Maybe for team formats? Simultaneous Turns on 2HG. That is the only thing I can think of. Someone would have to ask the person who maintains the oracle the reasoning behind that one. Maybe we should all submit an Ask Wizards question about it.
That's gotta be it. Yeah, because now it really has to be someone else's turn;
currently, it can be both your turn and another player's turn (your ally's).
Lemme just autocard Price of Glory so I can read it myself. Thank you.
I attended my prerelease yesterday and was playing 2 headed giant. Our oppenents were smashing our faces and we thought we were done for. Things started to change once we got leafdrake roost out and we made about 4 tokens. We also had an avatar of discord with taste for mayhem on him. We had some other guys as well, most I cant remember and dont matter. Most of our guys were flyers and they had none. We deiced to attack and try for the win, so we deiced to attack all out with our flyers and save the rest to block in case they had any tricks. I gave psychotic fury to my avatar in the hopes that they would have no choice but to waste whatever trick they had on him so we could win next turn. They did.
So now its their turn and we win next turn if they dont win here. They play master warcraft, lucky we have azorius guildmage and 9 mana open. We tell them to hold up while we debate our options about who to tap or make a token or counter an ability, etc. They dont listen and turn most of their guys sideways whille we are talking. We make our tap decisions to tap their 4/1, 4/4 and 3/3 so they would only end up doing max. 6 damage to us, 8 if they make our guy with nettling curse block. We tell them that this is our intent, they say its to late. No one can agree with us as everyone is trading and stuff because this is turn 2 after time and we are the last game left.
The judge comes over we tell them our side, them theirs. We say that we have tapped down guys all game and clearly that was our intent and we were just figuring out what to do. The judge says that he wants to to speak with the head judge and they speak for about 5 min. about it. We are looking at the board and realize that even if they declared attackers they failed to remember that we can still tap our guy with nettling curse meaning that they are 2 damage short of victory. Win figure no matter what we win next turn. The other team figures this out also and while the judges are speaking they tap their 4/1 to attack also. We call the judge. He claims that the board is now 'as is' and that his ruling is final, they are given a warning. We now cant win. While we are looking at the board we find they have been cheating all game with graft counters as well. We were pushed out of prize because of the call.
I think this was a boneheaded call and it wasn't at all fair. If we were half smart and played like we had all game we would have have won, regardless of how they played. The judge failed to see this. It wasn't like they played an instant and in retrospect we found out we could have done something differently.
In the the judges crew's defense however, the first judge is a level 1 who I know from past events. He is a rookie, but a nice guy. The head judge, barely a level 2, is a moron. Everyone hates him, he likes to start events late (this one over a hour). He even started the event, after deck registration by saying "Now everyone pass your pool to the left zero times! That is the pool you play with!". He usually doesn't judge these events but the level 4 who judged my JSS was out of town this weekend. I dont think I will play 2HG again.
The kids we played against po'ed their next opponents as well. They are little cheaters that ruin rules enforcement level one.
Anyway, what do you guys think? I am I just wrong on this one?
I thought the FAQ did a good job @ spelling out what Omnibian did. From da' FAQ:
The best thing to remember is that (at least with newer stuff, not anything before 6E, I'd guess) a card only does what it says. Nothing more, nothing less. If Omnibian's ability wanted it's target to lose all rules text or abilities, it would have said so. Otherwise, it does what it says: Set's a new P/T and creature type that override all previous itterations.
I agree with my friend here.
Honestly, there's no reason to believe the creature becomes "nothing but a 3/3 Frog". It just substitutes a power, toughness, and creature type.
The important thing to note about characteristic-setting abilities is that the selection is quite limited.
Firstly, only abilities printed right on the card are characteristic-setting abilities.
The rule says "abilities that an object grants to itself are never characteristic-setting abilities".
So, even if "This is red" is a characteristic-setting ability (which it is), the ability "0: This gains "This is red" " is not a characteristic setting ability, nor is the ability that it grants to itself by the use of this ability.
A characteristic-setting ability has three things about it. One - it defines a characteristic. Look that up in the Comp Rules to determine exactly what a characteristic is. I think it's name, mana cost, types, expansion symbol, power, toughness, and colour. Text or any abilities, no matter how simple, are not characteristics.
two: It only refers to itself; as in, an object's characteristic setting abilities, if any, only apply to itself. Anything else is not a characteristic-setting ability.
