Wrath of god___Biorythm

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Hello,

I cast Wrath of God, do the creatures leave play simultaneously or in order
of active/controlling players choice.

If the latter was true, would it then be possible for my opponent to use
goblin sharpshooter for each creature hitting the graveyard in turn.
Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play, untap Sharpshooter,
Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play..... etc etc?

I cast Biorythm with no cretures controlled by my opponent and one creature
controlled by me, can my opponent do anything, it happened in a tournament,
and my opponent tried to respond, the Head judge said that he could not
respond, because as soon as priority changes he would die because of his
life total being 0...Is this true?
So even if my opponent had a quicksilver amulet in play, he would not be
able to respond, by putting a creature into play with the amulet, before the
Biorythm resolves?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

In <cg0diu$qf6$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net> "Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> writes:

> I cast Wrath of God, do the creatures leave play simultaneously or in order
> of active/controlling players choice.

They leave play simultaneously. (You can, however, choose the order in
which they enter the graveyard.)

> If the latter was true, would it then be possible for my opponent to use
> goblin sharpshooter for each creature hitting the graveyard in turn.
> Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play, untap Sharpshooter,
> Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play..... etc etc?

No. By the time the Wrath is killing creatures, the Sharpshooter is
dead too.

> I cast Biorythm with no cretures controlled by my opponent and one creature
> controlled by me, can my opponent do anything, it happened in a tournament,
> and my opponent tried to respond, the Head judge said that he could not
> respond, because as soon as priority changes he would die because of his
> life total being 0...Is this true?

Sounds like the head judge had his head up his ass. Your opponent
could perfectly well respond to your Biorhythm by playing the
ability of his Quicksilver Amulet. By the time Biorhythm resolves,
he's got a creature in play.

If your opponent had deliberately waited for Biorhythm to resolve
and *then* wanted to use his Amulet, then yes, he'd be dead before
he could do so. (Maybe it was a creature that does damage when
it enters play, and he wanted to wait until you were at 1 life to
play it?) But it doesn't seem like that was the case here.

--
John Gordon "Between BST melee, their spells, their warders' melee,
gordon@panix.com and their warders' procs, they put out enough damage
to make monks cry." -- Dark Tyger

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

"Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote in message
news:cg0diu$qf6$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
> Hello,
>
> I cast Wrath of God, do the creatures leave play simultaneously or in
order
> of active/controlling players choice.

Simultaneously.

> If the latter was true, would it then be possible for my opponent to use
> goblin sharpshooter for each creature hitting the graveyard in turn.
> Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play, untap Sharpshooter,
> Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play..... etc etc?

This doesn't work, because the Sharpshooter is in the graveyard when it's
triggered abilities go on the stack. (This sounds weird, but I think this is
the case. The abilities still go on the stack, much the way a Disciple of
the Vault's triggered ability goes on the stack if it's killed by Wrath with
other Artifact Creatures in play) However, since it is in the graveyard, it
cannot be tapped to ping. OTOH, if you were to make the Sharpshooter immune
to Wrath of God (by making him indestructable, perhaps), your scenario would
work.

> I cast Biorythm with no cretures controlled by my opponent and one
creature
> controlled by me, can my opponent do anything, it happened in a
tournament,
> and my opponent tried to respond, the Head judge said that he could not
> respond, because as soon as priority changes he would die because of his
> life total being 0...Is this true?

No, this is simply wrong. The stack doesn't start resolving until both
players have passed priority (consecutively). This means that the Biorythm
hasn't resolved before your opponent has a chance to respond. If you cast
Biorythm and passed priority, then your opponent passed priority, the
Biorhythm would resolve (rather, the stack would start resolving, which
would begin [and end] with Biorhythim in this particular example [unless
things are complicated with Biorhythm being played as an instant, via
Vedalken Orrery]) and your opponent would lose. However, as I read your
example, this doesn't seem to be the case. If I'm understanding you
correctly, the judge was wrong, as he basically gave you an uncounterable
spell. He ruled that after you cast Biorhythm, your opponent would never
receive priority. That's wrong.

> So even if my opponent had a quicksilver amulet in play, he would not be
> able to respond, by putting a creature into play with the amulet, before
the
> Biorhythm resolves?

