Snakeform vs. Indestructible

13 posts / 0 new
Last post
since it just happened in an MTGO game I want clarification

I had 2 Timber Protector and some other treefolk out
I attacked with all of my creatures except for 1 Timber Protector (I just cast him)

opponent casts Snakeform on the attacking Protector, blocks it, and kills it

I was under the impression that being indestructible is not an ability and does not get removed
the ability making something indestructible can be removed, but that was on the non-attacking Protector
proud member of the 2011 community team
since it just happened in an MTGO game I want clarification

I had 2 Timber Protector and some other treefolk out
I attacked with all of my creatures except for 1 Timber Protector (I just cast him)

opponent casts Snakeform on the attacking Protector, blocks it, and kills it

I was under the impression that being indestructible is not an ability and does not get removed
the ability making something indestructible can be removed, but that was on the non-attacking Protector


but it became a snake

 
120.6. Some effects replace card draws.
It's because it's no longer a treefolk or forest (not that it ever was a forest), it's now a snake.  So the effect from the other protector no longer applies to it.

DCI Level 2 Judge

Rockford, Illinois

I'm an idiot...

thanks
proud member of the 2011 community team
you are correct on your assumption on how it would work it you'd artifical evolution'd the other protector to say snake.

 
120.6. Some effects replace card draws.
Just to clarify then, if opponent targets my Avacyn, Angel of Hope with Snakeform or other "lose all abilties" card, Avacyn herself would remain indestructible, but my other stuff will not for however long the spell stated?
Just to clarify then, if opponent targets my Avacyn, Angel of Hope with Snakeform or other "lose all abilties" card, Avacyn herself would remain indestructible, but my other stuff will not for however long the spell stated?


Until the end of the turn, all of your stuff is destructible, including avacyn.

While indestructibility isn't an ability, "Avacyn, Angel of hope and other permanents you control are indestructible" is. Since that ability is gone, it can have no effect. And unlike the timber protector question above, there's only one card generating an indestructibility effect.
Just to clarify then, if opponent targets my Avacyn, Angel of Hope with Snakeform or other "lose all abilties" card, Avacyn herself would remain indestructible, but my other stuff will not for however long the spell stated?

the ability that makes something indestructible can be removed, however, the property of being indestructible can not be directly affected

Spearbreaker Behemoth's first ability gives it the indestructible property, but if you remove that ability it will lose the property indirectly, however...

if it used its second ability on itself, it would give itself the indestructible property until end of turn and losing both abilities would not change that

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

How is the singular version of the ability (CARDNAME is indestructible) different enough than the plural version on Avacyn to warrant this different reaction? It is just stating something that is simply true about a permanent/group of permanents like the normal version.
How is the singular version of the ability (CARDNAME is indestructible) different enough then the plural version on Avacyn to warrant yhis different reaction?

I don't see a substantive difference... if you snakeform a Darksteel Sentinel, it is no longer indestrucitlbe.

The thing is, you need to snakeform the creature that has the ability, not the creature that is indestructible. These may be the same permanent, as in your examples, but they need not be.
It doesn't matter. It's the ability that is giving Avacyn and the other permanents the indestructible property, if you remove that ability, there's nothing giving them the property so they aren't indestructible.

Contrast it with having Avacyn with Indestructibility attached, Avacyn losing her abilities will not stop her from being indestructible because the property can't be directly removed from her and the Indestructibility aura is still providing it after she loses her own ability that was making her and other permanents indestructible. Indestructibility would lose the indestructible property when Avacyn lost her abilities because her ability no longer exists making Indestructibility indestructible.

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 understand now, thanks. Just a slight confusion on what to target to remove which ability. 2goth4u's example of the Indestructiblilty aura made me realize this.
Indestructible and Unblockable: the two problem child of (non) abilities! (rules 700.4 & 700.5)
Will Wizards ever quit fooling around and make them genuine abilites? 

If I steal a hundred dollar from a loot of one thousand, people might notice;

If I steal a hundred dollar from a loot of one million, I might get away with it;

If I wish to steal even more and still go unnoticed, I need to make the loot bigger.

 

Now you know why taxes always go up.

 

Looting: ''the plundering of public assets by corrupt or greedy authorities'' (Wikipedia)