I would suggest a slight change to the Lush Growth entry. "If you want to play one of these abilities, you have to pay its cost and tap the land." makes it look like "pay its cost" and "tap the land" are two distinct actions. Perhaps it could be phrased like "... you have to pay its cost (tap the land)" or "... you have to pay its cost (i.e., tap the land)."
Done.
I keep seeing that one question about Ethersworn Canonist --do you think it should be added to the FAQ?
Done.I keep seeing that one question about [c]Ethersworn Canonist[/c]--do you think it should be added to the FAQ?
You know there are questions I can totally understand. Then there are the questions where I have no idea what people are thinking (I still can't get my head around the 'I give DSC -1/-1 and then deal it ten damage, does it die now?' question). This is one of the last.
But if it keeps coming up this often, put it in I'd say.
P.S. That was so not an excuse to rant. I don't need excuses to rant!
You know there are questions I can totally understand. Then there are the questions where I have no idea what people are thinking (I still can't get my head around the 'I give DSC -1/-1 and then deal it ten damage, does it die now?' question). This i
You know there are questions I can totally understand. Then there are the questions where I have no idea what people are thinking (I still can't get my head around the 'I give DSC -1/-1 and then deal it ten damage, does it die now?' question). This is one of the last.
Imagine having the Canonist's ability, exactly as written, on an instant or sorcery. It'd work just for the one turn. That's why they think it might only work during the one turn.
Imagine having the Canonist's ability, exactly as written, on an instant or sorcery. It'd work just for the one turn. That's why they think it might only work during the one turn.
A couple minutes ago, i answered a question about Hybrid mana. To provide access to additional information, i was going to give a link to the FAQ. However, it appears the FAQ doesn't really cover hybrid mana. It is mentioned once when talking about card color, but nowhere else.
I think Hybrid Mana is a large enough topic to warrant its own post. A preliminary list of topics to include:
a description of what they symbols mean (a cost which can be paid using either half)
Probably a 2nd entry specifically covering mono-color hybrids (eg, mentioning all the ways that can be paid)
point out that if something ask for the number of "[color] mana symbols" (e.g. phosphorescent feast ) a hybrid symbol will match it
point out that a hybrid card is all of the colors in its mana cost, regardless of what you paid for it (could use an aura from shadowmoor enchanting a hybrid creature as an example)
In addition, there are a few places which could briefly mention hybrid mana or could link to its FAQ, such as the entries on: Playing Spells and Abilities; Mana; and Costs
A couple minutes ago, i answered a question about Hybrid mana. To provide access to additional information, i was going to give a link to the FAQ. However, it appears the FAQ doesn't really cover hybrid mana. It is mentioned once when talking about c
I guess it comes down to how many things will be added. If it can be covered succinctly in 1 or two questions, then by all means weave it into the post on mana. However, if it becomes a longer list of subquestions, then it might deserve a separate post.
I guess it comes down to how many things will be added. If it can be covered succinctly in 1 or two questions, then by all means weave it into the post on mana. However, if it becomes a longer list of subquestions, then it might deserve a separate po
Q: Does removing a named counter from a permanent do anything? A: Effects that put counters on things to change them (or mark them as changed) fall into two categories: those that depend upon the counter, and those that do not.
Sensei Golden-Tail , for example, puts a counter on a creature to mark it as changed, but the actual change is done as a one-shot effect and is then permanent. Removing Sensei after he has trained a creature does not remove the change, and neither does removing the training counter.
Rimescale Dragon , on the other hand, has an ability that puts a counter on a creature, and then has a seperate ability that affects creatures with ice counters on them. In this case, once the Dragon leaves play or the ice counter is removed, the permanent starts to untap as normal.
We think that if these 2 examples are being given, that the FAQ should also mention that some Counters are used as the Duration of Continuous Effects.
The effect is tied directly to the existence to the Counter. Removing the counter does remove the effect; Unlike example 1. And, the effect is not from some separate ability; Unlike example 2.
Also, just a minor Spelling issue; The word "sepArate" has 2 'e's and 2 'a's, not 3 'e's.
We think that if these 2 examples are being given, that the FAQ should also mention that some Counters are used as the Duration of Continuous Effects.[c]Cyclopean Tomb[/c], [c]Quicksilver Fountain[/c], [c]Makeshift Mannequin[/c], etc. create effects
"Mana cost and converted mana cost" should add a question about monocoloured hybrids. (It also wouldn't hurt if it said more explicitly that CMC is a number, not something that is expressed in mana symbols.) It also doesn't address split cards.
"Mana cost and converted mana cost" should add a question about monocoloured hybrids. (It also wouldn't hurt if it said more explicitly that CMC is a number, not something that is expressed in mana symbols.) It also doesn't address split cards.
All right; I've fixed most of the minor errors and added the last couple suggested questions, save only the addition of split cards to the mana cost section. Since there's an entire section for that, I don't think we need a complete question--maybe just a link to the proper section.
I'm working on a rewrite of the combat sections of the FAQ now, so that we have a general Combat section in addition to the current sections that cover attacking, blocking, and combat damage, kind of like the way the Abilities section is set up now. I've found that there are a number of fairly common questions that are more about combat in general than any one of those three specifically, and artificially squeezing such questions into an ill-suited section is a poor solution.
All right; I've fixed most of the minor errors and added the last couple suggested questions, save only the addition of split cards to the mana cost section. Since there's an entire section for that, I don't think we need a complete question--maybe j
until a card is successfully cast or failed, is it in your hand? Example, http://www.cardkingdom.com/card_viewer.php?sid=123675876&pid=124836 (thats demigod of revenge, sorry, apparently I forget how to link these :S)is cast, on the stack I drop htt
Please do not post questions of your own here! You should only post in this thread if you want a question or topic to be added to the list. If you do, please post both question and answer, along with an explanation of why the given answer is the correct one. Please make your own thread if you want to get a question answered.
