hand here. There, that's because Rain of Gore cares about a "spell or ability" "caus[ing]" something to happen (see also Pure Intentions, Library of Leng [C.R. 108.1], Panharmonicon, and Firesong and Sunspeaker, which likewise use the word "cause", and see also this thread). In contrast, Ranar's last ability doesn't use the word "cause" when describing the event it cares about (see also Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind), and neither does Rest in Peace.
You probably mean C.R. 119.3f, rather than C.R. 119.1f. It was renumbered in the meantime to C.R. 120.3f.
In the case at hand here, Rest in Peace cares about whether a "card or token would be put into a graveyard from anywhere". Each time that would happen, the controller of Rest in Peace is told to "exile [that card or token] instead". Any effects of a spell or ability are still present, but due to a replacement effect, it may produce different events than normal.
For example, say you control Rest in Peace and an opponent sacrifices a creature. Normally, when a player sacrifices a permanent, they put it into its owner's graveyard (C.R. 701.17a). However, Rest in Peace changes how it works. Now, instead of the opponent putting the creature into its owner's graveyard, you exile that creature instead. (This is effectively as though C.R. 701.17a's first sentence were "To sacrifice a permanent, its controller has the controller of Rest in Peace exile it from the battlefield." instead of its usual text.) Even so, however, the opponent has still "sacrificed" that creature for the purposes of abilities that care (e.g., from Savra, Queen of the Golgari). See also Remand, C.R. 700.1, and C.R. 118.11.
I'm still trying to understand how replacement effects work in general. I think my confusion boils down to how I'm supposed to understand the word "replace" in [CR 614.1] "Such effects watch for a particular event that would happen and completely or partially replace that event with a different event."? Specifically, does this mean the replacement effect is akin to a text change where the original effect is still active only with its concluding event having been swapped out (bad analogy time: like putting a new engine in an old car), or does it mean that a new effect/event is introduced that is itself a driving force (like trading in one car for another...oh god the puns...)? Similarly, in [CR 614.6] "If an event is replaced, it never happens. A modified event occurs instead[...]", and calling it a modified event makes it sound like the original effect/event is still running, just with a different end result...
It's like the difference between an original plan and what actually happens. Think of a road detour while driving from point A to point B. That specific part of the original plan (driving along the now-closed road) isn't "still running" in any meaningful sense, but you are still traveling from the original point A to the original point B.
With the release of Strixhaven: School of Mages, the Oracle text of Ranar changed in a manner that materially affects this question.
Specifically, on Ranar's last ability, the text "Whenever you exile..." was changed to "Whenever a spell or ability you control exiles...".
However, this text change made the behavior of Ranar unclear in the face of replacement effects that exile permanents, such as with Rest in Peace, as well as static abilities such as madness (C.R. 702.34a). This is especially since at the time of this writing, the only abilities that the comprehensive rules speak of as having a controller are activated and triggered abilities on the stackactivated abilities on the stack, mana abilities, and triggered abilities on the stack or waiting to go on the stack (C.R. 113.8; see also C.R. 109.4C.R. 109.4, especially C.R. 109.4a-b), not static abilities such as Rest in Peace's second ability (C.R. 113.3d; compare C.R. 113.1c with C.R. 113.1).
And unfortunately, the update bulletin for Strixhaven: School of Mages didn't point out this Oracle text change in Ranar, and neither did the update to the rules add clarification on whether foretell (C.R. 702.142a), madness (C.R. 702.34a), Rest in Peace's second ability, or other static abilities have controllers for purposes of Ranar's triggered ability. (Indeed, the bulletin went over Elemental Expressionist, where "When you exile this creature..." was changed to "When this creature is put into exile...", although for different reasons than the case of Ranar.)
With the release of Modern Horizons 2, the Oracle text of Ranar's triggered ability changed again. Now, the ability reads in part, "Whenever one or more cards are put into exile from your hand or a spell or ability you control exiles one or more permanents from the battlefield, ..."
With this change, for example, the ability will trigger when one or more cards are exiled from "your hand" by any means, including—
due to foretell (C.R. 702.143a), suspend (C.R. 702.62a), or madness (C.R. 702.35a),
when Rest in Peace (controlled by any player) exiles a card "you discard" that would otherwise go to the graveyard.
However, the new text change retains the behavior from the previous text change with respect to permanents. In particular, if we follow the logic of the rulings for Firesong and Sunspeaker, it would follow that for purposes of Ranar, a spell or ability "exiles [a] ... permanen[t] from the battlefield" "if its cost or effect instructs [a permanent to be exiled] or if an instruction in its cost or effect is modified by a replacement effect and the modified event includes [a permanent being exiled]".
