Feather, the Redeemed and Dire Fleet Daredevil Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?If I cast Flicker on an unearthed creature, does it remain exiled?Does Cremate counter Flashback, Scavenge, and their ilk?How long does a creature returned by the Whip of Erebos remain on the battlefield?Does a card moving from Exile to Exile count as being moved?How does Hazoret's Undying Fury work with Aftermath cards?Flashback + Kess, Dissident MageTargeting instants with aftermath in a graveyardPlaying Desertion on a commanderHow does Underrealm Lich interact with Sidisi when drawing multiple cards?Underrealm Lich and Divination

Could a cockatrice have parasitic embryos?

What is the ongoing value of the Kanban board to the developers as opposed to management

What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?

What do you call an IPA symbol that lacks a name (e.g. ɲ)?

Is it appropriate to mention a relatable company blog post when you're asked about the company?

Suing a Police Officer Instead of the Police Department

Does using the Inspiration rules for character defects encourage My Guy Syndrome?

Like totally amazing interchangeable sister outfit accessory swapping or whatever

TV series episode where humans nuke aliens before decrypting their message that states they come in peace

What is the evidence that custom checks in Northern Ireland are going to result in violence?

Why is water being consumed when my shutoff valve is closed?

Was Objective-C really a hinderance to Apple software development?

How to keep bees out of canned beverages?

Simulate round-robin tournament draw

Does a Draconic Bloodline sorcerer's doubled proficiency bonus for Charisma checks against dragons apply to all dragon types or only the chosen one?

VBA: Single line if statement with multiple actions

How did Elite on the NES work?

What is /etc/mtab in Linux?

Is it accepted to use working hours to read general interest books?

What is the definining line between a helicopter and a drone a person can ride in?

What helicopter has the most rotor blades?

Will I lose my paid in full property

Co-worker works way more than he should

Is a self contained air-bullet cartridge feasible?



Feather, the Redeemed and Dire Fleet Daredevil



Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?If I cast Flicker on an unearthed creature, does it remain exiled?Does Cremate counter Flashback, Scavenge, and their ilk?How long does a creature returned by the Whip of Erebos remain on the battlefield?Does a card moving from Exile to Exile count as being moved?How does Hazoret's Undying Fury work with Aftermath cards?Flashback + Kess, Dissident MageTargeting instants with aftermath in a graveyardPlaying Desertion on a commanderHow does Underrealm Lich interact with Sidisi when drawing multiple cards?Underrealm Lich and Divination










4















It has already been clarified by WotC that Flashback and Aftermath will work with Feather, the Redeemed. Specifically, because you control both replacement effects, you choose which one resolves, allowing you to cast a Flashback card that targets your creature from the graveyard then exile it, and return it to your hand at the end of turn.



My question is about what this means for Dire Fleet Daredevil? Does the fact that it would not go to Your graveyard mean that Feather's replacement effect would not apply? Although the wording specifies "your graveyard" the language is not as clear as usual ("exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard", rather than "if that card would go to your graveyard, exile it"), so it leaves open the possibility of putting a card you don't own in your hand...



*Feather, the Redeemed is in War of the Spark which will be released on May 3rd, 2019 and will not be in gatherer until that day.










share|improve this question




























    4















    It has already been clarified by WotC that Flashback and Aftermath will work with Feather, the Redeemed. Specifically, because you control both replacement effects, you choose which one resolves, allowing you to cast a Flashback card that targets your creature from the graveyard then exile it, and return it to your hand at the end of turn.



    My question is about what this means for Dire Fleet Daredevil? Does the fact that it would not go to Your graveyard mean that Feather's replacement effect would not apply? Although the wording specifies "your graveyard" the language is not as clear as usual ("exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard", rather than "if that card would go to your graveyard, exile it"), so it leaves open the possibility of putting a card you don't own in your hand...



    *Feather, the Redeemed is in War of the Spark which will be released on May 3rd, 2019 and will not be in gatherer until that day.










    share|improve this question


























      4












      4








      4








      It has already been clarified by WotC that Flashback and Aftermath will work with Feather, the Redeemed. Specifically, because you control both replacement effects, you choose which one resolves, allowing you to cast a Flashback card that targets your creature from the graveyard then exile it, and return it to your hand at the end of turn.



