Multiple questions (counter transform, token summoning, lifelink)

18 posts / 0 new
Last post
A few questions that I'm having a hard time figuring out.

1. If a spell is countered by a counter spell on a turn, and those are the only spells cast, how many spells were considered cast for the purposes of the common werewolf transform text "if two or more spells cast"?

2. If a 2/2 creature with lifelink is blocked by a 1/1, does the lifelink owner gain 1 or 2 life?

3. When a token is put into play by a card effect, does it have summoning sickness?
1. To cast a spell means to put it on the stack and pay its cost.  Countering the spell must necessarily happen after this occurs.  Countering a spell does not un-cast the spell.  In your scenario, two spells were cast, but unless they were cast by the same person, this will not cause the Innistrad werewolves to transform back into their human form.  The trigger requires that a player cast two or more spells, not just that two or more spells were cast in total.

2. A creature with 2 power will deal 2 damage, regardless of the blocked/blocking creature's toughness.  If that creature has lifelink, its controller will gain 2 life.

3. Unless it has haste, yes.  The "summoning sickness" rule applies to all creatures, both token and non-token.
MTG Rules Advisor since 2007-06-27. Amateur MTG rules nerd since forever. Download the official rules and more at wizards.com/magic/rules -[ IronMagus' New Marketplace Trade Thread ]- 100+ completed trades!
A few questions that I'm having a hard time figuring out. 1. If a spell is countered by a counter spell on a turn, and those are the only spells cast, how many spells were considered cast for the purposes of the common werewolf transform text "if two or more spells cast"?


Two spells were cast.  Countering a spell does not "un-cast" it.


2. If a 2/2 creature with lifelink is blocked by a 1/1, does the lifelink owner gain 1 or 2 life?


Two life.  Creatures don't pull their punches, so 2 damage is dealt and you gain 2 life.


3. When a token is put into play by a card effect, does it have summoning sickness?


Yes, unless it has Haste.  Token creatures are treated like any other creature.
 
1) Spells that are countered are still cast. They just don't ressolve. They will count towards the number of spells cast this turn.

Note: A werewolf cares about a player casting 2 or more spells, not that 2 or more spells got cast. So if the only spells cast in a turn were the counter spell and the countered spell, the werewolf would not transform.

2) 2 life. Creature's don't pull thier punches. They deal damage equal to thier power always.

3) Yep. All cards have summonig sickness regardless of how they entered the battlefield. They even get summoning sickness just by changing control.
… and then, the squirrels came.
Awesome. Thank you for answering my questions.
Nitpick: the objects will have summoning sickness even if they have haste, it's just that haste will negate the effect of summoning sickness on those objects while they have haste

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

DCI Certified Judge since July 13, 2013  - If you have any concerns with my conduct as a judge, feel free to submit feedback here.
DCI #5209514320


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

Please stop making that nitpick. 

Summoning sickness isn't even a thing in the rules. Thus, its impossible for a creature to technically "have" it or "not have" it.

There is a "summoning sickness rule," and an ability (Haste) that lets creatures ignore that rule, but there is no mention in the rules of a creature "having summoning sickness."
All Generalizations are Bad
what 2goth4u is saying is true for the MTGO game where every permanent has "Summoning Sick"

i doubt it has any relevance, it is just a way to represent the game state
proud member of the 2011 community team
We've had this discussion before. 

The rule which prevents you from attacking with, or paying a cost with a creature without haste you haven't controlled since the beginning of the turn doesn't just apply to creatures. It applies to ALL permanents. It must in order to stop you attacking with an animated land the turn it comes in to play, or a planeswalker that becomes a creature the turn it comes in to play.

Summoning sickness is a well accepted shorthand for that, but the rule doesn't actually limit itself to creatures. Only creatures are subject to it's restriction, however.

The rule "applies" itself to all permanents in play, and when certain conditions are met, it is obeyed as necessary.

The nitpick which 2Goth4U is making is that Haste doesn't make the rule go away, haste is a condition it checks before becoming enforceable. If that haste somehow goes away, the card would still be subject to the rule until you have controlled it from the beginning of your turn. The "haste" clause would then be irrelevant.   

