Deathtouch/Indestructible

12 posts / 0 new
Last post
Around a good month or two ago, I started my first Magic experience with "Shards of Alara". Since I have never-ever touched the game, I thought it would be a fun new experience. After reading the rules printed on the cards, I thought I had a clear understanding of how everything works. I was wrong.

Example -
Quietus Spike:
Equipped creature has deathtouch.

Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage to a player, that player loses half his or her life, rounded up. Equip 3

Upon reading this card straight forward, I personally think it says: "Whenever "Quietus Spike" is equiped on a creature, that creature can cause instant death upon other creatures. If that creature deals damage to a player, they loose half of their life points. Rounded up."

According to the rules found online, my understanding of the card was flawed. Even though I'm reading the card from a grammerically correct perspective, the person who wrote the card was not being specific. Since both affects are written on two seperate lines, I didn't think they were related to each other.

Another example:
Spearbreaker Behemoth
Spearbreaker Behemoth is indestructible.

1: Target creature with power 5 or greater is indestructible this turn.

This card clearly says, "Indestructible!" Its a 5/5 indestructable creature. If you read this card straight forward, nothing can destroy this card except for another creature. No spells, no artifacts, nothing. Only a creature with a 5/5+ can block or destroy the card. Anything else will not work.

After learning the card's true meaning, I started to rethink about why I wanted to buy into Magic. According to the rules found online, this card can be affected by spells, artifacts, and instants. Instead of using the phrase "Spearbreaker Behemoth is indestructible", the card should really say, "Spearbreaker Behemoth is not affected by instants, artifacts, or spells that instantly destroys creatures."

Once I read the card's true affect online, I started to retract from buying anymore cards. Since the rules are not clearly presented, why would anyone bother with translating encryptic writting?

"Indestructible" = Indestructible
"Deathtouch" = Instant death

My job iinvolves sending a clear and specific message to a group of individuals. If my audience has to go online for more details, I'm not doing a good job at being specific.

You seem to have taken the wrong door. This thread exists to inform people of the upcoming Rules Changes. If you feel the need to express your dismay with the existing complexities of MtG, feel free to re-post your rant in Magic General.

By the way: indestructible means impossible to destroy. So not even combat damage should work; and rightly so, it doesn't destroy an indestructible creature. And it would be highly unintuitive if it would work any other way.
DCI L2 Judge "When nothing remains, everything is equally possible." - One With Nothing
You seem to have taken the wrong door. This thread exists to inform people of the upcoming Rules Changes. If you feel the need to express your dismay with the existing complexities of MtG, feel free to re-post your rant in Magic General.

By the way: indestructible means impossible to destroy. So not even combat damage should work; and rightly so, it doesn't destroy an indestructible creature. And it would be highly unintuitive if it would work any other way.

If the creature is indestructible, why would they bother putting 5/5 on the card?

Note: I did open a new thread in the general forums, but my post was related to what was being said in the new rules. If they have to change the rules to be clear, that means they were not clear to begin with. Most players look for quick and easy rules, which automatically come with the game. If they have to go online to look for details, why even bother trying to make new rules for a bigger audience? Why bother playing a card game where the rules read off like a dictionary?
If the creature is indestructible, why would they bother putting 5/5 on the card?

Because its power still matters just as much as for any other creature, and its toughness still matters for many things as well (notably toughness reduction).

Note: I did open a new thread in the general forums, but my post was related to what was being said in the new rules.

No, it really wasn't.

Magic is indeed a relatively complicated game, and you're not wrong that this is sometimes a bit problematic. However, you are grossly exaggerating the extent to which this is true. Magic is not a game for people who proudly wear their own willful ignorance like a badge of honour, but having no time for people with that mentality in the first place, I find this to be a feature, not a bug.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
Moving this digression off of this thread to keep things clear...

Come join me at No Goblins Allowed


Because frankly, being here depresses me these days.

If the creature is indestructible, why would they bother putting 5/5 on the card?

