None of you explained how something chosen, has not been targeted.
It's been explained many times.
First of all, you're wrong about normal English usage and your own inept attempt at the tiresome "argument by dictonary" tactic proves it.
Second and more importantly, Magic has a definition of the term "target", just as almost any game has words that it defines in ways that don't necessarily line up with normal English usage. That definition is very clear and simple and you would have no trouble understanding it if you weren't clinging to your preconceptions about the word from other sources as though your life depended on them.
That definition does not state, imply, or in any way have the result that choosing is targeting. Moreover, the rulebook even has a passage stating in the clearest possible language that this is NOT the case, just to make this clear to people like you.
There is one (1), count 'em, ONE authoritative source on what the Magic rules are. That source is the Comprehensive Rulebook. Any argument you make needs to be based on what that actually says, not on your personal opinions of what it should say. If you refuse to believe the rulebook, there's no reason to have this conversation with you.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
At the same time, if you have a creature with protection from red, say Abbey Gargoyles , you could still play An-Zerrin Ruins and choose gargoyle as the creature type and it would effect the Abbey Gargoyles because the enchantment is not targetting the creature directly, it is chosen to effect it's creature type.
This is not the same thing. No one here gets what i'm talking about so I'll make this simple:
If I select a forest on the table FOR ANYTHING IT IS TARGETED PERIOD.. If I do not target the forest is cannot be selected.
Something cannot be selecetd/CHOSEN, and not be target. it's impossible.
You cannot chose ANYTHING WITHOUT IT BEING TARGTED.
As soon as ANYTHING is SELECTED IT HAS NOW BECOME TARGETED FOR SELECTION.
We get it just fine. You insist that any time you choose something, you are targeting it. You have asserted this about a dozen times now.
Where you got that idea, however, is indeed unclear. Relax for a few hours and come back and re-read this in a calmer mood and I really think even you will see why. Even if you're talking about normal English usage, this is pure nonsense. If I choose to order a burger for dinner, I have not targeted it. No-one in their right mind would say that. It's just bizarre.
If you're taking about the Magic rules, it's nonsense on stilts. You don't get to rewrite the Comprehensive Rulebook just because you don't like what it says.
Now, if you have a reasoned argument for why the actual text of the comprules, not your imagined version of it, should be interpreted your way, make it. If (somewhat more plausibly) you have such an argument for why it should be changed, you're welcome to make that as well.
What is not welcome, though, is repeatedly asserting your idea, with zilch in the way of supporting argument, refusing to seriously engage with anyone else, plugging your ears and going "wahhh wahhh wahhh" and just generally behaving like a petulant child.
That goes double for going "nobody understands me!" when it's plain that most of your interlocutors understand you just fine, and what's not clear is whether YOU understand a single word WE are saying. I'm willing to bet you've read less than half of what's been said in response to you, and understood less than half of that. If anyone could justifiably whine about a lack of understanding here, it's the rest of us.
Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
If all my creatures have shroud, and someone casts Diabolic Edict, I cannot sacrifice anything because Diabolic edict targets me, but I then have to TARGET one of my creatures to be sacrificed, which none cannot be because they all have shroud, so nothing happens because the resolution of the spell cannot have the creature selected to go to the graveyard.
False. The spell targets you, not your creatures. It's the same way a creature with Protection from everything can still be sacrificed or destroyed by things that do not target it directly, eg. Wrath of God
How to autocard (do this to specify a card in your posts): Type [c]Black Lotus[/c] to get Black Lotus . Type [c=Black Lotus]The Overpowered One[/c] to get The Overpowered One .
Anyone literate can verify just by looking at any of several cards that the word "target" in Magic does, in fact, exist.
Hum, I don't like this «proof». I can write the word «Dragon» on a piece of paper; that doesn't mean dragons exist!
Words are nothing but (very!) usefull ideas human beings have invented to communicate (or to meditate). They don't actually exist. All that exist is matter and energy; anything else is a figment of our imagination.
TARGET, like any other word, is nothing but pixels on a screen or ink blots on a card or sound waves our mouths emit. Our imagination may grant those blots some meaning, but this happens only inside our minds, under the form of energy patterns between our brain cells.
The ink blots exist; Our brain cells exist; The energy between our brain cells exist.
But «target» does not.
Proof? «Show me target» is an impossible task. All we can do is show an object, which our minds has designated as «target». (I admit this is not an ironclad proof, but still an adequate indication of possible nonexistency)
That being said, Cookedeye is totally wrong, of course: when playing Magic, many words mustbe used according to some specific game definition, differentfrom the Dictionary, and «target» is one of them!
«Dystocracy : A system of government in which corrupt leadership colludes with dishonest bankers and greedy elites in order to ensure that productive members of society –people who actually do useful work- bear the greatest share of taxes while gaining the least benefit possible.»
Like all enforcements, locking the Thread should be reserved for the most severe cases. All we have to do here is stop responding. Easy enough?
«Dystocracy : A system of government in which corrupt leadership colludes with dishonest bankers and greedy elites in order to ensure that productive members of society –people who actually do useful work- bear the greatest share of taxes while gaining the least benefit possible.»
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
He says it has to actually have the word target on it to be considreed targeted.
well this is about the only thing that he was wrong about (and that's a real nitpicky point to boot)
aura spells target and they don't say target on them (but it does say so in the rules)
likewise the equip ability targets, but it isn't always written on the card though it does say it targets in the rules.
Regardless of what one might think the word target means in English, that definition is irrelevant to the usage of the word target in Magic.
Many words have special meaning in Magic, target is one of them. Choose is not one of them.
Something must be chosen to be targeted, but the inverse is not necessarily true.
Just like "a horse has 4 legs" does not imply that all animals with 4 legs are horses.
To target requires choosing, but choosing doesn't require targeting.
That's the logic of it. The rules have been posted. End of argument.
MtG Rules Advisor & Goth/Industrial/EBM/Indie/Alternative/80's-Wave DJ DJ Vortex
DCI Certified Rules Advisor from July 14, 2009 to July 14, 2012 DCI #5209514320
Wit found in Rules Q&A
RPJesus: "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?"
The word "target" has a very narrow meaning in the Magic game rules.
A spell or ability uses the word "target" when we want to lock in what the spell or ability will affect as it's put onto the stack. All players then have access to that information when deciding whether to respond to that spell or ability.
The rules for Auras say that an Aura spell targets the object or player it will be attached to. The rules for the equip ability say that ability targets the creature it will be attached to. Everything else that targets uses the word "target" in its rules text (or reminder text).
Choices made as a spell or ability resolve do not use the word "target." Those choices are made as the spell or ability resolves, and players don't have time to react to them.
Certain categories of rules text can never use the word "target." Examples include additional costs (such as the first paragraph on Harrow and the trigger condition of a triggered ability.
