To name a creature card, the player must name a card that is legal in the format the game is being played in, and the player must name a card whose name corresponds to a creature card in the Oracle card database.
Naming the card must happen before anything else in the resolution of the spell. Once the player proceeds to search zones, they're not allowed to "take back" their decision and name another creature card instead. The reason for this is that the player may have gained additional information from searching part of a zone (because they weren't aware that a certain card existed, perhaps), and this prevents them from making use of that extra information.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How to use card tags (please use them for everybody's sanity)
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format Minimum deck size: 60 Maximum number of identical cards: 4 Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
On the topic: Can you not give the name of a creature card and give a description, be it the image and/or its text and/or CMC instead?
Local judge said he'd allow it when I forgot the name of Thought-knot seer but described everything else. Judge said it was ok to give an accurate image description or its CMC and effect, the other player wasn't happy with the resolution, as he had 2 in hand.
I guess if that's not allowed I could always ask a judge for the name, regardless.
On the topic: Can you not give the name of a creature card and give a description, be it the image and/or its text and/or CMC instead?
So long as you can uniquely identify the card you mean in this manner, certainly. I'm not certain about describing the card image, since that can be rather subjective, but rattling off things like power and toughness, mana cost, creature type, effect, etc. are all valid if combined they uniquely identify the card.
in case of creature reference, he named dragonlord silumgar, claiming he meant silumgar the drifting death, since it was at casual REL I didn't really since I ended up winning the match but how would that work at COMP REL?
in case of creature reference, he named dragonlord silumgar, claiming he meant silumgar the drifting death, since it was at casual REL I didn't really since I ended up winning the match but how would that work at COMP REL?
Judge's discretion.
If he hadn't started searching, I'd likely let him clarify that he meant the other. There's a chance that he was pulling a fast one by reading your response to what he names, if I believed that was what he was doing, I'd hold him to the first choice.
If he starts the search and pulls out all your Drifting Death copies, I'd have to determine whether he intended Drifting Death and just said the other by mistake or whether he was looking for one, found no copies and conveniently finds copies of the other.
In some cases, maybe not so much with Silumgar, your ability to respond with the card initially named may factor into the ruling.
it seems like it could have gone either way. I mean he could have mistaken the 2 silumgars or he could just have found more drifting deaths in my deck at the time
Seeing as your opponent named a legal card and you are in an actual tournament, they should be held to that choice. If you were just playing between rounds or otherwise just for fun, or if a legal card hadn't been named, then I would take intent in to account.
Seeing as your opponent named a legal card and you are in an actual tournament, they should be held to that choice. If you were just playing between rounds or otherwise just for fun, or if a legal card hadn't been named, then I would take intent in to account.
Yes, Dragonlord Silumgar is a legal choice, so the player would be held to it at Competitive REL. There was recently a high-profile example of this where a player named Borborygmos with Pithing Needle when he certainly meant to name Borborygmos Enraged instead. The "Borborygmos" was upheld and the player later died to the Enraged version.
Yes, Dragonlord Silumgar is a legal choice, so the player would be held to it at Competitive REL. There was recently a high-profile example of this where a player named Borborygmos with Pithing Needle when he certainly meant to name Borborygmos Enraged instead. The "Borborygmos" was upheld and the player later died to the Enraged version.
yeah I figured that would be a similar case, thanks for the reply
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Naming the card must happen before anything else in the resolution of the spell. Once the player proceeds to search zones, they're not allowed to "take back" their decision and name another creature card instead. The reason for this is that the player may have gained additional information from searching part of a zone (because they weren't aware that a certain card existed, perhaps), and this prevents them from making use of that extra information.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] -> Lightning Bolt
[c=Lightning Bolt]Apple Pie[/c] -> Apple Pie
Vowels-Only Format
Minimum deck size: 60
Maximum number of identical cards: 4
Ban list: Cards whose English names begin with a consonant, Unglued and Unhinged cards, cards involving ante, Ancestral Recall
Local judge said he'd allow it when I forgot the name of Thought-knot seer but described everything else. Judge said it was ok to give an accurate image description or its CMC and effect, the other player wasn't happy with the resolution, as he had 2 in hand.
I guess if that's not allowed I could always ask a judge for the name, regardless.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
it seems like it could have gone either way. I mean he could have mistaken the 2 silumgars or he could just have found more drifting deaths in my deck at the time
would that be true for a comp REL event?
I'm Mike, from The Mana Pool.
Check out my Tapped Out profile and comment on my decks!
yeah I figured that would be a similar case, thanks for the reply