I've been playing MTG with a group that has been playing longer than I have and today we had a big disagreement over a specific ruling in magic. I used a dragon fodder to bring out 2 1/1 goblin tokens and I also had Bloodflow Connoisseur on the field. When I was attacked by an opponent's creature I used one of my tokens to block the creature, and then I used the Bloodflow Connoisseur to also sacrifice the same blocking token. They disputed that since my blocker was gone that I would take the damage from the attacking creature. Except I know for a fact that once blocking is declared it doesn't matter that the token has been sacrificed because blocking had already been declared and there is no way that it can be undone. Also that same night I was attacked by a creature and I declared to block it and they then used a Mighty Leap, and they said that now they could just fly over and deal damage. And again I told them that once I declared my block they can't just nullify it by giving their creature flying. They began to get very salty over this rule and kept insisting that I was wrong, and that if I was right that the rule is just "stupid". They got very bitter at the rule and it just made me get frustrated because they thought I was just making it up to benefit myself and they continued to say that the rule just "makes no sense". I don't care if it didn't make sense to them because those are the rules. It made me feel like I was being a hard ass, but I just wanted to make it clear to them that blocking can't be undone once it's been declared. Even now I think they don't believe me, I guess they just don't read the rules very often.... oh well. I just wanted to get that off my chest. Has anything like this ever happened to you?
First off, you probably want Rules Q&A, not this forum, since that forum is set up for rules questions and answers.
As for your question, you are correct. Once a creature is blocked, it remains blocked for the rest of combat, even if all of the creatures blocking it leave combat. Unless the attacking creature has trample, it won't assign any damage in combat (assuming you blocked and then sacrificed the creature). From the Comp Rules:
510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage.
You are also correct in the second situation. Giving the attacking creature flying after blockers are declared won't undo the block or prevent any damage: the attacking creature is still considered blocked and will deal and receive damage from the creature that blocked it. If they didn't want that creature to block, they should have given it flying before blockers were declared, not afterwards.
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.
I had lots of rules disputes as well in my earlier years of Magic with people that had been playing the game for a longer time as well. They made many shady plays and insisted on many bogus interactions, that I knew for a fact where not working. Such people can be hard to convince of their errors. I began to make a point of noting down the questionable plays and the next time I went to play with them, brought with me a printout of the rules that clearly proved them wrong. They would still be quite adamant on their own interpretations, but I continued to shake their delusions and eventually, I became kind of a rules expert in the group and my word began to carry weight. Today, that can be done right on the spot with smartphones. Just have a link to the most recent Comprehensive Rules ready. Of course, intimate knowledge of that document is nessessary to find the rules you're looking for.
In your specific cases, the rules explicitly spell out the facts, so they shouldn't be able to argue their way around it:
509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a
blocked creature; one with no creatures declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked
creature. This remains unchanged until the creature is removed from combat, an effect says that
it becomes blocked or unblocked, or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. A creature
remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.
510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are
currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns
no combat damage. If exactly one creature is blocking it, it assigns all its combat damage to that
creature. If two or more creatures are blocking it, it assigns its combat damage to those creatures
according to the damage assignment order announced for it. This may allow the blocked
creature to divide its combat damage. However, it can’t assign combat damage to a creature
that’s blocking it unless, when combat damage assignments are complete, each creature that
precedes that blocking creature in its order is assigned lethal damage. When checking for
assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage
from other creatures that’s being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any
abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that’s actually dealt. An amount of
damage that’s greater than a creature’s lethal damage may be assigned to it.
509.1b The defending player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it’s affected by
any restrictions (effects that say a creature can’t block, or that it can’t block unless some
condition is met). If any restrictions are being disobeyed, the declaration of blockers is illegal. A restriction may be created by an evasion ability (a static ability an attacking creature has
that restricts what can block it). If an attacking creature gains or loses an evasion ability after a
legal block has been declared, it doesn’t affect that block. Different evasion abilities are
cumulative.
If they insist on their shady combat rules nonetheless, try building an aggro burn deck of sorts, and keep attacking and then frying their blockers with cheap removal after blockers have been declared, to have them take the combat damage as per their interpretation. That should make them see how unfair that is. After all, most removal spells would be way too powerful and way too cheap if the game really worked that way.
Thanks for the quick reply. And I would have posted in the rules Q&A but I was personally already very clear on the rulings. I was just venting about an experience where I was frustrated at more experienced MTG players not willing to believe what I was trying to explain to them, and getting bitter in the process. But I will make sure to post in the correct section next time.
A smart phone is the perfect tool in this situation (assuming there isn't an actual judge around), allowing you to look up and show them the official rules as needed. I think your experience is pretty typical, as a lot of casual groups can be insular and end up playing something incorrectly for a long time because they never get exposed to an outsider who knows better. And the rules in question here are a little unintuitive, so I can't blame them for being skeptical.