According to that judge, yeah. But this isn't the case for the rest of the
Magic-playing world. If you cast Biorhythm and passed priority, your
opponent could then tap mana and his Quicksilver Amulet to put a creature
into play. Then he passes priority, and you do the same. Now, the stack
begins to resolve LIFO (Last In, First Out). The Amulet puts a creature into
play. Then each player passes priority. Then Biorhythm resolves. This would
put your opponent at one life and you at one life (assuming the same
situation as above). Then each player receives priority again, and both
pass. The stack is now empty.

Hope that helps.

--

KB

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Jonathan Fourie <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote:
>I cast Wrath of God, do the creatures leave play simultaneously or in order
>of active/controlling players choice.

Simultaneously; nothing on Wrath of God says anything like "Destroy a creature.
It can't be regenerated. Repeat this process until all creatures have been
affected.".

>If the latter was true,

It's not.

>would it then be possible for my opponent to use
>goblin sharpshooter for each creature hitting the graveyard in turn.
>Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play, untap Sharpshooter,
>Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play..... etc etc?

No, because the creatures would -still- all be being destroyed during the
resolution of the Wrath of God, during which nobody gets priority, so that
anything that triggers can't go on the stack. The Sharpshooter will trigger
once for each buried creature, including itself ... but the triggered abilities
won't get to go onto the stack until AFTER the Wrath is all done resolving,
and each of them Does Nothing on resolution because the Sharpshooter it's
trying to untap died a long time ago.

>I cast Biorythm with no cretures controlled by my opponent and one creature
>controlled by me, can my opponent do anything,

Certainly. Biorhythm is a what? A spell. Spells use the stack. Anything that
uses the stack can be responded to before it ever gets to resolve. Opponent
can certainly kill off, or bounce, your creature before Biorhythm resolves.

>it happened in a tournament,
>and my opponent tried to respond, the Head judge said that he could not
>respond, because as soon as priority changes he would die because of his
>life total being 0...Is this true?

That is a _very_ bad Head Judge; Biorhythm has NO effect at all before it
starts to resolve ... just like EVERY other spell, activated ability, and
triggered ability in the game. Before it resolves, it hasn't done anything
yet.

It's true that opponent can't do anything _after_ Biorhythm is done resolving
but before he loses the game ... but that's quite definitely not what you
were asking the judge about.

>So even if my opponent had a quicksilver amulet in play, he would not be
>able to respond, by putting a creature into play with the amulet, before the
>Biorythm resolves?

Certainly he could do so. He can't do so AFTER it resolves but before he dies,
but he can do so just fine in response to it.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Ok, the amulet was just an example.... what my opponent actually wanted to
do was to kill my creature(burn spell, because he had no other answers),
thus killing me aswell and making the game a draw...Would it be a draw then?

"Ken Briscoe" <youcant@sendmespam.com> wrote in message
news:2ohudaFb56d8U1@uni-berlin.de...
> "Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote in message
> news:cg0diu$qf6$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
> > Hello,
> >
> > I cast Wrath of God, do the creatures leave play simultaneously or in
> order
> > of active/controlling players choice.
>
> Simultaneously.
>
> > If the latter was true, would it then be possible for my opponent to use
> > goblin sharpshooter for each creature hitting the graveyard in turn.
> > Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play, untap Sharpshooter,
> > Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play..... etc etc?
>
> This doesn't work, because the Sharpshooter is in the graveyard when it's
> triggered abilities go on the stack. (This sounds weird, but I think this
is
> the case. The abilities still go on the stack, much the way a Disciple of
> the Vault's triggered ability goes on the stack if it's killed by Wrath
with
> other Artifact Creatures in play) However, since it is in the graveyard,
it
> cannot be tapped to ping. OTOH, if you were to make the Sharpshooter
immune
> to Wrath of God (by making him indestructable, perhaps), your scenario
would
> work.
>
> > I cast Biorythm with no cretures controlled by my opponent and one
> creature
> > controlled by me, can my opponent do anything, it happened in a
> tournament,
> > and my opponent tried to respond, the Head judge said that he could not
> > respond, because as soon as priority changes he would die because of his
> > life total being 0...Is this true?
>
> No, this is simply wrong. The stack doesn't start resolving until both
> players have passed priority (consecutively). This means that the Biorythm
> hasn't resolved before your opponent has a chance to respond. If you cast
> Biorythm and passed priority, then your opponent passed priority, the
> Biorhythm would resolve (rather, the stack would start resolving, which
> would begin [and end] with Biorhythim in this particular example [unless
> things are complicated with Biorhythm being played as an instant, via
> Vedalken Orrery]) and your opponent would lose. However, as I read your
> example, this doesn't seem to be the case. If I'm understanding you
> correctly, the judge was wrong, as he basically gave you an uncounterable
> spell. He ruled that after you cast Biorhythm, your opponent would never
> receive priority. That's wrong.
>
> > So even if my opponent had a quicksilver amulet in play, he would not be
> > able to respond, by putting a creature into play with the amulet, before
> the
> > Biorhythm resolves?
>
> According to that judge, yeah. But this isn't the case for the rest of the
> Magic-playing world. If you cast Biorhythm and passed priority, your
> opponent could then tap mana and his Quicksilver Amulet to put a creature
> into play. Then he passes priority, and you do the same. Now, the stack
> begins to resolve LIFO (Last In, First Out). The Amulet puts a creature
into
> play. Then each player passes priority. Then Biorhythm resolves. This
would
> put your opponent at one life and you at one life (assuming the same
> situation as above). Then each player receives priority again, and both
> pass. The stack is now empty.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> --
>
> KB
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

