|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:11 pm
Man this is annoying. We were arguing over the old "Coat of Arms + 2 Misform Ultimus" issue again tonight.
I have known for a long time that Coat of arms checks for and counts the number of creatures that share a type with other creatures and not how many times the share a type. Thus the ultimuses (which you would have had to work hard at getting into play together, being legends) only get +1/+1 and not like, +50/+50
However, like always, no one ever believes me, even though I am right most of the time on this things. And having a level 3 (or so he said, I've never seen him judge an event, no with any judge foils) judge say that they do work the way I say they didn't did not help.
The stupid thing was the the star city virtual judge didn't say anything on the subject....
Can I get some back up from you guys (other rules officiants in this thread). Because all this telling me I'm wrong from a lot of people who are usually on the same page with me is making me waver a little.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:47 pm
String_Theory Lord Yawgmoth Both cards are replacement effects. Furnace of Rath's replacement however would include the card you're talking about. (Which I found out is called Divine Presence). The cards read as follows Furnace of Rath: If a source would deal damage to a creature or player it deals double that damage instead. Divine Presence: If a source would deal 4 or more damage to a creature or player that source deals 3 damage instead. Rule 419.6A states that replacement effects don't trip on a continuous basis and only get one chance to replace the event in question. I'm going to assume that Furnace of Rath would attempt to replace the event by doubling the damage. Divine Presence would then trip on the damage being 4 or more and reduce it to 3. Furnace of Rath will not get a second chance to double the damage since Divine Presence does not change the source of the damage. Actually, there is a interesting twist on things like this. THis is similar to the time we had a very annoying game were some player played both zur's weirding and shared fate and someone ended up gaining control of shared fate. Depending on who's turn it was, one resolved before the other due to the order of passing priority. Some people shared fate and others had to go through Zur's Weirding. This is the same issue here. Depending on who's turn it was, different things would occur. This is because of the enchantment's effects having to follow the order in which player's turns went. Let me put it like this: Say player 1 controls the furnace and player 3 controls the Divine Presence. So the order of priority goes: 1. Furance of Rath 2. nothing 3. Divine Presence 4. Nothing If players 2, 3 or 4 do damage both divine presence and furnace of rath go to affect to damage. How ever, it goes in APNAP order and so Furnace of rath's effect goes on the stack last and resolves first, causing the damage to first double, and then be reduced to 3. However, it player 1 deals damage, Divine intervention will resolve its effect first and reduce the damage to 3, and then furnace's effect will resolve and double the damage. If one player controls both enchantments, they decide which order the effects stack and there for decides what happens. Just thought I'd elaborate on the technicals. Cool, thanks, dudes! 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:18 am
String: Yeah tell whoever's arguing with you that Coat of Arms might as well read "Mistform Ultimus gets +1/+1 for each other creature in play" in that case. If that helps the people you're trying to talk to understand it go ahead. But yeah if it counted things more than once then there'd be some other backlash rules wise and be a huge headache. Also heads up, get ready for rules questions about planeswalkers, evoke, champion and every other Lorwyn keyword. Be sure to read the Rules F.A.Q. about Lorwyn whenever Mtg.com puts it up 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:34 am
ok, im keeping tabs on the lorwyn spoilers, so i should be ready for any potential rules queries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:38 pm
Didn't see this until just now. This should answer any Evoke questions you guys may or may not have but if they don't feel free to ask and let us clarify Evoke Comprehensive Rules 502.74. Evoke 502.74a Evoke represents two abilities: a static ability that functions in any zone from which the card can be played, and a triggered ability that functions in play. "Evoke [cost]" means "You may play this card by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost" and "When this permanent comes into play, if its evoke cost was paid, its controller sacrifices it." Paying a card's evoke cost follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 409.1b and 409.1fh. * When you play a spell for its evoke cost, you really are playing the spell—you're just paying a different cost. The spell can be countered as normal. Effects that prevent you from playing a spell also prevent you from playing the spell with evoke. * Each Lorwyn creature with evoke has a comes-into-play ability. That means paying the normal cost gets you both the ability and the creature, while paying the evoke cost just gets you the ability. * Playing a creature by paying its evoke cost will result in two comes-into-play abilities: The sacrifice ability from evoke, and whatever other ability the creature has. The creature's controller chooses in what order to put them on the stack. Both abilities can be responded to as normal. * Evoke doesn't change the timing of when you can play the creature that has it. If you could play that creature spell only when you could play a sorcery, the same is true for playing it with evoke. * If a creature spell played with evoke changes controllers before it comes into play, it will still be sacrificed when it comes into play. Similarly, if a creature played with evoke changes controllers after it comes into play but before its sacrifice ability resolves, it will still be sacrificed. * When you play a spell by paying its evoke cost, its mana cost doesn't change. You just pay the evoke cost instead. * Effects that cause you to pay more or less for a spell will cause you to pay that much more or less while playing it for its evoke cost, too. That's because they affect the total cost of the spell, not its mana cost. * Whether evoke's sacrifice ability triggers when the creature comes into play depends on whether the spell's controller chose to pay the evoke cost, not whether he or she actually paid it (if it was reduced or otherwise altered by another ability, for example). * If you're playing a spell "without paying its mana cost," you can't use its evoke ability. (Then again, you probably wouldn't want to.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 5:11 am
Hi,
I got some more questions.
