Paying more mana for a Flashed creatureWhen would it be advantageous not apply Training Ground's cost reduction?Does casting a card and paying for it work like this?Parallel Lives and Dance of ManyDo Gild's Gold tokens go into play under the caster's control?Can I play a Sorcery or Instant without paying its mana cost, in any way?Can you cast a creature with Bestow while you control a Steel Golem?What happens when an Animate Dead reanimates a dormant god?Can you sacrifice Corpse Hauler to its own ability and return it to the battlefield?Is cascade triggered by putting a creature into play?Can I use Nissa, Steward of Elements, to put out a creature with X in its mana cost onto the field?What Happens if I Manifest a Double-Faced Card?
Can humans ever directly see a few photons at a time? Can a human see a single photon?
Do I have to explain the mechanical superiority of the player-character within the fiction of the game?
How long would it take to cross the Channel in 1890's?
What happens to Cessna electric flaps that are moving when power is lost?
How does a blind passenger not die, if driver becomes unconscious
Is there a way, while dragging, to "snap" to the nearest guide?
Inaccessible base class despite friendship
How many people are necessary to maintain modern civilisation?
Can there be an UN resolution to remove a country from the UNSC?
Can Ogre clerics use Purify Food and Drink on humanoid characters?
How to model a twisted cylinder like this
How to get cool night-vision without lame drawbacks?
What did River say when she woke from her proto-comatose state?
Suggested order for Amazon Prime Doctor Who series
How does a pilot select the correct ILS when the airport has parallel runways?
Dates on degrees don’t make sense – will people care?
What size of powerbank will I need to power a phone and DSLR for 2 weeks?
How do I set an alias to a terminal line?
If I wouldn't want to read the story, is writing it still a good idea?
Java TreeMap.floorKey() equivalent for std::map
How does DC work with natural 20?
Why do all the teams that I have worked with always finish a sprint without completion of all the stories?
How to draw this center trajectory of rolling ball?
What's currently blocking the construction of the wall between Mexico and the US?
Paying more mana for a Flashed creature
When would it be advantageous not apply Training Ground's cost reduction?Does casting a card and paying for it work like this?Parallel Lives and Dance of ManyDo Gild's Gold tokens go into play under the caster's control?Can I play a Sorcery or Instant without paying its mana cost, in any way?Can you cast a creature with Bestow while you control a Steel Golem?What happens when an Animate Dead reanimates a dormant god?Can you sacrifice Corpse Hauler to its own ability and return it to the battlefield?Is cascade triggered by putting a creature into play?Can I use Nissa, Steward of Elements, to put out a creature with X in its mana cost onto the field?What Happens if I Manifest a Double-Faced Card?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Flash says
You may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield. If you do, sacrifice it unless you pay its mana cost reduced by up to 2.
(emphasis mine)
Does this "up to" clause mean that I can choose to Flash something and pay its full mana cost, or that it's only reduced by one?
magic-the-gathering
edited Jun 15 at 15:42
Lainathiel
37415
asked Jun 5 at 11:30
CollinBCollinB
25019
add a comment |
Flash says
You may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield. If you do, sacrifice it unless you pay its mana cost reduced by up to 2.
(emphasis mine)
Does this "up to" clause mean that I can choose to Flash something and pay its full mana cost, or that it's only reduced by one?
magic-the-gathering
edited Jun 15 at 15:42
Lainathiel
37415
asked Jun 5 at 11:30
CollinBCollinB
25019
add a comment |
Flash says
You may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield. If you do, sacrifice it unless you pay its mana cost reduced by up to 2.
(emphasis mine)
Does this "up to" clause mean that I can choose to Flash something and pay its full mana cost, or that it's only reduced by one?
magic-the-gathering
edited Jun 15 at 15:42
Lainathiel
37415
asked Jun 5 at 11:30
CollinBCollinB
25019
Flash says
You may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield. If you do, sacrifice it unless you pay its mana cost reduced by up to 2.
(emphasis mine)
Does this "up to" clause mean that I can choose to Flash something and pay its full mana cost, or that it's only reduced by one?
magic-the-gathering
magic-the-gathering
edited Jun 15 at 15:42
Lainathiel
37415
asked Jun 5 at 11:30
CollinBCollinB
25019
edited Jun 15 at 15:42
Lainathiel
37415
asked Jun 5 at 11:30
CollinBCollinB
25019
edited Jun 15 at 15:42
Lainathiel
37415
edited Jun 15 at 15:42
Lainathiel
37415
edited Jun 15 at 15:42
Lainathiel
37415
37415
asked Jun 5 at 11:30
CollinBCollinB
25019
asked Jun 5 at 11:30
CollinBCollinB
25019
asked Jun 5 at 11:30
CollinBCollinB
25019
25019
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
The use of "up to" means that the discount is optional. You can chose to have Flash's ability use a generic mana cost reduction of 0, 1, or 2.
