Magic Market Index for Nov 2nd, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for October 26th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for October 12th, 2018
  • posted a message on 5/5 Double strike vs two1/1 deathtouch creatures
    Quote from Crash525 »

    Does the first strike damage deal only first strike damage to one of the 1/1 or does it deal first strike damage to each 1/1 because it has 5 damage to distribute? I thought first strike damage was dealt to only one creature if there were multiple blockers because its the first damage that is done. Then it moves to the normal damage.


    Remember that all first strike and double strike do is—
    • give a combat phase two combat damage steps rather than one (C.R. 702.4b, 702.7b), and
    • restrict which creatures assign combat damage during those steps (C.R. 702.4b, 702.7b).
    Neither first strike nor double strike change how a creature assigns combat damage. (There is no such thing as "first strike damage".) For instance, if Goring Ceratops attacks and is blocked by two Hired Poisoners (and no other attackers and blockers are in the scenario), then due to double strike only Goring Ceratops can assign combat damage in the first combat damage step (C.R. 702.4b). It can assign 1 combat damage to the first Hired Poisoner and 4 combat damage to the other (among certain other possibilities) (C.R. 510.1a, 510.1c). If it does so, both Hired Poisoners will be dealt lethal damage and destroyed (C.R. 510.2, 510.4, 116.5, 704.5f), but Goring Ceratops will remain blocked (C.R. 509.1h), and then, in the second combat damage step, with Goring Ceratops blocked with no creatures blocking it, Goring Ceratops won't assign (and thus deal) combat damage (C.R. 510.1c, 510.2), and the two Hired Poisoners won't be there to assign combat damage (under C.R. 510.1d; review C.R. 702.4b) (so whether they have deathtouch is irrelevant). See also this thread and this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Doublestrike and spells.
    Note that players get priority to cast spells (such as Go for the Throat) after creatures, if any, assign and deal combat damage during any combat damage step (whether a normal one or one created because of double strike or otherwise) (C.R. 510.3, 702.4b, 116.1a). All double strike does is give a combat phase two combat damage steps rather than one (and restrict which creatures assign combat damage during those steps) (C.R. 702.4b). Double strike doesn't mean—
    • that a creature with that ability assigns twice its power in combat damage (see also this thread), or
    • that that creature assigns and deals combat damage, then assigns and deals combat damage again, with nothing in between.

    See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Can I put a land that isn't in my Commander's Color Identity in my deck?
    A land card, even one without a basic land type, is not exempt from the rule that it can't be included in a Commander deck if its mana cost or "rules text" contains a mana symbol of a color outside the commander's color identity (C.R. 903.5c, 207.1, 903.4; see also C.R. 903.5d).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Copying a Copy.. but worse?
    Note that Cryptoplasm still says "...you may have Cryptoplasm become a copy .... If you do, Cryptoplasm gains this ability." However, due to the Core Set 2019 update, the nature of that effect has become unclear — that is, whether the effect "If you do, Cryptoplasm gains this ability" has now become a layer 6 effect, not a layer 1 copy effect, so that the ability can't be copied by other copy effects such as found in Progenitor Mimic (C.R. 613.1f, 613.1a, 706.2).

    Before Core Set 2019, effects that gave a creature an ability upon copying something (within the meaning of C.R. 706.9a) used the formulation "becomes a copy ... and gains...", "becomes a copy, except it gains...", and "may have [this creature] become a copy ... If you do, [this creature] gains...". Now, the first two would both be worded "becomes a copy ..., except it has..." (compare Dimir Doppelganger's text as printed in Ravnica: City of Guilds with its Oracle text.) The last was changed to "may have [this creature] become a copy ... except ... it has ..." in the case of Vesuvan Doppelganger, but was somehow retained in the case of Cryptoplasm (compare with Artisan of Forms).

    A curious case is found in Heat Shimmer, whose text as printed in Lorwyn says "... a token ... that's a copy of target creature. It has [two abilities]", but whose Oracle text now says "...a token that's a copy of target creature, except it has [two abilities]". The former wording could be interpreted to include an effect that adds abilities within the scope of layer 6, rather than layer 1 (C.R. 613.1f, 613.1a; compare Heat Shimmer with Mimic Vat).

    See also this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Wickerbough Elder with no targets
    Wickerbough Elder's second ability requires you to target an "artifact or enchantment" as you activate it — you can't activate that ability if you can't do so (C.R. 601.2c, 601.2, 114.1c; compare Wickerbough Elder with Carnifex Demon).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Iona, Shield of Emeria and Eight 1/2 Tails
    Iona's last ability only keeps "your opponents" from casting spells with the chosen color (the ability affects the process of casting spells [C.R. 601.3, 601.2e]); it doesn't counter any spell if it wasn't that color before it was cast and becomes that color afterward.

    In general, an effect that would keep players from casting spells (either generally or of certain kinds) don't affect spells that were already cast (this applies to Iona as much as it does to Dragonlord Dromoka or Silence — see also this thread and this thread.)
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Naban, Dean of Iteration combined with Panharmonicon
    Quote from void_nothing »
    Nope. Those are also replacement effects, which, as we just covered, are not triggered abilities.
    The effects found in Naban and Panharmonicon are not replacement effects; rather they express continuous effects that change the rules of the game (C.R. 101.1, 611.1; they do so by modifying C.R. 603.2c in part). Note that the abilities of neither permanent contain "instead" (C.R. 614.1a) or have a form given in C.R. 614.1b-e. On the other hand, Academy Elite's first ability does express a replacement effect, since it does have a form specified for such effects, namely "[This permanent] enters the battlefield with..." (C.R. 614.1c).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Declare dominance on deathtouch with first strike?
    Deathtouch makes any nonzero amount of combat damage assigned to a creature lethal damage for the purposes of combat damage assignment rules (C.R. 702.2c) — assigning zero damage doesn't make it lethal this way. Therefore, deathtouch doesn't necessarily mean that all creatures blocking a creature with deathtouch are destroyed. Having first strike doesn't change any of this.

