I really like the suggestion that First Strike and Double Strike should function during "fights."
You may like it, but that doesn't make it a good idea. I am not trying to be a jerk by just disregarding your viewpoint either. A lot of discussion has happened in this thread regarding that suggestion in particular and it has been noted by a number of people that doing this would require a significant overhaul to the game rules. It does not make sense (mechanically), it is not easy to do, and it opens the question of why banding, trample, flying, etc. don't work with Fight. Keywords work differently with other keywords because they are different.
First/Double Strike in particular don't work the way you want with Fight because of how State Based Actions are handled.
Banding doesn't work because only two creatures are involved in the fight.
Flying doesn't work because the two creatures are chosen by the spell, not the defending player assigning blockers.
Trample doesn't work because the creature isn't attacking a player or planeswalker, it's fighting another creature.
Banding doesn't work because only two creatures are involved in the fight.
Flying doesn't work because the two creatures are chosen by the spell, not the defending player assigning blockers.
Trample doesn't work because the creature isn't attacking a player or planeswalker, it's fighting another creature.
Next?
And first strike and double strike doesn't work because we don't check state-based actions while a spell or ability is resolving (which is what would be required for first or double strike to "work" during a fight).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI Level 2 Judge
Scientists have calculated that the chance of anything so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one. But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten.
Banding doesn't work because only two creatures are involved in the fight.
Flying doesn't work because the two creatures are chosen by the spell, not the defending player assigning blockers.
Trample doesn't work because the creature isn't attacking a player or planeswalker, it's fighting another creature.
Next?
You got me. Banding was a terrible example.
However, First/Double Strike don't work because there is no additional step in the middle of "Fight" that allows SBA's to be checked before the spell finishes resolving.
It has been discussed and without this fundamental change to the rules (checking SBAs in the middle of a spell resolving), it won't work. As you demonstrated, there are plenty of reasons other keywords don't apply during a fight that would during normal combat. First/Double Strike have rules reasons why they can't be applied either.
Banding doesn't work because only two creatures are involved in the fight.
Flying doesn't work because the two creatures are chosen by the spell, not the defending player assigning blockers.
Trample doesn't work because the creature isn't attacking a player or planeswalker, it's fighting another creature.
Next?
And first strike and double strike doesn't work because we don't check state-based actions while a spell or ability is resolving (which is what would be required for first or double strike to "work" during a fight).
Obviously the rules would have to change to make First Strike and Double Strike work in a fight, don't be simple. My explanations don't reference the game rules, they reference common sense.
Banding doesn't work because only two creatures are involved in the fight.
Flying doesn't work because the two creatures are chosen by the spell, not the defending player assigning blockers.
Trample doesn't work because the creature isn't attacking a player or planeswalker, it's fighting another creature.
Next?
You got me. Banding was a terrible example.
However, First/Double Strike don't work because there is no additional step in the middle of "Fight" that allows SBA's to be checked before the spell finishes resolving.
It has been discussed and without this fundamental change to the rules (checking SBAs in the middle of a spell resolving), it won't work. As you demonstrated, there are plenty of reasons other keywords don't apply during a fight that would during normal combat. First/Double Strike have rules reasons why they can't be applied either.
So you change what a "fight" is. Unify the rules by making normal combat the same thing except that unblocked creatures deal damage to defending player / planeswalker. Job done. Sounds like half a day for WotC's rules crew.
You guys are arguing that this obvious simple thing shouldn't happen because the rules don't currently let it work, rather than because it would make "fight" spells too good or double strike creatures broken.
To use a political example, You're basically arguing that Trump can't forbid Muslims from immigrating to the USA because the law doesn't allow it, rather than arguing that it's a HORRIBLE DAMN IDEA to forbid a specific religious group from coming to the USA.
What actual gameplay argument do you have against First Strike working in Fights?
Banding doesn't work because only two creatures are involved in the fight.
