Q: I want to tap a creature to keep it from attacking--when do I have to do that? A: If you want a creature to be unable to attack, you have to tap it before your opponent gets the chance to declare it as an attacker--after that, it's too late.
The last chance to tap a creature to keep it from attacking is during the Beginning of Combat step, before the Declare Attackers step begins. (Note that at that point you technically don't know for sure whether your opponent is going to attack with that creature or not...though you may be able to make a fairly accurate guess if he has a massive creature on the board and you have no blockers.)
If your opponent is rushing things and goes ahead without allowing you a chance to do the things you want, you are perfectly justified in getting him to back up so you can do the things you want to--Magic is not supposed to be a game of reflexes. If you had your chance and wasted it, however, there's no turning back.
Q: Does untapping an attacking creature make it stop attacking? A: Not unless the spell or ability that taps or untaps it specifically says so. Once a creature is attacking, tapping or untapping it can't change that.
Q: So what can make a creature stop attacking? A: A creature is removed from combat when something specifically says it removes it from combat (Gustcloak Savior ), or when it leaves the battlefield (Terminate ), changes controllers (Grab the Reins ), stops being a creature (very rare), or is regenerated. (Note that using something that regenerates a creature simply creates a shield that will perform the actual regeneration later, and doesn't remove the creature from combat right away; see the Regeneration FAQ entry.) Nothing else (including tapping or untapping) will remove a creature from combat.
Q: My opponent attacks with a particular creature--can I then do something before he attacks with his other creatures? A: No. All attackers are declared at once--there is never a time "between" two creatures attacking during the same combat phase.
Q: My opponent's creature "attack[s] if able" for some reason, and there is some restriction on how or when that creature can attack. (For example, it's an Ember Beast .) What happens? A: When the time comes for your opponent to declare attackers, your opponent's creature is forced to attack if it is possible for your opponent, at that very moment, to make it do so somehow. Your opponent is required to declare other attackers in such a way as to make the attack legal.
However, it's very important to note that while the above is true, nothing is forcing your opponent 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, take the case of the forced-to-attack creature being an Ember Beast . If your opponent controls other creatures that are able to attack when it becomes time to declare attackers, he will be forced to attack with his Ember Beast and one of his other creatures, because Ember Beast must attack if able and it can't do so alone. It's possible at that moment for your opponent to attack with the Beast and another creature, so he must do so. However, imagine your opponent's only creature on the battlefield is the Ember Beast, but he has a Raging Goblin in his hand. Casting the Goblin before combat would later allow his Ember Beast to attack (along with the Goblin), but your opponent is not required to do so, because that's a separate, unrelated action. Sure, it would allow him to fill the requirement later on, but the game isn't looking that far ahead--it only cares about what he can do right as attackers are declared, and can only force him to do things right then and there. He isn't required to do anything before that if he doesn't want to.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: Can a creature be blocked by more than one creature? A: A creature can be blocked by any number of creatures. It can block only one creature. (Unless specified otherwise.)
Q: I want to tap a creature to keep it from blocking--when do I have to do that? A: If you want a creature to be unable to block, you have to tap it before your opponent gets the chance to declare it as a blocker--after that, it's too late.
The last chance to tap a creature to keep it from blocking is during the Declare Attackers step, just before the Declare Blockers step begins. (Note that at that point you technically don't know for sure whether your opponent is going to block with that creature or not...though you may be able to make a fairly accurate guess if you're attacking with a massive creature that will kill him if he doesn't block.)
If your opponent is rushing things and goes ahead without allowing you a chance to do the things you want, you are perfectly justified in getting him to back up so you can do the things you want to--Magic is not supposed to be a game of reflexes. If you had your chance and wasted it, however, there's no turning back.
Q: Does tapping a blocking creature make it stop blocking? Does it make it not deal combat damage? A: Not unless the spell or ability that taps or untaps it specifically says so. Once a creature is blocking, tapping it can't change that, and will have no effect on whether or not the blocking creature deals combat damage.
Q: So what can remove a creature from combat? A: A creature is removed from combat when something specifically says it removes it from combat (Gustcloak Savior ), or when it leaves the battlefield (Terminate ), changes controllers (Grab the Reins ), stops being a creature (very rare), or is regenerated. (Note that using something that regenerates a creature simply creates a shield that will perform the actual regeneration later, and doesn't remove the creature from combat right away; see the Regeneration FAQ entry.) Nothing else (including tapping or untapping) will remove a creature from combat.
