Boros reckoner infinite life combo?

14 posts / 0 new
Last post
hi there, looking for nice combos, i found something that REEEALLY wants to make sure if is a valid ruling combo with boros reckoner for an infinite life combo.


lets say in my first turn I play Ulvenwald Tracker, second turn I play  Nearheath Pilgrim, next turn I play Boros reckoner and paired with Nearheath Pilgrim so he can have life link, then next turn I play boros Charm so he can be indestructible this turn and pay the cost for Ulvenwald Tracker to get the Boros Reckoner fights another creature, now the Boros reckoner states:

Whenever Boros Reckoner is dealt damage, it deals that much damage to target creature or player.


  
So I chose that Boros Reckoner would deal damage to him self, then as he receive damage again I do it over and over for infinite life, would this be legal?

just to REALLY make sure 
that works

keep in mind that there is no such thing as "infinite" in Magic
just choose a large number such as googolplex and use that instead
proud member of the 2011 community team
Im not sure the fighting works without ANOTHER creature. I dont think fighting mechanic can work that way.
Read the original post again: Ulvenwald Tracker's ability is used to have Boros Reckoner fight another creature -- one time.

After that Boros Reckoner keeps the combo going by targeting itself with its own triggered ability, which is a completely legal move since it is indestructible for the turn due to Boros Charm.  Its own triggered ability deals damage to itself, causing its triggered ability to trigger again, and it targets itself again; rinse and repeat.  Normally, there'd be no point to this, but with lifelink you'll gain an arbitrarily large amount of life, if you keep the loop going long enough.
It would as he posted be selected to Fight another target creature. THEN WITH THE CHARM be indestructable. THEN the infinite life combo would kick in. Once he selected it to deal its damage to itself. Then just pick a number. Like 1 million life.
yes, in this case you need another creature to "kickstart" the combo
but there is at least Ulvenwald Tracker as a target, if the opponent has a creature, all the better
proud member of the 2011 community team
It is possible, under the rules of Magic, for a creature to fight itself, which is to say there are rules that govern how that works.   Now, whether or not the Ulvenwald Tracker can make a creature fight itself is not entirely clear to me as I read the gatherer entry for the tracker.  In the Gatherer it only says that the first target will fight the second target, and that the second target may be a creature controlled by any player, including you.  From the card wording, the word "another" is slightly ambiguous,  one would presume it means "any creature that is not the first target" but it could also mean "any creature that is not the Ulvenwald Tracker".  Lastly, it could mean "one more target" which could include the Tracker itself and/or the Reckoner.  In other words "another" might just mean "any target" not strictly "a different target than ____".  From the rulings listed below the entry it would seem to mean that second target can be anything.

One way or the other I think the card plus it's rulings require the reader to read into it something that's not entirely clear there.
Now, whether or not the Ulvenwald Tracker can make a creature fight itself is not entirely clear to me as I read the gatherer entry for the tracker. From the card wording, the word "another" is slightly ambiguous

Wrong. «Another» has its English definition, which is «not the same as the first one». Check Fate Transfer
608.2c (...) read the whole text and apply the rules of English to the text.

Wizards of the Coast: NOT ANYMORE outsourced to Elbonia

Lastly, it could mean "one more target" which could include the Tracker itself and/or the Reckoner.  In other words "another" might just mean "any target" not strictly "a different target than ____".  From the rulings listed below the entry it would seem to mean that second target can be anything.

Wrong again: Seeds of Strength

Wizards of the Coast: NOT ANYMORE outsourced to Elbonia

while it is possible for a creature to fight itself, I know of no card that achieves that
proud member of the 2011 community team
Nightfall Predator can target itself with its fight ability, making it probably the only current card that can fight itself.
while it is possible for a creature to fight itself, I know of no card that achieves that

Nightfall Predator targeting itself

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 accept everything Chaikov and others have said, however, I would point out that the word "another" seems to have two different meanings as pertains to the cards it is written on.  Consider Fiend Hunter.  The word "another" on Fiend Hunter basically means "fiend hunter's ability cannot target itself (it could target a different creature also named Fiend hunter, but THIS one can't exile itself).  Now, on Ulvenwald Tracker we're interpreting "another traget creature" to mean "not the first target mentioned earlier on in this ability, but a different one than that."

So on some creatures' abilities "another" means "not itself" and on others it means "not the first one we mentioned". 

This leads to some ambiguity, doesn't it?  I mean, a person who is used to reading cards like Fiend Hunter and learns that "this sort of language on a card generally means that it can't target itself with it's own ability, usually" could easily come to the conclusion that the Tracker cannot make some creature fight the Tracker, but it can make that first target fight itself.  I'm not saying I 100% agree with that interpretation, but I am saying that it is not entirely clear what was meant by "another" in the case of the Tracker's ability.

If we read the first ruling listed for the Tracker, it reads "The second target may be a creature any player controls, including you." this could be taken to indicate that there are no restrictions on the second target (unlike the first target, which must be a creature YOU control).  I mean, to make it abundantly clear that you can't make the first target fight itself, some people might have expected that ruling to read something like "The second target may be a creature any player controls, including you, BUT IT MAY NOT BE THE SAME AS THE FIRST TARGET."
@Frinkiac: The idea is that the word "another" doesn't have any specific meaning to the game -- so it falls back to its English meaning, which is subject to context.

A player may get used to reading magic cards in a precise way, and thus assume that there is a technical meaning, but this would be an incorrect interpretation. English is subjective by nature so there's no way to word anything in such a precise way.
Sign In to post comments