Sacrificial Altar and Eternal servant

[enozama]

Hi everyone, I was wondering: if I sacrifice my eternal servant with my altar, the creature is destroyed, as described on the card. So, I can sacrifice it and reanimate it right after, right? Or is there a special rule somewhere about "sacrifice" like in MTG?

[Zuberi]

You are correct. You can Sacrifice it with the Altar and then Reanimate it. I've heard this often done with Plague Zombie.

[enozama]

Oh I love it! Thanks a lot Zuberi

[Boocheck]

I need this confirmed from other source than me.

If there are 2 altars in game under control of 1 player. When he sacrificed a creature, there will be only ONE bonus. Not Two.

I just need this confirmed so i can sleep easily. There was this argument that if "they" (AW) wanted that, they will use "USED"marker.

Thank you for confirmation

[Zuberi]

I need this confirmed from other source than me.

If there are 2 altars in game under control of 1 player. When he sacrificed a creature, there will be only ONE bonus. Not Two.

I just need this confirmed so i can sleep easily. There was this argument that if "they" (AW) wanted that, they will use "USED"marker.

Thank you for confirmation

You use one Altar's effect to destroy the creature and gain a bonus. At that point, the creature is already destroyed and the second Altar can't destroy it again with its effect. The second Altar could destroy a different creature though to apply a second bonus.

Sacrificial Altar most certainly should have a ready marker put on it to remind you whether or not it has used its once per round effect. At least, in my opinion. It's not required by the rules, but not everything that could benefit from a ready marker says explicitly that you should use one. The markers are there to help you keep track of whether or not you've used an ability that has a limited number of uses per round, which the Altar does. Of course, its not that hard to remember if you killed off one of your own creatures this round or not. But if you're using 2+ altars, keeping track of which ones have been used and which ones haven't could be important if your opponent decides to destroy one.

[Borg]

And another question
Apparently you can only sac creatures you "control and own".
So does that mean you can't sac a previously enemy creature brought back with Rise Again ?
One of your own creatures brought back with Rise Again would qualify then ?

Seems strange not to be able to sac some Rise Again zombies you control.

[Schwenkgott]

Apparently you can only sac creatures you "control and own".

This has something to do with Mind controling an enemy creature. You cannot sacrifice them. But you should be able to sacrifice a creature, that you brought back in the game via reanimating. Think of it this way: When you are the one summoning the creature, then you can sacrifice it, when you have the control over it at this time.

[Borg]

you should be able to sacrifice a creature, that you brought back in the game via reanimating.

I think so too but codex3.0 seems to contradicts this :

"Owner (Game Term) The owner of a spell is the player who started with that spell in his spellbook at the beginning of the game."

So, it looks to me  that if you Reanimate an enemy creature with Rise Again this creature apparently cannot be sacrificed as it was not in your spellbook at the beginning of the game.
Or does the fact that this creature is now no longer a living creature but a Zombie change the interpretation ... ?

[Schwenkgott]

Makes no sense to me personally and I would understand the owner-controller-term otherwise. The Altar wants to make sure, that you can only sacrifice a creature, that initial mana cost has been paid by you.

[jacksmack]

Forcemaster + Necro buddie in a 2vs2 could be pretty OP if you could steal the creature with mind control and sacrifice it immediatly.

[Zuberi]

Borg is correct. You can not sacrifice a creature you don't own, no matter how you happened to gain control of it.

[Schwenkgott]

So we know what is written in the codex now. What is your opinion on this concerning the Altar and sacrificing reanimated (enemy) creatures?

[ExcaliburTK]

I think that even if you reanimate an enemy creature, the opponent is technically still the owner of the card as it originally came from there spellbook, so you cannot sacrifice it.

[Schwenkgott]

That is not the question. As I said, we all know the rule. Question is: Does the rule make sense concerning this issue?
A rule (or a law) is not created for nothing. There has to be an issue before, that the rule (or the law) should prevent in the future.
I totally understand why the rule exists: It is because you should not be able to Mind Control an enemy creature, attack with it and then sacrifice it right after to get a double benefit.
But I do not understand why this rule should be applied to the Sacrificial Altar issue discribes above, since there should be no issue at all.
That is why I am asking for Zuberis opinion on this

[Zuberi]

Thematically or mechanically?

Thematically, I don't think there's much difference between reanimation and mind control. In both cases you are taking something that your opponent created; hijacking their magic to bow to your will.

Mechanically I think that reanimation is less of a concern than Mind Control, since your opponent was no longer getting any use out of it, and more importantly since reanimate effects currently are priced to be permanent effects. Meaning you pay once for a creature that you're presumed to then keep until it dies. Mind Control is priced as a temporary effect, where you get it for a really cheap up front cost and then if you keep it past that you have to pay Upkeep on it. That is the current situation though. Hypothetically, there could be super cheap reanimation effects in the future that then have an Upkeep cost. These would then have a similar problem in economics as the Mind Control does, though again you wouldn't be taking a creature that they were using away from them. Unless of course we ever release a Mage that works off of their discard pile, getting more powerful as they get more things in their discard pile, or easily able to get things out of their discard pile. We already see things like this with Slavorg and Gloranna. Reanimate effects, like the ones we have now, that Obliterate the creature upon destruction then ARE taking away from your opponent.

So, basically, I don't have any issues with the ruling.