    Thus, in general, a creature with deathtouch can't assign more combat damage than its power (and so can't assign combat damage to more blocking creatures than its power), regardless of whether it has first strike (C.R. 510.1a, 510.1c, 702.2c). Remember that all first strike does is give a combat phase two combat damage steps rather than one, and restrict which creatures can assign combat damage in those steps (C.R. 702.7b).

    EDIT: Deleted a sentence for correctness, after comment 5 was posted.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Child of Alara, Gift of Immortality and Progenitor Mimic
    If the Child of Alara your opponent controls dies, both its triggered ability and that of Gift of Immortality will trigger (C.R. 603.2, 603.3).

    If your opponent orders those abilities by placing the Gift of Immortality ability first (C.R. 603.3b, 112.8), and the Child of Alara ability then resolves, all nonland permanents will be destroyed (including the Child of Alara you control). This will in turn make Progenitor-Mimic-turned-Child-of-Alara's triggered ability trigger (which will go on the stack above the Gift of Immortality ability -- which hasn't resolved yet [review C.R. 116.4]). Then, once that ability resolves, again all nonland permanents will be destroyed. Note that all this doesn't affect the Gift of Immortality ability, which can still get to resolve.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Firesong & Sunspeaker and Justice Strike
    Assuming you control Firesong and Sunspeaker and Justice Strike:

    Justice Strike is a red instant spell, so it has lifelink thanks to Firesong and Sunspeaker's first ability.

    Justice Strike is also a white instant spell, so if that spell, due to the damage Firesong and Sunspeaker deals this way, causes you to gain life (because it happens while Justice Strike is resolving), Firesong and Sunspeaker's second ability will trigger (C.R. 603.2, 119.3f; see also this thread).

    EDIT (correction after comment 5 was posted): Note, however, that it's not Justice Strike that is dealing damage when it resolves.

    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Casting an instant onto a newly empty stack
    The active player gets priority after every spell or ability on the stack resolves (C.R. 116.3b); it doesn't matter whether the stack becomes empty this way. As a consequence—
    • if the stack becomes empty, the game doesn't automatically move on to the next part of the turn (C.R. 500.2),
    • the stack itself doesn't resolve, but rather individual spells and abilities do, with priority windows in between (C.R. 116.4, 116.3b), and
    • because the active player gets priority, that player can choose whether to cast a spell before other players do, but all other players, including all opponents, will eventually get priority before the game moves to the next part of the turn or the topmost object on the stack resolves, as the case may be (C.R. 116.3d, 116.4, 116.1a).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Tomorrow, Azami's Familiar and Alhammarret's Archive
    Both Tomorrow and Alhammarret's Archive include replacement effects (C.R. 614.1a). If you control both permanents and would draw a card (except for the first card you would draw in your draw step), you, as the player would would draw that card, choose which of those effects applies (C.R. 616.1, 109.5).

    If you choose Tomorrow's effect, the card draw is replaced with something that doesn't involve drawing a card, so the Alhammarret's Archive effect no longer applies (C.R. 616.1; see also C.R. 616.2).

    If you choose Alhammarret's Archive's effect, you would draw two cards instead of one, so that the Tomorrow effect applies twice (once for each card that would be drawn this way), and one after the other (C.R. 616.1, 616.2, 120.2).

    See also this thread.

    EDIT: Clarification after comment 4 was posted.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Can my opponent cast a spell in response to me activating sundial?
    A player can cast spells in response to Sundial of the Infinite's ability as they can to any other activated ability on the stack (C.R. 116.7, 116.1a). And if a player does, that spell will get to resolve first (C.R. 116.7). Like any other activated ability, Sundial of the Infinite's ability has no effect unless and until it resolves (C.R. 608.2c). And that ability can resolve only if all players pass in a row while that ability is on top of the stack (C.R. 116.4, 608.2c). See also this thread and this thread.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Apprentice Necromancer and Xantcha, Sleeper Agent interaction?
    If you bring a creature card to the battlefield with Apprentice Necromancer, you can sacrifice the resulting creature only if you control the creature at the time you would sacrifice it this way (C.R. 701.16a).
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Callous Giant+Pariah
    Since Punish the Enemy uses the word "deals" only once, it deals damage at the same time to a creature and to a player (assuming both are legal targets) (under C.R. 608.2c, you "apply the rules of English to the text" of a spell when following its instructions). But if the damage to the player is dealt instead to the creature, that damage will likewise be dealt simultaneously with any other damage (see also this thread and this thread), so that if that creature is Callous Giant in this scenario, if the Pariah effect is chosen to apply first (C.R. 616.1; see also comment 3), Callous Giant would see a single source (Punish the Enemy) dealing 6 damage (not just 3) to Callous Giant (C.R. 700.1), so that the damage isn't prevented due to its ability. Unlike Magma Burst, the damage is dealt simultaneously, not at two different occasions (C.R. 608.2c).

    EDIT: Edited after comment 3 was posted.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.