a.) Say I play a STATIS deck against my opponent and since I want to be able to play Statis as fast as possible my deck is focused on setting up STATIS-LOCK and I don't have any cards that I can use to damage or mill my opponent's library. What if after I have setup my Statis-Lock, my opponent decides not to concede (even though I know he has nothing to play to stop the lock) and he tries to force a draw by deliberately stalling the game. Drawing the cards very slowly... checking cards in his hands as much as possible... "appearing" to think very carefully about his play. etc.
Basically, my question is, can you force your opponent to concede pending you are sure that the duel is un-winnable.
b.) I have a "Night of Soul's Betrayal" in play and my opponent has a "Rounin Warclub" (sic?) in play.
Night of Soul's Betrayal
All creatures get -1/-1
Rounin Warclub
Equipped creature gets +2/+1.
Whenever a creature comes into play under your control, attach Ronin Warclub to that creature.
I am right to assume that when my opponent plays a 1/1 creature that the state-base effect of Night of Soul's Betrayal will cause that creature to be sent to the graveyard before the Warclub can be equipped, thus making sure that no creature with a toughness of 1 (or less -- for Unhinged) can survive in play?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 6:03 am
Rohml Hi, I got some more questions. a.) Say I play a STATIS deck against my opponent and since I want to be able to play Statis as fast as possible my deck is focused on setting up STATIS-LOCK and I don't have any cards that I can use to damage or mill my opponent's library. What if after I have setup my Statis-Lock, my opponent decides not to concede (even though I know he has nothing to play to stop the lock) and he tries to force a draw by deliberately stalling the game. Drawing the cards very slowly... checking cards in his hands as much as possible... "appearing" to think very carefully about his play. etc. Basically, my question is, can you force your opponent to concede pending you are sure that the duel is un-winnable. b.) I have a "Night of Soul's Betrayal" in play and my opponent has a "Rounin Warclub" (sic?) in play. Night of Soul's BetrayalAll creatures get -1/-1 Rounin WarclubEquipped creature gets +2/+1. Whenever a creature comes into play under your control, attach Ronin Warclub to that creature. I am right to assume that when my opponent plays a 1/1 creature that the state-base effect of Night of Soul's Betrayal will cause that creature to be sent to the graveyard before the Warclub can be equipped, thus making sure that no creature with a toughness of 1 (or less -- for Unhinged) can survive in play? a. Well, personally, making a deck that only sets up the lock and not a way to kill the opponent, and thus only wins if the opponent concedes does not sound like a very good idea IMO. However, I think that you might be able to get a judge to come over and tell him the hurry it up. If he continues, he may get warnings I think. I'm not actually a judge, (I don't have that kind of time) so this is speaking from things I've read or seen. (If this is a casual match than you are definitely SOL, because he can do whatever he wants.) Also, I'm pretty sure there is no such thing as forcing your opponent to concede, as concession is a personal choice. b. Yes, SBEs will kill the creature. Things will go in this order: Creature comes into play Ronin warclub is trigger when the trigger is put on the stack, SBEs are check, and the 1/1 dies. Ronin war club's ability fizzles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:29 pm
I have a question about tokens. I read some of the cards in the 10th packs, and it said that if you didn't have the correct creature token that you needed, you could use other cards, dice, or other things you had lying around... I have a combo that involves playing Animate Artifact on a Chaos Orb, then using Kiki-Jiki to make a token copy of it, and using my Oversized 6X9 Chaos Orb as the token. So, just recently, I was having a conversation with my friend, when he brings up an interesting fact. The same rule applies to the card Chaos Confetti.Then I thought of the most horrible combo in the entire history of Magic. My question is this: (Disregard the fact that this is completely against the law.) By using this combo, can you legally (According to the rules of magic) tear up an Orphan Child and throw the pieces of him/her onto the play area?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:12 pm
I know that this one is a silly one, but I just wanted to ask it since I an currently having an argument with a friend about this one.
(This is a a Lorwyn question)
If you have Brion Stoutarm in play, along with a Rings of Brighthearth.
Then will using the ring's ability in order to copy Stoutarm's one make me gain double the life whilst dealing double the damage?
And, would I have to sacrufice one or two creatures?
I was saying that the sacrifice is part of the cost, that's why you only need to sacrifice one, and since the ability reads "Brion Stoutarm deals damage equal to the sacrificed creature's power to target player."
