Illusions of Grandeur

39 posts / 0 new
Last post
If you Donate the card Illusions of Grandeur to an apponent does he lose 20 life when it leaves play or do you?
If you Donate the card Illusions of Grandeur to an apponent does he lose 20 life when it leaves play or do you?



Official rulings:








4/10/2004If a player takes control of this card away from you, you do not lose 20 life because the loss of 20 life is a separate ability. That player is now subject to the loss.



So... When illusions of grandeur enters the battlefield, it creates a triggered ability. When that triggered ability resolves, the controller of that ability gains 20 life.

When illusions of grandeur leaves the battlefield, (for any reason), it creates a triggered ability under the control of the player who controlled Illusions. That player loses 20 life when the triggered ability resolves.

Implications of this:
Your opponent is on 20 life and plays Illusions of grandeur. In response to its "comes into play" triggered ability, you cast Disenchant, targeting it. When your disenchant resolves, it creates the "leaves play" triggered ability. When the leaves play triggered ability resolves, your opponent loses 20 life. State-based actions are checked before any other abilities on the stack resolve - meaning your opponent loses the game before the "gain 20 life" ability on the stack resolves.

You cast Illusions of grandeur and its comes-into-play ability gains you 20 life. You cast Donate, putting Illusions under your opponent's control. You then cast Disenchant, targeting Illusions of grandeur. The "leaves play" triggered ability is triggered under your opponent's control, since he controlled Illusions when it left play - so when the "leaves play" ability resolves, your opponent will lose 20 life.
M:tG Rules Adviser
If you Donate the card Illusions of Grandeur to an apponent does he lose 20 life when it leaves play or do you?



Whoever controls it when it leaves the battlefield will lose the life.  In your example, that is your opponent.

On a MtG card, the word "you" means the controller.
 
wow...
wow...



that particular combo was the basis for a Necropotence-fueled deck back in 2000. If you google "Trix" you can probably find some of the old decklists.
M:tG Rules Adviser
Implications of this:
Your opponent is on 20 life and plays Illusions of grandeur. In response to its "comes into play" triggered ability, you cast Disenchant, targeting it. When your disenchant resolves, it creates the "leaves play" triggered ability. When the leaves play triggered ability resolves, your opponent loses 20 life. State-based actions are checked before any other abilities on the stack resolve - meaning your opponent loses the game before the "gain 20 life" ability on the stack resolves.



This makes sense, even if it is a bit wonky... Guess that's what counterspells are for.
If you Donate the card Illusions of Grandeur to an apponent does he lose 20 life when it leaves play or do you?



Official rulings:








4/10/2004If a player takes control of this card away from you, you do not lose 20 life because the loss of 20 life is a separate ability. That player is now subject to the loss.



So... When illusions of grandeur enters the battlefield, it creates a triggered ability. When that triggered ability resolves, the controller of that ability gains 20 life.

When illusions of grandeur leaves the battlefield, (for any reason), it creates a triggered ability under the control of the player who controlled Illusions. That player loses 20 life when the triggered ability resolves.

Implications of this:
Your opponent is on 20 life and plays Illusions of grandeur. In response to its "comes into play" triggered ability, you cast Disenchant, targeting it. When your disenchant resolves, it creates the "leaves play" triggered ability. When the leaves play triggered ability resolves, your opponent loses 20 life. State-based actions are checked before any other abilities on the stack resolve - meaning your opponent loses the game before the "gain 20 life" ability on the stack resolves.

You cast Illusions of grandeur and its comes-into-play ability gains you 20 life. You cast Donate, putting Illusions under your opponent's control. You then cast Disenchant, targeting Illusions of grandeur. The "leaves play" triggered ability is triggered under your opponent's control, since he controlled Illusions when it left play - so when the "leaves play" ability resolves, your opponent will lose 20 life.




You know, I don't want to sound like a doomsayer, but it's little niggling rules like that that really turn me off of playing magic.  I mean, that doesn't make conceptual sense at all, I lose the game if I cast this thing and it gets disenchanted before the effect takes place?

Does that mean I can [C]Disenchant[/C] a [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] if my opponent has another artifact in play "in response to its ability"? 

Does that mean I can do that with *any* enchantment, and the effects on it don't matter at all because I can respond to the ability on the card, before it resolves and after it enters play?