Q: If all the creatures blocking a particular creature are somehow removed from combat, does that make the creature unblocked? A: No. Once a creature becomes blocked, it stays blocked for the rest of combat, no matter what happens to the creatures blocking it.
Q: My opponent blocks my creature with another creature--can I then give my creature flying, fear, unblockability, or some other evasion ability to make it so the creature's no longer blocking? A: No. Once blockers have been declared, that's it. It doesn't matter whether the creature has some sort of ability that would prevent it from being blocked if you went through declaring blockers again--it's blocked now, and that's all that matters.
Q: My opponent blocks with a particular creature--can I then do something before he blocks with his other creatures? A: No. All blockers are declared at once--there is never a time "between" two creatures blocking during the same combat phase.
Q: My opponent's creature "block[s] if able" for some reason, and there is some restriction on how or when that creature can block. (For example, it's an Ember Beast .) What happens? A: When the time comes for your opponent to declare blockers, your opponent's creature is forced to block if it is possible for your opponent, at that very moment, to make it do so somehow. Your opponent is required to declare other blockers in such a way as to make the block legal.
However, it's very important to note that while the above is true, nothing is forcing your opponent to take unrelated actions that would then, in turn, make it possible for the requirements to be met so that that creature could block.
To give an example, take the case of the forced-to-block creature being an Ember Beast . If your opponent controls other creatures that are able to block when it becomes time to declare blockers, he will be forced to block with his Ember Beast and one of his other creatures, because Ember Beast must block if able and it can't do so alone. It's possible at that moment for your opponent to block with the Beast and another creature, so he must do so. However, imagine your opponent's only creature on the battlefield is the Ember Beast, but he controls a Mobilization . Activating the Mobilization's ability before he needs to declare blockers would later allow his Ember Beast to block (along with the Soldier token), but your opponent is not required to do so, because that's a separate, unrelated action. Sure, it would allow him to fill the requirement later on, but the game isn't looking that far ahead--it only cares about what he can do right as attackers are declared, and can only force him to do things right then and there. He isn't required to do anything before that if he doesn't want to.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: If all the creatures blocking a particular creature are somehow removed, will that creature deal damage to the defending player? A: No. Once a creature becomes blocked, it stays blocked for the rest of combat, no matter what happens to the creatures blocking it, and blocked creatures can't deal combat damage to the defending player. (Unless, of course, they have Trample or a similar ability.)
Q: When is my last chance to boost/shrink creatures to make them deal more/less damage in combat? A: If you want to change the size of a creature so that it deals more or less damage, you have to do it during the Declare Blockers step, before it deals its combat damage at the beginning of the Combat Damage step. (If first or double strikers are involved in combat, you can wait until the first strike combat damage step to pump/shrink non-first-strikers.)
Q: Can I sacrifice my creature (say, as a cost to cast/activate a spell or ability) and still have it deal combat damage? A: No. If you sacrifice your creature before the Combat Damage step begins, it won't be around to deal damage. If you wait until the Combat Damage step, it's already been dealt damage and thus will have died from lethal damage.
Q: Can my creature be dealt more damage than its toughness? A: Yes. Things that deal damage to creatures don't "pull their punches" based on the toughness of the creature. If your creature is blocked by an 8-power creature, it's going to take 8 damage, no matter what its toughness is.
Q: My attacking creature is blocked by more than one creature. What happens? A: Your creature will deal damage equal to its power divided among the creatures blocking it. The exact procedure for doing this is as follows.
Immediately after blockers have been declared, you must decide the order in which each of your creatures will assign damage to the creatures blocking it. Once the combat damage step begins, you will assigns the damage from his or her creatures to the opposing creatures in the stated order. Each creature must be assigned "lethal damage" before any damage can be assigned to the next creature in the line.
For the purposes of assigning damage this way, "lethal damage" is defined as an amount of damage equal to or greater than the blocker's current toughness, minus any damage already on it or other damage being assigned at the same time. (Or any amount of damage from something that has deathtouch.) Any abilities or effects that might prevent or redirect the damage are ignored.