Now, to answer your question, there is no such thing as "successfully cast" or "failed." A spell is played. The process of playing a spell starts with announcing the spell and putting the spell on the stack. The process of playing a spell can not be interrupted. By the time you get the opportunity to respond, the spell is already on the stack. (Incidentally, at that time, the Demigod's "When you play ~" ability is ALSO on the stack already.)
In short, no, you can not counter a spell by removing it from its controller's hand, because it not in his controller's hand.
You're posting in the wrong thread.Now, to answer your question, there is no such thing as "successfully cast" or "failed." A spell is played. The process of playing a spell starts with announcing the spell and putting the spell on the stack. The pro
I've added the question about whether or not deathtouch targets to its FAQ entry--I have to leave in a few minutes, so I don't have time to sit down and think about this, but are there any other keywords that could use that addition also?
I've added the question about whether or not deathtouch targets to its FAQ entry--I have to leave in a few minutes, so I don't have time to sit down and think about this, but are there any other keywords that could use that addition also?
I've seen that asked about almost every keyword, including First Strike (how the heck would that even work? :confused. But Wither does seem to get it conspicuously more than the others.
I've seen that asked about almost every keyword, including First Strike (how the heck would that even work? :confused:). But Wither does seem to get it conspicuously more than the others.
All right, I've added it for Wither, Flanking, and Exalted--I remember seeing that question at least once for all three of those keywords. Not for Poisonous, though, as player-shroud is far rarer and thus less likely to arise.
All right, I've added it for Wither, Flanking, and Exalted--I remember seeing that question at least once for all three of those keywords. Not for Poisonous, though, as player-shroud is far rarer and thus less likely to arise.
I'm starting to wonder if it should be considered whether to add the interaction (or specifically, the lack thereof) between Sigil of the New Dawn and Enchanted Evening to the Specific Cards and Combos FAQ; the question seems to be popping up with great regularity.
I'm starting to wonder if it should be considered whether to add the interaction (or specifically, the lack thereof) between [c]Sigil of the New Dawn[/c] and [c]Enchanted Evening[/c] to the Specific Cards and Combos FAQ; the question seems to be popp
All right, here's what I have for the combat entry so far--can anyone think of any other questions I might need to answer in it? (Or that I should add to the existing Attacking, Blocking, and Combat Damage sections?)
[indent]Q: How does combat work in Magic? A: During each player's turn, that player has one combat phase. During this combat phase, that player may choose to attack his or her opponent (and/or any [[[planeswalkers]]] that opponent controls) with any number of creatures he or she controls. That opponent (the "defending player") may then choose to use his or her own creatures to block those attacking creatures. Attacking and blocking creatures exchange combat damage, and unblocked creatures deal damage to the player or planeswalker they are attacking.
In order to attack, a creature must be untapped and must not be suffering from "[[[summoning sickness]]]". (Its controller has to have controlled it continuously since the beginning of his or her most recent turn.) The act of attacking causes the creature to become tapped. An attacking creature that's blocked deals combat damage equal to its power divided as its controller chooses among the creature(s) blocking it. If it's not blocked, it deals that much damage to the player or planeswalker it's attacking instead. A blocked creature cannot (normally ) deal combat damage to anything other than the creature(s) blocking it.
In order to block, a creature must be untapped. However, blocking doesn't cause a creature to tap and "summoning-sick" creatures can block just fine. Any given creature may (normally ) block only one attacking creature, but any given attacking creature may be blocked by any number of creatures. A blocking creature deals combat damage equal to its power to the creature it's blocking. (If it's somehow blocking more than one creature, the damage is divided as its controller chooses among the creatures it's blocking.)
Q: Can I do things during combat... ...before attackers are declared? Q: ...after attackers are declared but before blockers are? Q: ...after blockers are declared but before combat damage is assigned? Q: ...after combat damage is assigned but before it is dealt? Q: ...after combat damage is dealt but before combat ends? A: Yes. Combat proceeds through a number of steps, and players have the chance to do things (mainly play spells and abilities, though there are other possibilities) during each of those steps before the game moves on to the next one.
The first step of combat is called the Beginning of Combat step. Being in the Beginning of Combat step means that the player whose turn it is (the "active player") can no longer play spells that aren't instants, but no attackers have yet been declared. Players are given a chance to do things during this step, and it's your last chance to do things before attackers are declared. Once everyone's done doing things, the game moves on to the Declare Attackers step.
As the Declare Attackers step begins, the active player chooses his or her attacking creatures and those creatures become tapped and become attacking creatures. (He can choose not to attack if he doesn't want to do so.) This happens first, before players can do anything. After that, players have another chance to do things, and then the game moves on to the next step, Declare Blockers.
As the Declare Blockers step begins, the defending player chooses which creatures (if any) he or she wants to block with and which creature each will block, then those creatures become blocking creatures, and the creatures they're blocking become blocked. (Any attacking creatures which aren't blocked become unblocked creatures.) As in Declare Attackers, this happens before players have the chance to do anything else. Once that's done, players get another chance to do things, and then the game moves on to the Combat Damage step.
As the Combat Damage step begins, each player decides how he or she wishes to assign the damage from his or her creatures. (Assuming there's more than one way it could be done.) Then, that damage is put onto the stack as a single object. Players have the chance to do things, and then that damage gets dealt as originally assigned. Players get another chance to do things, and then the game moves on to the End of Combat step.
Nothing much usually happens in End of Combat, but it acts as a "last chance" for players to do things before the game moves back to the active player's second main phase and the active player gets the chance to play non-instant spells again.
