If you are activating the +1/+1 counter ability in response to another activation, then both should resolve, as protection only stops targeting, not the resolution of effects. I could be wrong though.
If you are activating the +1/+1 counter ability in response to another activation, then both should resolve, as protection only stops targeting, not the resolution of effects. I could be wrong though.
If that were the case, then cards such as Gods Willing or Mizzium Skin wouldn't be able to stop the ability from targeting a creature either. I believe both spells and abilities check whether the targeting is legal or not upon casting/activating and upon resolution.
The rules aren't exactly clear on this, but I do believe that the source of abilities is always updated as they resolve so long as that source remains on the battlefield. This means that once the example creature becomes a creature with a +1/+1 counter on it, the additional ability on the stack will have its source updated upon resolving, and it will be countered due to illegal targeting. It is, however, an unclear area of the rules, and the simplest answer is that Wizard's wouldn't print a card that would cause this confusion when they could simply change the ability to "another target creature".
After the 2nd activation resolves, Muscle Santa will be an illegal target for the 1st activation. The 1st activation will be countered by the rules. There's nothing unclear in the rules about this. It's why a card like Gods Willing is able to work at all (for example: Lightning Strike -> Gods Willing naming Red -> Strike gets countered).
After the 2nd activation resolves, Muscle Santa will be an illegal target for the 1st activation. The 1st activation will be countered by the rules. There's nothing unclear in the rules about this. It's why a card like Gods Willing is able to work at all (for example: Lightning Strike -> Gods Willing naming Red -> Strike gets countered).
The difference is that one is a spell while the other is an activated ability. That's huge. Another difference is that in your example the protection ability is granted, while in my example the protection ability already exists and the circumstances change.
Note also that it is not the activated ability itself that changes, but its source. I am asking whether the state of the source of an activated ability is locked in at the moment of activation or not.
Since your example does not contain an activated ability, it is not applicable. I'm quite certain your conclusion is correct, but the analogy does not help to illustrate the point.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Planar Chaos was not a mistake neither was it random. You might want to look at it again.
[thread=239793][Game] Level Up - Creature[/thread]
Everything fits together the same way regardless, but sure, we'll look at another example with more closely matching details:
You control Death Speakers and your opponent activates Prodigal Pyromancer targeting the Speakers. You don't like that, so you cast Deathlace targeting the Pyromancer. The Pyromancer is now black which means Death Speakers is an illegal target for the ability. We use the relevant parts of the following rule to come to that conclusion:
Quote from 608.2b, regarding resolving an ability »
If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal ... Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal ... The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word "target," are now illegal
There's no rule that says the characteristics of a source are "locked in" upon the activation of an ability, and it's kind of difficult to quote the lack of a rule. The statement "Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal" in the above is really what tells us that we're supposed to use the current game state to evaluate legality.
Rhadamanthus is correct. Target legality is checked at two times: As a spell is cast or activated ability is activated or triggered ability is put on the stack, and as it starts to resolve. If the target is illegal as it starts to resolve, it doesn't really matter how it became illegal, it just is illegal.
The card in the first post would only be able to put one +1/+1 counter on itself.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Creature - Human Warrior
Protection from creatures with +1/+1 counters on them
: Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature.
2/2
Activating the ability on itself, then activating the ability on itself in response.
What happens?
I guess this problem can be recreated with existing cards...
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
The rules aren't exactly clear on this, but I do believe that the source of abilities is always updated as they resolve so long as that source remains on the battlefield. This means that once the example creature becomes a creature with a +1/+1 counter on it, the additional ability on the stack will have its source updated upon resolving, and it will be countered due to illegal targeting. It is, however, an unclear area of the rules, and the simplest answer is that Wizard's wouldn't print a card that would cause this confusion when they could simply change the ability to "another target creature".
Avant Block: Avant -- Stormfront
I'm Mike, from The Mana Pool.
Check out my Tapped Out profile and comment on my decks!
The difference is that one is a spell while the other is an activated ability. That's huge. Another difference is that in your example the protection ability is granted, while in my example the protection ability already exists and the circumstances change.
Note also that it is not the activated ability itself that changes, but its source. I am asking whether the state of the source of an activated ability is locked in at the moment of activation or not.
Since your example does not contain an activated ability, it is not applicable. I'm quite certain your conclusion is correct, but the analogy does not help to illustrate the point.
Finally a good white villain quote: "So, do I ever re-evaluate my life choices? Never, because I know what I'm doing is a righteous cause."
Factions: Sleeping
Remnants: Valheim
Legendary Journey: Heroes & Planeswalkers
Saga: Shards of Rabiah
Legends: The Elder Dragons
Read up on Red Flags & NWO
You control Death Speakers and your opponent activates Prodigal Pyromancer targeting the Speakers. You don't like that, so you cast Deathlace targeting the Pyromancer. The Pyromancer is now black which means Death Speakers is an illegal target for the ability. We use the relevant parts of the following rule to come to that conclusion:
There's no rule that says the characteristics of a source are "locked in" upon the activation of an ability, and it's kind of difficult to quote the lack of a rule. The statement "Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal" in the above is really what tells us that we're supposed to use the current game state to evaluate legality.
I'm Mike, from The Mana Pool.
Check out my Tapped Out profile and comment on my decks!
The card in the first post would only be able to put one +1/+1 counter on itself.