6

The recently released preview card for ELD, Irencrag Feat reads:

Add seven {R}. You can only cast one more spell this turn.

Would this wording allow me to play another Irencrag Feat, which would in turn allow me to play one more spell this turn?

6

You cannot cast another spell after casting the second Irencrag Feat

While I don't think the Golden Rule quoted by Arcanist Lupus in his answer necessarily applies here, simple logic will get you there:

  • You cast the first copy, which creates a condition "Condition A" that says you can only cast one more spell this turn
  • Trying to cast the second copy, you need to check existing conditions, namely "Condition A". Since you haven't cast another spell this turn, you cast the second copy, which creates a condition "Condition B" that says you can only cast one more spell this turn
  • Trying to cast another spell, you need to check existing conditions, namely "Condition A" and "Condition B". You haven't cast another spell since "Condition B" has been established, but you have cast another spell since "Condition A" has. This means that casting another spell would necessarily violate "Condition A", so you won't get to cast another spell this turn.

Keep in mind that cards like this will usually receive rulings upon or close to their release for clarification.

3

No.

You may not cast any other spells after the second Irencrag Feat because it would violate the restriction imposed by the first Irencrag Feat.

Contrary to your claim, Irencrag Feat doesn't allow you to cast any additional spells.

Instead, each Irencrag Feat imposes a restriction, and the restriction from the second Irencrag Feat doesn't erase the restriction imposed by the first. All restrictions must be obeyed.

1

No, it would not.

One of the Golden Rules of Magic is that "can't" trumps "can"

101.2. When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can't happen, the "can't" effect takes precedence. Example: If one effect reads "You may play an additional land this turn" and another reads "You can't play lands this turn," the effect that precludes you from playing lands wins.

This is a similar example. Your first Irencrag Feat says that you can't cast any spells this turn after the next one you cast. If you cast a second one, the first Irencrag will prevent you from playing any more cards even though the second one would allow one more card.

  • 2
    I am not sure if this is correct because I don’t think it’s been determined for sure if 101.2 applies to anything that doesn’t use the word “can’t”. – GendoIkari Sep 14 '19 at 7:37
  • See related comments on this question and this one. I think you’re probably right, just not sure. – GendoIkari Sep 14 '19 at 7:40
  • 1
    101.2 doesn't apply because no effect directs something to happen that another effect says can't happen. Specifically, you have two effects that say something can't happen. 101.2 would come into play if an effect instructs you to cast a spell (e.g. Electrodominance), but that's not the case here. A better answer would contradict the OP's claim that the second IF "would in turn allow me to play one more spell this turn" instead of repeating it. IF doesn't allow spells to be played. [I have now posted said better answer :)] @Gendolkari – ikegami Sep 14 '19 at 23:43

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.