Magic the Gathering: Ask a Judge

[tamaness]

I'm pretty sure the enchantment will leave the battlefield (to your graveyard), as its controller has left the game.

Also, the Trader can't give away an enchantment. It specifies "artifact, creature, or land;" not enchantments. (both oracle and printed text are phrased this way.)

[SilPho]

800.4a When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game, any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end, and all spells and abilities controlled by that player on the stack cease to exist. Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that player, those objects are exiled.

There are 3 different ways to handle left over stuff when a player leaves the game:

1) The first is what you would expect, anything you brought to the table you immediately take with you.
2) The second one deals with Mind Control style effects; anything stolen by way of enchantments or other temporary effects will return to their rightful owners.
3) Finally, (and this is the one relevant to Dreamer's case), anything you otherwise controlled but do not own is simply exiled.

That's a simple overview, but more often than not everything does what you would expect it to as long as you remember to exile things instead of putting them to the graveyard.

[dackwards d]

Curse of Echoes question. If the cursed player casts a counter spell, can the copy created by the curse be used to counter that counter spell? Also does this copy of the spell count as a spell in its own right (for the purposes of other counter spells, Increasing Vengeance, Angel Feather type things, etc)?

[theDreamer]

I'm pretty sure the enchantment will leave the battlefield (to your graveyard), as its controller has left the game.

Also, the Trader can't give away an enchantment. It specifies "artifact, creature, or land;" not enchantments. (both oracle and printed text are phrased this way.)

You're right.

I forgot to turn it into an artifact first somehow.

And damn...Giving away shit in a multi game is so risky...

[SilPho]

Curse of Echoes question. If the cursed player casts a counter spell, can the copy created by the curse be used to counter that counter spell? Also does this copy of the spell count as a spell in its own right (for the purposes of other counter spells, Increasing Vengeance, Angel Feather type things, etc)?

Curse of Echoes is a triggered ability that triggers after the cursed player has finished casting (not resolving) their spell. This means that all of the copies will be placed on to the stack on top of the original, so they'll be resolving first.

Since the original spell has already been cast, it is now sat on the stack and is a perfectly valid target for any new counterspells.

The copies of that original spell are still spells, so they themselves can be countered, but they were never cast. This means they won't trigger an Angel's Feather and they won't add to any Storm counts. As for Increasing Vengeance, I'm not sure I see the question you're asking.

Side note: If the old Storm mechanic did trigger when a copy was made then the copies made by Storm would create even more copies, it would create an endless number of copies and would never stop. The game would end in a draw.

[dackwards d]

Thanks. As for the Increasing Vengeance thing I was meaning if my opponent is cursed and I copy their spell can I target my copy of the spell with Increasing Vengeance to copy my copies. Bleh. The word copy no longer has meaning in my brain.

Lets say my opponent is cursed and plays Dismember. I copy Dismember, then cast Increasing Vengeance targeting the Dismember spell that I control. The final result is I dismember two of my opponent's creatures and he dismembers one of mine. Would that work?

[theDreamer]

Yes.

[SilPho]

^ What Dreamer said

[dackwards d]

Does there need to be a valid target before you can actually use an ability? For example, if I have an Elvish Skysweeper can I still use it's ability to sac a creature even if there are no flyers on the battlefield?

Also, as I understand it Martyr's Cause prevents the next damage to occur to the targeted player or creature, as opposed to targeting the damage source and preventing the next damage it causes. As such it can still prevent damage from creatures with hexproof/shroud, prot white and so on because they are not being targeted. Is that the right interpretation?

When Okina Nightwatch enters play while an opponent has less cards than the caster, does it count as entering play as a 4/3 that immediately afterwards bumps up to a 7/6, or does it count as entering play as a 7/6 creature(for the sake of things like Paleoloth or Garruk's Packleader)?

[SilPho]

Just a quick note to say that I'm not ignoring your message, I just won't be able to respond for a little while longer.

[SilPho]

Does there need to be a valid target before you can actually use an ability? For example, if I have an Elvish Skysweeper can I still use it's ability to sac a creature even if there are no flyers on the battlefield?

Short Answer: You need to have a legal target.
Long Answer: When you cast a spell or activate an ability you technically choose your targets before you pay any costs. This means an inability to choose a target will prevent you from ever getting to pay the costs for the spell or ability. This only applies when the word "target" is used, exceptions may apply for the word "choose".

Also, as I understand it Martyr's Cause prevents the next damage to occur to the targeted player or creature, as opposed to targeting the damage source and preventing the next damage it causes. As such it can still prevent damage from creatures with hexproof/shroud, prot white and so on because they are not being targeted. Is that the right interpretation?