      My question is about what this means for Dire Fleet Daredevil? Does the fact that it would not go to Your graveyard mean that Feather's replacement effect would not apply? Although the wording specifies "your graveyard" the language is not as clear as usual ("exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard", rather than "if that card would go to your graveyard, exile it"), so it leaves open the possibility of putting a card you don't own in your hand...



      *Feather, the Redeemed is in War of the Spark which will be released on May 3rd, 2019 and will not be in gatherer until that day.










      share|improve this question
















      It has already been clarified by WotC that Flashback and Aftermath will work with Feather, the Redeemed. Specifically, because you control both replacement effects, you choose which one resolves, allowing you to cast a Flashback card that targets your creature from the graveyard then exile it, and return it to your hand at the end of turn.



      My question is about what this means for Dire Fleet Daredevil? Does the fact that it would not go to Your graveyard mean that Feather's replacement effect would not apply? Although the wording specifies "your graveyard" the language is not as clear as usual ("exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard", rather than "if that card would go to your graveyard, exile it"), so it leaves open the possibility of putting a card you don't own in your hand...



      *Feather, the Redeemed is in War of the Spark which will be released on May 3rd, 2019 and will not be in gatherer until that day.







      magic-the-gathering






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 3 hours ago









      Joe W

      9,20823352




      9,20823352










      asked 3 hours ago









      Soulus101Soulus101

      806




      806




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3














          Feather's replacement effect does not apply to a card exiled and cast with Dire Fleet Daredevil.



          Dire Fleet Daredevil specifically takes a card from an opponent's graveyard, so you do not own any card cast this way. Then the final step of resolving spells and abilities, rule 608.2k, says




          As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell's resolution, the spell is put into its owner's graveyard. As the final part of an ability's resolution, the ability is removed from the stack and ceases to exist.




          Since your opponent owns the card, it would be put into that players graveyard, not yours, in this step.



          The exact wording of Feather's ability is as follows:




          Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell that targets a creature you control, exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves. If you do, return it to your hand at the beginning of the next end step.




          Since the card would not be put into your graveyard at all, Feather's replacement effect does not apply and the card is exiled by Dire Fleet Daredevil's replacement effect.




          If Feather's ability instead replaced the spell moving to any graveyard, it still wouldn't put the card into your hand. Rule 400.3 says




          If an object would go to any library, graveyard, or hand other than its owner's, it goes to its owner's corresponding zone.




          So, in that situation Feather's replacement effect would end up putting the card back into your opponents hand. This is almost always undesirable, so it's very likely that Feather's ability was purposely written to avoid that.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thanks, that is what I expected, but wondered if the wording was due to an assumption that as you are casting the card, you own it, rather than an explicit attempt to rule out the scenario I described.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago











          • Fundamentally, it doesn't really matter what the intention of the wording is, only what it actually says. In this case, they probably did it on purpose, because the alternative would be putting the card into the opponent's hand, because that's what would happen if you try to put a card they own into your hand (rule 400.3).

            – murgatroid99
            2 hours ago











          • Could you add that rule to your answer? My only experience with this effect is [mtg:X], but was not aware that it was an exception to the rule.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago











          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
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45982%2ffeather-the-redeemed-and-dire-fleet-daredevil%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









          3














          Feather's replacement effect does not apply to a card exiled and cast with Dire Fleet Daredevil.



          Dire Fleet Daredevil specifically takes a card from an opponent's graveyard, so you do not own any card cast this way. Then the final step of resolving spells and abilities, rule 608.2k, says




          As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell's resolution, the spell is put into its owner's graveyard. As the final part of an ability's resolution, the ability is removed from the stack and ceases to exist.




          Since your opponent owns the card, it would be put into that players graveyard, not yours, in this step.



          The exact wording of Feather's ability is as follows:




          Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell that targets a creature you control, exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves. If you do, return it to your hand at the beginning of the next end step.




          Since the card would not be put into your graveyard at all, Feather's replacement effect does not apply and the card is exiled by Dire Fleet Daredevil's replacement effect.




          If Feather's ability instead replaced the spell moving to any graveyard, it still wouldn't put the card into your hand. Rule 400.3 says




          If an object would go to any library, graveyard, or hand other than its owner's, it goes to its owner's corresponding zone.




