Good morning boys and girls! Not sure what became of the thread last night- I ended up having a minor family emergency and didn't get home until fairly late, so I apologize if any questions went unanswered!
Trying to understand "protection".
To what extent dos it actually protect a creature? Like obviously a creature can't be targeted by a red spell if it's got protection from red. But for example, could a foul tongue invocation force someone to sacrifice Emrakul? Or is it simply immune to all effects that result from coloured spells?
Also does targeting Thunderbreak regent with Ulamogs cast ability cause Ulamogs controller to take 3 damage?
>>47786182
Protection from Red, for instance, means it cannot be:
D amaged by red spells or the abilities of red permanents
E nchanted/Equipped/Attached by Red permanents
B locked by Red creatures
T argeted by Red spells or abilities from Red sources.
D E B T. Damage Enchant/Equip Block Target. That's all protection stops. Foul-Tongue Invocation does none of these to Emrakul, so it can hit Emrakul.
>Ulamog question
Is Ulamog's triggered ability an ability?
Non-Socratic answer: Yes.
>>47786182
The handy mnemonic for protection is DEBT. Something with protection from {blah} cannot be Damaged, Enchanted/Equipped, Blocked, or Targetted by anything that is {blah}.
For Emrakul, Foul-Tongue invocation targets a player, not emrakul - so its protection doesn't apply.
>>47786198
>>47786227
Thanks, I'll remember that.
>>47785798
How's it going man? I hope everything was alright with your emergency.
On the topic of protection, I have a question:
>opponent's creature has trample, G 5/3
>I have a 1/1 chump blocker
>give the blocker protection from G
What happens? Apparently you take 4 damage but I was a little fuzzy on that ruling.
>>47786182
Keep in mind that protection from colored SPELLS is not the same as protection from colored SOURCES. Once it's off the stack, it's no longer a spell, meaning if it's a permanent with an "enters the battlefield" trigger like Banishing Light or Fiend Hunter, Emrakul is just as legal a target as a grizzly bears.
>>47786289
Yeah, it was minor- I just had to go help my parents out with what was effectively a computer exploding on them since they don't tech so well.
Anyway, yeah, I'm fine, thanks! As for your question:
You take 4. The reason is because of how trample works. Trample means that once you've assigned lethal damage to all blockers, any remaining damage can be assigned to the defending player. The important bits here are ASSIGN and LETHAL DAMAGE. "Lethal Damage" is defined as 'damage equal to or greater than a creature's toughness'.
Put those together, and the game doesn't care whether that damage will actually kill the creature (indestructible) or even HAPPEN (protection)- you assigned lethal to the blocker, so you can now assign remaining damage to the player. This is also why if you have a Gisela out and your opponent blocks a 5/5 with a 2/2, you're only gonna dome them for 6. Assigning 1 damage to the 2/2 will kill it, but the game doesn't know that, it can't look that far ahead. You have to assign 2 damage to the blocker before you can move on- savvy?
>>47786335
Wait. So a 6/4 trample will deal 3 damage to the defending player, even if they blocked with uncle istvan?
>>47786412
Yep. Because you ASSIGN lethal damage (which is damage equal to toughness, not "enough to kill it"- in this case, that's 3) to the blocker. Anything past that lethal damage to the blocker can be assigned to the defending player. In this case, 3 again.
If someone taps a land for mana and I destroy the land and instant speed in response does the spell they cast fizzle or do they not get the ability to cast in the first place?
>>47786464
Sorry brah, you cant react to mana abilities, they just get to cast the spell as normal.
Also, destroying the source in response to an ability doesnt stop the ability
Say I have pic related in play, and I activate its ability targeting one of yours. In response, you deal it damage with some spell. First my creature dies, but your creature will still become tapped.
>>47786464
>>47786521
(Cont'd)
An often used metaphor is that destroying a gun after its been shot doesn't stop the bullet.
In technical terms: Abilities exist on the stack (the place where they go when you have the chance to respond to them), independent from their sources.
>>47786464
tapping lands for mana (or anything using a mana ability) does not use the stack and can't be responded to.
>>47786521
The analogy I like using is a grenade. Shooting the guy that threw it doesn't magically make the grenade disappear.
>>47786464
1) There is no such thing as speed in Magic.
2) "Fizzle" means "is countered on resolution by the rules of the game because it has no legal targets"
3) None of the above. Mana abilities don't use the stack and can't be responded to. If they're floating mana before they cast the spell, you can't respond. If they're tapping lands for mana as one of the steps of casting it, you don't have priority to respond until their spell is on the stack.