Rules justification
The phrase "up to" is consistently used in Magic to mean you get to chose a number between 0 and the full value. You can choose to have Abandon Reason target 0, 1, or 2 creatures.
See the ruling on Training Grounds (which has a similar cost reduction) for one defense of this:
You may choose not to apply Training Ground’s cost reduction effect. You may also choose to apply only part of it (causing an activated ability of a creature you control to cost just 1 less to activate).
As further defense, the use of "up to" is not necessary to support cards that have less than 2 generic mana in their cost. Magic in general does not need specific wording to prevent numbers from going negative (see 107.1b Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero.). For example, Arcane Melee and Power Artifact do not include the phrase "up to", and yet each reduces costs just fine.
Where this matters
Where the optionality of cost reduction usually matters is with cards like Prossh, Skyraider of Kher or Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge. However, this isn't relevant here because Flash is not casting the creatures, and therefore not reducing the mana spent to casting them. Mana burn was one of the main reasons this would matter; good thing Wizards got rid of that rule :) For examples of when this would matter, see here: When would it be advantageous not apply Training Ground's cost reduction?
answered Jun 5 at 12:58
ZagsZags
10.1k32073
1
@Arthur There is no mana spent to cast Prossh if you use Flash because Prossh isn't cast. It's the same as if you had used Elvish Piper.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:33
You can't necessarily use Arcana Melee as justification, because it reduces casting costs - the costs you pay for the Flash effect are not casting costs, so they dont necessarily use the same wording. As Glorfindel has quoted, the ruling for Flash has the example of the 1R creature that "you'll have to pay R to keep it".
– Hackworth
Jun 5 at 13:42
@Hackworth I included that card-specific ruling in my answer as well as a discussion of it.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:47
1
@Hackworth English is ambiguous "You have to pay R to keep it" could mean either "pay exactly R" or "pay at least R". "The cost is R", meanwhile, is not ambiguous.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:56
2
This answer appears to be correct based on a ruling on the card Training Ground. Training Ground also uses the phrase "up to" in the context of applying a cost reduction and the ruling says that you can ignore the cost reduction or use only part of it.
– murgatroid99♦
Jun 5 at 15:25
|
show 6 more comments
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47452%2fpaying-more-mana-for-a-flashed-creature%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
The use of "up to" means that the discount is optional. You can chose to have Flash's ability use a generic mana cost reduction of 0, 1, or 2.
Rules justification
The phrase "up to" is consistently used in Magic to mean you get to chose a number between 0 and the full value. You can choose to have Abandon Reason target 0, 1, or 2 creatures.
See the ruling on Training Grounds (which has a similar cost reduction) for one defense of this:
You may choose not to apply Training Ground’s cost reduction effect. You may also choose to apply only part of it (causing an activated ability of a creature you control to cost just 1 less to activate).
As further defense, the use of "up to" is not necessary to support cards that have less than 2 generic mana in their cost. Magic in general does not need specific wording to prevent numbers from going negative (see 107.1b Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero.). For example, Arcane Melee and Power Artifact do not include the phrase "up to", and yet each reduces costs just fine.
Where this matters
Where the optionality of cost reduction usually matters is with cards like Prossh, Skyraider of Kher or Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge. However, this isn't relevant here because Flash is not casting the creatures, and therefore not reducing the mana spent to casting them. Mana burn was one of the main reasons this would matter; good thing Wizards got rid of that rule :) For examples of when this would matter, see here: When would it be advantageous not apply Training Ground's cost reduction?
answered Jun 5 at 12:58
ZagsZags
10.1k32073
1
@Arthur There is no mana spent to cast Prossh if you use Flash because Prossh isn't cast. It's the same as if you had used Elvish Piper.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:33
You can't necessarily use Arcana Melee as justification, because it reduces casting costs - the costs you pay for the Flash effect are not casting costs, so they dont necessarily use the same wording. As Glorfindel has quoted, the ruling for Flash has the example of the 1R creature that "you'll have to pay R to keep it".
– Hackworth
Jun 5 at 13:42
@Hackworth I included that card-specific ruling in my answer as well as a discussion of it.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:47
1
@Hackworth English is ambiguous "You have to pay R to keep it" could mean either "pay exactly R" or "pay at least R". "The cost is R", meanwhile, is not ambiguous.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:56
2
This answer appears to be correct based on a ruling on the card Training Ground. Training Ground also uses the phrase "up to" in the context of applying a cost reduction and the ruling says that you can ignore the cost reduction or use only part of it.
