Can I choose the value for X for spells cast with Bolas's Citadel? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30 pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?What is the converted mana cost of a spell with X when cast with the Miracle mechanic?Can extort be triggered for countered spells?Does Thrumming Stone ripple after rippleChandra, Pyromaster's ability and spells with x casting costIf I exile Rout with Narset's ability, when can it be cast?Does Brain in a Jar let you cast a Sorcery at Instant speed?What happens if multiple people can cast the same card?Can I cast both parts of Commit//Memory from the graveyard with Torrential Gearhulk?Can a Djinn Illuminatus make me draw my whole deck with Ancestral Visions?What cards can I cast from exile with Dream Pillager?
Where to find documentation for `whois` command options?
Why I cannot instantiate a class whose constructor is private in a friend class?
Is a self contained air-bullet cartridge feasible?
Raising a bilingual kid. When should we introduce the majority language?
SQL Server placement of master database files vs resource database files
What's called a person who works as someone who puts products on shelves in stores?
What is the term for extremely loose Latin word order?
France's Public Holidays' Puzzle
Putting Ant-Man on house arrest
Are there existing rules/lore for MTG planeswalkers?
What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?
Did war bonds have better investment alternatives during WWII?
What were wait-states, and why was it only an issue for PCs?
What *exactly* is electrical current, voltage, and resistance?
How to keep bees out of canned beverages?
Marquee sign letters
How was Lagrange appointed professor of mathematics so early?
What is the numbering system used for the DSN dishes?
When speaking, how do you change your mind mid-sentence?
Is Bran literally the world's memory?
What's parked in Mil Moscow helicopter plant?
Arriving in Atlanta (after US Preclearance in Dublin). Will I go through TSA security in Atlanta to transfer to a connecting flight?
TV series episode where humans nuke aliens before decrypting their message that states they come in peace
/bin/ls sorts differently than just ls
Can I choose the value for X for spells cast with Bolas's Citadel?
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30 pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?What is the converted mana cost of a spell with X when cast with the Miracle mechanic?Can extort be triggered for countered spells?Does Thrumming Stone ripple after rippleChandra, Pyromaster's ability and spells with x casting costIf I exile Rout with Narset's ability, when can it be cast?Does Brain in a Jar let you cast a Sorcery at Instant speed?What happens if multiple people can cast the same card?Can I cast both parts of Commit//Memory from the graveyard with Torrential Gearhulk?Can a Djinn Illuminatus make me draw my whole deck with Ancestral Visions?What cards can I cast from exile with Dream Pillager?
There is a new card called Bolas's Citadel which says:
You may play the top card of your library. If you cast a spell this way, pay life equal to its converted mana cost rather than pay its mana cost.
Can use my life to pay for any X spell?
magic-the-gathering
add a comment |
There is a new card called Bolas's Citadel which says:
You may play the top card of your library. If you cast a spell this way, pay life equal to its converted mana cost rather than pay its mana cost.
Can use my life to pay for any X spell?
magic-the-gathering
1
Huh. I'm actually not sure. The relevant rule is 107.3b "If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0." The question is, does "Pay life equal to its converted mana cost" count as an "alternative cost that includes X"? I could see it ruled either way, and I couldn't find any other cards that worked similarly.
– Arcanist Lupus
2 days ago
add a comment |
There is a new card called Bolas's Citadel which says:
You may play the top card of your library. If you cast a spell this way, pay life equal to its converted mana cost rather than pay its mana cost.
Can use my life to pay for any X spell?
magic-the-gathering
There is a new card called Bolas's Citadel which says:
You may play the top card of your library. If you cast a spell this way, pay life equal to its converted mana cost rather than pay its mana cost.
Can use my life to pay for any X spell?
magic-the-gathering
magic-the-gathering
edited 2 days ago
TheThirdMan
6,64811243
6,64811243
asked 2 days ago
Shara SharaShara Shara
947
947
1
Huh. I'm actually not sure. The relevant rule is 107.3b "If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0." The question is, does "Pay life equal to its converted mana cost" count as an "alternative cost that includes X"? I could see it ruled either way, and I couldn't find any other cards that worked similarly.
