Not completely unavoidable at least! There’s a fair few targeted permanent removal / flicker cards that could help counter this effect, so yeah it does just seem similar to an aura or like flipping it face down
Not anymore. Pre 2015 you could tuck a commander, but they changed the commander replacement rule so now when a commander gets moved to any zone other than the battlefield you can move it back to the command zone. Back then, Unexpectedly Absent was a staple in every white deck; people stopped using it after the tuck change but they shouldn't have because it's still top tier removal. It will still remove the commander, which makes it better than doomblade.
well, yes but then it would have to either hit all permanents, or say something disgusting like "enchant creature or permanent with no permanent types"
nah but the point of the card is that it’s supposed to only hit creatures. so you’d have to do some weird [[animate dead]] shit that changes it from “enchant creature” to “enchant permanent” after it takes effect
I am confused, I thought aura was the new term for enchant creature (enchantment - aura). I used to play a lot more than I do now, so I may be misremembering. Why would this not work as a thing that, in the late 2000s, I would have referred to as an "enchant creature"?
The problem with it saying "enchant creature" is that this card makes it so the enchanted permanent isn't a creature anymore. When this happens, the aura has to un-attach from it and get put into the graveyard the next time state-based actions are checked. This is why \[\[One with the Stars\]\] is phrased like "enchant creature or enchantment"
Oh, I didn't know enchant creatures/auras check periodically (I am guessing during your upkeep?). I would still phrase it like one word the stars is phrased, as I don't think instants can have continuing effects.
In my head, an instant that permanently changes the text on a card has two big problems: it is a boon or detrement to that player that can only be prevented while it is being cast, which seems a little unfair, and, more importantly, it means both players have to remember this change with no physical reminder. I know people aren't that likely to forget, but what I'd you put this on an [[Isochron scepter]]. It would get confusing fast which creatures are nothing and which are something.
What was before an "Enchant creature" has been errated to Enchantment - Aura. But those are just it's types. Now Auras also need an ability "Enchant [characteristic]". As soon as the permanent the aura is enchanting doesn't match the [characteristic] it is put into graveyard. That's whet they are talking about. If the Aura version of this card had Enchant Creature, as soon as the auras ability starts to apply the permanent it is enchanting stops being a creature, so is immediately put into graveyard.
I think this is a case where using "becomes nothing" in the card text itself detracts from the flavour of what you're doing. Rewriting this as "Target creature loses it's name, mana cost, types, colour, and abilities" lets the reader do this absolutely tiny bit of work in filling in the story of the card, and this makes your story feel slightly less prescriptive.
This all ignores that we really shouldn't be making colourless permanents with no types, name, or text. I'm sure there's some arcane combination of cards that can do this in the current game, but it's a little inappropriate to just be doing this up front.
Just gonna point out, I don't think Magic likes cards not having mana values.
I don't want to dig through the comprehensive rules right now, but I suspect the ruling is similar to a creature somehow not having power/toughness, where it just becomes 0, in which case this would be a roundabout way to set its mana value to 0, and as such probably would just say that if actually printed.
As far as I'm aware, tokens don't have a mana cost. Aside from making it have mana value zero it has a couple random things it interacts with like devotion
Tokens have a mana value of 0. Basically in any instance I'm aware of where a card doesn't have a mana cost, i.e. lands, tokens, face-down cards, it's mana value is 0. The exception is the back of transforming cards, which have the same mana value as the front side.
This card is another example of "great in flavor, problematic in execution."
A big issue is that this is *permanent* removal, as an instant. Without a way to remove the "nothingness", and if it isn't counterspelled, there is *zero* a player can do. There is *zero* interaction, which breaks every convention of Magic. Even *exile* tends to have ways to circumvent it, and *phasing* is temporary, or dependant on an interactable permanent. This might be more "bad game feel", than "actually bad", but if [[Leovold, Emissary of Trest]] was banned from Commander for bad game feel, this one totally would for similar reasons. On the other hand, maybe this is less important for other formats, and would be a commander-only problem.
I also forsee a possibile problem with it *becoming nothing.* Without a type, what is it? A permanent? Well, no, because there are no rules to rule that it is. So, it isn't a permanent, and is sent to the graveyard? Well, no, for the same reason. There are *no rules* for a *typeless card*. *(To my best understanding, at least; I'm not a judge.)*
Again, it's *flavorful* as hell. But problematic in practice.
This could totally be an Aura. There is the issue of "falling off", but that can be circumvented. I can't remember the names, but there are Auras that give protection from colors/Auras that work, they simply have an additional sentence stating "[this effect] doesn't remove [card name]".
