Q: With Goblin Charbelcher, what happens if I trigger the ability and my library doesn't have any land card? --Felix B.
A: If you activate (trigger means something different in Magic) Goblin Charbelcher with no lands in your library you'll reveal your library until it's gone, count the cards, deal that much damage to your target, and then put the cards back in any order you choose. The Charbelcher stops when you hit a land or when you run out of unrevealed library.
Also, with Suspend, you may play the spell anytime, if you have a way to remove the counters. Like with Greater Gargadon, at the beginning of your declare attackers step, you may sacrifice permanents to remove his counters and then he comes into play with haste and you can then declare him as an attacker.
Yes. Overrun is still the spell being played. They don't have to pay it's cost, but if you're going to counter it with Spell Blast, you still have to pay for it's cost. You're not countering the ability, you're countering the spell they are playing.
EDIT: Also, even if they don't have to pay the spell's converted mana cost, it still HAS the CMC of 5.
I think he meant cards like That Which Was Taken. When That Which Was Taken leaves play, the permanent is no longer indestructible. Should it return, however, the counter is still the same type of counter, and so would have the effect once again.
I know. I was just SAYING, IF Tribal were a super-type, it wouldn't be any different. I don't think you're getting my point here. I was only correcting that part of what you said. There ARE sub-types on cards with super-types. So saying that Tribal can't be a super-type because cards with super-types can't have sub-types is wrong. Clearly Tribal can't be a super-type, but that's not the reason why.
And technically, Tribal COULD be a super-type. Fluffy Bunny could be a super-type. Wizards would just have to make it so, they do kind of control the game of Magic. Lol.
Well, while some people may consider it cheating, according to the rules, it's not. It's underhanded, I'll admit that, but I've done almost exactly the same thing, to someone who's been playing for years, and he immediately realized after scooping that he could have won if he hadn't just made the mistake of scooping. But you have to remember, Magic is a "Fantasy War", and everything is fair in love and war, as long as it doesn't go against the fantasy guidelines.
So, again I say, while it may seem unfair, it's perfectly legal to use manipulation.
Well, sure, but it's still basically the same thing. The cards with super-types still have sub-types on them. Not all of them, but, the majority of the Snow and ALL the Basic.
EDIT: And he tried to explain that Tribal couldn't be a Super-type because Super-Types don't have sub-types. But Tribal Enchantment - Elf, the Enchantment has the sub-type, and if Tribal WERE a super-type, it wouldn't be any different from Snow Creature - Dragon. That's all I meant.
What happens in the computations(I work for a game shop) is, in a 16 man FNM Booster Draft, there SHOULD be two 8-man pods, and you only play people in your pod. You do 3 rounds of Swiss. What's going to happen, is that each pod has one undefeated player, and, at my store, it doesn't work this way EVERYWHERE, we give out store credit. Drafts are $13, $10 for packs and $3 for the prize pool. Each pod has it's own prize pool. So $24 would go into each pod's prize pool. 1st and 2nd of each pod get a stake, 65% for 1st, 35% for 2nd. It actually, with 8 people, gets rounded to $18 and $6.
And then, as far as determining, OVERALL on the DCI, who takes what place, it just gets computed through tie-breakers, with all 16 players being lumped together. So, with tie-breakers, however you did, and however the opponents you faced did, is how it determines who takes what place.
Q: Why is it that tribal is a type and not a supertype like legendary? Since it is an adjective, and because it seems more like an augmentation of the original card than an actual type of card, it seems strange and a little awkward to fit it as a type. Does this mean there will be tribal cards that are just tribal, or will they be like Bound in Silence, alterations of existing noncreature card types that allow them to have creature types? On that note, why did Bound in Silence have to be tribal at all? Why not just make it an Enchantment — Rebel Aura? Why can't the rebel subtype be used on noncreatures?
–Jacob, Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic A: From Kelly Digges, Magic editor:
Rulesmeister Mark Gottlieb is out today tending his wombats, so I'll field your questions, which have appeared in the Ask Wizards box... oh, let's say "a few times."
Fair warning, though—the following is a feast for Melvin, and not for the faint of heart.
I'll start with the last question. Why was Tribal necessary at all? Why not just print an enchantment with the Rebel and Aura subtypes? That single card might seem innocuous, but the deeper issue here has to do with some very important rules that prevent some very silly things. See, rule 205.3d in the Comprehensive Rules states that—stop me if you've heard this one—each card type has its own possible list of subtypes, except for two pairs of types that share their list of subtypes. One such pair is instant and sorcery, allowing both of those to be Arcane; the other is creature and tribal.
If 205.3d didn't exist, we'd have a lot more freedom in adding subtypes to things. Instead of Arcane, we could have just made instants and sorceries that were Spirits! (That's ignoring the obvious problems that arise with splice.) Of course, we can't just have a generic list of subtypes, because it seems clear that Imagecrafter shouldn't turn things into Shrines or Equipment. So we could just define "creature types" as those subtypes that have been printed on a creature, right? (Well, or given to a creature, or created as a creature token...) That way Volrath's Laboratory can't make Forests. Oh, wait, crud, what about Dryad Arbor and Life and Limb? Now Mistform Ultimus taps for , because Forest has been printed on a creature! This is what we call a Bad Thing, and we avoid the whole mess by keeping discrete lists of subtypes.
