Suppose Participant A’s Sporogenic An infection enters enchanting Participant B’s 9-Lives Acquainted, and its ETB triggered skill is put onto the stack focusing on Participant B. Participant B responds by casting Again to Nature, destroying Sporogenic An infection. When Sporgenic An infection’s ETB triggered skill resolves, can Participant B sacrifice 9-Lives Acquainted?
The perfect candidate for related rule appears to be…
608.2h If an impact requires info from the sport (such because the variety of creatures on the battlefield), the reply is set solely as soon as, when the impact is utilized. If the impact requires info from a selected object, together with the supply of the flexibility itself, the impact makes use of the present info of that object if it’s within the public zone it was anticipated to be in; if it’s not in that zone, or if the impact has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the impact makes use of the article’s final identified info. See rule 113.7a. If a capability states that an object does one thing, it’s the article because it exists—or because it most lately existed—that does it, not the flexibility.
I’m unclear on the the best way to apply the phrase “requires info from a selected object.” In my very own try to arrive at a solution, two distinctions arose…
-
About which object(s) does the impact require info? Does it have a look at the creature and consider “being enchanted by Sporogenic An infection” as details about that creature? Does it have a look at the enchantment and consider “enchanting 9-Lives acquainted” as details about that enchantment? Does it have a look at each the creature and the enchantment?
-
Does the phrase “apart from enchanted creature” discuss with whichever object(s) the impact finally seems at intensionally or extensionally, for instance, within the case that the impact will have a look at simply the creature, does the impact say “hey recreation, give me details about 9-Lives Acquainted” (intensional) or “hey recreation, give me details about the creature which has the property of being enchanted by Sporogenic An infection”?
If the creature is the only object of question, and if “apart from enchanted creature” refers intensionally, then 9-Lives Acquainted is within the public zone it’s anticipated to be in, thus its present info ought to be used, and as it’s not enchanted by Sporogenic An infection, it ought to be authorized for Participant B to sacrifice 9-Lives Acquainted. If the creature is the only object of question, but when as a substitute “apart from enchanted creature” refers extensionally, then the sport won’t discover any creature which has the property of being enchanted by Sporogenic An infection, and must use final identified info to search out the creature which has that property, and thus it ought to be unlawful for Participant B to sacrifice 9-Lives Acquainted. By related logic, if the enchantment is the article of focus, then whatever the intensional VS extensional distinction, it ought to be unlawful for Participant B to sacrifice 9-Lives Acquainted. If each the creature and the enchantment are objects of question, then extra clarification could also be warranted.
What’s the proper strategy to interpret and apply this rule? A really perfect reply would clearly describe the mechanics which deal with the broadest class of phrases potential, but when such consistency is to not be discovered, then a minimum of how does it apply to the phrase “apart from enchanted creature” as within the above case?