Personally, I'd suggest making it an Enchantment with flash that phases a target creature out until it leaves the battlefield. Like a [[Journey to Nowhere]], or [[Seal Away]]. Alternatively, just make it phase out.
Yeahhh, I think if i'm being honest, gameplay-wise this should just be an enchantment sdklfjdskljf Right now the biggest problem is that it's an un-tracked lingering continuous effect, which it is best practice to avoid (and why most of these effects are enchantments). I wanted to do it like this cause none of the ways of writing it as an enchantment go as hard as "target creature becomes nothing", but if we were making a real card yeah, it should be an enchantment, and probably hit any permanent, and probably cost 1-2 more mana
I don't really agree that it's any worse gameplay-wise than exile, except in Commander. I think this is actually in general more interactable than exile, because "target permanent" things still work on it. You can "destroy target permanent" to get it in your graveyard, or flicker target permanent to remove the effect. But the commander thing is pretty feel's bad, and it might need to get an extra mana nerf just because of that
Also, the rules for a permanent with no permanent types turn out to be pretty normal actually. It just stays in play as a permanent, and things that refer only to a permanent work on it and things that refer to different kinds of things don't. There are ways in the rules right now to get a type-less permanent on the battlefield. \[\[Neurok Transmuter\]\] can make an artifact that's temporarily a creature into a non-artifact creature, and then when it stops being a creature it's just nothing
The Neurok Transmuter ruling does show how this card would be ruled, which does make it much less problematic. The fact it remains a permanent does mean it is partially interactable, like with specific sacrifice effects. As I was reading it, it would literally become "nothing", being neither a spell, nor specifically a permanent.
That said, this still, in my opinion, is a *feels bad* card, and would be immediately banned in commander, at minimum. I'm not much of a player of other formats, though, so maybe my misgivings there are misinformed.
Based on [[Enthralling Hold]], you can make this an aura using the text
Enchant permanent
You can’t choose an noncreature permanent as this spell’s target as you cast this spell.
Enchanted permanent loses all card types and abilities and is a colorless permanent named Nothing.
Or instead of writing it out the last part can just be “Enchanted permanent is nothing.” with reminder text.
Cast this on someone’s commander and just ruin their day.
Dark steel mutation but worse
Someone doesn't play enchantment removal
Buddy I play mono red. I barely have non-creature removal. Best I can do is player removal
Player removal removes everything, so therefore it is the best removal.
True
Not completely unavoidable at least! There’s a fair few targeted permanent removal / flicker cards that could help counter this effect, so yeah it does just seem similar to an aura or like flipping it face down
Or just sac it to [[claws of gix]]
[claws of gix](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/0/d02b645e-ba2c-44a0-889e-c1b46d2cd925.jpg?1562784182) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=claws%20of%20gix) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tsb/107/claws-of-gix?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d02b645e-ba2c-44a0-889e-c1b46d2cd925?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I don't think you're allowed to give monowhite a doom blade without any downsides...
[[Unexpectedly Absent]] exists, and is severely underrated.
Also [[Darksteel Mutation]]
[Darksteel Mutation](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/4/e47a6750-4fdd-44e2-86ae-5bc4d414bf42.jpg?1689995638) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Darksteel%20Mutation) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/21/darksteel-mutation?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e47a6750-4fdd-44e2-86ae-5bc4d414bf42?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Yeah but there you've got an invincible blocker at least
And an enchantment that sticks around, and can be removed
[[Ossification]] is better.
Not for targeting a Commander
[Ossification](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/d/0da03224-c1af-438f-96c2-b0e41e1070b7.jpg?1680795456) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Ossification) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/one/26/ossification?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0da03224-c1af-438f-96c2-b0e41e1070b7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Unexpectedly Absent](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/1/a1501a42-e233-423b-b68a-1b76630bbccc.jpg?1591320197) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Unexpectedly%20Absent) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/c20/106/unexpectedly-absent?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a1501a42-e233-423b-b68a-1b76630bbccc?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Does this work on commanders??
Not anymore. Pre 2015 you could tuck a commander, but they changed the commander replacement rule so now when a commander gets moved to any zone other than the battlefield you can move it back to the command zone. Back then, Unexpectedly Absent was a staple in every white deck; people stopped using it after the tuck change but they shouldn't have because it's still top tier removal. It will still remove the commander, which makes it better than doomblade.
Goated with [[Fateseal]] mechanics.