Flying doesn't work because the two creatures are chosen by the spell, not the defending player assigning blockers.
Trample doesn't work because the creature isn't attacking a player or planeswalker, it's fighting another creature.
Next?
And first strike and double strike doesn't work because we don't check state-based actions while a spell or ability is resolving (which is what would be required for first or double strike to "work" during a fight).
Obviously the rules would have to change to make First Strike and Double Strike work in a fight, don't be simple. My explanations don't reference the game rules, they reference common sense.
Sure. I get you want First Strike to work during Fight. And you acknowledge that rules would have to change to make it work. However, do you know what rules would have to change? This isn't a simple addition to say "First Strike works when creatures Fight". Rules changes would need to be made to say that SBAs are checked in the middle of the Fight ability resolving. And then, what would stop other people from wanting other SBAs to be checked in the middle of other spells? Why wouldn't Maro die when Wheel of Fortune is cast for example? The changes needed to make this work have far reaching consequences beyond just this one small interaction. The reason this doesn't work is because of the internal consistency that the rules strive to maintain.
I understand that your explanations reference common sense and I completely agree with them. However, they still reference the rules. Trample not working because there is no defending player is a good one. That references a rule that says the person being attacked is the defending player. Since no creature is attacking, there is no defending player. I think your explanations for the other keywords not working are actually spot on.
This thread is filled with intricate rules explanations as to why this interaction won't happen because the rules changes required to make it work are not worth it.
Banding doesn't work because only two creatures are involved in the fight.
Flying doesn't work because the two creatures are chosen by the spell, not the defending player assigning blockers.
Trample doesn't work because the creature isn't attacking a player or planeswalker, it's fighting another creature.
Next?
And first strike and double strike doesn't work because we don't check state-based actions while a spell or ability is resolving (which is what would be required for first or double strike to "work" during a fight).
Obviously the rules would have to change to make First Strike and Double Strike work in a fight, don't be simple. My explanations don't reference the game rules, they reference common sense.
"Why doesn't trample work while fighting?"
"Because trample only works while the creature is attacking, not while fighting."
"Why doesn't first strike work while fighting?"
"Because first strike only works while the creature is attacking or blocking, not while fighting"
You can't just wave your hands and say "Well, it'd be easy to change, so they should". Because it's a lot bigger change than you think it is. Right now, state-based actions are not checked while a spell or ability is resolving. It's the reason why casting Wheel of Fortune won't kill your Maro. State-based actions are what kill a creature when it's taken lethal damage.
And "common sense" doesn't work, because you could use that to justify any rules change you want. "My bird has flying, so it should have an advantage in a fight, since it can attack from the skies and stay out of reach of the other creature". See how it easy it to turn flavor around any way you want? The rules need to be based in the rules, not in flavor of the cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DCI Level 2 Judge
Scientists have calculated that the chance of anything so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one. But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten.
Obviously the rules would have to change to make First Strike and Double Strike work in a fight, don't be simple. My explanations don't reference the game rules, they reference common sense.
How would you reword some of the current Comprehensive Rules entries regarding fighting, first strike, and double strike so that they would work according to the way you want them to work?
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
Obviously the rules would have to change to make First Strike and Double Strike work in a fight, don't be simple. My explanations don't reference the game rules, they reference common sense.
How would you reword some of the current Comprehensive Rules entries regarding fighting, first strike, and double strike so that they would work according to the way you want them to work?
First, let me state that I don't really agree with the idea of making First Strike and Double Strike work with Fight. That being said, I think the rules could be modified to make it work without playing with how SBEs are checked. Feel free to improve on the wording, but the general premise involves breaking it apart with new effects on the stack.
Without further ado...
701.10. Fight
701.10a A spell or ability may instruct a creature to fight another creature or it may instruct two creatures to fight each other. Each of those creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature.
