Fizzeling a spell on the stack. Example: spell with awaken.
Asked by insertcleverid 8 years ago
When a spell is cast that has multiple targets (and/or effects) and while, sitting on the stack, one or more of those targets is removed, my go-to rule of thumb has always been "the spell will do as much as it can." This has served me well 99% of the time. If I cast Twin Bolt targeting 2 Eldrazi Scions and my opponent sacs one, the other still dies to the damage.
With the awaken spells like Clutch of Currents my understanding is that if you cast it with awaken and the land that you're targeting is removed, say with Grip of Desolation, the entire spell fizzles. You don't even get to return the target creature to hand. The opposite, I'm told, is not true. If I cast clutch with awaken targeting my opponent's scion, and he sac's it, I still get to awaken the land.
(I'm not 100% certain I even have this much right.)
I've read the cards again and again and I cannot tell from the text how I'm supposed to know awaken works this way. What is the rule that dictates the difference, and what do I need to know to tell which way spells work when I'm encountering them for the first time?
Epochalyptik says... #2
Awaken does not work this way.
If a spell requires some number of targets and at least one of those targets is still legal at the time the spell resolves, the spell will do as much as it can. It will only fizzle if all of its targets are illegal.
Awaken targets a land, which means it plays by the rule above.
If you cast Clutch of Currents for its awaken cost and the land becomes an illegal target, Clutch of Currents will still resolve and return the target creature to its owner's hand.
If, however, you cast Boiling Earth for its awaken cost and the land becomes an illegal target, Boiling Earth will fizzle (it has no remaining legal targets). Casting Boiling Earth for its mana cost doesn't cause it to fizzle because the spell never requires a target in that case.
December 2, 2015 9:16 a.m.
Basically, Awaken works by saying "If you pay another some mana, this spell will also do this and that" - in other words, you add another effect to the spell.
Spells in general do as much as they can - that's served you right in probably 100% of cases, as that's how the rules work! That means that whenever there's less targets than the amount of targets you chose while casting a spell, the remaining targets will still be affected. The only exception (not to "it does as much as it can", but to "it still resolves") is if it has no legal targets whatsoever, in which case it's countered by the game rules instead of resolving.
For your Awaken spells, that means that a spell that requires a target besides the land, such as Ruinous Path or your example, will have two targets when cast with Awaken: The creature being targetted, and the land being targetted. When cast without Awaken, you never choose a land as a target, therefore only have one target when casting it. As illustrated before, only if both targets are illegal by the time the spell tries to resolve, the spell will be countered.
Casting a spell like Boiling Earth without Awaken means you choose no targets and your spell won't be countered for having illegal targets. However if you do cast it with Awaken and the land you targetted becomes an illegal target before Boiling Earth resolves, the rest of the spell will be countered as well.
December 2, 2015 9:27 a.m.
insertcleverid says... #4
I see what you mean about the difference between clutch of currents and boiling earth.
I got this information from a recent episode of Limited Resources. Owen Turtenwald said that's how it worked and no one corrected him. If I wasn't at work I'd find the exact point in time and listen back. Maybe he was talking about boiling earth and not awaken spells in general.
December 2, 2015 9:29 a.m.
JANKYARD_DOG says... #5
I had a judge call based on this. My creature was targeted with Kolaghan's Command (2 dmg to creature/discard) and in response I played Collateral Damage sacrificing the creature being targeted. Judge's response: The spell fizzles because it now lacks a legal target, and thus I get to keep my card.
He mentioned the order it goes on the stack. Had the discard effect been announced first I would still discard, but because the creature was targeted first it was null and void. I know it's not awaken but it is a dual ability. Hope this helps.
December 2, 2015 9:32 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #6
@Mj3913: Your judge was partially incorrect.
Kolaghan's Command is a single spell on the stack. You don't break it into multiple objects that get rearranged.
Additionally, you must always perform instructions in the order in which they're written. Even if while casting the spell you announce the fourth mode as your first choice and the second mode as your second choice, you still perform them in "second mode, fourth mode" order because that's how they're written.
If you choose those modes and all targets become illegal, then the whole spell is countered. You don't get to resolve part of the effect.
December 2, 2015 10:16 a.m.
insertcleverid says... #7
Mj3913 that is extremely interesting, because it seems to contradict what the others are saying, as well as make me rethink what Owen Turtenwald said, unless I'm misunderstanding you. It sounds like the judge is saying that even thought the discard ability of Kolaghan's Command still has the legal target player, because it was the 2nd effect on the stack, when the first was countered, it was too.
So, if the judge is correct about the way effects are placed on the stack, do the effects of an awaken spell go on the stack in a specific way or can we choose? Would it work the same way for Twin Bolt? Is it different because Kolaghan's Command specifically says 'choose two?' If so, is it similar to the awaken spells that all say 'also' in their awaken descriptions?
Sorry to pick this apart, but I'm having a hard time resolving all of the different sources of information.
December 2, 2015 10:19 a.m.
@Mj3913: Not to derail the thread, but I'd say that's completely bogus - first, which order you announce modes in doesn't matter, as you always follow instructions as written on the card, from top to bottom, even if you announce them in a different order; second, announcing modes 2 and 4 means the spell has two targets - a player who has to discard, and a creature/player that will get 2 damage dealt. The spell only fizzles if both targets are illegal when the spell tries to resolve - you would still have to discard a card.
December 2, 2015 10:21 a.m.
insertcleverid says... #9
So Epochalyptik, is Clutch of Currents not similar to Kolaghan's Command in this way? It has multiple modes and the awaken is always printed second. Would it not also go on the stack with the awaken effect after the bounce?
December 2, 2015 10:24 a.m.
JANKYARD_DOG says... #10
So much for trusting judge calls then I guess...
December 2, 2015 10:26 a.m.
Gidgetimer says... #11
Epoch misspoke when describing Kolaghan's Command. It always has 2 targets so if either target is legal it will resolve. There is no order of the effects on the stack. It is a single object on the stack. Different effects from the same object always happen in the order they are listed in the object's text.
As for trusting judge calls, many judges at FNM level events are not DCI certified judges. They are a reasonably knowledgeable person that the TO decided would be in charge of rules enforcement.
December 2, 2015 10:58 a.m.
@insertcleverid: I should've clarified more that the order that effects are written on the card matters for how those effects play out, but not at all for whether the spell gets countered for having illegal targets or not. A single spell is always one instance on the stack, it will either resolve or not - not halfway resolve, then find out it lacks a target and be countered - instead, it simply won't do anything for the part that lacks a target.
Sorry for the confusion.
@Mj3913: Judges are people too, and can make mistakes. ;)
December 2, 2015 10:59 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... Accepted answer #13
Gidgetimer is right; I've amended the end of my pervious comment.
The end idea here is that all targets must be illegal to cause the spell to fizzle. If any target is still legal, the spell resolves and does what it can.
Further, spells do not fragment into different "effects" that occupy the stack. One spell has one spot on the stack. the spell itself can prescribe a number of actions that are all executed during that spell's resolution. Instructions/effects are executed in the order in which they're written.
Gidgetimer says... #1
As long as the base spell targets (as in Clutch of Currents) then the spell will resolve on the valid targets if awakened and the land is removed. If the regular non-awakened spell doesn't target (Ondu Rising, Coastal Discovery etc) then the spell will fizzle and have no effect if the targeted land is removed.
December 2, 2015 9:12 a.m.