1. Correct, assuming all the creatures involved in this scenario aren't tokens. Gadrak's last ability counts all "nontoken creature[s] that died this turn", even those that died "this turn" before Gadrak entered the battlefield (review C.R. 700.4). See also this thread.
2. Yes, assuming Gerrard and Aetherworks Marvel aren't tokens. Aetherworks Marvel's first ability will trigger whenever "a permanent you control is put into a graveyard", including Aetherworks Marvel itself or a "permanent you control" that goes to the graveyard at the same time as Aetherworks Marvel. This is because that ability is a leaves-the-battlefield ability that looks at the state of the game just before the trigger event it cares about (C.R. 603.6c, 603.10, 603.10a). See also this thread.
EDIT (Dec. 5): Add assumptions.
-
- Ljoss
- Registered User
-
Member for 19 years, 3 months, and 23 days
Last active Tue, Sep, 29 2020 13:30:21
- 1 Follower
- 5,442 Total Posts
- 95 Thanks
-
Jul 13, 2020
1
Cost36 posted a message on 2 Gerrard questions1) yes - his ability triggers at the end of your turn, so it doesn’t matter if you controlled him the whole time or not, as long as you control him when the trigger happens.Posted in: Magic Rulings
2) yes. AW gives you the energy counters when everything leaves play, including itself -
Nov 30, 20172
Tiro of Meletis posted a message on Christine Sprankle and Harassment in the MTG CommunityPosted in: Magic General
I agree, we should focus on the core premise here. My problem is, the mods are going to come in here, issue infarctions to everyone who disagrees with the article, ban me for bringing awareness to its insidious nature, and then graciously supply us with another list of pre-approved opinions we are permitted to share, instead of doing the right thing and taking down that atrocity, and replacing it with an unbiased and agenda-free survey of this issue with all the information and facts necessary to garner our own opinions on the matter, and actually address the root cause of this drama. But instead, we got a politically skewed lecture with undertones about the president. So basically Fake News.Quote from DirkGently »
It was a bit of a stretch to bring outside politics into the conversation, but holy crap talk about defensive. You'd almost think your man had a terrible approval rating or something. The existence of scumbags on all sides doesn't make your scumbags better. Also, no one cares about Hilary. Seriously. If she were president maybe someone would care. No one kept talking smack about Romney after he lost. No one talked about him at all, really. I don't care if she murdered children, she's not the president. She's just some private citizen. If she broke the law then lock her up, otherwise don't. I don't care and nor does anyone else.Quote from Tiro of Meletis »That new, agenda-pushing, judgmental, close-minded, propaganda-buying, soapbox-dwelling article is the real problem, actually. It should be deleted. This is a card game forum. Leave your political garbage out of here. The obvious skew against the right/Trump/conservatives is reprehensible - but I expected no less from a "discussion" where the mods already outlined and enforce what opinions we're allowed to have. Not surprising, from socialist liberals. Which is why I didn't bother with this thread at all outside of complaining about the most recent article. You want to make snide jabs at Trump tapes and riots about white heritage (where the other side threw the first punches)? Let's go ahead and address Hillary's fraud, Benghazi, USA's Uranium, Whitewater, and just what was on those iPads before hammers got involved. Let's chat a bit about Pochahontas and her newest reincarnation as Sen. Elizabeth Warren who plagiarized a French chef's recipe and published it as her own. So she's French Cherokee, got it. Let's talk Bill Clinton's lovely escapades or his impeachment and the gender of the intern involved. Or how Hillary attacked his female victims as his lawyer. You see? Where does it end, then? And at what point is the focus on Christine Sprakle and Jeremy? Don't bother trying to bring morality to politics. The Left isn't any better about women. If anything, possibly worse. Mono-White villain mentality at its finest there folks - at least the Right is honest about its stances.
