Maro made several posts about an upcoming removal of the "Planeswalker damage redirection rule", along with a large amount of errata to apparently support this change. Since it is unlikely they would make a rules change like this in the second set of Ixalan block, the most likely place to see the update is around Core 2019 next summer.
autumnthunder17 asked: About the possible upcoming change to the planeswalker redirection rule, why now?
If we think a change is warranted sooner is better than later.
theatremamadionysus asked: Wait, so with the update, future bolts will deal three damage to target, "Creature, player, or planeswalker"?
Yes.
mrmoustachemm asked: Why am I finding out about the planeswalker redirection rule change here and not on the official site? Something this huge should have been announced in an article on your website.
It hasn’t actually happened yet. It got “leaked” ahead of time because Magic The Gathering Arena cards had the new template.When the rule is actually changing, we will have a full article detailing everything.
theeverlastingdave asked: Will cards like Earthquake, Hurricane, and Flame Rift be errata'd to include planeswalkers? Will they play the same as before?
The change is coming. When we roll it out, we’ll put out an article detailing all the changes and talk about how old cards are affected and the philosophy behind how we decided how old cards work.
As I have nothing to do with that and don’t know any specifics, I’m going to stop answering these questions for now.
EDIT: Added Aaron Forsythe tweet regarding change as well.
This seems heavily isolated, especially what Forsythe said.
In this vein, is "any target" something that will only appear on damage spells? Will there be a kill spell that says "Destroy any target" but will only be able to destroy creatures or planeswalkers?
Having verbiage that affects only one sliver of cards (those that deal damage) seems incredibly wasteful. One of the great things about Magic "syntax" is that it all makes sense, and is pretty much consistent in all cases. This would be a very silly wordage change. Would have liked to see Wizards be more thoughtful in how they finally fix Planeswalker redirection.
Well this is intriguing. As the Planeswalker redirection has been one of the stranger rules to have to explain to new players. Never been that difficult to explain mind you, just slightly un-intuitive.
I'm interested to see how they go about actually implementing this change. Especially interested to see how they change some of the older cards, like Flames of the Firebrand and Arc Lightning, since currently you have to choose, hit the player or their planeswalker. But depending on the wording they give these cards, you could potentially kill a planeswalker with 1 or 2 loyalty counters on it and ping/shock your opponent too. Which would be quite useful.
But as this isn't the sort of rules change they would jump to, I'm sure they have taken the time to think things through and come up with something eloquent. At least that is my hope.
It's funny how "3 damage to any target" brings Lightning Bolt pretty close to how it was printed before 4th edition, way back when it said "3 damage to one target".
It's funny how "3 damage to any target" brings Lightning Bolt pretty close to how it was printed before 4th edition, way back when it said "3 damage to one target".
Hahah, this made me lol for real. The game is being reverted back to 1993, pretty soon we will have "destroy target creature without possibility of regeneration"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"People are the worst. The worst thing about music is that people play it." - Mike Patton
Ok, so I'm going to base this fear on that captured twitter message from Forsythe, but if we're going to errata damage spells to be "any target" but it doesn't include land - does that mean that Creeping Tar Pit can only be stopped with land destruction?
I think the change is necessary as things like Leyline of Sanctity currently protects Planeswalkers as well as the player, but it seems like turning damage spells into "nonland target" would cause a whole new box of problems to be opened.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern! Dredge RBG
Modern! Burn (RW, RWG, RBG , RB ... what can I say, I like variety in my BBQ )
Legacy! Burn RW
EDH! Uril the Miststalker RWG
I don't understand this. I'm probably missing something.
If they're going to get rid of the PW redirection rule, why don't they just get rid of it? Why do they need to errata anything?
Or are they getting rid of the rule and wanting to errata every card that could previously redirect damage to a PW, so that it can still damage a PW? If so, why not just keep the rule since it's the same end result?
Ok, so I'm going to base this fear on that captured twitter message from Forsythe, but if we're going to errata damage spells to be "any target" but it doesn't include land - does that mean that Creeping Tar Pit can only be stopped with land destruction?