First off, you probably want Rules Q&A, not this forum, since that forum is set up for rules questions and answers.
As for your question, you are correct. Once a creature is blocked, it remains blocked for the rest of combat, even if all of the creatures blocking it leave combat. Unless the attacking creature has trample, it won't assign any damage in combat (assuming you blocked and then sacrificed the creature). From the Comp Rules:
510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage.
You are also correct in the second situation. Giving the attacking creature flying after blockers are declared won't undo the block or prevent any damage: the attacking creature is still considered blocked and will deal and receive damage from the creature that blocked it. If they didn't want that creature to block, they should have given it flying before blockers were declared, not afterwards.
If you're the guy who always knows the rules, get certified as a rules advisor! Uninformed casual players find it pretty difficult to argue with somebody with official credentials. It's a matter of taking an online test; if you're already knowledgeable, you can get it done in a couple hours, tops.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
When I played casually as a kid, my group would kind of skip over any rules interactions we didn't understand and just do whatever made sense. The internet didn't have a repository of judge answers for frequent questions so we'd just come to a consensus based on reading the cards literally. When we started playing competitive it felt like we all sharpened up our rules knowledge overnight, we all wanted to know how to play correctly and we never really encounter that nowadays within our group.
However, as a rules advisor I do find it frustrating when people ask me about an interaction and then won't believe my answer. Sure, I ain't always right but when I google a question for someone and they spend 5mins arguing with me about it, I just wonder why they bothered asking in the first place.
The level between kitchen table and playing in a store that has some form of judge/rules guy is pretty big for a lot of players.
If someone is used to magic Online, the jump is much smaller ofcourse.
The video games kinda help with "some" rules, but also give troubles in other areas, as they do not handle the rules too well (in regards to priority and when you actually can do something etc.).
So in the end, its overall much more convenient to play by the rules and getting an understand about the rules ; especially as they changed over the history of the game ; so some will know rules that are simply outdated (especially keywords like deathtouch/lifelink , some do not resolve "fight" properly, as they actually think its some form of combat phase between the 2 creatures, taking first strike into account and such).
If you are sure about a rule its still a good idea (if you are interested) to look it up in the rules to make sure you are right, and maybe find some corner cases in which you might be not.
Most important, not knowing the rules has to be made clear as a totally viable option to simply ask ; players have to learn that they can ask a judge all the time, for anything they want to know about the rules. Helps to make a better community, and avoids all the hassle about people that cant stand to be wrong about a rule, as "we allways played it this way" isnt really an answer.
If you're the guy who always knows the rules, get certified as a rules advisor! Uninformed casual players find it pretty difficult to argue with somebody with official credentials.
In my experience, if you try to judge an event as an RA, then people arguing with you will just tell you that you're "not a real judge." It's frustrating, but the only thing you can really do is be firm but diplomatic in explaining yourself and your role in the event.
If you're the guy who always knows the rules, get certified as a rules advisor! Uninformed casual players find it pretty difficult to argue with somebody with official credentials.
In my experience, if you try to judge an event as an RA, then people arguing with you will just tell you that you're "not a real judge." It's frustrating, but the only thing you can really do is be firm but diplomatic in explaining yourself and your role in the event.
Perhaps, but for me, it's been a trump card to play in casual interactions. Actually judging an event is another matter entirely.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Angrypossum over at the now-defunct WotC forums.
My casual playgroup used to have similar disagreements. Eventually I started looking up rules and rulings to settle these discussions. Then I started reading other rules that I found interesting. Eventually I read the entire comp rules front to back. That helped me learn where to look for future questions. After about a year of learning more and reading the rules more, I found that I had a solid amount of rules knowledge. I parlayed this into becoming a Rules Advisor, and then a Level 1 Judge (and Teia Rabishu is correct, I had "you're not an actual judge" thrown at me more than a few times before I got my L1). Now my playgroup has less arguments and more fun, because they've learned (through play) what the rules actually are, and they know they can ask me rules questions and trust my answers.
I'm not saying you have to become a RA or Judge, but if you take some time to learn the rules enough that you can look up and quote the rules directly (and show them so they can read the rules themselves), it will have a big effect of ending arguments and improving your games. They may not like the rules, but at least they'll know you're not just saying something to benefit yourself.