Short Answer: Yes.
Long Answer: Selecting a source is not the same as targeting. Harm's Way was a prime example of a confusing card in this regard since there were many objects involved in the redirection effect, yet only one was ever targeted.
Bonus: If you activate Martyr's Cause in response to a create spell being cast, you can choose that creature spell, and the prevention effect still applies to the creature that spell becomes. This is one of the rare exceptions to cards having no memory of a previous existence in another zone.

When Okina Nightwatch enters play while an opponent has less cards than the caster, does it count as entering play as a 4/3 that immediately afterwards bumps up to a 7/6, or does it count as entering play as a 7/6 creature(for the sake of things like Paleoloth or Garruk's Packleader)?

Short answer: It comes in as a 7/6, it is never a 4/3 while the condition is true.
Long answer: Continuous effects like this are checked for immediately before the creature enters the battlefield and begin applying as the creature arrives. It's a bit like creatures entering with counters on them.

[Under_Score]

Short answer: It comes in as a 7/6, it is never a 4/3 while the condition is true.
Long answer: Continuous effects like this are checked for immediately before the creature enters the battlefield and begin applying as the creature arrives. It's a bit like creatures entering with counters on them.

In fact, I'm pretty sure that MtGO shows cards like these as having the buff while they're still in your hand. That's certainly one of the advantages of digital cards, being able to alter them to avoid confusion.

[dackwards d]

*snip*

Thanks. And I don't mind waiting, questions I ask here are generally either about a random thought I had while looking through cards or something that happened in a game usually several days past.

[dackwards d]

Protection doesn't defend from non-targeted abilities, does it? So if something had prot green or prot creatures the ability of Shinen of Life's Roar would still force it to block, right? And then said prot creature would die if the Shinen was regenerated via Gaze of the Gorgon?

[SilPho]

Short Answer: Correct
Long Answer: Protection means the following, and nothing more - A creature with protection from X cannot be:
Damaged by X.
Enchanted or Eqipped by X.
Blocked by X or
Targeted by X.

That acronym doesn't protect against something that says Destroy. Hence why Gaze of the Gorgon works against Pro-Black or Pro-Green and also why Day of Judgment takes down big ol' Progenitus.

[gcninja]

I just wanna ask a stupid simple question, but still. Lets say I have two Jace Erasures out and I play Divination allowing me to draw two cards
1) do they have to discard twice as much since I have two out?'
2) is it "per card I draw" or "per instance of drawing"?
Thanks!

[theDreamer]

To answer your second question from the official FAQ:

"8/15/2010: If a spell or ability causes you to draw multiple cards, Jace's Erasure's ability triggers that many times. (The spell or ability finishes resolving before you put Jace's Erasure's abilities on the stack.)"

To answer your first:

Multiple instances of jace will each trigger independently. I don't know how to explain why this is only true, because it seems obvious to me, so you'd have to wait for silpho.

[dackwards d]

When you draw a card it will trigger both Jace's Erasures separately so your opponent will mill two for every card you draw (or two opponents discard one each if your prefer). Essentially what would happen if you drew two cards is this:
-you draw a card
-erasure 1 makes an opponent mill one
-erasure 2 makes an opponent mill one
-you draw the second card
-erasure 1 makes an opponent mill one again
-erasure 2 makes an opponent mill one again
though in practice you would usually just say "I draw two, you mill four" and it gets done at the same time.
That's my understanding of it anyway.

[theDreamer]

Actually:

You draw two cards (triggers can't interrupt a spell resolving)
Four triggers are now available for you to put on the stack, each can target a different opponent.

[gcninja]

So yeah. exactly what I assumed. WOOT WOOT

[Volafortis]

One thing worth noting, however, is that state based actions (SBA) still apply throughout resolution.

For instance, let's say you control an Oracle of Mul Daya when you cast Divination, which causes you to play with the top card of your library revealed.

When you draw two cards, even though technically you draw both as part of resolution to one effect, you still need to reveal the second card you draw, like this:
- Top card revealed
- Draw card #1
- Reveal top card
- Draw card #2
- Reveal top card

Also, if a card such as "Brainstorm" would cause you to draw from an empty deck, you lose the game, even though cards remain at the spells resolution. For instance, let's say that you cast Brainstorm with a two card library.

You attempt to draw three cards, but are only able to draw two. You then put two cards back on top of your library, and lose the game, because even though the spell resolves with cards left, SBA checked and saw that you attempted to draw from an empty library.

