3

In a MTG Arena match, my opponent played Captive Audience on me, which I exiled/blinked using Teferi's Time Twist. I expected CA to return under the opponent's control, but it entered on my side.

The relevant wording on Captive Audience:

Captive Audience enters the battlefield under the control of an opponent of your choice. ...

and on Teferi's Time Twist:

Exile target permanent you control. Return that card to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step. (...)

What do the rules say about this kind of interaction?

4

That ability on Captive Audience is a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield. Effects like this are described in the replacement effects section of the rules:

614.1d Continuous effects that read “[This permanent] enters the battlefield . . .” or “[Objects] enter the battlefield . . .” are replacement effects.

614.12. Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c–d.) [...]

When you exiled it and then brought it back, it would have entered the battlefield under the control of its owner, your opponent, but the replacement effect modified that so that it entered the battlefield under your control instead.

  • 6
    One thing I think is missing from this answer and a key source of OP's confusion: it would be natural to read Time Twist's "Return that card to the battlefield under its owner's control" as also creating the same kind of replacement effect as Captive Audience creates. Then we would have two competing effects, and rule 616 would come into play to resolve the conflict. Am I understanding correctly though that Time Twist is not creating a replacement effect? (Instead, it could almost be thought of as a parenthetical rules reminder, since owner's control is the default way objects enter?) – Benjamin Cosman May 5 at 2:08
  • 1
    It's not a replacement effect, it's just the original effect that's being replaced. And yes, that's the default; but saying it explicitly resolves the potential ambiguity that the player being instructed to put the object onto the battlefield is not necessarily the same player under whose control it enters. Also, even if that was a replacement effect, and the order was decided in accordance with rule 616, the owner would be the one choosing the order (because of that default) so they would still probably put it onto the battlefield under OP's control. – murgatroid99 May 5 at 5:31
  • @Benjamin Cosman, Re "Am I understanding correctly though that Time Twist is not creating a replacement effect?", Correct. The instruction is question is "return", an alias for "move". "Move" is a one-shot effect, not a continuous effect. As such, the effect doesn't match the criteria to be a replacement effect under 614.1d or any other rule. – ikegami May 5 at 5:41

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.