Using Christine Sprankle as a pawn into pushing political agendas in a card game community is an embarrassment. I can see how you might like to justify that given her nature as a Cosplayer, but this is not the place, and your opinions are not the only way to think, despite how hard you're all willing to believe that. Typical internet mind-numbing trash - whites are all racist neo-Nazis, Trump is Hitler, men are wicked and women are all victims. Leave all this trash out of here and address the actual event - Jeremy and Christine - not Trump, not Hillary, not recent political events that no one here even understand - as clearly demonstrated by the article.
In summary, leave Fake News and its labels to CNN and other outlets.
Oh, and for the record, if Locker Room talk from those questionable Trump tapes is really what you consider worth mentioning about the President of the United States of America who has been doing an outstanding job running the world's leading country and staying true to his promises, than I am glad I voted the way I did.
Anyway, none of this is relevant to the topic at hand. Yes, there are scumbags everywhere. This is about magic, can we focus on that smaller sphere on influence?
My biggest problem with the article (and the bulk of the reception to this whole thing) is saying that any request for evidence is trolling or promoting harassment. I have literally never heard of these people prior to this incident, and I'm sure the same is true for many people. And I've been a very active magic player for over 15 years. A lot of the stuff seems to be deleted too (does anyone actually have a link to the original video? Still haven't seen that). Maybe there are some people who are just trolling or whatever, but I think most people are genuinely totally unfamiliar with what's going on. Requesting some kind of information doesn't equal maliciousness. If you don't want people asking for the information, then put it in the OP instead of letting it get buried by other posts. If the information is that most of the evidence has been deleted, then say that, and people can make up their own minds. -
Oct 24, 20171
silentstormraider posted a message on Sydri, Galvanic Genius + CaltropsItems (read - spell/ability) on the stack resolve one at a time, not all at once.Posted in: Magic Rulings
And after each item on the stack resolves, all players get priority again to add new items to the stack. The top most item on the stack will only resolve when all players pass priority.
So to elaborate, the stack looks like this:
Top of Stack
Sydri's first ability
Caltrops trigger
Bottom of Stack
Both players pass, Sydri's first ability resolves.
Player A receives priority, as the active player. Chooses to do nothing.
Player B receives priority, chooses to active Sydri's second ability. The stack now looks like this:
Top of Stack
Sydri's second ability
Caltrops trigger
Bottom of Stack
Both players pass, Sydri's second ability resolves.
Player A receives priority , passes. Player B receives priority pass.
Caltrops trigger resolves.
Hope that helps make things clearer for you. -
Oct 24, 20171
willdice posted a message on Sydri, Galvanic Genius + CaltropsPosted in: Magic RulingsQuote from Ljoss »Once both players pass, doesn't everything left on the stack resolve?
No. Once both players pass, the top object on the stack resolves, and nothing else.
Then, after that object has resolved, both players need to pass again, and so on.
In most game situations, players just assume, as a shortcut, that you keep passing until everything resolves, unless otherwise noted. -
Oct 24, 2017
1
genini2 posted a message on Sydri, Galvanic Genius + CaltropsThis is a legal play. Your confusion seems to come from a misunderstanding of how items on the stack resolve. Something on the stack only resolves once each player has passed without doing anything and this must happen every time something resolves. So after the blue activated ability of Sydri resolves both players will once again be given the opportunity to activate more abilities or cast spells if they want.Posted in: Magic Rulings -
Jan 26, 20162
pok_onnet posted a message on Zameck Guildmage and EvolveYes.Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
Zameck guildmage's 1st ability creates Replacement effect , so the 2nd Raptor enters the field with +1/+1 counter on it = its P/T is 1/2.
That means the 1st Raptor's evolve ability will trigger.