For example: Alice attacks Neil with Alpha Tyrranax ; Neil blocks the Tyrranax with Indomitable Ancients and Assault Griffin . Alice must choose the order in which her Tyrranax will assign damage to the two creatures blocking it. Let's walk through each option.
Alice could choose to assign damage to the Ancients first, then the Griffin second. In this case, she must assign at least 10 damage to the Ancients before being able to assign any to the Griffin, but since her Tyrranax only has 6 power, she isn't going to be able to do that, so her Tyrranax will deal 6 to the Ancients and not be able to deal any to the Griffin.
If she chooses to assign damage the other way, to the Griffin first, then the Ancients, she must assign at least 2 to the Griffin before being able to assign any to the Ancients. Her 6-power Tyrranax will be able to do that easily, assigning 2 damage to the Griffin--the rest can be divided as she chooses between the Griffin and Ancients.
The best choice for Alice is probably the second one--assigning damage to the Griffin first allows her to kill one of the blockers at least, whereas assigning damage to the Ancients first would mean she doesn't kill anything.
Q: My blocking creature is blocking more than one attacking creature. What happens? A: Much the same as in the above question, the controller of the blocker decides the order in which his or her creatures assign their combat damage to the creatures they're blocking. This ordering is done just after the attacking player chooses the damage assignment ordering for his own creatures. The same rules apply for what is considered 'lethal damage' as above.
For example: Alice attacks Neil with Alpha Tyrranax and Order of the Sacred Bell ; Neil blocks both creatures with Avatar of Hope . Neil must choose the order in which her Avatar will assign damage to the two creatures it's blocking.
If Neil assigns damage to the Tyrranax first, he must assign at least 5 to the Tyrranax before being able to assign any to the Order; since the Avatar has only 4 power he won't be able to do that. The Avatar will deal 4 damage to the Tyrannax and none to the Order.
If Neil assigns damage to the Order first, then the Tyrranax, he must assign at least 3 to the Order before being able to assign any to the Tyrranax; this he can do. The 4-power Avatar will be able to assign 3 damage to the Order, and the remaining 1 can be dealt to either the Order or the Tyrranax, whichever Neil prefers.
Again, the second case is probably the better one for Neil, since he kills off one of the attackers.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: What is a "counter"? A: The word "counter" has two meanings in Magic. To "counter" (verb) a spell or ability is to negate it and prevent any of its effects from happening. (This process is outlined above in Countering Spells and Abilities). A "counter" (noun), on the other hand, is a small marker placed on an object in order to either denote permanent changes to that object or as some way of keeping track of something.
("Poison counters" are given to a player instead of placed on a permanent, but it's the same idea.)
Q: What do +1/+1 counters do? How about -1/-1 counters? A: A +1/+1 counter (or +2/+2, or -1/-1, or whatever) on a creature modifies that creature's power and toughness. A +1/+1 counter gives, unsurprisingly, +1/+1, and so on.
Note: +1/+1 counters don't do anything on noncreature permanents, but that doesn't mean they can't be there.
Q: What do named counters do? "Age", "divinity", "training", "ice"... how are you supposed to keep track? A: Counters with names don't do anything by themselves; they are placed on a permanent and act as markers that allow other abilities to refer to them. Cumulative Upkeep, for example, uses age counters to keep track of how long a permanent has been on the battlefield.
Q: Does removing a named counter from a permanent do anything? A: That depends on how the effect that's actually doing something to the thing with the counter on it works. Effects that put counters on things to change them (or mark them as changed) can work any of several different ways.
First, they can do something to the permanent and then put a counter on that permanent for no other reason than to make it easier for you to remember the effect--in these cases, removing the counter won't stop the effect, and removing whatever added the counter doesn't do anything either. An example of this kind of effect would be Sensei Golden-Tail --note how the same ability that adds the counter says the creature gains Bushido and becomes a Samurai, and it doesn't say anything about the effect ending. Since no duration is specified, the effect from this activated ability is permanent, and won't end no matter what happens to the counter or to Sensei.
Second, they can have an ability that puts a counter on a permanent, and then have a separate ability that does something to permanents with counters on them. Rimescale Dragon works this way--its first ability puts an ice counter on a creature, but it doesn't say that that counter does anything. Instead, the Dragon has a separate ability that affects creatures with ice counters on them. In this case, once the Dragon leaves the battlefield or the ice counter is removed, the permanent starts to untap as normal, because the ability that's actually creating the effect leaves with the Dragon or stops applying once the ice counter is removed.
