My opponent controls Gideon, Champion of Justice . They turn him into a planeswalker creature using his second loyalty ability. I cast Grab the Reins to gain control of him.
My opponent then attacks Gideon, Champion of Justice (since he's a planeswalker). However, he's also a creature, which means he's allowed to block. Can he block the attack that's aimed at him?
I see no reason why he cannot block a creature that is attacking him, his controller or any other planeswalker that player controls.
Mh, that's what I thought. It seems weird, though.
"Hah, you can't attack me because I'm in your way!"
not sure if crazy hypotheticals are appreciated, but if, after stealing Gideon, your opponent (for some reason; i can't see why they'd want to try to kill their own planeswalker (we're assuming your opponent forgot about the "prevent all damage dealt to Gideon" part) that they'll soon get back!) attacks him, if you're allowed to block with Gideon, you can then Devouring Light him so your opponent doesn't get him back..
who knows, maybe a Planeswalker blocking to protect themselves will be relevant in an actual situation in the future in the meantime, it's a cool weird rules thought experiment.
Other planeswalkers could be turned into creature as well. In fact, every planeswalker can be turned into a creature. Attacking such planeswalker may not be pointless. Blocking with it is not pointless either. The planeswalker would not protect itself, but at least it would hurt the attacking creature.
Planeswalkers are permanents, so all you need is a way to turn permanents into creatures.
Let's say you have now a 5/5 artifact-creature-planeswalker Tezzeret. He can block creatures attacking you or him. If a creature attacks him and he doesn't block, he'll just be damaged (losing loyalty counters and having marked damage on him). But if he blocks it, he'll deal 5 damage to the creature (and receive the same amount of damage with the same effects on him).
also effects like Leyline of Punishment could make Gideon's day a little scarier.
Where the brain can bend is in that, if a planeswalker is removed from combat, it stops being attacked. So if Player A attacks Planeswalker B with a first strike creature and several non-first-strike creatures, a creature-animated planeswalker (like will_dice's examples above) could throw itself in front of itself to block for itself, choosing to block the first striker, set up a regeneration shield somehow, take lethal damage from the first striker, regenerate, regeneration removes the Planeswalker from combat, then all those unblocked non-first-strikers find themselves dealing their damage to nothing at all (more accurately: not dealing any damage at all) while Planeswalker B looks on and makes trollface at them.
Or at least, that's how I read 506.4 .
...or 1 point of first strike deathtouch. (Come at me, Glissa!) My scenario is getting exceedingly convoluted.
Interesting note; I hadn't realized animated-planeswalker damage from blocking would cause loyalty loss. I had thought that loyalty loss was entirely restricted to damage from unblocked-or-trampling attackers, and redirected damage originally destined to its controller.
Wait, then what would Magmaquake do under that logic? It's not 'redirected' damage and it's not an attacker.
In short, damage is damage is damage. It doesn't mater why or how the damage was dealt. It's damage, and it's a planeswalker in the receiving end, so loyalty counters are removed; that's all the rule says.
OK, now you're just piling on. I've already admitted I was mistaken and hadn't realized how it worked, to reply with extra reinforcement that my logic was wrong after I've already admitted my logic was wrong is unnecessary roughness. I've already conceded the tackle and taken a knee, you don't need to hit me again.
then if you weren't playing a wussy game like football, that stops frequently, you'd be getting into the scrum and trying to assist your team in recovering the ball to move down field and get the try.
Sorry, I wasn't trying to be rude, just curious, to better understand that line of thinking; may be relevant when another player with similar logic shows up with in another thread here.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.