So to sum up:
With the current oracle text (6/19/2021), Ranar’s second ability triggers with all ‘exile from hand effects’ like foretell, suspend and madness; but triggers only when spells or triggered/activated abilities exile permanents from the battlefield. So with [[Rest in Peace]], Ranar triggers only when a spell or ability controlled by Ranar’s controller, triggers RIP’s replacement effect?
Ranar's triggered ability generally will trigger if you control Ranar and—
you would discard one or more cards by any means (including by a spell or ability you don't control), but those cards are exiled instead of going to the graveyard (e.g., because someone controls Rest in Peace).
one or more cards are exiled from your hand by any means (including by a spell or ability you don't control such as Kitesail Freebooter's enters-the-battlefield ability).
one or more permanents (even permanents you don't control) would be destroyed or sacrificed while a spell or ability you control is resolving, but those permanents are exiled instead of going to the graveyard (e.g., because someone controls Rest in Peace).
one or more permanents (even permanents you don't control) are exiled while a spell or ability you control (such as Swords to Plowshares or Path to Exile) is resolving.
On the other hand, Ranar's triggered ability generally won't trigger if you control Ranar and a permanent is exiled—
while a spell or ability you don't control is resolving, or
even if you controlled that permanent and even if the permanent is exiled rather than going to a graveyard.
The second point covers in particular the case when a creature is destroyed as a state-based action due to lethal damage (C.R. 704.5g), but is exiled rather than going to the graveyard, e.g., because someone controls Rest in Peace.
The third point, however, is arguably in conflict with a ruling for Firesong and Sunspeaker, where for purposes of that card, a spell "causes you to gain life if [among other things] its cost or effect instructs you to gain life or if an instruction in its cost or effect is modified by a replacement effect and the modified event includes you gaining life". If costs are not similarly included in the meaning of "a spell or ability ... exiles [a] ... permanen[t] from the battlefield", then that would be an apparent inconsistency that—
is not otherwise resolved by the comprehensive rules, and
has yet to be resolved or explained by the rules manager.
EDIT (Jun. 28, Jul. 19): Edited.
EDIT (Jul. 31): Edited to account for a statement by the rules manager.
1) Ranar's last ability triggers off of Foretelling cards like Doomskar or Suspending cards like Mox Tantalite, as those abilities have you exile the card from your hand. But unless I'm mistaken (which I'd love to be) cards like Ephemerate with Rebound would not trigger Ranar's last ability because the card is exiled as the spell resolves, ie exiled from the stack, not from hand. Is this correct? In a similar vein, spells with Madness that are discarded are discarded into exile, so they do go to exile from the hand...but is this considered a discard from hand that happens to end up in exile, or would it be treated as an exile from hand?
(side note: what would be the correct forum in which to ask what other mechanics exist where you exile cards from hand, as I'm not familiar with some of the older mechanics?)
2) I've heard that mixing Renar with Rest in Peace and Blasting Station creates an infinite damage combo, where the player who controls all three sacrifices a Spirit token (or something else to start this off, either of which is exiled thanks to Rest in Peace's replacement effect) to pay for the Station's activated ability, since a permanent was exiled from the field Renar creates a token, the Station untaps since a creature ETB, the Station deals 1 damage, repeat). This, along with cards such as Swords to Plowshares, Play of the Game, or Ephemerate intuitively make sense to me, as Ranar's controller controls the spell/ability causing the exile. But I'm unclear of if it's specifically the Blasting Station or the Rest in Peace that's exiling the token. In this combo it doesn't really matter, as every permanent and ability involved is controlled by Renar's controller... but what what if they're not? Which of the following situations would trigger Ranar's last ability, and in general what is the origin of the exile?:
a) Player A controls Renar the Ever-Watchful and Rest in Peace, then a source Player A controls destroys/deals lethal damage to/forces a sacrifice of Player B's creature or permanent (that doesn't have indestructible). (If the exile is done by Player B (as an SBA?), Ranar's ability doesn't trigger)
b) Player A controls Renar the Ever-Watchful and Rest in Peace, then a source controlled by Player B destroys/deals lethal damage to/sacrifices Player B's creature or permanent (that doesn't have indestructible). (If the exile is done by the source controlled by Player B or by Player B, Renar's ability doesn't trigger)
c) Player A controls Renar the Ever-Watchful and Rest in Peace, then a source controlled by Player B destroys/deals lethal damage to/forces a sacrifice of Player A's creature or permanent (that doesn't have indestructible). (If the exile is done by the source controlled by Player B, Renar's ability doesn't trigger)
d) Player A controls Renar the Ever-Watchful, while Player B controls Rest in Peace. A source controlled by Player A destroys/deals lethal damage to Player B's creature or permanent (that doesn't have indestructible). (If the exile is done by Rest in Peace (which is controlled by Player B) Ranar's ability doesn't trigger)
So, when it comes to replacement effects, what is the source of the exile?
