Multiple Admonition Angels
Asked by Andromedus 8 years ago
Assume I have one Admonition Angel on the board, and play a land resulting in an exiled permanent. I then play another Admonition Angel. After that I play another land, do I get to exile two permanents for that one land drop (one for each Admointion Angel)?
Then, assume the second Admonition Angel (the one cast second) leaves the battlefield. Do all exiled cards from both Angels return? Or is each exile "tied" to a specific Admonition Angel?
Final question: Can one Admonition Angel exile another Admonition Angel?
FancyTuesday says... Accepted answer #2
Whenever a card refers to itself by name, in this case saying "When Admonition Angel leaves the battlefield..." it is referring specifically to itself as an object, it means "When [this] leaves the battlefield..." So only permanents exiled with that Angel will be returned.
Yes, one Admonition Angel can exile another. Again it is saying "Target nonland permanent other than [this]", if it meant to say that you could not exile any Admonition Angels it would say something like "Target nonland permanent not named Admonition Angel."
September 28, 2015 3:35 p.m.
Raging_Squiggle says... #3
A good example for FancyTuesday's reference is Detention Sphere, where it specifically says "Nonland permanent not named [this card]".
September 28, 2015 3:44 p.m.
Triforce-Finder says... #5
Detention Sphere is actually hosting one of the few exemptions to that rule. It does not only reference itself by its own card name, but also has a targeting restriction that specifically states that the targeted card can't be one named "Detention Sphere". One Detention Sphere can't exile another Detention Sphere. A better example would be Oblivion Ring, as one O-Ring can exile another O-Ring.
The distinction can be made by differentiating between just "other than cardname" or "not named cardname".
September 28, 2015 5:52 p.m. Edited.
FancyTuesday says... #6
Well both are good examples as approached from different directions, I referred to both wordings to explain the difference.
September 28, 2015 5:59 p.m.
Triforce-Finder says... #7
Note how Raging_Squiggle specifically quoted "Nonland permanent not named [this card]" from the text om Detention Sphere. That is not at all an example of a card referencing itself by its own name. Note how I specifically showcased the different wordings.
Especially in light of the topic of the question, it is wrong to use Detention Sphere as an example, since the wording does not work as it does on Admonition Angel and does not amount to the same results when choosing a legal target.
I'd really like to say that it is a good example, since that would be a nice thing to say. However, the point of this section is to answer rules questions, and I will pick precision and correct answers over being nice any time. Since it is faulty, I can't say that it is a good example. It's not even an example of the rule you quoted at all. That had to be pointed out. Many use TO as a reference, and they deserve precise and true informations.
September 28, 2015 8:13 p.m.
FancyTuesday says... #8
Note how Raging_Squiggle specifically refereed to what I was saying, not the question. Read the 2nd part of what I said; I mentioned the sort of wording you would see with that sort of effect, Raging_Squiggle pointed to a card with that wording. It's a good example that shows how rules text can be worded to produce a certain effect, you yourself showcased both wordings.
September 28, 2015 8:32 p.m. Edited.
Triforce-Finder says... #9
Dang, seems like there was that reference at the very end of your post used as counterexample. I must have missed that somehow.
My point still stands that it is not a case of self-reference, but it seems I've been preaching to the choir...
September 28, 2015 10:40 p.m. Edited.
Raging_Squiggle says... #10
Well, I'm glad we got that sorted out. I'm well aware, Triforce-Finder, that this section is focused on answering rules questions. And that is what I do to the best of my abilities. There are times, however, where further discussion can take place to provide further insight and understanding on things brought up that indirectly (or directly) relate to the original question. Such as what happened here. I provided an example card to FancyTuesday's reference, which in and of itself was provided as an additional insight and thoughtful information to the original question. That all being said, I understand your point of view, but please take more care in your posts and be sure what you're saying is on point with what's actually been said. Don't need anyone degrading other people's validity to answer or respond. We're all here to help each other play Magic better, let's keep it positive and constructive.
Rocknj06 says... #1
Short answer? Yes. Each land drop triggers each angel, so you would be able to exile 2. Each angel can exile the other, just not itself. I'm sure a longer, more detailed response is coming. Its just hard on a phone. If an angel is removed, or the cards removed by that one will return.
September 28, 2015 2:45 p.m.