Three: It is an ability that obviously means to tell you that instead of what else you may think, the object that it is on has the given characteristics. There is also a rule that states that certain characteristics are affected by these abilities at all times, even when the card is not in play; for example, this works for colour as exemplified by Transguild Courier.
Another example is Evermind. It woud default to having no colour because it has no colours in its mana cost (That mana cost.... that doesn't exist). But it says "Evermind is Blue".
Treat these abilities as though they were the first source of that information. Like, if you had something that said "Colourless spells you control are White", which under normal circumstances would look at colourless spells and make their only colour White, if it saw Transguild Courier, would do nothing. Transguild Courier is not "first colourless, then having all colours". It is all colours at all times to begin with. It's like self-replacement effects which always apply first.
And, in response to the original request - I don't think there's any gimmick for remembering interaction of continuous effects. Just go to rule 409 and memorize it, or try to.
Nevertheless, even WotC recognizes that people use the term and also refers to this rule informally as the "summoning sickness" rule:
212.3d A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol in its activation cost can’t be played unless the creature has been under its controller’s control since the start of his or her most recent turn. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control since the start of his or her most recent turn. This rule is informally called the “summoning sickness” rule. Ignore this rule for creatures with haste (see rule 502.5).
Odd that you have such a problem with that, given that you've got informal names all your own that you use for rules (for example, the "Phantom Rule" from the other day).
Well, at least my name is just a name, and doesn't repeatedly misrepresent what the actual rule is like the summoning sickness rule.
My evidence is the mounds and mounds of questions just like this one.
I think I've determined how to define myself on these boards. I'm the guy who hates the summoning sickness rule.
And I like to say the 'summoning sickness' rule is crap.
And tell you the actual rule:
"A creature that hasn't been in play under its controller's control continuously since the start of that player's last turn cannot attack and cannot pay :t: costs, unless this is the result of phasing out."
(where :t: is the tap symbol).
When I say 'creature', I mean a permanent with the type creature. When I say permanent, I mean something in play, and when I say the type creature, I mean something which is printed with that type or has been given that type by an effect.
when I say "its controller's control", I mean the control of its current controller.
When I say continuously, I mean without interruption. So if it has left play and returned, or has changed controllers, it has not been continuously satisfying the conditions.
When I say "the start of", I mean the very first instant where it is no longer anyone else's turn, and is one player's turn. I mean before you untap, before you even consider phasing. "The start of" means "the start of", "that which precedes all else".
When I say "That player's last turn", I refer to the "current controller" of the aforementioned creature. By last turn, I mean, looking backwards in time until one reaches a turn apart from the current one which belongs to that player. So if it's not that player's turn currently, it's the last turn that player took.
If it is that player's turn, then you look to the turn before that one which the player took most recently.
If that player has skipped any turns, then those turns never existed, so they never started, so they don't count.
I think this is a tricky question but it might be obvious I would like a clarification. I was told (by a friend) that the converted mana cost of Repeal is 1, disreguarding how much you paid for X. Is'nt the converted mana cost of Repeal whatever you pay for X plus U?
Second question: Someone is playing Power Surge in a casual game. And I dont want to take the burn from it. Can I target a non-land perm in the field and just pay all my mana to filter through repeal trying to bounce the perm, even though the exact cc is not what i paid?
The first question is more complicated to answer than you thought.
X is considered its chosen value while on the stack, and it is 0 everywhere else. That's just how it is.
The second question actually demands you read Power Surge.
It triggers on the upkeep, and deals damage to you referencing information from the beginning of the turn. The beginning of the turn is before you untapped anything.
You can't change the amount of damage this will deal unless you have lands tapped before your turn; i.e. during your opponent's turn.
Your question about Repeal is answered by the card itself. Again, as darkasecas reminds us all, reading is savage tech.
Repeal says "nonland permanent with converted mana cost X."
If the target is not a permanent, not a nonland (so.... *is* a land), or does not have converted mana cost X, it is not a legal target.
You cannot play a spell without legal targets. Therefore, you can't just sink the mana into a huge Repeal. There must be something to target legally.
The problem with citing the FAQ, epeeguy, is that it actually contradicts you.
Fortuitously, it is erroneous, and you remain correct as always.