In <cg0gr8$3ue$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net> "Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> writes:

> Ok, the amulet was just an example.... what my opponent actually
> wanted to do was to kill my creature(burn spell, because he had no
> other answers), thus killing me aswell and making the game a
> draw...Would it be a draw then?

Assuming he had instant-speed burn spell(s) sufficient to kill your
creature, then yes, the game would end as a draw.

--
John Gordon "Between BST melee, their spells, their warders' melee,
gordon@panix.com and their warders' procs, they put out enough damage
to make monks cry." -- Dark Tyger

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Jonathan Fourie <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote:
>Ok, the amulet was just an example.... what my opponent actually wanted to
>do was to kill my creature(burn spell, because he had no other answers),
>thus killing me aswell and making the game a draw...Would it be a draw then?

(in response to a Biorhythm where you controlled one creature and he had
none)

Yes, it would; if both of you have no creatures as Biorhythm resolves, you
both are set to 0 life, then both of you lose at the same time when state-
based effects are checked for, after Biorhythm is in the graveyard. And unless
there's someone else still in the game, that means it's a draw. (102.4)

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from dbd@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

 

[peter]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

"Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote in message news:<cg0gr8$3ue$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>...
> Ok, the amulet was just an example.... what my opponent actually wanted to
> do was to kill my creature(burn spell, because he had no other answers),
> thus killing me aswell and making the game a draw...Would it be a draw then?


That would work with an instant speed spell. It's possible he only
had a Sorcery (Volcanic Hammer) in his hand, in which case he would
die before anyone got priority.

Peter

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote in message news:<slrnci7oud.a9p.dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com>...
> Jonathan Fourie <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote:
> It's true that opponent can't do anything _after_ Biorhythm is done resolving
> but before he loses the game ... but that's quite definitely not what you
> were asking the judge about.
>
> >So even if my opponent had a quicksilver amulet in play, he would not be
> >able to respond, by putting a creature into play with the amulet, before the
> >Biorythm resolves?
>
> Certainly he could do so. He can't do so AFTER it resolves but before he dies,
> but he can do so just fine in response to it.

Here is what I suspect to be the cause of confusion for the judge:
It's not possible to use a lifegain effect to usefully get around
Biorhythm, either in response or after. I bet the judge was thinking
along those lines, and applying it to the wrong idea.

Still a bad judge, in any event.