701.10b If a creature instructed to fight is no longer on the battlefield or is no longer a creature, no damage is dealt. If a creature is an illegal target for a resolving spell or ability that instructs it to fight, no damage is dealt.
701.10c If a creature fights itself, it deals damage equal to its power to itself twice.
701.10d The damage dealt when a creature fights isn’t combat damage.
701.10e If only a single creature instructed to fight has first strike, instead of dealing damage, the player who controls the fighting creature without first strike puts an effect on the stack stating, "this creature deals damage equal to its power to the other creature". Then, the player who controls the fighting creature with first strike puts the same effect on the stack.
701.10f If both creatures instructed to fight have first strike and neither have double strike, proceed as normal.
701.10g If only a single creature instructed to fight has double strike, instead of dealing damage, the player controlling the fight effect puts an effect on the stack stating, "each of these creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature". Then, the player who controls the fighting creature with double strike puts an effect on the stack stating, "this creature deals damage equal to its power to the other creature".
701.10h If both creatures instructed to fight have double strike, instead of dealing damage, the player controlling the fight effect puts two copies of an effect on the stack stating, "each of these creatures deal damage equal to its power to the other creature".
...additional rules would be needed to deal with one creature having Double Strike and one having First Strike as well as creatures having both First Strike and Double Strike (even though the First Strike is redundant).
So now if either side (not just yours) had first strike, you could Stifle your way out of taking any damage, regardless of the size discrepancy?
In addition, it doesn't answer the related question of other combat-related keywords (and non-keyworded abilities!) that currently don't do anything with fight, but conceptually would apply to two creatures in "combat". Flanking and Bushido, for example.
What actual gameplay argument do you have against First Strike working in Fights?
To do that you'd have to have state based actions evaluated while a card is resolving.
That opens up far too many issues with the rest of the rules to even be considered.
01.10e If only a single creature instructed to fight has first strike, instead of dealing damage, the player who controls the fighting creature without first strike puts an effect on the stack stating, "this creature deals damage equal to its power to the other creature". Then, the player who controls the fighting creature with first strike puts the same effect on the stack.
Doesn't this open up the possibility of responding to the fight triggers? Stifle or Squelch would become answers to fight triggers now, wouldn't they?
Obviously the rules would have to change to make First Strike and Double Strike work in a fight, don't be simple. My explanations don't reference the game rules, they reference common sense.
How would you reword some of the current Comprehensive Rules entries regarding fighting, first strike, and double strike so that they would work according to the way you want them to work?
First, let me state that I don't really agree with the idea of making First Strike and Double Strike work with Fight. That being said, I think the rules could be modified to make it work without playing with how SBEs are checked. Feel free to improve on the wording, but the general premise involves breaking it apart with new effects on the stack.
Without further ado...
701.10. Fight
701.10a A spell or ability may instruct a creature to fight another creature or it may instruct two creatures to fight each other. Each of those creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature.
701.10b If a creature instructed to fight is no longer on the battlefield or is no longer a creature, no damage is dealt. If a creature is an illegal target for a resolving spell or ability that instructs it to fight, no damage is dealt.
701.10c If a creature fights itself, it deals damage equal to its power to itself twice.
701.10d The damage dealt when a creature fights isn’t combat damage.
701.10e If only a single creature instructed to fight has first strike, instead of dealing damage, the player who controls the fighting creature without first strike puts an effect on the stack stating, "this creature deals damage equal to its power to the other creature". Then, the player who controls the fighting creature with first strike puts the same effect on the stack.
701.10f If both creatures instructed to fight have first strike and neither have double strike, proceed as normal.
701.10g If only a single creature instructed to fight has double strike, instead of dealing damage, the player controlling the fight effect puts an effect on the stack stating, "each of these creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature". Then, the player who controls the fighting creature with double strike puts an effect on the stack stating, "this creature deals damage equal to its power to the other creature".
701.10h If both creatures instructed to fight have double strike, instead of dealing damage, the player controlling the fight effect puts two copies of an effect on the stack stating, "each of these creatures deal damage equal to its power to the other creature".