– Arcanist Lupus
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
Huh. I'm actually not sure. The relevant rule is 107.3b "If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0." The question is, does "Pay life equal to its converted mana cost" count as an "alternative cost that includes X"? I could see it ruled either way, and I couldn't find any other cards that worked similarly.
– Arcanist Lupus
2 days ago
1
1
Huh. I'm actually not sure. The relevant rule is 107.3b "If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0." The question is, does "Pay life equal to its converted mana cost" count as an "alternative cost that includes X"? I could see it ruled either way, and I couldn't find any other cards that worked similarly.
– Arcanist Lupus
2 days ago
Huh. I'm actually not sure. The relevant rule is 107.3b "If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0." The question is, does "Pay life equal to its converted mana cost" count as an "alternative cost that includes X"? I could see it ruled either way, and I couldn't find any other cards that worked similarly.
– Arcanist Lupus
2 days ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
No, you cannot choose any value for X other than 0 when casting cards using Bolas's Citadel.
The phrase "rather than pay its mana cost" or "rather than pay [card name]'s mana cost" is a standard phrase in Magic indicating that the cost specified is an alternative cost. This is stated explicitly in rule 117.9:
Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell's text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell's mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, "You may [action] rather than pay [this object's] mana cost," or "You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost." Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.
So if you cast spells using Bolas's Citadel's second ability, you are required to pay an alternative cost of life equal to the spell's converted mana cost. Then rule 107.3b applies:
If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn't defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. This doesn't apply to effects that only reduce a cost, even if they reduce it to zero. See rule 601, "Casting Spells."
So, you are required to choose 0 for X when casting spells with X in the mana cost.
2
You may like to cite rulings on existing cards until we have the WAR rulings article, e.g. the Expertise cycle all include the ruling "If the card has X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as the value of X when casting it without paying its mana cost."
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
3
The rules here seem to contain all of the relevant information. I don't see what an existing ruling would add.
– murgatroid99♦
2 days ago
1
Ok, no problem. 👍 I think once the WAR rulings arrive it will at least state it plainly and unquestionably that yes those rules apply like this to this card, but another card's rulings aren't relevant like that.
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
"...nor an alternative cost that includes X" seems relevant here. Wouldn't the life paid include x and therefore satisfy the condition to allow x to be non-0?
– km6zla
11 hours ago
I believe that phrase is very literal. The cost specified on Bolas's Citadel does not contain the word "X", so it doesn't satisfy that condition. For an example that goes the other way, Bonfire of the Damned has a Miracle alternative cost that explicitly includes X.
– murgatroid99♦
10 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "147"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45939%2fcan-i-choose-the-value-for-x-for-spells-cast-with-bolass-citadel%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
No, you cannot choose any value for X other than 0 when casting cards using Bolas's Citadel.
The phrase "rather than pay its mana cost" or "rather than pay [card name]'s mana cost" is a standard phrase in Magic indicating that the cost specified is an alternative cost. This is stated explicitly in rule 117.9:
Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell's text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell's mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, "You may [action] rather than pay [this object's] mana cost," or "You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost." Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.
So if you cast spells using Bolas's Citadel's second ability, you are required to pay an alternative cost of life equal to the spell's converted mana cost. Then rule 107.3b applies:
If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn't defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. This doesn't apply to effects that only reduce a cost, even if they reduce it to zero. See rule 601, "Casting Spells."
So, you are required to choose 0 for X when casting spells with X in the mana cost.
2
You may like to cite rulings on existing cards until we have the WAR rulings article, e.g. the Expertise cycle all include the ruling "If the card has X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as the value of X when casting it without paying its mana cost."
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
3
The rules here seem to contain all of the relevant information. I don't see what an existing ruling would add.
– murgatroid99♦
2 days ago
1
Ok, no problem. 👍 I think once the WAR rulings arrive it will at least state it plainly and unquestionably that yes those rules apply like this to this card, but another card's rulings aren't relevant like that.
