2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on Protection from color and equipped auras
    In general, if a permanent enchanted by an Aura gains protection from a quality shared by that Aura, the Aura will go to the graveyard as a state-based action for being attached to a permanent it can't enchant (C.R. 704.5m, 702.16d). (One exception is if an Aura's effect grants protection and says that the effect "doesn't remove" that Aura [C.R. 702.16n]; an example is White Ward.)

    Also, in general, if a creature to which an Equipment is attached gains protection from a quality shared by that Equipment, the Equipment will be unattached from that creature as a state-based action but remain on the battlefield (C.R. 704.5n, 702.16d).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on berserk vs regeneration
    The ability "At the beginning of the next end step, destroy that creature if it attacked this turn" expresses a triggered ability, more specifically a delayed triggered ability (C.R. 603.1, 603.7). Like most other triggered abilities, players get priority to activate abilities like River Boa's activated ability in response to it (that is, before it resolves) (C.R. 117.7, 117.1b).

    if I play 2 berserks on the boa, can I regenerate it twice? do I need to?


    In general, yes and yes.

    If two different Berserk spells resolve for the same creature while it's attacking, two different abilities of the form "At the beginning of the next end step, destroy that creature if it attacked this turn" will trigger as the same "next end step" begins, and will each try to destroy that creature at separate moments if that creature "attacked this turn". However, in general, regenerating a creature replaces what happens only "the next time [that creature] would be destroyed this turn" (C.R. 701.15a), so that if something would destroy that creature, regeneration kicks in and is "used up", so that to keep the creature from being destroyed, there must be some other way to achieve that, such as another regeneration effect on the creature (C.R. 701.15a). See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Damage Assignment Order / Damage Assignment question: Is it possible to distribute non-lethal damage to all blocking creatures?
    Under C.R. 510.1c, in general, a blocked creature "can't assign combat damage to a creature that's blocking it unless, when combat damage assignments are complete, each creature that precedes that blocking creature in its order is assigned lethal damage" (a similar rule applies to blocking creatures under C.R. 510.1d).

    Thus, in this scenario in general—
    • assigning combat damage to the 2/2 or 3/3 creature is not allowed if the 4/4 creature is not assigned lethal damage, and
    • assigning combat damage to the 3/3 creature is not allowed if the 4/4 and 2/2 creatures are not both assigned lethal damage.

    EDIT: Edited after comment 8 was posted, to add "in general".
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Jacob Hauken issue
    The transforming double-faced card Jacob Hauken, Inspector has a pair of linked abilities that spans both its faces: the first appears on its front face, the second on its back face (C.R. 607.1b). Where the second ability in the pair says "cards exiled with this permanent", it means only cards in exile that were exiled due to the first ability in the pair (C.R. 607.2a). No other cards are meant, not even cards exiled due to an ability with the same text as either ability in the pair (e.g., a card exiled due to an ability of another permanent named Jacob Hauken, Inspector).

    See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Scoop Stack
    Quote from Oloro4Life »
    Quote from peteroupc »
    In a multiplayer Free-for-All game, if one player leaves the game and two or more players are still in the game, the game will go on with just the remaining players. Notably, if the player who has left the game was the active player, the turn will "continu[e] to its completion without an active player" (C.R. 800.4j).



    So, if they scoop if their main phase, it’ll go through each phase after everyone passes priority…so I could still Swords in their end step (despite no active player)?


    Indeed, the players still in the game still get priority to cast instant spells as appropriate, even during a turn without an active player (C.R. 800.4j, 117.1a).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Scoop Stack
    If a player concedes the game, that player loses the game and thus leaves the game, and the game may or may not end depending on the circumstances (C.R. 104.5, 104.1, 104.2a, 104.2c, 104.4a).

    Usually, if it's a two-player game, the game will end and the other player will win (C.R. 104.2a, 104.1).

    In a multiplayer Free-for-All game, if one player leaves the game and two or more players are still in the game, the game will go on with just the remaining players. Notably, if the player who has left the game was the active player, the turn will "continu[e] to its completion without an active player" (C.R. 800.4j).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Rionya token rulings
    With Rionya, you create the tokens simultaneously, because its ability uses the action verb "create" only once.

    In general, each action verb on a spell or ability indicates a separate action. (See also C.R. 608.2c, 608.2f.) For example, compare Rionya, Fire Dancer with Finale of Glory, in which tokens are created at up to two separate moments.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on yorion + whirlwind denial
    The sentence on Yorion starting with "Return those cards..." expresses a delayed triggered ability that goes on the stack after it triggers (C.R. 603.7), so it can be countered by other spells and abilities, such as Whirlwind Denial.

    On the other hand, no spell or ability can counter a mana ability, as mana abilities don't go on the stack (C.R. 605.3b, 605.4a); this is true regardless of whether that spell or ability has reminder text stating that mana abilities can't be copied or targeted or countered (such as Stifle as printed in Scourge).

    See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Can Stet bypass the legend rule?
    Indeed, in general, a permanent that enters the battlefield as a copy of another object acquires that object's name from the moment it enters, so that the legend rule would apply as necessary before players get priority to activate abilities (C.R. 707.2, 611.3c, 117.5, 704.5j).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Teferi + Knowledge Pool Question
    Indeed, Knowledge Pool's second ability has to resolve for a player to cast a spell with it, but it also has to resolve for that ability to exile the spell that made it trigger (C.R. 603.2). (To be clear, both of Knowledge Pool's abilities are triggered abilities, not activated abilities [C.R. 603.1; compare with C.R. 602.1].)

