| Logic: the Processing: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Foreword |
|
CardName: Reduce/Rubble Cost: 2u+2r Type: Instant+Sorcery Pow/Tgh: / Rules Text: This card is called Reduce or Rubble, is blue+red, is an instant+sorcery, costs {2}{u}+{2}{r}, and has converted mana cost 6. Choose one-- • If you paid {2}{u} to cast this spell and didn't cast this spell from your graveyard, this spell is called Reduce, is a blue instant, and has converted mana cost 3. Counter target spell unless its controller pays {3}. • If you paid {2}{r} and cast this spell from your graveyard, this spell is called Rubble, is a red sorcery, and has converted mana cost 3. Exert up to three target lands. Flavour Text: Set/Rarity: Logic: the Processing Uncommon
Reduce/Rubble
  + This card is called Reduce or Rubble, is blue+red, is an instant+sorcery, costs
+, and has converted mana cost 6.
Choose one-- • If you paid to cast this spell and didn't cast this spell from your graveyard, this spell is called Reduce, is a blue instant, and has converted mana cost 3. Counter target spell unless its controller pays  .
• If you paid and cast this spell from your graveyard, this spell is called Rubble, is a red sorcery, and has converted mana cost 3. Exert up to three target lands. |
History: [-] |
blue+red is a distinct color. not to be confused with blue or red.
instant+sorcery is a distinct card type. not to be confused with instant or sorcery.
+
means you can cast the card with either 
or 
, but not both or any other combination (e.g. 
or 
).
So it's
?
What happens if you pay
to cast it?
If you're doing what I think you're doing; is a split-card a better way to represent it?
He's doing aftermath (hence the "X to Y" name rather than "X and Y"). Note the "if you cast this spell from your graveyard" (though this version doesn't have any rules permitting you to cast it from your graveyard). This card would more conventionally be represented like this: Reduce // Rubble. I think amuseum is trying to show that in the same way that any mechanic can be viewed as split cards, or any mechanic can be viewed as kicker, even split cards "don't need" to be represented that way.
So to answer your question, yes, a split card is a much better way to represent it, but it wants to be a half-sideways split card like Reduce // Rubble.
Oh, or actually, maybe amuseum is protesting against the split card rules changes.
It used to be that split cards had this very weird set of rules whereby if you ask about their CMC, colour etc, you'd get two answers. So Odds // Ends has a CMC of "2 and 5". This was not the same as 7, though it'd look the same when Dark Confidant makes you lose "2 and 5" life. But when revealed to Counterbalance, it'd counter a 2-drop or a 5-drop but not a 7-drop. You could fetch Odds // Ends with Sunforger because one half of it has a CMC <= 4, even if you then go on to cast Ends which doesn't. You could even fetch Research // Development with Sunforger, because one half of it has CMC <= 4, and one half of it is red, even though those aren't the same half!
But with Amonkhet bringing "splitback" cards like Reduce // Rubble, they tweaked the rules. Now anywhere other than the stack, the split card's characteristics are the sum of its component parts' characteristics. Odds // Ends has CMC 7, as does Research // Development - but when you cast one half of it, that half on the stack has CMC 2 or 5 as appropriate.
It's possible amuseum doesn't like these changes, and so created this card as an oblique protest? I dunno.
Alex is close, but still neglecting other characteristics besides cmc.
If 3+3=6, then what is Blue+Red? Is it a new color? The rules don't define composite colours. And Instant+Sorcery? Is that a new card type? The rules don't define composite card types.
Do you not understand the color of Whirler Virtuoso? That's blue+red. Do you not understand the card type of Wild-Field Scarecrow? That's a "composite" card type.
Whirler Virtuoso is multicolor, not composite colored. It is red and blue, not red+blue. Wild-Field Scarecrow is multitype, not composite type. It is artifact and creature, not artifact+creature.
3+3 does not equal 3. QED red+blue does not equal red or blue, and artifact+creature does not equal artifact or creature.
So you can cast this for
from your hand, but you have to choose an option that does nothing?
Flyspeck 1!
You certainly can redefine terminology and the rules to have colours and such be whatever you like. But it makes the card very very confusing when the expectation is that it will be a normal magic card. This rule feels like a confusing tweak on a split card with no benefit except confusion.
... in a set that is about confusing rules and their interations and logical operators. Carry on!