I just figured I'd mention both of those, because they're often situations that players confuse with triggered actions or abilities, and a lot of new players assume things like that are checked on the stack, when they really aren't.

[theDreamer]

Actually I'm going to need to see credentials, or wait for Sil Pho on dying in the middle of brainstorm, because of

"10/4/2004: This is all one effect. You draw 3 and return 2 cards all in one resolution. Nothing may happen between the two. If something triggers on drawing cards, it will go on the stack after Brainstorm finishes resolving." Which is errata/FAQ related to brainstorm, and is the ONLY thing related to brainstorm.

Notice the word "nothing."

Furthermore, playing with revealed cards is not an SBA (not on the list of them). I believe it is a replacement effect, but I could be wrong.

edit: though reading the wording on Decking, I'm a little confused. Your description seems to fit. It's just SBAs can't interrupt resolution of an effect, is all.

[phlip]

I think Vola is half-right... SBA's aren't checked, as far as I can tell, during the resolution of a spell... the rules say: just before any player would receive priority, and then again in the Cleanup step.

However, the wording of the "decking" SBA is "If a player attempted to draw a card from a library with no cards in it since the last time state-based actions were checked, he or she loses the game" - ie it doesn't care what happened before or since, just that it happened.

Even though they look similar, you have to consider SBAs and triggers separately... because they work differently behind the scenes. With triggers, something happens that triggers it, and then the trigger activates immediately, and the ability goes onto the stack at the next opportunity. So they're worded as "when X happens, do Y". If you're familiar with computing, compare it to a push protocol - when some action you're watching for happens, you're informed immediately.
Meanwhile for SBAs, they work differently. They don't do anything immediately when an action happens that would trigger them... many of them aren't even worded as watching a particular action, but watching for a particular state (hence the name). For instance, if the damage-loss rule was written as a triggered ability, it would be "when a player goes to 0 or less life, they lose" - ie reacting to the change. But the SBA is "when a player is at 0 or less life, they lose" - reacting to the state. Again, if you're familiar with computing, compare them to a pull protocol - the state changes and you aren't informed, you have to poll periodically to see if there are any changes. So many SBAs are worded as checking for a particular state (like the "0 or less life" thing), while those that need to check for a specific action (like drawing from an empty library) are worded as "if the action happened since the last check".

[Volafortis]

Actually I'm going to need to see credentials, or wait for Sil Pho on dying in the middle of brainstorm, because of

"10/4/2004: This is all one effect. You draw 3 and return 2 cards all in one resolution. Nothing may happen between the two. If something triggers on drawing cards, it will go on the stack after Brainstorm finishes resolving." Which is errata/FAQ related to brainstorm, and is the ONLY thing related to brainstorm.

Notice the word "nothing."

Furthermore, playing with revealed cards is not an SBA (not on the list of them). I believe it is a replacement effect, but I could be wrong.

edit: though reading the wording on Decking, I'm a little confused. Your description seems to fit. It's just SBAs can't interrupt resolution of an effect, is all.

I'm technically only classified as a Rules Advisor, haven't quite finished my Level 1 test yet.

They don't interrupt. Even in my example, I specifically state that Brainstorm finishes resolving before you lose, but it is recognized that the event occurred. Phlip word it better with regards to the rules, I was trying to make it easier to understand, and I guess I failed.

119.2. Cards may only be drawn one at a time. If a player is instructed to draw multiple cards, that player performs that many individual card draws.

That's the rule that causes static abilities such as Oracle of Mul Daya's "top card revealed" to reveal cards you draw mid resolution.

With regards to Brainstorm, I'll admit I worded the first sentence poorly, but if you read my post, I stated that Brainstorm finishes resolving before SBA checked to see that you decked.

The quote from my earlier post:

You attempt to draw three cards, but are only able to draw two. You then put two cards back on top of your library, and lose the game

I still had the spell resolve fully, the two cards are still put on top, and you lose on resolution. You don't lose the instant you draw the cards.

What I meant by my first sentence is that state based actions don't interact with the stack in any way, unlike triggered abilities, which is something a lot of players confuse.

[theDreamer]

Yeah, I saw "SBAs happen inbetween", the bit about Oracle of Mul Daya (which isn't a SBA), and brainstorm, stopped reading and found rules, re-read, and saw the edit.

However, SBAs still don't happen inbetween, or even matter, see

"704.5a If a player has 0 or less life, he or she loses the game."

But if a card was like Brainstorm but with life, ie "Lose 3 life, then gain 2" and you had 2 life to start with, you would go to -1 life, then 1 life, and not lose the game.

Card draw is an exception to that.