Pariah and range of influence
Asked by Drilnoth 8 years ago
We're playing an Emperor game (with its standard modified range of influence rules). The general on one team enchants a creature his emperor controls with Pariah. If a player on the opposing team deals damage to the player who controls Pariah, what happens? Does the damage get redirected at all? Does it get redirected and dealt? Does it get redirected away from the player who controls Pariah but then not dealt to the creature?
I checked over the comp. rules for range of influence and replacement effects, and although it seems to indicate what happens with spells or abilities dealing the damage, it is unclear about how combat damage interacts with it.
But, that would mean that a source controlled by Player A would be dealing damage to a creature controlled by Player C (the opposing emperor), who is outside of player A's range of influence. And for example, the comprehensive rules include:
801.13a. If a replacement effect tries to cause a spell or ability to affect an object or player outside its controller's range of influence, that portion of the event does nothing.
Since Player B's replacement effect from Pariah is trying to cause Player A's action to affect something outside their range of influence (Player C's creature), doesn't it negate the effect, causing the damage to just not get dealt?
The complicating factor then is that that only specifically applies to spells and abilities, but it doesn't specify how it works with combat damage at all... which one would assume is treated the same way, but hence the inclarity.
June 14, 2015 1:46 p.m.
801.13a is phrased to be specifically about spells and abilities, and the event of dealing damage is neither. Because of this, I would assume it is not affected in the same way, similar to "can't be targetted by spells and abilities" can still be countered by the game rules. I'm behind my call, but feel free to wait for clarification from someone else, as I'm just interpreting the rules myself here, and could always be wrong.
June 14, 2015 4:40 p.m.
So we can agree thus far that a Lava Axe against Player B would essentially be nullified (because it's a spell)? Combat damage then is the only thing I'm less certain about.
June 14, 2015 7:12 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... Accepted answer #5
Various rules of note:
801.2. A player's range of influence is the maximum distance from that player, measured in player seats, that the player can affect. Players within that many seats of the player are within that player's range of influence. Objects controlled by players within a players range of influence are also within that player's range of influence. Range of influence covers spells, abilities, effects, damage dealing, attacking, making choices, and winning the game.
801.10. Spells and abilities can't affect objects or players outside their controller's range of influence. The parts of the effect that attempt to affect an out-of-range object or player will do nothing. The rest of the effect will work normally.
801.13. Replacement and prevention effects watch for a particular event to happen and then completely or partially replace that event. The limited range of influence option can cause the modified event to contain instructions that can't be carried out, in which case the player simply ignores the impossible instructions. See rule 614, "Replacement Effects," and rule 615, "Prevention Effects."
801.13a If a replacement effect tries to cause a spell or ability to affect an object or player outside its controller's range of influence, that portion of the event does nothing.
801.13b If a spell or ability creates an effect that prevents damage that would be dealt by a source, it can affect only sources within the spell or ability's controllers range of influence. If a spell or ability creates an effect that prevents damage that would be dealt to a permanent or player, it can affect only permanents and players within the spell or ability's controllers range of influence. If a spell or ability creates an effect that prevents damage, but neither the source nor the would-be recipient of the damage is specified, it prevents damage only if both the source and recipient of that damage are within the spell or ability's controllers range of influence.
Remember that replacement effects are only prevention effects if they use the word "prevent." Therefore, redirection effects (which redirect damage that would be dealt to one object to another object instead) are not prevention effects and are not covered by 801.13. The other rules concerning spells and abilities don't apply to combat damage because combat damage is neither a spell nor an ability.
Whether by a shortcoming or a deliberate design choice, the rules do seem to permit combat damage to be redirected up the range of influence.
June 15, 2015 9:43 p.m.
Yeah, that supports my interpretation of things, but - other than what I was aware of - it means that Player A could also Naturalize Player B's Pariah, even if it enchanted a permanent controlled by Player C. If you think about it closely, that makes a lot of sense, I just never knew...
June 16, 2015 3:35 a.m.
Alright, glad to see there's some agreement on interpretation here. I feel like that was something they may have just missed (perhaps intending for 801.10 to cover most any replacement effect), but since there seems to be no rule really clarifying it it does indeed seem like in this circumstance Player A can damage Player C's creature.
@BlueScope: That particular interaction is very well defined. If Player B owns and controls an Aura, it is within Player A's range of influence regardless of what it is attached to.
Anyways, thanks folks!
BlueScope says... #1
Say Player A is dealing combat damage to Player B, both having a range of 1. Pariah is controlled by Player B, so it's effect works no matter what the range of influence is. If it mattered, it would span over a range of 1 from where Player B is sitting.
In other words: The replacement effect of Pariah works no matter what Pariah is enchanting, because it affects damage that would be dealt to the controller of Pariah (as opposed to a card saying "if a player would be dealt damage, ...", which would care about range of influence).
June 14, 2015 4:46 a.m.