Emblems
General forum
Posted on Dec. 16, 2012, 8:23 p.m. by UmbrotheUmbreon
Okay many planeswalkers give you emblems. Are these emblems permanents or just a way to show that you used the walker's ability?
For example, if I -8 Venser, the Sojourner , is there any way to get rid of the emblem so I can't exile stuff with spells?
They are indeed permanents. Anything that can destroy or exile a permanent would be able to affect it. For example, Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker 's +3 would be able to destroy the emblem.
December 16, 2012 8:36 p.m.
Correction: Just looked it up on the salvage wiki. They are not permanents.
December 16, 2012 8:37 p.m.
atreyujames says... #5
emblems aren't permanent's, and presently they cant be interacted with. they are just an emblem, they arent even a card
December 16, 2012 8:38 p.m.
Emblems aren't permanents. From the comprehensive rules: "113.5. An emblem is neither a card nor a permanent. Emblem isn't a card type". So, you can't blow one up with bolas.
December 16, 2012 8:41 p.m.
cartwheelnurd says... #7
correction. THey are cards. I have a few emblems myself.
December 16, 2012 8:57 p.m.
Check the Salvage wiki page. It says that emblems aren't cards at all. They're just a physical representation of an ability in effect.
December 16, 2012 8:59 p.m.
I think BrennanMcCabe is referring to the fact that in the game, emblems aren't cards, however, emblems have been printed (Such as the Tamiyo Emblem).
BTW, Emblems in the game don't really exist. They are not permanents, and exist in a zone outside of the game, like the Command Zone.. They are almost like ghost in the sense that they are there, but not there at the same time.
December 16, 2012 9:15 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #12
You rang?
An emblem is NOT a card, nor is it a permanent. WotC printed emblem markers to represent the existence of emblems, but these objects are neither cards nor tokens.
Currently, there is no way to interact with an emblem. They impose triggered or static abilities on the gamestate. From the CR:
113.1. Some effects put emblems into the command zone. An emblem is a marker used to represent an object that has one or more abilities, but no other characteristics.113.5. An emblem is neither a card nor a permanent. Emblem isnt a card type.
December 16, 2012 9:18 p.m.
@DaCeltics Exactly, it's just a physical representation of a lasting effect on the game. Once it's done nothing can happen to it, unless the game restarts through some means. The only situation that could happen that I can think of is with Karn Liberated .
December 16, 2012 9:19 p.m.
smash10101 says... #14
@acbooster You're forgetting Shahrazad . But yeah, an emblem is just a good way to keep track of stuff. WotC decided that those "until end of game" effects were bad because they could get hard to keep track of. They added emblems to they could keep printing those effects without further complicating the board-state/making it harder to read.
December 16, 2012 10:39 p.m.
I was only using legal cards. :P That one I think is banned in nearly every format.
December 17, 2012 3:47 p.m.
smash10101 says... #16
it's legal in commander! (i had to look that up) and infinite Shahrazad combos ftw!
December 17, 2012 8:47 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #17
Commander is only played with Vintage-legal cards, and Shahrazad isn't legal in Vintage. It's banned in Commander.
December 18, 2012 12:10 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #18
Actually, the EDH website doesn't list Shahrazad as banned, so it is legal.
December 18, 2012 1:16 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #20
If you read Section 7 closely, you'll see it says (emphasis mine):
Commander is played with vintage legal cards, with some exceptions:
- cards are legal as of their set's prerelease
- The following is the official banned list for commander games. These cards (and others like them) should not be played without prior agreement from the other players in the game.
(And then the Commander-specific banlist follows)
Shahrazad is not legal for Vintage play, and is therefore not legal for Commander. The same goes for all the Ante cards and the physical dexterity cards.
December 18, 2012 10:51 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #21
I meant to post this link as well: The announcement removing the exemption for Shahrazad that formerly made it legal for EDH/Commander
December 18, 2012 10:53 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #22
Interesting. I wonder why they didn't list it as banned on their Deck Construction page; that change is worth noting.