Forgive me for sounding like a jerk, but that kinda makes me mad.  It doesn't seem fair at all. 

Does that mean I can [C]Disenchant[/C] a [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] if my opponent has another artifact in play "in response to its ability"?


Drill-Skimmer's ability is a static ability. It works at all times it's on the battlefield, so there is nothing to respond to.

Illusions of Grandeur has a triggered ability, meaning it uses the stack, and therefore can be responded to.

So no, you can't Disenchant a Drill-Skimmer if your opponent has another artifact.
Ours is a vengeful god.

Does that mean I can [C]Disenchant[/C] a [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] if my opponent has another artifact in play "in response to its ability"?


No, you can never respond to a static ability.
116.7. If a player with priority casts a spell or activates an activated ability while another spell or ability is already on the stack, the new spell or ability has been cast or activated "in response to" the earlier spell or ability. The new spell or ability will resolve first. See rule 608, "Resolving Spells and Abilities."

405.6. Some things that happen during the game don't use the stack.

405.6b Static abilities continuously generate effects and don't go on the stack. (See rule 604, "Handling Static Abilities.") This includes characteristic-defining abilities such as "[This object] is red" (see rule 604.3).


Does that mean I can do that with *any* enchantment, and the effects on it don't matter at all because I can respond to the ability on the card, before it resolves and after it enters play?


That depends on the ability.
405.6. Some things that happen during the game don't use the stack.

405.6a Effects don't go on the stack; they're the result of spells and abilities resolving. Effects may create delayed triggered abilities, however, and these may go on the stack when they trigger (see rule 603.7).

405.6b Static abilities continuously generate effects and don't go on the stack. (See rule 604, "Handling Static Abilities.") This includes characteristic-defining abilities such as "[This object] is red" (see rule 604.3).

405.6c Mana abilities resolve immediately. If a mana ability both produces mana and has another effect, the mana is produced and the other effect happens immediately. If a player had priority before a mana ability was activated, that player gets priority after it resolves. (See rule 605, "Mana Abilities.")

405.6d Special actions don't use the stack; they happen immediately. See rule 115, "Special Actions."

405.6e Turn-based actions don't use the stack; they happen automatically when certain steps or phases begin. They're dealt with before a player would receive priority (see rule 116.3a). Turn-based actions also happen automatically when each step and phase ends; no player receives priority afterward. See rule 703.

405.6f State-based actions don't use the stack; they happen automatically when certain conditions are met. See rule 704. They are dealt with before a player would receive priority. See rule 116.5.

405.6g A player may concede the game at any time. That player leaves the game immediately. See rule 104.3a.

405.6h If a player leaves a multiplayer game, objects may leave the game, cease to exist, change control, or be exiled as a result. These actions happen immediately. See rule 800.4a.




No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.
You know, I don't want to sound like a doomsayer, but it's little niggling rules like that that really turn me off of playing magic.  I mean, that doesn't make conceptual sense at all, I lose the game if I cast this thing and it gets disenchanted before the effect takes place?


Unfortunately, that is the way that it has been templated, and I don't really see any easy way to fix it. The life gain is a "comes into play" ability, which uses the stack just like every other triggered ability. 
 
Most enchantments do not have comes-into-play triggered abilities



Does that mean I can [C]Disenchant[/C] a [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] if my opponent has another artifact in play "in response to its ability"? 



so...
Your opponent controls an artifact A. He casts Drill-skimmer. You can:
* counter drill skimmer while it is a spell on the stack
* disenchant Artifact A (assuming it is a legal target) while drill skimmer is on the stack

However, once drill-skimmer comes into play, it is not a legal target for disenchant.
Drill skimmer has a static ability which functions if your opponent controls at least one other artifact. This is different to the comes-into-play ability on Illusions of grandeur. Static abilities do not use the stack, so there is nothing to "respond" to.

Another example of a Static ability would be Glorious anthem. Suppose your opponent controls glorious anthem and casts Hill Giant. After hill giant comes into play, it is a 4/4 for as long as glorious anthem is in play. You can't "respond" to glorious anthem "making hill giant into a 4/4" (for example, by casting lightning bolt) - there's nothing to respond to. Hill giant simply _is_ a 4/4 while glorious anthem is in play.


