Please login to comment
Ghostly Prison imposes a cost on declaring a creature as an attacker. When the new creature arrives on the board, Alesha, Who Smiles at Death says it is already "attacking," so no cost needs to be paid for Ghostly Prison.
May 18, 2017 4:42 p.m.
Neotrup, where is the rule that defines opponent as a the opponent of the player being dealt damage? As far as I was aware, opponent just meant a player other than yourself or your teammate.
May 18, 2017 2:42 p.m.
As you expected, the Shock still must be paid for with red mana. A spell's color and it's mana cost are two different aspects of the card. In most cases, a spell's color is determined by it's mana cost, but there are exceptions (such as cards with color indicators) and this is one of those cases.
May 18, 2017 2:20 p.m.
I was looking up rules text to answer a different question, when I stumbled upon what I thought might be an interesting interaction.
Rule 306.7 says "If noncombat damage would be dealt to a player by a source controlled by an opponent, that opponent may have that source deal that damage to a planeswalker the first player controls instead."
Flying Men is a source my opponent controls, dealing noncombat damage to a player. If my interpretation of the rules is correct, is my opponent allowed to redirect the 1 damage from himself to my planeswalker, thereby not dying and killing my planeswalker in the process? This seems like something silly I'd like to be able to pull once in a blue moon.
May 18, 2017 2:17 p.m.
Redirection is only allowed in cases where the rules say you can do so. For more info you can look at the rules here: http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Redirection_effect)
So to answer you generally, no, you can't just redirect damage around willy nilly. There needs to be a rule or card that specifically says you can do so. In this case, the rule is rule 306.7.
May 18, 2017 2:16 p.m.
The player casts Shock targeting you, then chooses whether or not to redirect the damage to you as the spell resolves. As such, you do not get to see if he wants to hit you or the planeswalker before deciding to Cancel it.
306.7. If noncombat damage would be dealt to a player by a source controlled by an opponent, that opponent may have that source deal that damage to a planeswalker the first player controls instead. This is a redirection effect (see rule 614.9) and is subject to the normal rules for ordering replacement effects (see rule 616). The opponent chooses whether to redirect the damage as the redirection effect is applied. #
May 18, 2017 1:59 p.m.
That's a pretty reasonable explanation Winterblast, I think you've won me over.
119.7. The source of damage is the object that dealt it. If an effect requires a player to choose a source of damage, he or she may choose a permanent; a spell on the stack (including a permanent spell); any object referred to by an object on the stack, by a prevention or replacement effect that’s waiting to apply, or by a delayed triggered ability that’s waiting to trigger (even if that object is no longer in the zone it used to be in); or a face-up object in the command zone. A source doesn’t need to be capable of dealing damage to be a legal choice. See rule 609.7, “Sources of Damage.”
For me, the logical way to think about it seems to be as a parallel to a "prevent the next X damage from a source of your choice" type of ability. If I wanted to not take damage from Purphoros I would choose Purphoros as the source, not the triggered ability. And if I prevented the next 4 damage, it would work across two of his triggers.
May 12, 2017 5:29 a.m.
If the duplicate question is good enough for you, you should mark a post here as an accepted answer so this thread gets closed.
May 12, 2017 3:44 a.m.
I tend to agree with Neotrup, but I can't cite a specific rule that would back up my reasoning for why.
When I read the wording "where X is the greatest amount of damage dealt by a source to a permanent or player this turn." I singled out the word "amount," reasoning that if the card had meant "total amount of damage dealt by a source" it would have used the word "total." But as far as I'm aware, "total" and "amount" aren't magic-eese words with magic-eese definitions like "whenever" or "instead" so I don't know what rule to cite this ruling off of. If anyone knows, i'd love to hear it.
May 12, 2017 3:42 a.m.
I'm looking for suggestions on cards to add/cut. Right now I need to cut 19 cards and $3.92. Feel free to leave advice!
Cards on the chopping block:
- Figure of Destiny-It's a good card, and a nice mana sink, but is it worth a cost that's almost 1/8 of my total budget?
- Armageddon-My commander is cheap, so I'd probably benefit from land destruction more than other decks with expensive commander format cards. But it's 67 cents, and runs against the "not terrible to play against" goal.
- Lightning Greaves-Amazing card in commander, and extra great for voltron commanders, but almost a dollar in cost is hard to justify for anything.
- Darksteel Plate-Indestructible is perfect for my commander, and the source of the effect being indestructible is perfect in an artifact hate laden format like commander, but it's 66 cents and there are other ways to protect my commander.
- Meddling Mage-Shuts down my opponent's commander, but it's a flimsy body, color-intensive, and pretty expensive (money-wise) for what it does.
- Phantasmal Image-Copy effects are always useful, and this is a good card, but I wonder if I'm getting enough value out of it justify it's price.
May 11, 2017 2:50 p.m.
Commander / EDH
SCORE: 3 | 10 COMMENTS | 535 VIEWS | IN 1 FOLDER
|Avg. deck rating||3.00|
|Helper Rank||None yet|
|Good Card Suggestions||6|
|Last activity||1 week|