Q: How do I stop an attacking or blocking creature from attacking/blocking? A: If you want to stop a creature from attacking or blocking at all, you need to do something to it before it can be declared as an attacker/blocker that would stop it from attacking or blocking, such as tapping it or playing something that says it can't attack or block. However, doing those things after it has already been declared as an attacker/blocker won't somehow make it "un-attack" or "un-block"--it will still be attacking or blocking. If a creature is already attacking/blocking and you wish to remove it from combat, there are several options; an attacking/blocking creature is removed from combat when it leaves play, when it stops being a creature, when it changes controllers, or when something specifically says it's removed from combat.
However, note that removing a blocking creature from combat won't make the creatures it was blocking become unblocked, and removing a creature from combat after damage has been assigned won't stop it from dealing or receiving combat damage as assigned.
Q: My creature is forced (somehow) to attack or block "if able", and there's some additional restriction on how or when it can do so. What happens?(eg, Your opponent provokes your Ember Beast ) A: When the time comes for you to declare attackers/blockers, your creature is forced to do so if it is possible, at that very moment, for you to make it do so somehow. You are required to pay any necessary costs, declare other attackers, and so on, in order make the attack legal.
However, it's very important to note that while the above is true, nothing is forcing you to take unrelated actions that would then, in turn, make it possible for the requirements to be met so that that creature to attack.
To give an example, imagine your opponent has played Into the Fray on your Ember Beast . When the time comes to declare attackers, if you happen to control at least one other creature that can attack, you are forced to attack with Ember Beast and some other creature. It is possible for you to meet the Beast's requirements, so you must do so. However, now imagine that Ember Beast was your only creature in play, but you did happen to have a Raging Goblin in your hand and an untapped Mountain with which you could have played it. Playing the Goblin before combat would later allow your Ember Beast to attack (with the Goblin), but you're not required to do so. Sure, it would allow you to fill the requirement later on, but the game doesn't look that far ahead. It only cares about what you can do right as attackers are being declared, and can only force you to do things right then and there. You aren't required to do anything before that if you don't want to.
For another example, imagine your opponent has a Ghostly Prison in play and you control a Crazed Goblin . While you would be required to pay the two mana to let your creature attack if you had the mana in your mana pool right at that moment, if you don't already have the mana in your mana pool, you are not required to produce it if you do not wish to do so.[/indent]
All right, here's what I have for the combat entry so far--can anyone think of any other questions I might need to answer in it? (Or that I should add to the existing Attacking, Blocking, and Combat Damage sections?)[indent]Q: How does combat work in
For another example, imagine your opponent has a Ghostly Prison in play and you control a Crazed Goblin . While you would be required to pay the two mana to let your creature attack if you had the mana in your mana pool right at that moment, if you don't already have the mana in your mana pool, you are not required to produce it if you do not wish to do so.[/indent]
Are you sure about this? If your opponent played Into the Fray on your Exalted Dragon and you do control a land, would that obligate you to sacrifice a land and attack with the Dragon?
Comprehensive Rules]500.2. As part of declaring attackers, the active player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it must attack, can’ wrote:
500.2. As part of declaring attackers, the active player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it must attack, can’t attack, or is affected by some other attacking restriction or requirement. If such a restriction or requirement conflicts with the proposed attack, the attack is illegal, and the active player must then propose another set of attacking creatures. (Tapped creatures and creatures with unpaid costs to attack are exempt from effects that would require them to attack.)
Are you sure about this? If your opponent played Into the Fray on your [c]Exalted Dragon[/c] and you do control a land, would that obligate you to sacrifice a land and attack with the Dragon?
Argus is right. You're never forced to pay a cost to attack, even if you have the resources to do so. See Autocard ruling on War Tax - you can't even be forced to pay a cost of (barring Mindslaver shenanigans, of course).
Argus is right. You're never forced to pay a cost to attack, even if you have the resources to do so. See Autocard ruling on [c]War Tax[/c] - you can't even be forced to pay a cost of [mc]0[/mc] (barring [c]Mindslaver[/c] shenanigans, of course).
Hm; wonder where I got that part then. I guess I must have just been extrapolating from the Ember Beast case and the Pacts.
...I'm gonna go start a Rules Issues thread now.
Hm; wonder where I got that part then. I guess I must have just been extrapolating from the [c]Ember Beast[/c] case and the Pacts....I'm gonna go start a Rules Issues thread now.
Can you add "protection from everything" to the Protection Keyword FAQ entry?
Maybe just duplicate the "What does Protection from everything do" question and answer from the Progenitus entry?
Also, the Comp. Rules entry for Protection is out-of-date. It doesn't include the 502.7g rule that explains Protection from everything.
Can you add "protection from everything" to the Protection Keyword FAQ entry?Maybe just duplicate the "What does Protection from everything do" question and answer from the Progenitus entry?Also, the Comp. Rules entry for Protection is out-of-date.
I'll wait a couple days for that, I think; the protection rules are getting another update in the next CompRules release, so I'll do it all in one fell swoop rather than trying to remember to do it twice.
I'll wait a couple days for that, I think; the protection rules are getting another update in the next CompRules release, so I'll do it all in one fell swoop rather than trying to remember to do it twice.
All right, I've now added Cascade to the Keyword FAQ and Alara Reborn to the RPRP; I've also changed the Comprules entries for a bunch of keywords that have been altered. (Including protection.)
All right, I've now added Cascade to the Keyword FAQ and Alara Reborn to the RPRP; I've also changed the Comprules entries for a bunch of keywords that have been altered. (Including protection.)
The "0 Power in Combat" entry should probably include an explicit statement about whether such a creature will actually deal combat damage.
Avedommi is the one to inform of obsolete rulings in Gatherer (e.g., Liquid Fire ), right?
The "0 Power in Combat" entry should probably include an explicit statement about whether such a creature will actually deal combat damage.Avedommi is the one to inform of obsolete rulings in Gatherer (e.g., [c]Liquid Fire[/c]), right?