Does that mean I can do that with *any* enchantment, and the effects on it don't matter at all because I can respond to the ability on the card, before it resolves and after it enters play?

Forgive me for sounding like a jerk, but that kinda makes me mad.  It doesn't seem fair at all. 



Most enchantments grant static abilities which apply continuously. Illusions of grandeur is very unusual in that its abilities are triggered rather than static.

If Illusions of grandeur had been templated (along the lines of):
"
Illusions of Grandioseness
Enchantment
Cumulative Upkeep:
While Illusions of Grandioseness is in play, your life total is whatever it would be if you had started the game with 40 life instead of 20.
"

then the "40 life instead of 20 life" part would be a static ability applying to whoever the controller is.
Unfortunately, that's not the way the card was written so that's not how it works.

This could also cause rules problems with interactions on other cards. For example, suppose you cast the this new "version" of the card, "Illusions of grandioseness" and your life total changes from 19 to 39. Now, you cast Beacon of Immortality. Your life total becomes 78.  If Illusions then leaves play - does your life total become 58, or 38?
Under the rules as they stand, it's 58, but you can see what I'm getting at - making Illusions of Grandeur into a static effect is not a simple fix to try and make.
M:tG Rules Adviser
So what if [C]Illusions of Grandeur[/C] just said "You gain 20 life.  When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life."?

The fact that it says "When it enters the battlefield" is a no-duh.  *Everything* has to enter to the battlefield to take effect, that idea is implied in every permanent in the game.

So if [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] said "When Drill-Skimmer enters the battlefield, it has shroud as long as you control another artifact creature. " could I respond to it then?



*edit*

I mean the intent behind both of these cards is clear - the fact that some complicated stack and response rules overrides them is silly and frustrating. 
Does that mean I can do that with *any* enchantment, and the effects on it don't matter at all because I can respond to the ability on the card, before it resolves and after it enters play?

Forgive me for sounding like a jerk, but that kinda makes me mad.  It doesn't seem fair at all. 



The gains 20 life effect still matters, but if you hit zero life before it happens, then it doesn't happen because you're dead already.

If you had 21 life before this whole chain of events then the gains 20 life effect would still take place.

So what if [C]Illusions of Grandeur[/C] just said "You gain 20 life.  When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life."?

The fact that it says "When it enters the battlefield" is a no-duh.  *Everything* has to enter to the battlefield to take effect, that idea is implied in every permanent in the game.

So if [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] said "When Drill-Skimmer enters the battlefield, it has shroud as long as you control another artifact creature. " could I respond to it then?



*edit*

I mean the intent behind both of these cards is clear - the fact that some complicated stack and response rules overrides them is silly and frustrating. 



I think they SHOULD have worded the card "When Illusions of Grandeur is played, you gain 20 life." instead of "When Illusions of Grandeur comes into play."

I'm still not positive on how the rules would work for that though. I would think being played is different from coming into play and the stacks would be separate.
So what if [C]Illusions of Grandeur[/C] just said "You gain 20 life.  When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life."?


It would be a Valuable Misprint.

112.3a Spell abilities are abilities that are followed as instructions while an instant or sorcery spell is resolving. Any text on an instant or sorcery spell is a spell ability unless it's an activated ability, a triggered ability, or a static ability that fits the criteria described in rule 112.6.

No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.
So what if [C]Illusions of Grandeur[/C] just said "You gain 20 life.  When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life."?

The fact that it says "When it enters the battlefield" is a no-duh.  *Everything* has to enter to the battlefield to take effect, that idea is implied in every permanent in the game.

So if [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] said "When Drill-Skimmer enters the battlefield, it has shroud as long as you control another artifact creature. " could I respond to it then?



*edit*

I mean the intent behind both of these cards is clear - the fact that some complicated stack and response rules overrides them is silly and frustrating. 



what you really want to do is make the "gain 20 life" part of Illusions of Grandeur into a Static effect - in much the same way as Glorious Anthem works. Unfortunately, there isn't a simple way to do this for Illusions of Grandeur.