Then you would gain double the life too. ^-^
Am I correct by this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 6:45 pm
Mistform Ally I have a question about tokens. I read some of the cards in the 10th packs, and it said that if you didn't have the correct creature token that you needed, you could use other cards, dice, or other things you had lying around... I have a combo that involves playing Animate Artifact on a Chaos Orb, then using Kiki-Jiki to make a token copy of it, and using my Oversized 6X9 Chaos Orb as the token. So, just recently, I was having a conversation with my friend, when he brings up an interesting fact. The same rule applies to the card Chaos Confetti.Then I thought of the most horrible combo in the entire history of Magic. My question is this: (Disregard the fact that this is completely against the law.) By using this combo, can you legally (According to the rules of magic) tear up an Orphan Child and throw the pieces of him/her onto the play area?Besides the whole "OMG you sick person for even thinking of such a thing" a token has to be something that can be easily distinguished on the field in the various positions that any other card could take. Knowing this I don't believe that the opposing person would allow you to put a human child onto the playing field to represent a token. But if you really wanted to I'll be over here calling the police. For future purposes could make sure your question is actually useful to other people instead of sick things to waste our time. aka: I'm going on my gut feeling on rulings, and didn't bother looking up exacts. (sorry yawg, unglued stuff just isn't my cup 'o tea) Master Molder of WINGS I know that this one is a silly one, but I just wanted to ask it since I an currently having an argument with a friend about this one. (This is a a Lorwyn question) If you have Brion Stoutarm in play, along with a Rings of Brighthearth. Then will using the ring's ability in order to copy Stoutarm's one make me gain double the life whilst dealing double the damage? And, would I have to sacrufice one or two creatures? I was saying that the sacrifice is part of the cost, that's why you only need to sacrifice one, and since the ability reads "Brion Stoutarm deals damage equal to the sacrificed creature's power to target player." Then you would gain double the life too. ^-^ Am I correct by this? Here's how the official text from WotC; Quote: Copying an activated ability works just like copying a spell. The copy of the ability is put onto the stack (it's not "played"). It copies all decisions made when the original ability was played, including mode, targets, and the value of X. If an effect of the copy refers to something used to pay its costs, it sees what was used to pay the costs of the original ability.So if you copy the ability while sacrificing a creature with power X, it will deal 2X damage, and you will gain 2X life (from lifelink) because the copy saw the same sac'd creature upon resolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:19 am
Ramar E. Mana Master Molder of WINGS I know that this one is a silly one, but I just wanted to ask it since I an currently having an argument with a friend about this one. (This is a a Lorwyn question) If you have Brion Stoutarm in play, along with a Rings of Brighthearth. Then will using the ring's ability in order to copy Stoutarm's one make me gain double the life whilst dealing double the damage? And, would I have to sacrufice one or two creatures? I was saying that the sacrifice is part of the cost, that's why you only need to sacrifice one, and since the ability reads "Brion Stoutarm deals damage equal to the sacrificed creature's power to target player." Then you would gain double the life too. ^-^ Am I correct by this? Here's how the official text from WotC; Quote: Copying an activated ability works just like copying a spell. The copy of the ability is put onto the stack (it's not "played"). It copies all decisions made when the original ability was played, including mode, targets, and the value of X. If an effect of the copy refers to something used to pay its costs, it sees what was used to pay the costs of the original ability.So if you copy the ability while sacrificing a creature with power X, it will deal 2X damage, and you will gain 2X life (from lifelink) because the copy saw the same sac'd creature upon resolution.
Thanks, it's like I thought. ^-^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:10 am
Hi I have a question about: BROKEN FALL.
Broken Fall
2G
Enchantment
Return Broken Fall to its owner's hand: Regenerate target creature.
=======================
Since you can activate Regenerate without having a "dying" creature. I assume you can activate Broken Fall to avoid getting destroyed by a Naturalize, right?
If so, the only way I could effectively destroy a Broken Fall is if I hit it with a Naturalize after somebody puts it into the stack, but if I do... (starting to think)... wouldn't its cost prevent the Naturalize from hitting Broken Fall. And if I do hit Broken Fall, would I still be able to stop the regeneration effect?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:45 am
You effectively can't destroy it. Returning the card to it's owner's hand is the activation cost which you can't stop. It's just like tapping a creature to use its ability, you can't tap the creature in response because the tap is part of the cost. In this case the return is part of the cost and therefore can't be responded to. In addition regeneration puts a 'shield' on of sorts and doesn't actually HAVE to regenerate the creature to be a legal target. So yes. You can activate Broken Fall in response to Naturalize even if the creature isn't going to die.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:53 am
Lord Yawgmoth You effectively can't destroy it. Returning the card to it's owner's hand is the activation cost which you can't stop. It's just like tapping a creature to use its ability, you can't tap the creature in response because the tap is part of the cost. In this case the return is part of the cost and therefore can't be responded to. In addition regeneration puts a 'shield' on of sorts and doesn't actually HAVE to regenerate the creature to be a legal target. So yes. You can activate Broken Fall in response to Naturalize even if the creature isn't going to die. Yeah, and it's effectively a really expensive "Tap target creature' effect in green
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