          So, in that situation Feather's replacement effect would end up putting the card back into your opponents hand. This is almost always undesirable, so it's very likely that Feather's ability was purposely written to avoid that.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thanks, that is what I expected, but wondered if the wording was due to an assumption that as you are casting the card, you own it, rather than an explicit attempt to rule out the scenario I described.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago











          • Fundamentally, it doesn't really matter what the intention of the wording is, only what it actually says. In this case, they probably did it on purpose, because the alternative would be putting the card into the opponent's hand, because that's what would happen if you try to put a card they own into your hand (rule 400.3).

            – murgatroid99
            2 hours ago











          • Could you add that rule to your answer? My only experience with this effect is [mtg:X], but was not aware that it was an exception to the rule.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago















          3














          Feather's replacement effect does not apply to a card exiled and cast with Dire Fleet Daredevil.



          Dire Fleet Daredevil specifically takes a card from an opponent's graveyard, so you do not own any card cast this way. Then the final step of resolving spells and abilities, rule 608.2k, says




          As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell's resolution, the spell is put into its owner's graveyard. As the final part of an ability's resolution, the ability is removed from the stack and ceases to exist.




          Since your opponent owns the card, it would be put into that players graveyard, not yours, in this step.



          The exact wording of Feather's ability is as follows:




          Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell that targets a creature you control, exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves. If you do, return it to your hand at the beginning of the next end step.




          Since the card would not be put into your graveyard at all, Feather's replacement effect does not apply and the card is exiled by Dire Fleet Daredevil's replacement effect.




          If Feather's ability instead replaced the spell moving to any graveyard, it still wouldn't put the card into your hand. Rule 400.3 says




          If an object would go to any library, graveyard, or hand other than its owner's, it goes to its owner's corresponding zone.




          So, in that situation Feather's replacement effect would end up putting the card back into your opponents hand. This is almost always undesirable, so it's very likely that Feather's ability was purposely written to avoid that.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thanks, that is what I expected, but wondered if the wording was due to an assumption that as you are casting the card, you own it, rather than an explicit attempt to rule out the scenario I described.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago











          • Fundamentally, it doesn't really matter what the intention of the wording is, only what it actually says. In this case, they probably did it on purpose, because the alternative would be putting the card into the opponent's hand, because that's what would happen if you try to put a card they own into your hand (rule 400.3).

            – murgatroid99
            2 hours ago











          • Could you add that rule to your answer? My only experience with this effect is [mtg:X], but was not aware that it was an exception to the rule.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago













          3












          3








          3







          Feather's replacement effect does not apply to a card exiled and cast with Dire Fleet Daredevil.



          Dire Fleet Daredevil specifically takes a card from an opponent's graveyard, so you do not own any card cast this way. Then the final step of resolving spells and abilities, rule 608.2k, says




          As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell's resolution, the spell is put into its owner's graveyard. As the final part of an ability's resolution, the ability is removed from the stack and ceases to exist.




          Since your opponent owns the card, it would be put into that players graveyard, not yours, in this step.



          The exact wording of Feather's ability is as follows:




          Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell that targets a creature you control, exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves. If you do, return it to your hand at the beginning of the next end step.




          Since the card would not be put into your graveyard at all, Feather's replacement effect does not apply and the card is exiled by Dire Fleet Daredevil's replacement effect.




          If Feather's ability instead replaced the spell moving to any graveyard, it still wouldn't put the card into your hand. Rule 400.3 says




          If an object would go to any library, graveyard, or hand other than its owner's, it goes to its owner's corresponding zone.




          So, in that situation Feather's replacement effect would end up putting the card back into your opponents hand. This is almost always undesirable, so it's very likely that Feather's ability was purposely written to avoid that.






          share|improve this answer















          Feather's replacement effect does not apply to a card exiled and cast with Dire Fleet Daredevil.



          Dire Fleet Daredevil specifically takes a card from an opponent's graveyard, so you do not own any card cast this way. Then the final step of resolving spells and abilities, rule 608.2k, says




          As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell's resolution, the spell is put into its owner's graveyard. As the final part of an ability's resolution, the ability is removed from the stack and ceases to exist.




          Since your opponent owns the card, it would be put into that players graveyard, not yours, in this step.



          The exact wording of Feather's ability is as follows:




          Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell that targets a creature you control, exile that card instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves. If you do, return it to your hand at the beginning of the next end step.




