Hi guys, I have an old school question.
I tap a land which has Blight to cast a Balance. Can I sacrifice the land which has Blight or is it destroyed by Blight before I can sac it?
Using card tags is mandatory in the Magic Rulings forum. Please check your private messages to learn how to use them. I've added them for this post.
-MadMage
Hi guys, I have an old school question.
I tap a land which has Blight to cast a Balance. Can I sacrifice the land which has Blight or is it destroyed by Blight before I can sac it?
It will be long gone before the Balance resolves and counts the lands. (If Balance were an instant or were granted flash somehow, you would be able to cast it in response to the Blight trigger.)
I'm not sure why you would consider that necessary. Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that the opponent controlled 3 lands and you controlled 6, one of which had Blight on it. If you tap the Blighted land to cast Balance, the Blight trigger will destroy that land, taking you down to 5. Then when Balance resolves, you control 2 more lands than your opponent, so you sacrifice 2 of those remaining 5, taking you down to 3. If you were able to defer the Blight trigger, you would be sacrificing 3 of your 6 lands, still taking you down to 3.
The land gets destroyed by Blight before Balance can resolve.
However, Balance only counts the number of lands each player controls when it resolves. So it can't see the land Blight destroyed, and in any scenario you have to sacrifice ones less land than you would if the land hadn't be destroyed by Blight anyway.
Thank you both for your answers.
It's just that I was watching an old school game on youtube and it made me wonder if you could do that (sac the land with blight)
In any case the players had it wrong too because they counted the land with blight whereas it should have been destroyed beforehand.
-around 10:45: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7WoJay5JVc
In any case the players had it wrong too because they counted the land with blight whereas it should have been destroyed beforehand.
Part of their "old school Magic" seems to be ignoring this rule for Blight:
108. Cards
108.1. Use the Oracle card reference when determining a card’s wording. A card’s Oracle text can be found using the Gatherer card database at Gatherer.Wizards.com.
Anyway, Balance's decision between "keep" and "sacrifice" doesn't notice whether something is doomed to go away later in the turn. You probably care, but that card's effect does not.
For another example that works with current Oracle text, suppose you also have more creatures, one of which just attacked with Berserk. When you choose which creatures to keep (matching your opponent's current quantity), nothing suggests that you would need to keep that doomed creature.
I tap a land which has Blight to cast a Balance. Can I sacrifice the land which has Blight or is it destroyed by Blight before I can sac it?
Using card tags is mandatory in the Magic Rulings forum. Please check your private messages to learn how to use them. I've added them for this post.
-MadMage
[c]Balance[/c] -> Balance
It will be long gone before the Balance resolves and counts the lands. (If Balance were an instant or were granted flash somehow, you would be able to cast it in response to the Blight trigger.)
I'm not sure why you would consider that necessary. Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that the opponent controlled 3 lands and you controlled 6, one of which had Blight on it. If you tap the Blighted land to cast Balance, the Blight trigger will destroy that land, taking you down to 5. Then when Balance resolves, you control 2 more lands than your opponent, so you sacrifice 2 of those remaining 5, taking you down to 3. If you were able to defer the Blight trigger, you would be sacrificing 3 of your 6 lands, still taking you down to 3.
The land gets destroyed by Blight before Balance can resolve.
However, Balance only counts the number of lands each player controls when it resolves. So it can't see the land Blight destroyed, and in any scenario you have to sacrifice ones less land than you would if the land hadn't be destroyed by Blight anyway.
It's just that I was watching an old school game on youtube and it made me wonder if you could do that (sac the land with blight)
In any case the players had it wrong too because they counted the land with blight whereas it should have been destroyed beforehand.
-around 10:45: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7WoJay5JVc
Part of their "old school Magic" seems to be ignoring this rule for Blight:
Anyway, Balance's decision between "keep" and "sacrifice" doesn't notice whether something is doomed to go away later in the turn. You probably care, but that card's effect does not.
For another example that works with current Oracle text, suppose you also have more creatures, one of which just attacked with Berserk. When you choose which creatures to keep (matching your opponent's current quantity), nothing suggests that you would need to keep that doomed creature.