Discussion- Converge & Copy
General forum
Posted on Sept. 12, 2015, 7:56 p.m. by ------
Based on our discussion about Converge and Copy rules in the bfz-spoiler thread, I'd like to continue the debate here.
Currently on debate:
Tabak, rule manager, saying that copies of converge have X= 0.I have reason to think he is wrong.
Cards beeing debated:Radiant Flames + Pyromancer's Goggles
Current rules beeing debated:107.3c 107.3e706.2
September 12, 2015 8 p.m.
My thought of how stuff works is this:
Cast Radiant Flames with Pyromancer's Goggles. Spell goes on the stack, converge checks for "mana beeing spent", turns that vaule into X.Copy trigger goes on the stack, copies the spell on the stack that has X set, and takes over the value for X. (706.2.)
Also, 107.3e claims that we can choose to fix the value for X when it hits the stack.
Need to check out what Programmer_112 said about rule 107.3c.
September 12, 2015 8:03 p.m.
Programmer_112 says... #5
So, I think I was slightly off on my interpretation of 107.3e, based on 107.3c. However, 107.3c resolves the issue by itself. The card's text defines X, so the copy will check itself rather than the original.
The copy does indeed have "an X, [-X], or X in its cost and/or its text"
The copy also has the property that "the value of X is defined by the text of that spell or ability"
Thus, as a direct consequence of 107.3c, "that's the value of X while that spell or ability is on the stack"
As far as I can tell, there is no flaw here. There is a rule which explicitly answers our question, debate over.
September 12, 2015 8:07 p.m.
Hm not really over, we need to do the reroll first and confirm another thing.
107.3c defines X.107.3e if-condition does not trigger, thus we can't choose
That's how far we got then.
Still, the time when X is beeing fixed is the debate.You said it's fixed when it resolves as far as I can recall.If you can cite a rule for that, we solved the problem, as the copy trigger is "over" the original on the stack, resolves, copies the card without copying X yet, in which case X = 0, and you'd be right.
September 12, 2015 8:18 p.m.
Programmer_112 says... #7
I was wrong about when X is determined. According to 107.3c, X is defined dynamically while Flames is on the stack. What should happen is this:
Cast Flames for a number (arbitrarily 2)
Spell is copied
Rule 107.3c happens. The copy "rewrites" its original X value, and since no mana was spent to cast it, it sets its own X to be 0
Copy resolves, deals 0 damage to everything
Original resolves
September 12, 2015 8:45 p.m.
Unforgivn_II says... #8
This isn't a discussion, this is a rules question. Rules questions belong in the MTG Q&A. Let the rules masters over there handle it
September 12, 2015 8:46 p.m.
Just my two cents.
Converge doesn't have an X value until the spell is actually resolving.
Cast spell, noting colors of mana spent to cast it (this will matter for the original spell). Now,
A: Let the original spell resolves, upon resolution Converge will check what color(s) of mana were spent to cast it, and its effect will occur accordingly.
B: Use whatever method you are going to copy the spell with (goggles, Twincast, etc) the copied spell will resolve before the original (but in the same manner), converge will check, see that no mana was spent to cast the spell, and the spell will have an effect accordingly. Then the original spell resolves as mentioned in Part A above.
September 12, 2015 8:53 p.m.
Your way would be to copy the spell before 107.3c.If you do it that way, you're right.
I read over 107.3c a few times now, still wondering about this passage: "while that spell or ability is on the stack"
When does "while" start? At the monent that the spell hits the stack? Because then, 107.3c would fix the value for X directly when hitting the stack. Then, Goggles trigger goes on the stack after 107.3c fixed X. Then stuff would look life that:
Cast spell
107.3c sets X=3
Copy spell, copy X=3
Resolve, 6 damage to all
It's only a question of what happens first, the copy or 107.3c...Gonna look that up but it will take a while.Hey, atleast we are getting somewhere. :P
September 12, 2015 9:06 p.m.