          Since the card would not be put into your graveyard at all, Feather's replacement effect does not apply and the card is exiled by Dire Fleet Daredevil's replacement effect.




          If Feather's ability instead replaced the spell moving to any graveyard, it still wouldn't put the card into your hand. Rule 400.3 says




          If an object would go to any library, graveyard, or hand other than its owner's, it goes to its owner's corresponding zone.




          So, in that situation Feather's replacement effect would end up putting the card back into your opponents hand. This is almost always undesirable, so it's very likely that Feather's ability was purposely written to avoid that.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 1 hour ago

























          answered 2 hours ago









          murgatroid99murgatroid99

          48.5k7122205




          48.5k7122205












          • Thanks, that is what I expected, but wondered if the wording was due to an assumption that as you are casting the card, you own it, rather than an explicit attempt to rule out the scenario I described.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago











          • Fundamentally, it doesn't really matter what the intention of the wording is, only what it actually says. In this case, they probably did it on purpose, because the alternative would be putting the card into the opponent's hand, because that's what would happen if you try to put a card they own into your hand (rule 400.3).

            – murgatroid99
            2 hours ago











          • Could you add that rule to your answer? My only experience with this effect is [mtg:X], but was not aware that it was an exception to the rule.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago

















          • Thanks, that is what I expected, but wondered if the wording was due to an assumption that as you are casting the card, you own it, rather than an explicit attempt to rule out the scenario I described.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago











          • Fundamentally, it doesn't really matter what the intention of the wording is, only what it actually says. In this case, they probably did it on purpose, because the alternative would be putting the card into the opponent's hand, because that's what would happen if you try to put a card they own into your hand (rule 400.3).

            – murgatroid99
            2 hours ago











          • Could you add that rule to your answer? My only experience with this effect is [mtg:X], but was not aware that it was an exception to the rule.

            – Soulus101
            2 hours ago
















          Thanks, that is what I expected, but wondered if the wording was due to an assumption that as you are casting the card, you own it, rather than an explicit attempt to rule out the scenario I described.

          – Soulus101
          2 hours ago





          Thanks, that is what I expected, but wondered if the wording was due to an assumption that as you are casting the card, you own it, rather than an explicit attempt to rule out the scenario I described.

          – Soulus101
          2 hours ago













          Fundamentally, it doesn't really matter what the intention of the wording is, only what it actually says. In this case, they probably did it on purpose, because the alternative would be putting the card into the opponent's hand, because that's what would happen if you try to put a card they own into your hand (rule 400.3).

          – murgatroid99
          2 hours ago





          Fundamentally, it doesn't really matter what the intention of the wording is, only what it actually says. In this case, they probably did it on purpose, because the alternative would be putting the card into the opponent's hand, because that's what would happen if you try to put a card they own into your hand (rule 400.3).

          – murgatroid99
          2 hours ago













          Could you add that rule to your answer? My only experience with this effect is [mtg:X], but was not aware that it was an exception to the rule.

          – Soulus101
          2 hours ago





          Could you add that rule to your answer? My only experience with this effect is [mtg:X], but was not aware that it was an exception to the rule.

          – Soulus101
          2 hours ago

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          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.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45982%2ffeather-the-redeemed-and-dire-fleet-daredevil%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          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







          Popular posts from this blog

          Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

          Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

          François Viète Contents Biography Work and thought Bibliography See also Notes Further reading External links Navigation menup. 21Google Bookspp. 75–77Google BooksDe thou (from University of Saint Andrews)ArchivedGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle booksGoogle Bookscc-parthenay.frL'histoire universelle (fr)Universal History (en)ArchivedAdsabs.harvard.eduPagesperso-orange.frArchive.orgChikara Sasaki. Descartes' mathematical thought p.259Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle Bookspp. 152 and onwardGoogle BooksGoogle BooksScribd.comGoogle Books1257-7979Google BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGoogle BooksGallica.bnf.frGoogle BooksGoogle Books"François Viète"Francois Viète: Father of Modern Algebraic NotationThe Lawyer and the GamblerAbout TarporleySite de Jean-Paul GuichardL'algèbre nouvelle"About the Harmonicon"cb120511976(data)1188044800000 0001 0913 5903n82164680ola2013766880073431702w6vt1sb70287374827140948071409480