    Take the following scenario:

    1. Assume it's your main phase, you have priority, you control Knowledge Pool, and an opponent of yours controls Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir or Teferi, Time Raveler.
    2. You cast Divination, putting it on the stack among other things (C.R. 608.2, 117.1a). Knowledge Pool's second ability triggers (C.R. 608.2i, 603.2). (Although the ability triggers, it does nothing yet at this point [C.R. 603.2].) Then you put that ability on the stack (C.R. 603.3).
    3. At this point, both Divination and the Knowledge Pool ability are on the stack, the former below the latter. Before either resolves, players will eventually get priority to cast spells targeting the former (such as Cancel) or spells targeting the latter (such as Stifle) (C.R. 117.3d, 117.1a). Assume, however, that instead all players pass.
    4. Now, the Knowledge Pool ability resolves. Divination is exiled, but because Knowledge Pool is still on the stack, it won't be a time that a player "could [normally] cast a sorcery", so you can't choose to cast any spell from among cards exiled with Knowledge Pool. Thus, all that remains for the Knowledge Pool ability is to leave the stack.

    Now consider an alternative scenario.

    1. Step 1 is the same.
    2. Step 2 is the same.
    3. Now assume that you and other players pass until Teferi's controller gets priority, then Teferi's controller casts Stifle targeting the Knowledge Pool ability.
    4. All players pass, then Stifle resolves and the Knowledge Pool ability is countered.
    5. All players pass, then Divination resolves. You draw two cards, then Divination goes to the graveyard.

    Now consider a third scenario.

    1. Step 1 is the same.
    2. Step 2 is the same.
    3. Now assume that only you and other players pass until Teferi's controller gets priority, then Teferi's controller casts Cancel targeting Divination.
    4. All players pass, then Cancel resolves and Divination is countered.
    5. All players pass, then the Knowledge Pool ability resolves. Since Divination is no longer on the stack, it isn't exiled and the ability does nothing further (C.R. 118.12).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Cathar's Crusade + Oketra's monument trigger question
    If you cast a creature spell, the triggered ability of Oketra's Monument will trigger, go on the stack above that spell and get to resolve before that spell.

    Here is an illustration.

    • You control Cathar's Crusade and Oketra's Monument. You cast Grizzly Bears, a creature spell. This makes the triggered ability of Oketra's Monument trigger. The ability then goes on the stack.
    • All players pass, then that ability resolves. You create a "1/1 white Warrior creature token with vigilance". This makes Cathar's Crusade's ability trigger. The ability then goes on the stack.
    • All players pass, then that ability resolves. You put a +1/+1 counter on the token (and each other creature you control, but note that the Grizzly Bears spell hasn't resolved and entered the battlefield yet).
    • All players pass, then Grizzly Bears resolves and enters the battlefield under your control. This makes Cathar's Crusade's ability trigger. The ability then goes on the stack.
    • All players pass, then that ability resolves. You put a +1/+1 counter on the token and Grizzly Bears (and each other creature you control).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Teferi + Knowledge Pool Question
    You don't "create a new stack" upon casting a spell. Rather, in general there is only one stack (C.R. 400.1), and as part of casting a spell, you put that spell on the stack on top of anything already there (C.R. 405.2, 601.2).

    However, if an opponent of yours controls Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir or Teferi, Time Raveler, you can't cast any spell while Knowledge Pool's second ability is resolving, even if it's your main phase, since that ability would still be on the stack at that time so that, because the stack isn't empty, it won't be a time that any player "could [normally] cast a sorcery" (C.R. 117.4, 608.2c, 307.5, 101.2; see also C.R. 117.1a, 601.3, 608.2g). (Note that the ability leaves the stack only after its instructions are carried out [C.R. 608.2, 608.2c, 608.2m].) See also this thread and this thread. As a result, since you can't cast any spell this way, you can't choose to do so and Knowledge Pool's second ability does nothing further but exile the spell that made the ability trigger (C.R. 608.2d, 609.3).

    Also, note the following:
    • The stack itself doesn't resolve, but rather individual spells and abilities in it do, with priority windows in between (C.R. 117.4, 117.3b).
    • The comprehensive rules never speak of "speed" with respect to sorcery or instant spells.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Gratuitous Violence
    To be clear, the ability in question must (otherwise) have a "creature you control ... deal damage to a permanent or player" for Gratuituous Violence's ability to apply.

    For example, Goblin Tinkerer's ability has a particular artifact, not necessarily Goblin Tinkerer itself, deal damage, and the ability of Kiku, Night's Flower or the last ability of Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar has a creature (controlled by any player) deal damage. In all these cases, a permanent that isn't a "creature you control" dealing damage is outside the scope of Gratuitous Violence's ability.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Another Runed Halo Question
    The release of Innistrad: Crimson Vow changed the rules on token names.

    Now, unless the effect that creates a token specifies a name (or creates a token "that's a copy" of another object [C.R. 707.2]), that token has the same name as its subtypes plus the word "Token" (new C.R. 111.4). For example, tokens created with Splintering Wind are now named "Splinter Token", not just "Splinter" anymore (the latter is the name of a card in the Oracle card reference, but the former is currently not).

    In particular, at the time of this writing, there is no card name in the Oracle card reference with the word "Token".
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Token names
    The release of Innistrad: Crimson Vow changed the rules on token names.

    Now, unless the effect that creates a token specifies a name (or creates a token "that's a copy" of another object [C.R. 707.2]), that token has the same name as its subtypes plus the word "Token" (new C.R. 111.4). For example, tokens created with Splintering Wind are now named "Splinter Token", not just "Splinter" anymore (the latter is the name of a card in the Oracle card reference, but the former is currently not).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.