By itself, I mean to redirecting the spell to Redirect.
For example:
- Player A cast a spell
- Player B cast a Counterspell target the previously cast spell.
- Player A respond by casting Redirect redirecting Counterspell to Redirect itself.
I know this is legal, it's even mention in the ruling on the gatherer for Redirect.
I'm trying to understand why it is legal, and here is why I'm confused:
I always thought that in order to cast a spell which has one or multiple targets, all targets must be declared and be valid at the time of casting, that is before the spell is put on the stack. Or is it? Does that mean when you cast redirect, the spell is put on the stack 'first', then each valid target is chosen, all done in an atomic way of course.
So you cast redirect targeting the Counterspell. This is its only target, and the only one you have to choose when casting Redirect. When Redirectresolves, you can change the target of Counterspell to another spell currently on the stack. And since Redirect is still there (it leaves the stack as the final part of its resolution), you can choose Redirect as the new target for Counterspell.
608. Resolving Spells and Abilities
608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written.
608.2k As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell’s resolution, the spell is put into its owner’s graveyard. (…)
Oh, the new target is only chosen when the spell resolve. Interesting.
What part determine the fact that the new target will be chosen upon resolution as opposed to during the cast.
I assume that if the wording was: "change target spell's targets to one or more different target spells", both targets would have to be decided upon casting.
Is it because of the "may" clause that you only have to choose the new target when the spell resolve?
It is not the use of may that does this. Redirect would function mostly the same if it just said "change the targets of target spell." It is about what the spell actually targets. Redirect has only one target "target spell" the word targets appearing in "change the targets" is mentioning an aspect of another spell not setting a target for this spell.
So your card "change the targets of target spell to one or more other targets" targets both the spell you are affecting and the new targets you intend on targeting because both are defined as targets of the spell. This can cause problems with protection and hexproof as you can aim your opponent's doom blade at their own hexproof creature with redirect but not your proposed spell.
I always thought that in order to cast a spell which has one or multiple targets, all targets must be declared and be valid at the time of casting, that is before the spell is put on the stack. Or is it?
The spell is already on the stack by the time you choose targets for it.
The order of actions is:
Put on the stack
Choose targets
Pay cost
(There are other actions, those are just the most relevants here).
Does that mean when you cast redirect, the spell is put on the stack 'first', then each valid target is chosen, all done in an atomic way of course.
Yes.
However, Redirect has only target: the spell. Redirect does not targets the spell's new targets, only the spell itself. So here Redirect targets only Counterspell, not Redirect.
You don't announce Counterspell's new targets on casting Redirect, you do it when Redirect resolves.
Kandjy has a point: sure, Redirect has only one target, but its text still contains the word target TWICE!
601.2c The player announces their choice of an appropriate object or player for each target the spell requires. (…) However, if the spell uses the word “target” in multiple places, (…)
Ah, but let's see here:
115.1a An instant or sorcery spell is targeted if its spell ability identifies something it will affect by using the phrase “target [something],” where the “something” is a phrase that describes an object and/or player. (…)
But then… what about Smiting Helix; there's no 'something' to describe target...
Kandjy has a point: sure, Redirect has only one target, but its text still contains the word target TWICE!
601.2c The player announces their choice of an appropriate object or player for each target the spell requires. (…) However, if the spell uses the word “target” in multiple places, (…)
Ah, but let's see here:
115.1a An instant or sorcery spell is targeted if its spell ability identifies something it will affect by using the phrase “target [something],” where the “something” is a phrase that describes an object and/or player. (…)
But then… what about Smiting Helix; there's no 'something' to describe target...
That is why the rules deliberately define "any target".
Any Target
A spell or ability may require “any target.” “Any target” is the same as “target creature, player, or
planeswalker.” See rule 115.4.
Oh, the new target is only chosen when the spell resolve. Interesting.
What part determine the fact that the new target will be chosen upon resolution as opposed to during the cast.
I assume that if the wording was: "change target spell's targets to one or more different target spells", both targets would have to be decided upon casting.
