2019 Holiday Exchange!
A New and Exciting Beginning
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Can a 1/1 effectively block multiple creatures
    Yes, absolutely, provided of course the 3/3 and the 4/4 don't have trample or anything else special about assigning combat damage. Thanks to Brave the Sands, your 1/1 can block both. Both will be blocked creatures, and blocked creatures can't assign combat damage to the defending player without having trample or some other ability. They will have to assign all their damage to the blocker, no matter how small it is.

    To note, even if the 1/1 is removed somehow during the declare blockers step, after blocking but before combat damage, the attacking creatures still remain blocked until end of combat, and they still can't assign combat damage to the player or planeswalker they're attacking. If there is no blocker left come the combat damage step, they just don't deal combat damage at all.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Idol of Endurance and Bestow
    No, you cannot. Bestow is an alternative casting cost, and so is the "without paying its mana cost" from the Idol's effect. You can only apply the latter to cast the Siren from exile here, so it can only be cast as the default creature version.

    118.9. Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell's text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell's mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, "You may [action] rather than pay [this object's] mana cost," or "You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost." Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.

    118.9a. Only one alternative cost can be applied to any one spell as it's being cast. The controller of the spell announces their intentions to pay that cost as described in rule 601.2b.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Gyruda and Bruvac question
    Yes, you'll be able to pick a creature from the 8, since Bruvac's ability is a replacement effect that modifies Gyruda's effect. The 8 cards will be "those cards", those cards that Gyruda made them mill.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Bloodspore Thrinax and Sek'kuar
    If i have Sek'kuar, deathkeeper and 3 creatures on the board and i play bloodspore thrinax. devouring the 3 creatures, will the 3 graveborn tokens that i make with Sek'kuar enter with 3 +1/+1 counters?
    Yes, they will. The Thrinax is on the battlefield when Sek'Kuar's ability resolves and creates the tokens. You devour as the Thrinax enters the battlefield, which triggers Sek'kuar. Technically, Sek'kuar triggers before the Thrinax is on the battlefield, but the triggers can't even go on the stack until the Thrinax (or whatever effect is putting it on the battlefield if it wasn't cast) has finished resolving. So the Thrinax has been there for a while when the tokens are created (provided it wasn't removed, which an opponent could do in response to Sek'kuar's triggers).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Flip card question
    Quote from Jsun »
    If my opponent has no cards in hand and I cast Nezumi Shortfang, does Nezumi automatically flip or do I have to pay to make Nezumi flip?
    The flip is not a separate trigger, it is part of the effect of the activated ability. So you do have to pay and activate it. You don't need them to have a card in hand to do so; if they don't, the discard part won't do anything, but the Shortfang will flip.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Mutate and Gift of Doom
    Ok, phew, so I had actually answered correctly, albeit kind of on instinct. Thank you.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Mutate and Gift of Doom
    I think I have answered someone wrong about this on the IRC judge chat today. If you mutate onto a face-down creature with Morph and put the new creature (the card with mutate, e.g. Otrimi, the Ever-Playful) on top, making the merged permanent a face-up one, you end up changing the status of the face-down card to face-up, so the card is actually now face-up as part of the merged permanent, and so has its face-up abilities, right? But because of this rule:
    721.2e. If a merged permanent contains face-up and face-down components, the permanent's status is determined by its topmost component. If a face-down permanent becomes a face-up permanent as a result of an object merging with it, other effects don't count it as being turned face up.
    ... abilities that care about it turning face-up don't work, with the logic that the merged permanent didn't get turned face-up because its topmost card always was face-up. With Gift of Doom, the result would be that it would be face-up as a part of the merged permanent, but not have been considered to be turned face-up, so its replacement effect wouldn't happen, it would stay in the pile and it would have, despite its face-up text being part of the pile, no effect at all because the merged permanent is not enchanting anything. Correct?
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Are counters power?
    Quote from dbengio »
    If Dark Impostor has 2 counters on it and the opponent casts Giant Killer does it kill it because it has power 4 or it doesn't because it has power 2 and 2 counters on it?
    In your example, with two +1/+1 counters, the creature's power is 4, and that's what Chop Down sees. Anything that looks at a creature's power looks at its power as modified by counters and by effects, unless it speaks about base power. Same for toughness.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Deathtouch
    Quote from dbengio »
    Does deathtouch kill plans walkers?
    No. Deathtouch only affects creatures.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Help with synod sanctum.
    Quote from Jeff CH »
    Synod Sanctum basic question...
    When this card says: remove target permament YOU CONTROL from the game. Do i control a permanent if its in my hand, in play or in my graveyard?
    Hi, welcome to the site! Just a small thing to note for future questions: we'd ask you to create a new thread rather than reviving an old one that happens to be about the same card you wanna ask about. This helps keep threads shorter and to the point, and it keeps them in their proper timeframe. With your question answered above, I'm going to lock this so it doesn't become a place for future unrelated questions about Synod Sanctum. Thank you for your attention!! Lock
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on theatre of horrors + adventure
    You can cast Swift End, the Adventure instant part, in this case. Adventure doesn't only work from the hand. If what allows you to cast the card from an unusual zone has no special provisions on casting it as an instant spell, you can. If it resolves, it will end up exiled with you being able to cast Murderous Rider from there, just as if you cast it from your hand.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Copying a spell that is a permanent - potential card phrasing
    Moved to custom card rulings.