2. It's the player controlling Rest in Peace who exiles the creature, no matter who sacrifices that creature with Blasting Station (see also C.R. 109.5). (Recall that "exile" is a keyword action; see C.R. 701.11a.) Ranar's last ability will trigger in this case, however, only if "a spell or ability you control exiles" that creature; this generally means the creature is exiled while the spell or ability is resolving (even if it's exiled instead of going to another zone), but (in accordance with a statement by the rules manager) not while you're paying the cost of a spell or ability such as Blasting Station's first ability. See comment 13 below.
If you control Rest in Peace (as in scenarios (a) through (c)) and any card or token (controlled or owned by any player) would go to any graveyard by any means (whether by destruction, sacrifice, or otherwise), you exile that card or token instead. (Thus, for example, if multiple creatures, whether controlled by one player or several, are destroyed due to combat damage at the same time, then instead of them going to the graveyard, you exile all those creatures instead.) However Ranar's last ability doesn't care who exiles any permanents or cards.
Note also that it's not damage, by itself, that destroys a creature, but rather a state-based action could do so (C.R. 120.5, 704.5g-h).
EDIT: Edited to add note about damage, after comment 9 was posted.
EDIT (Mar. 15): Edited.
EDIT (Apr. 22): See comment 10.
EDIT (May 1): One rule was renumbered with Strixhaven.
EDIT (Aug. 14): Edited, including to conform to updated text in Modern Horizons 2.
EDIT (Aug. 15): Edited slightly.
EDIT (Aug. 4, 2023): Correctness edit.
EDIT (Aug. 5, 2023): Clarification.
Also, if an opponent were to copy my Rest in Peace with say a Mirrormade or play their own Rest in Peace, they would function in timestamp order, so I would still be exiling everything because by the time the newer Rest in Peace tried to exile anything those things would already be heading to exile from my RIP. Correct?
For example, say you and your opponent each control Rest in Peace. When your opponent then sacrifices a creature, it would go to the graveyard, but since your opponent controls that creature, your opponent can choose to apply the Rest in Peace they control so that they would exile that creature instead, rather than you.
Edit 2: Oops...typo fix on 119.3f
I'm still trying to understand how replacement effects work in general. I think my confusion boils down to how I'm supposed to understand the word "replace" in [CR 614.1] "Such effects watch for a particular event that would happen and completely or partially replace that event with a different event."? Specifically, does this mean the replacement effect is akin to a text change where the original effect is still active only with its concluding event having been swapped out (bad analogy time: like putting a new engine in an old car), or does it mean that a new effect/event is introduced that is itself a driving force (like trading in one car for another...oh god the puns...)? Similarly, in [CR 614.6] "If an event is replaced, it never happens. A modified event occurs instead[...]", and calling it a modified event makes it sound like the original effect/event is still running, just with a different end result...
Additionally, what are the rules that indicate this?
A lot of people seem to think the former (I stumbled across a thread on [REDACTED] asking my same original question, but which led to VERY different conclusions by the respondents), but from what has been discussed in this thread so far it would seem to be the latter.
I did stumble across this thread re:Rain of Gore that asserts that the card whose ability generates a replacement effect is the "cause" of the events that come of that effect, but I'm still unclear on where the actual justification for that assertion is found from the CR...
Side note, I've not been able to find [CR 119.3f] ANYWHERE. What is this? Is it from an old numbering or version of the rules?
This is a different matter from the case at hand here. There, that's becauseRain of Gore cares about a "spell or ability" "caus[ing]" something to happen (see also Pure Intentions, Library of Leng [C.R. 108.1], Panharmonicon, and Firesong and Sunspeaker, which likewise use the word "cause", and see also this thread). In contrast, Ranar's last ability doesn't use the word "cause" when describing the event it cares about(see also Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind), and neither does Rest in Peace.You probably mean C.R. 119.3f, rather than C.R. 119.1f. It was renumbered in the meantime to C.R. 120.3f.
