Protected Bruna

107 posts / 0 new
Last post
I have Divine Favor in my Graveyard,
Absolute Grace & Shifting Sky (set to black) on the Field.

I attack with Bruna, Light of Alabaster. May I still get 3 life?

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

you will not gain 3 life


303.4g If an Aura is entering the battlefield and there is no legal object or player for it to enchant, the Aura remains in its current zone, unless that zone is the stack. In that case, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard instead of entering the battlefield.

proud member of the 2011 community team
No. The aura will be black on the battlefield, and attaching to a creature with protection from black, which means it can't legally enchant Bruna.

303.4g If an Aura is entering the battlefield and there is no legal object or player for it to enchant, the Aura remains in its current zone, unless that zone is the stack. In that case, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard instead of entering the battlefield.


 
All Generalizations are Bad
I have Divine Favor in my Graveyard,
Absolute Grace & Shifting Sky (set to black) on the Field.

I attack with Bruna, Light of Alabaster. May I still get 3 life?


But the aura is not black until it enters the battlefield.  Wouldn't it enter attached, and then fall off?
 
interesting, that could also be possible (Chaikov, next time use Painter's Servant so the answer is easier :p)

I'm stumped
proud member of the 2011 community team
I'm looking for an aura rule similar to this, but I can't find anything:


614.12. Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c–d.) Such effects may come from the permanent itself if they affect only that permanent (as opposed to a general subset of permanents that includes it). They may also come from other sources. To determine which replacement effects apply and how they apply, check the characteristics of the permanent as it would exist on the battlefield, taking into account replacement effects that have already modified how it enters the battlefield, continuous effects generated by the resolution of spells or abilities that changed the permanent’s characteristics on the stack (see rule 400.7a), and continuous effects from the permanent’s own static abilities, but ignoring continuous effects from any other source that would affect it.

It seems like the game should needs to look forward in time to determine whether the aura will legally enchant the creature or not, but maybe it looks at it in its current zone. I don't really see anything to indicate either way.


 
All Generalizations are Bad
Due to Shifting Sky, the aura would be black on the battlefield from the first moment on. There's no time, when it is on the battlefield and not black. So the game state would go from having a (non)black aura card in the graveyard to a black aura attached to a pro:black creature. 303.4g prevents this and the aura never enters the battlefield.
While 303.4g and 303.4h don't say what effects you're allowed to consider, 303.4f does. Admittedly, this rule is not for chaikov's specific scenario, but it is for a very similar scenario:
303.4f If an Aura is entering the battlefield under a player's control by any means other than by resolving as an Aura spell, and the effect putting it onto the battlefield doesn't specify the object or player the Aura will enchant, that player chooses what it will enchant as the Aura enters the battlefield. The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura's enchant ability and any other applicable effects.

If all effects are taken into consideration in the case where no object or player is specified, it seems reasonable to me that it should also do so when an object or player is specified.
This works the same way replacement effects do as told by rule 614.12. Divine favor is entering the battlefield as a white aura and so it can enter attached to Bruna triggering the life gain ability. Then SBAs will be checked and, as a black aura that's attached to a pro-black creature, it will go to the graveyard.

If we replace shifting sky with painter's servant the answer won't be easier. It will be exactly the same.

There's an official answer somewhere.
no, with Painter's Servant it will be a black Aura trying to enchant a pro-black creature, it won't even enter the battlefield because of 303.4g
proud member of the 2011 community team
I think you will gain the life because the aura has to enter the battlefield to be black in the first place. It enters attached to Bruna, it's enter the battlefield ability triggers, state based actions make it black, and check for protection, and then it falls off. After that, the triggered ability will go on the stack and you will gain the 3 life.
I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.
I think you will gain the life because the aura has to enter the battlefield to be black in the first place. It enters attached to Bruna, it's enter the battlefield ability triggers, state based actions make it black, and check for protection, and then it falls off. After that, the triggered ability will go on the stack and you will gain the 3 life.