...additional rules would be needed to deal with one creature having Double Strike and one having First Strike as well as creatures having both First Strike and Double Strike (even though the First Strike is redundant).
The question was meant only for the OP, but I'll address the main problem of this approach as well.
The main problem with this approach is that fighting shouldn't use the stack just because a creature involved in the fight has first or double strike. It doesn't make sense for the effect to use the stack anyway, since what was put onto the stack in the first place has already begun the process that eventually causes it to leave the stack.
The templating of the CR rules entries to make the intended functionality work would be too much work for too little benefit.
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
I think people are probably overstating how difficult it would be to allow SBEs to be checked in the middle of the resolution of a spell or ability. Could you have a spell that said "~ deal 3 damage to target creature. Then check SBEs. Then if that creature died, draw a card"?
(Obviously that card would never ever be printed because explaining to players what it did would be a nightmare. But would it actually make the rules explode? Could SBEs actually not be checked while something was on the stack?)
Because if that could work, then the fight rules could just have built into them that you deal first strike damage, then check SBEs, then deal regular damage if both creatures are still there.
I don't necessarily think it's actually a good idea, but making fight work with first strike doesn't also automatically mean that Maro dies to Wheel of Fortune.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
First/Double Strike in particular don't work the way you want with Fight because of how State Based Actions are handled.
Flying doesn't work because the two creatures are chosen by the spell, not the defending player assigning blockers.
Trample doesn't work because the creature isn't attacking a player or planeswalker, it's fighting another creature.
Next?
And first strike and double strike doesn't work because we don't check state-based actions while a spell or ability is resolving (which is what would be required for first or double strike to "work" during a fight).
Scientists have calculated that the chance of anything so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one. But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten.
You got me. Banding was a terrible example.
However, First/Double Strike don't work because there is no additional step in the middle of "Fight" that allows SBA's to be checked before the spell finishes resolving.
It has been discussed and without this fundamental change to the rules (checking SBAs in the middle of a spell resolving), it won't work. As you demonstrated, there are plenty of reasons other keywords don't apply during a fight that would during normal combat. First/Double Strike have rules reasons why they can't be applied either.
Obviously the rules would have to change to make First Strike and Double Strike work in a fight, don't be simple. My explanations don't reference the game rules, they reference common sense.
So you change what a "fight" is. Unify the rules by making normal combat the same thing except that unblocked creatures deal damage to defending player / planeswalker. Job done. Sounds like half a day for WotC's rules crew.
You guys are arguing that this obvious simple thing shouldn't happen because the rules don't currently let it work, rather than because it would make "fight" spells too good or double strike creatures broken.
To use a political example, You're basically arguing that Trump can't forbid Muslims from immigrating to the USA because the law doesn't allow it, rather than arguing that it's a HORRIBLE DAMN IDEA to forbid a specific religious group from coming to the USA.
What actual gameplay argument do you have against First Strike working in Fights?
Sure. I get you want First Strike to work during Fight. And you acknowledge that rules would have to change to make it work. However, do you know what rules would have to change? This isn't a simple addition to say "First Strike works when creatures Fight". Rules changes would need to be made to say that SBAs are checked in the middle of the Fight ability resolving. And then, what would stop other people from wanting other SBAs to be checked in the middle of other spells? Why wouldn't Maro die when Wheel of Fortune is cast for example? The changes needed to make this work have far reaching consequences beyond just this one small interaction. The reason this doesn't work is because of the internal consistency that the rules strive to maintain.
I understand that your explanations reference common sense and I completely agree with them. However, they still reference the rules. Trample not working because there is no defending player is a good one. That references a rule that says the person being attacked is the defending player. Since no creature is attacking, there is no defending player. I think your explanations for the other keywords not working are actually spot on.
