1:16 I would explain the answer as follows: something that lasts “until” an event occurs is looking for a specific event. Since phasing does not cause a creature to leave the battlefield, the specific event “until this creature leaves the battlefield” does not occur, so the creature stays exiled. However, an effect with an “as long as” duration is not looking for a specific event, rather at the current game state. If the game state no longer matched the duration requirement, it ends. Since the game can’t see that you control the Preacher anymore, the game state no longer matches the requirement, and thus ends
"so the creature was on the battlefield." "Yes" "And phasing it out caused it to no longer be on the battlefield." "Yes" "So phasing it out made it leave the battlefield?" "Blasphemy!"
I enjoy that the actual rule for phasing practically says "it didn't actually leave, we're just pretending it's not there" 😂 It's actually a very elegant solution after a few different overengineered versions of the rule...
From a yugioh players perspective this was fairly intuitive. Yugioh has an astonishing number of effects that care about the current, past, and sometimes even future state of other cards for their resolution to complete or effect to continue. So the target of preacher no longer being able to see preacher have a particular temporary state applied to it (being tapped) interrupting the effect makes perfect sense. This also comes up a lot in Yugioh as a reasonably common form of interaction is flipping a monster face down which causes it to be treated as hidden information and when turned face down it loses nearly all information.
I wish I had seen this earlier today! I spent a few hours brewing a voltron deck which abused an entry-effect commander and that phasing out doesn't detach auras/equipment. I went very quickly from "oh! this one's relevant to me!" to realizing the whole core concept needs to be reworked. Thanks for keeping me from learning that mid-game Dave :)
My favorite quirk of this type of problem is what happens when the phased out Banisher Priest's owner leaves the game in multiplayer. Answer: you don't get your creature back
Is that so? I'm unsure of how to read 702.26n here. I suppose the two sentences are not linked, so that the first says "being phased out does not impede the effects of that rule" and the second says "if the player who left the game controlled a permanent they do not own and that is phased out, so that if that permanent were to phase in, the control changing effect would have ended, the permanent does not phase in immediately or stay phased out but instead at this specified time". I was unsure if this was instead saying "if a phased-out permanent would leave the game due to its controller leaving the game, it instead phases in at this specific time at which point it would be removed instead somehow." I suppose this doesn't make sense, since the rule does not replace the removal or exiling and also since the relevant multiplayer rule does not have a mechanism for removing objects at a later point and neither does 702.26n add one.
I don't know the relevant CR justification, but the rules manager posted about a similar situation with the card Out of Time on Twitter, which is somehow still a valid channel for official rulings.
I got it wrong, but it makes sense. Similar to if you tap Rubinia Soulsinger, and untap her before the ability resolves, then tap her again. You won't get the creature from the first activation of her ability because the condition (of her being tapped) stopped being true. With Preacher being phased out, it's more like the condition (of him being tapped) becomes undefined.
the best way i can think of to explain the difference here is to compare what you think should happen when you phase out a glorious anthem versus when you phase out an oblivion ring. the templating on oblivion ring more obviously seperates the [when it enters] and [when it leaves] as two distinct events because they are both triggered abilities that go on the stack and everything, and helps bridge the gap to explaining the one shots created by the [until it leaves] template, while i imagine more magic players would pretty easily intuit that a phased out glorious anthem shouldnt affect anything with its continuous effect, and you can use that as a bridge to explaining why preacher's continuous effect cant see it while its phased out
How I would explain it(no idea whether it's right or not): a permanent that phases in and out do not leave the battlefield and it does not enter the battlefield (something that is there, then doesn't exist, then exist again doesn't leave or enter). When something doesn't exist however it cannot be tapped
More interesting to me case would be with the so called 'old templating', where the exile and return triggers where separate abilities, like Fiend Hunter. I think phasing out a *Fiend Hunter with its first ability on the stack* would cause the target to be exiled indefinitely, because the relation between the two objects is never created since Fiend Hunter does not exist at the time of resolution (due to being phased out) and therefore the second ability fails to find the original target even if Fiend Hunter phases in and then leaves the battlefield. Further, if Fiend Hunter is phased out after the first ability already exiled its target, the target would remain exiled until the Fiend Hunter phases in and is later removed from the battlefield, as if I recall correctly, phasing out does not break the relation between the exiled object and Fiend Hunter, but also does not count as a circumstance that would trigger Fiend Hunter's second ability. I could however be wrong about the result or about the reason of either of the above, so would gladly hear you opinion, judge.
