Would Phyrexian Obliterator work against Aegis of the Gods?

Asked by Randompanda88 5 years ago

I hadn't encountered Aegis of the Gods before. I played a friend who brought it out, and we came to a disagreement about how "you are hexproof" would work. Funnily enough I was saying how Phyrexian Obliterator wouldn't work because It doesn't target the creatures with hexproof he obliterates, it targets the player. He disagrees but can't explain his answer. Can someone tell me if i'm right or not? That it does not work?

CrazyLittleGuy says... Accepted answer #1

Phyrexian Obliterator 's triggered ability doesn't target anything. It just triggers when the Obliterator is dealt damage, and the saccing player is chosen by whoever controls the source of the damage. Having hexproof won't prevent this ability from either being placed on the stack or resolving.

October 2, 2014 2:19 a.m.

Randompanda88 says... #2

If you're right, I won't complain. It's in my favor, but I would have thought otherwise. I apreciate you taking the time to answer, but I would like at least one other person to confirm what you've said. Thank you again, CrazyLittleGuy

October 2, 2014 2:28 a.m.

Epochalyptik says... #3

A spell or ability only targets something if it uses the word "target." If the spell or ability doesn't say "target," then it doesn't target anything.

Phyrexian Obliterator 's triggered ability contains no instances of the word "target," so it doesn't target anything. Remember that a spell or ability can affect something without targeting it.

October 2, 2014 3:05 a.m.

Boza says... #4

Simplest answer is that only things that specifically say target in the text of the card actually target anything.

Compare Thoughtseize and Delirium Skeins - one says target and the other does not mention it. You cannot target your opponent who has Aegis out with Thoughtseize, but you can cast and make him discard with Delirium Skeins .

October 2, 2014 3:07 a.m.

Randompanda88 says... #5

Thank you guys. I appreciate the answers.

October 2, 2014 3:28 a.m.

This discussion has been closed