>>47786584
I use "shooting a soldier after he throws a grenade", or "shooting down a plane after it already dropped a bomb", but same concept.
So. Are you a rules lawyer in non-magic tabletop games or just a rules lawyer in mtg?
>>47786772
I mean, that depends on your definition of 'rules lawyer'.
If you mean it in the sense that I make sure we'er playing by the actual rules, then all of them. If you mean it in the sense of trying to weaponize loopholes in the rules and being a dick about it, none of them.
How specifically does using a flicker effect like Essence Flux in the middle of combat work? I was told by a friend who is a low tier judge that it basically cancels that particular combat interaction, but I kind of committed to an Esper control Allies build and it heavily relies on this being true.
>>47786823
If an attacking creature is flickered, it is no longer attacking. If a blocking creature is flickered, it's no longer blocking (but the creature it was assigned to is still blocked).
>>47786823
When objects change zones, they become new objects with no memory of, or relation to, their previous "Selves". If you flicker a creature during combat, it leaves combat, whether it was blocking or attacking.
Also, I don't really like terminology like "low tier" judge. It implies that L1s are inferior to L2s, which is not accurate.
>>47786787
I mean that using the rules as written to such an extent that it cuts down on creativity and/or fun your group is having.
>>47786969
>baww I don't want to use the rules of the game to have fun because I can't understand them!
This is literally you right now.
>>47786969
I mean, I follow the rules as written, yes. Outside of very few instances of house-rules (like allowing one free mull even in 1v1 EDH among friends, or things like that) I follow the rules of the game even if I don't like them. I don't just ignore rules I don't like.
>>47786866
>>47786842
Thanks for responding, and apologies, I didn't mean to imply that. He started being a judge about a month or two ago, and is not yet experienced.
If I could run an example by you guys. I have a Kalistria healer, 1/2 with an on entry effect, and I use it to block an Ulvenwald Hydra which is 8/8 with Trample. When I block, I use essence flux on my healer, it dissapears then immediately reappears, and the hydra dealt no damage correct? Or could you please explain how it would work out?
>>47787000
If the Hydra were just a regular 8/8, you would basically negate the damage. It's blocked, so it can't hit you, but there's no blocking creatures for it to damage, so it just doesn't do damage this combat.
Unfortunately, the Hydra has trample, and you blinked the only thing blocking it. It's still blocked, but when we get along to the damage step there's now a whopping 0 toughness between that Hydra and your face, so it gets to slap you for the full 8 damage.
tl;dr don't blink things blocking tramplers
>>47787000
If it didn't have trample, you'd be correct. Since it's blocked normally attacking creatures deal no damage - but in this case, BECAUSE it has trample, it won't end well for you - because it can deal 0 damage to the now-nonexistent blocker and the other 8 to your face.
>>47787030
>>47787051
Thanks so much! I hope the deck works out, I get a lot of flack for playing pretty much nothing but midrange green decks since I can't afford much, but I am hoping this deck is complex enough that my friends will be interested.
>>47785798
hey gA, I keep forgetting so maybe you can set this straight. When I sacrifice yavimaya elder to its second ability, do I draw, then search; or search, then draw? I can never remember the proper order or why it's that way.
>>47787247
Search, then draw. The draw doesn't happen until the activated ability resolves, but the "search for two basics" is a trigger that fires on death. So you'll announce that you're activating the ability, put it on the stack, and pay all the costs for it, including saccing the Elder. That'll trigger the Elder's death trigger, which goes on the stack ABOVE the activated ability.
Can the damage from either Draconic Roar (the controllers 3 damage) or Atarka's command be directed at a planeswalker my opponent controls?
The rules lead me to believe yes, but want to be sure.
This happened at one of my last fnm's. In the middle of shuffling for the first game, one of my sleeves broke. Not so it was unusable, but the picture on the back had torn off and you could defiantly tell where in the deck that one card was. I didn't have any replacement sleeves since they were used sleeves given to me as a gift. The guy across from me took pity on me and said it was ok to play the round like that, and once we finished, I bought new sleeves and resleeved before the next round.
My question is what would you do if you saw some guy accidentally mess up a sleeve in the middle of a match? Especially if he didn't have replacements on him.
>>47788508
when you want to deal damage to a planeswalker, first you damage the player, THEN choose to assign the damage to a planeswalker
this is why if a player has Hexproof, you can't bolt his planeswalkers
Would you allow altered arts like this in a tournament? Specifically this one?