Note: I did open a new thread in the general forums, but my post was related to what was being said in the new rules. If they have to change the rules to be clear, that means they were not clear to begin with. Most players look for quick and easy rules, which automatically come with the game. If they have to go online to look for details, why even bother trying to make new rules for a bigger audience? Why bother playing a card game where the rules read off like a dictionary?

To be more specific, having 5 power and 5 toughness for an indestructible creature still matters greatly. Any indestructible creature that ends up having a toughness of 0 goes to the graveyard according to state-based effects. You can kill indestructible creatures by casting negative toughness spells on them, such as Last Gasp for example, if their toughness eventually reaches 0.

I also used Last Gasp as a flavor example as well. Think about it, even if you are indestructible, that doesn't mean you can't die. Sure arrows, swords, fireballs won't destroy you. But if you get all the air sucked out of you, your body wont properly function anyway and your brain will die due to lack of oxygen.

Now of course this kind of flavor example doesn't really address all issues regarding the idea of an indestructible creature, but it's a start. Heck for indestructible artifact creatures, even if they don't breathe air, one could argue Last Gasp would simply be draining all their magical energy away from them, thus causing them to fall apart into a pile of garbage. Just use your imagination.
"nothing can destroy this card except for another creature"
now where did you read that exception??

Indestructible ability is just as simple as the word states it, it is INDESTRUCTIBLE, no wrath of god can destroy it, no combat damage can destroy, no terminate, NOTHING, no exceptions
Since I have never-ever touched the game, I thought it would be a fun new experience. After reading the rules printed on the cards, I thought I had a clear understanding of how everything works. I was wrong.

Didnt it occur to you that maybe you should have read the rulebook for the game you were learning to play?

Besides, is it really that unusual for a game to use keywords for common abilities/rules in order to save space? (especially when space is so limited due to the size of the surface being written on)

~ Tim
I am Blue/White Reached DCI Rating 1800 on 28/10/11. :D
Sig
56287226 wrote:
190106923 wrote:
Not bad. But what happens flavor wise when one kamahl kills the other one?
Zis iz a sign uf deep psychological troma, buried in zer subconscious mind. By keelink himzelf, Kamahl iz physically expressink hiz feelinks uf self-disgust ova hiz desire for hiz muzzer. [/GermanPsychologistVoice]
56957928 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
That makes no sense to me. If they spelled the ability out on the card in full then it would not be allowed in a mono-black Commander deck, but because they used a keyword to save space it is allowed? ~ Tim
Yup, just like you can have Birds of paradise in a mono green deck but not Noble Hierarch. YAY COLOR IDENTITY
56287226 wrote:
56888618 wrote:
Is algebra really that difficult?
Survey says yes.
56883218 wrote:
57799958 wrote:
You want to make a milky drink. You squeeze a cow.
I love this description. Like the cows are sponges filled with milk. I can see it all Nick Parks claymation-style with the cow's eyes bugging out momentarily as a giant farmer squeezes it like a squeaky dog toy, and milk shoots out of it.
56287226 wrote:
56735468 wrote:
And no judge will ever give you a game loss for playing snow covered lands.
I now have a new goal in life. ;)
I simply use my infect deck and when i attack my oponents creatures that block mine get -1/-1 counters till there toughness drops to 0 then they are automaticly sent to the graveyard
I simply use my infect deck and when i attack my oponents creatures that block mine get -1/-1 counters till there toughness drops to 0 then they are automaticly sent to the graveyard



Yes, that works, but please don't bump old threads.
why not the last person to leave info on the idestructable ability was completely wrong so the thread needed an update
why not the last person to leave info on the idestructable ability was completely wrong so the thread needed an update


Except that the thread is 2 years old, and nobody has probably cared about its contents for most of that time. ^_-
I'm all about super-control in MTG. If you're able to stop my shenanigans, then there aren't enough shenanigans. Lv 1 Judge Current Decklists Sweeping Beauty (Casual) A Vision of Clones (Casual) Coming soon... more decks! :-O
Sign In to post comments