Activated abilities on targetted creatures

17 posts / 0 new
Last post
Can I still use an activated ability on a permanent if that permanent is being targetting by for instance an destroy spell?


1st case Example:

My opponent casts Terror on my Ezuri, Renegade Leader. Can I still use the abilities: {G}: Regenerate another target Elf. {2}{G}{G}{G}: Elf creatures you control get +3/+3 and gain trample until end of turn, before it gets destroyed?

2nd case example (now concerning a tap ability)

My opponent casts Terror on my Llanowar Elves. Can I still use the ability: 
{T}: Add {G} to your mana pool, before it gets destroyed?


Thanks in advance! 
Yes and yes.

(unless the ability says to use it only as a sorcery)
MTG Rules Advisor
Yes.

You can normally activate abilities any time you could cast an instant, which includes when another spell or ability is on the stack. The targets, if any, of that spell or ability have no effect on this.
Rules Advisor
As far as I understand, yes you can, since while your Ezuri is being targeted that means Terror hasn't resolved yet, so you can use its hability and place it on the stack, this will lead to resolve first the +3/+3 (i.e.) and then Terror will be resolved.

You can't interrupt a creature's hability if the spell doesn't say so. For instance if you have Thraben Doomsayer and you tap it to place a token, and then your opponent uses a Searing Spear on him, both spell and hability go to the stack in the cast order, so at the end both will resolve.
As far as I understand, yes you can, since while your Ezuri is being targeted that means Terror hasn't resolved yet, so you can use its hability and place it on the stack, this will lead to resolve first the +3/+3 (i.e.) and then Terror will be resolved.

You can't interrupt a creature's hability if the spell doesn't say so. For instance if you have Thraben Doomsayer and you tap it to place a token, and then your opponent uses a Searing Spear on him, both spell and hability go to the stack in the cast order, so at the end both will resolve.


Although we always appreciate people lending their help here in Rules Q&A, we prefer that you answer questions only if you are certain of the answer, and ideally only if you can either cite Comprehensive Rules or are a Judge/Rules Advisor. This helps cut down on confusion.

It also helps guarantee closer to exactly correct answers so that the question asker doesn't later rely on faulty reasoning to make incorrect decisions later down the line. It also helps ensure proper terminology as much as possible.

In this case, as others have said, in Magic the process for abilities and spells goes as follows:
First you go through the process of announcing the spell/ability.
Then it goes on the stack. At this point either the player who played the spell or activated the ability may chose to take another action or they may pass priority.
If they pass priority, the other player gets a chance to do something and you go back to the first step with the new spell/ability. If they don't, the ability begins resolving.

In this case, what that means is that the first thing that happens is the opponent casts Terror. Then he (or she) has to give you a chance to respond.
Since abilities can be activated at instant speed by defaults and neither ability has a restriction on timing (See Dimir Guildmage for an example of a restriction) you may choose to activate the ability in response.
Your opponent is once more able to do things. If they don't, your ability will resolve. In the case of Ezuri's second ability, this means your elves grow in size.
Then you both get another chance to do something, starting with the active player (Whoever's turn it is). You could activate Ezuri again, for instance. If neither player responds, Terror resolves and Ezuri dies. Note that Ezuri cannot save himself using the first ability since it says 'another' target elf. Plus Terror prevents regeneration.

Another important note is that for most abilities, once the ability has been used, the source doesn't have to survive. For instance, if he used Terror in response to Ezuri's ability, your creatures would still get bigger, Ezuri would simply not be around to see it.
Immature College Student (Also a Rules Advisor)
As far as I understand, yes you can, since while your Ezuri is being targeted that means Terror hasn't resolved yet, so you can use its hability and place it on the stack, this will lead to resolve first the +3/+3 (i.e.) and then Terror will be resolved.

You can't interrupt a creature's hability if the spell doesn't say so. For instance if you have Thraben Doomsayer and you tap it to place a token, and then your opponent uses a Searing Spear on him, both spell and hability go to the stack in the cast order, so at the end both will resolve.


Although we always appreciate people lending their help here in Rules Q&A, we prefer that you answer questions only if you are certain of the answer, and ideally only if you can either cite Comprehensive Rules or are a Judge/Rules Advisor. This helps cut down on confusion.

It also helps guarantee closer to exactly correct answers so that the question asker doesn't later rely on faulty reasoning to make incorrect decisions later down the line.

Thanks, but my post is a fact, unless there are any rule that says it isn't... just omit "as far as I understand"...
Thanks, but my post is a fact, unless there are any rule that says it isn't... just omit "as far as I understand"...


Your end conclusion was correct, but your terminology was not. You don't 'interrupt' abilities, you simply respond to them. And you can respond to them with anything that you can do at instant speed, but removing the source does not usually prevent the ability from resolving. Terminology is important since Magic is a complex game where quite a few changes happen due to very minor differences in wording.

You are playing with words dude... let's keep the way it was; no further discussion.
Thanks, but my post is a fact, unless there are any rule that says it isn't... just omit "as far as I understand"...


Your end conclusion was correct, but your terminology was not. You don't 'interrupt' abilities, you simply respond to them. And you can respond to them with anything that you can do at instant speed, but removing the source does not usually prevent the ability from resolving. Terminology is important since Magic is a complex game where quite a few changes happen due to very minor differences in wording.