DCI Rules Advisor 06/15/2011

 

I never let my mind wander. It's too small to let it go off by itself

 

CCG achievements Still calls the games CCGs and not TCGs... bah, young 'uns!

Decipher games 2001 North American Continental Champion - Inaugural Hall of Fame Inductee - Responsible for killing Young Jedi CCG (really!)

Wizards of the Coast games Won my one and only Pokemon tournament using only Pikachu and Raichu in the deck - and declaring loudly "PEEE-KAH-CHUUUUU" -- true story. 

We've had this discussion before. 

The rule which prevents you from attacking with, or paying a cost with a creature without haste you haven't controlled since the beginning of the turn doesn't just apply to creatures. It applies to ALL permanents. It must in order to stop you attacking with an animated land the turn it comes in to play, or a planeswalker that becomes a creature the turn it comes in to play.

Summoning sickness is a well accepted shorthand for that, but the rule doesn't actually limit itself to creatures. Only creatures are subject to it's restriction, however.

The rule "applies" itself to all permanents in play, and when certain conditions are met, it is obeyed as necessary.

The summoning sickness rule is as follows (boldings mine):

302.6. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the “summoning sickness” rule.

It's true that the summoning sickness rule doesn't care how long the creatures affected have been creatures. It's not true that the rule has any effect on objects that are not creatures. It's ridiculous to say it "applies" to them or that the rule isn't limited to creatures.

The nitpick which 2Goth4U is making is that Haste doesn't make the rule go away, haste is a condition it checks before becoming enforceable. If that haste somehow goes away, the card would still be subject to the rule until you have controlled it from the beginning of your turn. The "haste" clause would then be irrelevant.   

I guess I don't really have a problem with the specific nitpick that 2Goth4U made. It's true that haste just let's a creature ignore the summoning sickness rule. I just saw him nitpicking summoning sickness again and assumed he was making the argument that you're making above, which I do disagree with.
All Generalizations are Bad
It's true that the summoning sickness rule doesn't care how long the creatures affected have been creatures. It's not true that the rule has any effect on objects that are not creatures. It's ridiculous to say it "applies" to them or that the rule isn't limited to creatures.



The rule is like a line of code, or a conditional statement. 

IF permanent hasn't been under continuous control of a player since the beginning of their turn THEN 

IF permanent is currently a creature THEN 

IF permanent does not have the keyword "haste" THEN

the permanent's activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated and the permanent can't attack.

Else

No restriction

End If

End If

End If  

Gideon the planeswalker is subject to this rule during any turn that he isn't controlled by a player continuously since the beginning of that turn. The fact that they word the rule to be creature in every instance they could have used permanent is because they wanted to limit the restriction to JUST creatures. However, each permanent must be subject to this rule otherwise you would never be able to swing with Gideon or a land. They are never under your control from the beginning of any turn as creatures - therefore the rule must be applicable to them while they aren't creatures to set up that condition. 

I.e. it's inferring that the rule is being applied to all permanents, but that only while that permanent is a creature, does any restriction become enforced.

I have made my thoughts clear. But by the same token, I wouldn't post a "nitpick" because it's not a helpful clarification. It's an interesting discussion of a specific rule though. 

DCI Rules Advisor 06/15/2011

 

I never let my mind wander. It's too small to let it go off by itself

 

CCG achievements Still calls the games CCGs and not TCGs... bah, young 'uns!

Decipher games 2001 North American Continental Champion - Inaugural Hall of Fame Inductee - Responsible for killing Young Jedi CCG (really!)

Wizards of the Coast games Won my one and only Pokemon tournament using only Pikachu and Raichu in the deck - and declaring loudly "PEEE-KAH-CHUUUUU" -- true story. 

While this is nitpick is useful, because it helps players understand Gideon and animated Lands better, its just not true.

Does rule 303.3 talk about all Permanents, just because Enchanted Evening and Lucent Liminid exist?

303.3. Enchantment subtypes are always a single word and are listed after a long dash: "Enchantment -- Shrine." Each word after the dash is a separate subtype. Enchantment subtypes are also called enchantment types. Enchantments may have multiple subtypes. See rule 205.3h for the complete list of enchantment types.

