Shining Shoal

G

Guest

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

I was reading Aaron Forsythe's article on Magicthegathering.com today
(True, False, Tidbits and Tricks) and came across his tip/trick with
Shining Shoal. Here's the passage in question...

"For example, let's say you have the strong opening of Isamaru, Hound of
Konda and Eight-and-a-Half-Tails. Your opponent was ready for your
weenie assault, however, and plays a turn-2 Pyroclasm. How can you use
your Shoal best? Say you have the Shoal in hand along with an extra copy
of Eight-and-a-Half-Tails (how convenient!). You can remove the Tails in
your hand from the game to play the Shoal for free, setting X to 2. You
choose your opponent as the target and the Pyroclasm as the source. Upon
resolution, you can chose to prevent any two of the damage that the
Pyroclasm is dealing to your creatures (or you, if it could). You would
wisely choose to prevent one damage to each of your guys, allowing them
both to survive, and dealing two damage to your very sad opponent."

Here's the text on Shining Shoal

Card Name: Shining Shoal
Cost: XWW
Type: Instant — Arcane
Pow/Tgh:
Rules Text: You may remove a white card with converted mana cost
X in your hand from the game rather than pay Shining
Shoal’s mana cost.
The next X damage that a source of your choice would
deal to you or a creature you control this turn is
dealt to target creature or player instead.

The text clearly says "a creature you control", not creatures you
control. So - can you redirect the damage a single source would
deal to multiple creatures, or only to a single creature? TIA.

Brian
 
G

Guest

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

Brian Bowlby <bowlby@bu.edu> wrote:

> The text clearly says "a creature you control", not creatures you
> control. So - can you redirect the damage a single source would
> deal to multiple creatures, or only to a single creature? TIA.

Which part of the damage from Pyroclasm is *not* being dealt to a
creautre you control?
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W
 
G

Guest

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

In news:1gr3ry8.1qjds2211kfon4N%panoptes@iquest.net,
Daniel W. Johnson <panoptes@iquest.net> rambled:
> Brian Bowlby <bowlby@bu.edu> wrote:
>
>> The text clearly says "a creature you control", not creatures you
>> control. So - can you redirect the damage a single source would
>> deal to multiple creatures, or only to a single creature? TIA.
>
> Which part of the damage from Pyroclasm is *not* being dealt to a
> creautre you control?

His question had to do with the plurality of the word "creature".
"Pyroclasm deals damage to more than once creature. Shining Shoal does not
use the word 'creatures', it uses the phrase "a creature", which implies a
singular creature. His question was based on the assumption that Pyroclasm
deals damage to two or more creatures you control. Could Shining Shoal
prevent 4 damage, even though it's wording is singular?

My (highly unofficial answer) is yes, you can prevent all damage dealt by
Pyroclasm (provided you pitch an appropriately costed white card or pay an
appropriate amount of mana). I think this is one of those cases where
Wizards would have run into semantics issues no matter how they phrased it.
"...dealt to you or a creature or creatures you control." sounds funny, and
if they worded the Shoal to use "creatures", that would similarly imply that
damage must be dealt to multiple creatures (even though the majority of
Magic cards that affect creature/creatures are worded in the plural).

--

KB

Briscobar AT gmail DOT com
 
G

Guest

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

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:07:31 -0500, Brian Bowlby <bowlby@bu.edu> wrote:
>I was reading Aaron Forsythe's article on Magicthegathering.com today
>(True, False, Tidbits and Tricks) and came across his tip/trick with
>Shining Shoal. Here's the passage in question...

Okay...

>"For example, let's say you have the strong opening of Isamaru, Hound of
>Konda and Eight-and-a-Half-Tails. Your opponent was ready for your
>weenie assault, however, and plays a turn-2 Pyroclasm. How can you use
>your Shoal best? Say you have the Shoal in hand along with an extra copy
>of Eight-and-a-Half-Tails (how convenient!).

And she costs WW, converted mana cost 2, same as Pyroclasm's (so would work
even better with the blue Shoal...)

>You can remove the Tails in
>your hand from the game to play the Shoal for free, setting X to 2. You
>choose your opponent as the target and the Pyroclasm as the source.

That's fine; opponent falls under "creature or player", and the Pyroclasm on
the stack can be chosen as a "source".

>Upon resolution, you can chose to prevent any two of the damage that the
>Pyroclasm is dealing to your creatures (or you, if it could). You would
>wisely choose to prevent one damage to each of your guys, allowing them
>both to survive, and dealing two damage to your very sad opponent."

Well, you don't +prevent+ any damage at all. What you do is take one damage
that would be dealt to each of your two creatures (since the Shoal's X=2, you
can pick two points of damage from among the next damage that gets dealt to
you AND/OR any creature(s) you control), and cause that to be dealt instead
to opponent. That leaves 1 damage being dealt to each of the Fox and the Hound
(...no Disney lawyers nearby? ...Good), and 2 damage being dealt to opponent,
after the replacement shield from the Shoal is done with "what's about to
get dealt". The creatures both survive, opponent gets 2 to the head, and the
game goes on.