Please note that you have to wait until the Zameck's ability resolves before cast another Raptor. -
Feb 22, 2015
1
jskura posted a message on Boom + Sandstone NeedleYou can definitely do that. For a spell to "fizzle" all of the targets need to be illegal when it resolves. Since your opponent will still have his land around, Boom will do as much as it can, and destroy that landPosted in: Magic Rulings Archives -
Mar 4, 2014
1
redline22 posted a message on Mono-W : Rebel CorpsTitles says all. This is sweet deck can not fail to win your next Mercadian Masques block constructed tournament.Posted in: [MNP] Mercadian Masques, Nemesis, Prophecy
DeckMagic OnlineOCTGN2ApprenticeBuy These Cards Land (26):
22 Plains
2 Remote Farm
2 Dust Bowl
Creatures (18):
3 Ramosian Sergeant
2 Ramosian Lieutenant
4 Steadfast Guard
1 Shield Dancer
2 Ballista Squad
3 Voice of Truth
1 Reveille Squad
1 Ramosian Sky Marshal
1 Jhovall QueenSpells (6):
2 Disenchant
4 Reverent Mantra
Other (10):
2 Seal of Cleansing
4 Story Circle
4 Parallax WaveSideboard:
1 Seal of Cleansing
4 Topple
4 Defender en-Vec
1 Lightbringer
1 Distorting Lens
2 Disenchant
1 Nightwind Glider
1 Voice of Truth
This deck is very afford able too. For less than $20 US it can put together. If you are on strict budget, replace the Dust Bowl with more Remote Farm and it become less than $10! Excellent!!! - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
2
There are undoubtedly serious problems with debate, especially the expectation that it's going to be moderated with an all-volunteer squad. But sometimes I wonder if the fact that there's a back and forth at all is considered to be part of the problem. I hope it's not.
It was very clear from the beginning of this thread that personal insults and slurs were not desired, nor would they be accepted. But the specific ban on 'alt-left' (preceded by the similar-ish specific ban on 'SJW') on the grounds that they are not self-identifiers is, I've gotta say, pretty odd.
They're not odd in a vacuum: the use of those phrases as insults directed at specific people is likely to sink a thread. But they're odd in context. The context being that you are posting front page articles about this same subject which hurl around 'Nazi' and talk about all of the fictitiously rampant Nazi sympathy that's supposed to exist here. We (likely) all agree that that is a terrible thing to be, and I hardly see why 'alt-left' would be worse simply because it's not a self-identifier. I'd rather be 'alt-left' than a Nazi.
Anyway, article vs. thread... two different things, you might say. But to me it seems like there might be a disconnect in the way the show's being run, that's all.
1
I'm confused as to why, when I was researching this, the complaints I was finding were about stuff like the gendered insult he made against her (which IMO was pretty cruel and not OK) and people being disgusted by the flip it or rip it game (which IMO is not even in the same stratosphere). It should be more clear that she was receiving death and rape threats because that's a whole different universe than even the gendered insult, let alone the flip it or rip it thing.
This makes it really simple. If you're sending someone death or rape threats, you're a criminal. If you're explicitly encouraging others to do it, you're a criminal. If you're implicitly encouraging others to do it, you're still pretty terrible.
Since TPTB are outlining all of the things this is NOT about: this is NOT about anyone needing to adopt 4th wave feminism or any of the other neo-marxist claptrap that they're going to try to shove down our throats. I say this is about whether we are going to tolerate someone threatening or encouraging others to threaten members of our community. We should also be asking ourselves how we can identify and shut down these situations more rapidly. That's my take, at least.
3
Can we just get clear on one point? You want to discuss this situation, but during that discussion, we shouldn't reference the frontpage article on this site which is about this situation? I mean, I totally get that... it's conceivable that we could be urged to ignore that article, it's just a little confusing.
3
It absolutely is an attack on them. The "Make America Nazi Free Again" is such a bonk you on the head obvious allusion that you're either going to make that connection or you're going to have a migraine. Or both. It's honestly quite disgusting in its blatant exploitation.
