Time Walk Question
Lee Chow
after current on, or only one extra turn?
Also, if your opponent casts Time Walk, and then you Fork it, does you r
opponent get two consecutive turns and you get two consecutive turns, or
does play just resume as normal.
Thanx,
Philip
David DeLaney
>If you cast a Time Walk and then Fork it, do you get two extra turns
>after current on, or only one extra turn?
Two.
>Also, if your opponent casts Time Walk, and then you Fork it, does you r
>opponent get two consecutive turns and you get two consecutive turns, or
>does play just resume as normal.
The Forked TWcopy resolves before the original; the extra turns are taken
in the order the spells resolve in. You get an extra turn after this one,
then he gets an extra turn, then whoever was going to go after your
opponent (you, in two-player) goes normally.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney d...@panacea.phys.utk.edu "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. Disclaimer: IMHO; VRbeableURLAP
http://enigma.phys.utk.edu/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
tra...@maple.circa.ufl.edu
In article <3l0861$3...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, mrma...@unity.ncsu.edu (Mike Marcelais) writes:
>Try reading your summaries a bit harder:
>Time Walk:
> If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
> the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
Alright, look. Time Walks resolve, all at the end of the turn. If they did
not, the rest of your turn would not happen, you would have to skip immediately
to the time walked turn. Now, follow me carefully. When Time Walk is cast, it
states, "Take an extra turn after this one"
Period.
Now, Fork it.
Resolve...
Time walk will allow an extra turn after this one, but, fork goes first. Same
text. So, you gain an extra turn, after the current one...ok, so you do. Now,
still the same turn...resolve the time walk...you gain an extra turn,
again...so, after this turn, you gain an extra turn, qualified, quite
adamantly, by two, count them two cards. Since Time Walk resolves during this
turn, as does the fork, they both do the identical task. Right, take this
example....Reset, during your opponent's turn...fork it...so, you untap your
land, and do it again in the same turn...they both resolve, doing an identical
task, then the turn is over, mission completed. No noticable effect by the
fork, no? Same thing as with the TW. It is _only_ because the TW resolves
during the same turn as the fork, that this combo doesn't work.
Now trust me...I play with Time Walk in my deck, which also happens to have 4
forks in it, so I have checked up on this and truely wish that you could fork a
Time Walk! ^_^
Christopher Cates
: In article <3l0861$3...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, mrma...@unity.ncsu.edu (Mike Marcelais) writes:
: Now trust me...I play with Time Walk in my deck, which also happens to have 4
: forks in it, so I have checked up on this and truely wish that you could fork a
: Time Walk! ^_^
You didn't check very well. The rulings summary states it quite clearly.
Tom Wylie has said it quite clearly. The text of it states it quite
clearly. I don't understand the confusion.
English check real fast: You are drinking a soda. I give you an extra
soda to drink _after_ this one. You now have one soda that you're
drinking and one more that you have not started, but you like sodas, so
you fork my action. I give you an extra soda to drink _after_ this one.
You now have _two_ sodas to drink after this one, but unless you're
truly odd, you're probably not going to drink them at the same time, but
both will be consumed _after_ the one you're drinking. Have your
Time Walk out when you read this, and you'll notice I use a lot of the
same language that they use on the card. Too many people either
read in the word "immediately" onto the card when it isn't there or
just don't know what the word "after" really means. But just in
case you still doubt me, here are some quotes from Tom:
> There is no limit in the rules on how many turns you can take in a row,
> though a fair number of unofficial tournaments place a 'house rule'
> limit on such things.
>
> Tom Wylie rec.games.deckmaster Network Representative for
> aa...@hal.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
and
> Time Walk:
> If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
> the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
Good luck on the new found might of your Time Walk.
Cheers,
Chris.
c...@wintermute.ucr.edu
Mike Marcelais
| In article <3l0861$3...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, mrma...@unity.ncsu.edu (Mike Marcelais) writes:
| >Try reading your summaries a bit harder:
| >Time Walk:
| > If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
| > the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
| Alright, look. Time Walks resolve, all at the end of the turn. If they did
[Incorrect argument removed]
According to Wizards of the Coast (via Tom Wylie, the Net Representative --
that's who 'Aahz' is in the attribution up there), Forking a Time Walk will
give you two turns. If your opponent Forks your Time Walk, it effectively
negates it because his turn comes first (because Fork resolves before the
original). You can Fork a Timewalk and get 2 turns. Period.
