2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on 0 damage
    I'm sorry since I know the answer to this but I need the relevant rules quote and I can't find it through the search. (i know its been answered here)

    Can you assign 2 damage, 1 damage and 0 damage to 3 creatures with inferno titan ability?
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on False Orders
    Quote from Yamikiri
    No, no, and no. Declaring Blockers is the only time that things like Flying and Shadow actually matter when blocking. Past that, if an ability says a creature blocks another creature, it does. Without fail.

    Also, Chub Toad triggers when something it declared to block it. Whenever an ability refers to Attack or Block, it refers to the act of Declaring Attackers/Blockers, or else things like Chub Toad would trigger into infinity because it is continually blocked.

    Chub Toad only gains more that +2/+2 if it is Blocked by multiple creatures, either all at once or over the course of multiple Combat Phases.


    While this is all true I don't think its correct here. Yes, if the card said target creature blocks Target creature then flying wouldn't matter. But false orders tells you to choose another creature. How can you make an illegal choice since you are declaring the block?

    As for the trigger on chub toad I understand that it only triggers when declared as a blocker. However, since you are choosing another creature to block after it has been removed from combat aren't you declaring it as a blocker again? I would think it essentially the same if you were to block with chub toad twice in a turn. Like if someone cast waves of aggression or one of its ilk.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on False Orders
    You can't block the air elemental. All choices you would make have to be legal blocking choices and of course chub toad doesn't have flying.

    I believe the chub toad would get another trigger for +2/+2. False orders removes it from combat and then if you choose to have it block another creature its ability would trigger again and it would have +4/+4.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Planeswalker question
    Correct. Only non combat damage that would be dealt to an opponent may directed to one of your opponents planeswalkers. You cannot say lightning bolt yourself and deal it to your Gideon instead.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Phantasm Image + Shape Anew
    It will not resolve in either. You cast shape anew targeting the image will trigger the images sacrifice if target of spell or ability. This will go on the stack above shape anew and will resolve first. Then, when shape anew trust to resolve it will be countered upon resolution because its Target is now illegal. (not there anymore)
    If all targets of a spell become illegal then all parts of that spell are countered upon resolution.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on [M12]Magic show spoiler Grand Abolisher
    Quote from esserius
    Also stops Luminarch Ascension, or at least slows it down considerably.


    It doesn't stop them from putting a counter on if they took no damage. It would stop them from creating tokens though.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on Clarifying the Declare Blocker's Step
    1: you can't respond to blockers being declared. Once you both pass priority in the declare attackers step the next thing is declaring blockers.No one will receive priority until all blockers have been declared. Once a block is declared the attacking creature is considered blocked regardless of what happens to the defending creature.

    2: again you can't respond. This would be done as part of declaring blockers.

    3: yes, the damage can be assigned to the defending player. A creature with trample must assign lethal damage to a defending creature before assigning any to the defending player. Since there is no defending creature whrn damage gets assigned you may have other all go to the player. Player A must wait until all blockers are declared.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Consecrated Sphinx and Multiple Opponents
    G
    Quote from TDT
    The second part is wrong. You would only discard down to your hand size during your own clean-up step, and not at the next end step.


    It's not wrong. He is saying that any extra cards you draw during the resolution of memory jar you will discard at the beginning of the next end step because memory jar tells you to.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Can you activate instants in the untap phase before you untap?
    It is not. The first thing that happens in a turn is untapping your permanents. Generally no one gains priority in the untap step and of course you can't activate abilities without priority.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Torpor Orb and Flourishing Defenses
    Quote from Repsajo
    Lets have some fun with words:

    "The reason it doesn't trigger Flourishing Defenses with Torpor Orb out is simply that it is a creature. Main thing is can't beats out can. Flourishing Defenses sees a "countered" creature entering and says "CAN!!!" but Torpor Orb sees that "countered" creature entering and screams even louder "CAN'T!!!!!!" "
    (Note I'm using the word "countered" as an adjective to describe something with counters on it. Obviously this isn't what "countered" means in actual Magic rules, but I'm doing it to make the sentences more parallel)
    So... what's the difference between your quote and my modified-quote? You're saying one of them is true but the other one isn't, but they look pretty darn similar to me. Care to explain?

    What? That isn't even close to the same thing since there is no thing in magic as a 'countered' creature. Creatures don't enter the battlefield with counters on them. They are PLACED on them as a replacement effect. (with the exception of skullbriar) Dryad armor IS a land creature though. It has both types.
    So, flourishing defenses doesnt see a 'countered creature entering the battlefield. It does however see counters being placed on a creature as it is entering.


    Lets do the same thing with the second part of your post. This time, since I disagree with you in this paragraph, I'll be changing what you said into a parallel that is WRONG.

    "This situation is different because Grazing Gladehart sees a land entering the battlefield and yells "CAN!!!" Torpor Orb sees a creature entering and screams "CA!!!..." oh wait, nothing is triggering off this event of a creature entering the battlefield, because Grazing Gladehart is just seeing that a land is entering the battlefield, so I'll let it happen].
    ^At this point we agree that this above paragraph is incorrect, that Torpor Orb does indeed shut Grazing Gladehart out in this example. This paragraph, which I think we all agree is wrong, is using the same exact reasoning as your original paragraph, which I think is wrong and you think is right. If you are able to tell me why I can't apply your logic in the other way, you'll probably get me to agree with you.

    I agree what you wrote is wrong because as I stated the gladeheart sees a land creature entering and not just a land. I don't really see how this is the same reasoning. You can't apply the same logic because they are completely different things.

    As is, all you've done is restate the "it triggers" stance in a different way. Your logic fundamentally breaks down where you say "oh wait, nothing is triggering off this event," because the whole point is analyzing what "this event" is, and just stating that it doesn't trigger is circular logic.

    My logic doesn't break down simply because nothing is triggering off a creature entering the field. The only thing triggering is doing so because counters are being placed on a creature. It does not matter that those counters are being placed as a result of said creature entering the battlefield. It only sees counters being placed. We already know torpor orb doesn't stop those counters from being placed and there is no reason that it would stop flourishing defenses from seeing them placed since flourishing defenses doesn't care whether the creature just entered, is entering, or has been there all along.

    bert, paperwarrior: I'm relatively new to the whole "debating rules on forums" thing. What exactly is an official answer, who do we get it from, and why is it official? Also why is everyone surrounding the o by brackets (i.e. [o]fficial)

    I too am interested is how to go about this.

    Also can Carsten or Woapalanne or any other Rules Guru give an interpretation of this if they have the time? Thanks!


    Rebuttal in bold. (sorry, on my phone and cutting and pasting is a chore)
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Torpor Orb and Flourishing Defenses
    I can see no reason to think it wouldn't trigger.

    Everyone is seemingly hung up on this ruling on flourishing defenses.

    This ability triggers both when a -1/-1 counter is put on a creature on the battlefield and when a creature enters the battlefield with a -1/-1 counter on it. This includes when a creature returns to the battlefield as a result of persist.


    This ruling isn't saying it triggers because a creature enters the battlefield, its simply saying in an easy way that the game sees counters being placed on objects as they enter the battlefield. Which is ALL flourishing defenses cares about. It doesn't see any creature entering the battlefield. All it sees is counters being placed on a creature and therefore triggers.

    I don't feel the dryad arbor example fits here. The reason it doesn't trigger landfall with torpor orb out is simply that it is a creature. Main thing is can't beats out can. Glazing gladeheart sees a land creature entering and says "CAN!!!" but torpor orb sees that land creature entering and screams even louder "CAN'T!!!!!!"

    This situation is different because flourishing defenses sees counters being placed on carnifax demon as its entering the battlefield and yells "CAN!!!" Torpor orb sees carnifax demon entering and screams "CA!!!... oh wait, nothing is triggering off this event, nevermind, my bad."
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on [M12] Draft Simulator
    Quote from simpygdog
    eww.... sealed pool with 2 throne of empires.... sadness
    other than that it wasnt very good either, primordial hydra with no green support Frown


    I would never be upset with repeatable creature generation in limited. Especially in a set with a relatively light amount of artifact destruction. I mean, myr turbine is awesome in scars block. Granted its free but still.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on A return of enchantress in standard??
    Grand abolisher makes it possible though unlikely. With apostles blessing, stave off, brave the elements or emerge unscathed to protect it til you get a hyena umbra on it.

    Edit:

    Doesn't look too terrible.

    4 Mesa enchantress
    4 Kor spiritdancer
    4 grand abolisher
    1 auramancer
    2 kor skyfisher

    3 stave off
    2 brave the elements

    4 oblivion ring
    2 angelic destiny
    4 hyena umbra
    1 armored ascension
    2 forced worship
    4 honor of the pure

    2 emeria the sky ruin
    4 tectonic edge
    17 plains
    Posted in: Speculation
  • posted a message on [M12] Draft Simulator
    Interesting. I haven't noticed that yet. It is the first day its up though. I'm sure whatever glitches there are will be righted.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • posted a message on [M12] Draft Simulator
    The draft simulator is up at draftsim.

    http://www.magicdraftsim.com/

    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.