My friend has a card that is an artifact card. It states that when a player plays a white spell you can one life. The card is named Angel's Feather and me and him are at a stand still. He says that he gains a life when there is a creature summoned that has white mana in the cost I say that no creatures aren't considered spells. Either one could be right or wrong we just really need an answer. Any help would be great guys. THX
My friend has a card that is an artifact card. It states that when a player plays a white spell you can one life. The card is named Angel's Feather and me and him are at a stand still. He says that he gains a life when there is a creature summoned th
My friend has a card that is an artifact card. It states that when a player plays a white spell you can one life. The card is named Angel's Feather and me and him are at a stand still. He says that he gains a life when there is a creature summoned that has white mana in the cost I say that no creatures aren't considered spells. Either one could be right or wrong we just really need an answer. Any help would be great guys. THX
You're posting in the wrong thread:
zammm wrote:
Please do not post questions of your own here! You should only post in this thread if you want a question or topic to be added to the list. If you do, please post both question and answer, along with an explanation of why the given answer is the correct one. Please make your own thread if you want to get a question answered.
Anyway, creature spells are spells, and if there is white mana in a creature's mana cost, playing it as a spell (as opposed to putting it directly into play with an ability like Elvish Piper 's ability) WILL trigger the Feather's life gain ability.
In the future, if you have a Rules Question, please go to the Rules Q&A Forum and click on "New Thread" towards the bottom of the page.
You're posting in the wrong thread:Anyway, creature spells are spells, and if there is white mana in a creature's mana cost, playing it as a spell (as opposed to putting it directly into play with an ability like [c]Elvish Piper[/c]'s ability) WILL t
All right, I've finally gotten up and made that change to the Combat section of the FAQ. I'm probably going to fix it up some more, but the basics are there, at least. I also went through the rest of the FAQ and the supplementary FAQs fixing links--if you find some that I've missed, please let me know.
If you have links to any of the FAQ entries copied to a text file or something for quick access--be warned that the links for all the entries from Attacking onwards have changed.
All right, I've finally gotten up and made that change to the Combat section of the FAQ. I'm probably going to fix it up some more, but the basics are there, at least. I also went through the rest of the FAQ and the supplementary FAQs fixing links--i
This link in the Keyword section is says it goes to Indestructibility, but it doesn't.http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php? … st15169827The correct link is the one in the top index, which goes here:http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php? &he
I am currently updating the FAQ for the M10 rules changes--I've copied it all out into a Word document (dear god, 100+ pages!) and am combing through it for necessary changes.
I am currently updating the FAQ for the M10 rules changes--I've copied it all out into a Word document (dear god, 100+ pages!) and am combing through it for necessary changes.
I am currently updating the FAQ for the M10 rules changes--I've copied it all out into a Word document (dear god, 100+ pages!) and am combing through it for necessary changes.
You rock!
If you'd like to take a portion of the pages and have me go through them, i'll be happy to help.
You rock!If you'd like to take a portion of the pages and have me go through them, i'll be happy to help.
I am currently updating the FAQ for the M10 rules changes--I've copied it all out into a Word document (dear god, 100+ pages!) and am combing through it for necessary changes.
Also, if you'd like to use anything from the summary I wrote out, feel free to copy-paste. (Just saving the trouble of you asking if you were thinking to do so.)
Also, if you'd like to use anything from the summary I wrote out, feel free to copy-paste. (Just saving the trouble of you asking if you were thinking to do so.)
If you'd like to take a portion of the pages and have me go through them, i'll be happy to help.
I've gotten a good deal of the Main FAQ done already, but if you'd like to go through either the Keyword or Specific Cards FAQs and update the rules excerpts and terminology, that would be fantastic.
I've gotten a good deal of the Main FAQ done already, but if you'd like to go through either the Keyword or Specific Cards FAQs and update the rules excerpts and terminology, that would be fantastic.
All right, so the Main FAQ has been modified to use the new terminology, and I fixed up the Layers, SBE, Combat, and Turn sections for M10-compliancy; I think I caught everything, but if you spot any errant "in play"s or "play a spell"s or whatever, just let me know and I'll fix them.
Now comes the other three FAQs...
Whew! *mops brow*All right, so the Main FAQ has been modified to use the new terminology, and I fixed up the Layers, SBE, Combat, and Turn sections for M10-compliancy; I think I caught everything, but if you spot any errant "in play"s or "play a spel
The Keyword FAQ has been updated--there's no entry for Intimidate yet; I'm undecided on whether to add it now or wait until it actually appears. But in any case, the rest is done. A whole bunch of thanks goes to cyphern for that, who saved me a ton of effort by doing a good deal of the work for me.
So, now all that's left to do is the Specific Cards FAQ and the M10 entry in the Primer. I'll probably work on the latter first, since it's more important.
The Keyword FAQ has been updated--there's no entry for Intimidate yet; I'm undecided on whether to add it now or wait until it actually appears. But in any case, the rest is done. A whole bunch of thanks goes to cyphern for that, who saved me a ton o
Well Intimidate isn't needed now because there are 0 cards with it. It's unlikely that a new player (who has questions) would read through the Keyword section of the Comp. rulebook and then look here for a clarification.
Well Intimidate isn't needed now because there are 0 cards with it. It's unlikely that a new player (who has questions) would read through the Keyword section of the Comp. rulebook and then look here for a clarification.
I have a question regarding the combination of redirection and prevention with planeswalkers.
This is the piece of rules q&a I don't really get:
* So, let's take an example. You control an Ajani Goldmane with five loyalty counters on it. Your opponent plays a Lava Axe targeting you. (He can't target your planeswalker with it, because a planeswalker is not a player.) In response, you play a Mending Hands targeting yourself. (You can't target your planeswalker either, for the same reason.) Mending Hands resolves, setting up a prevention "shield", and then the Axe resolves. You have two choices; either give your opponent the opportunity to redirect before applying the Hands' effect, or apply the Hands' effect, then give your opponent the opportunity to redirect.