The Summoning Sickness Rule speaks about Creatures, period. Nothing Else. Just like Deathmark only speaks about Green or White Cards. Sure, they could also be Red, but who cares that their is an Intersection? Likewise with the Summoning Sickness Rule. Yes, there are things like animated Lands etc that are also Creatures, and thus fall under this rule, but they ONLY fall under this rule becasue that rule speaks about Creatures. Nothing else matters.
[c]Forest[/c] gives you Forest
My take on this:

"At this time, is that permanent a creature without haste?"
If yes:
    Rule 302.6 requires checking how long you've controlled it before performing certain actions.
If no:
    Rule 302.6 doesn't require that check.
    "Is there any chance of that permanent becoming a creature without haste in the future?"
    If yes:
        You still need to track how long you've controlled it, just in case.
    If no:
        You wouldn't need to keep track of it.

Different people have different ways of describing the "still need to track" part of the above, but I don't think anyone denies that it is there.

No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.

"Is there any chance of that permanent becoming a creature without haste in the future?"



It's almost impossible to answer NO with certitude to this question...
Who knows what the opponent may do to your permanents?


Thus we always need to keep track of «how long».

Wizards of the Coast: NOT ANYMORE outsourced to Elbonia

"Is there any chance of that permanent becoming a creature without haste in the future?"



It's almost impossible to answer NO with certitude to this question...


My first draft at that post followed that "If no" with "I haven't given this possibility much thought."

No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.

It's true that the summoning sickness rule doesn't care how long the creatures affected have been creatures. It's not true that the rule has any effect on objects that are not creatures. It's ridiculous to say it "applies" to them or that the rule isn't limited to creatures.



The rule is like a line of code, or a conditional statement. 

IF permanent hasn't been under continuous control of a player since the beginning of their turn THEN 

IF permanent is currently a creature THEN 

IF permanent does not have the keyword "haste" THEN

the permanent's activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated and the permanent can't attack.

Else

No restriction

End If

End If

End If 



While this is a structure works, it is not the only structure that works and is not the most efficent one. (There is no need to check each permenant each turn for how long it's been controlled. You only need to check permenants which are currently creatures for how long they've been controlled.)


Gideon the planeswalker is subject to this rule during any turn that he isn't controlled by a player continuously since the beginning of that turn. The fact that they word the rule to be creature in every instance they could have used permanent is because they wanted to limit the restriction to JUST creatures. However, each permanent must be subject to this rule otherwise you would never be able to swing with Gideon or a land. They are never under your control from the beginning of any turn as creatures - therefore the rule must be applicable to them while they aren't creatures to set up that condition.



This is simply untrue. When Gideon or man-lands become creatures, they do not become new objects. They are the same permenant you controlled before with the same time-stamp on them. If you controlled them at the beginning of your turn and then turned them into creatures, they are creatures you controlled at the beginning of your turn.


I.e. it's inferring that the rule is being applied to all permanents, but that only while that permanent is a creature, does any restriction become enforced.

I have made my thoughts clear. But by the same token, I wouldn't post a "nitpick" because it's not a helpful clarification. It's an interesting discussion of a specific rule though. 



Rules don't infer and good rules don't imply. You infer that it applies to all objects because it helps you understand it. While technically wrong, it does not harm you in generally applying the rule.

The summoning sickness rule is as follows (boldings mine):

302.6. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the “summoning sickness” rule.


Maybe the rule would be less confusing and cause less arguments if instead it was written:

"302.6. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless that permanent has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began"

~ Tim
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)

An alternative could be to grant «Sickness» an official place in the rules:

110.6. A permanent’s status is its physical state. There are four five status categories, each of which has two possible values: tapped/untapped, flipped/unflipped, face up/face down, sick/unsick and phased in/phased out. Each permanent always has one of these values for each of these categories.   


110.7.1 Permanents always enter the Battlefield in the Sick status.

110.7.2 At the beginning of a player's turn, permanents that player controls turn to Unsick status.  
 
110.7.3 Permanents turn to Sick status when they change controller.

302.5.1 A Sick creature cannot attack, unless it has Haste.

302.6. A Sick creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated, unless it has Haste. 
the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the “summoning sickness” rule.



Simple enough?



WARNING: the above text is NOT Magic's actual rules. (yet)

Wizards of the Coast: NOT ANYMORE outsourced to Elbonia

Sign In to post comments