In the case at hand here, Rest in Peace cares about whether a "card or token would be put into a graveyard from anywhere". Each time that would happen, the controller of Rest in Peace is told to "exile [that card or token] instead". Any effects of a spell or ability are still present, but due to a replacement effect, it may produce different events than normal.
For example, say you control Rest in Peace and an opponent sacrifices a creature. Normally, when a player sacrifices a permanent, they put it into its owner's graveyard (C.R. 701.17a). However, Rest in Peace changes how it works. Now, instead of the opponent putting the creature into its owner's graveyard, you exile that creature instead. (This is effectively as though C.R. 701.17a's first sentence were "To sacrifice a permanent, its controller has the controller of Rest in Peace exile it from the battlefield." instead of its usual text.) Even so, however, the opponent has still "sacrificed" that creature for the purposes of abilities that care (e.g., from Savra, Queen of the Golgari). See also Remand, C.R. 700.1, and C.R. 118.11.
EDIT (Apr. 22): See comment 10.
It's like the difference between an original plan and what actually happens. Think of a road detour while driving from point A to point B. That specific part of the original plan (driving along the now-closed road) isn't "still running" in any meaningful sense, but you are still traveling from the original point A to the original point B.
Specifically, on Ranar's last ability, the text "Whenever you exile..." was changed to "Whenever a spell or ability you control exiles...".
However, this text change made the behavior of Ranar unclear in the face of replacement effects that exile permanents, such as with Rest in Peace, as well as static abilities such as madness (C.R. 702.34a). This is especially sinceat the time of this writing, the only abilities that the comprehensive rules speak of as having a controller areactivated and triggered abilities on the stackactivated abilities on the stack, mana abilities, and triggered abilities on the stack or waiting to go on the stack (C.R. 113.8;see also C.R. 109.4C.R. 109.4, especially C.R. 109.4a-b), not static abilities such as Rest in Peace's second ability (C.R. 113.3d; compare C.R. 113.1c with C.R. 113.1).And unfortunately, the update bulletin for Strixhaven: School of Mages didn't point out this Oracle text change in Ranar, and neither did the update to the rules add clarification on whether foretell (C.R. 702.142a), madness (C.R. 702.34a), Rest in Peace's second ability, or other static abilities have controllers for purposes of Ranar's triggered ability. (Indeed, the bulletin went over Elemental Expressionist, where "When you exile this creature..." was changed to "When this creature is put into exile...", although for different reasons than the case of Ranar.)
I have notified the new rules manager, and fortunately his response acknowledges that the "wording was updated in a way that makes that unclear".
EDIT (Jun. 19): Edited.
With this change, for example, the ability will trigger when one or more cards are exiled from "your hand" by any means, including—
In particular, if we follow the logic of the rulings for Firesong and Sunspeaker, it would follow that for purposes of Ranar,a spell or ability "exiles [a] ... permanen[t] from the battlefield" "if its cost or effect instructs [a permanent to be exiled] or if an instruction in its cost or effect is modified by a replacement effect and the modified event includes [a permanent being exiled]".EDIT (Jul. 31): See comment 13.
With the current oracle text (6/19/2021), Ranar’s second ability triggers with all ‘exile from hand effects’ like foretell, suspend and madness; but triggers only when spells or triggered/activated abilities exile permanents from the battlefield. So with [[Rest in Peace]], Ranar triggers only when a spell or ability controlled by Ranar’s controller, triggers RIP’s replacement effect?
Am I somewhere wrong or is this correct?
Ranar's triggered ability generally will trigger if you control Ranar and—
On the other hand, Ranar's triggered ability generally won't trigger if you control Ranar and a permanent is exiled—
The second point covers in particular the case when a creature is destroyed as a state-based action due to lethal damage (C.R. 704.5g), but is exiled rather than going to the graveyard, e.g., because someone controls Rest in Peace.
The third point, however, is arguably in conflict with a ruling for Firesong and Sunspeaker, where for purposes of that card, a spell "causes you to gain life if [among other things] its cost or effect instructs you to gain life or if an instruction in its cost or effect is modified by a replacement effect and the modified event includes you gaining life". If costs are not similarly included in the meaning of "a spell or ability ... exiles [a] ... permanen[t] from the battlefield", then that would be an apparent inconsistency that—
EDIT (Jun. 28, Jul. 19): Edited.
EDIT (Jul. 31): Edited to account for a statement by the rules manager.