[Promo] – 2012 Holiday Promo Card: Naughty//Nice

[Marelt Ekiran]

Originally Posted by fnord

Probably, but there's no reason why it couldn't. It works perfectly fine within the rules.

If I recall the rules correctly, paying the cost is impossible. You can only pay the "Tap" cost if the permanent is untapped and you can only pay the "Untap" cost is the permanent is tapped. When paying a cost for a spell or ability, all parts of it must be paid at once. Partial payments are not allowed.

So yes, I do agree that Fruitcake Elemental and Season's Beatings are the only cards that can actually work under the game rules as they exist. I suppose technically Yule Ooze can work, since there's no rule forbidding the eating of food as part of a cost, although rules clarification might be requires towards defining food and setting a minimum required quantity.

[fnord]

Originally Posted by Marelt Ekiran

If I recall the rules correctly, paying the cost is impossible. You can only pay the "Tap" cost if the permanent is untapped and you can only pay the "Untap" cost is the permanent is tapped. When paying a cost for a spell or ability, all parts of it must be paid at once. Partial payments are not allowed.

Half right:

Originally Posted by Comprehensive Rules

601.2g The player pays the total cost in any order. Partial payments are not allowed. Unpayable costs can't be paid.

Since you can pay the costs in any order, you can pay the tap cost, then the untap cost, then the second tap cost, then the second untap cost, then the final tap cost.

[MrMunchlax]

Gotta love holiday promos...though I kinda was hoping for "Angel of the Christmas Tree." Given how broken Angel of Serenity is, it was more of an unreachable dream.

[benbuzz790]

I think the difference is that you now "own" the card you took (obviously depends on the person you're playing with), and you are giving a gift with nice.

Cool card.

Originally Posted by Bogardan Mage

It doesn't say that, and there isn't really any reason to think it does. In normal magic your hand can only contain cards that you own, but that doesn't necessarily apply in silver-bordered land.

Breaking the rule that says you own all the cards in your library seems less likely than actually allowing someone to give a gift when you take into account that it's a holiday card. I really admire how they implied it's a gift in such a subtle way.

Do you think it's more likely that they broke the rule that says you can't put cards in your hand or lib you don't own, or the rule that keeps ownership from changing?

[Bogardan Mage]

Originally Posted by benbuzz790

Breaking the rule that says you own all the cards in your library seems less likely than actually allowing someone to give a gift when you take into account that it's a holiday card. I really admire how they implied it's a gift in such a subtle way.

Do you think it's more likely that they broke the rule that says you can't put cards in your hand or lib you don't own, or the rule that keeps ownership from changing?

There is no rule that keeps ownership from changing, black bordered cards have been printed that do so. However, they do not do so without saying as much. Nice does exactly what it says it does, which is put a card into your opponent's library. Nowhere does it say that they now own it. By analogy, the opponent will also not own a Letter Bomb that has been shuffled into their library.

[benbuzz790]

Right, I know. It's implied because it's a holiday card. They're being clever. It's like a play-on-words, but instead it's a play-on-rules.

[jrch5618]

Originally Posted by Marelt Ekiran

If I recall the rules correctly, paying the cost is impossible. You can only pay the "Tap" cost if the permanent is untapped and you can only pay the "Untap" cost is the permanent is tapped. When paying a cost for a spell or ability, all parts of it must be paid at once. Partial payments are not allowed.

So yes, I do agree that Fruitcake Elemental and Season's Beatings are the only cards that can actually work under the game rules as they exist. I suppose technically Yule Ooze can work, since there's no rule forbidding the eating of food as part of a cost, although rules clarification might be requires towards defining food and setting a minimum required quantity.

They already defined this with Fat Ass from Unhinged. Read the FAQ for that set. (Gum isn't food.)

[Bogardan Mage]

Originally Posted by benbuzz790

Right, I know. It's implied because it's a holiday card. They're being clever. It's like a play-on-words, but instead it's a play-on-rules.

No it isn't. It is what it appears to be and nothing more. This is not unprecedented even in silver border. You are wrong about how this card works.

[EX33396948]

Originally Posted by Bogardan Mage

No it isn't. It is what it appears to be and nothing more. This is not unprecedented even in silver border. You are wrong about how this card works.

I have to agree with you here on this one.

108.3. The owner of a card in the game is the player who started the game with it in his or her deck. If a card is brought into the game from outside the game rather than starting in a player’s deck, its owner is the player who brought it into the game. If a card starts the game in the command zone, its owner is the player who put it into the command zone to start the game. Legal ownership of a card in the game is irrelevant to the game rules except for the rules for ante. (See rule 407.)

Just because this is silver bordered sillyness, doesn't mean the fundamental rules of the game change. If WotC wanted it to change ownership, they would have stated it on the card.

[Ogrefoot]

This would be so fun in EDH.