* If Cytoshape turns a creature into a copy of Sprouting Phytohydra, and that creature is dealt damage, the token that is put into play is simply a copy of Sprouting Phytohydra. At the end of the turn, the Cytoshaped creature will revert back to what it was, but the token copying it will not.
This is what you cited. Emphasis mine.
This FAQ ignores the possibility of responding, like our friend here said and I e-mailed Wizards about.
But again, I say, you are right and the FAQ is wrong.
SBEs aren't checked mid-resolution of a spell, so when the spell is finished resolving, the game sees that the creature has taken 12. Then the Ragged Veins Triggers and all the various SBEs will happen as I imagine lots of things dying.
The Veins actually triggers during the resolution, but waits to be stacked when the spell resolves and a player would receive priority next. This is after SBE's.
The Veins will have multiple triggers which will resolve separately for the appropriate amount of life.
You were right about the SBE's though. They're checked when a player would receive priority next, before triggered abilities are stacked.
In a tournament, you can only use it to get cards that were registered with your original deck (sideboard is easy, or main deck cards that were RFG'd).
They don't have to be T2 per se...they have to be legal in the format you are playing.
They don't have to be legal in the format you're playing just because.
It's just that, since the cards are from among cards you began the game with and those in your SB (which themselves must all be legal), this will always be the case.
In casual, of course, you make up your own house rules on that.
Brace for Impact doesn't have the "until end of turn" stipulation that I'm quite sure it does have.
Either that, or it's been erroneously written as an instant instead of an Aura.
If it really does prevent all damage that would be dealt for the rest of the game, send an ambulance to my address immediately. Hack my system to get my IP if you have to.
EDIT: And Stoic Ephemera is written "sacrifies it at end of combat" when it should say "sacrifice it at end of combat"
EDIT2: And there's a card like this:
Writ of Passage [MANACOSt]U[/manacost]
Enchantement - Aura
Enchant creature
Whenever enchanted creature attacks, it is unblockable if its power is less or equal to :2mana:.**
Forecast - :1mana::symu:: Target creature with power 2 or less is unblockable until end of turn.
I'll underline and bold everything I think is a typo. Also, the '2' would appear as a 2 the numeral, not a '[manacost]2[/manacost]' the mana symbol.
'Writ' could be the name I guess, but it may have been "Write" and someone missed the 'e'. Just checking.
Under the current wording, the creature woud suddenly become unblockable permanently if the trigger ever resolves.
"less or equal" is supposed to be "less than or equal"
"2 or less" might be it, but it's more usually written as "less than or equal to 2". Either way, I think that this wording will agree with the actual wording on the card.
It won't say "until end of turn" because "until end of turn" specifies the duration of an effect.
Being unblockable is a state. Therefore, the time limit would be described in terms of a .. time period, "this turn".
If it were "becomes unblockable", then the wording would be correct, but they don't write "becomes unblockable" since unblockability is not a keyword. It's a 'plain english' thing, like indestructible.
EDIT again: Slaughterhouse Bouncer has "A Rakdos party is a flob if anyone lives to talk about it" but the 'flob' is supposed to be 'flop' to agree with the picture to which the name links.
Flaring Flame-Kin's ability seems awkward. I don't know how to correct it myself though. I believe the templating is to say it "gets +2/+2" "gains trample", and "has [activated ability]". Therefore, normally, it would be written like this:
As long as ~ is enchanted, it gets +2/+2, gains trample, and has "R: ~ gets +1/+0 until end of turn"
But, it is a static ability, and I think maybe the trample and the ability would both be grouped under one 'has', like this:
As long as ~ is enchanted, it gets +2/+2 and has trample and "R: ~ gets +1/+0 until end of turn"
EDIT: My justification is Rakdos Pit Dragon, which says it "has double strike" in the static ability,even though Psychotic Fury says it "gains double strike" in a one-shot effect.
EDIT: Doesn't Ignorant Bliss trigger on your end of turn?
Sandstorm Eidolon is written as a "Spririt". Now, I'm all for Spririts, but I think it's a typo.
Stalking Vengeance says "Whenever another creature you control is put into a graveyard from play [. . .]". The "from play" qualification is redundant, since creatures can only go anywhere from play. Outside of play, anything that would be a creature in play is either a token (which will cease momentarily) or a mere card.