--
+--------------------------+---------------------------+
| Mike Marcelais | mrma...@eos.ncsu.edu |
| The Moonstone Dragon | Fourth Bryan Productions |
| -==(UDIC)==- | Author of ChrHack 2.3 |
+------------------Signature-Virus-Shield-v1.0-enabled-+
David DeLaney
>d...@panacea.phys.utk.edu (David DeLaney) writes:
>>ch...@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Lee Chow ) writes:
>>>If you cast a Time Walk and then Fork it, do you get two extra turns
>>>after current on, or only one extra turn?
>>
>>Two.
>
>time.
Incorrect. There is no way in Revised timing rules for two effects to resolve
"at the same time". (*Damage* from different effects can land at the same
time; that's not the same concept.) The Forked copy of the Time Walk
is placed on the stack on top of the original Time Walk, just like any
other Forked copy of something; instants and non-fast effects resolve
LIFO, so the Forked copy resolves just before the original Time Walk does.
(It's just that a Forked copy of a Sorcery is the *only* way to get more than
one non-fast spell on a stack at all, so Fork is the only situation where
the LIFO resolution for multiple non-fast spells in a stack *matters*.)
>>The Forked TWcopy resolves before the original; the extra turns are taken
>>in the order the spells resolve in. You get an extra turn after this one,
>>then he gets an extra turn, then whoever was going to go after your
>>opponent (you, in two-player) goes normally.
>
>Wrong again! Once again, both spells resolve at the same time, (At the end of
>the current turn).
You are seriously misinformed. Again, there's no possible way for them to
resolve "at the same time"; I think you are trying to apply Unlimited
timing rules, which have been superseded for over a year now and which never
worked very well in the first place. The spells resolve in reverse order,
one just before the current stack ends and one at the end of the current stack.
They do not wait "until end of turn" to do so.
>If I am not mistaken, this question has already been discussed and has been
>officially ruled this way by WotC.
You are seriously mistaken. Please consult the Rulings Summaries, available
(among other places) from marvin.macc.wisc.edu under /pub/deckmaster/rules .
David DeLaney
>mrma...@unity.ncsu.edu (Mike Marcelais) writes:
>>Try reading your summaries a bit harder:
>>Time Walk:
>> If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
>> the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
>
>Alright, look. Time Walks resolve, all at the end of the turn.
No. Time Walks resolve, in reverse order of their place on the stack, as the
stack is resolving. Each resolved Time Walk hangs a "This person will take
an extra turn after this one" sign on a player; these signs then take *effect*
at the end of the turn, one at a time, in the order they resolved during the
turn.
>Time walk will allow an extra turn after this one, but, fork goes first. Same
>text. So, you gain an extra turn, after the current one...ok, so you do. Now,
>still the same turn...resolve the time walk...you gain an extra turn,
That's two extra turns so far. Nothing says Time Walk is not cumulative, and
the "extra" says it *is* cumulative, so it's cumulative. The same way multiple
Instill Energies on a creature allow it to untap multiple "extra" times.
>Now trust me...I play with Time Walk in my deck, which also happens to have 4
>forks in it, so I have checked up on this and truely wish that you could fork a
>Time Walk! ^_^
You've not checked with anyone who knows what they're doing, then; Forking
a Time walk is perfectly legal, and *always* has produced multiple extra turns.
There have been rumored to be tournaments with House Rules concerning Time
Walks which made them work differently; that's not WotC's problem (except
inasmuch as the wrong rules were being used).
David DeLaney
>Although... was someone saying to play the extra turns in the order
>they resolved? That's not how it works out above...
Yes, that's a special rule for "when you get extra turns". The extra turns
people get during a given turn occur in the order they resolved in that
turn. If A Forks B's Time Walk, they both get extra turns - but A's extra
turn happens before B's does.
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
>If you cast a Time Walk and then Fork it, do you get two extra turns
>after current on, or only one extra turn?
