Player 1 casts Spelltwine. Player 2 copies it, e. g. with Twincast, and chooses not to change the targets. Will they be legal when the copy resolves?

In other words, is the first target of Spelltwine an “instant or sorcery card from your graveyard” or just an “instant or sorcery card” which just happens to be chosen from its controller's graveyard?

The targets are not legal. The first target restriction is “target instant or socery card from your graveyard” and the second is “target instant or socery card from an opponents graveyard”. So if Player 2 does not change the targets, the copied Spelltwine will be countered on resolution.

From the Gatherer's ruling for Twincast:

2009/10/1 If the copy says that it affects “you,” it affects the controller of the copy, not the controller of the original spell. Similarly, if the copy says that it affects an “opponent,” it affects an opponent of the copy's controller, not an opponent of the original spell's controller.

Therefore, if we understand Spelltwine's wording, “your” refers to Player 2 now, and “opponent” refers to Player 1 for the copy. As such, if Player 2 chooses not to change the targets, both are illegal targets, therefore the copy will be countered on resolution.

Edit: Got ninja'ed. :o

Edited Andrew Teo (Dec. 17, 2012 04:17:24 AM)

I thank both of you. So the text “from your graveyard” does belong to the target definition. This makes the target illegal for the copy, as I already intimated in my question.

Is there a general rule which text belongs to the target definition and which doesn't? Example: I can change the target of Evangelize (e. g. with Divert) to another creature. According to the rulings, the new target must also be a creature controlled by the chosen opponent. But that wouldn't be “target creature of an opponent's choice that he or she controls”, since it is no longer his or her choice.

And what would be a legal new target if player A Twincasted player B's Evangelize?

From the FAQ of Evangelize:

9/25/2006: The target of the spell is a creature the chosen opponent controls. As Evangelize resolves, if the target isn't a creature controlled by the chosen opponent, Evangelize will be countered. If Evangelize's target is changed (via Shunt, for example), the new target must be a creature controlled by the chosen opponent.

Source: Gatherer or magiccards.info (I prefer searching there, it's faster and easier to use than Gatherer.)

Originally posted by Mario Haßler:

Is there a general rule which text belongs to the target definition and which doesn't?

I would handle such issues by visualizing that if I copied the spell, I am the one who cast the spell, then determine if the targets are illegal.

For example if I Twincast my opponent's Duress, my copy will be visualized as me casting Duress (minus the casting cost etc. portion). In such a case, I am not my opponent, therefore the previously defined “target opponent” which is me will be countered on resolution if I do not choose new legal target(s) for the spell.

@Andrew Teo: Thank you for your attempt to help me, but again you seem to misunderstand the main reason for my question. I know that the definition of the target must match the new controller of the (copy of the) spell. That's not the point. The question was (in case of Spelltwine) whether the definition of the target comprises of “instant or sorcery card from your graveyard” or just of “instant or sorcery card” (and the part with the graveyard is just part of the instruction where to find that card). Similar, is the definition of the target in Evangelize “target creature of an opponent's choice that he or she controls” (1), “target creature of an opponent's choice” (2) or “target creature that the chosen opponent controls” (3). Depending on where to set the imaginary brackets “(…)” of the target definition, the game's check for illegal targets on resolution will lead to different results (e. g. option 1 and 2 would fail if the target wasn't chosen by the opponent).

@Stefan Ladstätter: Thank you too, but this does not help me either. Your citation is what I already mentioned (“According to the rulings…”). (Besides, I know that the rulings are not only available at the Gatherer; magiccards.info is also my #1 source for magic card search.) The ruling indicates that the definition of the target is “target creature that the chosen opponent controls”, i. e. option 3 from above. That is not even written on the card, hence my question whether there is a general rule for the definition of targets.

Plus, the last question is still unanswered: What if there is no chosen opponent, because player A copies player B's Evangelize and wants to choose a new target?

Mario, Gatherer does have the rulings & FAQ entries, but you need to click the + button at the bottom underneath the card to display it.

Regarding your question, the target definition is everything after the word target until the phrase (or sentence) ends.

For Evangelize, it's “target creature of an opponent's choice that he or she controls.”

In the case of Spelltwine, it's “target instant or sorcery card from your graveyard” (here the phrase ends) and “target instant or sorcery card from an opponent's graveyard”

Hope that helps!

Stefan

@Stefan Ladstätter: Thank you, but no, it doesn't help. I can't think a way to express it clearer than I did before. However, I will give it another try.

(1) You say “target creature of an opponent's choice that he or she controls” is the definition of the target. If so, then a player other than that opponent wouldn't be able to change the target to a creature of his choice, since then it wouldn't be a creature of that opponent's choice. It simply wouldn't match the quoted definition in every detail. Do you understand what I mean?

(2) We know from the FAQ that indeed another player can change the target, as long as the new target is still a creature controlled by the chosen opponent. Conclusion is that “of an opponent's choice” is not part of the target definition. That's why I wrote the definition as “target creature that the chosen opponent controls” (with the left-out “of an opponent's choice” as an instruction on how to pick the target). This text matches the old target and the new target. Can you follow me here?

(3) But then I wonder: This text isn't even printed on the card. If you have to leave out “of an opponent's choice” because of (1), then you shouldn't delete it from the middle of a sentence. So why isn't the target definition just “target creature” and the rest (“of an opponent's choice that he or she controls”) some kind of instruction on how to pick the target? I know it isn't, because then a player could change the target to any creature, and FAQ says he can't. But I'd like to know if there's a rule on that or how else you come to the target definition.

Others are welcome to help. Maybe there is someone else around who understands what I'm asking. Until then, I don't dare to ask again about copying another player's Evangelize…

Mario

PS: "not only available at the Gatherer“ =/= ”not available at the Gatherer"

Originally posted by Mario Haßler:

(1) You say “target creature of an opponent's choice that he or she controls” is the definition of the target. If so, then a player other than that opponent wouldn't be able to change the target to a creature of his choice, since then it wouldn't be a creature of that opponent's choice. It simply wouldn't match the quoted definition in every detail. Do you understand what I mean?

Stefan is right when he said “target creature of an opponent's choice that he or she controls” is the target definition. But rule 601.3 says, that the part “ of an opponent's choice ” only indicates that not the controller of the spell choose the target at the appropiate time, but the opponent does so. With this in mind, any player can still change the target to another legal target. (A legal target here is any other creature controlled by the same opponent).

Problem solved?

Cheers
Michael

@Mario, it took me a while to understand your question, let me rephrase it:

If “target creature of an opponent's choice that he or she controls” defines the target, but a redirected target no longer is “of an opponent's choice” (because this time, the controller of the redirection spell chose the target), wouldn't that make the new target illegal automatically?

Well, we know from the FAQ that “of an opponent's choice” is NOT part of the target restriction, otherwise redirection would not work. We could say that the phrase on Evangelize combines target restriction and an instruction how to determine the target.

This would mean that Evangelize could also read something like this:
“An opponent of your choice chooses target creature he or she controls. Gain control of that creature.”

How can we spot the difference between an instruction (how to determine a target) and a target restriction (determining the legality of the target)? It seems to boil down to common sense and CR 601.3 :)

Here is a list of all “of an opponent's choice” cards.

@Michael Wiese and @Stefan Ladstätter: Thank you for pointing me to CR 601.3. Together with Stefan's statement that the target definition comprises everything from “target” to the end of the sentence, we've got quite a good rule for that – until I find another contradictory example…