Simic Basilisk grants an ability that triggers on combat damage being dealt to another creature. That does have function, but it's quite redundant. The only way it could deal combat damage to itself would be through the use of White redirection effects. Just a thought.
Is not Sprouting Phytohydra's triggered ability non-optional?
There's a comma missing on Utopia Sprawl's first ability.
There's an apostrophe missing for Aethermage's Touch
Azorious AEthermage triggers on a permanent being returned to any player's hand. Says so in the FAQ.
Grand Arbiter Augustin IV needs to say "to play" at the end of each ability.
Leafdrake Roost's flavour text has "which where", which I am sure it not good English grammar. They are both acting as relative pronouns. Eliminate the 'which'.
Plaxcaster Frogling should say "can't be the target" and not "cannot be the target". Also, are we sure that's the right mana cost? That's *really* good.
Sky Hussar refers to itself as "hussars" in its text.
Trygon PRedator says "this player" when it should say "that player".
Twinstrike is probably written as "If you have no cards in hand, destroy those creatures instead."
The first ability of Rakdos Riteknife is more likely an unbroken sentence or two distinct abilities.
EDIT: Prahv should say "Prevent all damage that would be dealt to you this turn by the source of your choice."
Technically speaking, the cards you are registering are not your cards. You are opening cards that are actually going to someone else for the purposes of playing in the event; they don't become your property until they are redistributed to the players in the event. At that point, you can do what you will with them. Note: I'm aware that I'm going to get a dozen replies saying that "I paid for those cards and they belong to me!" No, you didn't pay for those cards. What you paid for was the right to play in a tournament and the cards necessary to play in the tournament; the cards you are registering are part of a pool that will be passed out after they've been registered. The cards you receive at this point will be yours.
That being said, can you take the product and leave? Yes. While you are likely to get a stern look from the judge, you can actually leave the event with that sealed product. However, it is a violation of the Universal Tournament Rules:
So, you will receive a match loss for your first round against the opponent you were paired against. And don't just run out of the venue; at least tell one of the judges on the staff so it can be handled correctly.
Wait a minute...
You mean it's LEGAL for someone to steal that product?
Whoa...
this is really important. Until now I was perfectly okay with the swapping thing; it made sense to me. But now... I think... yeah, people could open up a 100 dollar bill and just make a mad dash for the exit (in their heads. They'd probably try to calmly make an exit).
So what about a game loss?
What prevents this aside from the vigil of good security?
That's gotta be it. Yeah, because now it really has to be someone else's turn;
currently, it can be both your turn and another player's turn (your ally's).
Lemme just autocard Price of Glory so I can read it myself. Thank you.
you did make one error. Regarding Nettling Curse...
It can only make the enchnated creature attack, not block.
And it cuases loss of 3 life, not 2.
Aside from that, you were dealing with either (a) idiots all around, or (b) cheating opponents and a *REALLY* idiotic two judges.
But don't give up on low REL. Just keep an eye on those same opponents and make sure to catch them in the act next time they pull a stunt like that.
I agree with my friend here.
Honestly, there's no reason to believe the creature becomes "nothing but a 3/3 Frog". It just substitutes a power, toughness, and creature type.
Firstly, only abilities printed right on the card are characteristic-setting abilities.
The rule says "abilities that an object grants to itself are never characteristic-setting abilities".
So, even if "This is red" is a characteristic-setting ability (which it is), the ability "0: This gains "This is red" " is not a characteristic setting ability, nor is the ability that it grants to itself by the use of this ability.
A characteristic-setting ability has three things about it. One - it defines a characteristic. Look that up in the Comp Rules to determine exactly what a characteristic is. I think it's name, mana cost, types, expansion symbol, power, toughness, and colour. Text or any abilities, no matter how simple, are not characteristics.
two: It only refers to itself; as in, an object's characteristic setting abilities, if any, only apply to itself. Anything else is not a characteristic-setting ability.
Three: It is an ability that obviously means to tell you that instead of what else you may think, the object that it is on has the given characteristics. There is also a rule that states that certain characteristics are affected by these abilities at all times, even when the card is not in play; for example, this works for colour as exemplified by Transguild Courier.
Another example is Evermind. It woud default to having no colour because it has no colours in its mana cost (That mana cost.... that doesn't exist). But it says "Evermind is Blue".
