Mutate and mana costs for putting cards on the stack
Asked by epicPlain 3 years ago
Somehow I have difficulty to understand the mutate concept. Here are some questions:
1a) If I have Gemrazer in my hand during my turn, will I be able to put it on the stack without paying its casting cost and instead, pay for the mutate cost (e.g. )?
1b) Does 1a entail that any spell can be put onto the stack without paying mana (and if I can not pay for the cost it will not resolve)?
2a) If I pay the summoning cost , am I right in the assumption that it will not trigger its ability to destroy an artifact or enchantment?
2b) Instead, if I use a mutate spell on it, it will then destroy an artifact or enchantment.
2c) or else, I will have to pay his mutate cost (as in 1a) ) to trigger that effect mentioned in 2a) when the spell becomes a part of the mutated creature (after casting Gemrazer successfully for its mutate cost?
Raging_Squiggle says... Accepted answer #1
Mutate is an alternate casting method. You either pay that or the regular mana cost. Not both. Abilities that trigger off mutating either trigger off the card itself being cast via mutate cost, or, while already in the battlefield, being mutated by a different card that was cast for its mutate cost.
1B) Technically yes, the process to cast a spell is to first put it on the stack. The last step is paying the mana. If you do not have enough mana to pay the cost, the game reverses to just before you propose casting the spell. A spell is not considered cast until the cost has been paid. Though this has no relevance for your overall question.
2A) You are correct. It’s ability is triggered off of mutation. If it’s cast with its regular mana cost, it will not trigger the mutate ability.
2B) also yes. If it’s on the battlefield already, you can cast a second card for its mutate cost onto the Gemrazer , thus triggering its mutate ability.
2C) not sure what you’re asking. Refer to other answers.
April 12, 2021 3:47 a.m.