Please find, on the very detailed and specific list of SBAs in the comprehensive rulebook, the one that makes it black. You'll have the small problem that none exists, because this is not an SBA.

It attempts to enter the battlefield already black. It does not first enter the battlefield and later become black. For this reason, it finds that it's trying to attach itself to something it can't legally be attached to, and remains where it is because of this rule:

701.3b If an effect tries to attach an Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to an object it can‘t be
attached to, the Aura, Equipment, or Fortification doesn‘t move. If an effect tries to attach an
Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to the object it‘s already attached to, the effect does nothing.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
704.5n If an Aura is attached to an illegal object or player, or is not attached to an object or player, that Aura is put into its owner's graveyard.

There is no reason why it can't be placed on Bruna. If it was already in play, it would be black and therefor not a legal target. But if it is in your hand or graveyard, and not black, it would be a legal target. It is allowed to enter, state based actions, like 704.5n, check for legality and it's put into the graveyard. But it DID enter, so the enter the battlefield ability will trigger.
 
I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.
I think you will gain the life because the aura has to enter the battlefield to be black in the first place. It enters attached to Bruna, it's enter the battlefield ability triggers, state based actions make it black, and check for protection, and then it falls off. After that, the triggered ability will go on the stack and you will gain the 3 life.


Please find, on the very detailed and specific list of SBAs in the comprehensive rulebook, the one that makes it black. You'll have the small problem that none exists, because this is not an SBA.

It attempts to enter the battlefield already black. It does not first enter the battlefield and later become black. For this reason, it finds that it's trying to attach itself to something it can't legally be attached to, and remains where it is because of this rule:

701.3b If an effect tries to attach an Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to an object it can‘t be
attached to, the Aura, Equipment, or Fortification doesn‘t move. If an effect tries to attach an
Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to the object it‘s already attached to, the effect does nothing.



Why is it already black before it is on the battlefield?  Permanents only exist on the battlefield, and only affects permanents.  So doesn't the aura need to be on the battlefield as a permanent before it becomes black?

Or are you referring to the Painter's Servant case?

Sorry, I should have been a little more clear. I was assuming Shifting Sky was in play and set to black. That way if divine favor was in play on a different creature, it would be black. Bruna would allow you to grab it, but since she has pro black at the time, it's not a legal target. But Absolute Grace would mean there is no way it could be in play on a creature, so it would have to be in hand or in graveyard.
I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.
I think the argument for the aura not entering is that Shifting Sky modifies how the aura enters the battlefield (by turning it black) and Bruna's ability can see that replacement effect and therefor not move the aura
proud member of the 2011 community team
Right, but shifting sky does not alter cards that aren't already on the battlefield.
I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.
704.5n If an Aura is attached to an illegal object or player, or is not attached to an object or player, that Aura is put into its owner's graveyard.

There is no reason why it can't be placed on Bruna. If it was already in play, it would be black and therefor not a legal target. But if it is in your hand or graveyard, and not black, it would be a legal target. It is allowed to enter, state based actions, like 704.5n, check for legality and it's put into the graveyard. But it DID enter, so the enter the battlefield ability will trigger

This doesn't answer the (admittedly rhetorical) question I asked. I am well aware of the SBA you quoted, but it doesn't settle the issue by itself. You also asserted the existence of one that would make the Aura black at some point after it entered the battlefield. If that was true, then you'd be right about it entering white and later becoming black. But no SBA that does that exists,because what does this isn't an SBA at all.

I think you will gain the life because the aura has to enter the battlefield to be black in the first place. It enters attached to Bruna, it's enter the battlefield ability triggers, state based actions make it black, and check for protection, and then it falls off. After that, the triggered ability will go on the stack and you will gain the 3 life.


Please find, on the very detailed and specific list of SBAs in the comprehensive rulebook, the one that makes it black. You'll have the small problem that none exists, because this is not an SBA.