– murgatroid99♦
Jun 5 at 15:25
|
show 6 more comments
The use of "up to" means that the discount is optional. You can chose to have Flash's ability use a generic mana cost reduction of 0, 1, or 2.
Rules justification
The phrase "up to" is consistently used in Magic to mean you get to chose a number between 0 and the full value. You can choose to have Abandon Reason target 0, 1, or 2 creatures.
See the ruling on Training Grounds (which has a similar cost reduction) for one defense of this:
You may choose not to apply Training Ground’s cost reduction effect. You may also choose to apply only part of it (causing an activated ability of a creature you control to cost just 1 less to activate).
As further defense, the use of "up to" is not necessary to support cards that have less than 2 generic mana in their cost. Magic in general does not need specific wording to prevent numbers from going negative (see 107.1b Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero.). For example, Arcane Melee and Power Artifact do not include the phrase "up to", and yet each reduces costs just fine.
Where this matters
Where the optionality of cost reduction usually matters is with cards like Prossh, Skyraider of Kher or Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge. However, this isn't relevant here because Flash is not casting the creatures, and therefore not reducing the mana spent to casting them. Mana burn was one of the main reasons this would matter; good thing Wizards got rid of that rule :) For examples of when this would matter, see here: When would it be advantageous not apply Training Ground's cost reduction?
answered Jun 5 at 12:58
ZagsZags
10.1k32073
1
@Arthur There is no mana spent to cast Prossh if you use Flash because Prossh isn't cast. It's the same as if you had used Elvish Piper.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:33
You can't necessarily use Arcana Melee as justification, because it reduces casting costs - the costs you pay for the Flash effect are not casting costs, so they dont necessarily use the same wording. As Glorfindel has quoted, the ruling for Flash has the example of the 1R creature that "you'll have to pay R to keep it".
– Hackworth
Jun 5 at 13:42
@Hackworth I included that card-specific ruling in my answer as well as a discussion of it.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:47
1
@Hackworth English is ambiguous "You have to pay R to keep it" could mean either "pay exactly R" or "pay at least R". "The cost is R", meanwhile, is not ambiguous.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:56
2
This answer appears to be correct based on a ruling on the card Training Ground. Training Ground also uses the phrase "up to" in the context of applying a cost reduction and the ruling says that you can ignore the cost reduction or use only part of it.
– murgatroid99♦
Jun 5 at 15:25
|
show 6 more comments
The use of "up to" means that the discount is optional. You can chose to have Flash's ability use a generic mana cost reduction of 0, 1, or 2.
Rules justification
The phrase "up to" is consistently used in Magic to mean you get to chose a number between 0 and the full value. You can choose to have Abandon Reason target 0, 1, or 2 creatures.
See the ruling on Training Grounds (which has a similar cost reduction) for one defense of this:
You may choose not to apply Training Ground’s cost reduction effect. You may also choose to apply only part of it (causing an activated ability of a creature you control to cost just 1 less to activate).
As further defense, the use of "up to" is not necessary to support cards that have less than 2 generic mana in their cost. Magic in general does not need specific wording to prevent numbers from going negative (see 107.1b Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero.). For example, Arcane Melee and Power Artifact do not include the phrase "up to", and yet each reduces costs just fine.
Where this matters
Where the optionality of cost reduction usually matters is with cards like Prossh, Skyraider of Kher or Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge. However, this isn't relevant here because Flash is not casting the creatures, and therefore not reducing the mana spent to casting them. Mana burn was one of the main reasons this would matter; good thing Wizards got rid of that rule :) For examples of when this would matter, see here: When would it be advantageous not apply Training Ground's cost reduction?
answered Jun 5 at 12:58
ZagsZags
10.1k32073
The use of "up to" means that the discount is optional. You can chose to have Flash's ability use a generic mana cost reduction of 0, 1, or 2.
Rules justification
The phrase "up to" is consistently used in Magic to mean you get to chose a number between 0 and the full value. You can choose to have Abandon Reason target 0, 1, or 2 creatures.
See the ruling on Training Grounds (which has a similar cost reduction) for one defense of this:
You may choose not to apply Training Ground’s cost reduction effect. You may also choose to apply only part of it (causing an activated ability of a creature you control to cost just 1 less to activate).
As further defense, the use of "up to" is not necessary to support cards that have less than 2 generic mana in their cost. Magic in general does not need specific wording to prevent numbers from going negative (see 107.1b Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero.). For example, Arcane Melee and Power Artifact do not include the phrase "up to", and yet each reduces costs just fine.