You are playing with words dude... let's keep the way it was; no further discussion.

 

Leave the answering of Rules questions to the pros. I know that you want to contribute, but if you do you need to do it in a very explicit and precise manner.

Also, there are more than enough people on this forum who are VERY credible and are quick to answer.
IMAGE(http://www.spritestitch.com/forum/images/ranks/rank7mario.gif)
Thanks, but my post is a fact, unless there are any rule that says it isn't... just omit "as far as I understand"...


Your end conclusion was correct, but your terminology was not. You don't 'interrupt' abilities, you simply respond to them. And you can respond to them with anything that you can do at instant speed, but removing the source does not usually prevent the ability from resolving. Terminology is important since Magic is a complex game where quite a few changes happen due to very minor differences in wording.

You are playing with words dude... let's keep the way it was; no further discussion.

 
Leave the answering of Rules questions to the pros. I know that you want contribute, but if you do you need to do it in a very explicit and precise manner.

Also, there are more than enough people on this forum who are VERY credible and are quick to answer.

That's the problem of speaking several languages, you mix them up, so it seem that everyone here knows everything, good for you...
Thanks, but my post is a fact, unless there are any rule that says it isn't... just omit "as far as I understand"...


Your end conclusion was correct, but your terminology was not. You don't 'interrupt' abilities, you simply respond to them. And you can respond to them with anything that you can do at instant speed, but removing the source does not usually prevent the ability from resolving. Terminology is important since Magic is a complex game where quite a few changes happen due to very minor differences in wording.

You are playing with words dude... let's keep the way it was; no further discussion.

 
Leave the answering of Rules questions to the pros. I know that you want contribute, but if you do you need to do it in a very explicit and precise manner.

Also, there are more than enough people on this forum who are VERY credible and are quick to answer.

That's the problem of speaking several languages, you mix them up, so it seem that everyone here knows everything, good for you...

No, the problem with that is that YOU speak several languages and YOU mix them up.

Like that other guy said, we appreciate you trying to help, but unless you deliver an exact/accurate ruling...then please, don't even bother. Leave it to the pros.
IMAGE(http://www.spritestitch.com/forum/images/ranks/rank7mario.gif)
Everyone thanks for the quick answers. It's appreciated! 
Tristan82: If you haunt the forum for a while, you'll learn a lot.

Indicating "as far a you understand" is a valid proviso, but you may be doing the OP an injustice if your understanding is incorrect as you'll be passing along misinformation.

I'm not criticising or removing your right to post rather I'm merely explaining the rationale behind why others have posted what they posted.

Fortunately, there are many knowledgeable people here who will correct any misunderstandings that you may happen to have.

As to your post:
As far as I understand, yes you can, since while your Ezuri is being targeted that means Terror hasn't resolved yet, so you can use its ability and place it on the stack, this will have it resolve first (the +3/+3) and then Terror will resolve.

it's technically correct that Ezuri being targeted logically leads to the spell being on the stack and therefore that the spell hasn't finished resolving, it doesn't logically follow that one can respond. They can respond to the spell before it starts to resolve, but not after it starts to resolve. Obviously, other factors may also play a part in whether it can be responded to as well.
You can't interrupt a creature's ability if the spell doesn't say so.

there are no spells that allow an ability to be "interrupted", there are spells that can counter an ability or spells that can end the turn (thereby exiling the ability), but no spells that can "interrupt" a resolving ability.
For instance if you have Thraben Doomsayer and you tap it to place a token, and then your opponent uses a Searing Spear on him, both spell and ability go to the stack in the cast order, so at the end both will resolve.

yes, an ability is independent of its source
it's not clear in the way you worded it, but the activated ability goes on first, then the opponent casts Spear after the ability is already on the stack.

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

I've removed content from this thread. Trolling/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct

You can review the Code of Conduct here: company.wizards.com/conduct

Please remember to keep your posts polite, on topic and refrain from personal attacks. You are free to disagree with one another as long as it is done in a respectful manner. 

Is there anything in the rules of posting that prohibit someone that is not a rules advisor from responding to rules questions.  Those that have commented about leaving the job to the pros are going down a slippery slope.


I for one want to be given accurate timely responses to my questions since most come up during game play.  And so far, people have been great at responding in a timely manner.  This forum is a great place to learn.


However, I would rather be given a response that may be a bit misleading in a timely manner than get no response at all.  Any clarification can be given by a rules advisor after the fact.


So, unless there is a 'rule' that prohibits someone from answering rules questions we should not be asking nor expecting people not to respond and help those in need.


Just my two mana's worth.

nono, you are free to answer to the best of your knowledge (that's how I started and got some things wrong, still do on occasion ;))

if someone screws up there is generally a correction within minutes and everyone has learned something

not sure why some people are so hostile to new people
proud member of the 2011 community team
Is there anything in the rules of posting that prohibit someone that is not a rules advisor from responding to rules questions.

Nope. Anyone is allowed to post; tanuki-maro and dragon_nut were stating their personal opinions.
I post regularly and I've let my Rules Advisor status lapse so no, there's absolutely no requirement.

and even Rules Advisor certification isn't that distinguishing, it means you passed a multiple choice test of 25 basic to intermediate questions concerning rules interactions.

Anyone is free to answer, but that doesn't equate to just anyone should answer.

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