The "default" would be what you're used to, that tokens created by a normal token-making effect don't have a mana cost and therefore have a mana value - previously called "converted mana cost" - of zero. Tokens created by copy effects are an exception to that "default" because copy effects use special rules (and apparently Embalm uses even more special rules for whatever reason).

My reasoning is that the two effects form a dependency with each other, partly because of rule 205.3d. The two type-changing effects - Zur's effect that adds the creature type and Call's effect that adds the Angel subtype - apply in the same layer (Layer 4) and applying one of them (Zur) would change what the other (Call) applies to or what it does to any of the things it applies to. This means Call's effect is dependent on Zur's effect and Zur's effect needs to be applied first to determine the object's final characteristics even though Call has an earlier timestamp.

613.8. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is sometimes done using a dependency system. If a dependency exists, it will override the timestamp system.
613.8a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect; (b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to; and (c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability or both effects are from characteristic-defining abilities. Otherwise, the effect is considered to be independent of the other effect.
613.8b An effect dependent on one or more other effects waits to apply until just after all of those effects have been applied. If multiple dependent effects would apply simultaneously in this way, they’re applied in timestamp order relative to each other. If several dependent effects form a dependency loop, then this rule is ignored and the effects in the dependency loop are applied in timestamp order.
613.8c After each effect is applied, the order of remaining effects is reevaluated and may change if an effect that has not yet been applied becomes dependent on or independent of one or more other effects that have not yet been applied.

No, you won't be able to do what you're thinking. If a Clone copy of Squee, the Immortal dies or gets exiled, the card in the graveyard/exile zone will just be a Clone, not a Squee. When an object changes zones, the game treats it as a new object with no relation to what it was before, minus a few exceptions needed to make certain effects work properly (none of those exceptions help here). The Clone card in the graveyard/exile zone won't "remember" anything about the choices made for it when it entered the battlefield earlier.

This isn't a change in the rules. Mana cost is one of the copiable values that get considered by a copy effect, so a token copy of something will have the same mana cost as the original.

A token has the characteristics specifically given to it by the effect that creates it. "Normal" token-creating effects will define the type, color, P/T (if it's a creature), subtypes, name (if different from subtypes), any abilities and anything else you need to know. The design standard for these kinds of effects is that they don't define a mana cost for the tokens. However, effects that create token copies use the game's copy rules to determine the token's characteristics, which does include mana cost, and will only specifically call out any characteristics that aren't being copied (e.g. Offspring defines a different P/T for the token).

In the case of the Spellgorger Weird token from Ral and the Implicit Maze, you're being instructed to create a copy of a specific existing Magic card and the reminder text is giving you all the important information about that in case you aren't able to look it up otherwise.

As long as it's a permanent card (i.e. not an Instant or Sorcery), it will return to the battlefield. If it's a non-permanent card then it will stay in the graveyard.

"Dies" triggers and other "leaves-the-battlefield" triggers care about what an object looked like at the last moment it was still on the battlefield. This means Marchesa's ability will trigger when the creature in your example dies. The delayed trigger that happens at the next end step will still know the card as "that card" and will still be able to act on it. A permanent card can be returned to the battlefield this way, but there's a special rule that specifically disallows non-permanent cards from entering the battlefield.

Of the players who are still in the game, Witch Hunt will return to the control of whoever else controlled it most recently.

One of the steps involved in a player leaving the game is ending any active effects that give them control of things. If an object has been subject to multiple control-changing effects, it's important to note that the old ones still exist, they've just been superseded by the most recently created one. When that most recent one ends, the next most recent one (that hasn't been ended by someone else leaving the game) will be in effect again.

800.4a When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game and any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end. Then, if that player controlled any objects on the stack not represented by cards, those objects cease to exist. Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that player, those objects are exiled. This is not a state-based action. It happens as soon as the player leaves the game. If the player who left the game had priority at the time they left, priority passes to the next player in turn order who’s still in the game.

OyeGeVoltageSurge123: Answers to your question have been up for a while. Since there don't seem to be any more follow-ups or corrections that need to be made, I marked one of them as the "Accepted answer" so this topic can move out of the list of unanswered questions. In the future you can take care of this yourself using the "Mark as Answer" button on the response that you feel is the most helpful answer to your question.

Lightning-Rig Crew deals 4 damage to each opponent and Ghyrson Starn, Kelermorph doesn't get to do anything.

In this situation, no one has a choice of the order to apply things. That's because Ojer Axonil, Deepest Might  ^Flip and Ghyrson Starn use different kinds of abilities that are handled by the rules in separate, specific ways. Ghyrson Starn has a triggered ability, which you can tell by it starting with one of the words "when", "whenever" or "at". Ojer Axonil has a static ability with a replacement effect, which you can tell by the use of one or more of the words "as", "with" or "instead"

A replacement effect modifies an event as it happens and triggered abilities trigger after an event happens. In this example Ojer Axonil sees your Crew is about to deal less than 4 damage to an opponent and replaces the result with 4 damage instead. Ghyrson Starn's triggered ability watches for an event where exactly 1 damage is dealt, but that's not what happened here, so it doesn't trigger.

Yes, that's the reason. The effect does as much as it can and only skips the impossible parts. The triggered ability doesn't rely on having a specific "target", so it can still resolve if the creature goes missing from the graveyard.

lhetrick13: Since it's clear you got a satisfactory answer to your question and there don't seem to be any more follow-ups or corrections that need to be made, I marked it as the "Accepted answer" so this topic can move out of the list of unanswered questions. In the future you can take care of this yourself using the "Mark as Answer" button on the response that you feel is the most helpful answer to your question.

