|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 6:47AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2012
|
Hey all,
I've been googeling, searching forums of diffrent kinds etc,etc but I haven't found ANY answers to this question...
IF I have 2 Pyreheart Wolf in play, attacking at the same time, DOES the abillity stack?
"Whenever Pyreheart Wolf attacks, each creature you control can't be blocked this turn except by two or more creatures."
I haven't found ANYTHING saying that it WONT stack.
2 Wolves attacking = 4 creatures have to block one?
Should also mention that I'm VERY new when it comes to rule-digging. :P
If someone has a link to a place where this is discussed and/or explained, feel free to link on.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 6:47AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2010
|
multiple Pyreheart Wolf  are redundant it will still be 2 or more by blocking with 2 creatures you fulfill both wolves requirement
proud member of the 2011 community team
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 6:53AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2012
|
Ok, has it been said somewhere? (as in a rulebook) Or is it simply a thing you should realize, common sence if you will, as it otherwise would be a bit OP for an uncommongraded card? I believe what you're saying, Enigma256, just want to check. 
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 6:57AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2010
|
each blocking requirement is independent of any other you just have to fulfill as many as possible blocking with 2 or more creatures fulfills the requirement of both wolves here are the relevant rules: 509.1b The defending player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it’s affected by any restrictions (effects that say a creature can’t block, or that it can’t block unless some condition is met). If any restrictions are being disobeyed, the declaration of blockers is illegal.
A restriction may be created by an evasion ability (a static ability an attacking creature has that restricts what can block it). If an attacking creature gains or loses an evasion ability after a legal block has been declared, it doesn’t affect that block. Different evasion abilities are cumulative.
509.1c The defending player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it’s affected by any requirements (effects that say a creature must block, or that it must block if some condition is met). If the number of requirements that are being obeyed is fewer than the maximum possible number of requirements that could be obeyed without disobeying any restrictions, the declaration of blockers is illegal. If a creature can’t block unless a player pays a cost, that player is not required to pay that cost, even if blocking with that creature would increase the number of requirements being obeyed.
it's not really spelled out for this case, you just have to use some common sense to fill in the gaps 
proud member of the 2011 community team
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 7:09AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2012
|
Thank you for that. I still don't understand why it wouldn't stack, though, perhaps I'm just in denial here or something
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 7:10AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2010
|
if I say to you "draw 2 lines on that paper"
and someone else says "draw 2 lines on that paper"
how many lines do you have to draw on the paper?
proud member of the 2011 community team
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 7:17AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2012
|
Hahaha nice one Although, I must say, that it totally depends on what the outcome should be. If you say: draw 2 lines, and the other person says draw 2 lines, after I've drawn yours then I'd make 4 lines. If it's, however, just supposed to be 2 lines on the paper and 30 people tells me to draw 2 lines I'd only make 2 lines ^^ ;P
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 7:22AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Oct 29, 2007
|
Your creature attacks and the blocking restrictions are:
"This creature can't be blocked by only one creature." and
"This creature can't be blocked by only one creature."
I ask you, if I block your creature with two creatures, haven't I met the criteria for both restrictions?
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
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 7:38AM
#9
|
|
|
For the ability to work like you think/thought it would, it would need to say 'must be blocked by an additional creature', or something similar.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 19, 2012 - 8:30AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2012
|
Kk I surrender Thank you for the answers
|
|
|