Regarding drill-skimmer: if it were templated in such a way that its gaining shroud was a triggered ability rather than static, then yes, you could respond to it coming into play by destroying it.
That would look something like this:
"When drill-skimmer enters the battlefield, if you control another artifact creature, then drill-skimmer gains shroud (this effect doesn't finish at end of turn)."
As you can probably appreciate, this is somewhat clunkier than the way it has been written - hence why drill-skimmer has a static ability rather than a triggered one.
M:tG Rules Adviser
So what if [C]Illusions of Grandeur[/C] just said "You gain 20 life.  When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life."?


It would never be worded that way. As far as I know, only instants and sorceries are worded like that, permanents all have words that tell you when the ability works.

So if [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] said "When Drill-Skimmer enters the battlefield, it has shroud as long as you control another artifact creature. " could I respond to it then?


Like before, you wouldn't find that wording on a card. It could however say "When Drill-Skimmer enters the battlefield, it gains shroud as long as you control another artifact creature.". If it were worded that way, then yes, you could respond to it with a Disenchant before it gained shroud.
Ours is a vengeful god.
So what if [C]Illusions of Grandeur[/C] just said "You gain 20 life.  When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life."?

The fact that it says "When it enters the battlefield" is a no-duh.  *Everything* has to enter to the battlefield to take effect, that idea is implied in every permanent in the game.


What about all the things that have abilities that only trigger when they leave the battlefield?  Or Ichorid?  Or Bridge from Below?  Or Instants or Sorceries?
So if [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] said "When Drill-Skimmer enters the battlefield, it has shroud as long as you control another artifact creature. " could I respond to it then?


Yes, but the ability itself wouldn't work how one would think.  Say you control one other artifact creature when it enters the battlefield.  Two turns later, that artifact creature gets destroyed.  The next turn, you cast another artifact creature.  Now, ur-Drill-Skimmer can be targeted by spells and abilities even though you control another artifact creature.

*edit*

I mean the intent behind both of these cards is clear - the fact that some complicated stack and response rules overrides them is silly and frustrating. 


Even in the world of flavor, magic is complicated, and weird things can happen.

I'm still not positive on how the rules would work for that though. I would think being played is different from coming into play and the stacks would be separate.


Stacks???  There is only one stack.
400.1. A zone is a place where objects can be during a game. There are normally seven zones: library, hand, battlefield, graveyard, stack, exile, and command. Some older cards also use the ante zone. Each player has his or her own library, hand, and graveyard. The other zones are shared by all players.

No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.
As X enters the battlefield, you gain 20 life.

When X leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life?

I'm about to go to work, not sure if this would work for the thing people wish it did
Level 1 Judge. Feel free to call me out on any errors. I'm only human, and am working to improve.
So what if [C]Illusions of Grandeur[/C] just said "You gain 20 life.  When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life."?

The fact that it says "When it enters the battlefield" is a no-duh.  *Everything* has to enter to the battlefield to take effect, that idea is implied in every permanent in the game.

So if [C]Drill-Skimmer[/C] said "When Drill-Skimmer enters the battlefield, it has shroud as long as you control another artifact creature. " could I respond to it then?



*edit*

I mean the intent behind both of these cards is clear - the fact that some complicated stack and response rules overrides them is silly and frustrating. 



I think they SHOULD have worded the card "When Illusions of Grandeur is played, you gain 20 life." instead of "When Illusions of Grandeur comes into play."

I'm still not positive on how the rules would work for that though. I would think being played is different from coming into play and the stacks would be separate.




I think what you're after is this:


Illusions of Grandeur mark 2
Sorcery

You gain 20 life. If you do, then exile Illusions of Grandeur Mark 2 and create a token named "Illusions of grandeur Mark 2".  This token is a blue enchantment with Cumulative Upkeep: 2 and a converted mana cost of 4.
When that token leaves the the battlefield, you lose 20 life.


That way, you always gain 20 life before you can lose 20 life as a result of the enchantment leaving play.
You can still donate the token and have your opponent lose 20 life.
If you wanted to remove that possibility, then you would say "leaves your control" instead of "leaves the battlefield".

M:tG Rules Adviser
Wait.. wouldn't a disenchanted card leave play AFTER the stack is resolved, so then the "when leaves play" effect happens it would be a totally different stack?
By the way, I think something along the lines of this wording solves most of the problems.

When Illusions of Grandeur resolves, you gain 20 life.
When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life.
Ours is a vengeful god.
Wait.. wouldn't a disenchanted card leave play AFTER the stack is resolved, so then the "when leaves play" effect happens it would be a totally different stack?