You get two. From the rulings:
Time Walk:
If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
>Also, if your opponent casts Time Walk, and then you Fork it, does you r
>opponent get two consecutive turns and you get two consecutive turns, or
>does play just resume as normal.
It resumes as normal, as your Fork'ed copy resolves before his Time Walk.
>Thanx,
>Philip
Spot
--
Spot / l...@daimi.aau.dk
Triangle 3532 - The solution to your confuzion
'Faith without Judgement merely degrades the Spirit Divine..'
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
>In article <3l0861$3...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, mrma...@unity.ncsu.edu (Mike Marcelais) writes:
>>Try reading your summaries a bit harder:
>>Time Walk:
>> If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
>> the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
>Alright, look. Time Walks resolve, all at the end of the turn. If they did
>not, the rest of your turn would not happen, you would have to skip immediately
>to the time walked turn. Now, follow me carefully. When Time Walk is cast, it
>states, "Take an extra turn after this one"
>
>Period.
Questionmark! A spell resolves at the end of the batch in which it was cast. A
Time Walk is no different, and can resolve at any time during your main-phase.
>Now, Fork it.
And it will resolve just before the original Walk.
>Resolve...
1 extra turn
+1 extra turn
--
2 extra turns
>Time walk will allow an extra turn after this one, but, fork goes first. Same
>text. So, you gain an extra turn, after the current one...ok, so you do. Now,
>still the same turn...resolve the time walk...you gain an extra turn,
>again...so, after this turn, you gain an extra turn, qualified, quite
>adamantly, by two, count them two cards. Since Time Walk resolves during this
>turn, as does the fork, they both do the identical task. Right, take this
>example....Reset, during your opponent's turn...fork it...so, you untap your
>land, and do it again in the same turn...they both resolve, doing an identical
>task, then the turn is over, mission completed. No noticable effect by the
>fork, no? Same thing as with the TW. It is _only_ because the TW resolves
>during the same turn as the fork, that this combo doesn't work.
The current ruling (for some time0 is that :
Time Walk:
If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
You gain two extra turns, the one generated by the fork comes first.
>Now trust me...I play with Time Walk in my deck, which also happens to have 4
>forks in it, so I have checked up on this and truely wish that you could fork a
>Time Walk! ^_^
Stop wishing and start forking. It's official!
Rob H. Wall
|> In article <3l0fa0$c...@cutter.clas.ufl.edu>, tra...@maple.circa.ufl.edu
|> wrote:
|>
|> >
|> > Now trust me...I play with Time Walk in my deck, which also happens to have 4
|> > forks in it, so I have checked up on this and truely wish that you could fork a
|> > Time Walk! ^_^
|>
|> You're looking at the text "after this one," but the key word is
|> "extra." Here's what happens.
|>
|> 1. Play Time Walk.
|> 2. Fork it.
|> 3. Fork resolves; you get an extra turn "after this one;" which I
|> interpret to mean that an extra turn for you gets put at the head
|> of the "turn queue," which ordinarily would have your opponent's
|> turn at the head.
|> 4. Time Walk resolves; again, an extra turn for you gets inserted at
|> the head of the turn queue.
|> 5. Take the extra turn due to the Time Walk.
|> 6. Take the extra turn due to the Fork.
|>
|> You seem to be taking "after this one" too literally. Obviously the
|> turn you get "after this one" is to come *before* whatever the
|> previous following turn was; it doesn't *replace* it. If it did,
|> a single Time Walk would replace your opponent's next turn with
|> a turn for you, and then your normal next turn would follow.
|> Obviously, that's not right.
|>
|> Although... was someone saying to play the extra turns in the order
|> they resolved? That's not how it works out above...
|>
|> opponent Forks your Time Walk, it does. Hmm. For the effects to
|> cancel, which is what Tom said happens, I think, the extra turns
|> *would* have to occur in the order the effects resolve.
|> This doesn't seem right to me. When a Time Walk resolves, it
|> should preempt whatever the following turn is, and let you take
|> a turn before that.
|> Any chance on getting that ruling changed, Tom? :-)
|>
|> --
|>
|> Bob Hearn
|> bob_...@qm.claris.com
UHH... Every tournament I have been to in the last few months have specifically
told me (All the judges, all the players, everyone) that if you fork a timewalk,
the turns happen concurrently, so it does you absolutely no good. Conjure
said that WOTC has also ruled this, and since every tourney I have ever been
to has told me "You can't fork the Timewalk, no more than 2 turns in a row can
be taken by any player," I think this is the way it is. But maybe this is just
a tournament thing and for regular purposes you can fork it for extra turns.