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
"...nor an alternative cost that includes X" seems relevant here. Wouldn't the life paid include x and therefore satisfy the condition to allow x to be non-0?
– km6zla
11 hours ago
I believe that phrase is very literal. The cost specified on Bolas's Citadel does not contain the word "X", so it doesn't satisfy that condition. For an example that goes the other way, Bonfire of the Damned has a Miracle alternative cost that explicitly includes X.
– murgatroid99♦
10 hours ago
add a comment |
No, you cannot choose any value for X other than 0 when casting cards using Bolas's Citadel.
The phrase "rather than pay its mana cost" or "rather than pay [card name]'s mana cost" is a standard phrase in Magic indicating that the cost specified is an alternative cost. This is stated explicitly in rule 117.9:
Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell's text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell's mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, "You may [action] rather than pay [this object's] mana cost," or "You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost." Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.
So if you cast spells using Bolas's Citadel's second ability, you are required to pay an alternative cost of life equal to the spell's converted mana cost. Then rule 107.3b applies:
If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn't defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. This doesn't apply to effects that only reduce a cost, even if they reduce it to zero. See rule 601, "Casting Spells."
So, you are required to choose 0 for X when casting spells with X in the mana cost.
2
You may like to cite rulings on existing cards until we have the WAR rulings article, e.g. the Expertise cycle all include the ruling "If the card has X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as the value of X when casting it without paying its mana cost."
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
3
The rules here seem to contain all of the relevant information. I don't see what an existing ruling would add.
– murgatroid99♦
2 days ago
1
Ok, no problem. 👍 I think once the WAR rulings arrive it will at least state it plainly and unquestionably that yes those rules apply like this to this card, but another card's rulings aren't relevant like that.
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
"...nor an alternative cost that includes X" seems relevant here. Wouldn't the life paid include x and therefore satisfy the condition to allow x to be non-0?
– km6zla
11 hours ago
I believe that phrase is very literal. The cost specified on Bolas's Citadel does not contain the word "X", so it doesn't satisfy that condition. For an example that goes the other way, Bonfire of the Damned has a Miracle alternative cost that explicitly includes X.
– murgatroid99♦
10 hours ago
add a comment |
No, you cannot choose any value for X other than 0 when casting cards using Bolas's Citadel.
The phrase "rather than pay its mana cost" or "rather than pay [card name]'s mana cost" is a standard phrase in Magic indicating that the cost specified is an alternative cost. This is stated explicitly in rule 117.9:
Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell's text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell's mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, "You may [action] rather than pay [this object's] mana cost," or "You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost." Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.
So if you cast spells using Bolas's Citadel's second ability, you are required to pay an alternative cost of life equal to the spell's converted mana cost. Then rule 107.3b applies:
If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn't defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. This doesn't apply to effects that only reduce a cost, even if they reduce it to zero. See rule 601, "Casting Spells."
So, you are required to choose 0 for X when casting spells with X in the mana cost.
No, you cannot choose any value for X other than 0 when casting cards using Bolas's Citadel.
The phrase "rather than pay its mana cost" or "rather than pay [card name]'s mana cost" is a standard phrase in Magic indicating that the cost specified is an alternative cost. This is stated explicitly in rule 117.9:
Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell's text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell's mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, "You may [action] rather than pay [this object's] mana cost," or "You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost." Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.
So if you cast spells using Bolas's Citadel's second ability, you are required to pay an alternative cost of life equal to the spell's converted mana cost. Then rule 107.3b applies:
If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn't defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. This doesn't apply to effects that only reduce a cost, even if they reduce it to zero. See rule 601, "Casting Spells."
So, you are required to choose 0 for X when casting spells with X in the mana cost.
answered 2 days ago
murgatroid99♦murgatroid99
48.5k7122205
48.5k7122205
2
You may like to cite rulings on existing cards until we have the WAR rulings article, e.g. the Expertise cycle all include the ruling "If the card has X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as the value of X when casting it without paying its mana cost."