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 counter would.
If you're not sure which kind of effect you're looking at, don't be afraid to ask here in Rules Q&A.
Q: Are counters interchangeable? A: As long as they're of the same type, all counters are equal, no matter where they came from. So yes, you can use That Which Was Taken 's divinity counters to use Myojin of Cleansing Fire 's ability repeatedly, or whatever.
Q: Do counters ever "fall off" a permanent? A: With one sole exception, not unless something removes them or the permanent they're on leaves the battlefield. Counters will never "fall off" of a permanent of their own accord. Even if they're on something other than what they're supposed to or whatever gave them meaning has left the battlefield, the counters still remain, waiting to become relevant again.
The one exception is that +1/+1 counters and -1/-1 counters will annihilate each other on a one-to-one basis until only one kind remains if both are present on the same permanent.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: What does being indestructible mean? A: A permanent that is indestructible cannot be destroyed. In other words, it is immune to effects that attempt to destroy it. There are only two types of destroy effects: spells and abilities that actually use the word "destroy" and, for creatures, lethal damage (damage equal to or greater than the creature's toughness).
Note: "Bury" doesn't exist anymore and was changed in most cases to "destroy, can't be regenerated". Check the Oracle wording, though, because in some cases it was changed to "sacrifice". "Sacrificing" isn't the same thing as destruction, so indestructible creatures are put into the graveyard as normal when they are sacrificed.
Q: How can I get rid of an indestructible permanent? A: Permanent spells that will be indestructible once on the battlefield can be countered like any spell; once they're on the battlefield, you can exile them (Path to Exile ), force your opponent to sacrifice them (Diabolic Edict ), bounce them (Boomerang ), or in the case of a creature, reduce its toughness to 0 using toughness-reducing effects (Infest ). Anything that doesn't use the word "destroy" and doesn't deal damage will work just fine on an indestructible permanent. (Wither or Infect damage will also work, because they use -1/-1 counters to reduce toughness, but regular damage won't.)
Q: Can I still target an indestructible permanent with a spell that destroys? A: Yes; it will simply do nothing. Note, however, that if the spell has two parts and the second part doesn't say it depends on the first part (Deconstruct , for example), the second part will still happen. If you Deconstruct a Darksteel Colossus , the Colossus will stay alive, but you will still add to your mana pool.
Q: Is being indestructible an ability? A: No. Being indestructible is a quality, not an ability in and of itself--indestructible is something the permanent is, not something it has. However, and this is where people often get confused, the text "{This card} is indestructible" is an ability, an ability which grants the card the quality of being indestructible. Removing that ability would stop the card from being indestructible, because there would no longer be anything granting it that quality.
So, for example, if you make a Spearbreaker Behemoth lose its abilities with Snakeform , it will no longer be indestructible, because it loses the "this is indestructible" ability that causes it to be indestructible in the first place. However, if your opponent played Spearbreaker Behemoth 's ability to make one of his creatures indestructible until the end of the turn, and then you Snakeform ed that creature, it would still be indestructible, because the Behemoth's ability is granting a quality, not an ability.
Q: If an indestructible creature is dealt lethal damage in combat, is it removed from combat? A: No. An indestructible creature doesn't "regenerate" when dealt lethal damage; it simply ignores it.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: Does untapping an attacking creature make it stop attacking? How about tapping a blocking creature? A: Not unless the spell or ability that taps or untaps it specifically says so. Once a creature is attacking or blocking, tapping or untapping it can't change that. (And no, tapping a blocking creature doesn't stop it from dealing combat damage.)
Q: I want to tap a creature to prevent it from attacking me and/or blocking--when do I have to do that? A: If you want a creature to be unable to attack/block, you have to tap it before your opponent gets the chance to declare it as an attacker/blocker--after that, it's too late.
The last chance to tap a creature to prevent it from attacking is during the Beginning of Combat step, before the Declare Attackers step begins, and the last chance to tap a creature to prevent it from blocking is during the Declare Attackers step, just before the Declare Blockers step begins. Note that at that point you don't know for sure whether your opponent is going to attack or block with that creature or not.
