|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 1:32PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Apr 30, 2010
|
If someone plays Incremental Blight  and i unmorph my Willbender  do i get to choose new targets for all the sets of counters or..... im not sure. how does this work?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 1:32PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jan 19, 2003
|
Willbender 's ability can only target a "spell or ability with a single target". Incremental Blight has three targets, and thus does not match that targetting restriction. Since there are no legal targets for willbender's ability, it is removed from the stack and does nothing.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 1:36PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Apr 30, 2010
|
ok that makes sense, i thought it ment that everything went to a single target, i read it funny. thanks
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 1:37PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Apr 16, 2009
|
ok that makes sense, i thought it ment that everything went to a single target, i read it funny. thanks
I've done the same thing, many times. And complained loudly about the wording. 
Change the target of [target spell with a single target] is the correct reading. "With a single target" is a restriction applying to "target spell".
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 2:15PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2005
|
It baffles me that so many people can misread this effect in exactly the same way. If I said "change the diaper of that baby with the dirty diaper" would you remove the diaper of that baby, and replace it with a dirty diaper? No, you would "change the diaper of" that baby. Which baby? "That baby with the dirty diaper." The only way it could possibly mean what so many people seem to think it means is if it said " exchange" rather than "change". It's right up there with: Unless a player has Book Burning  [imaginary comma], deal 6 damage to him or her [imaginary period]. Put the top six cards of ["target" somehow becomes "that"] player's library into his or her graveyard.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 2:38PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Oct 29, 2007
|
@IronMagus: the baby example is a bit more evident.
change [this]>{the target of target spell or ability} with [this]>{a single target}
change the target of [this]>{target spell or ability with a single target}
these are both valid interpretations in English (though the latter is the intended interpretation)
but if someone read it as the former, I can see their confusion.
MtG Rules Advisor &
Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJDJ VortexDCI Certified Rules Advisor from July 14, 2009 to July 14, 2012 DCI #5209514320 Wit found in Rules Q&ARPJesus: "Man, screw the rules, I'll play a game of 2HG Archenemy Planechase Emperor EDH draft yet. Once I figure out the rules for it..." Chaikov: "Of course, casual Magic may be played any way your Pokemon group agrees on..." and "It's not logic. It's Magic!" GainsBanding: "I only play online. The Magic Online shuffler is AWESOME!" Ikegami: "one might think [adult cats] would make excellent tokens. The issue, though, is that they are very hard to exile. They return to the battlefield more often than an undying creature." Astarael7: "Does 121.1 imply that players are supposed to wear their poison counters?" Bimmerbot: "If you move the wrong way and [the poison counters] fall, it's a game rule violation" Helluminatus: "Just remember, if it looks like a duck, smells like a duck, and quacks like a duck, but the oracle text says creature - Bunny , then by god, it's a bunny." MadCow21: "Who are you and what have you done with the real Chaikov?" My Wife's Makeup Artist Page <-- cool stuff - check it out
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 2:46PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2005
|
change the target of [this]>{target spell or ability} with a single target
change the target of [this]>{target spell or ability with a single target}
these are both valid interpretations in English (though the latter is the intended interpretation)
No, they're not. You can exchange something with something else as in to trade one in for the other, because to "exchange" something [with something else] means the same thing as to "swap" or "replace" it. To simply "change" something, on the other hand, doesn't mean "replace" it it means to "alter" or "modify" it.
...maybe the word "change" isn't they key here, maybe it's "with." In reality, all the words of the sentence work together to put forth the idea, but "change A with B" can really only mean one thing. If "change" was changed to "exchange", or if "with" was exchanged with "to" (see what I did there?) then it could be read the other way but as it is written, it cannot mean anything but the second one.
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
Change the word "lazy" with "XXX":
The quick brown fox jumped over the lXaXzXy dog.
I changed (modified) the word "lazy." I used "XXX" to change it, and therefore it became "lXaXzXy."
Exchange the word "lazy" with "XXX":
The quick brown fox jumped over the XXX dog.
This time I exchanged (swapped) the word "lazy," using "XXX" in its place.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 2:52PM
#8
|
|
|
No, they're not. You can exchange something with something else as in to trade one in for the other, because to "exchange" something [with something else] means the same thing as to "swap" or "replace" it. To simply "change" something, on the other hand, doesn't mean "replace" it it means to "alter" or "modify" it.
So when I change my tire, I'm just altering the old one, not swapping or replacing it? Changing my clothes? Changing my shoes? Changing places with someone? Changing airplanes? Changing dollars into francs? Seems somewhat evident from all these examples that "change" pretty commonly means exactly the same thing as "swap" or "replace," and hence "exchange."
Also, your analogy of the statement about the dirty diaper is not a good one - it's obvious from the context of your situation that you would not put a dirty diaper on a baby. It is NOT obvious, especially to the newer player, how to interpret Willbender's text.
Rules Advisor - 10/24/2010
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 2:55PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2009
|
No, they're not. You can exchange something with something else as in to trade one in for the other, because to "exchange" something [with something else] means the same thing as to "swap" or "replace" it. To simply "change" something, on the other hand, doesn't mean "replace" it it means to "alter" or "modify" it.
So when I change my tire, I'm just altering the old one, not swapping or replacing it? Changing my clothes? Changing my shoes? Changing places with someone? Changing airplanes? Changing dollars into francs? Seems somewhat evident from all these examples that "change" pretty commonly means exactly the same thing as "swap" or "replace," and hence "exchange."