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
3
The rules here seem to contain all of the relevant information. I don't see what an existing ruling would add.
– murgatroid99♦
2 days ago
1
Ok, no problem. 👍 I think once the WAR rulings arrive it will at least state it plainly and unquestionably that yes those rules apply like this to this card, but another card's rulings aren't relevant like that.
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
"...nor an alternative cost that includes X" seems relevant here. Wouldn't the life paid include x and therefore satisfy the condition to allow x to be non-0?
– km6zla
11 hours ago
I believe that phrase is very literal. The cost specified on Bolas's Citadel does not contain the word "X", so it doesn't satisfy that condition. For an example that goes the other way, Bonfire of the Damned has a Miracle alternative cost that explicitly includes X.
– murgatroid99♦
10 hours ago
add a comment |
2
You may like to cite rulings on existing cards until we have the WAR rulings article, e.g. the Expertise cycle all include the ruling "If the card has X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as the value of X when casting it without paying its mana cost."
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
3
The rules here seem to contain all of the relevant information. I don't see what an existing ruling would add.
– murgatroid99♦
2 days ago
1
Ok, no problem. 👍 I think once the WAR rulings arrive it will at least state it plainly and unquestionably that yes those rules apply like this to this card, but another card's rulings aren't relevant like that.
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
"...nor an alternative cost that includes X" seems relevant here. Wouldn't the life paid include x and therefore satisfy the condition to allow x to be non-0?
– km6zla
11 hours ago
I believe that phrase is very literal. The cost specified on Bolas's Citadel does not contain the word "X", so it doesn't satisfy that condition. For an example that goes the other way, Bonfire of the Damned has a Miracle alternative cost that explicitly includes X.
– murgatroid99♦
10 hours ago
2
2
You may like to cite rulings on existing cards until we have the WAR rulings article, e.g. the Expertise cycle all include the ruling "If the card has X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as the value of X when casting it without paying its mana cost."
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
You may like to cite rulings on existing cards until we have the WAR rulings article, e.g. the Expertise cycle all include the ruling "If the card has X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as the value of X when casting it without paying its mana cost."
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
3
3
The rules here seem to contain all of the relevant information. I don't see what an existing ruling would add.
– murgatroid99♦
2 days ago
The rules here seem to contain all of the relevant information. I don't see what an existing ruling would add.
– murgatroid99♦
2 days ago
1
1
Ok, no problem. 👍 I think once the WAR rulings arrive it will at least state it plainly and unquestionably that yes those rules apply like this to this card, but another card's rulings aren't relevant like that.
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
Ok, no problem. 👍 I think once the WAR rulings arrive it will at least state it plainly and unquestionably that yes those rules apply like this to this card, but another card's rulings aren't relevant like that.
– doppelgreener
2 days ago
"...nor an alternative cost that includes X" seems relevant here. Wouldn't the life paid include x and therefore satisfy the condition to allow x to be non-0?
– km6zla
11 hours ago
"...nor an alternative cost that includes X" seems relevant here. Wouldn't the life paid include x and therefore satisfy the condition to allow x to be non-0?
– km6zla
11 hours ago
I believe that phrase is very literal. The cost specified on Bolas's Citadel does not contain the word "X", so it doesn't satisfy that condition. For an example that goes the other way, Bonfire of the Damned has a Miracle alternative cost that explicitly includes X.
– murgatroid99♦
10 hours ago
I believe that phrase is very literal. The cost specified on Bolas's Citadel does not contain the word "X", so it doesn't satisfy that condition. For an example that goes the other way, Bonfire of the Damned has a Miracle alternative cost that explicitly includes X.
– murgatroid99♦
10 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Board & Card Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45939%2fcan-i-choose-the-value-for-x-for-spells-cast-with-bolass-citadel%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Huh. I'm actually not sure. The relevant rule is 107.3b "If a player is casting a spell that has an X in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0." The question is, does "Pay life equal to its converted mana cost" count as an "alternative cost that includes X"? I could see it ruled either way, and I couldn't find any other cards that worked similarly.
– Arcanist Lupus
2 days ago