Community

Sep 30, 2009 -- 12:06PM, mrbananas wrote:

*Spoiler*

rabblerabble

You are comparing apples and oranges in your "spells get exiled and don't do anything while the Pyromancer's ability still does something when the Pyromancer gets exiled" complaint.

In removing the spell from the stack, it cannot possibly resolve, and thus it has no effect.

In removing the source of an activated ability, you do nothing to the ability itself and can possibly resolve unless something else interferes with said resolution.

The combat damage on the stack and the O-ring trick are also apples-and-oranges comparison. The O-ring trick takes the use of multiple cards to pull it off, and it is not all that over-powered because of the many ways with which it can be dealt. The 2-for-1 via combat, however, was a lot more powerful and makes a lot less sense (the O-ring thing can and has been flavorfully explained but I have yet to hear a good flavorful explanation for why a creature about to hit someone could disappear but still hit its opponent).

Please, learn of what you speak before you speak.

Sep 30, 2009 -- 9:28PM, mrbananas wrote:

Sep 30, 2009 -- 1:32PM, Kedar wrote:

Sep 30, 2009 -- 12:06PM, mrbananas wrote:

*Spoiler*

rabblerabble

You are comparing apples and oranges in your "spells get exiled and don't do anything while the Pyromancer's ability still does something when the Pyromancer gets exiled" complaint.

In removing the spell from the stack, it cannot possibly resolve, and thus it has no effect.

In removing the source of an activated ability, you do nothing to the ability itself and can possibly resolve unless something else interferes with said resolution.

 

my point is, the source of a spell is the spell card itself, while the source of an ability is usually a permenant (not always)

When something happens to the source of an ability, nothing happens to the ability,  but when something happens to the source of the spell, being the spell itself, suddenly the spell is also terminated. One is more dependent on its sources state than the other.

I'm not advocating entirely changing the relationship between all abilities and their sources, really i am advocating that we could make the relationship between combat damage and creatures similar to that of a spell's source and the spell's effect.

 

i am not saying that we need to get rid of exiling spells (i will admit i personally don't like the concept). I guess what i am really saying is if we made combat damage more like apples and less like oranges, then you wouldn't need the current rules change to combat damage to fix the sacrificing shenanigans.

You still don't get it. You are comparing apples and oranges. Removing the spell itself (there is no "source of the spell" in the sense you mean--there is just the spell, not some object to which the spell is attached--the spell is the object) does stop it from doing anything, just like the removing the ability itself will do something. Removing the source of the ability, which is always an object separate from the ability completely does nothing to the ability, just like removing the original spell doesn't make a copy disappear.

Stop comparing apples and oranges; you're not doing anything except embarassing yourself.

Sep 30, 2009 -- 9:38PM, DarkSunWolf wrote:

If someone shot a fireball at you, and you somehow killed that guy first, would the fireball disappear?

In multiplayer, if player A casts a Fireball targetting Player B, and Player C kills Player A in response, then Player A's Fireball is removed from the stack.

Sep 30, 2009 -- 9:56PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

In multiplayer, if player A casts a Fireball targetting Player B, and Player C kills Player A in response, then Player A's Fireball is removed from the stack.

Ya, ya, I was just trying to give some flavor. I knew someone was gonna get technical on me.

But now that you brought that up... that should be changed as well. If you can't kill a creature to make his ability go away, why can you kill a player to make his spell go away? Also, it ruined my plan of mass-kill when i played Breath of Malfegor with Hivemind in an 8-way. It just led to a confusing stack of life-totals and disappearing spells.

Sep 30, 2009 -- 9:36PM, Kedar wrote:

 

You still don't get it. You are comparing apples and oranges. Removing the spell itself (there is no "source of the spell" in the sense you mean--there is just the spell, not some object to which the spell is attached--the spell is the object) does stop it from doing anything, just like the removing the ability itself will do something. Removing the source of the ability, which is always an object separate from the ability completely does nothing to the ability, just like removing the original spell doesn't make a copy disappear.

Stop comparing apples and oranges; you're not doing anything except embarassing yourself.

How exactly does one exile an ability.  abilities can be countered, they can be lost, but i have never seen a card that changes the zone of an ability. their are abilities that trigger from other zones, but the ability itself is not in that zone

when an instant card is in my hand, is it a spell? No

when an instant card is in my graveyard is it a spell? No

when an instant card is exiled, is it a spell? No

The only time an instant card is considered a spell is when it is on the stack.

If i made a card that said, target opponent discards a spell from his hand, would it have any functionality? No

even a suspended card is not called a spell, but a face-up exiled card. see riftsweeper,  you can't counter target spell that is suspended because its not a target spell until its put onto the stack.

Perhaps my original perspective and wording is a little off, so here is a reword and a flip. (yes its a different argument, yes the original one was flawed) If the source of the spell is the instant card, then why does exiling the spell also exile the instant card,  when exiling the activated ability wouldn't exile the permanent source? 

so yes exiling the spell should remove it from the stack, but why then does it cause the instant card to then be exiled with it?

However, talk of exiling spells if off topic since its nothing new.  Is there something completely wrong with the idea of changing the relationship between combat damage and creatures.