Interesting that when Preacher and Dungeon Geists phase back in, I think they're still targeting the same card, they don't forget because nothing left the battlefield, no flicker effect, yet the continuous effect ends. And it makes sense, because once that switches from On to Off, the effect wouldn't just come online again. It's like they're still pointing a finger, but nothing is happening, and in game mechanics it is meaningless at this time. But certain qualities stay, like Monstrous. Though paired sounds like a quality coming from Soulbond, it says for as long as you control both creatures, so if either are phased out, they stop being paired I assume?
So a question about the Dungeon Geists example: Would the fact that Nick's Bears untapping even after Dungeon Geists are phased back in be different, if Dungeon Geists' effect's last sentence read something like "That creature doesn't untap while you control Dungeon Geists."?
To this day, everytime phasing is brought up, I will think of ferrish wheel being able to phase something out until a condition is met that, with minimal setup, you can just avoid forever. Thus only "Time and Tide" and restart the game karn are able to get it back (that I know of) How I would explain the difference: Priest sais "until it leaves", phasing (as a shorthand) treats something as if it does not exist without it leaving play, thus, whatever is contained is not released. Preacher sais "for as long as preacher ...), phasing (as a shorthand) treats something as if it does not exist, since preacher does not exist, it cannot fulfill the condition of being tapped, thus, it is returned. If I am really brave and ready to butcher the rules, id say that the Priest checks for a zone change, while Preacher continuously checks for its own existence, thus, Preacher's effect is broken on phasing out, but Priest is not
Similarly, if "Out of Time" is a creature when its ability that phases out all creatures until it leaves the battlefield resolves... none of those creatures is ever coming back. This really sucks if your Commander gets caught, because none of the effects that put it back in your Command Zone apply here.
@@centurosproductions8827 Didn't know about that one, thought the ferris wheel was the only one, nice. Chill on the never coming back part, surely some has a Time and Tide laying around
But what happens to the thing Banisher Priest removed if the Banisher Priest leaves the battlefield *while* it's phased out? (If a player loses in a multiplayer game for example)
I think that in this case, "when foo leaves the battlefield" is different still from "move target to another zone until foo leaves the battlefield", since the former would be a triggered ability and therefore go on the stack when foo leaves the battlefield whereas I think this video describes the latter as a one-shot effect that doesn't use the stack, but of course, I could be mistaken. (I have a vague memory of this coming up in another DDR, since there's one "exile until leaves the battlefield" that predates that templating and actually does use an extra triggered ability to return the target).
maybe for a future ruling: what happens to the card "artificers hex", when the creature, to which the equipment is attached, phases out? According to rule 702.26g, attached permanents phase out indirectly with the permanent they are attached to, but should'nt "artificers hex" go into the graveyard due to state based actions at that point? 😅 I'm curious
Just so i could test my understanding, if it's based on the type of effect let's say Banisher Priest 0.5 said "Exile target creature. It remains exiled as long as Banisher Priest is on the battlefield". Would that mean that if 0.5 version of the priest phases out the effect would end?
Now I think we need a clarification about Banisher Priest's controller losing a multiplayer game with more than one player left afterwards. The CR state that "all objects owned by that player leave the game", but does leaving the game include leaving the battlefield for permanents that care about it via "until" clauses?
As per official ruling: _In a multiplayer game, if Banisher Priest's owner leaves the game, the exiled card will return to the battlefield. Because the one-shot effect that returns the card isn't an ability that goes on the stack, it won't cease to exist along with the leaving player's spells and abilities on the stack._
For contrast - the "old templating" example: _In a multiplayer game, if you lose the game, the creature exiled with _*_Fiend Hunter_*_ remains exiled indefinitely. This is also different from abilities on other cards that exile a permanent "until" something happens._
But if the Banisher Priest was phased out when Amy left the game, Nick's bears would be left in exile, since the game would ignore the Priest leaving the battlefield.
