5th Edition Rule Set Question (Tapping)

28 posts / 0 new
Last post
According to the fifth edition rules (crystalkeep.com/magic/rules/fifth-summar...), would I be able to undercut the ability of a Prodigal Sorcerer by using either the ability of an Abyssal Hunter, or perhaps an Ivory Charm, thus preventing Prodigal Sorcerer from using its ability?  For example:

Prodigal Sorcer announces they are using their ability to tap and deal a damage to me.

I announce  that I am instead casting Ivory Charm on Prodigal Sorcerer, thus tapping it before its ability goes off.

Is this not how it works?  If so, or if not, where in the 5th Edition rule set linked above does it describe this process?

I'm terrible at deciphering these bloody things.

Thanks in advance! 
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
no, that doesn't work

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

That's what I figured, but I'm trying to find in the rules where it states that.

Thank you! 
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
in the original rulebook check out Timing page 29-30

only Interrupts could resolve first and prevent it from happening 

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

The following seem relevent to me:

A.2.2 - The cost is paid when the ability is announced (see Rule T.4).      The effect happens when the ability resolves (see Rule T.7).     [D'Angelo 02/03/98]

G.40.3 - You can tap an already tapped permanent as part of the effect of a     spell or ability.  This has no effect on the permanent.     [Duelist Magazine #5, Page 23]


Cheers
The following seem relevent to me:

A.2.2 - The cost is paid when the ability is announced (see Rule T.4).      The effect happens when the ability resolves (see Rule T.7).     [D'Angelo 02/03/98]

G.40.3 - You can tap an already tapped permanent as part of the effect of a     spell or ability.  This has no effect on the permanent.     [Duelist Magazine #5, Page 23]


Cheers


The first of those rules doesn't mean tapping the source will stop an ability from resolving, for the same reason destroying it doesn't accomplish this. Then as now, abilities that had already been activated were independent of thier sources.

The second isn't even strictly true (the second sentence contradicts the first; the second one is correct, while the first would be correct if one inserted the phrase "attempt to" in there).
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
The rules I quoted came from the 5th edition rulings link the OP provided, I did not word them myself.  SiNNiX wanted to find the rules that told him what he already believed.  To me, the first rule says that the cost of activating an ability is paid when it is announced, the Prodigal Sorcerer is tapped, which is before the interrupt window.  The second rule says that even though you can [attempt to] tap an already tapped permanent it will have no effect on the permanent.  If that doesn't confirm what he was asking, please direct us to the rule(s) that do(es).

Cheers
Thanks a lot for the replies, fellas.  So, here's a followup question:

Did this change at all prior to Mirrodin block?  Have tap abilities ever been able to be interrupted?

Thanks again! 
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
No it didn't, and no they haven't.
MTG Rules Advisor
So spells go on the stack, and abilities go on the stack, but tap abilities don't go on the stack?  I guess that's what confuses me.
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
Tap abilities go on the stack too (unless they're mana abilities).

"Once it is announced, nothing can stop a fast effect unless it is countered immediately by an interrupt."
- this has always been true since the Original Rules

Some players think that it was otherwise, but they were playing wrong or were misinformed. 

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

Yes, tap abilities go on the stack.

Costs don't go on the stack.  You can't stop somebody casting a Lightning Bolt by tapping there only source of Red Mana.  Just like you can't stop Tim by tapping him.

Of course if you are using 5th edition rules there is no stack, that wasn't a zone until 6th edition, but the answer is still the same.
MTG Rules Advisor
Hmm... that makes sense.  The bridge thing or whatever it is in 5th edition kind of confused me.  I work too darn much; I barely have enough time to go back and read the entire rule set like I know I should, hehe.

So in 5th Edition, you couldn't put spells and abilities on some alternate version of a stack?

I promise I'll try and go through the whole thing tonight if I have time.  Sorry for being annoying! 
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
Pre-Sixth edition, spells and abilities were added to a batch to be processed relatively simultaneously.

Interrupts and Mana Sources being the exception - they would resolve immediately unless responded to by another interrupt.

Once the batch was closed, everything would be processed through it. 

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

I'm gonna try to check that out during my lunch break in an hour or two.  Hopefully I can correctly decipher it.
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
This may or may not be helpful.

Source.

EDIT: Better source.

(As a personal aside, I think it's one of the reasons why the 6th-Edition rules changes were a really excellent idea.)

"Proc" stands for "Programmed Random OCcurance". It does not even vaguely apply to anything Magic cards do. Don't use it.

Level 1 Judge as of 09/26/2013

Zammm = Batman

"Ability words are flavor text for Melvins." -- Fallingman

Hmmm... I see.

Well I spent my lunch reading through a lot of the rule set.  I guess 5th Edition might not be the way to go for Vintage games with my MTG group.

I think perhaps we'll discuss switching to a more recent set of "Vintage Comprehensive Rules."  I believe that would be December 1, 2003?

www.wizards.com/magic/comprules/MagicCom... 
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
Nevermind; it looks like this is the latest Vintage rule set, except for 4/30/2003.

www.crystalkeep.com/magic/rules/sixth/ma... 
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
Hmmm... I see.

Well I spent my lunch reading through a lot of the rule set.  I guess 5th Edition might not be the way to go for Vintage games with my MTG group.


Well, rules are updated for a reason.

Magic and Magic Online Volunteer Community Lead. On Strike

I'm trying to make my official VCL posts in purple.

You posted saying my thread was moved/locked but nothing happened.


Show
Unfortunately, VCLs do not currently have the tools necessary to take moderation actions directly. VCLs submit their actions to ORCs, who then actually perform the action. This processing can take between a few minutes and several hours, depending on how busy/attentive the ORCs are.

