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

Specify the range of GridLines

Are there existing rules/lore for MTG planeswalkers?

France's Public Holidays' Puzzle

What is the purpose of the side handle on a hand ("eggbeater") drill?

Will I have to go through TSA security when I return to the US after preclearance?

Is a self contained air-bullet cartridge feasible?

How can I wire a 9-position switch so that each position turns on one more LED than the one before?

Why aren't road bicycle wheels tiny?

Simulate round-robin tournament draw

Translate text contents of an existing file from lower to upper case and copy to a new file

/bin/ls sorts differently than just ls

My admission is revoked after accepting the admission offer

Married in secret, can marital status in passport be changed at a later date?

Has a Nobel Peace laureate ever been accused of war crimes?

Is there a verb for listening stealthily?

What is a 'Key' in computer science?

Can't solve system of linear equations (that need simplification first)

Why is arima in R one time step off?

How to begin with a paragraph in latex

Why did Europeans not widely domesticate foxes?

A journey... into the MIND

Is there a possibility to generate a list dynamically in Latex?

VBA: Single line if statement with multiple actions

Deciphering death certificate writing



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 2 hours ago









      Joe W

      9,20823352




      9,20823352










      asked 2 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

          Era Viking Índice Início da Era Viquingue | Cotidiano | Sociedade | Língua | Religião | A arte | As primeiras cidades | As viagens dos viquingues | Viquingues do Oeste e Leste | Fim da Era Viquingue | Fontes históricas | Referências Bibliografia | Ligações externas | Menu de navegação«Sverige då!»«Handel I vikingetid»«O que é Nórdico Antigo»Mito, magia e religião na volsunga saga Um olhar sobre a trajetória mítica do herói sigurd«Bonden var den verklige vikingen»«Vikingatiden»«Vikingatiden»«Vinland»«Guerreiras de Óðinn: As Valkyrjor na Mitologia Viking»1519-9053«Esculpindo símbolos e seres: A arte viking em pedras rúnicas»1679-9313Historia - Tema: VikingarnaAventura e Magia no Mundo das Sagas IslandesasEra Vikinge

          What's the metal clinking sound at the end of credits in Avengers: Endgame?What makes Thanos so strong in Avengers: Endgame?Who is the character that appears at the end of Endgame?What happens to Mjolnir (Thor's hammer) at the end of Endgame?The People's Ages in Avengers: EndgameWhat did Nebula do in Avengers: Endgame?Messing with time in the Avengers: Endgame climaxAvengers: Endgame timelineWhat are the time-travel rules in Avengers Endgame?Why use this song in Avengers: Endgame Opening Logo Sequence?Peggy's age in Avengers Endgame

          Are there legal definitions of ethnicities/races? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Legal definitions in the United StatesAre there truly legal limits on US interest rates?Are gender identity and sexual orientation federally protected?Why is there an apparent legal bias against digital services?What limits are there to the powers of individual judges in the United States legal system?Are women only scholarships legal under Irish / EU law?Is the term “race” defined by Public Law enacted by Congress of the United StatesIs there a legal definition of race in the US?Neighbors are spying for landlord on Renters is it legal?Are Protected Classes Bi-directional?