If your opponent is rushing things and goes ahead without allowing you a chance to do the things you want, you are perfectly justified in getting him to back up so you can do the things you want to--Magic is not supposed to be a game of reflexes. If you had your chance and wasted it, however, there's no turning back.
Q: Can I tap something in order to stop its ability that requires a tap cost? A: No. Tapping is part of the cost to activate the ability, and you can't respond to a cost being paid--by the time you can respond, the permanent is already tapped and thus trying to tap it again would be useless. And of course, if you try to pre-emptively tap the permanent, they can simply respond to your spell/ability with the very ability you wanted to stop them from activating. The best you can do for most abilities is force your opponent to either "use it or lose it", forcing them to use the ability at a time they might prefer not to or else lose the ability to do it later.
If the ability requires a target that isn't always available (like Crossbow Infantry needing an attacking or blocking creature) or can only be played at certain times (like Ghost-Lit Stalker ), you could do your tapping at a time when that ability can't be played, such as before combat for the Infantry or during their upkeep for the Stalker; in such a case they wouldn't be able to use the ability in response. But most activated abilities can be played any time, and thus can't be circumvented this way.
Q: My opponent casts Twiddle or another card that allows him to tap my lands--does that give me mana? A: No. An activated ability (such as the ones lands have that give you mana) needs you to deliberately pay its cost for the purpose of using that particular ability before it does anything--tapping a land as an effect of a spell or ability is completely different from tapping the land for mana.
Note that this also applies to other card types--an opponent can never force your permanents' activated abilities to "go off" on their own. (Triggered abilities are a different matter.)
Q: I attack with a creature, which taps it. I later untap it somehow. Can I attack with it again? A: No. You get only one combat phase per turn (and thus only one chance to attack per turn) and that's it, unless a card specifically says otherwise. Untapping creatures won't allow you to attack with them again.
Q: Do cards (of any kind) "turn off" when they're tapped? A: Read the current Oracle text of the card. (You can find the Oracle text by looking up the card in Gatherer.) If the card doesn't say that it turns off, it doesn't.
Artifacts used to turn off when they were tapped, but that rule was dropped more than ten years ago; some artifacts (like Howling Mine ) were given errata to keep the same functionality, but the vast majority weren't.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: What is the layer system and how does it work? A: In Magic, many different effects can try to somehow alter or modify objects in any number of ways. When two or more effects try to modify the same object, the order the two are applied in often becomes important. Determining how all these different kinds of effects should logically interact is a complex and difficult job, which is why the layer system was created in an attempt to unify and simplify it. The layer system is Magic's method of determining just how multiple different effects should interact, by telling you the order in which you should apply them.
For an example of an interaction that could be changed by the order in which effects are applied, look at Darkest Hour and Bad Moon . If the Hour was applied before the Moon, every creature on the battlefield would get +1/+1. But if the Moon was applied before the Hour, only creatures that were black before the Hour did its thing would get the bonus. The layer system clears this up by giving us a consistent answer: the former is the way it actually works out, every time.
Effects that switch a creature's power and toughness (About Face )
Magic's layer system is similar to the layers of an onion. Each different kind of modifying effect is applied in a specific layer. You start with the actual cards, then apply the effects in the first layer, then those in the second, then the third, and so on until all relevant effects have been applied.
Note that this is all seen as a single continuous process. Even though we act as though we apply the layers one by one, there is never a time in which a particular effect has not been applied. (To use the onion analogy again, the size of the onion can be determined by starting with the size of the core of it, then adding to that the thickness of each layer in turn. The layers were always in place--we didn't take the onion apart and then reconstruct it. We just determined exactly how each of the layers affected the onion's size.)
For example, I control a Glorious Anthem , and have played Confiscate on one of my opponent's creatures. The Confiscated creature gets +1/+1, because control-changing effects are applied before P/T- changing effects, so by the time it's time to apply the Anthem, I control the creature and thus the Anthem applies to it.
Q: What if one effect wants to do things in more than one layer? (eg. March of the Machines wants to change artifacts into artifact creatures, and also wants to set the power and toughness of those artifact creatures.) A: If an effect wants to apply in multiple different layers, you apply each part of the effect in the appropriate layer. Note that once an effect has started to apply to a certain set of things in one layer, it will continue to apply to the same set of things in any other applicable layers, even if the ability that generated the effect is removed.
