Say I bestow a {Hopeful Eidolon} on a {Dryad Militant} and my opponent kills the DM before the HE resolves does my HE just become a creature?
Yes...unfortunately. This is a case of R&D just saying this is how it works with no real rules reason for it to work.
Ok lol I'm playing your deck in wall games but of the cards that I didn't have I replaced with cards I did like {Rootborn Defenses}
702.102a (http://imtgapp.com/forum/index.php?action=imtg;area=rule;number=702.102a): Bestow represents two static abilities, one that functions while the card with bestow is on the stack and another that functions both while it's on the stack and while it's on the battlefield. "Bestow [cost]" means "You may cast this card by paying [cost] rather than its mana cost." and "If you chose to pay this spell's bestow cost, it becomes an Aura enchantment and gains enchant creature. These effects last until one of two things happens: this spell has an illegal target as it resolves or the permanent this spell becomes, becomes unattached." Paying a card's bestow cost follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2e-g.
:)
Although reading through the actual aura rulings says this shouldn't really work, it does.
Quote from: Kaleo42 on December 03, 2013, 02:24:08 AM
Yes...unfortunately. This is a case of R&D just saying this is how it works with no real rules reason for it to work.
That's absolutely not true. Wizards has done some work trying to reverse the power creep of cards, and auras were very very underpowered. As such, they took steps to make auras better by adding bestow so as not to make it a two for one against removal. My first deck was mono white auras, and it sucked when I finally realized that it wasn't good enough. They tried making auras better, with things like angelic destiny and bruna, but even then it still isn't as good. So hence, bestow became a mechanic the prevents two for ones.
Quote from: Alexzang, etherium envoy on December 03, 2013, 10:35:28 PM
Quote from: Kaleo42 on December 03, 2013, 02:24:08 AM
Yes...unfortunately. This is a case of R&D just saying this is how it works with no real rules reason for it to work.
That's absolutely not true. Wizards has done some work trying to reverse the power creep of cards, and auras were very very underpowered. As such, they took steps to make auras better by adding bestow so as not to make it a two for one against removal. My first deck was mono white auras, and it sucked when I finally realized that it wasn't good enough. They tried making auras better, with things like angelic destiny and bruna, but even then it still isn't as good. So hence, bestow became a mechanic the prevents two for ones.
Yes I know WHY they did it what bothers me is HOW they did it. There is no real preexisting rule justification for bestow to work like it does when the target is removed. It is strickly a case of R&D playing the "because I said so" card.