This fear is completely unfounded.
As stated in Aaron Forsythe's later tweet. "Any target" will mean "creature, player or planeswalker". It does not mean the target has to be a "non-land".
When Creeping Tar Pit (or any other man-land) is animated, then it becomes a CREATURE that is also a land. So will be a valid target, just like always.
Roflmao. Maro said a rules change is better sooner than later. Took them
10 years late to consider this. When they should have done this right from the get go when they introduced the new card type.
I had similar idea when making custom cards. I created a new category of objects called "damageable". Which includes player, creatures, and planeswalkers. And possibly any new card type; like I had the idea of terrains that could receive damage. Templating is simply "this deals x damage to target damageable." The rules would have explicit list of card types and objects (including player) that fall under damageable.
It's funny how "3 damage to any target" brings Lightning Bolt pretty close to how it was printed before 4th edition, way back when it said "3 damage to one target".
And they brought back the "cast" wording a while back, too. Eventually, we'll have interrupts and mono artifacts again.
Because as usual they want something halfway in between. They will want most relevant things that used to be able to hit PWs to still be able to. But that don’t want to change *everything* - that prefer most cards work as printed.
We went through the same thing with ‘tapped artifacts turn off’, with ‘things that worked just like lifelink become lifelink’... with changes to etb triggers that resemble costs. Some got errated. Some didn’t. Some guy errated a second time because the first wave didn’t quite do what they wanted.
We went through the same thing with ‘tapped artifacts turn off’, with ‘things that worked just like lifelink become lifelink’... with changes to etb triggers that resemble costs. Some got errated. Some didn’t. Some guy errated a second time because the first wave didn’t quite do what they wanted.
Please don't bring that bad memory up. I still have nightmares about the B.S. they put Howling Mine through.
Sometimes I wonder if these rule changes aren't a result of some kid annoyed at how he kept losing to Howling or Planeswalkers or whatever getting hired into a rules position at WotC and making the rules update just so he can laugh at the players who made him lose matches ten years ago over said rule.
It's about time they made the rule change, but ten years? Geez, how much playtesting was needed to figure this one?
Ok, so I'm going to base this fear on that captured twitter message from Forsythe, but if we're going to errata damage spells to be "any target" but it doesn't include land - does that mean that Creeping Tar Pit can only be stopped with land destruction?
This fear is completely unfounded.
As stated in Aaron Forsythe's later tweet. "Any target" will mean "creature, player or planeswalker". It does not mean the target has to be a "non-land".
When Creeping Tar Pit (or any other man-land) is animated, then it becomes a CREATURE that is also a land. So will be a valid target, just like always.
Hope that makes sense to you a little bit better.
Oh, there it is. I misread that the prior person was talking about bolting a manland before it was animated, and Forsythe saying "you can't bolt a land" context is important.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern! Dredge RBG
Modern! Burn (RW, RWG, RBG , RB ... what can I say, I like variety in my BBQ )
Legacy! Burn RW
EDH! Uril the Miststalker RWG
I wish they'd errata cards targeting players to target PW instead and have players be indestructible PW. (Sure, make my Chandra discard two cards if you want to...)
PS: also, errata creature cards bck to summon. Currently, new players are confused that creatures are spells.
Roflmao. Maro said a rules change is better sooner than later. Took them
10 years late to consider this. When they should have done this right from the get go when they introduced the new card type.