Consider an alternative future where Bernie Sanders is elected and this emboldens a very small but vocal set of American communists. The right then moves to associate Bernie with communism, because that is a politically obvious move. What they hope to accomplish in this situation is to tarnish all support of Bernie or any policy that he holds with the communist label. As we mostly (but not fully, because there is an abundance of Marxist or quasi-Marxist sympathy in Hollywood and in the education system) consider communism to be cruel and evil and, as we now associate Bernie and his supporters with that, we begin to dehumanize them.
That is what's going on here and that's precisely what this game wishes to capitalize on. That is why it is such a despicable game.
If you find yourself feeling offended when the same call for introspection is repeated back at you, ask yourself why.
1
I wanted to explain what my issue is with this word right now by way of an example. Recently, there was an article about Yusra Khogali on Huffington Post. She is the co-founder of Black Lives Matter Toronto. She's said many things that are preposterous from a factual perspective (e.g. claiming that Justin Trudeau is a white supremacist, some pseudo-science about race and the sun) and also things that I contend are viciously racist (e.g. that white people are subhuman, talking about how hard it is for her not to kill white people, etc.). Now if you read that article and scroll down to the comment section you will find many people defending her comments or her position in this group and, to my knowledge, she hasn't resigned or been dismissed from it. So here you have people holding up the banner of anti-racism saying that these comments aren't racist and attacking the editor, calling him a racist for calling such comments out. So that highlights some of the strange ways in which this word is being employed lately. Meanwhile, I don't think you can find a more primo example of racism than the labeling of any group of people as subhuman because of their skin-color. And I believe I was in a conversation here not too long ago with someone claiming that no one is ever falsely accused of racism, which would mean that I have to accept that Justin Trudeau really is a white supremacist and that is just silly.
Bottom line, call it like you see it (racism or anything else) and be willing to listen and respond.
1
I'm not fiddling. I'm asking reasonable questions like "what has he done?" and getting Hitler comps as answers.
Obama bombs Yemen, wins Nobel Peace Prize. Trump places temporary ban on Yemeni immigration and he's Hitler. You see how this is difficult to take seriously? Meanwhile, the hijab is a symbol of female liberation and Western Christianity is repressive, Mexico is telling the U.S. that it can't do anything about its porous southern border all the while Mexico itself sure as heck is concerned about its southern border, NATO is whining about the U.S. being a poor ally when practically everyone besides the U.S., U.K. and Poland haven't fulfilled their treaty obligations in decades, Bern fans are complaining about Trump being an isolationist just because he's treating trade exactly like Bernie promised to and leftists are outraged at the phrase "alternative facts" after they've been warping the minds of our children with their moral and cultural relativism for years.
Maybe I need to start fiddling.
1
1
I relate and I don't know where the sensible middle ground has gone on race.***
When talking about race here, I mostly spend my time going after the SJWs. I figure that's because this forum can be very left. But I've been on right-wing forums and I'll come across the other way. The thing with the SJWs and race/gender is that they say things that are fundamentally appalling, things that I would recoil at if a white or male friend said them about women or a non-white group. But when they say these disgusting, hateful things, it is not considered racist---and, prejudice + power nonsense aside, these things are not even considered wrong. For a sample, one might google the SJW vs. Stormfront game and see how similar the rhetoric of SJWs and white nationalists really is or what happens when you replace all instances of "men" with "black people" in the words of a feminist SJW or when Buzzfeed celebrates presentations with titles like "white people are a plague to the planet," "white people are crazy" or "white people are dangerous," etc.
1
Hopefully less than it took to think Hillary was an electable candidate.
Like I said, he's a demagogue. There's not as much need for the demagoguery once he's in the White House. Further, he's going to have certain Republicans that are going to join the Democrats to fight him every step of the way. Not too worried - not that much more than usual at least.
2
Nice to see that Crooked Hillary will not have any kind of mandate, though. Trump voters are sending a big middle finger to the corrupt establishment, the status quo and the phony scumbags in Hollywood.