Except this could all be avoided if you had listened to me in the first place. All you are looking for is which interpretation of the rules you want to read. But you don't accept reliable sources, which is problematic.
September 12, 2015 9:11 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #12
This is not a discussion thread. It belongs in the Q&A. I can't move it at this point because the feature is buggy and would require me reassigning each individual comment.
Tabak is generally never wrong. He's the rules manager for a reason, and he will check any applicable rules before answering a question.
Radiant Flames's X value doesn't matter until resolution. On resolution, Radiant Flames will deal X damage, where X is the number of colors of mana spent to cast Radiant Flames. If you copy Radiant Flames as a spell, the copy is created on the stack and is not cast; therefore, no mana is spent to cast the copy. The copy's X value will therefore be 0.
Let's look at the rules in question:
107.3c If a spell or activated ability has an
, [-X], or X in its cost and/or its text, and the value of X is defined by the text of that spell or ability, then that's the value of X while that spell or ability is on the stack. The controller of that spell or ability doesn't get to choose the value. Note that the value of X may change while that spell or ability is on the stack.
107.3e Sometimes X appears in the text of a spell or ability but not in a mana cost, alternative cost, additional cost, or activation cost. If the value of X isn't defined, the controller of the spell or ability chooses the value of X at the appropriate time (either as its put on the stack or as it resolves).
107.3e is irrelevant. The value of X is defined. It's defined in the text of the converge ability. Per 107.3c, X's value updates dynamically. A copy of a converge spell will naturally have converge 0 because no mana is spent to cast it. Therefore, the copy's converge ability will deal no damage because its X value is defined by the colors of mana spent to cast it.
September 12, 2015 9:14 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #13
@------: You're misreading the text from 706.2. "The value of X" is being given as one of the examples of "choices made when casting". Rules 601.2b-d describe the choices made when casting, and making a choice for X is only done "if the spell has a variable cost that will be paid as its being cast" (601.2b). In the case of Radiant Flames, the value of X isn't a choice made while casting the spell, so the value itself isn't copied.
The copy of Radiant Flames has the full printed text of the original (mana cost, type, rules text). The rules text of the copy on the stack is "Converge - Radiant Flames deals X damage to each creature, where X is the number of colors of mana spent to cast Radiant Flames." No mana was spent to cast the copy, so the value of X on the copy is 0.
September 12, 2015 9:16 p.m.
Just to put the nail on the coffin, the copy isn't cast by Pyromancer's Goggles, either, it's just made. Thus, the "cast" portion of Converge is also invalidated. And yes, there is a difference, as referenced by rule 706.12. I can't copy it here because of phone limitations.
September 12, 2015 9:31 p.m.
@Rhadamanthus:
Just worked myself through 601.2, in that case you are right and X will be set on resolve.
601.2b-d is the proof I required for the X beeing set on resolve. In that case, problem solved. Good work there.
@JWiley129:
Looking up rules in the correct manner is important. I hope one day you will accept scientific research in your heart. ;P Also, that discussion with Programmer was fun and a good way to improove our understanding of the rules. I regret nothing.
September 12, 2015 9:37 p.m.
Scientific Research is important, but it isn't always necessary. You can scientifically research gravity all you want, or you can read about people who have done it, accept that gravity exists, and go scientifically research deeper implications of gravity rather than just simple gravity.
September 12, 2015 9:41 p.m.
Go see my debate with Triforce-Finder, I have enough credentials in scientific research to know that you have a scientific debate and cite sources.
September 12, 2015 9:42 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #18
Don't be like that. He (she?) requested technical rules backup for a technical rules question, and somehow no one had found and referenced the most important part.
JWiley129 says... #2
What happens if you copy a Converge spell, say Radiant Flames, with an effect like Twincast? You'll get two copies of Radiant Flames, one of which you spent mana on, and another you didn't spend mana on. So the copy would resolve and deal 0 damage, then the original would resolve and deal damage between 1 and 3 depending on the mana you spent to cast it.
September 12, 2015 7:59 p.m.