If you see something that needs VCL attention, please use this thread to make a request and a VCL will look at it as soon as possible. CoC violations should be reported to Customer Service using the "report post" button. Please do not disrupt the thread by making requests of either kind in-thread.

General MTGO FAQ

Yes, the Shuffler is Random!
The definitive thread on the Magic Online shuffler.

Magic Math Made Easy
Draw probabilities, Swiss results, Elo ratings and booster EV

Event EV Calculator
Calculate the EV for any event with a fixed number of rounds and prizes based on record

Dual means two. A duel is a battle between two people. Lands that make two colors of mana are dual lands. A normal Magic battle is a duel.
Thanks to PhoenixLAU for the [thread=1097559]awesome avatar[/thread]!
Quotables

Show
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, each lolcat actually produces a negative wordcount." -Ith "I think "Highly Informed Sarcasm" should be our Magic Online General motto." -Ith "Sorry, but this thread seems just like spam. TT is for off-topic discussion, not no-topic discussion." -WizO_Kwai_Chang "Stop that! If you're not careful, rational thinking may catch on!" -Sax "... the only word i see that fits is incompitant." -Mr44 (sic) "You know a thread is gonna be locked when it gets to the hexadecimal stage." -Gathion "It's a good gig" - Gleemax "I tell people often, if you guys want to rant, you've certainly got the right to (provided you obey CoC/ToS stuff), and I don't even really blame you. But if you see something you think needs changing a well thought-out, constructive post does more to make that happen." - Worth Wollpert
Hmmm... I see.

Well I spent my lunch reading through a lot of the rule set.  I guess 5th Edition might not be the way to go for Vintage games with my MTG group.


Well, rules are updated for a reason.



True, but that doesn't always result in a better game.

*cough*D&D*cough*
*cough*Warhammer:Fantasy*cough*



Also, your profile pic owns, good sir! 
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
Vintage games are perfectly playable using the current ruleset. The updated rules do their best to keep functionality and intent intact.

Is there a specific reason you wanted to play with the old rules? I feel that the new ones play about the same, but they're cleaner and there are fewer ambiguities.
the only real substantial change is damage on the stack and mana burn
so instead of using outdated rules just add those rules to the current rules as houserules

that should work much better
proud member of the 2011 community team
Vintage games are perfectly playable using the current ruleset. The updated rules do their best to keep functionality and intent intact.

Is there a specific reason you wanted to play with the old rules? I feel that the new ones play about the same, but they're cleaner and there are fewer ambiguities.



The reason we don't play with new rules is that we don't like how mana burn no longer exists.  My Saproling deck, for example, can easily produce 30 green mana in a reasonable amount of time (an absurd amount of mana-producing elves and 4x Priests of Titania make this possible), but it isn't fair if I can simply tap 2 of my Priests of Titania to float 12 or 14 mana, and then just use it on a Decree of Savagery.  I should be penalized and take the burn for the unused mana, just like in the old days.

Also, what have they changed about how damage goes on the stack?  I didn't know about any changes to how that works. 
SiNNiX Teams: NFL: Denver Broncos NBA: Boston Celtics NHL: Boston Bruins MLB: Boston Red Sox College: Texas A&M University
since M10 damage no longer uses the stack

so for example Mogg Fanatic can no longer deal combat damage and be sacrificed for damage
proud member of the 2011 community team
To Clarify Combat damage no longer uses the stack.  (damage never did)

But if you are familar with 5th edition rules it should be the same, combat damage didn't start using the stack until 6th edition.
MTG Rules Advisor
The rules I quoted came from the 5th edition rulings link the OP provided, I did not word them myself.  SiNNiX wanted to find the rules that told him what he already believed.  To me, the first rule says that the cost of activating an ability is paid when it is announced, the Prodigal Sorcerer is tapped, which is before the interrupt window.  The second rule says that even though you can [attempt to] tap an already tapped permanent it will have no effect on the permanent.  If that doesn't confirm what he was asking, please direct us to the rule(s) that do(es).

Cheers


Thanks for making your intention clear. In that case, my post was mostly pointless and we are in agreement.

In my defense, when you just post some rules with no context, it's hard to tell what you might be getting at. My worry was that the rules you posted could be misread, by you or others, as meaning tapping prevented the ability simply because it resolved sooner (this is a common misunderstanding under any version of the Magic rules).
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
So spells go on the stack, and abilities go on the stack, but tap abilities don't go on the stack?  I guess that's what confuses me.



tap abilities do go on the stack; but once created they are independent of the card that created them

think of it as the card casting a spell, that spell is now on the stack regardless of what happens to the card


Vintage games are perfectly playable using the current ruleset. The updated rules do their best to keep functionality and intent intact.

Is there a specific reason you wanted to play with the old rules? I feel that the new ones play about the same, but they're cleaner and there are fewer ambiguities.



The reason we don't play with new rules is that we don't like how mana burn no longer exists.  My Saproling deck, for example, can easily produce 30 green mana in a reasonable amount of time (an absurd amount of mana-producing elves and 4x Priests of Titania make this possible), but it isn't fair if I can simply tap 2 of my Priests of Titania to float 12 or 14 mana, and then just use it on a Decree of Savagery.  I should be penalized and take the burn for the unused mana, just like in the old days.

Also, what have they changed about how damage goes on the stack?  I didn't know about any changes to how that works. 



the few places i have played where they wanted to keep mana burn; they still updated all of the other rules. the game makes much more sense with the current ruleset and is much easier to figure out issues.

you can always just have the house rule for mana burn
Sign In to post comments