I had "you're not an actual judge" thrown at me more than a few times before I got my L1
Notably, since I forgot to mention it the first time, if you're listed as a judge in the event software, then you're judging the event and have all the authority that entails. You could even theoretically issue warnings or DQs, although you'd never really be in a position to do the former and the latter would be awkward as hell. It doesn't matter what rank the head judge is. Their rulings are final. It only really matters at the event level rather than the casual level, but it's something.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
As for your question, you are correct. Once a creature is blocked, it remains blocked for the rest of combat, even if all of the creatures blocking it leave combat. Unless the attacking creature has trample, it won't assign any damage in combat (assuming you blocked and then sacrificed the creature). From the Comp Rules:
510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage.
You are also correct in the second situation. Giving the attacking creature flying after blockers are declared won't undo the block or prevent any damage: the attacking creature is still considered blocked and will deal and receive damage from the creature that blocked it. If they didn't want that creature to block, they should have given it flying before blockers were declared, not afterwards.
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.
In your specific cases, the rules explicitly spell out the facts, so they shouldn't be able to argue their way around it:
509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a
blocked creature; one with no creatures declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked
creature. This remains unchanged until the creature is removed from combat, an effect says that
it becomes blocked or unblocked, or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. A creature
remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.
510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are
currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns
no combat damage. If exactly one creature is blocking it, it assigns all its combat damage to that
creature. If two or more creatures are blocking it, it assigns its combat damage to those creatures
according to the damage assignment order announced for it. This may allow the blocked
creature to divide its combat damage. However, it can’t assign combat damage to a creature
that’s blocking it unless, when combat damage assignments are complete, each creature that
precedes that blocking creature in its order is assigned lethal damage. When checking for
assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage
from other creatures that’s being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any
abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that’s actually dealt. An amount of
damage that’s greater than a creature’s lethal damage may be assigned to it.
509.1b The defending player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it’s affected by
any restrictions (effects that say a creature can’t block, or that it can’t block unless some
condition is met). If any restrictions are being disobeyed, the declaration of blockers is illegal.
A restriction may be created by an evasion ability (a static ability an attacking creature has
that restricts what can block it). If an attacking creature gains or loses an evasion ability after a
legal block has been declared, it doesn’t affect that block. Different evasion abilities are
cumulative.
If they insist on their shady combat rules nonetheless, try building an aggro burn deck of sorts, and keep attacking and then frying their blockers with cheap removal after blockers have been declared, to have them take the combat damage as per their interpretation. That should make them see how unfair that is. After all, most removal spells would be way too powerful and way too cheap if the game really worked that way.
Former Rules Advisor
"Everything's better with pirates." - Lodge
(The Gamers: Dorkness Rising)
"Any sufficiently analyzed magic is indistinguishable from science."
(Girl Genius - Fairy Tale Theater Break - Cinderella, end of volume 8)
He wasn't asking a question
However, as a rules advisor I do find it frustrating when people ask me about an interaction and then won't believe my answer. Sure, I ain't always right but when I google a question for someone and they spend 5mins arguing with me about it, I just wonder why they bothered asking in the first place.
If someone is used to magic Online, the jump is much smaller ofcourse.
The video games kinda help with "some" rules, but also give troubles in other areas, as they do not handle the rules too well (in regards to priority and when you actually can do something etc.).
So in the end, its overall much more convenient to play by the rules and getting an understand about the rules ; especially as they changed over the history of the game ; so some will know rules that are simply outdated (especially keywords like deathtouch/lifelink , some do not resolve "fight" properly, as they actually think its some form of combat phase between the 2 creatures, taking first strike into account and such).
If you are sure about a rule its still a good idea (if you are interested) to look it up in the rules to make sure you are right, and maybe find some corner cases in which you might be not.
Most important, not knowing the rules has to be made clear as a totally viable option to simply ask ; players have to learn that they can ask a judge all the time, for anything they want to know about the rules. Helps to make a better community, and avoids all the hassle about people that cant stand to be wrong about a rule, as "we allways played it this way" isnt really an answer.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
In my experience, if you try to judge an event as an RA, then people arguing with you will just tell you that you're "not a real judge." It's frustrating, but the only thing you can really do is be firm but diplomatic in explaining yourself and your role in the event.
Perhaps, but for me, it's been a trump card to play in casual interactions. Actually judging an event is another matter entirely.
I'm not saying you have to become a RA or Judge, but if you take some time to learn the rules enough that you can look up and quote the rules directly (and show them so they can read the rules themselves), it will have a big effect of ending arguments and improving your games. They may not like the rules, but at least they'll know you're not just saying something to benefit yourself.
Notably, since I forgot to mention it the first time, if you're listed as a judge in the event software, then you're judging the event and have all the authority that entails. You could even theoretically issue warnings or DQs, although you'd never really be in a position to do the former and the latter would be awkward as hell. It doesn't matter what rank the head judge is. Their rulings are final. It only really matters at the event level rather than the casual level, but it's something.