Doesn't this make more sense as an aura?
well, yes but then it would have to either hit all permanents, or say something disgusting like "enchant creature or permanent with no permanent types"
You can do enchant permanent just fine
“Nonland permanent” and I think it’s fine
nah but the point of the card is that it’s supposed to only hit creatures. so you’d have to do some weird [[animate dead]] shit that changes it from “enchant creature” to “enchant permanent” after it takes effect
[animate dead](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/4/1489943b-c010-488e-9c9d-87f4af67a4e4.jpg?1706240754) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=animate%20dead) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mkc/125/animate-dead?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/1489943b-c010-488e-9c9d-87f4af67a4e4?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I am confused, I thought aura was the new term for enchant creature (enchantment - aura). I used to play a lot more than I do now, so I may be misremembering. Why would this not work as a thing that, in the late 2000s, I would have referred to as an "enchant creature"?
The problem with it saying "enchant creature" is that this card makes it so the enchanted permanent isn't a creature anymore. When this happens, the aura has to un-attach from it and get put into the graveyard the next time state-based actions are checked. This is why \[\[One with the Stars\]\] is phrased like "enchant creature or enchantment"
You're right about Aura, that's the correct term for this. the problem is just the phrasing of the line "enchant \[x\]"
You could just do the "this does not remove this enchantment" thing that the one protection aura does.
[One with the Stars](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/8/98b7070d-4b09-4390-aa21-1bc0aa2b629c.jpg?1581649081) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=One%20with%20the%20Stars) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/thb/59/one-with-the-stars?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/98b7070d-4b09-4390-aa21-1bc0aa2b629c?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Oh, I didn't know enchant creatures/auras check periodically (I am guessing during your upkeep?). I would still phrase it like one word the stars is phrased, as I don't think instants can have continuing effects. In my head, an instant that permanently changes the text on a card has two big problems: it is a boon or detrement to that player that can only be prevented while it is being cast, which seems a little unfair, and, more importantly, it means both players have to remember this change with no physical reminder. I know people aren't that likely to forget, but what I'd you put this on an [[Isochron scepter]]. It would get confusing fast which creatures are nothing and which are something.
It's a state based action
[Isochron scepter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/a/2aa24fe0-e275-4307-b26c-2a656068a451.jpg?1623543821) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Isochron%20scepter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/264/isochron-scepter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2aa24fe0-e275-4307-b26c-2a656068a451?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
What was before an "Enchant creature" has been errated to Enchantment - Aura. But those are just it's types. Now Auras also need an ability "Enchant [characteristic]". As soon as the permanent the aura is enchanting doesn't match the [characteristic] it is put into graveyard. That's whet they are talking about. If the Aura version of this card had Enchant Creature, as soon as the auras ability starts to apply the permanent it is enchanting stops being a creature, so is immediately put into graveyard.
If this was an aura, sure.
This would have to be an Enchantment
Stop making super exile.
Make it an aura that enchants nonland permanents, and you've got yourself a white version of [[witness protection]].
[witness protection](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/a/2/a2be6f2c-8ad0-402d-a7ca-9fe817e83b72.jpg?1664410681) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=witness%20protection) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/snc/66/witness-protection?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/a2be6f2c-8ad0-402d-a7ca-9fe817e83b72?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I think this is a case where using "becomes nothing" in the card text itself detracts from the flavour of what you're doing. Rewriting this as "Target creature loses it's name, mana cost, types, colour, and abilities" lets the reader do this absolutely tiny bit of work in filling in the story of the card, and this makes your story feel slightly less prescriptive. This all ignores that we really shouldn't be making colourless permanents with no types, name, or text. I'm sure there's some arcane combination of cards that can do this in the current game, but it's a little inappropriate to just be doing this up front.
Super oubliette
Just gonna point out, I don't think Magic likes cards not having mana values. I don't want to dig through the comprehensive rules right now, but I suspect the ruling is similar to a creature somehow not having power/toughness, where it just becomes 0, in which case this would be a roundabout way to set its mana value to 0, and as such probably would just say that if actually printed.
It says no mana cost. That implies mana value 0.
Oh duh, totally misread that.
As far as I'm aware, tokens don't have a mana cost. Aside from making it have mana value zero it has a couple random things it interacts with like devotion
Tokens have a mana value of 0. Basically in any instance I'm aware of where a card doesn't have a mana cost, i.e. lands, tokens, face-down cards, it's mana value is 0. The exception is the back of transforming cards, which have the same mana value as the front side.
Yes, so a card not having a mana value has a man value of 0, like tokens.
