|
2 years ago ::
Apr 15, 2011 - 7:18PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2010
|
If I attack an oponent with 11/11 trample and he/she blocks with a 4/4 creature that has protection from my creatures color does the damage still trample through to the player or is the damage nulled?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 15, 2011 - 7:41PM
#2
|
- Celestial Teapots are broken!
Date Joined:
Feb 24, 2007
|
When you assign the damage, you must assign at least 4 to the blocking creature, but you can assign any/all of the remaining 7 to the defending player. The damage assigned to the creature will be prevented, but the damage assigned to the defending player will be successfully dealt.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2011 - 5:39AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Oct 29, 2007
|
If I attack an oponent with 11/11 trample and he/she blocks with a 4/4 creature that has protection from my creatures color does the damage still trample through to the player or is the damage nulled?
could be either, the 11/11's controller has to assign at least 4 to the blocker, but he could assign all 11 to the blocker. Whatever is assigned to the blocker will be prevented by protection so the damage could trample through to the player or be nullified at the trampler's option
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
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2011 - 10:57AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2007
|
And just to add some complexity, if the 11/11 was equipped with basilisk collar  one point of damage would be sufficient to kill it so you could apply 10 to the player. Notice that the damage is still prevented so the 4/4 does not die and you would gain 10 life feom the lifelink since 11 damage was done and one was prevented..
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2011 - 12:04PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Sep 14, 2009
|
Is this true? Wow, I've been doing this wrong. I always thought that enough damage has to be assigned to destroy the blocker before you can assign any to the defending player. Since none of your damage can destroy the blocker, nothing can get through.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2011 - 12:06PM
#6
|
|
|
Is this true? Wow, I've been doing this wrong. I always thought that enough damage has to be assigned to destroy the blocker before you can assign any to the defending player. Since none of your damage can destroy the blocker, nothing can get through.
You have to assign enough damage that the trampler *would* kill the blocking creature; the trample rules don't care if the damage gets prevented or redirected after assignment.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2011 - 12:08PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 17, 2004
|
Is this true? Wow, I've been doing this wrong. I always thought that enough damage has to be assigned to destroy the blocker before you can assign any to the defending player. Since none of your damage can destroy the blocker, nothing can get through.
When determining "lethal" combat damage for trample (or the damage assignment order), you ignore effects that might tamper with the actual amount of damage dealt (although you do get to treat as little as 1 combat damage from a creature with deathtouch as lethal). Protection won't make it necessary to assign all damage to the blocker, a Healing Salve  won't make it necessary to assign 7 damage from a trampling attacker to a 4/4 blocker, and Furnace of Rath  won't let a trampling attacker get away with assigning 2 damage to a 4/4 blocker.
702.17b The controller of an attacking creature with trample first assigns damage to the creature(s) blocking it. Once all those blocking creatures are assigned lethal damage, any remaining damage is assigned as its controller chooses among those blocking creatures and the player or planeswalker the creature is attacking. When checking for assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage from other creatures that's being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that's actually dealt. The attacking creature's controller need not assign lethal damage to all those blocking creatures but in that case can't assign any damage to the player or planeswalker it's attacking.
Example: A 2/2 creature with an ability that enables it to block multiple attackers blocks two attackers: a 1/1 with no abilities a 3/3 with trample. The active player could assign 1 damage from the first attacker and 1 damage from the second to the blocking creature, and 2 damage to the defending player from the creature with trample.
Example: A 6/6 green creature with trample is blocked by a 2/2 creature with protection from green. The attacking creature's controller must assign at least 2 damage to the blocker, even though that damage will be prevented by the blocker's protection ability. The attacking creature's controller can divide the rest of the damage as he or she chooses between the blocking creature and the defending player.
No, I am not a judge. That's why I like to quote sources such as the rules that trump judges.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2011 - 12:11PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2010
|
Is this true? Wow, I've been doing this wrong. I always thought that enough damage has to be assigned to destroy the blocker before you can assign any to the defending player. Since none of your damage can destroy the blocker, nothing can get through.
what is considered lethal damage from a source with deathtouch has been changed recently, you most likely missed that rule update.
lethal damage is considered damage equal to the toughness OR 1 damage with deathtouch
after that is dealt to a creature you can move on to the next creature or player in the case of trample.
proud member of the 2011 community team
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2011 - 12:19PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Sep 14, 2009
|
Is this true? Wow, I've been doing this wrong. I always thought that enough damage has to be assigned to destroy the blocker before you can assign any to the defending player. Since none of your damage can destroy the blocker, nothing can get through.
what is considered lethal damage from a source with deathtouch has been changed recently, you most likely missed that rule update.
lethal damage is considered damage equal to the toughness OR 1 damage with deathtouch
after that is dealt to a creature you can move on to the next creature or player in the case of trample.
I knew about the Deathtouch change, I just assumed that protection trumped all of that. Well, good to know thanks.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 16, 2011 - 12:49PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2010
|
no, it's basically the same as indestructible when you assign damage you have to assign lethal damage, if that damage goes through is of no concern. just as you can target an indestructible permanent with a spell that destroys, the rules don't discriminate against play errors 
proud member of the 2011 community team
|
|
|
