I'm a proud member of the Online Campaign for Real English. If you believe in capital letters, correct spelling, and good sentence structure, then copy this into your signature.
If that's your "casual," what on earth is required for "formal," a butler in livery shuffling the decks whilst a pianist plays Brahms in front of a tapestry?
-Both players can now control legendary permanents of the same name.
-A player can only control one of each legendary permanent of the same name.
-A player gets to choose one legendary permanent to keep if he/she has multiple legendary permanents of the same name.
Thus, legends can no longer be used to "kill"/"remove" opponents' legends.
Same changes apply to planeswalkers of the same planeswalker type.
The "Legend Rule"
Let's dive in, shall we? The "legend rule," rule 704.5k for those of you following along at home, is changing. Under the current rules, any time two or more legendary permanents with the same name were on the battlefield, they would all be put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based action. Under the new rules, any time two or more legendary permanents with the same name are controlled by a player, that player chooses one of them and the rest are put into their owners' graveyards as a state-based action.
One way to think about it is the "legend rule" now looks at each player individually. It doesn't matter what any other player controls. Clearly, this has a few play ramifications. If you control a legendary permanent, having another one enter the battlefield (by playing a second one or creating a copy of the first one) will leave you with one on the battlefield. It may be the old one. It may be the new one. That's up to you.
Also, creating a copy of a legendary permanent controlled by another player will simply give you a copy. The one controlled by the other player won't explode, won't leave the battlefield, and really won't be affected at all. Clones do what they were intended to do, which isn't to be situational killing machines. Let's look at two examples to see the new rules in action:
-You control Teysa, Orzhov Scion. Your opponent enchants it with Pacifism. You cast another Teysa, Orzhov Scion. You choose the new one to remain on the battlefield. The one enchanted by Pacifism is put into its owner's graveyard (and then so is the Pacifism).
-Your opponent controls Ruric Thar, the Unbowed. You cast Progenitor Mimic, copying it. Both creatures may stay on the battlefield as long as they're controlled by different players. After Progenitor Mimic's ability creates a token copy of Ruric Thar, you must choose one to stay on the battlefield. The other will be put into its owner's graveyard as a state-based action.
I've recruited ace developer Sam Stoddard to write more about R&D's motivations behind this change and the change to the "Planeswalker uniqueness rule." You should check out his article here. Oh, didn't I mention the Planeswalker one? Well then...
The "Planeswalker Uniqueness Rule"
You didn't think we were leaving our heroes out in the cold, right? Just giving the legendary permanents a shiny new upgrade? Because the Planeswalkers are coming along for the ride.
The "Planeswalker uniqueness rule" is getting a very similar update to what the "legend rule" got. The new rule 704.5j will state that if a player controls two or more Planeswalkers that share a Planeswalker type, that player chooses one and the rest are put into their owner's graveyards as a state-based action. Again, you no longer have to worry about what other players control. Let's look at a couple of examples:
-You control Jace Beleren. On your turn, you activate one of his abilities. You then cast Jace, Architect of Thought. You now control two Planeswalkers with the Planeswalker type Jace. You choose Jace, Architect of Thought to remain on the battlefield. Jace Beleren is put into your graveyard. You can activate one of the loyalty abilities of Jace, Architect of Thought.
-Your opponent controls Chandra Nalaar. You cast Chandra, the Firebrand. Both permanents may stay on the battlefield as long as they're controlled by different players.
Sideboards now can contain up to 15 cards, rather than requiring exactly 15 cards. Sideboarding no longer requires one-for-one swaps; now you can add as many cards you want without taking out any cards, as long as the deck remains at least 60 cards and the sideboard remains at most 15 cards.
Sideboards in Constructed Tournaments
We're also making an adjustment to sideboard composition in Constructed tournaments. Previously, your main deck was sixty or more cards and your sideboard was either fifteen cards or zero cards, indicating you weren't using a sideboard. With the new rule, your main deck is still sixty or more cards but your sideboard is now up to fifteen cards. Additionally, you are not required to swap cards between your main deck and sideboard on a one-for-one basis. For Games 2 and 3 (and so on), as long as your main deck is sixty or more cards and your sideboard is no more than fifteen cards, you're good. This change makes sideboarding in Constructed and in Limited closer.
The real benefit of this change is the following scenario, which is all-too-common at more competitive events: after Game 1, you bring in some cards from your sideboard, shuffle up, present your deck, and you discover you've presented a sixty-one-card deck. There are fourteen cards in your sideboard and you've just received a game loss.
Under the new rules, what you did in that scenario is legal and you can go about playing Magic. Here's a chart to demonstrate what's legal and not under the new rules (listed as main deck/sideboard):
- Jon Finkel Facts: (follow the link at left to see more Facts, or add more Facts!)
- Chuck Norris counted to infinity twice—because he was trying to count how much damage Jon Finkel deals in an average game.
- Jon Finkel believes in maintaining a healthy, balanced diet. He gets all his fiber from eating Magic cards for breakfast, and all his protein from eating Magic players for lunch.
The legend rule change is something I do not like at all, and I'm not sure why the did it. I'll admit that part of the reason I don't like it is due to flavor.
The other two are fine, the sideboard one is interesting, the keyword/not keyword makes sense.
Ok...I need some time to think about this from an unbias perspective. It could be a good thing. Yeah, good. Wizards knows what is best. Yep. Wizards always knows what is best.