It attempts to enter the battlefield already black. It does not first enter the battlefield and later become black. For this reason, it finds that it's trying to attach itself to something it can't legally be attached to, and remains where it is because of this rule:

701.3b If an effect tries to attach an Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to an object it can‘t be
attached to, the Aura, Equipment, or Fortification doesn‘t move. If an effect tries to attach an
Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to the object it‘s already attached to, the effect does nothing.



Why is it already black before it is on the battlefield?  Permanents only exist on the battlefield, and only affects permanents.  So doesn't the aura need to be on the battlefield as a permanent before it becomes black?

I didn't say it was black before it enters the battlefield. It is, however, black at the moment it enters the battlefield, for much the same reason Sword of the Meek and Glorious Anthem work so badly together. You write as though there were only two possibilities - it first becomes black, then enters the battlefield, or it first enters the battlefield, then becomes black. Neither is correct - it goes straight from being a white Aura card in whatever zone to being a black Aura on the battlefield, or rather it would if not for the rule I previously posted.

Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
It attempts to enter the battlefield already black. It does not first enter the battlefield and later become black. For this reason, it finds that it's trying to attach itself to something it can't legally be attached to, and remains where it is because of this rule:

701.3b If an effect tries to attach an Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to an object it can‘t be
attached to, the Aura, Equipment, or Fortification doesn‘t move. If an effect tries to attach an
Aura, Equipment, or Fortification to the object it‘s already attached to, the effect does nothing.

Why is it already black before it is on the battlefield?  Permanents only exist on the battlefield, and only affects permanents.  So doesn't the aura need to be on the battlefield as a permanent before it becomes black?

He didn't say it was black before entering the battlefield.

He's saying it enters the battlefield, turns black and attaches simulatenously. By simultaneously, the rules mean atomically; you can't see any intermidiary states. The aura goes directly from

In graveyard, white, unattached

to

On battlefield, black, attached to a creature with protection from black

This would attach an aura to an object to an object it can't be attached to. By 701.3b, the aura stays in the graveyard instead.





Right, but shifting sky does not alter cards that aren't already on the battlefield.

It does change HOW they enter, they enter black. I changed my mind, consider:

603.6b Continuous effects that modify characteristics of a permanent do so the moment the permanent is on the battlefield (and not before then). The permanent is never on the battlefield with its unmodified characteristics. Continuous effects don’t apply before the permanent is on the battlefield, however (see rule 603.6e).


It would have to enter to get changed, but then must go to the yard due to no legal targets. 

I disagree. It could not be black unless it was on the field.
Right, but shifting sky does not alter cards that aren't already on the battlefield.

It does change HOW they enter, they enter black. I changed my mind, consider:

603.6b Continuous effects that modify characteristics of a permanent do so the moment the permanent is on the battlefield (and not before then). The permanent is never on the battlefield with its unmodified characteristics. Continuous effects don’t apply before the permanent is on the battlefield, however (see rule 603.6e).


It would have to enter to get changed, but then must go to the yard due to no legal targets. 


The very part of your quote that you highlighted contradicts you.  It doesn't enter then change.
It could not be black unless it was on the field.

Correct. It never becomes black. What's your point?
This works the same way replacement effects do as told by rule 614.12. Divine favor is entering the battlefield as a white aura and so it can enter attached to Bruna triggering the life gain ability. Then SBAs will be checked and, as a black aura that's attached to a pro-black creature, it will go to the graveyard.

I agree. The principle is the same. Instead of checking what the event is to see if replacement effects apply, you are checking what the event is to see if rule 303.4f applies.

Consider what would happen if Shifting Sky with black chosen and Absolute Grace were on the battlefield, and you cast a white Aura targeting a creature. The Aura would resolve, enter the battlefield, then be put into the graveyard.
This works the same way replacement effects do as told by rule 614.12. Divine favor is entering the battlefield as a white aura and so it can enter attached to Bruna triggering the life gain ability. Then SBAs will be checked and, as a black aura that's attached to a pro-black creature, it will go to the graveyard.