--
Justin

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

Yeah that head judge needed to up his/her meds.... LoL
"Ken Briscoe" <youcant@sendmespam.com> wrote in message
news:2ohudaFb56d8U1@uni-berlin.de...
> "Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote in message
> news:cg0diu$qf6$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
> > Hello,
> >
> > I cast Wrath of God, do the creatures leave play simultaneously or in
> order
> > of active/controlling players choice.
>
> Simultaneously.
>
> > If the latter was true, would it then be possible for my opponent to use
> > goblin sharpshooter for each creature hitting the graveyard in turn.
> > Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play, untap Sharpshooter,
> > Sharpshooter ping opponent, creature leaves play..... etc etc?
>
> This doesn't work, because the Sharpshooter is in the graveyard when it's
> triggered abilities go on the stack. (This sounds weird, but I think this
is
> the case. The abilities still go on the stack, much the way a Disciple of
> the Vault's triggered ability goes on the stack if it's killed by Wrath
with
> other Artifact Creatures in play) However, since it is in the graveyard,
it
> cannot be tapped to ping. OTOH, if you were to make the Sharpshooter
immune
> to Wrath of God (by making him indestructable, perhaps), your scenario
would
> work.
>
> > I cast Biorythm with no cretures controlled by my opponent and one
> creature
> > controlled by me, can my opponent do anything, it happened in a
> tournament,
> > and my opponent tried to respond, the Head judge said that he could not
> > respond, because as soon as priority changes he would die because of his
> > life total being 0...Is this true?
>
> No, this is simply wrong. The stack doesn't start resolving until both
> players have passed priority (consecutively). This means that the Biorythm
> hasn't resolved before your opponent has a chance to respond. If you cast
> Biorythm and passed priority, then your opponent passed priority, the
> Biorhythm would resolve (rather, the stack would start resolving, which
> would begin [and end] with Biorhythim in this particular example [unless
> things are complicated with Biorhythm being played as an instant, via
> Vedalken Orrery]) and your opponent would lose. However, as I read your
> example, this doesn't seem to be the case. If I'm understanding you
> correctly, the judge was wrong, as he basically gave you an uncounterable
> spell. He ruled that after you cast Biorhythm, your opponent would never
> receive priority. That's wrong.
>
> > So even if my opponent had a quicksilver amulet in play, he would not be
> > able to respond, by putting a creature into play with the amulet, before
> the
> > Biorhythm resolves?
>
> According to that judge, yeah. But this isn't the case for the rest of the
> Magic-playing world. If you cast Biorhythm and passed priority, your
> opponent could then tap mana and his Quicksilver Amulet to put a creature
> into play. Then he passes priority, and you do the same. Now, the stack
> begins to resolve LIFO (Last In, First Out). The Amulet puts a creature
into
> play. Then each player passes priority. Then Biorhythm resolves. This
would
> put your opponent at one life and you at one life (assuming the same
> situation as above). Then each player receives priority again, and both
> pass. The stack is now empty.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> --
>
> KB
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

"Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote:
> I cast Biorythm with no cretures controlled by my opponent and one
> creature
> controlled by me, can my opponent do anything, it happened in a
> tournament,
> and my opponent tried to respond, the Head judge said that he could not
> respond, because as soon as priority changes he would die because of his
> life total being 0...Is this true?

I think that you failed to mention that your opponent wanted to respond by
playing a lifegain spell/ability. In this case, the opponent still loses.
The lifegain resolves, then the Biorythm resolves, and the opponent then
loses the game. There is no way for the opponent to play any spell/ability
after Biorythm resolves, because the player loses the game as a
state-based-effect, which is checked for before any player would receive
priority to play spells/abilities.

I have faith that (DCI) judges usually rule correctly, but are misunderstood
often. From this post, we can see the reasoning behind wizards' current
effort to improve the communications skills of judges:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=judge/article/20040426a

-War_Pig5

P.S. As a historical note, the opponent would not lose under the rules as
they were several years ago, when life totals where checked at the end of
each phase. "Un-learning" the old rules is a constant source of trouble for
many players. I know - I used to be one of them!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

No I did not fail to mention about the life gain spell, beacause my opponent
did not want to gain life..... My opponent actually wanted to kill my
creature in response to the biorythm. thus making the game a draw as opposed
to me winning.