I'm going to find a corner and rock back and forth for awhile. This is too much.
This is the ****in worst rule change in the history of magic.
worse than sixth edition
worse than m10
I guess geist is the best creature of all time now...
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dear kbx41,
You have received a warning at MTG Salvation Forums.
Reason:
-------
Flaming or Other Forms of Misbehavior
Saying that you sometimes wish people (in this case the implication is the staff) would fall down a well and get AIDS is hardly appropriate for the forum.
The legend rule change is something I do not like at all, and I'm not sure why the did it. I'll admit that part of the reason I don't like it is due to flavor.
The other two are fine, the sideboard one is interesting, the keyword/not keyword makes sense.
This mimics my feelings now.
Ever since I began playing MTG years ago, I was always fine with the Legendary rule. It made sense. Never did I complain; hell, it made me play more strategically. I can't imagine how the next FNMs and Game Days are going to go knowing this rule will be in effect.
The legend rule change is something I do not like at all, and I'm not sure why the did it. I'll admit that part of the reason I don't like it is due to flavor.
Was it really that flavorful before?
"I AM RURIC THAR, THE UNBOWED"
"Hi there, I'm a clone and I'm going to imitate you!"
"Oh no! I'm just going to die of embarrassment at there being someone like me around!".
Wow, it will make getting rid of Geist and other hexproof or untargetable legends much much harder (obviously). It is a big change, and I don't know exactly if it is for better or worse. At this point, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt because I'm sure they have tested it. It also points to the next block being legend heavy.
http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/248e
signature by rivenor at http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=329663
I'm a proud member of the Online Campaign for Real English. If you believe in capital letters, correct spelling, and good sentence structure, then copy this into your signature.
I hate the reserved list.
Mythic rares are fine.
708th at Grand Prix: Toronto 2013
Modern: U/R Delver, RUG Scapeshift, Pod
Standard: Jeskai Tempo
Legacy: Dredge, Burn
Pauper: Mono-U Delver
EDH: Ghave, Token Master
-Both players can now control legendary permanents of the same name.
-A player can only control one of each legendary permanent of the same name.
-A player gets to choose one legendary permanent to keep if he/she has multiple legendary permanents of the same name.
Thus, legends can no longer be used to "kill"/"remove" opponents' legends.
Same changes apply to planeswalkers of the same planeswalker type.
Sideboards now can contain up to 15 cards, rather than requiring exactly 15 cards. Sideboarding no longer requires one-for-one swaps; now you can add as many cards you want without taking out any cards, as long as the deck remains at least 60 cards and the sideboard remains at most 15 cards.
There are also some lesser changes, most notably that indestructible is now officially a keyword.
- Jon Finkel believes in maintaining a healthy, balanced diet. He gets all his fiber from eating Magic cards for breakfast, and all his protein from eating Magic players for lunch.
BGStandard Green AggroGB
UWRGModern Saheeli CobraGRWU
UBRGLegacy StormGRBU
Wizards Certified Rules Advisor
The other two are fine, the sideboard one is interesting, the keyword/not keyword makes sense.
WUBRGCommander Decklists - PaperWUBRG
CCCCCommander Decklists - TheorycraftCCCC
Sig Credit: Pegasus Bishop
*takes a deep breath*
Ok...I need some time to think about this from an unbias perspective. It could be a good thing. Yeah, good. Wizards knows what is best. Yep. Wizards always knows what is best.
I'm going to find a corner and rock back and forth for awhile. This is too much.
PucaTrade Invite. Sign up and enjoy the first 500 points ($5) free!
Footsteps Hulk
Ascendency Combo
Restore Balance
Ad Nauseam
EDH:
Ghave Lands
Narset Combo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY8h2vp5Xis
--Hector Reid
worse than sixth edition
worse than m10
I guess geist is the best creature of all time now...
Dear kbx41,
You have received a warning at MTG Salvation Forums.
Reason:
-------
Flaming or Other Forms of Misbehavior
Saying that you sometimes wish people (in this case the implication is the staff) would fall down a well and get AIDS is hardly appropriate for the forum.
I have 28 different EDH decks
Commander is changed forever. I expect to see some massive banlist changes with these new rules. Uril and other voltron commanders got an insane buff.
Emille, Seven-Sting Dancer Shalin Nariya
This mimics my feelings now.
Ever since I began playing MTG years ago, I was always fine with the Legendary rule. It made sense. Never did I complain; hell, it made me play more strategically. I can't imagine how the next FNMs and Game Days are going to go knowing this rule will be in effect.
Decks
Future EDH
BRGAdun OakenshieldG[MANA]R[/MANA]B
When it escaped, the experimenters hesitated. It would cause untold havoc, yet they wished to see it in action.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=537903
Was it really that flavorful before?
"I AM RURIC THAR, THE UNBOWED"
"Hi there, I'm a clone and I'm going to imitate you!"
"Oh no! I'm just going to die of embarrassment at there being someone like me around!".
...I'm literally speechless. And that's saying something for me.
UWU/W BlinkUW
BMono-Black ControlB
Commander:
GWUJenaraGWU
BGeth MBCB
RGXenagosRG
WUBSharuumWUB (retired)
Modern:
xAffinityx (starting)
Standard:
Ha! That's a good one.