Can Tezz the seeker search for lotus bloom?

Asked by Thatfatmummy 11 years ago

Tezzeret the Seeker Lotus Bloom

Can tezz use his -x ability to search for lotus bloom, and put it into play?

I don't know if Lotus Bloom's converted mana cost is 0, or if it just doesn't have a mana cost period.

GoldGhost012 says... #1

Lotus Bloom has no mana cost, so no, it can't be searched for.

April 28, 2014 9:05 p.m.

PremiumCola says... #2

Yes, It's converted mana cost is 0. The same say Sun Titan can could bring it back from the graveyard, you could search for it with Tezzeret the Seeker . You could -X for 0 and then search for it.

April 28, 2014 9:12 p.m.

PremiumCola says... Accepted answer #3

I understand we might need to quote the rulings. Well here you are:
"202.3a The converted mana cost of an object with no mana cost is 0."
Using this logic i believe you can search for Lotus Bloom

April 28, 2014 9:18 p.m.

GoldGhost012 says... #4

Actually PremiumCola, the Gatherer ruling explicitly say Lotus Bloom has no mana cost, not once but twice.

"10/15/2006 This has no mana cost, which means it can't normally be cast as a spell. You could, however, cast it via some alternate means, like with Fist of Suns or Mind's Desire .

10/15/2006 This has no mana cost, which means it can't be cast with the Replicate ability of Djinn Illuminatus or by somehow giving it Flashback."

April 28, 2014 9:30 p.m.

PremiumCola says... #5

GoldGhost012 : I understand that it clearly has no mana cost, but according to the rules it's 'converted mana cost' will still equal 0. I think that rule is in there so that you have to use the suspend ability rather than just dropping it for free. We must remember though that we are not casting Lotus Bloom with tez, we are searching for it and then putting it onto the battlefield. Since Lotus Bloom has no mana cost, its converted mana cost is 0. So surely we can still search for it with tez and put it on the battlefield ( not casting ). I think we may need a second opinion though. GreatSword, or Sam_i_am or even Epochalyptik might come to the rescue here.

April 28, 2014 9:41 p.m.

Rhadamanthus says... #6

PremiumCola has the right answer, and the quoted Rule 202.3a is the reason for it.

April 28, 2014 10:14 p.m.