The type-changing effect created by Call when it brings itself back to the battlefield still exists, it just doesn't have any effect on the object's characteristics while it's not a creature. If you use another type-changing effect to turn it into a creature, you have two continuous effects applying in the same layer (specifically, the layer for type-changing effects) and applying one of them (Zur) would change the result of the other (Call) and what it would apply to. That means the Call type-changing effect is dependent on the Zur type-changing effect, so the Zur effect needs to be applied first. That turns the object into a creature, which means it gets turned into an angel by the Call effect.

@hemalgiac: Grim Monolith costs to untap. You're thinking of Basalt Monolith, which does cost . That one would work.

It won't be an Angel. A card can only have subtypes that go with the types it has. Angel is only a subtype for the Creature and Kindred (formerly "Tribal") card types. In this example Valkyrie's Call is just an Enchantment when it comes back, so it can't have the Angel subtype.

If Zur turns Call into a Creature again, it will be an Angel. This is because the two type-changing effects form a dependency, since applying Zur's effect would change what the Call's effect does to itself. So the type-changing part of Call's effect is dependent on Zur's effect, meaning Zur's effect is applied first instead of using timestamp order.

Yes, it will return. Shirei's ability triggers when the 1-power creature dies, and as the trigger resolves it sets up another delayed triggered ability ("...at the beginning of the next end step"). Removing Shirei's abilities doesn't make that delayed trigger stop existing. It will still trigger at the appropriate time.

In a tournament setting, this is a weird enough situation where a Judge's ruling will depend a lot on exactly how much they know about the detailed shortcut rules, how they interpret those rules, and how well each player makes the case for their point of view. Since I'm not that Judge answering that real-life call, I don't know what to say there. In a non-tournament setting where the players can't come to an agreement on how to take shortcuts and what rules apply, the game just breaks down and the win/lose/draw results depend on how each player tells the story to their friends later.

Yes, they're "largely" informal because they don't need to be formal 100% of the time to cover the run-of-the-mill situations players will go through during a game. However, for more complicated situations the CR also provides a formalized framework in 729.2 to help sort out technical rules issues. This is a technical rules discussion, so we need the help.

Sections 729.1, 729.2, 729.3 etc. aren't in opposition to each other and they don't do anything to cancel each other out. They're all needed to fill out the complete picture of how the rules work.

The idea that "may" abilities can be ignored is mostly something for tournament play. It's an official judging policy that simplifies how problems are resolved. If a player doesn't take an optional action and the game continues on then it's just assumed the player chose not to do it, rather than having to stop and treat the miss as some kind of Game Rule Violation or Game Play Error.

I agree it's not exactly clear whether 729.3 regarding fragmented loops is strictly applicable here but you don't really need it. By my interpretation, everything important is laid out in 729.2 regarding the formal procedure for taking a shortcut. The reason I didn't quote it above was because it's a lot of text and my post was already long, but here it is for reference:

729.2. Taking a shortcut follows the following procedure.

729.2a At any point in the game, the player with priority may suggest a shortcut by describing a sequence of game choices, for all players, that may be legally taken based on the current game state and the predictable results of the sequence of choices. This sequence may be a non-repetitive series of choices, a loop that repeats a specified number of times, multiple loops, or nested loops, and may even cross multiple turns. It can’t include conditional actions, where the outcome of a game event determines the next action a player takes. The ending point of this sequence must be a place where a player has priority, though it need not be the player proposing the shortcut.
Example: A player controls a creature enchanted by Presence of Gond, which grants the creature the ability “{T}: Create a 1/1 green Elf Warrior creature token,” and another player controls Intruder Alarm, which reads, in part, “Whenever a creature enters, untap all creatures.” When the player has priority, they may suggest “I’ll create a million tokens,” indicating the sequence of activating the creature’s ability, all players passing priority, letting the creature’s ability resolve and create a token (which causes Intruder Alarm’s ability to trigger), Intruder Alarm’s controller putting that triggered ability on the stack, all players passing priority, Intruder Alarm’s triggered ability resolving, all players passing priority until the player proposing the shortcut has priority, and repeating that sequence 999,999 more times, ending just after the last token-creating ability resolves.

729.2b Each other player, in turn order starting after the player who suggested the shortcut, may either accept the proposed sequence, or shorten it by naming a place where they will make a game choice that’s different than what’s been proposed. (The player doesn’t need to specify at this time what the new choice will be.) This place becomes the new ending point of the proposed sequence.
Example: The active player draws a card during her draw step, then says, “Go.” The nonactive player is holding Into the Fray (an instant that says “Target creature attacks this turn if able”) and says, “I’d like to cast a spell during your beginning of combat step.” The current proposed shortcut is that all players pass priority at all opportunities during the turn until the nonactive player has priority during the beginning of combat step.

729.2c Once the last player has either accepted or shortened the shortcut proposal, the shortcut is taken. The game advances to the last proposed ending point, with all game choices contained in the shortcut proposal having been taken. If the shortcut was shortened from the original proposal, the player who now has priority must make a different game choice than what was originally proposed for that player.

Another detail to give context: A card's "mana cost" is specifically the symbols printed in the upper right corner of the standard Magic card frame. If an effect lets you cast a spell without paying its mana cost or lets you pay an alternative cost in place of the mana cost, that's the only part of the cost that gets replaced. Any other applicable cost increases/reductions will still be considered to calculate the total cost you have to pay.

I agree with Neotrup that the ruling note feels incorrect. The rules-as-written in the CR don't seem to say what the rulings note states about how the P/T characteristic is treated.

KrarkTheThumb: An answer to your question has been up for a while. Since there don't seem to be any follow-ups or corrections that need to be made, I marked it as the "Accepted answer" so this topic can move out of the list of unanswered questions. In the future you can take care of this yourself using the "Mark as Answer" button on the response that you feel is the most helpful answer to your question.