Treat these abilities as though they were the first source of that information. Like, if you had something that said "Colourless spells you control are White", which under normal circumstances would look at colourless spells and make their only colour White, if it saw Transguild Courier, would do nothing. Transguild Courier is not "first colourless, then having all colours". It is all colours at all times to begin with. It's like self-replacement effects which always apply first.
And, in response to the original request - I don't think there's any gimmick for remembering interaction of continuous effects. Just go to rule 409 and memorize it, or try to.
Well, at least my name is just a name, and doesn't repeatedly misrepresent what the actual rule is like the summoning sickness rule.
My evidence is the mounds and mounds of questions just like this one.
I think I've determined how to define myself on these boards. I'm the guy who hates the summoning sickness rule.
Hey, can we get a sticky on it?
And tell you the actual rule:
"A creature that hasn't been in play under its controller's control continuously since the start of that player's last turn cannot attack and cannot pay :t: costs, unless this is the result of phasing out."
(where :t: is the tap symbol).
When I say 'creature', I mean a permanent with the type creature. When I say permanent, I mean something in play, and when I say the type creature, I mean something which is printed with that type or has been given that type by an effect.
when I say "its controller's control", I mean the control of its current controller.
When I say continuously, I mean without interruption. So if it has left play and returned, or has changed controllers, it has not been continuously satisfying the conditions.
When I say "the start of", I mean the very first instant where it is no longer anyone else's turn, and is one player's turn. I mean before you untap, before you even consider phasing. "The start of" means "the start of", "that which precedes all else".
When I say "That player's last turn", I refer to the "current controller" of the aforementioned creature. By last turn, I mean, looking backwards in time until one reaches a turn apart from the current one which belongs to that player. So if it's not that player's turn currently, it's the last turn that player took.
If it is that player's turn, then you look to the turn before that one which the player took most recently.
If that player has skipped any turns, then those turns never existed, so they never started, so they don't count.
Try and remember the quote.
The first question is more complicated to answer than you thought.
X is considered its chosen value while on the stack, and it is 0 everywhere else. That's just how it is.
The second question actually demands you read Power Surge.
It triggers on the upkeep, and deals damage to you referencing information from the beginning of the turn. The beginning of the turn is before you untapped anything.
You can't change the amount of damage this will deal unless you have lands tapped before your turn; i.e. during your opponent's turn.
Your question about Repeal is answered by the card itself. Again, as darkasecas reminds us all, reading is savage tech.
Repeal says "nonland permanent with converted mana cost X."
If the target is not a permanent, not a nonland (so.... *is* a land), or does not have converted mana cost X, it is not a legal target.
You cannot play a spell without legal targets. Therefore, you can't just sink the mana into a huge Repeal. There must be something to target legally.
I thought it was just going to be a 0 cost thing with skip in the effect that there was some limitation on activations in one turn.
Perhaps I missed the section where Mark made that clear.
Anywho.. You might as well point out these abilities are "being replaced" Monday.
Fortuitously, it is erroneous, and you remain correct as always.
* If Cytoshape turns a creature into a copy of Sprouting Phytohydra, and that creature is dealt damage, the token that is put into play is simply a copy of Sprouting Phytohydra. At the end of the turn, the Cytoshaped creature will revert back to what it was, but the token copying it will not.
This is what you cited. Emphasis mine.
This FAQ ignores the possibility of responding, like our friend here said and I e-mailed Wizards about.
But again, I say, you are right and the FAQ is wrong.
The Veins actually triggers during the resolution, but waits to be stacked when the spell resolves and a player would receive priority next. This is after SBE's.
The Veins will have multiple triggers which will resolve separately for the appropriate amount of life.
You were right about the SBE's though. They're checked when a player would receive priority next, before triggered abilities are stacked.
They don't have to be legal in the format you're playing just because.
It's just that, since the cards are from among cards you began the game with and those in your SB (which themselves must all be legal), this will always be the case.
In casual, of course, you make up your own house rules on that.
EDIT: qualified I was talking about the Sprouting one, and not the growing one
Either that, or it's been erroneously written as an instant instead of an Aura.
If it really does prevent all damage that would be dealt for the rest of the game, send an ambulance to my address immediately. Hack my system to get my IP if you have to.