    As for your hypothetical wording, it feels very close to how this effet would be worded, I think; it might be possible for this to work without too much stuff added to the comprehensive rules, BUT I still think it would require some. Though I can't pinpoint them all, I believe the effect has rules issues linked to it, or it would probably already have been done. You're creating a token permanent that's a copy of a permanent spell. Permanent spells are not normally copiable, and they have certain particularities that may not translate too well to being copied onto a permanent. The issue that comes first to my mind is a permanent with an X in its mana cost. That X is defined when the card is a spell on the stack, but not anywhere else, it's treated as 0. How would that be translated when the spell's characteristics are copied into the token? It would probably end up as 0 as is usual for a permanent, but that would need a rules clarification, I think. I'm pretty sure there are bigger issues too, that don't come to my mind right now.
    Posted in: Custom Card Rulings
  • posted a message on Multiple triggers and priority
    Quote from Tommyygguunn »
    Then with Kokushos ability I’d lose 5 but then gain 10 from my 2 other opponents losing 5 life each due to his trigger?
    Yes. You lose 5 life at the same time as the other opponents of Kokusho's controller, then your Exquisite Blood triggers from them losing life, so you'd gain 10 more life.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Multiple triggers and priority
    I tried to edit your post to have the tags for "Chandra's Inferno" work (don't worry, not just anyone can go and edit your posts, that's because I'm a moderator of this forum), but no card of that name exists. My best guess would be Chandra's Ignition targeting a creature of theirs with 8 power?

    You would survive in the situation described if that's the card, or something else that damages opponents of yours and Kokusho at the same time. Creatures, and opponents of Player A take 8 damage, which causes those players to lose 8 life each and Kokusho to be destroyed. Then Kokusho's trigger and Exquisite Blood's triggers go on the stack, and as you stated, Exquisite Blood's triggers go on the stack last and resolve first, so you'd gain 16 life before Kokusho's ability makes you lose 5 life.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Walking Desecration vs Silent Arbiter and 2 other creatures.
    Quote from Squirrel455 »
    Can I use walking desecration to have a creature with shroud attack? Does this ability count as an area effect?
    Hi, welcome to MTGSalvation! We're always happy to answer your rules questions, but in the future, please post them in a new thread rather than reviving an old one that happens to mention the card you want to ask about. This helps keep threads shorter and in their proper timeframe, and it makes individual questions more easily searchable. With Argus Panoptes having answered you comprehensively above, I'm going to lock this. Lock
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.