I agree. The principle is the same. Instead of checking what the event is to see if replacement effects apply, you are checking what the event is to see if rule 303.4f applies.

Consider what would happen if Shifting Sky with black chosen and Absolute Grace were on the battlefield, and you cast a white Aura targeting a creature. The Aura would resolve, enter the battlefield, then be put into the graveyard.



Would it?  Or would the aura fizzle since it's target is no longer legal?

Would it? Or would the aura fizzle since it's target is no longer legal?

The target is still legal. The protection from black does not apply, because the Aura spell is white. Auras only target on the stack.
It could not be black unless it was on the field.

Correct. It never becomes black. What's your point?

I don't think 701.3b stops it from attaching. You are asking the game to look into the future to stop something that MIGHT be illegal when it happens.
I don't think 701.3b stops it from attaching. You are asking the game to look into the future to stop something that MIGHT be illegal when it happens.

How do you attach it if it isn't on the field? If it is on the field, then it is black and cannot be attached.

Even an argument about it being attached as it enters the field still fails because at the same time you are trying to attach it, it is also now black.

I would even say that the Aura spell on the stack fails to enter the Battlefield and gets moved to the graveyard per the rules regarding it staying in its previous location unless that location is the stack, in which case it goes to the graveyard.

EDIT:  That does bring up an interesting question though, if it fails to enter the battlefield from the stack... did the spell fizzle? I'm not sure. The spell had a legal target as it tried to resolve. It isn't until the final step that it fails to enter the battlefield as normal and would remain on the stack (but gets moved to the graveyard by the rules instead). Does that constitute fizzling? Or was the spell successfully cast?

Or am I wrong about it failing to enter the Battlefield?
I'm just a Pigment of your imagination.
Would it? Or would the aura fizzle since it's target is no longer legal?

The target is still legal. The protection from black does not apply, because the Aura spell is white. Auras only target on the stack.



This is where I am confused.  If the aura is allowed to enter the battlefield from the stack, why is it not allowed to enter the battlefield from the graveyard?  In both cases, the protection and color change do not apply and remove the aura until the aura is on the battlefield.
Would it? Or would the aura fizzle since it's target is no longer legal?

The target is still legal. The protection from black does not apply, because the Aura spell is white. Auras only target on the stack.



This is where I am confused.  If the aura is allowed to enter the battlefield from the stack, why is it not allowed to enter the battlefield from the graveyard?  In both cases, the protection and color change do not apply and remove the aura until the aura is on the battlefield.


I don't think anyone is suggesting these two questions have different answers. I, for example, would say it would fail to enter the battlefield in both cases.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
This is where I am confused. If the aura is allowed to enter the battlefield from the stack, why is it not allowed to enter the battlefield from the graveyard? In both cases, the protection and color change do not apply and remove the aura until the aura is on the battlefield.

I agreed with Nylon, and I think that the Aura would enter the battlefield in both cases.
The problem is the use of the word could. It implies looking into the future, but the game normally can't do that. And it's complex to determine whether an aura could enchant Bruna. What things do we consider? Which do we ignore? That's not explicitly defined anywhere.

Cards that use a similar template have caused problems before (could produce), and at least one actually doesn't work.

It seems to me that if there had to be a "check" coming from Bruna at some point to determine whether you can move an aura onto her, that would be when her attack trigger resolves. At that point, the aura is in the graveyard and it could enchant her. If I'm right, it'd enter the battlefield, its ability would trigger, and a couple state-based actions would put it back in the graveyard.