EDIT: And Stoic Ephemera is written "sacrifies it at end of combat" when it should say "sacrifice it at end of combat"
EDIT2: And there's a card like this:
Writ of Passage [MANACOSt]U[/manacost]
Enchantement - Aura
Enchant creature
Whenever enchanted creature attacks, it is unblockable if its power is less or equal to :2mana:.**
Forecast - :1mana::symu:: Target creature with power 2 or less is unblockable until end of turn.
I'll underline and bold everything I think is a typo. Also, the '2' would appear as a 2 the numeral, not a '[manacost]2[/manacost]' the mana symbol.
'Writ' could be the name I guess, but it may have been "Write" and someone missed the 'e'. Just checking.
Under the current wording, the creature woud suddenly become unblockable permanently if the trigger ever resolves.
"less or equal" is supposed to be "less than or equal"
"2 or less" might be it, but it's more usually written as "less than or equal to 2". Either way, I think that this wording will agree with the actual wording on the card.
It won't say "until end of turn" because "until end of turn" specifies the duration of an effect.
Being unblockable is a state. Therefore, the time limit would be described in terms of a .. time period, "this turn".
If it were "becomes unblockable", then the wording would be correct, but they don't write "becomes unblockable" since unblockability is not a keyword. It's a 'plain english' thing, like indestructible.
EDIT again: Slaughterhouse Bouncer has "A Rakdos party is a flob if anyone lives to talk about it" but the 'flob' is supposed to be 'flop' to agree with the picture to which the name links.
Flaring Flame-Kin's ability seems awkward. I don't know how to correct it myself though. I believe the templating is to say it "gets +2/+2" "gains trample", and "has [activated ability]". Therefore, normally, it would be written like this:
As long as ~ is enchanted, it gets +2/+2, gains trample, and has "R: ~ gets +1/+0 until end of turn"
But, it is a static ability, and I think maybe the trample and the ability would both be grouped under one 'has', like this:
As long as ~ is enchanted, it gets +2/+2 and has trample and "R: ~ gets +1/+0 until end of turn"
EDIT: My justification is Rakdos Pit Dragon, which says it "has double strike" in the static ability,even though Psychotic Fury says it "gains double strike" in a one-shot effect.
EDIT: Doesn't Ignorant Bliss trigger on your end of turn?
Sandstorm Eidolon is written as a "Spririt". Now, I'm all for Spririts, but I think it's a typo.
Stalking Vengeance says "Whenever another creature you control is put into a graveyard from play [. . .]". The "from play" qualification is redundant, since creatures can only go anywhere from play. Outside of play, anything that would be a creature in play is either a token (which will cease momentarily) or a mere card.
Simic Basilisk grants an ability that triggers on combat damage being dealt to another creature. That does have function, but it's quite redundant. The only way it could deal combat damage to itself would be through the use of White redirection effects. Just a thought.
Is not Sprouting Phytohydra's triggered ability non-optional?
There's a comma missing on Utopia Sprawl's first ability.
There's an apostrophe missing for Aethermage's Touch
Azorious AEthermage triggers on a permanent being returned to any player's hand. Says so in the FAQ.
Grand Arbiter Augustin IV needs to say "to play" at the end of each ability.
Leafdrake Roost's flavour text has "which where", which I am sure it not good English grammar. They are both acting as relative pronouns. Eliminate the 'which'.
Plaxcaster Frogling should say "can't be the target" and not "cannot be the target". Also, are we sure that's the right mana cost? That's *really* good.
Sky Hussar refers to itself as "hussars" in its text.
Trygon PRedator says "this player" when it should say "that player".
Twinstrike is probably written as "If you have no cards in hand, destroy those creatures instead."
The first ability of Rakdos Riteknife is more likely an unbroken sentence or two distinct abilities.
EDIT: Prahv should say "Prevent all damage that would be dealt to you this turn by the source of your choice."
Wait a minute...
You mean it's LEGAL for someone to steal that product?
Whoa...
this is really important. Until now I was perfectly okay with the swapping thing; it made sense to me. But now... I think... yeah, people could open up a 100 dollar bill and just make a mad dash for the exit (in their heads. They'd probably try to calmly make an exit).
So what about a game loss?
What prevents this aside from the vigil of good security?
I can finally counter Castrate!
Those discard spells give me all sorts of trouble.
And you know what.... Mike Flores reasoning is perfectly right. That's probably exactly the reason this spell was printed.
MUC making a comeback this rotation!!!!