If you do the former, your opponent can choose to redirect all 5 damage to Ajani, and then the Mending Hands won't do anything, because the Axe isn't trying to deal damage to you anymore. The Axe would deal 5 damage to Ajani, removing all the counters from it, and Ajani would die. (He could also choose not to redirect the damage, in which case the Hands would kick in and you would only be dealt 1 damage, but I think he'd probably want to go with the former.)
If you do the latter, however, you prevent 4 of the 5 damage first, before your opponent chooses whether or not to redirect the damage. Then your opponent gets the chance to either let the Axe deal its remaining 1 damage to you, or to your Ajani, which wouldn't be enough to kill it anyway.
(In most cases, you'll probably be wanting to prevent the damage first.) *
The part I made bold I don't really understand. What that seems to tell is, if I apply the Mending Hands prevention first before the redirection, the opponent HAS TO deal damage with the Lava Axe to me, not even getting a choise to deal damage with the Axe to the planeswalker. I can't believe that's true, so my question is: does he has to deal damage with the Axe to me if the prevention is up first?
Hello,I have a question regarding the combination of redirection and prevention with planeswalkers.This is the piece of rules q&a I don't really get:* So, let's take an example. You control an Ajani Goldmane with five loyalty counters on it. Your opp
Zammm]Please do not post questions of your own here! You should only post in this thread if you want a question or topic to be added to the list. If you do, please post both question and answer, along with an explanation of why the given answer is the correct one. Please make your own thread if you want to get a question answered.
In any event, on to your qu wrote:
Please do not post questions of your own here! You should only post in this thread if you want a question or topic to be added to the list. If you do, please post both question and answer, along with an explanation of why the given answer is the correct one. Please make your own thread if you want to get a question answered.[/quote] In any event, on to your question:
mantrixx]What that seems to tell is, if I apply the Mending Hands prevention first before the redirection, the opponent HAS TO deal damage with the Lava Axe to me, not even getting a choise to deal damage with the Axe to the planeswalker.
That is incorrect. Your opponent still has the option to redirect to the planeswalker, or to let the damage be dealt to you, whichever he prefers. To highlight a subsection of what you highlighted wrote:
What that seems to tell is, if I apply the Mending Hands prevention first before the redirection, the opponent HAS TO deal damage with the Lava Axe to me, not even getting a choise to deal damage with the Axe to the planeswalker.[/quote] That is incorrect. Your opponent still has the option to redirect to the planeswalker, or to let the damage be dealt to you, whichever he prefers. To highlight a subsection of what you highlighted:
If you do the latter, however, you prevent 4 of the 5 damage first, before your opponent chooses whether or not to redirect the damage. Then your opponent gets the chance to either let the Axe deal its remaining 1 damage to you, or to your Ajani, which wouldn't be enough to kill it anyway.
You are posting your question in the wrong placeIn any event, on to your question:That is incorrect. Your opponent still has the option to redirect to the planeswalker, or to let the damage be dealt to you, whichever he prefers. To highlight a subsec
I have a question regarding the combination of redirection and prevention with planeswalkers.
This is the piece of rules q&a I don't really get:
* So, let's take an example. You control an Ajani Goldmane with five loyalty counters on it. Your opponent plays a Lava Axe targeting you. (He can't target your planeswalker with it, because a planeswalker is not a player.) In response, you play a Mending Hands targeting yourself. (You can't target your planeswalker either, for the same reason.) Mending Hands resolves, setting up a prevention "shield", and then the Axe resolves. You have two choices; either give your opponent the opportunity to redirect before applying the Hands' effect, or apply the Hands' effect, then give your opponent the opportunity to redirect.
If you do the former, your opponent can choose to redirect all 5 damage to Ajani, and then the Mending Hands won't do anything, because the Axe isn't trying to deal damage to you anymore. The Axe would deal 5 damage to Ajani, removing all the counters from it, and Ajani would die. (He could also choose not to redirect the damage, in which case the Hands would kick in and you would only be dealt 1 damage, but I think he'd probably want to go with the former.)
If you do the latter, however, you prevent 4 of the 5 damage first, before your opponent chooses whether or not to redirect the damage. Then your opponent gets the chance to either let the Axe deal its remaining 1 damage to you, or to your Ajani, which wouldn't be enough to kill it anyway.
(In most cases, you'll probably be wanting to prevent the damage first.) *
The part I made bold I don't really understand. What that seems to tell is, if I apply the Mending Hands prevention first before the redirection, the opponent HAS TO deal damage with the Lava Axe to me, not even getting a choise to deal damage with the Axe to the planeswalker. I can't believe that's true, so my question is: does he has to deal damage with the Axe to me if the prevention is up first?
Mantrix this thread is not the place to post questions as it is rarely looked at, you are better of creating a new thread for your questions.
The FAQ is correct since you are being affected you chose which redirection / prevention ability to apply. Even if you prevent the some of the damage your opponent has the option of redirecting the remaining damage away from you to your planeswalker the only thing that has changed is the amount of damage that has been dealt.
Mantrix this thread is not the place to post questions as it is rarely looked at, you are better of creating a new thread for your questions.The FAQ is correct since you are being affected you chose which redirection / prevention ability to apply. Ev
This question has come up three times in the past day or so, and several times before that.
[indent] If a player has Liliana Vess , can he use the +1 ability even though the targeted player has no cards in hand? [/indent]
Can it be added to the FAQ?
This question has come up three times in the past day or so, and several times before that.[indent]If a player has [c]Liliana Vess[/c] , can he use the +1 ability even though the targeted player has no cards in hand?[/indent]Can it be added to the FA
Q: How do I become a certified judge? A: To become a judge, you have to work at least an two events under a [color=black]level 3 judge[/color] or higher, score at least a 70% on an entrance exam, and take part in an informal interview. (You must go through the entire process with the same judge.) For a complete list of level 1 requirements, you can go to this website.
