I want to make sure i am playing this right
Asked by Quadsimotto 9 years ago
From the reading of the card i am pretty sure that i am but i would like some validation. I have out a Flitterstep Eidolon on turn three i drop a Ordeal of Heliod and swing giving it the 1/1 counter. Turn four i drop a second ordeal of heliod on it and swing. Giving it two counters i then sac both for 20 life. Is that the correct way it is played? Also i have been using this strat with the skulker and Ordeal of Thassa dropping it on a Chasm Skulker with three counters already on it and immediately sacing it to draw two and add two counters. Is that the legal play?
Absinthman says... #2
No, you are not playing it right. Because sacrificing an ordeal is not an independent ability that relies solely on the number of +1/+1 counter that the creature has, but is instead a part of the ability that puts a +1/+1 counter on the creature, it will unfold as follows:
You attack with two ordeals on Flitterstep Eidolon
and one +1/+1 counter already on it. Both ordeals trigger and their abilities go onto the stack. The first one resolves, puts a second +1/+1 counter on the Eidolon, then checks the total number of +1/+1 counters on it, and sees that there are two of them -> it won't be sacrificed. After that, the second ordeal's ability resolves, adds the third +1/+1 counter, makes its own check for the total number of those, sees three of them -> gets sacrificed. The first ordeal will remain on the creature until you attack with it next time, which will result in putting a fourth +1/+1 counter on it and then finally sacrificing the last ordeal.
July 13, 2014 7:10 a.m.
Absinthman says... Accepted answer #3
I missed the second part of the question. That also doesn't work because sacrificing ordeals is a part of the ability that triggers upon attack. You won't be able to sacrifice your ordeal and reap its benefits until you attack with the creature it's attached to.
July 13, 2014 7:13 a.m.
hyperlocke says... #4
Oh crap, yeah, didn't think the first one through. Absinthman is right about that.
July 13, 2014 7:13 a.m.
Quadsimotto says... #5
thank you. I still need some lessons in the stack apparently. But still thanks.
July 13, 2014 7:17 a.m.
There is a mistake in your first scenario. It is somewhat hard to explain by text so I try to make it clear.
First combat, theres Eidolon with one Ordeal on it and it's declared as an attacker.
Ordeal triggers putting one +1/+1 counter on Eidolon.
Trigger resolves and Eidolon has one counter.
Second combat, Eidolon now has two Ordeals and one +1/+1 counter, declared as an attacker.
Both Ordeals trigger, stack:
Ordeal trigger
Ordeal trigger
Now here's the error->First Ordeal trigger is resolved, it puts a +1/+1 counter on Eidolon, then checks for three counters, finds only two and completes resolving. No life gain.
This resolves as expected->Second Ordeal trigger is resolved, it puts a +1/+1 counter on Eidolon, then checks for three counters, finds three. Sacrifice Ordeal, gain 10 life.
When you have a creature with one +1/+1 counter and two Ordeals on it declared as an attacker then only one of those Ordeals will be sacrificed (depending on which one resolves last) during that combat unless you find a way to put an additional counter on the creature at instant speed.
hyperlocke says... #1
Your first strategy is correct. Your second isn't.
The first ability of the Ordeals triggers only when the enchanted creature attacks. So when your Chasm Skulker already has 3 or more counters when you enchant it, the Ordeal won't be sacrificed. You have to swing with the Skulker. When you do, the first ability of the Ordeal triggers. You place a counter on the Skulker and sac the Ordeal. The second ability of the Ordeal triggers, you draw 2 cards. Then the first ability of the Skulker triggers and you put 2 counters on it.
So you will get 3 counters on the Skulker, but you have to attack with it to make that happen.
July 13, 2014 7:07 a.m.