I agree, and for that reason I find this really interesting. If they're making the change now I'm willing to bet that it's in preparation for something down the road. Perhaps we're going to get a "Planeswalker matters" block where redirection wouldn't be worth it? Alternatively, they may just be reacting to rules confusion coming from new players who are being introduced via the PW decks.
thx it is just a templete change, but this will make walkers way more powerfull, no more killing a planeswalker from a "deal 3 damage to each creature and player" effect
thx it is just a templete change, but this will make walkers way more powerfull, no more killing a planeswalker from a "deal 3 damage to each creature and player" effect
Unless the spell is errataed to say 3 dmg to each target which will include players, creatures and planeswalkers
W may only be paid with white mana. U may only be paid with blue mana. B may only be paid with black mana. R may only be paid with red mana. G may only be paid with green mana. C may only be paid with colorless mana. 1 may be paid with white, blue, black, red, green, or clolorless mana.
thx it is just a templete change, but this will make walkers way more powerfull, no more killing a planeswalker from a "deal 3 damage to each creature and player" effect
Unless the spell is errataed to say 3 dmg to each target which will include players, creatures and planeswalkers
Which will make it unfortunate that this would take down yourn own planeswalkers now, too.
One nice thing about the old rule was that nobody could redirect your 'friendly fire' to your planeswalkers. Your Hurricane/Earthquake/Pestilence/Pyrohemia/Crypt Rats could have its player-damage redirected to opponents' planeswalkers but your planeswalkers were immune. It seems likely that whatever changes they make will override the previous state of your own PWs being safe from your own sources of damage.
Funny how they try to make PW a target like a creature/player (text wise) while making them follow legendary rule instead of PW uniqueness. Not the first time they try to simplify the game, but it kinda lower the sovereignty of PWs, the supposed baddest arse in multiverse.
Or is my suspicion true that non-legendary PW is coming in Dominaria expansion? Frack, I hope not.
Or is my suspicion true that non-legendary PW is coming in Dominaria expansion? Frack, I hope not.
Maro was specifically asked "Now that we will have legendary planeswalkers, I'm sure the question everybody is asking is "will we also have non-legendary planeswalkers?"". His answer was "No. All planeswalkers will be legendary." (later clarified in the face of Jace's selfcopies, "Planeswalker cards. Sorry.")
Well, this change is inevitable, and I wish they did this when they introduced Planeswalkers to begin with.
Targeted effects like Lightning Bolt makes sense, but the errata is annoying as hell (which is probably why they tried to avoid it in the first place!)
For Earthquake effects, we'll wait and see the ruling and justification.
EDIT: Added Aaron Forsythe tweet regarding change as well.
In this vein, is "any target" something that will only appear on damage spells? Will there be a kill spell that says "Destroy any target" but will only be able to destroy creatures or planeswalkers?
Having verbiage that affects only one sliver of cards (those that deal damage) seems incredibly wasteful. One of the great things about Magic "syntax" is that it all makes sense, and is pretty much consistent in all cases. This would be a very silly wordage change. Would have liked to see Wizards be more thoughtful in how they finally fix Planeswalker redirection.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
I'm interested to see how they go about actually implementing this change. Especially interested to see how they change some of the older cards, like Flames of the Firebrand and Arc Lightning, since currently you have to choose, hit the player or their planeswalker. But depending on the wording they give these cards, you could potentially kill a planeswalker with 1 or 2 loyalty counters on it and ping/shock your opponent too. Which would be quite useful.
But as this isn't the sort of rules change they would jump to, I'm sure they have taken the time to think things through and come up with something eloquent. At least that is my hope.
Hahah, this made me lol for real. The game is being reverted back to 1993, pretty soon we will have "destroy target creature without possibility of regeneration"
I think the change is necessary as things like Leyline of Sanctity currently protects Planeswalkers as well as the player, but it seems like turning damage spells into "nonland target" would cause a whole new box of problems to be opened.
Modern! Burn (RW, RWG, RBG , RB ... what can I say, I like variety in my BBQ )
Legacy! Burn RW
EDH! Uril the Miststalker RWG
If they're going to get rid of the PW redirection rule, why don't they just get rid of it? Why do they need to errata anything?
Or are they getting rid of the rule and wanting to errata every card that could previously redirect damage to a PW, so that it can still damage a PW? If so, why not just keep the rule since it's the same end result?
Can someone explain this better?
This fear is completely unfounded.
As stated in Aaron Forsythe's later tweet. "Any target" will mean "creature, player or planeswalker". It does not mean the target has to be a "non-land".