Q: What if two effects are supposed to be applied in the same layer? A: If two effects are applied in the same layer, there are three factors to consider:
Is one of the effects a "characteristic-defining" effect?
What is the "timestamp" of the effects, relative to each other?
Is one of the effects "dependent" on another?
Characteristic-defining effects are effects from inherent abilities of a card that define some characteristic of that card as being a specific value. A card's characteristics are its name, mana cost, color, type, subtype, supertype, expansion symbol (yes, expansion symbol; don't ask), rules text, abilities, power, and toughness. Something that affects the characteristics of something other than what it's on, or affects characteristics only under specific circumstances, is not characteristic-defining. Examples of characteristic -defining abilities can be found on Ancestral Vision , Maro , and Mistform Ultimus .
An effect's "timestamp" is essentially the time that it started to become relevant. For effects created by the resolution of spells or abilities (such as Giant Growth 's +3/+3 effect), that's when the spell or ability that created it resolved. For Auras, Equipment, and other cards that become attached to other things, that's whenever they became attached to whatever they're currently attached to. For most other things, it's the time the object it's on entered the game zone that it's currently in. If two objects enter a zone at the same time, the player whose turn it is decides their timestamp order relative to each other.
An effect is said to be "dependent" on another if applying that other would change either the existence of the first effect, what it would apply to, or how it would affect the things it applies to. (Note that an effect can only be dependent on effects within the same layer as itself.)
So, with that under our belt, we (finally) answer the question. First, you apply characteristic-defining effects. Then you apply other effects in timestamp order, unless some of the effects depend on each other. If so, you apply the "independent" effects first (the ones that don't depend on anything), then the dependent ones.
Q: What if there's a chain of effects that are dependent on each other? (Effect C depends on effect B which depends on effect A) What if that chain forms a loop? (Effect A also depends on effect C) A: If there is a linear (straight line) chain of dependencies, you apply them in order--first the independent, then the one that depends only on that, then the one that depends only on that, and so on.
A "loop" of effects that are all interdependent is called a "dependency loop". If such a loop is created, you ignore dependency and just apply the effects in strict timestamp order.
All right, we start in layer 5, which is the first layer in which all these things start to become relevant, as that's the layer in which color-changing effects are applied. Working in timestamp order, first, Darkest Hour makes every creature black. Then, Celestial Dawn makes all my creatures white. So my creatures are all white, and yours are all black.
Next comes layer 7c, where Crovax and Bonesplitter are both applied. Crovax gives all of my other creatures +1/+1 (they're all white, remember), and gives all of your creatures -1/-1 (they're all just plain black). Bonesplitter gives your Seeker +2/+0. So Crovax is 4/4, Wind Drake is 3/3, and the Seeker is 3/1. (While you technically apply the effects in timestamp order, it doesn't really matter in this particular case.)
Sound simple enough? All right, let's try a really complex situation and see how things work out.
Layer 4: Type-, supertype-, and subtype- changing effects. This is where things get interesting. Mycosynth Lattice turns everything into an artifact, then March of the Machines turns everything into an artifact creature. Conspiracy turns all of my creatures (I control it now) into Goblins, and Dralnu's Crusade turns them into Goblin Zombies. (It's a dependency chain; applying each affects the applicability of the others, so you follow the chain.) Opalescence also turns all the non-Aura enchantments into creatures (they already are, but whatever; we don't care).
Layer 5: Color-changing effects. Mycosynth Lattice 's color-changing ability and Dralnu's Crusade 's color-changing effect both apply--since the Lattice was on the battlefield first, you apply it first, turning everything colorless, and then the Crusade, turning my Goblin-Zombie-y creatures green.
Layer 6: Abilities. Humility kicks in and removes everything's abilities. (They're all creatures at this point.) Note that even though it removes its own ability in the process, this doesn't matter--it's started to apply, and will continue to do so. The same goes for the Opalescence s and March of the Machines --they started to apply back in layer 4, and will continue to be applied even though Humility's removed their abilities.