_______________________________________________________________________________
"My opinion is just a point of view Rob Wall
And your position is the other side..." Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Fates Warning
Email ---> wa...@rpi.edu
Iron Maiden Information Network:
http://www.rpi.edu/~wallr/IronMaiden.html
________________________________________________________________________________
David DeLaney
>UHH... Every tournament I have been to in the last few months have specifically
>told me (All the judges, all the players, everyone) that if you fork a timewalk,
>the turns happen concurrently, so it does you absolutely no good.
You've met a lot of misguided players and judges then.
>Conjure
>said that WOTC has also ruled this,
Conjure was *wrong*. Conjure needs to print a *retraction*. Conjure is
*not* an Offical Source Of Magic Rulings. Good grief.
>and since every tourney I have ever been
>to has told me "You can't fork the Timewalk, no more than 2 turns in a row can
>be taken by any player," I think this is the way it is.
Well, you've run into a lot of False Info then. Forking a Time Walk is
perfectly OK; so is taking as many turns in a row as you can manage to
produce. (This is why Time Vault is *banned*; it's entirely too easy to
make it a creature and place Instill Energy on it.) Some tourneys may
have had *tourney-local* rules that more than 2 turns in a row would result
in forfeiture; this is not, and never has been, an Official Ruling or Rule
from WotC *or* from the Convocation, as far as I know.
PANTHER EYES 0 0
>>>Time Walk:
>>> If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
>>> the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
>
> Time Walk:
> If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
> the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
>
> You gain two extra turns, the one generated by the fork comes first.
>
>>forks in it, so I have checked up on this and truely wish that you could fork a
>>Time Walk! ^_^
>
Sorry....but if I recall correctly WOTC said you can't take more than one
extra consecutive turn...whether timewalk was forked or whatever...
Tom....I guess you can verify this
Shinavae
djb...@gemini.tntech.edu
Disclaimer: Parts of previous posts were deleted....I do not claim credit for
any of the requoted/quoted material, nor do I claim to know exactly what I'm
saying...because I have been known to be wrong before and very well might be
now.
Kyle Anderson Felker
: Sorry....but if I recall correctly WOTC said you can't take more than one
: extra consecutive turn...whether timewalk was forked or whatever...
You recall incorrectly. You can fork a time walk, and it will get you
another turn. There is nothing illegal about taking as many extra turns
as you can get.
: Tom....I guess you can verify this
No, he can't because it isn't true. WotC has never said that taking more
than one extra turn is illegal. That's why time vault is banned: it can
get you infinite extra turns if you animate it and stick an instill on it.
: Shinavae
: djb...@gemini.tntech.edu
: Disclaimer: Parts of previous posts were deleted....I do not claim credit for
: any of the requoted/quoted material, nor do I claim to know exactly what I'm
: saying...because I have been known to be wrong before and very well might be
: now.
--
-Kyle Felker
______________________________________________________________________________
* Sorceror, Gamer, Magic:The Gathering player, Madman, Comic Book Enthusiast *
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I'm sick and tired of being called evil by pompous elven tree-huggers and
others of their ilk, just because a few of my spells are not suitable for
small children and pets. And while we're on the subject, how come white
gets to be on top?"
-Matthew,
in a rec.games.deckmaster discussion about black spells.
David DeLaney
|>>>Try reading your summaries a bit harder:
|>>>Time Walk:
|>>> If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
|>>> the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
|>
|> The current ruling (for some time0 is that :
|> Time Walk:
|> If multiple "extra turn" effects resolve in the same turn, take them in
|> the order that the effects resolved. [Aahz 12/02/94]
|
|extra consecutive turn...whether timewalk was forked or whatever...
Please *read* the post you are responding to. The "current ruling" is the
Official Current Rulings From WotC As Collected By d'Angelo; you do not
in fact "recall correctly", since WotC has *never* said what you attribute
to them. Multiple extra turns are perfectly legal after any given turn.