So we have 205.3d to keep the lists of subtypes separate (except the ones that share nice), and we have 205.3e to state explicitly that for cards with multiple types (such as Bound in Silence), each subtype gets correlated to the correct type. That second one keeps us from landing in the exact same trouble that 205.3d is meant to prevent.
Of course, that leaves the question of why tribal couldn't be a supertype like legendary or basic. The issue here is that subtypes are correlated with types, while supertypes aren't (205.3d again, in a big-ticket team-up with 205.4a). So what exactly would the tribal supertype mean? Would it mean that this object can have creature subtypes, or would it mean that this object's types can have creature subtypes correlated with them? The first causes big problems with 205.3d, and the second gets weird if the permanent starts losing types, as with Neurok Transmuter or Soul Sculptor. You could argue that tribal still applies to the new types, so the subtypes are kept, but then you've got something that works differently than other cards do when types change... These issues aren't necessarily intractable, but they're messy and counterintuitive either way, and everything works a lot more cleanly if tribal is a type. The rules do specify, however, that tribal always appears on cards that have at least one other type (that's 212.8a, for those keeping score at home).
So why does it "sound like" a supertype? I can't speak to this one as easily, as I wasn't here yet when the decision was made, but as I understand it the name "tribal" was chosen because it's evocative and descriptive, and it's already associated with creature types for established players. Some people argue that it should be a noun, because all types are nouns (like instant... well, in some definitions), and not an adjective the way supertypes are (like snow and, um, world...).
Okay, I'm being a little tongue-in-cheek there, but what I'm saying is that these are "rules" we bend when the actual rules and creative needs dictate. Most players can play the game thinking that tribal is a supertype, or ignoring it entirely, and not be affected at all. If you need to know that tribal is a card type, odds are you already do.
Whew! We're done, and I didn't even have to say "tribals."
Basically Tribal is a type because it has to be. Supertypes can't have sub-types.
Actually, Supertypes CAN have subtypes. For example....Snow permanents. Snow Basic Lands have the land subtypes. Rimescale Dragon is a Dragon.
***EDIT: I know this was off-topic, but I had to correct his interpretation.
You didn't cheat, you used manipulation, mind games, to make him think he had lost. Him scooping up his cards, he basically conceded, and that is basically just a playing error on his part. You're not at fault for anything, except a little legal trickery. Lol.
Additionally, it's possible his opponent could receive a warning for Game-Play Error, but he'd actually have to report himself to receive it, and it would be him receiving the warning, and he'd still have lost the game.
"Up to", like in Blades, means that you can target anywhere between 0 and that number, 2 for Blades, legal targets. So with Blades, he could target 0 creatures, 1 creature, or two creatures. However, you must choose different targets. So his Elemental could only be targeted once. Another example is Choking Tethers. You may target up to 4 creatures to tap. However, if you have 1 creature in play and an opponent had 3 creatures, you may tap his 3 creatures, and not have to tap yours as well.
As for the second part, if you were thinking that you could play the second Liliana before the first one's ability resolves, you can't. Liliana's ability resolves, putting all creatures into play, and then you play your next Liliana, so you can't make them discard, see if it's a creature so you get an extra one. If that's NOT what you meant, well, sorry for the spam, it's just, the way you said it was a little confusing.
Quite often, it's really up to the discretion of your opponent, whether they're willing to accept your description, but if you have any doubts, and your opponent won't let you just describe it, call the head judge over and ask them. The person that usually judges the tournies at my local shop is kind of a tool, I mean, he's cool, but when it comes to rulings, he tries to be precise in every mechanic of the game, so he'd expect the exact name to be said.
A: If you activate (trigger means something different in Magic) Goblin Charbelcher with no lands in your library you'll reveal your library until it's gone, count the cards, deal that much damage to your target, and then put the cards back in any order you choose. The Charbelcher stops when you hit a land or when you run out of unrevealed library.
Here's the link:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/satschoolarchive&term=charbelcher
EDIT: Also, even if they don't have to pay the spell's converted mana cost, it still HAS the CMC of 5.
And technically, Tribal COULD be a super-type. Fluffy Bunny could be a super-type. Wizards would just have to make it so, they do kind of control the game of Magic. Lol.
So, again I say, while it may seem unfair, it's perfectly legal to use manipulation.
EDIT: And he tried to explain that Tribal couldn't be a Super-type because Super-Types don't have sub-types. But Tribal Enchantment - Elf, the Enchantment has the sub-type, and if Tribal WERE a super-type, it wouldn't be any different from Snow Creature - Dragon. That's all I meant.
And then, as far as determining, OVERALL on the DCI, who takes what place, it just gets computed through tie-breakers, with all 16 players being lumped together. So, with tie-breakers, however you did, and however the opponents you faced did, is how it determines who takes what place.
Actually, Supertypes CAN have subtypes. For example....Snow permanents. Snow Basic Lands have the land subtypes. Rimescale Dragon is a Dragon.
***EDIT: I know this was off-topic, but I had to correct his interpretation.
Additionally, it's possible his opponent could receive a warning for Game-Play Error, but he'd actually have to report himself to receive it, and it would be him receiving the warning, and he'd still have lost the game.