Multiple Totem Armors

15 posts / 0 new
Last post
If I enchant one creature with multiple enchantments and each enchantment has totem armor, will all enchantments with totem armor be removed if the creature takes lethal damage?  Or, does one at a time come off of it?
Only one, each totem armor has a replacement effect that replaces the destruction of the creature with the enchantment instead.  Once you apply one of those effects the creature is no longer being destroyed and the other totem armor's effects will no longer apply.

DCI Level 2 Judge

Rockford, Illinois

you choose one that gets destroyed instead of the creature
proud member of the 2011 community team
No, just the one whose replacement effect you apply first.

Replacement effects are applied one at a time. After you apply the first, no destruction is happening for the effect to modify, so it doesn't do anything.
Nitpick
Replacement effects are applied one at a time.

This might be a little misleading: strictly speaking, all replacement effects applying to one event are actually applied simultaneously, not one at a time.

What is sequential (and not simultaneously) is the evaluation of how each effect will affect the event.
Thus, replacement effects are evaluated one at a time, and that evaluation is used to enable/disable other applicable effects, which are then evaluated one at a time, etc. When all these evaluations are done, then the relevant effects are applied, simultaneously.

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)

They are most definitely applied one at a time.
616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.



For example, if two effect double the amont of damage something does, you first apply one (doubling the damage), then the other (quadrupling the damage).

It they were applied simultaneously, things would be very different.

For example, both Totem Armor enchantments would get destroyed.

For example, you'd get into situations impossible to resolve when two replacement effects change an object move differently.

The event they modify can still be instantaneous if was instantaneous before, but that's something else entirely.
Right. The replacement effects apply in the order you choose (and you have to choose one at a time in order to figure out what will still apply after that).

It's the modified event that occurs as a single event. So after I apply one replacement effect, then I apply the other, and a third no longer is applicable, finally the event as modified by those two effects will occur. 

Level 3 DCI Judge Mission Viejo, CA

They are most definitely applied one at a time.

No, they're not.

616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.


I am aware of the words used by those who wrote the rules. I still maintain that it is misleading and, from a linguistic point of view, false:

To apply: «to bring into action» 

For example, if two effect double the amont of damage something does, you first apply one (doubling the damage), then the other (quadrupling the damage).

Thanks for the example: it'll prove my point.
From the viewpoint of the Game, there NEVER is a moment, not even a zero-time duration, where the damage is doubled: the damage goes directly from single to quadruple.
Why? Because you applied both doubling effects, simultaneously.
You knew, however, that applying those two effects would produce quadruple damage, because you evaluated each effect sequentially.




N.B.: I will not reply to your inevitable denial.

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)

From the viewpoint of the Game, there NEVER is a moment, not even a zero-time duration, where the damage is doubled: the damage goes directly from single to quadruple.

The game doubles it then doubles it again, and it only ever deals quadruple. The rules are very clear on this. It no way does it go from single to quadruple.
Replacement effect are not "physically" applied until you fully know what event is going to happen.

Example : Your Gluttonous Slime is about to enter the battlefield and you control Master Biomancer.

You may chose to apply the Biomancer's effect first, then devour the Biomancer, which means the Slime will get the counters from devour and from Biomancer (and will be a Mutant).

But even if you chose the devour effect first, the Slime still get the counters from devour and from the Biomancer (and will be a Mutant). That's because even if you have chosen the devour effect first, the event has not actually happened yet, so Biomancer is still on the battlefield and it's replacement effect can still be chosen.

Ther is a special exception in the rules for zone changing replacement effect :

614.13b The same object can’t be chosen to change zones more than once when applying replacement effects that modify how a single permanent enters the battlefield.


 
You guys are using different definitions of "apply."

Chaikov's interpretation implies that, to apply something, there needs to be a real effect.
ikegami's interpretation is that the application of a replacement effect is simply the act of altering what another effect will do.

ikegami's interpretation is more in line with the way the rules are written, but Chaikov's does have a significant advantage: The term "apply" connotates action -- he's replaced the game's use of apply with the term evaluate, which is a far better word.
ikegami's interpretation is more in line with the way the rules are written, but Chaikov's does have a significant advantage: The term "apply" connotates action

Indeed, and as I've been saying all along, there is an action being performed. If there was no action performed, the OP's question would have a different answer, and it would be impossible to resolve the situation where the two replacement effects "exile it instead" and "move it to its owner's hand instead" are applicable,

You change (or take the action of changing) the effect by applying one, then you check again.

he's replaced the game's use of apply with the term evaluate, which is a far better word.

What is being evaluated for what quality?

Evaluate a replacement effect for applicability? That's only one step of the process. Once you've determined that one or more replacement affects are applicable, you then need to actually apply[7] it, and proceed to see (evaluate) whether other effects now apply[3] so they can be applied[7] in turn.

You guys are using different definitions of "apply."

Definitions. I've used #3 and #7. I can't see what other definitions would be applicable. It could be that he's talking about applying something other than replacement effects, except his entire post was telling me I was wrong about saying "applying a replacement effect".

What is being evaluated for what quality?

An effect is being evaluated to determine its final result.

It seems silly to bring in the dictionary definition of a word with as broad a usage as apply. I don't think anyone would say that Chaikov used it incorrectly -- in fact, I had hoped to point out that you were using the denotatative meaning (dictionary definition) while Chaikov used the connotative meaning (additional ideas tied to said definition). By using a different word, a distinction is created between applying replacement effects to an event and applying that effect to the game state.

With my post, I was hoping to illustrate that no one is actually wrong here.
What is being evaluated for what quality?

An effect is being evaluated to determine its final result.

"it's final result" is a not a quality that can be evaluated. "Is the effect its final result?" makes no sense.

The only thing being evaluated is a replacement effect's applicability. If some are deamed applicable, one of them is applied. Then both the evaluation and application are repeated. Replacement effect that didn't apply before the chosen replacement effect was applied might now apply, and vice-versa. It can't possibly be simulatenous if that's true.


  • One-shot effects are performed. (The rules use the passive voice: The instructions of effects are followed.)

  • Continuous effects are generated. (I've been using "created".)

  • Replacement effects are applied (which means "brought into use").


[Upd: Added to second paragraph. Added terminology for continuous effects.]

To conclude,

Whatever verb you want to use, the replacement affects are verbed one at a time. Saying they aren't verbed one at a time is just plain wrong.

If you don't like the choice of verb, suggest an alternate. I happen to agree with Wizard's choice of verb. "Applied" is completely applicable and unambiguous. That said, I will consider alternatives. "Evaluated" was suggested, but it simply does not fit.


The answer to the OP's question:

Replacement effects are verbed one at a time. The Totem Armor's replacement effect of your choice is verbed, then you check if any other replacement effects still verb. Since none do, the other Total Armor's replacement effect isn't verbed, so the Enchantment isn't destroyed.