Two Monstrositys On The Same Stack?

Asked by Sabbath91 11 years ago

Can you put the same monstrosity ability on the stack more than once, assuming you have the mana to do so? Eg:

My opponent casts Doomblade on my Fleecemane Lion . I respond by making him monsterous to give it hexproof. He in turn responds with a second Doomblade, which would kill Fleecemane Lion before his monstrosity resolves. Can i then, if i had the mana to do so, activate monstrosity a second time since the Fleecemane Lion would still be un-monsterous (is that a word?) at this point?

I assume if this is allowed then when the first activated monstrosity came to resolve it would just fizzle.

Sabbath91 says... #1

Doom Blade *

November 23, 2013 6:15 a.m.

Browncoat67 says... Accepted answer #2

Yes, you can put as many Monstrosity triggers on the stack as you'd like. However, after the first one has resolved, your creature is considered to be "Monstrous" and the other triggers will not do anything. So, for example, if you put 2 Keepsake Gorgon triggers on the stack, the first will resolve and you can kill another creature, but when the second goes to resolve, the Gorgon is already Monstrous, and so will not do anything.

November 23, 2013 6:29 a.m.

Kcin says... #3

a monstrous Fleecemane Lion gets hexproof and indestructible... so wouldnt' it survive anyway?

November 23, 2013 11:21 a.m.

Gidgetimer says... #4

You can activate monstrosity as many times as you want on top of each other on the stack, you can even activate monstrosity on a creature that is already monstrous. The thing is that when the ability goes to resolve it will check if the creature is monstrous, If not it has the stated effect of putting counters on and making the creature monstrous. If the creature is monstrous it has no effect.

@Nick, Casual Strategist: No Fleecemane Lion would not survive in the scenario without a second monstrous activation because the second Doom Blade is on the stack above it and will resolve on a non-monstrous Lion killing it before it becomes monstrous and therefore indestructible and hexproof.

November 23, 2013 11:45 a.m.

Kcin says... #5

okay. got it... i kinda forgot the whole last in first out way the stack works, for a minute.

November 23, 2013 12:34 p.m.

Siyanor says... #6

Well, it's been answered, but as for your other (probably rhetorical) question: No, un-monsterous is not a word. However, nonmonstrous is a word.

November 23, 2013 1:36 p.m.