Is it because of the "may" clause that you only have to choose the new target when the spell resolve?
Uses of the word 'target', in a particularly-structured way in the midst of the instructive part of a spell, decide that this spell satisfies the special burden "it has targets". This structured way is when the word target appears in either:
1) "Any target" as the object of some imperative (instruction), or
2) "[number] target [noun-like descriptor]" or "target [noun-like descriptor]" as the object of some imperative (instruction).
This sense of fitting into a certain syntactical category is reliant on English grammar to be understood by the players. I can't emphasize this enough.
It's also necessary to leave the other ways of target's appearance in text to be known as just that - some way not covered by the above. I'd be jammed up if I tried to define what sort of usage of the word appears in Redirect, to manufacture a rule of exclusion. All the same, "Change the target"/"Choose new targets" is not that usage which bestows targets to a spell by being found there.
The importance of the English syntax here is to be noted in that the reason "The target" doesn't count as the target specifier of type 2 above, is because the syntactic object is the "The target of [some spell]", and that category cannot be located in the subsidiary part, beginning "The target...".
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
For example:
- Player A cast a spell
- Player B cast a Counterspell target the previously cast spell.
- Player A respond by casting Redirect redirecting Counterspell to Redirect itself.
I know this is legal, it's even mention in the ruling on the gatherer for Redirect.
I'm trying to understand why it is legal, and here is why I'm confused:
I always thought that in order to cast a spell which has one or multiple targets, all targets must be declared and be valid at the time of casting, that is before the spell is put on the stack. Or is it? Does that mean when you cast redirect, the spell is put on the stack 'first', then each valid target is chosen, all done in an atomic way of course.
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)
608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written.
608.2k As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell’s resolution, the spell is put into its owner’s graveyard. (…)
RULES OF MAGIC :
http://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-formats/rules
What part determine the fact that the new target will be chosen upon resolution as opposed to during the cast.
I assume that if the wording was: "change target spell's targets to one or more different target spells", both targets would have to be decided upon casting.
Is it because of the "may" clause that you only have to choose the new target when the spell resolve?
So your card "change the targets of target spell to one or more other targets" targets both the spell you are affecting and the new targets you intend on targeting because both are defined as targets of the spell. This can cause problems with protection and hexproof as you can aim your opponent's doom blade at their own hexproof creature with redirect but not your proposed spell.
The spell is already on the stack by the time you choose targets for it.
The order of actions is:
Put on the stack
Choose targets
Pay cost
(There are other actions, those are just the most relevants here).
Yes.
However, Redirect has only target: the spell. Redirect does not targets the spell's new targets, only the spell itself. So here Redirect targets only Counterspell, not Redirect.
You don't announce Counterspell's new targets on casting Redirect, you do it when Redirect resolves.
Ah, but let's see here:
But then… what about Smiting Helix; there's no 'something' to describe target...
RULES OF MAGIC :
http://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-formats/rules
Any Target
A spell or ability may require “any target.” “Any target” is the same as “target creature, player, or
planeswalker.” See rule 115.4.
Uses of the word 'target', in a particularly-structured way in the midst of the instructive part of a spell, decide that this spell satisfies the special burden "it has targets". This structured way is when the word target appears in either:
1) "Any target" as the object of some imperative (instruction), or
2) "[number] target [noun-like descriptor]" or "target [noun-like descriptor]" as the object of some imperative (instruction).
This sense of fitting into a certain syntactical category is reliant on English grammar to be understood by the players. I can't emphasize this enough.
It's also necessary to leave the other ways of target's appearance in text to be known as just that - some way not covered by the above. I'd be jammed up if I tried to define what sort of usage of the word appears in Redirect, to manufacture a rule of exclusion. All the same, "Change the target"/"Choose new targets" is not that usage which bestows targets to a spell by being found there.
The importance of the English syntax here is to be noted in that the reason "The target" doesn't count as the target specifier of type 2 above, is because the syntactic object is the "The target of [some spell]", and that category cannot be located in the subsidiary part, beginning "The target...".
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].