Instant vs. Interrupt
Asked by PKman 13 years ago
Just a quickie, completely out of curiosity. What's the old-school difference between an interrupt and an instant? I know this is completely redundant now, but I'm planning on building a time machine and traveling back to 1993, so....
hunter9000 says... Accepted answer #2
I think that interrupts could be played when instants could, but once an interrupt was played, it created a batch with everything below it on the stack. The batch would then resolve and the AP would get priority again. This was all from before I started playing, so take this with a grain of salt.
January 23, 2012 10:35 p.m.
To my best knowledge, all interrupts had something similar to "split second", which are on cards like Krosan Grip and Sudden Shock. So like those cards say, nothing else can be put on the stack.
January 23, 2012 10:43 p.m.
Ah I see. Thanks! I knew they were obsolete, I just wanted to know the original difference, just out of curiosity.
January 23, 2012 11:16 p.m.
Back then, interrupts were essentially instants that could only be played on an opponent's turn. Now, it's the same as an instant.
January 25, 2012 4:50 p.m.
IPAheyheyhey says... #6
As someone who played mtg during that time, the rules were not nearly as complicated as people sometimes make them seem. You play a few games, you learn the rules. I'm trying to learn how the stack works and from reading stuff online and it seems much more complicated in terms of how things actually occur. I can see how the old rules may seem to confusing to players who never played with the old-school rules. Read this and remember THE STACK DOES NOT EXIST: " Interrupts resolve as soon as they are successfully cast. Instants, on the other hand, must wait for both players to respond with any other instants. Once everyone has finished playing instants, the instants resolve one at a time in last-in, first-out order. Each effect resolves completely before going on to the next effect, except that no damage is actually dealt until all of the effects have finished resolving. Also, if a creature's toughness is lowered, players don't check to see if lethal damage has been dealt to the creature until the batch has finished resolving. Also, instants cannot cancel or counter other effects."There are huge differences between the above and the contemporary rules. 1), It doesn't matter if Giant Growth or Shock was played first, because damage comes at the end; 2) The modern stack allows (I think) you to play permanents, such as creatures, onto the stack vs. the old school way (which is of course you can't play permanents while instants are being cast).In a nutshell, the old rules were about speeds, the new rules are about precedence. The new rules care a lot about the order in which things are cast; the old rules don't care a whit. The old rules only care about the type of spell you are casting. An interrupt is a "faster" instant. If I play a Counterspell (an interrupt), your only response is to cast another interrupt (most likely a counter).In the old rules, spells don't resolve one-by-one, they resolve class by class. All interrupts resolve then all instants resolve. In the old rules there is no unstacking, there is no priority,. You could not play a permanent in response to an instant or interrupt (which I believe you can do now?).If you are reading this, tell me, can you play a permanent onto a stack? That seems so retarded by old rules (where class is important) I have trouble believing it. I may have misinterpreted the new rules just as many of you have misinterpreted the old. I don't know.
January 11, 2013 12:10 p.m.
IPAheyheyhey says... #7
Oh, but the difference between an instant and an interrupt (and even 1995 has this) is that an interrupt is faster than an instant. Spells resolved by class back in the day, not by order in which they were cast. You play an instant, I could respond with either an instant or an interrupt; you play an interrupt, I can only respond with an interrupt.
January 11, 2013 12:12 p.m.
hunter9000 says... #8
Everything now is based off of the stack and priority, but "speeds" are still relevant with the timing restrictions certain card types have. At "Instant-speed" are Instants, most abilities, and cards with Flash, which can be played any time you have priority. "Sorcery-speed" cards are Creatures, Artifacts, Enchantments, etc, which can only be played when you have priority during your main phase when the stack is empty. So no, you can't respond to anything with something that's "sorcery-speed".
Epochalyptik says... #1
From the Comprehensive Rulebook glossary:
Interrupt (Obsolete)
An obsolete card type. All cards printed with this card type are now instants. All abilities that, as printed, said a player could "play as an interrupt" can now be activated like any other activated abilities (unless they're mana abilities, in which case they follow those rules instead). All relevant cards have been given errata in the Oracle card reference.
January 23, 2012 10:31 p.m.