Also, your analogy of the statement about the dirty diaper is not a good one - it's obvious from the context of your situation that you would not put a dirty diaper on a baby. It is NOT obvious, especially to the newer player, how to interpret Willbender's text.
Hint: English has idioms.
I am the Twilight Sparkle of The Pony Co. 
Ponies are the best animals on the planet. A cartoon about them made for little girls is the best show on TV. Join the movement. Rest of sig
Show
Disclaimers
Show
My initial responses to rules questions are usually just answers. If you want an explanation as to why, say so.
Just because it says I'm there, I'm not necessarily there. I leave my browser open so I don't have to reload ~30 tabs.
Anyone who wants to text duel me through either PM or chat can just PM me with a format (and a time if playing through chat). I don't play standard.
# Card Blind Hall of Fame
Show
3CB
Show
3CB #1 (1/30/11): Won by silasw, with Mishra's Factory  , Orzhov Basilica  , Vindicate  .
3CB #2 (2/13/11): Won by Vektor480, with Mishra's Workshop  , Ensnaring Bridge  , Scalding Tongs 
3CB #3(2/20/11): Joint win between defuse, with Saprazzan Skerry  , Scalding Tongs , Energy Field  ; and Mown, with The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale  , Inkmoth Nexus  , Sheltered Valley 
3CB #4(3/13/11): Won by Mown, with Keldon Megaliths  , The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale , Boros Garrison 
3CB #5(3/20/11): Won by silasw, with Black Lotus  , Channel  , Emrakul, the Aeons Torn 
5CB
Show
quotes
Show
So, how would I use a card that has a large  in the top half and "sui?l? -- pu?? ?is?q" across the middle?
Winning is not important if:
1. You win by a blowout.
2. You pay billions of dollars in cards to win. If you like wasting money just to win one game, while you could have saved it to lose a few and end up winning more in the future, then it is fine by me.
what?
do you ceremonially light your deck on fire after a win?
Or did no one notice Transmogrifying Licid  before. (And by not notice, I mean covered their ears and shouted LA LA LA LA  )
Hmmm...
I think the most awkward situation at the moment is simply the Myr Welder / Equipment / Licid / Aura craziness, but I'm pretty sure he's aware of it.
If the most awkward thing going on right now involves Licids, I declare victory.
We regret to inform you of Trevor Kidd's untimely demise in an unfortunate accident involving a mysteriously blown breaker box and a photophobic creature of unknown origin at his home near Renton, Washington. We at the Wizards Community apologize for any inconvenience or delay, and assure you we'll be preparing a replacement to assume his duties as soon as we finish warming up the cloning vats.
[02:47:46] It doesn't merely "come out of suspend" - you take the last time counter off, and then suspend triggers and say "now cast that! CAST IT NOOOOOW!"
[02:47:49] Because suspend has no indoors voice
[10:11:33] !opalescence
[10:11:33] Opalescence {2WW} |Enchantment| Each other non-Aura enchantment is a creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost. It's still an enchantment. · Reserved,UD-R,Vin,Leg,Cla,USBC
[10:11:51] *sigh*
[10:12:10] Otecko: Do you have a question about Opalescence?
[10:12:17] sure
[10:12:23] $10 on humility interaction
[10:12:25] :P
[10:12:29] :D
[10:12:47] humility + opalescence put into play by replenish
Ego
Show
Mage is awesome, BTW.
Dear Mage24365,
You are totally awesome. Thank you so much. I hope you are able to dine in Paradise without kicking the bucket to actually get there, and that every dollar you ever make magically becomes two more.
I don't think there are any cards like that.
There are things that prevent you from activating activated abilities, things that increase their cost, and things that counter them, but I don't think anything triggers from them specifically.
There are things that trigger from targeting, so that might be relevant, but I can't think of anything that triggers from targeting a player.
I'm almost positive there's nothing that triggers from damage being prevented.
Rings of Brighthearth  ; Dormant Gomazoa  ; Samite Ministration  .
Well played.
 | This user loves Wikipe-tan, the
cutest personification of Wikipedia. |
^Put this in your sig; PM me for html code.^<
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
May 11, 2010 - 3:00PM
#10
|
|
|
No, they're not. You can exchange something with something else as in to trade one in for the other, because to "exchange" something [with something else] means the same thing as to "swap" or "replace" it. To simply "change" something, on the other hand, doesn't mean "replace" it it means to "alter" or "modify" it.
So when I change my tire, I'm just altering the old one, not swapping or replacing it? Changing my clothes? Changing my shoes? Changing places with someone? Changing airplanes? Changing dollars into francs? Seems somewhat evident from all these examples that "change" pretty commonly means exactly the same thing as "swap" or "replace," and hence "exchange."
Also, your analogy of the statement about the dirty diaper is not a good one - it's obvious from the context of your situation that you would not put a dirty diaper on a baby. It is NOT obvious, especially to the newer player, how to interpret Willbender's text.
Hint: English has idioms.
Hint: The dictionary (Merriam Webster and dictionary.com) both include "exchange" as a definition in the entry for "change."
So, unless you go somewhere else for definitions to English words other than the English dictionary, I'd say the two are synonymous.
Rules Advisor - 10/24/2010
|
|
|