Layer 7: P/T-changing effects. Humility , both Opalescence s, and March of the Machines want to apply here. (Night of Souls' Betrayal, Dralnu's Crusade, and Shared Triumph would love to join in the party, but can't, because their P/T-changing abilities were removed by Humility before they had a chance to start applying.) All three effects want to change P/T to a specific value, so they apply in 7b. Humility goes first (because it's older), then the others. Everything ends up with P/T equal to its converted mana cost.
Whew!
So in the end, all of my permanents are green Goblin Zombie artifact creatures with power and toughness equal to their converted mana cost. Your Triumph and Crusade are both colorless artifact creatures with no creature type, and also have p/t equal to their converted mana cost.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: What is a token? A: A token is a marker that is used to represent a permanent that isn't represented by its own card. The effect that's creating the token will define a number of characteristics for the token, and you put a marker of some kind onto the battlefield that you pretend is a permanent with those characteristics. For example, The Hive creates 1/1 Insect artifact creature tokens with flying named Wasp; each token is represented by a marker and in game terms looks like this:
Wasp Artifact Creature - Insect Flying 1/1
They are treated exactly the same way you would treat a card that has those same characteristics, except that they are "tokens", not "cards", (an important distinction for some cards, like Wirewood Hivemaster ) and if they leave the battlefield for any reason, they cease to exist immediately after. (Once gone, a token can never return to the battlefield.)
A token can be represented by anything you like--a coin, a die, a glass bead, a piece of lint, whatever. While Wizards does make "official" token cards, which they include in booster packs, for players to use to represent tokens, these token cards are for looks only; they're strictly optional.
Q: Do tokens have names? A: Yes. A creature token's name is usually the same as its creature type(s); however, if the token is a copy of something, its name is the same as whatever it's a copy of, and if the effect that created it specified a name for it, that is its name.
Example: A "1/1 red Goblin Scout creature token" (Goblin Scouts ) is named "Goblin Scout", but a "legendary 2/2 green and white Wolf creature token named Voja" (Tolsimir Wolfblood ) is named "Voja".
Q: What is the converted mana cost of a token? A: It is 0, unless the token is a copy of some other card, in which case it has the converted mana cost of that card.
Q: Does putting a creature token onto the battlefield count as casting a creature spell? A: No. The act of "casting a spell" has a special meaning in magic, involving taking a card (usually from your hand), putting it onto the stack, choosing required targets, modes, and making other required decisions, and paying the required costs to do so. Putting a token onto the battlefield doesn't involve any of that--you aren't casting anything, much less a creature spell, when you put a token onto the battlefield.
Thus, putting a creature token onto the battlefield won't trigger abilities like Equilibrium 's, which trigger on casting a creature spell. They will, however, trigger abilities like Pandemonium 's, which trigger on a creature entering the battlefield and don't care how it got there.
Q: What happens when a token leaves the battlefield? A: After a token has left the battlefield, it ceases to exist almost immediately, as a state-based action; once a token has left the battlefield, it can never come back.
(Note that it still gets to wherever it was going--it just vanishes after getting there.)
Q: So, do they still trigger things like Grave Pact or Warped Devotion ? A: Yes, they do--the token leaves the battlefield (and triggers the ability) and then ceases to exist--it hangs around just long enough to trigger leaves-battlefield triggers before it disappears.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: Can I attack more than one opponent at once? A: If your playgroup decides to allow it, yes, you can attack as many different players as you wish at the same time. If not, no--you can only attack one. While some specific variants may work one way or the other, for general multiplayer play, either is a legal choice, and individual playgroups differ on which they allow. (Generally, allowing players to attack multiple opponents is the more common choice.)
Do note that this should be decided before the game begins. If you try to leave it until after, things can get a bit awkward.
Q: How do mulligans work in multiplayer? A: In multiplayer play, each player gets one 'free' mulligan, in which their hand size isn't reduced. Other than that, unless a variant specifies otherwise, mulligans proceed as in a normal two-player game.
Q: Does the player who goes first draw a card on his or her first turn? A: Yes. The first player only skips his or her first draw step in two-player play. In multiplayer, the first draw step isn't skipped.
Q: How does sharing turns work? A: In some variants, teammates share the same turn, which means that it's both their turns at the same time. They both untap their permanents during the untap step, they both draw a card as the draw step begins, they can both cast sorceries during their main phase, they both can attack during combat, and so on.
