Community

If goblin chieftan is in play, and i use krenko to create some goblin tokens, after the tokens resolve my opponent burns the goblin chieftan. Can the goblin tokens still swing that turn as they had the haste effect when they were created? this is all before the combat step?

No, they have to have haste as they are declared as attackers.

thanks
 

Haste is not "sticky"
if they don't have Haste when you declare attackers they can't be declared as attackers

Haste doesn't cure summoning sickness; it just hides the symptoms. The symptoms return if haste disappears.

Oct 4, 2012 -- 12:39PM, ikegami wrote:

Haste doesn't cure summoning sickness; it just hides the symptoms. The symptoms return if haste disappears.

This is a really nice explanation for less technically-inclined players.

(Of course, savvier ones will know that "summoning sickness" is something of a unicorn, but anyone knowledgable enough about the relevant rules to realize that will also already understand Haste well enough not to need to ask this question.)

Thanks.

The way I see it, "summoning sickness" is only a naughty word if Haste is thought to remove it. As such, explaining that Haste doesn't remove summoning sickeness is a better approach than the current non-attempt to erradicate the term "summoning sickness". I usually hate metaphores, but summoning sickness is a term players want, and even the official rules define haste is even defined in terms of summoning sickess! ("A keyword ability that lets a creature ignore the “summoning sickness” rule.").

Oct 4, 2012 -- 1:26PM, jeff-heikkinen wrote:

This is a really nice explanation for less technically-inclined players.

totally agree

Made a thread in Rules & Theory on the subject.

The ability of the chieftain is an ability granting effect (such as for any "lord" creature ) so if he isn't there anymore, he doesn't grant the ability anymore (in the case of the captain, the soldiers won't have vigilance anymore, same for the chieftain here).

Oct 4, 2012 -- 11:25PM, Zoidberg wrote:

The ability of the chieftain is an ability[-]granting effect [...], so if he isn't there anymore, he doesn't grant the ability anymore

That's not true. The conclusion does not follow from the premise. While the conclusion is true in this case, it won't always be. It's only correct if the effect is that of a static ability. If the effect is that of a triggered or activated ability, it would be independent of the source. Example , or since we were talking about Haste, example 2

Oct 4, 2012 -- 11:44PM, ikegami wrote:

Oct 4, 2012 -- 11:25PM, Zoidberg wrote:

The ability of the chieftain is an ability[-]granting effect [...], so if he isn't there anymore, he doesn't grant the ability anymore

That's not true. The conclusion does not follow from the premise. While the conclusion is true in this case, it won't always be. It's only correct if the effect is that of a static ability. If the effect is that of a triggered or activated ability, it would be independent of the source. Example , or since we were talking about Haste, example 2

Thanks for nitpicking next to the point.

You're welcome, but I don't consider correcting "The sky is blue, so the creatures deal no damage that turn." to be a nitpick, even if creatures deal no damage that turn, and even if that was your point. Even worse, your incorrect explanation sounded legit, which made it egregious.