>>47788674
...is that stitched out of multiple Mountains?
>>47788508
Yep! It's noncombat damage from a source you control that would be dealt to an opponent. Those are the requirements for damage to be redirectable to a planeswalker.
>>47788568
Honestly at an FNM, I'd just buy a cheapy pack of UltraPros and help him resleeve so he can finish shit out if he doesn't have a replacement on him. If he wants to buy replacements himself, that's fine- I'd help him resleeve and give a time extension so we can get back on track. It happens more than you'd think.
>>47788674
I follow the MTR's guidelines (and my own judgement) for alters. I couldn't say yes or no just based on a picture, but given that it's kludged together from multiple cards sliced up, I'd say "no" because it's likely that card will be different by feel alone than others.
>>47788692
Looks like a foil peeled cutapart. Peel two foil mountains apart, take an x-acto knife to them, reglue them to a cleaned card back. I usually just do that for tokens though.
>>47788674
Not allowed at competitive REL. Probably not at casual. Depends on the feel. If it's the altered mountain I think it is, in an entire double sleeved deck it would probably be fine for casual.
>>47788737
>Yep! It's noncombat damage from a source you control that would be dealt to an opponent
Huh, what about redirect affects? Ones that keep the original source.
At least I think those exist. I am Bad At Magic.
>>47788810
What do you mean by redirect effects? As in, if he goes to Bolt you and you cast Misdirection so his Bolt hits him?
Or things like you get attacked by him and cast Deflecting Palm?
In the first case, no. The original source of the damage is still HIS card- it's not a source YOU control doing the damage, so you don't have that option. In the second, it's YOUR Deflecting Palm doing the damage, so you do have that option.
>>47788853
>In the first case, no. The original source of the damage is still HIS card- it's not a source YOU control doing the damage, so you don't have that option.
Yeah, that's what I meant. I never knew that was how Planeswalker damage worked, thanks.
>>47788885
Yep! It's actually fairly simple.
For combat damage, you just either attack the player, or their planeswalker. You can have some creatures attack one and some attack the other, too- aim your 2/2 flier at the planeswalker because you wanna keep it off of Ult range, but swing your ground team at the player to force blocks, for example. Then when the creature connects, the planeswalker takes damage and loses loyalty.
For NONCOMBAT damage, it's just as simple as "You can redirect all the noncombat damage a source you control would deal to an opponent, to one of their planeswalkers instead". Aim Bolt at opponent, redirect to Jace. Cast Earthquake for 3, have your opponent's Elspeth take 3 instead of them, etc.
I was wondering: a lot of red token-creating abilities have you exile the tokens at end of turn, Thatcher's Revolt says "sacrifice"
If control over such a token changes, it still disappears right? Even if it says "sacrifice" and the person who controlled the effect creating the sacrifice effect doesn't control the thing to be sacrificed anymore.
>>47788948
It depends on the wording of the card. A very few of them make a token which has the ABILITY "Sacrifice this at the beginning of the end step". That ability is actually on the token, so it'll trigger appropriately under the opponent's control and they'll have to sac them.
The vast majority of the effects just have the "Sacrifice that token/those tokens at end of turn" clause as part of the effect that creates them, meaning it sets up a delayed triggered ability that'll fire under your control at the appropriate time.
You'll ATTEMPT to sacrifice the creatures, but since you cannot sacrifice permanents you don't control, they live.
>>47789041
Oh, I see... thanks for clearing that up!
Well, there goes my idea to abuse my playset of Daring Thieves, that I pulled during journey into nyx.
>>47789145
Anything with Brand or Homeward path can be amusing with daring thief. Or just trading global enchantments for ones with activated abilities.
>>47792277
Homeward Path gives everyone back their stuff, not exactly what I want. Brand would be perfect, I was just hoping to keep it in Modern. Gruul Charm would do the trick, so I might just try temur colours....
Revisiting the token idea: thatcher's revolt doesn't work, but a delayed triggered ability simply exiling the tokens should work, wether I still control them or not, right? So Elemental Mastery should be able to give me 2 tokens to trade away, and it taps my Thief too
I asked laat thread but I cant seem to find it anywhere, so i'm going to ask again.
An opponeent casts ghostly flicker targetting 2 creatures he owns (say, Mulldrifters). Can I fizzle it by targetting one of the creatures with a Vines of Vastwood?
>>47795456
No, since it still has a legal target it won't be countered.
It won't flicker the pseudo hexproof one though.
