Timeline for Can I use two different cards with the same name in Commander?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:01 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jun 22, 2019 at 11:18 | history | edited | Hackworth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Jun 22, 2019 at 11:11 | history | edited | Hackworth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 27 characters in body
|
| May 15, 2019 at 9:55 | comment | added | doppelgreener | @user3490 Here's the EDH rules committee response: legality is by card name, so only one of a functional variant (you can't have two Ineffable Blessings even if they're different) but one each of the Killbots because they've got different names. | |
| May 15, 2019 at 9:51 | history | edited | Hackworth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 288 characters in body
|
| May 14, 2019 at 10:41 | history | edited | Hackworth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 85 characters in body
|
| Feb 12, 2019 at 15:40 | comment | added | user3490 | Does this include silver-border cards like Ineffable Blessing that have multiple versions with different texts? | |
| Feb 6, 2019 at 23:31 | comment | added | doppelgreener | You might like to cite commander rule 5: "With the exception of basic lands, no two cards in the deck may have the same english name. Some cards (e.g. Relentless Rats) may have rules text that overrides this restriction." That even handles functional variants from Unstable. | |
| Feb 5, 2019 at 14:55 | comment | added | Becuzz | @Arthur It isn't redundant. Consider two different versions of the same character Akroma, Angel of Wrath and Akroma, Angel of Fury or most planeswalkers, etc. The monster's name could just be considered "Akroma". But that wouldn't stop you from having an "Akroma, Angel of Fury" and an "Akroma, Angel of Wrath" out at the same time. English is a goofy language where common practices make things more complicated in a game like Magic. So they specified so that there wouldn't be any pedantic English language arguments during games. Most rules are spelled out to the n-th degree. | |
| Feb 5, 2019 at 14:52 | comment | added | Hackworth | @Arthur a) because "same name" is a key term used in card wordings so it has to be defined, whereas "their names are identical" is the common, English meaning that needs no further definition; and b) because the full definition of "same name" is a little more complicated than that. "201.2b If an object has more than one name, it has the same name as another object if there are one or more names that both objects have in common." | |
| Feb 5, 2019 at 14:37 | comment | added | Arthur | Wow, 201.2a looks redundant. If you go so far as to define what "the same name" means, why aren't they also defining what it means for two names to be identical? | |
| Feb 5, 2019 at 9:40 | history | edited | Hackworth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Feb 5, 2019 at 9:34 | history | edited | Hackworth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 758 characters in body
|
| Feb 5, 2019 at 8:18 | history | answered | Hackworth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |