2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on First Strike + Multiple Blockers
    First strike does not "trigger". It modifies the rules of combat to cause creatures to deal their damage at different times.

    In your situation it sounds like you are blocking a 2/2 first strike with two 2/2s without first strike. In that case, the attacking creature will deal its combat damage to the first blocking creature (it will be destroyed), then the second blocking creature will deal its combat damage to the attacking creature.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Cranial Insertion: The Morning Sun has Vanquished the Horrible Night!
    Quote from epeeguy
    Which is precisely what I figured you intended. While misleading or even using a misunderstanding is "reasonable" (and different people will probably agree to disagree on that), it's quite another to get into semantic arguments over the name of the card which generally doesn't matter. Are there times where it matters? Yes, but this isn't one of them. (Absent something that does allow you to cast a double-faced card face down.)

    Remembering the proper name of a card is not a skill that is being tested, and requiring a player to provide the exact card name is not something that is necessary. So long as the card is uniquely identified for the appropriate situation, and given the game rules state that a double-faced card is cast "sunny side up", then naming either half is sufficient for that purpose.

    I can get behind that. I don't think remembering the names of cards should be a tested skill. But knowing the rules of Magic is a tested skill -- Magic is a complicated game and wrapping your brain around that complication is part of the point. Is the name confusion problem solution worth this reduction in complexity? Maybe. Mana burn being removed and combat damage no longer stacking speak to their desire to reduce complexity where it "doesn't matter" and keep it where it "matters".
    Where it matters is for the permanent once on the battlefield, and MTR 3.6 does make for that exception.

    This exception is interesting to me, as it seems I'd be able to name Howlpack Alpha for Nevermore as long as there's one on the battlefield.

    Practically, the situation where this comes up doesn't happen (who the hell has Nevermore and Mayor in the same deck anyway). Being a "rules guy" it always interests me when they (explicitly!) say something can happen in the Comprehensive Rules and then say it can't in the Tournament Rules.
    Posted in: Articles
  • posted a message on Cranial Insertion: The Morning Sun has Vanquished the Horrible Night!
    Quote from epeeguy
    What, precisely, are you trying to accomplish with such a situation?

    Maybe this is a bit dirty (OK it definitely is), but I'd be attempting to legally make my opponent think he can't cast Mayor of Avabruck. A possible reason not to simply name "Mayor of Avabruck" is that I have one of my own.

    Much like pretending I'm deciding not to block with my Carrion Feeder -- I'm not going to break a rule, I'm not misrepresenting the game state. If the rules guys think that a play allowed by the comprehensive rules shouldn't be tournament legal, ... ok, I guess Slant
    Posted in: Articles
  • posted a message on Cranial Insertion: The Morning Sun has Vanquished the Horrible Night!
    So if I actually wanted a Nevermore set to Howlpack Alpha, would I need to name "Howlpack Alpha, not using the tournament shortcut associated naming the back faces of cards that are not currently permanents", thus giving my opponent rules knowledge he might not already have?

    EDIT: Actually, this isn't a tournament shortcut, or at least is not listed in the shortcuts section. It's listed separately (thanks to whoever posted that it was item 3.6 -- I wouldn't have found it otherwise). What as a player do I need to do if I want to set Nevermore to Howlpack Alpha?
    Posted in: Articles
  • posted a message on SFaF question
    Yes.

    702.15b A permanent or player with protection can't be targeted by spells with the stated quality and can't be targeted by abilities from a source with the stated quality.


    Since your Hawk has protection from black, it can't be targeted by abilities from a black source.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on [[Official]] [Developing] Werewolves 2.0
    Quote from SoldierSolidus
    Turn 2 Mayor, flips, Turn 3 Phyrexian Metamorph

    In your experience, how realistic is this?
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on [[Official]] [Developing] Werewolves 2.0
    Quote from Halted Asylum
    Bobwayne: current meta is FULL of Ratchet Bomb, Day of Judgement and all sort of mass removal. So far, control is rulling meta, and FMR is the answer for that, so a MD! card, just because it's really probable to face many control decks on the run.

    Also, even if you don't face control in some games, FMR still provides +1/+0 and Trample. It's never a dead card. Nough said.

    See I have the same opinion about Rise. But I have a feeling Bob is the only one in this thread that's actually speaking from experience with the card (I sure ain't).
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on [[Official]] [Developing] Werewolves 2.0
    Quote from Bobwayne17
    Full Moon's Rise doesn't do ANYTHING for humans.

    Do you mean this from a strategic perspective or a rules perspective? It saves against Day of Judgment, but maybe that's not relevant?
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on [[Official]] [Developing] Werewolves 2.0
    Full Moon's Rise is crazy good, period. Sideboard what? 3-4 MD. 0 SB. The benefits are all relevant, and the fact that it works on the day side is what makes it awesome.

    I'm coming around on Daybreak Ranger. I still don't like it all that much, since we want all our guys to be at least solid on the day side and he really just seems irrelevant against lots of things on that side.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on [[Official]] [Developing] Werewolves 2.0

    I sort of understand Instigator Gang, but it seems like overkill.

    But why do so many people think Daybreak is playable in the slightest, much less "good"?

    Disclaimer: I have played about 2 fair games with werewolves (I've played a few more than that but over half of them involved me mulling to 4 or 5 because of land problems in a 23-land deck :-/)

    My build currently looks something like:

    I've been thoroughly unimpressed with Manabarbs from my very limited playing.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on Mirror-Mad Phantasm Question
    Since Mirror-Mad Phantasm's name is prefixed with "card named", if you activate its ability on Necrotic Ooze it will still look for the Phantasm.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Gideon Jura + Geist of Saint Traft
    508. Declare Attackers Step

    508.1 First, the active player declares attackers. This turn-based action doesn't use the stack. To declare attackers, the active player follows the steps below, in order. ...

    ...

    508.1d The active player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it's affected by any requirements ...

    As 508.1d is part of the steps for declaring an attack, it applies to Geist of Saint Traft. When its trigger resolves, it will put a creature onto the battlefield attacking, which is not covered by the steps in 508, and therefore not covered by Gideon's effect. It can attack any planeswalker or player.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Converted Mana Cost of DFC
    Yes.

    711.2b While a double-faced permanent's back face is up, it has only the characteristics of its back face. The back face doesn't have a mana cost; it has the colors in its color indicator.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on Adaptive Automaton and Inkmoth Nexus
    That works fine. Blinkmoth is a creature type:
    204.3k ... The creature types are ... Blinkmoth ...

    so it can be chosen for Adaptive Automaton.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • posted a message on A mind control activated ability after blockers are declared
    Quote from Celebrir
    enchantments are destroyed when the permanents they're attached to leaves the battlefield.

    They are put into their owners' graveyards, not destroyed. Relevant if something is (for example) trying to regenerate them.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.