When Creeping Tar Pit (or any other man-land) is animated, then it becomes a CREATURE that is also a land. So will be a valid target, just like always.
Hope that makes sense to you a little bit better.
10 years late to consider this. When they should have done this right from the get go when they introduced the new card type.
I had similar idea when making custom cards. I created a new category of objects called "damageable". Which includes player, creatures, and planeswalkers. And possibly any new card type; like I had the idea of terrains that could receive damage. Templating is simply "this deals x damage to target damageable." The rules would have explicit list of card types and objects (including player) that fall under damageable.
........................
We went through the same thing with ‘tapped artifacts turn off’, with ‘things that worked just like lifelink become lifelink’... with changes to etb triggers that resemble costs. Some got errated. Some didn’t. Some guy errated a second time because the first wave didn’t quite do what they wanted.
Please don't bring that bad memory up. I still have nightmares about the B.S. they put Howling Mine through.
Sometimes I wonder if these rule changes aren't a result of some kid annoyed at how he kept losing to Howling or Planeswalkers or whatever getting hired into a rules position at WotC and making the rules update just so he can laugh at the players who made him lose matches ten years ago over said rule.
It's about time they made the rule change, but ten years? Geez, how much playtesting was needed to figure this one?
Oh, there it is. I misread that the prior person was talking about bolting a manland before it was animated, and Forsythe saying "you can't bolt a land" context is important.
Modern! Burn (RW, RWG, RBG , RB ... what can I say, I like variety in my BBQ )
Legacy! Burn RW
EDH! Uril the Miststalker RWG
PS: also, errata creature cards bck to summon. Currently, new players are confused that creatures are spells.
I agree, and for that reason I find this really interesting. If they're making the change now I'm willing to bet that it's in preparation for something down the road. Perhaps we're going to get a "Planeswalker matters" block where redirection wouldn't be worth it? Alternatively, they may just be reacting to rules confusion coming from new players who are being introduced via the PW decks.
R Norin the Wary: I've Got a Bad Feeling About This
UG Thrasios & Kydele: Knowledge is Power
RG Borborygmos Enraged: The Breaking of the World
BG The Gitrog Monster: All Glory to the Hypnotoad
WUR Zedruu the Greathearted: Endless Possibilities, One Outcome
WBG Karador, Ghost Chieftain: What's Dead May Never Die
Turn your junk into something great with PucaTrade!
Unless the spell is errataed to say 3 dmg to each target which will include players, creatures and planeswalkers
Which will make it unfortunate that this would take down yourn own planeswalkers now, too.
One nice thing about the old rule was that nobody could redirect your 'friendly fire' to your planeswalkers. Your Hurricane/Earthquake/Pestilence/Pyrohemia/Crypt Rats could have its player-damage redirected to opponents' planeswalkers but your planeswalkers were immune. It seems likely that whatever changes they make will override the previous state of your own PWs being safe from your own sources of damage.
Or is my suspicion true that non-legendary PW is coming in Dominaria expansion? Frack, I hope not.
Shu Yun, the Silent Tempest WUR Voltron Control
Temmet, Vizier of Naktamun WU Unblockable Mirror Trickery
Ra's al Ghul (Sidar Kondo) and Face-Down Ninjas
Brudiclad, Token Engineer
Vaevictis (VV2) the Dire Lantern
Rona, Disciple of Gix
Tiana the Auror
Hallar
Ulrich the Politician
Zur the Rebel
Scorpion, Locust, Scarab, Egyptian Gods
O-Kagachi, Mathas, Mairsil
"Non-Tribal" Tribal Generals, Eggs
Maro was specifically asked "Now that we will have legendary planeswalkers, I'm sure the question everybody is asking is "will we also have non-legendary planeswalkers?"". His answer was "No. All planeswalkers will be legendary." (later clarified in the face of Jace's selfcopies, "Planeswalker cards. Sorry.")
Targeted effects like Lightning Bolt makes sense, but the errata is annoying as hell (which is probably why they tried to avoid it in the first place!)
For Earthquake effects, we'll wait and see the ruling and justification.