Where this matters
Where the optionality of cost reduction usually matters is with cards like Prossh, Skyraider of Kher or Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge. However, this isn't relevant here because Flash is not casting the creatures, and therefore not reducing the mana spent to casting them. Mana burn was one of the main reasons this would matter; good thing Wizards got rid of that rule :) For examples of when this would matter, see here: When would it be advantageous not apply Training Ground's cost reduction?
answered Jun 5 at 12:58
ZagsZags
10.1k32073
edited Jun 6 at 11:11
answered Jun 5 at 12:58
ZagsZags
10.1k32073
answered Jun 5 at 12:58
ZagsZags
10.1k32073
answered Jun 5 at 12:58
ZagsZags
10.1k32073
10.1k32073
1
@Arthur There is no mana spent to cast Prossh if you use Flash because Prossh isn't cast. It's the same as if you had used Elvish Piper.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:33
You can't necessarily use Arcana Melee as justification, because it reduces casting costs - the costs you pay for the Flash effect are not casting costs, so they dont necessarily use the same wording. As Glorfindel has quoted, the ruling for Flash has the example of the 1R creature that "you'll have to pay R to keep it".
– Hackworth
Jun 5 at 13:42
@Hackworth I included that card-specific ruling in my answer as well as a discussion of it.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:47
1
@Hackworth English is ambiguous "You have to pay R to keep it" could mean either "pay exactly R" or "pay at least R". "The cost is R", meanwhile, is not ambiguous.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:56
2
This answer appears to be correct based on a ruling on the card Training Ground. Training Ground also uses the phrase "up to" in the context of applying a cost reduction and the ruling says that you can ignore the cost reduction or use only part of it.
– murgatroid99♦
Jun 5 at 15:25
|
show 6 more comments
1
@Arthur There is no mana spent to cast Prossh if you use Flash because Prossh isn't cast. It's the same as if you had used Elvish Piper.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:33
You can't necessarily use Arcana Melee as justification, because it reduces casting costs - the costs you pay for the Flash effect are not casting costs, so they dont necessarily use the same wording. As Glorfindel has quoted, the ruling for Flash has the example of the 1R creature that "you'll have to pay R to keep it".
– Hackworth
Jun 5 at 13:42
@Hackworth I included that card-specific ruling in my answer as well as a discussion of it.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:47
1
@Hackworth English is ambiguous "You have to pay R to keep it" could mean either "pay exactly R" or "pay at least R". "The cost is R", meanwhile, is not ambiguous.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:56
2
This answer appears to be correct based on a ruling on the card Training Ground. Training Ground also uses the phrase "up to" in the context of applying a cost reduction and the ruling says that you can ignore the cost reduction or use only part of it.
– murgatroid99♦
Jun 5 at 15:25
1
1
@Arthur There is no mana spent to cast Prossh if you use Flash because Prossh isn't cast. It's the same as if you had used Elvish Piper.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:33
@Arthur There is no mana spent to cast Prossh if you use Flash because Prossh isn't cast. It's the same as if you had used Elvish Piper.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:33
You can't necessarily use Arcana Melee as justification, because it reduces casting costs - the costs you pay for the Flash effect are not casting costs, so they dont necessarily use the same wording. As Glorfindel has quoted, the ruling for Flash has the example of the 1R creature that "you'll have to pay R to keep it".
– Hackworth
Jun 5 at 13:42
You can't necessarily use Arcana Melee as justification, because it reduces casting costs - the costs you pay for the Flash effect are not casting costs, so they dont necessarily use the same wording. As Glorfindel has quoted, the ruling for Flash has the example of the 1R creature that "you'll have to pay R to keep it".
– Hackworth
Jun 5 at 13:42
@Hackworth I included that card-specific ruling in my answer as well as a discussion of it.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:47
@Hackworth I included that card-specific ruling in my answer as well as a discussion of it.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:47
1
1
@Hackworth English is ambiguous "You have to pay R to keep it" could mean either "pay exactly R" or "pay at least R". "The cost is R", meanwhile, is not ambiguous.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:56
@Hackworth English is ambiguous "You have to pay R to keep it" could mean either "pay exactly R" or "pay at least R". "The cost is R", meanwhile, is not ambiguous.
– Zags
Jun 5 at 13:56
2
2
This answer appears to be correct based on a ruling on the card Training Ground. Training Ground also uses the phrase "up to" in the context of applying a cost reduction and the ruling says that you can ignore the cost reduction or use only part of it.
– murgatroid99♦
Jun 5 at 15:25
This answer appears to be correct based on a ruling on the card Training Ground. Training Ground also uses the phrase "up to" in the context of applying a cost reduction and the ruling says that you can ignore the cost reduction or use only part of it.
– murgatroid99♦
Jun 5 at 15:25
|
show 6 more comments
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fboardgames.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47452%2fpaying-more-mana-for-a-flashed-creature%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