I'd wait on an official response, though.
All the right rules have been quoted here.  Divine Favor could enchant Bruna from the graveyard (satisfying her own rules text), though the Favor never "targets" Bruna.  It is coming to Bruna because of her triggered ability alone.  It is white while in the graveyard, but it gets to the battlefield attached to her as a black aura enchantment, its ETB ability triggers, and SBA's are performed right after the ability resolves, before players get priority.  The order of events right after resolution then, is that the echantment is put into its owner's graveyard due to SBA's, the 3 life is gained by Bruna's controller because that was the top item on the stack, and Bruna remains a black angel with protection from black that's still attacking or blocking.  That's my take anyway.
Teachable Level 1 Judge
The problem is the use of the word could. It implies looking into the future, but the game normally can't do that. And it's complex to determine whether an aura could enchant Bruna. What things do we consider? Which do we ignore? That's not explicitly defined anywhere.

You are right that it is not defined anywhere for this case. Rule 614.12 does define a method to determine what it would look like if it entered the battlefield and, based on that, what it could enchant. If rule 614.12 said, "replacement effects or rules," that would solve the issue.
The problem is the use of the word could. It implies looking into the future, but the game normally can't do that. And it's complex to determine whether an aura could enchant Bruna. What things do we consider? Which do we ignore? That's not explicitly defined anywhere.

You are right that it is not defined anywhere for this case. Rule 614.12 does define a method to determine what it would look like if it entered the battlefield and, based on that, what it could enchant. If rule 614.12 said, "replacement effects or rules," that would solve the issue.


With this post - if not much earlier - this becomes pretty clearly an RT&T topic...
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
It could not be black unless it was on the field.

Correct. It never becomes black. What's your point?

I don't think 701.3b stops it from attaching.

701.3b doesn't stop it from attaching; 702.15c does. 701.3b says what happens when it can't be attached.
702.15c A permanent or player with protection can’t be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners’ graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, "State-Based Actions.")


You are asking the game to look into the future to stop something that MIGHT be illegal when it happens.

No, there's no foretelling. You are instructed to change the game state from "in a graveyard, white and unattached" to "on the battlefield, black and attached to a creature with protection from black", but 702.15c forbids you from doing that, and 701.3b tells you what to do instead.
The problem is the use of the word could. It implies looking into the future, but the game normally can't do that.

Where do you see "could"? Neither relevant rules use that word. The explanation given doesn't use "could".
This is where I am confused.  If the aura is allowed to enter the battlefield from the stack, why is it not allowed to enter the battlefield from the graveyard?

It's no more allowed to enter the battlefield from the stack than from the graveyard, for exactly the same reason.
That does bring up an interesting question though, if it fails to enter the battlefield from the stack... did the spell fizzle? I'm not sure.

It wasn't countered, if that's what you're asking. Countering a spell or ability is an action one is instructed to take, and nothing instructed the spell to be countered here.
Or was the spell successfully cast?

Most definitely. Casting is putting on the stack, choosing modes, choosing targets, determining costs and paying costs. Casting was completed long before the spell starting resolving.

Both the «does enter Battlefield» and «can't enter Battlefield» sides have strong arguments.

A few years ago, the same situation (with slightly different cards)
was [O]ruled as «the aura enters play, then falls to the Grave».
According to this (somewhat aged) ruling, I would gain the 3 life. 

I wonder what the Powers That Be would say about this today...

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

Both the «does enter Battlefield» and «can't enter Battlefield» sides have strong arguments.

A few years ago, the same situation (with slightly different cards)
was [O]ruled as «the aura enters play, then falls to the Grave».
According to this (somewhat aged) ruling, I would gain the 3 life. 

I wonder what the Powers That Be would say about this today...



What were the other cards involved?  Do you have a link to the previous ruling?
 
It's older than this Forum; won't be an easy find...

Wizards of the Coast: outsourced to Elbonia

The oldest threads with actual visible posts in this forum are four years and four months old. I wouldn't trust anything older than that anyway. There's presumably been around 17 revisions of the comprules in that time, at least one of them (M10) quite substantial, not to mention a change of rules manager. Who knows how much of the prevailing wisdom on small, subtle matters like this has changed in that time.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
Sign In to post comments