The stack is a game zone, it doesn't leave just because everything on/in it has resolved
Level 1 Judge. Feel free to call me out on any errors. I'm only human, and am working to improve.
Ugh.  See what I mean? We have to be rules lawyers to do it right.

You guys are all really awesome by the way.

I think if I ran into this in play, I would treat it like it happened and then went away to avoid the conflict.  Explaining this to someone (especially a friend I'm trying to have a friendly game with) would just piss him off.  Winning is not important enough to me to bother with calling people out on stuff like this, I play for fun.
As X enters the battlefield, you gain 20 life.

When X leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life?

I'm about to go to work, not sure if this would work for the thing people wish it did



ehm.. that's how Illusions of grandeur is currently templated, and causes the triggered ability problem which has a couple of users outraged.
M:tG Rules Adviser
By the way, I think something along the lines of this wording solves most of the problems.

When Illusions of Grandeur resolves, you gain 20 life.
When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life.



i.e. using the sorcery templating which creates a token enchantment with cumulative upkeep, as I suggested above.
M:tG Rules Adviser
As X enters the battlefield, you gain 20 life.

When X leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life?

I'm about to go to work, not sure if this would work for the thing people wish it did



ehm.. that's how Illusions of grandeur is currently templated, and causes the triggered ability problem which has a couple of users outraged.


My apologies but I believe your reply is incorrect. As X enters the battlefield shoudln't be a triggered ability. When, Whenever, or at, should be. This would make it similer to devour, which works on resolution of the spell.
Level 1 Judge. Feel free to call me out on any errors. I'm only human, and am working to improve.
Wait.. wouldn't a disenchanted card leave play AFTER the stack is resolved, so then the "when leaves play" effect happens it would be a totally different stack?



you CANNOT disenchant an artifact while it is still a spell on the stack, before it comes into play. AT that point, it isn't a legal target for disenchant.

You CAN disenchant an artifact after it has come into play and while its enters-the-battlefield triggered abilities are still on the stack, i.e. BEFORE the enters-the-battlefield triggered abilities have resolved.

Example:
Contagion Clasp has a triggered ability when it enters the battlefield - put a -1/-1 counter on target creature.

You CANNOT use disenchant to stop contagion clasp entering the battlefield. You need a spell which counters an artifact spell to do that, e.g. Counterspell or Artifact blast
As soon as contagion clasp enters the battlefield, its triggered ability goes on the stack. Its controller chooses a creature to target for the -1/-1 counter.
You can respond to the -1/-1 counter ability by casting disenchant targeting contagion clasp. This will result in contagion clasp being put in the graveyard before the -1/-1 counter goes onto the target creature.
Your opponent can use Contagion clasp's Proliferate ability in response to your disenchant.
M:tG Rules Adviser
As X enters the battlefield, you gain 20 life.

When X leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life?

I'm about to go to work, not sure if this would work for the thing people wish it did


That would still let you do tricks with Donate but would stop them from killing you with Disenchant.

I think what you're after is this:


Illusions of Grandeur mark 2
Sorcery

You gain 20 life. If you do, then exile Illusions of Grandeur Mark 2 and create a token named "Illusions of grandeur Mark 2".  This token is a blue enchantment with Cumulative Upkeep: 2 and a converted mana cost of 4.
When that token leaves the the battlefield, you lose 20 life.


That way, you always gain 20 life before you can lose 20 life as a result of the enchantment leaving play.
You can still donate the token and have your opponent lose 20 life.
If you wanted to remove that possibility, then you would say "leaves your control" instead of "leaves the battlefield".



Actually, that prevents Donate tricks from working.  If you want that to still work, the triggered ability would have to be granted to the enchantment token.

By the way, I think something along the lines of this wording solves most of the problems.

When Illusions of Grandeur resolves, you gain 20 life.
When Illusions of Grandeur leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life.


Permanent spells resolve by entering the battlefield.  The only difference here is that Replenish doesn't cause the gains-life ability to trigger.

Actually, I'm not sure if that would even work.  The spell doesn't exist after it resolves, and the permanent doesn't remember that it was a spell.  They would need to write a new exception to 400.7.
As X enters the battlefield, you gain 20 life.

When X leaves the battlefield, you lose 20 life?