What happens if you turn banisher priest face-down and have it then leave the battlefield? Does the answer to this change if you have multiple face-down creatures?
Dungeon Geists sets up the continuous effect with an end condition. That condition is met when Dungeon Geists is phased out, as the permanent is considered to no longer exist. When it phases back in, the continuous effect is still gone, as the Dungeon Geists did not enter the battlefield, but merely started being observable again. It was there the whole time, but the effect simply lost track of the permanent and ended.
Okay, followup question for the Banisher Priest. Let's say Nick plays Reality Ripple on the Banisher Priest in response to it's ETB ability. Will the Priest still exile Nick's Grizzly Bears even though the priest treated as though it's not on the battlefield?
I believe 'not existing' is treated the same as 'not being on the battlefield' / 'no longer being on the battlefield' case from the official ruling: _If Banisher Priest leaves the battlefield before its enters-the-battlefield ability resolves, the target creature won't be exiled._
That ruling isn't applicable here. It refers to 610.3a, an "until" condition happening before the initial effect takes place. But the Priest phasing out is not leaving play, so the "until" clause is unfulfilled.
1:16 I would explain the answer as follows: something that lasts “until” an event occurs is looking for a specific event. Since phasing does not cause a creature to leave the battlefield, the specific event “until this creature leaves the battlefield” does not occur, so the creature stays exiled. However, an effect with an “as long as” duration is not looking for a specific event, rather at the current game state. If the game state no longer matched the duration requirement, it ends. Since the game can’t see that you control the Preacher anymore, the game state no longer matches the requirement, and thus ends
“It can’t be tapped if it doesn’t exist”
I love when one ruling leads to a follow up ruling like this.
"so the creature was on the battlefield."
"Yes"
"And phasing it out caused it to no longer be on the battlefield."
"Yes"
"So phasing it out made it leave the battlefield?"
"Blasphemy!"
I enjoy that the actual rule for phasing practically says "it didn't actually leave, we're just pretending it's not there" 😂 It's actually a very elegant solution after a few different overengineered versions of the rule...
Out of Time being phased out by its own trigger is the best.
Creatures phase out until.
From a yugioh players perspective this was fairly intuitive. Yugioh has an astonishing number of effects that care about the current, past, and sometimes even future state of other cards for their resolution to complete or effect to continue. So the target of preacher no longer being able to see preacher have a particular temporary state applied to it (being tapped) interrupting the effect makes perfect sense. This also comes up a lot in Yugioh as a reasonably common form of interaction is flipping a monster face down which causes it to be treated as hidden information and when turned face down it loses nearly all information.
I wish I had seen this earlier today! I spent a few hours brewing a voltron deck which abused an entry-effect commander and that phasing out doesn't detach auras/equipment. I went very quickly from "oh! this one's relevant to me!" to realizing the whole core concept needs to be reworked.
Thanks for keeping me from learning that mid-game Dave :)
Hey Dave, these kind of videos are my favorite! Thank you for explaining. Love your work!
My favorite quirk of this type of problem is what happens when the phased out Banisher Priest's owner leaves the game in multiplayer. Answer: you don't get your creature back
Is that so? I'm unsure of how to read 702.26n here. I suppose the two sentences are not linked, so that the first says "being phased out does not impede the effects of that rule" and the second says "if the player who left the game controlled a permanent they do not own and that is phased out, so that if that permanent were to phase in, the control changing effect would have ended, the permanent does not phase in immediately or stay phased out but instead at this specified time". I was unsure if this was instead saying "if a phased-out permanent would leave the game due to its controller leaving the game, it instead phases in at this specific time at which point it would be removed instead somehow." I suppose this doesn't make sense, since the rule does not replace the removal or exiling and also since the relevant multiplayer rule does not have a mechanism for removing objects at a later point and neither does 702.26n add one.