This thread is filled with intricate rules explanations as to why this interaction won't happen because the rules changes required to make it work are not worth it.
"Why doesn't trample work while fighting?"
"Because trample only works while the creature is attacking, not while fighting."
"Why doesn't first strike work while fighting?"
"Because first strike only works while the creature is attacking or blocking, not while fighting"
You can't just wave your hands and say "Well, it'd be easy to change, so they should". Because it's a lot bigger change than you think it is. Right now, state-based actions are not checked while a spell or ability is resolving. It's the reason why casting Wheel of Fortune won't kill your Maro. State-based actions are what kill a creature when it's taken lethal damage.
And "common sense" doesn't work, because you could use that to justify any rules change you want. "My bird has flying, so it should have an advantage in a fight, since it can attack from the skies and stay out of reach of the other creature". See how it easy it to turn flavor around any way you want? The rules need to be based in the rules, not in flavor of the cards.
Scientists have calculated that the chance of anything so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one. But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten.
How would you reword some of the current Comprehensive Rules entries regarding fighting, first strike, and double strike so that they would work according to the way you want them to work?
[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
First, let me state that I don't really agree with the idea of making First Strike and Double Strike work with Fight. That being said, I think the rules could be modified to make it work without playing with how SBEs are checked. Feel free to improve on the wording, but the general premise involves breaking it apart with new effects on the stack.
Without further ado...
701.10. Fight
701.10a A spell or ability may instruct a creature to fight another creature or it may instruct two creatures to fight each other. Each of those creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature.
701.10b If a creature instructed to fight is no longer on the battlefield or is no longer a creature, no damage is dealt. If a creature is an illegal target for a resolving spell or ability that instructs it to fight, no damage is dealt.
701.10c If a creature fights itself, it deals damage equal to its power to itself twice.
701.10d The damage dealt when a creature fights isn’t combat damage.
701.10e If only a single creature instructed to fight has first strike, instead of dealing damage, the player who controls the fighting creature without first strike puts an effect on the stack stating, "this creature deals damage equal to its power to the other creature". Then, the player who controls the fighting creature with first strike puts the same effect on the stack.
701.10f If both creatures instructed to fight have first strike and neither have double strike, proceed as normal.
701.10g If only a single creature instructed to fight has double strike, instead of dealing damage, the player controlling the fight effect puts an effect on the stack stating, "each of these creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature". Then, the player who controls the fighting creature with double strike puts an effect on the stack stating, "this creature deals damage equal to its power to the other creature".
701.10h If both creatures instructed to fight have double strike, instead of dealing damage, the player controlling the fight effect puts two copies of an effect on the stack stating, "each of these creatures deal damage equal to its power to the other creature".
...additional rules would be needed to deal with one creature having Double Strike and one having First Strike as well as creatures having both First Strike and Double Strike (even though the First Strike is redundant).
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
To do that you'd have to have state based actions evaluated while a card is resolving.
That opens up far too many issues with the rest of the rules to even be considered.
Doesn't this open up the possibility of responding to the fight triggers? Stifle or Squelch would become answers to fight triggers now, wouldn't they?
The question was meant only for the OP, but I'll address the main problem of this approach as well.
The main problem with this approach is that fighting shouldn't use the stack just because a creature involved in the fight has first or double strike. It doesn't make sense for the effect to use the stack anyway, since what was put onto the stack in the first place has already begun the process that eventually causes it to leave the stack.
The templating of the CR rules entries to make the intended functionality work would be too much work for too little benefit.
[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
(Obviously that card would never ever be printed because explaining to players what it did would be a nightmare. But would it actually make the rules explode? Could SBEs actually not be checked while something was on the stack?)
Because if that could work, then the fight rules could just have built into them that you deal first strike damage, then check SBEs, then deal regular damage if both creatures are still there.
I don't necessarily think it's actually a good idea, but making fight work with first strike doesn't also automatically mean that Maro dies to Wheel of Fortune.