Third, they can add a counter to the permanent and then specifically say that the effect lasts as long as the counter remains. Quicksilver Fountain works this way--the ability that adds the counter says what happens, and specifically says that the effect only lasts while the counter is there. In this case, removing the Fountain wouldn't stop the effect, but removing the Fountain would.
I'm pretty sure that you made a mistake here. You say that removing the fountain wound not stop the effect, but removing the fountain would . Shouldn't one the fountains be the counter (would it be the second one?)
I'm pretty sure that you made a mistake here. You say that removing the fountain wound not stop the effect, but removing the fountain would:confused: . Shouldn't one the fountains be the counter (would it be the second one?)
...... Third, they can add a counter to the permanent and then specifically say that the effect lasts as long as the counter remains. Quicksilver Fountain works this way--the ability that adds the counter says what happens, and specifically says that the effect only lasts while the counter is there. In this case, removing the Fountain wouldn't stop the effect, but removing the Fountaincounter would.
...... Third, they can add a counter to the permanent and then specifically say that the effect lasts as long as the counter remains. Quicksilver Fountain works this way--the ability that adds the counter says what happens, and specifically says that the effect only lasts while the counter is there. In this case, removing the Fountain wouldn't stop the effect, but removing the FountaintokenCOUNTER would.
I'm wondering if you can fix the table of contents, so that it links to the posts again?
Right now I'm waiting on a discussion with WotC CM to see if they'll be changing the text editor before I try to do any editing. If I try to edit it as things are now, it runs the stuff that's supposed to be in it through an HTML parser before letting me touch it, which removes all newlines and leaves me with a massive Wall o'TextTM that would require laborious effort to make readable again.
If things aren't going to be changing, then I'll have to grit my teeth and get down to it, but if they are...let's just say I'd rather wait and not have to go through that massive ordeal.
Right now I'm waiting on a discussion with WotC CM to see if they'll be changing the text editor before I try to do any editing. If I try to edit it as things are now, it runs the stuff that's supposed to be in it through an HTML parser before lettin
Hey, folks! You may have been wondering what's been going on with the FAQs--well, I've decided to start taking advantage of the capabilities the new site has given us, especially the power and flexibility of wikis. Myself and others are currently in the process of transferring the information from the existing FAQ threads to the wiki for the Magic Rules Sages group; come on over and lend a hand! There's plenty of work to be done if we want to make this the best rules resource possible, and the more hands, the better!
Hey, folks! You may have been wondering what's been going on with the FAQs--well, I've decided to start taking advantage of the capabilities the new site has given us, especially the power and flexibility of wikis. Myself and others are currently in
Whew! At long last, I've finally gotten off my lazy butt to get the FAQs up to snuff again, formatting-wise. I've gone through this FAQ and updated all the formatting so that it should work again--it won't look exactly as it did before, due to a couple quirks of implementation in the new format, but there should no longer be any loose code hanging around where anyone can see. I also fixed several errors as I came across them in the course of my work. (Mainly phrases that hadn't been updated to use M10 terminology.)
Let me know if you spot anything I missed. I should be finishing up the other FAQs over the next several days, as well.
Whew! At long last, I've finally gotten off my lazy butt to get the FAQs up to snuff again, formatting-wise. I've gone through this FAQ and updated all the formatting so that it should work again--it won't look exactly as it did before, due to a coup
The Specific Cards and Keyword FAQs have been updated, and Intimidate has been added to the latter. As always, let me know if there's anything you think I've missed.
The Specific Cards and Keyword FAQs have been updated, and Intimidate has been added to the latter. As always, let me know if there's anything you think I've missed.
The Specific Cards and Keyword FAQs have been updated, and Intimidate has been added to the latter. As always, let me know if there's anything you think I've missed.
Your signature seems to be attempting to link to the FAQ and failing. Can you fix that, or do signatures not like tags?
Your signature seems to be attempting to link to the FAQ and failing. Can you fix that, or do signatures not like tags?
Signatures don't like thread tags (or smilies) yet; apparently that's something they're working on, so in the meantime I'm keeping the sig as is...ostensibly so I don't lose the formatting, but really because I'm too lazy to bother changing it.
Signatures don't like thread tags (or smilies) yet; apparently that's something they're working on, so in the meantime I'm keeping the sig as is...ostensibly so I don't lose the formatting, but really because I'm too lazy to bother. :P
The Rise of the Eldrazi keywords have been added to the Keyword FAQ, but in writing the entry for Level up, I realized that what I really wanted would be a 'Levelers' section, since as with Auras and Equipment, the biggest questions are more about how the cards themselves work than how the keyword does.
This got me thinking about rewriting the FAQ and adding a number of sections I've been waffling on whether or not to write for a while now, potentially including such things as:
Levelers
Flip cards
Hybrid mana
Card legality (altered art, etc.)
Sideboarding
Infraction Penalties
Symbols (mana symbols, tap & untap symbols, loyalty symbols, etc.)
Are there any topics or FAQ sections that you might like to see added in future? Do you have any ideas about how the existing FAQ sections could be improved?
The Rise of the Eldrazi keywords have been added to the Keyword FAQ, but in writing the entry for Level up, I realized that what I really wanted would be a 'Levelers' section, since as with Auras and Equipment, the biggest questions are more about ho
Protection could probably use some love. There seems to be a recurring them on the meaning of "protection from colored spells", and why something like O-ring isn't a spell at the time it targets.
Protection could probably use some love. There seems to be a recurring them on the meaning of "protection from colored spells", and why something like O-ring isn't a spell at the time it targets.
I was looking through the the FAQ and didn't see a list of Magic acronyms/slangs. Would it be good to have a list of those or there's already a list made and I am not aware of it?
I was looking through the the FAQ and didn't see a list of Magic acronyms/slangs. Would it be good to have a list of those or there's already a list made and I am not aware of it?