I don't know the relevant CR justification, but the rules manager posted about a similar situation with the card Out of Time on Twitter, which is somehow still a valid channel for official rulings.
702.26k kind of covers this case, but the one-shot effect is not a trigger
As someone that loves using Preacher, this was good to know :)
Oh of course Dave is an engineer XD
If you like that, you might also like my video on how the activated sludge process works: ruclips.net/video/zLBDqaaL6GI/видео.html
I got it wrong, but it makes sense. Similar to if you tap Rubinia Soulsinger, and untap her before the ability resolves, then tap her again. You won't get the creature from the first activation of her ability because the condition (of her being tapped) stopped being true.
With Preacher being phased out, it's more like the condition (of him being tapped) becomes undefined.
the best way i can think of to explain the difference here is to compare what you think should happen when you phase out a glorious anthem versus when you phase out an oblivion ring. the templating on oblivion ring more obviously seperates the [when it enters] and [when it leaves] as two distinct events because they are both triggered abilities that go on the stack and everything, and helps bridge the gap to explaining the one shots created by the [until it leaves] template, while i imagine more magic players would pretty easily intuit that a phased out glorious anthem shouldnt affect anything with its continuous effect, and you can use that as a bridge to explaining why preacher's continuous effect cant see it while its phased out
How I would explain it(no idea whether it's right or not): a permanent that phases in and out do not leave the battlefield and it does not enter the battlefield (something that is there, then doesn't exist, then exist again doesn't leave or enter). When something doesn't exist however it cannot be tapped
I love the switch analogy
And the unintentional trip joke
More interesting to me case would be with the so called 'old templating', where the exile and return triggers where separate abilities, like Fiend Hunter. I think phasing out a *Fiend Hunter with its first ability on the stack* would cause the target to be exiled indefinitely, because the relation between the two objects is never created since Fiend Hunter does not exist at the time of resolution (due to being phased out) and therefore the second ability fails to find the original target even if Fiend Hunter phases in and then leaves the battlefield.
Further, if Fiend Hunter is phased out after the first ability already exiled its target, the target would remain exiled until the Fiend Hunter phases in and is later removed from the battlefield, as if I recall correctly, phasing out does not break the relation between the exiled object and Fiend Hunter, but also does not count as a circumstance that would trigger Fiend Hunter's second ability.
I could however be wrong about the result or about the reason of either of the above, so would gladly hear you opinion, judge.
Linked abilities are able to remain linked even when their source is phased out.
Interesting that when Preacher and Dungeon Geists phase back in, I think they're still targeting the same card, they don't forget because nothing left the battlefield, no flicker effect, yet the continuous effect ends. And it makes sense, because once that switches from On to Off, the effect wouldn't just come online again. It's like they're still pointing a finger, but nothing is happening, and in game mechanics it is meaningless at this time. But certain qualities stay, like Monstrous. Though paired sounds like a quality coming from Soulbond, it says for as long as you control both creatures, so if either are phased out, they stop being paired I assume?
So a question about the Dungeon Geists example:
Would the fact that Nick's Bears untapping even after Dungeon Geists are phased back in be different,
if Dungeon Geists' effect's last sentence read something like
"That creature doesn't untap while you control Dungeon Geists."?
To this day, everytime phasing is brought up, I will think of ferrish wheel being able to phase something out until a condition is met that, with minimal setup, you can just avoid forever. Thus only "Time and Tide" and restart the game karn are able to get it back (that I know of)
How I would explain the difference:
Priest sais "until it leaves", phasing (as a shorthand) treats something as if it does not exist without it leaving play, thus, whatever is contained is not released.
Preacher sais "for as long as preacher ...), phasing (as a shorthand) treats something as if it does not exist, since preacher does not exist, it cannot fulfill the condition of being tapped, thus, it is returned.
If I am really brave and ready to butcher the rules, id say that the Priest checks for a zone change, while Preacher continuously checks for its own existence, thus, Preacher's effect is broken on phasing out, but Priest is not
Similarly, if "Out of Time" is a creature when its ability that phases out all creatures until it leaves the battlefield resolves... none of those creatures is ever coming back.