"War_Pig5" <dontsendjunk2me@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cjr3r0$oli$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> "Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote:
> > I cast Biorythm with no cretures controlled by my opponent and one
> > creature
> > controlled by me, can my opponent do anything, it happened in a
> > tournament,
> > and my opponent tried to respond, the Head judge said that he could not
> > respond, because as soon as priority changes he would die because of his
> > life total being 0...Is this true?
>
> I think that you failed to mention that your opponent wanted to respond by
> playing a lifegain spell/ability. In this case, the opponent still loses.
> The lifegain resolves, then the Biorythm resolves, and the opponent then
> loses the game. There is no way for the opponent to play any spell/ability
> after Biorythm resolves, because the player loses the game as a
> state-based-effect, which is checked for before any player would receive
> priority to play spells/abilities.
>
> I have faith that (DCI) judges usually rule correctly, but are
misunderstood
> often. From this post, we can see the reasoning behind wizards' current
> effort to improve the communications skills of judges:
>
> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=judge/article/20040426a
>
> -War_Pig5
>
> P.S. As a historical note, the opponent would not lose under the rules as
> they were several years ago, when life totals where checked at the end of
> each phase. "Un-learning" the old rules is a constant source of trouble
for
> many players. I know - I used to be one of them!
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

"Jonathan Fourie" <jonathan@jonathan.za.net> wrote in message
news:cjs9sg$fd1$1@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
> No I did not fail to mention about the life gain spell, beacause my
opponent
> did not want to gain life..... My opponent actually wanted to kill my
> creature in response to the biorythm. thus making the game a draw as
opposed
> to me winning.

In that case, Bad Head Judge. Once Biorhythm is announced, it can be
responded to like any other spell, so your opponent is perfectly able to
cast Terror or whatever to kill your creature before Biorhythm resolves. Of
course, once Biorhythm has resolved, he will have no opportunity to cast
Terror or anything else, since he'll be dead. Maybe your judge wasn't quite
clear just when he was trying to cast his spell.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

In light of the information you provide, it now seems that the judge was
wrong. Is this a DCI judge? In what country (...it seems as though you are
posting from Africa...)?

I too have had differences of opinions with judges, and had opponent quit a
game in a huff after disagreeing with the head judge's ruling. The important
thing to remember is that judges are fallible, like the rest of us. The best
thing to do in this situation is, afterward, to provide the judge with the
correct information so that you can prevent such errors in judgment from
happening again in the future.

Do you recall how your opponent planned to kill your creature? There may be
some other reason for the judge not calling a draw. Say, if both you and
your opponent passed after the Biorythm was played, or if you won one game
and lost none. Or, there can be situations in a tournament where there is a
draw, but still, only one of the two players can advance to the next round,
and the officials use arcane methods to decide which. Sometimes draws can
cause problems at tournaments, so it is conceivable that a judge could
arbitrarily decide a winner in a game that would otherwise normally be a
draw. Based on the fact that you are playing such a high-cost spell in a
tournament, I can guess that lack of time might have been a factor which
adversely affected the fairness of the judge's call.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

War_Pig5, worshipped by llamas the world over, wrote...

> I have faith that (DCI) judges usually rule correctly, but are misunderstood
> often. From this post, we can see the reasoning behind wizards' current
> effort to improve the communications skills of judges:
>
> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=judge/article/20040426a

Off topic: how do you get to whatever page you're supposed to get to
judging articles like that one from? There is no obvious way to do this
from the main judging page.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

War_Pig5, worshipped by llamas the world over, wrote...
> "Jeff Heikkinen" <oh@s.if> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1bcb9c415268f76d989f37@news.easynews.com...
> > War_Pig5, worshipped by llamas the world over, wrote...
> >
> >> I have faith that (DCI) judges usually rule correctly, but are
> >> misunderstood
> >> often. From this post, we can see the reasoning behind wizards' current
> >> effort to improve the communications skills of judges:
> >>
> >> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=judge/article/20040426a
> >
> > Off topic: how do you get to whatever page you're supposed to get to
> > judging articles like that one from? There is no obvious way to do this
> > from the main judging page.
>
> In general, the judge articles can be found at:
> http://www.wizards.com/dci/judge
> It would be really nice if there was actually a way to get to old articles
> from there. If there is one, I can't figure it out.
> You can see Part 2 of the article listed there, because it isn't so old. It
> would be really nice if there was a link to get you to Part 1 of that
> article from Part 2. But I don't see one.

You just click on the Archives link.

But it's a mess, and while granted, you can use the Find function in
your web browser, that presupposes knowing what you're looking for.
There's no reasonable way to browse them, like there is for articles on
magicthegathering.com.