Can I choose the value for X for spells cast with Bolas's Citadel? 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?
How would it unbalance gameplay to rule that Weapon Master allows for picking a fighting style?
What is ls Largest Number Formed by only moving two sticks in 508?
Coin Game with infinite paradox
What is the numbering system used for the DSN dishes?
Stretch a Tikz tree
What is the definining line between a helicopter and a drone a person can ride in?
What's parked in Mil Moscow helicopter plant?
false 'Security alert' from Google - every login generates mails from 'no-reply@accounts.google.com'
Why did Europeans not widely domesticate foxes?
Are there existing rules/lore for MTG planeswalkers?
Why do people think Winterfell crypts is the safest place for women, children & old people?
What is the evidence that custom checks in Northern Ireland are going to result in violence?
All ASCII characters with a given bit count
Suing a Police Officer Instead of the Police Department
RIP Packet Format
What helicopter has the most rotor blades?
How do I deal with an erroneously large refund?
When I export an AI 300x60 art board it saves with bigger dimensions
Israeli soda type drink
What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?
In search of the origins of term censor, I hit a dead end stuck with the greek term, to censor, λογοκρίνω
Does using the Inspiration rules for character defects encourage My Guy Syndrome?
Does Prince Arnaud cause someone holding the Princess to lose?
How to translate "red flag" into Spanish?
Can I choose the value for X for spells cast with Bolas's Citadel?
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 Apr 21 at 5:15
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
14 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♦
12 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
14 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♦
12 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
14 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♦
12 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
14 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♦
12 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
14 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♦
12 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
14 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
14 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♦
12 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♦
12 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