I was looking through the the FAQ and didn't see a list of Magic acronyms/slangs. Would it be good to have a list of those or there's already a list made and I am not aware of it?
I need some clairification on how the triggered ability would work on this card Aven Farseer .
I am asking this given the low cost of the card versus the ability it has. It would seem if the term "face up" is reference to any creature card played on the battle field "face up" it could prove to be very problamatic and could create a rather nasty stack of +1/+1 counters in just a short time.
I am asking this here because I dont see anything saying how the "face up" triggered ability works.
Thanks in advance for the help and explanation.
Okay I have a noob question.I need some clairification on how the triggered ability would work on this card [c]Aven Farseer[/c].I am asking this given the low cost of the card versus the ability it has. It would seem if the term "face up" is refere
I am asking this given the low cost of the card versus the ability it has. It would seem if the term "face up" is reference to any creature card played on the battle field "face up" it could prove to be very problamatic and could create a rather nasty stack of +1/+1 counters in just a short time.
Aven Farseer 's ability will only trigger when a creature turns face up, as happens when you pay the morph cost of a face down morph creature (see this post if you are unfamiliar with the morph ability). It will not trigger if a creature begins its existence already face up, as most creatures do.
Please do not post questions in the FAQ thread. Make a new thread instead.[c]Aven Farseer[/c]'s ability will only trigger when a creature turns face up, as happens when you pay the morph cost of a face down [c=daru lancer]morph creature[/c] (see thi
Annilator, Level Up, Rebound, and Totem Armor are in the Keyword FAQ but are not listed in the table of contents in that FAQ. Nor are they listed in the main FAQ that lists all the Keywords.
Annilator, Level Up, Rebound, and Totem Armor are in the Keyword FAQ but are not listed in the table of contents in that FAQ. Nor are they listed in the main FAQ that lists all the Keywords.
216.2. A token is subject to anything that affects permanents in general or that affects the token’s type or subtype. A token isn’t a card (even if represented by cards from other games or Unglued cards).
216.3. A token in a zone other than the in-play zone ceases to exist. This is a state-based effect. (Note that a token changing zones will set off triggered abilities before the token ceases to exist.) Once a token has left play, it can’t be returned to play by any means.
When a token leave play, do it transit via any other zone before they ceases to exist ? Can we say, they are exiled ?
Would Tatsumasa, the Dragon's Fang return to play if the token is bounced (going to hand instead of in the graveyard)?
p.s. Sorry if this isn't in the right section, it's not really clear where it had to be posted.
Token216.2. A token is subject to anything that affects permanents in general or that affects the token’s type or subtype. A token isn’t a card (even if represented by cards from other games or Unglued cards).216.3. A token in a zone other than t
You should have made a new thread, not post in the Rules Q&A FAQ.
A token goes wherever it is send. Then it cease to exist. It is not exiled, it simply goes *poof*.
So if the tokens are bounced, they do not trigger 'going to graveyard' effects. I they actually go to the graveyard, they will.
You should have made a new thread, not post in the Rules Q&A FAQ.A token goes wherever it is send. Then it cease to exist. It is not exiled, it simply goes *poof*.So if the tokens are bounced, they do not trigger 'going to graveyard' effects. I they
Please do not post questions of your own here! You should only post in this thread if you want a question or topic to be added to the list. If you do, please post both question and answer, along with an explanation of why the given answer is the correct one. Please make your own thread if you want to get a question answered.
Also, your question is already answered in the "Tokens" section of the FAQ.
It's actually the very first thing written in this thread after the title:Also, your question is already answered in the "Tokens" section of the FAQ.
Question: Elvish Piper (3G 1/1 ({G} tap You may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield.) Is on the battlefield Using This tap ability to bring out Wolfbriar Elemental 2GG (Multikicker {G} (You may pay an additional {G} any number of times as you cast this spell.) When Wolfbriar Elemental enters the battlefield, put a 2/2 green Wolf creature token onto the battlefield for each time it was kicked.) Can you use the tap ability of Elvish Piper to bring out Wolfbriar Elemental and still pay the multikicker in order to bring out wolf tokens?
Answer: you are not paying the cost for wolfbriar elemental therefore not casting the spell to bring out wolfbriar. instead you are using elvish pipers ability to bring a creature into play using elvish piper's ability. this is an ability not a spell. Because an ability was used in order to bring out wolfbriar you are not able to use the multikicker.
Question: Elvish Piper (3G 1/1 ({G} tap You may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield.) Is on the battlefieldUsing This tap ability to bring out Wolfbriar Elemental 2GG (Multikicker {G} (You may pay an additional {G} any number of
Question: Elvish Piper (3G 1/1 ({G} tap You may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield.) Is on the battlefield Using This tap ability to bring out Wolfbriar Elemental 2GG (Multikicker {G} (You may pay an additional {G} any number of times as you cast this spell.) When Wolfbriar Elemental enters the battlefield, put a 2/2 green Wolf creature token onto the battlefield for each time it was kicked.) Can you use the tap ability of Elvish Piper to bring out Wolfbriar Elemental and still pay the multikicker in order to bring out wolf tokens?
Answer: you are not paying the cost for wolfbriar elemental therefore not casting the spell to bring out wolfbriar. instead you are using elvish pipers ability to bring a creature into play using elvish piper's ability. this is an ability not a spell. Because an ability was used in order to bring out wolfbriar you are not able to use the multikicker.
I am sure Zammm appreciates the proposed addition; if nothing else, it makes a nice change from people posting questions without answers in here and thereby ignoring the first words of the thread.
And this is indeed a common question that, in my opinion, deserves a spot. Where precisely are you proposing to add it? I suppose the keyword FAQ under "Kicker" (which also covers multikicker) would be logical; any other ideas?