>Here's the text on Shining Shoal
>Shining Shoal XWW Instant - Arcane
> You may remove a white card with converted mana cost X in your hand from the
> game rather than pay ~'s mana cost. / The next X damage that a source of your
> choice would deal to you or a creature you control this turn is dealt to
> target creature or player instead.
>
>The text clearly says "a creature you control", not creatures you
>control.

Look at the whole sentence. "damage that <blah> would deal to you or a creature
you control".

>So - can you redirect the damage a single source would
>deal to multiple creatures, or only to a single creature? TIA.

It's not saying "This is limited to only a) damage to you or b) damage to one
creature you control, pick one". It's saying "This is limited to damage the
source you picked would deal to anything among the following set: {you,
creature you control}". The Pyroclasm's damage all qualifies; each point it
will deal will be dealt to a creature you control. So the Shoal can redirect
as much of that damage as it can handle. If this were a Pestilence ability
instead, dealing 1 damage to each creature and 1 to each player, then the
Shoal would NOT be able to do anything about the damage dealt to opponent, and
would NOT be able to do anything about the damage dealt to opponent's
creatures... but WOULD be able to 'redirect' the Pestilence damage being dealt
to you and/or any or all of your creature(s). So a Shoal for X=3 in this
situation, for Pestilence, would have the damage dealt end up as "none to
you; none to either of your creatures; 4 (= 1 + 3) to opponent; one to each
of opponent's creatures".

In short: the Shoal looks for damage _from_ the source, _to_ you and/or any
creature you control. And they didn't word it "any creature you control"
because that has the exact same misinterpretation problem, slightly more
intensely - it sounds to some people like it means "any ONE creature", which
it doesn't.

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.
 
G

Guest

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

David DeLaney (dbd@gatekeeper.vic.com) wrote:
: On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:07:31 -0500, Brian Bowlby <bowlby@bu.edu> wrote:
: >Here's the text on Shining Shoal
: >Shining Shoal XWW Instant - Arcane
: > You may remove a white card with converted mana cost X in your hand from the
: > game rather than pay ~'s mana cost. / The next X damage that a source of your
: > choice would deal to you or a creature you control this turn is dealt to
: > target creature or player instead.
: >
: >The text clearly says "a creature you control", not creatures you
: >control.

: Look at the whole sentence. "damage that <blah> would deal to you or a
: creature you control".

: >So - can you redirect the damage a single source would
: >deal to multiple creatures, or only to a single creature? TIA.

: It's not saying "This is limited to only a) damage to you or b) damage
: to one creature you control, pick one".

Well, until reading this that's how I'd have interpreted it also.
There's nothing plural in there; the implication is "you"
(singular) *or* "a creature" (singular). (keep in mind the word
"or" usually means or implies an exclusive choice between A and
B; if "and/or" is meant it is usually written that way, just to
avoid confusion like this)

Could they not have made it clearer by using the only-slightly-
longer wording "...would deal to you and/or one or more creatures
you control..."?

I can see a lot of judges getting asked about this. Often. :)


Keith
 
G

Guest

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

Q: Are we not men? A: We are David DeLaney!
> And [8.5 Tails] costs WW, converted mana cost 2, same as Pyroclasm's (so would work
> even better with the blue Shoal...)

How? You can't discard her to the blue Shoal (or any other non-white
one) at all...
 
G

Guest

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

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:35:22 GMT, Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
>Q: Are we not men? A: We are David DeLaney!
>> And [8.5 Tails] costs WW, converted mana cost 2, same as Pyroclasm's (so would work
>> even better with the blue Shoal...)
>
>How? You can't discard her to the blue Shoal (or any other non-white
>one) at all...

Nitpick: nobody ever "discards" to a Shoal, they "pitch" to one - remove a
card in their hand from the game. That's not a discard.

But, assuming either a) she's blue for some reason, or b) your blue Shoal says
"white" for some reason, it could work fine. I can think of ways to have either
one happen...

Dave "never say 'never' in Magic without checking first" DeLaney
--
\/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.
 
G

Guest

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

Keith Piddington <uj551@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca> wrote:

> Could they not have made it clearer by using the only-slightly-
> longer wording "...would deal to you and/or one or more creatures
> you control..."?

If they thought that was a good idea, a lot of cards would need such a
change, starting with Dingus Egg: "Whenever *a* land is put into a
graveyard from play, Dingus Egg deals 2 damage to that land's
controller."
--
Daniel W. Johnson
panoptes@iquest.net
http://members.iquest.net/~panoptes/
039 53 36 N / 086 11 55 W
 
G

Guest

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

Daniel W. Johnson wrote:
> Keith Piddington <uj551@vtn1.victoria.tc.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Could they not have made it clearer by using the only-slightly-
>>longer wording "...would deal to you and/or one or more creatures
>>you control..."?
>
>
> If they thought that was a good idea, a lot of cards would need such a
> change, starting with Dingus Egg: "Whenever *a* land is put into a
> graveyard from play, Dingus Egg deals 2 damage to that land's
> controller."

Big difference here - Dingus Egg has a triggered ability, so it
will trigger whether one land or multiple lands is put into a
graveyard. SS does not have a triggered ability, so knowing
whether it "works" when multiple creatures are being damaged
is important. I agree that the above wording makes it obvious
that you can redirect the damage done from a single source to
multiple creatures.

Brian