30 messages · 1 616 vues · qui a participé ?
(un peu parce que ça date d'un peu trop longtemps)
Le 06/06/2009, AlexKid38 avait écrit ...
Cette video peut aider à comprendre Cascade et indique bien que X=0
En anglais par contre => http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_iv0nBr7E8
[ Dernière modification par AlexKid38 le 06 jun 2009 à 11h54 ]
The last couple of weeks have seen some discussion about the interaction between
* cards like Bonds of Agony (those with mana- and non-mana X-costs) and
* effects which state a spell's mana cost need not be paid (eg: Cascade)
Specifically, the question is whether a non-zero value of X can be chosen if some of the X-costs are not mana costs. (eg: Cascade revealing Bonds of Agony)
I've seen some vehement opinions on each side, but anyone who said the
answer is 'obvious' ... was wrong. The current rules are ambiguous
on the subject because the word "any" could have two different meanings in the sentence "If you're playing a spell that has {X} in its mana cost, the value of X isn't defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets you play that spell without paying any cost that
includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0." So the answer
isn't obvious.
After consideration, the rules manager has informed me that as part of the 2010 magic update, that sentence will be clarified to bring it in line with the desired interpretation: non-zero values for X are not allowed when the X-mana cost of a spell is not being paid. In the meantime, it has been ruled to work the same way... Bonds of Agony + Cascade does NOT work.
Le 14/06/2009, Ekrasios avait écrit ...
ca veut dire que la combo est legale jusqu'à la sortie de M2010?
