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.
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.
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
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?
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.
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).
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.
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 :-/)
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.
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.
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.
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".
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.
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
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?
Since your Hawk has protection from black, it can't be targeted by abilities from a black source.
In your experience, how realistic is this?
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).
Do you mean this from a strategic perspective or a rules perspective? It saves against Day of Judgment, but maybe that's not relevant?
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.
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:
4 Copperline Gorge
7 Forest
7 Mountain
1 Kessig Wolf Run
4 Mayor of Avabruck
4 Kruin Outlaw
3 Phyrexian Metamorph
4 Moonmist
4 Manabarbs
4 Arc Trail
6 cards i can't remember at the moment.
I've been thoroughly unimpressed with Manabarbs from my very limited playing.
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.
so it can be chosen for Adaptive Automaton.
They are put into their owners' graveyards, not destroyed. Relevant if something is (for example) trying to regenerate them.