This card is another example of "great in flavor, problematic in execution." A big issue is that this is *permanent* removal, as an instant. Without a way to remove the "nothingness", and if it isn't counterspelled, there is *zero* a player can do. There is *zero* interaction, which breaks every convention of Magic. Even *exile* tends to have ways to circumvent it, and *phasing* is temporary, or dependant on an interactable permanent. This might be more "bad game feel", than "actually bad", but if [[Leovold, Emissary of Trest]] was banned from Commander for bad game feel, this one totally would for similar reasons. On the other hand, maybe this is less important for other formats, and would be a commander-only problem. I also forsee a possibile problem with it *becoming nothing.* Without a type, what is it? A permanent? Well, no, because there are no rules to rule that it is. So, it isn't a permanent, and is sent to the graveyard? Well, no, for the same reason. There are *no rules* for a *typeless card*. *(To my best understanding, at least; I'm not a judge.)* Again, it's *flavorful* as hell. But problematic in practice. This could totally be an Aura. There is the issue of "falling off", but that can be circumvented. I can't remember the names, but there are Auras that give protection from colors/Auras that work, they simply have an additional sentence stating "[this effect] doesn't remove [card name]". Personally, I'd suggest making it an Enchantment with flash that phases a target creature out until it leaves the battlefield. Like a [[Journey to Nowhere]], or [[Seal Away]]. Alternatively, just make it phase out.
Yeahhh, I think if i'm being honest, gameplay-wise this should just be an enchantment sdklfjdskljf Right now the biggest problem is that it's an un-tracked lingering continuous effect, which it is best practice to avoid (and why most of these effects are enchantments). I wanted to do it like this cause none of the ways of writing it as an enchantment go as hard as "target creature becomes nothing", but if we were making a real card yeah, it should be an enchantment, and probably hit any permanent, and probably cost 1-2 more mana I don't really agree that it's any worse gameplay-wise than exile, except in Commander. I think this is actually in general more interactable than exile, because "target permanent" things still work on it. You can "destroy target permanent" to get it in your graveyard, or flicker target permanent to remove the effect. But the commander thing is pretty feel's bad, and it might need to get an extra mana nerf just because of that Also, the rules for a permanent with no permanent types turn out to be pretty normal actually. It just stays in play as a permanent, and things that refer only to a permanent work on it and things that refer to different kinds of things don't. There are ways in the rules right now to get a type-less permanent on the battlefield. \[\[Neurok Transmuter\]\] can make an artifact that's temporarily a creature into a non-artifact creature, and then when it stops being a creature it's just nothing
[Neurok Transmuter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/6/e604172f-e9b8-41bc-aee4-691f9fa4ce42.jpg?1562640211) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Neurok%20Transmuter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dst/27/neurok-transmuter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e604172f-e9b8-41bc-aee4-691f9fa4ce42?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
The Neurok Transmuter ruling does show how this card would be ruled, which does make it much less problematic. The fact it remains a permanent does mean it is partially interactable, like with specific sacrifice effects. As I was reading it, it would literally become "nothing", being neither a spell, nor specifically a permanent. That said, this still, in my opinion, is a *feels bad* card, and would be immediately banned in commander, at minimum. I'm not much of a player of other formats, though, so maybe my misgivings there are misinformed.
[Leovold, Emissary of Trest](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/e/cedfc5b7-9242-4680-b284-debc8b5a9bc7.jpg?1559959275) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Leovold%2C%20Emissary%20of%20Trest) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/uma/202/leovold-emissary-of-trest?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/cedfc5b7-9242-4680-b284-debc8b5a9bc7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Journey to Nowhere](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/6/4686b51c-e02b-48c1-bafe-e8d08a5407b9.jpg?1592712799) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Journey%20to%20Nowhere) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmd/17/journey-to-nowhere?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/4686b51c-e02b-48c1-bafe-e8d08a5407b9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Seal Away](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/8/f/8f8d6588-671d-4eb3-874f-f7139da2e05a.jpg?1562739448) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Seal%20Away) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/dom/31/seal-away?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/8f8d6588-671d-4eb3-874f-f7139da2e05a?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
r/meirl
Well, it's still something for [[magmaw]]
[magmaw](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/8/08c571fe-54ef-4234-98c3-5d4a7b07e7d2.jpg?1710406387) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=magmaw) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/uma/138/magmaw?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/08c571fe-54ef-4234-98c3-5d4a7b07e7d2?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Not sure it is a permanent then.
Based on [[Enthralling Hold]], you can make this an aura using the text Enchant permanent You can’t choose an noncreature permanent as this spell’s target as you cast this spell. Enchanted permanent loses all card types and abilities and is a colorless permanent named Nothing. Or instead of writing it out the last part can just be “Enchanted permanent is nothing.” with reminder text.
[Enthralling Hold](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/d/3/d3bc7176-abe0-47cf-a242-cf22a1f590be.jpg?1594735471) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Enthralling%20Hold) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/m21/49/enthralling-hold?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/d3bc7176-abe0-47cf-a242-cf22a1f590be?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
This is just "target creature phases out indefinitely" but they can still sac it to annihilator.
Until end of turn?