I'm about to go to work, not sure if this would work for the thing people wish it did


That would still let you do tricks with Donate but would stop them from killing you with Disenchant.


Yeah, basically what I intended to do. I just wasn't sure if it was what they intended/desired
Level 1 Judge. Feel free to call me out on any errors. I'm only human, and am working to improve.

My apologies but I believe your reply is incorrect. As X enters the battlefield shoudln't be a triggered ability. When, Whenever, or at, should be. This would make it similer to devour, which works on resolution of the spell.



Ahh my bad. I missed what you were getting at. Yes, that would work too
M:tG Rules Adviser
Ugh.  See what I mean? We have to be rules lawyers to do it right.


Not really, you just need basic logic and a cursory knowledge of the stack. If Illusions worked the other way, Sleeper Agent would get a lot more useless. Unless "you" does mean the card's controller in Agent's case, but not in Illusions, but then what about - you see the problem here?

I play for fun.


How is Genesis Wave for 13 with Confusion in the ranks not fun?
Zammm = Batman. Bronies unite. "I'd call you a genius, but I'm in the room."
It's my sig in a box
58280208 wrote:
Everything is better when you read it in Bane's voice.
192334281 wrote:
Your human antics and desire to continue living have moved me. Just kidding. You cannot move me physically or emotionally. Wall humor.
57092228 wrote:
Copy effects work like a photocopy machine: you get a copy of the 'naked' card, NOT of what's on it.
56995928 wrote:
Funny story: InQuest Magazine (I think it was InQuest) had an oversized Chaos Orb which I totally rooked someone into allowing into a (non-sanctioned) game. I had a proxy card that was a Mountain with "Chaos Orb" written on it. When I played it, my opponent cried foul: Him: "WTF? a Proxy? no-one said anything about Proxies. Do you even own an actual Chaos Orb?" Me: "Yes, but I thought it would be better to use a Proxy." Him: "No way. If you're going to put a Chaos Orb in your deck you have to use your actual Chaos Orb." Me: "*Sigh*. Okay." I pulled out this huge Chaos Orb and placed it on the table. He tried to cry foul again but everyone else said he insisted I use my actual Chaos Orb and that was my actual Chaos Orb. I used it, flipped it and wiped most of his board. Unsurprisingly, that only worked once and only because everyone present thought it was hilarious.
My DM on Battleminds:
no, see i can kill defenders, but 8 consecutive crits on a battlemind, eh walk it off.
144543765 wrote:
195392035 wrote:
Hi guys! So, I'm a sort of returning player to Magic. I say sort of because as a child I had two main TCG's I liked. Yu-Gi-Oh, and Pokemon. Some of my friends branched off in to Magic, and I bought two pre-made decks just to kind of fit in. Like I said, Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon were what I really knew how to play. I have a extensive knowledge of deck building in those two TCG's. However, as far as Magic is concerned, I only ever used those two pre made decks. I know how the game is played, and I know general things, but now I want to get in the game for real. I want to begin playing it as a regular. My question is, are all cards ever released from the time of the inception of this game until present day fair game in a deck? Or are there special rules? Are some cards forbidden or restricted? Thanks guys, and I will gladly accept ANY help lol.
I have the same problem with women.
117639611 wrote:
198869283 wrote:
Oh I have a standing rule. If someone plays a Planeswalker I concede the game. I refuse to play with or against people who play Planeswalkers. They really did ruin the game.
A turn two Tibalt win?! Wicked... Betcha don't see that everyday.
Is this my new ego sig? Yes it is, other Barry
57461258 wrote:
And that's why you should never, ever call RP Jesus on being a troll, because then everyone else playing along gets outed, too, and the thread goes back to being boring.
57461258 wrote:
See, this is why RPJesus should be in charge of the storyline. The novel line would never have been cancelled if he had been running the show. Specifically the Slobad and Geth's Head talkshow he just described.
57461258 wrote:
Not only was that an obligatory joke, it was an on-topic post that still managed to be off-topic due to thread derailment. RP Jesus does it again folks.
92481331 wrote:
I think I'm gonna' start praying to Jesus... That's right, RPJesus, I'm gonna' be praying to you, right now. O' Jesus Please continue to make my time here on the forums fun and cause me to chuckle. Amen.
92481331 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