This really sucks if your Commander gets caught, because none of the effects that put it back in your Command Zone apply here.
@@centurosproductions8827 Didn't know about that one, thought the ferris wheel was the only one, nice.
Chill on the never coming back part, surely some has a Time and Tide laying around
But what happens to the thing Banisher Priest removed if the Banisher Priest leaves the battlefield *while* it's phased out? (If a player loses in a multiplayer game for example)
As long as you control is different than when leaves the battlefield.
I think that in this case, "when foo leaves the battlefield" is different still from "move target to another zone until foo leaves the battlefield", since the former would be a triggered ability and therefore go on the stack when foo leaves the battlefield whereas I think this video describes the latter as a one-shot effect that doesn't use the stack, but of course, I could be mistaken. (I have a vague memory of this coming up in another DDR, since there's one "exile until leaves the battlefield" that predates that templating and actually does use an extra triggered ability to return the target).
reminded me I really need to find a place to play Preacher, you don't see that effect in white a lot
How does this work with the second ability of Assimilation Aegis when you phase both the creature and the aegis?
maybe for a future ruling: what happens to the card "artificers hex", when the creature, to which the equipment is attached, phases out? According to rule 702.26g, attached permanents phase out indirectly with the permanent they are attached to, but should'nt "artificers hex" go into the graveyard due to state based actions at that point? 😅
I'm curious
But the equipment phased out, so the Hex attached to it would phase out as well, according to the rule you cited.
Just so i could test my understanding, if it's based on the type of effect let's say Banisher Priest 0.5 said "Exile target creature. It remains exiled as long as Banisher Priest is on the battlefield". Would that mean that if 0.5 version of the priest phases out the effect would end?
That's really cool
Now I think we need a clarification about Banisher Priest's controller losing a multiplayer game with more than one player left afterwards. The CR state that "all objects owned by that player leave the game", but does leaving the game include leaving the battlefield for permanents that care about it via "until" clauses?
As per official ruling: _In a multiplayer game, if Banisher Priest's owner leaves the game, the exiled card will return to the battlefield. Because the one-shot effect that returns the card isn't an ability that goes on the stack, it won't cease to exist along with the leaving player's spells and abilities on the stack._
For contrast - the "old templating" example: _In a multiplayer game, if you lose the game, the creature exiled with _*_Fiend Hunter_*_ remains exiled indefinitely. This is also different from abilities on other cards that exile a permanent "until" something happens._
But if the Banisher Priest was phased out when Amy left the game, Nick's bears would be left in exile, since the game would ignore the Priest leaving the battlefield.
What happens if you turn banisher priest face-down and have it then leave the battlefield?
Does the answer to this change if you have multiple face-down creatures?
Even if it turns face down, it still has the effect attached to it that will return the card when it leaves the Battlefield.
What happens with the Grizzly Bears once Dungeon Geists phases back in?
Nothing, I assume, but I'm still curious.
Dungeon Geists sets up the continuous effect with an end condition. That condition is met when Dungeon Geists is phased out, as the permanent is considered to no longer exist. When it phases back in, the continuous effect is still gone, as the Dungeon Geists did not enter the battlefield, but merely started being observable again. It was there the whole time, but the effect simply lost track of the permanent and ended.
Okay, followup question for the Banisher Priest.
Let's say Nick plays Reality Ripple on the Banisher Priest in response to it's ETB ability. Will the Priest still exile Nick's Grizzly Bears even though the priest treated as though it's not on the battlefield?
I believe 'not existing' is treated the same as 'not being on the battlefield' / 'no longer being on the battlefield' case from the official ruling: _If Banisher Priest leaves the battlefield before its enters-the-battlefield ability resolves, the target creature won't be exiled._
It works, because the priest didn't change zones, which is the only thing its effect looks for
That ruling isn't applicable here. It refers to 610.3a, an "until" condition happening before the initial effect takes place. But the Priest phasing out is not leaving play, so the "until" clause is unfulfilled.