If something would cause a player to skip a turn or part of a turn, or gain additional turns or parts of turns, then the players they're sharing their turn with are also affected--it's all the same turn. Same goes for effects like Mindslaver and Sorin Markov 's ultimate.
Q: What happens when a player loses the game? A: When a player loses the game, they leave the game, and everything they own goes with them. Then, any effects that are giving them control of things other people own end. After that, if there's anything left that they still control, it gets exiled. The game then continues as normal without them or anything controlled by them. (If something they would control would somehow do something, it doesn't instead.)
'Effects that are giving them control of things' means things like Dominate , Act of Treason , Mind Control , and so on. Something that takes something already on the stack or battlefield and changes who its controller is. Things like Bribery , Rise from the Grave , or Gather Specimens that put something directly onto the battlefield under a specific player's control right from the beginning are not the same thing; they have no previous controller to go back to, so things the losing player grabbed using cards like those get exiled.
Q: What is range of influence and how does it work? A: Some variant formats use what's known as the limited range of influence option, which restricts how players can interact with each other. When players have a limited range of influence each player has a specific number of players to their right and left who are 'in range', and all others are out of their range. A player can't target someone or something that's out of their range, their spells and abilities don't have any effect on things outside of their range, and so on. (Also, if an effect in a limited range of influence game would have a player win the game, instead, everyone else within that player's range of influence loses the game.)
The actual rules for range of influence get a bit more involved than that, since they have to cover all the little corner cases, but that's the basic idea.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
Q: What is Archenemy and how is it played? A: Archenemy is a casual variant that allows multiple players to fight cooperatively against one powerful opponent, the Archenemy. Normally, such a team-up would be strongly in the favor of the opposing players (the 'heroes'), but the archenemy has a suite of advantages to swing things back in their favor. The archenemy starts with 40 life, while each of the opposing players (the 'heroes') starts with the normal 20. The heroes share a common turn (see the question on sharing turns in the General section above), but the archenemy always goes first and gets to draw on his or her first turn. The heroes win by defeating the archenemy; the archenemy wins by defeating all of the heroes.
But the biggest advantage for the archenemy is their Schemes. The archenemy plays with an additional deck of oversized Scheme cards, set aside from the rest of the cards in the game. These schemes contain powerful effects that swing the game in the favor of the archenemy. As each of his or her precombat main phases begin, the archenemy sets a scheme in motion by flipping over the top card of his or her Scheme deck, and following its instructions. These schemes may grant benefits to the archenemy, such as letting him draw extra cards or making his spells easier to cast, or they may hinder the heroes, such as by destroying their permanents or forcing them to discard cards.
Note that Archenemy is balanced best for one-on-three play; while you can play with any number of players, the archenemy has a big advantage against only two players, and is at a big disadvantage against four or more players. You may wish to modify the rules somewhat in such cases so that games are more evenly balanced and won't be so heavily in favor of one of the two sides.
Q: How does setting schemes in motion work? A: The Archenemy sets a scheme in motion as he or she begins his or her precombat main phase. ('Precombat main phase' is just a fancy way of saying 'the first main phase of the turn'.) This turn-based action can't be responded to--you can't do anything in the main phase before a scheme is set in motion. However, the actual instructions of the scheme are a normal triggered ability (you can tell because they say 'when') and can be responded to.
So, for example, the Archenemy starts his or her main phase. Before anyone can do anything else, the Archenemy sets the top scheme of his or her scheme deck in motion--let's say it's Tooth, Claw, and Tail . This triggers its ability, and that ability is put onto the stack and targets are chosen, just as for any other triggered ability. Players then have the opportunity to respond to the trigger, before anything is actually destroyed, just as they do with regular triggered abilities.
Once the triggered ability has resolved or otherwise been dealt with, the scheme is 'abandoned', put face-down on the bottom of the archenemy's scheme deck.
Q: What are ongoing schemes and how do they work? A: An ongoing scheme is a special type of scheme that doesn't just do one thing and then disappear--instead it hangs around to have a continuous effect on the game until something--the card will say what--forces the Archenemy to abandon it.
Note that having an ongoing scheme in motion doesn't prevent the archenemy from setting additional schemes in motion on future turns. Eventually, the archenemy could end up with five or ten ongoing schemes all at once, with new schemes each turn!
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real. --Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
~ 
~ 
~ 
~ 