It was wonderful. Us Johnnies had a field day. That Timmy with the Grizzly bears would actually have to think about swinging into your Mogg Fanatic, giving you time to set up your silly combo. Nowadays it's all DERPSWING! with thier blue jeans and their MP3 players and their EM EM OH AR PEE JEES and their "Dewmocracy" and their children's card games and their Jersey Shores and their Tattooed Tenaged Vampire Hunters from Beverly Hills
Seriously, that was amazing. I laughed my *ss off. Made my day, and I just woke up.
[quote=ArtVenn You're still one of my favorite people... just sayin'.[/quote]
56756068 wrote:
56786788 wrote:
.....would it be a bit blasphemous if I said, "PRAYSE RPJAYSUS!" like an Evangelical preacher?
Perhaps, but who doesn't like to blaspheme every now and again? Especially when Mr. RPJesus is completely right.
56756068 wrote:
I don't say this often, but ... LOL
57526128 wrote:
You... You... Evil something... I actualy made the damn char once I saw the poster... Now you made me see it again and I gained resolve to put it into my campaign. Shell be high standing oficial of Cyrix order. Uterly mad and only slightly evil. And it'll be bad. Evil even. And ill blame you and Lizard for it :P.
57042968 wrote:
111809331 wrote:
I'm trying to work out if you're being sarcastic here. ...
Am going to stop you right there... it's RPJesus... he's always sarcastic
58335208 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
112114441 wrote:
we can only hope it gets the jace treatment...it could have at least been legendary
So that even the decks that don't run it run it to deal with it? Isn't that like the definition of format warping?
I lol'd.
56287226 wrote:
98088088 wrote:
Uktabi Orangutan What the heck's going on with those monkeys?
The most common answer is that they are what RPJesus would call "[Debutantes avert your eyes]ing."
56965458 wrote:
Show
57461258 wrote:
116498949 wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because off-topic discussions are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively. If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
...Am I the only one that thinks this is reaching the point of downright Kafkaesque insanity?
I condone the use of the word Kafkaesque. However, I'm presentely ambivalent. I mean, that can't be serious, right? We're April 1st, right? They didn't mod RPJesus for off-topic discussion when the WHOLE THREAD IS OFF-TOPIC, right? Right.
57545908 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
Save or die. If you disagree with this, you're wrong (Not because of any points or arguements that have been made, but I just rolled a d20 for you and got a 1, so you lose).
58397368 wrote:
58222628 wrote:
This just won the argument, AFAIC.
That's just awesome.
57471038 wrote:
57718868 wrote:
HOW DID I NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BEAR PRODUCING WORDS OF WILDING?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME?!
That's what RPJesus tends to do. That's why I don't think he's a real person, but some Magic Card Archive Server sort of machine, that is programmed to react to other posters' comments with obscure cards that do in fact exist, but somehow missed by even the most experienced Magic players. And then come up with strange combos with said cards. All of that is impossible for a normal human to do given the amount of time he does it and how often he does it. He/It got me with Light of Sanction, which prompted me to go to RQ&A to try and find if it was even possible to do combat damage to a creature I control (in light that Mark of Asylum exists).
71235715 wrote:
+10
100176878 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
57078538 wrote:
heaven or hell.
Round 1. Lets rock.
GG quotes! RPJesus just made this thread win!
56906968 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
143359585 wrote:
Blue players get all the overpowerered cards like JTMS. I think it's time that wizards gave something to people who remember what magic is really about: creatures.
Initially yes, Wizards was married to blue. However, about a decade ago they had a nasty divorce, and a few years after that they began courting the attention of Green. Then in Worldwake they had a nasty affair with their ex, but as of Innistrad, things seem to have gotten back on track, and Wizards has even proposed.
You are my favorite. Yes you. And moments like this make it so. Thank you RPJesus for just being you.
On what flavor text fits me:
57307308 wrote:
Surely RPJesus gets Niv-Mizzet, Dracogenius?
56874518 wrote:
First: I STILL can't take you seriously with that avatar. And I can take RPJesus seriously, so that's saying something.
121689989 wrote:
I'd offer you a cookie for making me laugh but it has an Upkeep Cost that has been known to cause people to quit eating.
56267956 wrote:
I <3 you loads
57400888 wrote:
56957928 wrote:
"AINT NO LAWS IN THE SKY MOTHER****." - Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran
10/10. Amazing.

