Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 17:41:29 -0400 From: Jeff Jordan Subject: [O] NetRep Reply 570 ======================================================================= NetRep Reply number 570 to the Magic: the Gathering List ======================================================================= This reply covers the digests: MTG-L Digest - 9 Sep 2000 to 10 Sep 2000 (#2000-288) MTG-L Digest - 10 Sep 2000 to 11 Sep 2000 (#2000-289) MTG-L Digest - 11 Sep 2000 to 12 Sep 2000 (#2000-290) MTG-L Digest - 12 Sep 2000 to 13 Sep 2000 (#2000-291) MTG-L Digest - 13 Sep 2000 to 14 Sep 2000 (#2000-292) Older replies may be found at: http://www.second-hand.demon.co.uk ftp://ftp.magic.asuka.net http://www.yavapaiopen.com http://www.en.magic.asuka.net http://www.wizards.com/dci/judge/judgelistarchive.asp SHORT ANSWERS: ======================================================================= ** Regeneration can be used on any creature. It will prevent an effect that says simply to "destroy" that creature, like Royal Assassin's. It cannot prevent an effect that says "destroy but can't be regenerated" (or "bury" on older cards), like Terror. ** A creature that leaves play before the Combat Damage Step(s) does not deal combat damage. A creature that leaves play after it assigns combat damage but before it resolves will deal its damage. ** Body Snatcher can target any creature card in your graveyard; it does not have to be the card discarded when it came into play. ** The Mercadian Masques Depletion lands, like Peat Bog, are sacrificed at the same time they produce their last mana. One cannot be sacrificed to another ability after its last use but before it is sacrificed. LONG ANSWERS: ======================================================================= [Ed Phillips, on Soul Net and Forbidden Crypt] > If I have both in play and a creature of mine is destroyed, I can > stack FC then SN to get 1 life before the creature is RFG'd, right? No. By errata, Forbidden Crypt's "remove from game" ability is a replacement effect, not a trigger. It does not use the stack. The card goes directly from In Play to Removed From Game, and does not trigger the Soul Net. ----- [Jacek Malinowski on Pariah & Story Circle] > I control Story Circle and Pariah (which is on creature I control). > Earlier this turn I activated SC choosing as a source of damage > opponent's creature. Now, we enter combat phase and opponent attacks > with 1 creature (chosen as a source of damage for SC). I decide not > to block and combat damage is assigned to me. And what happens when > damage should be dealt to me: You have two damage prevention/redirection shields protecting you. You get to decide which to apply first. So you can either let the creature take the damage for you, or you can prevent it. If you redirect, the Story Circle shield still protects you until the end of the turn. ----- [Ed Phillips trying to put Rancor on a Blastoderm] > Can you use Enchantment Alteration to move a Rancor onto a > Blastoderm? ... Is the Oracle wording correct - the last phrase is no > longer valid? The phrase in parentheses on the original card, "The enchantment's new target must be legal," was reminder text. It still applies. The Rancor must be moved onto a creature that it can legally enchant. Since enchanting something does not target it, Blastoderm is a valid choice. ----- [David Stroud confused on the Classic trample rules] > Two 4/4 tramplers attack, one is blocked by a Grizzly Bears and the > other by an En-Kor with 2 toughness. Damage is assigned logically > (two damage to each blocker, four directly to defending player), and > the En-Kor uses it's ability to redirect the damage dealt to it to > the Grizzly Bears instead. Now, does the damage that is redirected in > this manner still trample through? Forget the phrase "trample through." All trample does is let you assign some portion of a blocked creature's combat damage to the defending player instead of to the blockers. Once combat damage is assigned, trample damage is treated no differently than other combat damage. The En-Kor's redirection effect won't do anything until the damage that has been assigned tries to resolve. Then it will redirect the two points, assigned to the En-Kor, to the Grizzly. Both the defender and the Grizzly will take four damage. > if the Grizzies were a Cho-Manno, would the same rules apply? Yes, but four damage on the Cho-Manno's will be prevented. ----- [Jason Finney, with Rule 419.8a Confusion] > ... player A plays a Shock targeting player B. Furnace of Rath and > Sulfuric Vapors are in play. Player A would like to apply first the > Vapors and then the Furnace, but as player B is the only player > "affected," he or she gets to choose and will probably apply the > Furnace before the Vapors to the Shock's damage (so as to take 5 > instead of 6). Is this interpretation correct? 100% correct. Replacements are ordered by the player or controller of the permanent "affected" by an event. This means the one that is having something done to it in the event. This could be a creature or player taking damage, the controller of a regenerating permanent, the controller or owner of a card being diverted from one zone to another (Serra Avatar, Library of Leng, buyback), the player who played a mana ability of a land (Contamination, Harvest Mage), or many other things. > And what happens if multiple replacement effects attempt to modify an > event that doesn't "affect" any players or permanents (if it only > effects spells, for example)? What if an event "affects" multiple > players? Are such things even possible? "Spells" should be treated just like "permanents" are in rule 419.8a. Both have controllers who will order replacements that alter an event doing something to the spell or permanent. Sometimes a non-permanent card is affected, like when you discard a Serra Avatar. The owner should decide in that case. Most (well, all, I hope) replacements that could affect multiple items at the same time are worded so that they isolate the part of the event that is affecting a specific item. Such replacements are ordered individually for each item by the controller (or owner) of that item. An example is to replace Shock with Earthquake in your example. A player could have the Vapors applied first to some creatures, and the Furnace to others. It isn't in the rules anywhere, but I'd have to say that if both players have replacement decisions pending, the active player has to make a decision first. The pending event is altered with respect to one sub-event within it, and then you look at the slightly smaller set of pending replacements the same way. Keep in mind that a replacement should only replace each sub-event within the effect once. So if the main player doubles the damage for the Furnace effect and then redirects it to the other player's creature with Pariah, it does not get doubled again when the rest of the damage on that creature is doubled. Jeff. - ------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Jeff Jordan Official MTG-L NetRep for - - jeffjo@erols.com Wizards of the Coast, Inc - - ------------------------------------------------------------------- -