December 18, 2012 11:33 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #23
It's not listed as Banned in the special Commander list on the Deck Construction page because it doesn't need to be listed there. The "vintage legal" specification makes it Banned. Pardon me for getting frustrated but that's literally the entire point of what I've been saying.
December 18, 2012 11:37 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #24
While this is true, the removal of a special rule specifically protecting Shahrazad is important to publicize. A glance at the deck construction page, including Section 7, does not inform readers familiar with the format that anything has changed. If a player was familiar with the old exemption, then there is no explicit indicator on the actual page for deck construction rules that said exemption has been nullified. Hence why I thought it was still legal.
I see your point, but it would avoid a lot of confusion between familiar and unfamiliar players if they made a comment about it in the appropriate location.
December 18, 2012 11:50 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #25
The exemption specifically allowing Shahrazad was formerly attached to the "vintage legal" notation, if I remember correctly (I don't know if it would be possible to find an archived version of the page from before the change). The rules update effecting this change was from over a year ago, and was part of the same update Commander-Banning Erayo, Soratami Ascendant and legalizing card:Lion's Eye Diamond, so it wasn't a low-profile announcement. Interested players were aware of the change.
How long does a reminder of a banlist update have to be posted, especially if it's a piece of redundant information with respect to something else given there? Reminders of past updates shouldn't have to be posted at all, because whatever is currently there is the current state of the rules. Expecting at least one person in a playgroup involved in the format to check the rules at least once a year isn't asking very much.
December 18, 2012 2:39 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #28
The official rules for the Commander format are found on MTGCommander.Net. This wouldn't be the first time Gatherer had an incorrect listing for a card's legality in the Commander format.
December 18, 2012 4:42 p.m.
smash10101 says... #29
Also, there is a change log of the rules/banned list
December 18, 2012 4:42 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #30
From your changelog:
"5. September 20th, 2011: LED unbanned. Erayo banned as a general. Shahrazad exception removed."
December 18, 2012 4:43 p.m.
smash10101 says... #31
the official rules say that they should be taken as suggestions and can be changed in local playgroups. but anyways, maybe gatherer is saying it's legal in MTGO Commander? (also, I really wish there was a way to edit posts) (also also, we are WAY off topic)
December 18, 2012 4:45 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #32
The original question has long since been answered.
The Gatherer page has been known to have inaccurate information about EDH legalities. All accurate information originates from and can be found on the EDH website. That website is the official resource for the format, NOT WotC or Gatherer.
December 18, 2012 4:48 p.m.
smash10101 says... #33
(still wishing I could edit posts)
I didn't say that it didn't, I was posting that mostly for Epochalyptik's benefit. Shahrazad is not a card I would ever try to play, it's not quite as bad as the infinite shuffle combo, (which I have seen in EDH, though the player didn't actually use it, they just had access to it) especially since in EDH you can't run a playset of them. But if you want to get rid of emblems, it's that or Karn Liberated
and now to respond to your latest post (since I checked to see that you had posted while I was typing this, again)
I agree that the EDH website is the authority on EDH, but I also think that WotC/Gatherer is the authority on MGTO Commander. And I also think the each playgroup should let people bring up rules they want to add/remove/change and make a decision. THat's kind of the whole point of the casual format.
December 18, 2012 4:56 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #34
Yeah, sorry about hijacking the thread with my Nerd Rage. I feel pretty embarrassed about it.
December 18, 2012 6:25 p.m.
Nah it's fine Rhadamanthus, we all go on nerd rages now and again. :3
December 18, 2012 6:27 p.m.
smash10101 says... #36
this is a magic site, nerd rages are expected seeing as pretty much everyone here is a nerd
TheOne4221 says... #2
I think they're permanents.
I mean, they sort of act like enchantments, which are permanents. They don't leave the battlefield until they are destroyed, thus another defining factor of permanents. Of course, I might be wrong.
JUDGE!
December 16, 2012 8:34 p.m.