You know, I don't want to sound like a doomsayer, but it's little niggling rules like that that really turn me off of playing magic. 



Worry not. I've been playing this game for years and still don't know what happens according to the rules for most things. A lot of these corner cases don't apply to me in a tournament setting, but even in Casual, you would think that after playing for years one would have it down.
I mean, I will probably never know a third of what goes on in the rules, because I simply can't. No one can know everything, that's why several people work together to get things like this sorted out. No one understands every single rule, and only like one person in the world fully and completely knows how to play Magic.

It's fun to know, and most of it won't come up, and them being there doesn't make the game any less fun until you realize that a combo your friend beat you with over the past two weeks doesn't work.

Orzhova Witness

Restarting Quotes Block
58086748 wrote:
58335208 wrote:
Disregard women acquire chase rares.
There are a lot of dudes for whom this is not optional.
97820278 wrote:
144532521 wrote:
How;s a 2 drop 1/2, Flying broken? What am I missing?
You're missing it because *turns Storm Crows sideways* all your base are belong to Chuck Norris and every other overused meme ever.

If you want to stop the Disenchant-in-response-to-the-ETB-trigger trick, use an ETB replacement effect for Illusions.

As ~ enters the battlefield, you gain 20 life.

that way you get the life before it could kill you if it was disenchanted.

Though personally I like the risk that Illusions has built into it.

DCI Certified Judge & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ
DJ Vortex

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013
DCI #5209514320


My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out

So I just wanted to get this straight.  If I play a Drill Skimmer or a creature with Hexproof, it CAN be countered by say an Unsummon or lightning bolt or Cancel?  Just trying to understand.
You should probably start a new thread, this doesn't seem related to this one (and it is over a year old)

Unsommon--No
Lightning bolt--no
Cancel--Yes  Hexproof only functions on the battlefield.
MTG Rules Advisor
So I just wanted to get this straight.  If I play a Drill Skimmer or a creature with Hexproof, it CAN be countered by say an Unsummon or lightning bolt or Cancel?  Just trying to understand.



Cancel works, since it is targeting the spell on the stack, and Hexproof does not "work" on the stack.

Unsummon and Bolt both target the creature on the battlefield, so Hexproof will stop it.
Drill-Skimmer

Cancel counters any spell. While on the stack, Drill-Skimmer is a creature spell, and not yet a creature permanent. While on the stack, its ability is not active.
Lightning Bolt and Unsummon target creatures, as in, creature permanents. The Skimmer's ability will prevent it from being targeted, assuming you have another artifact.
MTG Rules Advisor Autocarding helps a lot -> [c]Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas[/c] = Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas "But keep in mind when the internet dies with the electrical system in 2012, you can still play paper magic, while digital cards will have gone the way of the dodo. In the post apocalyptic world, magic cards will be our currency!" - Samot, explaining to someone the ramifications of switching to MTGO!
I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both selfish and rational. I'm scheming, secretive and manipulative; I use knowledge as a tool for personal gain, and in turn obtaining more knowledge. At best, I am mysterious and stealthy; at worst, I am distrustful and opportunistic.
Ugh.  See what I mean? We have to be rules lawyers to do it right....I play for fun.




I'm new to the forum and I just realized this was last year because I saw January and sometimes during the new year I forget that it's actually the new year...but still I just wanted to say that there is absolutely nothing stopping you from playing your own variant of the game.  In fact several variants made by players have become well known and even made official.  Don't get discouraged by the learning curve and keep an open mind but if there is no logic then don't be afraid to ask questions about it.  I myself am still learning as well and I just wanted other people learning to hear that cause I found this thread by the key words within the thread, not the title.  Thanks for the quick response yall and I completely understand now.  It's like before they are actually summoned they are spells...I picture a blob of black, green, blue, white, or red plasma or whatever forming and before they are completely formed, they have no power or toughness, no complex features because they are not finished yet.  So that's why Unsummon and Bolt wouldn't work because if it is not finished yet, then it is not a creature.  But Cancel works because it uses the blanket term "Spell".  So thanks and I will try to keep from posting in unrelated topics in the future.  I just seriously didn't realize this was Jan 2012 lol I always did that in school too writing the date of last year right after New Years.