Abeyance, Power Level Errata, and old Rules

[Bovinious]

And going back to the misprinted Cursed Scroll, those were $50 each when the card was T2 legal. Of cours, that was also a year after playsets of Abeyance were traded for Power 9, so whatever. People are pretty fucking crazy sometimes.

Isnt that because old Abeyance, before power-level errata, stopped mana abilities too so it was basically an instant Time Walk that cantripped, right? Its weird how WOTC is hypocritical with their policies like that, they let Null Rod and Cursed Totem stop mana abilities but not Abeyance, it gets power-level errata...

[TrialByFire]

Stopping your artifacts from making mana and stopping your lands from making mana (Abeyance before power level errata) are two very different things

[Bovinious]

Stopping your artifacts from making mana and stopping your lands from making mana (Abeyance before power level errata) are two very different things

But it is still power level errata, case and point. According WOTC's stated policy on this matter Abeyance should be restored and then banned/restricted in any format they dont want a white instant cantripping time walk. Anyways my point wasnt to scorn WOTC's obviously flawed policy, but to explain why Abeyance apparently cost so much back then.

[etrigan]

Abeyance wasn't power level errata. It was wonky pre-sixth edition rules that turned it into Time Walk.

[Nightmare]

How is the fact that the printed wording doesnt exclude mana abilities "wonky pre-6th rules?" It is power level errata because as printed the card is (arguably) way too powerful in that itd stop mana abilities, and WOTC obviously didnt want that so they issued the errata. Errata to stop the power of card, sounds like power level errata to me.There was no such thing as a mana ability before sixth edition came along. It also only worked then for about a week (hyperbole) until they fixed it. It's along the same lines as why you can't use Lotus Vale as a Black Lotus. The rules back then were completely different than they are today.

This thread is not the place for this discussion, nor the other one currently going on. Please stick to the pimp decks.

[Bovinious]

There was no such thing as a mana ability before sixth edition came along. It also only worked then for about a week (hyperbole) until they fixed it. It's along the same lines as why you can't use Lotus Vale as a Black Lotus. The rules back then were completely different than they are today.

This thread is not the place for this discussion, nor the other one currently going on. Please stick to the pimp decks.

Well there is power level errata on Lotus Vale, Scorhed Ruins, and a plethora of other cards too, that doesnt change that fact that the "fix" you refer to was power level errata. WOTC has pledged to restore all such cards, like they did to Dreadnought not too long ago.

I apologize, no more out of me about this topic here, I just wanted to defend my claim about Abeyance to you without starting a new thread.

[Nightmare]

It's ok, I moved the discussion to the appropriate location.

Scorched Ruins and Lotus Vale weren't power level erratas. There were changes in the way the cards functioned within the rules. Before sixth edition, you could not use a card before all costs had been paid to put it into play. This is the same reason the wording on Mox Diamond is "As an additional cost" now. These cards were changed to make them work the way they were intended under a different set of rules. There was only a brief period where they functioned differently. The errata was made to fix the cards' functionality, not the power level.

The same is true with Abeyance. Before 6th edition, mana abilities were not considered "activated abilities," they were "mana sources." When Abeyance was printed, it did not shut them off. When the sixth edition rules change occurred, this was overlooked, exploited, and then corrected to restore the original function of the card.

[Payne_The_Mediocre]

Wizards isn't going to un-errata Abeyance untill 1 week before a legacy GP. Then they won't emergency ban it because you can still win through an abeyance and they will wait a while to ban it.

Called it here first. =\

[Bovinious]

It's ok, I moved the discussion to the appropriate location.

Scorched Ruins and Lotus Vale weren't power level erratas. There were changes in the way the cards functioned within the rules. Before sixth edition, you could not use a card before all costs had been paid to put it into play. This is the same reason the wording on Mox Diamond is "As an additional cost" now. These cards were changed to make them work the way they were intended under a different set of rules. There was only a brief period where they functioned differently. The errata was made to fix the cards' functionality, not the power level.

The same is true with Abeyance. Before 6th edition, mana abilities were not considered "activated abilities," they were "mana sources." When Abeyance was printed, it did not shut them off. When the sixth edition rules change occurred, this was overlooked, exploited, and then corrected to restore the original function of the card.

So your saying WOTC is trying to preserve original functionality rather than printed wording? Fair enough I can see the interest in preserving that, but why then do Null Rod and Cursed Totem stop mana abilities now? Why werent they given the same fix? Either way I look at it it seems like an inconsistency by WOTC is all Im saying.

[Anusien]

So your saying WOTC is trying to preserve original functionality rather than printed wording? Fair enough I can see the interest in preserving that, but why then do Null Rod and Cursed Totem stop mana abilities now? Why werent they given the same fix? Either way I look at it it seems like an inconsistency by WOTC is all Im saying.
Null Rod and Cursed Totem were intended to stop certain effects. Abeyance doesn't. They have the same CMC because Rod and Totem are limited in what they affect.

[Bovinious]

Null Rod and Cursed Totem were intended to stop certain effects. Abeyance doesn't. They have the same CMC because Rod and Totem are limited in what they affect.

How can you say Null Rod and Cursed Totem were intended to stop mana abilities when mana abilities apparently didnt even EXIST when those cards were printed? Its a huge double standard, Abeyance getting axed but not Rod/Totem...

[Eldariel]

They're going case-by-case rather than by general rules it seems. Dreadnought's removal of errata moved it from functionality to printed wording, for example, while the lands have recieved no such treatment. It just goes to show that they're trying to make the cards playable while keeping 'em reasonable. I wouldn't expect removal of errata on Abeyance, Scorched Ruins or Lotus Vale since that would simply lead to banned cards.