Gaddock Teeg under Mosswort Bridge vs Boardwipe
Asked by Andromedus 7 years ago
I have Gaddock Teeg under Mosswort Bridge. My opponent plays Wrath of God (or any other >3 CMC or X-mana non-creature spell). In response, I tap a Forest and activate Mosswort Bridge to bring out Gaddock Teeg.
Now, does the Wrath of God "fizzle" and go into the graveyard? Or is it essentially an illegal spell and the player is then allowed to untap his mana and basically take the spell back? Or does the mana stay tapped and he must choose some other way to spend it, but the Wrath of God goes back into his hand? Or does it successfully trigger and wipe the board?
Thanks for any help.
Raging_Squiggle says... #2
Gaddock Teeg's ability only stops a spell from being cast. Once it's on the stack, his ability will do nothing.
December 4, 2016 3:32 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... Accepted answer #3
As a note, the only time the game is rewound is when a judge determines it's the correct way to address an action that was illegal at the time it was taken.
Because Gaddock Teeg was not on the battlefield at the time Wrath of God was cast, it was perfectly legal for your opponent to cast Wrath of God. Bringing Gaddock Teeg out after the fact will not make Wrath of God an illegal spell; the ability doesn't retroactively nullify spells, it just prevents new ones from being cast.
In fact, if you bring Gaddock Teeg out in response to a board wipe, you'll just end up getting Gaddock Teeg killed.
December 4, 2016 9:52 a.m.
Andromedus says... #4
Thank you. I didn't realize that the oracle text had changed the card from cast to played, which makes it a significantly weaker effect. I also didn't know that the "cast" or "play" does not accompany a card onto the stack.
December 4, 2016 12:33 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #5
"Played" is an older term that sometimes referred to casting spells. Now, casting a spell is referred to as "casting," whereas playing a land is still referred to as "playing" (effects that allow you to play lands and cast spells use "play").
But that's not what matters here. It's still true that you can only cast spells onto the stack, but the important distinction in this case is that the process of casting a spell is limited to what you do to put that spell onto the stack (that is, announcing it, making any casting decisions, and paying its costs). Once you complete this process, the spell is cast. Gaddock Teeg's ability does not retroavively undo castings that occurred before the ability when into effect. It only prevents players from casting additional spells of the stated qualities.
December 4, 2016 2:08 p.m.
'Played' was an older term for 'cast', it's a change in terminology, not how the card worked. The term play is still used to refer to either playing a land as a special game action (such as Mina and Denn, Wildborn or Horn of Greed), or it may be used when it's unclear whether you would be playing the card as a land or casting it (such as Spark of Creativity or Null Profusion). If it refers only to spells the game now refers to it as casting (such as Chandra, Torch of Defiance or Gaddock Teeg).
Bovine073 says... #1
If you look at the oracle text for Gaddock Teeg, it says "cast", not play. Therefore, the Wrath of God is completely legal and will resolve.
December 4, 2016 3:18 a.m.