|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:00 pm
Rave Matthias Morph creature is face down. I play timbermare tapping all creatures. Can I still flip the morph? and if so, does it remain tapped? As long as you can pay the morph cost, you can unmorph at anytime. Unmorphing a creature does not use the stack so you can do this at anytime a spell or ability is not resolving. ie a player casts Wrath of God, you can unmorph at any time prior to him resolving the Wrath (which is when all creatures die). or a Player casts Shock on a morph'ed Fathom Seer, the Seer can unmorph at any time before the Shock Resolves (which deals 2 damage). Any state that an morphed creature is in will be the same result that the unmorphed creature becomes.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:18 pm
Liquidor Rave Matthias Morph creature is face down. I play timbermare tapping all creatures. Can I still flip the morph? and if so, does it remain tapped? As long as you can pay the morph cost, you can unmorph at anytime. Unmorphing a creature does not use the stack so you can do this at anytime a spell or ability is not resolving. ie a player casts Wrath of God, you can unmorph at any time prior to him resolving the Wrath (which is when all creatures die). or a Player casts Shock on a morph'ed Fathom Seer, the Seer can unmorph at any time before the Shock Resolves (which deals 2 damage). Any state that an morphed creature is in will be the same result that the unmorphed creature becomes. seconded, and top be slightly clearer on the last bit, no, it does not untap. The creature never leave play during the time in which it is flipped, so it keeps any game state modifiers it had such as being tapped, having a temp buff or counters on it. (unless of course they untap due to the ability itself or it's cost. But that has nothing to do with the morph ability itself)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:40 pm
If a creature has protection from lets say white, and someone plays a wrath of god, will that creature be destroyed by it, even though protection is determined by the source?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 2:16 pm
nightasasin If a creature has protection from lets say white, and someone plays a wrath of god, will that creature be destroyed by it, even though protection is determined by the source? protection implies negation of damage dealt to the permanent, the inability to be targeted by those sources and the inability to be blocked by those sources. Since wrath of god does none of those things, but simply places a destroy effect on all creatures without targeting. So yes, creature is destroyed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:07 pm
Protection applies in the following Simple Terms: Quote: Damage : Anything that would leave damage is prevented. Enchanting // Equipping : Anything that would be put on is left off. Blocking : Creature that is attacking can not be blocked by a creature. The other way does not apply. Targeting : If it says target, you better find another one. In terms of Wrath of God verses a Creature with Pro-White, since none of those situations above apply, the creature is destroyed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:00 pm
Here's a question I saw on another forum that I thought was awesome. Quote: Under the new rules, how does banding work now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 11:41 pm
Liquidor Here's a question I saw on another forum that I thought was awesome. Quote: Under the new rules, how does banding work now? .........they made new rules for banding? *twitch* Who am I beating to death?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:27 pm
liz_bliz_inc Liquidor Here's a question I saw on another forum that I thought was awesome. Quote: Under the new rules, how does banding work now? .........they made new rules for banding? *twitch* Who am I beating to death? It's more on how creatures now queue up for battle now and how damage is dealt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:47 pm
Random Noob Situation:
Steve casts Lightning Bolt targeting Sam. In response Sam casts Harm's Way targeting the Lightning Bolt redirecting it to Steve. Then Steve casts Harm's Way targeting the Harm's Way redirecting it to Sam.
Who gets damaged and by how much?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:14 pm
Liquidor Random Noob Situation: Steve casts Lightning Bolt targeting Sam. In response Sam casts Harm's Way targeting the Lightning Bolt redirecting it to Steve. Then Steve casts Harm's Way targeting the Harm's Way redirecting it to Sam. Who gets damaged and by how much? I would have to say that the 2 damage redirected to Steve would simply be redirected again to Sam. In the end, all 3 damage would be dealt to sam.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 3:59 am
liz_bliz_inc Liquidor Random Noob Situation: Steve casts Lightning Bolt targeting Sam. In response Sam casts Harm's Way targeting the Lightning Bolt redirecting it to Steve. Then Steve casts Harm's Way targeting the Harm's Way redirecting it to Sam. Who gets damaged and by how much? I would have to say that the 2 damage redirected to Steve would simply be redirected again to Sam. In the end, all 3 damage would be dealt to sam. This answer is incorrect. Although Harm's Way changes where the damage is dealt, it does not change the source of the damage. If Steve doesn't want to take two from his own Lightning Bolt, he would have to cast his own Harm's Way to redirect the next two damage the Bolt would deal to him and have it deal the damage to Steve. Redirection effects do not change the source, just what that source would damage. -Jack
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:27 pm
After a long break from the game I'm back into it, updated on the rules I missed while out and will be back to checking this thread from a day to day basis for questions. Thanks to all those who kept answering questions in my absence. Appreciate it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