One place it should not be is under "abilities". (Your proposed answer is actually somewhat misleading; you seem to say that the fact that an ability is being used here is what makes it illegal to pay Kicker, which isn't true. Earlier, you give the correct and quite different information that it is the fact that it isn't being cast that does this. There are abilities such that you can pay kicker (e.g. Djinn of Wishes ) and spells such that you can't (e.g. Mass Polymorph ).
I am sure Zammm appreciates the proposed addition; if nothing else, it makes a nice change from people posting questions without answers in here and thereby ignoring the first words of the thread.And this is indeed a common question that, in my opini
I agree Jeff that it should be a clarification under "Kicker". I apologize for any misleading information.
My only goal was to clarify the difference between casting a creature spell and paying the "Kicker/Multikicker" and bringing a creature to the field using the ability of another creature. If you used the ability of another card to bring it to the battlefield you may not pay the cost for its "Kicker/Multikicker" (e.g. Wolfbriar Elemental).
Abilities such as Djinn of Wishes would still be usable because it is an ability that can be payed at any moment during the game. The only abilities I am speaking of that a player cannot use are "kicker/Multikicker" abilities because they require you cast the actual spell in order to pay the "kicked" cost. Using a card like Mass Polymorph allows you to bring out a number of creatures. If any one of those creatures have a "kicker/Multikicker" (e.g. Wolfbriar Elemental) then you cannot use its "Kicker" ability. Other abilities will be usable along with abilities that go into affect as it goes onto the battlefield.
I agree Jeff that it should be a clarification under "Kicker". I apologize for any misleading information. My only goal was to clarify the difference between casting a creature spell and paying the "Kicker/Multikicker" and bringing a creature to the
Your proposed answer made it sound (at one point) as though the fact that you were using an ability to bring Wolfbriar Elemental into play was the reason you couldn't pay kicker. This is false (and I think you realize this and are guilty only of poor word choice, but this response makes me less sure of that than I was before). As a counterexample, I offered the fact that if you play Wolfbriar Elemental with Djinn of Wishes, you can still pay the kicker cost.
You misunderstand my point about abilities.Your proposed answer made it sound (at one point) as though the fact that you were using an ability to bring Wolfbriar Elemental into play was the reason you couldn't pay kicker. This is false (and I think y
hey yall, just had a question about something. I think I might of found a damage loop. One card is an equipment that states all damage that would be dealt to me is dealt to equipped creature instead.
Now the other card is an enchant creature and it states that all damage that would be dealt to enchanted creature is dealt to that creature's controller. So wtf does that mean? The damage just bounces back and forth, never touching either one of us? Does the game go on, or does the loop need to be broken somehow before the game can go any further lol? Thanks.
hey yall, just had a question about something. I think I might of found a damage loop. One card is an equipment that states all damage that would be dealt to me is dealt to equipped creature instead. Now the other card is an enchant creature and it s
Please do not post questions of your own here! You should only post in this thread if you want a question or topic to be added to the list. If you do, please post both question and answer, along with an explanation of why the given answer is the correct one. Please make your own thread if you want to get a question answered.
Should this be added to the Specific Cards section of the FAQ?
The question of what happens with [c]Necrotic Ooze[/c] and Leveler cards has come up several times already.Example:community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...Should this be added to the Specific Cards section of the FAQ?
Necrotic Ooze, Infect, and Proliferate have been added to the appropriate FAQs. I'm still working on the RPRPrimer entry for Scars; expect that within a week or so.
Necrotic Ooze, Infect, and Proliferate have been added to the appropriate FAQs. I'm still working on the RPRPrimer entry for Scars; expect that within a week or so.
The link to the Gatherer in the first post still goes to the old gatherer. Also, it appears that inline text searches like those available in Firefox and Safari don't "see" text behind spoilers until it is revealed; this may hinder people looking for card specific FAQs etc.
The link to the Gatherer in the first post still goes to the old gatherer.Also, it appears that inline text searches like those available in Firefox and Safari don't "see" text behind spoilers until it is revealed; this may hinder people looking for
It hasn't come up a lot recently, but it's the most common one I've seen for Painter's Servant.
The card-specific entry for [c]Painter's Servant[/c] says that it changes the color of cards that are phased-out, which is not true anymore.Also, please add this question to that FAQ entry:community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...It hasn't come up
I think we need a Mimic Vat entry; it seem to be coming up a lot. Specifically, what happens when both players have a vat each. Along the following lines perhaps?
Q. My opponent and I both control a Mimic Vat. During my turn, I cast Day of Judgement, and as a result two creatures are put into my graveyard from the battlefield, and two creatures are put into my opponent's graveyard from the battlefield. Both of our Mimic Vats trigger four times, once for each creature put into a graveyard. Who gets to imprint any given creature?
A. When multiple abilities need to be put on the stack at the same time, they get put on the stack in "AP-NAP Order". That means that first the Active Player (Alice) puts her abilities on the stack in any order, and then the Non-Active Player (Nigel) puts his abilities on the stack in any order. Since Nigel's abilities are put on the stack last, they will resolve first, and he can imprint each of the creature cards one at a time (putting all but the last one back into the graveyard). When Alice's abilities resolve, they will do nothing because the creature cards that went to the graveyard from the battlefield no longer exist (the ones put there from exile won't do any good because they are new objects as far as the game is concerned). Of course, if Nigel forgets to order his abilities like this, or doesn't want any of the creatures because his Vat is already "occupied" by a creature he wants to keep, Alice will get her choice of which of the destroyed creatures she wants from those not taken by Nigel.
Adding the Mimic Vat entry from the Set FAQ would probably also be useful.
I think we need a Mimic Vat entry; it seem to be coming up a lot. Specifically, what happens when both players have a vat each. Along the following lines perhaps?Q. My opponent and I both control a Mimic Vat. During my turn, I cast Day of Judgement,
. Shouldn't one the fountains be the counter (would it be the second one?)
. But Wither does seem to get it conspicuously more than the others.
(barring Mindslaver 
